No Deal Yet in Matea Vallet Land Dispute

[bob]

harry said:

bob said:

1) There were start up costs like paying the architect and such.

2) They needed the money just in case BB settled, early.

You should be glad they did because they got a much lower rate than they would have recieved this year.

To be clear.. 1/2 of the bonds were issued in 06?? Could you please site the source of this info?? Thanks B0b

Actually Harry, notice I didn't play the little name change that you have been warned about doing, you should ask Blanckcheck that question since I didn't originally state that they issued bonds last year.

[harry]

bob said:

blankcheck said:

Question, why would you issue bonds before you need them???

1) There were start up costs like paying the architect and such.

2) They needed the money just in case BB settled, early.

You should be glad they did because they got a much lower rate than they would have recieved this year.

Bob, surely you jest

Your quote above states and I quote you, not blankcheck

"You should be glad they did because they got a much lower rate than they would have received THIS year."

So my question to you is..1/2 of the bonds were issued last year???

[bob]

Maybe you should get on the SD e-mail alert

The Board of Education approved the sale of $60.75 million in bonds that will be used to construct the district's new high school. Dave Holm, Assistant Superintendent of Business and Finance, said the district received a lower interest rate than projected, which translates to a savings for the taxpayers. "The district is borrowing money at a lower interest rate on its loan. We projected 5 percent, but we were able to get a 4.55 percent interest rate." Holm said the lower rate translates to a significant savings over the loan's term. The district was able to secure a lower rate due to the strong financial rating the district received from Moody's Investors Service and Standard and Poor's.
This is the first of several bond sales that will be used to fund construction approved through the $124.6 million referendum passed in March. If the district continues to be able to secure lower interest rates it may not be necessary to sell the entire $124.6 million in bonds.

[harry]

bob said:

Maybe you should get on the SD e-mail alert

The Board of Education approved the sale of $60.75 million in bonds that will be used to construct the district's new high school. Dave Holm, Assistant Superintendent of Business and Finance, said the district received a lower interest rate than projected, which translates to a savings for the taxpayers. "The district is borrowing money at a lower interest rate on its loan. We projected 5 percent, but we were able to get a 4.55 percent interest rate." Holm said the lower rate translates to a significant savings over the loan's term. The district was able to secure a lower rate due to the strong financial rating the district received from Moody's Investors Service and Standard and Poor's.
This is the first of several bond sales that will be used to fund construction approved through the $124.6 million referendum passed in March. If the district continues to be able to secure lower interest rates it may not be necessary to sell the entire $124.6 million in bonds.

I am sorry that I missed this..what date was this issued??

Also, where can one find the MM letter on an official website??

[bob]

Harry do you get the DH? You might have missed this article

Dist. 204 gets 3-D look at its third school
By Sara Hooker
Daily Herald Staff Writer
Posted Tuesday, June 27, 2006

Cost estimates are on track for the Indian Prairie Unit District 204’s $124.7 million third high school, officials said Monday evening, as architects and construction managers tweak and finalize the floor plans.

DLR group architects walked board members through traffic patterns and rough 3-D visuals of the third high school, minus some key components such as exterior window placement and building materials.

The district unveiled floor and site plans for the facility at a meeting in April that showed a 452,000-square-foot structure sitting on the northern end of the Brach-Brodie property officials hope to acquire off Route 59 near 75th Street and Commons Drive in Aurora. It is expected to open in 2009.

“We’re starting to work from the inside out now,” said Dennis Bane with DLR Group architects.

Department chairs from both Neuqua Valley and Waubonsie Valley high schools signed off on the preliminary layout of the school, he said.

Designs call for a building shaped like a plus sign. The pool and gymnasium will sit on the south end of the building, while the entrance and auditorium will sit on the north side. From east to west, four academic wings intersect in the shape of an “X.”

Architects have tweaked stairwell locations to spread traffic out and avoid the traffic jams like those at Neuqua Valley in the area near main stairwells.

Board members said they’re happy with the parking lot design. It calls for student parking on the east side of the school, bus and parent drop-off on the west side of the school and four different drop-off circular drives, two on each side of the school.

On the south end, parking lots don’t separate the playing fields from the school.

“I really like that students are not having to cross parking lots to get to practice areas here,” board President Jeannette Clark said.

Designs factor in what daylight may look like in the school at any given time. Officials plan to maximize natural sunlight to benefit courses such as art that especially need and appreciate that light.

Existing plans show cost estimates coming in on budget for the project, officials said.

The architect and construction manager expect to update the board again in mid-September.

