Page 4
Thursday, April 18, 2013
The Rhinoceros Times Greensboro
Council May Sell Bonds Without Voters by Alex JakubseN Staff Writer
The Economic Development Committee of the Greensboro City Council may recommend the council bypass the voters by using two-thirds bonds to fund economic development projects. The Economic Development Committee discussed possible funding sources for a list of projects for the coming fiscal year at its Friday, April 12 meeting in the plaza level conference room at city hall. The funding sources include roughly $7.5 million in two-thirds bonds. Other funding sources on the project list include transportation bonds approved by voters in 2008, economic development bonds, street improvement bonds and the water and sewer capital fund. The city can issue bonds worth up to twothirds of the principal paid off the previous year on voter-approved bonds. When a city issues bonds it is borrowing money, so with two-thirds bonds the city can borrow more money without voter approval. One of the many insidious aspects of two-thirds bonds is they can be used for virtually any capital project. For example if voters approve bonds for street repair, after those bonds are paid off, the city can spend two-thirds of that money for new gold plated City Council office suites. The voters would have no say so, but would get to foot the bill. The City Council has had a policy against
using two-thirds bonds during the past 10 years, which it broke in 2007 when it authorized $1.5 million in two-thirds bonds to spend on World War Memorial Stadium. Most of that money has not been spent. The Economic Development Committee went over of list of eight projects under consideration for this year including streetscape for High Point Road, upgrades for the Bryan Park Soccer Complex, industrial site development and improvements to the Central Business District. Possible funding for the economic development along High Point Road includes $3 million in two-thirds bonds. The project list for two-thirds bonds also included $1 million for the Renaissance Plaza project; $600,000 for downtown enhancements; roughly $1 million for industrial site development; and roughly $2 million for streetscapes and redevelopment on South Elm Street. Councilmember Zack Matheny said he would be in favor of using two-thirds bonds for development along High Point Road, “If it made sense,” but said he had not come to a decision on whether or not they should be used. “We’re putting everything on the table,” he said. Matheny said that the committee does not yet have a recommendation on whether or not to use two-thirds bonds, but said he wouldn’t necessarily have a problem selling bonds without voter approval
“The voters hire me to represent them and make the best decisions for the city,” said Matheny. “People don’t vote on everything.” Councilmember Tony Wilkins, who is also on the committee, said he has publically stated he will not support two-thirds bonds and plans to stand by word. “It’s just not something that I can support,” he said. Wilkins also pointed out that the two mile stretch of High Point Road from Groometown Road to I-40 that goes through District 5, which he represents, is not included in the streetscape improvements proposed for High Point Road. Wilkins said there is still enough time for a bond referendum, which would give the people of Greensboro a say in how much money their city borrows. Councilmember Marikay Abuzuaiter,
who is also on the committee, said she does not approve of using two-thirds bonds because the people do not get a say in whether a project is worth going deeper into debt over. “There is plenty of time, I believe, to get one on a referendum,” said Abuzuaiter. “Even if it’s not a huge amount we should bring it before the voters.” Mayor Robbie Perkins, who recently declared bankruptcy, said that he supported the use of two-thirds bonds for “essential projects.” “I look at using that source of money for things you will get an immediate return on,” said Perkins. He said that infrastructure projects like fire stations and improvements to downtown that would secure job growth are what he would be willing to fund with two-thirds bonds.
City Water Rates To Rise Yet Again by Alex JakubseN Staff Writer
Greensboro Water Resources Department staff is claiming that the City Council needs to raise water rates yet again for the coming 2013-2014 budget year. The council discussed the recommendation for raising water rates by 3.5 percent for users inside the city and 7.5 percent for users outside the city at a Thursday, April 11 work session in the plaza level conference room at city hall. If passed it will be the second year in a row that the city has raised water rates. The proposed rate increase would raise the monthly water bill of the average city
user by $1.29 to $37, and raise the bill of the average outside user by $5.96 to $85, or 2.3 times the rate for city users. Water resources staff has a long-standing tradition of asking for more money at budget time, which comes along with warnings about what would happen if the council doesn’t raise rates, even though the Water Resources Department makes a profit of millions of dollars every year. According to the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report, the water and sewer fund made a profit of $2.8 million for fiscal year 2011-2012, although some revenue sources (Continued on page 38)
City Returns Pool to Schools with $400K by Alex JakubseN Staff Writer
The Greensboro City Council voted to give the Grimsley High School pool to Guilford County Schools, along with $400,000 to put towards its repair or demolition. The council heard reports on the pool from city staff and consultants and pleas from a concerned community group at its Tuesday, April 16 meeting in the council chambers at city hall. The pool has been closed since 2011, when a storm peeled back part of the roof and the city’s engineering consultants Sutton-Kennerly & Associates determined
the building to be structurally unsound. Greensboro has had a joint use agreement with Guilford County Schools since 1975 that states the city would maintain the pool. The agreement also states that the pool would revert back to the school board if the city abandoned the pool or failed to maintain it. The city obviously has not maintained the pool, which may be a violation of the agreement. Sutton-Kennerly said that the pool has problems caused by bad dirt under the foundation that has led to subsidence and caused large cracks to form in the walls. (Continued on page 27)