Letter to the Editor

At the October 30 Cranbrook council meeting a motion to include strata homeowners in city garbage and recycling services was defeated. (“To provide curbside garbage collection and curbside recycling collection services to strata properties and mobile home parks that apply for these services, etc”).

Mayor Price, Councillors Stetski, Wray and Peabody all voted against and defeated the motion.  Councillors Graham, Blissett and Popoff supported the motion. The city staff presented a detailed document with three recommendations and the reasoning behind the choices.

After listening to the council discuss this motion I am not clear why the three counsellors and mayor oppose this motion and don’t want to provide this city service to a potential 800 more homes. As the city document states the garbage collection and recycling services are designed as cost recovery items and the city could increase capacity of the public works department and it would also align with the City Strategic Plan.

Here is what I understand after reading the detailed city background documents that were provided to each councillor and mayor.

Cost – currently each city homeowner pays $84/year for this service.  Each strata homeowner would pay the same $84/year fee. The city receives a recycle incentive of $37.40 from RecycleBC for each homeowner using the recycle service.  Additional strata properties would also add this incentive to the city coffers. This service is designed to be a cost neutral service so adding strata properties to this service should not be a cost issue.

Capacity – the city’s garbage and collection service is currently running at 84% capacity.  Adding every single strata property to the system would increase capacity to 95%.  I would think local politicians would be happy to increase their capacity and efficiency as close to 100% as possible. The city document states, “…it is anticipated that not all existing strata properties will request curbside garbage and collection services from the city. This would allow the city to continue to provide the existing level of service for current day-to-day responsibilities and could increase the amount of time before the city reaches 95% capacity.”

Strategic  Plan Alignment – Quality Infrastructure and Environmental Stewardship. The city document states this recommendation would; “Provide additional waste diversion opportunities for Cranbrook residents. Overall, it will increase the city’s solid waste and recycling volumes because more households will be serviced.”

On page 7 of the city’s strategic plan it states three goals that could be met by this recommendation (“Provide city infrastructure that is reliable and responsive to our current and growing community. Be progressive in protecting and enhancing our natural environment. Explore ways to reduce Cranbrook’s overall carbon footprint.”)

I hope the current mayor and council realize that this issue will not just evaporate and go away. I hope many of the 800 homeowners affected by the decision of Mayor Price and councillors Stetski, Wray and Peabody express their concern and ask them why they would not support such a move.

I also encourage these same citizens to congratulate councillors Graham, Blissett and Popoff for supporting this progressive motion that was designed to support all city residents and taxpayers.

Doug McLachlan,

Strata property owner,

Cranbrook

Article Share