The good news is that all five bids on the project came in lower than the $4.1 million estimate, said Public Works Director Brian Olson.
The construction contract for $2,734,000 was awarded to Knutson Construction, the firm has also worked on the majority of the Northstar Commuter Rail stations.
With Knutson on board, Olson said he is hopeful there will be a opportunity to get a lower bid when it comes time to bid out the Ramsey rail station project.
The contract also includes 5 percent, about $136,700, for construction change orders and a $55,453 contract for specialty inspections and soil boring was awarded to Braun Intertec.
My understanding is Knutson built the Allina Clinic at Ramsey Town Center recently. They are a respected firm, and work should be trouble free and on time.
The entire report written August 15 by Tammy Sakry of ABC Newspapers is online, here.
What is unclear to me is whether this step represents full build-out of the ramp, or whether more may yet be added. If it is full build-out, one would hope that the top floor would be configured as covered parking rather than making parking there undesirable as open to the elements.
______________UPDATE______________
The mayor sent an email:
Eric,
I've noticed you are losing control of some of your facts. Knutson did not build Allina, Kraus Anderson did. Knutson has built, at least, most of the North Star stops.
Stop already with the Port Authority, we will enter into the Metropolitan transit taxing district once the train stop is operational. Make you list and call me if you want to clear up facts and information.
Bob
That gets a big Steve Martin, "EXCUSE MEEEEEE".
There is a saying about distinctions without a difference. Okay. Fair. I was wrong Kraus Anderson did Allina. Another firm with an outstanding reputation for doing things right without hitches. Whoever built the VA clinic [for Jim Deal] seems to be top-notch too.
Now, the Metropolitan transit taxing district is not a "Port Authority." Fine.
Can anyone help. What is it?
I have found this and this.
I appreciate Bob's concerns, but for the sake of readers, I wish his email would have been more detailed about the consequences to Ramsey taxpayers of this situation.
If paying more in taxes is not one of the consequences, I wish the mayor would have been more explicit, as that would have been a relief for all to know.
We need to make a list and call the mayor, to be informed? The city otherwise leaves us hanging about taxation changes, until bills are sent out?
Tom Gamec, redux? Call the mayor?
Short list,
Bob: What can citizens expect in taxation changes from joining "the Metropolitan transit taxing district?" What is the practical bottom-line impact?
How much further taxation added to the tax bill for a home of $200,000 assessed value?
You read the post, I hope you read the update.
P.S. Was anything at all in error, this post? I tried to be as accurate as I could, and I think it is 100% spot on.
____________FURTHER UPDATE____________
I have cooled off a bit from that opening email, "I've noticed you are losing control of some of your facts." You start with a sentence like that, don't shake around contractor names.
The gist of what Bob said, a Port Authority would be something formed and instituted by City of Ramsey to operate and raise revenue in Ramsey; and that it is not that.
But is the "the Metropolitan transit taxing district" anything but a multi-jurisdicitonal "Port Autority?"
Anyone who has ever lived anywhere in the state of New York, knows the "Port Authority" runs the NYC subways there, the key transit services. That is the "Port Authority" context I know and understand. And I have read about St. Paul "Port Authority" mischief.
Now, it seems the strings attached to getting a train stop involve obligatory entry into a taxing conglomerate, of some kind, with some consequences. I could be wrong, but I get the impression that upping-taxes part of things was downplayed by our officials, all along, and deliberately. Bob's response to me puts sunshine on it and that is good.
Whether it is a fair price to pay, or excessive to a homeowner saying, "I will never ride Northstar in the remainder of my life," is a question that should be in the sunshine.
The question of how much of a tax hike hit, each bill, also is relevant to most living in Ramsey.
I do not object to taxes in exchange for services. It is how things work. Tax and spend. Borrow and spend, but tax later to pay down the borrowing. Services are not free - and the question is what do you get for having to pay more, and is it worth it to you, and to the collective you live in. Not that taxes are per se bad. Only idiots in the Taxpayer League, Krinkie-ites, adopt that simplistic stance. Taxes are per se necessary.
However, when it was touted that a new budget was passed without the city's levy rate increased, that ignored key facts such as reserves being drastically spent down to be able to say that. It ignored growth of government; specifically the HRA, to where it dwarfs the council's spending patterns. Then there is a reach into the Town Center speculation. HRA as competition with private sector development. Into "spend it into success," questions. Will they spend it into success, or simply put up a bunch of buildings, spending greatly to subsidize that, and call it a success?
