State 911 Administrator Addresses Gogebic E911 Committee
IRONWOOD, MI - Friday, April 24, 2009 - Because Chairman Mike Wiemeri was late arriving, Jim Loeper called the special meeting of the Gogebic County Enhanced 911 Committee to order at 1:00 PM yesterday afternoon.
The first order of business for the Committee was to approve the minutes from the April 8, 2009 meeting. The Committee voted unanimously to approve the minutes.
The next item on the meeting's agenda was to conduct a conference call with Michigan State 911 Administrator Harriet Miller-Brown. Once the connection was made, attendees of the meeting introduced themselves to Miller-Brown. Attending the meeting, and participating in the conference call were: Ken Jacobson, Gogebic County Firefighters Training Council; Ted Finco, City of Wakefield; Tom Laabs, Ironwood City Commission; Bob Erspamer, City of Ironwood; Louise Demasi, Citizen of Ironwood; Don Bennetts, City of Bessemer; Leroy Kangas, Gogebic County Board; Larry Sanders, Gogebic County Sheriff; Tom "Garbage" Gerovac, Chairman of the Gogebic County Board (Miller-Brown had considerable difficulty understanding people as they spoke. She though Mr. Gerovac identified himself as Tom "Garbage." Gerovac repeated his name to Miller-Brown, clarifying "It's 'Gerovac' NOT 'Garbage'!"); Bob Morin, Gogebic County Board; Sue Cestkowski, Gogebic County Sheriff's Department; Mike Peterson, Bessemer Township; Jerry Grenfell, Township Association; Mike Wiemeri, Chairman of the 911 Committee (representing the Citizens); Paul Wallenius, Michigan State Police; Brian McEachern, Negaunee Regional Dispatch Representative; Bob Ferguson, Ironwood Township; and Julie Ann Giackino, Gogebic County Administrator. Representing the press at yesterday's meeting were Lou Bonagura and Arvo Toolanen from IronwoodInfo.com and yours truly.
Loeper asked Miller-Brown to briefly explain the process that the County would have to go through to open up the County's 911 Final Plan. Miller-Brown told Loeper that the process is outlined in the State Statutes. Sections 484.1301-1311 state:
484.1301 Emergency 9-1-1 district; establishment; implementation of 9-1-1 service; modification or alteration of existing emergency 9-1-1 service; emergency 9-1-1 district board; creation and powers.
Sec. 301.
(1) The board of commissioners of a county may establish an emergency 9-1-1 district within all or part of the county and may cause 9-1-1 service to be implemented within the emergency 9-1-1 district under this act.
(2) The board of commissioners of a county all or part of which is operating an existing emergency telephone service shall modify the existing emergency telephone service or may alter the scope or method of financing of 9-1-1 service within all or part of the county by establishing an emergency 9-1-1 district and causing 9-1-1 service to be implemented within the emergency 9-1-1 district under this act.
(3) The board of commissioners of a county may create an emergency 9-1-1 district board and delegate certain powers to the board.
484.1302 Emergency 9-1-1 district; joint establishment; implementation of 9-1-1 service; actions; notices.
Sec. 302.
Two or more county boards of commissioners may jointly establish an emergency 9-1-1 district within all or part of the counties and may cause 9-1-1 service to be implemented within the emergency 9-1-1 district under this act. If 2 or more county boards of commissioners wish to jointly establish an emergency 9-1-1 district under this act, then all actions required or permitted to be taken by a county or its officials under this act shall be taken by each county or the officials of each county, and all notices required or permitted to be given to a county or its officials under this act shall be given to each county or the officials of each county.
484.1303 Tentative 9-1-1 service plan; adoption by resolution; requirements; payments for installation and recurring charges associated with PSAP.
Sec. 303.
(1) To establish an emergency 9-1-1 district and to cause 9-1-1 service to be implemented within that emergency 9-1-1 district, the board of commissioners of a county shall first adopt a tentative 9-1-1 service plan by resolution.
(2) A tentative 9-1-1 service plan shall comply with chapter II and shall address at a minimum all of the following:
(a) Technical considerations of the service supplier, including but not limited to, system equipment for facilities to be used in providing emergency 9-1-1 service.
(b) Operational considerations, including but not limited to, the designation of Public Service Answering Points (PSAPs) and secondary PSAPs, the manner in which 9-1-1 calls will be processed, the dispatch functions to be performed, plans for documenting closest public safety service unit dispatching requirements, the dispatch of Michigan state police personnel, and identifying information systems to be utilized.
