Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Minutes 01.18.2000MINUT! S OF TH! CITY OF LAUR! L January 18, 2000 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Laurel, Montana, was held in the Council Chambers and called to order by Mayor Chuck Rodgers at 7:00 p.m. on January 18, 2000. COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT: Lauren Van Roekel Ken Olson Gay Easton Bill Staudinger None Gary Temple Mark Mace Norman Orr Bud Johnson Mayor Rodgers asked the council to observe a moment of silence in behalf of the family of Miranda Fenner. MINUTES: Motion by Alderman Easton to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of January 4, 2000, as presented, seconded by Alderman Staudinger. Motion carried 8-0. CORRESPONDENCE: Montana Taxpayer' s Association membership meeting information. Max Baucus: Letter of December 30, 1999 regarding January 20, 2000 discussion on methamphetamine problem at MSU-Billings. Air Pollution Control Board Agenda for January 11, 2000 and the Activity Report for the month of December 1999. e. Laurel Revitalization League: CONSENT ITEMS: a. b. MMIA: Letter of January 10, 2000 regarding MMIA Development Plans. Information regarding meeting on January 13, 2000. Clerk/Treasurer Financial Statements for the month of December 1999. Committee Reports. --Budget/Finance Committee minutes of January 3, 2000 were presented. --City Council Committee of the Whole minutes of January 4, 2000 were presented. --City-County Planning Board minutes of January 6, 2000 were presented. --Public Works Committee minutes of January 10, 2000 were presented. The mayor asked if there was any separation of consent items. There was none. Motion by Alderman Johnson to approve the consent items as Alderman Orr. Motion carried 8-0. SCHEDULED MATTERS: Confirmation of Appointments. None. presented, seconded by Proposal of garbage rate increase: Jason Rittal, Double-Tree. Council Minutes of January 18, 2000 Jason Rittal distributed information and presented an overview of the rate structure and the garbage fund. The current rate structure was approved in February 1993, at which time a local committee structured the rate increase. The rates were set with a single unit residential charge of $10.25 as the base. Commercial and other rates were set based upon the number of containers, volume and weight. Jason stated that, due to lack of funds, capital needs have been put aside and annual rate increases have been passed over for several years. A review of the current rate structure and the garbage fund was necessary to ensure that it remains a self-sustaining enterprise fund. Jason explained the daily garbage routes and the number and size of the garbage containers located in each area and at Fox Lumber, Fiberglass Structures and Jan's IGA. The City of Laurel currently charges $151.50 to set, pull and haul a 40-yard container, $137.00 to set, pull and haul a 30-yard container, and $122.50 to set, pull and haul a 20-yard container. The City of Billings Landfill charges $1.45 per square yard for non-compacted containers. The charges to haul containers to the Billings Landfill are: a 40-yard container = $58.00 (Billings charge) plus $93.00 (Laurel labor and truck per pull); a 30-yard container = $43.50 (Billings charge) plus $93.00 (Laurel labor and truck per pull); a 20-yard container = $29.00 (Billings charge) plus $93.00 (Laurel labor and truck per pull). The Landfill charges $11.50 per ton for compacted containers. Jason explained the major expense items that were included in the Final 1999-2000 Budget for solid waste collection. The expenses total $557,932 and represent 83.8% of the total expenses for the solid waste fund. The two major revenue sources include collection fees and loan proceeds. These two revenue items total $556,970 and represent 96.5% of the fund revenue. Jason stated that the garbage truck replacement schedule should be reviewed annually based upon the existing condition of the equipment. Revisions in the schedule should be made accordingly. All purchased equipment should be new and have an expected life of ten years. The estimated cost of a container site compactor is $30,000, but a compactor would allow for savings in labor and equipment usage due to the reduced trips to the landfill. Jason noted that 2,218 users are currently paying $10.25 per month, which represents 90.87% of the users and approximately 64% of the revenue. The remaining 223 are billed in 38 different payment amounts, indicating that a great deal of individuality has been given to the current rate structure, He stated that significant changes to that structure at this time might be premature and unnecessary, as the community has grown accustomed to this method. To begin replacing equipment on the schedule represented and to add one full-time employee to maintain containers and run the roll off truck, Jason stated that the city needed to increase its revenues to ensure that the garbage fund is self-sustaining. To obtain this liquidity, the items of debt service on new equipment, employee salary and benefits for one additional full-time employee, and in~ationary impacts need to be addressed. Jason presented two recommendations for a rate increase to make the Solid Waste Fund self- sustaining. Option 1: A 12.5% rate increase on garbage collection