My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
06-25-2001 Council Minutes
Orono
>
City Council
>
2001
>
06-25-2001 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/7/2012 1:50:27 PM
Creation date
3/7/2012 1:50:27 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
28
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
• <br />C� <br />MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />October June 25, 2001 <br />(Long Lake /Orono Fire Station, Continued) <br />Sale of Property <br />Flint stated in his view this section goes to the term of the contract. Flint stated apparently the two <br />cities are unable to agree on what happens to the property in the event of a sale. Long Lake's <br />proposed language gives Long Lake the first right to purchase the property, with the sale price being <br />determined by an appraisal, and payment terms be on terms which are commercially reasonable. <br />Flint stated Orono had concerns regarding that language because in their view they feel it will be very <br />difficult to determine what the appropriate value of the building and land will be in the event of a sale, <br />and if one party does purchase it from the other, the purchasing city will need to pay cash for the <br />facility in order to help fund a new fire station. <br />Flint stated he and Council Member Sansevere have discussed this provision prior to tonight's council <br />meeting, with the thought being that perhaps this section should be eliminated entirely. <br />Flint stated an additional factor is that Orono has a provision in its current code that does not allow <br />another city to own land in Orono. Flint stated it was the intent to amend that code to provide for the <br />new fire station, with ownership by another city being limited to 50 percent. <br />White stated in his view that is a major issue <br />Flint susgested that provision be eliminated all together and that joint 50150 ownership would <br />continue. <br />Flint moved, White seconded, to delete any language relating to the Sale of the Property from <br />the Contract for Joint Ownership. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. <br />Term <br />Flint moved, White seconded, to delete any language relating to the term of the Contract for <br />Joint Ownership. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. <br />Attorneys' Fees <br />Flint stated he would prefer the section on attorney fees be deleted from the agreement since it might <br />encourage people to sue. <br />Flint moved, Peterson seconded, to delete any language relating to attorney fees from the <br />Contract for Joint Ownership. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. <br />PAGE 25 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.