Village of Haines Junction Regular Council Meeting 7:00 p.m. May 22, 2019
Council Chambers AGENDA
1. Call to Order
2. Acknowledgement of CAFN Traditional Territory
3. Additions to the Agenda
4. Adoption of Agenda
5. Adoption of Minutes a. Draft Council Minutes 2019-05-08
6. Hearing of Delegations
7. Public Hearings of Bylaws
8. Council Questions on Agenda Items
9. Passage of Bylaws and Policies a. Reviewing and or Rescind the following policies: i. ADM 002-92 Christmas Bonus Policy ii. Shakwak Valley Community Pool Policy & Procedures Manual iii. C.D 001-05 Art Acquisition Policy (suspend or rescind)
b. Discuss Adding the following Bylaws to the “Obsolete and or Redundant Repeal Bylaw” i. Bylaw 114-97 – Recreational Reserve ii. Bylaw 112-97 – Environmental Services Reserve iii. Bylaw 113-97 – Public Works Reserve iv. Bylaw 115-97 – Municipal Infrastructure Reserve v. Bylaw 116-97 – General Fund Reserve (Verbal Administrative Report)
c. Bylaw #344-19, Obsolete and or Redundant Repeal Bylaw, 1st Reading i. Bylaw #315-16 CPR Bylaw #197-05 Amendment #1 Bylaw ii. Bylaw #208-06 Economic Development Committee Bylaw iii. Bylaw #124-98 Water & Sewer Amendment Bylaw 1998 iv. Bylaw #102-96 Block 6 Sewer Main Bylaw v. Bylaw#212-07 Haines Junction Cemetery Committee Bylaw
10. Staff Reports and Recommendations
a. CAO Report (verbal) b. Update – AIP Developments c. AYC Conference (May 9 to 12) i. Council items ii. Administration Items d. Update – Zoning Bylaw/Development Permit Process/Zoning Bylaw Rewrite Project e. Due to the long weekend and operational capacity challenges, the following items will be brought forward on June 12th for a decision: i. St. Elias Lion’s Club request – accompanying letter and motion ii. CAMA membership
11. Committee Reports and Recommendations a. OCP Steering Committee Update (verbal) i. The second draft of the workplan for Phase 2 and 3 was received and is currently under review by the OCP Steering Committee.
12. Approval of Accounts Payable a. Municipal Accounts Payable to May 22, 2019
13. New Business/Business Arising: a. Request for Direction – Urban Electrification Program Request – John Lambert b. Request for Direction – Yukon University Legislation c. Request for Decision – Regional Landfill d. Request for Decision – Adoption of the Administrative Report & Project Structure
14. Information and Correspondence a. Public Letter to Mayor and Council – Angie Charlebois
15. Councilor Reports
16. In Camera a. Labour Relations - Union Negotiations b. Contamination & Environmental Spill c. Municipal Planning Board – Development Permit Appeal Process d. CAO Hiring Committee (Standing)
17. Adjournment
Next Regular Council Meeting is June 12, 2019, at 7:00 pm in Council Chambers. Next Committee of the Whole Meeting is June 5, 2019, at 7:00 p.m. in Council Chambers.
L661. ‘Jaqwede 40 IcEp S!1fl pessed Iteu!J PUB ew! PJ!Lfl B V3N
L66 L. ieqwede jo iep Sq4 ieqweg IPUflOD aAqnoex3 eq iq 3AONddV
L66 [. ‘;sn6nv JO cep qlL S!q4 ew puoes e
L66L. ‘sn6ny jo cep q S!1fl 8W!4 SJ! B V3N
JoeJeqT 6u!ssed IU!J eq uodn oejje pue eoioj iini OU! 8WOO fli4S MIi SP1I L
1PUflOD JO UO!TflIOSe] Aq pue sJope]!a OLfl JO UO7U8WwOO3J eq uodn Iuo!eeI pu S)JBd ai4 o; sJ!UeJ iofw io uawdoeAep I!U! 1IT ]OAOD O OpW eq Xw oiosoj uo!2o]ood woij SJeM2JPI4T!M 9
.pew8 S! T! 113!IIM U! ]20A eq U! enuaei ieieue6 se pesn eq ites nq eesej uoeeioej eq o; enioe OU IIBIIS 8MOSOd Uo!ee]oed eq Jo uawseAu! 81fl UO p8WB OflU9A8J ItY 9
•SpJ038] IePUEU!J sa6It!A 81fl U! pe!!1Uap! eq tqs eese UO!2eJOed eqj
•se6pn IT!dBD PUB e3UBUeU!e PUB IEuo!edO IflUU ]eI44 WO]J eMese UO!8]Oed 8Lfl OU! pe7sodep eq o; Se!UoW eooiie Aew IPUflOD ]B8/ L4O3
SO!!I!O2d IUo!1eeoed PU2 S)jJ JO 6U!pei6dn PU2 4uewdoleAep 0q4 JOJ epse A8UOW 6u!es o esodind eq ioj peqsqe;se S! eiesej UOfl9J8d eq
•eAIeSeèI uo;ewoej,, aq s pep eq iew MeIIS s!qI
:77c sv S13VN Aqeieq ‘patqwess ‘ip 6U!;eew uedo U! UOEOUflc seu!eH jo e6p 8Lf JO IPUnOD eq 3N013N3HJ. MON
:Uo!4OUnC seU!eH jo e6ep eqj jo eweU eq U! SPUflJ eesei eJOW JO 8U0 qsqse o IPUflOD S1!WJ8d ‘oeJeq4 suewpawe PUB 926L. UO)ffl,A eq JO S8flBT9 py pes!Ae eq; Jo 6U Je4deqQ 6Ueq Ied!!Un 8111 JO 9 UOfp8S SV3N3HM
3Ai3Sd NOI1ViDd V dO 1N3L’\IHSI79V1S H1 dOd 3GIAOdd 01. MY1A9 V
L6•i’ I. I.# MV9A9 NOLLDNflC S3NIVH dO 3OV17IA ______
. BYLAW ROUTING SLI1 Municipal and Community Affairs
NUNICIPALITY NAIIE AND BYLAW NUMBER 91L1 Q4-)
TITLE BYLAW F idte Received at Community Services Branch
Authority is given to Municipal Council to proceed to Third Reading with this Bylaw:
va1/R e j e c ti o n I Dfector, Coniiiunity Services Date
ection ¶7.O9; 2 Assist4t D i&y Minister, M&CA Date c9 f Ap1/Rejection Date
‘\pproval/Rej ection ? Mbrster 7 Date
COtLENT TO MUN1CIPALITY:
______
VILLAGE OF HAINES JUNCTION #115-97 BYLAW
A BYLAW TO PROVIDE FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF AN INFRASTRUCTURE RESERVE.
WHEREAS Section 216 of the Municipal Act, being Chapter 1 19 of the Revised Statutes of the Yukon 1986 and amendments thereto, permits Council to establish one or more reserve funds in the name of the Village of Haines Junction:
NOW THEREFORE, the Council of the Village of Haines Junction in open meeting duly assembled, hereby ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:
I . This Bylaw may be cited as the “Municipal Infrastructure Rese,ve”.
2. The purpose of the Municipal lnfrastwcture Reserve account will be to account accurately, funds received and expended to and from this account.
3. The Municipal Infrastructure Reserve account will be cash funded.
4. The method of calculating contributions to the Municipal Infrastructure Reserve account shall be as outlined in the Government of Yukon Municipal Finance and Community Grants Act.
5. The criteria and conditions governing withdrawals from the Municipal Infrastructure Reserve account shall be as outlined in the Government of Yukon Municipal Finance and Community Grants Act.
6. This Bylaw shall come into full force and effect upon the final passing thereof.
READ a first time this I day of August, 1997.
READ a second time this 27th day of August, 1997.
APPROVED by the Executive Council Member this 9th day of September, 1997.
READ a third time and finally passed this 24th day of September, 1997.
Mayor .. al lerk Sheila O’Hanlon 0 cEJ S 0 J< ci: ) ) > /> flt-1 Z -%)0 CD :0:: 0 (0 H i :j i: V ct 0 0 CD H H C) I—I :: 0 (0 H H t1 CD < t: H CD
c-i- C 0 Dl c-i- S 0 H I. 0 C) I Li. z S Di H ct I H- CT < C) C!) CD ti Dl < S H• C) 0 Dl U) 0 0 C Dl C z C) H- 2 c-i- 1<
Dl H-
U)
D Dl Dl Dl Di c-I- c-I- c-i- c-i- 0 0 0 CD
0 ______
,?
VILLAGE OF HAINES JUNCTION BYLAW #116-97
A BYLAW TO PROVIDE FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A GENERAL FUND RESERVE.
WHEREAS Section 216 of the Municipal Act, being Chapter 119 of the Revised Statutes of the Yukon 1986 and amendments thereto, permits Council to establish one or more reserve funds in the name of the Village of Haines Junction:
NOW THEREFORE, the Council of the Village of Haines Junction in open meeting duly assembled, hereby ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:
I . This Bylaw may be cited as the “General Fund Reseive”.
2. The Council for the Village of Haines Junction is hereby authorized to establish a General Fund Reserve for future expenditures.
3. The General Fund Reserve authorized under Section 2 may be broken down into such specific account allocations as Council deems appropriate, and shall be accounted for in a Schedule to the annual audited financial statements of the Village of Haines Junction.
4. All revenue earned on the investment of the General Fund Reserve shalt not accrue to the General Fund Reserve but shall be used as general revenue in the year in which it is earned.
5. Withdrawals from the General Fund Reserve may be made for municipal operations upon the recommendations of the Directors and by resolution of Council.
6. This Bylaw shall come into full force and effect upon the final passing thereof.
READ a first time this I 3th day of August, 1997.
READ a second time this 27th day of August, 1997.
APPROVED by the Executive Council Member this 4th day of September, 1997.
: READ a third time and finally passed this 24th day of September, 1997. cz) May,grfrie-6{rñson Mu Clerk Sheila O’Hanlon . BYLAW ROUTING SLIP £4unicipal and Community Affairs I!;-?y
NUNICIPALITY NAP4E AND BYLAW NUtYIBER
BYLAW TITLE &#% £:Lf rN
- . ce Received at Coiniriunity Services Branch
Authority is given to Municipal Council to proceed to Third Reading with this Bylaw:
va/Rej e c tion irector, Community Services Date
ection 97.G. f\(Assitant l9eputy Minister, N&CA Date ov1/Rej ectio: :; Date
‘ova1Rej ectioi %ôo Date
COMMENT TO MUNICIPALITY:
VILLAGE OF HAINES JUNCTION
Bylaw #344-19
A Bylaw to Repeal Obsolete and or Redundant Bylaw
WHEREAS Section 220 of the Municipal Act, being Chapter 154 of the Revised Statutes of the Yukon 2002 and amendments thereto, states “The power to pass a bylaw or a resolution includes the power to amend or repeal the bylaw or resolution unless this or any other Act expressly provides otherwise”
NOW THEREFORE the Council for the Village of Haines Junction, duly assembled, hereby enacts as follows:
SHORT TITLE
1. This bylaw shall be cited as the “Obsolete and or Redundant Repeal Bylaw”.
ENACTMENT
1. Repeal Bylaw#315-16, CPR Bylaw #197-05 Amendment #1 Bylaw 2. Repeal Bylaw#208-06, Economic Development Committee Bylaw 3. Repeal Bylaw#124-98, Water and Sewer Amendment Bylaw 1998 4. Repeal Bylaw#102-96, Block 6 Sewer Main Bylaw 5. Repeal Bylaw#212-07, Haines Junction Cemetery Committee Bylaw 6. This bylaw shall come into full force and effect upon the final passage thereof.
Read a first time the 8th day of May 2019.
Read a second time the 22th day of May 2019.
Read a third time and finally passed the 22th day of May 2019.
