HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda & Minutes
City Council Work Session - 5:30 - 7:00 p.m.
FORUM: 7:00 P.M. - 7:30 P.M.
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA
Date: January 3, 2000
WELCOME to this meeting of the Prior Lake City CounciL
The Council appreciates your attendance and values your input.
Please remember that City Council meetings are cablecast live; therefore, for viewers at home to be
able to hear your comments, you must use the podium and speak into the microphone to address the
City Council. Before beginning, please state your name and address so that the recorder is able to
have an accurate record of the meeting.
Special assistance for the hearing impaired may be arranged by contacting City Hall 48 hours prior
to time of the Council meeting.
1 CALL TO ORDER and PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:.......................... 7:30 p.m.
2 OATH OF OFFICE FOR NEW CITY COUNCILMEMBERS JIM ERICSON AND MIKE
GUNDLACH.
3 APPROVAL OF AGENDA.
4 CONSIDER APPROVAL OF DECEMBER 20,1999 MEETING MINUTES.
5 CONSENT AGENDA: Those items on the Council Agenda which are considered routine and non-
controversial are included as part of the Consent Agenda. Unless the Mayor, a Councilmember, or member of
the public specifically requests that an item on the Consent Agenda be removed and considered separately.
Items on the Consent Agenda are considered under one motion, second and a roll call vote. Any item removed
from the "Consent Agenda" shall be placed on the City Council Agenda as a separate category.
A) Consider Approval of Invoices to Be Paid.
B) Consider Approval of 2000 City of Prior Lake Official Fee Schedule.
6 ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT AGENDA:
7 PRESENTATIONS: None.
8 PUBLIC HEARINGS: None.
9 OLD BUSINESS:
A) Consider Approval of Resolution DO-XX Regulating US West Telecommunications Use
of Right-of-Way.
B) Consider Approval of Resolution DO-XX Authorizing Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik and
Associates, Inc. to Prepare a Storm Water Trunk Fee Justification Report.
10 NEW BUSINESS:
A) Consider Approval of Ordinance DO-XX Amending Prior Lake City Code Section
704.1001 to Increase the Water Billing Rate by Ten Cents (1 DC) for Every One
Thousand (1000) Gallons of Water.
010300
B) Consider Approval of (1) Resolution OO-XX Authorizing a Memorandum of
Understanding for County Highway Jurisdictional Changes for 170th Street from TH13
to CSAH 23, CSAH 39 from TH13 South to TH13 North, and County Road 81 from
TH 13 to C SAH 1 2; a nd (2) Resolution 9 9-XX A pproving a nd Accepting Removal of
County State Aid Designation from CSAH 39 from TH13 South to TH13 North.
C) Consider Approval of Appointments and Bylaws Revisions for 2000.
11 OTHER BUSINESS/COUNCILMEMBER REPORTS:
12 ADJOURN.
010300
SCHENCK: Asked to remove Item (I) (Consider Approval of Resolution 99-136 Rescinding City Council
Resolution 99-131, Rejecting All Bids Submitted Pursuant to the September 11, 1999 RFP, and
Authorizing Re-Bid of the Tanker Truck.
BOYLES: Briefly reviewed the consent agenda items.
MOTION BY PETERSEN, SECOND BY WUELLNER TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
(A) THROUGH (H) AS PROPOSED.
VOTE: Ayes by Mader, Kedrowski, Petersen, Wuellner and Schenck, the motion carried.
ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA:
Consider Approval of Resolution 99-136 Rescinding Resolution 99-131, Rejecting All Bids
Submitted Pursuant to the September 11, 1999 RFP, and Authorizing Re-Bid of the Tanker
Truck.
SCHENCK: Asked if the City has any legal liabilities with rescinding its award of the bid.
fACE: Indicated that the City has not executed a contract, and there is no case law on point. Advised
that in light of the new facts, the City can rescind the award and authorize re-bid of the truck.
MOTION BY PETERSEN, SECOND BY KEDROWSKI, TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 99-136
RESCINDING RESOLUTION 99-131, REJECTING ALL BIDS SUBMITTED PURSUANT TO THE RFP,
AND AUTHORIZING RE-BID OF THE TANKER TRUCK.
