Laserfiche WebLink
REGULAR MEETING OCTOBER 14, 2013 <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />Councilmember Oliver Davis: Could you share with us what that means with the minimum 4%. <br /> <br />Nick Surah: It means a minimum of 4% of the total project costs would have to go the one of <br />those disadvantaged business categories. I would like to point out as well that it is calculated off <br />the total project costs, but the hard cost which is $6.4 million, which are the actual nuts & bolts. <br />It’s actually the 4% translates to a bigger chunk of that, because the stuff that is soft cost, things <br />like paying architects, lawyers and all that other stuff so there is actually more than 4% of the <br />construction budget that would be going toward those disadvantaged businesses. <br /> <br />Councilmember Oliver Davis: So you are talking about more than a minimum 4%. <br /> <br />Nick Surak: We will do at least 4%, and when it comes to total amount of hard construction <br />costs it is more than 4% of that. <br /> <br />Councilmember Oliver Davis: When you have done other constructions in the past, what is <br />percentage rate with dealing with more than 4%? <br /> <br />Nick Surak: That was a new category that ICDA offered just recently and so we committed to <br />that on a most recent one that’s in Indianapolis and we didn’t have any problem hitting the 4%. <br /> <br />Councilmember Oliver Davis: What made you commitment to that? <br /> <br />Nick Surak: It seemed like an attainable goal. I mean we are talking about once we get those tax <br />credits and go through all the other process to the point of where you can actually bid out a <br />project, were talking almost a year from now and so now saying I can make this commitment <br />now gives you a lot of time to figure out the mechanics of that and we felt that was a reasonable <br />amount to ask without maybe over committing ourselves not knowing exactly who we needed to <br />hire and who was the most qualified to do the work at the time. <br /> <br />Councilmember Oliver Davis: So is there any reason when Councilmember’s Schey and Henry <br />Davis brought this up regarding the community agreement that this concept of the 4% was not <br />raised and discussed in that light and dealt with that. <br /> <br />Karen Ainsley: We did discuss it this afternoon when we were in. But the Community <br />Agreement, we didn’t see that until it was filed with the Clerk’s Office and became a public <br />document, so there wasn’t a conversation that happened before that. So that wasn’t something <br />that we were privy to, and so we did mention it when we were here this afternoon, the 4%, but I <br />assume that they were looking at the 4% and thinking that it was not enough, because we had <br />said that when we were one on one as well, so I’m not quite certain and maybe just a <br />misunderstanding. <br /> <br />Councilmember Oliver Davis: In the response that was given to us, I probably would have <br />looked at it a lot easier if they would have said that we already dealing with the 4% issue and like <br />you shared earlier that 4% is not only a minimum and that does not include possible attorney’ <br />and other issues, like you just shared . And we are talking about memorandums of <br />understanding it was clear to me that we kept hearing no we can’t do that or we will wait until <br />2014 and everything else, but I am glad tonight that I heard a whole different tune. <br /> <br />Karen Ainsley: I am sorry Oliver, what I think we were responding to was the commitment for <br />training. We couldn’t commit that training as opposed to probably maybe clearly expressing the <br />commitment that we would make through as a natural part of that application process. <br /> <br />Councilmember Oliver Davis: Because I hear you on that training issue, but what I really heard <br />my colleagues share or at least with me and I’m sure they are going to explain it themselves, but <br />they were looking at more dollars to take home for people. Because Councilmember Henry <br />Davis, Jr., has always talked about the unemployment rates, and so I think the Chamber was <br />talking more about the training piece of that. But in terms of what we were looking at was at that <br />4%, and I am glad to hear that and that was news to me, because I have been watching the <br />correspondence back and forth on e-mails, and it was seeming like there was a strong resistance <br />to that, but tonight I hear that this is a minimum of 4% and maybe even higher. Considering that <br />24 <br /> <br /> <br />