Originally Posted by CyAggie 
------------------------------
That is not correct. It is not a matter of spending the $100 million on something else. The artcle stated what they would spend in rent if they did not do it,
Also one source of funding is general fundng,the other is bonding Different budgets, costs, impact and limitations on expenditures.
Yes but it did say that if they continue to rent the locations they do now. So if no court house is built they will spend that $100 million on rent.
If the court house is built there will be alot of savings because the new courthouse will be funded by new taxes. It is not like they are going to refund that money back to tax payers.
Which means that if it does get approved it will cost tax payers 232 million over 20 years not 132.
