10/17/1972 - 00017079d �� '� j
� THE MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL PUBLIC HEARING MEETING OF OCTOBER 17, 1972
Mayor Pro tem Breider, in the absence of Mayor Liebl, called the Special
Public Hearing Meeting of Tuesday, October 17, 1972 to order a� 7:30 P.M.
He said that Mayor Lieb1 had notified the Council that he would be late and
could be expected to arrive about 8 3D P.M.
PLE➢GE OF ALLEGiANCE.
Mayor Pro tem Breider led the Council and the audience in saying the Pledge of
Allegiance to the F1ag.
ROLL CALL.
MEMSERS PRESENT Sreider, Utter, Mittelstadt (Mayor Liebl arrived at
8�25 P.M.)
MEMBERS ABSENT• None
ADOPTION OF AGENDA•
MOTION by Councilman Mittelstadt to adopt the Agenda as presenled. Seconded
by Councilman Utter. Upon a voice vote, al1 ayes, Mayor Pro tem Breider
declared the motion carried.
� PUBLIC HEARING ON AMENDMENTS TO ORDINANCE �496 - CABLE TELEVISZON FR9NCHISE
ORDINANCE:
Mayor Pro tem Breider called upon the City Manager to explain the amendments
made in each section, then after the outline, L-he hearing will be opened up
for comments and questions from the audience.
The City Manager said that first he would run through the changes to be made
to the copies the audience has that were furnished tonight. These changes
are the result of small typographical errors and oversights that have been
discovered since last Friday. The first change is on Page 8, Section 9:
strike the words °after the effective date of this ordinance" and �nsert
"after December 1, 1972". On Page S, Section 9, B(2) the word "Commission"
should be replaced by the word "Company". On Page 33, Section 22, B(3) &
(4) the service rates for the 5- 19 unit category for Commercial and Mobile
Homes should be corrected to read "5 - 19 un�ts - Not to exceed $4.75 each".
lhese rates would then be consistent with the 5- 19 rate for Multiple
£amily Dwellings in Section 22, H(2). The last change is not a typo, but
is a suggestion to renumber Section 34 entitled °Effective Da'te° to Section
35,and make Section 34 as follows•
"SECTION 34. GRANT OF FRANCHISE: There is hereby granted a franchise to
General Television of Mirinesota, Incorporated, pursuant to all the terms and
conditions of this ordinance".
, The City Manager asked the audience, who had been furnished with copies oi the
amended ordinance, if they had all marked these changes and the reply was
affirrnative. He then said that, if the Council whished, each change would be
gone through and pointed out.
� _� 4�T
SPECIAL PUBLIC HEARING MEETING OF OCTOSER 17, 1972 PAGE 2
The City Manager continued that these changes are the result of the sug- �
gestions made by the CATV Advisory Committee. These changes have been in-
corporated by the City Attorney and himself and he understood that the
Committee had no disagreement with them when they reviewed them on Thursday,
October 12, 1972 The first change is on Page 2, Section 1, and adds the
definition of "Commission" as #4, and "Cable Television System" as #7. This
change is consistent with the F.C.C. definitions. The next change is on Page
3, Section 1 and is adding #9 and #10 which are definitions of "Gross Operating
Receipts" and "Gross Subscriber Revenues". Number 11 has a sentence added, and
�13 -"Cablecasting" is a new definition. The last change in Section 1 is on
Page �r4 and adds the definition of "Channels". Page #5, Section 4 is now en-
titled "Condrtions on Street Occupancy" rather than "Uses Permitted by Company".
