Copyright (c)2007-2010 Curtis Bloes
All Rights Reserved
New East Sac County Mission Statement drafted, approved
At the February 11, 2010 joint East Sac County school board meeting, the boards agreed to let the following mission and vision statement be their new guiding set of principals.
Copyright (c)2007-2010 Curtis Bloes
All Rights Reserved
Copyright (c)2007-2010 Curtis Bloes
All Rights Reserved
Limbert-Hansen enters a guilty plea in library theft
As in all court matters, the disposition of any case can change without notice. This document is freely available for inspection at the Sac County Clerk of Courts office in Sac City, Iowa
The following is the original complaint.
Copyright (c)2007-2010 Curtis Bloes
All Rights Reserved
The following is the original complaint.
Copyright (c)2007-2010 Curtis Bloes
All Rights Reserved
Raiders boys beat Laurens Marathon by getting to the free throw line a lot
Copyright (c)2007-2010 Curtis Bloes
All Rights Reserved
Raiders boys come up a little short in battle for conference title
Copyright (c)2007-2010 Curtis Bloes
All Rights Reserved
The mess of the Citizen's Opportunity to Address the Council
During the February 8, 2010 Sac City Council meeting I made aloud to the Sac City Council the same points that I made in the TSN story entitled, Understanding the Sac City budget, Part 1: Community Requests
One of the concerns I raised was regarding the entity Partners for Progress. According to information put out by Sac Community Center meetings, last year they served in the neighborhood of 10 customers. I also pointed out that the Partners for Progress, back when they were calling themselves Horizons indicated publically that they would not ask for money from the taxpayers. I concluded this portion of my address by pointing out that this was the second year they were asking for tax money and I asked for the council's justification in funding them.
Mayor Barb Powell's answer was that the Partners for Progress are moving to a new location because people did not like to go to the Sac Community Center because they think it's too public. According to Mayor Powell, Partners for Progress is moving to a new location to "...try it again". The Mayor suggested that a lot of the work the Partners for Progress are doing doesn't happen at the Sac Community Center. According to Mayor Powell, they are helping get food packets out, and doing free income tax for people, and were responsible for the freecycle day last summer at the Chautauqua building.
(Please note that the tax preparation is a piggy back program that the Partners for Progress are doing with the ISU Extension.)
The mayor said that if I had any more questions she wouldn't be able to answer them, in spite of the fact that she is on the Finance committee and was partially responsible for determining whether the Partners for Progress would be eligible to receive funding this year.
I confirmed with her that when the Partners for Progress move into the Senior Center they will be paying $1,200 in rent for the year, and in return, the Mayor emphasized that the Partners for Progress are going to put out their own sign in front of the Senior Center that would help the public to find them better.
(Besides the location of the photo copier, signage is one of the main concerns that were repeatedly expressed to the former director of the Sac Community Center by the Partners for Progress leadership.)
She also indicated that organizations of this nature need some time to catch on.
Basically satisfied with her justifications for giving money to the Partners for Progress I moved on.
I then asked why, if the Partners for Progress are going give the Senior Center $1,200 this year, which is $200 more in revenue than the Senior Center received last year, why is the city going to give them anything. I asked, "Why not let Partners for Progress fund them?" which would allow the city to take the Senior Center out of the equation until such time as the Partners for Progress moves on and the Senior Center needs taxpayer funding again?
The Mayor said that she could not answer my question. When I pressed her, and said that it was my opinion that the city should not fund the Senior Center until they again need it, the mayor suggested that the Senior Center does need the money. According to Mayor Powell the Senior Center is, "...trying to do a lot of projects. They're trying to better their facilities in the hopes that they get more of our seniors because they have said...A lot of seniors won't go because they think it's not a pleasant place to be."
At this point in the conversation, most of the Mayor's reasoning made sense to me and I was ready to move on. Council person Brian Muska said that I made a valid point and that it was something that "We could look into and discuss."
Because blow off answers like that one get on my nerves I asked Mr. Muska, "Is it going on as a discussion point next meeting?"
He answered, "It's better than sitting here and telling you that we're not going to take it into consideration, and that's what I'm saying."
I pointed out, "That's not really a good consolation prize."
