Quote:
Originally Posted by Roughneck
The lease payments are acting as a capital repayment, which is the issue. It’s using what should be regular operating costs as a form of capital repayment.
So the city is either getting a loan repaid over time and receiving no revenue for their building, or they are incurring 97% of the capital costs and receiving lease payments for their building.
|
Yeah, which is what makes Farkas posts misleading. It doesn’t mention the lease payment.
My understanding with the last deal, but haven’t seen it confirmed with this deal was that the flames covered all Opex and maintenance costs during the lease of the building. The city just “owns” it to eliminate property taxes.