Re: ‘New waste collection system doomed to fail,’ Dec. 25:
Jim Starko recently criticized upcoming changes to St. Albert’s refuse collection system. Many inflammatory statements were made regarding the motivations for the changes. As a citizen volunteer who participated in discussions of the new system, I object to much of Mr. Starko’s letter.
To begin, the motives of city administration were questioned. Having attended meetings with staff in the office of the environment and the director of public works, I am confident that statements such as “the environmental department clearly has its own agenda” and “city administration’s agenda of empire building” fall very wide of the mark. These hard-working public servants have earned my respect for their dedication to improving our city and its programs with a commitment to nothing other than what is best for our community. To suggest they would have a nefarious agenda for “social engineering” is shameful. On the contrary, St. Albert is not leading the charge with something radical and unheard of — we are simply following the trend of other municipalities and are accepting the responsibility that we all share as a society to make progressive changes to better our world.
Moreover, city administration cannot set policy without approval. The changes were endorsed by a unanimous vote at council’s June 28, 2010 meeting. This was the time and place to make opposition known, and councillors are to be held responsible for their decision. It therefore appears that Mr. Starko’s true adversary is representative democracy itself.
I will offer the following observations on the changes to the system and the reasons for them. But please, do not take my word alone. Ask the city for a copy of Sonnevera International Corporation’s recommendations or the agenda report from council’s June 28 meeting noting that Spruce Grove, Morinville, Strathcona County, Beaumont, Devon, Medicine Hat, Lethbridge, Calgary and Grande Prairie already have automated waste collection (i.e., toters and trucks with mechanical arms). Also, a cost comparison concluded that, even with the changes factored in, St. Albert’s fee structure was at the low end for the Capital region, and was notably much less expensive than Edmonton, which has refuse collection rates of $31.34/month (compared to about $18 to $25/month for St. Albert).
On the subject of fees, trucking and landfill tippage rates are escalating rapidly. The fact is that the days of “dump and bury” are ending, and “waste diversion” — composting and recycling — is the new normal. This is not a “made in St. Albert idea” — it is a fact that other municipalities nationwide have already accepted and adjusted to.
In my opinion, Mr. Starko’s vision of a post-apocalyptic St. Albert with stinking garbage toters permanently lining the streets was outrageous. The fact is that organics collection will occur each week from April through October — the same frequency for current garbage collection — and so the change is nowhere near as severe as Mr. Starko believes. Additionally, I do not agree that there is wide satisfaction with the current “drive and drop” system for yard waste, especially for those who live at great distance from the depot or who lack a suitable vehicle — has anyone else torn a garbage bag and dumped yard waste into the trunk of their car?
Further, references to “two big toters” are factually inaccurate. The city plans for three sizes of garbage and two sizes of organics containers; the smallest take up less space than a conventional trash can. The strength of St. Albert’s system lies in choice — you can downsize according to your lifestyle. Incidentally, offering a smaller organics container was in response to public concern — hardly the act of an uncaring administration. Also, since up to half of garbage is organics, choosing to sort can reduce your garbage subscription, saving money.
Can I promise that the changes to St. Albert’s waste collection system will be without their adjustment period, or that they will be perfectly suited to everyone, without need to compromise along the way? Of course not. But I can promise that a great deal of careful thought was put into the recommendations that council accepted unanimously. More importantly, I have a faith in my community’s ability to adapt to change that outstrips any lingering concerns. It is a true shame that this faith is not held by all.
Jason Cooke, St. Albert
