Excluding solid waste management fee from tax rebate unfair, say Bengaluru residents
Bengaluru: The BBMP's decision to extend the 5 % rebate deadline for property tax payments to May 31 has not enthused property owners. Reason: Exclusion of solid waste management (SWM) user fee from the rebate calculation.
Slamming the move as 'deception' and 'unfair' in the backdrop of the civic body's poor track record in service delivery, residents argued that not giving rebate on SWM user fee undermines the purpose of the incentive. However, BBMP officials defended the move, saying the user fee has been excluded as this is the first time it is being collected after being introduced.
You Can Also Check:
Bengaluru AQI
|
Weather in Bengaluru
|
Bank Holidays in Bengaluru
|
Public Holidays in Bengaluru
Swarna Venkatraman, a member of I Change Indiranagar, said: "The very fact that we have to pay SWM fee is unfair, given that Bengaluru has become a garbage city from a garden city... Instead of looking for integrated solutions, BBMP has decided to tax taxpayers yet again, and not giving us this rebate when BBMP's payment system had issues is further rubbing salt into our wounds."
For many residents, the grievance is not just about money, but about the absence of logic and transparency. SWM fee, often amounting to nearly half the total tax bill, is mandatory and yet excluded from the rebate computation. Sneha Nandihal, another member of I Change Indiranagar, said, "When the downstream processing of SWM hasn't changed, what is the extra fee for? We're still dealing with mixed waste being sent to landfills, leachate in lake and river waters, and poison in the soil."
Others pointed out that while the rebate scheme is a good incentive, its benefits are undercut by BBMP's dismal delivery record. Naresh Sadashivam from Save Voices of Sarjapura said, "If I'm not mistaken, BBMP has waived SWM fee for bulk generators like apartment complexes that process their own waste. If that's true, it is a step in the right direction. As for the discount, I agree with the new rule, as long as the additional money goes into a separate SWM account and BBMP keeps the city clean of garbage."
He added, "The trouble is BBMP collects fees but has never delivered quality service — whether it is good roads, encroachment-free footpaths, streetlights or drainage systems. People, therefore, turn cynical and don't feel good about paying a fee for anything. I belong to an area that includes Bellandur, ORR and Sarjapur Road — a place that is the gold standard of BBMP's terrible service quality."
Vinod Jacob from Namma Bengaluru Foundation pointed out that while extending the rebate deadline is a positive step, the Palike has failed to address its deeper trust deficit with citizens. "SWM cess is being collected but garbage collection and monitoring are not happening. Basic civic amenities like streetlighting, road cleaning, desilting, footpath maintenance and black spot clearance are not being monitored."
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
2 hours ago
- The Hindu
Activists urge Karnataka CM Siddaramaiah to stop felling of 368 trees in Bengaluru's Cantonment area
Environmental activists have written to Karnataka Chief Minister Siddaramaiah urging him to immediately intervene and prevent the felling of 368 trees in the Bengaluru Cantonment railway premises. To facilitate construction, the Railways has sought permission from the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) Forest Cell to axe the trees. Following this, the Deputy Conservator of Forests (DCF) had invited public objections on April 25, 2025. A letter by A.T. Ramaswamy, an environment activist, stated that a campaign held on World Environment Day (June 5) saw participation from seers, retired officials, and environmentalists, all demanding that the trees be saved and the land declared a biodiversity park. The group has accused the BBMP Forest Cell of prioritising corporate interests over public health and green cover. They have called on the Chief Minister to issue immediate directions to stop tree felling and protect Bengaluru's rapidly declining urban canopy. In April, The Hindu first reported that the BBMP issued a public notice inviting objections to the proposed felling of 368 trees located inside the colony. The Rail Land Development Authority (RLDA), under the Ministry of Railways, has sought permission for the removal of trees as part of its 'commercial development project' planned at the site.
