My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Agenda Packets - 2003/01/27
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2003
>
Agenda Packets - 2003/01/27
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/28/2025 4:46:08 PM
Creation date
8/8/2018 9:34:06 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Commission Documents
Commission Name
City Council
Commission Doc Type
Agenda Packets
MEETINGDATE
1/27/2003
Supplemental fields
City Council Document Type
City Council Packets
Date
1/27/2003
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
153
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 December 30, 2002 <br />Regular Meeting Page 12 <br /> <br />there was a limit on costs for 1996 of $4,000 and invoices received and paid totaled $8,770. He 495 <br />further indicated that this contract established an hourly rate of $35.00 and charges paid by the 496 <br />City included educational and mileage expenses not outlined in the contract. 497 <br /> 498 <br />Mr. Wilson indicated the fire protection contract has had 8 versus 9 installments but that is 499 <br />consistent with past practice. The second item is that in establishing the City’s estimated share 500 <br />for calls the formula is to use the calls for the three previous years. In reviewing the formula for 501 <br />2001 2000 data was not used per the contract. A reason may be that the data was not yet 502 <br />available but that is inconsistent with the contract. The third item is the assessed values in the 503 <br />formula, the numbers for 2000 were not used but should have been per the contract. Another 504 <br />observation is that there was an invoice for $8,553 for a capital budget expenditure that was not 505 <br />addressed in any contract they reviewed. 506 <br /> 507 <br />Mr. Wilson indicated the Creative Kids contract was reviewed and the lease commenced in 508 <br />August of 2001 but there were no payments until September of 2001. The second item is that the 509 <br />initial payment for September was $5,288 rather than the $5,244 specified in the contract. The 510 <br />third item is that Section 2.2 of the contract identifies a penalty and interest component for late 511 <br />payments not received with 10 days of the due date and, on more than one occasion, the 512 <br />payments were made after the established due date with no penalty imposed. 513 <br /> 514 <br />Mayor Sonterre asked Finance Director Hansen if there should be suggested changes to the past 515 <br />practices and what the plan to move forward would be. 516 <br /> 517 <br />Finance Director Hansen indicated that several of the contracts have expired and are no longer an 518 <br />issue. He then indicated that the fire services contract had been discussed and Council had 519 <br />directed Staff to pay the Fire Department as billed. He further commented that he would contact 520 <br />Creative Kids to inform them that late fees will apply for payments received more than 10 days 521 <br />late. 522 <br /> 523 <br />Mayor Sonterre asked whether the $8,553 capital budget expenditure was an approved budget 524 <br />expenditure. 525 <br /> 526 <br />Finance Director Hansen indicated he would need to review records and report back. 527 <br /> 528 <br />Mayor Sonterre suggested having something in the documentation to identify this type of 529 <br />expenditure to save time reviewing the future. 530 <br /> 531 <br />Council Member Thomas indicated she would like to get clarification on what should be done 532 <br />with regard to educational and mileage charges. 533 <br /> 534 <br />Finance Director Hansen indicated those were on the housing inspection and building inspection 535 <br />contracts and those are the contracts that ended. 536 <br /> 537 <br />Council Member Stigney noted the report was dated June 27, 2002 and asked why Council is 538 <br />hearing about it in December. 539
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.