Agenda - 06-01-1999 - 9a - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

O~ To: John Link, Orange County Manager ~~ r From; Gayle Wilson, Solid Waste Director Subject: Response to HOCC Budget Queatioas Date: May 29, 1999 Several questions were raised at the BacC meeting on May 18, 1999. 2 have provided aasxers be1oN. Please let me lmow if you need additional detail regarding my responses. 1. Shouldn't xe be initiating a process to establish the Solid Waste Advisory Coaamission since it is to begin Nosk in August? Answer - Development of the interlocal Agreement is proceeding in a timely fashion. svwQvQr, until such a tiwe as this work is completed and the Interlocal Agreement is presented tb, considered and adopted by all the governing bodie9, the fostn and responsibilities oP the Commission are uncertain. = believe• the Saterlocal Work c3roup is considering September i5,ae as alternative to the first draft's August 1 goal for activating the Comd~i.ssion. Z. What is thA status of the $48,460.89 Fffi~A reimbursement? Answer - officials of FEMA are scheduled to meet Kith the Town o! Chapel idiil FSl~U1 coordinator on June 3 to conduct a final evaluation of documentation. We had believed this issue rwould have been resolved several months ago, hoxever, contirniing personnel turnover at FffiKA has delayed final decisions on reimbursement. While xo have received no aasuranees that xe ~tili recover the full amount cla~3aied, xe also have ao basis for assuming we will not be fully reimbursed. 3. Why isn't the $2,000 TJC06 add item for development of a long- tezm regional strategy for solid vra-ste management included in thQ bss~ budget request? Aasner - Oyu b~udg~et request nrad Finalised prior to the TJCOa request for funding. tte xould at this titee reea®mend that the $2,000 be considered for iaelusion in the base budget, funded troe; the uadesignated rsaerve, with no impact va the proposed tipping fee. 4, in reviewing the Bquipaaent Replacement Reserve it appears that wv are reserving foods for landfill equipment xhich Nill not be needed once the 1$~lfill closes in 2006. Wby hasa~t this equipment been eliminated from the reservQ fund? The attached equipment replaceatent schedule represents all major equipment used by the Solid Wast• Department. 1~lajor equip~neat is defined as that costing in excess of $25,000. Smaller equipment are not included because the impact on a s.6 million annual budget of an $18,000 pickup truck is small and can usually be fut~ed 20