Ontario Recycler Workshop Seminar on Sustainable Financing of Municipal Solid Waste Management - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 52
About This Presentation
Title:

Ontario Recycler Workshop Seminar on Sustainable Financing of Municipal Solid Waste Management

Description:

Remove $183M from property tax base mid-2008. Create shared Water & Waste Utility Bill ... New Board with 4-year term. MOE Policy Statement on Waste Management ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:125
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 53
Provided by: beverl55
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Ontario Recycler Workshop Seminar on Sustainable Financing of Municipal Solid Waste Management


1
Ontario Recycler Workshop Seminar on Sustainable
Financing of Municipal Solid Waste Management
  • Maria Kelleher
  • Kelleher Environmental

1
2
Welcome!
  • First of 2 Ontario Recycler Workshop (ORW)
    seminars
  • Results from work of EE Fund project 160
  • 40 participants in room 15 on webcast
  • municipal recycling co-ordinators, waste
    management staff, clerks, analysts, Councillors,
    consultants other stakeholders

2
3
Sustainable Financing Project
  • Started Fall 2005
  • Objective provide municipalities with research
    practical support related to implementation of
    sustainable financing systems
  • Co-sponsored by London Ottawa
  • 6 Discussion Papers Implementation Manual
  • Finalized December 2007

3
4
What is a Sustainable Financing System?
  • Self-financing, separate cost centre
  • Budget separate from other departments or
    services (not competing at budget time)
  • Charge fees to households off property tax bill
  • Keep all revenues generated (including surplus)
  • Municipal oversight minimal involvement in
    decision-making
  • Operates as independent entity

4
5
Issue
  • Current property tax-based financing not
    sustainable
  • residential solid waste management costs
    cross-subsidized by ICI sector
  • solid waste competes with other municipal needs
  • no independence to make changes to solid waste
    management system to increase diversion
  • Independent, self-financed systems in place
    across US CA
  • Many ON municipalities exploring sustainable
    financing approaches

5
6
Sustainable Financing Project Products
  • Discussion Papers
  • Municipal Act
  • Financing Governance Arrangements
  • Billing Approaches
  • Household Fees Pay-As-You-Throw Rates
  • Multi-Family Buildings
  • Practical Implementation ExperienceLessons
    Learned
  • Impacts of Financing Models on Diversion Cost
  • Implementation Manual
  • summary of key information from Discussion Papers

6
7
Todays Agenda
  • Presentations from 4 municipalities
  • Approximately 10 minutes per presentation
  • Hold all but questions of fact to end
  • Facilitated discussion after questions
  • Finish by 10 am

7
8
For Webcast Viewers
  • Use questions/comments box at left of
    consoleanytime
  • comments do not flash on screen
  • responses
  • immediate (especially for how to queries re
    webcast)
  • relayed to speakers at QA portion
  • follow up after webcast
  • Enlarge slide as desired

8
9
Councillor Adam Giambrone Geoff
Rathbone Vice-Chair, Public Works General
Manager Infrastructure Committee Solid Waste
Management City of Toronto City of Toronto
9
10
Target 70
  • City set an aggressive goal of 70 solid waste
    diversion from landfill by 2010
  • New programs services will give residents tools
    needed to reduce reuse including
  • blue bin recycling/new recycling materials
  • apartment/condo SSO
  • durable goods collection for reuse/recycling
  • volume-based solid waste rate
  • mixed waste treatment prior to landfill
  • Reaching our goal of 70 solid waste diversion
    from landfill by 2010 will extend of Green Lane
    Landfill until approximately 2034

10
11
Volume-Based Rate
  • City needs an additional 54M annually to achieve
    70 diversion
  • current average household cost up 62/year from
    209/hh/yr to 271/hh/yr
  • City will generate the necessary funds through a
    new volume-based rate structure for solid waste
  • payment based on how much garbage is produced by
    households residents can reduce garbage to
    reduce costs
  • users of small size garbage bin will receive
    rebate

11
12
12
13
Similar Programs in North America
  • San Francisco
  • Los Angeles
  • Seattle
  • San Jose
  • Vancouver

13
14
Automated Collection
Fully automated
Semi-automated
14
15
Los Angeles
15
16
Data Management
  • All bins/apartment containers to be equipped with
    RFID Identifiers
  • management of billing system
  • feedback to residents
  • system management tool
  • potential for RecycleBank rewards

