- Begun at 20:48.
- BOS recommended a vote as set forth in its report.
- Mr. Sullivan said there are limits to how long BANs can be rolled over and that there is a requirement after two years to pay them down. He said that while the extra time would likely not be needed, he wanted the extra flexibility to make sure that Symmes would not hit the tax rate.
- Mr. Jamieson asked if this would be the only direct vote on Symmes. Mr. Sullivan said it was. Mr. Jamieson moved to postpone to 8 May so as to hear the Symmes status report before voting on this article. Mr. Sullivan said there was no reason to postpone but that he was not against it.
- Mr. McCabe questioned some odd wording in the vote. Mr. Tosti suggested that “being paid” be inserted after “revenue funds”.
- Mr. Judd said he hoped the Legislature would give us what we asked for. He asked who would issue the BANs. Mr. Tosti said BANs are automatically authorized when Town Meeting authorizes borrowing and that the Treasurer and BOS decide when and what will be issued under that authorization. Mr. Gilligan said he supported the vote and was against postponement. Mr. Judd asked if the developer would be making any interest payments. The Moderator cut him, saying that was not germane. Mr. Judd asked if the project could be held up any further. Mr. Maher said all the deadlines for appealing have expired, so he could not see what course of action a litigant could take.
- Mr. Streitfeld asked if the time extension would only apply to the Symmes debt. Mr. Tosti said it was so limited.
- Mr. Loreti (as a TMM) said it was unlikely this would clear the Legislature before the sale of the property made the needs for BANs moot. Mr. Tosti said that it was still needed so that the otherwise-required debt paydown wouldn’t cause a hit on the tax rate. Mr. Loreti asked if stretching out the debt repayment would allow more money to go into the general fund rather than going to pay down debt and why wouldn’t all Symmes revenues be used to pay down the debt. Mr. Tosti said the vote to establish the Symmes account only said that debt service had to be funded from the account and that the Treasurer and BOS would decide how quickly to pay off the debt and how much Symmes money would go into the general fund. Mr. Loreti said this was inconsistent with the representation that monies would be used to pay off the debt and that this vote looked like a way to get extra money into the general fund by stretching out the repayment.
- Mr. Gilligan said that if this did not pass it might force money to be taken from services.
- Mr. Daly moved the previous question. Debate terminated.
- Mr. Loreti said Mr. Gilligan was incorrect and that there would be no such taking money from services. The Moderator cut him off since a motion to terminate debate had passed.
- The Moderator said that after consulting with Town Counsel he was moving to “being paid” to just before “from revenue funds”.
- Motion to postpone defeated.
- BOS recommendation approved 183-5 at 21:15.
This entry was posted
on Wednesday, 26 April 2006 at 20:48 and is filed under notes.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.