Minutes 06-17-2014 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

* assuring long-term partnership of the entities involved through an interlocal agreement on waste handling and disposal; * addressing equitable funding and mechanisms for establishing fees and making future joint decisions; * future use of closed landfill sites; * investigation of partnership possibilities involving neighboring jurisdictions; * feasibility of innovative and cost-effective, environmentally-sound methods of disposal of solid waste beyond burial; * potential inclusion of biosolids in long-range disposal plans; * emergency storm debris planning * treatment of communities impacted by siting of any facilities either within Orange County or beyond its borders to receive shipments of waste. The Towns' and County staffs created a detailed outline from which the draft preliminary Interlocal Agreement for Solid Waste was produced. Due to time constraints and a need for elected official level guidance, there are remaining unresolved operational issues and policy decisions yet to be discussed and will be included in the recommendations from Solid Waste Advisory Group. The known unresolved operational issues to be addressed by the SWAG are listed below, but are not limited to: • Creation of a permanent advisory committee/group to advise the parties to the Agreement, including rules of procedure, mission, composition, etc.; • More thorough definition of outstanding debt as it relates to termination or withdrawal; • How to bring the University into substantive discussions with regard to becoming a party to the Agreement; • The degree of involvement and the role of the parties to approve proposed fee increases versus County discretion; • Degree of program/operational detail with regard to current recycling and waste reduction programs and services that should be incorporated into the Agreement; and • The level of flexibility, discretion, accountability and authority the County will maintain as the lead agency with regard to ongoing operations, budget, facilities and policies versus the elements requiring notification to or approval or consent from the parties. Michael Talbert said the financial impact of this has not yet been determined. He said the Board's purpose tonight is to consider this initial draft agreement as a starting point, and to refer this agreement to the SWAG. He reviewed the manager's recommendation. He said ideally a preliminary report would be done and be presented to the Assembly of Governments in November; however this may be difficult since there is public representation on this board that will not be appointed until September. Commissioner McKee said he assumes the Board would appoint the two Commissioners to the SWAG tonight, although he does not see that in the abstract. Donna Baker said this will be done in item 11-e, under appointments. Commissioner Pelissier said she wants to have an inter-local agreement, but she will vote against this because she feels that it really should be a group of elected officials that come up with the framework for how to proceed and what kind of advisory board to have. Commissioner Rich agreed with Commissioner Pelissier and said inter-local agreements happen between bodies of government, and she does not feel the public needs to be involved at this stage.