HomeMy WebLinkAbout1986-06-17 Info Packet of 6/13City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
DATE: June 13, 1986
TO: City Council
FROM: Acting City Manager
RE: Material in Friday's Packet
Memorandum from the Energy Coordinator regarding the Energy Gonservaci
Program.
Memorandum from the Director of Public Works regarding cost of wastewa
treatment facility improvements.
Memorandum from the Director of Parks and Recreation regarding tour of
parks and recreation facilities.
Article: "Libraries and horses"
Presale Analysis: $6,350,000 G.O. Bonds.
Presale Analysis: 538,950,000 Sewer Revenue Bonds.
Memo from JCCOG Com=ity Assistance Coordinator re Iowa City
representation on JCCOG Animal Shelter Committee
79
1083
-A,
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date: June 13, 1986
To: City Council
From: James Schoenfelder, Energy Coordinator
Re: Energy Conservation Program
The City of Iowa City has won the "Iowa Award for Excellence in Energy
Conservation" from the State of Iowa for our energy conservation program,
and specifically for the innovative concept of the Energy Savings Payback
Fund. The award will be presented by Governor Branstad at the Governor's
Office on June 20, 1986, at 3:00 p.m. The City is permitted to send up to
three persons to the awards presentation if desired.
bdw5/8
-A,
10UJA EnERGY POLKY ioun[IL
CAPITOL COMPLEX — DES MOINES. IOWA 50319 — 515-281.4420
Dennis Guffey
Acting Director and
chavman
June 12, 1986
Mr. James L. Schoenfelder
Energy Coordinator
City of Iowa City
410 East Washington
Iowa City, IA 52240
Dear Mr. Schoenfelder:
Terry E. Branslad
Governor
It is my pleasure to inform you that your project has won the
Iowa Award for Excellence in Energy Conservation. It will be
submitted to the U.S. Department of Energy by Governor Terry E.
Branstad in nomination for the 1986 National Awards Program for
Energy Innovation. Your contribution to energy conservation
encourages economic development in the State of Iowa and deserves
to be recognized. Congratulations!
Please make plans to attend the Iowa awards ceremony on Friday,
June 20, 1986 at 3:00 P.M. in the Governor's Office at the State
Capitol. You will be recognized by the Governor, receive your
award, and have your picture taken by the press. Please R.S.V.P.
to Tami Kuhn of our staff by June 18, 1986; call (515) 281-7013.
The Energy Policy Council hopes this award will encourage you to
continue your commitment to energy conservation efforts in the
future. We look forward to working with you to increase energy
awareness in Iowa and the nation. Again, congratulations from
the Council and our staff.
Sincerely,
DG:ac
Making Ale most of Iowat energy 1077
_f
City of Iowa city
MEMORANDUM
WE: June 12, 1986
M: Dale Helling and City Council
FROM: Chuck Schmadeke
RE: Cost of Wastewater Treatment Facility Improvements
Attached is a chart prepared by neetccosts ddysh growthhe distrib-
tion of wastewater facility Project roew Bros h andnexistnded in
ing
needs. The cost distribution is based on imp
the selected Alternative 11.
—A,
a
-f
IDIAL FRMA=T
6 33,91LOD0
TYSTEM EXISTING; 5TMCIVEMENTSI NEV PLANTS NEMENTS
14,608,000 I 9�0�
FEV GROVIM tEw TGEVTN NIV
f 319,m0
f 2,629,000
EXISTING NEEDS EXISTING NEEDS EXISTING NEEDS
f 11,979,000 i 9,993,000 i 1271,000
I
i
i I
PROJECT COST DISTRIBUTION
� � a
0
IV
I
parks & recreation department MEMO
to, The Honorable Mayor, City Council
Members, and City Manager from. Terry G. Trueblood, Director's
re: Tour of Parks and Recreation date - June 13, 1986
Facilities
On behalf of the Parks and Recreation Commission, I Would like to extend an
invitation to join us on a tour of city facilities operated and maintained
by the Parks and Recreation Department.
The tour is scheduled for Saturday, July 12th, with the Commission conduct-
ing a brief meeting at 8:30 a.m. in the Recreation Center, and the tour
beginning at 9:00 a.m., leaving from the Center parking lot. We hope to
conclude the tour by mid-afternoon.
Tentatively scheduled stops include City Park, City Park Pool, Hickory Hill
Park, Mercer Park, Mesquakie Park, Napoleon Park, Oakland Cemetery, and the
Central Business District. Additionally, we will be driving by many other
areas. The tour has two primary purposes: 1) to point out and discuss areas
of concern; and 2) to become more familiar with department facilities and
areas of maintenance responsibility.
If you would like to join us, please contact Dee Harvey at 356-5110 by
July 3rd. We need to know numbers in order to make transportation and
lunch arrangements.
We hope you will be able to join us.
cc: Parks and Recreation Commission Members
city of iowa city
/071
=1'�I
pate? (WESTBRANCB6m Thursday, May 29. 1966
Libraries and horses
By Kevin Boatright
"What do we, as a nation, care about
books? How much do you think we spend
altogether on our libraries, public or pri.
vate, as compared with what we spend on
our horses?"
John Ruskin made that cynical observa.
lion about England in 1865, but it's no less
true today, substituting Corvettes and con.
version vans for stallions and mares.
In our own state, it is noteworthy that,
in total number of volumes, the University
of Iowa's library ranks ninth in size among
Big Ten universities. The library at Iowa
Slate University ranks sixth in size among
Big Eight universities,
The S6 million spent by Iowa and Iowa
State for library materials in 1984-85 was
less than the amount spent by the Univer.
sity of Texas alone.
In most Iowa towns, West Branch and
Iowa City included, per capita tax support
for the public library amounts to less than
525 per year. Subtract staff salaries, build.
ing maintenance and other costs, and
what's left wouldn;t buy one book per per.
son per year.
In many small towns, West Branch
among them, it wouldn't do any good to
buy a book for everyone since you'd have
no place to put it. A library is not a book
warehouse, but that is what many cramped
library buildings now resemble.
Our public and campus libraries aren't
starving, they're being eaten alive by
"bookworms": inflation, inadequate
space, cuts or no growth in funding, the
information explosion and, worst of all,
public apathy and the widespread feeling
That the library budget is a frill to be whit.
tled down at the earliest opportunity.
Setting Aside the equally urgent needs of
she National Archives and its system of
presidential libraries (in which 1 have an
Obvious interest), I would suggest that a Ii.
brary is fundamental, not incidental, to ■
town or campus. It Is the memory of those
Communities, the nerve center that makes
research and informed decision-making
possible.
For that reason, money spent on Ii.
