My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
RM 08-04-78
sbend
>
Public
>
Redevelopment Commission
>
Minutes
>
1970-1979
>
1978
>
RM 08-04-78
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/5/2012 5:04:04 PM
Creation date
9/24/2012 3:16:42 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
10
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
COMMISSIPNER'S REGULAR MEETING <br />Friday, ugust 4, 1978 <br />7. PROGRESS REPORTS (Continued) <br />—T <br />Mr. iggins: Do you know of your knowledge whether or not the contractors <br />invo ved have made any arrangements or agreements in terms of wages that <br />were reflected in their bids? <br />Mr. Orownell: I am not aware of this, perhaps. Mr. Harcus can help you. <br />Mr. arcus: We opened the quotations last Friday, and Mr. Schaller says <br />they are in line with prior estimates and with. prior bids. There appears <br />to b no significant change in the quotation figures. <br />Mr. rownell: I noticed in one case, where we rebid the contract without <br />requ ring the wage rates the prices went up, now down. <br />Mr. iggins: I know that the concern here has been that the wage rates being <br />paid are responsible, and are in line with wage rates prevailing in the <br />community. The Bacon -Davis arrangement merely gives us some kind of an <br />acce ted. standard to peg these things on; without it, we are wandering around <br />in n)-man's land. If these contractor's have incorporated into their bids <br />payi g that, or a previous standard, as long as it is a fair wage rate and <br />reas nable, I don't believe we have any quarrels with it. The whole idea <br />here is to make sure that this happened. If it has happened, fine, that <br />sati fies our concern. <br />Mr. kobinson: How many projects are we talking about? <br />Mr. arcus: You have a one bulk bid of approximately ten homes for all <br />four components (electrical, heating, plumbing, and general construction). You <br />have two that were rebid for electrical and they were about eight'.or ten <br />hous s each; so you have three packages coming before you next session. <br />Two are electrical, and one is a composite of four different traits. <br />Mr. iggins: So, to your knowledge and understanding, none of these antici- <br />pate paying less than the previous standard than they had been paying? <br />Mr. arcus: To my knowledge, no sir. My knowledge is that the prices appear <br />comparable to what we have been paying all along. We also have another one <br />by tie way, beyond this, that is bid with prevailing wages, a commercial rate <br />of'prevailing wages which is not a single home, but a construction business. <br />Mr. rownell: I have talked with Mr. Ellison about getting this letter from <br />HUD, and the letter has not yet arrived. Mr. Ellison called me yesterday <br />tryi g to find out the reasons why. We would like to have the admission that <br />Mr. Dew received over the telephone, in writing, over HUD's area manager's <br />Signature for the record, because we don't want any more problems. <br />Mr. arcus: By the way, this Southeast package of twelve homes or more was <br />one 3f the original tabled items from back in April, and if we delay it <br />this time, it may take longer than six weeks because of the prior initial <br />dela . <br />ma <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.