11-03-1958 - Regular Meeting - MinutesMINUTES OF THE ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA
November 3, 1958
The meeting was called to order by Mayor Mottinger at 7:45 P. M. in
the West Covina City Hall with the Pledge of Allegiance led by
Councilman Brown.
RnT.i. CAT.i.
Present: Mayor Mottinger, Councilmen Heath, Brown, Pittenger,
Barnes
Others Present: Mr. George Aiassa, City Manager; Mr. Robert Flotten,
City Clerk; Mr. Tom Dosh, Assistant Public Services
Director; Mr. Walter Nollac, Sanitation Engineer
Absent: Mr. Harry C. Williams, City Attorney
DISTRICT A'11-57-7
• Sanitary Sewer District
APPROVED BY COUNCIL AT
THEIR MEETING OF OCTOBER
27, 1958 - REAFFIRMED
LOCATION: Maplewood Avenue and Burwood
Avenue Sewer District, designated as
A'11-57-7.
Preliminary report of the City Engineer
was read at the October 27, 1958 meeting.
This matter was held over until November
3, 1958 pending result of review by the
City Manager, Mr. Aiassa.
Mr. Flotten presented and read the report of the result of the review
of this matter signed by Mr. Nollac, Sanitation Engineer; and approved
by Mr. Pontow, City Engineer, and Mr. Dosh, Assistant Public Service
Director, copies of which had been presented to members of Council.
Councilman Pittenger: On some of these petitions we haven't re-
quired:the signatures of 60,% of the people
living in the area,.;and_sometimes not even
50%;
Mr. Nollac: Yes, although we have had 60% or better
in almost every district. However,
under Section 2808 it is possible for,
Council to initiate a district upon the recommendation of the Health
Officer with no signatures. On the recommendation of the Health
Officer that a sewer is favorable and of a public health benefit,
Council may over -ride a 100% protest and proceed with no signatures.
Councilman Brown: This report would indicate that from
the original time the petition was re-
ceived and the time the preliminary
report came to Council, it took 15 months, and I can'see why the
people are perturbed on this.
s
• Adjourned C. C. 11-3-58 Page Two
DISTRICT A111-57-7 - continued
Mr. Nollac: When the original petition came back in,
it had only 40% of the signatures. We
sent it back out and it took that long
to get it back again. There. was a great deal of trouble getting this
in again, although I believe there is a date left out at which time it
had come in again but still without the proper amount of signatures.
Mayor Mottinger: You show February 10, 1957 and petition
coming back May 16, 1958.
Mr. Nollac: It took that long to get the 60% of sig-
natures and they did not have that
amount until that length of time.
Mayor Mottinger: Regarding 4111-58-1, I notice that the
original petition was returned February
20, 1958 and yet it is scheduled to go
to bid several months ahead of the previous one. How can one get fur-
ther ahead of the other one, 57-7?
Mr. Nollac: District 57-7 is a larger district and it
• took more time to prepare the plans.
Mayor Mottinger: Who is engineer on 57-7?
Mr. Nollac: Mr. Johnson.
Councilman Pittenger: Plans are proceeding on both districts?
Mr. Nollac: Yes.
Councilman Heath: Perhaps it was fortunate in a way in the
matter of delay of completion of County
.District. Had the County gone ahead
faster than shown here, we might have been a little embarrassed, mainly
because of the Health Officer's Report received on May 12th and the
final papers assigned to the Engineer on October 17th. That seems to
be a long time and I do not know.what was involved between those two
steps but it seems unnecessarily long. That is the feeling I've gotten
from these reports and from people.in the City in relation to petitions.
A petition is sent around when the people are in trouble and it takes
a year to get a contract awarded. Originally, on this contract it was
going to be 18 months and I think there is something wrong in the
organization when you wait from May 12th to'October determining we
have trouble and until the plan preparation is assigned to the Engineer.
I think we can be criticized when we have a health problem which is a
definite menace to the people and take 18 months for sewers to go in.
•
•
•
•
Adjourned C. C. 11-3-58
DISTRICT A'11-57-7 - continued
Page Three
Mr. Dosh: About that time, although I do not recall
the specific case, there was recommended
the awarding of contract to certain
engineers. I believe it was Council's desire to have them present bids
on these so we proceeded to obtain informal bids. This was successful
and we awarded the contract. Then we had another district two weeks
later and the engineers wouldn't do this and all three turned down
bids. As a result, we went through conferences and made various award-
ing schedules. This perhaps delayed it more than it should have been.