(c) Managerial considerations including the organizational form and agreements that would control technical, operational, and fiscal aspects of the emergency 9-1-1 service.
(d) Fiscal considerations including projected nonrecurring and recurring costs with a financial plan for implementing and operating the system.
(3) The tentative 9-1-1 service plan shall require each public agency operating a PSAP under the 9-1-1 system to pay directly for all installation and recurring charges for terminal equipment, including customer premises equipment, associated with the public agency's PSAP, and may require each public agency operating a PSAP under the 9-1-1 system to pay directly to the service supplier all installation and recurring charges for all 9-1-1 exchange and tie lines associated with the public agency's PSAP.
484.1304 Specifications of resolution.
Sec. 304.
A resolution adopting a tentative 9-1-1 service plan pursuant to section 303 shall specify a time, date, and place for the public hearing to be held on the final 9-1-1 service plan pursuant to section 309, which date shall be not less than 90 days after the date of the adoption of the resolution authorized by this section.
484.1305 Forwarding copy of resolution and tentative 9-1-1 service plan to clerk or other appropriate official.
Sec. 305.
Within 5 days after the adoption of a resolution authorized in section 303, the county clerk shall forward a copy of such resolution, together with a copy of the tentative 9-1-1 service plan, by certified mail, return receipt requested, to the clerk or other appropriate official of each public agency located within the 9-1-1 district of the tentative 9-1-1 service plan.
484.1306 Repealed. 2007, Act 165, Imd. Eff. Dec. 21, 2007.
Compiler's Notes: The repealed section pertained to exclusion from 9-1-1 service district.
Popular Name: 9-1-1484.1307 Notice of intent to function as PSAP or secondary PSAP.
Sec. 307.
(1) Any public safety agency designated in the tentative 9-1-1 service plan to function as a PSAP or secondary PSAP shall be so designated under the final 9-1-1 service plan if the public safety agency files with the county clerk a notice of intent to function as a PSAP or secondary PSAP within 45 days after the public agency which the public safety agency has been designated to serve by the tentative 9-1-1 service plan receives a copy of the resolution and the tentative 9-1-1 service plan adopted under section 303. The notice of intent to function as a PSAP or secondary PSAP shall be in substantially the following form:
NOTICE OF INTENT TO FUNCTION AS A PSAP OR SECONDARY PSAP Pursuant to section 307 of the emergency 9-1-1 service enabling act, ________________________ shall function as a (check one) _______________ PSAP ___________ Secondary PSAP within the 9-1-1 service district of the tentative 9-1-1 service plan adopted by resolution of the board of commissioners for the county of _________________________, on ________________, 19_______. _____________________________ (Acknowledgment) (2) If a public safety agency designated as a PSAP or secondary PSAP in the tentative 9-1-1 service plan fails to file a notice of intent to function as a PSAP or secondary PSAP within the time period specified in subsection (1), the public safety agency shall not be designated as a PSAP or secondary PSAP in the final 9-1-1 service plan.
484.1308 Hearing on final 9-1-1 service plan; notice.
Sec. 308.
The clerk of each county which has adopted a tentative 9-1-1 service plan under section 303 shall give notice by publication of the hearing on the final 9-1-1 service plan to be held under section 309. The notice shall be published twice in a newspaper of general circulation within the county, the first publication of the notice occurring at least 30 days prior to the date of the hearing. The notice shall state all of the following:
(a) The time, date, and place of the hearing.
(b) A description of the boundaries of the 9-1-1 service district of the final 9-1-1 service plan.
(c) That if the board of commissioners of the county, after a hearing, adopts the final 9-1-1 service plan under this act, the state 9-1-1 charge and, if a county 9-1-1 charge has been approved, a county 9-1-1 charge shall be collected on a uniform basis from all service users within the 9-1-1 service district.
484.1309 Conduct of hearing; opportunity to be heard.
Sec. 309.
The board of commissioners shall conduct a hearing on the final 9-1-1 service plan at the time, place, and date specified in the notice published pursuant to section 308. All persons attending the meeting shall be afforded a reasonable opportunity to be heard.
484.1310 Final 9-1-1 service plan; adoption by resolution; application to service suppliers.
Sec. 310.
