City Council (View All)
Tuesday, April 15, 2014
MINUTES FOR THE REGULAR MEETING
ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL
April 15, 2014
1175 E. Main Street
CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Stromberg called the meeting to order at 7:15 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers.
Councilors Voisin, Morris, Lemhouse, Slattery, Rosenthal, and Marsh were present.
Mayor Stromberg explained there were still vacancies for various Commissions and Committees even though the annual appointments process was finished.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The minutes of the Study Session of March 31, 2014 and Business Meeting of April 1, 2014 were approved as presented.
SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS
Mayor Stromberg presented the Ragland Award in memoriam to Doug Gentry. The Mayor’s proclamation of April as Fair Housing Month in Ashland was read aloud.
Historic Commission member Keith Swink provided the annual report and shared upcoming events and activities.
Mayor Stromberg moved 1. First Reading by title only of an ordinance titled, “An ordinance adopting a prohibition on the distribution of single use plastic bags,” Public Forum, and 2. Second Reading of an ordinance titled, “An ordinance imposing a temporary moratorium on establishment of medical marijuana facilities in the City of Ashland, and declaring an emergency” after the Public Hearing with Council consent.
1. Acceptance of Commission and Committee minutes
2. Special procurement for the purchase of a Rovver X closed circuit sewer inspection system
3. Special procurement for installation of a CERT antenna at Fire Station No. 1
4. 2014 annual appointments to boards and commissions
5. Extension of Firewise Grant through September 30, 2014
6. Ashland’s Wildfire Hazard Zone boundary amendment
Councilor Rosenthal pulled Consent Agenda item #4. Council agreed all Commissioners would sign off on the newly revised Uniform Policies for Commissions and Committees. Commission staff liaisons would obtain the signature sheet and forward them to the City Recorder for filing.
Councilor Marsh pulled Consent Agenda item #6 for further discussion. Fire Chief John Kars clarified the Wildfire Hazard Zone boundary was a land use action before Council for approval that would go to the Planning Commission for review. Homeowners in the wildfire designation areas were subject to construction restrictions, primarily roof construction, and landscape restrictions. They will be eligible for Firewise grants and the boundary amendment will not affect homeowners insurance.
Councilor Voisin pulled Consent Agenda item #3 for further discussion. Public Works Supervisor Mike Morrison, Jr. clarified staff would purchase the Rovver X closed circuit inspection system from Owen Equipment Company in Portland through the Houston Galveston Area Council that provided nationwide service access to local government for volume purchasing and discounts. City Administrator Dave Kanner further clarified the City belonged to a statewide purchasing cooperative that bid out vehicles and equipment and offered a low price for those items to its members. The Oregon Cooperative entered into mutual aid agreements with other purchasing cooperatives all over the country. Under state law, the City could make purchases through other purchasing cooperatives depending on who had the lower price.
Councilor Slattery/Morris m/s to approve Consent Agenda items. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed.
1. Public Hearing on the 2014 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) award and CDBG action plan development
Housing Program Specialist Linda Reid explained the City received a direct allocation of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds from the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Each year the City offered these funds competitively to area nonprofits and organizations to provide services to populations that benefited from the money. For the 2014-2015 program year, the City received three applications for the $136,000 allocation. Applicants included Maslow Project to continue the School-Based Services for Ashland Homeless Youth outreach program, the St. Vincent de Paul home visitation program, and Habitat for Humanity Rogue Valley for their A Brush with Kindness and Critical Home Repair program.
Public Hearing Open: 7:37 p.m.
Lacey Renae/330 Glenn Street/Program Manager and Mental Health Counselor for MASLOW/Noted support received from the City allowed Maslow Project to expand services into Ashland. They requested $10,000 in CDBG continued funding to help provide basic needs, resources, outreach, and case management services to homeless youth and families in Ashland. The funds would pay for a .65 full time equivalent case manager. She described services offered by the Maslow Project to homeless and at risk children from birth to 21 years old. The average child was 11 years old, often homeless with their entire family. In 2013, they graduated 91% and served 82 unduplicated individuals.
