Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 2001 1107 CC REG ITEM 10C ITEM or �}PPt2CU�'C7 STpF'��C.p1rr1M. AC n4b_�kSEa12��iQ. -14AUac, 1,2,3,4•KuF-4lwsArTV b, P&N0Jt4G7 A`TtCt.1 o1J Itn �-�} t FY 3f t,. • RI�T4O STWM G n,!;r F 4U LS YAp M MOORPARK - CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Hugh R. Riley, Assistant City Manage •- � L DATE: October 24, 2001 (City Council Meeting of November 7, 2001) SUBJECT: The City Council is Requested to Approve Proposed Development and Financing Plan for New Civic Facilities Including City Hall, Police Services Center and Public Works/Parks Corporation Yard. BACKGROUND: In March 2000 the City completed a space needs study to determine the City' s future civic facilities requirements . The facilities included in the study are City Hall , Police Services Center and Public Works/Parks Corporation Yard . Staff has prepared a comprehensive report that outlines various findings and recommendations for the financing and development of these new civic facilities for the City of Moorpark . The Report is now being presented for the City Council ' s consideration and approval . DISCUSSION: The attached report provides and analysis of development costs and staff ' s conclusions for site selection and financing for a new City Hall , a new Police Services Center and a Corporation Yard for the Public Works and Parks Departments . Appendix A to the Report contains details of the proposed sites and building concept designs . Appendix B contains exhibits supporting staffs financing conclusions and recommendations . Cost estimates and financing recommendations are summarized the following table . City Council Agenda Report November 7, 2001 Page 2 DEVELOPMENT COST A. SIZE AND CONSTRUCTION COST Size and construction costs for the desired facilities are as follows : FACILITY SIZE COST • City Hall 32 , 000 Sq. ft . $ 5, 660 , 000 • Police Services Center 21 , 300 Sq. ft . * $ 4 , 400 , 000 • Corporation Yard 9, 400 Sq. ft . On 2 acres $ 1 , 275, 000** * Includes space for Highway Patrol ** Includes supporting facilities B. DESIGN AND ADMINISTRATION COST City Hall Design (100 of construction) $ 566, 000 Admin and Inspection (15% of construction) $ 849, 000 Contingency $ 300 , 000 Police Services Center Construction (Highway Patrol) $ 650, 000 Design (10% of construction) $ 505, 000 Admin and Inspection (15% of construction) $ 757 , 500 Contingency - $ 200 , 000 Corporation Yard Design (8% of construction) $ 102 , 000 Admin & Inspection (150 of construction) $ 191 , 250 Contingency $ 75, 000 City Council Agenda Report November 7 , 2001 Page 3 SITE SELECTION AND ACQUISITION The report outlines staff ' s findings and recommendations for the siting of these key public facilities within the City ' s Downtown Specific Plan Area . After analyzing the land available for these projects, staff is recommending the following sites for the facilities : City Hall - To be located on an expansion of the existing Civic Center site between the County Library and High Street at the east end of the Specific Plan Area . Land Acquisition $ 1 , 490 , 000 Relocation Costs $ 1 , 188 , 675 SUBTOTAL $ 2 , 678 , 675 Police Center - To be located on Spring Road between Flinn Avenue and High Street . Land Acquisition $ 866, 061 Corporation Yard - To be located on M-2 zoned property at the end of Fitch Avenue next to the CalTrans Equipment Yard. Land Acquisition $ 413 , 820 Land Acquisition for the new facilities has already begun with the acquisition of a 7 . 5 acre site at 500 Spring Road and the purchase of the Moorpark Mobile Home Park at 83 West High Street . A number of the parcels needed for the City Hall Site are presently developed and those businesses and residents will have to be relocated. Land Acquisition Total $ 3 , 958 , 556 City Council Agenda Report November 7 , 2001 Page 4 TOTAL LAND AND DEVELOPMENT COST The combined cost for all the new facilities is summarized as follows : PROJECT LAND DEVELOPMENT TOTAL City Hall $ 2 , 678 , 675 $ 7 , 375 , 000 $10 , 053 , 675 Police Center $ 866 , 061 $ 6, 512 , 500 $ 7, 378 , 561 Corp. Yard $ 413 , 820 $ 1 , 643 , 250 $ 2 , 057, 070 GRAND TOTAL PROJECT COST $19 , 489, 306 FINANCING Staff is recommending a combination of current cash assets and bond financing to pay for the new facilities . The projected cash balance as of November 1 , 2001 in those funds applicable to the project are as follows : FUND PROJECTED BALANCE (November 1 , 2001) General Fund Reserve (Fund 1000) $ 7, 500 , 000 General Fund Increase, 2000 to 2001 (Fund 1000) $ 1 , 100, 000 City Hall Improvement (Fund 4001) $ 465 , 000 Police Facilities (Fund 4002) $ 1 , 103 , 000 Special Endowment (Fund 2800) $ 8 , 070 , 000 TOTAL $ 18, 238, 000 The City is in an excellent financial position to take advantage of the current municipal bond market by issuing a limited amount of Certificates of Participation (COPS) to finance a portion of the new City Hall development . A COP is a commonly used municipal finance technique of financing city hall construction. This approach will reduce the amount of cash required and preserve these resources for other important projects such as open space property acquisition. Staff has concluded that the City could issue COPs to provide $5, 000 , 000 for the City Hall project . Alternately, the City could borrow internally from the Endowment Fund or General Fund reserve to obtain funds necessary for this project . Staff will not make a recommendation for financing city hall construction until final design and cost analysis is complete . City Council Agenda Report November 7 , 2001 Page 5 All of the bond proceeds from previous Redevelopment Agency tax allocation bonds have been spent or will be spent on currently budgeted projects and none remain to be used for this facilities project . However, there is sufficient annual tax increment revenues to make additional debt service payments . The Redevelopment Agency is able to issue tax increment debt to provide up to $10 , 000 in new cash for the Police Services Center and Public Works/Parks Corporation Yard . The table below summarizes the sources and uses of funds proposed to finance these three facilities . Source of Funds Use of Funds Police City Agency Station City Hall Yard Land Acquisition/Relocation 866,000 2,678,000 414,000 Construction/Admin/Design 6,513,000 7,375,000 1,644,000 Total Needs 7,379,000 10,053,000 2,058,000 Current balance in Police Facilities Fund 1, 103,000 1, 103,000 Current balance in City Hall Facilities Fund 465, 000 465,000 Proceeds from agency purchase of exiting City hall 2_ ,500,000 2,500,_000 2,500,000 Existing Redevelopment Agency funds 866,000 866,000 Proceeds from new Tax Allocation financing 10,021,000 5_,500,0.00 2, 100,000 General Fund increase, 2000 to 2001 1, 100,0.00 1, 100,000 Housing set-aside funds for relocation costs 1, 190,000 1, 190,000 Proceeds from City issue new COP or interfund borrowing 5,000,000 5,000,000 10,615,000 14,577,0000 7,469,000 10,255,000 2, 100,000 Although staff is recommending that the Redevelopment Agency proceed immediately with the issuance of tax allocation bonds, additional analysis is needed before a financing plan for City Hall can be determined. Many factors need to be considered. First , with statewide economic conditions slowing, general fund revenues may be impacted. Second, the State of California is currently facing significant budget shortfalls and staff anticipates that certain state revenues to local agencies may be reduced next year as a result . Third, there will increased City Council Agenda Report November 7 , 2001 Page 6 operating costs for park maintenance, pool operations, and maintenance of the proposed new Police Services Center in the next 12 to 36 months . Finally, the Endowment fund and other reserves may be needed to offset these or other project costs . Staff recommends that these issues, along with their impact on the City' s ability to finance construction of a new City Hall , be referred to the Budget and Finance committee for further consideration and report back to the Council . RECOMMENDATION: 1 . Authorize staff to retain necessary consulting services for the issuance of $11 , 095 , 000 in tax allocation bonds within the next 90 days to take advantage of the present low interest rates . 2 . Prepare documents necessary for the issuance of the tax allocation bonds for consideration by the Redevelopment Agency Board at a special meeting on November 13 , 2001 . 3 . Initiate the appraisal process for the existing buildings in the civic center complex in anticipation of its ultimate purchase by the Redevelopment Agency. 4 . Initiate the appraisal process for the privately owned properties on Moorpark Avenue, High Street and Fitch Avenue (update of previous appraisal) referenced in the report . 5 . Continue or initiate the development of plans and specifications for the identified projects at the recommended sites . G . Solicit bids for the design and construction of City hall and the Public Works/Parks yard. 7 . Discuss city hall financing options with the Budget and Finance Committee . Attachments : 1 . Moorpark Civic Facilities Development and Financing Report and Recommendations w ' Re : Item 10 . C . MOORPARK CIVIC FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT and FINANCING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS OCTOBER 2001 MOORPARK CIVIC FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT and FINANCING RECOMMENDATIONS The following report outlines staff ' s findings and recommendations for the financing and development of new civic facilities for the City of Moorpark. These facilities include City Hall , Police Services Center and Public Works/Parks Corporation Yard. Exhibits referenced in the report are included in the Appendix. THE FACILITIES In March 2000 the City completed a space needs study. The study was prepared by Leach Mounce Architects of Ventura, California . The Final Report for this Study is the basis for the space and cost requirements that follow. A summary of the study is included in Exhibit A-1 of this report . The evaluation of locations and costs associated with site acquisition are discussed in the second part of the report . CITY HALL SIZE - Based on the Space Needs Study and subsequent information developed by staff, the City ' s future needs for the City Council , Council Chambers, City Manager, City Clerk, Human Resources, Administrative Services, Community Development , Public Works (including Building Safety and Engineering) and Community Services will require a new, independently developed city hall facility with 32 , 700 square feet and parking space for approximately 230 cars (staff and visitor) on a site containing around 4 . 75 acres . The site size and parking requirements may vary slightly if the new city hall facility is developed in conjunction with other public facilities allowing for shared parking or if the facility is designed as a two story building. A summary of the building and site development estimates is provided in Exhibit A-2 . DEVELOPMENT COST - The estimated cost to design and construct a new city hall building excluding land cost is as follows : Construction $ 5, 660 , 000 Design (10% of construction) $ 566, 000 Admin and Inspection (15% of construction) $ 849, 000 Contingency $ 300 , 000 TOTAL $ 7, 375, 000 A Site Plan and Building Floor plan that are suitable for the City Hall facility are included in Exhibit A-3 of this report . Depending on the final site selection, a variety of building footprints including a multiple story structure and site plans could be used. POLICE SERVICES CENTER SIZE - A facility with approximately 18 , 200 square feet will be needed for the Moorpark Police Department . An additional 3 , 100 square feet would be needed if the California Highway Patrol is to be located in the new center. The Space Needs study recommends a site containing between 2 . 5 and 3 acres with parking for about 120 vehicles . The space estimates for the Police Department include provisions for administration, possible future communications (dispatch) . No holding facilities are planned. The new facility would also provide space for an Emergency Operations Center . DEVELOPMENT COST - The cost to design and construct the proposed Police Services Center excluding land cost is as follows : Construction (Admin Svcs . ) $ 4 , 400 , 000 Construction (Highway Patrol) $ 650 , 000 Design (100 of construction) $ 505, 000 Admin and Inspection (150 of construction) $ 757 , 500 Contingency - $ 200 , 000 SUBTOTAL $ 6 , 512 , 500 A Site Plan and Building Floor plan that are suitable for the Police Services Center are included in Exhibit A-4 of this report . Depending on the final site arrangement a variety of building footprints and site plans could be designed. PUBLIC WORKS/PARKS CORPORATION YARD SIZE - Based on the Space Needs Study the City will need a site with 1 . 5 to 2 acres for the Corporation Yard. The site will need a building of approximately 9, 400 square feet for operations, storage, street maintenance and public works yard storage; parking for about 50 vehicles for employees and visitors, a materials storage area and a grade separated dumping ramp (allowing direct dumps from trucks to containers) . Fueling facilities may also be included in the jot 2 plan but not necessarily constructed in the initial phase of development . A summary of the building and site development estimates for the Corporation Yard Facility is provided in Exhibit A-2 . DEVELOPMENT COST - The cost to design and construct the Corporate Yard building and facilities excluding land cost is as follows : Construction $ 1 , 275 , 000 Design (8% of construction) $ 102 , 000 Admin & Inspection (15% of construction) $ 191 , 250 Contingency $ 75 , 000 SUBTOTAL $ 1 , 643 , 250 DEVELOPMENT COST SUMMARY City Hall $ 7 , 375 , 000 Police Services Facility $ 6, 512 , 500 Corporation Yard $ 1 , 643 , 250 GRAND TOTAL $15, 307, 750 BUILDING SITES CITY HALL After a study of numerous possible sites for a new City Hall and discussions with the City Council , site planning has recently been directed to the city owned property on Moorpark Avenue and adjacent property to the south. This is the site of the existing City Hall , Civic Center, Public Works Corporation Yard, Senior Center and County Library. The property includes two parcels owned by the Moorpark Redevelopment Agency. One of these parcels is an occupied, single-family rental house on Moorpark Avenue . The other parcel fronts on West High Street and is vacant . The redevelopment of the Civic Center Site with a new city hall presents a number of challenges and opportunities . The northern half of the site slopes from north to south and its dimensions limit the construction of a new facility to the existing city hall building site . Construction of a new city hall on the existing site without additional land would require a temporary relocation of all 3 ��00C' city offices during construction. Suitable existing facilities where all offices could be temporarily situated with good public access are very limited . The best alternative for the development of a new city hall at the Moorpark Avenue location appears to be to enlarge the current site by acquiring additional properties to the south. These properties include the Moorpark Mobile Home Park (which has already been purchased) , a residence on West High Street , and commercial property at the northwest corner of Moorpark Avenue . Planning for this site will need to include provisions for the expansion of the library facilities . The structures and property ownership of the existing Civic Center area north of High Street and west of Moorpark Avenue are described in Exhibits A-5 and A-6 . The cost to acquire these properties and relocate the occupants is substantial . Based on recent appraisals and sales of comparable property in the area , staff estimates that this land cost , excluding the County Library, is $1 , 490 , 000 . The probable cost associated with relocating the residents of the property is approximately $1 , 052 , 367 including administrative costs for planning and property management . These costs are itemized as follows : LAND COST: Mobile Home Park - $ 900 , 000 Commercial Parcels - $ 400, 000 Residential Parcel - $ 190 , 000 TOTAL LAND $ 1 , 490 , 000 RELOCATION PAYMENTS : Mobile Home Park - $ 800 , 000 Single Family (2) - $ 19, 500 Commercial (4 ) $ 85 , 000 SUB TOTAL $ 904 , 500 20% contingency $ 180 , 900 TOTAL RELOCATION $ 1 , 085 , 400 4 PROFESSIONAL FEES : Relocation Plan Preparation - $ 8 , 275 Replacement Housing Plan $ 2 , 500 Implementation Services Residential - $ 57 , 750 Implementation Services Commercial - $ 11 , 750 Project Management $ 8 , 000 Property Management (estimated 12 months) $ 15 , 000* TOTAL FEES $ 103 , 275 GRAND TOTAL SITE ACQUISITION $ 2 , 678 , 675 *Park rent income is expected to offset operating costs and pay for property management . SITE DEVELOPMENT AND REUSE - There are a variety of arrangements for the reuse of the existing Civic Center site and buildings . With the construction of a new city hall at the corner of High and Moorpark Avenue, the existing city hall could be acquired by the Redevelopment Agency for reuse to meet other important community facility needs . The City could utilize the sale proceeds for the new City Hall . The existing buildings could be dedicated for other community uses such as : Reuse City Hall building as a one-stop community services center to house various public service agencies such as Catholic Charities, Clinicas Del Camino Real (low cost medical care) , county human development services, child care, family and individual counseling services, legal aid and other services for Moorpark residents . Reuse City Hall building as a Teen Center. Expand Senior Center use in Civic Center Building and/or combinations of the above uses . y Remove the Modular Annex at the north end of City Hall for additional parking or reuse the annex for some of the above uses . 5 Redevelop existing City Hall and office annex site with senior housing or commercial uses . Buildings could be leased for commercial office space ORIENTATION OF NEW CITY HALL - Orienting the new City Hall to the Southeast , facing the High Street -Moorpark Avenue Intersection is recommended. Such an orientation will give the building a commanding presence at the west end of High Street creating community pride and inviting visitors . It will serve as the central focus for the City and an "anchor" for the downtown High Street area . An example of this orientation is demonstrated in Exhibit A-7 using the building concept developed in the Space Needs Study. Other building designs would be easily adapted to this site leaving sufficient room for parking, pedestrian-friendly circulation and attractive landscaping improvements . POLICE SERVICES CENTER The site for the new Police Services Center has already been designated by the City Council . A 7 . 52 -acre site on Spring Road was acquired early in April by the Redevelopment Agency with agency funds and transportation improvement funds totaling $ 2 , 100 , 000 . Approximately three acres of the site will be needed for the police facility. The land cost charged to the Police Services Center Project is $866 , 061 . Approximately three acres will remain available at the north end of the site for development uses consistent with the Downtown Specific Plan. The remaining property will be used for the widening of Spring Road and the realignment of Flinn Avenue to intersect Spring Road directly across from Second Street . This alignment will facilitate the installation of a traffic signal at this modified intersection. About 1 . 5 acres will be needed for the street widening and realignment . A site plan for development of the Police Services Center and alternatives for the realignment of Flinn Avenue are provided in Exhibit A-8 . PUBLIC WORKS/PARKS CORPORATION YARD The recommended site for a new Corporation Yard is a part of a 4 . 19-acre site at the end of Fitch Avenue . This parcel provides sufficient area (1 . 9 acres) for the Corporation Yard and a remaining parcel of 2 . 26 acres held for future 6 expansion. Staff recommends that the Corporation Yard be sited on the parcel as a "Flag" lot leaving a larger frontage on the Fitch Avenue Cul de Sac for the remaining parcel . A parcel map and possible siting plan are included as Exhibits A-9 and A- 10 . A portion of the remaining parcel could be developed for the City ' s Transit bus parking and maintenance . Grant funding could then be made available for both the facility and the land cost . Based on previous appraisals and current comparable sales, staff estimates the cost to acquire this parcel is $ 5 . 00 per square foot or $ 912 , 582 . Of this cost , $ 413 , 820 would be charged to the Corporation Yard Project . LAND ACQUISITION COST SUMMARY City Hall $ 2 , 678 , 675* Police Services Facility $ 866, 061 Corporation Yard $ 413 , 820 GRAND TOTAL $ 3, 958, 556 *Includes relocation costs TOTAL LAND AND DEVELOPMENT COST PROJECT LAND DEVELOPMENT TOTAL City Hall 2 , 678 , 675 7, 375, 000 10, 053 , 675 Police 866 , 061 6 , 512 , 500 7, 378 , 561 Corp. Yard 413 , 820 1 , 643 , 250 2 , 057, 070 GRAND TOTAL PROJECT COST $19, 489, 306 7 FINANCING The following is a discussion of the available options to finance the desired new public facilities . These options involve the commitment of cash assets combined with various types of debt financing. The City has several financing options which, when combined with the Redevelopment Agency ' s bonding capacity, could finance a major portion of the project components . These financing methods together with cash that could be committed now and that is anticipated in the future provide the City with the ability to pay for these projects . When examining the use of various financing mechanisms it is important to understand that State law does not permit the use of Redevelopment Agency funds for the financing of City Hall development . However, current State law does not prohibit the Agency' s participation in financing the Police Services Center and Corporation Yard . CASH ASSETS - CITY The City has wisely established a number of funds to assist in the funding of the desired projects . These funds are : FUND PROJECTED BALANCE (November 1 , 2001) General Fund Reserve (Fund 1000) $ 7, 500 , 000 General Fund Increase, 2000 to 2001 (Fund 1000) $ 1 , 100, 000 City Hall Improvement (Fund 4001) $ 465 , 000 Police Facilities (Fund 4002) $ 1 , 103 , 000 Special Endowment (Fund 2800) $ 8 , 070, 000 TOTAL $ 18, 238, 000 On June 30 , 2000 , the General Fund reserve was approximately $7 . 5 million, and by June 30, 2001 , it is projected to increase to $8 . 6 million. This amount is slightly in excess of twelve months of General Fund operations and above average for cities in California . For the next year or two, General Fund revenues are anticipated to be sufficient to pay for all operating expenses, and the reserve level is anticipated to stay at approximately the same level . However, with costs expected to increase in the coming years, longer term projections indicate that on-going revenues may not be 8 sufficient without new revenue sources . Nonetheless, with the relatively high reserve level and renewed efforts to seek out new General Fund revenue sources, the limited use of these funds, for these capital projects, would not be imprudent . The City Manager has recommended that $1 , 100 , 000 , representing the increase in funds available from 2000 to 2001 , be used for the City Hall Project . The Police Facilities and City Hall Improvement funds were established for the purpose of developing these particular facilities . Police Facilities development fees, which were updated in September 2000 , are projected to provide an additional $3 . 3 million in the next nine years from the development of an estimated 3 , 700 residential units and 3 . 9 million square feet of non-residential construction. While this amount won' t be available in time for construction and can' t be pledged for debt service, the future revenues could be used to assist with debt service payments if the police facility construction is financed. The City Hall Improvement fund has no dedicated revenue source and will increase only by interest earnings in the coming years . The Endowment Fund is an innovative strategy used in Moorpark to fund long term capital improvements . The Endowment Fund was initially funded with $1 . 5 million received upon dissolution of the Moorpark Mosquito Abatement District , and subsequent revenue sources to this fund have included contributions from new development and interest earnings . The table below identifies past and projected funding sources for the endowment fund. Dissolution of Mosquito Abatement District 1 , 572 , 500 Toll Brothers settlement 3 , 720 , 300 Archstone development fees 1 , 667, 600 Carlsberg development fees 815, 600 Other development fees 29, 000 Interest earnings and miscellaneous 263 , 400 Subtotal , November 1 , 2001 8, 068,400 Carlsberg/Pacific Comm/Suncal development fees 2 , 000 , 000 LT Development fees 2 , 000 , 000 SP2 development fees 4 , 500, 000 SP1 development fees 4 , 500, 000 West Pointe development fees 1 , 750 , 000 Other development fees 1 , 500, 000 Commercial development fees 1 , 200, 000 Subtotal , future fees 17, 450, 000 9 As directed by the City Council , the Endowment Fund retains the first 20 of interest earned, with additional interest earnings directed to the General Fund. In the 2001/2002 fiscal year, the Endowment Fund is expected to retain approximately $180 , 000 in interest earnings, with an additional $220 , 000 going to the General Fund. Interest rates are the lowest they have been in many years and are projected to increase in the coming years; interest earnings on the endowment fund balance is likely to be greater in future years . Current projections for revenues to this fund from planned residential , commercial and industrial projects total approximately $17 million over the next five years, increasing interest earnings substantially. While these future revenues may not be pledged against new debt , as they accumulate over time they may be used to reduce or pay off debt issued now to pay for projects . There is an on-going debate as to whether it is preferable for a municipality to preserve cash and incur debt for capital improvement projects or minimize debt by utilizing available cash . The City of Moorpark must make this choice as the financing of the new City Hall is considered. Both the General Fund Reserve and the Endowment Funds provide interest earnings used annually to pay for City operating expenses . Any depletion of these funds reduces this income accordingly. CASH ASSETS - REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY All of the bond proceeds from previous tax allocation bonds have been spent or will be spent on currently budgeted projects and none remain to be used for this facilities project . The MRA Tax Increment Fund contains monies from annual tax increment revenues and rental revenues . These funds are used to make existing debt service payments and pay operating costs . Any funds not used for these on-going expenses may also be used for capital projects . For the 2001/2002 fiscal year, it is estimated that approximately $700 , 000 in revenues will be received in excess of expenses in this fund, and this amount would increase slightly over time. These funds may be used to make debt service payments on new debt issues . In addition to annual increment and other revenues, the City anticipates receiving a one-time payment of $1 million from the County of Ventura in 2008 , as required by our tax increment agreements . 10 BORROWING There are a number of options available to utilize the City ' s credit backed by future revenues . These options are discussed below. Attachment B- 1 , a financing analysis developed by our public finance advisors, provides details about the borrowing options summarized below. REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY - The Redevelopment Agency can issue tax allocation bonds pledging future tax increment revenues (excluding the Low and Moderate Income (LMI) pledge) . Based on the cash flow projections mentioned above, the Agency presently has the ability to issue approximately $11 , 095, 000 of new tax allocation bonds that would net the Agency approximately $10 , 021 , 000 . The agency' s current bond financing will be paid in full in 2018 ; the proposed new bonds will "wrap around" the current debt service payments, with a smaller annual payment due until 2018 , then increased payments between 2018 and 2030 . Total debt service costs would be constant over the years, so that any increase in increment revenue could be used for other projects . CITY OF MOORPARK - The City can issue debt in the form of certificates of participation (COPs) pledging future general fund revenues . The issuance of COPs is limited to the City' s ability to allocate annual debt service payments from the General Fund, although the General Fund could be assisted by revenues in other funds , including the Endowment Fund. The City may utilize either a long term fixed rate or a variable rate for the financing of the City secured Certificate of Participation borrowing . Each financing structure offers distinct advantages . Fixed rates would allow us to take advantage of current low average coupon rates, about 4 . 8%, for a full thirty years . There would be no risk of interest rates changing over time . However, variable rate bonds in today' s market carry the lowest rate of any financing vehicle available . Current average coupon rates for variable rate debt are around 1 . 95% . While there is risk that rates would increase, and no guarantee that in the long run the total interest cost would be less than with fixed rates, the low initial rate is very attractive . This option is especially attractive if the City has cash available to retire the bonds if or when the rates become too high. In addition to issuing debt , the City may raise cash by selling assets or borrowing from reserve funds at appropriate 11 I,�• ',1 interest rates . This option would help to minimize the costs associated with debt issuance in the public finance marketplace . NARROWING THE OPTIONS CITY HALL - City staff is concerned about financing these projects with the least possible impact on the General Fund . Thus, it is important to minimize the use of General Fund and Endowment Fund balances to preserve interest earnings as much as possible . Therefore, maximizing the use of some of the Redevelopment Agency ' s funding resources is essential . The challenge becomes finding a way to use Agency resources to assist in the development of City Hall and still be within the intent of State law. Staff suggests the Redevelopment Agency purchase the existing City Hall and other civic center facilities, which would all eventually be converted (or expanded) for use as community resource facilities . The acquisition of these facilities is an eligible use of Agency funds . It is estimated that the existing land and facilities are worth approximately $2 , 500 , 000 . To pay for the City Hall , the City could commit the proceeds of the civic center property sale ($2 . 5 million) together with funds available from the City Hall Facilities Fund ($465 , 000) and $1 . 1 million from the General Fund Reserve (the increase from 2000 to 2001) . Additionally, $1 . 2 million in housing set- aside funds will be used to pay for relocation costs of the residents currently on the building site . An additional $5 . 0 million would be required to complete the project . The City currently has approximately $7 . 5 million in the General Fund Reserve and $8 . 1 million in the Endowment Fund, for a total of $15 . 6 million in available funds . There are two options for utilizing these funds . First , the City could use $5 million in cash. This would reduce interest earnings in the general fund by about $220 , 000 per year at current rates . As development occurs in the coming years , the endowment fund balance would be restored to previous levels, increasing interest earnings . Alternately, the City could leverage these cash balances and instead use the interest earnings on the endowment fund to make debt service payments on certificates of participation. The annual debt service payments would be between $290 , 000 and $400 , 000 , depending on the type of financing. While the City must pledge it ' s general fund 12 revenues for the COP, it is recommended that the interest earnings in the Endowment Fund (currently about $400 , 000 per year total) be dedicated to make the debt service . If lower, variable rate bonds were used, this would initially reduce general fund revenues by approximately $110 , 000 per year, and could increase if the variable interest rate on the bonds increases . If the higher fixed rate bonds were used, revenues would be reduced by about $220 , 000 . However, as interest rates and the fund balance in the endowment fund increase in the next few years, interest transfers to the general fund will return to previous levels . If interest rates on the variable rate debt were to increase in a few years, the cash that is projected to accumulate in the endowment fund over the next five years could be used to pay off the debt at any time . It must be recognized that the building of a City Hall is a specialized project that can be expected to occur only once in 30 years, and, even if debt is not usually favored, it could be an appropriate financing mechanism for long-term capital projects such as this . Even if the General Fund had to rely on its own revenues to make the debt service, the annual payment would represent less than one-half of one percent of total expenditures ($9 million) . However, if general fund revenues are not sufficient to meet expenditure demands, any payment , no matter how small , may be a burden. If the City Council is adverse to this level of debt , additional cash reserves could be used. However, any use of cash reserves for this project limits the Council ' s ability to use the funds, and the interest earnings, for other projects or purchases . Staff will not make a recommendation for financing city hall construction until final design and cost analysis is complete . POLICE SERVICES CENTER - The Redevelopment Agency can immediately raise $10 , 021 , 000 by issuing tax allocation bonds . These fixed rate bonds would "wrap around" the Agency' s existing debt , with only interest payments required until the existing debt is retired in 2018 . This would require annual debt service payments of $580 , 000 for the next 17 years, increasing to $1 . 2 million per year beginning in 2019 . To supplement the debt proceeds, $1 , 103 , 000 in the Police Facilities Fund would be available to finance the $6 . 6 million required for construction. This solution leaves approximately $2 . 4 million of the tax allocation bond proceeds (after deducting for the parks/public works yard, discussed below) 13 �6, 07 and $1 million one- time payment anticipated in 2008 available for other projects . Additionally, the Agency is currently owed approximately $3 . 5 million from the sale of land (Mission Bell Plaza) , which will be paid in installments over the next 27 years . These funds would also be available for other projects . Staff projects that the Police Facilities Fund, as noted earlier, will receive an additional $3 . 3 million in the next nine years . These revenues can contribute to the debt service payments made by MRA for the financing of the Police Services Center, freeing up additional MRA funds for other projects . PUBLIC WORKS/PARKS YARD - The cost of developing a new parks/public works yard, about $2 . 1 million, will also be funded with tax allocation bond proceeds discussed above . The following table summarizes the sources and uses of funds proposed to finance these three facilities . Source of Funds Use of Funds Police City Agency Station City Hall Yard Land Acquisition/Relocation. 