►
From YouTube: Public Works, Finance & Safety Meeting 07-19-2021
Description
Public Works, Finance & Safety Meeting
A
B
A
A
A
A
A
First
up
on
the
regular
agenda
agenda
item
a
approval
of
amendment
number,
one
of
the
professional
services
agreement
with
hdr
engineering
incorporated
for
the
primary
clarifier
number
two
replacement
project
project
number
2022
in
the
amount
of
254
475
dollars
for
construction
administration
for
a
total
engineering
services,
contract
of
420
964
dollars
need
a
motion
moved
by
vilhauer
need
a
second
seconded
by
bueller
and
we'll
go
to
our
assistant
city.
Engineer,
justin
peterson!
To
kick
this
one
off
for
us.
C
Thank
you,
mayor
hdl
has
completed
the
design
of
the
primary
clarifier
number
two
project.
It
was
bid
on
june
23rd
and
the
council
has
awarded
the
contract
to
khc
construction
for
a
little
over
200
2.1
million.
This
agreement
before
the
council
is
an
amendment
to
the
contract
with
hdr
to
add
construction
administration's
administration
services.
C
A
A
D
Yeah,
I
guess
I
can't
help
be
concerned.
I
mean
this
is
just
for
the
engineering
services.
I
mean
it's
a
40
increase
over
and
above
what
was
originally
contract
is,
if
I'm
not
mistaken,
I
mean
what
that
that's.
A
huge
percentage
and
dollar
dollar
increase
any
explanation
as
to
what
necessitates
that
or
I
need
some
assurance
that
it's
that
it's
a
legit.
C
Yeah,
the
the
original
contract
was
just
for
design,
and
then
this
is
the
additional
construction
administration
services
just
similar.
It
was
a
similar
type
scenario
for
the
wastewater
facility
administration.
Building
that
one
is
actually
a
little
bit
more.
The
original
contract
for
the
wastewater
was
three
hundred
thousand
add
another
three
hundred
thousand
for
the
construction
admin.
So,
okay.
A
Seeing
none
the
motion
is
to
approve
this
amendment.
So
all
those
in
favor,
please
say
aye
all
right.
Any
opposed,
say,
nay,
motion
carries
moving
on
to
item
b,
approval
of
change
order,
number
two
final:
with
hydro
clean
incorporated
for
sanitary
sewer
rehabilitation,
project
number
1908
for
a
decrease
of
four
hundred
and
forty
two
dollars
and
thirty
five
cents
for
an
overall
contract
price
of
two
hundred
and
ninety
thousand
five
hundred
and
sixty
seven
dollars
and
ninety
one
cents
need
a
motion
moved
by
dan,
moved
by
councilman,
shutty,
sorry,
second
and
seconded
by
councilman.
E
E
A
Any
further
questions
from
the
council
questions
or
comments
seeing
none.
The
motion
is
to
approve
this
change
order.
All
those
in
favor,
please
say
aye
aye,
any
opposed,
say,
nay,
motion
carries
agenda
item
c
the
approval
of
change
order,
number
one
final
for
the
boys
and
girls
club
roof
improvements,
project
number
2033
with
pro
tech
roofing
for
a
net
decrease
of
13
500
for
a
new
contract
amount
of
173
813
need
a
motion
to
approve
moved
by
councilman
buehler
seconded
by
councilman
vilhauer.
A
C
C
With
the
information
that
we
had
prior
to
the
project,
we
thought
they
were
all
metal
roofing.
It
turns
out
that
roof
number
two
right
here
was
found
to
have
a
concrete
deck,
and
so,
after
consulting
with
the
architect,
it
was
recommended
to
to
use
the
ballast
on
that
roof
and
the
contractor
credited
thirty
five
hundred
dollars.
C
C
A
See
none
any
comments.
Councilman
paulson.
Did
you
have
something?
Okay
with
that
the
motion
is
to
approve
the
change
order,
all
those
in
favor,
please
say:
aye
aye,
any
opposed,
nay,
motion
carries
moving
on
to
council
or
committee
agenda
item
number
d:
approval
of
change
order,
number
two
with
great
construction
company
for
the
airport
terminal
project
number
1927
for
an
increase
of
four
hundred
and
seventy
two
thousand
eight
hundred
and
ninety
nine
dollars
for
a
new
project
contract
amount
of
ten
thousand
seven
hundred
and
sixty
five.
Oh
ten
million.
A
C
C
That's
240,
000,
roughly
during
design
the
the
restaurant
space
was
was
perfectly
purposely
left
open
kind
of
as
a
shell,
because
at
the
time
we
didn't
know
what
what
needs
the
the
restaurant
or
what
needs
would
be
needed
in
that
area.
The
space
would
be
designed
slightly
differently
if
it
was
say,
a
coffee
shop
versus
a
full-scale
restaurant.
C
C
First,
one
there
for
some
channel
glass
and
we
think
we'll
end
up
with
a
really
good
looking
product
at
the
end.
Overall
total
is
472
899
dollars,
and
I
believe,
jason
khan
of
co-op,
architect,
architecture
and
michael
schmidt
of
helms
associates
online
and
between
us
three.
We
can
answer
questions.
A
F
F
But,
as
as
justin
said,
you
know,
several
of
these
items
are
there's
there's
kind
of
a
mix
of
things,
there's
a
couple
things
that
are
just
needed
to
be
needed
to
happen
based
on
some
items
that
come
up,
came
up
some
coordination
issues
and
stuff
like
that.
There's
quite
a
few
items
that
address
some
plan
changes
the
restaurant
that
was
talked
about
the
revising
the
space
for
the
second
airline,
all
that
kind
of
stuff.
F
So
the
change
orders
for
that
are
accommodating
what
they're
going
to
have
to
put
into
their
spaces
and
getting
those
to
work
and
there's
a
few
items
here
that
are
also
just
kind
of
shifting
things
from
from
phase
one
from
phase
two
to
phase
one.
Just
to
kind
of
you
know,
mike
with
with
mike
schmidt
with
helms,
has
has
been
kind
of
massaging
these
those
numbers
a
little
bit
to
make
sure
that
we
use
as
much
much
of
that
federal
funding
and
stuff,
as
we
can.
F
So
several
of
these
large
ones
were
actually
pieces
that
were
gonna
be
done
in
phase
two,
but
we
shifted
them
to
this
project.
To
try
to
take
take
advantage
of
some
of
that
money
that
we
that
we
have
had
in
this
project,
with
some
of
the
worries
that
we
had
about
being
over
budget
with
the
phase
two
stuff
in
the
srv
building
that
were
just
bid
so
and
that's
what
what
quite
a
few
of
these
items
are
as
well.
A
D
I
guess
just
procedurally
before
this
ever
comes
to
us
these.
These
proposed
change
orders
have
been
vetted
by
by
your
office,
justin
staff.
In
general,
I
mean
because
we
don't.
We
don't
know
this
understand
this
at
all
when
it
comes
to
us,
but
so
I
guess
relying
upon
the
process
and
procedures
that
goes
on
in
your
office
is
that
is
that
a
correct
statement:
correct,
okay,
thank
you.
A
A
I
guess,
could
you
assure
me
and
the
public
watching
that
we're
not
I
mean
we're
building
it
to
fit
the
tenant
that
we
know
we're
going
to
have,
but
we
don't
want
to
lock
ourselves
out
of
any
potential
future
tenant,
and
I
know
that
the
needs
of
a
coffee
shop
would
be
way
different
than
the
needs
of
the
proposed
tenants.
So
I
just
I
don't
want
to
spend
money
to
like
limit
ourselves
in
the
future,
or
you
know
spending
extra
money
that
perhaps
not
knowing
exactly
how
long
that
tenant
would
be
there.
A
I
guess
that
would
be
a
question
and
then
the
follow-up
question,
if
you
don't
mind
me
asking
two
and
one
would
be
some
of
the
other
dollars
were
to
accommodate
the
second
airline
and
that's
also
something
that
we
can't
guarantee
is
going
to
be
around
long
term.
