HomeMy WebLinkAbout1972-03-27 (Special) Meeting Minutes370
CXXJNCIL OWtiE&5
CI1Y OF ElGEWX>D, CDLORAOO
MARCll 27, 1972
SPECIAL t£ETIR;:
The City Council of the City of Englewood, Arapahoe County, Colorado, met in special
sessicn K:>nday, March 27, 1972, at 8:00 P.M., in the Cculcil Owlrbers, City Hall, Englewood,
Colorado.
The following was the Notice of Call for the meeting:
OOl'Iffi OF CAIL BY 'DfE K\YOR
FOR A SPECIAL SESSIOO OF 'DIE CITY CDWCIL
~Y, Mf\RCll 27, 1972
7:30 P.M.
The City Council of the City of Englewood, Arapahoe County, Colorado, is hereby called to a
special meeting at the Englewood City Hall, 3400 South Elati Street, to consider far following
agenda:
Public hearing to coosider the assessments of Paving District No. 20.
(List of the streets and alleys in the Paving District and copies of
the letters of protest received transmitted herewith).
/s/ STANLEY H. DIAL
City Manager
SHD/ij
~aEn' OF REQ:IPI' OF tCI'Iffi
The following perscns, all CotmCil menbers of the City of Englewood, do hereby ackoowledge
receipt of notice of the above special sessicn:
/s/ Elmer E. Schwab
/s/ Dallas Dhority
/s/ Mil ten E. Senti
Is/ Howard R. Brown
/s/ Paul Blessing
/s/ Judith B. Heming
/s/ John J. Lay
Mayor Senti, presiding , called the meeting to order and asked the City Clerk to
explain lliily the meeting was being held at 8:00 P.M. as owosed to 7:30 P.M.
Mr. William L. McDivitt explained that the letters to all affected property owners
notifying them of the hearing had indicated that the meeting would be at 8: 00 P .M. On the
other hand, the resoluticn (Resoluticn No. 9, Series of 1972) calling for the public hearing
had set the time for 7 :30 P .M. If the meeting were held at 7 :30 P .M., those perscns relying
on the meeting being held at 8:00 P.M. as set forth in their letters would nm the risk of
not being present when their particular inprovement came up for discussicn. Therefore, it
was the City Attorney's feeling that the meeting should be held at 8:00 P.M. Mr. McDivitt
indicated that at 7:30 he tmde an announcement that those perscns already in attendance should
not leave before the Council convened at 8:00 P.M.
present:
Mayor Senti then asked for roll call. Upcn the call of the roll, the following were
c.ouncil Melrbers Blessing, Brown, Dhority, Heming, Schwab, Senti.
Absent: Council Menber Lay.
The Mayor declared a quorun present.
Also present were: City Manager Dial
Assistant City Manager McDivitt
City Attorney Berardini
~ IH)Rl1Y KJVED, CXlJNCil11AN SCliWAB SECXIIDFD, 'DIAT 'lllE PUBUC ~'ID
~IDER 1llE AS.5ESSl-DTS FOR PAVIK; DISl'RICT W. 20 BE OPENED. Upcn a call of the roll, the
vote resulted as follows:
Ayes:
Nays:
Absent:
Council Menbers Blessing, Brown, Dhority, Heming, Schwab,
Senti.
Ncne.
Council Meuber Lay.
The Mayor declared the mticn carried, and the public hearing opened at 8:05 P.M.
(A tape recording of the public hearing is en file with the official records).
Listed below are those individuals who appeared before City Council and the letters
of protest which were received.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-2-
City Manager Dial noted that for thirteen years the City had ccnducted an annual
paving illprovenent program with the exception of one sunner. He noted that the staff prepares
a preliminary list of streets and other illprovements to be included in the proposed district am that this report is forwarded to him and then to the Council. The Coureil in tum holds
a hearing after appropriate advertisement to hear all cooments, either pro or cen, about the
district. Following the public hearing. r.ouncil adopts arxl ordinance creating the district.
Paving District No. 20. he noted, wa.ild have $385 ,000 of the costs paid by the
property owners benefiting fran the illprovements while the City wa.ild pay $l<IS,OOO. The City's
share is to cover such iteml as intersectien paving, ditdl crossings, etc.
