About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

LOG IN
LOG IN


1984 Arizona Attorney General Reports and Opinions 1 (1984)

handle is hein.sag/sagaz0007 and id is 1 raw text is: A ttvrneij &neral- 1275 WEST WASHINGTON Phpuenix, Arizona 85007 fRobert J.(lri January 4, 1984 Douglas R. Norton, C.P.A. Auditor General 111 West Monroe, Suite 600 Phoenix, Arizona 85003 Re: 184-001 (R83-0.97) Dear Mr. Norton: This letter is in response to your letter of July 13, 1983, in which you asked the following question: Assuming that all other statutory requirements are met, must the sale of refunding bonds by a school district be made as a public sale, utilizing sealed competitive bidding procedures, or may the sale be negotiated with one investmenIt organization or group without following a bidding process? For the reasons set forth below, we conclude that the pertinent statutes and, in particular, A.R.S. § 35-471 et seg., do not require that school district refunding bonds be bid pursuant to the competitive bid process prior to sale. The original issuance of bonds by school districts is governed by A.R.S. § 15-1021 et seq. A.R.S. § 15-1024 requires that original issue school district bonds bear interest at rates set by the accepted bid for not less than par. Likewise, A.R.S. § 35-457 which pertains to the original issuance of bonds by a county, city, town or other similar municipal corporation1' requires that the bonds be awarded to the highest and most responsible bidder at not less than par with accrued interest. 1. Until 1980 A.R.S. § 35-451 et seg. also applied to the original issuance of school district bonds. However, school districts were deleted from that statute by Laws 1980, 2nd S.S., Ch.8, § 21.