2004 03 09MOSES LAKE CITY COUNCIL
March 9,2004
6086
Council Present:Richard Pearce,Lee Blackwell,Brent Reese,Steve Shinn,Dick Deane,and Jon
Lane Absent:Ron Covey
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:Deputy Mayor Pearce led the Council in the Pledge of Allegiance.
MINUTES:Mr.Blackwell moved that the minutes ofthe February 6 - 7,2004 Council/staff retreat
be approved as submitted,seconded by Mr.Lane, and passed unanimously.
Mr.Deane moved that the minutes of the February 24,2004 meeting be approved as submitted,
seconded by Mr.Shinn,and passed unanimously.
^J APPROVAL OF BILLS.CHECKS.AND PREPAID CLAIMS
Action Taken:Mr.Blackwell moved that the bills,checks,and prepaid claims issued be approved,
seconded by Mr.Reese,and passed unanimously.
Vouchers audited and certified by the Finance Director as required by RCW 42.24.080,and those
expense reimbursementclaimscertified as required by RCW 42.24.090, have been recorded on
a listing which has been made available to the City Council.
Claims:The vouchers included on the below list as modified by the Council and noted upon said
list for the Council meeting of March 9,2004 for the funds listed below are approved in the amount
of $453,371.80.
GENERAL FUND $108,545.81 SANITATION FUND 94,707.02
STREET 36,276.04 AIRPORT 131.90
STREET REPAIR/RECON 189.90 AMBULANCE SERVICE FUND 4,139.77
EQUIPMENT LEASES 2,229.53 AMBULANCE DEBT SERVICE 614.26
WATER/SEWER 25,230.91 CENTRAL SERVICES 8,719.99
W/S CONSTRUCTION 98,355.58 EQUIPMENT RENTAL 61,227.46
W/S LEASES 1,022.65 BUILD MAINTENANCE 11,980.98
TOTAL $453,371.80
Prepaid Claims:Prepaid claimsapprovedbythe City Manager according tothe processestablishedby Moses Lake Municipal Code 3.42.030 and the internal control polic]
o
u
approved by the City
Council has been recorded on a listing which has been made available to the City Council.The
claims listed below are approved in the amount of$34.62 for all funds.
GENERAL FUND $20.36
WATER/SEWER 14.26
TOTAL $34.62
Claim Checks:Checks 22683 through 22854 issued February 23,2004 through March 4,2004
were approved for payment at the Council meeting held on March 9,2004 in the total amount of
$1„18$,341.02.
Payroll:The payroll issuedon February 27,2004 having been approved pursuant tothe rule ofthe
City Council set forth inMoses Lake Municipal Code 3.42.040, was paidby checks 33437 through
33491 in the total amount of $52,318.89.
Payroll:The payroll issued on February 27,2004 having been approvedpursuanttothe rule ofthe
CityCouncil set forth inMoses Lake Municipal Code 3.42.040, was paid by checks 33492 through
33497 in the total amount of $2,018.23.
PROCLAMATION
A proclamation declaring March 21,2004 as Pearl "Skip"Munson Day was read in its entirety.//JJ
PRESENTATIONS/AWARDS -None
CONSENT AGENDA
Resolution -Accept Donation -Samaritan Healthcare:A resolution was presented which accepts /a -O
$500 from the Samaritan Healthcare Foundation.The funds are for the Central Basin Traffic Task
Force.
Resolution -Spring Festival:A resolution was presented which approves the Spring Festival on /JJ./
May 27 -31,2004.
Security and Emergency Response Plan -Municipal Airport:The Security and Emergency /OOC?
Response Plan for the Moses Lake Municipal Airport was submitted for approval.
Mr.Pearce stated that comments have been received from the Fire and Police Departments.Herequested that the Council approve the plan as submitted and allow the Airport Commission to
review the comments.Any amendments to the plan would be submitted for approval at a later
Council meeting.
Ridgecrest Short Plat -Variances:Colombia Northwest Engineering,on behalf ofOlsen Homes,//Jo?
LLC,has submitted a preliminary plat for a nine lotshort platlocated southeast of the intersection
of Valley Road and Crestview Drive.The site is zoned R-1,Single Family Residential,and the
Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation is Low Density Residential.