866,000 2,678,000 414,000 Construction/Admin/Design 6,513,000 7,375,000 1,64=,000 Total Needs 7,379,000 10,053,000 2,058,000 Current balance in Police Facilities Fund 1, 103,000 1,103_ ,000 Current balance in City Hall Facilities Fund 465,000 465,000 Proceeds from agency purchase of exiting City hall 2,500,00.0 2,50.0,000 2,500,000 Existing Redevelopment Agency funds 866,000 866,000 Proceeds from new Tax Allocation financing 10,021,000 5,500,000 2, 100,000 General Fund increase, 2000 to 2001 1, 100,000 1,1QO,O�JO Housing set-aside funds for relocation costs 1,190,000 1, 190,0.00 Proceeds from City issue new COP or interfund borrowing 5,000,000 5,000,000 10, 168,000 14, 577,OOC 7,469,000 10,255,000 2,100,000 0� 14 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS It is important to remember that many details remain to be worked out , and construction is not likely to begin for many months . Thus, this report offers a financing proposal that is subject to changes and fine-tuning in the coming months . Based on the proposal set forth in this report , the following immediate actions are recommended: 1 . Retain necessary consulting services for the issuance of $11 , 095, 000 in tax allocation bonds within the next 90 days to take advantage of the present low interest rates . As the City would have up to three (3) years to spend these funds, the interest earnings on the invested proceeds can be a significant bonus to the Agency. 2 . Initiate the appraisal process for the existing buildings in the civic center complex in anticipation of its ultimate purchase by the Redevelopment Agency. 3 . Initiate the appraisal process for the privately owned properties on Moorpark Avenue, High Street and Fitch Avenue (update of previous appraisal ) referenced in the report . 4 . Continue or initiate the development of plans and specifications for the identified projects at the recommended sites . S . Solicit bids for the design and construction of City hall and the Public Works/Parks yard. 6 . Review city hall financing options with the Budget and Finance Committee with a report back to the City Council . Such discussion to include an evaluation of long-term General Fund revenue projections in light of state economic and budget constraints and expense projections, and anticipated increased costs for pool operations, park maintenance and police facility maintenance . 15 APPENDIX A EXHIBIT A- 1 Summary of Space Needs Study, March 2000 Leach Mounce Architects , Ventura, CA EXHIBIT A- 2 New Building & Site Development Estimates EXHIBIT A-3 City Hall Site Plan and Floor Plan EXHIBIT A-4 Police Services Center Site Plan and Floor Plan EXHIBIT A-5 Existing Civic Center Area Site Plan EXHIBIT A-6 Existing Civic Center Property Ownership EXHIBIT A-7 Possible City Hall Building Orientation EXHIBIT A-8 Site Plan for Police Services Center EXHIBIT A-9 Parcel map for Public Works/Parks Corporation Yard EXHIBIT A-10 Siting Plan for Public Works/Parks Corporation Yard :, •.r v• ..Li l 16 APPENDIX A EXHIBIT A- 1 Summary of Space Needs Study, March 2000 Leach Mounce Architects , Ventura , CA EXHIBIT A-2 New Building & Site Development Estimates EXHIBIT A-3 City Hall Site Plan and Floor Plan EXHIBIT A-4 Police Services Center Site Plan and Floor Plan EXHIBIT A-5 Existing Civic Center Area Site Plan EXHIBIT A-6 Existing Civic Center Property Ownership EXHIBIT A-7 Possible City Hall Building Orientation EXHIBIT A- 8 Site Plan for Police Services Center EXHIBIT A- 9 Parcel map for Public Works/Parks Corporation Yard EXHIBIT A- 10 Siting Plan for Public Works/Parks Corporation Yard 3/07100 CITY OF MOORPARK9 CALIFORNIA SPACE NEEDS STUDY TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. SUMMARY come from the addition of the('onurlunicalions 001011 proposed tilr The Police fit Adnlinisilative selvlces The 1. SUMMARY STAFFING SUMMARY currenT eslimale of staffing lilr cunlnrlulicaT lolls anti hold slid in" is forecilsi to Increase by apploxinrlteiy 40'/r in ing represents 50 1/( of The lon" tel nl Police I)epalilnew 11. INTERACTIONS the 20 year long Ielnt From a currrnl Irvel of 101 to 15(I inclose and 2514 of the total ('fly Stali nlcre:ISr.Withuul or. 47 I)Ioti• Staff in addition Tn ('onununicatiolls esti- Ihisoptionalinctease.the,,rowth off lie('fly Stall v,4h'/,. Ill. PROJECTIONS nlaled al 10,I folding 5 and I liohway 1'auol t Ink wiili 24 The anticipated long term growtl of the(•ity•S popIlh- IV. SHORT TERM PLANS persons ('unlnunliranonS and I lulttin�sutff inn need I" lion iiom 30.000 to 40,000 in 20 years with the propo.ed be the silhiect of addle ml Studles lilr long terns staliin� scale of new devclupnlenl iS more than 3 3'/.The growth V. LONG TERM PLANS need. The titaf'f Sununary fable is shown below. 'I he of Slaty is not out t)I'line with the expected growth t1f the City's largest snlole staft increase in The future would ('ny. V1. COSTS STAFF SUMMARY Vll. SPACE STANDARDS DEPARTMENT Short Statt Slatt 11y.iT'�AiV��JSLry Oty Oty `r TU, ��1,' .ah`.'r�' 1II.T�I�I� A� ;i1Y+ ►. r " �•'4`� �d1'� .,'�. .rwl w.. 1-5 Current City Hall Operations 14 19 6 Police 21 36 7-6 Holding & Communications Options 15 1,2.3 Current City Hall Operations 14 18 4,5 Building & Safety & Engineering 8 12 F�,»��:���'A�i�NI����A�lo�:�I,toy:�!� �1.` 1��'�'�t�1-ak;�•�,; '���. TOTAL CITY HALL & POLICE DEPARTMENT 87 141 oils r, GRAND TOTAL 103 189 * MOORPARK SPACE NEEDS STUDY Leach Mounce Architects EXHIBIT A-I I - FINAL DRAFT 3/07/00 STAFFING SUMMARY BY DEPARTMENT The City Colmcil & City Manager anticipate an in- an increase in staff by 5 'I he remaining stall j( i II s i n crease in craft of one pocifion for if clerk typist. Staffing AS arc Iwo clerk lyl)ists.one each in AS and Itedevelop)- in fhic section also includes the part time City Attorney. Inent. 'I he City Clerk/Human Resources WC)arc adding 2 Community Developmenl (('I)) Stall will gro(v by S ctafi. The('fly Clerk will add an Management nnalvst. from 22 to '30.or 27'/.The Director will adtl a clerical thereby hringing the ('pork's sup)porl on pain with other aide. Planning will add one Senior I'lanner. The ('ifv Directors. A new I'uhlic Information position is heing 1:ngineerwill.add Iwoengineerim,p)o.cilionc(heat l)oci- created live impact on staffopxrmional efficiency will collie front S1 A ' '( ROWI H Administrative Services(AS)has the largrl stall.cur bringing all the staff and their files ino a conTrnon loc;l- lion. Without this• additional staff time and therefore. renliy;5 growing to 70 if all options are taken.'llu Ito- additional staff may he re({uired to move staff.file nlate- lire account fur 51'/ ofnS staff. rials.and copies hetween locations. In the shore term.staff is projected to inc•reace Police Department The Police staff will grog' from 21 Ptthlic Works(I'W)The currenf staff of 5 will expand by six above the current levels as rellecte(f to 1h.or 29'/x.The growth inciudes patrol ollicers.cleri (. in the Decenllk t. 1999 Short germ Simi/ 2)7 to 7 with the addition ol'one inspector and one clen- Area D'rojec•tions The growth indicated in c'al and volunteers.As mentioned ahove.hringing('one- cal aide of('fly I l;all and a Field Supervisor and naainte- nunic•ations on-pine within the City will 3x1(1 10 staff for nance worker at the Yard. this summary is for the long Icon. 24 hours/7 (lay a week cnrcragc. l he {Inl(hng OI)lion for short term holding (less Ihan four hours) does not Community Services (('S) will ;I(I(I O st;il'I'Io the cur- anticipare any increase in staff and naay sage staff Banc real IO.or 60'7 including one cicri(•al aide of ('itv 11311 by not regnning the trancp)ort of detainees by ollicerc. andtwoa(Idilional nannlenancc(+'orkcrcal Ihc('ityY'ard. 1100 T\I>< I I folding(lot up)to 72 hours)would require Recreation and the Senior('enter are not covered by this cfndv. to 2n 30 40 5n Flo 70 Ern CITY(:nt)NCIL&CITY MANAGEn CITY(•LERK/HUMAN RESOURCE S �� >:�'''�!ipi„• . ADMINISTRATIVF SERVICES Cutrpnl C y HallO p pea ens Police `,�:.�iI:••f.,_�„:T�` I I Hnld,nq R Commun,cationc Options (:OMMUNIIV DEVELOPMENT Cm rant City halt Operations Ridding&Safpty&Engmeennq "t,.: PI IRUC WORKS r City Hall .`Yjr^r.^';:.r•C.l COMMUNI I Y SERVICES i~c y CR Hall .. CITY YARD SITE RCwrent Staff -I t HIGHWAY PATROL UMI7 ;ESlafl Growth MOORPARK SPACE NEEDS STUDY Leach Mounce Architects 1 - 2 FINAL DRAFT 3/07/00 IN'FERACfIONS SUMMARY REPORT DEPARTMENTS Interactions indicate how the different (Iep'lrtntents in the City relater hoth intermally an(I he(wecn e;tell other flit. LEGEND hloolpillk C)loanizauon chart shows how the City povernnlent authority is orpantzetl. It clue~ nut show hoer the del)u'nnents work touethei of how they intrulcl with each other Sl)atial size.anll relarlonshil)s;ur not scell in the Char) helow. Intemcnons also lnuvide important planning intorimmon and :ue shown in the dmoiilnt on the next A. City Council&City Manngrr pale. B. City CW*/Human Resources C. AdminliAmdveServias Moorpark Government Organization Chart D. Community Development .Cltl:ens of Moorpark E. Public Works F Community Servkxs __ ___ PWnnng Commission Parks 8 Recreation ` ————— Hon orable City ouncil ___________ Y Commission -- G. General Site Services I I (Nola di:parowni) � I I I I l 1 Adminrsuatwc I H. City Ya I CiCity Attorney City Manager Secret rd � INot it deparuncm) i I � I I l 1. Highway Patrol Unit I ' Community Development :.+<<;Pu W I Rol;: Adm6tant live SeMCes City Clerk Community Services (NtN:IltlpanitllJR1-OUlSldt.'AbCl16'Y) i Duocior <�eJrF:���;4�?�F'ti;t ,l •,�.-. ASSslenlCrryMaripga' t:.ryt'Im1d1'eisorva.•IUtlwr* preaa l I 'sli. s. a er mnis ra a �yr.e. Secielaiy Seraalary (FWwe) :>,. jria ,_. Hi:�oid, Adrnnis wow ".:s Mt- Sevier sure p e7'• �i ihr, Seaetaiy Mafntenatrq. (Niure) ESId!'�ri►i.�'r,; Intom�aeuu ar ai way Manpniamo A Fflanimg •l 4 - Ilnmau F.Maheo> 6tlards :i:::"'•Dsvw>�i•.' Husuw:es Cunene enaa an NPDES :: � (AVRt;1 AOvance -i•'.•'..�X.. F gc Anmial CalYd ..Police: Rngulalron E nloitert�um ar 8 Soad Wasic BuilAng d Enlorcemenl Seloiy ,o� iienvl '� Engrneeiirg Senla Caner Lea"Meer a Arcldbets MOORPARK SPACE NEEDS STUDY Leach Mounce Architects I - 3 FINAL DRAFT 3107100 DIAGRAMS Omrl:lllN reve;ll imlx)ll;lllt fllleracllons mxl Ielatfollships the (her:lll I)i;pill,l on the fight OVERALL DIAGRAM shows ;III tike depmllllenls ill ic•lalive size to e;lch other. I he ol-anvin, fiemme lot the('fly (1erk.('onununity I kvelopment.Public Works,Zito('ollum lmy Services fs the public see{ice _ ——————————————— counler'Ibis is the lx)int of contact fill the Mix)IP:u Is residents that needs direct•personal service that cm not Ile p ovided through other lot ills of colnnlunicahon. I ix•Site f lil"mill on the next IV- t- gives an L'XICI IC(f ovelview of the entire operation Including file respective site area I - C 6 quii–cownts.Both building and site areas we represented I POLICE KEY RIB LNI'MNtiElMS The relationship Iletwc'en the C01111cfl alxl the('fly Manager Is sll'olI" I'of 11116 IC:Lsoll.Illey ill e placed fn the s;lnle section of the Space Needs.Both Interact frequently with each 01110 alxl with the overall olx•ralion 'I he intcrachon with outside conlacts is similar;Is well'Mlle('n),Manager PUBLIC Aso h;rs,irnlficanl inlelartfon with file heads olfhe depannte•nl„md outsick aocncfes COUNTER ('it),('Icrk.('fly tilanagm('fly Council(ti('onununlry DCVrlopnx•nt h;l{e 111WIllal ol>Lraffons that Junction I><st II'their IespedivC Will IIMIlber,;ur Inclose pruxilfifty tO cash other'. Both CITY HALL 4' have it need to relate to the public over it counter will in nleclinrs. IItINIc Walks& (,ollul Ill fill y tics vices an•split with Cool dhnalto[ of i )lei-del)arfnlenrll opera lions at('fly I fall and extefull hlcifities.work clews:uld equipment al the l'uhlfc Worms Yard. I Ifult is it close.fnfemclfre working rel;monshfp between these depatll?wilts. I Ile('fly Yilld i s A C 1 -s occupied jointly. Public Woli s interacts fiequenlly with('onlnuulily lhvelopnlenl.( olllllltl- AUMINIcOIiAIIVI. COUNCIL A Sc I Wit:I,s fitly Six%Ices&KN sit also.but(oil lessel&-tee.lkihllc Walks Is im okck will('I)Illh':lstrnc- CITY MANAGER title iSSIIC,Ihaf require ea,y consu1Ct111u1;. Adminisu;uive Services has two major conllxments ()lie is the administering support to other dep;ulnx•nls. Ilse other is the police olvimiom.The sulpm hinclion inleracl.s closely with all --- the olhel dep;Ulnlents and spatially w;ults to he next to:dl ulfhenl.('ongxments of(Ile i\S touch B PUBLIC IF COMMU ITY otherde•p;ulnx•nts in sp cilic places.Fin;utce mki IIttimut Resource,interact. Reckvelopmenv CITY sERVIC s Fcononlic Ikvelopnlem fntemos with the Council. Community Developnlellt Planner,and CLERK _ 1111ildnlg&tiafi•ly.I-fnance also interacts with life Council.('fly('lelk and('onllrlunily I)LVCI— vu1kuC •, opmellt.'l e police►Illlclioll is cIIIT'elllly 1'emotely lociiied in-1,O(Il),(h4ue•foot Iellllx)I;Uy faclli- COMMUNITY 4, S:, Iles at it school site in moor itk ill(1;It(he Bast Valley I.aw I )j(•elnent I.ICfhly i►l'fhonsand DEVELOPMENT Oaks ()IICC this ol><rltion is completely relocalc•(I in the('fly.it has the option oleither Ileing PUBLIC Included or not Included fn the civic Wild' for security reasollS:tlxi ol)eurlional hours, this SERVICES olx•rahon will remain,ell-collmined.I.l:lison personnel could Ile I(xated ill the puhhc services zone of Ilse('fly poll it total co-location is not leasfhle due to site consl►aims _-- _- Demd•d dfa"rams for each drparUnrnt i:In he bound fn SCOW))11 i • MOORPARK SPACE NEEDS STUDY Leach Mounce Architects I - 4 FINAL DRAFT 3/07/00 NI/;W"IN HOUSI?" FUNCTIONS SI'A('I(;S7'ANUARDS New ('ity hall resident services to be brou"ht inlo the Space stand;uds arr Ih0 huilding blocks fiont which Ihr Space Needs ati• huilt I hey.Wl it St;tntlaitf I' 011I0talional new, tun"term civic center Iltcility ati units. I.roil stand;«'d,are file support 100 each wutk Space. Slura"c area and l)tretin"room. I here ole illusttaliol)s of many ul Ihr standard, l)1 the,ecltun. ('0nytostte standards me;l cul)thinatiun of units • I (dice I><•plurrd in Ihr('ivic('inlet • ('untnuuuly I h•vrlopnunt will hill)"('ity I:n"il)rer- in"and Builtlin"Xc Safi ly stalf,in to City 111111 _ • n I l i"hway hilrul held Office will Ik added in run- µutruun with Ihr Police Ihputunrrn W \ o ° 1 0 Nu;pier projection ran Ix;t prrtrrt mirror of the t't t \.lie bill Ih0 lute" lrrnt ,pace projrrtions Sine to terord Ihr � runrm undrt:;landil)g ul how file('ity wants to grow its civic 1•uncti0ns. I lowever.should file City decide to p'0- crc(I will)in-house Building and Salety and I{nginreriltg -- 8' 0" — 16-10" Services in the luture. additional space would nut be I needed over 111;t1 Provided lot-Collinict Services. Unit Standard Composite Standard Many Ilutctions which may he Supplied by City stalf in 01110' cities arr provided it) Moorpark by private con- IracQns.Should the city decide it is a1 file henrlil of the Moorpark ciuiens,other nt•,tiot functions ntay he brought "in house This would change Ihr Spare nrrds.'I he spare Standard;supplied with Ibis document can be applied to I'ItOJI"C'I'MNS newly identified I•tuure functions as well. The ptoieclions arr for daft and spare.I)nailed lists of I'll netions iutd e(Ittipntenl were developed Pile list is sunuua- rved into spares.SuppolYin"detail includes dest"n notes and guidelines.staliin".spier,fillniuue.parking and site rryuirrntenls. Below IS a Sample e><uacted From Section IV - Projections. SPACE SHORT TERM NEED LONG TERM NEED REMARKS SI•^' 1PTl.• 7d 511111 Sulll[[i ENAII.ly A. 11TH T4w[nt H1wmiq Ar4.l ...1.. .,, i.n.J•.ni...vJ N I1•'.uilli�il S1J Al. lily CA Cxtll 06 (xy (Ay ('L'dC kaUlrw[ .•(. 7 Work Room Short web I nru rr I'nhk Wu k•.8 Cumuuunly tivrv•as>Itdl Snared space 195 Work counter 50 4 12 48 Mail benJlu Cop,el large 58 70 1 70 Formslolage 61 3 3 g Fax machine 72 1 s 1 1© norurt,ent shredder 73 10 1 10 Worktable open 22 40 1 4U h MOORPARK SPACE NEEDS STUDY Leach Mounce Architects 1 - 5 FINAL DRAFT 3/07/00 til!()It'1' '1'1�;It111 c�k 1.()N(: 'I'I,;IKM !'I,ANti S7'A AlZ1: FINAL DRAFT 3/07/00 C o S •r S I he coil r,tinrut,s for file shrnt and luny term development are difficult to hrin�info congiarisun I he short lt,f of COST SCENARIOS hits a,-iven site,exi,ung huildinU,and it ,upulation to ntal.e ecunomicfl re,ulution the tif,l priority t,%t,n over file space sl;mdaid,which air nut economical to extend to all Staff in the shaft ICI III. I lie 1 0111 li 111 ha,no,pecilic site There arc many possible combinations ur time of cim:iion. Neverthe-les".[lie auempt wits nrule to ahon the two info one Co.,.[approach. Huth a detailed but those listed below are starting and broad hrush were used un the Short l I In Option,. file broad brush approach proved to he flit, nfure const,n a- points. live Ifnure expensive)and wits used. I he hioad brush approach was use on the I.unglefm. SHORT TERM Option A Option B MINIMUM 370,768 'i.Cl� u�1'' ' y, �3 {"3 ,� '' sy t• ' OPTION C "tv+s .r!.. ..! ,. L.. !�.•t/!�•4? '�t r ' f �T•11� a 'r�C,' 664 ON' MEDIUM 444,454 �N: l1tX 'rtir� t1� 66,086 OPTION A i' N. r .t , .: .18' MAXIMUM 556,990 444,454 556,990 370,768 OPTION B LONG TERM LONG TERM - New Building +. New Site MINIMUM $5,144,695 CITY HALL Buildings Site Work Facility MEDIUM $9,728,510 TOTAL FACILITY , CITY HALL POLICE ; YARD Y 1r ;6 9 .:... Including A. B. C.1-5, D, E.1-2, F 1-28 G 3,881,521 1,263,174 5,144,695 MAXIMUM $11,886,953 Council Chambers 506,400 - 506,400 CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS + � z .k POLICE plus Holding&Communications C 6 Police 81 A% 2,625,856 689,542 3,315,398 CITY YARD C !Holding 11.3% 672,870 672,870 HIGHWAY PATROL C 8 Communications Option 7.3% 334,908 334,908 Including MOORPARK SPACE NEEDS STUDY Leach Mound Architects 1 - 7 FINAL DRAFT 3/07/00 TWO S'FORY COMPAK1,A) '1'0 ONI? S'FORY COST The long lermphnn show one story buil/lntrs on a hypothetical site that is re;rsonahly level and rrctangul;u in shape. If*it is not trasihle to ayuire enough property to build it one story suurture or the topography i, innoie steeply sloping then two story buildings would he the appropriate solution. •fhe buildink,gross-up t.rctor t()' :'two story buildin.- would he 14'/(.,which is 514 mote than the 211/, shrnk n liir it one story building(lue to the stairs,elevators, mechanical ducts,addi- tional janitors spaces,electrical rooms an(1 lobby space. •62,659 sf x .05= 3,133 additional st'fora two story building- 3.133x1'x$150=$939,885 •land savings for two story buildings is estimated at 401/.of 62,651)- 62.659st'x.40=25,061 sf(a) $14/sf=$350,891) •Net additional cost for two story buildings on smaller land area-$588,995 fA, �t ,� e., r MOORPARK SPACE NEEDS STUDY Leach Mounce Architects 1 - 8 Moorpark Space Needs Study Feral 317100 NEW BUILDING & NEW SITE DEVELOPMENT ESTIMATE the costs include furnishings&contingency See the NEW CONSTRUCTION AREA COST TABL E The costs represented are for concept comparison only and do nor reflect the detail or market conditions that may exist at the Ionia this project Is bid Cost of the land or professional fees are not included In this estimate. This Conceptual Estimate uses NEW CONSTRUCTION AREA COS] FABLE LONG TERM - New Building UNIT Buildings Site Work Site Facility ID Unit Uescri tton Unit Cost St Total Unit cost sf Total Total $ 150 s.f. x 4,548 682,232 $8 s.f. x 59,1 17 472.937 1,155,169 Council Chambers $ 150 s.f x 3,376 506.400 506,400 �!ArQ�T=Y!4111 1RK'/,}}UM��liR4te011RQ�!$1J1 i 001 10"Moft a,s:,t $ 132 s f. x 3,382 446,474 $8 S.f. x 12,951 103.608 550,082 F Qr0!'ADMINI¢1RA,AYE'_SHRVJQK%%J"*AgMW 71; ,�► ' °� x;�a��iTt r7 si t(. ± to $ 132 s.f. x 7,427 980,404 $8 S.f. x 23,903 191.223 1,171,627 �D.:r�9,QOMMUNItY:DHVHgOPtWHNT �xakitt�1 .��jS. s't<:h ass;3:� k'Jyllkr<}r,u:��:�ce`:tt.t�;. Current City Hall operations $ 132 s f. x 5,933 783,220 $8 s.f. x 22,388 179.104 962,324 Rullding&Safety 8 Engineering $ 132 S.f. x 3,581 412,629 $8 S f x 13.512 108.096 580,1'15 A54"-PUBW0jIW0RK8' . :. °. i•�dlaM41�2i* o! - ��' l�ibrw :p;r�< t. $ 132 s.f. x 2,077 274,219 $8 s.f. x 8,623 68,985 343,203 $ 132 s.f. x 1,836 242,342 $8 S.f x 7,677 61,413 303,756 $8 s.f. x 9,726 77,808 77,808 CI rY HALL TOTAL. 32,161 4,387,921 157,897 1,263,174 5.651,095 a. Holding $330 s I. x 2,039 672.870 x 672,870 Connnunlcallons(;011ie( $252 S I. x 1,329 334.908 x 334,908 Police Department $ 118 S.f. x 14,752 2,625,856 $8 S.f, x 86,193 689,542 3,315.398 POLICE 101 Al 18,120 3,633,634 86,193 689.542 4,323.176 $90 s.1 x 9,341 840,690 $6 s.f. x 71,288 427,728 1,268,418 n=. $ 150 s.f. x 3,037 455,484 $8 s.f. x 23,598 188,782 644,265 wt'° r..gY�1 '(:.� :•;1a,;.'r_.,;.�,;z: .fL'<?t. .�� ii��jSl.'+y. '" ;,jir FAA-11BI T A-? Leaoh Mounce Architeots 1 Moorpark Space Needs Study Final 3/7/00 NEW CONSTRUCTION AREA COST TABLE Building Site New construction costs are reflected in this table. FF&E usually is more � �'y;?" '. Ott '^ in new versus a remodel because of less reuse of existing items. The r. h.A, ) unknowns are fewer and the contingency is lower than in remodels } < a r ��'�'Y.Y•� � a Construction Type - 10.0% 10.0% Public Meeting & Executive New Construction 125.00 12.50 12.50 150 7.00 0.70 8 Executive Plan Alteration 40.00 4.00 4.00 48 Executive Remodel 25.00 2.50 2.50 30 Administration New Construction 110.00 11.00 11.00 132 7.00 0.70 , 8 Administration Plan Alteration 30.00 3.00 3.00 36 New Statt Toilets 70.00 7.00 7.00 84 Administration Remodel 15.00 1.50 1.50 18 Modular 40.00 4.00 4.00 1 48 5.00 0.50 6 Public Safety New Construction 100.0% 148.11 14.81 14.81 178 7.00 0.70 8 Administration 81.4°x° 125.00 12.50 12.50 150 - - Holding 11.3°x° 275.00 27.50 27.50 330 - Communications 7.3°x° 210.00 21.00 21.00 252 - Highway Patrol New Construction 100.0% 125.00 12.50 12.50 150 7.00 0.70 8 Maintenance 75.00 7.50 7.50 90 5.00 0.50 6 `1 Leach Mounce Architects 2 MOORPARK LONG TERM PLAN OPTION CITY HALL Final 3-7-00 • i .ry. .�r� 5 r G:.r,Tk"��.yi i 7:'tom � i •'�. 2 It N . I ,I, ON I tk f e' K 4' 1%a nt ar `' iJ Ent r ;Ir l}ir p�err.* r•t a � +�r g�� . I 4 SC` •F`�.s 'Y�� 1 rsa� ry ,. ,y ... , ;;. y' I _ODDy .D Plan A City Council i City Manager B-Gry Clerk/Human Resources �:. C t-C a Administrative Services D-Community Development L— — — -- -- — - — -- — — -- -- --. _ J — ■ E Public Works ■ F,community Services Site Plan ® Dpen Office v-L— MOORPARK CITY HALL SITE PLAN CITY HALL PLAN Site Needs Land Parking Building Cry Nall 3 65 acres 234 spaces 32.176 FXf11131T A- Leach Mounce Architects MOORPARK LONG TERM PLAN OPTION POLICE Final 3-7-00 Minor Street ter' I I Heli I I I � I I �J X31 I ! " ►P I ^�;u �^ 1.000Y PUBLIC ENTRY { ® I♦ C 6.Ponce H-Hlyhway Patrol l I Open Orrice L. I Major Street Site Plan -- Floor Plan Site Needs Land Parking Building , n- Police 1 96 acres 65 spaces 18.120 i Highway Patrol 48 acres 29 spaces 3.037 I TATA6 244ereee 94epeeee " 's' CX1flF31l A-4 MOORPARK POLICE SITE PLAN MOORPARK POLICE FLOOR PLAN Leach Mounce Architects Charles Street co co, t- o Pag•(L� Mav�PAiLk L`- C 10 M,W-A r COAL. NORTH High Street (D Poindexter Avenue 7) 0 "_ First Street POR. TRACT L, RANCHO SIMI Tax Rate Area ":)11-C)b 10066 ieee6 10039 —o 02 T V I r> . S W COR 5W COP LOT u 5Ri45 LOT 6 10i.54• 154.#7' 1541 5, 23i 34 -�02 a' 2 - - - 4 r.,sb6�db� .(17 0 22902--- Y 0 —— I I �o. S10 /02.82 5 RM37 1 : '��Z / _ i.64-At C _ a •rill N� '7 I ,(3(]p ' Ir L21' ,V/q /q5 PO I !.04 At I C6� a 'Ln` k—— 2 e e 3 —_ / 7' vI U U 1 L P ti ro I *I t c.45A n 319At- 1P 0 :0,♦ lake' C Y v ! J 6II�n7 I_ 11- !ti l�nV C fl 0 i0 K JI 4-f�A� I 3�9Ar Ip N ' /� a Tract 3 9 08)1512 W � f -- t0 a•_ - 175 i 'id ---,- - ------ --- - - - - - - suooa7oos•229.07' 168 70 `, /. HWY 1 18 �- 0.(MOORPARK)"3� •? '(HWY.231 ' AVENUE`-- 0q7 - - -4- - - - - - - I-- -- �. -- GISLER PARCEL USE SQUARE OWNERSHIP fn ,1= FOOTAGE < = m C 6 City Public works Field office 10 096 CITY 70 8 Residential 6 341 PRIVATE R N 9 Vacant 10 500 RDA t4 Residence 15.839 RDA 17 Mobiie Hcrre Park 45 302 PRIVATE u 22.24 Library ParKirg Lot 2 874 (IIIIIIIIIIIIIII11m 25 Library 23.870 IIIlIIIIIIIIIII11w 26,30 Civic Center 173 478 CITY 27 Retail Center 14 880 PRIVATE RR Tract Vacant 1 52 acres CITY TOTAL 8.48 Acres �„4,ri,-1,,,,,�,,,,._ -11 CITY OF MOORPARK aaa.m�Cou"suvrvo.rs 0.ks 00 Par Lot U"Poindexter SubrrR.M 13k.5,Pg.5 L am '°VIMn EXHIBIT A-6 Y... M.L.Wicks Sub. R.M. Bk 5, Pg.37 NOTE Assessor's 810CA Numbers Shown In ErIIpses Assessors Parcel Nutn6*,s Shown in C,rcres Rancho Simi. R.M. Bk.3. Pa. 7 .v J= m N C Q Charles Street co CL o 0 NORTH High Street a Q L Q L O Poindexter Avenue o ml ( First Street - - - - - - r - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - SPRING STREE w .1 0 > $� i j U6. / t Patio C- �_ n 6 Ir r�6 Helistbp Moorpark Civic MINOR STREET -- -- -- -- -- -f-acitities-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 010 30 60 100 SITE PLAN EXHIBIT A-8 Nov. 30, 2000 Leach Pounce Architects arctutecture planning interiors rffS lwarl Orry �f051 i56]577 I sw)u)a.�:�Irlor n,•)]00] �r ,f OSI SSi rY75 C) X C)iLL-j L) x Vf to of N Sp— _._AQAo RINL. ----------- --- -------- ---------- uj MIS mr now AWE k.,ff ms oft 7 !'M'sr MINOR MINOR -STR jw 2®r REAUGNMENT OP7M I REAUaAlCHT 0"�ft 2 BM AYM WAU11M C zitf W Oily 0. C, W.Ln LLJ w:&n ft.Cmd sr -- -------- MINOR S MINOR jr i j I � I —•-- EKALICNMENT OP71ON 3 UGNMEWT OPTION 4 RANCHO SIMI EXHIBO-rA - 9---- Tax Rate Area 512 - 15 V.1 R 19 W 10 E) f 10054 16 10007 10057 A O 10066 10076 Itl S.PR R o' i sc' -sN7l ' i1 1119 38.1e 7o NELY CDR 1 I 76 N73°,2'WE / jPNtR.J, 1 VI N I I . ✓ y9rr j 3190/401 - 56 Ac _ - -r - 4:8 -P-TRACT ' 902 e I 1266-1 FI // Parl 1 (771 21 PM 2 I 11 PAR 3 ,^,�� Par 10 I �7) I 4.0IAc 2.24Ac e I 140' w Por IH Pr�aous Poc No. !7021P 32 sa3 >s y / 5 I � � io /• /9 I�= 400 I 512-150-01 o R xQ 24 - 2 74 //s 24 02;z 1 o I F�JyN N 21PAf 2 SEE DETAIL I 74.3 48' I " 43lK4,/r34 rb°3t'29}r - �' /SZd 9 21 RSIS 44 Q I.164C. 1 , 784Ac. 1 1 36.03 Ac - ! i � t X0\1 a 1 W _ TRACT Aee4ss 0/`� � 5561 6,AJ AG o ^ �6oye N`531 s 1 D I 2636 19 RS 52 ( 18 Q. i) 2.94Ac P1. 6 -3-3-01T—1 t91 30 (IR 05) �1 1 66 -� (1/9b. -0 c JN I B k. ' 1L 14200/'44 P 3�� Zs 3�3q� � �2 316X6.4 fi I I 513 SI 1, S05vy6e �_ 35 _1_4336 725 _ T _v-R Z - R=31 35 46RS42 — — — — P — — — 4 3- - 1 - - 1117.38 _ 0-3869f33d- N I 38 9 0- of M 9 1O 70 _ 4014-- / I !PM / 1 a 0 N O �O 0 lS.II/VhOh'I:ISfaCF CITY OF MOORPARK � VjTII JT��E:J!'OAS '` ,�` ""` Assessor's Mop Bk.512 , P¢ I5 ck 1w1,1bers Shown In Ellipses County of Ventura, Calif. gel Numbers Shown in Circles _ its _ 410. '� � gyp_• � �r, "•"_' vf y. s.V}�r a areb..w�+.a'•:::-"""'',•...r..'.�:/il�iwif►�•.�c► .�� �;���r CITY � . / i• i• i::!�!Y,YAtl'1:'V's� Y sy�r'•:ii:at «iipt:?te,^�•:fra. .-..+{.:`• ,• �-• r� � � • •!.' + t �"�.�•� • � ..tea... •:. ;.�„�...i ,`wMfii! t R�tL:'. }c ••• � , '! �I j :i.r• . 4)1,.f.y.. :��.�•' ;i. ,erg;.1. .y'.:;.y.' J: s��' ♦ L oil i ti � '.•...�1�s� � ':Y�,��..t,,., fir. . .,.e � •• i'k•� y -T , A APPENDIX B EXHIBIT B- 1 Proposed financing plan from USbancorp/ Piper Jaffray and Urban Futures , Inc . 17 �bancorp Piper Jaffray. SUITE 220C 345 Califoma Stree: San Franciscc. CA 9-110­262':_ 4'�_984-3600 October ?001 Mr. Hugh Rile-, Assistant Cite Manaser Cite of Moorpark 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark. CA 930"! Dear Mr. Rile•: 1: is trul-, a pleasure to present the following financial analysis to the Cite and Redevelopment AgencN of Moorpark. This analysis is intended to provide your City Councii and your office with a preliminary view of the credit packages that we hope to present to the rating agencies and municipal bond insurers on your behalf. Based on our due diligence review. the credit position of both the Cite and Agency is excellent. We believe that the Agency can prudently raise upwards of S 10 million for redevelopment improvements. including the Public Safery facility. The City is also in a very solid financial position. We are reasonably certain that the On- can raise the requisite funds to complete the Civic Center undertaking. hank you again for this Opportunity to work with the City and Agencv of Moorpark. Bes- . art: Curran Manazinu Director Public Finance Nonaeposit investment oroaucts are -to, tnsured by the FDIC. are not oeoosits o- otne• ool+oations o• o- gjaranteec b: J.S Bank National Association Or its affiliates. anc nvoive -vestment nsKS. incwdmg possible joss of the pnncioai amount mvestec. Securities oroducts anc services are o'tered through U.S. Bancorp Pioer„affray Inc member SIPC and NYSE. Inc.. a suosidiary of U.S Bancorc TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Power Point of Proposed Moorpark Redevelopment Agency, Series 2001 Bond Financing II. Summary of Financial Analysis for Moorpark Redevelopment Agency, Series 2001 Bond Financing III. Moorpark Redevelopment Agency, Series 2001 Bond Financing Cashflows and Financial Model Financing Presentation to the City of Moorpark Redevelopment Agency For the Series 2001 Tax Allocation Bond Financing bancorp October 22, Zool Piper jaffray City of Moorpark Redevelopment Agency *The Assessed Value in the Project Area has Averaged over 7% Annual Growth Since 1995 •The Assessed Value in the Project Area has Averaged Annual Growth of 6.6% Since the Agency's Last Bond Issue in 1999 *The Current Assessed Value in the Project Area is over $500,000,000 *As a Result, Tax Increment Revenues have Grown to $2.6 Million City of Moorpark Redevelopment Agency 2002 Assessed Value $525,655,494 Less Base Year (1988-89) $264,798,987 Incremental Value $260,866,507 Incremental Revenue $2,634,752 (Tax Rate 1.01 %) City of Moorpark Redevelopment Agency Historical Assessed Value 550,000,000 - --- - ----- ---•__ �_._ 500,000,000 F4 450,000,000 400,000,000 S � I _ r 350,000,000 §i_ 300,000,000 250,000,000 200,000,000 t3' 150,000,000 -- - - - _ --- --- 100,000,000 --, 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 w. City of Moorpark Redevelopment Agency I N 0 M M *Due to the Growth in Tax Increment Revenues, current Coverage is strong at 2.44%. Gross Tax Revenues $2,6349752 Less Housing Set Aside $5269950 County Tax Admin. Fee $52,695 Senior Revenue Sharing Agreements $558,238 = Pledged Tax Revenues $194969869 Debt Service on the 1999 Bonds 614 082 Coverage 2.44% City of Moorpark Redevelopment Agency Revenues Available for New Bonds: Pledged Revenues $2,107,801 Less Sr. Obligations $610,993 Balance $1,496,868 Available Based on 125% Coverage $1,197,495 Less Series 1999 Bonds $614,082 Available for New Bonds $583,413 Pledged Revenuesand Other Agency Revnues $2,301,537 Less Sr. Obligations and Series 1999 Bonds $1,225,015 Less Subordinate Obligations $378,258 Balance $531,007 Available for New Bonds $531,007 6 City of Moorpark Redevelopment Agency *This Financing will Take Advantage of Solid Assessed Value Growth in the Project Area over the Last 5+ years. *The Series 2001 Bonds will Produce over $ 10 Million for New Projects *Debt Service from the Series 2001 Bonds will Wrap Around That of the Outstanding Series 1999 Bonds to Create Level Debt Service Throughout the Life of the Financings City of Moorpark Redevelopment Agency Series 1999 Bond Debt Service 1,250,000 1,150,000 1,050,000 - - 950,000 -— -- - _ — 850,000 -- — - - - _ 750,000 - -- - - - -- — 650,000 ---- - _ _ 550,000 450,000 350,000 — '~ 250,000 '� N M et � co ►� oo a� O r- N M � O co ►� oo rn O •— N M tt � O � N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N M• x 1.250.000.00 1,150,000.00 1.060.000.00 950.000.00 850.000.00 750,000.00 650,000.00 550.000.00 450.000.00 350,000.00 City of Moorpark Redevelopment Agency Series 2001 Bonds Debt Service 250.000.00 ..2p�1 + 2�2 ��� Z�a 20oy 2006 Zook 2ooa 2009 X0,0 20,, 2012 20\� 2�1� 2�a� X0`6 20`� 2�,9 202 021.. 022 2 O�y9 2 .,OZA 2 X25 2 .: X26= `L 021 'L ,. `t$ 20 ;..29. 20 9� 20 Cit y of Moorpark Redevelopmeot Agency 1999 and 2001 Bonds Debt Service Series , 1,250,000.00 1,050,000,00 950,000.00 850,000-00 x r 750,000.00 650,000-00 550,000.00 , Y r �aa ,3•x.th��1 ', a, .;�� 4 .��`�� .fi; � gym.���..�.' ,��—_�'-C �'.af�'•#,. -..- � 450,000.00 r" �& 1l�- 5:33> uc , :fir-~ '�i 350,000.00 s wr .. . - - ;, r ^ N 5 Nr' N N N N N No D o lqy O tJ g N N N N cat N 250,000.00 p op N N N O0 0 S N Ban ds ■Series 199 9 Bond Senes U City of Moorpark Redevelopment Agency Tax Increment Revenues Available for New Debt Service Based on No Growth in Assessed Value Fiscal Year Available Revenues 2002 $531,007 2018 $789,896 2019 $1,427,482 2030 $1,704,471 1 1 1 1 . � 1 ' 1 1 � � ' ' 1 i 1 1 � 1 " 1 r :1 • 1 � z�. ��." _ - ��r 1 �� _ s a'"�-i�Lr ...cam ��£ �" r- � . . f ,� ! �:' � r. - �y � �-'_ ���• �: 6. t - 1 1 1 • • 1 • ' :• • • ::• �-•• • �•• •■ S• • ll 1 ••■ • • City of Moorpark Redevelopment Agency Uses of Tax Increment 20°,° 20% <, 2% 8% 6% 21% 23% ❑ Housing Set Aside(20%) ■ County Tax Admin Fee ❑Senior Pass Throughs ❑ Series 1999 Bond Debt Service(1) ■ Subordinate Pass Throughs ■Agency Administration ■ Series 2001 Bonds Debt Service City of Moorpark Redevelopment Agency -M M I Projected Uses of Agency Revenues (Assuming 3% Growth in Increment) 12,000,000 10,000,000 Represents One _ _T_ime Payment from 8,000,000 — - t e County 6,000,000 —4,000,000 — —2,000,000 ,. w tp N m 0. o g o $ $ g g $ g o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FE Revenues of Agency ■Series 2001 Debt Service o Series 1999 Debt Service ■Housing Set Aside ■Subordinate Rev Sharing Agreements ■Senior Rev Sharing Agreements Agency Administration Fees — ■County Administration Fees October 22, 2001 City of Moorpark Redevelopment Agency Tax Allocation Bonds, Series 2001 Summary of Financial Analysis The following presents a financing scenario for the City of Moorpark Redevelopment Agency (the "Agencv") for various improvements within their Redevelopment Project Area (the "Area''). After conversations with the City, the Agency and the Citv's Financial Advisor, Urban Futures Inc. and reviewing the appropriate documents, a preliminary model for a proposed Series 2001 tax allocation financing was constructed that will meet the following goals: 1. Utilize the impressive growth in assessed value within the Project Area over the last few years to issue additional bonds to the currently outstanding Series 1999 Bond Issue. The Series 2001 bonds will provide funds to pay for new improvements within the Project area. Structure a financing, whose annual debt service. when combined with that of the Series 1999 Bonds will have at least 125% coverage from Series 2002 tax increment revenues. 3. Structure debt service on the Series 2001 Bonds that "wraps around" that of the outstanding Series 1999 Bonds. This will provide for level annual debt service throughout the life of the financings. 4. Structure a financing that provides sufficient funds after the payment of debt service to meet all administrative needs of the Agency. Redevelopment Project Areas and Tax Allocation Financing Redevelopment Agencies are a tool utilized by cities to eliminate blighted areas. In order to finance the elimination of blight, agencies undertake tax allocation financings. When a City establishes a project area, the year in which it is established is its base year and thus its first year to allocate taxes from the project area. After the Project Area has been established. any incremental increase in assessed value over the base year is considered the incremental value of the Project Area. The tax revenues generated from the incremental value increase over the base year multiplied by the current tax rate are tax increment revenues. These revenues less any proceeds to the low and moderate income housing fund and other pre-established tax revenue sharing agreements with other taxing City of Moorpark Redevelopment Agenev Page agencies(discussed below). are to be used by the Redevelopment Agency for uses within the Project Area. Using the Moorpark Redevelopment Agency as an example, how tax increment is generated is illustrated below: 2002 Assessed Value S525.655,494 Less Base Year Value (1988-89) S264.798,987 Incremental Value S260,866.507 I Incremental Revenue (Incremental Value . $2,634,752 Multiplied by the Tax Rate (1.01%)) Below is a description of the allocation of incremental tax detailed above. Low and Moderate Income Housing Set Aside Redevelopment Agency Law stipulates that at least 20°,o of tax increment revenues must be set aside and put into the housing set aside fund(the "H.S.A. Fund"). Monev in the housing fund must be used to increase the stock of Iow and moderate income housing within the Citv. Senior Revenue Sharing Agreement Redevelopment Agencies often enter into agreements with other taxing entities as a way to allocate the incremental tax revenues generated in a Project Area. Senior Revenue Sharing .Agreements are paid prior to any outstanding bond's debt service payments. The following is a list of the taxing entities that have entered into Senior Revenue Sharing Agreements with the Moorpark Redevelopment Agency. I. Ventura County 2. Ventura County Superintendant of Schools Mosquito .Abatement District (.whose successor agency is the Cite of Moorpark) Subordinate Revenue Sharing Agreements Subordinate Revenue Sharing Agreements are also a way for taxing agencies and the Agency to allocate incremental tax revenues generated in the Project Area. However. these agreements have a subordinate lien on tax increment revenues to both Senior Revenue Sharing Agreements and debt service due on outstanding bond issues. Although these agreements have a subordinate lien on tax increment, they must be paid in full every year. A Redevelopment Agency cannot issue so many bonds that the annual debt service payments leave insufficient tax revenues to fully pay the subordinate revenue sharing agreements. The following is a list of the taxing entities that have entered into Subordinate Revenue Sharing Agreements with the Moorpark Redevelopment Agencv. 