My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
9/7/1988
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1980's
>
1988
>
9/7/1988
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 12:00:11 PM
Creation date
6/12/2015 2:21:39 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Special Call Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
09/07/1988
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
26
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
In further discussion, it was noted that there are new <br />technologies, and sometimes the DER will let you go higher. Mr. <br />Pinto noted that the regulations have already changed, and for <br />the next cell we will have to put in a double liner or a liner <br />with a clay base, and that will be $700,000 more. There is no <br />easy answer. <br />Director Pinto continued his review of the Landfill budget, <br />noting that the actual budget numbers themselves were reduced <br />somewhat to $3,874,322, which equates to a charge of $31.50 per <br />equivalent residential unit (ERA). He cautioned that until we <br />get through the appeal process and get started operating, the <br />cost may be less or it may get to be more. The regulations on <br />Landfills are changing daily. <br />The Chairman asked if anyone present wished to be heard in <br />regard to the Solid Waste Disposal District. <br />Attorney Bruce Barkett came before the Board representing Ed <br />Schlitt, owner and manager of several properties which would be <br />included in the third concern brought up by Chairman Scurlock, <br />i.e., leases where these costs cannot.be passed -through. The <br />so-called glitches and kinks in the proposed assessment method <br />represent a cost of about $90,000 to Mr. Schlitt. Attorney <br />Barkett explained that when you have a tenant such as Walgreen's, <br />Eckerd's, Woolworth's, or Winn Dixie, they have long term leases, <br />30 to 40 years, and ten years ago assessments such as this were <br />unheard of. These long term leases are pretty ironclad and do <br />not allow the landlord to pass these costs through. Mr. Barkett <br />questioned whether much consideration was given to this problem <br />when developing the assessment, and he felt the notices sent out <br />about setting up the SWDD certainly did not cause people to think <br />that they might have such tremendous increases on their property <br />taxes. As far as there being a savings because the waste <br />collectors should reduce their bills, he pointed out that the <br />landlord doesn't pay the collector, the tenant does, and the <br />J <br />tenant does not <br />pay the assessment. <br />He, therefore, suggested <br />7 1988 <br />22 <br />Boor 74 PiUF 1 ? 9 <br />J <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.