6087
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES March 9,2004
The short plat fronts on Crestview Drive but will require the construction of Virginia Street and
Monarch Street to serve the 9 lots.Each lot will have frontage on Virginia Street.At this time the
site is vacant.Water,sewer,and other public utility infrastructure are availableto serve the site and
currently located in Crestview Drive right-of-way.Utilities will be extended within the Virginia Street
right of way to serve the lots.Each lot has a 5*minimum public utility easement along interiorpropertylinesanda10'wide utility easement alongstreet right ofways.Fire hydrantsare required
to be within 300 feet of any structure and at locations approved by the Fire Marshall.The Planning
Commission recommended that the following variances be granted:
1.Variance to the minimum tangent length of 100.00 feet for the roadway curve in proposed
Virginia Street,as required by MLMC 17.28.030;
2.Variance to the minimum usable depth of 100.00 feet for Lot 1,Block 1,as required by
MLMC 17.28.040;
3.Variance to the minimum road right-of-way at the north intersection of proposed Virginia
Street and Crestview Drive,namely a 10.00 foot radius return as required by MLMC
17.28.030 and require that the developer provide an easement ordeed for the area at the
south corner of the intersection of Virginia Street and Crestview Drive to accommodate
sidewalk,curb,roadway,and sewer main priorto the dedication acceptance by Council of
said area.
4.Variance to the requirement that the cul-de-sac at the east end of proposed Virginia Street
be constructed to city standards,provided that a bond,or other approved security,be
provided to the city to insure that the cul-de-sac consistent with Community Standards is
constructed within 5 yearsand provided thata municipal easement for the temporary cul-
de-sacshall be provided to the Municipal Services Department forreview prior to signatures
and priorto final plat approval.
Action Taken:Mr.Shinn moved that the Consent Agenda be approved with the stipulation that the
Municipal Airport Security and Emergency Response Plan be brought back to the Council within
one month,seconded by Mr.Blackwell,and passed unanimously.
COMMISSION APPOINTMENTS -None
CONSIDERATION OF BIDS -None
PETITIONS.COMMUNICATIONS.OR PUBLIC HEARINGS -None
ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS
IJLJ^ORDINANCE -CHAPTER 3.40 -2nd READING ^\
An ordinance was presented which amends Chapter 3.40, Auditing Officer and Voucher Auditing
and Certification, to reflect a simplified recording of Council action regarding the Auditing
Certification.
The ordinance amending Chapter 3.40 ofthe Moses Lake Municipal Code entitled "AuditingOfficer
ane Voucher Auditing and Certification"was read by title only.
n
\on
||53
Action Taken:Mr.Blackwell moved that the second reading of the ordinance be adopted,
seconded by Mr.Reese,and passed unanimously.
ORDINANCE -CHAPTER 2.08 -1st READING
An ordinance was presented which amends Chapter 2.08 by changing the meeting time of the
Council from 7 p.m.to 6 p.m.
The ordinance amending Chapter 2.08 of the Moses Lake Municipal Code entitled "Mayor and
Council"was read by title only.
Mr.Deane requested that consideration of the second reading of the ordinance be delayed untila
signed contract for the video taping of the Council meetings by the School District has been
received by the city.
Action Taken:Mr.Blackwell moved that the first reading of the ordinance be adopted,seconded
by Mr.Shinn,and passed unanimously.
ORDINANCE -AMEND 8.08 -1st READING
An ordinance was presented which amends the garbage regulations for the city.
The ordinance amending Chapter 8.08 of the Moses Lake Municipal Code entitled "Garbage '\
Collection"was read by title only.
Joseph K.Gavinski,City Manager,stated that information onthe new automatedgarbageserviceisbeingprovidedto the public through the newspaper,the city's new newsletter,and also from
Lakeside Disposal.
Bob Bemd,Lakeside Disposal,mentioned that converting the garbage collection to an automatedservicewillbegradualand noone will receive "A i_J '"'-AM Al '...--.**--
information on the service and the new cans.
service will be gradual and no one will receive the automated service until they have received the
i tr
\J
6088
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES March 9,2004
Action Taken:Mr.Blackwell moved that the first reading of the ordinance be adopted,seconded
by Mr.Lane.
Mr.Shinn felt that the rates should be reviewed in six months as he was concerned the Sanitation
Fund has an excess of funds.
Mr.Pearce mentioned that while there are currently extra funds in the Sanitation Fund at thepresenttime,the city could be hit with additional charges in the future.He recommended that
instead of reducing rates that additional services be provided such as starting a neighborhood
recycling program with a new chipper/shredder.
The motion passed unanimously.
