Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 02-04-2014 - 7bORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: February 4, 2014 Action Agenda Item No. 7 -b SUBJECT: Scheduling Public Hearings - Proposed Unincorporated County Recycling Service District DEPARTMENT: Solid Waste Management ATTACHMENT(S): 1) Rural Curbside Recycling Impacts of Four Recycling Options 2) Summary of Funding Alternatives for Rural Curbside Recycling Services 3) Draft Rural Tax District Public Hearing Letter and Draft Notice of Public Hearing with Map PUBLIC HEARING: (Y /N) No INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Talbert, 919 - 245 -2308 John Roberts, 919 - 245 -2318 Gayle Wilson, 919 - 968 -2885 PURPOSE: To suggest dates and locations for two public hearings on the proposed Recycling Service District for unincorporated Orange County and provide a summary of possible financing alternatives for rural area recycling. BACKGROUND: At the January 23, 2014 regular meeting, the BOCC directed the County Manager to return at the February 4 meeting with suggestions for public hearing dates, times and locations. The BOCC agreed that there would be two public hearings - one in the southern part of the County and one in the Town of Hillsborough area. A public hearing is required by statute. The proposed hearings are recommended as follows: March 18, 2014 — 6:OOPM — Southern Human Services Center, Chapel Hill April 1, 2014 — 6:OOPM — Department of Social Services, Hillsborough Additionally, upon the BOCC establishing the public hearings, staff has been directed to proceed with mailing the statutorily required notices of the public hearings to the owners of property located in the proposed district by February 14, 2014 and to complete and file the required District Report (including a map of the proposed district) in the office of the Clerk to the Board by February 14, 2014. I As part of both public hearings, the Board will also take comments regarding consideration of: the elimination of rural curbside recycling; a subscription service for rural curbside recycling; and supporting rural curbside recycling with the County's General Fund revenues. At the January 23 Board meeting, the BOCC also suggested that four funding alternatives for Rural Curbside Recycling be considered (including the Solid Waste Service District). These alternatives are outlined in an attachment. FINANCIAL IMPACT: The financial impact for first class mailing and printing of notices for the public hearings is estimated at $13,000. RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends that the Board establish public hearings as follows: Public Hearing #1 Public Hearing #2 Date: March 18, 2014 Date: April 1, 2014 Time: 6:00 PM Time: 6:OOPM Location: Southern Human Services Location: OC Department of Social Services, Center, Chapel Hill Hillsborough The Manager further recommends that the Board direct staff as to which Recycling options staff should include within the Public Hearing advertisement. t Attachment 1 Rural Curbside Recycling Impacts of Four Recycling Options 1, Eliminate Rtiral Ctirbsi(le Re(.".,yc1ing Services and rely on convenience centers f. all rd,:ral re( :., c1ing.' County Impacts: Will increase recycling volume at existing Solid Waste Convenience Centers and possibly require new or expanded Solid Waste Convenience Center sites. Financial Impact: New or expanded Solid Waste Convenience Center sites; Cost of a new Solid Waste Convenience Center $1,350,000 (based on Walnut Grove Church Road without the cost of land) Estimated Annual Operating Costs of a new Solid Waste Convenience Center $ 300,000 Stibscription Ser,vice four, he existing Rtiral Ctir side Re( :., cling (pt —/ n or, pt —otil) County Impacts: A Subscription Service would take six months to implement and likely decrease recycling volumes in the County. Financial Impact: Rural Curbside recycling fees would be established by the Board based on the number of customers that request the rural services. Estimated Annual Costs $ 630,000 (based on a 13,700 existing customer base) If 60 % of the 13,700 existing customers billed the 3R fee in fiscal 2012/2013 (8220 customers), request recycling services, the Annual household fee is estimated to be: $ 76.64 M 3, Establishment of a Rtiral Solid Waste to Service istric four, he existing rivr l Ctirbside Recycling Program County Impacts: Existing Rural Curbside program would remain in place with the potential to expand the recycling services and maximize operational efficiencies. Financial Impact: Rural Curbside recycling district tax rate would be established by the Board based size of the proposed district. Estimated Annual Costs $ 630,000 (based on a 13,700 existing customer base) A property tax rate of 1.5 cents per $100 of assessed value in the tax district is estimated to provide revenues of $630,000 annually a. Rtiral Ctir si(le- Recycling four, he 13,700 existing ctisto�rner s. County & Towns Impacts: Funding from the General Fund would reverse the Board's policy that made Solid Waste and Recycling Services self- supporting. Existing Rural Curbside program would remain in place funded by the County's property tax, which would be paid by all County residents, not just by the residents receiving rural curbside recycling services. Town residents and County residents not receiving services would supplement rural curbside recycling. Financial Impact: General Fund property tax revenues would be appropriated by the Board based on the size and scope of the rural curbside recycling program. Estimated Annual Costs $ 630,000 (based on a 13,700 existing customer base) A property tax rate of .4 cents per $100 of would generate revenues of $630,000 annually County & Town Impacts: Funding from the General Fund would reverse the Board's policy that made Solid Waste and Recycling Services