VOTE: Ayes by Mader, Kedrowski, Petersen, Nay by Schenck and Wuellner, the motion carried.
PRESENTATIONS:
Presentation of Plaques Acknowledging Service to the City of Prior Lake for Retiring Board and
Commission Members, Councilmembers Tom Kedrowski, Councilmember Dave Wuellner, and
Police Officer Dennis Left.
Mayor MADER and City Manager BOYLES presented awards to out-going LAC members Doug Larson
and Tom Kearney, PAC members Bob Rykken and Tom Reddinger, Planning Commissioner Dick
Kuykendall, Council member Kedrowski, Councilmember Wuellner, and Police Officer Dennis Leff.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
Continuation of the Public Hearing to Consider Approval of Resolution 99-137 Approving the
Vacation of a Portion of Red Oaks Road.
Mayor MADER opened the public hearing.
Bryce HUEMOELLER (counsel for Charlotte Roehr): Noted that Ms. Roehr supports the staff
recommendation to vacate the right-of way. There is one issue involving the legal standard that applies
to the vacation under MN Statutes 412.851 where no vacation shall be made unless it appears in the
public interest to do so. The DNR refers to the wrong statute and quotes the wrong standard which
relates to vacation of plats by the district court. Therefore, the only question before the Council is
whether the vacation is in the interest of the public in order to meet the statute. Advised that Ms. Roehr
finds the conditions to the vacation acceptable, but that the resolution should offer enough flexibility to
authorize City staff to release the resolution so that it can be filed concurrently with the easement.
2
MOTION BY WUELLNER, SECOND BY PETERSEN, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
VOTE: Ayes by Mader, Kedrowski, Petersen, Wuellner and Schenck, the motion carried.
MOTION BY KEDROWSKI, SECOND BY WUELLNER TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 99-137
APPROVING THE VACATION OF A PORTION OF RED OAKS ROAD.
fACE: Agreed with Attorney Huemoeller's comments on the legal standard applicable.
VOTE: Ayes by Mader, Kedrowski, Petersen, Wuellner and Schenck, the motion carried.
Consider Approval of Resolution 99-138 Vacating a Portion of the Drainage and Utility
Easement located on Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Enivid First Addition.
Mayor MADER declared the public hearing open.
BOYLES: Explained that the purpose of the proposed vacation of the utility and drainage easements is
to allow the lots to be consolidated so that new postal facility can be built without the constraints of the
easements. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the vacation contingent upon
submittal of the development plan and combination of the lots. The staff believes the vacation should
be denied because the vacation is premature as a specific development plan has not been submitted,
and therefore it cannot be determined whether the vacation is in the public interest. Advised that the
Council has three options - approving the vacation, direct staff to prepare a resolution denying the
vacation, or defer the item and provide staff with specific direction.
~ KIRKMAN (counsel for Neil Boderman, landowner); Commented that the closing on the purchase
agreement with the post office is scheduled within the next sixty days, and a condition of that purchase
agreement is that the easements be vacated so that the post office knows it will be able to build across
the lot lines. Believes that the concerns raised by staff can be addressed by conditioning the vacation
on submission and approval of the development plan and approval of the lot combination. Also noted
that the portion of the ring road affecting this property is complete.
BAY LEMLlE (owner of Hollywood Bar & Grill): Noted his support for the post office facility at this site.
GALE OZMUTH (Prior Lake Postmaster): Commented that any action the Council could take to push the
process along would be greatly appreciated because the current facilities are inadequate.
MADER: Asked staff to clarify Mr. Kirkman's comments regarding the ring road being complete in this
area, and if the road is constructed does it mean that it is the final alignment of the ring road.
~: Explained that that section of Tower Street was complete eight or nine years ago, which is the
segment from Duluth over to Toronto. The street, as constructed is the obvious alignment for the ring
road. The most recent discussions regarding the ring road concerned the missing links between
Franklin Trail and Toronto, and Duluth over to Panama.
MADER: Commented that the resolution submitted approves the vacation upon submission of a
development plan, and not necessarily approval of the development plan.
KIRKMAN: Noted that this is an unusual circumstance that in some respects puts the cart before the
horse, but advised that his understanding was that final vacation would be conditional upon approval of
development plans.
