HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000 02-15 PreMERIDIAN CITY PRE-COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 15, 2000
The Pre-Council meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 6:30 p.m. on Tuesday, February 15, 2000, by Mayor Robert Corrie.
Members present: Robert Corrie, Cherie McCandless, Ron Anderson, Tammy deWeerd, Keith Bird.
Others present: Shari Stiles, Gary Smith, Bill Nichols, Bill Gordon, Ken Bowers, Will Berg.
Corrie: I’ll open the Pre-Council meeting to go over the agenda, and if we have time, we might put the department reports on early since we’ve got a long thing tonight, and we’ll see
where we are by 10:30. I’ve seen times when we have just five or six items on the agenda and we’re here until one or two in the morning, and twenty items we’re gone at 10:30. Okay.
Item G. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law: AZ 99-019 Request for annexation and zoning of 4.34 acres to C-G (Walgreen’s) by Hawkins Smith Management, Inc. – NW corner of Fairview
and Locust Grove:
Item H. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law: CUP 99-034 Request for a Conditional Use Permit to construct a single-tenant commercial building with a drive-thru window (Walgreen’s)
by Hawkins Smith Management, Inc. – NW corner of Fairview and Locust Grove:
Item J. Tabled from February 1, 2000: Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law: AZ 99-022 Request for annexation and zoning of 10 acres to L-O for proposed Magic View Office Complex
by W.H. Moore Company – Eagle Road and Magic View:
Item K. Tabled from February 1, 2000: Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law: CUP 99-040 Request for Conditional Use Permit to provide multiple buildings on a single site and an
ancillary restaurant in proposed L-O zone for proposed Magic View Office Complex by W.H. Moore Company – Eagle Road and Magic View:
Corrie: I guess I’ll start. I’ve got a couple of things on that G & H. We’ve got some requests for annexation and zoning. That’s that Walgreen’s, and there’s some items there that
I think I’m sure Mr. Anderson will challenge. So you might have to think about pulling that one off and also J & K. We got some things back from the Winston Moore that is in your packet
today. So you may want to pull
those off and address them right after – right off the front of the regular agenda meeting. That’s the only thing I have.
Item L. Tabled from February 1, 2000: Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law: CUP 99-033 Request for Conditional Use Permit for 81,000 s.f. mini-storage on Lot 2 of proposed Overland
Mini Storage Subdivision by Overland Mini Storage, LLC – 1230 East Overland Road:
Bird: Mr. Mayor. I’ve got a question on L. No. That’s on your (inaudible). Did we ever get the paperwork on L?
Corrie: That was just the agreement (inaudible) wasn’t it? On L, wasn’t that just the agreement signed?
Berg: Yes, Mr. Mayor. We need to annex the property before we could deal with the CUP. If you noticed, Item No. 1 is the ordinance for the mini-storage. We adopted or approved the
Development Agreement last meeting so we have the ordinance to annex the property this meeting.
Corrie: So we’ll have to do the annexation and then we’ll have to go back in and do the CUP, right?
Berg: Whatever the advice of the legal –
Corrie: Have we got the time? Can we do that right afterwards or do we have to have it public? See, on Item L –
Nichols: Mayor Corrie, Council members, have we not already had the hearing – we’ve concluded all the hearings on the issue so it’s just a matter – yeah, you need to do your annexation
before you can grant your conditional use permit, that’s true.
Corrie: So we’d have to do L right after 1, then.
Item B. Treasure Valley Economic Development $5,000 Commitment:
Anderson: Mr. Mayor. I also had a question on our Treasure Valley Economic Commitment. Our cover sheet on our agenda, and if I remember correctly from our presentation, we were asked
for $5,000 and when I read this, it says that Meridian is being asked for $10,000 on Page 4 of the agreement. Okay.
Corrie: Chamber’s already given their $5,000 and we’ll give our $5,000.
Anderson: All right. Well, that answers my question.
Bird: Good thought. Meridian Chamber has already donated theirs, haven’t they, Mayor?
Corrie: Yeah. They’ve done it.
Bird: So we’re just actually giving up the $5,000?
Corrie: Right.
Item E. Development Agreement: AZ 99-013 Request for annexation and zoning of 1.9 acres to R-2 by Charles Crane – 3610 W. Ustick Road:
Item F. Development Agreement: AZ 99-018 Request for annexation and zoning of 7.25 acres to C-G by Overland Mini Storage, LLC:
deWeerd: Mr. Mayor, on Items E and F, have those Development Agreements been signed?
