Laserfiche WebLink
_g_ <br /> 1 paying now. But if the City continues to generate the same amount <br /> 2 of garbage it has been, their rates would rise substantially. He added <br /> 3 that all the trash haulers who had submitted proposals had verified that • <br /> 4 was what would happen no matter which service was selected by the <br /> 5 Council. <br /> 6 Councilmember Makowske suggested that because both residents and haulers <br /> 7 have been given a 90 day period to comment between the September 27th <br /> 8 hearing and the date when the Council can appoint a hauler to collect <br /> 9 recyclable materials, the later the Council held the public forum, the <br /> 10 more concrete information would be available on which to base a <br /> it decision. She said by the end of November the Council should have more <br /> 12 specific data related to rates which would be charged; what day <br /> 13 collections would be made; what the containers would look like; whether <br /> 14 they would have to be curbside; and what's to be done with grass <br /> 15 clippings and leaves. <br /> 16 Mayor Pro Tem Ranallo reiterated his concerns that without official <br /> 17 bids being taken, the Council would be opening itself to a lot of <br /> 18 criticism from the residents when their garbage bills start going up <br /> 19 to $20 or $25 a week. <br /> 20 Councilmember Enrooth reiterated that he perceived that would happen <br /> 21 only because the residents don't understand that all haulers would be <br /> 22 paying the same $75.00/ton to Hennepin County for each load they haul <br /> 23 to the incinerator which is going to raise their bills no matter who <br /> 24 takes care of the City's recyclable materials. The Councilmember said <br /> 25 he perceived it would be up to whoever takes such calls to clearly <br /> 26 explain the issues to the callers because as far as he could see, the • <br /> 27 City had done everything it could to inform the public about what was <br /> 28 going to happen through newspaper and City Newsletter articles and then <br /> 29- holding a public hearing on the Task Force's recommendations where the <br /> 30 format had attempted to present a clear explanation of the issues which <br /> 31 were involved and invited public comments and questions. He added that <br /> 32 he understood the Public Works Director had sought proposals from every <br /> 33 hauler who services the City now as well as any other companies who had <br /> 34 the capability to handle the whole community. Only four companies had <br /> 35 submitted bids and only two of these, Knutson and Waste Management, had <br /> 36 accepted the Task Force invitation to appear before them. Woodlake and <br /> 37 other haulers who were contacted were not big enough to handle the whole <br /> 38 City, were only set up to handle recyclable materials, or were not <br /> 39 interested. <br /> 40 Sue VanderHeyden agreed to add the public forum date to the Newsletter <br /> 41 article which invited residents to call the City offices if they have <br /> 42 any further questions or concerns about recycling or the process which <br /> 43 the City is following. <br /> 44 The Public Forum which is to be held during the Council's November <br /> 45 22nd meeting, would be advertised on the City's bulletin board, Cable <br /> 46 TV, and press releases to both` the Bulletin and the Northeaster, in <br /> 47 addition to the Newsletter. <br /> 48 DEPARTMENT AND COMMITTEE REPORTS <br />