Minutes 2005-05-24
MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
TUESDAY, MAY 24,2005
COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 215 EAST BRANCH STREET
ARROYO GRANDE, CALIFORNIA
1. CALL TO ORDER
Mayor/Chair Ferrara called the Regular City Council/Redevelopment Agency meeting to order at
7:00 p.m.
2. ROLL CALL
City Council/RDA: Council/Board Members Dickens, Guthrie, Arnold, Mayor Pro TemlVice
Chair Costello and Mayor/Chair Ferrara were present.
City Staff Present: Acting City Manager Hernandez, City Attorney Carmel, Director of
Administrative Services/City Clerk Wetmore, Chief of Police TerBorch,
Director of Financial Services Pillow, Director of Public Works/City
Engineer Spagnolo, Associate Planner Heffernon, and Associate Planner
McClish.
3. FLAG SALUTE
Terry Orton, representing Arroyo Grande Lions Club, led the Flag Salute.
4. INVOCATION
Jean Bowser, Bahai Faith, delivered the invocation.
5. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS
None.
6. AGENDA REVIEW
6.a. Resolutions and Ordinances Read In Title Only
Council Member Dickens moved, Mayor Pro Tem Costello seconded, and the motion passed
unanimously that all resolutions and ordinances presented at the meeting shall be read in title
only and all further reading be waived.
7. CITIZENS' INPUT. COMMENTS. AND SUGGESTIONS
None.
8. CONSENT AGENDA
Prior to consideration of the Consent Agenda, Mayor Ferrara referred to Item 8.1., and for the
public's benefit, he read aloud the proposed letter requesting that the County of San Luis Obispo
delay by one year relinquishment of maintenance of Flood Control Zone 1 and 1A to the
Department of Water Resources.
Council Member Dickens moved, and Council Member Arnold seconded the motion to approve
Consent Agenda Items 8.a. through 8.i., as recommended. The motion carried on the following
roll-call vote:
AYES: Dickens, Arnold, Guthrie, Costello,. Ferrara
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
-
CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES
MAY 24, 2005
PAGE 2
8.a. Cash Disbursement Ratification.
Action: Ratified the listings of cash disbursements for the period May 1, 2005 - May 15,
2005.
8.b. Consideration of Statement of Investment Deposits.
Action: Received and filed the report of current investment deposits as of April 30, 2005.
8.c. Consideration of Fiscal Year 2005-06 Appropriation Limit.
Action: Adopted Resolution No. 3840 establishing the appropriation limit from tax
proceeds for Fiscal Year 2005-06.
8.d. Consideration of Agreement with William Avery & Associates for Police Chief
Recruitment.
Action: Authorized the City Manager to execute an agreement with William Avery &
Associates to provide consultant services to coordinate the recruitment and selection
process for the position of Police Chief and approved an additional appropriation of
$6,500.
8.e. Consideration of Approval of Letter to the County of San Luis Obispo Opposing
Efforts to Develop a Soccer Field Complex at Sevada Lane and EI Campo Road.
Action: Approved a letter to be sent to the County of San Luis Obispo Board of
Supervisors.
8.1. Consideration of Approval of Letter Requesting that the County of San Luis Obispo
Delay by One Year Relinquishment of Maintenance of Flood Control Zone 1 and 1A
to the Department of Water Resources.
Action: Approved a letter to be sent to the County of San Luis Obispo Board of
Supervisors.
8.g. Consideration of Transfer of Surplus Police Enforcement Motorcycle to the City of
Greenfield.
Action: Adopted Resolution No. 3841 declaring the Police Department's 1996 Kawasaki
enforcement motorcycle as surplus and authorize the transfer of the motorcycle to the
City of Greenfield for use by its Police Department.
S.h. Consideration of Approval of Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Program
for Federal Fiscal Year (FFY) 2005.Q6.
Action: 1) Approved the submittal of the FFY 2005-06 DBE Program with "proposed"
Overall Annual DBE Goal to Caltrans by June 1, 2005; 2) Directed the Director of
Administrative Services to publish a public notice in the local media in accordance with
Section XIV of the Program; and 3) Directed staff to return to the City Council with a
summary of public comments and approval to submit the FFY 2005-06 DBE Program
with "established" Overall Annual DBE Goal to Caltrans by September 1, 2005.
