Council Minutes

MINUTES/COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
Monday, February 24, 2003 - 7:00 p.m.______

The city council met as the Committee of the Whole on Monday, February 24, 2003 in the council chambers in City Hall with Mayor Brown presiding. Present at roll call were Council Members Brooks, Hamerlik, Glassheim, Gershman, Christensen, Kerian, Kreun - 7; absent: none.

Mayor Brown announced that when addressing the committee to please come forward to use the microphone to give your name and address for the record, and advised that the meeting is being televised live and taped for later broadcast.

Mayor Brown also commented on various events during the past week and upcoming events:
1) he congratulated the organizers of the Ag Expo and Pool Tournament last weekend at the Alerus Center; the Alerus Center has great entertainment and has great visitors.
2) we have a big hockey weekend coming up this week and have opportunity to put our best host face to people from all over North Dakota as the State Hockey Tournament gets underway at The Ralph.
3) there is a meeting of the organizers of the World Jr. Hockey Tournament slated to take place just after UND's Saturday's game and can't wait to show them how we do hockey in Grand Forks.
4) he stated he will be presenting the State of the City address this Wednesday at the Alerus and is excited to have this opportunity and want to encourage everyone to attend and be part of this event, is pleased at where we are and eager to lay out his vision for the plan for the city's future.

Mayor Brown stated he had the honor tonight to congratulate Sgt. Dennis Jensen on his retirement from the Grand Forks Police Department; Sgt. Jensen is a 36-year veteran of the force and will officially retire Friday, February 28, 2003, there is an official ceremony at the police department at 11:00 a.m. Sgt. Jensen has been an asset to the city for nearly four decades and has covered every area of law enforcement from bank robbery to arson to fraud and forgery, in 1990 he was elected as the Grand Forks police department officer of the year and in 2002 he received the Sgt. Wayne "Andy" Anderson Meritorious Service Award and this award carries respect and honor of every officer and demonstrates not only his impact on the community but on those who worked with him. He thanked Sgt. Jensen for his dedication and presented Sgt. Jensen with a watch.

COMMITTEE DISCUSSION ITEMS

3.1 Sorlie Bridge Enhancement Concept Report (with video presentation of highlights of
proposal).________________________________________________________________
Traie Dockter, Downtown Leadership Group, stated in 2002 two independent consultants came to the city to offer their incite on how our communities can best focus on economic development and the expansion of tourism - Ned Hill, an economic development specialist from Cleveland State University and Judy Randall of Randall Travel Marketing. They both focused on the area of downtown's potential role in expanding economic development, and urged us to capitalize on the outstanding beauty and character in our downtown, cited pocket parks, the floodwall, the unique historic buildings and our public arts.

The Sorlie Bridge built in 1929 to honor the only ND governor to hail from Grand Forks and is one of only a few through truss bridges left in the state and is the only connection between our two communities in the downtown area and with completion of the downtown portion of the greenway project in summer 2003 the import of this bridge to pedestrian traffic will become apparent and as a result the Downtown Leadership Group has commissioned a study to host information gathering sessions with technical advisors and the public to review what, if anything, can be done to the Sorlie Bridge to improve its appeal to pedestrians. The report has been approved in concept by the local and state historic preservation groups and the MPO. The recommendations and price tag associated with them are modest but benefits many.

Roger Helland, architect with Widseth, Smith & Nolting, stated they were hired by the Downtown Leadership Group to do investigation and workshop for the Sorlie Bridge; that they had two workshops which included community leaders and technical staff with City people and State people from Minnesota and North Dakota, some of the concerns brought up during workshops were that the bridge is on the historical register and wanted to make sure that everybody in the state from historic end was aware of what they were looking at doing, and noted that the bridge is poorly lit, and concern about people walking across the bridge and that needs to be addressed so safer pedestrian walkway at night and during the day. He stated they wanted to enhance the historical beauty of the bridge and wanted to have a dramatic lighting effect on the bridge and also wanted to have access to the greenway. He reviewed the video presentation.

Council Member Kerian stated in prior discussions there was concern about bikes meeting pedestrians on the walkway and suggestions about one-ways or crossings at end bridges, etc. and if that was discussed. Mr. Helland stated that was being looked at by MPO, and at some signage. Ms. Dockter stated it is a narrow walkway and there was some discussion about widening that walkway but too cost prohibitive.