16
17
Regulatory Changes Requested from Province
  • Allow City broad authority to implement rate
    structure
  • Solid waste management service fees to have
    priority lien status
  • Allow property tax reductions or credits where
    City service is currently financed through
    property tax base
  • City can pass by-law establishing a user fee
    system to fund the service

17
18
Implementation of Toronto 70 Sustainable
Financing Plan
  • Remove 183M from property tax base mid-2008
  • Create shared Water Waste Utility Bill
  • increase frequency
  • Issue rebates to households on joint water/waste
    bill
  • Single family households have 4 bin subscription
    options (1 to 4.5 bags waste every 2 weeks)

18
19
Lessons Learned from Toronto Experience
  • Must decide if prime driver is
  • increased diversion
  • new source of revenue
  • or, both
  • Challenges of untangling residential/commercial
    tax sources
  • Tax rebates not flexible
  • Massive implementation project
  • allow at least 1 year

19
20
Sustainable Financing of Solid Wastein City of
Ottawa
  • Anne-Marie FowlerOttawa

20
21
Sustainable Financing Context
  • Citys Solid Waste Management Master Plans (2003
    2005) endorsed full-cost accounting utility
    funding concept
  • City Council approved hybrid funding model July
    2005
  • Purpose
  • to make waste management costs more transparent
    to citizens
  • to increase waste diversion
  • to achieve fairness

21
22
Flat Fee Structure (1)
  • City eliminated ICI subsidy, now full cost
    recovery from residential properties
  • City now funds 21M of its solid waste costs
    through a flat fee
  • Flat fee covers garbage collection disposal
  • Waste diversion costs continue to be covered
    through property taxes
  • Flat fee avoided additional 2006 tax increase
    (beyond approved 3.9)

22
23
Flat Fee Structure (2)
  • City introduced differential flat fee
  • 2007 SFH 80.25 (more costly to provide curbside
    collection service)
  • 2007 MFH 32.50/year (cheaper to provide bin
    collection service)
  • Flat fee collected as separate line item on
    property tax bill
  • Subject to same penalties interest rate for
    non-payment

23
24
2006 Property Tax Bill
24
25
Billing Challenges
  • Review underway to transfer fee to water bill
  • Legal logistical concerns have hampered
    efforts
  • some rural residents receive waste service but
    not water service
  • some rural residents receive annual water bill
    not bi-monthly as with urban resident
  • multi-unit buildings pose billing challenges

25
26
Selling the Idea to the Public
  • City staff well prepared to promote new billing
    structure
  • Staff conducted public consultations in 2005
    2006 specific to flat fee issue
  • Staff published comprehensive QA on website well
    in advance of fee
  • Honest about cost increase (fairness issue)
  • Showcased other large cities that have adopted
    flat fee approach

26
27
Outcome
  • Flat fee approved for garbage collection
    disposal for 2006
  • Facilitated by budget pressures - remove it from
    tax base
  • Removal of ICI subsidy for garbage portion
    allowed for tax relief for business
  • Positive move for solid waste as 2008 Budget
    being presented as tax, rate user fee funded

27
28
Rob Schmidt, Chair of Board Todd Pepper,
General Manager
  • Essex Windsor Solid Waste Authority

28
29
Introduction to EWSWA
  • 143,100 households served
  • 8 municipalities
  • Bi-weekly curbside recycling collection
  • Own MRF recycling truckscontract collection
    processing
  • Operate regional landfill
  • Operate other waste diversion programs

29
30
How EWSWA Activities Currently Financed
  • EWSWA acts as a public utility
  • Tipping fee for waste disposal charged to
    municipalities, individual residents ICI
    customersmunicipalities pay gt35 of system cost
  • Fee for municipal waste includes net cost of
    recycling, composting HSW programs
  • EWSWA markets recyclables retains 100 of
    revenue WDO funding

30
31
EWAWA Review Has the Future Arrived?
  • EWSWA Agreement refers to a point in the future
    when the parties to the agreement may consider
    changes to the powers of the Authority
  • EWSWA started a strategic planning process to
    review governance other issues

31
32
Timing of EWSWA Review
  • New Board with 4-year term
  • MOE Policy Statement on Waste Management Planning
    in June 2007
  • 2010Essex-Windsor Solid Waste Management Plan
    target

32
33
EWSWA Review Governance Options
  • New Municipal Act (2001 2007 changes)
  • New governance model options for regional waste
    management services
  • Service Board
  • Corporation
  • Authority created as local board under old
    Municipal Act (1990)

