SUMMARY MINUTES OF A PUBLIC HEARING
OF THE CHAPEL HILL TOWN COUNCIL
WEDNESDAY, MAY 10, 2000, AT 7:00 P.M.
Mayor pro tem Lee Pavão called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
Council members present were Flicka Bateman, Joyce Brown, Pat Evans, Bill Strom, Jim Ward, and Edith Wiggins. Mayor Rosemary Waldorf was absent, excused. Council Member Kevin Foy arrived at 7:37 p.m.
Staff members present were Town Manager Cal Horton, Assistant Town Managers Sonna Loewenthal and Florentine Miller, Town Attorney Ralph Karpinos, Assistant to the Manager Bill Stockard, Finance Director Jim Baker, Public Works Director Bruce Heflin, Police Captain Tony Oakley, Interim Police Chief Gregg Jarvies, Interim Transportation Director Scott McClellan, Personnel Director Pat Thomas, and Town Clerk Joyce Smith.
Item 1 – Public Hearing on the Manager’s 2000-20001 Recommended Budget,
2000-2005 Recommended Capital Improvements Program, and
Proposed Use of 2000-2001 Downtown Service District Tax
Town Manager Cal Horton said the hearing was to discuss the Manager’s 2000-2001 recommended budget proposal, the recommended Capital Improvements Program, the proposed use of 2000-2001 Transportation Grant funds proposal, and the 2000-2001 Downtown Service District Tax. He said the proposed tax rate would increase from 56.3 cents to 59.7 cents, that 2.4 cents of the increase would be in the General Fund and .4 cents would be in the Transportation Fund. Mr. Horton said the proposed budget would continue most services, provide for the cost of additional debt service on bonds issued by the Council as authorized by voters, and would provide for additional Capital Improvement funding on a “pay-as-you-go” basis and an installment financing basis, principally to protect existing investment in existing buildings. Mr. Horton said several key issues had emerged as the Council had been working on the budget, three principally:
· Options for Transit Service Improvements.
· Compensation for Town Employees—The cost of implementing the Consultant’s recommendations would be about $1 million, equivalent to about 6 ½ percent of the payroll and about 23% of this amount was for relief of compression in the pay structure. Another 15% of the total would bring pay rates up to about the 75th percentile of the labor market. The remaining percent of the pay increase would focus on merit pay.
· Proposal for changing single-family residential refuse collection services from twice weekly rear- or side-yard service to once weekly curbside service using roll carts.
Public Works Director Bruce Heflin reviewed some key facts concerning the refuse collection issue. He said the proposal for collections would be phased in over a two-year period, with the primary advantage being cost savings and improved working conditions for employees, and the primary disadvantages were related to reduced levels of services for residents and their having to take the carts to and from the street. Mr. Heflin said the costs savings would begin next year at $53,000 and grow to a 6-year figure of $402,000, and if the Council were to annex Southern Village in June of 2001, there would be an additional cost savings of $34,000 because of the additions of services put into place to immediately begin serving that area. Mr. Heflin said savings would also result from reduction in personnel and equipment, and equipment maintenance. He said there would be additional costs for 9,000 roll carts at $55 each—a total of $500,000 over a two-year implementation period, and increased overtime costs for collection in holiday weeks. Mr. Heflin said with curbside collection, employees would not be exposed to possible injuries and it would reduce conflicts with private property concerns. He noted some of the questions raised were:
· The issue of cart size—if multiple sizes are used the costs will go up.
· Exemptions—for physical impairments of residents.
· Unusual terrain.
· Once weekly rear yard pickup service—not recommended by the staff because (1) there are not productivity gains to justify reducing a full crew, and (2) once per week collection would be the hardest on the employees.
· Appearance of the carts.
· Carts left at the curb—ordinance changes could address this.
· Litter and overturned cans—roll carts have secure lids and do not easily tip over.
· Unusual neighborhood configuration or housing types—each would be addressed individually.
