Loading...
09/30/1974MINUTES ADJOURNED MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 30,..1974 COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL 7:30 P.M. Pledqe ' Roll Call PRESENT: John C. Brown, Myron Graham, T. Keith Gurnee, Jesse Norris and Mayor Kenneth E. Schwartz ABSENT:..None City Staff . PRESENT: J.H. Fitzpatrick, City.Clerk; R.D. Miller, Administrative Officer; D.F. Romero, City Engineer; A.J. Shaw, City Attorney;.Robert Strong, Planning Director 1. At this time the City Council held a public hearing on the appeal of Murray C. Warden on behalf of Mrs. Dorothy Bilodeau from an action of the Planning.Commission in filing a negative environmental impact declaration on City Plan No. 2 -72, S.S. 161, dated:August 20, 1974. A.J:,-Shaw, City Attorney, reviewed for the City Council the state law and the City's environmental impact procedures to determine whether or not proposed public and private projects would have a significant effect.on the environ- ment before the City approved or issued permits for.any.such projects. ' He stated that.significant effect as defined in the state law means, "a substantial adverse effect on the environment." The City Attorney continued that the City's procedure provides that the Planning Commission should, based upon a.preliminary report from.the staff, make a finding as to whether any proposed project might.have a significant effect upon the environment. If the.Planning Commission found that there would be no significant effect, the..Commission would.approve the filing by the City of a negative declaration, which was.defined in state law as follows: "Negative declaration means a statement by the lead agency briefly presenting the reasons that the project, although hot otherwise exempt, would not.have.a significant effect on the environment and therefore does not require an environmental impact report." In the Bilodeau matter, the Planning Commission did find that the City's proposed project for the widening of Johnson.Avenue.would not-have a sig- nificant effect on the environment. Therefore, the Commission approved and.the City filed a negative.decla.ration. As permitted by City procedures, Mrs. Bilodeau had now appealed the filing of the City's negative declaration, and the sole issue for the Council's consideration on the appeal was whether or not.the proposed project might ' have a significant effect upon the environment. A.J. Shaw then reviewed in detail Section 15081 of the state environmental impact.report guidelines, which.tried to help a public agency in determining whether or not.a project might have a significant effect upon the environment. Robert Strong, Planning Director, reviewed the steps taken by the.Plan- ring Commission on request of the Public Works department for a negative environmental impact report determination on the project to widen Johnson Avenue under City Plan No. 2 -72. He stated that, in his opinion, . the Planning Commission took proper steps in arriving at the negative E.I.R. declaration and complied with the provisions of both the City's and the state's guidelines on environmental impact reports. City Council Minutes September 30, 1974 Page 2 D.F. Romero, City Engineer, reviewed the plans for -the proposed widening of Johnson Avenue at the Bilodeau property, which included retaining wall, driveways, grading, etc. Upon question by the City Council, D.F. Romero, City Engineer, reviewed all the various proposals made by the City to ac- complish the widening of Johnson Avenue at the Bilodeau property. Mayor Schwartz declared the public hearing open Murray Warden, representing the property owner Dorothy Bilodeau, again ' reviewed the various alternatives to plan "D" preferred by the City,of San Luis Obispo for widening of Johnson Avenue. He felt that his primary objection at this time was to improper procedures used by the City in adopt- ing the E.I.R. negative declaration, Planning Commission Resolution 605 -74. He stated that in reviewing the negative declaration, the process followed in the adoption, and the requirements of the state of California, he did not believe that the negative declaration as adopted by the City was a valid document. Further, he did not believe that the Planning Commission had sufficient information presented to it to make a judgment as to the environ- mental impact of the proposed project. As a consequence, he believed that the referenced negative declaration was invalid and that the Planning Com- mission should nullify its August 20, 1974 action and reconsider the matter following proper and required procedures. In support-of his.request, he offered.the following considerations: The matter of the negative declaration did.not. appear .as a published agenda item of the Planning Commission. Therefore, no public input could be expected or placed in the record. 