HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-03-1996 Adjourned CC?RDA Minutess
r~JOURNED REGULAIt CI'd'I' C~iTP7C'aI/I2EDEVELOPMEN'P AGEiVCY
MEE'I'I101~
CIT'Y f3F %~KE EL5INOdtE
130 SOU3`H MAdN S'I'REET
i.Ai~ ELSIIVORE, CALI~'ORNIA
'Y'UESDAY, DECENYBEbt 3, 199b
RRRRRRAS1Nf1~tRRR3Rf~tRi~RkRRRRRf~RAR~lRRR1cRRkRktRRRRi~RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRARAR$RRRRRh~lR RRx ~ 1c
CALL TO ORDER
The Joint Meeting was called to order by 1VIayor Pro TemBoardmember Kelley at 1:10 p.m.
FLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The Pledge of Allegiance was led by CouncilmanlBoardmembei Alongi.
IfZOLI, CALL
PRESENT: COUNCCYI.MEMBERSBOtLRDMEll~fBE~:
ABSENT: COUNCII.MENYBERSBOA~tDMEMB~ItS
PUBLIC COMMENTS - AGENDIZ~;D IT`EMS
None.
CLOSED SESSYON
Discussion of Personnel matters.
AIAIVGI, T~F'.i ,T .F' V , ME"I'I.E,
BRINLEY
EAPE
T'HE li^~ETING AIBJOU1tN, IB T~ ~LOS~D SESS~~N A'i' 1:12 P.ft'Y. TO DISCUSS 'THE
ABOVE l~1ENTIONED Il~SATTEI2S.
THE MEETING RECOI~TVEIdED r~'F 2:1~ P.tal. 6~1~ ilT~ E1C'Y'ION TA~P1.
Dick Knapp, Ciry Treasurer, questioned the availabiliry of paperwork on item no. 3. He stated that
he felt that it was inappropriate to present this item unless Council has had fune to read the material.
He explained thai even if Council has discuss~ this item befose, they should take a month to redigest
the whole contract for $21 millioa He suggested that the City would only receive $2 millio~ rather
than the $3 miiion discussed.
1. Proposed Budget and
2. ProposiEioce 21~ Interpretatio~e & 3.mpscts. (r:3o. i) (x:96. i)
City Iv~anager/Executive Director ivfolendyk explained Yhat in the Closed Session alternatives
were discussed regazding the revenue stream and personnel adjustments. He noted that
Council directed staffto cut $3,000,040 and use $70,000 ~SOm the reserves and retain all the
fulf time arul part time employees through the end of this budget year. He further noted that
foliowing Proposition 218, this will give voters the opporiunity to make the LLNID whole
ttuough a ballot measure and give an ~pportunity to bring necessary assessments to a Special
~[ection in 7une. ~Ie eoncluded that whaE occurred in Closed ~~ssi~n was that Cauncl]
agreed to cut costs and use reserves ~~ith no layoffs until Iuly 1, 1997.
PAGE TWO - ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING - DECEMBER 3, 1996
City Attomey/L,egal Counsel Harper noted that everyone should be awaze of Proposition
218 and its results and the impact on the e~cisting LLMD District; which will require a
reduction of an amount equal to what the City is currently spending on pazks. He stated that
it is staffs recommendation that Council do two things; Regarding the LLMD - use the
procedures in Proposition 218; with mailed and returned ballot to reinstate the puks portion
of the LLMD. He noted thai the analysis is not complete but would cost approxunately $25
a year for a single family residence. He pointed out that the Assessment Engineer has not
completed his analysis and this issue depends on that information. He noted that the City
cou(d look at holding a public hearing on the park portion in late Mazch, 1997) He explained
that ai the same time the City can use the ballot approach regazding a general taac on a ballot
to include pazks, recreational facilities and the west end fire station. City Attomey/Legal
Counsel Haiper explained that if the pazks portion is reinstated on the Mazch ballot, then the
City would drop that issue off of the June 3, General Municipal Election. He noted that if
unsuccessful the amount considered for the election would be approximately $2.5 million.
City Manager/E~cecutive Director Molendyk added that passage would bring the City current
with the existing service ]evel and the additional dollazs would be allocated for staffing of the
West End Fire Station. He noted that the money has been set aside for construction, but
these dollus would address staffing. City Attorney/Legal Counsel Harper noted that the
budget assumes the Sumitomo Bank payment will go away due to future actions that staff is
working on, but without that debt going away an additional half million dollars would have
to be cut from the budget..
