Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
US Public Works Administration Files (part 12)
é.... Me. 33 Shectt 2. of A — FEDERAL EMERGENCY ADMINISTRATION OF PUBLIC WORKS DIVISION OF ACCOUNTS PRecs@ct AaawT SecTeon s Title of project .___Seheol Buildings | PW. No. 3022 ES Wess of contract (unit price or lump sum) Location —______Bagatterille, 8.6... Docket Na Andit Report No. 2, Policing Bo. i. Date prepared AAR Name of contractor... La. Pa Seu Company_- Contract ul . Address Jenesboro, B. Ss Pies of waa. : ea ee —— em aes Date of award : a. Date of contract . Bids: Advertised a Received and opened Base. bid Public ability nite. ... Sabuhery =a eo 6/39. 19 ae Approved by the regional ‘Seeder aa . Jeo Giitiek = SOB mara aca ah ap meshes b Prsgnes Ties Teen its ee “Sa e. 2... Ne. 2-43. feet tk ; he ~ FEDERAL EMERGENCY ADMINISTRATION OF PUBLIC WORKS OrweseON OF ACCOUNTS PRACT AgaoeT fame tec ‘Tite of peedect _..__.. . Sobeok Puiddiegs = = CW inte... ayettevilie, Bf. 6 ts cet No agaeenGanea: f Sadia Repert Na 8, Policing Bo. }. | Date prepared. AYR 1982 Nace of comtrecter — ite Qeevbeek,- Comtrast 5-1. a eae Payetteriiie, BE. ¢. _ RN I pi cinsindnctenseneceeeeneninteiarcniinn — Deore af ecard scaaipeniad Tse of comtrect Baeedved amd opened “jee See Pitctietiod 4 Sean: Cunteny .___-Babienel Surety Bo, SS, eee See, Raber sud meteriahem's bend $=. — Comoe ea Pevtmes 2 com se tast Pudhs Nebiete Prenerty damage Doeten, Meee. De 2 SPAR _ OP 1G TAs hee 67... ae PS za ona ae So ea RE II rnc =o ee aes 2 a REE ener ce a A et 4 FEDERAL EMERGENCY ADMINISTRATION OF PUBLIC WORKS DIVISION OF ACCOUNTS PROSECT AUEET Geer SYNOPSIS OF CONSTRUCTION AND EQUIPMENT CONTRACTS Title of project Schoo). Buildings i soon P.W. Mo. 722.20 Location Fayetteville, B.C. Dect Ne BE Op Audit Report No. 2, Policing So. 1. Date prepared S/T ==? Name of contractor _.__._._____.__._. Biewmon and Rewell - Coutrest 6-2 Address __._ Raleigh, Be G. Class of work Date of award Date of contract _.. Bids: seca. ‘Received and opened Basis of contract (unit price or lump sum) Base bid : Additions—Alternate Nos. Dee ens Tee. seat Net additions 6r deductions Contract price awarded the total Performance bond Take Company Aetnn Gammel aad Rerete Ga Labor bond $. wares Company e Labor and materialmen’s bond —. $_____=--- Company EEE ana m Tusurance Workmen's compensation Pubtee Sadelits Svegeete dawg Company in fegth Ree eo. ___22_ a Policy No. = 2 3 pHhwealge So <n 2 __ Coverage. Statutory” «s«§#$s“‘(<ws Effective date mae cs giant ANNI eceesl- lctclipetd nnn CC eee Approved by the regional director ertificate attached be. eomtreast. Do 2 Bailder’s risk - eS cniescsipcadanigcapiee a aie Do above policies cover subcontractors? Fit lied ais aap pi ciaceprioargtgtilnapttomesinenicntnittiaaidiaa iia ae Remarks tg ciadinis dceieaene FEDERAL ADINTISTRATION OF PUBLIC WORKS” PROJECT AUDIT SECTION - REGION HO. 3. 4 DOCKET HO. WO 1407-F. AUDIT BO; 2, Policing No, 1. ARALYSIS OF ENGINEERING Deseristion Amount Cost fimeurred ¢pscifically for the project and since September 23, 1956, the date of the grant offer. WR Wa. Henry Dietrick "oalsigh, - 6. For plans and specifications. oS 6 Ta cael $30 -7, (See Sch. 2-7) equals $1,053.63 Por supervision and inspection. of construction campleted todate in the eae $20,029.76 (See Sch. 2-7) equals 500.445 “Yor sketches of the White and Negro High School 1% of the estimated cost of $282,000.00 equals2,820.00_ There are no costs of,a continuing nature charged te Engineering. tin tte mg tn ite oe A OE FEOERAL EUERCKECT ADNINISTRATIVG OF PUBLIC woRES |" PROJECT AUUET SECTION - BEGEGE BO. 3. ; DOCKET WO. BD 1407-F. me AUDIT BC. 2, Policing No. 1. AMALYSIS OF LBGAE AED ADNTNISTRATIVE, ETC. Deserizticn Costs ineurred cifically for the proeiect ami since ‘September 25, 1956, tte date of the grumt offer. Anount brought forward fram Aedit Ho. 1, Preliminary-Policing $454.95 Amount brought forward from Agdit No. 1, Prelinimary- iB we ii 18 25, a es B. Wijkies, Supt. of Geumty Schools Por trip te Washington ami reture te Fayettevilie. ; : ticket ami pul imen $19.50 Eotel Be Son Meals 4200 Taxie fares, telegrams ani tel. calle 4.15 B. Wilkies, Supt. of Caommty Schools For trig fran Payetterilie, FE. CC. to Sashington, C. and retern. Raiiroed ticket and ulinan $19.50 Bote) 6.00 Yeals 43200 Teleshene calle ami teiegrans 1.060 Taxie fares 2.45 A. B. Wilkins, Sapt. of Geamty Sehoois For trip from PayettewillesS. ¢. to Atlanta, %. am return. a&wbomobile fron Pagetteville, 5. ¢. to Aberdeen, %. C. and retern - 90 miles @ 5 oents $4.50 SaSircad ticket aud puliman from Aberdeen, B. ©. to Atias: Ga. and retore 2.b3 Taxie fare, tel z ealle and a ee __ telegrems-— : : Totals formurded 9. HRS ‘ FEGHRAL BYERGENCY ACMTVISTRATION OF FISLIC HOSES PROJECT AUDIT SECTION ~ REGION BD. 3 DG-EET BO. BE 1407-P. AUDIT WO. B, Policing He. 1 Schedule Ne. 3 Sheet I of 2 FEDERAL EMERGENCY ADMINISTRATION OF PUBLIC WORKS DIVISION OF ACCOUNTS PROJECT AVENT SECTION DATA FOR DEVELOPING INTEREST DURING CONSTRUCTION © “Tite of project... Sehoah Buildinga 0 i | Lacation ———-—-- —-- Papaberilia, By Be. ~ Dechat i8 a "Audit report No.@, Palieing Petit ten. SR eh ee ae : SECTION {STATEMENT OF SECURITIES SOLD TO FINANCE PWA PROUECE A. Despite at eee: Cumberland County, North Carolina, School Bonds, dated 11/1/38, ral obligations of the county, coupons attached, interest 5 per cent and 5} per cent payable May ist and November ist annually at the office of the 2S ee ee nea S.-Y. B. Per sched Sa he wa ine sen saa ai singe aa at ton pn momen a Cc Maturing on 28%. day of - _, aey__________ of each of the following years, in the amounts. shown Year Amenzt Yeer mount Year Amemeent 19h0 te GHG, ime. $5,000.00 anmually totalling $50,000.00. 1950 to 166k, ine. $10,000.00 anmually totalling $150,000.00 DP. Nominal or coupon rate $30,000.00 65% __ E. Effective or yield rate (if known} —__---e___ F. Purchaser ___B._ 3, Dickson amd_Co. New York, §..T. 0. G. Date of sake. U/1/88 a Date funds deposited cred s -apeestoe Si en ant et I. Amount realieed from sale: Cea ae ee Par wale a AGG 8's eer Sciacca ns iokecanis Seana Add— Accrued ‘etek oe a Sale prise 3. Par value ef bonds retired prior to maturity date (. ; (Dipbe retiredié K. Date of andit ____ L.. Date of eubatantial completion of project ¢ (ermnwtteetmbar estimated) Not . — 2—COMPUTATIONS OF INTEREST DURING 5 CONSTRUCTION A. From 11/23/39 deed to, 3/31/39 Number of days 126 3. 3,706.66 Ten Jaa ro Ciaketaatin’ cree pletion; B. Leas: ee ee ee $ . Interest during construction _ a a Gea $.. 21h ease z SR GRAIL ees & if aa ee -- REMARKS: FEDERAL EMERGENCY ADMINISTRATION OF PUSLIC Woees PROJECT AUDIT SECTION ~. REGION BO. 3. DOCKET HO. BC 1,07-F. AUDIT BO. @, Policing Be. 1. e ANALYSIS OF INTEREST DURING CONSTRUCTION Deseripticn aAerant Interest during Construction “ | $3,706.66 Interest of $170,000. bonds at 5} % from 11/23/38 to 3/51/39. 3939 h 1 (Date following) 1938 1 23 (inte of deposit) a : 000. % & equals $6,925. X 126 da. equals ae 1,142,400. aisited oy 360 dns equals $3,173.33 For interest om $30,000. bonds at 5 % fran 11/23/38 te 3/31/39. © 000, X 5 & equals $1,500. X 128 as. equals ast 192,000. divided by 360 da. equals 533.33 . @. to a. tra * * DIVISION OF ACCOUNTS PROSECT AMOTT SECTION STATEMENT OF UNPAID PROJECT COSTS ‘Tithe of project... Ssbeo) Bulldiag Deockst No. 30 1107-7 ~ Weeation 2, Payetesile, B, . 0. PL W No, AMR 2012 : Cente cover pried from 9/23... 189 ©, te aap l9BG Req. Noe _ Andit es -&, Pelioing Bo. } Date sei joan Siactecoge 4 Dmecairrmos f Se ¥. P. Lefties - Retained Percentare — L. P. Com Co” Anount due »* , 929.68 SPACE BELOG FOR STATEMENT OF PROJECT AGEETOR “ome ae | Qos x _ FEDERAL EMERGENCY ADMINISTRATION OF PUBLIC WORKS s DIWRRION OF ACCOUNTS STATEMENT OF ESTRMATED OR ACTUAL FINAL PROJECT COSTS AND COMPARISON i WHE LATEST REVISED ESTIMATED PROJECT COSTS Sobral Bri lings P.W. Ne. 322.2032 Buyetterilie, E. C. Rett eg Se ee ee ee eee aE a : aaa See ee See LT TF TTF... Toma Se sia eleadaeeiamneiiimmencdaiaiasratinamnes SE LS eg aS CE eee & IXTSetert MS = eee RCTS Gand Dated - F363,.635,.00 Bf te "$008.6 Sy peteatienl ns nose 4s vaste te Seadesk lies indie Wve k: . fe adore stenemet gresared in eclleb@ration eith Br. A. 3. Wilkins, Supt. of foanty Seheols «xt Br. EB. f. Derby, Beci¢ent Engineer Inspector. | Foun P. Ww. 0.4. aes ee * ¥ Fes eel tes 1938 ee WO a Req. | audit Report No_2. Poliotms He. 1. Dele eieeed. SM : a - Z Minor Pliemb. Co. ik 00 Heating = 2 © Sicuanm & Rowell 19,570.60 ~~» vn. eerast Tn} « Southern Desk Bo, . ‘ otal. @-i-) Order Tetal Schedule bel, 2 eS Sheet 2 of 2, 9 "FEDERAL EMERGENCY ADMINISTRATION OF PUBLIC WORKS DIVISION OF ACCOUNTS PROT eet SecTion 2 ae eee ee oer 1938 to__..__3/3h___, 1089 Reg. ; DIFFERENCE Desert Interest at $ t frm 3/38, aate of deposit to 12/31/39, ectina date of Yetion - Fetal Intérest $3ii, <i Hee ew ee eS ee FEDERAL EMERGENCY ADMINISTRATION OF PUBLIC WORKS | oe of) on ee DIVISION OF ACCOUNTS , | ; Sumer No_Z wa... 3 PROJECT AUDIT SECTION Docust No QC. (SUF + : : PW. Nose 27 19a” toate ee bens Acorr Reroer ovr. No. Rete ates arnt A oi amet as ARTE ary SrppeCRE NT ses Se } Sikes ionaiieelaeneniain f | | toa a i ) FEDERAL EMERGENCY ADMINISTRATION OF PUBLIC WORKS DIVISION OF ACCOUNTS _ PROJECT AUDIT SECTION ‘ e eo a“ Sraremawy axe Disrssertion of Prosect Cosrs Frou Fh. hop 2 inf’ to Plawnde 2/ Bi Pam ~ 2 Acer. Ko. 3—Coxergyemeam Coer dowz. Ka. a ete tee ee y t ee eee hme sete i ! : } CONFIRMATION OF BANK BALANCE __ Fayetteville, 8. C. Aprii 35, 1939. To Fred Ansley _........................-Project Auditer, Federal Esergency Administration of Public forks. Dear Sir: Our books show that the account of The Board of Baveation af Cumberland County. North Cerclina._. designated as PMA Constrection Ameount Doaket SC 1i,07-F. had a ‘ it } balance of $46,561.24 as at the close of business The above—stated deposit is secured by: Os Ren OO eee oe ee ee eee ae ecto ctectemnicnesip einen getter nero a AOTC ACL EAA AD OE A A AN A DA Depositary Branch Rankine & Emus? co. Gerry * ss 2 < soe = 5 * — en ADMINISTRATION OF von Mons DIVISION OF ACCOUNTS Cum Paerscr Accot 3a) aes i oF goowens status Bf “ Tc iciy pean inh caring igtsaaaitee Wree Comme, Suawes ¥ axp 3: ~* . Qi copy ith dupieate eat Pepe ig - Date eek Cao is: sclaee CONSTRUCTION ite se: ate 2%: Sonam co Poxmts, Meee ee ; %. Conmaacr Wane: (a) Fron P- WEA ten : -. Contracts, Manip ann and nnit price. 0) Prom FW. a ali ak ; (Extra work or chance a Ae (6) Oioen fend (‘h Cmca 9 oe Crested owe fences. @ a % Teena Marannans: (a) Contract___...____ <®) Grantee's oun forees 13. Gomerarcrios Comers... Estimated final praject sost.. Total project costs to Gete (item, 2)... --- +, Cast to 2 lite cade biicomenn Pumds expended (Hee: 4... to , tala . wl : FEDERAL *... Y ADMINISTRATION OF WORKS ; “IBIVIGION OF ACCOUNTS . a PROJECT AUDIT SECTION _ANALYSIS.OF UNAUTHORIZED: EXCESS HOURS 7 \ . "This Form shall be used for resorting ait iumances of unautho ised ; “ =~ §, Om projects under N, L BR. A. dated Jane 16, 1933. ~ wows 3 oie omen 16 TS St cine a osse ae NCY. ADMINISTRATION OF rel men Se 2 } AvKt SECTION 7a ms pa THORIZED EXCESS HOURS Text . Porn shalt von i 3 under porting all i 4 ate renege INSTRUCTIONS 1. On NLR. A. Jane 14. Je eee Z . eS ee we {o) Showr day violations the Enscrgency Motel Ast ia week violations ‘ota Public ©) 130-hour = 7 es tension Act, 1937. \ "© sack ult le wc ™ FEDERAL EMERGENCY ADMINISTRATION OF PUBLIC WORKS 4. Pore 5-68 ‘ v& thet }oP8s ‘ Hurt Building, Atignat, Georgia Pett te Dete March 2, 1939 Refer to 239: Si: acd Ec. 2407-¥ ____ Sehoot Coe 2 Rearsbhershle, BG ny (Bet Ne} ttre ei 12 Peel toh. Peres 2 B19 oO oe ca these Nag sa aicaha Sean ; ee storedeeriba Seminary Report on the basis inet blow: Hem No. ss Disposition 2 See ee (a) fs laa: eee eee oS Bee Chenred, as stated by auditor. z eee ee ee © Cleared, as shown ie iota ol this deitlien ee eee eee ee man ncn ere oe (@} Not within the jurisdiction of this division. lei rao eiitep Rak aes toward. clearance initiated by this division. peek aie ber Referred to Ditiiels ah havesligution oS ee cain tienn» (§) Yo be referred to executive officer. CErerivier as CORRECT: a ae 2S CSYZeR@EET eR eTINS OF FECE aati ac I Te ee Seeet l oe 2 Somes FEDERAL @enconcr a OF > oll? WORKS ioe DIVISION OF ACCOUNTS acaeinsainsiitsatend 5 AUDITOR'S SUMMARY pn STATEMENT OF UNADJUSTED NONCOMPLIANCES eo gm PEErakep BY: FEDERAL EMERGENCY ADMINISTRATIQN « tana <<a — OF PUBLIC WORKS Sa SF REGIOHAL sag: OFFICE . REGION yO. je a Ee : Bort Building wort Atlanta, Georgia ian it caren 3 February 27, 1939 Docket BC-1407-F P,¥, Bo, Fi2.2112 School Baikings Tayetterilie, ¥,¢, kod, WiKi cde TO: The Chief Project Accountant, SUBIR: sndit Beport Ho, 1, Preliminary-Policing, applicant: Board of Biucation, Sumberlané Co, Baclosuret Audit Report No, 1, Preliminary~Policing, sa Enclosed herewithAndit Report MN. 1, Preliminary Policing. om the above project, as of January 31, 1935, prepared by Daniel 3, Kilcullen, Asst, Project duditor, February 23, 1939. Bext Judit will include additional information, as (a) Status of smendatory application for land -yurchase, Narrative, Iten 8(b), (o) Status of contracts not executed, Har, Item 9, (c) Verity or adjust Exhibit 2, funds expended and ____ pad cost _shoulé total amount of projec unless overpaynent has been safe, (4) Builder's Risk Insurance -State whether presiua de am obligation of Omer or contractor, and status of approval for contractor's insurance, ¥, Pleftis. Schedule 2,15. * In addition to the docket covered by this report, the eappli¢ant has allotments on the following PWA non-Federal projects om which work is contemplated or under way? Docket BO<1335-¥,-- i 7 ¢ Heary “, Eenerson, it Abaa——> Regional Project and iter, Oc’ Dentet 3, Kilenlien, APA Directer with ® «x # #Y taf Coed 49 : ; de, FAL 4 wars iv Fayetteville, ¥. ¢.; _ Fepruary 22, 1939 As 3. Plant, Chief Project Aecountent, Washington, D. Ss Attention: Project Audit Section D, B. “Aleullen, APAuditor(through Tracy 8. Newton, Sr., Regione! Project Auditor) Audit No. 1-Preliminary Policing, School Buildings, Fayetteville, Cumberland County, North Carolina, Docket No. WN. C.-1407+P, period en@ing January 31, 1939. Omer end Location: The Board of Education of Cumberland County, Payetteville Officiel Representetive: Mr. A..3. Wilkins, Superintendent of Cesberland County Schools,5#d floor Cumberland County Court House, Fayetteville, Horth Carolina. Attorneyt@hariles G, Rose, Fayetteville, 3. C. Architects Wm. Henry Dietrick, Raleigh, HN. C. PRA Inspeotor: J. 4. Helms, Srd floor Cumberland County Court House, ; Fayetteville, N.C. 1. DESGRIPPION AND LOWATION OF PROJEDT: ee “Construction of Sohool buildings and an addition to an exinting acheool building, including necessary equipient." ae S OF CONSTROCTION: s - (m) Date construction started-11/19/38 {b) Anticipated date of completion-11/19/s9 ©) Approximate percentage of work physically completed- 9¢. 4) Anticipated date of 70% completian-9/1/39 . METHOD OF CONSTRUCTION: Contract, ump eum and unit rice. PRA PIRANCE AGREMOEYT: Date of Ofter-9/23/38. Aeceptence 9/30/38 Grant $163,636.00 In accordance with Pra # 230. ai ESTIMATED COST OF THE PROJECT AS APPROVED BY Pras focount ~. eo %- Cost Lat. Rev. Est. ¢ 1. Preliminary Expenses ~ BOUL00 Ske Cost Ze Lands, eto. E N &. Construetion: 9 General 266,496.00 x Plumbing 16,698.00 Heating 21,431.00 E = ae 4. Engineering —_- 16,832.00 RECEIVED 5. Leral ete. 1,000.00 6. Interest 3,000,600 MA 9 7. Miscellaneous 22,679.00 R 2~ 1090- Total “T""3S5, 035,00 wg PROJECT AUDIT Sr OTIOn By SE Seip sche Sie siete ity cet tei PRELIMINARY: POLICING AUDIT: P.W.AA-'38° ~~ linrrative Sheet 4 2 Decket 3. Ceol TWP Avdit @i-Prel., Pol. + METHOD OF FINANCIND: (a) Finda $6 be provideds ae | PRA Grant : $167, 636.00 Omer’ s oan funds: tot ele = 300,000.00 otal ere. “@) Depositery-Sranch Benking and Trust Company, es 5. ¢ member. of FDIC. Status ef requirement = for security. . None Status of restriction Limiting emownt of unsecured funds in Construction Account. Hone. Stetus of waiver requirements, Par. é, Part 2, Form 230. Hone, - The Onmuer has deposited $200,639.15 Sm the Construetion Apc ount. - OFER'S RECORDS: ‘Records are adequate end availabe for audit purposes. < are located in the office of Superintendent of Schools A. 35, Wilkins, ird floor Cumberland ~~ Court et ee EH, oc. mat Ps dakaes ste itude of the Cmer aad sautrastors with respect to complisnee with PRA requirements, Satiefestory. pe cies Caste acon atepped smoect arproctmneely lication te inclede Omar Daanmneetie chase thet he has ae SHASTSED: ee Humber _- Bame of Contractor Work —_Anount ar. ie Ps Cex pe 7880 Otto Orerbeck Plumbiest. 1,629.00 ¥. FP. Loftis Exoevates 1,885.00 de FP. Cox = Generai 35,934.00 Otto Seerbaate Plumb. . 975.00 Siewam end Bowell Heating - 1,874.00 Southern Deez Je Rouips———----- 8, 294,00 Ger. School Sap.Co. * 3,732.00 Total : ; eorGe # Not executed as of this dete 10. CONTRACTS - UEMEARDED: It is smticipated that cantracts will be awarded in the future in smowné § 267,928.41 lie CONTRACTS ~- ARGEITECTURAL Bane of Architect-fm Eenry Dietrick Contract dated-7/22/38 TE Servisest Beoestary conferences, the preparation of preliminary studies, working drawings, the drafting of forms of proposals, and somtragts, issuance of certificates of payment ,beeming of -i - ecoounts, general administration of the bisiness and sup. of works “xtra work to be paid fer on ecuitable basis. Foo: S% ef cost of work. Payments: 52% when contracts are ewerded, renainder as work 5 Approved by oe = Evie Serrative sheet # 3 Docket Ks O.-2t07eF Andit fi~Prel Policing - cOnTaacts & OTTER: Benes FORCE acooemrr: Zane. Changees PRCA Form 526, “Sumeary of Contrast and Change Order Coste.” . See Schedule 2-7, CLEARANCE OF REVIEW COppeerrs: Rone. GENBRAL COMMEETS: Lends, Bight of Ways and Easmpents: The Owner has received the eum of $10.00 for the sale of en old sheok which wee situated on land when latter was purchased. The writer was. unable te ascertain whether or not several tracts or parcels of innd purchased were excessively aporehsed or there was expess acreage. Por description of land reference is nade to Geheduale 2-4 2 Bocket abe Cum 1407-F Andit ¢ 1-Prel. Policing Iepex Form Bo. Deseripti on 146 Cheok list of Standard Contrast Stipuletions 45-4 Summary of Receipts, Coste, and 2alances os @ of Punds and Disburesenents liminary Expenses Lemis, Rights of Way and Easements 20-A Summary of Audited Construction Costs 326 Summary of Contract and Change Order Coste 325 Synopsis of Construction Contracts TTebulation of Contract Bids . Engineering Charges Legal, adem. and Overhead - o8-A Interest during Construction 5%-A Statement of ‘Unpaid Project Costs is-B Statement of Estimated Final Project Costs 236 Reconeiliation ef Analysis Sheet = 123 Statement and Distribution ef Project Costs 46 Confirmation of Bank Balance 24 sand, schedules are hereto attached, with the exeeption of the following which are not pertinent to this report.” : : (a) p=1 2 2-5(a) e=8 2=9 B10 2=iLi Bat? 2-165 to 2-22 incl. f= 26 5 B=] 8-2 mete SS FEDERAL EMERGENCY ADMINISTRATION OF PUBLIC WORKS DPVISION OF ACCOUNTS PROJECT 40GIT SEC TIC 2 F.w. a en wet tnx. : 3 Constrartios contmete approved by State ia 3. Bias proper bond and inmuranen eoverage been provided . ae © Dierenesite caly fer potent conte TO... B. Povect funds adequate. | ® Bstinstod or actual final construction costs within latest approved estimate _ Kaa. “$0. Estimated or setual project coste within latest approved estimate fas Approved wage rates and required notices posted Yee oe one i cect SAMMI S oie one sateen die once deste eo deeees 14. Wages paid by cash or check . O8S% pak sen a aie Sa RR Re Eee» a ne eh oe Rie Stn et OE ert Bn = a eg an Sele OS ti le A me Sir se orth sacs eee en ate in Cake Nineteen ne ey pie EPS Ry eH Eee Sk ee Ue ae = ed oe Sk wo rere e ie e ome atin ain enema etn imenli Gl eet a innit, = & 8 SavesneEet Paswtees crrice @ FEDERAL EMERGENCY ADMINISTRATION OF PUBLIC WORKS ae 2 DIVISION OF ACCOUNTS PROJECT AUDIT SECTION Summary of Receipts, Costs, and Balances as Audited and : Reconciliation With Grantee's Figures 7 Fe at Scheel. Bad laings is RE es SE “Teontion____Pigwitereiie, Be Qe Dent No, Bab ; © Costs cower period from Beginning vg 198, to Semuery Ths, 1999 Ree. Ma eo ee _ Andit Repert No. ..1-Pral. Policing "Date prepared .Rebruary 23.0000. 