X X Thomas Eckervogt John Thomas Mayor Acting Chief Administrative Officer
Municipal Accounts Payable to May 22, 2019
Cheque No. Name Amount Department Description
Transfer Payroll Account #4305418 $ 23,562.85 Administration Ceridian Net Pay - Pay Period 10 $ 11,163.51 Administration Ceridian Receiver General - Pay Period 10 $ 111.57 Administration Ceridian Service Charges - Pay Period 10 $ 4,419.01 $ 39,256.94 Administration RRSP Contribution - Pay Period 10
Transfer CIBC $ 1,443.35 Recycle Centre Coin Order $ 1,009.70 $ 2,453.05 Recycle Centre Coin Order
Transfer Visa $ 648.27 Administration Hard drive, paper, stamps, mass mailer, web domain renewal $ 344.32 Public Works Car battery, rust spray paint, cutting disks, gloves $ 55.11 Fire Department Creeper seat $ 62.98 $ 1,110.68 Arena Mats
25165 Twiss & Shine Custodial Services $ 2,835.00 Convention Centre Shampooing chairs, deep clean of Convention Centre
25166 Yukon Workers' Compensation Board $ 6,944.32 Various 2nd quarterly YWCHSB payment
25167 Petty Cash - Noelle Palmer $ 122.45 Administration Mass mailers: Service Canada and Rainbow St. Park survey
25168 Martin Eckervogt $ 61.27 Fire Department Windshield repair kit, gas cap, wipes, snacks, pens
25169 Donna Istchenko $ 483.34 Legislative AYC AGM flowers, drinks, sugar, cleaning supplies
25170 15042 Yukon Inc. $ 254.10 Convention Centre Wash and press tablecloths and skirting
25171 Atco Electric Yukon $ 7,235.97 Water and Sewer Electricity - May billing $ 2,983.55 Arena Electricity - May billing $ 241.49 Fire Department Electricity - May billing $ 114.48 Community Hall Electricity - May billing $ 352.80 Public Works Electricity - May billing $ 390.74 Pool Electricity - May billing $ 581.87 Convention Centre Electricity - May billing $ 581.87 Administration Electricity - May billing $ 90.72 Landfill Electricity - May billing $ 165.44 Recycle Centre Electricity - May billing $ 2,641.92 $ 15,380.85 Roads and Streets Electricity - May billing
25172 Canadian Freightways -$ 49.32 Fire Department Correction on Guillevin freight cost $ 357.95 $ 308.63 Fire Department Freight on Rescue Tools Canada order
25173 Dieter Gade $ 237.50 Legislative AYC AGM tech services
* Denotes an item not directly funded by the Village **Grant funded Municipal Accounts Payable to May 22, 2019
25174 Haines Junction Minor Hockey Assoc. $ 200.00 Roads and Streets TCT Pine Lake Trail Cleanup* $ 20.00 $ 220.00 Legislative Coach of the Year Award
25175 Haines Junction Soccer Club $ 200.00 Roads and Streets TCT Pine Lake Trail Cleanup*
25176 Home Hardware $ 294.70 Convention Centre Paint, paint tray liners, painter's tape, rollers
25177 Jacobs Industries Limited $ 652.05 Water and Sewer CO2
25178 Klondike Business Solutions $ 120.75 Administration Cleaning and repairing printer
25179 Lisa Preto $ 200.00 Roads and Streets TCT Pine Lake Trail Cleanup*
25180 Raven Recycling Society $ 264.60 Landfill & Recycle Galvanized wire
25181 Source Motors $ 1,380.22 Fire Department Heating fuel - April 2019 $ 552.99 Arena Heating fuel - April 2019 $ 1,573.69 Convention Centre Heating fuel - April 2019 $ 1,573.68 $ 5,080.58 Administration Heating fuel - April 2019
25182 Staples $ 366.35 Administration Paper, flipchart paper, table-top post-its, wireless laser presenter
25183 Terus Construction Ltd. (Skookum) $ 2,178.75 Roads and Streets Cold mix
25184 Tish Tomlin Scholarship Recipient $ 500.00 Legislative 2019 Tish Tomlin Scholarship
25185 Total North Communications Ltd. $ 882.01 Administration Full backup restore and creation of Councillor email accounts
25186 Village Bakery & Deli $ 5,553.35 Administration AYC AGM catering contract* $ 418.00 $ 5,971.35 Administration Minister of Community Services meeting snacks*
25187 Teresa Ward $ 2,600.00 Administration AYC AGM catering contract final payment*
25188 WFR Wholesale Fire & Rescue Ltd. $ 851.04 Fire Department Shut-off valve, foam
25189 Yellow Pages $ 28.67 Administration White pages listing - May 2019
25190 Yukon College $ 262.50 Legislative Drinking Water for Decision Makers online course for Council
25191 Yukon Service Supply Company $ 1,924.13 Convention Centre Glasses, cutlery, mugs, airpots, pitchers, coffee pots, plates $ 720.14 $ 2,644.27 Convention Centre Chafing dish inserts, coffee filters, busing cart and tubs
* Denotes an item not directly funded by the Village **Grant funded Municipal Accounts Payable to May 22, 2019
Municipal Accounts Payable $ 92,765.75
Adopted on______Motion#______
Mayor______CAO______
* Denotes an item not directly funded by the Village **Grant funded A.
B.
C.
1. 2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
3. 2. 1. 4.
2. 1. 3. 4.
Assessed Description
Attachments
Eligibility
Applicant. Mailing
Legal
Rollnumber..L
A Amortization Sketch
Tax acceptance
are
Cost Applicant identified
Administration Current
written
paid.
information address
URBAN
as
value
address..’’
showing
identified
.c%./
taxes
of
VILLAGE
estimate
in
required
A
of
why
of
A
(2)
schedule,
ten ELECTRIFICATION
paid.
lands/improvements,..xE.7
(6).
where
comments/recommendations
must
electrical
showing
annual
in
from
B
OF
be
the
(2)
signed
Yukon
the
HAINES
payment
assessed
must
proposed service
registered
by
not
Electrical
the
required.
JUNCTION amounts. value
exceed
electrical
PROGRAM
applicant,
owner
(
and
detailing
75%
confirming
to
of line
.
of indicating
Council.
the
will
assessed
the
property
PAGE
70
RECEIVED
run.
cost
current
Halnes -
MAY
his/her
value
to
Village
1
OF
A -
supply.
12O19
Q5C
Juflctlofl
(4).
taxes
as 2
of
Lk Urban
D. financing Council two tax electrification
App,ñt’s
pay ** life E.
F.
In
Electrification
levy
of
percent,
out
accordance
the
3. 2. •
1. 5.
6.
2. 1. 3. Certification
The
the
for for Local
Payment
will
bylaw.
Bylaw
Public 3td Budget 1st Add
Delete
Village Yukon
(copy Payment
the a balance
signature
applicant
as
period
&
be
Reading
to
Improvement
Village at
to
2nd
his/her
repaid
to
Number
with
Meeting/hearing, from
A
to
Program.. Tax
Electric
revision
purchase
reading
be
owing,
(1)
Yukon
not
date
hereby
all attached)
roll
date of
Tax
the
via
property.
to
flames
local
Invoice
exceed
plus
date
a
roll Electric date &
Name order
Charge
Date
local
continued
requests
adoption
improvement
interest
of
Junction
ten The Date
Name
improvement number the
number
if
Bylaw
held
years,
application.
applicant
the
of
to
Bylaw to Village
date
at
charge approve
the
of
charge further
Administration payout,
prime
bylaws,
interim
added
acknowledges
rate
at
the
any
financing
of
to
applicant
interest
time
his/her
PAGE
to
request
during
that
of
2
plus
annual
0F2 may
the (
ci 123 ATCO 08:27:20 am. 05—14—2019 1/2 ATCO Electric YUKON
May 9, 2019
John Lambert Via email: [email protected] ‘J çg 4 OO
RE: Project It 1012332 - Estimated cost to provide an electrical service to Lot 6 Bear Berry Lane, Haines Junction, VT.
Dear Mr. Lambert
The estimate which ATCOElectricYukon is providing includes the cost to install two poles, two anchors, one transformer and stringing of approx. 77m of secondary wire. This estimate is based on the attached sketch and is also based on shared travel with other work in the area.
Materials & Labour $11,800.00 Survey/Design/Engineering $850.00 Travel 1 way $800.00 Backhoe $750.00 Total Construction $14,200.00 Company Investment -$1,500.00 Deposit Paid -$500.00 Total Construction Cost (Customer Contribution) $12,200.00
ATCOElectric Yukon strives to provide accurate estimations utilizing the available information at the time of the estimate. Please note that ailfinal billings will be based on actual costs. Should the circumstances of your construction change resulting in impacts to your billing, ATCOElectric Yukon will notify you the changes.
BEFORECONSTRUCTIONCHECKLIST
ATCOElectric Yukon can proceed with scheduling the construction of your new service once the following check boxes have been completed:
LI Is the construction contribution paid or have we received a Contract from the Municipal Government? El Is the brushing/tree removal done on your property? LI Is there Unobstructed access for power line construction?
ALMOSTTHERE— AREYOU READYFORTHEMETERTO BESETIN PLACE?
LI Do you have a ‘Connect Permit’ from the Yukon Government Electrical Inspector? El Have you set up a new billing account with our office? Please call 633-7000 or 1-800- 661-0513 to get this done.
Serving the Yukon since 7901 100— 1100 Front Street. Whitehorse, YT YJA 3T4 • tel: 867-633-7000 or 1-800-661-0513 • fax: 867-633-5797
123
[email protected] ATCO
Capital
Sincerely, The
Should
construction
taMcKiñnàn
estimate
ATCO
Electric
you
Projects
have
will
100
provided
Yukon &
—
any
be
7100
Design
completed
questions,
Front
will
Street.
remain
Whitehorse,
in
please
2019.
in
effect
feel
YT
Serving
YIA
free
for
3T4
120
the to
•
Yukon
tel:
contact
days
867-633-7000
since
and
me
1901
is
at
based
or
633-7094.
7-800-667-0513
on
08:27:29a.m.
the assumptions
•
fax:
867-633-5797
05—14—2019
that
the 2/2
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
TO COUNCIL Department Office of the Chief Administrative Officer Business Unit Office of the Chief Administrative Officer Report Date May 17, 2019 From John Thomas, Manager of Public Policy & Strategic Initiatives & A/CAO Subject Request for Direction – Yukon College Legislation
Classification Public (approved for release)
OVERVIEW (quick summary) Yukon Government has embarked on the process of transitioning the institution of Yukon College into Yukon University. Part of this process requires legislative changes in order to create the official framework within which the university structure can operate.
The Department of Education has brought forward an invitation for Council and the community to share their thoughts on this change.
RECOMMENDATION (incl. motion) It is recommended that Council participate and provide input into the development of the legislation.
This change in structure stands to impact the community in terms of its future development and branding. Having a satellite branch of a university in a community can be a key economic and social driver for development; therefore, Council should have an interest in ensuring they understand the change and the legislative framework governing the University going forward.
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
BACKGROUND
See attachment for additional details.
ANALYSIS
N/A
IMPACTS & CONSIDERATIONS
Public/Community
N/A
Human Resources
N/A
Financial Resources
N/A
Bylaws & Procedures
N/A
Policies & Strategic Plan(s)
N/A
Attachment(s)
See attachment.
Respectfully Submitted,
John Thomas
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
TO COUNCIL Department Office of the Chief Administrative Officer Business Unit Office of the Chief Administrative Officer Report Date May 06, 2019 From John Thomas, Manager of Public Policy & Strategic Initiatives & A/CAO Subject Request for Decision – Regional Landfill
Classification Public (approved for release) OVERVIEW (quick summary) The Yukon Government has approached the Village of Haines Junction regarding exploring a Regional Landfill Model for the Solid Waste Facility in Haines Junction. A recent community service update dated April 26, 2019 indicated that Cabinet has endorsed the next steps of the Ministerial Committee on Solid Waste including proceeding with regionalization and liability agreements with solid waste facility owners.
The outstanding question for Council to determine is whether the Village wishes to formally engage in negotiations to convert its solid waste facility into a true regional facility. Part of this process will involve addressing many topics including: what role with CAFN/KFN or other neighbouring First Nations play in regionalization, upgrades to the building, ongoing and one-time funding, governance model, site plans, projected usage change (increase), ongoing and long-term liabilities, etc.
RECOMMENDATION (incl. motion) The Administration recommends that Council engage in formal negotiations with Yukon Government regarding regionalization of the Solid Waste Facility. There are a few reasons for this recommendation: 1. At present, the Village does not have mechanisms in place to monitor and keep track of the utilization of the Landfill. With regionalization, there is the opportunity to address this gap; 2. With regionalization, Council has an opportunity to address long-term liability, i.e. future costs that would otherwise be completely carried by the Village; 3. Council also has an opportunity to access various funding streams that will help the Village upgrade the facility to be better the community’s growing needs and the wider region. Without access to those funding streams, the Village will have to carry the full cost of such initiatives; and 4. The cost of the Solid Waste Facility has steadily climbed over the past few years and is expected to continue climbing. During this time, revenues have been relatively flat which means the deficit gap will continue to widen if a different approach is not taken. Regionalization will likely help stabilize the balance between our cost and revenues to operate the facility in a more sustainable way.
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT BACKGROUND
In 2018, the Ministerial Committee on Solid Waste table its report which included a list of recommendation for how the territory can sustainably manage solid waste. Subsequent to this report, the Village has been approached by Yukon Government to engage in formal negotiations regarding transitioning the existing Solid Waste Facility into a Regional Solid Waste Facility with a catchment area identified in the attached documents.
The decision to move forward with regionalization discussion rest exclusively with Council.
ANALYSIS
Subject to the evidence presented, Council may wish to proceed or not with regionalization. It is important to note that the Yukon Government maintains the prerogative to change governing legislation and regulation which will impact how Solid Waste is managed within the territory. From an environmental perspective, regionalization makes sense. Operating many small sites adds tremendous ongoing and long-term liability costs, redundancies, and negative environmental impacts throughout the Territory. At present, the Territorial Government transports waste from smaller communities along the Alaska Highway past the “Regional Solid Waste Facility” in Haines Junction to Whitehorse to be disposed of.
With regionalization, the Village has an opportunity to reshape how solid waste is managed within the region to the benefit of all.
IMPACTS & CONSIDERATIONS
Public/Community
The community stands to benefit from regionalization of the landfill as the resources which would have otherwise be allocated to operating other sites can be diverted to support Haines Junction (subject to negotiated terms). Additionally, with this change in operation, the Village will be better position to operate the existing facility in a manner that is more fiscally sustainable thereby alleviating some financial pressures from community members in Haines Junction.
The community will also be able to benefit from a more robust site management plan, upgrades to the facility and monitoring program.