Corrie: On Item what?
deWeerd: Items E and F.
Corrie: Mr. Clerk.
Berg: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council, yes, they have or else I wouldn’t put them on the agenda. I don’t like tabling things, so I’m trying to keep them so when they are signed they
are on the agenda.
Item M. Agreement with Randy Ware for sewer / water hookup:
Berg: And just discussing that same thing on the last item under my department report, the agreement with Randy Ware on the water and sewer hook-up. That was just a follow-up agreement
when the Council approved him being able to hook up to water and sewer. The agreement came in at the end of Friday afternoon and he has it signed and it’s ready to go also. He’s here
tonight since he didn’t know if he needed to be here until 11:00 to be here to discuss that. I would have probably put it on the Consent Agenda, but we already had that agenda made
up so I just put it at the very end.
Bird: Can we add it to the Consent Agenda?
Berg: I think you could if you want.
deWeerd: Let’s do it.
Corrie: Put that as Item K?
deWeerd: No, it’d be M.
Department Reports:
B. City Engineer – Gary Smith
Application / Request for Latecomers Fee Agreement for Russell Hunemiller:
Berg: Just another comment, Mr. Mayor and members of the Council, Gary had a couple items that he also added at the very end, and one had to deal with the application or request for
latecomers fee agreement with Russell Hunemiller. That was another one of those that we accept his request and we still have to have the agreement drawn up and it comes back before
the Council to approve it, procedurally, and Gary could answer that. That’s the reason we have a revised agenda for a couple items at the very end.
Item F. Development Agreement: AZ 99-018 Request for annexation and zoning of 7.25 acres to C-G by Overland Mini Storage, LLC:
Item G. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law: AZ 99-019 Request for annexation and zoning of 4.34 acres to C-G (Walgreen’s) by Hawkins Smith Management, Inc. – NW corner of Fairview
and Locust Grove:
deWeerd: I had one other question, Mr. Mayor. Item G, the annexation and zoning for Walgreen’s, did that need a Development Agreement?
Corrie: Is Shari here tonight?
Berg: Mr. Mayor, Shari had a couple comments on one Development Agreement and a couple Findings she’d like to address to you that she asked me about.
Corrie: Shari, why don’t you step in there and get you the question.
Stiles: Mr. mayor and Council, the Development Agreement on F, I needed some discussion on that. They had requested a change from the attorney to change one of the conditions of approval
to make it instead of eight buildings that it was going to be 81,000 square feet. I wanted to clarify that with the easements that are existing there and the landscape plan that was
approved as part of the conditional use permit, they’re not going to be able to put any of the landscaping where they showed it on the conditional use permit. So their square footage
of buildings is going to have to be reduced. The majority of their landscaping that they proposed in their conditional use permit is right over the top of the sewer line, and Gary won’t
let us do that. And their plat that they submitted didn’t show
any easements – show that easement, so that is going to affect their plan. I don’t have the copy of the Development Agreement here with me, but I just wanted to clarify in that Agreement
that they’re only getting the 81,000 square feet provided they meet all the other conditions of the conditional use permit.
deWeerd: So what happens if they already signed it?
Stiles: I guess we’ll have to do an amendment, then. I guess you can approve it, but we’ll have to amend it.
: (inaudible)
Bird: Mr. Mayor. Shari, with that many changes and stuff, I mean, you’re affecting the whole deal. I’m not too sure that I want to vote on that thing at all tonight until that Development
Agreement is ironed out and is in to the agreement of everybody concerned. I mean, you’re changing the plat and everything on the deal. I don’t know if – I mean, you can answer a question:
Do they need to go back through and re-do it because of that change on the plat?
Stiles: I believe the conditional use permit they do because it is going to have a significant impact on their conditional use permit plan.
Bird: That’s right. They should have known they had to have some easements in there for sewer line, should have known where the sewer lines and stuff were. I think we ought to completely,
Mayor, if it’s okay with you, I’d certainly take that completely off the agenda if that’s satisfactory to you.
Item L. Tabled from February 1, 2000: Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law: CUP 99-033 Request for Conditional Use Permit for 81,000 s.f. mini-storage on Lot 2 of proposed Overland
Mini Storage Subdivision by Overland Mini Storage, LLC – 1230 East Overland Road:
Item 1. Ordinance No. : AZ 99-018 Request for annexation and zoning of 7.25 acres to C-G by Overland Mini Storage, LLC:
Corrie: We can pull it to a date certain, and also Item 1 is an Ordinance there. You better just pull that one along with it.
