Laserfiche WebLink
r <br /> f <br /> Bd. of Sel . Minutes <br /> Meeting of October 8, 1986 <br /> el . Hanson asked if anything is to change in the opinion of Town <br /> Council? John Ferguson said that there isn't any reason to have <br /> town council change his opinion. They are looking at ten month <br /> of work having gone into it . They want to get this on the table <br /> by 1988 or 1989. The longer they hold back on anything they are <br /> doing, the longer they are looking at the overcrowding situationip <br /> el . Hanson commented that knowing Ferguson the way he knows him <br /> and if he was reviewing a document from Town Council h i c states <br /> he does not recommend it , he couldn't imagine h i i gn i ng that <br /> piece of paper . John Ferguson said that he thinks there is a <br /> compromise . He said that the three things which pertained are : 1 . <br /> in case the building burred down. 2. in case the general <br /> contractor defaulted on the contract and the architect had to put <br /> in additional money and 3. being in litigation and providing <br /> expert w i tness test im n . <br /> el . Lawrence said if they think it is a reasonable request from <br /> i a s and it will get it on track, he has no objection . Sel . <br /> Thomas said that she agreed; Dr. Nicholson said that in talking <br /> with the impartial party, it is reasonable. The Executive <br /> Secretary commented that Article XV deals onlywith additional <br /> services and for any other personal services required, it would <br /> still only be 1 . . <br /> e l * Thomas asked if i t was in order to rescind their vote, of <br /> September 3 for Option A. The Executive Secretary said that the <br /> vote on Sept . 3 was for Option A on Phase IV, The 1 ,3 is in the <br /> original document , which he is asking to be corrected. The <br /> Board's vote did not set that at 1 .3. The Executive Secretary <br /> said that he can see where he should have requested a higher <br /> amount . The follow up letter asks for Article XV to be changed a <br /> well . <br /> e l . Thoma ' roved to rescind the former action on the contract <br /> between the Town and Hisaka. Sel . Lawrence seconded. Vote was <br /> unan i nous; <br /> e l . Thomas moved that they accept the recommendations of 1 .3 <br /> tE Article 5.5, Section IV and Article XV. Sel . Lawrence <br />' <br /> seconded. Vote was unanimous, <br /> Change o ce <br /> John Ferguson said that there was no percentage in the change of <br /> scope Sel . Lawrence said that it was never discussed before. <br /> The only part of the contract which care up for discussion before <br /> receiving the letter of the Sept . 24th was dealing with the <br /> formula, <br /> -14- <br />