PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH
TUESDAY, JUNE 1, 1982
THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH, MET AS A COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE ON TUESDAY, JUNE 1, 1982, AT 5:00 P.M. IN ROOM 211 CITY AND COUNTY BUILDING.
ON ROLL CALL THE FOLLOWING COUNCIL MEMBERS WERE PRESENT: RONALD J. WHITEHEAD ALICE SHEARER GRANT MABEY IONE M. DAVIS SYDNEY R. FONNESBECK EDWARD W. PARKER PALMER DEPAULIS.
Council Chairperson Sydney R. Fonnesbeck presided at and conducted this meeting.
POLICY SESSION
Leigh von der Esch, Executive Director, briefed the Council on items on their agenda for June 1, 1982. Byron Jorgensen, Performance Audit Manager, discussed performance audits with the Council and briefly advised them of what audits are currently underway. Chief Pete Pederson, Fire Department, discussed items with the Council relating to Fire Station No. 15.
The Council adjourned at 5:55 p.m. to begin the Council meeting in Room 301.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH, MET IN REGULAR SESSION ON TUESDAY, JUNE 1, 1982, AT 6:00 P.M. IN ROOM 301 CITY AND COUNTY BUILDING.
ON ROLL CALL THE FOLLOWING COUNCIL MEMBERS WERE PRESENT: RONALD J. WHITEHEAD ALICE SHEARER GRANT MABEY IONE M. DAVIS SYDNEY R. FONNESBECK EDWARD W. PARKER PALMER DEPAULIS.
Mayor Ted L. Wilson and Walter Miller, Deputy City Attorney, were present at this meeting.
Council Chairperson Sydney R. Fonnesbeck presided at and Councilmember Alice Shearer conducted this meeting.
Invocation was given by Police Chaplain W. C. Rounds.
Pledge of Allegiance.
Approval of Minutes:
Councilmember Parker moved and Councilmember Mabey seconded to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of the Salt Lake City Council for its meeting held Tuesday, May 25, 1982, which motion carried, all members voting aye.
(M 82-2)
DEPARTMENTAL BUSINESS
FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
RE: Industrial Revenue Bond assumption: SYSCO Corporation.
RECOMMENDATION: That the Council approve a resolution for an Industrial Revenue Bond assumption by SYSCO from SHIRE WAREHOUSE ASSOCIATES subject to the City Attorney’s approval of the resolution.
DISCUSSION: The bonds were originally issued by Salt Lake City and purchased by First Security Bank of Utah for the purpose of allowing Shire, a limited partnership, to acquire and expand an industrial warehouse located at 1880 West 1700 South. Shire wishes to sell the project to SYSCO Corporation under their approved inducement resolution. First Security Bank as bondholder and trustee, is willing to approve this assumption by SYSCO. Council approved SYSCO to issue Industrial Revenue Bonds on November 10, 1981.
Councilmember Shearer referred the Industrial Revenue Bond assumption by SYSCO Corporation to the consent agenda for June 8, 1982; referred without objection.
(Q 82-24)
RE: Proposed resolution authorizing issuance and sale of approximately $17,700,000 of tax anticipation notes, the approval of an Official Notice of Sale, and the scheduling and providing notice of the sale.
Councilmember Whitehead moved and Councilmember Parker seconded to adopt Resolution 54 of 1982 authorizing issuance and sale of approximately $17,700,000 of tax anticipation notes, approval of an Official Notice of Sale, and the scheduling and providing notice of the sale, which motion carried, all members voting aye, except Councilmember DePaulis who was absent when the vote was taken.
(Q 82-22)
OFFICE of BUDGET AND MANAGEMENT PLANNING
RE: Mayor’s recommendation to the City Council for Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding of new local option projects.
RECOMMENDATION: That the following new local option CDBG projects be recommended to the City Council for funding. 1 - Handicapped Barrier Removal; City & County Building and Metropolitan Hall of Justice - $25,000; 2 - 6th East Street Islands Rehabilitation - $220,000; 3 - Preservation/Redevelopment Planning - $8,000.
AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS: $253,000
DISCUSSION: Requests for new projects to be funded from unallocated surplus (slippage) CDBG funds are periodically received from city departments, community groups, non-profit organizations, etc. These requests are reviewed for eligibility and merit as community development projects by city staff, and a public meeting is held on a quarterly basis to receive comments from interested citizens. Once the amount of CDBG funds available is determined, a staff recommendation for funding is made to the Mayor through the Chief Administrative Officer. The Mayor then passes a recommendation on to the City Council for a final decision. A summary of all project proposals received and a breakdown of slippage funds available including a recommendation for deletion of two inactive CDBG projects is on file in the Office of the City Recorder.
The funding level requested for the 6th East Street Islands Rehabilitation project has been increased from $130,000 to $220,000. This increase is based upon more accurate cost estimates received from the Engineering Department. It is estimated that each block will cost approximately $40,000 to rehabilitate, and while $220,000 will not rehabilitate all the blocks from South Temple to 900 South, a significant portion of the project can be completed.
On March 16, 1982, the City Council tentatively budgeted $130,000 in 8th year CDBG funds from the 6th East Islands project. In providing these funds, the City Council substantially reduced the 8th year CDBG contingency budget to $195,263, or 3.9 percent of the total 8th year CDBG entitlement amount. On April 6, 1982, the City Council gave final approval of the 8th year CDBG program. At that time the City Council deleted the 6th East Street Islands Rehabilitation project and moved that this project be funded from previous program years contingency. The 8th year contingency budget was increased to a satisfactory level.
Councilmember Shearer referred the Mayor’s recommendation for CDBG funding of new local option projects to the Public Improvements Committee; referred without objection.
(T 82-16)
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR
RE: Appointments to the Central Business Improvement District Advisory Board.
DISCUSSION: The Mayor recommends that the following individuals be appointed to this Board: Jess Agraz, Kent Money, Stewart Hanson, Jr., Richard Schubach, Fred Wheeler, Phyllis Steorts, Clinton P. Mott, Ronald Carnago, and Fred S. Ball.
Councilmember Whitehead moved and Councilmember Parker seconded to approve the appointments of Kent Money and Richard Schubach, which motion carried, all members voting aye, except Councilmember DePaulis who was absent when the vote was taken.
(T 82-8)
PUBLIC WORKS
RE: Special Improvement District No. 38-700, 500 North from 1400 West to Redwood Road (Phase I); and Parley’s Way from 2300 East to Maywood Drive and Foothill Drive from Sunnyside Avenue to 2100 East (Phase II).
RECOMMENDATION: That City Council adopt resolutions for the following: 1) Creating Special Improvement District No. 38-700; 2) Approval for the Mayor to award contracts with W.W. Gardner for construction of Phase I, and Gibbons and Reed Contractors for construction of Phase II.
AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS: Fiscal Year 81/82 Capital Improvement Fund, Property Owner Assessments (Special Improvement District) and Public Utilities Funds.
DISCUSSION: Curb and Gutter District No. 38-700 will provide for the construction of curb and gutter, sidewalk, roadway and drainage facilities for the above mentioned streets. During the protest period two streets, 700 West from 1300 South to 2100 South and 12th Avenue from “K” Street to L” Street were protested out. In addition, a 36-inch and 42-inch water transmission line funded by Public Utilities has been included in the project for construction on both Parley’s Way and Foothill Boulevard. W.W. Gardner was the low bidder for Phase I and Gibbons & Reed Contractors was the low bidder for Phase II. Both bids were well below the engineer’s estimate. It is the intent to start construction in the first part of June with completion scheduled for November, 1982.
Both Foothill Drive and Parley’s Way are city-maintained streets, however, the fee title to the rights-of-way rests with Utah Department of Transportation. In order to allow the city to proceed with the special improvement district on the state-owned streets, particularly since a portion of Foothill Drive will be closed to vehicular traffic and a park constructed, the city has proceeded to receive from the state quit claim deeds for these streets. The deeds are scheduled to be approved by the State Highway Commission on May 28, 1982.
Richard Johnston, Deputy City Engineer, addressed the Council and stated that the action before the Council was to award the contracts to the low bidders. He stated that the district has already been established but under the procedures of the Special Improvement District the Council has to make the recommendation to award the contracts.
