Loading...
06-12-79SpMtg JUNE' 12, 1979 A special meeting of the City Council of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, was held in the Council Chambers at 7:05 P.M., Tuesday, June 12, 1979, with Mayor Leon M. Weekes, presiding and City Manager J. Eldon Mariott, City Attorney Roger Saberson, and Council members Malcolm T. Bird, Charlotte G. Durante, James H. Scheifley, and Willard V. Young, present. Mayor Weekes announced that this meeting has been called for the purpose of (1) holding a public hearing on the future land use element of the Comprehensive Plan, (2) to consider authorizing trans- mittal of a letter to the Division of State Planning requesting an extension of time for the adoption of the Comprehensive Plan and (3) to consider waiver of the sidewalk requirements for High Point, Section VII. The City Attorney stated that item (3) is a relatively minor item on the waiver of sidewalk requirements in Section VII, and since Mr. Leal has not yet arrived, he suggests that Council take item (3) first. It was Council's consensus to take item (3) first. 3. The City Attorney stated that that item was just considered By the Planning & Zoning Board and they recommended that in this in- stance the waiver be granted. This plat was approved some time ago. It was approved without sidewalks at that time and the Planning & Zoning Board felt that in order to be consistent with prior practice, in this instance it should be waived. They don't want that to be misinterpreted to mean that in the future sidewalks would not be required; they do intend to require them consistently in the future. Mr. Skahen showed Council a copy of the plan that they are referring to. Mrs. Durante moved that Council sustain the recommendation of the Planning & Zoning Board, seconded by Mr. Scheifley. Said motion passed unanimously. ~ 2. Mayor Weekes requested that Council take item (2) now. The City Attorney advised that the letter addressed to Mr. Whittle, the Director of the Division of State Planning, requests a one year extension in accordance with Chapter 163 Lo~'al Government Compre- hensive Planning Act and this letter has been read to the staff member who makes recommendations to the Division Chief for extensions. Mrs. Plume stated that she heard of this for the first time Monday night and she was startled by the whole thing. She felt that the Planning & Zoning Board has been doing everything right and she is very unhappy about this. Mayor Weekes stated that the one thing that they have no control over is the fact that proper notice was not given to Tallahassee of these public hearings. To reschedule and readvertise would throw them beyond the date in which the plan must be adopted. In response to Mr. Scheifley, the City Attorney stated that they can have any period not to exceed one year in the initial request. He and Dan Kotulla, Planning Director, felt that they should request the maximum they are permitted for the first request and that way they would not have to go back for a, second request. They can't tell right now how long it is going to take. Everybody wants to get it adopted as soon as possible but if there are major amendments that are going to be made to the Plan, they're going to have to be sent back to the State for review which will invoke a sixty day review requirement. Mayor Weekes suggested that in fairness to the people that are waiting to speak, they go ahead and have the public hearing and come back to this issue, because he can see that the discussion they are now having is going to open up the whole subject. Council concurred with the suggestion. 1. The public hearing was opened at this time Ron Sanson stated that he came tonight in the hopes of somehow demonstrating that he puts great stock and importance in what the City is doing tonight. He is very disappointed that the other citizens in Delray don't share that concern. In his opinion, the adop- tion of this plan is a very necessary and important procedure for this City to be following in the sense of the Council acting in a responsible manner to the future demands that are going to be placed on the City from the citizens. He has gone through the Comprehensive Plan and has some suggestions. There are eight other elements to this plan besides the zoning element. He would like to see Council take affirmative action on some of the recommendations. In regard to the section on Coastal Zone Management, one of the things that concerned him was that they address areas in the coastal zone that are preservation, conserva- tion and developed zones. In the preservation zone, they've addressed the area of the public beach and a Mangrove area which is just north of the Eighth Street bridge and a Pinelands area south of Miller Park; they think that those three areas should be specifically taken care of and possibly purchased by the City and preserved because of the natural vegetation that is present in their natural state and kept for future generations. He fully concurs with those recommendations but he some- what debates the manner in which they present the Atlantic public beach as being something that is natural in its state when we all know it's not. He thinks that Atlantic Dunes Park should be put into this as an added area; it should be preserved as a preservation area with no changes for future generations to be made to that park. They have recommended that in some way the Mangrove area be purchased and kept; he would remind Council that at some point about two years ago, Commissioner Medlen was trying to get the County Commission to purchase that land and it was never pursued. He thinks that land is still available for pur- chase through the County Commission for future