Laserfiche WebLink
Under Article VIII, the City would have access to the Development Property <br />to inspect the construction of the Improvements and access to the books to <br />determine if the Project is breaking-even, "except as may be otherwise <br />provided by operation of law,...". <br /> <br />In the past, the City has discussed the Waste Management Act which was <br />adopted by Legislature and pertains mainly to siting of new landfills. <br />Council and members of the public know that the City has little local <br />control over siting of new landfills. Council should be aware that it is <br />not certain and there is some debate on whether the City has lost it's <br />control, because of that Act, with regard to an expansion of existing <br />landfills and siting new landfills. Council may be thinking that the City <br />should be entering into this agreement with Waste Management because Anoka <br />County, PCA and Metro Council will allow the vertical expansion anyway. <br />That vertical expansion will be permitted by these other governmental <br />units, even though Ramsey objects, should not be a foregone conclusion when <br />deliberating whether or not to enter into this agreement with Waste <br />Management. <br /> <br />Edward Moersfelder - Attorney for Waste Management of Minnesota, Inc. - <br />Made the following comments: Waste Management and the City have come a <br />long way in preparing the agreement and there isn't anything from Waste <br />Management's standpoint that would present unsurmountable obstacles. Waste <br />Management is very interested in building the ski facility. Waste <br />Management has operations all over the Country and in the course of those <br />operations, has done similar projects in other cities. The recreational <br />facility would be good for the citizens of Ramsey and a demonstration of <br />what Waste Management can contribute after operations and that they are <br />responsible citizens of the communities in which they operate. Waste <br />Management also recognizes that there a lot of other people besides the <br />City and themselves that have a hand in designing the expansion of the <br />landfill. When talking about giving and taking, Mr. Goodrich is correct in <br />saying that in order to move forward, the City has to agree to it and then <br />Waste Management can perform. It is conceivable that once Waste Management <br />has gone through the process with the City, PCA can determine that a ski <br />hill is not an acceptable final use of the facility. The alternative for a <br />recreational facility was included in the agreement as an attempt to say to <br />Ramsey that if Waste Management cannot construct the ski hill, Waste <br />Management will make something available for another facility. In regard <br />to concerns with reference of the 1984 purchase price agreement and the 10% <br />of gross revenue collected by the City from the landfill, there is no <br />intent for this agreement to say those terms would fall by the wayside. If <br />the vertical expansion goes forward, with or without the agreement with <br />Ramsey, Waste Management recognizes that the terms of the 1984 agreement <br />will be carried out throughout the vertical expansion time frame and there <br />is no intent to take any of that back. Mr. Goodrich's concerns regarding <br />'cooperation' on the part of the City go beyond what he and Waste <br />Management intended to do in drafting the agreement; the City's <br />'cooperative' role was intended to be one of non-compete in a commercial <br />sense. There is nothing in the agreement that Waste Management intended to <br />take away the city's police power to regulate landfills in Ramsey. Waste <br />Management was trying to avoid a situation where the City would grant a <br />City Council/March 9, 1988 <br /> <br />Page 7 of 14 <br /> <br /> <br />