Local residents outraged at lack of transparency, public consultation surrounding east-end landfill

Last spring, the City of Ottawa signalled that the city was approaching a waste management crisis, with the Trail Road landfill approaching capacity, and announced plans to pursue a variety of new options for managing the issue. 

Now, the city is considering purchasing a privately-owned landfill in the east end, but it isn’t clear how this would impact the City’s long-term waste management plans. 

The City expects solid waste in the city will increase by 31 per cent over the next three decades, and the city-owned and operated landfill at Trail Road is expected to reach capacity within the next decade.

To address this, city council approved the City’s new Solid Waste Master Plan in June 2024, which outlines how Ottawa will manage waste in the city over the next 30 years. The plan also aims to address the additional waste that will accompany population growth, considering Ottawa’s population is expected to reach 1.5 million people by 2053.

A year later, in June 2025, city council directed city staff to launch an in-depth evaluation of new ways to manage waste. At that time, staff began to examine three options: sending waste to private facilities; building a waste-to-energy incineration facility; or building a new landfill to process residential waste.

Then, in recent weeks, the City announced it was considering purchasing the Capital Region Resource Recovery Centre (CRRRC), a waste management facility currently owned by Taggart Miller Environmental Services Inc., in the east end of the city. 

Mayor Mark Sutcliffe says the city is continuing to pursue the purchase of the 475-acre property, without an official council vote, and the details of the process aren’t clear. Even murkier, though, is how this purchase could impact the city’s waste management plans.

The property is on the east side of Boundary Road, west of Frontier Road, just southeast of the Boundary Road and Highway 417 interchange. According to a city report, the CRRRC is the first and only landfill approved by the province in over two decades. It has the approval to receive up to 450,000 tonnes of waste per year, and is expected to have a lifespan of 30 years.

In early 2025, when staff were made aware that it was possible to acquire the property, the City entered into a non-disclosure agreement (NDA) with Taggart. City staff said this was required in order for the city to participate in the bidding process.

On Wednesday, city council spoke extensively in camera, and Sutcliffe told media afterwards that the discussion was confidential and he could not confirm details, but that the city will “continue the process”.

“The conclusion of today's meeting is that the process continues, and the city continues to participate, and we'll be able to share any and all details about the outcome of the process when the process is over,” said Sutcliffe. 

The city report said staff have engaged with experts within city departments as well as external consultants, and confirmed that the City would be able to receive public feedback before council makes the final decision.

Sutcliffe told members of the media that regardless of the outcome with the sale of this property, staff will still be reporting back to council in 2027 with the feasibility studies regarding a broader waste management plan. 

“If we become the owner of this landfill, it doesn't mean that we don't have any more issues, and we want to stop the assessment. That's not the case,” he said. “Let's say that we're looking at the incinerator. We will need a landfill in any case… Sometimes it's very difficult to understand the decision, because we're making a decision for the next 100 years. It's not a short-term one.

“We are going to be spending money on waste solutions for the next 100 years in Ottawa, one way or another. The question is, what are we going to be spending that money on?” Sutcliffe said.

He also said that although he understands that it is “frustrating”, he cannot reveal further details about the acquisition process.

“It's a confidential process, and that's not unusual, and we've been through it many, many times before when we require different pieces of land as the City of Ottawa, so that's normal,” he said. “This is not an issue of transparency. It's an issue of timing. At some point in the future, we will share all the details with the people of Ottawa, once the process is complete.”

Despite repeated questions from media about where in the process the City currently sits and when the public will learn the details, Sutcliffe maintained that he was unable to respond.

The staff report was first submitted on Nov. 12, then presented to the Finance and Corporate Services Committee on Nov. 21 and outlined that the intent of the report was for the committee to receive community and resident feedback before the report went to council — only five days later.

From the release of the report, residents had nine days to organize and either sign up for delegation or submit written feedback.