Bird: I just wonder with as much as they’ve changed if we can even proceed.
Corrie: I think you probably can, but you need to have a date certain from when you’re going to wok on it. Shari, do you have any timing there?
Stiles: The public hearing is closed. I mean, it’s – everything’s all done and I don’t have anywhere in my file that they had submitted a plan showing the
existing easement. They showed the sewer line, but they didn’t show the easement that went with that sewer line. With as tight as it is in there now, we may still be able to live with
it, but I don’t know.
Bird: I think talking to the counselor over here that we can pass it but they can’t build it because it’s been approved that way. I mean, we can pass this thing, but they can’t build
it. I think they need to basically start over, myself, and get the right plat and everything for us.
Stiles: I don’t know if Bruce received a copy of the revised plat that showed any easements on it. They submitted for a final plat today, we told them that we couldn’t accept it because
they weren’t even annexed yet, and so that’s why I didn’t even know until today what a problem it was.
Bird: The problem is we passed on what we saw and what Planning and Zoning saw. Now it has completely changed. So the Development Agreement and everything has to go back through the
system again. I hate to say that, but I don’t know how else you’re going to rectify it.
Corrie: Personally, I think you should pull it and go back to Planning and Zoning.
Bird: I agree with you, Mayor.
Corrie: These last few changes are –
Bird: They’re major changes. We can’t – they can’t build – the plat we approved they cannot build it.
Stiles: The plat they could – they could build out the plat, but they can’t build the landscaping that was shown in –
Bird: That was part of the plat.
Stiles: Well, it was a conditional use permit.
Bird: That’s part of that. So that’s part of the whole deal. They can’t do it.
Stiles: They can’t.
Bird: So basically that plan is gone.
Stiles: They would have to reduce the number of buildings and they’re going to have to provide additional landscape buffering.
Bird: I agree with the Mayor. I think it needs to go back to the Planning and Zoning.
Corrie: They’re changing too much. They’re not going to like it, but –
Anderson: Mr. Mayor. On Page 4 of the Development Agreement, doesn’t the conditions governing the development of the subject property, 6.1.1, doesn’t that cover us? That paragraph
in there because it talks about construction development use and maintenance of a mini-storage facility consisting of mini-storage buildings of various sizes not to exceed 80,430 s.f.
in total while such buildings and one caretaker unit which development shall be pursuant to the City’s Planned Unit Development procedure and pursuant to the conditional use permit process
in which conditions shall be provided for but are herein not limited to landscape, common-area requirements, the right-of-way dedication prior to submitting for any building permits,
signage restriction or bike lanes. Doesn’t that basically tell us that before they can get a building permit they would have to give us the right-of-way, the easements for the sewage
and comply with our landscape requirements? I’m asking that question probably to legal counsel.
Nichols: Councilman Anderson, members of the Council, Mayor, I think you’re right. I think it covers it. I think it’s really a practical issue, though. You have a developer who wants
to develop this property a particular way and now you can see that it can’t be done that way. Whether or not they choose to develop it as an economic reality based upon the reduction
in the number of storage units or anything else, it affects the practical aspect of this development. I think what I’m hearing from the Council and the Mayor is it may not be fair to
this developer to say, oh, yes, you’re in, but by the way, because of these things here, you’re going to have to scale down your development is such a way that it may not be practical
for you to do it. I think that’s the problem as I’m hearing it. It seems to me that may be the problem. Not so much a legal issue as a practical one (inaudible) fairness to the applicant
and staff, too, in terms of what the assumptions were going in on this deal.
Anderson: So I guess my question would go back to staff, then. Is he aware of this and knows that this could cut down what he could build there?
Stiles: Steve just sent them a memo today because we got this final plat application in, and I know that they’re ready to come in with building permits at any time. I’d hate to see
them go completely back through the whole thing if we can talk to them and make sure they understand and see if we’re able to change any of the wording of the Findings or – make them
give us a revised plan, I do know –
Corrie: That was my thought was to send it back to you. What did I say? Planning and Zoning? I meant to the planners. But that way you could work with them and get that put together
with their satisfaction. If I was a developer, I’d be – I don’t know if I’d want to do (inaudible) prove it now and whether it would even come into – the way I would like to have it
in the first place. Should be able to
work with you, I would think, and see if it’s going to be feasible. It’s going to change their whole program.
