Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Finance Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
District hears plan to issue sales‑tax bonds to finish $270M capital program; public hearing, sale dates set
Summary
Financial advisers outlined a two‑year bond plan that would use sales tax (alternate revenue) bonds and future debt‑service extension base bonds to fund roughly $184 million of remaining capital needs; board will take procedural steps in February and March.
Anne Noble of Stifel Public Finance presented the district’s plan to fund remaining facilities projects and outlined a two‑step bond program spanning this year and 2026.
Noble said the district has about $270 million of projects yet to complete, approximately $88 million on hand, and a remaining need of about $184 million. The proposal calls for approximately $83.4 million of sales‑tax‑secured alternate revenue bonds this spring (no voter referendum required) and a second issuance in 2026 that would include about $16 million more in sales‑tax bonds plus roughly $85 million of general obligation‑style bonds secured by the district’s debt service extension base (property tax capacity tied to the district’s DEEB of about $9.7 million a year).
Noble explained that the sales tax bonds are secured by the 1% sales tax revenue approved by voters earlier and are not subject to the district’s statutory debt limit. She noted the plan assumes no growth in sales tax receipts and modest CPI‑based growth in the debt service extension base; district finance staff said actual sales tax collections have shown growth but the plan does not count on it.
The presentation included an explanation of the legal process and schedule: the board is expected to approve a resolution of intent on Feb. 3, hold a public hearing on Feb. 18, and consider approving the bond sale on March 10. Noble said bonds would effectively commit most of the sales tax revenue for about 20 years under the proposed structure if sales tax collections do not grow; any future growth would free revenue for additional projects.
Board members and staff discussed contingencies and cost escalation: officials said guaranteed maximum prices and contingencies have been included in project estimates and that some past change orders were driven by unforeseen conditions in older buildings. District construction managers and advisers said they had adjusted project estimates to reflect cost escalation through projected construction dates.
