Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-10-14 Charter MinutesCharter Commission April 10, 2014 Page 1 1 APPROVED 1 CITY OF LINO LAKES 2 CHARTER COMMISSION 3 4 5 DATE April 10, 2014 6 TIME STARTED 6:30 p.m. 7 TIME ENDED 9:51 p.m. 8 MEMBERS PRESENT Aldentaler, Bartsch, Bretoi, Combs (arrived at 7:50 9 p.m.), Dahl, Damiani, Lyden, Poehling, Storberg, 10 Sutherland, Timm, Penn, Turcotte, and Helgemoe 11 MEMBERS EXCUSED Johnson 12 MEMBERS UNEXCUSED None 13 STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT City Clerk Julie Bartell and Charter Commission 14 Attorney Karen Marty 15 OTHERS PRESENT: Council Members Dale Stoesz, resident Dean 16 Hausladen, Ryan Howard of Quad Press, and Mayor 17 Jeff Reinert 18 19 20 CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL 21 Chair Sutherland reconvened the meeting of the Lino Lakes Charter Commission at 6:30 p.m. on 22 April 10, 2014. 23 24 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 25 Chair Sutherland lead the Pledge of Allegiance. 26 27 SETTING THE AGENDA 28 Chair Sutherland advised of a letter available to coincide with agenda Item 6A. She asked that 29 Members updated their contact information. She also advised of a new method for making 30 motions in order to obtain the motion accurately. 31 32 Commissioner Dahl requested to add an item to the agenda to be considered as Item B2, Road 33 Email Presentation by Commissioner Dahl. 34 35 MOTION by Commissioner Penn, seconded by Commissioner Dahl, approving the April 10, 36 2014 agenda as amended. 37 38 Motion passed unanimously. 39 40 OPEN MIC/PUBLIC COMMENT 41 Dean Hausladen asked the Commission to do additional study before wasting any additional time 42 discussing a matter he believes is unnecessary. He referenced other cities that have made 43 changes to their Charter which were not beneficial and which he believed would also cause an 44 Charter Commission April 10, 2014 Page 2 2 increase to taxes. He stated that while he does not believe that the Charter amendment is 45 necessary he does acknowledge that the roads to need to be improved. 46 47 APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES 48 Chair Sutherland asked for corrections to the January 9, 2014 regular meeting minutes. She 49 noted line 51 through 54, noting that corrections were made to the October draft minutes and 50 therefore had been inserted in the draft minutes. 51 52 MOTION by Commissioner Timm, seconded by Commissioner Aldentaler, approving the 53 meeting minutes of January 9, 2014 as presented. 54 55 Motion passed 11-0-2. (Penn and Poehling abstained) 56 57 Chair Sutherland asked for corrections to the March 24, 2014 special meeting minutes. She 58 noted on lines 33-35 it should state, “…Turcotte, make a proposal to the City Council requesting 59 funds to cover the services per estimate provided by Attorney Marty for consulting on the 60 proposed amendments put together a request to the Council for $4,000 to continue the potential 61 review and changes to one of the two proposed amendments.” On line 37, it should state, “Chair 62 Sutherland abstained.” On lines 42-44, it should state, “…Bretoi suggested to move the joint 63 agenda item of discussing “vision of success” with the City Council to the July regular meeting 64 and obtain clarification as to the nature of the meeting postpone the agenda item around the 65 discussion of a quote “vision for success” with the Council to July 10th and that agenda item 66 would not exceed one hour.” On line 46, it should state, “Chair Sutherland abstained.” 67 68 MOTION by Commissioner Timm, seconded by Commissioner Penn, approving the special 69 meeting minutes of March 24, 2014 as amended. 70 71 Further discussion: Commissioner Dahl stated that she would like to review the changes and 72 asked that the vote be tabled until she could have additional time to review the changes. 73 74 Chair Sutherland asked if Commissioner Dahl would like to listen to the recording. 75 76 Commissioner Lyden provided his written notes on the motion that he made during the meeting. 77 78 The City Clerk provided input. 79 80 Chair Sutherland explained that the new process for submitting motions will help to alleviate 81 these issues in the future. 82 83 Commissioner Dahl noted on line 52 it should state, “MOTION by Commissioner Timm Lyden , 84 seconded by Commissioner Dahl Bretoi, to…” 85 86 Motion passed 9-2-1. (Turcotte, Dahl, and Bretoi opposed) (Helgemoe abstained) 87 88 UNFINISHED BUSINESS 89 Charter Commission April 10, 2014 Page 3 3 90 A. Action from March 24, 2014 Motion: Fund Request to Council 91 Chair Sutherland stated that her interpretation of the motion was to take the funding estimate to 92 the Council, which was $600, compared to the $4,000 that had been in the amended motion. She 93 advised that the $600 was approved by the City Council and explained that the decision would be 94 of the Charter Commission whether to accept the $600 or to deny the funds and bring the request 95 for $4,000 back to the City Council. 