After conducting the hearing on the final 9-1-1 service plan pursuant to this act, the board of commissioners of the affected county may adopt by resolution the final 9-1-1 service plan. Upon adoption of the resolution, the county, on behalf of public agencies located within the 9-1-1 service district, shall apply in writing to the service supplier or suppliers designated to provide 9-1-1 service within the 9-1-1 service district under the final 9-1-1 service plan.
484.1311 Implementation of 9-1-1 service in 9-1-1 service district; public safety agency to function as PSAP or secondary PSAP.
Sec. 311.
(1) As soon as feasible after receipt of a written application from a county requesting 9-1-1 service within a 9-1-1 service district described in a final 9-1-1 service plan adopted pursuant to this act, each service supplier designated in the final 9-1-1 service plan shall implement 9-1-1 service within the 9-1-1 service district in accordance with the final 9-1-1 service plan.
(2) Upon implementation of 9-1-1 service in a 9-1-1 service district pursuant to subsection (1), each public safety agency designated as a PSAP or secondary PSAP in the final 9-1-1 service plan shall begin to function as a PSAP or secondary PSAP.
Loeper then opened the meeting up for questions. The first question for Ms. Miller-Brown came from Mike Peterson.
"You used the words 'open the plan...' is that any different than amending the plan?"
Miller-Brown explained that minor amendments can be done to the 911 plan, like increasing the surcharge or purchasing/changing equipment, however, creating another PSAP requires a whole new plan.
Peterson continued with a follow-up question, "Our plan is only eight years old and there isn't much wrong with it other than like 'Ameritech' to 'AT&T'! What if we switch the PSAP? Is there a problem with that?"
Miller-Brown said the whole plan would need to be opened in order to change the PSAP. Peterson asked what minor changes can be made, in other words, what distinguishes a minor change from a major change?
Minor amendments include: changes in premise equipment & computer mapping can be done by a Commission resolution to amend the plan. Changing participating public agencies within the service district -- like combining two small police departments that are adjacent to one another -- can be done through an administrative signing. The two departments were listed as independent in the plans, but they were "combining services." The change allowed the both districts to save money by eliminating personnel and sharing other costs.
A township that is normally served by a neighboring city's fire department can establish their own fire department because they are not really creating a PSAP, they are creating a service department. Privatizing EMS services can also be done as a minor amendment.
After spending several minutes explaining the issue, Miller-Brown asked Peterson, "Does that make sense?"
To which Peterson responded, "I understand it! I'm not happy with it! But I understand it!"
IPSD Director Bob Erspamer asked the next question of Miller-Brown. His question was regarding the surcharge. Would changing the surcharge from 30¢ to 42¢ require opening the plan?
Miller-Brown's answer was no. Under the law, there are three minor changes that can be made without opening the plan. Here is the Statute:
484.1312 Amendment of final 9-1-1 service plan.
Sec. 312.
(1) Except as otherwise provided under subsection (2), after a final 9-1-1 service plan has been adopted under section 310, a county may amend the final 9-1-1 service plan only by complying with the procedures described in sections 301 to 310. Upon adoption of an amended final 9-1-1 service plan by the county board of commissioners, the county shall forward the amended final 9-1-1 service plan to the service supplier or suppliers designated to provide 9-1-1 service within the 9-1-1 service district as amended. Upon receipt of the amended final 9-1-1 service plan, each designated service supplier shall implement as soon as feasible the amendments to the final 9-1-1 service plan in the 9-1-1 service district as amended.
(2) The county board of commissioners may by resolution make minor amendments to the final 9-1-1 service plan for any of the following:
(a) Changes in PSAP premises equipment, including, but not limited to, computer-aided dispatch systems, call processing equipment, and computer mapping.
(b) Changes involving the participating public safety agencies within a 9-1-1 service district.
(c) Changes in the 9-1-1 charges collected by the county subject to the limits under this act.
Mike Wiemeri asked if a Gogebic County decided to go with Iron County's PSAP and the City of Ironwood, the county's biggest user, decided they don't want to join with Iron County. What would they have to do?
Ironwood would need to put in a notice that they wanted to either stay with Negaunee or go independently. Miller-Brown told Wiemeri that the public safety agencies, by law, have the right to decide who their PSAP's are. Miller-Brown explained that there are a number of counties that have consolidated dispatches, where an individual city has decided to keep their own dispatch. She said if Ironwood were to go on it's own or go with Negaunee, Ironwood's share of the surcharge revenues would go to Ironwood. The Statutes that relate to this question are highlighted below. The first subsection relates to the local surcharge:
484.1401b Additional charge assessed by county board of commissioners; method; limitation; approval of charge by voters; statement on service provider's bill; annual accounting; payment and distribution; methods; adjustment; county having multiple emergency response districts; distribution to secondary PSAPs; retention of percentage to cover supplier's costs; listing as separate charge on customer's bill; exemption from disclosure; separate charges imposed on access points or lines; use of charge assessed; levy after repeal date.
