It's not often that a revolutionary idea proposed at city hall has any chance of being implemented. But one such idea is under serious consideration. On the surface it seems like little more than accounting. Our property tax bills might be divided into two: there will be one line for the cost for waste services and the second for the balance of municipal services. Those who choose larger waste receptacles will be charged more.

 

Instead of seeing one property tax total on your bill for perhaps $2,200 per year, the solid waste portion of about $180 will be listed as a separate item. Need a bigger garbage bin? No problem. The city can provide the additional service at extra cost, included on your tax and waste bill.

 

You might think there is nothing remarkable with the concept. But consider some of the impacts.

With taxpayers looking at their solid waste invoice every time they pay an instalment, will they start questioning the expense? If they can be charged for a premium service, can they get a discount for less service? Can they contract out for less expensive service? Can they opt out entirely? If some people leave the service, who will pay the balance?

 

For years, council has been told about the inadequacies of the city's software. Now it seems city software and staff have both the precision and time to invoice individual property owners down to the level of a garbage pail month by month. Really? If so, what's next? A reduced fire services invoice for sprinkler installation? How about reduced police services costs for households with a monitored alarm system?

 

Two years ago, city staff estimated the average annual household cost for solid waste disposal was about $120. Now the figure is in the $180 range. It will be fascinating to see whether residents will be sensitized to the cost of a service that has an insatiable growth rate.

Will residents then start asking how to better control those costs? Council has made the decision to allow only Etobicoke to have contracted out waste disposal, a decades-long arrangement satisfactory to residents at significant savings.

 

Since the city administration proposes to charge residents for premium services, then it follows to invoice Etobicoke residents less since their equivalent service costs less.

 

The city collects a small proportion of the commercial waste generated within its borders. Under the proposed system, the majority of business taxpayers will no longer pay a waste disposal charge. But what about the solid waste infrastructure investment and fixed costs presently allocated across all taxpayers? With business taxpayers looking after themselves, it follows that the entire cost will be borne just by individual households.

 

The situation is similar for condominiums and apartment building owners, which will have the prospect of being completely relieved of a waste disposal charge if they hire contractors.

As bad as this idea is for individual single family residential taxpayers, it's worse for public policy. The environment needs attention and resources. To establish a policy that encourages evasion, social division and municipal penury is wrong.

 

Fortunately, there is a reasonable alternative: bag tags. Countless city studies and the experience of our municipal neighbours prove that such a program is easy to administer, fair in its burdens and with manageable side effects. Best of all it will allow the city to achieve its goals in paying for the increased costs of environmental stewardship.

 

The concept of a two-tier tax bill will cause more problems than it will solve. Going back to the bag tag concept is another case where recycling is the best solution.