Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRM 05-06-77SOUTH BEND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING May 6, 1P77 10:00 a. . Presidin_ Officer: F. Jay Nimtz, President 1. ROLLI CALL 1200 County -City Building 217 West Jefferson Blvd. South Bend, IN 46601 Commissioners Mr. F. Jay Nimtz, President Present Mr. Mr. Donald A. Wiggins, Vice President Robert J. Cira, Assistant Secretary Mr. Lloyd E. Robinson, Sr., Member Leqal Counsel Mr. Mr. Kevin J. Butler George Patton News Media Mr. Ms. Dave Anderson, WNDU Reporter Jeanne Derbeck, South Bend Tribune Mr. Les Howard, WNW Photographer Others Present Ms.:Janet S. Allen Com unity Development Sta f Mr. Keith Crighton Mr. John E. Davis Mr. James Johnson Mr. Richard E. Pfeifer Mr. Ken Schaller LPA Staff Mr. C. Wayne Brownell Ms. Gertrude Barth Mr. Marc Brammer Ms. Sue Ragland 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES On otion by Mr. Wiggins, seconded by Mr. Cira and carried, the Min tes of the Regular Meeting of April 15, 1977 were approved as mailed. 3. APPOOVAL OF CLAIMS On otion by Mr. Wiggins, seconded by Mr. Robinson and carried, the claims in the amount of $14,719.10 were approved as submitted and ere allowed and ordered to be paid. Lis of claims approved this date as follows: MINUTES OF 4 -15 -77 APPROVED CLAIMS APPROVED -- $14,719.10 3. APPROVAL OF CLAIMS (Continued) PROJECT EXPENDITURE ACCOUNT, INDIANA R -66 Abstract & Title Corp. Abstract Co. of St. Joseph County South Bend Tribune Clyde E. Williams & Associates Knepp Studio, Inc. S. Bend Exterminating Co. George A. Wing O'Neal Trucking Co. Total BUREAU OF HOUSING #312 LOAN Midwest Alunimum Siding Co. - Jovice Meader Total BUREAU OF HOUSING - FEDERAL ASSISTANCE GRANT Ted ombs, Inc. - Contract #16 OF S. Total DCIICIM nDMChIT nTCTDTrT f ADTTAI Gllnln nd Exterminating Co. REDEVELOPMENT REVOLVING FUND Total Payroll: April 9 through April 22, 1977 Kevin J. Butler Business Systems Business Systems Credit Bureau of S. Bend - Mishawaka Comet Car Wash Hammes N.D. Book Store Indiana & Michigan Electric Co. I.B.M. Corp. Maki lski Art Shop Postmaster Stan & Ted's Lawnmower Shop Xerox Corp. Amoco Oil Co. Total GRAND TOTAL -2- $ 588.00 72.50 9.34 424.09 110.00 30.00 500.00 6,767.59 $ 8,501.52 $ 2,068.00 $ 2,068.00 $ 580.20 $ 580.20 $ 30.00 $ 30.00 $ 2,875.78 200.00 17.91 32.60 5.00 4.80 4.63 7.23 279.36 18.00 6.92 33.05 1.12 52.98 $ 3,539.38 $14,719.10 4. COMMONICATIONS a. Letter dated April 19, 1977 signed by Michael H. Setzer of rans o, re: public transportation plans in connection with the proposed mini -mall. Mr. Brownell indicated that this letter is quite long, and that the writer has indicated he would like to have us consider his letter. Perhaps writing him in return, to arrange a meeting so that matters can be discussed between our commission and the board in charge of the transportation function. Mr. Brownell suggested that the commission give some direction, if they wish CWB to write Mr. Setzer, and tell him anything the commission might want him to think about that hasn't been mentioned here, preparatory to getting together and talking about it. I� c. he Chair: Let's talk about this informally. It has been my nderstanding that this is one plan that has been recommended. t is not our plan, but it is a recommended plan. We have aken no official action on it and I think our attitude should e that we would be pleased, either as a commission, or as ndividuals, to sit down and to discuss their interest, desires, roblems, suggestions, etc. r. Brownell: The other thing that brings this up is that the us company's lease is to run out in June, and we need to give ttention to this shortly, probably at the next meeting. he Chair directed that this letter be received and placed on ile, and that the director reply to Mr. Setzer in the tenor hat had been discussed. etter dated April 21, 1977 from Lloyd S. Taylor, Vice President t. Joseph Bank & Trust Co., re: inspection of the Whitcomb & Keller Building and Certificate of Completion furnished to the (bank. r. Brownell: I have arranged with our architect to inspect he building on Tuesday (May 9) and have arranged with Mr. aylor for one of their people to meet the architect and take im through the building. This way he can make this inspection reliminary to having a report come to the commission. If that s satisfactory, you could approve the certificate of completion. e Chair directed that this letter be received and placed on file. etter from Patrick McMahon, Director of Public Works, dated pril 22, 1977, re: Karl King Towers; 600 E. Monroe St., outh Bend, IN, FHA Project No. 073- 35217- PM -L8. C. Wayne rownell read Mr. McMahon's directive noting that "sanitary ewers and city water are now available at the above referenced ite and the project shall be allowed to hook up to said acilities" etc. He also noted that our plan requires Re- evelopment to build the sidewalks, but "we can't do that for robably a year until they get that building finished." it directed this letter be received and placed on file. -3- LETTER RE: MINI -MALL TRANSPORTA- TION PLANS FROM M. SETZER OF TRANSPO LETTER RE: INSPECTION OF WHITCOMB & KELLER BLDG. & CERT. OF COMPLETION FROM L. TAYLOR LETTER RE: KARL KING TOWERS FROM P. McMAHON 4. COMMUNICATIONS (Continued) d. etter dated April 28, 1977 from Thomas P. O'Malley, Attorney LETTER RE dvisor HUD Area Office, re: Karl King Towers -- approval of HUD.APPROVAL onsors of the Project. C. Wayne Brownell read this letter OF.KARL KING and explained that we needed such a letter because the developers PROJECT for this had not been approved up until this time by HUD. DEVELOPERS he Chair indicated that this again is one of the HUD regulations hich requires a lot of paper work as to their financial ability, background, experience. There being no objections, it was directed that this letter be received and placed