Surrey, North Dakota



City of SurreyRegular Council MeetingNovember 2, 2020Present: Chuck Tollefson, Mike Thiesen, Steve Fennewald, Elaine Christianson, Brent Dickinson. Present via phone: Jenny Johns & Twila Gantzer. Absent: noneAlso Present: Diane Fugere, Anita Trana, John Doyle, Chief Kevin Howe, Connor Kircher, Attorney Andrew SchultzThe Pledge of Allegiance was recited.Christianson mentioned a meeting with Johns and Dickinson that occurred after the October 27th meeting. She explained that she should have known better and that it will not happen again. Christianson called Fugere earlier in the day to discuss two or three changes to the minutes regarding votes. Mayor Tollefson mentioned there was a lot of input on Dickinson’s discussions in the minutes but not much for Fennewald’s discussions. Johns discussed the Mayor’s final sentence at the October 27th meeting about some council members acting like children. Fennewald moved to approve the October 5th, 20th and 27th minutes, Gantzer seconded: Fennewald – yes; Gantzer – yes; Thiesen – yes; Christianson – yes; Dickinson – yes; Johns – yes; motion carried.Council reviewed a quote from Computech for a new computer for the SCADA system which monitors the lift stations and water tower. Fugere was asked to check with the city engineers on what is needed to run the system. The matter was tabled.Thiesen questioned a bill to C & C Storage for a time clock and timecards. Mayor Tollefson stated he purchased a timeclock and timecards and submitted the bill through his company. Gantzer stated she does not want a time clock for the office and asked why the mayor did not bring the matter before council. She thinks changes to office procedures should be agreed on by council. Fennewald would like to see a computer program used for tracking employee hours. Chief Howe discussed officers responding to emergencies. Thiesen moved to pay all bills except the time clock and timecard bill to C & C Storage, Gantzer seconded; Thiesen – yes; Gantzer – yes; Johns – no; Dickinson – no; Christianson – yes; Fennewald – yes; motion carriedJohns questioned a line item in the general fund, non-departmental NDPERS totaling $48,005.32. Fugere will check into it. Christianson moved to approve the financial and payroll reports with the question answered, Thiesen seconded;Christianson – yes; Thiesen – yes; Dickinson – yes; Fennewald – yes; Johns – yes, motion carried.Tom Slorby, attorney for Blaine and Nancy Klein appeared before council to discuss the past due water bill at Klein’s rental home at 304 2nd Street NE. At this time, city attorney, Andrew Schultz left the meeting. After some discussion Fugere stated the past due bill had been certified to the county last week. Slorby stated the will bring action against the city. Christianson informed Slorby that, because he has stated his intent to sue the city, council has to stop any more discussion on this matter. Discussion ended. At this time, city attorney, Andrew Schultz, returned to the meeting.Gantzer addressed council regarding the mayor’s opening remarks at the special meeting October 27th. She stated she did nothing wrong at the volleyball game on October 6th. She stated she was verbally assaulted by Ms. Johns. Mrs. Tollefson contacted her employer three times regarding the verbal exchange with Ms. Johns, she was not present and has no idea what happened. Mrs. Tollefson filed a formal complaint with the school against her on behalf of the mayor and Connie Tollefson. The complaint was investigated, and she was found to have done nothing wrong. She also wanted to know why the mayor finds it necessary to request her phone number from the meeting on October 27th from 5:30 – 8:00. She stated she will not be handing the records over as there is no cause for it. She stated she’s being accused of being on the phone and texting with Mrs. Knipp and Mrs. Walsh. There was also an accusation of eye contact and nodding and that this is a phishing expedition by the mayor. She has no contact information for Mrs. Walsh, and she was not texting Mrs. Knipp. These items, to prove that, were given over to the council president, Mike Thiesen, along with the investigation done by the school. The mayor wants to punish me for using my phone, yet Mr. Dickinson at 33 minutes and 40 seconds received a text message, logged into his phone and answered that text message. She has never once been talked to or counseled by the mayor regarding this situation but yet he feels she needs to be reprimanded and that it needs to be decided by the whole council. Dickinson asked, now you’re throwing me into this crap too? Words were exchanged between Gantzer and Dickinson. Mayor Tollefson stopped the conversation. Mayor Tollefson read a note received by Fugere and Tollefson from Steve Quist regarding Gantzer and Knipp sending private messages at the last meeting. Tollefson stated, at that meeting, it was apparent that Twila & Terra are sending private messages only 10 minutes into the meeting. Thiesen asked if that was just an assumption. Tollefson stated they watched the video and Twila would text and Terra would smile