HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 11-20-2003-3ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: November 20, 2003
CT: Solid Waste Matters
Action Agend~
Item No.
DEPARTMENT: Solid Waste Management PUBLIC HEARING: (Y/N)
No
ATTACHMENT(S):
11/17/03 Solid Waste Director Memo
6/12/03 PowerPoint Presentation an
Orange County Solid Waste Plan
Overview of Current Financial Situation
INFORMATION CONTACT:
Gayle Wilson, 968-2800
TELEPHONE NUMBERS:
Hillsborough
Chapel Hill
Durham
Mebane
732-8181
968-4501
688-7331
336-227-2031
PURPOSE: To discuss proposed changes to Orange County's 10-year solid waste
management plan and major elements of a proposed approach to implementing a mechanism
to provide supplemental financing for solid waste reduction, reuse and recycling programs for
FY 2004-05.
BACKGROUND: In 1997, Orange County and its municipalities prepared and approved a 10-
year solid waste management plan required by North Carolina law, The State requires updates
every three years, with the 2003 update due now, Solid Waste staff have developed proposed
revisions to the 2000 version of the plan, based on feedback received from the BOCC during
the most recent work sessions on solid waste matters, The accompanying memo from the
Solid Waste Management Director outlines the proposed changes in the three-year update, and
describes the process for soliciting public input, obtaining governing board approvals, and
submission to the State.
The eventual need far alternative financing tc supplement the declining revenue available for
solid waste operations and recycling/reuse/reduction programs has been discussed for a
number of years by the County and its municipalities. The Solid Waste Advisory Board
presented its report and recommendations an this subject to the Board of Commissioners in
early 2003. This November 20 work session will provide the Board with an opportunity to
discuss its preferred direction far implementing a supplemental revenue mechanism far the
County's highly successful reduction and recycling programs, which lead the state of North
Carolina with a per capita reduction since 1992 that has surpassed 40 percent,
FINANCIAL IMPACT: As outlined in the attachments to this abstract,
RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends that the Board discuss the proposed
changes to the County's solid waste management plan and the preferred approach to providing
solid waste alternative financing, and provide appropriate direction to the Manager and staff..
MEMORANDUM
TO: .John Link, County Manager
FROM: Gayle Wilson, Solid Waste Management Director
SUBJECT: Solid Waste Plarmiug/Alternative Financing
DATE: November 17, 2003
This memorandum identifies and discusses issues surrounding Orange County's existing solid waste
management plan, proposed revisions to the existing plan stimulated by BOCC continents/concerns,
and a staff suggested approach to providing alternative financing to the enterprise fund, No formal
decisions are required at this November 20 work session. To the extent that time permits, however,
any "agreement in principle" the Boazd may be able to r°each would he most helpful regarding some
or all of the proposed elements of the waste reduction plan revisions and the basic approach to solid
waste alternative financing,.
Previously Adopted Solid Waste Mana~ement_Plan
In 1997, the local governments of Orange County developed and adopted a solid waste management
(waste reduction) plan (Attac/unertt A). hi that same yeaz•, the waste reduction plan was incorporated
into a comprehensive solid waste management plan, again endorsed by Orange County goverruuents
and submitted as required to the State of North Carolina. hi 2000, all the local governments in
Orange County reaffirmed the plan, and it was resubmitted to the State, consistent with the State's .3-
yearplan update requirement.
When the BOCC most recently endorsed the solid waste management plan, the Board expressed
some reservations regarding certain aspects of the waste reduction portion of the overall plan and
indicated that they wished to more thoroughly revisit plan components prior to the scheduled 2003
reauthorization. The discussion of the plan at the November 20 work session is intended to begin
BOCC reconsideration of the plan prior to staff s proceeding to schedule a public hearing, obtain
formal govermlental endorsements, and submitting Orazige County's three year update to the State.
The plan update was originally due .Tune .30, 200.3, but staff obtained State approval of an extension
of this requirement.
