Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1981-10-27city council minutesBook 22 Page 294 REGULAR MEETING October 27, 1981 12:00 noon The Meeting was called to order by Mayor McCluskey. The Roll of the City Council was called with the following members present: Williams, Raymond, Mallea, Carter, and Betts. Absent: Hopper. The Mayor requested that everyone stand and give the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. (AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION) The Mayor asked if there was anyone in the audience who cared to bring anything before the City Council that was not on the prepared Agenda. A Mr. Harold Schmierer, who stated that he runs Ward's Auction at 1424 Chicago, was recognized and informed the City Council that he just returned from the Post Office and observed a man on the street selling oranges. His question was whether there wasn't an Ordinance of the City of Caldwell which prevents the selling of produce from out of the back of a. truck on the City streets. He further commented that he had also seen this done across the street from his place of business. The Mayor informed Mr. Schmierer that there was an Ordinance with regard to selling on the street and from door to door. The person planning to sell must come to the City Hall and secure a license from the City Clerk. The procedure to be taken was to report an incident of this kind to the Police Department so they can check with the City Clerk to see if they have a license and if not, the Police will issue a citation. Mr. Schmierer further stated that he also had concern with regard to whether these people were conforming to the Idaho State Sales Tax laws. He also stated that he had people who come into his place of business, buy his merchandise and then take it home and have a yard sale. The Mayor informed Mr. Schmierer that when he was on the Council he had an Ordinance prepared to limit yard sales to a certain number a year. It was the purpose to have them licensed so the City could keep an account of them as they were aware that there was a lot of stolen merchandise that was sold at yard sales. The public was against the Ordinance as there was a great number present at the meeting when it was discussed. The Mayor said that he agreed with Mr. Schmierer with regard to the yard sales as there was nothing that bothered him more. The Mayor said that in answer to his concern with regard to the sales tax problem, the City has no authority. to collect sales tax for the State of Idaho. Bill Morrison, City attorney, was recognized and suggested that Mr. Schmierer address his complaints to the City Council and those complaints could be forwarded to the State Tax Commission. NEW BUSINESS (BID OPENING - VEHICLE AND EQUIPMENT FOR PUBLIC WORKS AND FIRE DEPARTMENT) The Mayor inforred the City Council that the City Clerk pointed out that the bid submitted by Curt Beukelman came in a few minutes after noon and there was a question in his mind as to whether they could accept his bid as 12:00 noon was set for the time that all bids must be submitted. Mr. Beukelman pointed out that the notice also states that the bids will be opened at 12:00 Noon and the Mayor and Council did not open the bids at that time so he felt they were just as much out of line as he was. The Mayor said that he would like to have a vote from the people in the audience who were in competition with him. Councilman Raymond was recognized and stated that there was a time set for bids to be received. If it was all right to accept a bid beyond the time set according to the City Attorney, he would certainly be willing to accept the bid. It was not the City's law that requires an established time be set for bids to be delivered Book 22 Page 295 at a given place and he felt that the City had to be fair in this matter. Mr. Morrison, City Attorney, was recognized and stated that there was a date certain set which should be binding, but at the same time if the other bidders agree to the City accepting the bid, he could see no harm in accepting the bid. Councilwoman Williams was recognized and stated that she would think that if he had come in after the bid opening started, it would be a different matter. She could see nothing wrong with accepting the bid under the present circumstances. MOVED by Williams, SECONDED by Betts that the City allow the bid from Curt Beukelman to be opened and considered. Councilman Raymond again stated that he had one concern and that was with the legality as far as the City was concerned if they were challenged in a Court of Law for accepting a bid that came in late, could the City be held liable in the purchase product of the other qualified bidders. Councilwoman Williams again stated that if he had come in after the bid opening was started, then she would feel differently, but nothing has been started. She further said that she would like to see a poll of the people in the audience who submitted bids after the motion was acted on. The Mayor stated that he felt it was his prerogative to do this and. he