3 B e Wee CLactannca TiO Sr erm eguerers reomer severe sto perreseNcE ‘SUMMARY--RECEIPTS, COSTS, AND BALANCES ce “4. Sounen oF Pompe: 7 (o) From P. W. a. @ Pee FWA 7 () Other Government « Cee Ls @ | ; = ‘tovis, and 1 ‘& Provect Cosrs: (a) Pretininary expen {e) Comatraction costs (ites 5, Form P. W. 0. A. 20-A {d) Exgiorering (o} Legal, administrative, aad 7. Derosrtamy Ratance—Bauk Bravawest Se gs _ 172,934.80 & Accaves isresesr Recerves ox FP. W. A. Loax... slices teclotitae snsiepstelll ianilatbatiiaosi<teniccniliuigetn : ; emanate WS A OA wg See hg ances pegs Setmapionag oat eee Sohedule 2-2 Docket B. 0.-1107-F gudit Bo. 1-Prel. Pol. = SOURCE OF FUNDS AND DISBURSmccyTs x Bond Sale Preniue Aesresd Interest Sale of old shack on lands purchased ® Sheet #1 of @ Sehedule 2-3 Decket 8, CooL lO7-F Audit #1-Prel, Policing PRELIMINARY EXPEESES (a) Sosts incurred apesifioally for, project: 124 12/1 11/9/38 11/29/58 The Raleigh Times, advertising bids The Locel Goyerument Commission, delivery of 230,000.60 echoal bonds | he Security Beak Rote Company, printing 200 : ty Company ing $2000.00 denomfnation school Superintendent of Schools Wilkins, mileage from Aberdeen, BH. C., to Atlanta, Ge., in rer amend. application: : Round trip 698 miles at 3i¢ 2h ..L3 iG miles from Fayetteville , HN. C., to Aberdeen-90 miles by personal car @ (05.50 Hotel at Atlanta 5.00 Sxpeness to Washington, D. C., Supt. of Sehocls, Wilkins and Board mesber Mr. a. Slark in reremend. application: 660 miles round trip at 3¢ Gotel bill Heals Taxicab fares Payetteville Observer, adv. bids Western Union, tolegran to Atlanta s s 2 @. M. Shaw, postmaster, postage stamps ®. &. Nimocke, County Treasurer . Reimbursement in rejexpense $200,000 bonds 8:00 in local papers Printing bond sale 15.00 Postage shipping bonds 5-5 [ -Payetteville Observer, adv. bids Cerolina Tel. and Tels Co., telephone calis te_end from Atlanta, Ga., in re: amend. sppiicaticon Telephone call to Atlanta, Ga., Gar. Tel. amc Tel. Co. in re: amend.applicaticn Car. Tel. and Tel. Oo., telephone call to Charlotte, Nd. in res Gomtractor ¥. P. ieftis starting to work. Sheet 4 2 of 2 : Sehedale 2-3 Seoket %, 0.-1107.F iudit # 1-Prel. Pol, > PRELIMINARY SPSaSE3 (s) Costs imeerred specifieaily for project: Car. Tel. and Tel, Co., a/eahs eall to Architect Dietrick at Raleigh ive As 11/26/ toPL 5 va a Hote: Above calis in ‘einasttioe with original and anendeatery wd Baganetonate Sheet 1 ef 6 Sshedule aul, Docket W. G.-107-F Audit #1-Prel. Policing rw RAS, RIGHTS = OF - WAY AND Eas mEGNTS. (a) Costs ineurred specifically for projects ‘ Warranty Deed-Grantora, Tf. MH. Gunter and Joeephine P. Hunter, Mis wife. Paresl of land on the West side of Robeson Street, in the City of Payettevilie, B. ¢. “Beginning at a stake in the western margin of Robeson Street, Pemberton's corner, at a point 127 feet North of the northern margin of Elm Street, and running thence vith the western margin of Ecbeson Street, Borth 20 Deg. Gast 53 deg. toe stake, the corner of the lect conveyed to ®. A. Humphrey, (Book # UG, pagelli;); thense with the southern line of that lot, Horth 70 deg.West 58 feet to a stake, im the tuaphrey line the northeast corner of the Inge Lot, South 20 deg. West 53 feet to a stake, the northwest cormer of the Pemberton lot, South 7O deg. Sast 58 feet to the fing .* Recorded im Deed Book 109, page 206, 12/13) 3000.00 Warrenty Deed-Grentors, Robert Patterson amé Sarah Patterson his wife, parcel of land im Cross Creek Tep., as follows: On the West side of Robeson Street; and om the South side of Franklin ‘sometimes called Pershing Street extended); in ths city of as LOS, page » W.A.Sroley and Larette ad Croley, his «ife, paree: of land in Cross Creek Twp. as follows: Qn the North side of Sim 3t. in the city of Peyetteville, “Beginning at a stake is the northern margin of Zim Street, at the southwestern corner of the Ings lot, sRich is Worth 70 Deg. West 142.15 feet from the western margin of Robeson Street, thence with the western line of the I lot, and @ ___.__-__ paralialqith Robeson. Street; Rorth 20 dec. Seat 191.50 feet to =. a stake in southern lime of the lot formerly Yusphreys(see dded regiate in Book IO, page 11); themes with the southern line of the Guephrey lot, now belonging to Croam, and beyond the same with the Pittean lot ,Jorth 70 deg.Weet 71.25 feet to « stake, in ths southers ilas of the Pittman lot, tis northeast corner of the Herring lot, formerly the Sikes lot; thenee «ith the eastern line of the lot, South 20 deg. West 161.50 feet, to a stake in the northern margin of Elm Street, thenos with the northern margin of Sis Street,Zouth 70 deg. Hest 71,28 feet te the beginning .* Recorded in Daed Book #409, pege ‘210, 12/13/38 1,915.00 3 Set Sohedule 2-l; : Docket Be Ci-1LO7-F : : ~*pedit # 1-Prel, Policing LANDS , RIGHTS-OF-May and 2.3 NTS oo (a) Costs ineurred specifically for thé project Warranty Deed-Grantors, 3. &. Inge and Bessie inge his wife, paroel cof lend in Cross Creek Tornship ea follows: Om the northern side of Slim Street, in the city of Fayetteville, "Beginning at a stake in the northern margin of Sin. Street, at the southwest corner of the Pemberton ict, which is North 70%deg. West 58 feet frome the westerns margin of Robeson Street, and running thence with the western line of of the Pemberton let and the Humter lot, and parallel with Robeson Street, Borth 20 deg ast 160.8) fest to a stake in in the southern line of the Mimphrey lot(see deed registered in Book #119, page 11); thenes with the southern line of that lot, North 70 deg. West &i,.15 fect to a stake at the northeast corner of the MoDougald lot,(see Book 292, pags 223.) thence with the eastern line ef that Jet, South deg. West 180.84 feet to a steke in the northern margin of Elm Street, thence with the northern margin of film Street, South 7O deg. Sast 64.15 feet to the begi Pil Hecorded in Deed Book # 409, page 215, | Warranty Deed-J. 3..Croam and wife, Janie Crogm, parcel of lend in Cross Creek Township es follows: On the Sowth side of Franklin Street, in the city "Beginning at a stake in the southern margin of Franklin Street, at a point North 70 deg. West about 130 feet fram the western margin of Eobinson Street, and about ten feet Zast of a emall dwelling lcoated on said lot, the northwest corner of the Patterson Lot(Book # 340, page 341); and rmcaing thence with the southern marin of Franklin ; Street, North 70 deg. West SO feet to a.stake, the comer of the Pittman lot, (Book 311, page 57); thence with the esatern line of that lot, South 20 deg. Mest S? feet to a stake in the southern line of the Humphrey lot,(Beok 146, page 114); thenes with that line, South 70 deg. Sast abdcat 55 feet to the southwest corner of the lot conveyed to Jamis Humphrey; thenios with the western line of that lot, North 20 deg. Sast LO feet to a stake, the north<eet corner of seid lot; thenes North 70 deg. Bast about 5 feet to the southwest corner of the Patterson lot, North 20 deg. Bast k2 feet to the beginning.” Recorded in Deed Book # 09, page 21), 12/14)/58. $75.00 Warrenty Deed-Grantor, Lilly M. Serring, unmarried, parcel of land in Crosa Creek Township as folloces: On the North eide of Sle Strest, in tue city of Fayetteville, Seginning at a stake in the north margin of Sim Street, at the southwest corner of the EsDougald lot, which is North 70 deg. West about 2120i3 feet from the western margin of Robeson Street, end rumning thence with the western Line of the MeDoug- ald ict and parslliell with Robeson Street, Zorth 20 deg. Sast 182.50 feet to a stake in the southern line of the lot former- ly belonging to Humphrey,{ see deed registered in Book 119 page 11h); now eoseas to Pittman; thence with the southern line that lot, North 70 org West 95.70 feet to « stake in the eastern margin of Bolver Street, thence with the sastern mar, of Melver Street, South 20 deg Best 182.50 feet to a steke in the northern margin of Elim Street; thence with the northern margin of Sim Street, South 75 deg Sast 95.70 ft. 2 ; to the beginning,” Srecrded in déed book 109,pege 221,12/15/38 2,925.00 + ® | Os ccs : Gehedyle 2-{, Deaket BH. C.-lLLOTS LANDS, RIGHTS OF WaY AND SaS"uawrs : ey og PU EST SPST SEES pre fact: : Warranty Deed-Grantors, &. L. Paaberton and Kete ¥. Peaberton, hie wife, &. HB. Pemberton and flisebeth ¥. Pemberton, his wife, and ¢. W. Sandrook, Trustee and Dera Zeichauser, parcel of land in Croes Creek Township as follows: : ; Cn the Horth side of Elm Street, in the chty of Paystteville, | . "Beginning at a stake at the intersection of the northern of Sim Street, and rumning thence with the of Robeson Street, North 20 deg. Bast 127 to @e ¥. lot this day conveyed by ea thenes with the eastern line of that 3, Horth 22 deg. Saat il feet te « steke in the J@huson lins, formerly called the Hartman line, the northeast oormer of the lot thie day con- yeyod; thence with the lines of the Johnson lot, South 66 deg. Bast 19 feet to a stake, a corner of said lot; thence North 22 deg. Sast 9 feet to another corner of gaid lot; thenoe with the southern line of the Johnson lot, South 66 dag. Bast U9 feet Go the be — Recorded in Deed Book 09, page 231, 12/17/38 et Schedule 2-l Docket B. G--LOT-F sg 1 acta # 1-Prel. Policing > LANDS, RIGHTS OF WAY ABD S358 OTS. ; (a) Coste imeurred specifically for the project: Amount ‘Warranty Deed-Grantors, 3. &. Hatch and Este P. Hateh, hie wife, end &. 8. Vann and Ruth P. Yamn, hia wife, parosl of land in Cross Cresk Tomship as follows: Ia the County of Cumberland, 3. ©. "Adjoining the lends of the University of North Carolina, the property formerly known as the Walter Watson residence, s lot belonging to the Generel Realty Company and others, and North of Franklin Street and Mest of Robeson Street, in the city of Payetteville," "Beginning at a stake in the Wateon or MoRee line, which is North 22 deg fast 60 feet southwest corner of the let formerly known as Moleill lot, and now t d in the County Gumberland, 3. C., as follows: “MBAjoining the lends of Walter Watson, Mts. Wooten end J. W. Moeill, oe "Beginning at s corner formerly called Hrs. Hartean's, said sorner being 61 fect north of the intersection of the of Pershing Street, «ith the western margin of Robeson Street, and rumming thence Borth 66 deg. Nest og. Bast Ll fest; thence South 66 ’ to Flora I. ips by deed from W. A. Phillips, said deed being duly registered in Sook ari, >? 129, Cumberland County Segistry, to which reference is hereby made for further descriptian and histroy of title; and being the same property conveyed to General Healt Co., by W. G. Branham and Ty L. Blend, Receivers of Pirst tional Go., of Durham, Inc., Trustes by deed dated April ist, ise, recorded in Book 575, we co?, Caaberland Couity Registrys Recorded in Leed Book » page 23, 12/20/38 1,957.8 * Sheet 5 of 6 Schedule 2-4 eS . °° Becket 3.0 1kO?-F : fedit S t-Prel.-Pol. SASOS RIGSTS OF WAY AND SaSSMENTS (a) Costs Sseurred epecifically for the project: Bargeis end Sale DeedeGramteors, The State of North Carolina aad University of Berth Caroilia, parcel of lamé Ioeated in the city of Fayetteville, Croes Creekx Tep., Gamberland County, B. C., as follees: SReginning « “a poise Geto. wnemecelegin si at a western marge Robesem Street at the Sautheastern sorner of the lot con- veyed Sy ¢. M. Moleill ami Wife, to 8. As Hetch by deed of recori in Sook ¢ #3, p 70, ena : thence with the Western margin of Street South deg. Weet 7oPt. 6 an.,(to « point seven fest sight imches over the print called for in the Beverly Rose Js thence orth “ G6 deg. Seat 272 fest te @ corner formerly Moore's; thence with thet line Ferth 22 deg. Sast SO feet to the south- westeru oGrner of the Hatem and Phillips lot; thence with the southern line of it Seath 66 deg. Sast 268 feet tb the ee tee oe to L. Levin by ¥. = ant weve eee ot My » 1918, of recerd Book + page Str. Recorded im Deed book 409, page AR 12/20/38 ‘2,100.00 be J. in » &8 follows: "Om the Best side of Robeson Street, in the city of Paystterilles,” : =e deg. Bast 0 fect to a stake, the seutheast corner of tus Pattersin lot, {Book # 31,0,page 31}; thenoe with the southers Tine of that let, North 70 deg. Beat 140 feet So a stake a cormer of the Croom lot;-thenee ith -« line of that lot, South 23 deg. Heat LO feet to a stake in the Southern lime cf the Recorded box ef2 3.0 . Sheet 6 af 6 | Sehodalle 2 Docket: B. C.107-F sudit & 3-Prel Pol. LaNOG . RIGHTS OF WAY AND SaSswewTs (a) Costs incurred specifically for the project: Warrenty DesG- Grantors, 8. L. Pittman and Greece Sikes Pittman, his wife, perce] of iemd in Cross Greek Trp. as follows: . “On the South side of Franklin Street,{eomstines called Pershing Street); in the city of Fayetteville,” “Beginning at a stake in the s-uthern in of Frankiin or pershing Street, «t @ point North deg. Best bout i et _Weat fros the western margin of Robeson Street, the + corner of the lot purchased by the party of the seoond part from J. 8. Crom amd wife, by deed » 1935, and rueming thence wEth the southern ’ Street, 72 deg. West 100 Peet to McIver — the northwest sarner of the lot e . + A bf ty : 12/15/38, Chas. G. Rose, attorney for professional services rem@ered in the aegquisition of roperpy 12/31/38 Qhee. G. Rose + we 12/17/38 F. B. Averitt, for procerty and tosgraphical survey for school talidings Si/my/se - 901. Gndt bo teiss oF Me, tx rob sate Of lends nA * ro * e = s * « > * = nA * ] * ‘J = * * ~ ” a 1/11/39 —s Sule of old shack om lends to Careline Best Total lends etc. Ss CA OF ACCENTS e OARS eT HAT I “Reconciliation with Grantee's Requisition Witenn 2 este ee FI a pest a aoe = _[ sSaeeee or conte oe Were: ib Contrarta, Somep se sot nih pan a Eatee, work oe cheer oe ie ae puschaned hy Guantan Gestalt’ weir © : asap Schedule No. <7 Shoot FEDERAL EMERGENCY ADMINISTRATION OF PUBLIC WORKS GIVISION OF ACCOUNTS Provect AuorT SECT | 4,P.P pee nieapiceriieitetmninlintitinacn adanconscnvafe et tnaiesiwed I | LPP i ee A nae eet eet nes eee ete Sdedhciagpateiapaigeeniionntonas Tora., SUMMARY OF ABOVE ITEMS . : > ee RII 6s atcniagcieaneci te aokdiceticciebinnae ae ; Material stored on site... a Ske tae fF? So Ce hh i : 3 pt pF ft ¢ een me te a a On eigenen sem & ‘eeusses ' NAT OoTiMDD ; 7 : ? @ @ aE wen wa Pex PO See @ @ «* @® ReaD aaa] 03 | <2 382 ot Pong omy } > eqeanyg pg Bivd OL CENMMOaMEd BECK SiVMiiss GE NvVisa (FRhoosrs Bag) ——————? eo peasy rr So eeus F feuad WEQ) — os eo pee ee Sy ee poe ower ¢,20penUD —gorgpay td seam ———_-—__—_+5-5q *erryanrareg “We HEGIOg JO Hrsdg FIGS} Hie Tioqang PP" Pow owes e.0UNH Teed meford jo adky 0 ogg et ege: ates se See “weer Circ frome y ° Tr ITSqmsoeq Pores on og —— CN OS 2... ‘S°k0FI"S "8 ON 1X00 “SON LNSWAVd TVLLUVd YOd ILYWLLSI TYIGONGd ee p>; 248 SMYOM DTafd 40 NOLLVULSININGY AQNGOUIWG ‘TwH3ds4 é Bee we ee ne mee 88 . ee see es ee 2 gt Ss FeO ge dedi ee > daqne gente ain os enya Sypuame queen, eae a oan ow oo beep - aie Dep eee se ne ERT Seg any sfueg Petueg ets Poe qusuENSOp IerIEES eoQINZeESS Sutpuodsaazzco aq) pO sUONTPEDS pee seuss; eq] Gus Apiasoe 0} puNcy useq aang pet oa syergenee parogine Amp hin 2 sen 4q pegsodeu: aosq saeg SPER SY PrpOUaY HY & pEpToe: malem pre quom [Te wy) 47199 | SOWVED NI BOLIEESNI UAENIONE NOLLVSLSININGY §X#OM DaNd ZHI £0 ALVIILAAD te telat TT OT oe Poutargred Goag aay sIeqnsy [IpOusg FEN popnps: priyeer pee quom Yeerg: Pee yer! pus josiso & GER] ehp yMours oq; PEt ORES Sy po sees pey wuss €.209y9es790D 2G; IG] PEE “ssg=SNGOD aq; MQ parddns errusrea: pus pemizojied _Jom jo wusUaIE Weis PET sg PH HB pySG pus sBpspmoay dus po yssq Suz oy Fey: pee “sywGFY pomousg ey peguse aaeq yeqs Ajtsss9 | Eryn : Wak RT OOD GT Oe £08 posse us go wy sOIIeIGUOD agi Gores oj furTep Aue pes sm pounder ye Surpeqea: ‘pred 334 jou oss yore SRQOE UCD ay: yeurEBe surrey pe wesw sec yusuII3EIs PCy , “JIGS Pye ie 9g] GO wo MOTEG PysT 278 se SUNS BuIpuE ENO Yons ydasED Spenagens BG p> Ceemnames ous Gaps soenpeccee w; yy Se Peed Erg 200g ETINES FEES 79 sOOTNpEE SqI'e; Paioytus qeoEne Sepenten pas Meter See ogy ; FIM eee = ——— an °C ee ees 0) “S238uEEe EMciasd wo preduy (jy) > aunauss ea anp yunouy so ~~ panestide Kpmoraasd poe (p) ~~~ _—T re? PRESS Say Pouswe ICL (o) ~N —————"‘ egg yg te Pree memos a, (0) ;pRaleoes Seq sey snp ySEROws [801,, 943 JO pred oe PS soecemse: em fq p2iesco poursd 2q3 jo Aep pee] qn Bospaps: pee co) dm peMocoF 55817BOD 2g) O WSTFEISIEY 1931209 pus on ES we {aeeneeD) Ee 3e wei ‘ogasegi saBueg> paruogine ye paw eC7eVtr a Easd =O 4 205 *g kee 55 paw Lieamns 8 Poor eee ; Beqpecdsaiso 3g) FO SESTNPSSS PUB eusIs3 3g Tiss arts sf FBC Ss eels eal i dicnaind cnatbicenn gine tedintendghtiinns pemennen ss ite eenalaele So SRnGS PRUE pur yom pO sed pus ‘ssguenh “pan “swe Pe igi Api 7 “jaqeq pus sBpopmouy A yog eH OL i i : hilt i Re. . zZEx =xx “ — 2,886.0 + 1,885.00 A agi a mate Sf, 6rs.00 se RM APU NA ARNE Oa pn ee HIE ts pete pigeons et Haima ag Aber en A : ? : i ' Zaz zex “ bent ge a tga elt ie ae MN ee : cn He nah ek hcl Mew Cowrismmes Dare Deeserptaon ochre. ‘Thte enacrentam change is issesd to record the everd of Gentrect 5, Eocereticn 3 scbeal sites to ¥. PF. Loftis CR RN ICS ing Tae Ceec=ract Change » actreved ee The Potie Works Admemeeraton. im appreving amy chanes, sesemes ne chligation a fimance the cont | thereof, eacept te the extent te whach the eame mar be paid oct of fomés expressly contrecsed for by it, and- Date _2Jemery BB.: 190% 2 #2 2S pied ite ctaieiadiee Bag. 2-0 Lae ewes aoche oY meee fer dengan: acd eupdamecies af emg) S * SOeET eer ey tl CONTRACT CHANGE N NO: _Infdedpat To The Beant of Bhuestionof Gumberlend Gounty Docket Ne. Hie Gs LIF of ot eS eae ee er le eet Content Mic a Be mink ts teinuboldidl ot Sei teneeetbiina tntel ome of the following contract change: + wiles i CREA oa . Tate Comtraet Change is to resord the nvurd of following Gontrasting ei, Contract Me, 2, General Gonstruction, Addition, Parson Street School te kL. FP. Cox «~~ + = 87,575.00 e nn oe See St en eS ee . School, to Otto Overbeck - - --=- 1,623.08. RE $9,204.00 These contracts the Control Estimate for the = 2 t- rp : 339 as secs ot. a ee ne é = s 3 Compbest 2 wewer of ny tight of : e Fe eS PS Us the periaeert Pwa f Wahce ag egengat eid. tespect a eiciiaedad occas The Poblie Works Administration, in approving any change, assumes no obligatiem to finance the enst thereo!, exrept te the extent to which the same may be paid out of funds expressly comtracted for by it, and — a HT. Gf Hy B, Cole, EO. gn eet AJ requests for change, whether approved or disapproved, shall be recorded. (Use reverses side if needed for description aad explanation of change! Sa Shen sea coreg | 1d MEGIONS, PROIECT auorrow FEDERAL EMERGENCY ADMINISTRATION OF PUBLIC WORKS re neon ae Receipt is acknowledged of your communication, dated Sowember 22, 1938 , requesting spproval — of the following contract change: i Ee, Sr @ 500690 xxx 312,625.00 not conciacte o welver of any right of “The apresval cha? = the pertinent OWA tinaccl agreement. -9 ih vane + & the sthctad project.” The Public Works Administration, im approving any change, assumes no obligation to finance the cost — thereof, except to the extent to which the same may be paid out of funds expressly contracted for by it, and apecifically makes no representation concerning any additional funds necessitated by any approved change. Detc_Bacenber 30,1088 = het = All requests for change, whether approved or disapproved, shall be recorded. (Use reverse side if seeded for description and explanation of change} 2 enieRets totes ce | Le Wy i, i ROR SRE UDINE = 2: a 3 aS Ne ids Oe saps: ote ah PRIN a £69TSs & + eeeensseess*TEes BED a ee ee Tee ees ye puog ie oe ee ee ee ee | QO°QETR <o+ ttre ess see ee a+ -eereay SEB secs soca sueeaad Baza eoor ~8t PES Tee uemereg qnerg, Jatt é 3 : ‘ v nt eee sat oe Se 92 eon R er eee BOTs iwodmeg 2 o's 5; ASSES ene th eeceese o> pier res aoe eaiz att : PES REAE SS RO OS O60 5 S04 64 5588404 Supreqesis oo*st = Set see reskaess 6éUCees Crores aeTeigz 66*o¢ Set eSe ess) ese <S5 re eee pee Sewer oo°oe ¢ Sree ere ee SosszO4 @0zT SSaSTl Os Se St Usop-7eeig 2p “PL"EST$ JO UPS |G aos TOomSSG geemg uoSssezZ OF) OF MOTI I pee 64s JO Wile Gl eseerory 0; esedaond og Reb ieq “<n 168g SToOoges 4519 ST Ttaepzeteg 2-Lovl of Segoe 4 *qei oT ey Taeehtin se *meta3teq AsTaeq ‘mm -an a geet “Zz cequescy eet TesBp tise ‘orcqeeter ts é Time of completion ihin.$0.days fron snd ineluding said date 7 6 Quam 2 | eng Sheet * FEDERAL EMERGENCY ADMINISTRATION OF PUBLIC WORKS DIVISION OF ACCOUNTS Progect Avert Sacro Title of project .Sohool Buildings ms P.W.No, 312.2102 ? ‘Location Fayetteville, 3, 0.. as Docket No, 3eGe-1407-F Audit Report No. l«Prel. Pols Date prepared February 21, 1939. 198 Name of coutractor a Ps Cox Company Ince ens ne nny SS Eebore, My Cs ena ST gies Ae PERS RS See eS Class of work General aonstrustion~Addition to Person Strest Sahoo) Date of award . ; eee SR Date of contract AL as ‘Bids: Advertised 22/5 and 11/10/38 | daca eeiern ia Base bid Additions—Alternate Nos, Net additions or deductions aeouel ta Wi dadieeel eeu oe a ae - Starting date — nAs/ss "Labor and materialmen’s bond a oe Company —____. Inanrance Workmen's compeisation Pebkic lability Property damage Coie er. CA CE... Policy No. CTC SPR _ SBPP-236 Dis oe Statutory _ — 7S... ee Effective date ___ ea a ce : Expiration date - is ee yee eee Approved by the Kestonal hivccian — {248 i2Asa 2A Builder’s risk Yea-Fire 7,575. 00; Mindstorms 7,575.00-Globe and. Rutgara AR OO. Soccinide Do above policies cover subcontractors? N90 ne Remarks . cae ab a oe cine edges ae _ oo ER A ae & -& : ~a- O. No. 7! erg e | FEDERAL EMERGENCY ADMINISTRATION OF PUBLIC WORKS | DIVISION OF ACCOUNTS PeQvecT AugrY Becton Title of project _.._Schtogi Buildings Location Fayetteville, Bo Cs. Audit Report No. _1-Prel. Policing Name of contractor _.._._.. _.Otta Overbeck. cae Address ..._._..__....,_.._ Eeypetiovilis, 2. GG... Class of work Plumb. and Beat..Adiition to Poreon Street Sahoo] Date of award Date of contract nA. Bids: Advertised _..______.__ 11/3 and 13/20/58 Received and opened ATA Basis of cuntapet (unit price or hemp sum) Do Aegosdel bis the veciocsl diaashet .. ea ARB ne ‘ Builder's risk Bo ‘> as Do above policies cover taheamlanators? ‘a a ‘Fae Remarks dace FEDERAL EMERGENCY ADMINISTRATION OF PUBLIC WORKS DIVISION OF ACCOUNTS _ > Tithe of project __Soho0) Buildings PW. No, 5122012 : . Location _..._Payetteviile, B. ¢- . Docket No. RO or LO7-F Audit Report No. _1-Prel. Pol. Name of contractor Vs Fs Loftis. Address _ Charlotte, 3. C. Class of work —Smaration_on.three (3) sahools Date of award ..__. 12/22/38: : Basis of contract (unit price or lump sum) Base bid Additione—Alternate Nos. . Net additions or deductions . Contract price awarded __ Aegevvel thd valeadl teae Starting date . 12/23/38 Time of completion _____ 62. aya from anid dete Liquidated damage provisions : Jone Bonus provisions Sone. Contract payment provisions 908 nomthiy, material in plas snd siitahly'stared - eee Sininhied pundiatans pooeidliens 10% | ae Performance bond Bg OTE Cumin Recher Sunity 0c at Sen Merk. Labor bond $ Company Labor and materialmen'’s bond a Company Insurance Werkmen's compensation Public Hadility Property damage Company ; Policy No. =e aR a eens ee Coverage A : ‘ a a ee Expiration date a is Approved by the regional director ... f Builder's risk _._.Bo. Sot aceguaanans Do above policies cover subcontractors? Bo ____ Sohedule 214 | Docket B.t.-Lio7-P Ape Tae - pabit # 1-Pret, Pol. TABULATION OF BIDS Person Street Sahool Addition — ee Rene of Contractor te P. Geox "Be &.. De We Le Jeeeil Te. As Loving F. Be tcc Seinicke-Dillehay Minor Plusbing Co. Otte Overbeck _Fayetteville Ziementery School General - 15.934.008 16,995.00 irs 16,379.00 16,900.00 Furniture and Beuipment for the Paysttevill 1, Wegro High, nak Sivasmbaty Scheels Gar, School Saaeas temp Oe. 1100 and. ohairs e286 h, 26.00 2100 aad. sheirs 3.7 Bes : . 538 1,780.90 500 peranr doaks ree 2,875.00 300 dble.?.Lockers e-3h 2,082.00 * 300 go 6° : in 1,388.09 4 eo .C* _ Tak 2 Racks 1y20 38.16 ¢ 2 ” 25.00 : 8 We Basket ote. 1.07 8546 & 85 * 1.50 : 80 Box leckers ' 3.73 136.40 #4 Oo. * = i. © Schedule 2.2% -Booket BH. ¢.-1i07-F Aadit # 1-Prel. Policing (a) Costs incurred specifically for project: ane of Architect-W. Henry Dietrick Contrast dated 7/22/38 Foe: 54 of eest of the work Payments : on award of contracts, remainder as work progresses. # Comtracts awarded: $ : 4 tims f1 a ei 7-2 J-2, 1 fan ’ k Vi / Ni Lethn * Jy! Kilqullen, APAuditor Schedule 2-2, Docket §.0.-1107-F Avtit Ho. i-Prel. Pol. . LSGaL, AUMINISTRATIVE AND CYERHRAD {a} Cost inourred specifically for tke project: a Payee and Description 12/29/38 Professional services in connection with bond iesne , Storey, Thorndike and Dodge 12/30/38 Duncan Shaw, attorney for legal services 12/30/38 Duncan Shaw, attorney for legal services Salary of Lacy Yall, Clerk-Typist as follows: ® 15.00 15.00 15.00 15.00 15.00 Total legal, etc. ~S weeks Wf Poems sem. ta se @ Schedule No. 2. dE FEDERAL EMERGENCY ADMINES TRATION OF PUBLIC WORKS DIVIGION GF ACCOUNTS ee : PROJECT MIT SECTION DATA FOR DEVELOPING INTEREST DURING CONSTRUCTION S Sata. Butidings | “etapa mS are eration Ts I . Wayevtevilie, Bae ea ak eee Docket No. Heo, 1407-F F ‘Audit report No. 1-Prels. Fol. Pertad from Seginnding eS to damuary 31, T reso: ne tag ers eS SECTION 1 —STATRMENT OF SECURITIES SOLD TO FENANCE PWA PROJECT A. Description of issue: Ousibinihaisa County Sckecl Bonds, dated Bovenber i, i938. Interest 5% and Soe payable semi-ammually May ist and Novenber ist each year’ B. Par value of bends—this sale __ C. Maturing om _i8¢ day of Mag. ‘Binet; Year Amount 1910 to 19¢l6 imcl «5,000.00 -1950 te 196 = * 16,900,06 D. Neosland de dekaes tide {76,008.00 eee i Efecto si rat it inown)¥Ot enem FP. Purchaser Bs Sa ——- end A Compan. Som. Tork Cite. rosttin- ie Citta ee shyt die saa ieee tore C6 Date of sale Aa Se Dake tanta emelied i. Amount realized from sale: SO II nrg cpt de incigeetes a. Deduct—Discount oS, SUM Ua J. Par value of bonds retired prier te maturity date € Bone K. Date of audit P@hguary 27, 31939 L. Date of substantial completion of project (LEER estimated) Phot ee nd er stesee Ser cos ee ee eg ee tee ee as = a re is SS SS ‘SECTION 2—-COMPUTATIONS Or INTEREST DURES CONSTRUCTION 62 @ 4.1666 fos 8h A. From _ 11/23/38 . to Sam. 31, 1999 Number of days SS @24.79-16— 1,68 | pth eeninet reereesers *Smuse of ale} B. Less: Interest earned on eee pene OL mg cain a Vane Other deductions pao a ; Some < Shanssasicor Garing construction. “a «© e FEDERAL EMERGENCY ADMINISTRATION OF PUBLIC WORKS Be -$ Di¥iSiOn OF ACCOUNTS PRomcy auDrT etc Tras 2 STATEMENT OF UNPAID PROJECT COSTS ; hae P. W. No. 5A2e212 : thas aaa dllikc aineibain Docket No.S.0 need period es 193 pte 2 Jenuery 31. .,193 9 Req. Ne Audit Report No. 1-Prels Pols... ‘Date prepared _ Rebraaty 23... 2 te SEL ETS “ orate 7 . 3 . bene . ‘Darn Newmem | Le Pe Cox-Contractor ieas-paid Ma, BH. Dietrick-Architest 1, Si Lees~-paid . igey Gell-Clere Typist 120.00 Lees-paid Bendholésre-Interest 1960016 Loss-paid eae . SPACE BELOW FOR STATEMENT OF PROAICT AUDITOR #..10.00._ received from sale of old shack. a as a saan ences ADMINISTRATION OF wl WORKS Ce of DIVISION OF ACCOUNTS / “MQ TEUENT OF ESTHAATED OR ACTUAL FINAL PROJECT COSTS AND COMPARISON. WITH ORIGINAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COSTS ‘Title of Project ...._. Aeheol Buildings 0 PW, She con tremvanMagpabbevitle, Be Be Docket No, B20 Tr Date poupered . ...-_Fabruary. 23.9.2... 193 9 @ ae : @ i. PRELIMINARY EXPENSES... es 500.00...) 509,08 % LANDS, RIGHTS-OF-WAY, AND EASEMENTS... OO 26. 229 elit 2 CONSTRUCTION COSTS: | Cowrnact Woax: = {@ Contracts, lump sum and unlt price | ee 3 (2 Material cenlias by Grantee and Seatetied i : under contrainte. cna sebomen S Re # _Uaewarded Contracts = ORIGINAL Plot toes PROJECT + He re nt ete 26,2200l5 | | Aetna Chien nian ys easiain (2) Other costa. Sieeon DD acres i IB ics ec ieee sca heen aes Pease Screnvision axp Iseracrion axp Fist Ex- GINRERING: ( Grantee's own forsee. ie Cher Taermse Mareataue: be Celie oa a a ok ee i @) Grantee's own forsee. bs s ces eae seajeees ona e 4 ENGINEERING (exchading ini bes ; i ood Ficki Engiuatag | 16,852.00 | 15,109.05 | -1,558oF & LEGAL, ADMINISTRATIVE, AND OVERHEAD..._|__21,000.00 1,904.95 ORS & INTEREST DURING CONSTRUCTION... |i in Sip MOO 10,222.04 |... 7, 222.0h. 3. MIBCELLANEODS.. | 29 ,679.00 | oO = 29,679.00 Tora... ie = See | 363,636.00 +. ; 00. een eee meen aA reat NaS Figures in col. I from latest approved nme Order. Solon Ietalar % & soreregdest fey vetine ett ite 6 @ : oi a wena in nF DIVISION OF ACCOUNTS RECONCILIATION ANALYSIS SHEET “Title of bene os 5. eae ies : P, W. - Tecation Fayetteville, zu, So, Dockst No.2 _Cosis cover pried trom. Bagianing 193 to Semuary #4, 198 Req. 2 _Andit Report No. 4=*) i-Prel. Pol. ; Date prepared Febru: Lcieilaaiec eee 3 FE oa DIk FERENCE 1 | Brel anses Lat. anpd. Est. Costs Costs to date a ee pas ee ee a Travel » Feb.1939 in ret Peary’ — Ss * 920+ aay. Sontract bids. Lat, Est. costs on 309,980.55 t. « Est costs to date sires Salary of cle = st 15,00, from 11/19 te of som. — 6 jinterest ts appd Est. costs saccutantes Costs to date 1,989.16 + on 30,000. at o 1,187.60 ce 3 176 { * ate of 170 000 Rite : 15-eeEn - oo . Misesllenso: 1 ee Tae aoe ee bate Roe eee ee ome fer i) ee & ae ® 42Z | ve 4 KEDERAL EMERGENCY ADMINISTRATION OF PUBLIC WORKS , Oyun Pt AB Lh en Nt. [fee CAG erlen Kir | DIVISION OF ACCOUNTS Ah Lv fa PROJECT AUDIT SECTION Starewunr axp Dieraection oF Pyomer Cosrs i Pao ™ on _ hoor. Ba. 4 PF... 4. Form So. tg Ber be p 4 | DERAL EMERGENCY ADMINISTRATION OF PUBLIC WORKS waite rw 2) | DIVISION_OF ACCOUNTS gee eter ace ans ene, Magi a i i Srateweer anp Disrrisution or Prosecr Coers Paw aoe 1 YEE Iscunsan ; Cheek ~ : re Ne. Date = fo. ft “@ Sxnibit ¢ 7 CONFIRMATION OF BANK BALANCE sw» Project Auditer, Federal Emergency Administration of Public Works. Dear Sir: Our books show that the account of ~-. Cumberland County P._ Med. Const. ine 2 Sr ‘ . designated as 1407 el ... + hed a ‘ area } balance of $172,068.80... as at the close of business : 198. ie ghcuavatiiad duets te Maoh fhe shove funds sre securéée wee 2 held by our mein office in Wilson, N. C. ee a ee ee ee Yours very truly. Depositary Te ee 2 _ Branch Banking and Trust Company _ Paygtteville, Noeth | Garolion sepia Gentlemen: For the purpose of audit of the records of Docket MoC.-1L07-F eg Sg eo aes. See Seneieh areas: to the Federal Emergency Administration of Public Works, on the attached form, a certified statezent of the condition of their account ‘designated as PMA School Building Fund. sheild Hult AND WAAR bps ware vesueretes tod re etnp ee SE Ss ee certificate is a enclosed herewith. Yours very teuly: Bice Auditor. S| This request is made with our approval. ME Mlatexrs Yee My a ne a A A te RRA (Oficial tc} P. W. ©. A. Porm 46 &, le erin a EN MAVISION OF ACCOUNTS PROMEEC AUOrT CECTION AUDITOR'S R’S SUMMARY STATEMENT oF UNADJUSTED NONCOMPLIANCES :: 2 J. MAXoY, 7 scntomplanses meported by your auditer aad noted by cur etatiomant the or states of each item falling , et degestiion or present status the jurisdiction of this division. Te tagector bab Seeded de eee eget eee. toe a “&. GRAY, Director, F Corr To RESIDENT EAGrAEa POSRECTOR see : ret snide Bassani AOMINISTRATION OF - WORKS _ BIVIGPON OF ACCOUNTS : PROJECT AUDIT Sac Tron Py | AUDITOR'S SUMMARY STATEMENT: OF, PROJECT STATUS : file “eee oa Seton Se thos, yaa eS fa . DOCKET Neate ie, Norsk Seretitn J pw te ee on ane eo a ae? e =e Req. Keg ae » Andit Report No. l-?Prels Pe Date prepared ‘Pebroary. $5 3 SUMMARY—RECEIPTS, COSTS, AND BALANCES oe ~ QONSTRUCTION COSTS } 1. Sovuce de Fexvs: “| &. Commnaer Wons: c (<) Froeee Ri, Weticciiceetaen Ab. nace. (a) Costracts, tump som and exif peice. _ ) From PW. A. grant. > ' ® Extra work or change orders. if] » ee eae un algae’ a @ Makeriel purchased by Grantee a ape de! 2 | f aad instedied under coatrect___ - Sala a8 ot shank 2 eo @ MRA sl catncet 4 P » Protehiary on a o Lande, HW ond agen a 22 te Cenphretinn sxe Ce | @ Engiawering gee . {8 Coste itt June 18,1588 @ on Gi R54 Tora: Prosect Costs. . i axe Pure Exorvermine: 's, ‘Uxegg Bonaice Coats au he -f a (a) Prefeastocial fees 6. Cutcas Orustanvord— as -& 33. ‘Treweed Marsrts.e: 7. Deposrrany Batance—Basa.... 172,934.80 oS ote. 8 Accavep Ixrenese Recerres ow ()} Grantee's own forces a Foc strana plein} nw saan eat Tera. Constxoctios Coeri__{- Origins! estimated project cost__..___ [363 536,00. ibe i Estimated Sead project cost... $65,656.00 : Eetiniated finial ptoject cost... :....| 3634856.00 ee Total projest sonte to date (item 2. .._|..55_855-02, 5 Over-ran of underrun. ne to coe sia swt cs _ B27 ,T8009 tattoo “hes 658.00. Loans and graet payments (](¢) aed @)). ite nage [ Funds expended (item 4)... 104s55. Balsnuce of aotment iactioethipiaintehidicgloded hss (836. 00 ot g Punts reqeiee’ to complete... es a Estimated date of project compaction 5S AAO a a Peseent of physica! compietiog BR. ax upite Ee SeVeeeeeet Pear ies coreg ee a FEDERAL EMERGENCY ADMINISTRAKION = OF PUBLIC WORKS No jo Ana Regie. n cose Waseencron, BD. C. Seca ee nane an eee wa JAK 28 1939 “F°a'd i GREENS NOIbverEss “SI © DONTE ay sEMaEE 6 Dies - Mia: tee eee =f SWYOM IITENd 40 UANOISSININOD OL NUNIZH : NOLLO3dSNI orand 404 LON _TWILNaGIdNO> NOLLVYLSININGY SYYOM diand AQNISY SWHOM 1¥UI033 she cane irene ee ae HOLVULSININGY LNVISISSV OL NUOLAY | | - NOLLOZdSNI DITENd YO4 LON “IWLLNAGIANOD NOLLVHLSININGY SWYOM IIT8Nd ~ “yn ~ # aye we ~ nics : ‘ whee ae SERIAL NO. » Ziehic the » bawe been Cispored of, | | » Seting Execetive assistert. Srgiveering Mivisian the report end copies cf pertirest serrercen- Se 21) itens Geese te ©. 5. ferisdietion af the : a 2 | ‘ © ip . ei eT ca e Sai Sl ila PU hi ak Coli Nip il il’ Mar, 218764, (7-17-39) "pep, 2/20/39 i | ly 1} 13 eal a ul . Ma a if fa oni Marr 2167, (7-17-39) PED. 7, : sousrome tron oF PoeLre WORKS Regional Director . E ASO Hurt mistding * A&lanta, Georgia In seply please refer te Adhin: HAW: fed Docket N. 6. 1407-F : Refer.ice: enorantes to: wer fron Lata 6) z. Dotler, Pe This ortice congere a ‘he eicumssileetivn z of the Special Agent that the award ef eantrect to Reinecke- ~- = Dayietay, Ines,.for the onoakepesian ‘ef the Begro High Sehoot.. ee de approved, =o 26 Je Stee Haas keh penigslg 62 tiie hone “Spatbodues thet’ the wether wea FafartOn io abs. General Counsel ies 9 \, dor opinion as to whether or ‘BOt the Public’ forks Admisistre- .. _~ _wlomaay conqur inthe action teken ty the Owner. In this < eomneetion four particular ‘ettestion is called to Exhitit No. 12. 99 aad siko Exhibit Bo. 8. 24 ahoald' be noted particulariy in Exhibit lo. 8 the Astorhay General for the State of North Carolina concurs thet the Owner was within its legal right -in makiag award to Reinegke-Dillehay, ints in view of the above, we are closing our file ~ ox the - mubdject. EZ — Jaf B.A. Wortaan H. A. @ORTSAX, Hesgicenal virector, PHA: oe ts ‘ ay Fels Welle Ymams, Soman ABENSMATTON OF PUR Yams ee, Atlante, Georgia ae 1939 Admin: RABifeb = Hy, Gs oe x) <-> gy Bek, 8/18/39 » * (10k) 2%, : ss ; ine. retained PROMRAL separ ATMONIsTRATTON OF Puatic works « Regional Ti reeter Hurt Building Atlanta, Georgie June 12, 193% Rec'd . - Im reply please tefer 6/14/59. “ Docket Bo: K.0.1407-¥ C.".3. Fayettevilis, zm. 3. ENG: ise ” gubeitting for your information a copy of @ telegran -Peceived from ’¥, P, Lottis, GéRere) eet ia Preference to nis “bid on tie. Begro High Behgel.: fa/ B. Av Bortham * HH. A. MORTEAR Agting Regional Director, PuA @p 15 106 mi. P 0 cians war Tues 9 3018 3 A ORBAN BEG DIR Pai | Asting Regios Diresten, Pua FEDERAL EMERGENCY ADMINISTRATION OF PUBLIC WORKS Wasuneron, D.C. June 27, 1929 ? IN REPLY, PLEASE PErER TO Dociget MLC. 1407-F) 4 School - Payetterilia.® Eng. 7-f-ces a tritenth ekerith pore, of tbe 2h = aion of erent dated June 18, I959. . P.W.A. Form Be. Rev. 7—16-38 FEDERAL EMERCENCY ADMINISTRATION To: Mr OF PUBLIC WORKS TRANSMITTAL SLIP For: . Gray Approval Colonel Clark Signature Ur. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr ur. Mr ur Mr Mr ir ir Mr ur. lr Mr. Mr. Mr Mr. Madigan Recommendati Baker Remark Bulger Information Burlew To Check Butler Previous Papers Comfort File . Denny Prepare Reply Dunbar See Me ‘ . Farbach Foreman . Gillman Mr. Harvey Mr Beattie: Mr. Kirkpatrick - Patton . . Plant eff + bes . Puryear Qi. atkKe ce eerefew days 290 to . Slattery Sepof aim aS rT as soean “ s ebaaed © fece eal ie € ebere 4s - es Refer to File: He GO. 1407-F (3-3) MEMDRANDDGM to Mr. Grey: I tremenit the report of Special Agent Hancock, North Carolina, docket B. GO. 1407-F, 4 The special agent's recommendation "That the award FEDERAL EMERGENCY ADMINISTRATION OF PUBLIC WORKS DIVISION OF INVESTIGATIONS WASHINGTON Region _ 3, -bblauba, Georgia, Date of report _ Serial wumber; erigen; type of report; name of special agent He Ce 1407-F (F-3 JUN 191939 ei | CGRIGIN: Instructions from the Special Agent in Charge dated May Poried of ineutigation 1939, (Memorandum from Hs A, Wortham, Acting Regional Mey 24 - 30 end Director, dated May 11, 1939, Legal - ABS:bwn). — June 7 = 26, 1939, | Administrative Je Be Hancock, Special Agent. Be Cs 1407-7, SCHOGE BUILDINGS, FAYETTEVILLE, MRTH CAROLINA (G. $163,656.00 THVESTIGATION GF SUBMISSION OF IDENTICAL BIDS BY TWO BIDDERS, WITHORANAL Brief: OF PROTEST AND PROPOSAL OF ONS BIDDER, AND ACCEPTANCE OF WITHDRAWAL BY ORNS On April 12, 1939 when bids were opened for the construction of « Negro high s ing umfer the above docket, it was found tht Reinecke-Dillehay, Im., chev! Cerolina, and V. P. Loftis, Charlotte, North Carolina, had each submitted a } the encunt of $62,300.00. Time for completion specified in Instructions t Bidders days. lLoftis proposed completion in 240 days and Reinecke-Dillichay, Inc. in 275 ds here was mo evidence to imiicate the identical amount of the bids was other than coinsi dentsl. Om the same day Leftis requested the owner to be awarded the contract on the of a lesser mamber of days but the omer, after determining that time was sot 4 consic ion, awarded the contract to Reinecke-Dillehay, Inc. as a local contractor that day. Toftis then stated to the omer thet if he could not be awarded the contract he was = ased to see it awarded ‘to Reinecke-Dillehay, Inc., ani accepted the return of his bid urity. Om April 15, without the knowledge of Loftis, Robert Hunter, his associate, pr tested to the Public Works Administration, claiming the eward on the basis of time. On 1 19 the office of the Regional Counsel held that the contract should be awarded to eftis in view of Section 1516 (a), Narth Carolima Code of 1955, which provides that « “@hould be wade, taking into consideration the time for completion. e. Hunter alleged William BH. Deitrick, owner's architect, stated it would be to his ed= - vantage te withdraw his pretest as local pressure would make him interpret the speci fice- '-#ions too literally, amd that at a conference of the Board of the owner, held May 5, the “abtitode of eid Board led him to believe they wuld be antagonistic if Loftis received — the contract but no one said undue pressure would be brought if Loftis was awarded the — Gontrect. Gm May 5 Sumter adrised the Public Works Administration he was withdrawing his ~ Protest and om May.