Agenda - 09-04-2014 - 6a - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

40 1 to the Agreement; 2 • The degree of involvement and the role of the parties to approve proposed fee increases 3 versus County discretion; 4 • Degree of program/operational detail with regard to current recycling and waste reduction 5 programs and services that should be incorporated into the Agreement; and 6 • The level of flexibility, discretion, accountability and authority the County will maintain as 7 the lead agency with regard to ongoing operations, budget, facilities and policies versus the 8 elements requiring notification to or approval or consent from the parties. 9 10 Michael Talbert said the financial impact of this has not yet been determined. He said 11 the Board's purpose tonight is to consider this initial draft agreement as a starting point, and to 12 refer this agreement to the SWAG. He reviewed the manager's recommendation. He said 13 ideally a preliminary report would be done and be presented to the Assembly of Governments in 14 November; however this may be difficult since there is public representation on this board that 15 will not be appointed until September. 16 Commissioner McKee said he assumes the Board would appoint the two 17 Commissioners to the SWAG tonight, although he does not see that in the abstract. 18 Donna Baker said this will be done in item 11-e, under appointments. 19 Commissioner Pelissier said she wants to have an inter-local agreement, but she will 20 vote against this because she feels that it really should be a group of elected officials that come 21 up with the framework for how to proceed and what kind of advisory board to have. 22 Commissioner Rich agreed with Commissioner Pelissier and said inter-local agreements 23 happen between bodies of government, and she does not feel the public needs to be involved 24 at this stage. 25 Chair Jacobs said one possibility is to have the Board appoint elected officials, Chapel 26 Hill elect its representatives, and then this group could meet over the summer while advertising 27 is done for public positions in the larger group. 28 Commissioner Price asked if this means there would still be citizen participation, just not 29 as many, and not as early. 30 Chair Jacobs said it is a good point that the interlocal agreement is between the 31 governments, although he would argue that the University should also be included. He said 32 this does not necessarily require participation of residents who were anticipated to deal with the 33 more complex list of issues that the interlocal agreement covers. 34 Commissioner Gordon said the four groups of elected officials could meet as a phase 1 35 of this group, to define the charge and work on the interlocal agreement, and then phase 2 36 would allow for residents to participate. She said this is a big project, and phase 1, which would 37 be comprised of elected officials, would report back at a time to be determined, and then phase 38 2 would be the full group, who could work for at least a year. 39 Commissioner Pelissier made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Rich to refer the 40 attached draft agreement to a work group of elected officials—two from each of the 41 municipalities and two from the County; and that the group complete their work in time to 42 present to the Assembly of Governments in November; and that part of that interlocal 43 agreement would outline the composition, scope and mission of the advisory board and its 44 purpose. 45 46 Chair Jacobs said the University should be included in this if possible, and they are not 47 elected officials. He said there may not be two elected officials from Chapel Hill immediately. 48 Chair Jacobs offered a friendly amendment to include the University if UNC is willing to 49 appoint representatives, and that there be no specific designation of the number of elected 50 officials.