Howard Baldwin, a retired sanitation employee, spoke for himself and for Bill Campbell, who could not be present. He said he felt that the Council should be more concerned for the welfare of the sanitation workers than for those who claim they could not bring their refuse to the curb. Mr. Baldwin said there were seven routes and three workers per truck, and if the Town went for curbside collection twice a week, the other days could be used for picking up brush and other things needing collection. He said that presently one route picked up from 1,147 houses a week, and he did not think that those crews would be able to pick up from all those houses with one-day, backyard pickup. Mr. Baldwin cited the numbers for some of the other routes. He said that there was considerable turnover in the Sanitation Department because of injuries, it was easier and less injurious unloading the refuse at the curbside, and it would take just two workers to do the work. Mr. Baldwin offered his assistance in setting up the routes, if the Council adopted curbside collection.
Kathleen Lord, Chair of the Downtown Commission and owner of Emma Contemporary Fashions, updated the Council on what the Commission had accomplished during the year: Chapel Hill Arts Festival, Arts Downtown, Apple Chill, cooperated with the Parks & Recreation Department, the Public Arts Series with the University, the Chamber of Commerce and the Orange County Visitors Bureau, Adopt-a-Planter, Second Annual Round-up for the Cure which benefits the UNC Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, started a website downtownchapelhill.com, working on a site for a Welcome Center, July 20th Downtown Employees Picnic, December 2nd The Holiday Parade. Ms. Lord said that Chapel Hill had the best Police and Fire Departments anywhere, making sure that the celebrations were safe and the after-celebration cleanup was done swiftly and completely. She thanked the Departments and the Council for their support.
Eunice Brock, a Chapel Hill realtor, thanked the Council for all its efforts in serving the Community. She said curbside trash collection created visual pollution, and that trash carts left at the curb would be just as ugly as billboards on Highway 40, which the Council had gone on record as opposing. Ms. Brock said during the two-year pilot program in 1991-92 the number of carts left on the street doubled within 15 months and according to the pilot program report, if the number of exemptions from curbside pickup reached 8%, and if exemptions exceeded 11%, curbside collections would not be cost-effective. She said after the trial collection period 40% of the residents in the Mount Bolus community opposed curbside collection. Ms. Brock noted that switching to curbside collection would require a large investment in trucks and equipment. She suggested that the Council take the time to investigate other alternatives.
Charles Tanquary suggested that once-a-week pickup would cut in half the injuries and the distance traveled by the sanitation workers. He said that, in his report in 1998, Mr. Heflin said that switching to once-a-week collection would allow a savings of $74,100 the first year and $76,100 the second year. Mr. Tanquary said the Town could switch to curbside pickup and save $53,000 the first year, or switch to once-a-week backyard pickup and save $74,000. He said the second year the Town could save $129,000 by adopting curbside pickup, or could save $167,000 by going to once-a-week pickup, including $91,000 lease/purchase price the Town would not have to pay for carts for the first year. Mr. Tanquary said the minimum savings of $59,000 in the first two years would give enough money to boost the hourly rates of sanitation workers, and still save money for the taxpayers. He said that going to once-a-week backyard pickup for one year would give the Town time for further study, including “pay-as-you-throw.”
Betty Smith said she had lived in the Town for 20 years and was a senior citizen. She felt that Chapel Hill was a community not to be compared with any other place. Ms. Smith said the local paper had indicated that the community had been divided into two groups, elitists and populists, and she felt this was not an accurate label for a group opposed to curbside collection. She said this opposition was a concern for the quality of life that was Chapel Hill. Ms. Smith said if the expenditure of $500,000 for the 63-gallon carts was made there would be no turning back. She asked the Council to consider other pickup measures, such as once-a-week backyard pickup and “pay-as-you-throw” pickup.
Jill Blackburn requested the Council not to adopt curbside pickup for several reasons:
· Curbside pickup in other cities had produced many problems, such as vandalism, enforcing problems, unsightly streets and pollution from the garbage trucks.
· There had not been any financial analysis made to indicate any money would be saved and there were many collection systems in the Town and this was not efficient, but curbside pickup would not solve the problems.
