City Council Minutes 1993 03 09 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Griffiths: In terms of the commitment, it's necessary under the current agreement, the final commitment of the City occurs in December of this year. Does this commitment for 4 c.f.s, fall within the same agreement? Phare: Yes. It would be essentially a proration upward of the cost established in the agreement or previously incurred expenses of the District. Essentially, the City's exposure would go from approximately $290,000.00 to $350,000.00. The final decision would be in December, as projected today. That's what we would be doing is amending that contract. I would attempt to bring it back to ~Council as early as next Tuesday, if possible. That way we could formally adopt it before the District is too far ahead of us, since we have three (3) weeks before our next meeting. There is one other part of this discussion and that's direction on acquiring water interest to let the pipeline. There are some opportunities available that may or may not be there in the future. Council broke from this discussion, so Phare could gather some information. UPDATE ON LASTOKANEGOTIATIONS Davidson reported that they got together with the County and Lafayette on Lastoka. Davidson went over what they had voted on: 1.) 2.) Louisville wishes to solely own the property necessary for its ball fields, the expansion around the City Shops and Treatment Plant, and any land necessary to address its drainage concerns. They agreed with that. Louisville's financial participation would be at the same level as Lafayette's, 25% of the total, so long as the participation is adequate for the acquisition of the property mentioned above. Louisville's financial participation would be greater only if 25% is not adequate. The only exemption to'this~that they didn't agree to ..... originally the discussion was the land that Louisville would buy for the City Shops and Water 10