First off, can I get an amen for Susan Hubbard? Second, although Susan Young does not need me to defend her, I will. Ms. Young is easily one of the best program directors this city (and probably this state) is fortunate enough to have. The reason Minneapolis has such a comprehensive recycling program and the various "Clean City" initiatives is because of the efforts of Susan Young to run this program in a pragmatic and cost-effective manner. With her review of the three recycling bids that has been going on, I believe she is only continuing to make what she believes is the most pragmatic decision for Minneapolis, even if I happen to disagree with it.
I'd like to second Susan Hubbard's description of the WM facility that would be collecting these materials. I've toured it and it is a single-stream facility. And while I'm not the expert the good folks at RW Beck are, I have enough experience in the area to know that it wouldn't be easy for WM to re-vamp it to meet the specifications that Minneapolis requires. I have more concern about that than I do about allegations that Eureka's facility is not fully operational. Especially in light of the glass contamination issue with single-stream with regards to paper because paper is one of the materials that brings the most revenue back to the city. I'd also like to point out that whether it was specifically included in the RFP or not, Minneapolis does require city contractors to pay living wages and offer domestic partner benefits. Only Eureka currently does that, although WM and BFI have pledged to "honor" that requirement if they get the contract. So I ask, what happens if they don't? Does Minneapolis find WM or BFI in breach of contract or do they ignore it like past councils have done? I also take issue with the charge that any oversights about citizenship are due to "new" council members. CM Dean Zimmermann has been extensively quoted as favoring Eureka based on citizenship concerns whereas the SW Journal documented how CM Sandra Colvin Roy felt in their Feb. 9th article on the recycling contract: "However, Councilmember Sandy Colvin Roy (12th Ward), chair of the Transportation and Public Works Committee that will first review the recycling deal, said Waste Management's long legal history doesn't count for a lot in the consideration of the city contract. "What matters more to me is reliable service to the city so that our recycling can continue smoothly," she said." http://www.swjournal.com/articles/2004/02/09/news/news01.txt In addition, I'd like to note that staff has not asked City Council to accept a bid. What they have asked for is for City Council to direct staff to enter negotiations with a bidder and choose which bidder to start with. That means that if council directed staff to start with Eureka and staff were unable to resolve concerns over bonding or whatever, then they could end negotiations and proceed with the next bidder. There's really nothing to lose by giving Eureka a real opportunity to address staff concerns in negotiations. None of the concerns I've heard look like deal-breakers and the upside of partnering with a locally-based organization with a sustainable mission would be well worth the extra effort. Mark Snyder Windom Park REMINDERS: 1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
