>
Dear Mayor and City Councillors,
This weekend it was brought to my attention that at tomorrow’s GIC meeting (July 9, 2012) the Mayor and Council will be discussing the Good Shepherd’s request for a $5 Million dollar interest-free 5 year loan. See Discussion Item – 8.1 [http://www.hamilton.ca/NR/rdonlyres/44BA144D-605A-41DE-800B-F83D93370435/0/Jul09EDRMS_n327460_v1_8_1__FCS12035_Good_Shepherd_Centres_Loan.pdf](http://www.hamilton.ca/NR/rdonlyres/44BA144D-605A-41DE-800B-F83D93370435/0/Jul09EDRMS_n327460_v1_8_1__FCS12035_Good_Shepherd_Centres_Loan.pdf).
I’ve read the staff report in great detail and believe that one funding option for the interest-free loan has been overlooked.
As recently reported by The Hamilton Spectator, the Hamilton Future Fund has committed $5 Million to the PanAm velodrome. Since the velodrome is no longer proceeding Robert Rossini has stated that money is “lying in limbo”, [http://www.thespec.com/news/local/article/753361–hamilton-future-fund-asks-for-its-money-back](http://www.thespec.com/news/local/article/753361--hamilton-future-fund-asks-for-its-money-back).
As the $5 Million committed to the velodrome exactly matches the $5 Million requested by The Good Shepherd, my suggestion is as follows; **Should council decide to provide a 5 year interest-free loan to the Good Shepherd, the $5 Million Future Fund money previously committed to the velodrome should be re-directed to the Good Shepherd requested interest-free loan.**
Re-directing the Future Fund committed money of $5 Million would serve taxpayers and the city in three significant ways;
1. It would avoid lost interest of approximately $1.1 Million over 5 years (see Page #3, Report FCS12035) – [http://www.hamilton.ca/NR/rdonlyres/44BA144D-605A-41DE-800B-F83D93370435/0/Jul09EDRMS_n327460_v1_8_1__FCS12035_Good_Shepherd_Centres_Loan.pdf](http://www.hamilton.ca/NR/rdonlyres/44BA144D-605A-41DE-800B-F83D93370435/0/Jul09EDRMS_n327460_v1_8_1__FCS12035_Good_Shepherd_Centres_Loan.pdf)
2. It would avoid interest charges of approximately $600K over 5 years if the $5 Million was borrowed at the City’s preferred interest rate (see Page #4, Report FCS12035 –[http://www.hamilton.ca/NR/rdonlyres/44BA144D-605A-41DE-800B-F83D93370435/0/Jul09EDRMS_n327460_v1_8_1__FCS12035_Good_Shepherd_Centres_Loan.pdf](http://www.hamilton.ca/NR/rdonlyres/44BA144D-605A-41DE-800B-F83D93370435/0/Jul09EDRMS_n327460_v1_8_1__FCS12035_Good_Shepherd_Centres_Loan.pdf))
3. It would prevent the potential of deferring capital projects by transferring the $5 Million from “available funding” (see Page #3, Report FCS12035) – [http://www.hamilton.ca/NR/rdonlyres/44BA144D-605A-41DE-800B-F83D93370435/0/Jul09EDRMS_n327460_v1_8_1__FCS12035_Good_Shepherd_Centres_Loan.pdf](http://www.hamilton.ca/NR/rdonlyres/44BA144D-605A-41DE-800B-F83D93370435/0/Jul09EDRMS_n327460_v1_8_1__FCS12035_Good_Shepherd_Centres_Loan.pdf)
I believe the above proposal should be seriously considered should council decide to fund the Good Shepherd’s request for an interest-free loan.
Thank-you for your time and for considering the above.
Sincerely,
Paul Tetley