My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Question and Answers to Issues Courthouse Square
>
CS_Courthouse Square
>
Question and Answers to Issues Courthouse Square
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/20/2012 7:48:22 AM
Creation date
9/6/2011 10:10:59 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Building
RecordID
10326
Title
Question and Answers to Issues Courthouse Square
Company
Transit Board
Building
Courthouse Square
BLDG Document Type
Committee
Project ID
CS9601 Courthouse Square Research
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
85
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
' <br />, <br />, <br />' <br />' <br />' <br />Did the County and Transit District misuse public funds by agreeing to a settlement with <br />Mr. Berrey? <br />No. In July 1996, the Marion County Commissioners authorized negotiating a contract <br />with Berrey and an interim agreement was executed by Marion County on July 31, 1996. <br />Berrey was paid nothing under that agreement, pending development of a final contract when the <br />scope of the project was finalized and defined. <br />On March 6, 1997, an agreement was executed with Berrey which allowed him to be <br />compensated $60,000 for expenses incurred on behalf of the project with the condition that the <br />amount would be credited against the ultimate proj ect management contract. <br />In April 1997, R.G. Andersen-Wyckoff and Randy Curtis were informed by the attorneys <br />' <br />' <br />' <br />' <br />'J <br />' <br />' <br />, <br />' <br />' <br />' <br />' <br />that the 5% management fee proposed by Berrey was more than market pazameters for the <br />services then anticipated (financing for the project had been restructured to lower Marion <br />County's interest expense ... please see "Was the original project privately or publicly <br />financed?") to be performed by Berrey on behalf of the project. The diminished financial risk to <br />Berrey as the developer under the revised financing proposed for the project no longer warranted <br />the 5% management fee. <br />Andersen-Wyckoff reported this issue to his entire board in April 1997 in a memo to the <br />Board of Directors clarifying the concerns of the County and the District over the compensation <br />issue. On May 29, 1997, after several unsuccessful negotiating sessions with Beney and his <br />attorney, Marion County, Salem Area Transit District and Berrey entered mediation to settle his <br />claim against the project. <br />A settlement which included compensation for project services provided at market rate <br />including supervision of the architectural and engineering work, contracting and supervision of <br />environmental consulting and testing, supervision of the bids for demolition and abatement, and <br />preparation of the project budgets and financial analysis, release of architectural work product; <br />and release of any further claims against the project (no litigation) was reached. The entire <br />amount was $360,000 with the previous payment of $60,000 credited to the amount. Berrey's <br />original fee request on a$30-million (hard costs) project was $1.5 million. <br />(Support information: Tabs 18-21) <br />, <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.