Agenda Packets - 2023/03/03 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

A list of haulers licensed for residential MSW and recyclable material collection in each city are identified in Appendix C. 3.3 Rate Information Rate information was sought to provide data for comparisons between different collection system arrangements. The municipal survey included a yes/no question asking if cities wanted to participate in a billing statement survey to compare residential MSW and recycling service costs between cities. If the city responded yes to this question a separate survey was sent to the city contact for distribution among city staff. The billing survey requested the breakdown of costs (garbage service, taxes, surcharges, recycling, yard wastes, bulky wastes, and other) associated with MSW and recycling services at the participant's home. Some cities noted they were interested in participating in this survey but did not provide any responses to the survey. The cities that did participate provided a range of a single response to several responses to the survey. A copy of the billing survey is provided in Appendix A. As part of their participation in the "In-depth" analysis, the city of St. Paul actively participated in the billing survey with the public works department distributing the survey requesting participation by employees. The rate information is included in this section to provide a broader data base. Rate data from other "In-depth" cities is also provided to broaden the data base. Additional rate data was gathered by reviewing contracts that were provided by cities with organized systems. To gather more rate information Foth distributed the survey among local Foth employees. As part of the billing survey, participants were asked to submit their latest refuse/recycling bill to provide the most accurate billing data possible. Some participants provided copies of their actual bill and other participants only provided the rate data without a copy of their bill. A total of 157 billing survey responses were received from both the municipal survey participants and the in-depth cities. Some of the billing information was collected from city and hauler websites to verify information or obtain information for cities that did not have any billing survey responses. Ninety-seven of the survey responses are from cities with an open MSW collection system. Sixty survey responses are from cities with an organized MSW collection system. It should be noted that this survey methodology was not a scientific process and that there are many variables that affect pricing. This limits application to other areas around the state. Even so, the survey provides interesting data. A summary matrix of the rate data is provided in Appendix D. Haulers are coded by number rather than specific haulers listed by name. This matrix is separated into two categories, cities with open MSW collection systems and cities with organized MSW collection systems. Some of the cities with open collection systems have organized recyclable material collection and others have an open recyclable material collection system. In a system that has open MSW and open recyclable material collection systems, the resident's chosen MSW hauler also provides their recycling service. Each line in the table represents rate data for a particular city and a particular hauler. The costs for the different levels of service (generally 30, 60 and 90 gallon containers and commonly each size container has variations such as the 30 gallon container sizes range from 30 to 35 gallons) R - Analysis of Waste Collection Service Arrangements.doc Foth Infrastructure & Environment, LLC • 51 June 2009