and text back and stuff like that. Gantzer stated that was absolutely untrue and to ask Thiesen as he has the information. Gantzer stated she never once replied to any message she received from anyone during that meeting. Thiesen stated from what he could see, that was correct, she’d received 4 messages and hadn’t responded to them. Gantzer asked for an apology from Dickinson. Dickinson stated, ain’t happening and asked what would he apologize for. Gantzer asked why he doesn’t get written up for his texting during meetings. Dickinson stated he doesn’t remember getting a text during the meeting. Gantzer stated she remembers hearing a ding on his phone and he answered at 33 minutes and 40 seconds and to review the video. Dickinson stated his phone was actually on video as he recorded twice. Fennewald asked Tollefson to move the meeting forward. Tollefson stated we have an accusation made and a rebuttal by Thiesen saying it’s not true and that we are at a draw.Tollefson called on Terra Knipp to speak. Knipp asked how the Quist’s could see her facial expression on the video as she faces away from the camera. She stated she’s watched the video 6 times, she looked at her phone one time, that’s it. She stated Dickinson was actually on his phone. Dickinson stated he has to look at his phone to tell what time it is. Knipp stated she has a complaint and that she was told when she called the office that the mayor wasn’t going to do anything with the complaint. Knipp asked Fennewald to read the complaint aloud. Tollefson stated the reason he didn’t put it on the agenda is because the agenda was already out and had established what was going to happen for the meeting and that he didn’t know how and why it got changed. Fugere stated we’ve done this several times before. Tollefson stated he is supposed to approve the agenda before it’s sent out. Fugere stated he never comes in to approve it. Tollefson stated he’s never called when it’s ready. Fugere stated, it’s always the Friday before the meeting. Tollefson stated we’re not going to talk about this now. Tollefson stated he didn’t want it on the agenda because it wasn’t on the agenda at first. Knipp asked what Tollefson’s exact words were when he saw the complaint. Tollefson stated he didn’t know. Knipp said from what she understood she was told that nothing would be done as we’ve heard it all before and it had nothing to do with the agenda. Tollefson stated the complaints we talk about tonight is to determine how we handle complaints and the complaint was to go to Fugere who would forward it to the mayor and he would either do some counseling on it or some sort of punishment. Knipp asked Fugere if she remembered exactly what the mayor said, Fugere said yes, we’ve heard all this before. Fennewald read Knipp’s complaint aloud as follows: “After the meeting on October 27, Brent, Elaine and Jennifer were gathered by the council table discussing Home Charter issues which is in violation of Open Meeting laws. When I mentioned this to the group about having a private meeting, they disbanded quickly. While Brent stormed past me, he sneered and called me a “bitch”. I told him to kiss my ass to which he retorted, why don’t you just bite me! I feel he has been violating several Leadership Codes and is out of control at meetings. He is allowed to rant and carry on, say things that are not true, attack city employees, citizens and council members. To my knowledge, Dickinson has not been reprimanded in any way. He has not been written up for any behavior issues he’s shown. His behavior at the last two meetings alone should have had cause enough for him to be asked to leave the meeting. I am afraid that he is getting preferential treatment by the mayor and by other council members. Council member Gantzer was written up for texting me, which never happened, during the last meeting yet Dickinson was viewed on his phone during the same meeting without repercussions. Council member Fennewald was written up for his treatment of a citizen during a meeting yet Dickinson continually harasses me when I have the floor, again, with no repercussions. With this behavior being allowed to continue meeting after meeting, I feel is one of the main reasons our meetings drag out so long and morale with the council, city and employees is so low. I would like to see him written up for a litany of reasons. Although there are dozens of examples, I have only included some herein.” Tollefson read the email sent by Steve Quist. Dickinson asked for time to rebut, Tollefson allowed one minute. Dickinson stated when they were standing by the table, I was standing listening, didn’t even talk. I started walking away, Terra came right by me and said Brent, kiss my ass and I said bite me bitch, that’s how it went. Dickinson said, to Knipp, you are a liar and all the stuff you post every day, constantly on social media, bashing me and constantly…..I’m speaking my opinion. Tollefson told Knipp to not interrupt. Dickinson said he was not yelling and told Knipp she does this constantly, you harass me. Thiesen attempted to ask Tollefson something (inaudible). Tollefson