HomeMy WebLinkAboutAG RPTS 1999 0317 RDA REGJ ESTABLISHED
MARCH 1A.list
O
LiFOR��n of
�r' OF
�
MOORPARK REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 17, 1999
7:00 P.M.
Moorpark Community Center
1. CALL TO ORDER:
2. ROLL CALL:
3. PUBLIC COMMENT:
4. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
5. PRESENTATION /ACTION /DISCUSSION:
Resolution No. 99 -79
799 Moorpark Avenue
A. Consider Refunding of the 1993 Tax Allocation Bonds with a New
Money Component. (Continued from March 3, 1999) Staff
Recommendation: 1) Direct staff and the financing team to
proceed with the preparation of financing documents and to
submit said documents to both Standard & Poor and to various
bond insurers (option 6 of the attached); 2) Price the bonds
after formal approval of the financing documents by both the
Agency and the City Council at a meeting to be held in April;
3) Instruct the financing team that the "new money" portion is
to be at least $1,950,000 prior to pricing the bond issue; 4)
Enter into an Agreement with the law firm of Quint & Thimmig
to serve as Bond Counsel subject to approval of the Executive
Director and Legal Counsel, and authorize the Executive
Director to sign said agreement; and 5) Enter into an
Agreement with the firm of Miller & Schroeder Financial, Inc.
to serve as Underwriter subject to approval of the Executive
Director and Legal Counsel, and authorize the Executive
Director to sign said Agreement. (ROLL CALL VOTE REQUIRED)
B. Consider Purchase of Mortgage Loan for Moorpark Playhouse.
Staff Recommendation: Direct staff as deemed appropriate.
Redevelopment Agency Agenda
March 17, 1999
Page 2
6. CONSENT CALENDAR:
A. Consider Notice of Completion for Alley Improvements Phase 2.
Staff Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 99- approving
an amendment to the FY 1998/99 Budget by increasing the
appropriation and budget for the subject project from $54,000
to $55,000 ($1,000 increase). (ROLL CALL VOTE REQUIRED)
7. CLOSED SESSION:
A. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - ANTICIPATED LITIGATION
Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Subdivision (b)
of Section 54956.9 of the Government Code: (Number of cases to
be discussed - 4)
8. ADJOURNMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Any member of the public may address the Agency during the Public Comments portion of
the Agenda, unless it is a Public Hearing or a Presentation /Action /Discussion item.
Speakers who wish to address the Agency concerning a Public Hearing or
Presentations /Action /Discussion item must do so during the Public Hearing or
Presentations /Action /Discussion portion of the Agenda for that item. Speaker cards
must be received by the City Clerk for Public Comment prior to the beginning of the
Public Comments portion of the meeting and for Presentation /Action /Discussion items
prior to the beginning of the first item of the Presentation /Action /Discussion portion
of the Agenda. Speaker Cards for a Public Hearing must be received prior to the
beginning of the Public Hearing. A limitation of three minutes shall be imposed upon
each Public Comment and Presentation /Action /Discussion item speaker. Written Statement
Cards may be submitted in lieu of speaking orally for open Public Hearings and
Presentation /Action /Discussion items. Copies of each item of business on the agenda
are on file in the office of the City Clerk and are available for public review. Any
questions concerning any agenda item may be directed to the City Clerk at 529 -6864.
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need assistance to
participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk's Department at (805) 529-
6864. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make
reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting (CFR 35.102 - 35.104 ADA
Title II).
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF VENTURA ) ss
CITY OF MOORPARK )
AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING
I, Deborah S. Traffenstedt, declare as follows:
That I am the City Clerk of the City of Moorpark and that an agenda for a Regular meeting of the
Moorpark Redevelopment Agency to be held March 17, 1999, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers
of the Moorpark Community Center, 799 Moorpark Avenue, Moorpark, California, was posted on
March 12, 1999, at a conspicuous place at the Moorpark Community Center, 799 Moorpark Avenue,
Moorpark, California.
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed on March 15, 1999.
S. I <�
Deborah S. Traffenstedt itY Clerk
ITEM 5• A•
%1400F!%ARK, CALIFORNIA
Re0evg}epment Agency Meeting
ar
ACI 10.0: Uo of OP ibn No 3
.L._Sba.v.edor S{Zif�
recomn'►e�dafi'pnc
s y.• 40�°• �d1�e..
MOORPARK REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY -
AGENDA REPORT
TO: Honorable Board of Directors
FROM: John E. Nowak, Assistant Executive Director
Prepared by Urban Futures, Inc.
DATE: March 8, 1999 (Agency Meeting of 3- 17 -99)
SUBJECT: Consider Refunding of the 1993 Tax Allocation Bonds
with a New Money Component (Continued from 3 -3 -99)
SUMMARY
With interest rates at a 20 -year low the Redevelopment Agency of
the City of Moorpark has a unique opportunity to issue refunding
bonds relative to the Redevelopment Agency of the City of
Moorpark Redevelopment Project 1993 Tax Allocation Bonds (the
"Bonds ") $10,000,000.00. By taking advantage of the lowest tax -
exempt rates since the adoption of the Redevelopment Project
area in 1989, the Agency can raise approximately $2,000,000 of
new project money without significantly increasing the Agency's
current annual debt service. In addition, by refunding and
restructuring its existing debt the Agency will accomplish the
following:
1. The new Agency Bonds will be rated AAA as opposed to
the A minus rating on the current bonds. This rating
upgrade will greatly assist the Agency in the
marketing of additional debt in the future, as new
debt would be issued on a parity basis (equal claim to
the pledge of revenues) at the highest rating as
opposed to the Agency's current rating.
2. The restructured and refunded debt would be issued at
an interest rate of 5.06° to 5.10% given current
market conditions. While the savings on the existing
debt is not significant, the new bond's AAA rating, as
stated above will permit the Agency, in the future, to
issue AAA parity bonds which will result in
�UODUAA
significant future savings to the Agency over the
remaining life of the project area.
BACKGROUND
In June of 1993 the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Moorpark
issued its Moorpark Redevelopment Project 1993 Tax Allocation
Bonds in the amount of $10,000,000. The Bonds are an
indebtedness of the Agency and are secured solely by tax
increments generated by increases in the assessed valuation of
property within the Moorpark Redevelopment Project (the "Project
Area ") which was approved by Ordinance No. 100 adopted by the
City Council on July 5, 1989. The Project Area consists of
approximately 1,217 acres and is primarily comprised of
commercial and industrial land uses.
DISCUSSION
The Agency, at the present time, is financially unable to issue
significant amounts of new debt to raise money for either
projects or any other lawful activities without restructuring
its existing debt and extending maturities. With interest rates
at historical lows, it is the ideal time to raise new capital at
interest rates in the low 5% range.
Our analysis has shown that issuing additional parity debt at
the Agency's current standards Poor A- rating, would necessitate
an annual 25 basis point increase on the interest rate the
Agency would have to pay. In addition, the Agency at the A-
level would have to pay approximately $150,000 of debt service
on an annual basis for 30 years to raise a net amount of
$2,000,000.
By restructuring
the Agency will
existing bonds of
More importantly,
essentially level
up unobligated
activities.
its existing debt and achieving an AAA rating,
achieve a Net Present value saving on its
$144,344 using a NPV factor of 5.39 %.
the Agency's annual debt service will remain
to which now exists, thus continuing to free
tax increments for operations and other
1. In order for Moorpark's Bonds to be rated AAA, a
refunding and restructuring of the existing bond issue
is necessary. The Agency cannot issue any additional
----------------- - - - - --
new bonds, which would place the repayment obligation
on. the existing debt in a junior lien position. In
(AMU 04
order to avoid a potential additional interest expense
to the Agency, all of the bonds should carry the same
rating. As we are confident in the Agency's ability
to achieve an AAA rating it is obvious that the Agency
should take all these actions necessary to achieve
that goal.
Staff is recommending that the Agency engage the law firm of
Quint & Thimmig to serve as Bond Counsel. Staff is also
recommending that the Agency engage the underwriting firm of
Miller & Schroeder Financial Incorporated to serve as
underwriter. Quint & Thimmig provided bond counsel services for
the City's last public offering, a Community Facilities District
bond issue, and did a highly professional job. Miller &
Schroeder Financial was the Agency's underwriter for the 1993
Tax Allocation Bonds and also served as underwriter on the
Community Facilities District bond issue.