City ManagedExecutive D'vector Molendyk explained that because of Proposition 218, staff
recommends hiting Berryman & Heniger as consuliants to develop funding formulas, to assist
in putting together a public information brochure, participate with staff in the Town Hall
Meeting process and bring the exacY figures together. He noted changes in assessment
procedures and explained that it will also assess public entities a fair portion . He fiiRher
explained that the City will need to have the engineer's review to determine what is fair, as
well as a request for evaluaiion of operating costs for the West End Fire Station. He further
noted that there will be public input at the town hall meetings and Council can decide what
costs they need to pass on and thus need to appear on the ballot in June.
CouncilmanBoardmember Metze questioned the process for the two attempts and further
questioned the reason we went with option No. 2, and asked if it would allow for two
opportunities for pa.csage. Ciry Attomey/I.egal Counsel Hazper explained the public hearing
process and ihe mailed ballot to pass or deny the pazks portion of the existing LLIvff) budget.
He noted that the election will be scheduled at a pubGc hearing in approximately late March
and at the same time processed for a Registered Voter Election on 7une 3rd, and include
parks and additional items such as recreation and fire station opeiations. He further explained
that if the measure is approved in March it could reduce the amount asked for in June.
Councilrnar/Boardmember Metze questioned the Mazch election and the impact of the large
land owners. City Attorney/I,egal Counsei Harper clarified that the vote count is based on
the total assessment. He noted that the City needs 51% of the ballots retumed to be
favorable. City Manager/Fxecutive Director Ivfolendyk noted the benefit of two opportunities
foe vote, but furthet noted the impact of user goups on the need for the parks. He explained
that the Community Services Depar[ment has indicated to them thaY we can accommodate
user groups through June 30th, Yo allow the opportunity to host tournaments and make plans.
City Attomey/Legal Counsel Harper noted the choices if unsuccessful with both elections,
being; on Juty 1, the Ciry will have to lay o$' I 1 full time employees from a small staff, all part
time employees and there will be no park maintenance.
~CQV~p $}~' B_I~INLEY~ SE~Q~~p $I' ~T~ ~N,~ C¢.~2,~~E~ ~Y ~1Yt~N~?f~iT~ VOTE
OF THOSE PRESENT TO APPR~VE OP'I'ION NO. TWO AND STAFF
RECONI:'1~NDATIONS.
PAGE THREE - t4DdOURNLD REGULr4R H'IEETIN~ - DECEMBER 3, 1996
3. Financial Strategy/Refinancing. (F:3o.1) (x:133.1.)
A Formation of the New Recreation Authoritv.
City Manager Molendyk introduced Rod Gunn, and explained the intent of the
proposed actions
Rod Gunn, noted that in 1994, the City issued $10,000,000 in bonds to assist in the
financing of the Stadium and on a taxable basis. He explained that the City is
currently paying 9.5% in interest. He further explained that one direction received
from staffwas Yo determine how to refinance on a tax exempt basis and save the City
interest costs. The second chazge under the budget process now in e$'ect, was how
to defer paymen4 for some period of Yime because general fund could not pay the debt
service without fwther cuts. Mr. t'iunn explained that the original intent was that the
RDA would have money to pay for the debt service. He stressed that this was a City
bond issued, and noted that the assessed values have declined and the RDA does not
have money to transfer for debt service on the bonds. He reviewed the various
proposa(s, but eecommend a bond issue with money set aside to pay the interest on
the bonds for three year~ therefora there would be no City payment required for three
yeazs from the date of bond issuance. Mr. Gunn explained that in the meantime, as
4he economy recovers, revenues will increase and with regular hudget evaluations and
4he proposed cuts the City would be able, at end of three years, to assume the debt
service. He furcher explained that this is buying a three year window to proceed. He
noted thaY the other issue thai was raised regarding the bond issue is the fact that one
of the major assets in the City is the La;ce and part of the economic recovery depends
on the Lake to draw new development. He furiher noted that one hindrance is water
quality and fish kills and if this can be addressed it opens the possibility for new
development. Mr. Gunn noted t;~at ihe $21 million is a safety factor as it would not
be that large since actual sizing depends on interest rates at the time of issuance. He
noted that the issuance would be for $19.5 million; $10.5 million to pay off the
Sumitomo Loan; funding of interest for 3 years is $4 million; $3 million for water
quality for the Lake; debt service reserve at $1.5 million to $1.6 million and the
balancE to discounu to underwri4er and cost of issuance which is approxunately $I/2
millioa He stated that on the day of issuance and rate will impact those factors so the
figures could be lower or higher, but it will be nearly that ratio.
