My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
02-26-07-WS
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Minutes
>
2000-2009
>
2007
>
02-26-07-WS
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/26/2007 9:12:50 AM
Creation date
4/18/2007 11:33:45 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
Document
Work Session City Council Minutes
General - Type
Minutes
Date
2/26/2007
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
8
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
<br />ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION - FEBRUARY 26,2007 <br /> <br />4 <br /> <br />City Attorney Bubul stated all contracts are subject to interpretation; it is better to leave the <br />comment out. <br /> <br />Councilmember McClung asked City Attorney Filla if he was more comfortable with the added <br />language or the way it is currently written. <br /> <br />City Attorney Filla replied he is more comfortable the way it is currently written. <br /> <br />City Attorney Bubul indicated he and City Attorney Comodeca agree the way the language is <br />currently written is the best. <br /> <br />City Attorney Comodeca stated the language about the earnest money is addressed throughout <br />the document and if the earnest money comes back to the City, it would be returned to CRR. <br /> <br />City Attorney Filla pointed out what a default would be and the exposure to CRR. He said it is a <br />given that negotiations would be conducted in good faith. <br /> <br />City Administrator Wolfe stated this has been months of negotiations and neither party ever gets <br />everything it wanted. She indicated that the City's representatives feel the proposed agreement is <br />a safer position than the additional language that both sides wanted. <br /> <br />Mayor Harpstead asked for a way to reach consensus on this issue. He suggested adding the <br />sentence that excluded the "hold harmless" language, but that the City would not carry financial <br />liability if the GSA determines that the City defaults. <br /> <br />Councilmember Holden asked how much the relationship between CRR and GSA weighed into <br />this. <br /> <br />City Attorney Comodeca stated he was not aware of anything. <br /> <br />Councilmember Holmes clarified that because we are the City, in as much as CRR does not want <br />the language, there must be some significance to it. She stated the language should be added <br />under Paragraph (d). <br /> <br />Councilmember Holden pointed out the attorneys stated the most viable way for the City to <br />protect itself is to leave it the way it is written. <br /> <br />Councilmember McClung said he did not want the additional language III the document; <br />however, would this be doing what is best for the citizens. <br /> <br />Mayor Harpstead stated that if, after the best efforts at the Council's direction, CRR could not <br />hold the City liable. <br /> <br />Councilmember Holmes asked for an explanation of the terms associated with 30 days and 60 <br />days under Section I O(b). <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.