Laserfiche WebLink
1 was done and the "service went down while the prices went up." He added <br />? that he didn't think older residents should have to haul their garbage <br />s down to the curb and wondered whether residents were going to be given <br />4 a choice of days to have their collections made because the resident <br />5 said he is out of town all week and he has to put his garbage out on <br />6 Monday and can't bring the empties back in until he returns on Friday. <br />7 When Mr. Gondek identified himself as the letter write who had sent <br />8 letters to all the Councilmembers in which he had drawn a comparison <br />9 between the City's proposal and Soviet Russia, Mayor Sundland told him <br />10 it might have been because of that statement that he had received no <br />11 replies to his letter. Mr. Gondek then suggested that if the City was <br />12 going to be the only one to deal with the garbage hauler the Council <br />13 selected, it might be a good idea to include all the Councilmembers' <br />14 phone numbers on the bills so residents could make any complaints they <br />15 had about the service directly to them. Councilmember Ranallo told <br />16 the resident that based on the number of calls he had gotten in response <br />17 to the Bulletin article about recycling, which had highlighted his own <br />18 disappointment not to see residents at the public hearing on the same <br />19 issue, he was certain the Councilmembers would be the first to hear <br />20 from the residents who are unhappy with the new system. <br />21 The Councilmember indicated that the City had always had the option of <br />22 just letting hauler who met the County's criteria handle the recycling, <br />23 but having had no resident concerns expressed to them, had accepted the <br />24 Task Force's arguments for having only one vendor. <br />Councilmember Enrooth told the residents there's nothing to prevent any <br />c6 hauler who meets the County's criteria from charging any rate they <br />27 chose. He added that "just so you don't get surprised, you should be <br />28 aware that when the County's incinerator goes into operation, your <br />29 charges, regardless of who your hauler is, will automatically have to <br />30 go up by roughly $6.00 to $8.00 a month." He pointed to the Hennepin <br />31 County newsletter which had been sent to all county residents as the <br />32 source of that information. The Councilmember said he hoped the <br />33 residents realized that raises like that couldn't be blamed on the <br />34 haulers who only have to respond to the conditions imposed on them from <br />35 government agencies. <br />36 In response to a question from Councilmember Marks related to the number <br />37 of haulers who had responded to the City's invitation to submit a <br />38 proposal, Councilmember Enrooth reiterated that only three companies, <br />39 Waste Management, Super Cycle, Inc., and Knutson had responded at first <br />40 and a fourth, Reuters, had contacted the City at the last minute in the <br />41 process. Even though Task Force members inspected Reuter's facilities, <br />42 the fact that their process concept had not been accepted by Hennepin <br />43 County resulted in that proposal not being seriously considered. The <br />44 Councilmember said several of the vendors, including BFI, the parent <br />45 company of Woodlake, had at first declined to submit proposals. Only <br />46 one, Waste Management, appeared to meet all the Task Force's <br />47 requirements and already picked up about 820 of the City's garbage. One <br />A8 didn't pick up in St. Anthony at all, but did service other <br />14 <br />