Rich Hansen/St. Vincent de Paul/Explained CDBG funds, St. Vincent de Paul volunteers and budget monies combined to prevent the growth of homelessness in Ashland. The 2011-2012 grant of $14,000 helped 42 Ashland residents or 19 households. Eleven of the 19 families were homeless. St. Vincent de Paul was able to house the families and keep the remaining families in their homes with grant money. Transitioning out of homelessness was extremely challenging and could take over a year to accomplish. He described the services they provided and how many people they assisted.
Denise James/2233 S Pacific Hwy/Executive Director Habitat for Humanity Rogue Valley/Chair Mark Weir/Explained Habitat for Humanity built houses from the ground up for low income people willing to partner and help build the home. Habitat Humanity offered no interest loans. It was difficult getting into the Ashland market because the land was limited and the prices high. Their mission was limiting substandard housing to those in need. Habitat for Humanity established nationwide repair programs. A Brush with Kindness provided small repair, paint, landscaping, and fencing. The second program was Critical Home Repair for major needs. Both programs came with an interest free loan. Mark Weir, chair added Habitat for Humanity’s store, Restore covered all administrative fees, and 100% of the CDBG funds would go into the repair programs. Ms. James confirmed the CDBG fund would be specific to Ashland only.
Public Hearing Closed: 7:50 p.m.
Ms. Reid explained the selection process and HUD’s limitation on public service activities. Both the Maslow Project and St. Vincent de Paul were public service activities. CDBG had a 15% cap on the overall grant amount resulting in $25,500 for public service activities. Maslow Project asked for $10,000 and St. Vincent de Paul asked for $24,000. Staff recommended a 70/30 split so both organizations receive more than half of the funding they requested. St. Vincent de Paul would receive $18,000 and Maslow Project would receive $7,500. Habitat for Humanity Rogue Valley was a capital project and staff recommended they receive $41,300 to fund their program fully. The remaining balance of $69,200 would carry over into the following program year. HUD allowed the City to carry over one and half times its grant allocation.
Councilor Lemhouse/Marsh m/s to direct staff to draft 2014 Annual Action Plan for the use of Community Development Block Grant Funds (CDBG) reflecting the award of CDBG funding for 2014-15 program year as follows: $18,000 to St. Vincent De Paul-Home Visitation Program; $7,500 to Maslow Project; $41,300 to Habitat for Humanity Rogue Valley and carry forward $69,200 in unallocated funds to be awarded in the 2015 program year. DISCUSSION: Councilor Lemhouse noted all three applicants were well-established organizations with clear goals and plans to achieve them. Councilor Marsh added Ashland was fortunate to have these organizations working in the community. This also related to Council goals over the next six years. Councilor Voisin thanked the applicants for their services and for applying. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Voisin, Marsh, Lemhouse, Morris, Rosenthal and Slattery, YES. Motions passed.
ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS
1. First Reading by title only of an ordinance titled, “An ordinance adopting a prohibition on the distribution of single use plastic bags”
Management Analyst Adam Hanks provided the background on the plastic bag ban. The ordinance would prohibit single use plastic bags, required paper bags to be a minimum of 40% recycled content, and required businesses to charge a .25-cent fee for the use of paper bags if requested by a customer. The ordinance would exclude a variety of plastic bag types as well as a six-month delay for the ordinance to go into effect to allow businesses to exhaust their current inventory.
Conservation Commission Chair Mark Weir added the bag ban represented information based on 70 communities that had implemented plastic bag bans in the United States and several countries worldwide. Research showed that disincentives helped people use reusable bags more than education did and charging .25 cents would drive down the need for paper bags that had a higher environmental impact. He shared statistics on plastic bag use in Ashland and the need not to rely on paper bags. The Commission was looking into the Chamber of Commerce possibly providing an inventory of bags that promoted Ashland.
Mr. Hanks explained compliance would go through the Code Compliance officer and was part of the outreach plan. City Attorney Dave Lohman clarified companies distributing plastic bags after the ordinance went into effect would incur a citation with a daily fee assessment.
Emily Folmer (parent) and students from John Muir School/Explained the majority of trash in the ocean was made of plastic. Plastic did not biodegrade and broke down into dust that smaller fish consumed as food that was detrimental to their health. The ratio of this dust to phytoplankton was 36-1. There was also an island of trash twice the size of America that animals lived on and ate. It was not healthy and polluting. The plastic dust gave off chemicals that pollute the ocean. Most of the plastic entered the ocean from rivers and originated from towns far away from the sea.