Council Member Gershman asked re. funding at federal level; Ms. Dockter stated that would be the next step after approval from Grand Forks and East Grand Forks city councils; and getting approval would allow them to be one of the projects under consideration for TE or TCSP funds. Council Member Gershman stated he didn't remember a sign - welcome to Grand Forks, ND when coming in and thank you for visiting Grand Forks when leaving.

Council Member Brooks stated they were coming for approval of the concept, not funding source, etc. He noted that est. funding is $150,000 - Ms. Dockter stated that federal funds should be available for a project of this nature, but question more in what timeframe, and that they have been advised that this would be entirely available for funding through federal sources.

Council Member Christensen stated that he and Council Member Kreun will bring this up at the MPO level on Wednesday to see if they can get it in the funding package for this upcoming year, signage.

Mr. Helland stated they are looking at possible sources for power for the Sorlie Bridge and also talking with people in East Grand Forks and also talking with Xcel Energy.

3.2 Ordinances relating to the jurisdiction of Municipal Court and enforcement of Park
District ordinances by the Grand Forks Police Department._____________________
Rick Duquette, adm. coordinator, stated he had been working with UND, UND Senate, Mr. Staley of Park District since last fall to prepare for next spring's Springfest, one of the things is for the City of Grand Forks to adopt ordinances allowing our police department to enforce Park District ordinances and to adjudicate those violations in Municipal Court, and asking council to adopt these ordinances keeping in mind that one of the next steps that needs to take place is for the Park District to develop their substantive ordinances that the City would be enforcing. Some of the discussions have been ordinances re. glass bottles and flammable materials, and that the Park District would be putting together ordinances on that and City would be enforcing those and hearing violations in Municipal Court.

Council Member Christensen stated that with our Home Rule and when reading the statutes it appeared that the ordinances could have been enforced in Municipal Court, and questioned if they are going to deputize park patrol or who is going to enforce park board incidents in the park, our police. Mr. Duquette stated yes, the ordinances they would be coming out with, City would be able to enforce them, and have been under discussions with the police department - this is aimed at the Springfest type circumstances.

3.3 Matter of salary increase for Municipal Judge.
Charlie Bunce, HR director, stated this was request of the municipal court judge asking what the average increase across city was for 2003, and they were told 3.33% and that is being presented to the city council for this elected position. Hamerlik stated that the 3.33% was the outgrowth of the study and certain inclusions and eliminations, and the negotiated salary increase was much less than that (Mr. Bunce stated .4) and with recommendation giving those in classifications, etc. and this position wasn't in that mix at all. Mr. Bunce stated this was not a recommendation from his department, request coming from municipal court. Council Member Brooks stated if this were approved they would use cash carryover. Mr. Bunce stated he would like to recommend for the next budget process to put this in a line item with other elected officials and look at it that way.

3.4 Plans and specifications for Project No. 5431, District No. 139, street lighting in
Southern Estates 1st and 3rd Additions._________________________________
Cindy Voigt, asst. city engineer, reported that the expiration date of protest period is March 31.

3.5 Plans and specifications for Project No. 5408, District No. 589, paving on South 20th
Street from 44th Avenue South to 47th Avenue South.__________________________
Ms. Voigt reported that the expiration date of protest period is March 31.

3.6 Plans and specifications for Project No. 5444, District No. 415, sanitary sewer to serve
2700 and 2800 blocks of 36th Avenue South.____________________________________
Council Member Glassheim asked who wants development; Ms. Voigt stated request by Mr. Parker, one owner owns almost entire property in assessment area and another owner of the future Dairy Queen site also requesting this - that she hasn't heard from Development Homes. Council Member Gershman stated Development Homes is now open, new facility that needs some financial help, and what benefit will they get from an additional sewer line. Ms. Voigt stated she would let council members know if Development Homes in the district.

Council Member Christensen suggested that when receiving these requests in the future, get info. as to who landowners are in the affected district and percentage to protest it out so have the information and know who is getting affected and what issues are re. protestability
- Ms. Voigt stated they can give property owners on a map that isn't published but can't provide cost until the Commission meets and bids are opened. Council Member Christensen stated they could receive estimated cost.

3.7 Consideration of bids for construction of Project No. 5411, 2003 Asphalt Street Repairs.
There were no comments.

3.8 Consideration of bids for construction of Project No. 5410, 2003 Concrete Street
Repairs._____________________________________________________________
Council Member Kreun questioned comment in the staff report, which stated that the contractor appears to be qualified to perform the work and would like to know that they are qualified to do the work or if cost City more for monitoring the work. Council Member Christensen stated they probably should have references and if acceptable. Ms. Voigt stated she had made some calls to Fargo where they are based, and can send e-mail and give results and good point that there might be some increased inspections but doesn't know how to reject them on the information she received.

