Agenda - 02-04-2014 - 6a - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

10 1 said the County entered the process several weeks after the evaluation process was started. 2 He said the County has to go out and get pricing before a firm price for 5 years can be given. 3 He said the County is interested in giving this, and estimates have been listed in the 4 attachment. He referred to pages 30 and 31 of the abstract and reviewed the pricing listed 5 there, noting that this is the best guess at the moment. . 6 Gayle Wilson said he did try to respond to the questions he heard. He said it is difficult 7 to give the Town a 5 year pricing when many of the costs are not known yet. He said the 8 collections service cost and the roll cart bids are not known; and there is no answer to the grant 9 requests yet. He said this makes it risky to give a price at this time. He said the multi-family 10 cost can be fairly accurate, since this is already run by the County. He said he can't push a 11 price and ask the County to guarantee it for 5 years with the lack of information. 12 Chair Jacobs said a 5 year agreement is in the County's interest as well and the Board 13 wants to make this work. He said the two staffs can work together to serve their constituents. 14 He said the Board of County Commissioners is not going to stand in the way of making this 15 work. 16 He said the County has been interested in the purchase of carts for years but was 17 hesitant to move forward without a mutual commitment. He said it seems this issue is close to 18 agreement, and he hopes everyone joins. 19 Council Member Ward said he is prepared to support a move forward with this letter of 20 intent. He noted that it is written in this agreement that the Town of Chapel Hill is seen as an 21 equal partner in setting the costs. He would like this letter to treat the other Towns the same 22 way. 23 Commissioner Gordon said she hopes everyone can find a way to have a unified effort 24 and work together. She understands there is a process that has to be followed, but she would 25 like to underscore the past success of working together. 26 She mentioned a concern with privacy, regarding the chip in the cart to collect data. 27 She wants the Board to think about this. 28 Mayor Chilton asked if this is central to the application. 29 Gayle Wilson said yes. He said the grant application requires the carts to be fitted with 30 the RFID chip. 31 Mayor Chilton asked why, and he asked if there is a significant cost difference in carts 32 with or without the chips. 33 Gayle Wilson said it is a nominal difference in cost, but most entities are using the chips 34 nationwide, as it allows for tracking of participation rates. He said this can capture specific 35 routes that have low participation rates where education efforts to encourage recycling can then 36 be focused. He said the system does not track specifically who lives there. 37 Mayor Chilton asked if there is a way of protecting this information. 38 Gayle Wilson said this can be protected, since there is a portal where the information 39 resides. He said those without access cannot view it. 40 Mayor Kleinschmidt said there are open data interests at play here. He said cities at the 41 front of providing high quality services to their community are opening their data to come up 42 with new solutions to problems. 43 Mayor Chilton said you can contract with a company to drive around and scan the bins. 44 He said the trucks will have a computer that reads the addresses and what the bins are 45 collecting, but the question is what the contracted company would be able to do with that 46 information. He said some of the individual products are also now being fitted with RFID chips, 47 so the truck can tell what is in the recycling bin. He does not think having RFID chips on the 48 carts is a problem, but it is a problem to interject a private contractor that will scan these. He 49 said there might be a way to disallow this in the terms of the contract.