D001006CITY OF SAINT PALTL
•
OFFICE OF TF� MAYOR
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER
BUDGET REVISION
No.: `r'-rV `'.I�1�
Date: � � � t �1
GS #: 31984
ADMUVVISTRATIVE dRDElI, Consistent with the authority graMed to the Mayor in Section 10.07.4 of the City Charter and
based on the request of the Director of the Department of P��61ic Works
toamendthel9 g3_budgetofthe furd,theDirecloroftheDepartmerd
of Fnance and ManagemeM Services is authorized to ame said budget in the foilowing manner:
C�urent
��
SPENDING PIAN
C93-2T725
SIDEWALK RECONSTRUCTION
Construction Plan
Construction
C �
J
FINANCING PLAN
C932T725
SIDEWALK RECONSTRUCTION
167, 000.00
589,175.40
756,175.40
• - -
11,789.60
11, 789.60
178,789.60
589,175.40
767,965.00
1993 PIA 461,308.45 461,308.45
ASSESSMEN'f 244,866.95 1�,789.60 256,656.55
1993 CIB 50,000.00 50,000.00
756,175.40 11,789.60 767,965.00
�
Preparetl bY. �'M Manager
��
a�uezedby mo�or
���-�- �`�
App MaWr
�
g Z�o-c'Z�o
Public Works
Michael J. Eagum 266-6143
# OF SIGNATURE PAGES
8/12/96
ASSICaN
GREEN SHEET
INITIAL,IpATE
9EPAATMEMDIRECTOR
CITY ATTORNEY �
(CLIP ALL LOCATIONS FOR SIGNA7URt7 �2 �
M�ke Eggum
� oeanarn�er+r
Approval of administrarive order amending the 1993 Capital Improvement Pro�ram hy increasing Assessment revenue in the 1993 Sidewalk
Reconstruction project and authorizing addirional spending for ena neerin� services.
RECAMMENDA770NS:Hpprove tA) or RejeC[ (F�
PIANNINGCAMMISSION CNIISERVICECOMMI5510N
CIB COMMITTEE
STAFF
_ DISTAICTCOUNCIL _
SUPPORTS WHICH COUNCIL O&IECTNE?
PERSONAL SERVICE CONTRAC7S MUST ANSWER THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS:
i. Nas this persoNfirtn ever worketl under a con[ract for this tlepaRmenl?
YES NO
2. Has this persoNfirm ever been a city employee?
YES NO
3. �ces ihis persoNfism possess a skill `rot normally possessetl by any curtent ciry employee?
YES NO
Euplain ail yes answers on separote sheet antl attach to green sheet
INITIATING PROBLEM, ISSUE, OPPORTUNITV (WHO, WHAT, WHEN, WHERE, WHY�
Additional assessment revenue was collected for the 1993 Sidewalk Reconstruction project and there is a need to xecover total engineering
services on the project.
Department of Public Works will be able to awazd conteact.
��c��v��
AUG 2 71996
�ITY CLERkE
�ISADVANTAGESIF APPROYED.
None.
DISADVANTACaES IF NOT APPROVED:
Budgeted revenues will not reflect actua] assessments collected. The Engineering Fund wiIl not fully recover their engineering cosu on ttus
project.
.i'ALAMOUM OF7R4NSAGTiON $ � � 789 &0 COSUREVENUE BUDGETED (CIRCLE ONE) YES NO
FUNDMGSOURCE Assessment5 AC77VffVNUMBER C93-2T725
FINANCIAL INFORMATION (EXPLAIN)
Additions - $11,759.60
�i��
N O. 31984
GITY COUNCIL
GT'CLERK
d ih1