8.1. Consideration of Approval of Plans and Speclfic!itlons and Authorization to Solicit
Bids for the Wilton Place Paving Project, PW 2005.Q3.
Action: 1) Approved the plans and specifications for the Wilton Place Paving Project,
PW 2005-03; 2) Authorized the Public Works Department to solicit construction bids; 3)
Determined that the project is categorically exempt from CEOA pursuant to Section
15301 (e); and 4) Directed the Director of Administrative Services to file a Notice of
Exemption.
9. PUBLIC HEARINGS
9.a. Consideration of Proposed Ordinance Amending Title 2 of the Municipal Code to
Change the Regular Meeting Schedule of the Senior Advisory Commission.
CITY COUNCIUREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES
MAY 24, 2005
PAGE 3
Acting City Manager Hernandez presented the staff report and recommended the Council
introduce an Ordinance amending Arroyo Grande Municipal Code Section 2.28.050.D. to allow
the Senior Advisory Commission to meet quarterly rather than monthly.
Mayor Ferrara opened the public hearing and invited comments from those in the audience who
wished to be heard on the matter. No public comments were received and the Mayor closed the
public hearing.
Council Member comments included support for the Senior Advisory Commission to change its
regular meeting schedule from monthly to quarterly; and acknowledgement that there is currently
a vacancy on the Commission. Council Member Dickens invited members of the public who may
be interested in serving on the Senior Advisory Commission to contact City Hall for an
application.
Mayor Pro Tem Costello moved to introduce an Ordinance as follows: "AN ORDINANCE OF
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE AMENDING SECTION
2328.050.D. OF TITLE 2 OF THE ARROYO GRANDE MUNICIPAL CODE TO CHANGE THE
REGULAR MEETING SCHEDULE OF THE SENIOR ADVSORY COMMISSION". Council
Member Dickens seconded, and the motion carried on the following roll-call vote:
AYES: Costello, Dickens, Guthrie, Arnold, Ferrara
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
9.b. Consideration of Proposed Ordinance Repealing, Amending, and Adding
Provisions to Titles 8, 9,12, and 15 ofthe Arroyo Grande Municipal Code.
Director of Administrative Services/City Clerk Wetmore presented the staff report and
recommended the City Council introduce an Ordinance repealing, amending, and adding
provisions to Titles 8 (Health & Safety), 9 (Public Peace & Welfare), 12 (Streets, Sidewalks &
Public Places), & 15 (Buildings & Construction) of the City of Arroyo Grande Municipal Code to
provide internal consistency with current City policies, procedures, and practices. Staff
responded to questions from Council concerning how often street trees are inspected to
determine whether damage is being caused to public improvements, sidewalks, or whether
street trees are creating traffic hazards; how often staff conducts a physical inspection and
inventory of the City's landmark trees; and what percentage of landmark trees are located on
private property. .
Mayor Ferrara opened the public hearing and invited comments from those in the audience who
wished to be heard on the matter. No public comments were received and the Mayor closed the
public hearing.
Following Council discussion, the Ordinance was modified as follows (deleted text denoted with
strilmout, added text denoted with double underline):
12.16.060.G. The director shall cause the physical inspection and inventory of all landmark trees every
twe ~ years to detennine their condition and presence, and he/she shall report his or her findings
publicly to the city council, the parks and recreation commission, and the planning commission, via
the city manager.
CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES
MAY 24, 2005
PAGE 4
l2.16.040.A. The public works director H.ay, fre!ll time Ie time, will neriodicallv prepare a list of
particular street trees that have created a present and immediate danger 10 pedestrian travel, by causing
damage to public improvements, sidewalks, or have interfered with drainage flow in gutters, or
resulted in traffic hazards in adjacent streets. The list shall be submitted to the director of parks,
recreation and facilities for comment or revision.
Council and staff concurred with the modifications to the Ordinance.