Sec. 401b.
(1) In addition to the charge allowed under section 401a, after June 30, 2008 a county board of commissioners may assess a county 9-1-1 charge to service users located within that county by 1 of the following methods:
(a) Up to $0.42 per month by resolution.
(b) Up to $3.00 per month with the approval of the voters in the county.
(c) Any combination of subdivisions (a) and (b) with a maximum county 9-1-1 charge of $3.00 per month.
(2) A county assessing a county 9-1-1 charge amount approved in the commission's order in case number U-15489 that exceeds the amounts established in subsection (1) may continue to assess the amount approved by the commission. Any proposed increase to the amount approved in the commission order is subject to subsection (1).
(3) The charge assessed under this section and section 401e shall not exceed the amount necessary and reasonable to implement, maintain, and operate the 9-1-1 system in the county.
(4) If the voters approve the charge to be assessed on the service user's monthly bill on a ballot question under this section, the service provider's bill shall state the following:
"This amount is for your 9-1-1 service which has been approved by the voters on (DATE OF VOTER APPROVAL). This is not a charge assessed by your service supplier. If you have questions concerning your 9-1-1 service, you may call (INCLUDE APPROPRIATE TELEPHONE NUMBER).".
(5) Within 90 days after the first day of each fiscal or calendar year of a county, an annual accounting shall be made of the charge approved under this section.
(6) Except as otherwise provided in subsection (10), the county 9-1-1 charge collected under this section shall be paid quarterly directly to the county and distributed by the county to the primary PSAPs by 1 of the following methods:
(a) As provided in the final 9-1-1 service plan.
(b) If distribution is not provided for in the plan, then according to any agreement for distribution between the county and public agencies.
(c) If distribution is not provided in the plan or by agreement, then according to population within the emergency 9-1-1 district.
(7) Subject to subsection (1), the county may adjust the county 9-1-1 charge annually to be effective July 1. The county shall notify the committee no later than May 15 of each year of any change in the county 9-1-1 charge under this section.
(8) If a county has multiple emergency response districts, the county 9-1-1 charge collected under this section shall be distributed under subsection (6) in proportion to the population within the emergency 9-1-1 district.
(9) This section shall not preclude the distribution of funding to secondary PSAPs if the distribution is determined by the primary PSAPs within the emergency 9-1-1 district to be the most effective method for dispatching of fire or emergency medical services and the distribution is approved within the final 9-1-1 service plan.
(10) The service supplier may retain 2% of the approved county 9-1-1 charge to cover the supplier's costs for billings and collections under this section.
(11) The charge allowed under this section shall be listed separately on the customer's bill and shall state by which means the charge was approved under subsection (1).
(12) Information submitted by a service supplier to a county under this section is exempt from the freedom of information act, 1976 PA 442, MCL 15.231 to 15.246, and shall not be released by the county without the consent of the service supplier. Unless required or permitted by statute, court rule, subpoena, or court order, or except as necessary for a county, the commission, committee, or public agency to pursue or defend the public's interest in any public contract or litigation, a county treasurer, the commission, committee, agency, or any employee or representative of a PSAP, database administrator, or public agency shall not divulge any information acquired with respect to customers, revenues or expenses, trade secrets, access line counts, commercial information, or any other proprietary information with respect to a service supplier while acting or claiming to act as an employee, agent, or representative. An aggregation of information that does not identify or effectively identify the number of customers, revenues or expenses, trade secrets, access lines, commercial information, and other proprietary information attributable to a specific service supplier may be made public.
(13) If a service user has multiple access points or access lines, the county 9-1-1 charge will be imposed separately on each of the first 10 access points or access lines and then 1 charge for each 10 access points or access lines per billed account.
(14) A county 9-1-1 charge assessed under subsection (1) shall be used only to fund costs approved as allowable in a published report by the committee prior to December 1, 2008. The committee shall notify the standing committees of the senate and house of representatives having jurisdiction over issues pertaining to communication technology at least 90 days prior to modifying what constitutes an allowable cost under this subsection.
