Laserfiche WebLink
93 <br /> • <br /> It was pointed out that the charter refers to "surplus" funds and <br /> "profits", but the Port is not in a position to make such payments at <br /> this time. <br /> Discussion continued regarding the need for public support of the Port; <br /> the fact that the public might be favorably inclined to support the Port <br /> if some revenue came to the City; the <br /> the downturn in Port revenue; whether generally resolution to <br /> spell out a formula as the basis for a percentage of income being <br /> returned to the City on an annual basis, providing continuous income. <br /> Commissioner Mauk stated for the record that the Port pays taxes in that <br /> anyone leasing property from the Port pays a possessory interest tax as <br /> well as sales tax; that the Port contributed some $300,000 for the water <br /> project to the City's benefit, noting that the City had to make <br /> application for the federal funds, but that the Port took the initiative <br /> for the City. <br /> It was pointed out that the Port made up the shortfall on the water line <br /> which was dedicated to the City and for which the City will receive <br /> connector fees and that the <br /> had to pay, project was one for which citizens would have <br /> Discussion continued regarding the desirability of the Port making some <br /> income available to the City General Fund; the long range prospects for <br /> such income; the fact that Seaport Village will provide additional income <br /> to the City through the possessory interest tax and sales tax on <br /> projected gross annual sales of 20 million dollars; the fact that <br /> improvements are needed soon on Harbor Boulevard for traffic to the Port <br /> and Seaport Village; the fact that the Port is a public enterprise from <br /> which the citizens should expect a return; the need for publicity for <br /> benefits already contributed to the City by the Port; whether or not a <br /> dollar amount based on certain tonnage could be returned to the City <br /> automatically; whether a token payment would be worthwhile; whether <br /> reinvestment of the funds in the Port would not result in greater return <br /> to the City later; and the situation with regard to shipping coal in the <br /> future. <br /> City Attorney Schricker cautioned that a "formula" approach resulting in <br /> an automatic return to the City might not comply with the Charter as <br /> being "profits" or "surplus" and that revenue bond holders also have a <br /> claim on Port earnings. Mr. Schricker pointed out that any formula would <br /> have to be conditioned upon Charter requirements. In response to <br /> question regarding a Charter change, Mr. Schricker advised that federal <br /> law would not permit anything which would affect the security of the <br /> bonds or the rights of bondholders. <br /> In response to questions, Mr. Di Pietro commented on the consideration <br /> given to establishing a coal terminal at the Port, what would be required <br /> in order to do so and the probable manner of operation of coal trains. <br /> ADJOURNMENT <br /> There being no further business, President Dragan called for adjournment. <br /> M/S: Keckely/Mauk to adjourn. <br /> Carried unanimously by voice vote. <br /> The Joint Meeting adjourned at 5:40 p.m. <br /> JACQUELINE C. HILDEBRAND <br /> City Clerk <br /> Jnt.Mtg. <br /> CC/Port <br /> 7/6/81 <br /> Page 3 <br /> { <br />