preservation.. The specific conversation has been as a bird sanctuary and he thinks that should be done. Mr. Sanson further stated that on page 59 Council addresses the impact fee requirement. A majority of the Planning & Zoning Board, Serafin Leal and himself feel that an impact fee is definitely a viable consideration for this City to be implementing. If the City is not going to develop its own, then he'd like to think that Council will b9 talking along the lines considering how they are going to react to the County impact fee ordinance if, in fact, it is enacted on June 22 when it comes up for Second Reading. In that sense this City as well as all the other municipalities in Palm Beach County have an opportunity to receive monies from the County from an impact fe~ on the County's formula. On pages 112 and 113 it says that analyses indicate that no significant negative environmental affects have been found concerning the Delray Beach Outfall; he is sorry to see that sentence in there. He personally thinks that there is a lot of controversy with that statement and that it should be modified. On page 118 it says that a recycling program can and should be implemented to achieve the goal of limiting solid waste increases. They have had results of studies given back that question the cost effectiveness of this. West Palm Beach has initiated a program which would dispute that. Boca Raton is still continuing theirs. Page 142 deals with the summaries of the section on housing rehabilitation, something in which he thinks the City of Delray has a lot to be proud of. Delray has set an example for a lot of cities to follow. On this page there are two items. One is the opinions of the consultants which is that there is a lack of code enforcement in the City. He felt that way the four years he served on Council and he still feels that way. He hopes that Council, in conjunction with the Administration, will look at the issue of lack of code enforcement to solve the housing problems. He feels that the last statement dealing with racial discrimination is not needed. On page 144 which deals with the community development programs, it talks about increased participation. He feels that whatever programs this Council or the Housing Authority develops should be ones that provide incentives, no free give-away programs. They should be loan programs where people have to pay back for what they get. He hopes that the Council will do everything within their power to adopt the Compre- hensive Plan. The public hearing was closed. - 2 - 6/12/79 Mayor Weekes and Mrs. Durante concurred with Mr. Sanson's suggestion in regard to preserving Atlantic Dunes Park as a preservation area. In response to Mrs. Durante, Mayor Weekes stated that one of the reasons for the delay in the plan is that Council may wish to change the planning area so if they chose to make any changes in the plan, they could do so. The City Attorney advised that if they have minor changes, they can make them and go ahead and adopt it without going back through the review process but if they get into major changes, they'll probably have to go back. Mayor Weekes asked Council whether or not they wish to include a statement that Atlantic Dunes Park should be maintained as a preservation area. It was the consensus of Council to include such a statement and the Mayor instructed the City Attorney to note that. Mayor Weekes stated that the next question is the property lying to the north of Eighth Street on the west side. He asked Council if they feel that this should also be included in a positive statement that it should be maintained as a preservation area or an area of con- cern. It was Council's opinion that the report adequately covers that as is. 2. Mayor Weekes announced that they will now go back to ques- tion (2) to consider authorizing transmittal of a letter to' the Division of State Planning requesting the extension of time for the adoption of the Comprehensive Plan. Mayor Weekes stated that the delay is mandated by the fact that they did not give Tallahassee proper notice of the two public hearings, which the Council scheduled, therefore, according to the law, they must notify the State and reschedule them. Under any condition they've got to have an extension; the question before them is whether the extension should be for ninety days, six months or a year. An integral part of that decision seems to lie in how this Council chooses to treat the planning for the land in the reserve annexation area. Council unanimously elected to establish a policy that they would not~ annex any lands lying west of Military Trail even though by special act of the legislature the reserve annexation area goes a quarter mile west of Military Trail. They have two or three options to consider; (1) whether to implement the Council's policy decision by withdrawing to the centerline of Military Trail for planning purposes, (2) to continue to accept the reserve annexation area even though it's the expressed policy of this Council that they don't intend to annex, and (3) to extend the planning area to some other line which is a more natural barrier than an artificial line a quarter mile west of the centerline of Military Trail. It is an artificial, arbitrary line; prOperty ownerships extend past that line and you have a jigsaw type of a thing. If they choose to plan as far as the E-3 Canal, they would at least have a natural barrier. What Council does in a matter of policy in no way binds a future Council; if they give up planning in the reserve annexation area and five years from now a Council wants to annex this, they have lost con- trol of the planning process in that area. The reserve annexation area by statute does not say they