Perspective
Tonight the city council will vote on whether or not to adopt the organized hauling plan that has been developed over a process that, it's fair to say, has been going on at least since last summer.
The out-of-town hauler group, which is probably more concerned about what might happen on their turf in Roseville, sent another big mailing to residents to drum up opposition. However, with the city actually having specifics of a plan to share with people, I've noticed a much higher proportion of e-mails and phone messages in favor of the organization plan than was the case in the past.
Still, people are skeptical -- they've learned not to trust haulers, and so they sometimes don't believe the numbers the city has obtained through this process. One person who wrote assumed that the city postcard's rates must be talking about cost per week, not cost per month for weekly service. He could not believe that he would see a 60% savings. It's ironic that peoples' distrust of haulers' rate quotes, based on bad experiences, has led many to trust a group of haulers (defending their profits) over their city government (trying to save them millions over the next few years).
Meanwhile, today's mail brought me a copy of Little Canada's city newsletter -- something we often get, due to being in the 55117 ZIP code. It mentions that they received the results of a scientific survey of their residents about satisfaction with various city services. Among the very highest-rated: their organized refuse & recycling program, which 96% of Little Canada residents rate as "excellent" or "good." I've heard that White Bear Lake found similar results in their own similar survey in the past year.
Many people are afraid of change, and I suspect that they have a particular cynicism about trash because of experiences dealing with many haulers. But if Maplewood passes this plan, I expect that it will reach the same level of popularity as organized systems have in our neighbor cities -- and when the contract expires, no serious candidate for city office will campaign on a platform of going back to an open system (just as candidates opposing organized trash this year were not willing to voice any complaints about organized recycling). After people see the benefits, it's going to be tough to run on a promise of doubling everyone's rates in order for them to enjoy "choice" and the privilege of having half a dozen or more trucks drive down their street on trash day in place of one.
The out-of-town hauler group, which is probably more concerned about what might happen on their turf in Roseville, sent another big mailing to residents to drum up opposition. However, with the city actually having specifics of a plan to share with people, I've noticed a much higher proportion of e-mails and phone messages in favor of the organization plan than was the case in the past.
Still, people are skeptical -- they've learned not to trust haulers, and so they sometimes don't believe the numbers the city has obtained through this process. One person who wrote assumed that the city postcard's rates must be talking about cost per week, not cost per month for weekly service. He could not believe that he would see a 60% savings. It's ironic that peoples' distrust of haulers' rate quotes, based on bad experiences, has led many to trust a group of haulers (defending their profits) over their city government (trying to save them millions over the next few years).
Meanwhile, today's mail brought me a copy of Little Canada's city newsletter -- something we often get, due to being in the 55117 ZIP code. It mentions that they received the results of a scientific survey of their residents about satisfaction with various city services. Among the very highest-rated: their organized refuse & recycling program, which 96% of Little Canada residents rate as "excellent" or "good." I've heard that White Bear Lake found similar results in their own similar survey in the past year.
Many people are afraid of change, and I suspect that they have a particular cynicism about trash because of experiences dealing with many haulers. But if Maplewood passes this plan, I expect that it will reach the same level of popularity as organized systems have in our neighbor cities -- and when the contract expires, no serious candidate for city office will campaign on a platform of going back to an open system (just as candidates opposing organized trash this year were not willing to voice any complaints about organized recycling). After people see the benefits, it's going to be tough to run on a promise of doubling everyone's rates in order for them to enjoy "choice" and the privilege of having half a dozen or more trucks drive down their street on trash day in place of one.
Labels: council politics, organized collection