fees, which would result in $52,121 increased revenue to offset the increase in principal and interest on debt service; increase haul rates for roll off containers from $93 to $125 (labor and truck) plus the landfill charge to help phase in an additional employee; charge daily rent of $5 on roll off containers to decrease mistreatment of time and allow for capitalization of a replacement fund for the containers and phase in an additional employee; review revenues and expenses annually to ensure that the fund is self maintaining; annual increase based upon a cost of living index and/or the status of the solid waste fund. Option 2: A 15% rate increase on garbage collection fees, which would result in $62,545.50 increased revenue to offset the increase in principal and interest on debt service and add one-half full-time employee; increase the haul rates for roll off containers from $93 to $125 (labor and truck) plus landfill charge to help with maintenance and capitalization of replacement or new containers; charge a daily rent of $10 on roll off containers to allow for capitalization to obtain new containers and fund one-half full-time employee; review revenues and expenses annually to ensure that the fund is self maintaining; annual increase based upon a cost of living index and/or the status of the solid waste fund. Alderman Staudinger questioned why the cost factor has not decreased since we went to once-a- week pickup in certain areas a few years ago. Larry McCann explained that the east and south sides are currently on once-a-week pickup and the west side will be soon. It was necessary to increase the number of containers to accommodate once-a-week pickup, but the trucks still pick up the same Council Minutes of January 18, 2000 amount of trash. Once-a-week pickup saves wear and tear on the garbage trucks, but there is still no down time for the roll off trucks and for maintenance of the containers. Larry mentioned that we have been purchasing used garbage trucks from the City of Billings, but they sell them because they are well used. The City of Laurel needs to purchase new trucks. When Alderman Staudinger stated that the alleys are in need of repair, Larry McCann explained that another employee is needed in order to have the manpower to do work in the alleys and other projects. Alderman Johnson stated that the actual weight of the garbage being hauled to Billings is growing. He questioned what is being hauled to Billings and suggested that branches and grass clippings could be handled in another way. Alderman Johnson mentioned that residents should be aware of non-residents that dump in the garbage containers within the city. Jason Rittal agreed that these are problems but he expressed that their effects are probably minimal. Either one of the options that Jason presented would increase the garbage fee by less than $2.00 per month. Mayor Rodgers stated that the Public Works Committee would address this issue. c. Project Impact Grant presentation. Larry McCann gave a visual presentation on the Project Impact Grant. Commissioner Ziegler and Larry McCann attended a meeting about Project Impact in Washington, D.C. in December. FEMA, Federal Emergency Management Association, spent $20 billion responding to two disasters. FEMA is attempting to do preventative maintenance to provide disaster prevention. The City of Laurel's water intake situation is critical to all of the citizens, and the Project Impact Grant would help address it. The agenda for the joint city/county meeting on February 16th will include the City of Laurel water intake system, West End Billings storm drainage master plan, and the Project Impact Grant Steering Committee selection. Yellowstone County has compiled a job description for the Impact Disaster Coordinator position. The coordinator will be a local person that is paid out of the grant money, will work for Yellowstone County during the two-year temporary position, and will be required to have grant-writing capabilities. The Project Impact Coordinator should be hired by the end of February. Then the Federal Emergency Management people will schedule community-wide meetings to assess the risk. The water intake situation for the City of Laurel impacts more people in this county than any other known disaster. Larry emphasized that Project Impact requires a community effort, and he encouraged the council to participate by attending the city/county meeting on February 16th. d. Ordinance No. O99-27: Ordinance amending the requirements for home occupations. ORDINANCE NO. O99-27 ORDINANCE AMENDING THE REQUIREMENTS FOR HOME OCCUPATIONS. Motion by Alderman Johnson to approve Ordinance No. O99-27, seconded by Alderman Temple. Alderman Johnson asked the council to consider defeating the motion to approve this ordinance. After talking with various individuals, Alderman Johnson proposed the idea of having the staff develop an ordinance that would allow the Public Works Department, the Police Department and the Fire Department the opportunity to review home occupation applications. Alderman Johnson suggested that the city staff should be allowed to consider the home occupation applications and issue them if there were no problems. He also emphasized that a time limit would insure that the applicant would receive an answer within a reasonable