Cannon Falls
City rejects government managed trash collection.
April 5, 2022 City Council Meeting
At the public hearing called to gather citizen input on government managed trash collection, 100% of citizens who spoke were against it for various reasons, but one common theme was the opposition to government taking away citizen choice.
Two testifiers with experience in solid waste disposal raised critical points for residents to consider. Bobby from Highland Sanitation spoke of the mandates in Goodhue County which force all haulers to pay high tipping fees. He said that it is the most expensive county they do business in. Goodhue County charges $118 a ton vs. other counties that charge in the $80's a ton. What may look like an apples to apples comparison when looking at other cities, may actually be an apples to oranges comparison.
Bobby also talked about his experience negotiating a contract in St. Paul and that it took hundreds of hours, and customer service was sacrificed in the end. He said that there are lower prices for those who never bothered price checking, reminding residents to always price check with the competition every few years. He also questioned whether cities like St. Paul and Bloomington, which eliminated choice, actually had lower road maintenance costs. In his opinion, the weather wrecked roads long before their trucks did from driving on them.
Bobby also highlighted one key issue with billing. In most government collection cities, payments to haulers are guaranteed. If the city forces everyone to have service, they are required to making everyone pay. In an open market, collection of bad bills is on the hauler. In a government contract market, the city is responsible for bad bills. The city then has to use taxpayer money to pay the haulers and then city and county employees have to spend resources attempting to collect bad debt through property tax penalties. This is a hidden taxpayer cost that cities don't like to talk about.
Resident Floyd Hauser talked about his experience with Greenline Disposal. Said that competition in Rochester forced all haulers to move to the current carts of today that are picked up by automated trucks. Innovation is lost in a monopoly. He said that he lives in a condo where all three units have one bin. With recycling, he said they are forced to have three bins and only use one. He also stated that two streets recently resurfaced that did not have trash trucks drive on them had just as many potholes as other streets.
Other residents spoke in opposition and raised questions that GHCC will help answer.
The mayor stated that trucks are ripping up roads during the summer. This is not supported by experts. The most sensitive time for road use is during the spring thaw, which is why in some areas you will see spring weight restrictions being posted. There are a myriad of experts who claim everything from no damage to horrendous damage. Yes there are some city engineers who state there is either no damage, isn't measurable, or isn't going to change maintenance budgets. GHCC simply asks the basic question, show me the money, or in this case, show me the budget and tax reductions in public works budgets when cities remove a few truck trips from a road every year. GHCC has spent years looking for it and hasn't found one cent of savings.
One resident spoke of Better Business Bureau ratings, how one company scored poorly and another company scored excellent. Regardless of how one views BBB ratings, one thing that cannot be disputed is that if the city tells you that you will use a specific hauler, and you do not like their service, your only option is to sell your home and move to a different city. Not exactly what one considers putting residents first.
Councilmembers made several comments about not being required to take the low bidder. To a point, they are correct. The law requires lowest responsive responsible bidder for the purchase of tangible items, like concrete, copy machines, etc. For services, the city is not required to select the lowest bidder. But this does not mean that the city can arbitrarily pick anyone they want. A city may be sued if they pick a service provider for specious reasons. As one resident pointed out, this is a system that could be ripe for corruption. Does a city council member vote for the highest bidder because they received a campaign contribution that does not require disclosure under the law? Those questions start to get raised when a city picks the highest bidder instead of the lowest without darn good reasons that can be clearly articulated.
One resident spoke about some seniors having their kids take their trash. Under an open market, they don't need trash service. In most government contracts, they will be forced to have service even if they don't need it. The condo resident who shares one can with two other residents, will now be forced to pay for three cans even if they only use one. Can can sharing be negotiated? Can residents can opt out? Sure, anything is possible, but highly unlikely. If you let people share or opt out, the entire contract price goes up. It is a dirty secret that the way to lower contract rates overall is to force some people to pay for service they don't need. Sort of like forcing everyone to use the same barber so the cost of haircuts can be lowered. But what about the bald guy? Why should he have to pay?