On Page #6 in Section 5, there has been some rewriting as they have been
informed that the franchise fees the City is to receive must be based on gross
subscriber revenues rather than gross operating receipts. Aiso within this
paragraph is the change of "supervision" to "regulation" and again taking out
"operating receipts" and replacing it with "subscriber revenues". On Page #8,
Section 9, the title has been changed from "Duration of Franchise or License"
to "➢uration and Renewal of Franchise". This section has been rewritten to
incorporate the CATV Advisory Committee`s recommendation for a 10 year
franchise with a 5 year renewal procedure rather than 15, and also includes
the renewal procedure recommended by the Committee. On Page 9, Section 10, D
has been rewritten to include new procedures for sale or transfer of the
Company. On Page '�11, Section 11, there is a phrase added to further ensure
the right of first refusal to purchase the franchise to the City. On this '
same page there is a further elaboration of the procedure to settle disputes
outlined in "F. and covers arbitration and sets up a Board of Arbitration.
The City Manager continued the next change is on Page #23, in Section 19, C, 1
and removes the word "synchronously". On Page #24 in this same Section �n
#4 (b) there is a phrase added dealing with the technical standards. Page #25,
item number 9 has a new sentence added and in number 11, the radiation limit
was changed from 10 to 20, both of these changes dealing with the technical
standards. Fage r�31, Section 20 on Interconnection has been rewritten verbatum
as the committee recommended. Page #31, Section 21 has had the title changed
from "Service Contract" to °Installation Contract", with those words changed
throughout the paragraph. On Page #33 are the typos in the rates as already
explained and should be $4.75 rather than $4.25. Page #39� Section 27, D,
has the words "at no additional cost" added. Section 28, on Page #41 has
been entitled "Cable Television Commission" rather than "Cab1e Television
Committee" with the warding changed throughout the following paragraphs.
There is also a third paragraph that is inserted at the recommendation of the
Committee. Section 30 on Page #42 has been changed from "Procedure upon
Termination" to "Termination and Reimbursement" with subheadings of "Procedure
upon Termination" and "Procedure upon Reimbursement", the second being a new
subsection.On Page �44, Section 31 dealing with violations, "F'� &��G" have been
added, with "G" setting out the fine for violations of this ordinance as a
misdemeanor, and providing the penalty. On Page #46, Section 34 -°Effective
Date" becomes Section 35 with the addztion of the new Section 34 -"Grant �
of Franchise".
� � �i
SPECIAL PUBLIC AEARING MEETING OF OCTOBER 17, 1972 PAGE 3
� Mayor Pro tem Breider asked if there were any comments from the audience.
Mrs. Barbara Hughes, Commrttee Member, said that since their committee
meeting last night there have been a few new thoughts that have come to mind
she would like to bring up. These have not been written as yet and are just
suggestions. One of the problems seems to have been through a misunderstanding
on the meaning of "arbitration". She said when they used the word arbitration
they were speaking more in terms of a service complaint procedure. One of
the things the F.C.C. gauges the quality of an ordinance on is on service
complaint procedures. As the arbitration portion of the ordinance is writL-en
is fine - it deals more with disputes between the Company and the City and is
more formal in nature. She would like to see added some sort of complaint
handling procedure for disputes between a subscriber and the Company, wh?ch could
probably be settled without the formal procedure. If a subscriber had a
complaint, it could be filed with a Complaint Review Board, who would have a
hearing and their final determination would be whether to accept, re�ect, or
compromise the determination of the City Manager The Complaint Review Board
could be made up of three members of the CATV Commission appointed by the
Chairman. The complaints could be filed either with the City or tne Company,
then within 10 days, perhaps copies could be transferred between the two. Every
three months there should be a report of the complaints tabulated, with the
disposition of each complaint. This suggestion is not to take the place of
the section on arbitration or the Board of Arbrtration as written
Mrs. Hughes continued, in Section 23, C, perhaps there should be some require-
� ment on the distribution of service by the company to the subscribers. The
F.0 C. also gauges the Ordinance on the dist�ibut,on throughout the City, and
this should be included for extending cable service into other areas. The
figure the F.C.C. suggests is 200 of the City per year should get service
after the initial year.
