Browse
Search
Agenda - 04-20-1993 - VII-C
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
1990's
>
1993
>
Agenda - 04-20-1993
>
Agenda - 04-20-1993 - VII-C
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/23/2017 9:28:47 AM
Creation date
1/17/2017 2:58:44 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
4/20/1993
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
VII-C
Document Relationships
Minutes - 19930420
(Linked From)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\1990's\1993
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
20
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
SECTION 2 <br /> SHARE OF EXISTING COUNTY EXPENDITURES <br /> TO TOTAL LOCAL NONRESIDENTIAL USES <br /> Total County Expenditures - This figure represents the total county expenditures for the current fiscal year <br /> budget. This information may be obtained from the county's finance or budget office. Example - $42,494,467. <br /> Proportion of Nonresidential Value To Total Local Real Property Value - This figure is derived by dividing the <br /> county's nonresidential equalized real property value ($380,988,660 in our example)by total local equalized real <br /> property value ($3,463,533,275 in our example). The resulting quotient indicates that 11% of the total local <br /> equalized real property value is nonresidential. <br /> Refinement Coefficient - County expenditures are not allocated according to market values of residential and <br /> nonresidential properties. It is therefore wrong to assume that because 11%of the total equalized real property <br /> value is nonresidential, that 11% of the county's total expenditures go to serve nonresidential developments. <br /> Generally speaking, residential developments place more demands on county services, and therefore, cost the <br /> county more than nonresidential developments. It is best that the analyst contact the tax assessor and finance <br /> department for this figure. Based on input from the tax assessor and a brief overview of services offered by <br /> departments, our refinement coefficient was set at 20 %. This means that 20 % of the 11% nonresidential <br /> market value actually goes to serve nonresidential developments. The resulting 80% goes to residential. <br /> Total Existing County Expenditures Attributable To Nonresidential Uses-This figure is the product of the above <br /> three figures(($42,494,467 * .11) * .20),or$934,878. This figure represents the total existing county expenditures <br /> attributable to nonresidential uses. <br /> SECTION 3 <br /> FUTURE TOTAL COUNTY OPERATING COSTS <br /> INDUCED BY THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT <br /> Total Existing County Expenditures Attributable to Nonresidential Uses - See above. This figure is$934,878 in <br /> our example. <br /> Proportion of Facility to Total Local Nonresidential Real Property Value -This figure is derived by dividing the <br /> real property market value of the proposed development ($1,899,819 in our example)by the total nonresidential <br /> real property value ($380,988,660 in our example). This gives us a quotient of.005 indicating that the market <br /> value of this development is .5 percent of the total nonresidential real property value. <br /> County Costs to Proposed Development - This figure is the product of the two figures above ($934,878 * .005 <br /> = $4,662). This gives us the total county expenditures allocated to the future nonresidential development. <br /> 7 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.