Browse
Search
Agenda - 01-05-1987
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
1980's
>
1987
>
Agenda - 01-05-1987
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/17/2016 2:18:52 PM
Creation date
9/27/2016 11:34:41 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
1/5/1987
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
324
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 /> • <br /> Soanttl of(q 181 <br /> FINANCE DEPARTMENT rJ <br /> „.....) <br /> MEMORANDUM ORANGE COUNTY <br /> GORDON R. BAKER <br /> DIRECTOR <br /> TO: Board of County Commissioners <br /> FROM: Finance Director/ <br /> SUBJECT: Financing Options for Long-Range Capital Needs <br /> DATE: December 23, 1986 <br /> Some possible sources of funding for long-range capital needs (schools and others) <br /> are outlined below for your consideration. These sources, as well as any others that <br /> may not be listed, are scheduled to be discussed at the January 5th Board Meeting as <br /> a first step in preparing for the County's response to a survey of school capital needs <br /> being conducted by the North Carolina Department of Public Instruction. <br /> In addition to the school capital requirements, the County faces other long-range <br /> capital needs that will be brought to the Board for consideration in the Spring of 1987 <br /> as part of the Five Year Capital Improvement Plan. <br /> Five Possible Sources of Funding <br /> 1. Local bond issue - This would allow major capital projects for the schools <br /> and other needs to be undertaken much sooner than under the present pay-as- <br /> you-go plan. Also the advantage of bonds is that it spreads the repayment <br /> cost over a longer period and to the public that will benefit from the project. <br /> The disadvantage of this approach is that passage of the bonds through voter <br /> approval is uncertain. Also, costs of a referendum and interest cost make <br /> the total outlay higher than a state bond pool or pay-as-you-go approach. <br /> 2. State bond pool - Again, major capital projects for schools could be under- <br /> taken much sooner and with the beneficiaries paying the cost over the life <br /> of the project. Enabling legislation is needed from the General Assembly and <br /> then a statewide referendum must be held before this option is available. <br /> Advantages of this option over a local bond issue are the elimination of the <br /> costs of holding a referendum at the local level and the reduction in interest <br /> costs as a result of the debt being issued by the State rather than the County. <br /> However, this would only be available for school capital needs and would not <br /> address the other needs of the county. <br /> 3. Two-thirds net debt reduction bond issue - While this would not require <br /> voter approval, the amount of bonds that could be issued each year is small <br /> and would hot be sufficient to allow the County to move ahead with the major <br /> projects that are needed. Taking last year as an example, were the County <br /> to have borrowed in relation to the principal paid in that year it would <br /> only have amounted to $330,000.00. <br /> 106 EAST MARGARET LANE • HILLSBOROUGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27278 • 919/732-8181 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.