Minutes - 08-30-2000 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

John Link said that the volunteers working an the I&E Committee were very committed to looking into how the County can improve innovation and efficiency. He said that it might be helpful to give the committee information on the solid waste needs in the coming years. Chair Carey asked about the current state of affairs an household hazardous waste. Blair Pollock said that there was a contract that was joint with Chatham, Durham, and Wake Counties through Triangle J with Safety Clean to pick up hazardous household waste. He said that this contract runs out next month and a request for aone-month extension will be coming to the Board. This contract will be re-bid in the winter. All four counties are interested in pursuing various paths with this contract. The value of the contract is around $100,000 for disposal services. Commissioner Brown said that she did not understand why everyone would not want to keep the compact for the household hazardous waste disposal contract. Gayle Wilson said that he would characterize the joint effort as highly successful even if everyone pulls out. Commissioner Halkiotis said that there was a significant amount of people in the rural areas who da not understand how the recycling efforts are financed. He hopes that when the web site enhancements are made that it is significantly educational. He said that the citizens needed to know that the costs of recycling are not coming out of the property tax. Chair Carey acknowledged that four of the Solid Waste Advisory Board members were in attendance -Jackie Gist, Jan Sassamon, Joal Hall-Broun, and Roger Barr. 3. Integrated Solid Waste Management Plan _ Approval of State Three-Year Plan Update Rod Visser said that in 1997 the County and the municipalities approved a state mandated solid waste management plan. He said that there was a requirement that every three years the County and its municipalities submit a formal update to that plan. Staff has developed a draft plan, which has been circulated to the state and to the towns. The cornerstones still include the reduction goals of 45% by 2001 and 61 % by 2006, a MRF, expanded commercial recycling, increased number of materials to be recycled, education, etc. The staff is asking the Board to ask any questions and make any changes that are needed before the plan is submitted back to the state. He said that changes could be made more often than three years. Commissioner Jacobs suggested some changes. In Section iii, in the sentence in the next to the last paragraph it says, "However, an elected officials preoccupation with solid waste organizational issues have diverted attention from plan implementation." He said that there was a mare positive way to state this such as: "However, elected officials' attention to solid waste organizational issues have slowed efforts toward plan implementation." He made reference to page 3.3 and enviro-shopping. He said that there have been some efforts to do this. He made reference to the Human Services Advisory Commission Symposium at the Friday Center in two weeks. He said that he met with Economic Development Director Dianne Reid, Cooperative Extension Director Fletcher Barber, Vice Chancellor at UNC, and the head of food services to talk about purchasing locally produced foods and trying to change practices to use recyclable and biodegradable materials in food handling. He asked that when the County was paying for an event at the Friday Center that this be the principle. He said that the County staff would have to be educated as they go out and negotiate with people to know what to ask. Also, on page 3.8, the last sentence under Disposal Diversion Ordinance, there was a typographical error. Also, on page 3.26, about purchasing recycled products, "the town" should be specified as the Town of Chapel Hill. He said that there was some outdated information in this document, and the updated information should be incorporated into this document. Commissioner Brown said that she was not interested in changing this document now, but she does think that the Board should come back to this and plan to revise it at some point. She does not think it reflects what the County wants to do. She said that the 61 % reduction was generated arbitrarily and did not reflect the financial realities of being able to do it.