Council Member Guthrie moved to introduce an Ordinance, as follows: "AN ORDINANCE OF
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE REPEALING, AMENDING, AND
ADDING PROVISIONS TO TITLES 8, 9, 12 & 15 OF THE ARROYO GRANDE MUNICIPAL
CODE", as amended (Sections 12.16.040.A. and 12.16.060.G.). Council Member Arnold
seconded, and the motion carried on the following roll-call vote:
AYES: Guthrie, Arnold, Dickens, Costello, Ferrara
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
Mayor Ferrara requested, and the Council concurred, to move Agenda Item 11.a. up on the
Agenda for consideration prior to Agenda Item 10.a.
11. NEW BUSINESS
11.a. Consideration of Fiscal Year 2004-05 Third Quarter Budget Status Report.
[COUNCIL/RDA]
Financial Services Director Pillow presented the staff report and recommended the City
Council/RDA: 1) Approve detailed budget adjustments and recommendations as shown in
Schedule B; and 2) Approve Schedules A through E included in the Third Quarter Budget Status
Report. Director Pillow responded to questions from the Council/RDA Board.
Mayor/Chair Ferrara invited comments from those in the audience who wished to be heard on
the matter. No public. comments were received and the Mayor/Chair closed the public comment
period.
Council/Board Member Arnold moved to approve detailed budget adjustments and
recommendations as shown in Schedule B; and to approve. Schedules A through E included in
the Third Quarter Budget Status Report. Council/Board Member Dickens seconded, and the
motion carried on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Arnold, Dickens, Guthrie, Costello, Ferrara
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
10. CONTINUED BUSINESS
10.a. Consideration of Interpretatl~n of Objective Ag1 of the Agriculture, Conservation
and Open Space Element of the General Plan Regarding Conservation of Prime
Farmland Soils; Applicant - City of Arroyo Grande; Loc.atlon Citywide.
CITY COUNCIUREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES
MAY 24, 2005
PAGE 5 .
Associate Planner Heffernon presented the staff report and recommended the City Council: 1)
Consider an interpretation of General Plan policies under Objective Ag1 of the Agriculture,
Conservation and Open Space Element regarding conservation of prime farmland soils and
determine if a General Plan Arnendment or other action is necessary; and 2) If the Council
determines that a General Plan Amendment or other action is necessary, direct staff to return to
Council with an appropriate Resolution. Associate Planner Heffernon responded to questions
and comments frorn Council regarding the General Plan Amendment process; clarification
regarding areas in the Village Districts that have urban developments on prime farml.and soils;
and clarification regarding soil definitions as noted in the Soil Survey of San Luis Obispo County
issued by the United States Department of Agriculture.
Mayor Ferrara invited comments from those in the audience who wished to speak on the matter.
Otis Paae, Arroyo Grande, acknowledged that the issue tonight was confined to a policy
interpretation as opposed to any specific project. He stated that the staff report did not address
specific issues relating to revisions made by the Council to the 2001 General Plan that took
place between December 2002 and March 2004. He commented that the issue being considered
tonight was not a clarification of the policy; it was whether the policy should be changed. He
suggested that the policy should not be changed at this time. He then addressed other concerns
he had with the staff report including the analysis of existing definitions in the Agriculture,
Conservation and Open Space Element. He stated that the staff report did not consider the four
principles in the Agriculture, Conservation, and Open Space Element.
John Kniaht, RRM Design, stated that although he was not here to talk about a specific project,
this policy interpretation affects a project he is working on. He commented that City staff is
asking for confirmation of the existing policies and objectives, which have been in place and
acted upon by the Planning Commission and City Council for the past five years. He suggested
that the agricultural policies in the General Plan do not apply to non-agricultural zoned property.
He encouraged the Council to confirm that Objective Ag1 does not apply to non-agricultural
zoned properties.
Nanci Parker, Arroyo Grande, stated she had studied this issue and she addressed two main
issues: 1) agricultural zoning versus prime soils, and 2) CEOA review. She referred to and read.
existing General Plan agricultural policies; referred to parcels in the CitY that consist of prime
farmland soils, and stated that there can be environmental impacts to the soil on a parcel
regardless of the zoning. She stated that just because a parcel is zoned residential does not give
it entitlements that override the environmental constraints. She commented on various
classification of soils as they relate to required mitigation. She stated that the primary issue to
consider is the fact that prime soils are considered to be a natural resource by the General Plan
and by CEOA. She stated that the City must determine the significance of loss of natural
resources and determine whether mitigation, if any, is required.
