Financial- COPS (Official Statement/Drafts)

Home Browse Search

From: "Craig Lewis" <CLewis@melvinmark.com> Tos GWM2.M-MAR2(BWASSON) Date: 11/3/98 3:51pm Subject: Sources and Uses----and ---Sources of Aggravation Billy- I had a chance to discuss your financing question with Mike Kendig. Randy Curtis may be able to shed additional light on this. Let me give it a try. It was our recollection that the $992,638 (used to purchase the remaining parcels) and the $1,669,631(used to pay for demolition and remediation costs) were funded by Transit's contribution to the total land purchase e.g. $1,671,287, and the $600,000 Solid Waste Loan. The Solid Waste reimbursement is reflected as a line item in the project cost budget. The repayment of Transit's $1,671,287 is essentially money- as a part of Transit's $9.8 M-which will have to be replenished in order for the Financing Worksheet to balance (see Adjustments to Net Requirements). Worded another way: Transit paid the County for their share of the land. The County spent that money on the remaining parcels and demolition/remediation. Transit is only responsible for another $7,881,066 (plus contingency). To fund the project as currently anticipated, we still need the $9,844,061 for that part of the project equity.-----Had the County paid for the remaining parcels from funds not part of Transit's payment for the land, the $992K would be "found' money and could be returned to the County. Similarly, if the County had paid for demolition and remediation from funds which did not have to be repaid (to Solid Waste for example) that money could be put back into the project fund. I think this makes sense. If it would help, give me a call and we can walk through it with Mike.