My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
09/16/1986
Clerk
>
Minutes
>
SUCCESOR AGENCY(formerly Community Redevelopment Agency)
>
COMMUNTY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (1974-2012)
>
1973-1999
>
1986
>
09/16/1986
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/3/2012 1:15:01 PM
Creation date
3/3/2005 11:46:18 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Clerk
Doc Type
Minutes
Date
9/16/1986
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
8
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).
View images
View plain text
<br />In response to a question from Agency Member Luxembourger, Mr. Gray <br />stated that the Southern California Law Center and Wallin, Roseman & <br />Klarich had filed joint tax returns on the advice of their tax <br />accountant. <br />. <br /> <br />In response to questions from Agency Member Hart, the City Attorney <br />stated in his opinion the Southern California Law Center and Wallin, <br />Roseman & Klarich were the same and that they were not entitled to an <br />"in lieu" payment, adding that a "goodwill" payment was an entirely <br />different and separate issue. <br /> <br />Vice Chairman Johnson stated that, in his opinion, that Wallin, <br />Roseman & Klarich had merely closed a branch office when they closed <br />the Southern California Law Center. <br /> <br />In response to questions from Commissioner McGuigan, Mr. Gray stated <br />that an employee at the Southern California Law Center would schedule <br />appointments for members of the Wallin, Roseman & Klarich law firm <br />and that they would come to the Santa Ana Boulevard office to meet <br />and confer with these clients. <br /> <br />After further discussion, it was moved by Agency Member Hart, <br />seconded by Agency Member McGuigan and carried unanimously (5:0) that <br />the Redevelopment Agency deny an "in-lieu" relocation claim of the <br />Southern California Law Center. <br /> <br />4IÞ DEMOLITION OF IMPROVEMENTS LOCATED ON THE A-8 SITE <br /> <br />The Real Estate Manager advised the Agency Members that the owner of <br />American Demolition, the lowest bidder, had withdrawn his bid because <br />he had overlooked the fact that the building to be demolished had a <br />basement, and that this oversight had caused him to seriously <br />underbid the project. He added that staff was now recommending that <br />the second lowest bidder, the John Dodd Company, be awarded the <br />contract. <br /> <br />After a brief discussion, it was moved by Vice Chairman Johnson, <br />seconded by Agency Member Luxembourger and carried unanimously (5:0) <br />that the Redevelopment Agency authorize payment to John Dodd Company, <br />in the amount of $85,600.00 for the demolition of improvements <br />located at 201,203, 207, 209, 211, 213, and 215 East Fourth Street, <br />in the City of Santa Ana. <br /> <br />EXECUTIVE SESSION <br /> <br />The Agency Members adjourned to Executive Session at 6:58 P.M. and <br />4It returned 7:05 P.~. with all members still in attendance. <br /> <br />The Agency Secretary read the following statement: "THE LEGAL COUNSEL <br />REQUESTS THAT THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION TO <br />CONFER WITH ITS ATTORNEY REGARDING PENDING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO <br />GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9 (B) (1) WHICH WOULD CAUSE SIGNIFICANT <br />EXPOSURE." <br /> <br />7 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.