33
34
Four Governance Model Options
  • Status Quokeep Local Service Board
  • could reduce size of Board
  • Disband Board
  • City or County delivers service
  • Create Municipal Service Board (MSB)
  • Create Municipal Service Corporation (MSC)

34
35
EWSWA Governance Options Create Municipal
Service Board
  • Like a Local Board, but consistent with new
    Municipal Act
  • Can own land
  • Clarifies that EWSWA is a body corporate
  • Maintains financial clarity reporting under
    Municipal Act
  • Meetings must be public
  • Can have mix of elected non-elected Board
    members

35
36
EWSWA Governance Options Create Municipal
Service Corporation
  • MSC new option January 2007
  • MSC newno-one has created one yet, rules not
    certain
  • Must do business case to justify creation of MSC
  • Is incorporated under Corporations Act
  • Issue shares
  • Can borrow money independently of municipality
  • Meetings not required to be public
  • More independent of municipalities

36
37
How Change in Governance Would Change Financing
Options
  • Current Authority Agreement provides that garbage
    collection is function of local municipalities
    until such time as decided in the future
  • Creation of a new governance model for Authority
    could result in the future arriving
  • Authority would then operate the entire waste
    management system could implement user fees at
    the generator level

37
38
Leamington Financing Case Study (1)
  • Population 28,830
  • Heinz largest employer tax payer
  • Issuebusiness paying for waste management
    service but not receiving service from
    municipality
  • Solutionremove waste management costs from
    property tax pay through fees
  • Fee identified on tax bill as Garbage Levy

38
39
Leamington Financing Case Study (2)
  • Fee in urban area is 125/hhld/year
  • Fee in rural area is 115/hhld/year
  • Urban area receives weekly yard waste collection
    April to November while rural area does not
    receive yard waste collection
  • 4 bag garbage limit in both urban rural areas

39
40
Leamington Financing Case Study (3)
  • Next steps might be to consider a utility-based
    financing model
  • 25 of households in Leamington do not
    participate in recycling program
  • Could increase household fee for those not
    participating in recycling program reduce fee
    for those who do participateadministration may
    be difficult

40
41
Leamington Financing Case Study (4)
  • Leamington has high seniors population second
    only to Victoria B.C. lowest overall garbage
    generation rate of the 8 municipalities in
    Essex-Windsor
  • While a bag tag program may decrease waste
    management cost to seniors, there is little
    political support for a tag program

41
42
Bluewater Recycling Association
  • Francis VeilleuxPresident

42
43
Bluewater Recycling Association
  • Based in south-western Ontario
  • Founded in 1989
  • Set up as non-profit corporation outside the
    Municipal Act
  • Provides integrated waste management diversion
    services to 22 municipalities (70,000 households)

43
44
Legal Options
  • At time of inception, 2 options
  • Local Board
  • Non-Profit Corporation
  • Non-profit corporation formed under Business
    Corporations Act (1970)
  • Only public waste management entity in Ontario
    operating as a corporation

44
45
Benefits of Non-Profit Corporation
Finance
Policy
Legal
Operations
Bank Financing Budget Setting Fee Structure
Centralized Program Design Flexible Purchasing
Policy
No Municipal Liability Indirect
Ownership Cooperative
Hybrid Operation Public Service Private
Cost Arms Length
45
46
BRA Governance Structure
  • All activities governed by by-law policy
  • 8 member Board of Directors
  • Board election follows municipal election
  • Board represents all members but act
    independently of municipal entity
  • Board responsible for whole operation but
    delegates day to day management

46
47
Governance Structure
Member Municipality
Local Politician
Entity Relationship
Ratepayer
BRA Board
BRA
47
48
Future Directions for BRA
  • Moving to automated collection for garbage
    recycling over next 5 years
  • First 3,000 households in May 2008
  • Will change entire funding mechanism

48
49
Funding Mechanisms
Past
Present
Future
Property Tax Costs funded through general levy
or separate fee on property tax bill
User Pay Costs funded mostly through bag tag
sales with some general levy subsidy
Utility Costs funded through metered
or subscription fees billed individually
49
50
Questions on Presentations
50
51
Questions for Facilitated Discussion
  • Will your new sustainable financing system result
    in waste management system cost savings ?
  • Will your new system increase Blue Box diversion
    rates?
  • What advice would you give to other
    municipalities contemplating a sustainable
    financing system (e.g. lessons learned)?
  • How does a sustainable financing system support
    Ontarios goal of 60 diversion by 2010?

51
52
Thank you!
52
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com