Human Resources
Regionalization will likely mean an increase in demand for service which is inextricably linked to an increase in demands on our existing human resources capacity. However, through negotiations the Village will be able to better understand its potential increase in staff demands. Additionally, the Village will be better position to address those potential cost increases by accessing the various funding sources that will become available as part of this process.
Financial Resources
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT Below you will find a table outlining the Villages actual revenues and costs for operating the Solid Waste Facility between 2013 and 2018. The figures for 2019 are projected and outlined in the 2019 O&M Budget. On average (excluding 2019’s budget figures), the Village earned $102,915 per year from 2013 to 2018. Further, on average, the Village spent $221,476 per year from 2013 to 2018 which equates to an average operating deficit of 53.5%. It is recognized that the lower figures in 2013 and 2014 will have skewed the data downward.
Deficit Gap In Landfill & Year Revenues Expenses Recycle Centre O&M Budget 2013 $ 25,956.37 $ 114,170.48 77.3% 2014 $ 97,083.84 $ 184,307.21 47.3% 2015 $ 114,261.62 $ 242,604.60 52.9% 2016 $ 127,647.53 $ 265,136.63 51.9% 2017 $ 131,891.90 $ 263,835.00 50.0% 2018 $ 120,651.04 $ 258,805.65 53.4% 2019 $ 130,860.00 $ 288,130.17 54.6% **2019 figures are projected as per budget.
Revenues & Expenses for Landfill $400,000.00 $350,000.00 $300,000.00 $250,000.00 $200,000.00 $150,000.00 $100,000.00 $50,000.00 $- 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Revenues Expenses Linear (Revenues) Linear (Expenses)
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT Deficit Gap In Landfill & Recycle Centre O&M Budget 90.0% 80.0% 70.0% 60.0% 50.0% 40.0% 30.0% 20.0% 10.0% 0.0% 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
The true changes to the financial picture will be dependent on the terms and conditions of the negotiated agreement (if Council chooses this path). This may also be dependent on the resulting governance model for the facility – example whether the facility will be under a co-governance model or a single governance model with various managing partners, etc. all to be determined.
Bylaws & Procedures
There are two bylaws that will need to be reviewed and resolved as part of any discussion involving regionalization. They are: Bylaw 140-99 Garbage Bylaw and Bylaw 174-03-A Landfill User Fees Bylaw.
Policies & Strategic Plan(s)
Solid Waste Management should be a top priority for the community through it’s strategic planning processes. This should form part of the Official Community Plan document to guide the Village on how best to proceed in the future. Additionally, having solid waste as part of the Official Community Plan also allows it to be vetted by the community in terms of its priority locally.
Attachment(s)
See attachment for full details on the program.
Respectfully Submitted,
John Thomas Community Affairs Updates
[email protected] Fri 2019-04-26 11:05 AM To: [email protected]
I hope you all doing well on this Friday morning. The Community Affairs branch has a couple of updates to share with you this morning.
The first is that Ben Yu Schott has officially started back in Community Services as Director of the Community Affairs Branch. I have included Ben on this email and he can be reached by phone at (867)332-3537. He looks forward to meeting those of you he hasn’t had a change to meet yet at the AGM in a couple of weeks.
The second update is that we have received word from Minister Streicker that his colleagues have endorsed the next steps for solid waste including proceeding with regionalization and liability agreements. We would like to extend a big thank you to AYC and the committee members for their input into the recommendations and their continued commitment to modernize solid waste systems and recycling in the Yukon. We expect that more information about next steps will be shared at the AYC AGM.
I also look forward to seeing you all in a couple of weeks in Haines Junction.
Have a great weekend, Sam
GYWordmark_2018_RGB Samantha Crosby Community Advisor Community Services | Community Affairs (C-11) T 867-336-0396 | F 867-393-6397 | Yukon.ca
Ministerial Committee on Solid Waste Recommendations for Action towards a Sustainable Solid Waste Management System for Yukon April 2018
Contents 1.0. Executive Summary ...... 2 1.1. Executive Summary - Key Findings ...... 2 1.2. Executive Summary - Recommendations ...... 4 2.0. Recommendations ...... 5 2.1. Reading the Recommendations ...... 5 2.2. Theme: Regionalization ...... 5 2.3. Theme: User Pay...... 7 2.4. Theme: Clear Standards ...... 9 2.5. Theme: Local Initiatives: Organics and Compost ...... 11 3.0. Next Steps ...... 11 4.0 Background ...... 12 APPENDICES ...... i Appendix I – Community Waste Survey Results ...... i Appendix I – Community Waste Survey Results (YG Figures) ...... ii Appendix II – Bibliography ...... iii
1
1.0. Executive Summary The Ministerial Committee on Solid Waste (the Committee) is pleased to submit its final report to the Minister of Community Services (the Minister) for review. This report provides an evaluation, analysis and recommendations for Yukon’s solid waste management system. Methods of evaluation and analysis included a community waste survey (See Appendix I) and a jurisdictional scan (See Muniscope Jurisdictional Scan), as well as utilizing historical, regional and national data to inform the Committee’s recommendations. The recommendations put forward center primarily on improving the current systems and creating efficiencies where possible. The Executive Summary – Recommendations table below provides a brief description of the Committee’s prioritized recommendations with high level cost estimates for development of the required action plans or reports and/or implementing the action. These costs do not include existing (i.e. sunk) costs such as landfill liabilities, landfill closure costs or known operating costs. The theme throughout is to keep operating cost impacts to a minimum. These recommendations lead to a reallocation of existing costs with a focus on evidence based decision making. The committee finds that interim financing may be required by some municipalities to meet regulatory requirements such as groundwater monitoring. All data used to inform this report can be found in the appendices. Results of the Committee’s analysis show that while Yukon residents enjoy a high level of waste management services in many cases, the delivery of these services can generally be characterized as inconsistent and costly (on a per-capita basis) when compared to other jurisdictions in Canada. This report finds that without changes to the ways in which waste management services are delivered in Yukon, there is significant risk to municipalities and the Yukon government in providing adequate and cost-effective waste services to residents in the long-term. The pressure of increasing costs, coupled with public and stakeholder demands for action, highlights the need for action.
1.1. Executive Summary - Key Findings High Cost of Waste. Yukon currently has 14 unincorporated community landfills (three operated by Highways and Public Works, 11 by Community Services), five waste transfer stations (operated by Community Services), and eight municipally operated landfills, meaning Yukon operates 27 waste management facilities to serve 38,641 residents. The estimated operating and maintenance cost (not including landfill closure) of managing Yukon’s waste streams which includes operating landfills, recycling depots and compost facilities, and transporting waste and recyclables is approximately $10.5 million per year or $275 per person per year (See Appendix I - YG Costs). Rationalization of Services. Many jurisdictions have launched waste management strategies that have sought to improve their waste management facilities and services in rural and isolated communities. As a result of increasing awareness around environmental liabilities and the life-cycle cost of landfilling, landfills are being closed across Canada. Moreover, the majority of the landfills in operation in Yukon provide a wide-range of services and accept a variety of materials at little to no upfront cost to residents. Regionalization. Several jurisdictions have opted to implement legislation that allows or facilitates regional cooperation for waste management. Three landfills in Yukon currently accept waste from areas outside their municipal boundaries through regional agreements: Dawson, Whitehorse and Watson Lake. Expanding upon this model for the rest of Yukon would provide support for regional (municipal) sites, while reducing the number of active landfills and associated long term environmental liabilities.
2
User Fees. The primary cost-recovery process for solid waste in Canada is currently taxation and utility fees. Growing regulatory requirements, increasing volumes of waste, and potentially toxic legacy waste has led to solid waste systems which can be considered underfunded. The Committee believes that adequately funding this system cannot be accomplished through transfer payments from the Yukon government alone. Users, industry, and governments, must pay a reasonable portion of the cost of the waste they generate if a sustainable system of management of solid waste is desired. In particular, this Committee believes that the timely implementation of the Designated Materials Regulation (DMR) is a critical action in relation to the financial sustainability of waste management. Best Practices. The variety of ways in which solid waste is managed in Yukon presents a significant challenge in making improvements to the overall system. Implementing territory-wide service levels and new initiatives requires the support and buy-in of all of the operators and facilities. Solid waste systems have a great number of interdependences and to continually improve the system it is helpful for solid waste managers to be consistent in following best practices.
First Nations Participation in Solid Waste Management. Though many First Nations in Yukon do not have a role in waste management in the same way municipalities do, the Committee carefully considered the current and potential future role of First Nations. For example, the Committee sees significant economic development opportunities for both municipalities and First Nations in the regionalization of our solid waste system in handling and transporting solid waste. The Committee feels strongly that solid waste management is an issue which affects all Yukoners, including First Nations, and any solutions to be implemented should involve First Nations groups where possible.
Implementation Working Group. A collaborative approach to improving waste management practices throughout Yukon requires that the Yukon government work closely with all affected First Nations and municipalities throughout the implementation of the following recommendations. In order for this working group to have the authority and capacity to make the changes suggested in this report, specific roles will need to be identified and positions will need to be funded for the short to medium term. This can either be done in a formal agreement between governments or by providing a clear mandate and resources to Community Services.
3
1.2. Executive Summary - Recommendations The Committee is recommending the following actions (See pages 5 – 11 for detailed activities):
Theme Recommendation Timeframe Priority Capital 1 Cost2 Regionalization Review waste management costs Short (2018) 1 * and service levels for unincorporated areas Develop and implement a solid Short to Medium 1 *** waste regionalization strategy (2018-19) and framework Develop a strategy for managing Short to Medium 1 ** landfill liability responsibilities (2018-19) including legacy liabilities User Pay Implement DMR as expediently Medium to Long (2018- 1 ** as possible and explore Extended 2022) Producer Responsibility (EPR) with industry Implement a solid waste user fee Short to Medium 1 ** pilot in Whitehorse periphery to (2019-20+) explore potential user fees at all sites Continue to support diversion Short to Medium 2 * credit program in the short term (2018-19+) as DMR is implemented Implement a coordinated Short (2018) 2 ** communications strategy promoting stewardship programs and practices in Yukon Clear Standards Establish a Solid Waste Short (2018) 2 * Implementation Working Group Implement best practices for Medium (2019) 3 * waste management facility operations Explore the role of social Medium to Long (2019- 3 * enterprise, entrepreneurship and 2022+) local innovation in solid waste management across Yukon
1. Priority 1: (critical), 2 (important) and 3 (beneficial). 2. Capital Cost: - No cost, * ($10,000 or less) to ***** ($1,000,000 or more)
4
2.0. Recommendations The recommendations included in this section represent the Committee’s deliverable as per the mandate given by the Minister and as outlined in the Terms of Reference. The recommendations encompass three broad priority areas of solid waste management, which are (1) Regionalization, (2) User pay, and (3) Clear standards. The actions contained within each of these areas are grounded in the key findings of the Committee and based on the primary and secondary research undertaken. The actions utilize the SMART (specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-based) principle for strategic planning.
2.1. Reading the Recommendations The recommendations are formatted into tables for clarity and readability. Below is a description of each column and how it should be interpreted:
Theme: This row describes the overarching priority area in which the recommendation/action fits Recommendation: This column describes the broad recommendation which the attached actions support Action Timeframe Cost Deliverable Outcome Partners This column This column This column This column This column This column describes the describes the describes the describes what describes the describes who specific action estimated estimated the anticipated broader purpose should likely be being timeframe to incremental deliverable of the of the action and involved in the recommended initiate the action costs to specific actions what goal is action. This does implement on a trying to be not indicate who scale of * achieved by the would be leading ($10,000 or less) action the to ***** implementation ($1,000,000 or nor is an more) exhaustive list
2.2. Theme: Regionalization The Committee’s vision for this theme centers on the efficient use of resources and support for enhanced municipal solid waste operations. The Yukon currently has 27 solid waste facilities, eight of which are municipally operated. Given the increasing pressure to mitigate environmental risk, improve monitoring and reduce waste management costs over the long term, it is essential that waste management facilities implement best operating practices and the number of active landfills in Yukon be managed. Directing existing and new resources towards enhancing regional solid waste sites can help the Yukon government ensure that there is an appropriate level of service for the population served, as well as strategically prepare for the eventual closure of some solid waste facilities without a significantly reducing service.
