Residents need to petition City about green cart program
By Letter to the Editor on November 25, 2021.
Editor:
Apparently $4.75 million has been allocated from the provincial government to the City of Lethbridge to support “Municipal Infrastructure Improvements.” The City has earmarked this money for “purchasing solid waste carts and vehicles for the city’s green cart program.”
Do residents realize what is going on here? In short, the City plans to implement the “green cart program” and you will be expected to maintain yet another bin on your property, this one for “organics.”
 It appears that the City is trying, once again, to hoodwink us into believing that the “green cart program” is necessary and will be beneficial. Similar to the “blue cart curbside recycling” program?Â
Actually, full disclosure on City-operated, curbside recycling has never been released.Â
We do know that in addition to the City operated curbside recycling, the three City operated recycling facilities are still opened. We also know that since the City began their curbside recycling, three private companies that provided curbside residential recycling have been forced out of business.
Residents have been saddled with perpetual and constantly increasing costs for recycling.Â
Well, here we go again, with no chance of opting out of the green cart program, who knows the eventual additional costs to the taxpayer for this program?
 Perplexing is the fact that the provincial government allocated the $4.75 million to Lethbridge for “municipal infrastructure improvements.”Â
The definition of “infrastructure” in any dictionary is:
 “The basic physical and organizational structures and facilities (buildings, roads, power supplies) needed for the operation of a society or enterprise.”Â
 How, by any stretch of the imagination, can this provincial funding be allocated to a currently non-existing “green cart program” by our City?
In fact, how can the green cart program be considered infrastructure?Â
Have the residents determined, or have they even been asked, as to whether they want or need green carts? The answer is a resounding “no!”
 Perhaps the “green cart program” should have been included as a referendum with the other referendums we recently had the opportunity of voting on.
 Apparently “infrastructure improvements” in our City are not required for replacing ancient sewer and water lines; road repairs. Municipal building upgrades?
 Before waking up one day finding a “green cart” in your driveway, you need to act now and petition our newly elected city council not to proceed with the “green cart program.” Â
Harold Pereverseff
Lethbridge
-1
For a fellow who has presented his grievances about waste management for the past two or three election cycles, and has not been elected, I would suggest that the majority are for this program.
Only someone who doesn’t understand that the dump is a major source of greenhouse gas emissions would gibber on like this.
Maybe move on, Harold, to losing your nut over EVs or single use plastics or something.
Thank you SophieR – Yes, the issue with waste management continues and with the proposed introduction of Green Bins is yet another chapter of our City dilemma and you better believe it, I am here to campion the cause for the misguided direction that the City is taking. Are you really in favour of the allocation of the funds designated for “Municipal Infrastructure Improvements” to be expended on the green bins? Do you realize what this program will cost the tax payers in the end….actually there is no end once it gets rolled out… we are taking millions upon millions!
Thank you Harold. There is a number of infrastructure HOT spots that the city has neglected since the 40’s. But councilors like “show” that they can show off, like shiny new “plastic” bins. Why do you think the city has finally gotten under way to replace the lead water pipes in many residences in the older parts of town? How long has it been known about the dangers of lead pipes ? How many people know ANYTHING about the true condition of many infrastructure facilities in town? It doesn’t seem to stop them from mouthing off,though?
And when people like Snowman,Harold etc. try to info(people who by the way aren’t getting paid by the city or anyone) others attack. The group think crowd don’t want to see or hear,they want to be lead by the powers that be.
Sorry Sohie R I believe you are poorly informed on the actual numbers. Harold,Grant Harrington,Snowman and many others are very informed of the actual data. They have done more to promote transparency and accountability than you will ever care to know.
Maybe their concerns don’t support empires at city hall. There is a lot of union promoted empires at city hall that the majority, that you speak of, have drunk the kool-aid on.
It’s a bit of a bad habit to believe that anyone who disagrees with you and the so-called Transparency Council are uninformed, sheep, or drugged on kool-aid. If y’all could look past the smog of condescension you might find people like me who support these programs at the additional costs.
