​Questions and inquiries regarding News Release content should be directed to the Thurston County Public Information Officer:

Meghan Porter
360-867-2097

Bryan Dominique
360-867-2091

 
Thurston County News Release

 

Current News Releases

Past News Releases

Legal Notices

  

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Monday, September 13, 2004
Contact:
Marie Cameron, Staff to the Steering Committee, Phone:  413-7486

Capital Area Regional Public Facilities District Update


SUBJECTS:   

1.   New estimated long term bond amount  

2.      Next Phase of Review – Sept.-Nov. 30:  local jurisdictions consider project sponsorship 

3.      Steering Committee Meetings postponed during this phase – until Dec. 13, 2004

The Capital Area Public Facilities District Steering Committee has issued revised estimates for the amount of long term bonds that could be issued from PFD revenues for a second project. 

The amount of PFD money received during the period of  June, 2003 to July, 2004 is approximately $700,000.  Based on this current revenue, it is estimated that a long term bond could be issued in an amount ranging from $9.6 million to $10.7 million, or $12 million to $13 million.  The lower estimate ($9.6 million - $10.7 million) utilizes current revenue (i.e. $700,000) to estimate bonding capacity, and anticipates an interest rate ranging between 4% and 5%.   The higher estimate (i.e. $12 million - $13 million) makes the assumption there will be annual growth in sales tax receipts, all of which would be applied toward a bond with a structured debt retirement.  The lower estimate does not make this assumption, but rather anticipates that any growth in sales tax receipts will be used for repair and replacement over the life of the project.

The Steering Committee has been advised that projects using PFD funds need a government sponsor.  Therefore, the next work on project selection will be done by the governing bodies of the jurisdictions in which the projects are located.

Between now and the end of November, the participating governments agreed to determine the answers to the following three questions:

  1.  Which project(s) will you sponsor?
  2. How do the projects relate to each criterion for reviewing projects?
  3. Is there a clear financial plan, including:
    • A commitment of the legally required one-third match to the PFD money,
    • Whether the revenue projections are reasonable and  "do-able" , and
    • How continued operations and maintenance will be handled, and whether this seems reasonable and "do-able?"

Once each jurisdiction makes its sponsorship decision, the process will resume to select a final project that all can agree to.   Meanwhile, the Steering Committee meetings are postponed, probably until December 13, 2004.

The review criteria that will be used during the sponsorship review are enclosed.

CONTACT:   Marie Cameron, Staff to the Steering Committee, Phone:  413-7486

Public Facilities District Steering Committee

Criteria for Reviewing Project Proposals

July 1, 2004

Meets Statutory Requirements - Project eligibility for Public Facility District support is contingent upon meeting the following statutory requirements:

  1. Qualifies as a "Regional Center" 
  2. Costs at least $10 million inclusive of debt
  3. Requires a 1/3 local financing match.
    (Ensure that other jurisdictions are not responsible for capital costs and ongoing operations, management, and financial and legal risks.)

REVIEW CRITERIA

Viability of Proposal, such as:

  • Evidence and strength of market support. (Feasibility Study)
  • Functionality and suitability of the proposed facility.
  • Realistic cost, revenue, and use projections.
  • Realistic management and operation plan.
  • Financial capacity of the proposer. (Proven track record in construction and management.)
  • Relevant development experience of the proposer.
  • Relevant experience and success of the proposed management team.
  • The extent to which the project demonstrates self-sufficiency.  (Again, no additional financial support from the other jurisdictions is required or requested.)

Economic Impact of the Project Proposal, such as:

  •  Initial anticipated private and public investment amount. (Leveraged)
  • Anticipated amount of future private and public investment. (Leveraged)
  • Projected increase in visitor activity and tourism.
  • Projected increase in visitor spending.
  • Anticipated increases in hotel bed nights.
  • Increase in revenues (e.g. property, B&O, lodging and sales tax).
  • Amount of increased commercial and retail sales.
  • The extent to which the project generates increased jobs and payroll.
  • Source of local 1/3 match (private/public).
  • Potential for revenue sharing.
  • Amount of future public investment and risk.
  • The extent to which the project stimulates economic and business development.

Responses of Proposal to Community needs, such as:

  •  The extent to which the project benefits a broad range of residents and regional user groups.
  • The extent to which the project is available for use by residents and user groups such as service clubs, athletic organizations, visitors, businesses, and the like.
  • The project supports a broad range of community needs/goals (e.g. historic, educational, recreational, trade show, visual arts, and special events).
  • The extent to which multiple community needs/goals are combined into one facility.
  • Could the project be funded from other public or private sources?  Would it likely not happen without PFD funds?

Environmental Considerations  such as traffic, habitat, parking, noise, storm water and the like.

County Commissioners:

Carolina Mejia
District 1

Gary Edwards
District 2

Tye Menser
District 3