Now we have a going schedule satisfactory to all engineers and I think
it will work out better.
Councilman Heath: I think I said this should be put up to
outside engineers because we were loaded
with work within City's offices and
did say it to speed the thing up, but if putting it out cost us five
months, it certainly doesn't do what we intended it to do.
Mayor Mottinger: This wouldn't have been dyne in City
offices.
Councilman Heath: I think it was suggested by Councilman
Brown that we equal up these bids and
get them on an equal basis for everyone.
At that one time they migh.t.have, been refusing bu-L to take five months
to get it down into a form they wanted doesn't seem right.
Mayor Mottinger: - A. -five month's delay in this state is
unwarranted and I think it should be
watched very closely so that such a
thing doesn't occur again.
Mr. Aia.ssa: We_have projected everything for 1958-59.
to next Tune and summarized all the jobs
and referred them to the Engineers and
they know what they are to do. These two small projects are not bring-
ing in dividends as they knew they were going to get it.
Mr. Nollac: We knew, too, that the County was
dragging their feet in the construction
and we didn"t push this district any
faster. There was no real point in it with.so many other things to
get through.
Councilman Brown: Any time the County drags their feet
ti after money has been appropriated I
think it has stepped out of the (City).,
department level and then becomes a political level and can'be expe-
dited.
Mr. Nollac: It has nothing to do with Sanitation
District.
•
• Adjourned C. C. 11-3-58 Page Four
DISTRICT A'11-57-7 - continued
Councilman Brown: How come these two smaller districts
were included in 58-1?
Mr. Nollac: These two petitions were just received.
When we can, to save people time, we
include them into a district already
started, if we can do so without.delaying the original district. We
save them four or five months of time, which is why we do it. That
little piece of Lark Ellen, if proceBsed by itself, would make -the
cost fantastic.
Councilman Barnes:. The price is $475.00 per lot now.
Mr.. Nollac: That is for the entire district on
Lark Ellen, Thackery and Coral Tree.
Councilman Brown: How do you.know this is the right amount
to spread there? I do not see how you
can break it down and say this piece is
so much, and that piece is so much.
• Mr. Nollac: The law states assessments are spread
according to the benefits received.
Councilman Brown: You are jumping about a mile at one
point and spreading some cost of the
larger area on the smaller area. You
can't help but do it.
Mr. Nollac: This particular sewer right here is
going to be fairly shallow and the
additional cost of moving equipment
from here to there will cost a little more money, but there isn't
anything in this area here.that it could be added to that was any
closer in.
Councilman Barnes: Would there be at any later date?
Mr. Nollac: This is the only piece now developed
that is not sewered. There is no -action
in...this area for sewers and these people
want sewers. There just isn't anything else that we can tie this
district to.
Councilman Barnes_: What is the large gray district?
(Referring to overall Sewer District Map)
Mr. Nollac
: c• Under construction.
Councilman Barnes: I do not understand why those people
were not contacted because those homes
on Lark Ellen were the older homes of
that district and would need sewers more than other areas at that time.
. Adjourned C. C. 11-3-58 Page Five
DISTRICT A111-57-7 - continued
Mr,'Nollac: I know that, but until people actually
request petition for sewers we can do
nothing. If any one of them had made
such a request they would have been sent a petition immediately.
Councilman Brown: Perhaps we should establish a policy,
as a Council, that whenever pieces are.
left out it should be City initiated or
else someone in that district should be contacted and made aware of
that facto
Councilman Heath:
57-1 is under construction
right now.
Why couldn't they tie into
that?
Mr. Nollac:
_ You can't do that after the
Resolution
of Intention is passed unless
it goes
through the whole procedure
again,
Councilman Barnes:
These people with subdivision
tentative
maps had nothing to do with
people front-
ing on Lark Ellen and the other
two lots
• and I can't understand why-
they were not included in the
large district
at the time it was formed,
excluding tract map.
