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
� s � <br />be a very specific flow of funds that will be set out in the <br />bond documents. As to what benefit the county might receive <br />from this when in the end the government absorbs the tax <br />exempt status, Ms. Wheeler felt that the Board must consider <br />that the Constitution and Statutes give them the authority <br />to issues such bonds for particular benefits, with specific <br />reference to pollution control projects. <br />Chairman Scurlock wished to be assured that none of <br />these funds would be used to bring the present facility into <br />conformance with any possible violations of DER standards, <br />and Attorney Wheeler stated that these funds cannot be used <br />for unrelated projects. She informed the Board that <br />although her firm was hired by General Development Utilities <br />to structure this bond issue, she realized that the County <br />may desire their own bond counsel. Attorney Wheeler felt <br />the Commission should be aware that in conduit financing the <br />interests of the industry and the interests of the county <br />are close, if not identical, because the interests both <br />share is to be sure the corporation is 100% responsible for <br />the bonds and the county is not responsible at all. <br />Commissioner Fletcher stated that he could see the <br />advantage to General Development to finance their expansion <br />with tax free bonds, but he did not believe this was the <br />intent of the Legislature, and he further was not in favor <br />of giving this particular company an edge in competition <br />with other housing. <br />Attorney Wheeler pointed out that under the Constitu- <br />tion, a lot of projects now qualify for industrial bond <br />issues that did not before, but pollution control facilities <br />always have been a qualified project. <br />Commissioner Wodtke spoke in favor of the Commission <br />considering General Development's request, both because the <br />type of homes they provide are needed in this county and <br />MAR 31982 <br />45 <br />NOK 9 - ME 57 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.