HomeMy WebLinkAboutAugust 18, 2022 - Council - AddendumTHE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM
COUNCIL MEETING ADDENDUM
MUNICIPAL OFFICE – SCC Main Hall
Thursday, August 18, 2022
6. A Laverne Kirkness, Rebecca Walker & Barry Wade re Beach House Lane
Development – REMOVAL (at request of applicant)
12.2 E Report DS-49/22 by Margaret Underhill, Deputy Clerk|Planning Coordinator re
Official Plan Amendment OPA-01/22 and Zoning Amendment ZBA-02/22 – Barry
Wade Homes – REMOVAL (at request of applicant)
13.1.1 I Municipality of Bayham re 2023 Capital Budget Delayed
13.2 C Report CAO-40/22 by Thomas Thayer, CAO|Clerk re 2023 Blue Box Transition
14 E By-law No. 2022-060 Being a by-law to adopt Official Plan Amendment Number
30 – REMOVAL (associated with Item 12.2 E)
Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham
2023-2032 CAPITAL BUDGET DELAY
Please be advised that the 2023 – 2032 Capital Budget Public Documents are delayed to
public posting to October 1, 2022 due to the status of outstanding multi-year capital grants.
The Municipality will be extending the public comment period, up to September 25, 2022.
Mayor Ed Ketchabaw
o eketchabaw@bayham.on.ca
Deputy Mayor Rainey Weisler
o rweisler@bayham.on.ca
Ward 1 Councillor Valerie Donnell
o vdonnell@bayham.on.ca
Ward 2 Councillor Dan Froese
o dfroese@bayham.on.ca
Ward 3 Councillor Susan Chilcott
o schilcott@bayham.on.ca
Treasurer, Lorne James CPA, CA
o ljames@bayham.on.ca
o 519-866-5521
REPORT
CAO
TO: Mayor & Members of Council
FROM: Thomas Thayer, CAO|Clerk
DATE: August 18, 2022
REPORT: CAO-40/22 SUBJECT: 2023 BLUE BOX TRANSITION
BACKGROUND
The Municipality of Bayham currently has a recycling contract with Norfolk Disposal for the
collection of waste and blue box materials.
The Blue Box Regulation under the Resource Recovery and Circular Economy Act, 2016
(RRCEA) came into effect on June 3, 2021, and made producers of products and packaging
fully responsible for managing their products at end of life. Producer Responsibility
Organizations (PROs) are implementing the Blue Box Regulation by developing a province-wide
common collection system on behalf of producers.
DISCUSSION
The Government of Ontario has made amendments to the Blue Box Regulation to clarify the
process for creating the province-wide system for collecting Blue Box materials that will be
operated by PROs on behalf of producers. A summary of the amendments are as follows:
Each producer is responsible for providing Blue Box collection to every eligible source in
Ontario.
Rule creators and the rule reation process, including the allocation table, have been
removed. Those sections have been replaced with requirements making every producer
responsible for providing curbside collection of Blue Box materials for every eligible
source that receives curbside garbage collection.
PROs that, either on their own or with another PRO, represent producers that supply
more than 66% of Blue Box material tonnage are required to submit a report on how
they will operate the Blue Box system. This report must be submitted to RPRA by July
1, 2022
Newspaper producers whose newspaper supply accounts for at least 70% of their total
Blue Box supply are exempt from collection, management and promotion and education
requirements. Newspapers, however, are still an obligated material under the regulation
and will continue to be collected in the Blue Box system.
The Municipality’s transition date to producer responsibility has been established under the Blue
Box Transition Schedule (our preferred date) as July 1, 2023.
Circular Materials Ontario (CMO) are working on behalf of producers to establish a commercial
agreement with any interested municipality and their service provider to provide blue box
services after July 1, 2023, should municipalities wish to enter into such an arrangement.
Otherwise, producers will assume full responsibility as of this date. CMO will act as the
administrator of the collection system and their existing service provider RLG will manage the
collection system.
Overview of Approach to Collection by PROs
365 eligible communities will transition between July 1, 2023 and January 1, 2026. Due to the
enormous contract burden, Circular Materials Ontario (CMO) has recently announced that
PROs will offer contracts to municipalities opting to continue existing collection services during
transition period from July 2023 to December 2025. If a municipality wishes to opt out, the
same contract will be offered to the Municipality’s service provider (Norfolk Disposal). If neither
the Municipality or Norfolk Disposal is interested, then each PRO will make its own
arrangements to collect its share of blue box materials. The Municipality’s service contract with
Norfolk Disposal expires on June 1, 2023. This contract would have to be bridged for one
month, until July 1, 2023. Thereafter, the ability to opt out would provide our residents with
seamless transition for blue box collection services.
