Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Tourism Bonds topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council advances first reading for bonds to fund tourism projects
Summary
Floyd County heard a first reading of Ordinance 2026-12 to authorize Economic Development Revenue Bonds, Series 2026, on behalf of the Clark Floyd Counties Convention & Tourism Bureau; county leaders said the bureau’s innkeepers tax receipts would back the bonds and the county would serve as issuer.
Get email alerts on the Tourism Bonds topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Floyd County leaders on May 15 heard a first reading of Ordinance 2026-12, which would authorize issuance of Economic Development Revenue Bonds, Series 2026, to finance four tourism-related projects. Bo Zeller of FBT Gibbons, bond counsel for the Clark Floyd Counties Convention & Tourism Bureau (also referred to in the meeting as Southern Indiana Tourism), told the joint meeting the bureau collects an innkeepers tax and seeks to pledge portions of that tax to support the bonds.
"They cannot issue bonds directly because they are not an elected body. They can pledge it to bonds. They felt Floyd County would be the proper issuer," said Bo Zeller, bond counsel. Zeller said three of the four projects are located in Floyd County, with the others in the greater Clark County area; projects named in the discussion included a school-related facility and a trailhead associated with Indiana University Southeast.
Council members moved to approve the ordinance as published, including a related interlocal, in a unanimous vote; the motion was recorded as a council action and treated as the ordinance’s first reading. Dale Bagshaw moved the ordinance; Sam Sarkisian seconded and the motion passed unanimously. Proponents emphasized that the bonds would be repaid from pledged tourism revenues and not constitute general County debt.
The measure was presented as a first reading; a subsequent council meeting was expected to consider a second reading and final action. The ordinance and the projects it would finance were discussed in general terms during the joint meeting; specific bond terms, repayment schedules and any required county administrative approvals were not provided at the session.
