Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
<br />Gordon -May 23 Page Z. <br />IIL Concerns with the_nolicy for allocation_ of funds. for_ narks and <br />oven space <br />In retrospect, this appears to be a flawed policy, for several reasons, <br />although the motivation to ensure equitable distribution of resources <br />over a period of time is still valid. <br />A. The palicv is not comprehensive. The policy fails to consider <br />equitable distribution of resources in all categories of bond projects. <br />In 1997 and again In 2001, there are many categories besides <br />schools either funded or being considered, including: . <br />Affordable housing., <br />Community college - <br />County projects <br />Parks and recreation, open space, Lands Legacy <br />Senior centers <br />Water, sewer, wastewater (Efland Sewer Project) <br />Are we only going to practice equitable allocation, of futads in the <br />area of parks and open space? <br />B. The olic is retaroactive. We should revisit the question of <br />whetherand/ar how our policy should be retroactive (i.e. before the <br />2001 bond referendum) and if so, whether i~ should include more <br />than just bond fiends. We use multiple funding sources for many <br />projects, including bond referendum funds, other kinds ~of debt <br />instruments, grant funds, pay-a~-you-go funds, and so fvxth. <br />C~.' The oli does not refl t the corn lexi of the issues involves. <br />Before the policy was adopted, the County Conunissior~ers had a long- <br />standing unwritten ~pvlicy of striving to allocate resources, whether <br />band funds or other funds, so as to serve citizens all ever'the County. <br />In the formulation of the recent written policy, there were many <br />issues not addressed. These unaddressed issues include the ones <br />mentioned above, and several others. <br />