Park district considers loan options for Village at the Park
By Eliav Appelbaum eliav@theacorn.com

The Pleasant Valley Recreation and Park District board of directors is considering four options to finance Village at the Park, the 55-acre sports park that is expected to be completed in fall of 2008.

During a special board meeting on Nov. 20, financial consultant Curt de Crinis presented the board members with the financial impact for funding the sports park, which is estimated to cost around $13 million. The board will try to choose the financing option that is least likely to hinder its ability to continue making smaller, necessary improvements on a daytoday basis.

Based on the information presented, the board leaned toward financing the park through a 30year bond issue with escalating payments. However, each board member wanted to take more time before making a decision that would impact the district for years.

Other funding options were financing through bonds for 30 years with fixed payments and 20-year bank loans with steady or escalating payments.

"We want to maintain maximum flexibility in our (daily) operating budget and maximum ability to do other things, like handle emergencies or fund other projects," board member Mark Malloy said.

Malloy also indicated that the board hasn't had to make a decision involving so much money since 1971.

"The last time we borrowed a big loan was 36 years ago," Malloy said. "The last large loan for construction that we took on was to build Pleasant Valley Park pool."

During the meeting, de Crinis discussed how and why each of the financing options would work.

"What's important is that we discovered there are a variety of options to fund the project," said PVRPD General Manager Dan LaBrado. "Whatever method we use, we will continue to be operational. It sure looks like our budget will sustain the new debt to the Village. . . . And we should be able to continue our capital improvement projects program."

De Crinis pointed out several key elements in making the financial decision: obtain $13 million in funding for the park; make sure the debt repayment is affordable; identify a secure and stable source of debt repayment; maintain flexibility for future projects; and obtain the best financing terms while paying the least amount of interest.

After the detailed presentation, the board members voiced their thoughts on the loan process.

"Frankly, I don't know which way to go," board member Bob Kelley said.

Board member Paul Rockenstein wanted to know how other businesses fared operating under debt.

"We've gotten good input from Curt, but I'd like to do it right," Rockenstein said.

Chair Patty Hamm and board members Nancy Bush and Malloy agreed with their colleagues at the meeting that the 30-year bond plan with escalating payments made the most financial sense.

Whichever way the board chooses to finance Village at the Park, the board members want to make sure the PVRPD is not handcuffed by the new project.

"We never know what's around the corner," Malloy said. "You need to have some flexibility."