Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Statement 1985/02/05 Item 10 COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item 10 Meeting Date 2/5/85 ITEM TITLE: Report: Proposed tax-exempt single-family mortgage revenue bond issue for 1985 a) Resolution //9A3Approving agreement for Market/Feasibility Study with Empire Economics b) Resolution /7 9)-6 Approving agreement for investment banking services with Miller & Schroeder Municipals, Inc. c) Resolution // 9027 Approving agreement for bond counsel services with Jones Hall Hill & White SUBMITTED BY: Community Development Direc 4/5ths Vote: Yes No x ) REVIEWED BY: City Manage, The City is about to receive a $10 million allocation from the State Mortgage Bond Allocation Committee to issue tax-exempt single-family mortgage revenue bonds, based on an application approved by the City Council on December 20, 1983. In anticipation of the allocation, active developers in Chula Vista have been solicited for participation in the issue. $12.5 million in allocation requests, with participation fee deposits, have been received from three developers. The next step in the process is to contract with the members of the bond team. RECOMMNDATION: That the Council approve the three resolutions approving agreements with Empire Economics, Miller & Schroeder Municipals, Inc. , and Jones Hall Hill & White, for services associated with a single-family mortgage revenue bond issue. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: The Human Relations Commission, on January 12, 1983, recommended the issuance of single-family mortgage revenue bonds as a tool for enhancing affordability of housing in Chula Vista. DISCUSSION: At the time the City issued the 1983 single-family mortgage revenue bonds (December 1983) , the City also made a request to the State for $10 million in bond allocation authority for 1985. The Redevelopment Agency appropriated $55,000 of Low and Moderate-Income Housing Fund monies to pay the necessary participation fees required by the State in order to make application for the bond authority. Chula Vista is now third on the State allocation list, and we expect to receive our $10 million allocation authority on February 13. In anticipation of that authority, actions are being taken to prepare for bond issuance. This is an appropriate point for the City Council to approve further action and agreements with the bond issue team members. \\°\'5 7 Page 2, Item 10 Meeting Date 2/5/85 Summary of tax-exempt mortgage revenue bond program: Tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds are identified in the Housing Element of the City's General Plan as a tool to be provided by the City to enhance the affordability of housing. The tax-exempt nature of the bonds ultimately provides mortgage money for purchasers of single-family homes in Chula Vista at below-market interest rates. Eligible mortgagers are first-time homebuyers who are low and moderate-income and who are owner/occupants. Unit sales prices for new and resale homes are restricted. Details of the program are attached as Exhibit A. The Housing Policies Report, adopted by the City Council on December 11 , 1984, in public hearing, established the following policies for structuring the 1985 bond issue: 1. The maximization of the issue's investment-quality rating to yield the lowest interest rate. 2. The maximization of homeownership opportunities for lower income households. 3. The maximization of the quality and balance of Chula Vista's housing stock and residential environment. Those policies will be used in selecting the developments participating in the 1985 issue. It should be pointed out that no financial liability exists for the City as a result of bond issuance. The debt obligation on the bonds is paid from the mortgage payments, or in the event of delinquencies, from private mortgage insurance. Developer solicitation: Active developers in Chula Vista were invited by letter to a meeting on January 11 , at which they were informed of the particulars of the bond issue. They were given the opportunity to submit applications for participation shortly thereafter. As a requirement for application, they were required to reimburse the City for the participation fees committed by the Redevelopment Agency in December of 1983. Three applications were received totaling $12.5 million. The product cost ranged from $78,000 to $110,000. Using the policies stated in the section above, the feasibility consultant and Community Development staff will select issue participants and their shares of the $10 million allocation. Participation fees: The fees received from the developers will replace the Housing Fund participation fees appropriated earlier, which can be released back into the Housing Fund's unappropriated revenues. The fees to the developer represent one-half percent of the developer's total request and are intended to cover Page 3, Item 10 Meeting Date 2/b/85 initial costs to the City for structuring the bond issue, such as the Market/Feasibility Study. An additional four percent fee will be charged to the developers as soon as the allocation is received. The total fees cover the cost of the subject agreements. Contractual Services: The bond team recommended for the proposed 1985 bond issue is the same used for the 1983 issue. Bid solicitation was not undertaken in arriving at the recommendation for a number of reasons specific to the 1985 issue, reasons which constitute special circumstances that make it in the City's best intere st to select the recommended firms. Those special circumstances are discussed below. It should be noted that if the City participates in another round of single-family mortgage revenue bond financing in the future, bid solicitation would be utilized. Market/Feasibility Study: The Market/Feasibility Study, which is the only contractual cost which the City will incur regardless of whether or not a bond issue occurs, does the following: 1 . Establishes the average area sales price, which determines the issue's maximum allowable unit sales prices. 