(15) Notwithstanding any other provision of this act, the county 9-1-1 charge levied under this section shall not be levied after the repeal date provided in section 717. If all or a portion of the county 9-1-1 charge levied under this section has been pledged as security for the payment of qualified obligations, the county 9-1-1 charge shall be levied and collected only to the extent required to pay the qualified obligations or satisfy the pledge.
The second relates to the State-shared distributed surcharge:
484.1408 Collection of service charge by CMRS supplier; state 9-1-1 service charge by service supplier; retention of percentage to cover supplier's costs; deposit of money in emergency 9-1-1 fund; collection, deposit, and distribution of money; feasibility study of IP-based 9-1-1 system; methods of distribution to primary PSAPs by county; rules to establish standards for receipt and expenditure of funds.
Sec. 408.
(1) Beginning January 1, 2008, a CMRS supplier or reseller shall, until July 1, 2008, for each CMRS connection that has a billing address in this state, continue to collect the service charge that the CMRS supplier or reseller was authorized to collect by this section prior to December 21, 2007. Except as otherwise provided under this act, starting July 1, 2008, a service supplier shall include a state 9-1-1 service charge per month as determined under section 401a. The service supplier shall list the state 9-1-1 service charge authorized under this act as a separate line item on each bill. The service charge shall be listed on the bill as the "state 9-1-1 charge".
(2) Each service supplier may retain 2% of the state 9-1-1 charge collected under this act to cover the supplier's costs for billing and collection.
(3) Except as otherwise provided under subsection (2), the money collected as the state 9-1-1 charge under subsection (1) shall be deposited in the emergency 9-1-1 fund created in section 407 no later than 30 days after the end of the quarter in which the state 9-1-1 charge was collected.
(4) Except as otherwise provided under section 401a(5), all money collected and deposited in the emergency 9-1-1 fund created in section 407 shall be distributed as follows:
(a) 82.5% shall be disbursed to each county that has a final 9-1-1 plan in place. Forty percent of the 82.5% shall be distributed quarterly on an equal basis to each county, and 60% of the 82.5% shall be distributed quarterly based on a population per capita basis. Money received by a county under this subdivision shall only be used for 9-1-1 services as allowed under this act. Money expended under this subdivision for a purpose considered unnecessary or unreasonable by the committee or the auditor general shall be repaid to the fund.
(b) 7.75% shall be available to reimburse local exchange providers for the costs related to wireless emergency service. Any cost reimbursement allowed under this subdivision shall not include a cost that is not related to wireless emergency service. A local exchange provider may submit an invoice to the commission for reimbursement from the emergency 9-1-1 fund for allowed costs. Within 45 days after the date an invoice is submitted to the commission, the commission shall approve, either in whole or in part, or deny the invoice.
(c) 6.0% shall be available to PSAPs for training personnel assigned to 9-1-1 centers. A written request for money from the fund shall be made by a public safety agency or county to the committee. The committee shall semiannually authorize distribution of money from the fund to eligible public safety agencies or counties. A public safety agency or county that receives money under this subdivision shall create, maintain, and make available to the committee upon request a detailed record of expenditures relating to the preparation, administration, and carrying out of activities of its 9-1-1 training program. Money expended by an eligible public safety agency or county for a purpose considered unnecessary or unreasonable by the committee or the auditor general shall be repaid to the fund. The commission shall consult with and consider the recommendations of the committee in the promulgation of rules under section 413 establishing training standards for 9-1-1 system personnel. Money shall be disbursed on a biannual basis to an eligible public safety agency or county for training of PSAP personnel through courses certified by the committee only for either of the following purposes:
(i) To provide basic 9-1-1 operations training.
(ii) To provide in-service training to employees engaged in 9-1-1 service.
(d) 1.88% credited to the department of state police to operate a regional dispatch center that receives and dispatches 9-1-1 calls, and 1.87% credited to the department of state police for costs to administer this act and to maintain the office of the state 9-1-1 coordinator.
(5) For fiscal year 2007-2008 only, an amount not to exceed $500,000.00 to the department of state police to study the feasibility of an IP-based 9-1-1 system in this state.
(6) Money received by a county under subsection (4)(a) shall be distributed by the county to the primary PSAPs geographically located within the 9-1-1 service district by 1 of the following methods:
(a) As provided in the final 9-1-1 service plan.
(b) If distribution is not provided for in the 9-1-1 service plan under subdivision (a), then according to any agreement for distribution between a county and a public agency.