96 97 MOTION by Commissioner Timm, seconded by Commissioner Penn, that the Charter 98 Commission accept the $600 that was authorized by the City Council for this purpose and reserve 99 the right to re-approach the Council for an additional $3,400 for this purpose. 100 101 Further discussion: Commissioner Turcotte did not believe that this option should be exercised, 102 as he believed the intent of the Charter Commission was to request the full $4,000 to review the 103 amendments. 104 105 Chair Sutherland stated that the Charter Commission can either decide to accept the $600 to 106 allow Attorney Marty to continue to work on this issue or the Commission can deny the funds 107 and make a request for $4,000. 108 109 Commissioner Lyden stated that when he proposed the $4,000 he believed that to be a reasonable 110 amount to request. He noted that anything not used would not be spent. 111 112 Chair Sutherland acknowledged that this was her mistake. 113 114 Motion passed 7-6 (Aldentaler, Damiani, Bretoi, Lyden, Turcotte and Dahl opposed) 115 116 B. Action from March 24, 2014 Motion: Joint Agenda Item for July 10, 2014 Meeting 117 Chair Sutherland stated that when she met with the City Council they were willing to the joint 118 agenda item for the July 10, 2014 meeting, forgoing the facilitator. She explained that the 119 Council would like to focus on how the two bodies can communicate more effectively and the 120 meeting would exclude discussion regarding the amendment. She confirmed that this agenda 121 item would be one hour in length in addition to the regular meeting of the Charter Commission. 122 123 124 B2. Road Email Presentation from Commissioner Dahl 125 Commissioner Dahl provided a copy of email communication between herself and City 126 Community Development Director Michael Grochala where she had requested a list of 127 Minnesota State Aid (MSA) roads within the City and he provided that information. She 128 referenced the timeline of repairs listed and did not believe that the roads are holding up as well 129 as they should be. She believed that MSA roads are only allowed to be repaired using MSA 130 funds. She believed that she needed additional information on the roads listed for repair and the 131 designation of MSA. 132 133 Charter Commission April 10, 2014 Page 4 4 Chair Sutherland confirmed that Commissioner Dahl wanted clarification on why MSA roads are 134 included on this list. She also noted that the last full reconstruction of an MSA road was ten 135 years ago and questioned where those funds are. 136 137 Commissioner Lyden explained that there will be different methods for fixing different roads. 138 He acknowledged that some of the roads are MSA roads. He referenced a financial report that he 139 was able to find online dated December 31, 2012 that specified that the MSA fund balance was 140 $5,000,000. He stated that if the MSA funds were used to fix residential roads, about five miles 141 of roads could be fixed. He advised that the City can also bond and use other creative financing 142 to fix the roads. He advised that bond funds were used to purchase recreational land. He 143 believed that if the reconstruction of the Shenandoah neighborhood roads were included on the 144 ballot that question would be approved the next year. 145 146 C. Discussion of City Council Proposed Charter Amendments 147 Chair Sutherland advised that included in the Commission packet were the proposed Charter 148 amendments as discussed at the special meeting of March 24, 2014. She stated that the City 149 Clerk was able to provide timeline references for the Commission as requested to better 150 understand the timing allowed for review. 151 152 The City Clerk provided additional information from the County regarding the process for 153 Charter amendment elections. She noted that amendments can be requested by the City Council, 154 by citizen petition, by the Charter Commission by Ordinance, and for the Charter Commission by 155 election. She reviewed the timeline, noting that the 60 day review period will expire on May 156 12th, and advised that the Charter Commission can either make a decision by that time or pass a 157 resolution requesting an additional 90 days for review. She explained that if the 90-day review 158 period is requesting the definitive deadline would be August 11th. She advised that the City 159 Council would then have approximately 11 days to submit the official language for ballot 160 election to the County by August 22nd. She explained that if the Charter Commission wished to 161 request an amendment of their own to the Charter, the deadline for language submittal to the City 162 would be July 8th. 163 164 Commissioner Dahl Charter requested additional information on the option for the Charter 165 Commission to pass an amendment by ordinance. 166 167 The City Clerk explained the process and provided an example that took place the previous year, 168 noting that unanimous vote of all Charter Commission members and City Councilmembers 169 would be necessary to pass an amendment by ordinance. She noted that registered voters could 170 still request a referendum on the amendment by bringing forth a petition that meets the minimum 171 number of signatures. 