Laserfiche WebLink
6. NEWIBUSINESS (Continued) <br />a. <br />(Continued) <br />Mr. Crighton: Ken has some houses accumulated and we are in the <br />process of changing our contract form and we should be ad- <br />vertising our first contract in May. <br />Mr. Butler: Have -you had discussion with the various trades -- <br />the sub, people who are traditionally sub - contractors? <br />Mr. Crighton: Yes, I have talked with two representatives from <br />each area and they are the ones who actually brought their con- <br />cerns to me. The paper work is getting worse -- before we had <br />quite a bit, but as the year goes on, there was more and more <br />reporting forms that had to be filled out and it is just getting <br />to be quite a burden on them. Where we had agreed originally to <br />voluntarily use labor standards provisions, we knew we weren't <br />required to do it when we first started community development, <br />but it was with the hope of attracting more contractors, and it <br />has not worked. <br />Mr. Butler: Do you have any idea what is behind the policy . <br />determination to eliminate basically single family or anything <br />less:than . . . <br />r. Crighton: From what the Department of Housing and Urban <br />evelopment has told me, I have talked with Fritz Paffenbach <br />nd Eleanor Granger and other representatives down there -- <br />hat single family rehab (this is rehab, not construction) is <br />. . with continuous reduction of community development funds, <br />hey are more or less giving their tacit endorsement to dropping <br />abor standards provisions. Most, I would say 99%, of the cities <br />n the country who are using community development funds for <br />ehab are not using labor standards provisions at the present <br />ime. <br />r. Butler: The Davis -Bacon has never been a requirement for <br />he single family rehab, is that correct? <br />r. Crighton: It had been a requirement under Revenue Sharing, <br />of so much because of the type units being worked on, but be- <br />ause of the source of the funds. Revenue sharing had the <br />haracteristic of becoming city funds once they were transferred. <br />here are no regulations as far as revenue sharing is con - <br />erned even related to housing that was due to the nature <br />f the funds. <br />r. Butler: The basic policy is not to increase the competitive <br />spect other than as that might affect the cost. The primary <br />eason is to bring costs down? <br />r. Crighton: To bring costs down and to spread our dwindling <br />ccumulation further. <br />.hair: To try to make the money go further. <br />-10- <br />