HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 10/02/1972_8
MINUTES OF MEETING
OF'CITY COUNCIL.
PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA
October 2.,• 19.72
Council Meeting RegulaT meeting-.of. the Council of the City -of`
Petaluma was called order by Mayor Putnam
at the hour,,of 7:30 , o'clock p.m..
Attendance Present: Councilmen Brunner, Cavanagh, Jr.,
Clecak, Daly, Mattei, Perry, Jr.,
and Mayor Putnam.'
Absent: None.
Invocation
The invocation was given by the Reverend David
Shaw, St. Vincent's Church.
Broadcast.of
Mayor Putnam announced that tonight's Council
Council Meeting.
meeting -is being 'broadcast'ed.by'KTOB as a pub -
lic service:-to th'e community:
Approval.of Minutes
The minutes of-September 18'x, 1972, were approved
as recorded.
{j'7
CONSENT CALENDAR
The City Attorney explained that the Consent
Calendar authorized by Ordinance No. 1052 N.C.S:
is, a method group routine, noncontroversial
items under for Council action;,
and_; if anyone .in..th'e. audience or any member of.
the Council wishes to discuss an item,_ such
item may be considered separately later on the
agenda. Mr. Robert added "that the Consent.Calen-
dar is.a.:means to expedite the Council meeting.
Agenda Items Nos ._„ 1 , .2 ; 3, 4, and 6 (No. 5 re-
moved from the'•agenda) on Consent. Calendar
were u'nanimous•ly. approved on a motion made by
Councilman Cavanagh, Jr., and seconded by
Councilman Daly:
Agenda Item 41 -.-
Resolution #6138 N.0 :S. "denying, claim for .!/ F
Claim for Damages
d by.J - .; Fred Haley on, behalf of
Res:•_ #6138 NCS
Dolores De.rmake. in.'the,amount of $200,000.
Agenda•.Item #2 --
Resolution. #6139 N..C:S: setting hearing date > C
Petaluma "I" St.
f.or protest to proposed annexation, Petaluma
Annexation
"I` ". Street An- nexation.
Res: #6139 NCS'
Agenda Item #3 - -'
Resolution #6140 N.C.S.,a,pproving plans and ��\•
Demolition'of -
spec- ifications;for "Demo.lition of Buildings --
Buildings,.330
Project 330 English Street."
English Street
Res #6140 NCS
Agenda Item #4 --
C
Resolution #614.1_N.C.S. protesting decision a(�
County Bond
of County Board of Supervisors to J
Election
charge a portion of the election costs of .the
Res. #6141 NCS
recent County Bond Election to'Sonoma County
Water Agency.
T
Ag enda Item #6 - -.
g
C.S. declaring certain
Resolution #61,42 N. ti
Surplus 'Property
outmoded equipment as surplus property.
Res. #6142 NCS
East Washington
Notice of Public Hearing on the subject matter
Street Plan Lines--
was - .duly posted and published:
Lakeville Street to
Freeway 101
This being the time set-to hear protests and
_ -8
October 2, 1972
East Washi -ngton
Street Plan .Lines --
Lakeville Street .to r
Freeway 101
(continued)
comments regarding the East Washington Street
Plan Lines -- Lakevil le, Street 'to - Freeway .:101 --
the Mayor - declared, the public- hearing. open. `
The City Clerk announced that the following
two letters were received:
Letter, dated September-2.0, 1972, from Mr.
Lesly.H: Meyer;'Superin.tendent of'PeItaluma
Sehool requesting that the City -take into
consideration the students who cross-the street
to reach the Kenilworth Junior' H_igh.,School, 'or
McKinley Elementary School and that
cro swalks, sidewalks, and,zafety zones
established,- read and filed.
Letter, dated September. 29, - 19.72, from Mr.
Ernest Curtis,, owner of property at. 817, 821,
825, and 8.29 East �.Wa�shington Street,, expressing
an opinion on .some al:,ternatives possible -to the
proposed plan- 1 -ines and giving . reasons-to warp
the right -o,f -way toward_ the park area, read and
filed.
Dire.c:tor of Public Wo,r:ks David,Young reviewed
the 5 -plan submitted in 1969 by; - - Ho,ffman and.
