CITY OF SHORELINE

SHORELINE CITY COUNCIL

SUMMARY MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING

Monday, September 23, 2002

Shoreline Conference Center

7:30 p.m. Mt. Rainier Room

PRESENT: Mayor Jepsen, Deputy Mayor Grossman, Councilmembers Chang, Gustafson, Hansen, Montgomery and Ransom

ABSENT: None

1. CALL TO ORDER

The meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m. by Mayor Jepsen, who presided.

2. FLAG SALUTE/ROLL CALL

Upon roll call by the City Clerk, all Councilmembers were present.

3. CITY MANAGER’S REPORT

Steve Burkett, City Manager, reported that the low bidder for Item 7(c) was Precision Earthworks, Inc. at $162,598, an amount well below the $260,000 available budget for construction funds.

Kirk McKinley, Aurora Corridor Project Manager, summarized a memo responding to the highway accident statistics mentioned in a Seattle Times article discussed at the September 9th meeting, noting that there are many ways to collect and analyze data. He said the Seattle Times used HAC (high accident corridor) statistics, which differs from other methods of measurement. He noted that while there are similarities between SeaTac and Shoreline, the rate and severity of accidents in SeaTac has dramatically decreased due to elimination of protective/permissive left-turns at intersections.

Mr. Burkett noted the importance of having reliable traffic accident data.

Responding to Councilmember Ransom, Mr. McKinley said he provided the Shoreline Merchants Association with a copy of the most recently acquired information.

Councilmember Chang asked why it is so difficult for the average citizen to get traffic data from the Washington State Department ofTransporation (WSDOT) or the City. Mr. McKinley replied that part of the reason may be that traffic data is only analyzed on a two-year cycle. He also mentioned that some citizens may not be familiar with how to obtain traffic information.

4. REPORTS FROM BOARDS OR COMMISSIONS: none

5. PUBLIC COMMENT

(a) Walt Hagen, Shoreline, asked Council to reconsider the Aurora Corridor Project because its planning is based on faulty WSDOT traffic data. He said the Council, ignoring the fact that WSDOT lost six years of traffic data, proceeded with a design plan anyway.

(b) Dennis Lee, Shoreline, speaking on behalf of the Briarcrest Neighborhood Association, expressed support for the BMX track on the "17 acres" purchased by the School District and Water District. He noted that the area is environmentally-sensitive and that the City must carefully consider any grading permits. He said the BMX riders have been using and improving the area for years, but recent insurance concerns are threatening the track. He asked that Council slow down the process if the permit comes to the Planning department.

(c) LaNita Wacker, Shoreline, expressed support for the BMX track on "17 acres." While her primary concern is preservation, she supports the BMX track because no impervious surfaces have been added. She described the area as a beautiful, environmentally-friendly work-of-art that creates no pollution or noise. She expressed confidence that the liability insurance issue could be resolved and asked Council to preserve the track under the 1% for Arts program.

(d) Preston Peterson, Kirkland, representing the Back Country Bicycle Trails Club, expressed support for the BMX track on "17 acres." He described the track as a world-famous earthwork that provides a positive atmosphere and opportunity for youth to build personal skills and abilities. He noted that since both Greenlake and Bellevue have BMX parks, it is possible to overcome any potential liability problems. He suggested that Rob Beem, a former Bellevue employee, and legal experts take an interest and help preserve the area.

(e) Tom Gergen, Shoreline, outlined his ecology expertise and noted that land-moving equipment will damage the ecology and wildlife habitat of "17 acres." He urged Council to consider other alternatives to developing the area, and questioned whether site development would require a SEPA process.

(f) Anthony Poland, Shoreline, expressed opposition to discussing Agenda Items 8(b) and 8(c), Referendum 51 and Initiative 776. He felt that public money should not be used to influence political campaigns, whether it be for an individual candidate or an initiative.

Mayor Jepsen suggested speakers attend the Water District's meeting tomorrow to address the "17 acres" issue. He suggested that the City wait to see what the Water and School Districts decide, since they are joint owners of the property.

Mr. Burkett said the City was anticipating a permit application from the Water District.

Councilmember Gustafson suggested that Shorecrest High School be brought into the discussion, since the principal has expressed concern about conditions at "17 acres."

