3/3/1982 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MAR 3 1982 19 mf because he believed that it will benefit the existing residents in the long run. Motion was made by Commissioner Lyons to authorize the Chairman and Attorney Brandenburg to meet with representa- tives of General Development Utilities and come back with a recommendation as to the Inducement Resolution. Attorney Wheeler explained that the Inducement Resolution indicates intent to move forward but reserves options not to proceed if you do not choose to do so. It will also specify that any cost of the issue will be borne by the corporation and not the county. She informed the Board that they have a draft of a resolution that the Commission might want to consider, and of the County does wish to retain further counsel, it should not be necessary to pay them to redo the work that has been done already. Attorney Brandenburg noted that the Commission is the issuing authority, and the Inducement Resolution, financing arrangements, etc., should be worked out by their counsel to protect the county's interests all the way down the line rather than relying on the counsel who has been retained by the corporation making the request. He did agree since it appears that much of this work already has been done, there may be reduced fees, but emphasized that the county should have their own bond counsel. Chairman Scurlock was in favor of accepting the recommendation of the County Attorney in regard to having our own bond counsel review these documents. Discussion followed as to retaining the firm of Freeman, Richardson, Watson & Kelly, which firm has worked with the county on other bond issues. Attorney Wheeler stated that her firm has worked with Freeman, Richardson, Watson & Kelly in the past, and they would be happy to again. It was noted that the Motion made by Commissioner Lyons had died for lack of a second.