Councilmember Mabey moved and Councilmember Whitehead seconded to adopt Resolution 55 of 1982 awarding construction contracts to separate contractors for construction of improvements in Phases I and II of Salt Lake City, Utah Curb and Gutter Extension No. 38-700, which motion carried, all members voting aye, except Councilmember DePaulis who was absent when the vote was taken.
(Q 82-12)
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Proposed Budgets for Fiscal Year 1982-83, Amendments to budget for Fiscal Year 1981-82.
RE: Proposed budgets for Fiscal Year 1982-83 including proposed ordinance increasing City Cemetery fees, proposed ordinance increasing city park reservation fees, proposed ordinance increasing parking meter rates, proposed ordinance increasing business license fees, proposed ordinance increasing excavation fees and budget for Federal Revenue Sharing Funds, and the Salt Lake City Library Budget. Also, amendments to the budget for Fiscal Year 1981-82.
A continued public hearing was held before the Salt Lake City Council to discuss the proposed budgets for FY 1982-83 and to discuss amendments to the budget for Fiscal Year 1981-82. State Representative Lamont Richards addressed the Mayor and City Council to discuss items relating to the proposed closure of Fire Station No. 15. He stated that for the last four years he has been co-chairman with Senator Caning for the appropriation for the nine universities and colleges in the State of Utah.
Mr. Richards stated that the legislators got an appropriation for the fire station after Mayor Garn appeared before the legislature and stated that Salt Lake was concerned about safety of students at the University of Utah and the inability of the fire department to take care of the needs of the institution, including the buildings and possessions. Mr. Richards referred to comments made by Ray Hickson stating that the University supported the city’s request and recommendation that a fire station be located on the campus as the fire marshal had determined the facilities on 1300 East could no longer serve the needs of the expanding campus in terms of lives and buildings.
The University felt an obligation to support the request and was willing to donate the land for this purpose; however, this was not to be a University fire station but a community fire station located on the campus. It was emphasized that this was a city request supported by the University. Mr. Richards further stated that since 1970 the University of Utah and the University Research Park have added three million gross square feet of improved building space; the bulk of the new space constructed on campus consists of hospital space, laboratory space, clinical space, research space, and student housing. All but the latter category are high fire-risk facilities.
Mr. Richards stated that he did not believe that a fire vehicle could get from “I” Street to the higher Avenues in four minutes. He gave Mayor Wilson a copy of a newspaper article from a Chicago newspaper; the story described a Christmas Eve fire which occurred on the campus of the University of Michigan. The story indicated that by the time the fire department arrived it was too late; the firefighters could not get inside the building and had to fight the fire from the outside. The loss included three million dollars worth of buildings as well as professors’ life-time work. Mr. Richards stated that he did not understand the logic of closing Fire Station No. 15 when it was built at the city’s request to protect the University. He stated that there were many new homes which have been built in the University area as well as development in Emigration Canyon. The Mayor stated that the question was availability of resources and continuing to supply a standard, reasonable and prudent level of fire service.
If certain sections of the city are not even at the standard then it is not right to have a luxurious service in another part of the city. This is not a question of balancing the budget, it is a question of having the money to shift the resource to where there is currently substandard protection. Both services can be provided if taxes are raised, but the Mayor stated that the message he gets from his constituents is that they do not want taxes raised. The Mayor further stated that the city has offered an alternative station to the University where there is volunteer or student service; so far the University says no, either the fire station is needed or it is not.
Charlie Quick, President of Local 1645, addressed the Council and stated that the firefighters of Salt Lake City have come to him with concerns. He stated that the question is if the Mayor’s budget provides adequate or an increased level of fire protection for the west side or is the city going to defer that and redistribute the protection which has now been created. The firefighters are concerned to see the level of protection reduced in any area of the city; a fire station cannot be closed without reducing that level of protection.
The computer read-outs are good; however they do not take into consideration all of the adverse factors; firefighters have driven these routes and come up with different times. Mr. Quick stated that Local 1645 hopes that the Council weighs all the evidence and makes the decision as wisely as possible. Fire Chief Pederson addressed the Council and re-emphasized his position; he stated that he has never supported the closure of Fire Station No. 15. He has addressed the manning situation in the city and it is obvious that fire defenses are desperately needed on the west side because of westward growth; the east side of the city is extremely well protected and Chief Pederson stated that he wanted to maintain this protection. Salt Lake is growing and fire defenses must grow too.