City Attomey/Legal Counsei Harper clariSed 4hat we would basically borrow
$700,000 to proceed with what is owed on the Sumitomo I.oan. Mr. Gunn noted that
iY is based on the clifferential with money for lake and other things. He further noted
that the mechanism to issue the bonds , cannot be done with the Stadium on a tax
exempt basis due to tha private party lease, so the mechanism to use is an asset
trazufer with creation of a new financing authority specifically cfesigned for tracking
the Lake. He explained that the Lake will be sold to the financing authority and
leased back to the City; and the lease payments will go to pay off the bonds.
CouncilmanBoardmember Aiongi questioned the lease back. Mr.Gunn expiaine3
thai this is designed to create the revenue stream to the bonds and is not a mortgage
situation. He further explained that the only cption the bond holders would have is
to lease the I.ake to someone else, but they cannot sell it. Councilman/Boazdmember
Alongi questioned the pledge ofDMV fees for the payment. Mr.Gunn explained that
the City will pledge DMV fees as a guazantee to the extent necessary to make the.
lease payments to the authoricy. Councilman 2vletzelBoardmember asked why we
used 4he La~ke as colla4eral. Mr. Gunn explained Yhat the I,ake is used to set up the
lease. Councilman/Boazdmember Metze asked if the bond holders could take the
Lake and DMV fees. City Attoney/Lega! Counsel Harper clarified the lease and
stated all that could be foreclosed on was the Lake, and the DMV fees would stay in
,i:
PAGE FOUR - ADJOURNED REGUI.r~R MEETING - DECEMBER 3, 1996
the budget. Certificates ofParticipation are typical ways of financing public facilities
with no other use such as sewer fces. He explained that this is a way a public agency
must finance things because it can't borrow money otherwise.
Councilman/Boazdmember Along questioned the cost to the Lake account to pay
back $3 million and asked if there had been a feasibility study of its potential.
Mr.Gunn explained that the payment on $3 million would cost appro~cimately
$280,000 annually in terms of the Lake revenue. Councilman/Boardmember Alongi
questioned the Lake Management Ageement payback. Assistant City Manager
Watenpaugh stated that it is $380,000 a year. CounciUnanBoardmember Alongi
questioned the cosi of operations for just the lake. Assistant City Manager
Watenpaugh clarified. Councilman/Boardmember Alongi indicated that this would
mean $1 million a yeaz is needed from the Lake. Councilman/Boardmember Metze
noted the offset ofrevenue on the Lake. Councilman/Boazdmember Alongi stressed
the $1 million we are in debt on the Lake and stressed that this is adding to that figure
to do something we don't have. He stated that when the ball field was built,
development was expected to help make repayment and this did not happen and
pointed out that the City will be prepaying for another year not knowing where the
economy will be. He made note of the negotiation with EVMWD regarding the Lake
and reclaimed water and he still feels that they are responsible for the water. City
Attorney/Legal Counsel Harper ciarified the feasibility study and projections. City
Manager/Executive Director Molendyk noted $326,000 federal payback for the Lake
responsibility of the RDA obligation prior to the Ciry taking over the Lake.
Councilman/Boazdmember Alongi stressed that it is still a debt to be paid. City
Manager/Executive D'uector Molendyk noted two studies-on the economics of the
Lake and both say that the revenue stream is dependent on lake stabilization and
water quality and stated that what he has heazd from Council is that the highest
priorities are the Budget and ihe Lake. He noted efforts to obtain grants and
subsidies and pointed out that this will improve the opportunity to generate revenue
to off-set the costs of the La]ce. He further noted no one is interested in participating
in the Lake except the City; and when we have the $3 million it can only be used for
water quality or acquisition of land for public use. He explained that this gives the
City the opportunity to pay offthe debt and address problems regarding the Lake. He
stressed that the City has three yeazs to spend that money and give us the ability to
meet a matching funds situation for grants and increase the spending power of our
money. He stressed that he is not saying the City will spend $3 million immediately,
but this will provide funds to use on the lake and time to work on a plan.
