Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
Draft <br /> Haven-O’Donnell states that trees that are taken down are not representative of what would be <br />in a mature forest. I would like to see the work is more unified. <br /> Hemminger states that can we concentrate on compost options and how we do something that <br />individuals can participate in. <br /> Marcoplos states that thoughts on maintaining the connection. What would you like to see in <br />the future with representation from CFE being connected with us. <br /> Lyvelle states that having someone at our quarterly meetings may be enough of an update for <br />now. <br /> SWAG Priorities – Williams states that items completed are Interlocal Agreement, Rural Curbside <br />Expansion, Develop/Implement Measuring and Tracking Methods. Items ongoing are Cooperative <br />Operations with UNC and UNC Healthcare, and Permanent Northern Emergency Storm Debris <br />Management Site and Assess Effectiveness and Compliance with RRMO. Items we need more <br />information on is Residential Organics/Evaluate Non-Residential Programs/Evaluate Urban <br />Curbside/Consider Options for Non-Municipal Operated Waste Collections Service and Effectiveness and <br />Compliance with RRMO. <br /> Lavelle states that for Residential Organics/Evaluate Non-Residential Programs there has been <br />talk over the years of how restaurants were getting rid of their organics but there was discussion of <br />expanding pickup of organics for residents. <br /> Hammersly states that former Commissioner Jacobs was partly the creator of Evaluate of Non- <br />Residential Programs and the issues of picking up non-residential customers at no cost. <br /> Pollock states that gradually some of the larger customers have been taken off the program and <br />paying their own way. This year we have identified the next tier of large customers. <br /> Marcoplos states that an update of that can be given at the next meeting. <br />Hemminger asks for information on digesters. <br /> Recycling Challenges – Processing Fees Williams states that it was recommended that solid <br />waste programs increase to $142 for the upcoming budget. We are putting together a plan starting with <br />recycling sort to see what’s in the recycling stream. Because of the China Sword which bans materials <br />from the US there is no more revenue sharing. <br /> Ives asks if the processing cost of $125 will move if the recycling stream is cleaner. <br /> Williams states that that has been discussed. We don’t want to be lumped in with other <br />customers bringing in material that isn’t cleaned. <br /> Norris asks if this is a long term down turn. <br /> Williams states that this may be a two or three year process. <br /> Solid Waste Master Plan – Williams states that we will do a plan that guides us for the next 20 <br />years that will include land use, ordinance changes, partnerships with towns and processors. <br /> D. Bell asks what happens to the materials that will be removed from the recycling stream such <br />as glass. <br /> Williams states that we are working on a pilot program to separate glass and build on that <br />information. <br /> Interlocal Agreement Approval Celebrations – Williams states that each jurisdiction get a signed <br />copy. <br />Next Meeting – Doodle poll for June. <br /> <br />Public Comment – None <br /> <br />Meeting adjourned at: 7:40pm <br />Name of Minute Taker Wanda McCain