UPDATE: Results of Sioux Falls Garbage Survey are strange

UPDATE: As I suspected today during the informational, the Public Works department dropped their bomb. The garbage haulers want curbside service, don’t want to give a discount for it, and get this, want to charge extra for VALET service (what we currently receive by ordinance). The city council did push back and said a larger discussion must be had first. As I predicted, big business in Sioux Falls wants to get their way, and there is NO way it will trickle down to the citizen consumers. We will see what the rubberstamp council decides, but I’m guessing we (working stiff citizens) will lose in the end, with less service and higher rates. Isn’t deregulation wonderful?

Oh, and if you want a real get in the sack, watch public input during the regular council meeting tonight. Sierra drops the bomb on the Dudley House situation and one lady testifies the Covid vaccination is a bitcoin injection that will be turned on with a micro-chip activated by 5G phones to steal our bank accounts and kill us. LMFAO!

While around 58% of respondents were ok with putting garbage cans at curbside that was about the only clear answer we received.


Some don’t want government to tell garbage haulers what to do, which means the (private haulers) will be telling the consumers what to do and the very reason we have regulation that apparently people don’t want.

And while most consumers agree customer service and price is what they look for most, only around half think they should get a better deal because of curbside. Around another half think it is okay to take the cans to curbside, they just want the hauler to return them to beside their house. So about HALF want HALF-WAY curbside.

The comments are also interesting to read, over 70 pages of them.

I have argued for a long time leave it up to the CONSUMER to decide if they want to take it to curbside, and if so sign a contract with the hauler that says if you do this 100% of the time you will receive a discounted rate in your next bill.

Also, in the comment section, many people feel the city should be broken up in districts so garbage collection only occurs once a week on your block instead of multiple haulers picking up multiple days at multiple times.

I have said for a long time a money and time saving solution to all this madness is for the city to contract with the top haulers (like they do with snow removal) and make it a public system using private haulers. We could supply them their fuel and charge NO tipping fees. We would pay the companies directly for volume and the city would bill you for the garbage fee in your water/sewer bill. You could have the option of having curbside or by your house pickup and one hauler would come to your block once a week.

Many have argued competition keeps prices lower. There really isn’t competition in Sioux Falls. In fact, with all of the companies Waste Management has bought up there really is only one major hauler, them.

One of the main reasons I have argued against curbside is because the haulers are not willing to give a discount for helping them out with fuel and labor costs.

If the council makes changes to curbside, the haulers MUST be willing to discount for that kind of service, but like TIFs they will argue the trickle down economic benefits to the rest of us without actual deliverance of those benefits. Think about it, the results came out on August 20th and the public works department has been fiddling with how they are going to spin this to the public and the council for almost 2 months! In the end we will get screwed.

I truly think the haulers want to save money on labor and fuel, but they also want to put that savings right into their pockets, and frankly, that’s a bunch of garbage.


#1 D@ily Spin on 10.10.21 at 5:00 pm

Don’t stir the pot. There’s a labor shortage and wages inflation. Bothering trash haulers is an opportunity for them to raise rates.

#2 Theresa Stehly on 10.10.21 at 5:45 pm

Scott, Thank you for keeping the public informed on important issues.
I disagree with you about competition. There are still locally owned companies that provide excellent service and competitive rates. Keep government out of it. (My opinion.)

#3 l3wis on 10.10.21 at 5:48 pm

Big T, we could keep government out of it, by allowing consumers to set their rates based on the level of service they want. But that won’t happen under SelfTaken government.

#4 Scott Biden on 10.10.21 at 8:55 pm

Scott Biden, why in hell would we want the city control our garbage? If you haven’t noticed, govt screws up everything they touch. What we should be doing is figure out ways to keep govt from controlling anything in our lives.

#5 Erica on 10.10.21 at 8:55 pm

I am with Theresa, keep Govt OUT of the waste management system for Sioux Falls. I have lived in many cities where there was only ONE option, city ran, and having private companies is so much better. Govt NEVER solves problems, they only create them, and for a very high cost.