So
I
guess
I
just
want
some
assurance
that
this
is
absolutely
necessary
and
it's
good
protection
for
public
dollars.
So
I
open
that
up
to
anyone
who
would
like
to
answer
that
one.
F
Hi,
this
is
jason
kane
with
co-op
architecture
again
yeah.
I
can.
I
can
kind
of
talk
to
that,
a
little
bit,
basically
with
the
kitchen
stuff,
essentially
that
space
as
justin
said
was,
was
just
shelled.
So
there
was
nothing
done
in
there.
We
didn't
have
our
our
plumbing
in
there
we
didn't
have
electrical.
F
We
didn't
have
mechanical,
because
we
didn't
know
what
the
loads
would
be
on
those
things
and
what
sort
of
sync
setup
would
would
be
required,
obviously,
with
a
with
a
somewhere
serving
food,
there's
some
extra
requirements,
as
far
as
like
you
know,
a
veggie
sink
and
a
three
compartment
sink
and
those
things
where
some
of
those
wouldn't
be
required
with
say
a
coffee
shop
or
some
of
those
other
things,
so
that
stuff
wasn't
included.
So
essentially,
this
rfp
takes
everything
and
we've
met
with
the
vendor.
F
You
know
what
once
that,
that
kind
of
happened
this
early
this
summer
or
late
spring,
and
we
had.
We
had
a
few
meetings
with
with
the
vendor
to
kind
of
talk
to
lay
this
space
out
figure
out
what
they
need
in
there
and
it
actually
lays
out
pretty
efficiently.
We
did
have
to
make
a
few
modifications
to
things,
but
the
biggest
piece
is
we.
We
were
able
to
understand
what
loads
are
required
so
that
that
price
includes
the
mechanical
unit
to
serve
that
space.
F
You
know
it
includes
all
the
electrical
the
plumbing
there's,
there's
built-in
there's
three
built-in
sinks,
your
your
required
kind
of
hand,
washing
sink
a
three
compartment
sink
and
a
veggie
washing
sink.
It's
got
all
the
wall,
framing
the
the
ceiling
lighting,
all
that
kind
of
stuff,
because
we
didn't
know
what
what
was
in
there
at
that
point.
So
it
was
very
much
just
a
shell
space
but
essentially
you're
paying
for
you're
you're
paying
for
the
everything
kind
of
built
in
this
space.
F
F
Like
there's
a
big
overhead
hood,
you
know
under
what
will
be
the
pizza,
oven
and
that
kind
of
stuff,
but
all
of
that
stuff
is
built
in
and
as
part
of
the
project,
and
that
will
stay
there
for
for
another
tenant
would
be
coming
in.
So
I
would
feel
pretty
good
about
the
space
being
set
up
very
well,
for
you
know
a
wide
variety
of
things
to
come
in
in
the
future
and
be
able
to
utilize
those.
F
A
F
It
does
make
it
far
more
delineated,
and
you
know
it
separates
that
space
up
clearly
between
the
two
airlines,
where,
with
the
existing
plan
it
it
would,
it
would
honestly
be
a
mess
to
kind
of
figure
figure
that
out
from
a
rental
agreement
and
from
two
separate
kind
of
competing
companies,
that
probably
don't
want
to
be
co-mingling
all
day
all
day
long.
So
from
a
feasibility
standpoint,
I
think
it
works
much
much
better
for
the
for
the
airport,
and
at
this
point
it's
it's
a
very
manageable
change.
F
Where
I
think,
if
this
is
something
you
know
if,
if
there
was
sustained
success
between
the
two
airlines
or
you
know,
even
if
one
left
and
someone
else
came
back
back
in
the
future,
it's
set
up
much
much
better.
In
my
opinion,
to
handle
that
than
it
is
now
so,
just
from
from
a
long-term
planning
standpoint,
we
would
we
would
recommend
kind
of
moving
forward
with
it.
F
F
Correct
all
of
these
items
are
grant
eligible.
Some
of
them
are
eligible
100,
a
few
of
them
are
eligible.