€ requested the architect to be pernitted te withdrems his proposal, — _ Deitrick denied the statement attributed to him by Hunter and the preponderance of the “wridence is that Hunter withdres the proposal voluntarily, : a FEDERAL EMERGENCY ADMINISTRATION OF PUBLIC WoaKs “‘DIVIGION OF INVESTIGATIONS : WAneNGTON . Soa eS we ean cen et ww a tb Serial number; origin; type ef report; name of special agent vt i Me C. 1407-F {F-3) Regiomal Counsel, after considering the withdrewal of te Reinecke-Dillehay, Inc. should be approved advised the Acting Regional Directcr that he. : ara. On June 16 EH. A. Wortham, Actin: Rerional Reinecke-Dillehay, Imc. should be approwed because acts; of bid security by Loftis eliminated him from further consideration at because considering Section — ‘pili for interpreting local laws was that of the owner. ‘After a), the attorney for the owner held that the omer was within §ts lecl rights in zis “making the award to Reimetke-Dillehay, Inc., and his opinion was concurred in by the Attorney General of Borth Carolim. ee : The contract dcouments include mo provision for payment of liquidated daseges in ‘the event the contractor fails to complete his ontract in the time preposed. Recommendation: That the award of the contract te Reinecke-Dillehey, Inc. for the comstrustion of the Negro high school building Be approved. - SO (extra copy brie? - ED - F CONFIDENTIAL NOT FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION — ae o i jee :. * @ WP hy oo res o % juve ya i t yore i | = whe £ it , * Wet Py ye ‘ai Es &. ter, <e aa Elierte eer actions $06 +088) Director iste, ory Contractor Secretary, Cumberland Boars ot Eavoat fon Raleigh, Bw o; 201 Pat kere, alds., Charlotte ; zr Chai reise Cumberians Board a Séncatiar ember, Cursber land Board 62 ; Paucation wz 3 ‘ember. Cemberler- Bosra oF Sdzcatic: leeks er, Camber tent Board oF Pdueatior Co Co Vets wOe, Atilazte, a tee Trider date of Septesber 23, 1928 an offer was mde, subject to. the terms and conditions of FP.’ ras Porn 2, dated Septenber 75; 1957, as mended té date of offer, to the Board of Bdusation of-Sunberiedd County, Herth Carolina, for a zrant at LS per cent of the. estimated ecet, not exceeding eee te aid in financing the construction. of schools bul ldinze end am addition to en existing schoo? Sublding,” So @ndimuent, whieh otter was accepted September 30, 19335 for was amended under Gate of Avril Z, 193 9 to permsit use of funds aa the ne le of necessary lands bat did not affect the asaount . of the offe Punis to supply this «id were derived from Public Works. © péninietrets ion Apvropriation Act of 79S. = : That pert of the project concerned by this investirstion consists af the construction of s Negro Fich Sekbool Bulldings Bide were opened: on Aprid 22, i979 at 11:00.-a.m. in the Gomty Court Souse, Fayetteville, worth Caroling, ami ¥. FP. Ioftis of Charlotte, Sorth Caroline and~— Reinecke<Dillehay, appanage? Fa ayer tevilie, North Carcline submitted - és in the identical ascount ofS Time speci ft “oe srustions to Bidders was day leftis proposed te senplets the © iding ip Ze days and Reines! aaa incernarated, in 275 dayse = — ontier adepte? a resolution to award the contract to Re inecke- i> inserporated, Hut the Public Yorke Adetinistration withheic se ; Seero Tieh Zchocl or Biuession, tCreaber ntrect te 2elnecke-3i & Yenerania of bales? whe gall between Ers perched ind tobert poche ansoci ste of ¥, F. tofkie, Avril 13, 1939, receriin: time for Reet etter fron ek Thaster, dated April }%, 1975, bea sone date. ; = inion of A.D to f, approved by 2. H. Ramreil, Aetine testcaa} Counsel, 3 time slenent in bids. Cory of memorer tus of Abe Fortes, General Coun 1801, ‘Makes Moy 4, 19°99; regarcine eonsideratiat af w Tor serpiction. ° ¥.4 Assistant Attorney Teneral, dated dune’7,. Qwner tc award camtract.< dated May be 1059, regardin:c tine element ef bid, protest, and <ithérawal of eroetest 3 ed ag ‘Pravenent . of Ae Be Wilkins, Secretary, Cusberland: County Board. of: Bducetion, dated May 25, nIP% regercing sutnission of agirhont bias ane sudsequent etentae ; 4 Statement of Ee Us Breese, detache Cunber land Court Bosse ae: os Béupation, dated Mey 26, A939, recarding subi ssion at iRenttoat bide = patadquent events. — Sk Statienent of As Re Devitt, ‘Member, Cusberiakd: pica! ‘Bost of Biueat 2. “@eated Hey ee, 19? a ees Stteission of aonertens: bide. a 2 @vente. oe ee oe Fe iste e aenree Statement of Ye ee ‘Wember, acces Board of Eau Gated May 27, 1939, rezeréin: submission of identicsl bide asé subsecuent. events. z re eos Statement of %, T. Reaves, Meabor, Cumberland Cousty Zoard of Biucatis dated Ser 25, 1939, renerdine siteissian of identities? bide. and subsequent _ everta, . Statement of o Se Curl ererits, Member, el Seedy oe of way on tion, sated Hay 25, 17s Tecerdins eximisgsion of ents *e2 bik gaent SveONSss Se Seen 4% fe 52 OR ares Andee Srsts PEST, hae OF JSG ey Sig AIS Zy Syatenent of Willies Senley Deitric’, Arobitect, dated June = 199, tegerding suiiission of identical bics end phbeent eventzee es Statement of E. C. Derty, Resicent Burise Inzpector, dated Mey ae i. 1939, Tegerding identical bids end attitude of Beer: towards Lottie. Sof J. B. Zllerbe, Resident Bagineer Inspect . Sderntiéal bids Bed attitude of Board tewnr: Sof G. Ae O'Semion, dre, oe 29, 19359, regarding ideatis oe = oe aS former; Pocet y-ires Reaiaweke- Gated June & erardinme iecesle of th ¢ fire of Reines Copy ‘of letter from mperey, # protest of mwari. : Copy: ef letter fron fobert E. Burter, date: May <4, 12s, requesting withdrawal ef proposal aid reborn of bid seourity. & se 2 Cony of “vation of Ae Sse Steed, approved by Albert By Liktistons Regional Countel, dated May 9, 1939, recat ae award of contrast sub~ seguent to withirarzal of protest and proposals Statement of ¥. P. Marion, Gicinesr, dated Jane 15, at =o Se examination of séntrach doowsent=. Mengranie cf HE, A. Wortnek, Astin= Rertonal > irectar, Gated June 16. i939, regepitag award of comtrect. tetenert or. Special Acent. Hancock, dated gune 14 ination oF @¢siirates and. simesary of evideses diselc opr ot & telerran fron Ve P. Loft thst he stil? feels he is sntliles to e2uye; Twaemm esoqy JO eyo St STE 4¥uz fuoTenTTOS hte, Fen O20G, BENE SISO TERT 02 SomBPTAD ox st OuL, ‘Sgzed wy ‘pegege wea 9; “zeeuT2ag [eaoy3eg yaeg? psy *“se0ts *q “g “sm 4q soppbeg Tele] o— 03 persezppe ee A "oe ‘eo ©] “gumoue cy Teapyoept Sareq sptq we0q ‘S1Rg0T “ga “A Po ‘sour ‘Avyeltig-eqvettey 4q ‘freatjcedre: ‘pegypmqns ezea woTzons3su00 SFI} 103 SPyE BOT ong ogy. Fase eee ates ee ee D2Seg JO UOTQeRARETOD wy Zez Pesteoes ezem septa “6C6T “et Tindy | SIrTPITRE ToowE fuoTWwonp_ Jo Prec” Syu0D PHETZequD tsoarans : eSr0qp uy quePy Tepoeds ‘noszeqgey *s *H ie mmqesey - Te8e7 | 4-LOM *O *R OH Qeqeeg G6 “tt fen tyizceg “eqreTsy PeTPT I pe WIISTEIS TROISEE SXEQR STTGid £ MOLIVSISIADMY LOSeSEUE Ves tt gw nae TN “Plot 0M SRA SORTA ; ; roeiesdenes amano oy ‘Medes wr o* * * ° canoes SEeLMOO gH IVE SORAISISNI ARIK GaUGONS SILAOT OF CEVEY “ms JoverEoo - _ SEMAN MUSVERTISHOO ONTEINDSE *s 9TLT NOTEOMB “Sé6t BaDO < WETIOUYO Bi WE TMOOOY CAACEAsY LON CEVMY KVETTTIG-axOSKTDD *X¥OOL ‘TEV GHOSEZIAL UNA *LOYT °D °H WAAANG WOUTTATA, temezTes sv ‘666T For tety be, sala ©q) pesTApE @oTZZo syry JO uot Sg Puyrcouptug eq eee ee eee (v qQ- 3 ! goood Stee wils oe STWweT *d “4°03 popreme wo T3eenb uy Pte pepryoses eq prmoys woTG0e Gens geyy pire feurpTOtED a704 e383g ou) Jo ast f4z09n9098 FuTQS pee sepua snoemosz¢e sea *our ‘SeqeTitg-eqoeutey 09 pourquoc oy Seytprems AjeatTye9Q003 UT BOTIOV §,10UNH OG GET Ped woTjceg TeeT eu “6c6T “61 TIAdY = Page 3s - a gs ~~ Upon « consideration of the qestion, the Legal Division of the Central Offices concurred in the opizion of this Office (Radiocram, Portas-Littleton; May 2, 1939; Memo, MeCall-Kejrwe11, May hb, 1939) Under letter, dated May 6, 1999, addressed te the Regional: Director, from the Owner's representative, it is stated; th baits seoutbed & remusiies 8, Phin allowed to withdraw his bid as submitted in of $62,300 for the construction of the above — withdrawal sf ae kisi enntie oak: stendpoint, an award to the former firm (Supplenental Opinion; Docket ¥. Cc. this Office with viedo te this centract abeyance pending the ae of the Gore ee taco) Directer, Ps We As ENG: SHW: ir April 12, 1939 MEMORANDUM OF LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE CALL PRG: TO: Mr. Deitrich Fayetteville, Re. Cs ur. Carmichael] HC-1407-F We have just opened bide on portion of the negro ani shite high schools. SBverything is clear exeept one question with -pegerd to award on negro high school, Two identical bids. One is fram a leeal contractor and one is from an out of town contractor about 150 miles away. The Board of Education feels thet it would be to the interest of the project and the community to award that building to the local bidder. That is the genere] gonjractor? ° Yes. Xt see no objection to that at all. We have no cbjection to the other contractor, but to the imterest of the job and to the community to award te the iccal mBTe There should be no ebjection on the part of the PHA. ‘They are going to adopt tentative resolution of award, and will send that int Yes. RESOLVUTIOS mS BE IT RESOLVED By the Board of Stuation of Cumberland County, North Carolina: That in as mech as ‘identical bids were submitted by two son- tractors, namely ¥. FP. Loftis of Charlotte, Morth Carolina, and Reinscke-Dilliehsy, Im., of Fayetteville, North Carolina, for the construction of the Fayetteville Hegre Bich Scheel, Docket WC 1407+F, that the iosal contractor be awarded the contract. fe CERTIFICATE GF SECRETARY ~ %, as py ome the daly electedy’ gialified, and sacisk, ual Guineas as ie cronies meg liny Pe wanted « Goad emcee sey Hanged By at -@ Special meeting duly held efter notice end thereto -@ll the members, which reseiution appears a er eee mocking oa are Bil Fareed 46 Bimae Seal Ro. 2 | page 169 Witness my hand ani the seal of the said Board of Bieostion ae ee orth Carclim, this the 1 939. f/s/ &. 3. Wilxims Secretary, Board of Education of Cumberland County, North Carolina. (s24.)} THE BOaRD oF EpuarioH CUMBERLAND COUNTY, 4. Cc. EMG: Si: ir April 13, 1939 MEMORARDUM OF LOM] DISTANCE TELEPHONE CALL PRGH: Mr. Robert Hunter, Ve Ps Leftis Construction Co., Charlotte, Horth Carolinas Mr. Carmichael Docket MC~-1407-F ‘= Contract was let yesterday on the Payetteville Hich School. We were tied for low bidder at $62,500, The building con- mittee has awarded this job to . . . . (looal contractor). They comtended that this was « local contractor. However, their home office is in Southern Pines and they have « branch at Payetteville; ours is in Charlotte with a branch in Payetterille. We are up ageinst this propesition. We have no well estab- lished rules on identical bids. They happen so infrequently, which is just a coincidence ani does not happen onee in 5,000 times, However, we beat them on the number of days to complete the work, BR T bid 276 days ani we bid 240 days. We beat thes 35 Gays. We contend that should have a bearing as to award on the fod. We have mot concurred in that award. Deitrich exlled in yes- terday, We told him te let Applicant make make tentative award and submit here. We would appreciate a hearing. They cave us our certified check beck and tried to wash us out of the picture. We will give you every possible consideration. We will clear it to Washington for an anewer, but I believe the answer will be that the Board in Payetterille has the privilege of making an award to either contractor. This time element may change that decision. I do net think there is any use of your enter- img any further pretest. I will bring this to Mr. Sleants attention and we «ill not approve an award until we are clear on it... 2. , E would think thet if you had a tie bid, the next thing would be the time element, which is important. Did Deitrich mention thatt Wo, he did not. I dé mot think ef it. Ordinarily our projects are set up with time limit fixed. I wish you would cive that time element merit. All we want is a fair hearing. We appreciate thet and will do everything we oan. Exhibit e Faecernl Buergendcy Administration of Publis orks 150 Burt Building, Atiantea, Ga. Docket NC-L335-F, Negro High School, Fayetteville, North Carciina Dear #r. Carmichaei: Confirming cur telephone conversetion this morning with ret erence to the letting of the above project, bids were tasen on this job April 12, 1939. Heinecce-Dilieney, inc., of Southern Pines, North Caroling, submitted « Sic of $62, KU.00 efd 275 deye for the time of completion. We, ¥. F. Lofttis, General Contrseter, of Charlotte, Narth Garelies, subsitted e bid ef $62,300.00 and 240 Gays for the time of completica. As you xBow, these two bids were the lowest Submitted end were tied. However, we submitted 35 daye igss time to com ane i plete the wore than did Reinecke-Diliehey, inc. iiding Committee tentet hacke-Dilieheay, inc... suo; job should be axarded completion end « tied wish to thanc< you in #eivence for you cen Youre very tmiy, ¥. FP. iFTiS, GENERAL OCONTHACTOS e: PES. ES ANTE STRATOS @ PUBLIC WORKS Leged Division Hurt Building s+ &tlepta, Georgia Opinion in Re: Doshit Bo. Ms Co 1407-P State: Berth Carolina i ' @f Biecetion Date: April 19, 1939 ~ Be are a of the following wenoerandum addressed to the Legal Section by Mr. BE. D. Sloan, Assistamt Pecional Engineer: "-t 11:00 A. Me om April 12, 2958, bids were received for the #everal divisiems: of construction sork or beth the white and the megro scheai at Payettevilie, Kerth Carolina, The two “lew bids for the megre school were subnitted, respectively, by Beinecke-Dillehay, Incorporated, and ¥. P. Leftis, both bide being idestical in smcunt ~ ~ namely: $62,200.00, | There is no evidemse to indicate that there wes any collu- siem; that this Ss ons of these unusual things thet happen ome ina long -pericd. Both eomtractors are reliable, both bids apperentiy regsler in all reepects and the only differ- va eee Tha netructine te Bidders exntained the follering tree paragrephs; — ; COMEECRIRNe gb COrUTEE & WORK: {ee contractor for the generel contract shall commence werk under his comtreet on = Gate to be epecified in a written a-der of the architect ani shall fully complete e111 wrk within 275 sanseoutive ealem@ar days from ant inelut~_ ing said dete. Seki pave Giecidi es tian Ai oe be Gables is OS mi xime time esteblished by the Ower for completion of the combragt, horever, #esh establishes ef the mumber of calewfer days for oampl ction dees act re~ strict bidders from steting In the proposals, in the . spece provided, thereof, « lesser muber ef eslendear days in which they agree te camplete the ecatract. Bidders are metified that proposals offering to complete this contract is excess of the murber cf days established Oy the Omer aay be deemed irregular and will not be sub- Sect for comeicerstion of awards.* The bid of Re! mecke-Dillehay, Imecrporated, preposed to do thé work in 275 days which is steted as the maxiuam time; the bid of ¥. P. Toftis offers to do this in 240 days, or 35 days less then the saxima time. The question Involved is whether sward - should be made te ¥. P. Loftie as the better bid. cCoPpr The Owner and the Architect seas to favor the Beinecke-Dili shay, incorporated, claiming that they are local contractors whereas the headquartere of V. P, Leftis is Charlotte, Borth Carelina, This stetement is questioned, however, for it appears that Reinecke-Dillehay, Ineorperated, hes offices in Southern Pines, Berth Carolina and also at Payetteville, whereas ¥. PF, Loftis has an office at Charlotte and a branch office st si es pews where he is already doing other P. 4H. A. work, ¥. P. Loftis is contending thet he is entitled to the wark beonuse of his lower time limit ami the Owner admits that they have no objection to either contracstcr. The Owner has made « _.Fesolution showing their preference to award to Reinecke- Dillehay, Incorporated, but thie is not final ami is awaiting the approval or disapproval of this office. Please let us have your opinion promptly." SE iz ox Aileoigds tet: Gabba Mebolnhs selina ool qo laun dia eeeeal Xe se pega ry toedh pie Scop ge yet ‘iets, whether it shell be awarded — to the "lowest" bidder, the “lowest responsible” bidder or the “lowest — amd best" bidder, calar applictble siatutary lan of the Stabe of forse eK eee Fespemsibio® Bikers” Seetion 16 (4), Berth Carelion Code of 1036, provides in part ax follows: contracts involving expenditure of $1,000 or sore ict after advertisement for bids.-Ho sontract for construction or repair work, or for the purchase cf apparatus, supplies, materials or equipment, involving the expenditure of public money, the estimated cost of which amounts to or exceeds one thousand ($1,000) dollars, except im cases of special emer- gemey involving the health or safety cf the people or their ase hig shali be awarded by any board or governing body of any county, sity, town or other subdivision of the state, unless proposals for the same shall heve been invited by «d- vertisement omee in at least one newspepor having general eirculation in the ocunty, eity, tow cr other sub-division, the publication to be at least ome week before the time specified for the epening of said proposals; ***¢ All such proposals shall be opened in public, shall be recorded on the winutes of the board or governing bedy and the award, if any be made, shell be made to the lowest responsible bidder, taking into somsideraticn quality and the time specified in the proposal for performance of the contract. * * © * + Morecrer, it will be observed, from an examination of the above excerpt, that, in determining the “lowest responsible” bidder, it is incumbent upon the awarding exthority to consider “the time specified in the propesels for performance of the contrast.” In other words, the statute expressly states that the mximu time established for cspletian of the work, os set out in the various bids, is a facter te be eonsidered im every case pricr to the awarding of the contract. In the instant ease, it appesre that, while the bids of ¥,. F. Loftis ani Reinecke- Dillehey, Incorporated, ere idextics) in secant, the former | te complete the work specified under the omitraet within thirty- corr. es a sxnitar & - SF uo five conséouvtive calendar days less time than does the latter. Be think, under mach facts, that ¥. P. Leftis ie the “lowest - responsible” bidder within the meaning of the stetute and should be the recipient of the award in qestion, Therefore, the Omer should be advised to rescind ite scticm in tentatively awarding this contract to Reinecke-Dillehay, Incorperated, and to re-award gach contract te the protestant, V. P. Loftis. Approved: . z Ale Me Mexeel2 fr R. Me Maxeetl Aeting Regional Counsel, P.W.4. ASS. Jaf Ae Be Svovd de. Be. Steed Attorney, P.u.A. Approved: j/s/ Then. Je Wing fieié Thos. J. Wingficla attorney, Contrast Unit ies i : GF MSc was Wasttacsten, 5.0. ey 3 Mey &, 3979 os Iagel-COmees . 4 Bee ret Eee Bale 1j07-F MEMORANDUM: EE SELLE AL ALOE TO: Rs HM. Mawvell, Esc, Counsel, Rerion No. 5. F208: Abe Portas Mtidieing Bidders* Specified fine for Completion of Contract as Factor Im Evaluating Sids for Purpose of weed. ; : This ia im further reply tp your memorandum of April 27, 2999 {your referents: Legal-TJ¥-mm), concerning your opinion of April 39, 1939, im ectimection with the matter of the award of a comsiree~ - Gion contrast on the sbove-masbered dockets : You state ‘that the propaeis’ contract documents in questicm con- tained, smemg other itens, the following previstons: = * CCAEECREERT xp coMpIErION OF WoRk: ‘The contractor. for the neral Gontract shall commence work whder bis contratt om & gate to be specified in « written order ef the architect and. shall ¢6ily complete al? work within 27° sonpecwtive days from ané including s8i¢ ¢ate. bs This peried specified sieve is to be construed as the maucdieu time egtablished by the Gener for caupietion of the cosmeract, howerer, . such establisteeest of the number of calender Says fer completiar does not restrict bidders fram suctinr in the pro- posala, in the space provided, thereat, # lesesr nawber of calender Gays in which Shey szree to complete the contract. piddere ere notified that proposals offering to complete this scatemet in excess of the maaber of cays established by the Qmer sey be deene< irtegaler and «ill met be subject Ser consideration of awards.” Several bids were reeeives in response te the Acvertiawnent for Tae cao lowest bids ceceive: were each in the sncunt ef $42,300, by Reinecke-Dilielmy, Incorporated, stl V. P. Lettis, re~- spectively. The former stxted {n ite Prepesal that it wats do. the work in 2M duys, while the Letter stated tm Ms fF opossl that he wonld do thw work-in 20 daa. a & ¥ = a You sail attention to Section 236 (a); Morth Carclian Gese of 19%, which provides, in ser, *, « & @ the averd, if any lowest responsible biesar, ity and the tine specified i of the contract. & * #9". It sppesrs that the Attormey General * Borth Carolin, im ade 4° ‘wiged the Oemer as follars: ; ":ine slement in this case mob inportamk. Both bide ‘belng the sane If has discretion under the lew te mrar “eee te ReineckeeDi Lieh«y instead oF Loftis.