1997 SPE MIN MAR 26 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

C. FARECAL Proposal vs State Revolving Fund: If, in the future, there is a change in the project or substitution of the project for another, there is flexibifily under the FARECAL Prograrn to do that, to -react to the changes in the system, to react to the changes to the City, to react to the changes to the needs of the system, during the 3 yr construction prograin. A.s to state revolving funds, the City has to provide an engineering design, project by project. If the City makes any W Z� I W alterations it must go back through the process to get reapproval, there is no certainly that all of the projects qualify under the state revolving fund; they all qualify under FARE AL. The City has spent approximately $15,000 in the past two ino.n.ths to consultants to respond to three letters a state revolving fund loan, questions that go to the beginning of the -trom, the state regardina ., Z� z::1 process that requires staffto do more studies to j ustify the loan which still has not been approved. D. Involvement of the Utilities Commission: Staff subn-,iltted this same program to the Commission twice for their evaluation: (1) First tirne staff gave them a cursory review; and (2.) second time staff went into more depth. It was n-.i.et withsome , resistance istance only because of the -fiiiiancing plan being proposed, There were. questions as to whether the costs were accurate. Staff believed costs were accurate based on the opinion of consultants. The cost sarin gs.for the flexibility of having the FAREAL Cis about W,000 more per year in total debt senicc, V The Commission essentially authorized the utility to move forward with half of what we are requesting- with FARECAL Staff'has -tit together a very comprehensive package that is coordinated. P I He concluded that to cut it in half and do Just piece by piece ofTers no advantage to the City CL SEDD SU IQN, Tim Sabo.., Legal Counsel, announced the City Council would meet in Closed Session pursuant to Goveninient Code § 54956,9(b), to confer with, its Legal Counsel. regarding; tie following matter of pending litigatioll: L'Ay-ofCo�11on�vllanS�telx�ar At 420 p.m., Mayor Gaytan declared the ineetin adjourned to Closed Session and at 5:2 - I 1 9 p.m., meeting reconvened with all Members present as heretofore. Tim Sabo, City Iegal Counsel, announced that the Z> Citi did meet in Closed Session as previously stated and. declared there was no reportable action taken. ND, , JQL�;RN MEN!: At 5:26 pm., Mayor Gaytan declared the Meeting adjourned. . ......... . ........... CAROLINA P. BARRE City Clerk I