would ask how many in the audience would be against allowing Mr. Beukelman to present his bid. There was no one in the audience who objects. The Mayor then asked for a vote on the motion as made. MOTION CARRIED Ron Redmond, City Engineer, was then requested by the Mayor to open the bids. Mr. Redmond. explained that there was five bid schedules and two of the bid envelopes were not marked on the outside and he would open those last and put them in the proper schedule. SCHEDULE I Tour door sedan for the Fire Chief Burns Chevrolet, Caldwell V -8 $ 8,477.65 Six cylinder 8,418.15 Trade -in allowances for three vehicles: 1973 Ambassador $ 400.00 1979 Dodge Aspen 750.00 1979 Dodge Aspen 750.00 Net Price: V -8 $6,577.65 Six Cylinder $ 6,518.15 Happy Day Ford V -8 $ 8,600.00 Six Cylinder Not Available Trade -in allowances: 1973 Ambassador $ 300.00 1979 Dodge Aspen 1,200.00 1979 Dodge Aspen 1,200.00 Net Price: V -8 $ 5,900.00 Six Cylinder Not Available SCHEDULE II Mini pickups Burns Chevrolet; minimum of three and possibly up to seven of 1980 -81 half ton pickups Total price each: $ 6,596.73 Total of seven trade -in: 1969 Ford pickup $200.00 1974 Ford four door sedan 250.00 1971 International pickup 200.00 Book 22 Page 296 1973 Datsun pickup $ 600.00 1977 Dodge pickup 1,600.00 1971 International pickup 200.00 1970 Ford pickup 250.00 Mr. Redmond explained that the City would have one trade -in allowance for every pickup purchased. Happy Day Ford 1981 Ford Courier Total price each: $ 5,617.00 Trade -in allowance: 1969 Ford pickup 300.00 1974 Ford four door 250.00 1971 International pickup 100.00 1973 Datsun pickup 450.00 1977 Dodge pickup 1,100.00 1971 International pickup 300.00 1970 Ford pickup 150.00 SCHEDULE III One ton flat bed truck with lift gate. Burns Chevrolet $ 10,950.97 Happy Day Ford 10,999.00 (options identified, but those will be reviewed) No trade -in SCHEDULE IV Ten yard dump truck Burns Chevrolet $ 34,728.50 Trade -in allowance on International: $ 2,700.00 Net Price: $ 32,028.50 Happy Day Ford $ 42,331.00 Trade -in allowance: $ 1,500.00 Net Price: $ 40,831.00 SCHEDULE V Loader Backhoe Idaho Tractor Inroporated of Nampa Total: $ 45,166.00 Trade -in: 1966 International: $ 9,128.00 1970 John Deere 400 9,128.00 Net Price: $ 26,910.00 Foulger Equipment Company of Idaho, Boise - Total: $ 30,604.00 (exceptions to bid specs) Trade -in: 1966 International $ 3,600.00 1970 John Deere 400 5,200.00 Net Price: $ 21,804.00 They were bidding a JCB 3C 1400 Foulgers second bid: Total: $ 33,742.00 Trade -in: 1966 International Loader 3,600.00 1970 John Deere 400 5,200.00 Net Price: $ 24,942.00 The model being bid was a JCB 3C 1550 Book 22 Page 297 Cesco of Boise First bid total: $ 41,797.00 Trade -in: 1966 International Loader $ 7,300. 1970 John Deere 400 6,011.1 Net Price: $ 28,486.00 This bid was for a John Deere 410 loader backhoe and there was some optionall equipment to be added on. Second Bid Total: $ 40,190.00 (alternate bid on 1980 current production model) Trade -in: 1966 International loader $9,036.00 1970 John Deere 7,300.00 Net Price: $ 23,854.00 Schlofman Tractor and Implement Co. of Boise 'Total: $ 28,564.00 Trade -in: 1966 International loader $ 2,975.00 John Deere 400 3,213.00 Net Price: $ 22,376.00 Their bid was for a Ford 555 TLB Century Equipment Company in Salt Lake City Total: $ 44,045.00 Trade -in: 1966 International $ 8,024.00 1970 John Deere 400 $ 10,000.00 Net Price: $ 26,021.00 Their bid was for a Case 580 Super D Starline Equipment Co., Boise Total: $ 45,392.00 Trade -in: 1966 International $ 8,000.00 1970 John Deere 400 11,526.00 Net Price: $ 25,866.00 They were bidding an International 270 A Mr. Redmond then stated that he would open the bids that were not marked as to the Schedule and would inform the City Council what Schedule they belong in as opened. Curt and Hall, Inc. SCHEDULE II Mini Pickups Their bid was for three pickups. The bid was for a Plymouth Arrow. Two 1981 pickups $ 6,562.00 One 1982 6,724.00 Trade -in 1969 Ford pickup $ 974.00 1981 model 1977 Dodge pickup 1,535.00 1982 model 1970 Ford pickup 1,074.00 1981 model Bob and Johns, Caldwell SCHEDULE IV Ten yard dump truck Total: $ 38,775.00 Trade -in $ 2,500.00 Net Price: 36,275.00 Book 22 Page 298 They were bidding a 1982 F -1954 dump truck. The Mayor then asked for action from the City Council with regard to these bids. MOVED by Betts, SECONDED by Mallea that the bids be turned over to a review committee. MOTION CARRIED The Mayor then stated that he would like to have Ron Redmond, City Engineer; Dennie Shippy, of the Street Department; and Councilman Carter and Councilman Hopper on this Committee. Mr. Redmond further stated that he would hope to have the recommendation for the City Council by the next Regular City Council Meeting on Wednesday, November 4th at 12:00 noon. (REQUEST FROM THE MAYOR TO MOVE AN ITEM AHEAD ON THE AGENDA) The Mayor stated that he would like to have permission from the City Council to move Mr. and Mrs. Withers' request ahead on the Agenda so they would not have to stay for the