said, let him talk. Thiesen asked Tollefson if he was going to allow Dickinson to talk like that to a citizen. Tollefson said, she talked that way to him. Dickinson said councilmen don’t even stick up for other councilmen. Tollefson asked Dickinson if he was done. Tollefson stated Terra had her say and Brent had his and asked what needs to be done. Thiesen asked Tollefson if he counseled Dickinson at all. Tollefson stated they’d talked several times. Thiesen asked if it had done anything. Tollefson stated, yes, he has gotten better, he doesn’t swear anymore. Dickinson asked Thiesen if the mayor had ever counseled him for taking the power away from the mayor and not giving it to him. Or the administrator, we can round and round here all night long. Tollefson asked for one-sentence solutions from council members and called on Thiesen. Thiesen told the mayor he needs to control the meetings, if people raise their voices, get agitated, he needs to rein it back in. This is your meeting, and you need to control it. When we have council members and citizens get unruly, loud, disrespectful you need to step in. This is your meeting; you need to run it. Dickinson asked, is it ok when you have somebody that bashes you constantly, diss me on social media every day; you guys know it, you see it, you don’t do nothing about it. And she comes in here and makes accusations and lies about them. But that’s ok right Mike? Thiesen said, whatever cross you need to be bearing that night. Dickinson said he straightens the record out about what happened because she lies. Fennewald said that just becomes you said, she said and to be honest, it’s a bunch of shit. Fennewald said Chuck wrote me up, do I care? Am I bitching about it at the meeting? It’s tucked away and I’m done. I’m done with it. Dickinson said but it happens every day. Fennewald said, be done with it, be the bigger man. Dickinson said, so I’m supposed to sit here and let her bash me? Tollefson stopped the conversation and stated we’ll go on to Article 15. Gantzer asked if Mike was the only one that gets to make a statement. Tollefson said, he was defending you I thought. Gantzer stated she doesn’t need anyone to defend her and that she’s asking if the rest of council will be making a statement regarding Brent. Dickinson said why don’t you guys make the motion you want. Fennewald said the motion’s not there that I’m aware of and I think you know everybody’s feelings up here, I’ve talked to you about it before. Dickinson said she’s on the agenda, it was not supposed to be on the agenda, it wasn’t even approved by the mayor apparently. Fennewald said we can add things to the agenda any time we want with the mayor’s approval. Tollefson said, okay we’re done with that. Tollefson said he’d like to see everyone have their arguments written down instead of yelling back and forth. Dickinson requested that the mayor write him up for whatever he thinks these people want and you can stick it in my file. Council reviewed two ordinances drawn up by the city attorney on Complaint Procedures and Disciplinary Ordinance. Discussion followed on the Disciplinary ordinance comparing the one included in the packets and the amended ordinance presented at the meeting. Schultz explained the only difference is that Section 2 was restructured so the topics could be more easily followed; other than that, there was no changes to the language. Section 4; Amendment of Ordinance on Aldermen; “unless a vacancy occurs pursuant to Ordinance 3.0111(18) or by state law’ was added to reconcile with the grounds for vacancy. Discussion on whether there is anything on this in our current ordinances. Tollefson asked if it should be tabled giving more time to review it. Fennewald stated it takes 2 readings to pass it. Dickinson questioned why complaint forms go to the administrator instead of the mayor. Schultz said it’s good if all complaints go to one central clearing house so they can be filtered out from there based on the subject. It’s for efficiency of getting it resolved and cataloged. Thiesen asked to add a caveat to the mess. It would be nice if, when someone gets a complaint form we follow this structure and can someone get in touch with whoever wrote the complaint form and have some kind of conversation and the complaint doesn’t sit and fester. He thinks it would do a lot toward public relations to have a conversation. Tollefson said we started that this week. Dickinson asked how many complaint forms have come into the office since Thiesen’s been a councilman. Thiesen did not know. Fennewald said 2 in 22 years while he was on council. Fugere stated, throughout the years Chuck Badke has had many. Tollefson said yes. Thiesen moved to approve on 1st reading both ordinances: An Ordinance relating to the selection, terms and qualifications of members of the Surrey City Council, for removal and/or expulsion of members of the City Council and for other purposes. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SURREY, NORTH DAKOTA: Section 1. Authorization for action. The authorization for the provisions herein is contained in ND Century Code § 40-05.1-06(6), and the Home Rule Charter of the City of Surrey which includes verbatim the statutory language of ND Century Code § 40-05.1-06(6). That statutory language authorizes the City of Surrey to, “if included in the charter and implemented through ordinances, have the (power)” to “provide for the city officers, agencies and employees, there selection, terms, powers, duties, qualifications and compensation. To provide for change, selection or creation of its form and structure of government, including its governing body, executive officer and city officers.” Section 2. Expulsion of Council Member from Meeting. Surrey City Ordinance 3.0111(17) is hereby enacted as follows: 17. Discipline of Council Members. A member of the City Council may be censured or expelled under the following terms. a. Censure of Council Member. i. Standard for Censure. Any member of the Surrey City Council may be censured for any conduct, regardless of where it occurs, that tends to bring the City Council into dishonor and disrepute. ii. Process. Any member may move for the Council to determine, by a simple majority vote, that a member be censured and must include in the motion a description of the subject member’s censurable conduct; upon a second, the vote shall be called without any discussion of the motion. The vote on the motion shall be recorded in the meeting minutes. If a motion is defeated, the alleged conduct may not be used in any other motion for censure. b. Expulsion of Council Member. i. Standard for Expulsion. Any member of the Surrey City Council may be expelled from a council meeting for unruly conduct committed by the member during that meeting. Unruly conduct is conduct which disobeys the presiding officer’s reasonable and lawful commands; is disorderly; or is contrary to the decorum of the proceeding. ii. Duration. The expulsion shall only continue for the duration of the meeting where the unruly conduct occurred. iii. Process. Any member may move for the Council to determine, by two-thirds majority vote, that a member has committed unruly conduct in that meeting and upon a second, the vote shall be called without any discussion of the motion. The results of the vote shall be recorded in the meeting minutes. If a motion is defeated, the alleged conduct may not be used in any other motion for expulsion. Section 3. Removal of Council Member from the Council. Surrey City Ordinance 3.0111(18) is hereby enacted as follows: 18. Removal. In addition to any grounds for removal under ND Century Code § 44-02-01 and other state law, a vacancy in the office of a City Council member shall occur if the member: a. Dies in office; b. is adjudged mentally ill; c. resigns from office; d. is removed from office; e. fails to discharge the duties of office, when the failure has continued for sixty consecutive days, except when prevented from discharging the duties by reason of the person’s service in the armed forces of the United States, by sickness, or by other unavoidable cause. However, as to any office which under the law the vacancy must be filled by the governor, the governor for good cause shown may extend the period, which the incumbent may be absent, for an additional period of sixty days. No remuneration on account of such office may be paid to an absentee officeholder during that person’s absence, and the office in all cases becomes vacant upon the termination of the term for which the person was elected or appointed; f. fails to qualify as provided by law, which includes taking the designated oath of office prescribed by law; g. ceases to be a resident of the state, district, county or other political subdivision in which the duties of the office are to be discharged or for which the person may have been elected; h. is convicted of a felony or any offense involving moral turpitude or a violation of the person’s official oath; i. ceases to possess any of the qualifications of office prescribed by law; j. has his or her election or appointment declared void by a competent tribunal; k. is censured under Ordinance 3.0111(17)(a) more than twice in any six-month period; or l. is expelled under Ordinance 3.0111(17)(b) more than once in any six-month period. Section 4. Amendment of Ordinance on Aldermen. Chapter 3, Article 1, Section 3 of the Surrey City Ordinances is amended and re-enacted to read as follows: “3.0103 Aldermen – Qualifications – Term. Aldermen shall be qualified electors of and residents within the City of Surrey and shall not have been convicted of malfeasance, bribery or other corrupt practice or crime. Aldermen shall hold office for staggered four-year terms and until their successors are elected and qualified unless a vacancy occurs pursuant to Ordinance 3.0111(18) or by state law. Section 5. Effective Date. This ordinance has immediate effect on its date of adoption. Section 6. Clerk. The City Clerk shall amend the publicly available Surrey City Ordinances as indicated herein. AND BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SURREY, NORTH DAKOTA: Section1. Complaint Procedure. Article 15 of Chapter 4 of the Surrey City Ordinances is hereby created and enacted as follows: Article 15. Complaint Procedure. 