Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
3 <br />year. Both school systems have requested Commissioner approval of the <br />remaining Level 1 projects that the Board deferred in June. <br />As stated earlier, approval of Level 2 projects, those projects that require several <br />phases to complete, will be requested at the appropriate times in accordance <br />with the Board's adopted School Planning and Funding Policy over the life of the <br />major project. Examples of Level 2 projects include CHCCS Elementary #10, <br />Staff plans to include approval of remaining School and County capital project <br />ordinances for fiscal year 2006 -07 on the September 12, 2006 agenda unless the <br />Board directs otherwise during the August 31 work session. <br />B. Analysis of Future Debt Affordability and Staff Updates on County and <br />School Capital Projects <br />Orange County Commissioners along with both local school boards face a <br />number of future capital and operating needs in order to provide quality services <br />and learning environments to our citizens. During the County's 2006 -07 budget <br />and capital planning work sessions this past spring, Commissioners discussed a <br />variety of projects that would go a long way in meeting those school and County <br />needs. Examples of those needs include completion of two state of the art senior <br />centers, construction of new elementary, middle and high schools in our two <br />school districts, and provision of sanitary water and sewer services to citizens <br />located in the Efland /Buckhorn areas of the County. Attachment 2 of this <br />agenda abstract, County and School Projects Requiring Debt Funding, <br />offers a list of projects discussed by the Board this past spring. <br />As discussions continued throughout the spring, it became clear that the amount <br />of funding required to meet the identified capital needs would require the County <br />to assume debt above and beyond the amount currently programmed and <br />endorsed by Commissioners. To that end, the Board instructed staff to analyze <br />how the identified needs may or may not fit within the County's current debt <br />management policy of maintaining annual debt payments within the Board's <br />adopted debt management policy. The adopted Board policy states that annual <br />debt service payments are to be equivalent to or less than 15 percent of the <br />County's total annual General Fund budget. <br />Over the summer, County staff has worked with Local Government Commission <br />(LGC) staff, County Bond Counsel, Robert Jessup, and County Attorney, Geofrey <br />Gledhill among others to analyze options that would enable the County to <br />maximize resources while still adhering to the 15 percent debt capacity policy <br />limitation. It is important to note that the affordability of future debt depends on <br />several variables such as the annual increase in the County's approved General <br />Fund budget along with the amount of money borrowed and interest rate <br />obtained with each debt issuance. Staff has run various analyses based on <br />these variables including a range of the amount of debt that Commissioners <br />might consider should the County's General Fund increase at annual percentage <br />