Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1952-12-28
Almond Opinion
May Not Settle
Housing Dispute
Alexandra Authority
And PHA Soy Ruling
Will Not Be Binding


Will Not Be Binding
Principals in the Alexandria
housing controversy are waiting
for an opinion from Virginia,s at
torney general. but both sides
agree it really won't settle the
dispute.
The attorney generals views
have been requested by the Alex
andria Redevelopment and Hous-
ing Authority, which seeks to
throw out the low bid on a 148-
unit low-rent housing project be-
cause it was submitted by a union
shop contractor.
A spokesman for the Public
Housing Administration, which
must approve any contract
awarded by the Alexandria agency,
said PHA would not be influenced
by the attorney generals ruling.
He said PHA was a Federal agency
in charge of Federal funds. PHA
has insisted on award of the con-
tract to the lowest bidder.
A spokesman for the Arlington
Authority also conceded that the
attorney generals ruling would
not be binding. He said his group
would consider this the best avail
able legal advice in the matter and
probably would make its final de-
cision accordingly.
Almond Indicates Delay.
!. Attorney General j. Lindsay Al
mond, meanwhile, has indicated
itmay be some time before he can
rule-o on the complex situation.
The question before him, in
effect, is whether employment of
a union shop firm would violate
provisions of Virginia's right-to-
work law and secondary boycott
provisions of the Taft-H Hartley Act.
While word is awaited, Alexan-
dria's chances of obtaining money
for the project grew simmer.
PHA has enough money for
$4,000 units all over the country
including Alexandria, Right now.
nearly $4,000 units are out for
bids. PHA has said it will approve
contracts on first-come, first
serve basis - leaving Alexandria
out in the cold If all funds are
expended before Alexandria's con-
tract comes in for approval.
Fund Reservation Asked.
The Alexandria City Council
interviewed in the controversy Fri
day. It sent a request to PHA
that funds for the Alexandria
project be set aside until the at
torney general untangles the stu
alton. A PHA spokesman yeSter-
day refused to comment on the
request until the councils letter
Is received, but the prospects of
any fund reservations appeared
dim in view of PHA's attitude
toward the attorney generals
ruling.
The city council appoints mem
berS of the authority, but other
wise has no control over its oper-
atoms.
The controversy began Novem-
Der 6 as the authority prepared
to open bids for the Negro project.
Before the bids were opened, a
letter from the Southern Iron
Works was read protesting any
contract award to a union-Shop
firm on grounds it would violate
Virginia'S right-to-Work law and
secondary boycott provisions Of the
Taft-Hartley Act.
The protest named several firms.
including the low bidder, Victor
r. Beauchamp, Inc, Of Washing
ton. Southern, a non-union firm,
claimed it would be prevented
from bidding on steel SubcontractS
If a union builder was employed.
The Beauchamp bid of $751;
$40 was $62,50O under the next
lowest bid, submitted by Eugene
Simpson g. Bro. of Alexandria.
PHA Rejected Award.
No award was made at the bid
opening. The authority later de-
cided the contract should go to
the Simpson firm, and sought
PHA accord.
PHA promptly rejected the idea,
insisting that the contract go to
the lowest possible bidder.
Glenn U. Richad, chairman of
the Alexandria Authority, sub
sequently wrote John Taylor
Egan, Public Housing Admins
traitor, stating that PHA appar-
emily was under pressure to have
the contract awarded to Beau
champ.
The whole controversy has been
embarrassing for Mr.. Richard.
His law firm is general counsel for
Southern Iron Works and also
represents the Simpson firm. Mr..
Richard said he had advised both
firms they would have to seek
legal advice elsewhere in the
current wrangle, however.
Pressure Is Denied.
James B. Davis, secretary treas
urer of the Beauchamp firm, yes
terday denied knowledge of any
pressure in behalf of his firm.
Mr.. Davis insisted that award
of the contract to his firm would
not violate any law, Federal or
State. He said there were union
contractors throughout Virginia
which operate like Beauchamp.
II don't think they should be
concerned with any possible vio-
lation of the law in awarding us
the contract" said Mr.. Davis
Federal, State and private jobs
are being awarded every day. all
over the country-including Vir-
ginia-to both union and open
shop contractors, and to our
knowledge no one has ever OBJ
jected yet.
IF that is not their real con-
Germ" he added then they just