Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWD-035-01 -;0/"" 0;..:-"':: , J,-.:.L REPORT #6 > THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON REPORT Meeting: COUNCIL File # Date: JUNE 25, 2001 Res, # Report No.: WD-35-01 Our File No.: 0.50.02 By-Law # Subject: CLARINGTON'S CURBSIDE GARBAGE COLLECTION Recommendations: It is respectfully recommended to Council the following: 1. THAT Report WD-35-01 be received; 2. THAT, in order to assist in attaining a 50% diversion target by 2007 or sooner, a curbside organics composting program be implemented in the Municipality of Clarington through a negotiated partnership with the Region of Durham; 3. THAT the Public Works Department and Treasury Department staff work with the Region of Durham to develop an acceptable integrated solid waste collection system; 4. THAT all costs associated with the integrated waste collection system be recovered through a Regional Solid Waste Levy; and 5. THAT a copy of this report and Council's decision on the matter be forwarded to the Region of Durham. REPORT 1.0 BACKGROUND 1,1 Existing Waste System Under the existing waste collection system being implemented in the Municipality of Claringtan, the Municipality of Clarington is responsible for: . Curbside garbage collection . < . REPORT NO.: WD-35-01 PAGE 2 . Curbside leaf and yard waste collection The Region of Durham is responsible for: . Collection, processing and sale of recyciables 1.2 Clarington's Curbside Garbage Collection The Municipality of Clarington's curbside garbage collection contract tenninates December 31,2001. The Region's curbside Blue Box recycling collection contract ends at nearly the exact same time, February, 2002. This report summarizes recent actions taken by both Clarington and Region staff to detennine the direction that future waste collection and disposal will take in C1arington. 1.3 Waste Management Reports from the Region of Durham On March 7, 2001, the Region's Works Committee received for information the following three waste management reports: . No, 2001- WR-03': Report on the weekly organics pilot program in Ajax . No.2001-WR-04: Residential curbside composition studies , . No. 2001-WR-05: Weekly food and yard waste pilot program in Clarington Organics Pilot Program in Ai ax: In the Spring of 1999, the Region and the Town of Ajax undertook a pilot program to increase the amount of residential leaf and yard waste materials collected at the curb for composting, In general, the pilot program provided 16 additional weeks of collection, The results of this weekly organics collection program are encouraging as there was a significant increase in the amount of organic material collected for composting. In Report No, 2001-WR-03 on the weekly organics pilot program in Ajax, in addition to being received for information, there was an additional matter considered by Regional Council. The Region requested that the Area Municipalities consider the benefits of an increased leaf and yard waste collection program, REPORT NO.: WD-35-0l PAGE 3 Residential Curbside Waste Composition Studies: The Region undertook three residential curbside waste composition studies, one in April, another in September, and the third in December, 2000, The purpose of these studies was to: (1) detennine what types and amounts of waste are being generated by residents, (2) how much of the Blue Box recyclables are actually being recovered, and (3) how many bags, boxes or containers are being set out for curbside collection each week. The three studies were conducted in the same area ofClarington (Courtice) as the Region's pilot food and yard waste composting program. The results of these waste composition studies are assisting the Region and Area Municipalities in developing better waste diversion programs in order to reduce the amount of residential waste currently being landfilled. Food and Yard Waste Pilot Program in Clarington: The Region undertook a pilot food and yard waste collection program in a residential subdivision in the Courtice area The pilot program involved the separation of household organic food and yard wastes from other residential garbage wastes and the organic wastes were then processed at a compost facility, Residents indicated having food and yard waste collection on the same day of the week as garbage and recycling collection would have probably been better, Many residents were of the opinion the program should be mandatory and, if more stringent bag limits had been in place for garbage disposal, participation levels would have been greater. The Region and Clarington gained valuable information implementing a pilot program of this nature. Based on the experience of this program, it is apparent that significant education and promotion will be required to reduce the amount of garbage set out for disposal. The participation level in this voluntary program was only 23% and this illustrates the possible need for regulatory measures. Results of the program identified that consideration should be given to the following measures: . requiring mandatory participation in recycling and composting programs; . imposing bans on waste materials not to be disposed of as garbage; REPORT NO.: WD-35-01 PAGE 4 . lowering the limits on the number of garbage bags per week set out for disposal; and . establishing a partial user pay system for excessive amounts of garbage waste only. The Region's pilot program was deemed to be a success. The information gathered will greatly assist in the development of larger more comprehensive food and yard waste programs. 