1983-22 CRA - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

RESOLUTION NO. 83-22 PAGE THREE . business. Agency staff acted reasonably in assuming Mr. William Greenberg had such authority. At the time it was negotiated, the letter agreement of February 18,1981, was understood by Agency staff and Mr. William Greenberg, and presumably by Mrs. William Greenberg, to extend to all business operations conducted by Mr. and Mrs. William Greenberg in that portion of the Grand Central Building leased by Green's Furniture Store, Inc. That letter agreement reflected Mr. William Greenberg's own estimate of the expenses he and his wife would incur, either directly or through their corporation, for such relocation of their businesses, or portions thereof, as was necessitated by the rehabilitation of the Grand Central Building. It was accepted by Agency staff, in lieu of an estimate of such expenses by an independent source, in order to accommodate Mr. and Mrs. William Greenberg in their desire to proceed quickly with a staggered self-move out of the Grand Central Building to minimize adverse impacts on their business operations. The fact that the letter agreement is addressed to "Green Furniture" merely reflects the status of "Green's Furniture Store, Inc." as the tenant of record on the premises and does not reflect any intention or understanding by the parties that the clothing business was excluded from its scope and to be treated separately. From the time of the letter agreement of February 18,1981, to the filing of the claim for "Katie's Children's Boutique" on August 3, 1982, neither Mr. William Greenberg nor his wife ever made any representation or inquiry to Agency staff on the issue of whether "Katie's Children's Boutique" should be entitled to relocation assistance payments apart from, or in addition to, those made to Mr. William Greenberg pursuant to the letter agreement, even though they were fully aware that Agency staff had determined that their business operations in the Grand Central Building were eligible for relocation assistance payments, as evidenced by the letter agreement itself. Such conduct on the part of Mr. and Mrs. William Greenberg precludes them from now asserting a separate and independent status for "Katie's Children's Boutique" as a tenant-claimant under federal relocation assistance regulations. . . c. Even if it were assumed that a valid separate status exists for "Katie's Children's Boutique" as a tenant- claimant, and assumed, further, that the letter agreement of February 18,1981, pertained solely to the furniture business operated by Mr. and Mrs. William Greenberg, the claim of "Katie's Children's Boutique" must still be denied on the alternative basis of insufficient substantiation of the items and amounts claimed as relocation costs and ~~,J., 0 6A