Remarks by Craig Berenstein
326 remarks on the record, newest first · Page 1 of 14
I will second that. And Nicole, do you want to comment on what you and Heidi have learned on the citizens' concerns portion, or do you want to hold off until you notice that?
Marty or Jill, so how will you determine there's no environmental impact Do you actually have to do a separate study?
For the most part, you have the information in detail that you need to certify. Yes. In response to the notice.
So you're using federal funds for the infrastructure. Will there be grant funds available for the developer to build the homes that will, to Ike's point in question, reduce the price?
So is this Teresa or Ron? Who's got this item? Nicole? Through City Legal. Okay.
Can you help provide some clarity on that? premium was reduced by about $300,000.
Is our coverage, is our deductible, is our retainage changed, or is it the same coverage, but we have a reduction of $300,000?
Please. We don't often see reductions in annual policy, so I'm not trying to get renegotiated.
So is this likely because of our risk rating has improved? Is that what the?
I am okay to bring this to about this back.
You're welcome. Quick question. This resolution approves the grant for the coordinator's positions for $257,000. I'm assuming the $257,000 covers the full compensation and benefit package for those two coordinators. Is there any excess?
Jill, can you comment, how did these help the homeless street outreach program and how will they impact the HART program? I know you had mentioned possibly being able to get a UTV. And then on which of these programs do we require a CDBG grant?
So 9A is not a forgivable loan. 9B is a forgivable loan. Correct. Yes. 9A is 2.85%. Is that correct? Yes. On 9A? Yep. And Erin's welcome to come in on the projects if she would like to.
I've had some calls on frustration for the timing, but they're not complaining. They realize it's a long project, but they're just frustrated by...
I'm sorry, who's got this item? Steven? So the 40,000, I know it's not doing an exceed number, but this seems like a very significant number for the work that was defined in the RCA for us. I have the same question. How did you get to a $40,000 number? And I know they've been doing work on this project in preparation for other litigation, but how did you get to this number?
Is there pre-skill qualification when these bids go out? I don't know anything about the contract. I'm not questioning their capabilities, but when the package goes out, What required demonstration is mandated?
When they review the bids, they're also commenting on their background and their capability, or they're not allowed to?
So just curious. Totally understand. Tom, just let me direct it to Mike. Mike, you reviewed this with Tom and Vicki and Janelle. You're comfortable with these numbers, the reassignment of the responsibilities. I assume that part of this is to prepare for the budget cycle of 26-27, well, 27-28, and that this is taking those issues into account as well?
Yeah, I think this is the kind of critical analysis we need on all of our departments. I commend you and Vicki and Janelle working with Mike to try and come up with solutions like this. It's going to make us more efficient, as long as we don't lose service to the community and the public, and at the same time, try and affect and help our budget.
We might be yelling at you. Item number 14. Take the win.
I'll move 14. Second. So Tom, can you come back up please?
Second. So this is clearly a very significant project. We've had a lot of dialogue on the council and the public. This is a project that we anticipated going in a different direction for a long period of time. We pulled it back. We have reason to believe that we can save literally hundreds of millions of dollars by pulling it back. I think it would be helpful for you to share with our consultants a little bit of detail and background of how we got to where we are now and how we're anticipating the reasoning for pulling back the project and the manner in which we're going forward in the scope…
I don't know if there's a particular A, B, C, and D. I think it's just very important to understand where we've been, how we got to today. We The council has been very concerned about the scope of the project, the cost of the project, and we've been intricately involved. All five council members have been intricately involved regularly with Tom, working with the two of you as well to better understand this project, which could have potentially been a $450, $500 million project. And we weren't comfortable with that. We tried to refocus the project, re-scope the project. have a better sense of…
Some questions have been raised whether the scope of the project is beyond what's necessary. I shouldn't say our, but I believe our understanding is that the design, the plans, the specs, the scope of this project is consistent with the requirements of the consent order, correct? That's correct.
That the scope is too large that we're over building there are a number of I get a number of calls that reach out and I'm like Different organizations individuals.