VVVVVV brarieS is in a category by itself, quite dis.
tinct from money spent on street paving
and sewage treatment. When libraries arc
allowed to languish, the campuses and
towns they serve begin to die of a Corporate
Alzheimer's disease, characterized by loss
of memory, senility and paralysis.
Theta is no "status quo" for a library.
Staying "as is" is an admission of failure,.
chiefly a failure to serve the students and
taxpayers who need what a library has to
offer: current, accurate information.
When you see children, rollege stu.
dents, teachers and retired persons at a
library's check-out desk, remember that
books are the only renewable, the only
renewing, resource there is. Good books
are worth the paper they're printed on, and
the public and college libraries that house
them deserve decent support in the form of
appropriations and contributions.
Vartan Gregorian, president of the New
York Public Library, recently said that "a
library is a sacred place... We are a trea.
sured repository of civilization. Sometimes
1 am overwhelmed when 1 realize what we
mean to the city and to the world. Libraries
keep the records on behalf of all humanity
...II makes a man tremble. Endless sources
of knowledge are here,"
That's a different view of the role of a
library than the one held by the members
Of most city councils and stale legislatures,
or the people who elect them.
Today, with bookworms chewing up our
libraries, dollars truly are the best book.
marks. What a difference it would make If
every cent of support could have its Dewey
decimal point moved farther to the right.
That should be our goal, so that we as a
nation might spend at least as much on II-
braries as we do on Mustangs.
The writer to director of development for
the Herbert Hoover Presidential Library
Association in Weal Branch.
/Od10
—t
r--
■■ EVENSEN DODGE, INC.
■■ f INANCIAL CONSU LTANTS
A
r
I,
I
to IA27.86
EVENSEN DODGE, INC.
FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS
J June 12, 1986
Ms. Rosemary Vitosh
Acting Assistant City Manager
City of Iowa City
410 E. Washington Street
Iowa City, Iowa 52240
Dear Ms. Vitosh:
Attached is our Presale Analysis prepared in connection with the
Cityls proposed issuance of $6,350,000 of General Obligation
Bonds on July 1, 1986.
The Presale Analysis summarizes the purpose of the Bond issue,
describes how the Bond issue has been structured, and discusses
other aspects related to the marketing of the Bonds.
r We will prepare a Postsale Analysis reporting the results of the
sale, market conditions preceding and immediately following the
sale, comparative issues in the market, and other matters rele-
vant to the sale of the Bonds. The Postsale Analysis will be
submitted following the closing and delivery of this issue.
j
We look forward to a successful offering.
EVENSEN DODGE, INC.
IBJ. S.� .
Wayne S. Burggraaff
Senior Vice President
-, mkh
3608 IDS lower, Minneapolis Minnesola 55402
IA27.86B/15
612/338-3535 800/328-8200 800/328-8100 Minnesota
1 rit
r
I�
i
to
i
!A
SUMMARY OF
19
PURPOSE OF
IH
I,.
STRUCTURIN
RATING ,
D
I`
GENERAL MA'.
(r,
TENTATIVE 1
H
r
IH
EXHIBIT A --
EXHIBIT B--
IA
I�
It
i�
y
I1
tt
I:
re
t
hs
I�
r+
'
1+
t'
IA27.86B/16
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PRESALE ANALYSIS
$6,350,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS
CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA
JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA
t..
Proposed Sale Date: July 1, 1986
u
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS
Recommendations and arrangements for the Bond sale have been
developed by Evensen Dodge, Inc., after consultation with the
Acting Assistant City Manager, Rosemary Vitosh, and Ken Haynie,
Bond Counsel to the City of Iowa City.
14
The arrangements and conditions for the Bond sale will be
it incorporated in resolutions and other documentation prepared by
Ahlers, Cooney, Dorweiler, Haynie & Smith, the City's Bond
!A Counsel, and Evensen Dodge, Inc. Action authorizing the Bond
it sale is scheduled for City Council consideration at the June 17,
1986 City Council meeting.
is
The major recommendation contained herein is that the City issue
$6,350,000 of General Obligation Bonds to be sold on July 1,
1986, for the purpose described below.
it
'.7 PURPOSE OF THE SALE
Proceeds of this Bond sale will provide the City with the funds
It to finance definitively a number of public improvement projects.
It The Bond proceeds are estimated to be used as follows:
I� Uses of Funds
Ptl
City Project Costs $6,225,000
Underwriter's Discount/
Issuance Costs 125,000
Total $6,350,000
�F
19
I
12
i -1-
Ix IA27.85A/17
/o P/
a.
-I
t:
The City projects to be funded by this bond issue
are as follows:
t�
East Side Water Storage Tank
$1,100,000
Summit/Burlington Signals
24,000
Benton Street/Morman Trek Signals
25,000
t:
Scott Boulevard Paving (Design)
26,000
Heartland Railroad Crossings
50,000
Gilbert Street Bridge Deck
70,000
�a
Dodge Street Bridge Deck
155,000
Burlington Street Bridge at Ralston Creek
42,000
Woolf Avenue Bridge Deck (Design)
7,000
Melrose Avenue Bridge Deck (Design)
10,000
to
Benton Street Bridge Widening
575,000
Brookside & 2nd Avenue Bridges (Design)
25,000
City Plaza Lights Replacement
31,000
)a
Benton Street Culvert Replacement
40,000
Dubuque Street - Iowa Avenue to Park Road
365,000
Dubuque Road Improvements
30,000
to
$2,575,000
�!
I
Swimming Pool Project
$3,650,000
'
It
I�
Discount/Issuance Costs
125,000
ly
Total
$6,350,000
IK
The swimming pool project was approved by the
voters at an j
election held June 3. The other projects
are "essential
IK
corporate purpose" projects and do not require voter approval.
It
STRUCTURING OF THE BOND ISSUE
ii
Various components of this issue were structured in different
I,
ways. The Eastside water storage tank project and
the swimming j
pool project were structured to provide level debt
service over
fifteen years. The balance of the projects were
structured with
ten level principal payments. Exhibit A includes
debt schedules
for each component of the issue and for the total
issue.
Under current market conditions, high quality
issues with
maturities of "intermediate" range of ten to fifteen
years are
regarded to be highly marketable issues. The debt
schedule for
this issue providing for a term of fifteen years
is at the high
end of this range.
On an overall basis, the $6,350,000 bond issue
has an average
maturity of 9.21 years. The issue has been structured in $25,000
increments for the purpose of allowing trading
and selling in
this customary block size.
-2-
^ IA27.85A/18
=1'k,
=1�
with flexibility and the ability to take
Several features have been added in the structuring of the issue
to provide the City occur in the
Id advantage of lower interest rates should they
future.
