My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2.2 ERMUSR 08-09-2022
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
Boards and Commissions
>
Utilities Commission
>
Packets
>
2014-2024
>
2022
>
08-09-20222
>
2.2 ERMUSR 08-09-2022
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/6/2022 11:40:29 AM
Creation date
8/6/2022 11:40:29 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Government
type
ERMUSR
date
8/9/2022
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
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
Elk River Municipal Utilities Commission Meeting Minutes <br />July 12, 2022 <br />Page 5 <br /> <br />Chair Dietz expressed his concern that there would be a continuing trend of a negative <br />Net Income Profit. Staff responded that a majority of other expenses are at or below <br />budget. There was discussion <br /> <br />Chair Dietz asked if staff is receiving questions from customers on the billed PCA. Ms. <br />Youngs responded that questions were very rare except from large customers. <br /> <br />Chair Dietz asked if neighboring utilities are also passing on PCAs. There was discussion. <br /> <br />Moved by Commissioner Westgaard and seconded by Commissioner Nadeau to receive <br />the May 2022 Financial Report. Motion carried 5-0. <br /> <br />5.2 Field Services Facility Expansion Project <br /> <br />Mr. Kerzman presented a memo on the Field Services Facility Expansion Project, sharing <br />that the motion for summary judgement had been filed on July 7 with a hearing scheduled <br />for August 5 to resolve disputed issues with the project’s original structural steel <br />contractor. Mr. Kerzman explained that RJM Construction informed him that it typically <br />takes 90 days from the hearing for judgement to be reached. There was discussion. <br /> <br />Chair Dietz asked if staff believed they would be able to move into the building by September <br />1. Mr. Kerzman shared his opinion that they could be moving inventory in by that date, but <br />staff would have to move in after September 1. Mr. Kerzman explained that delays were <br />related to challenges with concrete contractor’s inconsistent presence on site and work that <br />needs to be redone. There was discussion. <br /> <br />Mr. Kerzman estimated that the project was six weeks behind the contractual date for <br />substantial completion of the project. <br /> <br />Chair Dietz asked if there was a penalty for missing the deadline. Mr. Kerzman expressed his <br />belief that issue stemmed from failures in the scheduling of subcontractors and holding them <br />to the schedule, but they could argue that COVID-19 and supply chain issues created the <br />delay. Mr. Kerzman stated that ERMU’s legal advisors told him delays beyond the contractual <br />date would be considered damages solely for costs that would not have otherwise been <br />incurred. Mr. Kerzman sought direction from the Commission on if and how to bring that <br />issue forward. There was discussion. <br /> <br />Commissioner Westgaard said staff should start the conversation with RJM Construction to <br />protect ERMU’s interests and to avoid a prolonged delay. <br /> <br />Staff sought commission consensus on how to proceed. The Commission agreed to begin <br />discussions on penalties. <br /> <br />Chair Dietz had questions on the timeline for landscaping. Staff responded. <br />39
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.