Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
2 <br />3 <br />4 <br />5 <br />6 <br />7 <br />8 <br />9 <br />10 <br />11 <br />12 <br />13 <br />14 <br />15 <br />16 <br />17 <br />18 <br />19 <br />20 <br />21 <br />22 <br />23 <br />24 <br />25 <br />26 <br />27 <br />28 <br />29 <br />30 <br />31 <br />32 <br />33 <br />34 <br />35 <br />36 <br />37 <br />38 <br />39 <br />40 <br />41 <br />42 <br />43 <br />44 <br />45 <br />46 <br />47 <br />48 <br />49 <br />50 <br />E <br />The following additional points were noted by the facilitator during the presentation: <br />• In reply to a question from Commissioner Jacobs, Mr. Knutson said that Management <br />Partners recommends that the County use a ten year financial forecasting model instead of <br />a five year model. They have two reasons for this. First, the longer view enables the analysis <br />to consider that economic recessions occur about every 4 -7 years. Second, the longer view <br />also enables the analysis to capture the impacts of Orange County's four -year property <br />revaluation cycle. <br />• In reply to a question from Commissioner Price about the Major Assumptions used in the <br />modeling, Mr. Knutson said the growth in the set of operating cost drivers reflects growth in <br />the number of staff as well as growth in the cost per staff person of health costs, <br />salaries /benefits, etc. <br />• In reply to a question from Commissioner Rich, the $11 M annual structural imbalance does <br />not include any tax increase associated with the recent bond. <br />• In reply to a question from Commissioner Marcoplos, Ms. Ramaglia explained that the <br />annual half - million dollars anticipated from Wegman's offsets the impact of future recessions <br />on the County's sales tax projections. <br />• In reply to a question from Commissioner Burroughs, Mr. Knutson said that the divergence <br />(increase) of forecasted property tax revenue from the short term trend at 2021 is influenced <br />by the growth of development in the county over time. <br />• In reply to a question from Commissioner Rich, Mr. Knutson said that the property tax rate <br />analysis does not include fees other than those fees directly related to the tax such as late <br />payments and interest charges. <br />• In reply to a question from Commissioner Jacobs about Intergovernmental Revenues, Ms. <br />Ramaglia said that the $1.3M for the lottery is now included in this category after being <br />reclassified from Miscellaneous. <br />• In reply to a question from Commissioner Price, Ms. Ramaglia explained that the <br />Intergovernmental forecast is being driven by two changes: a decision by the State to <br />remove Social Service pass through fees from the County budget, and the reclassification of <br />the education lottery into this category. Ms. Hammersley added that child care services will <br />continue to be paid for, but they will be paid for by the State. <br />• In reply to a question from Commissioner Jacobs, Ms. Ramaglia said that the proposed <br />impact fee for parks is not included in revenue from Transfers In category, although it is <br />addressed in the study's conclusions and recommendations. <br />• In reply to a question from Commissioner Jacobs, Ms. Hammersley said that Support <br />Services includes IT, Human Resources, and Finance. Mr. Myren added that increases in <br />personnel costs are assigned first to Support Services and then reallocated to the other <br />categories as needed. <br />• In reply to a question from Commissioner Price, Ms. Ramaglia explained that there is no <br />growth in the forecast line for Transfers: School Capital Projects after 2020 because that line <br />is based on the projected $1.3M education lottery revenues. <br />• In reply to a question from Commissioner Burroughs, Mr. Myren said that the Baseline <br />Forecast and Sample A Option assumes that the County does not drop to a revenue neutral <br />position. Other options presented today do allow for revenue neutrality. <br />• In reply to questions from Commissioners McKee and Price, Mr. Knudsen and Ms. Ramaglia <br />said the model captures revenue expected from an assumed rate of growth in population <br />and development, based on historical patterns. Revenue from development that would push <br />beyond that historical pattern is not included. Mr. Benedict, Director of Planning and <br />Inspections, explained that there is a 2% growth baseline built into the model. <br />• In reply to a question from Commissioner Dorosin, Ms. Hammersley said that even under <br />phase -in scenarios, such as Sample Option B, the Board retains the flexibility to set the tax <br />