. The report was published on February 23, 1998. Copies of the report were sent to all City of Toronto Councillors on February 25, 1998.
Written comments on the draft report are being accepted by the RCO until March 24, 1998. These comments will be incorporated into the final report which will be forwarded to the Provincial Minister of the Environment by the end of April, 1998.
The draft report focuses on the sharing of responsibility for the recycling of residential non-durable products and packaging. The report estimates that Ontario municipal recycling programs are diverting approximately 507,000 tonnes of material per year at an average net cost of $86.00 per tonne. Basically, the report identifies four municipal recycling funding options. These options include:
Funding Option #1 - Municipal Jurisdiction
Variation A - Recycling funded through property taxes
Variation B - Recycling funded through garbage user fees
Variation C - Recycling funded through recycling user fees
Funding Option #2 - Provincial Measures
Variation A - Tax on specified products/containers at point of sale
Variation B - Levy per product unit/container paid by product manufacturers or importers
Funding Option #3 - Industry Funded
Variation A - Voluntary industry funding of municipal recycling
Variation B - Mandated industry funding of municipal recycling
Funding Option #4 - Industry Funded and Operated
Variation A - Industry funds and operates curbside recycling system
Variation B - Industry funds municipal recycling and operates alternate recycling systems, for example a deposit-return system for liquor and wine containers
The report does not recommend one particular option, but instead evaluates each of the options against a set of five Guiding Principles and six other evaluation criteria. The report also states that the options are not mutually exclusive, since user fees (Option #1) and deposit/return systems (Option #4) are compatible with municipal recycling funded through environmental levies under Option #2 or #3. An Executive Summary of the RCO report is attached (Attachment #1).
This Department has provided written comments to RCO on the draft report, copy of letter appended (Attachment 2). We would have preferred to have the draft report discussed at Works & Utilities Committee prior to submitting our comments, however, this was not possible since a meeting of the Committee was not scheduled between February 23, 1998, when the report was released and the March 24, 1998 deadline for comments.
The attached letter to the RCO addresses our comments on the report, which can be summarized as follows:
- Municipal waste management user fees are not an acceptable funding mechanism for municipal recycling systems since this option is inconsistent with the principle of a shared responsibility (ie., the full cost of municipal recycling remains with municipalities).
- Industry funding of 100 percent of net municipal recycling costs is entirely consistent with the principle of shared responsibility, since municipalities would continue to have financial responsibility for managing recyclable materials, and all other non- durable goods and packaging, that remain in the waste disposal stream.
- A deposit/return system for liquor and wine containers would reduce municipal recycling and waste disposal costs, and therefore is compatible with other funding options.
- Provincially mandated environmental levies on non-durable consumer products and packaging can be an effective funding mechanism provided that the monies flow into a dedicated, single purpose fund for municipal recycling be administered by an arms-length multi-stakeholder board.
Based on the above, we propose that the following two recommendations be adopted by Toronto Council and forwarded to the Province:
- The Ontario Minister of the Environment be advised that funding municipal recycling solely through waste management user fees or property taxes is unacceptable, since the full cost of municipal recycling and all other waste management would remain with the municipalities; and
- The Province of Ontario be requested to collect and distribute environmental levies on all non-durable consumer products and packaging managed in municipal waste management systems, with the monies received through the levies flowing into a dedicated, single purpose fund to pay the full net cost of municipal recycling programs.
Recommendations regarding deposit/return systems for beverage containers are provided in a separate report on this agenda.
It should also be noted that a separate Interim Funding Proposal has been prepared by the Association of Municipal Recycling Co-ordinators (AMRC), after consultation with a number of municipal staff throughout Ontario, and submitted to the Minister of Environment. The Interim Funding Proposal was originally developed by the Commissioners of Works from the former Area Municipalities and Metro Toronto and was modified slightly after consultation by the AMRC with other municipal staff in Ontario. The purpose of the Interim Funding Proposal is to ensure that the immediate financial needs of municipal recycling programs in Ontario are met. A copy of the Proposal is appended (Attachment #3).
Conclusions:
The preferred option for funding municipal recycling programs is for the Province of Ontario to collect and distribute environmental levies on all non-durable consumer products and packaging (other than beverage containers managed through deposit/return systems), with the monies received through the levies flowing into a dedicated fund for municipal recycling programs.
Contact Name:
Andrew Pollock
Sr. Manager - Waste Diversion & Planning
Solid Waste Management Division (Metro Hall)
Phone: (416) 392-4715 Fax: (416) 392-4754
E-mail:
