CITY OF OTTAWA ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEEJUNE 16, 2015AGENDA ITEM 5: PROPOSED 2015 2018 TERM OF COUNCIL PRIORITIES

I NEED TO GIVE YOU SOME CONTEXT. I WORKED FOR OVER 30 YEARS AS AN ECONOMIST IN SEVERAL DIFFERENT FEDERAL GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS. AFTER I RETIRED I SEEMED TO HAVE SOME EXTRA TIME TO ACTUALLY LOOK AT MY PROPERTY TAX AND WATER BILLS.I AM VERY PLEASED TO SEE THAT RESTRUCTURING THE WATER AND WASTE WATER RATE STRUCTURE IS FINALLY BACK ON THE AGENDA AFTER A 4 YEAR TIME OUT. I HOPE THAT THIS TIME AROUND THERE WILL BE ENOUGH RESOLVE AROUND THE TABLE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH CHANGES THAT WILL FINALLY MODERNIZE THE WATER RATE STRUCTURE.I HOPE THAT THE PROCESS BY WHICH THE PUBLIC WILL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE INPUT THIS TIME WILL ALSO BE IMPROVED.I ALSO AM ENCOURGED THAT THIS COUNCIL WILL BE PUT OUR WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN BACK TOGETHER. THE PLASCO AND ORGAWORLD SITUATIONS HAVE COST TAXPAYERS MONEY AND MANY TAXPAYERS ARE WONDERING HOW THINGS WENT SO BADLY OFF TRACK.I CAN APPRECIATE THAT WE MAY NEED TO GO SLOW TO AVOID COMMITTING TO ANOTHER TECHNOLOGY. HOWEVER IN THE INTERIM COUNCIL CAN PERHAPS BEGIN TO CONSIDER SOME SOLID WASTE PRICING ISSUES THAT ARE AFFECTING OUR WASTE DIVERSION?THE COST OF THE WASTE SYSTEM IN OTTAWA LOOKS VERY AFFORDABLE. IF I UNDERSTAND MY PROPERTY TAX BILL THERE IS A UNIT CHARGE OF $82 AND A SECOND CHARGE THAT IS BASED ON THE ASSESSED VALUE OF MY HOME. MY TOTAL COST LAST YEAR FOR WASTE WAS ONLY ABOUT $134. WHAT A BARGAIN! THE COST OF JUST GETTING SNOW REMOVED FROM MY DRIVEWAY IS ALMOST 3 TIMES THAT AMOUNT.I SOMEHOW WONDER IF ALL OF THE COSTS OF WASTE SERVICES HAVE BEEN FULLY ALLOCATED IN THIS CALCULATION. WHAT ABOUT ALL OF THE LEGAL FEES ASSOCIATED WITH BOTH ORGAWORLD AND PLASCO DEALS? WHAT ABOUT THE RESERVES FOR THE COSTS OF A FUTURE LANDFILL IF/WHEN TRAIL ROAD REACHES CAPACITY? WHAT ABOUT THE POTENTIAL LIABILITY COSTS AND EVEN THE RISING COSTS OF THE GHG EMISSIONS FROM WASTE OPERATIONS?PLASCOS FAILURE TO LAUNCH SHOULD WARN US THAT THERE IS ALMOST CERTAINLY NO SILVER BULLET. EVEN INCINERATION THAT IS BEING USED BY DURHAM IS NOT CHEAP. I BELIEVE IT WAS $285 MILLION AND TOOK YEARS TO BE APPROVED.SINCE THE CITY HAS FINALLY FOUND THE TIME AND ENTHUSIASM TO REFORM ITS WATER RATES I WOULD LIKE TO SEE A SIMILAR PROCESS APPLIED TO REFORM THE WAY THAT RESIDENTS PAY FOR CURBSIDE WASTE PICKUP AND PROCESSING. I WOULD LIKE TO SUGGEST THAT THE ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE RECOMMEND THAT THE TERM OF COUNCIL PRIORITIES REPORT BE AMENDED TO ADD UNDERTAKING A COMPREHENSIVE AND THOROUGH REVIEW OF HOW RESIDENTS SHOULD BE CHARGED FOR ALL OF THE DIRECT AND INDIRECT COSTS OF WASTE COLLECTION AND PROCESSING. IS IT LOGICAL TO ARGUE THAT A MORE VALUABLE HOUSE CONSISTENTLY PRODUCES MORE CURBSIDE WASTE? ARGUABLY WASTE COLLECTION AND PROCESSING REPRESENTS A SERVICE JUST LIKE PROVIDING DRINKING WATER AND TREATING WASTE WATER. SINCE IT IS A SERVICE IT CAN BE PRICED. CURBSIDE WASTE NEEDS TO BE PRICED SO THAT ALL RESIDENTS CAN BETTER VALUE THE SERVICE. OUR TWO WEEK 12 BAG MAXIMUM LIMIT FOR RESIDUAL WASTE IS A NEGATIVE SIGNAL THAT DIVERSION IS REALLY NOT A TOP PRIORITY. FOR YEARS OTTAWA COUNCILLORS HAVE RESISTED EVEN CONSIDERING ANY VARIANT OF A TAG-A-BAG SYSTEM. OTHER CITIES IN ONTARIO HAVE BEEN ABLE TO DEVELOP THEIR OWN CUSTOMIZED VARIANTS OF PAY AS YOU THROW (PAYT) AND IT HAS HELPED THEM INCREASE DIVERSION. PAYT WHEN PROPERLY DESIGNED REWARDS INDIVIDUALS WHO MAKE AN EFFORT TO SORT AND SEPARATE THEIR WASTE. BELLEVILLE HAS PAYT BUT ONLY COLLECTS ABOUT OF ITS TOTAL CURBSIDE RESIDUAL WASTE COSTS THROUGH TAGS. OTHER CITIES MAY DEVELOPED OTHER TARGETS.IN CONCLUSION THIS COUNCIL SHOULD CONSIDER REFORMING THE WAY THAT RESIDENTS PAY FOR THEIR WASTE SERVICES USING MANY OF THE SAME CRITERIA BEING DEVELOPED TO EVALUATE POSSIBLE NEW WATER RATE STRUCTURES. THE NEED FOR FAIRNESS, AFFORDABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY ARE JUST AS IMPORTANT FOR THE WASTE COLLECTION SYSTEM AS THEY ARE FOR OUR WATER RATE SYSTEM. I HAVE TAKEN THE LIBERTY TO SUGGEST A POSSIBLE MOTION FOR YOUR FUTURE CONSIDERATION. IT HAS VERY FAMILIAR WORDING. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

BILL TOMS(613) 225-9732ANNEX: POSSIBLE MOTION ON SOLID WASTE

That the Environment Committee recommend that Council:

1. Direct staff to return to Council by Q4 2016 with a new solid waste costing structure for Councils consideration and;

2. Approve that the overall guiding principles for this specific review will be as follows: a) Is fair and equitable to all users of the solid waste service.

b) Increases financial sustainability.

c) Ensures that the basic level of curbside waste service continues to be affordable for residential customers. d) Is transparent and understandable.

e) Encourages increased diversion in residential and multiple unit buildings.

f) Is co-ordinated with waste collection and processing activities that support the IC&I sector.

3