Jonny Boulton/165 E Main Street/Spoke against the ordinance. He was greatly concerned the effects that plastic bags had on the environment and the subsequent deaths of the whales that consumed them. However, using government to compel behavior was not a legitimate role. It robbed the initiative of the people and created dependency. Voluntary incentives that encourage shoppers to use alternative baggage was something the City could lead, coordinate, and facilitate. He encouraged Council not to pass the ban but assist the community to help the people it served.
Cheryl Carlich/215 Nutley Street/Supported the plastic bag ban ordinance. She shared an experience of traveling outside of the country to an area completely covered in plastic bag trash and remarked on the litter she saw in the states.
Tobias Cains/105 3rd Street, Talent OR/Described his experience in Florida helping sea turtles during their nesting period. He was wearing 500 plastic bags, the amount the average person in the United States used annually. He supported the proposed ordinance.
Rikki Seguin/2032 SE Tibbett Street, Portland OR/Explained she was a Conservation Advocate for Environment Oregon and spoke in favor of the ordinance. It would help protect rivers and waterways from the increasing problem of plastic pollution. She noted the overwhelming support of the ban in Ashland. The problem was enormous and the solution too simple to wait.
Emma Barry/1659 Fordyce Street/Currently was a senior at Southern Oregon University and strongly supported the ordinance. Ashland had a strong vision of sustainability and removing single use plastic bags was a great step to take and embodied the ideals the community stood for daily.
Randall Fitzpatrick/548 Iowa Street/Supported the proposed ordinance and noted plastic bag use in Ashland was recent. Plastic bags were not necessary and an unnecessary waste.
Kindler Stout/130 Orange Avenue/Commented on the task of eliminating plastic and thought the ordinance was a great way for the City to participate. He was concerned plastic would end up in the ocean as much already did.
Councilor Voisin/Rosenthal m/s to approve First Reading by title only of an ordinance adopting a prohibition on the distribution of single use plastic bags and place on agenda for second reading and direct staff to begin appropriate education and outreach efforts to both the business community and residents. DISCUSSION: Councilor Voisin explained the community supported the ban and would serve Ashland as a sustainable community and was the responsible thing to do. Councilor Rosenthal thanked the Conservation Commission for researching the ban. This was an opportunity to make a difference and keep plastic out of the waste stream and ocean. Councilor Lemhouse thought the ordinance would make a difference but not prevent people from bringing plastic bags into town. Councilor Slattery thought the ordinance was forward thinking and fit within community values and concepts. Councilor Marsh supported the ordinance and had a concern regarding the paper bag fee. Councilor Morris supported the ordinance and was interested in eventually adding single use plastic water bottles. Mayor Stromberg shared his experience eliminating plastic produce bags.
Councilor Rosenthal/Voisin m/s to amend the motion that the City of Ashland to retain .10 cents of the .25 cent per bag cost pass-through for the purpose of refunding the City for administrative costs and provide funding for conservation education efforts pertaining to the ordinance.
DISCUSSION: Councilor Rosenthal explained the funds would make staff costs revenue neutral and contribute to cloth bags. Councilor Voisin agreed. City Administrator Dave Kanner understood the intent of the amendment but would need time to address how the money would be tracked, reported, and remitted to the City. City Attorney Dave Lohman clarified the amendment did not negate the original motion. Councilor Slattery added that over time the fee would get smaller and eventually cease and expressed concern the collection system might outweigh the cost of whatever the City received. Councilor Lemhouse would support the amendment, did not think taxing paper bags was a good idea but thought the City should at least get some form of revenue stream from the fee. Councilor Morris agreed with Councilor Slattery. Councilor Marsh would not support the amendment and thought it fundamentally changed the intent by creating a ban that also profited the City. The fee reimbursed the merchant and encouraged people to bring their own bags. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Rosenthal, Lemhouse, and Voisin, YES; Councilor Slattery, Marsh and Morris, NO. Mayor Stromberg broke the tie with a NO vote. Motion failed 3-4.