Mr. Muska said, "I'm not really trying to give you a consolation prize. You seem to have the right answers all the time, how come you don't run for city council?"
I stammered a bit at this point and Mr. Muska found my words for me asking, "Conflict of interest?" to which I confirmed that that was how I felt.
He nodded and indicated that he disagreed with that saying, "...you're interested, your here all the time." I didn't take the obvious set up and ask him if he knew what that phrase meant but I did point out that I’m running a for profit business.
Council Person Nich Frohardt chimed in with a little tension breaker at this point and said, "Most of the time I think I am too, but some years don't work out that way."
I thought, "Tell me about it!'
The Mayor dismissively asked if there were any questions or comments and if anyone had anything else by way of answer for my questions, (Which she actually mostly answered a few minutes earlier.)
Council Person Jim Johnston decided to bare his teeth and said to me, "I'd like to say this, the reason a lot of people don't give opinions in here is because on your website you slant everything that somebody says."
I can only assume he's talking about the word for word transcriptions that I am rather fond of running. Probably he's not so fond of The Sac News because I got to the bottom of just who's idea, (Council Person Jim Johnston's) it was to award Mediacom a franchise without giving the public a proper opportunity to be heard.
Brian Muska then also decided to get his jab in saying that I, "Give [my] point of view and only [my] point of view!"
I answered calmly, "Everyone is welcome to come up and give their point of view." (I reflected to myself how most opposing points of view ran along the lines of “You need to get a job” and the classic, “you just hate your step-mother.” ;)
Mr. Johnston continued on his earlier track saying, “The only thing I've heard from several people in the community. The reason they don't show up at these meetings is because that camera's on and they don't want to be on camera.
I said "I can't help it if there are people that are afraid."
Mr. Johnston said, "Well, I'm just telling you. You’re scaring people away." Mr. Muska also pointed out, "You're not the spokesperson either for the whole city." To which I replied that I'm the first person anyone comes to on the internet and that I’ve got a lot more people reading me. It felt a little arrogant putting it that way, but it’s not by my choosing that the members of the city council refuse to communicate with the public through TSN or the Sac Sun. As I recall, former mayor Lonnie Rubendall use to regularly write “From the desk of the Mayor” style pieces in the Sac Sun.
They are choosing to let my opinion be first and most widely read. They have a really slick website at their disposal at http://cityofsaccity.org and could choose to communicate their one single message per month instantly, long before I wade through the 63ish stories I’m working on every week and get down to writing the editorials.
I ended my address saying that I think it's deplorable that the city is giving $50,000 total to the Sac Community Center and Kid's World and that nobody from the council is showing up to represent the council, (read that: taxpayer's interests) on those boards.
In the middle of my statement, Mr. Johnston interrupted me and told me that it was my opinion and was not, "the rest of our opinions."
Mr. Muska said, "Most of us have a full time job, Curtis, and we are not city employees and we do this on pretty much a volunteer situation to do this, and yes we get a total of $25.00 per council meeting."
I said, "you ran." meaning that he is the one who wanted to be on the city council. He seemed to understand that because he said, "That's exactly right, why didn't you?"
It was a "see previous answer" moment regarding my conflict of interest with sitting on a board while reporting on its doings.
Mayor Powell, pointed out a factual error I had made in speaking, noting that Jim Frederick's attendance on the Kid's World board was nearly flawless, which is true. Mr. Frederick DOES do a great job of representing our interests on the Kid's World Board, and I spoke out of turn when I said that.
She didn't address Mr. Johnston's complete absence from the Sac Community Center's board however.
Mayor Powell, said, "I really think we need to move on."
Because I was getting really sick of her dismissive attitude I overly rudely said, "I'm really not done addressing you yet." She excused herself and indicated with her body language that I could continue. A little embarrassed regarding my tone, I thanked her and continued.
I said, "You are giving Kid's World $20,000 this year." I then pointed out that on page 13 of the proposed budget it indicated that Kid's World would be giving the city back $18,000. I continued, "It just seems like you are literally paying them so that they can pay you back."
I pointed out that Kid's World has a lot of financial problems, to which Councilperson Muska vigorously nodded, so I asked, “If you're going to do this charade year after year, why not just forgive their debt and just say "they're an asset to the community?" and get that monkey off their back?"
