Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
PROPOSED FIMING MECHANISMS <br />A program such as the MMA program will necessitate additional <br />staff from its inception and will require expansion as more <br />systems are brought into the program. Along with additional <br />staff, other major expenses that should be considered are <br />equipment and lab fees. The staff has explored several ways <br />to fund the program and achieve the goal. <br />The first alternative would be a user fee system for all <br />owners of systems in the program. These fees would be paid <br />annually by the owner and hopefully could be collected <br />through the tax office through a special assessment on the <br />property. The fees would be prorated based on'the size and <br />class of the system. This system would be intensive on the <br />members of the program and the fees may have to be adjusted <br />from time to time to meet the expenses of the program. A <br />disadvantage of this system is that a large group of citizens <br />in Orange County who rely on municipal water supplies would <br />directly benefit from the program without incurring any of <br />the financial burden of the program. This is due to the fact <br />that all classified water supply watersheds are in areas not <br />served by public sewers, thus all of the watershed areas are <br />being developed using on -site sewage disposal technologies. <br />The entire financial burden would be placed on the system <br />owners when in fact other citizens will realize benefits of <br />the program through better protection of both ground and <br />surface waters. <br />The second alternative would be to fund the program from <br />general tax revenues. This mechanism would have each citizen <br />paying equitable amounts to fund the program. This method <br />would not be as intensive on any one individual, and since <br />all members of the county will benefit from the program, the <br />cost burden of the program would be shared. <br />A third alternative that might be considered is a combination <br />of the first two. Certainly some of the costs of the program <br />will directly.i}yenefit the system owner by prolonging the life <br />of the system, thus delaying the expense of repair or <br />replacement of the system. On the other hand, proper <br />operation and maintenance of the systems decreases the risks <br />of surface water and groundwater degradation as well as <br />direct contact with improperly treated sewage. These reduced <br />risks are a benefit to all citizens of the county, not just <br />system owners. <br />Based on conversations with county management, the staff is <br />recommending that the combination approach be used. With <br />this option, inspections of all types of individual home <br />systems would be funded with general tax revenues and home <br />owners with individual systems would not be assessed an <br />27 <br />