Browse
Search
Agenda - 06-23-2005-6b
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
2000's
>
2005
>
Agenda - 06-23-2005
>
Agenda - 06-23-2005-6b
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/22/2013 4:47:40 PM
Creation date
8/29/2008 10:33:07 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
6/23/2005
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
6b
Document Relationships
Minutes - 20050623
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\2000's\2005
RES-2005-054 Resolution Expressing Orange County's Position on One Legislative Item
(Linked From)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Resolutions\2000-2009\2005
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
23
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
conducted by the Albemarle Regional Solid Waste Authority indicates an impact of perhaps <br />$938,000, depending on the specific service expansion taken by the authority.. <br />"Phis bill is a creation of the private hauling industry. As best as we can determine, its unfortunate <br />consequence, or some say its intention, will be to impede /constrain counties and cities from <br />initiating, expanding or changing the manner in which waste or recyclables are collected. Some <br />local government solid waste professionals believe the bill's real long -term intention is to reduce <br />or eliminate local government collection services that presently sometimes compete with private <br />hauling companies. While the bill's sponsor indicates the primary intent of the bill is to resolve <br />an alleged problem/loophole related to annexation law, the original bill did not even contain the <br />present Section 2 relating to the provision of waste collection services in annexed areas; this was <br />only added in the second edition of the bill. <br />Senate Bill 951 appears to have been prepared to protect private waste hauling companies from <br />local governments performing waste collection services, whether these services can be provided <br />more efficiently, comprehensively, or with regard to significantly higher likelihood of'meeting <br />local waste reduction objectives. Local governments, unlike private haulers, do not typically <br />have the option of'picking and choosing clients, avoiding those customers whose particular <br />situation may make these services less profitable, and seek to provide services to all citizens more <br />uniformly. For instance, private haulers do not typically provide recycling services, with the <br />possible occasional exception of cardboard (in thriving market times) and some niche materials, <br />unless they are contracted directly by a specific residence/business or unless the local government <br />pays for (subsidizes) the service. Local governments, in order to insure that recyclable or waste <br />collections are most effectively /efficiently /consistently provided, or desire that their local <br />mandatory recycling ordinances are not ignored/circumvented, occasionally decide to expand or <br />get into the business, Private haulers, understandably, will provide collection services only if <br />there is a profit potential, however, local governments may choose to provide these services in <br />down as well as up market times because of a local environmental ethic and corresponding local <br />ordinances /policies. Local governments are also under a certain level of obligation to try to meet <br />the State's statutory waste reduction goals of 25% and 40 %. They should be allowed to do so, <br />based on their own local circumstances. Recycling programs are already prohibitively expensive <br />without adding unrelated additional expenses.. <br />Senate Bill 951 could be particularly detrimental to local recycling and waste reduction efforts.. <br />The Division of Pollution Prevention and Environmental Assistance has recently determined that <br />the main factor holding back the expansion of recycling businesses in North Carolina is access to <br />supplies of'collected materials. This bill would provide a chilling impact on expansion of <br />recycling collection programs if local governments had to first pay -off hauling companies active <br />in their regions before modernizing or expanding local programs. Publicly funded recycling <br />collection programs must remain flexible in order to expand recycling opportunities, increase <br />public participation, and respond to changing recycling markets. Public recycling programs will <br />be hard- pressed to lower program operating costs per ton and give citizens value for their taxes <br />and fees if'significant portions of funds are diverted to private haulers for no discernable public <br />benefit. This bill could not only result in a stifling of programs that are needed to increase the <br />quantities of collected materials, but would inhibit local government actions that would generate <br />these additional materials,. <br />It is a fact that local governments utilize non - optional fees and taxes to fund waste /recyclable <br />collection services (and numerous other types of'services). SB -951's definition of "displacement" <br />seems to indicate that local governments should be penalized for utilizing these lawful funding <br />sources with regard to the provision of waste services. However, the private sector haulers seem <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.