SUNFISH LAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING – OCTOBER 6, 2009

7:00 P.M. - ST. ANNE’S EPISCOPAL CHURCH

Attendants:

      Mayor:  Molly Park

      Councilmembers: Cathy DeCourcy, Judy MacManus, Richard Williams and Roger Conant.

      City Attorney:  Tim Kuntz

      City Planner: Laurie Smith
      City Engineer:  Tim Hanson
      Building Official:  Russ Wahl

      City Forester: Jim Nayes

      City Treasurer:  Mike Blair

      City Clerk:  Cathy Iago
      Police Chief Manila Shaver

           and Members of the General Public.

1.   CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Molly Park opened the meeting at 7:00 p.m. 

2.   APPROVE AGENDA:       Mayor Park stated that Councilmember Conant wished to distribute information relating to City finances and cash reserves and that there would be no discussion on the information this evening; she placed the item after the Inspector’s Reports. She asked if there were any further corrections or additions to the agenda and there was no response.

Councilmember DeCourcy moved approval of the Agenda as amended, seconded by Councilmember Williams and carried. (5-0)

3.   CONSENT AGENDA:       The Mayor asked if there were any questions or comments relating to any items on the Consent Agenda.

Councilmember MacManus referred to page 2 of the Monthly Financial Report and asked the Treasurer for an explanation of the Charlton Road Expense.

Treasurer Blair explained that the expense for Charlton Road included work by the City Attorney and City Engineering firm.

Councilmember MacManus asked if the fees were related to road maintenance and questioned if it was appropriate to place those fees against the road maintenance budgeted item. Treasurer Blair responded that there was no budget for the fees and an alternative would be to place the expense under Attorney’s and Engineer’s fees, however; the costs generally relate to the project.

Councilmember Williams suggested placing a “footnote” on the expenses. Councilmember MacManus agreed that it should not be under Road Maintenance and should be explained or highlighted in some manner. Treasurer Blair agreed to highlight the expense to show that it relates to the improvement project and not the budget.

Councilmember Williams asked that a correction be made to page 13 of the September 1 minutes; he stated that the second to last paragraph should read as follows:  “Councilmember Williams asked if potential landowner Attorney fees are included in the appraisal costs and Mr. Kuntz responded no, but that landowner appraisal reimbursement was included.” He asked if the Attorney agreed with that statement and Mr. Kuntz responded yes.

Councilmember DeCourcy noted a minor correction on page 10 of the minutes; the word “he” should be changed to “she”.

Councilmember Conant asked if the corrected minutes are posted on the website and Clerk Iago responded yes.

Mayor Park asked if there were any further comments and there was no response.      
 
Councilmember McManus moved approval of the Consent Agenda with amendments to the Monthly Financial Report and September 1, 2009 minutes as discussed, seconded by Councilmember Williams and carried. (5-0)

a.      Regular Council meeting minutes of September 1, 2009.

b.      List of Bills

c.       Monthly Financial Statements

4.   COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC:   Mayor Park asked if there were any comments from the public regarding items not listed on the agenda.

Ibby Hammett stated she has resided on Charlton Road for 50 years and she expressed concern regarding the recent discussions relating to improvements on the road. She explained that historically Charlton Road was the entryway to Sunfish Lake and she would prefer preserving the history of the road by leaving it as is. She stated that she agrees the road needs some work along the ditches and noted that dust has been a problem over the years. She also pointed out that there was a crown in the road in area near the Chase property and that accommodated natural runoff; however, there is not longer a crown in the road at this location. She stated that in her opinion paving the road is not the answer and she suggested that the City needs to get a second opinion from a licensed road builder regarding what needs to be done to the road.         

Mayor Park thanked Ms. Hammett for her comments.

5.   PLANNING COMMISSION:

a.   Planner’s Report: Planner Smith reported that the Planning Commission met at Commissioner Schulehuber’s residence on Acorn Drive to view his efforts to remove Buckthorn from his property. She explained that the Commission discussed possible steps to educate the public on Buckthorn removal and also a possible ordinance amendment requiring an invasive species survey for properties seeking development or redevelopment approvals.  She stated that recommendations from the meeting will be forwarded to Council at their regular meeting in November.

Mayor Park distributed information regarding the upcoming Buckthorn Bust event on October 10, 2009.

Councilmember MacManus asked what happens if it is raining on that day. Mayor Park indicated that the weather report did not forecast rain. 

Council thanked the Planner for her report

6    INSPECTOR’S REPORTS: 

      a.   Building Inspector: Inspector Wahl stated that he conducted fifteen (15) inspections and issued eleven (11) building permits in September. He explained that he issued a Certificate of Occupancy for the Noble residence at 120 Salem Church Road. He stated that he had to double fee a contractor this month.

Councilmember Williams asked if the double fee was based on the fact that the contractor did not obtain a permit before starting work and Mr. Wahl responded yes.

Councilmember DeCourcy noted that in the past the Building Inspector had prepared an article for the Sunfish Lake Quarterly regarding the dollar figure of repairs that require building permits and what projects require permits; she suggested that it may be wise to publish the information for residents and also that Council may wish to increase the amount of money spent before a permit is required.

Inspector Wahl noted that current any project over $1,000 requires a permit and he did not support an increased in that amount. He explained that he has had problems during inspections for permits he has issued in another community and he prefers maintaining the current $1,000 amount for projects within the City.

Council asked that the Inspector prepare an informational item for the next issue of the Sunfish Lake Quarterly relating to permit requirements and he agreed. 

Council thanked the Inspector for his report.

b.       City Engineer:   Salem Church Road Reconstruction:  The Engineer stated that some of the punch-list work on the project has been completed and that washouts along the shoulder and inslopes of the roadway were repaired by the contractor and re-seeded. He explained that additional topsoil has been added to a slope in the west central portion of the project. He stated that the seed is starting to grow and should look good in the spring of next year. He noted that mailbox repairs and a few other items still need to be completed and that the project has not been finalized at this time. He explained that the assessment were approved at the last meeting and the Treasurer’s report identifies 24 of the 50 parcels prepaid the assessment amount; the remaining 26 parcels will be certified to the County prior to December 1 and will be placed on the property owner’s tax statement for next year.

Charlton Road Feasibility Update:  Engineer Hanson explained that this item would be discussed with the appraisal information item on the agenda.

Ballion State Plan review (348 Salem Church Road):  The Engineer stated that a preconstruction meeting was held with the contractor for the proposed improvements at 348 Salem Church Road.

Review of Surface Water Assessment Grant (SWAG):  Engineer Hanson explained that at the last meeting, Councilmember Williams suggested WSB review the grant information. He stated that the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) has submitted a request for proposal for their grant identified as SWAG. He noted this grant is for lake monitoring projects to collect sufficient data to confidently assess water quality of a lake and that priority is given to lakes not yet assessed. 

The Engineer explained that the grant is highly weighted to proposals with volunteer participation for water bodies located in the targeted areas. He indicated that it appears Sunfish Lake is within a targeted watershed; however, since it does not naturally discharge, it does not contribute to the Mississippi River and thus would not be highly weighted. He advised that the CAMP program currently being utilized on all three lakes within the City obtains the information that the SWAG grants requires and an application for the SWAG for these water bodies would need to identify water quality at different depths of the three lakes.

Engineer Hanson asked if Council wished to move forward with the grant application.

Councilmember Williams stated that in his opinion there is no point in proceeding with the grant application since the City is already obtaining the information via the CAMP program; he questioned if there was any additional testing of the lakes that would be required in the future where the grant monies would be needed.

Engineer Hanson explained that what the City is doing at this time meets the current criteria; he noted that if a future problem is identified by the MPCA that classifies the lake water as impaired, there would be numerous grants available at that time.

Mayor Park asked if the competition for the grants is statewide since the MPCA is a state agency. Mr. Hanson responded yes.

Councilmember Williams noted that most grants are statewide; he pointed out that Sunfish Lake does not have runoff that contributes to the Mississippi River since it has no natural outlet.

Councilmember DeCourcy commented that she does not see it as a waste of time to proceed.

Councilmember Williams noted that the City does not have a specific project in mind and if Sunfish Lake is placed on the list of impaired waters it would open up future grants. Engineer Hanson agreed and explained that the odds of being awarded a grant at this time are poor.     

Review of Streets:   Engineer Hanson stated he had completed a review of the City streets for necessary repairs. He explained that he did not identify anything as urgent during the review. He noted that shoulder maintenance needs to be completed next year on several streets.  

Public Works Activates Undertaken in the Month of September:   Windy Hill Road and Salem Church Road Sign Repair:  The southbound stop sign at the Windy Hill Road and Salem Church Road intersection was  knocked down and repaired.