Stiles: It is going to reduce the buildings.
Bird: Mr. Mayor. I think before any of the Findings of anything can be changed, it’s got to come back before the Council, so anything that would be – we couldn’t negotiate on any of
that, Shari, I don’t believe, which I know you wouldn’t want to anyway, but I’m like the Mayor. I think it needs – I wish there was a way we could work it out, but I don’t want the
developer to get in there and get a big surprise. Come in for building permits and find out, hey, you can’t have a building this size or you can’t do it this way.
deWeerd: Mr. Mayor. Is it possible that we can just give this to staff, have them talk to the applicant? We can table it for now and come back with the appropriate response at our
next meeting?
Corrie: We can do it. Does that sound plausible to you?
Stiles: That would be great and we could talk to legal counsel and make sure we’re proceeding as we should, but I’d hate to say start over right now. Especially when they don’t have
– they’re not here.
Bird: The same, we don’t want any surprises to them, either, though. I don’t want them to come in and get a building permit, expect a building permit for x-amount and they can’t have
it, you know.
Stiles: I don’t want them to proceed – I don’t think what Councilman Anderson read, I think that had been slightly revised. It took out what they actually signed, it took out the number
of buildings and put 81,000 s.f. at their request which we considered was okay because 81,000 s.f. was approved, but until we got that final plat today and realized where all those easements
were, they can’t do it. They can’t do 81,000. If they think they’re getting a guarantee through that Development Agreement, that’s what I’m afraid of. So that would be great if we
–
Bird: So should we pull that until the 7th?
Corrie: Pull F, L and 1.
Berg: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council, I was just wondering if we could move it off of the agenda entirely until it’s ready to come back to you because it’s kind of a package thing.
We have Development Agreement, Ordinance and then the CUP Findings all mentioned together, and we have the CUP Findings that have been tabled for, well, since December. I try to put
the Development Agreement when it’s signed and ready to go, but apparently it’s – with new development, it’s not really probably not up to the approval of the applicant anyway. I just
don’t
want to get too many things to be tabling and then we forget what we have it there for.
Bird: You just want to pull it?
Anderson: You want to pull all of those together?
Berg: Just the Development Agreement and the Ordinance because those are the things you have not acted on yet. Those are brand-new items that if they’re not ready to be presented to
you, just pull them off and bring them back when they’re ready.
Corrie: But you can’t use the conditional use permit. Can act on that.
Berg: No, but we’ve already tabled that. That was one of those motions for the City Attorney to prepare Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and that’s what they did and they brought
it up at the next meeting and we’ve been tabling it since.
Corrie: You have to table them until a date certain, though. Do you think that March 7th is a –
Berg: Without Shari talking with the applicant, I don’t know what March 7th would bring. I’d hope it would get the Development Agreement straightened out and we could go on, but maybe
not.
Bird: Lately, how much is Shari going to be able – if they start changing the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law, then it’s got to be re-sent before the Council.
Berg: I’m not suggesting those be changed as much as if the Development Agreement which is supposed to be attached with the annexation which is what I’m told, how much that could be
– I don’t want to say rearranged or affected, but if the conditional use has to go back through the hearing process because of some other conditions.
Bird: But we passed it as one type of way. If it’s changed too much, then it’s not that type.
Berg: That’s correct.
Bird: You don’t think we can have it by the 7th?
Corrie: Shari? (inaudible) more of a question to you.
Stiles: I’ll try to meet with them this week. If I can’t, I’ll get Steve or Brad to work on it.
Corrie: Yeah, because you’re going to be leaving the 22nd. Okay.
Bird: (inaudible)
Corrie: (inaudible) table it –
deWeerd: If we just pull it, you could still put it on the 7th if it’s ready, correct? So why don’t we just pull it?
: (inaudible)
Nichols: Councilwoman deWeerd, Council members, I think the issue, again, is not necessarily what’s the legal procedure, but what’s practical. We have a property owner that wants to
develop their property right now, so they’re expecting to be able to come in right away and get those building permits and get started. So my only other concern about pulling an item
is what if we don’t get it on the next meeting? We don’t get something done in time? We don’t – it kind of sits in limbo. I think if you set a date certain and you put it on there,
then you get it done ahead of time, say, we’re not there.
deWeerd: Table it.
Bird: L and No. 1. We can do that in order (inaudible).
Corrie: Shari, did we need a Development Agreement for the G?
