HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 1988-05-27 Minutesf
0
CITY OF
O4pp
I NCORP GRATED
18 96
C_Qsf
MIAMI
COMMISSION
'
MINUTES
OF MEETING HELD ON
MAY 27, 1988
(SPECIAL)
PREPARED aY THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
CITY HALL
MATTY HIRAI
City Clerk
W W
MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING OF THE
CITY COMMISSION OF MIAMI, FLORIDA
On the 21th day of May, 1988, the City Commission of Miami, Florida, met
at its regular meeting place in the City Hall, 3500 Pan American Drive, Miami,
Florida in Special Session for the purpose of considering matters of urgent
public import, namely consideration of renovations to Miami Gusman Hall and
Olympia Building and agreements with Department of Off -Street Parking and
Sunshine State Governmental Financing Commission, in connection therewith.
The meeting was called to order at 3:32 p.m. by Mayor Xavier Suarez with
the following members of the Commission found to be present:
Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Vice Mayor Rosario Kennedy
Mayor Xavier L. Suarez
ABSENT: Commissioner Victor De Yurre
ALSO PRESENT:
Cesar Odio, City Manager
Jorge L. Fernandez, Acting City Attorney
Matty Hirai, City Clerk
Walter J. Foeman
An invocation was delivered by Mayor Suarez who then led those present
in a pledge of allegiance to the flag.
1. APPROVE FORM OF LOAN AGREEMENT WITH SUNSHINE STATE GOVERNMENTAL
FINANCING COMMISSION AND DELETE REQUIREMENT OF AGREEMENT WITH DEPARTMENT
OF OFF-STREET PARKING.
Mayor Suarez: This is a special session called for the purpose of considering
matters of urgent public import, namely for consideration of an agreement with
the Department of Off -Street Parking, in connection with the execution of a
loan agreement by the City in an amount not to exceed $7,200,000 from the
Sunshine State Governmental Financing Commission for the construction,
acquisition and erection of renovations to the City of Miami Gusman Hall and
Olympia Building, as previously authorized by Resolution No. 88-475 adopted
May 19, 1988. The time and the hour were determined by Commissioner Plummer,
who felt that it was particularly appropriate to meet on Friday at 3:30 p.m.,
and I wanted to oblige to his request. That's why we are meeting here at this
time. Do you have anything to say for yourself?
Mr. Plummer: We need a new Mayor.
Mayor Suarez: If everyone is coming, I figure that...
Mr. Dawkins: If you call another meeting at 3:30, we will need another
funeral director!
Mr. Plummer: It is all right, as long as I bury this one first.
Mayor Suarez: Actually, the real concern was, the resolution or motion or
determination of the Off -Street Parking Board that I know had additional
conditions, let us any, and I think the Manager and the City Attorney all
thought the Commission ought to be aware of before we move forward with this
application for a loan, so that we can, in a clear and convincing manner
decide whether this is something the City wants to do.
Mr. Plummer: Well, Mr. Mayor, let's put it on the record and make it clear,
the action taken, as you will recall at the last meeting, I demanded a
document signed, sealed and delivered by the Off -Street Parking Authority. At
that time, the pretension was, certain "X", "Y" and "Z", when a meeting was
1 May 27, 1988
called of the Off -Street Parking, it changed, and it changed radically. And
with none of those provisions that were in the old, so-called original
understanding, and of course, that is what we are going to hear now. The 70
percent, of course, is predicated on certain criteria that no one understood
before, that it was no longer a guarantee of 30,000 square feet at $26, but
has been reduced by them now to $23, and I don't disagree with that, but that
was the very reason, Mr. Mayor, that I demanded a document, signed, sealed and
delivered before this Commission vote on this issue, so I just wanted to make
it clear for the record.
Mayor Suarez: Let me say that since the last meeting, and pursuant to the
Commission's determination and desires, as regards to DDA, and as chairman
working with the acting director, we sent off a letter to the landlords of the
Downtown Development Authority and the Commission's request that as much
10,000 square feet be committed to by the DDA, I think is quite feasible,
although I can't say at this point there is something definite on that, but I
think it would be quite feasible without any great loss of resources to DDA.
Mrs. Kennedy: And Jack, following Commissioner Plummer's words, why wasn't
this made clear to us from the start? Why come up with all this evidence now?