on file. e. Letter dated May 4 , 1977 from Dr. George A. Wing concerning his ACCEPT DR. resignation and termination of consulting contract with the WING'S Redevelopment Commission. Mr. Brownell read this letter in RESIGNATION its entirety. & TERMINATE CONSULTING The Chair: We are certainly going to miss Dr. Wing. The re- CONTRACT lationship has been excellent between him, the Commission and 4 -30 -77 the Mayor, and we regret very much losing him. But, of course, this is one of the opportunities that come to a gentleman who has good background and qualifications -- he moves to larger and lustier fields. We shall certainly miss him. Mr. Brownell: I presume we should do more than just place this on file shouldn't we? Mr. Wiggins: I move we accept Dr. Wing's letter and concur in his request for cancellation of his consulting contract, effective April 30, 1977. Motion was seconded by Mr. Robinson and carried. 5. OLD BUSINESS a. Commission approval of changes to be made in General Conditions for the Rehabilitation of Real Property as requested in Commis- sion meeting of April 1, 1977 as it concerns t t f h f i lieu of sure con- rac or o cas sum o money n .. Brownell read the letter from Keith Crighton, and also an attached letter from Attorney Ed Chapleau. e The Chair asked Mr. Crighton if he cared to add anything to this reading, to which he replied that he did not, but he would like to thank Attorney Chapleau for his cooperation in getting this back to us right away and that "heldi.d a good job." Kevin Butler was asked if he had any comments, and he replied that he had reviewed it at Ed's request, and Mr. Butler also stated that Mr. Chapleau did an excellent job. Upon request by the Chair for a motion, Mr. Robinson moved for approval of this change order, seconded by Mr. Cira and carried. -4- CHANGES IN GENERAL CONDITIONS FOR REHAB OF REAL PROPERTY RE DEPOSIT BY CONTRACTOR OF CASH IN LIEU OF SURITY BOND 5. OLDIBUSINESS (Continued) b. Mall drinking faucets replacement. C. Wayne Brownell suggested that the Commission might be interested in hearing about this since summer is coming up. Mr. Ward came to South Bend and met with Jim Zakrocki of the Hickey Company, and they have taken the drinking fountain off the Mall in front of what was the LaSalle Hotel. They are going to furnish to us new parts for all five drinking fountains. They found the difficulty to be with the design of those parts, plus the fact that the bolts, or screws, holding the casing to the concrete were not holding. As they came loose, it was "like the motor mount on your car coming loose." Nothing else fit, so they are going to replace all the parts on all five drinking fountains, per a report from Mr. Zakrocki. r. Cira: What is the future then, if they have any more problems? s it going to be easy to get parts so we don't have any more roblems? . Brownell: We don't know what the future is. We have been ree years now fighting about this -- to get these fixed. , I think we will get them fixed and, hopefully, they will rk. Ms. Derbeck: You say you are going to remove the fountain in front of the LaSalle Hotel? Mr. Brownell replied that it has already been removed, whereupon Ms. Derbeck asked "Will it be replaced ?" The Chair: They have taken it apart to see what the difficulty is. . . Mr. Brownell: I am reporting it because I didn't want anyone to think it had been stolen. The Chair: Robert, actually this is a board of public works responsibility and jurisdiction, but we have found out what the difficulty is and the contractor is willing to go ahead and do this, and we said, "go ahead and do it." . Derbeck: Would it be under warranty? Mr. Brownell: Yes, it is under warranty. We don't have to pay for it. Chair: Ok, that's good news. Proceed. 6. NEWIBUSINESS REPLACEMENT OF FIVE DRINKING FOUNTAINS ON THE MALL a. Commission approval to eliminate Part II, General Conditions, ELIMINATION Labor Standards Provisions of Contract for Rehabilitation of OF LABOR Real Property, as outlined in letter from Mr. Keith Crighton STANDARDS and letter from Legal Counsel. PROVISIONS ON REHAB TABLED TO _5. 5/20/77 6. NEW IUSINESS (Continued) a. (Continued) W. Brownell read the letter from Mr. Crighton and also the etter from Daniel B. Bowman, Director of Housing Production and ortgage Credit Division, HUD to Mr. Morris Kaufman, Emerson eighborhood Code Enforcement Office, Gary, Indiana. These etters are regarding Davis -Bacon requirements for rehabilitation ontractors involved in rehab of single - family detached homes nd residential property for use of eight or less families. eference was also made to a letter from Charles S. Leone, eputy City Attorney of the City of South Bend. Mr. Brownell hen asked Mr. Crighton if he would like to add to this infor- ation, and Mr. Crighton replied in the affirmative. !r. Crighton: Just briefly, a very important part of our com- unity development program is the self - evaluative aspect of it. n other words, we have the ability to change areas that have roven to be inefficient or unnecessary. This proposal is part f that self - evaluation process. I suppose the major points are hat we will be able to realize a 15 -20% savings on each contract; nd we should be able to further improve our production. We are rocessing about two hundred applications now and it's very dif- icult for us to get all of these processed and completed and ave them contracted, if we are unable to have contractors bid. n actual dollars taxpayer savings, on this budget alone, would e about $83,000 this year. By eliminating the labor standards rovision we should be able to realize that savings. In other ords, that would be money we would be able to put back into the ommunity. I realize that this may be viewed as a somewhat rastic proposal, but I do. firmly believe it is a necessary one. e have had a lot of probliems with contractors, as you know, nd