RM 01-02-80 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

South Be d Redevelopment Commission Regular eeting - January 2, 1980 FLOOR DISCUSSIONS (continued) s. Auburn: I think the issue Ms Derbeck s bringing out is good, and I think it is omething that Mr. Butler and the rest of us ave discussed. All of us have tried to do usiness and set up the Commission in such a ay that it is not an issue. The question is, f the developer looks at that coming into outh Bend, do they automatically assume that the lace to do business is where we all do business, r what we all own, because that would give you the nside track in getting things approved by the omission. I would hope that what comes back nd what we have talked about with the Michiana itle Corporation (not doing business with evelopers), would satisfy that. r. Richard Hill: We have discussed that par- ticular issue earlier in terms of whether the cope of special counsel would include looking t what the Commission, or the action of the Commission, has taken relating to Michiana, and ave special counsel address the issue of whether at does take it out of the conflict situation. ut I would think that really what it comes down o is looking at what steps the Commission has aken and then having outside counsel determine Nether that is adequate. . Derbeck: A very important point that yor Nemeth's memorandum stressed.that this s. the potential to jeopardize some downtown velopments. Nimtz: The Commission's staff has had some cussions with the regional counsel of HUD. ically, he has said he is not getting involved local issues, that he was satisfied with the lacement of the policy, and as far as he was cerned. that ended the matter. is. Derbeck: I agree that there was not a sub - >tantial amount of money involved but I am not >ure that really makes a difference. It is the LDDearance of a conflict that makes a difference. -19-