3.9 Consideration of City of Grand Forks as a cooperating agency on the EIS for the Red
River Valley Water Supply Project.___________________________________________
Council Member Brooks asked what other entities, groups or agencies are members and who is being solicited and who will the City be joining in this. Mr. Grasser stated he doesn't have the complete listing of all the cooperating agencies, that Fargo, Moorhead and possibly East Grand Forks have been asked to become a cooperative agency. Mr. Grasser stated he will get a listing from the Bureau of Reclamation - the EIS is going to be reviewed by a group of agencies and special interest groups, the cooperating agency status is to allow additional people to come into that review process and doesn't mean that the only people involved will be the cooperating agencies.

Council Member Kerian asked for overview and what going to do with it. Mr. Grasser stated that the U.S. Congress passed a Red River Valley water supply project a couple years ago and one of the tasks within the project is to do an EIS of different alternatives available to the Valley to address the future water needs - that can range from conservation to ground water, surface water, etc. and brainstorming session about how might you meet the water needs - there is a process by which these alternatives start to get narrowed down, one is practicality and cost and impacts to the environment and EIS process is one of those that starts to evaluate and narrow down these different alternatives - that the cities in the eastern part of the state are very interested in getting water from the Missouri River, which is good clean solid supply of water for long term needs and might come with that vent of special interest, and other special interests that we not get water from the Missouri, and invited to become part of this process so can make sure that our concerns are known and understood, and have been part of the process to a degree but can have a closer relationship as a cooperating agency. Council Member Kerian stated there are a group of organizations that are concerned with water along this border and if they are also involved as they have made some efforts to pull some of those various organizations together, and if these are working together or another separate organization looking at water. Mr. Grasser stated this isn't an organization but a process of the EIS and have other interest groups from Missouri that want everything going south for large traffic and Canada that doesn't want to see water come to the north side - all those people are part of this whole environmental impact statement development in review. He stated he didn't know what level of involvement is for Red River Basin and at some time the review group may ask the Red River Basin Commission for their opinion on this - not in the same vein of involvement as what talking about here as a cooperating agency.

Council Member Kreun stated he wanted to make sure that we understand how extremely important this is to Grand Forks over long range planning goals for our water source and strongly encourage us to be part of the EIS study.

Council Member Glassheim asked if there was estimate about cost or staff. Mr. Grasser stated that part of the process here is that we will sign off on a joint cooperation agreement between us and the Bureau of Reclamation and the Garrison Conservancy District and they have told us our involvement can be basically whatever we want it to be - can be so involved that talk to them daily on the development or remove ourselves to the point where we review it once a year - his impression about where want to be is that they are having quarterly meetings and would want to be part of that - something about once a month where we review and go to special meetings that may come up - and probably involving couple days worth of staff time - will be reviewing and providing data and comments, what our needs are, what our treatment system works, what impacts different alternatives on our ability to process water - Hazel Fetters-Sletten will be significant part of this and from the City's side probably have a small working group. Process has already started.

3.10 Consideration of mower bids for street department.
Council Member Hamerlik asked if bid included trade-in, or pass off equipment to another department and have the same problem. Todd Feland, director of public works, stated they would declare it as surplus to see if another department would want it, and if not, sell outright. Council Member Hamerlik stated it concerns him if equipment so bad and need to get new equipment other than a different size, and then pass it to another department and have the same problem there. Council Member Kreun asked how many hours the demo unit has on it - approx. 80 hours.

