Minutes from 1996 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

LRRWMO Meeting Minutes • November 21, 1996 Page 6 is that those questions should have been anticipated and did not require special meetings which is the justifiable rationale to reduce the number to 7. He noted a lot of that additional data was removed from the Plan. Weaver stated he believes "common ground" was reached with regazd to the number of meetings to be paid -followed by lengthy discussion. Jankowski concurred. Ferguson stated there maybe one additional meeting needed due to a change in rules. He stated he was under the assumption that one public hearing was included in the contract. Lobermeier asked what is anticipated for future meetings and how SEH can m;nim;~e their costs to complete the process for completion of the Plan. Weaver noted that the LRRWMO authorized the Plan to be submitted for agency review and asked if there is a need for SEH attendance prior to comments being received. Lobermeier noted an additional agency review is now required by the State so the process has changed. Prior to the Legislative change, a concurrent agency review could be done but now the agencies review the Plan for 60 days, LRRWMO has 30 days to respond on those comments and hold a public hearing, and then the agency can again respond. The Plan is then revised a second time prior to submittal to BWSR He stated the contract was written to address if the law changes. Once agency comments aze received, Haas suggested the Board consider and determine which BWSR requests aze reasonable and will result in an actual Plan revision. Ferguson agreed that the second "round" is all that has changed. Lobermeier commented on the cost to reproduce the Plan a second time. Weaver asked if SEH is anticipating an additional $1,000. Ferguson stated the additional $1,000 was included in the amount determined last month. Lobermeier asked if the additional public hearing was considered or if one of the other anticipated meetings could be eliminated. Ferguson suggested SEH not attend the March 20th meeting and submit the agency comments in writing. Weaver suggested SEH determine scheduling to be in compliance with the law and not incur additional costs to the LRRWMO. Loberrneier stated under the LRRWMO agreement of last month, it would not incur additional costs. Lobermeier asked about the 10% retainage, noted it is not part of the contract, and stated it makes him feel more like a contractor than a consultant. He noted the increase of the contract equaled 10%. Ferguson stated this was noted but is coincidental. Lobermeier stated he believes he has shown a good faith effort to continue with the Plan and asked that the retainage be removed. Lobermeier offered his personal assurance and the assurance of SEH to complete the project. Ferguson advised the LRRWMO did authorize payment of invoices submitted by SEH. He explained • the retainage occurred due a concern about the high percentage of payment made eazly in the process. Lobermeier requested removal of the retainage and stated he will complete the project. If agreed, he stated SEH will invoice to the maximum amount and asked that LRRWMO approve payment.