Lucie Régimbald was one of the delegates at committee. She is the vice-president of the Carlsbad Springs Community Association and has lived in the community her whole life. She was born there, as were her parents, and her grandparents. She’s also the vice-president of Dump This Dump 2, a dedicated group of people opposing a proposed landfill in Carlsbad Springs.

“Bid prices, identities of participants, and terms are hidden from the public,” Régimbald told the Ottawa Lookout. “This prevents transparency and limits competition while muzzling councillors who are the ones getting bombarded by their residents.”

She said she’s “used to this”, having watched the land be purchased and re-sold over the last 50 years, and that her community is often left behind when it comes to consultation with the City. 

“I just don't understand that there's no transparency whatsoever, and this [NDA] has sort of taken on a life of its own, it's a big umbrella now,” she said.

The staff report stated that the public was given time to provide feedback — with nine days’ notice — and would be consulted further about how the City develops the site should the city proceed with purchasing the property.

It also stated that the public “had the formal opportunity” to provide feedback for the site back in 2012 and 2015. 

Régimbald delegated to councillors at the committee meeting, but “what can you say in five minutes?”.

Together with the community association and Dump This Dump 2, Régimbald, 70, also said she’s worried about the environmental and traffic impacts, which is part of why she’s opposed it “from the beginning”, and raised these same concerns back in 2012 and 2015.

“The NDA-based process and closed meetings prevent the public from participating and providing input,” said Réginbald. “This decision will impact not my generation but my children and grandchildren.”

In a letter to city councillors and Sutcliffe, the community association president Adrian Becea asked the City to “respect our needs and right to live in a healthy rural setting.”

The letter argued that the landfill would impact the community’s drinking water — most of the homes in the area rely on wells, not the municipal water system. He also said that the community was concerned about air pollution and the health impacts of long-term exposure to a landfill. 

In addition, Becea said a landfill would impact local property value, traffic and infrastructure. 

“While we live in a rural community, we are members of the City of Ottawa and should have the same rights and privileges to access healthy and clean-living environments like our urban-residing neighbours,” he wrote.

Régimbald also said that for nearly 50 years, residents have been warning “every level of government” that the soil at the site would be unable to support a landfill; there is reportedly about 100 feet of Leda clay on the site, a clay that can lose strength and behave like a liquid when disturbed, making it prone to landslides and causing foundation problems like cracking, shifting, and collapse. 

But speaking to media after the council meeting on Wednesday, Sutcliffe said that “the site is going to be a landfill.”

“The question is not whether it's going to be a landfill or not. The question is, who's going to own the landfill, who will have control over it, and who's going to look out for the public interest?” he said. “So there is not an option where we stay out of this process and nothing happens on this site. The site is going to be sold to somebody, and it will be a landfill.”

Currently, though, it isn’t. The site is approved as a waste management facility, but is not an operating one. Réginbald wants to know if there are other options for the site.

Isabelle Skalski is the councillor for Osgoode ward, where the property is located, and she joined the committee meeting to share that “residents are beside themselves.”

“In the last eight days, I have attended community meetings, fielded endless emails and phone calls – one message rings out loud and clear – rural communities are tired of being treated like second-class citizens,” she said. “They are tired of being the backyard dumping ground, storage shed for the City.”

“This rural community fought tooth and nail for over a decade to stop the site at Boundary Road from being approved because of serious concerns backed by expert analysis that the site was not suitable for a landfill,” she said. “After years of fighting they were assured the site would be a recycling facility and used for commercial construction waste and soil processing.”

For her part, Réginbald said she has lost trust with the City and is frustrated that the property has cycled in and out of City ownership for decades, only not to be purchased 

“for an enormous but secret amount of money.

“I feel victimized, but I have had enough.”

City staff and Sutcliffe did not tell media when the public could expect to hear updates, but said that city council had “directed staff” to proceed with the bidding process for the property in an in camera meeting. Due to the NDA, there is no information available about what was discussed or which councillors were opposed or in favour.