Albritton; Consulting Engineers employed by
the City to prepare,a study on'the'widenin--
of East. Washington Street.• Plan A -2.-1, referred
to asr the Compromise Phan, . was `recommended - to
the City, Council by the consultants - -and, 'the
Planning ::Commission some 3 years. - - ago . -
After holding--a public hearing -on December 1,,
1969- ,. the .Council `tabled -the matter and in
July, :197.0, it was' -ed to Council Study• Ses-
sion. At a recent•study session 'the: Council
directed the City Engineer to prepare a
based upon-A -2 1 and modified eliminate
parking::.
In ,discus,sang, Plan A: -2 -1 Modified, Mr. Young
recommended' that the p1,an be 'further ,modified
to warp .th'e design between P.ayran Street and
the Freeway by- widening the street only on the
southerly side Washington Street and:
therr6by - t =ake ':publicly 'owned land ('Kenilworth
Park'and, the Municipal Swimming Pool-),
Those who raised questions regarding the- amount
of land - to . b.e -taken for the right -of -way- were.: .
Mr., Par-r-ell Fleming, owner: of property on the
northwest corner of Payrarn and East Washing -
ton Street .
M.r. Larry Short., representIng Taco Bell, 707
East Washington Street;.
Mr . 'Ken Colin,. involved in property . on the
northwest, :corner of. Vallejo -and, East, Wash
ington Streea
Mr. .Dan, .O' Brien, A & W - Dr - in , 6.00 East
Washington Street,,.
Mr . V " DeCafl -i owner of service .station
at the southwest corner of Payran and :;East
Washington Street.
Both Mr. O'Brien. Mr. DeCarli objected to
the proposed, plan. and f °avored.a more symmetrical
9-
October 2, 1972
187
East-Washington
plan to 'widen the street. Mr., DeCarli also ob-
S!treet'Plan.Lines --
jected to 5. lanes of- traffic with islands pro -
L akeville :Street to
posed at Payran and East Washington Streets
Freewa 101
which would prohibit left -turn movement into
('continued')
hi,s -service station -from East Washington Street.
Comments were heard from.the following: Mr. -
Stuart Curtis, 21 Alma Court, Mr. Bernauer,
842 St,. Francis Drive; and Clyde "McCord,
1008'Philips Avenue.
Mr. Norman Rollins, -owner of, parcel at the north-
west corner of Ellis Street and.East Washington
Street, favored the plan as recommended by the
City Engineer.
Upon of the discussion, the Mayor
declared - the public hearing closed. A motion
was made by Councilman Brunner and seconded by
Councilman Perry; Jr.., that the City Engineer
bring back a..graphic. plan in accordance with
his -recommendation, and also.to'prepare,a written
description for the•.Plan Line'Ordinance incorpo-
rating the recommendation. Motion carried by
6 affirmative and l,negative votes. Councilman
Mattei voted "No." During ,discussion of Plan
A -2 -1 Modi,fied,:Counc lman,Mattei proposed con -
sideration of a mor.e:equitable - plan -- particularly
between Edith and Streets.
Transfer - -James B.
Letter,.- da -ted October 2, 1972, from Gerald Rodder,
Simonds Development
Inc.; T-ransamerican Builders, Inc., requesting sla
ttO
To Gerald Rodder, Inc.
Counei.l of•transf'erring from James B.
Simonds'to.Rodder, In - .c.•, the allotment granted
by' "Re,solution No. 6028 N.C.S. of-Policy - respecting
residential construction and population,growth
for 93 apartment.dwell°ing units located on
Magnolia.Avenue and also requesting a change in
the construction schedule -to begin November -
1.972, to February 1, 1973, read-and filed.
Director of Planning-McGivern referred to Sec-
ti6n.8 of Resolution-No. 6028. N.C.S. requiring -
Counci'l's a.pr.q� the transfer and construe-
tion.`schedule change;
"After a brief discussion, a motion was made.by
Councilman Daly and - seco- nded by .Councilman
Perry , :. Jr : , approving the ', trans16-r from Mr,
Simonds to Rodder% Inc. Motion carried unanimously.
It.was.explained to Mr: Ro'dder that construction
of .19,72 -73 allotments: 'is ' to be completed by May
1, ~1973, and'he was urged to.commence construction
as -as possible to meet the- deadline date.
- If, additional time.'is" necessa -ry in order to com-
p,le'te construction is near comple-
tion-by May 1, 1973:, an extension of. time can
then. be. requested•.