172 173 Commissioner Penn questioned if Attorney Marty would be providing her recommendations on 174 the amendments to the Commission. 175 176 Attorney Marty stated that she could review strengths and weaknesses of each amendment, 177 noting that she does have some reservations on each amendment. She referenced amendment 3-178 Charter Commission April 10, 2014 Page 5 5 14, which was described to be the existing Charter with a slight change to allow overlays. She 179 stated that she found the amendment to be more extensive than that. She stated that while she 180 does like the additional definitions, she also found conflicting information between different 181 sections 8.01.4 and 8.02.1. She explained that the proposed changes to section 8.02.1 would 182 create a strange combination of State law and the Charter and reviewed differences between the 183 Charter and the process identified under State law. She referenced subdivision four and noted 184 that the amendment would allow the City Council to adopt the resolution ordering the local 185 improvement at any time after six months of the date of the hearing, whether objection is made 186 or not. 187 188 Chair Sutherland stated that the Council would still have the ability to vote and move forward on 189 an improvement even if objection is made at the hearing. 190 191 Attorney Marty confirmed that the Council could simply adopt the item. She continued to review 192 differences between the existing Charter and the amendment, noting that she would simply like 193 to alert the Commission to the proposed changes so they could be better informed. She 194 referenced proposed amendment 4-14 explained that rather than having the provisions and 195 definitions pulled out front this amendment basically rewrites the Charter. She referenced one 196 specific change, which states that street reconstruction and bituminous overlays may be done. 197 She explained that street reconstruction is very expensive. 198 199 Chair Sutherland stated that a main concern of the Commission was that there are a considerable 200 amount of residents that have their own septic and well systems that do not want to be in the 201 situation where they are forced to upgrade to City services simply because of a street 202 reconstruction project. She questioned if that situation would occur as these amendments are 203 written. 204 205 Attorney Marty stated that there is not language included that addresses connection to City 206 utilities. She advised that the item could be included in an ordinance of this nature but advised 207 that was not included in this ordinance. 208 209 Commissioner Combs arrived. 210 211 Commissioner Bretoi questioned if there is language that defines road reconstruction. 212 213 Attorney Marty stated that street reconstruction has a generally understood meaning. She stated 214 that perhaps the residents would like a definition of a scope of a project to specify simply the 215 street and not additional items such as utilities or a trail. 216 217 Commissioner Turcotte questioned if there is language included in the current Charter that would 218 include reconstruction of roads. 219 220 Attorney Marty explained that the standard assessment process cannot be followed and therefore 221 the Charter provision has to be followed which could be voted down on the ballot. She 222 explained that a special assessment is completed for reconstruction because the adjacent 223 Charter Commission April 10, 2014 Page 6 6 homeowners are provided a larger benefit. She advised that roads can be constructed between 18 224 and 66 feet in width, noting that MSA roads would have specific standards. She was not aware 225 of a State law that would specify street width. She noted that cities adopt ordinance that specifies 226 street widths but noted that variances can be issued. 227 228 Commissioner Storberg questioned which amendment would be better for the Charter 229 Commission and Lino Lakes residents and whether additional language should be added to the 230 existing Charter to allow for road projects. 231 232 Attorney Marty stated that it appears the main issue that comes back is that some residents really 233 want to see roads improved while others are afraid that the City would be able to overbuild 234 roadways. She noted that there is nothing included in these amendments that deal with that issue 235 and advised that it appears the existing Charter is overkill as it is pretty easy to stop any project. 236 She stated that this Charter is not all that different from other Charters and does not make it 237 harder to bond but simply makes the bonds more expensive. She confirmed that bonding would 238 be an option under the existing Charter. She believed that amendment 3-14 would be closer to 239 the existing Charter than 4-14. She stated that if the Commission wished to move forward with 240 amendment 4-14, she would recommend changes to the proposed language. 