Council Today, we had our regularly scheduled SWAC meeting. We discussed two issues: 1. Proposed ballot measure 2. Alternatives if it fails The discussion on the ballot measure ended with the offering for a motion to support the proposed ordinance. No motion was made by any members. Individuals were asked if they supported the proposed ballot measure, and none voiced support. Rather than offering a negative recommendation, we felt it best to leave the Council with our concerns (not in any order of importance): • guarantee that the funds raised will be used for only solid waste needs (even after reviewing section nine of the draft ordinance) • sunset clause • fairness of undeveloped parcels not being included (future access to the system) • legal defensibility • fairness to commercial customers • impact on current model for route-collected pick-up feasibility • disproportionate increase increase in costs to a large portion of waste generators - route-collected customers suffer most • unlikelihood of residential route-collected recyclables program with low/free recycling at county-operated facilities • fairness of multiplier(s) • fairness of county residents/businesses being asked to a support system used by the Town residents/businesses as well (what use nexus explains this?) • sunset clause currently lacking? • comprehensive plan forward seems to be missing from current path • not based on pay-as-you-throw - current trend in solid waste in most other counties/municipalities • funding-only solution - does not address operational failures of past decade and current concerns • failure to address expressed local-option desires from Lopezians and Orcasians • possible blank check on future expenditures • incomplete information on total revenue generated with $100 base fee and suggested multipliers ($1.2 mm is expressed revenue goal, but no

• • • • • • •

idea how much the ordinance produces as currently laid out with base fee and multipliers) lack of cost control incentives uncoordinated with local-option desires and Town interests likely significant short- and middle-term increases in already top-heavy administrative system, as well as burdens to other County departments (ie. Assessor, Auditor, PA) lack of clearly expressed comprehensive rate plan (what's the gate fee, tipping fee, differential for unique customer classes?) tipping fee and/or gate fee increases at a 5-7% increase each year unlikely to stem leakage failure to establish needed/desired service levels inequity of unincorporated businesses/residences carrying the burden of the entire system

In short, it's fairly concrete that the SWAC does *not* support the current ballot measure. The discussion on the alternatives was robust and informative. We reviewed the draft "white paper" from the SWAC workgroup, and will have firm/detailed answers/documents in the next few days. Thank you for your time, and I look forward to engaging the Council at the Aug. 8 workshop. Respectfully submitted, Sam Jacobson SWAC Chairperson