Mr. Nollac:
Because of the way the line
would goo
They wouldn't pay for that
line but for
the way it was spread all over the
district,
Councilman Barnes:
I can't see why it couldn't
be spread
over the whole district and
be fair and
equitable,
Mr, Nollac: It is entirely possible in the rush of
things here it was overlooked but it
was not intentionally. We had our ideas
on this, although obviously Council doesn't agree with them. But we
have never tried to solicit business, we have more than we can handle
now.
Mayor Mottinger: It.is the duty of the City to take care
of as many of the areas as they possibly
can. I think this points out that the
projects need further review. Some of the projects need further review
before thay are consummated so there is no question of taking care of
the little areas as well as .the big areas.
Councilman Barnes: Will this total cost be
spread over the
three areas alike?
Mr. Nollac: Yes, sir, so far as I know. However,
that is up to the assessment Engineer,
• Adjourned C. C. 11-3-58 Page Six
DISTRICT A111-57-7 - continued
Councilman Brown: I can't help but feel that to add this
piece on the original district would in-
crease the cost over-all to the larger
piece. It isn't only a matter of. moving equipment, it is more office
work in the City Hall, - the contractor working his crews part on one
and part on the other, - it needs more supervision and when it is bid
those things are taken into consideration accordingly.
Councilman Barnes: Why.is one $303.00 and the other $475.00?
Mr. Nollac: It is based on frontage foot. It has been
running about $4.25 to $4.50 a front foot.
Our first district ran about $4.01 but.it
has now been running about $4.20 to $4.25. We do not anticipate any
change in cost unless the market for construction suddenly becomes
loaded and the contractors become choosy.
Councilman Heath: I feel that I cannot vote in favor of this
annexation to the original sewer district
because of the reasons I have just stated.
. Councilman Brown: I would be inclined to agree with Council-
man Heath and also for the reason of the
third to last paragraph on the report
submitted. In the matter of the report of Health Officer it sounds
like he never goes out and checks these areas.
Mr. Nollac: Yes, he does. They go out and ring door-
bells in the district and check the soil
conditions. The conditions would be
approximately the same and perhaps it is felt there would be no point in
wasting time to come out and.inv.estigate it again and possibly this is
the way he figures.
Councilman Heath: On Fircroft, south of Vine, we are creat-
ing a small area not sewered at this time
which will probably come back later.
Mr. Nollac: The petition was circulated up this
street and received no signatures.
Councilman Pittenger: When you have a small area and they do
not want sewers perhaps we should try to
get them in. However, in little streets
and little sections not in on sewers, one part wants them and others do
not, and we exclude them. Are you going to hold it up for these people
that want them if the others don't? If they have to pay a little more
for coming in later that'is their hard luck.
Mayor Mottinger: However, we want to make sure we are not
overlooking these people in giving them an
opportunity to get a sewer in. I think
we were negligent in this Lark Ellen area in not getting them in on this.
• Adjourned C. C. 11-3-58 Page Seven
Councilman Pittenger: I do not think it is as easy to get
these peitions•in as we might think.
Maybe we should say if we think a whole
area should be sewered then if an area doesn't want them we should
send out somebody from the City to do a selling job on the whole thing.
We have a hearing so people know. about it and if they wanted to get in
they probably could do it..
Mayor Mottinger: We also have the situation of not
penalizing these small areas by putting
them by themselves.
Councilman Brown: Take small districts along with large
districts and award bids in lump sumo
Have the same deal as on one but be
able to break it down.
Councilman Pittenger: Small districts cost more money.
Councilman Brown: I think it should cost more money,
Councilman Pittenger: That is correct but I do not know if it
is fair.
• A motion by Councilman Heath that Thackery Street and Coral Drive and
the other district on Lark Ellen be not included in this A'11-58-1
sewer district failed for a lack of a second.
Councilman Brown: I think that Councilman Heath is right
but we went out on a limb where I feel
we can hardly do this, but in the future,
annexations should be brought to the attention of Council.
Councilman Pittenger: I'a.gree with Councilman Heath in princi-
ple but I, too, think this has gone too
far to reject now, However, In the
future I think we should tie these things close together and give more
thought to them before we go ahead with these things.
Mayor Mottinger: I think there should be no similar
annexation brought before us without a
very plausible explanation of why, before
it is done.
Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Pittenger and
carried reaffirming its approval as indicated by motion and second at
Council meeting of October 27, 1958.