entire meeting. MOVED by Carter, SECONDED by Williams that Mr. and Mrs. Withers be allowed to present their case to the City Council at this time. MOTION CARRIED (MR. AND MRS. WITHERS APPEAL TO COUNCIL REGARDING PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION DECISION) The Mayor said that he felt that most of the City Council were aware of this item as some of the members were at the Planning and Zoning Commission when the request by Mr. and Mrs. Withers was made. The Mayor further explained that it takes four members of the City Council to overturn a Planning and Zoning Commission's decision. IIe further stated that for the benefit of the audience he would briefly explain the situation. There was a building permit issued and a building was built according to specifications established. In the meantime, a carport was also built and the carport exceeds the limitations on the City setback zone according to the City zoning laws as established. This issue went through the Planning and Zoning Commission and they turned down the request made by Mr. and Mrs. Withers to have a variance established. Now, Mr. and Mrs. Withers were appealing to the City Council to override the Planning and Zoning Commission. Mr. Bob Yost, Attorney at Law, was recognized and stated that he was present at the meeting to represent Mr. and Mrs. Withers. He stated that he would begin by thanking the Council for hearing the appeal and he would briefly cover the matter. He first presented a photograph of the carport in question which was located at 120 North Indiana Street in that part of town where there was no curb and gutter as yet. It was difficult to estimate and measure distances because of the lack of development. As Mr. Yost understood the situation, Mr. and Mrs. Withers applied for a building permit and thought that the carport was part of the building permit, but found out later to their sorrow that it was not. There was five inspections made by the Building Inspector during the course of this and the carport was now installed in a very neat manner by a company from Nampa. Mr. Yost pointed out the effect the photograph had with regard to how the carport enhanced the beauty of the street. Mr. Yost also informed the City Council that there was a number of neighbors in this area who said that they did not object to this carport and would recommend to the City Council that these people be allowed to maintain their carport. Mr. Yost further commented that he knew that this situation comes up very often and in this case there was no opposition from the people and he understood the reasons for the carport being built as they needed an extra room for a mother that moved in. This was a developing part of town that has had its problems in the past and the whole street looks betts with this carport added on. You say that you cannot make an exception in these cases because if you do it for one, you will have Book 22 Page 299 to do it for another. Mr. Yost knew that this was a problem the Council has had and will continue to have. He felt that in this case it did enhance the beauty of the area. Ile did not think that anyone in.th.e area would object. Iie believed that the carport was there for some considerable time before it was called to their attention that it was an unlawful variance. They respectfully requested that the City Council consider the nature of the street and the area it was in and the undeveloped nature of the street and the enhancing value that carport does -add to the street. The Mayor then asked for Mr. Dennis Davis, the Building Inspector to explain the sequence of events that led up to this request. Mr.. Davis explained that Mrs. Withers came into his office to get a permit on July 25, 1980, to enclose a carport. Mrs. Withers informed him that she had a contractor to do the work and he did issue the permit. All of the inspections were conducted and all went well. When remodeling within the confines of a building, he` does not require a plan. The next event after the final inspection was when he drove by and s.aw the carport over the driveway. FT stopped and informed them 'that they were in violation. The Mayor then called on Mrs. Robison to make a statement with regard to the Planning and Zoning decision. Mrs: Robison stated that Mrs. Withers asked to be put ^on the Agenda for the Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting to have them consider a variance to allow this carport to remain on the front setback. The Commission reviewec it and determined that they would not grant a variance because the carport was built without a building permit and it was on the setbac] The Mayor then stated that he would now ask the City Council members to address any questions that they might have with regard to this appeal.. One of the questions asked was how much too far out was the carport. Mr. Davis put a picture of the property and the carport on the projector for the benefit of the Council and the audience to point this out. Mr. Davis stated that the residence took up most of the front