BOOK 23_1950-05-15 to 1952-04-21

Browse Search

{: 116 inset Jain was to check bids and report at the next meeting, on motion by speci City Eng , to Councilman Jones and carried. He would also � e Councilman Spillers, seconded by report x ` ?: into I' cost with exception of pavement and electroliers. i t . �I OPENING OF SEALED BIDS FOR BONDS, BROADV+AY-.,IARSHALL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT. Bids opened rsr� neces. Y' ;, _ _•,' there as follows: Y 1 333 Russ Building, San Frm cisco 4, bid 95% of the par value this , BLAIR, ROLLINS & CO., of all legally issued bonds to be issued pursuant to Resolution of Intention No, 890 p3ATEY�NT `— x of PO - adopted July 3, 1950, and accrued interest to date of delivery, said bonds to beer i Tire interest at the rate of 5% per annum. Bid was made subject to the following condi• I ! _ Harolc tions: but That a: That the bonds would be delivered not ]a tar than June 1, 1951. t Korear 2. That said bonds would be accompanied by a non -litigation certificate and the legal opinion of Moser. Kirkbride, Wilson, Herzfeld and Wallace un- 1' culty qualifiedly approving the legality of said bonds and proceedings, at your I' cost. ly cot STONE & YOUNGBERG, Russ Building, San Francisco bid 95% of the principal amount of sider, bonds to be issued to represent unpaid assessments levied under Resolution of in re t Intention No. 890 on July 3, 1950, plus accrued interest at the rate of 6% per of th annum. Bid was made subject to the following conditions: tenant 1. That in the event law suits contesting the validity of the assessment or j asked bond proceedings or liens against the assessment are filed at any time I prior to the delivery of said bonds, they might at their option, refuse ABATE1:EIvT i " • to purchase the bonds until such time as such lawsuits would be settled and such liens removed. of po. 2. That an award of said bonds should be made on or before December 1, 1950, 2071 �I. 1 or immediately upon confirmation of the assessment whichever occurs first, IY, 3. That, subject only to said bonds being issued, they shall be awarded to appear the high bidder at this sale. before j A letter was, read from Stone & Youngberg previous to the opening of their bid stating that 1 r certain conditions were to be considered if the bid was to be opened. Attorney Wilse aper; 's stated the conditions were substantially the same as those of Blair, Rollins, &Co, i recoil jl and recommended opening of bid. Councilman Royer then moved that conditions be ao. Jones cepted and bid be opened, seconded by Councilman Herkner and carried. After the bids C LETTER FRO, E ! were opened Councilman Jones moved that the bids on bonds be referred to Attorney OF AL l Ij Wilson for examination for a report at the next adjourned meeting, August 28th, secoccs' l had a 5 ! by Councilman Spillers and carried. as th ' HEARING CONTINUED - OAK-REESE & JOHNSON PROPOSED IMPROVE14ENTS. Mr. Remmer s submitted a list f Letts of 10 signatures objecting to the bridges.He also appeared and stated that 90% did s 1:0TICE OF not want the bridges. City Attorney stated it wul.d be necessary to adopt a new resol"• UTIL7 Il�tion of intention and give notice again thus delaying the project approximately at 1( j' weeks. One phase of the proceeding would be eliminated, namely, the debt limitation that A act. If a new resolution of intention was adopted this would mean an additionalde1sl LETTER FR, of 5 weeks as new Plans would be a MISS' p approved and a call for bids would have to be made after the resolution of intention. It was possible that the contractor 'might be "rill the Ing to accept the change in the bid, leaving out the bridges. City Engineerwould the II prepare new plans and specifications and City Attorney would prepare new resolution �, nSOLUTIG 1 of intention for the next Council meetin . Yitb' g There would be two dead end streets r ' and out a turn around. No one in the audiencethe preferred to have bridges included in carr assessment. Councilman Spillers moved that Cit i ! y Engineer proceed with neer plans and