Loading...
Minutes 04-23-92MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COMMISSION WORKSHOP MEETING HELD IN COMMISSION CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA, ON THURSDAY, APRIL 23, 1992, AT 3:30 P. M. PRESENT Arline Weiner, Mayor Jose Aguila, Commissioner Edward Harmening, Commissioner RObert Walshak, Commissioner J. Scott Miller, City Manager Sue Kruse, City Clerk CALL TO ORDER Mayor Weiner called the meeting to order at 3:35 P. M. City Manager Miller announced that the purpose of this meeting is to discuss the Proposed Utility Refunding Bond Issue for Series 1985 and 1990. INTRODUCTION BY MICHAEL HOLE OF SMITH BARNEY Michael Hole of Smith Barney introduced David Levy of Smith Barney, Mark Raymond of Moyle, Flanigan; and John Forney and Craig Hunter of William R. Hough and Company. Mr. Hole reported that both Series 1985 and 1990 bonds were refundable and both contributed to savings that could be achieved by the City, and that because both issues were contributing to the savings, there was the opportunity to refund both of them, which is the entire outstanding debt on the utility side. He advised that any time you refund all of the bonds, you have the opportunity to change covenants (a set of rules and regulations bY which the Utility System of the City has to abide by). One covenant he focused on was the Additional Bonds Test. He stated this is the test which bascialty requires that when the City is ready to issue new bonds, the City has to show that it not only has enough revenues to meet 0 and M costs and the debt service, but that it has a cushion. The Resolution provides for a 35% cushion (a 1.35x test) which was appropriate in 1985. The Utility System has grown and is considerably stronger today than it was back then from a credit standpoint, and because of that, he thinks it can be reduced to 1.10 to 1.15x Coverage which gives the City a lot more flexibility and affordability as far as issuing new bonds. Mr. Hole said that having a cost associated with changing covenants is quite common. Most utility systems around the State get in a situation where they are not really aware of how much a certain outdated covenant is costing them until they are ready to issue new bonds. When they do issue new b~nds, they find out that while they have enough cash flow to afford the new bonds, they do not have enough revenues or cash flows to afford that 35% coverage and are forced into changing c~venants at that time in order to be able to issue the new bonds 1 MINUTES - SPECIAL CITY COMMISSION WORKSHOP MEETING BiOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA APRIL 23, 1992 under a covenant they can afford. If interest rates are at nor- mal levels (8 to 9%), chances are that is going to cost them something. Mr. Hole felt the City could refund all the bonds, take this opportunity to change the covenants, and actually save money and not have it cost the City anything. He recommended refunding the outstanding 1985 bonds and the outstanding 1990 bonds, in entirety, which would allow the City to write new reso- lutions for the Utility System to abide by. He stated that at the same time, there will be some debt service savings. He suggested that if there is a bond issue and if there is any new money requirements that might be appropriate to add to this bond issue at this time, it might be appropriate to tack it on to avoid going through a separate set of costs on a separate bond issue. Mr. Hole asked for direction on whether the City Commission wants to use this opportunity to try to modernize the covenants now or wait until 1994 or 1995 when the next new money issue may come up and then being forced to change it at that time under an unknown interest rate. POTENITAL SAVINGS - CRAIG HUNTER Mr. Hunter briefly summarized the following three options for potential savings: (1) Take the savings upfront in the first two to five years; (2) Take savings each year (level annual savings) over the life of the issue; and (3) Defer the savings, which would shorten the debt. He said his company usually recommends that their clients take either upfront savings because they receive some immediate benefit, or take it level annual savings over the life of the issue. Commissioner Aguila wanted to know the pros and cons of each option. Mr. Hunter said the savings on this total refunding have fluc- tuated between $550,000 present value savings to $900,000 present value savings since January. Mr. Hole advised that the draft resolution will be presented to the rating agencies and insurers to see if they will sign off on it. Mr. Hunter said when you take savings upfront in the first one to five years, generally what is going to happen is you are going to capture that savings upfront and lower debt service for that period of time. But after that period of time, the savings will level off at the debt service level you currently have. In reverse, if you take deferred savings and shorten your debt, you are going to save money in the 27th through 30th year of your debt, but in the 1st through the 26th year of your debt, your debt service is really going to be about what it is now. MINUTES - SPECIAL CITY COMMISSION WORKSHOP MEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA APRIL 23, 1992 Mr. Hole said right now with interest rates where they are today, i!t is between the 25th and 26th year. The original issue was 30 years. Right now, keeping all the debt service the same and just Chopping off the back years, four years can be chopped off. C~mmissioner Aguila asked if the amount of savings that the City is hoping to achieve by its actions is to cut the debt service back by four or five years. Mr. Forney explained that the debt wiill remain essentially the same as it is now on an annual basis and that it would stop four years sooner than it does right now. POSSIBLE COVENANT CHANGES Mr. Levy briefly reviewed the following possible covenant changes: Increase the City's borrowing capacity before rate increases are necessary by reducing the Additional Bonds Test from 135x Coverage to 1.10x - 1.15x Coverage. Mr. Levy said this is to change the Additional Bonds Test (that required cushion the City must have over operations, maintenance, a~d debt service payments in order to issue new bonds). Mr. Levy advised that his company has spoken to the insurers and the rating agencies about this and has looked at other financings and discussed other cities with them. He did not know exactly where they are going to come out in terms of exactly what Additional Bonds Test they will allow the City; however, he did know that they will allow a substantially lower Additional Bonds T~st. in response to Commissioner Aguila, Mr. Levy said ten or fifteen Percent is very common. in response to Commissioner Harmening, Mr. Hole did not believe the insurance rate would be raised with 1.10 as opposed to 1 15 or 1.20. ' C~mmissioner Aguila asked if the City is taking any more of a r~sk at going in at 1.10 as opposed to 1.15 or 1.20. Mr. Hole d%d not believe so. COmmissioner Aguila inquired about the need for the cushion. C~mmissioner Harmening advised that the purpose of the cushion is sO the money is there to pay the debt service. I~ was the consensus of the City Commission to reduce the Additional Bonds Test to 1.10x Coverage. 2.i Provide flexibility in rate structure by lowering required i coverage on current debt service from 1.25x Coverage to 1.10x MINUTES - SPECIAL CITY COMMISSION WORKSHOP MEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA APRIL 23, 1992 Coverage, and include only direct utility expenses in calcu- lating coveraqe. Mr. Levy advised that this is the rule that requires the City to set water and sewer rates at a certain percentage above opera- t!ions, maintenance expenses, and debt service charges. Currently the rate covenant is set at 1.25x Coverage. It was recommended that the City lower that rate covenant to 1.10x Coverage to keep the City from having massive rate increases in the future to accommodate the rate covenants and to allow the City to move into steady, more gradual rate increases over time. It does not require that the City reduce rates; it just gives the City the flexibility to do so. I~ was the consensus of the City Commission to lower the required coverage on the current debt service to 1.10x Coverage. Minimize the necessity for future rate increases by creating a rate stabilization fund to be funded from future surplus revenues. Mr. Levy advised this would enable the City to create a fund out of the Resolution which will allow the City to set aside surplus mOnies into a fund specifically designed to pay debt service in place of increasing rates in the future. COmmissioner Harmening said the City has that now. Commissioner Aguila asked why this cannot be done without creating a rate stabilization fund. Mr. Raymond stated it is true that under the current Resolution the City has a savings account. However, the feature of a stabilization fund that the City does not have is that the stabilization fund is taken into account in the addi- tional bonds and rate covenant test. For example, if you take money out of your savings account and use it to pay operation eXPenses, then when you go into your rate covenant and your ad bonds test, that amount of operating expenses is taken out of the t~st. The City could use its savings, but it really does not get any benefit from it. Ms. Levy added that i% enables the City to meet the rate covenant and Additional BOnds Test in the future, prevents the City from having large rate increases, enabling the City to gradually phase i~ rate increases. It was the consensus of the City Commission that a rate stabili- zation fund be created. 