Time of India
13 hours ago
- Time of India
BBMP demands clarifications on controversial tree proposal
BBMP RLDA Cantonment trees public consultation The railway should respect people's opinions and look for an alternative location. Even the Forest Minister of Karnataka spoke about the protection of the 368 trees Vijay Nishant, Member, Bengaluru Biodiversity Management Committee Karnataka Forest Minister With mounting objections from citizens and environmentalists,has formally requestedto review its controversial plan to cut 368The Forest Department of Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike has asked the Rail Land Development Authority (RLDA) to reconsider its proposed commercial project at Cantonment railway station, which has faced severe public backlash since its announcement. According to BBMP's Deputy Conservator of Forest (DCF), RLDA has also been asked to furnish a detailed response for every question and query raised by citizens during themeeting held on May 20.'We have asked higher officials of RLDA to reconsider the project, looking at objections raised by the public. Public sentiment is clearly against the proposed project. BBMP has also recorded the proceedings on May 20 and handed it over to RLDA for a detailed response. A general reply to public concerns will not be admissible,' said BLG Swamy, DCF, got to know about the project when BBMP put out a public notice on April 25, stating RLDA's intention to remove 368 trees for commercial development at the Bangalore Cantonment Railway Colony campus. Following the notice, BBMP was flooded with objections against the RLDA officials informed that the project is to ensure a source of revenue for Karnataka Rail Infrastructure Development Company Limited (K-RIDE). The agency stated that the Bengaluru suburban rail project was approved by the Railway Board with a total cost of Rs 15,767 crore, with a completion period of 6 years. While 20% of this cost is borne by the State government and 20% by the Centre, the remaining 60% is through per RLDA, out of the Railway share of Rs 2,479 crore (20%), Rs 500 crore is through budgetary support and the remaining through the returns of monetisation of land parcels identified in the project tree activists say, after the stormy public consultation held on May 20, RLDA should withdraw the proposal and consider establishing the project at an alternate site.'The railway should respect people's opinions and look for an alternative location. Even the Forest Minister of Karnataka spoke about the protection of the 368 trees proposed to be removed for the project,' said Vijay Nishant, a member of Bengaluru's Biodiversity Management Committee (BMC).Notably, after the public outcry,Eshwar Khandre instructed that action be taken for the protection of the 368 trees on the Cantonment Railway Colony campus proposed to be felled for a commercial project.A letter issued from his office also stated that rules will be framed to bring the request of cutting down more than 50 trees to the notice of the Forest Minister, after obtaining the government's permission.
Hindustan Times
14 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
National Green Tribunal points out gaps in Uttar Pradesh govt report on STPs, sewage waste management
The National Green Tribunal (NGT) has raised serious objections to the Uttar Pradesh government's report on the status of Sewage Treatment Plants (STPs) and Sewage Waste Management (SWM) submitted to the tribunal. Directing the government to fill the gaps, a three-member bench of NGT comprising chairperson Justice Prakash Shrivastava, Justice Sudhir Agarwal and expert member A. Senthil Vel passed the order on May 26. The tribunal also handed over a prescribed format to the state government in which details have to be submitted before the next hearing on July 28. 'Report dated 16.04.2025 filed on 24.5.2025 disclosing the status of solid and liquid waste management does not point out gaps plugged thereby not complying with SWM Rules, Water Act and order of the Supreme Court,' the tribunal said. Anomalies pointed out by tribunal Against disclosure of 95% waste processing facilities (19,014 TDP or tons per day), the quantity of segregated waste is 74% (14,884 TPD). This anomaly needs to be clarified. No clarification was given on the operation of waste processing plants without authorisation under the SWM Rules. The report discloses figures of waste generation in 762 local bodies, but does not reveal the actual waste processed by urban local bodies. The report says there has been 100% remediation of legacy waste at 60 sites but no material has been placed on record in support of this claim. Figures disclosed indicate 60 sites remediated and only 26 sites are left with legacy waste. Since, in other ULBs, waste processing facilities do not exist, specific disclosure of legacy waste in such ULBs should be pointed out. No disclosure has been made on the operational status of waste-to-energy plants. Legacy waste Legacy waste refers to accumulated solid waste that has been improperly collected and stored for an extended period, often in landfills or dumpsites. It is essentially a backlog of waste that was not managed effectively and has created a significant environmental problem. Sewage management In view of sewage generation of 5,500 MLD (million litres per day) and installed treatment capacity of 4,651 MLD (but treating only 3,122 MLD), the gap in treatment comes to 2,378 MLD. Untreated sewage is being discharged into the environment, which is evidenced by the disclosure that only 21.08 lakh households (HH) are connected to the sewerage system out of 52.17 lakh houses in 17 municipal corporations. STPs have been designed in excessive capacities compared to sewage generation in Agra, Bijnor, Anupshahar, Chirakoot Karwi, Pilkhuva, Kannauj, Bela, Pratapgarh and other cities. But many urban local bodies do not have STPs, including Bahraich, Banda, Deoria, Fatehpur, Gonda, Hathras, Sambhal and Bhadohi. THE CASE In 2018, the Supreme Court in the 'Paryavaran Suraksha Samiti & Anr. vs. Union of India & Ors' case issued key directions regarding environmental protection, particularly river pollution and industrial waste treatment. The top court made it compulsory for industries to install and maintain functional primary effluent treatment plants (PETPs) within a specific timeframe. SC directed the municipalities to operate existing STPs and established timelines for setting up of common effluent treatment plants (CETPs) and STPs. The apex court also emphasized on the responsibility of municipalities to ensure public health, sanitation, and solid waste management. The Supreme Court permitted Uttar Pradesh to approach NGT with an application regarding the feasibility of the time lines set by the top court. The NGT was tasked with monitoring compliance with the Supreme Court's directions.