Anticipated Engineer/Public Works Activities for the Month of October:

*  Project management for the Salem Church Road Reconstruction Project
*  Fall grading and maintenance of Charlton Road and repair of potholes

Councilmember Conant distributed photos of problem areas along Salem Church Road; 295 Salem Church Road – runoff; and the Lick Residence – holes. He noted the third photograph was of green netting that was used by MnDOT near his home for turf restoration.

Engineer Hanson explained that the driveway culverts were not cleaned as part of the improvement project and that he would review the culvert at 295 Salem Church Road to determine if the runoff was there previously or occurred as part of the improvement project. He further explained that the netting used by MnDOT is one method to re-establish turf; however, the method used for the Salem Church Road project was a spray tack with a seed and mulch mixture that works well on narrow shoulders.

Councilmember Conant encouraged the engineer to review the culvert at 295 Salem Church Road. Mr. Hanson stated he would do so and if it was part of the project he would take measure to clean it. He indicated that since it is on the north side of the road he is doubtful it was caused by the improvements.   

Councilmember MacManus asked if the City has the authority to require the property owner to clean the culvert and also if the property owner would be responsible to repair a collapsed culvert. Mr. Hanson explained that typically the property owners are responsible for cleaning culverts and repairing a collapse on their property and the City has the authority to require them to do so.

Councilmember Conant agreed that if the collapsed culvert clearly impacts drainage the City would require the property owner to fix the problem and they would be obligated to do so. Engineer Hanson agreed that the City has authority to require repair of a collapsed culvert; however, cleaning a clogged culverts is somewhat ambiguous.

Attorney Kuntz explained that the City would require cleaning of a culvert if the drainage impacts an adjacent property; he noted that it would benefit the property owner to maintain the culverts on their property although the City has no authority to require them to do so.
   
Council thanked the Engineer for his report.

c.       CITY FORESTER:  Interim Forester Nayes stated he did not issue any burning permits in September. He explained that he has been pruning and removing Buckthorn along Salem Church Road and will continue to do so through the fall months. He stated he had purchased safety equipment for the upcoming Buckthorn Bust on October 10 at Musser Park and that only those wearing appropriate safety gear would actually be using the chain saws.. He encouraged residents and Council to attend the event. He noted that he identified the wooded area adjacent to the meadow as most effective for removal. He noted that no chipping or burning would be done on site and that clipped branches would be left to decompose.

Councilmember DeCourcy asked if he had mowed the Spotted Knap Weed and he responded yes. She also asked if he would remove the grapevine that has infiltrated a pine tree at Harmon Park. Mr. Nayes stated he would take care of the vine.

Councilmember Conant questioned if there was Poison Ivy in Musser Park. Mr. Nayes stated that he is unsure but that he will educate the workers on the appearance of Poison Ivy; he noted that Poison Ivy should never be burned because the fumes cause blisters in the lungs if inhaled.

Council thanked the Forester for his report.

d.      PUBLIC SAFETY:   Chief Shaver was present and noted that the number of false alarms was lower this month. He commented that residents leaving town for the winter months should contact the Police Department with information on the dates and who to contact if a problem arises and request extra patrols for the property. 

The Chief noted that there was a fraud case this month due to identify theft and reminded residents that they should not place billing statements in their mailboxes for pickup. He also advised that he witnessed a resident burning on their property in September and that he would provide this information to the City Forester since no burning permits had been issued for that month.

Councilmember Conant requested an update on the recent accident involving a school bus at Charlton and Highway 110. The Chief explained stated that the driver of the vehicle sustained injuries, but the students on the bus did not require medical attention. He advised that the Highway Patrol is conducting an investigation to determine how the accident occurred.

Councilmember Conant asked if the Chief could provide an explanation for the deviation in the larger amount of alarm calls this year versus last year. Chief Shaver pointed out that 2008 was an exceptionally good year and that most of the alarms are based on weather conditions, workers in the homes and residents forgetfulness.

Councilmember Williams agreed that 2008 was an extraordinarily low year and that this year more closely reflects the usual amount of alarm calls. 

Mayor Park questioned if parking would be a problem on Saturday for the Buckthorn Bust. Forester Nayes explained that he had asked participants to park off the road near the meadow.

The Mayor asked if the Forester had informed Mr. Kampmeyer as a courtesy since his property would be most affected.  Mr. Nayes stated he had not contacted Mr. Kampmeyer, but that he would do so.

Engineer Hanson suggested that due to the recent rains it may be wise to test the ground before driving or parking in that area.

