Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Bond Program topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Grand Prairie staff outline $335 million bond package with 3.91¢ worst‑case tax impact
Summary
Finance staff presented a proposed $335 million general-obligation bond authorization across streets ($209M), public safety ($86.5M) and community projects ($39M), saying the 3.91¢ tax-rate figure is a conservative, worst-case snapshot and that council will consider a project list and an ordinance to call a May 2 election.
Finance staff briefed the Grand Prairie City Council on a proposed general obligation bond program that would authorize $335,000,000 in projects across three categories and carry a published tax-rate impact estimate of 3.91¢.
"This meeting is also an opportunity for council and the public to provide any additional input as we move towards the May election," finance staff member Tablo said, summarizing the package and schedule. Tablo said the authorization covers three primary categories — streets, public safety and community projects — and described next steps: bringing a resolution with a project listing to council on Jan. 20, refining ordinance language with bond counsel, calling the election on Feb. 3 and holding the election on May 2.
Tablo gave the staffing estimates for each category: roughly $209,000,000 for streets projects (described as a 2.5% impact in staff presentation), about $86,500,000 for public-safety projects (a little over 1¢ tax impact) and approximately $39,000,000 for community-based projects (just under one-half cent tax impact). The combined figure was presented as $335,000,000 and a total estimated tax-rate impact of 3.91¢.
Council members sought clarity on how the tax impact was calculated. Council member Shotwell noted the state-prescribed method produces a "worst-case" snapshot and that projects are authorized over a 10-year period, not built simultaneously; Tablo agreed the 3.91¢ figure assumes conservative growth assumptions and the city would issue bonds as projects are phased and funded.
Staff and council also discussed wording and naming for planned civic facilities that may be included in the bond listing. Tablo advised that bond counsel and the attorney general's office review ballot language, and the council should aim to finalize language in time for the Jan. 20 agenda to avoid re-submittals to the attorney general.
No final vote on the bond authorization was recorded in the supplied transcript; staff said they will return with a formal resolution and ordinance language for council consideration.
