HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Minutes 03.05.1996Minutes of the City Council of Laurel
March 5, 1996
A regular meeting of the City Council
held in the Council Chambers and called to
p.m., on March 5, 1996.
COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT:
Gay Easton
Bud Johnson
Miles Walton
COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT: John Minch
of the City of Laurel, Montana, was
order by Mayor Chuck Rodgets at 7:00
Ron Marshall
Dirk Kroll
Chuck Dickerson
Donna Kilpatrick
INVOCATION: Invocation was given by Alderman Johnson.
MINUTES:
Motion by Alderman Marshall to approve the minutes of the regular meeting
of February 20, 1996, as presented, seconded by Alderman Easton. Motion carried
CORRESPONDENCE:
Received a letter from Zoo Montana regarding the mulching of Christmas trees.
Received a letter from the Water Quality Division regarding community public
water supply fee payment.
Received a letter from Governor Racicot regarding allocating local CTEP money
for the State Capitol restoration.
Received a letter from the Montana Department of Commerce regarding extension of
municipal building code jurisdictional area. The department has denied the
city's request to extend the jurisdictional area.
Received an article from Betty Selvig, Laurel Elementary Counselor, regarding
water fluoridation.
CLAIMS:
Claims for the month of February were reviewed by the Budget/Finance Committee
and recommended that they be paid.
Motion by Alderman Marshall to approve the claims in the amount of
$291,580.22 for the month of February, seconded by Alderman Kroll. Motion
carried 6--0.
EMERGENCY CONSTRUCTION - WATER INTAKE LINES:
Jim Flisrand asked for the approval of the council to set up a contract in order
to continue with the emergency construction of the water intake lines.
On February 9th there was melting and ice breakup. It was determined the
following week that this caused damage to an intake line which needed repair.
The condition of the other two intake lines was not known but there was pumping
from the intake pier.
The city needed to acquire the permits from government agencies. The agencies
realized the emergency and were very cooperative in issuing the permits.
The next week it was determined that the second intake line was ruptured or was
not pumping from the intake pier. The third line was deflected severely. It is
the assumption that the line was also drawing water through some of the joints
at the sever deflections.
The city, Morrison-Maierle, and local contractors familiar with river work,
assisted with an emergency design to repair the problem. The city has received
the permits and/or authorizations. The pipe and fittings have been ordered. The
20" material is used quite frequently, but is not made unless it is needed. A
lot of work was done in locating necessary fittings and pipe.
A short term emergency line has been prepared. If the deflected line ruptures
further, the temporary line can be laid within a Couple of hours and continue
pumping water to the city. A detailed description of the problem, an approach to
correct it, the actual condition, and the approval of the council is necessary
in order to continue from this point. The construction is planned to start March
llth and will take three to four days.
The three existing lines, 14", 16", and 20", and will be replaced with two
lines. The two new lines will give the same SHDDlV of water ~ ~h~
Minutes of the City Council of Laurel
Page 2
Council Meeting of March 5, 1996
for $9,500.00 each, without warranty. The new butterfly valve is available for
$2,400.00 each and parts are readily available. The valve can be repaired
without removal.
Jim stated COP Construction is the contractor who is doing the preliminary work
but they cannot start construction until the council authorizes it. The
projected total cost will be somewhere between $1001000.00 to $175,000.00. The
estimated cost from COP Construction was figured with preliminary information
available at the time. Since then there have been more meetings, more knowledge
on the condition, availability of parts, consultation with Morrison-Maierle on
procedure and design and it is possible the cost will be at the lower half of
the projected total cost. This is the only proposal at this time.
Alderman Dickerson suggested a letter be sent, from the city, to the government
agencies thanking them for their fast response in suppling the permits for the
emergency construction. Jim stated he has thanked them numerous times, but it is
a good idea and he will send them a letter of thanks.
Jim was asked if the temporary emergency line is something that the city will
be able to use in the future or is it only necessary for the construction during
this emergency?
Jim explained that they will try to use the line in the future as a winter line.
It is the same material that has been used for the winter suction line. It will
be made to work as an emergency line during construction and/or before, if the
existing line is washed out. The line will then be retrieved and hopefully used
next winter for a winter suction line.
Jim was asked what the comparison of gallons going through the lines now are
compared to the intake after construction?
Jim stated the gallons will be nearly identical. The intake lines will be
adequate for the current plant design. The maximum daily output at the plant is
ten million gallons and it is putting out approximately four million gallons
during the summer and approximately one million gallons during the winter. The
city is limited to what it can divert from the river, according to water rights.
