Agenda - 06-03-2014 - 6a - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

19 1 The Board started the process discussing options for rural recycling at a time when the County 2 was going it alone with all aspects of solid waste. He said on the 13th the Board will be 3 discussing an inter -local agreement which brings them back into discussion with their partners. 4 He said staff has been trying to meet with vendors and advocates to get fresh ideas on various 5 aspects of waste reduction. He said the frequently asked questions list is up to 70 questions, 6 and the Board has not even discussed these. He said the Board has not decided that the only 7 option is to fund with the general fund. He said he feels more confident that the Board can 8 come up with a good plan through working with its partners. He said this is a proactive way to 9 look at the issue; marshal resources; create partnerships; ask the right questions; and articulate 10 goals before moving forward. 11 Commissioner Dorosin said one thing that came out of the hearings that was 12 disheartening to him was the opposition to using property tax instead of a fee. He said property 13 tax is a progressive tax, and it is the fairest way to distribute those costs. He said flat fees hurt 14 lower wealth residents. He said, when thinking about social justice and equity, property tax is 15 the best way of addressing the fairness in taxation. 16 Commissioner Pelissier said everyone has trash and recyclables. She said one of the 17 problems is that residents look at solid waste as an individual service, while the County looks at 18 it as a program for solid waste reduction and reducing the carbon footprint. She said it is easy 19 to get caught up in the perception of this as an individual service and it is a hard thing to 20 communicate the difference. She said that it was clear that the public is overwhelmingly 21 against the solid waste district tax. She said many who opposed the service district spoke out 22 in the public hearings, but what the public and media did not see were the many emails that the 23 Board received in support of this tax district. She said she would like to have a way to put this 24 information on the internet to allow people to see this support. She feels there were many more 25 emails in favor of this, than against it. 26 Commissioner Rich thanked Commissioner Pelissier for pointing this out and said she 27 feels it is important for all of the voices to be heard. She said most of the emails she received 28 were in favor of the tax. She said these emails should be public. 29 Commissioner McKee said most of the emails he received were against the tax. 30 Commissioner Gordon said she is going to remain optimistic. She had hoped the Board 31 would be in a position to make a decision tonight, but this is not going to happen. She said her 32 optimism is that the Board might be able to come up with some steps for moving forward at the 33 May 13th work session. 34 Commissioner Price said she received a lot of emails from people wanting the tax, but 35 most of these people lived close to urban areas. She agreed with Commissioner McKee that 36 there were a lot of emails and written notes from those in the district who were opposed to the 37 tax. She said the rural residents already have to take trash to the convenience centers, and 38 many rural residents also own vacant property that would be a tax burden. 39 Chair Jacobs asked Information Technology staff to pull out every email that related to 40 solid waste tax district and post it on the County website. He said there were very cogent and 41 impassioned emails from both sides, and the public should be able to see this. 42 Chair Jacobs said the Board needs to pull back into the same orbit with all of the 43 partners involved before making any further decisions. He said there needs to be a plan for 44 some sort of work group or entity. 45 Commissioner Rich suggested the addition of some parameters to avoid the upcoming 46 work session being an open ended event. 47 Commissioner Pelissier said the Board needs to clearly articulate the Board's desire to 48 continue rural recycling. She suggested giving staff direction to add on the additional homes for 49 recycling, and she would like clarification that this could be done for the same cost of the 50 current services. She said there needs to be a plan for what will be done next fiscal year