4~ Create combined Water, Sewer, and Stormwater Utility in reso- lution, providing the City with an easy mechanism from which to borrow for future stormwater improvements if ever necessary. Also add Assessments as a Pledged Revenue. MINUTES - SPECIAL CITY COMMISSION WORKSHOP MEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA APRIL 23, 1992 Mr. Levy said this will enable the City Commission to add another source of revenue to the Resolution. Iin response to Commissioner Walshak, Mr. Levy advised that there lis no covenant that allows for stormwater revenues, but there is ~othing to his knowledge that separates the water and sewer. Mr. Raymond agreed that the 1985 Resolution treats the water and siewer system as a combined utility and there is no distinction miade between water and sewer purposes. Mir. Hunter asked Commissioner Walshak if he was talking about the ability to issue debt or the cost of those two systems· C!arrie Parker, Assistant City Manager, thought Commissioner W~lshak was asking if the City can expend water and sewer out of the water and SeWer Fund for stormwater use. Mr. Forney advised that any bonds the City issues under this Resolution are collat- e~alized by both water and sewer revenues. Mr. Hole added that the City cannot take water and sewer revenues out from th' Re ..... is so±u~lon to use for stormwater. Mr. Raymond said the term "Dystem" does not contemplate a stormwater utility; it con- templates only water and waste water. It was the consensus of the City Commission to create a combined Water, Sewer, and Stormwater Utility in resolution. 5~ Provide ease in obtaining bondholder approval if ever necessary by allowing the Bond Insurer to approve certain ~ changes on behalf of all bondholders. Mr. Levy said many bond issuers use bond insurance, especially in the state of Florida. Other cities have been allowing the bond insurer to act as the bondholders in the event that they ever needed to change a certain covenant in the future. Sometimes the o~ly option is to go to the bondholders and ask them if the cove- n~nts could be cha~ged. Mr. Levy said this is a massive task. M~. Hole added that there are certain covenants that cannot be c~anged, even with bondholders. He suggested those that are a±lowed to be changed by the bond insurer on behalf of the b~)ndholders be included in the Resolution. Cc)mmissioner Aguila asked if the sale of the bonds is in any way j~opardized because the buyer would not have 100% control over t]lem. Mr. Hole said it would not affect the interest rates at a~.l. Mr. Forney added the insurers have a vested interest in making sure the maintainages that are made are not to the detri- ment of the bondholders because they are on the line financially f6r any payments that the City falls short on I~ was the consensus of the City Commission to allow the Bond INsurer to approve certain changes on behalf of all bondholders. MINUTES - SPECIAL CITY COMMISSION WORKSHOP MEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA APRIL 23, 1992 Modify Impact Fee language to provide the City the option of increasing the amount of pledged Impact Fees as the legal limitation on such amounts Increases. Mr. Levy advised that part of the pledged revenues the City has under the current Resolution are Impact Fees, which are defined by a certain formula. He proposed that under the new Resolution the City enable itself, if it were legally able to levy a higher Ii,pact Fee, to pledge all of that Impact Fee as opposed to just tilat certain formula defined under the current Resolution. M~. Raymond explained that an Impact Fee is a fee that is imposed u)on someone and is designed to reflect an additional burden upon ti~e system. Under current law, the City can only pledge Impact F~es to the extent that the bond issue resulted in an increase in t~e capacity of the system. The existing Resolution has a for- m~la in it that reflects current law. The result of that is that the City can only use a portion of the Impact Fees to pay debt s~rvice. It is possible that over time the limitations currently inposed by law will be loosened and if they are, it would be nice tD have the Resolution loosen up along with the law. Mr. Hole added it does not force the City to increase it, it just gives the City an option to do so. I~ was the consensus of the City Commission to modify Impact Fee language to provide the City the option of increasing the amount o~ Pledged Impact fees as the legal limitation on such amounts i~creases. 7. Separate reserve funds for all future issues for ease in calculating Arbitrage Rebate. Mr. Levy explained this would enable the City to separate the rsserve funds from each bond issue. Presently, every time new bonds are issued, the City contributes additional money to one common reserve which is used for all bond issues. He proposed that each bond issue have its own reserve fund to enable the City to calculate Arbitrage Rebates more easily and more inexpen- sively. The City deposits money into a reserve fund and is only entitled to earn interest on that up to the yield on the bonds which that reserve fund is issued under. The bonds issued in 1985 have a yield of almost 9% and in 1990 the City issued bonds which had a yield of approximately 7.3% or 7.4%. The City has one reserve fund there. A portion of the reserve fund can only earn up to 7.4%. Another portion can only earn up %o 9% and the City has to give back to the Federal Government the amount that it earned over those respective percentage rates by a certain time. This proposed change in covenant will create two reserve funds which could more easily track the Arbitrage earnings. Nr. Raymond added this would make it easier for the accountant to 6 MINUTES - SPECIAL CITY COMMISSION WORKSHOP MEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA APRIL 23, 1992 calculate what, if 'anything, the City has to give back. It could be performed without this change; it would just be more compli- cated. COmmissioner Harmening asked what would happen if the City had positive Arbitrage in one reserve account but negative Arbitrage in another reserve account. Mr. Raymond advised you would not be able to offset it. He said the Internal Revenue Code would per- form that separation for you. It is done on an issue by issue basis. It was the consensus of the City Commission to separate reserve funds for all future issues. 