|
REGULAR MEETING September 24, 2018
<br /> has. The more expenses you have on an annual basis reduces, perhaps, the cash reserves that you
<br /> may have so you may in the long run benefit by paying less interest but in the short term you may
<br /> affect your credit rating negatively which may increase the cost of borrowing for other projects
<br /> you may have.
<br /> Councilmember Oliver Davis interjected, Well in this case, given the fact that it is $3.7 million,
<br /> with that, I mean that is a lot of money when you consider it all. Given our whole City budget and
<br /> everything else it is a small piece of that. So with only $3.7 million of it, would that low number,
<br /> even though it's millions, add to the stress going on? Would it automatically take the bond rating
<br /> down? Wouldn't our strength already cover that if it's only $3.7 million?
<br /> Mr. Frierson replied, I think the bigger question is more of what the plan is and working with the
<br /> Controller's Office. Projects will be coming out each and every year from a revenue standpoint
<br /> and we will be consulting with the City, if they desire,to shift priorities or put a heavier burden on
<br /> that revenue. As it stands right now in working with the Controller's Office, it has made more
<br /> sense to stretch it out over twenty (20) years to keep the cash flow at a minimum level that is
<br /> coming out. But that is definitely something you will have to talk about with your Controller's
<br /> Office.
<br /> Councilmember Oliver Davis interjected, I mean, if we did it in half the time,how much stress are
<br /> we talking about? Me picking up water versus this is more stress, if I only pick up this it's less
<br /> stress, but I can handle both of them without it hurting me. My thing is, there is sometimes stress
<br /> and we use those words stress but it doesn't always mean that it doesn't bother me worth a dime
<br /> or worth a thing. And then the second(2nd) thing on that is, what is the difference in payments? If
<br /> you have a fifteen(15)year mortgage versus a thirty(30)year mortgage,yeah,you go from paying
<br /> something from maybe a five hundred dollar ($500) a month mortgage to maybe a six hundred
<br /> dollar($600) a month mortgage, but at the same time you pay it off and then you can utilize more
<br /> when you look at the City strength down the long road too. Yeah it's a little hit per month but at
<br /> the same time it's going down from that standpoint. So it's a give and take in apples from that
<br /> standpoint but I think it helps us, as we look at these kinds of things to shorten while we have the
<br /> financial strength of our credit. We may not always have that and my thing is when we have good
<br /> credit, even in a home standpoint, they are still fifteen (15) year mortgages. But over the course
<br /> there are rough times, and those are for longer periods of time, the thirty (30) year mortgage and
<br /> everything else. Since we have a good time and we are in that, why can't we operate like that?
<br /> That is where my concern is. The Zoo gets their money, the taxpayers get theirs, we're in good
<br /> times, why can't we go for that?
<br /> Mr. Frierson replied, That is something we can evaluate with the Controller's Office in lieu of
<br /> other commitments they have coming out of those revneues.
<br /> Councilmember Oliver Davis interjected, Is there a way that we can look at those revenues and
<br /> delay this vote? Not because of anyone opposing the Zoo not getting their monies but a delayed
<br /> vote where we can look at what the difference is like a mortgage. Are we paying six hundred
<br /> dollars ($600) or five hundred dollars ($500) and can say that and then in two (2) weeks we can
<br /> send that information, make it public, we have less money we are paying on the interest, the Zoo
<br /> gets all their money,we get our savings for the City, it's a win-win for everybody else and we save
<br /> money. Can we do that?
<br /> Mr. Frierson replied, The way this bill is currently laid out is it states it will not exceed twenty(20)
<br /> years. As we work with the Controller's Office, if it is the desire of the City and it makes financial
<br /> sense of the City,we do have the opportunity to reduce the life. It is just not to exceed twenty(20)
<br /> years so there is that opportunity to do that.
<br /> Councilmember Oliver Davis interjected,The only reason I would,I mean,I like that and I'm glad
<br /> you shared that. I would like to do something that is not to exceed ten (10) years but before I can
<br /> do my due diligence in suggesting that to my colleagues, I would just like to see the numbers. You
<br /> see what I'm saying? Because of the fact that I can see the numbers when my mortgage person
<br /> told me what the advantage was for thirty (3 0) years or fifteen(15) years. I looked at the numbers
<br /> and I was about to go to thirty (3 0) years and he said to me, if you go fifteen (15), here are your
<br /> numbers and I looked at the numbers and went wow that is a little bit more but it saves in the long
<br /> run. So I don't have these numbers and you don't have those numbers. I'm just saying if we could
<br /> get those numbers within a short period of time, we can still make the decision and they still can
<br /> 20
<br />
|