Financial- Vandermay Law Firm (Previous Tenant)

Home Browse Search

,~ `~ HANNA~ MCELDOWNEY & ASSOCIATES 8835 S.W. CANYON LANE, SutrE 405 PORTLAND, OR 97225 (503) 297-9588 Fax: (503) 297-2835 September 24, 1998 Elyn M. Lyon, Property Manager Marion County Generai Servi~s 100 High Street N.E., Room 5321 Salem, Oregon 97301-3665 Subject: The VanderMay Law Firm Relocation Benefits Dear Elyn: I have completed my review ef the relocation claim forms and documents submitted by The VanderMay Law Firm which you sent me by letter dated August 13, 1998. I have reached the following conclusions: l.) Relocadon Site Search Claim: A claim was submitted for searching for a replacement site. The claim form is properly aompleted, signed and dated. Tfie total claim for $1,102 exceeds the maximum allowable claim of $1,000. Therefore, I recommend payment of $1,000 for searching for a replacement site. 2.) Reestablishment Claim: A claim was submitted for the maximum reestablishment benefit of $10,000. 1'he increased ret~t casts alone of $5,423.64 per manth for the replacement office (of comparable size) qualifies the claimant for the ma~cimum allowance. In addition to increased rent, other expenses at the replacement site are documented by the claimant. Therefore, I recommend the maximum payment of $10,000 for reestablishment expenses. 3.) Moving Exl~g,nses Claim: A elaim was submitted for related moving expenses in addition to the $3,940 previously paid for direct moving costs. The following costs have been documented and aze allowable moving relocation expenses: A) Actual direct loss of tangible personal property: $ 0.00 * B) Replacement stationery: 541.25 ** C) Replacement signs: 270•~ D) Modifications to adapt utilities: 4 745. $5,556.25 * The claimant has requested payment o$5 993.33 r direct loss of tangible personal property which could not be relocated to thc new site. The operative word in this particular benefit is "personal" property as oppos~d to "real" property. This reviewer requested clarification of this