The primary feature which adds flexibility is the provision for
tt the City to call
to call or redeem bonds maturing beginning in 1996 an
extending to the end of the issue. This allCifYinterest
$3,125,000 or 49.28 of the $6,350,000 of principal can save interest
I" rates in the future are lower, and the City
cost by replacing the current debt with lower cost debt. Also,
investment bankers and underwriters who bid on the bond issue
ears and optimize
{ti will be required to submit their bid with coupons in ascending
order to minimize debt service in the early y
the potential use of the call feature.
The ability to deepen the call feature to oYderis maximum
madelevel
possible
require that coupons be bid in ascending
by provision of an underwriters discount. The amount of discount
permits the successful bidder
offered relates to the term and difficulty anticipated in selling
ed
the issue. The discount
(underwriting syndicate) to purchase the bonds with spec
iwer
f no discount
it coupons and
to
bidder would have toreoffer the bonds at Par. lbid a higher coupon
14
allowed, selling the bonds
rate on the bonds to obtain their commission y
at a premium. purchasers and offsets
Experience has shown that use the
helps make an issue more attractive to p
�a impact of the call feature. of this issue the discount is strongly
advisable in the marketing rice
II underwriters at a P
ti These bonds 1 348 belowotheramount of the Bonds.
approximately
I
s RATING
currentl has an "Aaa" rating from Moody's
j' The City of Iowa City Y Mood 's. A
is Investors Service, Inc., the highest rating given by Y
financial condition and will 1 likely
s of
preliminary review i City l 1986.
comparable municipalities indicates that this rating
e be renewed for the issue scheduled to be sold on July
GENERAL MARKET CONDITIONS
all of which are
There are a number of indices available I
vailab e,
categories
designed to plot the tax exempt bond market or various
-, designed
market. One of the best known of these indices is the
of twenty bond Bon_ dm's Index.
is
IA27.85A/19
r-
_
A graph dated June 5, 1986, showing the movement includedis the Bond
lS Wer's indexlysis andlideover the ntified asasExhi.bit Bt three �.ed It demonstrates
w h
strength of the tax-exempt mark1986 a when itin
fell6.
to 6,he 86%.
Since
seven-year low on March 6, figure which
{� then it has risen to its current level of 7.978, a
then
still well below the general level of the past three years.
III If this issue were to be sold today, we believe that it would
receive a net interest rate in the range of 7.258 to 7.758.
Nevertheless, the possibility t eventsshifts thatncannotthe mbekeforeseen.
II because of its sensitivity
will boT�erefore, the we cannot redid whatJth lac ual rate of interest
I!
IAi
t'
u
t
k.i
Tentative Bond Sale Schedule
Iowa City, Iowa
Vi
June
16,
1986
City Council review of Presale Analysis and
debt issuance proposals.
u
June
17,
1986
Public hearing; City Council consideration
and action on resolution authorizing bond
14
sale.
June
18,
1986
Draft copies of an Official Statement will be
submitted to City staff and Bond Counsel for
review.
i1
June
19,
1926
Official Statement will be mailed to
+
underwriters and other interested parties
throughout the country.
June
23-30,
1986
Potential bidders contacted, questions from
,
underwriters and analysts concerning proposed
sale answered.
June
24,
1986
Official publication of Notice of Bond Sale.
June
25,
1986
Official publication of Notice of Bond Sale.
IN
July
1,
1986
Bond sale.
July
2-22,
1986
Work with Bond Counsel on details concerning
arrangements for closing and delivery.
July
23,
1986
Approximate date for closing and delivery.
i
L.�
_5_
^
IA27.85A/21
,O �/
I
17 IA27.85B/2
SNICII i tiu" FD:! FRC•: ZZ�C
DEN SERVICE SCHEDULE
DATE PRINCIPAL COUP09 INTEREST PERIOD TOTAL FISCAL TOTAL
6/ Ili, 229,075.00 229,015.00 229,015.00
1:/ 1/87 124,950.00 124,950.00
6/ I/S3 150,000.00 4.500000 124,950.00 274,950.00 359,900.00
121 I/E3 121,515.00 121,575.00
5l 1/S9 175,000.00 5.000000 121,575.00 295,575.00 419,150.00
12/ 1/59 117,200.00 117,100.00
6/ 1190 175,000.00 5.500000 117,200.00 292,200.00 409,400.00
121 1190 112,337.50 112,387.50
6/ 11191 200,000.00 5.750000 112,3E1.50 312,337.50 424,775.00
121 1151 106,637.50 106,631.50
6/ 1192 200,000.00 6.000000 106,637.50 305,537.50 413,275.00
121 1/52 100,537.50 100,537.50
5l !153 270,000.00 5.250000 100,637.50 300,637.50 401,275.00
121 '.193 94,357.50 114,3211.50
61 :!?4 225,000.00 6.500000 94,387.50 319,337 50 413,775.00
121 1i54 57,073.OP 87,911`.,00
6/ ::95 :ZS,ODO.CO 5.700000 27t675.00 312,075.00 399,:50.00
121 1155 79,537.50 79,537 50
61 !1195 250,00.00 6.9000o0 79.537.50 325,E-7.50 409,075.00
Ill 1/56 70,912.50 70,9!2,50
61 IM 275,000.00 7.100000 70,912.50 345,912.50 416,525.00
12/ 1/37 61,!50.00 61,1150.00
6/ MS 300,000.00 7.200000 61,150.00 361,150.00 422,300.00
12/ 1/58 50,350.00 50,350,00
61 J39 300,000.00 7.300000 50,350.00 350,350.00 400,700.00
12/ 1/99 39,400.00 39,400.00
6/ 1/ 0 325,000.00 7.400000 777,400.00 364,400.00 403,900.00
12/ 1/ 0 27,375.00 27,315.00
61 1l 1 350,000.00 7.500000 27,375.00 377,375.00 404,750.00
I,./ 1/ 1 14,250.00 14450.00
5/ 1/ 2 31.,000.00 7.600000 14,250.00 389,250.00 403.SC0.00
______________
BCCSOE9 3,725,000.0D 2,644,725.00 5,369,725.00
3,1:5,000.00 2,644,725.00 5,369,725.00
DATE, 7! !!86 4TH DELIVERY CF 7l 1/ES
MENS TEASE 31,+64.533
AVE•.ASE ! EFZ 10..115?
N I C 1.193494 2 US1INS 95.6500000
PREPARED BY EVE55EN DOME, INC.
