My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
01-12-2015 Council Minutes
Orono
>
City Council
>
2015
>
01-12-2015 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/5/2015 1:49:34 PM
Creation date
3/5/2015 1:49:14 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
19
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
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />Monday, January 12, 2015 <br />7:00 o'clock p.m. <br />(5. WATER TREATMENT SYSTEM IMPROVEMENT continued) <br />Peterson stated there was a contracting firm that did not bid on the project even though they are one of the <br />top bidders. Peterson indicated he did call them up and they said they are too busy right now and will not <br />be submitting a bid. <br />Walsh stated he would like the City to develop and maintain a list of contractors, the cities the <br />worked in, and their performance. Walsh stated he would prefer the City to actively advertise projects to <br />potential contractors rather than just putting the project out there and waiting to see who bids on it. Walsh <br />stated a lot of times the engineer will know who is busy and who is not. Staff needs to work getting the <br />word out as hard as they can because the City only has limited funds. <br />Martini stated they attempt to be smart as it relates to the time the bid process is started to make sure they <br />are optimizing the best deal. Martini stated for all the work they do, they generally are monitoring those <br />lists so they can be following up and see if there is somebody who might be interested in the project. <br />Walsh stated under No. 3 in Staff's report, he noticed the sentence that says "This is below the normal <br />engineering oversight costs of 20 percent of construction." Walsh stated in his view that is a very high <br />number and that he is not sure where that comes from. <br />Edwards stated he looked at what the rule of thumb is for oversight construction fees and that they are <br />typically under 20 percent. <br />Martini stated that is not how the proposal was put together and that they generally attempt to look at the <br />work that is anticipated, figure out staff time involved, and compute it that way. Martini stated at times <br />they sometimes will do that math and compare the projected engineering fees to the costs to get a feel for <br />how this project compares to others. <br />Edwards stated the engineer's proposals are basically an hourly based proposal and that he threw that in <br />there simply as a check, because if it is over 20 percent, it would be a red flag. <br />Levang moved, Printup seconded, to award the contract to Municipal Builders, Inc., in the amount <br />of $625,000 and approve the construction phase services to Bolton & Menk in the not -to -exceed <br />amount of $40,800. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. <br />6. 2015 GOLF COURSE FEE SCHEDULE <br />McMillan stated she is glad to see that 2014 was a good year for the golf course <br />Walsh stated the revenues look good for last year, and given the loss of some of the other local golf <br />courses, it looks good for 2015. <br />McMillan stated the only change she would like to make to the 2015 fee schedule is to eliminate or <br />reduce the junior fees. McMillan stated in her view the fee schedule is a very good solution to some of <br />the problems the golf course has faced in the past. McMillan suggested the junior fee for 18 and under be <br />reduced from $12 to $10, the junior season pass be reduced to $260, and that children under 12 could play <br />Page 12 of 19 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.