ORDINANCE -AMEND 10.12 -PARKING REGULATIONS
An ordinance was presented which amends the parking regulations by prohibiting parkingwithin
5'of a garbage collection cart.
The ordinance amending Chapter 10.12 of the Moses Lake Municipal Code entitled "Parking
Regulations"was read by title only.
Mr.Bemd suggested thatthe ordinance be amended bydeleting"daysthe carts arecollected"and
adding "day ofcollection".
Action Taken:Mr.Blackwell moved that the ordinance be amended by deleting "days the carts arecollected"andadding "day ofcollection"and the first reading ofthe ordinance be adopted,seconded
by Mr.Shinn,and passed unanimously.
REQUEST TO CALL FOR BIDS -None
REFERRALS FROM COMMISSIONS -None
OTHER ITEMS FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
WATER/SEWER SERVICE -ABBOTT MAJOR PLAT
Jim Keyes,Columbia Northwest Engineering,requested approval to connect to the water main in
Westshore Drive inordertoserve the AbbottTvlajor Plat with citywater.Since the plat is in the city's
UGA,the Council should consider requiring the streets to be built to city standards.
Phil Bloom,Columbia Northwest Engineering,stated that it is not proposed to construct the streets
.,to city standards at this time because sewer is not being extended to serve the lots.Sewer is not
w^available at this time.He stated that the developer would be agreeable to covenants for future
street improvements.
There was some discussion by the Council.
Action Taken:Mr.Blackwell moved that the request to connect to city water be granted with the
stipulation that an Extra Territorial Utility Agreement be required and that a covenant also be
required for street and utility improvements to be constructed to city standards in the future,
seconded by Mr.Lane,and passed unanimously.
PARK MITIGATION FEES/ASSESSMENTS
The City Council directed staffto prepare an ordinance adopting park mitigation fees,which wouldbeassessedagainstnewdevelopmentthrougheithertheplattingprocessorbuildingpermit
process.These fees are intendedto mitigate the negativeimpactthat new development has on
the city's park system.The Comprehensive Plan does not identify parkmitigation fees or impact
fees as a financial source for funding future park deficiencies.The Comprehensive Plan wouldneed tobe updated to include a process for these types ofexactionsprior tothe Council having the
authority to adopt such measures.Samples of what other jurisdictions have adopted to address
the impacts of development on parks and open space were provided.One of the methods of
collecting a fee for parkimpactsis a "fee in-lieu of dedication"of land for park purposes. This is
done underthe provisions of RCW 58.17.110,Subdivision Approval,which requires the legislative
bodyto assess thatadequate provisions for public facilities and infrastructure,whichincludesparks
and open space,are in place prior to approval ofthe plat.
Gilbert Alvarado,Community Development Director,stated that until the city's Comprehensive Plan
is amended to address park fees,the city cannot pass an ordinance to require those fees.Ifit is
the Council's direction to collect such fees,that issue will be included in the nextamendment to the
Comprehensive Plan.The "fee in lieu of dedication"is provided for in a different area of state lawi)and itwas used for the Hayden development in the Knolls Vista area.The Parks and Recreation\~s Commission identified the areaas beingdeficient in parksandunderthose conditions,the Councilcanrequirethatthedeveloperaddresstheissue.It was calculated that thearea had a potential
for 754 lots and the Council ultimately settled on a fee per lot for park improvements.He pointed
out that this is not an impact fee.
David Spencer,President of Grant County Home Builders,stated that the state legislature is
dealing with impact fees through State Bill 6413.Home builders are working with the legislature
to try to move impact fees from platting or permitting process to the occupancy or final inspection
process so the developer does not have to provide those fees up front. He mentioned thatas areas
develop there is a need for parks and someone will have to pick up the cost.
Mr.Alvarado pointed out the impact fees are different from the in-lieu of fee.
/OA7
//bCe
/OU
6089
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES March 9,2004
Terry Brewer,Grant County Economic Development Council,was opposed to assessing these
kinds of fees for industrial areas.He pointed outthat the costofland acquisition,construction,and
associated fees determines whether or not a business will locate in Moses Lake.
Mark Fancher,Tomlison Black Real Estate,stated that a park fee is a tax and it is not something
the city should rush into. He felt the issue would need additional study before it could even be
submitted as an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan. He mentioned that additional fees are
not compatible with affordable housing,which the city needs.
Mr.Deane pointed out that the landscaping requirements were initially opposed but now it is
considered a good thing. He felt that park improvements were necessary to the future quality of
life in Moses Lake.