8i. Allow interfund borrowings at market rates for limited periods of time (18 mos.) or for General Fund transfers up to a certain percentage of the system's net income after all requirements are filled. Less than a certain percent by Commission action, Greater that a certain percent by super- majority vote. Interfund Borrowings Mr. Levy said this is to allow the Water and Sewer Fund, the enterprise fund, to loan money to the General Fund. He advised that the City would limit the amount of time and the interest rate of a loan. He was not sure that the City cannot do this now. However, this would make it clear that there would be no doubt about the ability of the City to do that. Mr. Raymond added that the Resolution is silent with regard to this. Commissioner Harmening was opposed to this because it is awfully sasy to borrow the money out and extremely difficultlto put it kack. It encourages a wanton Commission to go into debt unnec- sssarily. He pointed out that there is presently a loan which is scheduled to be paid off in five years. Mr. Raymond advised that ~f the new Resolution is going to expressly prohibit interfund korrowings, it would certainly have to make accommodations for existing loans. £1ommissioner Aguila asked for an explanation of the difference k~etween borrowing and transferring. Mr. Hole said one you pay k.ack and one you do not. Borrowing is a true loan. It is on the k~ooks at a certain interest rate to be paid back over a certain time period. A transfer is money that just goes out of the ystem. !ommissioner Walshak stated it is transferred for a reason, for .dministrative costs and things of that nature. You do not just .rbitrarily transfer money out of the Utility Fund. He thought 7 MINUTES - SPECIAL CITY COMMISSION WORKSHOP MEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA APRIL 23, 1992 i~ was the policy of this City for years to transfer only for costs of an administrative nature. M~. Hole said there are three concepts: (1) borrowing; (2) transfers for administrative expenses; and (3) other transfers. C( )mmissioner Aguila did not think borrowing was a good move. )mmissioner Walshak did not think the door should be locked on lything and said the City may need a short term loan in the lture. It gives the City some leeway to be able to move in case an emergency. Commissioner Harmening said the City always has e ability to borrow money elsewhere. Lty Manager Miller stated he could not say that these type of ~venants are not seen highly by the bond rating institutions. was the consensus of the City Commission not to allow )rrowings. Commissioner Harmening directed that the Resolution ~flect that the existing ones be allowed to stay in place. General Fund Transfers M~. Levy said this refers to money that is taken from the Water and sewer Fund and put into the General Fund or some other fund after all requirements of the Water and Sewer Fund are met. This i~ surplus money. It does not refer to the adminstrative expense tLat the General Fund would charge the Water a~d Sewer Fund for snared expenses that the General Fund incurs, such as payroll. At this point in the meeting, Commissioner Walshak left the Caambers. CDmmissioner Harmening was in favor of transfers up to 20% of the n~t profits after depreciation. At this point in the meeting, Commissioner Walshak returned. Commissioner Aguila expressed concern regarding "Commission action". Commissioner Harmening did not believe any funds could be transferred anywhere in the City without Commission action. Mr. Raymond thought the Commission would have the authority to delegate someone the power to do so. Mr. Hole said the example given in covenant change number 8 calls for a regular majority Commission vote for up to the 20% and then to the extent that if there was reason to go aboVe it, either a supermajority or a unanimous vote would be required. In response to Commissioner Walshak, Mr. Forney said that transfer for administrative purposes is taken into account in arriving at that net income figure which that 20% or 15% would be applied to. 8 MINUTES - SPECIAL CITY COMMISSION WORKSHOP MEETING BOyNTON BEACH, FLORIDA APRIL 23, 1992 A% this point in the meeting, City Manager Miller left the Chambers. COmmissioner Walshak asked if the City has been transferring in the past. Ms. Parker advised that the City has done this once in the past ten years. A% this point in the meeting, City Manager Miller returned. It was the consensus of the City Commission to allow for General F~nd tranfers up to a certain percentage of the system's net pro- fits up to 20% of a regular majority vote, with a provision to allow up to 