Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
15 <br /> 1 Commissioner Jacobs made reference to the estimate for closure expenses of$3.1 <br /> 2 million. He asked how much was in the reserve fund to apply toward closure costs. <br /> 3 Gayle Wilson said that he does anticipate that this expense will be paid from reserves <br /> 4 and not debt financed. <br /> 5 Commissioner Gordon clarified that June 30, 2013 is the earliest that the landfill could <br /> 6 be closed. <br /> 7 Commissioner Jacobs said that this financial impact does not say they have any funds <br /> 8 available. He asked if there was $10 million in reserve and it was answered yes. <br /> 9 Frank Clifton said that the issue is that the State may change the rules and the amount <br /> 10 could change. <br /> 11 Commissioner McKee said that by deciding to extend the life of the landfill for a very <br /> 12 short timeframe took this off the table. He said that the downside for him is that it does not <br /> 13 allow for a timeframe to talk with the towns about the disposal of their trash. <br /> 14 Chair Pelissier said that the County has asked the towns for several years if they wanted <br /> 15 to collaborate with Orange County about the closure and the disposal of trash afterwards. <br /> 16 Everyone has known about this. <br /> 17 <br /> 18 A motion was made by Commissioner Foushee, seconded by Commissioner <br /> 19 Hemminger to approve the date of June 30, 2013 for the closure of the Orange County <br /> 20 Municipal Waste Landfill, direct staff to initiate any and all regulatory procedures for <br /> 21 implementing closure, and direct staff to notify Orange County Landfill account holders and <br /> 22 facility users of the imminent cessation of landfill operations <br /> 23 VOTE: UNANIMOUS <br /> 24 <br /> 25 C. Direction for a New Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement and Transfer Station <br /> 26 The Board reviewed and discussed a new Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement and a <br /> 27 Transfer Station Site based on the Solid Waste/Rogers Road joint work session on January 26, <br /> 28 2012. <br /> 29 Frank Clifton said that during the last joint meeting with the towns there was a <br /> 30 suggestion by Mayor Chilton to look at a site in the rural buffer and that was one of the sites <br /> 31 originally looked at in 2008. This site was deferred because it was not big enough. <br /> 32 John Roberts said that there is limited action to take right now with a new agreement <br /> 33 because it is not known what the towns are going to do. If the Board decided to pursue another <br /> 34 transfer station in Orange County, a new agreement would not be needed because it would be <br /> 35 a successor facility to the landfill and it would be treated like a landfill for the purposes of the <br /> 36 existing agreement. The agreement would have to be amended to get into more details about <br /> 37 recycling, etc. <br /> 38 Frank Clifton made reference to the agreements and said that, as a County, they need <br /> 39 to formalize their relationship with the City of Durham and its transfer station. It would be in the <br /> 40 best interest of the County to move forward. <br /> 41 Commissioner Hemminger asked who owned the property in the rural buffer. <br /> 42 Frank Clifton said that the rural buffer is a boundary and a zoning clarification. The <br /> 43 parcel is owned by an individual. <br /> 44 Commissioner Hemminger asked who could make the determination about it being <br /> 45 rezoned, etc. <br /> 46 Frank Clifton said that he thinks it is a joint planning issue where any decision that <br /> 47 occurs requires unanimous agreement between the three parties. <br /> 48 <br /> 49 PUBLIC COMMENT: <br />