HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - 19950629APPROVED 8/22/95
MINUTES
ORANGE COUNTY ASSEMBLY OF GOVERNMENTS MEETING
JUNE 29, 1995
The Orange County Assembly of Governments meeting was held on
Thursday, June 29, 1995 at 5:00 p.m. at the Homestead Community
Center, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Moses Carey, Jr., and
Commissioners Stephen Halkiotis, Alice Gordon, Bill Crowther and Don
Willhoit.
CARRBORO BOARD OF ALDERMEN PRESENT: Mayor Eleanor Kinnaird, and
Aldermen Hank Anderson, Randy Marshall, Jay Bryan, Jacquelyn Gist, and
Mike Nelson.
CHAPEL HILL TOWN COUNCIL PRESENT: Mayor Ken Broun and Council Members
Joyce Brown, Joseph Capowski, Mark Chilton, Pat Evans, Lee Pavao, and
James Protzman.
HILLSBOROUGH BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Mayor Horace Johnson,
and Commissioners Evelyn Lloyd, Richard Simpson and Remus Smith.
INTRODUCTIONS: Chair Carey convened the meeting at 5:10 p.m. and
requested that Commissioner Willhoit present his perspective as Chair
of the Landfill Owners Group. Commissioner Willhoit indicated that
Orange County is at a crossroads in solid waste management. He
mentioned that the citizen participation program for solid waste
management planning began in 1984 with the acquisition of the Green
tract. He mentioned that the approach used at that time to decide,
announce and defend, proved to be ineffective. It did, however, result
in citizens becoming organized. An Orange County Solid Waste
Committee was established in 1984. Former Chapel Hill Mayor Wallace
later called for the establishment of a Regional Solid Waste Group.
Upon the dissolution of that regional group, Orange County reorganized
and established a search committee charged with locating a site for a
landfill in Orange County. In 1986, Alamance County was invited to
join the effort. They did attend a meeting at which time they
suggested picking a landfill site in Alamance County. Their
suggestion was that Orange County pay for the landfill and Alamance
County would be the host. Orange County chose not to go that route
with Alamance and decided to locate a site in Orange County. This
process has continued since that time. He mentioned that it was
recently voted by the L.O.G. membership to recommend that the
membership of the L.O.G. be expanded. He expressed frustration over
the missed opportunities for recycling. It is time to move along in
the process. The L.O.G., in its expanded version, will be in a
position to address the strategy for making the decisions which must
be made.
Gayle Wilson, Chapel Hill Solid Waste Administrator, mentioned
that the Landfill Site Search process was begun in 1989. The issues
decided upon at that time were 1) to have diverse citizen involvement
in the process, 2) to make sure the search would be public and 3)
obtain the services of an experienced technical consultant. Joyce
Engineering was ultimately hired for that job. The Committee first
established criteria which were used by the consultant to screen the
entire County to determine which areas were not suitable for the
proposed landfill. After this screening was completed, a set of
ranking criteria was established out of which sixteen possible sites
were identified. An additional list of criteria were then applied and
a process was developed which eliminated all potential sites except
for the one chosen. Actions taken in the last several years have
extended the life of the current landfill. The process of the site
selection for the landfill has brought recycling issues to the
forefront of citizens attention. It has been an extraordinary
educational tool. The final decision on the site selection has been
made and the Landfill Owners Group is deliberating on the selection.
It is probable that at the August L.O.G meeting they will begin
discussion of the process to be used to move toward a final
recommendation.
Sonna Lowenthal, Chapel Hill Assistant City Manager, presented a
report on the Landfill Reorganization and Finance Working Group. The
purpose of this group is to determine who will finance the landfill,
how it will be financed and exactly who will own it. Last spring the
L.O.G. suggested that a group of representatives from the three owning
bodies as well as the Town of Hillsborough consider the issues of
ownership and financing in order to make a recommendation to the
governing bodies. A report was commissioned from Womble, Carlyle,
Sandridge and Rice PLLC. They presented possible options of political
structures which could be established for ownership and financing of a
landfill. At the last meeting the goals and objectives which were
adopted by each governing body were reviewed with the intention of
organizing and removing redundancies. These goals and objectives will
then guide the new structure.
In response to a question, Gayle Wilson indicated that the
increase in the projected cost of land for a landfill and construction
is approximately 50 - loo each year. He also indicated that the life
of the current landfill is approximate 8 or 9 years.
Commissioner Halkiotis commented on Alderman Nelson's letter
dated June 29, 1995. Nelson indicated that 1/3 of the material going
to the landfill is recyclable. That statistic came from the Waste
Source which was done by a consultant hired to determine what was
being taken to the landfill. He asked if increasing recycling now
could significantly increase the life of the current landfill. Gayle
Wilson indicated that the ban on cardboard will add approximately 8
months to the life of the facility. However, it is unlikely that
anything will be implemented quickly enough to significantly extend
the facility's life.
Commissioner Willhoit mentioned that Alamance County owns and
operates the landfill but they do not collect solid waste or have a
green box system. This means that they are in a position to tell the
municipalities what they will and will not accept. In Orange County
it is more complicated because the County is actually a part of the
problem as well as the solution. One thing that is a possibility is
to increase the tipping fee now to begin saving money for the
acquisition of land and the operation of the facility.