The next point Mrs. Hughes brought up was that the Ordinance covers non-
discrimination to subscribers, but she wondered if it should also cover non-
discrimination in hiring by the Company. The Company wlll be required to
file an equal opportunity program with the F.C.0 , so if it is felt that this
is not essential to add to the Ordinance, it would be satisfactory with Mr
Holland of �he Cable Television Information Center and the CATV Committee.
Mrs. Hughes said that in the section concerning "Rates" them should be stated
somewhere that the first 5 minutes of the public access channels are to be
provided free with some provision on what the estimated cha�ges would be
after that for personnel, use of studio, equipment eLc. One other point that
perhaps should be clarified is a provision for the underground work in such
areas as mobile home courts where the streets are privately owned and there
is not public right of way.
Councilman Mrttelstadt commented that he would think the inclusion of the non-
discrimination would not be necessary. The City Attorney sa3d it would not
make any difference, it is controlled by State law, it could be added if the
Committee desired. Councilman Mittelstadt asked the City Attorney if he
� foresaw any problems with the new suggestions by Mrs. Hughes. The City Attorney
replied no, but it will take some time to work up the language to be used.
Mr. Dan Fish, 7501 Lakeside Road N.E., said that on Page �3, rtem #8 is the
term "installation" and on Page �31 is the term "Installation Contract" He
questioned what contract this is. Mrs. Hughes said this could be the contract
'��2
SPECIAL PUBLIC HEARING MEETING OF OCTOBER 17, 1972 PAGE 4
the City would approve that the subscriber would sign for the installation �
into the house. Mr. Fish questioned what if there was damage to any instru-
ment, such as the convertor. If it is damaged accidently, what is the home
owner to do? The Czty Attorney sazd that he did not th.ink this would be
covered by liability insurance of the Company. This would be damage to
equipment owned by the Company and could be compared to the telephone or the
water meter. Mr. Fish said he would like to know the extent of liability on
the part of the subscriber, and did not think this was covered adequately in
the Ordinance. A convertor is a costly piece of equipment. The City Manager
said that if the damage is willful, it is a misdemeanor and would be the same
as deliberate damage to a telephone. The penalties for this are covered on
Pages t�43 , of the Ordinance. Mr. James Goetz, President of General
Television, said that a convertor costs between $25 -$32 and the subscriber
is not liable for normal wear and tear. This will be covered by the contract
that the Council must approve. If experience with a particular resident shows
they have gone through 5-6 convertors in 6 months, then he would say it would
be time they started paying for them. General Televiszon's interest is to
provide cable television service to the residents, and the normal wear and
tear is the Company's responsibility.
Mr, Ole Bjerkesett asked if the Board of Arbitration would be three members of
the CATV Commission. The City Attorney said no, the use of the word cause
some misunderstanding between the Commitee and himself. They were referring to
it more in a general sense and he used it more in a legal sense. The Com-
mittee is proposing that the arbitration clause remain for formal disputes '
between the Company and the City, or possibly between a member of th2 public
and the Company. The formal Artirtration Board would be made up of one person
from the Company, one from the other party, and a third chosen by the first
two. The second body, i.e., the Complaint Review Board, is suggested to be
a more informal procedure and would be instituted for settling service complaints.
Mr. William Nee, 219 Logan Parkway, said that he was very concerned with the
City's abandonment of the 5% gross operating receipts in favor of 5o sub-
scriUer revenues, as their payment to the Crtp. In coming years the sub-
scriber revenues would have to become less and less of their operating
revenue as more of their money comes from advertising. With this change there
would not be enough money for an effective program in the public service areas.
Television is expensive and the City should be entitled to So off the top to
turn back into the public access channels. He said he is an ad man and he
believes that in the years to come advertising will be bearing the brunt of the
costs of cable television as opposed to a company trying to operate on
subscriber revenues, and would think that in terms of total reuenue, sub-
scriber revenue would only amount to about 20°0. He said he wouTd assume that
the reason rt was changed was because of the mistaken idea that the F.C.C.
is requiring this change.
