Browse
Search
Agenda - 06-02-2015 - 6a
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
2010's
>
2015
>
Agenda - 06-02-2015 - Regular Mtg.
>
Agenda - 06-02-2015 - 6a
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/1/2015 8:14:05 AM
Creation date
5/29/2015 4:05:40 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
6/2/2015
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
6a
Document Relationships
Minutes 06-02-2015
(Linked From)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\2010's\2015
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
44
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
2 7. Regular Agenda <br />3 <br />4 a. Solid Waste Program Fee Recommendation - Solid Waste Advisory Group <br />5 The Board received the Solid Waste Advisory Group (SWAG) recommendation on the <br />6 funding mechanism for solid waste /recycling programs and considered endorsing the fee, to <br />7 then be communicated to the Towns of Carrboro, Chapel Hill and Hillsborough. <br />8 Gayle Wilson, County Solid Waste Director, said last June the BOCC created the <br />9 SWAG, and this intergovernmental group began meeting in August. He said subsequent to the <br />10 group's creation, additional representatives were added: one from the University of North <br />11 Carolina (UNC) and one from UNC Healthcare. He said in November 2014 the group's primary <br />12 focus became the funding mechanism for the County wide recycling program. He said the staff <br />13 have been meeting and communicating on a regular basis. He said at the November 20th <br />14 Assembly of Governments (AOG) meeting, a preliminary update was given regarding the <br />15 progress of the advisory group. He said on March 26th the AOG met and discussed two <br />16 proposed options for funding the recycling program: <br />17 • option 1: a two part fee; an urban fee and a rural fee and <br />18 • option 2: a single County -wide comprehensive fee <br />19 <br />20 He said at the SWAG meeting on April 1, 2015, SWAG endorsed option 2, and this <br />21 option went back to each governmental entity to vote on. He said Chapel Hill and Hillsborough <br />22 have already met and voted for option 2. He said the Town of Carrboro is meeting tonight. He <br />23 said SWAG is present tonight for a possible decision from the BOCC. <br />24 Gayle Wilson said the County Manager is recommending that the Board of County <br />25 Commissioners endorse the fee recommendation and direct the County Manager to incorporate <br />26 the fee into the proposed Fiscal 2015 -2016 Annual Budget; and direct the County Manager to <br />27 communicate the BOCC decision to the Carrboro, Chapel Hill and Hillsborough Town Managers <br />28 and request that the Towns prepare to incorporate County authorization to assess the Solid <br />29 Waste Programs Fee into their Fiscal 2015 -2016 Budget Ordinances. <br />30 Commissioner Price asked for the criteria if residents are in need of a subsidy for the <br />31 fee. <br />32 Gayle Wilson said there is an income criterion of about $29,000 per year for the <br />33 homeowner of the property. He added the homeowner must reside in the property for which <br />34 they seek a subsidy. He said the current 3 -r fee subsidy will need to be modified to incorporate <br />35 the new fee. <br />36 Commissioner Price requested the lengthening of the hours at the Convenience Centers <br />37 as the rural residents will not be getting curbside service immediately. <br />38 Chair McKee asked to limit the current discussion to questions only. He said debate can <br />39 occur after public comment. <br />40 <br />41 PUBLIC COMMENT: <br />42 Alex Castro, Jr. said he is a rural resident in Bingham Township. He said he is <br />43 concerned about the proposed expansion of the rural curbside recycling. He said many people <br />44 do not have a curb or a short paved way to the road. He added that some residents are <br />45 mobility challenged and hauling a loaded ninety -five gallon recycling bin to the roadside would <br />46 be a strain and a difficult task. He said everyone has a mail box at the road side but not <br />47 everyone has a good location to place a ninety -five gallon bin at the road side. He referenced <br />48 his own property having a forty -five degree slope and being unable to accommodate a bin. He <br />49 said other residents have long, gravel or dirt driveways that make the large bin difficult to move. <br />50 He said the current practice of taking manageable sized containers to the Convenience Centers <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.