STAFF RE COME NDAT I ON
Staff recommends the Board of Directors (Roll Call Vote):
1. Direct staff and the financing team to proceed with the
preparation of financing documents and to submit said
documents to both Standard & Poor and to various bond
insurers (Option 6 of the attached);
2. Price the bonds after formal approval of the financing
documents by both the Agency and the City Council at a
meeting to be held in April;
3. Instruct the financing team that the "new money" portion is
to be at least $1,950,000 prior to pricing the bond issue;
4. Enter into an Agreement with the law firm of Quint &
Thimmig to serve as Bond Counsel subject to approval of the
Executive Director and Legal Counsel, and authorize the
Executive Director to sign said agreement; and
S. Enter into an Agreement with the firm of Miller & Schroeder
Financial, Inc. to serve as Underwriter subject to approval
of the Executive Director and Legal Counsel, and authorize
the Executive Director to sign said Agreement.
Attachment: Addendum
W)G010 -3
SENT BY: URBAN FUTURES : 3 -10 -99 : 5:02PM : Urban Futures lnc.
805 529 8270;# 2/ 5
URBAN
FUTURES
INCORPORATED Finance • Redevelopment • Implementation . Ptelnning
MOORPARK REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
AGENDA REPORT
ADDENDUM
TO: Honorable Board of Directors
Redevelopment Agency of the City of Moorpark
FROM: John E. Nowak, Assistant Executive Director
Prepared By: Urban Futures, Inc.
DATE: March 10, 1999 (Agency Meeting of March 17, 1999)
SUBJECT: Revised Staff Report In Regards To the Potential Refunding of the 1993 Tax Allocation
Bonds with a New Money Component
At the March 3, 1999 Agency meeting, members of the Board of Directors requested that staff and the
Agency's financial advisor, Urban Futures, Inc., prepare various refunding options related to the potential
refunding/restructuring of the Agency's 1993 Tax Allocation Bonds. The purpose of this staff report is to
serve as an addendum to the staff report presented at the March 3i4 meeting.
As the Board wnli recap, in 1993 the Moorpark Redevelopment Agency issued $1 0,000,000 of Tax allocation
Bonds (the `Bonds) to finance various projects and related costs associated with the implementation of the
Moorpark Redevelopment Plan adopted In 1989. The Bonds are rated 'A by Standard & Poor's and carry
a term bond rate of 6.125%. The Bonds have an interest rate range of 3.30° to 8.125%.
In 1993, when the Bonds were first issued, the Agency did not qualify for bond insurance and its related
'AAA' rating. While an "AAA' rating is not imperative at this time, the Agency, If it wants to Issue additional
debt now or in the future, will not be able to Issue 'AAA' rated Bonds unless the 1993 Bonds are
refunded/ Uructured into AAA -rated securities. The reason for this is that parity bonds (equal claim to the
pledge of tax increment revenue) must be at the same rating as the existing Bonds. In Moorpark's case, a
parity Issue under the current situation could not achieve a rating higher than 'A unless the existing Bonds
Are refunded/restructured Into AAA Bonds.
At the March 31" Agency meeting, questions were raised as to the costs and economic feasibility of
refundingfrastrvciuring the existing 1993 Bonds and adding a new money component If the Agency desired
to raise additional money for projects and programs. The following financing options are presented for your
review and consideration:
3r10rl8J111��r,NOa1139Y,v�p
4-
0106004
CreGtview Corporate Center - 3111 N. Tustin Avenue, Suite 230, Orange, CA 92865.1753
Tel: (714) 283 -9334 Fax: (714) 283 -9319 a -mail: ufifpacbeil.net
714 293 9319 PAGE.02
MAR 10 199 17:25
SENT BY:URBAN FUTURES ; 3 -10 -99 ; 5 :02PM ; Urban Futures Inc. -; 805 529 8270;# 3/ 5
Op it on No. 1: Leaving the Existing Bonds In Place
If the Agency derides to leave the existing Bonds in place in their present form, the Bonds
will be fully amortized in 2018. The Agency Currently still owes $15,384,464 in principal and
Interest. If this option is selected, any future debt the Agency may choose to issue cannot
be rated higher than 'A-.'