have to annex; it simply says that nobody else may annex. So it does no harm to the City to have as a policy not to annex it but still continue to plan it in the event that some future Council should see fit to annex it. If they change their planning boundaries, it's going to necessitate extensive changes in their Com- prehensive Plan; all the statistics will have to be changed and they'll need a year to do that. It seems to him that the better part of dis- cretion is to continue to plan within the reserve annexation area as has been set forth and let the Council adopt the policy if it chooses to. The City Manager stated that of the three suggestions the Mayor has made, he feels that number (2) is by far the better of the choices for all the reasons that the Mayor has mentioned plus some others. - 3 - 6/12/79 In response to Mr. Scheifley, Mayor Weekes stated that this City is only planning in that area reserved to it by the State Legis- lature by special act. Mayor Weekes stated, in response to Mrs. Durante, that the City Attorney feels that if they are planning that in their Compre- hensive Plan, then they should be prepared' to furnish that area with municipal facilities, utilities and be prepared to annex it at some time in the future, otherwise it shouldn't be a part of their Comprehensive Plan. The City Attorney added that the plan, the way it is set up now, evidences an intention to annex everything within the reserve area so if Council intends to change that policy, there would have to be an amend- ment to the plan. Mayor Weekes asked if they could include a statement that Council, even though it has planned in this reserve area, at this time, as a policy, does not intend to annex it. The City Attorney advised that he has some difficulty with the assumption that the County is going to cooperate with them in an area that they're planning when they've indicated no intention to annex in that area. He thinks that Council has got to keep something in mind in regard to the planning area and that's what the planning area is going to be for the purposes of annexation on the one hand, compliance with the local government Comprehensive Planning Act on the other hand and the extension of utility services or other public services. The Comprehensive Planning Act specifically says that the area under muni- cipal jurisdiction or planning for municipalities with reserve areas shall include the reserve area. That question is now being litigated by Boca Raton. If that decision is that a city is allowed to exercise authority over the unincorporated area within the reserve area, they will in essence have zoning authority over that entire area and all development regulations, all building permits and all variances must be consistent with the plan. Legally, under the act, no building permit could be issued to develop an area that's designated strictly for pre- servation. That's the jurisdictional requirement for the Comprehensive Planning Act; that is not necessarily the same line as for annexation. The City is not legally obligated to stop annexation at the reserve annexation line or to annex all the way to that annexation line. It makes sense to him to plan for the area they intend to annex. The Council has the authority to take the position that has been suggested, at least until they get a decision from the Fourth District Court of ~ Appeal. If the case with Boca Raton comes down the other way, the only area that will be under City jurisdiction would be the area that is actually within the City limits. The City Manager noted that several advantages have been mentioned making it advantageous to go with option (2) which the Mayor suggested. In trying to think of disadvantages, he can't think of a single one. It seems to him that that option should be selected. Mr. Bob Hutzler asked what the difference in area is between the quarter mile that the Mayor mentioned and the centerline of the E-3 Canal. Mayor Weekes replied that he would judge that it's about a half mile to the E-3 Canal; the quarter mile is probably half way. Mr. Hutzler asked what the expenses would be for the City to go to the E-3 Canal. The Mayor stated that he doesn't think that the Council has any desire to go that far. Mr. Scheifley stated that if Council decided to annex any- thing west of Military Trail and have a cutoff line at the E-3 Canal, they would have a real problem because they have had two people come before them with large tracts of land that go from Military Trail west beyond a quarter of a mile. The Mayor advised that three members of the Boynton Council are here because they are having an emergency meeting on the $CRWTD Board which is going to take about ten minutes. They will recess this meeting and come back in ten minutes. Mayor Weekes declared a recess at 8:00 P.M. The meeting reconvened at 8:15 P.M. - 4 - 6/12/79 Ron Sanson stated that he came here under the assumption that the plan was going to be voted on for adoption tonight. He only found out tonight that consideration is being made to postpone the decision. The one thing he feels that he tried to do for the 2% years that they talked about this plan was to bring it up often enough to make sure that no extension was ever going to be asked for. He feels that past practice of Council sometimes has not been to ever find out where blame lies; he doesn't think it should be done here. He outlined the steps the plan has gone through since November, 1977, at which time the last sentence in a letter from Mr. Serafin Leal said that the time of performance will be ten months from the time of contract execution. On May 19, 1978, Mr. Leal responded to a request from Mr. Kotulla for a summary. He said that the program