She asked the Council to vote “No” to curbside pickup and to look at other more unified, cost-effective, and environmentally-friendly approach to waste disposal problems.
Janet Kagan-Resnick said she and her family had been residents of Chapel Hill since 1998, and until she lived in Chapel Hill she never had had backyard collection. She said she had lived in larger cities where the collection was curbside and produced filth and noise, and Chapel Hill was not a large city with such huge waste production. Ms. Kagan-Resnick said the noise and air pollution produced by the garbage trucks, collecting any time of the day, caused traffic hazards, and the noise from the compressors would destroy the tranquility of the Town. She urged the Council to maintain backyard pickup, and to consider the complexity of the problems of waste disposal.
Madeline Jefferson read a letter from Haywood and Sylvia Clayton, from the Oaks neighborhood, expressing their opposition to any change in the garbage pickup plan. Ms. Jefferson said she wanted to go on record as being opposed to curbside pickup and garbage cans. Ms. Jefferson said Chapel Hill was a very special community that did not have to be like other communities. She said curbside pickup would be a deletion of service.
Margaret Deberry urged the Council members to drive through Durham and see the cans that were left at the curbside. She asked how many workers had been injured in the collections. Ms. Deberry said there were many people who would have difficulty with curbside collection, who were not actually certified as handicapped. She said she felt there should be an ordinance requiring citizens to keep their garbage cans in a safe, clear place for the collectors. Ms. Deberry said the figures for savings were not clear, and urged the Council not to pass curbside pickup and to listen to the concerns of the citizens.
Bob Moorhead said he opposed curbside garbage pickup and the amount of tax savings was trivial compared to the disadvantages, adding that the tax savings would be minimal. He described his experience with curbside pickup in Charlotte. Mr. Moorhead urged the Council to kill the proposal once and for all.
Scott Madbury spoke against the curbside collection, and noted some of the problems of curbside collections in New Jersey. He said all the concerns expressed were problems that he had experienced in New Jersey, and added he supported recycling. Mr. Madbury said he lived in Chapel Hill and his neighborhood had steep topography and lots of critters that lived in the Morgan Creek area. He said there were many elderly people living in the neighborhood and curbside pickup would be very difficult for them.
Alice Moore said at her second home in Maryland she had curbside pickup, and it was an eyesore, and inconvenient. She said in that Town there was a $25 fine for leaving trash cans on the street for more than 24 hours. Ms. Moore wondered who would be monitoring the removal of the cans and doing the administrative work necessary. She suggested a compromise where the containers could be rolled to the driveway, making it safer for the sanitation workers to collect the trash. Ms. Moore said she remains opposed to the curbside collection proposal.
Phil Rominger, who served on the Beautification Commission, said he was opposed to curbside pickup. He said there were two issues: Mr. Horton was trying to save money for Chapel Hill, and Mr. Heflin was trying to make the job safer for sanitation workers. He said once-a-week pickup was the solution, but he would not have room for a 68-gallon cart on his property, except in open space, where it was not aesthetic. Mr. Rominger urged the Council to think about the consequences of adoption of curbside pickup.
Arnold Lowey, 32-year resident of Chapel Hill, said he thought this proposal was the biggest single quality-of-life issue he had seen in the Town. He said there were three issues: the costs, the working conditions, and environmental issues. Mr. Lowery stated the cost savings over the projected years came to under $28 per house per year, or 28 cents per pickup, which was one of the best bargains he knew of. He said the pay for the garbage collectors was low, as were the benefits, and it was time to give them better working conditions and better pay.
Jack Olin, President of the Oaks I Neighborhood Association, said the Association requested that the Council reject the idea of curbside pickup. He said he had recently been in Salt Lake City and the curbside cans were not a pretty sight, and the issue was aesthetics. Mr. Olin said he was very concerned with the safety issue and that work study should be the key to solving that problem. He said in moving back to Chapel Hill after several years, he was surprised by the amount of litter on the streets, which had not been there before he moved away. Mr. Olin asked the Council to think about some initiative to sensitize the citizens to these issues.
