My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Minutes 1993 01 19
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
MINUTES (45.090)
>
1970-1999 City Council Minutes
>
1993 City Council Minutes
>
City Council Minutes 1993 01 19
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 2:31:35 PM
Creation date
7/30/2004 9:17:49 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
City Council Minutes
Signed Date
1/19/1993
Original Hardcopy Storage
2E3
Supplemental fields
Test
CCMIN 1993 01 19
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
44
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Sisk: <br /> <br />bound to follow through, so long as <br />we maintain an assurance to them <br />that we can build the project for <br />the money that they have - $18.4 <br />million. If we determine that we <br />cannot meet that obligation, then <br />Broomfield gets no refund of the <br />money that they spent. They simply <br />get the right to pursue the project <br />and finish it on their own. <br /> <br />Why isn't it in the agreement that <br />you will build it for $3.5 million? <br />Why does Broomfield get that <br />assurance and we don't? <br /> <br />Dreher: <br /> <br />Shimmin: <br /> <br />We have not given them that <br />guarantee in the agreement that we <br />have with them. We have not given <br />them a warranty that we can build it <br />for $18.4 million. All we've said <br />is that if we cannot, we keep the <br />money we've spent and you can have <br />the project back. That, in essence, <br />is in this agreement too. If we've <br />received more than we've have <br />actually incurred in pursuing the <br />project, then there would be refunds <br />back. You would have the same <br />rights as Broomfield. <br /> <br />We've had some discussions about <br />this issue and from Broomfield's <br />perspective, they've already paid <br />the District $2.5 million, of which <br />$1.2 million has already been spent <br />to get things this far. <br /> <br />Dreher: <br /> <br />There is a provision in the contract <br />that deals with the fact that if <br />Louisville walked out later on, and <br />maybe we need to clarify this, that <br />any work products developed by the <br />District on behalf of Louisville, <br />would be given to Louisville as <br />well. Maybe we could clarify that <br />relationship a little bit. <br /> <br />Mayer: <br /> <br />But it says here that Broomfield <br />exercises its rights under the <br />November 12, 1991, contract to take <br />control of the project. If they <br /> <br />7 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.