#6 l3wis on 10.11.21 at 12:28 am

You do realize that garbage in SF is already highly regulated, they tell us where the cans need to be, they tell us we must recycle, they require us to have it and we run the public landfill (which actually makes the city money). The only private part of hauling is the haulers which are NOT regulated by price because if they were, it would be cheaper. If you truly wanted to make garbage haulers exclusively private, you would be paying a sh!t ton for it. The only reason it is somewhat affordable is because government IS involved.

#7 Mike Lee Zitterich on 10.11.21 at 4:49 am

Keep government out of the private sector. The City does not have to take over the garbage industry, that is communism. I am perfectly happy with my service that costs me $37 dollar a month. IF the city were to take over this as a public utility, it would not only add expense costs to the city, the city could or would then apply for Federal Grants to run the service, provide tons of tax dollars to help “invest” in the trucks, equipment, and it would play favorites with a small group of private contractors to kill any competition. This then creates a monopoly within the industry only now the CITY would essentually own 51% of the industry. It would not only make my monthly bill go up, but it would also cause our “tax dollars” to go up as well.

Leave the service alone, deregulate the industry, and allow people to manage their ‘waste baskets’ on their property as they see fit.

I do not use Waste Management, nor Novak, I use a small town rural waste company, and it only costs me $37 dollars a month. That is less than what the CITY charges me to use our public water and sewer system which costs me $52 dollars a month.

The reason my garbage is affordable is cause there are roughly 30+ companies doing business in the area. IF the city gets involved, and does what Scott is wanting, it would narrow the field from 30+ down to a few select few companies, and it would cost an arm and a leg to operate, and it would kill jobs.

#8 Commie on 10.11.21 at 1:32 pm

Scott is a commie and wants nothing more than the government to take care of us and tell us what to do….fact! I try to be a good friend to him and help him pull his head from his ass. I can’t do it alone folks! Please help if you can!!!

#9 EBG on 10.11.21 at 6:21 pm

What do you mean the city FORCES you to recycle? I know many people in my neighborhood who do not pay their sanitation service for recycling services because they handle it themselves. I know when we moved here that when we called around to find various services and their rates, we had the CHOICE to add on recycling services or not. We CHOSE to do so because we thought the rates were fair.

Why on EARTH do you want the Govt to regulate rates? Dont you realize that the more Govt gets involved in ANYTHING that quality of service goes down while costs go up? If you arent happy with thr rates of the company you CHOSE to go with, change companies!

#10 The Guy From Guernsey on 10.11.21 at 9:35 pm

Cannot agree with your points about having the City run waste pick-up routes.
While, in theory being more efficient with regard to routes of travel and road miles for trucks, ultimately it would not be less expensive.
Were the City to engage in waste collection, one of the first things to happen would be the emergence of a special interest PAC composed of those who wish to be in the waste business in the City, in order that they could influence election of the Mayor and City Council.
There is plenty of current concern about the influence on political process of money from developers, banksters and the state’s largest employer.
If you have concern about developers and banksters, look to add to your POV some advice ‘Thornton Mellon’ offers to ‘Dr. Phillip Barbay’s’ theoretical business model in “Back To School”,

“Then there’s long term costs such as waste disposal. I don’t know if you’re familiar with who runs that business but I assure you it’s not the boyscouts.”

#11 Donald Pay on 10.12.21 at 9:00 am

I have a city (Madison, WI) operated garbage and recycling collection service mated to a publicly operated landfill and a privately operated household recycling operation. There is no fee for this. It is part of services paid by residential property taxes. Larger apartment complexes, commercial and industrial businesses contract with the private sector for these services. The system is efficient. The city operates a large item collection service as well, but that is based on a fee.

Sorry, to whine about curbside service is ridiculous considering how much more efficient it is.

