|
Conservation CMazission
<br /> August 25, 1989
<br /> ... Page - - Executive- Session.
<br /> R..-= MURPHY SPEAKING, Cant. : from the conversations, there was a need
<br /> to review our method of payment, They had submitted a rropetitive bid
<br /> with other people.' They got, the license, because their's was the high.
<br /> est, bid_ That's terribly important because we can' t says we' re going t
<br /> shift it down as- they hada - couple of more years, as a- matter of
<br /> equity to the people who did submit bids, there was more than one.
<br /> Interest ingly, Hal et and,. Germain. bid, eparat l'y and, subsequently co -
<br /> -soli ate = operati-ons. The r.---came 6 back . and -through serious :,conversations
<br /> they made- clear they wanted. to modify this and- from what- they were
<br /> .-spending and- seeing the- cranberry price going down, , there- was. -a need.
<br /> to'.-modify . For a variety of reasons, the -discussions to modify the
<br /> .-financial arrangement were not. conducted in. as- timely a fashion as
<br /> they, or we, : want ed. They- do., not I i ke. to deal- with paper. - They are not
<br /> es -they- want:-you- o ",think they- are,-,:-but they area't. Terg we get
<br /> February:and at,.,that..time-. there was= good.. solid. discussion as
<br /> prioe.�-�;� .- actual suggestion came from us to male it
<br /> . - per-.-,barrel;. --2 % 9 of the -gro s .9 ece i pt :.- Now,. what occurred here i s-
<br /> o-me eo m ication.. roblem, I cannot speak, for -the entire seeti- 6-
<br /> bec,a e e f :t o back . t�o- y - -o f f i-ce 19. le t. here..with-.-the- iiap�ress.--
<br /> ton-:that --the .effective date-- of.--this- change .-would:- be the -er.op ..that was.
<br /> harvested I as t 69-f al I a a i.n,_ y -impress 1-on-,; ,because . was aware-:that
<br /> ., were desirous. of, - and. we were talking abo - , , a . change while that
<br /> crop. was still . in, ..the ground and not harvested.- It L was still. ire,-it
<br /> growing stage when. ,-we -first, started..:.;talking about the actual,. price..
<br /> We =-_A ..not, --get-. of g:,-ori.At-.. -e itivate y -unt9i.-I February-..: I hay-e a- mind--
<br /> sedon't ..th n - t was,: anything that was 6. aid at ..the- meetkng,,
<br /> b .. 1, have. a mindset that 'it -was--.,for- the -crop just harvested. "� he
<br /> 9t
<br /> r.ec- mmendat o .---came, -f r on - the -Commission., to. the Bo ard-9 o f. Selectmen- to.
<br /> -sadify the 1i cense.---to- refIect the new- agreem.ent effective :with the
<br /> .1988 crop. year.-'
<br /> ., cal d Louise,,_-.-as9-this somewhat supris d tie,. but she
<br /> said, o, 'she related the 'members- of the -Commission were clear -in their
<br /> un erstandins that they were looking at 1988- very clearly.
<br /> SNF : The reason- is,, - we- looked- at the contract and the contract
<br /> cal-led . for -a . reevaluation q after =.3 years= and..-that would mean- for the.
<br /> '88,- crop because that's the fourth - y ear; -The- 84. crop,' the contract
<br /> .was-,.started, In. "84,- we . get paid -in:. '85, so that's the firs-t year. `85-
<br /> is the first year end', the second.- - ' 79 the. third end and we were
<br /> 6
<br /> asked to revie , it and we said the review period is at the end of the
<br /> third year; at the- end 6 f: the- ` = - year 'a ct: we Will gine- . t to them for
<br /> the year and thea, at- the end of the year, we-911- see what' s happened
<br /> arid-, talk about -it for the next year,. -
<br /> MURPHY*. It- went to6 tyre Board- of Selectmen,. -the Board: of Selectmen
<br /> approved' it, the Board of.-.Selectmen. directed. tat9..To , Counsel prepare
<br /> th.e.-amendment. - t carne back. in. April. At this. point,9 the- Apr.il payment
<br /> arrived which- reflected- 25% of -the '97 crop. year. _C lear Iyjr - we have a
<br /> situation where the operators were not in concert with. the Commission.
<br /> The Commission- was.- advised we have ..a.- problem here..
<br /> :S MONS: - - came --back and we talked about it again and the decision was
<br /> 1988.
<br /> MURPHY=, At that point, - took eardo 's contract and retyped it to
<br /> state `88 and- sent t. off. to then#9 they get i t, are surprised and
<br /> don' t want to hear about i t. We set up a meet i ;6 that" s where we are.
<br /> Th-eir contention is that in the original request for proposal, i
<br /> shoe to a provislon for a tree year review.
<br /> E3ut a ain, it ' s a ratter
<br /> al semantics, is it three years after first payment or three years
<br />
|