Agenda - 05-04-1992 (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

The Chapel Hill Public Works staff saw that by reducing the tipping fees for UNC's ash, they could keep a major customer from going elsewhere. Neighboring counties had in fact welcomed the ash. Public Works was clearly guided by immediate costs rather than a sound waste management plan. The county commissioners initially voted down this proposal. At the next commissioners meeting, however, they waited until 11:30 p.m. when most of the concerned audience had left, and then voted to accept the reduced price to keep the ash. This action disregards the fact that landfill volume must be kept to a minimum, and favors only the interests of the landfill business. Commissioner Wilhoit asks us to believe his reassurances that the landfill will not accept garbage from out of the county. The Orange County Citizens' Landfill Council, however, presented him with a petition several weeks ago requesting a resolution to ban out -of- county trash. The commissioners still have not acted on that petition. The commissioners refuse to ban out -of- county solid waste, and voted to underbid other landfills to keep UNC ash. At the same time the LOG seeks huge tracts of Northern Orange County land which are suspiciously convenient to both Durham and Chapel Hill. This apparent coincidence ected officials in serious questions range Counryt solid waste policies and about the integrity of some The process of public input has been severely compromised by manipulated votes, faulty reasoning and midnight decisions. The Orange County commissioners must hold the LOG accountable for a fair and open site-selection ocess, n ddirect them s which have reconvene the LSC before spending $�O000 If taxpayers' commissioners can revote on UNC's been selected by a faulty and tainted process. ash, surely they can permit a revote of the.LSC.