* Ts. view of the Atte: rey General’ ‘epintes, the Dende ilipetxee award ths santracs to Bei inecke-Dillehey, Imterperated, notarithst ; the feot thet the Reinecke-=Dillehsy bid amd the Lefties bid ere idegst eal in mmount, the me bid, 275 days for completion and the esther 2G days for eampletion. The temer’s preference for Pelnecin-Dillehay appears to be on the ellegation that the eommern ‘is s loca? actor emi thet Loftie is not 2 loom) Sontracters Zowever, it is oy stenidine that it.ise contrary Se PHA policy fer an Omer te base ite meerd of a comtract on the fact that ‘he curtanpleted awardee ise *iocal" contractor. = Inameacth @s it sppeers that the bid of Beftis and the hs wr... Reinecke-Dillebey are idextical in amount amd ere equally retponsive “to the specifieations, but the former proposed to couplete the work Gm less tine tien the letter, we felt that fie contract = ferent <* fot a vontrest $0 shat - seonset ” . mee ee Ze 4 a ine | : : apeeitiet ty sacks bidder in Bis propossl fet the perfa This is because the abovre-quoteé. provision. “Qacoss of or Jase than the touaber of 2aye mystified Uy the Dever. Similarly, ‘in & case where the low bide. very in enous, there ‘@eal of ciffieulty im epphyiag the shove-gu provisian of & statute “hich provides that the tine specified in. ‘the proposal Por perfornance of the contract shall be taken nto Gonsiteratione This difficelty mould be obviated if the preposed eoutracs Jocunents oe a Sefinite besiz for the noueGary — evalustion of the days bid im excess of of Ress than the muater of days sorenaeee by the Qmer, of indicated above. In cusp hlaual oircanstamees, where the Becional Direster is - 23 thorourhly eavinced that tine is reelly of the essence of the prow | posed contract, we would have ne objection Se his epproring of prow =. posed contrack Zocuments reccirine each bisder to stete is Bis Proposs! the sunber of ieys Sid ty hin for eempletion of She eon- tract, provided that s:ch decamsents also scenform tc the faiicwinge They should specify 4 certeiz gumber of esmeecutive calender days for completion amd shocld prerite for the Mocetary evaluation of Bids er the besia cf the addit pam to or the subtracticn fram sash bic of = cortain statet ancast for each esiemder dey in excess of er less than the mochber of calender days specified by the Gumer. xs Where resort is had to this procedure, it ig highly important tat tne Eafermation for Siciers shail be fully instructive te bidders and @@ell ect forth clearly the sime and monetary basis upon which bide Wl] be evaluated. It is siso hichly importent thet the fors of Prepesal shal) sontain an eppropriste paragraph under which each. widéder etall tbe required to gake n cppropriate entry of the tise tid te hin for thé saepievica of the scorntrest. When 3 eontrest is awarded. on this basis, it must be awarded to that, responsible Bidder whose Wid 16 lowest in amount efter the sadition tharsto or subtrac- tion therefrom ef the sum arrived at by sulbiplying.the <i fferencs between the days bid by bis and the specified cays by the par dict : sacante And, of course, when the, contract is executed, i* must oon tain, asthe completion perici, the monber of cansecutive calemiar days which the bidder has bite Rereafter, in view of the foregoing, before epproving of pro- posed struction eomtract doouments, yoo gheuld take steps SPPTO~ priate to insure thet, if any prevision such ae thet Above-quoted iy to de included in such documents, such provision amd the orn f Proposal are aot tnoonsistent with the lest preceding paragraph of this mmorenda. — Abe Portas general Comsel at » ‘hich Rane, ¢ Attorney General Assistant Attorney General on was under consideration at the time written, and it was my unders that the element of time was considered this contract and that it was its Sime clement of the case was not important the contrect to the locel fire right to do under the lav. Yours very truly, HARRY McMULLAN, one i dai be a tais tf: i 4 _ Cherlotta, KN. C., May 24, 2959 , I, BR. BR, Mextet, 20) Builders Building, Coariotte, Nort: Gerdlina, Sake rp = following stetement voluxtery to J. B. Hamecek, whe has identified himesif as a special @gent, Division of investigations, Public Borts Ami ni st resi ome wt an aspociete of ¥. P. Lofhis, General Gontrector and bate power ef z to make contracts ami ect for Mr. Loftis in aii official oxpaci ties: v. F. Lomtis, Generel Contractor, subei ited & bid in the ascunt of 962, 300.00 for the construction of = Negre School Building, Fayetteviile, Jerth Ourolina, xnomn ms Docket BC 1407-F,; of which Mr. Hiilia: HE. Beitricek, Meisigh, Norca Gsercline is architect, end for which the Building Comittee of the City of Faystteville, North Carolime is sponsor. Reinseke-Dillebeay, Ige., Fayette- = ville, North Gaeralins, aabti¢ted « bid ifentical in emount, whieh, as rhe seis as this tira ig concerned, was purely colncidentel, as me hed mo denlings — with Reineske-Dillehay, Jue., prior to the gubmiasion of bids. fo the best. of my semory, in toteling our 614 our figares res $62, ae art we alested to deduet the $46.00. to make 1% sven money. i was not present at the opetize or the bids. et. Loftie was at the Latsting en, efter the bide were epesed, the building com:i ttee went into executive session end mede the sward to Reinecke-Diliehay, Inc. Mr Loftis saked to. be beard Sd oslied to the attention of the building combi ties that he hed id forty: Goya" less tine for construstion then did Reinecke-Dili¢hay, Ine We specified tec hundred <hirty-five deya? time for cowpletion whereas | - Reineeke-Diliahay, In¢. tes ‘epecified two bundred seventy-Tive days. rs Loftis stated. that he felt the differeice ib tine constituted a lower & than thet of Reinecke-Dillehay, tne. Mr. Wilkins, Gheairsen of the Bui Comnittes, then told ¥r. Leftis thet the tize wes not the esgperice of thé Gob- tract end thes it would have nme bearing ss to the award, fir. Loftis stated to the building committee that, if be could not have the job, bb. enc pit te. see Reinecke-Dilishay, sae eet it end gow retired. : When I heard ef the ection the puilaing Gowmmittee Lad cour i Liteliin teks protested to Ur. Carnichesl, Public Works Administration, Atlanta, Georgia, by telephone asd confirmed euxe by-letter, Wr. Carnichesl gtated that @ % thorough investigetion wuld te made and Gut we would heer ar ae: as ae his.was dene, Two er three weets elapsed frase the time of our protest. Er, Saath the architect, cnlied me tc his office shd stated that it would be-to our ad- vantege to withdrew our protest, os the local pressure of the Gullding som. wittes in Payetteviile mess wake him intersret cur spesification on thie erojett too iitersliy. I did not telieve that Mr. Deitrick*s stetendnt scald be ccongurred in but, upor » mabkie With the building comittes, tiey sub- stentieted the statenent sede by Mr. Deitriek. .fhey appeared to be resensral of the rage that we bad smd@e = protest, it the fire? piece erid tock t&e ttitude. thet the citizens ef the ooamunity would be better clessed wits tteville, Sorth Gerolina, make the following sien af Tmrestigations, Public Works Afrinistration: of Cumberland Gourng Scheels and Secretery to the ledeter meas a addadece, oak etcinetae oe vaenee a om lima 1407-7, a Peblic Works Adsizistration of the constretion of various school buildings inom oss bere ststement welentarily to J. B. Hancock who has identified Rimecif es Herts iama Country. “I, A. B. Widicins, Page e Special Agent, Divi Also, I em the official representative of the ef Cumberiené Comty for the administration of the i ui a j au i et nl if an i i qwamt be ate to ¥. FP. loftis. award ef com-ract, ani sygpested thet the “he ii. il Pin “al ei . a Ht | i | Hat a HH test ani Purmisheé « letter of with- ef his orn free will ené accord mexber of Se Guberland County the Pays vierille Aiy Sceols, withcre pre sis amt mE ct te suggestion of any his : h 4 i Senet of SOerction, Beare of Trustees of Sercer =. >=.. xe id tion it would be better, he Public Works A@mini stration and from... aoe inset ok County, to readvertiss — “then to award it toV. P. Ieftis. * an Payetteville, North Carclizn Mey 26, 1939 I, B. U. Breece, Fayetteriiie» North Caroline, make the ts statement voluntarily to Z. B. Hancock, who bas identified himself as « Special Agent of the Division ef Investigation, Public Works Administration; <I am Chairman of the Cumberland Beard ef Education, Cumberland Coun Sorth Carolina eh bedy is the sponsor of & project known as Docket N.C. 1407-F con- sting of the construction of several school tuiidines. Although I am Chairman of the Board, Er. A. B. Wilkins, Secretary of the Board has been appointed official representative by reso OB» . Gn April i2 , ata meeting “eek Biaiy Rennie wear tere a ville, North Carolina, and V. P. Feats: roth Carolina, sulmitted bids in identical auamts. In My sedation ‘these identical Bids were not the seeulS of collusion but merely of pure coincidence. The identical bids of the two above contracters were the ao iow bids, and the Board instructed Mr. Wilkins to call . oa at titemarion a we the in hendling reque orm as procedure i@entical bids. T aia not hear the telenhone conversation, fy tas Selds Wake Natatetninee dee ne ee By the Public Works Adsiniestretion that e« Be a there would be no objection te the te the local contractor. The Board of Education then voted to avard the contract te Reinecke Diliehay, Inc., and shortly efter the vote — Er. Loftis came inte the meeting ond ealled our attention © anaes days prior time specified liehay, Inc. ie. Wiiktss ous entheskied Scand tn ingace uetihe Ghat oe matter 40 mo Gifference to the Board as they did not expec Sie school for the coming term, and that the voted to award the contract to the iecal ¢ ite consideration, and position he would award the contrast te the iseal con- Breece = Page 2 I do not remember who replied to Er. Hunter but to the best oe tae eeeey ee Soon Soe ee eee that any pressure would be brought to bear on him the Board of Education or the citizens of the ty. - ee. ee ee eee ee 2 erent ee contents of which I do not remember, TI am not aware of the manner or the time at which the the check and bid bond were returned to proposal, v. Pe Loftis. I have the above statement and find that it is trae and t to the best of my knowledge sna Hope Milis, Sorth Garcline Mey 25, 1969 eo I, Ach. Duwis, Hope Killa, North Cerclina amke the following statesent wolunterily te J.5. Heneock who ans Rieself as y & Special Agent, Division of investigations, Public Administrations I am © somber of the Cusberiemd County Boerd of Bducction, Cusberland County, Marth Omrolina «hich body is the sponsor of a project known @ Public Berks Administration Sducstion on April 12, 1959 Building, = ie, North e3 ur. Loftis wae then called te the mecting of the Board and although i do not remember the exact comwersation I gained the iupression thet be was satiaTied with the decision of the Bomrd to asard the contract inecke-Diliensy and did mot make « protest at tant tins, is true te the best . 3 | . . the above statemect ami find tmet it ami belief, Fayetteville, orth Geroiina may 27, 1959 statesent voluntarily to J,3. Hancock who gas identified hisweif as a Special Agent, Division of Investigations, Pubiic Works, Administration; — I em @ Member of the Cusberland County Board af Biucation, Cumberland County North Carolim which body is the sponsor of « project known as Docket N.C. 1407-F, a Public Works Aduinistration project which consists of the construction of several school buildings the am asked ne bad agreed hed specified far thet reason, beat Mt $6 Gd a i | tf wy knowledge and belief, — Payetteville, Morth Cerslina May 26, 1939 I, Ws 2, Reaves, R.¥.D. #6, Fayetteville, North Garolins, mske the following stetement to J, B. Hancock, who hes identified himself as & Special Agent, Division of Investigstion, Public Works Adninietrati on: I em a member of the Cumberland County Board of Béucction, CumberJand Goanty, North Garolina, which body ics the Sponsor of = project mom aa Docket BN. C.,1407-F, A Public Works Administration project whieh consists of the odnstruction of various schools in Cumberland County. I was present at a meting of the Bosrd of Education on April 12, 1939, when two contractors, Reinecke-Dillehay, Fayetteville, North Carolinas, and ¥V. P, loftis, Charlotte, North Carclins, submitted identical bids im the amount of $62,300.00 on the Negro School Building. I have no . / te beliere that the submission of these identical bids was ee Mr. Hunter then explained thet he hed filed the protest to Mr. Loftis and then withé@rew hic protest by letter. He « his proposal, bid bend end certified and wes advised that the hands of the Architect. ‘ 3 i z a . i a ‘to the dest of my Kndwledge ani belief. = here Fayetteville, Borth Garoline May 26, 1939 I, W. Garl Averitt, Stedman, North Carolina, make the folloring statement voluntarily to J. B, Hancock, who hae identified himself a8 « Special Agent, Division of Iavestigations, Public Works AAministration, as i am 2 member of the Cumberland County Board of Education, Gusberland — County, North Caroline, which bedy is the sponer of « project known 3 as Docket North Caroline 1407-F, a Public Borks Administration projeaty a whieh consists of the construction of various school buildings in see Cuuberland County, Proposals were submd tted by Various contractors for the construction af SalsAiame se Sb penvert ae Ants 2%, 1939, and the bide of Reinecks-Dilicshay, Inc. » Fayetteville, Rorth Carolina, and ¥. P. lefttis, Charlotte, B, C., were the low bids on the High = Gehool building and were in the identical amount of $62,300.00. I an of the opinion that the identical amounts were purely eoinet- e ee 8 Tamored that Mr. se wet Hed ac pee tie coatract to Rednecks Diliahay, Inc., and at a meeting of the Board held on May 5th, 1939, Mr. Hunte?, Representative — wriatia wie wee wae stated that he had the Architect, that in case Loftis were d local aitizens would sibs tt hard fer ek had no authority from the Boaxd em personally concerned, I heli: been brought to bear on Mr. first expressing satisfaction ing a protest, I would prefer the contrast to Mr, Loftis. thin ite rights in ee the chove statencnt ani find that it is tres to the Y- Const, Clawrras %. Carl Averitt snowledge amd belief. \ WORTH CAROLINA, CUMBERLAND COUNTY. #. G. DOWNING, being duly sworn, says! That Be 16 2 neiber of the School Soard of the Fayette= ville Graded Schoole and aé such was designated ag Ohairitan of Building Committee; that he has followed closely the letting of the contracts for the erection the white high é@cheool building and eolored high sotins bu ldine in Fayetteville | affiant further says that Se Was press on April 12th. when the tide for the erection of the whise oi colored high achool were Bpened and read; .-tat gaia bids were publically. opened. in the Sourt room in tae Courthouse in Payette saA44 and were read by Mr. Deitrick, the architect. tee Affians: furth ner Says that the Did - the Loftis: Con-: struction Company and the B14 of Reinecke Dillehay Gonstrustion Campany on the colored high school was for the same sum; “that When eaid bide mere opened and read and 15 was found that ‘the Loftie Construction Company and the Reineoke Dillehay Construe- - tion Company olds were identical in so far as the amounts were eoncerned, and Were the low biddere on the colored high school) and the question then arose as to which one should be awarded the nic, tlanta Office Hr. Wileins Board that he wae advised by ‘he atliante Office tha é & award the bid to either one of the Dladdere that they saw fit to award it to. At thet time Mr. Widkins called the attention: of the Board to the fact that Mr. Loftie had acked to be aii to come before the Board and make a statement before the cén-~ . tract bad bean awarded, and theretipon Mr. Loftic wae “aekbac to come before the Board “and Make any Statement that he would like : totiake. Mr, Leftie stated. to the toard in substance, that it wae true that the amount of the bide wae ecqunl eo far as the amount of the bid was aees mut that in hie bid the work was to be completed some thirty or thirty-five Gays earlier tie the time epecifisd. in che Redbooks Dillehay bid, and for that reason he felt like he was the low bidder. Hr. Wilkins then. tela uP. Loftis that the Board had eansidered the two bide — i and that «6 far as the time was conserned it would make no difference mith our Board in view of the fact that the time : specified in. the ‘Reinecke Dillebay bid would ‘cosiplete the : building by the time it would be needed and in view of the tact that the amount of money to te expended would be the same and that the Reinecke Dilienay Sonetruction Company was a local = corporation the Board would like to award the contract to : Reinecke Dillehay. Mr. Loftis then sade a etatement that in o, wiew of the Board's desire in that respect and in view of the fact that hie was not a local corporation and that af he was nat in his own home town he wce.ld probably feel the same way and that he haa no ovjections to offer to the to the Reinecke Dillehay Comgpeany. He thanked ae their courtesy and told them that he hoped he would to Go some work for them in the future and “tnesreciee After Mr. Loftis had retired the Board again discussed the awardine of the contract, discussed the identical amounts and the time in which the work was to be completed, and after Scns Lop ~Abtorney for the “Boars or Education,” irs Honties;- Enginesr.for TET ee. edie rapetitemnenemunmr sae iercostty peta fede $ having Secided that the time in @hich the builicing was to be completed would not effect the use of the vullding, the contract was awaried to Reinecke Dillehay Construction Company. Some few days after the 12to I learned that the Leftis Sonetruction Company had filed a protest on account of he awarding of the contract to Retnecks Dillehay Conetruction Go. and made the contention that the contract & have bean awarded to him for the reason that the time ie in his was some thirty or thirty-five days ghorter than that specified in he Reinecke Dillehay Did. On May 65 1. "ae present at a meet ing in the office of Mr. Wilkins, County Superintendent, Fayetteville, N. o-, where ur. Wilkins, Mr. Deitrick, the Architect, Mr. Chas G. Rose, : Loftis Construstion Company, and @ gentlemen representing ‘the bonding company who had written the bond for the Loftis construe] tion Company, and one or two others were present. This meeting wae called for the purpose of giving Mr. thintley an opportunity 4 to take the matter up with ‘the authorities in an effort to try te get the matter straightened out. Mr. Huntley stated in. substance that they had some information, not coming direct fron the local school board or the Gounty School Board that the County Board wae making some effort to force Mr. Lottis out.. Mr. Wilkins etated to Er, Huntley and the other gentlemen that so far as he knew no such thing had © contemplated by His 90s 3 I, Speaking tated that ou : board Hac mn rigidered » euch tactick or proposition whatso . he the contract was finsily = : - =F + = > % awaraced to mr hat & would wSeeree’ als the coopera- tion that any other Contractors would receive, and thet there was no feeling on their part toward the Loftis Conetruction Company whatsoever and that the Board, in awarding the contrast man (Ot to Reinecke Dillehay Conatrusti in Company, felt that they were acting proper after wr. Loftis had Sede the statement to |. the Board Stat he made om the date of She ietting. after ur, Huntley had gene into the matter fully with the County Superins tendent, myself and others, Mr. Huntley Stated that he was Willing to withdras the protest filed om behaif of Loftis Conatructiae Company by Bim, and saié that the protest was '- $41ed in the abeence of Er. Loftie and at a time when he did Hiei vee ei at ery i a al i i hot know tiset Mr. Loftie had appeareé before the County Board | and had taée the statement that he hed made, and thereupon Rr. Kuntley prepared a letter, as I umderstood it, in full ~ “withdrawing the protest filed by the Leftis Construction Company $0 the amamcing. of the eoatract.to tha Reinepce. Dillehay...-.