Colleen Martin, Arroyo Grande, referred back to the 2001 General Plan update, stated that the
City should follow the General Plan, and objected to the policies being negotiable. She said that
loss of prime farmland soil as a significant adverse environmental impact needs to be avoided,
not mitigated. She stated that the City needs to decide not only what the definition of farmland is,
but also what the definition of a Neighborhood Plan is. She supported the preservation of prime
soils regardless of the zoning designation.
No further public comments were received and the Mayor closed the public comment period.
CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES
MAY 24, 2005
PAGE 6
Council Member Guthrie stated he had asked for this item to be on the Agenda for clarification
because he was not on the Council when the policies were adopted; however, he was on the
Planning Commission during the General Plan update process and the intent seemed clear at
that time that the policy issues in the Agriculture Element included only those areas that were
zoned Agriculture. He acknowledged concerns expressed about the interpretation of the existing
policies and the need to clarify the policies.
Council Member Arnold agreed that there was some question about how and when the policies
are applied. He also agreed that while serving on the Planning Commission, he believed the
intent was to mitigate the converted properties that were zoned agriculture, not residential. He
stated he would have a problem with applying the policies to properties that were zoned
residential. He also agreed that there was a need to determine how CEQA is applied. He
believed that the policy applies to designated farmlands and that staff had provided an accurate
interpretation. .
Council Member Dickens stated that the agricultural objectives and policies are consistent as
currently written and a distinction needed to be made between a couple of the definitions. First,
he stated that the definition of prime farmland soils are those that are naturally occurring non-
renewable resources suited for growing agricultural products. He referred to the classifications in
the General Plan and other resources that define prime soils. He spoke about the differences
between prime farmland soils (as a natural resource) and agricultural lands or farmlands, which
are properties that have been zoned agriculture for agricultural purposes or are in agricultural
production. He spoke about good land use planning which was done through the General Plan
update process and that the Council identified those parcels that would be best served for
agricultural purposes. He said he thought that was the intent when the Land Use Map was
created and that the policies were then developed. He then referred to CEQA review, which was
about reviewing all of the aspects of a particular proposal as it relates to potential environmental
impacts. He said that review includes aesthetics, agricultural resources, air quality, biological
resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, hazards, hazardous materials, noise,
population, housing, public services and utilities, recreations, transportation and circulation,
wastewater, water, and land use. He said all of the areas are identified through the CEQA
review process as areas that need to be reviewed for their potential environmental impacts and
this was done regardless of zoning. He commented that when the Council is looking at parcels
that are not identified in the General Plan as being zoned either agriculture or agriculture-
preserve and there is a potential for having prime farmland soils, this is just a part of the CEQA
process. He stated, for example, that it would be unreasonable to require mitigation on a 7,200
square foot lot in the Village and that was not the intent ofthe General Plan. He suggested it
was reasonable to require mitigation on a four-acre parcel meeting the prime soils definition as
related to Ag1-1.2. He emphasized that development needs to address all potential impacts
through the CEOA process. He concluded that when reading the General Plan objectives, he
did not believe there were any inconsistencies. He said he believed that the current position that
these policies do not apply to non-agricultural zoned property is not correct. He said they
needed to be applied across the board in a reasonable way.
Mayor Pro Tern Costello stated he was also on the Planning Commission when this issue came i
I
forward and he recalled dealing specifically with the conversion of agriculture land that was L.
zoned agriculture or in active production. He referred to policies and objectives in the Agriculture,
Conservation and Open Space Element and stated that if property is not designated as
Agriculture or Agriculture Preserve it does not matter If the soils are prime or not because it is not
-
I
CITY COUNCIUREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MiNUTES
MAY 24, 2005
PAGE 7
available for agricultural use. He said to put anything other than agricultural use on the land is
not a loss of prime soils. He commented that the intent was to preserve the use of agricultural
resources and he did not think we wanted to convert non-agricultural uses back to agricultural.