One resident asked if a performance bond requirement could force out small companies. The answer is yes. This was seen in Bloomington when city official initially demanded that each hauler provide a bond of a dollar amount so large that it would pay for the city to hire a different hauler to do their service area for an entire year. Apparently Bloomington believed that it would take a year to find another hauler if someone went out of business. The reality was that it was things like crazy bond requirements that were actually damaging companies and forced the longtime local hauler, run by a lifetime city resident, to be forced out of business.
One resident asked if negotiations would be confidential or would their discussions be publicly disclosed. State law clearly provides for an exemption to federal antitrust laws and allows the haulers to meet privately to collude on pricing. The public will not be allowed to observed those discussions. They will most likely be held at city hall in closed door meetings that staff may be invited to attend from time to time only if requested.
Several residents inquired about whether new cans would be required and how inflation and fuel costs would be addressed. All of these issues are addressed in large contracts. Everything is negotiated down to the penny and provision. Most contracts have provisions that allow costs for increased tipping fees, inflation, and fuel costs to be added onto the initial rates.
One resident inquired if the company the city contracted with is bought out by a larger company no one wants, is the contract voided? Generally the answer is no. The contract remains in place for the full length of term. As the city attorney stated, if the contract ended immediately, then the next day there would be no trash service. It is correct that a provision could provide for contract termination in 60 days perhaps, but for every provision that is added into a contract that impacts the value of the contract, the price for residents generally increases.
The city attorney stated that the city may have more leverage to complain about bad service. This is absolutely false. The city must abide by the contract. Either you are in compliance or you are not. If the contract says more than 50% of carts must be emptied to be considered on time, like Bloomington had, then you need 50% plus 1 to be on time. If the city wants to negotiate 60% or 75%, then the price of the contract just went up. When you are in an open market, it takes one phone call to fire your current hauler and one phone call to hire another. No city has powers that top this!
A resident spoke about recycling carts sitting out for two weeks without being emptied under the city's recycling contract. In other cities, recycling is picked up by your trash hauler, not through a city government contract. You hire and fire your trash and recycling hauler as they come as a paired service.
To conclude, one resident raised questions about big time lobbyists. Yes the solid waste industry had a lot of paid lobbyists and government relations representatives. When a city decides to take over management of the trash system, awards a winner with a contract and kicks the rest out of the city, there is always an opening for corruption. The public will never know if their elected officials are getting campaign contributions that are below the limits that require reporting. And who knows, maybe elected officials are getting a cash payment to dodge reporting laws. What can be guaranteed is that if you have an open market system where the contract is between the resident and their own hauler, it is impossible for elected officials to be on the take because they are not involved.
At the conclusion of the hearing, the city council gave no indication as to what the next steps would be beyond gathering additional information. No future timelines were provided. No further meeting dates to discuss the issue were set. The mayor indicated that he and several on the council supported a referendum vote if they determined that there was citizen support.
The city council meeting is on YouTube and can be found at this link.
March 15, 2022 Introduction
The City of Cannon Falls has started down the road of taking away citizen rights to select their own hauler and is putting taxpayers in legal jeopardy. Garbage Haulers for Citizen Choice (GHCC) learned of the city's efforts due to an anonymous citizen tip.
The city council appears to have started the discussion on or before the February 15, 2022 council meeting where it appeared on the agenda as item 9A.
Then on March 1, 2022, the city council held a meeting which set a future timeline for action and demonstrated the city administrator's lack of understanding of the process set by state law and citizen rights under the city's charter.
At their March 15, 2022 council meeting, the council intends to vote to establish a public hearing on government managed trash for the April 5, 2022 council meeting.
The city administrator's lack of understanding of the process and failure to respect citizen rights is troubling. Minnesota Statutes 115A.94 calls for an open and transparent process, and longstanding legal practice requires parties to negotiate in good faith with ALL haulers in the market.