Mayor Powell answered, "We have discussed that. It's not foreign to our conversation, we have discussed it, and we're all very much aware of what's going on.'
Sandy Tellinghuisen, the Sac City Clerk broke in at that point and, "They did ask the auditor that question, Curtis, about forgiving it, and they said, legally the best thing to do would be to do what they're doing right now." Then she paused and made a "what can you do?” gesture with her hands and added, "From an audit perspective"
Mayor Powell reiterated her point that forgiving the loan had been part of the discussion, but that they found out, "there are some things that we cannot do."
With that the portion of the conversation in which the Mayor allowed me to participate ended.
Later on while the City Council was considering accepting the proposed budget as recommended by the finance committee, Council Person Muska asked if there was a possibility that the finance committee could get together and discuss some of the points I brought up.
Council Person Johnston replied, "I don't think people realize the amount of hours that Barb, myself, Jim and Adam have spent on this budget. We've probably spent 5 to 6 hours, and if people think we, this list of money that we give out, we take lightly, we don’t. We discuss everyone, go through their budget that they give us, so I mean; I think we've done the best that we can do."
Mr. Muska indicated that he was "fine with" what the finance committee decided.
Mr. Johnston went on saying, "I mean. I don’t have a problem if we want to have another meeting and go through things again that's fine, but like Adam said, we're under a timeline now."
As the debate about whether to have another look at the budget continued it occurred to me that what Jim Johnston had just said spoke volumes about the process.
If you'll recall, even though it says so on the budget calendar the city council approved that evening, (see document below) the city council did not actually have a preliminary budget to review on January 25 because the weather had knocked the computers out. Because there was no preliminary budget even available until well into the next week for ANYONE to review, that means on the evening of February 8, they should have set the calendar back and done a preliminary review of the budget that night, and then proceeded accordingly.
But what do I know, right?
Following is a copy of the budget calendar that the Sac City Council approved on the evening of February 8, 2010.
Copyright (c)2007-2010 Curtis Bloes
All Rights Reserved
One of the concerns I raised was regarding the entity Partners for Progress. According to information put out by Sac Community Center meetings, last year they served in the neighborhood of 10 customers. I also pointed out that the Partners for Progress, back when they were calling themselves Horizons indicated publically that they would not ask for money from the taxpayers. I concluded this portion of my address by pointing out that this was the second year they were asking for tax money and I asked for the council's justification in funding them.
Mayor Barb Powell's answer was that the Partners for Progress are moving to a new location because people did not like to go to the Sac Community Center because they think it's too public. According to Mayor Powell, Partners for Progress is moving to a new location to "...try it again". The Mayor suggested that a lot of the work the Partners for Progress are doing doesn't happen at the Sac Community Center. According to Mayor Powell, they are helping get food packets out, and doing free income tax for people, and were responsible for the freecycle day last summer at the Chautauqua building.
(Please note that the tax preparation is a piggy back program that the Partners for Progress are doing with the ISU Extension.)
The mayor said that if I had any more questions she wouldn't be able to answer them, in spite of the fact that she is on the Finance committee and was partially responsible for determining whether the Partners for Progress would be eligible to receive funding this year.
I confirmed with her that when the Partners for Progress move into the Senior Center they will be paying $1,200 in rent for the year, and in return, the Mayor emphasized that the Partners for Progress are going to put out their own sign in front of the Senior Center that would help the public to find them better.
(Besides the location of the photo copier, signage is one of the main concerns that were repeatedly expressed to the former director of the Sac Community Center by the Partners for Progress leadership.)
She also indicated that organizations of this nature need some time to catch on.
Basically satisfied with her justifications for giving money to the Partners for Progress I moved on.
I then asked why, if the Partners for Progress are going give the Senior Center $1,200 this year, which is $200 more in revenue than the Senior Center received last year, why is the city going to give them anything. I asked, "Why not let Partners for Progress fund them?" which would allow the city to take the Senior Center out of the equation until such time as the Partners for Progress moves on and the Senior Center needs taxpayer funding again?