F9!IC'I-: 05-:.-1935 3'u11ii XE: '
15:.8; b
/OP/
—,A v
fi..
u
�
EST SIDE IlAieS. 9T05H8E TA43
c� DEET SERVICE EC.:E98LE
u
• BATE FF,I!IC:FAL COUF04 14TUES7 FUND TaiAL FISCAL 79TAL
c, 61 1/37 69,265.63 691255.63 69,265.63
121 1/E1 37,76!.25 37,731.25
it IIE3 50,000.00 4.500000 37,781.25 87,761.25 135,562.50
121 1188 36,656.25 36,656.25
1/59 50,000.00 5.000000 35,656.25 96,656.25 123,312.50
I�
121 1169 35,406.25 35,406.25
r' 61 1190 50,000.00 5.500000 35,466.25 85,06.25 120,912.50
„ 121 1/90 34,031.25 34,031.25
61 1/91 50,000.00 5.750000 34,031.25 84,031.3 119,062.50
12/ 1191 32,593.75 32,592.75
6/ 1/92 50,000.00 6.000000 32,593.75 B2,5?3.75 115,187.50
121 1192 31,093.75 31,993.75
61 1193 75,000.00 5.30000 31,693.75 106,6?3.75 137,137.50
It 121 1/5-
-8,7!0.00 28,757.00
?5.000.00 6.SOOUDD 28.750.00 103,750,60 1;2.500.00
,
t
26,
L/ 1194 21.3)2.50 312.50
'-I '.195?S,OBU. CO 6.790090 25.312.50 101,3!2.50 127,625.00
23,866.00 2,E00.00
i- 51 1/95 75,000.00 6.900000 23,950.60 99,800.00 122,600.00
t !ZI 1/?6 2!,212.50 21,212.50
51 !1?7 75.000.00 1.160000 21,212.50 96,212.50 117,;25.00
`y 171 1157 18,550.00 18,5 0.00
61 1193 75,000.00 7.200000 I9,E50.00 93,550.00 112,100.00
�t 121 !/9E 15,850.00 15,550.00
.� 51 !/99 100,600.00 1.300000 15,550.00 115,850.00 131,700.00
i
l2l 1199 12,200.00 12,200.00
si u o 100,000.00 1.406000 12,200.00 112,200.00 124,40.00
121 !/ 0 8,500.00 8,500.00
61 11 I 100,040.00 1.500000 8,500.00 108,500.00 117,000.00
t 121 !1 1 4,750.00 4,750.00
t
6/ 11 2 '.25,000.00 7.600000 4,150.00 129,750.00 134,500.00
Ik -------'------ --------------
`,�
1,12"000.00 504,240.63 1,929,240.63
ACCRUED
504.240_63 - 1.929_240.63
:nTE. i; :186 ri?� CELi4E5'i SF 77 1155
tf ?:6E5P:3E Ca'iu9 7.1,56
4EE62E!... 10.::7
,I 1 C '! • 7.;99503 ? US 166 ?3..'560000
I'
'V"'c °' !:lC.
.r rnnw
EY : c.I =1 876.',
t,
/ O V
,
,
,
1,
1
,
IA27.951
EXHIBIT B
i
Bond Buyer's Index Graph
1 1 .5%
11.0%
10.5%
10.0%
9.5%
a�
0 9.0%
o:
8.5%
8.0%
7.5%
7.0%
6.5%
June 5, 1986
1/84 7/84 1/85 7/85 1/86 7/86
Month
20 Year G.O. Index
THIS WEEK 7.97
LAST WEEK 7.70
BOND BUYERS
INDEX (1983-86)
PREPARED BY
EVENSEN DODGE,
INC.
1 1 .5%
11.0%
10.5%
10.0%
9.5%
a�
0 9.0%
o:
8.5%
8.0%
7.5%
7.0%
6.5%
June 5, 1986
1/84 7/84 1/85 7/85 1/86 7/86
Month
20 Year G.O. Index
THIS WEEK 7.97
LAST WEEK 7.70
.. .. :Yr:
_-T
PRECEDING
A
M
Y
C ■� EVENSEN DODGE, INC.
■■ FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS
0
I
f� IA27.86B/4
W
EVENSEN DODGE, INC.
�! LIN ANCIAL CONSUlTAN15
la
$A
June 12, 1986
`-` Ms. Rosemary Vitosh Manager
Acting Assistant City
City of Iowa Cion Street
a 410 E. Wash
ingt 52240
Iowa City,
I� Dear Ms. Vitosh:
is prepared in connection with
Attached is our Presale Analy
sevenue
y
Cit 's proposed issuance of $38,950,000 of Sewer Utility
Bonds on July 22, 1986-
sis summarizes the purpose of the Bond issue,
The Presale Analysis
and discusses
IL aspects related to the marketing of the Bonds. We refer
describes how the Bond issue has been struc mor
W which
a other asp pint City/Evensen Dodge and sale
you also to the j
there is a detailed discussion of the
copy oflthatlmemorandum is
I� alternatives available to the City.
e attached.
11 We look forward to a successful offering.
a
Sincerely,
I ` EVENSEN DODGE, C • �J`�� /� /
Wayne S. Burggraaff
Senior Vice President
it
/jgc
3608 IDS Tower, Minneapolis Minnesota 55402
IA27.86B/5
612/338.3535 800/328-8200 000/328.8100 Minnesota
Q
-f
=l�
1'k,
I
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . 1
PURPOSEOF THE SALE . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . 1
i
STRUCTURING OF THE BOND ISSUE . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . 2
OUTSTANDING SEWER DEBT
2
SECURITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
i
. . . . . . 2
d
�v
METHODOF SALE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . 3
sr
GENERAL MARKET CONDITIONS . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . 3 '
f
1
t
PENDING LEGISLATION REGARDING TAX EXEMPTION .
. . . . . . . 4 �
6
!
"s
SALE SCHEDULE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . 5
a
EXHIBIT A --Debt Redemption Schedule
IR
EXHIBIT B --The Bond Buyer's Index Graph
EXHIBIT C --May 22, 1986 Memorandum on Financial
Planning and
Recommendations
i
l9
I
I
Ih
1's
It
�c
11
h
IA 27.868/6
r•
PRESALE ANALYSIS
is
$38,950,000 Sewer Revenue Bonds
City of Iowa City
Johnson County, Iowa
Proposed Sale Date: July 22, 1986
�a
�-� SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS
Recommendations and arrangements for the Bond sale have been
developed by Evensen Dodge, Inc., after consultation with Acting
Assistant City Manager, Rosemary Vitosh, concerning the City's
financing options to generate the funds necessary to pay the cost
„ of improvements to the City's wastewater treatment system. Mr.
Ken Haynie, Bond Counsel to the City of Iowa City, was consulted
on legal matters and procedures relating to the proposed sale.
' Themajor recommendation contained herein is that the City issue
$38,950,000 of Sewer Revenue Bonds to be sold on July 22, 1986,
for the purpose described below.