setback. From the center of Indiana to their property line measured thirty feet and the carport actually extends out sixteen feet from the building line. The building has the minimu- setback of twenty feet at this time and the carport extends out sixteen feet which. leaves about _['our feet to the property line. Mrs-. Withers was recognized and explained the reasons for constructing the carport. During; her explanation, Councilman Carter asked her if she was under the impression when they got the building permit that this carport was included. Mrs..Withers stated that yes they were. She further commented that when an average citizen looks at a job like this, they do not know.that it requires a special permit. The electrician came up three times, they got their permit and Mr. Davis was there five times. The fifth time,that Mr. Davis came to their place they understood from him that the City did not need to inspect fireplaces and.etc. They wanted to do it right and the fifth time they invited Mr. Davis to come up there was so they would feel safer about anything - regarding the roof. When Mr. Davis was there, they had to extend the hearth eighteen inches so the contractor had to do additional work. At that time, Mrs. Withers questioned why after one year he would state this to them. She also stated that Mr. Davis came in the middle of August and it was up in September. Councilman Carter then asked if it was a fact up almost a year before they were notified by Carter also asked Mr. Davis if curb and gutter would he explain where it would be. Mr. Davis should be about sixteen feet from the curb and carport. that the carport was Mr. Davis. Councilman was put in there, stated that there gutter to the Councilwoman Mallea was recognized and informed them that she had gone to see this carport and also read the report from the Planning and Zoning Commission and it'was her opinion that Planning and Zoning has not made a decision on this. They have simply d.ec ided not to hear a request for a variance; therefore; she would MOVE to send the petition back to Planning and Zoning and ask them to consider the variance. SECONDED by Carter. The Mayor then stated that he would like to come out in defense of tl Building Inspector because rightly so, he has been designated to Book 22 Page 300 uphold the laws that were es.tahli,sh_ed by th.i,s body and through Planning and Zoning. When he comes to an irregularity, no matter how long it might be, he still has to take that action. It was unfortunate and it would have been much easier for Mr. Davis to have ignored the situation, but he was just not like that. The Mayor further said that the City should. take a good look at some of these things as the City was running into them quite often. He was inclined to feel that if the neighbors did not object within three hundred feet of the established area, then why should the City. This was only his feeling and not the feeling necessarily of the City Council. The Mayor then asked for a vote on the motion as made. (RESOLUTION FOR TEMPORARY ACCESS EASEMENT AT AIRPORT) MOTION CARRIED The Mayor stated that he would bring this item up for consideration at this time as the City Attorney was present at the Meeting. The Mayor further said that he did have Mr. Morrison go over this Resolution and he informed the Mayor that he could see nothing wrong with the Agreement. The Mayor then read the Resolution in full as follows: A RESOLUTION GRANTING A TEMPORARY ACCESS EASEMENT ON CITY AIRPORT PROPERTY FOR PURPOSES OF FACILITATING DEVELOPMENT OF INDUSTRIAL PROPERTIES ADJACENT TO THE AIRPORT. WHEREAS, a request for an access easement on City property from Ustich Road north paralleling the High Line Canal to serve properties lying easterly of the Caldwell Industrial Airport has been received by the City; and, WHEREAS, it is the intent of the request to improve access to the aforementioned area to facilitate the development of the industrially zoned properties; and, WHEREAS, all parties are fully aware that the access easement will be temporary and subject to cancellation by the City at any time; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, That the Mayor be authorized to prepare and execute on behalf of'the City of Caldwell, a temporary access easement across City property north of Ustick Road and paralleling the High Line Canal to the property easterly of the Caldwell Industrial Airport; and, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED That said easement be subject to the following conditions: 1. The easement be subject to cancellation at any time by the City of Caldwell. 2. Granting of this temporary easement shall not commit the City to providing an alternate access at cancellation or any future date. 3. Any and all associated costs relative to the granting, construction, required relocation and /or restoration shall be the responsibility of the parties receiving the benefit of the easement, and not the City of Caldwell.. 