Minutes - 2001/02/26 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mounds View City Council February 26, 2001 Regular Meeting Page 17 Mayor Sonterre asked if the figures were the estimated salary or projected out. The Springsted Representative stated the chart reflected total estimated salary projected out five years. Mayor Sonterre noted EGCS was the company that prepared the numbers for the original pro forma and then asked if that organization was contracted by Springsted or if that organization was a separate entity contracted by the City. The Springsted Representative stated EGCS was contracted by the City not Springsted. Mayor Sonterre pointed out for clarification that the errors were as a result of unforeseen changes and are not attributed to Springsted. MOTION/SECOND: Marty/Thomas. To Extend the Meeting Fifteen Minutes. Ayes - 5 Nays - 0 Motion carried. Council Member Stigney asked if Springsted was the original bonding agent for the City and inquired as to how bonding is determined. The Springsted Representative explained the actual issuance of bond for the debt for the golf course would primarily be based on the projections of revenues for the golf course. The City's credit rating is utilized only in terms of having it reviewed by credit rating agencies indicating they would have relied on the study prepared by EGCS. The Springsted Representative explained that in many cases on golf course bond issues there is a study done of the type prepared for the City for discussion at this meeting. In the case of EGCS the City hired a consultant to work with them on developing the golf course and part of the consultant's job was preparing the pro forma. He noted Springsted was not asked or told to do anything other than use the pro forma as provided to them stating the City had indicated it was comfortable with the information provided in the study by EGCS. Council Member Stigney questioned whether reviewing the study was part of Springsted's responsibility. The Springsted Representative stated his company would not have reviewed the study as the City had contracted with another company to provide the information. He stated they did review the study in terms of working to bond for the golf course but noted the information from EGCS was relied upon for financing. He then explained the study made certain assumptions that never took place. For example revenues were figured on $8.00 a round and somewhere along the line the decision to take the sales tax out of the $8.00 was made, thereby shorting revenues by 6.5%. • Council Member Stigney asked if the sales tax issue was researched.