Laserfiche WebLink
b. The second question is asking for copies of all invoices paid to Arbuckle Costic, <br />going clear back to the original design. Transit has paid all of these bills and Billy <br />will refer Craig Harris to John Whittington for answers on both issues raised. <br />Billy Wasson gave an update on Arbuckle Costic contract. This has been tumed over to Ben <br />Fetherston, Transit Legal Counsel to draft. Both John Whittington and Billy Wasson gave <br />assumptions they wanted incorporated into this contract to Ben. One new wrinkle that occuned was <br />Melvin Mark's concern about placing cost estimating services in the A/E contract. The cost <br />estimating services charges would be split in half; we would pay half and Arbuckle would pick up <br />the other hal£ It may be a negotiation item in the contract. Melvin Mark felt the owner should <br />contract separately. Billy Wasson has asked for input from a couple SPOC members (Maynard <br />Hammer and 7erry Vessello) and will awa.it their responses. Concem is to build in pmtection against <br />additional costs in the event of re-design if project doesn't come in within budget. <br />4. ~tatus of Berrey/Frey Drafts <br />Carol Fischer has all the reports. She has Sue McCracken working on separating the information. <br />Ra.ndy Franke has been very spec~c about what will go into the report. There are some issues that <br />need to be included in the Q& A for SPOC, but the depth of information that Ra.ndy Franke is <br />looking for needs to be separate. This will not be an agenda item for SPOC, unless they request <br />it. It will be mailed out to members separately. <br />Item #5 Ancillary Costs will be reviewed with the Budget Status at the end of the agenda. <br />6. Melvin Mark/Bond Counsel/County/Transit Conference Call <br />a. The question of using COPs versus revenue bonds surfaced. Bond counsel is taking <br />the stance that revenue bonds are more marketable and easier to sell. But both <br />options are open. <br />b. Timing of the bond sale can be handled either way. To make revenue bonds more <br />marketable, it is best to wait for a fixed cost on construction. This option is <br />feasible, as we can tap the loan from Solid Waste for interim cash flow. There is <br />too much risk to go out for sale before we have fixed costs on the project. <br />c. Bond counsel also reiterated any debt incurred, including Beney costs, development <br />costs - Melvin Mark contract, financing costs, are all eligible to be reimbursed by <br />bond sale if that is our policy choice. Or we can choose to use other sources of <br />revenue to pay these costs. <br />d. Bond counsel's cost, if this was a routine project would have been $25,000. We <br />have spent $55,000 to date for advice to county counsel and they project another <br />$25,000 for preparation of the bond sale. <br />e. Bond counsel will also be sending us a check list for preparation for the bond sale. <br />Page 2 of 6 <br />