Issues and Priorities Debt service expenditures, the result of King County's bonded indebtedness, include payments of mature bonds interest and bond reserve requirements. Under the most favorable circumstances, a government's debt would be proportionate to the size and growth of its tax base, would not require repayment schedules that put excessive burden on operating expenditures, and would not be so high as to jeopardize its credit rating. In terms of its legal debt margin, King County's outstanding general obligation debt falls well below half of the debt limit calculated as a percent of total assessed value. See the County's CAFR (Comprehensive Annual Financial Statement) for details. Regional capital needs are straining the financial resources of the County's local governments. This condition is being addressed by government oversight organizations and the County. The idea of a regional capital financing oversight body has been taken up by The Greater Seattle Chamber of Commerce (The Chamber), the League of Women Voters, and the Municipal League. A Capital Finance Review Board (Board) has been organized and has begun work reviewing ballot measures proposed for each election and informing voters on capital projects. Information that the Board provides includes whether capital projects meet local and regional policy goals, are based on community needs, project their costs and tax impacts realistically within the context of current and anticipated debt, and are developed through open discussion between citizens and their representatives. The Growth Management Act and the County's Comprehensive Plan are providing ways for the County to determine its critical capital needs and any funding gaps to critical capital infrastructure. If the County is not providing critical capital infrastructure such as roads to growing areas, then growth cannot take place under the Growth Management Act unless service standards are altered. These requirements have facilitated a lively debate about how capital infrastructure is financed and will lead to some long-term solutions to local government capital financing. This process requires that King County take into consideration the capital needs of other governments in King County in an effort to determine how to develop a regional approach to prioritizing and financing major public capital projects such as transportation, housing, health facilities, parks and open space, and corrections facilities. The facilities component to the County Comprehensive Plan will ultimately address not only capital needs, but also financing options available to address those needs. The facilities plan will give the County a basis upon which to plan for future funding scenarios. Near Term Plans for Issuing Limited General Obligation Bonds Adopted 2000 Bond Financed CIP Parks: Ballfield development projects 10,000,000 Water and Land Resources projects 5,000,000 Airport projects 1,500,000
2000 The 2000 Executive's Adopted Budget anticipates the issuance, in 2000, of limited general obligation bonds and revenue bonds to finance a variety of projects. Debt service on the bond issue will be paid from the various County funds, as indicated below. The projects include: Miscellaneous capital improvements: $10.0 million of limited general obligation bonds will finance the repair and rehabilitation of various County buildings. Debt service will be paid by the Current Expense Fund and the Department of Construction and Facilities Management Internal Service Fund. Parks: $10.0 million of limited general obligation bonds will finance the development of ballfields. Debt service to be paid by REET 2. Water and Land Resources: $5 million of limited general obligation bonds will finance the repair and rehabilitation of various Surface Water, Drainage and River Improvement projects. Debt Service to be paid by SWM. Airport: $1.5 million of limited general obligation bonds will finance the repair and rehabilitation of various Airport facilities. Debt service to be paid by the Airport fund. Wastewater Capital: The Wastewater Capital Fund will be issuing approximately $60 million in revenue bonds in 1999, backed by their fees for service. Financed projects include facility improvements to the West Point and Renton plants, as well as improvements to transmission facilities. Council Adopted Budget Due, in part, to uncertainty regarding the County's debt financing capacity following passage of Initiative 695, the Council Adopted Budget excluded the $10 million of Miscellaneous Capital Improvements. The Council decision to bond finance the Parks ballfields initiative is contingent upon approval of a proviso response intended to assess the costs and benefits of issuing 15 year bonds that are to be repaid with REET 2 funds.
Limited Go (LGO) Bond Fund Balance Reduction The fund balance of the property tax/general fund (CX) component of the Limited General Obligation Bond Redemption Fund (8400) is proposed to be reduced to bring the corresponding average monthly fund balance to zero. The fund balance reduction is implemented by transferring $6.2 million to a general government capital fund and to the General Fund (CX). The $3.5 million transfer to the Building Repair and Replacement Fund is in support of specific capital projects proposed in 2000. The remaining $2.7 million is proposed for transfer to the CX fund to compensate for the projected $213,528 reduction in Fund 8400 interest earnings that would have been credited to the CX fund, $1,000,000 is transferred to a lawsuit reserve fund, and $1,530,257 is proposed for transfer in preparation for the $3.1 million projected increase in 2001 CX debt service payments. The $1.5 million offset is a one-time adjustment because CX debt service obligations are scheduled to fall by $1.9 million in 2002. Council Adopted Budget The Council Adopted Budget transferred the $6.2 million fund balance consistent with the proposal to bring the average monthly LGO fund balance to zero. However, the CX financial plan no longer includes a $3.1 million increase in 2001 debt service payments. Therefore, the $1.5 million transfer component is no longer designated to offset a debt service payment increase. First Previous NextUpdated: June 28, 2000 King County | News | Services | Comments | Search Links to external sites do not constitute
endorsements by King County. | ||||||||