There are some really fundamental questions. Bob and I can agree on that they exist. We differ as to best responses. Contractor identities are largely a so-what thing, relative to the bigger questions. One big thing is what tie-ins are the price of a rail stop in Ramsey, and should the question and answer be in sunshine or shade?
I think the best way to look at things is childless families pay school taxes. That is because succeeding generations being educated is a public good. All of society benefits. But the fact that school taxes and bond issues can be imposed, and citizens can either vote approval or vote down school bonding (correct me please if I am wrong on that point) is an essential part of how things are best done. When is the last time, if ever, City of Ramsey has had a referendum on any bonding? It is not required. It has never been done. Are we better off or worse off for it not happening?
Recently the balance of the Ward 4 term David Jeffrey had to leave was determined by special election with it seeming from the start Brenda Look and Sarah Strommen were the front-runners. Either would have been a new face, and a female face on council. From discussions with others and knowing Strommen personally, I believe neither would have taken the job to be someone else's rubber stamp. I expect if Brenda Look chose to she would in 2012 present a strong challenge to Jeff Wise were she to run for the at large seat up for election in 2012. I would find that an interesting juxtaposition, with an understanding other interesting and promising candidates might emerge for all the seats up in 2012.
The Ward 4 special election turnout was disturbingly small. One cannot extrapolate too far into what voting patterns, and hot button issues might exist locally, in a presidential election year, where too often down-ticket elections are determined by who has the most prominent highway signs because up ticket there will be concerned turnout numbers who get down ticket and say, oh, I recall those signs everywhere.
It is not how democracy grounded on an informed electorate is under standard mythology supposed to work. It is a practical reality, however, it works as it does, warts and all.
I supported Bob when he ran. Do I think he has been good about holding back sewer-water intrusions into existing neighborhoods while a lack of new building might have motivated such a revenue generating step? Absolutely. Do I question his motivations as somehow ill-grounded? No. Judgments are made and can be disagreed with but I do not have any personal doubts about Bob or his total honesty in dealings. Do I dislike the choice of Landform, and its continuance as a quite costly consultant? I have not disguised my feelings and beliefs that way. Do I think keeping Tinklenberg as consultant would have been better? No. I don't know his cost while on contract, but dropping that consultancy was in my judgment a good decision by Bob and others.
Have I been too harsh in my judgment of Colin McGlone? Probably, but whenever he says he cannot see how the Flaherty-Collins thing could ever fail, I cringe.
From knowing Strommen I believe she will be an independent voice and vote on council. And that is good. From not knowing Brenda Look, I could not reach that opinion, or a contrary one, in fairness, and for now until the 2012 elections that's moot. One who seems responsible and informed and reliable, has said she would be independent.
I hope that puts my position in perspective. My judgment is that too much has been paid for the town center mop-up position, the vacant land bought out of foreclosure; and that too aggressive a push is being made.
I fully understand the rationale and dynamics of saying if nobody else can get credit, the banks not lending and the developers antsy to get into new adventures, putting a pot of Ramsey money - liquidity - in play now allows picking and choosing among developers to [hopefully] attract the best and brightest; whereas in hotter market times choice would be lessened, even if the same city money were put into play.
My complaint is the base premise, my belief being that the city should not be putting money in play to deviate greatly from patching potholes, retarring roads, and providing cops in cars driving and watching as a step to curb crime. Putting out fires once started is a traditional local government function.
Land speculation and credit extension are done elsewhere by local government, but that is not cause to want them done here.
That such things are at issue presently in Ramsey is not a mystery.
Would I support Bob Ramsey for reelection? That depends mainly on who would be running against him. Has he been hard working? Nobody can challenge that. Will the course he is taking with Town Center work? I don't think so, but time will tell, and if proven wrong I would have no problem saying so.
However --- If some things happen, with strings attached, it is best citizens are fully informed about what the strings are, up-front. This obligatory entry into some taxing situation is problematic. In posing the $200,000 home, how many dollars more tax will be added from entering into this taxing conglomerate question, my guess is it will be a positive number between zero and several thousand dollars, but not at either of those extremes. My worry, it is an obligatory thing and what if nobody has an answer to what will be its tax impact on each household?
Then what? Hope for blind luck? That is not much of a plan.