Share to Facebook Share to Twitter Bookmark and Share
Meeting Name: City Council Agenda status: Final
Meeting date/time: 8/23/2019 4:30 PM Minutes status: Final  
Meeting location: Council Chambers - 3rd Floor
City Council Special Meeting
Published agenda: Agenda Agenda Published minutes: Minutes Minutes  
Meeting video:  
File #Ver.Agenda #NameTypeTitleActionResultAction DetailsVideo
RES 19-1401 11Ballot Question LanguageResolutionDirecting the City Clerk notify the County Auditor to place a referendum of Ordinance ORD 18-39 on the November 5, 2019 ballot and approving the title and language for that ballot question.AdoptedPass Action details Video Video
File #Date NameDistrictOpinionCommentAction
RES 19-1401 8/24/2019 4:23 AMUnhappy Resident #28,655 For Thank you council member Prince for sponsoring this bitter pill. +1
RES 19-1401 8/23/2019 9:56 PMJacob  Against (Abridged)I don't seem to fall neatly on one side or the other of the "Trash Wars". I'm not a fan of the way it was enacted but not opposed to the idea of "city run" waste management. I care that it's not holistic for waste and resource reduction. I care it's not adaptable to the needs of many. I propose a renegotiation to better fulfill the goals of "city run" collection. Because I don't want to see 10-15 garbage/recycling trucks trundle by my house everyday again. For noise, street wear and tear and other pollution. 1ST: I want to see an opt out added for 0 and low wasters. That doesn't mean getting another hauler. 2ND: Size and number bins PER PLOT should be up to owners. 3RD: A rewards system for haulers losing or gaining market share dependent on customer satisfaction +/- 5-15% a year. 4TH: A system to adjust bin size if conically overfull. 5th: More public garbage's (near bus stops) that haulers p/u not city. 6TH: The billing, accountability and responsibility need to be clear. +4 -1
RES 19-1401 8/23/2019 9:04 PM    I'm hoping it won't help, and at this point there is little you, as a city council, could do to repair the damage you have done, but admitting your mistake and stopping the threats now would allow all of you at least a small bit of dignity on your way out the door in November. +3
RES 19-1401 8/23/2019 8:26 PMAbu Nayeem Candidate for Ward 1   I would like to ask the city council and the mayor; "why are you snubbing the people’s right for a referendum at every given moment?" Every step you take to silence community members voice, the greater distrust of governance is seeded within. Furthermore, you should apologize, in advance, to your staff for potentially wasting their time and effort in preparing the trash proposal. Please be sensible on the language. Thank you. +4
RES 19-1401 8/23/2019 5:42 PMKErickson Against Please revise to allow HOA's that have sole responsibility for rubbish to opt out. In our complex, some units are attached by 6, some are attached by 4. Those with 4 units attached have to comply, those with 6 do not. We have homeowners that need to pay and then ask for reimbursement from HOA and the charges are double! It is an administrative nightmare! Some homeowners can throw different garbage out, some can't. It's a PRIVATE ROAD nd the City does not maintain it. There is also ONE EXTRA garbage truck driving on our private drive once a week; total three per week versus the two previously. The Council DID NOT completely research all variables beforehand and this is what makes homeowners upset. Thoughtless and if there are not major revisions to allow these types of situations opt out, I will be advocating to the neighborhood to say NO at the ballot to both the Ordinance and your seat! You've already wasted how much on the lawsuit that you ultimately lost! +4
RES 19-1401 8/23/2019 5:22 PMWard 7 For Please do not punish taxpayers for ramming this ordinance through last year. A valid petition was provided that was ignored by the city council. Elections have consequences. +6 -2
RES 19-1401 8/23/2019 3:08 PMCandidateSharonAndersonWard2   Strict Scrunity on Wording Summary of Councils Bad Faith in a Patterned Enterprise also at
RES 19-1401 8/23/2019 3:06 PMChris Cloutier   I am not sure what I am being asked to support or not support here. But, I hope the Council understands that St Paul is a Home Rule City and while they may support organized collection (as do I) the bigger issue is how the citizens of St Paul get to participate in the decision-making process for the City. Creating a confusing, poorly worded referendum will engender bad feeling, deepen the conviction that the Council and Mayor don't listen and probably help the "No Organized Collection Crowd". Keep the wording simple, plain and understandable. +5
8/23/2019 3:02 PMCandidateWard2SharonAnderson   Please read Sharons Blogs re Council Guide yourselves accordingly Strict Scrunity on Wording +1
RES 19-1401 8/22/2019 10:45 PM    How about an apology for this whole fiasco: ignoring citizens' concerns in July 2017 before the final contract negotiations, approving a poorly designed program, doing nothing when all the complaints began surfacing in May 2018 before service began, denying a citizen petition, and appealing the district court's decision to the MN Supreme Court? You are supposed to represent us, not the haulers. +10 -1
RES 19-1401 8/22/2019 7:36 PM    Please don't make this mistake any worse than you have already. Make the wording on the ballot understandable for all. +10 -1
RES 19-1401 8/22/2019 6:48 PMDavid Thom For Ward 7   “whether to direct”? The Minnesota supreme court has ordered the referendum be placed on the November 5 ballot. It would appear to me that the city Council does not have a choice in this matter anymore. The current city council and mayor have cost the citizens of Saint Paul millions of dollars with their boondoggles. The language of the question put on the ballot should be plain and simple so that the citizens of Saint Paul understand the question with no confusion. The entire city council and mayor should be ashamed of themselves for denying the citizens their rights. You all need to be voted out of office in the next election. Signed David Thom for Saint Paul City Council Ward 7. +9
RES 19-1401 8/22/2019 5:22 PMEric Lein   FOR - the ballot referendum on garbage ORD 18-39. /// AGAINST - confusing or convoluted language designed to "trick" voters (Keep It Simple). As I write this, proposed ballot text has not been disclosed. /// WHAT'S MISSING - Court rulings in favor of the People's right to vote also means that (per St. Paul's City Charter) ORD 18-39 should have been suspended by the Council on 11/14/2018. /// WHAT'S NEXT - Issue refunds to trash "customers" for improperly-charged trash fees for the period beginning 11/15/2018 through 11/05/2019 [regardless of whether voters decide to accept or reject ORD 18-39]. +8
RES 19-1401 8/21/2019 5:48 PMBruce Clark Against "Justice Delayed is Justice Denied"- Gladstone Watch how this plays out: By scheduling a Supreme Court hearing so close to the critical Aug. 23rd deadline for printing the Fall election ballot, is "someone" counting on the City of St. Paul "taking a knee, and running out the clock"? Evidence? The Council will schedule a special hearing to consider a referendum question at 4:30 on Friday the 23rd. Oh, wait! That's the exact time that the Ramsey County Elections office closes! Hmmm.... +8