Orange County NC Website
Minutes - Regular Meeting <br /> Solid Waste Advisory Board <br /> September 6, 2007 <br /> Approved October 4, 2007 <br /> and several district attorneys was that we are covered under the law as long as we <br /> make it clear that we [Orange County] own the materials . We are now in the process <br /> of preparing a memo to alert the various police departments that we have complied <br /> with what they ' ve asked . There are two gray areas - at the multifamily sites and the <br /> blue bins at the curb . The new labels stating that materials belong to Orange County <br /> will go on the [rolloff] containers next week . Wilson has had some dialog with the <br /> County Attorney about strengthening the County ordinance . <br /> Wilson states that the County Attorney' s office has invited us to provide language to <br /> strengthen any ordinance against theft. Another element of the theft has been at the <br /> [staffed] convenience centers . Some employees have been the culprits and that has <br /> been dealt with and stopped . At a couple of the sites, customers have just taken the <br /> material using threatening language to take the material that' s on the ground, not <br /> containerized . We are trying to have the attendant call the sheriff and stop it one way <br /> or the other . It will get worse as prices go up . The reason this is a problem is because <br /> the revenue from the metal is used to help fund other things we do . <br /> Pollock notes that 600 of the 800 tons that came to the County last year came from the <br /> convenience centers, not directly to the landfill . <br /> Sassaman asks if this board needs to do anything with this . <br /> Wilson states that at this time it' s just for your information. At a later date we may do <br /> an ordinance or formal recommendation that you all may or may not want to endorse . <br /> 4 . Solid Waste Management Plan Work Group Process Pollock states that we are <br /> twenty months behind in our submittal to the State of our three year update of the <br /> ten-year plan . It is a problem for several reasons [outlined in the memo for this <br /> month' s meeting] . The intent is to write an interim plan and we' d like to know if you <br /> want to endorse it. It would be [primarily] a descriptive document that explains <br /> what' s been done and what we plan to do . We' ve introduced mixed paper and that' s <br /> raised rural curbside tonnage 21 % and urban curbside 8 % though in place for only <br /> half a year . Our intent would be to describe the planning process as a substitute for <br /> the prescriptive portion . We would show process as we don' t have product now . If <br /> you agree, we ' d like you to consider the interim plan concept. <br /> Smith asks if at the next meeting the placeholder, interim plan could be presented . <br /> Pollock states that we could give you a detailed outline of what the document will <br /> look like . <br /> Smith favors that. <br /> 2 <br />