The City Manager replied that this section was changed at the suggestion of the
Committee. The Committee met with Mr. Michael H. Holland, Cable Television
Information Center, Washington D.C., and it was his interpretation also that the
F.0 C. would require this change. He then read from a memorandum from Mr. �
Holland dated September 12, 1972 in which Mr. Sol Schildhause, Chief, F.C.C.
Cable Television Bureau, sta'ted that "subscriber revenues are considered to
be those revenues derived from regular subscriber services", not inaluding
_I ` �
SPECIAL PUBLIC HEARING MEETING OF OCTOBER 17, 1972 PAGE 5
� advertising, based channel or pay-TV revenues. The memo also states that
5% of the gross operating revenues is "inconsistent with the F.C.C. regu-
latory scheme". The F.C.C. also su$gested 3% - 50, and Pridley has chosed
to require the maximum allowed. Based largely upon Mr. Holland's recommendations
concerning the requirements of the F.C.C., the Commit�ee felt compelled to
make this change.
Mr. Nee said that he wished the Committee had allowed a consultation between
them and his attorney Uefore making this change As he understands the situ-
ation, someone is saying that the F.C.C. has jurisdiction over such things as
this, and he was sure the people in the industry would like everyone to believe
that, however, he would like to ask that the Council get an objective answer to
this question before proceeding too far. The F.C.C. has asked L-or juris-
diction two times, and in both cases Congress has refused. All the Supreme
Court rulings have to do with the jurisdiction of the F.C.C. are in instances
of air interference with other systems. He offered to show the rulings to the
City Attorney at his leisure.
Mayor Lieb1 arrived at 5.25 P.M.
Mr. Nee continued that the F.C.0 was given authority by court cases to pro-
hibrt the importation of signals long distances and the Supreme Court has
applied itself only to this question, so the only thing that the F.0 C.
officially has control over is the physical transmission through the air
� The F C.C.,however, would like to persuade people otherwise. Mr. Nee said
that he would like to urgently urge that the Council consider the base upon
which they are going to collect their share because with the reduced base, this
community just will not be al�le to afford the programming.
The City Attorney said that he had read the F.0 C. rules and regulations and
what Mr. Nee is saying is true. He said he will not speak for the Committee,
but he also attended 'the Meeting at which Mr. Holland made his recommendations,
and Mr Holland did advise that this was contrary and would probably have to
be removed. He said he would agree with Mr. Nee, it would certainly be bene-
ficial to keep the higher base. The Ordinance as revised kept the 5% even
though Mr. Holland advised that may also have to be reduced. The F.C.C.
recommends 3o and if a City takes So they have to �ustify the increase He
suggested some wording could be added whereby 5% gross operating receipts could
be the payment to the City "providing a superior regulating authority does not
rule otherwise".
Mr. Nee said that municipal and state governments have to assert their authority
for control, The F.C.C, does not have authority over closed circuit cable-
casting - that is a local prerogative. Fridley does have the franchise power
by State legislation and he could not see the F.C.C. telling Fridley what we
can do with our streets The F.0 C. is a bunch of bureaucrats sitting in
Washington D.C. that would like to take the franchise authority away From us
Fridley, and all other municipalities, must meet the challEnges Lhat need to
� be met, and he is not prepared to recognize the F.C.C. as any authority. The
F.0 C. is going to try to creep into every municipality in the country.
Mr. Dean Caldwell, Member of the CATV Advisory Commitee, said that the reasons
for the Committee's action was as the City Manager stated. They would have
prePerred to leave it the way it was. The reason for the F.C.C. making this
�
�.�r�
SPECIAL PUBLIC HEARING MEETING OF OCTOBER 17, 1972 PAGE 6
ruling is to guard the franchisee and to prevent the governing units from ,
taxing the companies too heavily. The City Manager added that the F.C.C.'s
7ustification is that they did not want the crties advertising for bids, then
the comnanies vying for the bid by using the amount they would pay to the
City as a major consideration as opposed to maximum service to the customers
being the most important item. They did not feel that the percentage of
payment should be criteria for granting a franchise.
