CC_Minutes_2011_1024 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday, October 24, 2011 Page 7 Mr. Miller advised that the City's Bond Counsel, Mary Ippel, was present in the audience to respond to any questions of the City Council or audience during to- night's Hearing and action process. Mayor Roe clarified that the City Council, immediately following the Public Hearing, would be considering three actions, as outlined in the staff reports relat- ed to Items 11.a, 12.a and 12.b. Councilmember Willmus referenced the 2012 Budget Fact Sheet prepared by staff and included in tonight's meeting packet (Item 7.k) and the projected combined impact on a typical single-family home of 25% over 2011, and what that projec- tion was based upon. Mr. Miller advised that the impacts reflected a series of items: if the City Council continued with their proposed 2012 tax levy, impacts of issuing $8 million in bonds for a new fire station, impacts of issuing $19 million in bonds for parks, and proposed increases to utility rates as outlined, all of which would equal an additional $25/month for a typical single-family homeowner. However, Mr. Mil- ler noted that this impact would not be felt in its entirety in 2012, with approxi- mately half felt in 2012, with the rest phased in during 2013 and 2014, with the total maximum impact arriving in 2014, contingent upon the City Council pro- ceeding with each of those items as they had originally indicated. Councilmember Willmus clarified that this impact would be reduced if the City Council didn't raise utility rates as much as anticipated; with Mr. Miller respond- ing affirmatively. Councilmember Willmus noted the proposed allocation of this first $10 million bond issue between the fire station and parks; and questioned if the City Council approved the bond issue tonight, if there was anything preventing the City Coun- cil, in subsequent action, to reallocate that 80/20 split between the fire station and parks. Mr. Miller advised that, if the City Council proceeds with authorizing the bond is- sue, the City's Bond Counsel would be holding subsequent discussions with bond agencies on the allocation; and there may be general concern expressed by those agencies on whether future action met the general intent of the bond issue terms and proceeds. Ms. Ippel responded to Councilmember Willmus by noting that, at the time the bonds are sold and the City Council accepted the resolution accepting that bond sale and based on the present schedule for a November 24, 2011, bond sale date, the City Council should have established by then how the proceeds will be spent and specific allocations for each of the two (2)projects.