My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2004_0614
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
200x
>
2004
>
CC_Minutes_2004_0614
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 9:30:14 AM
Creation date
2/9/2006 1:05:02 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
6/14/2004
Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
46
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
<br />Mr. Schwartz and Mr. Betts: <br /> <br />After spending considerable time with you on the FA terms, it is clear to us that we <br />need to address "apples and apples." The frame of reference we hear from Roseville <br />implies your position reflects the FA terms of other municipal agreements. That <br />position needs to be based on "apples and apples." We are formalizing cenh"al aspects <br />of our position to assist you and the City of Roseville get to an "apples to apples" <br />position. <br /> <br />To compare apples to apples (e.g. Minneapolis and/or Saint Paul existing FAs to our <br />Roseville proposed FA), you must acknowledge trash receptacles and trash collection. <br />First, neither the Minneapolis or Saint Paul F As include provision of trash receptacles at <br />shelters or delivery of weekly collection of trash. Both of these, the receptacles and the <br />collection/disposal of trash-- are NOT included in the F As of Minneapolis and Saint <br />Paul. <br /> <br />In addition, in both Minneapolis and Saint Paul, the shelters are old, 10 to 25 years <br />old and are fully depreciated. Consequently, in each agreement there is little or no <br />capital expense or debt service. Therefore, more revenue is available for payment as <br />fees. Furthermore, look at the actual performance against FA terms. In Minneapolis <br />and Saint Paul the franchisee has paid the minimum or less fees over 20 years! <br /> <br />The Minneapolis and Saint Paul F As are not our business and do not reflect our <br />program elements, business philosophy, and practice of building partnership <br />relationships. <br /> <br />The shelters we will install in Roseville will be new and purchased at 2004/2005 <br />prices. Installation will be at 2004/2005 prices. These expenses and debt service are <br />charged against gross revenues. And, gross revenue will also be impacted by the <br />number and distribution of shelters we can offer to business partners for their <br />promotions. <br /> <br />Second, our proposal to Roseville includes our capital investment in trash receptacles <br />on each shelter and our delivery of twice weekly trash collection and disposal <br />maintenance service at 20 locations. Trash collection and disposal is a significant on- <br />going maintenance expense and a prominent expense against revenue that depletes <br />dollars for the franchise fee. Roseville benefits directly in both improved transit <br />image and reduction in public works expense because we will provide trash <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.