Mr. Jim Goetz said that he did not want to get into a discussion of who should
regulate what, but the fact remains that any community that wants cable
television service has to operate under basically the same standards. There
is also a licensing procedure to go through. The first step is for a city
to grant a company a franchise, the second is for that company to apply for
and receive a certificate of compliance from the F.C.C. They can prohibit
the operation of a company in any municipality unless the franchise is in
compliance with their rules. He said General Television is prepared to
abide by the Ordinance, they did not complain about any of the requirements
before and are not going to now.
Mr. B�erkesett said that the CATV Advisory Committee has spent three months
analyzing this issue and are people of good judgment. The recommendations
of the Committee should be weighed heavily by the Council. He asked the
members present if during the time this was being studied, Mr. Nee's question
was raised� He would assume he had ample opportunity to bring this before the �
Committee. Mr. Dean Caldwell answered no, Mr. Nee did not bring it up, but
there was no reason to, because up until recently the Ordinance did state
"5% gross operating revenues". Mr. Bjerkesett asked if Mr. Holland could be
considered to be somewhat an expert and Mr. Caldwell answered yes. Mrs.
Hughes added that with 3 months allotted for deliberations on such a huge
topic, they did not have time to go through and write down the exact language
that should be used. The amendments as written were written within one
months time, and the committee just saw them in final form last Thursday.
Mrs. Barbara Koropchak said that the employees at City Hall have been very
nice to her the past few days when she has been in for information,and a copy
of this amended ordinance. As late as last night there were still meetings
between General Television and the City. She asked 7ust exactly what is the
rush° The Committee, and others have spent months on this subject, then the
Council calls a meeting so soon after the amendments are done, there is no
time for study. The vote on November 7th cannot be on the amended Ordinance
anyhow.
Councilman Mittelstadt said that theprocedure was to get an amended ordinance
in proper form that could be approved by the majority of the citizens. The
referendum should give the Council a fair judgment of whether they want CATV
or not. The Council wanted to avoid the expense of a special election and add
this question onto the general election when it could be done for close to
nothing. He added that he believed the Committee did an excellent job. Mrs.
Koropchak said that she thought these amendments should have been out for a �
time before this meeting to allow for some time to study. Mayor Liebl said
that the Committee recommendations have been out for about two weeks and she
could have gotten them. Mrs. Koropchak replied that she did, but she was
talking about the new Ordinance.
-�_
_,_
SPECIAL PUSLIC HEARING MEETING OF OCT�BER 17, 1972 PAGE 7
� Mayor Liebl said that they hAd to a11ow the franchisee some time to look it
over also to see if it was agreeable with them. Ti the Council takes
affirmative action tonight� the second reading could be November 6th. He
said that after the study and recommendations of the Committee, the Council
is in a position to amend the Ordinance that has been the result of the input
from many citizens and would be in the best interest of the City. He felt
the City would have to comply with the F.C.C. guidelines that are set for all
50 states. He said the Council should vote upon the amendments and let the
people vote on the issue on November 7th. Mrs. Koropchak said that the vote
will have to be on the original ordinance. Mayor Liebl said yes, but they will
have the information on what will be contained in the new Ordinance. There is
actually little more the Council can do legally. Mrs Koropchak said she
was talking about maybe 10 weeks, not 1D years. The Committee has been under
a great deal of pressu�e and she was glad for the changes they have made, but
she was not completely satisfied and did not believe the average citizen would
be able to digest a11 this information in time for the election. Mayor Lieb7
said that an Ordinance is not valid on first reading, and it could sii11 be
amended on second reading. The Council wanted an unbiased view of the Ordi-
nance and now feel they got it. The Ordinance can always be amended in the
future if desired and found to be necessary.
