Joe, at this juncture I have not felt a burning need to be familar with "the" contract.  I assume the "the" that everyone is concerned about is the Blades contract.  I have read the Blades bid package, cover to cover, along with the other supporting cost documentation from SPN.  Per the bylaws, the General Manager is the contracting officer for OPA, therefore, I presume the contract was signed by Mr. Duffy acting in the GM capacity.  Do I feel a need to see an actual signature; no.  Do I feel a need to read the arbitration language which Mr. Olson already described in detail; no.

When it comes to the speculation about costs to cancel "the" contract, it should be remembered that there is more than one contract.  You might need to face liquated damages from not only Blades, but DAL, SPN, Soule, Richardson, CECO Building Systems and AWB Engineers, each of whom has some form of contractural agreement linking them to the CC project.  More new contracts will be added shortly as site work begins.

When it comes to the amount of damages, I have to ask as of when?  It is a moving target.  Our liability increases every single day as all of these organizations continue to work.  Any dollar figure calculated today would not be valid in 75 days following the submission of a valid number of petitions to demand another referendum.  75 days is the time allowed in the bylaws to go from petition through public hearing to referendum vote.  I don't believe that work would be stopped during that time period to await a vote.  That puts the earliest stoppage about the beginning of February or later depending on the haste with which S.T.O.P. might work.  How much will be committed by then?  My guess is no better than yours (or Dan's or Janet's or Marty's or Rick's or Tony's or anyone else who's throwing numbers at the wind).

As everyone who has been a party to the process the CC has taken since last Feburary should know by now, I have been admently against most of the steps taken by the Board.  However, I agree with what you have stated repeatedly in the last week or two; the past is past.  At this point I must look at what is the best course from here on and stopping the construction sometime in the first quarter is not the best course.  We need to focus on getting the current project completed as quickly and cost efficently as possible while making it both attractive and functional.  Right now that is the best possible outcome that I see for our membership.

Bill Zawacki