1.4 Region of Durham - Review of the Solid Waste Management System and the 2001 Proposed Current and Capital Budgets and Related Financing In Regional Report 2001-J-8, dated March 27, 2001, the Joint Works and Finance and Administration Committees made a number of recommendations to Regional Council, including two particular recommendations as outlined in the following paragraphs: Solid Waste Disposal Recommendation No.9: THAT the Durham Works Department and Finance Department staff work with willing Area Municipalities to develop an acceptable integrated one-tier solid waste collection system with uniform service delivery, Explanation: A main goal of the Long-Tenn Waste Management Strategy Plan (2000 to 2020) is the implementation of"",an integrated residential waste management system for the collection, processing and disposal of blue box recyclables, food and yard waste compost, residual garbage waste and special wastes. ,,", It has been proposed that Regional staff work with willing Area Municipalities to develop an acceptable integrated one-tier solid waste collection system with uniform service delivery. Solid Waste Recycling and Diversion Recommendation No, 1 0: THAT, in order to assist the Region in attaining the 50% diversion target by 2007 or sooner, a curbside organics composting program be implemented in the Region of Durham through a partnership between the Region and interested Area Municipalities, REPORT NO.: WD-35-0l PAGE 5 Explanation: Much was leamed from curbside organics pilot programs conducted in 2000. Utilizing the knowledge gained during the pilot programs and given that compostables represent approximately 40% of the Region's current waste stream, it is recommended that a curbside organics (composting) program be implemented in the Region of Durham, through a partnership between the Region and interested Area Municipalities, This type of program would represent a significant step towards meeting the Region's current diversion target of 50% diversion by 2007 or sooner. 1.5 Waste Diversion Practices Report from the Region of Durham On May 9, 2001, the Region's WOIks Committee received for information a consultant's report from Enviros RIS regarding current waste diversion practices, as well as recommendations from the Region's Waste Management Advisory Committee on how to improve waste diversion programs. Recommendations contained in the Consultant's report, if implemented by the Region and its Area Municipalities, will improve the existing waste management system and significantly increase waste diversion, In February 2001, the Consultant made a special presentation to the Region's Waste Management Advisory Committee (WMAC) out1ining the findings of their study. The Municipality of Clarington is represented by Stephen Vokes on this Committee, The WMAC discussed these findings and decided to make a nwnber of recommendations on how they would improve waste diversion programs. In March 2001, copies of the Consultant's report and the recommendations from the WMAC were distributed to the Durham Region Public Works Officials. At follow-up meetings, which took place on April 20th and May 30th, 2001, the Durham Region Public Works Officials recognized the need for the Region and the Area Municipalities to aggressively take action to significantly increase waste diversion. . ' REPORT NO.: WD-35-01 PAGE 6 Copies of the Report from Enviros RlS and the recommendations from the Region's Waste Management Advisory Committee were forwarded to the Area Municipalities with a request that they consider implementing those waste diversion practices under their jurisdiction as soon as practicaL In order to achieve the goal of 50"10 waste diversion by the Year 2007 or earlier, the Region and Area Municipalities will have to take action and improve the existing waste management systems, 1.6 Meetings Between Region of Durham and Municipality ofClarington Staff In addition to the numerous pilot studies, Regional reports and meetings attended by staff from the Region and all area municipalities, Clarington staff attended two other meetings with Regional staff. These meetings were held to specifically discuss the concept of Clarington entering into an integrated waste collection contract in cooperation with the Region of Durham, At the same time that the above-mentioned investigative meetings were taking place, Clarington staff were taking steps to update the Garbage Collection Tender to ensure that Clarington was still in a position to act on its own to enter into a garbage collection contract. 1.7 Stage II Services Review Study The consulting firm of Deloitte & Touche, in partnership with Earth Tech Canada Inc. and Integrated Maintenance & Operations Services Inc. (IMOS), is presently engaged to undertake the Who Does What (WOW) Stage II Services Review, This Study will provide financial analysis, business case development and implementation plans for certain mandatory concepts identified in the Stage I Services Review, including Waste Management. The Study is scheduled to be complete by December, 2001. As Director of Public Works, Stephen Vokes has been Clarington's staff representative on the Who Does What Services Review, Along with a number of other municipal representatives, C1arington has consistently supported the concept of the Region supplying a one-tier waste management system. In a similar fashion, the move to one-tier road maintenance, supplied by the Municipality of Clarington, has also been supported. As , . REPORT NO.: WD-35-01 PAGE 7 mentioned previously, with Clarington's and the Region's waste collection contracts coming up for renewal, it is timely to review the implementation of an integrated solid waste collection system. 