Orange County NC Website
the choice of a waste transfer site. He said that if economic considerations are the only factors <br /> in governing decisions, there would not be a need for government officials, but only bean <br /> counters. <br /> Commissioner Nelson arrived at 7:09PM. <br /> Will Raymond is a citizen of Chapel Hill. He spoke about the waste transfer station <br /> issue. He said that several years ago it was decided to have community participation in this <br /> process, but this is getting more difficult. He said that he would like the minutes from the <br /> SWAB meeting to be presented to the Board of County Commissioners and the public at the <br /> December 71h meeting on the waste transfer station. Regarding public participation, he said <br /> that the Olver website needs to be updated and there are a number of questions that need to <br /> be answered before December 71h. He said that the Paydarfar property was bought to be used <br /> as a park and this is clear in reading the minutes, but the Board continues to talk about it as if <br /> it could be used as a waste transfer site. He wants to make sure that the documents that the <br /> public needs to weigh in on this are available in a timely manner and that they are accurate <br /> and consistent, and that the public is invited. <br /> Mark Dorosin, a Senior Attorney at the Center for Civil Rights at UNC, read a letter that <br /> he had written to the County Commissioners: <br /> Dear Commissioners: <br /> The Center for Civil Rights has been working with residents of the Rogers, Millhouse, <br /> and Eubanks Road on a number of environmental justice issues, including the County's recent <br /> consideration of siting the solid waste transfer station on the Paydarfar site on Millhouse Road. <br /> We appreciate that the decision as to where to locate the WTS is a difficult and critical one for <br /> the Board. However, pursuing the Paydarfar site violates the intent, spirit, and letter of the <br /> detailed and deliberate selection process you designed; disregards the extensive public input <br /> establishing the criteria as well as the County's purported commitment to such input; and <br /> ignores the overwhelming racial and socio-economic disparate impacts of this site. In fact, <br /> consideration of the Paydarfar site expressly elevates the fiscal costs of a WTS over the <br /> environmental and social justice costs to the surrounding community and the County as a <br /> whole. <br /> Due Process <br /> As you know, the process for selecting a WTS site began almost 2 years ago, in <br /> December 2007. As one of its first actions, the BOCC unanimously adopted a resolution <br /> noting that it is "keenly concerned and committed to conducting a process that provides for a <br /> high level of public participation and abundant opportunity for meaningful public participation <br /> throughout." In light of this stated commitment to transparency and substantive community <br /> input, the County held several public meetings and accepted comments and suggestions from <br /> County residents from December 2007 through June 2008, and ultimate developed three sets <br /> of criteria by which to evaluate each potential site. The process to this point, though <br /> cumbersome at times, appeared to have honored the County's stated commitment. <br /> - On September 16, 2008, the ten sites scoring highest on the technical and <br /> exclusionary criteria were presented to the BOCC, which voted to then apply the <br /> community specific criteria to all 10 sites. The Paydarfar property failed to even <br /> meet the basic exclusionary criteria and thus was not among these ten sites. <br />