5
Theme: Regionalization
Recommendation: Review waste management service levels for unincorporated areas
Action Timeframe Cost Deliverable Outcome Partners Review levels of Short * Report and Service levels are cost- YG service and costs for Term Action Plan efficient through unincorporated solid (2018) rationalization of Yukon Municipalities waste facilities government solid waste sites as part of regional LAC’s strategy Possible introduction of First Nations a user pay system at Yukon government solid waste sites
Theme: Regionalization
Recommendation: Develop and implement a solid waste regionalization strategy and framework
Action Timeframe Cost Deliverable Outcome Partners a) Develop and Short to *** Regional Defining criteria for YG implement a solid waste Medium Waste regional solid waste regionalization strategy Term Management sites First Nations and framework which (2018-19) Strategy and Establishing evidenced includes: operating Framework based funding criteria Municipalities boundaries, service for regional sites levels, base Implementation of AYC infrastructure (gates, regional agreements electricity, scales, Identifying economic Unincorporated monitoring wells etc.), development Communities best practices, and opportunities for local population based funding governments, non- profits and private sector
Establish “Solid Waste Short - All waste Best practices for solid YG Management for Term managers waste are consistent at Northern and Remote (2018) adopt guidance all sites across Yukon Municipalities Communities” document document as Environmental risk is as best practices for solid applicable to minimized waste operations the individual site
6
Theme: Regionalization Recommendation: Develop a strategy for managing landfill liability responsibilities including legacy liabilities Action Timeframe Cost Deliverable Outcome Partners a) Develop a Short ** Workshop All municipalities and YG YG territorial Term and report understand process and understanding of (2018) responsibilities should Municipalities landfill liability environmental responsibilities and contamination occur at a processes, including landfill costs for monitoring General understanding wells, closure and of the costs and post-closure costs. responsibilities with ongoing landfill liability b) Determine historic Medium * Report Determine if landfills YG use of all landfill sites Term were active prior to in Yukon (2018-19) municipal operations in Municipalities order to clarify responsibilities
2.3. Theme: User Pay The Committee’s vision for this theme centers on acknowledging the need for additional resources to address new and existing challenges. In some cases, there may be an adequate amount of resources directed to a particular asset or service, but it may not be being used efficiently. In other cases, there may not be an adequate amount of resources in place to deal with the issue at hand in the manner specified. The Committee recognizes that a sustainable solution to funding solid waste operations requires a combination of approaches, including transfer payments, taxes and user fees. Increased funding for solid waste is necessary, but this funding should not come solely from Yukon government.
Theme: User Pay
Recommendation: Implement DMR as expediently as possible and explore EPR with industry
Action Timeframe Cost Deliverable Outcome Partners Continue with a phased- Medium to ** Inclusion of Increasing funding for YG in approach to Long-term relevant Yukon waste implementation of (2018/19 materials in management systems Municipalities designated materials to 2020+) DMR as per Ongoing support for regulations including YG already adopted CCME items commonly commitment Action Plan identified as household to CCME Addition of key hazardous waste Canada Wide materials on the DMR Action Plan list such as oil and on EPR waste oil containers Examine and report on Short Term * Report Understanding the YG EPR feasibility in Yukon (2018) feasibility of EPR in Yukon
7
Theme: User Pay
Recommendation: Implement a solid waste user fee pilot in Whitehorse periphery and phase in fees throughout Yukon
Action Timeframe Cost Deliverable Outcome Partners Initiate consultation Short Term * Engagement Understand public YG with Whitehorse (2018) and opinion of user fees at periphery on proposed Action Plan Yukon government Unincorporated fees solid waste sites in the Communities Whitehorse periphery Develop a user fee Local pilot implementation organizations plan Implement a solid waste Medium ** User fees in Establish a user fee YG user fee pilot project in Term place in model to increase cost the Whitehorse (2019) Whitehorse efficiencies Unincorporated periphery periphery Communities Reduce waste flows to
Whitehorse peripheral Local sites Organizations Evaluate impact and Medium to ** Report and Determine the YG based on results, Long-Term Action Plan effectiveness of pilot determine potential for (2019 to including potential Municipalities a territory-wide roll out 20) implementation of user fees at all Unincorporated municipal and YG sites Communities
Local Organizations
Theme: User Pay
Recommendation: Continue to support the diversion credit program in the short term and assess the program for accountability and financial sustainability
Action Timeframe Cost Deliverable Outcome Partners Assess and modify the Short * Program Accountable funding YG diversion credits (2018) review report program in the short City of program for term Whitehorse accountability and Recycling financial sustainability Processors Ensure diversion credits Short to * Strategy for Secure funding for YG are fully funded until Medium- diversion processors in the short such time that DMR term credits term until DMR is fully Municipalities offsets this funding developed (2018/19 system to 2020+)
8
Theme: User Pay
Recommendation: Implement a coordinated communications strategy promoting stewardship programs and practices in Yukon
Action Timeframe Cost Deliverable Outcome Partners Implement a Short ** Ongoing Ensuring awareness YG coordinated strategy Term collaborative of existing programs promoting stewardship (2018) Communications and practices Municipalities programs, practices Strategy Establishment of long and innovation in term communications Non-profits Yukon strategy around key solid waste initiatives Business Sector
Yukon College/Research Centre
2.4. Theme: Clear Standards The Committee’s vision for this theme centers on the ability for all solid waste operators and managers in Yukon to deliver services in a consistent manner and to become more efficient in the delivery of these services through standard approaches and use of best practices. Through reviewing the results of the Committee’s 2017 Community Waste Survey, it became apparent that there are a number of disparities among communities and municipalities in how they deliver services, how those services are funded, and how the costs and services are tracked and accounted. The Committee acknowledges the limitations of the Yukon government to impose new regulations on municipalities in how they operate solid waste facilities, so the recommendations and actions contained under this priority are based primarily in leadership, data collection and reporting, and promotion of best practices.
Theme: Clear Standards
Recommendation: Establish an Implementation Working Group
Action Timeframe Cost Deliverable Outcome Partners Establish a Task Specific Short * Establishment of Ongoing oversight YG Implementation Working Term task specific and guidance for Group (2018) working groups the Municipalities implementation of the report’s First Nations recommendations
9
Theme: Clear Standards
Recommendation: Implement best practices for waste management operations
Action Timeframe Cost Deliverable Outcome Partners Standardize reporting Short * All facilities Solid waste YG practices for solid waste Term separating managers are facilities (2018) waste costs by utilizing best Municipalities functional area practices to guide operations First Nations
Review the efficiency of the Medium * Report Evidence based YG movement of solid waste Term decision making on and recyclables (2018) the transportation Municipalities of waste First Nations
Assess the production, Short * Report Clear YG transportation, processing Term understanding of and handling of non- (2018) the economic, refundable materials for social and the economic, social and environmental environmental value value of recycling
Theme: Clear Standards
Recommendation: Explore the role of social enterprise, entrepreneurship and local innovation in solid waste management in Yukon
Action Timeframe Cost Deliverable Outcome Partners Explore the role of Medium to * Report Gaining an YG social enterprise and Long-term understanding of entrepreneurship and (2019 to the potential of Municipalities local innovation in 2020+) non-profits, private solid waste industry and mining First Nations management in Yukon sector and its roles in solid waste management
10
2.5. Theme: Local Initiatives: Organics and Compost Theme: Local Initiatives
Recommendation: Continue to encourage compost programs to be developed and delivered at the discretion of communities
Action Timeframe Cost Deliverable Outcome Partners Continue to encourage Short Term * Nil Enhanced local YG the development and (2018) organics diversion delivery of local compost programs Municipalities programs at the discretion of First Nations communities
3.0. Next Steps In order to move forward with the recommendations in the report, the Committee recommends that an implementation working group be formed as soon as possible. Dependent on the recommendations selected for implementation, the implementation group can begin to work with various partners to determine project scope, budgets, resources needed, and so on, to ensure that initiatives are moving forward. The Committee believes that working towards a robust, modern and sustainable territory-wide solid waste system is an iterative process that will require ongoing dialogue and participation of stakeholders. The implementation working group will be vital in ensuring we have the appropriate mechanisms in place for that feedback and communication. Beyond forming an implementation group, next steps will depend on which recommendations the Minister feels are feasible to implement. Although the mandate of this Committee has concluded, there is high interest from members to continue this conversation and help support implementation.
11
4.0 Background The Ministerial Committee on Solid Waste was struck in October of 2017 and tasked with developing recommendations to the Minister of Community Services on improving solid waste management in Yukon. Members of the committee were as follows: Ian Davis Co-Chair (YG), Bev Buckway Co-Chair (AYC), Ian Dunlop (AYC), Cam Lockwood (AYC), Cole Hunking (AYC), Bryna Cable (City of Whitehorse), Todd Powell (YG), Damien Burns (YG), Dave Albisser (YG). The Minster provided initial guidance through a Terms of Reference and asked the Committee to provide their recommendations on the following:
Developing a user fee pilot at YG and municipal waste management sites; Exploring improved HHW and waste oil collection programs/service levels; Exploring organics diversion and composting programs in communities; Exploring waste transportation and collection efficiencies; and Advising the Minister of Community Services on solid waste, specifically focusing on solid waste governance models, stewardship, funding models and service objectives. Based on guidance from the Minister, the Committee established the following goals for developing this report:
To produce a short and simple report with recommendations that are clear and easy to understand; To help quantify and provide context to the different solid waste systems in Yukon; To have a clear understanding of shared solid waste issues; To better define the roles and responsibilities of solid waste managers in Yukon; To help inform citizens on the true costs associated with operating solid waste services; To put forward pragmatic actions that support a structured and shared vision for waste management; and To provide recommendations that, as much as possible, work within existing resources. The Committee approached all of its recommendations utilizing the vision of the previous 2017 Solid Waste Working Group. The vision of that group and this Committee is as follows: “A standardized waste management system for the Yukon that is based on: shared responsibility for waste management and waste reduction; financial sustainability; collaboration; environmental health; and economic benefit.” Solid waste management in Yukon has been an increasing topic of interest for governments over the past number of years. There has been an equivalent amount of resources and research directed towards understanding how Yukon can overcome some of its unique challenges in order to develop a sustainable and effective territory-wide solid waste system. In order to provide context to the findings in this report, it is important to acknowledge the important and valuable work that has preceded the Committee’s recommendations. It is appropriate to say that the findings and recommendations of this Committee are a continuation of previous reports such as AYC’s Solid Waste Management: Vision for a Sustainable Model for Yukon Communities (2016) (See AYC Report) and Government of Canada’s Solid Waste Management for Northern and Remote Communities (2016) (See Government of Canada’s Report) (a full listing of resources utilized to inform the
12
Committee’s recommendation can be found in the bibliography Appendix III). The Committee recognizes the work of these groups and this work has informed the recommendations of this report greatly. To summarize, the findings of the aforementioned reports make similar recommendations for solid waste management in northern and remote communities. Vast land masses and relatively sparse populations distributed across these areas present significant challenges for effective management of solid waste. Collecting and processing waste efficiently and in a cost-effective manner is greatly dependent on volumes. As well, providing the infrastructure and human resources to meet current environmental regulations, while simultaneously providing a high level of service to residents, has become a significant task in Yukon. Adding pressure to the need to develop solutions for solid waste in northern communities is that the operation, maintenance and eventual closure of landfills is only getting more expensive as time moves on. Yukon’s relatively small tax base means that paying the full cost of landfill operations and closure under the current system, through the use of taxes or subsidies by the Yukon government, will likely never lead to a truly sustainable solid waste system. The research to date has concluded that funding sustainable landfill operations must include a robust user-pay component, including multiple revenue streams such as tipping fees, providing value-added services (e.g., household hazardous waste) and progressive systems such as the Designated Material Regulation (a stewardship model) and Extended Producer Responsibility. The need to develop solutions is apparent and has been well articulated in past studies. It is important to note that the Committee wholly supports and recognizes the need for solutions and hopes that the recommendations contained in the balance of this report will move Yukon towards a more sustainable, effective and efficient solid waste system.
The methodology used to create this report was to analyze past research and customized survey data to quantify and contextualize the state of Yukon’s current solid waste systems. Through this research and survey, the Committee’s goal was to develop evidence-based recommendations which related directly to the present challenges being faced to solid waste managers and that could be implemented effectively and quickly. Throughout the process the Committee worked closely with municipalities (directly and through AYC) to ensure that relevant data were being sought and that it reflected the current realities of solid waste managers.
The Committee collected primary data through two sources: the 2017 Community Waste Survey (See Appendix I) and 2017 Waste Management Jurisdictional Scan (See Muniscope Waste Management Jurisdictional Scan). The 2017 Community Waste Survey asked a series of questions to municipalities regarding municipal waste management operations. Including landfilling, recycling, compost and household hazardous waste. The results of the survey were helpful in understanding the challenges of municipal solid waste operations, and more importantly, where those challenges aligned or diverged. The intent of the survey was to determine current costs and service levels in municipal waste management systems. The 2017 Waste Management Jurisdictional Scan was undertaken by Muniscope for the Committee in order to better understand the various governance structures, service levels and funding models to waste management throughout Canada. Understanding the various solid waste regimes and how they are operated and funded provided valuable context for the Committee and ensured that all possible models were considered in the recommendations of this report.
