My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2004_0329
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
200x
>
2004
>
CC_Minutes_2004_0329
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 9:27:16 AM
Creation date
7/13/2005 4:35:45 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
3/29/2004
Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
38
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 />Regular City Council Meeting - 03/29/04 <br />Minutes - Page 19 <br /> <br />in a project of this magnitude. Mayor Klausing supported <br />Councilmember Ihlan's previous recommendation to <br />include contract language providing a parallel termination <br />requirement to better protect the City and identify the costs <br />to be borne by each party at termination. <br /> <br />Councilmember Ihlan addressed her interpretation of the <br />City's perspective on parallel termination language. <br /> <br />Councilmember Maschka requested a legal opinion from <br />Mr. Casserly. <br /> <br />Mr. Casserly responded with past practical project <br />experience on how the contract could be voided; noting the <br />advantage of the contract in freezing all players during the <br />length of the contract to determine the project's feasibility. <br />Mr. Casserly opined that it should become apparent to the <br />developer and/or staff if the project looks feasible or should <br />be abandoned, once the analysis becomes more fine-tuned. <br /> <br />Further discussion ensued regarding good faith contract <br />termination rights; enforcement mechanism; and costs <br />and/or damages incurred and the ownership of those costs. <br /> <br />Mr. Casserly advised Councilmembers that it was the intent <br />of the crafters of the contract to keep it as simple as <br />possible; noting it was simply a framework to initiate <br />discussions, and not intended to represent any more than <br />that. <br /> <br />City Manager Beets recommended changing one word of <br />the contract, possibly alleviating concerns of <br />Councilmembers to balance termination rights and meeting <br />the expectations of the developer. Mr. Beets noted the <br />language revision in the contract on page 5, third bullet <br />point, amending the language to read: <br /> <br />"In coordination with the City, prepare a preliminary <br />financial feasibility analysis identifying costs and <br />sources of revenue, including tax increment and <br />other potential sources of public assistance, to <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.