•
Request for Deviation Le.tter•, dated - September 25, 1972,; from David C. 4g-� F
From Plan Lines Traversi,. a.ttorriey.representing Paul,Ciampi,
Magnoli - Avenue •requestimg deviation-from-the normal setback
from plan lines fronting property at 20 Magnolia
Avenue, read- - and filed
Planning Director William McGivern displayed
a map of.the lot-arid surrounding area. He
explained,that the - structure on the lot is
October 2, 1
Request` .for Deviation pr -,eser tly •.a residence-and a site - design approved
From.Plan Lines by the Planning Commission incorporates' remodel
Magnolia Avenue ing and up- grading,of the building•with.conver-
(`continued) sion to a conform ng,:commerc�i .use. The site
plan does not-invo;lve'any enlargement.of the
structure within the setback area, but does
provide-for. an..-addition, of approximately 262
square -feet in the rear yard and.partof the
front.portio:n,of' existing residence will:
be removed.in order - to provide the j foot set-
_
back. - He added tYat_in accordance with the
City Code `and C- S . Zone' requirements, a setback
of 10 feet is from-.the' established
plan lines.' The�Cit.y Code -also stipulates the
City Council may grant a variance upon evidence
of unusual hardship or extenuating circumstances.
He noted designation of the area as Planned.
Unit Development. ri the E...,D.P. and Commercial
Zoning in. the 'Zonin'g Ordinance' - -a point ; to. be
clarified. before. January 1, 197'3.
Mr...David Traversi appeared before the'Council
On - beh`al'f of Mi`_ Ciampi presentirng details of
the request for the '7 foot deviation from the
plan line requirement..: ,He .pointed ' out . the
benefits to ":b.e derived .by the City -up- grading
of the structure, converti -ng to,' a- conforming
u.se,% and dedicating °-property within - ,the plan
line area which would relieve the City of 'pur-
chasing . the property for street widening.,
purposes.
Questions were raised whether the 'structure
would present a _pr.oblem, for proper s1' ht..dis
tance •f.or traffic -using the - accesss- driveway , on
the adjacent- lot for the C &.S',Enter -.
prises' apartment complex., When- °the. - -site plan
for C.& S Enterprises' apartment complex was.
reviewed,.there` was a staff recommendation that
serious consideration.be. given to:provide
public street, for access to the' development.
Director of- Public' Works 'David Young made ,a
comment there could be.a sight problem, because .
of width of the.access street. 'and also be-
caus.e of th:e..ex'isti.hq "biii.ld`ings that could
obstruct the.sight distance -.
Mr..Ciampi was present and pointed out that
the subj e,ct . lot contains. a 12 foot driveway-,
westerly tof-the structure and that the access
driveway for the complex .on. the adjacent lot
to the west -is situated near the center of the
lot _with parking avad la -b,le to the. east.
Mr. Victor .DeCarli,, owner o.f: property located
at the corner of Petaluma Boulevard North and
Magnolia Avenue and. 2 :lots east of -the subjaect
p :t,del, -- spoke against the .request, for the devia-
tion of the ,plan liners.. He felt there should
be,, no precedent ; set , ;to allow any encroachment
in the= plan line -area.
Bec'au'se of the .c_oncern, of proper-''sight, distance
and design of the adjacent lot with parking and
acgess.d-- riveway to the apartment complex., a motion.
was made by Councilman .Clecak,- and seconded by
Councilman Perry : Jr: to table the subje "c.t re-
quest" 'until October 10 - 1972 ", in order for the
Council to make 'a f -field .trip -of the site. -
Motion carried ;,by '6 affirmative and 1 negative
votes. Councilman Jr.; voted "No."
