Comment 73137

By hshields (registered) - website | Posted January 18, 2012 at 09:05:09 in reply to Comment 73124

Lakeside - you're spot on. Thanks to Ryan for scratching below the surface when it comes to illegal dumping.

  1. City doesn't know what they don't know. By their own admission, they are going by a complaint-driven process instead of getting real numbers.

  2. Furthermore, by the City's own admission, even when they look at complaints only 1/3 of illegal dumping can be categorized as residential.

this leads me to conclude a few things:

a) The City doesn't know what they are talking about. I'm not being mean here, but factual. If they choose to run a complain-driven system, it dramatically reduces the way they can come up with effective changes.

b) Even if we agree with the assumption that about 2/3 of illegal dumping is non-residential, doesn't this beg the question about bulk dumping charges and other barriers to responsible waste management? Shouldn't the city look at both carrots and sticks on this front (e.g. hours of operation, dumping charges, amnesty programs, fines, surveillance, enforcement).

c) Either of these conclusions have nothing to do with diapers and pet waste. It doesn't have anything to do with urban/suburban divides. It doesn't have anything to do with apartments/houses divide. This is all about collecting some facts, analysing the trends and coming up with a range of options that directly addresses the facts.

I don't see a lot of facts - yet. Thanks again Ryan for at least giving us a starting point.

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds