Minutes 04-01-2014 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

1) Fairness and Equity - He said this proposal has been marketed as a small amount of money equal to the current rate for the average house. He said this is not dealing in averages, and some people will pay much more than average, and some will pay less. He said he has heard about other increases, and the additive effect of all of these increases grows to an astronomical rate. He said he does not understand why the Board is trying to implement a tax scheme with a monopoly that has no constraints on future increases. He said the rates should be all flat or all progressive. 2) Recycling Participation — He said Orange County has been a leader in recycling for many years, before and during recycling pickup; and it will continue to be a leader in the future, no matter what plan is elected. He said the County would not have been able to achieve this without aggressive rural resident participation. 3) No Choice — He said he took his trash and recycling on the same trip and this is the practice most of the time. He said it makes no sense that he would be forced to pay for something he doesn't need. He said the roll cart would not be suitable for him. Mark Marcoplos said he lives in Bingham Township. He said this proposal has been under consideration with the Board of County Commissioners for more than a year now, and it is no closer to a clear resolution. He said the lack of clear information has resulted in testimony and letters being submitted from people who are not even in the proposed district. He said the County has not checked the addresses of citizens who have spoken at their meetings to see if these residents live in the proposed district. He said the end result is that neither the public nor the media really know the extent of support or criticism for this proposal. He said there are people living in dense areas that would like the service and support the modest tax. He said there are also people in the district that live down long driveways and would not use the service. He said these residents generally support recycling and haul it to the centers, along with household trash. He said the state policy has forced the creation of a district that has clusters of density separated by areas of scattered households. He said the connecting zones have a practical reason to not use the service. He said none of this investment of time and money to explore the tax option would have been necessary if the Board of County Commissioners had kept the 3-R fee. He said it is unclear that the attorney's opinion on the possibility of a legal challenge merited the scrapping of the 3-R fee. He would like to re-instate the fee and concentrate efforts on the adoption of a comprehensive plan. He feels it is essential that Orange County have its own transfer and recycling station at the same location. He said this will end the increasing cost of trucking waste to transfer stations; reduce pollution; and allow for future collection of both household waste and recyclables. He said the most cost effective location is near 1-40 and the Chapel Hill/Carrboro urban zone, which generates most of the solid waste. He referred to available land near the Chapel Hill Town Operations Center. Stan Cheran lives in rural Orange County and said he would like to join with many of his rural neighbors in expressing opposition to a fee for a service that he does not use and will never use. He lives on an unpaved road and hauls his recyclables and trash to the convenience centers. He said if he chose to put out his recyclables he would still have to haul trash. He finds the proposed mandatory fee objectionable and not appropriate for a County as progressive and enlightened as this. He said it is not a matter of cost, but it is a matter of principle. Steve Hopper lives in Efland. He is opposed to the tax, and he has been doing research on the issue. He said most people he has spoken with did not realize that this will be a progressive and variable tax. He said this is a strange way to fund this service. He