Council Member Brown mentioned that there was an immediate and
drastic reduction in material going to the landfills in Wayne and
Alamance Counties upon their refusing to accept the recyclable
materials and/or instituting a pay-as-you-throw system. The clear
plastic bags used in many counties allow the staff to tag and refuse
pick-up for bags containing recyclable materials. Sometime in the
recent past, a resolution was passed by each of the governing boards
to have staff work together on a regional effort. That staff work is
occurring and a report will be forthcoming in the fall.
Commissioner Willhoit stated that counties with a large amount of
industry are able to institute drastic reductions in solid waste going
to the landfill when pay-as-you-throw systems are implemented.
However, Orange County does not have a great deal of industrial waste.
He also suggested that recycling containers could be required to be
placed at every drink machine and in each location where a waste
receptacle is located.
Alderman Nelson mentioned that the recycling cost is $20 per
household per year for County residents compared to $106 per household
for Carrboro and $167 for Chapel Hill.
Council Member Evans asked if regional cooperation in regard to
waste management is being considered. Commissioner Willhoit indicated
that regional cooperation is not being considered at this time with
the exception of construction and demolition waste.
Blair Pollock, Chapel Hill Recycling Program Manager, mentioned
that a regional group consisting of Wake, Chatham, Durham and Orange
Counties have been exploring possibilities for solid waste. The most
substantive effort has been in the area of hazardous waste. In the
near future four household hazardous waste centers will be open. Each
of the four participating Counties will have a collection center which
will be open a minimum of one day each month. Several ideas for
disposal have been explored. Wake County has indicated that they may
have a surplus of landfill space and Montgomery County may be willing
to set up a construction and demolition waste site. However, these
solutions would depend on moving large amounts of low value material a
long distance which may not be financially practical. He is not at all
certain that this can be a financially viable effort. There has been
no formal proposal. However, a report will be presented in the fall.
Mayor Broun pointed out that this possibility is an important
factor in the siting of a landfill. If, through cooperation with
other counties, Orange County might have a compostable waste site
rather than a landfill, that needs to be made clear.
Alderman Gist mentioned that many of the members of the
reorganization group are concerned about the social equity issue of
the landfill siting. As a fairly wealthy county, it could be tempting
to find a poorer county to receive our waste. This is neither fair
nor responsible as it is proven to be easier to ignore the
consequences of waste if it is not disposed of in the community of
origin.
Gayle Wilson mentioned that data was gathered on the racial and
income composition of the census block group for six out-of-county and
Orange County's in-county landfill facilities. The Owners Group had
agreed that income and race are key criteria with respect to social
equity. He mentioned that the options for centralized waste disposal
were centralized composting, construction/demolition waste, transfer
landfill space and sludge and mixed paper composting.
Mayor Kinnaird mentioned that a social issue with regard to
privatization is that salaries and benefits paid to the employees of
the private companies are often significantly lower than that of the
local governments. That needs to be considered.
Commissioner Halkiotis attended the Composting in the Carolina's
conference in Charlotte and was intrigued by the efforts in North
Carolina. Orange County is not a part of that effort and they need to
be more involved.
Blair Pollock presented a status report on the Integrated
Solid Waste Study. This group has been researching ways in which this
community can work together to develop a plan incorporating waste
prevention, collection processing and final disposal. Options were
studied for prevention, collection of recyclable, compostables and
waste and then final disposal options. The first two steps of this
study have been completed. A set of evaluation criteria for the
different methods of meeting objectives was established as well as
ways to actually meet the objectives. The third phase will be an
evaluation of the three systems for waste prevention, collection and
processing. This report, in its entirety, is in the permanent agenda
file in the Clerk's office.
Council Member Protzman mentioned that it has been suggested that
citizens could pay for collection by a unit measurement rather than
through property taxes. The assumption is that the economic incentive
would make people want to throw away less trash. This study shows
that pay-as-you-throw falls behind public education and non-economic
incentives in terms of diverting materials from the waste stream. How
should this information be taken into account as decisions are made in
regard to trash collection and payment methods? Will a recommendation
be forthcoming on whether or not a pay-as-you-throw collection system
should be implemented?
Blair Pollock indicated that the cost of implementation and
expected amount of waste diversion will be made clear. He recommended
looking at the report for the tables of percentages of diversion as
well as looking at the scores. Items other than percentage of
diversion received points as well. Issues such as social equity, ease
of implementation and public opposition were taken into account.
Mayor Kinnaird mentioned that
wealthy and poor families pay the
under a pay-as-you-throw system.
tax system.
another equity issue is that
same amount for their collection
This is not the case when using the
This portion of the meeting was completed. The floor was open
for comments on other topics of mutual interest.
Alderman Hank Anderson commented that the joint Recreation and
Parks Committee has met and identified work tasks. A report will be
completed and presented to the elected officials in December, 1995.
He also reminded the group that when the landfill was sited in 1972
promises were made to the neighbors. Those residents are upset about
the lack of follow through on those promises. The elected officials
need to be willing to facilitate a discussion of this issue with the
residents.
Chair Carey mentioned that the L.O.G could engage these residents
in a conversation regarding recreational uses for this land when the
landfill is closed.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned.
Moses Carey, Jr., Chair
Kathy Baker, Deputy Clerk