Background/History Sample Clauses

Background/History. During 2003 and 2004, the Town Council was involved in a series of meetings to address traffic on Indiantown Road which resulted in a document entitled, the Jupiter Area Study. The Town council was also working to lure Scripps Florida to the Town. To facilitate this, the Town Council discussed the creation of zoning regulations which would be complimentary to Scripps Florida and to set aside land for the Town’s build out of hi-tech business and technology uses. Eventually, the Town Council enacted the I-4 (Industrial, High Technology Limited) zoning district (see Attachment A) on December 21, 2004 (see Attachment B). Thereafter, on April 21, 2009, the Town Council rezoned 90.9 acres of the 93.5+/- acre DDR property to I-4 zoning (see Attachment C, D and E). The rezoning did not include 2.6+/- acres abutting the Jupiter Community Park that was dedicated to the Town. At the same meeting, the Town Council denied DDR’s application to rezone this same 90.9 acres of DDR’s property to the Industrial, General (I-2) zoning district (see Attachment E). On December 21, 2010, the Town Council renamed the I-4 district to “Industrial, High Technology and Employment Center” and modified the uses permitted therein (see Attachment F). The denial of DDR’s rezoning application was the impetus for DDR’s property rights claim. Through mediation the Town agreed to enter into the Development Agreement to expand the uses in the I-4 Zoning District. The additional uses were agreed to by the Council to allow several commercial uses in the I-4 Zoning District pursuant to the Development Agreement. It is important to note that any use included in a Development Agreement must be consistent with the Future Land Use assigned by the Comprehensive Plan to the property. The rationale the Council accepted to permit commercial uses with the Comprehensive Plan’s General Industrial Land Use designation was that the limited number of commercial uses would be complementary commercial uses of a business park or employment center. The Town Council held several public meetings wherein it discussed with DDR’s representatives and P&Z Director, Xxxx Xxxxxxx, and Town Attorney, Xxxxxx X. Xxxxx, the commercial uses DDR proposed. After several public meetings, the Council and DDR agreed to a Development Agreement which, included some, but not all of the property owner’s proposed “complementary” commercial uses. On March 15, 2011, the Town Council approved a Development Agreement between the Town of Jupit...
Sample 1
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Background/History. The TAP grant program was established in 1988 by Wisconsin Act 339 and modeled after the national Treatment Alternatives to Street Crime (TASC) programs and later renamed Treatment Accountability for Safer Communities initiated under the Drug Abuse Office and Treatment Act of 1972. TASC programs were designed to divert drug-involved offenders into appropriate community-based treatment programs by linking the legal sanctions of the criminal justice system to treatment for substance use issues, holding offenders involved in both systems accountable through the implementation of client- specific case management. As justice involved individuals were directed to treatment, success in treatment could be taken into consideration at time of sentencing. These programs initially focused on pretrial diversion of first time offenders, yet quickly expanded to reach all drug-involved individuals that the courts were willing to divert. Today, TASC programs serve as a court diversion mechanism or as a supplement to probation or other justice-system sanctions and procedures. In addition to being an effective program model, TASC methods are utilized by programs or systems attempting to manage drug-involved offenders as they occupy places in both justice and treatment programming. In 1989 the Wisconsin Department of Health Services established Wis. Admin. Code ch. DHS 66 to implement a Treatment Alternative Program (TAP) and provide grants to local agencies to support substance use treatment options for justice involved individuals to be used in lieu of incarceration. While the exact rates of inmates with substance use disorders (SUDs) is difficult to measure, the U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics reports that nationally more than half (58%) of state prisoners and two-thirds (63%) of sentenced jail inmates met the criteria for drug dependence or abuse. Another 20% percent, while not meeting criteria for a SUD, were under the influence of drugs or alcohol at the time of their crime. Female inmates were more likely than male inmates to have met criteria for drug dependence or abuse. Nationally, about 54% of state prisoners and 61% of sentenced jail inmates incarcerated for violent offenses met the DSM-IV criteria for drug dependence or abuse. Nearly half of all state prisoners and sentenced jail inmates who were incarcerated for property offenses committed the crime to get money for drugs or to obtain drugs. Although those with violent offenses make up t...
Sample 1
Background/History. Interdev has provided IT support to the City of Forest Park for the past four years as a Managed ServiceProvider to help supplement the City’s internal IT staff. Interdev is able to provide resources that are either not economical or difficult to maintain as a single entity with a small IT department. This updated agreement better aligns with the needs of the City as we will continue to receive the key services an MSP can provide better than we can, while also eliminating from the agreement those services we can provide better as an internal department. The updated contract reduces the support agreement costs by roughly $6000 a month and also changes from the current 36 month agreement to a 12 month agreement with an annual renewal option. Cost: $ Budgeted for: x Yes No Reduction in cost of roughly $6000/month None
Sample 1