4. Location and utilization of the easement shall be coordinated with the lessee to minimize impacts to any farming operations. Mr. Morrison stated that he was in support of the easement and did not think it would offer any detriment to the City and it may be beneficial in terms of the bankruptcy procedures with regard to the Goiri property. Councilwoman Mallea asked.Mr. Morrison if the Number two provision definitely states that no permanent easement be granted or implied. Mr. Morrison answered that what was said was that it was an easement at will. The City has the option to cancel this easement. He further stated that this could be spelled out in more detail if there was a feeling of reservation. Councilman Raymond was recognized and stated that one of his concerns was that he felt the City needed a written statement from the owner as to his intent to participate in the cost of future permanent access to those industrial properties which were being addressed. Book 22 Page 301 IIis concern was that there was a piece of property 'changing hands, with someone not from this-area, that was landlocked with no permanent access to it. at this time.. At some time, there will have to be an access and he would:hope' that it was not up to-the City of Caldwellto that in the future. He understood that it was a temporary "easement, but still if down the road;, the C -ity buys more property, expands the airport and that access was cut off and the ownership of those properties may look to the City to replace that easement. Mr. Morrison stated that he felt they were talking in terms of polic, He could not recall, and perhaps the Council did need some study on this, if on the map there was a proposed access. If this was there, then maybe Councilman Raymond's concerns were valid and could be something that Mr. Jensen could talk about with the potential buyer. If he recalled that M?_�!, this property would no'' —, be adjacent to that roadway. This could cause a problem. This issue was discussed at some length among the Council members an4 the -City Attorney and Mr. Jensen. Mr. Jensen stated that he felt that Item Number Two in the Resolution pretty well outlines the issue The Mayor.stated: that he did not see :how the Council could sit here and determine what the developer does with his land when he purchase: it. This was where he could not agree. Mr. Morrison was recognized and stated that this matter came to his attention rather late, but he would like to see something done with this property. The original intent.on the sale of the Harris property was to develop this area into an Industrial Airpark. If the City Council would desire more control ove r the nature of the easement, it certainly could be considered. Councilwoman Williams said that she felt they were all having a problem with this issue and she would suggest that the City Council members go out and look at this area at the airport. Mr. Redmond stated that he had addressed his concerns the last time:it was discussed; the:access would'go through a cornfield and there was a problem with a concrete ditch. He didn't really feel that the Council couI.d see very much by going out there. Councilwoman Mallea asked if there was some way that it could be delayed so they could go see the area with City Engineer. The Mayor did point out that'the Airport Commission approved this proposal one hundred percent. Councilwoman Williams, however, point( out that both Councilman Raymond and Co.i- incilman Hopper, who were Council members of the Airport Commission, expressed their concern over the easement. Mr. Morrison stated that there was no reason why the language in the Resolution could not be tightened up more. The City could address adverse possession to.specifically spell it out in the Resolution. Mr. Morrison stated, however, that it was a tight document as it was It was then MOVED by Carter that the Resolution be passed based on addressin —the issues of adverse possession.as suggested by the City Attorney. The motion died for lack of a second. After further discussion as to how the Resolution should address the issues, it was MOVED by Williams, SECONDED by Mallea that the City Attorney tighten up the Resolution regarding the question and that this be placed on the Agenda for the Wednesday noon meeting of November 4, 1981. Councilwoman Mallea stated that she was not opposed to development and would be delighted to see this development and to assist in any way possible. She did feel that the wheels of Covernment should move..slowly and until the problem was addressed, she would. hesitate 1 take action. The Mayor asked for a vote on the motion as made by Councilwoman Williams. MOTION CARRIED Book 22 Page 302 (BILL NO. 22 - ORDINANCE NO. 1612 - AMEND CODE REGARDING CONDITIONS OF SALE OF BEER LICENSE) The Mayor stated that he would read Bill No. 22 in full as follows: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE IV, CHAPTER 7, OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE'CITY OF CALDWELL, IDAHO, STATE OF IDAHO, RELATING TO SALE AND DISTRIBUTION OF BEER, BY ADDING CERTAIN LANGUAGE IN SECTION 4 (E) PERTAINING TO CONDITIONS