Mr. Dawkins: They were there from the beginning, they just didn't tell us.
Mr. Jack Mulvena: Jack Mulvena, executive director of the Department of Off -
Street Parking. I really think there is so much involved in this agreement,
that I think we perhaps need to review it from the Department of Off -Street
Parking's side. I think that the City has an opportunity to look at the
meeting and the resolution and my cover letter, and in addition, the maker of
the motion, David Weaver, has submitted a letter to each of the Commission
members to help you understand what his thinking was with regards to what
these conditions were and are.
Mr. Plummer: Not the point. The point is, that at the last meeting of this
Commission, you made certain pretensions before this Commission, never, ever
stating that it was tied to a given plan, OK? Now, you have tied it to a plan
that I would assume is unacceptable to this Commission. I am assuming that,
and I should not assume...
Mr. Dawkins: Your assumptions are quite right.
Mr. Plummer: Well, OK, the point is, we were, as a Commission, asked to vote
on this and it was being pushed at the last meeting, and none of these things
were brought out in the meeting, and yet some people found fault with me, when
I demanded a signed, sealed and delivered letter from the Off -Street... an
agreement, which we did not have. Now, subsequent to that, you had a meeting
and you stipulated the things that you wanted. You know, I find that just
totally unacceptable, because it didn't coordinate, is what I am saying.
Mr. Mulvena: Let me respond, Commissioner Plummer. The board did in fact,
have two meetings. They had a special meeting on Monday, and the issue was
put before them to sign an agreement. The board in its wisdom wanted to re -
look at what our finances were for the up and coming five years. Believe it
or not, we have assumed all along that the five year plan was in fact accepted
by the Commission, if only in principle, so we didn't choose to bring that up
or tie it to any of the Commissioners...
Mayor Suarez: What assumptions, Jack, so that I remember, were built into the
five year plan by way of an increase in your revenues? I remember four
percent figure being mentioned. I assumed, I think at the time, that like
everything else growing at a rate of four percent, inflation growing at four
percent, our City tax base roughly grows at four percent, that is basically
what your assumption was in your projection.
Mrs. Kennedy: And 500 parking meters every year for the next five years.
Mr. Plummer: Well, but that is also the four percent totals twenty.
Mayor Suarez: Yes. No, that's...
Mr. Plummer: It totals twenty over five years.
2 May 27, 1988
Mayor Suarez: Might, and compounded it even more; but 1 thought it was just
twelve percent. I didn't think that we were committing to any particular
number of parking meters or any particular rate increases. I mean, it might
be expected that just the flow of traffic and parking in your facilities would
increase at the rate of four percent a year. That is all I intended to approve
at the time, I'll tell you that.
Mr. Mulvena: Well, see, that is a good point, because it is not as clear cut
as we will raise the rates on an average of four percent each year.
Mayor Suarez: Your revenues from parking would increase at four percent, is
what your projection is, right?
Mr. Mulvena: Yes, but let's look at that. In the five year plan, we project
an either or possibility, OK? Let's may for example, that the utilization
does not improve, so the money remains flat, therefore, you don't get a four
percent increase.
Mr. Dawkins: May I ask a question Mr. Mayor?
Mayor Suarez: Commissioner Dawkins.
Mr. Dawkins: In the event, Mr. Mulvena, that there is not three votes up here
to cover one and to cover background on the one, see nobody told me that I had
to pay $305,900 as a closing cost. Now, in the event that I do not, and I am
just going to speak for Miller Dawkins, and if you don't get three votes, for
one, and that, does that kill the agreement?
Mr. Mulvena: No, from our side I think we have committed to our share of...
Mr. Dawkins: I'll ask my question again, sir. In the event...
Mr. Mulvena: I'm sorry. Yes.
Mr. Dawkins: ... that three members of this Commission does not vote for one,
which is the four percent, and the parking meter, which I am not voting for,
and if you go to page three of four, the top of it says background and you go
down to the beginning... the middle of the first paragraph, it says: "In
addition to $305,900 to cover all costs associated with closing of the loan to
finance the project, and you have another cost of $525,751." Now, if those
two... in order for me to vote for it, those two I know would have to come
out. If we take those two out, does that kill the deal?
