Laserfiche WebLink
FEB 6 1995 <br />BOOK `'G 784 <br />very strongly that the developer should not be allowed to shop <br />around for a lower priced bond counsel just so he can save a few <br />dollars at the County's expense. He did agree that we must <br />monitor bond counsel to make sure these people are not being <br />gouged and stated that he intended to inform the Board any time <br />our bond counsel is charging too much money or is not giving.us <br />the proper service. <br />MOTION WAS MADE by Commissioner Bowman, SECONDED by <br />Commissioner Wodtke, that the Board continue with our <br />present bond counsel until such time as the Attorney's <br />office informs the Board that the counsel is not <br />performing properly or is price gouging. <br />Under discussion, Commissioner Wodtke expressed concern <br />about being cost effective and not just giving the bond counsel a <br />blank check. <br />Attorney Brandenburg explained that recently it has been <br />brought to his attention that possibly our present bond counsel <br />was charging too much; actually what they are charging is the <br />same price they have charged in the past, but the bond field is <br />' becoming more competitive. He, therefore, called around to check <br />on the competition and then called our bond counsel back to tell <br />him he would have to lower his costs some, which he agreed to do. <br />Attorney Brandenburg emphasized, however, that he did not feel <br />you can call around to bond counsels who do not have much <br />experience with industrial revenue bonds. <br />Commissioner Scurlock disagreed on this matter. He felt <br />there are enough firms out there for us to be able to rank them <br />and negotiate with them just as we do in other competitive <br />situations. <br />Attorney Brandenburg totally disagreed with that concept; he <br />did not feel looking for a lower price is as important as having <br />someone you feel you can rely on. He further noted that when you <br />35 <br />