Chief Shaver stated he would work with the Forester regarding the parking situation.  

Council thanked Chief Shaver for his report.  

Councilmember Conant distributed a graph he had prepared relating to the City’s available cash reserves at month’s end from 2007 through 2009. He explained that two adjustments were made to remove the Salem Church Road Bond issue and the installation of a traffic signal at Delaware Avenue in November of 2007. He commented that in his opinion the graph indicates that the City has more cash on hand than necessary and that Council may wish to discuss possible investment options. He suggested that Council review the graph and be prepared to discuss the matter at a future meeting. He also suggested considering a per diem of $100 per meeting for Council as a small payment for their work and that it could be put in place for upcoming elected officials.

Mayor Park asked if there were any specific issues for Council consideration. Councilmember Conant responded no, but asked that Council be sensitive to the cash flow issue. He pointed out that expenses have remained fairly steady over the two year period and overall costs have not increased substantially which is a tribute to this Council. 

Councilmember Williams noted that when he was first elected there was a depletion of the reserves due to the powerline controversy and that Council has worked to build up the reserves.

Councilmember Conant advised that this matter came up during discussions with Treasurer Blair, who had spent time with him explaining the budgeting process and common budget practices for cities. 

Mayor Park thanked Councilmember Conant for the information.                       

6.   OTHER/NEW BUSINESS:      

 a.  Discussion of Appraisal Reports for Charlton Road Improvement Project – Tabled from September 1 Meeting:  Engineer Hanson explained that at the last meeting Attorney Kuntz presented the results from the two appraisal reports received outlining the cost to obtain right-of-way for the proposed Charlton Road improvement project . He stated that the estimated costs from the two appraisal firms were similar to acquire 33 ft. of right-of-way and that discussion of the appraisals stopped at that point to be continued to this evening.

The Engineer pointed out that there was a questioned raised that if there was a detailed plan for the improvement if    be less right-of-way needed. He explained that is a true statement that less right-of-way would be needed. He noted that there are two factors relating to that comment; if the road remains a gravel road the City would need the full 33 ft. of right-of-way and most likely the amount would not change substantially with a detailed plan. In his opinion he stated the amount maybe reduced by approximately $100,000, but not cut in half.

Councilmember Williams stated he raised the question after the last meeting and thanked the engineer for addressing his question.

The Engineer explained that in his opinion there would be more benefit and more of a reduction in the figure by using a curb section where a full ditch section was not necessary, such as adjacent to the Chase property and Paster property; he indicated that the appraisal costs may be cut in half if the curb sections were installed.

Councilmember Williams commented that it would still be a substantial amount of money.     

The Engineer offered to respond to questions.

Mayor Park commented that it appears that the project will not move forward with the projected costs that now include the right-of-way acquisition.

Councilmember Williams commented that it is clear in order to proceed with the project the City needs to obtain right-of-way and it is also clear that with the acquisition costs for the right-of-way the project appears to be cost prohibitive. He noted that a rustic road designation may not work for this road due to the amount of traffic, but that there may be other options. He asked what could be done in terms of grading or sloping the road to improve drainage without obtaining a full-width road.

The Engineer pointed out that the obvious issue that has been previously discussed is drainage; he noted that the vegetation adjacent to the road is dense and does not allow sunlight to reach the area for turf establishment. He pointed out that removing the dense foliage to allow sunlight or placing some type of rip-rap material in the ditch areas would improve drainage; he did not recommend the use of rip-rap due to problems associated with its use along a gravel road.

The Engineer suggested Council consider focusing on the worst drainage areas along the road and attempt to acquire right-of-way in those areas for installation of some type of improvement project. He stated removal of growth in those areas and turf establishment would improve the drainage.

Councilmember MacManus pointed out that the road does need gravel at this time and asked if it would be installed. She noted that the engineer had previously presented a road maintenance plan for the road and asked if he would continue with that plan.

Engineer Hanson explained that the maintenance plan was based on maintenance of a road that was well constructed and that Charlton Road is beyond that point. He stated and proposed every 7 to 10 years the City would build up the gravel and maintain ditches; however due to the condition of Charlton Road it would merely be maintaining it to its current condition.

Councilmember MacManus noted that the engineer had stated the road had not been maintained due to the fact the project was under discussion and that in her opinion it appears that the City may have lost some ground.

Engineer Hanson explained that the City delayed placing a substantial amount of gravel on the road due to the proposed project because it would have been lost with either type of improvement.