Mr.Alvarado pointed out that the March 31 date is simplythe date by whichthe Council has to
determine ifan amendmentto the Comprehensive Plan is needed.By the time allthe discussionsandtherequiredamendmentproceduresarecompleted,the ordinance concerning anyfees would
not be adopted tillat least December.
There was some discussion by the Council.
Chris Blessing, Tomlison Black, wanted to know ifthe fees for parks would also be required of
development in the UGA.
Mr.Alvarado pointed out that the city has no jurisdiction in the UGA and the county has norequirementforparkdevelopmentfees.He mentioned that the city has discussed park
improvements with the countysince theirComprehensive Plan makes no mentionofthem, butthe
county is notinterested in park development.Inessence then,the city is providing parks for county
residents.
Mr.Blessing stated that the city has a great park system and is currently well over the national
standards.He mentioned that the existing park system was constructed without impact or
mitigation fees.
Mr.Deane pointed out that the safety of children is such a concern at this time that parents no
longer wish to allow their children to travel two or three miles or even half a mile to a park, nor to
cross a major highway.That concern necessitates the construction of parks in close proximity to
a residential neighborhood.
Mr.Blessing stated that he is not opposed to parks, just the current proposed funding method.
Mary Ann Hopperstad, 1219 Skyline Drive,a realtor,stated that adding mitigation fees increases
the costofdevelopment and preventsnewhome buyers from purchasing ahome. She was infavor •-v
of parks butfelt theyare being underutilized because parents just donotlettheir children gotothe f )
park without supervision.
Bonnie Thompson,1311 Fairway,a loan officer,felt thatneighborhood parks arenotneeded. ShefeltthatthecityneedstoencouragebusinessesandincreasethegrowthofMosesLakebefore
considering additional parks.
Ralph Kincaid,899 Westshore Drive,realtor,mentionedthatthe park system is greatbut with the
emphasis on developing vacant land inside the city,an additional fee will encourage greaterdevelopmentoutsidethecity.He pointed outthata large percentage of home buyers are fromwithintheexistingcommunityand so those fees would be paid by existing residents.He alsomentionedthat65%ofthe population live in oneortwo person households.He pointed outthat
parents today do not lettheirchildrengo to any park unsupervised.
Leah Maygren,2424W.Marina,realtor,statedthat parents do not like to lettheir children goto
parks without supervision.She felt thatthe current park system isexcellentbut park mitigation fees
on development should be reconsidered.
Dennis Ferguson,511 Division,developer and builder,stated thatthe parksare greatbut sincetherearenoneinthecounty,the city residents are footing the bill for county residents who usethe
parks. He suggested that a park districtbe formed.
It was pointed outthatthe cityhas no jurisdiction toinclude property outsidethe citylimits ina park
district and at this time the county is not interested in parks.
Phil Bloom,Columbia Northwest Engineering,statedthat10 years agothe prime development wasoutsidethecitylimitssinceitwascheapertodevelopinthecountythaninthecity.The last 10
years the development has been mostly inside the city limits.He mentioned that if the cost to
develop inside the city increases over the cost to develop outside the city,development will once
again move outside the city limits./—v,
Mr.Blackwellfeltan overall planforparks forthe cityis needed before discussing how they should
be funded.
Action Taken:Mr.Reese moved that this item be tabled,seconded by Mr.Shinn,and failed with
Mr.Shinn,Mr.Reese,and Mr.Blackwell in favor, and Mr.Lane,Mr.Deane,and Mr.Pearce
opposed.
Mr.Dean requested that staff draftan ordinance dealing with park mitigation fees.
n
6090
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES March 9,2004
Mr.Pearce pointedout thatany parkmitigation fees are ultimately paid bythe property owner,notthe developerand not the city.The question is who should pay-existing property owners orpropertyownersinnewlydevelopedareasthatrequireparkimprovements.He mentioned thaton
the west side of the state, developers found that amenities provided by assessing impact fees
causedtheir property to sell faster.He pointed outthattherearegood reasons for a park mitigation
fee.
There was some discussion by the Council.
ActionTaken:Mr.Dean requested staff draftan ordinance dealing with "in-lieu"fees for parks,
seconded by Mr.Lane.
^-^Mr.Lane felt that additional information on park fees is needed and that citizen input should be
solicited.
Mr.Blackwell felt that the survey previously conducted concerning parks should be taken into
account. He also feltthat a county-wide parkdistrictshould be investigated.
