Minutes 05-08-2014 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Michael Talbert said this issue has been looked at for a little over a year, and there are 60 pages of history on where this has been. He said this is not about going over that again, but this is about looking at what the County could do and what the legal options are for the future. He referred to page 4 of the abstract and reviewed the following issues and decisions to be discussed: Issues to be discussed at May 13, 2014 Work Session • Discussion of Frequently Asked Questions from the Public Hearings (see Attachment 9) • Does the County want to continue Rural Curbside Recycling, and if so, what is the customer base - the existing rural district (13,700 customers) and/or additional customers • How does the County fund Rural Curbside Recycling for Fiscal 2014/2015 • Recycling and Solid Waste issues with the County's partners • Other ways to provide recycling services and look at options • New Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement •A stable funding source for recycling that is fair and equitable • Discuss different options for servicing high density rural residential clusters, including costs/benefit analysis Decisions by July 1, 2014: • Does the County want to continue Rural Curbside Recycling, and if so, what is the customer base, the existing rural district (13,700 customers) and/or additional customers • How does the County fund Rural Curbside Recycling for Fiscal 2014/2015 Michael Talbert said the above decisions are in the budget, and staff is recommending continuation of services to the existing customers and moving forward with the roll carts. He said the proposal for funding at this point is to use the reserves for the upcoming fiscal year. He said a work group, task force, and/or a solid waste advisory board could examine this issue for moving forward. Chair Jacobs said he would be meeting with the Mayors again soon, and this will be a major topic of conversation as they try to find a common approach to this issue. PUBLIC COMMENT Jan Sassaman said he understood that no decisions will be made tonight. He said he has some expertise with Orange County's solid waste management systems. He said the Board of County Commissioners needs to decide on funding for rural curbside recycling now. He said the Board has kicked the can so far down the road that it is running out of road. He said whatever decision is made should be: 1) consistent with what is expected from the municipal partners; 2) designed to maximize citizen participation in recycling; and 3) should equitably allocate costs among eligible citizens. He said combining rural, municipal and family curbside collection, paid for by the general fund, may be the most cost effective and equitable approach. He said it would also provide a political incentive to extend curbside recycling throughout the County. He said this would cost about 1.4 cents on the tax rate. He said this solution is not currently before them, so the tax district is still the best interim solution. He said a voluntary subscription service will not likely be cost effective or achieve recycling goals. He said paying from landfill reserves is not prudent or equitable, as these funds were derived from all County and town residents who have used