03051984 Special Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

87 Special Heeting March 5, 1984 Page 2 that Table 3 be amended under Utility Revenue 1983-1984 as follows: Growth Income (10%) from 198,029 to 220,997 Rate Increase from 354,024 to 331,056; - - that Table 1 be amended under the column Average Gallons Billed to read "5-Year Average Gallons Billed" and that three O's (000) be placed at the end of each of the numbers in that column, i.e. 112,032 would read 112,032,000; and that Table 5 be amended as follows: Total Bonds Total Bonds Combo Tax & Rev. Outstanding Outstanding c.o. Series 1982* from *20,000,000 to 200,000 c.o. Series 1984 from 30,000,000 to 300,000. - - Mr. Brown seconded Mr. Farr's motion, which passed unanimously. Ms. Kissler moved to amend the figures in Table 5 regarding G.O. Bonds under the Total Bonds Outstanding Column to add decimals to each of the five figures and that the figure in G. O. Bonds Series 73 be changed from 155,000.00 to 140,000.00 so that the column of figures would read as follows: Total Bonds Total Bonds G.O. Bonds Outstanding Outstanding St. Improv. Series 56 from: 4,400,000 to: 44,000.00 Series from: - G. O. Bonds 68A 35,000,000 to: 350,000.00 G. O. Bonds Series 73 from: 15,500,000 to: 140,000.00 G. O. Bonds Series 74 from: 22,500,000 to: 225,000.00 G. O. Ref Bonds Series 75 from: 17,000,000 to: 170,000.00. - - Mayor Craddock seconded Ms. Kissler's motion, which passed unanimously. The City's auditor, Don Laine, advised the Council this plan was not required in the bond-rating process but would only be used as supple- mental information and suggested the Council not present it. Bill Harrison stated the only items required in the bond-rating process are copies of the City's audits for the last two years, copies of the City's budgets for the last two years and two copies of the prospectus as being presented to the Council for approval on this agenda. Messrs. Harrison and Laine both agreed that Table 3 of the plan was the most important portion of the plan. City Manager Gon- zalez expressed greater importance of the presentation of the plan during the bond-rating process than Messrs. Laine and Harrison. Mr. Harrison then suggested the Council consider presenting the plan as a draft that would be finalized within two weeks and presented to the bond-rating companies. City Attorney Hankins suggested amendments to the Resolution. Mr. Farr moved that Part 3 of the Resolution be amended to add the word draft as follows: " attached Draft Wastewater and Collection . . . System Financial Plan " and Part 4 of the Resolution be amended . . . , to include the two underlined words as follows: " the Draft . . . Water and Wastewater Collection System Financial Plan, attached here- to as Exhibit A, are hereby tentatively adopted as goals and objectives for the City." Mr. Brown seconded the motion, which passed unanimous- ly. On roll call the following vote was recorded for adoption of the Resolution (and Plan) as amended: AYE: Brown, Farr, Guerra, Craddock, Kissler. NAY: Kreczmer, Moore. ABSTAIN: None.