15.0101 Any resident, employee or officer of the City of Surrey may make a complaint concerning any matter affecting the City using the written form established by the City for such purposes. All complaints must be signed and dated by the resident and submitted to the City Administrator for resolution. A. Regarding Elected Official or City Administrator. For any complaint regarding any elected City official or the City Administrator, the City Administrator shall immediately for the complaint to the Mayor and members of the City Council. The complaint shall be placed on the agenda at the next regular City Council meeting for discussion and resolution. This section does not preclude the City Council from placing the matter on a special meeting agenda. b. Regarding City Employee. For any complaint regarding a city employee who is not an elected official, including a City Officer, the City Administrator shall review the Complaint and, within two business days of receiving said Complaint, forward a recommendation to the Council for a resolution thereof. The Council shall place said Complaint on the agenda at the next regular meeting for discussion and resolution. This section does not preclude the Council from placing the matter on a special meeting agenda. i. Recommendations from the City Administrator may include, but not be limited to: 1. A letter in the employee’s file; 2. Suspension with or without pay; 3. Dismissal. c. Regarding Other Items. For any other complaint, the City Administrator shall take reasonable action to resolve the Complaint and make a report to council at the next regular meeting concerning complaints received and resolutions taken. Section 2. Effective Date. This ordinance has immediate effect on its date of adoption. Section 3. Clerk. The City Clerk shall amend the publicly available Surrey City Ordinances as indicated herein, Fennewald seconded. Discussion on replacing “decorum of proceedings” with Leadership Code. Thiesen amended the motion to remove “decorum of proceedings” and replace it with “Leadership Code; Thiesen – yes; Fennewald – yes; Johns – no; Gantzer – yes; Christianson – yes; Dickinson – no; motion carried.Brenda Quist is willing to clean the hall every month for $200 a month. Discussion followed. No action taken.Council reviewed the Complaint Chart drawn up by the city attorney.Martin Law Firm will be Fugere and Wallers attorney for the upcoming depositions. They require a $1,000 retainer each. Council reviewed the retainer agreement. Attorney Schultz would like council to get a little more information before deciding anything on this. His concerns are; it’s not an itemized billing statement but just a retainer agreement; it’s unsigned. His preference is that whoever is requesting reimbursement could get a billing statement from Mr. Martin or Mr. Ward and present that for reimbursement instead of using an unsigned retainer. Fugere stated the retainer was for the depositions for Waller and her and said we are running out of time. Schultz said this fund is set up to reimburse. Dickinson asked if it was a legal deal to put taxpayer’s money out there. Schultz declined to comment. Fugere asked what to do as we are running out of time. Schultz thinks the best course would be whatever expenses are incurred are paid out of pocket and submitted for reimbursement. Fugere said, oh, no, that she refuses to do that as there is no way she should have to pay her own money for the city’s legal work. Thiesen said if anybody sitting up here at this council got called for a deposition, would you go and say Citizen X said that Councilman Z….. Dickinson said I’d go in and tell the truth. Thiesen said, without and attorney and any word that you say in there, whether you misspoke or whatever can hang you. Fennewald said, and the city. Thiesen said, and the city, she’s currently an employee of the city. Fennewald said, so this is for Diane and AJ, he wants $1,000 retainer to start working with you. Schultz stated this is a $1,000 deposit he’s disputing. Gantzer said the document says it’s a retainer. Schultz said it just means it’s a condition of him undertaking representation. This money goes into a trust account and as he earns it…. Thiesen read a portion of the agreement: the balance of the retainer shall be refunded to me. Schultz said, yes that’s 4 hours so he’s charging you $250 an hour, if he only uses 3 hours that’s $750 and you get the $250 back. Schultz said so the $1000 is not for fees earned, its not going into his pocket, it’s going into a separate account so he can bill her. Fugere asked, what’s the difference? Gantzer said, we’re not out anything. Schultz said, if you incurred $900 in fees, they reimburse you. Dickinson asked if there were any complaints filed on this matter. Tollefson said yes, there have been complaints from the citizens and that’s part of the next round of complaints. Thiesen stated, as employees they need to be represented. Fennewald moved to approve the $1,000 retainer/deposit for Diane & AJ, Gantzer seconded. Thiesen said we need to make sure