Councilor Lemhouse/Morris m/s to amend the motion and remove section 9.21.030 pertaining to a tax on paper sacks. DISCUSSION: Councilor Lemhouse explained this was the section that he thought had unintended consequences on lower income households. Councilor Morris was not sure he could support the amendment. The .25 cents fee was too high and zero would not produce the same affect.
Roll Call Vote: Councilor Lemhouse, YES; Councilor Rosenthal, Slattery, Marsh, Morris, and Voisin, NO. Motion failed 1-5.
Councilor Marsh/Lemhouse m/s to amend the motion and change the fee on paper bags from .25 cents to .10 cents. DISCUSSION: Councilor Marsh thought charging .25 cents as a beginning level was high. Similar ordinances in other communities set paper bag fees at .10 cents. She suggested charging .10 cents for a year, set goals and at the end see how successfully the community responded to the challenge. Councilor Lemhouse supported lessoning the impact on lower income households. Councilor Slattery thought the .25 cent fee had a purpose and the success of the program somewhat depended on the higher fee. Councilor Voisin agreed the .25 cents was an incentive and the Conservation Commission proved that incentives worked through their research. There were alternative ways to deal with low-income families through education and outreach and she would not support the amendment.
Roll Call Vote: Councilor Lemhouse, Marsh, and Morris, YES; Councilor Rosenthal, Slattery, and Voisin, NO. Mayor Stromberg broke the tie with a YES vote. Motion passed 4-3.
Roll Call Vote on main amended motion: Councilor Rosenthal, Slattery, Marsh, Morris, and Voisin, YES; Councilor Lemhouse, NO. Motion passed 5-1.
Amy Haptonstall/341 Beach Street/In response to the proposed gun ordinance, a group of citizens worked with Council to propose a campaign regarding Child Safety Education particularly relating to gun safety. The next meeting was April 22, 2014 at 5:00 p.m. in the lower level of the library.
ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS-continued
2. Second Reading of an ordinance titled, “An ordinance imposing a temporary moratorium on establishment of medical marijuana facilities in the City of Ashland, and declaring an emergency”
City Attorney Dave Lohman explained the ordinance would impose a temporary limited moratorium on medical marijuana facilities in the C-1-D zone, and lots in the E-1 zone within 100-feet of residential lots. The ordinance would exempt dispensaries in the E-1 zones along boulevards. The moratorium would last until May 1, 2015 and Council could rescind it at any time prior to that date. During the moratorium, the Planning Commission would look into possible land use restrictions on the dispensaries. Council could also approve time, place, and manner restrictions that were not considered land use restrictions.
Linda Stickle/492 Rogue Place/Expressed concern regarding the impact a medical marijuana dispensary would have in her neighborhood. She supported dispensaries but thought they should be on arterial streets designed for heavy traffic flow. Williamson Way was a narrow street and increased traffic could present issues. She asked Council to retain the moratorium for a year.
Carol Kim/422 Rogue Place/Supported the moratorium and the time the City would take to determine how to regulate dispensaries. Last week the Planning Commission suggested dispensaries belonged on major arterial streets that could handle lots of traffic. She asked Council to allow dispensaries in central commercial locations with ample parking six to seven days a week. For those needing medical marijuana now, the current operating dispensary was in the ideal location. Of the six known applications in Ashland, one was 400 Williamson Way with two others within 1,000 feet of that location. She encouraged Council to strengthen the moratorium, require dispensaries on arterial streets, and eliminate the loopholes that currently exist prior to final approval.
Christina Freedman/390 Robleda Drive, Central Point OR/Explained she was currently a medical marijuana patient and how marijuana enabled her to play a functioning role in society. She shared her experience with discrimination on the job once employers discovered she uses medical marijuana. People had put time and money into the dispensary on 400 Williamson Way. Patients should have options regarding dispensaries. Medical marijuana was medicine. Any other business could create heavy traffic in that area.
William Clary/470 Williamson Way/Expressed concern regarding traffic impact to his neighborhood due to the dispensary. He asked Council to apply the 100-foot buffer to any lot in the E-1 zone that did not border a main boulevard. He shared traffic statistics that indicated the Williamson Way dispensary could have 400-500 trips per day if they are in full operation. Putting it on a boulevard would provide easy access for patients, alleviate safety concerns, and retain the integrity of his neighborhood.
