Current Operations

The Waste Management function is currently provided by separate divisions. Public Works organizes the collection and the Waste Management Division looks after the disposal. Public Works staff also provide a back up role in inspection and testing services at the landfill site. Garbage collection services are provided by internal staff on a 5 day collection system. To provide waste collection services, Public Works maintains a fleet of 10 collection vehicles plus one rear loader. Additional support staff, beyond those directly providing the service to the public include the following:

• 1 mechanic dedicated to the maintenance of waste collection fleet • 2 seasonal green waste collectors

The operating budget for solid waste collection in 2005 was approximately $872,000. Approximately 63% of the budget is associated with salary and wage related costs, with the remainder of the costs associated with vehicles and equipment.

The following graph reflects the annual tonnes of solid waste collected.

Tonnes of Solid Waste Collection - 2004

10500 11000 11500 12000 12500 13000 13500 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 Tonnes

On average, solid waste tonnes collected have increased by 2% annually, slightly higher than the increase in population over the same period.

Up to 25 temporary staff are brought in each summer and many of those are assigned to garbage collection. This has placed a larger training load on the Supervisor to ensure that the staff knows how to operate the equipment safely.

The annual tonnes of garbage collected, on a per capita basis, are low in the City of Peterborough compared to other municipalities surveyed. This is due in part to a strong recycling program with a high percentage of waste diverted as well as policies that limit the number of containers to two for residential properties. These policies impact the cost of service in each municipality.

5.5.2 Benchmarking

The following table reflects the 2004 percentage of tonnes diverted to recycling in a number of municipalities. As shown below, Peterborough is among the highest in terms of solid waste diverted.

Municipality MPMP % of Recycling Diverted Cornwall 12.3 Wasaga Beach 18.5 Vaughan 18.7 Thunder Bay 19.1 York Region 24.9 King 26.1 Whitchurch-Stouffville 26.9 Hamilton 26.9 Chatham-Kent 27.5 Georgina 29.7 Sudbury 30.0 Brantford 30.9 Barrie 31.0

Sault Ste. Marie 32.0 Kawartha Lakes 32.4 Ottawa 33.2 Belleville 34.0 Orangeville 34.2 Windsor 35.2 Durham Region 35.3 North Bay 35.7 London 37.1 Sarnia 37.5 East Gwillimbury 37.9 Newmarket 38.2 Niagara Region 40.1 Halton Region 40.2 Waterloo Region 41.0 Peel Region 45.2 Peterborough 45.4 St. Thomas 47.7 Stratford 48.9 Guelph 53.1 Average 46.9

Contract versus In-House Service Provision

Peterborough is in the minority of municipalities where garbage collection is still provided by City staff. A staff report was presented to Council to explore alternate service delivery options for garbage collection; a decision on how garbage collection services should be provided was postponed until the completion of the Public Works review.

Consistent with the practice in the majority of the other municipalities surveyed, disposal and recycling are contracted out in the City of Peterborough. To create synergies, the majority of

provided at the upper tier (typically recycling and disposal) and another is provided at the lower tier (typically garbage collection).

As an example, the Region of Waterloo has all three services contracted through one tender. In the City of Brantford, one tender is issued for all services. Interested companies have the option of bidding on all or a combination of the services. During the review process, the City of Guelph was in the process of issuing an RFP for all services to compare the internal cost of service to external service providers.

There are a number of factors that impact the cost of service including: • service levels

• policies on bag limits • land area and density • distance to a disposal site • collective agreements

The following table summarizes the MPMP data for 2004 for garbage collection across other municipalities where information was available. The table has been sorted into contract, mixed service of contract and internal and municipal only. As shown below, the majority of the municipalities contract for garbage collection.