He stated that the interpretation was clear that any prime soils that exist on non-agricultural uses
are not in the City's inventory of agriculture lands; therefore, there is no loss of those soils.
Mayor Ferrara referred back to the update of the General Plan and stated there were issues with
regard to the approval of the Agriculture, Conservation and Open Space Element. He stated the
Ag Elementwas revisited to tighten up some of the policy language (Ag1). He stated that while
the interpretation can be confusing, the City does not have a track record established yet, or
substantive evidence that related issues that have come forward are going to be difficult to
interpret. He agreed with using the standard of reasonableness when evaluating proposed
projects. On the issue of CEOA, .he commented that the CEOA process includes tools to
evaluate individual projects as they come forth relative to the General Plan which includes
criteria for determining whether a negative declaration, mitigated negative declaration,
environmental impact report, or statement of overriding considerations is required. He stated he
was not convinced at this point that there is a problem, and he did not support changing anything
in the Agricultural, Open Space and Conservation Element at this time. He said he believed
there was enough information in the policies to make the kinds of interpretation that needs to be
made based on the test of reasonableness.
Council Member Guthrie stated that since the policies have not yet been applied, he was
comfortable with moving forward and seeing how the process works. He stated, however, that he
was uncomfortable with the issues pertaining to CEOA review.
Mayor Pro Tern Costello referred to Policy Ag1-4 (Establish and apply a significance criterion for
CEOA analysis, as provided by CEOA Guidelines, that considers loss of prime farmland soils as
a significant adverse environmental impact); referred to the definition which indicates that a loss
of prime farmland soils shall refer to their unavailability for agricultural use; and stated that if they
are not zoned for agricultural, conservation, or open space, they are not available for agricultural
use. He commented that there is no loss and that loss only occurs when there is a property that
is designated for agricultural use and it is being converted to something else. He said the
conversion constitutes the loss of prime farmland soils.
Mayor Ferrara asked the Council if there were any objections to the interpretation of the policies
as presented.
Council Member Dickens stated he had no objections; however, he suggested it would be
appropriate to get additional feedback from other cities on similar policies, and/or get an
interpretation from CEOA in regard to the idea of whether or not a parcel is considered
unavailable if the zoning has been changed. He commented that the City Councii has discretion
to rezone properties. He believed that the language in the General Plan is adequate; however,
he disagreed with some of the comments made because he believed that properties that are
currently zoned non-agriculture do apply to the CEOA review process.
Mayor Pro Tem Costello requested that the City Attorney research the CEOA issue.
The City Council concurred and no formal action was taken.
I
!
l
-
CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES
MAY 24, 2005
PAGE 8
12. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS
a. MAYOR TONY M. FERRARA:
(1) San Luis Obispo Council of Governments/San Luis Obispo Regional Transit
Authority (SLOCOG/SLORTA). 1) SLOCOG meeting was postponed; 2)
Received and reviewed SLORTA budget and work plan; and then held closed
session to discuss labor/personnel issues.
(2) South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District (SSLOCSD). Discussed
routine plant maintenance and purchase of components; and then held closed
session on legal matters relative to Zone 1/1A.
(3) other. None.
b. MAYOR PRO TEM JOE COSTELLO:
(1) Zone 3 Water Advisory Board. Discussion held regarding the Habitat
Conservation Plan which is still not adopted and Is currently under legal review.
Reported that Zone 3 Water Advisory Board meetings are now being telecast.
(2) County Water Resources Advisory Committee (WRAC). No report.
(3) Air Pollution Control District (APCD). Reviewed proposed budget.
(4) Fire Oversight Committee. No report.
(5) Other. Attended Police Officer's Memorial in Paso Robles.
c. COUNCIL MEMBER JIM DICKENS:
(1) South County Area Transit (SCAT). No report.
(2) South County Youth Coalition. Met April 28th; Presentation received regarding a
program that will coordinate child welfare services within the County.