3.11 Recycling Service Agreement.
Terry Bjerke, 5356 5th Avenue North, did a brief cost to benefit ratio of recycling program based on City information, and that he can prove this is an inefficient program. He noted what it would cost additionally to totally quit recycling curbside program and newspaper drop-off and purchase of additional land for the landfill. He stated the 2003 recycling program is $349,000/yr. and have a savings of (net 50-year savings is $11,545,658 less costs) or approx. $231,000/year if threw it away. He stated he reviewed his numbers with Mr. Feland and he agrees with theories and equations he used in getting all the costs in; and that would assume that everything gets thrown away - there is a business on DeMers that buys aluminum cans and buys newspapers - drop off, and if they are going to buy the paper, put a drop-off site there for newspapers. He stated committed recyclers believe what they are doing is correct so they will continue to save their alum. cans and newspapers and drop it off and would get paid for it as opposed to paying for the service. He stated some of the arguments for recycling are to save space in the landfill and that it's the ethical or moral thing to do. He stated we're concerned about siting a new landfill and if anybody thinks that when the EIS comes back and if everything is okay and can site it, that the people in that township will get their lawyers and be in court - they don't want the landfill - that in his opinion this program has never really been analyzed, and one of the biggest problems he has with government programs is that we don't want to evaluate what we do and we keep doing it - once something starts, almost becomes impossible to stop. He said his final comments for the citizens of Grand Forks - if you believe that your money is not being spent efficiently here, do you think it might not be spent efficiently somewhere else and should consider; that in the 2003 budget the City of Grand Forks decided to reduce the size of the police force to make the budget balance, they did an evaluation and thought that services would still be provided for public safety, etc. , if the police department should be efficient at a time of heightened public awareness as far as security goes, we're not going to make recycling efficient, and challenged the priority of that; and if believe that public officials are not spending money the way you want them to spend it, the question is why would you vote to give them any more. He stated he was talking about efficiencies and strategic long term planning, next Monday night when they vote we're going to find out about efficiencies and long term planning; and asked council to base decisions on facts.

Council Member Kreun stated that the Recycling Task Force identified that the recycling program needs to be reinvigorated but did not want to recommend any major service level changes at this time, but wants to monitor the program with the goal of increasing the usage in tons collected and also recognized that landfilling may make sense in certain economic aspects but feels that a recycling program has important qualative benefits for local citizens that they have brought forward to us in the region; and all of the items that Mr. Bjerke brought up have been discussed and nothing new in his information and it becomes an issue if we want to continue recycling at the current level or not.

Council Member Kerian stated there is a tentative agreement in all of this information, and have had several meetings on this, there was an RFP with a single response, and in line with what Mr. Kreun stated, are trying to get the kind of information that the citizens are asking them to do with this program and that many continue to ask for. She stated that one of the things they discussed was some measure of the number of households that do recycle and has a statement she would like to add to the agreement under C, 6. Other Reports, that a report be submitted to the sanitation department that would indicate the numbers of residents in areas that are recycling and that the sanitation department and the contractor work out the period and methodology, data to help them to evaluate.

Council Member Hamerlik stated at meetings he attended there was a request and if Mr. Feland had responded to percentages of people, number that are recycling in certain areas. Mr. Feland stated a survey was done but doesn't have numbers with him and will e-mail those out. Mr. Hamerlik stated concern that after all work by staff and committee that we come out with continuing it and further study; and the same thing going on further except to check to see what can be done with tonnage.

Council Member Gershman stated if we were to go with just the drop-offs and talked to owner of a major grocery chain in Grand Forks that would be agreeable to having nice recyclable drop-offs placed where the City would maintain the cleanliness and if did that, would be a 32% savings - its $111,000 but still a 32% savings if went to straight drop-offs, and haven't tested that yet, we've tested this and will know through the e-mail if works to some degree or has improved, but according to tonnage, doesn't appear that it has; and maybe at point to try the drop-offs.

Council Member Glassheim stated that the process of trying to get a variety of bids - and
we got back an effort to increase utilization, which is tied in a financial way to the whole process, that we're going to be trying this over the next year or two to see if we can increase the ratios and decrease the cost per unit amount and increase utilization; that is what he would like to see and wants to be part of a city recycling program, not upset about paying $2.05/month. He stated difficulty of privatizing, once you privatize a city service, you lose control over it.
Council Member Brooks stated that many cities are doing their own recycling and not privatizing, and if want to continue recycling, look at doing it ourselves, looking at public works department doing this; look at drop-off sites.

Council Member Christensen stated he echoes comments by other council members - that they were given a report and maybe asked to raise water fees, wastewater fees, storm sewer and if didn't do this wouldn't have to raise fees, we have to start someplace, that he is concerned that this is a quality of life issue, same as not bagging your grass, picking up your grass or hauling it to the dump sites that we have throughout the city, good to go for awhile but not 2.5 years and would like to see the study that Mr. Feland has re. how many people actually recycle and that information crucial in decision - let's explore site locations and bringing it back to the city - rather explore where cut something but yet allow those who want the recycling, haul it and dump it before being forced to raising rates for water, wastewater, etc. He stated the count should be made so they have that information and if not done, get before April.