The City Manager indicated that bids for construction are advertised and that a ccn-
tract is let to the lowest and best bidder. In additien to the ccntract cost, other expenses,
including engineering assessment conputatien and interest during constructien, are included
in the cost of the district. He further explained that those persons paying part or all of
their assessments on or before May 22. 1972. would receive a 5 percent discx:>tmt. Perscns
choosing to do so could pay their assessments over a ten year period at an interest rate of 5
percent. At any rate, the first payment due en January l, 1973. does not include interest.
Public Works Director Kells Waggener outlined the m:!thod used in cooputing assess-
ment costs. He noted that no assessments \liere nade for curbs. gutters, and sidewalks in place
which emf~ with the plans and specifications for the proposed i.nprovements and which were
acceptable to the City Engineer.
He also noted that the costs of illproving street intersections throughout the
District am of paving in excess of 300 foot widths and 1/8 inch thicknesses en streets de-
signated as arterial within residential zoning as of January 4. 1971 \liere to be paid by the
City. tt>st of the assessments in the districts \liere of a froot-foot nature and cost $7 .51 per
front foot.
He explained that the bids ~ in higher than expected. Hence, it was possible
that sane owners received an assessment higher than they had originally expected. Excavation
costs in particular, he noted were considerably higher than anticipated.
Mayor Senti then asked if any letters of protest had been received and/or if anyene
present wished to speak en the following illprovements:
2000 West ADherst Avenue (fran Sooth Tejen Street to me-half block west)
The City Clerk indicated that no letters of protest had been received.
No perscns appeared in oppositicn.
400 East ADherst Avenue (fran So.1th Logan Street to South PE1U1Sylvania Street)
The City Clerk indicated that no letters of protest had been received.
No perscns appeared in oppositien.
2000 West Baker Avenue {between South Tejon Street and South Zuni Street)
Mr. Ernest Bliss, 2060 West Baker, appeared and stated that a California type curb
had been installed m the saith side of the street. Because this curb was generally in the
shade, there was a tendency for ice to build up during the winter. He questimed the ad-
visability of placing this type of curb on that side of the street.
Public Works Director Kells Waggoner noted that ice often builds up en the saith
side of any street in the City. ·
2100 West Baker Avenue {between South Tejon Street and South Zuni Street)
The City Clerk indicated that oo letters of protest had been received.
No persons appeared in opposition.
2200 West Baker Avenue {between South Tejon Street and South Zuni Street)
The City indicated that oo letters of protest had been received.
No perscns appeared in opposition.
2300 West Baker Avenue {between Saith Tejm Street and South Zuni Street)
The City Clerk indicated that no letters of protest had been received.
No perscns appeared in oppositien.
500 East Bates Aven.ie {between South Pennsylvania Street and South Pearl Street extended)
The City Clerk indicated that no letters of protest had been received.
No persons appeared in opposition.
371
372
-3-
~00 East Bates Avenue (fran east of South Pearl Street extended to South Washingtoo Street)
The City Clerk indicated that no letters of protest has been received.
No perscns appeared in oppositioo.
700 East Bates Avenue (fran South Washingtoo Street to South Clarksai Street)
The City Clerk indicated that no letters of protest had been received.
No perscns appeared in oppositioo.
100 West Cornell Averue (fran South Bannock Street to South Oterokee Street)
The City Clerk indicated that no letters of protest has been received.
No perscns appeared in opposition.
300 West Cornell AvemJe (fran South Cherokee Street to South Delaware Street)
The City Clerk indicated that no letters of protest had been received.
No perscns appeared in oppositioo.
400 West Cornell Avenue (fran Sooth Delaware Street to South Elati Street)
The City Clerk indicated that a letter had been received from Ff;m M. Cox, 2801
Sooth Jay Street, Denver, dated March 22, 1972, and copies transmitted to Council.
No perscns appeared in oppositioo.
500 West Cornell AvemJe (fran South Elati Street to Sooth Fox Street)
The City Clerk indicated that no letters of protest had been received.
No perS<XlS appeared in opposition.
600 West Cornell Avenue (fran South Fox Street to South Galapago Street)
The City Clerk indicated that a letter had been received from Benjamin P. Naiman,
4428 South Barnx:k, dated March 21, 1972, and copies transmitted to Council.
No perscns appeared in oppositioo.
