Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br /> <br />Council Meeting Minutes <br />September 10. 1990 <br /> <br />Page 6 <br /> <br />Council Business, continued <br /> <br />Although bonding for the full amount is a possible technique, <br />alternatives were discussed to better satisfy all objectives. An <br />approach which co-mingled the use of reserve funds with bonded debt <br />property taxes provides to further lower property taxes, minimal <br />impact on reserves, lowe~st overall finance costs, and compliance <br />with citizen survey findings. <br /> <br />Two ways to use reserves were researched: spend reserves as capital <br />to build the center and thereby lower the need for general <br />obligation bonds to $5,500,000; or use reserves to assist with the <br />bond payment. After examination, spending of the reserves as <br />capital was determined to be the preferred choice. This is because <br />Federal arbitrage regulations limit interest earnings on any funds, <br />such as the Envi ronmenta 1 Reserve, whi ch are pledged for debt <br />reti rement. Thi s interest restri cti on over the next 15-20 years <br />would be a costly and undesirable condition. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />Egan said that in order to pledge the bonds, the City would <br />voluntarily lower its interest earnings. It is in the City's best <br />interest to not tie up the total interest earnings. <br /> <br />The recommended City payment would be $2,000,000 from the <br />Envi ronmenta 1 Reserves. Use of the portion mi n i mi zes impact on <br />existing general services. Reserves are adequate for such an outlay. <br /> <br />The per household costs complys with the citizen survey which showed <br />a 2 to 1 margin favored a community center which costs $53 per year <br />for a $100,000 home. According to the proposal, a $100,000 home <br />would be annually taxed for 15 years at $48 per year. <br /> <br />Gunderman expressed concern about the spending of reserves and asked <br />if the center could be funded without a referendum. Egan said, as <br />a Finance Director, the least desirable choice would be to build the <br />center and fund it totally from reserves which are considered <br />precious and non-replaceable assets_ She feels the spending of <br />reserves for a small percentage of the proj ect cost is a very <br />prudent financial choice and by the end of the payback period on the <br />remainder, the City would be at a substantial advantage. <br /> <br />Childs said staff and the construction manager will supervise the <br />costs during all construction phases_ <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />Walt Witzke asked what risks does the City incur if the facility is <br />not used. Benke said that once the City commits to the building it <br />is obligated to own and operate it effectively and efficiently. <br /> <br />Motion by Gunderman, seconded by Williams, to WAIVE THE READING AND <br />ADOPT THE RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING THE METHOD OF FINANCE FOR THE <br />CONSTRUCTION OF THE COMMUNITY. <br /> <br />5 Ayes - 0 Nayes, Motion Carried <br /> <br />Counei 1 Business <br /> <br />Content, Financial, and <br />Referendum Report on <br />Proposed Community Ctr. <br />Report 90-196A <br />Report 90-196B <br />Report 90-196C <br />Resolution 90-076 <br />Resolution 90-077 <br />