Background/History. The Amended and Restated Delegation Agreement approved by the Board on September 18, 2007 was accepted by NERC and filed with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) on October 30, 2007. On March 21, 2008, FERC conditionally accepted the Amended and Restated Delegation Agreement, but required Texas RE make certain modifications to Attachments 1 and 2 of Exhibit D (the Texas RE Hearing Process and the Rules of Procedure to be used for federal enforcement hearings held at the Public Utility Commission of Texas) and Exhibit E (Funding) by July 18, 2008. FERC’s required modifications to the Exhibit D Attachments are primarily “clean-up,” to make certain definitions consistent with the pro forma NERC Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement Program (CMEP) definitions. FERC also requires Texas RE to exclude breaches of confidentiality from the “hold harmless” provision in the Texas RE Rules of Procedure for hearings, in accordance with the pro forma CMEP requirements. FERC does not require any modifications to the unique Hearing Process for the ERCOT Region. FERC’s required modifications to Exhibit E are to (1) address the obligations of Texas RE and ERCOT to properly transfer the Electric Reliability Organization (ERO) fee to NERC, and (2) confirm appropriate financial safeguards are in place for funds that ERCOT collects from Market Participants in the ERCOT Region. In order to avoid a separate FERC filing by ERCOT (to confirm its agreements regarding the billing and collection functions relating to the ERO fee), Texas RE proposes that ERCOT sign an attachment to Exhibit E, agreeing to the required financial safeguards, and to timely transfer the ERO funds it collects to NERC. NERC has accepted this proposal. Texas RE has no objections to any of the revisions required by FERC and has made the required modifications to Attachments 1 and 2 of Exhibit D, and Exhibit E. In addition, because FERC’s March 21st Order held that the ERCOT Bylaws would not become “rules” (and FERC would only need to approve modifications to the portions of the ERCOT Bylaws that are relevant to Texas RE functions), Texas RE can remove the note at the top of Exhibit B, Governance. The Amended and Restated Delegation Agreement (with redlines showing the changes to Exhibits B, D, and E) is attached hereto as Exhibit A. Texas RE needs to finalize the amendments to the Delegation Agreement and provide the Board-approved Amended and Restated Delegation Agreement to NERC by June 1, 2008. T...
Sample 1
Background/History. In August 2012, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Region IX and CDPH, together with a diverse group of Stakeholders, launched the California Partnership. In December 2012, members discussed how best to continue the reduction of unnecessary antipsychotic medication in nursing homes. Using federal Civil Monetary Penalty funds, CMS and CDPH identified CCCC to carry on the goals already established by the California Partnership. Under the contract, CCCC facilitated stakeholder engagement to improve dementia care and reduce unnecessary antipsychotic medication used in nursing homes. Through the facilitation, CCCC refined the targets for action in the following areas: • "Enforcement” and "Informed Consent" areas by convening the appropriate stakeholders, assisting the development of action plans, and documenting results.
Sample 1
Background/History. Jan 2017—City Council adopted the hearing officer’s recommendation to uphold the MPB recommendation of denial. Feb 2017—Owner filed a petition pursuant to the Florida Land Use and Environmental Dispute Resolution Act, Section 70.51, Florida Statutes, for a special magistrate proceeding to contest the Orlando City Council’s denial of the proposed Xxxx XX Amendment. Feb 2017—Owner concurrently filed a Petition for Writ of Certiorari in the Circuit Court to challenge the Orlando City’s Council’s denial of the proposed Xxxx XX Amendment; and, in accordance with Section 70.51(17)(a), Florida Statutes, the City and Owner participated in mediation conferences in an effort to amicably resolve the dispute regarding the proposed Xxxx XX Amendment. Reconsideration of PD Amendment To reiterate, the applicant requested a PD amendment for:
Sample 1
Background/History. On February 7, 2023, The School Board authorized the Chair to conduct negotiations for an employment agreement with Xx. Xxxxxxx X. Smiley as Interim Superintendent of Schools. Negotiations were held on February 13, 2023. The parties were able to reach agreement which provides for Xx. Xxxxxx to commence as Interim Superintendent of Schools upon School Board approval on February 15, 2023. Please see the attached Employment Agreement and minutes.
Sample 1
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Background/History. Recreation Department would like to enter into a Summer Food Service Program partnership with Clayton County Public Schools to provide meals (breakfast and lunch) to Summer Camp 2022 participants and children in the community ages 18 years and under from June 6, 2022, through July 22, 2022. The Seamless Summer Option (SSO) will provide Clayton County Public Schools free summer meals in low-income areas during the traditional summer vacation periods. Cost: $ N/A Budgeted for: Yes No Financial Impact: N/A Action Requested from Council:
Sample 1
Background/History. In July of 1997, Allegro and its parent company, Sanken, were in the process of developing similar technologies as part of their product development efforts. These technologies were to be derived from [***] BCD technology for applications in the automotive and office automation industries. Pursuant to a management decision, Allegro and Sanken shared information and cooperated in planning the development of the new technologies. The parties ultimately decided to build the new technologies from the starting point of certain technology developed by Allegro and Sanken prior to July of 1997. Thereafter, development proceeded along two separate paths as each party intended to have different applications specific to their market. In the case of Allegro, the new technology was known as ABCD3 and was intended for [***] capability, whereas Sanken's new technology was known as SBCD3 and was intended for [***] capability. After July of 1997, Allegro and Sanken coordinated their research and development activities. Their relevant new technologies of ABCD3 and SBCD3 were developed by cross-exploitation of each party's know-how, information, and assistance; however, the parties separately paid for their respective development costs. It was ultimately determined, by way of an independent valuation, that at the time of such technology exchange the value of Allegro's technology was approximately $[***] and the value of Sanken's technology was approximately $[***]. As a result, it was agreed that Sanken would recognize receipt of a net benefit of $[***] to be compensated to Allegro. The parties now wish to memorialize their understanding concerning this matter, and provide for a transfer of the applicable technology in exchange for a monetary payment.
Sample 1