800 East Cornell Avenue (fran South Clarksai Street to South Emersai Street)
Mr. Gary Pattersai, Attorney at Law, appeared on behalf of Caroline B. Weist, 835
East Cornell. Mr. Pattersoo stated that Section 12-1-8 of the Englewood Municipal Code
specifically stated that an owner IIUSt receive a benefit to his property fran an inprovement
before he can be assessed for said inprovement. This was not the case he felt with the ~
provement assessed to the property at 835 East Cornell.
He referred to a letter dated March 2, 1972, addressed to the City Clerk and written
by John A. Criswell, Attorney At Law. Mr. Criswell 's letter referred to a court case in-
stituted by the City before the District Court against Caroline B. Weist and Paul Wolf, Civil
Actial No. 29255. In this case the City had condemed 10 feet of property for roadway pur-
poses and it was the cootentioo of the defendants that they should be catpensated for alleged
accrued benefits now deprived then by loss of their property.
City Attorney Berardini recalled the case and stated that the matter of benefits was
not at issue. He recalled that in arguing the case he had maintained that ( 1) because right-
o f -way ooly had been required and the City had not i.IIproved said right-of-way, no benefits
could be assigned to the abutting property, and (2) that the remaining property while in the
then proposed paving district had not yet been i.IIproved; therefore, the questioo of benefit
accruing to the abutting property was noot.
Mr. Berardini cited Mr. Criswell' s letter of March 2 , especially paragraph 2, which
stated in part:
The proposed assessment is not based upai the benefits acccruing from the
i.IIprovements to the property involved and, indeed, it is the uniersigned's
understanding that neither the actni.nistrative staff of the City, nor City
Council, has, or will, take any evidence or informatioo upai the increased
value of this realty resulting fran the constructioo of the i.IIprovsnents
involved.
Mr. Berardini ~ed of Mr. Pattersoo if he, Mr. Criswell, or their client had
sutmitted to Council any evidence which the Council has refused to hear. Mr. Pattersai in-
dicated that no evidence had been presented.
Hr. Berardini asked if he (Mr. Pattersai) could shaw an increase in the value of
the property. Mr. Pattersoo said he did not un:lerstand. Mr. Berardini referred again to the
letter saying that it was his interpretatioo that Mr. Criswell was inplying that the Council
refused to hear any evidence as to whether or not the value of the property in question had
been affected by the inprovsnent. Mr. Pattcrsai said that he (Mr. Criswell) mly meant to
illply that the City's ~thod of assessing property owners in the district was based upai a
118thsnatical fornula and not benefit. He did not mean to inply that the Council was urwi.11-
ing to hear testinnly relating to the property value.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
( Duplicated accidentally -disregard this page)
-3-
600 East Bates Avenue (from east of South Pearl Street extended to South Washington Street)
'lhe City Clerk indicated that no letters of protest has been received.
No persoos appeared in opposition.
700 East Bates Avenue (from South Washington Street to South Clarksoo Street)
'lhe City Clerk indicated that no letters of protest had been received.
No persoos appeared in opposition.
100 West Comell Avenue (from South Bannock Street to South Cllerokee Street)
The City Clerk indicated that no letters of protest has been received.
No persoos appeared in opposition.
300 West Cornel_!. Avenue (from South Cllerokee Street to South Delaware Street)
'lhe City Clerk indicated that no letters of protest had been received.
No persalS appeared in opposition.
400 West Cornell Avenue (from South Delaware Street to South Elati Street}
'lhe City Clerk indicated that a letter had been received from Fem M. Cox, 2801
South Jay Street , Denver, dated March 22 , 1972, and copies transmitted to Cotmeil.
No persoos appeared in oppositioo.
500 West Cornell Avenue (from South Elati Street to South Fox Street)
The City Clerk indicated that no letters of protest had been received.
No persalS appeared in opposition.
600 West Cornell Avenue (from South Fox Street to South Galapago Street)
The City Clerk indicated that a letter had been received fran Benjamin P. Nainmi,
4428 South Barnock, dated March 21, 1972, and copies transmitted to Council.
No persoos appeared in opposition.
800 East Cornell Avenue (from South Clarksoo Street to South Emersoo Street)
Mr. Gary Pattcrsm, Attorney at Law, appeared on behalf of Caroline B. Weist, 835
F.ast Cornell. Hr. Pattersm stated that Sectioo U-1-8 of the Engl~ ~cipal Code
specifically stated that an owner nuat receive a benefit to his property from an i.nprovement
before he can be assessed for said i.nprovement. This was not the case he felt with the inr
provement assessed to the property at 835 East Cornell.
