My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
COM 0636.004 1996-1998
ClerkCouncil
>
Council Records
>
Communications
>
1996-1998
>
COM 0636.004 1996-1998
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/12/2016 10:42:10 AM
Creation date
5/10/2008 8:00:59 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Communications
Communications - Type
COM
Communications - Council Term
1996-1998
Communication
0636
Point
004
Author
Leslie Chow, Fiscal/Program Review Auditor
Communications - Referred To
FC
Comments
FC: Close file - 2/17/98
Communications - File Code
FND/BND
Document Relationships
AGE FC 02/17/1998 1996-1998
(Related)
Path:
\Council Records\Agendas\1996-1998\Finance Committee (FC)
COM 0636.000 1996-1998
(Related)
Path:
\Council Records\Communications\1996-1998
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
34
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
~a <br /> <br /> Bill 180, Draft Two <br /> <br /> Page Three <br /> 4. What is a bond rating? <br /> • Moody's defines a credit rating as, "...an assessment of the ability and willingness <br /> of an issuer offixed-income securities to make full and timely payments of <br /> amounts due on the security over its life." <br /> • In 1993 and 1996, the County received an "A" rating from Moody's. <br /> (Attachments A & B) <br /> • "Bonds that are rated A possess many favorable investment attributes and are to <br /> be considered as upper-medium-grade obligations. Factors giving security to <br /> principal and interest are considered adequate, but elements may be present that <br /> suggest a susceptibility to impairment some time in the future." Guide to <br /> Moody's Ratings, Rating Process, and Rating Practices <br /> B. Need for the Proposed Bond Authorization at This Time <br /> In a letter dated, Januay 23, 1998, we requested further information from County Finance <br /> Director, Harry Takahashi, regarding the need for the proposed bond authorization at this <br /> time. (Attachment C) We asked the following questions: <br /> Your letter of January 7, 7998 (Communication No. 636.03) provided a tentative <br /> list of <br /> projects that the proposed bond authorization is needed to fund <br /> a. Wllh respect to these projects, what wozdd he the implications of the $40 <br /> million G.O. bond authorization request not heing approved'? <br /> h. YVhat would be the implications of delaying approval qf'/his hoed <br /> authorization? <br /> c. If these projects cannot be delayed, please explain why and include relevant <br /> documentation such as court orders, etc. Please also include a schedule for <br /> implementation. <br /> 2. Has the availahility of other funding mechanisms for these projects heen <br /> explored? <br /> 3. What would he the positive impacts of authorizing this $40 million dollar hoed <br /> request at this time? <br /> We have been informed by Mr. Takahashi that these answers will be provided by the <br /> Departments of Planning and Public Works. <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.