3
II r
BYE: Concerned that the City is not in a position to approve or disapprove construction plans for a
federal agency.
KIRKMAN: Understands that to be true, although he understands that the postal service does not
typically flex that muscle unless compelled to and makes every effort to comply with local zoning
regulations.
MADER: Asked staff how much they would need to see in the form of a plan and submittal to combine
the lots. If the requirements are minimal, believes the post office should submit for approval prior to the
Council taking action to vacate. Asked staff if the post office submitted for a lot combination, would it
reverse its recommendation to deny the vacation.
RYE: The lot combination is an administrative process that can take place within a couple of weeks. In
terms of building approval, we would need the same level of detail as any other applicant applying for a
building permit. The staff recommendation denying the vacation would not necessarily be reversed with
an approved lot combination because it is really a function of how the site lays out with the buildings
proposed.
KEDROWSKI: Asked if the postal service has to respect the easement if they own the land.
KIRKMAN: The postal service does not have to respect local zoning regulations, they would have to
respect the real estate rights owned by the City.
MOTION BY SCHENCK, SECOND BY WUELLNER TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
VOTE: Ayes Mader, Kedrowski, Petersen, Wuellner and Schenck, the motion carried.
The Council took a brief recess.
fAcE: Proposed revised language to the Resolution in order to accommodate the concerns of staff.
Approval of the vacation would be conditional upon application and development plans submitted to the
City, a definition of development plans, approval of plans by the City, submittal of lot combination, and
approval of the lot combination by the City.
KIRKMAN acknowledged that is the language the applicant is requesting.
MOTION BY WUELLNER, SECOND BY SCHENCK, TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 99-138 VACATING
A PORTION OF THE DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT LOCATED ON LOTS 1 AND 2, BLOCK
1, ENIVID FIRST ADDITION AS AMENDED.
VOTE: Ayes by Mader, Kedrowski, Petersen, Wuellner and Schenck, the motion carried.
OLD BUSINESS:
Consider Approval of Resolution 99-XX Adopting Findings of Fact Denying the Comprehensive
Plan Amendment for Northview Development.
BOYLES: Gave an overview of the item in connection with the staff report.
4
Kedrowski: Asked the City Attorney to comment on new issues submitted into the public record outside
of the public hearing process regarding this matter. .
~: Commented that in the past she has expressed reservation concerning land use decision
pertaining to matters other than this issue, and specifically with reference to the public hearing on this
matter, when, after a public hearing has been closed, an applicant's counsel is given subsequent
opportunity to enter facts into the record that may not have been discussed at the public hearing. The
public hearing in these matters are before the planning commission. In this case, the applicant's
counsel did have an opportunity to address the City Council outside the public hearing and took such
opportunity to enter into the record issues or facts that were not discussed at the planning commission
level, nor did staff have a chance to review or comment on such matters. Subsequently, the applicant's
attorney has written to the City Manager and City Council with a request that the Council's action
directing staff to prepare a resolution with findings of fact denying the comp plan amendment be
reconsidered. The letter of request contains additional arguments that are in the nature of testimony. It
is a decision for the Council to make whether it believes that the testimony at the Council meeting on
December 6th and the testimony in the letter requesting reconsideration is tantamount to putting
additional evidence into the record.
MOTION BY KEDROWSKI, SECOND BY WUELLNER, TO DEFER ACTION ON THIS ITEM TO THE
2ND MEETING IN JANUARY AND DIRECTING A NEW PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE CITY,
COUNCIL.
Council members SCHENCK, WUELLNER and PETERSEN agreed they would like to hear additional
testimony in light of the postal service site selection.
MADER: Commented that he would support the motion, but that the issue has been before the Planning
Commission twice and the City Council twice, and in all cases denied. Also noted that it was those who
opposed to the comp plan amendment that were not allowed to speak, so to the extent that the
process was compromised, it was done so to the benefit of the applicant. Even so, the Council still did
not approve the resolution.
~: Asked if the applicant has agreed to waive the 60-day rule.
BRYCE HUEMOELLER did not approach the podium, but indicated that the applicant has agreed to waive
the 60-day rule.
