My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Agenda Packets - 2023/03/03
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
2020-2029
>
2023
>
Agenda Packets - 2023/03/03
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/28/2025 4:46:48 PM
Creation date
3/7/2023 10:21:54 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Commission Documents
Commission Name
City Council
Commission Doc Type
Agenda Packets
MEETINGDATE
3/3/2023
Supplemental fields
City Council Document Type
Packets
Date
3/3/2023
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
393
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
"The open market system gives haulers, large and small, the opportunity to provide customized <br />waste solutions for its customers. Again, competition demands the best service at the best price. <br />Government managed collection reduces these opportunities and dramatically slows innovation, <br />hence value. In most cases, government management adds a layer of cost that is unnecessary. " <br />Question: What cities have followed the Organized Collection Statute in Minnesota <br />and actually implemented an organized system with a single hauler or consortium? <br />"During the past 12 years, several Minnesota communities have pursued government managed <br />collection using the Organized Collection Statute. Not one municipality has moved away from <br />an open market system in favor of Government Managed Waste Collection. The municipalities <br />that considered Government Managed Waste Collection and rejected a change, remaining a <br />competitive market area: Arden Hills, Carver, Lauderdale, Prior Lake, Coon Rapids, Pine <br />Island, Greenwood, St. Michael, Hanover, Albertville, St. Anthony, Falcon Heights, Ramsey <br />County and Olmstead County Sartell, Lino Lakes, Crystal and New Hope. " <br />Question: Does NSWMA oppose the concept of hauler consortiums (e.g., MRI) to <br />address the needs of both local government and the haulers? <br />"The members of NSWMA oppose hauler consortiums, want to compete, and believe the open <br />market system delivers the best value to the customer. " <br />Question: What is the history of the Organized Collection Statute? Why was it <br />originally developed? Why was it amended to include the 180 day hauler involved <br />planning/negotiating period? <br />"The organized collection statue was passed many years ago to protect haulers from government <br />unilaterally taking, without compensation, the businesses they have built over many years. <br />Thankfully it gives citizens and haulers ample opportunities to reinforce the importance of open <br />competition. " <br />Question: Do you have data on the prevalence of'open and government managed <br />collection in other states? <br />"Each market area, across the country, is unique with many components figuring into how waste <br />and recycling is managed. " <br />Question: Are you familiar with the recent court case between MRI and the city of <br />Minneapolis? Specifically the judge's ruling that required the City to follow the <br />procedures of the Organized Collection Statute? <br />► How does NSWMA believe that ruling affects open versus organized collection? <br />► How does NSWMA believe that ruling affects future collection procurement <br />processes for cities that already have a single hauler under contract, but the <br />contract term is nearing completion? <br />44 •Foth Infrastructure & Environment, LLC R - Analysis of Waste Collection Service Arrangements.doc <br />June 2009 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.