I believe the cash bond aspect will help, and I believe the abor standards provision (elimination of) will also help sub - tantially. The paper work has gotten increasingly more diffi- ult, more complex, over the past year for contractors, and this ill help them out quite a bit. hair: The doctors tell me the same thing about filling out apers for Medicare. They spend more time doing paper work than hey do treating people. Does the Commission have any questions? Ir. Robinson: Yes. I don't totally agree with that position. [ think all you are going to do is open up Pandora's box and get nore unqualified contractors when you do not have a provision For protection in the Labor Acts and things like this. I don't think what you are trying to achieve is going to benefit the )eople in the community who are supposed to be getting the help. Jhen you are talking about eight or ten family residents, I igree. Now, at the same time, you are also talking about con - ;racts by block, so many houses to a block. To me, again, it could be interpretation -- to me, this could be part of that 8 )r 10 families just because of the way you are issuing the con ;ract, in a block grant. Whenever you eliminate some provision, 20 6. NEWIBUSINESS (Continued) a. (Continued) all you are doing is opening up the door to give these poor people who are basically having enough problems anyway. . . all they will get is a cheaper, shoddier job by people coming in here. The cash bond I agree with -- but the rest of it, I think you are just defeating the purpose of the cash bond and you are not doing the people of the community a service. Mr. Crighton: If I might respond to that Commissioner Robinson, the HUD regulations under that Section 605 refers to the actual dwellings being worked on, not the size of the contract. I disagree insofar as we will be getting unreliable contractors. I think that the cash bond and the new bid procedure will essentially be the same as we have now -- we have had a re- latively low contractor participation and I don't think it would get much worse. I think that the labor standards provi- sions . . we have been following them on a voluntary basis and it is costing us quite a bit of money. I am making this pro- posed change with the endorsement of the Department of Housing and Urban Development and the National Association of Housing and Redevelopment. They firmly agree that since our community development funds are less and less every year, we have to make them go further. We have to be careful about how we spend our money. It is getting to be a very difficult problem. Mr. Robinson: Ok, you said paper work -- Davis Bacon isn't that much more paper work than what normal paper work is because of HUD money. I don't necessarily always agree with HUD, I can assure you, and to me, if you are going to open up the possibility that you are going to get more people -- let's say contractors that to me aren't as qualified as the larger type contractor -- then what you are going to do is eliminate that more reliable type contractor of the community from even getting involved. I thought that was the idea when you came in here before and you were talking about using a block bid process so you could get the more reliable, more reputable contractor, to bid on these projects. I don't think you have given it enough time to see if it is going to work because we haven't hardly instituted the block process. They did once, but then they stopped, and you went on an individual dwelling basis after that. I think we ought to stop and not be pushed into something real quick, and see how it is going to work on a block bid type thing, and see what kind of contractors you get.to bid on this work. I am interested more in seeing that the people of the community get a better job instead of a lousier job. Mr. Crighton: Well, we are too sir, but we are also interested in terms of how far our money will go and if we can realize -- say a saving of 183,000 this year -- that is a rather substantial saving. -7- 6. NEW BUSINESS (Continued) a. (Continued) Mr. Robinson: I understand, but if you are going to take the money and put it in with someone not qualified really to do the work, you might as well throw it out the window. I would rather have them spend a little more money and get a qualified job that is good for the inhabitant, than have a whole bunch of jobs just because you want to scatter the money around. I don't think that's the answer. Mr. Crighton: The term "qualified contractor" is kind of an arbitrary point to assume. We really can't say whether a con- tractor is qualified or unqualified. If he's got a good record and a good Dun & Brad, and he's able to provide us with hazard insurance, he can bid on any of this work. Chair: Apparently you've been getting some ripples and complaints from contractors about the amount of paper work. Is that right? Mr. Crighton: Yes. The Labor Standards Provisions requires them to submit weekly and monthly reports and they have gotten more complex. It is taking a lot of time and they have ob- viously been passing costs on to us. Chair: What are these reports, what do they consist of? Mr. Crighton: They are primarily manpower utilization reports which they submit to the Equal Employment Officer, Mr. Alford (upstairs). This is a requirement under Section 8 of Revenue Sharing, but it is not a requirement under Community Develop - ment. The fact is, I suppose a very important aspect of this would be that, (I believe it-was February 17 of this year) seven unions signed an agreement with the National Association of Housing and Redevelopment officials to work at rates less than the pre- vailing wage rate under Section 8 housing. Section 8 is re- quired, keep that in mind, to use prevailing wage rates, but because of the problems they have had with construction, the unions negotiated with NAHRO and they did reach an agreement. I believe as of two days ago, six of the seven agreements were signed. What it will mean is that they are reducing the rate by 15 -20% in Section 8 housing. All the major unions were in- volved. Mr. Wiggins: Davis -Bacon establishes the wage rate per hour that is paid to the various trades, is that right? Mr. Crighton: Right, as far as prevailing rates are concerned, yes. Mr. Wiggins: Well, it establishes what the prevailing rates are. Mr. Robinson: On a federally funded project, right. 