Chief Pederson stated that if Fire Station No. 15 is kept open it would agree with this decision as long as he could have resources for the west side of the city. If Fire Station No. 15 is closed, there are five stations within a three-mile radius of that area; a total of 50 firefighters. On the west side, there are three fire stations; Fire Station No. 14 which is about 5.5 miles from most of the Centennial Park area, Fire Station No. 7 which is 7.5 miles from the International Center, and Fire Station No. 11 which is funded through the Airport. The resources on the west side are not adequate for anything in the International Center; the first two engine companies responding to a fire at the International Center or the Centennial Park area would provide 14 firefighters. These are large industrial, commercial buildings; there are manufacturing entities on the west side that are as vital and as hazardous as those at the University. Chief Pederson further stated that he has made every attempt in six months to get the University to cooperate and participate in Fire Station No. 15; they have refused to help keep this fire station open.
Volunteer and reserve programs have been considered and the University has said that if the city wants the fire station open then they should keep it open. Chief Pederson stated that he talked with the Mayor and Mr. Haines and indicated that if he could not get additional resources then he recommended that the manpower be redeployed and No. 15 was the fire station recommended to be closed. Councilmember Davis stated that one of the agreements associated with the Emigration Canyon annexation was that the developers, Boyer Company, would pay for a fire station to be built. Ms. Davis asked if this idea has been discussed with Mr. Emanuel Floor since a new fire station was being promoted at the International Center.
She also asked what area a fire station at the International Center would cover. Chief Pederson stated that the coverage being talked about would be for the industrial center in Councilmember Mabey’s district; in the Capital Improvements Budget there is a proposal for a fire station in the industrial center, the westward side of Redwood Road. He further stated that getting the developers to pay is a very viable approach which should be considered. He stated that currently the only fire station proposed for the immediate future is at the International Center; there are three stations proposed in the Five Year Capital Improvements Program, one in Centennial Park and another one on North Redwood Road along with the station at the International Center.
Councilmember Davis asked if Mr. Floor was ever approached about the possibility of building a fire station at the International Center. Chief Pederson indicated that it was his understanding that some land would be donated and some would perhaps be traded. Councilmember Shearer stated that part of the property was designated as a gift but the rest is valued at almost $200,000 an acre for which the city has traded Learned and Deseret Avenues. Mr. Haines stated that Mr. Floor agreed to make a one-acre contribution (gift) which is the acreage requirement for a fire station.
Through negotiation a value exchange was determined on the International Center property and Deseret and Learned Avenues and a property exchange was discussed. He further stated that as far as the International Center participating fully or partially in construction of a fire station, their position has been that this was not a condition of development and therefore they are not obligated to participate in the construction of a station. The Mayor asked if the International Center site is the best one for the location of the fire station. Chief Pederson stated that from a fire station standpoint the location is ideal; it would be adequate for anything within a two-mile radius. He further commented about the need for a fire station further south in Councilmember Mabey’s district because of tremendous growth; currently Fire Station No. 14 has an access problem to that area because of the freeway. Chief Pederson stated that the future needs of the city and deploying existing resources to best cover the city have to be addressed.
Councilmember Fonnesbeck stated that the closure of No. 15 would not immediately solve the distance problem of west-side fire stations; it will only add more manpower. Chief Pederson stated that his main concern is getting manpower to the scene of the fire because it takes manpower and equipment to extinguish a fire. He stated that he is trying to look at the total picture as far as the best use of resources. Councilmember Mabey stated that interlocal agreements with other cities for fire service may have some affect on providing other apparatuses; he asked about the policy of never leaving a fire station vacant. Chief Pederson stated that there are some fire stations that are never left open and if the unit is out, manpower will be moved in.
He further stated that the interlocal agreements are an answer but not necessarily a solution; he stated that he questions the availability and training of other resources. It is a viable program but requires a lot of cross training. Councilmember Mabey asked about the problem of having to adapt equipment for use in other cities; Chief Pederson stated that the issues have been addressed and the cities can function within other jurisdictions without operational problems. Milt Hogensen, Utah Power & Light, addressed the Council about the proposed excavation ordinance. He stated that different utilities operate in different ways and this ordinance impacts Utah Power & Light differently than some of the other utilities involved.
