My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Minutes 1993 12 21
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
MINUTES (45.090)
>
1970-1999 City Council Minutes
>
1993 City Council Minutes
>
City Council Minutes 1993 12 21
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 2:31:37 PM
Creation date
8/27/2004 2:28:22 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
City Council Minutes
Signed Date
12/21/1993
Original Hardcopy Storage
2E3
Supplemental fields
Test
CCMIN 1993 12 21
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
18
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
escrow, either as a lump sum when the construction costs are paid <br />or over a 12 month period, at the participants option. The <br />participant has full control over the extra 5%. If it goes over <br />the totaled 10%, the District would not be putting any money into <br />this project. The participants would have to come up with <br />additional money. If the participants can't agree what to do, the <br />District will give the participants the project, including all <br />money, rights-of-way, everything. <br /> <br />Mike Shimmin, Louisville's Water Attorney, stated that in Paragraph <br />20, second line after "6.b.iii.," 6c. should be added. At the end <br />of Paragraph 20, he wanted the word "therein" removed and add "with <br />respect to the obligations set forth in said paragraph 11." This <br />will clarify that the portion of the agreement to be performed by <br />the District remains the District's obligation and the portion, <br />which is Paragraph 11, related to constructing the connecting <br />pipeline to Louisville, would be performed by the enterprise and <br />not the District itself. <br /> <br />Mayer had heard that there is an allotment for Public Service and, <br />since Public Service isn't participating, that may be granted to <br />some other entity. <br /> <br />Trout: <br /> <br />That's what Longmont would pick up. <br />If Longmont increases its <br />participation, Longmont would assume <br />that 13.5 c.f.s. <br /> <br />Sisk wondered, if Louisville's share was $8,200, what did other <br />co~unities pay and what is the overage. <br /> <br />Trout did not have the breakdown with him, but he thought the <br />percentages that would have been used to allocate that are in <br />Schedule B-3. <br /> <br />Lathrop wanted to know what Louisville's maximum exposure would be <br />under the various alternatives. <br /> <br />Phare: <br /> <br />To get the total project cost, use <br />the $353,400, plus the $10,600, plus <br />the $2,385,000, plus the $600,000, <br />that would be the estimate today as <br />to what the project would cost us. <br />I don't believe those numbers <br />include the two 5% contingencies. <br />They would be based on 5% of $2.985 <br />million (approximately $150,000 <br />each). The $600,000 escrow we put <br />up is to guarantee our participation <br />plus the $2.385 million is our total <br />construction cost, or $2.985 <br />(million). <br /> <br />5 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.