Item G. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law: AZ 99-019 Request for annexation and zoning of 4.34 acres to C-G (Walgreen’s) by Hawkins Smith Management, Inc. – NW corner of Fairview
and Locust Grove:
Item H. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law: CUP 99-034 Request for a Conditional Use Permit to construct a single-tenant commercial building with a drive-thru window (Walgreen’s)
by Hawkins Smith Management, Inc. – NW corner of Fairview and Locust Grove:
Stiles: Yes. That was – we did ask for a Development Agreement. They had some restrictions on their signage, and they were limited to no more than one drive-through on the entire
site.
deWeerd: So G and H will have to be tabled, then, too?
Corrie: You can approve the Findings.
deWeerd: But not for the CUP?
Stiles: G and H, also, we got some requests for changes from the applicants on those today. On both of those, the annexation and zoning and conditional use permit. So those would
at least need to be pulled from the Consent Agenda.
Item J. Tabled from February 1, 2000: Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law: AZ 99-022 Request for annexation and zoning of 10 acres to L-O for proposed Magic View Office Complex
by W.H. Moore Company – Eagle Road and Magic View:
Item K. Tabled from February 1, 2000: Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law: CUP 99-040 Request for Conditional Use Permit to provide multiple buildings on a single site and an
ancillary restaurant in proposed L-O zone for proposed Magic View Office Complex by W.H. Moore Company – Eagle Road and Magic View:
Corrie: (inaudible) and be the first item to come up. Same way with J and K. Got stuff to do.
Bird: Okay. We’re going to pull G and H and J and K and Items 1 and 2, aren’t we?
Corrie: One. Not two.
Bird: Well, we’re pulling J and K and G and H.
Corrie: Yeah. F, L and regular agenda 1 we’ll table until the 7th. Okay.
Bird: Okay. Were we taking the G and H?
Corrie: G and H and J and K are the first items in the regular agenda.
Bird: Okay.
Item D. 1998/1999 FY Audit:
deWeerd: So G and H will be 1 and J and K will be 1A and 1B. Mr. Mayor, I believe also Item D, the 98-99 audit at our workshop we had asked for further information on evaluating MUBS
and – do we need to pull that off of the Consent Agenda for any response because he’s not on the regular agenda. I see –
Corrie: This is the audit – just okaying the audit. (inaudible)
(inaudible discussion amongst Council members)
Anderson: Mr. Mayor, just a question of legal counsel on these Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law for G and H where evidently the applicant either misunderstood what we were saying
or something, I guess where does the legality stand in that. I mean, just because he doesn’t understand them, is that a reason to change them?
Nichols: Councilman Anderson, Mayor, members of the Council, I think the answer is your Findings are your Findings and if what is in those proposed Findings are what you decided, they
accurately reflect your decision, then that’s your decision unless you, as a Council, choose to change it. The position statement from the applicant does at least clarify some things
that I think may be under the conditional use permit, but there were some things that we looked at the minutes specifically as well as our own notes, and so if that’s your decision,
you can just simply say that’s our decision and we see no reason – I mean, they’re Findings, and that’s what you voted on. So just because they don’t have the same recollection doesn’t
mean that you change them. It’s just an opportunity for the applicant to point out what they believe to be errors in the record.
Anderson: Okay.
Corrie: So you do have a choice of saying G and H on the Consent Agenda is what you want and that’s it. (inaudible) If that is, indeed, the way you want it.
Berg: Mr. Mayor, Item H will have to be tabled no matter what because it’s a CUP Finding which goes with the same thing as a mini-storage. We have to wait for a Development Agreement
and Ordinance before you can approve the CUP Findings. Like we’re doing with the Overland Mini Storage, we’re holding the CUP Findings until it’s actually passed.
Corrie: So if you approve G, you could go ahead and do H at the same time because you’re doing the annexation. Do we have to go (inaudible).
(inaudible discussion amongst Council members)
Corrie: It stays with their findings and then H will be pulled off until the 7th for the Development Agreement; correct?
Bird: We’re just going to keep G on? That’s fine with me.
Nichols: Mayor and Council members, there is one item that I think maybe needs to be changed that the applicant has correctly pointed out, and it has to do with this section 3.6. So
that would be appropriate to put that on the regular agenda to change that particular item because I think that’s (inaudible).
Corrie: Okay. Any other questions or changes?
