Laserfiche WebLink
we can get and when to complete remediation work to obtain either NFA or approved remediation <br />~ plan from DEQ in place to go out for bonds. David Hartwig will continue to coordinate with <br />Centurywest closure on the Liu Building and the remainder of the block. We need to keep aware <br />of any unique opporiunities to accomplish some site work during the summer construction months, <br />while keeping in mind the politics involved in attempting to do some of this work. <br />3. Transit Draft on O rating Proforma <br />R. G. Andersen-Wycko~'handed out a copy of a preliminary operating proforma for transit that will <br />be given to their board for review this evening. R.G. went through the document and explained the <br />highlights, assumptions and answered any questions. Staff made a few corrections to the format <br />of the report to more clearly show the distinction between office expenses to agree with the current <br />proforma and the other unique transit mall expenses, using footnotes and explanations for <br />identification and clarification on the items. Both facilities (current and proposed) will be <br />maintained without adding any new t~ dollars to their budget. <br />This document answers and anticipates answers to questions that may be raised by SPOC. County <br />will prepare a similar document that would add up to the entire $1.30. Other issues for revenue <br />need to be explored to possibly incorporate into this document from the county's perspective. Other <br />county policy issues will be worked on in the next few weeks regarding equalizing county rental <br />rates. <br />~ Another issue SPOC dealt with was when does the project reach the point of not being a good deal. <br />Documentation provided did not address this. The $1.30 per s.f. is one standazd that the county set. <br />The other benchmark would be if costs to build the project exceed the costs of going out and renting <br />space in the private market. Another issue is the $1.30 rental rate: what is inside this number and <br />is there something missing; and if the $1.30 generates too much in service cuts to county and should <br />they really do this. This is an internal county issue that needs to be addressed over the next week. <br />There are general fund vs. nongeneral fund impacts to be considered. Another way to look at it <br />would be to identify the efficiencies as a result of this project and add this to the information <br />provided to SPOC. It was done back in December in a conceptual basis, but dollar amounts were <br />not defined. <br />At the last meeting, it was requested that a third line be added on the graph charting the savings in <br />dollars using a blended county rental rate in addition to the computation of project cost ($1.30 s.£) <br />vs. private market rental rates based on the lease study information. Staff felt this was a critical part <br />to the presentation, but it was not presented to either the press in the Friday morning meeting or at <br />SPOC's meeting on Tuesday. Had this graph been presented, it would have shown the negative <br />numbers in the first 3-1/2 years and then the increase in savings out to year 25. The report transit <br />is generating would be a good model to support the graph. The county report should be a joint <br />effort between Randy Curtis and Ken Roudybush. Billy Wasson will take up both issues, omission <br />of the graphic and providing a county report similar to the draft of the transit report, with both <br />Randy Franke and Ken Roudybush. <br />Page 3 of 4 <br />