The Mayor said that she could not answer my question. When I pressed her, and said that it was my opinion that the city should not fund the Senior Center until they again need it, the mayor suggested that the Senior Center does need the money. According to Mayor Powell the Senior Center is, "...trying to do a lot of projects. They're trying to better their facilities in the hopes that they get more of our seniors because they have said...A lot of seniors won't go because they think it's not a pleasant place to be."
At this point in the conversation, most of the Mayor's reasoning made sense to me and I was ready to move on. Council person Brian Muska said that I made a valid point and that it was something that "We could look into and discuss."
Because blow off answers like that one get on my nerves I asked Mr. Muska, "Is it going on as a discussion point next meeting?"
He answered, "It's better than sitting here and telling you that we're not going to take it into consideration, and that's what I'm saying."
I pointed out, "That's not really a good consolation prize."
Mr. Muska said, "I'm not really trying to give you a consolation prize. You seem to have the right answers all the time, how come you don't run for city council?"
I stammered a bit at this point and Mr. Muska found my words for me asking, "Conflict of interest?" to which I confirmed that that was how I felt.
He nodded and indicated that he disagreed with that saying, "...you're interested, your here all the time." I didn't take the obvious set up and ask him if he knew what that phrase meant but I did point out that I’m running a for profit business.
Council Person Nich Frohardt chimed in with a little tension breaker at this point and said, "Most of the time I think I am too, but some years don't work out that way."
I thought, "Tell me about it!'
The Mayor dismissively asked if there were any questions or comments and if anyone had anything else by way of answer for my questions, (Which she actually mostly answered a few minutes earlier.)
Council Person Jim Johnston decided to bare his teeth and said to me, "I'd like to say this, the reason a lot of people don't give opinions in here is because on your website you slant everything that somebody says."
I can only assume he's talking about the word for word transcriptions that I am rather fond of running. Probably he's not so fond of The Sac News because I got to the bottom of just who's idea, (Council Person Jim Johnston's) it was to award Mediacom a franchise without giving the public a proper opportunity to be heard.
Brian Muska then also decided to get his jab in saying that I, "Give [my] point of view and only [my] point of view!"
I answered calmly, "Everyone is welcome to come up and give their point of view." (I reflected to myself how most opposing points of view ran along the lines of “You need to get a job” and the classic, “you just hate your step-mother.” ;)
Mr. Johnston continued on his earlier track saying, “The only thing I've heard from several people in the community. The reason they don't show up at these meetings is because that camera's on and they don't want to be on camera.
I said "I can't help it if there are people that are afraid."
Mr. Johnston said, "Well, I'm just telling you. You’re scaring people away." Mr. Muska also pointed out, "You're not the spokesperson either for the whole city." To which I replied that I'm the first person anyone comes to on the internet and that I’ve got a lot more people reading me. It felt a little arrogant putting it that way, but it’s not by my choosing that the members of the city council refuse to communicate with the public through TSN or the Sac Sun. As I recall, former mayor Lonnie Rubendall use to regularly write “From the desk of the Mayor” style pieces in the Sac Sun.
They are choosing to let my opinion be first and most widely read. They have a really slick website at their disposal at http://cityofsaccity.org and could choose to communicate their one single message per month instantly, long before I wade through the 63ish stories I’m working on every week and get down to writing the editorials.
I ended my address saying that I think it's deplorable that the city is giving $50,000 total to the Sac Community Center and Kid's World and that nobody from the council is showing up to represent the council, (read that: taxpayer's interests) on those boards.
In the middle of my statement, Mr. Johnston interrupted me and told me that it was my opinion and was not, "the rest of our opinions."
Mr. Muska said, "Most of us have a full time job, Curtis, and we are not city employees and we do this on pretty much a volunteer situation to do this, and yes we get a total of $25.00 per council meeting."
I said, "you ran." meaning that he is the one who wanted to be on the city council. He seemed to understand that because he said, "That's exactly right, why didn't you?"
It was a "see previous answer" moment regarding my conflict of interest with sitting on a board while reporting on its doings.
Mayor Powell, pointed out a factual error I had made in speaking, noting that Jim Frederick's attendance on the Kid's World board was nearly flawless, which is true. Mr. Frederick DOES do a great job of representing our interests on the Kid's World Board, and I spoke out of turn when I said that.
She didn't address Mr. Johnston's complete absence from the Sac Community Center's board however.
Mayor Powell, said, "I really think we need to move on."
