Agenda - 06-18-2013 - 5a - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

10 1 Thank you for hearing residents tonight. We realize that you have many service and fiscal 2 challenges facing the county's solid waste operation. Funding for curbside recycling is one. 3 The landfill closing, convenience center upgrades and the very real prospect that Chapel Hill 4 may take over the urban curbside program are others. 5 This has been especially challenging for rural residents who do not rely on curbside 6 services. For years, we have been advocating for convenience centers, and to keep the county 7 from expanding curbside services and fees throughout the county. We are committed to 8 recycling, composting and waste reduction; we just don't all do it the same way. Curbside 9 services work well in the towns and suburban areas but don't fit rural lifestyles. 10 There is growing concern about the costs of service to rural residents. Convenience 11 center fees and taxes are increasing and we still don't know how the landfill closing will impact 12 the costs of service. Towns are advocating for their own citizens, and if the towns go their own 13 way, rural residents could be burdened with the bulk of the county's solid waste costs. There 14 has been no transparency about what citizens — rural or otherwise- can expect with respect to 15 future services, fees or taxes. Looking at a new tax in a vacuum only confuses the subject. 16 Tonight, we respectfully request that you delay any decisions on new solid waste taxes 17 or services, until you have a full understanding of the going forward services, taxes and fees. 18 To us, that includes knowing what the towns plan to do, and how much all solid waste and 19 recycling services will cost moving forward. That context is essential for you to properly 20 examine alternatives and assure us that fees and taxes will be fair and equitable — not just this 21 year-but for the next 3-5 years. 22 Please don't add any new taxes without transparency on services, costs and fees and 23 costs for the foreseeable future. 24 Thank you. 25 26 Tom Strukmeyer said this issue impacts him on two levels, since he is a resident of 27 Chapel Hill city, but lives in Durham County. He asked for clarification that residents in this 28 position, regardless of what happens, will have to fend for themselves. He said he gets all 29 services, except recycling, from Chapel Hill. He said he does not mind paying this fee and he 30 would discourage any changes to this program. He said he is proud of his community and he 31 hopes this won't be used as an opportunity to maintain the status quo. He feels that 100% 32 recycling can be obtained. He said in his prior life he was a mariner and spent a lot of time at 33 sea. He said that this gave him an idea of the global scale of the recycling issue. He would like 34 to see Orange County become a national leader in reducing the waste that goes into the 35 environment. 36 Rob Taylor is a resident of Bingham Township and served as recycling manager for 37 Orange County from 2005-10. He asked the Board to reject any option that eliminates curbside 38 recycling in unincorporated areas. He said moving to carts would reduce collection costs. He 39 noted that all neighboring municipalities have made this change and he asked the Board to 40 consider this option as soon as possible. He said municipal leaders support recycling efforts 41 and joint planning has gotten these programs to their current high level, and he asked for 42 reconstitution of the Solid Waste Advisory Board (SWAB). He said the recommendation to use 43 reserves would undermine the recycling efforts and will make future recycling more expensive. 44 He urged the board to implement a funding mechanism to cover next fiscal year. He said 45 recycling costs money but as the County begins to ship waste to another community, recycling 46 becomes an investment that pays dividends by reducing disposal. 47 Richard Palmer lives in Hillsborough and has curbside recycling. He asked what the 48 shortcomings of current systems may be and how can the system be improved. He said this 49 issue has been brought forward because of the State Supreme Court decision about a fee in 50 another county that was not authorized. He recommended that the County approach the