Agenda - 01-20-1998 - 10a - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

} 11~ Orange County Board of Commissioners Page 3 October 16, 199T reasonable to assume annexation by the towns of their respective transition areas. The towns can provide public wader and sewer in their transition areas. Furthermore, and in my opinion significantly, the entire identified community can be served with public water and sewer acing the general fond revenue of Orange County, Chapel Hill and Carrboro in a joint undertaking. This would allow a "blurring" of jurisdictional lines by reasonable assumptions concerning financial contribution to the enterprise. I think there could be quite a bit of latiwde in these assumptions gives that the enterprise is question would be one of constructing public water and sewer utilities and not their operation thereafter. 'The operation of these utilities would presumably fall to OWASA once they were constructed. Fees for coru~ectioa to the water sad sewer utilities can be justified, if they are all to be paid, on the same basis as the lime extensions themselves However, if only those fees associated with homes owned by persons with low and moderate income are to be paid, then landfill enterprise fends would not be available. Low and moderate income homeowners' fees can be paid by the local governments under the community development programs and~acdvities power of the County, Catzboro and t~rapel Hill found is N.C. Gen Stat ~~ 153A-376 and 160A~56, copies of which are enclosed. The legal analysis for public transportation in the Orange Regional Landfill community is the same as the general fund public water and sewer extension analysis above. The practical issues are different but the legal issues ate the same. Relocating fnttn+e annexation boundaries by trfereadum is, in my opinion, problematic. I have previously written to the Board advising against holding non binding or "straw" ballot referenda not expressly authorized by the North Carolina General Assembly. The annexation boundary and the joint planning aaasition area boundary should be determined through the joint P1~~8 F~ ~Y ~ P~ One of ~ the recommendations is the Repoa of the Landfill Oa+nets Group/Landfill Neighbors Woddng Group calls for using at least 50 acres of the Greene tract for recreation facilities. 'The Gt~eeae tract is paGSently an asset of the Orange Regional Landfill enterprise. I have not done an exhaustive research project on this question However, transferring the Greene tract out of ti>e eaoerpdse and essentially declaring it to be surplus property for landfill purposes raises a legal gaesdoa because the property was purchased with landfill tiFP~B ~• which by law cannot exceed thd' cost of operating the landfill. The question further becomes one of whether tht Greene tract is or ever can become truly surplus given the potential liabrliry associated with owning and operating a landfill foreveamore and the cost of its continued operation_ Put another way, can the Greene tract be disposed of by the landfill enterprise while ripping fees are charged for operations expenses, including the potential for future payment of environmental mitigation expenses rise to past, present artd fntune landfill practices, that could otherwise be avoided because of the availability of the Greene tract asset? I have not rtached