Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
Minutes - Regular Meeting <br /> Solid Waste Advisory Board <br /> August 2, 2007 <br /> Approved September 6, 2007 <br /> Combined with that there will be the first element of the commercial recycling and <br /> solid waste evaluation. The commercial piece is to try and solicit the interest of the <br /> commercial community . There has been a series of meetings with the Chapel Hill- <br /> Carrboro Chamber of Commerce, the Economic Development division of Orange <br /> County, the Visitor ' s Bureau, the Hillsborough-Orange County Chamber, and the <br /> Chapel Hill Downtown Partnership, to expose the idea of commercial recycling . They <br /> are on board with ways to look at that. We will recommend to the work group a <br /> process where we go out and get information through a series of focus groups and use <br /> that to produce a survey - survey the business community based on what the focus <br /> groups tells us they are interested in solid waste and recycling and drive that towards <br /> some options . Options will include publicly owned and operated services, franchise <br /> services or use regulations to drive materials out of the waste stream into the <br /> recycling bim. Those analyses will help us form the plan . <br /> Because this is such an information- dense process, there are so many pieces to the <br /> individual pieces that they are taking a long-time, the integration will take a long <br /> time . We will probably propose at the next work group meeting, hopefully to be held <br /> next month, to do a placeholder, interim plan and get off the State ' s list of not <br /> complying and continue the work on the plan. <br /> Smith asks is it your opinion that the work group recommend a MRF to put pressure <br /> on the County Commissioners to make a decision. <br /> Vickers states that it is sort of like a hazardous waste incinerator, it may make the <br /> most technical, feasible and economic sense but politically it will not happen. <br /> Pollock states that what is interesting about the work group is nominally you have <br /> four elected officials in the room . It is a good opportunity to get a litmus test with the <br /> elected officials about their feelings regarding that. If you want to look at the <br /> numbers and regardless of what the numbers say, ask them their opinion . <br /> Wilson states that this process will give us the data and the analysis that will allow <br /> anyone that wants to know what the benefits are, if any, of having a local MRF . The <br /> material will be picked up and processed somewhere . The elected officials will do <br /> what they think is right and feasible . <br /> Sassaman states that there are two issues — we said earlier there is little chance of <br /> having a MRF on the Eubanks Rd . property and there is a finite possibility that they <br /> could decide to site a MRF elsewhere . <br /> Norwood states that our job is to come up with any convoluted ideas we can <br /> regardless of if we feel that. way, and present them . We can' t make them make <br /> decisions . We shouldn' t put ourselves in a position that we don' t propose ideas . If we <br /> 5 <br />