2. Establishes area median income, which determines maximum allowable purchaser income. 3. Evaluates marketability and economic feasibility of participating projects, based on an assessment of the local development market. It is this study which is used by the rating agency (Moody's) to rate the bond issue. Attached to Resolution (a) is a contract with Empire Economics for an amount of $10,000. Empire Economics is recommended as the feasibility consultant as a result of its participation in the 1983 issue. The highest volume applicant/project for the 1985 issue was a participant up until the last minute in the 1983 issue. All of the analysis on that applicant/project has been done already by Empire Economics. Empire Economics can therefore respond quickly and at a favorable cost. In 1983, Empire Economics was significantly the low bidder, their bid being 70% of the average bid amount. Their current bid two years later is only $1 ,500 more and is equal to the second low bid in 1983. Assessment of currently prevailing Market/Feasibility Study costs indicates that Empire Economics is quite cost effective for the City on this issue. Investment Banker Services: The investment banker/bond underwriter is responsible for both the complex job of financially structuring the bond issue and for the sale of the issue. The bond underwriter plays the largest part in the initial structuring of the issue, and the bond underwriter's compensation is the largest share of the initial cost. However, the bond underwriter receives no compensation unless the bonds are successfully sold, and that compensation is in the form of a discount extended to the underwriter on the purchase of bonds, a cost covered by bond sale proceeds and developer commitment fees. The discount, or sales credit take-down, is dependent upon market conditions at time of actual structuring, but it generally averages two percent. �_\\" Page 4, Item 10 Meeting Date 2/5/85 . Attached to Resolution (b) is an agreement with Miller and Schroeder Municipals for investment banking services for the 1985 issue. Miller and Schroeder are recommended without bid solicitation for two reasons: they also have dealt very specifically in the 1983 issue with the principal applicant/project of the 1985 issue, and they assisted the City without compensation in conforming with the new requirements of the 1984 Tax Act. In the second case, Miller and Schroeder kept us informed and provided us with technical advice in our effort to respond to the at-the-time ambiguous Treasury Department Requirements for an Annual Housing Policies Report required for issuance of bonds in 1985. I am aware of other jurisdictions which regularly issue bonds which were not advised of that new regulation until just before the deadline for report submission. Finally, it should be noted that Miller and Schroeder's compensation is from the sales credit take-down at issue sale, not from City revenues, and the take-down rate is specified in the contract to be at a rate commensurate with the prevailing market. Thus, of greater concern to the City than compensation is the level of service offered. That service level has been admirable. Bond Counsel Agreement: The Bond Counsel represents the City in ensuring tax exempt status of the issue. Bond Counsel renders legal opinions, prepares legal documents, and assists in the financial structuring of the i ssue. The stature of the Bond Counsel is very important to the marketability of the bonds, as is the working relationship between the bond counsel and the bond underwriter. Therefore, I recommend that the agreement attached to resolution (c) be approved with Jones Hall Hill & White for bond counsel services. They are a highly respected national firm, they have represented us frequently, and they have a long association with Miller & Schroeder on single-family mortgage revenue bond issues. Jones Hall Hill & White's fee, standard for the industry, would be paid by bond proceeds and is as follows: One-half percent of the first $5 million. One-quarter percent of the next $15 million. One-tenth percent of any additional. Process and Schedule: Subsequent to the recommended City Council actions, the structuring of the issue would begin. Projects would be evaluated and selected, issue lenders would be solicited and selected, and the issue would be rated, sized, and priced. The City Council would then approve or disapprove issuance of the bonds. It is also likely that a Joint Powers Authority with another jurisdiction would have to be entered into to get the most favorable rating possible for the issue. A tentative schedule has been drawn up which would result in a bond sale and closing at the end of April . FISCAL IMPACT: All costs associated with the bond issue would be paid for from bond proceeds or developer fees, with the exception of City staff time, which would be reimbursed from the