My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
06-13-2011 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
2011
>
06-13-2011 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/8/2015 11:30:16 AM
Creation date
4/8/2015 10:20:59 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
131
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, May 23, 2011 <br />7:00 o'clock p.m. <br />_____________________________________________________________________________________ <br /> <br /> Page 6 of 24 <br /> <br />(6. OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT BID CONSIDERATION, <br />Continued) <br /> <br />the original schedule was revised months ago in order to accommodate additional input by the new <br />Council. <br /> <br />Bremer commented the City is far along into this project and that there are costs associated with the <br />project planning. A considerable amount of time and effort have gone into this project and that there are <br />times when the City Council may make a decision that does not seem wise but it is the Council's job to <br />make difficult decisions. Bremer noted she personally supports the project but in her view it may be a <br />waste of time to continue to have this conversation since it appears that there are only two votes in favor <br />of proceeding forward with the project. Bremer stated if any members of the Council are interested in <br />continuing the conversation, she would prefer to wait until the City is able to get a couple more bids and <br />that they could do some temporary minimal repairs in the meantime. <br /> <br />Bremer noted the people who attended the open house and saw the simulation were generally receptive to <br />the project and realized that the design was more focused on safety than they had initially realized. <br />Bremer commented the Council members need to trust the City's engineers and other experts to make the <br />best decision for the design of this roadway. Bremer reiterated she would prefer to step back from this <br />project long enough to regroup, get more input and people on board with the project, and obtain more bids <br />next year. Bremer noted the mayor is against this project and that it will not be helpful to delay it tonight. <br /> <br />Kellogg indicated the Council will need to make a decision tonight. <br /> <br />Franchot asked how the City would pay for the bonds if they did not move forward with the project. <br /> <br />Loftus stated they could do what Council Member Bremer suggested and put the plans out for bids early <br />next year. If the Council is not inclined to do that, they could look at the CIP, as well as this road, and <br />discuss it further this summer. <br /> <br />Printup stated in his view the arguments will not change and will only prolong the process. Printup stated <br />this conversation has taken the Council to this last meeting in May and that he does not buy into the <br />argument that delaying the letting of bids was the result of receiving only one bid. <br /> <br />Franchot stated nobody has said it is the new council members' fault that only one bid was received but <br />that it was a contributing factor to the schedule being revised. Franchot noted the City Council needs to <br />understand the financial ramifications of not proceeding forward with the project. <br /> <br />Printup stated the financial contributions are what money has been put into it to date. <br /> <br />Bremer noted the bonds have been issued for this project and that the question is how they can be repaid <br />and how quickly the funds must be used. <br /> <br />Loftus noted the City is required to make an interest payment in August and will also be making an <br />interest and principal payment in February. The City will still be receiving the MSA funds to cover those <br />payments. <br /> <br />Franchot asked if the City will receive those funds even if the City is not doing a project. <br /> <br />Item #02 - CC Agenda - 06/13/2011 <br />Approval of Council Minutes 05/23/2011 [Page 6 of 24]
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.