Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987-10-22 EURA MINUTES• • • I. ENGLEWOOD URBAN RENEWAL AUTHORITY OCTOBER 22, 1987 CALL TO ORDER. The Special Meeting of the Englewood Urban Renewal Authority was called to order at 5:35 P.M. by Chairman Robert Voth. Members Present: Tatton, Voth, Cole, Keena, Mcintyre Hinson, Executive Director Members Absent: Minnick, VanDyke, Alternate Members Hanson and Daugherty. Also Present: Financial Advisers Steve Bell, Judy McBride and Peter Gaide , of E. F. Hutton; Legal Counsel Paul C. Benedetti Negotiation Consultant Ron Myles Engineering Services Director Densel Ragland William Taggart and John Pflaum, Mclaughlin Water Engineers Herb Schaal, EDAW II. LITTLE DRY CREEK CONSTRUCTION Final Phase -Downtown a) Financing b) Award of Bid Mr. Hinson stated that since the Authority meeting of October 7, the staff has evaluated alternatives for financing and construction of the final phase of the Little Dry Creek improvements. Alternate Member Alice Hanson entered the meeting and took her chair with the members of the Authority . Mr. Hinson distributed copies of a letter from Laventhol & Horwath regarding the refunding of the bonds. Mr. Hinson stated that the two viable financing alternatives to fund the proj- ect as bid were: 1) The f unds would have to be transferred to the Urban Re- newal Authority from the City PIF fund; or 2) The Authority would have to refund the existing bond issue in an effort to obtain the additional funds. Staff has met with the members of the City Council, and the City Council has affirmed their desire tha t the improvements for the final phase of Little Dry Creek be constructed as were proposed and let for bid. The City Council, at their meeting on October 19, committed funds in the amount of $613,000 to the Urban Renewal Authority to enable the Authority to award the construction con - tract within the prescribed time frame. The Authority is, in turn, to pursue refunding of the existing bond i ssue to obtain the additional funds. Mr. Hinson cited three goals and/or advantages to pursuing the refunding of the bonds, these being: 1. To provide a redu ction in debt service in the first three years of the issue, allowing the increment to be constructed; -1 - 2. Maintaining a debt reserve fund of 10% of the new issue. Mr. Hinson noted that the amount indicated on the computer run summary sheets as Debt Service Reserve Fund, is not the level of the fund, but an amount of money generated from the refunding which would bring the Debt Service Reserve Fund up to the 10% level. 3. To maximize savings over the life of the bonds. The generation of savings should be a key consideration in the refunding of bonds. Mr. Hinson stated that the computer runs which were included in the packets of information for the Authority, are not necessarily the way the bond deal will be structured. The money market may not be conducive to the refunding issue in late November or December when our refunding issue should be ready for the market. In this event, City Council has guaranteed that the funds will be available to complete the improvement project as awarded to the low bidder. Ms. Keena asked Mr. Bell if he concurred with the letter from Laventhol & Hor- wath. Mr. Bell stated that at this point in time, he does concur. He empha- sized that the projections have not been updated for approximately three years, but that he is comfortable with the determination that Laventhol & Hor- wath has made. Mr. Bell stated that they would like to have the issue ready for the market by the third week of November. City Manager Mccown entered the meeting. Mr. Tatton stated that he would like to see the refunding issue increased by a sufficient amount to clear the loan on the old King Sooper's property with the First National Bank of Englewood. Mrs. Cole asked if Mr. Bell felt this could be ready for the market by the third week of November. Mr. Bell stated that he felt it could be done, and would work toward that goal. Mr. Hinson stated that he would keep members of the Authority posted on every- thing that comes up on the bond refunding. He also noted that a Coast-to- Coast Hardware has signed to lease 10,000 square feet in the Trolley Square development, and want to be open by Christmas, 1987. This should help in the sales tax income. Mr. Neil Lillard, of Lillard & Clark, entered the meeting. Mr. Hinson stated that the staff has worked with Mr. Bell and Ms. McBride on the bonds for the Urban Renewal Authority for a number of years. He stated that one of the basic things you need in working out financing options for a project is trust in the financial advisers. He stated that he has that trust in Mr. Bell and Ms. McBride, and in their firm, and felt that members of the Authority also have that basic trust. He stated that he would ask the Au- thority to approve a resolution or motion directing the staff to work with E. F. Hutton on the issuance of the bond refunding. Mr. Voth asked if there were any questions from members of the Authority on the financing for Little Dry Creek improvements. Cole moved: Keena seconded: The Englewood Urban Renewal Authority accept City Council's -2 - • • • • • • AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: guarantee of funds from the Public Improvement Fund so the Little Dry Creek construction contract can be awarded . Voth, Cole, Keena, Mcintyre, Totton None VanDyke, Minnick None The motion carried. Totton moved: Cole seconded: The Englewood Urban Renewal Authority direct the staff to work with E. F. Hutton and Laventhol & Horwath to attempt to put together a refunding bond issue beneficial to the Authority and report to the Authority on the progress of the effort on a periodic basis. AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Tatton, Voth, Cole, Keena, Mcintyre None VanDyke, Minnick None The motion carried. The matter of award of the construction contract was considered. Ms. Keena recalled that members of the Mclaughlin Water Engineers staff had indicated at the last meeting that they had worked with Lillard & Clark on other projects, and that they were a reputab l e firm and did good work . Mr. Hinson stated that Mr. Lillard and members of his firm have been working with the City Engineering staff to devise cost savings on the project wherever possible. · Keena moved : Cole seconded : The Urban Renewal Authority award the contract for con- struction of the final segment of Little Dry Creek to Lil- lard & Clark in the amount of $2,869,477.79. Engineering Services staff is directed to work with the contractor to develop cost savings which will not substantially interfere with the elements of the project as bid. AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Voth, Cole, Keena, Mcintyre, Totton None Minnick, VanDyke None The motion carried. Mr. Totton asked about the l etter the Authority had received from Kiewit West - ern regarding the bid bond dis crepancy. Mr . Hinson asked that Mr. Benedetti address this issue. Mr. Benedetti stated that he had spoken with the Western, and advised him that the Authority does nicalities as set forth by the Bid Document, and disqualify the bidder because of a technicality. -3 - legal counsel for Kiewit have the right to waive tech- that the Authority should not He stated that he had also advised Kiewit Western's legal counsel that the disparity between the bids received was too great, and the project would have to be rebid, so their com-• pany would not be awarded the contract automatically in any case. They would have to rebid the project as anyone else would be expected to do. Mr. Benedetti stated that he felt the Authority was within their rights to award the contract to Lillard & Clark. Mr. Hinson thanked the consultants for attending the meeting. There being no further business to come before the Authority, the meeting was adjourned at 5:55 P. M. -4 - • •