�+ PURPOSE OF THE SALE
Proceeds of this Bond sale will provide the City with the funds
�-� to make major improvements to the City's wastewater treatment
system. Sources and uses of funds are as follows:
I �.a
Sources
$38,950,000
Bond Proceeds 3,299,340
Investment Earnings
$42,249,340
Uses
Construction Fund $33,911,000
Debt Service Reserve Fund 3,656,563
2,032,259
Capitalized Interest 175,000
Issuance Costs 779,000
Discount 1,684,600
Refunding of G.O. Sewer Bonds
Miscellaneous (Rounding) 10918
$42,$42,2
I
ly
I� IA27.86B/7
1
/08A
a
STRUCTURING OF THE BOND ISSUE
Several alternatives were considered and d'4scussed with the City
before reaching a final decision on the best. debt structure for
this issue. The City considered revenue bond, general
obligation/revenue bond combinations, and current interest/zero
coupon bond combinations. The option selected was current
interest revenue bonds. This option best meets the City's goals
of minimizing debt service costs and preserving the City's Aaa
general obligation rating. The structure finally selected
provides for repayment of the debt over a twenty-six year period,
as shown in Exhibit A. The structure provides for level debt
service payments at a level of approximately $3,650,000 annually.
The bonds will be offered for sale at a discount of 28 by
provision of an underwriters discount. Iowa State statutes
permit a municipality to offer an underwriter's discount in an
amount not exceeding 28 of the bond issue size. The amount of
discount offered relates to the term and difficulty anticipated
in selling the issue. The discount permits the successful bidder
(underwriting syndicate) to purchase the bonds with specified
coupons and to reoffer the bonds at par. If no discount were
allowed, the successful bidder would have to bid a higher coupon
rate on the bonds to obtain their commission by selling the bonds
at a premium. Experience has shown that use of the discount
helps make an issue more attractive to purchasers. Also,
investment bankers and underwriters who bid on the bond issue
will be required to submit their bid with coupons in ascending
order to minimize debt service in the early years and optimize
the use of the call feature.
OUTSTANDING SEWER DEBT
As of July 1, 1986, the City will have outstanding $800,000 in
sewer revenue bonds and $1,725,000 in general obligation bonds
paid out of sewer revenues. The revenue bonds will be defeased
out of funds currently on hand, and the general obligation bonds
will be effectively defeased with a portion of the proceeds of
this issue. By defeasing its current sewer debt, the City will
eliminate restrictive covenants in the revenue bond ordinance and
spread its entire sewer debt service cost over the life of this
issue.
IA27.86B/8
/opt
_1
SECURITY
W The Bonds will be payable solely out of sewer revenues. TO
provide the necessary revenue, the City will raise sewer rates
over a three-year period to a level which will meet at all times
the requirements of the bond resolution. The resolution will
provide that rates must be set at a level which will generate
annual net revenues at least 1.1 times annual debt service.
" Further security for the Bonds will be added by the provision in
Iowa law that sewer charges are liens against property and by
creation of a debt service reserve
To enhance the marketability of the Bonds we recommend that the
City apply for a rating on this issue. The City's outstanding
sewer revenue bonds are rated "A" by Moody's Investor's Service.
We are hopeful that with the rate increase and other security
" features listed above, this issue will also receive an "A"
rating. While no guarantee can be given that an "A" rating will
be received, it is essential that a rating be applied for.
Is
METHOD OF
SALE
It
The City also reviewed thoroughly the question of
whether to
sell
the Bonds through negotiation or a
public, competitive
sale.
It
o
was decided that none of the
factors which
would make a
'
negotiated sale more effective were present in
this case
and
that therefore a competitive sale
would produce
the lowest
net
"
interest cost to the City.
It GENERAL MARKET CONDITIONS
' A graph dated June 5, 1986, showing the movementof the -Bond
Buyer's Index (BBI) over the last three years is included- w ti h
this analysis and identified as Exhibit B. It demonstrates
' general trends in the tax-exempt market.
The BBI graph charts the movement of 20 general obligation issues
with an average rating of A. The Bond Buyer also publishes an
index of 25 revenue bonds maturing in thirty years. The movement
of the revenue bond index has been similar to that of the BBI
except that the revenue bond index averages approximately 45
basis points higher than the BHI. Both indexes dropped to their
lowest levels in more than seven years early in March. They have
risen somewhat since then, but tax-exempt rates are still much
lower than their general level over the past three years.
If this issue were to be sold today, we believe that it would
receive a net interest rate in the range of 8.008 to 8.508.
Because of uncertainties in the market we cannot predict what the
actual rate of interest will be when the Bonds are sold on
July 22.
IA27.86B/8.1
-Al
r
I PENDING LEGISLATION REGARDING TAX EXEMPTION
)'D On December 17, 1985, the United States House of Representatives
passed H.R. 3838, entitled the "Tax Reform Act of 1985."
H.R. 3838 is now pending in the United States Senate. If enacted
Ia into law in the form approved by the House of Representatives,
this law would, because of its January 1, 1986 effective date, be
applicable to this financing.
{i On March 14, a Joint Statement was issued by the majority and
minority leaders of the House Ways and Means and Senate Finance
Committees and the Secretary of the Treasury endorsing a
19 postponement of the effective date of tax reform legislation
I' until September 1, 1986 (or the date of enactment of legislation,
if earlier). On the strength of this joint statement, the City
IB will not be required to comply with H.R. 3838. It is also pos-
sible that when the law is finally passed, it will not be in its
present form. At that time, we will review with the City any
13 further changes that need to be made in the City's procedures to
insure the continuing tax exemption of this issue.
4
ie IA27.86B/9 /69z
r-
1,
IA
1�
I
Id
June
17, 1986
19
I'
June
20, 1986
I`
June
26, 1986
li
I°
July
1, 1986
(Y
JE
July
2-21, 1986
1�
Ik
p�
July
15, 1986
July
16, 1986
�k
July
22, 1986
Is
July
22 — August
i.
18,
1986
i
August 19, 1986
h�
Ie
ly
IF
IY
I�
IM
I�
r
I'
I'
IA27.86B/11
SALE SCHEDULE
Tentative Bond Sale Schedule
Iowa City, Iowa
Public hearing. City Council consideration and
action on resolution authorizing bond sale.
Draft copies of an official Statement will be
submitted to City staff and Bond Counsel for
review. Draft also sent to Moody's.
Rating presentation to Moody's Investors
Service.
official Statements will be mailed to
underwriters and other interested parties
throughout the country.
Potential bidders contacted, questions from
underwriters and analysts concerning proposed
sale answered.
official publication of Notice of Bond Sale
official publication of Notice of Bond Sale
Bond Sale.
