Laserfiche WebLink
payments when they come due. This is a true balancing act because we need money to fund the <br />project, but the bond requires repayment of debt to the lenders which cannot be pushed off too far, <br />all the while we want to ease in to rate increases for our residents. As I said, a plan was crafted <br />and the City Council implemented it. With this, we incorporated rate increases to then allow us to <br />take out the "phase II" of bonding when the time came, which was the balance of the estimated <br />$60-$70 million project. That would be scheduled to occur in 2024 or 2025. As of today, I am <br />told that our rate program has been very successful, fully capable to meet the growing needs of <br />debt payment for our initial bond and foreseen to meet the needs of the second bond that was <br />planned to come, all under the original cost estimates. <br />Now, two years later, under the 2022 economy and price hikes we are seeing, our project has <br />grown to an estimated $80-$90 million. Our staff and Garver Engineering have worked extremely <br />hard to eliminate any excess and provide as lean a project as possible. However, there is only so <br />much you can cut before you functionally eliminate the project completely. I must also stress, <br />"phase I" is incomplete without "phase II". Remember, we only divided this project up in to two <br />phases because of arbitrage issues and a goal of easing residents in to rate increases over a period <br />of years given debt payment can only be delayed so long. It could become easy to incorrectly <br />think that "phase I" will give us a product that will suffice. When asked point blank, our staff and <br />Garver have stressed that "phase I" will not suffice. What we have done is taken the full project, <br />pulled out elements that can hold out long enough to allow us to build "phase I" elements. But <br />once "phase I" is complete, the remaining aged elements scheduled for "phase II" must start. <br />Basically, "phase II" elements can hang in there longer than "phase I" elements. <br />Garver Engineering has estimated that, under today's pricing in the market, we are in need of an <br />additional estimated $7 million to complete those elements designed in "phase P. The price for <br />"phase II" has also gone up, making up the balance of the now estimated $80-$90 million total <br />price tag. Important — the request for bids we have issued will tell us the true amount needed for <br />"phase I", so I am still hopeful that having a slate of qualified and competitive contractors as well <br />as Garver Engineering examining and verifying their bid pricing, will bring about some better <br />pricing than expected. However, we should expect a need to issue a second bond to support "phase <br />I", this year. That unfortunately will require us to amend our rate increase plan. I still fully plan <br />to stair step our increases over time, but the rise of the steps will have to get a little steeper. We <br />are trying to avoid turning this in to a cliff climb though, so we will work hard to balance this out. <br />In a year or two, we will need to begin preparations for a "phase II" bond. Instead of this being <br />$15-$20 million as we originally planned, it is now estimated to be closer to $35-$40 million. <br />Again, bids will decide and if we continue to have a slate of good and qualified competition, we <br />will get the best price we possibly could get. <br />