Mr. Mulvena: Not so much the second one, because they are all...
Mr. Dawkins: No, no, I don't want to know... I said the two of them - if the
two of them, if I don't vote for two of them, and another person up here
doesn't vote for two, does that kill the deal?
Mr. Mulvena: Yes, then I would...
Mr. Dawkins: All right, I move... we'll see where we are right now. I move
that the only way that this should be accepted by us that they delete one and
the background up there, where it says we pay the $305,900 to cover the
closing costs.
Mayor Suarez: So moved. While we determine if that gets a second, because we
are all concerned about the same thing, Mr. Rodriguez, why $305,900 closing
costs? And I, like Commissioner Dawkins, I was not aware that there would be
anywhere near that amount of money.
Mr. Plummer: Well, there is a breakdown in your portfolio. $100,000 of it is
legal. $40,000 is for miscellaneous.
Mayor Suarez: I would assume a fee of one percent, the typical fee for
commitment.
Mr. Sergio Rodriguez: The first part of the amount would be the fee of 1.1
percent and then we have to pay for the bond counsel land for the Sunshine
Committee, Government Finance Committee, and for the City of Miami Bond
Counsel.
3 May 27, 1988
Mrs. Kennedy: Even if the deal doesn't go through, we still have these
expenses, correct?
Mr. Rodriguez: No, well, if we were to go through with the loan agreement, we
have to pay for the whole thing.
Mrs. Kennedy: Yes, I understand that.
Mayor Suarez: Let me say something that might clarify the posture of, if not
the majority of the four of us, two out of the four of us, because it is based
on his motion, and see how the rest of you feel. If we had to vote to approve
any of this, except the commitment fee, $75,900, I couldn't vote with it. I
don't buy any of the rest of those fees. Commitment fee, which I presume we
need to pay to participate, Sunshine State Government Pool, and everything
else absorbed by existing staff of the City, including the City Attorney's
office and the agency, including your staff. I would vote for that.
Mr. Plummer: Well, but Mr. Mayor, you will vote for that as a package vote.
You are still remaining the right to argue about the project itself.
Mayor Suarez: Yes, I'm sorry, that is only as to the issue of the fees. That
might calm the concerns, or quiet the concerns of some of the other
Commissioners, like Commissioner Dawkins, on the overall cost of this thing.
Mr. Plummer: All right, let me tell you my area of concern. If in fact,
Dawkins motion, which I more or less agree with, but here is the danger - the
danger Miller is, if they were to acquiesce and consent to that, that puts
their bonding ratio down and below one multiplying effect. It puts it down to
about eight seventy, I was told. I don't ever want to see the Off -Street
Parking Authority in that position. So, you know, I just...
Mayor Suarez: Are you talking about debt service coverage?
Mr. Plummer: Exactly!
Mayor Suarez: Well, they have told us, they have assured us that all of the
projects mentioned here, if done as planned, would still allow them a
reasonably safe debt service coverage. I know that if anyone becomes more
precarious than expected, that that effects your overall financial situation
on a year to year basis, and I presume this is one of the riskier ones of all
of the ones that we are talking about.
Mr. Mulvena: Well, if I can go back to one for a minute, because...
Mr. Plummer: Well, wait a minute, let me add, Jack, if I may, all right?
Mr. Mulvena: Oh, you want to
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, I have expressed another area of concern. A five
year plan is fine, but this loan is 24 years. What happens with the other 19
years? Now, under normal circumstances, the way a government operates is,
when you pledge to support and guarantee, you have a restricted fund of money
which cannot be touched, or source of revenue. I do not find in any of these
documents, that if in fact, this four percent, and these 2,500 meters were to
pass, that money is pledged and restricted only for the purposes of covering
this loan beyond year five. And I would be very reluctant, on the sixth year
they can do whatever they want with that money, and the City as you know, from
day one, is 100 percent responsible for the loan. - I would have to have an
assurance that money which is derived from that, if it were to pass, which I
don't think it would, that there is no provisions in here for that fund to be
restricted beyond the fifth year.
Mrs. Kennedy: Another thing that also concerns me is on page 2 of 4, number
3: "The DOSP board further stated an understanding that if the loan proceeds
are either repaid or reallocated to a DOSP project, DOSP would probably be
responsible for 100 percent of the repayment of the loan." Probably is too
loose a term.
