Sanitation Committee Summary Report

Information as of June 14, 2007 outlining the current system and summarizing three options for further discussion. All costs are approximate and all options have prerequisites. The contract with TIRRA for the current system expires in Spring 2008 so we have a strong incentive to make a decision about the future by Fall 2007.

Current System

Current rates range from a high of  $100/household/year to a low of $25.00/household. Average payment is $75.00/household/year. TIRRA is the collection agency.  Presently contributions are voluntary and we receive about 95% participation from the households billed.

We currently have recycling once/month manned by a paid person (Ron Bannister) supported through our collection of garbage fees.

Returnables are the responsibility of TIPA.  They pay an individual (Kevin Hughes) to collect, sort and haul the returnables.  The funds raised are used to purchase supplies for the school.

Pros:

• Convenient
• One stop area
• Fair pricing with adjustable rate according to use

Cons:

• Relies on TIRRA to manage and collect fees
• Many recyclables end up in garbage increasing our tonnage
• Difficult to supervise – not sure who is using or abusing the system
• Requires at least two willing individuals with appropriate vehicles to commit for xx period of time to be the “paid persons’ implementing system. One of the above individuals has already indicated he is not prepared to continue with the current system because it is not sustainable from his perspective.
• Seen as unsustainable by some people due to heavy reliance on a small number of people (even if paid). Without distributing the burden, the system falls apart if these people are no longer able or willing to continue.

Option 1: Curbside Recycling and Garbage Pick up via CVRD

A Bylaw has already been established for curbside service including Gulf Islands (note: Thetis is the only island in Area G). A Bylaw for service to commence has also passed however Gulf Islands are not included.

The process to commence curbside service is to petition/ask Area G Director.(Mel Dory) Must be shown that all or majority of households are in favor of curbside service for Area Director to agree.  Once it is in place, all households will pay a base fee whether they use the service or not. CVRD does billing annually and would be the collection agency. Service entails 2 cans/week – if excess needed then household purchases a ticket ($2.00/can).

Until recently, cost has been $80/year/household. New current cost is projected to be $104.00/year/household. There is a potential for fees to be higher, since rates have not been negotiated since 1998.  New contract with much larger area to be bid upon by end of September. If included, Thetis Island could pay a slightly higher fee to offset the ferry costs.

The school possibly at a different site could still collect returnables.
The large garbage bins would be removed and the current garbage site would be closed.

Pros:

• CVRD would be the manager and collection agency (this could also be seen as a con)
• All households would pay for system (this could also be seen as a con)
• Removes unsightly garbage area (see photo!)
• No volunteer hours required
• Environmentally friendly as it takes recyclables out of garbage
• Convenient administration and use of system

Cons:

• Cost may be higher than other options
• No sliding scale for base payment to reflect household use (single vs. family, full-time vs. part-time)
• Potential dumping on private lands

Option 2: Curbside Recycling and Garbage pickup via a private hauler

Estimated it would cost about $20,000/year.  If divided among 250 households that would equal $80.00/year/household for pick up every 2 weeks.  

With this method, TIRRA would manage collection of fees and could presumably set sliding scale as long as costs are covered.  TIRRA would also be responsible for issuing garbage bag tags.  Each household would have to “tag’ their garbage to indicate pickup.  Untagged garbage would not be picked up. Tags usually cost about $2-4 each.  TIRRA would set that rate once a bag is weighed and we get an idea of how much tonnage we can expect to be hauled off. Returnables remain with school.  Current garbage yard would be closed.  

Pros:

• Sliding scale for payment could be established
• Convenient for user
• Environmentally friendly
• User pay system
• Removes unsightly garbage area

Cons:

• TIRRA-managed and TIRRA as collection agency (requires committed volunteers)
• Volunteer hours also required for selling of tags
• Dependant on hauler wanting to service Thetis Island (note: of six
• companies called, only WSI indicated an interest)
• Potential dumping on private lands

Option 3: Garbage and Recycling remaining on Thetis Island

Keeping garbage at current site and expanding our recycling system into the Highways yard.  We have gained permission of Highways. Could be an “open’ or “closed system’. The following estimated costs would be incurred:
      - Fencing area - $10,000 (fencing is required by Highways for use of their land)
      - Shed to sort items - $5,000
      - Platform for 40-yard bins - $1,000
      - $100/month to rent one bin
      - $200/bin to have it picked up (estimated we will need to empty two 40 yard bins 3x/year)
      - If “closed “system, volunteer hours to man site when it is open and to help people sort, etc.  Depends on how often the site is to be open (1x/week or more).

Pros:

• Garbage and recycling remains at current site
• A dedicated space for recycling would be established

Cons:

• Infrastructure costs
• Heavy demand on volunteers
• Open only certain days could be inconvenient if closed system
• Potential dumping on private land if closed system
• Likelihood of huge mess if open system (as with current situation) so need for regular cleanup.

Key Considerations for a “sustainable’ system

Sustainability includes reconciling fair distribution of costs, fair distribution of burden on individuals, minimizing environmental impacts, addressing associated health and safety issues, maximizing community participation, meeting community needs, maximizing user satisfaction, etc. Some key considerations to make an informed decision are:

  1.  Full cost accounting (e.g. user fees, volunteer time, infrastructure)
  2.  Fairness (e.g. sliding scale based on use, incentives for users who minimize waste)
  3.  Environmental (also health and safety) issues (e.g. state of site, potential dumping elsewhere)
  4.  Convenience (especially consideration of non-drivers, elderly, physically-challenged)
  5.  Others??
      › We need to hear from our community to fully understand what all the considerations are and how to prioritize them in deciding on a sustainable system.
      › Views will be collected over the summer and a community forum is planned for the Fall to discuss and decide on the future.

Education and outreach

A committee headed by Bev Vreeswick, Stephanie Cottell, and Ruth Rebain is developing an education and outreach strategy to help people learn about the issues and make informed choices as individuals and as a community. A presentation and demonstration are planned as part of the Fall community forum.  

Respectfully submitted,
Barbara Williamson, Chair Sanitation Committee
Members: Ron Bannister, Joe Squire, Claire Hess, Bev Vreeswijk, Andy Keir, Dennis Culver, David and Pat Vickers, Stephanie Cottell, Ruth Rebain, Steve Frankel, Pat Mooney, Kevin Hughes, Kevin Gailbraith