In this case, the city administrator has already stated for the record that he wants one hauler, meaning all competition is kicked out of the city. Then a council member has stated for the record that he wants fees added to utility bills. (see 3/1/22 meeting minutes)
The meeting minutes of March 1, 2022 further detail that the council discussed bidding process and administrative costs, stating a preference for a "single hauler contract". Furthermore there is a discussion about initiating an RFP process.
Let there be no ambiguity, the statements made by the city administrator and city council are a direct violation of Minnesota Statutes 115A.94 and their actions legally jeopardize their duty to negotiate contracts in good faith.
City attorneys in other cities, such as Roseville, have publicly cautioned staff and elected officials from making the exact statements made by the Cannon Falls city administrator and city council members. One cannot say they have negotiated in good faith when they have already made their decision prior to beginning negotiations.
Because Cannon Falls is a charter city, it has a city constitution that allows citizens to place issues before the voters per Chapter 11. (see city charter)
The new Cannon Falls city attorney Sarah Schwarzhoff, is well aware that citizens have the right to place this government managed trash scheme on the ballot because her boss, George Hoff, lost twice in the Minnesota Supreme Court, arguing that citizens have no rights to do this. Well citizens in Bloomington won that battle. (see MN Supreme Court A17-0221) (Schwarzhoff bio)
GHCC contacted the city administrator to inquire as to whether he was aware of the law and why he was not following it. During the short discussion, the city administrator stated that he was warned that GHCC might show up to look into this. He refused to provide any explanation, then got angry, said he does not talk to lawyers (which we are not), and then aggressively hung up the phone in the middle of the call.
City staff also refused to provide the name of the newly hired city attorney. GHCC quickly found this information and called Sarah Schwarzhoff of Hoff Barry Attorneys to discuss the issue. Ms. Schwarzhoff was rather unpleasant when she learned it was GHCC that was calling and stated that she did not regularly attend city council meetings but would be doing so on April 5, 2022.
Addressing the policy points made by the city council and staff on March 1, 2022, GHCC has seen these arguments made dozens of times before in other cities. The same tired false arguments used to support government taking over private business activities and eliminating a citizens right to choose.
Several city public works directors and city engineers have stated that there is no measurable wear and tear on city streets from garbage trucks. Bloomington and Roseville city engineers stated that there would be no change in their maintenance programs by removing a few garbage trucks from the road. There are no savings if a city will not change their maintenance program, and no city has ever reduced taxes due to taking away a citizen's right to choose their own trash hauler. Maplewood said their institution of single hauler would result in big savings, but then immediately raised property taxes and created a new natural gas tax all in the name of improving roads. The savings is imaginary.
Concerning the effort to deter illegal dumping, there is zero evidence that criminals who engage in illegal dumping will suddenly change their behavior because the city institutes government managed trash collection.
The so called resident savings that is always touted by city councils is often illusive when one examines the details of what likely would be a 100+ page contract for service between the city and haulers, cutting out citizens. Often times base rates are reduced to make city council members look good, and then residents are nickeled and dimed for every imaginable add on which in the open marked was included with service. Then there is what is known as the "senior slam" where residents, generally senior citizens, are forced to pay for trash service they do not need because they either have their grandkids take care of it or share a can with a neighboring senior. Of course, if you make people pay for something they do not need, you can charge other users less, but that does not make it right or allow one to call it honest savings.
One thing the council will not tell residents is how their quality of service will suffer. When haulers compete in an open market, it takes one call to fire a hauler and a second call to hire a new hauler. In Bloomington, a government managed single hauler city, one of the large providers constantly has complaints filed against them for being a day late on pickups. The city-hauler contract states that they are on time if they pick up 50% +1 of customers on their scheduled day. They have a long term contract so they cannot be fired if they meet these low standards. This large provider has privately admitted that they service their open market customers first in other cities because those citizens have a right to fire them directly for poor service on a moment's notice.
Reading the March 1, 2022 meeting minutes clearly indicates that in the mind of the city administrator and some council members, this is a done deal. Well citizens have rights before their city council, and they have the additional right in Cannon Falls to simply go around the city council and place the issue directly on the ballot.
updated 4/7/22
City rejects government managed trash collection.