1. ?Moorpark Unified School District Cin of Moorpark Redevelopment Agency Page 3 2. Ventura County Community College District Administration Fees A portion of tax increment revenues also go to pay administration fees. Approximately 2°/0 of the Moorpark Redevelopment Project Area tax increment pays the County for a tax collection administration fee. Additionally, a portion of tax increment, $211.000 in 2002, is paid to the Redevelopment Agency for the administration of the Project Area. However, the County Administration Fee has a Senior Lien on tax revenues to anv outstanding debts, while the Agency Administration Fee is paid after all outstanding debts and revenue sharing agreements are paid. Available Revenues for Series 2001 Bonds The factors above contribute to the total amount of revenues that will be available to make debt service payments on both the Series 1999 Bonds and the proposed Series 2001 Bonds. After reviewing the above mentioned factors a financing was structured for the Series 2001 Bonds. with maximum annual debt service payments that would be limited to the lesser of the following two constriants. 1. 125% Coverage on all Outstanding Debt Service: As stated in the Bond Indenture of the Official Statement for the Series 1999 Bonds. to issue any parity debt. debt service coverage from pledged revenues on both the Series 1999 Bonds and any additional Bonds must be at least 125%. Pledged revenues in this constraint consist of tax increment revenues (for Rating Agency purposes no growth is assumed and revenues are held constant at 2002 levels) less the Housing Set Aside Amount, less the amount to pay Senior Revenue Sharing Agreements. less the County Tax Administration Fee. 2. 100% Coverage on all Outstanding Debts and Agreements of the Agency: Available revenues to pay debt service in this constraint are the total amount of tax increment revenues (growing at a very modest 3% annually) less the Housing Set Aside .Amount. less the amount to pay Senior Revenue Sharing Agreements. less the Amount to pay Subordinate Revenue Sharing Agreements. less Series 1999 Bond annual Debt Service, less the County Tax Administration fee, less the Redevelopment Agency Administration fee. The remaining revenues are available for debt service on the Series 2001 Bonds. By adhering to the lesser of the above two constraints. the Agency will insure that there is at least 125% coverage on the Series 2001 Bonds. that all of the taxing entities receive their portion of the increment revenues and that the Redevelopment Agency will be paid their administration fee. '3i „s .f Ciry of Moorpark Redevelopment Agency Page 4 Series 2001 Bonds Structure — Debt Service Wrapping Around the Outstanding Bonds After reviewing the above constraints, it was determined that the best structure for the Series 2001 Bonds would be to have debt service that "wrapped" around that of the outstanding Series 1999 Bonds. The Series 1999 Bond's debt service is approximately 616,000 annually (actual debt service is approximately 5770,000, but 20% is paid from the low and moderate income housing fund) and runs only through 2018. Since most new tax allocation issues are 30 year financings, we have structured the Series 2001 Bonds as a 30 year financing with mostly interest coming due through 2018 and the bulk of the principle maturing between 2019 and 2030. This structure is "back loaded," so that when combined with the Series 1999 Bonds, total debt service is level. Bond Issue Based on the lesser of the above mentioned debt service constraints and a "back loaded" structure, it was determined that the Moorpark Redevelopment Agency could support a 511,09 ,000 bond issue. A bond issue of this size would generate approximately S10.020,990 in bond proceeds that could be used by the Redevelopment Agency for projects in the Project Area. The difference between the bond issue size and the bond issue proceeds is due to the cost of issuance of the bonds. The cost of issuance include bond council, financial advisor, trustee, underwriting, rating agency and other miscellaneous fees. In addition, the cost of issuance will fund a debt service reserve fund and pay the cost of bond insurance. We anticipate bond insurance will cost approximately 80 basis points of the bond issue, however bond insurance will provide the financing with a AAA rating and very low interest rates. The Series 2001 Bonds will have a debt service reserve fund that will be on parity with that of the Series 1999 Bonds. Parity reserve funds means that the combined balance in each fund must be equal to maximum annual debt service of both the Series 1999 and the Series 2001 Bonds. When combined, maximum annual debt service on both issues is approximately S1.35 million. The total reserve fund deposit from the Series 1 999 Bonds is currently 5;70.000. therefore the amount needed to be deposited into the Series 2001 Reserve Fund is 5580.000. This amount is approximately half of what would be needed if the reserve funds were not on parity. By being able to make a smaller deposit into the reserve fund. the Agency will receive a larger amount of bond proceeds. The Agency is able to generate such a large amount of bond proceeds even with the above constraints because the market's current interest rates on insured bond issues is extremely low. Due to the Series 1999 Bonds being insured and the stellar assessed value growth in the Project Area, the Series 2001 Bonds should have no trouble being insured by one of the larger monoline insurance companies. Conclusion Incremental tax revenues within the Project Area have grown impressively over the last few years. The increased revenues along with the market's current low interest rates. will allow the Redevelopment Agencv to issue a bond issue that will generate over City o/Moorpark Redeveiopment Agency Pagc S 10 million in bond proceeds to be used on projects within the Project Area. By structuring debt service that wraps around that of the Series 1999 Bonds, total debt service will be level throughout the life of the financings. By keeping debt service level and not growing it over time as the assessed value of the Project Area grows, the Agency is giving itself a cushion in case of a slight decrease in assessed value. This financing is the most appropriate structure for the Agency, because it maximizes the amount of proceeds the Agency can raise today, while remaining conservative in terms of assumed assessed value growth. $11,095,000 City of Moorpark RDA Series 2001 Bonds SOURCES&USES Dated 1210112001 Delivered 1 210 11200 1 SOURCES OF FUNDS ParAmount of Bonds........................................................................................... $11,095,000.00 TOTALSOURCES................................................................................................ $11,095,000.00 USES OF FUNDS BondProceeds..................................................................................................... 10,020,990.94 Deposit to Debt Service Reserve Fund IDSRFI....................................................... 580,192.50 Gross Bond Insurance Premium(80.0 bpl............................................................ 189,034.06 Total Underwriter's Discount (1.350%).............................................................. 149,782.50 Band/Disclosure Counsel..................................................................................... 62,000.00 FinancialAdvisor.................................................................................................. 40,500.00 RatingAgency Fee............................................................................................... 22,000.00 POS/Official Statement........................................................................................ 13,000.00 Miscellaneous...................................................................................................... 10,000.00 Trustee&Counsel Fees....................................................................................... 7,500.00 TOTALUSES....................................................................................................... $11,095,000.00 us Bancorp Piper Jallroy frle- Tabs.sl Series 2001 Max Debt.SINAI E PURPOSE Public finance 101251200112:26 PM Pape 1 $11,095,000 City of Moorpark RDA Series 2001 Bonds DEBT SERVICE SCHEDULE Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P 41 1010112002 75,000.00 2.200% 453,250.00 528,250.00 1010112003 542,250.00 542,250.00 1010112004 10,000.00 2.700% 542,250.00 552,250.00 1010112005 30,000.00 2.850% 541,980.00 571,980.00 1010112006 40,000.00 3.150% 541,125.00 581,125.00 1010112007 40,000.00 3.350% 539,865.00 579,865.00 1010112008 40,000.00 3.550% 538,525.00 578,525.00 1010112009 45,000.00 3.700% 537,105.00 582,105.00 1010112010 45,000.00 3.850% 535.440.00 580,440.00 1010112011 45,000.00 3.950% 533,707.50 578,707.50 1010112012 50,000.00 4.050% 531,930.00 581,930.00 1010112013 50,000.00 4.200% 529,905.00 579,905.00 1010112014 50,000.00 4.300% 527,805.00 577,805.00 1010112015 55,000.00 4.400% 515.655.00 580,655.00 1010112016 55,000.00 4.500% 523,235.00 578,235.00 1010112017 60,000.00 4.600% 520,760.00 580,760.00 1010112018 60,000.00 4.700% 518,000.00 578,000.00 1010112019 680,000.00 4.800% 515,180.00 1,195,180.00 1010112020 710,000.00 4,900% 482,540.00 1,192,540.00 1010112021 745,000.00 5.000% 447,750.00 1,192,750.00 1010112022 785,000.00 5.000% 410,500.00 1,195,500.00 1010112023 815,000.00 5.000% 371,250.00 1,196,250.00 1010112024 865,000.00 5.000% 330,000.00 1,195,000.00 1010112025 905,000.00 5.000% 286,750.00 1,191,750.00 1010112026 950,000.00 5.000% 241,500.00 1,191,500.00 1010112027 1,000,000.00 5.000% 194,000.00 1,194,000.00 1010112028 1,050,000.00 5.000% 144,000.00 1,194,000.00 1010112029 1,100,000.00 5.000% 91,500.00 1,191,500.00 1010112030 730,000.00 5.000% 36,500.00 766,500.00 Total 11,095,000.00 12,534,257.50 23,629,257.50 US Bancorp Piper Affray file- Tabs.sl•Series2001 Max Debl SING1£PUBPOSf Public finance 1012S✓7001 12.26PM Pape 2 r� �t i $11,095,000 City of Moorpark RDA Series 2001 Bonds DEBT SERVICE SCHEDULE YIELD STATISTICS BondYear Dollars............................................................................................................................................ $152,635.83 Averagelife.................................................................................................................................................... 22.770 Years AverageCoupon.............................................................................................................................................. 4.9613934% NetInterest Cost(NICI.................................................................................................................................... 5.0206813% TrueInterest Cost(TIC)................................................................................................................................... 5.0541347% Bond Yield for Arbitrage Purposes.................................................................................................................... 5.0811932% AllInclusive Cost IAIC).................................................................................................................................... 5.2961499% IRS FORM 8038 NetInterest Cost............................................................................................................................................. 4.9613934% WeightedAverage Maturity............................................................................................................................. 22.770 Years US Bancorp Piper Jaffrey Re- Tabs.sf Series 1001 Max Debt SINGLE PURPOSf Public finance 101251200112:26 PM Page 3 b W r •W $11,095,000 City of Moorpark RDA Series 2001 Bonds NET DEBT SERVICE SCHEDULE Date Principal Cnupnn Interest Total P.I DSR Net Now DIS 1010112002 75,000 00 2.7011% 453,250.00 528,250.00 528,250 00 1010112003 542,250.00 542,250.00 542,250.00 1010112004 10.000.00 2.700% 542,250.00 552,250.00 552.250.00 1010112005 30.000.00 2.850% 541,980.00 571,980.00 571,980.00 1010112006 40,000.00 3.150% 541,125.00 581,125.00 581,125.00 1010112007 40,000.00 1350% 539,865.00 579,865.00 579,865.00 1010112008 40.000.00 3.550% 538,525.00 578,525.00 578,525 00 1010112009 45.000.00 3.700% 537,105.00 582,10500 582.105.00 1010112010 45.000.00 3.850% 535,440.00 580,440.00 580,440.00 1010112011 45.000.00 3.950% 533,707.50 578,707.50 578,707.50 1010112012 50,000.00 4.050% 531,930.00 581,930.00 581,930.00 1010112013 50,000.00 4.200% 529,905.00 579,905 00 579,905.00 1010112014 50.000.00 4.300% 527,805.00 511,805.00 577,805.00 1010112015 55,000.00 4.400% 525,655.00 580,655.00 580,655.00 1010112016 55,000.00 4.500% 523,235.00 578,235.00 578,235.00 1010112017 60.000.00 4 600% 520,760.00 580,760.00 580.760.00 1010112018 60,000.00 4.700% 518,000.00 578,000.00 578,000.00 1010112019 680,000.00 4.800% 515,180.00 1,195,180.00 1,195,180.00 1010112020 710,000.00 4.900% 482,540.00 1,192,540.00 1,192,540.00 1010112021 745.000.00 5.000% 447,750.00 1,192,750.00 1,192,750.00 1010112012 785.000.00 5.000% 410,50010 1,195,500.00 1,195,500.00 1010112023 825.000.00 5.000% 371,250.00 1,196,250.00 1,196,250.00 1010112024 865,000.00 5.000% 330,000.00 1,195,000.00 1,195,000.00 1010112025 905,000.00 5.000% 286,750.00 1,191,750.00 1,191,750.00 1010112026 950,000.00 5.000% 241,500.00 1,191,500.00 1,191,500.00 1010112027 1,000.000.00 5.000% 194,000.00 1,194,000.00 1,194,000.00 1010112028 1,050,000.00 5.000% 144,000.00 1,194,000.00 1,194,000.00 1010112029 1,100,000.00 5.000% 91,500.00 1,191,50010 1,191,500.00 1010112030 730,000.00 5.000% 36,500.00 766,500.00 766,500.00 1010112031 1580,192.501 1580,192.501 Total 11,095,000.00 12,534,257.50 23,629.257.50 1580,192.501 23,049,065.00 US aeecoip PQer Afft y fie- rebs.t/Senn 2001 Max Debt.SING1E PURPOSE Pubk f'aence IL12512001 12:26PM Page 4 4" Table 1 City of Moorpark RDA Redevelopment Project Area Fiscal Year Assessed Value Change e 1995-96 352.136.613 1996-97 408,915.260 1612% 1997-98 415,327,260 1 57% 1998-99 434,514,943 4.62% 1999-00 449,056,203 335% 2000-01 497,354,056 10.76% 2001-02 525,665,494 5.69% Base Year 88-89 264,798,987 50.37% Incremental Value 260,866,507 4963% Acreage 1,217 Adoption Date 05-Jul-89 Last Day to Incur Debt 05-Jul-09 Term of Plan 05-Jul-29 Last Day to Collect Revenues 05-Jul-39 Maximum Bonded Indebtedness 60,000,000 Maximum Tax Increment 180,000.000 Growth Assumption 3,00/, Tax Rate Assumption 1.01% Prepared by US Bancorp Piper Jaffray Page 1 10125101 Table 2 City of Moorpark RDA Increment Revenues Less Housing Set Aside Fiscal Year Total Taxable Assumed Tax Revenues Housing Set Revenues Ending Value Growth% Total Increment (1.01%) Aside(20 94.) Less Housing. 2002 525,665,494 260.866,507 2.634.752 526,950 2,107,801 2003 541,435,459 3% 276,636.472 2,794,028 558,806 2,235,223 2004 557,678,523 3% 292,879.536 2,958,083 591,617 2,366,467 2005 574,408,878 3% 309,609.891 3,127,060 625,412 2,501,648 2006 591.641,145 3% 326,842,158 3,301,106 660,221 2.640,885 2007 609,390,379 3% 344,591,392 3,480,373 696,075 2,784,298 2008 627,672,090 3% 362,873,103 3,665,018 733,004 2,932.015 2009 646,502,253 3%, 381,703,266 3,855,203 771,041 3,084,162 2010 665,697,321 3% 401,098.334 4,051,093 810.219 3.240,875 2011 685,874,240 3% 421,075,253 4,252,860 850,572 3,402,288 2012 706,450.467 3% 441,651,480 4,460,680 892,136 3,568.544 2013 727,643.981 3% 462,844.994 4,674,734 934,947 3,739,788 2014 749,473,301 3% 484,674,314 4,895,211 979,042 3,916,168 2015 771,957,500 3% 507,158,513 5.122,301 1,024,460 4,097,841 2016 795,116,225 3% 530,317,238 5,356,204 1,071,241 4,284,963 2017 818,969,712 3% 554,170,725 5,597,124 1,119,425 4,477,699 2018 843,538,803 3% 578,739,816 5,845,272 1,169,054 4,676,218 2019 868,844,967 3% 604,045.980 6,100,864 1,220,173 4,880,692 2020 894,910,316 3% 630,111,329 6,364,124 1,272,825 5,091,300 2021 921,757,626 3% 656.958,639 6,635.282 1,327.056 5,308,226 2022 949,410,354 3% 684,611,367 6,914.575 1,382,915 5,531,660 2023 977,892,665 3% 713,093,678 7,202,246 1,440,449 5,761,797 2024 1,007,229,445 3% 742.430,458 7,498.548 1,499.710 5,998,838 2025 1,037,446,328 3% 772,647,341 7,803,738 1,560,748 6,242,991 2026 1,068,569,718 3% 803.770,731 8,118,084 1,623,617 6,494,468 2027 1100,626,810 3% 835,827,823 8.441,861 1.688,372 6,753,489 2028 1,133,645,614 3% 868,846,627 8,775,351 1,755,070 7,020,281 2029 1,167,654,982 3% 902,855,995 9,118,846 1,823,769 7,295,076 2030 1,202,684,632 3% 937,885,645 9,472,645 1,894,529 7,578,116 2031 1,238,765,171 3% 973,966,184 9,837,058 1,967,412 7,869,647 2032 1,275,928,126 3% 1,011,129,139 10.212,404 2,042,481 8,169,923 2033 1,314,205,970 3% 1,049,406,983 10,599,011 2,119,802 8,479,208 Prepared by US Bancorp Piper Jaffray Page 2 10125101 Table 3 City of Moorpark RDA Calculation of Maximum Debt Service Based on Additional Bonds Test Senior Pass Max. Debt Fiscal Revenues Less Throughs Based Service Based Series 1999 Max.Debt Year Housing Based County Tax on No Growth in Total Pledged on 125% Bond Debt Service for Ending on No Growth Admin Fee Assessed Value Revenues Coverage Service(1) New Bonds 2002 2,107,801 52,695 558.238 1,496,868 1,197,495 614,082 583,413 2003 2,107,801 52.695 558,272 1,496,835 1,197,468 615,716 581,752 2004 2,107,801 52,695 558,306 1,496,800 1,197,440 616,620 580,820 2005 2,107.801 52,695 558.341 1,496,766 1,197,412 612,770 584,642 2006 2,107,801 52.695 558,376 1,496,730 1,197,384 616,134 581,250 2007 2,107,801 52,695 558,413 1.496,694 1,197,355 614,534 582.821 2008 2,107,801 52.695 558.450 1,496.657 1,197,325 616,102 581,223 2009 2.107,801 52,695 558,487 1,496.619 1,197,295 612,830 584,465 2010 2,107,801 52,695 558,526 1,496,581 1,197,265 614,305 582.960 2011 2,107,801 52.695 558,565 1,496.541 1,197,233 614,805 582,428 2012 2,107,801 52,695 558,605 1,496,501 1,197,201 614,330 582.871 2013 2,107,801 52.695 558,646 1,496,461 1,197,168 616,880 580,288 2014 2,107,801 52,695 558,687 1,496,419 1,197,135 614,260 582,875 2015 2,107,801 52,695 558,730 1,496,376 1,197,101 614.665 582,436 2016 2,107,801 52,695 558,773 1,496,333 1,197,066 613.900 583,166 2017 2,107,801 52,695 558,817 1.496,289 1.197,031 615,965 581.066 2018 2,107,801 52,695 558,863 1,496,244 1,196,995 616,665 580,330 2019 2,107,801 52,695 558,909 1,496,198 1,196,958 1,196,958 2020 2,107,801 52,695 558,955 1,496,151 1,196,921 1.196,921 2021 2,107,801 52,695 559,003 1.496,103 1,196,882 1,196,882 2022 2,107,801 52,695 559,052 1,496,054 1,196,843 1,196,843 2023 2,107,801 52,695 559,102 1,496,005 1,196,804 1,196,804 2024 2,107,801 52,695 559,153 1,495,954 1,196,763 1,196,763 2025 2,107,801 52,695 559,204 1,495,902 1,196,722 1,196,722 2026 2,107,801 52,695 559,257 1,495,849 1,196,679 1,196,679 2027 2,107,801 52,695 559,311 1,495,795 1,196,636 1.196,636 2028 2,107,801 52,695 559.366 1,495,740 1,196,592 1,196,592 2029 2,107,801 52.695 559,422 1,495,684 1,196,547 1,196,547 2030 2,107,801 52,695 559,479 1,495,627 1,196,502 1,196,502 2031 2,107,801 52,695 559,538 1,495,569 1,196,455 1,196,455 2032 2,107,801 52,695 559,597 1,495,509 1,196,407 1,196,407 2033 2,107,801 52,695 559,658 1,495,449 1,196,359 1,196,359 (1)Less 20%of debt service funded from the low Income housing fund Prepared by US Bancorp Piper JaNray Page 3 10125101 '1 Table 4 City of Moorpark RDA Calculation of Maximum Debt Service Based on Actual Projected Revenues Revenues Less Housing Subordinate Fiscal Year Based on 3% Other Revenues Senior Pass Pass Pledged Ending Growth in AV to the Agency(1) Throughs Throughs Revenues 2002 2.107,801 193,736 558,238 167,258 1,576,041 2003 2,235.223 199,548 650,665 176,452 1.607,653 2004 2,366,467 205,535 745,865 185,918 1,640,217 2005 2,501.648 211,701 843,921 195,664 1,673.764 2006 2,640,885 218.052 944,917 205,697 1,708.322 2007 2,784,298 224,593 1.048,944 216,026 1,743,922 2008 2,932,015 231,331 1,156,090 226,660 1,780,595 2009 3,084,162 1,238,271 1,266,451 237,609 2,818,374 2010 3,240,875 245,419 1,380,122 248,880 1,857,291 2011 3.402,288 252,782 1,497,203 260,485 1,897,382 2012 3,568,544 260,365 1,617,796 272,432 1,938,681 2013 3,739,788 268,176 1,742,006 284,732 1,981,225 2014 3.916,168 276,221 1,869.942 297,396 2,025,051 2015 4,097,841 284,508 2.001,716 310.434 2,070.198 2016 4.284,963 293,043 2,137,443 323,858 2,116,705 2017 4,477,699 301,834 2,277,241 337,678 2,164,614 2018 4,676,218 310,889 2,421,233 351,907 2,213,967 2019 4,880,692 320,216 2.569,543 366,557 2,264,807 2020 5,091,300 329,823 2,722,303 381,640 2,317,179 2021 5,308,226 339,717 2,879,645 397,169 2,371,129 2022 5,531,660 349,909 3,041,707 413,158 2,426,704 2023 5,761,797 360,406 3,208,630 429,620 2,483,953 2024 5,998,838 371,218 3,380,560 446,568 2,542,927 2025 6,242,991 382,355 3,557,648 464,019 2,603,678 2026 6,494,468 393,825 3,740,048 481,986 2,666,259 2027 6,753,489 405,640 3,927,919 500,484 2,730,725 2028 7,020,281 417,809 4,121,426 519,531 2,797,133 2029 7,295,076 430,344 4,320,738 539,141 2,865.541 2030 7,578,116 443,254 4,526,028 559,332 2,936,009 2031 7,869,647 456,552 4,737,477 580,122 3,008,600 2032 8,169,923 470,248 4,955,268 601,526 3,083,377 2033 8,479,208 484,356 5,179,593 623,565 3,160,406 (1)Includes lease revenues and interest earnings. In addition,a one time payment of$1 million from the County to the Ageny in 2009 Prepared by US Bancorp Piper Jaffray Page 4 10125101 r Table 5 a City of Moorpark RDA Calculation of Maximum Debt Service Based on Actual Projected Growth Revenues Less Series 1999 Bonds and Admin Fees Revenues Revenues Less Series 1999 Less County Available for Less Pass Bonds Debt Less Agency Tax Admin Additional Fiscal Year Throughs Service(1) Admin Fees Bonds 2002 1,576,041 614,082 211,000 52,695 531,007 2003 1,607,653 615,716 217,330 55,881 542,274 2004 1,640,217 616,620 223,850 59,162 554,667 2005 1,673,764 612,770 230,565 62,541 572,224 2006 1,708,322 616,134 237,482 66,022 582,987 2007 1,743,922 614,534 244,607 69,607 599,147 2008 1,780,595 616,102 251,945 73,300 612,587 2009 2,818.374 612,830 259,503 77,104 1,631,328 2010 1,857,291 614,305 267,288 81,022 645,796 2011 1,897,382 614,805 275,307 85,057 661,728 2012 1,938,681 614,330 283.566 89,214 679,139 2013 1,981,225 616,880 292,073 93,495 694,044 2014 2,025,051 614,260 300,836 97,904 714,655 2015 2,070,198 614,665 309,861 102,446 732,792 2016 2,116,705 613,900 319.156 107,124 752,667 2017 2,164,614 615,965 328.731 111,942 770,298 2018 2,213,967 616,665 338,593 116,905 789,896 2019 2,264,807 348.751 122,017 1,427,482 2020 2,317,179 359.213 127,282 1,449,043 2021 2,371,129 369,990 132,706 1,471,264 2022 2,426,704 381,089 138,291 1,494,165 2023 2,483,953 392,522 144,045 1,517,766 2024 2,542,927 404,298 149,971 1,542,090 2025 2,603,678 416,427 156,075 1,567,158 2026 2,666,259 428,920 162,362 1,592,992 2027 2,730,725 441,787 168,837 1,619,616 2028 2,797,133 455,041 175,507 1,647,054 2029 2,865,541 468,692 182,377 1,675,331 2030 2,936,009 482,753 189,453 1,704,471 2031 3,008,600 497,235 196,741 1,734,502 2032 3,083.377 512,152 204,248 1,765,450 2033 3,160,406 527,517 211,980 1,797,343 (1)Less 20%of debt service funded from the low income housing fund. Prepared by US Bancorp Piper Jaffray Page 5 10125101 Table 6 City of Moorpark RDA Revenues Available for Series 2001 Bonds Available Revenues Available Constraint for Series 2001 Based on No Revenues Based Series 2001 Bonds Debt Fiscal Year Growth on 3%Growth Bonds Service Surplus Funds 2002 583,413 531,007 531.007 528,250 2,757 2003 581,752 542,274 542,274 542,250 24 2004 580,820 554,667 554,667 552,250 2,417 2005 584,642 572,224 572,224 571.980 244 2006 581,250 582,987 581,250 581,125 1.862 2007 582,821 599,147 582,821 579,865 19,282 2008 581,223 612,587 581,223 578,525 34,062 2009 584,465 1,631,328 584,465 582,105 1,049,223 2010 582,960 645,796 582,960 580,440 65,356 2011 582.428 661,728 582,428 578,708 83.020 2012 582,871 679,139 582,871 581,930 97,209 2013 580,288 694,044 580,288 579,905 114,139 2014 582,875 714.655 582,875 577,805 136,850 2015 582,436 732,792 582,436 580,655 152,137 2016 583,166 752,667 583,166 578,235 174,432 2017 581,066 770,298 581,066 580,760 189,538 2018 580,330 789,896 580,330 578,000 211,896 2019 1,196,958 1,427,482 1,196,958 1,195,180 232.302 2020 1,196,921 1,449,043 1.196,921 1,192,540 256,503 2021 1,196,882 1,471,264 1,196,882 1,192,750 278,514 2022 1,196,843 1,494,165 1,196,843 1,195,500 298.665 2023 1,196,804 1,517,766 1,196,804 1,196,250 321,516 2024 1,196,763 1,542,090 1,196,763 1,195,000 347,090 2025 1,196,722 1,567,158 1,196.722 1,191,750 375,408 2026 1,196,679 1,592,992 1,196,679 1,191,500 401,492 2027 1,196.636 1,619,616 1,196,636 1,194,000 425,616 2028 1,196,592 1,647,054 1,196,592 1,194,000 453,054 2029 1,196,547 1,675,331 1,196,547 1,191,500 483,831 2030 1,196,502 1,704,471 1,196,502 766,500 937,971 2031 1,196,455 1,734,502 1,196,455 2032 1,196,407 1,765,450 1,196,407 2033 1,196,359 1,797,343 1,196,359 Prepared by US Bancorp Piper Jafi`ray Page 6 10125101 Re : Item 10 . C . MOORPARK CIVIC FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT and FINANCING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS OCTOBER 2001 MOORPARK CIVIC FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT and FINANCING RECOMMENDATIONS The following report outlines staff ' s findings and recommendations for the financing and development of new civic facilities for the City of Moorpark. These facilities include City Hall , Police Services Center and Public Works/Parks Corporation Yard. Exhibits referenced in the report are included in the Appendix. THE FACILITIES In March 2000 the City completed a space needs study. The study was prepared by Leach Mounce Architects of Ventura, California. The Final Report for this Study is the basis for the space and cost requirements that follow. A summary of the study is included in Exhibit A-1 of this report . The evaluation of locations and costs associated with site acquisition are discussed in the second part of the report . CITY HALL SIZE - Based on the Space Needs Study and subsequent information developed by staff, the City' s future needs for the City Council , Council Chambers, City Manager, City Clerk, Human Resources, Administrative Services, Community Development, Public Works (including Building Safety and Engineering) and Community Services will tequire a new, independently developed city hall facility with 32 , 700 square feet and parking space for approximately 230 cars (staff and visitor) on a site containing around 4 . 75 acres . The site size and parking requirements may vary slightly if the new city hall facility is developed in conjunction with other public facilities allowing for shared parking or if the facility is designed as a two story building. A summary of the building and site development estimates is provided in Exhibit A-2 . DEVELOPMENT COST - The estimated cost to design and construct a new city hall building excluding land cost is as follows : Construction $ 5 , 660, 000 Design (10% of construction) $ 566, 000 Admin and Inspection (15% of construction) $ 849, 000 Contingency $ 300, 000 TOTAL $ 7, 375, 000 A Site Plan and Building Floor plan that are suitable for the City Hall facility are included in Exhibit A-3 of this report . Depending on the final site selection, a variety of building footprints including a multiple story structure and site plans could be used. POLICE SERVICES CENTER SIZE - A facility with approximately 18, 200 square feet will be needed for the Moorpark Police Department . An additional 3 , 100 square feet would be needed if the California Highway Patrol is to be located in the new center. The Space Needs study recommends a site containing between 2 . 5 and 3 acres with parking for about 120 vehicles . The space estimates for the Police Department include provisions for administration, possible future communications (dispatch) . No holding facilities are planned. The new facility would also provide space for an Emergency Operations Center. DEVELOPMENT COST - The cost to design and construct the proposed Police Services Center excluding land cost is as follows : Construction (Admin Svcs . ) $ 4 , 400, 000 Construction (Highway Patrol) $ 650, 000 Design (10% of construction) $ 505 , 000 Admin and Inspection (15% of construction) $' 757, 500 Contingency - $ 200 , 000 SUBTOTAL $ 6, 512 , 500 A Site Plan and Building Floor plan that are suitable for the Police Services Center are included in Exhibit A-4 of this report . Depending on the final site arrangement a variety of building footprints and site plans could be designed. PUBLIC WORKS/PARKS CORPORATION YARD SIZE - Based on the Space Needs Study the City will need a site with 1 . 5 to 2 acres for the Corporation Yard. The site will need a building of approximately 9, 400 square feet for operations, storage, street maintenance and public works yard storage; parking for about 50 vehicles for employees and visitors, a materials storage area and a grade separated dumping ramp (allowing direct dumps from trucks to containers) . Fueling facilities may also be included in the 2 plan but not necessarily constructed in the initial phase of development . A summary of the building and site development estimates for the Corporation Yard Facility is provided in Exhibit A-2 . DEVELOPMENT COST - The cost to design and construct the Corporate Yard building and facilities excluding land cost is as follows : Construction $ 1, 275, 000 Design (8% of construction) $ 102 , 000 Admin & Inspection (15% of construction) $ 191, 250 Contingency $ 75, 000 SUBTOTAL $ 1, 643 , 250 DEVELOPMENT COST SUMMARY City Hall $ 7, 375, 000 Police Services Facility $ 6, 512 , 500 Corporation Yard $ 1, 643 , 250 GRAND TOTAL $15, 307,750 BUILDING SITES CITY HALL After a study of numerous possible sites for new City Hall and discussions with the City Council, site planning has recently been directed to the city owned property on Moorpark Avenue and adjacent property to the south. This is the site of the existing City Hall, Civic Center, Public Works Corporation Yard, Senior Center and County Library. The property includes two parcels owned by the Moorpark Redevelopment Agency. One of these parcels is an occupied, single-family rental house on Moorpark Avenue. The other parcel fronts on West High Street and is vacant . The redevelopment of the Civic Center Site with a new city hall presents a number of challenges and opportunities . The northern half of the site slopes from north to south and its dimensions limit the construction of a new facility to the existing city hall building site. Construction of a new city hall on the existing site without additional land would require a temporary relocation of all 3 I city offices during construction. Suitable existing facilities where all offices could be temporarily situated with good public access are very limited. The best alternative for the development of a new city hall at the Moorpark Avenue location appears to be to enlarge the current site by acquiring additional properties to the south. These properties include the Moorpark Mobile Home Park (which has already been purchased) , a residence on West High Street, and commercial property at the northwest corner of Moorpark Avenue . Planning for this site will need to include provisions for the expansion of the library facilities . The structures and property ownership of the existing Civic Center area north of High Street and west of Moorpark Avenue are described in Exhibits A-5 and A-6 . The cost to acquire these properties and relocate the occupants is substantial . Based on recent appraisals and sales of comparable property in the area, staff estimates that this land cost, excluding the County Library, is $1, 490, 000 . The probable cost associated with relocating the residents of the property is approximately $1, 052 , 367 including administrative costs for planning and property management . These costs are itemized as follows : LAND COST: Mobile Home Park - $ 900 , 000 Commercial Parcels - $ 400 , 000 ' Residential Parcel - $ 190 , 000 TOTAL LAND $ 1, 490, 000 RELOCATION PAYMENTS : Mobile Home Park - $ 800, 000 Single Family (2) - $ 19, 500 Commercial (4) $ 85 , 000 SUB TOTAL $ 904 , 500 20% contingency $ 180, 900 TOTAL RELOCATION $ 1, 085, 400 4 PROFESSIONAL FEES : Relocation Plan Preparation - $ 8, 275 Replacement Housing Plan $ 2 , 500 Implementation Services Residential - $ 57, 750 Implementation Services Commercial - $ 11, 750 Project Management $ 8, 000 Property Management (estimated 12 months) $ 15, 000* TOTAL FEES $ 103 , 275 GRAND TOTAL SITE ACQUISITION $ 2 , 678 , 675 *Park rent income is expected to offset operating costs and pay for property management . SITE DEVELOPMENT AND REUSE - There are a variety of arrangements for the reuse of the existing Civic Center site and buildings . With the construction of a new city hall at the corner of High and Moorpark Avenue, the existing city hall could be acquired by the Redevelopment Agency for reuse to meet other important community facility needs . The City could utilize the sale proceeds for the new City Hall . The existing buildings could be dedicated for other community uses such as : Reuse City Hall building as a one-stop community services center to house various public service agencies such as Catholic Charities, Clinicas Del Camino Real (low cost medical care) , county human development services, child care, family and individual counseling services, legal aid and other services for Moorpark residents . ➢ Reuse City Hall building as a Teen Center. ➢ Expand Senior Center use in Civic Center Building and/or combinations of the above uses. ➢ Remove the Modular Annex at the north end of City Hall for additional parking or reuse the annex for some of the above uses . 5 Redevelop existing City Hall and office annex site with senior housing or commercial uses . Buildings could be leased for commercial office space ORIENTATION OF NEW CITY HALL - Orienting the new City Hall to the Southeast , facing the High Street-Moorpark Avenue Intersection is recommended. Such an orientation will give the building a commanding presence at the west end of High Street creating community pride and inviting visitors . It will serve as the central focus for the City and an "anchor" for the downtown High Street area . An example of this orientation is demonstrated in Exhibit A-7 using the building concept developed in the Space Needs Study. Other building designs would be easily adapted to this site leaving sufficient room for parking, pedestrian-friendly circulation and attractive landscaping improvements . POLICE SERVICES CENTER The site for the new Police Services Center has already been designated by the City Council . A 7 . 52-acre site on Spring Road was acquired early in April by the Redevelopment Agency with agency funds and transportation improvement funds totaling $ 2 , 100, 000 . Approximately three acres of the site will be needed for the police facility. The land cost charged to the Police Services Center Project is $866, 061 . Approximately three acres will remain available at the north end of the site for development uses consistent with the Downtown Specific Plan. The remaining property will be used for the widening of Spring Road and the realignment of Flinn Avenue to intersect Spring Road directly across from Second Street . This alignment will facilitate the installation of a traffic signal at this modified intersection. About 1 . 