13
APPENDICES
Appendix I – Community Waste Survey Results Faro Whitehorse Carmacks Watson Lake Teslin Haines Junction Mayo Dawson City General Info Population 397 28,577 540 1464 514 909 499 2226 <-- Based on 2016 YBS census data Number of Households N/D 5,850 N/D 374 N/D 262 (excl. CAFN) 150 700 Tonnage (internal) 280 17,709 486 755.6 390 N/D N/D N/D <-- N/D - No Data Tonnage (external) 75 1,424 45 154.2 198 N/D N/D N/D
Annual Tonnage (approx.) 360 19,133 496 910 488 818 449 2,003 <-- Where N/D (no data) available, total tonnage was calculated at .9T per year, per person
Waste Streams MSW Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes R = Recycling C&D Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes PB/NP = Private Business/Non-Profit Metals Yes Yes - R Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes HHW, other toxics No Yes - PB/NP No No No Yes - R Yes No <-- Mayo checked both "landfill" and "not accepted" Tires Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes - R Yes Yes Yes E-waste PB/NP Yes - R, PB/NP Yes Yes - R Yes - R Yes - R Yes - R Yes Recycling PB/NP Yes - R Yes-R Yes - R Yes - R Yes - R, PB/NP Yes - R Yes -R Organics Yes Yes Yes No Yes - R Yes - R Yes Yes Reuse Facility PB/NP No Yes Yes - R Yes - R Yes - R Yes - R Yes Vehicles Yes Yes - PB/NP Yes Yes Yes - R Yes Yes Yes Bulky Items (mattresses, etc) Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes - R Yes Yes Yes
WMF Operations Is the Facility Gated? No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Facility Open Hours Daily Daily MWFS 8am-7pm Daily Daily Daily Daily Daily <-- Daily means 5+ days per week. Is an Attendant present during working hours? No Yes No Yes Yes Yes No Yes Facility Attendant hours/wk 0 80 0 80 40 40 0 40 Operator/Attendant Training (courses) Landfill Ops SWANA+ SWANA SWANA+ None SWANA SWANA SWANA Who maintains Facility? Municipal Municipal Municipality Municipal Municipal Municipal Municipal Municipal
Annual WMF Operating Expense $ 78,704.11 $ 1,669,906.00 $ 94,243.00 $ 359,945.00 $ 136,150.00 $ 177,880.00 $ 215,940.00 $ 114,640.00 <-- Includes maintenance, wages, landfilling and operations expenses Annual groundwater monitoring cost $ 15,200.00 $ 65,000.00 $ 17,100.00 $ 19,360.00 $ 12,300.00 $ 10,400.00 $ 16,100.00 $ 20,000.00 <-- Whitehorse includes this in the above WMF cost
Recycling Operations Cardboard Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No No Paper/boxboard Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Beverage containers Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Plastics Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yss Yes Tin Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Glass Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Non-Ferrous Metals Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes No Yes
Annual Recycling Operating Expense $ 6,193.00 $ 150,000.00 $ 27,000.00 $ 225,000.00 $ 37,000.00 $ 88,442.85 $ 88,970.00 N/D $ 622,605.85 Annual Recycling YG Contribution (Diversion Credits in Whse) $ 14,700.00 $ 612,692.00 $ 18,300.00 $ 40,800.00 $ 19,700.00 $ 31,500.00 $ 14,700.00 $ 40,800.00 $ 793,192.00 $ 1,415,797.85 Compost Operations Compost (Y/N) Yes Yes No No Yes Yes N/D Yes
Annual Compost Operating Expense $ - $ 424,178.00 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
Waste Collection Waste CollectionProvided (Y/N) Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes No Yes
Annual Waste Collection Expense $ 12,666.51 $ 797,798.00 $ - $ 53,394.00 $ 15,500.00 $ 19,968.00 $ - $ 290,000.00
Waste Administrative Support Estimated Weekly Hours 2 138.75 N/D 10 10 N/D 12 9
Annual Waste Administrative Cost $ - $ 348,743.00 N/D $ 15,600.00 $ - $ - $ 21,840.00 $ -
Landfill Closure Liability
Annual Landfill Liability Cost N/D $ 173,352.00 $ 18,000.00 N/D N/D $ 3,500.00 $ 36,000.00 N/D Years of life left in current landfill >50 35 >50 >50 >50 >50 >50 >50 <-- From MH 2013 Report landfill reserve value $ 48,000.00
Total Estimated Waste Management Expense Total Annual Estimated Expense $ (100,097.00) $(2,163,379.00) $ - $ (414,445.00) $ (188,650.00) $ (270,002.85) $ (362,750.00) $ (378,912.00) <-- Dawson Data Inconsistent *note: As reported by communities; does not include waste collection costs. Waste collection costs are reflected in per capita calculations belw.
Revenue Streams
Operational Funding for Recycling Depot $ - $ - $ - $ 40,800.00 $ 11,400.00 $ - $ - $ - Total Annual Tipping Fee Revenue $ - $ 1,828,253.00 $ - $ 141,945.00 $ 5,700.00 $ 8,085.00 $ 1,000.00 $ - Total Annual Permit/Utility Fee Revenue $ 29,875.28 $ 537,302.00 $ - $ 88,100.00 $ 27,000.00 $ - $ 28,000.00 $ 166,347.00 Annual Regional Waste Facility Operational Funding $ - $ - $ - $ 75,000.00 $ - $ 31,500.00 $ 95,000.00
Total Estimated Waste Management Revenue Total Annual Revenue $ 29,875.28 $ 2,209,290.00 $ - $ 380,845.00 $ 53,100.00 $ 99,585.00 $ 78,000.00 $ 261,347.00
Total Estimated Waste Management Surplus (Deficit) *note: does not include waste collection expense $ (70,221.72) $ 45,911.00 -$ $ (33,600.00) $ (135,550.00) $ (170,417.85) $ (284,750.00) $ (117,565.00)
Waste Management Cost /Capita $198 $58 $175 $246 $265 $196 $433 $52 Waste Collection Cost/Capita $32 $28 $0 $36 $30 $22 $0 $130 Annual Landfill Liability/Capita - $6 $33 - - $4 $72 - Recycling Cost/Capita (municipal funding only) $16 $5 $50 $154 $72 $97 $178 -
Appendix I – Community Waste Survey Results (YG Figures)
Solid Waste Operational Costs to Yukon Government in Fiscal Year 2017/18 Note that the table below does not include recycling costs Waste Regular Tipping Groundwater Maintenance Annual Landfill Location Population* Site Attendant Transfer Waste HHW Utlities Other Gasifier Forecast Total Management Maintenance Expenses Monitoring** Beyond Scope Liability*** Cost per Capita Silver City 10 $0 $0 $15,610 $0 $15,403 $17,779 $0 $0 $0 $0 $48,792 $4,879 $7,395 Keno 20 $0 $0 $1,200 $0 $17,494 $28,248 $2,030 $0 $0 $0 $48,972 $2,449 $13,660 Swift River 20 $0 $0 $5,069 $0 $4,850 $23,500 $0 $0 $0 $0 $33,419 $1,671 $14,145 Braeburn 25 $0 $0 $18,356 $3,010 $17,494 $18,640 $550 $0 $0 $0 $58,051 $2,322 $7,644 Johnson's Crossing 25 $10,601 $0 $31,525 $0 $9,978 $22,800 $0 $0 $0 $0 $74,904 $2,996 $11,685 Stewart Crossing 30 $0 $0 $21,396 $3,437 $0 $21,483 $5,830 $0 $0 $0 $52,146 $1,738 $17,690 Champagne 50 $31,336 $60,580 $24,080 $12,884 $15,403 $17,779 $16,575 $253 $2,090 $0 $180,980 $3,620 $17,857 Deep Creek 70 $32,620 $51,075 $15,278 $15,965 $35,067 $25,285 $32,411 $278 $3,920 $0 $211,899 $3,027 $21,127 Beaver Creek 110 $60,352 $0 $0 $4,010 $0 $17,779 $4,000 $0 $1,841 $0 $87,983 $800 $25,632 D-Bay/Burwash 163 $19,550 $64,948 $23,875 $11,328 $15,403 $17,779 $5,330 $1,218 $3,372 $0 $162,803 $999 $19,513 Old Crow 259 $23,300 $192,500 $0 $0 $0 $62,993 $1,582 $27,262 $5,069 $26,720 $339,426 $1,311 $23,201 Tagish 264 $23,917 $60,568 $13,473 $24,359 $12,437 $21,191 $36,070 $2,782 $1,870 $0 $196,667 $745 $16,410 Pelly Crossing 390 $79,310 $0 $34,313 $12,872 $17,494 $24,825 $2,800 $0 $3,590 $0 $175,204 $449 $17,282 Ross River 395 $69,690 $51,777 $0 $3,750 $0 $21,794 $700 $479 $3,978 $0 $152,167 $385 $37,445 Mount Lorne 437 $104,760 $0 $5,005 $15,574 $23,037 $18,363 $18,539 $2,826 $1,870 $0 $189,974 $435 $15,420 Carcross 504 $23,317 $62,936 $35,485 $14,645 $35,583 $18,363 $48,562 $2,822 $3,370 $0 $245,082 $486 $22,629 Marsh Lake 696 $53,856 $147,125 $7,525 $54,771 $28,169 $18,363 $37,825 $8,387 $4,603 $0 $360,624 $518 $14,315 Faro 397 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $12,700 $0 $0 $0 $0 $12,700 $32 $37,655 Mayo 507 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $12,892 $0 $0 $0 $0 $12,892 $25 $27,379 Teslin 514 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $12,300 $0 $0 $0 $0 $12,300 $24 $42,460 Carmacks 548 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $13,399 $0 $0 $0 $0 $13,399 $24 $20,543 Haines Junction 914 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $10,261 $0 $0 $0 $0 $10,261 $11 $27,142 Watson Lake 1,471 $75,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $29,040 $0 $0 $0 $0 $104,040 $71 $70,338 Dawson 2,229 $66,140 $0 $0 $0 $0 $19,896 $0 $0 $0 $0 $86,036 $39 $70,339 Burwash $17,779 $850 $0 $0 $0 $18,629 $6,703 Canyon Creek $10,276 Horsecamp Hill $4,124 Upper Liard $20,861 Territory Wide $0 $0 $14,300 $35,074 $0 $0 $21,753 $0 $76,217 $0 $147,344 Total $673,749 $691,509 $266,489 $211,678 $247,814 $525,231 $235,408 $46,306 $111,791 $26,720 $3,036,695
1 Population is estimated *YBS Population Report, Third Quarter, 2017 OR 2016 Census, OR estimate **Projections not acuals. Do not include ~75k for PM and ~25K for SARU travel ***Maximum 50 year landfill life. Morrison Hershfield 2013. Environmental Liability Assessment for Municipally Operated Landfills AND Morrison Hershfield 2017. Environmental Liability Assessment for Selected Yukon Government Landfills Site closed Municipality
Appendix II – Bibliography Solid Waste Management for Northern and Remote Communities, Planning and Technical Guidance Document. March 2017. Department of Environment and Climate Change Canada.
Solid Waste Management: Vision for a Sustainable Model for Yukon Communities. January 2016. Association of Yukon Communities.
Getting to 50% and Beyond: Waste Diversion Success Stories from Canadian Municipalities. 2009. Federation of Canadian Municipalities.
Comprehensive Solid Waste Study for Yukon Territory Waste Facilities. August 2009. EBA Engineering Consultants.
State of Waste Management in Canada. 2014. Giroux Environmental Consulting.
The Road Map, Framework for Financial Implications of Reaching 50% Diversion by 2015 through Recycling in the Yukon. June 2012. Kristina Craig Strategic Solutions with Bryna Cable.
Waste Management in Northern and Rural Areas Across Canada. May 2017. Muniscope.
Ministerial Committee On Solid Waste Recommendations and Actions for Implementation
Recommendation Action Proposed Approach Timeframe/Status Review waste • Conduct an internal review of waste • Internal review for each solid waste facility. Fall 2018 - Complete management costs and management costs and service levels service levels for for unincorporated areas unincorporated areas Develop and implement • Develop a Regionalization Framework • Framework will include and/or require: Framework a solid waste document that includes strategies and o Controlled access, gates and attendants at all established Winter regionalization strategy criteria for regionalization Regional Facilities 2018/19 – Draft and framework o Weigh scales and tipping fees implemented at all complete Regional Facilities o Tipping fees for residential waste must not differ for municipal vs rural users o Commercial/Industrial tipping fees at the discretion of municipality o Best practice document adopted o Monitoring and reporting of waste standardized o YG funding formula for acceptance of unincorporated residential waste o YG funding for initial capital upgrades at all regional sites o Similar service levels at all Regional Facilities o Consistent regional agreements o Defined boundaries for regionalization negotiated with each municipality • Regionalization strategy will include: o Establish regional agreements with all municipalities. o Shared landfill liability arrangements will be negotiated as applicable in conjunction with Regional Agreements.