The butterfly valves are an improvement over the fifty year old gate valves that
currently don't seat. Through the double screening process at the intake pier,
moss and debris shouldn't be a problem.
Jim commented that a low interest loan would be needed for the cost of
construction. There aren't any options but to repair the intake lines which need
to be done before high water is a concern and we lose the opportunity to get in
the river. There is also a concern that the two refinery pumps are not working.
As soon as the emergency water supply is installedl the pumps can be pulled for
maintenance.
Motion by Alderman Walton to approve the emergency construction of the
water intake lines and the financing, seconded by Alderman Johnson. Motion
carried 6--0.
AMENDING THE CITY BOUNDARY:
The City Clerk mentioned that the Entertainment Subdivision was inadvertently
left out of the ordinance on the first reading on February 20, 1996.
ORDINANCE NO. 096-2
AMENDING SECTION 1.12.010 OF THE LAUREL
MUNICIPAL CODE, ORIGINAL TOWNSITE
Motion by Alderman Dickerson to amend Ordinance No. 096-2 to include the
Entertainment Subdivision, seconded by Alderman Johnson. Motion carried 6--0.
ORDINANCE NO. 096-2 (first reading)
Motion by Alderman Marshall that Ordinance No. 096-2 (first reading) be
passed and adopted as amended, seconded by Alderman Dickerson.
A roll call vote was taken and all aldermen voted "YES". Motion carried 6--0.
ORDINANCE NO. 096-3 (first reading)
AMENDING SECTION 1.16.020 OF THE LAUREL
MUNICIPAL CODE, FOUR WARD DIVISION
Page 3
Council
Minutes of the City Council of Laurel
Meeting of March 5, 1996
A roll call vote was taken and all aldermen voted "YES". Motion carried 6--0.
ADDITIONAL 18" WATERLINE AND IMPROVEMENTS AT WATER PLANT:
Jim explained that the council approved construction on the 18" waterline on
September 19, 1995. The additional 18" waterline is planned for First Avenue
between South 4th Street and Railroad Street. This section of line needs to be
replaced due to fire service concerns~ condition of line, etc. The engineer has
recently submitted an agreement for the increase in engineering fees. Council
action will not be needed on this particular construction. The Mayor has been
authorized, by resolution, to sign all documents relating to the water plant
construction. This is on the agenda for the council's information and awareness.
The engineering fee was not originally part of the consultant agreement, so the
engineering costs for designing, drawing plans, construction, inspection, and
surveying are being added to the original contract. The cost is $6,500.00 for
the design and $3,500.00 for the engineering.
The original water plant project consisted of the water plant activity,
reservoir, and an 18" line from South Fourth and First Avenue across to Fifth
Avenue and Main Street. This additional 18" line is tying on at the same
location, South Fourth Street and First Avenue, and runs north to the underpass.
This is one of three items added to the original project in September, 1995.
The second item of additional improvement at the water plant does need council
approval. The water plant is very limited for space. The current operator area
is approximately 12' X 14" which is used for a lab, an office for the operators
and the superintendent, a room for training and safety classes, and a lunch
room,
The lower level of the water plant, the basement, needs to be expanded to allow
the necessary piping for the construction anticipated at the water plant. This
expansion is approximately ten feet by forty feet. It is already included in the
cost for the construction.
Jim is proposing to put two walls and a roof on the expanded pipe gallery. This
will allow enough room for a training room for both plants, area to conduct
safety meetings, additional filing area as the plant becomes computerized, and
adequate office space. Morrison-Maierle has proposed an estimate of $35,100o00
for construction and engineering fees of $3,000.00 for a total cost of
$38,100.00 for the addition.
This will be an increase to the original design cost, however, a number of areas
of expense have already been cut. For example, the length of the access road has
been reduced by fifty percent which will decrease the overall cost. The
$38,100.00 will still be within the budget of 3.6 million, the cost will reflect
a finished room.
Jim would like the council's opinion and support on this addition.
Alderman Marshall suggested that approval not be given until the end of the
water plant construction, in case there are other amendments or additions to the
design.
Alderman Dickerson asked if the city will incur any costs involved with the
bridge project that will relate back to the water plant project?
Jim explained that the money the city will need for the water lines, that relate
to and are part of the bridge project~ are separate from the water plant
project.
Jim was asked if it would be a problem to wait until the end of the project?
