My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Minutes - Council Work Session - 05/28/2013
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Minutes
>
Council Work Session
>
2013
>
Minutes - Council Work Session - 05/28/2013
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/14/2025 12:01:26 PM
Creation date
6/17/2013 10:39:43 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Type
Council Work Session
Document Date
05/28/2013
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
8
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Mr Tinklenberg explained that Mn/DOT does not need to use this plan if they have the money <br />and that would be the first choice, to just do the project and pay for it. Another option may be <br />that the next bonding bill would have money for this project and in that case Mn/DOT would <br />move forward with the project with its own money and money from next year and would not use <br />this option. He indicated this innovative financing option would only apply if Mn/DOT was <br />looking at a longer period of time and did not have financing for the project. It would be a fall <br />back financing alternative. <br />Mayor Strommen asked if the City or County would bond, or a combination, for this type of <br />project. <br />Mr. Lubervich stated the tax exempt bonds would be sold based on a repayment or future <br />appropriation agreement. It would be a public offering. <br />Mr. Tinklenberg stated the City would not sell these bonds. <br />Mayor Strommen asked what the risk to the City is. <br />Mr. Lubervich stated the risk is to the bond holders on future appropriations, not on the City. <br />Mr. Tinklenberg stated there is no risk to the City of Ramsey. <br />Mr. Lubervich stated if Mn/DOT defaults, that is the risk the bond holders assume. <br />Acting Mayor Backous asked why the City of Ramsey would not consider this option and asked <br />Mr Tinklenberg if it would be his role to present this financing option to Mn/DOT. <br />Mr. Tinklenberg stated it follows a number of different paths and his job is to get the project <br />done. • The first piece is to get financing through a traditional process (bonding bill, Federal and <br />State dollars, and some contribution from Anoka County and Ramsey). If that does not happen <br />and there is a financing gap, rather than the entire burden falling on Anoka County and Ramsey, <br />Mn/DOT could put together a financing plan and spread out payments, fill the gap, and manage <br />its cash flow. Mr. Tinldenberg stated he is in conversations with Mn/DOT and made <br />presentations to their financing teams and found significant interest. During those discussions, <br />he has promoted Ramsey as being a demonstration project, to complete a demonstration project <br />early, and allow Mn/DOT pay for it over time without over burdening any of the project <br />participants. Mr. Tinklenberg stated there is a need to overcome the lack of familiarity and <br />inertia at Mn/DOT to consider something different. He indicated the experience in Florida has <br />been extremely positive so there is growing excitement about this option for other projects. <br />Councilmember Tossey stated this concerns him because he wants it clear what government <br />should and should not do. He stated roads are a function of government but this sounds too good <br />to be true, so he is cautious. <br />City Council Work Session / May 28, 2013 <br />Page 4 of 8 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.