o Closure of YG sites at Braeburn, Silver City, Keno and Johnsons Crossing o Reduction of waste stream types at certain YG sites o Improvements to Household Hazardous waste collection o Tipping fees will be introduced at all YG sites in phases throughout 2019/2020, and 2020/21 o Begin similar phased transition from full sites to MSW and Recyclable transfer stations at Carcross, Tagish, Mt Lorne and Deep Creek o Make amendments to the littering regulations (Environment Act) to increase the current fine from $50 to $1000 and enforcement of regulations Develop a strategy for Initiate a stakeholder workshop to re- • Host a landfill liability workshop with the purpose of: Workshop Fall 2018 - managing landfill engage on landfill liability to be o Outline legal considerations behind obligations of Complete liability responsibilities sponsored by CS and ENV, and re-establish landfill liability including legacy interim groundwater monitoring funding o Develop common understanding of landfill liability liabilities until discussions are concluded o Prepare municipalities for introduction of PSAB Estimates and 3280 agreement drafted CS to work with ENV and FIN to evaluate o Prepare next steps for inclusion of shared by current landfill site information, responsibility for landfill liability as part of Fall 2019 monitoring data and financial assumptions regionalization. and develop an estimate of Yukon government liabilities associated with current and legacy landfill sites. MH commissioned to prepare report on current landfill site information – completed August 2018. Implement DMR as CS and ENV to develop a public • Introduce single use plastic and paper bags as the next Single use bags expediently as possible engagement and implementation strategy item on the DMR using a similar model implemented by consultation and explore Extended for further amendments to the DMR. NWT underway Producer Responsibility • Invite industry to participate in a “Focus Group” led by the (EPR) with industry Solid Waste Advisory Group to begin exploring the concept Planning currently of EPR and help prepare a more focused approach for underway for EPR
consultation and possible implementation of EPR for single Workshop. use plastics and packaging and waste oil amongst other Anticipated Spring items 2019 • Recycling Fund Manager formalized to manage and expand entire recycling program to increase efficiencies and improve process Implement a solid waste Draft a plan and engagement strategy for • Recommendation modified to introduce a tipping fee at all 1-year Pilot user fee pilot in a user fee pilot project in the YG sites to ensure that rate shopping does not occur and implementation Whitehorse periphery Whitehorse periphery for consideration. to coincide with the introduction of regional sites. beginning Fall 2019 to explore potential • Regional Agreements will also require fees in 2019/20, Review of pilot and user fees at all sites user fee may utilize Whitehorse rates as a baseline, further however, Regional Facilities may determine fee depending implementation Fall on region 2020+ • User fee will either be taken at entrance or will be on a Underway permit basis. Continue to support Identify continued interim funding • Continue interim funding for 2019 2018-19 diversion credit requirements for the diversion credit • Discussions on improved recycling program including Funding continued program in the short program. modification of types of material that are recycled. term as DMR is Initial discussions implemented begun at committee level Underway Implement a Environment and Community Services to • Issue an RFP for a communications strategy to focus on Consultant hired coordinated work together to develop a coordinated “Waste Costs” from a stewardship and financial Education campaign communications communications strategy. perspective and potential strategy promoting marketing campaign stewardship programs under development. and practices in Yukon Roll out expected Spring 2019 Duration of implementation and beyond – Underway
Establish a Solid Waste Establish an advisory group to help guide • Group established. Membership will be monitored and Spring 2018 - Implementation implementation of the recommendations updated as required Complete Working Group Implement best Encourage municipalities to join Yukon in • 7 of 8 municipalities have endorsed the best practices Fall 2018 practices for waste adopting the Environment and Climate document as of August 15, 2018. Underway management facility Change Canada "Solid Waste Management operations for Northern and Remote Communities" as the guide for solid waste management in Yukon. Explore the role of ECDEV to establish a working group to • Group established. Approach still requires development. Fall 2018-2022+ social enterprise, explore social enterprise, Underway entrepreneurship and entrepreneurship and local innovation in local innovation in solid solid waste management waste management across Yukon
Solid Waste Management: Vision for a Sustainable Model for Yukon Communities January, 2016
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. BACKGROUND & RATIONALE ...... 3 Background ...... 3 The Vision ...... 3 What Comes Next? ...... 3 2. THE NEED FOR CHANGE ...... 4 Current Situation...... 4 Issues With the Current System ...... 5 Changes Envisioned ...... 6 The Challenges of Change ...... 7 3. GUIDING PRINCIPLES ...... 9 1. Responsibility ...... 9 2. Fairness ...... 9 3. Coordination and Consistency ...... 9 4. Flexibility ...... 9 5. Community Involvement ...... 9 4. OBJECTIVES ...... 10 1. Staffing at All Yukon Waste Management Facilities ...... 10 2. Comparable Tipping Fees Throughout Yukon ...... 11 3. Add Materials to BCR and DMR ...... 12 4. Develop a Liability Risk Management & Strategy ...... 13 5. Implement Education Programs ...... 14 5. APPENDIX: AYC Solid Waste Working Group Participants ...... 15
LIST OF ACRONYMS
AYC Association of Yukon Communites CMG Comprehensive Municiapl Grant BCR Beverage Container Regulation BMP Best Management Practices DMR Designated Materials Regulation EPR Extended Producer Responsibility OTOF Our Towns, Our Futures PSAB Public Sector Accounting Board SOP Standard Operating Procedures SWANA Solid Waste Association of North America SWAP Solid Waste Action Plan SWWG Solid Waste Working Group YG Yukon Government
PREPARED FOR AYC BY:
36 Blanchard Rd. Whitehorse YT Y1A 4T7 (867) 335-3499 www.cambioconsulting.ca [email protected]
All content represents the views of the Association of Yukon Communities (AYC) as expressed at workshops facilitated by Cambio. This document has been reviewed approved by AYC prior to public release.
2 AYC Solid Waste Strategy, December 2015 – Final AYC approved
1. BACKGROUND & RATIONALE
Background
Solid waste management in the Yukon has received a good deal of attention over the past few years, including a Yukon Solid Waste Action Plan in 2009, a Findings Report stemming from the Our Towns, Our Futures (OTOF) process in 2013 and a Yukon Recycling review done by AECOM in 2012 which showed how costly it is to integrate recycling in the territory. These efforts brought forward many essential elements that need to be in place for sustainable, effective waste management around the Yukon. Throughout these processes, members of the Association of Yukon Communities (AYC) have discussed the issues that affect them, and worked to develop a vision for an overall approach to waste management that would meet the needs of Yukon communities and citizens. At their AGM in May of 2015, AYC members passed a motion to create an AYC Solid Waste Working group “for the purpose of identifying the solid waste needs of each and all Yukon municipalities”. This document presents the results of that work - a vision for a waste management system that AYC members believe will lead to more sustainable, integrated, and effective operations. It is a vision that draws on previous work, and we hope leads to more dialogue among our communities and our partners at the Yukon government (YG).
The Vision
The specific details of AYC’s vision for a more sustainable, integrated and effective waste management system over the next five years are laid out in the rest of this document. The key elements of this vision are: Increased user-responsibility for waste management costs Community landfills with sufficient resources and complimentary standards An integrated approach with communities and YG implementing changes in unison A phased approach with doable steps
This strategy document contains five objectives (along with suggested steps, timelines and roles) that our members believe will move us towards a more sustainable, integrated waste management system that is based on best practices and modern philosophies. What Comes Next?
Significant changes to the Yukon waste management system will require changes to policy and allocation of resources by Yukon’s elected officials - territorial and municipal. These people have a responsibility to taxpayers to ensure that their decisions are based on sound information that is carefully considered. After initial dialogue about the key elements of the vision presented here, AYC’s intention is for the partners involved to identify key information and partnerships that will support responsible decision-making. This may include: Specific options scenarios for implementation Financial forecasting Best practices research, models from comparable jurisdictions Engagement with citizens, local businesses, and First Nations
AYC Solid Waste Strategy, December 2015 – Final AYC approved 3
2. THE NEED FOR CHANGE
Current Situation
At present, Whitehorse is able to support its operations through tipping fees and a portion of collection revenue. The vast majority of funding for other community landfills comes in the form of transfers from the Yukon government (YG) and other funding programs. There are only a handful of materials covered under the Beverage Container Regulation (BCR) and Designated Materials Regulation (DMR), which build in the costs of disposal at the point of purchase (an approach referred to as “Stewardship”).1 So the current approach to funding Yukon waste management looks like this, in terms of relative amounts from each source (estimates only for Yukon communities, Yukon government and historical recycling data from the City of Whitehorse diversion credit applications): Total Waste Management Costs: Estimated at $6,332,000
Municipal Revenue: 47% With the partial exception of Whitehorse, revenue for landfill costs in all other incorporated communities in the Yukon comes from CMG, taxes and other fees collected by the municipality. NOTE: Municipalities outside of Whitehorse are spending an average of $175,000 to $350,000.00 annually on landfill O&M costs Tipping Fees - 37% Vast majority through Whitehorse
Stewardship - 16% Through bottles, cans, containers (BCR) and Tires (DMR)
Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) is a mechanism for implementing Stewardship programs, where product importers or sellers are required by regulation to include disposal costs in the purchase price, and to pass these funds along to government waste management agencies. The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) defines “EPR as an environmental policy approach in which a producer’s responsibility, physical and/or financial, for a product is extended to the post- consumer stage of a product’s life cycle. There are two key features of EPR policy: (1) the shifting of responsibility (physically and/or economically, fully or partially) upstream to the producer and away from municipalities, and (2) to provide incentives to producers to take environmental considerations into the design of the product.
4 AYC Solid Waste Strategy, December 2015 – Final AYC approved
Issues With the Current System
Tax Dollars Instead of Users Paying
Rural community landfill operations are funded mainly through property tax dollars, revenue from the Comprehensive Municipal Grant (CMG) received by municipalities annually, and other grant programs such as GasTax, Build Canada, and environmental monitoring funding. Other jurisdictions (such as British Columbia) are moving towards more user-pay Stewardship models and EPR approaches that build disposal costs into purchase prices. This approach encourages more waste diversion, and builds personal responsibility for waste into the system. Strategy: Shift from a tax-based model to a user-pay model through a combination of tipping fees/user fees, DMR and eventually EPR
Inconsistent Staffing and Tipping Fees
Most rural community landfills are currently not staffed, which severely limits the ability to manage incoming waste and to levy tipping fees/user fees as a way to encourage diversion and finance operations. Only half of Yukon communities currently have tipping fees/user fees. Rural landfills and transfer stations operated by YG do not have tipping fees/user fees, which can lead to citizens “dump shopping “ and dumping for free. This undermines the waste diversion practices we hope to promote. Strategies: Staffing at municipal landfills to support waste diversion, control waste streams, and implement tipping fees/user fees Comparable tipping fees/user fees at all Yukon waste facilities
Peripheral Dumping
Some rural landfills do attempt to enforce tipping fees, which often leads to peripheral dumping at YG-operated transfer sites (where there are no fees), roadside pull-outs, and even illegal dumping. For example, the Marsh Lake transfer station costs YG about $700K/yr to operate, or almost a third of the cost of the entire City of Whitehorse landfill’s annual budget of $2.1 million Strategy: Communities and YG to implement staffing based on capacity and/or service requirements and tipping fees/user fees in unison to discourage peripheral dumping
Liability Costs
All communities do not have the resources to shoulder the costs of closing a landfill at the end of its life, in keeping with PSAB requirements around liabilities for waste management. Further, it is
AYC Solid Waste Strategy, December 2015 – Final AYC approved 5
not clear how communities and YG share responsibility for the liability of landfills. Some landfills pre-date the existence of municipal councils, and can include “legacy waste” that is not fully known. This is a potentially huge cost to Yukon taxpayers, and the ability to divert waste and manage incoming waste is essential for lengthening the life of landfills and preparing for closure. Strategies: Public education about the reality of liability costs Add new materials to the BCR and DMR and institute comparable tipping fees/user fees around Yukon Ensure that waste management facilities have adequate staffing based on capacity and/or service requirements to manage waste streams and apply tipping fees/user fees
The bottom line is that Yukon communities are struggling to operate their landfills in ways that will be financially sustainable over the long-term. Most communities have limited tax bases, and insufficient usage for tipping fees/user fees to significantly support operations. Meeting new regulatory requirements, monitoring environmental impacts (e.g. groundwater contamination) and offering modernized services (like recycling and composting) is increasingly expensive. Strategy: Generate more revenue and reduce long-term costs by shifting towards a user-pay system that encourages diversion; recoup more disposal costs at the point of purchase through Stewardship and EPR programs
Changes Envisioned
AYC members support a shift in the coming years towards a model that increases user responsibility for the costs of waste management through increased Stewardship, and comparable and consistent fees. The graph below expresses this shift using estimates based on information provided by Yukon Communities, Yukon Government and historical recycling data from the City of Whitehorse diversion credit applications. Note the following key points of this shift, envisioned over roughly five years: Revenue generated through Stewardship triples The total amount of tipping fees/user fees levied has only a modest increase at first, and it begins to drop as Stewardship programs help increase diversion $ 1 million/yr in tax revenue is freed up for other purposes (such as landfill closure planning)
6 AYC Solid Waste Strategy, December 2015 – Final AYC approved
AYC Solid Waste Strategy, December 2015 – Final AYC approved 7
The Challenges of Change
Fees for Users
New fees are never popular with citizens, and therefore difficult for elected officials to champion. This is why education about liability costs and the amount of tax dollars currently funding community landfills is essential. Further, public dislike of increased fees is a strong motivation to implement Stewardship programs more quickly, as consumers feel much better about paying disposal costs at the time of purchase than at the time of disposal.
Staffing Costs
Staffing based on capacity and/or service requirements for waste management facilities is an up- front investment that is essential for enabling more diversion and liability management. AYC suggests that this investment be shared between municipalities and Yukon government, with relative amounts to be determined. AYC envisions that over time, revenue generated from the combination of fees collected through Stewardship and EPR plus tipping fees/user fees will offset the costs of increased staffing. Further, staffing will enable management that extends the life of landfills and reduces closure costs, both of which are huge long-term benefits to tax payers.
Community Support
Education to build community support is essential if political leaders are to implement new approaches to waste management, particularly if they involve materials deposits and fees. In Whitehorse and some outlying communities, much work has been on community education regarding the Solid Waste Action Plan and Zero Waste initiative, which could serve as a starting point for all Yukon communities.
