Flagg-Rochelle Community Park District commissioners and staff have been working hard the past couple of years to complete several needed facility upgrades, which has put the district in position to revisit building a community recreation center in the not-so-distant future.
This item is available in full to subscribers.
To continue reading, you will need to either log in to your subscriber account, or purchase a new subscription.
If you are a current print subscriber, you can set up a free website account and connect your subscription to it by clicking here.
If you are a digital subscriber with an active, online-only subscription then you already have an account here. Just reset your password if you've not yet logged in to your account on this new site.
Otherwise, click here to view your options for subscribing.
Please log in to continue |
ROCHELLE — Flagg-Rochelle Community Park District commissioners and staff have been working hard the past couple of years to complete several needed facility upgrades, which has put the district in position to revisit building a community recreation center in the not-so-distant future.
For several years, representatives of the park district, City of Rochelle, school districts and private citizen groups have tried to figure out a way to finance a stand-alone recreation center for the community.
Collaborative efforts in the past have shown initial promise in the planning stage for building a facility, but the projects have lost steam when it comes to how to finance it and who would operate it.
With a majority of the big ticket upgrading projects behind them, park district leaders are now looking at the possibility of building a community recreation center on their own and financing construction with non-referendum general bonds.
On Monday night, the board heard from its outside financial adviser Tom Chapman, of Raymond James, who explained three options the district could take to finance the project, including voter-approved referendum bonds, non-referendum bonds and alternate revenue bonds.
“Most major projects like this are done with alternate revenue bonds, because they include two sources of revenue and it is the most cost-effective plan for the district,” Chapman explained. “General obligation bonds would require a referendum or you could use non-referendum bonds like one you take out every year.”
The park district has the capacity and ability to issue up to approximately $1.5 million in non-referendum bonds each year for capital projects. For several years the typical amount issued annually has been between $750,000 to $800,000.