16-SOUTH COLLEGIATE RECONSTRUCTION

Home Browse Search

memo�andum TO: Mayor & Council FROM: John Godwin, City Manager SUBJECT: SOUTH COLLEGIATE RECONSTRUCTION DATE: June 3, 2013 BACKGROIIND: In February the city council approved a contract with a local engineering iirm to design improvements to South Collegiate between Clarksville and the creek. At that time, there was some concern that expenditures for the driveway to the police building and for the small parking lot near the trail might not be eligible expenditures based on the original purpose of the bonds that funded phase 1 of Collegiate. We immediately reexamined the bond language and also got an opinion from the city's bond counsel, both of which satisfied us that work in and along the right-of-way of the road was okay. I notified the council of those findings the next morning and we instructed Hayter Engineering to proceed with the design. Once design was complete, we advertised the project for bids and opened four sealed bids on Thursday, May 16. The apparent low bidder was Richard Drake Construction, with a total base bid price of $892,135.78. On May 20 city staff recommended award of this bid. STATUS OF ISSUE: At the May 20 meeting the issue of what is and is not eligible was brought up again. The documents that establish how the 2010 CO proceeds can be legally used are the published notice of intent (NOI) and the purpose clause of the city ordinance. Both documents included identical language, as they must, which reads: "For paying all or a portion of the City's contractual obligations incurred in connection with improving and expanding South Collegiate Drive and making improvements to the frontage access for South Collegiate Drive and paying legal, fiscal, engineering and architectural fees in connection with such project. " Both the drive and parking lot are in the roadway frontage. It was suggested on May 20 that our bond counsel may have answered the way he did in February due to a conflict of interest. In addition to that being a very bold charge against a licensed attorney, I need to point out that the bonds were all sold in 2010. Whether or not we spend these bonds on a parking lot or driveway has no effect whatsoever on how much the attorney in question is compensated — which will be $0 in either case. '71