By Kevin Werner, News Staff

For the third time within two months, Hamilton politicians have deferred deciding on a new waste collection strategy until possibly March, saying they need more time to study the various options that city staff presented them.

Councillors at their Feb.6 public works committee meeting remained divided over whether to keep the current waste collection system, while adding an additional container to the current one-bag limit, and also instituting a bag tag system, or introducing a bi-weekly collection service, which could involve allowing up to six bags for curbside pickup.

Both systems will save the city money – anywhere from $1.3 million to $3.6 million  – under a new seven-year contract that would begin April 2013, and last until 2020.

Mountain councillors Terry Whitehead and Tom Jackson spearheaded the discussion for council to approve the status quo system, which includes the two-bag limit, plus the introduction of bag tags, at a cost of about $150,000.

“It would simplify the system,” said Whitehead. “There would be more predictability.”

Jackson bluntly stated to his colleagues that not under “ any costs” will he vote on a bi-weekly collection system, which has been adopted by Halton Region.

But the status quo service, with some enhancements will mean keeping in the city’s current 49 per cent diversion rate, compared to an increase of up to 9 per cent in the diversion rate under a bi-weekly system. Senior Director of Operations and Waste Management, Beth Goodger, was hopeful that having a two-bag limit won’t decrease the city’s waste diversion rate. Over the last 10 years the city’s waste diversion rate has jumped from 17 per cent to 49 per cent.

Both Ancaster councillor Lloyd Ferguson and Flamborough councillor Judi Partridge backed the bi-weekly system, which waste staff has recommended. Both stated their residents want the system, which will mean more cost savings, and a higher diversion rate.

“I have trouble turning my back on that,” said Ferguson.

Ward 1 councillor Brian McHattie was steadfast in his refusal to support adding a higher container limit.

“I can’t support this at all,” he said. “The bi-weekly pickup would add significant services. We are going backwards.”

But as members of the public works committee attempted to work through the many variations, revenue projections, and service improvements, they felt overwhelmed by the information, and concerned they were being rushed by staff for an answer.

“I’m sorry, I’m lost with this,” said Mountain councillor Scott Duvall at one point during the three-hour discussion.

Stoney Creek councillor Brad Clark, who isn’t a member of the committee, but attended the discussion nevertheless, said residents would be just as perplexed with the proposals as politicians were now, if they approved of the system.

“It seems very confusing,” he said.

Clark pointed out councillors seemed to be making a decision based upon a waste diversion strategy, increasing revenues and saving money, three divergent goals that are counterproductive.

“There is no haste to do this,” he said. “Let’s reflect on it.”

Councillors agreed to refer the issue to the next public works meeting, which isn’t until March 5. Some politicians, though, wanted the issue to go before the government issues committee so all councillors could debate the merits of the options.

“We should all be involved in the discussion,” argued Stoney Creek councillor Brenda Johnson.

Waste management staff are also encouraging politicians to make a decision soon so the tenders for the waste collection service can be issued. The next contract is scheduled to begin April 1, 2013.

It will be up to politicians at the Feb. 8 council meeting to determine when the issue is debated.