8 AYC Solid Waste Strategy, December 2015 – Final AYC approved
3. GUIDING PRINCIPLES
The proposed changes to Yukon’s waste management system are founded upon an important set of guiding principles that encompass emerging best practices and community values:
1. Responsibility
Everyone is responsible for the waste they generate, and contribute to disposal and management We put in resources to waste management today to ensure long-term sustainability
2. Fairness
We move towards more user-pay and stewardship approaches, and away from general tax- based models of funding waste management
3. Coordination and Consistency
Yukon waste managers at different levels - Territorial, regional, and municipal - all implement compatible approaches based on a shared vision Gradual and steady steps are taken towards milestones that support the shared vision
4. Flexibility
Specific needs and circumstances of communities are accommodated within the shared vision
5. Community Involvement
Education programs bring citizens the information they need to understand and support waste management efforts
AYC Solid Waste Strategy, December 2015 – Final AYC approved 9
4. OBJECTIVES
AYC members believe that the specific objectives outlined below will help Yukon communities take the first steps towards a more effective, sustainable waste management system. The steps to achieve each objective include general timelines2, and roles for communities, YG and AYC. In some cases, there are specific roles for each partner, while in other cases there is simply an overall need to work in partnership to address certain topics. These objectives all have clear links to the 2009 Yukon Solid Waste Action Plan and the 2011 OTOF Solid Waste Working Group findings report, which are noted for each one.
1. Staffing at All Yukon Waste Management Facilities
Steps Timeline Roles Comm: Develop picture of current staffing based on capacity and/or service o Identify costs for Short requirements each facility YG: Identify staffing based on capacity and/or service requirements at their facilities Comm: Identify training needs; develop standards for Job Descriptions o Staff training to AYC: Provide funding for training meet qualifications Short (e.g. SWANA) YG: Provide courses through partners (e.g. Yukon College); coordinate participation Comm: Identify staff & infrastructure o Coordinate with needs Stewardship AYC: Liaise and coordinate between Med programs for partners efficiency YG: Ensure a flexible policy framework to support Stewardship
Links to Previous Work: SWAP 2009: Improve Site Management OTOF Findings 2013: Waste Diversion, Fees & Charges, Landfill Liability
2 Short = 1-2 years, Med = 3-4 years, Long = 5 years
10 AYC Solid Waste Strategy, December 2015 – Final AYC approved
2. Comparable Tipping Fees Throughout Yukon
Steps Timeline Roles Comm: Identify overall landfill costs AYC: Provide costing template; o Develop and evaluate compile community data various cost recovery YG: YG could also figure out their models and analyze Short costs for their landfills/transfer different waste stations they operate and identify streams, pressure tipping fees and compare to points municipal tipping fees. First nations and mining camps will also need to be consulted. o Create tipping YG: Create legislation requiring fees/user fees Short tipping fees/user fees at Yukon waste legislation and bylaws management facilities3 o Coordinated Comm: Implement fees at all landfills implementation of YG: Implement fees at all LAC landfills comparable tipping Med and transfer stations fees/user fees throughout Yukon
Links Previous Work: SWAP 2009: Improve Site Management, Regional Coordination, Integrate Yukon Government Waste Disposal and Recycling Programs OTOF Findings 2013: Fees & Charges, Peripheral Users, Waste Diversion, Landfill Liability, Financial Sustainability
3 This is a similar approach to what was done with non-smoking bylaws for Yukon communities
AYC Solid Waste Strategy, December 2015 – Final AYC approved 11
3. Add Materials to BCR and DMR
Steps Timeline Roles o Create a priority list of All parties in partnership materials to be Short recommended Comm: educate public on stewardship AYC: determine how stewardship will integrate o Expand DMR and BCR with current waste & list of materials through Med recycling systems legislation change YG: implement legislative change based on priority and work on expanding DMR and BCR list ASAP, possibly follow BC list Municipalities to create or revise Solid Waste bylaws as necessary to show unified tipping fees o Update relevant bylaws Med YG: develop similar waste management requirements for unincorporated communities o Partner with BC and AB AYC: research options for on Stewardship - mirror EPR implementation in the Long BC or AB legislation for territory in collaboration EPR with YG
Links Previous Work: SWAP 2009: Enhancing Our Efforts for Recycling, Waste Reduction and Diversion OTOF Findings 2013: Extended Producer Responsibility, Financial Sustainability, Landfill Liability
For Example: The following is a list of materials currently covered under British Columbia designated materials or containers regulations:
12 AYC Solid Waste Strategy, December 2015 – Final AYC approved
Lead-acid batteries Antifreeze, used lubricating oil, filters and containers Outdoor power equipment
Appliances Paints, solvents, flammable liquids, gasoline and pesticides Batteries and cell phones Pharmaceuticals Beverage containers Power Tools Electronics (“e-waste”): computers, televisions, audio-visual Sports and exercise equipment
Gaming equipment Thermostats
Hobby & craft materials Tires
Lamps and lighting equipment Toys - electronic and electrical
4. Develop a Liability Risk Management & Strategy
Steps Timeline Roles o Review Morrison Hershfield report to All parties ensure accuracy of closure and post- Short closure liability figures o Determine a shared approach for All parties environmental liabilities between YG Short and communities YG: Engage consultant o Develop environmental monitoring to help develop Med program program and tailor to specific landfills Comm: Ensure implementation of o Develop and implement common BMPs and SOPs Med BMPs and SOPs, including training YG: Seek partners to develop and offer training
Links Previous Work: SWAP 2009: Working with communities to develop measurements and targets for waste reduction and ongoing monitoring and review; Assessing possible future impacts on waste management; OTOF Findings 2013: Landfill Liability, Financial Sustainability
5. Implement Education Programs
Steps Timeline Roles o Consolidate education All parties in partnership materials (Recycling, Reuse, Short Reduce, Zero Waste, Stewardship) o Design and deliver PR materials YG: Engage consultant using about the “hard facts” of solid Short recycling fund revenues waste and the Yukon plan o Engage youth, schools, YG and municipalities to community champions and distribute PR materials On-going business leaders to build provided by YG support o Design a package specifically for YG work with AYC to provide political leaders - engage with info to councilors which can Med election cycles be presented at council orientation sessions or AGM
Links Previous Work: SWAP 2009: Working with communities to develop measurements and targets for waste reduction and ongoing monitoring and review; Exploring potential partnership and business opportunities OTOF Findings 2013: Education and community involvement
14 AYC Solid Waste Strategy, December 2015 – Final AYC approved
5. APPENDIX: AYC Solid Waste Working Group Participants
NAME COMMUNITY POSITION/ROLE
Cory Bellmore Carmacks CAO Ian Dunlop Faro CAO Margrit Wozniak Mayo CAO Shelley Hassard Teslin CAO Monika Schittek Haines Junction CAO Christine Smith Whitehorse City Manager Bryna Cable Whitehorse Environmental Coordinator David Albisser Whitehorse Manager of Water and Waste Dave Hatherley Haines Junction Public Works Foreman Cole Hunking Teslin Public Works Foreman Norm Carlson Dawson Superintendent Public Works Tony Radford YG Community Operations Supervisor Bev Buckway AYC Executive Director Laura Eby AYC Manager of Operations
AYC Solid Waste Strategy, December 2015 – Final AYC approved 15
Ministerial Committee on Solid Waste Recommendations for Implementation
Framework for Regionalization of Solid Waste Disposal in Yukon
Issue / Initiative The Ministerial Committee on Solid Waste Recommendations for Action towards a Sustainable Solid Waste Management System for Yukon included a “Regionalization” theme with specific corresponding actions. One of these actions directs partners/YG to “develop and implement a solid waste regionalization strategy and framework.” The Committee’s vision for regionalization centers on the efficient use of resources and reduction of risk by supporting municipal solid waste operations. The Yukon currently has 27 solid waste disposal/transfer facilities, eight of which are municipally operated. Given the increasing pressure to manage environmental risk, improve monitoring and reduce waste management costs, it is essential that waste management facilities implement best practices and the number of active landfills in Yukon be reduced. Directing resources toward enhancing regional solid waste sites can help the Yukon Government ensure there is an appropriate level of service for the population served, and prepare for the closure of solid waste facilities without significantly reducing service. The intent of this framework is to outline the criteria and key strategies for regionalization that will be used to develop Regional Agreements.
Key Strategies and Considerations for Regionalization Agreements • YG and municipalities are partners in realizing the vision set out in the Ministerial Committee recommendations. Efficiencies and reduction of financial and environmental risks can only be realized through cooperative and mutually beneficial plans, agreements, and strategies.
• Solid waste management in Yukon should aim to be a “territory wide system.” There should be similar service levels and fees across all facilities. Efficiencies should be sought in operations and management of the system where possible.
• Providing uncontrolled access to waste disposal sites results in inefficiency (e.g. poor waste sorting and lack of consolidation of waste), increased operating costs (e.g. expensive clean-ups and re-sorting) and increased risk of environmental impacts (e.g. spills and unauthorized deposits of hazardous waste).
• Regional Boundaries will be established for each Regional Facility that ensure reasonable access to waste disposal services for the public. See Figure 1.
• Smaller facilities (ie: under 50 local residents) that are currently operated by CS that serve very small numbers of residents and are located within reasonable
Page 1 of 6 February 8, 2019
travel distances to Regional Facilities will be closed. This frees up resources to support municipal facilities in becoming Regional sites and helps to reduce environmental impacts at those sites while improving stewardship and reducing financial (liability) risks to Yukon government.
• In recognition of municipalities accepting waste from outside of municipal boundaries (i.e. operating as Regional Facilities), YG will provide annual funding to municipalities based on residential population outside the municipal boundary, but within the Regional Facility Boundary.
• The funding formula for Regional Facilities where Liability Agreements have been established is proposed to be as follows: 50% of regional facility groundwater monitoring cost + ($”X” x Regional Boundary Unincorporated Population). Where no Liability Agreement has been reached due to no YG involvement in the facility (ie: Whitehorse and Faro), Regional Agreements will be established that set tipping fees for non-municipal waste at a premium rate that covers Landfill Liabilities.
• The “X” in the formula above will be established based on a portion of the current and expected costs for a gatehouse attendant assessing loads and charging per tonne fees at the landfill, utilities to operate a gatehouse/scale, administrative costs to manage tipping fees, and landfill site equipment and maintenance costs. These expenses do not include recycling costs or landfill liabilities as these costs are funded by separate programs or agreements.
• The annual funding for each Regional Facility is intended to help ensure that facilities are financially sustainable and able to properly handle the volumes of waste deposited by regional residential users of the facilities.
• Funding will not be provided to accommodate commercial/industrial users of facilities. Municipalities have the authority to recover associated costs through user/tipping fees which may be differentiated from residential rates.
• YG will implement tipping fees at unincorporated sites across Yukon based on the following schedule: by end of 2019/20 fiscal year – Whitehorse Periphery, by the end of 2020/21 fiscal year – remainder of YG sites excluding Beaver Creek and Old Crow, by the end of 2021/22 – Beaver Creek and Old Crow.
• Monitoring and reporting of waste tonnage, type of waste and related waste management expenses should be similar at all waste disposal facilities in order to ensure compatibility and comparability of data.
• YG can provide access to funding and project management for anticipated capital upgrade requirements at municipal solid waste facilities (e.g. site configuration, weigh scales) in order to transition to a Regional Facility. Funding may not be available for all required infrastructure. Municipalities may be asked to fund some upgrades from their allocations of gas tax or other federal funding.
Page 2 of 6 February 8, 2019
• Regional facilities with Liability Agreements will not discriminate between in- and out-of-municipality boundary residential users in terms of tipping fees or access.
• Regional Agreements must be negotiated in conjunction with Liability Agreements in order to ensure consistency between agreements.
• Regional Agreements to be negotiated between YG and municipalities should be similar in scope between facilities. Requirements of Regional Facilities • Access to all Regional Facilities must be controlled. During open hours, attendants will be on site at all Regional Facilities to monitor incoming waste and direct users to appropriate disposal areas, reject banned or unauthorized waste, charge appropriate tipping fees, and track volumes/tonnage of waste streams. This helps to ensure any accepted waste is properly sorted and deposited at the proper disposal locations, and users are educated on proper waste sorting practices.
• Tipping fees will be charged at all Regional Facilities that are similar enough between facilities to be a deterrent to hauling waste to less expensive facilities.
• Regional Facilities will operate in accordance with the guidance document Solid Waste Management for Northern and Remote Communities (https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/services/managing- reducing-waste/municipal-solid/environment/northern-remote-communities.html) Regional Agreements and Next Steps In August 2018, Community Services (CS) developed a Draft Regional Agreement which was sent to municipalities for discussion and feedback. Where applicable, the considerations listed above were incorporated into the Draft Agreements. CS has received some feedback to-date and more information requests and exchange is expected in the coming weeks as the partners work toward finalizing regional agreements. CS hosted a workshop in November 2018 on landfill liability in order to promote the finalizing of liability and regional agreements with a clear understanding of relative responsibility associated with liability. The Ministerial Committee recommendations note that the timeframe for completion of the “regionalization strategy and framework” is short to medium (i.e. 2018-19). In order to have regional facilities operational and associated regionalization components in place including the closure of some smaller rural sites, the regional agreements should be finalized by May 31, 2019. Table 1 below provides an overview of current facility status and service levels, as well as anticipated status under a regional model.