Because I was getting really sick of her dismissive attitude I overly rudely said, "I'm really not done addressing you yet." She excused herself and indicated with her body language that I could continue. A little embarrassed regarding my tone, I thanked her and continued.
I said, "You are giving Kid's World $20,000 this year." I then pointed out that on page 13 of the proposed budget it indicated that Kid's World would be giving the city back $18,000. I continued, "It just seems like you are literally paying them so that they can pay you back."
I pointed out that Kid's World has a lot of financial problems, to which Councilperson Muska vigorously nodded, so I asked, “If you're going to do this charade year after year, why not just forgive their debt and just say "they're an asset to the community?" and get that monkey off their back?"
Mayor Powell answered, "We have discussed that. It's not foreign to our conversation, we have discussed it, and we're all very much aware of what's going on.'
Sandy Tellinghuisen, the Sac City Clerk broke in at that point and, "They did ask the auditor that question, Curtis, about forgiving it, and they said, legally the best thing to do would be to do what they're doing right now." Then she paused and made a "what can you do?” gesture with her hands and added, "From an audit perspective"
Mayor Powell reiterated her point that forgiving the loan had been part of the discussion, but that they found out, "there are some things that we cannot do."
With that the portion of the conversation in which the Mayor allowed me to participate ended.
Later on while the City Council was considering accepting the proposed budget as recommended by the finance committee, Council Person Muska asked if there was a possibility that the finance committee could get together and discuss some of the points I brought up.
Council Person Johnston replied, "I don't think people realize the amount of hours that Barb, myself, Jim and Adam have spent on this budget. We've probably spent 5 to 6 hours, and if people think we, this list of money that we give out, we take lightly, we don’t. We discuss everyone, go through their budget that they give us, so I mean; I think we've done the best that we can do."
Mr. Muska indicated that he was "fine with" what the finance committee decided.
Mr. Johnston went on saying, "I mean. I don’t have a problem if we want to have another meeting and go through things again that's fine, but like Adam said, we're under a timeline now."
As the debate about whether to have another look at the budget continued it occurred to me that what Jim Johnston had just said spoke volumes about the process.
If you'll recall, even though it says so on the budget calendar the city council approved that evening, (see document below) the city council did not actually have a preliminary budget to review on January 25 because the weather had knocked the computers out. Because there was no preliminary budget even available until well into the next week for ANYONE to review, that means on the evening of February 8, they should have set the calendar back and done a preliminary review of the budget that night, and then proceeded accordingly.
But what do I know, right?
Following is a copy of the budget calendar that the Sac City Council approved on the evening of February 8, 2010.
Copyright (c)2007-2010 Curtis Bloes
All Rights Reserved
February 11 2010 East Sac County joint school boards TSN Twitter feed
The following is a collection of tweets from the night of the February 11, 2010 East Sac County Joint School Board meeting. The tweets were entered by Curtis Bloes. In the original tweets, images appear as a link.
Thus far, all of the comments regarding these tweets have been entered on http://facebook.com/thesacnews, you are welcome to friend me there to read them.
Information that is reported live is considered developing and is subject to change without notice.
Photos are from twitpic and you have to click them to see them full size.
Joint school boards call to order. New outfit for Shirley Phillips tonight.
2 students, one from Sac and one from WLVA are attending court ordered homes. The transportation is provided by our school...MORE
...The ranch (Rabiner's) they attend is in the Manson district which is the same as open enrolling out. We pay $1.69 per mile for that.
Both boards approved the minutes of the previous minutes and the agendas without comment or change.
According to the Midschool princ. they are having a hard time getting the play done and the final date and time are not in stone.
Shirley Phillips just questioned this item on the MSchool report.
Reading Plus Rate & Reading Report Part 1 MORE...
Reading Plus - Part 2
2nd semester ESC HS discipline data
Significant ESC HS Dates
SCHOOL MAKE UP DAYS ANNOUNCED! (This is subject to change)
Seniors to return after graduation exercise 4 make up. (Click to read more)
According to ESC Supe. Barb K., the rumor about being able to petition the Gov. to have snow days forgiven is not true. [Further discussion revealed that you can actually petition the governor, but it would not be effective]
I want to re-emphasize that those [MAKE UP] dates are subject to change. At the March meet, the question of extend. days will be answered
"I think it's a strong indication to the boards about where the community stands." Barb Kruthoff re: the successful reorganization vote.
