Browse
Search
JMRPWG agenda 052599
OrangeCountyNC
>
BOCC Archives
>
Advisory Boards and Work Groups - Inactive
>
Joint Master Recreation and Parks Work Group
>
JMRPWG agenda 052599
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/5/2020 5:11:37 PM
Creation date
2/5/2020 4:59:08 PM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
225
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
minimal growth in town programs . County <br /> assumption of responsibility for most facilities and <br /> services at some future time when capacity to perform <br /> and community acceptability has been demonstrated. <br /> b . Advantages : Same as in 1 b , but attained over time <br /> with enhanced opportunity for acceptance . The <br /> County is in the best position to be the lead agent in <br /> funding , acquisition, and maintenance for an expandea <br /> capital program . This role can position the County to <br /> become the primary provider of facilities and programs <br /> and to be accepted as such . Transfer of existing major <br /> park ownership and maintenance responsibility to <br /> County may be an interim step . <br /> c . Disadvantages : Same as 1 c except community <br /> acceptance and transition problems would be reduced . <br /> 3 . Program management by Carrboro or Chapel Hill . <br /> a. Description : lnterlocal agreements to assign <br /> countywide responsibility to one town . <br /> b . Advantages : Reduced administrative responsibility and <br /> cost for one town and the County . Benefits of <br /> coordination, such as economy of scale and more <br /> effective use of resources would be realized for <br /> operating programs . <br /> c . Disadvantages : The operating town would have <br /> responsibility without control of revenues . Potential <br /> for intergovernmental disagreement on annual funding . <br /> Little benefit for capital program because an <br /> intergovernmental process for facility lanni p ng and <br /> capital funding would still be necessary . Benefits <br /> would be limited to those associated with operations <br /> coordination . <br /> 4 . Independent governmental authority ( independent park <br /> district) <br /> a . Description . Independent governmental unit <br /> established for the purpose of providing park facilities <br /> and services . Powers to tax and issue bonds <br /> independently from other governing agencies . Board <br /> of directors may be either elected or appointed by <br /> existing governi e ng boards . <br /> 10 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.