BOARD00995 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

FINANCIAL ANALYSIS The total cost of the entire project is approximately $3.2 million. The Board's investment in the . project would total $1.25 million if the loan request were approved, which is about 39% of the total cost. The source for repaying the loan will be the City's Stormwater Drainage and Flood Fund, which is directly appropriated from the City's general fund. The City Council, by ordinance, has established that two-tenths of one- percent City sales tax is allocated to drainage and flood control projects. This fund generated annual revenues in 1997 of $283,356 and had a balance of $762,374 as of September 30,1998. The estimated annual CWCB loan payment is $89,953 assuming a 20-year term with an interest rate of 3.75 percent. The annual revenues for project are well in excess of the estimated annual payments. Based on the $1.25 million CWCB loan and the available funding source, the debt to total project cost is a very reasonable number and is not considered to be prohibitive at all. The City's attorney has informed the CWCB staff that is has de-Bruced and can make the loan without taking it to a TABOR election. The Loan Collateral for the loan shall be an additional two-year annual payment which is $180,000 as an additional security in the Stormwater Drainage and Flood Fund. . DISCUSSION CWCB staff believes that the City and County proposed floodplain project is economically, financially, and technically feasible which is based upon the information and analyses in the project feasibility study. The basis for this Board staff findings from the engineering investigations and analyses as present the City's feasibility study. In addition to the economic analysis which was performed by the City's consultant for the feasibility study, FEMA performed an economic for their review of the City request for federal assistance. FEMA determined the cost/benefit ratio to be 1.13 _ See Attachment No.2. The CWCB investment in the project is less than fifty per cent of the total project cost which is not a high investment when compared to most other similar projects, and the repayment of the loan will easily managed through the City's specifically allocated general fund revenues. Previous detailed analyses and studies have demonstrated the need for the project. Alternatives to addressing the problem have been investigated over the past 20 years; however, the proposed project has been accepted as the best alternative by the consulting engineers, the federal and the affected local governments, and the general public. Prior to the endorsement of "Alternative Number No.5" as the selected project alternative, the City and County staff in cooperation with their engineer conducted seven public hearings and workshops to gather input in the selection process. In addition, the Board's staff has been an active partner in the formulation of the proposed project and can fully support the selected plan. 4 .