Mayor Suarez: You know Jack, this illustrates a problem that we talked about
a year ago with the prior executive director, and with Leslie a year before
that too, which is the objective of this Commission, I think would be able to
work a lot better with these projects if each one was self-contained and self-
4 May 27, 1988
supporting, and to the extent that they are not, the Commission has clarified
what our risk is going to be at any one time, I still think that if we are
going to get involved in these major projects, you know, we ought to try for a
self-sufficiency approach, and you have a term for that - zero something or
other, whatever it is you call it.
Mr. Mulvena: Oh, the 1.0 debt service.
Mayor Suarez: 1.0 debt service, right.
Mr. Mulvena: Yes, for each one, yes.
Mayor Suarez: That each one be self-sufficient, self-supporting, and that
helps a lot in our deliberations. That way, we don't get these general
statements like this Dave Weaver letter that we just received, talking about
five, six, seven projects. I think some of these are probably self
supporting. Some of them are not, and it is hard to prioritize unless you
know. We have approved the five year plan in a general sense, with the
assumption that your rates and your revenues are going to go up at a four
percent clip. Like Commissioner Dawkins, and I think the rest of us, I would
be very concerned if that implied that we are going to approve off the bat,
you know, additional meters, although we know there are some areas of the City
where they want meters, so there is no problem in that sense, but it is a heck
of a lot easier to analyze this, which is already a difficult analytical
process if each project is self supporting. Now Olympia and Gusman, I
understand, you could probably never make it that way. And it may be, that
you will go back, if the Commission does not proceed with this application,
and consider something that was mentioned at the last Commission meeting,
which is just something to improve Gusman Hall, knowing of course, that that
will not be a self-supporting project, but one that the Commission might want
to be committed to, or it may not, I don't know, but it doesn't involve this
very complicated process where we assume $26 per square foot for a building
that now is losing, if I remember correctly, on a operating basis, $300,000 a
year, I think. The very fancy calculations that counsel for the developer made
to us, by which he shows that instead of $26, the effective rate is actually
$16 a square foot because of savings, comparative to the present situation. I
still would vote for it, myself. I would take the risk, if I knew the fees
are going to be reasonable, and if any other Commissioner wants to take that
approach, you have my vote on that.
Mr. Plummer: Well, Mr. Mayor, as you know there has been conversations about
if the project did not go forth, that there was the potential that the money
could be used for other things. Now, it is my understanding that if we went
forth without the DOSP agreement at this particular time, the only thing we
have to indicate to the Sunshine Loan Committee is that we are operating in
good faith, trying to reach an agreement with Gusman, they would approve the
loan next Tuesday. If in fact, the agreement with Gusman did not materialize,
after we have negotiated out everything we can, it is... excuse me?
Mayor Suarez: We have to satisfy the legal standard and... ?
Mr. Plummer: We would go through the legal standards of going ahead and
negotiating with the Gusman situation and go forward with the Gusman project.
Ms. Miriam Maer: (OFF MIKE) The documents would come back.
Mr. Plummer: The documents would come back to the City, and that we could
have the right of approval. Now, the worst that could happen, worst scenario
as I understand it...
Mayor Suarez: Losing the commitment fee.
Mr. Plummer: ... would be the commitment fee, which is only a total of
$85,000.
Mayor Suarez: Why is he shaking his head? Why are you shaking your head?
Why can we not limit it to that. I would love to undertake the risk, limiting
it to the commitment fee, and I think Vice Mayor would too, and maybe
Commissioner Dawkins would too.
Mrs. Kennedy: I could live with that.
5 May 27, 1988
Mr. Rodriguez: I think that I agree with everything he has said so far,
except for the amount of the fee, because I believe you have to pay for the
two bond counsels, the $20,000 figures that you have there, so the risk that
were incurring...
Mr. Plummer: What two bond counsels?
Mrs. Kennedy: We are talking about seventy-five nine and...
Mr. Rodriguez: Seventy-five nine plus twenty thousand and twenty thousand, so
you are risking $150,000.
Mayor Suarez: Why do we have to pay the Sunshine State Pools' bond counsel
and our own bond counsel? Can't we get one bond counsel to give opinion of?