6. NEW BUSINESS (Continued) a. (Continued) Mr. Wiggins: How big an area does this cover -- and how do these rates compare with the . . . or, how are they obtained? Is this an average of what is being paid in the area? Mr. Robinson: Not an average, it is a survey conducted by the Division of Labor. There is also a survey conducted by HUD and we just got through having one of those surveys here on multi- family dwelling and the residential field here. After extensive research and a heck of a lot of leg work by a few of us, we proved that at that time, HUD came in here and we got a fast shuffle and we proved we were doing the majority of the work. Evidently since we proved it and got the Davis -Bacon rates es- tablished again - prevailing in our area and St. Joseph County, to me they are now trying to come back at us again from another angle. You bet I'm against it, because I represent a lot of people that for years and years and years have fought like crazy to get rates up so they could enjoy a standard of living to be equal to the average citizen in the community, and now they are trying to do something else and I am against it, period. I realize maybe you're not supposed to show partiality in your job, but we are all human and I sure do. Ok? The Chair recognized Keith Crighton who wished to respond to the above. Mr. Crighton: We are not attempting to effect multi - family con- struction or rehab, we are not attempting to effect construction of new units. The fact is, this is the only section in all the federally - funded programs in which prevailing rates do not apply. This would be the rehab of single family units. It does not amount to . . . for this year my budget will amount to about $450,000 in this area that will be affected. This is hardly a substantial portion of the construction that goes on in this area. Our participation of organized labor in our contracts has been between 25 -30% in the past six years, whether we had a prevailing rate or not. It made no difference, we had organized labor in our programs. Many of our sub - contractors have used organized labor, but we have never had an increase or decrease whether we use the prevailing rate or not. Mr. Wiggins: How would this operate in respect to Mr. Alford's office? Would he be out of the picture in terms of this type contract Keith? Mr. Crighton: Only in part Commissioner. We would still retain the affirmative action monitoring, employment standards, working conditions, and that sort of thing. It is the money end of it that we are primarily concerned with here. It will reduce the contractor paper work by about 50 %. Mr. Butler: Keith, when is the other program, the block bidding by individuals for each item, when is that going to start? 6. NEWIBUSINESS (Continued) a. (Continued) Mr. Crighton: Ken has some houses accumulated and we are in the process of changing our contract form and we should be ad- vertising our first contract in May. Mr. Butler: Have -you had discussion with the various trades -- the sub, people who are traditionally sub - contractors? Mr. Crighton: Yes, I have talked with two representatives from each area and they are the ones who actually brought their con- cerns to me. The paper work is getting worse -- before we had quite a bit, but as the year goes on, there was more and more reporting forms that had to be filled out and it is just getting to be quite a burden on them. Where we had agreed originally to voluntarily use labor standards provisions, we knew we weren't required to do it when we first started community development, but it was with the hope of attracting more contractors, and it has not worked. Mr. Butler: Do you have any idea what is behind the policy . determination to eliminate basically single family or anything less:than . . . r. Crighton: From what the Department of Housing and Urban evelopment has told me, I have talked with Fritz Paffenbach nd Eleanor Granger and other representatives down there -- hat single family rehab (this is rehab, not construction) is . . with continuous reduction of community development funds, hey are more or less giving their tacit endorsement to dropping abor standards provisions. Most, I would say 99%, of the cities n the country who are using community development funds for ehab are not using labor standards provisions at the present ime. r. Butler: The Davis -Bacon has never been a requirement for he single family rehab, is that correct? r. Crighton: It had been a requirement under Revenue Sharing, of so much because of the type units being worked on, but be- ause of the source of the funds. Revenue sharing had the haracteristic of becoming city funds once they were transferred. here are no regulations as far as revenue sharing is con - erned even related to housing that was due to the nature f the funds. r. Butler: The basic policy is not to increase the competitive spect other than as that might affect the cost. The primary eason is to bring costs down? r. Crighton: To bring costs down and to spread our dwindling ccumulation further. .hair: To try to make the money go further. -10- 6. NEW IBUSINESS (Continued) a. (Continued) Mr. Crighton: If we can do this, we will be able to have $83,000 (18.5 %) -- that's an approximation, obviously -- that we can put into more homes. We're talking about saving the taxpayers' money. Mr. Robinson: Who are the