•
Adjourned C, C. 11-3-58
DISTRICT A'11-58-1
Sanitary Sewer District
APPROVED
Page Eight
LOCATION: Thackery Street and Coral
Drive Sewer District designated as
A'11-58-1.
Preliminary Report of the City Engineer.
Decision held over until November 3,
1958, pending result of review of this matter by City Manager, Mr.Aiassa.
Mr. Flotten presented and read the report.
Councilman Heath: Putting these out at one time in separate
district will that be done?
Mayor Mottinger: Not at this time, but if small areas
crop up it will be considered in the
future.
Mr. Nollac: It is either a combined district or
separate district.
Mr. Aiassa: You might do this if you field off small
districts and then combined all small
districts into one large district and
. then bid it. Then all would gain because then the job becomes larger
than individual bids for each separate district. You could pick up
all smaller districts and put them all together.'
Mayor Mottinger: Either that or they small district would
have the added cost of a smaller district.
Motion by Councilman Pittenger, seconded by Councilman Brown and
carried that the Preliminary Report of the City Engineer be accepted
and the small district be added to the approved District A'11-58-1;
that the combined map be approved and filed with the City Clerk and
the City Engineer be instructed to proceed with the preparation of
final plans and specifications for this project.
RECREATION AND PARK
COMMISSION ACTION AT Copies of this action were presented to
MEETING OF OCTOBER 23,1958 members of Council and it was consensus
REFERRED TO CITY this matter be referred to the City
MANAGER FOR REPORT Manager for study and report at next
regular meeting of Council.
Mr. Aiassa stated this had been -turned over to the City Engineer for
review of Plans and Specifications.
0 Councilman Brown:
Councilman Pittenger:
I do not want to pay the price we paid
for the Cameron Park transaction.
Do we have any money for this?
Mr. Aiassa:
It has been carried over from the
57-58 budget.
• Adjourned C. C. 11-3-58 Page Nine
•
GENERAL MATTERS
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None
ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA
Mr. H. W. Carpenter What I am here tonight for is to ask
121 So Lark Ellen Ave. what, if anything, has been done by the
City to eradicate the death trap at my
corner at the Lark Ellen off -ramp on
the Freeway and frontage road. I have been after you people for two
years 'to give a definite answer as to whether or not you have the
jurisdiction legally to give me a permit, or whether it was the respon-
sibility of the State to issue permits, for a safety barrier to be
built by myself at my expense between the curb and north side of my
property line of my lot. I have had, to this date, no answer as to
where you stand legally on -that. You do not seem to know the outcome,
although you are sympathetic to the problem, but in the meantime there
are things you do not understand.
You have City rules and regulations issuing permits that fall within
the jurisdiction of the City Engineer's Department called the Sanita-
tion Department. There isn't one of those people that understands
that a local community ruling can over -ride a State one. If that
cement abuttment was put in with proper steel posts to stop the
traffic, according to the Sanitation Department it would have to be
higher on my side than on the curb side.so the water would have to
run out to the curb. The State says that no part of any easement or
strip adjacent to any State property will be graded.that water will
run, drip, etc., onto State Highway, So you do not have proper know-
ledge about what goes on between.the State and local government on that.
There is one man in this room, the City Clerk, who saw to it that
your City Inspector was up there. It was stated that permission
wouldn't be given by the State to put in cement and posts. I have a
letter from the State that you now have jurisdiction over this road
and the State doesn't have the right to control the easement strip.
Sunday morning a drunk came around that corner from the Center. He
had to be doing 55 to 65 to do what he did. He just went straight
ahead where he should have made a right hand turn and then should.;,.
have swung left, but struck the curb and glanced off the first group
of posts I had put in. Then the.car went up in the air 35 feet and
landed and got impaled on the other three posts on the other side of
the driveway. The front end of the car ended up 7 feet away from my
bedroom.
Now there is another thing which was the matter of the Sheriff's
forces as against a City Police Department. You people were supposed
to be getting Sheriff protection for the City in here and at the time
it was decided I was away, When I.got back you had Police but no
Sheriff. It was said the City Council did it, Maybe I can get'.it
answered why that happened.
•
•
0
Adjourned C. C. 11-3-58
Page Ten
Mr. Ho W. Carpenter - continued:.