Councilman/Boazdmember Metze questioned if the City will continue to pursue the
$3 million that was taken away by the State. City Manager/Executive D'uector
Molendyk stated that we can pursue this issue forever, but if we can go to other
agencies or legislators and offer a match it increases our possibilities for the Lake; and
$3 million is a lazge amount for the State in their finances at this time. He stated that
no State agency has thaY much money to give. Councilwoman/Chauman Brinley
noted that we aze still working with other agencies to pursue grants. City
ManagerBxecutive Director Molendyk concurred with Councilman
AlongiBoardmember and stressed the importance of resolving issues with other
agencies, such as a long tetm water source and stressed that without this there aze no
dollars available to use for participation. City Manager/Executive D'vector
Molendyk further stressed that the City is not required to spend the funds. Ciry
Manager/Executive D'uector Niolendyk asked Ciry Attomey/I,egal Council Harper
what happens if the money is not used. City Attomey/Legal Counsel Harper stated
that we would ret'ue bonds and reduce the debt payment. Mr. Gunn stated that it
would amourit ta abtsut 1.5°lo pee year ar ~30,000 to $40,00~ per year. ~Ie clarified
that the money would be there, but clarified that the City has the ability to invest.
City Attomey/Legal Counsel Harper further clarified the impact of the Federal
Government regazding bond investments.
PAGE FIVE - ADJOURNED REGULAR NfEE'PING - DECEMBER 3, 1996
Councilwoman/Chairwoman Bririley requested clarification the use of the $3 million
and asked if it would be soleIy for lake waier quality and land azound the lake for
public use. Ciry Manager Molendyk confirn~ed and explained that it can be used for
capital items, but not operations or other uses. \~fr. Gunn confumed this and stated
that it must be related to the Lake.
CouncilwomazJBoazdmember ICelley questioned the lake revenue this year. Assistant
City Manager Watenpaugh stated Yhat it was $219,000, withouc a boat launch.
Councilwoman/Chauwoman Briniey questioned the forecast for 1996-97 with the
boat launch. Assistant City Manager Watenpaugh stated that it will be about
$350,000..
There was genera] discussion. Councilman Alangi/Eoardmember noted that the
Council was saddling the community with more debt. City Attomey/I,egal Counsel
Harper clariSed that in order to take this action Yhey need to convince bond buyers
that we can afford to pay them back and he would be remiss discussing this approach
if there was no chance that it would be paid, or if there were no opportunity to repay
no bonds they would not be sold. CouncilmanBoardmember Alongi stated that the
3 yeazs of interest payments were set for that reason. City Attomey/Legal Counsel
Harper stressed concem for the ner.t 22 to 27 yeazs, aot the first three years.
CouncilmanBoazdmembec Alongi asked why the Bank ofSumitomo loaned the City
$10 million if we could not project for 20 years. City Attorney/Legat Counsel Harper
stated buause it is not a30 year loan and noted the actions by Sumitomo which took
advantage of the City. Councilman/Boardmember Alongi questioned figures on the
boazd to show the total cost ofthe $21 million and suggested that ttus is consolidating
the debt to reduce the payment and doubling the cost Lo repay. City Attorney/Legal
Gounsel Harper clarified that the debt service is approximately $1.6 million. Mr.
Gumi clarified the options and the costs of each; Option No. l, is refinance the $10.5
million and that could 'oe done at a savings, but not buy any time; Option No. 2,
consists of buying three years to get the City Snances in arder: City Attorney/Legal
Counsel Harper noted OptionNo. i is not a feasble option since Prop. 218, as no one
would buy the tefinanced bonds: Mr. Gunn noted that with Option No. 2, the City
will gain the three yeazs to work out all the problems and will take the amount to
approx. $IS-16 million; Option No. 3, adds new money for a future projects and adds
to the capitalized interest. He clarified the $19.5 million option and stated that from
6th year on it will cost $1.6 million, $1.4 million for 3-S years and nothing on the first
1-3 yeazs since it has been refunded.
City Attomey/Legal Counsel Ha~per noted that the positive effect is a strategy to
dismande the master pool. He stressed the reserve fund for the pool. Swapping the
funds and eliminating Yhe ob(igation for the pool. Councilwoman/Chairwoman
Brinley stressed that this will be standing on its own merit. City Attomey/Legal
Counsel Hatper clarified that the issuance has $1.5 million in an established reserve
fund and will be transferred. Mr. Gunn n~dicated no reserve would be required.
Councilman/Boardmember Alongi questioned what the City's paying today in
payments. Mr. Gunn stated that the City is currently paying $1.1 million plus fees.