amount of time. He suggested that an appeal process should be developed for an applicant and that the appeal process should include the City- County Planning Board and the City Council. Alderman Johnson also recommended that home occupations be logged in order to review them on a yearly basis. Specific guidelines would be necessary to implement this change in the home occupation process. Council Minutes of January 18, 2000 The council had further discussion on the home occupation issue. Alderman Olson mentioned that this change in the home occupation process would allow the City-County Planning Board to use their time to consider the important issues, as Mr. Thurner had explained at the previous council meeting. Cal Cumin stated that the Planning Board is very interested in changing the home occupation process, and he will present it at the next City-County Planning Board meeting on February 3rd. A roll call vote was taken on the motion to approve Ordinance No. 099-27. All of the aldermen voted nay. Motion defeated 8°0, therefore Ordinance No. 099-27 was not adopted. Ordinance No. O00-1: Amending Section 15.48,010 of the Laurel Municipal Code, Floodplain Regulations. First reading. ORDINANCE NO. O00-1 AMENDING SECTION 15.48.010 OF THE LAUREL MUNICIPAL CODE, FLOODPLAIN REGULATIONS. Motion by Alderman Temple to approve Ordinance No. O00-1, seconded by Alderman Easton. A roll call vote was taken on the motion to approve Ordinance No. O00-1. All eight aldermen voted aye. Motion carried 8-0. The public hearing and second reading for Ordinance No. O00-1 will be held at the council meeting on February 1, 2000. Zone change - Rossmoor Subdivision, Block 1; Lot 3 from residential tracts to RMH. Planning Board recommends approval. Set public hearing for February 15, 2000. Motion by Alderman Temple to deny the zone change of Block 1, Lot 3, in the Rossmoor Subdivision from residential tracts to RMH, seconded by Alderman Staudinger. Cal Cumin questioned if this was the appropriate time for a motion since the law requires that a public hearing be set for an application. As there was some confusion, Joe Leckie explained that the public hearing should be set or denied at this time. Alderman Temple withdrew his motion to deny the zone change of Block 1, Lot 3, in the Rossmoor Subdivision from residential'tracts to RMH. Alderman Staudinger withdrew his second to the motion. Cal Cumin stated that the council had an application before them, and state law requires the council to hold a public hearing before it is denied or approved. Motion by Alderman Johnson to send the application for the zone change back to the City- County Planning Board for a re-vote, seconded by Alderman Orr. Alderman Temple stated that there was no relevance in sending the application back to the Planning Board. Mayor Rodgers stated that, by sending the application back to the City-County Planning Board, they would be given the tight to give an appropriate vote on the matter. Alderman Johnson stated that there is a time when it is necessary to recognize the legality issues. He suggested that it would be better for the council to vote on a recommendation from the Planning Board that is not shadowed in any form or fashion by a legality question. Cal Cumin stated that the next Planning Board meetin is scheduled for February 3rd, and the recommendation would be available for the February 15~g council meeting. His concern regarding sending the application back was that the matter would be delayed again, and the applicant has the right to have things done in an expeditious manner. Alderman Temple stated that he is opposed to the subdivision and did not see a reason to delay the process. 4 Council Minutes of January 18, 2000 Alderman Johnson asked Mayor Rodgers to allow Cal Cumin to present some information regarding the zoning process. Cal Cumin presented an overview of the zoning, subdivision and annexation process. He stated that "requesting a change in zoning to a zone classification that allows small lots is the first step in developing a piece of property. The Kukes Property is presently zoned to allow, at the minimum, single-family, residential housing built on-site on one-acre minimum-sized lots to Uniform Building Code standards. The developers are requesting a zone change to allow for manufactured homes on lots which, they say, will average about 7,500 square feet in size. Part of the property along Main is also being requested as Highway Commercial Zoning. Laurel exercises extra-territorial zoning jurisdiction up to one mile (and no further) from its City Limits, as shown on the Zoning Maps. (It does not, however, have Building Code Enforcement in that adjacent one-mile area immediately outside the City Limits - which is ridiculous.) Beyond the one mile, there is no zoning until the extra-territorial zoning area of Billings is reached to the northeast of Laurel. Billings, as a first-class city, has much greater reach with its extra-territorial zoning. There is also a County Zoning District by Thiel Road and on the county line southwest of Laurel. Under Laurel's City Code, the Planning Board must advertise a public hearing and noti& all property owners of record with 300 feet of the subject land. Once the Planning Board makes a recommendation (and that is all their decision is) to the