(3) Other. None.
d. COUNCIL MEMBER JIM GUTHRIE:
(1) Economic Vitality Corporation (EVC). John Dunn is serving as the Interim
President; Board is planning for Annual Event to be held on Friday, May 27th; Will
be attending an annual retreat on Friday, June 3rt! to establish what the EVC's
direction will be in the future.
(2) Other. None.
e. COUNCIL MEMBER ED ARNOLD:
(1) Integrated Waste Management Authority Soard (IWMA). Attended the Board
meeting out at Cold Canyon Landfill and received a tour of the recycling facility.
Discussion was held about the capacity of the landfill and the need for future
expansion. Viewed recycling video and suggested obtaining a copy of the video
for programming on the City's government access channel.
(2) California Joint Powers Insurance Authority (CJPJA). Will be attending a
CJPIA seminar in June.
(3) County Water Resources Advisory Committee (WRAC). Attended as the
Alternate. Recommended to the County that they take Nipomo to a Level 3; ;
however, the Board of Supervisors chose to go with a modified Level 2. Also L
discussed Zone 1/1A issue.
- ~---
CITY COUNCIUREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MiNUTES
MAY 24, 2005
PAGE 9
13. CITY COUNCIL MEMBER ITEMS:
None.
14. CITY MANAGER ITEMS:
Acting City Manager Hernandez announced that on Friday at 11 :00 a.m. there would be ribbon-
cutting ceremonies for the Traffic Way Bridge Rail Replacement project and the Creekside
lighting Project.
15. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS:
Mayor Ferrara commented that the City's government access channel is being underutilized and
suggested expanding its use by programming certain videos such as the IWMA's recycling video
that Council Mernber Arnold referred to earlier.
Mayor Ferrara announced that he would be serving as a judge in the Strawberry Cooking contest
on Friday, which is an event associated with the Annual Strawberry Festival.
Mayor Ferrara reported on issues relating to the Zone 1/1A issue.
Mayor Pro Tem Costello requested that he and Council Member Arnold switch primary and
alternate assignments on the County Water Resources Advisory Committee (WRAC). Council
Member Arnold agreed to serve as the primary representative. Staff indicated this request would
be put on a future agenda for formal Council action.
Council Mernber Arnold reported that on Saturday his son's Cub Scout Pack 13 conducted a
beach clean-up and collected 40 bags of trash (500 Ibs). He thanked the Michael Bay family and
the Dave Montanaro family for all of their help.
16. STAFF COMMUNICATIONS:
None.
17. COMMUNITY COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS:
Steve Ross, Arroyo Grande, commented that the City Council had taken action in the past to
convert residential property to agriculture. He stated that although he did not necessarily support
that, he commented there was some history of changing zoning. ,He also commented on the
success of the City's water conservation retrofit program and encouraged the City to continue
this prograrn until all eligible properties were retrofitted.
Colleen Martin. Arroyo Grande, stated it was unclear when the public could comment on the
Consent Agenda. She referred to Item a.e., and supporte~ the approval of a letter to the County
of San Luis Obispo opposing efforts to develop a soccer field complex at Sevada Lane and EI
Campo Road, stating that it was not in the City's best Interest to have soccer fields at this
location. She encouraged the Council to attend a meeting at the Regional Center on June 8th
from 3:00 to 5:00 p.m. where this issue would be addressed. She then referred to Item 8.1
regarding consideration of approval of a letter requesting that the County of San Luis Obispo
delay by one year relinquishment of maintenance of Flood Controi Zone 1/1A to the Department
of Water Resources Zone 1/1A and supported the proposed letter; however, she wished it was
stronger, not only in encouraging a delay, but that there be local control. She expressed .
concerns about the State taking over maintenance of the Zone and the excessive costs to
property owners within Zone 1/1A. She concluded by asking the Council to find some place on
the Agenda where public comments on the Consent Agenda could be made.
,
-.---
CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES
MAY 24,2005
PAGE 10
18. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the City Council, Mayor Ferrara adjourned the meeting at
9:12 p.m.
c'<-- !:J ;.j'tC
Joe ostello, Mayor Pro TemNice Chair
~
Kelly e, City Clerk/Agency Secretary
(Approved at CC Mtg (,. 2f. 05 )
,
i
!
'--
~~