October 2, 1972
Appeal'filed by- of Planning Com-
Appeal - -- Rezone 817,
.Ernest
821, 825, and 8
miasIon decision, September- 19, - 1972,. denying
East Washington St_
application.to' rezone' -8;17, 821, 825,-and 829
East Washington Street from an R -M -1500 District
to a .C' - District, :submi ted and filed. A
motion was by Councilman Cavanagh, Jr.,
and seconded by Councilman Daly, setting October
10',' 1.972, .as "date to hear the 'appeal. Motion
carried unanimously,
Agenda
',moved Agenda Item #17
By .consensus the Council
, Luche.ssi''Park - Development, for con-
re gardin g
°s:deration with Agenda Item #11 regarding
- S'hollenberger River Park;;
Shollenberger-
- Letter, dated September 2'1, - 1972, from Super- �s
River Park, -=
visor Philip L. Joerer requesting that a basic
.g
Luches,s.i -.Park
uhderst between the Council and Board of
Development
Supervis,ors,be�.reached with regard to an agree-
ment on the-development of Shollenberger River
Park and also asking' assura'nce.by, the
City Council to make some financial.'effo.rt in
regard to.-.sewer, water,.and some land preparation
so the baseball and .soccer groups can start work
on fields; read. and filed.
Counci -lman Clecak•re,ported that he attended a
tee ting * - held`by Sonoma County Counsel .Tom Sawyer,
Sonoma County Recreation Director Joe Rodota,
Reereation.Director Jim Raymond, City Manager
Robert Meyer, and City. Attorney Edouar.d Robert
at..which time a.proposed draft Agreement and
Lease -was4 developed- and accepted '.by those at-
tendng. Copy of said draft submitted and filed.
Councilman Cle'cak - reviewed.various.sect , ions of
the - proposed draft relating to County and City
participation. He out the provision
whereby the City agrees , to - maintain and care
for the - park at•its.own expense; however, in
order to�pr.operly the - area,, it -will
be" necessary- for the City to - install an 8" water
line to' sdry -ice, Pha.se- and future development
of Phase I I,. •Co'st of 7 such installation , would
be.;.approximate'l.y $17, and said' amount would
have. to be all'o,cated by the Council.
Councilman Cl.ecak referred to the minutes of
t.h& Recr-.eation Music; and Parks Commi's.sion,
dated'September'_20, 1972, and letter, dated
September 28..,'19.72 ; from Commission Chairman
R..' C.; Mu,zio , -of the Commission's', request that
the- present master plan of Luchessi ,Park be
developed along' -the. lines-of the
phases and priorities.-- Athletic fields, in-
clud.ing. tenni °s, courts', turfed-area and land-
scaping, arid buildings•and parking. Copy of
'sa'id . minutes. and letter submitted and 'filed .
The Commis'sron : in its: action *further requested
that the motion be .considered when the.City
Council- discusses the..priorities to be'placed
on the - budgeting of .funds for.the development
of-' •Luchessi Park ,.and Shollenberger, , River Park.
The - Commission.' accepted Shollenberger River
Park for future development, but is waiting --for
an- 'agreement as to.. the full of the
park between the City, acid .the County before
taking any definite action.
i t
October .2.,, 1972
Shollenberger Supervisor_Joerger was present and - requested
River Park_ that "the - Council accept- the .pr agreement
Luchess.i..,P'ark for-the' development of Shollenberger River
Development Park,
(continued)
A..lengthy discussion followed and.Councilman
Clecak,stated that an up- to- date. report of
Shollenb.erger River together with the pro-
posed agreement will be presented at the,
Recreation „C'ommission meeting Wednesday. If
the.agreement is- accepted and $17,00`0 allocated
for.,Shollenber.ger River Park';, he.suggest',ed the
Council then consider development of Luchessi
Park-as recommended'by� the Comiiission.
Upon..completion ,of -the deliberation, the Council
by'consensus supported -.the general principles
ofithe. proposed- :draft agreement. The City
Manager` „was directed -to refer said .proposed
agreement - to the.Board of Supervisors for its
review:: Councilman Clecak was asked to submit_
said proposed draft_to.the Commission for.its
consideration-and comments for a, report to
the Council thereon.
No further discussion or action was held on the.
Commiss�ion''s: request for Luchessi -Park develop - il, ment'..priorities:
TOPICS FUNDS Letter, dated September 1, 1972, from State
Director.rof. Public•Wo - ,rks James A. Moe.announcing'
revised dead- li- ne. for res °erving • TOPICS Funds
for f.i.scal years. 1970- 7'1.,. 1971 - -72, and 197 -2 -73
and - requesting 'the City, furnish an estimate . of
its abilityi'to' meet. the revised -deadline .dates
in..otae'r for t'he.de.partment to. take action to
ensur.e'the obligat of the funds, read'and
filed.