Item 7. Public Hearing: AZ 99-021 Request for annexation and zoning of 8.25 acres to R-8 for proposed Woodhaven Subdivision by Dan Wood / D.W., Inc. – west of Eagle Road between Overland
and east Victory:
deWeerd: Mr. Mayor, can we make a comment on the items under the regular agenda? On Item No. 7, it refers that they’ve had a change in their plat.
Corrie: It’s a public hearing, so we (inaudible).
deWeerd: Then, I would just like to make a request. I would kind of like to have the minutes from the Planning and Zoning Meeting in our application so I know how we’ve come to the
Planning and Zoning recommendations and what the public testimony – the issues that the public has raised in prior testimony. I think that really helps in preparing us to know how decisions
were made and maybe what might be expected unless that can be done in staff summary when staff does their presentation, and they can say what happened at the P & Z meeting and if neighbors
were there and the issues they raised. I don’t know. I feel like I’m coming out of the blue and I don’t see staff comments in these packets. I just get the summary that the City Attorney
draws up, but that doesn’t tell me if there were objections from the citizens or anything. I would like to see more complete synopsis of what has transpired before we get it.
Anderson: Mr. Mayor. I guess I’ll throw in my two cents’ worth. I’d rather see that in a staff summary or in Shari’s report to us, too, is a little bit of background history and what
the testimony was, but rather than having the complete minutes, because God knows we get enough paperwork to try to read prior to the Council meetings that I’d rather just see that summarized
for us in the staff report.
Bird: I’d have to agree.
Corrie: If some don’t need it, some get it from staff, if you want a little more thorough, pull the file.
deWeerd: I’d just like to have more information coming into this.
Bird: We used to get the minutes off of certain subjects attached to our packet, but we haven’t been lately.
17. Department Reports:
A. City Treasurer - Janice Smith
Treasurer’s Report:
Corrie: Janice, do you want to give your report before 7:30? We can save you from having to stay here until late at night.
deWeerd: You have seven minutes.
Smith: Treasurer’s report? Nothing to do with audit? Okay. Mayor and Council, it’s nice of you to let me go from the bottom to the top, here. You’ll see in your packets tonight
the expenditures and revenue report was put in everybody’s box. Of course, you haven’t had time to check any corrections that need to be made. There may be a few. There was an investment
summary, it’s a little bit different format. It looks like this. Councilman Anderson requested that we have them all together. It’s probably stapled with your investments. We’ll
do a combined summary every month and staple them together so there’s not one drifting out from the investment pool, from the State Treasury’s Pool. We will be – we have drawn a million
dollars out from Enterprise account to pay for some construction projects that are going on out at the sewer plant, and that was in their budget if you look in the water and sewer, use
of the fund balance. Other than the investments, I don’t have the whole expenditure and revenue report in front of me, but if you have any questions.
Bird: Are we going to move that item B into the investment fund? I think that’s a good idea.
Smith: Item B, that’s a proposal we’ll get together with our Investment Committee.
Bird: (inaudible)
Smith: The Investment Committee is City Council President Keith Bird, Mayor, City Clerk and myself. So we’ll get that together as soon as possible. And I do have – I see on tonight’s
agenda you also have the audit report. I’ll pass out the cost of the audit. On the cost of – as we get – there was a conversion this year, and if we get more staff, if you get a financial
director, that would cut the costs because then he would do the closing entries, so that would reduce the cost of the audit. Do you have any questions on this?
Bird: So which part of it would save if we had our own financial director?
Smith: When they come out in the first part of the year, if you see at the top, I guess it was in December, I’d have to do a breakout of that, and our auditors could tell you probably
how much of it is closing costs. I could do a detailed printout of how much was closing, but we could cut our costs on the audit if we did our own closing entries. Right now we have
lack of time. We get our budget and we also get our audit coming right behind it.
Corrie: Save that time going back (inaudible).
Bird: Mr. Mayor. Janice, I want to thank you and Reta for getting this together and I want to thank Kevin and all his people for the fine job they did on the audit. It was timely
which we definitely want, and, again, I’d just like to thank you guys in the Accounting Department for everything you’ve done and the job you’ve done for us. I appreciate it.
Smith: Thank you. Do you have any other questions? Thank you, Mayor and Council.
Corrie: Thank you. Okay. If that takes care of the Pre-Council, I would say that we take a break and we come back here at 7:30 for about a two-minute break and we start the meeting.
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 7:28 P.M.
(TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS)
APPROVE:
ROBERT D. CORRIE, MAYOR
ATTEST:
WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., CITY CLERK