Browse
Search
NN ORD-1997-019 1997-1998 Budget, Capital and Grant Project Ordinanceas
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
Ordinances
>
Ordinance 1990-1999
>
1997
>
NN ORD-1997-019 1997-1998 Budget, Capital and Grant Project Ordinanceas
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/12/2013 4:14:58 PM
Creation date
8/1/2013 3:09:03 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
6/30/1997
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Ordinance
Agenda Item
9b
Document Relationships
Agenda - 06-30-1997 - 9b
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\1990's\1997\Agenda - 06-30-1997
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
43
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
39 <br /> MEMORANDUM <br /> TO: Orange County Commissioners <br /> FROM: John M. Link, Jr. , County Manager <br /> DATE: June 26, 1997 <br /> RE: Attached Letter from Mark Royster <br /> I received the attached faxed letter from Chair Royster, at 4 :45 pm <br /> June 25th. (yesterday) As I told him and staff, <br /> in earlier conversations this week, GS 115C-430 requires the BOCC to <br /> apportion current expense according to membership of each unit . As we <br /> indicated in the work session with the <br /> school systems, Mandy Farmer of the N.C. Dept . of Public <br /> Instruction stated that no new certified numbers for any <br /> school system would be changed from the original numbers of <br /> March. <br /> I am recommending that the BOCC not respond favorably to <br /> this request for the following reasons : <br /> 1 . The BOCC must respond to both school systems at the same time based <br /> on certified membership. Present law, does not allow funding for <br /> just one system. The Orange County system would have to be willing <br /> to pursue the same process as suggested by the Chapel Hill system. <br /> The uncertainty surrounding school allotments versus actual <br /> enrollment is an annual occurrence. Sometimes, school systems enroll <br /> more students than the State projected, sometimes less . In 1996-97, <br /> for example, the Orange County Schools enrolled far more than the <br /> increase of 63 students that the State had projected. In that case <br /> • and in years past, the school systems have adjusted their budgets as <br /> necessary to deal with more or fewer students than were projected and <br /> budgeted. <br /> 2 . Even if number one could be worked out, the BOCC would have to <br /> revisit the total appropriation for the school systems which would <br /> impact the tax rate. The district tax rate would also be impacted, <br /> were that source of funds to be considered. Moreover, if a higher <br /> district tax rate were established, the Board of Commissioners would <br /> not have authority to hold the additional revenue in reserve . Under <br /> State law, once the Commissioners set the district tax rate, all <br /> revenue produced is used at the discretion of the school board. <br /> 3 . Counties with more than one school system have historically, and with <br /> mutual consent by the school systems, used the spring certified <br /> numbers given by the state. This provides order, stability and a <br /> level playing field for both the school systems and the BOCC. <br /> Changing this process needs to be carefully and thoroughly reflected <br /> upon and not considered in the heat of the budget season. .,. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.