Should City borrow money for interest?

The Pensacola City Council will decide this week whether its bond issue for the Community Maritime Park should include $4.9 million to pay interest on the bond while the park is constructed. My question is why?

In the PNJ, Dick Barker says the extra money would be used to level out those poor revenue years and cut down on the risk of having to dip into the city’s general fund to make bond payments.

The CRA revenues for 2009-10 fiscal year are $4,471,400 with $2,946,800 for CRA debt. Barker only gives the council one option. He doesn’t provide an amortization schedule on a bond issue that doesn’t include capitalizing the interest. What happens to the $2.9468 million? Is this an attempt to give CRA a larger budget?

Also the original interlocal agreement between the CRA/City and ECUA said that the financial obligations for demolition of the Main St. Plant are to be paid after CMP notes and other obligations of the CRA are paid—-so that can’t be used as an excuse for increasing the bond amount.