Councilmember DeCourcy asked if it would be feasible to pave the road from Highway 110 to the Church; she noted that she has received questions from several people regarding this matter.

Engineer Hanson stated it would be costly to install that type of improvement on such a short segment of the road.

Mayor Park asked if the project could be a cost-sharing between the property owners and the City and the engineer responded yes.

Councilmember MacManus commented that it would be unfair to assess all the property owners for such a small segment of road improvement.

Councilmember Williams asked if the City owns the full width of right-of-way near the church and the engineer responded no. Mayor

Councilmember Williams asked if crowning the road and improving the ditches in this area without putting down bituminous would help the road carry more traffic without deterioration.

The Engineer explained that because the road remains gravel the traffic would still cause problems such as potholes.

Mayor Park suggested clearing out the ditches along the road and creating more open areas. Engineer Hanson agreed that approaching the improvements by small segments of clearing the ditch areas would be good.

Councilmember MacManus asked if existing ditches could be cleaned. Engineer Hanson responded yes, but that the City would be limited to clearing the bottom of the existing ditch up to the road.

Mayor Park questioned how Council should proceed at this time.

Attorney Kuntz reviewed the proposed project costs, the amount of the bond issue and the proposed costs for the assessment and noted that the project was not petition by the property owners and therefore requires a 4/5ths vote by Council to move forward. He commented that due to the excessive costs it does not appear as though Council wishes to proceed with the project and therefore it would not be worthwhile to conduct a public hearing.

The Attorney indicated that Council has three approaches to follows; 1) to determine that the project is too expensive and decide to continue with past practices for road maintenance; 2) to continue with the current maintenance of the road and if one of the issues is that costs for standard road maintenance increase, Council could request the engineer prepare a 5-year projection for maintenance costs and assess any discrepancies to property owners; and 3) identify any changes such as bituminous improvement near the church or clearing ditches and prepare a 5-year plan and funding options to complete the identified projects.

Mayor Park asked for clarification regarding assessing the cost differential for road maintenance in the second scenario if it is above and beyond the normal to homeowners for a gravel road. Attorney Kuntz explained that if the City is investing too much for return of value they would have an option to assess for the additional costs.

Councilmember Williams commented that if Council determines that the project is too expensive the City would still be maintaining a sub-standard road. He agreed that the points made by the attorney are valid and that some people may question the costs of maintaining a gravel road. He preferred to review options 2 and 3 as proposed by the attorney. He indicated that the options should be discussed with the residents along Charlton Road.

Councilmember MacManus noted that the engineer presented a scenario to normally maintain a paved versus a gravel road over a long span of time and the end results were almost identical.

Councilmember Williams pointed out that the cost analysis prepared by the engineer was based on a properly constructed gravel road and not using the current condition of Charlton Road which is substandard; therefore generally criteria cannot be used. The Engineer agreed.

Councilmember MacManus stated she did not support spending any further money on reports.

Mayor Park suggested placing a timeframe on the study to forward a recommendation in a timely manner.

Councilmember MacManus stated she would not vote for any further spending.

Councilmember Williams asked how many parcels are proposed for assessment. Engineer Hanson responded 30 parcels identified for a potential assessment and 15 for easement acquisition.

Councilmember DeCourcy asked if easements would be needed to pave the road from Highway 110 to the church.

Engineer Hanson responded that there are three parcels that would require easement acquisition. He explained that if the people were in favor of the project it may be somewhat less costly to obtain the easements.

Mayor Park questioned if a task force were formed for a 30-day period to study the matter how costly it would be.

Engineer Hanson indicated that Council needs to determine a method to proceed prior to forming a task force.

Mayor Park asked if Council wished to think about the options and discuss the matter again at the November meeting. Council concurred.

Councilmember DeCourcy asked if the Hovey’s would support paving the road from the highway to the church and Mike Hovey responded yes; he pointed out that one of the properties is for sale.

Councilmember MacManus asked if they would be willing to bear the assessment costs for the project and she noted the project costs would be higher since it would only involve three parcels. Mike Hovey responded that he would have to bear the assessment costs for any project that occurs on the road.
Mayor Park asked if there were any further comments and there was no response.    

b & c.  Consider Deer Management Plan and Ordinance Ordinance Amending Article VI, Chapter 601.04 of the Sunfish Lake City Code Relating to Deer Management:  Attorney Kuntz explained that Council direction from the last meeting was that the City would seek a permit from the DNR to hunt after the season and that the culling would occur on public property at Musser Park. He stated that the park property would be cordoned off and warning signs posted. He further stated that the hunting would be done by volunteers on the property. He indicated that no hunting permits would be granted to any other persons within the City. He advised that he worked with Officer Muellner of the West St. Paul Police Department regarding preparation of the Deer Management Plan and that he would respond to questions relating to the proposed ordinance amendment.