- Constructian Company and stated that. ur the cpjections were Dasec on the grounces ite the Reinecke Dillenay Construction Company Was a local corporation, the Loftie Construction Company. had no further objections to the contract being awarded to “Reihecke Di liehay Construction Company 2f the same could de éone without the Loftis Construction Gompany Fons eNe ing tie Gepocit it Bad made and released frat ite bond. Wish to state further that there is no disposition of the county board of education or the Board of the Fayetteville coerce or Sntimidate the Loftis effort to to Leftis courteous | Reinecke Bililehay | would receive. Subscribed and sworn to before me, thie the @7%h day of May, 1959. . Downing and I were present Cousty Board of Biucation on Agril Iz, 1959 concerned in tie meetings system ani will be edministered ty tie City Fayetteville, lorth Careline gy 29, 1980 schools ‘icial vote re uest as the Hancock whe ses identified hieself as a | 3 2 4 Z ae thet the Architect, Mr. Dietrick was the custodian of all proposals, me. Hunter then withdrew his protes t and furnished a letter of with- Grewal and asked for his proposal, bid bormi and check, He wee iiforned us iii f iC A IR ee pon B.M, lewis ~ Page 2. i em of the ogimicn thet if the award of the contract to Beimecke - Diliehay is cisepuroved the Public Yorks Adsinistration end instrictions Talan to baal tee aubueal Ga VF loftisa tied the citisesr 2, the comamity amd the taxpapers will be very much dissatisfied, I would geefer to ree@wertise rather than award the contract to ¥.?. Loftis in view of the circusstances ic this particular case, stetemest and find tast it is true ami correct ee BG tn ns anne BORTH CAROLINA, =) CUMBERLAND COUNTY. ) x, GHARIZS G. BOSE, of Fayetteville, Narth Ceroline, make the followla:c stetenent, voluntarily, te Zz. B. HANCOCK, who has identified himself as a Spectd Seent of the Division of Imrastication, Public Yorks Administration. = am a practicing attorney in the City of Fayetteville, Borth Carclige, end have practiced iaw in the State of Barth Caroline for thirty-seven (37) years 4 end have twiee been President of the State Ber Association, — T em attorney for the Cumberland County Board of Bducation, Cumberland County, ¥ Garolina, I was — not present at the meeting of the Boeri of Education held ou April 12th, 1939, when bids were submitted for the... eisees; Mtminad a6 & noaktne volt. ba tear Se:. 196 ae present, however, at a held om May 5th, 19 ae which Mr, Hunter, a represent etive of ¥. P, Loftis, Gontract met with the Soard to discuss the matter of the identical — bids submitted by VY. P. Ioftisa and Reinecks-Diliehay, on above project. — ere were present at that meeting all of the Seamne sae ptt wane eee ee ‘ PRA . a ore ete ferences: <p geen a orn EE embers of the Board of B@acation,-with the exception of BR. A. Davisy 4,5. Wilkins, County Superintendent, ¥. 0. Bowing, a representetive af the Board of Trustees of the ve of some - Peyetteville Graded Schocls, Mr. Hunter, representing +t Bonding ¥. P. loftis, « representa pany , ond his affients. After the Boerd was celied to order, Er. Wilkins nade the statement es to the purpose of the meetix and then Mr. Hunter was ellowed to make his statement, whi was to the effect that he Red heard some rumors thet the — Board of Education of Cumberland County would make it Bard for loftis to camplete his contract, if thé tontrect wa awarded to him; and he wanted to make inquiries of the Board if such were the fects. Mr. Downing, spé« foe. himeslf, and the members of the City Board of Education, = atated @ the meeting thet there was no truth whatever BB Se such rumors, and the members of the Boerd of Sducation expressed the seme sentiments; and Mr. Hunter was sdvised thet the only reason why the contract was awarded to Reinecke=. Dillehay Campany on identical bids was that it wes felt a every member of the Bodrd that a local contractor shoulda given preference when the bids were identical, in view of the fact that the contracter was to Be peld, to a large extent, out of local tar a It wes definitely stated by the members of the Board eni . Wilkins that there was no prejudice whatever against Mr. loftis,hinself. There was some criticism in the commnity which hed been heard by some mambers of the Board thet they eould not understand why Mr. Loftis, st the meeting, when the eontrect was ewarded to Reimecke-Dillehay Company, agreed to eward the ecomtrect to the.local comeern, and he, oF his ‘pepresentative, hed thereafter filed = protest that such contract hed been awarded to the local concern. Te was stated at the meeting, snd ny recollection is, that Mr. Bunter made Statement that the protest '% on eee filed in Atlanta without the knowledge of Mr. Loftis. Mr. Hunter then withdrew his protest, furnish ing a letter of withdrawal. I am not aware of the cireumstances under which he received his proposal, bid bond and certified check, «s : cote meeting prior to any aisoussion concerning the above ~ ocume Se . I have examined Section 1316 (a) of Michie's Code of 1935, whieh states in pert: *all such proposals shall be opened in public; shali be recorded on the mimutes of the Board or governing body; and the award, if eny be made, shall be made to the Lowest responsible bidder teking into eonsiderstion the quelity and the time specified in the proposal for the performance of the contract." as. It is my. information thet the advertisement for “this project-specified that it should be Core: leted within two- is hundred and seventy-five (275) days; end both or the bids of Reinecke-Dillehay Company end v. P. leftis were well within the . period specified ain the advertisement. In my opinion, the fact that the Reinecke-Dillehay bid specified a ionger time of performance, Loftis Le bid n doth were within the advertised time, would not in any /#¥rect the legal right of the Board of Bducation to avard the contract to either of these two firms, in the exercise of ts best judgmente : In my opinion, there is eerteiniy nothing in the section of the statute referred to, which would, in eny way, limit the discretion of the Board under such circumstances. T have read the ebove stetement, end find that it is true to the best of my knowledge and pelief. Sworn to and subscribed pefore me, this the 27th day of May, 1939, at et : t. i Carglinge Faye LE Raleigh, Worth Carolina dune 7, 1939 I, William Henley Deitrick, mike the following statement voluntarily to J, B. Hancock, who has identified himself as «© Special Agent of the Division of Investigation, Public Works Administration. I am a practicing Architect with offices at 115 West Morgan St., Raleigh, Worth Carolina and am employed by the Cumberland County Board of Education to act as Architect in the con- struction of « project known as Docket BH. C. 1407-F, which con- of the construction of various school buildings in land County. Bids | the Fayetteville White Hich School and Paystteville School were opened on the 12th day of April, 1939. revealed that Mr. V. P, Loftis, Charlotte, North - E ile, Horth My assistant, Mr. EH. W. Moser, then returned the plan deposit chezks, the bid bonds and the certified bid deposit checks to all of the bidders present, except to Reinecke-Dillehay, and the other lowest bidders. Mr. Loftis received his check and receipted for same, which receipt is now in my files. Superintendent hin, 8 presence called the ec a conference for ; zl pia Abgpesbsgaziea és. iibsifbasbretl? a stated that he Fayetteville he informed me that ided to withdraw his protest and e 3 i pag ey i ii is si} $ a s 3 5 Deitrick ~ Page 3 See T toe ck Gen the enUee CUGT to eh eu cane CO thet I did not think the withdrawal of his protest would suffice, but - amt. the withdrawal of his bid would be necessary. He agread with ne ae in this opinion and then wrote to me as Architect requesting that ho . ‘be al lowed to withdraw his bid and alse requested return of his sert- ae ee eae ' ecks, signed by Er. Loftis and ie ie etebana cha Hak 20 Ga OF oes a tae Saat my knowledge and belief, Fayetteville, North Carolina May 29, 2939 E, 8. Gs Derby, Fayetteville, North Garolins, make the following statement voluntarily to J, B. Hancock who has identified himself as a Special Agent, Division of Investigation, Public Works Administration: I om Resident Engineer Inepector of the Public Works Agquinistration, previously essigned to Docket NO 1407-F, Fayetteville, North Carolina, and attended the bid opening on April 12th, 1939, when identical bids were submitted by V. FP. Leftis ani Reinecke-Dillehay, Inc., on the Begro High School Building. When it wes discovered that the bids were identicel, Mr. Deitrick, the Arehitect, informed me that it had been suggested that the two contractors flip a coin to see who would be awarded the contract, and I informd Mr. — Deitrick that I 4ié not think that would conform with the Public Work Administration policy. aAgter some airoussion by the mambers of the Board, it was decided that it would probably be a better policy to award the contract to @ locel contractor, and at Mr. Wilkins! suggestion, Mr. Deitrick, the Architect, called the Public Works Agministration an Atlante and talked to Mr, i, who informed Mr. Deitrick that all other things being then continued with their 4iscussion ané deciding that the time — + was not a factor in this caes, they voted to award the contract Reinecke-Diliehay, Inc. have not heard any mowber of the Cumberland County Board of Biucetion, its employees, or any member of the Board of Trustees of the Payetterille City Schools, or officials acting for these boards, state that they would make it difficult for Mr. Leftis if he were awarded the contrest. Derby - Page #2 I was transferred from Fayetteville shortly efter the bid opening and am not aware of the circumstances surrounding the protest of wward, ite subsequent withdrawal, nor of the withdrawal of the proposal, bid bond and Gheck of 7. P. loftis. I beve read the above statement and find that it is trae to the of my knowledge and belief. Fayetteviile, North Cerolina May 29, 1939 ‘ I, JeBe Bllerbe, Box 248, FayetDeville, North Carolina sake the following etatenetit woluntarily to J,5. d@mcock who hes identified himself as a Special Agent, Division of luvestigations, Public Works Aduinistration, I em resident engineer inpecter, Public Works Administration te Docket §N.C. M07-F and I beve desk space in the office of to the Cumberland County Bosrd of Education, I attended bid opening on April 12, 1939 when bids were opened for the Golered High School on which Reinecke-Dillety ani V.P. Loftis bids identical in amount, I believe that the subaission assigned A,B. Wilkins, be allowed to withdraw hie proposal ware returned, He was advised that the proposal,bid the hands of Mr. Dictrich,the Architect, ‘orwed at the:mecting on May 12, toast the avers ande to Reinecke-Dillehay, the locai contractor, he stateatoat ituation sliould aries in Charlotte be would expected whe has identified hisself as ons, cublic forks Adainistration; , igeti . a and belief, 3,347 83,3 | npn ha i aehage 4 volurterily to J.5, a Special Agent, Division of Invest read the above statement and find thst it true te the best ee * 4 i 92 * aa * Ls) i and Statesent Charictte, H. ¢. June &, 19% J - I. Be J. MAliehay, S11 Bast Morehead Street, Gharlotte, B. C.,. make the following statement voluntarily to J. 3. Hancock, who has identified hiaself as a Special Agent of the Division of Investige- tiem, Pabliic Works Aé@ministrations I o- now Erecutive Director of the Housing Authority of the City of Charictte, North Careline. I wos formerly SecretatpTreasurer of the Reinecke-Dillehay, Imc., general contractors, Fayetteville, North Carclime. The firs of Reinecke-Dilleheay, Inc. sterted doing business in Fayetteville, Serth Gerclina on May 9. 1935, and has maintained an offices in that City continously since that tine. Previous to ay asre®iation with Mr. Reinecke of the firs of Reinecke- Dillehay, Inc., Mr. Beinecke himself maintained a oo mracting business in Egyetteviile for more than twenty (20) years, with the exception of rp period 1922 to a. end owns a2 howe on Hilicide Street in that iy. + It is true that Mr. Beinecke maintained an office of the Reinecke- ' Biliehey, Inc., in Southern Pines, Sorth Grolina @uring the four years in which I sainteimed ap office in Fayettevilie. Nee G. A. Otianled, who ie Vice-President of the Heinecke-Dillehay. Inc., has | sise Lived in Fayetteville all his life. “Fie airsose of this Statement is to show that the a hay, Inc., is a Pagetteville, North G,rolim concerz. I here read the above statement ani fini it true to the best of ay know = ledge and belief. Hi ae ie fa ie i fh Hh tl | il ; i I prefer thet eny further statement cone from his. ’ [ heave reed the above statement anf find it is true to the best of ay kmouledge and belief. ? QOPrT lire Se Ap Wortnea, Serional Director, Pederal Bnergency Adninistratian of Public Yorks, baste fullding, Atlante; Georcia in res. @e@sro Rich Scheol Beeket EC Lvl Deer Mr. Yorthan: 7. Bobert 3s Santer, Resenaantatt ve of ¥e PF. inftia, hete mat with ‘the Balidiag Committee of the Payettevilie City Sohsels and the Board of Bduentien of Cumerland County, Forth Carolina, on May 5, 1939, end we have discussed the identical bid “im the eecunt of 342, 300.00 we had with h Reimecke-Dillehay, Ine., . on the above protect, and from auneolusicns deeen I hereby wittdrew the protest agninst the Board of Biueation of Cumberlend County @6 to the aweri.the Courty Bord of Btueetion nade at the letbirg. I withdrew this protest on the basis that we Mii] not be penalised for pur certified check and bid band and FP. WN. A. apeforal. We heave mo further protest io awardins the eontrect for Shis bulidine te Reineche-Biliehay, Incss, other. then the shore. Yours very truiy, ¥. FP. leftis, Generel Contracter Dear Sirs after Qne consideration, we request that we be permitted to ¥ithdres qa proposal. cs the above project amd that oir certified check amé bid bond be returned tm use : oars very truly, qs P. lnttiz, General Coutesctor By Bchert BE. Banter @ fe ‘ x Se PRDERAL MIKROMICY ATMA MLSTAATICN or poplic Boxes vurt Building Atlanta, Georgis Docket Noe Hel- LiOT-F Yorth Cerelina Cumberland Couty Hoard ef Béucation : ay 9, 13 fayetteville, Berth Caroline @ $shool Building rate Qa April 29, 1979, the Leral Section held that the Omner’= @otion in tentetively awarding the coutract for sunstruction of « Segre school tailing to Reinecks- Tilliehay, ints 74 erroneous; snd that euéh action should be rescinéed ead the contract in question awarded to V+ P.lofbias This decision Was soncurred in oy the Contre] Office. (See Meno; Wo-Call-iaxwsll; May hk, 2339)> In « mesorend, addressed to. the lecal Section, unier dake of May 5, 193), => Bs Ds Sloan, Assietant Regional Engineer, states: ee Sindh epactal reference to the negra sches! vail’ 6 Ot which ideatical bids were received fran Fs Ps Loftis, sx Reinseke-Dillehay, Incorporated: dour aling on this subject was thet Fhe bids showha go te V+ Pe tottis : because he had specified a lesser number of calender days to eouplete the works . on ee : = Sis are now in receipt of * letter dated May 5, 1999 fro Ae be Wilkins, Secretary ef the Board ot Education, and attaching ® ‘etter of sane Gave fro % Pe leftis, in shich it will be notec that Ve Ps loftis withirass his protest to ewarding the ecntrast to Reinecke<Diliehes, Incorparetede tefore this letter wat received, Mr. Deitrick - ihe Erehitect, cathe the writer and gave advance sotiee over the telephone of this withdrersid of protest. Attorney Zs BS. Saith was present during this telephone, comrets sation snd will reeali the Aiscussion thereon. i+ Deitrick was asmed 4%) jn withdrawing his provest, ¥« P+ leftis alse witharet his bids fe etated- ever the telephose (eiten is not mentioned in the detter) that hs understood ue, loftie would withdrew bis Sia ana that the Beart would like te aeeept the withtreal, leaving the erard <o Reinecke-Diliehey, Incorperstede The matter is agein referred to your attention for reconsideration in view of the above statenanta.” supplemental nenoramis, dated Bay y of yestertay rerarcim 6 pertinent question now +o be Settled is -whepeet oF oC ireunstances, the sxerc +0 Beinec we-Dillehsy, Troerporates oproved by this offices is the matter bas bese considerably Selayed tis. fer we will aporeciate en eariy reply." 3 a4 ~t 3 OPTBicCc#s 7 = it ‘sppeers, fron an examination ofthe facts ot hand, that the Owner has pepe ~~ mittec “he protestant, ¥. FP. Lefiis, to withdrew bis bid, instead af awarding ~~ the comtract to this bidder in actordance with the ii.strsetions of the Regional Orrice. ; a : the Botice to Bidders, it ig provided: “Ho bidder may withdrew his bjd for a period of thirty days after the opening thereof.* “ : previous applications of similar provisions, the Lega) Diviaton.of the Central Gffice has Puled: "You Fequest information as to the theory upon which we can prevent a bidder from with@rewing his bid at any time he desires to do so before the bid is accepted. We have ascertsined thet courts have held that, =. where an advertisement or form of proposel provides that bide may te. - <° withdrawn for « stipulated number of days, or that the bids are Pres irrevccabie, the bidders are bound by such comditiows. “In the one — of Wheaton Building and Lawber Co. ys. City ef Boston, 2 Mass. 215 — {90 BH. W. 308) the proposal stated thet the bid should remain open Zor 20 days. The leweet bidder refused to executes a contract and the pinintiff's bid was accepted. When the plaintiff refused to execute a ecetract, the deposit which he submitted with his bid was foerfeite?. Be sued to recover his deposit, In holding thet the City sould retain the deposit, the court stated ag follows: 6 ‘The propose] stated that the bid sheuld renain epen « definite masher of days, rot until sone one of the bids shoulé be secepted. The aceeptance of a bid was only one step toward the execution of the contract. The bidder first accepted niicht be unable -te secure the re- quired tond for the performance of the contract. The mayor might for some just reason refuse to approve She contract, or some other cause misht intervene te prevect the exetution of a final contract. fhe tener of the proposal, which was upon a bletk furnished by the defendant, reed.in the lirht of the statute, in- Gicates an intent that the city remerves ail its rizhts under all the bids witii a sontract shell heave been formally executed and delivered, and to hold all the Sidders to the terms of their proposals until it has either rejected.al] of them as provided in St. 1980, pe G16, per. &, of becmme bound by the execution of a ecatrect with one, or the tise limited for acceptance has expired, Henee the aceentance of « bid without the execution of a contract camot be resarded a’ an tmecquivecal and definite determination om the part o* to considir no sther. proposal.:« Se lone as limited for the deposit to remain had not 3 i ena no formni contract had been executed, the eity was at liberty to accept amy proposal, and require the bidder to respend either by signine the contract or sustaining the loss of the deposit.t* leral Division information Sheet Bo. 7, weer nia $14 srier equirement to the in other words, under the Jecibions, a bidder may wit r of the Qener to i hor to the ucceptance thereof, where there is no etatutory r contrary, unlees. the bidder has not acreed.to the risht retain his bid fer a definite period af tine, Applying this ruling to the fecte of the instart case, i. Loftis, in submitting his proposal, waived hie richt to withdrer his bid unt!] the expiration of thirty days fron the date of the openins of the sane {Avril 22; 19795). We thick thet, if a comtrect head been awerded te thi bicéer within such thirty-dey period, « failure on his rart to execute the contract would have resulted, in the sbsenes of a waiver of the Comer's rights under the “thirty-da; clause", in a forfeiture of the Ma security. However, in applying this principle, it would seem that the richt of the public bedy te grant the withdrawal of a bid during such period is unquestioned ~ that is to say, the municipal coverniizs sucherity, in the exercise of ite discretionary powers, might waive its richt to insist that the bid camnct be withiresn wntil the period, rreseribed in the proposal, has elapsed. ; In the instant* case, the Omer has expressly accepted a withdraws! of’ Mr. Loftis' Bid, Unler these cirewetances, it