HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 02-18-1999 - Attachment 8Town
of
Hills gh
TO: Landfill Owners Group Alternative Financing Committee
FROM: Town of Hillsborough Board of Commissioners
DATE: January 27, 1999
SUBJECT: Comments on Solid WastelRccycling Funding Alternatives
~GC. ~x~ ~~o*
~/,$f9~
The Hillsborough Hoard of Conuriissioners held a workshop on January 26'" to discuss arxi evaluate
the four proposed funding alternatives for solid waste and recycling operations in Orange County.
The Board approached this issue with the intent of commenting on conecptual funding philosophies
rather than trying to determine a precise mechanism to address this issue. Since there are an infinite
number of funding alternatives, each possessing irtherent inequities and administrative difficulties,
the Hillsborough Board attempted to focus its comments an the most practical and reasonably
equitable solutions available to address the cast of solid wastdrecycling operations.
The following is a summary of the Board's comments, concerns, and recommendations regarding
the four alternative financing mechanisms:
1. Reveenes Ex ln:iy ly rnm T p~pg,~;
This alternative may be the most equitable and easiest to administer and therefore was worthy of
evaluation. Unfortunately, the Board believes that exclusively increasing tipping fees to fluid
operations while the waste stream is being reducod through recycling would ultimately force haulers
to take their waste to rztore affordable disposal facilities, thus magtifying the problem of providing
a reliable revenue source. For these reasons the Hillsborough Board feels Alternative #1 is nQt a
viable financing mechanuism.
2. Ceuety-wride Prn~ty Tax
While there are some inequity problems associated with this method, the Hillsborough Board feels
this may be an acceptable source of alternate financing for solid waste/recycling operations. The
Hoazd feels that the availability of a MRF would benefit residents equally throughout Orange
County, thus justifying the taxation for a countywide plan. If a countywide tax is used, the Board
suggests Orange County provide a separate line on the tax bills to show/educate the citiiens they are
paying four (4) cents for Solid Waste Disposal/Recycling Operations in the county. Since there is
already apre-existing syste~on in place for property tax collection, administering this financing
mechanism would be one of the easier methods of collecting this revenue.
3_ s.-~tt~t~ittt.-,~ Fee
While there are some inequity problems associated with this method, the Hillsborough Board feels
this may be an acceptable source of alternate financung for solid waste/recycling operations. The
101 Eart Orange Stmt • P.O. Boat 4Z9 • Xillibororagh, North Catollnat 27298
919-7~$-211N • Fax: 919-ef4s-at9ft
Board believes using a "stabilized" fee would be a preferable method of eatabliahing a rate. The
Board also acknowledges the benefit of this mechanism's flexibility to include or exclude tax exempt
or undeveloped properties and to adjust fee stnuturea when appropriate, such as with multi-family
housing. The m$jor concern with this mechanism is the method of administering fee collections,
who would do it and how would it be done?
4. .ach l ris is nn Fs~'bli•_hes, Imnlementa^snd -o lech its a+vn F~
While the Hillsborough Board does IIt1L believe this is the best option, it still appreciates the concept
of giving each local governmental entity the flcxibiliry and freedom to implement the mechanisms
they feel are most appropriate for their jurisdiction. More specifically, the Board believes the
solution should be an integrated countywide plan that is administered by the agency in charge of
solid wastc/rccycling operations. It appears at this point that Orange County will ultimately be the
agency administering these functions. A uniform method of charging and fee collection would
ideally provide for an e#Eicient administration of the program. In addition, centralized administration
of a countywide plan allows the local governments to more easily support and explain the positive
merits of malting these noceasa:y improvements to Orange County's Solid Waste Managemrnt Plan.
For these reasons the Hillsborough Board is concerned that decentralizing authority for fee coAcction
would make it harder to educate citizens. Equally important to the Town of Hillsborough is that the
p~ropOSed Cha1~C 20 Hillsborough under tht$ Option e~arLet a 'fttp revere ~) ce~et t r in icasv tp the
Town. This type of increase would put an excessive burden on Hillsborough and is unacceptable.
Cnn
The Hillsborough Board of Commissioners believe that Alternatives #2, #3, or a combination of #2
and #3 anay be viable financing mechanisms to provide the necessary subsidy to make up for the loss
of tipping fee revenues.