Laserfiche WebLink
with the consultant and the City. <br />As presently proposed the request for proposals have an initial <br />sum with a cost plus feature depending on the amount of time. <br />The amount requested from each of the three communities is <br />intended to cover any extras. To the extent that there is <br />overage it would be the desire of the Westonka Chamber that this <br />money be spent for actual plantings or other amenities in the <br />community. (As an example if there is $300 left between the <br />three communities that appropriate trees or flowers be planted in <br />an equal number among the three communities.) As an alternative <br />this money could be remitted to each of the Cities as requested. <br />ALTERNATIVES - <br />Issue 1. Determination as ^ level of participation - <br />1. Fund the requested amount. <br />2. Fund an altered amount. <br />3. Choose not to fund. <br />4. Table for further discussion <br />Issue 2. Process for imput <br />1. Agree to the Westonka process as proposed. <br />2. Choose to have additional meetings with the <br />consultant at an additional cost. <br />3. Submit an alternative plan for the process. <br />RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that the City of Orono <br />contribute up to $1,350.00 to the plan developjan^'t out of <br />budgeted monies for the Navarre Redevelopment Co* ^.989. In <br />addition the process as proposed by the Westonka Chamber <br />Beautification Committee is recommended to be adopted as it <br />limits the cost entailed in the development cl the plan, yet <br />allowing for adequate public input. <br />PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by that the Council <br />agree to contribute up to $1,350.00 out ofT”ts budgeted amount <br />for Navarre Redevelopment 1989 and that the Council agree to the <br />process proposed by the Westonka Chamber. Ayes _. Nays _. <br />cc: John Cerhardson <br />Chic Remien, Westonka Chamber