Current Status of the Ptan
The BOCC's review and achieving "agreement in principle" on the plan is critical to gaining final
formal endorsements of all the local governments and submission of'the completed plan update to the
State. It is also essential for finalizing the progrannnatic/operational elements of the plan so that a
financial analysis can be refined. The financial analysis will allow development of a 10-year
financial plan so that accurate determinations can he made regarding the level of supplemental
financing that may be necessary
q'
In recognition of some of the reservations articulated by the BOCC regarding the 2000 solid waste
plan update, staff has made some changes to the proposed 2003 waste reduction plan in. These
changes include:
• elimination of a plamred Materials Recovery Facility (MRF)
• continued utilization of the existing processing pad
• elimination of a proposed shift to connningled collections of recyclables
• elimination of contemplated service expansions to the eonunercial sector (except for incremental
expansions to the food waste program)
• elimination of assumed additions to the recyclable materials waste stream ((except possibly
drywall if reliable long-terra markets develop)
• reduced expansion of rural curbside routes (no universal curbside recycling)
• elimination of the personnel, equipment, etc. related to the expansions
Staff considers these changes to have the effect of making the plan a "baseline plan" rather than a
growth/expansion plazr. For the most part, the County would simply maintain the current mix of
programs and services. The plan could be characterized as a more deliberate/gradual reduction
strategy that maintains current activities/services. While the suggested chazrges will likely make it
more difficult to achieve the 61 % waste reduction goal or lengthen the timeline along which the goal
will ultimately be met, the BOCC may make future modifications to the plan that could allow
meeting or exceeding that goal. Staff assumes that the 61% reduction goal will be maintained.
Based on direction from the BOCC, staff will finalize the tluee-year plan update due to the State and
schedule the revised plan for a public hearing as soon as possible., While staff believes that a single
,joint public hearing would be more efficient, we would Ue prepared to conduct a separate hearing for
each,jurisdiction if necessary. Following the public hearing(s), Solid Waste staff would work with
staff of each local govenunent to schedule consideration by each governing board of final approval of
the plan. All four entities must formally endorse before Solid Waste staff submit it to the State.
Current Status of Alternative Financing
The BOCC's most recent substantive discussions regarding the alternative financing issue took place
in late winter 200.3 in conjunction with recommendations presented by the Solid Waste Advisory
Board. It is az~ticipated that the November 20 work session will provide time for- further discussion of
the issue, including obtaining additional feedback/guidazlce from the BOCC..Attachurent B provides
an outline of the current financial status of the fund.
Since the SWAB alternative financing reconunendation was presented to the BOCC in February
2003, staff has had the opportunity to further consider the various related issues. Staff has had
ongoing discussions with the SWAB, conununicated with the members of County staff who will have
billing and collection responsibilities, and spoken with the Manager and various citizens on the
subject. Based on this continuing reflection staff has prepared a preliminary proposal regarding a fee
assessment methodology,
s
Pursuant to BOCC direction, staff will schedule additional discussion of this subject at arx upcoming
BOCC meeting to review details, examine staff assumptions, and offer additional guidance and
dix°ection as necessary.
Alternative Fnnancint Approach
Staff has considered the SWAB recommendation and taken into account various comments received
over the past several months and developed a framework for supplemental financing for- the
enterprise fiord. The fiord will be unable to continue providing the same level of service in FY 2004-
05 as is now provided without major BOCC financial decisions being made and implemented. It
should be noted that tinder the existing enterprise fund structure, no State or General Fund
appropriations are provided to fund Orange County recycling or° waste reduction activities.
I{ey elements of the staff revised financing approach are:
• It would be an availability fee rather than a tax.
• It would be assessed on all improved properties, including tax-exempt, residential, non-
residential.
• It would be billed on the tax bill, begimiing in 2004, but identified as a Waste Reduction, Reuse,
and Recycling Fee..
• The fee would not be assessed to the University.
• Philosophically, consumers will pay for the services they receive or that are reasonably available
to/or that are performed for them.
• There would be four categories of fees:
• Universal Services (LTS) -services provided to or on behalf of everyone. Examples are
household hazardous waste (HHW)/electronics/drop-off site/food waste/bar & restaurant
glass and recycling administratior>/education.