241 242 Commissioner Lyden stated that his opinion is that government should exist to serve the people. 243 He acknowledged that while road improvement is needed, he also believed that MSA funds and 244 bonding could be used to repair roads as well as street reconstruction bonds and utility bonds. 245 He explained that these methods could be utilized without requesting a vote of the people. 246 247 Attorney Marty confirmed that there are a lot of tools that could be used to repair roads under 248 State law that exist in conjunction with the current Charter. She explained that the current 249 Charter would provide a lot of protection as to what could occur and would provide the 250 maximum amount of protection from taxes being raised but noted that a compromise could 251 probably be made. 252 253 Commissioner Bretoi referenced the proposals that were brought forward by the Charter 254 Commission in 2007 and asked the opinion of Attorney Marty on those changes. 255 256 Attorney Marty noted that the proposed changes in 2007 did clarify chapter eight. 257 258 Commissioner Bretoi stated that it was his opinion that in the past several years the City Council 259 has brought forward several amendments and asked to review them under duress and without 260 appropriate legal review. He stated that after review when the Commission did provide 261 appropriate comment to the Council proposals the language was not accepted. He did not believe 262 that these amendments should be considered and instead believed the Commission should review 263 the work completed in 2007. 264 265 Attorney Marty stated that the proposed amendments and the current Charter do not have the 266 balance that would allow a project to move forward without inclusion on the ballot, if properly 267 defined, wanted, and if special assessments were within an acceptable range. She believed that 268 Charter Commission April 10, 2014 Page 7 7 the Council may be in agreement with that language that would also work with the intent that 269 road projects not be forced. She suggested keeping part of amendment 3-14 and amending 270 certain parts; keeping provisions one, two, three and changing provision four. She was unsure 271 the remaining provisions would be needed and instead would add the additional option 272 mentioned. She confirmed that the language between the current Charter and amendment 3-14 273 could be merged along with the discussion mentioned. She confirmed that she could also review 274 the work from the Charter Commission in 2007. 275 276 Commissioner Bartsch questioned if a neighborhood could request bonding for a road 277 improvement through a request to the City Council. 278 279 Attorney Marty confirmed that would be an allowable option under the existing Charter. 280 281 Commissioner Lyden questioned if there is a format to ask additional legal questions should 282 Commissioners think of them after the meeting. 283 284 Attorney Marty stated that typically it is best to funnel questions through one person to ensure 285 that there are not duplicate questions being asked to her. 286 287 MOTION by Commissioner Storberg to instruct Attorney Marty to research additional 288 information that the Charter Commission could use to draft a proposed amendment that would 289 allow street reconstruction as discussed without requiring a referendum. 290 291 Motion failed for lack of a second. 292 293 MOTION by Commissioner Timm, seconded by Commissioner Damiani, to extend the review 294 period by an additional 90 days to review the Charter amendments. 295 296 Further discussion: Commissioner Timm stated that the Charter Commission must make a 297 decision prior to May 12th or would have to extend the review period by an additional 90 days. 298 299 Commissioner Bretoi believed the motion should be contingent upon additional funding from the 300 City Council to fund the legal review that would be necessary. He stated that he would be in 301 agreement with treating the issues separately but did not want to spend an additional 90 days 302 reviewing this information if the additional funds were not approved by the Council. 303 304 Commissioner Timm explained that whether additional funding is gained or not a decision would 305 still be needed. She advised that if the review period is not extended tonight, the decision would 306 need to be made tonight on the amendments, as the Commission will not meet again prior to the 307 expiration of the 60 days review period. 308 309 Chair Sutherland confirmed that if the decision is not made to extend the review period a 310 decision would then need to be made as to whether to accept or deny the amendments as there 311 would not be sufficient time to craft alternative language prior to the expiration of the 60-day 312 review period. 