He referred to a letter dated March 2, 1972, addressed to the City Clerk and written
by John A. Criswell, Attorney At Law. Mr. Criswell's letter referred to a court case in-
stituted by the City before the District Court against Caroline B. Weist and Paul Wolf, Civil
Actim No. 29255. In this case the City had condenned 10 feet of property for roadway pur-
poses and it was the contentim of the defendants that they should be conpensated for alleged
accrued benefits ncM deprived them by loss of their property.
City Attorney Berardini recalled the case and stated that the Dlitter of benefits was
not at issue. He recalled that in arguing the case he had maintained that (1) because right-
of-way ooly had been required and the City had not inprJVed said right-of-way, no benefits
could be assigned to the abutting property, and (2) that the remrlning property while in the
then proposed paving district had not yet been i.nproved; therefore, the questim of benefit
accruing to the abutting property was 1000t.
Mr. Berardini cited Mr. Criswell' s letter of March 2, especially paragraph 2, which
stated in part:
The proposed assessment is not based upm the benefits acccruing from the
inprovenents to the property involved and, indeed, it is the undersigned's
understanding that neither the rubinistrative staff of the City, nor City
Council, has, or will, take any evidence or informtioo upm the increased
value of this realty resulting from the construction of the i.Dprovements
involved.
Hr. Berardini inquired of Mr. Pattersoo if he, Mr. Criswell, or their client had
subni.tted to c.ouncil any evidence which the Council has refused to hear. Mr. Pattersoo in-
dicated that no evidence had been presented.
Hr. Berardini asked if he (Mr. Pattersm) could show an increase in the value of
the property. Mr. Pattersm said he did not unierstand. Mr. Berardini referred again to the
letter saying that it was his interpretatim that Mr. Criswell was i.Dplying that the Council
refused to hear any evidence as to whether or not the value of the property in questioo had
been affected by the inprovenelt. Mr. Pattersm said that he (Mr. Criswell) ooly meant to
i.Dply that the City's method of assessing property aimers in the district was based upoo a
Dllltheaatical f01'1lllla and not benefit. He did not IOOail to i.Dply that the Council was undll-
ing to hear testiloony relating to the property value.
373
374
-4-
City Attorney Berardini then referred to paragraph 3 of Mr. Criswell' s letter
and cited the foll.awing in part:
In any event, in that recent litigation instituted by the City before
the District c.ourt in and for the County of Arapahoe and State of
Colorado, entitled "City of Englewood, Colorado v. Caroline B. Weist
md Paul Wolf, Civil Actiai No. 29255," the specific issue of whether
the property here involved would be benefited at all by the installa-
tiat of these i.nprovements was taken under consideration, with the
result that the court DBde a specific and unequivocable finding,
based ~ the evidence then subnitted, that the i.nprovement in-
volved Cooferred no benefits whatsoever upai this property.
Hr. Berardini said that the issue was whether or not the City was under the obliga-
tiat to shcM evidence of benefits accruing to the property. The Court ruled, according to
Hr. Berardini, that the City was not obligated to introduce evidence of benefit in order to
set-off any award to Mrs. Weist.
Mr. Pattersal said that it was his interpretation that the Coumi.ssiaiers had said
that there was no value. Mr. Berardini stated that Judge Foote had ruled that the City was
not required to shOli whether there was any value. He said that the City had the optial of
presenting evidence of an increase in the value of the property as a result of i.nprovements
but that it chose not to do so since the i.nprovements had not been DBde at the time. Mr.
Berardini again asked Mr. Pattersai if he had any evidence bearing on the questial of value
accruing to the Weist property, saying that if the client feels that the assessment is i.nproper
then the Ctiy should know the reasatS why.
Hr. Pattersal stated that he did not know if there was any (benefit) at all. He
felt that it was quite possible that there might be benefits accruing to property in general
throlWt such i.nprovement districts but that there was inequity to this particular property
owner. Hr. Berardini asked Mr. Pattersai if he could show this. Mr. Pattersai stated that
he could not.
Mayor Senti interjected, saying that unless there were further points to be DBde
by either attorney, it l!IOUld be in the best interests of those attending the hearing to tOOVe
on to the next i.nprovsnent at the agenda.