Mayor Pro tem Sreider said that this sub]ect has been under study a long time
and probably two years from now the Council could go back and have more public
hearings. The Council has indicated through iLs vote they will initiate a
� referendum to determine whe'ther the people want or do not want cable tele-
vision. The Council understands the difficulLy the people had with the
original ordinance and due to legal requirements the original Ordinance has
to be put on the ballot. While the Council must do this, they would also like
to indicate to the citizens that they are, and have been, willing to listen
to suggestions for a good working Ordinance through holding public hearings.
The Council's aim is to indicate to 'the public that even though they will be
voting on the original Ordinance, the Council will be arriving a� a workable
Ordinance very shortly through the efforts of the CATV Advisory Committee.
He said that the Committee did an excellent job in the time frame allotted.
Mr. Nee indicated that he felt that the point he was trying to make in the
payment percentage to the City is so important to fuLure public access pro-
gramming, that it deserves more research and should not �ust be passed over.
He said he could produce the documentation to prove the F.C.C. does noz have
that authority, and to place so much credence upon one authority really is not
too objective. It is true a company must get a permit from the F.C.C., but on
the whole area of cable transmission.s, the F.C.C. is 7ust indulging in wishful
thinking. The City Attorney sazd that if that section ls rewritten, it
should be done carefully and not �eopardize either the ordinance or the
Company�s ability to obtain its license from the F.C.C. Mr. Nee said the
City, along with all municipalities, will have to defend its position at
some point in time against the bureaucrats in Washington D C. It has been said
that the Fridley Ordinance will be used as a model, this implies leadership &
the accompanying burdens of leadership. The City Attorney said that he would
� like to see the memoranda Mr. Nee has.
Mr, B�erkesett said that actually, this is all irrelevant - it is always the
buyer who pays. Mr. Nee said the subscriber would not pay for it, advertising
would. As written now the subscriber has the whole burden of financing tne
public access channels. The ad agencies should be skimmed rather than the
home owners.
"��6
SPECIAL POBLIC HEFIRING MEETING OF OCTOBER 17, 1972
PAGE 8
Mays�r Liebl asked the Chair if he would call a 15 minute recess, so that he
could catch up on what he rrzssed in the first part of the Meeting.
RECESS,
Mayor Pro tem Breider called a recess at 9;10 PM. The Meeting was re-
convened by Mayor Liebl at 9 30 P.M.
MOTION by Councilman Breider to close the Public Hearing on the Amendments
proposed to Ordinance #496 - The Cable Television Franchise Ordinance.
Seconded by Councilman Mittelstadt. Upon a voice vote, all ayes, Mayor Liebl
declared the hearing closed at 9:30 PM.
Mayor Liebl asked the City Attorney, in regard to Mr. Nee's suggestions, whether
it would be proper to make the change he proposed in regard to the City's
percentage If the City did this and it was declared null, there is still a
sectaon that would save the rest of the Ordinance. The City Attorney said yes,
Section 33 provides severability, and would protect the rest of the Ordinance
should that section be declared void. Mayor i,iebl asked Mr. Caldwell if the
recommendations of the Committee were unanimous and Mr. Caldwell replied yes,
there was no dissenting vote.
MOTION by Councilman Breider to approve the Amendments �to Ordinance �496 on
first reading, waiving the reading, with the additional corrections as
follows•
1) Add the corrections noted in the City Manager's memo dated October 17,
1972.
2) Instruct the City Attorney to add the service complaint procedure as
recommended by the CATV Advisory Committee.
3) Review the time frame for se.rvace to the total community.
4) Add the non-discriminatory clause for hiring by the Company as we11 as on
the part of the Company to subscribers.
5) Rework the rate section so that the first 5 minutes of public access are
to be free, with some type o� schedule for the remain�er of the time.
6) Give some attention to the section dealing with rights of way, speaifi-
cally for mobile homes & developments where the streets are not public.
7) On Page �;3, delete item #10 -"Gross Subscriber Revenues".
8) On Page #6, change "subscriber revenues" in all places to "operating
receipts".