You
know
some,
it's
kind
of
broken
up
where
a
lot
of
the
site
stuff
is
is
100
eligible.
A
lot
of
the
building
related
stuff
is,
is
74
74.75
eligible,
but
all
of
these
items
are
are
eligible.
Correct.
E
C
C
B
A
A
Excuse
me.
Moving
on
to
a
council
agenda
item
e
approval
of
amendment
to
tiff
number
12
development
agreement
with
parkside
place,
llc
for
a
total
amount
of
145
209.45
for
the
city's
obligations
toward
the
parkside
place,
downtown
development
project.
We
will
go
to
our
city
attorney,
matt
roby.
To
start
this
one.
A
A
G
So
tax
increment
financing
district
number
12
encompasses
the
property
across
the
street.
Here
that
you'll,
you
see
the
project
going
up
here.
It's
parkside
place.
In
october
2020
the
council
approved
a
development
agreement
related
to
that
tif
district
part
of
the
development
agreement
accounted
provided
for
city
paid
expenses
related
to
site
utility
improvements
and
the
removal
and
replacement
of
sidewalks
and
alleys.
G
G
A
A
C
The
these
are
the
list
of
items
that
have
been
requested,
dealing
with
asphalt,
parking,
striping
utilities
staking
and
some
some
dirt
work
there.
They
all
kind
of
generally
fall
in
the
category
of
utilities,
improvements
and
and
removal,
and
replacement
sidewall
canali
totaling.
The
quest
by
the
development
is
a
total
of
145
thousand
two
hundred
nine
dollars
and
forty
five
cents
and
yeah
without
leave
it
with
some
questions.
A
H
H
H
H
So,
even
with
those
arguments,
I
was
denied
by
city
engineering
to
allow
us
our
finished
floor
height
that
we
wanted
so
because
of
that
decision.
This
is
why
these
costs
have
really
come
about.
We
had
to
finish
way
more
of
the
alleyway,
the
entire
alleyway
on
the
north
side,
when
we
had
planned
on
only
doing
half
of
it,
because
there's
no
lower
parking
garage,
so
we
didn't
have
to
tear
out
as
much.
H
I
ended
up
having
to
lower
the
alleyway
on
the
on
the
south
side,
also,
which
then
affected
those
buildings
that
that
butt
that
that
alleyway
and
then,
of
course,
like
we
talked
about
the
gamber
parking
lot,
had
to
be
taken
out,
also
a
good
portion
of
of
that
southwest
corner.
So
that's
really
constituting
the
the
difference
in
the
cost
and
then
in
tearing
out
the
alleyway
up
against
the
street.
We
ran
into
vaults
for
the
city
utilities,
so
we
had
to
work
on.
We
couldn't
jackhammer
them
and
take
them
out.
H
So
it's
you
know
it's
it's
one
of
those
things
with
working
with
downtown
high
density
development
were
running
constantly
into
hidden
structures,
hidden
utilities,
things
that
no
one
knew
was
there,
and
you
know
it's
hard
to
put
that
into
a
dollar
figure.
Before
you
even
break
ground
chad,
you
got
chad
anything
yet.
I
No,
I
well,
I
think
he
covered
it.
I
mean
we
did
put
together
just
a
simple
presentation
to
kind
of
step
you
through
the
process.
If
you
want
to
start
from
the
original
there,
you
can
go
ahead
and
move
to
the
next
one,
but
again
it
kind
of
steps
you
through
that
same
process,
that's
already
been
described.
I
I
You
can
see
on
the
north
side
even
getting
into
the
parking
lot
for
some
site
improvements,
getting
grades
to
work
that
full
alleyway
on
the
west
side
we're
getting
out
into
the
street
all
of
the
sidewalk
parking
area
to
get
grades
and
ada
to
work
there.
So
the
overall
limits
of
the
project
just
increased
to
to
make
it
work
grade
wise
and,
like
I
said
you,
you
make
some
assumptions
up
front
for
those
quantities
and
those
numbers
and
then
once
we
got
into
it
similar
to
some
of
the
other.
