pages: RecreationandParkCommission/2009-10-05.pdf, 2
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
RecreationandParkCommission | 2009-10-05 | 2 | out, that the Bond Counsel will need a few more weeks to be able to provide an opinion because this project is more complicated then a normal project. Therefore, the action tomorrow night (absent a change in motion) will be to follow through on what the City Council's motion was which is absent the two pieces, only one of which they have. Without the other piece showing up, the Council's prior motion would be to continue this issue until they receive that information. Absent the Bond Counsel letter the prior motion would be to continue this item until such time as we have received the letter from the Bond Counsel. They have said that it will be several weeks so we are figuring a 30 day continuance. There is a possibility that the Council could pass a motion to amend their prior motion. Ms. Gallant feels that is unlikely but there is a possibility. Other than that it is on the agenda schedule. Since we do not have the letter it will be continued for 30 days until the information is received. Chair Ogden clarified that we have to wait until the Council Meeting on Tuesday, October 06, 2009, to see if the Bond Counsel Letter is received. ICM Gallant stated that we received the e-mail that it will take several weeks so she does not feel that it will show up. She anticipates that the Bond Counsel will have to do a lot of due diligence. Commissioner Cooper asked about the loan of $1 million. ICM Gallant stated that in terms of eligibility of Measure WW when she raised the issue with EBRPD staff they stated that they were not so sure about it. In actuality, they cannot really opine or give us an opinion as to whether we can loan our money. The bottom line is if this project is eligible, it is eligible. Whether we choose to loan it to someone else or give it to someone and make them pay it back is a separate agreement between us and the recipient of the money. As long as we are loaning it for a legitimate project under Measure WW, it is the eligibility that is going to drive this issue. Whether we choose to do it on a loan basis or partial funding is really up to the City and is really a joint use agreement between us and the Boys and Girls Club. The Joint Use Agreement for the loan would be a separate agreement between the City and the Boys and Girls Club. It does not drive the eligibility of the Measure WW. If we choose to do it as a loan it is our (City) option to do it as a loan. The Bond Counsel cannot opine on that, the Bond Counsel can only opine as to whether the use of the dollars are legitimate under the Bond resolution. Commissioner Restagno asked if we know the term of the loan. ICM Gallant stated that the action of this Council is only to amend the list subject to a Joint Use Agreement, Loan Agreement, terms and conditions of the arrangement between the City and Boys and Girls Club. Commissioner Restagno asked if it could be a 50 year loan and those funds could potentially never funnel back into the Recreation and Park Department. ICM Gallant stated that it could be, but that is not what we have talked about. We have not come to an agreement about it, but what we have talked about is 5 years. Since we do not have an executed agreement, it would have to be memorialized in an agreement which both the Boys and Girls Club and City Council approved. Jean Sweeney, Alameda resident, asked how the loan would be secured; by a piece of the building or what. ICM Gallant stated that in negotiating an agreement for long repayment there are several things that could be done. Basically, in negotiating an agreement for loan repayment there are several things that can be done. We could look Recreation & Park Commission Special Mtg. 2 Minutes - Monday, October 5, 2009 | RecreationandParkCommission/2009-10-05.pdf |