Do you go to the park and leave your picnic garbage in a big pile because it is easy and free to do? Diverting waste is what responsible citizens do to reduce ghg emissions and protect surface and ground water. Where are these environmental costs in snowman’s cost/benefit jumble?
Although so far I’m quite happy with the recycling program including the change to the front of the house from the alley, I’m a bit more concerned about the green bucket. What I didn’t like, was this is already a done deal while pretending that our voices matter. You can save yourself some time and frustration Harold by changing courses and trying to make a difference in another area that might actually get some traction at city hall.
Doug, are you really happy about the recycling program currently? Your garbage collection now bi-weekly, three city recycling stations in full operation and our recycling fees going up yearly….. what, pray tell, do you have to recycle that you can not take to the recycle station every month or so? From your comments in past, I know you are a reasonable and conscientious individual with great ideas. This green bin program is NOT a done deal, and if we act now, it can and should be stopped. (Please see “snowman’s comments below”.
The persistence of people like Harold,Snowman ,Grant Harrington etc. is the only thing that gives hope to the ancestors of people who came here and worked like slaves for 2 years hoeing beets before they were free. People that were or thought they were escaping slumlord and tyrannical governments for themselves and their offspring. And escaping those that buy into them and support the status quo.
the city can not control it’s spending so it is entering competition with private enterprise to develop a new revenue stream that will be mandated to all property owners, ev4n those that do not participate. I have a blue bin I have not used since it has been delivered, yet I have incurred. Another bin, another $150 a year to the city. WE are already taxed to the max in this city, we do need an audit. Secondly, why isn’ surplus tax revenue returned to the citizens instead of kept by the city. It is tax payers money, since it was over charged.
Harold: it is what the residential customers do not know, we have had meetings with the City manager and Waste and &RecyleGm Mr. Sanchez on this so-called waste diversion save our landfill reading City Documents in the annual report it tells us for the past eight years over 100,000 tones of waste (garbage) A YEAR has been deposited in the landfill 75% is Industrial, Commercial, Institutional (ICI) Both City managers confirm that for over five years 20,,000 tonnes yearly of organics have been deposited in what is called Organic Cell /ICI solution a special 5 year grace period no targets for ICI with a reduced $50.00 tipping fee. The new ICI organic facility can only handle 10,000 tonnes of ICI organics cost $5.8million.
The residential deposit approx 22,000 tonnes of waste yearly with less than 5000 tonnes of organic material, proposed cost for the new program is over $16million. with a 50% reduction targetThey do not take into account the diversion by residential of 2,000 tonnes of yard waste to the present $150,000 compose facility, or the 4,000 tonnes of yearly recyclables also the City-sponsored backyard composters and in sink garburators tonnage
There has been no collaboration with residential customers we have presented a request to the new Council to pause and revisit this file also to consider a five-year grace period of the proposed residential organic program. We need help to put together a presentation to Council. If you can read all the facts you will see City Council has blindly approved a Residential organic and a cost-benefitanalysis will prove it. Your opinions would be appreciated.
how about the max overload of constriction and industrial wastes which far exceeds the domestic, yet the financial burden falls back on the citizens and not the culperts.
Plushie the C&D Mearnsand her Build group were looking for a special tipping fee for construction they usually run about 15,000 tonnes no targets, The waste management had a company from Cranbrook to lear out the mountain of wood I believe it was a $700,000.00. fee. Now a red deer company cleans out the mountain for $400,000.00, The City and the two enviro groups push the Waste diversion button the yearly figures do not drop you look at the landfill debt but tipping fees do not cover nor does the council approve. increases. But they will approve a $5.00 increase to the residential recycling fee in 2023. There is no Recycle services budget or financial accounting the re residential curbside recycling fee is deposited in the Waste collection fund. There is a difference between garbage and recycling. The legal requirement for user fees they are deposited in a recycling fund like Recycle Services which was wiped out merged buy bylaw 6146.. The so-called profits and $1.4 million tipping fees for the materials resort facility (MRF) are deposited in the Waste processing fund no proper accounting in Recycle Services.