PROJ01868 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. Associates has been drafted and is expected to be signed prior to the execution of a loan contract between the CWCB and the Eagle Park Reservoir Company The Board has a number of adjudicated in stream flow water rights on the Eagle River and its tributaries and has filed a statement of opposition in the exchange application, Case No. 95CW348. The Water Rights Investigation Section staff has met with the applicants to discuss our concerns of injury to instream flows and it is our understanding that the applicants have attempted to address these concerns in a draft decree which is under review by staff. FlNANCIAL ANALYSES The staff has reviewed recent financial statements for each of the participants in the proposed company. The three public entities, the Authority, Eagle County, and the ERWSD, would appear to have no difficulty in assuming the amounts of debt indicated in Table 1. Vail Associates is a privately held company and does not report its financial information publicly. Staff was provided with recent fmancial statements for Vail's parent company Gillett Holdings, Inc., now Vail Resorts, Inc. While the net equity and recent earnings for Gillett Holdings are substantial, we do not believe that the fmancial statemen~ provide us with any significant fmancial information regarding Vail Associates. . The applicants submitted a detailed 20-year fmancial (cash flow) projection for the Eagle Park . Reservoir Company and for the three public entities. Those projections allocate operating and debt service costs among the participants and indicate the impact of the project on total debt service and on water rates. For Eagle County, the costs of participation would have a minimal impact on an existing Sales Tax Capital Improvement Fund. The ERWSD would have to increase water rates by $0.19 per 1,000 gallons from an existing $1.50 per 1,000. The analysis for the Authority indicates that rates would have to be increased by about $0.14 per 1,000 gallons from an existing level of about $2.27 per 1,000. The lending rate recommended for this project would be the commercial and high-income municipal rates (which are identical). Table 2 shows the loan amount authorized in 1996 and the amount requested in 1997. For 1996, the 5.75 percent rate is that adopted by the Board in November 1996. The 5.25 percent for 1997 is based on the recommended rate as discussed in . Agenda Item No.5. The table also gives the estimated annual payments for each loan. TABLE 2. Estimated Loan Structure . ~ Toan Lending ;:SU-Yr Annual Year Amount Rate CRF Payment 1996 $3,125,000 5.75% 0.07073 $221,031 1997 $5,375,000 5.25% 0.06693 $359,749 Totals $8,500,000 5.43% N/A $580,780 4