The URL can be used to link to this page

2. Organized Collection.CITY OF � CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager FROM: Bob Generous, Senior Planner DATE: January 24, 1996 SUBJ: Organized Collection Contract PROPOSAL SUMMARY Staff has prepared an organized collection PRICING the City of Chanhassen. In late 1994 and early 1995, the city reques that each hauler present a proposed rate structure on a monthly basis for each service level of waste collection. Following is the overall low, second lowest and highest rate structures submitted for each level of service including basic solid waste and recycling services: Service level Low 2nd High Variation 96 gallon weekly" -- ,$13,00 $13.90 $18.50 , . $5:50 As part of the instructions to the haulers for the preparation of their rate structures, staff advised the haulers that the rates would be evaluated and a' single pricing schedule for the city would be proposed. In reviewing the rate structures, staff,considered recommending the lowest rate structure in any category submitted. However, since one of the articulated goals was to maintain some competition and also to try to work with existing haulers, staff is recommending the second lowest rate structure as the single pricing schedule for the city. In this way, we do not cater to the strengths of any individual hauler; we have at least two haulers that were within the price structure being proposed; and we provide a pricing schedule that will reduce the waste Don Ashworth, City Manager Organized Collection January 24, 1996 Page 2 service charges for the majority of Chanhassen residents. These rates are lower than the current rate structure offered to residents with the exception of special introductory rates provided by the haulers and a few isolated neighborhood contracts. Staff requested that haulers provide the city with a pricing schedule for alternative forms of yard waste collection including spring, fall and winter curbside collection, special drop -off collection, and continuing the standard price per bag /container. Staff has included the spring, fall and winter collection in the rate structure and a per bag /can charge for other periods. Staff requested that the haulers also provide a bulk item rate structure for larger items that are generated by residential customers. Each district would be the exclusive territory of an individual hauler for residential customers. While all haulers may not have the capability to haul bulk items, staff believes that a contractual relationship could be established by the individual haulers and a subcontractor to provide these services. The proposed rate structure would establish a pricing schedule for common bulk items and individual residents would contact their hauler to have the item picked up. Billings would be made by the district hauler directly, rather than through a third party. No automatic adjustments are proposed as part of the rate structure, however, the parties may agree to evaluate the pricing structure if external factors arise, such as substantive changes in fuel prices, landfill tipping fees, tax or surcharge laws or external financial issues impacting solid waste management. DISTRICTS In preparing the haulers districts, staff requested that the haulers provide an initial outline for the proposed district. Staff then took these districts and adjusted the lines to maintain the proportionality of accounts for the individual haulers based on January 1995 information. The proposed hauler districts and approximate dwelling units in each district are as follows: 1. Chaska Sanitation - 970; 2. Waste Management - 260; 3. Woodlake Sanitation - 1,460; 4. Admiral Waste (which was acquired by Woodlake Sanitation) - 260; 5. Aagard West - 1,620; and 6. Quality Waste - 160. As part of the implementation of organized collection, staff would need to code each residence in the city with the appropriate hauler district number to verify the total number of dwelling units in each district and to provide a mailing list for haulers to notify residents in their district for the transition to organized collection. HAULERS ALTERNATIVES An alternative, dated November 8, 1995, has been proposed by one of the haulers that would address many of the issues which originally lead to the city's investigation of organized Don Ashworth, City Manager Organized Collection January 24, 1996 Page 3 collection. Staff believes that this alternative could work, however, there has not been a consensus that all the haulers would participate in alternate 1. Alternate 1: Districts: Divide the city into five districts for day certain collection. Vehicles: Use of Mini- packers only, with no mother trucks. Recycling: Move to bi- weekly recycling pickup. Alternate 2: Districts: Divide the City into three districts for day certain collection with a two day moratorium on Monday and Tuesday. Spring Road Postings: Use of Mini - packers with the city providing a location for mother trucks /transfer vehicles (note that the city would defer to the county and the state regarding licensing requirements for these transfer sites). Yard Waste Collection: provide a moratorium on collection during spring road postings until June 1 st. Haulers would provide for a weekend drop off of yard waste in late April and mid -May. The city would continue its current yard waste program as well as enhancing the city's yard waste compost site program. The city would consider a ban on yard waste collection, establish a paper bag system, limit collection to fall, or some combination of these ideas. Identify high risk roads: Haulers would limit collection on high risk roads to mini - packers. Hybrid Alternative: Similar elements appear in both alternatives: districting the city, the use of mini - packers, and reduction of recycling pickup days. Were staff to develop an alternative to the existing open collection system, its elements would include: Districts: Create three districts for day certain residential solid waste collection. Mini - packers: Require the use of mini - packers year round within the city with or without transfer vehicles. Don Ashworth, City Manager Organized Collection January 24, 1996 Page 4 Recycling: Require weekly pickup. Staff does not support the reduction in the recycling program to bi- weekly. Much of the literature regarding recycling states that participation is reduced when collection is other than the standard solid waste collection schedule. Yard Waste: Require special spring, fall and winter collection, similar to that proposed in the organized collection contract. Yard waste may be reduced to bi- weekly during the growing season on a fee for service basis provided haulers give ample notice and education to residents. Alternative Conclusion Staff's primary concern with the haulers alternative(s) is that though a long time has elapsed since the initiation of this process, very little effort has been provided for the creation of a workable alternative. While the haulers have provided suggestions that would make their operations more efficient, there has been no corresponding discussion regarding the possible reduction in collection rates. There has been no consensus for alternative 1 or the hybrid alternative and alternative 2 does not address all of the issues in the organized collection report. Staff is requesting that the City Council approve the final contract to permit staff and the haulers to complete individual contracts or direct staff to initiate a hauler's alternative. BACKGROUND In February 1995, City Council tabled this item and requested a meeting with the haulers at a Council work session. Previous work session dates have been postponed and in October, City Council directed staff to try to work with the haulers to resolve their objections or develop an alternative. In the interim, staff completed the contract negotiations. Staff has met with the haulers to review the haulers' proposed revisions to the contract. Staff has incorporated these changes and has provided the haulers with a revised draft contract (dated 12/8/95). We further requested that the haulers provide any additional comments by January 5, 1996 on both the contract and a haulers alternative so that staff could respond to them or include them in the packet to City Council for the work session scheduled for January 29, 1996. We received no additional correspondence. On July 11, 1994, the City Council approved a motion authorizing staff to initiate negotiations with the existing waste haulers for organized collection. The haulers met several times to come to a consensus on the contract language. In May, 1993, the City of Chanhassen approved a study of the potential for organized collection of mixed municipal solid waste and recyclables. The City's Recycling Committee served as a study group to gain input from haulers and the public in order to advise City Council on waste Don Ashworth, City Manager Organized Collection January 24, 1996 Page 5 collection as part of Phase I of an Organized Collection Study. The Committee completed its initial study and made its final report, in September, 1993, recommending that the City accept the Organized Collection Study, institute a licensing provision to limit the number of waste haulers to a maximum of six with a declining limit based upon turnover by haulers, adopt a resolution of intent to organize solid waste collection, and proceed with Phase II of the Organized Collection Study. The existing solid waste collection system in Chanhassen is open, often resulting in an inefficient overlap of services with the potential for up to six different haulers collecting garbage and recycling each week in each neighborhood. All this excessive truck traffic has a negative impact on the design life of the road, particularly during "load limits" in the spring when overweight vehicles have their greatest destructive impact on streets, resulting in expensive street repair bills. According to the Minnesota Department of Transportation, the combined impact of one garbage truck and one recycling vehicle is equal to 1,650 automobiles. Additionally, garbage and recycling may be deposited at curb side each day of the work week negatively impacting the sights and smells of the neighborhood. Alternate collection methods can reduce the number, frequency, and damage of vehicles on Chanhassen streets. In addition to the positive impact on roads, organized collection could also result in the reduction of air emissions, noise, litter, traffic safety, aesthetics, and overall system redundancies. On December 13, 1993, the Chanhassen City Council accepted the "City of Chanhassen Organized Collection Study" and the "Findings and Recommendations" of the Chanhassen Recycling Committee with modifications to the recommendations The Council had directed that the Organized Collection Program should be based upon developing reasonable districting of the community, preparing a menu of mandatory and optional services, and developing a list of requirements to define haulers eligible to participate in the program. Finally, as part of the final approval for the organized collection contracts, staff will be preparing appropriate amendments to Chapter 16, Solid Wastes, of the City Code that are necessary to implement organized collection. In addition, a resolution increasing the licensing fee for waste haulers to $500.00 per year to cover the administrative costs of organized collection will be proposed. RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the following motion: "The City Council authorizes staff to prepare final organized collection contracts with the individual waste haulers based on the Chanhassen Collection Contract dated 12/8/95, directs staff Don Ashworth, City Manager Organized Collection January 24, 1996 Page 6 to prepare appropriate revisions to Chapter 16 of the Chanhassen City Code, and authorizes the preparation of a resolution increasing residential solid waste haulers licensing fees." •' "The City Council directs staff to implement the hybrid alternative through amendments to Chapter 16 of the Chanhassen City Code and the city's solid waste haulers licensing agreement." ATTACHMENTS 1. Organized Collection Contract (12/8/95) 2. November 8, 1995 Hauler Alternative 3. Proposed Alternative to Organized Waste Collection (Feb. 1995) 4. Metropolitan County Mobile Transfer Facility Policy 5. City Council Minutes of February 13, 1995 6. City Council Minutes of October 9, 1995 i CHANHASSEN SOLID WASTE COLLECTION CONTRACT THIS CONTRACT made and entered into this day of , 499--5 1996, by and between the City of Chanhassen, a Minnesota municipal corporation, herein referred to as "City ", and , a corporation, herein referred to as "the Contractor ". L General - Collection Service A. Independent Contractor The contractor is declared to be an independent contractor, and nothing in this Contract shall be constructed to create the relationship of employer and employee between the City and the Contractor or its agents, or make the Contractor, its agents, or employees, subject to City employment requirements or benefits. B. General Description The Contractor shall perform waste management services from residential dwellings consisting of four units or less, in the City of Chanhassen, according to the terms and conditions of this contract. Waste management services include four basic collection categories: 1. Solid Waste Collection. 2. Recyclables Collection. 3. Yard Waste Collection. 4. Bulk Item Collection. C. Legal Compliance 1. Governing Law This Contract is governed in all respects by the laws of the State of Minnesota, and all obligations are enforceable in accordance therewith; and the Contractor, where required by the City or other government agencies, must obtain all licenses or permits to transact a solid waste collection business in the City of Chanhassen. 2. Health Regulations and Ordinances The Contractor shall acquaint itself with all pertinent City Ordinances and shall comply with all health regulations and Ordinances of the City of Chanhassen, the counties of Carver and Hennepin, and the State of Minnesota in effect at this time or hereafter adopted. 3. Contractor's Examination. a. The Contractor shall make its own examination, investigation, and research regarding the proper method of doing the work, and all conditions affecting the work to be done and the labor, equipment and materials needed thereon, and the quantity of work to be performed. b. The Contractor agrees that it has satisfied itself by its own investigation and research regarding all such conditions, and that its conclusion to enter into the proposed contract is based upon such investigation and research. RSC 12/8/95 Contract C. The Contractor shall make no claim against the City because of any of the estimates, statements, or interpretations made by any official, officer, or agent of the City that may prove to be in any respect erroneous. d. The Contractor so assumes the risk of all conditions, foreseen and unforeseen and agrees to complete the work without additional compensation under whatever circumstances which may develop other than as herein provided. 