VOTE: Ayes by Mader, Kedrowski; Petersen, Wuellner and Schenck, the motion carried.
Consider Approval of Resolution 99-139 Adopting 2000 Prior Lake Budgets and Certifying Final
2000 City of Prior Lake Property Tax Levy to Scott County Department of Taxation.
BOYLES: Gave an overview of the budget process, noting several changes as discussed at the truth-in-
taxation hearing.
SCHENCK: Asked if the $90,000 were applied to the budget, what would be the impact to property
taxes.
TESCHNER: A rough estimate would be a 2-3% reduction, but explained that there is a bounce-back
effect when you apply a one-time revenue source, and the $90,000 would have to be made up for in
subsequent years.
5
I] I
. .-- -~.-r-.
"." .'._m_.....,.,," ,...~~__.,~,..___,__~__....".,,,_.,__,,~~,._..
MOTION BY KEDROWSKI, SECOND BY SCHENCK TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 99-139
ADOPTING 2000 CITY OF PRIOR LAKE BUDGETS AND CERTIFYING FINAL 2000 CITY OF PRIOR
LAKE PROPERTY TAX LEVY TO SCOTT COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF TAXATION.
KEDROWSKI: Beyond the issues of the EDA levy and one additional police office, my recollection is that
the Council had reached a consensus as to approval of the budget. Further noted the necessity of
adding an additional police officer at this time rather than adding two officers next year.
PETERSEN: Also supported the resolution.
Councilmembers WUELLNER and SCHENCK concurred.
MADER: Disagreed that the Council had agreed that an additional police officer was the only issue.
Believes the only issue is that based upon the surpluses the City has, the City Manager could hire a
new police officer without having any impact on the budget. It comes down to what tax level is
necessary in Prior Lake.. Noted several examples which compare operating expenses with the
proposed budget for 2000. Went on to discuss the surplus which is used to fund different projects from
different revolving funds, none of which show up in the general operating budget.
TESCHNER: Noted that the Park Referendum gave the City a $7.3 million influx which spiked us up to
almost $19 million. We have now been liquidating those funds as the park expansion projects near
completion. The surplus has been closer to $600,000 over the last two years.
MADER: Excluding 1999, the reports indicate that the surplus has been $1.8 million over the last four
years, most of which has been transferred to different revolving funds.
TESCHNER: Addressing the Mayor's opening remarks regarding the $5.8 million in operating expenses
excluding interest payments, advised that you have to include the interest payments because the debt
service interest on the general fund side is supported in the operating budget. Those are identified as
transfers within the financial statements. If you include those, it diminishes the surplus. They can't be
dealt with separately.
MADER: If you look at how the City spends its money from the general fund, a majority is spent on
salaries, materials and supplies, and then there is an interest payment. If you exclude the interest
payment from that budget each year, so that what your comparing in the level of expenditure that go
for wages, materials and supplies, in two years those numbers have increased by 13.7%.
TESCHNER: That is correct because we have also factored in the large $379,000 transit levy that takes
up a substantial portion of that increase which we never had before. That was a brand new operating
expenditure within the budget that the City hadn't previously incurred. 1998 was the first year that the
transit levy appeared in the general fund operating budget.
MADER: My comparison was for 1998, which did have the transit tax in our cost, with the proposed
budget for 2000.
TESCHNER: Commented that the operating budget did not go up 13% because the operating portion of
the general fund budget only from 1999 to 2000 is going up approximately 2.9%.
MADER: That is when comparing budget to budget. My comparison is for the 2000 budget and the
actuals from 1998.
6
TESCHNER: Noted that the only comparison is budget to budget. For examples, revenues that would net
out this year would be the substantial sale for the City property plus FEMA funds received. It is
impossible to anticipate those type of items that may come into play on the budget. If you take out
those wild cards, you would be very close to the parameters of what the City would anticipate as far as
budget results. We had a couple of extraordinary revenue sources that came into play. You cannot
budget those types of factors.
MADER: Noted that in the April, June and August work sessions, a budget was proposed that would
yield a 4% reduction whereas this budget delivers only a 1 % reduction. Disappointed that we are not
now delivering 4%. Also commented that the State's surplus is about 1 %. In comparison, the City's
surplus runs approximately 10%.
