Should Mississippi taxpayers be paying for RV dumping stations?

 by Theresa Peluso

Did you know that Mississippi Mills taxpayers are now on the hook for $4,000 to cover the costs of a dumping station for RV owners?

Prior to this decision, RV owners were using the field behind Roads and Public Works to illegally dump their effluent, until they were found out. At the meeting to approve the 2013 budget held in February of this year, our Council agreed to spend $4,000 on an officially approved dumping station for these RV owners, which they can use for free.

Although RV owners have other options to dispose of their effluent (there are at least five dumping stations within a 20-mile (32-km) radius of Almonte), this isn’t convenient enough.

According to the minutes of the Council meeting held in May, 2012:

The Town of Renfrew is seeking approval for an unmanned station with no tracking or reporting protocols proposed. The Town of Mississippi Mills is following the proposal very closely to see how the MOE will respond and if it will open more economical options locally….

The MOE application costs for a new RV Dump site are $2,000 for review in Toronto. The Town of Renfrew has advised that they constructed their RV sanidump facility in accordance with Ontario Parks design guidelines. The corresponding costs for the materials to construct their facility was around $2,000 however all of the labour and installation was absorbed by municipal forces. Once the Director (of RPW) is clear on the monitoring requirements imposed on the Town of Renfrew, the Department will be in a position to accurately report on the capital and operating costs alternatives for a new RV dump facility.

Renfrew might consider it feasible to pay $4,000 for an RV dumping station because they have a huge tourism sector targeted at people with RVs and campers and might benefit economically from this venture, but there is absolutely no need for Mississippi Mills to follow suit.

And so, fellow taxpayers, we have our Councillors to thank (with the exception of those few who voted against this motion) for their inability to say no when others want to help themselves to the contents of our bank accounts.