<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: City, contractor at odds over pool leaks</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.monticellolive.com/city-contractor-at-odds-over-pool-leaks/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.monticellolive.com/city-contractor-at-odds-over-pool-leaks/</link>
	<description>Today's news.........Today.</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2008 09:06:54 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: dean</title>
		<link>http://www.monticellolive.com/city-contractor-at-odds-over-pool-leaks/#comment-31217</link>
		<dc:creator>dean</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 May 2007 19:44:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.monticellolive.com/?p=713#comment-31217</guid>
		<description>i can appreciate the concerns of swim team parents, and well, just parents in general about the possibility of the pool not being ready for the summer.  but whatever the city does to resolve the issue, i dont think it needs to be at a single penny of additional cost to the city.  the city already contracted for $25,000  more than the initial contract, and according to what i'm assuming is a quote from the minutes of the council meeting (above), that was agreed to so that the contractor would warranty his work for a year.  the contractor needs to honor that, if it is indeed what he said he'd do for the additional money.  we should have something... like maybe the CONTRACT ITSELF... in writing that will prove this.  if it turns out that the contractor did NOT agree to this, we need to find out  how the city ended up in this position.  but just because the kids need something to do in the summer is not going to be a very responsible reason for spending good money after bad on this project.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>i can appreciate the concerns of swim team parents, and well, just parents in general about the possibility of the pool not being ready for the summer.  but whatever the city does to resolve the issue, i dont think it needs to be at a single penny of additional cost to the city.  the city already contracted for $25,000  more than the initial contract, and according to what i&#8217;m assuming is a quote from the minutes of the council meeting (above), that was agreed to so that the contractor would warranty his work for a year.  the contractor needs to honor that, if it is indeed what he said he&#8217;d do for the additional money.  we should have something&#8230; like maybe the CONTRACT ITSELF&#8230; in writing that will prove this.  if it turns out that the contractor did NOT agree to this, we need to find out  how the city ended up in this position.  but just because the kids need something to do in the summer is not going to be a very responsible reason for spending good money after bad on this project.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: lj</title>
		<link>http://www.monticellolive.com/city-contractor-at-odds-over-pool-leaks/#comment-30781</link>
		<dc:creator>lj</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 May 2007 20:17:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.monticellolive.com/?p=713#comment-30781</guid>
		<description>My children will be very disappointed if the pool does not get to open this summer.  The city needs to do whatever it can to see that the pool gets to be open this summer to give the kids something to do.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My children will be very disappointed if the pool does not get to open this summer.  The city needs to do whatever it can to see that the pool gets to be open this summer to give the kids something to do.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic Page Served (once) in 0.225 seconds -->