This mission statement was just approved by both boards.
The boards are discussing insurance...MORE
...they are now discussion the single salary schedule. Neither of these topics are discussable in the depth they need to be via twitter...
School board organizational meeting. email tween supe. and AEA. part 1
school board re-organization vote email between Supe. and AEA part 2
The boards are having a difficult time deciding when to have the meeting to become 1 board. There have been several dates rejected so far.
The meeting to decide who the East Sac County board members are will be on Wednesday March 3rd at 5:00PM at Lake View.
Lee Ann Huser (spelling of name may be wrong) has just resigned from Sac. [Leigh Ann]
ESC Middle school wrestling has just been reinstated with 14 students participating. (congrats)
Shirley Phillips doesn't seem to know much about how servers work. She definitely brought a spoon to this tech discussion knife fight...
...should I add the "When she pretends she knows something about a topic" to the drinking game?
Yeah, Shirley... computers communicate with each other via "fiber glass".
meeting adjourned.
PS The following people have decided to take advantage of early retirement.
The results of tonight's Economic Development Drinking:
0 drinks in 4 hours... you are dead sober. (I swear that during the meeting, Sac School Board President Shirley Phillips was pitched some easy set ups by some of the board members where she could have taken the opportunity to reminded those present that she is the director of a local pseudo-governmental entity (sort of) concerned with economic development, but that may have been my imagination.)
Copyright (c)2007-2010 Curtis Bloes
All Rights Reserved
Thus far, all of the comments regarding these tweets have been entered on http://facebook.com/thesacnews, you are welcome to friend me there to read them.
Information that is reported live is considered developing and is subject to change without notice.
Photos are from twitpic and you have to click them to see them full size.
Joint school boards call to order. New outfit for Shirley Phillips tonight.
2 students, one from Sac and one from WLVA are attending court ordered homes. The transportation is provided by our school...MORE
...The ranch (Rabiner's) they attend is in the Manson district which is the same as open enrolling out. We pay $1.69 per mile for that.
Both boards approved the minutes of the previous minutes and the agendas without comment or change.
According to the Midschool princ. they are having a hard time getting the play done and the final date and time are not in stone.
Shirley Phillips just questioned this item on the MSchool report.
Reading Plus Rate & Reading Report Part 1 MORE...
Reading Plus - Part 2
2nd semester ESC HS discipline data
Significant ESC HS Dates
SCHOOL MAKE UP DAYS ANNOUNCED! (This is subject to change)
Seniors to return after graduation exercise 4 make up. (Click to read more)
According to ESC Supe. Barb K., the rumor about being able to petition the Gov. to have snow days forgiven is not true. [Further discussion revealed that you can actually petition the governor, but it would not be effective]
I want to re-emphasize that those [MAKE UP] dates are subject to change. At the March meet, the question of extend. days will be answered
"I think it's a strong indication to the boards about where the community stands." Barb Kruthoff re: the successful reorganization vote.
This mission statement was just approved by both boards.
The boards are discussing insurance...MORE
...they are now discussion the single salary schedule. Neither of these topics are discussable in the depth they need to be via twitter...
School board organizational meeting. email tween supe. and AEA. part 1
school board re-organization vote email between Supe. and AEA part 2
The boards are having a difficult time deciding when to have the meeting to become 1 board. There have been several dates rejected so far.
The meeting to decide who the East Sac County board members are will be on Wednesday March 3rd at 5:00PM at Lake View.
Lee Ann Huser (spelling of name may be wrong) has just resigned from Sac. [Leigh Ann]
ESC Middle school wrestling has just been reinstated with 14 students participating. (congrats)
Shirley Phillips doesn't seem to know much about how servers work. She definitely brought a spoon to this tech discussion knife fight...
...should I add the "When she pretends she knows something about a topic" to the drinking game?
Yeah, Shirley... computers communicate with each other via "fiber glass".
meeting adjourned.
PS The following people have decided to take advantage of early retirement.
