MINUTES OF SPECIAL WORKSHOP MEETING
OF THE EMERALD ISLE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
FEBRUARY 7, 2003 – TOWN HALL – 10:00 A.M.             Mayor Art Schools called the meeting to order at 10:00 A.M.

Board members present for the meeting were Mayor Schools, Commissioners McElraft, Messer, Farmer, Eckhardt and Marks.  Staff members present was Town Manager Frank Rush, Assistant Town Manager Georgia Overman and Town Clerk Carolyn Custy. Others present were Keith Stroud, Operations Manager Waste Industries, Thomas Winstead Eastern Division President and Dallas Goodwin, accounts.

Mayor Schools announced that this meeting was a workshop and there would be no decisions made. He then called on Mr. Frank Rush, Town Manager to give a brief overview of the subject for the meeting.

Mr. Rush began by saying a lot of thought, contemplation and discussion has gone into the options presented at this meeting.  They were developed with the best intentions in mind.  The town has struggled with this issue for a while along with the solid waste people. 

OPTION 1 – REQUIRE ROLL-OUT AND ROLL-IN OF 90-GALLON CONTAINERS; TOWN CREWS PROVIDE ROLL-IN SERVICE AS NECESSARY – would eliminate the need for racks; would require 90-gallon containers to be rolled out and rolled in by property owner; requires any housing units that exceed these guidelines would be required to utilize a sufficient number of 90-gallon containers for collection. In order to finance this higher level of service, with Town employees routinely rolling-back containers from the right-of-way, the annual solid waste fee would increase from $130 to $145.  This fee increase equates to $15 per year, or an additional $1.25 per month. 

OPTION 2 – BACKYARD / UNDER HOUSE COLLECTION; REQUIRE 90-GALLON ROLL-OUT CONTAINERS – require 90-gallon containers exclusively in Emerald Isle; each rental would require one 90-gallon container for each 3-bedrooms, permanent and second homes would be required to utilize at least one 90-gallon container; would eliminate racks and would involve town’s solid waste contractor rolling out and in; containers stored adjacent to housing unit or under housing unit. Any housing units exceeding these guidelines would be required to utilize a sufficient number of 90-gallon containers. Participation in this program would be mandatory for all housing units in Emerald Isle. All other aspects of the Town’s current solid waste program would continue to operate in a similar manner.  In order to finance this higher level of service, the annual solid waste fee would increase from $130 to $170.  This fee increase equates to $40 per year, or an additional $3.33 per month.

OPTION 3 – BACKYARD / UNDER HOUSE COLLECTION; OPTIONAL SELF ROLL-OUT; REQUIRE 90-GALLON CONTAINERS - Option is identical to Option 2, with one important exception.  Property owners would have the ability to apply for an annual discount in exchange for taking responsibility for rolling-out and rolling-in their containers.  This option would not be automatic.  Interested property owners would be required to apply for this discount, and would need to provide sufficient proof that their containers would be rolled-out and rolled-in in a timely manner.  Sufficient proof would consist of any of the following:  1) a valid voter registration card indicating Emerald Isle as the permanent residence,  2) a valid NC drivers’ license indicating Emerald Isle as the permanent residence, or 3) a written agreement with a private commercial entity to provide roll-out and roll-in service in accordance with the Town’s requirements.  If the application is approved, the property owner would receive a $40 discount on the annual solid waste fee. In order to finance this higher level of service, the annual solid waste fee would increase from $130 to $170.  This fee increase equates to $40 per year, or an additional $3.33 per month.  Those who receive the self roll-out discount would pay a net fee of $130 per year, or no increase over the current annual fee.

The Board in considering these options should take note of three important points.  First, it will be important for all members of the community to consider these options in a cooperative spirit and focus more on a solution to our common problems rather than dwelling primarily on who pays more, who pays less, or who is responsible for the problem.  The status quo does not appear to be solving our common problems, and the community must be open minded about other solutions if there is any hope of improving our community.  Second, the Board must recognize that the cost figures provided are preliminary at this point, and are based on assumptions that, while reasonable and logical, may or may not hold true in practice.  It is simply impossible to predict the costs associated with these options without making assumptions, however, Mr. Rush has discussed these assumptions with Waste Industries personnel and others, and believe they are relatively accurate assumptions.  Finally, because each of these options involves the mandatory use of 90-gallon roll-out containers, the Town would work with Waste Industries to coordinate a bulk purchase of containers to provide our property owners with the lowest possible price on new containers.

• If the present system was enforced, it would work.
• The real estate people cause the problems, they should pay for it.
• 90-gallon cans too heavy for elderly to push out.
• People who don’t want to use the trash service should be exempt from paying.
• Concern about a stranger going on the property to pick up trash.
• What happens if cars get scratched?
• When second homes are shut down for winter, homeowners should get a price break.
• Three real estate companies were present, and they all showed support for the 90-gallon can, and pick up at the hours or at least off the right-of-way

• Feels this is double taxation.
• Spent $2,000 last year redoing racks – would have to start all over again.
• Has estimates but no fixed costs.
• Property Managers should do their jobs in addressing garbage for their rentals.
• Have other options other than the 90-gallon can for part-time owners.
• Four people liked Option # 3 better than the others.

There were many other suggestions that ran within the same range as those listed.  

• Remove residential garbage and recycle storage facilities (containers and racks) from public property right of way.
• Store residential garbage and recycle storage facilities on private property.
• Screen residential garbage and recycle storage facilities so that they are not visible from the street or public right-of-way.
• Improve appearance of residential property.
• Improve sanitary and safety aspects of trash storage and collection.
• Provide off street garbage and recycle collection for property owners who do not want to place their garbage and recycle containers at the street on collection days.

(1)   Include recycling options, roll-out or bins. (2) How to deal with deep lots. (3) How to decide who rolls and who doesn’t roll out.  Possibility of stickers, etc.  (4) Prevent Waste Industries from checking cans in off-season after winter shutdown. (5) Cost including recycling. (6) Fee for elderly and disabled . (7) Rack placement i.e. setbacks, right of way, can’t be more than 100 feet off road.

Mr. Rush is also going to determine how to implement this system beginning May 1, and calculate the additional cost this year.

There being no more discussion the meeting was adjourned at 12:10 P.M.

(This meeting was a workshop meeting with the intent of getting ideas from citizens, staff, and commissioners. The Mayor requested that the Clerk  summarize the major points and not record as much detail as we do at Town Board meetings.)

Respectfully submitted,

Carolyn K. Custy, CMC