|
|
|
COMMON COUNCIL ACTION
NOVEMBER 27, 2001
NORWALK, CONNECTICUT 8:00PM DST, COUNCIL CHAMBERS
|
ALL COMMON COUNCIL ACTIONS TAKEN AT THIS MEETING TO APPROVE EXPENDITURES AND CONTRACTS OR TO ACCEPT BIDS AND OTHER PROPOSALS REQUIRING THE EXPENDITURE OF CITY FUNDS ARE SUBJECT TO THE AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS. |
Prior to the meeting being called to order, Mayor Knopp swore in Councilman Kenneth Baker who was unable to be present at the Swearing In Ceremony last week.
The regular meeting of the Common Council of the City of Norwalk was held on Tuesday, November 27, 2001, in the Common Council Chambers, City Hall, 125 East Avenue, Norwalk, Connecticut. Mayor Alex Knopp called the meeting to order at 8:00 p.m. and then led the assembly in reciting the Pledge of Allegiance.
I. ROLL CALL
Betsy Bain, Jeanette Olmstead-Sawyer
Kenneth Baker, Christopher Perone
Fred Bondi, Kevin Poruban
Barbara Hudgins, Judith Rivas
Bruce Kimmel, Douglas Sutton
William Krummel, Peter Wien
Joseph Mann, William Wrenn, Matthew Miklave
Fifteen (15) Members were present at Roll Call.
There were none.
III. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
There was none.
IV. MAYOR
RE-APPOINTMENTS
HARBOR MANAGEMENT M/C NWLK CODE§ 69
JOHN T. PINTO Term expires 12/31/05
35 Winfield Court Succeed Lovejoy
East Norwalk, CT 06855
Mr. Krummel stated that the Harbor Management Commission was comprised of 6 Republicans and one Democrat. He went on to state the code requirements of the Members of the Harbor Management Commission and added that he felt the lone Democrat would be less lonely if the Council made a Democratic appointment. Moreover, he pointed out that Mr. Pinto’s term did not expire until the end of the year and he felt that more appropriate nominations could be developed. He suggested that Mr. Pinto not be reappointed.
Mr. Wrenn stated that since they had not caucused about this issue he thought the nomination should be tabled.
** MR. WRENN MOVED APPROVAL TO TABLE THE REAPPOINTMENT.
Mr. Mann stated that although he could relate to the concerns mentioned he felt that in the spirit of reaching out to all the citizens of Norwalk the Council should reappoint someone who had served on this Commission and had done so for quite some time. He added that Dr. Pinto had enjoyed his position on the Commission and wanted to continue. He remarked that this was the type of person that they needed, someone who was committed to what they did.
Mr. Kimmel stated that for several years he had watched partisan politics play a big role in who was appointed to what and he understood that there were some unbalances. He went on to state that his hope was that the Council would not look, unless the Charter required it, at the affiliation of a candidate (particularly those that were being reappointed). He remarked that this was being involved in the community and he had no problem with Dr. Pinto being reappointed. He added that he was hopeful through the natural process that they would be able to balance things out. He closed by stating that he would not want to deny a reappointment to someone who had been doing a fairly good job because he was a Republican and added that was the other side of the coin.
Mr. Bondi stated that Dr. Pinto had done a magnificent job during the years he worked on the Harbor Management Commission and he was in favor of his reappointment.
Mayor Knopp interjected that he had received a letter from the Chairman of the Harbor Management Commission requesting that Dr. Pinto be reappointed.
Mr. Wrenn stated that he would like to keep his motion on the floor to table this reappointment.
** MOTION TO TABLE THE REAPPOINTMENT FAILED WITH THREE (3) IN FAVOR (MESSRS. WRENN, KRUMMEL, MS. OLMSTEAD-SAWYER) AND TEN (10) OPPOSED (MESSRS. BONDI, KIMMEL, MANN, MIKLAVE, PERONE, PORUBAN, SUTTON, WIEN, MS. RIVAS, MS. BAIN) AND ONE ABSTENTION (MS. HUDGINS).
** MOTION TO REAPPOINT DR. PINTO PASSED WITH TEN (11) IN FAVOR (MESSRS. BONDI, KIMMEL, MANN, MIKLAVE, PERONE, PORUBAN, BAKER, SUTTON, WIEN, MS. RIVAS, MS. BAIN) TWO (2) OPPOSED (MESSRS. WRENN, KRUMMEL) AND TWO (2) ABSTENTIONS (MS. HUDGINS, MS. OLMSTEAD-SAWYER).