5 acres will be needed for the street widening and realignment . A site plan for development of the Police Services Center and alternatives for the realignment of Flinn Avenue are provided in Exhibit A-8 . PUBLIC WORKS/PARKS CORPORATION YARD The recommended site for a new Corporation Yard is a part of a 4 . 19-acre site at the end of Fitch Avenue . This parcel provides sufficient area (1 . 9 acres) for the Corporation Yard and a remaining parcel of 2 .26 acres held for future 6 expansion. Staff recommends that the Corporation Yard be sited on the parcel as a "Flag" lot leaving a larger frontage on the Fitch Avenue Cul de Sac for the remaining parcel . A parcel map and possible siting plan are included as Exhibits A-9 and A- 10 . A portion of the remaining parcel could be developed for the City' s Transit bus parking and maintenance. Grant funding could then be made available for both the facility and the land cost . Based on previous appraisals and current comparable sales, staff estimates the cost to acquire this parcel is $ 5 . 00 per square foot or $ 912 , 582 . Of this cost, $ 413 , 820 would be charged to the Corporation Yard Project . LAND ACQUISITION COST SUMMARY City Hall $ 2 , 678, 675* Police Services Facility $ 866, 061 Corporation Yard $ 413 , 820 GRAND TOTAL $ 3, 958, 556 *Includes relocation costs TOTAL LAND AND DEVELOPMENT COST PROJECT LAND DEVELOPMENT TOTAL City Hall 2 , 678, 675 7, 375 , 000 10 , 053 , 675 Police 866 , 061 6, 512 , 500 7, 378, 561 Corp. Yard 413 , 820 1 , 643 , 250 2 , 057, 070 GRAND TOTAL PROJECT COST $19,489, 306 7 FINANCING The following is a discussion of the available options to finance the desired new public facilities . These options involve the commitment of cash assets combined with various types of debt financing. The City has several financing options which, when combined with the Redevelopment Agency' s bonding capacity, could finance a major portion of the project components . These financing methods together with cash that could be committed now and that is anticipated in the future provide the City with the ability to pay for these projects . When examining the use of various financing mechanisms it is important to understand that State law does not permit the use of Redevelopment Agency funds for the financing of City Hall development . However, current State law does not prohibit the Agency' s participation in financing the Police Services Center and Corporation Yard. CASH ASSETS - CITY The City has wisely established a number of funds to assist in the funding of the desired projects . These funds are : FUND PROJECTED BALANCE .(November 1, 2001) General Fund Reserve (Fund 1000) $ 7, 500, 000 General Fund Increase, 2000 to 2001 (Fund 1000) $ 1, 100, 000 City Hall Improvement (Fund 4001) $ 465 , 000 Police Facilities (Fund 4002) $ 1, 103 , 000 Special Endowment (Fund 2800) $ 8, 070 , 000 TOTAL $ 18, 238, 000 On June 30, 2000, the General Fund reserve was approximately $7. 5 million, and by June 30, 2001, it is projected to increase to $8 . 6 million. This amount is slightly in excess of twelve months of General Fund operations and above average for cities in California. For the next year or two, General Fund revenues are anticipated to be sufficient to pay for all operating expenses, and the reserve level is anticipated to stay at approximately the same level . However, with costs expected to increase in the coming years, longer term projections indicate that on-going revenues may not be 8 sufficient without new revenue sources . Nonetheless, with the relatively high reserve level and renewed efforts to seek out new General Fund revenue sources, the limited use of these funds, for these capital projects, would not be imprudent . The City Manager has recommended that $1 , 100 , 000 , representing the increase in funds available from 2000 to 2001, be used for the City Hall Project . The Police Facilities and City Hall Improvement funds were established for the purpose of developing these particular facilities . Police Facilities development fees, which were updated in September 2000, are projected to provide an additional $3 . 3 million in the next nine years from the development of an estimated 3 , 700 residential units and 3 . 9 million square feet of non-residential construction. While this amount won' t be available in time for construction and can' t be pledged for debt service, the future revenues could be used to assist with debt service payments if the police facility construction is financed. The City Hall Improvement fund has no dedicated revenue source and will increase only by interest earnings in the coming years . The Endowment Fund is an innovative strategy used in Moorpark to fund long term capital improvements . The Endowment Fund was initially funded with $1 . 5 million received upon dissolution of the Moorpark Mosquito Abatement District, and subsequent revenue sources to this fund have included contributions from new development and interest earnings. The table below identifies past and projected funding sources for the endowment fund. Dissolution of Mosquito Abatement District 1, 572 , 500 Toll Brothers settlement 3 , 720, 300 Archstone development fees 1, 667, 600 Carlsberg development fees 815, 600 Other development fees 29, 000 Interest earnings and miscellaneous 263, 400 Subtotal, November 1, 2001 8, 068,400 Carlsberg/Pacific Comm/Suncal development fees 2 , 000, 000 LT Development fees 2, 000, 000 SP2 development fees 4 , 500, 000 SP1 development fees 4 , 500, 000 West Pointe development fees 1, 750, 000 Other development fees 1, 500, 000 Commercial development fees 1, 200 , 000 Subtotal, future fees 17, 450, 000 9 As directed by the City Council , the Endowment Fund retains the first 2% of interest earned, with additional interest earnings directed to the General Fund. In the 2001/2002 fiscal year, the Endowment Fund is expected to retain approximately $180 , 000 in interest earnings, with an additional $220, 000 going to the General Fund. Interest rates are the lowest they have been in many years and are projected to increase in the coming years; interest earnings on the endowment fund balance is likely to be greater in future years . Current projections for revenues to this fund from planned residential , commercial and industrial projects total approximately $17 million over the next five years, increasing interest earnings substantially. While these future revenues may not be pledged against new debt, as they accumulate over time they may be used to reduce or pay off debt issued now to pay for projects . There is an on-going debate as to whether it is preferable for a municipality to preserve cash and incur debt for capital improvement projects or minimize debt by utilizing available cash. The City of Moorpark must make this choice as the financing of the new City Hall is considered. Both the General Fund Reserve and the Endowment Funds provide interest earnings used annually to pay for City operating expenses . Any depletion of these funds reduces this income accordingly. CASH ASSETS - REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY All of the bond proceeds from previous tax allocation bonds have been spent or will be spent on currently budgeted projects and none remain to be used for this facilities project . The MRA Tax Increment Fund contains monies from annual tax increment revenues and rental revenues . These funds are used to make existing debt service payments and pay operating costs . Any funds not used for these on-going expenses may also be used for capital projects . For the 2001/2002 fiscal year, it is estimated that approximately $700 , 000 in revenues will be received in excess of expenses in this fund, and this amount would increase slightly over time. These funds may be used to make debt service payments on new debt issues . In addition to annual increment and other revenues, the City anticipates receiving a one-time payment of $1 million from the County of Ventura in 2008 , as required by our tax increment agreements . 10 BORROWING There are a number of options available to utilize the City' s credit backed by future revenues . These options are discussed below. Attachment B-1, a financing analysis developed by our public finance advisors, provides details about the borrowing options summarized below. REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY - The Redevelopment Agency can issue tax allocation bonds pledging future tax increment revenues (excluding the Low and Moderate Income (LMI) pledge) . Based on the cash flow projections mentioned above, the Agency presently has the ability to issue approximately $11, 095, 000 of new tax allocation bonds that would net the Agency approximately $10, 021, 000 . The agency' s current bond financing will be paid in full in 2018 ; the proposed new bonds will "wrap around" the current debt service payments, with a smaller annual payment due until 2018, then increased payments between 2018 and 2030 . Total debt service costs would be constant over the years, so that any increase in increment revenue could be used for other projects . CITY OF MOORPARK - The City can issue debt in the form of certificates of participation (COPS) pledging future general fund revenues . The issuance of COPS is limited to the City' s ability to allocate annual debt service payments from the General Fund, although the General Fund could be assisted by revenues in other funds, including the Endowment Fund. The City may utilize either a long term fixed rate or a variable rate for the financing of the City secured Certificate of Participation borrowing . Each financing structure offers distinct advantages . Fixed rates would allow us to take advantage of current low average coupon rates, about 4 . 8%, for a full thirty years . There would be no risk of interest rates changing over time. However, variable rate bonds in today' s market carry the lowest rate of any financing vehicle available. Current average coupon rates for variable rate debt are around 1 . 95% . While there is risk that rates would increase, and no guarantee that in the long run the total interest cost would be less than with fixed rates, the low initial rate is very attractive. This option is especially attractive if the City has cash available to retire the bonds if or when the rates become too high. In addition to issuing debt , the City may raise cash by selling assets or borrowing from reserve funds at appropriate 11 interest rates . This option would help to minimize the costs associated with debt issuance in the public finance marketplace . NARROWING THE OPTIONS CITY HALL - City staff is concerned about financing these projects with the least possible impact on the General Fund. Thus, it is important to minimize the use of General Fund and Endowment Fund balances to preserve interest earnings as much as possible . Therefore, maximizing the use of some of the Redevelopment Agency' s funding resources is essential . The challenge becomes finding a way to use Agency resources to assist in the development of City Hall and still be within the intent of State law. Staff suggests the Redevelopment Agency purchase the existing City Hall and other civic center facilities, which would all eventually be converted (or expanded) for use as community resource facilities . The acquisition of these facilities is an eligible use of Agency funds . It is estimated that the existing land and facilities are worth approximately $2 , 500 , 000 . To pay for the City Hall , the City could commit the proceeds of the civic center property sale ($2 . 5 million) together with funds available from the City Hall Facilities Fund ($465 , 000) and $1 . 1 million from the General Fund Reserve (the increase from 2000 to 2001) . Additionally, $1 . 2 millionRin housing set- aside funds will be used to pay for relocation costs of the residents currently on the building site. An additional $5 . 0 million would be required to complete the project . The City currently has approximately $7 . 5 million in the General Fund Reserve and $8 . 1 million in the Endowment Fund, for a total of $15 . 6 million in available funds . There are two options for utilizing these funds . First, the City could use $5 million in cash. This would reduce interest earnings in the general fund by about $220, 000 per year at current rates . As development occurs in the coming years, the endowment fund balance would be restored to previous levels, increasing interest earnings . Alternately, the City could leverage these cash balances and instead use the interest earnings on the endowment fund to make debt service payments on certificates of participation. The annual debt service payments would be between $290, 000 and $400, 000, depending on the type of financing. While the City must pledge it' s general fund 12 revenues for the COP, it is recommended that the interest earnings in the Endowment Fund (currently about $400 , 000 per year total) be dedicated to make the debt service. If lower, variable rate bonds were used, this would initially reduce general fund revenues by approximately $110 , 000 per year, and could increase if the variable interest rate on the bonds increases . If the higher fixed rate bonds were used, revenues would be reduced by about $220, 000 . However, as interest rates and the fund balance in the endowment fund increase in the next few years, interest transfers to the general fund will return to previous levels . If interest rates on the variable rate debt were to increase in a few years, the cash that is projected to accumulate in the endowment fund over the next five years could be used to pay off the debt at any time . It must be recognized that the building of a City Hall is a specialized project that can be expected to occur only once in 30 years, and, even if debt is not usually favored, it could be an appropriate financing mechanism for long-term capital projects such as this . Even if the General Fund had to rely on its own revenues to make the debt service, the annual payment would represent less than one-half of one percent of total expenditures ($9 million) . However, if general fund revenues are not sufficient to meet expenditure demands, any payment, no matter how small , may be a burden. If the City Council is adverse to this level of debt , additional cash reserves could be used. However, any use of cash reserves for this project limits the Council' s ability to use the funds, and the interest earnings, for other projects or purchases . Staff will not make a recommendation for financing city hall construction until final design and cost analysis is complete . POLICE SERVICES CENTER - The Redevelopment Agency can immediately raise $10 , 021, 000 by issuing tax allocation bonds . These fixed rate bonds would "wrap around" the Agency' s existing debt, with only interest payments required until the existing debt is retired in 2018 . This would require annual debt service payments of $580 , 000 for the next 17 years, increasing to $1 . 2 million per year beginning in 2019 . To supplement the debt proceeds, $1, 103 , 000 in the Police Facilities Fund would be available to finance the $6 . 6 million required for construction. This solution leaves approximately $2 .4 million of the tax allocation bond proceeds (after deducting for the parks/public works yard, discussed below) 13 and $1 million one-time payment anticipated in 2008 available for other projects . Additionally, the Agency is currently owed approximately $3 . 5 million from the sale of land (Mission Bell Plaza) , which will be paid in installments over the next 27 years . These funds would also be available for other projects . Staff projects that the Police Facilities Fund, as noted earlier, will receive an additional $3 . 3 million in the next nine years . These revenues can contribute to the debt service payments made by MRA for the financing of the Police Services Center, freeing up additional MRA funds for other projects . PUBLIC WORKS/PARKS YARD - The cost of developing a new parks/public works yard, about $2 . 1 million, will also be funded with tax allocation bond proceeds discussed above . The following table summarizes the sources and uses of funds proposed to finance these three facilities . Source of Funds Use of Funds Police City Agency Station City Hall Yard Land Acquisition/Relocation 866,0001. 2,678,000; 414,000 Construction/Admin/Design 6,513,000; 7,375,000' 1,644,000 Total Needs 7,379,000; 10,053,000 2,058,000 Current balance in Police _Facilities Fund 1,103,000: 1,103,000; 'Current balance in City Hall 'Facilities Fund 465,000' 465,000; 'Proceeds from agency purchase jof exiting City hall 2,500,000 2 500,000 2,500,000'. Existing Redevelopment Agency ;funds 866,000 866,000; Proceeds from new Tax Allocation financing 10 021,000 5,500,000t 2,100,000 :General Fund increase, 2000 to 2001 1,100,000 1,100,000: Housing set-aside funds for relocation costs i 1,190,000 1,190,000; :Proceeds from City issue new .COP or interfund borrowing 5,000,000; 5,000,000! 10,168,000 14,577,000 7,469,000' 10,255,000_ 2,100,000 14 I CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS It is important to remember that many details remain to be worked out , and construction is not likely to begin for many months . Thus, this report offers a financing proposal that is subject to changes and fine-tuning in the coming months . Based on the proposal set forth in this report, the following immediate actions are recommended: 1 . Retain necessary consulting services for the issuance of $11, 095, 000 in tax allocation bonds within the next 90 days to take advantage of the present low interest rates . As the City would have up to three (3) years to spend these funds, the interest earnings on the invested proceeds can be a significant bonus to the Agency. 2 . Initiate the appraisal process for the existing buildings in the civic center complex in anticipation of its ultimate purchase by the Redevelopment Agency. 3 . Initiate the appraisal process for the privately owned properties on Moorpark Avenue, High Street and Fitch Avenue (update of previous appraisal) referenced in the report . 4 . Continue or initiate the development of plans and specifications for the identified projects at the recommended sites . 5 . Solicit bids for the design and construction of City hall and the Public Works/Parks yard. 6 . Review city hall financing options with the Budget and Finance Committee with a report back to the City Council . Such discussion to include an evaluation of long-term General Fund revenue projections in light of state economic and budget constraints and expense projections, and anticipated increased costs for pool operations, park maintenance and police facility maintenance . 15 APPENDIX A EXHIBIT A-1 Summary of Space Needs Study, March 2000 Leach Mounce Architects , Ventura, CA EXHIBIT A-2 New Building & Site Development Estimates EXHIBIT A-3 City Hall Site Plan and Floor Plan EXHIBIT A-4 Police Services Center Site Plan and Floor Plan EXHIBIT A-5 Existing Civic Center Area Site Plan EXHIBIT A-6 Existing Civic Center Property Ownership EXHIBIT A-7 Possible City Hall Building Orientation EXHIBIT A-8 Site Plan for Police Services Center EXHIBIT A- 9 Parcel map for Public Works/Parks Corporation Yard EXHIBIT A-10 Siting Plan for Public Works/Parks Corporation Yard 16 APPENDIX B EXHIBIT B-1 Proposed financing plan from USbancorp/ Piper Jaffray and Urban Futures , Inc . 17 v (h 3l07/00 14 CITY OF MOORPARK CALIFORNIA V i < 1� '�'�����s 4c,lnfry�•}!3eJ��� tt�i t t 1'�;-Fry" i t SPACE NEEDS STUDY i`A , ` 'I'ABI,E QF5C0 'iTNT5Fr I. SUMMARY come from the addition of the Communications Option proposed for the Police in Administrative Services. The T. tSSUMMARY� r� N STAFFING SUMMARY kr' q �Jfi� CWTCtltestimateofstafhngforC01111nUnlCatiOnSandhold- r Staffing is forecast to increase by approximately 46%;in in re�1e,senls 50%of the long term Police De paittnent II•�� RACPON a47 the 20 year long term 6om a current level of']03 to 150 g I .,. 6 I. L wt k °� 5 increse and 25%of the total City staff increase.Withoul or, 47 more staff in addition to Communications estt- y this optional increase,the growth of the City Staff is 46(k. ;� mated at 10,Holding 5 and Highway Patrol Unit with 24 The anticipated Irnlg term growth of the City's popula- r persons. Communications and Holding staffing need to �11V JJF[(� T'j'1 � $ �� g Lion from 30,000 to 40,000 in 20 years with the proposed ry t 1r1 s � be the subject of additional studies Ibr Ion term staffing o f s f r. J g g scale of new development is more than 33%.The growth need. The Staff Summary Table is shown below. The l � V•' ,L ►IV(�► � �► �' of staff is not out of line with the expected growth of the „ City's largest single staff increase in the future would City, iW J STAFF SUMMARY SP� E�SANDARD5 DEPARTMENT STAFF _ Short Staff • Staff fr `� A y�M n 4e+q � 5 Qty. Qty. t t� f X11 y - k n s $w 4 + rd x ,-? 1-5 Current City Hall Operations 14 19 } 1­4 k�°ki 6 Police 21 36 7-8 Holding & Communications Options 15 N t f4 ,� t 1,2,3 Current City Hall Operations 14 18 4,5 Building & Safety & Engineering 8 12 � 'l't"A TOTAL CITY HALL & POLICE DEPARTMENT 87 141 fY tti t a #a�wYj.: s 's't'd. +tk ' i, ,f Y GRAND TOTAL 103 189 MOORPARK SPACE NEEDS STUDY Leach Mounce Architects EXHIBIT A-I I - 1 FINAL DRAFT 3/07/00 STAFFING SUMMARY BY DEPARTMENT 'File City Council & City Manager anticipate an in- an increase in staff by 5.The remaining staff additions in crease in staff of one position for a clerk typist.Staffing AS are two clerk typists,one each in AS and Redevelop- in this section also includes the part time City Attorney. ment. The City Clerk/Human Resources(CC)are adding 2 Community Development(CD) Staff will grow by 9 staff.The City Clerk will add an Management Analyst, from 22 to 30,or 27%.The Director will add a clerical thereby bringing the Clerk's support on par with other aide, Planning will add one Senior Planner. The City Directors. A new Public information position is being Dingineer will add two engineering positions.Great posi- created, tive impact on staff operational efficiency will come from bringing all the staff and their files into a common loca- STAFF GROWTH Administrative Services(AS)has the largest staff,cur- tion. Without this, additional staff time and therefore, rently 35 growing to 70 if all options are taken.The Po- additional staff may be required to move stall',file mate- lice account for 51%of AS staff. rials,and copies between locations. In the short term,staff is protected to increase Police Department The Police staff will grow from 21 Public Works(PW)The current staff of 5 will expand by six above the current levels as reflected to 36,or 29%.The growth includes patrol officers.cleri- 29%to 7 with the addition of one inspector and one cleri- in the December, 1999 Short Term Staff/ cal and volunteers.As mentioned above,bringing Com- cal aide at City Dlall and a Field Supervisor and mainte- - Area Projections. 'The growth indicated in munications•on-line within the City will add 10 staff for nance worker at the Yard. this summary is for the long term. 24 hours/7 day a week coverage. The Holding Option for short term holding (less than four hours) does not Community Services (CS) will add 6 staff to [lie cur- anticipate any increase in staff and may save staff time rent 10,or 607c including one clerical aide at City}call by not requiring the transport of detainees by officers, and two additional maintenance workers at file City Yard. BOO Type 1 Holding(for up to 72 hours)would require Recreation and the Senior Center are not covered by this study. 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 so CITY COUNCIL&CITY MANAGER CITY CLERK/HUMAN RESOURCES ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES Current City Hall Operations Police Holding&Communications Options COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Current City Hall Operations Building&Safety&Engineering PUBLIC WORKS lfr7 City HaA COMMUNITY SERVICES Gdy Halt CITY YARD SITE ■Current Staff I HIGHWAY PATROL UNIT ■Staff Growth I f F0 MOORPARK SPACE NEEDS STUDY I - 2 Leach Mounce Architects f FINAL DRAFT 3/07/00 1 Y f R : ,,4ya h IN1'I+;KACTIONS SUMMARY REPORTDEPARTUPE, { Interactions indicate how the different departments in the City relate both internally and belween each other.The Moorpark Organization chart shows how the City government authority is organized. It does not show how the r n departments work together or how they interact with each other. Spatial sizes and relationships are not seen in the chart below. Interactions also provide important planning information and are shown in the diagram on the next �At Chi me& x .` klY" ' s u4�llT�4 `n7a� page. 4 ,` e 7k �, Moorpark Government Organization Chart f 0 J +YtI1R5� V��aYri+,s� I. ,s /`.COfl11111>alhi�, � in6 tea . . r---------- PlanningCOrnmission Parks&Recreation Honorable CilyCOUncll Commission -------------� — y(i ppp+��((,, r I I L vi Pt�bUt 4A(' ,itr l I 'fix� •Sx I t, I ` I c �! City Clerk Comrnurn Service h d''t,�et4 r} s7kP,��.i h�'1*Y'!ta'4y'ta4FGo-�i y Me s f.: aZt' (t U4,a),dr3p�rtmenp oU�Sl1, City CIerWPersarnelofficer Dlreclor i KitStfi4i� tmatC> 9 •� t tc s ✓£ s�'.f !a s �;n, eorg�(ary«�' ..7.: IIS1ra). . rruns[�IVe-. CflyClerk/ -------'� Rocords AdminstraM a t ` Secretary e WI 7'Sei✓ s, is li�,`� < w ° r s SeGSelary. +Mil.IPRSY,tG$' ,z.;•1`tF,lll4te) - Information t r x r:r a r Ya o f ar , ar ay utr f 4� InB 4 Human Maintenance& Facilities i Rasources �.�' ,� »�� ,�`e�(���,.�� � � t✓ _ ecrea ton (AVRC) ' rd 4�" "r � a�-,+ .r ds •T p� ;'u rr ?l e6 R F Anlmal t ��� ij teN=yyKr ; '�;}y ` i -.-,!'. ;�ti✓ t[A.t�t�':. Regulation (:.. 'n i I S„ 7rs'� !r-_•i r y.Sir .yi � �.Y r°�:" EnfnrCBfl1,901- r }4 y } 4 Solid Waste � Safely;- ' ass F :s 7yffi r }sr yy !_� Transit Senlor Center Loch Mouncs Architects MOORPARK SPACE NEEDS STUDY Leach Mounce Architects I - 3 ` :r3 FINAL DRAFT 3/07/00 DIAGRAMS Diagrams reveal imlxrrtarrt interactions and relationships.The Overall Diagram on the right OVERALL DIAGRAM shows all the departments in relative size to each other.The organizing feature for the City Clerk,Community Development,Public Works,, d Community Services is the public service _ _ _ ____ ____ counter.This is the point of contact for the Moorpark residents that needs direct,personal service 1 that can not be provided through other forms of communication.The Site Diagram on the next page gives an extended overview of the entire operation including the respective site area re- { C 6 { quirements.Both building and site areas are represented. i POLICE KEY REi,ATIONSHIPS I I The relationship between the Council and the City Manager is strong.For this reason,they are placed in the same section of the Space Needs.Both interact fi-equently with each other and with the overall operation.7'he interaction with outside contacts is similar as well,'17he City Mannager I PUBLIC { also has significant interaction with the heads of the depa t ents and outside agencies. { COUNTER City Clerk,City Manager,City Council&Community Development have internal operations that function best if their respective team members are in close proximity to each other. Both have a need to relate to the public over a counter and in meetings. Public Works&Community Services are split with coordination of inter-departmental opera- tions at City I fall and external facilities,work crews and equipment at the Public Works Yard. There is a close,interactive working relationship between these departments,The City Yard is C +•s occupied jointly.Public Works interacts tiequently with Community Development.Commu- ADMINISTRATIVE nity Services does so also,but to a lesser degree.Public Works is involved with CD infrastnrc_ SERVICES lure issues that require easy consultations. Administrative Services has two major components.One is the administering support to other departments.The other is the police operations.The support function interacts closely with all the otherdepartments and spatially warts to be next to all of them.Components of the AS touch B PUBLIC Es` other departments in specific places.Finance and Human Resources interact.Redevelopment/ x CITY se°AV c s Y Economic Development interacts with the Council,Community Development Planners and CLERK Building&Safety.Finance also interacts with the Council,City Clerk and Community Devel- opment.The police function is currently remotely located in 4,000 sgnve trot temporary facili- ties at a school site in Moorpark and at the East Valley Law Enforcement Facility in Thousand Oaks.Once this operation is completely relocated in the City,it has[lie option of either being PUBLIC included or not included in the civic center. For security reasons and operational hours, this SERVICES operation will remain self-contained.Liaison personnel could be located in the public services zone of the City}fall if total co-location is not feasible due to site constraints. Detailed diagrams for each depa tment can be found in Section 11- Interactions. MOORPARK SPACE NEEDS STUDY I - 4 Leach Mounce Architects FINAL DRAFT 3/07/00 NEW"IN HOUSE"FUNCTIONS SPACE+' STANDARDS New City hall resident services to be brought into the Space standards are the building blocks from which the Space Needs,u-e built.They set a standard for operational new,long term civic center facility are: units. Unit standards are the support for each work space,storage area and meeting room.There are illustrations of placed in the Civic Cente • Police be placed of the standards in the section.Composite standards are a combination of units. Centel- • Community Development will bring City Fngineer- ing and Building&Safety staff in to City Hall 1 - • A Highway Patrol Field Office will be added in con- junction with the Police Department o `• �. Nos ace projection can be a perfect minor of the future but the long term space projections serve to record the current understanding of how the City wants to grow its ' civic functions. However,should the City decide to pro- ' — ` coed with in-house Building and Safety and Engineering $' 0" _ - _ _ __ 16'-0" - Services in the future, additional space would not be needed over that provided for Contract Services. Unit Standard Composite Standard Many functions which may be supplied by City staff in other cities are provided in Moorpark by private con- tractors.Should the City decide it is to the benefit of the Moorpark citizens,other major functions may be brought "in house".This would change the space needs.The space standards supplied with this document can be applied to PROJECTIONS newly identified future functions as well. The projections are for staff and space.Detailed lists of functions and equipment were developed.The list is summa- rized into spaces.Supporting detail includes design notes and guidelines,staffing,space,furniture,parking and site requirements. Below is a sample extracted from Section IV-Pro.jections. SHORT Spam SIM Support Building Area Slatt S q4S 0a Bukting Area ,b—do,wi rears No. Doscnpl,on SNI. Area Oly. Oly. Guido- 13dension Oty. Oly. Guido' Exlwslon 7 Work Room Sharo with 1"inanre.f'ubhr.Works 8 Community S8IVICOS slat(. Shared space 195 Work counter 50 4 12 48 Mail handling araa Copier-Large 58 70 1 70 Form storage 61 3 3 9 Fax machine 72 18 1 18 Document shredder 73 10 1 10 Work table-open 22 40 1 40 MOORPARK SPACE NEEDS STUDY Leach Mounce Architects I -5 FINAL DRAFT 3/07/00 SHORT TERM & LONG 1'ERM PLANS STAFF / AREA PROJECTIONS SUMMARY BUILDING NEED SITE NEED Short Term Long Term Short Term Long Staff Buildings Staff Buildings i Site Site I . Total Gut Total Vehicles Total Vehicles Total Includin A, B, C.1-5, D, E.1-2, F.1-2&G Includin C.6-8 Includin E.3& F.3 Total 103 23,798 189 62,660 109 131,781 3.03 315 338,975 7.78 This Space Needs Study establishes a planning basis for Modest modifications to the City Hall and additional do not adhere to the Space Standards or Space staff and space projections in both short term and long mobile office units on the existing civic center site present Needs, but rather focus on the use of existing term.The short term is defined as current and near term the quickest response to providing for the City's urgent facilities.This minimizes construction changes (1-3 year)space need.The long tenn time frame(at 15- space needs.This short term response answers the needs and makes do with a large portion of the exis(- 20 years) is not as time specific,but covers foreseeable of general staff with the addition of staff toilets and break ing building(as it is)in order to minimize short needs as expressed by staff during interviews and inques- room. In addition,Community Development(CD) De- term costs(See Section V.). tionnaire responses.The long term site needs anticipate partment,who must respond to community zoning regu- future growth in proportion to the forecast growth in lations,development and growth,is currently tinder great Long Term Plans-Two plans showing ideal- building and parking for each department. space pressure. "The CD staff needs spill over to other ized site plans and floor plans which focus on departments that must support them.The three short term consolidation of dep�urtment operations at one "('here are three Short 'Term Plan Options adding more options (listed A - C:) provide different budget/scope location.These plans can be phased. For ilhts- mobile office twits to the existing site. Adding the new choices to solve the short tern needs. (rative purposes the site plans were made so staff toilets and break room is a common feature of all that they are easily divisible into City Hall, the options. The mobile office units contain the pro- The concept plans are presented in Iwo categories: Police and City Yard components(Sec Section grammed short teen spaces but are substantially less than -VI). the space standards square footage due to limited site Short Term Plans-Three options that modify area and budget. the existing City Hall and site.These options MOORPARK SPACE NEEDS STUDY Leach Mounce Architects 1 - 6 N FINAL DRAFT 3/07/00 r #�.?*'`r�w� '#u' p'��,�r ax rsa`}r� '.�tr•.n,. L O 5 T 5 rye w `yr�St } w #q t Y sad✓ 4 �frYvf V ''� G ' F k. •,`( "` •���t� r,■.F���"��q`-!�"�� The cast estimates for the short and long term development are difficult to bring into coin prison.l'he Short'(�:rm r L7 has a given site,existing buildings and a stipulation nc{ation to make economical resolution the first priority even over the b b t I space standards which are riot economical to extend to all staff in the short term.'The L.ono Terin has no specif is site ��n ''[�I1Ct"d Ititgnj�p6' 110 bttl ln.ot`s or time of constncction.Nevertheless,the attempt was made to align the two into one cost approach.Both a detailed I but thole listed beloWW starting and broad brush were used on the Short Tenn Options.The broad brush approach proved to he the more conserva- Gpoittts r ti 4A s 'k, live(more expensive)and was used.-The broad brush approach was use on the l.ong'Term. t�° 4.r,A "r SHORT TERM iMINIA�IIJ 1 � 30 , '¢8` P Si n NNW FMD �` � k4M "4, d4r y ; R In a ,d„- g• > Wn OWN' If�A �sI " s1699U '1 444,454 556,990 370,768 PT 1 6 j-�"1?' �'�'irr��nt�FN LONG TERM IMNIM1 yf« f5;; `l �,, r �'•?i t F ; Buildings Site Work Facility t CITY HAA ti L TOTAL FACILITY 8,862,245 2,380,444 11,886,953 Including A, B,C.1-5, D, E.1-2, F.1-2&G 3,881,521 1,263,174 5,144,695 `MA IM " �s ;� ��1; $gg,>��3 Council Chambers 506,400 - 506,400 CITY-1,H%,, COy I trcylMF�S C.6 Police 81.4% 2,625,856 689,542 3,315,398 C.7 Holding 11.3% 672,870 672,870 ,ray I kr C.8 Communications Option 7.3% 334,908 334,908 Ax �� 11VI 0161,k t i �R4" yf }yf3 r� Including E.3& F.3 � MOORPARK SPACE NEEDS STUDY Leach Mounce Architects . 1 - 7 FINAL DRAFT 3/07/00 a xVW°Lr rTre �t-r 4iw�3 y,x ^ l� v TWO STORY COMPARE TO ONE STORY COST nf`.'K^�. .� '�Lk'?y4 Y F 'rhe long termplans show one story buildings on a hypothetical site that is reasonably level tk;�, ��, L and rectangular in shape. I1'it is not feasible to aquire enough property to build a one story Y` azF +hx, � ? �r t � structure or the topography is mnore steeply sloping then two story buildings would be the v ilppl'oprlate solution. f x ar a.r�+,YX aF r3 urn {nt' :M #'' The building gross-up factor for a two story building would be 34%,which is 5%more than i F x�y� ��.