Sure it will reduce trucks on the road and accumulated weight traveling over the streets by a tiny bit. But Is the wear & tear really significant compared to the much higher passenger vehicle load and that of heavier delivery and work trucks?

The safety fears are unwarranted and ridiculous. How many people are getting injured by garbage trucks all the time? Do we really have enough incidents that cutting hauler traffic by 50% (or whatever it would really be) would reduce the carnage?

Less pollution? This is an emotional argument. Who doesn't want to pollute less? It's a talking point that's virtually impossible to argue against since it's really hard for anyone to quantify the true impact of it. We could probably have a much larger positive impact on the environment simply by reducing the amount of garbage we create and recycling and composting more.

The idea that a single "organized" system can cost the consumers less ignores the benefits consumers gain from competition. Countless locals regularly re-negotiate their waste hauling rates with their provider or switch to others which offer better rates. In other words, the haulers will always try to creep their rates up on everyone, but when individuals complain or threaten to change services the consumer generally wins. Some of us are paying on the order of $140 less per year than others for the same service simply because we've negotiated or switched service.

Continued in next comment...

...continued from previous comment.

If concrete examples are produced showing the reduction in road wear will reduce street maintenance costs by the county and city enough to reduce my tax bill more than $140 per year, I'll consider the costs less in taxes argument. Besides wouldn't the city lose tax revenue from the haulers that are kicked out of the city?

If the city were to mandate a single hauler, residents would be stuck with whatever rates the hauler offered us or the government negotiated for us. No thanks. I don't trust others to negotiate my rates for me; I seem to be doing just fine at it.

What problem is the city really trying to solve? They don't have enough influence over how their resident's live? Who in the administration is floating this topic?

I would love it, one garbage day per street. There are some houses don't have garbage service at all. Thid would force people to pay for garbage service.

what's next? A "city designated pizza delivery company?" A designated milk man? Why do we need both UPS and FedEx both ruining our streets? Where will it end?

One need look no further than the cable company to decide if a one-company approach is beneficial.

I would like to see more enforcement for trucks that spew oil and leak garbage juice all over the street. A new cheaper provider has ruined our street with its oil spillage and sloppy trash handlers leaving garbage in the street. You can tell who their customers are by the stains and mess in the street in front of the houses.

Environmentally, and for our tax dollars and the condition of our roads one hauler makes sense. Another issue is the look of our town. Wouldn't it be better to have only one day when there are unsightly garbage cans and garbage strewn about, than three days plus.

I moved to Lakeville from Eagan where they had one designated day of the week for garbage pick up. You could choose the company you wanted, but there was only garbage sitting by the curb in the neighborhood one day a week. I prefer being able to shop the competition by price and service and to pick the company I want. But I would prefer that everyone in the neighborhood to put their garbage out on the same day.

Do Not go to 1 Garbage carrier. We see the results with a endorsed city cable co. This is a scam by the TV carrier industry to give the city money for their endorsement and the TAX for that is greatly inflated pricing for TV services. Do not fall in this same category as it will surely result in a monopoly that we will pay dearly for. The price increase does not warrant the policy of 1 carrier.

When a business knows it has a monopoly, they do not have to compete so therefore they can jerk the customers around, give shoddy service, charge whatever they want, and know they can get away with it, because the customer is forced to do business with them.

Need any further proof, look at Cable TV. Charter knows that they do not have to compete with Comcast, with Time Warner, with MediaCom, etc for the business of cable customers, however they do have to compete with DirecTv and Dish Network in the TV business. Dish, I know partners with Frontier for telephone and internet and provides great service at a reasonable price.