I
H
A
A
A
E
Okay,
so
then
can
I
follow
up
with
a
couple
questions
then?
Yes,
please,
so
I
see
on
the
supporting
documents
that
this
dollars
145
forty
five
cents
actually
replaces
the
sixty
five
thousand
that
was
originally
directed
towards
this
tif
correct.
So
we're
essentially
increasing
this
by
eighty
thousand
dollars
correct.
E
H
I
don't
know
if
they
didn't
feel
it
was
needed,
but
the
ada
was
definitely
needed
on
the
original
sidewalk
that
was
in
there,
you
couldn't
get
a
wheelchair
on
to
it
or
keep
it
on
there.
The
grade
was
just
too
severe
and
then
the
cityscaping
again
I
paid
the
money
to
design
it
based
on.
You
know
when
I
first
came
down
to
watertown
until
lately.
Every
time
you
walked
in
the
city
hall,
the
whole
board
was
city
escaping
bump
outs.
H
That
was
the
whole
vision,
so
we
designed
that,
like
I
said
I
paid
for
that
and
then
that
got
denied
also
so
did
the
lofts
one.
Also,
though,
so,
like
I
said,
I
paid
that
one
out
of
pocket
to
the
tune
about
20
grand
and
recently
just
paid
for
all
the
flowers
and
grasses
and
stuff
to
be
put
in
those.
Also
because
that
wasn't
approved
by
a
budget.
C
H
Yeah
there
was
not
as
extensive
as
a
mount
because
the
the
cityscaping
allows
to
raise
elevation,
which
then
would
allow
us
to
bring
the
building
up
versus
drop
it
down
when
we
had
to
match
the
or
the
sidewalk
make
those
ada
compliant
that
we
took
it
and
had
to
tip
it
down
towards
the
building
which
then
again,
and
then
we
in
order
to
get
the
ada
from
the
sidewalk
into
our
front
door
without
a
step
which
isn't
allowed
by
ada.
We
had
to
lower
the
entire
building.
H
So
we
would
have
to
replace
half
the
alleyway
on
the
north
side
because
we
had
to
excavate,
but
we
wanted
to
replace
the
whole
thing
and
we
definitely
wouldn't
had
to
go
into
the
gamber
parking
lot.
And
that
was
pointed
out
in
several
emails.
They
were
warned
about
that
because
it's
a
domino
effect.
E
B
B
Correct
okay,
just
granted.
This
is
a
new
construction
project
and
working
through
all
the
ins
and
outs
and
the
unknowns.
But
you
know
you
mentioned
the
sidewalks
and
ada
approved,
and
it's
it's
more
for
the
not
not
for
the
building
itself
for
building
owners
more
for
the
city,
sidewalks.
Just
making
sure
that
that
that
cost
generally
is
for
the
businesses
themselves
do
pay
for
that
up
for
getting
the
sidewalks,
correct
and
updating
and
whatever
it
takes.
A
H
I
might
even
rely
on
matt
roby,
I
mean
by
federal
law.
They
have
to
be
ada
compliant,
a
wheelchair
needs
to
be
able
to
get
into
any
any
business,
and
that's
a
city-owned
sidewalk,
not
a
business-owned
sidewalk.
So
I
mean
from
the
city
standpoint.
All
of
that
should
be
ada
compliant.
It
shouldn't
have
fallen
the
business
to
come
and
make
the
city
aware
of
it.
To
be
honest
with
you,
matt.
A
G
Initial
sidewalk
construction
is
the
responsibility
of
is
typically
the
responsibility
of
developers
and
it's
the
responsibility
of
developers
to
make
sidewalks
ada
compliant
now,
in
this
case,
it
was
part
of
an
economic
development
agreement
that
we
were
to.
We
were
agreeing
to
pick
up
certain
costs
so
to
answer
councilman
chutty's
question.
Typically,
that
is
the
developer's
responsibility
and
it's
their
responsibility
to
meet
those
ada
requirements.