self- supporting. Existing Urban, Rural Curbside, and Multifamily programs would remain in place funded by the County's property tax, which would be paid by all County residents, not just by the residents receiving rural curbside recycling services. An Urban recycling fee would no longer be levied by the Towns and the property tax would generate revenues to fund the programs Financial Impact: General Fund property tax revenues would be appropriated by the Board based on the size and scope of Urban, Rural Curbside, and Multifamily programs. A property tax rate of between 1.4 and 2.0 cents per $100 of assessed value is estimated to provide revenues necessary to fund of Urban, Rural Curbside, and Multifamily programs. Detail service delivery and pricing estimates will be needed to be completed to confirm the estimated costs of services. u Attachment 2 Summary of Funding Alternatives for Rural Curbside Recycling Services • Eliminate the Rural Curbside Recycling Service and Rely on Solid Waste Convenience Centers for all Rural Recycling This option would require all residents in the unincorporated area of the county to utilize a solid waste convenience center for recycling. It would likely necessitate the siting of new neighborhood style convenience centers (at least three new ones) and expansion of current centers to manager larger quantities of recyclable materials than current capacity provides. No cost analysis is available for this option, but additional capital and ongoing operational costs could be substantial. o Pros • Many rural residents that recycle currently utilize five existing centers. • Eliminates expenditures for curbside services in unincorporated area of County, including need for service district or subscription service. o Cons • Centers would have to be expanded and new center siting considered to manage entire unincorporated County quantity of materials. • Expenditures for new centers, acquisition or leasing of property and expansion of existing centers. • Collection savings offset some by necessity to provide additional servicing of materials at centers. • Significant public opposition to siting new centers can be expected. • Lack of recycling convenience would almost certainly reduce participation in recycling and lower quantity of recovered recyclables. • Counties that rely exclusively on convenience centers for recycling don't have as successful waste reduction programs as those that also provide curbside service. • It would take time to plan and implement new centers. • Traffic at existing centers could increase and cause delays; if PAYT was to be implemented in the future, additional delays would be experienced. • Subscription Service for the Existing Curbside Recycling Service (Opt -In and Pay requirement) This option would provide county delivered curbside recycling service to the unincorporated portions (within a specific area or county -wide) of the County. No cost analysis has been conducted for this option. o Pros o Cons Would eliminate those who do not choose to utilize the curbside recycling service from paying for the service and the cost of carts for those residences. Resident chooses whether to participate in recycling service or not; equitable. Subscription revenue would be difficult to estimate and would likely not provide stable and predictable funding; may require general fund subsidy. 7 • Stand -alone subscription services historically do not advance recycling and instead is likely to create a set -back in recycling participation /recovered materials as considerably fewer residents will be expected to participate. • Would almost certainly make meeting the locally adopted 61 % waste reduction goal significantly more challenging. • Would require the establishment of a billing and tracking system within the department and potentially related additional resources; would need to encourage subscribers (market to increase participants) and ensure payment. • Allows residents to forgo responsibility for waste reduction in rural areas. • May require extra fee for special elderly /disabled residents. • It would take about six months to plan and implement subscription services. • Efficiency of routing to be examined vis -a -vis cost of service to be provided. (cost to serve sporadic population may be too high for those who want service); as cost for service increases participation (and revenue) will decrease causing further service cost increases. • Establishment of a Rural Solid waste Service District (as presented at January 23, 2014 Board meeting) This option would establish a rural solid waste service tax district that would provide universal bi- weekly curbside recycling services (with roll carts) within the district. It is estimated that the rate for this option would be approximately 1.5 cents per $100 assessed value to provide revenue of about $630,000. o Pros • Service cost for property valued at $250,000 is approximately $37.50 /household, which compares favorably with previous rural recycling fee of $38 /household. • All residents within district would be eligible for the service. • Universal service would be expected to result in high level of participation, especially when coupled with distribution of roll carts. • Very efficient service relative to cost per household; good financial economy of scale. • Allows participation of elderly /disabled through special collection service • May reduce trips to convenience centers and the associated negative environmental impacts. • Stable and predictable funding. • District can be expanded in the future. o Cons • Requires residents to pay who do not recycle or recycle through other means. • Requires a detailed process to establish service district. • Likely opposition to any new tax regardless of the service provided. • General Fund Supported Program a) This option would provide rural