taxpayers, Mr. Crighton? Mr. Crighton: We are, sir. Mr. Robinson: Ok, you bet! Mr. Crighton: I like to save myself as much money as possible. Mr. Robinson: I don't. Not when you are beating the poor guy down and making his wage scale and his standard of living lesser and lesser. I'm against it. Ms. Derbeck: Could I ask a question? The main thing at issue here is basically that contractors may hire people at a lower age scale? Mr. Robinson: That's right. The basic issue is that now we have a wage scale established that the people can have a decent living standard for them and their families, and now we are trying to reduce it. You know we are using a lot of tax dollars by all of us who pay taxes, and to me you are supposed to be improving the quality of life instead of lessening it Ms. Derbeck: Can they reduce it to any amount the contractor wants to? I mean, there is no minimum there? Mr. Robinson: Sure. Ms. Derbeck: If he can get someone to work for a dollar an hour, he can? Mr. Robinson: That is correct. Mr. Butler: Fair labor standards is the only thing that would apply, basically, that would be the only thing that would apply? Mr. Robinson: That is correct. Chair: Woudln't the minimum wage apply? Mr. Butler: The fair labor standards is the only thing that would affect it. Ms. Derbeck: Why would that cut down paper work? Mr. Wiggins: There wouldn't be the required reporting under Davis - Bacon. -- how much of a break you would get. Let's assume the contractor paid the same wages and eliminated the reporting, how much of a saving do you suppose that would be in the contract price? -11- 6. NEW BUSINESS (Continued) a. (Continued) Mr. Robinson: Well, you don't know. You can assume that a lot of it would go in the pocket and they are still cheating the guys that are working. Mr. Cira: I don't think that anyone who works for a contractor though, Lloyd, is going to work for a dollar, or two or three an hour. Mr. Robinson: Bob, you are going to get people who are working in a plant. They already have a steady wage coming in from one entity and then they are going to be going out here for hunting money, you know, other things -- and they are beating the guy who doesn't have a job out of a job -- the so- called "Moonlighting." Ms. Allen: Then he has a better standard of living. Mr. Robinson: Yes, the moonlighter does, but he is cheating the poor guy who doesn't have a job to start with Ms. Allen -- out of a job. Ms. Allen: But if that man was good, it seems to me he ought to have a job. Mr. Cira: I really and truly don't agree with you Lloyd. I don't totally agree with you. Mr. Robinson: Would you want someone working on your home who is qualified or would you rather have one they pick up off the street because he's cheap? Ms. Allen: There are quite a few men who are qualified and haven't been able to find jobs, and if they could spread this out a little bit more and get more done . Mr. Robinson: Who establishes qualifications? Ms. Allen: I would think the Department of Housing and Urban Development. Mr. Robinson: Huh! That's like the blind leading the blind, Ms. Allen. How many of them are qualified craftsmen . ok. . . Mr. Wiggins: I wonder if it would be possible to continue this and I would like to see a little more breakdown -- the size of the contractors, the number of employees they have, the qualifi- cations of the employees, this sort of thing -- to determine, to a degree, what has been happening now and on that we might be able to base some kind of projection as to what Keith thinks will happen. . . has a fair chance of happening. I don't think anyone in this -- at least speaking for myself -- wants to establish any kind of a program that is going to result in a lessening of -12- 6. NEW �USINESS (Continued) a. (Continued) eople's standards. I am sure no,one wants to be involved in a rogram that could have as a result, a poor job kind of thing, here the work that is being done for these people is of a poor uality and won't hold up. We have had enough problems in that rea with the wages we've paid and the contractors that have een hired. r. Cira: It's going to create more interest with the smaller ontractor. It's been obvious that the larger contractor is not nterested in doing this kind of work. r. Wiggins: I don't know how people can be attracted to making ess money. It just always seemed to go the other way around to e. If you wanted to attract more people, you raised the ante -- ou didn't put the carrot further out ahead of the donkey. The onkey is going to quit after awhile. ir: What is the pleasure of the commission? r. Butler: Could I ask another question of Keith? Have you hecked into the possibility of - since this is not a requirement n this area, the C. D. monies for the single family rehab -- ave you checked into the possibility of our voluntarily requiring he prevailing wage rate to be paid by the contractors, and at he same time, eliminating perhaps some of the (and I have no dea what the reporting requirements are), but maybe returning o the reporting system of a couple of years ago, if that was dequate. Obviously you couldn't eliminate reporting altogether ecause we have seen what occurs when there is no reporting, no heck at all. r. Wiggins: In that same light, Counselor, would it be possible or us to establish the wage rate? r. Butler: In effect, we would state the . . . r. Wiggins: We would establish a minimum wage rate. r. Butler: . . . that would correspond to what the commission elt would be reasonable. Ir. Wiggins: I certainly wouldn't want to be a part of getting ome cut - throat competition going here. hair: Hearing no motion, the Chair would direct that this be laced on the table and that it be placed on the agenda for the ext meeting . . . for further investigation and report. b. ommission authorization to request consideration for setting ip an Urban Redevelopment Fund, with