Commerce recently completed an independent financial feasibility review of the Spokane Public Facilities District’s INB Performing Arts Center project.
The review, prepared by E. D. Hovee & Co. LLC, examines up to $20 million of costs that will be incurred by the district in financing upgrades and improvements to the INB Performing Arts Center (read review here). Additionally, the feasibility review examined adequacy of revenues and expected revenues to meet costs encompassing the five major scopes of work to be completed in this project: auditorium accessibility, backstage circulation improvements, lobby upgrades, music room improvements and building system upgrades.
We hope this review will be helpful to the Spokane Public Facilities District in completing the INB Performing Arts Center improvements.
What State Law Requires In a Feasibility Review
Commerce is implementing the public facilities district independent financial feasibility review, as required by Chapter 36.100.025 RCW. The requirement went into effect in 2012.
Our role is not to approve or reject a public facilities district’s plan. Rather, we are directed to contract for an independent review, which is intended to ensure that local decision makers have access to objective and timely analysis of the financial feasibility of the project.
State law further directs Commerce to make the review public upon its completion, and submit it to participating local governments, state elected officials, and the Legislature.
The law requires that an independent financial feasibility review must take place before:
- A new PFD is formed.
- A PFD issues new debt (not refinances existing debt).
- The long-term lease, purchase, or development of a facility by a PFD.
The independent review must be conducted by Commerce through the Municipal Research and Services Center of Washington or through another state agency, educational institution, or private consulting firm.
The review “must examine the potential costs to be incurred by the public facilities district and the adequacy of revenues or expected revenues to meet those costs.” This potentially would include information from interlocal agreements between the public facilities district and other local governments, bond covenants, construction and operating contracts, business plans, and other such documents.
Typically, Commerce and the jurisdiction(s) will negotiate a cost-recovery agreement under the Interlocal Cooperation Act (RCW 39.34). We select and contract with an independent party to perform the review. Commerce pays the reviewer directly and the jurisdiction(s) reimburse us for the review and associated costs.
Other Municipal Finance-Related Programs
Asotin County Asotin County Family Aquatic Center project (PDF)
Lewis County Public Facilities District Event Center and Sports Complex project (PDF)
Richland Public Facilities District Hanford Reach Interpretive Center project (PDF); Richland Public Facilities District’s letter with comments on the review (PDF); AECOM Economics’ additional remarks related to the RPFD’s letter (PDF)
Spokane Public Facilities District, 2013 Convention Center Expansion (PDF)
Spokane Public Facilities District 2013 Debt Issuance (PDF)
Spokane Public Facilities District INB Performing Arts Center (PDF)
State Convention Center Feasibility Review Documents
LMN Feasibility Study Part 1, 2013 (PDF)
LMN Feasibility Study Part 2, 2013 (PDF)
Market Feasibility Analysis (PDF)
Expansion Funding Strategy (PDF)
Expansion Impact Highlights (PDF)
Lodging Tax Forecast (PDF)
Financing Overview (PDF)
Preliminary design submitted to Seattle for design guidance (PDF)
Early Design Guidance meeting
Land Acquisition & Financing Feasibility Review, 2015 (PDF)
Downtown Design Review, 2015 (PDF)