The results of tonight's Economic Development Drinking:
0 drinks in 4 hours... you are dead sober. (I swear that during the meeting, Sac School Board President Shirley Phillips was pitched some easy set ups by some of the board members where she could have taken the opportunity to reminded those present that she is the director of a local pseudo-governmental entity (sort of) concerned with economic development, but that may have been my imagination.)
Copyright (c)2007-2010 Curtis Bloes
All Rights Reserved
February 8, 2010 Sac City Council Call to Order
2010 Sac City Council and Government Attendance:
Jim Johnston 4 of 4
Brian Muska 2 of 4
Administrator Adam Ledford 4 of 4
Mayor Barb Powell 3 of 4
Bill Brenny 3 of 4
Jim Frederick 3 of 4
Nich Frohardt 4 of 4 (1 late)
Clerk Sandy Tellinghuisen 4 of 4
Also attending:
Sac City Police Chief John Thomsen
City Employee "Danny"
City Employee "Bob"
Curtis Bloes (TSN)
Dale Wegner (SS)
Loretta Rice
The minutes of the January 25, 2010 Sac City Council meeting were approved without challenge. Councilman Brian Muska abstained due to not being present at that meeting.
The evening's agenda was approved without amendment, though later on the Sac Community Center annual report was removed from the agenda or skipped.
There was no public input during the portion of the meeting entitled, "Public Input on Solid Waste"
Copyright (c)2007-2010 Curtis Bloes
All Rights Reserved
Jim Johnston 4 of 4
Brian Muska 2 of 4
Administrator Adam Ledford 4 of 4
Mayor Barb Powell 3 of 4
Bill Brenny 3 of 4
Jim Frederick 3 of 4
Nich Frohardt 4 of 4 (1 late)
Clerk Sandy Tellinghuisen 4 of 4
Also attending:
Sac City Police Chief John Thomsen
City Employee "Danny"
City Employee "Bob"
Curtis Bloes (TSN)
Dale Wegner (SS)
Loretta Rice
The minutes of the January 25, 2010 Sac City Council meeting were approved without challenge. Councilman Brian Muska abstained due to not being present at that meeting.
The evening's agenda was approved without amendment, though later on the Sac Community Center annual report was removed from the agenda or skipped.
There was no public input during the portion of the meeting entitled, "Public Input on Solid Waste"
Copyright (c)2007-2010 Curtis Bloes
All Rights Reserved
February 15, 2010 Sac City Park Board Agenda
Copyright (c)2007-2010 Curtis Bloes
All Rights Reserved
February 2, 2010 Cunningham accident report
This is a public release of information by the Iowa State Patrol.
Copyright (c)2007-2010 Curtis Bloes
All Rights Reserved
Copyright (c)2007-2010 Curtis Bloes
All Rights Reserved
Tentative February 22, 2010 Sac City Council Agenda
The following is the tentative agenda for the February 22, 2010 Sac City Council meeting. This almost ALWAYS changes.
Copyright (c)2007-2010 Curtis Bloes
All Rights Reserved
Copyright (c)2007-2010 Curtis Bloes
All Rights Reserved
ESC Snow Make Up Days Announced
Currently East Sac County has 10 days to make up.
There WILL be school on:
Monday, February 15th (make up day #1)
Friday, March 26th (make up day #2)
Thursday, April 1st (make up day #3)
Monday, April 5th (make up day #4)
Tuesday,April 6th (make up day #5)
This leaves 5 remaining days to make up. Those days will be added to the end of the school year. Monday, June 7th will be the last day for students and Tuesday, June 8th will be checkout day for teachers.
At this time East Sac County School intends to have graduation on May 23rd as originally scheduled.
Copyright (c)2007-2010 Curtis Bloes
All Rights Reserved
There WILL be school on:
Monday, February 15th (make up day #1)
Friday, March 26th (make up day #2)
Thursday, April 1st (make up day #3)
Monday, April 5th (make up day #4)
Tuesday,April 6th (make up day #5)
This leaves 5 remaining days to make up. Those days will be added to the end of the school year. Monday, June 7th will be the last day for students and Tuesday, June 8th will be checkout day for teachers.
At this time East Sac County School intends to have graduation on May 23rd as originally scheduled.
Copyright (c)2007-2010 Curtis Bloes
All Rights Reserved
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)