2.0 REVIEW AND COMMENT 2.1 The previous pages contain a lengthy discussion of the pilot studies and consultant's reports, which have led up to the consideration of an integrated waste collection contract for Clarington, in cooperation with the Region of Durham. The Municipality of Clarington has 3 options in regard to the award of their garbage collection contract: 1) Negotiate with our present garbage collection contractor, Canadian Waste Systems, to extend their existing contract; 2) Clarington to award a garbage collection contract with a firm price to allow for future collection of separated household organic food waste; or 3) Award a contract for an integrated waste collection system for garbage, recyclables and compostables, in partnership with the Region of Durham. (Collection costs to be charged to the Regional Levy with the Region providing contract administration. Clarington continues to administer local issues,) 2.2 Option #1 - Extend the Existing Contract Option #1 would be to negotiate with our present garbage collection contractor, Canadian Waste Systems, to extend their existing contract for a fixed term, preferably until either September/October of 2002 or April 30, 2003, These dates are preferred in order that the contract changeover would no longer occur in the Christmas holiday week, during winter conditions. Comparison to prices obtained for recently awarded collection contracts indicate that Clarington may expect to experience cost increases in the range of 33 to 67%. This would increase the garbage collection contract from its present level of$I,075,OOO to between $1.4 million and $1.8 million. , ' REPORT NO.: WD-3S-01 PAGE 8 ADVANTAGES: . The major advantage of this option is that the results of the "Who Does What - Stage II Services Review", covering the analysis of Waste Management, would be complete. DISADVANTAGES: . The opportunity to implement a long-tenn integrated one-tier solid waste collection system for recyclables, food waste and residential garbage will have been missed. . Delay would occur in the move toward increased waste diversion from landfill. . Higher cost. Recognizing that the intention would be to enter into a long-term contract in May 2003, a contractor would not want to publicly disclose their price to extend the contract for approximately one year, Unless the extended price could remain confidential, Clarington could expect to receive a significantly higher price from Canadian Waste Systems so that they could remain competitive for the long- tenn contract. . Extending the contract in the short term means the Municipality will likely be serviced by existing older vehicles. The Municipality would not be in a position to require new trucks. 2.3 Option #2 - Clarington Curbside Garbage Collection Contract Option #2 would involve the award., by Clarington, of a long-tenn garbage collection contract, similar to the present contract. Although it would not be an integrated contract to include the Region's recyclables collection, it would require a firm price to be quoted to allow for the future collection of separated household organic food waste. Very preliminary indications are that Clarington may expect an additional 20% increase in the cost of collection resulting from the implementation of household organics collection. Combined with the previously mentioned inflationary increases for curbside collection of 33 to 67%, this would result in a cost increase from a present level of $1,075,000 to between $1.7 million and $2,2 million. , ' REPORT NO.: WD-35-01 PAGE 9 ADVANTAGES: . This long-term contract would likely result in lower costs than Option #1. . Clarington would retain the same level of control and influence over details of the contract. DISADVANTAGES: . The opportunity to implement a long-term integrated one-tier solid waste collection system for recyclables, food waste and residential garbage will have been missed. . Some delay would occur in the move toward increased waste diversion from landfill. . Adding household organic food waste collection at a future point in the contract, rather than implementing it at the outset, will result in higher costs, . The "Who Does What - Stage II Services Review", covering the analysis of Waste Management, would not be complete. 2.4 Option #3 - Integrated Waste Collection System Option #3 is for the award of a contract for an integrated waste collection system for garbage, recyclables and compostables, in partnership with the Region of Durham. It is fully expected that the cost of waste collection will rise substantially with the award of the next collection contract. The additional cost of collecting household organics will increase costs even further. For these reasons, it is proposed that the total cost of the new integrated system be recovered entirely from a Regional Solid Waste Levy. Regional staff indicate that the additional cost associated with combining recycling, household organics and residential garbage will likely be offset by savings in disposaL In particular, the disposal cost for household organics is substantially less than the disposal cost for regular garbage, It is expected that some savings can be achieved through the combination of the recycling and garbage collection contracts and the early inclusion of household