Page 3 of 6 February 8, 2019
Table 1 – Yukon Solid Waste Facilities Operational Status and Anticipated Changes under Regional Model
Estimated tonnage** Facility Current Status with Regionalization Regionalization Status* Regional Model Phase I Phase II (Phase I)* (2019/20) (2021-2024)
Beaver Creek LF LF All All n/a Landfill
Braeburn TR Closed n/a n/a 195 (Total Transfer Station combined Braeburn, Keno, Pelly & Stewart)
Carcross MT MT (Whse) All All (C&D and 211 Transfer Station (Whse) Large Scrap Metal TBD)
Champagne MT TR (HJ or All All (C&D and 186 (Total Transfer Station (Whse) Whse) Large Scrap combined Metal TBD) Silver City, D- Bay and Champagne)
Deep Creek MT MT (Whse) All All (C&D and 217 Transfer Station (Whse) Large Scrap Metal TBD)
Destruction Bay MT MT (HJ or All All 186 (Total Transfer Station (Whse) Whse) combined Silver City, D- Bay and Champagne)
Johnson's TR Closed n/a n/a 34 Crossing (Whse) Transfer Station
Keno Transfer TR Closed n/a n/a 195 (Total Station (Whse) combined Braeburn, Keno, Pelly & Stewart)
Marsh Lake MT MT (Whse) All All 170 Transfer Station (Whse)
Mt. Lorne MT TR (Whse) All (except C&D) All (except C&D) 125 Transfer Station (Whse & Carcross)
Page 4 of 6 February 8, 2019
Old Crow Gasifier Gasifier and All All n/a Gasifier Facility and C&D C&D
Pelly Crossing MT MT (Carmacks All All 195 (Total Transfer Station (Whse) or Whse) combined Braeburn, Keno, Pelly & Stewart)
Ross River LF LF/MT (Faro) All (MSW TBD) All (except C&D n/a Landfill and MSW)
Silver City TR Closed n/a n/a 186 (Total Transfer Station (Whse) combined with Silver City, D- Bay and Champagne)
Stewart Crossing TR TR (Whse) All (except C&D) Closed 195 (Total Transfer Station (Whse) combined with Braeburn, Keno, Pelly & Stewart)
Swift River TR (WL) TR (WL) MSW Closed n/a
Tagish Transfer MT MT (Whse) All All (C&D and 73 Station (Whse) Large Scrap Metal TBD)
Carmacks LF Regional Facility All All n/a LF
Dawson LF Regional Facility All All n/a LF
Faro LF Regional Facility All All n/a LF
Haines Junction LF Regional Facility All All n/a LF
Mayo LF Regional Facility All All n/a LF
Teslin LF Regional Facility All All n/a LF
Watson Lake LF Regional Facility All All n/a LF
* TR = Transfer Station, MT = Modified Transfer Station (landfill C&D), LF = Landfill MSW & C&D. ** Based on waste hauled to Whse facility in 2017/18.
Page 5 of 6 February 8, 2019
Figure 1 Draft Regional Boundaries for Solid Waste Disposal Facilities
t
Page 6 of 6 February 8, 2019 Faro Whitehorse Carmacks Watson Lake Teslin Haines Junction Mayo Dawson City General Info Population 397 28,577 540 1464 514 909 499 2226 <-- Based on 2016 YBS census data Number of Households N/D 5,850 N/D 374 N/D 262 (excl. CAFN) 150 700 Tonnage (internal) 280 17,709 486 755.6 390 N/D N/D N/D <-- N/D - No Data Tonnage (external) 75 1,424 45 154.2 198 N/D N/D N/D
360 19,133 496 910 488 818 449 2,003 <-- Where N/D (no data) available, total tonnage was calculated at .9T per year, Annual Tonnage (approx.) per person
Waste Streams MSW Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes R = Recycling C&D Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes PB/NP = Private Business/Non-Profit Metals Yes Yes - R Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes HHW, other toxics Yes - PB/NP <-- Mayo checked both "landfill" and "not No No No No Yes - R Yes No accepted" Tires Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes - R Yes Yes Yes E-waste PB/NP Yes - R, PB/NP Yes Yes - R Yes - R Yes - R Yes - R Yes Recycling PB/NP Yes - R Yes-R Yes - R Yes - R Yes - R, PB/NP Yes - R Yes -R Organics Yes Yes Yes No Yes - R Yes - R Yes Yes Reuse Facility PB/NP No Yes Yes - R Yes - R Yes - R Yes - R Yes Vehicles Yes Yes - PB/NP Yes Yes Yes - R Yes Yes Yes Bulky Items (mattresses, etc) Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes - R Yes Yes Yes
WMF Operations Is the Facility Gated? No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Facility Open Hours Daily Daily MWFS 8am-7pm Daily Daily Daily Daily Daily <-- Daily means 5+ days per week. Is an Attendant present during working hours? No Yes No Yes Yes Yes No Yes Facility Attendant hours/wk 0 80 0 80 40 40 0 40 Operator/Attendant Training (courses) Landfill Ops SWANA+ SWANA SWANA+ None SWANA SWANA SWANA Who maintains Facility? Municipal Municipal Municipality Municipal Municipal Municipal Municipal Municipal
$ 1,669,906.00 <-- Includes maintenance, wages, Annual WMF Operating Expense $ 78,704.11 $ 94,243.00 $ 359,945.00 $ 136,150.00 $ 177,880.00 $ 215,940.00 $ 114,640.00 landfilling and operations expenses $ 65,000.00 <-- Whitehorse includes this in the above Annual groundwater monitoring cost $ 15,200.00 $ 17,100.00 $ 19,360.00 $ 12,300.00 $ 10,400.00 $ 16,100.00 $ 20,000.00 WMF cost
Recycling Operations Cardboard Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No No Paper/boxboard Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Beverage containers Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Plastics Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yss Yes Tin Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Glass Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Non-Ferrous Metals Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes No Yes Annual Recycling Operating Expense $ 6,193.00 $ 150,000.00 $ 27,000.00 $ 225,000.00 $ 37,000.00 $ 88,442.85 $ 88,970.00 N/D $ 622,605.85 Annual Recycling YG Contribution (Diversion Credits in Whse) $ 14,700.00 $ 612,692.00 $ 18,300.00 $ 40,800.00 $ 19,700.00 $ 31,500.00 $ 14,700.00 $ 40,800.00 $ 793,192.00 $ 1,415,797.85 Compost Operations Compost (Y/N) Yes Yes No No Yes Yes N/D Yes
Annual Compost Operating Expense $ - $ 424,178.00 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
Waste Collection Waste CollectionProvided (Y/N) Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes No Yes
Annual Waste Collection Expense $ 12,666.51 $ 797,798.00 $ - $ 53,394.00 $ 15,500.00 $ 19,968.00 $ - $ 290,000.00
Waste Administrative Support Estimated Weekly Hours 2 138.75 N/D 10 10 N/D 12 9
Annual Waste Administrative Cost $ - $ 348,743.00 N/D $ 15,600.00 $ - $ - $ 21,840.00 $ -
Landfill Closure Liability
Annual Landfill Liability Cost N/D $ 173,352.00 $ 18,000.00 N/D N/D $ 3,500.00 $ 36,000.00 N/D Years of life left in current landfill >50 35 >50 >50 >50 >50 >50 >50 <-- From MH 2013 Report landfill reserve value $ 48,000.00
Total Estimated Waste Management Expense Total Annual Estimated Expense $ (100,097.00) $ (2,163,379.00) $ - $ (414,445.00) $ (188,650.00) $ (270,002.85) $ (362,750.00) $ (378,912.00) <-- Dawson Data Inconsistent *note: As reported by communities; does not include waste collection costs. Waste collection costs are reflected in per capita calculations belw.
Revenue Streams
Operational Funding for Recycling Depot $ - $ - $ - $ 40,800.00 $ 11,400.00 $ - $ - $ - Total Annual Tipping Fee Revenue $ - $ 1,828,253.00 $ - $ 141,945.00 $ 5,700.00 $ 8,085.00 $ 1,000.00 $ - Total Annual Permit/Utility Fee Revenue $ 29,875.28 $ 537,302.00 $ - $ 88,100.00 $ 27,000.00 $ - $ 28,000.00 $ 166,347.00 Annual Regional Waste Facility Operational Funding $ - $ - $ - $ 75,000.00 $ - $ 31,500.00 $ 95,000.00
Total Estimated Waste Management Revenue Total Annual Revenue $ 29,875.28 $ 2,209,290.00 $ - $ 380,845.00 $ 53,100.00 $ 99,585.00 $ 78,000.00 $ 261,347.00
Total Estimated Waste Management Surplus (Deficit) *note: does not include waste collection expense $ (70,221.72) $ 45,911.00 $ - $ (33,600.00) $ (135,550.00) $ (170,417.85) $ (284,750.00) $ (117,565.00) Waste Management Cost /Capita $198 $58 $175 $246 $265 $196 $433 $52 Waste Collection Cost/Capita $32 $28 $0 $36 $30 $22 $0 $130 Annual Landfill Liability/Capita - $6 $33 - - $4 $72 - Recycling Cost/Capita (municipal funding only) $16 $5 $50 $154 $72 $97 $178 -
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
TO COUNCIL Department Office of the Chief Administrative Officer Business Unit Office of the Chief Administrative Officer Report Date Click or tap to enter a date. From Click or tap here to enter text. Subject Click or tap here to enter text.
Classification Public (approved for release)
OVERVIEW (quick summary) Click or tap here to enter text.
RECOMMENDATION (incl. motion) Click or tap here to enter text.
BACKGROUND
Click or tap here to enter text.
ANALYSIS
Click or tap here to enter text.
IMPACTS & CONSIDERATIONS
Public/Community
Click or tap here to enter text.
Human Resources
Click or tap here to enter text.
Financial Resources
Click or tap here to enter text.
Bylaws & Procedures
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT Policies & Strategic Plan(s)
Click or tap here to enter text.
Attachment(s)
See pictures attached.
Respectfully Submitted,
John Thomas
Village of Haines Junction PROJECT REPORT TO COUNCIL Department Office of the Chief Administrative Officer Business Unit Office of the Chief Administrative Officer Report Date Click or tap to enter a date. From Click or tap here to enter text. Subject Municipal Capital & Special Projects
Fiscal Year: Click or tap here to enter text. Last Updated: Click or tap to enter a date.
This is a list of capital and special projects. This list is intended to provide Council and the Community with an overview of non-O &M projects under management by the Village. Assumptions: Project planning is accounted for in the ‘%COMPL’ field when evaluating the total project lifecycle.
PROJECT NAME DEPT PROJECT STATUS START END % STATUS AT THE TIME OF THIS REPORT RESP TYPE (Est.) COMPL Enter Project Name F & A O & M N-Started click click 0% click
Page 1 of 1
Fwd: Public Letter to Mayor and Council and the Village of Haines Junction
Angie Charlebois
I mistyped the CAO email address the first time. Please see attached.
:)
Begin forwarded message:
From: Angie Charlebois
------Forwarded message ------From: Angie Charlebois
May 1, 2019
Dear Mayor and Council,
Please consider this email an official letter for your review (and hopefully, action) with my full permission to distribute and file as you would any other correspondence.
RE: Fiberglass insulation litter I've been concerned with the lack of effort, urgency and care dedicated by the owners of the KPI, to the clean up of the insulation (etc.) that was widely blown around the St. Elias Convention Centre following the wind storm on April 22nd, 2019. The owners/operators of the KPI have since worked on the demolition of the abandoned and condemnable mobile home that was on their property but in the meantime, the bits of insulation that were WIDELY SCATTERED from that location remain strewn about the town.
What bothers me... beyond the fact that this mess is unsightly and widespread is that 1) the mess is on other residents' properties; 2) the mess was visible to the 90 attendees of the economic development conference held in Haines Junction this past weekend; 3) the beautiful view from the St. Elias Convention Centre is still affected by this mess; 4) our community (including youth) are about to embark on a community clean up day and this stuff is not our responsibility to handle nor is it SAFE; 5) this stuff isn't safe for squirrels and birds and it's embarrassing that a community adjacent to a national park is unsafe to animals!!; and 6) that I KEEP SEEING THE OWNERS OF THE KPI WORKING ON PROJECTS TO IMPROVE THEIR OWN LANDS WHILE THIS MESS REMAINS.
Since the storm, I've observed the KPI owners/caretakers digging plumbing or water piping at the Kluane RV park, working on the demolition and removal of the trailer, and embarking on a small construction or repair project at the front of the hotel, in the parking lot, to name a few.
I can't begin to tell you how frustrating it is to participate in community development/growth/marketing events while also seeing a blatant disrespect and disregard for others' properties by a local business in tourism sector!!
I'm not sure what avenues you can pursue as a Municipality to address this littering (intentional or not) but I'm hopeful that if a bylaw exists, you will enforce it. And in the absence of a bylaw, could you trigger the enforcement of a piece of Environment Yukon legislation/regulations or something else?
I'm sorry to voice my concern and disappointment so vehemently but its' been more than a week and I feel disrespected as a resident of the community by the lack of effort at cleaning up the mess that the KPI is responsible for. I can't imagine how the other land owners nearby feel... oh wait, the Village of Haines Junction is one of those... How do you feel? Have you seen the corner by the zamboni garage door? There are shreds of insulation there too.
I don't want or expect my children to touch fiberglass insulation during the community clean up and I know I've given you very little time to resolve this issue but I'm insistent that the owner held accountable for their litter and clean it up ASAP. Thanks so much for your ear as I share my views on this matter.
Angie Charlebois resident since April 2005. 57694893_10156337546162399_33081306734909 19424_n.jpg