09-27-06 Special Board Meeting

-->click here to download meeting audio<--

To download or listen click the link, then click the file "09-27-06 spec board". Then click the download link. When you click the download link it should open a window asking if you want to open or save the file. Click "open" to listen, click "save" to download it to your computer. Or you can right mouse click the download link, and choose "save target as.." or "save link as.." This will prompt you to save the file on your computer. This is a 10 megabyte file. On a high speed connection it should take 10-15 minutes to download.

***

09-27-06 Special Joint Board and Energy Committee Meeting

Meeting called to order at 7pm.

Board members present: Jon Evenson (president), Margaret Billman, Wayne Lambert, Dan Muleski, Tammy Steward
Board members absent: Jan Gaber and June Siegler

Energy members present: Groff Collet and Dan Meyer

Village Clerk Deb Eichsteadt present


1. Vote to go into closed session under ss 19.85(1) to confer with legal counsel regarding Consolidated Water Power's Public Service Commission proceedings.

Motion and second to go into closed session. Roll Call vote: Tammy-yes, Dan-yes, Wayne-yes, Dan-yes, Groff-yes, Margaret-yes, Jon-yes.

Closed session lasted approximately 1 hour from 7:10pm to about 8:15pm

2. Return from closed session for possible action.

No action taken after returning from closed session.
Energy Committee members Meyer and Collet left the meeting at this time.

3. Consideration of BPAC (Bridgewater Public Access Committee) recommendation to contract with Lampert and Lee to engineer....

BPAC in order to meet a November 1st grant deadline application has requested from the village board authorization to spend up to $4000 to contract with Lampert-Lee & Associates for engineering services.

Lampert-Lee submitted a proposal for services to the village -->Click here to view Lampert-Lee proposal<-- The proposal lays out the site improvements to be deisgned by Lampers-Lee which are: Paved parking lot with two standard parking stalls and two (handicap) accessible stalls Paved multi-purpose trail designed as an accessible route that extends from the parking lot to the proposed fishing pier location coordinate accessible fishing pier design and cost estimate with pier consultant The proposal also lays out the scope of the services Lampert-Lee will provide: Prepare construction plans and details for three plan sheets (Existing Topographic Survey, Grading, Drainage & Erosion Control Plan; Layout & Landscape Plan) for the proposed site improvements listed above to meet grant requirements for a Site Plan and Engineering Plan Provide a project description and supporting information to meet grant requirements for a Project Narrative Provide an engineer's estimate ofprobably cost to meet grant requirements for a Budget Sheet The proposal further lays out a maximum fee of $3000 for these services, with caveats as to what is not covered by the proposal and that the full scope of the project could require additional services. It was noted that while the proposal for services is $3000 the BPAC was askingfor $4000. The reason for the additional $1000 was explained as the monies possibly needed to obtain a design for the handicap accessible pier itself. While BPAC is asking for the authoriaztion to spend up to $1000 for this, the committee intends to exaust all possibilities for obtaining a pier design before spending to obtain a design. Motion and a second to authorize the BPAC to spend up to $4000 with the understanding that the BPAC is pursuing several grant options (Federal, State and Community foundation) to recoup some or all of the approved monies. Motion Carried. Amongst the discussion of the Lampert-Lee proposal arose the question of the letter of retroactivity. (See post for XX/XX/XX BPAC meeting for details on this -->click here<--) The letter of retroactivity is an item that needs to be in place in order to receive grant monies for the acquisition of any lands that may be purchased after grant applications have been made, but before the grant has been approved.

Lambert questioned the possible acquisition of lands, as his understanding was that there would be no future land acquisitions by the village in this project. Muleski went to the Bridgewater map and pointed out the initially proposed pier location, and explained that for the pier to be acceptable, it had to be located at the point of greatest depth, and that due to that BPAC would not be committing to a pier location, but letting the DNR choose the best location for the pier, which could end up farther east or west of the initally proposed location. Lambert then asked if that possbile location area was the 225 feet that the village committed to purchasing in the Developer Agreement which Evenson confirmed. Further discussion followed over the possibile scenarios that could require the village to obtain more land in order to meet requirements that could be set forth by the DNR or FERC in order for the Bridgewater project to proceed. A specific possibility that was mentioned was an increased number of handicap accessible parking stalls.

Lambert also asked about the funding scenario(s) that would arise under the possibility that no grant funding is obtained. Evenson immediately replied that TIF funding would be the fallback for this. Muleski interjected that BPAC would research and apply for local community grants. Lambert also questioned the possibility of moving the completion of the project(s) to a later date in the event of no grant money. Evenson referenced the fact that there are time fixed commitments in the developer's agreement that the village would have to abide by, but that the timeline is flexible based on the continuing delay of the project start date.

Further discussion about the quality of the information dispersed to the trustees was brought up by Lambert as he felt that he was poorly informed about the processes and details being pursued on this project.

4. Adjourn

Motion and second to adjourn. Motion carried.