4. Obligation. The Contractor shall supply all labor, material, and equipment necessary for carrying out this Contract. D. Term. The term of this Contract shall be three (3) years and shall be in full force and effect for the period beginning ,995 1996 and ending , 49991999 1. Extension. The City may, at its option, extend this contract for an additional two (2) year term. E. Districts. 1. Establishment. The Contractor may only operate within the residential collection service district, approved by the City. Residential collection services within the district will be the responsibility of the Contractor, according to the terms and conditions of this contract, once a resident has been certified for occupancy by the City. District boundaries and collection days are identified on Attachment A. 2. Adjustment. The Contractor's district will be reviewed annually and may be adjusted by the City to reflect an equal distribution of household growth by percent to Contractor's hauling district 3. No Recourse. The City will not license any other hauler for residential collection service in the district. The Contractor shall, however, have no recourse against the City as a result of others operating in the district without a license from the City. A license will not be required for appliance or bulk item exchanges or when bulk items are removed from residences without charge. F. Day- Certain Collection. Day - Certain Collection is a City- approved plan for weekly Collection Services by an established day- certain schedule. This schedule requires that a district must be collected on the same day of each week and is based on a five (5) day, Monday through Friday, working week. G. Collection Days. The Contractor shall provide Day- Certain Collection for solid waste, recyclables and yard waste according to the district boundaries and collection days identified on Attachment A. 1. Adjustment. The Contractor may request a change in the pickup schedule by requesting such change in writing to the City at least thirty (30) days from the proposed date the requested change is to take affect. A change shall be effected only upon written authorization from the City. The City is under no obligation to approve any adjustments. 2 RSC 1218/95 Contract 1 2. Notification. The Contractor shall bear all costs involved in notifying residents of approved schedule changes. 3. Exceptions. Exceptions to "Day- Certain" plan include Bulk Item collection or special services authorized herein and shall be during those weeks in which legal holidays occur or in the event of a weather emergency, "Act of God," construction delay, or other uncontrollable interruption of service. H. Homes. The Contractor shall not collect on legal holidays. The legal holidays are: 1. New Year's Day 2. Memorial Day - - - 3. Independence Day 4. Labor Day 5. Thanksgiving Day 6. Christmas Day When holidays fall on a weekday, the collection for each day of that week after the holiday shall be made on (1) day later. I. Hours of Service. The Contractor shall perform all Collection Services between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m., except when an emergency exists, at which time the Contractor shall notify the City of such emergency and request an extension of time to complete collection. The Contractor may perform collection services on Saturday when a holiday falls on a weekday. J. Location. Residents shall have, as required by City ordinance, their collection receptacles located at the boulevard adjoining the curb at or before 7:00 a.m. on the designed day of collection. 1. Exception. Door Step Service will be provided by the Contractor at the direction of the City for disabled customers who have no other able persons in the household, or those customers who have elected to utilize door step service as an option. K. Receptacles Required All customers will be required to keep solid waste in watertight, receptacles with lids, designed for solid waste storage. Recyclable materials shall be placed in recycling bins approved by the City. Leaves, grass and garden waste, shall be placed in bags approved by the City. Trimmings, brush, and branches shall be tied in bundles. 1. Exception. Bulk items are not required to be placed in receptacles. II. Solid Waste Collection Service A. Description. Solid Waste Collection Service shall include the collection and transportation of. Garbage. Garbage is organic waste, including discarded material resulting from the handling, processing, storage, preparation, serving, and consumption of food. 3 .SC 12/8/95 Contract l 2. Refuse. Refuse is putrescible and non - putrescible solid waste from residences, including garbage and rubbish, and specifically excluding compost, recyclables and toxic and hazardous waste. Refuse further excludes industrial, commercial, agricultural, and construction garbage or rubbish and wastes. 3. Rubbish. Rubbish is inorganic solid waste, including ashes, consisting of both combustible and noncombustible waste, such as wood, bedding, crockery, and other non - reusable waste. Rubbish also includes non- recyclable types of glass, paper products, metals, plastics and mixed materials. B. Exclusions. Solid Waste Collection Service shall not include the collection of: 1. Toxic and Hazardous Wastes. 2. Problem materials such as batteries, tires, construction material, motor oils, and paint in liquid form. 3. Bulk items and Appliances. 4. Yard waste, limbs, brush, and other items. 5. Recyclables. 6. Animal waste. 7. Solid waste materials resulting from industrial, commercial and agricultural operations, and from community activities. 8. Earthen fill, boulders, rock, and other materials normally handled in construction operations, solids or dissolved material in domestic sewage or other significant pollutants in waste water effluent, dissolved materials in irrigation return flows, or other common water pollutants. C . Title. Title to all solid waste collected shall remain vested in the Contractor until delivered to a disposal facility. D. Volume Based Service. "Volume- based" solid waste collection means the maximum limit of solid waste a dwelling unit is permitted to dispose under the basic collection structure, selected by each household. With exception to bi- weekly service, all volume levels receive weekly collection service. The fee structure for basic service levels is identified in Attachment B. 1. 32- gallon bi- weekly service (1 can) 2. 32- gallon service (1 can) 3. 64- gallon service (2 cans) 4. 96- gallon service (3 cans) E. Service Level Overage. The Contractor is not required to charge for occasional overages by customers. Other overages in excess of the maximum service level volume which are billed to the customer shall be according to the rate schedule included on Attachment B. F. Rate Structure. The schedule of rates is included on Attachment B. 4 RSC 12/8/95 Contract G. Optional Service Levels: The Contractor will provide the following additional optional collection services, when requested by the customer. The fees for optional services are included on Attachment B. 1. Door Step Collection. 2. Wheeled carts (64 gallon, 96 gallon). 3. Solid Waste Overage. 4. Optional Curbside Yard Waste Collection. 5. Appliance Collection. 6. Bulk Item Collection. H. Disposal. (dieing Sehed try IA lU S 1114J t b e .d ,a a , E PA ef Subtitle D solid waste MSW must be disposed of at Carver County preferred solid waste management facility.) III. Recyclable Collection Service A. Description. Recyclable Collection Service shall include the curbside collection of recyclables from residential dwelling units in the City of Chanhassen. Recyclables targeted for collection are specified in Chapter 16 of the Chanhassen City Code. B. Placement. Residential Dwelling Units shall have their recyclables in containers, approved by the City, located at the boulevard adjoining the curb on or before 7:00 a.m. on the designated day of solid waste collection. Exception to boulevard placement includes customers with disabilities. Q T itk AA! e ile - � able rfiatefials - -1 a[.ed s he- « 41 -1.4 . , , respensibi e f th c ucZVi: D C. Recycling Container The Contractor shall furnish and deliver initial recycling containers at no charge to new residential households in the City. The Contractor may require a security deposit on containers at new households. The recycling container shall be constructed in accordance with specifications established by the City. Containers which are lost or destroyed shall be replaced by the Contractor, who may charge customers for replacement containers, according to the schedule of fees included on Attachment B. E D. Source Separation Recyclable materials shall be prepared by residents as follows: 1. Newsprint and Supplements Placed together in paper bags. 2. Corrugated Cardboard Flattened, placed in paper bags or tied in bundles, not to exceed 3' X 3' X 1'. 3. Mixed Paper /Mail Placed together in paper bags. 4. Magazines. Placed separately in bags. 5 RSC 12/8/95 Contract _ 5. Glass Food and Beverage containers. Caps removed, rinsed eeningled- eelemd glass containers (no flat glass or ceramics), sorted by color and placed in paper bags. or bin 6. Metal Food and Beverage Containers. Rinsed, and placed in paper bags or bin. 7. Plastic Food and Beverage Containers with a Neck Caps removed, rinsed, flattened and placed in paper bags. E E. Materials Disposition. The Contractor shall deliver all such recyclables to a processing site or market. The Contractor shall not landfill, incinerate, or otherwise dispose of the recyclable materials unless specifically authorized by the City N. Yardwaste Collection Service A. Definition. Yardwaste means leaves, grass clippings, garden waste, prunings, and branches less than two (2) inches in diameter. Yardwaste also includes Christmas trees but does not include wired wreaths or other materials containing metal, ornaments, etc. B. Description. The Contractor shall provide the following curbside collection of yard waste from residential properties, as part of the basic collection contract. 1. Spring and Fall Curbside. Contract service shall include curbside yard waste collection during two (2) weeks in the spring and during two (2) weeks in the fall of each year. Specific collection dates will be determined by the City. 2. Winter Curbside. Contract service shall include a special holiday curbside yard waste collection period in the month of January each year. Items permitted in the collection include Christmas trees and boughs, provided no metal, plastic, glass or other non - biodegradable materials are attached or included. Specific collection dates will be determined by the City. C. Optional Curbside. Optional service shall include curbside collection of yard waste from April 1 to November 30. The contractor shall provide the optional service at the request of residents and for a fee as outlined in Attachment B of this contract. D. Placement. Yard waste shall be placed at the boulevard and prepared by residents as follows: 1. Bagged Yard waste. Leaves, grass, and garden waste must be contained in bags that are securely closed and not exceeding forty (40) pounds per bag 2. Bundled Yard waste. Bundles of branches and limbs (2 -inch maximum cross - section per limb) up to 12 inches in diameter, three feet (3') long must be tied securely with twine or string, not wire. E. Disposal. The Contractor shall not dispose of yard waste in violation of Minnesota Pollution Control Agency rules. 6 RSC 12/8/95 Contract V. Bulk Item Collection Service A. Definition. Bulk item means household goods, construction debris and white goods. B. Description. Requests for pick -up of bulk items shall be made to the Contractor. The Contractor may subcontract the collection of bulk items, but may not allow third party billings to residents. Charges for pickup of bulk items shall be billed by the Contractor to the resident owner at the prices stated in Attachment B. C. Household Goods. Household goods are carpeting and padding, mattresses, chairs, couches, tables, televisions, electronic equipment, and other similar items. D. Construction Debris. Debris includes stone, sod, earth, concrete and building materials resulting from remodeling of the residence on the property at which these materials have been placed. E. White Goods. White goods are major appliances including washers and dryers, dishwashers, hot water heaters, garbage disposals, trash compactors, conventional ovens, ranges and stoves, air conditioners, refrigerators, freezers, and other similar items. F. Special Containers Contractors may furnish residents with dumpsters for construction debris, home sale clean up and other single purpose occasions G. Disposal. The Contractor shall not dispose bulk items in violation of Minnesota Pollution Control Agency rules. VI. Performance Standards A. Issuance of Notice. The Contractor shall issue City approved notices to all homeowners and users of the service whenever solid waste, recyclable, yard waste and /or bulk item removal is not effected. B. Failure to Collect. In the event that the Contractor shall fail by its own error to make a day- certain collection at any particular residence, as required by the contract, the Contractor shall do so by the end of the following business day after notification from the City or resident of the address where such collection was not made. C. Exceptions. For purposes of this Contract, the Contractor shall not be deemed to be in Default where its inability to perform is the result of conditions beyond the control of the Contractor, including, but not limited to civil disorder, acts of God, inclement weather severe enough that trucks cannot make collections, changes in applicable statutes, regulations, and ordinances; provided, however, that the Contractor shall exhaust every reasonable remedy to correct the conditions resulting in its nonperformance. D. Payment Method The Contractor shall bill and collect fees due from residents for services according to the fees outlined in Attachment B. In the event the Contractor is unable to collect fees for services rendered, and upon written notice to the City of the failure to collect, the Contractor may cease service to the party in default of payment. Pursuant to Minn. Stat. 443-015, the Contractor MU RSC 12/8/95 Contract 7 l _J E. Vacation Credits. The Contractor shall allow prorated credits on customer billings for pre - noticed vacations of a minim duration of two (2) consecutive weeks. F. Dwelling Vacancy There shall be no service collection required or payment due from vacant dwellings G. Personnel Requirements. 1. The Contractor shall be required to maintain an office equipped with telephones and staffed with sufficient personnel to handle complaints, orders for special service, and /or to receive instructions. The office shall be staffed from at least 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday (except holidays). The Contractor shall maintain a written log of all complaints, the date thereof and the action taken pursuant thereto or the reason for no action. A record of all complaints and action taken thereon shall be kept by the Contractor for a period of one year and made available for City inspection upon request. 2. There shall be no limitation on the size of the Contractor's collection crew so long as they are sufficient to fulfill the requirements of the specifications and contract. 