•yv�"��"r ;r.�'Yas �� b b p y b the 29%shown for a one story building due to the stairs,elevators, mechanical ducts,addi- t 1csS� � _� t tional janitors spaces,electrical roans and lobby space. t :�'{`7V,ij f 'I'IGb'�,,t�Y�� L d4 �''' � '. • - 62,659 sf x.OS=3,133 additional sf for a two story huildin g b 3,133sf x$150=$939,885 Az tY'3 t# � `z' "L�' •Land savings for two story buildings is estimated at 40%of 62,659- b b r� apt 5 62,659sf x .40=25,064 sf @ $14/sf'=$350,890 tF ?-7*`r rr,fxY'S*at ��, u *3tf ofts',s 'MR a Net additional cost ti>r two story buildings on smaller land area-$588,995 t Fr°t''4.,y 3� ¢ aiMF4:1 � +z r.' �� y r�`�-'�. ta{4ya q'fx, r��fy,,� .,•�� : ��ai �.•t IFit IlY.t R. Iy� N1 1 r I 4p.1 S S 1 y II MOORPARK SPACE NEEDS STUDY Leach Mounce Architects 1 - 8 Moorpark Space Needs Study Final 3/7/00 NEW BUILDING & NEW SITE DEVELOPMENT ESTIMATE The costs include furnishings&contingency. See the NEW CONSTRUCTION AREA COST TABLE.The costs represented are for concept comparison only and do not reflect the detail or market conditions that may exist at the time this project Is bid.Cost of the land or professional fees are not Included In this estimate. This Conceptual Estimate uses NEW CONSTRUCTION AREA COST TABLE LONG TERM - New • • UNIT Buildings i Site Work Site Facility ID Unit Descri tion Unit Cost sf Total Unit Cost sf Total Total $150 s.f. x 4,548 682,232 $8 s.f. x 59,117 472,937 1,155,169 Council Chambers $150 s.f. x 3,376 506,400 506,400 $132 s.f. x 3,382 446,474 $8 s.f. x 12,951 103,608 550,082 $132 s.f. x 7,427 980,404 $8 s.f. x 23,903 191,223 1,171,627 Current City Hall operations $132 s.f. x 5,933 783,220 $8 s.f. x 22,388 179,104 962,324 Building&Safety&Engineering $132 s.f. x 3,581 472,629 $8 s.f. x 13,512 108,096 580,725 $132 s.f. x 2,077 274,219 $8 s.f. x 8,623 68,985 343,203 $132 s.f. x 1,836 242,342 $8 s.f. x 7,677 61,413 303,756 $8 s.f. x 9,726 77,808 77,808 CITY HALL TOTAL 32,161 4,387,921 157,897 1,263,174 5,651,095 Holding $330 s.f. x 2,039 672,870 x - 672,870 Communications Center $252 s.f. x 1,329 334,908 x - 334,908 Police Department $178 s.f. x 14,752 2,625,856 $8 s.f. x 86,193 689,542 3,315,398 POLICE TOTAL 18,120 3,633,634 86,193 689,542 4,323,176 $90 s.f. x 9,341 840,690 $6 s.f, x 71,288 427,728 1,268,418 $150 s.f. x 3,037 455,484 $8 s.f. x 23,598 188,782 644,265 EXHIBIT A-2 Loaoh Mounoo Arohitoots Moorpark Space Needs Study Final 3/7/00 NEW CONSTRUCTION AREA COST TABLE Building Site New construction costs are reflected in this table. FF&E usually is more in new versus a remodel because of less reuse of existing items. The unknowns are fewer and the contingency is lower than in remodels. Construction Type 10.0%. 10.0%: 10.0% Public Meeting & Executive New Construction 125.00 12.50 12.50 ; 150 7.00 0.70 8 Executive Plan Alteration 40.00 4.00 4.00 ' 48 Executive Remodel 25.00 2.50 2.50 30 Administration New Construction 110.00 ; 11.00 11.00 132 7.00 0.70 ; 8 Administration Plan Alteration 30.00 ; 3.00 3.00 36 New Staff Toilets 70.00 7.00 7.00 84 Administration Remodel 15.00 1.50 1.50 18 Modular 40.00 ; 4.00 ; 4.00 48 5.00 . 0.50 ; 6 Public Safety New Construction 100.0% 148.11 14.81 14.81 i 178 7.00 0.70 8 Administration 81.4% 125.00 12.50 12.50 ; 150 Holding 11.3% 275.00 27.50 27.50 1 330 - Communications 7.3% 210.00 21.00 21.00 252 - Highway Patrol New Construction 100.0% 125.00 12.50 12.50 150 7.00 0.70 ; 8 Maintenance 75.00 7.50 7.50 90 5.00 0.50 ' 6 Leach Mounce Architects 2 r [ E ra j f ate. Cet. •.a. ao . � "„L.rriyi - ,,'I •,a �E•w.'j -..Y bap. Ai! f .l MOORPARK LONG TERM PLAN OPTION POLICE Final 3-7-00 Minor Street y i L I Heli top 1 I _ V- .� .. aL2" A—u Vu tb � uGss I � O I Vu �3 V1 Lobby PUBLIC i ENT9V Y 'ENTRY II, C.6-Police H-Highway Patrol a I Open Office Major Street Site Plan Floor Plan Site Needs Land Parking Building Police 1.96 acres 65 spaces 18,120 Highwa Patrol .48 acres 29 spaces 3,037 es 23 157 EXIIIB["C A-4 MOORPARK POLICE SITE PLAN MOORPARK POI IrF PI nnP PI AN i :I W eet � Ghar`es str ti-- a `L �,,`' h Street g��� �- � 1'19 tA y a o t stree t e pelndeXter Aveng Firs C� C Q c� Charles Street CV o 0 NORTH High Street a a L Q L O Poindexter Avenue o First Street POR. TRACT L, RANCHO SIMI Tax Rafe Area 511-05 10066 1666& MEW 10039 ° T SW COR SW COR o p? L07 U 5RM5 LOT 3os S•r' 154.92' 1JIY 31. SOU7`14 iz 55•b g9 2y ip CBE' 1 O 2 a' 2 q• - - - 4 ».sum., ��? � • x�sti y e 57.0 /02.,2' 5RM37 J OZV / X. 4 L -' I re0 O I �rf QO 1 mwV i N a l P. 6 2Q6 4 l?®• O o:o i r r)y - I- s -a•' ,ccgz r �:, '�4-+t-Ar I '3ieA>-'.K? N �,Ih• ,`a �a l4 I Tract (, r X o tit �'>r 3 0Bk512 -� v e' y5 ♦o' / 1bt a' �i�ITO eaodi7ooe229.02' I -4!0.37' •aip Z69.70 NWY I18 k6- o.(MOORPARK) 12 �(HWY.231 AVENUE- 847 ---+--- - -- --- ---- -� GISLER PARCEL USE SQUARE OWNERSHIP fC1 71D ^= FOOTAGE < \ 6 City Public Works Field Office 10,096 CITY 70 8 Residential 6,341 PRUATE; 9 Vacant 10,500 RDA 14 Residence 15,839 RDA pp 17 Mobile Home Park 45,302 FWATE u 22,24 Library Parking Lot 2,874 25 Library 23,870 26,30 Civic Center 173,478 CITY 27 Retail Center 14,880 ItHINATEe RR Tract Vacant 1.52 acres CITY i- TOTAL 8.48 Acres 0-WIN CITY OF MOORPARK KMM G O COIMTT S MFYOIC'S OFFICE OR Por. Lot U"Poindexter Sub°R.M Bk5,Pg.5 ��`��'��� EXHIBIT A-6 M.L.Wicks Sub. R.M. Bk.5, Pg.37 NOTE-Assessor's Block Numbers Shown in Ellipses Assessor's Porrel Absmh.r. Chnvn in rweL s / -' - Ok7-J'LLJ F1,470.4 sr jr ZIUJ Ln=0 -LK fn MdM4 V1 or, sr sr 3240 gr MPao sr ?ANCHO SIMI EXH,BiT 512 - 15 Tox Rote A reo R /9 W. 101906 10054 Q!6 10007 10057 A 10066 10076 ! 1 0 14 �:' rp7j I 93. M j� 38.18 7D NELY COR � (J ;/ b_ 1 76 M�,{Q ! �' ; R.1266 ! 52 i_ \N75-42F+"E A1t.1, J ' e,% 3190/401 �� TRACT �> o 1266-! FITCH A Fors l 0 y 6/ �w� f g0 ►= 21 PM 2 W o % 1'or rJ �4 g75 42 ioc1► � � PAR. 2 �J �^, '4 Pvr.10 J 7 4.01Ac a y 224Ac 170 533.75 a Wr.IH� 3 Prgvious Phr.Na21P 32 P 3 f t I I t � , I 400512-150-of 2 74 -02 4 N ' Il 16 I FLfNN :_N 21PM2 SEE DETAIL 75 f I IN — ! 2d 74,x.48 J a f � 3e" SSS.49' 439W4/1734 �'�3g29• _1CL I 20 !3}28.9 21 RSIS 44 r Ste, n I.16AC. J / F91� r s3$Ae` 7.84Ac. Jt� J 36 63Ae - i `0`162 1 W C) I TRACT r�984379 �' �o56`p 55ly�li S6,o4�3gG ! D I 2636 19RS52 18 1 QI013 2.94AC. S 8 N 5B / R oA6 1191.30_ (1.9 05) �•I 1 566 d C5B 330J7 �9r,i -0 f4 �;R , w 361 I J I 4� 16x, c, �3Ae.�p / yy5 2° kq'S 259 26 I PAR P, 1 a 5051/y6B �, 35 �' 1_4336 725 _ T 930 — / R"31 g5 46R$42 — — P 4 3- 1 -- 1117.38 yr` ----- _ — - -- - - _X3869"38— N 9 IO 1 38 9 0- 01 M. 70 6 4.OAc 'I 3O', t— t 6 / f1PM j� ' %Mr- 1 0 h N O b b - L� IIK:, foh-mSrAGE CITY OF MOORPARK 4STI1 JT5 LEGAL'0i S 'R` -FIC. ';; Assessor's Mop Bk.512 , Pq I5 lWmmbers Shown In Ellipses County of Ventura, Calif. '1 Numbers Shown in Circles I ♦ OT •/• 1 • try. {` '•r r �`• ° va t I tyar•• ` _ , F Ffi v 41K 4,W �' � t. �.^ r � � g ..:�. ? r` J'"t'-8`bjd•F''-' ',:t�i�. Mdt:� � +� .7♦�; 7, ..� - .. r 1rr++w.�...r.:"•a^.Ma.c ��'._.+ :,�y;.:.1 ^'�`:_��'.k��'�kF ki�ga..z...',{,,°,�.�.:.. . '."'- '� ,�111Oa"��'�1 4 ��~��� � !, �• 1 Ic.. tomet 4' y APPENDIX B EXHIBIT B-1 Proposed financing plan from USbancorp/ Piper Jaffray and Urban Futures, Inc . 17 Qbancorp Piper Jaffray Suite 220C 345 California Stree: San Francisco. CA 94104-2623 415 984-3600 October 25. 2001 Mr. Hu--h Rilev Assistant Citv Manaser City of Moorpark X99 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark. CA 93021 Dear Mr. Riley: It is truly a pleasure to present the following financial analysis to the City and Redevelopment Agency of Moorpark. This analysis is intended to provide your Cit}• Council and your office with a preliminary view of the credit packages that we hope to present to the rating agencies and municipal bond insurers on your behalf. Based on our due diligence review. the credit position of both the City and Agency is excellent. We believe that the Agency can prudently raise upwards of SIO million for redevelopment improvements. including the Public Safety facility. The City is also in a very solid financial position. We are reasonably certain that the City can raise the requisite funds to complete the Civic Center undertaking. Thank you again for this opportunity to work with the City and Agency of Moorpark. 4CBBes7 urran Manazina Director Public Finance Nonoeposit Investment progucts are not insured by the FDIC. are not deposits or otne obligations of or guaranteed by U.S. BanK National Association or Its affiliates. and involve Investment nsKs. including possibie loss of the pnnclpai amount invested. SecuntleS products and services are offered through U.S. Bancorp Pipe„affrav Inc.. memoer SIPC and NYSE. Inc.. a subsldian,of U.S. Bancorp. TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Power Point of Proposed Moorpark Redevelopment Agency, Series 2001 Bond Financing II. Summary of Financial Analysis for Moorpark Redevelopment Agency, Series 2001 Bond Financing III. Moorpark Redevelopment Agency, Series 2001 Bond Financing Cashflows and Financial Model I Financing Presentation to the City of Moorpark Redevelopment Agency Forthe Series 2001 Tax Allocation Bond Financing bancorp October Za, Zool Piper Jaffray, City of Moorpark Redevelopment Agency •The Assessed Value in the Project Area has Averaged over 7°Io Annual Growth Since 1995 *The Assessed Value in the Project Area has Averaged Annual Growth of 6.6% Since the Agency's Last Bond Issue in 1999 •The Current Assessed Value in the Project Area is over $500,000,000 *As a Result, Tax Increment Revenues have Grown to $2.6 Million City of Moorpark Redevelopment Agency 2002 Assessed Value $525,655,494 Less Base Year (1988-89) $264,798,987 - Incremental Value $260,866,507 Incremental Revenue $2,634,752 (Tax Rate 1.01 %) City of Moorpark Redevelopment Agency Historical Assessed Value 550,000,000 ----------- 500,000,000 - 450,000,000 - 400,000,000 350,000,000 _. ---- - 300,000,000 - 250,000,000 200,000,000 - - 150,000,000 100,000,000 -- 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 Cit y of Moorpark Redevelopment Agency *Due to the Growth in Tax Increment Revenues, current Coverage is strong at 2.44%. Gross Tax Revenues $2,6349752 - Less Housing Set Aside $5269950 County Tax Admin. Fee $529695 Senior Revenue Sharing Agreements $558,238 = Pledged Tax Revenues $194969869 Debt Service on the 1999 Bonds $614,082 Coverage 2.44% Cit y of Moorpark Redevelopment Agency Revenues Available for New Bonds: Pledged Revenues $2,107,801 Less Sr. Obligations $610,993 Balance $1,496,868 Available Based on 125% Coverage $1,197,495 Less Series 1999 Bonds $614.082 Available for New Bonds $583,413 Pledged Revenuesand Other Agency Revnues $2,301,537 Less Sr. Obligations and Series 1999 Bonds $1,225,015 Less Subordinate Obligations JE8 258 Balance $531,007 Available for New Bonds $531,007 City of Moorpark Redevelopment Agency •This Financing will Take Advantage of Solid Assessed Value Growth in the Project Area over the Last 5+ years. *The Series 2001 Bonds will Produce over $10 Million for New Projects *Debt Service from the Series 2001 Bonds will Wrap Around That of the Outstanding Series 1999 Bonds to Create Level Debt Service Throughout the Life of the Financings Cit y Moorpark of Redevelopment Agency Series 1999 Bond Debt Service 1,250,000 1,150,000 - -- - - - -- - -- - - 1,050,000 -- - - ---- - - - --- - - - -- - - - -- _ 950,000 -. .---- -- ---- - - - 850,000 - 750,000 --_. .---- --- ---- - -- ----- -- 650,000 - --- -- ---- -- --- - --- -- - --- --- -- -- -- _ 550,000 -- - ----... .---- -- 450,000 _ ---- --- - ----- 350,000 --- - --- --- --._... .._ 250,000 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N City Moorpark of Redevelopment Agency Series 2001 Bonds Debt Service 1,250,000.00 1,150,000.00 - - - - - - - - - - - 1,050,000.00 - - -- - - ---- - 950,000.00 850,000.00 - --- -- -. .--- 750,000.00 -- - - --- -- - --- --- - - --- 650,000.00 --- - - - - - 550,000.00 450,000.00 350,000.00 250,000-00 - - 02 City of Moorpark Redevelopment Agency 1,250,000.00 1,150,000.00 1,050,000.00 950,000.00 850,000.00 750,000.00 650,000.00 550,000.00 450,000.00 350,000.00 250,000.00 Series 1999 and 2001 Bonds Debt Service N co to CO N W O O N CO V to t0 N O O 0N N N N N g N O N d N N O O N d N O N O N O N O N N O d N O O N� N N N O O O O O O 0 ° O N N N F Series 2 001 Bonds ■Series 1999 Bonds City of Moorpark Redevelopment Agency Tax Increment Revenues Available for New Debt Service Based on No Growth in Assessed Value Fiscal Year Available Revenues 2002 $531,007 2018 $789,896 2019 $1,427,482 2030 $1,704,471 City of Moorpark Redevelopment Agency Uses of Bond Proceeds 189 034.06 304,782.50 580,192.50 -- w 10,020,990.94 L�Bond Proceeds■Deposit to Debt Service Reserve Fund❑Bond Insurance(80.0 bpp Costs of Issuance Cit y of Moorpark Redevelopment Agency Uses of Tax Increment 20% - - 20% 2% 8% 6% 21% 23% 0 Housing Set Aside (20%) ■ County Tax Admin Fee ❑ Senior Pass Throughs ❑ Series 1999 Bond Debt Service(1) ■ Subordinate Pass Throughs ■Agency Administration ■ Series 2001 Bonds Debt Service J Cit y of Moorpark Redevelopment Agency Projected Uses of Agency Revenues (Assuming 3% Growth in Increment) 12,000,000 - - -- - ---- - 10,000,000 - - -- -- -..-- - -- Represents One - Time Payment from 8,000,000 - - ---- -- -- t e County 6,000,000 4,000,000 - 2,000,000 � Cp O O w NN r co CO O) O O O p O O $ $ O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N l N N ■Revenues of Agency ■Series 2001 Debt Service ■Series 1999 Debt Service ■Housing Set Aside ■Subordinate Rev Sharing Agreements ■Senior Rev Sharing Agreements D Agency Administration Fees _ ■County Administration Fees — I October 22, 2001 City of Moorpark Redevelopment Agency Tax Allocation Bonds, Series 2001 Summary of Financial Analysis The following presents a financing scenario for the City of Moorpark Redevelopment Agency (the "Agency") for various improvements within their Redevelopment Project Area (the "Area"). After conversations with the City, the Agency and the Citv's Financial Advisor, urban Futures Inc. and reviewing the appropriate documents, a preliminary model for a proposed Series 2001 tax allocation financing was constructed that will meet the following goals: I. Utilize the impressive growth in assessed value within the Project Area over the last few years to issue additional bonds to the currently outstanding Series 1999 Bond Issue. The Series 2001 bonds will provide funds to pay for new improvements within the Project Area. 2. Structure a financing, whose annual debt service. when combined with that of the Series 1999 Bonds will have at least 125% coverage from Series 2002 tax increment revenues. 3. Structure debt service on the Series 2001 Bonds that "wraps around" that of the outstanding Series 1999 Bonds. This will provide for level annual debt service throughout the Iife of the financings. 4. Structure a financing that provides sufficient funds after the payment of debt service to meet all administrative needs of the Agency. Redevelopment Project Areas and Tax Allocation Financing Redevelopment Agencies are a tool utilized by cities to eliminate blighted areas. In order to finance the elimination of blight, agencies undertake tax allocation financings. When a City establishes a project area, the year in which it is established is its base year and thus its first year to allocate taxes from the project area. After the Project Area has been established, any incremental increase in assessed value over the base year is considered the incremental value of the Project Area. The tax revenues generated from the incremental value increase over the base year multiplied by the current tax rate are tax increment revenues. These revenues less any proceeds to the low and moderate income housing fund and other pre-established tax revenue sharing agreements with other taxing I City o_f Moorpark Redevelopment Agency Page agencies(discussed below), are to be used by the Redevelopment Agency for uses within the Project Area. Using the Moorpark Redevelopment Agency as an example, how tax increment is generated is illustrated below: 2002 Assessed Value ; S525,655.494 I Less Base Year Value (1988-89) $264,798,987 Incremental Value S260,866,507 i I Incremental Revenue (Incremental Value ! $2,634,752 Multiplied by the Tax Rate (1.01%)) Below is a description of the allocation of incremental tax detailed above. Low and Moderate Income Housing Set Aside Redevelopment Agency Law stipulates that at least 20% of tax increment revenues must be set aside and put into the housing set aside fund(the "H.S.A. Fund"). Money in the housing fund must be used to increase the stock of low and moderate income housing within the Citv. Senior Revenue Sharing Agreement Redevelopment Agencies often enter into agreements with other taxing entities as a way to allocate the incremental tax revenues generated in a Project Area. Senior Revenue Sharing Agreements are paid prior to any outstanding bond's debt service payments. The following is a list of the taxing entities that have entered into Senior Revenue Sharing Agreements with the Moorpark Redevelopment Agency. 1. Ventura Countv 2. Ventura County Superintendant of Schools 3. Mosquito Abatement District (whose successor agency is the City of Moorpark) Subordinate Revenue Sharing Agreements Subordinate Revenue Sharing Agreements are also a way for taxing agencies and the Agency to allocate incremental tax revenues generated in the Project Area. However. these agreements have a subordinate lien on tax increment revenues to both Senior Revenue Sharing Agreements and debt service due on outstanding bond issues. Although these agreements have a subordinate lien on tax increment, they must be paid in full every year. A Redevelopment Agency cannot issue so many bonds that the annual debt service payments leave insufficient tax revenues to fully pay the subordinate revenue sharing agreements. The following is a list of the taxing entities that have entered into Subordinate Revenue Sharing Agreements with the Moorpark Redevelopment Agency. I. Moorpark Unified School District i City of]Moorpark Redevelopment Agency Page 3 2. Ventura County Community College District Administration Fees A portion of tax increment revenues also go to pay administration fees. Approximately 2% of the Moorpark Redevelopment Project Area tax increment pays the County for a tax collection administration fee. Additionally, a portion of tax increment, 5211,000 in 2002, is paid to the Redevelopment Agency for the administration of the Project Area. However, the County Administration Fee has a Senior Lien on tax revenues to any outstanding debts, while the Agency Administration Fee is paid after all outstanding debts and revenue sharing agreements are paid. Available Revenues for Series 2001 Bonds The factors above contribute to the total amount of revenues that will be available to make debt service payments on both the Series 1999 Bonds and the proposed Series 2001 Bonds. After reviewing the above mentioned factors a financing was structured for the Series 2001 Bonds, with maximum annual debt service payments that would be limited to the lesser of the following two constriants. 1. 125% Coverage on all Outstanding Debt Service: As stated in the Bond Indenture of the Official Statement for the Series 1999 Bonds, to issue any parity debt, debt service coverage from pledged revenues on both the Series 1999 Bonds and any additional Bonds must be at least 125%. Pledged revenues in this constraint consist of tax increment revenues (for Rating Agency purposes no growth is assumed and revenues are held constant at 2002 levels) less the Housing Set Aside Amount, less the amount to pay Senior Revenue Sharing Agreements, less the County Tax Administration Fee. 2. 100% Coverage on all Outstanding Debts and Agreements of the Agency: Available revenues to pay debt service in this constraint are the total amount of tax increment revenues (growing at a very modest 3% annually) less the Housing Set Aside Amount, less the amount to pay Senior Revenue Sharing Agreements, less the Amount to pay Subordinate Revenue Sharing Agreements, less Series 1999 Bond annual Debt Service, less the County Tax Administration fee. less the Redevelopment Agency Administration fee. The remaining revenues are available for debt service on the Series 2001 Bonds. By adhering to the lesser of the above two constraints, the Agency will insure that there is at least 125% coverage on the Series 2001 Bonds, that all of the taxing entities receive their portion of the increment revenues and that the Redevelopment Agency will be paid their administration fee. i City of Moorpark Redevelopment Agency Page 4 Series 2001 Bonds Structure — Debt Service Wrapping Around the Outstanding Bonds After reviewing the above constraints, it was determined that the best structure for the Series 2001 Bonds would be to have debt service that "wrapped" around that of the outstanding Series 1999 Bonds. The Series 1999 Bond's debt service is approximately 616,000 annually (actual debt service is approximately $770,000, but 20% is paid from the low and moderate income housing fund) and runs only through 2018. Since most new tax allocation issues are 30 year financings, we have structured the Series 2001 Bonds as a 30 year financing with mostly interest coming due through 2018 and the bulk of the principle maturing between 2019 and 2030. This structure is "back loaded," so that when combined with the Series 1999 Bonds, total debt service is level. Bond Issue Based on the lesser of the above mentioned debt service constraints and a "back loaded" structure, it was determined that the Moorpark Redevelopment Agency could support a 511,095,000 bond issue. A bond issue of this size would generate approximately $10,020,990 in bond proceeds that could be used by the Redevelopment Agency for projects in the Project Area. The difference between the bond issue size and the bond issue proceeds is due to the cost of issuance of the bonds. The cost of issuance include bond council, financial advisor, trustee, underwriting, rating agency and other miscellaneous fees. In addition, the cost of issuance will fund a debt service reserve fund and pay the cost of bond insurance. We anticipate bond insurance will cost approximately 80 basis points of the bond issue, however bond insurance will provide the financing with a AAA rating and very low interest rates. The Series 2001 Bonds will have a debt service reserve fund that will be on parity with that of the Series 1999 Bonds. Parity reserve funds means that the combined balance in each fund must be equal to maximum annual debt service of both the Series 1999 and the Series 2001 Bonds. When combined, maximum annual debt service on both issues is approximately 51.35 million. The total reserve fund deposit from the Series 1999 Bonds is currently 5770,000, therefore the amount needed to be deposited into the Series 2001 Reserve Fund is $580.000. This amount is approximately half of what would be needed if the reserve funds were not on parity. By being able to make a smaller deposit into the reserve fund, the Agency will receive a larger amount of bond proceeds. The Agency is able to generate such a large amount of bond proceeds even with the above constraints because the market's current interest rates on insured bond issues is extremely low. Due to the Series 1999 Bonds being insured and the stellar assessed value growth in the Project Area, the Series 2001 Bonds should have no trouble being insured by one of the larger monoline insurance companies. Conclusion Incremental tax revenues within the Project Area have grown impressively over the last few years. The increased revenues along with the market's current low interest rates, will allow the Redevelopment Agency to issue a bond issue that will generate over I City of Moorpark Redevelopment Agency Page 5 $10 million in bond proceeds to be used on projects within the Project Area. By structuring debt service that wraps around that of the Series 1999 Bonds, total debt service will be level throughout the life of the financings. By keeping debt service level and not growing it over time as the assessed value of the Project Area grows, the Agency is giving itself a cushion in case of a slight decrease in assessed value. This financing is the most appropriate structure for the Agency, because it maximizes the amount of proceeds the Agency can raise todav, while remaining conservative in terms of assumed assessed value growth. $11,095,000 City of Moorpark RDA Series 2001 Bonds SOURCES&USES Dated 1210112001 Delivered 1210112001 SOURCES OF FUNDS Par Amount of Bonds........................................................................................... $11,095,000.00 TOTALSOURCES................................................................................................. $11,095,000.00 USES OF FUNDS BondProceeds..................................................................................................... 10.020,990.94 Deposit to Debt Service Reserve Fund(OSRF)....................................................... 580,192.50 - Gross Bond Insurance Premium(80.0 bp)............................................................ 189,034.06 Total Underwriter's Discount (1.350%)............................................................... 149,782.50 Bond/Disclosure Counsel..................................................................................... 62,000.00 FinancialAdvisor.................................................................................................. 40,500.00 RatingAgency Fee............................................................................................... 22,000.00 POSIOfficial Statement....................................................................I................... 13,000.00 Miscellaneous...................................................................................................... 10,000.00 Trustee&Counsel Fees....................................................................................... 7,500.00 TOTALUSES....................................................................................................... $11,095,000.00 US Bancorp Piper Jafrray fBe- Tabs.sf•Series 1001 Max Debt-SINGLE PURPOSE Public finance 101251200112:26 PM Page 1 $11,095,000 City of Moorpark HDA Series 2001 Bonds DEBT SERVICE SCHEDULE Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P+I 1010112002 75,000.00 2.200% 453,250.00 528,250.00 1010112003 - 542,250.00 542,250.00 1010112004 10,000.00 2.700% 542,250.00 552,250.00 1010112005 30,000.00 2.850% 541,980.00 571,980.00 1010112006 40,000.00 3.150% 541,125.00 581,125.00 1010112007 40,000.00 3.350% 539,865.00 579,865.00 1010112008 40,000.00 3.550% 538,525.00 578,525.00 1010112009 45,000.00 3.700% 537,105.00 582,105.00 1010112010 45,000.00 3.850% 535,440.00 580,440.00 1010112011 45,000.00 3.950% 533,707.50 578,707.50 1010112012 50,000.00 4.050% 531,930.00 581,930.00 1010112013 50,000.00 4.200% 529,905.00 579,905.00 — 1010112014 50,000.00 4.300% 527,805.00 577,805.00 1010112015 55,000.00 4.400% 525,655.00 580,655.00 1010112016 55,000.00 4.500% 523,235.00 578,235.00 1010112017 60,000.00 4.600% 520,760.00 580,760.00 1010112018 60,000.00 4.700% 518,000.00 578,000.00 1010112019 680,000.00 4.800% 515,180.00 1,195,180.00 1010112020 710,000.00 4.900% 482,540.00 1,192,540.00 1010112021 745,000.00 5.000% 447,750.00 1,192,750.00 1010112022 785,000.00 5.000% 410,500.00 1,195,500.00 1010112023 825,000.00 5.000% 371,250.00 1,196,250.00 1010112024 865,000.00 5.000% 330,000.00 1,195,000.00 1010112025 905,000.00 5.000% 286,750.00 1,191,750.00 1010112026 950,000.00 5.000% 241,500.00 1,191,500.00 1010112027 1,000,000.00 5.000% 194,000.00 1,194,000.00 1010112028 1,050,000.00 5.000% 144,000.00 1,194,000.00 1010112029 1,100,000.00 5.000% 91,500.00 1,191,500.00 1010112030 730,000.00 5.000% 36,500.00 766,500.00 Total 11,095,000.00 12,534,257.50 23,629,257.50 US Bancorp Piper Jaffray File- Tabs.sf-Series 1001 Max Debt.SINGLE PURPOSE Public Finance 1012WO01 12.•26PM Page 2 $11,095,000 City of Moorpark RDA Series 2001 Bonds DEBT SERVICE SCHEDULE YIELD STATISTICS BondYear Dollars............................................................................................................................................ $252,635.83 AverageLife.................................................................................................................................................... 22.770 Years AverageCoupon.............................................................................................................................................. 4.9613934% NetInterest Cost(NIC►.................................................................................................................................... 5.0206813% TrueInterest Cost(TIC)................................................................................................................................... 5.0541347% Bond Yield for Arbitrage Purposes.................................................................................................................... 5.0811932% AllInclusive Cost(AIC).................................................................................................................................... 5.2961499% IRS FORM 8038 NetInterest Cost............................................................................................................................................. 4.9613934% WeightedAverage Maturity............................................................................................................................. 22.770 Years US Bancorp Piper Jaffrey rile- Tabs.sf-Series 2001 Max Debt S/N6[E PURPOSE Public finance 101251200112:26 PM Page 3 $11,095,000 City of Moorpark RDA Series 2001 Bonds NET DEBT SERVICE SCHEDULE Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P+I OSR Net New DIS 1010112002 75,000.00 2.200% 453,250.00 528,250.00 528,250.00 1010112003 542,250.00 542,250.00 542,250.00 1010112004 10,000.00 2.700% 542,250.00 552,250.00 552,250.00 1010112005 30,000.00 2.850% 541,980.00 571,980.00 571,980.00 1010112006 40,000.00 3.150% 541,125.00 581,125.00 581,125.00 1010112007 40,000.00 3.350% 539,865.00 579,865.00 579,865.00 1010112008 40,000.00 3.550% 538,525.00 578,525.00 578,525.00 1010112009 45,000.00 3.700% 537,105.00 582,105.00 582,105.00 1010112010 45,000.00 3.850% 535,440.00 580,440.00 580,440.00 1010112011 45,000.00 3.950% 533,707.50 578,707.50 578,707.50 1010112012 50,000.00 4.050% 531,930.00 581,930.00 581,930.00 1010112013 50,000.00 4.200% 529,905.00 579,905.00 579,905.00 1010112014 50,000.00 4.300% 527,805.00 577,805.00 577,805.00 - 1010112015 55,000.00 4.400% 525,655.00 580,655.00 580,655.00 1010112016 55,000.00 4.500% 523,235.00 578,235.00 578,235.00 1010112017 60,000.00 4.600% 520,760.00 580,760.00 580,760.00 1010112018 60,000.00 4.700% 518,000.00 578,000.00 578,000.00 1010112019 680,000.00 4.800% 515,180.00 1,195,180.00 1,195,180.00 1010112020 710,000.00 4.900% 482,540.00 1,192,540.00 1,192,540.00 1010112021 745,000.00 5.000% 447,750.00 1,192,750.00 1,192,750.00 1010112022 785,000.00 5.000% 410,500.00 1,195,500.00 1,195,500.00 1010112023 825,000.00 5.000% 371,250.00 1,196,250.00 1,196,250.00 1010112024 865,000.00 5.000% 330,000.00 1,195,000.00 1,195,000.00 1010112025 905,000.00 5.000% 286,750.00 1,191,750.00 1,191,750.00 1010112026 950,000.00 5.000% 241;500.00 1,191,500.00 1,191,500.00 1010112027 1,000,000.00 5.000% 194,000.00 1,194,000.00 1,194,000.00 1010112028 1,050,000.00 5.000% 144,000.00 1,194,000.00 1,194,000.00 1010112029 1,100,000.00 5.000% 91,500.00 1,191,500.00 1,191,500.00 1010112030 730,000.00 5.000% 36,500.00 766,500.00 766,500.00 1010112031 (580,192.50) (580,192.501 Total 11,095,000.00 12,534,257.50 23,629,257.50 (580,192.50) 23,049,065.00 US Bancorp Poor Jeffrey file- rabs.sGSeries 1001 Max Debt-SINGLE PURPOSE Pubrrc Finance 1012511001 11.