I have no problem with private or public systems, as long as they are efficient. The Sioux Falls system could use a tuneup to move from a third world system into the modern world. I like the idea of bidding on collection from various city sectors.

#12 l3wis on 10.12.21 at 10:59 am

Thank you for the constructive critique and not calling me a commie. LOL. I’m fine with the private public partnership we have currently but I think regulations can make it more efficient. Once we go to curbside we can never go back. I hope people realize that.

#13 Corn Dogger on 10.12.21 at 11:06 am

Problem with curb side is every time the wind is blowing (which is all the time here) everyone’s cans are blowing over and garbage is blowing all over the place. Up by the house/garage there is quite a bit of a wind break which prevents most of the trash blowing over. Or I’d be for the 50/50 rule. Leave it near the house, hauler empties the container but leaves empty containers curb side which are now empty and save’s hauler the extra trip up the driveway.

#14 trashy neighbor on 10.12.21 at 2:26 pm

i think the real point here is we were all paying for a service that was changed due to covid…or so they say. as soon as dick kiley went on his lecture of how we should help out the haulers the idea then became the rule and we all had to take our cans to the street. did anyone get any kind of discount for doing part of the job we were paying for precovid? of course not. my view is things should go back they way they were or we should get reduced rates. it should be very simple for the council to do this…if they wanted to.

#15 Erica on 10.12.21 at 4:53 pm

People who use curbside can use a brick on their lids (I do this even when cans at house) to prevent spillage. Or, cans could be updated to have a simple latch system. There ARE better and more reasonable options than having city take over services.

#16 scott on 10.13.21 at 9:17 am

5g was also used to switch votes to biden. stop the steal!

#17 "Woodstock" on 10.13.21 at 11:31 pm

”’Covid vaccination is a bitcoin injection that will be turned on with a micro-chip activated by 5G phones to steal our bank accounts and kill us. LMFAO!’?”…

“But what about those of us who have already lost all of our money buying gift cards to get a nephew, we didn’t know we had, out of jail?”…. “Will we just die before our time?”….

#18 The Guy From Guernsey on 10.14.21 at 11:15 am

RE: Information in the Update:

Given the inflationary influence of everything else in the economy
(especially labor), it is foolhardy to think that rates for garbage pick up service will do anything but increase in the months ahead, regardless the location from which garbage containers are retrieved.
Twice in last several weeks, my service has been delayed by a day due to “staffing issues” and “circumstances beyond control” (read as “also staffing issues”).
I am expecting that my provider will be raising rates. This in order that they can pay more to drivers in order to relieve staffing shortages.

AFA service providers providing a spectrum of service, perhaps ranging from an economy service (containers from curb/returned to curb) to valet service (container removed from garage/returned to garage; with extra charge and perhaps code access to garage door) …
… ain’t this a great country where the consumer can elect to purchase the level of service which they choose as appropriate.
This could be a simple point of differentiation for businesses.
Some businesses will choose to specialize in providing minimal service for low cost; others may offer more service snd charge more.
As a City resident (and customer), the choice is yours (and mine).
Isn’t that great!

#19 Fear & Loathing in Sioux Falls on 10.15.21 at 8:55 pm

Let’s hear it for socialized garbage. It all ends up in the same place anyhow, so that sounds like socialism to me. Or, is it just with death that your capitalized toys cannot be taken, but are left as the trash of capitalism for the living socialists to handle? #TrustsWithPerpetuity

#20 Further Fear & Loathing on 10.15.21 at 9:31 pm

Dear Commie,

Kristi’s government wants to tell us what we can learn from history. In her world, fireworks mean more than teacher pay. In an age of driverless cars, she rides a horse. She trusts in God, but never in women. She wants an airplane, a fence, and a desk, but what has she given us lately? No hemp or Maryjane without a fight. Somehow she thinks failure is freedom, which we must all consume as if it was a slice of cake from Marie-Antoinette. Is there truly a difference?