(c) If distribution is not provided for in the 9-1-1 service plan under subdivision (a) or by agreement between the county and public agency under subdivision (b), then according to the population within the geographic area for which the PSAP serves as primary PSAP.
(d) If a county has multiple emergency 9-1-1 districts, money for that county shall be distributed as provided in the emergency 9-1-1 districts' final 9-1-1 service plans.
(7) The commission shall consult with and consider recommendations of the committee in the promulgation of rules under section 413 establishing the standards for the receipt and expenditures of 9-1-1 funds under this act. Receipt of 9-1-1 funds under this act is dependent on compliance with the standards established under this subsection.
Mike Peterson then pointed out that, should Ironwood opt out of the Gogebic County 911 service, approximately 1/3 of the County's surcharge funds would go to Ironwood. He asked Miller-Brown, if the 1/3 surcharge is not enough money for Ironwood to provide their own dispatch would they have to fund it alone? Miller-Brown said yes.
Wiemeri asked if Ironwood could opt out of the Gogebic County 911 service. Miller-Brown said they can only opt out if the plan is opened. But she was quick to point out that opting out of a plan and opting out of the service are two different things. Opting out of the service means that the City will be either creating their own 911 service or joining some other service. Opting out of the plan means that the City is choosing not to have 911 service of any kind.
Louise Demasi asked Miller-Brown if Gogebic County decides to join with Iron County, MI, and any of the communities within the county don't want to join can they venture on their own, or stay with Negaunee. Miller-Brown said anyone can leave the county plan once it is open.
The Committee then went to work on the rest of the agenda.
Loeper gave his Coordinator's report. There were no major issues with the financials, and the Committee unanimously approve the financial information.
Loeper then told the Committee that he received a bill from the Negaunee Dispatch in the amount of $59,469.00. He asked that the Committee approve payment as soon as the funds become available. The Committee unanimously approved the payment under those conditions.
Loeper then addressed the Committee on the State Payment for calls of service. According to Loeper, the payment is calculated on a 20% baseline. Gogebic County in 2010 will have to pay $130,700.00.
Paul Wallenius pointed out that Negaunee Regional Dispatch, which has eight dispatchers, costs Gogebic County only $15,000 per dispatcher. He asked the Committee how it would be possible for the County to get by on their own or with another provider for only $15,000.
Sue Cestkowski pointed out that Gogebic County is paying a part of eight dispatcher's salaries. She said that the real cost per dispatcher was $83,000 -- Gogebic County pays for 1.7 dispatchers. Wallenius stated that 1.7 dispatchers could not possibly run a dispatch center.
Cestkowski said that eight dispatchers are each getting $83,000. Wallenius said that Gogebic County is only paying a portion of those wages because the costs are shared with other counties Negaunee services. Mike Peterson said that money would be saved by going to Iron County because they don't charge as much.
Loeper told the Committee that he has been meeting with several area communities trying to express the need for an increased surcharge. He was happy to report that most of the people he has be in contact with have been very supportive. He said he will be meeting with the Ironwood City Commission on Monday and he will do his best to show the need for quality 911 service to continue.
Loeper provided the Committee with a breakdown of calls dispatched to Gogebic County. According to the paperwork:
-
December 2008 - there were 25 fire calls; 259 EMS calls; and 646 law enforcement calls for a total of 930 dispatched calls.
-
January 2009 - there were 29 fire calls; 238 EMS calls; and 657 law enforcement calls for a total of 924 dispatched calls.
-
February 2009 - there were 15 fire calls; 208 EMS calls; and 572 law enforcement calls for a total of 795 dispatched calls.
Loeper explained that he would be out of town during the election. He said he has all of the needed paperwork ready to increase the surcharge to 42¢ just in case the increased surcharge is defeated in the May 6th election. He asked that the Committee approve submittal of the proper paperwork should the surcharge be defeated. The Committee unanimously approved.
Ken Jacobson expressed concern that the Committee Chairman Mike Wiemeri was telling people to vote against the surcharge increase. Wiemeri explained that he was being "beaten up" about the issue and he said "if you don't agree with it, don't vote for it!" He apologized to the Committee for making the statement.
Finally, the next meeting was scheduled for May 8th, 2009, at 1:30 PM in a location to be announced. Loeper said the meeting should be very short because it's about the surcharge. Mike Peterson said, if the surcharge is defeated, it might just be a very long meeting.
The Committee unanimously voted to adjourn.