Low and Moderate-Income Housing Fund. WPC 1398H \\c9 COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item 10 Meeting Date 2/5/85 ITEM TITLE: Report: Proposed tax-exempt single-family mortgage revenue bond issue for 1985 a) Resolution //9a- Approving agreement for Market/Feasibility Study with Empire Economics b) Resolution //%2 4'Approving agreement for investment banking services with Miller & Schroeder Municipals, Inc. c) Resolution //927 Approving agreement for bond counsel services with Jone's Hall Hill & White SUBMITTED BY: Community Development Direc .O4/5ths Vote: Yes No x ) REVIEWED BY: City Manage, rd. The City is about to receive a $10 million allocation from the State Mortgage Bond Allocation Committee to issue tax-exempt single-family mortgage revenue bonds, based on an application approved by the City Council on December 20, 1983. In anticipation of the allocation, active developers in Chula Vista have been solicited for participation in the issue. $12.5 million in allocation requests, with participation fee deposits, have been received from three developers. The next step in the process is to contract with the members of the bond team. RECOMMENDATION: That the Council approve the three resolutions approving agreements with Empire Economics, Miller & Schroeder Municipals, Inc. , and Jones Hall Hill & White, for services associated with a single-family mortgage revenue bond issue. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: The Human Relations Commission, on January 12, 1983, recommended the issuance of single-family mortgage revenue bonds as a tool for enhancing affordability of housing in Chula Vista. DISCUSSION: At the time the City issued the 1983 single-family mortgage revenue bonds (December 1983) , the City also made a request to the State for $10 million in bond allocation authority for 1985. The Redevelopment Agency appropriated $55,000 of Low and Moderate-Income Housing Fund monies to pay the necessary participation fees required by the State in order to make application for the bond authority. Chula Vista is now third on the State allocation list, and we expect to receive our $10 million allocation authority on February 13. In anticipation of that authority, actions are being taken to prepare for bond issuance. This is an appropriate point for the City Council to approve further action and agreements with the bond issue team members. Page 2, Item 10 Meeting Date 2/5/85 Summary of tax-exempt mortgage revenue bond program: Tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds are identified in the Housing Element of the City's General Plan as a tool to be provided by the City to enhance the affordability of housing. The tax-exempt nature of the bonds ultimately provides mortgage money for purchasers of single-family homes in Chula Vista at below-market interest rates. Eligible mortgagers are first-time homebuyers who are low and moderate-income and who are owner/occupants. Unit sales prices for new and resale homes are restricted. Details of the program are attached as Exhibit A. The Housing Policies Report, adopted by the City Council on December 11 , 1984, in public hearing, established the following policies for structuring the 1985 bond issue: 1. The maximization of the issue's investment-quality rating to yield the lowest interest rate. 2. The maximization of homeownership opportunities for lower income households. 3. The maximization of the quality and balance of Chula Vista's housing stock and residential environment. Those policies will be used in selecting the developments participating in the 1985 issue. It should be pointed out that no financial liability exists for the City as a result of bond issuance. The debt obligation on the bonds is paid from the mortgage payments, or in the event of delinquencies, from private mortgage insurance. Developer solicitation: Active developers in Chula Vista were invited by letter to a meeting on January 11 , at which they were informed of the particulars of the bond issue. They were given the opportunity to submit applications for participation shortly thereafter. As a requirement for application, they were required to reimburse the City for the participation fees committed by the Redevelopment Agency in December of 1983. Three applications were received totaling $12.5 million. The product cost ranged from $78,000 to $110,000. Using the policies stated in the section above, the feasibility consultant and Community Development staff will select issue participants and their shares of the $10 million allocation. Participation fees: The fees received from the developers will replace the Housing Fund participation fees appropriated earlier, which can be released back into the Housing Fund's unappropriated revenues. The fees to the developer represent one-half percent Of( the developer's total request and are intended to cover \\°\ -b Page 3, Item 10 Meeting Date 2/5/85 i initial costs to the City for structuring the bond issue, such as the Market/Feasibility Study. An additional four percent fee will be charged to the developers as soon as the allocation is received. The total fees cover the cost of the subject agreements. Contractual Services: The bond team recommended for the proposed 1985 bond issue is the same used for the 1983 issue. Bid solicitation was not undertaken in arriving at the recommendation for a number of reasons specific to the 1985 issue, reasons which constitute special circumstances that make it in the City's best interest to select the recommended firms. Those special circumstances are discussed below. It should be noted that if the City participates in another round of single-family mortgage revenue bond financing in the future, bid solicitation would be utilized. Market/Feasibility Study: The Market/Feasibility Study, which is the only contractual cost which the City will incur regardless of whether or not a bond issue occurs, does the following: 1 . Establishes the average area sales price, which determines the issue's maximum allowable unit sales prices. 