Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
Minutes <br /> Regular Meeting - Solid Waste Advisory Board <br /> November 8 , 2001 <br /> Jacobs states the State is tapped out in enforcement and support . It is a very <br /> benign system . We might say that we recommend 61 % as of the year the <br /> County took over Solid Waste operations . <br /> Visser states that 61 % is great but if it' s going to cost a billion dollars to do <br /> that we may not want to proceed <br /> Jacobs states we might want to think creatively about our definitions . <br /> Pollock states that based on this year' s calculation against 1991 -92 we are at a <br /> 36 % waste reduction . Arithmetically we are looking to cut 25 % off waste <br /> generation . That boils down to 431 lbs . per person . In another month we will <br /> know if this can be done . <br /> Visser states that the 61 % goal by 2006 is only the goal of the elected officials, <br /> staff and the citizens of Orange County . Another way of looking at it is keep <br /> 61 % but do it by 2011 . The Board of Commissioners has said we should be <br /> patting ourselves on the back for the accomplishments made . We are among <br /> the leaders of the state in per capita reduction . Let' s celebrate . If we get <br /> another one or two percent, that' s cause for celebration. The Commissioners <br /> are faced with practical impacts of what it cost to do that and balance that <br /> against all the other things like affordable housing . <br /> Jacobs states that no one wants to back away from being aggressive or a <br /> leader, but if it' s going to take hundreds of thousands of dollars to achieve <br /> 2 % , then we need to be creative so that we don' t kill ourselves over a self- <br /> imposed political decision . People are going to say " I can' t back down <br /> because then I won' t be pro-environmental' . <br /> Sassaman suggests that maybe it needs to be spent on source reduction <br /> instead of materials handling . <br /> Something came up in one of the subdivisions, we should start to consider <br /> threshold size of a sub- division at which point there would have to be <br /> mandatory recycling containers for the community as opposed to having to <br /> go to house-to - house . We should build in a central location if it' s more than <br /> twenty five houses . I could push that through the planning process . Does this <br /> group think it' s a good idea, will it save us any money ? Maybe as you come <br /> on line, it should be a requirement that you recycle . We could get the existing <br /> later . We' re losing ground because we' re not being aggressive . <br /> 10 <br />