• Rural Curbside Services (RC) -Those who receive curbside recycling collection in the
unincorporated areas.
• Urban Curbside Services (UC) -Those who receive curbside recycling collection in the
incorporated areas.
• Multi-FunilyServices (MF) -Those who receive apartment/condominium type recycling
services.
Note. All improved pr°operties >7~ould receive the US fee. Those proper°ties that also fall into one of
the other three categories would also be charged the respective fee. Some proper-ties u~ozdrl only
receive the US fee.
• hi FY 2004-OS the commercial sector would only pay the US fee. Due to the significant variety
of conunercial establislunents that exist in Orange County, staff proposes to conduct farther'
analysis and offer- a refinement of fees for FY 2005-06 to make commercial fees as equitable as
is practical. There is insufficient staff time available for the additional analysis needed for a
well-founded differentiation of fees for a FY 2004-OS implementation.
• Upon the BOCC selection of a preferred financing method, staff will initiate abroad-based
public education and outreach progr'arn to explain the need for supplemental financing and the
new fee system.
(v
Note.- The soozzez• in 1004 that t7ze Board can make decisiozzs about the appropriate alternative solid
waste funding mechmzisms to implement for the ?004-0.5, the 7aighez° will be the degree to which
billing and collection of fees can be accomplished accurately mrd timely, for real property tczx bills
tJzat would be zzzailed izr late July w' em~ly Augzrst .2004.
~,~ Decision Points: Solid Waste staffreconunends that the BOCC, consider the following at the
til November 20 work session and or subsequent meeting(s):
Waste Reduction Plan
a) Consider the proposed revisions to the waste reduction portion of the 10-year
Plan, provide additional direction to staff as necessary, and indicate, if possible, that the Board
"agrees in principle" with the new plan approach or a modified version thereof,
b) Direct staff to prepare a final draft of the 10-Year Solid Waste Management Plan, incorporating
changes as directed by the BOCC, and schedule a public hearing (joint or individual) to provide
public input, and
c) Following the public hearing(s), schedule the Plan for final approval by the County and Towns.
Availability Fee
a) That the BOCC consider the availability fee approach as outlined above, provide staff additional
direction as necessary, and indicate, if possible, that the Board "agrees in principle" with the new
fee approach or a modified version thereof, and
b) Direct staff to continue the financial analysis and schedule further discussion with the BOCC
following the holidays that will present fee calculations for each category, revenue and
expenditure assumptions, programmatic assumptions, assumptions regarding reserve funding,
debt management, and other financial and adminishative details.
Please contact me if you require additional information in preparation for the November 20 BOCC
Work Session,
C.~
Review of Solid Waste
Management (Redaction) Plan
June 12, 2003
Orange County
Solid Waste Advisory Board
Overview of Oi~auge County's
Solid Waste Managem, ent Plan
Focus on mcycting eud waste~itiduptido elcinent of
the overall ptm -reducing disposal needs and
reaching the County's adopted goal of 61%waste
mductioa per person. S WAB has endorsed fhe
goat, a reduction plm fiamcworlc and timeline.
Tonight we will place minimnt emphasis on
dispossl..
Qmnge County has prepared other solid waste
plms including the requited plm for submittal to
the Sm[e, a County master plm for Imdfill ,
Plan overview (cont'd.)
As of 2001-02. the County has reached the State's
goal of 40% waste reduction per person.
Both MSW and C&D, disposed inside and outside
the County, are included in calculations
Other elements o(the larger plan also include
closing the MSW lined landfill and building a
transfer station to move MSW oui of county
Those will not be a focus', as they must be done,
no debate is necessary
,:~.-
~:
Brief History of the Plan
• In 1993 I'he Landfill Owners Group (LOG)
determined a need to develop a solid waste
reduction plan.
• In t9941`he LOG selected a consultant and
appointed a Citizens' Committee to assist in
plai7 developmeat:
• 6ptions foF waste reduction were developed
by the consultant and presented in June
1996. ,
nptians Evaluated
• Consultant developed three scenarios end
target ranges for wastereduction/recycling:
I. Status quo, continuing source-separated
type collections and processing: achievable
diversion potential of30%-49%.