2. Establishes area median income, which determines maximum allowable purchaser income. 3. Evaluates marketability and economic feasibility of participating projects, based on an assessment of the local development market. It is this study which is used by the rating agency (Moody's) to rate the bond issue. Attached to Resolution (a) is a contract with Empire Economics for an amount of $10,000. Empire Economics is recommended as the feasibility consultant as a result of its participation in the 1983 issue. The highest volume applicant/project for the 1985 issue was a participant up until the last minute in the 1983 issue. All of the analysis on that applicant/project has been done already by Empire Economics. Empire Economics can therefore respond quickly and at a favorable cost. In 1983, .Empire Economics was significantly the low bidder, their bid being 70% of the average bid amount. Their current bid two years later is only $1 ,500 more and is equal to the second low bid in 1983. Assessment of currently prevailing Market/Feasibility Study costs indicates that Empire Economics is quite cost effective for the City on this issue. Investment Banker Services: The investment banker/bond underwriter is responsible for both the complex job of financially structuring the bond issue and for the sale of the issue. The bond underwriter plays the largest part in the initial structuring of the issue, and the bond underwriter's compensation is the largest share of the initial cost. However, the bond underwriter receives no compensation unless the bonds are successfully sold, and that compensation is in the form of a discount extended to the underwriter on the purchase of bonds, a cost covered by bond sale proceeds and developer commitment fees. The discount, or sales credit take-down, is dependent upon market conditions at time of actual structuring, but it generally averages two percent. Page 4, Item 10 Meeting Date 2/5/85 .A Attached to Resolution (b) 3s an agreement with Miller and Schroeder Municipals for investment banking services for the 1985 issue. Miller and Schroeder are recommended without bid solicitation for two reasons: they also have dealt very specifically in the 1983 issue with the principal applicant/project of the 1985 issue, and they assisted the City without compensation in conforming with the new requirements of the 1984 Tax Act. In the second case, Miller and Schroeder kept us informed and provided us with technical advice in our effort to respond to the at-the-time ambiguous Treasury Department Requirements for an Annual Housing Policies Report required for issuance of bonds in 1985. I am aware of other jurisdictions which regularly issue bonds which were not advised of that new regulation until just before the deadline for report submission. Finally, it should be noted that Miller and Schroeder's compensation is from the sales credit take-down at issue sale, not from City revenues, and the take-down rate is specified in the contract to be at a rate commensurate with the prevailing market. Thus, of greater concern to the City than compensation is the level of service offered. That service level has been admirable. Bond Counsel Agreement: The Bond Counsel represents the City in ensuring tax exempt status of the issue. Bond Counsel renders legal opinions, prepares legal documents, and assists in the financial structuring of the issue. The stature of the Bond Counsel is very important to the marketability of the bonds, as is the working relationship between the bond counsel and the bond underwriter. Therefore, I recommend that the agreement attached to resolution (c) be approved with Jones Hall Hill & White for bond counsel services. They are a highly respected national firm, they have represented us frequently, and they have a long association with Miller & Schroeder on single-family mortgage revenue bond issues. Jones Hall Hill & White's fee, standard for the industry, would be paid by bond proceeds and is as follows: One-half percent of the first $5 million. One-quarter percent of the next $15 million. One-tenth percent of any additional. Process and Schedule: Subsequent to the recommended City Council actions, the structuring of the issue would begin. Projects would be evaluated and selected, issue lenders would be solicited and selected, and the issue would be rated, sized, and priced. The City Council would then approve or disapprove issuance of the bonds. It is also likely that a Joint Powers Authority with another jurisdiction would have to be entered into to get the most favorable rating possible for the issue. A tentative schedule has been drawn up which would result in a bond sale and closing at the end of April . FISCAL .IMPACT: All .costs- associated with the bond issue would be paid for from bond proceeds (or developer fees, with the exception of City staff time, which would be reimbursed from the Low and Moderate-Income