Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
C. Efland Sewer Fund Inter-Fund Debt <br />The Board was to consider options for resolving debt issues related to the Efland <br />Sewer Fund, but this item was delayed to a future meeting. <br />d. Efland Sewer Fund - Revisions to Fee Schedule <br />The Board considered revisions to the fee schedule for new connections to the <br />Efland Sewer System. <br />John Link said that they are not asking that the Board approve this revision to the <br />fee schedule but they are asking that the County Commissioners consider the suitability to carry <br />the revisions to the public hearing at their meeting on October 19th. The staff, including the <br />County Attorney, feel that it is important to move aggressively in trying to address the fee <br />structure so that as development occurs in Efland and the EDD area that the developers will <br />know what the fees are for any additions to the sewer service. This excludes any of the original <br />citizens who signed up in the mid-1980's with the understanding that they would not be <br />assessed any tap-on or acreage fees. <br />County Engineer Paul Thames made reference to the chart in the agenda and <br />said that part of it is informational in terms of what the existing and proposed sewer use rates <br />are for existing and potential customers, and there is no change there at this time. County staff <br />will bring back a recommendation to modify the sewer use rate fee structure. The availability, <br />acreage fees, and sewer stub-out construction fees are the critical components. The rules of <br />operation limit the County's share of the tap-on fee to $600. A minimum price for a tap-on fee is <br />about $750 worth of construction costs which are out of pocket for independent contractors, and <br />can be as much as $3,000. They have proposed to leave the $600 fee as an availability fee to <br />help establish a capital reserve fund for paying for repairs to the system. <br />Commissioner Jacobs asked what would the acreage fee be for a six-acre lot <br />and a one-bedroom house. <br />Paul Thames said it would be about $6,000 worth of acreage fees plus $600 for <br />the availability fee. <br />Commissioner Jacobs said that this is a regressive way to do it. OWASA <br />changed their entire rate structure so that the burden would be on those who had the largest <br />houses. He asked that Paul Thames talk to OWASA and listen to what they have done. He <br />said this is a more equitable way to do it. <br />Geoffrey Gledhill said that there is some urgency about this because Efland has <br />been discovered. There needs to be capital fees in place prior to expanding the Efland sewer <br />system. He suggested that the Board let this go to public hearing and have the staff talk with <br />OWASA and bring back that information. He said they could add language that suggests an <br />alternative, less regressive fee schedule for the acreage fee that would be added to the notice <br />for public hearing. <br />Geof Gledhill said there is a risk that a 300-home development could come in <br />under this fee schedule and cost the County's general fund hundreds of thousands of dollars. <br />Commissioner Carey suggested also comparing the fee schedule with what <br />Hillsborough is doing. He said they are recovering their costs and more. <br />A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner <br />Halkiotis to approve the recommendation from the Manager which states: 1) approve the <br />publishing of the proposed fee structure; 2) direct staff to schedule and notice a public hearing <br />to be held at its meeting of October 19, 1999 for the purpose of receiving public comment, <br />implementing the proposed fee structure and adopting the attendant changes to the Resolution <br />Establishing Rules and Regulations for the Operation of a Sewer Collection Treatment System <br />to Serve the Efland Area of Orange County. Also in this motion, a third part will be added which <br />states that a report would be brought back at the public hearing comparing the structure with