City Council has voted 6-5 to allow Councillor Darren Hill to rescind his vote approving a new waste collection model, effectively putting the plan on hold.
On Monday night, Hill tabled information which he said questioned how much waste would be diverted with a new system where residents are billed according to the size of the garbage bin.
“I have not found one single report that shows variable bin size reaches 44 per cent diversion. Not one,” Hill said while making his case for council to allow him to rescind his vote.
Under the new system, people would have selected the size of waste bin they'd like to receive and paid according to size. Cost estimates are $6 per month for a small bin, $8 for the medium bin and $11 for the largest bin.
Hill said he supports a plan to ensure residents pay for the garbage they throw away or incentives to change behavior. However, he does not approve using a plan based on “variable bin size.”
“Variable bin size is not a true pay-as-you-throw as it is based on which bin you have, and not the amount of garbage that is actually thrown away in the bin or the amount of times you put the bin out for collection.”
Hill also challenged the reported costs of a new landfill and the feasibility to expand the current one. Hill says he’s had conversation with government about expanding the current landfill footprint and says they are more than receptive to receiving applications for expansion, and adds the process is not as onerous and restricted as reported.
City administration said it has assessed the barriers and the utility conflicts but has not done physical site investigations beyond the existing landfill footprint.
Councillor Sarina Gersher said there would still be a cost to expanding the landfill.
“Even if land was available next to our landfill, those costs that we have been talking about that could be saved by implementing our waste diversion plan, we would realize if we didn’t have to expand outside of our existing footprint of the landfill,” Gersher said.
Hill also mentioned previous concerns about costs of making waste as a utility, especially the impact it could have on people in lower valued homes.
“They don’t want to have to decide between garbage and groceries for their family.”
Mayor Charlie Clark said he’s heard residents want to move on and that council has already made a decision.
“While a rescind motion is possible, I think we need to look at it and consider very carefully what that means,” Clark said in closing debate on the motion.
Clark said council considered all of the options over the last several months and while there are questions about the landfill he said hasen’t heard anything new that warrants changing course.
“It gets very challenging if council wants to revisit and reconsider debates.”
The decision to allow Hill to change his vote puts the proposed system on hold but does not eliminate it as a possibility as a waste collection model. It could still be brought back to council in various different forms, or administration could choose to propose a different kind of system entirely.
