Orange County NC Website
20 <br /> Bonnie Hammersley said the County and schools operating expenses are starting to <br /> eat away at the fund balance. <br /> Commissioner Jacobs said the BOCC set the 17% fund balance during FY 2013-14, as <br /> a way to improve the County's fiscal standing. <br /> Chair Dorosin said the Board discussed this, and he thought the Board voted to change <br /> the 17% policy, but it looks like the Board only agreed to just dip into the balance. <br /> Bonnie Hammersley said the BOCC agreed to take money out of the fund balance, but <br /> the impact was unknown at the time. She said the BOCC did have a more comprehensive <br /> discussion about changing the policy, but there was also discussion about the audit not yet <br /> being completed at the time. <br /> Commissioner Burroughs said she had a similar recollection, and she thought the <br /> BOCC had agreed to go to 16% last fall. She said she would be willing to consider going to <br /> 16% as the County fund balance policy. <br /> Chair Dorosin said he would support lowering the fund balance to 16%, and said the <br /> Board should make a policy decision. He said he would like the Board to vote on it formally, <br /> one way or the other. He said he would be willing to do that this evening, or wait a bit if other <br /> Commissioners would like any additional information. <br /> Commissioner Rich recalled the discussion being between 16.5% and 16%. <br /> Chair Dorosin said it is not important to remember the previous discussion, because <br /> there was no vote. He said the conversation can happen now. <br /> Commissioner Jacobs suggested asking the bond counsel about this topic. <br /> Bob Jessup said he would defer the question to Ted Cole, but there is not a bond risk <br /> within his scope. <br /> Ted Cole said if there is a near-term need for these funds, it would be preferable to use <br /> the reserves for a one-time event as opposed to just lowering the policy permanently. He said <br /> the bond agencies may ask at some point why the Board chose to permanently lower the fund <br /> balance. <br /> Ted Cole said rating agencies may or may not pick up on a permanent change, but if <br /> they do, they will ask why the change occurred. He said no one ratio is going to drive a rating, <br /> but picking away at areas of strength will eventually have an impact. He asked if there a <br /> specific reason behind lowering the percentage to 16%. <br /> Commissioner Marcoplos said he sees this money as a safeguard, and he does not <br /> see it as a risk to go to 16%. He said having the money available now, and using it in current <br /> dollars, is an investment that will save money. <br /> Commissioner Jacobs said a 5.5-cent property tax increase is expected next year, and <br /> if the reason for lowering the percentage is to give more to schools, then it will not be available <br /> to offset the tax increase next year. He said he would rather plan for the inevitable 5.5-cent <br /> property tax increase, and leave funds in the balance for one more year and then lower it next <br /> year, to offset property tax increases in FY 2018-19. <br /> Commissioner McKee said he would like to stay in a comfortable range, which is 17% <br /> for him. He said he is not opposed to lowering it, but Commissioner Jacobs makes a good <br /> point. He said there will be a demand for extra money, but "you can only sell the cows one <br /> time," and the 1% can only be taken out once. <br /> Commissioner McKee said his main concern about this discussion is not the actual <br /> percentage, but rather the trend of the fund balance going down over the years. He said the <br /> Board needs to be cognizant of this conversation, and it cannot continue to reduce the <br /> percentage of the fund balance every year. He said this is a policy change, and asked if this <br /> vote could be deferred to a regular meeting agenda, so that the public can be notified and <br /> heard. <br />