The motion was seconded by Councilman Mittelstadt. Upon a roll call vote,
Utter, Mittelstadt, Breider and Liebl voting aye, Mayor Liebl declared the
motion carried unanimously.
Mayor Liebl informed the audience that the ordinance will again be on the
Agenda November 6, 1972.
ION OF INSTROCTING THE CITY MANAGER TO
APPROVING THE ACQUISITION OF A SEWER LINE BY THE
THE VILLAGE OF NEW BRIGHTON�
DIS-
The City Manager reported that this material is outlined in his memo dated
October 16, 1972, and involves a request by New Brighton for the Metro-
politan Sewer Board to acquire an interceptor line for just under $863,OD0.
Fridley, along with the other surrounding municipalzties in Servzce Area #2,
�
�
�
9 i, ��
! �
PUBLSC HEARING MEETING OF 6CTOBER 17, 1972 PAGE 9
� believe that the line does not qualify as an interceptor line and the Metro-
politan Sewer Board should not acquire it. The effect on Fridley if it is
arquired is that the Service Area �r2 memhers will be required to pay for this.
He said hz would recommend opposition to this acquisition and that he
believed written testimony should be prepared for presentation at the
Metropolitan Council Referral Committee Meeting November 2nd
Mayor Liebl said that he would also like to have a Council Nlember accompany
Mr. Davis at this Referral Committee Meeting, even if it means reimbursing
that member for one days' lost pay, as this is a very important item.
MOTION by Councilman Mittelstadt to instruct the City Manager to prepare
written testimony in opposition to the New Brighton request for acquisrtion
by the Metropolitan Sewer Board of an interceptor sewer line. Seconded by
Councilman Breider. Upon a voice vote, all ayes, Mayor Lieb1 declared the
motion carried unanimously.
Councilman Mittelstadt said that if the Meeting was at 2 DO PM on November
2nd, he would be able to attend, if it was in the morning, he would not
RECEIVING THE BID FROM THE VILLAGE OF OKABENA, MINNESOTA, AND APPROVING THE
SALE OF ONE FIRE DEPARTMENT TANKER TRUCK TO THE VILLAGE OF OKABENA IN THE
AMOONT OF $750 (Bid Opening 11 00 A.M., October 17, 1972)
, MOTION by Councilman Mittelstadt to receive the bid from Okabena, Minnesota
for the surplus Fire ➢epartment Tanker Truck in the amounL of $750. Seconded
by Councilman Breider. Upon a voice vote, all ayes, Mayor Liebl declared the
motion carried unanimously
The City Manager reported that he had requested a report from the Engineering
Department on the possibility of using the ald tanker truck as an oiling
vehicle for street work. He has a verbal report that it would be no use, but
it the Council would like to wait for a written report, the award could be
tabled until November 6th to await the written report.
MOTION by Counrilman Breider to table the award to November 6, 1972. Seconded
by Councilman Mittelstadt. Up�n a voice vote, all ayes, Mayor Liebl declared
the motion carried unanimously,
RECEIVING COMMUNICATION FROM THE LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA MUNICIPALITIES REGARDING
MEETING OCTDBER 20, 1972:
Mayor Liebl said he had received a communication from Mr David L. Norrgard of
the League regarding a luncheon meeting at Sandee's on October 20th. He said
he would like the Crty Man�ger to attend and also a member of the Council, if
possible. Councilman Mittels'tadt said �hat he would try to attend the meetin.g
with Mr. Davis.
ADJOURNMENT:
, MOTION by Councilman Mittelstadt to adjourn the Meeting. Seconded by Councilman
Breider. Upon a voiee vote, a11 ayes, Mayor Liebl declared the Special P
Hearing Meeting of Tuesday, October 17, 1972 adjourned at� /9� ►5�0� P.M.
Respectfully submitted, � ) �
���� %'� E�ci,�,.� . '
Juel A. Mercer, Secretary to the Ci�y Council Frank G. Lie 1, M yor