Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
The Board formally indicated its intent not to <br />We continue to believe that a locally owned or <br />seek a new MSW landfill in Orange County. <br />controlled MSW disposal facility is still <br />desirable, given the potential future financial <br />and public health risk of depending on distant <br />facility and commercial vendors. The Council <br />position of July 2 remains the same, i.e., <br />"Acknowledge at this time that there will be no <br />search for a future landfill site recognizing that <br />this will not be binding on any future <br />government." <br />The Board affirmed its intent not to use <br />We believe that eminent domain should be <br />eminent domain to acquire an MSW landfill <br />used if necessary to obtain land needed for the <br />site, but acknowledged that decision is not <br />community's solid waste management <br />binding upon future Boards of Commissioners. <br />facilities. <br />The Board also indicated a willingness to <br />consider the use of eminent domain as a last <br />resort, with regard to other types of solid waste <br />facilities. <br />V. Financing <br />As part of the financing mechanism, all boards <br />The case has yet to be made that additional <br />The Council recognizes that all boards will <br />endorse implementation of a "Chapel Hill- <br />funding sources are unavoidable. The LOG <br />need to endorse a revenue generating <br />Carrboro - Hillsborough- Orange County Solid <br />financing committee has yet to finish its work, <br />instrument to supplement tipping fees. As <br />Waste Availability Fee" for all county residents. <br />and we cannot take a firm position on this <br />previously states, before endorsing any <br />issue until more, information is available. <br />funding mechanism we want to have the <br />benefit of the report from the LOG finance <br />The Carrboro Board of Aldermen believes <br />Committee. We remain committed to a <br />quite strongly, however, that if it does become <br />funding mechanism that supports waste <br />necessary to implement an availability fee, that <br />reduction and is equitable for all generators of <br />only a "progressive" fee will be acceptable. <br />waste. If a countywide fee is implemented, the <br />The fee structures outlines in the County report <br />Council does not support including the names <br />were regressive in nature. <br />of the municipalities in identifying the fee. The <br />citizens of the municipalities are residents of <br />Orange County. <br />Solid waste operations shall continue to <br />operate as an enterprise fund after the County <br />assumes responsibility. The County shall have <br />the option of implementing other fees, and <br />shall not be required to use general funds for <br />solid waste management activities. <br />Any interlocal agreement must allow the lead <br />entity unilaterally to raise feels by up to 10% <br />annually (this provision is the most recent <br />version of the draft interlocal agreement.) <br />C ADEPTS \PUBW0RKS\SWlswch1117.doc 7 Printed: 12/04/98 <br />