May 18 2012
Leave a comment
City Council, Committees, Finances

Committees-At-A-Glance: Executive Committee Agenda, May 22 2012

Next week the three main committees of City Council – Executive, Administration & Finance, and Planning and Operations – will meet to discuss a range of items.

The following is a summary of the highlights from the Executive Committee agenda (available HERE):

Executive:

1. Gordie Howe Bowl Upgrades:

The committee will consider at report by administration suggesting that they create a foundation that would be tasked with fundraising a majority of the $9.8 million in upgrades planned for Gordie Howe Bowl.  In addition, they will be asked to approve an expenditure of $45,000 towards the hiring of an administrator of that foundation, with the money to be paid back from the funds raised by the foundation. Finally, they will be asked to approve that a request for $600,000 be forwarded to the 2013 budget deliberations for initial funding of the upgrade project.

2. Public Beach:

A report to the committee recommends that a public beach not be established on the S. Saskatchewan River, just north of the Train Bridge.  As many are well aware, the sandbar deposited last year after the high river waters receded became a defacto beach with hundreds of residents flocking to sunbath and even swim from its shores – despite being technically illegal.  The report suggests that signs be posted warning against swimming in the river due to fast currents and a strong undertow. However, it also recommends that garbage bins be provided. Finally, it suggests that parking restrictions in place in the area be communicated to those using the beach.

3. Pleasant Hill Redevelopment:

As I outlined in a previous post (HERE) – the City has owned 18 units built during the first phase of the neighbourhood redevelopment since December 2010, after having agreed to purchase them at a set cost from the builders if they did not sell in the first 6 months.  4 of the units did sell at the set prices (between $190 and 240K); however, 14 units still remain in the city’s possession. Earlier this year, the mortgage insurance required to allow potential buyers to only pay a 5% down-payment was removed by CMHC, meaning prospective buyers would need to provide a 20% down-payment.

Since then, City Administration has been working on a way to unload the homes while still recouping their costs from their original purchase in December 2010 – at no point did they attempt to lower the asking prices on the open market.

In a report to Executive, the administration is now recommending that the City provide a 9.99% sales incentive to prospective buyers (i.e. they would pay a portion of the 20% down-payment in a form of a grant) – for a total cost of just under $300K to the City.  It is currently costing the city $40K per year to own the unoccupied homes.

 

May 15 2012
Leave a comment
Uncategorized

City-wide Curbside Recycling Finally Approved

After six years of consultation, debate, straw-man arguments, countless City Council meetings, and high stakes public relation battles, City Council awarded a seven year contract to Loraas Recycling to deliver a city-wide curbside recycling program.

Of interest, the 2007 Waste and Recycling Report outlines plans that would have seen a curbside recycling system implemented between 2007 and 2009, followed by a multi-unit dwelling program, and finally a program for the industrial/commercial/institutional (ICI) sector:

 

May 14 2012
Leave a comment
Accountability, Budget, City Council, Commentary, Environment, Finances, Recycling, Voting Record

City Fast Forwards on Multi-Unit Recycling Program

After taking the better part of six years to institute a single-family universal curbside recycling program, Saskatoon City Council is attempting to fast-track a multi-unit dwelling (MUD) recycling program after making policy on the fly during their April 16th meeting.

At that meeting, Councillor Lorje introduced a motion that would see the City attempt to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with Cosmopolitan Industries (who had lost the single-unit curbside program competitive bid to Loraas) to be intimately involved in the next phase of recycling for the city – multi-units – in turn, Cosmo agreed to stop their aggressive public relations war against the City.

Hindering the development of a sound and well thought-out multi-unit program is a looming July 1st deadline, after which time the City (under the New West Partnership agreement terms) will no longer be able to sole-source contracts greater than $75,000 – which the multi-unit agreement with Cosmo, if reached, would certainly exceed.

Due to this timeline, and the uncertainty of exactly what type of multi-unit system City Council had in mind, City Administration has been rushing to lay the groundwork for the MOU over the past month.