Director of Public Works David Young•explained
the various- .methods to reserve the funds. He .
pointed . that clarification was ;•obtained
from. the State Off ice that it will not be neces-
sary to reserve the "Wash Dollars' "' °TOP -ICS Funds
which were appropriated for'the:1972- 73-fiscal
year.
Upon Mr.. Young'•s ,.reeommendat -ion'a motion was -
made by Councalman. Daly .and. seconded by Council-
man ,Perry; Jr.,'au thorizng the Director of
Publ,ib to contact the State Department
of'-Public Works and reserve the°'TOPICS' Funds.
for 1970 through" 1 by Method No'. , 3-- "Construc-
tion• ". for .propos,ed ; proj "ect "Washington Street
Widening• Between Kentucky Street 'and 'Keokuk
Street,. Motion carried unanimously.
Agenda Agenda ',I,tem #13 regarding Proposi;ti #20 was
moved for consid;erat_on - with Agenda Item #22.
Agenda •A motion wa s , made:by Councilman -Cavanagh, Jr.,
and seconded by.Counc-ilman Perry, .Jr. ,.to.add
an item to the.a , re ; lative to the grant for
the Sewer Projec ... Motion earr,ie'd.un'animous,ly.
191,
October 2, 1972
David Young d �
Water - Polliition _:
Di:recto.r of •Publici Works . report_ed
Control Facilities•
that a - letter ways- 'received from•the State Water
1972
Resources-Contr Board with the 'contract for
Res. #6143 NCS
the ,Clean' Water Grant, The Board partictilarly
pointed out that.due to language'contained in
the proposed ..amendments to the Federal Water
Pollution• Control •.Act, _it ,is important the
contract-be;-fully executed befo're.enactment of
said ,Act:. •.,Mr . Young , summarized the contract.
for Counci information.
Resol >ution. #6143.!N.C.S. authorizing the Mayor
to execute a contract.with• the State of California
relative to.a.Grant for Clean Water -was introduced
by Councilman Brunner; seconded by Couricilman
Matte, and adopted by 7' - affirmative votes.
Claims and Bills
Resolution= #•61.44 N.C•.S.. approving claims .and
Res. ' #6:144 :NCS
bills, 996;to .106 inclusive and Nos 1366
-to 13:87 inclusive,. approved for payment by the
City , Ma- nager, was' introduced by Councilman
Clecak,.•seconded - bby.Councilman Brunner, and
adopted - by.:7 affirmative votes.
Jitney Bus
Councilman..Cavanagh,: Jr.., Chairman of the 344
Operation_ -.
Council- 'Transportatiorri--Committee, reported
that the Committee met,sever.al times with
Gravesen. Brothers., - owners of the jitney bus
line, to review-its- fiftancial' operations and
to exp,lore,:the.possibility of the City assisting
the:, transit -system. with ' a' subsidy .program in
order .to, 'continue
No specific recommendation,on the natter was
submitted by;the.'Commtte.e; however, it was.
the consensus, of the Committee that .it would
-
be too expensiv the line on the
basis tithe system.'s•prese'nt 'level of service
and
The Gr,avesen Brother-,were.present and indicated
interest to continue the service or resume
service if a:-method to generate more usage is
developed.
A motion was -°made - by -Counc,ilman Brunner and
seconded -by Councilman,Perry. Jr.,, to,.terminate
the: -jitney:• bus .service franchise, effective
today: Motion Carrie- unanimously.
Functional •
Councilman-Brunner reported on the hearing.
Classification
held' by- the;,St`ate . Senate Committee on Trans -
Study'
portation• ;In Santa- Rosa. on September .,19, 1972,
on.-the Functional Classification Study con-
ducted-by the.-State-•Department of Public•Works,
which proposes - to reduce the State Highway"
System from 16.,000 to 5,100 miles. 'Senator
Randolph Collier was present at the - hearing,
and expressed displeasure with the report.
Councilman Brunner stated that there is no
action. - required by ,the-Council at this .point.
Sonoma .County
Letter,,. dated 'September 27, 1972, from. Gordon 0
Water Agency --
W. Miller, Chief Engineer, Sonoma County Water
Committee
Agency,, that at-.the Water Contractors' meeting
Appointments
it was agreed to establish 3 committees to work
on various - problems in' assuring construction
of water supply facilities in time to divert
1.92
October 2, 1972
Sonoma County
Water:Agen
Committee
Appointments' -
(continued)
Sonoma County.