If Bayham wishes to remain involved in our blue box collection program from July 2023-Dec
2025 the following is proposed:
CMO will offer to contract with Bayham to continue residence collection services to
December 31, 2025
Contract will be based on continuing existing services
o Current residences and facilities, accepted materials, number of streams,
collection container, continuation of co-collection if applicable, continuation of
commingling of materials from eligible and non-eligible sources
Contract will include:
o Methodology to calculate quantity collected from non-eligible sources (IC&I) to
deduct costs for collection and management from payment due to Bayham
o Local P&E (Promotion and Education)
Contamination
Contamination is non-blue box material in collected material. Contamination examples as
follows:
Hard cover books, toys, electronics, textiles, garden hoses
Items designated under another regulation such as containers designated under HSP
Regulation (ie: paint cans)
For calculation of contamination, deposit containers are considered blue box material
Contamination will be measure through sampling of in-bound material at receiving
facilities
Propose aspirational target of 4% non-blue box material in material collected from
residences and facilities
From July 2023 to December 2025, if a Municipality opts to contract with CMO, said municipality
that exceeds 4% non-blue box material in inbound material over a rolling 6-month period will be
expected to develop and implement an improvement plan to gradually reduce non-blue box
material through the Improvement Plan and public education.
Calculation and Financial Impacts
Staff utilized a model provided by CMO to determine costs under any 2-year contract to which
the Municipality may choose to be a party. The model is based on the costs from the 2020
Datacall reporting to the Resource Productivity & Recovery Authority (RPRA), indexed for
inflation including CPI and fuel increase influences.
The payment to the Municipality from CMO to steward this 2-year contract would be
approximately $223,000, which is an increase in revenue that we currently receive from RPRA
Grants and the London MRF; however, it will not cover the Recycling program’s overall costs
through Norfolk Disposal. Also, under an Agreement with CMO, it is expected that if there are
any additional, unforeseen costs, they would be borne by the Municipality.
Currently, the Recycling program operates at a loss of ~$100,000/year, which is then subsidized
by the tax levy. If Council chose to opt out of the provision of recycling services and allowed
producers are take over the same commencing on Bayham’s transition date of July 1, 2023, that
$100,000 loss would disappear, which would allow the same amount to be allocated elsewhere
in the budget where there may be operational need, such as Public Works or By-law
Enforcement, and would provide staff and Council added operational budget flexibility.
Agreement Concerns
AMO, etc. correspondence (attached) from July 26, 2022 does continue to identify contracting
issues with the draft Agreements provided by CMO for their oversight of the service.
Specifically, there are concerns that the values used to calculate the compensation from CMO
to municipalities are insufficient to address administration costs, increases in development and
number of households over time, and promotion and education components, all of which could
saddle the Municipality with insufficient compensation to address the 2-year bridge contract.
Additionally, there are concerns about the 4% contamination cap as noted in this Report, which
could require the Municipality to expend additional staff and time resources to address.
Elgin County
To-date, staff are aware of Aylmer, Central Elgin, and Southwold have chosen to opt out of the
transition and allow full producer takeover by July 1, 2023. Dutton-Dunwich has chosen to enter
into the 2-year Agreement. Malahide and West Elgin are still in internal discussions.
Staff recommend that the Municipality opt out of the blue box collection program on the
transition date of July 1, 2023. The Municipality needs to advise CMO as soon as possible as,
based on discussions with their representatives, they are seeking to moving swiftly based on the
decisions of the Municipality – no decision is interpreted as wishing to opt out and immediately
move responsibility to the PROs effective July 1, 2023.
ATTACHMENTS
1. AMO, etc. correspondence, July 26, 2022
RECOMMENDATION
1. THAT Report CAO-40/22 re 2023 Blue Box Transition be received for information;
2. AND THAT the Council of The Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham hereby opt out
of the option to provide continuation of existing collection services during transition
period from July 2023 to Dec 2025 and allow Producer Responsibility Organizations to
take over provision of recycling services effective July 1, 2023.
Respectfully Submitted by:
Thomas Thayer, CMO
CAO|Clerk
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Association of Municipalities of Ontario RPWCO Municipal Waste Association City of Toronto
200 University Ave., Suite 801 70 Pine Street 10C Shared Space, 42 Carden Street 100 Queen St. W., 25th Floor, East Tower
Toronto ON M5H 3C6 Bracebridge, ON P1L 1N3 Guelph ON N1H 3A2 Toronto, ON, M5H 2N2
Sent via e-mail to: allen.langdon@circularmaterials.ca
July 26th, 2022
Nicole Fischer, Chair
c/o Allen Langdon, President & CEO
Circular Materials Ontario
800-1881 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M4S 3C4
Dear Ms. Fischer:
RE: Master Service Agreement and Schedules of Work for Collection
Services
We wanted to thank you for updating the terms and conditions included in the
Master Service Agreement (MSA) and Schedules of Work (SOW’s) posted on
Circular Material's website on July 4, 2022. The updated agreements have made
it easier for many communities to align with their current collection contracts.