2. Commingled recycling system with
universal collections to atl sectors, includes
a materials recovery facility: achievable
recycling goal of 35%-60%.
Plan Options (cont'd)
3 Wet/dry system to separate compostable
and recyclable materials in each sector
Includes materials recovery facility and
composting planC achievable recycling goal
0142-71%.
G
`~'.
2
°I
Option Selected
• Commingled recycling system #2 with
universal collection was selected and
modified to retaiif all current drhpoff and
convenience sites. Composting limited, at
this time, to only yardwaste and CBuD
wood: Continued separate collectpn of
comifierciai'~fdbd°'Ri g1'ass.
• System further refined by staff and
presented to Landfill Owners Group For ,
Plan History Continued
Waste reduction goals of 46% per capita by
2001 and 61%by 2006 and plan framework
were adopted County-wide in 1997. C&D
not included in plan initially,
Goals were based on the characteristics of
both the MS W and C&D waste streams and
whaz was deemed practically achievable but
aggressive,
Plan History (cont'd)
• Goals re-affirmed in 2000 by all local
governments in the Coun[y.
• Percentage goals may remain thesame, the
timeline may need to be revised.
• 60CC has stated reservations about plan
and wants to revisit.
_'~ ,~
I~
~~
Progress Towards the Goals
The County has achieved the State Goal of
40% reduction per capita by 2001-02.
County progrnms encompass both MSW
and C&D, which is relatively unusual for a
local government in North Carolina,
Outline of the (Reduction) Plan
"Ihc plan calls for recyclable materials to be
wlleIXed commingled (mixed together) from
every accessible location in Orange County then
sorted m n materials recovery facility..
Collections are conducted by public agencies,
private contractors for the Comty and other
private contractors woridng for other entities e.g.
t1NC has n recycling contractor.
Currengy all iccycling is collected source-
separnted by type of material and shipped directly„
Getting There from Here
Plan scheduled to be phased in over a five year
period beginning in 2004-OS and to be complete in
?009-IO May be delayed
Projected results bring the County very close u>
tic 6I%goal without much more C&D recycling
then currently.
Including more C&D recycling may achieve goal
CKD diversion rates now higher than projected
No financing mechanism yet chosen to implement
the plan County Board has not endorsed schedulm
fit„
r
Schedule
• NOTE: numbasin 6otd bclvw rtpscrntrtryrlin6 tuns {livcnd ovc
die base case unvuvt pmj~ed widiwt P~°Btnm apanciwu, nest bW
b11i r65'ctPj
200:3-04
• Ban unpainted. drywall @om landfill disposal and
establish recyelingmatket (additienal C&O tons
regcled: 70U)
2004-OS
• Site and design Materials Rewvery facility
(mittimtmr five acres are needed, Land cost es4 °
2005-06
• Construct Materials Recovery Facility, Under
model curtendy nonlyzcd, County would own
building shell and operator would own equipment.
Other ertangemeots am possible, Mote merchant
wpacity'wuld be included to nttmct outside
tonnages More tonnage means lower processing
cost per ton
• Expand wrrrmercial food waste wllections 8°/a
annuolly (goal of 1,600 tons by 2009-10). Expand
commercial glass program 5%per year. „
2005-06 (cont'd,)
Plan universal curbside recycling routes, purchase
and distribute urban curbside containers. contract
I'or curbside services
Recmrsider target year of 2006 (or reaching goal
(additional tons recycled: 1,314)
}'
5
i~
r
2006-07
• Distribute mml curbside bins and odditionnl
multifamily taro. Conduct education.
• Implement universal residential and multifamily
curbside recycling, Ywo-bin system (one for n1I
paper and one for all types of coos and bottles).
Service ail Accessible addresses. About 10%of
nual homes projected to be inaccessible.
• Multiftimily complexes use one or more groups of
roll cans nt each wmplex.
2006-07 (cont'd)
• All materials would be taken to tvIItF for
processing.