Al Lilly, a resident of Laurel Hill Road, said he saw the proposal for curbside pickup as a way to save money and to safeguard the municipal employees. He said he did not feel that the proposal was a way to deal with these issues. Mr. Lilly said a significant number of residents of the community did not want to give up the present service, so the Council should prove why the present service should be replaced with curbside collection. He said the savings to be realized were not significant—1.2 % of the Town’s current annual budget. Mr. Lilly referred to a letter-to-the-editor in the daily newspaper from Robert Moorhead. He urged the Council to preserve backyard pickup and find ways to protect the safety of the collectors.
Bill Camp said he supported once-a-week curbside pickup, and that he already took his garbage to the curb, and did not think of it as a burden. He stated he felt it would be a good use of the savings to use it for brush pickup, to clean up the neighborhoods. Mr. Camp encouraged the Council not to keep elevating the tax rate, but to keep the budget in check by ranking the priorities that needed to be addressed.
Sue Ann Brooks, an Oaks resident, who lives with her legally-blind mother, offered a suggestion that citizens should look at ways they can help the collectors and volunteered to be part of a committee to study this. She gave Mr. Horton a check for $8.00 for the trash collection for the year at her home.
Cynthia Wise also gave Mr. Horton a check for $8.00 for the trash collection for the year at her home. She responded to Mr. Howard Baldwin’s letter in the local newspaper and said that people who did not make their property safety for sanitation workers should be identified and made to make their backyards safe for the people collecting. Ms. Wise said that older people would not be able to roll their carts to the curbside.
Phil Post, representing the Chamber of Commerce Government Relations Committee, said the Chamber was concerned with the proposed development fees, and the effect that they would have on the non-profits, which made up about 32% of the development applications in the last 10 years. He said an initial application presently cost about $2,000 and increased dramatically, depending upon what the application consisted of. Mr. Post said the Chamber was urging: (1) non-profit projects be given the same break in fees as Town projects and University projects, (2) the Town not double the fees for modification of the Special Use Permits, and (3) the Town delay the whole proposal until the rewriting of the new Development Ordinance.
Ray deFriess, Chief of the Orange County Rescue Squad, said they would like to have the four municipalities, Chapel Hill, Carrboro, Hillsborough and Orange County, provide $20-25,000 per year for funding for their Rescue Division, because most of the rescue equipment was about 15-20 years old, and needed replacement. He said fund raising was getting difficult, and they needed guarantees from the local governments for a continued amount of money each year.
Steve Bodeen, Deacon at Ephesus Baptist Church, Durham County but in Chapel Hill city, said the Church was trying to build a Family Life Center, and the proposal to increase the impact fees ten fold would make it more and more difficult to fund these kinds of projects. He said that non-profits like churches provided services to the Town and County free-of-charge, and he did not understand why the Council wanted to tax these services with impact fees.
Frank Leith spoke in favor of curbside pickup. He said he had lived in Andover, Massachusetts, where there was curbside pickup and it worked very well. Mr. Leith said the residents bought their own trash barrels, took their trash to the curb, rolled the cans back, and there were no problems. He said when he moved to Chapel Hill he took his trash to the curbside, as his neighborhood did not have backyard pickup. Mr. Leith said the brush containers sometimes stayed at the curbside for months, which he would like to have addressed by the Council. He said whether the trash barrels were left at the curb or not depended upon how the residents felt about their neighborhood.
David Worster, a resident of St. Ayrs Way and representing the Church of the Holy Family, spoke against raising development permit fees. He said that for a modest renovation and expansion project under the current development fee structure, the Church would pay a total of $1,320 for two fees, and under the proposed increase it would pay $10,580 for the same two fees. Mr. Worster said the project would have to be cut back if these fees were so high. He asked the Council, on behalf of the other non-profits in Town, not to pass the proposal, but to defer it until the Council had more time to study its negative impact on the organizations that were least able to afford the increases.