The motion passed with Mr.Blackwelland Mr.Shinn opposed.
Itwas the consensus of the Council that the Comprehensive Plan not be amended to include park
mitigation fees.
CITY HALL COMPLEX/CAMPUS -VISION 2020 /prfi
Maps were presented which showthe Civic Campus element oftheVision 2020 Plan,including a ////
possible location of the restrooms.
Joseph K.Gavinski,City Manager,also distributed information showing how the city could pay forthe proposed improvements to the Civic Campus area by using the same amount of funds the cityiscurrentlyusingto payoff existingdebt. Also in 2001 the Council was requested to considerapermanenthomefortheMuseumandArtCenterintheCivicCampusareawhenthecurrentrented
facilities come up for renewal.
There was some discussion by the Council concerning the location of the restroom.
Action Taken:Mr.Blackwell moved that the location of the restroom be accepted and staff be
directed to proceed with the project,seconded by Mr.Shinn, and passed unanimously.
u
Mr.Deane wanted to know what needs to be done to proceed with the new Civic Campus.
Mr.Gavinski pointed out that itis difficult to do anything untilthe funds are available.
There was some discussion by the Council.
Action Taken:Mr.Dean moved that staff move forward on the exploration of the Civic Campus
concept as proposed by Vision 2020,seconded by Mr.Blackwell, and passed unanimously.
PAVER PROJECT
A plan for the completion ofthe paver project overa four year period was submitted along with the
financial commitmentthatwould be necessary.
Joseph K.Gavinski,City Manager,explained the project.
Mr.Shinn stated that he would like to take care of the areas in need ofenforcementand take a look
at the rest ofthe areas in need of pavers in light ofthe city's financial situation.He did not feel the
city could complete the paver project in 4 years due to financial constraints.
Mr.Lane also felt that the enforcement areas need to be taken care ofand the other areas as the
budget allows.
Mr.Deane stated that itis a five year construction plan with a 14 year payment plan. He requested
information on the enforcement areas.
Mr.Gavinski stated that the property owners have been informed that their sidewalks need
replacement.These locations have been known tothe city for about1 Va.yearsandthe city has
some liability ifthe sidewalks are not replaced.The sidewalks have to be replaced with pavers
sincethey are in the paverdistrict established bythe Council.If the sidewalks arenot replaced,
the citywill need to investigate how to alleviatethose hazards.
Mr.Shinn requested clarification on whetheror not additional lightingwas included in the proposed;i IVH.v
v—'plan
Gary Harer,Municipal Services Director,stated that an additional 71 decorative lights would beneeded on Fourth Avenue ata cost of $105,000 plus $37,000 peryeartothe PUD.Those costs
were not included in the costs for the paverproject.He also mentioned that additional lights,not
the decorative ones,could be provided at the alley entrances to provide extra lightat this time.
Mr.Shinn suggested thatthe sidewalk onthe north sideof Chestnut,adjacent to Inca,maynotbe
conducive to paverssince the restaurant uses itfor a rear entranceand for their grease traps.
Itwas pointed out that paver maintenance will need to be done about every five years at a cost ofabout$650,000.
l^y.
//*?
Mb
6091
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES March 9,2004
Jeff Foster,324 S. Ash, stated that the city has approved the 2004 paver project in the 2004budget.He mentioned thatthecostofdoing this project will notbeanyless in the future and capital
improvements have to be done when required. He felt that the paver project needs to be done.
Ralph Kincaid,899 Westshore Drive,stated that the paver area was originally established to
provide for a uniform look in the downtown core. He pointed out that for the 2004 paver project
property owners were contacted to see if they wished to participate.Those property owners who
indicated an interest in the pavers have made plans for that and now,unless they are underenforcement,their property may notbe done.He felt the city has made a commitmentfor thosepeoplewho have signed up and they should be included in the next paver project.
Mr.Blackwell felt that the city has a commitment to continue with the paver project and he was /*"\
agreeableto the four year plan.''
Mr.Gavinski stated that a letter has been received from Vision 2020 and their downtown design
committee feels the pavers are important but they pointed out that there are elements that also
need to be considered such as the main street signature element,design standards,and the
waterfront.
Mr.Blackwell pointed out that the Vision 2020 has discussed the signature element and has come
to no consensus,the design standards are a city function,and the waterfront improvements consist
of removing the railroad which will take years to accomplish.That only leaves the paver project.
There was some discussion by the Council.
