Laserfiche WebLink
1 *was just "Republican" enough to oppose giving a contract to only one <br />hauler who he perceived with no competition, could raise his rates <br />J next year; <br />4 *expected there would be "no free lunch" as far as getting back money <br />5 from recycling went; and <br />6 *preferred to deal with his own hauler. <br />7 Jim Wiehoff, 3508 Coolidge Street, identified himself as "representing <br />8 himself and other community members who vote" reported that when the <br />9 predecessor to Waste Management did the garbage hauling, the service had <br />10 been "excellent", but as soon as Waste Management took over, the <br />11 service had become very erratic, resulting in garbage being left out on <br />12 the streets for days at a time. He said he and most of his neighbors <br />13 had switched to Woodlake because of that poor service. Mr. Wiehoff said <br />14 he preferred the "free enterprise system" which enabled them to do that <br />15 and was concerned that if that were taken away now, the residents would <br />16 suffer from "big corporation" actions which he deemed inappropriate for <br />17 such a small community. The resident wanted the City to retain some <br />18 measure of competition by at least contracting with two services the <br />19 first year and making a decision as to who would serve the City after <br />20 that on the service those two provided during the testing period. Mr. <br />21 Wiehoff then suggested that selection could even be made by a vote of <br />22 the community at the next election. The resident added that he had <br />23 perceived the Waste Management driver in his area was always in such a <br />24 hurry that small children in his neighborhood might be endangered. <br />a5 Alvena Law, a resident of Mirror Lake at 4001 Foss Road, said she had <br />26 to leave the meeting early but was concerned that her complex could <br />27 not handle the large Waste Management trucks and wanted the residents <br />28 to be able to retain Larry Saba, the hauler they had now. Councilmember <br />29 Smooth indicated there were certain conditions related to haulers which <br />30 Hennepin County had mandated and those conditions had to be met by the <br />31 Mirror Lake hauler in terms of recycling all the materials which <br />32 required by the County. He reiterated that if the City didn't meet <br />33 those requirements, then the County could select a service which would <br />34 meet them. The Councilmember told Mrs. Law he didn't believe her hauler <br />35 had submitted a bid to provide all the City's hauling and that might <br />36 have been because Mr. Saba couldn't meet the County requirements. Mr. <br />37 Childs told him the hauler wasn't even licensed to haul in St. Anthony. <br />38 He also pointed out that the City was only addressing the concept of <br />39 servicing single family residents at this time and would have to look <br />40 at multi -family service later on. <br />41 Mike Gondek, 2901 St. Anthony Boulevard, was told the final selection <br />42 of a hauler wouldn't be made until after the first of the year although <br />43 the Task Force had recommended the City begin negotiating a contract <br />44 with Waste Management during the required 90 day waiting period. <br />45 Mr. Gondek said he was also opposed to giving any single vendor a <br />A6 monopoly on the service because he had seen many instances where that <br />13 <br />