organics collection. However, without knowing how the successful contractor will implement collection, it would be prudent to assume the same collection costs as with Option #2 ($1.7 million to $2,2 million), " , REPORT NO.: WD-35-01 PAGE 10 It is recognized that costs will be increased substantially through the introduction of the proposed integrated waste collection system. It is further recognized that Clarington and the Region will be hard pressed to implement such a system in time for the expiration of the recycling and garbage collection contracts, In fact, it is desirable that the contract be adjusted so as not to begin in winter conditions during the ChristmaslNew Year's week. In light of these facts, combined with the fact that it is being recommended that the total cost of the new integrated system be recovered entirely from a Regional Solid Waste Levy, discussions will take place to finalize whether this same Solid Waste Levy will be utilized for the payment of cost overrun to extend the Municipality's present garbage collection contract. Although final details of the integrated system are not required for Council to formulate a decision in this matter, it is suffice to provide a generalized list of components of the system that have already been discussed, Staff from Clarington and Durham Region are giving consideration to the following issues, many of which would also be applicable to Clarington proceeding with its own contract award in Option #2: . Requiring mandatory participation in recycling and composting programs. . Reduced bag limit from 4 to 3. . Bag tags for anything over 3 bags of residual garbage waste only (12 courtesy tags). . Ban tires, electronics, cardboard, etc. from the regular garbage stream. . Recycling pickup on alternate weeks (i.e, Week 1- containers/Week 2 - fibres). . Use of compartmentalized trucks to give contractors the option of picking up all items at once. . Food waste placed in double grocery bags in small container, then into light green bags, . Yard waste placed in kraft paper bags, . Six year contract to recover full value of trucks. . Regional Levy will pay the cost ofClarington's call centre, " , . REPORT NO.: WD-35-01 PAGE 11 ADVANTAGES: . An integrated waste collection system, including household organics, will achieve waste diversion of greater than 50%. . Cost savings associated with combining recycling and garbage collection contracts, . Cost savings associated with including food waste collection from the outset of the contract. DISADVANTAGES: . Clarington and the Region share in the control and influence over details of the contract. . The "Who Does What - Stage II Services Review", covering the analysis of Waste Management, would not be complete. 2.5 Property Tax Impacts As referenced in the 2001 Current Budget Report, TR -18-01, the existing flat rate charge for garbage was proposed to be eliminated for 2002 as a result of tax policy issues. Although Treasury were already proposing to eliminate the flat rate charge, Option #3 would definitely require the elimination of this charge. In its place, the Region of Durham would determine a solid waste levy to be applied to all property classes. This practice is in place for other Area Municipalities in the Region for disposal and recycling. The impact would be to charge a garbage levy to property classes who did not traditionally pay a garbage charge, This would alleviate some of the impact to residential taxpayers, However, the additional property classes do not receive garbage collection/disposal services, The impact on the industrial/large industrial classes is not yet determinable due to legislative issues surrounding Bill 140 and application of the "hard cap". The Finance Department at the Region of Durham are not able to provide information on impacts to each class because they have not had sufficient time to perform analysis nor are actual costs available. This would be determined in conjunction with the 2002 budget calculations. . '._1' REPORT NO.: WD-35-01 PAGE 12 ~ < From a tax billing perspective, the administration of rates across all property classes is much simpler to administer than the existing flat rate charge, Currently, each individual property must be identified and specifically coded to receive a garbage charge, This is very time consuming and it is difficult to ensure that every property is appropriately identified for the charge, 3.0 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 3.1 It is recognized that the Region and Area Municipalities need to aggressively take action to increase waste diversion. With Clarington's and the Region's waste collection contracts corning up for renewal, it is timely to take steps to achieve the target of 50% waste diversion from landfill by 2007. It is recommended to progressively move forward at this time to implement a curbside organics composting program through a partnership with the Region of Durham. It is further recommended that the Public Works Department and Treasury Department staff work with the Region of Durham to develop an acceptable integrated solid waste collection system, as outlined in Option #3. In the event that Council do not support Staffs recommendation for an integrated solid waste collection system, Staff will proceed with the award, by Clarington, of a long-term garbage collection contract, as outlined in Option #2, Respectfully submitted, Reviewed by, ~J4--/ Stephen A. Vokes, p, Bng" DrrectorofPublicWorks o-~-~ Franklin Wu, Chief Administrative Officer SA V*ce 20106/01