Asset Management, GASB 34, and the Local Entity Perspective
Publication: Leadership and Management in Engineering
Volume 4, Issue 1
Abstract
The paper presents a view of the benefits and drawbacks of applying GASB Statement No. 34 in a small municipal entity. Cole County, Missouri, is taking the requirement and using it to improve the long-term operations of the county to the benefit of the taxpayers. The county chose to use GASB 34’s modified reporting method, which, despite the effort required to maintain a database on the condition of the county’s infrastructure, can be used to justify maintenance costs. This is a cost-effective way to maintain a locality’s assets. If the infrastructure assets can be maintained in a predetermined condition, the need for deferred maintenance will decrease, and thus the life-cycle cost for the whole network will decrease.
Formats available
You can view the full content in the following formats:
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Copyright
Copyright © 2004 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Published online: Dec 15, 2003
Published in print: Jan 2004
ASCE Technical Topics:
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.