Agenda - 12-07-2009 - 4a - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 2 a waste transfer site. He said that if economic considerations are the only factors in governing decisions, there would not be a need for government officials, but only bean counters. Commissioner Nelson arrived at 7: 09PM. Will Raymond is a citizen of Chapel Hill. He spoke about the waste transfer station issue. He said that several years ago it was decided to have community participation in this process, but this is getting more difficult. He said that he would like the minutes from the SWAB meeting to be presented to the Board of County Commissioners and the public at the December 7th meeting on the waste transfer station. Regarding public participation, he said that the Olver website needs to be updated and there are a number of questions that need to be answered before December 7th. He said that the Paydarfar property was bought to be used as a park and this is clear in reading the minutes, but the Board continues to talk about it as if it could be used as a waste transfer site. He wants to make sure that the documents that the public needs to weigh in on this are available in a timely manner and that they are accurate and consistent, and that the public is invited. Mark Dorosin, a Senior Attorney at the Center for Civil Rights at UNC, read a letter that he had written to the County Commissioners: Dear Commissioners: The Center for Civil Rights has been working with residents of the Rogers, Millhouse, and Eubanks Road on a number of environmental justice issues, including the County's recent consideration of siting the solid waste transfer station on the Paydarfar site on Millhouse Road. We appreciate that the decision as to where to locate the WTS is a difficult and critical one for the Board. However, pursuing the Paydarfar site violates the intent, spirit, and letter of the detailed and deliberate selection process you designed; disregards the extensive public input establishing the criteria as well as the County's purported commitment to such input; and ignores the overwhelming racial and socio-economic disparate impacts of this site. In fact, consideration of the Paydarfar site expressly elevates the fiscal costs of a WTS over the environmental and social justice costs to the surrounding community and the County as a whole. Due Process As you know, the process for selecting a WTS site began almost 2 years ago, in December 2007. As one of its first actions, the BOCC unanimously adopted a resolution noting that it is "keenly concerned and committed to conducting a process that provides for a high level of public participation and abundant opportunity for meaningful public participation throughout." In light of this stated commitment to transparency and substantive community input, the County held several public meetings and accepted comments and suggestions from County residents from December 2007 through June 2008, and ultimate developed three sets of criteria by which to evaluate each potential site. The process to this point, though cumbersome at times, appeared to have honored the County's stated commitment. - On September 16, 2008, the ten sites scoring highest on the technical and exclusionary criteria were presented to the BOCC, which voted to then apply the community specific criteria to all 10 sites. The Paydarfar property failed to even meet the basic exclusionary criteria and thus was not among these ten sites. - On October 1, 2008, the results of evaluating the ten sites pursuant to the community specific criteria were presented to the BOCC, which agreed to proceed