SCHENCK: Noted that he also would like to provide an additional reduction, and the $90,000 proceeds
from the sale of property could give a nice one-time reduction, but it puts the Council in the position
next year of trying to make up the difference.
VOTE: Ayes by Kedrowski, Petersen, Wuellner and Schenck, Nay by Mader, the motion carried.
Consider Approval of Resolution 99-XX Directing Use of Proceeds from Sale of Real Estate
Purchased by Northview Development Company.
BOYLES: Gave a brief overview in connection with the staff report, outlining five alternatives for Council
consideration.
MOTION BY MADER, SECOND BY PETERSEN TO DEFER THE DECISION FOR THE USE OF
FUNDS UNTIL A DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT PLAN IS COMPLETE AND PROJECTS ARE
IDENTIFIED.
MADER: Clarified that if the proceeds remain undesignated they become part of the surplus and
automatically part of the general fund reserve. But, there is no reason that would prevent us from
moving them to another fund at a future date.
TESCHNER: Confirmed that what the Council could do is when the audit report is finished and brought
before the Council in May, at that time, by Resolution, staff would recommend designation of any
surplus in excess of the 30% cash reserve. This could be considered in conjunction with the audit
report as we have done in normal course in past years.
KEDROWSKI: Opposed the motion because the money in question is a result of a land sale, and should
be directed to a specific project. One of the issues with the City's surplus is that it is available to pay-
down old debt, provided equipment replacement, replenished reserves, etc. Proposed to use the
money for Downtown redevelopment.
SCHENCK: Also opposed the motion. Believes the funds should be directed back to the area and
suggested directing the funds to the completion of the ring road.
PETERSEN: Noted that this action does not preclude the Council from using the funds for a specific
project at a later date when a project is identified for either the Downtown Redevelopment, or the ring
road.
VOTE: Ayes by Mader, Petersen, Wuellner and Schenck, Nay by Kedrowski, the motion carried.
7
r 1 ..
-~_._'--'-.'-'----""'~------'--'-'-.,---"--'-"--'-----'
NEW BUSINESS:
Consider Approval of Resolution 99-140 Making a Negative Declaration for an EIS for the
Deerfield Development.
BOYLES: Gave a brief overview of the item in connection with the agenda report.
MADER: Concerned how the development addresses the diversion of storm water, and asked if the City
is able to manage the rate and volume of run-off as the development progresses and permits are
issued.
KANSIER: That was the most significant concern of staff. Based upon the analysis, staff is comfortable
that the overall impact, diverting the water to the wetlands, will have a negative impact on Markley
Lake, if measurable at all. The DNR has a much more stringent permitting process, and through that
process staff is comfortable with the control measures.
RYE: Clarified that the issue was discussed at the last Planning Commission meeting. When the
developer's engineer was asked precisely that question, his response was yes.
MOTION BY SCHENCK, SECOND BY WUELLNER, APPROVING RESOLUTION 99-140 MAKING A
NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR AN EIS FOR THE DEERFIELD DEVELOPMENT.
VOTE: Ayes by Mader, Kedrowski, Petersen, Wuellner and Schenck, the motion carried.
Consider Approval of Resolution 99-141 Authorizing BRA & Associates, Inc. to Provide
Construction Observation Services for Developer Installed Improvements at the Wild Oaks
Subdivision.
BOYLES: Gave a brief overview of the staff report and the recommendation of staff.
MOTION BY SCHENCK, SECOND BY PETERSEN APPROVING RESOLUTION 99-141
AUTHORIZING BRA & ASSOCIATES, INC. TO PROVIDE CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATION
SERVICES FOR DEVELOPER INSTALLED IMPROVEMENTS AT THE WILD OAKS SUBDIVISION.
MADER: Asked about the billing rate.
McDERMOTT: Noted that the rates are on the last page of the contract, and are similar to those charged
by OSM.
VOTE: Ayes by Mader, Kedrowski, Petersen, Wuellner and Schenck, the motion carried.