OF LICENSE: REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES, RESOLUTION, ORDERS OR�PARTS HEREOF IN CONFLICT HEREWITH AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CALDWELL, COUNTY OF CANYON, STATE OF IDAHO: Section 1. That Section 4, Chapter 7, Title IV of the Municipal Code of the City of Caldwell be amended as follows: 4 -7 -4: CONDITIONS OF LICENSE: (E) No license shall be granted to a person who is not of good moral character and who is under the age of nineteen (19) years, or to a person to sell or dispose of beer by peddling. No license shall be issued for any premises place where beer is sold or dispensed to be consumed on the premises, whether conducted for pleasu or profit that is within three hundred feet 300' of any public school, church or other place of worship, or college, measured in a straight line from said building to the nearest entrance of the licensed premises. Section.2. That all ordinances or parts of ordinances inconsistent herewith are hereby repealed. Section 3. That this ordinance shall be in force and effect from and after its passage, approval and publication according to law. The Mayor further commented that this Bill was approved by the City Attorney. MOVED by Williams, SECONDED by Carter that the City Council suspend the rule requiring the reading of a Bill three separate times. Roll call vote. Those voting yes: Williams, Raymond, Mallea, Carter, and Betts. Those voting no: none. Absent and not voting: Hopper. MOTION CARRIED MOVED by Williams, SECONDED by Carter that Bill No. 22 be passed and entitled Ordinance No. 1612. Roll call vote. Those voting yes: Williams, Raymond, Mallea, Carter, and Betts. Those voting no: none. Absent and not voting: Hopper. MOTION CARRIED (APPROVE BEER LICENSE - GEM FUEL SERVICE) The Mayor explained that this beer license was requested at the last City Council Meeting and was not approved until the passage of the Ordinance just addressed. The Mayor asked the City Attorney if it was possible for the City Council to approve this beer license request subject to publication of the Ordinance. Mr. Morrison, the City Aetorney, stated that he could see no problem with approval of the beer license effective after publication of the Ordinance. The Mayor stated that this beer license was requested by Gen Fuel Service located at 1102 Cleveland Boulevard and was for packaged beer. As was discussed at the last meeting, the Police Chief submitted his approval and the fee was paid to the Office of the City Clerk. MOVED by Carter, SECONDED by Williams that approval be given for the beer license requested by Gem Fuel Service to become effective as soon as Ordinance No. 1612 was published. MOTION CARRIED Book 22 Page 303 CREPORT ON STOP LIGHT AT TENTI -I AND CHICAGO) The Mayor informed the City Council that there was a and Street Meeting where a discussion was held with regard to the stop light at Tenth and Chicago. It seemed at that meeting that this request of Caldwell's was again pit aside for other priorities. Both the Mayor and Councilman Raymond commented with regard to this stop light as this corner was designated as of the most hazardous ones in the State of Idaho. Mr. Sacht evidently took this to heart and went to the highway Board and accomplished a revision which resulted in the stop light being put on another; priority list.. The light was to go to bid on November 27th so should be installed in the Pall. (REPORT ON U.D.A.G. GRANT) The Mayor reported that the City was in the process of getting more private sector monies involved in this.project. There was `W rough -ly. $,13,500.00,committed so -far .from the pr,.ivate sector. This shows quite a committment from the private sector in the belief that this sewer line will mean quite a lot to the City of Caldwell. (COMMITTEE REPORTS) Councilwoman Williams- stated that she -had one quick report she would like to make. .Always at .the end of the fiscal. year, there was a little problem because the b.ills that were run in the October run were bills that go into..last.year.'s budget. -. This means that no new budget bills can.be pa.id.uzatil November and some bills just have to be paid. She gave.the Accounting Department permission to do this mini run and she also had the approval of the Finance Chairman. The bills totalled.$10,433.91,: This run will be on the next month's report. She just wanted to- inform the City Council that these bills were being run and the people would be paid (AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION) Terry Bonner was recognized and stated that he did raise his hand during the request for,audience participation, but the Mayor did not notice. He asked for some c'Larification and discussion with regard to the Tico Tico Bar and the action that was taken to revoke their license. The City .Attorney and the Council explained -- briefly what had occurred w.ith,this situation. There being no further business, the Meeting was adjourned at 2:00 p.m. APPROVED AS written THIS 4t.h DAY OP November 1981. C ' n'cilman ounc -lman o'tifici Iman