Councilmember Ransom discussed the possibility of leasing part of the land to the City in order to preserve the track and resolve the liability insurance problem. He said the Water District meeting might provide a good opportunity to discuss the idea with the property owners. He pointed out that skateboard parks and other public facilities have been given special exemptions under the law.

Mr. Burkett reiterated that the City's only role is to review the grading permit. He understood that the owners intend to apply for a permit to remove the BMX track.

Mayor Jepsen said the Water District meeting will reveal more about the relationship between the BMX track and the property owners. He recommended that the City obtain a copy of the meeting minutes when they become available.

6. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA

Councilmember Montgomery moved approval of the agenda. Councilmember Gustafson seconded the motion, which carried unanimously, and the agenda was approved.

7. CONSENT CALENDAR

Councilmember Montgomery moved approval of the consent calendar. Councilmember Ransom seconded the motion, which carried 7-0, and the following items were approved:

Minutes of Dinner Meeting of August 26, 2002

Minutes of Workshop of September 3, 2002

Minutes of Dinner Meeting of September 9, 2002

Minutes of Regular Meeting of September 9, 2002

Approval of expenses and payroll as of September 13, 2002 in the amount of $1,289,714.73

Motion to authorize the City Manager to execute a Construction contract with Precision Earthworks, Inc. in the amount of $162,598 for the 175th Street Sidewalk (Meridian to Corliss Avenues) project and the 175th Street Sidewalk (adjacent to the YMCA) project

8. ACTION ITEMS: PUBLIC HEARINGS

8(a) Public Hearing to consider citizens' comments on the Proposed Human Services Allocation Committee's Recommendations for the 2003-2004 Human Services Funding Plan (including General Fund and Community Development Block Grant)

Rob Beem, Assistant Director of Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services, summarized the review process of the Human Services Allocation Committee and introduced advisory committee members Nancy Phillips and Dianne Ritter. He explained the process and criteria for ranking applications, noting that the committee recommended funding about half (13) of the human service applicants. He noted that the committee developed a contingency plan that allows the City to adjust to the final CDBG appropriation.

Mayor Jepsen opened the public hearing.

(a) Jerry Evergreen, Seattle, expressed appreciation to Council for funding of the Center for Human Services, particularly at a time when resources are scarce.

(b) Maia Bauman and Aaron Reichart, Shoreline, asked Council to reconsider the decision to cut funding of the Crisis Clinic Teen Link Program. They explained that Teen Link has been in Shoreline for the past seven years, during which time 21 youth have served on the telephone hotline to assist in youth suicide prevention. Teen Link provides suicide prevention training in middle and high schools and other organizations in King County. Although the program will continue to operate due to contributions from other cities, they noted that a funding decrease will negatively impact Shoreline youth. They suggested that Teen Link's outreach efforts have contributed to a reduction in the King County suicide rate.

(c) Erick Slabaugh, Lynnwood resident and Crisis Clinic board member, urged Council to support funding for the Teen Link program.

(d) Larry Bauman, Shoreline, urged Council to support Teen Link, noting that the program should be funded even if it saves only one child. He said the program uses the peer-counseling model well, and that training provided for volunteers is very extensive.

(e) Anzhelika Nisanova, Seattle, representing the Fremont Public Association, brought seniors from Briarwood and Lakehouse to speak in favor of the Neighbor-to-Neighbor program.

(f) Alma Buginnis, Shoreline, Briarwood House resident, asked Council to reconsider funding for the Neighbor to Neighbor program. She said the program provides many seniors and disabled citizens with fulfilling and worthwhile activities, including meals, opportunities for companionship, and support.

(g) Abram Gutkin, Shoreline, Lakehouse resident, asked Council to support the Neighbor to Neighbor program. He said the program provides many benefits to the senior and disabled populations that have limited mobility due to lack of transportation.

(h) Iracema Conom, Shoreline, Briarwood resident, spoke in favor of the Neighbor-to-Neighbor program, noting the value of the many services the program provides.

(i) Shaunta Hyde, Lake Forest Park, president of the Center for Human Services, thanked the Council for preserving CHS funding.

Upon motion by Councilmember Hansen, seconded by Deputy Mayor Grossman and unanimously carried, the public hearing was closed.

Councilmember Hansen moved to: 1) adopt the Human Services Allocation Committee's recommended 2003/2004 Human Services Funding and Contingency Plan and the recommended allocations for CDBG Planning/Administration and the King County Housing Repair Fund; and 2) authorize the City Manager to enter into agreements for implementing these projects. Councilmember Montgomery seconded the motion.