The people have lost faith in the way you are operating and if you
would listen to some of the things the people want done and try to
resolve them in their behalf .it would be better,
Friday I was on the roof with a contractor putting in an air condi-
tioning system. Up the road came an automobile, - he never made
any apparent effort to make the turn to the left and plowed into the
field. The car gave a jerk and went through the redwood fence and
into the neighbor woman's yard. Then Sunday morning my wife and I
missed dying by only about 7 feet and that was only because of my
efforts and money, not anything that you have ever done up there.
The people are willing to sign a petition and I have asked them to
come to the City Hall at Council -meetings, but they are scared or
something.
It seems you have indicated you are going to black -top all of the
intersections of the Freeway to be allocated for parking area.
That shouldn't be permitted in any residential section. If you give
legal egress and ingress to these areas all the potential burglars
for a residential area could come in and you would have to have an
.increase of the Police force to play watch dog and that serves no
purpose at all.
Why is it you have permitted a building to be built next and adjacent
to Fox Brothers to be used.as a Greyhound Depot? I would like one
and all of you to spend a night in my home and see if you get any
sleep. You now have these busses in the area with no jurisdiction
over where it is coming in or out.. They leave going east and stop
at my corner for the stop sign and when a diesel engine takes off
from a stop, brother everything goes, shingels, etc. The bus also
stops on the frontage road on the east side of Lark Ellen and we have
the same thing. You should never have issued permission for a bus
station where you did, - it should be west of the business section
so they get off and on at that area. We are going to present a
petition on that one.
Another thing is why is State 39 traf-fic allowed to go through that
same intersection? The people around the area, including La Puente,
are very sympathetic to the problem and they said if West Covina
will submit a plan to submit to the State to remove the 39 sign route
to be by-passed and go through Pass and Covina Road, along Francis-
quito and through to Azusa..Avenue, using it as the State Highway 39
which it is, they would offer assistance. You have never submitted
such a petition.
Mayor Mottingero There are many things, Mr. Carpenter,
which cannot possibly be answered here
tonight. If you desire answers on
these things I would suggest you come to the City Hall in person or
present petitions with those questions and you will get your answers
from the City Council.
Adjourned Co Co 11-3-58 Page Eleven
•' Mayor Mottinger - continued:
The item you speak of in relation to a barricade on your corner I
am not aware of at all, but to begin with, the service roads along
the Freeway are not accepted by the City of West Covina. The State
says they are but we have not accepted them. That is the reason we
have gone on record of not accepting them and until the City accepts
them by formal Resolution they (State) realize we have not accepted
them. There are too many things on the Freeway not proving satisfac-
tory to the City for acceptance. Once they would be accepted, then
we would have no recourse for anything. We are aggravated this has
not been accomplished but we can't accept this and then expect correc-
tions at a later date.
Mr. Carpenter: Didn't Council take action to permit
the Eastland sign on State property?
Councilman Brown: That was done only after the State
leased the property to them,
Mayor Mottinger: There is a certain amount of truth in
what you have said but it certainly is
not the entire picture If you had the
rest of the picture you might be ,more satisfied with what Council
• has been doing. So far as Route_ 39 is concerned we moved to get into
the State Legislature to get accepted just what you have spoken about
and everyone turned it down. We have been trying to do just what you
refer to. A State route has been.established through the City from
which we are getting no money and at a location which we do not
approve
I would suggest you enumerate the items you would like answered and
address it to the City Council and we will see you get the answers
in complete form,
Mr. Carpenter: I will comply and upon receipt of the
answers I will decide on what to do,
Mayor Mottinger: That is true. If the neighbors wish to
petition we are here to do the best we
can for the community and some of these
items you bring may or may not be within the jurisdiction of the City
but if the matters are brought properly to our attention we will give
you the answers to them.
Mr. Carpenter: There is another problem with the
sweeper cleaning the area of rocks
thrown up from the traffic. I called
down here and it was stated you were not authorized to sweep the area.
but still it was done, and has been done on several occasions. If .it,
can be done at request it can be done voluntarily.
Mayor Mottinger: You are treading on the same thing in
that we would have to act accordingly
since we have rejected the frontage road,
Adjourned C. C. 11-3-58 Page Twelve
• Mr. Bloom: At Badillo you have a crown in the road
and at the south, and Azusa has been
widened three times its original.size
and you have a number of apartment buildings in the area adding to the
water problem bringing water down to the Freeway. Prior to the Free-
way the water came to Garvey and carried west along the north side of
Garvey to beyond Glendora where it started to sheet over to Vincent.