Council Member Kreun stated that the task force consisted of Glassheim, Kerian and himself and didn't decide they wanted to keep this level of service, that it was year or year and half ago that questionnaire was sent out and citizens brought forth this part of the initiative, and lot of the information that was directed towards the RFP came out of that request and more detailed than just making up request; they contacted the other particular recycler that is in town and asked why they didn't bid - they have their recycling plant in Fargo and can't load up and bale it in Fargo because the cost is prohibitive, and saying we could do it ourselves - all those things were taken into consideration (hauling it, doing it ourselves, also drop off sites was part of choices (not much savings) and felt that savings difference and what they had came almost break even and kept it at the curbside level rather than the drop off level - lot of thought process put into this and all the questions that are brought forward, and each time that they met those questions were asked at different times and addressed them - that they are not saying that this is the only thing that can be done - that this was brought forward by the citizens and what they have been doing in the past.

Council Member Kerian stated they have an extension of the current agreement which is quite favorable to Waste Management and they probably would be pleased to continue that and what we are trying to do is to get them to work with us and citizens to increase the number of recyclers and the volume, and that's why the count is important. She stated that during the time that this has been debated we have not put anything into place to try to turn this around - Waste Mgmt. has no agreement to put anybody on to work with individuals about recycling, we don't, and if going to make a difference, would like to try that now and put some time on it, thought a year's agreement reasonable, that tonnage is less this year than last, and if don't do something to make a difference, be on the path not to be able to continue this.

Council Member Gershman stated that one area we could take a look at or postpone for awhile, but he calculates approx. 60% of the tonnage is newspaper and aluminum and if that is correct, maybe should investigate having the city take that over and selling it to the recyclers. It was noted they looked at that and no money in it - problem is that no one wants to buy it, is labor intensive and have to get rid of it. Council Member Gershman stated that when the market is down, they use the glass as a cap at the landfill and also with plastic - that City wouldn't have any sorting because all aluminum or all paper. Another problem is that apartments, 3 or less, that are serviced and don't have 8-plexes, 12-plexes or all high density housing and no drop-off sites there - and if want to encourage recycling and 25% of people not set up to recycle (11,000 units multi-family). Council Member Christensen stated he wasn't good to go for 3 years but a balance of a year and look at some drop-off sites to begin the weaning process.

Council Member Kreun stated they are coming to the point where this will have to pay for itself or really change drastically; and difficult to come up with good solution so that it fits economics and service part.

Mr. Feland stated if looked across region to see cost to collect curbside, we would be on the lower end of the charged amount, we're paying $2.05 per customer , that EGF paying $2.34 per residence - it is expensive to do curbside recycling and qualitative issue, and looking at new landfill or its equivalent and in the next 5-10 years to see where want to be and what have to do in that timeframe.

3.12 HOME application for Affordable Housing Programs.
Council Member Gershman stated we should authorize the staff to apply for the HOME funds, but that he and Council Member Kreun are co-chairing a meeting on Thursday on entry-level housing and if interested meeting will be held in the council chambers and ties in with what doing here and have a large group of entities and people coming to see if can crack some programs. Council Member Kreun stated if you look at the survey of HOME ownership assistance program, that 63% would not have been able to purchase homes without some of these programs they are putting into place and that the in-fill program as well as CDBG funding programs are part of this, and that last year added $500,000 to our tax base by using these programs.

Council Member Kerian stated the staff recommends that the Acquisition Rehab Program be suspended indefinitely and those funds go into HOME and asked why. Keith Lund stated that the State's allocation of HOME funds for the City of Grand Forks was decreased from $455,000 last year to $365,000 this year and in looking at priorities and what achieves our home ownership goals, the HOME Ownership Assistance Program is by far a better program; that Acquisition Rehab, if purchased the house and participated in their programs and if some essential needs for the home would participate in some rehab activities, however, the fact that Community Action does that as well and felt that was the program to cut because of the shortage of funding.

Council Member Gershman asked how many in-fill lots the City has left; Mr. Lund stated we have about 60 parcels that have reasonable development potentials now and have several parcels they've considered too low for development and will wait until the flood protection project is certified and the entire city is out of the floodplain so can have standard development in those areas. Council Member Hamerlik asked if those are 50' or more lots, have 25 ft. lots and not building on those. Mr. Lund's stated we can build on a 25'x140' parcel, however doesn't consider that desirable, aren't targeting any parcels that have frontage of less than 37.5' for development, have 4 or 5 pairs of 25' lots that are adjacent that would be combined into one 50 ft. parcel.