. 7
Improvement
Committee
pbssIble..wAt6r, shortag - e and requesti:..nq: that
repr&sentative appointed fr6m the 'City bn
each committee,:-'s.ubffii't and filed.
City Manager Robert Meyer noted the En-:,
gineer.ihg will be meeting..on
4, 1,972,, and -an appointment. to this Committee
is -ne:edod; whereupon; :a motion I ,was made, by
y
Cbun Matt6i, and.-sec6nded.by Councilman
Clecak,, dosign City Engineer David'Young
as the,C'ity's;official representative to the,*
Water U
gineering Advisory Committee
to the , Sonoma'CoUnty Water-Agency*. Motion.
Appointments . to the.C'bntract and-Polidy Commit-7-
tees Are to be.m.ade'at later date.
Councilman Cavanagh, -Jr., was asked to represent
tho,City'of'-'Petaluma at the Sonoma County Im-
provement CoMmitteo' at S6,nomA Joe's on
Tuesday,, - October 3, 1972, at which time projects
to b,e recommended to the State Highway, Commis sion
will be - considered.
�i Former . Christian R&ference was made . - by the ,City ;Manager with
Chiirch Building regard to momb', dated September 27-1972, from
Directbr of, Recreation'Jim Raymond on uses of
the f&:rinet C hristian Church Building. Discus:-
s matter will be' held at the Council
meeting on pctober 10, 1972.'
San Francisco Bay
City Manager.-Robert*Meyer requested those
Area Coun cil
Council members planning to attend the San.
Francisco Bay Area Council meeting in San
Franci-sco on -Thursday to notify him .immediately
so that re can be 'maae'
Rezoning--833-,
Planning , Commis:s ion. 'Resolution #Z13-72.-recom-,
And 8'41 East
mending the adoption of pt,oposbdamendment to
Washington Street
Zoning Ordinance No. 66 N -.C.S. ,by',reclass
Ord. #1065 NCS�
833'_, .8,-37, an . d 841 East Washingtqn I S treet tree t (As s
Parcels No. 7- 022- 1'0 ; -1 -19) from an R-.,M.-15'00
Distriqt a C-N. , District, submitted and filed.
Z
N.C.S..amendin''o'
Ordinance No. 1065 n
'g - -,in _g
Ordinance as recommended was int-roduc6d by
Councilma-n Daly, seconded by 'Councilman.Perry,
Jr. , - and ordered, published by 7• .a - ff irmative.
votes*.
Development All'otment
Map'',and. broa'kdown' of' Developmen*t Allotment,
- .
Appl .1973-74
Appliaatiohs tbr 19 73 prepared by - T16Lnning
Director Will i,am�- McGivern, submitt;ed and. f iled.
Ballo Propositions.
Lotter, dated Septom4e'r 20, 1972,, from-Citizens
l*
Against the Co,asta - Initiative sup-
port,in opposition to-P•oposi No. 20, sub--!
mitted and. f noa,.
Letter -f rom City of Half Moon. Bay With r'esolu-
t #20 urging :suppo of
all-cities to :.defeat the proposition,, submitted
and f-,
Rd Watson Amendment #14) City'
Attorney-Robert,report-ed that the Board-bf -
Directors -of the League Cities
unanimotis ly-,voted •to oppose' the su:bject
*
initiative.
-93'
October 2, 1972
Ballot Propositions Consideration.of said propositions.was. deferred
(continued.) for'further' review.
Appointment -- Resolution #6145 N.C.S. appointing G. Roland
Planning Commis's,ion Bond -to the Planning (to fill
Res. #6145 NCS vacancy created by- resignation of Arthur
Cerini)- was introduced by Councilman ; Brunner,
seconaed'by Councilman Perry., Jr., and
adopted by'7 affirmative ,votes.
Agenda. Agenda-Item #24-7-303 Street was postponed
for consideration at the Council meeting on
October .1'0, 1972.
Adjournment There-being-no further business to come before
the Council, the meeting was adjourned to an
executive session at 1.2:20..a.m., October..3, 1972,
and' Tuesday,-October 10, 1972, at 7:.30 o'clock
p.m.
Mayor -
Attest:-
C'ty.Clerk,