Orange County NC Website
27 <br /> 1 Chair Jacobs said SWAB had a UNC position, but the university never appointed <br /> 2 anyone and sent a staff person instead, so they were never officially a member. He does not <br /> 3 remember if Hillsborough had one or not. <br /> 4 Commissioner Rich said she attended some meetings years ago, and she did not <br /> 5 remember any one from Hillsborough being there. She asked if Chair Jacobs has spoken with <br /> 6 any at UNC about this. <br /> 7 Chair Jacobs said no. He said he and Commissioner McKee were waiting for the new <br /> 8 manager to set up a meeting with the new Chancellor. He said there has been discussion of <br /> 9 taking the Chancellor on a tour of the County in the fall, to some of the places where there are <br /> 10 joint projects and interests. He said this item was one of the topics planned for that meeting. <br /> 11 Commissioner McKee noted, in response the Commissioner Price's question, that slot <br /> 12 10 and slot 12 are open. <br /> 13 Dorosin proposed the addition of three more residents to the listing, to make it an even <br /> 14 15, with 5 Orange County residents. He feels the current proposal is weighted too heavily <br /> 15 toward government representatives. He said the diverse interest and needs of the people <br /> 16 around the County makes it reasonable to go up to 15. <br /> 17 <br /> 18 PUBLIC COMMENT: <br /> 19 Bonnie Hauser thanked the Board for considering this work group. She loves the idea, <br /> 20 but is confused by the purpose and scope. She thought the goal was to have a one year effort <br /> 21 to clarify the current services and funding equity and to form the basis for a new interlocal <br /> 22 agreement with the towns and an updated service and fee model. She said topics such as <br /> 23 landfills, alternative technologies and handling bio solids are much more strategic and belong in <br /> 24 a different group. She said these issues will take years to resolve and require specific skills and <br /> 25 partnerships. She hoped this workgroup would work on services, costs, and funding for existing <br /> 26 services, such as recycling, waste reduction, convenience centers, and possibly the siting of a <br /> 27 local transfer station. She thought the goal was for a committed interlocal agreement with the <br /> 28 towns and better service and equitable funding for the unincorporated parts of the County. She <br /> 29 said recent testimony from residents revealed that services in the unincorporated area are <br /> 30 broken. She said the County needs to clarify the needs of curbside users versus convenience <br /> 31 center users. She said this suggests the need for at least 2 citizen participants from the <br /> 32 unincorporated area to represent both types of users. She agrees with Commissioner <br /> 33 Dorosin's comment regarding the inclusion of 5 citizens. She said residents remain concerned <br /> 34 about the cost of service, transparency and equitable funding. She hopes the workgroup will be <br /> 35 asked to benchmark services and costs versus other counties. She asked for a limited focus <br /> 36 for the workgroup, to include a 5 year plan for current services. <br /> 37 <br /> 38 Commissioner Pelissier said she is not clear, looking at this list, what this group would <br /> 39 actually accomplish. She said the Board has been asking the towns for years to be in this <br /> 40 together. She would like to see a small group of elected officials come up with an interlocal <br /> 41 agreement to define the process by which these issues are worked out. She suggested the <br /> 42 inclusion of a focus on some of the immediate needs. She said the issue of how to pay for <br /> 43 recycling has been deferred two times. She is afraid that a long list and a large group will <br /> 44 prevent anything concrete from being accomplished by next budget cycle. <br /> 45 Chair Jacobs clarified that this group is charged to come back to the Assembly of <br /> 46 Governments (AOG) meeting in November, after sorting through these issues and prioritizing <br /> 47 them into short and long term needs. He said the thinking was to allow the group to determine <br /> 48 and define what was important in the short and long term plan. He said obviously the majority <br /> 49 of these will not be resolved in a six month period, but it would be up to the group to make the <br />