Councilmembers Ransom and Gustafson asked for clarification of the Teen Link program. Mr. Beem explained that Crisis Clinic provides 24/7 community information and emergency assistance, whereas Teen Link focuses on suicide prevention services to teens.

Councilmember Gustafson asked if there were any other resources available for Teen Link, noting that the program provides a valuable service. Mr. Beem said Teen Link can explore charity, philanthropy, and other fund-raising options that are available to similar non-profit groups. He noted that Teen Link receives money from Crisis Center, a United Way program, but he was not sure how much it receives.

Councilmember Gustafson supported the committee's recommendations, although he felt that Teen Link is a valuable program. He expressed a desire to see Teen Link explore sources of funding.

Councilmember Hansen was also willing to accept the committee's recommendations, noting its extensive effort in selecting and rating applicants.

Councilmember Montgomery expressed appreciation for the committee's efforts, noting the difficulty in trying to choose among so many legitimate services. She emphasized the need to address the issue of adolescent suicide, describing it as a national epidemic. She also agreed with the committee's recommendations, though she would like to see the Teen Link program receive additional funding.

Councilmember Ransom questioned why the Teen Link program did not receive a higher ranking, suggesting they are deserving of additional consideration. He said it is likely that Council will consider another emergency appropriation on a one-year funding cycle.

Mr. Beem said the rank was largely based on the number of volunteers involved in Teen Link since its inception. He also noted that Teen Link received fewer Shoreline phone calls than other similarly funded programs.

Mayor Jepsen felt it would be premature to commit to additional funding since the budget has not yet come forward. He said city and county budget cuts are likely to devastate human services funding. He stressed the importance of committing resources to programs that make the most difference to the community. He noted that the committee process was established to make these difficult determinations on behalf of the City.

Councilmember Ransom expressed a desire to include funding for Teen Link in the upcoming budget process.

Deputy Mayor Grossman asked whether Shoreline teens would still be able to talk to someone on the teen crisis hotline if funding is eliminated. Mr. Beem's understanding was that the phone service would remain, but there would be less outreach to schools and the community.

Deputy Mayor Grossman expressed support for the committee's recommendations, even though many deserving causes were not funded due to limited resources. He said the Council should honor the committee process since it was composed of human services specialists who had the duty to evaluate applications, rank proposals, and make recommendations to Council.

Councilmember Hansen noted that there is nothing to preclude Council from reinstating funds in human services, but from a practical standpoint it makes more sense to wait for the budget process.

Councilmember Ransom moved an amendment to take $6,000 from the Reserve Fund to support the Teen Link Program. Councilmember Hansen seconded the motion.

Councilmember Gustafson acknowledged the importance of the Teen Link program but suggested that Council explore ideas to fund it outside of city resources.

Councilmember Chang expressed support for the committee recommendations but noted his preference to explore alternative funding sources for Teen Link, given the difficult economic outlook. He added that businesses, schools, churches, and other community organizations could be potential sources of funding for future human service needs.

Deputy Mayor Grossman noted that budget cuts in human services on a state and county level will create an even greater need. He said since crisis hotline service is already available, the City should use its resources in the areas that will experience reductions. He stressed the importance of planning for further cuts in funding by the county and state.

Councilmember Ransom expressed support for the committee process, noting that he respects the work of the people appointed to the committee. However, he said part of the process includes public input on committee recommendations, and Council should be responsive to the public's concerns.

Deputy Mayor Grossman said that the highest risk people are usually the ones who cannot attend public hearings and advocate for themselves. He said even though a program may deserve funding, it sets a bad precedent to ignore committee recommendations and acquiesce to public sentiments.

Mayor Jepsen expressed a preference to evaluate human service funding needs as part of the 2003 budget process, noting that the list of needed services continues to grow. He said the 2003 budget process will provide more clarity about what assistance the state and county will be able to provide.

A vote was taken on the motion, which failed 1-6, with Councilmember Ransom voting in the affirmative.

A vote was taken on the motion, which carried 7-0 and the Human Services Allocations Committee's recommended 2003/2004 Human Services Funding and Contingency Plan and the recommended allocations for CDBG Planning/

Administration and the King County Housing Repair Fund were approved; and the City Manager was authorized to enter into agreements for implementing these projects.