HARBOR MANAGEMENT M/C NWLK CODE§ 69
ANTHONY N. MOBILIA Term expires 12/31/05
47 Allen Road Succeed DePalma
Norwalk, CT 06851
** MR. KIMMEL MOVED THE REAPPOINTMENT.
Mr. Kimmel stated that Mr. Mobilia had been doing a great job and added that he also liked his work on the Commission.
Ms. Bain asked if a list could be obtained of the existing Commissioners so that the Council could review who was on each commission to ensure they were balanced when they made their recommendations and appointments. Mayor Knopp replied that a list had been distributed and it would be redistributed.
** MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY BY VOICE VOTE.
NORWALK HOUSING PARTNERSHIP M/C NWLK.CODE§ 59C
JUDITH RIVAS (D) Term expires 11/18/03
208 Flax Hill Road #18
Norwalk, CT 06854 Council Representative
Mayor Knopp stated that that the Statute required 2 members of the Council on this Committee.
** MR. MANN MOVED APPROVAL OF THE APPOINTMENT.
** MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY BY VOICE VOTE.
APPOINTMENTS
NORWALK HOUSING PARTNERSHIP M/C NWLK.CODE§ 59C
PATSY BRESCIA (D) Term expires 11/18/05
17 Appletree Lane
Norwalk, CT 06850 Public Interest Group Rep.
** MR. MANN MOVED APPROVAL OF THE APPOINTMENT.
Mayor Knopp stated that the Norwalk Housing Partnership recommended this appointment.
Mr. Krummel stated that he knew Ms. Brescia well and he felt that she would be a good addition to the Committee. He went on to state that the last he knew Ms. Brescia was a realtor and he thought that was her main job. He added that since he was aware of the Mayor’s concern that this type of situation be handled properly he was in doubt as to whether she would be appropriate to handle this appointment. He stated that it might be more appropriate for her to represent a business. He closed by stating that he understood the Mayor wanted Ms. Brescia to be on the Housing Partnership but he felt they should not sacrifice having someone in the public interest.
** MOTION PASSED BY ROLL CALL VOTE WITH TEN (10) IN FAVOR (MESSRS. MANN, KIMMEL, SUTTON, MIKLAVE, BONDI, PORUBAN, BAKER, PERONE, MS. RIVAS, MS. BAIN), TWO (2) OPPOSED (MR. KRUMMEL, MS. HUDGINS) AND THREE (3) ABSTENTIONS (MESSRS. WRENN, WIEN, MS. OLMSTEAD-SAWYER).
NORWALK HOUSING PARTNERSHIP M/C NWLK.CODE§ 59C
EDWARD BOWERS (R) Term expires 11/18/05
304 Main Street, #107
Norwalk, CT 06851 (Former Council Member)
Mayor Knopp stated that Mr. Bowers had given long service to the Council and he dealt well with the public and added that he had an interest in developing the Housing Partnership.
Mr. Krummel stated that he had the same problem with this appointment that he did with the other 2. He went on to state that prior to this meeting he had not received full information in voting and found that his copy of the Code was from 1990. He noted that he did not find where it accommodated Mr. Bowers’s nomination. He added that all he had was Mr. Bower’s resume and it did not tell him anything that was stated this evening. He closed by stating that he was not certain that a former Council Member could be reappointed.
Ms. Rivas stated that as she understood in reading of the Listing of Agencies an additional Member could be added as a former Partnership Member.
Mr. Kimmel stated that he never thought he would be in this position with Mr. Bowers. He went on to state that he and Mr. Bowers had their past differences in committee and on the Council floor. He also stated that he had the opportunity to be on Recreation, Parks and Cultural Affairs Committee with Mr. Bowers and it was clear that when Mr. Bowers was involved in something he did a good job. He added that if Mr. Bowers approached this appointment in any manner similar to the way he chaired in the past he would make a terrific contribution. He closed by stating that he would support Mr. Bowers’s appointment.
Mr. Mann pointed out that it was mentioned on Mr. Bower’s resume that he had served on this Committee since 1990 and he added that they had served on the Committee together. He stated that he knew Mr. Bowers was committed and would provide a valuable service. He went on to state that Mr. Bowers had been involved in a lot more than just the Council and he felt that type of commitment was something that was needed. He closed by stating that type of dedication was important especially in the Housing Partnership and he supported the appointment.