•16PM Page 4 Table 1 City of Moorpark RDA Redevelopment Project Area Fiscal Year Assessed Value Chang 1995-96 352,136,613 1996-97 408,915,260 16.12% 1997-98 415,327,260 1.57% 1998-99 434,514,943 4.62% 1999-00 449,056,203 3.35% 2000-01 497,354,056 10.76% 2001-02 525,665,494 5.69% Base Year 88-89 264,798,987 50.37% Incremental Value 260,866,507 49.63% Acreage 1,217 Adoption Date 05-Jul-89 Last Day to Incur Debt 05-Jul-09 Term of Plan 05-Jul-29 — Last Day to Collect Revenues 05-Jul-39 Maximum Bonded Indebtedness 60,000,000 Maximum Tax Increment 180,000,000 Growth Assumption 3.00% Tax Rate Assumption 1.01% Prepared by US Bancorp Piper Jaffray Page 1 10/25/01 Table 2 City of Moorpark RDA Increment Revenues Less Housing Set Aside Fiscal Year Total Taxable Assumed Tax Revenues Housing Set Revenues Ending Value Growth% Total Increment (1.01%) Aside(20916) Less Housing 2002 525,665,494 260,866,507 2,634,752 526,950 2,107,801 2003 541,435,459 3% 276,636,472 2,794,028 558,806 2,235,223 2004 557,678,523 3% 292,879,536 2,958,083 591,617 2,366,467 2005 574,408,878 3% 309,609,891 3,127,060 625,412 2,501,648 2006 591,641,145 3% 326,842,158 3,301,106 660,221 2,640,885 2007 609,390,379 3% 344,591,392 3,480,373 696,075 2,784,298 2008 627,672,090 3% 362,873,103 3,665,018 733,004 2,932,015 2009 646,502,253 3% 381,703,266 3,855,203 771,041 3,084,162 2010 665,897,321 3% 401,098,334 4,051,093 810,219 3,240,875 2011 685,874,240 3% 421,075,253 4,252,860 850,572 3,402,288 2012 706,450,467 3% 441,651,480 4,460,680 892,136 3,568,544 2013 727,643,981 3% 462,844,994 4,674,734 934,947 3,739,788 _ 2014 749,473,301 3% 484,674,314 4,895,211 979,042 3,916,168 2015 771,957,500 3% 507,158,513 5,122,301 1,024,460 4,097,841 2016 795,116,225 3% 530,317,238 5,356,204 1,071,241 4,284,963 2017 818,969,712 3% 554,170,725 5,597,124 1,119,425 4,477,699 2018 843,538,803 3% 578,739,816 5,845,272 1,169,054 4,676,218 2019 868,844,967 3% 604,045,980 6,100,864 1,220,173 4,880,692 2020 894,910,316 3% 630,111,329 6,364,124 1,272,825 5,091,300 2021 921,757,626 3% 656,958,639 6,635,282 1,327,056 5,308,226 2022 949,410,354 3% 684,611,367 6,914,575 1,382,915 5,531,660 2023 977,892,665 3% 713,093,678 7,202,246 1,440,449 5,761,797 2024 1,007,229,445 3% 742,430,458 7,498,548 1,499,710 5,998,838 2025 1,037,446,328 3% 772,647,341 7,803,738 1,560,748 6,242,991 2026 1,068,569,718 3% 803,770,731 8,118,084 1,623,617 6,494,468 2027 1,100,626,810 3% 835,827,823 8,441,861 1,688,372 6,753,489 2028 1,133,645,614 3% 868,846,627 8,775,351 1,755,070 7,020,281 2029 1,167,654,982 3% 902,855,995 9,118,846 1,823,769 7,295,076 2030 1,202,684,632 3% 937,885,645 9,472,645 1,894,529 7,578,116 2031 1,238,765,171 3% 973,966,184 9,837,058 1,967,412 7,869,647 2032 1,275,928,126 3% 1,011,129,139 10,212,404 2,042,481 8,169,923 2033 1,314,205,970 3% 1,049,406,983 10,599,011 2,119,802 8,479,208 Prepared by US Bancorp Piper Jaffray Page 2 10125101 Table 3 City of Moorpark RDA Calculation of Maximum Debt Service Based on Additional Bonds Test Senior Pass Max.Debt Fiscal Revenues Less Throughs Based Service Based Series 1999 Max.Debt Year Housing Based County Tax on No Growth in Total Pledged on 125% Bond Debt Service for Ending on No Growth Admin Fee Assessed Value Revenues Coverage Service(1) New Bonds 2002 2,107,801 52,695 558,238 1,496,868 1,197,495 614,082 583,413 2003 2,107,801 52,695 558,272 1,496,835 1,197,468 615,716 581,752 2004 2,107,801 52,695 558,306 1,496,800 1,197,440 616,620 580,820 2005 2,107,801 52,695 558,341 1,496,766 1,197,412 612,770 584,642 2006 2,107,801 52,695 558,376 1,496,730 1,197,384 616,134 581,250 2007 2,107,801 52,695 558,413 1,496,694 1,197,355 614,534 582,821 2008 2,107,801 52,695 558,450 1,496,657 1,197,325 616,102 581,223 2009 2,107,801 52,695 558,487 1,496,619 1,197,295 612,830 584,465 2010 2,107,601 52,695 558,526 1,496,581 1,197,265 614,305 582,960 2011 2,107,801 52,695 558,565 1,496,541 1,197,233 614,805 582,428 2012 2,107,801 52,695 558,605 1,496,501 1,197,201 614,330 582,871 - 2013 2,107,801 52,695 558,646 1,496,461 1,197,168 616,880 580,288 2014 2,107,801 52,695 558,687 1,496,419 1,197,135 614,260 582,875 2015 2,107,801 52,695 558,730 1,496,376 1,197,101 614,665 582,436 2016 2,107,801 52,695 558,773 1,496,333 1,197,066 613,900 583,166 2017 2,107,801 52,695 558,817 1,496,289 1,197,031 615,965 581,066 2018 2,107,801 52,695 558,863 1,496,244 1,196,995 616,665 580,330 2019 2,107,801 52,695 558,909 1,496,198 1,196,958 1,196,958 2020 2,107,801 52,695 558,955 1,496,151 1,196,921 1,196,921 2021 2,107,801 52,695 559,003 1,496,103 1,196,882 1,196,882 2022 2,107,801 52,695 559,052 1,496,054 1,196,843 1,196,843 2023 2,107,801 52,695 559,102 1,496,005 1,196,804 1,196,804 2024 2,107,801 52,695 559,153 1,495,954 1,196,763 1,196,763 2025 2,107,801 52,695 559,204 1,495,902 1,196,722 1,196,722 2026 2,107,801 52,695 559,257 1,495,849 1,196,679 1,196,679 2027 2,107,801 52,695 559,311 1,495,795 1,196,636 1,196,636 2028 2,107,801 52,695 559,366 1,495,740 1,196,592 1,196,592 2029 2,107,801 52,695 559,422 1,495,684 1,196,547 1,196,547 2030 2,107,801 52,695 559,479 1,495,627 1,196,502 1,196,502 2031 2,107,801 52,695 559,538 1,495,569 1,196,455 1,196,455 2032 2,107,801 52,695 559,597 1,495,509 1,196,407 1,196,407 2033 2,107,801 52,695 559,658 1,495,449 1,196,359 1,196,359 (1)Less 20%of debt service funded from the low Income housing fund. Prepared by US Bancorp Piper Jaffray Page 3 10125101 Table 4 City of Moorpark RDA Calculation of Maximum Debt Service Based on Actual Projected Revenues Revenues Less Housing Subordinate Fiscal Year Based on 3% Other Revenues Senior Pass Pass Pledged Ending Growth in AV to the Agency(1) Throughs Throughs Revenues 2002 2,107,801 193,736 558,238 167,258 1,576,041 2003 2,235,223 199,548 650,665 176,452 1,607,653 2004 2,366,467 205,535 745,865 185,918 1,640,217 2005 2,501,648 211,701 843,921 195,664 1,673,764 2006 2,640,885 218,052 944,917 205,697 1,708,322 2007 2,784,298 224,593 1,048,944 216,026 1,743,922 2008 2,932,015 231,331 1,156,090 226,660 1,780,595 2009 3,084,162 1,238,271 1,266,451 237,609 2,818,374 2010 3,240,875 245,419 1,380,122 248,880 1,857,291 2011 3,402,288 252,782 1,497,203 260,485 1,897,382 2012 3,568,544 260,365 1,617,796 272,432 1,938,681 2013 3,739,788 268,176 1,742,006 284,732 1,981,225 - 2014 3,916,168 276,221 1,869,942 297,396 2,025,051 2015 4,097,841 284,508 2,001,716 310,434 2,070,198 2016 4,284,963 293,043 2,137,443 323,858 2,116,705 2017 4,477,699 301,834 2,277,241 337,678 2,164,614 2018 4,676,218 310,889 2,421,233 351,907 2,213,967 2019 4,880,692 320,216 2,569,543 366,557 2,264,807 2020 5,091,300 329,823 2,722,303 381,640 2,317,179 2021 5,308,226 339,717 2,879,645 397,169 2,371,129 2022 5,531,660 349,909 3,041,707 413,158 2,426,704 2023 5,761,797 360,406 3,208,630 429,620 2,483,953 2024 5,998,838 371,218 3,380,560 446,568 2,542,927 2025 6,242,991 382,355 3,557,648 464,019 2,603,678 2026 6,494,468 393,825 3,740,048 481,986 2,666,259 2027 6,753,489 405,640 3,927,919 500,484 2,730,725 2028 7,020,281 417,809 4,121,426 519,531 2,797,133 2029 7,295,076 430,344 4,320,738 539,141 2,865,541 2030 7,578,116 443,254 4,526,028 559,332 2,936,009 2031 7,869,647 456,552 4,737,477 580,122 3,008,600 2032 8,169,923 470,248 4,955,268 601,526 3,083,377 2033 8,479,208 484,356 5,179,593 623,565 3,160,406 (1)Includes lease revenues and Interest earnings. In addition,a one time payment of$1 million from the County to the Ageny in 2009 Prepared by US Bancorp Piper Jaffray Page 4 10125101 Table 5 City of Moorpark RDA Calculation of Maximum Debt Service Based on Actual Projected Growth Revenues Less Series 1999 Bonds and Admin Fees Revenues Revenues Less Series 1999 Less County Available for Less Pass Bonds Debt Less Agency Tax Admin Additional Fiscal Year Throughs Service(1) Admin Fees Bonds 2002 1,576,041 614,082 211,000 52,695 531,007 2003 1,607,653 615,716 217,330 55,881 542,274 2004 1,640,217 616,620 223,850 59,162 554,667 2005 1,673,764 612,770 230,565 62,541 572,224 2006 1,708,322 616,134 237,482 66,022 582,987 2007 1,743,922 614,534 244,607 69,607 599,147 2008 1,780,595 616,102 251,945 73,300 612,587 2009 2,818,374 612,830 259,503 77,104 1,631,328 2010 1,857,291 614,305 267,288 81,022 645,796 2011 1,897,382 614,805 275,307 85,057 661,728 2012 1,938,681 614,330 283,566 89,214 679,139 2013 1,981,225 616,880 292,073 93,495 694,044 2014 2,025,051 614,260 300,836 97,904 714,655 2015 2,070,198 614,665 309,861 102,446 732,792 2016 2,116,705 613,900 319,156 107,124 752,667 2017 2,164,614 615,965 328,731 111,942 770,298 2018 2,213,967 616,665 338,593 116,905 789,896 2019 2,264,807 348,751 122,017 1,427,482 2020 2,317,179 359,213 127,282 1,449,043 2021 2,371,129 369,990 132,706 1,471,264 2022 2,426,704 381,089 138,291 1,494,165 2023 2,483,953 392,522 144,045 1,517,766 2024 2,542,927 404,298 149,971 1,542,090 2025 2,603,678 416,427 156,075 1,567,158 2026 2,666,259 428,920 162,362 1,592,992 2027 2,730,725 441,787 168,837 1,619,616 2028 2,797,133 455,041 175,507 1,647,054 2029 2,865,541 468,692 182,377 1,675,331 2030 2,936,009 482,753 189,453 1,704,471 2031 3,008,600 497,235 196,741 1,734,502 2032 3,083,377 512,152 204,248 1,765,450 2033 3,160,406 527,517 211,980 1,797,343 (1)Less 20%of debt service funded from the low income housing fund. Prepared by US Bancorp Piper Jaffray Page 5 10125101 Table 6 City of Moorpark RDA Revenues Available for Series 2001 Bonds Available Revenues Available Constraint for Series 2001 Based on No Revenues Based Series 2001 Bonds Debt Fiscal Year Growth on 3%Growth Bonds Service Surplus Funds 2002 583,413 531,007 531,007 528,250 2,757 2003 581,752 542,274 542,274 542,250 24 2004 580,820 554,667 554,667 552,250 2,417 2005 584,642 572,224 572,224 571,980 244 2006 581,250 582,987 581,250 581,125 1,862 2007 582,821 599,147 582,821 579,865 19,282 2008 581,223 612,587 581,223 578,525 34,062 2009 584,465 1,631,328 584,465 582,105 1,049,223 2010 582,960 645,796 582,960 580,440 65,356 2011 582,428 661,728 582,428 578,708 83,020 2012 582,871 679,139 582,871 581,930 97,209 2013 580,288 694,044 580,288 579,905 114,139 2014 582,875 714,655 582,875 577,805 136,850 - 2015 582,436 732,792 582,436 580,655 152,137 2016 583,166 752,667 583,166 578,235 174,432 2017 581,066 770,298 581,066 580,760 189,538 2018 580,330 789,896 580,330 578,000 211,896 2019 1,196,958 1,427,482 1,196,958 1,195,180 232,302 2020 1,196,921 1,449,043 1,196,921 1,192,540 256,503 2021 1,196,882 1,471,264 1,196,882 1,192,750 278,514 2022 1,196,843 1,494,165 1,196,843 1,195,500 298,665 2023 1,196,804 1,517,766 1,196,804 1,196,250 321,516 2024 1,196,763 1,542,090 1,196,763 1,195,000 347,090 2025 1,196,722 1,567,158 1,196,722 1,191,750 375,408 2026 1,196,679 1,592,992 1,196,679 1,191,500 401,492 2027 1,196,636 1,619,616 1,196,636 1,194,000 425,616 2028 1,196,592 1,647,054 1,196,592 1,194,000 453,054 2029 1,196,547 1,675,331 1,196,547 1,191,500 483,831 2030 1,196,502 1,704,471 1,196,502 766,500 937,971 2031 1,196,455 1,734,502 1,196,455 2032 1,196,407 1,765,450 1,196,407 2033 1,196,359 1,797,343 1,196,359 Prepared by US Bancorp Piper Jaffray Page 6 10125101 URBAN FUTURES INCORPORATED Finance Redevelopment • Implementation Planning STAFF REPORT :�tcplveC TO: Hugh Riley, Assistant City Manager C' City of Moorpark FROM: Marshall F. Linn A.ssistal; office Urban Futures, Inc. DATE: October 8, 2001 SUBJECT: New Money 2001 Tax Allocation Bonds and financing Alternatives Related to the Funding of a New City Hall. As per your request, please find attached a draft sources and uses and a cash flow in regards to the Agency's proposed new money tax allocation bond issue needed to fund the proposed police and civic center. As we have discussed on the telephone numerous times, the Moorpark Redevelopment Agency has always been most fortunate in being able to issue bonds at the lowest point in an interest rate cycle. It appears we are going to be able to accomplish this goal again. For your review, and for the review of Steven Kueny, City Manager, I have attached a sources and uses for an $11,095,000 tax allocation bond issue which will net the Agency approximately $9,577,000 of proceeds to be used for the construction of a police facility and for the acquisition of various civic center properties by the Agency. Our latest runs are labeled Exhibit 1. You will note that we HAVE NOT bonded against the Agency's housing set-aside. If you wish us to capitalize the housing funds, we can. The choice is up to you, Steve and the Agency Board. Please note that Mark Curran has "run" the numbers at a 5 percent coupon rate with a $13.50 discount. I believe we will end up with a 5.10 percent coupon and a $12.50 discount rate. As per your request, a listing of fees has been provided in the sources and uses. Paul Thimmig is presently working with out staff and Mark's staff in the preparation of documents. All we need from you is an Agency and City Council agenda date. For your information I have also included as Exhibit 2 a tax increment growth summary. As can be seen, the value of the Project Area has doubled since the Plan's adoption in 1989. You will recall that you also requested that an analysis be prepared comparing variable rate financing vs. fixed rate financing for the proposed Certificate of Participation (the COP's) issue to construct City Hall. Exhibit 3 illustrates a fixed rate COP that nets $6,000,000 of proceeds using an aggressive rate of 5 percent on the term bonds. In order to achieve a net amount of$6,000,000, a COP in the amount of$7,335,000 will need to be issued. The total debt service (principal and interest)over the next 30 years would be $12,359,190. In order to present a truly objective analysis of variable rate financing, we have prepared three (3) financing scenarios. All are structured to result in a $6,000,000 net proceeds construction fund. Crestview Corporate Center.3111 N.Tustin Avenue.Suite 230.Orange.CA 92865-1753 Tel:(714)283-9334 Fax:(714)283-9319 email:Dianning@urbantuturesmc.com CITxe...a 00oare.200,JM Exhibit 4 illustrates a financing using today's historic (all inclusive) loan interest rate of 2.350 percent. Total debt service using current (however, most likely not achievable for the long run) rates would be $9,460,746. Exhibit 5 presents a scenario using average rates over the last five (5) months which has been 2.850 percent. Total debt service on this scenario is $10,171,809. Exhibit 6 is the most realistic scenario in that we have used a more realistic 10-year historic variable rate of 3.250 percent. Total debt service, for this most realistic scenario is $10,264,988. TOTAL DEBT SERVICE Exhibit 3: Fixed Rate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $12,359,190 Exhibit 4: Current Variable Rate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 9,460,746 Exhibit 5: Previous 5-Month Variable Rate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $10,171,809 Exhibit 6: 10-Year Historical Rate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $10,764,988 In summary, the most realistic comparison is using today's do-able fixed rate total compared with the 10-year historic average. I have presented this comparison below: TOT AL DEBT SERVICE Fixed Rate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $12,359,190 10-Year Historical Average . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $10,764.988 Difference . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ($1,594,202) In conclusion, a variable rate financing will best serve the City when it issues its COP's. Finally, you have asked me to prepare an analysis comparing bond financings vs. the use of City cash. Exhibit 7 demonstrates that the using COP (bond) financing in the long run best serves the economic interest of the City. For purposes of this analysis, we have assumed a historic L41F rate of 5.5 percent for the investment of City cash, which I believe is fair. As Exhibit 7 demonstrates, after year six(6)a positive charge results where the asset (cash invested in LAIF) ears $4,679,496 over total debt service needed to retire the COP issue. RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Immediately issue fully insured, AAA-rated tax allocation bonds by the early part of December. 2. Issue variable rate COP's next year when plans and price estimates are completed for the new City Hall. As always I am available to meet with you and Steve at your convenience. Z100F wr%,SWRpgt 01TA&"d 2 Oeobw 1.2001 OM $11,095,000 City of Moorpark RDA Series 2001 Bonds DEBT SERVICE SCHEDULE YIELD STATISTICS BondYear Dollars.......................................................................................................................................... $252.635.83 AverageLife.................................................................................................................................................. 27.770 Years AverageCoupon........................................................................................................................................... 49613934% NetInterest Cost INICI................................................................................................................................... 5.0106813% TrueInterest Cost(TIC)............................................................................................................................... 5.0541347% Bond Yield for Arbitrage Purposes. .............................................................................................................. 5.0811932% AllInclusive Cost IAICI.................................................................................................................................... 5.2961499% IRS FORM 8038 NetInterest Cost........................................................................................................................................ 4.9613934% WeightedAverage Maturity........................................................................................................................... 22 770 Years US Bancorp Pger Jiffrsy file- labs s1 Seiies 7001 Mir Gnbr SENGEf PURPOSE Public finance 10125x2001 17.26PM Page 3 w ' Re : Item 10 . C . MOORPARK CIVIC FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT and FINANCING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS OCTOBER 2001 MOORPARK CIVIC FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT and FINANCING RECOMMENDATIONS The following report outlines staff ' s findings and recommendations for the financing and development of new civic facilities for the City of Moorpark. These facilities include City Hall, Police Services Center and Public Works/Parks Corporation Yard. Exhibits referenced in the report are included in the Appendix. THE FACILITIES In March 2000 the City completed a space needs study. The study was prepared by Leach Mounce Architects of Ventura, California. The Final Report for this Study is the basis for the space and cost requirements that follow. A summary of the study is included in Exhibit A-1 of this report . The evaluation of locations and costs associated with site acquisition are discussed in the second part of the report . CITY HALL SIZE - Based on the Space Needs Study and subsequent information developed by staff, the City' s future needs for the City Council , Council Chambers, City Manager, City Clerk, Human Resources, Administrative Services, Community Development, Public Works (including Building Safety and Engineering) and Community Services will require a new, independently developed city hall facility with 32 , 700 square feet and parking space for approximately 230 cars (staff and visitor) on a site containing around 4 . 75 acres . The site size and parking requirements may vary slightly if the new city hall facility is developed in conjunction with other public facilities allowing for shared parking or if the facility is designed as a two story building. A summary of the building and site development estimates is provided in Exhibit A-2 . DEVELOPMENT COST - The estimated cost to design and construct a new city hall building excluding land cost is as follows : Construction $ 5, 660, 000 Design (10% of construction) $ 566, 000 Admin and Inspection (15% of construction) $ 849, 000 Contingency $ 300, 000 TOTAL $ 7, 375, 000 A Site Plan and Building Floor plan that are suitable for the City Hall facility are included in Exhibit A-3 of this report . Depending on the final site selection, a variety of building footprints including a multiple story structure and site plans could be used. POLICE SERVICES CENTER SIZE - A facility with approximately 18, 200 square feet will be needed for the Moorpark Police Department . An additional 3 , 100 square feet would be needed if the California Highway Patrol is to be located in the new center. The Space Needs study recommends a site containing between 2 . 5 and 3 acres with parking for about 120 vehicles . The space estimates for the Police Department include provisions for administration, possible future communications (dispatch) . No holding facilities are planned. The new facility would also provide space for an Emergency Operations Center. DEVELOPMENT COST - The cost to design and construct the proposed Police Services Center excluding land cost is as follows : Construction (Admin Svcs . ) $ 4, 400, 000 Construction (Highway Patrol) $ 650 , 000 Design (10% of construction) $ 505 , 000 Admin and Inspection (15% of construction) $` 757, 500 Contingency - $ 200 , 000 SUBTOTAL $ 6, 512 , 500 A Site Plan and Building Floor plan that are suitable for the Police Services Center are included in Exhibit A-4 of this report . Depending on the final site arrangement a variety of building footprints and site plans could be designed. PUBLIC WORKS/PARKS CORPORATION YARD SIZE - Based on the Space Needs Study the City will need a site with 1 . 5 to 2 acres for the Corporation Yard. The site will need a building of approximately 9, 400 square feet for operations, storage, street maintenance and public works yard storage; parking for about 50 vehicles for employees and visitors, a materials storage area and a grade separated dumping ramp (allowing direct dumps from trucks to containers) . Fueling facilities may also be included in the 2 plan but not necessarily constructed in the initial phase of development . A summary of the building and site development estimates for the Corporation Yard Facility is provided in Exhibit A-2 . DEVELOPMENT COST - The cost to design and construct the Corporate Yard building and facilities excluding land cost is as follows : Construction $ 1 , 275 , 000 Design (8% of construction) $ 102 , 000 Admin & Inspection (15% of construction) $ 191, 250 Contingency $ 75, 000 SUBTOTAL $ 1, 643 , 250 DEVELOPMENT COST SUMMARY City Hall $ 7 , 375, 000 Police Services Facility $ 6, 512 , 500 Corporation Yard $ 1, 643 , 250 GRAND TOTAL $15, 307, 750 BUILDING SITES CITY HALL After a study of numerous possible sites for 'a new City Hall and discussions with the City Council, site planning has recently been directed to the city owned property on Moorpark Avenue and adjacent property to the south. This is the site of the existing City Hall , Civic Center, Public Works Corporation Yard, Senior Center and County Library. The property includes two parcels owned by the Moorpark Redevelopment Agency. One of these parcels is an occupied, single-family rental house on Moorpark Avenue. The other parcel fronts on West High Street and is vacant . The redevelopment of the Civic Center Site with a new city hall presents a number of challenges and opportunities . The northern half of the site slopes from north to south and its dimensions limit the construction of a new facility to the existing city hall building site. Construction of a new city hall on the existing site without additional land would require a temporary relocation of all 3 city offices during construction. Suitable existing facilities where all offices could be temporarily situated with good public access are very limited. The best alternative for the development of a new city hall at the Moorpark Avenue location appears to be to enlarge the current site by acquiring additional properties to the south. These properties include the Moorpark Mobile Home Park (which has already been purchased) , a residence on West High Street, and commercial property at the northwest corner of Moorpark Avenue . Planning for this site will need to include provisions for the expansion of the library facilities . The structures and property ownership of the existing Civic Center area north of High Street and west of Moorpark Avenue are described in Exhibits A-5 and A-6 . The cost to acquire these properties and relocate the occupants is substantial . Based on recent appraisals and sales of comparable property in the area, staff estimates that this land cost, excluding the County Library, is $1, 490 , 000 . The probable cost associated with relocating the residents of the property is approximately $1, 052 , 367 including administrative costs for planning and property management . These costs are itemized as follows : LAND COST: Mobile Home Park - $ 900 , 000 Commercial Parcels - $ 400 , 000 ` Residential Parcel - $ 190, 000 TOTAL LAND $ 1, 490, 000 RELOCATION PAYMENTS : Mobile Home Park - $ 800, 000 Single Family (2) - $ 19, 500 Commercial (4) $ 85, 000 SUB TOTAL $ 904 , 500 20% contingency $ 180, 900 TOTAL RELOCATION $ 1, 085, 400 4 PROFESSIONAL FEES : Relocation Plan Preparation - $ 8, 275 Replacement Housing Plan $ 2 , 500 Implementation Services Residential - $ 57, 750 Implementation Services Commercial - $ 11, 750 Project Management $ 8 , 000 Property Management (estimated 12 months) $ 15, 000* TOTAL FEES $ 103 , 275 GRAND TOTAL SITE ACQUISITION $ 2 , 678 , 675 *Park rent income is expected to offset operating costs and pay for property management . SITE DEVELOPMENT AND REUSE - There are a variety of arrangements for the reuse of the existing Civic Center site and buildings . With the construction of a new city hall at the corner of High and Moorpark Avenue, the existing city hall could be acquired by the Redevelopment Agency for reuse to meet other important community facility needs . The City could utilize the sale proceeds for the new City Hall . The existing buildings could be dedicated for other community uses such as : Reuse City Hall building as a one-stop community services center to house various public service agencies such as Catholic Charities, Clinicas Del Camino Real (low cost medical care) , county human development services, child care, family and individual counseling services, legal aid and other services for Moorpark residents . Reuse City Hall building as a Teen Center. ➢ Expand Senior Center use in Civic Center Building and/or combinations of the above uses . ➢ Remove the Modular Annex at the north end of City Hall for additional parking or reuse the annex for some of the above uses . 5 Redevelop existing City Hall and office annex site with senior housing or commercial uses . it Buildings could be leased for commercial office space ORIENTATION OF NEW CITY HALL - Orienting the new City Hall to the Southeast, facing the High Street-Moorpark Avenue Intersection is recommended. Such an orientation will give the building a commanding presence at the west end of High Street creating community pride and inviting visitors . It will serve as the central focus for the City and an "anchor" for the downtown High Street area. An example of this orientation is demonstrated in Exhibit A-7 using the building concept developed in the Space Needs Study. Other building designs would be easily adapted to this site leaving sufficient room for parking, pedestrian-friendly circulation and attractive landscaping improvements . POLICE SERVICES CENTER The site for the new Police Services Center has already been designated by the City Council . A 7 . 52-acre site on Spring Road was acquired early in April by the Redevelopment Agency with agency funds and transportation improvement funds totaling $ 2 , 100, 000 . Approximately three acres of the site will be needed for the police facility. The land cost charged to the Police Services Center Project is $866 , 061 . Approximately three acres will remain available at the north end of the site for development uses consistent with the Downtown Specific Plan. The remaining property will be used for the widening of Spring Road and the realignment of Flinn Avenue to intersect Spring Road directly across from Second Street . This alignment will facilitate the installation of a traffic signal at this modified intersection. About 1 . 5 acres will be needed for the street widening and realignment . A site plan for development of the Police Services Center and alternatives for the realignment of Flinn Avenue are provided in Exhibit A-8 . PUBLIC WORKS/PARKS CORPORATION YARD The recommended site for a new Corporation Yard is a part of a 4 . 19-acre site at the end of Fitch Avenue . This parcel provides sufficient area (1 . 9 acres) for the Corporation Yard and a remaining parcel of 2 .26 acres held for future 6 expansion. Staff recommends that the Corporation Yard be sited on the parcel as a "Flag" lot leaving a larger frontage on the Fitch Avenue Cul de Sac for the remaining parcel . A parcel map and possible siting plan are included as Exhibits A-9 and A- 10 . A portion of the remaining parcel could be developed for the City' s Transit bus parking and maintenance . Grant funding could then be made available for both the facility and the land cost . Based on previous appraisals and current comparable sales, staff estimates the cost to acquire this parcel is $ 5 . 00 per square foot or $ 912, 582 . Of this cost, $ 413 , 820 would be charged to the Corporation Yard Project . LAND ACQUISITION COST SUMMARY City Hall $ 2, 678, 675* Police Services Facility $ 866, 061 Corporation Yard $ 413 , 820 GRAND TOTAL $ 3, 958, 556 *Includes relocation costs TOTAL LAND AND DEVELOPMENT COST PROJECT LAND DEVELOPMENT TOTAL City Hall 2 , 678 , 675 7, 375, 000 10, 053 , 675 Police 866, 061 6, 512 , 500 7, 378, 561 Corp. Yard 413 , 820 1, 643 , 250 2 , 057, 070 GRAND TOTAL PROJECT COST $19,489, 306 7 FINANCING The following is a discussion of the available options to finance the desired new public facilities . These options involve the commitment of cash assets combined with various types of debt financing. The City has several financing options which, when combined with the Redevelopment Agency' s bonding capacity, could finance a major portion of the project components . These financing methods together with cash that could be committed now and that is anticipated in the future provide the City with the ability to pay for these projects . When examining the use of various financing mechanisms it is important to understand that State law does not permit the use of Redevelopment Agency funds for the financing of City Hall development . However, current State law does not prohibit the Agency' s participation in financing the Police Services Center and Corporation Yard. CASH ASSETS - CITY The City has wisely established a number of funds to assist in the funding of the desired projects . These funds are : FUND PROJECTED BALANCE .(November 1, 2001) General Fund Reserve (Fund 1000) $ 7, 500 , 000 General Fund Increase, 2000 to 2001 (Fund 1000) $ 1 , 100 , 000 City Hall Improvement (Fund 4001) $ 465, 000 Police Facilities (Fund 4002) $ 1, 103 , 000 Special Endowment (Fund 2800) $ 8, 070 , 000 TOTAL $ 18, 238, 000 On June 30, 2000, the General Fund reserve was approximately $7 . 5 million, and by June 30, 2001, it is projected to increase to $8 . 6 million. This amount is slightly in excess of twelve months of General Fund operations and above average for cities in California. For the next year or two, General Fund revenues are anticipated to be sufficient to pay for all operating expenses, and the reserve level is anticipated to stay at approximately the same level . However, with costs expected to increase in the coming years, longer term projections indicate that on-going revenues may not be 8 sufficient without new revenue sources . Nonetheless, with the relatively high reserve level and renewed efforts to seek out new General Fund revenue sources, the limited use of these funds, for these capital projects, would not be imprudent . The City Manager has recommended that $1, 100, 000, representing the increase in funds available from 2000 to 2001, be used for the City Hall Project . The Police Facilities and City Hall Improvement funds were established for the purpose of developing these particular facilities . Police Facilities development fees, which were updated in September 2000, are projected to provide an additional $3 . 3 million in the next nine years from the development of an estimated 3 , 700 residential units and 3 . 9 million square feet of non-residential construction. While this amount won' t be available in time for construction and can' t be pledged for debt service, the future revenues could be used to assist with debt service payments if the police facility construction is financed. The City Hall Improvement fund has no dedicated revenue source and will increase only by interest earnings in the coming years . The Endowment Fund is an innovative strategy used in Moorpark to fund long term capital improvements . The Endowment Fund was initially funded with $1 . 5 million received upon dissolution of the Moorpark Mosquito Abatement District, and subsequent revenue sources to this fund have included contributions from new development and interest earnings . The table below identifies past and projected funding sources for the endowment fund. Dissolution of Mosquito Abatement District 1, 572, 500 Toll Brothers settlement 3 , 720, 300 Archstone development fees 1, 667, 600 Carlsberg development fees 815, 600 Other development fees 29, 000 Interest earnings and miscellaneous 263 , 400 Subtotal , November 1, 2001 8, 068,400 Carlsberg/Pacific Comm/Suncal development fees 2 , 000 , 000 LT Development fees 2, 000, 000 SP2 development fees 4, 500, 000 SP1 development fees 4, 500, 000 West Pointe development fees 1, 750, 000 Other development fees 1, 500, 000 Commercial development fees 1, 200, 000 Subtotal, future fees 17,450, 000 9 As directed by the City Council , the Endowment Fund retains the first 20 of interest earned, with additional interest earnings directed to the General Fund. In the 2001/2002 fiscal year, the Endowment Fund is expected to retain approximately $180, 000 in interest earnings, with an additional $220, 000 going to the General Fund. Interest rates are the lowest they have been in many years and are projected to increase in the coming years; interest earnings on the endowment fund balance is likely to be greater in future years . Current projections for revenues to this fund from planned residential , commercial and industrial projects total approximately $17 million over the next five years, increasing interest earnings substantially. While these future revenues may not be pledged against new debt, as they accumulate over time they may be used to reduce or pay off debt issued now to pay for projects . There is an on-going debate as to whether it is preferable for a municipality to preserve cash and incur debt for capital improvement projects or minimize debt by utilizing available cash. The City of Moorpark must make this choice as the financing of the new City Hall is considered. Both the General Fund Reserve and the Endowment Funds provide interest earnings used annually to pay for City operating expenses . Any depletion of these funds reduces this income accordingly. CASH ASSETS - REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY All of the bond proceeds from previous tax allocation bonds have been spent or will be spent on currently budgeted projects and none remain to be used for this facilities project . The MRA Tax Increment Fund contains monies from annual tax increment revenues and rental revenues . These funds are used to make existing debt service payments and pay operating costs . Any funds not used for these on-going expenses may also be used for capital projects . For the 2001/2002 fiscal year, it is estimated that approximately $700 , 000 in revenues will be received in excess of expenses in this fund, and this amount would increase slightly over time. These funds may be used to make debt service payments on new debt issues . In addition to annual increment and other revenues, the City anticipates receiving a one-time payment of $1 million from the County of Ventura in 2008, as required by our tax increment agreements . 10 BORROWING There are a number of options available to utilize the City' s credit backed by future revenues . These options are discussed below. Attachment B-1 , a financing analysis developed by our public finance advisors, provides details about the borrowing options summarized below. REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY - The Redevelopment Agency can issue tax allocation bonds pledging future tax increment revenues (excluding the Low and Moderate Income (LMI) pledge) . Based on the cash flow projections mentioned above, the Agency presently has the ability to issue approximately $11, 095 , 000 of new tax allocation bonds that would net the Agency approximately $10, 021, 000 . The agency' s current bond financing will be paid in full in 2018 ; the proposed new bonds will "wrap around" the current debt service payments, with a smaller annual payment due until 2018, then increased payments between 2018 and 2030 . Total debt service costs would be constant over the years, so that any increase in increment revenue could be used for other projects . CITY OF MOORPARK - The City can issue debt in the form of certificates of participation (COPS) pledging future general fund revenues . The issuance of COPs is limited to the City' s ability to allocate annual debt service payments from the General Fund, although the General Fund could be assisted by revenues in other funds, including the Endowment Fund. The City may utilize either a long term fixed rate or a variable rate for the financing of the City secured Certificate of Participation borrowing. Each financing structure offers distinct advantages . Fixed rates would allow us to take advantage of current low average coupon rates, about 4 . 8%, for a full thirty years . There would be no risk of interest rates changing over time . However, variable rate bonds in today' s market carry the lowest rate of any financing vehicle available . Current average coupon rates for variable rate debt are around 1 . 95% . While there is risk that rates would increase, and no guarantee that in the long run the total interest cost would be less than with fixed rates, the low initial rate is very attractive . This option is especially attractive if the City has cash available to retire the bonds if or when the rates become too high. In addition to issuing debt, the City may raise cash by selling assets or borrowing from reserve funds at appropriate 11 interest rates . This option would help to minimize the costs associated with debt issuance in the public finance marketplace . NARROWING THE OPTIONS CITY HALL - City staff is concerned about financing these projects with the least possible impact on the General Fund. Thus, it is important to minimize the use of General Fund and Endowment Fund balances to preserve interest earnings as much as possible. Therefore, maximizing the use of some of the Redevelopment Agency' s funding resources is essential . The challenge becomes finding a way to use Agency resources to assist in the development of City Hall and still be within the intent of State law. Staff suggests the Redevelopment Agency purchase the existing City Hall and other civic center facilities, which would all eventually be converted (or expanded) for use as community resource facilities . The acquisition of these facilities is an eligible use of Agency funds . It is estimated that the existing land and facilities are worth approximately $2 , 500 , 000 . To pay for the City Hall , the City could commit the proceeds of the civic center property sale ($2 . 5 million) together with funds available from the City Hall Facilities Fund ($465, 000) and $1 . 1 million from the General Fund Reserve (the increase from 2000 to 2001) . Additionally, $1 . 2 million in housing set- aside funds will be used to pay for relocation costs of the residents currently on the building site . An additional $5 . 0 million would be required to complete the project . The City currently has approximately $7 . 5 million in the General Fund Reserve and $8 . 1 million in the Endowment Fund, for a total of $15 . 