Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Bonds And Debt topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
York University asks county to serve as issuer for up to $9.25 million refinancing
Summary
York University requested that York County act as the issuer (name and tax-exempt status only) to refinance two existing loan instruments into a single bond of up to $9.25 million; university leaders said the county would have no legal obligation and would be reimbursed for legal costs.
Get email alerts on the Bonds And Debt topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
York University officials asked the York County Board of Commissioners on Oct. 4 to serve as the issuer on a proposed bond issue that would refinance two of the university's current loans into a single tax-exempt bond.
Sam Smith, president of York University, and Todd Sheldon, vice president and chief financial officer, described the plan as administrative: the county would provide its name and tax-exempt status but would not assume legal or financial obligation for repayment. The university asked the county to act as the issuer to enable tax-exempt financing arranged with Union Bank.
The university representatives said the refinancing could combine the two instruments into up to $9.25 million in debt with an estimated 5.05% interest rate and about a 13-year amortization if issued near the time of the meeting. They said legal and issuance costs would be reimbursed by the university and that the university would provide necessary documentation and a county-designated attorney to prepare the resolution and closing documents.
Commissioners asked clarifying questions about timing and precedent; staff noted the county had served as a named issuer on prior local institutional financings and that the matter could be added to a near-term agenda if commissioners raised no objections. No formal county action was recorded on the transcript during the Oct. 4 meeting; university officials said the process typically takes a month or two to complete the legal work and closing.
The board did not vote on an issuer resolution at the meeting; county staff and the university indicated next steps would include drafting resolution language and assigning legal counsel to represent the county in the issuance process.