2. He did not feel that the San Luis Obispo Engineering Department had completed its preliminary design and engineering estimates as far as.the impact of earth-work, foliage destruction,.etc. in order to guide the Planning Commission in their determination. ' 3. As adopted, the negative declaration stated some mitigating measures that would be taken, but did not identify who was responsible to accomplish these measures for correction. He then reviewed in detail the.implication of the state guidelines, Section by Section as it applied to this particular problem. He .felt that in the present.instance, the negative declaration was not prepared.and made avail- able to the public until after the Planning Commission approved the project. He asked how, then, could there be an opportunity for public imput. Further, he cited that the Engineering Department had not completed its design, so how could the Planning Commission even know what was planned. On this basis, he requeste.d that.the City Council reject the negative decla- ration of the Planning Commission and that the matter be reconsidered following the state guidelines. He urged the City Council to reject the Planning Commission's negative decia- ration, comply with state law and process a correct and proper E.I.R. prepared by an independent expert who could present an objective report for the City's consideration of the proposed City street project. Donald.Smith.stated he felt the City should approve the appeal of Mrs. Bilodeau and file a complete E.I.R. on the project. Mayor Schwartz declared the public hearing closed. A.J. Shaw, City Attorney, again,stated he felt the City Planning Commission had substantially complied with the state guidelines and legally complied with the.filing of the negative declaration. He concluded the issue before the Council was whether or not the proposed project might have any significant effect on the environment. City Council Minutes September 30, 1974 Page 3 Robert Strong again reviewed Section 15083c with'the City Council of the state E.I.R. guidelines dealing with the findings for a negative E.I.R. declaration, and he assured the City Council that the Planning Commission had complied with the provisions of state law. The City Council then discussed with the staff steps taken in filing the negative declaration on this project. ' Councilman Graham stated that he was sorry that after all these years, Mr. Warden was using this E.I.R. negative declaration as a delaying tactic. Councilman Gurnee asked for engineering clarification on the condition of the sub -soil on the cut slopes on the Bilodeau property. D.F. Romero, City Engineer, reviewed the sub - structure conditions with the City Council. Councilman Gurnee felt that a proper and legal E.I.R. should be prepared for the City so that the Council could act with full knowledge of the impact the project would have on the environment. He continued that the City Council had not seen fit in the past to procure proper E.I.R.s on major City projects; for example; :the _,major Los Osos Valley water project. He urged the Council to order the preparation of an E.I.R. on this project.. Robert Strong, Planning Director, agreed that the City should have an E.I.R.s prepared on many City projects, but he felt that in this case, the action was properly taken in filing the negative declaration. Councilman Norris felt the City Council had spent a.lot of time on this street widening project and after study, adopted plan. "D ". .Therefore, he' felt the City should proceed with the widening in order to allow children going to school to walk in safety. He felt that the project would improve the environ- ment. He would support the Planning.Commission's action in filing the ' negative declaration,.but he would not oppose the preparation and filing of nd a proper a complete E.I.R. on this project. Mayor Schwartz felt the report by the City staff was adequate in his mind to meet the conditions of a negative E.I.R. declaration. He then reviewed the years of study, alternate plans and proposals by the City to widen thi's portion of Johnson Avenue.. He felt the City Council could:. 1. Support the Planning Commission!s action with proper procedures and deny the appeal.. 2. Reject the Planning Commission's report and order a complete environmental impact report, or I r 3. Ask the Planning Commission to advertise and hold public hearings on the negative declaration, and reconsider the environmental determinatlion. He felt i-t would be nice for the City to proceed with the project, but felt the City should comply with their own guidelines on E.I.R. state- ments and particularly felt that the City should receive public input on the project. Mayor-Schwartz felt the Council should ask thelPlanning Commission to hold a public hearing on the environmental determination. 