Housing Fund. WPC 1398H COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item 10 Meeting Date 2/5/85 ITEM TITLE: Report: Proposed tax-exempt single-family mortgage revenue bond issue for 1985 a) Resolution // ' Approving agreement for Market/Feasibility Study with Empire Economics b) Resolution //17 .Approving agreement for investment banking services with Miller & Schroeder Municipals, Inc. c) Resolution // ?7 Approving agreement for bond counsel services with Jones Hall Hill & White SUBMITTED BY: Community Development Direc yp64/5ths Vote: Yes No x ) REVIEWED BY: City Manage, Imo, The City is about to receive a $10 million allocation from the State Mortgage Bond Allocation Committee to issue tax-exempt single-family mortgage revenue bonds, based on an application approved by the City Council on December 20, 1983. In anticipation of the allocation, active developers in Chula Vista have been solicited for participation in the issue. $12.5 million in allocation requests, with participation fee deposits, have been received from three developers. The next step in the process is to contract with the members of the bond team. RECOMMENDATION: That the Council approve the three resolutions approving agreements with Empire Economics, Miller & Schroeder Municipals, Inc. , and Jones Hall Hill & White, for services associated with a single-family mortgage revenue bond issue. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: The Human Relations Commission, on January 12, 1983, recommended the issuance of single-family mortgage revenue bonds as a tool for enhancing affordability of housing in Chula Vista. DISCUSSION: At the time the City issued the 1983 single-family mortgage revenue bonds (December 1983) , the City also made a request to the State for $10 million in bond allocation authority for 1985. The Redevelopment Agency appropriated $55,000 of Low and Moderate-Income Housing Fund monies to pay the necessary participation fees required by the State in order to make application for the bond authority. Chula Vista is now third on the State allocation list, and we expect to receive our $10 million allocation authority on February 13. In anticipation of that authority, actions are being taken to prepare for bond issuance. This is an appropriate point for the City Council to approve further action and agreements with the bond issue team members. R1 1 ' Page 2, Item 10 Meeting Date 2/5/85 Summary of tax-exempt mortgage revenue bond program: Tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds are identified in the Housing Element of the City's General Plan as a tool to be provided by the City to enhance the affordability of housing. The tax-exempt nature of the bonds ultimately provides mortgage money for purchasers of single-family homes in Chula Vista at below-market interest rates. Eligible mortgagers are first-time homebuyers who are low and moderate-income and who are owner/occupants. Unit sales prices for new and resale homes are restricted. Details of the program are attached as Exhibit A. The Housing Policies Report, adopted by the City Council on December 11 , 1984, in public hearing, established the following policies for structuring the 1985 bond issue: 1. The maximization of the issue's investment-quality rating to yield the lowest interest rate. 2. The maximization of homeownership opportunities for lower income househol ds. 3. The maximization of the quality and balance of Chula Vista's housing stock and residential environment. Those policies will be used in selecting the developments participating in the 1985 issue. It should be pointed out that no financial liability exists for the City as a result of bond issuance. The debt obligation on the bonds is paid from the mortgage payments, or in the event of delinquencies, from private mortgage insurance. Developer solicitation: Active developers in Chula Vista were invited by letter to a meeting on January 11 , at which they were informed of the particulars of the bond issue. They were given the opportunity to submit applications for participation shortly thereafter. As a requirement for application, they were required to reimburse the City for the participation fees committed by the Redevelopment Agency in December of 1983. Three applications were received totaling $12.5 million. The product cost ranged from $78,000 to $110,000. Using the policies stated in the section above, the feasibility consultant and Community Development staff will select issue participants and their shares of the $10 million allocation. Participation fees: The fees received from the developers will replace the Housing Fund participation fees appropriated earlier, which can be released back into the Housing Fund's unappropriated revenues. The fees to the developer represent one-half percent Of, the developer's total request and are intended to cover Page 3, Item 10 Meeting Date 2/5/85 initial costs to the City for structuring the bond issue, such as the Market/Feasibility Study. An additional four percent fee will be charged to the developers as soon as the allocation is received. The total fees cover the cost of the subject agreements. Contractual Services: The bond team recommended for the proposed 1985 bond issue is the same used for the 1983 issue. Bid solicitation was not undertaken in arriving at the recommendation for a number of reasons specific to the 1985 issue, reasons which constitute special circumstances that make it in the City's best interest to select the recommended firms. Those special circumstances are discussed below. It should be noted that if the City participates in another round of single-family mortgage revenue bond financing in the future, bid solicitation would be utilized. Market/Feasibility Study: The Market/Feasibility Study, which is the only contractual cost which the City will incur regardless of whether or not a bond issue occurs, does the following: 1. Establishes the average area sales price, which determines the issue's maximum allowable unit sales prices. 