3. Each collection crew shall adhere to all applicable ordinances of the City and all of those rules, regulations, and conditions for refuse collection as established by the City. 4. Driver. a. The driver must have a valid Minnesota Driver's License with all the necessary endorsements. b. The driver must adhere to all traffic laws. 5. Driver /Collector. a. The driver and collector(s) shall at all times have a courteous attitude toward the general public. b. The driver and collector(s) shall be of sound character, competent and sober throughout the entire work day. C. The collector(s) shall perform their work in a neat and a quiet manner and clean up all materials spilled in collection. d. All containers shall be replaced in their proper locations and covers placed securely back on containers. RSC 12/8/95 Contract LAty will be remitted to the Contractor less a ten percent (10 %) administration fee e. Damage to containers or other property shall be avoided. f. Containers may not be confiscated no matter how worn or useless it may be unless requested to do so by the owner. If the container fails to meet the specifications set by ordinance, it shall be tagged and the City shall be notified. g. Consumption of any beverages containing alcohol or illegal drugs is forbidden during or before work hours of any collection day. h. Before the start of each collection day, personnel shall check to see that the collection vehicle is equipped with at least one broom and shovel for use in cleaning up refuse spilled during collection or hauling. 6. Supervision. The Contractor shall designate an individual to be the representative of the Contractor under this Contract. The representative shall be on the job during normal hours of collection operations and shall maintain proper schedules for collection. The representative shall have supervisory duties which shall include servicing complaints and responding to inquiries by customers and the City. H. Non - Discrimination. The provisions of Minn. Stat. Section 181.59 which relates to civil rights and discrimination shall be considered a part of this contract as if fully set forth. This Contract may be canceled or terminated by the City, and all money due or to become due hereunder may be forfeited for the violation of the terms and conditions of this paragraph. I. Safety. The Contractor shall provide and maintain all sanitary and safety accommodations for the use and protection of its employees as may be necessary to provide for their health and welfare and comply with federal, state, and local codes and regulations, as well as those of other bodies and tribunals having jurisdiction. I Public Construction Project The City reserves the right to improve any street or alley which may prevent the Contractor from traveling its accustomed route or routes for collection. No additional compensation will be made for this interference. 2. The Contractor shall be obligated to protect all public and private utilities whether occupying street or public or private property. If such utilities are damaged by reason of the Contractor's operations, under the contract, it shall repair or replace same. RSC 12/8/95 Contract K. Equipment. 1. Vehicle Protection. All trucks or motor vehicles used by the Contractor shall be water -tight so as not to allow the leakage of liquids or refuse while hauling the same and shall be covered to prevent the scattering of its contents upon the public streets or private properties in the City. Should any refuse be dropped or spilled under any circumstance in collecting or transporting, it shall be immediately cleaned up. A broom and a shovel shall be carried on each vehicle at all times for this purpose. 9 2. Cleaning. All vehicles shall be kept in a clean and sanitary condition. 3. Painting. The packer body shall be painted and numbered, and shall have the Contractor's name and telephone number painted in letters of contrasting color. 4. Maintenance. The trucks shall be maintained in good working order. They shall be equipped to meet all Federal, State, and Municipal regulations concerning vehicles used on public roads and maintained to meet these standards. 5. Vehicle Inspection. All vehicles used in the performance of this contract shall be made available for inspection by the City of Chanhassen reasonable notice of the city. 6. Description of Vehicles. The Contractor shall furnish the City with a written description of all vehicles and equipment to be used within the City of Chanhassen and in the performance of this contract and shall advise the City in writing of any change therein within one (1) week of the time of making such change. L. License Fee. Before the Contract shall be valid and binding against the parties, the Contractor shall remit license fees to the City, as established in Section 16 of the Chanhassen City Code. ( Tentative annual licensing to be recommended to City Council - $500.00) M. Liability Insurance. The Contractor shall, at all times during the term of this contract, procure and maintain at the Contractor's expense general public liability insurance and automobile liability insurance. This insurance shall cover claims for bodily injuries, wrongful death, and property damage occurring as a result of the Contractor's performance of its duties under this contract. Such insurance shall afford protection to a limit of not less than Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($500,000.00) in respect to injuries or death to a single person, to a limit of not less than One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) in respect to any one accident or occurrence, and to a limit of not less than Two Hundred Thousand Dollars ($200,000.00) in respect to property damage. The City shall be named an additional insured on all such policies of insurance. The Contractor shall file with the City a certificate evidencing coverage before the commencement date of the term hereof of this contract. The certificate shall provide that the City must be given ten (10) days written notice of the cancellation of insurance. N. Worker's Compensation Insurance The Contractor shall at all times keep fully insured, at its own expense, all person's employed by it in connection with the performance of this Contract as required by the laws of the State of Minnesota relating to Worker's Compensation Insurance and shall hold the City free and harmless from all liability from any cause that may arise by reason of injuries to any employee of the Contractor who may be injured while performing work or labor necessary to carry out the provisions of the Contract. The Contractor shall file with the city a certificate evidencing coverage before the commencement date of the term hereof this contract. The certificate shall provide that the City must be given ten (10) days written notice of the cancellation of insurance. 10 RSC 12/8/95 Contract O. Indemnification. The Contractor shall hold the City and its officers, employees and agents harmless from all - claims, ca - uses of actions, and damages incurred resulting from the Contractor's performance or failure to perform under this contract. The Contractor shall indemnify the City and its officers, employees and agents for all costs, damages, or expenses which the City may pay or incur in consequence of such claims and damages, including attorneys' fees. P. Contractor recourse for non - payment /delinquent accounts Contractors may exercise all remedies provided by law as recourse for non - payment of customer accounts. Q. Performance Evaluation Criteria. 1. Contract Violations - blatant or intentional 2. -- Contract Violations - errant or unintentional 3. Complaints (verified and unverified) 4. Complaint resolution 5. Vehicle weight restriction adherence 6. Vehicle inspection compliance 7. Contract management cooperation 8. Collection schedule adherence 9. Litter control /container handling 10. Safety record 11. Reporting timeliness and completeness RSC 12/8/95 Contract R. City Performance Evaluation Review Process The City shall evaluate performance based upon the performance evaluation criteria above. S. Termination. 1. If the City determines that the Contractor is in material breach of the Contract or has repeated unsatisfactory performance evaluations, the City may terminate the Contract. 2. Upon failure of the Contractor to fulfill any of the provisions of the Contract, the City shall be authorized to hire personnel and equipment, or City employees and equipment, as deemed necessary to do the work and the cost of such expenses may be charged to the Contractor. T. Severability. All parts and provisions of this Contract are severable. If any part or provision of this Contract shall be held invalid, the remainder of this Contract shall remain in effect. U. Disputes. Any disputes or controversies arising out of the interpretation of the provisions of this Contract shall be submitted to arbitration in accordance with the provisions of this Contract. V. Arbitration. In the event of any disagreement in which a solution has not been reached within thirty (30) days subsequent to a formal written request for binding arbitration by either party, the dispute or controversy shall be submitted to arbitration in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 572 of the Minnesota Statutes. The venue of such arbitration shall be in Carver County, and three arbitrators shall be appointed by any Carver County District Court Judge selected by the City. Arbitration shall only apply to claims under $10,000. 11 W. Subletting or Assignment of Contract. No assignment or subletting of this contract, all or in part, will be permitted without authorization of the City, except as specifically provided herein. The Contractor alone will be held responsible for full and faithful performance of the contract. 1. The Contractor will not make or create, or suffer to be made or created, any total or partial sale, assignment, lease, or transfer in any other part of this agreement or any part thereof or any interest therein, without the prior written approval of the City, which approval will not be unreasonably withheld. The City shall be entitled to inquire, as to conditions to any such approval that: a. Any proposed transferee shall have the qualifications and financial responsibility, as reasonably determined by the City, necessary and adequate to fulfill the obligation undertaken in this agreement by the Contractor; b. Any proposed transferee shall submit in writing satisfactory to the City expressly assumes all of the obligations of service under this agreement and agrees to be subject to all the conditions of same; C. There shall be submitted to the City for review all documents involved in affecting such transfer, and if proposed transferee shall submit to the City for review all bonds, insurance policies and any and all other documents required by this agreement, and if approved by the City, its approval shall be indicated to the proposed transferee in writing. X. Reporting. The Contractor shall forward a copy of all solid waste, recycling, yard waste and bulk item report summaries to the City in the format and by the deadline required by Carver County. Y. Notice. Except as otherwise herein provided, all notices required to be served by either party on the other shall be in writing and forwarded by certified mail to the principal office of the party to which notice is given, as follows: To the City of Chanhassen: City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Drive P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, Minnesota To Contractor: All notices shall be effective when received. 12 RSC 12/8/95 Contract 9 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City of Chanhassen and have executed this agreement the day and year first - written above. CONTRACTOR President CITY OF CHANHASSEN By Mayor B City Clerk/Manager CERTIFICATES OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF ) On this day of 19 before me personally appeared to be known, who, being duly sworn, did say he is the president of , and acknowledged that he executed the same as his free act and deed on behalf of said corporation. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF CARVER ) On this day of , 19 before me personally appeared to be known, who, being duly sworn, did say they are Donald J. Chmiel, Mayor and Don Ashworth, City Clerk/Manager of the City of Chanhassen and acknowledged that they executed the same as their free act and deed on behalf of said municipal corporation. Notary Public RSC 12/8/95 Contract 13 ATTACHMENT A CHANHASSEN SOLID WASTE COLLECTION CONTRACT DISTRICT BOUNDARY MAP A s e i'i r s s s 1 c; s r r E _ r .., J _ ua aver t Nrf —rr • •�' p� ....�„ •5 ��'Q, � .mt r . Aar � f # i � $ •• � d. �:r'�,?� a .. _ \;, °_. •: ;r �;_�� `�- ._...�.i�;,; °.� "'� ... CITY OF € 1 I r �_�_..i CHANHASSEN /V BASE MA j W�c��IP kit PWPAAW Mr.! CHAN AS— ENGMEEMNG DEPT. I �' � —' r . . rcr:sta ,�.r, ,sf. - ... r' •.. �� ' •C i j i ; r F t J J ATTACHMENT B CHANHASSEN SOLID WASTE COLLECTION CONTRACT PRICING SCHEDULE Solid Waste and Recycling Collection 32- gallon bi- weekly $ 9.00 /month 32- gallon weekly 10.90 /month 64- gallon weekly 12.60 /month 96- gallon weekly - -- 13.90 /month Additional Charge to Use Processing Facility 32- gallon bi- weekly $ 0.00 /month addt'l 32- gallon weekly 0.00 /month addt'1 64- gallon weekly 0.00 /month addt'1 96- gallon weekly 0.00 /month addt'1 Seasonal Curbside Yardwaste Collection Wheeled Carts (any size) (Charge per household per month year round) 2 week Spring $ 0.20 /month addt'1 2 week Fall 0.30 /month addt'1 2 week Winter 0.17 /month addt'1 TOTAL $ 0.67 /month addt'1 Recycling Bins Furnished by the Hauler Deposit Amount $ 5.00 Replacement Amount $ 7.00 II: OPTIONAL'SER�jICES il. Doorstep Collection Monthly /household $ 3.00 Wheeled Carts (any size) Deposit $ 0.00 Monthly /household 1.00 Solid Waste Overage Per 30- gallon bag $ 1.50 Optional Curbside Yardwaste Per 30-gallon bag $ 1.00 RSC 12/8/95 1 0 F �r ATTACHMENT B CHANHASSEN SOLID WASTE COLLECTION CONTRACT PRICING SCHEDULE Washer $ 20.00 Recliner $ 15.00 Dryer 20.00 Loveseat 15.00 Range _ __ _ 20.00 - Full couch 20.00 Microwave 20.00 Loveseat hide -a -bed 20.00 Dishwasher 20.00 Full hide -a -bed 25.00 Refrigerator 20.00 Single rollaway 15.00 Freezer 25.00 Single mattress/box 15.00 Water heater 20.00 Full/queen mattress/box 20.00 Water softener 20.00 King mattress/box 20.00 Laundry tub 10.00 Portable TV 5.00 Porcelain sink 8.00 Console TV 15.00 Bath tub 15.00 Stereo components 2.00 Toilet 10.00 Carpet /pad (sq.yd) 1.00 Folding chairs 2.00 Automobile tire 4.00 Easy chair 10.00 Truck tire 6.00 The prices shall remain in effect for the duration of the contract; however, the parties may agree to evaluate the pricing structure if external factors arise, such as substantive changes in fuel prices, landfill tipping fees, tax or surcharge laws or other external financial issues impacting solid waste management. RSC 12/8/95 2 November 8, 1995 Solutions for consideration by Haulers. Primary concerns of the City: Aesthetics Roads Safety - Assuming the city has a desire to allow the fiee market system to remain in effect, there are simple solutions to amicably resolve all of the concerns. Aesthetics: Divide the city into 5 zones for each day of the week ( such