it doesn’t go over. Fugere asked what if it does go over, they are still in the same situation and it’s a situation neither AJ or she caused. Fennewald asked how much was approved, Gantzer said $5,600. Fennewald said okay we’ve got $4,600 if it goes over, we dip into that. Fugere stated that there are more people involved. Fennewald stated if they have to come back to a meeting and amend the $5,600, we can do that. Dickinson asked if anyone checked to see how legal this is, you can’t give taxpayers money away like this. Fennewald asked, what are we supposed to do, what are we supposed to do. Dickinson: you can’t give taxpayers money away, not like this. Fennewald said, I don’t think you want to go down this road right now. Dickinson: It’s gonna go down a road alright. Fennewald: It’s gonna go down it eventually. Dickinson: you bet you are and it ain’t gonna be good. Tollefson called the roll. Fennewald – yes; Gantzer – yes; Johns – no; Dickinson – no; Christianson – yes; Thiesen – yes, motion carried.Gantzer stated Ms. Johns should have abstained in that vote as it has to do with her legal situation. Johns stated that technically she’s an elected official and has every right to vote on that motion. Dickinson stated you’re innocent until proven guilty too. Schultz said to Dickinson, I don’t see how the editorial comments help. Council reviewed information from the League of Cities on abstaining. Tollefson read information from Roberts Rules of Order on abstaining. Christianson asked about roll-call voting all of our motions and how is that affected versus voting in unison. Dickinson asked if there were rules that you should or shouldn’t. Gantzer asked if there was a Surrey City Code that supersedes Roberts Rules and the League of Cities Rules that says if you abstain from voting it’s a yes. Tollefson stated, after three of the organization and procedures of the city council of the city of Surrey; on page 3-4, paragraph 8; 3.0111 Council Procedures and Rules. Gantzer asked, if you don’t want to count it as a yes vote then you just don’t say anything. Tollefson: if you don’t say anything, it’s a yes. Gantzer said it’s ridiculous. Thiesen asked what happens if say Steve’s wife is up for a raise, he can vote yes on that? Dickinson: right, that’s a good question. Tollefson: I haven’t found anything that says different. Audience member talking – inaudible. Gantzer asked that this be revisited by the Ordinance Committee because she doesn’t agree with it at all. Christianson agreed to do that. Council reviewed correspondence from First District Health Unit on the property at 104 2nd Ave NW regarding the following nuisances: dilapidation of siding, roof and skirting providing harborage of vermin, excess junk, debris on lot, odorous cat urine. Fennewald asked about adding the time clock discussion under New Business. Different options were discussed. Dickinson wants a time clock for city employees. Thiesen stated, if we continue doing it like we are now, it doesn’t cost any money. Officer Kircher spoke about time clocks; he has no problem with a time clock. Johns asked the officers if they’d prefer a separate time clock in their office. Fennewald would prefer it be done on a computer. Tollefson asked if the computer system was workable yet. Thiesen said it’s an expensive program. Trana mentioned the program she and Fugere were called about, noting it was quite expensive. Johns spoke about the process she uses in Velva. Dickinson moved to use the timeclock Tollefson purchased for 30 days and then evaluate. He added, if Diane thinks there should be a time clock in the police office and the public works office she can decide. Dickinson stated we’ve wasted a lot more than $220 here. Fugere stated that they’d save a lot more, Dickinson asked on what? Fennewald seconded. Fugere asked Dickinson if he wanted an answer to his question. Connor spoke about being honest with their timecard he doesn’t see any issues and thinks the employees are trustworthy. Fugere stated she thinks the timeclock should be chosen by the administrative office. Johns stated there is a form in excel for printing timecards. Fugere told Johns that is what the office is using currently. Fennewald asked Dickinson if his motion included the administrative office getting the clock they wanted, that would work for them. If the clock Tollefson bought doesn’t work for the office, they need to get what works for them. Fugere stated if Tollefson would return the timeclock he purchased, Trana and Fugere will work on getting what works for us. Fennewald and Dickinson discussed different types of timeclocks. Tollefson called the roll; Dickinson – yes; Fennewald – no; Christianson – no; Thiesen – no; Johns – yes; Gantzer – no, motion failed. Thiesen moved to allow Trana and Fugere to check for a cheaper timeclock and one that fits the office needs; Gantzer seconded; Christianson asked about putting a dollar amount on it; Gantzer asked if the information can be brought to the next meeting, Fugere stated yes. Thiesen asked if the price could be at the discretion of the mayor, up to a certain amount. Tollefson