Introduction

The Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) has recently introduced a new user fee for garbage collection, bundled with property tax. The move aims to bolster funds for solid waste management (SWM) infrastructure, including building transfer stations and material recovery facilities. However, the bundling of this fee has stirred significant debate among citizens regarding its fairness, transparency, and efficiency. This analysis examines whether bundling the fee with property tax is justified or whether a separate, usage-based model would be more equitable.

Arguments Supporting the Bundled User Fee

• Revenue Generation:
  Bundling helps BBMP secure an estimated ₹650–700 crore annually to fund crucial SWM projects.

• Policy Alignment:
  The user fee complies with the SWM Rules, 2016, the Swachh Bharat Mission (SBM) 2.0, and recommendations by the NGT-appointed committee.

• Administrative Ease:
  Collecting the fee along with property tax streamlines billing and reduces collection costs.

• Precedents from Other Cities:
  Major cities like Mumbai and New Delhi have successfully implemented similar waste user fees.

• Stabilizing BBMP Finances:
  With reduced state grants, bundling ensures BBMP and Bengaluru Solid Waste Management Ltd (BSWML) become more self-sufficient.

Issues and Concerns with Bundling

• Technical Glitches and Incorrect Charges:
  Citizens reported wrong fee amounts and website errors, undermining trust in the system.

• Double Burden on Households:
  Residents already paying private contractors, like Ramesh, face additional payments without clear exemption mechanisms.

• Inspection-led Corruption Risks:
  Bulk waste generator exemptions based on inspections can fuel bribery and favoritism.

• Flat Fee is Inequitable:
  A fixed charge based on built-up area penalizes smaller families and ignores waste generation behavior.

• Disincentivizing Sustainable Practices:
  Home composters, like Nandini Bhat, see no reward for reducing waste at the source.

• Lack of Citizen Participation:
  Policy rolled out without an elected council and minimal public consultation.

Alternative Approaches for Fairness

• Charge Based on Waste Generation:
  A per-kg charging model would encourage waste minimization and reward eco-friendly households.

• Household Census-Based Fee Calculation:
  Using the number of residents rather than built-up area would better reflect waste production.

• Exemptions for Composters and Private Contractors:
  Verified households composting waste or using private agencies should get automatic exemptions.

• Incentivize Sustainable Solutions:
  Promote decentralized solutions like Compressed Bio Gas (CBG) plants and high-tech local transfer stations.

• Transparency Measures:
  Make exemption criteria, inspection reports, and fee structures public to reduce corruption risks.

Conclusion

While bundling the garbage collection fee with property tax ensures steady funding and simplifies administration, it is not the fairest method for citizens. The current model penalizes responsible waste generators and encourages blanket payments regardless of individual contributions to waste. Ideally, a usage-based fee model that charges households according to their actual waste production would be more just, sustainable, and effective. BBMP must incorporate greater citizen participation, transparency, and decentralization in future policies to build trust and ensure Bengaluru moves towards a cleaner, more equitable urban future.