is our eriniean that this bidder camet be caspelled to enter inte « contract for the eon- ‘struction of Shas Project, assuming thet the action of the emer in awerding the comtract te Reinecke-Dillehay, Inc. were rescinded. Although the Gumerts action, in allewins the withdrawal of the Loftis bid, contrary to the Administration's previous advice to award to this “bidder, constitetes a viclation of the spirit of Parv Iv, Pars. 1 {a) ent {b} of Palcds Porn Yoo £50; ee cannot say thet en emerd of the contract to Reinecke-Dillehay, Ine. at this time would be objecticseable tras = legal standpoint. This sanélusion is based wron the theary that, upon the with¢rewal of the loftis bid, the Reinecke-Dillehay, Imc. bid, being identigal im amount te the Loftis bid, constitutes the lovest Fesponsible bid upon which a lewful award nicht be dase<. Aithouzh the Gunner's disregard of its duties arisin: cut of ita contract. with the Goverment micht well deserve appropriate penalty, there arrears Se be ne legal prineiple upon which such penalty could be predicated. That is to say, the demares that might be sustained by the OCuner, as 2 result of the esceptance of Mr. Loftis* withdraws] anc « fine? eward of the comptract to Reinecke-Dillehay, Ine. are purely speculative. This is in view of the fact that, although the former proposed to complete the work an less time than the latter, there is available no principle woon which a proper measure of demeres micht be accurately determined since the cantrect cocuments feii-te provide « definite basis for the monetary evaulation of the cays bid less than the manber of days specified by the Omer. - refore, we are of the opinion that the award te Reinecie- ; be approved as to leral matters. Sed Aste Stead Attorney, P. 7.4. Sprrered: Sea Those J. Tincfield, attorney, Contract Unit ‘Aprroved: Sg¢ sibvert Y. Littlete: Besiondl Counsel, pore, FPF ote is ¥ * Harica, 2 él i etin 2 gsistenont volustar 3 meaket Ss —s a Special hs 4orxs Ramin: stretse <3 £ [ ex eh eneioeer of nema orth Serclins te of she aemegrnetion - gavoral s*>o a rasations Cusberiend Comty, Payetveril} cansist of She empetination of plans, sr werts and maiz wnteining complisnce with regulations o& tee dockets assi ceed jl heve carefully exanined the contract aocanent Y07-2, snd find S50 they do mot panbare & ar for failure ‘Se proposal of = have reed She above statement amc eearrect. Sitness: eves vitast Si, Punic of Wy duties aireact <tcue o? dedket BeGe ; damase olause ast tz the fi Eng; ij fe 133 2 tins i il i i i ili} it fh ii | sity tai Ht dg ye 8 alee oii 8 " ‘PUBLIC WORKS « * = BEES « * iquidated damage provisions were included. | | no Lianisation of the proposed contract docunents discloses Bids in the SSentics] amcunts of ; : s Soe Dagre Zich Gebcol building oe Goetet = LiT-*, Yasetterilie, Soapess farei is ae ae Sa Fe ia! Sie, jar ictte yore SS 0 ex ‘Relaecke= Biliehey, Inee, Bayettevilie, North Carolina. leftic specifies BO days ter utes of ocpietige end Seineche-Tilileher, In — cays. as } esiled ion “dm iustroctiqte. Se. bidders. : i an @fiers to cetermime the reason for the samsiagion of léene: bigs exe E ohe < enki @scinetes af teth eamteactors. These |extinste z ssarel: ; fer in every respect, there bein: = veri rren in @ gnats ettieties fer sack Standarz ‘ieee ae eech, Sartitton and rour: and finished herdware. ihe aeteal ficure ‘gerekee at by Loftia. in computation ef cost including bend, imsurance and pred rit was found tc have been $52, 36.00 and thet ef Reinecke-Tillehay, | Inme., wae feast te be $62,750.05. it wes revealed. thet ¥. FP. ioftis slecte? to subtract $14. from Ris bid, leerins it in rowad figures of $42,300.00 and that Eeinecke-Dilichay, Ines, bed cet : $62, 300.00 becacce ef insufficient Space on the fare of cropesald for — writing Sn the emowmtsixty tro thogeand tires beadred fifty épllers.. is Tere was oo evidemee that the valent seien of bids in dentin?” Moonta wae other then eemperent tals Attention ts Sallei to the Zeca! crinions Purnishet ty the lege? Geparteent ef the Public tor ke ‘Raministration advising thet the contract sheald be meerdei tc Y. Ps Eeftis becetae of bis nearine pro-_ . poaed to wenplete. Ste Selicing in ao lesser tine tusn scare wy Reiner Dilletay, Ince, Ghie spinicn bese pen stetutory lew of Forth: Garslina, which provides thet award of ecntrasts shall be made, taking iste coi- sideret? on quality ami tive of completion. The srigence indjestes that the qumer in this:ease, the Soerd of Education of Oumberla.4 Seunty, =: Worth Carolica, 434 take th- tise of Sazpletion inte considerstion but om the basis that Sher did not inSend to use the school building for the coming acheo] term, swerde< wo ee xo Raigenge-Dillchay,’ ince Fare stem of the omer was aphelc by the Attorney Gemaral of the State of. Serth Carolica after a review of the “statute referred to by the decal Degertesst ef the Patlis forks idnini eiretion. we» 5 he de Forth, fg tees — Girest mt, Public ree i attis in aseesti ‘the date af he Di apeni ny olsateateie " tai dirad ee, “e3 that ity of the intenpretatis z co laws waa bat of the oui: eect inasspeen AS the accard of Secrest “co the Seinecke~>i lletag, inc., “i¢ net sane Sith Pobiie Bees Acci-n<9stretios es ané golicies, Re wee of ix EB x of Approved. mat inticates ti — & mish? 2 gure wh: 3 mm returned. 2 * . #i ioe = = a Feece 4 f i * 3 * SBS TART GS: FAYETTEVILLE AnD Tit SG420 IS EEAPECTLE Wisi TO-s forte! REGRO SCHOOL 3106 Ba TRACT TO = IF YOU Zid arercve ? SAKE I ‘STILL FEEL. THAT I At BRSETIoO tO Tus ARARD AS MY 81D FAS GASED © CN PORSE DAS Less TIES THEME ANY OTHER SURO TTES =“ a F PISISEDSS TO PIA PaOIeCT Tf FaretTevilis at TSS T APD WOULD: LIKE TO Por SAS ORGAMIGATIO£“’ HBsAC FAGH Sscsool pxvecT #1Li, GRESTIS APPate: <Ova USUAL GOOD ATTERTICN IX TELS LATTES. 7? Tarts COPT of Copy NOLLVYISININGY SWYOM I118Nd cys i oy tiF i ge? “ON TVIEAS JT0At~ 7 "ON LEMO0C PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION A Bo + "u = | CONFIDENTIAL NOT FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION RETURN TO ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR = 4/7. A as . J ws a PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION ‘ON ‘TVIHHS ey ‘Md ~ 3 a4 ~% = S Sn x "YQ = . 2 CONFIDENTIAL NOT FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION PEDERAL WORKS AGENCY PUBLIC WORKS AQMIMISTRATION . ° WASHINGTON Cetsbet’ &, 1989 "aa ot the ‘Sits we erproeed eo he’ bee of Maa aubuitted. — Qi beiddndl OC this <eiMiaes Wi SOE, ‘Sarecedet’ deley of'me ee ee ee ee Sharge vas not included in his propossi. 2. ‘Teat the award of the contracts for the eclered achoot te twinetke-—Dillebag, ie we rns ae ee ae eae we-eeerd it oF. ae a basis of bid cubai tied. PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION a, 4. WASHER ae “© September 27, 1939 Sm g lad Go < E s Sd a’ a " i ii Se py a a F eh Pe ai a + ote te a £ Se Tt Tae Touts s: Fird ‘2eser1d Teaoysey Buys0¥ “at “MVE .*g. can "xe * women *@ ony /e/ . TOGHRE StOTE eT ey TONY ecet ‘es Som perep tesget ano *Z GS6T *TT ABM pegeD Te4geT BNO °T eget *Tz thay pew. qtodey suotye@yseauy 50 woseTATT SRIOM OTTGNG JO Jetotssyummeg Pupgoy St¥TO *A °Z ays (@-ad) E-L00T “OD °R QM 'suoyyeTey soqeT 2@TTE 03 tezox sTooqes Bi foreD Weroy ‘eT TpAeagetez E-LOrT °O *M teex00d BTSi10ep *RRUUTAy 6c6t “tt ‘tae PUTPITod gang BOTSUIZSTUTUPY SyIOR OT TAN: @ iompyY amon ‘Tvenciz x - * a EMERGENCY ADMINISTRATION OF PUBLIC WORKS (REGIONAL DIRECTOR > 4 Decket: 3.c. 1407-F = F--8 Schools Fayetteville, 8. ¢. Leber Reletions: &:b1 (Cory 100716280) SOuRD OH SDNCATION, COMBERLAND COUNT? Payesteriite, Berth Careline cree te Im re: Docket NC 1407-F Oe): EXC: LED terb My commission expires January 11, 1940. Copied 5-£2-59 Labor Retetions:b1 Hurt Building © ae ; a&tlente, Georgia Docket: H.0, 1407-F Refer ‘to File: “ot say it, ivss. Fayetteville, Ha. Ce Ne &. 1407-7 (F+2) € ENG; LWD: er > waite = a Brstioe; Relaeteing otviaton eS (Gerla tt Be 8. 14007 re = aa Fepert, . you are advined aa follow: ee = ay ‘the Owner ‘sbi pancalld 40 kakans bs bina trom F. K. |. Fhempeon. This contract was awarded and was concurred in by a Weae ottios SEE wenhtyh eB qT, Rupees SF rqccmmentat amy . a “dotion ub to the aeard Of euatrast on the colered high ochool” xs EE © One foe ee onal Gounsel, Pe oan’ Se ee ee eer HSde Centred : a ‘Ship sérign Satsutoe Vast s8is: resummentasion sheuld be die= for the same reasons as etéted in Memorandum to the ‘diministrator dated Mey 11, 1959, om Recommendation No. 2 of the Divieion of Investigation's Report on file, Ns C. 141i-F, « To carry out the recommndation it would eppegr to eriminatery and unwise. aa comments as for Nos 3+ * This office codeurse in the recommendation thet the phase of the case relative te the alleged unfair practices of the State License Buresu of North Cerolina be cleseds _ (8) 8, A, WORTH Acting Begional Dir ector (Region No. 3 E Atlenta, Geargie “May 13, 2939, ‘Docket Mor i, Cc. LeOTor ENG: LED: erb ur, he Be Wilkins Seeretary Board of Btucation, — Fayetverilie, Heres Carolinas Dear =. es ‘Bon sate african + ia bovured, Rincly stad one sony $0 * 1ours very | ate B. A, WORTHAM. Acting xegional Director Region Mo. 3 For the Adeinistrate Doeket: B.C. 1407-7 Fayetteville, Bs Se EG: LD; ord via Z 2 i‘ batere reestys of this B. I. Report snd Tooanmadii ties, ease relative to.the alleged unfair practic Bureau of North Carclina be closed. j Pervice charges of (200 inetatet by Y. Fy Wilk yom edViee thie effise of yaur seties o@ thease recom senéatiens and Perecrd 6 epg ef affidavits reqeestes in the first and f arth reqummescst ioe. iad shone se to ‘stulaes to Feceeetd (8 8 Ve 7 latte cn tao wake of MA WERE you elvine Ghia offiew GF your eebinn @2 thend recom nencetiens emé ferwisrd o eogy of afficavite reyeseted in the first end foarth fecummenseti one. Refer’ fs: Filer. Bee as?-? (F-2): ™ REPLY PLEASE SEFER TO Pocket 8c. 1497-7 Schools - Fayetteville Pocket N.0e:1461-F Dormitory =< Cullowhes © Eng. 7-B-ca W.4. Form No « 7-16-38 i Se ee eee ee OF PUBLIC WORKS TRANSMITTAL SLIP - To: Por: Mr. Gray Approval Colonel Clark Signature Mr. Madigan Recommendation Wr. Baker Remark ... Wr. Bulger Information Wr. Burlew To Check ur. Batier Previous Papers Mr. Comfort Pile Mr. Deany Prepare Reply Mr. Denber See Me Mr. Farbech Necessary Action Mr. Foremes - Hote and Return Ur. Gillean ur. Harvey Mr. Kirkpatrick ur. ur. wr. ur. Wr. ur. ur. ur. wr. Mr. Mr. ur. Refer to Filse: a, So. U6 B.C. 1409-F {P-2) MEMORANDUM to Mr. Gray: Socenvaie in ands 0 the tee; dated April #1, << _ siah samt lomses soncerning invectiontion of ellaged wafait er tise tun aneet eee e iac., in connection with schoo] projects, Fayetteville, North 5 ths , docket H.C. 1407-F, which ts being referred to you on site. {cstena depot eatnd 14 it te dares oe Special Agent, Division of Investigations, Fodaul Raenquacy Adialsistredion of Peldia Wess, of my own re ee ee ert en ed No threats or promises of reward or immunity have been made to me. —~ 2 is E pesiée ot Greensboro, Herth Gapelina, and in business for mrself es general contractor, with offices in the Piedmont Building, Greensboro. 2. I bid only on the White High School at Fayetteville, Docket H. G, 1407-F,; and signed an agreement_with the issoeqited General Gontrectors of 4merica, Carolinas _ Sonach, te pag the sageciadion ah eatineting sexvisg.staege of ELAM: « £¢ 1 rer eeived the contract. : 3. = ste al ic: Mak aaah: X wunedbdl and 40 Sk aces Ss den _ @harge, specifically, but some allowance was made in the Administretive overhead ex pense included to provide for such payment. I comnet state Just how mach was iathee ed, but know that it wae not included in ite entirety. 5 4, ¥ aseiead a jauiniel ber. the Suadbastion ¢ & Buakeery Os ens, N.C, f the Stete Teachers’ College, on docket N. C, 1461-F. which included the eum of - as an estimating service charge to be paid to the dssociation, Seer Selene included the charge in other estimates. Si. I feel that the benefits received by menbers of the Association ere worth more the cost of the service, and of course, the charge ism by paymente for the Nee er tan ae tees aed ce es meabers who are smong the ve low bidders. In other words, were such payments not received, I believe os Mild x Gaceeeane 4s increase the administrative overhead, or expected mar of profit, over that which is now gemerally included. if all bidders do not sign a= agreement in « given case, a an cancels — the agreement of those who have signed, and doesnot make payment to the nerbers from its own funds, should one who had not signed, obtaing the contract. . + I beve read this statement, before signing it, and it is true end correct, tothe ‘best of my knowledge, belief and present recollection. Witness: F, BH. Loweree Special Agent, Division of investi- - gations, FP. W. a. Sernal wamber, origin, type of repart, mame of speral agent B.C. 1407-7 (F-2} CGRIGIN«: ieoteustieds than the-Geeeli Aout in Charge dated April. 7, 1939. (Memorentium from BH. St. C. T. Garmionsel, Jr., Adting Regiosnl Bacineer, deted Apel 6, 1500, eras Investigation disclosed that all bidders on the genere) <a s struction of the white of colored high school buildings om this docket, except # Muirheeé Construction Company, signed agreements to pay estimting service charges “they obtained the comtrects, 75 per cent of whieh charge is distributed to the 3 ct five low bidders and 25 per cent of which is reteined by the Associatitm,. $1000 wa - the charge fized by the Association for the white sehool and $400 for the colored. : ee ee ee eee eee y he had ineldded the charge, but L. 8. Gallimore stated that sone allownes was for it i= the overhead expense included, and the others, including tie low bidder. A. J. Pox, gonerel manager of F. 8. Thompson, denied that it was included in aay whatever in their bids, or that expected profit included was increased to allow far peyment. Exeninetice of the estimating shect of the latter firm did not reveal my i @iestion that it hed been incluied, Of the nim bidders on the colored schoel whe signed, V. P. Loftis and G. As O'Hanlon, Jr., office mameger for Reinecke-Dillehay, Inc., who submitted identical | bids, e@mitted that the $400 cherge was included in their bids, but O"Bamlon steted that they bad reduced the expected margiz of profit by sore then $1700, thereby sore than offsetting this chatge, which eppeared on his estimate sheet. F. 5. Dixon, 60) a . tractor, refused to state whether be had included it, and all others denied thet it . FEDERAL EMERGENCY ADMINISTRATION OF PUBLIC WORKS DIVISION OF INVESTIGATIONS WASHINGTON Served member; orygen, type af report; meme of specs! agent B.S. 1407-7 [(F-2) such cases, Willism Henley bidding charge practice an4 be- Zewestigetion also disclosed that L. B. Gellimore obtained a contract on Smet Tot. BeSl-F which included an estimating service charge of $950 in the contract lemgeet ame, ax possibly amaller emounts on the other twe. thie Greate Gieclosed that charges for other two buildings were $150 ani §100, =. B Lefties steted in his eee ehilae fuse ahabek aoe nae oe Cedtie agiiziian thet the Board was within its Gagine sites thes wen at oe ae The Acting Regione] Counsel approved am : ieee ee dl Serial wussher; orign; type of report: name of epeceal agent BiG. 1407 (FH2) ~ eer os ‘Dass: ceiiishisk od tha Weccsoinik Maga Ghat *ta-than Seust seni Gsounes Se ment under the state law, snd recommended that the contract be re-awarded to eet «= Loftis. Es Co. Derby, resident enzineer inspector, stated that he was informed that L. P. Cox, contractor, had been deprived of an opportunity to bid on this doeket as the State Licensing Board of North Carolina limited hie License to $50,000, and steted of the Board was unconstitutional, md that he, Derby, hed been simi treated while im the contrecting business, which complaint has no relation to this ket. Board raised his license limit from $25,000 to $50,000 just before the bia opening Gate and hs could not submit his bid as it was over this re but thet he 444 not think he wes treeted unfairly or discriminated against. The Carolina Code provides the Board shall have the power te make necessary Tules that '. Pegulations, and ¥. P. Loftis, stated that its authority to determine 1 of licenses hed never been cont in the State courts. Pe te RECGMUNDATIONS: 1. ‘That F. K. Thompson be required to furnish an affidavit ing specifically that the $1000 estimating service charges | aa affect the total amount of his proposal, snd upon receipt oka Ganka iar Tia chite eahack vo bin bs Aeecoted en’ Win Wants of 108 EE 2, Theat the award of the contract for the colored school te Reineck Inc. be disapprovel, ant thet the Owner be advised to re-award it to Y. P, Laftis on besis of bid submitted. 3. That the estimating service charges of $400 included by Y. P. Loftis in : pid om this docket, apd $950 included in docket ¥.C. 1461-F, be deducted from the “pases, end the respective omers be so advised. 4, That Reinecke-Dillebey, Ine. be required to furnish proof by affidavit of kepcercerten: the total amount of estimating service charges included ond@boket _ NC. 1355<F, and that much amount be deducted from the grant base, and that the Gus be so e@vised. 5S. Thet the phase cf ti case relative to the alleged unfair practices of => % Ligpusing Boaré of North Carolina be closed. ea Ages S ~ CO (Extre copy of brief sheet} Bs ® 5 pootel Avety. 3S 1 = BD : 2<«fFf CONFIDENTIAL | ,. amie fo NOT POR PUBLIC INSPECTION veotigations of ection taken. <2 BASIS _FOR INVESTIGATION This investigation is besed upon instructions from the Special Agent in Charge, deted April 7, 1939, to which wae at= tached « memorandum from H. St. G. T. Carmichael], Ire, Acting @egionel Engineer, dated April 6, 1959, {exhibit "1"), trans- matting a memorendum from E. C. Derby, resident engineer in- specter, dated March Sl, 1959, alleging improper distribution of approxinetely $2500 emong the five low bidders on this docket, ama elimination of competition through the State Licensing Board of North Gerclise by ite unconstitutional method of limiting con- trecters' licenses. (Exhibit “1-A"), There wee attached to Mr. Dery’ s memorandum « newspaper clipping of the notice to bidders em this docket. (Exhinds—"1-5") Office Manager, Reinecke- Diliehay, Ines Manager of Building Divi- Raleigh, BR. ¢. sicn of F. NH. Thompson Secretary-Treasurer, T. A. Goldsboro, BN. ¢. Leving ami Company General Contractor 605 Samait Drive, Sanford, Be Se Vice-President, Muirhead Durham, N. C. Senstruction Company General Manager, George 226 Jefferson @. Kane Standard Bide., Greensboro, BH. C. General Contractor Piedmont Bldg., Greensbaro, BH. 6. General Superintendent, Greensbore, B. C. Chas. 8, angie, Ine. Vice-President, Fowlere Winston-Galem, RN. C. Jones Company Secretary-Treasurer, Fayetteville, N. 6. Dixen Construction Co. ; Executive Secretary, Aseo- Builders® Bldg.,. eiated Ges. Contractors of Cherictte, B. ©. Agerics, Inc. x ae ~~ = “4 Raleigk, BE. fayetteville, 3. Ce 150 Bart Building, Milenta, Georgia, 1214 Mert Building, Payetterilie, E. &, Atlenta, Georgiae Matdeney, Regional Office 150 Bart Building, Atlanta, Georgie. First Cittcess Bank 1959 at 11:00 Ak in the Oounty , for the conustreeticn of om beth buildings. Con- high school building Morth Carolina , Inc., Puyetterilie, Barth buildings, including the electri<« systems for both buildings to Minor Plumb- Acting Regional plumbing and beating Borth Cercline, om the colored high Borth Carolina, ena for the heeting sys- Biemenn and Sowell, Raleigh, Herth Garo- 2 A&torney for Owner ewarded on the white i 3 fhe docket as « whole was estimted to be 20 pr cent com plete as of April 15, and it ms approximately on schedule. Bids were opened om April i2, tracts were tentatively to F. EB. Thompeca of Releizt, echeol tailding to Carclim , om the plumbing ing Company, Fayetteville, tems of both buildings to lias. = init "jo" See Sazis for Inrestigetice. Affidervit of EB. OC. Derby, resident engineer inspector, dated April 15, 1939, giving details of sllegetions contained in compleiat, end of eward of contract om the colored Bigh school building, Signed copy of petition by EB. C. Derd;, dated February 6, 1959, to State Apesembly of North Carolina, requesting repeal ct amendnest of — lews reguls®ing ceneral contractors. A&Tigevit of L. P. Cox, comtrecter, @ated April 13, 1939, Giving dvteils of spplication for increase in license limit, and of Sera St Ae ees Brtmact fron the North Carclise Consolidated Statutes regarding licensing of contrectors, aeTigavit of ¥. P. Loftis, contractor and secretary of State Licensing Board, deted April i4, 1959, steting thet estimeting ser~< . _ Slee charges were included and giving deteils of bid submitted, and Gogy of letter from ¥. P. Loftis te the Public Yorks Admini« stration, G@eted April 13, 1958, protesting avard of contmect, Sffiderit of G. A. O'Hanlon, Ir., office mnager, Reinecke= Dillehey, Tms., dated April 15, 1939, stating that estizsting service Searen ae Sees 15 EE ee ee ee ee ee wes obtained, S¢Tigewit of 4. J. Pox, menager, wailding division, F. By ‘Thompson, Gated April 18, 1939, Seannag Meh canton int gence neu wes uot inmeiuded in 2i4. Affidevit of R. 4. Bryan, secretary-treasurer, T. 4. Loving end Company, Guted April 12, 1939, steting that estimeting service charce 4 was not imeim@ed in bid om this dockst, tet is sometimes included in bids, Aftidevit of %. L. Jewell, comtracter, deted April 15, 1953, gteting thet estimating service charg: wee act included in bié on this docket but bes been incleded i= ome or tec canes, Affiéevit of Hal. 3S, Crain, vice-president, William Muirhesd Construction Company, date@ April 15, 1959, steting tact they 414 not sign exreement tomy estimtinge service charge om this docket, Letter fron J. A. Timberlake, genetel manager, George Eene, dated April 15, 1959, stating thet eetimating service charge wes not imeluded i: bidse arriters: of L. B.Gelhience, comtrecter, dated April 15, 193, ~ _ stating that ihome allowance for estimating service charge was in~ Sleded in oreriead expense im Gid om this docket, and that exch charge ee ee ee ee ee Memorenttes of Spetial dgent Lowsree, @ete? April is, 1999, relia= Sive to intereiows «ith J. B. hones, general superintesient, Chas. we angle, Ine., Se B. Jones, viee-president, Powler—lonse Company, and : ¥. 