2009-11-12-CPC-min (730PM) - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

housing, he said he believed the CPC should use cash whenever possible. In considering Large Fixed Asset projects, the CPC may choose to bond, but might wish to choose a standard for retiring the bonds. (One such standard is the retirement of 70% of the debt in a 10 year period. This is the standard the industry uses for AAA rated debt.) He said it was important only to use debt for projects for which there would be a long term benefit to the Town, thereby making the distribution of the payments over time equitable to taxpayers. In regard to Financing Renovations or Rehabilitations for Existing Assets, Mr. Valente suggested such projects should always be paid with cash, unless the cost of the project greatly reduced the balance in the CPC accounts. Finally in regard to Private Projects, Mr. Valente suggested that only cash be used, so as not to inequitably obligate future taxpayers for such debts. 3.General Discussion a.) Suggestion of $500,000 in each “Bucket” – After Mr. Addelson’s and Mr. Valente’s introductions, the meeting was opened to a discussion of the points raised by Mr. Valente. Discussion first focused on the recommendation that $500,000 be kept in each of the CPC “buckets”. Mr. Kanter questioned the premise of having each group feeling entitled to “their $500,000”. Mr. Levine suggested that if the CPC needed cash for a large project, they might wish to rethink having dedicated monies to specific buckets (which cannot be used for any other non-designated purpose). In the event such a project was considered, Mr. Valente responded that the CPC could always bond its cost or consider a BAN or bridge loan. Mr. Levine suggested that one could make distributions based on percentage, rather than specific amounts, similar to the 10% distributions. He suggested the distributions to each bucket could be doubled, for instance. A lengthy discussion ensued, in which Ms. Weiss, Ms. Manz and Mr. Eurich felt the distribution of $500,000 into each of the buckets would restrict the CPC in funding future projects. There was no specific sense of the meeting on this topic, but there was a general hesitancy to “tie up” funds in a manner that would make them less available to Special Town Meetings if needed. b.)Minimum Balance - The discussion then turned to the policy of keeping a minimum total balance in the CPC accounts. Ms. Levine asked the group if there was general agreement with the figure of $2.5 million as a minimum balance. Mr. Lamb said he had suggested $3.0 million in a paper he had emailed to the meeting participants, but voiced no serious objection. 2