Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
� <br /> Commissioner Jacobs made reference to the rose sheet and asked about the <br /> statement, "it is our intent to issue the remaining $2.7 million for parks and open space when <br /> financing is sought for Elementary School #11." <br /> Michael Talbert said that this was part of the motion when the County Commissioners <br /> approved the $2.8 million, which was sold in April 2009, knowing that they had authorized $20 <br /> million in 2001 bonds. Up until that point, in December 2008, the County had sold $14.5 <br /> million that was dedicated to parks and open space. When the County decided to issue $33 <br /> million in new debt there were some technicalities in the size of the bond issue to keep it <br /> qualified and get a preferred interest rate. Therefore, the County Commissioners decided to <br /> only issue slightly less than $30 million instead of $33 million. When this was done, there was <br /> a downsizing from $5.5 million to $2.8 million. The $2.7 million will be additional proceeds over <br /> and above the $1.86 million. <br /> Frank Clifton said that there are a lot of accounting and budgeting transactions that <br /> were going on simultaneously with two different departments. Now these two departments are <br /> combined — Finance and Budget— and this should never happen again. <br /> Commissioner Foushee arrived at 8:27 PM. <br /> Commissioner McKee said that he is concerned that the original bond funds were put <br /> before the voters and approved and in 2008 the unissued bond money lapsed. With that lapse <br /> it was no longer possible to issue the remaining amount of the bonds for any of these <br /> programs. Rather than going back to the voters, the money was obtained through alternative <br /> financing. He does not think that there is anything wrong with doing that, but it is <br /> circumventing the original intent. He said that he knows that the reallocation of monies from <br /> one fund to another to make up for shortfalls is a standard practice, but he thinks that the <br /> funds should be returned to the original designated use as quickly as possible to account for <br /> that return. <br /> Clarence Grier said that one of the things that staff recognized was that a lot of the <br /> communication in the past that should have been provided to the Board of County <br /> Commissioners was not provided. He assured the County Commissioners that he would <br /> always communicate with them. <br /> VOTE: UNANIMOUS <br /> d. Closinq of County Capital Projects <br /> The Board considered closing seven completed County Capital Projects and closing <br /> prior years' activities in six active County Capital Projects. The details for closing these <br /> projects are shown in the schedules on page 3 of the agenda materials. <br /> Michael Talbert summarized this item. <br /> BACKGROUND: The Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for June 30, 2010 has <br /> 86 capital projects with activity in the County Capital Projects Fund. Over the past eight years, <br /> few if any capital projects were closed even though many have been completed for several <br /> years. <br /> On October 26, 2010, the Board was presented the second draft of a revised Five Year <br /> Capital Investment Plan. The format was discussed and changes were requested to improve <br /> that format and provide the Board with information that is necessary to make Capital Funding <br /> decisions. One component of the Capital Investment Plan is to review active Capital Projects <br /> and close projects as completed. <br /> As of June 30, 2010, there are seven completed County Capital Projects that can be <br /> closed. Attached is a detail schedule of the completed projects with the total project budgets <br />