Jim suggested an option would be for the engineer to design it and put it in the
plans as an alternate. Then the city has the option, at the time of the bid
letting, to take the alternate or not. If they wait with the design or add it
after the project has been bid, a change order would be required. Normally,
change orders cost more because there is a percentage added for the
inconvenience.
Alderman Dickerson mentioned that if the
city decides not to go with the addition,
engineering fees for designing
design is done as an alternate and the
then the city is out the $3,000.00 for
Jim stated this is
can afford the the
waste.
correct but if, at a later date and time, the city feels it
money for an addition, then the design is there and is not a
Minutes of the City Council of Laurel
Page 4
Council Meeting of March 5, 1996
Motion by Alderman Dickerson to
the water plant construction as an .alternate design of $38,100.00,
Alderman Walton.
accept the proposal for a room expansion to
seconded by
Alderman Johnson asked what is the scenario, if the expansion is not done? He
knows money is a question, but $38,100.00 for the size of our project is not
that big of a deal. What about the people who work at the plant and need the
spacel if it is not done?
Jim said the
desks in the
Someone will
computer stations will be added to the small area. There are three
area now, the lab, storage of plans for the plant, and filing.
end up in the hallway! At this time, it is difficult to conduct
safety meetings and have
need to resolve the money issue.
Vote was taken on the motion. Motion carried
Mayor Rodgets suggested the council members
current space. Additional space would not go
BUDGETARY AUTHORITY - CDBG GRANT:
RESOLUTION NO. R96-4
training classes. The additional space is needed and we
5--1, with Alderman Johnson voting
visit the water plant and view the
unused.
BUDGETARY AUTHORITY - CDBG GRANT
Motion by Alderman Dickerson that Resolution No. R96-4 be passed and
adopted, seconded by Alderman Johnson. Motion carried 6--0.
ANNUAL SERVICE FEE FOR ALL WATER USERS:
RESOLUTION NO. R96-5
ESTABLISHING AN ANNUAL SERVICE FEE
FOR ALL WATER USERS, PURSUANT TO THE
PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY PROGRAM
Motion by Alderman Marshall that Resolution No. R96-5 be passed and
adopted, seconded by Alderman Dickerson. Motion carried 6--0.
VOLUNTEER AMBULANCE SERVICE RATES:
RESOLUTION NO. R96-6
A RESOLUTION ESTABLISNING RATES FOR
SERVICES, EQUIPMENT AND SUPPLIES FOR
THE LAUREL VOLUNTEER AMBULANCE SERVICE
Motion by Alderman Dickerson that Resolution No. R96-6 be passed and
adopted, seconded by Alderman Johnson.
Don Hackmann commented that a resolution for volunteer ambulance service rates
was passed in September 1995. There were four items inadvertently left out of it
because the rates did not change. This resolution is to include those four
items.
A vote was taken on the motion. Motion carried 6--0.
ONE CALL SYSTEM:
Jim explained that the one call system is for anyone wishing to dig in back
yards, streets, or alleys. By calling a 1-800 number, the gas company, power
company, cable company, etc. will come to locate their lines at no cost. If
someone does dig without calling the number~ then they are liable for damages to
gas, power, or any other utility lines.
The city has not participated in the one
because the city didn't have a fax machine
on.
call system in the past. Primarily
at the office for the system to work
Occasionally people will voluntarily come in and ask the city for the locations
of water or sewer lines, however, a lot of construction goes on where they do
not come in to ask. The city finds out, after the fact, when damage has been
done.
The one call system is operated by UtiljtieR [lnH~o ..... ~ r~_^~= ......
Minutes of the City Council of Laurel
Page 5
Council Meeting of March 5, 1996
receive a copy by fax telling us the location, the time,
done. The city then decides whether or not they need to
locate the lines.
and what work is being
be there to inspect or
This is a good program to assure the permit process is upheld. The program has a
annual fee of $260.00. The program will give the city satisfaction that we are
aware of what is happening throughout the city. Jim would like the support and
approval from the council to adopt the one call program. The $260.00 would be
made up many times, through the permit process and the lack of time the city
would need to go out to make repairs to our utilities.
Alderman Dickerson questioned, is
this? Knowing what type of work is
lines could be marked at that time.
the building permit process in control of
to be done when a building permit is issued,
Jim said that every request that comes in could be reviewed and investigated.
For each building permit sold, the city could try to make a detailed evaluation
of any lines that may be out there, but this would take a lot of time. If the
city knew exactly what type of work was to be done and what direction it was
taking, then it would be much easier to deal with. Building is just one phase of
it. The utility companies also call this system when they put in lines. Building
permits have nothing to do with cable, power, gas, and telephone lines. Unless
they walk in to notify the city, we have no way of knowing they are digging.
