My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
3/3/1982
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1980's
>
1982
>
3/3/1982
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 11:49:38 AM
Creation date
6/11/2015 2:01:40 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
03/03/1982
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
89
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 />Industrial Development Bond financing by a county provides a mecha- <br />nism where local government can provide an incentive and attempt to <br />lure the type of industry the local government feels is appropriate <br />and in the best interest of the community. An initial determina- <br />tion should be made by the Board of County Commissioners that a <br />given project falls within the framework of those types of activi- <br />ties which the County desires to lure and promote within the <br />County. <br />If the Board of County Commissioners desires to pursue the issuance <br />Of bonds to fulfill the requests submitted by General Development <br />Utilities, Inc., this writer would request your approval to execute <br />a standard fee arrangement with bond counsel, (Freeman, Richardson, <br />Watson & Kelly), all fees to be paid by the applicant, and to pre- <br />pare and present the necessary inducement resolutions, memorandums <br />of agreement, and financing arrangements to accomplish the bond <br />issue. <br />Respe�tfu ty submitted, <br />?r i• M. Brand n'burg <br />/� my Attorn .y <br />Charles Fancher, Assistant Vice President of General <br />Development Utilities, Inc., and Attorney Patricia Wheeler, <br />acting for General Development Utilities as an expert in the <br />field of tax exempt securities, were present. <br />Mr. Fancher informed the Board that the funds would be <br />used for expansion of their waste water facility and <br />construction of the collection mains and force mains to <br />collect the sewerage from the development in certain areas <br />of Vero Beach Highlands and also for treatment of that <br />sewerage. He stated that the practical effect of the <br />request being made is to provide a means to finance the cost <br />of those facilities at a rate lower than would otherwise be <br />required if no tax exempt status were applied to the bonds, <br />and this lower rate would flow through to the benefit of all <br />the customers of the utility system. <br />Chairman Scurlock found the provision that General <br />Development chooses to use their own bond counsel for this <br />issue unacceptable, and questioned the actual benefit to the <br />public when ultimately the government has to make up the <br />difference from the taxes lost due to the tax exempt status <br />of the bonds. <br />MAR 3 1982 4319 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.