Laserfiche WebLink
r <br />AUG 51981 <br />BOOR 4. 7 PAI-IE122 <br />COMMISSIONER FLETCHER NOTED THAT DUE TO THE ON-GOING NATURE <br />OF SUCH A CONTRACT, THERE MAY BE'SOME COST FOR RETAINER, AND HE WISHED <br />TO KNOW WHAT THAT MIGHT ENTAIL. <br />CHAIRMAN LYONS ENVISIONED WORKING ON A YEAR TO YEAR BASIS, <br />AND COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK NOTED THIS WOULD GO ALONG WITH NEGOTIATING <br />A CONTRACT, HE DID NOT FEEL ANY COST WOULD BE ON A RETAINER BASIS, <br />BUT PROBABLY WOULD BE BASED ON THE SIZE OF THE ISSUE. HE POINTED OUT <br />THAT FINAL APPROVAL WOULD NOT BE MADE TONIGHT IN ANY EVENT. <br />DISCUSSION CONTINUED AS TO WHY HAVING A FINANCIAL AGENT IS <br />PREFERABLE TO WHAT WE ARE DOING NOW AND WHETHER SUCH AN AGENT WOULD <br />BE CONCERNED ONLY WITH BOND ISSUES. <br />COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK NOTED THAT LEEDY HAS BEEN GIVING US <br />SOME ASSISTANCE IN THIS FIELD BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE ANYONE ON OUR STAFF <br />WITH THIS PARTICULAR EXPERTISE. HE FELT SUCH AN AGENT WOULD BE AVAIL- <br />ABLE TO PROVIDE ADVICE ON ANY FINANCIAL ENDEAVOR OR FUNDING WE MAY BE <br />LOOKING AT AND TO COME UP WITH VARIOUS MECHANISMS. IT WOULD BE ON <br />A BASIS OF REQUIRED SERVICES. <br />CHAIRMAN LYONS FELT WE SHOULD PROCEED AS RECOMMENDED IN ORDER <br />TO DETERMINE WHETHER THIS IS WORTHWHILE AND WHETHER WE CAN AFFORD IT. <br />THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. IT WAS VOTED ON AND <br />CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. <br />THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS THEREUPON RECESSED AT <br />8:20 O'CLOCK P.M. IN ORDER THAT THE SPECIAL MEETING CALLED FOR THE <br />PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PROPOSED GIFFORD STREET LIGHTING DISTRICT MIGHT <br />TAKE PLACE, MINUTES OF SAID SPECIAL MEETING ARE BEING PREPARED <br />SEPARATELY, <br />THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS RECONVENED AT 9:511 O'CLOCK <br />P.M. WITH THE SAME MEMBERS PRESENT. <br />