Work with Bond Counsel on details 'concerning
arrangements for closing and delivery
Approximate date for closing and delivery
5
,DIAL
-I
o,
II IA27.86B
CITY OF 1"'M MY, 10'IA
J36,950,CP0 3EVE1LE BONDS
I1
7/
119?
1482,456.25
1,182,455.25
I
1p
1/
GEST
SERVICE SCHEDULE
7.300000
1,162,456.25
1.Y
Ic
7/
�1
!/ 0
1/ 1
1,450,060.00
7,900000
1,130,761. 25
1,130,781. 25
DAiE
PRINCIPAL
COUPON
INTEREST
PERIOD TOTAL
FISCAL TOTAL
la
I/ 1/37
1,013,506.:5
3,654,267.50
1,524,193.15
1,524,193.75
1/ 2
1,550,000.00
7/ 1/67
1,073,50615
2,623,596.25
1,5:4,193.75
1,524,193.75
3,048„31.50
1/ 2
!/ 1183
t,p12,2"c1.:5
1,524,193.75
1,524,193.75
lr
l+t
71 1/H
1,700,000.0D
3,500000
1,524,!93.75
1,524,!93.75
3,048,387.50
IS
1/ 1/39
625,000.00
5,00000
1,524,193.75
2,149,193.75
944,281,25
2,769,231,25
li
7/ !I6?
1,506,063.75
1,506,063,75
3,655,262.50
i
11 1/90
650,000.00
6.050000
1,506,063.75
2,156,063.75
7/ 1/90
3,640,106.25
1
1,466,406.25
1,436,406.25
3,642,475.00
3.100000
1/ 1/91
700,000.00
6,30D000
1,466,406.25
2,166,406.25
., ,I
17
I'
7/ 1/91
790.537.50
790,537.50
11464,356.25
1,464,356,25
3,650,762.50
!I 6
11 1/91
750,000.00
6.550000
1,+641355.25
2,214,356.25
I
14
7/ 1/72
1,439,793.75
1,439,793.75
3,654,150.00
It
ll 1/?3
800,000.00.
6,600000
1,439,793.75
2,239,793.75
3,02S,762.SO
7/ 1193
71
!1 7
1,412,593.15
1,412,593,75
3,652,337,50
609,600.00
1/ 1/94
350,000.00
MUM
!,412,593.75
2,262,5=3,75
S. !0000
13
3,134,5('0,00
i7
1'!
7/ !/94
IM".631.25
1,332,631.25
3,645,225.00
!/ 3/?5
900,000.00
7.300000
1,132,631.25
2,232,:31,25
3
7/ 3/95
1,349,761.25
1,34997^1.'25
3,632,412.50
!/ !195
975,000.00
7,500000
1,2?9,783.25
2,324,181.25
7/ li?6
1,313,218.75
1,313,213,75
3,630,000,00
I;
!/ 'r61
1,050,000.00
7,600000
1,313,216.75
71 .197
!,273,315.75
!,273,335.75
3,636,537.50
li !1?8
1,150,000.00
7. 00000
1,:73,338.75
2,423,313. i5
la
7/ !196
3.229,616.75
!,229,516.75
3,652,937.50
I/ 1/9?
1,215,000.00
7,700000
1,229,616.75
2,;54,616,75
I1
7/
119?
1482,456.25
1,182,455.25
3,637,075.00
1p
1/
I/ 0
1,3".5,000.00
7.300000
1,162,456.25
2,507,455.:5
Ic
7/
�1
!/ 0
1/ 1
1,450,060.00
7,900000
1,130,761. 25
1,130,781. 25
1,130,781,25
2,580,761.25
3,633,237.50
111
11 1
1,073,506.:
1,013,506.:5
3,654,267.50
It
1/ 2
1,550,000.00
7.900000
1,073,50615
2,623,596.25
Ii
7/
1/ 2
t,p12,2"c1.:5
1,012,261, 25
3,635,187.50
lr
1/
1/ 3
1,700,000.0D
3,500000
1,017,261.'S
2,712,23115
IS
71
1/
11 3
!/ 4
1,325,000.00
B4O50000
944,2615
944,231,25
944,281,25
2,769,231,25
3,656,562,50
11
71
1!'
670,325,00
3,640,106.25
1
11
11 S
1,975,000,00
3.100000
870,325.00
2,645,625.00
it!
71
:1
., ,I
790.537.50
790,537.50
3,676,562,50
!I 6
2,13G,000.vG
6,100000
790,337.50
2,940,637,50
I
7/
11 6
703,762.50
703,762.50
3,644, 600. 00
Ir
11
11 7
2,325,000.00
8.100000
703,762.50
3,02S,762.SO
71
!1 7
609,500,00
609,600.00
3,638.162.50
:! 0
1,5:5,000.00
S. !0000
6Di,600.90
3,134,5('0,00
i7
101A
/Gp•Z
Cl T7 OF
1GA C1 TY, ID11A
t3a,95D,000 REVENUE BONDS
DEBT SER'/ICE SCHEDULE
DATE
PRINCIPAL
COL'PCN
INTEREST
PERIOD TOTAL
FISCAL TOTAL
71 1/ a
507,337.50
507,337.50
3,641,937.50
11 1/ 9
2,750,000.00
B.150000
507,337.50
3,257,337.50
71 11 9
395,275.00
395,275.00
3,652,612.50
^+
I/ 1110
2,975,000.00
8.150000
395,275.00
3,370,275.00
7/ 1110
274,043.75
214,043,15
3,644,313.75
11 till
3,225,000.00
8,150000
274,043.75
3,499,043.75
11 1/11
142,625.00
142,525,00
3,641,66875
11 1/12
3,500,000.00
3.150000
142,625.00
3,642,525,00
71 IM -3,642,625.00
'-'
-------------- --------------
i :
3E,950,000-00
54,611,763.75
93,561,766.75
ACCRUED
�.�
38,950,000.Op
54.611,766.75
93,561,768 75
17
DATE) 71
I/66 4TH D3LIVEa'! OF 71 1185
I.i
BOND YEARS
682,550.CC0
AVERASE COUPON
8.001
AVERASE LIFE
17.5:4
f7
� I Z
3,1!5269 X
Uailio 98.0000000
�t
FEEFARED
BY EVENS=_E DODSE, INC.
�Y
RUIICATE:
05 -70-1986
3UAti9E: 10:15:06
:
V•
le
IA
re
IIR
is
(A
le
/Gp•Z
II ZA27.86B,
r -
wmmm�=m
MOM
MMM
BOND
BUYERS
INDEX (1983-86)
PREPARED BY
EVENSEN DODGE,
INC.