6 million in available funds . There are two options for utilizing these funds . First , the City could use $5 million in cash. This would reduce interest earnings in the general fund by about $220, 000 per year at current rates . As development occurs in the coming years, the endowment fund balance would be restored to previous levels, increasing interest earnings . Alternately, the City could leverage these cash balances and instead use the interest earnings on the endowment fund to make debt service payments on certificates of participation. The annual debt service payments would be between $290 , 000 and $400 , 000, depending on the type of financing . While the City must pledge it ' s general fund 12 revenues for the COP, it is recommended that the interest earnings in the Endowment Fund (currently about $400, 000 per year total) be dedicated to make the debt service. If lower, variable rate bonds were used, this would initially reduce general fund revenues by approximately $110, 000 per year, and could increase if the variable interest rate on the bonds increases . If the higher fixed rate bonds were used, revenues would be reduced by about $220 , 000 . However, as interest rates and the fund balance in the endowment fund increase in the next few years, interest transfers to the general fund will return to previous levels . If interest rates on the variable rate debt were to increase in a few years, the cash that is projected to accumulate in the endowment fund over the next five years could be used to pay off the debt at any time . It must be recognized that the building of a City Hall is a specialized project that can be expected to occur only once in 30 years, and, even if debt is not usually favored, it could be an appropriate financing mechanism for long-term capital projects such as this . Even if the General Fund had to rely on its own revenues to make the debt service, the annual payment would represent less than one-half of one percent of total expenditures ($9 million) . However, if general fund revenues are not sufficient to meet expenditure demands, any payment, no matter how small, may be a burden. If the City Council is adverse to this level of debt , additional cash reserves could be used. However, any use of cash reserves for this project limits the Council ' s ability to use the funds, and the interest earnings, for other projects or purchases . Staff will not make a recommendation for financing city hall construction until final design and cost analysis is complete . POLICE SERVICES CENTER - The Redevelopment Agency can immediately raise $10 , 021, 000 by issuing tax allocation bonds . These fixed rate bonds would "wrap around" the Agency' s existing debt, with only interest payments required until the existing debt is retired in 2018 . This would require annual debt service payments of $580, 000 for the next 17 years, increasing to $1 . 2 million per year beginning in 2019 . To supplement the debt proceeds, $1, 103 , 000 in the Police Facilities Fund would be available to finance the $6 . 6 million required for construction. This solution leaves approximately $2 .4 million of the tax allocation bond proceeds (after deducting for the parks/public works yard, discussed below) 13 and $1 million one-time payment anticipated in 2008 available for other projects . Additionally, the Agency is currently owed approximately $3 . 5 million from the sale of land (Mission Bell Plaza) , which will be paid in installments over the next 27 years. These funds would also be available for other projects . Staff projects that the Police Facilities Fund, as noted earlier, will receive an additional $3 . 3 million in the next nine years . These revenues can contribute to the debt service payments made by MRA for the financing of the Police Services Center, freeing up additional MRA funds for other projects . PUBLIC WORKS/PARKS YARD - The cost of developing a new parks/public works yard, about $2 . 1 million, will also be funded with tax allocation bond proceeds discussed above . The following table summarizes the sources and uses of funds proposed to finance these three facilities . Source of Funds Use of Funds Police City Agency Station City Hall Yard Land Acquisition/Relocation 866,0001 2,678,000 414,000 Construction/Admin/Design 6,513,0001 1,644,000 Total Needs 7,379,000;10,053,000 2,058,000 I , Current balance in Police 'Facilities Fund 1,103,000' 1,103,000. - _ ...__.. ._.._.__. .._. . _._._._. .... - _.._._ _ . ._....... ..__......_. Current balance in City Hall 'Facilities Fund 465,000' 465,0001 ;Proceeds from agency purchase .of exiting City hall 2,500,000' 2,500,000 2,500,000; Existing Redevelopment Agency :funds 866,000 866,000; Proceeds from new Tax Allocation financing 10,021,000 5,500,000: 2,100,000 ____._._�---. _._._ .__.__. _ _... _._..._ _..._. General Fund increase, 2000 to 12001 1,100,000_; 1, 100,000; ;Housing set-aside funds for !relocation costs 1,190,000 1,190,000; Proceeds from City issue new COP or interfund borrowing 5,000,000' 5,000,000' 10,168,000; 14,577,000 7,469,000; 10,255,000 2,100,000 14 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS It is important to remember that many details remain to be worked out , and construction is not likely to begin for many months . Thus, this report offers a financing proposal that is subject to changes and fine-tuning in the coming months . Based on the proposal set forth in this report , the following immediate actions are recommended: 1 . Retain necessary consulting services for the issuance of $11, 095, 000 in tax allocation bonds within the next 90 days to take advantage of the present low interest rates . As the City would have up to three (3) years to spend these funds, the interest earnings on the invested proceeds can be a significant bonus to the Agency. 2 . Initiate the appraisal process for the existing buildings in the civic center complex in anticipation of its ultimate purchase by the Redevelopment Agency. 3 . Initiate the appraisal process for the privately owned properties on Moorpark Avenue, High Street and Fitch Avenue (update of previous appraisal) referenced in the report . 4 . Continue or initiate the development of plans and specifications for the identified projects at the recommended sites . 5 . Solicit bids for the design and construction of City hall and the Public Works/Parks yard. 6 . Review city hall financing options with the Budget and Finance Committee with a report back to the City Council . Such discussion to include an evaluation of long-term General Fund revenue projections in light of state economic and budget constraints and expense projections, and anticipated increased costs for pool operations, park maintenance and police facility maintenance . 15 APPENDIX A EXHIBIT A-1 Summary of Space Needs Study, March 2000 Leach Mounce Architects , Ventura, CA EXHIBIT A-2 New Building & Site Development Estimates EXHIBIT A-3 City Hall Site Plan and Floor Plan EXHIBIT A-4 Police Services Center Site Plan and Floor Plan EXHIBIT A-5 Existing Civic Center Area Site Plan EXHIBIT A-6 Existing Civic Center Property Ownership EXHIBIT A-7 Possible City Hall Building Orientation EXHIBIT A-8 Site Plan for Police Services Center EXHIBIT A-9 Parcel map for Public Works/Parks Corporation Yard EXHIBIT A-10 Siting Plan for Public Works/Parks Corporation Yard 16 APPENDIX B EXHIBIT B-1 Proposed financing plan from USbancorp/ Piper Jaffray and Urban Futures , Inc . 17 APPENDIX A EXHIBIT A-1 Summary of Space Needs Study, March 2000 Leach Mounce Architects , Ventura, CA EXHIBIT A-2 New Building & Site Development Estimates EXHIBIT A-3 City Hall Site Plan and Floor Plan EXHIBIT A-4 Police Services Center Site Plan and Floor Plan EXHIBIT A-5 Existing Civic Center Area Site Plan EXHIBIT A-6 Existing Civic Center Property Ownership EXHIBIT A-7 Possible City Hall Building Orientation EXHIBIT A-8 Site Plan for Police Services Center EXHIBIT A- 9 Parcel map for Public Works/Parks Corporation Yard EXHIBIT A-10 Siting Plan for Public Works/Parks Corporation Yard 16 3/07/00 �' CITY OF MOORPARK CALIFORNIA s 4" `{ 1 �'•;y t ii"i r'i�t'��`� "ra�n'�G'�.4�+r,� �d�ySY.,r�.�� t, SPACE NEEDS STUDY TABI pFGO�iTENTS ' I. SUMMARY come floln the addition or'the Communications Option proposed for the Police in administrative Services. The I. SCJMMAjtY"; r S' 'AFFIN(� SUMMARY current estimate ofstafling for communications and hold- Staffing is forecast to increase by approximately 46�/c;in v inb represents 50 %of the long term 1 olive Department IN'1'I* AG [O s m ,� the 20 year long term from a current level of 103 to I50 increse and 25�Ic of the total City staff increase.Without r F + P'NOW,. �;r� �� or, 47 more staff in addition to Communications esti- this optional increase,the growth ofthe City Staff is 46%. coaled at 10,Holding 5 and I Iighway I atrol Unit with 24 The anticipated long term growth of the City's popula- .A'str '� � � �y3•r I g b persons.Comnuu)ications and Holding staffing need to tion from 30,000 to 40,000 in 20 years with the proposed IVH R'T�T PN&�fi: be the subject of additional studies for long term slaffino n ,� a,T b scale of new development is more than 33/r..'I'he growth f� G' need. The Staff Summary Table is shown below. The of staff is not out of line with the expected growth of the , ease in e fue would City.Z f WIN, STAFF SUMMARY DEPARTMENT . SPAtL� $TARdS fY f n eta a d t) z Short Term Long Term Staff Staff ��fi�njaY ;, City. Qty. f"J;�,NS{r(4•uq yy. fyr ; - -- - it .0dikFty`Y�rI,' Ky"S )w . . y at 3 rC � r } l r 4ii fl jj to "s fis7 ;T � '� 1 1-5 Current City Hall Operations 14 19 Matw)o 6 Police 21 36 F 'yxan f 7-8 Holding & Communications Options 15 1,2,3 Current City Hall Operations 14 18 4,5 Building & Safety & Engineering 6 12 TOTAL CITY HALL & POLICE DEPARTMENT 87 141 t u y'TM(arytt a ' tWya�^ ; � �-q may!r.J�M K GRAND TOTAL 103 189 MOORPARK SPACE NEEDS STUDY Leach Mounce Architects EXHIBIT A-I I - 1 FINAL DRAFT 3/07/00 STAFFING SUMMARY BY DEPARTMENT The City Council & City Manager anticipate an in- an increase in staff by 5.The remaining staff additions in crease in staff'of one position fora clerk typist.Staffing AS are two clerk typists,one each in AS and Redevelop- in this section also includes the part time City Attorney. ment. The City Clerk/Human Resources(CC)arc adding 2 Community Development(C )) Staff will grow by S staff.The City Clerk will add an Management Analyst, from 22 to 30,or 27%.The Director will add a clerical thereby bringing the Clerk's support on par with other aide. Planning will add one Senior Planner. The City Directors. A new Public Information position is being Rngineer will add two engineering positions.Great posi- created, tive impact on staffoperational efficiency will come from bringing all the staff and their files into a common loca- STAFF GROWTH Administrative Services(AS)has the largest staff,cur- tion. Without this. additional staff time and therefore, rently 35 growing to 70 if all options are taken.The Po- additional staff may be required to move staff.file mate- lice account for 51%of AS staff. rials,and copies between locations. in the short term,staff is projected to increase Police Department The Police staff will grow from 21 Public Works(PW)The current staff of 5 will expand by six above the current levels as reflected to 36,or 29%r..The growth includes patrol officers,cleri- 29%to 7 with the addition of one inspector and one cleri- in the December, 1999 Short Term Staff/ cal and volunteers.As mentioned above,bringing COm cal aide at City Hall and a Field Supervisor and mainte- Area Projections. The growth indicated in munications•on-line within the City will add 10 staff for nance worker at the Yard. this summary is for the long term. 24 hours/7 day a week coverage. The Holding Option for short term holding (less than four hours) does not Community Services (CS) will add 6 staff to the cur- anticipate any increase in staff and may save staff time rent 10,or 60% including One clerical aide at City Hall by not requiring the transport of detainees by officers. and two additional maintenance workers at the City Yard. 130C'I ype 1 Ilolding(for up to 72 hours)would require Recreation and the Senior Center are not covered by this Study. 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 CITY COUNCIL&CITY MANAGER CITY CLERK/HUMAN RESOURCES ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES Current City Hall Operations Police Holding&Communicalions Options COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Current City Hall Operations Building&Safety&Engineering PUBLIC WORKS 4 City Hall COMMUNITY SERVICES R Cfty Hall CITY YARD SITE ■Current Staff, HIGHWAY PATROL UNIT ��Staff Growth MOORPARK SPACE NEEDS STUDY Leach Mounce Architects 1 - 2 E FINAL DRAFT 3/07/00 r fi rat }rFR, INTERACTIONS SUMMARY f%fi y E.x..« tvJx� t REPORTDEPARTNENTS i� z. Interactions indicate how the different departments in the City relate both internally and between each other.The LI:GENDkn, tr'r,:, Moorpark Organization chart shows how the City government authority is organized. It does not show how the departments work together or how they interact with each other. Spatial sizes and relationships are not seen in the chart below. Interactions also provide important planning information and are shown in the diagram on the next page. r` •fQ �Y�-.3.1Y,,/,•I�1-ti,.lr��Ys°tYL`.��� ` ,-: `a`'� , Moorpark Government Organization Chart o r•n✓ s '�"'(' tit r^$:e�.m'Cry}�ryk�`tk-•�aVti '= D. munky tf�g.•F R * �I y I.•. G.x+G���aeoax zt eQlr¢qa.l 3 b"�ite"�wC e ra t rvicrsri�'kd�r i:�w ya�C�{��3 <k�... I I Pars& crmisso Riaag on -----------• --.r—______--- HonoraOW tyCoetcll r} CommsonPnn Com N r•. '• Y g ��t. H. City Yj" /i4tyf')'Al ti 1 v" I I I ' t a 11 11 P:e rt Pr r I ,. l •'"4'7^ r �„T ■x t I I �;? l• H�IIWA t Paw 1uA ��s 5���� ; � t� svk, xR� 5� CIIy Clerk convnurnty Services ' r;- (�,rf v +,r{x. rc�C'4ih, r� •.:� I 1 3 City ClerkrPersonnel Officer Olreclor (fVgt a�dea�trne�nl,0f►ISUie Aency) r. °'f �yAri,•},`t�'� ;-i"� it k �3 �y .ylr L------- - r•�stg" l� CIIyClerk/ --- --'J Records Adrninlstralive k ro Secretary Sec,(, ° r s aF r Public Informalion ? r �d�8 r g.ery �A'tithNfrll S ;,fEuIUF @). ar . ar a L Y Mainlenance 8 Planning '?� (e fir:. Human Facilities Hesourcos 1. •L S "31 '{.�x +�iL t" y�rf < of r St ecrea on gk ri. .n� A��x GuReD4 (AVRC) } Lt?�```"L r'�x?I i�^saC ` '* ti •z. :;�A r Y a "1 772�g cYftt x i Afluance Animal Regulation MRr fir -lj � t .K 4`;}>,s�yx; r �te•� r3SG.nY�s�'n' r� .; Y•:..:_ Solid Waste I,..•ai` x* - s r k ''� �� k v �a'�'T'tia r *rick; y isdlety f,tl'Y c R s4s;i. i,r.'FF z q z Transit � J f r` �` r ° ..kr, � •S Senbr Center - "� ' - - Leach Mounce Architects MOORPARK SPACE NEEDS STUDY Leach Mounce Architects 1 - 3 FINAL DRAFT 3/07/00 DIAGRAMS Diagrams reveal important interactions and relationships.The Overall Diagram on the right OVERALL DIAGRAM shows all the departments in relative size to each other.The organizing feature for the City Clerk,Community Development,Public Works,and Community Services is the public service ________________ counter.This is the point of contact for the Moorpark residents that needs direct,personal service f that can not be provided through other forms of communication.The Site Diagram on the next page gives an extended overview of the entire operation including the respective site area re- C 6 quiren►ents.Loth building and site areas are represented. i POLICE KEY RELATIONSHIPS The relationship between the Council and the City Manager is strong.For this reason,they are placed in the same section of the Space Needs.Both interact frequently with each other and with the overall operation,The interaction with outside contacts is similar as well.The City Manager � PUBLIC also has significant interaction with the heads of the departments wed outside agencies. COUNTER City Clerk,City Manager,City Council&Community Development have internal operations that firnction best if their respective team members are in close proximity to each other. Both have a need to relate to the public over a counter and in meetings. Public Works&Community Services are split with coordination of inter-departmental opera- tions at City Hall and external facilities,work crews and equipment at the Public Works Yard. There is a close,interactive working relationship between these departments.The City Y a r d is C +-s occupied,joindy.Public Works interacts frequently with Community Development.Commit- ADMINISTRATIVE pity Services does so also,but to a lesser degree.Pitblic Works is involved with CD infrastruc- SERVICES Lure issues that require easy consultations. Administrative Services has two major components.One is the administering support to other departments.The other is the police operations.The support function interacts closely with all the other departments and spatially wants to be next to all of them.Components of the AS touch B PUBLIC F other departments in specific places.Finance and Human Resources interact.Redevelopment 9 CITY se°RV c s Y Economic Development interacts with the Council, Community Development Planners and CLERK Building&Safety.Finance also interacts with the Council,City Clerk and Community Devel- opment.The police function is currently remotely located in 4,000 square foot temporary facili- ties at a school site in Moorpark and at the East Valley Law Enforcement Facility in Thousand Oaks.Once this operation is completely relocated in the City,it has the option of either being PUBLIC included or not included in the civic center. For security reasons and operational hours, this SERVICES operation will remain self-contained.Liaison personnel could be located in the public services zone of the City Hall if total co-location is not feasible due to site constraints. Detailed diagrams for each department can be found in Section 11-Interactions. MOORPARK SPACE NEEDS STUDY Leach Mounce Architects 1 -4 FINAL DRAFT 3/07/00 NEW"IN HOUSE"FUNCTIONS SPACE STANDARDS New City hall resident services to be brought into the Space standards are the building blocks from which the Space Needs are built.They set it standard for operational new,long term civic center facility are: units. Unit standards are the support for each work space,storage area and meeting room.There are illustrations of many of the standards in the section.Composite standards are a combination of units. • Police be placed in the Civic Center • Community Development will bring City Engineer- ing and Building&Safety staff m to City Ifall • n Highway Patrol Field Office will be added in con- junction with the Police Department co o 1 r No space projection can be a perfect minor of the future ; but the long term space projections serve to record the Iril kT kh� I )- current understanding of how the City wants to grow,its civic functions. However,should the City decide to pro- ceed with in-house Building and Safety and Engineering 8'-0 r -- - 16'-0" Services in the future, additional space would not be needed over that provided for Contract Services. Unit Standard Composite Standard Many functions which may be supplied by City staff in other cities are provided in Moorpark by private con- tractors.Should the City decide it is to the benefit of the Moorpark citizens,other major functions may be brought "in house".'this would change the space needs.The space standards supplied with this document can be applied to PROJECTIONS newly identified future functions as well. The projections are for staff and space.Detailed lists of functions and equipment were developed.The list is summa- rized into spaces.Supporting detail includes design notes and guidelines,staffing,space,1`111-niture,parking and site requirements. Below is a sample extracted from Section IV-Projections. SPACE SHORT TERM NEED LONG TERM NEED REMARKS Spa Space SId. 81luf Suppal Bt"ig Area Stall SI ad Budding Aron ooao numbers do ml Hued No. Doacnplim Std. Area Oly. Qly. Guide' Uloinan Qty. Oty. Guild' ExlomkA la o„m fixionnon nan•.bw 7 Work Room Sharo with F nanco, a fir.Works& Community SarVICeS staff. Shared space 195 Work counter s0 4 12 48 Mail handling area Copler-Large 58 70 1 70 Form storage 61 3 3 9 Fax machine 72 18 1 18 Document shredder 73 10 1 10 Work table-open 22 40 1 40 MOORPARK SPACE NEEDS STUDY Leach Mounce Architects I -5 FINAL DRAFT 3/07/00 SHORT TERM & LONG TERM PLANS STAFF / AREA YROJEC'I,IONS SUMMARY BUILDING NEED SITE NEED Short Term Long Term Short Term Long Term Staff Buildings Staff Buildings Site ! Site pt Total pt Total Vehicles Total Vehicles Total 01111111 1 now= Includin A, B, C.1-5, D, E.1-2, F.1-2&G filmda Includin C.6-8 Including E.3& F.3 Total 103 23,798 189 62,660 109 131,781 3.03 315 338,975 7.78 This Space Needs Study establishes a planning basis for Modest modifications to the City Hall and additional do not adhere to the Space Standards or Space staff'and space projections in both short term and long mobile office units on the existing civic center site present Needs, but rather focus on the use of existing term.The short term is defined as current and near term the quickest response to providing for the City's urgent facilities.This minimizes construction changes (1-3 year)space need.The long term time frame(at 15- space needs.This short term response answers the needs and makes do with a large portion of'the exist- 20 years)is not as time specific,but covers foreseeable of general staffwith the addition of staff toilets and break ing building(as it is)in order to minimize short needs as expressed by staff during interviews and in ques- room. In addition, Community Development (CD)De- term costs(See Section V.). tionnaire responses.The long term site needs anticipate partment,who must respond to community zoning regu- future growth in proportion to the forecast growth in lations,development and growth,is currently under great Long Term Plans-'Two plans showing ideal- building and parking for each department. space pressure. The CD staff needs spill over to other ized site plans and floor plans which focus on departments that must support them.The three short term consolidation of department operations at one There are three Short"Term Plan Options adding more options (listed A - C) provide different budget/scope location."These plans can be phased. For illus- mobile office units to the existing site.Adding the new choices to solve the short term needs. trative purposes the site plans were made so staff toilets and break room is a common feature of all that they are easily divisible into City Hall, the options. The mobile office units contain the pro- The concept plans are presented in two categories: Police and City Yard components(See Section grammed short term spaces but are substantially less than -VI). the space standards square footage due to limited site Short Term Plans-Three options that modify area and budget. the existing City Fall and site.These options MOORPARK SPACE NEEDS STUDY Leach Mounce Architects 1 - 6 FINAL DRAFT 3/07/00 C o S T S '13F'f The cost estimates for the short and long term development are difficult to bring into comparison.The Short"Term has a given site,existing buildings and a stipulation pulation to make economical resolution the first priority ..even over the b a ,,ham,. space standards which are not economical to extend to all staff in the short term.The Long"Perm has no specific site r, 1lIC211G r4,e ,,gy-a^`�.'r 'une po 1b1 C6f binadons':: or time of construction.Nevertheless,the attempt was made to align the two into one cost approach.Both a detailed I but thdii listed'belgvt }i[�`starUtlg and broad bnrsh were used on the Short Term Options.The broad harsh approach proved to be the more conserva- potttt8 five(more expensive)and was used.The broad brush approach was use on the Long'Ierm. tMINI -�U •",, � � r8 �0,�768 p Ses � ` �`, d ��x�•� ,.���tt�c� Ala y �.& .. . . .,, .. SHORT TERM TZ 444,454 556,990 370,768 'OPTI I B"H • 1. atJy'' MINIM(JAil � z $ " 144°'685` a ;Cllr A� ��' xry�,� Buildings Site Work Facility TOTAL FACILITY 8,862,245 2,380,444 11,886,953 r w q t tr�' A Including A, B, C.1-5, D, E.1-2, F.1-2&G 3,881,521 1,263,174 5,144,695 Council Chambers 506,400 - 506,400 WAXIIU� CIT UuMI 53: -:i Y J,!�1, IINrIL`C A'�ye1BERS , ', ,_4�ri ��a� x ,` .� � C.6 Police 81.4% 2,625,856 689,542 3,315,398 � H'I r om 'fin fx�d ci'7�t� � C.7 Holding 11.3% 672,870 672,870 y C.8 Communications Option 7.3% 334,908 334,908 K Including E.3& F.3 MOORPARK SPACE NEEDS STUDY Leach Mounce Architects . 1 - 7 FINAL DRAFT 3/07/00 TWO STORY COMPARED TO ONE STORY COSCOST d s;�^ryi �p 2 The long tennplans show one story buildings on a hypothetical site that is reasonably level and!•ectangular in shape. If it is not feasible to aquire enough property to build a one story structure or the topography is n»]ore steeply sloping then two story buildings would be the appropriate solution. _., n '�'✓ ,rrs v«. e-r t'r� J r�t 2"k t 4F r r t a y,"k,i+' .S✓ i ,. �,�t' -t r� he building gross-up factor for a two story building would be 34%-,which is 5%more than T the 29%shown for a one story building due to the stairs,elevators, mechanical ducts,addi- c�'t tional anitors spaces,electrical I'OOI7rS and IObb S pace. f ,f t fr k •62,659 sf x,05=3,133 additional sf fora two story building- ' � �k �ut�� 3,133sf x$150=$939,885 ,5�" ice*F' tr}+s�� .",�. �r •Land savings for two story buildings s is estimated at 40%of 62,659- 1+r .:r � ��",1re'<���',�•r����< ,M"fl' Gr r�.S 62,659sf x.40=25,064 sf(0 $14/sf=$350,890 ' `�` �` ` �^ � '" •Net additional cost for two story buildings on smaller land a ea-$588,995 ;Rv f as a a s t t d rA t ',ka i v A, rl�4\✓r`Fi, �4 E'��'Y".,t 3�,�`i�•��R,-'c�7'S tr'� 3 t .rL . ry n5' ,Z i>�,'�-*.,lao-ri, WO sad t' � �.3fh. k. +��#•. MOORPARK SPACE NEEDS STUDY Leach Mounce Architects I - 8 Moorpark Space Needs Study Final 3/7/00 NEW BUILDING & NEW SITE DEVELOPMENT ESTIMATE The costs include furnishings&contingency. See the NEW CONSTRUCTION AREA COST TABLE.The costs represented are for concept comparison only and do not reflect the detail or market conditions that may exist at the time this project Is bid.Cost of the land or professional fees are not Included in this estimate. This Conceptual Estimate uses NEW CONSTRUCTION AREA COST TABLE LONG TERM - New • • UNIT Buildings Site Work Site Facility ID Unit Description Unit Cost sf Total Unit Cost sf Total Total $150 s.f. x 4,548 682,232 $8 s.f. x 59,117 472,937 1,155,169 Council Chambers $150 s.f. x 3,376 506,400 506,400 $132 s.f. x 3,382 446,474 $8 s.f. x 12,951 103,608 550,082 1-1�011 OWN" $132 s.f. x 7,427 980,404 $8 s.f. x 23,903 191,223 1,171,627 Current City Hall operations $132 s.f. x 5,933 783,220 $8 s.f. x 22,388 179,104 962,324 Building&Safety&Engineering $132 s.f. x 3,581 472,629 $8 s.f. x 13,512 108,096 580,725 $132 s.f. x 2,077 274,219 $8 s.f. x 8,623 68,985 343,203 $132 s.f. x 1,836 242,342 $8 s.f. x 7,677 61,413 303,756 $8 s.f. x 7267 77,808 77,808 CITY HALL TOTAL 32,161 4,387,921 157,897 1,263,174 5,651,095 Holding $330 s.f. x 2,039 672,870 x 672,870 Communications Center $252 s.f. x 1,329 334,908 x - 334,908 Police Department $178 s.f. x 14,752 2,625,856 $8 s.f. x 86,193 689,542 3,315,398 POLICE TOTAL 18,120 3,633,634 86,193 689,542 4,323,176 $90 s.f. x 9,341 840,690 $6 s.f. x 71,288 427,728 1,268,418 $150 s.f. x 3,037 455,484 $8 s.f, x 23,598 188,782 644,265 0 EXHIBIT A-2 Lesoh Mounoo Arohitoots 1 Moorpark Space Needs Study Final 3/7/00 NEW CONSTRUCTION AREA COST TABLE Building Site New construction costs are reflected in this table. FF&E usually is more in new versus a remodel because of less reuse of existing items. The unknowns are fewer and the contingency is lower than in remodels. Construction Type 10.0%; 10.0% 10.0% Public Meeting & Executive New Construction 125.00 12.50 : 12.50 ' 150 7.00 : 0.70 i 8 Executive Plan Alteration 40.00 4.00 4.00 48 Executive Remodel 25.00 2.50 2.50 30 Administration New Construction 110.00 11.00 11.00 132 7.00 1 0.70 8 Administration Plan Alteration 30.00 3.00 3.00 36 New Staff Toilets 70.00 7.00 . 7.00 84 Administration Remodel 15.00 1.50 1.50 18 Modular 40.00 4.00 4.00 48 5.00 0.50 6 Public Safety 1 New Construction 100.0% 148.11 14.81 i 14.81 178 7.00 0.70 8 Administration 81.4% 125.00 ; 12.50 12.50 150 - Holding 11.3% 275.00 27.50 27.50 330 - Communications 7.3% 210.00 21.00 21.00 252 - Highway Patrol New Construction 100.0% 125.00 1 12.50 12.50 150 7.00 0.70 8 Maintenance 75.00 7.50 7.50 90 5.00 : 0.50 6 Leach Mounce Architects 2 �� � ,yy� ��� — - •.gym,.,����� �� c�gs��� �� r �� ei.e„ 4I : r o eoi cw j Al •�, , e.n. 011 „ c+ews , _ id's: J -.i•-:d MOORPARK LONG TERM PLAN OPTION POLICE Final 3-7-00 Minor Street I` Heli top I I ID j Ali, n E w —_. I V I I F N U ro a s PULIC i ear Lobby ENTRY I I _ C.6-Police H•Highway Patrol It � a Open Otflce Major Street Site Plan ru-L— Floor Plan Site Needs Land Parking Building i"F-L__-� Police 1.96 acres 65 spaces 18,120 Highwayy Patrol .48 acres 29 spaces 3,037 T6TA6 �44 ai eea 94 epaees "157 � - EXIIIBff A-4 MOORPARK POLICE SITE PLAN WORPARK Pnl IrF: 171 nnR PI AN J CiY�C. Q c� Charles Street P��] L O Pwq�a. 2 kS sn�Xs M0104.PAIZJL tf i-10!�6 C�RES�ae.NtE.s J Paa� ► COMME CIAL. NORTH High Street F� a� c a� c� Q. L ° Poindexter Avenue ° Ll m First Street Cam" m N 7 C Q c� Charles Street La s NORTH High Street F5 a L a L - O Poindexter Avenue ° First Street POR. TRACT L, RANCHO SIMI Tax Rate Area 511-05 10066 ieee6 10039 02 T >r� SW COR sW COR LOT U 5RM5 LOT 6 3°5.54 154.a 2' W2' 31.40' SOur,,4 62 35•b�9.�6 4�$" o 11 7 31 3.4 —. -1o2 S' 2 - - - �d1F -- /02.82 5RM37 J 4� diFf1 :/9 30 v�oo, � PD I . j fi 1r:r ✓� ..%4 _ - 2 ? N 3't9RG--W` w2r'WYO' ��•\^,` ;41 l P... 9 206 a lam // ti i"ire �l 70; t4 f Tract / O� (qtr w� 6 3 �_ > Bk512 z, ov— ao a ---�- ------- ------- -` WOOOMM229.02'. : 410.!7• ')iq j -168.70 NWY 118 *(MOORPARK) i2' �(HwY23) AVENUE--947 ---�--- --- -- - -- -- GISLER - t PARCEL USE SQUARE OWNERSHIP tT = FOOTAGE < M 6 City Public Works Field Office 10,096 CITY 1C] 8 Residential 6,341 PRIVATE, m < -� T N 9 Vacant 10,500 RDA � 14 Residence 15,839 RDA Qp 17 Mobile Home Park 45,302 PRN&TIE u 22,24 Library Parking Lot 2,874 25 Library 23,870 26,30 Civic Center 173,478 CITY 27 Retail Center 14,880 RIFAM0 RR Tract Vacant 1.52 acres CITY i TOTAL 8.48 Acres Lt,;,,<< ,,, CITY OF MOORPAR.K CHECK N1TH=W"S RV"ORS OFFICE OR CHECK OMSaH TO VERIFY 11 Par. Lot U'Poindexter SuVR.M Bk5,Pg.5 EXI IIBIT A-6 M.L.Wicks Sub. R.M. Bk.5, Pg.37 NOTE-assessor's Block Numbers Shown in Ellipses Assessor's Pnrrel N,smn.ra 4hnwn In rirrlea RFAUMMENT OP-R(W I ZEALIGWEiYT opiioN 3 REAUGNMENT OPTION I sc„z Cf ft" MR, RFAUMMENT OP-R(W I ZEALIGWEiYT opiioN 3 REAUGNMENT OPTION I sc„z Cf ft" 512 - 15 —� Rote Area T°X 10054 A 10057 5��� 10066 10076 RANCHO R. 19 w r 38.18 ro NELY COR i i NT f �• S P R.1266'� gb% 319a/� � u a o1 pot. ! ai \ 'I I 400 TRA�T (ITCH A 56 PA R 2 j 4<4 9 Nf IN t 4 2 24At / �4.01 AC ` o / 2 533.75 Q f ' 1 ��l 140. 21 PM �" ��3 A mA ° �y.Q, ' q' 9viou �r�l ao X2 � gz2.. V� ' a 10 t5 2 Z sT �'° ( -5 1 a o � 1' M pV SEE DETAIL 75 w ' r '0 2 NBO°34129"N' ELINN t1�21PM 74 AS 4 w 4t ti 1 A,w jv 4 y II 4„1 —Pf— X10 t ap6 D`G 2Q` S 49` 21 1326.9 43 1.16A� 1 ( 0.y 20 v oy / \i 66 OAS •h Aso 4379! g 3 TRA } 2.94AC i 5 CT r` �► ( U _ j9RS52 ( (8 } cn ( a`' 26 \ 0 2636 t ( tSn i g3p.1 PER /AtU„� y � tiP�D 45 6Rg _ p _ ID 7 1 W�N2� 9 44 N _ 51 1` —g3"S6 T� I"'.3'3969 38 J7Y 38 9 43 70 / tir J✓ 4.� 60 ItPM A OP F MCORPARK 15 N CITY OMQp Elk. . P4 0 Assessors calif ntura• county of Ve SIn E IIIpse' t NjOOers wn in CirC105 ,e1 Nu^'bers 500 V nrnr...,.n.._....v... _...w.2�.. ........r•-.... r., .ae<.^.„.......r... .w.ns..+..r. ..,-.wa...w,..•ra—.w..... .._.•».......n.�......n....�.....•.._.........�.r....w..s...e..w.... ._... w....w+•.-.._w.�........�r.. ., f vo i ..✓ ta.. i ;sa. ,j. 2 . 2 4 i c ITY s f y *mar• ��.; R� � -�`,, � y � 1'i , .r �'a..�;} ... A,1." �_ � ��Y rt h +� -�fi M .r _ � a.s1►w.,ww•+�.w+M�. �.. <i v � C a G s - � i� '; } }.. y ...tit �.� • :, -x t APPENDIX B EXHIBIT B-1 Proposed financing plan from USbancorp/ Piper Jaffray and Urban Futures , Inc . 17 Qbancorp Piper Jaffra`-. suite 2200 345 Califomia Street San Franciscc. CA 941C)4-2623 415 98a-3600 October 25. 2001 Mr. Hu--h Rilev Assistant City Manaser City of Moorpark '99 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark., CA 93021 Dear Mr. Riley: It is truly a pleasure to present the following financial analysis to the City and Redevelopment Agency of Moorpark. This analysis is intended to provide your City Council and your office with a preliminary view of the credit packages that we hope to present to the rating agencies and municipal bond insurers on your behalf. Based on our due diligence review. the credit position of both the City and Agency is excellent. We believe that the Agency can prudently raise upwards of $10 million for redevelopment improvements. including the Public Safety facility. The City is also in a very solid financial position. We are reasonably that the City can raise the requisite funds to complete the Civic Center undertaking. Thank you a_ain for this opportunity to wort: with the City and Agency of Moorpark. Bes ark Curran Manam'na Director Public Finance Nondeposit investment Droducts are not insured by the FDIC. are not deposits or otner obligations o4 or guaranteed ov U.S. Bank National Association or its affiliates. and involve investment risxs. mciudino possible loss of the princiaai amount invested. Securities Droducts and services are offered through U.S. Bancorp Pme,„affray inc.. memoer SIPC and NYSE. Inc.. a suosidian-of U.S. Bancorp. TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Power Point of Proposed Moorpark Redevelopment Agency, Series 2001 Bond Financing II. Summary of Financial Analysis for Moorpark Redevelopment Agency, Series 2001 Bond Financing III. Moorpark Redevelopment Agency, Series 2001 Bond Financing Cashflows and Financial Model Financing Presentation to the City of Moorpark Redevelopment Agency For the Series 2001 Tax Allocation Bond Financing bancorp October 22, 2001 Piper jaffray, City of Moorpark Redevelopment Agency *The Assessed Value in the Project Area has Averaged over 7% Annual Growth Since 1995 *The Assessed Value in the Project Area has Averaged Annual Growth of 6.6% Since the Agency's Last Bond Issue in 1999 *The Current Assessed Value in the Project Area is over $500,000,000 *As a Result, Tax Increment Revenues have Grown to $2.6 Million City of Moorpark Redevelopment Agency 2002 Assessed Value $525,655,494 Less Base Year (1988-89) $264,798,987 Incremental Value $260,866,507 Incremental Revenue $2,634,752 (Tax Rate 1.01 %) City of Moorpark Redevelopment Agency Historical Assessed Value 550,000,000 - - ------ ' 500,000,000 - ---. -- - - - -- - 450,000,000 - - - I 400,000,000 350,000,000 - - - - 300,000,000 - 250,000,000 200,000,000 -- - -_ -- - 150,000,000 100,000,000 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 City of Moorpark Redevelopment Agency *Due to the Growth in Tax Increment Revenues, current Coverage is strong at 2.44%. Gross Tax Revenues $296349752 Less Housing Set Aside $5269950 County Tax Admin. Fee $52,695 Senior Revenue Sharing Agreements $558,23- 8- = Pledged Tax Revenues $194969869 Debt Service on the 1999 Bonds $614,082 Coverage 2.44% City of Moorpark Redevelopment Agency Revenues Available for New Bonds: Pledged Revenues $2,107,801 Less Sr. Obligations $610,993 Balance $1,496,868 Available Based on 125% Coverage $1,197,495 Less Series 1999 Bonds $614,082 Available for New Bonds $583,413 Pledged Revenuesand Other Agency Revnues $2,301,537 Less Sr. Obligations and Series 1999 Bonds $19225,015 Less Subordinate Obligations $378,258 Balance $531,007 Available for New Bonds $5319007 City of Moorpark Redevelopment Agency *This Financing will Take Advantage of Solid Assessed Value Growth in the Project Area over the Last 5+ years. *The Series 2001 Bonds will Produce over $10 Million for New Projects *Debt Service from the Series 2001 Bonds will Wrap Around That of the Outstanding Series 1999 Bonds to Create Level Debt Service Throughout the Life of the Financings City of Moorpark Redevelopment Agency Series 1999 Bond Debt Service 1,250,000 1,150,000 1,050,000 - -- - - -- -- - -- 950,000 850,000 750,000 650,000 -- 550,000 - - - 450,000 -- - - - 350,000 - - 250,000 N CO � LO �O N 00 O) O ^ N M �f CO N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N City of Moorpark Redevelopment Agency Series 2001 Bonds Debt Service 1,250,000.00 1,150,000.00 - 1,050,000.00 950,000.00 850,000.00 750,000.00 -- - ... 