** MOTION PASSED BY A SHOW OF HANDS WITH FOURTEEN (14) IN FAVOR (MESSRS. MANN, KIMMEL, SUTTON, MIKLAVE, BONDI, PORUBAN, PERONE, WRENN, WIEN, MS. RIVAS, MS. BAIN, MS. HUDGINS, BAKER, MS. OLMSTEAD-SAWYER) AND ONE OPPOSED (MR. KRUMMEL).
NORWALK HOUSING PARTNERSHIP M/C NWLK.CODE§ 59C
BARBARA HUDGINS (D) Term expires 11/18/03
25 Chestnut Street, Unit 1-H Succeed Bowers
Norwalk, CT 06854 Council Representative
Mayor Knopp stated that Ms. Hudgins had a long history of service and had worked with many housing projects in the City.
** MR. MANN MOVED APPROVAL OF THE APPOINTMENT.
** MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY BY VOICE VOTE.
NORWALK HOUSING PARTNERSHIP M/C NWLK.CODE§ 59C
NATHANIEL L. YORDON Term expires 11/18/05
6 Weatherbell Drive
Norwalk, CT 06851 Housing Professional
Mayor Knopp stated that he was proud to appoint Mr. Yordon and added that he had a long community career in the City and had used his skills as an accountant. He went on to state that he felt Mr. Yordon would bring expertise to the Housing Partnership and he was one of the people recommended by the Partnership’s Director.
Mr. Krummel stated that he had the same problem with Mr. Yordon as he did with Ms. Brescia. He went on to state that although Mr. Yordon had served on 2 Housing Authority Boards he did not consider him to be a housing professional. He noted that there was one other person on the Board who was a housing professional. He remarked that he did not see where a CPA and an attorney qualified as one. Mr. Krummel agreed that he would be a good Member but he felt they were bending the code. Mayor Knopp interjected that he did not think Mr. Yordon was an attorney and Mr. Krummel said that he meant he was a tax accountant.
** MOTION PASSED BY A ROLL CALL VOTE WITH FOURTEEN (14) IN FAVOR (MESSRS. MANN, KIMMEL, SUTTON, MIKLAVE, BONDI, BAKER, PORUBAN, PERONE, WRENN, WIEN, MS. RIVAS, MS. BAIN, MS. HUDGINS, MS. OLMSTEAD-SAWYER) AND ONE OPPOSED (MR. KRUMMEL).
X. SUSPENSION OF THE RULES.
** MR. KRUMMEL MOVED TO SUSPEND THE RULES TO ADD THE APPOINTMENT OF COUNCIL MEMBERS TO THE MARITIME AUTHORITY.
** MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY BY VOICE VOTE.
** MR. KRUMMEL MOVED TO APPOINT MR. BAKER TO THE MARITIME AUTHORITY FOR A PERIOD OF TWO (2) YEARS.
** MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY BY VOICE VOTE.
** MR. KRUMMEL MOVED TO APPOINT MR. WIEN TO THE MARITIME AUTHORITY FOR A PERIOD OF TWO (2) YEARS.
Mr. Wien stated that he was honored to do this and he was interested in the Maritime Authority. He went on to state that the appointment came as a surprise to him so he was not certain what was involved. Mayor Knopp interjected that he would tell him later and added that the record should show that Mr. Wien was being drafted.
** MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY BY VOICE VOTE.
** MR. KRUMMEL MOVED TO REAPPOINT MR. MANN TO THE MARITIME AUTHORITY FOR A PERIOD OF TWO (2) YEARS.
Mayor Knopp stated that Mr. Mann had served on the Maritime Authority and they were anxious for him to continue.
** MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY BY VOICE VOTE.
B. REMARKS
Mayor Knopp stated that the Administration had been sworn in last Tuesday and the Council Agenda had to be compiled by noon of that same day. He went on to state that this seemed to him to be a one-time incident and he did not expect it to happen again.
Next, Mayor Knopp stated that he felt it was a good idea to invite representatives from PricewaterhouseCoopers to make a presentation this evening on the audit. He went on to state that he felt they could appraise the situation both as a Council and in relation to the Board of Education and the budget. He remarked that he felt this would be their first of several briefings. He noted that there was a special meeting of the Board of Education this evening to discuss the budget and there was another one scheduled for this Thursday. The Mayor said that the representative from PricewaterhouseCoopers met with Mr. Miller and Dr. Corda and then he in turn met with Dr. Corda.