Mr.Gavinski pointed out thatthe Council has already approved a project in the amount of $1.6
million but staff does not have the ability to do that large of a project,along with all the other
projects,in one year.
Action Taken:Mr.Reese moved that the paver project be reduced to what can be done by
engineering with an approximate cost of $1 million,seconded by Mr.Blackwell,and passed
unanimously.
Action Taken:Mr.Blackwell moved that the submitted plan for paver projects be approved.Motion
died for lack of second.
Mr.Harer stated that all the property under enforcement is included inthe 2004 paver project,the
cost of which is under $1 million.Since the Council has authorized a $1 million project,he
requested clarification on whether or not Mr.Foster's property is to be included in the 2004 project.
The inclusion of Mr.Foster's property willbring the project up to $1 million.
Itwas the consensus that Mr.Foster's property should be included in the project.>^-v
There was some discussion on whether or not decorative lights should be included in the project.
Action Taken:Mr.Blackwell moved that decorative lighting be included on Fourth Avenue as part
of the paver project,seconded by Mr.Shinn,and passed unanimously.
NON-AGENDA ITEMS AND PUBLIC QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS
AMBULANCE SERVICE
Pat Hochstatter,GrantCounty Fire District #5,distributed a letteroutlining theirproposal to resolve
the differences between Grant County Fire District #5 and the city concerning the ambulance
service.
There was some discussion by the Council.
Action Taken:Mr.Lane moved that the proposal in the letter be rejected,seconded by Mr.
Blackwell.
Mr.Shinn felt thatsome ofthe proposals in the letter should be discussed but objected to their
contention that an answer by Friday is required.
Mr.Blackwell stated that the city has followed the proper procedures in trying to resolve this issue
and felt the letter is not appropriate.
Joseph K.Gavinski,City Manager,stated thatthe cityis waiting for a response from GrantCounty
Fire District #5 based upon the mediator's report that came from the meeting in January.
The motion passed with Mr.Shinn opposed.
COUNCIL QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS
HEALTHY COMMUNITIES
Mr.Blackwell stated that he will be attending a meeting dealing with assessments and audit
instruments forwalkabilityand bikabilityin communities.
COUNCIL TRAVEL -GUNPO.SOUTH KOREA .
Mr.Blackwell stated that GrantCounty Economic Development Council will be traveling to GunpoCity,South Korea from April 23to30. The EDC will pick up half thecost for him totravel to South
Korea ifthe city will pick up the remainder of the cost.
n
6092
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES March 9,2004
There was some questionofwhetheror notthe city could legally contribute tothe expenses ofthis
trip.
James A.Whitaker,City Attorney,stated that if there isa benefittothe city in furtherance ofsomeplanofthecityanditisanofficialfunction,the city can participate.At this time,beyond a possible
Sister City relationship,there is no official city tieto Gunpo City,South Korea.
Joseph K.Gavinski,City Manager,stated that in the past there has been some criticism ofspendingcitymoneyonSisterCityfunctions.He felt that an expenditure of this type would be
criticized by an auditor.
<-J CITY MANAGER REPORTS AND COMMENTS
DEPARTMENT DIRECTORS PRESENTATION SCHEDULE
Joseph K.Gavinski,City Manager,distributed a list ofdates for presentations by the Department
Directors before the Council.
WIRELESS CONNECTIONS
Joseph K.Gavinski,City Manager,distributed information on wireless internet service as the cityislookingintothepossibilityofprovidingthat service as part of the downtown redevelopment
project.
SALES TAX/TRANSIENT RENTAL INCOME
Joseph K.Gavinski,City Manager,reported that the city received $295,492.40 in sales taxand
$13,896.91 in transient rental income in February 2004.
INVESTMENT REPORT
The investment report shows that the city received $23,819.61 ininvestment incomefor February
2004.
SELF-HELP FUNDS
Joseph K.Gavinski,City Manager,presented a report on the city's self-help funds.Due to a
change in the law,the city could budget up to $31,460 in self-help funds.The city has only
budgeted $25,000 and currently has committed $13,000 of that to the BMX Track development.
He mentioned that if the Rotary Club wished to use the self-help funds for their handicapped
playground equipment project, the Rotary Clubwould have todo the project. Atthis timethe Rotary
Club is donating the funds and the city is doing the pj-Qje^t.
The regular meeting was adjourned at 10:45 p.m.
ATTE^f:FSchard Pearce,Deputy Mayor
%n
onald R.Cone,Finance Director
>j(