Laserfiche WebLink
Redevelopment Agency <br />Memorandum <br />TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND AGENCY MEMBERS DATE: December 13, 2011 <br />FROM: OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER – FINANCE ITEM NO: <br /> DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT <br />WARD: All <br /> <br />SUBJECT: REIMBURSEMENT RESOLUTIONS FOR 2011 TAX ALLOCATION BOND- <br />FUNDED PROJECTS <br />ISSUE <br />The issue before the Redevelopment Agency is whether to adopt reimbursement resolutions <br />associated with projects currently funded by or anticipated to be funded by the Redevelopment <br />Agency’s 2011 tax allocation bond issuance. <br />RECOMMENDATION <br />That the Redevelopment Agency adopt the attached Treasury Regulation Section 1.150-2 <br />Reimbursement Resolutions (Exhibit A) to allow for repayment of qualified expenditures from future <br />tax-exempt bond proceeds. <br />BACKGROUND <br />On March 1, 2011, the Redevelopment Agency adopted resolutions authorizing the issuance of up <br />to $90,400,000 of tax allocation bonds through the Riverside Public Financing Authority. <br />Concurrently the Redevelopment Agency adopted reimbursement resolutions for certain projects to <br />be funded from the proceeds of the bond issuance. On March 8, 2011, the previously-authorized <br />tax allocation bonds were issued in the amount of $65,000,000. Following a careful evaluation of <br />the Redevelopment Agency’s funding needs it was determined that the full $65,000,000 would not <br />be needed in the near term. Accordingly, on June 16, 2011, $31,700,000 of the outstanding bonds <br />were called using unspent bond proceeds on hand. The remaining balance outstanding totals <br />$33,300,000. <br />The 2011 tax allocation bonds were privately placed in the City’s investment pool in lieu of <br />placement with a private investor or being sold in the bond market. This facilitated paying a lower <br />interest rate of 5%, which was below the rate that the market would have demanded at the time but <br />represented a premium over what the City’s other investments were earning at the time. As a result, <br />the Redevelopment Agency has achieved a lower cost of borrowing while the City has earned a <br />