50% by supermajority, requiring four votes for anything above the 20%, capped at 50%. Mr. Raymond pointed out that the Commission prohibited borrowing and permitted tranfers; therefore, the Resolution is going to reflect that it is all right to give money away, but it may not be required that it be repaid. Commissioner Harmening asked if there were any problems with Ambach on this. Mr. Hole said he h~s not discussed this particular detail with them. Mr. Levy advised that what has happened in the past and what h~ppens in many utilities is if they have closed resolutions, they end up building up a massive pool of money. If you are speaking to interfund borrowings, they could theoretically in a single period of time go in and borrow $15,000,000.00 from a U~ility Fund. This enables you to take 50% of your net profit each year, but it does not enable you to accumulate that. C~mmissioner Harmening said if you do not spend it for utility p~rposes, you accumulate 50% of the net profit every year. 91 . Amend refunding provisions to allow for a partial refunding ! of a specific series of bonds. I~ was the consensus of the City Commission to amend the refunding provisions to allow for a partial refunding of a spe- cific series of bonds. iD. Delete current requirement that redemption notices be ! published in national publications. I~ was the consensus of the City Commission to delete the current r~quirement that redemption notices be published in national p~blications. 11. Change sinking fund requirement to allow for the use of variable rate debt. Mr. Levy explained that this technically adjusts the sinking fund so the City can use a variable rate debt in the future and pro- 9 MINUTES - SPECIAL CITY COMMISSION WORKSHOP MEETING B(~YNTON BEACH, FLORIDA APRIL 23, 1992 vide the City with some flexibility. Mr. Raymond stated the current Resolution requires that a monthly deposit be made to the sinking fund. The amount of the deposit is 1/6th of the interest due on the next semi-annual interest payment date, and 1/12th of the principal due on the next annual principal payment date. If you have a variable rate debt, in order to determine how much interest is owed on the next interest payment date, you would simply pay that month's worth of interest on the variable rate debt. It was the consensus of the City Commission to change the sinking f~nd requirement to allow 'for the use of a variable rate debt. 12. Allow for substitution of Reserve Fund Letter of Credit. M~.'Levy said this would allow the City to go to a bank and get a L~tter of Credit in place of the Reserve Fund and release those reserved funds into the Water and Sewer Fund. Under the current R~solution, the City can only go to a bond insurance company and g~t a surety in place of the Reserve Fund. This allows the City a~broader array of options. · CQmmissioner Aguila asked what kind of protection the citizens have if the bank fails. Mr. Hole explained that the insurer will insist on very restrictive language as to the rating requirements oF the bank, the type of bank, etc. Mr. Forney said you Would n~ver draw on the Letter of Credit unless you.were in a position where you were not able to pay your debt service. Mr. Raymond s~ated this is really no different than the investment of money. I~ you have dollars in the Reserve Fund and you invest them in a C~rtificate of Deposit in a certain bank and the bank fails, you wDuld have still lost your money. Normally, what he has been s~eing recently is that the Letter of Credit Bank has to be rated in one of the two highest rating categories, AAA or AA, at the time that you purchase it. ~r. Levy said you can issue bonds with a Reserve Fund Letter of Credit and never fund a reserve fund with cash so it does not always have to be an instance where you have a cash fund of reserve and you are releasing that cash and replacing it with a Letter of Credit. Sometimes it is an instance where you are just issuing bonds in place of issuing 3 or 4 million dollars in new konds to fund aReserve Fund. You are just issuing pure bonds and getting a Reserve Fund Letter of Credit. Nr. Hunter advised that he saw more clients that intended, when they issued new money, to substitute a surety for the reserve ~ather than going back and cashing out their old reserve just kecause it was the conservative thing to do. If you issue 30,000,000.00 in new money, your general reserve account 10 MINUTES - SPECIAL CITY COMMISSION WORKSHOP MEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA APRIL 23, 1992 requirement would be $3,000,000.00, roughly 10%, which means instead of issuing $30,000,000.00 in bonds, you are going to have tO issue $33,000,000.00. For a smaller fee, you could substitute aisurety that requires somebody else to pay that reserve account and you avoid issuing the additional $3,000,000.00 in bonds. That is more than norm than the cash out provision. Mr. Levy said many times the cash out provision, if it is ever used, is u~ed in an instance where you issued $30,000,000,00 in bonds per p~oject and found that you ran into cost overruns and you did not want to borrow additional money because interest rates have risen. By cashing out your reserve, you are just increasing your b~rrowing at the lower rates-that you bonded for back when you issued those additional bonds. In addition, you do have death provision to go with an insurance company now. All this does is expand the instrument that you could use to take the place of a cash funded reserve. I~ was the consensus of the City Commission to allow for substi- tution of Reserve Rand Letter of Credit. 