Mr. Jorge Fernandez: Yes, the way that works, Mr. Mayor, is that...
Mayor Suarez: The more I see these, the more I think that maybe our City
Attorney eventually will be able to be bond counsel for the City on some of
these.
Mr. Fernandez: The fund has their own bond counsel and the City has to have
their own bond counsel. This is a regular closing as it were on the loan
where both sides are being represented and the cost runs to the borrower, in
this case, the City, so we would be obligated to pay...
Mayor Suarez: Can you think of any real reason why you have to have two bond
opinions by counsel? Why can't they use our bond opinion? I mean, we are not
working against the State.
Mr. Fernandez: That is not the way that the industry works, Mr. Mayor.
Mayor Suarez: Yes, that's... lawyers have a way of always ending up with a
large percentage of the transaction.
Mr. Mulvena: Mayor and Commissioners, certainly the Department of Off -Street
Parking has demonstrated its commitment and also you know, its good faith
would be very happy to share in that on a 70-30 basis, which has been our
share anyway.
Mayor Suarez: I'll... if the Commission wants to wrap this up with that kind
of motion subject to all of the other concerns that we have on the
negotiations of this deal, that is an interesting one, J.L., that they would
share on a 70-30 basis on that cost of the bond counsel.
Mr. Plummer: Does this resolution in front of us cover what I am trying to
accomplish?
Mr. Dawkins: No.
Mr. Plummer: It does not?
Mr. Fernandez: No.
Mr. Dawkins: No.
Mayor Suarez: No. Be careful with that.
Ms. Maer: (OFF MIKE) That is the resolution from last Thursday.
Mr. Fernandez: The resolution that you have in front of you is the resolution
that you passed last Thursday, Commissioner Plummer.
Mayor Suarez: It is not even necessary, but let me just put it on the record
to state that the bond monies will be... to be spent at the discretion of the
City.
Mr. Fernandez: That's correct.
Mayor Suarez: OK, obviously we work with our agency. We think that you are a
City agency. We don't work in an adversarial position to you, but I don't
want people to think that all of a sudden six point what ever million dollars
available for projects that people might come up with.
6 May 27, 1988
Mr. Dawkins: Jack, may I ask a question please? I see the Department of Off -
Street Parking, legal fees, Hughes, Hubbard and others, $100,000. Can you
tell me, what Black firms or Latin firms you are using and how much you have
paid them in legal fees during the year?
Mr. Mulvena: Off hand, I don't have that information, but... because you
know, we just have one legal counsel, Hughes, Hubbard and Reed. We do go out,
by the way, on the same rotating basis that the City does for bond counsel,
and other specialized counsel, and are guiding by the same, both minority
requirements and fairness of getting that work around.
Mr. Dawkins: Well, what special expertise that Hughes and Hubbard has, that a
Black law firm or a Latin law firm does not have? ...
Mr. Mulvena: I would presume...
Mr. Dawkins: ... that is required by the Off -Street Parking?
Mr. Mulvena: I would presume that there, you know, is no difference other
than the fact that Hughes, Hubbard and Reed have a long standing with us, and
understand our operations pretty well.
Mr. Dawkins: OK, thank you.
Mr. Plummer: Let me try this on for size, and I will read it to you as
approved by the City Attorney.
"A resolution of the City Commission of the City of Miami Florida,
amending the resolution number 88-475, of the City to delete the
requirement that the City Manager approve the form of a loan
agreement between the City and the Sunshine State Governmental..."
Ms. Maer: (OFF MIKE) to approve the City Manager's ... approve the
terms of an agreement between the City and DOSP. You want to delete that
requirement.
Mr. Plummer: Right.
Ms. Maer: (OFF MIKE) Then you want to approve the form of the loan agreement.
Mr. Plummer:
..."approving the form of a loan agreement between the City and
the Sunshine State Governmental Financing Commission in
substantially the form attached hereto as Exhibit "B" approving
the payment of certain costs as described in exhibit "C," hereto
related to a borrowing by the City from the Sunshine State
Governmental Financing Commission and providing an effective
date."
Ms. Maer: Mr. Mayor, if I may be so bold.
Mayor Suarez: Yes, Miriam.
Ms. Maer: I would like to reread the title into the record, if that is OK.
Thank you.
