Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
Orange County, Chapel Hill and Carrboro all have the power to spend general fund revenue to <br />provide public water and sewer to the citizens in their jurisdictions (municipal boundaries for the <br />towns; outside of munt Oal boundaries for the County). Further, it is reasonable to assume <br />aMe rmon by the towns of their respective transition areas. The towns can provide public water and <br />serer in their transition areas Furthermore, and in my opinion significantly. the entire identified <br />community can be served with public water and sewer using the general fund revenue of Orange <br />County, Chapel Hill and Carrboro in a joint undertaking. This would allow a -blurring" of <br />jurisdictional lines by reasonable assumptions concerning financial contribution to the enterprise. l <br />think there could be quite a bit of latitude in these assumptions given that the enterprise in question <br />would be one of constructing public water and sewer utilities and not their operation thereafter. The <br />operation of these utilities would presumably fall to OWA.SA once they were constructed <br />Fees for connection to the water and sewer utilities can be justified if they are all to be paic4 on the <br />same basis as the line extensions themselves. However, if only those fees associated with homes owned <br />by persons with low and moderate income am to be paid then landfill enterprise funds would not be <br />available. Low and moderate income homeowners' fees can be paid by the local governments under <br />the community development programs and activities power of the County. Carrboro and Chapel Hill <br />found in N. C. Gen Star SJ I S3A -316 and 16OA- 456... <br />The Board of Commissioners considered three approaches for allocating costs - landfill <br />ownership interest; population; and waste generation rates (details are included in <br />Attachment 11). Costs are based on the assumption that all neighborhoods would be <br />included; costs to each jurisdiction would be less if fewer properties are included or if water <br />filtration systems are pursued rather than water line extensions. Are there other methods that <br />should be considered for assessing the shares of the public costs of water line extensions? <br />D. Benefit #1 - Water /Sewer Extensions: Other Issues <br />1. The Board of Commissioners believes that water lines should not be extended into the <br />rural buffer (for example, the Millhouse Road area) at this time, but a tipping fee <br />supported contingency account should be established and funded in the upcoming <br />Landfill budget to immediately address any potential future contamination of wells that is <br />caused by leachate from the landfill. How does your board feel about this proposal? <br />2. As noted in paragraph B3 above, installation of water filtration systems could help some <br />or all'homeowners in the ultimate benefit area achieve quicker relief from their water <br />quality problems... A public information education effort should be initiated to provide <br />homeow=sin the vicinity of the landfill with e.,zplanations of the pros and cons of water <br />filtration systems compared to water line extensions. The Board would support a survey <br />(if landfill neighbors are receptive to the idea) to ascertain which residents could benefit <br />from the installation of water filtration systems. Does your board support these <br />initiatives? <br />E. Benefit 92 - Financial Assistance for Water and Sewer Connections <br />1. The Board of Commissioners addressed financial assistance for water quality <br />improvements in two ways: 1) a proposal that OWASA be asked to waive its facility fees <br />