HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Committees - Economic Development Corporation - 12/04/1986 CITY OF KENT
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
December 4, 1986
The reaular meeting was called to order at 7:30 a.m. by Chairman Berne Biteman.
Present: BOARD MEMBERS: Berne Biteman, Chairman of the Board
Tom Bailey, Vice-Chairman
Steve Dowell
Ted Knapp
Walt Ramsey
OFFICERS: Marie Jensen, Secretary of the Board
Tony McCarthy, Treasurer
Steve DiJulio, General Counsel
Also Present: Brent McFall , City Administrator
KENT DEVELOPMENT CENTER FOUNDATION - CONTRACT
DiJulio presented the final copy of the proposed contract with the Kent
Development Center Foundation for the Incubator Program. He described the
changes from the draft copy, most of which were proposed by Anthony Retford,
the Director. It was noted that Dowell and Knapp serve on the Board of the
• Foundation, and, therefore, will not vote on this item. Bailey moved to
approve the contract for signature. Ramsey seconded, and the motion carried,
with Biteman, Bailey and Ramsey supporting it.
FINANCIAL STATEMENT
Treasurer McCarty presented a financial statement giving the history of the
Corporation through November 30, 1986 showing net retained earnings of
$41 ,371 .23. He pointed out that this did not include the payment of $10,000
to the Kent Development Center Foundation or the insurance bill of
approximately $5,000.
Throu h November, 1986 the Corporation has generated $82,549.38 in revenue
with 941 ,178.15 shown as expenses. Revenue is generated through application
fees, administrative fees, charges for services of the General Counsel and the
Secretary, and accumulated interest. Additional renewal administration fees
will be billed later this month. The financial statement has been filed by
the Secretary.
OUTLOOK
DiJulio noted that Dowell had attended the seminar sponsored by the State
Department of Economic Development. The Internal Revenue Code of 1986 will
cause some changes for this Corporation. The exemptions for small industrial
development bonds will be sunsetted on December 31 , 1986. Warehouses,
research, and so forth will no longer be eligible to take advantage of
industrial revenue bonds. Only manufacturing facilities will be eligible for
• 1987, 1988, and 1989.
He noted that SeaFirst Bank could not place the bonds for Northwest Bottling
Company. Northwest Bottling could, however, proceed in the future if they are
ab secure funding, since this is a manufacturing facility.
DiJulio explained that the volume cap is imposed on all states and applicants
must compete for available volume. The Governor has allocated the State of
Washington volume cap, generally described as $75 per capita or $250 million
on all private activity bonds. Volume of all private activity bonds in
Washington will be limited to approximately $320 million for the period of
August 16 to December 31 , 1986, with a similar amount for 1987. The volume
cap was all used and last month there was a scramble to get in under the cap.
Northwest Aluminum Products was successful and Northwest Bottling Company was
not.
Upon Bailey's questions, DiJulio explained a portion of the cap is set aside
for certain purposes such as housing bonds, utility bonds, and so forth. Many
traditional types of public financing will be considered private industry
revenue bonds, so there will be more competition for the volume cap, thus
affecting municipal financing. He noted that it appeared that LIDS would not
be considered private activity bonds, but that is not absolutely certain.
Sensitive areas will be water and sewer projects. As an example, DiJulio
noted that we could not issue revenue bonds for construction of a golf course
if we intended to have it privately managed. A checklist will be prepared by
bond counsel and the process will be complex.
Upon Dowell 's question, DiJulio noted that there has been some discussion that
• the State will take up the entire volume and all issues will be combined
issues out of Olympia, with none of the volume allocated to the local boards.
He pointed out that bond counsel was confident that most of the traditional
debt financing of cities will be tax exempt and not subject to the volume
cap. He summarized that the only applications to be brought before this Board
in the future would be for manufacturing projects. He also pointed out that
instead of requiring that 910 percent of the issue be used for approved
purposes, in the future it will be 95 percent, leaving only 5 percent for
non-approved purposes such as office furniture. The percentage allowed for
the purchase of raw land will remain at no more than 25 percent. In answer to
further questions, DiJulio noted that the applicant is responsible for
securing the financing, pointing out that this is usually done before the
application is filed. Usually, the bonds have been purchased by the bank for
their own accounts, but the advantage of holding tax free bonds has been
greatly reduced. It could be that banks might eliminate tax exempt bonds from
their portfolios.
Upon Dowell 's question about arbitrage, DiJulio noted that in new bond
ordinances the City will guarantee the bonds to be tax free, and in the
unlikely event that the earnings limitations are exceeded, the City will pay
the penalty so as to ensure that the bonds do not become taxable. McCarthy
noted that on City bonds, the interest rate of the bonds is noted on the
investment fol e—r to be sure that the investment interest is not higher than
the bond rate. A state pool will be set up by the federal government to
facilitate this. McFall pointed out that the investments will require more
• attention in the future. If interest becomes taxable to the bond holders, the
City will be unable to find a market for future bonds.
- 2 -
CHAMBER OF COMMERCE MEETING
Knapp noted that next We nesday, on December 10, the Chamber will sponsor a
lunch with a panel discussion with representatives of other Economic
Development Councils, plus Penny Peabody of the King County Economic
Development Council , and a representative from the State. The purpose is to
network and to learn how these other groups operate. The State has "Team
Washington" and it works down through counties and cities. It is hoped that
King County will become more aware of what is available in Kent. The County
has videos to show to industry and South King County needs to become better
organized. It was pointed out that the lunch tickets would be an allowable
expense of the corporation.
The meeting adjourned at 8:25 a.m.
NEXT MEETING
e ecretary will advise as to the date for the next meeting.
Marie ens k.
Secretary a Board
. 0024C-01C
- 3 -