My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Agenda and Packet 1985 01 15
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
AGENDAS & PACKETS (45.010)
>
1973-1989 City Council Agendas and Packets
>
1985 City Council Agendas and Packets
>
City Council Agenda and Packet 1985 01 15
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 1:46:54 PM
Creation date
12/29/2009 1:44:58 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
City Council Packet
Signed Date
1/15/1985
Supplemental fields
Test
CCAGPKT 1985 01 15
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
127
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
fees related to the southwest pump station, and <br /> water atin extensions dependent on Hoaart's <br /> development, and those dollars could then be <br /> shifted in to this project. This could be a <br /> potential option that council may consider. <br /> Headley described the difference in the 20 year <br /> budget scenario actually budgeted and the new <br /> estimates as a $324,447 increase for the entire <br /> project. The totals of the items that could be <br /> cut from 1985 projects mount to $332, 160. <br /> The impact of carrying over these projects into <br /> subsequent years would have to be assessed. <br /> Hundley brought to council 's attention the <br /> lover tap fee income in 1984 than was projected <br /> and consequently lower interest income than was <br /> projected. In 1985, in order to complete this <br /> project as well as Harper Lake, a bond issue of <br /> $1 .2 million as opposed to $500,000 would be <br /> needed. <br /> If reductions are made in other a.-eas of the 1985 <br /> budget, this could reduce the bond issue amount <br /> to $900,000. But this is • major adjustment in <br /> terms of the City's bonded indebtedness in <br /> • order to accommodate this project as well as <br /> what was budgeted for the Harper Lake project. <br /> Council's inquiries with regard to negotiating <br /> with the bidders was a point of d:scusaion <br /> and prowpted Rautenstraus to relate the <br /> possible legal entanglement of negotiating with two <br /> prospective contractors as opposed to awarding <br /> a bid and negotiating the reduction of whatever <br /> amount council deemed necessary. <br /> If actual rebidding took place, it is RMC's <br /> opinion that the bids would not come in any lower <br /> unless there is a major change to the scope of the <br /> project . <br /> Rautenstraus recommended that either new bids <br /> be called for or an actual award be made and <br /> negotiate for • reduction in construction costs <br /> through contract analysis. <br /> RMC advised council that the contract is written <br /> such that the City can go to Notice of Award, then <br /> negotiate a change in the contract, as the contract <br /> allows for a change up to 25X of the total without <br /> any readjustment of other costs. If in fact, it <br /> 4 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.