Morgan O. Heller/876 B Street/Opposed the moratorium there was no way of proving how much traffic the dispensary would create. A yoga studio, a clothing store, or an herbal apothecary could generate just as much traffic. She supported dispensaries as long as they were not within 1,000 feet of schools, and were legal. She had planned on working at the 400 Williamson Way dispensary as a massage therapist and due to the moratorium now could not.
Cheyanne Davis/400 Williamson Way/Represented the dispensary, noted the amount of time and money invested in the business and shared how upsetting it was to know their hard work could be for nothing.
They had wanted the support of the City and the neighborhood and had abided all of the City and state guidelines for medical marijuana dispensaries. They were willing to look for a new location but had already signed a 5-year lease at 400 Williamson Way that would cost them $300,000. They felt purposely singled out.
Phil Studenberg, attorney/230 Main Street, Klamath Falls OR/Represented the business owners at 400 Williamson Way. He was previously involved with the Klamath Falls City Council who decided not to pass a medical marijuana moratorium. They decided to use this instead to engage in a social experiment that honored the spirit of the Oregon Medical Marijuana Act and the people in need of medical marijuana. They would regulate the dispensary but were looking towards the possible legalization vote in the fall and saw it as a great social experiment. He thought there were issues regarding the legality of the partial moratorium, with equal protection, and questioned whether the distinctions were rational and justifiable. He asked Council to discern them since the business owners had invested a lot of money and signed a lease. He encouraged Council to work with the business owners and not declare a moratorium.
Mr. Lohman clarified boulevard and arterial streets were the same. City Administrator Dave Kanner was not aware of specific limitations on what could go in on certain types of streets. He agreed that high traffic businesses should be zoned on high traffic streets. In the E-1 zone, certain types of businesses with higher traffic uses had to be at least 200 feet away from residentially zoned parcels. Alternately, a conventional pharmacy could legally locate at 400 Williamson Way.
Mr. Lohman read aloud changes to the ordinance. He clarified the ordinance drafted did not nullify any contracts that anyone might have. The lease with the business at 400 Williamson Way was a separate transaction between the proprietor and lessee and did not pertain to the moratorium ordinance. The business in question did not have a permit as of March 1, 2014 and did not qualify for a grandfather clause.
Removing “or any other provision of Oregon Law” from the sentence in Section 1, “Dispenses marijuana pursuant to ORS 475.314 or any other provision of Oregon Law,” would focus only on medical marijuana dispensaries. The time to address recreational marijuana was when the land use ordinance came back from the Planning Commission. The land use ordinance could apply to all marijuana dispensaries. Senate Bill 1531 applied only to medical marijuana dispensaries and gave cities the authority to impose moratoriums on medical marijuana dispensaries.
Community Development Director Bill Molnar explained the Planning Commission was drafting code that would limit the location of dispensaries to commercial zones, C-1, E-1, and M-1 only on properties along major boulevards. Those boulevards were North Main, East Main, Lithia Way, Siskiyou, Ashland Street, and portions of Tolman Creek Road. It would prohibit dispensaries in the entire downtown commercial zone. City Administrator Dave Kanner added the Planning Commission would hold a public hearing regarding the ordinance May 13, 2014 with the ordinance going before Council for First Reading and potentially Second Reading May 20, 2014.
Councilor Marsh/Rosenthal m/s to approve Ordinance #3093 as amended, declaring an emergency, and eliminate the words from Section 1 “or any other provision of Oregon law.”
DISCUSSION: Councilor Marsh noted a pharmacy could locate at 400 Williamson Way and generate the same amount of traffic that a medical marijuana dispensary could as indicated by one of the speakers. However, this was new territory and the moratorium would allow enough time to research where dispensary locations were most appropriate. The change removing “or any other provision of Oregon law,” limited the discussion to medical marijuana facilities only. Councilor Rosenthal commented Council needed to be cautious with respect to those hoping to get into the business. Residents had valid points. He hoped the Planning Commission would proceed thoughtfully and expeditiously on this topic.