Related to Background/History

  • BACKGROUND 1.1. The “Work” is the research article, review article, letter, clinical trial study, report, article, or other copyright work, as identified in the Copyright Letter and further detailed in Schedule 1: Details of the Work (including such form of the copyright work submitted to Xxxxxxx Science for publication pursuant to clause 4, below), but excluding (except where context otherwise requires) any diagrams, figures or illustration specifically identified to Xxxxxxx Science pursuant to clause 3.2, below.

  • Background Check The Department or Customer may require the Contractor to conduct background checks of its employees, agents, representatives, and subcontractors as directed by the Department or Customer. The cost of the background checks will be borne by the Contractor. The Department or Customer may require the Contractor to exclude the Contractor’s employees, agents, representatives, or subcontractors based on the background check results. In addition, the Contractor must ensure that all persons have a responsibility to self-report to the Contractor within three (3) calendar days any arrest for any disqualifying offense. The Contractor must notify the Contract Manager within twenty-four (24) hours of all details concerning any reported arrest. Upon the request of the Department or Customer, the Contractor will re-screen any of its employees, agents, representatives, and subcontractors during the term of the Contract.

  • Background Technology List here prior contracts to assign Inventions that are now in existence between any other person or entity and you. [ ] List here previous Inventions which you desire to have specifically excluded from the operation of this Agreement. Continue on reverse side if necessary.

  • Background Checks The State may require that the Contractor and Contractor Parties undergo criminal background checks as provided for in the State of Connecticut Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection Administration and Operations Manual or such other State document as governs procedures for background checks. The Contractor and Contractor Parties shall cooperate fully as necessary or reasonably requested with the State and its agents in connection with such background checks.