as Eden Prairie and Bloomington). Allow haulers to pick up only on the zoned day. Result: All cans out on the same day. Roads: Eliminate heavy trucks year round by going to Mini- Packers only. No mother trucks. Every other week recycle pick up. Result: Less wear and tear on roads. .k Safety: Safety concerns reduced to one day (zone) per week truck traffic. CITY OF CHANHASSEN Proposed Alternative to Organized Waste Collection Objectives The City of Chanhassen has identified several benefits that might be obtained from organizing waste collection services. In addition to obtaining these benefits, the city has shown concern for the impact that organized hauling would have on the existing haulers and to the choices available to its residents. A list of these concerns follows: Concerns of the City Reduce the damage to city streets. Improve safety through reduced traffic in neighborhoods. Reduce pollution and noise caused by collection vehicles. Improve the appearance of neighborhoods by day- certain service. Obtain a better price for the residents. Keep administrative involvement to a minimum. Concerns of the Residents Loosing choice of haulers or the special services they offer. Having to pay for services that are included in the price now. Quality of service will degrade without direct competition. I want / don't want a cart. Not being able to choose my service day. Concerns of the Haulers Investments made in the community could be entirely lost. Our unique service options and equipment might not work. Moving of customer accounts and containers will be expensive. Quality service and innovation will not be rewarded as in open hauling. Forming and running a consortium is time consuming and expensive. During the study of organized collection it became obvious that the concerns of all the parties could not be addressed. If any one group received all that it wanted it would mean the other groups would receive little. Some compromises would be required. In the hope that the city will look at options that include the needs of all the parties involved, we offer this alternative proposal. We hope the city will seriously look at this as an option to organized collection. It meets most of the concerns of the parties but requires compromise from them too. Hauler's Proposal This proposal contains many of the elements of our original proposal but has been expanded to better address the issue of the hauler'§ presence in the city. Although many details have been agreed to, some issues border on possible anti -trust violations and can not be dealt with until we have received the blessing of the city council to proceed. Should the council agree to try this proposal, we are prepared to have the plan in place by March 1, 1995, in time for spring road postings. Obviously, all existing ordinances governing waste removal and recycling in your city will remain in effect and be followed. Because of the large investments required by the hauler's to meet the terms of this alternative, we would ask that the city evaluate its success for a period of three years. We would be willing to work with city staff during that period to make reasonable changes to the plan if it fell short of expectations. If after the three year trial the city felt that its needs were not being adequately met, a complete renegotiation with the haulers or a move to organized collection could still be considered. Day - certain Districts We propose to divide the city into three districts. The boundaries will be established along major routes and would be easily understood by residents. All residential trash removal and recycling would take place on the specified day for that district. The haulers will notify all their customers in writing of the change at least 30 days prior to implementation. The city will publish the new boundary map in the local paper and inform their residents of the need to cooperate with their hauler. Two Moratorium on Collection With only three districts in the city, the haulers can limit their presence and impact to just those days. This proposal will prohibit residential collection on Monday and Tuesday every week. The effect of this change will include tighter routing for many of the haulers and carry the benefits of reduced fuel, improved safety, and limit the impact on roads throughout the year. Spring Road Postings This 8 to 10 week period each spring is the time when residential streets are most prone to damage from traffic. Although highly inefficient and costly, the haulers agree to limit their waste removal equipment to the smaller (5 ton axle weight) trucks during the entire posting period. The city should provide the haulers with at least one area in each district where these small trucks can safely transfer their waste to larger waste vehicles and return to their routes. Such an area might be municipal parking lots or other limited use land off of trunk highways. The "mini- packer" type of truck is designed for just this type of activity and can quickly perform that operation without spilling waste. Since mini- packers have a limited stop capacity of 30 to 70 stops, it would not be possible for them to run to a disposal facility each time they were full as most of those trucks would be required to service 300 to 350 homes each day. Hauler's Proposal (continued) Yard Waste Collection For most haulers, the collection of yard waste requires a third truck on the route. Although these vehicles are typically light weight, they still have an impact on the roads and add to the problems of fuel consumption, costs, safety, and general aesthetics in your neighborhoods. Resolving the problems associated with yard waste collection will require a combined effort by the city, the haulers, and the residents. 1) During the spring road postings we propose that the city establish a moratorium on the collection of yard waste until June 1st. During this period the haulers would provide the personnel and equipment at a city designated site(s) to receive this material from the residents. Such a collection would be held on a Saturday in late April and again in mid -May. The costs associated with the collection and disposal of the yard waste would be bom by the haulers. Advertising the collections would be the responsibility of the city. 2) The city must continue to educate its residents on the benefits of backyard composting and in using mulching mowers. Educational handouts or flyers provided by the city will be distributed to every resident requesting yard waste collection service and could be mass - mailed with our billing if appropriate. The subsidy program established for backyard composters should be continued and expanded if possible. 3) Access to the city's compost site should be improved for your residents. This is the chief complaint we hear from them about yard waste. 4) The city should seriously consider a ban on yard waste collection, establishing a paper bag system, limiting collection to fall only, or some combination of these ideas. A bag system is used by many cities and has proven benefits. Identify High Risk Roads Instruct your public works staff to identify specific roads that are at high risk to damage each year. A list of these few roads should be sent to all the licensed haulers by January 1 st. The haulers will limit their collection equipment on these roads to 5 ton axle weight throughout the entire year, or until road improvements have been made by the city. This approach has worked successfully in the City of Chaska for many years. Hauler's Proposal How Does this proposal meet Objectives? View of the city The reduction in truck traffic created by a two day moratorium and tightened routing impacts both the road wear issues as well as appearance of the neighborhoods. Changes to current ward waste collection will improve the picture even more. The major concern of truck damage to roadways is addressed by the use of "Mini- Packers" during spring road postings as well as their exclusive use on problem roads. It was clear from the video presentations and report by Charles Folch that the worst impact of truck traffic is during spring postings. Noise and pollution effects are minimized by day- certain service. This also effects safety as the haulers will only be on a specific street one day during the week. Obtaining a better price for residents is an elusive issue. With our current competition, prices and margins are already thin. It's important to compare apples to apples when looking at price. Does our average price in the open market include services not included in the base prices of organized cities? Another thing to consider is the range of pricing. Surely the range of prices offered by the current haulers has one or more at or below the organized average. If price is the residents only concern, they can already match or beat organized rates. One must question, however, why some residents are willing to pay at the high end of pricing. Obviously, quality and service are their primary concerns. This proposal also eliminates any involvement by the city into the waste hauling business. The haulers have the major burden of billing, education, complaint resolution, and scheduling. Under any organized plan the city will have to deal with these issues to some degree. In addition, the city will have to contract and monitor hauler activity. The open market approach retains all the current benefits enjoyed by the city. View of the Residents There are many reasons why residents contract with specific haulers that go beyond pricing and services offered. Many have family or friends in the business. Many have existing business contracts that include their residence as part of the arrangement. Some neighborhoods have already negotiated with a single hauler and tied the service to their covenants. This proposal will maintain all of the resident's choice except for the service day. They can still obtain special services or offers available by the various haulers. They will continue to receive the best of service because competition demands it. Hauler's Proposal View of the Haulers Although this proposal will require major investments in new equipment and high operating costs during the spring, we retain the value of the investments already made in the community. Our ability to grow through unique offerings and excellent service remains unchanged. We will need to do some major re- routing but will not have to move containers or customer accounts. We will not have to face the costs of forming a separate corporation to negotiate with the city. The healthy competition between haulers remains. This keeps all of us on our toes and means that the residents will always have the best of service offerings to choose from. Summary This proposal was developed after several meetings by the haulers and required considerable effort and compromise. We appreciate that accepting any compromise will be difficult for the city council as well. Each member of the council has expressed different objectives in changing the current arrangements for waste hauling. We have tried to consider all of these views while putting this proposal together. The haulers will be happy to meet with the council and staff at any time to discuss this proposal. We all have a stake in this community and a desire to find workable solutions. Thank you for your consideration. 1 . The undersigned licensed haulers accept the terms of this proposal. We agree to implement all of the proposed changes by March 1, 1995 if accepted by the City of Chanhassen. Tom Moline Woodlake (BFI) - Lw,� io-'tz Gary no Chaska Sanitation Pat B ood Nancy Lee Admiral Waste Management Inc. Chris Boa ht Mike Trulson Aagard West, Inc Quality Waste Mike Berkopec e Waste Management SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT COORDINATING BOARD REGULATORY COMMITTEE Metropolitan County Mobile Transfer Facility Policy INTRODUCTION As part of its 1995 work plan, the Solid Waste Management Coordinating Board's Regulatory Committee began the process of developing a consistent policy regarding the licensing of mobile transfer facilities. Carver and Dakota Counties along with the MPCA have already addressed this issue of regulating this type of facility. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency defines a "Transfer facility" as a facility in which solid waste from the collection vehicles is compacted or rearranged for subsequent transport.- A- - — transfer facility may be fixed or mobile. The MPCA along with the Metropolitan Counties agree that mobile transfer facilities meet their definition of a transfer station and are subject to regulation. BACKGROUND The issue of licensing mobile transfer facilities became a concern for Carver County Environmental Services during the 1995 spring road restriction period. The problem arose when the County began receiving noise and litter complaints from residents and business owners regarding the use of temporary mobile transfer facilities. These mobile transfer facilities were developed by haulers in an effort to abide by City road restriction requirements. These requirements barred the use of large garbage trucks on city streets during spring road posting. The operation of these facilities include the use of unmanned "Transfer Trucks," usually a large rear load packers, that are stationed at a specific site while smaller "Mini- Packers" collect the trash from the surrounding area. The mini packers would make numerous trips, resulting in traffic and noise nuisances for nearby residents and businesses. In addition, litter and leachate is created when the mini packer deposits waste into the transfer truck. According to Carver County's Solid Waste Ordinance this type of transferring activity needs to be licensed. Carver County's attempts to license this activity were met with stiff opposition from one hauler engaging in this activity. No consensus was reached. Meanwhile a bill was initiated at the State legislature by State Representative Tom Workman of Chanhassen. The bill's intent was to amend the Waste Management Act and restrict counties from regulating transfer facilities during road restriction. The bill was passed by the House but no companion bill was passed by the Senate. Attempts were made to amend it into the Waste Management Act at the Conference Committee. This amendment was opposed by most haulers including Waste Management, BFI, and the Minnesota Waste Haulers Association. In return for having the amendment dropped, Carver County did agree to not attempt further licensing . during the 1995 road restriction period. The bill was authored by Representative Dennis Ozment with Representative Workman's support. Representative Ozment felt that this type of activity should not be regulated as a transfer facility, and that he may want to resolve the issue through legislation in the next year. The purpose of the bill was to circumvent the MPCA and Counties' facilities permitting requirements. The County and other opponents felt the amendment was unnecessary because the issue of familiar with equipment or solid waste operations. Children may be attracted to the equipment. Domestic pets and wild animals, such as raccoons and skunks, may be attracted to the solid waste. Public Health - Solid waste management activities have been historically regulated because of valid public health concerns. These concerns are no less valid today. Solid waste contains hazardous chemicals from businesses and residents, medical waste such as used needles from home treatment of illnesses, used diapers, and a host of other potential public health threats. Solid waste management personnel are trained and familiar with the material and may wear protective clothing or take precautions to minimize these risks. Permits specify conditions and management techniques to limit these concerns. Permits require limiting public access, limiting the amount of waste managed, and limiting the time solid waste is stored. No such conditions have been agreed to at unpermitted sites. Insurance /Financial Assurance - Permits commonly require that operators hold insurance of required types and amounts and provide proof of financial viability such as bonds or letters of credit. These conditions help protect customers and the general public. They also serve to provide assurance that funds are available to address spills, accidents, etc. that may require substantial funds to mitigate. RECONEk4ENDATIONS It is recommended that: The SWMCB's review of mobile transfer operations, finds that such operations are a "transfer facility" as defined in Minnesota Rules 7035.0300, subp. 110 and supports each of its member counties in their regulation of mobile transfer facilities under their Solid Waste Ordinance in order to protect the public health, safety and general welfare of the community. It is further the position of SWMCB that there should be no legislative changes diminishing the county's authority to license and regulate solid waste facilities, including mobile transfer facilities. 