INFORMATION ITEMS

4.1 City of Grand Fork Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan Summary and Notice of
Intent for Coverage under NPES.____________________________________________
Council Member Christensen stated he was concerned because over 6 years as he watched some of the things they are going to be doing, responsible departments and the enforcement - that this is informational only and has the permit been sent in and if it has, is the information that was presented part of the permit. Mike Shea, Environmental Coordinator, reported that they have received the permit already and are sending in a summary of our plan plus notice of intent to be covered. Council Member Christensen stated he would be interested in sending in as least an ambitious plan and see what got back; Mr. Shea stated that was what they have got, and if you look at the requirements of the permit, they did the least and put enough disclaimers in there so really not tying them -selves to anything more than the minimum. Council Member Christensen stated he didn't want to get into anything where citizens are having to monitor lawn watering, individual residential car washings; Mr. Shea stated those were words they had to put in there and part of the permit. Mr. Shea stated if you look at the paragraph that precedes all of those and if there is a problem have to address them and those are words out of the permit. There were questions as to the cost of monitoring this or staff over the next 5 years; Mr. Shea stated that was one of the questions they are going to answer as they proceed, doesn't have an estimate of cost, that Fargo and Moorhead have hired positions to oversee this, City hasn't and if notice each one of the yearly projections, we are fairly conservative and don't promise a lot in the first few years, starting year 3 gearing up a little bit more and know more as get into that. Mr. Christensen questioned coordination of departments, but probably should be centered in one department; Mr. Shea stated you have functions that are in other departments and that inspections and engineering are heavy into one, also public works, and other is public education and yearly meetings. Mr. Christensen stated he was concerned about what this federal mandate is going to cost us and how fund it.

Council Member Kerian noted this Summary was put together by members of bodies of all of those entities along with EERC's assistance and how we got here. Mr. Shea stated they put a group together about 3 years ago when they knew these were coming, all of the cities in the Red River Valley that would be covered under these storm water regulations - Fargo, Moorhead, West Fargo, Grand Forks - the University and County just came in at the last minute - the University applied for a waiver and didn't get it and they have the exact same permit as the City and so does the County, and all in one urbanized area. Kerian stated in the Summary Program under Best Management Practices, Structural, the rest of these talk about evaluating methods but the storm water ponding program states we will develop a program, not evaluate; and sounds like on a path. Mr. Shea stated there are all kinds of different structural best management practices that you can utilize but because we have no gravity here, there are only so many we can use and ponding is probably the most efficient, least costly of those alternatives and we will pursue that.

Council Member Kreun stated this is an unfunded mandate and has long range implications on our development down the road and glad to hear that we want to keep everything as generic as possible in order to keep the costs down, and does have long range impacts on our development as well as cost to the city and monitor it as closely as possible.

Mr. Christensen stated that General Construction Site Waste Controls and Construction Site Plan Reviews, that slows the process down as far as developing, but trying to make ourselves as user friendly as possible and then these show up and a way of measuring your progress and measurable goals, number of stop work orders given, enforcement actions taken, and that's not the way want to treat someone that comes to town that wants to build - Mr. Shea stated that was right but had to search for measurable goals and when write very generic --
4.2 Financial Management - January Cash Report.
There were no comments.

MAYOR AND COUNCIL COMMENTS

1) Council Member Brooks stated we have the Citizens Request item on the agenda and thanked Mr. Bjerke although under a specific item, and urged citizens to remember that item is on the agenda, and to come down and voice opinions and let us hear what you have to say. Congratulations, appreciation and good luck to Sgt. Jensen.

2) Council Member Hamerlik stated he owed council and citizenry an apology when he was absent last Tuesday with cause, was ill, and did ask to be on the teleconference but that didn't work out.

3) Council Member Christensen stated he has been asked to refer request by the CVB for some funding for advertising and to move that to the finance/development committee; and also ask as part of that to move to their committee working with the Transp. Department to get the buses back and forth to the hotels and get used or excess buses so the CVB, hotels and Alerus know they have that available.

ADJOURN

It was moved by Council Member Hamerlik and seconded by Council Member Kreun that we adjourn. Carried 7 votes affirmative.

Respectfully submitted,



John M. Schmisek
City Auditor