letter to members of the ommon Council. C. Wayne Brownell indicated that the letter e prepared was to the Honorable Members of the Common Council, A. al. He read the balance of the letter and the Chair asked if this is part of the HUD regulations? -13- AUTHORIZATION GIVEN TO REQUEST SETTING UP URBAN REDEVELOPMENT FUND 6. NEW BUSINESS (Continued) b. (Continued) C. Mr. Brownell: No, this is simply a matter that I have dis- covered that in the revolving fund there is $10,000. They have been asking people on our staff to do work for the city which we can't do and pay them with federal money. So, I wanted them to authorize the reinstatement of the Urban Re- development Fund so that.we can do this work for the city and pay them out of local monies. Chair: Kevin, is a motion necessary that we approve this action? Mr. Butler: At the point that the commission wants to authorize staff to involve themselves in this, you are going to need action by the commission. C. Wayne Brownell: I would like authorization today if I possibly can get it. Mr. Wiggins moved for authorization to request consideration for setting up an Urban Redevelopment Fund, with letter to members of the Common Council. Mr. Cira seconded and motion carried. Change Order #1 to Rehabilitation Contract SECD /PR /CS -6/47, with Slatile Roofing and Sheet Metal Company, in the Southeast Com- munity Development Program for increase in contract amount of 65.00 and an amended contract total of $2,951.00. Mr.'Brownell: stated that "it appears that they have an addition of $350.00 to patch and waterproof 151 square feet on the southeast wall of the basement and patch 25 square feet and waterproof the entire south- west wall of 91 square feet. That is an addition of $350.00. They want to delete kitchen screens, install one aluminum com- bination storm window (deleted) $35.00 and foundation tuckpointing 6' x 2' at the northeast corner and tuckpoint 1 square foot north window on west side, total of $250.00, the deletions total $285.00 and the additions $350.00." Mr. Wiggins moved for approval. Mr. Robinson: Was that wall that was caving in repaired before they put all the cosmetics on the front of it? It says here, "during the winter the basement wall began to give way." I'm asking if the wall was repaired before they put the cosmetics on it? Mr. Johnson: Yes. Evidently it had been repaired some years ago . . . You know how sometimes when you have these old Michigan basements, that are dug out and you leave the dirt there and there had been a one -inch cap on it, the cap is just cracked. r. Robinson: But was the problem solved whereby it won't do it gain, that's what I'm asking. . Johnson: Well, we think so. It has already been sealed and are going to waterproof the whole thing. -14- APPROVAL OF CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 TO SECD /PR /CS- 6/47 FOR INCREASE OF $65.00.F,OR CONTRACT TOTAL $2,951. 6. NEW BUSINESS (Continued) M 9 (Continued) Mr. Cira seconded the motion made earlier by Mr. Wiggins to approve Change Order #1 to Rehabilitation Contract SECD /PR /CS- 6/47, for an increase in contract amount of $65.00 resulting in an amended contract total of $2,951.00. Motion carried. Request for Commission authorization to award the following contracts as bid, subject to legal counsel review, per recom- mendation of the Advisory Board South: CD2 /PR /CS -2/09 738 S. Phillipa St. $2,415.00 Siding Masters CD2 /PR /CS -2/10 825 S. Jackson St. $4,078.00 " CD2 /PR /CS -2/11 617 S. Jackson St. $3,255.00 " CD2 /PR /CS -2/12 521 S. Phillipa St. $3,008.00 CD2 /PR /CS -2/13 2514 Huron St. $4,635.00 " he Chair asked if the Commission could act "in toto" and was old that it could do so. Mr. Brownell then proceeded to list he various contracts involved and stated that attached to the equest for approval is a list of bids and labor and materials stimates. He pointed out that Charles Brown Maintenance Service ook out papers, but did not bid. . Wiggins: On the basis of labor and materials estimates, it uld appear there were a couple of these they were doing pretty 11 on. The others are running very tight. . Crighton: Mr. Chairman, I think Mr. Schaller has some infor- tion that will shed some light on why those figures were higher. COMMISSION AUTHORIZATION TO AWARD CONTRACTS AS BID TO SIDING MASTERS, INC. Ir. Schaller: Contracts 11, 13 and 14 -- the bid amount is a ittle bit higher than the estimate, due to the fact that the ontractor has recommended that a water heater and furnace be re- laced in each of those dwellings. We were unable to determine hether or not they were to be replaced by the condition of those tems and he has recommended replacing them. So, if you deduct he replacement of the furnace and water heater on Contract 11, he difference between the estimate and bid would be $410.00, and he difference on contract 15 would be $506.00. The bid submitted or contract 14 would be less than our labor and materials estimate. . Wiggins: That makes a difference. binson seconded, Imotlpn carried. e. e uest for Commission authorization to racts as bid, which were awarded to Ma ecember 17, 1976, inasmuch as Madison er contract documents, the Performance I ECD2 /PR /CS -6/51 ECD2 /PR /CS -6/52 ECD2 /PR /CS -7/55 ECD2 /PR /CS -7/57 ECD2 /PR /CS -7/58 ECD2 /PR /CS -7/59 I move the approval. rescind ison Bu ui1ders and Pay 1803 South Fellows St. 420 East Haney Ave. 213 East Calvert St. 1220 South Fellows St. 201 E. Pennsylvania Ave. 501 E. Keasey St. -15- the followin lders, Inc., has not prov ent Bond as $6,566.00 $7,369.00 $2,447.00 $7,910.00 $6,960.00 $7,329.00 Mr. con- COMMISSION on AUTHORIZATION ded, TO RESCIND CONTRACTS AWARDED TO MADISON BUILDERS ON 12/17/76 6. NEWIBUSINESS (Continued) (Continued) C. Wayne Brownell read the letter and indicated the contract numbers involved. The Chair asked Mr. Crighton for comments and Keith stated that