Financial- COPS (Insurance Information)

Home Browse Search

From: "Edward Einowski" <eeinowski@stoel.com> To: GWM1.M-LEGAL(MHANSEN) Date: 12/4/98 4:18pm Subject: Re: Notice Address -Reply Yes - Z received the MBIA final commitment. Unfortunately, contrary to my discussions with MBIA earlier this week, the attachement enitled "Lease Transactions Subject to Annual Appropriation General Document Provisions" still has the langauge concerning "triple net lease" opinions and other inappropriate items. These were supposed to be removed from the final. I've got a call into Angela Grassi at MBIA to see what she wants to do (she's out until Monday). I've suggested that Billy merely strike out and initial the offending paragraphs and then sign and return the commitment, but left Angela the option of sending us a new one that deletes these provisions (the ones in question are A. l. and 2.). I don't think there's any real problem here, just the fact that the commitment gets generated by their "closing department" who no doubt was in "automatic pilot" when they prepared it and sent it out. In any event, I'll let you know what the deal is when I talk to Angela on Monday. Also, I've finished re-running the "good costs/bad costs" numbers based on the pricing information. As you may recall, back during a September meeting at Melvin Marks, the County identified $2,492,863 in cash equity that it was putting into the project (i.e., over and above the Certificate proceeds available to pay project costs). If this cash equity figure is correct (I still haven't had anyone confirm that it is still accurate - Billy, can you confirm or deny?), then we're in the clear on "good costs/bad costs". We can discuss this further when we talk about the Tax Certificate next week. Have a good weekend. »> MICHAEL HANSEN <MHANSEN@OPENGOVT.OPEN.ORG> 12/04 3:34 PM »> Ed, we are working on it. will respond soon. In the meantime, I sent you a fax on the MBIA commitment. Did you get it? Any thoughts? CC: GWM2.M-MAR2(BWASSON)