Rev. Robert Seymour, President of the Chapel Hill Senior Center, said the seniors did not want the Town to take away backyard pickup because it was the one service they cherished the most. He said seniors did not like to ask for things, and probably would not ask for exemptions for curbside pickup. Rev. Seymour said the collectors were of both black and white races, and this was not a “racist” issue. He said garbage collection was not a demeaning task, but was for the betterment of the community.
Edwina Zagami, read a letter from Judy Margolis requesting increased funding for the School Resource Officers positions (SRO) in the schools. She said the presence of the SROs in the schools increased security and decreased crime, freeing the principals to be available to the teachers and students. Ms. Zagami read that the SROs provided role models and acted as mentors and advocates. Ms. Zagami, a faculty member of the Phillips Middle School, said she would be presenting a petition in support of John McCurley, the school’s SRO, and she felt as a parent and as a taxpayer that the SROs belonged in the schools, where they could do the most good. She said the students also wanted the SROs in the schools.
Susan Spalt, Health Coordinator for the Chapel Hill/Carrboro Schools, said SROs were not security guards, but they were skilled in law enforcement and contributed to health and prevention classes, worked with troubled youth, and defused violent situations. She asked the Council to think of the students in the community as it voted on the issue of SROs, which had real serious consequences and benefits for the future, and she urged the Council to vote to support the SROs. Ms. Spalt left petitions with 500 signatures and a letter from the School Health Advisory Committee with the Council.
Philip Hirsch said he and his wife had a letter in the local newspaper today in opposition to curbside pickup. He said they had lived in Chapel Hill for 30 years and backyard pickup was a service he was happy to pay for. Mr. Hirsch said he had a very steep driveway and was nervous about taking the trash down this driveway. He urged the Council to take a vote in the Town to see how many people were not in favor of curbside pickup. Mr. Hirsch said it was the Council’s obligation to do what the citizens of Chapel Hill wanted them to do with regard to curbside pickup.
Steve England, a Town employee, spoke on the Town’s pay plan, which he said was better than the plan the employees had presently, but there were too many issues which it did not address, such as compression. He said curbside pickup was responsible spending, which would save quite a bit of money. Mr. England said that once-a-week pickup would not work because it would be impossible to reach all the houses. He said one set of rules should apply to everyone, in order to be efficient. Mr. England stated the employees were incensed that the salary increases were put off until October, instead of the beginning of the budget year. He suggested some remedies for the pay plan, such as what years of service should receive higher increases, less increases to the higher employment levels and more increases to those at the lower end of the pay scale. Mr. England said that rear yard pickup was a form of “slavery,” with the workers being among the lowest paid and suffering indignities during the collection day, such as dog bites, accusations of theft and other dangers. He suggested that the community neighborhood associations should put into their covenants rules for removing garbage barrels off the curb after collection. Mr. England noted the employees were asked to be efficient and he asked the Council to support curbside pickup.
Greg Ling, a Town employee, spoke in favor of the pay plan, and said to attract quality people, a competitive pay plan was needed, and he felt this pay plan addressed this issue.
Henry Sweezy, a resident of Churchill Drive and Chair of the Board of Deacons of Ephesus Baptist Church, expressed the unanimous opposition of the members of the Church to the proposed increased development fees. He said that would take about 6% of the Church’s budget for the next year to pay the Town a single tax unrelated to property value or any service or assistance performed by the Town. Mr. Sweezy stated that the members of the Church had started a lengthy process for planning and constructing a new Family Life Center and Education building. He said the 6% taken out of the Church’s budget would cause a reduction in benevolence, and it would be hard to expect more contributions from the church members to pay an increase in the Town taxes for the Special Use Permit, which, he said, was a huge increase. Mr. Sweezy urged the Council not to add to the list in opposition to churches, by increasing development fees.
Greg Gangi addressed two issues: pay-as-you-throw garbage and curbside pickup. He said pay-as-you-throw increased recycling and decreased the way garbage goes into the landfill, shifted the burden of solid waste disposal to those who produced the most solid waste, and promoted greater ecological literacy. Mr. Gangi said curbside pickup would increase participation in recycling, and improve conditions for the least desirable jobs in the community. He said this was not comparable to billboards, but was a matter of showing greater respect for human dignity.