There is always some construction that goes on without permits, however, they
don't want to hit gas or power lines so they will call the one call system. The
system will normally cover all excavation in the area,
Jim feels the city has the personnel to go out and review or investigate all
requests for locations of lines. There has been no record kept of calls,
walk-ins, or requests for locations. The system would be a plus for the city and
would be made a part of the requirements. It would depend on the time of year or
construction season whether or not there would be a lot of calls.
Dave Michael mentioned the one call system will cover more than just the city
limits, it will also cover construction in the area of the plants and protect
the water lines and sewer transmission lines.
Motion by Alderman Johnson to subscribe to the one call system, seconded by
Alderman Dickerson. Motion carried 6--0.
COMMITTEE REPORTS:
--Budget/Finance Committee minutes of February 20, 1996 were presented and
reviewed.
Motion by Alderman Kroll to enter the Budget/Finance Committee minutes of
February 20, 1996, into the record, seconded by Alderman Johnson. Motion
carried 6--0.
--City Council Committee of the Whole minutes of February 20, 1996 were
presented.
Motion by Alderman Dickerson to enter
Whole minutes of February 20, 1996, into
Johnson. Motion carried 6--0.
the City Council Committee of the
the record, seconded by Alderman
--Fire Committee minutes of February 17, 1996 were presented and reviewed.
Motion by Alderman Marshall to enter the Fire Committee minutes of February
17, 1996, into the record, seconded by Alderman Easton.
Darrell McGillen stated that he and Jim had an indication from Larry McCann that
expansion of the jurisdictional code enforcement area would be a key factor in
him staying with the city. Dartell doesn't know what his plans are now.
Mayor Rodgets stated Larry has been a asset to the city and this needs to be
kept in mind at budget time, regarding what can be done.
Darrell noted that Larry is working without a contract at this time and one will
need to be drawn up. They were in the budgetary process of putting him on as a
part time employee.
Vote was taken on the motion. Motion carried 6--0.
--Laurel Local Government Review Commission minutes of February 12, 1996 and
February 26, 1996 were presented.
Minutes of the City Council of Laurel
Page 6
Council Meeting of March 5, 1996
Motion by Alderman Marshall to enter the Laurel Local Government
Commission minutes of February 12, 1996 and February 26, 1996, into the
seconded by Alderman Dickerson. Motion carried 6--0.
Review
record,
--Park Committee minutes of February 22, 1996 were presented and reviewed.
Motion by Alderman Walton to enter the Park Committee minutes of February
22, 1996, into the record, seconded by Alderman Dickerson. Motion carried 6--0.
--Police Committee minutes of February 29, 1996 were presented and reviewed.
Motion by Alderman Marshall to
February 29, 1996, into the record,
carried 6--0.
enter the Police Committee minutes of
seconded by Alderman Johnson. Motion
--Public Utilities Committee minutes of March 4, 1996 were presented and
reviewed.
Alderman Marshall asked for discussion on the fluoridation system and felt it
should be brought before the public.
Dave Michael called the State Water Quality Division to inquire about their
position regarding fluoridation. They don't have any official standards, it is
up to the options of the community. Fluoride started in Laurel many years ago
and he doesn't know if it was voted on by the people or not. It usually is
accepted in most towns by approval of the people. There are eight fluoride
systems in Montana; Laurel, Colstrip, Chester, Miles City, two plants in
Bozeman, Hardin and Scobey. Dave feels there should be research as to what kind
of action brought fluoridation to Laurel in the first place. He also feels it
should be brought before the people in the Laurel elections.
The cost of installing a fluoride feeding system at the new contact basin, as
part of the water plant project~ would cost between $7~000.00 and $10,000.00 for
liquid fluoride system and double that for dry fluoride system. The cost to the
people is minimal.
Fluoride basically helps children's teeth but this is only in a certain age
group. About 3/4 of the fluoride that is in the drinking system is natural from
the river. The city is only adding about 1/4 or 1/3 to bring it up to what the
allotment is. The standard fluoridation rate is between 1 part to 1 1/2 parts
per a million gallons for drinking water.
Jim stated that Morrison-Maierle needs direction regarding whether to relocate
the current dry system or put in a liquid system, if the city continues with the
fluoride. Along with the request~ they have recommended and encouraged the idea
of a public hearing in case it is a big issue with the people.