313 Charter Commission April 10, 2014 Page 8 8 314 Attorney Marty stated that the Charter is not clear on what would happen if the Charter 315 Commission does not respond but advised that the typical response would be that if the 316 Commission did not act the Council would be able to include their amendment on the ballot as 317 they wish. 318 319 Motion passed 11-1-2. (Turcotte opposed) (Poehling and Bartsch abstained) 320 321 NEW BUSINESS 322 323 A. Researching Attorney’s for Future Frame and Amendment of Charter 324 Attorney Marty stated that it if the Commission chooses to move forward with her as an attorney 325 on this issue it would be helpful for her to meet with as many Commissioners that desire through 326 a special meeting to discuss the scope of the allowed special assessment projects in order to gain 327 additional input from the Commission. She stated that it may also be helpful to have an expert 328 on cities as well as special assessment and road projects. 329 330 Commissioner Storberg commended Attorney Marty for her work. 331 332 MOTION by Commissioner Penn, seconded by Commissioner Dahl, to express appreciation for 333 the work Attorney Karen Marty has contributed on behalf of the Charter Commission. 334 335 Motion passed unanimously. 336 337 Commissioner Poehling questioned the scope of work that would be included for Attorney 338 Marty. 339 340 Chair Sutherland noted that direction will be given to whichever attorney the Commission 341 chooses to move forward with. 342 343 Attorney Marty asked for any negative feedback the Commission may have should they choose to 344 move forward with another attorney. 345 346 Chair Sutherland explained that when previous amendments had been proposed by the Charter 347 Commission by use of Attorney Marty the City Council has denied those amendments and the 348 work has been called unconstitutional by other attorneys. She stated that perhaps another 349 attorney could assist in changing the atmosphere of review by the City Council. 350 351 Attorney Marty commented that she drafted what she was asked to draft without changing the 352 intent of the Commissioners. She noted that there will always be differences of opinion between 353 attorneys. She reviewed her career experience working internally for cities as well as externally 354 for cities through her private practice. 355 356 Chair Sutherland briefly recessed the meeting at 8:50 p.m. 357 358 Charter Commission April 10, 2014 Page 9 9 Chair Sutherland reconvened the meeting at 8:56 p.m. 359 360 Commissioner Timm referenced the March 24th special meeting at which time there was 361 discussion regarding researching options for alternate attorneys. She explained that the intent 362 was not to disrespect Attorney Marty but to simply investigate options. She stated that she did 363 visit the League of Minnesota Cities website, noting an item offering Charter Commission 364 assistance. She confirmed that the City is a member of the League of Minnesota Cities. She 365 reviewed the aspects that the League of Minnesota Cities could provide to Charter Commissions 366 at no cost. She advised that the League of Minnesota Cities will not advocate and will only 367 provide viewpoint neutral information. 368 369 Commissioner Penn stated that she was not able to find a specialty attorney. 370 371 Commissioner Storberg commented that the League of Minnesota Cities did not provide any help 372 to the Charter Commission in the past; noting that both the League of Minnesota Cities and City 373 Attorney are paid for by the City. 374 375 Commissioner Damiani stated that the Charter Commission only has 90 days to review the 376 amendment and did not believe there was sufficient time to also investigate new attorneys. 377 378 MOTION by Commissioner Bretoi, seconded by Commissioner Turcotte, to retain Attorney 379 Karen Marty as the Charter Commission Attorney. 380 381 Further discussion: Commissioner Penn stated that Attorney Marty has a tremendous amount of 382 history and for that reason could be a great resource for the Commission. 383 384 Commissioner Poehling believed that specific direction should be given to Attorney Marty. 385 386 Motion passed 12-2. (Poehling and Bartsch opposed) 387 388 B. Letter to the Chief Judge of the 10th Judicial District 389 Commissioner Timm provided corrections to the letter noting the title should state, “…the 390 Honorable Judge John C. Hoffman…” She referenced another section of the letter which 391 references the membership requesting the letter state after except for the last quarter, after a 392 Commissioner Zastrow past passed away.” She referenced the meetings section of the letter 393 noting that the April 23, 2013 meeting should be struck from the letter because the meeting was 394 canceled due to snow. She referenced the minute portion and believed that the language should 395 read “…a Charter Commissioner now records the minutes…” Under Commission activity it 396 should read, “The Commission requested secretarial services from the City Council. The 397 Council decided to pay for TimeSavers for two meetings in the year 2013.” She requested to 398 strike the last sentence from that section entirely. She also noted that the attachments referenced 399 should be included in the mailing. She noted that City should be capitalized in the first 400 paragraph on the second page. She referenced the five-year plan section and believed that should 401 read, “2013: no vote has been taken on the five year plan by the City Council.” She believed the 402 remaining statements should be stricken as this report is simply for 2013 and not previous years. 