Orange County NC Website
Minutes - Regular Meeting <br /> Solid Waste Advisory Board <br /> October 5 , 2006 . <br /> Approved November 2, 2006 <br /> Sassaman states that there should be two . One for the elected officials and do <br /> something else in the paper . <br /> Pollocks states that the intentions for the newsletter this year as a front page story was <br /> about the plan . <br /> Wilson states the Carrboro Board has asked for an update and we will be there <br /> Tuesday night for that . On October 24 the County has scheduled a work session that <br /> includes solid waste and an update will be given along with landfill gas and the <br /> transfer station . <br /> Sassaman states that I polled Bill Letteri and Bill Strom to see where they [Chapel Hill] . <br /> stood on this . What Chapel Hill wants is a transfer facility for MSW located in Orange <br /> County and prefer it to be on Eubanks Road . Chapel Hill wants to continue the <br /> collection and hauling of MSW . <br /> Wilson asks commercial and residential ? <br /> Sassaman replies residential . Chapel Hill wants a MRF , private or outsource or the <br /> ability for Orange County to transfer recyclables to a MRF . Chapel Hill continues to <br /> support 61 % waste reduction goal . [They] want mixed paper and cardboard collected <br /> at the curb dual stream . Bill Strom added Chapel Hill wants recycling to be at least as <br /> easy as tossing the trash . Chapel Hill wants a legit PAYT option . <br /> Wilson states that there are a couple interesting things in all of this . One is that they <br /> want to continue to haul their residential MSW which may mean that they would be <br /> open to discussing satisfactory arrangement of handling their commercial waste . Also <br /> as required in the interlocal agreement that member governments deliver their waste <br /> to county facility but there is a good deal of residential waste that doesn' t come to our <br /> facility because the Town does not pick up compactors that they are recommending <br /> for large multi-family developments . It would also be interesting to hear why an in- <br /> county MRF is OK as long as it not publicly-operated . It would appear that an in- <br /> county facility is probably closest to nailing most of your principles . <br /> Sassaman states that Kabrick said that Bill Strom says he didn t want a MRF . <br /> Kabrick states it' s complicated by the fact that I think that Bill Strom has zero <br /> confidence in Jim Frey . He didn' t believe any of the numbers he saw . He doesn' t <br /> believe that if it cost $5 million eight years ago it would still cost the same now . Show <br /> me the real cost of building a MRF . If it' s the right thing to do to build an in-county <br /> MRF he' ll get behind it . He' s taking a pre -position that we car t build it for the same <br /> price as eight years ago . <br /> 6 <br />