3 City Council Meeting - February 13, 1995 APPROVAL OF FINAL CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS FOR ORGANIZED COLLECTION Public Present: Name Address Gary Lano 731 Victoria Drive, Chaska Tom Moline. 7700 -44th Avenue, Mpls. Jayne Schifsly Carver County Enviro. Services Dean Johnson Minnetonka Tom Workman Chanhassen Vernelle Clayton Chanhassen Bob Generous: Mr. Mayor, Council members. We brought this item back so that we could get some direction to complete contract negotiations for organized collections. As part of our review we're trying to establish a pricing structure that would be uniform throughout the city. The contract would establish service levels for our residential customers within the city. There are two issues that we really have. One is the pricing schedule. We've received five responses for the, based on the contract from the haulers. In reviewing this we decided to go with the second lowest overall bid. Or the second lowest bid based on all five responses. For yard waste collection and also for recycling services. One item that we have yet to resolve is how the city wants to handle yard waste collection. Currently we've recommended as part of this that we go with the per bag or per can cost. - However, as part of the pricing structure that was submitted, we looked at a 3 time a year, two week collection that could be provided for. Or we looked at a special drop off type collection option and we need direction from City Council how we should address that as we complete these negotiations. The second item is regarding the disposal of the solid waste. As part of our review and in working with the County, we're looking at the possibility of requiring through the contract to have residential waste processed at some facility prior to being landfilled. Currently the County is providing a subsidy for waste that's processed. About $15.00 per ton subsidy. At least 3 of the haulers specified that they submit subsidy, there is no difference in the cost between allowing them to dispose of it anywhere and going to one of these processing facilities. As I said, we're requesting that we give direction so that we can complete these negotiations. The city's consultant, Dean Johnson is here to answer any questions that you might have or that you have for me. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. This is one of the, probably the hardest kinds of things really try to tackle as far as I'm concerned but we're going to listen to some Council and then I'll offer my opinion at the last part of it. Is there anyone wishing to address Council at this time in regard to this proposal for organized collection? I know that we have had haulers here previously. We know their concerns but if you have some other concerns other than those that you've already indicated, we'll be happy to listen to those. Or if you've got a solution to some of the things that we have talked about, since we've talked, I'm even willing to listen to that. So I'd like to open the floor for that. Anyone wishing to address that. Okay if not, we'll come back to Council. Councilwoman Dockendorf: I'd like to hear Dean's 5 minute spiel on this concept. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Dean. Dean Johnson: Mayor, members of the Council. It's been about 6 months since we've had a work session. We talked briefly on that and I think Bob has hit all of the issues. If you would, attached to my memo is a summary, 4 or 5 pages which is called the pricing options. And in it are the three pricing summaries that we 27 City Council Meeting - February 13, 1995 put together for you to consider. On this third page it's identified as number one, basic services. And not all of these, as Bob indicated, are a given here. Basic services because at least one of these with the seasonal yard waste collection is an option that you haven't had before and basically I'll just run through that quickly and explain it. The very first item there, solid waste and recycling. That is what's going on right now. You require that ... kind of a package deal by the haulers and what we've identified here in the first column is the lowest priced structure that was submitted by one hauler. So throughout that column there's what I would typically call the low bidders price. In the second column, in the middle, is the second lowest price for that particular category by any one of the haulers. So it's not just the second low package submitted by a single hauler. It represents the second lowest price throughout this list. And then the third column is the average price of all of our haulers, throwing out the highest and lowest values. We did that in part because we indicated to the haulers that we'd be submitting a range of prices to try to indicate how some of these prices would be met. So again that first column is a set of prices that were all submitted by the same haulers. The second was the second low bid. In any event, those are a reflection of, in the very first category, solid waste and recycling, are reflective of what you're really receiving now as the "basic service ". And back in my memo ... you are seeing on the average in Chan of about $13.13 per month for one can or 32 gallon weekly. $15.00 for two cans and $16.55 for 3 cans. When you compare those then with the previous sets of values that are shown on this sheet, the lowest priced structure of $13.00, excuse me $9.00, we didn't want to upset $13.00 for... The second item that Bob talked about, the seasonal yard waste collections. These are values that would be added to the monthly bill every month throughout the year whether or not someone used the service. Presently the yard waste collection, people are either hauling seasonally to your facility. The city is subsidizing that or paying haulers to pick it up curbside. What we asked the haulers to submit prices for a curbside collection program.- Twice in the spring, a couple of months in April or May and then twice in the fall, and that's generally the last couple weeks of October. And this has not been ... who would use the services. It would serve every household in the city, whether you use the service or not, 10 to 12 months out of the year ... 17 cents a month extra or 30 cents a month extra are prices that would be in addition to that every month by each household. I think the reason Bob said there's a direct... policy decision by the Council, you may have some large lots full of trees that would love to take use of a situation like that. Some newer developments with one or two 2 inch trees that don't shed many leaves and they may be subsidizing that so you're seeing subsidies in the city one way or the other. You have to make the decision which program you want. Another element that Bob mentioned, Carver County has been attempting to, and this has been assisted by the State, in directing solid waste be disposed of at a facility other than a landfill... They are to that effort ... and subsidizing... in the amount of $15.00 per ton for those that are using the so called preferred facilities. We...this item in the pricing structure, what the additional costs per month to residents would there be if Chanhassen were to ask for and didn't get paid for pay for, this additional cost to take waste to a preferred landfill. And as you can see in the first two columns, there was no additional cost to residents based upon that kind of a structure. And the last column, we took the average of the prices submitted by the haulers and there are charges ranging from 40 cents to 80 cents a month extra. Other elements in here are basically optional service levels but it breaks down the cost to get in those three broad categories... parts that might be provided. What solid waste overage costs would be, are putting these into three categories. There's no longer proposed to be a traditional or an unlimited category. If someone has 3 cans at this time and you go over, the price you see here per 30 gallon bag or extra can would be 75 cents in one instance or $1.50 in another. ...hoping to improve recycling activities within the city as well. Finally on that list are some bulk item costs. We would like, as part of this structure, that all residents pay the same fee and this is an attempt to do that. So we've itemized things that while you could have some haulers that contract with the 6th District... included in that and... regardless of what districts people are having collections in from whatever hauler, the price category is likely to be the same throughout the city. Item number 3 in this list had to do with any kind of adjustments to the contract, which is proposed to be a 2 year contract and we asked two different questions. If there were a need, in the minds of the haulers for any automatic annual adjustments to the contract. As you can 28 City Council Meeting - February 13, 1995 see in the low hauler category, or on the second... annual or automatic increases proposed with the contract. We ask again that ... might trigger a change in the pricing structure and those range from 10% in change in disposal costs to the next category which is a 5% change in those type of...Those can be tied into a contract. The last item on there was alternative yard waste collection and this was a little bit different from the curbside collection, and that was to have a drop off within the district that the haulers are operating within that district would attend. This could be a couple of Saturdays or whatever was chosen. This was just itemized... cost could be if that option was chosen as well. Basically, as Bob mentioned, we've come to the point now where it's really the Council's decision to move forward on this. I would say ... about a year and a quarter ago when the Council approved this ... study. One of the objectives there in the mission... some of the impacts on the city's street and there were some environmental issues. Plus to work of the existing haulers and that's been the objective from the start. This contract still does that. If you accept one of these pricing categories, we will enter into 6 different contracts. One with each of the existing haulers. They would each be assigned a district. Annually the city may adjust that district based on growth. It can be done ... You can make a decision on which approach you want the yard waste. To leave it the way it is or to get one of the options that we've identified here. We need some direction. If it's determined that you would like to assist the County in directing waste ... and then last takes some action on the... With that I'll answer any questions. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. Vernelle Clayton: Don? Mayor Chmiel: Yes. Vernelle Clayton: ...I didn't realize that I... Mayor Chmiel: Would you just introduce yourself so we get it on tape. Vernelle Clayton: I'm Vernelle Clayton. I live here in Chanhassen. I'm confused. And I think that a lot of people are on this subject. I don't mean to take a whole lot of your time if in fact there's going to be another public hearing. I don't particularly want to be the only one speaking tonight although I do have some messages I'd like to convey. Are we going to, I'm concerned that it seems like you're being asked to make some decisions on contracts and yet I don't remember that we actually held a public hearing on this. Is there going to be a public hearing later on where the people of the city of Chanhassen are going to have a chance to talk about this? If so, are they going to be ... paper. I don't think most people read the little mini notices. I do because we have other things that ... but I know a lot of people that are concerned about this and I think if they knew what was going on, they'd be here. So before I start talking about why I think we should stop this before we ... I'd like to know if there's going to be another meeting? Mayor Chmiel: As we have right now, we have not basically planned that. We've had several meetings on this and it has been published in the paper. But I think you're right. There's a lot of people out there who are concerned about what might happen now. And I think probably, or hopefully, maybe Council's going to address that. But I don't, as far as having another meeting, I'm never adverse to having a public meeting for people to come in and express their concerns but I think that would probably be a one meeting night because I'm sure this would probably be filled with people who would have those concerns. Vernelle Clayton: Is it your intent on that night to make it ... direction to staff on the contract... informational meeting after the fact? FM City Council Meeting - February 13, 1995 Mayor Chmiel: Well, let me put it this way. I'm not sure exactly where this is going this evening. Vemelle Clayton: Well with that in mind Don, I think I'll go on to... Mayor Chmiel: Okay, why don't you. Vernelle Clayton: When I'm finished you'll probably summarize what I have just said with, that I don't want the city of Chanhassen to tell me... Mayor Chmiel: Just a second. Dean, are you going to be able to respond to some of these questions? Dean Johnson: I'll try, sure. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, good. Vernelle Clayton: I don't want the City of Chanhassen to tell me who should pick up my trash, and I don't want them to tell me when I should do it. But let me go on to say ... and that is, as I kept eluding to ... knew much about the issue. When they learn of it, they do care and are mystified. They wonder, and their first response is usually why. Why would the city of Chanhassen want to do this? And they do care. This is a service that's provided by the haulers to us residents. It's not a service provided by the city. And I know, I happen to have had the same hauler for 27 years. As was pointed out in an earlier meeting that I attended by... there are some added benefits to us ... trash. We just like to leave that option open. Likewise, we'd like the freedom to change if the situation warrants. As I mentioned last time, we found ourselves in that position at Market Square. I understand that it's your initial intent here to exclude commercial areas. However, I'm still concerned. Future well meaning Councils could easily add commercial areas... The impacts on area haulers based on the limitations imposed by this proposal could well affect the number available to us to choose from at that time. At Market Square, without Festival, the fees are just over $10,000.00 a year. For that amount of money, it's important to have the option of... At a candidates forum last year, one of the unsuccessful candidates reasons for running were as she stated, for such a Republican area, we don't seem to be taking a very Republican approach here in Chanhassen. And ... taking the Republican approach but this does not do it ... one for trash and one for recycling. That wouldn't change ... That doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. And some of the garbage trucks usually have someone hanging on or whatever at the back and observing what's going on and it's my observation that the delivery trucks and the UPS ... they only have one guy. Maybe we should have all of them stop at the other edge of town... Road constraints. It will cost taxpayers millions of dollars if we don't do anything about it ... but I'm skeptical. At best I think a second opinion would be in order. I may not have my own ... During that time there's been no limitation on the number of haulers. I don't know if they made roads better in 1957 than they did in the 70's. If they did, maybe the more appropriate response would be to build better roads. That leads me to just another point. In my neighborhood of approximately 20 homes, even though we ... to choose who we want, in fact there's only been about 4 different haulers. Currently there are only 2. In situations where neighborhoods have 6 different haulers at a time, it seems they could exist but not likely... I suggest the rate charge by haulers and their guarantee contracts would be less than we would pay under pure competition... There will be some reorganization. Who pays for what but ... there will be a shift in the tax burden away from the federal and state government to the local communities... So finally, don't put—in our face. There's nothing broken that needs to be fixed. Cut our losses. The nickels and dimes we save today will come in mighty handy when ... Thank you. 30 City Council Meeting - February 13, 1995 Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Dean, can you maybe respond to some of those. I think one of the things that I think we want to indicate too, that in gathering the information that we're looking at this evening, first of all I think we Mow where the haulers are as far as the districts are concerned. I think that we just don't know exactly where that's going to go, and they may not be favorable for this or maybe they might, depending upon what really all ties down. The second part of it is, gathering this information. I think that there probably should be some type of a hearing but by pulling all the information together that you're doing now, is the only way to really know exactly what it is and what it's going to consist of. So maybe from that you can also. Dean Johnson: Maybe I can back up and give a little summary on the process ... and it began in May of 1993. So we're approaching 3 years on this and we started with a public hearing which was followed then by 6 - meetings with a citizen committee that reviewed the various aspects of what it was the city was concerned about in evaluating their existing system... collection versus this new option called organized collection. The result of that was a document prepared by the committee, with the help of my firm, ultimately approved by the Council. We had notice in the newspaper about all of those initial recycling committee meetings. We did have a few people come but not too many. We had a number of Council liaison during that time, in particular Councilmember Dockendorf attended most of those meetings, as did the Mayor. I think most of the Council at the time attended at least I or 2 of those sessions. The nickel and diming, to use this woman's term, I don't think should be taken lightly. It's not just a matter of what the individual pricing structure may be. This whole project started out of a concern about damage to streets in the city. And we heard change orders earlier about poor soils in the city and generally with some over burdens of clay in your community, you have higher initial street costs and you have higher maintenance and repair costs. And one of the things that we've determined in the study is that we can't avoid taking away choice or ... so I can't answer that question when people say well, I don't want to be told what day of the week I have this or really, isn't there a way to offer a choice. That's a down side of the recommendations that's in here. Organized collection is inherent to having a single hauler. It creates districts, if you have more than one. And generally people are without that option to pick which day or which hauler. So that's a given but you're comparing that to what we hopefully identify or in some reductions in aesthetics within the community. Trash out on any given day of the week in every subdivision. Certainly the reduction of vehicles themselves which reduces the risk to damage to streets, which again is the number one issue that people cited. We do know that there's a fairly dramatic reduction in fuel consumption. It's not noticeable in my mind but there is obviously a reduction in air pollution and there certainly is some efficiency for the haulers in this system. Do they prefer an open system? You bet. They don't want to change that either. We won't argue that fact either. I think it just comes down in comparing again some of the things that you're attempting to accomplish here and notwithstanding the issue or question to me of should we have another public meeting. I don't know. After a year and a half, that's your decision. Not mine. I think there's been a lot of opportunity for input and I think you could drag this out for another 2 years and probably get an ongoing change of opinion so that's a decision that you have to make. But when you compare hopefully the positive elements of this, you're comparing them against the selection of the hauler or the day of the week. Perhaps even free enterprise or competition as we know it. And that's one of the things that we've seen are pricing structures that are dramatically lower than what your residents or most of your residents are experiencing now as well so there are savings for the majority of the residents with this type of system. Hopefully the taxpayers are going to see that in creating a system that's efficient and has less impact on the streets. So those are some of the thoughts I have at this point. You know your community better than I and have to make decisions about more public input. That's not my function. Mayor Chmiel: Okay, good. Thanks. Council. As to basically what Bob is looking for some direction from. Council. Let me just go through and some of the other things that he's mentioned as far as yard waste and so on. They're all the considerations I think that we should take into view at this time and also I'll ask the same 31 City Council Meeting - February 13, 1995 question to find out whether or not Council would like to continue these kinds of discussions with our general public and populous of the city. I know through the period of time when we first initiated that to concerns by the people and the numbers of phone calls that I had received. Some of them told me where to put the garbage but that's neither here nor there and I told them there wasn't any room there because my garbage can was full. But I think those are some of the concerns that we have and I think we really have to address that and maybe I'll start with you Steve. Councilman Berquist: Thank you. Mr. Johnson, do you define, is trash pick up in your estimation a utility? Dean Johnson: In the Statutory sense it doesn't have quite the same characteristics. You couldn't put these on your taxes if you have a delinquent trash bill, as you could a water bill, so in essence it's not regarded that way. Except I believe ... in the City of Minneapolis. They have a special... Roger Knutson: In cities that of the first class. Mayor Chmiel: We're a first class city but we're not in that terminology. Thank you. Councilman Berquist: So no was the answer. I know this has been going on for quite some time. Has it? Has it been determined that the haulers are unable or unwilling to address the city's issues? The city's concerns? Dean Johnson: We looked at this as a two track approach. That haulers were requested and encouraged to submit an alternative to our organized collection that addresses those issues. There have been some submittals to the Council. They haven't been received favorably so we've kept moving forward with this approach to attempt to negotiate a contract with all 6 of these haulers. Councilman Berquist: So over the 2 years since this began, do you feel like there's been any significant progress in reaching compromise between the private sector and the city in trying to, the city's trying to achieve less road use. More aesthetics. Those sorts of things. Do you feel that there's been progress to that end? Dean Johnson: It's difficult. It's not a, there's not a halfway point. It's one type of system or another basically. Councilman Berquist: But ideally, I mean looking at it from my point of view. We're talking about private enterprise versus something less than private enterprise and I hate to contemplate the something less than private enterprise so I would certainly hope that the first initiative would be to bring the ideas of what we're trying to accomplish. Get that done through the private enterprise system. Ultimately perhaps and say we'll grow to the point where we are a class one city and treat trash as a utility, but that's quite a ways down the road I would guess. What was my original statement? Dean Johnson: I don't know how to answer your question. Councilman Berquist: Well, okay. I do have some real concerns. I'm not a real good at extemporaneous speech so I always try to write comments out and I really don't know that this is the time for me to make these comments so I'll pass on down. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Sure. As Dean has said, we've been working on this issue for, I just want to deal with the public notification of it first of all. We've been working on it for coming on 2 years and the initial meetings were well noticed. I believe Dean Trippler, we've had two Villager articles on it. It's been in our city 32 City Council Meeting - February 13, 1995 newsletter twice, at least. So I'm comfortable that notification has gone out as to what we were thinking of doing. I mean it was all very conceptual. It was this is what we're doing. Or what we're thinking of doing. I have taken no phone calls on it, that I can recall. I have received a couple of letters. One from my hauler, arguing against that but I firmly believe that is the vocal minority. I think we've done our, I think our reasons for going in this direction are very good and well documented. If anyone would like to hear them, I'll reiterate them again but Mr. Johnson touched on them in terms of road wear and aesthetics and some safety concerns. We've seen a couple of neighborhoods go to organized collection themselves, just to deal with those issues. And in the best of all possible worlds, I think it would be great if the neighborhoods could organize themselves but I don't see that happening. I don't see this as private enterprise going to public. You still have private haulers doing the pick up. You still have private haulers doing the billing. You still have private enterprise taking care of your customer service needs. What you have is an overlay of public saying this is where you'll operate and you know, where you want to put that on the continuum of public versus private is an individual choice. I see it still leaning heavily towards the private. We are including the haulers who already serve the city. Vernelle, I don't see it touching on commercial anywhere in the future. It just doesn't make sense. The commercial haulers run on very strong streets. You know we don't have some of the same concerns that we have on the residential streets. I'm concerned that the Mayor's intimating that the rest of Council may not agree with the direction that we've been going along in the last two years. That concerns me because if we had those concerns two years ago, we shouldn't have gone this route that we have. Because we have spent some money on this study. I think in looking at the prices, they beat what I pay now. I think there are some great economies of scale. Yes, there will be initial start -up costs for the haulers to figure out their new routes but in the long term, they're saving a lot of costs and we're saving as consumers a lot of costs in garbage pick up. That having said, I wanted to address the issues that you still wanted direction on Bob. Prices seem okay. The yard collection, I have concern about since I dump all of my recycleables, or not recycleables but yard waste in my back yard and compost it. But in looking at the prices, 34 cents a month. I don't know, can I deal with $3.60 a year or $4.00 a year? Probably. If that would make it easier for all residents instead of hauling it down to a central location to put it on their curbside 4 or 5 times a year, I'm willing to look at that option. The processing, if it's at no cost. I'm not certain that we should get into that direction though. I mean once they have the garbage in their trucks, it's the County's jurisdiction as to where they process that. I really don't think the city should get into that. I guess that's all I have to say on the issue right now. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Michael. Councilman Mason: We have not heard what the haulers' opinion is on this contract. On this proposal and I believe at one point there was one hauler speaking for the group. I quite honestly would like to hear what they have to say about this before I say anything more. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Mark. Councilman Senn: I guess I'm in a, I think I'm in a little bit of a unique situation here because I live in one of the neighborhoods that organized. I think by the time we had 20 houses in the neighborhood, we were organized. Heard very strongly from people in the neighborhood that they did object to all the trucks going through the neighborhood. To the safety of their children and all kinds of issues like that. Most of the people I heard from, the street maintenance issue wasn't I'm going to say paramount. It was more safety. But I don't think that needs to downplay the street maintenance issue. When we organized and did this as a neighborhood, we had people in the neighborhood cut their rates in half by doing that. Because we had people basically all over the spectrum in the neighborhood. I guess for my perspective on this issue, I've said all along I really wish the haulers could come up with a better solution on their own that would satisfy these concerns and the concerns 33 City Council Meeting - February 13, 1995 being street maintenance and safety and costs, etc. It bothers me and disturbs me I guess that that hasn't happened. The only people that I've heard from on this at all is the haulers, and quite honestly I've heard split opinions even from the haulers on it. I look at the information, which has kind of gotten to a new level here, and I guess in one sense I'm wondering if the process is flawed because I look at this and see my rates are going to go up, not down. Which raises some questions in my mind. The system that we're looking at organized collection, I don't really view as being a public system. I view it still as being a private system with some, with what's called some public intervention because that's what it is. I'm not sure until I get a chance I think to check out some of the numbers here a little bit more exactly how I'm going to come down on that but from the standpoint of the spring and fall, I mean if we're going to do organized collection, I really feel strongly that for 34 cents a month, we ought to be doing that. I think that would cut down a lot on some of the extraneous garbage that kind of gets left a lot in different places in the city around the spring and fall time. And I don't see that as an overdue burdensome cost. In fact, even if we didn't do organized collection, I'd like to see something like that. Because the emphasis we've placed in this city on open spaces and trees and all of that sort of thing, I think necessitates some special attention to that. So I'm not sure I'm happy I guess where this has gotten so far with costs. I'm unhappy that there's been no alternatives proposed by the haulers that are even remotely within the confines of meeting the issues we raised. Or satisfying, I should say, the issues we've raised. And other than that I give you some strong direction on the issues... Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thanks. Colleen, I wasn't intimating anything when I said what I said. Give a clarifier on that. I think the basic real needs that we saw was how can we eliminate replacing streets within the city. And replacing those streets over the period of time as we looked at it, roughly went around, was it about $10 million that we had looked at Charles? Charles Folch: It's actually, the city's infrastructure right now, currently to replace the streets, it runs about a million dollars a mile and we currently have just a hair under about... Mayor Chmiel: Okay, so we're talking much more dollars. That was one of the concerns. The other part of the concerns too vas, as Mark has indicated and I said that probably to the haulers after the first meeting, you come back here and tell us what you think you can do to accommodate this. I don't think we'd have been as far as we basically are with where we're at right now. The other part was the fact that I think some of the haulers even eluded to the fact that they may even decide to go to the smaller packers to come into the neighborhoods. In coming into those neighborhoods they then would have their larger trucks out on the collector streets which would carry that additional weight. And have a specific location to unload the smaller packers running in and out, but that didn't eliminate that completely. I think somewhere in the notes as I had read that, and I don't know how true but it's a quote that we have in here that it takes approximately 1,600 and some cars to make the same wear that one hauler has with his large packer truck. There's a lot of real concerns from my standpoint, and hopefully all those people that called me, maybe they'd like to call Colleen since she didn't get any of those phone calls. But, neither here nor there but I think these are some of the things that Michael has even mentioned the fact that maybe the main hauler who represented the balance of the haulers in discussion, if you'd like to come up at this particular time to address maybe some of the concerns that Mike might have. But let me just back off a little bit too. The yard waste collection. Much of what I go through is the same thing that Colleen says she does. Is goes back into composting. Plus the fact that 34 cents more per month would really not be that much of a problem. That may involve some people who are on fixed incomes, even to come up with those additional dollars, that it might be a little difficult for them. But, maybe at this time, if one of the representatives who had addressed the Council that one time, would you like to come up here and maybe indicate. 34 f } City Council Meeting - February 13, 1995 Tom Workman: Who would you like to talk? Mayor Chmiel: Whoever. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Tom, you're never at a loss for words. Tom Workman: I can make a couple of points. Probably answer some questions... I'm Tom Workman, a resident of Chanhassen and I happen to be employed by one of the haulers in the city so I have a little bit of a role. I've had a little bit of past experience in government in the city and government currently at the statewide level. I don't know if you want to ask me some questions. I've kind of paid a lot of attention to this. It looks like I will be named to the Legislative Commission on Waste Management which involves all sorts of things. And to talk about that from the state level, there's a lot of things going on here and I think the Council should be a little bit alarmed. I don't know if you've heard in your contract negotiations this word processing before tonight. It's a very big issues that's brought several County Commissioners out, and I can explain that a little bit. I think I've spoken to almost all of you or you've all spoken to me and I think I might have brought this issue up. I believe to date you've paid the consultant about $30,000.00 for this study. And for the County there's an awful lot at stake. They would like to process waste. Now this in itself is not a bad concept. What is flawed is that the State has kind of designated what's a good place to process and a bad place. They don't like to bury garbage but they like to burn it. And they like to compost it. Well, the Hennepin County burner bonded their edifice at about $95.00 a ton of waste. A ton of garbage waste. You can landfill it for about $40.00 a ton. Now if you were a hauler and you had customers who wanted low prices and good service, where would you go? So there's a big perpensity to get this stuff down to a Hennepin County burner. Now where they've now had to lower it to $60.00. Still high but they brought it down to $60.00 and then like all counties, figuring out new ways to get this stuff into that burner and so they're taxing all sorts of other things to get that accomplished. In fact I think the number is about $280 some odd million dollars that have been taxed statewide by counties under this processing and taxing and trying to redirect and designate where garbage is going. And to get back to the consultant, it was at Hennepin County applied for a grant. You guys paid for your study. Hennepin County paid for a grant or Carver County applied for a grant with the Board of Government Innovation and Cooperation people ... and applied for a $50,000.00 grant so that they could do this very same project in Chaska, Victoria, Waconia, and Laketown. Chanhassen's a leader in this county and what Chanhassen kind of does, other cities like to do. So there's $50,000.00 that they did attempt to get. Those cities will not possibly be able to afford their own study like we have generously done here in Chanhassen. And so this program and this proposal will tend to go on to the rest of the county. That's why there's an awful lot at stake and that's why I'm a little nervous about this word processing which has come up tonight and whether the city is going to process. The reason they don't like ... these serious leaky landfills and certainly we're not sending garbage into those landfills... liability insurance and stuff. Tipping fees at landfills are redirected to burners or you're going to have to pick up telephone books whether you like it or not or bucking batteries or recycling or whatever else. I get real nervous when anybody attempts to set a price. Unless there's some sort of collusion the city feels is going on out there, I think the haulers are trying to be as competitive as they can be to keep the costs down to maintain the customers and still provide great services. Haulers have said they will go to mini packers when road postings are on March 15th to May 13th. Two day moratorium in the city. Pick up only on 3 days, not 5. I'm trying to remember everything that's going on. Something that while I was sitting on the City Council, we decided to go to curbside recycling in the city of Chanhassen. We decided we had to go to every week because people would lose their interest if they missed it one week and it wasn't supposed to be another week. We don't need every week recycling in this city. If you go to every other week, and I would propose that we could have a City Council the second and fourth week of every month. A truck has been mandated by this city to follow a garbage truck, wouldn't have to pick up the one can, two jars, and the Sunday 35 S City Council Meeting - February 13, 1995 paper that could wait for a month to be picked up. So I don't know that this process has been one that the haulers have really been asked to participate. Come up with creative ideas about what can be done, because there's a lot of things. All you have to do is open up the phone book and go down and figure out new ways to do this. I don't think that it's been done. It's been, this process has been followed with the line that's on the front page there that says, get in line with this process or we will give out the whole city and you will be out. Those are the words in the second paragraph. That's been in every piece of documentation that's come from the city. So a lot of issues going on, not the least of which is processing issue that if you look, the State has given all 87 counties the right to sort of control where their garbage goes. It's a rather bulky system and every county kind of has their own concept of what that is. Thanks heaven we in Carver County didn't go and build a burner or other facility. Didn't have our own facility because now the counties that do are in great dire straits to get waste into their facilities where the Supreme Court said, you're interfering with interstate commerce. You can't do that. Was I going to answer some questions? Councilman Berquist: I hope so. First question. Confiscatory, is that the word you used? Tom Workman: The Governor uses that all the time. And he's my hero. Councilman Mason: Well, I'm kind of sorry to hear that. Tom Workman: It's just, it's a very sticky wicket and you guys know that and I'm confident that the haulers can help you work this stuff out. You have 6 licenses now. I think it's in fact going to be 5 very shortly. The numbers of haulers, the numbers of neighborhoods that are organizing on their own. My neighbors in my small neighborhood over by the landing want me to get an Aagard cart out in front of their house. That's great. I'd love to do it. I'll give them a great price but I don't need the government to tell me how to do that. Don, you have one of the more strong and vocal neighborhood organizations, I think they could probably accomplish that very easily. And we would be happy to do that for you. But to take that out is. Councilman Berquist: So the haulers, I had Mr. Johnson if the haulers had been working to resolve some of the issues that the city has been wanting to address. Road wear and tear. The aesthetic issues and he indicated that over a 2 year period of time, I think there had not been a lot of progress made. Yes or no? Dean Johnson: I think the Mayor earlier summed up what had been proposed by the haulers, as did Mr. Workman and the Council has not accepted those. There have been a couple of written submissions by the haulers to the Council. It has not been accepted to date. That's what I understand. Councilman Berquist: So there have been formal proposals made by the hauler associations to address these issues. Tom Workman: Well, and you know in relationship to the road issue, it's sort of a tough one to nail down. Two things. One, it's hard to prove if you took all the trucks off the roads, that the roads would last any longer. That study does not exist. And second of all, there are two cities nearby, they're about as close together as you can possibly get. Not Minneapolis and St. Paul but Norwood and Young America. Coincidentally, one of those cities does have a city wide contract with one hauler and I would ask if anybody knows who has the better roads. Which city? You really can't tell. Councilwoman Dockendorf. How long has it been in place? 36 City Council Meeting - February 13, 1995 Tom Workman: 15, 13 years possibly. So the study doesn't exist obviously. It's very difficult for anybody to defend a vehicle which provides the public health and good for moving trash but which has to do it in a large capacity and what it's hauling does not smell usually very good in 90 degrees. It's a very difficult thing to defend so to say that road wear and tear doesn't exist would be a lie also. Councilman Berquist: So cooperation has really not been forthcoming? Yes? No? Is it too early to tell? Is 2 years not a reasonable time to expect some progress? Tom Workman: No, I think the haulers want to cooperate. I think it's just been a process where under the threat of you're going to be out of business completely if you don't come to the table with what we want. — - - -- Councilman Mason: Where's that threat come from? Tom Workman: It's on the front page of that memo. Councilman Berquist: No, what it says is, if a negotiated contract with existing haulers is not possible, then staff will recommend that a contract for competitive bid be prepared and the city, if authorized, will prepare a request for proposals. Is that the sentence you're referring to? Tom Workman: I think Roger needed to put that in for legal reasons... Councilman Berquist: So and now the staff is recommending that the Council authorize them to finalize negotiations with existing haulers. So by that then negotiated contract with existing haulers is not possible. Or addressing of the concerns of the populous has not been accomplished to the city staffs satisfaction. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Or Council. Bob Generous: Or Council's. Councilman Mason: Well I think the haulers have been strangely quiet on this, to be honest with you. Tom Workman: Well I don't think there's been a public meeting or even the haulers meeting for some time. I think a lot of the haulers were under the impression that there was still a first and second reading and this is a finalization of the negotiations. Otherwise I think this room would be noticeably more crowded. Councilman Mason: Well you know Tom, with your experience up here, I think you know as well as I do that people don't complain until a law is changed and then they bring down the roof. You know Verrielle you made that comment about reading the notices. You know short of a 72 point headline, you know I think everybody, and I include myself in that, has got to take responsibility for what's going on in this city and I do get a little tired, and I'm talking dog gone it, I will get on my soapbox for a minute here. I'm talking as a parent, a teacher and as a Councilman. You know I get a little tired being told that people don't have to be responsible. I mean if people aren't reading the public notices, I can't help that. I mean this has been publicized. Now I'm not saying that people don't know what's going on, because I don't think they do. But on the one hand, I think everybody in this city has to take responsibility for what's going on in this city, you know. Maybe we do need another public hearing on this. Maybe we do but on the one hand I'm hearing, saying dog gone it, you know city stay out of this but then I'm also hearing, you know you really should be publicizing this more. So those are two different issues. But still I'm going well, when are we, and I'm also a citizen of this community. When 37 City Council Meeting - February 13, 1995 does our responsibility start? I guess, and maybe that's a whole different issue but I still, Tom I've heard from you but I haven't heard, I mean I paged through this contract and I think, well. It looks okay to me but I haven't had a citizen call me. I haven't had a hauler call me and say well this part's good. Dog gone it, this is really going to hurt me. I'm indifferent to this. I don't know. I don't know how much input haulers have had on this. Willard Johnson: Mike, I want to make a statement as a public citizen. I'm satisfied with my hauler but I don't get no notice because I don't get the Villager because there's nothing in it as far as I'm concerned. I'm not going to pay for a paper that I can't read. I'm interested in the Council meetings and half the time I can go pick up a paper in Excelsior and I can get more out of that than I do out of the Villager so ... like it or not, that's the way I feel. Councilman Mason: Willard, that's not my bailiwick. Willard Johnson: But Colleen says it was in here twice. I've only noticed one meeting where... Councilwoman Dockendorf: But the city newsletter has dealt with it at least twice and that goes to every resident. Willard Johnson: I don't ... city. And I work for the city. Mayor Chmiel: Maybe, just before you start I'd like to bring this up to Council. In looking at what has transpired, maybe it would be best for Council to sit down and work directly with the haulers at a work session. Just as a suggestion. And to see if we can't pull something together at that particular time and if we can't, then we have our opportunity to go back to where we're at right now. Councilman Senn: Doesn't bother me. Councilwoman Dockendorf: You know, in my opinion and in sitting on the committee. Mayor Chmiel: Well I sat on the committee too. Councilwoman Dockendorf: I know. And the issues, you know. Mayor Chmiel: It's a hard thing to really address and I do, I do believe in the free enterprise system but I think what I'd like to do is try that particular position out. If we can't come up with a conclusion, then let's move ahead with it. We've sat around as long as we have. Let's go from there. Councilman Senn: If nothing else, it will prolong it out a while longer. Mayor Chmiel: Well, that too. Councilman Senn: Our first open work session is what, a few months down the road? Mayor Chmiel: Maybe that I think is the position that we should come from and have the haulers come back. Get a date pulled together and Don will notify each of you of that meeting and then we can sit down and really work from there. But that meeting we'd better come up with a conclusion. Okay? So maybe what we should 38 City Council Meeting - February 13, 1995 do, I'd like to give you some time but we have a few more items on the agenda that are going to be controversial and we're going to be sitting here until midnight, or probably after that. But if you could summarize something in just two minutes, I'll be more than happy to let you do that. Tom Moline: Okay. First of all, your point of dragging it out a little bit more. By State Statutes, you can do it no quicker than 6 months. There's no time limit on the other end and I think that's good. Alright. We want to do what's right. Negotiation. I think the haulers do feel that we have tried to negotiate. It's not been a give and take situation. It's not, this is bad. We don't want this. It's just, we proposed something and then a blanket statement that that's not good enough, okay. It's not been a give and take on individual items. This contract, I don't think any of the haulers think it's good. There's some very bad things. Number one, we're not guarantee payment. We're tied to a contract to provide service. We're not guaranteed payment. That issue was brought up and there's no regrets for it. Okay. As far as negotiated prices here, if you take a look at all the prices on that whole questionnaire, look at the variation in them. On one, there's some mistakes in there. There's some omissions in there. There was a wide range of responses on the part of the hauler and in talking with the others, I don't believe all of the points were completely understood. We're all in the same business. We're all successful. Otherwise we wouldn't be here today but you've got a very wide range. There was some real confusion on that whole questionnaire and the whole price issue, so far we have spent two sessions on it. Supposedly it's ended now. Our total thoughts after the second session was, is the negotiations over? Was that it? You know we're feeling a little resigned right now. A little beat up. I think that's why you haven't heard from us before. We consider ourselves a guest here in the community. We provide a service. We try to do it in the most cost effective manner that we can. Provide a good service. That is our goal and I don't -know, we're- feeling a bit beat up, so. Be it right or wrong. Thank you. Councilman Berquist: I missed your name. Tom Moline: Oh! My name's Tom Moline. I'm with Woodlake Sanitation. Councilman Berquist: Thank you Tom. Mayor Chmiel: Okay with that, can I have a motion to put this on a work session and sit down with the haulers and Don will set that up and notify the haulers as to what date that's going to be. Councilman Senn: So moved. Mayor Chmiel: Is there a second? I'll second it. Councilman Senn moved, Mayor Chmiel seconded to table the final contract negotiations for organized collection and direct staff to set up a work session with the City Council and the haulers. All voted in favor and the motion carried. VARIANCE REQUEST FOR A 6.5 FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK VARIANCE FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A SHED. 931. SADDLEBROOK TRAIL, MATTHEW HOFFMAN Mayor Chmiel: What happened with the Board of Adjustments and Appeals with this particular one? Mark? Or Willard? 39 City Council Meeting - October 9, 1995 SET CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION TO DISCUSS ORGANIZED C_ OLLECTION, PLANNING DIRECTOR. Kate Aanenson: During my budget presentation we raised the issue that we still had that task not completed and we had put money in there for the completion of the, implementation actually of the organized collection study. Just to refresh your memory, we left it, we had the staff had completed the districting. We actually completed the contract language. The fee schedule and the servicing and even actually looked at pricing. At that meeting how we wanted another opportunity to meet with you and to discuss their perspective and the Council chose at that time not to go forward with any action and wanted an opportunity to possibly meet with the haulers. You asked during the budget presentation to put this back on the table so we've given you some possible meeting dates. If you want to just pick one of those and we'll bring back all the background information if you'd like then. Councilman Senn: ... I thought the last direction was, not only that we wanted to talk again but I thought they were supposed to go back. Kate Aanenson: No. Where it got left is, their preference is not to have the organized collection. Councilman Senn: I understand. Kate Aanenson: So they wanted one more opportunity to now. Councilman Senn: But we said you're going to have one I thought. _ Kate Aanenson: Well you wanted one more opportunity to meet with them. So if you wanted to meet and discuss where we left it, that's fine. If you wanted to give me direction on what you'd like to meet on. We can bring you back where we left it. All the meetings. Where we showed the districting or if you want an opportunity to meet with the haulers again or whatever direction you'd like, we'd be willing to do. Councilman Senn: But I thought at the time we went around and stated this whole thing and I thought there was a consensus on Council that there was going to be organized collection. Now that you understand that haulers, go sit down with staff and either come up with a plan that you can jointly agree to, or we're going to simply go with staffs plan. Now I thought that's where we left it. Councilman Berquist: More or less I thought that... Councilwoman Dockendorf. I thought that was it too. Councilman Berquist: Who cancelled the meeting? Back in May. Councilman Senn: Well see I don't think it was ever... Kate Aanenson: They wanted to meet with Council. Councilman Berquist: They wanted to meet with Council? Kate Aanenson: Correct. .- City Council Meeting - October 9, 1995 Councilman Senn: They came and met with Council and that's when we all went aroutid and told them, gave our consensus. Go sit down with staff but I mean that was in a regular Council meeting. I can't remember if it was a Visitor Presentation or if it was under the item but we said, you're going to have it. Now go work it out with staff or. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Yeah, I don't want to have the haulers back. Councilman Senn: I don't want to bring the haulers back again to try and change our minds. I'm sorry, I'm just not open for that. I'd rather vote on it. If you and the haulers sat down and agreed to a plan that alters what you guys came up with before, I'd love to see it. Kate Aanenson: We haven't done that. Councilman Senn: That's what I'd love to see happen. Mayor Chmiel: Did you see that memo that you just got? Did you get an opportunity to read that? Councilman Senn: No. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Well it's nice that Chaska gave us this information but we don't know what kind of information they gave to the residents before eliciting their reactions. Mayor Chmiel: There was a certain amount of that done, wasn't there? ...ordinarily satisfied with their garbage collection service. 89% rate it as excellent or good with only 6% thought it was only fair or poor. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Well I would think that we're going to get, you know we would get similar results here and I think in fact we did but that doesn't address. Councilman Berquist: That doesn't address our concerns. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Exactly. Mayor Chmiel: Not it doesn't but then it's just another thing to look at Councilwoman Dockendorf: You know I concur with Mark. I thought we gave clear direction that it was going to happen and we were giving one more opportunity for the haulers to get together and decide how they wanted to do it, or at least the pricing schedule I think was the issue that was... Councilman Senn: Yeah the only complaint calls I got from residents was the haulers had been going back to them saying if you go to organized collection your rates are going to go up. Kind of a scare tactic. Kate Aanenson: Well ... the only issue that was unresolved is that we agreed to, we picked the lowest pricing schedule and it appeared that the service level would remain the same and that the question was, there was a question about yard waste. That there'd be some way to accomplish covering that, I mean at least even twice a year in the spring and the fall. That was really, because we had basically negotiated a deal and put the contract together so the staff had done. 47 City Council Meeting - October 9, 1995 Councilman Senn: Yeah and they were saying that they didn't like that and that's kind of when we said, you're going to have it so go work something out with staff or that's what you're going to get was what I remember. Kate Aanenson: So I guess you'd like us to meet with them again? Councilman Senn: See if you guys can work out some compromises. If you can't, I think you should bring staffs plan back. Councilwoman Dockendorf. I think we need to meet with them again because there has been such a time period since we last met so I think the staff should have a discussion with the haulers saying you know we haven't dropped this issue. This is where we last left it. Council wants to go ahead with this plan. Mayor Chmiel: Not necessarily all Council. Councilman Mason: Yeah. Mayor Chmiel: But, no that's the direction we can go, fine. But I think. Kate Aanenson: Just so I'm clear. We'll meet with the haulers and... Mayor Chmiel: I'd like to just sit in on that to see what they might come up with as well so let me know. Is there anybody else from Council like to sit in? - Councilman Berquist: Yeah, I might like to. Councilman Senn: Well then why don't we just have them come in Council. Councilman Mason: Well yeah because we can only have two of us, right? Well then maybe they should come in. Kate Aanenson: Well I was thinking they would come in after we met with them once ... so we'll meet with them ... and ° put them on the agenda. Mayor Chmiel: Alright. Okay, with that. Councilman Berquist: I've got a couple of issues I wish to discuss briefly. Mayor ChmieL Okay, go ahead. Councilman Berquist: First of all I want to talk about... necessarily in order here. I guess maybe I do have an order. I want to talk quickly about this industrial park issue. The painted block versus dyed block versus painted pre -cast versus tile. I want to just try and find out where that direction came from in the last and the latest and greatest industrial park. Over on the other side of Audubon. The PUD agreement calls out that if there's going to be a block building, it has to be a dyed block rather than painted and I don't know if there's some wordage that refers to durability that could be misconstrued in meaning dyed block. I understand the paint adhesiveness of pre -cast is better than block but the paints that are on the market now for block are much better than they used to be and I wonder whether it was Council's intent to add roughly a buck a square foot to a building when you're talking about 30,000 foot and more than that, if you're talking about less. By requiring dyed block. .•