Browse
Search
Agenda - 02-07-2017 - 6-a - Minutes
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
2010's
>
2017
>
Agenda - 02-07-2017 - Regular Mtg.
>
Agenda - 02-07-2017 - 6-a - Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/2/2017 3:44:08 PM
Creation date
2/3/2017 8:34:27 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
2/7/2017
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
6a
Document Relationships
Minutes 02-07-2017
(Linked From)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\2010's\2017
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
52
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
2 <br /> 1 Commissioner Jacobs asked if the Chair and Vice Chair would come back with a <br /> 2 clarification of policy about having the BOCC represented on other boards, in positions that <br /> 3 require an elected official; as well as other elected officials serving on BOCC advisory boards, <br /> 4 but are not members of the BOCC. <br /> 5 Commissioner Burroughs had no announcements or petitions. <br /> 6 Commissioner Rich had no announcements or petitions. <br /> 7 Commissioner Marcoplos had no announcements or petitions. <br /> 8 Commissioner McKee said he handed out a request for information on the light rail <br /> 9 project (LRT) containing several categories that he would like GoTriangle provide to the Board. <br /> 10 He said his second handout was a list of items to evaluate the viability of the light rail system. <br /> 11 These handouts are shown below. <br /> 12 Commissioner McKee asked if staff would approach GoTriangle about obtaining this <br /> 13 information. He petitioned that an arm's length independent review of the LRT, by a qualified <br /> 14 consulting firm, begin immediately. He asked if the GoTriangle budget for the LRT could be <br /> 15 posted on the County website, for public viewing. <br /> 16 <br /> 17 Information Request: <br /> 18 Expenses: <br /> 19 • Report of total expenses by quarter and by category for FY 2014 and 2015 <br /> 20 • Report of expenses by month and by category for FY 2016 <br /> 21 • Request that we receive monthly reports for expenses by category going forward to be <br /> 22 delivered to finance by the 15th of the following month <br /> 23 • Request a clarification of how administration cost are allocated to individual projects <br /> 24 <br /> 25 Income: <br /> 26 • Request a definitive statement of what income sources are locked in (sales tax, fees) <br /> 27 • Request a concise but definitive statement on what these sources of revenue are being <br /> 28 spent on <br /> 29 • Report on what if any credit rating Go Triangle has and what interest rate that will <br /> 30 currently establish <br /> 31 • Report on what the extra cost to the light rail project will be if that interest rate rises by <br /> 32 1% <br /> 33 • Report on how Orange County would finance the requested (currently) 40,000,000.00 <br /> 34 and what would the impact be on our credit rating and capacity if we borrow these funds <br /> 35 <br /> 36 Other: <br /> 37 • Find the BRT study included in an August 2015 data dump and determine if LRT and <br /> 38 BRT are compared using the same assumptions and modeling <br /> 39 • Using original plan cost and revenue assumptions, create a flow chart outlining each <br /> 40 individual item in the plan and how those assumptions have changed over time using Go <br /> 41 Triangle power point presentations <br /> 42 • Create a list of firms that have the ability to review the light rail plan and that are not <br /> 43 currently engaged with Go Triangle or intending to seek work on this project. <br /> 44 <br /> 45 Environmental <br /> 46 • Expected reduction in traffic and reduced travel time 15-501 year-by-year LRT versus <br /> 47 BRT <br /> 48 • Expected reduction in traffic on NC 54 year-by-year LRT versus BRT <br /> 49 • Expected reduction in traffic on 1-40 year-by-year LRT versus BRT <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.