"A resolution of the City Commission of the City of Miami,
Florida, amending Resolution no. 88-475 of the City to delete the
requirement that the City Manager approve the terms of an
agreement between the City and DOSP; approving the form of a loan
agreement between the City and the Sunshine State Governmental
Financing Commission in substantially the form attached hereto..."
Mr. Plummer: Nol Absolutely not!
Ms. Maer: This is what you took out.
Mr. Plummer: This is what you took out and you are reading it! It is not an
agreement with DOSP.
Ms. Maer: No, that is correct. This is the loan agreement I am talking
about. In other words, what I am deleting, you read into your title
approving... deleting the requirements of the City Manager approve the
agreement with DOSP.
7 May 27, 1988
Mr. Plummer: I did not.
Ms. Maer: You yourself approving the agreement with DOSP and what I am doing
is, I am deleting the requirement that there be an agreement with DOSP, and I
am going on to say that you are approving the form of the loan agreement,
attached hereto between the City. This is the loan agreement, not the
agreement with DOSP.
Mrs. Kennedy: The City and the Sunshine Staste pool.
Ms. Maer: This is the loan agreement between the City and the Sunshine State
Governmental Financing Commission and the form attached hereto is Exhibit "B."
And you are also approving the payment of certain costs, the costs as modified
by deleting all costs from Exhibit "C," but for the 1.1 percent fee to the
Commission, the bond counsel fee to Holland & Knight, and the bond counsel fee
to Bryant Miller and Olive.
Mayor Suarez: Of which the Off -Street Parking Authority commits to 70
percent.
Ms. Maer: And furthermore... furthermore what?... providing an effective date.
Mr. Plummer: You are eliminating any agreement with DOSP.
Mayor Suarez: Well...
Ms. Maer: That is what I just did. I eliminated DOSP agreement.
Mr. Plummer: Well, we are eliminating...
Mayor Suarez: You just got saved $28,000, you know.
Mr. Plummer: Well, let's also remember that Al stood up here and said that if
the City was out of pocket, he would pick up any of the expenses that we were
out of pocket.
Mayor Suarez: Actually, if we are going to have control of the funds and it
is not subject to any kind of firm agreement with DOSP, I suppose it is fair.
In any event, is that your motion?
Mr. Plummer: Yes, sir.
Mayor Suarez: You going to second it?
Mrs. Kennedy: Second.
Mayor Suarez: Seconded. Any discussion from the Commission? Call the roll.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Plummer, who
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 88-486
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI,
FLORIDA, AMENDING THE RESOLUTION NO. 88-475 OF THE CITY TO
DELETE THE REQUIREMENT THAT THE CITY MANAGER APPROVE THE
TERMS OF AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND THE CITY'S
DEPARTMENT OF OFF-STREET PARKING; APPROVING THE FORM OF A
LOAN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND THE SUNSHINE STATE
GOVERNMENTAL FINANCING COMMISSION IN SUBSTANTIALLY THE
FORM ATTACHED HERETO AS EXHIBIT "A"; APPROVING THE PAYMENT
OF CERTAIN COSTS AS DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT "B" HERETO
RELATED TO A BORROWING BY THE CITY FROM THE SUNSHINE STATE
GOVERNMENTAL FINANCING COMMISSION; AND PROVIDING AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here
and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Kennedy, the resolution was passed
and adopted by the following vote:
8 May 27, 1988
AYES: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Vice Mayor Rosario Kennedy
Mayor Xavier L. Suarez
NOES: None.
ASSENT: Commissioner Victor De Turre
Mr. Dawkins: Mr. ... somebody over there, anybody over there, get me from
Holland 6 Knight the amount of money they have earned from the City of Miami
as bond counsel, and the total amount that they have given to Black or Latin,
other lawyers.
Mr. Fernandez: Black or Latin what, Mr. Dawkins?
Mayor Suarez: Vhy don't we get a report from all the bond counsel as to their
minority participation?
THERE BRING NO FURTHER WSDMSS TO CUM$ BEFORE THE CITY
CONNISSION, THE NERTING WAS AWWRNRD AT 3.58 P.M.
ATTEST:
Natty Hirai
CITY CLERK
Walter J. Foeaan
ASSISTANT CITY CLERK
Xavier L. Suarez
M A T O R
9 May 27, 1988