8(b) Public hearing to consider citizens' comments on Referendum 51

City Attorney Ian Sievers provided the legal guidelines that govern City Council's discussion of ballot issues. He said that state statute establishes general rules prohibiting public employees or elected officials from using city resources in support of or opposition to candidates or ballot measures. However, there are very clear exceptions that allow for Council consideration of Resolution No. 191 supporting Referendum 51. He said the City followed all state noticing and documentation rules pertaining to this ballot measure.

Sara Bohlen, Transportation Planner, provided factual information regarding Referendum 51 and the implications for Shoreline of its passage or failure at the polls on November 5, 2002.

Mayor Jepsen opened the public hearing.

(a) LaNita Wacker, Shoreline, supported Council's endorsement of Referendum 51 because of the negative impact that the ailing transportation system has on the economy. She said the problem is a congested corridor which limits our ability to move goods and services.

(b) State Representative Ruth Kagi, Lake Forest Park, urged Council to endorse Referendum 51, noting that transportation improvements are urgently needed and long overdue. Her discussion focused on vulnerable bridges, high accident areas, and traffic congestion that seriously impacts our state's economy. She said although Referendum 51 will not fix every problem, it will give us the resources to start on the highest priority projects. She emphasized the importance of starting now, since it will only get more expensive and more difficult later. She said accountability is one of most important features of Referendum 51, noting that quarterly audits, specific project lists, and revenue tracking will be part of the plan. She urged Council not to let controversial local projects prevent it from supporting Referendum 51.

(c) Daniel Mann, Shoreline, expressed opposition to Council endorsement of Referendum 51. He commented that he has tried to work with WSDOT and City to save $50 million on the Aurora Corridor Project, but WSDOT is not interested in saving money. He emphasized the need to make WSDOT more accountable to the public. He said WSDOT should be denied funding to send a clear message that it must be respectful of taxpayers and change its methods of operation.

(d) Anthony Poland, Shoreline, expressed opposition to Council discussion of Referendum 51. He said WSDOT has not concentrated on the highest priorities, noting that Aurora Avenue does not need bus-only lanes. He was skeptical about the idea of dedicated transportation funds, noting that in the past the legislature used cigarette settlement money to cover deficits in the general fund.

(e) Walt Hagen, Shoreline, expressed opposition to Council endorsement of Referendum 51. He said although bridges may be in poor condition, neither WSDOT nor the legislature has been accountable to the public. He said Referendum 51 will not address high accident areas and that the projected costs cannot be trusted. He noted that administrative and design data for transportation improvements is faulty, and that local projects like Aurora are typical of projects throughout the state. He said WSDOT has neither the ability nor the duty to correct local economic problems.

(f) Edsel Hammond, Shoreline, expressed opposition to Council endorsement of Referendum 51, noting that two other transportation proposals offered to the legislature could have done the same job for much less. He said Referendum 51 is full of waste and that the Council should not endorse a wasteful plan.

Upon motion by Councilmember Hansen, seconded by Deputy Mayor Grossman and unanimously carried, the public hearing was closed.

Councilmember Montgomery moved that the Council support Referendum 51 (Resolution No. 191 to support Washington State Referendum 51, financing transportation improvements through transportation taxes and fees at the November 5, 2002 General Election). Councilmember Gustafson seconded the motion.

Councilmember Ransom supported Council endorsement of the Referendum, noting that there has been no gas tax increase since 1991. He said the 9-cent increase will simply catch up to inflation and cost-of-living increases. He expressed support for performance-based measures but explained that even with efficiencies, it is impossible to produce enough money to address transportation needs without an increased tax. He said Referendum 51 is just the beginning, noting that additional transportation funds will be needed in the tri-county area.

Councilmember Hansen questioned State Representative Kagi's reference to $2 billion in costs. She clarified that $2 billion represents the total economic cost of the transportation problem to the state. Councilmember Hansen continued, saying he personally will vote for Referendum 51 but he has reservations about whether Council should take an official position. He said the serious transportation problem warrants an increased tax, which is essentially a user fee that will be put into dedicated accounts to address specific traffic problems. Although he does not agree with every project in the plan, he said it is the best way to address the problem since the MVET loss put the state in a difficult fiscal position.

