Laserfiche WebLink
MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL <br />PAGE TWO <br />JUNE 6, 1989 <br />2. Ar. Tobias would state, should the matter go to <br />Court, that no decks appear to be defective at <br />this time. <br />3. The bonding company does not appear to be willing <br />to relinquish the bond amount without the filing <br />of appropriate legal action to force them to do so. <br />Besides the question of whether or not the Council wishes to <br />agree with our recommendation for a replacement agreement, a <br />further question exists regarding whether or not you wish to have <br />this replacement agreement also contain a surety bond <br />requirement. It is my feeling that since the agreement would <br />call for the City having authority to enter the property and <br />assess any work, a surety bond would not provide us with any <br />ddditional protection considering the unwillingness of most <br />surety bond companies to relinquish funds without a court battle. <br />Your direction in this matter would be appreciated. <br />DFp/MJS <br />