Howard Terminal: City Of Oakland, SB 293 Skinner, Mello Roos, And Private Activity Bond
Howard Terminal: City Of Oakland, SB 293 Skinner, Mello Roos, And Private Activity Bond - Video
Howard Terminal: City Of Oakland, SB 293 Skinner, Mello Roos, And Private Activity Bonds. The City of Oakland, in its presentation to the County of Alameda, said it was planning to junk SB 293 Skinner, and use an rather questionably complicated approach that calls for an "over-lay" community district with the enhanced infrastructure financing district. All to avoid a bond backed by the City of Oakland. They also proposed using Mello Roos Financing, but the problem is, are the A's willing to pay that, and the other question is are they paying the annual property tax? In her talk, Project Manager Molly Mayburn said that they were advised that existing law, presumably SB 293 Skinner, did not allow for specific boundaries. That's not what the law was designed to do, but it calls for the "Agency" or the Public Financing Authority of the City of Oakland (my name for it) to do that. Moreover, no EIDL law version does that. The trouble is the Alameda County Board of Supervisors people did not do that. Mello Roos taxes are commonly applied where there is a known base of existing buildings and owners, not a newly constructed development on previously un-developed land. The idea of Mello Roos is to finance services in the area - but a cold-read of what SB 293 Skinner allows to be paid for implies that services can be covered (albeit backhandedly) and in the process of developing schools, libraries, parks, recreational facilities, and open space - all listed as covered in the law. The best way to have a bond issue that is issued by the Public Financing Authority of the City of Oakland, is to call what SB 293 Skinner will produce, what it really is: a bond issue for the Oakland A's, where the A's are a private company. Thus, the spending percentage goes well over the 10 percent threshold, and makes the bond a Private Activity Bond. A Private Activity Bond "are tax-exempt bonds issued by or on behalf of a local or state government for the purpose of providing special financing benefits for qualified projects. The financing is most often for projects of a private user, and the government generally does not pledge its credit" according to Investopedia. But this is not the first time I have introduced this approach: I did so in the matter of the plan I created to retain the Raiders in Oakland. This one: https://ift.tt/3cU48ho The idea of the Private Activity Bond is to avoid using Oakland's coffers as a backstop. The developer - in my idea I planned to form a new LLC - assumed the risk. In this case, the A's would assume the risk. Stay tuned.
via IFTTT
https://youtu.be/x8BzA22sCsM
Howard Terminal: City Of Oakland, SB 293 Skinner, Mello Roos, And Private Activity Bonds. The City of Oakland, in its presentation to the County of Alameda, said it was planning to junk SB 293 Skinner, and use an rather questionably complicated approach that calls for an "over-lay" community district with the enhanced infrastructure financing district. All to avoid a bond backed by the City of Oakland. They also proposed using Mello Roos Financing, but the problem is, are the A's willing to pay that, and the other question is are they paying the annual property tax? In her talk, Project Manager Molly Mayburn said that they were advised that existing law, presumably SB 293 Skinner, did not allow for specific boundaries. That's not what the law was designed to do, but it calls for the "Agency" or the Public Financing Authority of the City of Oakland (my name for it) to do that. Moreover, no EIDL law version does that. The trouble is the Alameda County Board of Supervisors people did not do that. Mello Roos taxes are commonly applied where there is a known base of existing buildings and owners, not a newly constructed development on previously un-developed land. The idea of Mello Roos is to finance services in the area - but a cold-read of what SB 293 Skinner allows to be paid for implies that services can be covered (albeit backhandedly) and in the process of developing schools, libraries, parks, recreational facilities, and open space - all listed as covered in the law. The best way to have a bond issue that is issued by the Public Financing Authority of the City of Oakland, is to call what SB 293 Skinner will produce, what it really is: a bond issue for the Oakland A's, where the A's are a private company. Thus, the spending percentage goes well over the 10 percent threshold, and makes the bond a Private Activity Bond. A Private Activity Bond "are tax-exempt bonds issued by or on behalf of a local or state government for the purpose of providing special financing benefits for qualified projects. The financing is most often for projects of a private user, and the government generally does not pledge its credit" according to Investopedia. But this is not the first time I have introduced this approach: I did so in the matter of the plan I created to retain the Raiders in Oakland. This one: https://ift.tt/3cU48ho The idea of the Private Activity Bond is to avoid using Oakland's coffers as a backstop. The developer - in my idea I planned to form a new LLC - assumed the risk. In this case, the A's would assume the risk. Stay tuned.
via IFTTT
https://youtu.be/x8BzA22sCsM
Post A Comment
No comments :