1976/04/1576-27.5
City Hall; Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 15, 1976, 1:00 P.M.
The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in adjourned regular
session for the purpose of considering the Official Statement and
Notice Invit/ng Sealed Bids in connection with the proposed $6
million bond issue.
PRESENT: COUNCIL }~}-~ERS: Kaywood, Seymour and Thom
ABiE:Tf: COUNCIL MEMBERS.. Pebley and Sneegas
PRESENT: ASSISTANT CITY }~uNAGER; William O. Talley
ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY: I~illiam Hopkins
DEPUTY CITY CL~%K; Linda D. Roberts
UTILITIES DIRECTOR.. Gordon W. Hoyt
BOND COUNSEL; Bill Kraemer of O'Melveny & :~.yers
Mayor Thom called the meeting to order and welcomad those in attendance
to the Council meeting.
QFFICIAL .STATEMENT A}~D NOTICE INVITING SEALED F~IDS - $6 ;'~ILLION ELECTRIC ?d~VEL~JZ
BOJDS; ,~r. Gordon Hoyt briefly outlined the minor chan~es made to the Official
Statement since the Council meeting of April 13, !976. These include notifica-
tion that Council ~embers Pebley and ,~neegas will be replaced on the Anaheim
City Council by Council l[embers Kott and Roth, pursuant to the results of the
April 13, 1976 election. The additions also reflect the withdrawal of Southern
California Edison from the Kaiparowits Project and the fact that the effect of
~his ac~lon on the City of Anaheim's generating plan will be minimal. The
City's financial audit report prepared by Arthur Young & Company, Certified
Public Accountants, as well as the complete electric revenue financial report
has been appended.
Mr. Hoyt reported that the overall impact of the issuance of these bonds
will be $576,000 in the forthcoming 1976-77 Fiscal Year. lie explained the
allocations for each account.
.~{r. Hoyt reaffirmed that his recommendation is that the draft Official
Statement and Notice Inviting Sealed Bids be approved by the City Council
subject to such minor changes as may be required by Bond Counsel, City Attorney
or Utilities Director.
In response to Councilman Seymour's request for clarification as to the
cash flow effect of this bond issue on the 1976-77 Budget, with specific
reference to the reported $49,000 per month ($588,000 per year) additional
costs, Mr. t{oyt responded that this was anticipated in the proposed 1976-77
Budget which he presented to the Assistant City ~{ana§er.
Mr. Talley added that the current Fiscal Year Budget for the Utilities
Department anticipates a return to the General Fund of $1.6 million. If that
capability does not exist in the proposed 1976-77 Budget, it would be reason-
able to assum~ tha~ amount of money would have to be found. He advised that it
is his goal to bring to ~he Council a program showing the current level of
transfer to the General Fund and what steps need to be taken to attain that
amount, so that the Council can make the determination as to whether or not
they wish the Utility to provide the same amount of money to the General Fund
and whether or not they wish ~o institute new revenues or service reductions to
off-set this amount.
It was stressed that there are many hours of negotiation and discussion
which the Utilities Director and Assistant City :~anager have yet to perform in
connection with the forthcoming Utilities Department Budget. bit. Hoyt reported
on the capital construction and equipment needs included in the proposed
budget.
In response to Councilman Seymour's observation that the City could be in
the situation of paying 6 3/4% interest to bond holders and the City's idle
funds invested at a rate less than that, '..ir. Talley indicated this would be
correct only in connection with short-term investments, and he would not
anticipate this to be the case.
Councilman Seymour voiced the opinion that if the 1976-77 Budget does not
include funding from current revenues for certain capital improvements, then,
in fact~ the $1.6 million in question would be a larger number, more like $2.1
million.
76-276
City Halls Aaaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - April 15~ 19761 1:00 P.!i.
Mr. Talley remarked that he did not share this opinion because of the
adjustments possible within the budget to make up the difference. He pointed
out that the total construction program, the effects of legislation, and the
Council's pricing policy regarding the sale of electric energy would also be
factors to be considered.
In reply to Councilman Seymour, Mr. ttoyt outlined the "take or pay"
contract proposal and financial structure of the Intermountain Power Project
namely that a local public agency would be formed in Utah, which would issue
tax exempt revenue bonds to construct the plant and pay interest during the
construction period. These bonds would be secured by the "take or pay"
contracts. The commencement of payments against the "take or pay" contracts
will be ~imed =o tile best extent possible to coincide with the beginning of
commercial operation of the generation plants.
At :he conclusion of discussion, following brief consultation with Bond
Counsel regarding the instrument by which Council could adopt the Official
Statement and authorize the publication of the Notice Inviting Bids, Mayor Thom
stated }tis preference would be that these actions be accomplished by minute
motions inasmuch as he would vote affirmatively because of the quorum situation
in which the Council finds itself at the present time, even though this is
incompatible with his previous voting record on the issue, because he did not
wish the will of the Council to be thwarted.
Mr. Bill Kraemer of O'::elveny & Myers advised that either resolutions or
minute motions would be equally acceptable.
On the recommendation of the Utilities Director, Councilman Seymour moved
that tile Official Statement dated April 15, 1976, prepared by Wainwright &
Ramsey, Inc., relating to the $6 million Electric Revenue Bonds, Issue of 1976,
be approved and that said Statement be mailed to prospective bidders for said
bonds, subject to such minor changes as may be required by Bond Counsel, City
Attorney or the Utilities Director. Councilwoman Kaywood seconded the motion.
Council :.[embers Pebley and Sneegas absent. ~IOTION CARRIED.
On motion by Councilman Seymour, seconded by Councilwoman Kaywood, the
City Clerk was authorized and directed to publish the Notice Inviting Bids on
the $6 million Electric Revenue Bonds, Issue of 1976, of the City of Anaheim,
California, dated April 15, 1976, once in a newspaper of general circulation
published in the City of Anaheim, said publication to be at least five (5) days
prior to the date for receiving bids, and ~o cause said Notice (or an
advertisement referring thereto) to be published once in The Daily Bond Buyer,
a financial Journal published in New York, New York, and to cause to be
furnished to prospective bidders copies of said Notice (including a bid form)
and of the Official Statement relating to the' bonds. Council }Iembers Pebley
and Sneegas absent. MOTION CARRIED.
ADJOURNME~f: There being no further business to be brought before the City
Council, Councilwoman Kaywood moved to adjourn. Councilman Seymour seconded
the motion. Council Members Pebley and Sneegas absent. .MOTION CARRIED.
Adjourned: 2:00 P.M.
ALONA M. HOUGARD, CITY CLERK
City Hall., Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES -April 20, 1976, 1:30 P,M.
The City Council o£ the City of Anaheim met in regular session.
PRESENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Pebley, Sneegas, Kott, Roth and Thom
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Seymour
PRESENT: ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT: John Harding
DEPUTY CITY ATTORN~: Frank A. Lowry ~ Jr.
CITY CLERK: Alone M. Hougard '
DEPUTY CITY CI~RK: Linde D. Roberts
ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, PLANNING: Don McDaniel
ZONIN~ '~UPERVISOR: lnnika Santalahti
PARKS, RECREATION AND T~E ARTS DIRECTOR: James D. Ruth
ASSISTANT CITY ENGINEER: William Devitt
Mayor Thom called the masting to order and welcomed those in attendance.
, ~