Option No. Refunding the Existing Bonds and Keeping the Current Rating 01 "A '
Option No. 2 Is not economically feasible.
Opoon No. 3: Refunding/Restructuring the Existing Bonds into "AAA" Rated Securities with No New
Money
Option No. 3 achieves the goal of upgradng the rating of the original Bonds into 'AAA' rated
securities and produces a modest saving of total debt service If the original term is not
extended. Under this option, using current interest rates, the Agency over the remaining
term of the Bonds will save approximately 5136,247 which represents a net present value
(NPV) of 1.075% of the refunded principal.
ORtIon No. 4 Issuing a Stand - Alone, New Money Issue
Option No. 4 Illustrates the costs associated with issuing new, stand -alone debt to achieve
$2,000,000 of net proceeds (after funding of the debt service reserve fund and issuance
costs), without the refunding/restructuring of the 1993 bonds, at an 'A-' rating. Under this
option the Agency's total debt service, Including principal and interest, would be $3,626,878,
assuming a 5.25°x► interest rate on the term bonds. Option No. 4 would cost the Agency
approximately $187,000 more per year in additional debt service over and above that which
the Agency Is currently paying on its 1993 Bonds,
Qgffion No. 5: Refunding/Restructuring Existing Bonds with New Money Component, No Extension of
Maturities
Option No. 5 illustrates the total cost and average annual debt service as a result of
refunding/restructuring the 1993 Bonds with a new money component at an 'AAA" level, and
Got extending maturities over and above that which the Agency now has. The total debt
service under Option No. 5 would be $18,696,043 using a long Bond coupon of 4.95%. The
total additional actual dollar cost to the Agency to net $2,000,000 in proceeds is $3,474,251.
Option No. 5 Is very cost effective except that the average annual debt service payment will
be approximately $956,000, which represents an annual increase of about $176,000 more
per year than what the Agency now pays on the 1993 Bonds.
Ontlon No. 6: Refunding/Restructuring Existing Bonds with New Money Component, and Extending the
Maturity Schedule
Option No. 6 illustrates a refunding/restructuring of the 1993 Bonds, with a new money
component netting $2,000,000 to the Agency and extending the maturities out to 30 years.
By refunding and restructuring the 1993 Bonds into 30 -year, 'AAA" rated securities, the
Agency would pay a total of $23,289,362 in principal and interest over the next 30 years.
Regarding the total additional actual dollar cost to the Agency to net $2,000.000, Option No.
6 is $1,119,068 higher than Option No. 5 (the shorter maturity schedule).
a►toaen.�,no��saowvo
-2-
MAR 10 '99 17:26 ?14 283 9319 PAGE-03
SENT BY =URBAN FUTURES ; 3 -10 -99 : 5 :02PM ; Urban Futures Inc. 805 529 8270;# 4/ 5
Regarding Option No. 6, members of the Board of Directors have focused on the fad that, by refundingfre-
structuring the 1983 Bonds Into longet maturities (18 years versus 30 years), the Agency will spend an
additional $7,924,900 in total debt servlm While this Is a true statement, the Agency, N it wants $2,000,000
now lifftg raising its annual debt service level, has no other choice. By using a present value discount rate
of 5.39%. which represents the all- inclusive cost of the financing, the actual present value of the additional
expense, as discussed In Option No. 6 above, Is $2,027,837, not $7,924,900 (please we attached Exhibit
A).
It Is unfortunate that the Agency does not have sufficient cash flow to shorten the maturity schedule for the
new money as Wistrated by Option No. 5, orto issue parity bonds as discussed In Option No. 4. The Agency
should keep in mind that dollars to be paid back after 2019 have less of a value: as such, the present value
calcuiat(on is the most objective measure of real cost to the Agency. The Agency should also keep In mind
that in the future it will be easier to Issue additional parity debt if annual debt service payments are kept at
a fairly constant level during the term of the bond.