Many members continue to have a few common, remaining issues that have
been identified in previous submissions and discussions but not addressed in
the revised agreements, such as:
Delivery of Material to Unknown Receiving Facilities:
While our members understand that the location of Receiving Facilities is
unknown at this point, concerns remain about the proposed standard of a sixty-
minute drive time from the centroid of the community. Our members would
like to see language incorporated that specifies that any increased costs they
face from their contractors would be passed through to CMO. This is not a cost
the community should bear. We also recognize there is a range in that some
communities require vehicles to travel in excess of sixty-minutes currently but
for some this could extend the amount of time vehicles spend collecting and
may require additional resources and additional costs.
2
Meeting the Proposed 4% Contamination Threshold
Many of our members continue to raise the 4% contamination threshold as a
concern. While they appreciate that the liquidated damages clauses have been
removed from the agreements on this issue, there remains a concern that the
remedies required to address contamination rates that exceed 4% are open
ended and could result in considerably more resources being expended than
CMO is providing for through the public education and promotion incentive.
Our members have suggested a cap on spending to a commercially reasonable
amount or establish a limit on the amount of reporting and remedies to be
implemented are added. This would alleviate the concern of the community
being required to provide ongoing resources to address this issue that would
exceed the resources CMO is offering to provide.
In addition, it would be advantageous for CMOs technical team to supply audit
data from other Canadian municipalities where these thresholds are being met
so best practices in promotion, education, incentives and disincentives can be
understood and implemented where it makes sense and is feasible. This will
assist all with a desire for a seamless transition to incoming standards. We note
that while there’s always room for improvement, the P&E spending in 2020
resulted in contamination rates on average being much higher than the 4%
target. More resources will be required to make the improvements you are
seeking.
Compensation for Promotion and Education
The proposed $1.50 per household serviced has been flagged by a number of
our members as being inadequate. Many have noted that the 2020 Datacall that
CMO used to derive this offer, saw less promotion and education funds spent
by communities than prior years due to COVID-19. Primary focus of all
municipal communications was to address COVID-19 and its impacts. Given the
reduced amount spent on the 2020 Blue Box program and the increased
spending and effort being requested by CMO to address contamination as
described above, our members suggest that this rate be increased.
Administration Costs
The compensation formula proposed uses the RPRA Datacall caps for
administration costs. These are limited to amounts in the Datacall User Guide
that many of our members do not feel are adequate (3% for contracted services
and 5% for in-house services). Typical administration overheads for publicly
reporting waste management companies consistently range between 10-15% of
3
total costs. Our members propose that administration costs be at an adequate
level to cover their costs.
It may be advisable for CMO to solicit and review actual administration costs
incurred by a range of programs in the RPRA Datacall. This will provide visibility
of costs that are currently incurred to design, coordinate and administer
recycling services.
Regular Adjustments for Household Growth
Our members agree with the proposed methodology to determine
compensation on a cost per household serviced basis. The contract documents
do not appear to include a clause or methodology on the how the growth in
households due to new/re-development will be accommodated (e.g., generally
between 1 and 2% per year). Our members would like to see the inclusion of
such a clause with an ability to update it regularly. There is again a range across
our members with some communities updating this annually and some being
adjusted in real-time as soon as a new source is serviced.
Balanced MSA Termination Clauses
The MSA termination clauses are still unbalanced in favour of CMO. Our
members propose that they be amended to include terms that would allow the
Contractor to terminate the agreement.
In summary, thank you again for the updated the terms and conditions
included in the Master Service Agreement (MSA) and Schedules of Work
(SOW’s).
We would be happy to discuss this with you in further detail and answer any
questions you may have.
4
Best Regards,
________________________ ______________________________
Monika Turner Annette Synowiec
Director of Policy Director, Policy, Planning & Outreach
Association of Municipalities of Ontario Solid Waste Management Services
City of Toronto
__________________________ ________________________
Andrew Farr David Douglas
Co-Chair, Regional Public Works Chair, Board of Directors
Commissioners of Ontario Municipal Waste Association
cc: Gordon Day, Ryse Solutions Inc.
Nicole Willett, Resource Recovery Alliance