April 5, 2022 City Council Meeting
At the public hearing called to gather citizen input on government managed trash collection, 100% of citizens who spoke were against it for various reasons, but one common theme was the opposition to government taking away citizen choice.
Two testifiers with experience in solid waste disposal raised critical points for residents to consider. Bobby from Highland Sanitation spoke of the mandates in Goodhue County which force all haulers to pay high tipping fees. He said that it is the most expensive county they do business in. Goodhue County charges $118 a ton vs. other counties that charge in the $80's a ton. What may look like an apples to apples comparison when looking at other cities, may actually be an apples to oranges comparison.
Bobby also talked about his experience negotiating a contract in St. Paul and that it took hundreds of hours, and customer service was sacrificed in the end. He said that there are lower prices for those who never bothered price checking, reminding residents to always price check with the competition every few years. He also questioned whether cities like St. Paul and Bloomington, which eliminated choice, actually had lower road maintenance costs. In his opinion, the weather wrecked roads long before their trucks did from driving on them.
Bobby also highlighted one key issue with billing. In most government collection cities, payments to haulers are guaranteed. If the city forces everyone to have service, they are required to making everyone pay. In an open market, collection of bad bills is on the hauler. In a government contract market, the city is responsible for bad bills. The city then has to use taxpayer money to pay the haulers and then city and county employees have to spend resources attempting to collect bad debt through property tax penalties. This is a hidden taxpayer cost that cities don't like to talk about.
Resident Floyd Hauser talked about his experience with Greenline Disposal. Said that competition in Rochester forced all haulers to move to the current carts of today that are picked up by automated trucks. Innovation is lost in a monopoly. He said that he lives in a condo where all three units have one bin. With recycling, he said they are forced to have three bins and only use one. He also stated that two streets recently resurfaced that did not have trash trucks drive on them had just as many potholes as other streets.
Other residents spoke in opposition and raised questions that GHCC will help answer.
The mayor stated that trucks are ripping up roads during the summer. This is not supported by experts. The most sensitive time for road use is during the spring thaw, which is why in some areas you will see spring weight restrictions being posted. There are a myriad of experts who claim everything from no damage to horrendous damage. Yes there are some city engineers who state there is either no damage, isn't measurable, or isn't going to change maintenance budgets. GHCC simply asks the basic question, show me the money, or in this case, show me the budget and tax reductions in public works budgets when cities remove a few truck trips from a road every year. GHCC has spent years looking for it and hasn't found one cent of savings.
One resident spoke of Better Business Bureau ratings, how one company scored poorly and another company scored excellent. Regardless of how one views BBB ratings, one thing that cannot be disputed is that if the city tells you that you will use a specific hauler, and you do not like their service, your only option is to sell your home and move to a different city. Not exactly what one considers putting residents first.
Councilmembers made several comments about not being required to take the low bidder. To a point, they are correct. The law requires lowest responsive responsible bidder for the purchase of tangible items, like concrete, copy machines, etc. For services, the city is not required to select the lowest bidder. But this does not mean that the city can arbitrarily pick anyone they want. A city may be sued if they pick a service provider for specious reasons. As one resident pointed out, this is a system that could be ripe for corruption. Does a city council member vote for the highest bidder because they received a campaign contribution that does not require disclosure under the law? Those questions start to get raised when a city picks the highest bidder instead of the lowest without darn good reasons that can be clearly articulated.
One resident spoke about some seniors having their kids take their trash. Under an open market, they don't need trash service. In most government contracts, they will be forced to have service even if they don't need it. The condo resident who shares one can with two other residents, will now be forced to pay for three cans even if they only use one. Can can sharing be negotiated? Can residents can opt out? Sure, anything is possible, but highly unlikely. If you let people share or opt out, the entire contract price goes up. It is a dirty secret that the way to lower contract rates overall is to force some people to pay for service they don't need. Sort of like forcing everyone to use the same barber so the cost of haircuts can be lowered. But what about the bald guy? Why should he have to pay?