Mr. Hogensen indicated that Utah Power & Light had several questions with the ordinance. First under excavation charges, there is a penalty for excavating between November and March; generally a utility does not excavate in the winter and unless there is an emergency situation or a customer needs service, this would be avoided. He further stated that given this attitude on the part of Utah Power & Light he wondered about this penalty fee. Mr. Hogensen stated the next question was how the fees were derived. He further stated that an informal agreement has been worked out with the Engineering Department which is a bookkeeping matter for UP&L; they wanted to get a monthly billing for fees rather than getting a permit every time excavation is done.
Mr. Hogensen stated that the section of the ordinance dealing with poles and anchors gives UP&L their major concern; they are involved with poles more than any other utility. He stated that if street lighting is approved by the Department of Transportation the utility has to pay $75 to install the light; since this is installed at the city’s request Mr. Hogensen wondered if this was a valid charge to the utility. Also, is it fair to charge the utility to replace car-hit poles. There is also maintenance involved with the lines and this could become a cost to the utility. Since the utility is trying to get its distribution system underground the cost on these excavation permits could slow the conversion program. Mr. Hogensen addressed the issue of asphalt restoration and stated that the utility prefers the city to do the restoration. He referred to the section of the ordinance dealing with emergency work stating that it was difficult for the utility to meet the deadline as outlined in that section.
Mr. Hogensen concluded by stating that the utility would appreciate the chance to discuss the ordinance and the issues raised. Councilmember Mabey suggested that the utilities meet with the city to discuss this proposed ordinance and the problems. The Mayor thought it would be a good idea to meet as quickly as possible so the Council could get the input before the budget is adopted. Jim Talebreza, Director of Public Works, addressed the Council to discuss some of the issues raised. He stated that the reason for higher winter rates is because it takes more manpower to check the work done in the winter; once the work is done it has to be checked again in the summer to make sure the cold patch has been replaced with a hot patch.
Mr. Talebreza stated that previously he talked with Mr. Hogensen and it was mentioned that the utility would not be charged for light poles installed at the city’s request. Mr. Talebreza circulated pictures of street work done by the utilities showing the shoddy job which was done; He stated that this is the reason the inspectors are needed. Jim Klein, a paramedic with Salt Lake City representing his own views, addressed the Council about a proposed paramedic service charge; he stated that he was opposed to this type of charge. Mr. Klein outlined several points relating to this concept. First, he thought there was a legal liability as well as a moral and ethical question involved. When there is a patient, the paramedic has a duty to care for the patient.
Therefore, would the patient be billed before or after care is given; often it is difficult to know if a person needs care just by looking at them, vital signs must be taken. If it is found that a person does not need care, would they be billed for this preliminary service. The second point Mr. Klein addressed was the proposal of charging a flat fee for service; the medical profession bills people on a basis of the work done. Mr. Klein stated that it would be a bureaucratic nightmare trying to collect the fees; in other cities charging for this service, the collection rate is 50%. He stated that some of the fire departments billing for service also transport patients, Salt Lake does not. Consequently a person would have to pay for paramedic service along with a transport fee. Mr. Klein continued by stating that people may delay calling the paramedics because of the bill. He also raised the question of who would be billed for second party calls or calls from the police department.
Councilmember Fonnesbeck asked if the County charges for their service. Mr. Klein stated that to the best of his knowledge they do not charge for paramedic service. Mr. Klein stated that it would be better to have a tax increase that could be deducted from income taxes rather than having a flat fee. The paramedic service is one of the few things that the government does that is a direct benefit to the health and welfare of the citizens. Mr. Klein stated that if the Council does assess the paramedic service charge he hoped that they did not make it a flat fee and that it would be reasonable enough so that people would not hesitate to call. Also one government agency will pay another for services rendered to people unable to pay, such as transients.
Councilmember Davis stated that it is not the intent of the Council to consider this type of fee for the 1982-83 budget. The Council wants the administration to submit a proposal to the Council outlining the pros and cons. Councilmember Shearer asked if there was any legal way to bill just non-city residents for this service; Walter Miller stated that this would have to be studied. She further stated that according to the figures she has, 1 1/2% of city residents will use the service next year. Hermoine Jex addressed the Council and stated that the community councils feel it is a poor policy to sell city property, one-time assets, to balance the budget.