D
D
H
We
had
talked
about
the
generalization,
but
we
hadn't
bid
anything
it
was
denied,
so
they
didn't
look
at
the
costs
involved
in
it
and
it
was
again
I
was
dealing
with
stacy,
who
I
and
again
telling
me
if
I'm
wrong,
but
isn't
a
licensed
engineer,
so
it
just
felt
like
she
was
relying
on
on
a
third
party
which
is
the
same
kind
of
route.
We
go
when
we're
doing
buildings,
plan
submittals
and
permits
submittals.
That's
the
same
thing
is
it's:
it's
contracted
out
to
a
third
party.
H
B
B
I
I
I
E
D
I
would
like
for
paul
as
a
substitute
motion
in
lieu
of
what's
on
the
table
right
now,
I
would
like
to
propose
or
move
that
we
pay
for
okay,
sixty
four
thousand
the
original
agreed
upon
amount.
Eighty
thousand
is
roughly
the
amount
at
at
issue
here.
I
propose
a
motion
to
split
that
difference
and
increase
the
sixty
four
thousand
to
a
hundred
and
four
thousand.
I
I
I
feel
like
there
was
some
blame
on
both
sides.
I
don't
like
the
communication.
That
was.
Oh
I'm
sorry.
A
Would
I
would
say
that
that's
not
a
substitute
motion.
That
is
an
amendment
to
the
main
motion
so
with
taking
the
liberty
of
interpreting
your
desire,
I
would
say
the
amended
motion
from
councilman
vilhauer
would
be
to
change
the
total
amount
to
one
hundred
and
four
thousand
two
hundred
and
nine
dollars
and
forty
five
cents
would
that
be.
If.
A
Make
it
easy,
let's
just
say,
100
and
4
thousand,
so
the
amended
motion
would
be
to
strike
145,
209.45
and
and
insert
thousand
dollars.
I
would
second
that
the
motion
is
moved
by
councilman
vilhauer
seconded
by
tupper.
Now
we
are
limited
to
questions
and
comments
only
upon
the
amended
motion
at
this
time,
not
the
gen,
not
the
overall
motion,
just
the
amendment
and
I
will
allow
the
councilman
who
made
the
amendment
to
or
made
the
proposal
to
comment.
D
I
started
to
make
the
comment
that
I
I'm
essentially
splitting
the
difference
here
looks
like
there
was.
I
I
find
some
fault
on
both
sides
here
looked
like
we.
Probably
there
was
some
pump
part
of
this
that
maybe
we
should
have
should
have
done
or
allowed
for.
By
the
same
token,
I
didn't
like
the
fact
that
the
work
was
done
without
getting
approval
and
getting
some
cost
estimates
by
the
developer
before
it
was
done
and
now
the
bills
are
submitted
to
us.
So
that's
that's.
Why
I'm
proposing
to
split
the
difference.
A
E
A
A
A
A
B
A
Yes,
thank
you
good
question.
We
are
voting
upon,
so
what
we
are
voting
on
right
now
is,
and
I
will
read
it
out-
approval
of
amendment
to
tiff
number
12
development
agreement
with
parkside
place,
llc
for
a
total
amount
of
104
thousand
dollars
for
the
city's
obligation
toward
obligations
toward
the
parkside
place
downtown
development
project.
That
is
what
we
are
voting
for
right
now.
So,
if
you
vote
for
this,
you
are
voting
to
give
a
hundred
and
forty
thousand
a
hundred
and
four
thousand
dollars.
Essentially.
E
A
We
are
on
to
old
business
now
any
old
business,
any
new
business
we
do
have
a
need.
We
will
go
into
executive
session.
This
will
be
as
a
city
council
executive
session,
but
we're
just
in
the
in
the
interest
of
time
saving
we're
going
to
go
into
executive
session
now
before
our
city
council
meeting.
But
in
order
to
do
so
well,
I
need
a
motion
to
go
into
executive
session,
correct
all
those
in
favor
move
by
bueller
seconded
by
shutty,
all
those
in
favor
say
aye
aye,
any
opposed
name
motion
carries
and
then
should.