Agenda - 11-17-1998 - 9d - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

3 11 3- We believe it would be necessary for the Chapel I-lill Town Council to formally adopt the budget; however, the budget could be developed by the County Manager and reviewed and approved by the County Commissioners before action by the Town Council; 4. We agree that the Carrboro Board of Aldermen, the Chapel FiiIl Town Council, and the Orange County Boazd of Commissioners must sign tEie Intedocal Agreement in order to execute the transfer of ownership and responsibility. 5- We agree on the nerd for a local commitment to efficient, res nsible and waste management activities. The Intcrlocal A meat would PrnSressive solid ~ Provide the lcga.l basis for the commitment ofihe partners to the system. 6. The Landfill Qyvncrs' Group is an advisory body to the three member ov not direct solid waste maaa ement o 8 ~~ aad does B perarions. The Towa of Chapel Hill is currently responsible for administration of the Landfill: Fund and the Solid Waste Manag Dcpartaieat. We would a emrnt xpect this situation to contiaue uatiI the revised Interlocal Agreement. is exccute~ and implemented. The Council recognizes the LOG's right.to set and o - own rules as established in January of 1997. Thcsc rules included decision b P~ ~ l~ Tize Council supports this LOG decision. y majority rule. 7. Members of the new Solid Waste. Advisory, Commission should be appointed according. to . Article VI 6.03 of the latest draft of the Interlocsl AgreGraent ~ - . - 8- `-~~derstarid• that solid waste collection decisions should be the -. nsioili . .jurisdiction, as contained is Article V of the latest dra$ of the Interlocal Agreement, t7' of ~~.~~ -- 9. We believe it would be useful for the Unive~ity to motiitorlparticipate in aII proceedings and that-we should eneotuage their participation. ~ Our understaciding is that the law does not allow the University to be a signatory to ati Intctlocal Agreement. Facilities Services - L We reiterate the Couacil resolution of July .2,. 1998 stating:. "Rxogniac the -need to begin discussions oa whether tQ keep the Greene Tract as publicly owned load, and if so, what if aay - uses would be suitable. Recognize that a derision about the Greene Tract should riot delay the transfer of governance." The Council opposes the use of the. Grecae Tract for a construction and demolition waste facility and requests t}sat the Commissioners specify what solid waste management activities it coritemplatcs on the Greene Tract as well as where on the_Greenc Tract 2., 3., 4. The council continues to support the July 2 resolution that siting a MRF and C & D waste facility have priority anti favor these decisions bring .made by fall of 1998.. The Council further supports working with the MRF consultant to help is identifying criteria for selecting a site, using already identified sites as candidates. The Council supports identifying possible ,locations for a transfer station during the process of siting a MRF. .