Hr. HcDivitt announced that in addition to the letter fran Mr. Criswell a letter
fran Hr. John C. Holoubek, 3046 South Clarksai Street, dated March 20, 1972, had been received,
and that copies of both letters had been transmitted to Council.
900 East Cornell Avenue
The City Clerk indicated that a letter had been received fran Dc.nald Weakland dated
March 21, 1972, and copies transmitted to Council.
The City Clerk indicated that a letter had been received frail Elmco, Inc., 5050 South
F.npori.a Street, dated March 17, 1972, and copies transmitted to Council.
Hr. Donald Weakland appeared before Council and said that if Emersai Street went
thr~, he could see saoo benefit accruing to his property as a result of the i.nprovement.
Because he did not frmt on the property, he said he could not see that he had received any
benefit fran the i.nprovement.
Public Works Director Kells Waggoner indicated that Mr. Weakland had received a rear
zone assessment and stated that the total ownership of Mr. Weakiand's property does have assess.
Hr. Weakland again stated that his property did not have assess to a public street.
(;ouncilmm Sclwlb asked Mr. Weakland if he could get a driveway into his property
and Hr. Weakland stated that he could not.
Hr. Weakland then stated that approximately 98 percent of the property owners along
that particular street had been opposed to the i.nprovement in the first place. How, he asked,
could the Council go against the najority.
Mayor Senti said he appreciated Mr. Weakland appearing before the Council.
Hr. Weakland asked what he should do next.
Mayor Senti indicated the Council would study the matter and make a decision later.
4700 South Decatur Street (fran West Union Avenue to West Laytai Avenue)
The City Clerk indicated that a letter had been received from Windsor B. Wade, Jr.,
2903 W. Layton Avenue, dated March 17, 1972, and copies transmitted to Council.
Hr. Wade appeared and stated that apparently the machine operator had accidentally
pulled approximately ten feet of sidewalk loose when he was doing the \<l.10rk and that he was,
therefore» being billed for an extra ten feet of sidewalk i.nprovement. "I should be billed
for 30 feet and not 40 feet" t he said.
Mrs. May Fergusai , 2740 West Union, appeared before Council and asked why the City
made a distinctiai between front foot and side foot assessments and said that the only ad-
vantage she could see fran the inproVE!llent was that there was a little less dust to contend
with than before.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-5-
4800 South Decatur Street (from West Laytcn Avenue to West Cllenango Avenue)
The City Clerk indicated that no letters of protest had been received.
No persalS appeared in opposition.
3300 South Lafayette Street (fran East Floyd Avenue to East Girard Avenue)
The City Clerk indicated that no letters of protest had been received.
No persalS appeared in oppositicn.
3400 South Lafayette Street (from East Girard Avenue to East Hanpden Avenue)
The City Clerk indicated that no letters of protest had been received.
No persalS appeared in oppositicn.
000 West Lehigh Avenue (from South Broadway to South Acoma Street)
The City Clerk indicated that a letter had been received from S. R. Andrews, Division
Real Estate Representative, Continental Oil Coupany, 1755 Glenarm Place, Denver, dated March
2 1, 1972, and copies transmitted to Council.
No persalS appeared in oppositicn.
100 West Lehigh Avenue (from South Acooa Street to South Bannock Street)
The City Clerk indicated that no letters of protest had been received.
No persalS appeared in opposition.
200 West Lehigh Avenue (from South Barmock Street to South Cherokee Street)
The City Clerk indicated that no letters of protest had been recieved.
No persalS appeared in opposition.
300 West Lehigh Avenue (from South Cherokee Street to South Delaware Street)
The City Clerk indicated that no letters of protest had been received.
No persalS appeared in oppositioo.
4600 South Lincoln Street (from East Tufts Avenue to East Union Avenue)
The City Clerk indicated that no letters of protest had been received.
No persalS appeared in oppositioo.
000 West Mansfield Avenue (from South Broadway to South Acoma Street)
The City Clerk indicated that a letter had been received from Howard and Evelyn
Phillips , 1031 Pal.n?r Road, Rockledge, Florida, dated March 16, 1972, and copies transmitted
to Council.
No persalS appeared in oppositioo.
