According to the GFOA, issuers should have what kind of input in the engagement of underwriter's counsel?

The correct choice indicates that issuers should have limited input in the engagement of underwriter's counsel. This approach recognizes the expertise and experience that underwriters bring to the table when managing debt issuances. Although issuers may provide insights or specific preferences related to the transaction, the underwriter's counsel typically possesses specialized knowledge of the market, regulatory environment, and legal frameworks, allowing them to make informed recommendations that serve the interests of the issuer while ensuring compliance.

The concept of limited input suggests that while issuers retain some degree of involvement, particularly concerning their own specific needs and situations, the underwriters, due to their professional background, generally take the lead in selecting counsel. This division of responsibilities optimizes the efficiency and effectiveness of the bond issuance process, allowing issuers to focus on broader strategic issues while relying on the underwriter's counsel for detailed legal aspects.

In contrast, options implying full, significant, or minimal input would either overstate or understate the appropriate level of issuer involvement in this specialized area, potentially leading to inefficiencies and complicating the underwriting process.