.MzMyOA.MzMyOA

rJUL 1 8 REG"b DEPARTME NT OF LAW 2614 FI RST NATION AL BANK BU I LD I NG ATLAN TA , GEORGIA 30303 July 16 HEMRY L . BOW ! EN CITY ATTORN ,Y FERRIN Y. MA H · ,W S A SSIS':ANT CITY 1969 ROBERT S. WIGGIN S MA RT IN McFAR LAND EDW I N L . STERNE RA I_PH C. JENKINS JOHN E. DO U GHE RT Y CHAR L ES M . LOKEY T H O MAS F. CHOYC E J AME S EJ . · PILCHER ASSOC IA T E A T ' ORN !:.. Y CIT Y ATTORNEYS HORII.CE T . WA RD 01.cP UT Y CI T Y. A TTO RNEY ROBERT A . HA RRIS HENRY M . MURFF CLA IMS A TTORNEYS JAMES B . HEN D ERSO N Mr a J ohn 1y S. J0hns on, Dirsc to r Model ri:ies ?rog~t m 676 r-ap1· -.-, 1 '\ven""' S P!IV Atlanta , c ~orgia 30315 ,...., ... . .,.• • A. •-. \. ... ) .. SPECI Al. ASSOC I A 1"E C l TY AT "rO RNEY g Dear Mro Johnson: I have i~ hand your request fo r an opinion, dated July 14, 1969 9 In addi tion, I have in hand the minut es of the Model Neighborhood Executb e Board, dated July 1, 1969 . It contains, among other things, a request f or an opinion from t he Ci ty At torne y as to whe t her :) r not a proposed res olution prepa red by Mro Clarence Coleman is a "lega 1 document". Further, I have i n hand a copy of the proposed resolution, as well as a copy of Contr;,,ct No o ME-10-00 1 which, hereinafter, shall be ref erred to as the grant agreeme.nt o It is important to know what a grant is from a l egal standpoint o A grant has been judicially defined as the bestowing or conferring upon another of some thing, with or without compensation, particularly in answer to the request of the othero In this instance, that thing is money. One of the conditions of this grant is found in Section 502 of the grant agreement above referred too This section reads as follo~s: n~EC o 502 . Opportunities for Residents -- In all ,.;o -r i:< 11\1. de possible by or r esulting from t his / .grr~ 1;;1nen :.. :i the City and each employer wi 11 take

• f f','

~-·mE d v e ,qction to ensure that residents of �Mro Johnny C. Johnson, Director Model Cities Program Page 2 July 16, 1969 the mode l ne ighborhood are given maximum opportunities for training and employment and that bus iness concerns located in , or owned in substant:U1 l part by , residents of the model neigh-· borhocd are t o t h e gre atest extent fea sible awa. ·!Bd cont::ac ts. ' 1 This ~yr, .... r.f c c ~t:c: f.:ua:: ..,,..,.-.:-eement is authori zed under Section 42 USCA 3303 C:1 ):: 1 There.:-u :~...,, : · '1 8 r-i1y op1.n1.on that a gr ant, such a s we have here: may be c onditio· ed upon add i t i ona l performance by the donee , the recipien t of the grant . Th is type of add it i ona l performanc e is made manifes t by the s e ct i on of the grant a gr eement a bove r e fer red t o. The general requirements of law relat ing t o c ompetitive biddi ng are set forth in McQui l lan on Municipal Corporations, Vol 10, at PPs 321, wherein , i t states as f ol lows: "The provisions of statut es , charters and ordinances requiring competitive bidding in the letting of municipal contracts are for the purpose of invitin g competition, to guard against favoritism, improvidence, extravagance, fr aud and corruption, and to secure the best work or supplies at the lowest price practicable, and they are enacted for the benefit of property holders and taxpayers, and not for the benefit or enrichment of bidders, and should be so construed and administered as to accomplish such rrnrpose fai rly and reasonably with sole reference , .0 t· .c public interest o 11 (Emphasis added) The pr:- :,c :· ~ 1 .._ ._· c:;n ·.·~tion mu.s t now be compared with the verbage of the s ~ct.1, ~: u[ -.. .-~ "': ,...A.nt agreement above referred to and with the genera~ · ,., .

_. -- - .~ . . . . .:it:::T.-Jing the resolution, I am of the opinion

tha t :_, : . ·.::> , ..1.1-. J ,. OlJ ' · t.eJ resolution may be a "lega 1 document", none, i. · l · . · -' S -. i tl y wor.ded, it is more restrictive than the 1 �Mro Johnny C. Johnson, Director Model Cities Program Page 2 July 16, 1969 section of the grant agre ement above referred to in tha t it places more of a bur den on the donee than was origina lly envisaged in the grant a r:rE.ement o The n e x t qu,:-~r t i u t 1--a L ;:nu r t be answered is whether or not the l angua ge o f i.:.L;.:, :.~c'J;:,,~sr· ·, r~so lution is so restric t ive that it does not ful f i } 1 tb ,." ~ C!; L. ~-~: ·:. -.r e ri.1 f rements of law rela t ing to c ompetitive b i .::'ld · :.;_.'.,c °i:,' r• . , · ~,:. .. ,,. _, :. . is t oo r e stric t iveo The r e.:., s t r-"r. .. ,·. c ;· i.nl;;n i s that it is necessary f or t he donee , th e Ci t :~· r... , ~-- .. . . cc: OL·;:: ain the contra cts at t he lowe s t p ossible price c oP. s u r,;;: ,t: ·vLt.l; Lo t h the condi tion s o f the grant a g r e ement and the gene r a l. l -c:\v. Th i s obj ec t i ve, i n a l l p roba bilit y, c annot be ob ta ine d und er the l a n gua g e of the p r oposed r e s o lution und er con- s ideration. Therefore , we wou ld r e spec tful l y s uggest tha t the propos ed res olution be modified a lon g the l ine s of th,3 propos e d re s olution a t tach ed h ereto so that bo t h the pa.t i cular section o f the grant a greement ( SEC o 502) a nd the general l aw can be sat i sf i ed~ Shoul d you wish any addi tiona l pr oblem, please fee l f r ee to con tact me o HLB:cwh 1 with res pect to this �