Browse
Search
Agenda - 10-20-2015 - 6a - Minutes
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
2010's
>
2015
>
Agenda - 10-20-2015 - Regular Mtg.
>
Agenda - 10-20-2015 - 6a - Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/16/2015 7:54:02 AM
Creation date
10/16/2015 7:53:08 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
10/20/2015
Meeting Type
Work Session
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
6a
Document Relationships
Minutes 10-20-2015
(Linked From)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\2010's\2015
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
61
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
8 <br /> 1 • Orange County (MFRA): 1.2% <br /> 2 • Orange County (2016): 1.1% <br /> 3 • North Carolina AAA Counties: <br /> 4 — Minimum 1.2% <br /> 5 — Median 1.5% <br /> 6 — Maximum 1.6% <br /> 7 • National AAA Counties: <br /> 8 — Minimum 0.0% <br /> 9 — Median 0.6% <br /> 10 — Maximum 3.5% <br /> 11 <br /> 12 Debt Service to Expenditures <br /> 13 • Orange County (MFRA): 13.6% <br /> 14 • Orange County (2016)1: 12.7% <br /> 15 • North Carolina AAA Counties: <br /> 16 — Minimum 13.6% <br /> 17 — Median 16.8% <br /> 18 — Maximum 23.8% <br /> 19 • National AAA Counties: <br /> 20 — Minimum 0.0% <br /> 21 — Median 8.8% <br /> 22 — Maximum 23.8% <br /> 23 <br /> 24 Ted Cole said the County does have a maximum Debt Service to General Fund <br /> 25 Revenue policy of debt policy of 15 percent. <br /> 26 Ted Cole said the County has been managed well, as related to debt, and there is some <br /> 27 room to take on some additional debt. He said the County has debt capacity. <br /> 28 Ted Cole referred to page 7 which reviewed the Decline in Tax Supported Debt Service. <br /> 29 He said this relates to affordability. He reviewed two tables which are incorporated here by <br /> 30 reference. He said the County is retiring its debt rapidly. <br /> 31 Ted Cole said the decline in the annual debt service should be captured in order to <br /> 32 finance new debt. <br /> 33 Ted Cole referred to pages 9 and 10 which give a Case Overview of the Capital <br /> 34 Improvement Plan: <br /> 35 <br /> 36 • As part of the annual CIP process, the County identifies Capital Projects for potential <br /> 37 debt funding. In addition to the potential debt issuances in the CIP the County is <br /> 38 considering voting a General Obligation Bond Referendum in November 2016. <br /> 39 <br /> 40 • Future debt is assumed to be funded under the following assumptions: <br /> 41 —Issuance Date: As indicated <br /> 42 —First Interest: Fiscal Year Following Issuance <br /> 43 —First Principal: Fiscal Year Following Issuance <br /> 44 —Interest Rate: 3.75% - 4.50% <br /> 45 —Term: 20 Years <br /> 46 —Non-GO Amortization: Level Principal <br /> 47 —GO Amortization: Level Principal <br /> 48 <br /> 49 Key Debt Ratio Growth Assumptions: <br /> 50 —Assessed Value - Natural Growth: 2017: 1.50%, 2018 & Beyond: 2.00% <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.