V. COUNCIL PRESIDENT
A. CONSENT CALENDAR
There was none this evening.
Mr. Mann stated that he was pleased to present the representatives and noted that the Council did have a presentation from them some months back. He went on to state that they had done a fine job and it was important that the newer Council Members be brought up to date.
Mr. Henry Jones introduced himself as being with the Management Consulting Practice of PricewaterhouseCoopers. He also introduced Mr. Bob Sampieri and stated that he had 37 years of school business experience and served as the CEO of the Chicago Public School System as well as three other school districts. He then introduced Mr. Donald Wilks and stated that he had 25 years experience as an Engineer of construction school experience and Mr. James Keeley who had 10 years experience and was serving as a consulting engineer. Mr. Jones then announced that a handout was being distributed to the Body that they could use in following the briefing. He then proceeded to review the handout with the Members.
Mr. Jones explained to the Council that the purpose of the audit was to conduct an independent and objective analysis of the management and operational practices of the Norwalk Public School System in order to increase the District’s business efficiency and improve its operational practices. In addition, he said, the purpose was also to review the School District’s Capital Investment Program in order to make recommendations to the City with how best to proceed with its investment in the physical infrastructure of Norwalk’s schools.
Mr. Jones then covered the scope of the project and noted that they would provide short-term and long-term view projections of cost savings. He explained that they would review increased cost recommendations as well as reductions. He went on to explain that the audit would be used as an instrument by the system for implementation.
Next, Mr. Keeley stated that they had reviewed the Schools for the Millennium Study and part of that review was to look at the existing conditions of the schools. He went on to state that they had also been asked to look at any opportunities that might exist capitalizing the facilities as well as the Capital Budget process and its life throughout the process.
Mr. Jones stated that they had completed their interviews with school personnel including the Superintendent and the Assistant Superintendent. He noted that they had obtained 85% of the resource documents and they still had some to review. He remarked that this project had begun on September 17, 2001 and in December 2001 they would give their interim report on preliminary findings. He stressed that this would not be a final report or recommendation. He also remarked that they had interviewed personnel from the City to get a focus of the City side and School side duplication of services.
Mr. Jones went on to state that as they reviewed documents and had discussions with staff additional questions were raised. He added that they were in the process of getting answers to those questions. He noted that they had seen a lot of increases in payroll benefits and when they reviewed the budget document they saw many costs related to training and staff development but they could not get answers on how much had been spent. He explained that many of the Special Education accounts were co-mingled with regular accounts and they were pursuing to get answers.
Mr. Kimmel asked Mr. Jones to explain what "Position Control" related to and Mr. Jones replied that it was a mechanism to control cost. He noted that it would require that everyone here be authorized as they found it was not being utilized.
Mr. Keeley stated that they had conducted many personnel interviews. He explained that the span of control of the projects that the City was funding had the Board of Education as the customer of these projects. He then went on to list the positions of all the people that had been interviewed. He directed the Members to page 14 of the Handout where all the other activities they were involved with were listed. He pointed out that there had been extensive document review of the Jeter, Cook and Jepson Report as well as the Capital Budget and Operating Budget Request Report. Mr. Keeley closed by discussing the site visits that had taken place and lastly he mentioned the financial analysis that they had performed to monitor the Capital costs.
Mr. Jones reviewed with the Members what would constitute the final report and concluded by stating that this had been a quick overview of the study and what had been done to date. He advised the Council that he and the team members would be pleased to respond to any of their questions.
Mr. Kimmel asked how many Council Members had been interviewed by the Firm and Mr. Keeley replied that only one had been interviewed to date. Mr. Kimmel noted that if the Final Report were completed by February of next year it would give the Council the availability to use the information for the budget in the spring. He asked if it would be possible to have it a little earlier because according to City Charter serious decisions had to be made in January of next year. He asked if they could have the report by mid-January and Mr. Jones replied that they would do everything possible to accomplish that. Mr. Jones added that they would let the Council know where they were at in December and they would attempt to get the report to them by January. He remarked that they might be able to submit the facility piece first and said that he would report back either to the Mayor or to Mr. Miller.
