Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
a. Want a system that is cost effective; <br /> b. Want a system that maximizes recycling; <br /> c. Want a system that maximizes equity; <br /> d. Want a system that is fair to staff and private haulers; <br /> e. Want a system that advances the possibility of comprehensive waste <br /> reduction in partnership with the towns. <br /> 2. Consider options 2, 37 4 permutated into one option; consider option 1 for a solid <br /> waste authority for either a long term or alternative option; and leave on the table <br /> option 8 that would have a 3-R fee with no curbside recycling. <br /> 3. Hold a public hearing on April 23 where the three options will be presented. <br /> 4. Notify haulers that the Board is removing from options under consideration the <br /> franchising system. <br /> Chair Jacobs clarified that options 2, 3, and 4 were related to a countywide tax <br /> district; staff will provide pros and cons, with costs and revenue sources for each <br /> option, and a timetable for implementation of each option. <br /> Commissioner Gordon asked what was done with option 7, and Chair Jacobs said this <br /> option only addresses cost effectiveness and how to pay for things, without being an option in <br /> and of itself. <br /> Commissioner Gordon noted the statement of the motion should include the pros and <br /> cons, with costs and revenue sources, for each option, as the Chair previously said. <br /> Commissioner Pelissier said she does not understand of cost effectiveness and how <br /> this can be interpreted. <br /> Frank Clifton said that looking at the system as it is now, but there are cost efficiencies <br /> that could be acquired to deliver the same service or an expanded service, because of <br /> methodology used. He gave the example of an automated system with rollout cans providing <br /> labor and equipment savings that allow for a larger service district for the same cost. <br /> Commissioner Pelissier said this means that it is really more about efficiency in how <br /> things are done, rather than how charges or taxes are done. <br /> Frank Clifton noted that the least costly system for the county is to have more drop off <br /> sites as this eliminates drivers and trucks. He said that even this has pros and cons and all of <br /> these will have to be looked at. <br /> Chair Jacobs asked if it made sense to substitute efficiency for effectiveness in the <br /> motion. <br /> Commissioner Dorosin accepted this as a friendly amendment and Commissioner Rich <br /> seconded. <br /> Gayle Wilson asked if the discussion is regarding efficiency in rural and urban curbside. <br /> Chair Jacobs said that this discussion is related to recycling. <br /> Vote was taken on the following motion, which included the friendly amendment: <br /> 1. Adopting 5 goals related to recycling and solid waste: <br /> a. Want a system that is cost efficient; <br />