In this weeks Council Agenda, City Admin has submitted two reports that they intend to deal with at the next meeting (May 28th).  However, the reports are being made public in advance in order to allow both Council and the public to have time to fully digest the process that is being fast-tracked.

The first report, issued by the Environment Branch, outlines five possible options for how the multi-unit recycling program could look and how Cosmo Industries would potentially be involved in each option (see below).

The second report, issued by the City Solicitor, explores how the MOU could potentially be setup and what the potential implications to the City would be under each scenario (see below). Of note, the Solicitor outlines the following regarding the potential MOU:

“It is usually, at most, a three-page document and is not a formal agreement outlining specific terms of any arrangement. It is usually of limited legal enforcement.”

“On the other hand, if the City enters into a MOU with Cosmo regarding multi-unit dwelling recycling, there will be an expectation that the City intends to create some role for Cosmo in the recycling of materials obtained from MUDs. In essence, the City is agreeing that there will be a multi-unit dwelling recycling program and that Cosmo will have a role in that program.  That intent is the only purpose for entering into an MOU with Cosmo. The MOU will reflect that intent”

What will be of interest over the next few Council meetings is how each Councillor interprets exactly what they agreed to back on April 16th with their policy-on-the-fly manoeuvrer to ensure a single-family dwelling curbside program.

While some may interpret the motion passed at that meeting as merely exploring the option of entering into an MOU with Cosmo on being involved in a MUD system, others may see it has Council agreeing to sole-source the entire MUD system to Cosmo before the July 1st deadline.  It is likely safe to assume that Cosmo Industries viewed the motion in a manner that would see them being intimately involved in a MUD system as the processor.

 

In addition to the debate around the intent of the April 16th motion, there are a series of questions that remain unasked and unanswered by City Council in the case were Cosmo is ultimately awarded a contract to process recyclables from MUDs.

How will the organization be able to process recyclables other than paper/cardboard – including plastics, cans, and glass?

Will they partner with an established processor or will they have to build an expanded facility?

Who collects the recyclables from the MUDs (the City currently collects all paper from the depots for Cosmo)?

How will Council ensure that they are getting the best deal for the taxpayer’s dollar without a competitive bid process?

 

With a little under two months to decide on what the system should look like, if an MOU with Cosmo is required, how Cosmo will be involved, and what the implications are to the City budget, City Council meetings and the public relations messaging are sure to be heated.

 

1. MUD System Options Report:

Download (PDF, 110.88KB)

2. MOU Report:

May 14 2012
Leave a comment
Budget, City Council, Environment, Finances, Recycling

City to Finalize Universal Curbside Recycling Program Tonight

After taking the better party of six years – Saskatoon City Council is being asked to award a seven-year contract to Loraas Recycle to run a universal curbside recycling program for the City.

Valued at $25,536,937.49, the contract will see Loraas both collecting and processing all recyclables from single-family dwellings, likely beginning in early 2013.  All told, the per household, per month cost comes in at $3.83 in the first year, increasing to $4.56 by year seven. Not included in that cost are the City administrative fees, which could increase the per month cost by upwards of $0.50.

Loraas will deliver a single-stream system, where residents will have one cart (a blue cart, roughly the same size as their garbage can), which will be collected every 2 weeks.  The system will recycle most plastics (#1-7), paper, cardboard, glass, beverage containers, metal cans, and plastic bags.

The Loraas processing plant is located just south of Circle Drive North, at 1902 1st Ave N.  For a closer look at the state-of-the-art processing facility and how it works – take a look through my post of the plant tour I took last fall (HERE and HERE).

May 11 2012
Leave a comment
City Council, Commentary, Committees, Environment

SEAC Recommends Against A Plastic Bag Ban

(Full Disclosure – I am the chair of SEAC (Saskatoon Environmental Advisory Committee).)