anmook,W.,owaQ13W.►wo -3-
MAR 10 '99 17:26 714 293 9319 PPGE.04
SENT BY:URBM FUTURES ; 3-10-99 ; 5 :03PM ; Urban Futures Inc.-
MOORPARK REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
PRES NT VALUE ANALYSIS
805 529 8270;# 5/ 5
EXHIBIT A
1999
(ACTUAL
$534,620
($17,941)
(ACTUAL
DOLLARS)
2000
$780,609
DOLLARS)
(PROPOSED)
(ACTUAL
(NET PRESENT
1993 T.A. BONDS
1999 REFUND.
DOLLARS)
VALUE DOLLARS) PRESENT
DATE EXISTING DEBT
T.A. BONDS
SAVINGS I
SAVINGS f VALUE
(October Ij SERVICE
(* $2mm NEW $$)
(EXPENSE)
(EXPENSE) FACTOR
1999
$516,679
$534,620
($17,941)
($17,941)
1.00000000
2000
$780,609
$756,490
$24,119
$22,885
1.05390383
2001
$781,959
$760,055
$21,904
$19,721
1.11071329
2002
$782,109
$757,880
$24,229
$20,698
1.17058499
2003
$781,014
$760,320
$20,694
$16,774
1.23368401
2004
$783,629
$767,180
$26,449
$20,343
1.30018430
2005
$779,616
$758,630
$20,986
$15,315
1.37026922
2006
$779,556
$759,465
$20,091
$13,912
1.44413198
2007
$777,956
$759,665
$18,291
$12,018
1.52197623
2008
$780,156
$759,210
$20,946
$13,058
1.60401658
2009
$780,350
$758,080
$22,270
$13,174
1.69047922
2010
$779,013
$756,255
$22,758
$12,774
1.78160253
2011
$781,144
$758,715
$22,429
$11,945
1.87763773
2012
$781,438
$758,865
$22,573
$11,407
1.97884960
2013
$779,894
$758,272
$21,622
$10,368
2.08551717
2014
$781,513
$756,938
$24,575
$11,181
2.19793454
2015
$780,988
$759,860
$21,128
$9,121
2.31641164
2016
$783,319
$756,793
$26,526
$10,866
2.44127510
2017
$788,200
$757,983
$30,217
$11,744
2.57286918
2018
$785,325
$758,183
$27,142
$10,010
2.71155669
2019
$0
$757,393
($757,393)
($265,034)
2.85771999
2020
$0
$760,173
($760,173)
($252,401)
3.01176204
2021
$0
$756,690
($756,690)
($238,395)
3.17410756
2022
$0
$757,198
($757,198)
($226,353)
3.34520412
2023
$0
$756,443
($756,443)
($214,562)
3.52552344
2024
$0
$759,425
($759,425)
($204;390)
3.71556266
2025
$0
$760,893
($760,893)
($194,311)
3.91584573
2026
$0
$760,845
($760,845)
($184,361)
4.12692482
2027
$0
$759,283
($759,283)
($174,573)
4.34938188
2028
$0
$761,205
($761,205)
($166,063)
4.58383023
2029
IQ
$7%360
($756,360)
!$156.5671
4.83091625
$15,364,467
$23,289,367
($7,924,900)
($2,027,637)"
Note: The proposed 1999 Bonds will have smaller annual debt service payments than the
existing 1993 Bonds through 2018, when the 1993 Bonds mature. Although the existing 1993
Bonds wilt mature in 2018, the annual debt service payments for the proposed 1999 Bonds
will continue through 2029.
Cost to Agency for net new proceeds of $2,000,000, expressed in net present value dollars.
000c.07
MAR 10 199 17 =26 714 283 9319 PAGE.05
n °�L -7 ;02 , ? rte. (C -)
i
rrEM SO&
CITY OF MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA
Redevelopment Agency Meeting
nf 3 1-7 —
MOORPARK REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ACTION: COn�'� 't� 4' 1-1'`tq ,
AGENDA REPORT 0-5{'ru u.rQl rev,ewi repor_f_ �S
it b e Lo K►_ be i-ed fb r a cos4 nof-
i'V- A eXc_eed $5,00a ConiPa4�xrf'
o n 'th e- res" .7'
TO: Honorable Board of Directors u p pru i Sa 1 may S�a nbe.
n
FROM: John E. Nowak, Assistant Executive Director Ordered ¢p
C�e�-errv�tne
1Th a Va f u e op
DATE: 05 March 1999 (Council Meeting of 03- 17 -99) .f- he 'oroper+F
SUBJECT: Consider Purchase of Mortgage Loan for Moorpark
Playhouse.