403 Charter Commission April 10, 2014 Page 10 10 404 Commissioner Helgemoe left the meeting at 9:20 p.m. 405 406 Commissioner Turcotte provided alternate language to include for that item and it was the 407 consensus of the Commission to amend the language as “2013 the City Council has not adopted 408 the five year plan.” 409 410 Commissioner Bretoi thanked Commissioner Timm for her efforts. 411 412 MOTION by Commissioner Lyden, seconded by Commissioner Bretoi, to submit the letter as 413 amended. 414 415 Motion passed unanimously. 416 417 Chair Sutherland confirmed that an amended version of the letter will be sent to the Commission. 418 419 C. Presentation of Proposed Charter Amendment – Commissioner Turcotte 420 Commissioner Turcotte stated that he would forgo the presentation due to lack of time but 421 wanted to gain consensus from the Commission that they will read the information submit in 422 order to present an amendment which could be placed on the ballot. 423 424 Chair Sutherland noted that if the Charter Commission wished to include language on the ballot 425 that information would need to be submit to the City by July 8th, which would be prior to the next 426 regular meeting of the Commission. She noted that a special meeting could be held. 427 428 Commissioner Turcotte stated that he reviewed different Charter cities and noted that most of 429 those cities are divided into wards in order to provide localized representation. He explained that 430 Councilmembers would be elected through each ward and advised that some cities have at large 431 positions as well. He believed that the Mayor should be at large while the four Councilmembers 432 would be elected by each of the four wards. He did not believe that accurate representation is 433 being provided on the City Council and believed that this method would provide more equal 434 representation. 435 436 Chair Sutherland confirmed that there are eight precincts. 437 438 Commissioner Turcotte confirmed that he would determine if the eight precincts could be 439 combined together to create four wards. He believed that Attorney Marty could then be directed 440 to prepare the proposed language for the ballot. 441 442 Chair Sutherland confirmed that July 8th would be the deadline for language for ballot 443 submission. She confirmed that the Commission would like to hold a special meeting to discuss 444 ballot language and potential amendments. She advised that she will poll Commissioners to 445 determine the best date. 446 447 Charter Commission April 10, 2014 Page 11 11 MOTION by Commissioner Bretoi, seconded by Commissioner Aldentaler, to schedule a special 448 meeting to discuss the issue of wards and time permitting to discuss the proposed amendments. 449 450 Further discussion: Commissioner Dahl stated that perhaps it would be helpful to have a 451 Subcommittee to further discuss the issues. 452 453 Commissioner Storberg questioned if there were additional funds for Attorney Marty and 454 TimeSavers. 455 456 Chair Sutherland noted that the funds have already been budgeted for the review of amendments. 457 She stated that she would have to double check with the City Clerk regarding the status of 458 TimeSavers attending a special meeting but noted that she would prefer to have TimeSavers 459 attend a special meeting. 460 461 Commissioner Poehling stated that the Commission already has two difficult amendments to 462 review and comment on and did not believe there would be sufficient time to review another 463 option in order to place the item on this year’s ballot. 464 465 Commissioner Dahl stated that this issue has been brought forward in the past but had never been 466 fully discussed because of other items that were given higher priority. 467 468 Motion passed 6-5-2 (Combs, Penn, Storberg, Poehling, Bartsch opposed) (Sutherland and Timm 469 abstained) 470 471 Chair Sutherland noted that she will use the same scheduling tool that was used to schedule the 472 previous special meeting. 473 474 NOTICES AND COMMUNICATIONS 475 476 A. February 3, 2014, RE: Pavement Management Program Process 477 B. March 3, 2014, RE: Charter Amendment/Street Reconstruction Plan 478 C. Street Reconstruction Plan, February 24, 2014 479 D. Lino Lakes Home Rule Charter, Updated January 13, 2014 480 481 NEXT MEETING DATE 482 Chair Sutherland noted the next meeting date is Thursday, July 10, 2014. She advised that up to 483 one hour would be used to discuss the joint agenda item with the City Council and the remaining 484 time would be used to discuss the regular agenda. 485 486 ADJOURN 487 MOTION by Commissioner Bretoi, seconded by Commissioner Dahl, to adjourn the meeting at 488 9:51 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. 489 490 Drafted by: Amanda Staple, TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. 491