At a March 2012 City Council meeting a group presented to Councillors a petition with over 4,000 signatures supporting the implementation of a ban on single-use plastic bags in Saskatoon.

The idea received a lukewarm reception from Councillors, who ultimately referred the matter to their Environmental Advisory Committee (SEAC).

SEAC is composed of 10 citizens appointed to two year terms by City Council. Also on the Committee is a representative from the Saskatoon Health Region and a City Councillor.

The proposed ban came before SEAC at their April 12th meeting. After a lengthy discussion they voted to issue a report to City Council recommending against a bag ban in Saskatoon.

The group who brought forward the petition was invited to present to SEAC in April and again to respond to the draft report recommending against the ban.  During both meetings no representatives from the petition group were in attendance.

The following is the report issued to City Council by SEAC yesterday, Thursday, May 10th:

TO: Administration and Finance Committee
FROM: Saskatoon Environmental Advisory Committee
DATE: May 10,2012
SUBJECT: Communications to Council
From: Michelle Lee
Date: March 20,2012
Subject: Disposable Plastic Bags
FILE NO.: CK. 7830-1

RECOMMENDATION: that the information be received.

BACKGROUND:
City Council considered a communication dated March 20,2012 from Michelle Lee, and heard a presentation on this matter at the March 26, 2012 meeting made by Michelle Lee and Kelsey McLean. The matter was subsequently referred to the Saskatoon Environmental Advisory Committee for information and discussion; and also to the Administration to review with its recycling initiatives.
The Saskatoon Environmental Advisory Committee considered this communication and petition at its meeting held on April 12, 2012 and while the Committee recognizes that this issue is critical, the Committee does not support implementation of a plastic bag ban at this time. Instead, the Committee recommends an approach that involves public education, starting with students who have become avid supporters of environmental controls, especially with respect to recycling. The Committee suggests that an educational approach could be integrated with the City of Saskatoon recycling program.

REPORT:
The Saskatoon Environmental Advisory Committee would like to recognize and commend the extensively researched report by Ms. Lee and Ms. McLean. In particular, the case studies of
municipalities that have implemented plastic bag bans were appreciated. The Committee agrees with the report’s authors that plastic pollution is an important issue for the City of Saskatoon and that plastic bags pose a risk to wildlife, in addition to reducing quality of life for city residents in a number of ways, including unsightly litter.

In order for a single-use plastic bag ban to be effective, funding must be allocated for public education and engagement as well as enforcement. The committee noted that cost of such a ban, as outlined in the report, was significant even for municipalities much smaller than Saskatoon (e.g. Wood Buffalo). The City of Saskatoon is currently undertaking a more comprehensive recycling program, which continues to require significant financial and human resource commitment for the city. The committee is therefore reluctant to recommend implementing a plastic bag ban at this time as the Committee believes that the city’s resources should be concentrated in this area.

Aside from large costs of implementation and enforcement, the Committee discussed additional challenges to banning single-use plastic bags. Many consumers purchase single-use plastic bags (e.g, garbage bags) for household waste (garbage, diapers, dog dirt), and elimination of single-use plastic bags may simply increase plastic bag purchases. It also may disproportionately affect low-income households.

The Committee discussed efforts that have been effective in changing consumer behavior, including incentives and public education. Committee suggests that in order to tackle plastic
pollution, a full cost account of an incentive-based versus ban program be performed.

The Committee recommends a public education approach to the problem of single-use plastic bag pollution, beginning with programs for K-12 students, who are often eager to adopt change and able to influence family members. The Committee recommends that the Administration consider incorporating such an approach into the city of Saskatoon recycling program.

CONCLUDING COMMENTS:
While the Saskatoon Environmental Advisory’ Committee recognizes the negative environmental and social impacts of single-use plastic bags, the Committee does not recommend a ban at this time. Instead, the Committee recommends tackling the problem through public education. The Committee recognizes that considerable City resources are already devoted to the recycling program and recommends that the Administration consider an education component to the recycling program.

← Older posts