District advisers outline bond scenarios as capital funds fall far short of needs

Martin Gavorory, the district’s financial adviser from Stifel, reviewed multiple bond‑issue scenarios the district could consider to finance large‑scale facility work. He described five bounding options: a $175 million 2026 issue (with later phased issues), a scenario that preserves existing final maturities, and a maximum single‑issuance scenario of about $280 million if the board pursued maximum capacity. Gavorory noted Missouri law limits general obligation bond maturities to 20 years and that a district’s assessed valuation and outstanding debt determine legal debt capacity.

Dr. Tim (transcript: Dr. Tim Rer), the district CFO, explained the capital fund (Fund 4) revenue and expense structure: the fund primarily receives a portion of property taxes, interest and occasional transfers from operating funds or other restricted funds. He said the district projects about $46 million in Fund 4 on July 1 in the baseline scenario and that typical transfers in recent years have been near $10 million annually; under those transfer assumptions the district could fund $42 million–$92 million of deferred maintenance over five years, well short of the red‑list need.

Board members repeatedly asked how each bond option would translate into household costs. Dr. Tim said a ballot question can be structured as a “no tax‑rate change” proposition, but noted that assessed‑value growth can still raise an individual homeowner’s dollar payment even when the tax rate is unchanged. Martin Gavorory advised that election timing (August or November windows) and the board’s packaging of issues would determine when projects could be planned for summer construction cycles.

Presenters cautioned that market and legislative changes can alter capacity and that the district should prepare more detailed homeowner impact estimates and a prioritized plan before placing a measure on the ballot. No bond authorization was voted on at the meeting.