Agenda - 05-05-1997 - 10b - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

1 32 From: <adams04 I @mc.duke.edu> To: ocmail.ocmail(skost) Date: 4/25/97 2:06pm Subject: Comments on Bond Package Sally: I have just a couple comments on the bond package,which looks very similar to what I had recommended. The first is to include in the appendix a comment on the school enrollment and cost projections. The task force spent a fair amount of time discussing the validity of the enrollment projections for both school systems,with a majority (including myself)feeling that the estimates could be low,especially beyond the year 2000. In addition,the cost of the Meadowmont Middle School does not take into account the$1 million in land costs incurred if the deal with East-West Partners falls through. In short, while the dollcfs in the bond devoted to schools appears large,the need may be even greater. A second point, is to translate the increase in tax rate into a specific number per personal property valuation. This bond package is so crucial to our school overcrowding problem,that the"marketing" aspect should not be overlooked. That is,the taxpayers should know that they are getting a great and diverse number of needs met for less than the cost of a pair of name brand tennis shoes(for a$150,000 house). This tax increase is not the same as a federal increase where we have no idea where the tax revenue is actually going. The voters should have a very clear idea of the needs of the community and how they are being met by this bond. Finally,I enjoyed participating in the Task Force and appreciate all the hard work you and the county staff did to make things happen. I was especially impressed by the idea of having a facilitator present to guide and focus our discussions,and in the end,use some techniques that really helped bring us to some decisions. I look forward to seeing both the majority and minority reports. David 30