My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
6/4/1980
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1980's
>
1980
>
6/4/1980
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 11:48:53 AM
Creation date
6/11/2015 11:29:09 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
06/04/1980
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
134
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
r <br />JUN 41980 BOOK 43' PAGE 664 <br />THEN PROCEEDED TO UPDATE SOME OF THE FIGURES SET OUT IN THEIR <br />PRELIMINARY PROPOSAL, POINTING OUT THAT THESE FIGURES WILL ILLUSTRATE <br />HOW MARKEDLY THE MARKET HAS CHANGED IN THE PERIOD OF TIME SINCE THEIR <br />PROPOSAL. HE THEN ASKED THE BOARD TO CHANGE THE INTEREST RATE SHOWN <br />ON THE BAN AS 9-1/2% To 6% AND SPECULATED THAT AS OF TODAY, IT <br />PROBABLY IS A LOT LOWER THAN THAT. ITEM 6, WHICH SHOWED AN AVERAGE <br />INTEREST INCOME RATE ON THE NET BAN PROCEEDS AND CAPITALIZED INTEREST <br />OF 14%, HE REQUESTED BE CHANGED TO°8.757., AND ITEM 7, -WHICH IS AN <br />ASSUMPTION THAT THE ISSUER WOULD HAVE TO PAY A RATE OF 10.5% FOR <br />CONVENTIONAL INTERIM FINANCING, WAS TO BE CHANGED TO 8%. ALSO THE <br />DATE FOR ISSUANCE OF THE BAN IN ITEM 3 SHOULD BE CHANGED FROM <br />JUNE 1, 1980 TO AUGUST 1, 1980. ALTHOUGH THAT DATE PROBABLY WOULD <br />NOT ALLOW ENOUGH TIME FOR THE VALIDATION AND APPEAL PERIOD, HE FELT <br />IT WOULD SUFFICE FOR ILLUSTRATION PURPOSES. MR. LYONS STATED THE <br />ASSUMPTIONS THEY ARE.LOOKING AT IS A RESOLUTION BY THE BOARD AUTHORIZING <br />THE ISSUANCE OF THE BAN AND A STATEMENT FROM FMHA THAT THEY HAVE <br />RESERVED THE MONEY AND, DEPENDING UPON COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS <br />OF THE LOAN, THEY WILL ISSUE THE PERMANENT TAKE-OUT COMMITMENT LETTER. <br />HE THEN COMPLIMENTED MR, ENG HIGHLY FOR HIS EXTREME COOPERATION IN <br />ASSISTING THEM. <br />MR. LYONS RECAPPED THAT AS OF YESTERDAY, IT LOOKED TO THEM <br />LIKE THE CONVENTIONAL CONSTRUCTION LOAN INTEREST AT 8%, ACCORDING <br />TO THE CONSTRUCTION DRAW SCHEDULE THEY HAVE UTILIZED, WOULD RUN <br />$247,286. THE NET INTEREST INCOME, OR EXPENSE, FROM THE BAN WOULD <br />BE $4,618; SO, YOU HAVE GOT A SWING BETWEEN THE TWO OF $242,668, AND <br />THAT IS JUST BASED ON THE INTEREST EXPENSE FOR THE BANS OVER THE LIFE <br />OF THEM. <br />COORDINATOR THOMAS COMMENTED THAT WHAT MR. LYONS IS SAYING <br />IS THAT THE NET RESULT ON TODAY IS MARKET IS THAT YOU WOULD BE SHORT <br />$4,600 - THAT'S NOT ASSUMING THAT YOU HAD BORROWED THE MONEY UNDER A <br />STANDARD CONSTRUCTION LOAN BASIS. HE CONTINUED THAT, IF WE HAD <br />PURSUED THIS WHEN MR. LYONS FIRST CALLED, THE INCOME WOULD HAVE BEEN <br />CONSIDERABLY MORE. <br />w <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.