My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Council - 01/25/1983
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Council
>
1983
>
Agenda - Council - 01/25/1983
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/15/2025 11:56:29 AM
Creation date
5/18/2004 7:46:55 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Council
Document Date
01/25/1983
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
227
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />Janaury 11, 1983 <br />Carl Michaud, Environmental Planner <br />Pa ge 2 <br /> <br />2. Liability Fund: <br /> <br />Whether privately or publicly owned, a fund needs to be established to <br />protect the local unit from all costs that maN result because of a "failure <br />or pollution problem" during the lifetime of the facility and for a number of <br />years after closure. (I think the Committee is on the right tract on this <br />issue and therefore I have no additional recommendations at this point in time). <br /> <br />3. Direct Costs: <br /> <br />4o <br /> <br />We recommend that ~1~1 direct costs such as fire protection, buffer zone <br />amenities, water'and sewer ~e~vi~e, and street repair be paid by the facility <br />in addition-to tax payments or Pilot. The facility owner-operator should be <br />required to negotiate a contract with' the local unit to cover these items. <br /> <br />Indirect Costs: <br /> <br />Experience with existing solid waste disposal facilities also shows that there <br />are other less direct costs to the "host community" such as street maintenance, <br />trash control, monitoring andinspection costs, etc. which should be reimbursed. <br />These costs and problems will vary from facility to facility and should be <br />subject to negotiations between the facility owner-operator and the "host <br />community" irrespective of private or public ownership. Agreements resulting <br />from such negotiation could be made subject to approval by a neutral outside <br />agency such as the Waste Management Board, MPCA, Metropolitan Council, etc. <br />Such agency could also be granted the authority to impose an agreement if a <br />voluntary agreement or contract can not be achieved. <br /> <br />5. Existing Facilities - Compensation: <br /> <br />A. The liability fund to be established as in paragraph'2, should cover all <br /> existing facilities as well as the new facilities to be established per <br /> the 1980 Solid and Hazardous Waste Act. · <br /> <br />B. The 1980 Solid and Hazardous Waste Act should be amended, if necessary, <br /> so that existing solid waste landfill facilities which continue to operate <br /> and "host communities" would be treated the same as new facilities <br /> established in communities Under this act. (This could be optional <br /> as determined by the host community). <br /> <br />There should be no disposal charge (tipping fee) for the residents of the local <br />unit itself, which contains or will contain an operating solid waste landfill <br />facility. - <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.