Councilor Lemhouse/Slattery m/s to suspend Council rules in order for the Mayor to ask question of staff. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. Mr. Lohman clarified Council could enact time, place, and manner restrictions but it might not be clear. Time restrictions would be clear but zone restrictions could reflect on land use. Councilor Lemhouse/Slattery m/s to reinstate Council rules. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed.
Councilor Morris noted land use was supposed to be concise. The description for the E-1 was designed to provide a variety of uses and noted restaurants, bakeries, plumbing shops, auto repair, some were permitted, and some were special permitted. He had issues restricting dispensaries to certain areas in E-1 based on what was already allowed in E-1. He would vote against the moratorium. The existing uses currently in E-1 zones could have a much higher impact than a dispensary. Councilor Voisin added conditional use permits required criteria and the Planning Commission would have to determine what that was. She did not want to go towards conditional use permits.
Councilor Voisin/Lemhouse m/s to amend the motion to remove language in Section 1 “which has any boundary line one hundred (100) feet or less from a boundary line of a lot zoned for residential use.” DISCUSSION: Councilor Voisin thought Council needed to protect residential areas, take the time to research impact, and send a clear message to potential business owners regarding zone restrictions. Councilor Lemhouse agreed. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Slattery, Rosenthal, Voisin, and Lemhouse, YES; Councilor Marsh and Morris, NO. Motion passed 4-2.
Councilor Slattery emphasized with the business owners of 400 Williamson Way and understood the neighbors had valid concerns. He would support the moratorium because it was the best negotiated settlement of a complex issue.
Councilor Lemhouse motioned that the proposed ordinance regarding the moratorium apply to the entire city of Ashland. Mayor Stromberg ruled the motion would need to wait until Council voted on the current motion. Councilor Lemhouse motioned to appeal the Mayor’s decision. Motion died for lack of a second.
Councilor Lemhouse/Voisin m/s to amend the motion by changing the language in Section 1 Moratorium Declared, first paragraph, end of first sentence “D” Downtown Overlay District to state “Downtown Design Standards zone.” DISCUSSION: Councilor Lemhouse considered Lithia Way downtown and wanted the moratorium to include that area. Council Voisin agreed.
Roll Call Vote: Councilor Voisin and Lemhouse, YES; Councilor Marsh, Morris, Slattery, and Rosenthal, NO. Motion failed 2-4.
Councilor Slattery/Rosenthal m/s to call for question. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Marsh, Morris, Slattery, Rosenthal, Voisin, and Lemhouse, YES. Motion passed.
City Recorder Barbara Christensen restated the amended main motion, An ordinance imposing a temporary moratorium on medical marijuana facilities in designated areas of the City of Ashland, and Declaring an Emergency with any amendments as noted by the City Attorney, eliminating words in Section 1 “or any other provision of Oregon Law,” and eliminating language in Section 1, “which has any boundary line one hundred (100) feet or less from a boundary line of a lot zoned for residential use.”
Roll Call Vote on the amended main motion: Councilor Marsh, Slattery, Rosenthal, Voisin, and Lemhouse, YES; Councilor Morris, NO. Motion passed 5-1.
1. Second reading by title only of a ordinance titled, “An ordinance amending AMC Chapter 2: Rules of City Council; Uniform Policies and Operating Procedures for Advisory Commissions and Boards; Recreation Commission; Conservation Commission; and Certain Administrative and Operating Departments”
Item delayed due to time constraints.
NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS
1. Appointment to Audit Committee – Mayor/Council liaison
Councilor Slattery/Rosenthal m/s to reappoint Councilor Voisin as the liaison to the Audit Commission. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed.
2. Discussion of Proposed Utility Rate increases
a. Proposed Electric Utility rate increase
b. Proposed Water, Wastewater, Transportation, and Storm Drain Utility rate increases
Item delayed due to time constraints.
3. Talent Ashland Phoenix Pipeline Intertie Project update
Item moved to a special meeting April 22, 2014 Tuesday at 7:00 p.m. in Council Chambers.
4. Solid waste franchise, a presentation of financial incentive options for waste reduction
Item delayed due to time constraints.
OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS/REPORTS FROM COUNCIL LIAISONS
Meeting adjourned at 10:27 p.m.
Barbara Christensen, City Recorder
John Stromberg, Mayor