One resident asked if a performance bond requirement could force out small companies. The answer is yes. This was seen in Bloomington when city official initially demanded that each hauler provide a bond of a dollar amount so large that it would pay for the city to hire a different hauler to do their service area for an entire year. Apparently Bloomington believed that it would take a year to find another hauler if someone went out of business. The reality was that it was things like crazy bond requirements that were actually damaging companies and forced the longtime local hauler, run by a lifetime city resident, to be forced out of business.
One resident asked if negotiations would be confidential or would their discussions be publicly disclosed. State law clearly provides for an exemption to federal antitrust laws and allows the haulers to meet privately to collude on pricing. The public will not be allowed to observed those discussions. They will most likely be held at city hall in closed door meetings that staff may be invited to attend from time to time only if requested.
Several residents inquired about whether new cans would be required and how inflation and fuel costs would be addressed. All of these issues are addressed in large contracts. Everything is negotiated down to the penny and provision. Most contracts have provisions that allow costs for increased tipping fees, inflation, and fuel costs to be added onto the initial rates.
One resident inquired if the company the city contracted with is bought out by a larger company no one wants, is the contract voided? Generally the answer is no. The contract remains in place for the full length of term. As the city attorney stated, if the contract ended immediately, then the next day there would be no trash service. It is correct that a provision could provide for contract termination in 60 days perhaps, but for every provision that is added into a contract that impacts the value of the contract, the price for residents generally increases.
The city attorney stated that the city may have more leverage to complain about bad service. This is absolutely false. The city must abide by the contract. Either you are in compliance or you are not. If the contract says more than 50% of carts must be emptied to be considered on time, like Bloomington had, then you need 50% plus 1 to be on time. If the city wants to negotiate 60% or 75%, then the price of the contract just went up. When you are in an open market, it takes one phone call to fire your current hauler and one phone call to hire another. No city has powers that top this!
A resident spoke about recycling carts sitting out for two weeks without being emptied under the city's recycling contract. In other cities, recycling is picked up by your trash hauler, not through a city government contract. You hire and fire your trash and recycling hauler as they come as a paired service.
To conclude, one resident raised questions about big time lobbyists. Yes the solid waste industry had a lot of paid lobbyists and government relations representatives. When a city decides to take over management of the trash system, awards a winner with a contract and kicks the rest out of the city, there is always an opening for corruption. The public will never know if their elected officials are getting campaign contributions that are below the limits that require reporting. And who knows, maybe elected officials are getting a cash payment to dodge reporting laws. What can be guaranteed is that if you have an open market system where the contract is between the resident and their own hauler, it is impossible for elected officials to be on the take because they are not involved.
At the conclusion of the hearing, the city council gave no indication as to what the next steps would be beyond gathering additional information. No future timelines were provided. No further meeting dates to discuss the issue were set. The mayor indicated that he and several on the council supported a referendum vote if they determined that there was citizen support.
The city council meeting is on YouTube and can be found at this link.
March 15, 2022 Introduction
The City of Cannon Falls has started down the road of taking away citizen rights to select their own hauler and is putting taxpayers in legal jeopardy. Garbage Haulers for Citizen Choice (GHCC) learned of the city's efforts due to an anonymous citizen tip.
The city council appears to have started the discussion on or before the February 15, 2022 council meeting where it appeared on the agenda as item 9A.
Then on March 1, 2022, the city council held a meeting which set a future timeline for action and demonstrated the city administrator's lack of understanding of the process set by state law and citizen rights under the city's charter.
At their March 15, 2022 council meeting, the council intends to vote to establish a public hearing on government managed trash for the April 5, 2022 council meeting.
The city administrator's lack of understanding of the process and failure to respect citizen rights is troubling. Minnesota Statutes 115A.94 calls for an open and transparent process, and longstanding legal practice requires parties to negotiate in good faith with ALL haulers in the market.
