My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
06-09-1986 CC MIN
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
City Council
>
Council Minutes
>
City Council 1974 - Present
>
1980-1989
>
1986
>
06-09-1986 CC MIN
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/21/2008 8:34:44 AM
Creation date
4/12/2005 3:08:54 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Government
type
CCM
date
6/9/1986
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
9
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />e <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />Page 2 <br /> <br />City Council Minutes <br />June 9. 1986 <br /> <br />the Highway Department and central administration offices. <br />Ms. Drude indicated that Minnesota Statute 641.24 allows a <br />City located within the County or a duly appointed County HRA <br />the authority to issue Unlimited Tax Lease Obligation bonds <br />to finance the jail and law enforcement portion of the <br />County's building program. Ms. Drude reviewed her memorandum <br />to the County Board. dated May 13. 1986 (attached and made <br />part of these official minutes). Ms. Drude indicated that <br />Page 1 outlines costs anticipated for jail/law enforcement <br />section of the project at a total of $1.690.000. Ms. Drude <br />further reviewed costs for the remainder of the project at a <br />total of $2.667.275. <br /> <br />Ms. Drude explained the financing options available to the <br />County. She further explained that the County Board has <br />directed her and Mr. Palmer to request that the City of Elk <br />River become involved since the facility is located within <br />the City limits of Elk River and would be beneficial to the <br />City. She further indicated that at this time the County <br />Board is unsure as to whether or not they should pursue the <br />entire project or only the jail facilities. which is most <br />urgently needed. Ms. Drude indicated that if part of the <br />financing were provided through the Unlimited Tax Lease <br />Obligation bonds. the County may be able to come up with the <br />remaining monies to finance the entire building program and <br />bid as a large project. Ms. Drude explained that to pursue a <br />referendum to raise the tax levy would be time consuming. <br />She further explained that if the referendum failed. the <br />County would still have an option for mandatory levy. but <br />that would drag out the process even longer. <br /> <br />Ms. Drude explained the bonding process as follows: The City <br />would lease the existing facilities from the County. the City <br />would issue bonds to finance the project. and the City would <br />then lease the upgraded facility back to the County. who <br />would make lease payments to trustee on behalf of both the <br />City and County. who would then make the bond and interest <br />payments. At the end of the lease term. the title would be <br />conveyed to the County. <br /> <br />Ms. Drude assured <br />the City. such as <br />would be covered <br />fund. Ms. Drude <br />the costs to <br />parties involved. <br /> <br />the City Council that any <br />legal fees for review of <br />in the bond issue and come <br />indicated that they would <br />a minimum to protect the <br /> <br />costs incurred by <br />the documentation. <br />out of the County's <br />attempt to keep <br />interests of all <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.