Laserfiche WebLink
South B�nd. Redevelopment Commission <br />Special Meeting - April 20, 1978 <br />6. NEWIBUSINESS,(Continued <br />Mr. Harcus: HUD just keeps sending me different sections. I talked <br />with Mr. Dew and said .. "Sir, you have 45 days from my entry of a <br />request to respond, you are obliged to do so, please respond..in <br />writing sir." He said: "I will endeavor to do so ".. So I am <br />seeking a response from HUD, according to this 45 days requirement. <br />Mr. Dew's other threat is, "when we come up and _audit you we are <br />going to find you in non- compliance ". My resonse has been.. "Sir, <br />you have audited us for the last three years, and you have been the <br />Auditor and have not found us in non-compliance. I wish to be ad- <br />vised in writing promptly so that I can go to my Redevelopment <br />Commission, have this resolved, and expedite the contracts ". <br />So I am waiting for a wage determination request to be answered by <br />HUD. <br />Mr. Robinson: I would like to make one other comment, if I may, and <br />then I will give up in support of Mr. Harcus. At various times we have <br />received BNA reports on scattered site housing, it could be one or <br />two, or whatever, and in the past, Mr. Dew has even put his sig- <br />nature on the thing, and it was prevailing rates of the area. Why <br />he is taking a position now all of a sudden, I do not know, and I <br />am with Mr. Harcus, if he sends a letter to us, that is one thing, <br />until he (Mr. Dew) does, as far as I am concerned, we will stick <br />with our decision rendered in the past, and they will pay the pre- <br />vailing rate, or they won't do it. <br />Mr. Harcus: I have even pointed out to Mr. Dew Sir that we have <br />letters showing that in recent years they have ruled on a specific <br />wage on grant rehabilitation action in the Model Cities Program, <br />which is similar to ours. This morning he said, "I don't care about <br />that, go see your attorneys and get their interpretation of that <br />phrase ". <br />Mr. Butler: We have made an interpretation of that in the past, as <br />long ago as three or four years, and our interpretation has con- <br />sistently been: 1. that we do have the latitude, it is a local <br />option, and we have opted in favor of the prevailing wage rate; <br />and secondly, with respect to the eight units in a program, as we <br />are administering it now, we generally have eight or more individual <br />residential units submitted or offered for bid, therefore, we auto- <br />matically fall under the eight unit provision. <br />Mr. Nimtz: Of course the other threat Kevin, is .. "we are going to <br />find you in non - compliance when we come down to audit you ", that <br />is the difficulty. <br />