113. Liberalize definition of allowable investments. Mr. Levy proposed that the Resolution define the types of invest- ments that the City can make with reserve funds and with its rate sltabilization fund or whatever funds it has under the Water and eeWer Fund. This provision would enable the City to expand the mber and types of investments to accommodate the new types of vernment bonds that have been issued over the past five or six ars. Nr. Forney said there are all types of investments now issued that were not contemplated to be issued when the original Resolu- tion was drafted. These investments carry the same kind of Guarantees that the City is already permitted to invest in. kr. Hole said in today's market there are other things other than ~hat is in the current Resolution that an insurer would buy off cn, although they are still going to be very restrictive. He ~sked if the City Commission wanted this area to be explored. £ommissioner Aguila wanted to know what the options are. Nr. Raymond recommended eliminating all references to obligations cf savings and loan associations as being permitted investments ~nd eliminating the guaranty of the FSLIC as being worth ~nything. In response to Mayor Weiner, Mr. Raymond said the entity no longer exists and it is not appropriate to refer to ~nvestments in it in the ResolutiOn. However, the new category cf investment is called the pre-refunded municipal obligation. ~here is a tax advantage to the City in being able to invest in the pre-refundeds. The whole concept of Arbitrage does not apply 11 MINUTES - SPECIAL CITY COMMISSION WORKSHOP MEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA APRIL 23, 1992 tO an investment in pre-refunded. If the City was able to issue these bonds at 6% and find somebody else's pre-refundeds that are 9%, the City gets to pocket that 3%. Mr. Raymond said it is a AAA investment. It is as good as a Government U. S. Treasury obligation. Mr. Hunter said he will draft a resolution, underlining those allowable investments that have changed from the previous Resolution, which he thinks should be changed, for discussion in the future. Delete current requirement that Publication of supplemental resolutions be made. Mr. Levy advised that there is a requirement in the current Resolution to publish notification if any other supplemental resolutions are adopted. If the City wants to issue additional bonds in the future, under the current Resolution, the City COmmission would have to vote on supplemental resolutions to issue those bonds. The City would have to publish to the bondholders the fact that it is adopting resolutions. It was the consensus of the City Commission to delete this requirement. 17. Redraft Debt Service Reserve Fund requirement. Mr. Levy advised that under the current Resolution, the Debt Ser- vice Reserve Fund requirement is set at the maximum annual debt service on bonds. Therefore, if the maximum annual debt service iS $4,000,000.00, the City has to deposit $4,000,000.00 into the R~serve Fund. Under the new tax law, the City. is limited to depositing the lesser of maximum annual debt service or 10% of the par amount of bonds outstanding. He proposed the adoption of ai Resolution which takes into account the changes that were made in the 1986 Tax Act to allow the City to more easily deposit a l~sser amount in the Reserve Fund. Mr. Hole said this would be biringing current the Resolution with the current tax law. Iit was the consensus of the City Commission to redraft the Debt Siervice Reserve Fund requirement to take into account the changes t!hat were made in the 1986 Tax Act. 118. Remove requirement that Contractors post performance bonds i and retainage from Bond Resolution. Mr. Levy advised that in the current Resolution, there is a ~equirement that contractors post performance bonds and ~etainage from bonds. Mr. Levy felt this is something the City Can deal with outside of the Bond Resolution in a separate City ~rdinance. 12 MINUTES - SPECIAL CITY COMMISSION WORKSHOP MEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA APRIL 23, 1992 I~ was the consensus of the City Commission to remove this requirement from the Bond Resolution. SUMMARY I~ was the consensus of the City Commission that bond council proceed with drafting a resolution, present the package to the rating agencies, prepare for a refunding issue, and submit some alternative savings scenarios to the City Commission for dis- cussion. Mt. Hole said he will resubmit a resolution to the City COmmission after it has been amended by an insurer. AZ )JOURNMENT 5ere being no further business, the meeting properly adjourned 5:18 P. M. THE CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH TTEST: ~i~ Clerk ~ecordihg Secretary Two Tapes ) Mayor Commiss~'r 13