is proceeding well and is anticipated the established August 31, 1978 State deadline to complete preliminary drafts of the program work elements will be complied with, the Planning & Zoning Board hearings can take place shortly thereafter probably in September or October, 1978, the City Council public hearings for plan adoption based on State guidelines can take place as early as February, 1979, therefore, we would have a safe margin of four months to the June 30th State deadline. As he understands it, the fault lies because somebody at the State wasn't notified properly. Mr. Scheifley stated that they all regret that they can't meet the timetable and asked the City Attorney how it came to his atten- tion. The City Attorney stated that he went through the statute, checking off the legal requirements. He called the Division to ask them if they had published the notice since the statute requires the publica- tion of the notice and was informed that they had not. It's the respons- ibility of the Division of State Planning to publish the notice; the Division takes the position that they will publish the notice when they are notified by the local government. Mr. Serafin Leal stated that there were four months that could have been spared as a safety margin. What has happened is that these final adoption procedures is something relatively new to both the State as well as local jurisdictions. He talked with them today and they talked about confusion in regard to the steps that have to be taken in the final adoption process. They are revising the final adoption ~ procedure and guidelines; they say that these new guidelines will be distributed within a week. The plan was finished last year as far as the work that they and the Planning & Zoning Board did but the corres- pondence and the review process with the different agencies has taken longer than they had anticipated and has taken lqnger than what was anticipated by the State guidelines. He doesn't think that the State is going to change the rules very substantially because the State Act is still the same but they are coming with new guidelines for final adop- tion procedure. The State has not published the date, time and place of the City's public hearing as far as final adoption of the plan. Mayor Weekes asked Mr. Leal how many cities have had their plan approved at this point. Mr. Leal answered that it is difficult to make an exact estimate; he would say perhaps 20% of the total juris- diction. Mr. Bird stated that one of the three options which was presented to them was to eliminate the planning area to the west of Military Trail. He asked Mr. Leal if this Council were to adopt that option, what cost in funds and time would be involved in going back and readjusting the presentation to the State. Mr. Leal stated that it would be a substantial amount of time and money; it would be several months and several thousand dollars. Mr. Bird stated it appears as though the first step toward enforcing annexation would be for this City Council to adopt responsi- bility for planning the use of lands which, as of now, doesn't belong to the City. Although they have stated no intention of absorbing those lands into the confines of the City, it is entirely possible that by legal action, they may be required to absorb them. It is his opinion that if this Council does not desire any land west of the centerline of Military Trail, the time to take such a stand and make it final and official would be now. - 5 - 6/12/79 The City Attorney advised that establishing that line will not force annexation. If, as part of the plan, the City indicates an intention to annex the unincorporated area within a certain geograph- ically defined area, you adopt that policy by ordinance and would be legally obligated to annex people who request it in that area. In response to Mayor Weekes, Mr. Leal stated that he likes (option 2) the alternative of leaving the options open and leaving the area west of Military Trail as part of the planning area. In many other cities that they are planning in the state, some of which have already been accepted, they have included a planning area which goes beyond the ~oundaries of the City without necessarily an implication, as far as planning is concerned, to annex those areas. The main reason that they have done so is that the physical fact of those areas outside of City limits affects physically what's inside City limits and vice-versa. Mr. Scheifley noted that he has been to hearings at the courthouse where development west of Military Trail wanted to exceed the densities that the City recommended for that area. They paid no atten- tion to the City in extending a large development out there. In actual practice, he thinks that the cooperation between the County and the City in the reserve areas and pockets has been practically nil. You can plan all you want, but the County, in many cases, is going to ignore it and go ahead. There is no assurance that the County will abide by any planning that the City does in that area. Mrs. Durante stated that even though in some cases the County did not concur with the City in zoning matters, she still thinks it makes a lot more sense to have a plan for that area than to not have any plan at all because they may want to annex it someday. Mr. Bird stated that rather than putting themselves in the position where they might possibly be required to take into the City of Delray Beach, properties which were not developed to the City's stand- ards, he would much rather see this Council adopt the posture that they would not plan for that area to the west of Military Trail. His concern is a legal one and it doesn't have anything to do with whether or not the option