DISCUSSION: Information on this subject will be provided
to the Agency Board under separate cover.
RECOMMENDATION: Direct staff as deemed appropriate.
(A)G OS
To:
From:
Date:
City of Moorpark
Agenda Report
The Honorable City Council
The Moorpark Redevelopment Agency
A�
ITEM
bis A.
CITY OF MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA
Redevelopment Agency Meeting
of 3 --11- Gg
ACTION: Ur roved s4- 4
Y@ Go rn rviertojail'a n c! o e
}peso uf'ion No. q9 -i
Kenneth C. Gilbert, Director of Public Works
March 1,1999 (Council Meeting 3- 17 -99)
9(1�_
Subject: Notice of Completion for Alley Improvements Phase 2
BACKGROUND
Last March the City Council approved the Notice of Completion for a
project to construct improvements to Maureen Lane, Bonnie View
Street and the downtown alleys. Included in that report was
information regarding the need to construct additional improvements
along the edges of the alleys reconstructed by that project. That
report stated that efforts to negotiate a Change Order to the
original contract to add this additional work had failed and that
it would be necessary to have this work done under a separate
contract.
On October 21, 1998, the City Council authorized staff to advertise
for receipt of bids for this follow -up project. On November 17,
1998, The City Council awarded a contract for the subject work.
DISCUSSION
A. Scope of Work
The scope of the Phase 2 project consists of the construction
of additional improvements at the edges of the newly
reconstructed alley pavement. The types of improvements to be
constructed are described on the diagram attached as Exhibit 1.
In addition to the above described improvements, the project
also includes the reconstruction of a portion of the existing
driveway located on the west side of the alley just north of
Second Street, serving the property at 432 Moorpark Avenue, and
the construction of modified alley improvements in the area to
improve drainage.
At the request of the contractor, the areas shown to be
constructed in gravel where changed to asphalt. The unit bid
price for gravel and /or asphalt was the same: $1.00 per square
foot.
0) ®L0Q�3
Alleys Phase 2: Completion
March 1, 1999
Page 2
B. Added Allev: Between First St. & Second St., E/O Bard St:
The project design did not call for any work to be done to
portions of the alley running between First Street and Second
Street, just west of Bard Street. Although the surrounding
alley segments were to receive gravel improvements, the omitted
areas did not seem to be suitable for this type of improvement.
When the type of improvements to other nearby alley segments
changed to asphalt, it became clear that leaving some of the
areas out of the contract was not consistent with the intent of
the project. Accordingly these areas were added to the scope of
work.
The cost of this added work is as follows:
• Change Order (re- mobilization, etc.): $1,559.50
• Added Quantities: $1,250.00
$2,809.50
C. Change Orders
There was only one Change
This Change Order was for a
above. The Change Order was
control and removal costs.
D. Quantity Adjustment
order, in the amount of $1,559.50.
portion of the added work described
for re- mobilization, added traffic
Invariably with Public Works projects the final actual quantity
for each of the items required to complete the project will
differ somewhat from the engineer's estimate of quantities set
forth in the bid documents. This means that the final contract
cost will differ somewhat from the bid price, based upon the
actual quantity of items constructed. In this contract more
quantities were required than the amounts set forth in the
engineer's estimate.
A summary of the additional quantities is as follows:
• Total Cost of additional quantities: $3,709.00
• Cost of Added Quantities for Added Area: $1,250.00
Net Additional Quantities $2,509.00
0.1eyz Cmr. 000610
Alleys Phase 2: Completion
March 1, 1999
Page 3
A summary of the total project cost is as
• Bid Price:
• Net Added Quantities:
Sub -Total Adjusted Cost
• Added Area
- Change Order $1,559.50
- Quantities $1,250.00
Total
E. Final Inspection and Acceptance
follows:
$39,431.00
$ 2,509.00
$41,940.00
$ 2,809.50
$44,740.50
The City Engineer has completed a final inspection of the
project and has found the work to be acceptable. At this time
it would be appropriate for the City Council to accept the
project as completed, direct the City Clerk to file a Notice of
Completion and authorize release of the retention.
