SM 05-09-75 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

4. COMMUNICATIONS (Cont_' their claim, Mr. Armstrong stated they can find no basis to change the decision made by HUD in their letter of February 16, 1974. A review was made by the HUD Relocation Specialist and the guidelines on the Direct Property Loss Payment set forth in HUD Regulations, Section 42.70, are unchanged. The guidelines state, the amount of the Direct Property Loss is based on the lesser of the Fair Market Value for continued use on the esti- mated moving expenses as determined by the 'A enc . The letter states the LPA has conformed to HUD guidelines and has made every effort to make the maximum relocation payment allowable in this case. Thus, HUD does not concur in their request for payment of $68,671.75. HUD authorizes payment of $47,488.00, as approved by the LPA. This is to constitute payment in full. Under established grievance procedures, Mr. Armstrong informed Mr. Poledor that he has the right to seek Judicial review. f. HUD letter dated April 30, 1975: This letter, over the signa- ture of Mr. James E. Armstrong, Area Director, advises the Department of Housing and Urban Development is responsible for assuring that local agencies carrying out HUD assisted activities involving displacement, comply with the Uniform Relocation Act, and the Department's implementing regulations. To accomplish this purpose, their Relocation Specialist made a relocation progress and performance evaluation of our Urban Renewal Projects, Indiana R -66 and R -57, and N.D.P. Project Indiana A -10, on April 17 and 18, 1975. Consultation with our Relocation Staff and a random sampling of our relocation files and records was made in conjunction with this evaluation. The evaluation included a determination as to the degree of compliance by the LPA with the items and conditions of the contract, and with the pertinent regulations, policies, and procedures of the Department of Housing and Urban Development governing the Relocation Assistance Program. The evaluation revealed that our Relocation Assistance Program "is being carried out in an acceptable manner." g. HUD Regional Office letter dated May 2, 1975: This letter, over the signature of Mr. Richard A. Kaiser, Assistant Re- gional Administrator for Community Planning and Development, Region V, Chicago Office, advises Requisition No. 8 for Pro - ject Capital Grant Progress Payment, for Contract No. Indiana R- 66(LG) that was transmitted with our letter of March 21, 1975, has been approved, in the amount of $3,384,012.00. The approved amount represents payments of 95% of the earned grant. - 10 - RELOCATION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM EVALUATED CONTRACT NO. IND. R- 66(LG) GRANTS APPROVED