curbside recycling for the 13,700 existing customers. Cost to provide services in the current service area, expanded to the area proposed for the service district option, would be about $630,000. Property tax rate would be approximately 0.4 cents per $100 assessed value to all taxable real property in the County to provide revenue of about $630,000. o Pros • Most easily understood, explained and administered funding option. • Stable, flexible and predictable source of funding. • Entire unincorporated area could be phased in over a relatively short period of time. o Cons • Inequitable for municipal taxpayers who would pay for municipal curbside service through a fee restricted to municipalities, but who would also contribute to general fund to pay for rural curbside recycling service. • Contrary to historical enterprise fund approach to funding many solid waste services. b) This option would provide general fund financing for urban curbside, rural curbside and multi - family recycling (residential) services county -wide (both municipal and unincorporated services). No cost analysis has been conducted on providing this multi - jurisdictional service; however cost estimates have been performed for multi - family, urban curbside and rural curbside excluding only the portion of the unincorporated area not included within the previously proposed solid waste service district. Therefore, we extrapolate that these services (including county -wide rural curbside recycling) could be provided for $3.2 million dollars or 2 cents per 100 assessed value. o Pros • Easily understood, explained and administered funding option. • Stable, flexible and predictable source of funding. • Would eliminate fee requirement for municipalities (except for portion of Chapel Hill in Durham County); reduce fee management responsibility from Towns. • Reasonably equitable between municipal and unincorporated funding participation. • Would provide for truly universal residential recycling services. • Least administrative effort by staff to manage funding for residential services. o Cons Would require Towns to agree to move from already agreed fee funding process to county general fund financing. Contrary to historical enterprise fund approach to funding many solid waste services. 9 Attachment 3 February 14, 2014 Fb: Public Hearing to discuss Solid Waste Service Tax District Dear Property Owner On February 4, 2014 the Orange County Board of Commissioners voted to hold two Public Hearings to consider the establishment of a Solid Waste Service Tax District effective July 1, 2014. You are receiving this letter because your property is located in the proposed Solid Waste Service Tax District. A Notice of the Public Hearing and a map of the proposed new Solid Waste Service Tax District are attached. The Solid Waste Service Tax District is being considered as a means to improve curbside recycling services in the county's unincorporated area. For those residents currently located within the rural curbside recycling service area and eligible for curbside recycling services, the tax district will replace the annual $38 /household Floral 3-R Fee, which was assessed on the property tax bill from 2004 to 2012. A report, as required by North Carolina General Statute 153A-302(b), containing additional information related to the proposed Solid Waste Service Tax District is available for public inspection in the office of the Clerk to the Board — 200 South Cameron Street, Hillsborough (open 8:OOAM to 5:00 PM), beginning February 14, 2014. The first Public Hearing will take place on March 18, 2014 at 6:OOPM at the SDuthern Human Services Center, 2501 Homestead Fbad, Chapel Hill, 27516. A second Public Hearing will take place on April 1, 2014 at 6:OOPM at the Social Services Center, Hillsborough Commons, 113 Mayo Street, Hillsborough, 27278. A brief presentation will be made at 6:OOPM to be followed by public comments. The Board will also take public comments at both public hearings regarding: the elimination of rural curbside recycling; a subscription service for rural curbside recycling; and supporting rural curbside recyclingwith the County's General Fund revenues. Please feel free to contact Gayle Wilson in the Solid Waste Management Department Office if you need additional information at 919 - 968 -2885 or gwilson rangecountync.gov 10 NOTICEOF PUBUCwEAMNGS ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COM M ISSONERS Pursuant to the requirement of the General Statutes of North Carolina, Chapter 153A-302(c), notice is hereby given that the Board of County Commissioners will hold a Public Hearing at the SDuthern Human Services Center located at 2501 Homestead Road, Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27516, on Tuesday March 18, 2014 at 6:00 p.m.; and a second Public Hearing at the SDcial Services Center, Hillsborough Commons, 113 Mayo Street, Hillsborough, North Carolina, 27278, on Tuesday April 1, 2014 at 6:00 p.m. for the purpose of taking specific action on the following item: creation of a SDlid Waste Service District 1. A report prepared on the proposed district as required by N.GG.S 153A- 302(b) may be inspected in the Office of the Clerk to the Board of County Commissioners located in the ,bhn Link Government Services Building located at 200 SDuth Cameron Street, Hillsborough, North Carolina between 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. 2. A map of the proposed SDlid Waste Service District is attached. Questions regarding the proposed solid waste service district may be directed to the office of Gayle Wilson located in the SDlid Waste Management Department administrative offices at 1207 Eubanks Road, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, 27516. Office hours are from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. You may also call (919) 968 -2885.