3. Dimon, senretary-treesarer, Dixom Construction Company, reporting. that Thomas ami Jomes stated thet their bids 414 not incl ede ost iaet ing Service charge, wd thet Dizes wuld oct stete whether it was included, Aftigawit of Harry ¥. Loving, executive secretary, Associated | @eneral Comtcacters of Ameries, Inc., dated April 12, 1989, steting thet all UidSers except one Kigned agreenests to pay eatinsting ser- ‘Wiee charges um this docket, ami reasons why sereements ere sometines cancelled, Letter from Willian Keeley Deitrict, architect, Qated April 3, i359, regarding estiusting service chargss , @uplicate low bids on adared BiG ail teciheing, adh Sbecmannee aie eanteacbores ‘ mS aftigeett of A. B. Wilktms, secretary, cds wel biel ee eee ee ee regarding estimating service contracts. : Gertifiel copy of resabution dated April 12, i338, ewerding con- : treet for eelered high schesl beilding te leeal contracter, 2 Letter frum Rose & Lyon, etterneys fur the Owner, éeted April 15, 2999, giving apinion regur@ing scoeptence of tie bid, but om wield : lenger complekion time was stated. ‘Signed eecy of semoran@ue from A. 3. Stes, attorner, Office of Megicns] Coumesl, dated April 13, iss, civing opinion regerting duty _ to consider time element iz bids. Tabuission of three low bids om white Bigh school brilding. Sabuisiiem of three iow Side om colered high school milding. Tabulation of other bide reeeived, a Stetement of Special Agent Loweree, Gifted April 18, 1959, giving @etails of impestigetica:. : creredinty STS{tt0.0b ta Yesmartot ct tepwenitn, Be €. ste date of Apri} 12tR.g 19795 Te the personel knowleige of the uriter ‘thks prejeut wilt ‘cost the tax piyers apprastantely $2,500u00 to be divided between the five lew bidders. Tt is alse possthia, to the ee nr ee Pee © amen Ot through the state Lissnstag Board of T, C, by ite wmeonstitutioral wethod af limiting eontresters Liseess, ether this antter ia worthy of iovestigetien I leave te you, but 1 feel I have dene ay duty by submitting this repert. i 43 —_ at . at § eet #1 3 uel ; tue AS 1 i oe “Beare op _Dorth Corching Counrr or Saaberland ae Special Agent, Division of Ineastigation, Federal Emergency Administration of Publie Works, of my own free will knowmmg that 4 mar be weed against me. ee ee made to me. i. I rested at Payetteviile, Yorth Carolin. —— oe I am = Resicest Imginee r Inspectors @r the Public Yorks :dministration, essign~ ed to Dockete FE. C. 19967 «nmi HE. C. 1407-F. I wish te supplementtheinformtion give to the tegiomel Tirecter, under dat of Mirch 51, 1958, with respect te bidding prac— tices of seabers a” the Associated General Cutrectors of imirics, Carolinas Branch, se follows: - = I mawe since Inarned thot te figure of ayironimtaly §2500. muttioned in this is ectelly G1400. EI wes not informed ty any bidder on the echoed going to include this charge im kis’ im this stete, I kmow that it isthe general practice: S,ecial sgent, Divisice of In- vestigations, P. F. &. Pith respect to the duplicate low Bidson the colored high school tullding, 2. Deitrick, the ar€hitect, coiled ¥. Commichesl, in wy presence, but Be ¢id not men- tion the Gifferesce in tims of complet tion in the bids, since it had mot been diseussed up to them. ‘The time of completion wus mot read with the bids, and is not usually read, unless time is of the eesence of the contract. Is this case, ail bicders agreed. to complete the contracts withing the time specified im the documents, amd hence IT dig ot, contin: thas Uap: Liat: Cat: SatSsee Sit mee Sue. & See are lnc See eS ee ecke-Diliaisy*s, te be of aay ortemee. I was present at the meeting < Soema, wher Loftis T cared, tal ta theked the he tad bo euajection to the action of tn SME in prefering the loce2 cemteector, although he would like to heve the job. The Board did not muke the amapé wmtil after Mr. Car micneel bed been called, amd Mr. Leftis been hamrdé, I Kaew thet Mr, Seinecke bas been « resident of the Toum of Payettegiile for at least 16 years, and bes recenbiy garchased a place place bere, eats We CORRE ES ee ee ee EC ite man ous. “erent Sys JO Ast ee ne Seaohon omrqu03 os sues 9 dupeee: af = ark @45 Og : e¥, Tetenep ogy FO HiMt ae eee emeftedts Wton Faonraeu ewe weed wo oysh aa o2 ere de pus pent; ~come we ese; akeqxty vivo ordre seertane ous 3 peqertuoe a tqensasuon we Darke oy "pending dompeny: had repented lik, betanee of the Linthition ta has ieense, not. to File the bid eek SateN, MAES Romain company had iesued. . rit . mf 2S “what 4 the time of the opering of the bids subaitted for said construction on December 6, 1956, the aid V, Py Loftis sutmitted the lowest bid which was Gre conastersd, and sete bid _aoemaed So Gem cehaty. fad, thn: Sangeet ae reeset he Sm c ; Sirare or North Carolina eae re od des. ee & . Couxrr 66 ee ae I, ....Aen_Fe CGR... ntccevtosmamesny Wake this statement for E. ¥. Loweree i Special Agent, Division of Investigations, Yoseul Kutengeney Advsielettation of Public Waths, of tap aan free will knowing that it may be used against me. No threats dr promises of reward or immunity have been made to me. oo se i. I reside at Jonesboro, North Carelinmé. i ame generel contractor, in business for myself under the neme of L. P. Cox Company. I have a license from the North Carolina Stete Licensing Board, which up to the firtt of this year was for bed « limit of $25,000. In Januery of this year, shen renexing my license, I asked the Board to increamny limit, but did not specify the amount, 5 ee ee ee ee ae en a, ee ee Februmry. i __ I asked the Architect, Mr. Deitrick, for plans and specifications of the sbic buildings for the Board of Education of Cumberland County, intending to bid on the folored school building, the amaller of the two jobs, and prepared-e bid. I got bid bond, and had a certified check ready to submit with the bid, and on the fore the opening, the llth of this month, was edvised thet the Licensing Board had increased my Limit, but to $60,000. only, which did notpermit me to submit my bid, pe dees Se ee See 4, I furnished offmencial cortege aad ubas meron aad otoen hoped that it would show enough to warrant a bigger increasg but do not think that was treated unfairly by the Board in its decision. I have renewed ay a ‘the linit reised, but they ufll not act upon it until the next meting the Bos s. {ia oot chain to ave been docrininatad opuict Sn this casey and mv no herd fcoelings in the ma ‘ter, 6. I heave read this statement, before signing it, and it istrue amd correct, to best of my knowledge, belief and gesent recollection. Witnesses) ZY As special Agent, Divisicg of Tewestigutions) 2. F to the applicant a certifi~ S a general contractor in the echt AFFIDAVIT Stare or _. North Carolina : Date, Courrr or Mecklanburg.............. oe I, ¥._2.lofttis............._..._._., make this statement for din cle LESS sinlsciepencesndiapetied Special Agent, Division of Investigations, Federal Emergency Administration of Publie Works, of my own free will knowing that it may be used against me. No threats or promises of reward or imanunity have been 1. I ema general coutrector, with offices in the Builders! Building, C@rlotte, - orth Carolina, and also Secretary of Borth Caroline Sgate Licensing Board for _econtrestors. ee Board, cives it authority to make rules and regulations, provided that tigy ‘or a licensesubaits his application, 4 Limit of his license is determined by Bis financial ability, equipeent, and techn . ‘The limits of his license are incresed, upom application, as in theji of the Board, hié finenciel and téchmice] ability, equiguent, << other considerat - Warrant. The porver of the Board to make such determinations hes newer been contested in the Stete Courts, , = _ & I beve resd this stetement, before signing it, and it is trus and correct, to the _ Best of my knowledge, information apé greeent recollection, Fitness: 2 ECO cE Mi» bates FE Special Agent, Division of In- — westigetions, P. F. A. Federal Rn orreney “Medni ston don of a 150 Butt Suilding, j | MEleet a, Ga. en oe . ee ics eler he: pctbveninhek tikes rise ~~ @retiee to the. iene of. the above project, ‘pide’ were tees . Of this. Job Apri SR, 1939. Rpinecke-Dillemy, Ines, of ‘) Gewthern Fines, Jer Careline, sulaitted « bid of $6¢,300 end 275 days for. hea time et completion. Ye, ‘Ts zs. ‘tet Generel Sontrastérs of Charlotte, Werth: Cnrolige,,” sltaseees’ 962 300.09 e00°O,0 days for the time of someletion.’ know, these tap bids ‘ages thie lowest suteritted: and - : » However, we eybuitted 55 days less time té ton- plete the cao rie. text: #16 Reinecke-Dillehay, ite the Salidins Comets tentatively bas amerdéd side 480 a Reineske-Dillehey, Ins., subfect to your’ epprorel « He contend! that the job should. be awarded te =6 Os we had the ghorter time for completion: anda tied bid 3 Ge again wish to thexk vou in advence for your @onsiéerction. Youre very traly, LOPTIS, GaERAL CONTRACTOR ‘¢ _Bebnit: > Date igi 15, 13%. I, ... Gede O'Bamlon, Jr... make this statement for 2. ¥- Loweres Bpecial Agent, Division of Investigations, Federal Emergency Administration of Public Works, of my own free will knowing that it may be used against me. No threats or promises of reward or immunity have been made to me. a a 4. t am Office Manager for Reinecke-Dillahay, Inc. with offices in the Let ote gens Sank and Trust Co. Building, Fayetteville, Sorth Caroline. de Tais firs ms the suecessful bidder on the colored high sthool building for the Board of Education of Cumberland County, known as docket ¥, ©. L4G7@F, Pe didonotosub. mit a bid om the white school building on this docket. Be ss aioe au advection with Min. jaecia sed ‘Gucaundl: Castendbels 06 amen cae Glinas Branch, to pay an estimating serwice charge to tie Association of 400,00, the event thet we obtained this contract. ‘This agreement has not been cancelied noi withtr.wn, and since we got the contract, we expect to uy this amomt te it, a‘ a. Our satiante sheet shows that an ites of $600.00 ess included for eotincting which is. the service fee mentioned abowe. However, I wish to point out that our es imate included an expected gross profit of only $5500.00, or approximately 10%, pefore sutmitting our bid, we arbitrarily reduced tae expected margin of profit t more than $1700.00, in order to make our bid more competitive, which reduction would gore than wipe out the estimating service charge, oe ee | the expected profit. 3 8. So fer as I knoe, them isno sgreement «among the bidders who sign those é as to how this item chal be handled, thet ic whether or not it shall be included ; amy way in their estimates and Bids, nor do I think that the Association indicates to its members in eny way how the matter shall be hamdied. Wr. Reinecke is ths Pres: of thés Cerporation, and usuliily handles metters of this kind, but be is at nen ili to be comeulted sith respect to it nor, G. We sometimes inclixie these service charges in our bids, and sometimes do not, } 5 I am not sble to state just Met determines our decision as to whether if shall be ine cluded. ‘We have obtained only one contract, other than the one referred te above, in chich the Public forks Administration is interested. ‘This was docket N. C, LS36Gar, school building for the County Board of Sd@ucation of Cumberlabd County. This dooket consisted of three buildings, end I am able to locate our estimete sheet on omiy one then, the Sunmy Side school building at Vander, B. C., which sheet indicates tint an estimating service charge of $400. 00 wes included in our bic on ‘t, but ZI aciwme tae tne agreement with the Association ces age ast three reer te The other bulidings were much smaller than this one, one of thet being «n addition only, so that if any « charce mis included, it es smell. eabese, we lost money cn each of these tures, or st omy rete on the docket es a whole, or costs exceeding our estinete by shout tro t%& r sand dollers on the Swmy side building elore. Fe a hs ve a this stetement, andit is true and correct, to the best of my know present recoliscticn.. ; : 4 : : . <4 ¢? Sh, ££ : att in Ol aot, oa dade metion Bie % Fags aon e ‘ ~~, ae “+8. 2 a4 ‘Pr if 0 tox, a di nee 3 ~~ s > GA. Orliguion, Jr. a : WA fenaekh, bY ee ys MBied 2. footie. Fe 5 eg . poe Gun Sth, th o locale Y Fon, esti dL. Special agent, meyieiom of investigations, P. 7. 4. ‘ " Brarwor North Gerelina Dee DELL 12, 1639 | Fieserie-ak Comperiend a | - Luda ce POx- maake this statement for => .™: Lowereee " Gipeciad Aquat, Dividon of Investigations, Vedesal Emergency Adnsinistention of Public Ware, of tay stm free will knowing that it may be used against me. No threats or promises of reward of immunity have been, _ made to me. t reside at Raleich, Mert: Carclina, and an Menacer aE ths" = ~~. 1, iéinge Division: of HN. Thompson, Releign, North Carolina = Gur Compaiiy ususlly sigrs acreements with the Associated General Contractors. to pay them an estimating service onaree in the event that we are the low or successful bidder on a giver! — RAR tEROS -Oaut this is handled’ Sp our main of etfoe in Chariotte,.. ae Forth Caroline. I assume thet such an acreemént was simmed on ea ‘Docket. RO 2407-7, Peyetteville Eich Schools, Payettevilie, Horth Caroling, since i wes not advised. to the contrary. “he bid on Docket HC 2407-F was rrepered unier mr - ~ supervision, and F esn state of my owmm knowledge that there wes nothing extra Ineluded in any manner whatever to eliow for payment of such charge, shoul@-@e be the sucesssful biddef in. this case. We do inelode en item of overhead expenss, which “however, is exactly the sare whether or not such an eu “he@ Seen simned. = This is beceuse of the fact that Z consider ‘that over ae. period of tixe we sbont break even on payments made -%0 the Association and paymenta received from it in those cases where we do mot obtain the contract but are among the next five low bidders. I also wish to state that the expected marein ef orerit and covermead on the bia was soproximately seven per cent, end that neither was {nereased in any manner whatever to _ -Rllow for reyment of the Association's service charge, and thet this charge will be paid out of cur ceneral profits rather then out of this perticu Sex 30D- at ae z z “twee t ak Cede hale Cpe cbewlan. 2 se Gea —~ Ag fod, jaye ee £ wae bial’ Pitan Le Aether Kkijny berth . AiPont (laa ion Leach, ttc t=? det hota: # ihe lewd, = | - 3. Mt, Loweree 1, Re Ac Deven, minke the statement for ce dipicech ganan Wivioion of ommieigaalons, Vedecsd Wplanaseny SAndelcaaale of Pella Welles of me ee free will knowing that it may be used against me. Me threats or promises of reward or immunity have been ‘My fire signed the agreemnt to pay the Associated General Contractors ef America, Carolina's Branch, an estimating service charge of $1400.00 _ in the evemt that we bad been low bidders om Docks t NO1407-F, Fayetteville : Eh Seeman, Deye teria, Meet Cunaee, e | cilgbek tes Sk UU te widens A on Chin Mlk. gas 9 ac cee of ay own Knowledge thet it id not include this charge or any portion of it, | ee | | Date Aphid 18, 19ig Counrr ov Oe = : 1, ER ds emelh |, make thie statement for Ea U. Loweree 2 Special Agent, Division of Investigations, Federal Emergency Administration of Public Works, of my own | free will knowing that it mar be used against me. Ne threats or promises of reward or immunity have been - tade to axe. x on tame 4d. I resige at 605 Sumit Drive, Sanford, North Caroling. ee I am the owner of FE. L, Jewell, general contractor, and subaitted ebid on the high school bulllding of Education of Cumberland County, B.C, docket $ I tewe read this ctatement, and it is true and correct,to the best of ay know jege, informtion and present recoliection. z Fitness: ao G7 a Ite ASC Specicl igent, Division of Invest— Agetions, FP, “. 2. ye Counry or Durham. Srare or .Notth Carolina, I, Da Ba Drei , make this statement for 2. Me Lowetee 00 Special Agent, Division of Investigations, Federal Emergency Administration of Public Works, of my own — free will knowing thet it may be used egainst me. op ee eee eS ee . made to me. 2 i. 1 reside et Durhem, North Carolina, spine ta italic ace Construction Company, with office s et Durkan. abe This fire did not sign an agreement to pay any estimating service charge to the Associated General Contractors of Jmerica, Carolinas Branch, in conmection with bias . Bubmitied on high achool belldings for the Board of Education of Cumberland — . 3..¢ we BF Fayetteville, on docket n €. 1407-F. : 4. I hews reed this speek: before signing it, and it is true and correct tor te best of ay OINe, Relief and present recollection, ae 217 QUERAS (GAN @ THUS? Sun reS @ —— Cearye Bim Grsenebors, MC, April 15, 1939 iy. BE. M. Loweree, Special Agent “Division of Investigations Public Works Administration Greensboro, North Carolina Dear Sir: I wish to confirm the information given you on your recent visit to this office regarding our bid submitted on the Fayetteville High Schools, Docket No. H.C.-1407-F. Wy firm signed an agreement with the Associated General Contractors of America, Charlotte, North Carolina to pay to them an emtimating service charge of $1,000.00 and $400.00 respectively on the White — and Colored School Buildings in the event that we shovid obtain the con ts. I wish to state, however, that these items were not included, either specifically or in any tanner whatever, — in the bids, nor was expected margin of profit included increased at all te provide for such payment. In other words, we treat this charge in the event that we have to pay it as part of our general overhead expense computed on an anmual basis. In recent times, we have made no allowances in our. profit margin or otherwise im preparing and submitting bids whether we Signed such agreements or not as bids have been too highly com- petitive to permit including any extras if we hoped to be in line. _ In the event that all. bidders do not sign agree- ments to pay the estimating service-charges in a given case, it is the p@licy of the Associated General Contractor to cancel those signed since theAssociation would not make payments to the next five low bidders on its own account should one of those who Vid not sign obtain the contract. Bours very truly, GEORGE W. KARE By: WO cee — tha Lo? ete meral Manager