We didn't have any problem of water there and didn't anticipate any.
At the time the Freeway came in two pumps were put in at Azusa Avenue
to possibly carry 750 gallons of water per minute and in the past two
months there have been two wide open culverts put in dumping all the
water down Azusa Avenue bringing it to the corner of Stuart and Holly -
oak, where it floods. About 100 feet beyond that is a school crossing.
,There are children from 5 to 12 years of age crossing.the street and
any car doing 25 miles per hour can cover that 100 feet .in about four
seconds and because of the water brakes go out and without brakes the
first child crossing that walk at that intersection could get hit.
I do not see why this water was brought down to Azusa south.df'.the
Freeway. Can't there at least be. some storm drain put in to carry it
to the 'Wash, from the frontage road?
Mayor Mottinger: We are aware of the flood conditions
but we are also aware of the amount of
money needed to fix them.
• Mr. Bloom: How much would it cost for an under-
ground drain there?
Mayor Mottinger: $150,000.00.
Councilman Pittenger: Before taking care of Azusa. we will
take care of Orange.
Mr. Bloom: That may be true but I've understood
that Orange was a river bed anyway
before the City took it over, although
maybe I'm wrong. However, $150,0.00.00 might not be too much to spend
if one child gets killed in that area due to the conditions.
Councilman Brown:
It might not be too much to spend if
we had the $150,000.00.
CITY ATTORNEY
ORDINANCES
DELETED Item D-3, Page 2, deleted from this
Agenda.
It was consensus this be deleted from the Agenda as certain information
has not, as yet, been presented to Council at this time.
n
L.J
•
Adjourned C. C, 11-3-58
INTRODUCTION
ORDINANCE REGARDING SALE
OF CHRISTMAS TREES
Page Thirteen
The City Clerk presented and read
"AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF WEST COVINA AMENDING
CERTAIN PROVISIONS OF ORDINANCE N0,325
RELATING TO TEMPORARY USES,"
Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Barnes and carried
that said Ordinance be introduced and given its first reading.
It was indicated this matter be on the next Agenda of Council for
second reading (November 10, 1958),
REOPENING FOR FURTHER November 5, 1958 at 10:30 A.M. in City
HEARING APPLICATION OF Hall Council Chamber at Whittier.
SAN JOSE HILLS WATER
COMPANY FOR AUTHORITY Mayor Mottinger directed that the City
TO ADJUST RATES Manager attend this hearing with full
report on this matter to be presented
to Council,
ADDITION TO TREASURER'S Motion by Councilman Brown, seconded by
REPORT OF SEPTEMBER, 1958 Councilman Pittenger and -carried that
the addition to the Treasurer's Report
of. September, 1958 be accepted and filed
f-or the record,
APPLICATION TO OPERATE Mr, Flotten stated that an application
SPIRITUALISTIC CHURCH had been received for a license to
permit the operation of a. Spiritualistic
Church in the City known as Louella
Spiritual Temple, Incorporated.
LICENSE DEPARTMENT REPORT Report presented for the month of
October, 1958.
STORAGE OF "WELCOME TO Mr, Flotten stated that the Chamber of
WEST COVINA" SIGN Commerce would like to have payment
for the storage of the "Welcome to
West Covina" sign stored with the Azusa
Sign Company in the amount of $125.00 paid by the City.
Councilman Brown: Last year's allottment was to take care
of signs stored but it was supposed'to
be brought down to the City Yard quite
some time ago, about a year ago,
Mr, Aiassa: This could be turned over to the City
Clerk for investigation.
Adjourned C. C. 11-3-58 Page Fourteen
STORAGE OF'SIGN - continued.
Councilman Brown: In our appropriation last year there
was budgeted an amount for storage and
erection of this sign and the matter
was taken care of under that for that year but it was to be moved down
to the City Yard.
Perhaps we should pay this.a.nd move
the signs out, but check the dates,
Mr, Aiassa: We can give a report on this at our
next.meeting.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:30 P.M.,
•
APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL
Date
1. As submitted V
2. With the following corrections:
0