I've never understood this; it seems to be an arbitrary distinction. If one budget is short, why can't funds from one be shifted to the other? It seems like spiting the right hand to benefit the left, or something like that. Can anyone explain this to me?
-Ricky


On Sep 2, 2004, at 2:11 PM, Mark Krull wrote:

The $10 million in projected cost does *not* come from the City's general fund, which supports ongoing city services. It is a capital expenditure that is an entirely separate budget. Also included in the Capital Budget are Computer System Improvements and Interior and Exterior Renovations for the Fire Department. This budget cannot be used for operating purposes.








---- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see <http://www.purple.com/list.html>.

Reply via email to