The city’s information flyer about the new garbage bins explains the garbage fee and tax rebate; did you know that the rebate applies in future years too (not just 2008)? Glen Gustafson (Councillor McConnell’s assistant) explains:

” Because of Provincial legislation, the City cannot simply remove the cost of solid waste from the property tax bill (which would greatly simplify things). Instead, every year on the water bill, every household - regardless of the size of the bin - will receive a $209 rebate. This is the cost of solid waste. Next on the water bill will be the user fee. For those who use the small bin, that user fee is $199/year, which will result in a net rebate of $10/year. For those who require the medium bin, the user fee is $248/year, resulting in a net cost of $39/year, and so on.

Every year, you will see on your water bill a rebate and then the user fee charge. Like any other user fee, these will likely be reviewed every year during the operating budget process. If, at some future date, the province amends legislation to allow municipalities to remove the cost of services from property tax bills, you would likely no longer see the rebate on your water bill but on your property taxes. “

Finally, there is recognition by City Hall that some residents have no storage space and cannot accommodate any size of bin: “In some extremely problematic situations, residents may require a bag system for collection“, quoting Ward 28 Councillor McConnell’s March 7 newsletter. Not surprising, considering the many compact houses that can found throughout Riverdale, Cabbagetown, Trefann Court, Chinatown and other downtown neighbourhoods.

To ensure exceptions to the unwieldy and unpopular big bins are applied consistently, wouldn’t a published set of criteria help? Something like this:

Such written criteria would provide all residents with the same guidelines to follow, and reassure residents that the City is not imposing an unrealistic amount of extra hardship on some residents, to accommodate these bins. But the city won’t share its criteria, opting instead for an expensive and subjective process: requiring that a City Solid Waste employee representative conduct a site visit for every resident requesting an exception to the bins.

---

The official reason given for the new bins is “70% waster diversion”, but verbally, some City staff have hinted at cost savings as another reason, the benefit of semi-automated lifting and emptying of the bins:
- collection will be faster than the current system of bins and bags
- reduced worker injury (so fewer absences from work, reduced insurance claims)
Toronto is implementing a “user pay” system for waste management, so let’s demand a firm commitment from the Mayor that the annual increases in the fee for residential waste management will not exceed inflation.

---

Call the City at 392-2467, if you want an exemption from the new “blue bin” program

Toronto wants everyone - downtowners as well as suburbanites - to use large wheeled bins for recyclables, garbage (and eventually, a 3rd large bin for organic waste). This plan was approved in June 2007, but until recently, no recognition that “big bins” might not be feasible in downtown neighbourhoods. In early January, the city made a rushed attempt to force acceptance of the bins: a brochure giving Trefann Court residents 10 days to choose a bin size, no small bins (only medium, large, or jumbo), large bin by default, information meetings only a few days before the deadline for ordering bins. After considerable opposition, the City’s only compromise for Ward 28 is a “one bin pilot”: use the same bin for garbage and recyclables, on alternate weeks.

No one likes being lied to by their government. The city’s stated rationale for the bins is to “increase recycling”; not mentioned are the real benefits:
1) mechanized garbage collection (use hoists to lift and empty these bins into the garbage truck), and
2) user-pay “garbage fees” (starting in Nov) set at an amount to ensure extra revenue for the city

Objections have been voiced on the Urban Toronto discussion board:
- large bins will occupy lots of sidewalk space, making it difficult for persons in wheelchairs or pushing a stroller to get by
- challenge of manoeuvring bins around snow banks and parked cars

The newspapers have reported on the controversy with these big bins.
- In a Jan 20 article in the Toronto Sun, it was suggested that one motivation for the bins is to “pay back the CUPE unions for supporting Mayor David Miller in the 2006 election”.
- And on March 25, the Sun asked whether the entire exclusive Cabbagetown area had been granted an exemption from having to use these big bins ?

Toronto Star articles:
Jan 8 (includes a video),
Jan 26 - reasons from the city why bag collection would be problematic,
Jan 29 - suggests that residents revolt, similar to 1773 Boston Tea Party,
Jan 30 - where Mayor Miller asserts that for downtown residents, the new bins are “easier for people to use”,
Feb 8 - estimated garbage fees, now more than anticipated,
Feb 13 - suggests garbage collection fee might be “extra City revenue”, not just a “user-pay fee” calculated to cover costs, and
Feb 22 - challenges of proposed bins for Ward 19

• “They are too damn big. They won’t fit between most houses. There isn’t room for them on most porches. They are too damn heavy. Empty they are cumbersome, full they are dead weights – even with their wheels. …Forget getting one that’s loaded down steps. They’re too damn ugly. Considering that most of them will be left parked in front of houses, they’ll lend a slummy tone to even the most pretentious streetscapes.” (Slinger, Jan 29)
• “Last June, they said the plan would net about $54 million extra. Now, they’ve increased the take to $74 million and rising. Soon, garbage fees will be covering any municipal budgets costs a mayor wants to hide.” (Royson James, Feb 13)

Hopefully some creative thinking and co-operation among downtown residents associations can produce some viable alternatives to these monster bins, that will still achieve our recycling goals.

(Updated to add links to Feb 22 and March 25 newspaper reports.)