My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
08-11-2004 Council Agenda
>
City Council Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2004
>
08-11-2004 Council Agenda
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/3/2012 2:49:14 PM
Creation date
5/3/2012 2:43:46 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
141
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).
View images
View plain text
MAYOR <br />Michael 1. Fahey <br />COUNCIL <br />Jim LaValle <br />Matt Anderson <br />Rick Montour <br />Bill Blesener <br />515 Little Canada Road, Little Canada, MN 55117 -1600 ADMINISTRATOI? <br />(651) 766 -4029 / FAX: (651) 766 -4048 Joel R. Hanson <br />www.ci.little-canada.mn.us <br />MEMORANDUM <br />M <br />TO: Mayor Fahey & Members of the City Council <br />FROM: Joel Hanson, City Administrator <br />DATE: August 5, 2004 <br />RE: Engineering Discussion <br />Attached is a letter from Lee Elfering, formerly of Howard R. Green. As you know, Lee left the <br />employee of HRG a couple of weeks ago. He has started his own engineering company and is interested <br />in working for us. <br />It is staffs opinion the Mr. Elfering has done an excellent job for us. He has been a solid engineer, <br />excellent with the public, and fits in extremely well with the staff. Retaining his services has a number of <br />advantages for the City. They are as follows: <br />1. He is extremely familiar with the operations and needs of the City thereby avoiding <br />problems associated with transitioning to 'another engineer. <br />2. The cost proposal he has outlined will save the City significant dollars in major project <br />construction. You will note that he has proposed an hourly charge with a maximum percentage <br />cost of 20% for projects over 3500,000 in value. Most of our improvement projects will easily <br />exceed that amount. Our recent past indicates we have been paying over 35% for these services. <br />On a 3 1,000,000 project, that would translate to 3150,000 in savings. <br />3. He will be a low overhead operation. At this point in time, he will not have costs <br />associated with rent, administration, marketing staff, or specialty services. This allows him to <br />offer his services to us at a reduced rate. <br />4. IIe will have the technical tools and support staff to meet our needs. He has indicated to <br />me that another engineer is already on board with him. He is also confident he will be retaining <br />qualified field personnel (inspection). From a software standpoint, he will have all the programs <br />that Little Canada would need in the design and review of our projects. <br />5. I -Ie will contract with an independent survey crew for field work. It is hoped he will use <br />one of our local firms given their knowledge of the area and minimal commute time. This also <br />offers the advantage of avoiding. the overhead of having an "on staff' survey crew. <br />6. He has already retained another client (the City of Wyoming) giving him a customer base <br />to generate sufficient cash flow to support his operation. <br />7. We are at a point with most of our projects that transitioning to another from HRG should <br />be very manageable. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.