suggested by the Mayor is desirable; it is desirable, maintaining your options as widely as possible is better than restrict- ing yourself but if the penalty for getting caught at that game is ~. having to take into the City something that they don't want, he is opposed. The City Attorney advised that if the plan is adopted as it presently exists, in his opinion, the City would .be legally required to take in anyone who requests annexation within the reserve area. That does not mean that the plan could not be phrased so that they have a planning area that goes beyond the established annexation area. Perhaps, they could even go beyond Military Trail in terms of annexation and phrase it in such a way that they would annex beyond Military Trail but they would have an established policy that they would annex something only west of Military Trail if they could take in a compact development; at no time, in no event, would they take in a development that would be fragmented by annexation. The City Manager stated that taking that tact would have the advantage of maintaining all the advantages that have been cited here tonight plus an added advantage of not being required to annex some area that the City now wants to exclude; there's a way of exclusion that could be built into the plan. Mr. Sanson questioned why would the adoption of this plan mandate that they have to annex people in the reserve area. The City Attorney replied it's because there are statements in the plan that the City intends to annex all land within its reserve area. They're adopt- ing that statement by ordinance and once they adopt it by ordinance, they're legally obligated to follow the ordinance. He cited some state- ments in the plan that refer to annexation. Mr. Leal stated that he wants to clarify the reference made by the City Attorney referring to much and most but definitely not all of the unincorporated areas. Maybe that wording can be changed. A pocket area is an area that is on one side or more surrounded by City limits. - 6 - 6/12/79 Mayor Weekes stated that he would be in favor of strengthen- ing the option that the City has but it would be a lot cheaper to change that wording to strengthen the City's option than it would be to redo the plan. Mayor Weekes added that he thinks that what they need to do is to adopt that posture, then they should instruct the City Attorney to come forward with such protective language as he deems advisable to include in the plan to prevent that eventuality from occurring. The City Attorney stated that this is possible. The City Attorney stated that if the area west of Military Trail is going to be the planning area and Council has some reservation about planning area in the sense of land use map, maybe it should be a planning area only for utility extensions. They wouldn't have t° change the statistics because the statistics are based on projections for utility services primarily. Mr. Leal suggested that the City make sure that the wording is such that the City has an option; that the City "may" annex, that the City "may" serve as opposed to "shall" for those areas. The City Attorney agreed with that. That is what they are discussing in reference to the change of language as far as annexation is concerned. In response to Mr. Scheifley, Mrs. Plume stated that the Planning & Zoning Board leans toward the planning area. People from that area are filling the roads and they're affecting the whole town. Council has got to recognize what's there and yet there should be a plan for it. Let's hope that as time goes on, the County will more and more respond to the plan. In response to a comment by Ron Sanson, Mayor Weekes stated that Council does not perceive that because it gave water to High Point that it is necessarily obligated to give water to anyone else lying west of Military Trail. Mr. Young stated that one of his chief worries about this is the grandfathering in of some of places that have been built out ther9 now which do not come under the City code in size of lot, type of con- struction or anything about it. Are they going to be obligated to annex these people if they request annexation? Mayor Weekes answered that they would instruct the City Attorney to amend the language in that document as would preclude that possibility. It .~ould be done as the City Attorney has suggested by saying that they would annex no subdivi- sion or part thereof that would cause the fragmentation of that subdivi- sion. By doing that they're immediately eliminating about 75%-80% of everything that's out there. Mr. Bird moved that the City Attorney be authorized to add sufficient language to insure that this Council and future Councils will not be put in a position of having to annex properties which they find deficient west of Military Trail and any annexation west of Military Trail will be at the discretion of Council and not fostered upon it by some inattention in the drafting of the document, seconded by Mrs. Durante. Said motion passed unanimously. Before roll the following discussion was had: the City Attorney stated that there are no guarantees at any time. The rule in conjunction with utility service is that it's a discretionary func- tion with the City. Sometimes you get involved in constitutional questions that require a different result. In the United Farmworkers case, the city was compelled by the Circuit Court to provide water service to that project, even though ordinarily it's discretionary. In response to Mr. Young, the City Attorney stated that he thinks there is no question that they will be able to act before the twelve month period is up. At this point the roll was called to the motion. - 7 - 6/12/79 Mayor Weekes asked the City Attorney