called the roll: Thiesen – yes; Twila – yes; Johns – yes; Christianson – yes; Fennewald – yes; motion carried. Public Works - Waller reported the following work completed:RV Park blowoutStarted exercising valvesManhole work Grease backup on 6th Ave SW - 3 timesWater meter issuesAdded safety lights to truckHydraulic leakChristmas Decorations outCut up downed treeGenerators checks periodically during power outageTollefson asked if the City Auditor had anything to discuss. She had nothing, Thiesen told her to keep being awesome and thanked her for putting on the Halloween parade and she received applause.Police ReportChief Howe thanked Anita and Diane for putting on and helping with the parade. Howe reported holding a staff meeting with the officers. He’s receiving good comments from Surrey citizens. He gave Officer Kircher and Officer Olson thanks for their attentiveness to the school. He’s caught up on the state reports; completed the radio survey for the state. They will be receiving $3000 for their radios. They need all new radios and they’ll be receiving a $1,500 reimbursement on every radio and a possible sale for the old radios at $2,700 each. Howe discussed the power outage the past Saturday, we have no emergency lighting or a backup generator in the city hall building which, in an emergency, is our operating center. Trana reported having completed the application for the second round of the CARES act which totaled approximately $34,000.00. Ward County Emergency Management was mentioned as a source of information. Thiesen offered to take the lead on checking on a generator with Ward County.Fennewald asked Chief Howe about any leads on part-time officers. Howe reported Officer Nason was on duty. Fennewald asked if they needed any more part-time officers, Howe stated they are handling it at the moment. Gantzer asked Fugere how the new clerk is working out, Fugere stated she is doing very well. Trana stated Lisa is amazing and has a great attitude. Fugere reported receiving 122 tax abatement applications for 2018 from the Silver Springs Developers. Noreen from the Ward County Tax Assessors office is working with Silver Springs Development on some of the valuations. Normally, we would have 10 business days from the date the information was received to hold a special meeting, but Noreen has put that on hold until she speaks with them. Fugere asked if anyone was interested in the Christmas Party due to the COVID problem. Several said no. Fugere asked permission to close the office the Friday after Thanksgiving. Christianson asked if someone from Public Works would be on call, Fugere stated there would be. Fugere asked permission to close the office on Christmas Eve.Fugere was asked earlier in the meeting by Dickinson what money we had saved the city in the past year. Fugere stated: $14,000 a year on the Circle Sanitation bill, changed the insurance deductible and saved over $1,500, received a 25% discount on the Workforce Safety premium, getting rid of the present copy machine and save $6,000 per year, increased interest on bank accounts due to changing banks and making every account interest bearing doubled the interest the city will receive, for a combined annual savings of $30, 450.00. Johns mentioned that the mayor does have the authority to purchase items such as the timeclock and that we should have gone along with it.Dickinson asked the mayor if he’d ever received a key to the city hall yet. Tollefson stated not yet. Fennewald stated when he was mayor he was given keys but when the security system was installed he gave them back and that he doesn’t know why the mayor would want them. Tollefson stated he didn’t know that he wants them but that he has to be let in the building when he brings stray cats in. Former Acting Mayor Karla Walsh reported she never had keys, Terry Johnson never had keys, Jason Strand never had keys, Chuck Schmidt never had keys, to the office or the city hall. Johns stated that Jason Strand did have keys. Walsh stated that is not what she was told. Trana reported we are still going to try to do the gift baskets for families in need for the holidays and selling roses and asked for input on these matters.Attorney Schultz stated if council reconsiders the Christmas Party his firm will donate up to $500 in food.Fugere asked council to review the correspondence from the state lab regarding the unannounced routine inspection of the tree dump and the comment at the end of the checklist stating: “Site is well maintained and well managed” and she thinks public works needs a pat on the back whenever we can. Connor spoke about the Fraternal Order of Police food drive. Knipp asked to clarify something with Johns on her vote regarding paying attorney fees. She thinks it’s a conflict of interest because its her charges and it’s her subpoenaing public employees and she voted on whether or not the employee should be reimbursed for her charges. She was elected but she was charged after she was elected. Motion to adjourn.*These minutes subject to review and revision by City Council. * ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download