Councilman/Boardmember Alongi questioned all debt service. Administrative
Services D'uec[or Boone stated that it is $5.6 million. Councilman/Boazdmember
Alongi clazified that this action would take $1:1 million and increase to $l.b million.
He asked how long the City would pay the $I.6 millios. Mr.Gunn stated 30 yeazs.
Councilman/Boardmember Alongi questioned if the primary goal is to get rid of
Sumitomo. Mr.Gunn explained that it 'rs ta gain a lower interest rate, buy tune and
gain money for capital improvements. Councilman/Boazdmember Alongi stated that
he understands the ne~essity with Sumitomo ~a.nl~ but ques2ioned 4he totai cost over
PAGE SIX - ADJOURNED REGULAit MEETING - DECEMBER 3, 1996
30 years in contrast to Sumitomo. City Attomey/Legal Counsel Harper stated that
it would be $300,000 x 30 years; assuming the City is not in the same boat and the
City could actually save money based on the rates obtained and allow us to move the
do(lars around. Mr.Gunn concurred, but noted the refinancing will be at a savings,
but the additional cost is the other two elements. He explained that the cost of that
is $4 million and paying debt service on $4 million. City Attomey/Legal Counsel
Harper clarified the required payments and noted the difference is $700,000.
Councilman Alongi questioned $21 million in bonds at the going rate, and questioned
what is the bottom line. City Attorney/Legal Counsel Harper explained that the net
effect is $300,000 in debt service annually for 30 years with the receipt of $3 million
in new dollazs.
Councilman/Boazdmember Metze questioned CouncilmanBoazdmember Alongi's
suggestioa CouncilmazJBoazdmember Alongi stated that we don't need to add more
debt to what the City already owes. He explained that he knows we have to
refinance, but the City is strapped right now because of debt service. He stressed that
this is predicated on the future and only Lake Elsinore will be assessed for this.
Councilman/Soazdmember Alongi questioned the cost of operating the aeration; use
of reclaimed water; etc, and indicated that while he hates to say it, he does have
serious concems taking on an additional $3 million in debt plus interest without a
guarantee for the future. Ae indicated that property values will continue to go down
and noted an artic(e in the paper which says that the recreational dollazs have
decreased in 1996. He stressed his concern with putting the community in debt for
an additional $3 million when we have no figure on aerating the fake. City
- IvlanagedExecutive Director Molendyk noted that some day the Council might agree
on a$10 million unprovement project, but £or right now the $3 million has been
discussed with legislators in regard to aeration. He explained that he could not
detetmine the right aeration system tomorrow, since it is up to the technical people
to tell us what is best, but it is still a step in a direction that the Council appeared to
want to go. Councilwoman/Chairwoman Brinley explained that she did not disagree
with CounciUnanBoazdmember Alongi and stressed the need for proper studies on
the Iake. She further stressed the fact that we would have the option to participate
in programs we can not now participate in at this time. Councilwoman/Chairwoman
Brinley stressed the need for options and the need to pay off Sumitomo Bank. City
Attomey/Legal Counsel Harper noted that the other positive point is how the financial
community will view the transaction. He explained that a positive view is different
if guazanteed funds will be used to make it more useable. He further noted the
potential for increased return. Councilman/Boazdmember Metze questioned the
benefit of 3 years. Councilwoman/Chairwoman Bririley made note of potential
projects which could be built in that time to balance the burden. Mayor Pro
Tem/Boazdmember Kelley stressed that the main priority is a balanced budget with
the assistance of Mr. Crunn who has developed a long term pian to buy our way out.
Mr. Gunn stressed the need to buy three yeazs. He further stressed the irnpact of
further budget cuts and how it affects the City. Mayor Pro TemBoardmember
Kelley stated that when combined with the other issues it works as a package.
Councilwoman/Chairwoman Brinley stated that they all ageed with this when
Council put this in the hands of Mr. Cruru~ and that is the package that we go with.
Mr. Gvnn recommeaded the $10 million refinance; and stressed the need for three
years to get the house in order. He stated that it is not a solution, but buys three years
to develop a solution. He further clarified the payment schedule and seated that the
final option is the $3 million toward the lake which will enhance the bond issue but
not a requiremern.. Mr. Gunn stressed the need to do something to address the Lake.
