Scranton officials outline parking debt restructure, propose extended enforcement and capital set‑asides

City of Scranton staff and the city’s parking operator presented a package of proposed changes to the city’s parking concession agreement and a related debt‑restructuring plan at a City Council meeting to avoid a potential default on parking bonds and to fund long‑deferred garage repairs.

The presentation, led by the city’s financial adviser Scott Shear of PFM, said AllianceBernstein — the current bondholder — has agreed in principle to a deal that would reduce outstanding parking debt from about $45,000,000 to about $30,000,000, with interest rates in the expected range of 5.75 percent to 6.75 percent. The plan would include three years of interest‑only payments, principal payments beginning in 2029 and a final maturity stretched to 2070 to lower annual debt service in the near term.

Shear said the restructuring is intended to preserve an affordable downtown parking rate structure that the council approved after the pandemic and to create a predictable capital reserve for garage maintenance. “We didn’t want to raise rates just to pay the bills,” Shear said, describing the goal of maintaining lower garage rates to attract long‑term parkers off street parking.

Why it matters: the city has been using reserves to cover operating costs and, without a restructuring, staff said those reserves would not cover future debt service. The proposed transaction was described as necessary to avoid a default, reduce the bondholder’s exposure and secure funding for capital repairs and ongoing preventive maintenance of downtown garages.

Key provisions discussed

- Debt reduction and term structure: staff said AllianceBernstein would accept a reduction of the amount outstanding from roughly $45 million to about $30 million; interest only for three years with principal beginning in 2029 and maturities extended to 2070 were cited as proposed terms.

- Annual capital contributions: the concession agreement would include a $200,000 annual capital contribution from operations for capital repairs (described in the presentation as a $200,000 annual capex set‑aside, tracked as part of a 10‑year schedule). Staff said unmet contributions can be made up in later years if not spent in a single year.

- Operational and revenue changes: staff and the operator proposed extending on‑street enforcement hours on weekdays (additional hours in the evening) and adding enforcement on Saturdays. Staff estimated incremental revenue included in the bond model at about $97,000 from the Monday–Friday extension and about $74,600 from Saturday enforcement; citation revenue was excluded from that estimate because it was labeled unpredictable.

- Fee and administrative changes: the draft amendments would update meter citation rates, hang‑tag and bag fees (adjustments that staff said were included in the 2016 contract schedule and indexed for inflation), and permit and bagging fees that have not been adjusted since 2016. Staff also proposed passing credit‑card processing fees through to users (estimated at about $90,000 per year).

- Governance and contracting: the proposal recommends removing the parking authority from the transaction, reverting its assets to the city and dissolving the authority after closing to reduce duplicate administrative costs (staff estimated the authority’s recurring costs at roughly $20,000–$35,000 per year). The Scranton Lackawanna Health and Welfare Authority (the issuer described in the presentation) and AllianceBernstein were named as parties in the documents.

- Capital program and grant requirements: the concession amendment would require the operator (CDPS) to submit a five‑year capital plan each September and to apply for grants (state multimodal, LSA and other sources) before city funds are released for certain purposes. Presenters said the city has assisted in prior federal funding applications and that capital grants are difficult to secure but pursued.

Questions and concerns from council and stakeholders

Council members and business‑owner attendees pressed staff on the Saturday enforcement proposal and its impact on downtown residents and small businesses. One council member asked staff to return to the bondholder team and seek relief from the Saturday enforcement requirement; staff said they would raise that concern with the bondholder and the administration said it would advocate to the bondholders on Saturday enforcement in the days before the next council meeting.

Councilors also asked about staffing costs for extended enforcement; staff responded that enforcement salaries were already subtracted from the revenue line used in the bond model. A council member raised accessibility concerns for downtown residents (groceries, visitors), and business owners in the audience urged clearer meter messaging and technical safeguards to prevent payments outside posted hours.

Operational details and capital costs

- Walker Consulting performed a needs assessment that identified shoring and other capital needs in several garages; staff said the city has not made major capital investments since a 2016 plan and would set aside funds for future required repairs.

- Power washing all garages in a single year was estimated at about $120,000; staff said the plan is to cycle power washing (one or two garages per year) and have the city provide power washing at least once every two years under the amended agreement.

- Staff said they will continue to seek multimodal and LSA grants and other capital funding; prior to and after 2016 the city obtained at least one multimodal award with the city providing the match.

What is not decided

No formal council vote on the restructuring or concession amendments was recorded in the meeting transcript. Staff described the package as negotiated with the bondholder and as contingent on the full set of operational changes and revenue assumptions used in the bond model; if those assumptions change, the presenters said they would need to renegotiate with bondholders and rework the financial model.

Speakers and attribution

Direct quotes and attributed factual statements in this article come from the following meeting participants: Scott Shear (city financial adviser, PFM); Liz Preate Havey (special counsel to the city); Jessica Askress (city solicitor, who provided the estimated parking authority recurring cost); Dave Trevisani (CDP/parking operator); an operations presenter identified as Jake (no surname given); and an administration representative who spoke for the mayor’s office. Other attendee remarks (business owners and council members) are described without individual names when the transcript did not provide them.

Next steps

Staff said documents had been circulated to council the prior week and that the parking authority would meet separately; staff and the administration said they would continue discussions with the bondholder, and that changes to any of the operational or rate assumptions would require re‑engagement with bondholders and could alter the financing.

Ending note

Officials framed the restructuring as necessary to preserve an affordable garage rate structure, reduce the risk of default, and create a sustainable capital program for aging parking garages while asking council to weigh the economic and access impacts of extended enforcement hours and new Saturday enforcement.