  • BACKGROUND STATEMENT The Borrower has requested that the Lenders make available to the Borrower revolving credit facilities in the aggregate principal amount of $725,000,000. The Borrower will use the proceeds of these facilities as provided in Section 5.5. The Lenders are willing to make available to the Borrower the credit facilities described herein subject to and on the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement.

  • BACKGROUND OF AGREEMENT 1.1 LICENSOR represents that it has certain intellectual property pertaining to services and technologies in the field of teleradiology, in respect to which it is prepared to grant a nonexclusive license to LICENSEE.

  • Background and Purpose Executive was employed by the Company. Executive's employment is ending effective ____________ under the conditions described in Section 3.1 of the Executive Severance Agreement ("Agreement") by and between Executive and the Company dated ____________, 2012. The purpose of this Release is to settle, and the parties hereby settle, fully and finally, any and all claims the Releasing Parties may have against the Released Parties, whether asserted or not, known or unknown, including, but not limited to, claims arising out of or related to Executive's employment, any claim for reemployment, or any other claims whether asserted or not, known or unknown, past or future, that relate to Executive's employment, reemployment, or application for reemployment.

  • Background Intellectual Property ‌ Notwithstanding and superseding anything to the contrary in this ARTICLE 14, each Party retains title to all Intellectual Property Rights owned or possessed by it or any of its affiliates prior to or independent of performance of this Agreement and used by it in fulfilling its obligations under this Agreement, as well as any modifications or improvements made thereto in the course of performing this Agreement (“Background IP”). To the extent that one Party acquires any right, title, or interest in and to any aspect of the modifications or improvements to the Background IP of the other Party, such first Party shall assign such right, title, and interest to the second Party, immediately following such acquisition. If any of the Supplier’s Background IP is included in or required to use the Documentation provided by the Supplier to the City, the Supplier hereby grants to the City an irrevocable, perpetual, fully paid-up, royalty-free, worldwide, transferable and non-exclusive licence (including the right to sub-licence only to members of the City’s Group) to, itself and through contractors and agents, use, copy, amend, reproduce, modify, create derivative works of, use, commercialize, and otherwise exploit the Supplier’s Background IP but only to the extent required to use such Documentation for the purpose (or any reasonably inferred purpose) for which it has been provided or for the provision of the Supply under this Agreement (excluding any software source code).

  • BACKGROUND INFORMATION (A) The Adviser has entered into an Investment Adviser's Agreement with the Fund ("Investment Adviser's Agreement"). Pursuant to the Investment Adviser's Agreement, the Adviser has agreed to render investment advisory and certain other management services to all of the funds of the Fund, and the Fund has agreed to employ the Adviser to render such services and to pay to the Adviser certain fees therefore. The Investment Adviser's Agreement recognizes that the Adviser may enter into agreements with other investment advisers who will serve as fund managers to the funds.

  • Tests and Preclinical and Clinical Trials The studies, tests and preclinical and clinical trials conducted by or, to the Company’s knowledge, on behalf of the Company were and, if still ongoing, are being conducted in all material respects in accordance with experimental protocols, procedures and controls pursuant to accepted professional scientific standards and all Authorizations and Applicable Laws, including, without limitation, the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act and the rules and regulations promulgated thereunder (collectively, “FFDCA”); the descriptions of the results of such studies, tests and trials contained in the Registration Statement, the General Disclosure Package and the Prospectus are, to the Company’s knowledge, accurate in all material respects and fairly present the data derived from such studies, tests and trials; except to the extent disclosed in the Registration Statement, the General Disclosure Package and the Prospectus, the Company is not aware of any studies, tests or trials, the results of which the Company believes reasonably call into question the study, test, or trial results described or referred to in the Registration Statement, the General Disclosure Package and the Prospectus when viewed in the context in which such results are described and the clinical state of development; and, except to the extent disclosed in the Registration Statement, the General Disclosure Package or the Prospectus, neither the Company nor any Subsidiary has received any notices or correspondence from the FDA or any Governmental Entity requiring the termination or suspension of any studies, tests or preclinical or clinical trials conducted by or on behalf of the Company, other than ordinary course communications with respect to modifications in connection with the design and implementation of such trials, copies of which communications have been made available to you.

Time is Money Join Law Insider Premium to draft better contracts faster.