Municipality 2004 Population Service Provider

North Bay 54,098 Contract Prince Edward County 26,338 Contract Sarnia 73,756 Contract Cornwall 47,333 Contract Brantford 91,584 Contract Chatham-Kent 109,708 Contract St. Thomas 35,947 Contract Ajax 83,570 Contract Ottawa 829,578 Mostly Contract Georgina 45,302 Contract East Gwillimbury 22,588 Contract Newmarket 76,835 Contract Lakeshore 31,373 Contract Whitchurch-Stouffville 25,152 Contract Vaughan 236,194 Contract Region of Durham 562,008 Contract Orangeville 28,226 Contract King 20,105 Contract

Hamilton 519,734 Contract and Municipal Stratford 31,378 Contract and Municipal Sault Ste. Marie 75,693 Contract and Municipal Sudbury 160,839 Contract and Municipal

Peterborough 75,780 Municipal Windsor 221,463 Municipal London 356,436 Municipal Thunder Bay 111,804 Municipal Guelph 115,071 Municipal

Some of the benefits identified by other municipalities in contracting garbage collection services include:

• Reduced absenteeism and WSIB claims • Reduced cost of operations

• Efficiencies through consolidated contract

• Ability for management to focus on skilled work processes

The following table provides a summary of the MPMP for garbage collection on a per tonne basis for comparable municipalities.

All municipalities that contract garbage collection service experience lower costs on a per tonne basis than those providing the service internally. The cost of the contracted services ranges from a low of $32 per tonne to a high of $53 per tonne.

Peterborough’s collection cost per tonne at $56 is the lowest amongst other municipalities using internal resources to collect solid waste; however, these figures are a bit misleading in that they do not take into account the accrued WSIB claims associated with solid waste collection. Also, Peterborough’s collection costs at $56 per tonne are higher than all the municipalities in the survey using contracted services.

The majority of municipalities organize solid waste disposal and collection under one division. Solid waste is an obvious candidate to be included in any rationalization of services. There are opportunities to jointly tender contracts for recycling and waste collection.

5.5.3 Gap Analysis

Municipality

MPMP Collection Costs

Per Tonne Service Provider Service Levels, Limits

Sarnia $ 32 Contract

no limit, bulk items on regular garbage day

Cornwall $ 38 Contract

no limit, 60 lbs, heavy refuse on regular collection day

Brantford $ 39 Contract

5 bags per week, 55 lbs, bulk collection 2 times a year

Chatham-Kent $ 40 Contract weekly, no limit

Ajax $ 42 Contract

4 bag, weekly, being transferred to the Region

Newmarket $ 53 Contract

3 bag limit, 50 lbs, weekly pick up

Average Contract $ 41

Sault Ste. Marie $ 78 Contract and Municipal

2 bag limit, 44 lbs, weekly pick up

Peterborough $ 56 Municipal

2 bag limit, container must not exceed 50 lbs, 4 large article collection days a year

Thunder Bay $ 115 Municipal 3 bag limit, 40 lbs limit

Guelph $ 167 Municipal no limit

With higher costs and a number of critical service delivery problems, a staff report prepared for Council consideration in 2004 on alternate service delivery options identified a number of risk management issues including the following:

• Physical duties of the one-man sanitation truck operator as the most physically demanding of all Public Works tasks and is identified as a high risk work position

• WS&IB claims are impacting the service delivery. Specifically, sanitation has resulted in $300,000 in WS&IB claims alone. The absenteeism in the sanitation staff has a negative impact on the ability of the Public Works Division to schedule work. Since the waste collection service has to be fully staffed every day, the vacancies have to be replaced from the balance of the Public Works staff. The selection is done by reverse seniority. The days following a statutory holiday experience a higher rate of absenteeism since the sanitation work load increases and the work is very demanding. • A number of employees have submitted medical certificates stating that they are unable

to perform the sanitation operator duties

• It has been increasingly difficult to assign, on a daily basis, permanent staff to waste collection

• Currently, Public Works does not have enough indoor, heated vehicle storage for its existing fleet

• Vehicles need replacing (approximately $2 million)