Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
Minutes <br /> Regular Solid Waste Advisory Board <br /> August 9 , 2001 <br /> and benefits of recycling we agree it ' s nice but abstract until we try to <br /> quantify costs v . size v . amount of materials . The problems come up when <br /> you think of it in terms of quantitative cost vs . size vs . what we have . That' s <br /> when we focus . <br /> Gist recalls previous issues which involved not having enough volume on <br /> our ( Orange County ' s ) own to support a MRF at a profitable level , thus we <br /> would have to import materials and then there would be more traffic to the <br /> neighborhood . It was a matter of size and some labor issues such as paying <br /> a ' living wage ' and how big to build the MRF to accommodate only the <br /> known materials or anticipate influx of materials from others . ) . <br /> Wilson states that the labor issues were were whether we entered into a <br /> contract or have our won employees . Depending on how it' s organized , <br /> however, we would expect all laborers to be paid a living wage and that can <br /> be done contractually . <br /> Visser agrees with the points made by Gist . The labor would be contracted <br /> out, for example, under any arrangement and we would specify a living wage <br /> and any other labor requirements we need them to meet <br /> Wilson states that size was very important . They ( RRSI ) stated that generally <br /> there was enough material to support a modest smaller facility in Orange <br /> County, but the cost could be bought down by increasing the amount of <br /> materials . The more materials that came through the less it would cost the <br /> county . County could share in revenues . Does that include Alamance or <br /> Durham or others , we don' t know but we ran some sensitivity analyses . We <br /> need a specific talk about our situation here rather than a " MRF 101 " . <br /> Barr expresses the need to get sufficient specific info from consultant instead <br /> of just finding out about the merits of a MRF . <br /> Visser states that in terms of scheduling, the major reason this is being <br /> brought up is because of the sub-committee that' s looking at alternative <br /> financing - - it makes sense to do that in the context of what financing <br /> mechanism they are going to need to implement, whatever the solid waste <br /> management plan, whether we need a MRF is absolutely central to how much <br /> it is going to cost . It may be best to dovetail the meeting with the <br /> subcommittee ' s work to see what kind of progress the subcommittee makes . <br /> 7 <br />