Consider Approval of Short-Term Lease Agreement with Scott-Rice Telephone of the Old
Library Building Located at the Northwest Corner of the Intersection of Main Avenue and CSAH
32 in Downtown Prior Lake.
BOYLES: Discussed the process in working with Scott-Rice Telephone to this point, and the tentative
terms in leasing the old library facility.
8
MOTION BY PETERSEN, SECOND BY KEDROWSKI AUTHORIZING A SHORT-TERM LEASE
AGREEMENT WITH SCOTT-RICE TELEPHONE OF THE OLD LIBRARY BUILDING LOCATED AT
THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF MAIN AVENUE AND CSAH 21 IN
DOWNTOWN PRIOR LAKE.
MADER: Asked if there were other viable discussions for the use of the building.
BOYLES: There were discussions that proposed more long-term use. This option seemed the best fit for
the City because Scott-Rice is looking for a short-term solution to their need for office space.
VOTE: Ayes by Mader, Kedrowski, Petersen, Wuellner and Schenck, the motion carried.
Consider Approval of Resolution 99-142 Denying a Request to Extend the Protection of Final
Plats from a Change in Zoning Ordinance Requirement Established by Minnesota Statutes
462.358, Subd. 3c.
BOYLES: Explained the staff report, the issue currently before the Council, and the staff
recommendation.
SCHENCK: Asked why the Planning Commission did not have a recommendation.
MADER: Explained that it would seem that this issue is more of a policy decision with respect to an
ordinance.
PETERSEN: Asked what would be the difficulty in extending the provision for another year.
RYE: The issue in this case is primarily the change in the ordinary high setback from 50 to 75 feet,
which clearly would have an impact on this property.
MADER: Noted that the big issue is the precedent the action would set, and would not prevent the
owner from requesting a variance in the future.
KEDROWSKI: Would the action be more palatable if the owner had in fact extended utilities, and would
there be any merit to bringing the discussion to the Planning Commission.
RYE: That would certainly put a different light on it, but the fact is nothing had been done at this point.
There really is nothing to discuss at the Planning Commission short of a variance application.
MADER: Reminded the Council that a sunset provision was applicable when the new zoning ordinance
was adopted.
fAcE: Clarified that the sunset provision was actually a specific amendment to the subdivision
ordinance in order to clean-up those outstanding plats where the hold harmless period had passed.
MOTION BY MADER, SECOND BY SCHENCK TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 99-142 DENYING A
REQUEST TO EXTEND THE PROTECTION OF FINAL PLATS FROM A CHANGE IN ZONING
ORDINANCE REQUIREMENT ESTABLISHED BY MINNESOTA STATUTES 462.358, SUBD. 3C.
KEDROWSKI: Clarified that by extending the protection we would be providing an exception to our
zoning ordinance.
9
[l I
~--~--~ ~~-~- ~-'~~-r"---"-------"-"---
.-----~-----------------_r_.~--.----- - .- --- .~..
~: Confirmed and noted that if we wanted to give any relief from the zoning ordinance, they would
have to go through the variance process. Economic hardship alone is never a rationale for a variance.
VOTE: Ayes by Mader, Kedrowski, Petersen, Wuellner and Schenck, the motion carried.
Consider Approval of 1999 City Manager Performance Evaluation and Salary Review.
[This Item was removed to Executive Session]
The Council returned to the regular meeting at 10:25p.m.
MOTION BY SCHENCK, SECOND BY KEDROWSKI TO INCREASE THE CITY MANAGER'S
ANNUAL SALARY TO $82,533.00.
VOTE: Ayes by Kedrowski, Petersen, Wuellner, and Schenck, Nay by Mader, the motion carried.
MOTION BY KEDROWSKI, SECOND BY WUELLNER TO DIRECT THAT A DISCUSSION TAKE
PLACE AT THE CITY COUNCIL ANNUAL WORKSHOP REGARDING THE CITY MANAGER
EVALUATION PROCESS AND CRITERIA FOR 2000.
VOTE: Ayes Mader, Kedrowski, Petersen, Wuellner, and Schenck, the motion carried.
OTHER BUSINESS I COUNCILMEMBER REPORTS: NONE.
A motion to adjourn was made and seconded. The meeting adjourned
Frank Boyles, City Manager
10