Chris Belcher spoke in favor of curbside pickup. He said the $400,000 savings could be used to fix curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and streetlights needing repair or installation. Mr. Belcher noted areas where the money could be used: better funding for the Senior Center, better funding of the Teen Center, help the Red Cross, help not to raise the impact fees so as not to hurt the churches, and help the affordable housing efforts.
John Birkholtz, Administrator at Chapel Hill High School, said he spoke as a citizen and an administrator, and he felt that the responsibilities of the School Resource Officers were multi-faceted and played a huge role in the safety and security of the Town’s schools. The number one role at the schools were presence, he said, and, in addition, the SROs taught in classrooms, assisted teachers from mundane to complex issues, settled issues which otherwise would require police calls to the Department for assistance, and their expertise in the Safe Schools Program was invaluable. Mr. Birkholtz urged the Council to fund the SROs as much as possible, because they made a difference in the schools and a dollar figure could not be placed on their value to the schools and the community.
Pearson Stewart said that Chapel Hill already had curbside pickup with the recycling boxes, although, because they were open, their contents could be scattered and viewed. He said they should be picked up in the rear of the houses. But, he said he felt that the large, covered containers on wheels would do no harm to the real estate values of the neighborhoods and the scare tactics were “red herring” fears, and would not materialize.
Ed Tenney thanked the Council for serving the Town, and said he had lived in Chapel Hill many years and had served in three wars: World War II, Korean, and the Chapel Hill School Board. He said the Town should look into other places in the budget to cut, not just in garbage collection. Mr. Tenney said Chapel Hill was a beautiful town and he would like to keep it that way, and urged the Council to vote against curbside pickup.
Betty Maultsby said she would like the Council to decide whether to go to curbside collections based on appropriate workplace conditions, and an integrated look at how the Town’s collection methods influenced additional costs throughout the solid waste prevention, recycling, collection and disposal programs. She asked how the Town was doing in reaching the 60% waste reduction goal of Chapel Hill. Ms. Maultsby said shipping waste out-of-County did not count toward 60% waste reduction goals, and asked if there was any town that had backyard pickup and still reached the 60% waste reduction goals. She said that 40% of the waste going to the landfill was recyclable. Ms. Maultsby said that every citizen paid for the service of backyard collection, but only 40% received it. She stated her belief that the working conditions of the sanitation workers were deplorable. Ms. Maultsby said much money had been spent on integrated solid waste management planning, which hadn’t been implemented, and the goals of 60% waste reduction hadn’t been met.
Aaron Nelson, representing the Chamber of Commerce, spoke regarding the Special Use Permit (SUP) fees and the proposal to raise them, especially for the non-profit institutions. He said for a 10,000 square foot addition the cost of the SUP would rise from $875 to $7,000, an 800% increase. Mr. Nelson stated that the SUP fee for a new 10,000 square foot structure would increase 400%, from $1,750 to $7,000. He said he felt that cost was too much for a non-profit institution to pay, when approval of the SUP was not guaranteed. Mr. Nelson noted that the zoning amendment fees were determined as 50% of the SUP fees, which, in addition, would significantly raise the fee costs. He said the Council should wait until after the Development Ordinance was rewritten, before deciding to raise the development fees, with exemptions for non-profits, government agencies, small businesses, fraternities, and sororities.
Ruby Sinreich, a member of the “Pay-As-You-Throw” Committee, but not speaking on behalf of the Committee, said she was in favor of curbside pickup, because it would save money to be spent on worthy costs elsewhere in the community. She said backyard pickup did not serve all of the Town, although it was included in the services to be provided to everyone through their taxes. Ms. Sinreich asked about the quality of life for the people who lived near the landfill, or the quality of life for the sanitation workers. She said curbside would work well with "pay-as-you-throw.” Ms. Sinreich said the people in Carrboro did not complain about the aesthetics of their curbside carts, added that she hoped that there would be no loss of jobs with curbside pickup.
