Also, most people don’t understand that a lease revenue bond, while legal, is to have a “dedicated” stream of revenue that comes in, to cover the lease, (the City is leasing from itself, through a Joint Powers financing authority of the San Dieguito Water District and the City of Encinitas) after the proposed improvement has been constructed. A lease revenue bond is NOT the same as homeowners’ getting mortgages to finance their homes. It’s not like “refinancing,” (as mentioned by outgoing Councilmember Jim Bond) but even when comparing this method of financing to a first mortgage, a homeowner’s real property is used as collateral to insure debt should be guaranteed to be repaid. Lease revenue bonds DO NOT (contrary to Bond’s incorrect analogy) use the finished improvements, or land, as collateral.

The City floated a previous lease revenue bond to pay for the library and new fire stations; we don’t own the land upon which the library sits. The County does. Bond is well aware of this, as he’s pointed it out, at past Council Meetings.

Similarly, the City doesn’t own the land at Moonlight Beach, the State does. While the City may own the former Hall Property, there was another, initial lease revenue bond floated for that, to purchase and construct the property, before.

So we’re on our third lease revenue bond, never allowing the electorate to vote on whether we think it’s prudent to take on more debt, which must be paid for by us taxpayers! While we won’t see the debt for a lease revenue bond on our property tax bills, we do see it in the form of higher taxes and fees, such as fees for doing home improvements, roof repairs, etc. The city raises fees, dramatically, claiming they must, for “back-up costs.”

The land and/or improvements don’t collateralize the bond debt for lease revenue bonds. A revenue stream derived from use and occupancy should, as with those projects which actually generate revenue, such as public parking garages or ball stadiums.

The public should be allowed to vote for general obligation bonds when there is no revenue stream derived from “use and occupancy” other than a public entities General Fund. The City has been putting us more and more into debt and tweaking the facts, trying to “alter history,” by claiming that a majority of citizens supported or now support a regional sports complex, where the soccer leagues would NOT have to pay for using the fields, as they must, currently, when using fields at local schools.

Within the next year or two, the City will have to change its methodology for reporting debt. Because we, like so many other public entities, have massive unfunded pension liability, we will undoubtedly lose our “overly optimistic” Triple A rating, and our debt ratio as compared to the General Fund will be thrown off balance. The City is not being fiscally prudent in trying to win a “popularity” contest in building a regional sports complex and overdeveloping Moonlight Beach, when we cannot afford to “pay as we go.” If the voters genuinely support the improvements as planned, then we would vote for general obligation bonds!