CCMin_82Nov4_Special - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

1 MINUTES SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING NOVE~JIBER !t, 1982 PAGE 3 is all for Pascal. The Engineer replied Albert Street in the bid was X89,757.75 and this X20,000 would make it metal X109,757.75. The Clerk administrator added that the X20,000 is designated strictly for the Ib4SA~ project and Mayor Warkentien commented that the storm sewer is ,.erely ari additicn. Councilmember Ciernia asked i_f the State Aid payment did not cover the entire cost and the Engineer replied in the negative. Councilmember Ciernia stated there is some limit on how much the State can cover and the Engineer said it covers the Albert Street project. Councilmember Ciernia asked if it covers the entire project for street and sewer. Councilmember Eggert inquired why Council did not assess fer just one block on either side of Pascal and Councilmember Ciernia stated the numbers just do not work cut. Mayor ti"'arkentien asked where the 13,000 for Pascal. came from. Councilmember Ciernia stated the assessment bcttom line number was X11+3,000, it was not just Pascal that cost that, he thought State Aid funds did not cover the entire project and Council allocated as much as they could for the project and the rest was to be assessed. Engineer Lemberg said it covers the entire Albert Street project, that is just construction, but the design fee, legal fees, bond fees and administration must be added. A,Raycr Warkentien asked if there was a breakdotim. Councilmember Chestovich said she did not understand the matter, the State is paying for all tre road repair work on Albert, but they are not paying for the storm sewer or part of the storm sewer, so the assessment is then for part of the storm sewer, administration, legal fees, engineer fees, etc., plus Pascal. The Engineer stated all of the City is assessed for part of the State Aid. ~.4 ~ CHANGE ORDER DISCUSSION Mayor V!~:arkentien then moved the payment of Change Order #1 on the Albert` Pascal Street Improvement for $20,075.00 contingent on State approval. The mctior. was seconded by Councilmember Larson« Councilmember Eggert stated he thought there was an upper limit on the amount a community can get from State aids and Mayor 1~arkentien agreed, and added that if the cost goes over like it did on Roselawn, then it is necessary to bond and the bonds are paid off by future State Aid. Engineer Lemberg informed that State Aids are based on estimates the State makes based on streets but when the actual construction is done, then they pay the amount. Mayor Warkentien asked if anything had as yet been submitted to the State for State Aid and the Clerk Administrator replied in the affirmative. He explained that the balance in the State Aid account has been requested to be deposited toward this construction which will reduce the amount cf the bond payment. This will go into the sinking fund to retire that bond that was sold. Upon a vote being taken, the foregoing motion carried unanimously. Attorney Swanson explained that when you make the assessment you are really assessing for Albert and Pascal. There is fundable money and you have the combined prcject of Albert and Pascal and the dollar amount that is assessed against each parcel is a portion of the total amount, including the Municipal State Aid portion, so as a technical matter, you do not look at the assess- ment as being a dollar amount for part of Pascal or part of Albert or both, it is a dollar amount of the whole thing. Councilmember Eggert commented on the fact that the State is paying only for one street. Attorney Swanson replied that is true but you can assess for Albert even though you get State Aid. In fact, you can assess for projects under the statutes even though you get 100 percent reimbursement by 14iunicipal State Aid Funds.