My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
No. 0033 the form of contract used by the Interstate Demolition Corporation with such purchasers both as to the nature of work to be done and wages to be paid to employees was submitted and examined by the members of RC
sbend
>
Public
>
Redevelopment Commission
>
Resolutions
>
No. 0033 the form of contract used by the Interstate Demolition Corporation with such purchasers both as to the nature of work to be done and wages to be paid to employees was submitted and examined by the members of RC
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/18/2012 4:29:11 PM
Creation date
8/24/2012 2:41:56 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
2
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
I. RESOLUTION N0: 33 Continued <br />Mr. Baer, attorney for the Commission' advised that under the <br />original contract entered into with the Interstate Demolition <br />Corporation, dated the 20th day of April, 1961, there were no <br />provis ons authorizing sales 'of this type, except that thecon- <br />tracto had the right to sub - contract work with the written <br />approval of. the Redevelopment Commission. He also stated that <br />approx mately'501dwellings had been sold'by the Interstate <br />Demoli ion Corporation under the foregoing arrangement, all <br />without approval of the'Commission, the contractor taking the' <br />position that the purchasers were not sub- contractors, but <br />purchasers of salvage materials. Mr. Baer stated that An his <br />opinion such sales constituted sub - contracting and,that in'the <br />future written requests for` the approval of the Commission should <br />be required from the contractor before authorizing him to enter <br />into any agreement with individuals for the demolition of dwellings. <br />Mr. Baer further stated that since the present procedure of contractor <br />consti uted a violation under the contract, on June 1, 1361 the <br />Inters ate Demolition Corporation was advised in writing that its <br />action5 were being reviewed by the Commission. A copy of the letter <br />sent on June 1, 1 61 to the Inters tate'Demolition Corporation <br />was s mitted to the Commissioners.for examination and ordered made <br />a part of these minutes. <br />After a full.discussion of the procedure heretofore followed by <br />the contract or, the Commission decided that this manner of demolition <br />was in violation of the letter and intent of the Contract.aind should <br />cease. '.an motion duly made," seconded And unanimously passed, it was <br />R <br />P <br />0 <br />C <br />t <br />t <br />;SOLVED: That the Interstate Demolition Corporation be <br />:rmitted'to proceed with contracts of sale now in effect, <br />which the Executive Secretary of the Redevelopment <br />)mmission had notice at the date of this meeting..)That <br />ze authority to proceed is given` subject' to each purchaser <br />zalif -ying as a sub -- contractor and complying with all the <br />arms and con.'.. itio- is with which any sub- contractor or, <br />iterstate Demolition Corporation is charged. <br />-2- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.