My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
RM 08-19-77
sbend
>
Public
>
Redevelopment Commission
>
Minutes
>
1970-1979
>
1977
>
RM 08-19-77
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/5/2012 5:12:18 PM
Creation date
9/24/2012 1:00:01 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
15
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
South end Redevelopment Commission <br />Regula Meeting <br />August 19, 1977 <br />3. <br />4 <br />IMS (Continued) <br />REDEVELOPMENT REVOLVING FUND <br />Pa roll: 7 -16 -77 thru 7 -29 -77 $ 2,734.04 <br />International Business Machines Corporation 247.35 <br />International Business Machines Corporation 82,20 <br />Os co Drugs 21.56 <br />Po tmaster 23.35 <br />Si ger General Tire, Inc. 16.50 <br />Xe ox Corporation 11.80 <br />Mr . Wendy Winters Thornton 10.00 <br />a. <br />[PIN <br />TOTAL $ 39146.80 <br />GRAND TOTAL $10,774.69 <br />IMUNICATIONS <br />Letter dated August 10 , 1977, from Thomas A. Oesterling to the - <br />Hickey Company reference the inspection of urban Renewal Project <br />Indiana R -66 Phase III Contract #5 as part of Contract'3 year <br />guarantee against defective material or workmanship. <br />Mr. Nimtz requested that this be received and placed on file <br />to wait further report from Hickey Company. <br />Letter dated August 15, 1977, from Mrs. Kathy Skiba of Legal <br />Services Program of Northern Indiana, Inc. regarding further <br />complaint from Mrs. Frances Jackson about work completed on <br />her home five years ago under Project E -5. <br />Mr. Brownell explained that her complaint was based on a paint <br />job that was done five years ago, to which she complained was <br />poor work, upon our inspection, it was decided that this was <br />just normal wear on the paint. She also complained of the lack <br />of gutters and downspouts, which was taken care of by Change Order <br />#1, which eliminated the gutters and downspouts in favor of needed <br />electrical work, agreed to in 1972, as signed by her, and therefore, <br />not a valid complaint. She now has new complaints about electrical <br />work, roof trim, and other defects not explained. Mr. Nimtz directed <br />this be received and referred to legal counsel. <br />�3 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.