City Council, the latter also schedules a public hearing. When the Council advertises its public hearing, it must include what the recommendation of the Planning Board is in the newspaper. The Council is, however, not bound by the recommendation. State law, through a series of legislative changes and convolutions, also requires that specific items be included when zone changes are being considered; these are listed in my written report accompanying the Planning Board recommendation to this Council. State law does not say that the items it requires to be considered are binding on the Council's decision; only the consideration is required and must be part of deliberations. Montana health laws require that the smallest lot size that may be created when neither a centralized water system or a centralized sewer system is available is one acre; if either centralized system is available, the mandatory lot size can be reduced to one-half acre -- depending on specific groundwater and soil conditions on the property. The plan to go to 7,500 square feet indicates the developers plan to use Laurel's municipal water and sewer system in their project. Using Laurel's water and sewer systems will require that the property be annexed to the City. It is currently not contiguous, but the City could flag pole its boundary out to the property, encircle it, and annex it. One advantage to extending municipal water and sewer to such a project is that it allows land to develop in a more compact manner than spread over one-acre minimum size lots which gobbles up land and makes the provision of sidewalks, utilities, and other city services extremely expensive; as can be seen in most such large lot subdivisions, city services do not exist, and the large lot developments all tap into the ground water while returning their sewage wastes back into the same ground. Often the large lot subdivisions adjacent to the City have the ease of access to police, fire, schools, and other such central services - sometimes even water - without having to pay the costs that actually being inside the city limits would incur. Extending city water and sewer services is up to the City Council. This issue will be addressed by the developers probably as part of the subdivision process, if they get to that point. Subdivision may occur after the zone change request is approved Usually a subdivision near a city requesting municipal services is prepared as "an addition to the city," and this is so stated on the face of the preliminary and final plats. The preliminary plat is the graphic document the developers must prepare in order to subdivide a piece of land. It shows the layout of the streets and lots. It also shows any other details of importance to the Planning Board and City Council that may influence the decision making process, such as adjacent land ownership, topography, zoning, utilities, existing buildings, lot sizes, park land, etc. Section 16.12.110 lists 26 different items that must be addressed on the preliminary plat. One of the most important documents that must accompany the preliminary plat, in addition to all the things that are actually shown on the face of the plat, is the Subdivision Improvements Agreement (SIA). The SIA is the proposed, binding contract between the City and the developers spelling out just what improvements are proposed in the subdivision, such as sidewalks, paved streets, curbs, gutters, lighting, landscaping, water and sewer mains, fire hydrants, stop signs, etc. The SIA is very specific as to size, number, installation timing, costs, and how the improvements are to be financed. The SIA is submitted as a proposal in draft form along with the preliminary plat and Council Minutes of January 18, 2000 is refined by negotiation with the City until a final form is agreed upon. The final SIA is signed by the City and the developers as a contract and filed with the final plat of the subdivision in the County Courthouse. It is a contract that runs with the land and is binding on whoever subsequently owns the property. In addition to the SIA, a Traffic Impact Study must also be prepared for large developments. This study is done by a professional transportation engineer and determines how much traffic the subdivision will generate. The generation of extensive traffic may cause the developers to participate in the cost of traffic systems, such as roads or traffic control devices, off site on roads leading to the subdivision. This was done, for example, when Entertainment Subdivision was approved by the Council several years ago. Because of the concern with everything from fences, view sheds, soil conditions, ground water, property valuation, and irrigation systems, an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) will also be required to be prepared by the developers. The required provisions for EIA are listed in Laurel's Municipal Code in Chapter 16.44. Section 16.12.070 of the code also lists public interest criteria that the Planning Board and City Council must consider, under State law, during the review of a subdivision proposal. When all of the required information is prepared, 24 copies of the preliminary plat and all its accompaniments are submitted to the Planning Board secretary. Copies are distributed to the Planning Board members, Planning Director, and