Louis Rubin, retired professor at UNC, said that the people who opposed the change to curbside pickup were citizens, many who have lived in the Town for many years and who cared for the appearance and the quality of life in the community. He said many were elderly, for whom having to wheel trash and garbage out to the street would be a considerable burden. Mr. Rubin said those who were in favor of curbside collection wanted it because the money used for trash collection could be used for other purposes. He asked the Council not to vote to place this unwarranted burden on its fellow citizens, in order to make a relatively small amount of savings available for other purposes.
Gary Barnes, a resident of the Ironwoods neighborhood, spoke in favor of curbside pickup. He said his neighborhood had been part of the pilot test of curbside pickup, and the residents continued to take their trash to the curbside after the trial was over. Mr. Barnes said these people were the “silent majority” not finding it burdensome. He asked that recycling and trash collection be favored equally. Mr. Barnes noted he would like to see the money saved addressed to SROs, public parks, Town beautification projects, and for other aesthetic concerns. He said he would favor a penalty for people who did not take in their garbage cans. Mr. Barnes urged the Council not to favor a system that would make “pay-as-you-throw” a more difficult conversion.
Steven Scroggs, Assistant Superintendent of the Chapel Hill/Carrboro City Schools, said he wished the Council to continue support of the funding for the SROs for the School District. He said the School System would like more time for the transition for funding of the SROs. Mr. Scroggs said the SROs provided an invaluable safety resource for the schools. He said he thought funding could be found for the continuation of the SROs, but not in time to keep the program continuing uninterrupted. Mr. Scroggs asked the Council for support of the SROs, during the transition.
Council Member Ward asked Mr. Scroggs if he could give a time frame when he felt the school budget could adjust to greater funding of the SROs. Mr. Scroggs said they were preparing the grant application and were looking at a transition period of this school year.
Council Member Bateman said she supported funding of the SROs, and asked Mr. Scroggs if what he was asking was for the Council to go 50-50% with the funding grant. Mr. Scroggs said that was correct.
Council Member Wiggins asked, if the Council did not increase the amount it was presently contributing, would that mean that the Resource Officers would not be present in the schools. Mr. Scroggs said that presently there were Resource Officers in all of the high schools and all of the middle schools. He said the funding, which came from the State, had a $66,000 line item in it, which would stretch for the high schools until the end of next year, but would give no services in the middle schools.
Council Member Wiggins asked if keeping the Resource Officers in the schools was totally up to the Council. Mr. Scroggs said they were exploring other avenues for funding, but were not sure whether or not they would be funded. He added that the County Commissioners had not finished its budget, and the State had not yet made a decision for funding, so the schools wanted to have the funding in the Chapel Hill budget, since the Town was at a time for completing its budget.
Council Member Wiggins said one way or another the contribution would come from tax funds, whether from the Orange County taxes or the Chapel Hill taxes, in one budget or another. Mr. Scroggs said there was the possibility that those funds would not be present, and the school system was asking all the jurisdictions to contribute.
COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WARD, TO REFER ALL COMMENTS FROM THE HEARING TO THE MANAGER.
Council Member Wiggins asked for more information about the implementation schedule for curbside pickup. Mr. Horton said the staff would sketch out what the process would be.
Council Member Brown said she would like some time to formulate her questions, and put them into writing. She said she was not ready to discuss them at this meeting.
Mayor pro tem Pavão agreed, adding he wanted more time to consider the discussions at this hearing.
Council Member Ward wanted clarification on some issues:
· Were the figures of 40% of the population receiving backyard collection accurate?
· What kind of enforcement did the staff envision for carts left overnight or the time period they could be left?
Council Member Evans asked about the issue of tax districts and requested a report back to the Council.
Council Member Bateman asked what the citizen meant by rolling the carts to the top of the driveway, as a compromise. Mr. Horton said he believed she meant to the portion of the driveway nearest the house, which was basically what was being done at the present time.
THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER FOY, TO ADJOURN THE MEETING. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
The meeting adjourned at 9:47 p.m.
The minutes from May 10, 2000 were adopted on 7-5-2000.
______________________________
Town Clerk