Madison Builders had failed to provide us with a bond in the time required. Therefore, he had to forfiet the contract and the bid bond. Mr. Brownell: One point, Keith. If this is authorized by the commission, this letter should be re- written since it says the Redevelopment Commission "has been authorized" and actually the commission will do the authorizing. Chair: I concur with Mr. Brownell's comment concerning the letter itself. This is just an aside, but do you have any idea why they failed to do this -- are they too busy or what? Mr. Crighton: Mr. Chairman, I really don't know. We have re- peatedly requested that they get this bond in and they have not done so. Motion was made by Mr. Robinson, seconded by Mr. Wiggins, and carried, to approve action to rescind the above - listed contracts. Ms. Allen: I just wondered why it took all these months to find out he doesn't have his bond in. Chair: Well, when you keep after somebody . Ms. Allen: Don't you have a time limit for them and if they don't do it by then, you're out -- rather than, say, four months later another sink would go bad. Chair: That's right. But, Janet, it is so hard to get people to bid on some of these jobs, that when you do get a bidder that is within reason, you are pleased to have them. These contractors are busy and you have to keep after them to do things. I run into this in the things I am interested in. You call a contractor and . . . I called a plumber the other day -- he showed up ten days later to fix up a stopped sink at the building. These are the things that you have to put up with. Keith, do you want to say anything further on that? r. Crighton: Well, I think what Ms. Allen is expressing is a oncern for the homeowner rather than anything else. Before we e- advertise these houses they are going to be completely re- nspected, to make sure that there isn't anything just to ake sure that nothing else has gone wrong. hair: We will have to go through the process on this . . . Ir. Wiggins: However, he does forfeit his bid bond and this can ielp defray some of the cost. 302 6. NEW OUSINESS (Continued) e. (Continued) f. tii s. Allen: Can't you possibly make some kind of a ruling that hey have to submit it by a certain time or they automatically re cancelled. . . r. Wiggins: We do have, and an extension was granted and the xtension has run out, and that is what we are in the process f doing right now. He had his "day in court." uest for Commi ject to South iew: ion approval of bids for contract award, nd Common Council approval and legal counsel CD2 /PR /CS -1/03 417 S. Carlisle St. $7,811.00 Siding Masters CD2 /PR /CS -2/14 705 S. Carlisle St. $6,625.00 " " he Chair asked Keith if he had any comment to make on these. . nd he did not. Mr. Schaller said that on contract 14 (the ne where the contractor is recommending a new furnace and a ew water heater), if you delete those two items from his bi`d, is bid would be less than our estimate. tion was made to approve these two contract awards by Mr. ggins, seconded by Mr. Cira, and carried. is item was deleted from the agenda.due to incomplete paper work. h. Request for approval of Chang tract SECD /PR /CS -3/25 with Ted originally submitted in meetin has been reviewed and approved Mr. Brownell asked if this was together and agree on . . . Order #1 to Rehabilitation Cor cCombs, Inc. second submittal of April 15 and tabled, and y Kevin J. Butler, attorney. he case where they had to get r. Butler: Yes, on these contracts Wayne, there were three owes involved and I suggested to Keith and Ken.they have the hecks made payable to the contractor and his subs, and when ou check with the sub - contractors, find out what they were wed. There was a controversy with respect to this particular an. Our original specs were a bit ambiguous as to whether a ub was to be replaced or whether it was simply the tub faucets hat were to be replaced. I guess that would be the genesis of he controversy. . Wiggins: Now do you have the whole thing worked out? otion was then made by Mr. Wiggins for approval of Change Order 1 to Rehab Contract SECD /PR /CS -3/25 with Ted McCombs, Inc. otion was seconded by Mr. Robinson and carried. -17- APPROVAL OF CONTRACTS AWARD TO SIDING MASTERS APPROVAL OF CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 TO SECD /PR /CS- 3/25 6. NEW BUSINESS (Continued) i. Commission approval of the following bid for contract award, APPROVAL subject to approvalby Legal Counsel, per recommendation of OF NWCD #25 he Northwest Advisory Committee: TO CHARLES BROWN Contract #25 /NWCD 814 N. Sherman Ave. $3,428.00 Chas. Brown MAINTENANCE Maintenance Potion was made by Mr. Wiggins to approve the above bid for contract award. It was seconded by Mr. Robinson and carried. j. Commission approval requested for the following bids for con- APPROVAL OF tract award subject to approval by the South Bend Common Council CONTRACT and Legal Counsel Northwest Bureau of Housing Director John AWARD ON avis' letter was attached). #22, 23, 27, 24, AND Contract #22 /NWCD 738 N. Sherman Ave. $6,383.00 Siding Master FINALLY 26 Contract #23 /NWCD 914 N. Brookfield St. $6,625.00 " Contract #27 /NWCD 1243 L.W.W.