all pertinent and interested agencies such as the County Public Works Department, City Public Works, Fire Department, utility companies, Park Board, etc. The Planning Department schedules a public hearing in the Laurel Outlook for its next meeting, and all adjacent property owners are notified by mail. During the process of review and decision making from the initial discussion with the Planning Director, through the Planning Board, and on down to the Council, negotiations occur over what is allowed or may be required. If everything was hard and fast, there would be no need for deliberation, and decisions could be based on black and white facts. Such negotiations can include public or private streets, street widths; sidewalk locations, landscaping, park improvements and size, timing of construction of improvements, and so forth. All that is agreed upon between the City and the developers is spelled out in detail in the SIA and reflected to the extent necessary on the final plat. After all the details are worked out, a final plat and final SIA contract are prepared. If the final documents reflect what was agreed to during the preliminary plat stage, the final plat is automatically approved. The City, for example, cannot decide during the final plat stage to add any additional requirements. The City also requires a Waiver of Protest to accompany and be filed with the final plat. This waiver should be filed as a deed restriction on each property within the subdivision and waives the right of landowners present and future to protest improvements that the City decides need to be made to the property at some time in the future. Other finishing requirements include a title report examined by the City Attorney and assurance that all taxes have been paid." Cal Cumin also stated that the zone change requires a majority of the council. A denial by the council would be in effect for one year, after which time the property owners could submit another application for a zone change. Alderman Johnson and Mayor Rodgers thanked Cal for his presentation. Alderman Johnson stated that his reason for making the motion was that the applicant deserves a reasonable time for consideration of their application and that a firm decision should be made with the proper recommendation clarified. Alderman Temple stated that we always go back and give the City-County Planning Board a second chance. He stated that they need to "go back and read the rules a little bit and understand procedure." Joe Leckie stated that the council's public hearing on this zone change could be scheduled for March 7th to allow for publishing the notice of the public hearing and the recommendation. A vote was taken on the motion to send the application back to the Planning Board for a re-vote. Motion carried 7-1, with Alderman Temple voting nay. Motion by Alderman Temple to set the public hearing on the zone change for the Rossmoor Subdivision, Block 1, Lot 3, from residential tracts to RMH for the council meeting on March 7, 2000, seconded by Alderman Easton. Motion carried 8-0. Council Minutes of Jalltlary 18, 2000 g. Temporary use permit for relocation of Mountain Mudd. recommends approval. Planning Board Motion by Alderman Temple to approve the temporary use permit for the relocation of Mountain Mudd, seconded by Alderman Johnson. Cal Cumin stated that the Planning Board recommended approval with certain conditions required. The conditions, as specified in the Planning Board minutes of January 6, 2000, were the paving of the lot as required and the $1,500 cashier's check or money order being given to the city prior to council approval. Alderman Temple withdrew his motion, and Alderman Johnson withdrew his second. Motion by Alderman Temple to approve the temporary use permit for the relocation of Mountain Mudd, subject to the conditions specified by the Planning Board, seconded by Alderman Johnson. Motion carried 8-0. h. Special Review - Truss and wood paneling manufacturing business - Entertainment Subdivision, Block 1, Lot 2. Planning board recommends approval. Set public hearing for February 15, 2000. Motion by Alderman Temple to approve the special review of the truss and wood paneling manufacturing business in Entertainment Subdivision, Block 1, Lot 2, based upon the approval of the Planning Board, seconded by Alderman Staudinger. Alderman Temple stated that he attended the City-County Planning Board meeting on January 6th. He was unsatis~ed with the process as it was done regarding the landscaping requirements. Alderman Temple felt that the Planning Board arbitrarily decided to require landscaping on this particular site, but the same requirements have not been made for other businesses. Alderman Temple talked with the landowner, and he is agreeable to landscaping. Motion by Alderman Temple to amend the motion to state that a maximum of $5,000 worth of landscaping be required on this property, seconded by Alderman Van Roekel. Alderman Johnson also attended the Planning Board meeting and did not feel that an anti-business sentiment was expressed. Some options to require landscaping have possibly been overlooked in the past, but the board was not attempting to create a hardship for the business. Without any clear figures to address the desire of the Planning Board, Alderman Johnson suggested