2. Establishes area median income, which determines maximum allowable purchaser income. 3. Evaluates marketability and economic feasibility of participating projects, based on an assessment of the local development market. It is this study which is used by the rating agency (Moody's) to rate the bond issue. Attached to Resolution (a) is a contract with Empire Economics for an amount of $10,000. Empire Economics is recommended as the feasibility consultant as a result of its participation in the 1983 issue. The highest volume applicant/project for the 1985 issue was a participant up until the last minute in the 1983 issue. All of the analysis on that applicant/project has been done already by Empire Economics. Empire Economics can therefore respond quickly and at a favorable cost. In 1983, .Empire Economics was significantly the low bidder, their bid being 70% of the average bid amount. Their current bid two years later is only $1 ,500 more and is equal to the second low bid in 1983. Assessment of currently prevailing Market/Feasibility Study costs indicates that Empire Economics is quite cost effective for the City on this issue. Investment Banker Services: The investment banker/bond underwriter is responsible for both the complex job of financially structuring the bond issue and for the sale of the issue. The bond underwriter plays the largest part in the initial structuring of the issue, and the bond underwriter's compensation is the largest share of the initial cost. However, the bond underwriter receives no compensation unless the bonds are successfully sold, and that compensation is in the form of a discount extended to the underwriter on the purchase of bonds, a cost covered by 1\ bond sale proceeds and developer commitment fees. The discount, or sales credit take-down, is dependent upon market conditions at time of actual structuring, but it generally averages two percent. Page 4, Item 10 Meeting Date 2/5/85 • Attached to Resolution (b) 3s an agreement with Miller and Schroeder Municipals for investment banking services for the 1985 issue. Miller and Schroeder are recommended without bid solicitation for two reasons: they also have dealt very specifically in the 1983 issue with the principal applicant/project of the 1985 issue, and they assisted the City without compensation in conforming with the new requirements of the 1984 Tax Act. In the second case, Miller and Schroeder kept us informed and provided us with technical advice in our effort to respond to the at-the-time ambiguous Treasury Department Requirements for an Annual Housing Policies Report required for issuance of bonds in 1985. I am aware of other jurisdictions which regularly issue bonds which were not advised of that new regulation until just before the deadline for report submission. Finally, it should be noted that Miller and Schroeder's compensation is from the sales credit take-down at issue sale, not from City revenues, and the take-down rate is specified in the contract to be at a rate commensurate with the prevailing market. Thus, of greater concern to the City than compensation is the level of service offered. That service level has been admirable. Bond Counsel Agreement: The Bond Counsel represents the City in ensuring tax exempt status of the issue. Bond Counsel renders legal opinions, prepares legal documents, and assists in the financial structuring of the issue. The stature of the Bond Counsel is very important to the marketability of the bonds, as is the working relationship between the bond counsel and the bond underwriter. Therefore, I recommend that the agreement attached to resolution (c) be approved with Jones Hall Hill & White for bond counsel services. They are a highly respected national firm, they have represented us frequently, and they have a long association with Miller & Schroeder on single-family mortgage revenue bond issues. Jones Hall Hill & White's fee, standard for the industry, would be paid by bond proceeds and is as follows: One-half percent of the first $5 million. One-quarter percent of the next $15 million. One-tenth percent of any additional. Process and Schedule: Subsequent to the recommended City Council actions, the structuring of the issue would begin. Projects would be evaluated and selected, issue lenders would be solicited and selected, and the issue would be rated, sized, and priced. The City Council would then approve or disapprove issuance of the bonds. It is also likely that a Joint Powers Authority with another jurisdiction would have to be entered into to get the most favorable rating possible for the issue. A tentative schedule has been drawn up which would result in a bond sale and closing at the end of April . FISCAL IMPACT: All costs associated with the bond issue would be paid for from bond proceeds `or developer fees, with the exception of City staff time, ,�'1 which would be reimbursed from the Low and Moderate-Income Housing Fund. 1►■ WPC 1398H