11.5%
11.0%
10.5%
10.0%
9.5%
8.5%
8.0%
7.5%
j 7.0%
6.5% +rrrr
7/83
June 5, 1986
F
I'
I
I's IA27.86B/13
=r•t
TO:
FROM:
RE:
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
DATE: May 22, 1986
City Council & City Manager �\
Rosemary Vitosh, Acting Assistant �1"�
Wayne Burggraaff, Evensen Dodge, Inc.
Financial Planning Process &
Recommendations 4
After an extensive and thorough planning process, the Iowa City
City Council made basic decisions on design and construction
aspects of this project in September, 1985. Since that time,
work has been proceeding on detailed plans and specifications,
with construction scheduled to start in October, 1986. The
financial planning process for this project has been proceeding
during this same period of time. Attached is a schedule which
indicates the events which have occurred since March, together with
the remaining tentative time schedule.
The total estimated construction cost for the project is
$33,911,000. After adding to this amount funds required for a
debt service reserve, capitalized interest, issuance costs and
defeasance requirements for refunding a portion of the City's
general obligation debt previously issued for sewer purposes, the
total estimated financing is $38,950,000.
In planning for the financing for this project, there were five
areas which required careful review and consideration. These
areas were:
1. Pending federal legislation effecting issuance of
tax-exempt debt.
2. Current outstanding debt for the Wastewater System.
3. security and revenue provisions for the new bond issue.
4. Alternate financing mechanisms.
5. Method of sale.
PENDING FEDERAL LEGISLATION
On December 17, 1985, the House of Representatives passed
H.R. 3838 (the "Tax Reform Act"). Included in the Tax Reform Act
are numerous provisions which restrict and, in some cases, pro-
hibit the issuance of tax-exempt municipal obligations. A
variety of provisions contained in this legislation would have an
adverse effect on the issuance of debt for this project.
C-1
/o
-,IQ
t_.
-I
Earlier this year, a "Joint Statement" was issued by
Congressional leaders and the Secretary of the Treasury indi-
cating that the effective date for any tax-exempt legislation to
be passed this year could be expected to be September 1, 1986.
More recently, the Senate Finance Committee has passed on its
version of the Tax Reform Act, including provisions which would
affect the issuance of tax-exempt debt.
Therefore, in order to avoid problems associated with pending
federal legislation on this subject, it is necessary for the City
to issue bonds for the total amount required on this project in
one issuance transaction. The sale and closing of the transac-
tion must be planned to occur prior to September 1, 1966.
OUTSTANDING DEBT
The City currently has relatively small amounts of outstanding
debt for the wastewater system. Part of this debt is in the form
- of sewer revenue bonds and part of it is in the form of general
obligation bonds. User fees from the system are being used to
make debt service payments in both instances.
It is desirable to defease both of these current obligations for
sewer purposes as part of the overall financing for the new
improvements. Funds are currently available in the sewer fund to
f permit a cash defeasance of the outstanding revenue bonds. In
the case of the outstanding general obligation bonds, an amount
has been built into the issue size of the new issue which would
- permit creation of an escrow from which funds would be available
for the annual abatement of that portion of the G.O. bond levy
required for sewer purposes.
The defeasance of the revenue bonds enables the City to adopt a
new indenture resolution for the new bond issue, which will
reflect current standards and requirements for the issuance of
Utility revenue debt.
I
SECURITY AND REVENUE PROVISIONS
Repayment of the debt to be issued for the wastewater system
project will be repaid from user fees. Therefore, it is neces-
sary that the user fees be increased prior to the time of the
bond sale to provide assurance that funds will be available for
debt service. The plan that we have been reviewing with Metcalf
and Eddy provides for rate increases to be phased in over a three
year period, at which time revenue is projected to be adequate to
cover annual debt service payments for the remaining life of the
bond issue. Future increases following this phase-in period
would be dependent on the increased costs of operations for the
system.
r- 7
1ofy
=1�
In addition to a commitment to increase rates for the system, it
is also necessary to create a debt service reserve equivalent to
W the largest annual debt service payment. This reserve is created
and exists for purposes of a backup in the event the revenue in
any one year is not sufficient to make debt service payments. In
addition to the debt service reserve, the proposed indenture
resolution includes a covenant which requires rates to be set at
a level which will generate revenues equal to 1.1% of the annual
debt service payments. These covenants and others contained in
the indenture resolution, together with the City's commitment to
increase rates, are necessary to obtain the best possible rating
from Moody's Investors Service and, ultimately, the sale of bonds
- at the lowest possible rate.
FINANCING ALTERNATIVES
The City's goals in this financing are to provide the funds
needed to complete the project at the lowest interest cost within
the constraints of the City's debt policies.
The City considered a number of financing alternatives. The
three best alternatives were:
1. A combination of current -interest general obligation
and revenue bonds;
2. Current -interest revenue bonds; and
3. A combination of current -interest and zero-coupon
revenue bonds.
�J
The advantages and disadvantages of each type of financing are
discussed below.
General Obligation/Revenue Bonds
The advantage of using general obligation bonds to fund a portion
of the costs of the project is that general obligation bonds
carry interest rates lower than the other alternatives discussed
in this report. This is true because these bonds are secured by
a pledge .of the City's unlimited taxing powers, the strongest
security available. (It should be emphasized that although the
bonds would be general obligari:on bonds, debt service payments on
the bonds would be -made with the sewer utility revenues). Iowa
City's current general obligation bonds are rated Aaa by Moody's
Investors Service, Inc., the highest rating given by Moody's.
The City has earned this outstanding rating hecause of its finan-
cial and economic strength; relatively small amounts of outstand-
ing debt; and because of its debt policy which stresses rapid
repayment of its debt.
There are two primary disadvantages to using general obligation
bonds for the project. It would use a portion of the City's debt
capacity which would othr•,-wise be available for other projects,
some of which would be ftui, id only with general obligation bonds.
�- It could also jeopardize the City's general obligation Aaa credit
rating because it would significantly increase the City's general
obligation debt and cause the City to deviate somewhat from its
policy of rapid debt repayment.
C - 3 Atdt
-I
Zero Coupon/Current-Interest Revenue Bonds
The primary advantage to using zero coupon bonds is that it would
defer payment of interest until the later years of the bond
issue. This would enable the City to moderate the rate increase
required immediately. The disadvantage of zero coupon bonds is
that they carry a higher yield than current -interest bonds and
thus the total interest cost of the issue would be greater than
for the other alternatives. It would also be more difficult to
market and secure a good rating for an issue with a large zero
coupon component.
Current -Interest Revenue Bonds
- with revenue bonds only the revenues of the sewer utility are
pledged to support the bond issue. This is perhaps the fairest
financing method since all operating and capital costs of the
system are paid for by the users of the system. Because this
security is not as strong as a general obligation pledge, a debt
service coverage requirement (for example 1.10%) may be neces-
sary. This would require the City to establish rates which would
produce net revenues at least 1.10 times debt service require-
ments. One feature of Iowa law which enhances the security of
sewer revenue bonds is the fact that sewer fees are a direct lien
- on property.
