Browse
Search
Minutes - 19950209
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
Minutes - Approved
>
1990's
>
1995
>
Minutes - 19950209
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/14/2008 3:29:32 PM
Creation date
8/13/2008 1:22:04 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
2/9/1995
Document Type
Minutes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
5
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
i <br />a part of the project costs is an appropriate one. However, the budget implication <br />is that there is not enough money to implement that policy. The issue is how to <br />channel sufficient money to cover all of these costs. The policy needs to be for the <br />total start-up costs to be part of the initial project cost. <br />John Link agreed that all start-up costs should be included in either the Bond <br />or Sales Tax revenue on the Capital side of the budget. There are still new <br />operating costs that have to be picked up through current expense. The issue is to <br />be clear about which expenses fit each catagory. The definition of start-up costs in <br />terms of equipment and supplies is fairly liberal. Textbooks, media center, and <br />computers could be included in start-up costs. <br />Neil Pedersen indicated that support staff does not transfer from the old <br />school to the new school. These add up to very significant expenses. The new High <br />School was too far along in the process for start-up costs to have been included in <br />the project costs. However, the project costs for the elementary school did include <br />the start-up costs. The only unbudgeted start-up costs for the elementary school <br />relate to staff development and administrative staff hired in advance of opening. <br />Chairman Carey indicated that he felt there was consensus in the group that <br />start-up cost need to be included in the project cost, wherever possible. He noted <br />that the Board of Commissioners' policy on how to allocate the 1/2 cent sales tax <br />could again be readdressed. Commissioner Willhoit indicated that the 1/2 cent sales <br />tax money is committed to the Court project for the short term. <br />John Link concurred that the 1/2 cent sales tax money was already committed for <br />the next several years. He suggested that one element of this discussion could be <br />whether or not to continue to fund recurring Capital out of property tax or to <br />consider some other means, such as the District Tax. <br />Robert Batemen indicated that the County Commissioners are charged with <br />financing the schools and he felt that it was inappropriate for the school Boards to <br />tell the Commissioners how to do that. He opposes a District Tax in Orange County. <br />Ken Touw pointed out that because the growth is occurring in southern Orange it <br />places an undue burden on the northern orange residents who will be asked to help pay <br />for schools being built in southern Orange. Using the District Tax would resolve <br />that inequity. <br />Commissioner Willhoit mentioned that several years ago the tax rate was <br />increased for a two year period at which time the tax was eliminated. That method <br />could be used for school costs. <br />Commissioner Halkiotis asked that both systems consider reusing floor plans for <br />new schools in order to achieve a savings. <br />John Link mentioned that the County will begin to pay less on its indebtedness <br />starting in the 1996-1997 fiscal year. The Board of Commissioners could decide to <br />use that savings for start-up costs or recurring capital, etc. <br />Larry Kolbinsky indicated that the Orange County School Board will make a <br />commitment this year to reexamine all expenditures and hold down costs. <br />Susan Dovenbarger suggested that both School Boards lobby State Legislators to <br />commission and pay for architectural drawings for new elementary and high schools to <br />be used by local systems. <br />Commissioner Willhoit indicated that he felt the Manager could look at the <br />school capital projections and report back to the Board. He suggested that the <br />report encompass the entire County rather than by districts. He mentioned that a <br />citizen contacted him recently and requested that the impact fee be raised to $3,000. <br />Commissioner Gordon agreed that there were reasons to create county wide <br />projections. However, in the short term Chapel Hill/Carrboro anticipates a much <br />larger growth than the Orange County system. She mentioned that issues of funding <br />equity standards for both operating and capital needs to be discussed.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.