Mr. Bondi left Chambers at 8:50 p.m.
Ms. Bain asked if anyone could clarify who was on the Oversight Committee. Mayor Knopp replied that the Oversight Committee had not been formed yet but they would be adding several Members of the Council to it.
Ms. Bain asked if she could have an elaboration of the 3rd bullet ("Analyze Programs and Services in Terms of Necessity and Responsiveness to the Norwalk Public Schools’ and Community’s Core Mission") on page 4 of the Handout. Mr. Sampieri replied that sometimes in public education there were operational activities that were considered core and some were considered non-core. He explained that core activities would be necessary for the operations of the classrooms. He went on to explain that when addressing the instructional needs of the students in the classrooms they often found that there were other activities that were nice and enhancing but they did not contribute to the effectiveness or the quality of the District. He added that in those districts that had substantial revenue this was not a problem but in those districts that did not, the rule was to omit them because they were not crucial and there would be cost savings in doing so. Ms. Bain asked who would make the determination of what was core and what was not and Mr. Sampieri replied that the governing body would make that decision. Mr. Sampieri added that the Firm would point it out but the Board of Education and the Superintendent would be the final decision makers.
Mr. Wrenn stated that he would follow up on what Mr. Kimmel had asked earlier regarding the interviewing of Council Members. He asked Mr. Jones if they were looking at how the Council Members were interacting with Board of Education Members and said that he would like to know the purpose of the interview. Mr. Jones replied that they were not looking at the interaction between the Members and Mr. Keeley commented that essentially they were talking to the entire range of people involved to understand the whole range of the Jeter, Cook and Jepson Report and how they arrived at their conclusions.
Mr. Bondi returned to Chambers at 8:55 p.m.
Mr. Keeley remarked that there was dual ownership of the process and they had looked at that to see if it was a smooth process or if it could be smoother.
Mr. Wien asked if there was a statistical skew of where they chose to visit and Mr. Keeley replied that the population was not large enough to have to deal with statistical measures. He added that they had based it on the Jeter, Cook and Jepson Report.
Mayor Knopp commented that it seemed to him that although the audit team had divided up an educational policy and a facility policy they sometimes overlapped. He stated that the problem the City had was the enormous cost of Special Education students because the District did not have the facilities for them under State Law. He noted that there had been a suggestion that some of the Special Education training could be done in the District but the previous Council had rejected it. He also noted that the City was not using their facilities to support them and he asked how the audit team would deal with these issues.
Mr. Jones replied that from the educational aspect of that issue they would identify the cost of Special Education by components and what the cost savings would be inside versus outside. He explained that next they would look at the inner relationship to great detail after today. Mayor Knopp stated that he felt it would be good information to have a figure on the cost of expanding special-ed classroom facilities and how this would produce a long-term savings in out of district cost per year, per student. He went on to ask about early childhood education and how the Sheffield -vs- O'neil desegregation case highlighted the fact that suburban towns have a higher proportion of pre-K children attending quality preschool versus urban district. This was one of the areas where they could expand services but prior Council refused to add a preschool lab and classroom to Brien McMahon High School. He asked how the audit team would address that.
Mr. Sampieri stated that the concept of the pre-K program nationally, when they had been properly installed, gave a fabulous statistical gain to these children. He added that there was no question that it had tremendous impact and this was one of those programs that worked. He remarked that during the interview sessions that they conducted on the educational side of the House, Norwalk has a pre-K program that was not meeting the total needs of the preschool population. He stated that he felt it would be advantageous to optimize the utilization of classrooms to this population and he also felt they would be coming back with that type of recommendation. Mr. Sampieri went on to state that it was a cost effective program and the gains of the students made it impressive as well. He said that they had interviewed staff members who were aware of these programs and the Firm had very experienced people.
Mayor Knopp stated that he agreed the City could not lose with this program and he added that this was Norwalk’s last opportunity to take these steps to have pre-K classroom space. He went on to state that if they did not do it now they might never do it and he felt it should be done.
