CITY OF OTTAWA ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE

JUNE 16, 2015

AGENDA 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
1

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.
3

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) 225-9732
ANNEX: 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.
4

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.