magic

Chapter 9 - THE MAJORITY HOLDERThe bond trustee held the verification hearing in a conference room, not town hall.

Good.

Less theater.

Present:

Trustee.

Fairwick Redevelopment Authority counsel.

Town counsel.

My counsel.

Other noteholder representatives.

No Mayor Conrad.

His attorney requested observer status.

Granted.

The trustee, Caroline Weiss, began with the obvious.

“Ownership of debt does not transfer governmental authority.”

I almost applauded.

Then:

“A majority holder may exercise only rights specified under the indenture.”

Yes.

My holdings were verified through custodial accounts and assignment records.

No secret suitcase of bonds.

Electronic book-entry interests.

The press was not in the room.

Outside, they waited.

Inside, numbers.

Original 2019 note issuance:

$8.6 million.

Principal repaid over time:

$2.1 million.

Outstanding:

$6.5 million.

My position:

Still sealed until final trustee calculation.

Other holders:

Insurance pool.

Two funds.

Private accounts.

First County retained a small residual amount.

Town counsel challenged one block I bought after the council incident.

“Settlement occurred after the contested demolition hearing.”

“Correct,” Naomi said.

“Then Ms. Whitfield did not control it when she made the statement that she was the town’s most powerful creditor.”

“Largest single creditor and majority are different claims.”

Exactly.

At town hall, I was already the largest.

The final block came later.

No rewriting.

The trustee ruled the acquisition valid.

Then the more important question.

What could a majority direct?

Special audit.

Yes.

Enforcement of reporting covenants.

Yes.

Refusal of certain covenant waivers.

Yes.

Direction to trustee regarding remedies after default, subject to protections for minority holders.

Potential acceleration of the redevelopment notes after specified defaults.

Yes, under conditions.

Can majority holder seize town hall?

No.

Can majority holder remove mayor?

No.

Can majority holder cancel zoning laws?

No.

Can majority holder directly block lawful eminent domain?

No.

Thank God.

Power with boundaries.

Then Caroline Weiss opened the final settlement report.

“Whitfield Agricultural Holdings has beneficial ownership of…”

She stopped to verify one figure.

Nobody breathed.

“…three million six hundred sixty-six thousand dollars principal amount.”

I did the calculation anyway.

I already knew.

56.4 percent.

More than half.

Town Attorney Stern leaned back.

Conrad’s attorney wrote something.

Caroline continued:

“Whitfield therefore constitutes the majority holder under Section 9.4 of the indenture.”

There it was.

Not king.

Not mayor.

Majority creditor.

Then she reviewed the special-audit trigger.

If proceeds were materially misapplied or reporting certifications knowingly false, the majority holder could direct the trustee to issue a formal notice of default and demand cure.

A notice of default would complicate:

Refinancing.

Stonegate.

Future borrowing.

Possibly Fairwick’s credit rating.

Serious leverage.

Dangerous leverage.

The trustee asked:

“Ms. Whitfield, do you intend to direct immediate default notice?”

Every face turned toward me.

“No.”

Conrad’s attorney looked surprised.

“Then what do you want?”

“Audit first.”

“Why?”

“Because I want facts before remedies.”

Caroline nodded.

Then slid another document forward.

“Before we conclude, there is one covenant Ms. Whitfield’s counsel requested we interpret.”

Naomi sat straighter.

The clause concerned:

Proceeds from disposition of property acquired with redevelopment-note funds.

If Fairwick used bond proceeds to prepare or acquire property, sale proceeds from that property had to enter the debt lockbox unless noteholders approved otherwise.

My farm had never been acquired.

Yet Fairwick spent at least $840,000 preparing it.

Stern saw the problem.

If Conrad demolished my home using redevelopment money, then forced a condemnation purchase, Stonegate sale proceeds might become restricted debt collateral rather than flexible town cash.

Conrad’s entire plan to use my property as quick money may have violated his own financing assumptions.

May you like

The trustee ordered a formal interpretation.

And the audit began Monday.

Related Stories

Other posts