Browse
Search
SWAB minutes 090309
OrangeCountyNC
>
Advisory Boards and Commissions - Active
>
Solid Waste Advisory Group
>
Minutes
>
2009
>
SWAB minutes 090309
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/14/2019 4:43:13 PM
Creation date
1/14/2019 4:42:21 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Advisory Bd. Minutes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
19
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Minutes - Regular Meeting <br /> Solid Waste Advisory Board <br /> September 3, 2009 <br /> Approved November 5, 2009 <br /> geographical problems of distributions . Some areas are denser and others less dense <br /> that might make more than one franchise make sense . <br /> Pollock states that the Olver report recommends a maximum of three districts with <br /> one franchisee getting awarded to no more than two . A competitive bidder could get <br /> them all . <br /> Vickers states that aren' t there some parts of the county where no services are <br /> provided because it is too remote ? <br /> Pollock replies that is correct. One of the advantages to franchising is to obligate the <br /> franchisee to provide service . Speaking to the Bradshaw Quarry area issue those <br /> people who are now stating that no one will come out and serve them, the franchisee <br /> would be obligated to provide service under the conditions of the contract. <br /> Yuhasz states that to understand when you say ' mandatory' that means that every <br /> household in the county would be required to take this service ? <br /> Pollock replies that is one way to look at mandatory . A ` soft' mandatory is the model <br /> which eliminates other options except going to the landfill . In other words the <br /> convenience centers might be maintained, but they would only accept things other <br /> than MSW or eliminate them [SWCCs] completely and have only the franchise and <br /> self -haul . The way mandatory was analyzed by Olver was that everyone would have <br /> it and everyone would pay . <br /> Yuhasz asks if the payment would go directly to the solid waste collector in that <br /> situation. <br /> Pollock states that the report, which hasn' t been endorsed, indicates that it might be to <br /> our advantage to act as the fiscal agent, collect the fees and administer the program . <br /> But more typically, the franchisee collects the money . <br /> Sassaman states that on the flip side is it correct that the franchisee would be required <br /> to collect from all households in the area in which it has the operating permit . <br /> Pollock replies in a voluntary situation yes . In a mandatory it is more likely to go <br /> either way, because it could be incorporated into the tax structure or other ways of <br /> collecting . <br /> Sassaman clarifies that he is asking if the franchisee would be able to determine if <br /> there are certain households he would not collect waste from due to access issues . <br /> 4 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.