The Attorney stated that he was unsure how many deer would be removed and he would defer establishing that number to the volunteers.

Mayor Park pointed out that the volunteers had indicated that there was a method to determine the number of deer to be removed.

Councilmember Williams noted that there has been nothing done to cull the deer herd within the last two or three years and most of the deer population is located within Musser Park. He supports adopting the ordinance amendment and eliminating the deer hunting season this year to accommodate the culling of the herd by permit. He asked if the City has the option to go back to issuing hunting permits or utilize both methods in the future. 

Attorney Kuntz responded yes.

Councilmember Conant moved adoption of Ordinance No. 2009-01 titled, AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ARTICLE VI, CHAPTER 601.04 OF THE SUNFISH LAKE CITY CODE RELATING TO FIREARMS AND DEER MANAGEMENT, seconded by Councilmember Williams.

In discussion, Councilmember DeCourcy stated she is adamantly opposed to bow hunting due to the fact that she has seen a deer in town with an arrow stuck in its leg.

Mayor Park pointed out that the volunteers present at the last meeting explained that with the highly technical bow hunting equipment they use that would not happen and most likely it was a child that was not using such equipment. Councilmember Williams agreed that with the high tech equipment the arrow would not remain in the deer’s leg; he indicated that in his opinion more problems may arise with sharp-shooters since bullets travel further than arrows. He also commented that he did not wish to see deer that have been injured by vehicles.

Chief Shaver agreed that the volunteer hunters are professionals and do not take chance shots at the deer. Mayor Park agreed and noted that the area would be more confined with this type of hunt since it is baited for deer.

Mayor Park asked if there were any further comments and there was no response. The Mayor called for a vote on the motion.

Motion carried. (4-0-1) (Conant, Williams, Park, MacManus voting in favor; DeCourcy abstained) 

Attorney Kuntz questioned the person that would be designated to pursue obtaining the Deer Hunt permit from the DNR and also noted that the Council had postponed  setting the number of deer for the 2009 hunting season. He suggested a motion be adopted by Council setting the number of deer at zero for the 2009 hunting season based on the fact that Council has determined they would prefer to use the volunteers to cull the herd.

After a brief discussion Councilmember Williams offered to work with the Police Chief and Officer Muellner to obtain the permit from the DNR for the volunteer hunt. 

Councilmember Williams moved to set the deer kill limit for the December 31, 2009 hunting season at zero with the exception of the deer taken by DNR permit under the Deer Management Program to cull the herd, seconded by Councilmember MacManus. Motion carried. (5-0)

d.   Consider Resolution Approving an Agreement Regarding Completion of Raingarden Improvements on Lot 1, Block 1, Angell Acres (Roe Property)::  Attorney Kuntz explained that the rain garden improvement for the Roe property have been completed and inspected by the City Engineer. He advised that Mrs. Roe has asked for a recordable document to memorialize the fact that the improvements were completed.

Councilmember Williams moved to adopt Resolution NO. 09-16  titled, RESOLUTION APPROVING  AN AGREEMENT RELATING TO COMPLETION OF RAINGARDENS AND RAINGARDEN IMPROVEMENTS ON LOT 1, BLOCK 1, ANGELL ACRES,  seconded by Councilmember DeCourcy and carried. (5-0)

e.   Consider Award of Snow Plowing Contract for 2009-2010:  Engineer Hanson recommended this item be tabled to the November meeting since he did not receive responses from all of the bidders.

Councilmember DeCourcy questioned who the contract was awarded to last year and Engineer Hanson responded Pine Bend Paving.

Councilmember Williams moved to table discussion of the bid award for snow plowing to the November 3, 2009 Council meeting, seconded by Councilmember DeCourcy.  Motion carried. (5-0)

The Mayor asked if there was any further business and there was no response.

9.   ADJOURN:           Councilmember DeCourcy moved for adjournment at 8:40 p.m., seconded by Councilmember Williams and carried. (5-0)

Molly Park, Mayor                                                 Catherine Iago, City Clerk