Form revised April 22, 2003

FISCAL NOTE FOR NON-CAPITAL PROJECTS

Department:	Contact Person/Phone:	DOF Analyst/Phone:
Finance	Michael vanDyck/684-8347	Diane Clausen/684-8151

Legislation Title:

A RESOLUTION adopting updated Debt Management Policies for the City of Seattle; and superceding a portion of Resolution 30345.

· Summary of the Legislation: This resolution updates the City’s debt management policies in three ways. First, the policies clarify the acceptable uses of accrued interest and net premiums on general obligation bonds. Second, the policies allow for resizing a limited tax general obligation bond issue at pricing, in order to ensure that projects receive the appropriate amount of overall bond proceeds. Third, the policies remove the stipulation that fiscal agent fees for outstanding bonds will be paid from the General Bond Interest and Redemption Fund. A copy of the updated policies is attached to this fiscal note for informational purposes.

· Background: (Include brief description of the purpose and context of legislation and include record of previous legislation and funding history, if applicable): City financial policies are periodically updated, including the City’s debt management policies.

· Please check one of the following:

____ This legislation does not have any financial implications. (Stop here and delete the remainder of this document prior to saving and printing.)

__x__ This legislation has financial implications. (Please complete all relevant sections that follow.)

Appropriations (in $1,000s): (Please only reflect the dollar amount actually appropriated by this legislation.)

Fund Name and Number	Department	Budget Control Level*	2003 Appropriation	2004 Anticipated Appropriation
			$0	$0
TOTAL			$0	$0

* This is line of business for operating budgets, and program or project for capital improvements

Notes:

Anticipated Revenue/Reimbursement (in $1,000s) Resulting From This Legislation:

Fund Name and Number	Department	Revenue Source	2003 Revenue	2004 Revenue
			$0	$0
TOTAL			$0	$0

Notes:

Total Regular Positions Created Or Abrogated Through This Legislation, Including FTE Impact:

Position Title*	Part-Time/ Full Time	2003 Positions	2003 FTE	2004 Positions**	2004 FTE**
		0	0	0	0
		0	0	0	0
TOTAL		0	0	0	0

· Fund Name and Number: _________________________________________

· Department: ___________________________________________________

* List each position separately

** 2004 positions and FTE are total 2004 position changes resulting from this legislation, not incremental changes from 2003.

· Do positions sunset in the future? (If yes, identify sunset date):

Spending/Cash Flow (in $1,000s): (Please complete this section only in those cases where part or all of the funds will be spent in a different year than when they were appropriated (e.g., as in the case of certain grants and capital projects.)

Fund Name and Number	Department	Budget Control Level*	2003 Expenditures	2004 Anticipated Expenditures
General Subfund (00100)	Finance	Finance	0	$5
General Bond Interest and Redemption Fund (201xx)	N/A	N/A	0	($5)
TOTAL			0	0

* This is line of business for operating budgets, and program or project for capital improvements

Notes: The resolution would remove the stipulation that fiscal agent fees for outstanding bonds will be paid from the General Bond Interest and Redemption Fund. Instead these costs (about $5,000 annually) will be paid from the Department of Finance budget. The department will absorb this cost into its existing budget authority.

· What is the financial cost of not implementing the legislation? (Estimate the costs to the City of not implementing the legislation, including estimated costs to maintain or expand an existing facility or the cost avoidance due to replacement of an existing facility, potential conflicts with regulatory requirements, or other potential costs if the legislation is not implemented.) The small (roughly $5,000) annual cost would continue to be paid from the General Bond Interest and Redemption Fund.

· What are the possible alternatives to the legislation that could achieve the same or similar objectives? (Include any potential alternatives to the proposed legislation, such as reducing fee-supported activities, identifying outside funding sources for fee-supported activities, etc.)

· Is the legislation subject to public hearing requirements: (If yes, what public hearings have been held to date, and/or what plans are in place to hold a public hearing(s) in the future.) No

· Other Issues (including long-term implications of the legislation):

Attachment: City of Seattle Debt Management Policies, Revised May 2003