Laserfiche WebLink
the number of solid waste and recycling <br />collection services available in the area. The <br />reasons for implementing organized <br />collection can vary, but include: <br />a) Public safety concerns caused by the <br />number and frequency of large trucks <br />moving quickly through residential <br />neighborhoods; <br />b) Reducing wear on public infrastructure <br />from heavy truck traffic; <br />c) Improving the efficiency, cost and <br />quality of garbage and recycling service <br />provided to local residents; <br />d) Cooperating with other local <br />governments to best meet solid waste <br />management and recycling objectives; <br />e) Taking local steps to reduce energy <br />impacts of public services; and <br />f) Meeting the requirements of county <br />ordinances and solid waste management <br />plans as required under Minn. Stat. § <br />115.94. <br />Organized collection is also encouraged in <br />state solid waste policies as a means of <br />improving the efficiency and coordination of <br />solid waste management between local units <br />of government. There are very specific and <br />burdensome public procedures laid out in <br />statute defining how such a decision must be <br />publicly vetted and approved and over what <br />time period that can occur. <br />Despite all of these important and valid <br />reasons for using organized collection, <br />legislation has been discussed in several <br />recent sessions that would allow special <br />takings claims or contractual damages to be <br />claimed by the solid waste industry if local <br />governments make decisions that limit the <br />number of companies that can collect <br />garbage in a community in a manner that <br />prevents a company currently operating in <br />the community from continuing to do so <br />through the implementation of organized <br />collection. The unspecified and ongoing <br />liability this change would create would <br />have the effect of eliminating organized <br />collection as a waste management option. <br />This change would also create a virtual <br />monopoly situation for any company <br />awarded a solid waste contract under <br />organized collection. The local unit of <br />government would have to "buy out" a <br />contractor in the future to change providers, <br />even if their services were no longer the <br />lowest bid. It also creates an incentive for <br />bidders under organized collection to submit <br />high bids, as they would be eligible for <br />damages if they fail to win without having to <br />provide service. Furthermore, this is a <br />precedent that, if applied to other <br />government purchasing and service <br />contracting decisions, would clearly run <br />counter to the public purpose of government <br />providing services at the lowest feasible cost <br />to taxpayers. <br />Response: The League of Minnesota <br />Cities opposes efforts to apply inverse <br />condemnation claims to city solid waste <br />contracting decisions or to allow <br />automatic contractual damage claims for <br />solid waste haulers that lose competitive <br />bids in organized collection communities. <br />Further, the League supports the current <br />state policy that organized collection is a <br />valuable tool as part of a comprehensive <br />solid waste and recycling management <br />program and recognizes the need to <br />protect and preserve the authority of <br />cities to adopt solid waste service <br />contracts that protect public safety, the <br />environment and public infrastructure. <br />SD -24. Private Well Drilling <br />Issue: The state has continued to place <br />requirements on public water supply <br />providers to add drinking water treatment <br />and testing, to restrict the volume of water <br />used, and to increase the cost of water use <br />League of Minnesota Cities <br />2016 City Policies Page 14 <br />