Major overhaul of council's waste services to be discussed

Whatever the decision though, council's director of assets and operations Anthony McMahon has warned that all options will require either an expansion of the landfill capacity at the CWF or construction of new equivalent capacity elsewhere.

But Mr McMahon said he considered it unlikely that development consent would be easily attainable, if at all, for a landfill site elsewhere in the shire.

"Additionally, from a financial perspective, council has already invested several million dollars in establishing the existing landfill site," he added.

The preferred option will see much more reuse and recycling to reduce pressure on the shire's landfill which is filling at a faster rate than initially forecast.

The proposal, to be delivered in stages over the next five years, includes introducing new kerbside and bin bank collections to more than 1100 rural residents and reopening the fire-damaged Bemboka waste transfer station.

It also includes, in order of delivery:

The cost to deliver the changes will be funded through the waste fund and grants, council said.

One of the aims would see less waste transfer stations operating but at a higher standard of service including more operating hours, providing more waste diversion at less sites for no net operating cost increase.

Merimbula is where the FOGO waste is turned into compost but the success of the service can be impacted by the size of the available area for composting. ACM understands that council would like to use more space for FOGO composting.

Mr McMahon said the risks of not changing the way council managed its waste were far greater than accepting the proposed changes.

READ MORE

Bushfire clean-up nears completion

Merimbula's wild weather event takes roof off

Art classes offer new skills, connections

BlazeAid volunteers invaluable

"We appreciate some aspects of our proposal will be challenging to deliver, but we must move forward to provide the best possible waste management services to our community, meet national waste diversion targets and reduce our environmental impacts," he said.

"These changes will deliver financial, economic and social benefits."

Mr McMahon said although a primary objective of minimising waste to landfill was to reduce the region's environmental footprint, the proposal also had clear economic and financial drivers.

"Council's waste transfer stations operate at considerable net loss due to the high cost of servicing relative to the amount of waste they process," he said. "Council needs to improve the quality and number of service locations provided - less sites done better."

He said the proposal would have far-reaching benefits, with the 2018 National Waste Policy identifying that every 10,000 tonnes of waste material equals either 2.8 landfilling jobs or 9.2 recycling jobs.

"Council's Waste Strategy guides more than just diversion of material from landfill. The benefits are far reaching, with business and partnership opportunities being created as a direct result of diversion," he said.

OPINION: At what stage do we reach 'tipping' point

One of the initiatives presented by the strategy is the expansion of council's kerbside bin collection service, which will grow to include residents on rural properties. The expansion will see an additional 1100 waste collection services rolled out across the shire and introduces recycling bins to households that have previously not had a recycling service.

This will promote greater diversion of household recyclables from landfill and reduce through traffic at waste transfer stations, such as Candelo, by up to 70 per cent based on current volumes, council said.

Much of the preparation work has been completed and depends only on council's endorsement of the plan.

From a financial perspective the large and growing costs associated with landfill (quite apart from the environmental cost) can outweigh the cost of recycling.

Council has the option to investigate different rates of waste charging should it choose to, by looking at volumes of waste rather than standard charges for a set number of bin collections. However it does already differentiate by size of bin, and charges more for red (landfill) collections than recycling.

The move to up the ante on the waste strategy follows impacts from the bushfires. The central waste facility was designated to take bushfire waste from the entire shire.

It is also set against the backdrop of an investigation by IPART (The Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal) which released a discussion paper on domestic waste management charges levied by local councils.

IPART chair Dr Paul Paterson said there was wide variation in charges. He explained that previously IPART had decided not to regulate waste charges, but now needed to consider whether this was the right approach going forward.

The discussion paper points to IPART's preliminary analysis that, in general, domestic waste management charges appear to be increasing faster than the rate peg and inflation.

"We are particularly interested in whether charges reflect the reasonable and efficient costs of providing waste services while meeting environmental and legislative requirements. We are also keen to hear what opportunities there may be for greater transparency for customers and councils," Dr Paterson said.

Dr Paterson encouraged ratepayers, councils and other stakeholders to make a submission to the review. IPART will consider all comments made on its website and in submissions. Submissions to IPART are due by October 6, 2020.

IPART's Discussion Paper on local council waste charges, and opportunities to have your say are available on IPART's website.

Want to have your say? Click here to submit a letter....