Laserfiche WebLink
RISI£ FACTORS <br />The following factors, along with other information in this Official Statement, should be considered by <br />potential investors in evaluating the risks in the purchase of the Bonds. <br />Water System Demand and Growth <br />There can be no assurance that the local demand for the services provided by the Water System will be <br />maintained at levels described in this Official Statement under the heading "THE WATER SYSTEM." <br />Reduction in the level of demand due to conservation efforts of the City and MWD, or other factors, could <br />require an increase in rates or charges in order to produce Net System Revenues sufficient to comply with the <br />City's rate covenant in the Installment Purchase Agreement. Such rate increases could increase the likelihood of <br />nonpayment, and could also further decrease demand. There can be no assurance that any other entity with <br />regulatory authority over the Water System will not adopt further restrictions on operation of the Water System. <br />Water System Expenses <br />There can be no assurance that the City's expenses for the Water System will be consistent with the <br />levels described in this Official Statement. Changes in technology, new regulatory requirements, increases in <br />the cost of energy or other expenses would reduce Net System Revenues, and could require substantial increases <br />in rates or charges in order to comply with the rate covenant. Additionally, the cost of purchasing water from <br />MWD continues to increase. Such rate increases could increase the likelihood of nonpayment, and could also <br />decrease demand. <br />Parity Obligations <br />Although the City has covenanted not to issue additional obligations payable from Net System <br />Revenues senior to the Installment Payments, the Installment Purchase Agreement permits the issuance by the <br />City of certain indebtedness which may have a lien upon the Net System Revenues which is on a parity basis to <br />the lien which secures the Installment Payments, if certain coverage tests are met (see "THE BONDS — Issuance <br />of Parity Obligations" herein). These coverage tests involve, to some extent, projections of Net System <br />Revenues. If such indebtedness is issued or incurred, the debt service coverage for the Installment Payments <br />securing the Bonds will be diluted below what it otherwise would be subject to under the coverage tests. <br />Moreover, there is no assurance that the assumptions which form the basis of such projections, if any, will be <br />actually realized subsequent to the date of such projections. If such assumptions are not realized, the amount of <br />future Net System Revenues may be less than projected, and the actual amount of Net System Revenues may be <br />insufficient to provide for the payment of the Installment Payments and such additional indebtedness. <br />Proposition 218 <br />On November 5, 1996, the voters of the State approved Proposition 218, the "Right to Vote on Taxes <br />Act." Proposition 218 added Articles XIIIC and XIIID to the State Constitution, which contain a number of <br />provisions affecting the ability of the City to levy and collect both existing and future taxes, assessments, fees <br />and charges. Proposition 218 also extends the initiative power to reducing or repealing any local taxes, <br />assessments, fees and charges. This extension of the initiative power is not limited to taxes, assessments, fees <br />and charges imposed on or after November 6, 1996, the effective date of Proposition 218, and could result in <br />retroactive repeal or reduction in any existing taxes, assessments, fees or charges, except those which are <br />pledged to the repayment of debt. If such a repeal or reduction in City fees or charges were to occur, and it was <br />held that any such taxes, assessments, fees or charges were not pledged to any debt repayment, the City's ability <br />to make Installment Payments could be adversely affected. <br />In addition, while the matter is not free from doubt, Proposition 218 imposed restrictions on the levy of <br />charges for "property- related services." hi July 2006 the California Supreme Court confirmed that a public <br />agency's charges for ongoing water delivery are "fees and charges" within the meaning of Proposition 218. As <br />a result, voters within the boundaries of the City could adopt an initiative measure that reduced or repealed <br />37 <br />