100 West Mansfield Avenue (from South AC0118 Street to South Bannock Street)
200 West Mansfield Avenue(from South Barmock Street to South Oterokee Street)
300 West Mansfield Avenue(from South Cherokee Street to South Delaware Street)
400 West Mansfield Avenue (from South Delaware Street to South Elati Street)
500 West Mansfield Avenue (from South Elati Street to South Fox Street)
3100 South Marien Street (from East Dart:Dnlth Avenue to East East:mm Avenue)
2700 South Pennsylvania Street (from East Yale Avenue to East Anherst Avenue)
3500 South Pennsylvania Street (from East Haupden Avenue to U.S. 285
300 West Princetcn Avenue (fran South Cherokee Street to South Delaware Street)
400 West Princetcn Avenue (from South Delaware Street to South Elati Street)
500 West Princetcn Avenue (from South Elati Street to South Fox Str~t)
600 West Princetcn Avenue (from South Fox Street to South Gal apago Street)
700 West Princetcn Avenue (from South Galapago Street to South Hunn Street
375
376
-6-
:>00 East Union Aven.Je (fran South Pennsylvania Street to South Pearl Street)
600 East Unicn Averme (fran South Pearl Street to South Washington Street)
700 East Unicn Averme (fran South Washington Street to South Clarkscn Street)
600 East Yale Place (frcin South Pearl Street to about 125 feet east)
Alley between South BroaG,.,ay and South Lincoln Street -2700 block south -East Yale Avmue to
East ADherst Avenue
Alley between South Broad,Jay and South Lincoln Street -2800 block south -East Anherst Avenue
Alley between South Broad#ay and South Lincoln Street -2900 block south -East Bates Avmue to
East Cornell Averme
Alley between South BroaG,.,ay and South Lincoln Street -4300 block south -East Quincy Avenue
to East Radcliff Avenue
Alley between South Broad,Jay and South Lincoln Street -4400 block south -East Radcliff Avmue
to East Stanford Aven.ie
The City Clerk indicated that no letters of protest had been received on any of
the previous listed streets (coomencing with 100 West Mansfield Avmue).
~o perscns appeared in opposition relative to any ot the previously mentioned streets
(ccmnencing with 100 West Mansfield Avenue).
Alley between South Acom Street am South Broa<May -4400 block south -East Radcliff Avmue
to West Stanford Avmue
The City Clerk indicated that a letter had been received from Jcim W. Geiger, Jr.,
c.ouncil for Agnes Mary Kinney, owner of property at 4455 South BroaG,.,ay, dated March 17 , 1972,
and copies transmitted to Council.
City Manager Dial inquired of the City Clerk about a letter he (the Clerk) had dis-
tributed to Council prior to the rooeting. The letter according to the Clerk was fran an Effie
McGuire, 1103 West Mathias, Roswell, New Mexico 88201, dated March 23, 1972. From her letter
it was not apparent whether she was protesting an inprovement in Paving District No. 20 or the
proposed Paving District No. 21. City Attorney Berardini said that the letter should be re-
ferred to the Engineering Department to dete1'111i.ne which district it pertained to.
Council.Jmn Dhority said that all of the letter of protest should be ref erred to the
Engineering Division so that the specific protests could be studied.
An uni.dmtif ied ~ frcin the audience asked if the Public Works Director could go
over again the costs of sidewalk inprovements. Public Works Director Kells Waggener did so.
CilJNCill1AN SCllWAB MlVED, ~C~ ~ SECXlIDED, 'lllAT 'lHE PUBLIC HF.ARIK; BE
OOSED. lJpal the call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows:
Ayes: Council Menbers Blessing, Brown, Dhority, Henning, Schwab, Senti.
Nays: None.
Absent: Camcil Menber Lay.
The Mayor declared the DX>tion carried, and the public hearing closed at 9: 15 P .M.
CilJNCill1AN SOlWAB MJVED, CD.JN~ ~ SECDIDED, 'lllAT 'lHE ~ BE AilJOOmED.
lJpal a call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows:
Ayes:
Nays:
Absent:
c.ouncil Menbers Blessing, Brown, Dhority, Henning, Set.Jab, Senti.
None.
Council Merrber Lay.
The Mayor declared the DX>tion carried, and the ueeting adj oumed at 9 : 15 P .M.
/S/ W. L. McDivitt
Ex Officio Clerk of the Council
I
I
I
I