Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Bond Financing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lancaster County approves revenue bonds for downtown parking garage
Summary
The Lancaster County Board of Commissioners voted unanimously to authorize revenue bonds to construct a parking garage north of the County‑City Building; advisers said the sale should not raise the public’s property tax levy and the Public Building Commission will contribute toward costs.
Lancaster County commissioners on Jan. 13 voted to authorize revenue bonds to pay for a parking garage north of the County‑City Building, a project county officials said will serve both employees and members of the public who use county services and the courts.
Karen Peterson, director of facilities and property, told the board the resolution would tie master leases together and allow the county to issue bonds to fund construction. Bond adviser Scott Keane of Piper Sandler said the Public Building Commission has retired prior debt and currently maintains a levy “well below where it was the last time the PBC did a financing,” which he said helps limit tax‑levy pressure from the new issue.
Keane and other advisers described the financing as timed to replace rolling‑off debt and to address rising construction costs. An adviser told commissioners the county expects to issue roughly $17 million to fund the project; the PBC plans roughly $1.5 million in contribution and earlier paperwork set a not‑to‑exceed principal of $19.2 million.
Several commissioners framed bonding as a way to avoid higher future costs if construction prices rise. Commissioner Sean Flower said delaying projects can increase the eventual burden on the public, adding that current timing and partnership with the PBC and city make bonding appropriate.
The resolution passed on a unanimous roll call. County staff and bond counsel said the next steps are to finalize sale documents with the PBC and proceed to market the bonds in the coming weeks.
The board did not adopt a change to the county’s tax levy at the meeting; advisers described the financing plan as keeping levy impacts near current levels rather than increasing them.
