Laserfiche WebLink
<br />\ <br /> <br />21. On page 19 under US Army Corps of Engineers, have any of the environmental <br />analyses been performed? If not, what is the schedule for these analyses? The 404 <br />Permit activities should be included in the overall project schedule on page 25. Will <br />an EA or EIS be required? <br /> <br />22. On page 22, is the 47%/ 53% allocation of project costs intended for the entire period <br />of loan repayment? Any arrangements for modifying the allocation of debt during the <br />repayment period should be described here also. <br /> <br />23. In the second paragraph on page 23, how was the 4.50 percent lending rate arrived at? <br />On what median household income is it based? CWCB staff can provide the <br />recommended lending rate structure for 2001 to be approved by the Board in <br />November 2000. How do the amounts of debt service allocated to the City and the <br />County in this paragraph relate to the 47%/53% cost allocation? <br /> <br />24. A better explanation is needed for the proposed fmancial program. <br /> <br />25. In Table 3, the figures in the columns Net Cash Flow and Fund Balance don't seem to <br />balance with the rest of the spreadsheet. How are the figures in the column Other <br />Capital Projects used in the calculations? How was the number for-New Taps per <br />Year arrived at? The numbers in the column Reserve Account Payment don't appear <br />to be adequate to add up to one annual loan payment at the end of ten years. Footnote <br />1. is incomplete. <br /> <br />26. Tim Feehan's comments of September 6th should be reviewed again to be sure they <br />are completely addressed. It appears as if some comments are still unanswered. <br /> <br />27. Attached is my markup of the draft report. <br /> <br />.., <br />,) <br />