My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Minutes - 2007/02/26
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Minutes
>
2000-2009
>
2007
>
Minutes - 2007/02/26
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/6/2025 2:14:13 PM
Creation date
7/20/2010 9:32:42 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Commission Documents
Commission Name
City Council
Commission Doc Type
Minutes
MEETINGDATE
2/26/2007
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
16
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
Mounds View City Council February 26, 2007 <br />Regular Meeting Page 8 <br />Mr. Jay ind2catecl it was a plea agreement to one of the counts. • <br />William Werner said that the south side of County 10 there was a segment of sidewalk going to <br />the library and out and asked whether that is still included in the project. <br />Council indicated it is not. <br />MOTION/SECOND: Stigney/Mueller. To Waive the Reading and Approve Resolution 7020 <br />With Statement of lA with Jay Brothers and Item 3B Bid Alternate One Removal of Board Walk <br />Bump out. <br />Acting Mayor Stigney said that regardless of money involvement with something else this is a <br />construction project with a trailway and they have performed satisfactorily with other projects <br />and their bid is $47,000 lower and there are bonds to cover the City should they not perform as <br />required. <br />Council Member Mueller asked what year the situation took place in. <br />Mr. Jay indicated that it was in 2001. <br />Council Member Mueller indicated that a lot of time has transpired and a lot of good work has <br />been done by them for the City and other cities are happy with the work. She then said that if • <br />there was an issue with having the bid come in the City should have informed Mr. Jay that he <br />was not eligible for bidding. <br />City Attorney Riggs said that this is a debarment with an issue relating to something other than <br />performance issues and there is a performance history with this contractor. He then said that the <br />recommendation of Staff is that it is appropriate for the City to accept this bid, as the issue was <br />something completely different than for performance. <br />City Attorney Riggs indicated that they are not on the State Debarment list they are on the <br />Department of Administration's list. <br />Council Member Flaherty said that he feels it is incumbent on this Council to work with <br />companies that have ethics and integrity and he would like a synopsis of the situation. <br />Mr. Jay said that in 2001 they had 90 employees in seven states and were involved in <br />communication construction building communication systems. He then said that 911 happened <br />and all of the work under contract was cancelled and they had all the equipment to support those <br />employees and kept them employed for as long as they could and then started laying them off and <br />attempted to sell equipment. He then said that they got behind in obligations and one was to the <br />pension fund. He further said that in the spring of 2002 the federal government came into see <br />why they were behind and had lost $1 million in 2001 and he was told to file bankruptcy but said ~ <br />he wanted to work through it. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.