• tJNC regclables delivered to MRF beginning this
year (2,237 loos up to 2,354 toss projected
throug62010.11),
• Expect 6,320 loos increase io recycling due to
adding mixed paper ood alt wntainers to curbside
recycling. Includes some decrease nt dropoffsites.
• hire commercial recycling route supervisor and
plan routes, purchase carts and wcks
2007-08
• Distribute commercial recycling containers
and conduct education.
• Institute first half of commercial recycling
routes including any business or other non-
residential entity in Orange County.. Project
9,540 tons of additional diversion.
• Two trucks would be purchased and drivels
hired.
r.
G
~3
2008-09
• Add 25% more commercial recycling
routes. Purchase additional truck and hire
driver, 13,893 tons more diversion over
base case..
• Work with Towns and County to implement
pay-as-you-throw or mandatory recycling
county-wide (through each jurisdiction).
2009-10
Complete implementation of commercial
recycling routes. Add fourth wck and
driver, 15,813 tons more diversion'projected
(over base case)..
Continue to fine-tune system and look for
additional recycling opportunities..
20)0-jj
• Additional recycling tonnage diversion
from MSW 16,417.
1
Projected Waste Reduction Rates
Year Reduction Rote
• 2002-03 46 7%
• 2003.04 49.1
• 2004-OS 49.4%
^ 2005-06 qg g%
• 2004-07 52.5%
^ 2007-08 54.1°,
^ 2006AB SG 2%
• 2009-2010 54.7%
• 2010-2011 56.9% (no addt'1 C&D) v
Financing the System
• Proposed system or my system wilt require
additional funding..
• No method for providing this funding has been
selected.
• 'Che Board oCOrange County Commissioners
could change the goals and/or timeline and
implementation schedule, reduce funding or
provide sufficient funding fo maintain Ute smtus
quo in solid waste management in Orange County.
v
Next Steps
llte Board o(Ornnge County Commissioners is
scheduled to make solid waste financing decisions
later this calendar year.
Pall work srssion is to be devoted to solid waste.
i'hose decisions will be intermeshed with their
decisions on the County's long term solid waste
goals and plan.
The curtent plan and goals may change
iltose decisions will afTect the solid waste plan
update due to Ute Sta[c later this year ~~
I~
15
AttacBment B
Overview of Cut°rent Financial Situation
11/20/0.3
• Financial Status
• Current budget = $5,553,291
• Fund Balance used = $1,222,07.3
• Current estimated undesignated fund balance =$865,098 (15.6%)
• Current balance of closure, equipment replacement, and landfill construction
reserves =zero
• Current equipment replacement balance should be = $ (based on staff financial
plan assumptions)
• Positive reserve balance exists primarily due to unexpected storm debris revenue
and debt finalrcing of equipment
• Gunent debt load balance estimate = $1.95 million (including current year
f nanced equipment and debt payments)
Reasons for current revenue decrease and expenditure increases
• Success of new mandatory recycling ordinance
• Master facilities plan implementation
• C&D material recycling facilities
• Property acquisition, design and permitting of new C&D landfill
• New electt°onics recycling storage building
New or etrlranced programs
• Assumption of nntlti-family program operations
• Expansion of rural curbside programs
• Implementation of electronics and dry cell battery recycling programs
• Expansion of food waste recycling
• hnplementation of new mandatory recycling ordinance with additional
equipment and persomrel
• Takeover of govermnent building recycling program from OCPW
• Two new drop-off sites
Disposal tonnages reduced due to waste reduction successes
Continued delivery of OC wastes to other facilities
• Towns' commercial waste collection fees having unexpected/undesirable
consequences
• Some private haulers waste going out of county escaping paying fair share of
recycling programs
• Rogers Road sewer installation
• Historical use of fund balance to minimize tipping fee increase
• L,ilcely 2004-OS budget shortfall could not be addressed tlu~ough projected remaining
fiord balance
• Need for supplemental revenue for 2004-05, a solid waste fiord business plan, and
reestablishment ofplan to fund equipment reserve