Our recommendation is that the City use the current -interest
revenue bond alternative. Although the total interest cost for
such an issue would be slightly higher than for the general
- obligation revenue bond combination, the difference in favor of
the general obligation combination is not great enough to offset
- the disadvantages associated with using general obligation bonds
to finance the project. Both the current -interest revenue bond
and general obligation revenue bond alternatives would produce
significantly lower interest costs than the zero-coupon
alternative.
METHOD OF SALE
Iowa law permits the sale of issues larger than $15,000,000
_ through negotiation rather than the usual method of a competitive
public sale. Therefore, it is necessary to decide which is the
preferable method for selling the bonds to finance the project.
A competitive sale is generally used for the sale of municipal
bond issues because it most frequently elicits the best bid for
the issue. By giving any interested bidder the opportunity to
participate in a sale, the bidder who has the greatest demand for
the issue, and hence will submit the bid producing the smallest
net interest cost, is most likely to purchase the issue. There
_ are, however, certain situation when a negotiated sale is most
advantageous for the issuer. This is the case when certain fea-
tures of the issue require an aggressive, well -organized market-
ing effort to sell the bonds to their ultimate purchasers. This
" requires a longer, more extensive commitment by the underwriter
to insure the widest distribution of the bonds.
A /0 orX
WSome of
the features of an issue which may make negotiation the
better method of sale are:
w 1.
Complexity. Issues with unusual and complex structures
are frequently negotiated.
w 2.
Novelty. Issues for new or unusual purposes or of a
type with which the markets are not familiar may have
to be negotiated.
~ 3.
Unusual or weak security features. Issues where
security is weak, or where the supporting revenue
stream is uncertain, are generally negotiated.
4.
for flexibility in and
timportsizing,
structuringthe issue for If
of an issue must be adjusted or revised shortly before
it is sold, the normal legal process required for a
competitive sale may prevent the optimum features from
being incorporated in the issue's structure.
We recommend that the bonds be sold competitively. Although the
issue will be large (an estimated $38,950,000), issues this large
and even much larger are frequently sold on a competitive rather
than a negotiated basis. in all other respects this issue is of
a type with which the market is very familiar. It is not a new
or particularly complex type of issue. be Zt carries standard
should
att actygood bids. Therefore, wefeatUrsur and theibelieve that in high
his ase,J com-
petitive market forces will produce the best bid for the issue
and that a negotiated sale is not in the best interest of the
City.
SUMMARY
N In summary, after a thorough review of all considerations and
extensive consultation with members of the City staff and
attorneys and other consultants retained by the City, we
recommend that:
1. The bonds to finance the wastewater improvements be
current -interest revenue bonds; and
ti 2. that the bonds be sold through a competitive public
sale.
C - s
/OIX
i
r
PRELIMINARY FINANCING SCHEDULE
WASTEWATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
IOWA CITY, IOWA
Date Event
March 25, 1986: Meeting of City Staff and Evensen Dodge
to review financing alternatives; pend-
ing federal legislation; and financing
schedule options
March 26-Aoril 4, 1986: Evensen Dodge prepares preliminary
analysis of general obligation/revenue
bond financing alternatives
April 7, 1986: Metcalf & Eddymeeting oftand Evensen Bond
dgeotosdis-
- cuss preliminary financing analysis,
financing schedule and Waste Water
System Rate Study'
April 7, 1986: Meeting of City Staff, Bond Counsel and
Evensen Dodge with CityCouncil to
brief Council on proposed
ng
schedule and arrangements
April 7 -941 -EL 1986:
April 7-30, 1986:
Rate Study to be prepared by Metcalf &
Eddy
Detailed Analysis of general obliga-
tion/revenue financing program
C-6
/DIX
_'A�
r -
_,A�
Date
Event
April 23 -May 9, 1986:
Evensen Dodge reviews proposed finan-
cing program with Moody's Investors
Service
April 29, 1986:
Meeting of City staff, Metcalf & Eddy
and Evensen Dodge to review preliminary
rate study conclusions and recommen-
dations
May 14, 1986:
Meeting of Finance Director, Bond
Counsel and Evensen Dodge to review
draft of revenue bond indenture
-
i
resolution
May 20, 1986:
City Council sets date of hearing on
rate adjustments for June 3, 1986
i
'J
May 22, 1986:
Metcalf & Eddy rate study submitted to
City Council
f
May 22, 1986:
Preliminary financing recommendations
from Finance Director., and Evensen
i
Dodge submitted to the City Council
May 27, 1986:
Informal Council discussion of rate
study and financing program
F.
C-7
_,A�
L:rl r-
-�-_------------
i
w
y
Date
Event
,.
June
3 ,
1986:
City Council hearing on rate
adjustments; first reading on rate ordi-
nance
w
3,
1986:
City Council sets June 17 for hearing
June
on issuance of bonds.
i
9,
1986:
Construction cost estimate submitted to
June
City Staff for final bond sizing pur-
poses
-
June
12,
1986:
i
Presale Analysis prepared by Evensen
to City Staff
Dodge and submitted
I
{
June
17,
1986:
City Council gives second and third
consideration to rate ordinance
E
reading
'
June
17.
1986:
City Council holds hearing on issuance j
bond sale for
of bonds and authorizes
July 22, 1986
Meeting tatives and
of
eMoody
June
26,
1986:
Evensen age; with s Investors
Service in New York
i
/ogot
C_8
r-
Date
Julv 1. 1986:
July 22,
August
Aug.-SeF
Oct., 15
01
-7 a
c�
Event
Rate adjustments become effective
r-
Johnson County Council of Governments
910 E \&bshinytcn St. kava City, bvvo 4240
rr 00
Date: June 16, 1986
To: Iowa City Counc��il,,,QQ
From: Melody Rockwe11�3CC , Co unity Assistance Coordinator
Re: Iowa City Representation on JCCOG Animal Shelter Committee
On June 25, 1986, at 4:00 p.m., the JCCOf, Animal Shelter Committee will be
meeting to discuss the feasibility of a cooperative venture among the JCCOG
Communities and County with Iowa City in renovating and expanding the Iowa
City Animal Shelter. Because Councilman Zuber, the Iowa City representative
on the Animal Shelter Committee, will not be able to attend this meeting, the
Council may want to consider appointing an alternate to represent Iowa City's
concerns on this matter. please feel free to contact me at 356-5251 with the
result of your decision. Thank you.
bj2/13
i
r
i
i
I
1013
01
c