The decision should be made based on if it is the right time to sell the property. Ms. Jex stated that some of the councils were concerned about specific parcels being sold. People in the northwest indicated concern about the sale of property in Davis County; they were told that this is the vicinity where a state prison satellite would be built and they wondered if this property was being set up for that site. Another group expressed concern about the sale of property by Riverside Park. The people in the south-central area thought it was foolish to close the fire station on 17th South and Main and move it four blocks to the Derk’s Field corner. Ms. Jex stated that the community councils wanted to submit reports for Council consideration.
Bernice Cook addressed the Council and stated that possibly the fire station at 17th South could be left and the money which was going to be used for the fire station by Derk’s Field could be used for a fire station at the International Center; by doing this, Fire Station No. 15 could remain open. Vic Duvano addressed the Council and stated that he was concerned about the closure of Fire Station No. 15. He felt that the new fire chief did not have enough experience with the area to make this decision, especially when veteran Salt Lake firefighters are saying that it should remain open. Mr. Duvano also addressed the issue about the beer tax and stated that if beer is taxed why not have a soda water tax.
Councilmember Parker moved and Councilmember Mabey seconded to close the public hearing regarding the budget for Fiscal Year 1982-83 and amendments to the budget for Fiscal Year 1981-82, which motion carried, all members voting aye, except Council Members Fonnesbeck and DePaulis who were absent when the vote was taken. Louis Miller, Finance Director for the Airport, addressed the Council and stated that two budget amendments have been made this year and in both amendments $1,000,000 was inadvertently taken out of Planning and Development money; this reduction was duplicated and the money needs to be put back in the budget. Therefore, the amendment to the Airport portion of the 1981-82 budget needs to be made. Jim Lewis, Chief Accountant from the Public Utilities Department, stated that the Public Utilities Department also needs their budget adjusted. There is a contract which has been bid for the line to be installed along Foothill and Parley’s Way and payments need to be made on the principal and interest on bonds.
Jim McGuire reviewed the amendment for the Council. He stated that the amendment would affect six separate funds. 1. In the insurance trust fund, it is requested that the budget be increased to add employees’ contributions and associated expenditures that were not included in the 1981-82 budget. 2. In the water and sewer utility fund, it is proposed that funds be taken out of reserves-for-improvements to cover bonding expenses associated with the recent bond issues. Also, take $829,000 out of cash reserves to fund the water line at Parley’s Way; these funds will be reimbursed out of the 1983 series bond. Also, $2,050,000 will be taken out of bond proceeds to be used for the McEntire Reservoir and for the Big Cottonwood Conduit.
3. In the Airport Authority fund, Lou Miller addressed the Council regarding those adjustments. 4. It is also proposed that the CDBG operating fund be reduced by $190,000 in contingency, transferring those funds to the capital project fund. Mr. McGuire stated that this did not pertain to projects, it is strictly a transfer of contingency. He further stated that the Council is just approving the transfer of contingency funds from one fund to another and not the use of those contingency funds.
Councilmember Whitehead moved and Councilmember Parker seconded to adopt Resolution 56 of 1982, amending the budget of Salt Lake City, Utah for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 1981 and ending June 30, 1982, which motion carried, all members voting aye, except Councilmember DePaulis who was absent when the vote was taken.
(B 82-4) (B 82-2) (O 82-35) (O 82-33) (O 82-3) (O 82-32, (O 82-36)
Fire Station No. 8
RE: The sale of land and improvements known as Fire Station No. 8.
A public hearing was held before the Salt Lake City Council to consider this sale. Albert Haines stated that the property has been declared surplus and has been vacant for some time; the property is up for public bid and the proceeds are anticipated to be used for fire station construction. Councilmember Davis stated that when the Salt Lake School District sells property they post a sign on the property; she suggested that the city should do the same to get more bids. The Mayor asked about the historic value of the building on this property; he stated that he would hate to see it torn down and perhaps the bidding should be tempered to take this into consideration. Councilmember Shearer stated that the bid has not been advertised as being restricted. The Mayor also commented that if the title is limited, it would cost the city money. There were no comments from the audience. Councilmember Shearer closed the public hearing without objection.
(W 82-4)
The meeting adjourned at 7:40 p.m.