Jim presented a little history on fluoride. It started back in the 1930s,
primarily for younger children to strengthen teeth. The subject has always been
a debate as to whether it is good or bad. Some people contend that because
fluoride tooth paste and fluoride treatments are available, there is no need to
fluoridate the public water system. For example, Helena designed it into their
new facilities but installation was cancelled due to public protest.
Morrison-Maierle had information that read, according to the state, most new
plants have omitted fluoridation. The last five new installations did not
include fluoride. However, Morrison-Maierle recommends that the city evaluate
the issues and a public hearing may be the best way to do this. Before the
design can be completed, the city needs to decide on what direction to take.
In discussion, it was suggested that a survey be sent out with the water bills
in April, however this could be expensive and more time consuming. The most
common option is to advertise a public hearing and encourage people to attend.
Whatever the response, it will assist in resolving the issue.
Dave recommended that if the city continues with fluoridation, that they go with
the liquid system because it is cheaper and easier to work with.
Jim suggested setting a date for a public hearing at the next council meeting.
He will get some facts and information together and then a date for a public
hearing can be set up at the March 19th council meeting.
Motion by Alderman Marshall to enter the Public Utilities Committee minutes
of March 4, 1996, into the record, seconded by Alderman Johnson. Motion carried
COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE:
Minutes of the City Council of Laurel
Page 7
Council Meeting of March 5, 1996
construction of the turnaround at 6th Street West, next to the West School. Jim
presented a review of the plan. The traffic on 6th Street West is very congested
several times a day; in the morning, in between morning and afternoon
kindergarten, and after school. The schools intent is to pave the remaining
portion of 6th Street West, down to a point where it will allow them to build a
turnaround on the school property and come back on 6th Street taking the flow of
traffic out of the area. This is a needed project. The school's position is to
get the county and the city to participate in the overall cost of the project or
at least 6th Street West improvements. Jim itemized the cost and came up with a
figure that is less than the school's figures.
The proposal that was presented to the city from the school district was
approximately $30,000.00 to do the street renovation. Ten thousand would be the
county's participation of gravell shaping, etc. The remaining $20,000.00 would
be split between the city and the school.
Jim stated the project will not affect the future development of 6th Street
West. He noted there is a subdivision that is platted and undeveloped directly
west of the school property and ties into 6th Street. He has had interest
expressed from a developer requesting utilities, participated cost, annexation,
etc. The school project will not detour from tying 6th Street into 10th Avenue,
which is the street that fronts that development.
Jim is concerned that the design of the turnaround is somewhat restricted to
traffic. The frontage on the design is approximately 50 feet of straight curb
which will allow automobile traffic. A school bus is 35' to 40' long, therefore,
if it was ever used as a school bus pick up, it would have to be expanded.
Margit Thorndahl stated it is not anticipated to be used as a school
but it is a concern that emergency vehicles are able to enter the
The turnaround was built with a 70' turning range in the plans.
apparently enough to get a good size vehicle turned around.
bus pick up
turnaround.
This was
The total street area planned for construction would be 240' X 38' which equals
1100 sq. yds. Jim reports that if the city removes all gravel material and
import new base and cushion, including all work, the cost would be $111642.00.
To use existing base as stated and import 4 inches of 3/4-inch cushion including
all work would be $4,420.00. To place a 2-inch asphalt mat on West 6th Street
would be $4,755.00. Curb and gutter/double gutter installed from exiting curb to
end of project (125 feet) would be $2,500.00 for double gutter and $1,275.00 for
standard curb and gutter (85 feet). Total cost with new material would be
$20,172.00 for construction of just 6th Street West. Total cost using existing
gravel would be $12,950.00. All costs reflect work to be done by a contractor.
If the city and county participate, the cost would be reduced. These costs are
considerably less than the school district anticipated and it is a workable
program. Jim feels it would now be up to the school district whether they still
want the city to participate.
Margit stated that the county has committed to bid site preparation and put in a
12" gravel base, using existing material. The school district has asked the city
to share the cost of the paving with them. The school intends to take care of
the cost of the curbs and sidewalks for the project.
The school district is concerned that this is a significant safety hazard and
hopes to do something before an accident happens. A traffic count done about a
year ago showed there were 748 cars a day tripping the traffic counter. They are
asking the council to share the cost of paving and drainage with the school
district.
Jim has figured 1100 sq. yds. for the street area and possibly half that much
more for the turnaround. Total cost now is $4,755.00 for the asphalt with a 2"
mat for the street and perhaps another $2,300.00 to $2,500.00 for the turn
around.