“I think that certainly is the next thing that they’re doing: putting some mock-ups of what the outside might look like,” Superintendent Howard Crouse said. “It’s largely brick and pre-form concrete and glass.”

The board recently approved the sale of $60.75 million in bonds to build the school.

The district received a lower interest rate, 4.55 percent, than the 5 percent it projected for the bonds, therefore saving money throughout the life of the loan, officials said.

Despite taking a large amount of debt with the approval of the funds for the high school, the district maintained its financial rating of a AA bond rating from Standard and Poor’s and an Aa2 rating from Moody’s Investors Service.

[harry]

bob said:

Harry do you get the DH? You might have missed this article

Dist. 204 gets 3-D look at its third school
By Sara Hooker
Daily Herald Staff Writer
Posted Tuesday, June 27, 2006

Cost estimates are on track for the Indian Prairie Unit District 204’s $124.7 million third high school, officials said Monday evening, as architects and construction managers tweak and finalize the floor plans.

DLR group architects walked board members through traffic patterns and rough 3-D visuals of the third high school, minus some key components such as exterior window placement and building materials.

The district unveiled floor and site plans for the facility at a meeting in April that showed a 452,000-square-foot structure sitting on the northern end of the Brach-Brodie property officials hope to acquire off Route 59 near 75th Street and Commons Drive in Aurora. It is expected to open in 2009.

“We’re starting to work from the inside out now,” said Dennis Bane with DLR Group architects.

Department chairs from both Neuqua Valley and Waubonsie Valley high schools signed off on the preliminary layout of the school, he said.

Designs call for a building shaped like a plus sign. The pool and gymnasium will sit on the south end of the building, while the entrance and auditorium will sit on the north side. From east to west, four academic wings intersect in the shape of an “X.”

Architects have tweaked stairwell locations to spread traffic out and avoid the traffic jams like those at Neuqua Valley in the area near main stairwells.

Board members said they’re happy with the parking lot design. It calls for student parking on the east side of the school, bus and parent drop-off on the west side of the school and four different drop-off circular drives, two on each side of the school.

On the south end, parking lots don’t separate the playing fields from the school.

“I really like that students are not having to cross parking lots to get to practice areas here,” board President Jeannette Clark said.

Designs factor in what daylight may look like in the school at any given time. Officials plan to maximize natural sunlight to benefit courses such as art that especially need and appreciate that light.

Existing plans show cost estimates coming in on budget for the project, officials said.

The architect and construction manager expect to update the board again in mid-September.

“I think that certainly is the next thing that they’re doing: putting some mock-ups of what the outside might look like,” Superintendent Howard Crouse said. “It’s largely brick and pre-form concrete and glass.”

The board recently approved the sale of $60.75 million in bonds to build the school.

The district received a lower interest rate, 4.55 percent, than the 5 percent it projected for the bonds, therefore saving money throughout the life of the loan, officials said.

Despite taking a large amount of debt with the approval of the funds for the high school, the district maintained its financial rating of a AA bond rating from Standard and Poor’s and an Aa2 rating from Moody’s Investors Service.

Does the above post confirm that 1/2 of the bonds were issued in 2006??? I am confused by the verbiage

[bob]

harry said:

bob said:

Maybe you should get on the SD e-mail alert

I am sorry that I missed this..what date was this issued??

I think in June 2006.

[bob]

What are you confused about?

It is a Sara hooker article, it wouldn't be the first time her verbiage was confusing. ;D

[harry]

bob said:

What are you confused about?

I am confused about when 1/2 of the bonds were issued since you alluded to the fact that we should be happy for a lower rate cause this year, if issued, they would be higher. that's all

Also, where did you access the MM letter you posted?? Can't find it anywhere

gracias

[bob]

harry said:

bob said:

What are you confused about?

I am confused about when 1/2 of the bonds were issued since you alluded to the fact that we should be happy for a lower rate cause this year, if issued, they would be higher. that's all

Also, where did you access the MM letter you posted?? Can't find it anywhere

gracias

I got it from the SD in one of their e-mail blasts.

[bob]

It came from sender [e-mail] .

[Arch]

harry said:

bob said:

1) There were start up costs like paying the architect and such.

2) They needed the money just in case BB settled, early.

You should be glad they did because they got a much lower rate than they would have recieved this year.

To be clear.. 1/2 of the bonds were issued in 06?? Could you please site the source of this info?? Thanks B0b

tinyurl.com/349fyq

Also, I know the '0' and 'o' are close by on the keyboard, but please let's try to get people's handles typed properly.