My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
08/13/2007 Meeting Minutes
DOcument-Host
>
Mayfield Village
>
Meeting Minutes
>
2007
>
08/13/2007 Meeting Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/22/2019 9:28:05 AM
Creation date
7/18/2018 6:49:13 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Legislation-Meeting Minutes
Document Type
Meeting Minutes
Date
8/13/2007
Year
2007
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
25
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Minutes of the Combined Caucus/Council Meeting <br />8-13-07 <br />Page 13 ? <br />comprises the $1.86 million is to purchase the acquisition of 691 SOM Center Road. Mr. Saponaro <br />is not convinced that that is the wisest purchase of 691 SOM Center Road. Mr. Saponaro does not <br />know how we are supposed to have this first when it directly relates to that. It does not make <br />sense to him as they go hand in hand. <br />Mr. Brett pointed out that the Finance Committee recommended this 2-1 at the meeting. <br />Mr. Buckholtz indicated that it does not state the properties we are buying. <br />Mr. Saponaro indicated that the explanation by the Finance Director was 691 SOM Center Road <br />was going to be purchased for $750,000.00 and the $1.86 million that they are talking about in <br />Notes, part of that was that $750,000.00. That is part of how they comprised that money, so to Mr. <br />Saponaro that goes hand in hand. <br />Mr. Brett advised that that was laid out in a memo to Council at the last Council meeting at which <br />time in Executive Session the Mayor laid out his thoughts on the purchase of this property and <br />briefed Council on that. <br />Mr. Buckholtz asked if the main objection here is the order. If so, we will defer to Mr. Diemert, <br />does it matter the order at which we approve these things. <br />Mr. Diemert replied that he does not see a problem in the order. <br />Mr. Buckholtz added that the bond is being used according to the way it is written for the purpose <br />of conserving, preserving and enhancing available open spaces. If for some reason, the purchase <br />of this property did not pass, what would the ramifications of the bond be? <br />Mr. Brett replied that you would want to go back and restructure the bond. Mr. Brett would have <br />to call people this evening and tomorrow at the latest to prevent invitations to bid from going out. <br />Mr. Buckholtz asked if it would be easier to amend the agenda and do the other item first. <br />Mr. Diemert advised that he does not see a problem with it. <br />Mr. Buckholtz asked that if legally is it better to approve the money first or approve the purchase <br />first? <br />Mr. Diemert replied that it does not matter because it is when you sign the contracts or the issuance <br />of the bonds actually takes place and what order that happens is really what counts. Perhaps the <br />order in which the Mayor signs them could have an impact. <br />Mr. Brett agreed with the assumption that if Council elects not to approve the purchase of the <br />property, it does not make sense to issue this debt now. The question then is when do you want to <br />meet because we still have large groupings of projects that will need to be funded that requires <br />invitations to bid and settlement on the sale on the 28th of August with settlement on the 10t' .
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.