Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Municipal Finance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Officials weigh bonding versus cash for smaller projects; surplus numbers pending
Summary
Committee members asked why relatively small projects (e.g., $1.5M) are sometimes bonded rather than paid in cash; CFO Don Enright said the decision depends on year‑end surplus and cap-space considerations and that the surplus number will be known in a few weeks.
Aldermen questioned why the city bonds modest sums (for example, around $1.5M) rather than using surplus cash when available. Don Enright, the city CFO, explained that whether a project is paid from cash or bonded depends on the audited year-end surplus and on the city's cap-space constraints, which can favor bonding for projects that should be excluded from cap calculations.
Enright said the administration will know the surplus figure within a few weeks after closing accounts for FY26; if surplus exists, staff will propose using cash for certain priority items and avoid borrowing if practical. He noted some past projects have been paid with cash (for example, police training‑building renovations and certain fire-station roofs), but cautioned that using surplus for recurring deferred maintenance is not prudent long-term policy because surplus is variable year-to-year.
Committee members asked staff to return with a prioritized list of projects that could be paid from surplus if the figure is sufficient and to show the trade-offs between bonding and cash for tax-rate impacts.