650,000.00 550,000.00 450,000.00 350,000.00 - - — — — - 250.000.00 1 " IZ, oI6 001 X11 X00 01� �,"0 QN1 �II� 0,19 X11 o2� X22 X29 oZA ��6 X20 021 X20 X20 ��0 2 2 2 2 2 2 � 2 ti ti 2 `L 2 2 ti 2 2 ti 2 2 2 City of Moorpark Redevelopment Agency Series 1999 and 2001 Bonds Debt Service 1250,000.00 — - _ .. - -- -- - -- - - - -- - — -— - ------- 1,150,000-00 1,050,000.00 950,000.00 850,000.00 750,000.00 - 650,000.00 - 550,000-00 - - 450,000.00 - - -- 350,000.00 --_ -- - - - _=- 250,000.00 Cf)0 0O0 0 O O O O r 00 O O N M rt t0 N c0 O O p N N oN N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N M Series 2001 Bonds ■Series 1999 Bonds] City of Moorpark Redevelopment Agency Tax Increment Revenues Available for New Debt Service Based on No Growth in Assessed Value Fiscal Year Available Revenues 2002 $531,007 2018 $789,896 2019 $1,427,482 2030 $1,704,471 City of Moorpark Redevelopment Agency Uses of Bond Proceeds 189,034.06 -304,782.50 580,192.50 - :: : 10,020,990.94 13 Bond Proceeds■Deposit to Debt Service Reserve Fund❑Bond Insurance(80.0 bpp Costs of Issuance; City of Moorpark Redevelopment Agency Uses of Tax Increment 20',0 = - 20% 2% 8% 6% 21% 23% B Housing Set Aside(20%) ■ County Tax Admin Fee ❑ Senior Pass Throu hs ❑ Series 1999 Bond Debt Service(i) ■ Subordinate Pass Throughs ■Agency Administration ■ Series 2001 Bonds Debt Service — Cit y of Moorpark Redevelopment Agency Projected Uses of Agency Revenues (Assuming 3% Growth in Increment) 12,000,000 __—_—.. - ---- --- --- -- ------ ------ -- ---_ — _ -------- --------- ---_-- -- 10,000,000 -- - -- _ ----- .. _--- -- -- ----- Represents One Time Payment from 8,000,000 — -- t e County 6,000,000 - — — -- --- -- -- — — 4,000,000 2,000,000 MR 8 $ $ o S o g $ o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N F�Revenues of Agency ■Series 2001 Debt Service ■Series 1999 Debt Service ■Housing Set Aside ■Subordinate Rev Sharing Agreements ■Senior Rev Sharing Agreements ❑Agency Administration Fees — _ ■County Administration Fees October 22, 2001 City of Moorpark Redevelopment Agency Tax Allocation Bonds, Series 2001 Summary of Financial Analysis The following presents a financing scenario for the City of Moorpark Redevelopment Agency (the "Agency") for various improvements within their Redevelopment Project Area (the "Area"). After conversations with the City, the Agency and the City's Financial Advisor, Urban Futures Inc. and reviewing the appropriate documents, a preliminary model for a proposed Series 2001 tax allocation financing was constructed that will meet the following goals: 1. Utilize the impressive growth in assessed value within the Project Area over the last few years to issue additional bonds to the currently outstanding Series 1999 Bond Issue. The Series 2001 bonds will provide funds to pay for new improvements within the Project Area. 2. Structure a financing, whose annual debt service, when combined with that of the Series 1999 Bonds will have at least 125% coverage from Series 2002 tax increment revenues. 3. Structure debt service on the Series 2001 Bonds that "wraps around" that of the outstanding Series 1999 Bonds. This will provide for level annual debt service throughout the life of the financings. 4. Structure a financing that provides sufficient funds after the payment of debt service to meet all administrative needs of the Agency. Redevelopment Project Areas and Tax Allocation Financing Redevelopment Agencies are a tool utilized by cities to eliminate blighted areas. In order to finance the elimination of blight, agencies undertake tax allocation financings. When a City establishes a project area, the year in which it is established is its base year and thus its first year to allocate taxes from the project area. After the Project Area has been established, any incremental increase in assessed value over the base year is considered the incremental value of the Project Area. The tax revenues generated from the incremental value increase over the base year multiplied by the current tax rate are tax increment revenues. These revenues less any proceeds to the low and moderate income housing fund and other pre-established tax revenue sharing agreements with other taxing City o f Moorpark Redevelopment Agency Page agencies(discussed below), are to be used by the Redevelopment Agency for uses within the Project Area. Using the Moorpark Redevelopment Agency as an example, how tax increment is generated is illustrated below: 2002 Assessed Value $525.655,494 Less Base Year Value (1988-89) $264,798,987 Incremental Value $260,866,507 . Incremental Revenue (Incremental Value ' $2,634,752 Multiplied by the Tax Rate (1.01%)) Below is a description of the allocation of incremental tax detailed above. Low and Moderate Income Housing Set Aside Redevelopment Agency Law stipulates that at least 20% of tax increment revenues must be set aside and put into the housing set aside fund(the "H.S.A. Fund"). Monev in the housing fund must be used to increase the stock of low and moderate income housing within the City. Senior Revenue Sharing Agreement Redevelopment Agencies often enter into agreements with other taxing entities as a way to allocate the incremental tax revenues generated in a Project Area. Senior Revenue Sharing Agreements are paid prior to any outstanding bond's debt service payments. The following is a list of the taxing entities that have entered into Senior Revenue Sharing Agreements with the Moorpark Redevelopment Agency. 1. Ventura County 1 Ventura County Superintendant of Schools 3. Mosquito Abatement District (whose successor agency is the City of Moorpark) Subordinate Revenue Sharing Agreements Subordinate Revenue Sharing Agreements are also a way for taxing agencies and the Agency to allocate incremental tax revenues generated in the Project Area. However, these agreements have a subordinate lien on tax increment revenues to both Senior Revenue Sharing Agreements and debt service due on outstanding bond issues. Although these agreements have a subordinate lien on tax increment, they must be paid in full every year. A Redevelopment Agency cannot issue so many bonds that the annual debt service payments leave insufficient tax revenues to fully pay the subordinate revenue sharing agreements. The following is a list of the taxing entities that have entered into Subordinate Revenue Sharing Agreements with the Moorpark Redevelopment Agency. 1. Moorpark Unified School District City of ioorpark Redevelopment Agency Page 3 2. Ventura County Community College District Administration Fees A portion of tax increment revenues also go to pay administration fees. Approximately 2% of the Moorpark Redevelopment Project Area tax increment pays the County for a tax collection administration fee. Additionally, a portion of tax increment, $211,000 in 2002, is paid to the Redevelopment Agency for the administration of the Project Area. However, the County Administration Fee has a Senior Lien on tax revenues to any outstanding debts, while the Agency Administration Fee is paid after all outstanding debts and revenue sharing agreements are paid. Available Revenues for Series 2001 Bonds The factors above contribute to the total amount of revenues that will be available to make debt service payments on both the Series 1999 Bonds and the proposed Series 2001 Bonds. After reviewing the above mentioned factors a financing was structured for the Series 2001 Bonds, with maximum annual debt service payments that would be limited to the lesser of the following two constnants. 1. 125% Coverage on all Outstanding Debt Service: As stated in the Bond Indenture of the Official Statement for the Series 1999 Bonds, to issue any parity debt, debt service coverage from pledged revenues on both the Series 1999 Bonds and any additional Bonds must be at least 125%. Pledged revenues in this constraint consist of tax increment revenues (for Rating Agency purposes no growth is assumed and revenues are held constant at 2002 levels) less the Housing Set Aside Amount, less the amount to pay Senior Revenue Sharing Agreements. less the County Tax Administration Fee. 2. 100% Coverage on all Outstanding Debts and Agreements of the Agency: Available revenues to pay debt service in this constraint are the total amount of tax increment revenues (growing at a very modest 3% annually) less the Housing Set Aside Amount, less the amount to pay Senior Revenue Sharing Agreements, less the Amount to pay Subordinate Revenue Sharing Agreements, less Series 1999 Bond annual Debt Service, less the County Tax Administration fee, less the Redevelopment Agency Administration fee. The remaining revenues are available for debt service on the Series 2001 Bonds. By adhering to the lesser of the above two constraints, the Agency will insure that there is at least 125% coverage on the Series 2001 Bonds, that all of the taxing entities receive their portion of the increment revenues and that the Redevelopment Agency will be paid their administration fee. City of Moorpark Redevelopment Agency Page 4 Series 2001 Bonds Structure — Debt Service Wrapping Around the Outstanding Bonds After reviewing the above constraints, it was determined that the best structure for the Series 2001 Bonds would be to have debt service that "wrapped" around that of the outstanding Series 1999 Bonds. The Series 1999 Bond's debt service is approximately 616,000 annually (actual debt service is approximately $770,000, but 20% is paid from the low and moderate income housing fund) and runs only through 2018. Since most new tax allocation issues are 30 year financings, we have structured the Series 2001 Bonds as a 30 year financing with mostly interest coming due through 2018 and the bulk of the principle maturing between 2019 and 2030. This structure is "back loaded," so that when combined with the Series 1999 Bonds, total debt service is level. Bond Issue Based on the lesser of the above mentioned debt service constraints and a "back loaded" structure, it was determined that the Moorpark Redevelopment Agency could support a $11,095,000 bond issue. A bond issue of this size would generate approximately $10,020,990 in bond proceeds that could be used by the Redevelopment Agency for projects in the Project Area. The difference between the bond issue size and the bond issue proceeds is due to the cost of issuance of the bonds. The cost of issuance include bond council, financial advisor, trustee, underwriting, rating agency and other miscellaneous fees. In addition, the cost of issuance will fund a debt service reserve fund and pay the cost of bond insurance. We anticipate bond insurance will cost approximately 80 basis points of the bond issue, however bond insurance will provide the financing with a AAA rating and very low interest rates. The Series 2001 Bonds will have a debt service reserve fund that will be on parity with that of the Series 1999 Bonds. Panty reserve funds means that the combined balance in each fund must be equal to maximum annual debt service of both the Series 1999 and the Series 2001 Bonds. When combined, maximum annual debt service on both issues is approximately S 1.35 million. The total reserve fund deposit from the Series 1999 Bonds is currently 5770,000, therefore the amount needed to be deposited into the Series 2001 Reserve Fund is 5580.000. This amount is approximately half of what would be needed if the reserve funds were not on parity. By being able to make a smaller deposit into the reserve fund, the Agency will receive a larger amount of bond proceeds. The Agency is able to generate such a large amount of bond proceeds even with the above constraints because the market's current interest rates on insured bond issues is extremely low. Due to the Series 1999 Bonds being insured and the stellar assessed value growth in the Project Area, the Series 2001 Bonds should have no trouble being insured by one of the larger monoline insurance companies. Conclusion Incremental tax revenues within the Project Area have grown impressively over the last few years. The increased revenues along with the market's current low interest rates, will allow the Redevelopment Agency to issue a bond issue that will generate over City of Moorpark Redevelopment Agency Page 5 $10 million in bond proceeds to be used on projects within the Project Area. By structuring debt service that wraps around that of the Series 1999 Bonds, total debt service will be level throughout the life of the financings. By keeping debt service level and not growing it over time as the assessed value of the Project Area grows, the Agency is giving itself a cushion in case of a slight decrease in assessed value. This financing is the most appropriate structure for the Agency, because it maximizes the amount of proceeds the Agency can raise today, while remaining conservative in terms of assumed assessed value growth. $11,095,000 City of Moorpark RDA Series 1001 Bonds SOURCES&USES Dated 1210112001 Delivered 1210112001 SOURCES OF FUNDS ParAmount of Bonds........................................................................................... $11,095,000.00 TOTALSOURCES................................................................................................. $11,095,000.00 USES OF FUNDS BondProceeds..................................................................................................... 10,020,990.94 Deposit to Debt Service Reserve Fund I OSRF►....................................................... 580,192.50 Gross Bond Insurance Premium 180.0 bp)............................................................ 189,034.06 Total Underwriter's Discount 11.35096►............................................................... 149,782.50 Bond/Disclosure Counsel..................................................................................... 62,000.00 FinancialAdviser.................................................................................................. 40,500.00 RatingAgency Fee............................................................................................... 22,000.00 POS/Official Statement........................................................................................ 13,000.00 Miscellaneous...................................................................................................... 10,000.00 Trustee&Counsel Fees....................................................................................... 7,500.00 TOTALUSES....................................................................................................... $11,095,000.00 US Bancorp PWJallray fire- Tabs.sGSeries 2001 Max Debt.SINGLE PURPOSE Public Finance 10112001 12:16 PM Page 1 $11,095,000 City of Moorpark RDA Series 2001 Bonds DEBT SERVICE SCHEDULE Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P+I 1010112002 75,000.00 2.200% 453,250.00 528,250.00 1010112003 542,250.00 542,250.00 1010112004 10,000.00 2.700% 542,250.00 552,250.00 1010112005 30,000.00 2.850% 541,980.00 571,980.00 1010112006 40,000.00 3.150% 541,125.00 581,125.00 1010112007 40,000.00 3.350% 539,865.00 579,865.00 1010112008 40,000.00 3.550% 538,525.00 578,525.00 1010112009 45,000.00 3.700% 537,105.00 582,105.00 1010112010 45,000.00 3.850% 535,440.00 580,440.00 1010112011 45,000.00 3.950% 533,707.50 578,707.50 1010112012 50,000.00 4.050% 531,930.00 581,930.00 1010112013 50,000.00 4.200% 529,905.00 579,905.00 1010112014 50,000.00 4.300% 527,805.00 577,805.00 1010112015 55,000.00 4.400% 525,655.00 580,655.00 1010112016 55,000.00 4.500% 523,235.00 578,235.00 1010112017 60,000.00 4.600% 520,760.00 580,760.00 1010112018 60,000.00 4.700% 518,000.00 578,000.00 1010112019 680,000.00 4.800% 515,180.00 1,195,180.00 1010112020 710,000.00 4.900% 482,540.00 1,192,540.00 1010112021 745,000.00 5.000% 447,750.00 1,192,750.00 1010112022 785,000.00 5.000% 410,500.00 1,195,500.00 1010112023 825,000.00 5.000% 371,250.00 1,196,250.00 1010112024 865,000.00 5.000% 330,000.00 1,195,000.00 1010112025 905,000.00 5.000% 286,750.00 1,191,750.00 1010112026 950,000.00 5.000% 241,500.00 1,191,500.00 1010112027 1,000,000.00 5.000% 194,000.00 1,194,000.00 1010112028 1,050,000.00 5.000% 144,000.00 1,194,000.00 1010112029 1,100,000.00 5.000% 91,500.00 1,191,500.00 1010112030 730,000.00 5.000% 36,500.00 766,500.00 Total 11,095,000.00 12,534,257.50 23,629,257.50 US Bancorp Piper Jaffiay Me- Ws.sf-Series 2001 Max Debt.S1NGLf PURPOSE Public Finance 1012512001 12:16PM Page 2 $11,095,000 City of Moorpark RDA Series 2001 Bonds DEBT SERVICE SCHEDULE YIELD STATISTICS BondYear Dollars............................................................................................................................................ $252,635.83 AverageLife.................................................................................................................................................... 22.770 Years AverageCoupon.............................................................................................................................................. 4.9613934% NetInterest Cost(NIC).................................................................................................................................... 5.0206813% TrueInterest Cost(TIC)................................................................................................................................... 5.0541347% Bond Yield for Arbitrage Purposes.................................................................................................................... 5.0811932% AllInclusive Cost IAICI.................................................................................................................................... 5.2961499% IRS FORM 8038 NetInterest Cost............................................................................................................................................. 4.9613934% WeightedAverage Maturity............................................................................................................................. 22.770 Years US Bancorp Piper JaMay Me- Tabs.sl Series 2001 Max Oebl-S1NME PURPOSE Public Finance 101251200112:26 PM Page 3 $11,095,000 City of Moorpark RDA Series 2001 Bonds NET DEBT SERVICE SCHEDULE Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P+I DSR Net New DIS 1010112002 75,000.00 2.200% 453,250.00 528,250.00 528,250.00 1010112003 542,250.00 542,250.00 542,250.00 1010112004 10,000.00 2.700% 542,250.00 552,250.00 552,250.00 1010112005 30,000.00 2.850% 541,980.00 571,980.00 571,980.00 1010112006 40,000.00 3.150% 541,125.00 581,125.00 581,125.00 1010112007 40,000.00 3.350% 539,865.00 579,865.00 579,865.00 1010112008 40,000.00 3.550% 538,525.00 578,525.00 578,525.00 1010112009 45,000.00 3.700% 537,105.00 582,105.00 582,105.00 1010112010 45,000.00 1850% 535,440.00 580,440.00 580,440.00 1010112011 45,000.00 3.950% 533,707.50 578,707.50 578,707.50 1010112012 50,000.00 4.050% 531,930.00 581,930.00 581,930.00 1010112013 50,000.00 4.200% 529,905.00 579,905.00 579,905.00 1010112014 50,000.00 4.300% 527,805.00 577,805.00 577,805.00 1010112015 55,000.00 4.400% 525,655.00 580,655.00 580,655.00 1010112016 55,000.00 4.500% 523,235.00 578,235.00 578,235.00 1010112017 60,000.00 4.600% 520,760.00 580,760.00 580,760.00 1010112018 60,000.00 4.700% 518,000.00 578,000.00 578,000.00 1010112019 680,000.00 4.800% 515,180.00 1,195,180.00 1,195,180.00 1010112020 710,000.00 4.900% 482,540.00 1,192,540.00 1,192,540.00 1010112021 745,000.00 5.000% 447,750.00 1,192,750.00 1,192,750.00 1010112022 785,000.00 5.000% 410,500.00 1,195,500.00 1,195,500.00 1010112023 625,000.00 5.000% 371,250.00 1,196,250.00 1,196,250.00 1010112024 865,000.00 5.000% 330,000.00 1,195,000.00 1,195,000.00 1010112025 905,000.00 5.000% 286,750.00 1,191,750.00 1,191,750.00 1010112026 950,000.00 5.000% 241,500.00 1,191,500.00 1,191,500.00 1010112027 1,000,000.00 5.000% 194,000.00 1,194,000.00 1,194,000.00 1010112028 1,050,000.00 5.000% 144,000.00 1,194,000.00 1,194,000.00 1010112029 1,100,000.00 5.000% 91,500.00 1,191,500.00 1,191,500.00 1010112030 730,000.00 5.000% 36,500.00 766,500.00 766,500.00 1010112031 (580,192.50) (580,192.50) Total 11,095,000.00 12,534,257.50 23,629,257.50 (580,192.50) 23,049,065.00 US Llancoip Pgoor Jelfroy File- Tabs.sl•Se4s 2001 Max Debt.SINGLE PURPOSE Pabrrc Eiaence 101251200112:25 PM Page 4 Table 1 City of Moorpark RDA Redevelopment Project Area Fiscal Year Assessed Value Change 1 995-96 352,136,613 1996-97 408,915,260 16.12% 1997-98 415,327,260 1.57% 1998-99 434,514,943 4.62% 1999-00 449,056,203 3.35% 2000-01 497,354,056 10.76% 2001-02 525,665,494 5.69% Base Year 88-89 264,798,987 50.37% Incremental Value 260,866,507 49.63% Acreage 1,217 Adoption Date 05-Jul-89 Last Day to Incur Debt 05-Jul-09 Term of Plan 05-Jul-29 Last Day to Collect Revenues 05-Jul-39 Maximum Bonded Indebtedness 60,000,000 Maximum Tax Increment 180,000,000 Growth Assumption 3.00% Tax Rate Assumption 1.01% Prepared by US Bancorp Piper Jaffray Page 1 10125101 Table 2 City of Moorpark RDA Increment Revenues Less Housing Set Aside Fiscal Year Total Taxable Assumed Tax Revenues Housing Set Revenues Ending Value Growth% Total Increment (1 01%) Aside(20%) Less Housing 2002 525,665,494 260,866,507 2,634,752 526,950 2,107,801 2003 541,435,459 3% 276,636,472 2,794,028 558,806 2,235,223 2004 557,678,523 3% 292,879,536 2,958,083 591,617 2,366,467 2005 574,408,878 3% 309,609,891 3,127,060 625,412 2,501,648 2006 591,641,145 3% 326,842,158 3,301,106 660,221 2,640,885 2007 609,390,379 3% 344,591,392 3,480,373 696,075 2,784,298 2008 627,672,090 3% 362,873,103 3,665,018 733,004 2,932,015 2009 646,502,253 3% 381,703,266 3,855,203 771,041 3,084,162 2010 665,897,321 3% 401,098,334 4,051,093 810,219 3,240,875 2011 685,874,240 3% 421,075,253 4,252,860 850,572 3,402,288 2012 706,450,467 3% 441,651,480 4,460,680 892,136 3,568,544 2013 727,643,981 3% 462,844,994 4,674,734 934,947 3,739,788 2014 749,473,301 3% 484,674,314 4,895,211 979,042 3,916,168 2015 771,957,500 3% 507,158,513 5,122,301 1,024,460 4,097,841 2016 795,116,225 3% 530,317,238 5,356,204 1,071,241 4,284,963 2017 818,969,712 3% 554,170,725 5,597,124 1,119,425 4,477,699 2018 843,538,803 3% 578,739,816 5,845,272 1,169,054 4,676,218 2019 868,844,967 3% 604,045,980 6,100,864 1,220,173 4,880,692 2020 894,910,316 3% 630,111,329 6,364,124 1,272,825 5,091,300 2021 921,757,626 3% 656,958,639 6,635,282 1,327,056 5,308,226 2022 949,410,354 3% 684,611,367 6,914,575 1,382,915 5,531,660 2023 977,892,665 3% 713,093,678 7,202,246 1,440,449 5,761,797 2024 1,007,229,445 3% 742,430,458 7,498,548 1,499,710 5,998,838 2025 1,037,446,328 3% 772,647,341 7,803,738 1,560,748 6,242,991 2026 1,068,569,718 3% 803,770,731 8,118,084 1,623,617 6,494,468 2027 1,100,626,810 3% 835,827,823 8,441,861 1,688,372 6,753,489 2028 1,133,645,614 3% 868,846,627 8,775,351 1,755,070 7,020,281 2029 1,167,654,982 3% 902,855,995 9,118,846 1,823,769 7,295,076 2030 1,202,684,632 3% 937,885,645 9,472,645 1,894,529 7,578,116 2031 1,238,765,171 3% 973,966,184 9,837,058 1,967,412 7,869,647 2032 1,275,928,126 3% 1,011,129,139 10,212,404 2,042,481 8,169,923 2033 1,314,205,970 3% 1,049,406,983 10,599,011 2,119,802 8,479,208 Prepared by US Bancorp Piper Affray Page 2 10125101 Table 3 City of Moorpark RDA Calculation of Maximum Debt Service Based on Additional Bonds Test Senior Pass Max.Debt Fiscal Revenues Less Throughs Based Service Based Series 1999 Max.Debt Year Housing Based County Tax on No Growth in Total Pledged on 125% Bond Debt Service for Ending on No Growth Admin Fee Assessed Value Revenues Coverage Service(1) New Bonds 2002 2,107,801 52,695 558,238 1,496,868 1,197,495 614,082 583,413 2003 2,107,801 52,695 558,272 1,496,835 1,197,468 615,716 581,752 2004 2,107,801 52,695 558,306 1,496,800 1,197,440 616,620 580,820 2005 2,107,801 52,695 558,341 1,496,766 1,197,412 612,770 584,642 2006 2,107,801 52,695 558,376 1,496,730 1,197,384 616,134 581,250 2007 2,107,801 52,695 558,413 1,496,694 1,197,355 614,534 582,821 2008 2,107,801 52,695 558,450 1,496,657 1,197,325 616,102 581,223 2009 2,107,801 52,695 558,487 1,496,619 1,197,295 612,830 584,465 2010 2,107,801 52,695 558,526 1,496,581 1,197,265 614,305 582,960 2011 2,107,801 52,695 558,565 1,496,541 1,197,233 614,805 582,428 2012 2,107,801 52,695 558,605 1,496,501 1,197,201 614,330 582,871 2013 2,107,801 52,695 558,646 1,496,461 1,197,168 616,880 580,288 2014 2,107,801 52,695 558,687 1,496,419 1,197,135 614,260 582,875 2015 2,107,801 52,695 558,730 1,496,376 1,197,101 614,665 582,436 2016 2,107,801 52,695 558,773 1,496,333 1,197,066 613,900 583,166 2017 2,107,801 52,695 558,817 1,496,289 1,197,031 615,965 581,066 2018 2,107,801 52,695 558,863 1,496,244 1,196,995 616,665 580,330 2019 2,107,801 52,695 558,909 1,496,198 1,196,958 1,196,958 2020 2,107,801 52,695 558,955 1,496,151 1,196,921 1,196,921 2021 2,107,801 52,695 559,003 1,496,103 1,196,882 1,196,882 2022 2,107,801 52,695 559,052 1,496,054 1,196,843 1,196,843 2023 2,107,801 52,695 559,102 1,496,005 1,196,804 1,196,804 2024 2,107,801 52,695 559,153 1,495,954 1,196,763 1,196,763 2025 2,107,801 52,695 559,204 1,495,902 1,196,722 1,196,722 2026 2,107,801 52,695 559,257 1,495,849 1,196,679 1,196,679 2027 2,107,801 52,695 559,311 1,495,795 1,196,636 1,196,636 2028 2,107,801 52,695 559,366 1,495,740 1,196,592 1,196,592 2029 2,107,801 52,695 559,422 1,495,684 1,196,547 1,196,547 2030 2,107,801 52,695 559,479 1,495,627 1,196,502 1,196,502 2031 2,107,801 52,695 559,538 1,495,569 1,196,455 1,196,455 2032 2,107,801 52,695 559,597 1,495,509 1,196,407 1,196,407 2033 2,107,801 52,695 559,658 1,495,449 1,196,359 1,196,359 (1)Less 20%of debt service funded from the low income housing fund. Prepared by US Bancorp Piper Jaffray Page 3 10/25101 Table 4 City of Moorpark RDA Calculation of Maximum Debt Service Based on Actual Projected Revenues Revenues Less Housing Subordinate Fiscal Year Based on 3% Other Revenues Senior Pass Pass Pledged Ending Growth in AV to the Agency(1) Throughs Throughs Revenues 2002 2,107,801 193,736 558,238 167,258 1,576,041 2003 2,235,223 199,548 650,665 176,452 1,607,653 2004 2,366,467 205,535 745,865 185,918 1,640,217 2005 2,501,648 211,701 843,921 195,664 1,673,764 2006 2,640,885 218,052 944,917 205,697 1,708,322 2007 2,784,298 224,593 1,048,944 216,026 1,743,922 2008 2,932,015 231,331 1,156,090 226,660 1,780,595 2009 3,084,162 1,238,271 1,266,451 237,609 2,818,374 2010 3,240,875 245,419 1,380,122 248,880 1,857,291 2011 3,402,288 252,782 1,497,203 260,485 1,897,382 2012 3,568,544 260,365 1,617,796 272,432 1,938,681 2013 3,739,788 268,176 1,742,006 284,732 1,981,225 2014 3,916,168 276,221 1,869,942 297,396 2,025,051 2015 4,097,841 284,508 2,001,716 310,434 2,070,198 2016 4,284,963 293,043 2,137,443 323,858 2,116,705 2017 4,477,699 301,834 2,277,241 337,678 2,164,614 2018 4,676,218 310,889 2,421,233 351,907 2,213,967 2019 4,880,692 320,216 2,569,543 366,557 2,264,807 2020 5,091,300 329,823 2,722,303 381,640 2,317,179 2021 5,308,226 339,717 2,879,645 397,169 2,371,129 2022 5,531,660 349,909 3,041,707 413,158 2,426,704 2023 5,761,797 360,406 3,208,630 429,620 2,483,953 2024 5,998,838 371,218 3,380,560 446,568 2,542,927 2025 6,242,991 382,355 3,557,648 464,019 2,603,678 2026 6,494,468 393,825 3,740,048 481,986 2,666,259 2027 6,753,489 405,640 3,927,919 500,484 2,730,725 2028 7,020,281 417,809 4,121,426 519,531 2,797,133 2029 7,295,076 430,344 4,320,738 539,141 2,865,541 2030 7,578,116 443,254 4,526,028 559,332 2,936,009 2031 7,869,647 456,552 4,737,477 580,122 3,008,600 2032 8,169,923 470,248 4,955,268 601,526 3,083,377 2033 8,479,208 484,356 5,179,593 623,565 3,160,406 (1)Includes lease revenues and interest earnings. In addition,a one time payment of$1 million from the County to the Ageny In 2009 Prepared by US Bancorp Piper Jaffray Page 4 10125101 Table 5 City of Moorpark RDA Calculation of Maximum Debt Service Based on Actual Projected Growth Revenues Less Series 1999 Bonds and Admin Fees Revenues Revenues Less Series 1999 Less County Available for Less Pass Bonds Debt Less Agency Tax Admin Additional Fiscal Year Throughs Service(1) Admin Fees Bonds 2002 1,576,041 614,082 211,000 52,695 531,007 2003 1,607,653 615,716 217,330 55,881 542,274 2004 1,640,217 616,620 223,850 59,162 554,667 2005 1,673,764 612,770 230,565 62,541 572,224 2006 1,708,322 616,134 237,482 66,022 582,987 2007 1,743,922 614,534 244,607 69,607 599,147 2008 1,780,595 616,102 251,945 73,300 612,587 2009 2,818,374 612,830 259,503 77,104 1,631,328 2010 1,857,291 614,305 267,288 81,022 645,796 2011 1,897,382 614,805 275,307 85,057 661,728 2012 1,938,681 614,330 283,566 89,214 679,139 2013 1,981,225 616,880 292,073 93,495 694,044 2014 2,025,051 614,260 300,836 97,904 714,655 2015 2,070,198 614,665 309,861 102,446 732,792 2016 2,116,705 613,900 319,156 107,124 752,667 2017 2,164,614 615,965 328,731 111,942 770,298 2018 2,213,967 616,665 338,593 116,905 789,896 2019 2,264,807 348,751 122,017 1,427,482 2020 2,317,179 359,213 127,282 1,449,043 2021 2,371,129 369,990 132,706 1,471,264 2022 2,426,704 381,089 138,291 1,494,165 2023 2,483,953 392,522 144,045 1,517,766 2024 2,542,927 404,298 149,971 1,542,090 2025 2,603,678 416,427 156,075 1,567,158 2026 2,666,259 428,920 162,362 1,592,992 2027 2,730,725 441,787 168,837 1,619,616 2028 2,797,133 455,041 175,507 1,647,054 2029 2,865,541 468,692 182,377 1,675,331 2030 2,936,009 482,753 189,453 1,704,471 2031 3,008,600 497,235 196,741 1,734,502 2032 3,083,377 512,152 204,248 1,765,450 2033 3,160,406 527,517 211,980 1,797,343 (1)Less 20%of debt service funded from the low income housing fund. Prepared by US Bancorp Piper Affray Page 5 10125101 Table 6 City of Moorpark RDA Revenues Available for Series 2001 Bonds Available Revenues Available Constraint for Series 2001 Based on No Revenues Based Series 2001 Bonds Debt Fiscal Year Growth on 3%Growth Bonds Service Surplus Funds 2002 583,413 531,007 531,007 528,250 2.757 2003 581,752 542,274 542,274 542,250 24 2004 580,820 554,667 554,667 552,250 2,417 2005 584,642 572,224 572,224 571,980 244 2006 581,250 582,987 581,250 581,125 1,862 2007 582,821 599,147 582,821 579,865 19,282 2008 581,223 612,587 581,223 578,525 34,062 2009 584,465 1,631,328 584,465 582,105 1,049,223 2010 582,960 645,796 582,960 580,440 65,356 2011 582,428 661,728 582,428 578,708 83,020 2012 582,871 679,139 582,871 581,930 97,209 2013 580,288 694,044 580,288 579,905 114,139 2014 582,675 714,655 582,875 577,605 136,850 2015 582,436 732,792 582.436 580,655 152,137 2016 583,166 752,667 583,166 578,235 174,432 2017 581,066 770,298 581,066 580,760 189,538 2018 580,330 789.896 580,330 578,000 211,896 2019 1,196,958 1,427,482 1,196,958 1,195,180 232,302 2020 1,196,921 1,449,043 1,196,921 1,192,540 256,503 2021 1,196,882 1,471,264 1,196,882 1,192,750 278,514 2022 1,196,843 1,494,165 1,196,843 1,195,500 298,665 2023 1,196,804 1,517,766 1,196,804 1,196,250 321,516 2024 1,196,763 1,542,090 1,196,763 1,195,000 347,090 2025 1,196,722 1,567,158 1,196,722 1,191,750 375,408 2026 1,196,679 1,592,992 1,196,679 1,191,500 401,492 2027 1,196,636 1,619,616 1,196,636 1,194,000 425,616 2028 1,196,592 1,647,054 1,196,592 1,194,000 453,054 2029 1,196,547 1,675,331 1,196,547 1,191,500 483,831 2030 1,196,502 1,704,471 1,196,502 766,500 937,971 2031 1,196,455 1,734,502 1,196,455 2032 1,196,407 1,765,450 1,196,407 2033 1,196,359 1,797,343 1,196,359 Prepared by US Bancorp Piper Jaffray Page 6 10125101 URBAN FUTURES INCORPORATED Finance - Redevelopment • implementation Planning STAFF REPORT ;�eCp!ve TO: Hugh Riley, Assistant City Manager C' o ?v, , City of Moorpark FROM: Marshall F. Linn AS"sista ml.Gijiv Ma,nalgeTs Lice Urban Futures, Inc. DATE: October 8, 2001 SUBJECT: New Money 2001 Tax Allocation Bonds and financing Alternatives Related to the Funding of a New City Hall. As per your request, please find attached a draft sources and uses and a cash flow in regards to the Agency's proposed new money tax allocation bond issue needed to fund the proposed police and civic center. As we have discussed on the telephone numerous times, the Moorpark Redevelopment Agency has always been most fortunate in being able to issue bonds at the lowest point in an interest rate cycle. It appears we are going to be able to accomplish this goal again. For your review,and for the review of Steven Kueny, City Manager, I have attached a sources and uses for an $11,095,000 tax allocation bond issue which will net the Agency approximately $9,577,000 of proceeds to be used for the construction of a police facility and for the acquisition of various civic center properties by the Agency. Our latest runs are labeled Exhibit 1. You will note that we HAVE NOT bonded against the Agency's housing set-aside. If you wish us to capitalize the housing funds, we can. The choice is up to you, Steve and the Agency Board. Please note that Mark Curran has "run" the numbers at a 5 percent coupon rate with a $13.50 discount. I believe we will end up with a 5.10 percent coupon and a $12.50 discount rate. As per your request,a listing of fees has been provided in the sources and uses. Paul Thimmig is presently working with out staff and Mark's staff in the preparation of documents. All we need from you is an Agency and City Council agenda date. For your information I have also included as Exhibit 2 a tax increment growth summary. As can be seen, the value of the Project Area has doubled since the Plan's adoption in 1989. You will recall that you also requested that an analysis be prepared comparing variable rate financing vs. fixed rate financing for the proposed Certificate of Participation (the COP's) issue to construct City Hall. Exhibit 3 illustrates a fixed rate COP that nets $6,000,000 of proceeds using an aggressive rate of 5 percent on the term bonds. In order to achieve a net amount of$6,000,000, a COP in the amount of$7,335,000 will need to be issued. The total debt service (principal and interest)over the next 30 years would be $12,359,190. In order to present a truly objective analysis of variable rate financing, we have prepared three (3) financing scenarios. All are structured to result in a $6,000,000 net proceeds construction fund. Crestview Corporate Center-3111 N.Tustin Avenue,Suite 230.Orange,CA 92855-1753 Tel:(714)283-9334 Fax:(714)283-9319 e-mail:otanning@urbantuturesinc.com 1gOFM�7 02TAS..W 7t4b6.200-1M Exhibit 4 illustrates a financing using today's historic (all inclusive) loan interest rate of 2.350 percent. Total debt service using current (however, most likely not achievable for the long run) rates would be $9,460,746. Exhibit 5 presents a scenario using average rates over the last five (5) months which has been 2.850 percent. Total debt service on this scenario is $10,171,809. Exhibit 6 is the most realistic scenario in that we have used a more realistic 10-year historic variable rate of 3.250 percent. Total debt service, for this most realistic scenario is $10,264,988. TOTAL DEBT SERVICE Exhibit 3: Fixed Rate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $12,359,190 Exhibit 4: Current Variable Rate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 9,460,746 Exhibit 5: Previous 5-Month Variable Rate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $10,171,809 Exhibit 6: 10-Year Historical Rate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $10,764,988 In summary, the most realistic comparison is using today's do-able fixed rate total compared with the 10-year historic average. I have presented this comparison below: TOTAL DES' SERVICE Fixed Rate . . . . . . . . I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $12,359,190 10-Year Historical Average 510,764.988 Difference . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ($1,594,202) In conclusion, a variable rate financing will best serve the City when it issues its COP's. Finally, you have asked me to prepare an analysis comparing bond financings vs. the use of City cash. Exhibit 7 demonstrates that the using COP (bond) financing in the long run best serves the economic interest of the City. For purposes of this analysis, we have assumed a historic LAIF rate of 5.5 percent for the investment of City cash, which I believe is fair. As Exhibit 7 demonstrates, after year six (6)a positive charge results where the asset(cash invested in LAIF) ears $4,679,496 over total debt service needed to retire the COP issue. RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Immediately issue fully insured, AAA-rated tax allocation bonds by the early part of December. 2. Issue variable rate COP's next year when plans and price estimates are completed for the new City Hall. As always I am available to meet with you and Steve at your convenience. 7-'AW WMOPp07 0/TAS.." 2 0CWW6.n01_)"