Mr. Kimmel stated that his concern in the cost with Out-of-District placement costs and he remarked if it was assumed that the additional of space would solve the problem. He asked Mr. Sampieri if they have looked carefully at the reasons behind the out of district placements to safely conclude that creating the additional classroom space would provide an answer. Mr. Sampieri replied that they had not concluded yet and they were in the process of collecting the information. He explained that the drivers that spurred Mr. Kimmel’s question were what they needed to review. He went on to explain that they needed to look at the reasons clustered together in groups that would be appropriately served within a reasonable cost parameter. Mr. Sampieri noted then they could conclude and make a recommendation for pulling those classes back. He remarked that there were some cases that were so severe, so unique and so different that no public school system could provide the placement without going broke. He said that he had students whose total placement cost ran $50,000-$60,000 a year and there would be no way that they could pull them back.
Mr. Kimmel stated that with regard to core and non-core operational activities he would assume that the Firm would take the Mission Statement of the District and accept it at face value and work from that. Mr. Sampieri replied that was the basis from which they began the analysis.
Ms. Bain asked if any of the interviews conducted with City personnel were done with members of Corporation Counsel. She explained that her understanding was that in the construction phase a lot of work went through Department contracts.
Mr. Wilks replied that with regard to documenting change orders and their ultimate resolution in court they were looking at how the documents were structured to avoid court. He stated that it was his understanding that the Council had approved an architect for the Brien McMahon Project and it had been with Corporation Counsel for quite some time. He explained that some of the process of the contract was having it go to Corporation Counsel. He added that this was a procedural matter and as such he did not feel that the lawyers would be interviewed. He explained that everything was a handcrafted product and reliability was the part of the program. He went on to explain that was the difference between running a small and mid-sized operation. He noted that the procedure needed to match the sophistication of the contractors they were dealing with in these projects.
Mr. Keeley stated that to build on what Mr. Wilks said they would review and recommend the whole process of how the project should move from its initiation to the building of the school. He added that they would look at the whole life cycle and remarked that at the moment it was done one way and the organizational process was not there and more than likely it would have to be restructured.
Ms. Bain stated that although appropriate interviews had been conducted with City personnel, the other department that projects went through was Corporation Counsel. She added that since they were a definite player in the whole process her concern was that they should be interviewed. Mr. Keeley responded that they had not been but Ms. Bain’s point was taken.
Ms. Bain asked Mayor Knopp if it were possible to revisit the issue regarding a training lab in early childcare due to the fact that there was a critical shortage of providers in the City. The Mayor replied that he agreed. Mr. Kimmel commented that there would be a space available at Brien McMahon High School.
Mr. Kimmel stated that he was aware that the Firm had agreed to a fee of $475,000 for a specific scope of work, but he asked if they could find the time it would be helpful for them to identify an average amount of time that it should take a contract to go through the City. He added that if it was found that it took longer to go through Corporation Counsel than other cities perhaps there was a reason. He suggested that the Firm look at the type of contract that the City did and determine if it was substantially different from the type of contracts that other cities did. He wondered if they were being presented with large and small contracts that were too much for them to handle.
Mr. Wilks stated that they were looking into that. He noted that the interview process was anecdotal and they were looking at the hard copies that defined the process.
Mr. Wien asked what the other costs were involving Special Education and Mr. Jones replied that they included the transportation, which was where they were trying to get a handle on what the true costs were. He reiterated that they could not decipher the costs of special and regular transportation because they were co-mingled and they were looking to separate it out.
Mayor Knopp stated that with regard to the Final Report it was important that the Firm determine a specific recommendation to decrease costs through changes in various programs and to also recommend increasing costs where technology positions were needed. He went on to state that it would be reasonable that an audit implementation budget be developed to create an offset so that the Board of Education would not be competing with themselves. He added that then they could fund the increased costs with the cost savings. The Mayor said that it should be a mini budget and should be included in the audit so that the Board of Education would not have to fund an increase.
VI. REPORTS: DEPARTMENTS, BOARD AND COMMISSIONS
There was no report.
VII. COMMON COUNCIL COMMITTEES
Mayor Knopp advised that since the next Council Meeting would be held in 2 weeks he would encourage the Chairs of the various committees to make sure that they contact all agency heads and set up organizational meetings.
VIII. RESOLUTIONS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS
There were none.
IX. MOTIONS POSTPONED TO A SPECIFIC DATE
There were none.
There being no further business before the Council,
** MR. KIMMEL MOVED ADJOURNMENT.
** MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY BY VOICE VOTE.
The meeting adjourned at 9:20 p.m.
Respectfully submitted
Ann Marie DeLuca
Telesco Secretarial Services
ATTEST: _______________________________
Pam Stark, City Clerk
 |
 |