that it would be an incorrect move to cap the amount necessary for landscaping at this location. Cat Cumin stated that we do not 'receive a lot of special reviews for this kind of commercial area project. The last one was a commercial lot where an owner is starting a truss building business, and the minutes of the Planning Board and the council state that the owner is required to landscape the site. Laurel Ford was not required to provide landscaping because it is located in a Highway Commercial Zone. The special review process for a zone change allows the city to impose certain requirements that might not be necessary in a different zone. Section 17.68.040 states that "the zoning commission shall consider and may impose modifications or conditions concerning, but not limited to the following: street and road capacity, ingress and egress to adjoining streets, off-street parking; fencing, screening and landscaping." Cal asked the council not to put a limit on the landscaping requirements. Code also requires that at least ten per cent of a commercial site must be landscaped. Alderman Temple stated that the sudden requirement of landscaping by the Planning Board was unfair, and no cost estimates were presented. Cal stated that the person who presented this at the Planning Board meeting has been a professional developer for at least twenty years. Cal had previously informed him of the landscaping requirements, but the developer did not provide any information other than the location of his building. The city codes and special review requirements are available to him at any time, so he should not have been surprised. Cat stated that Laurel should not lower its standards to attract business, because businesses are coming to Laurel because it is a nice city. Discussion continued regarding the landscaping issue. Council Minutes of January 18, 2000 A roll call vote was taken on the amendment to the motion. Aldermen Temple and Van Roekel voted aye, and Aldermen Mace, Orr, Johnson, Olson, Easton and Staudinger voted nay. Motion defeated 6-2. A vote was taken on the motion to approve the special review of the truss and wood paneling manufacturing business in Entertainment Subdivision, Block 1, Lot 2, based upon the approval of the Planning Board. All aldermen voted aye. Motion carried 8-0. i. Annexation - Laurmac Subdivision, Block 15, Lot 2A. Planning Board recommends approval. Motion by Alderman Staudinger to approve the annexation of Block 15, Lot 2A in Laurmac Subdivision, seconded by Alderman Olson. Motion carried 8-0. UNSCHEDULED MATTERS: a. City Council President. Mayor Rodgers stated that Alderman Easton has served as the council president for the past eight years and was recently re-elected to serve another four-year term in Ward 3. Motion by Alderman Olson to elect Alderman Easton as the council president, seconded by Alderman Orr. Motion carried 8-0. b. City Council Vice-President. Mayor Rodgers stated that Alderman Johnson has served as the council vice-president for the past four years and was recently re-elected to serve another four-year term in Ward 4. Motion by Alderman Orr to elect Alderman Johnson as the council vice-president, seconded by Alderman Staudinger. Motion carried 8-0. c. Council appointment' to the City-County Planning Board. Mayor Rodgers stated that Miles Walton served on the City-County Planning Board during his term on the council. Since Miles is no longer on the council, the council needed to appoint a councilman to serve on this board. Alderman Easton stated that Miles Walton did a good job on the City-County Planning Board. He also stated that Bud Johnson would be an asset to the Planning Board since he presently serves on West End Task Force. Motion by Alderman Easton to appoint Alderman JOhnson to the City-County Planning Board, seconded by Alderman Orr. Alderman Johnson said that he welcomed the opportunity to serve on the Planning Board. A vote was taken on the motion to appoint Alderman Johnson to the City-County Planning Board. Motion carried 8-0. d. Goal-setting workshop. Mayor Rodgers mentioned that the goal-setting workshop is scheduled for Saturday, January 22"d, at the Fire Hall. Breakfast will be served at 8:00 a.m. and the workshop will continue until 3:00 p.m. e. Drug and alcohol speaker on January 25th. Alderman Van Roekel informed the council that a special speaker would be addressing drug and alcohol issues on Tuesday, January 25th, at 6:30 on Channel 2. The school will provide transportation to the meeting for those who need it. Information regarding transportation will be published in the Laurel Outlook on January 19th. Council Minutes of January 18, 2000 Alderman Johnson stated that it would be helpful if our representative to the Yellowstone County DUI Task Force would inform the council of similar events so that we could take advantage of them in the Laurel schools. f. Committees. Mayor Rodgers stated that he would speak with Aldermen Mace and Van Roekel regarding their participation on the various committees. There being no further business to come before the council at this time, the meeting was adjourned at 8:50p.m. Cindy Allen, ;'~eecretar~ Approved by the Mayor and passed by the City Council of the City of Laurel, Montana, this 1st day of February, 2000. Attest: Ma~K~.mbleton, Clerk-Treasurer