- $6,343.00 " Contract #24 /NWCD 1104 N. Adams St. $7,208.00 Chas. Brown Contract #26 /NWCD 920 N. Sherman Ave. $6,500.00 " " he above were the lowest bids received for these contracts. . Wiggins stated that there was something wrong with the figures nce Siding Masters was listed as being $15 under Charles Brown intenance, according to "this on No. 26. Do we have a reversal re ?" . Brownell: You show Charles Brown at $6500 and Siding Masters $6,485. air: Do you recommend we defer action on #26 -- we will delete tion on #26 and place it on the agenda for the next meeting. ** at is the pleasure of the commission on the remaining four? Notion was made by Mr. Wiggins, and seconded by Mr. Cira, to approve contracts 22, 23, 27 and 24. Motion carried. ( ** Note this was cleared up later in the meeting. See portion under item 6m.) k. commission approval or the following: me gerald Walsh 11128 E. Bowman St. aul & Rebecca Morse 27 E. Bowman St. ally Lake 117 W. Linden sted for Section 312 Loan applications Amount Loan Number $7,750.00 $9,500.00 $6,500.00 18 /SOU- 1/13/1 -76 -77 18 /SOU- 1/12/1 -76 -77 18 /SOU- 2/14/1 -76 -77 APPROVAL OF 312 LOANS TO G. WALSH AND P. & R. MORSE 6. NEW BUSINESS (Continued) k. (Continued) e Chair asked if this was just "pro forma" and received a sitive response. Mr. Crighton: Before you make a motion, I would like to ask the commission to defer action on the last one, Sally Lake, until he next commission meeting. At the time the agenda was prepared on Wednesday we had hoped that one final document would be in. In fact, we were promised it by this morning. It did in fact not arrive, so actually we do not want commission approval until we have the whole package. tion was made by Mr. Wiggins and seconded by Mr. Cira to approve ction 312 loan applications to Gerald Walsh and Paul & Rebecca rse. Motion carried. 1. Commission approval requested for rejection of the following bids or contract award, per recommendation of the Advisory Board South, letter from Kenneth J. Schaller, Project Director, was attached. SECD2 /PR /CS -8/60 1513 Marietta St. $7,340.00 Siding Masters SECD2 /PR /CS -8/62 415 E. Wenger St. & $7,626.00 " 1115 S. Fellows St. SECD2 /PR /CS -8/63 1213 High St. $7,244.00 " " S CD2 /PR /CS -1/07 430 -32 S. Olive St. $7,189.00 S CD2 /PR /CS -1/08 758 S. Phillipa St. $9,135.00 " ove contracts are to be reviewed and re- advertised for bids as S on as possible. was pointed out that 415 E. Wenger St. and 1115 S. Fellows St. the same house -- a duplex facing two different streets . W. Brownell stated that the Advisory Board thought these bids ere too high and recommended they be rejected, reviewed and re- dvertised as soon as possible. Motion was made by Mr. Wiggins, econded by Mr. Cira and carried to concur in the Advisory Board's ecommendation. m. Commission authorization to solicit bids for the Indiana R -66 Audit, January 1, 1975 through June 30, 1977, as required by UD on verbal instructions from HUD Area representative. Fol- lowing are the firms to be contacted for bids: Peat Marwick Mitchell & Co. Crowe Chizek & Co. Price Waterhouse & Co. Goodson -Tyler & Associates Ernst & Ernst John Dobson & Co. )tion was made by Mr. Wiggins, seconded by Mr. Cira and carried authorize solicitation of bids for the audit. -19- REJECTION OF BIDS BY SIDING MASTERS AUTHORIZATION TO SOLICIT BIDS FOR R -66 AUDIT 1/1/75 THRU 6/30/77 6. NEW BUSINESS (Continued) m. (Continued) ** Note: The Chair asked the Commission to back up to item 6.j., APPROVAL Contract #26, which was tabled until the next meeting. This ON CONTRACT actually represented a transposition of numbers in the contract AWARD ON mount. Siding Master's bid was actually $6,845 rather than #26 $6,485. tion was made by Mr. Wiggins, seconded by Mr. Cira and carried approve award of contract #26 /NWCD at 920 N. Sherman Ave. Charles Brown Maintenance in the bid amount of $6,500.00. n. Commission authorization to advertise for bids on Parcel 2 -6C (only a part of this parcel to be advertised), Indiana R -66 enewal Area. his concerns the west 52.38 feet of parcel 2 -6C. It is the land in back of Sonneborns' Sporting Goods Store and they would like to bid on the west 42.38 feet. There may be other bidders also. Motion for approval to advertise was made by Mr. Wiggins, s conded by Mr. Robinson and carried. 7. PROGRESS REPORTS Mr. Brownell reported (if you haven't all read it in the paper) that the Elderly Housing was closed on Parcel E and F. We received a check in the amount of $133,610. This will be for 219 units. They will break ground sometime within the next 30 days. It was reported that the replacement cost for this project is about 6 million dollars and the mortgage is $5,500,000, and construction costs over 4 112 million dollars. We have here a rendering -- this is on the corner of Monroe and the river and, as you can see, it indicates the stories high and the setting in which you are going to put it. We have one obligation left -- when they finish this building, we will be obli- gated to put in the sidewalk. We did not put it in because we felt they would damage it during construction of the building. I don't know when this will be completed, but down the road when they com- plete the building, maybe a year from now or so, we will have that oblig tion under site improvements to build a sidewalk. Mr. Blutler: Is that on Monroe Street? Mr. Brownell: Yes. I don't know if there is anything else about this to tell you or not. I have to tell you that these attorneys did an awful lot of work. They had papers and papers and papers to sign, and we still have one agreement that they're working on in connection with it. Mr. Wliggins said he felt a big sigh of relief -- no questions. -20- AUTHORIZATION TO ADVERTISE FOR BIDS ON PART OF PARCEL 2 -6C CLOSING ON PARCELS 6-1E & F FOR KARL KING TOWERS 7. PROGR SS REPORTS (Continued) The C air made an announcement that we have a letter from the Governor GOVERNOR, that ie has signed Senate Bills 55 and 56, which we were interested SIGNED in concerning the financing. SENATE BILLS. 55 &56 Mr. Brownell: Senate Bill 55 is incremental financing and 56 is the bill to permit a definition of the building. 8. NEXT COMMISSION MEETING NEXT COMM. MEETING There being nothing further, the next Commission meeting will be 5/20/77 held on Friday, May 20, 1977 at 10:00 a.m. 9. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business before the commission, motion was made by Mr. Wiggins, seconded by Mr. Cira and carried, to adjourn at 11:20 a.m. . Ra4ja& - -- Brownell , Executive D :ctor F. Jay NNtz,'Nresiaen -21-