Browse
Search
Agenda - 04-05-2011 - 8b
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
2010's
>
2011
>
Agenda - 04-05-2011
>
Agenda - 04-05-2011 - 8b
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/1/2011 11:31:39 AM
Creation date
4/1/2011 11:31:22 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
4/5/2011
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
8b
Document Relationships
Minutes 04-05-2011
(Linked From)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\2010's\2011
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
6
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
<br />Using a cost sharing arrangement between the towns to make the County whole based upon <br />the percentage of sales taxes each town receives would provide the following impacts: <br />Orange County $ 874,082 Increase <br />Chapel Hill (65.65%) ($573,807) Decrease <br />Carrboro (23.99%) ($209,689) Decrease <br />Hillsborough (8.14%) ($ 71,168) Decrease <br />Mebane (2.16%) ($ 18,870) Decrease <br />Durham (0.06%) ($ 548) Decrease <br />Certainly, no municipality desires a change from the current method selected by the County for <br />sales tax distribution which would reduce its sales tax revenues. However, each municipality <br />also remains at risk that the County might one day in the future select the other available option. <br />Each year a future Board of County Commissioners will decide this issue within the authority <br />granted by State law. There is an effort within the N'C General Assembly ~a North Carolina <br />League of Municipalities' legislative goal} to place further limits on a County's ability to make <br />this decision in the future. <br />REC~MMENDATI~N~S~: The Manager recommends no change in the options selected at this <br />time. However, the County has limited ability to increase or control future revenues beyond <br />property taxes and the distribution of sales tax revenues, <br />During a difficult budget period, a future Board of Commissioners might view a change in the <br />sales tax distribution formula from a different perspective Ito the detriment of the towns at that <br />time}. <br />Growth management practices and a lack of utility infrastructure in the rural ~non~municipal} <br />areas of Grange County ensure that the `Population' method of sales tax distribution will always <br />benefit the municipalities. As urban centers intensify density and sales tax revenues grow, the <br />disparity between the two formula options will increase. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.