In this case, the city administrator has already stated for the record that he wants one hauler, meaning all competition is kicked out of the city. Then a council member has stated for the record that he wants fees added to utility bills. (see 3/1/22 meeting minutes)
The meeting minutes of March 1, 2022 further detail that the council discussed bidding process and administrative costs, stating a preference for a "single hauler contract". Furthermore there is a discussion about initiating an RFP process.
Let there be no ambiguity, the statements made by the city administrator and city council are a direct violation of Minnesota Statutes 115A.94 and their actions legally jeopardize their duty to negotiate contracts in good faith.
City attorneys in other cities, such as Roseville, have publicly cautioned staff and elected officials from making the exact statements made by the Cannon Falls city administrator and city council members. One cannot say they have negotiated in good faith when they have already made their decision prior to beginning negotiations.
Because Cannon Falls is a charter city, it has a city constitution that allows citizens to place issues before the voters per Chapter 11. (see city charter)
The new Cannon Falls city attorney Sarah Schwarzhoff, is well aware that citizens have the right to place this government managed trash scheme on the ballot because her boss, George Hoff, lost twice in the Minnesota Supreme Court, arguing that citizens have no rights to do this. Well citizens in Bloomington won that battle. (see MN Supreme Court A17-0221) (Schwarzhoff bio)
GHCC contacted the city administrator to inquire as to whether he was aware of the law and why he was not following it. During the short discussion, the city administrator stated that he was warned that GHCC might show up to look into this. He refused to provide any explanation, then got angry, said he does not talk to lawyers (which we are not), and then aggressively hung up the phone in the middle of the call.
City staff also refused to provide the name of the newly hired city attorney. GHCC quickly found this information and called Sarah Schwarzhoff of Hoff Barry Attorneys to discuss the issue. Ms. Schwarzhoff was rather unpleasant when she learned it was GHCC that was calling and stated that she did not regularly attend city council meetings but would be doing so on April 5, 2022.
Addressing the policy points made by the city council and staff on March 1, 2022, GHCC has seen these arguments made dozens of times before in other cities. The same tired false arguments used to support government taking over private business activities and eliminating a citizens right to choose.
Several city public works directors and city engineers have stated that there is no measurable wear and tear on city streets from garbage trucks. Bloomington and Roseville city engineers stated that there would be no change in their maintenance programs by removing a few garbage trucks from the road. There are no savings if a city will not change their maintenance program, and no city has ever reduced taxes due to taking away a citizen's right to choose their own trash hauler. Maplewood said their institution of single hauler would result in big savings, but then immediately raised property taxes and created a new natural gas tax all in the name of improving roads. The savings is imaginary.
Concerning the effort to deter illegal dumping, there is zero evidence that criminals who engage in illegal dumping will suddenly change their behavior because the city institutes government managed trash collection.
The so called resident savings that is always touted by city councils is often illusive when one examines the details of what likely would be a 100+ page contract for service between the city and haulers, cutting out citizens. Often times base rates are reduced to make city council members look good, and then residents are nickeled and dimed for every imaginable add on which in the open marked was included with service. Then there is what is known as the "senior slam" where residents, generally senior citizens, are forced to pay for trash service they do not need because they either have their grandkids take care of it or share a can with a neighboring senior. Of course, if you make people pay for something they do not need, you can charge other users less, but that does not make it right or allow one to call it honest savings.
One thing the council will not tell residents is how their quality of service will suffer. When haulers compete in an open market, it takes one call to fire a hauler and a second call to hire a new hauler. In Bloomington, a government managed single hauler city, one of the large providers constantly has complaints filed against them for being a day late on pickups. The city-hauler contract states that they are on time if they pick up 50% +1 of customers on their scheduled day. They have a long term contract so they cannot be fired if they meet these low standards. This large provider has privately admitted that they service their open market customers first in other cities because those citizens have a right to fire them directly for poor service on a moment's notice.
Reading the March 1, 2022 meeting minutes clearly indicates that in the mind of the city administrator and some council members, this is a done deal. Well citizens have rights before their city council, and they have the additional right in Cannon Falls to simply go around the city council and place the issue directly on the ballot.
updated 4/7/22