Deputy Mayor Grossman said the transportation plan is not perfect, but it will help the state from getting further behind. He noted that the longer we wait, the higher the costs will increase.

Mayor Jepsen said there is no question that WSDOT needs to be more accountable, but voting against Referendum 51 does not necessarily achieve this.

Councilmember Montgomery concurred, stating that the public, not WSDOT, will be negatively impacted if Referendum 51 fails.

Councilmember Gustafson concurred, explaining that we must consider the effect of a poor transportation system and worsening economy on the next generation.

Councilmember Chang noted that businesses have wanted transportation improvements for decades, but the political leadership has failed them. He said Referendum 51 goes beyond transportation issues, noting the importance of strong political leadership and common sense. He said that Council should stay out of the issue and abide by what the public decides. He added that the legislature needs to exhibit leadership and vision.

A vote was taken on the motion, which carried 5-2, with Councilmembers Chang and Hansen dissenting; and Resolution No. 191 was approved.

8(c) Public hearing to consider citizens' comments on Initiative 776

Debra Tarry, Finance Director, provided factual information regarding Initiative 776 and the implications of its passage for Shoreline. She noted that I-776 requires license tab fees for motor vehicles to not exceed $30. I-776 also eliminates the authorization for voter-approved local option Motor Vehicle Excise Tax (MVET) for transit, and repeals the local option vehicle license fee. She explained that the biggest impact to the City would be a loss of approximately $500,000 in annual revenue from the City Street Fund. She noted that Shoreline citizens have previously opposed other reductions in transportation funding. Council is considering Resolution No. 193 which opposes Initiative 776.

Mayor Jepsen opened the public hearing.

(a) LaNita Wacker, Shoreline, expressed support for Resolution No. 193. She said the MVET was the only progressive tax in the state, and guessed that I-776 will be declared unconstitutional. She urged local elected officials to speak out on this issue since I-776 removes local tax control. She asked Council to submit majority and minority opinions to the Enterprise so people can understand the rationale on both sides.

(b) Dennis Lee, Shoreline, said the people that support initiatives are protest voters who are not being reached by political leaders. He encouraged the Council not to take a position on the issue.

(c) Anthony Poland, Shoreline, reiterated his view that it is inappropriate for the Council to discuss ballot issues. He said the only reason the City has singled out ballot measures for discussion is because it has a financial stake in the outcomes. He added that the public wants government to do more with less money, and said the Council should not be surprised when the City falls apart.

Upon motion by Councilmember Hansen, seconded by Councilmember Ransom and unanimously carried, the public hearing was closed.

MEETING EXTENSION

At 10:00 p.m. Councilmember Gustafson moved to extend the meeting until 10:30 p.m. Councilmember Ransom seconded the motion, which carried 5-2, with Deputy Mayor Grossman and Councilmember Montgomery dissenting.

Councilmember Ransom moved approval of Resolution No. 193, opposing State Initiative 776, which would repeal the motor vehicle excise tax that is currently available to local transit agencies, eliminate the local voter-approved motor vehicle excise tax option for high capacity transit that funds Sound Transit projects, repeal the vehicle license fee that is currently collected in four counties to fund local transportation improvements, and require license tab fees to be $30 per year. Deputy Mayor Grossman seconded the motion.

Councilmember Chang said Council should not address I-776 since it is a ballot measure. He expressed concern about the potential loss of $500,000 in the City Street Fund that may result from passage of I-776. He cited the City of Camas as a good example of revenue generation and suggested that the City develop an economic development program to generate more revenue.

Mayor Jepsen said that the North City Subarea and Central Subarea are two tools that may help address the revenue issue. He said another area of focus might be business improvement districts, an idea the Chamber of Commerce has discussed in the past.

Councilmember Hansen said that Shoreline and Camas are not comparable, noting that the City of Camas depends on a paper mill as its primary source of revenue. He expressed reservations about Council taking a position on ballot measures, but noted that I-776 directly affects the City's budget. He said the City could be forced to consider discontinuance of the overlay program if it loses $500,000 in the City Street Fund. He said initiatives are a poor way of making law because they often have unintended consequences. He added that it is not the Council's job to take a position on ballot measures.

Councilmember Ransom felt it is appropriate for Council to discuss ballot measures because people have a right to form opinions based on their leaders' positions. He said license tab fees are user fees that will be used for the specific purpose of paving roads. He opposed the initiative and felt that responsible elected officials should make their positions known.