Darrell McGillen commented that the best idea would be to extend 6th Street with
10th Avenue which is directly west of the school property.
Jim stated that 6th Street is platted to tie into 10th Avenue. He has had two
calls from the same person that is interested in developing the subdivision. If
this would be the case, it would be ideal to tie into 10th Avenue. The school
project would probably be first and if the developer does pursue it, it would be
later in the summer.
Darrell is considering that, if there is development in the future, there may be
unnecessary money spent to put in the project where the street could be put in
by the developer. Basically, he is worried about the turnaround. If there was a
through street, people could come and ~o wi~hn,,t ~ ~ .......... ~ ~ ~ ......
Minutes of the City Council of Laurel
Page 8
Council Meeting of March 5, 1996
Alderman Marshall asked if the city has participated in street construction or
development that is not part of an established SID? Jim answered "yes" to the
question. The county and city joined forces to open up the street on East
Maryland between Washington and Alder to allow traffic to move through. Alderman
Marshall would like to see something done about the situation on 6th Street West
at West School to eliminate any tragedy.
Mayor Rodgets asked Jim to put some definite figures together for the Street and
Alley Committee and the council.
Mr. McMilin stated the turnaround would not affect the baseball
take a small portion of the school playground. Mr. McMilin stated that
school district considered the county doing the preparation work of gravel
shaping then the school would split the cost of paving the street and
turnaround with the city. They would pay for the sidewalks and curbs within
turnaround and the city would do the ones that affect the city street.
school district felt it would be
on the street and the turnaround.
field but would
the
and
the
the
The
simpler to split the total cost of the asphalt
Alderman Easton feels the city may be setting a
the cost beyond 6th Street onto private property.
would be alright if the city wants to do 6th
turnaround. It's about a 1/3 to 2/3 split.
precedent as far as splitting
Margit Thorndahl commented it
Street and they will do the
A1 McMilin, Superintendent, thanked the council for their help.
Negotiations Committee
Alderman Dickerson stated the Negotiations Committee has met and it has been
decided to obtain the services of Dick Larsen during the negotiations with the
union. There will be a meeting on Tuesday, March 12, 1996 at 5:30 in the council
chambers.
Jurisdiction Code Denial
Jim asked for comments from the council as to whether he should respond to the
letter of denial. Another option would be to request expansion of established
subdivisions and areas of that nature.
The city could attempt the process again. The major concern of the city was the
faulty construction being done in the neighboring subdivisions or at least the
requests from homeowners that they were not satisfied.
Alderman Walton stated that the city should go at least that far and then try to
educate the people as to what they were arguing against. They may not have
understood what the city was asking, but thought that the city wanted just their
money. They don't realize that someone will get the jurisdiction and they will
deal with either Laurel or go to Billings.
Darretl McGillen said that the state legislature adopted the uniform building
and fire codes and made them the law. The city of Laurel has to abide by that
law, but the guy next door in the rural area doesn't have to? He feels the State
of Montana needs to put someone out there to get the job done, since they are
not allowing Laurel to do it. Respectable people of Laurel want to expand the
jurisdictional code area and take care of what the state is not doing because of
the inadequate construction going on. Yet, the city gets the rap in the public
hearing that we are the bad people, just out to get into someone's pocketbook.
The State of Montana passed the laws so they should abide by the laws and do the
inspections. Everyone is created equally and should be charged equally. Why
should we abide by the rules and the neighbor in the county doesn't have to? The
city's intention was not to pick on the farmer or the rancher, but to have
control over the subdivisions so someday when their water goes bad and they need
the services and want to be annexed into the city, we don't have to annex a
bunch of junk.
It was suggested that Jim write a letter to the State of Montana and be
opinionated and also request a variance.
APPOINTMENTS:
Mayor Rogers appointed Robert Spannagel to the Airport Authority Board to fill
the unexpired term of Howard Clayton which ends 6-30-97.
Motion by Alderman Dickerson to confirm the appointment of Robert Spannagel
to the Airport Authority Board to fill the unexpired term of Howard Clayton
which ends 6-30-97, seconded by Alderman Marshall. Motion carried 6--0.
There being no further business to come before the Council at this time, the
meeting was adjourned at 8:57 p.m.
Page 9
Council Meeting of March 5, 1996
Minutes of the City Council of Laurel
Donald L0 Hackmann, City Clerk
Approved by the Mayor and passed by the City Council of the City of Laurel,
Montana, this 19th day of March.
s Rod
Donald L. Hackmann, City Clerk