Laserfiche WebLink
3. APP <br />IAL OF CLAIMS (Cont'd <br />REIMBURSEMENT TO REVOLVING FUND <br />Project Expenditures Account, Indiana R -57 <br />Project Expenditures Account, Indiana R -66 <br />Total <br />4. COMMUNICATION <br />a. UD letter dated April 16, 1976: This letter, over the signa <br />ure of Mr. Stephen J. Havens, Director, Community Planning and <br />Development Division; advises our business relocation claim from <br />Indiana and Michigan Electric Company for moving and related <br />xpenses, in amount of $370,444.00, has been reviewed and they <br />are unable to concur in payment of this claim without proper <br />ocumentation prepared by the L.P.A. <br />hey also suggest that.we avail ourselves of the services of a <br />onsultant capable of preparing the claim for submission to the <br />UD Area Office for concurrence, since the L.P.A. has no busi- <br />ess relocation person on staff. <br />he letter also states that our entire claim is being returned, <br />nd that upon completion of the claim preparation by our consul - <br />ant the claim.with all new documentation be resubmitted for <br />urther handling. <br />$ 1,439.75 <br />6,390.10 <br />7,829.85 <br />BUSINESS RELO- <br />CATION CLAIM, <br />INDIANA & <br />MICHIGAN ELEC- <br />TRIC CO., R -66 <br />. C. Wayne Brownell, Executive Director, Department of Redevelop - <br />nt, advised the claim amount in the HUD letter is in error and <br />e correct amount should be: $379,444.00; also, that we did not <br />ceive any enclosures with the letter. <br />r. F. Jay Nimtz, President, Redevelopment Commission, stated <br />nless there is some objection from the Commission, the Chair <br />ill direct this be given to our legal counsel, Mr. Kevin J. Butler, <br />or.discussion with Mr. Warren McGill, counsel representing Indiana <br />nd Michigan Electric Company, for re- preparation of the claim. <br />here being no objections, i:t was so ordered. <br />5. OLD BUSI <br />None <br />6. NEW 3USINESS <br />a. 4mendment to Relocation Assistance Contract with S. M. Dix & <br />ssociates, Inc., Project Indiana R -66: Mr. Brownell advised <br />hat he has talked to Mr. Warren McGill concerning the above <br />IUD letter we received on the business relocation claim from <br />ndiana & Michigan Electric Company, and also discussed the <br />etter from S. M. Dix & Associates, Inc., with whom we have a <br />ontract. This firm is a recognized consultant in this field <br />nd HUD has recommended via phone that we use S. M. Dix & Asso- <br />iates, Inc. for this matter. We would need an amendment to <br />heir contract for additional services. <br />- 3 - <br />AMENDMENT TO <br />RELOCATION <br />ASSISTANCE <br />CONTRACT WITH <br />S. M. DIX & <br />ASSOCIATES, <br />INC. APPROVED, <br />R -66 <br />