Councilmember Gustafson concurred with Councilmember Ransom and expressed opposition to the initiative. He said he is obligated to represent a majority of citizens, and since a majority of citizens oppose the initiative, Council should oppose it as well. He expressed his belief in local tax control and the right of citizens to vote on initiatives and taxation.

Mayor Jepsen said by calculating the anticipated losses of the Street Fund into the future, the City's road resurfacing plan changes from a 10-year plan to a 30-year plan. He expressed his opposition to the initiative since it will have a negative effect on roads in Shoreline neighborhoods.

A vote was taken on the motion which carried 5-2, with Councilmembers Hansen and Chang dissenting, and Resolution No. 193 was approved.

9. UNFINISHED BUSINESS

(a) Consideration of the proposal of the Rotary Club of Shoreline and the Breakfast Rotary Club to change the name of Ronald Bog Park to "Rotary Park at Ronald Bog."

Wendy Barry, Director of Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services, provided background on this proposal, which was discussed by Council six months ago and postponed. She noted that the City had no policy with regard to naming parks when the Rotary proposed the change in April 2001. After the Parks Advisory Committee developed policies in August 2001, the policy was presented to Council on Feb 11, 2002, when it was approved with minor changes. The Parks Advisory Committee reviewed the Rotary's proposal again and brought it before Council on March 25, 2002. Council decided to delay action until September 23, 2002.

She said Council is presented with three options: 1) change the name; 2) do not change the name; or 3) do not change name and take other action to identify Rotary's contributions to the park. The Parks Advisory Committee recommends Option #3.

Mayor Jepsen called for public comment.

(a) Richard Johnsen, Shoreline, commended the Rotary for its work but was opposed to the name change. He expressed support for Option #3 and said the Rotary could install individual signs on improved locations in the park. He gave a brief history of the park and surrounding area, noting that the park was named after Judge James Ronald, a former Seattle Mayor.

(b) LaNita Wacker, Shoreline, said the name of the park should not be changed under any circumstances. She said that Ronald Bog Park is the widely accepted name and suggested that the Rotary could be recognized as a park sponsor. She noted that the Rotary is one of many service clubs that contribute to the community.

MEETING EXTENSION

At 10:30 p.m. Councilmember Ransom moved to extend the meeting until 10:45 p.m. Councilmember Chang seconded the motion, which carried 6-1, with Deputy Mayor Grossman dissenting.

Councilmember Montgomery moved Option #3 ("not to change the name of the park, and take other action to reflect the story of the park and Rotary's contributions to the park over the years"). Councilmember Hansen seconded the motion, which carried 6-1, with Councilmember Gustafson dissenting.

Councilmember Ransom thought that the Rotary Club was not interested in a memorial plaque or kiosk, and inquired whether the morning and afternoon Rotary clubs were joint participants in the proposal.

Ms. Barry noted that both clubs were signatories on the proposal. She said Mr. Cottingham previously indicated that a kiosk was not an acceptable alternative.

10. CONTINUED PUBLIC COMMENT

(a) R.W. McLane, Shoreline, said vehicles are being parked in space traditionally reserved for pedestrian traffic in the Echo Lake Neighborhood. He asked Council to direct more Aurora Project funds to differentiate between space for vehicle traffic and pedestrian traffic in Echo Lake. He expressed opposition to Referendum 51, noting that design restrictions and geographic limitations will prohibit real traffic improvements.

(b) LaNita Wacker, Shoreline, said the Council has a responsibility to protect "17 acres" because its duty is to preserve the environment in Shoreline. She met with the Water District , Superintendent of Schools, and the principal of Shorecrest and learned that the BMX bikers are not the problem. They participate in a healthy sport, and she would like to see the City promote more positive recreational activities in the future. Noting that the liability issue could be resolved, she urged Council to get involved and consider "17 acres" a City matter.

(c) Richard Johnsen, Shoreline, gave a brief historical outline of the Ronald Bog area, expressing regret that the Rotary does not have much of a historical perspective. He said the community should take an interest in history and appreciate what it has.

11. ADJOURNMENT

At 10:45 p.m. Mayor Jepsen declared the meeting adjourned.

 

_____________________________

Sharon Mattioli, CMC

City Clerk