5) What is your opinion about the debt that Henderson is carrying? Is it the right amount? What would be the right amount? What would your criteria be for assuming more debt or retiring debt more quickly?
Mayor
James David (Pete) O’Geary (no incumbent in race): No response submitted.
Jeanne Hight (no incumbent in race): ACCORDING TO THE STATE OF N. C. LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMMISSION THIS IS THEIR ANNUAL PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST REQUIREMENTS FOR THE CITY OF HENDERSON NON GENERAL OBLIGATION FISCAL YEAR 200708. THIS REPORT WAS RAN APRIL 17,2007
TOTAL OUTSTANDING DEBT:32,100,638.00 plus other debt service of 3,988,649.00=$36,089,287.00
TOTAL BOND PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST REQUIREMENTS FOR THE YEAR
PRINCIPAL 2,748,043.15 PLUS INTEREST 1,367,317.76 = 4,115,360.91 This information is signed and dated 7-30-07 by Gord J. with the L.G.C.
NET ASSESSED VALUE AS OF 6-30-2006 745,837,360.00 DEBT LIMIT 8%= 59,666,989.00- 36,089,287.00 = 23,577,702.00 (THIS IS THE LIMIT FOR HENDERSON, WE CANNOT GO OVER THIS AMOUNT.)
MY CRITERIA OF ASSUMING MORE DEBT? -0- unless we have an emergency that can not be helped. Right now the city is unable to pay any large debt off. Until the city tax rate improves they are stuck and not able to do much about it. This is why lowering The joint funding would help.
Ward 1
Mary Emma Evans (Incumbent): No response submitted.
George W. King, Sr. (Challenger): Of course we don’t want debt, however, sometimes is can’t be avoided. I would need to look into this issue more thoroughly to determine the “right amount,” of debt to have and the criteria for having it.
Ward 1 At Large
Bernard Alston (Incumbent): No response submitted.
Sara Coffey (Challenger): I am not familiar with the budgeting and financial process that has occurred in the city within the past. As a council member, I plan to commit myself to learning and understanding what it takes to have a financially sound city. I believe that acquiring debt for the purpose of financing infrastructure needs is justifiable when it reduces the total cost of a project or addresses emergencies. I do not think that acquiring debt for operating expenses or luxury projects is warranted.
Ward 2
Bobby Gupton (Incumbent): The debt as reported by the City Manager of over $36 million dollars and is on the books as being owed by the city. The debt ceiling for the city is around $52 million dollars. The city would be hard pressed to borrow additional funds if needed with the current debt.
We should not incur any additional debt, currently it cost the city 17-18 cents of every tax dollar just to pay the interest.
Mike Rainey (Challenger): No response submitted.
Ward 2 At Large
Lynn Harper (Incumbent): My opinion is that Henderson is carrying a lot of debt relative to its annual operating budget. Total debt is about $36,000,000. This includes general fund, water and sewer, and Kerr Lake Regional Water debt.
The right amount of debt would require no more in annual payments than 1/10 of the City’s operating budget which is about 25 million dollars for all funds. This means that annual debt payment including principal and interest would be no more than 2.5 million dollars.
Retiring debt early will be very difficult until the city’s savings account (fund balance) is rebuilt.
My criteria for assuming more debt is “only as absolutely necessary.” In the current 2007-2008 budget, the city is borrowing less than $200,000 for capital improvements and none for operating capital.
Michael Inscoe (Challenger): No response submitted.
Ward 3
Garry Daeke (Incumbent): Henderson has approx. $36 million in debt, which would appear excessive, but about $30 million is secured by payments other than taxes (such as Franklin County water contract paying for that water line). The remaining debt, approx. $6 million, is secured by the City and its revenue (including taxing authority). That amount is not out of line for this City. However, I believe we should be very cautious about any future debt until we pay off present commitments, and until the local economy is in a better position to fund any future growth.
Frank Terry (Challenger): No response submitted.
Ward 3 At Large
Brenda Peace (Challenger): No response submitted.
Elissa Yount (Incumbent): Before we incur any more debt, we need to grow our fund balance. It would be very difficult to retire our debt more quickly and grow our fund balance without a tax increase. Presently the city has not borrowed the maximum allowed by the Local Government Commission. I am very afraid that we are going to have to borrow the money to fix our sewer lines and storm water problems. Also we need to pay down our debt before we consider any unnecessary capital projects. We need to be extremely frugal and conservative. We are just pulling our city out of a react mode and are just getting financially able to become proactive and get ahead of problems. Nevertheless, if the state mandates a solution to our sewer needs and we cannot get grants, borrowing is the only other solution.
Ward 4
Horace P. Bullock (Challenger): No response submitted.
Lonnie Davis (Incumbent): No response submitted.
Ward 4 At Large
George Daye (Challenger): No response submitted.
Lora Durham (Challenger): No response submitted.
Ranger Wilkerson (Incumbent): The reason for our high indebtedness is the fact that the City moved forward extremely too fast in their decisions.
Yes, it is the right amount.
Criteria for increasing more debt would be for sewer.
Hard to retire debt if City has to make the approach for sewer improvement a reality.