F. Fiscal Impact
1. Prior Project Costs: The total cost for the Alley
improvements already constructed is $196,000.
2. Estimated Cost of Phase 2 Improvements:
• Design $ 3,400.00
• Construction Contract $44,740.50
• Other $ 859.50
• Admin. / Inspection $ 6,000.00
Total $55,000.00
3. Budget Adjustment: This project is funded by the Moorpark
Redevelopment Agency. The attached Resolution amends the MRA
Budget for FY 1998/99 to provide sufficient funds to proceed
with the project. A summary of the actions proposed by that
Resolution is as follows:
• Current Budget
Prior Year Carryover $11,455
FY 98/99 Appropriation $42,545
Total $54,000
• Proposed Increase $ 1,000
• Proposed Amended Budget Amount $55,000
AI'ey% rmv �� (t.I � I
0 � I
Alleys Phase 2: Completion
March 1, 1999
Page 4
RECOMI,MNDATIONS [Roll Call Vote]
A. Moorpark Redevelopment Agency (MRA): Staff recommends that the
MRA take the following actions:
1. Adopt Resolution 99 - approving an amendment to the FY
1998/99 Budget by increasing the appropriation and budget
for the subject project from $54,000 to $55,000 ($1,000
increase).
B. City of Moorpark: Staff recommends that the City Council take
the following actions:
1. Accept the work as completed;
2. Instruct the City Clerk to file the Notice of Completion for
the project; and,
3. Authorize the release of the retention upon satisfactory
clearance of the thirty five (35) day lien period.
Y' _
W I
o
I
MOORPARK ( ST. HWY,
mzm
r-oo
m
23
BARD ST.
ST.
..........................................
........ ... .....
..A
.BARD
MILLARD ST.
V-0
kv
in
BARD ST.
ST.
..........................................
........ ... .....
..A
.BARD
MILLARD ST.
V-0
RESOLUTION NO. 98 -
A RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF
THE CITY OF MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING
A BUDGET AMENDMENT TO THE FISCAL YEAR 1998/99
ADOPTED BUDGET FOR THE MOORPARK REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY FUND [FUND 4101 `
WHEREAS, on July 15, 1998, the Moorpark Redevelopment Agency
adopted the MRA Budget for Fiscal Year 1998/99; and
WHEREAS, a staff report has been presented to the MRA
requesting an increase to the amount budgeted for an MRA funded
capital improvement project; and
WHEREAS, Exhibit "A," attached hereto and made a part hereof,
describes said budget amendment and its resultant impacts to the
budget line item(s).
NOW, THEREFORE, THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF
MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. That the appropriation and budget amount for the
Alleys Phase 2 project is hereby increased from $54,000 to $55,000
($1,000 increase) as more particularly described in Exhibit "A."
SECTION 2. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of
this Resolution and shall cause a certified Resolution to be filed
in the book of original Resolutions.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 171" day of March, 1999.
Patrick Hunter, Chairman
ATTEST:
Deborah S. Traffenstedt, Secretary
List of attachments: Exhibit 'A'
000014
Resolution No. 99 -
Exhibit "A"
ADDITIONAL APPROPRIATIONS FOR
PROJECT 8001 (Alleys Phase 2)
FUND
ACCOUNT NUMBER
APPROPRIATION
TO ACCOUNT NUMBER
NUMBER
APPROPRIATION
REQUEST
APPROPRIATION
MRA
410.000.0000.000.5100
$1,000
400.801.8001.000.3992
TOTAL TRANSFERS
$3,400
$1,000
$3,400
FROM RESERVES:
DISTRIBUTION OF APPROPRIATIONS TO EXPENSE ACCOUNT NUMBERS
ACCOUNT
CURRENT
SUBJECT
REVISED
NUMBER
APPROPRIATION
APPROPRIATION
APPROPRIATION
/ (REDUCTION)
410.801.8001.802.9102
$3,400
$0
$3,400
Design
410.801.8001.804.9903
$44,600
$1,000
$45,600
Construction
410.801.8001.808.9102
$6,000
$0
$6,000
Inspection
TOTALS:
$54,000
$1,000
$55,000
(.you(j15