My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
9/1/1982
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1980's
>
1982
>
9/1/1982
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 11:49:39 AM
Creation date
6/11/2015 2:26:48 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
09/01/1982
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
78
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
TO: Members of <br />of County <br />of Indian <br />the Board <br />Commissioners <br />River County <br />FROM: Gary M. Brandenburg <br />- County Attorney - - <br />r� <br />DATE: August 20, 1982 FILE: <br />SUBJECT: Rampmaster--$850, 000 <br />Indian River County <br />Industrial Development <br />Revenue Bonds Series 1982 <br />REFERENCES: <br />I have received proposed final versions of the bond resolution, <br />Guaranty Agreement and Loan Agreement, Mortgage and Security <br />Agreement. These documents are too lengthy for inclusion in your <br />agenda packages; however, they are available for your review in our <br />office at any time. These documents are now being reviewed by all <br />the parties involved; and if acceptable, they will be placed on a <br />future County Commission agenda for authorization for the Chairman <br />to sign on behalf of the County. <br />In preparation of closing on the bond issue, the attorneys for <br />Rampmaster have requested the County to waive validation of the <br />bonds. Validation of Industrial Development Revenue Bonds is not <br />required by law and waiving the requirement generally saves the <br />applicant a considerable amount of expense. On the other hand, a <br />validation proceeding serves to protect the issuer by allowing the <br />Circuit Court and State Attorney's Office a general review of the <br />issue resulting in a final judgment. The final judgment creates a <br />conclusive presumption that the bonds are proper and that the <br />issuer (the County) acted properly and within its statutory author- <br />ity. I have consulted.with the County's bond counsel who indicates <br />that they generally prefer validating all Industrial Development <br />Revenue Bond Issues. Bond counsel also indicates that in this case <br />because of the small size of -the issue.which encompasses a project <br />which clearly falls within the statutory framework the bond valida- <br />tion proceeding is not a necessity. <br />RECOMMENDATION <br />The County Attorney recommends that the Board of County <br />Commissioners inform Rampmaster that Indian River County will <br />require validation of the $850,000 Industrial Development Revenue <br />Bond Series 1982. <br />Respectfully submitted, <br />bu <br />Brandeng <br />SSP <br />11982 <br />TO: Members of <br />of County <br />of Indian <br />the Board <br />Commissioners <br />River County <br />FROM: Gary M. Brandenburg <br />- County Attorney - - <br />r� <br />DATE: August 20, 1982 FILE: <br />SUBJECT: Rampmaster--$850, 000 <br />Indian River County <br />Industrial Development <br />Revenue Bonds Series 1982 <br />REFERENCES: <br />I have received proposed final versions of the bond resolution, <br />Guaranty Agreement and Loan Agreement, Mortgage and Security <br />Agreement. These documents are too lengthy for inclusion in your <br />agenda packages; however, they are available for your review in our <br />office at any time. These documents are now being reviewed by all <br />the parties involved; and if acceptable, they will be placed on a <br />future County Commission agenda for authorization for the Chairman <br />to sign on behalf of the County. <br />In preparation of closing on the bond issue, the attorneys for <br />Rampmaster have requested the County to waive validation of the <br />bonds. Validation of Industrial Development Revenue Bonds is not <br />required by law and waiving the requirement generally saves the <br />applicant a considerable amount of expense. On the other hand, a <br />validation proceeding serves to protect the issuer by allowing the <br />Circuit Court and State Attorney's Office a general review of the <br />issue resulting in a final judgment. The final judgment creates a <br />conclusive presumption that the bonds are proper and that the <br />issuer (the County) acted properly and within its statutory author- <br />ity. I have consulted.with the County's bond counsel who indicates <br />that they generally prefer validating all Industrial Development <br />Revenue Bond Issues. Bond counsel also indicates that in this case <br />because of the small size of -the issue.which encompasses a project <br />which clearly falls within the statutory framework the bond valida- <br />tion proceeding is not a necessity. <br />RECOMMENDATION <br />The County Attorney recommends that the Board of County <br />Commissioners inform Rampmaster that Indian River County will <br />require validation of the $850,000 Industrial Development Revenue <br />Bond Series 1982. <br />Respectfully submitted, <br />bu <br />Brandeng <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.