if he is satisfied with the steps that have been taken in the preparation of this plan by the Planning & Zoning Board and this Council insofar as meeting the public input requirements. The City Attorney stated that he discussed it with Mr. Leal to some extent already and they are going to discuss it some more; Mr. Leal has some material to show him but, yes, he is concerned about that. He feels that there has been more than enough public input but the opportunity for public input should have been structured a little differently to invite written comments. The act specifically says that the City would allow an opportunity for written comment; that's something they didn't do. If they need to do that, they'll go back to the Planning & Zoning Board, have a notice published in the newspaper giving an opportunity for written comment and the Planning & Zoning Board will hold one more public hearing and that will be the end of it. Mayor Weekes stated that he is strongly opposed to sending this back to the Planning & Zoning Board if it's at all possible to avoid it. He would rather have the written comments directed to the Council if necessary. The City Attorney noted that they are looking at two different things, the extent of public participation and requirements that could possibly invalidate the whole plan. He agrees with Mayor Weekes. Public participation, as far as their plan is concerned, has been absolutely nil but that does not help them in the posture of going back and defending the plan at some later date. There may be an act that the City takes in the future that somebody doesn't agree with and somebody is going to go through that statute and there are plenty of places in there where they have got to do each thing exactly right or the whole plan will go down the drain. Mrs. Durante asked if they can resolve the City Attorney's concern by stating in the next public notice for a public hearing that written comments will be accepted. The City Attorney stated that de- pending upon what he and Mr. Leal go over, it may be necessary to do it at the Planning & Zoning Board level. The statute requires the adoption of procedures by both the local planning agents, the Planning & Zoning Board and the City Council, regarding participation. They need two more public hearings at the City Council level. Mr. Sanson stated that under State statute, Council is obligated mandatorily, at least every five years, to review the plan but it is supposed to be done annually. So if there are some defects of efficiency in it, Council may address that over .~he next year in the annual review and rectify the problem. Mr. Bird asked if they could hold the Planning & Zoning Board hearing with the City Council hearing immediately following to save people from having to do a lot of scheduling. The City Attorney stated that it may be possible but he doubts it. Mayor Weekes instructed the City Attorney to work with Mr. Leal to come up with the least objectionable solution that they can and come back to Council with it. It's very difficult for them to arrive at a time frame other than the one included in the City Attorney's proposed letter. He sees no reason why this thing couldn't be done in a maximum of six months; he thinks it could be done in ninety days. The City Attorney stated that looking at it in this posture, it looks like six months but he feels that since they're making the request they ought to go ahead and request a year. Mr. Scheifley stated that Mr. Leal brought up the fact that new approval procedures might be issued in the near future. If they do, and the City isn't finished, will they have to abide by those or the old ones? - 8 - 6/12/79 The City Attorney stated that he thinks what Mr. Leal was referring to is Department of Community Affairs. They're preparing materials for the adoption process by local governments. He stopped at their office in Tallahassee about a month ago requesting those materials and he has not received them yet and doesn't know when he will. They do change the requirements of the statute but there will be recommended procedures for the City and other cities to go through in the adoption process. That answers Mr. Scheifley's question in the sense that it will not change the adoption procedure from the terms of the statute; the statute has not been changed. In response to questions from Coun- cil, he added that a realistic time frame is probably three months but he would like to have a little cushion against that. Mr. Young asked the Mayor if a motion would be in order. Mayor Weekes stated that he thinks so because the extension doesn't start running until the 30th of June or the 1st of July; they've got two weeks there which is a little bit of a cushion. They can go ahead and start implementing whatever it is they need to do immediately. Mr. Young moved that the language of the first paragraph of the City Attorney's letter be changed to a three months extension rather than one year, seconded by Mr. Bird. Said motion passed unanimously. Mayor Weekes declared the meeting adjourned at 9:15 P.M. ATTEST: ~ MAYOR The undersigned is the City Clerk of the City of Delray Beach and that the information provided herein is the minutes of the meeting of said City Council of June 12, 1979, which minutes were ~ formally approved and adopted by the City Council on ~ ~J~//~?f~. · -/~ City Clerk NOTE TO READER: I.f the minutes that you have received are not completed as indicated above, then this means that these are not'the official minutes of City Council. They will become the official minutes only after they have been reviewed and approved which may involve some amendments, additions, or deletions to the minutes as set forth above. - 9 - 6/12/79