Finance Flashcards
GOB for public roads.
5 step essay approach.
- ## I.D. Project. New development needs roads, sewer, water. LG wants to issue bonds
- ## I.D. powers. Not incons; As is; Except.
- Is Project w/in powers?
Is issuing a bond for a road a ‘public purpose’?
(a) It is: econ devmt – luxury condos, etc.
(b) It is not: it is developer’s burden
———– - Payment Vehicle/Pledge/Impediments.
(a) Bond. GOB. 1 yr, referendum
(b) Pledge. AV tax wd be used to repay, which is appropriate as the improvements are public roads benefitting everyone in the City.
(c) Impediments,
———– - How issue? Referendum.
ESSAY ----------- Private Road Finance = SPEC ASSMT ----------- 6 step Essay Approach.
(1) I.D. Project.
(2) I.D. powers.
(3) Is Project within powers?
———–
(4) Payment vehicle/Pledge/Impediments.
(ex) Special Assmt Bond. bene+apport
———–
(5) How issue?
COUNTIES
(a) Ch 153 - spec ass + bonds for water/ww
(b) Ch 125 - pass ordinance
(c) Home Rule [Chrt: not inconst/N-C: as provided]
MUNIS
(a) Ch 170 - city for water/ww
(b) Home Rule - pass Ord [R*166.111-bonds only]
[govtl, corp, proprietary pwrs to conduct govt, perform functions + service, an exercise any pwr for municipal purposes except as otherwise provided by law.]
———-
(6) 197.3632 place on tax bill
3 step validation review.
1) AUTHORITY to issue
-a- 125.01
-b- 166.111 capital ‘or other’]
2) PURPOSE is legal
-a- public purp? econ dev - 125.045
-b- if buying/leasing cd argue need to bid but econ dev = exception, no collusion
-c- cd argue private benefit but incidental okay.
Once the stadium is deemed to be for a public purpose, the Court need not micromanage the terms of the lease.
3) Issuance COMPLIES w/ law.
-a- sales/tdt/occupational tax = revenue bond = no referendum
———–
~confirmed. Rowe v. Pinellas, 461 So.2d 72 (Fla. 1984).
State 3 supports for City’s authority to issue bonds to finance capital improvements.
2) Art 7, §2, FL Const - broad HR pwrs, except as provided by law.”
———–
3) HR codified to issue bonds. See §§ 166.021, 166.111(1), 166.141, FS
———–
Public purp = econ development, incl issuance of bonds
ESSAY ----------- Sports Stadium bond issue. ----------- State 5 arguments to be made after validating a sports stadium bond issue.
1) Property shd have been competitively bid.
> no, econ dev = exception
———–
2) LG is essentially ‘gifting’ land to corp.
> no, pub purp prevails.
———–
3) LG is promising zoning
> shd be noted in lease no promises
———–
4) lending its credit.
> use tax money for pub purp, incidental private
———–
5) Should have had a referendum on bond.
> not if sales/tdt/occupational tax b/c has no impact on AV.
———–
Rowe v. Pinellas, 461 So.2d 72 (Fla. 1984).
State the support for step #5 - how issue?
What statutes permit LG to issue a spec assmt bond for w/ww?
5. How issue? COUNTIES (a) Ch 153 - spec ass + bonds for water/ww (b) Ch 125 - pass ordinance (c) HR [Chrt: not inconst/N-C: as provided] ----------- MUNIS (a) Ch 170 - city for water/ww (b) HR - pass Ordinance [except as ...] ---------- 197.3632 place on tax bill
State 3 reasons why LG cannot pledge ALL of its revenues.
1) Revenues from regulatory fees & user charges may not be diverted from their lawful purps = to defray costs in providing related services.
2) Cd become a promise to levy AV, which requires voter approval. To pledge all revenues requires increased AV tax = voter approval.
3) At very least, all revenues requires voter approval.
~~~courtesy of Justice Stevens~~~
Why can’t leases of equipment permit repossession?
Because UCC does not apply.
What 3 things look for to determine if lease of equipment permissible.
ESSAY
1) Non-appropriation. Makes it a less than 1 yr K.
2) No repossession b/c UCC does not apply.
3) No mortgage/lien.
State 2 responses if lease includes non-substitution clause?
i.e., can’t lease similar equip for a period of time after ends.
ESSAY
1) Makes non-appropriation & non-usage of AV illusory. LG is faced w/ tapping into AV or going without.
2) Void as against public policy. Is public supposed to go without computer for 2 yrs?
State the 2 statutes w/ each 2 prohibitions, re: conflict of interest essay approach.
ESSAY ----------- A) 112.313(3) -1- POPE in official cap, no SPOC Materials, Inc. -2- POPE in priv cap, can't sell ----------- B) 112.313(7)(A) -1- No w/ doing bus w or regulated by -2- Continuing or recurring conflict.
State the 3 step Conflict of Interest essay approach.
ESSAY
- 2 statutes.
- Is there a facial conflict under one of the 2?
- Does any exception apply?
- a- Advisory bd mbr fill out form.
- b- Comp. bid.
- c- Sole source.
ESSAY
———–
ESSAY
———–
State the 4 LEO constitutional violations you’ll see.
ESSAY ----------- 1. 1983 + 4th Amend. Exc Force, Battery, Seizure, false arrest, seizure. > s&s, objectively reas, arrest/crash --- 2. 14th Amend. Subst dp. > shocks consc = arbitrary. --- 3. 1983. Neg superv, Delib Indiff. --- 4. 8th amend - cruel + unusual
State 6 LEO State claims vs. individual.
Indiv. – State claims.
- Battery Bat Intends Homerun for Person
- Assault. Ass Threatens CIA
- False Arrest. False Arrest for DUI
- Intent Inflict E.D. Intent Inflic ROC to Person
- Mal Prosec. I won on the Merits, now I’m MAD.
- Defamation. Don’t Care you Acted Falsely @ Pub = Dmg.