Mayor Pro Tem/Boardmember Kelley questioned the actions required to place this
plan in motion. CounciLnan/Boardmember Alongi questioned the importance of
doing it today. City Attomey/Legai Counsel Harper noted that there is a short
window period which is involved and explained that it had more to do with federal taa~
PAGE SEVEN - ADJOURNEID REGULAR MEETING - DECEMBER 3, 1996
law. He further noted that he was very nervous about the fact if the City was going
to make it to January 1 st;. and now he has been informed that if we close in January
we will still be O.K., but after that the situation is very uncertain.
1. City Council Resolution No 96-63 - Approving the Joint Powers A~reement. (F:133.5)
MOVED BY BRIIVLEY, SECONDED BY METZE AND CARRIED BY A VOTE OF 3 TO
1 WTTH ALONGI CASTING THE DISSENTING VOTE AND PAPE ABSENT TO ADOPT
RESOLUTTON NO. 96-63 AS FOIS.OWS:
RESOL~TTTON NO. 96-63
A RESOLUTION OF 'Y'HE CTTY COUNCII. OF THE CITY OF LAKE
ELSINORE AUTHORIZIlVG FORMATION OF 1~ LAKE ELSINORE
RECREATION AUTHOI2Td'Y BY JOINT POWERS AGREE11~fENT WTTH
THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CTTY OF LAKE ELSINORE.
2. Redevelo~ment Agenc~ Resolution No 96-9 - Approving the Joint Powers
A~reement. (P:133.5)
3. Joint Powers AQreement creating the "Lake Elsinore Recreation Author.t~°_ (F:133.5)
MOVEI3 BY BRINLEY, SECONDED BY METZE AND CARR~D BY A j~I~TE OP 3 TU
i WIT'H ALONGI CASTING T'HE DISSENT'ING VO"1'E'E ~TD ~r~PE rALSENT "L':~
APPROVE THE JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT CREATING'THE "L:A.KE ELSINO$T
RECREATION AUTHORIT'I'" AND ADOPT REDEVELOPirIEPdT AGEiVC."1'
RESOLUTTON NO. 96-9 AS FOLLOWS:
RESOLUTION NO. RDA 96-9
A RESOLUTION OF T"HE I2EDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF T'~ CTTY OF
LAKE ELSINORE AUTHORIZING FORMATION OF THE LAKE
ELSINORE RECREATION AUTHORYTY BY JOINT POWERS
AGREEMEPIT WITH THE CI'TY OF LAKE ELSINORE.
T'HE 30INT MEETING WAS RECESSED TO THE ORGANI7.ATIONAL MEETING OF.
T'HE LAKE ELSINORE RECREATION AUTHORTI'Y AT 3:10 P.M.
T'HE JOINT MEETING WAS RECONVENED AT 3:fl4 P.NY.
4. Citv Couneil Resolution No 96-64 - Approving Lease Ag,reement and Related
Matters. (F:68.1) (X:133.5)
MOVED BY METZE, SECONIDED BY BRINLEY AND CARRIED BY A VOTE OF 3 TO
1 WI"TH ALONGI CASTING 'I'HE DISSENTING VOTE A1VD PAPE ABSENT TO
APPROVE RESOLUTI~N 1V0. 96-64 AS FOLLOWS:
RLSOLUT'YON NO. 96-64
A RESOLUTION OF THE CTTY COUNCII. OF THE CTPY OF LAKE
Fi CINORE PitOVIDING FOR APPROVAL OF rL LE.~.SE AGREEMENT IN
CONNECTION WITH T'~E lSSUAI~'~E OF CERTAIN BONDS BY THE
LAKE ELSINORE RECRErSTION AUTHORTTY, APPROVIlVG dSSUANCE
OF SUCH BOIiT-S, APPROVING A BOND PURC'HASE CONTRACT AND
PAGE EIGHT - ADJOUItNED REGULAR MEETING - DECEMBER 3, 1996
AN OFFICIAL STATEMENT, ELECTING TO GUARANTEE LEASE
PAYMENTS WTTH AMOUNTS IN THE CITY'S MOTOI2 VEffiCLE
LICENSE FEE ACCOUNT, AND PROVIDING OTHER MATTERS
PROPERLY RELATING T'HERETO.
ADJOURNMENT
MOVED BY BRINLEY, SECONDED BY METLE AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE
OF THOSE PRESENT TO ADJOURN T'HE JOINT ADJOITRNED REGULAR MEETING
AT 3:15 P.M.
~ ~-
E KELLEY, YOR M
OF LAKE`ELSINO
A
~~~°~l
. ~ZCHI ~~~.S~s LI~' C~
i:Z.ERK OF',i`p?lv' SOARD