Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
any portion thereof is located. <br /> 4. The ability of the proposed district to sustain the additional taxes necessary to provide the <br /> services planned for the district. <br /> 5. If it is proposed to furnish water, sewer, or solid waste collection services in the district, the <br /> probable net revenues of the projects to be financed and the extent to which the services <br /> will <br /> be self-supporting. <br /> 6. Any other matters that the commissioners believe to have a bearing on whether the district <br /> should be established. <br /> Notice of Public Hearing must be mailed (first class prepaid is fine), at least 4 weeks prior to <br /> the date of the public hearing, to the "owners as shown by the county tax records as of the <br /> preceding January 1 (and at the address shown thereon) of all property located within the <br /> proposed district." <br /> Commissioner McKee asked if this is doable with the current staff. <br /> Michael Talbert said staff may need extra help to get out 13,000 letters, which would <br /> have to go out 4 weeks prior to a public hearing. He said if the Board would be willing to set a <br /> late March or early April public hearing date, this would give staff adequate time to put together <br /> the details of a district. <br /> Commissioner Gordon asked if the idea was to come back with plan in January. <br /> Michael Talbert said yes, and the idea was that the public hearing dates would be set at <br /> that time. <br /> A motion was made by Commissioner Pelissier, seconded by Commissioner Rich to <br /> direct staff to come back with a plan on January 23 d for public hearings, with the intent to <br /> establish a solid waste district by July 1, 2014. <br /> Commissioner Dorosin said he can support he motion for the hearing, but this does not <br /> mean he will support the district. He said the argument about the value of recycling is counter- <br /> balanced by the value of trying to maintain affordability in the County. He said discussion <br /> about a 1.6 cent tax on the rural areas of the County is troubling, especially when it does not <br /> guarantee more participation than the other option. He is not comfortable with the wording <br /> regarding intent. <br /> Commissioner McKee said he will not support this motion, because he feels the Board <br /> is walking past a viable option with the subscription service. He said this provides a stop gap <br /> option with the ability to see if it will work. He questioned if it is viable to tax when there is no <br /> guarantee that it will mean more participation. He said residents are committed to recycling, <br /> and he does not hear residents in the rural part of the County making arguments against it. He <br /> does not believe there will be a 20 percent drop. <br /> Commissioner Price said she can support the motion, but she does have a problem <br /> with the word "intent." <br /> Commissioner Pelissier said she could withdraw the word "intent", but she feels there <br /> does need to be some level of intent. <br /> Commissioner Pelissier said she would like to vote on her original motion first and see <br /> where things stand. <br /> Commissioner Gordon questioned the meaning of the word intent. <br /> Chair Jacobs said there is no point in having a public hearing if there is no willingness <br /> to change the premise. <br /> Commissioner Gordon said she does not think intent means a commitment. <br />