1 On motion of Councilman Brown, seconded by Mayor Schwartz-that the City Council grant the appeal based upon the procedural defects of failure to place the item on the.Planning Commission agenda, (lacking proper notice to the public) and not as to the merits of the question as to whether or not an environmental impact report is required; also, refer-the-matter back to the Planning Commission for further hearings on the question of whether or not the proposed project may have a significant effect on the environment. City Council Minutes September 30,..1.974 Page 4 Motion carried on the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilman Brown, Mayor Schwartz, Councilmen Gurnee and Norris NOES: Councilman.Graham: ABSENT: None 2. Mayor Schwartz announced the following appointments to the Human Relations Commission: Mike Reynolds to June 30, 1977 Gail Sorenson to June 30, 1975 Mrs. Rose McKeen was appointed to the Tree Committee for the term expiring in June 30, 1975. Mayor Schwartz declared a recess at' 9:20 P.M. The meet.ing reconvened at 9:30.P..M. with a.11.councilmen present'. 3. The City Council.reconsidered the proposal for the reorganization . and staffing of various departments within the City (continued from September 16, 1974). R.D. Miller, Admi.nistrative Officer, again reviewed sketch "G" for the reorganization of the Community Development Department, Community Services Department, and the Social. Services Department. He.also. reviewed with the City Council the recent trip with: several.members of the City.Council to the City of Walnut Creek to review their organization, which was based on this type of breakdown. Councilman John Brown.reported on his trip to Walnut Creek, and while he found their organization comparable to the new proposed organization for the City of San Luis Obispo, he felt there were many dissimilarities which should be considered very carefully by the City Council-. Councilman Graham felt the Wa.Inut.Creek:plan seemed to work well. for them, and that their personnel seemed comfortable with their organization. David Williamson, Assistant Administrative Officer, again reviewed in detail his proposed reorganization of City departments as shown in sketch "G" and their responsibilities in the new organization. Councilman Norris again submitted for the Council's consideration a new proposal scheme "F ", which he felt would better serve the City, particularly in the fact that his proposal put the personnel, who design public projects to also supervise and inspect the projects. They would also be responsible for the maintenance and operation of the completed project. He felt that scheme "F" would better serve the citizens of the City in a more complete way than the Williamson' scheme "G ". He also felt that scheme. "F" made better 'use of existing City personnel. Councilman Brown felt that the best approach to reorganization would be on a phase basis or a step plan rather than to attempt to change all the City at one time. He:felt that combining engineering with utilities should be done first. He also felt implementing the Community Services Department should also be in step one, and that the Community Development operation should be implemented on a long -range basis and not all at one time'.' He felt that by doing this plan in phases, personnel would not be disturbed. He felt that during phased implementation, the Assistant Administrative Officer would act in the interim to coordinate utilit.ies,.development services and community services departments, similar to the proposed community development director, as head of the single department.proposed in Scheme "G ". He felt that.the Com- munity Development Department should:be.implemented slowly due to size of the department, trying to combine utilities, engineering, etc. City Council Minutes September '30,11974 Page 5 Councilman Graham was opposed to.the Brown plan due to the i.nability.to put in the one -stop counter.. He felt that without the reorganization they would continue to have uncoordinated City departments as presently existed in the City. Councilman Brown felt the one -.stop counter could work if the Assistant Admin- istrative Officer.would implement and.require cooperation within the departments. Councilman Norris felt the Brown plan would work and might be the best way to go, on a phase basis. Councilman Gurnee stated he was opposed.to both the Norr.i.s and the Brown plan as all you would have would be the present, ineffective organization with no opportunity to'better serve the people of San Luis Obispo. He felt the only solution to the-present organization would be to assign the departments along functional:.lines and,:not as the present line organization. Dave Williamson, Assistant Administrative Officer, spoke on the weak points of the Brown proposal and the Norris scheme 7 "....He, felt both proposals kept the ..same lack of.cooperation as presently existed in the,City departments with no coordinationion projects to the good of the people of San Luis Obispo. He then gave examples,of the lack of cooperation and coordination within the various department, such as the water••problems in Los Osos Valley, .which he..felt came from a lack of planning and engineering cooperation: Councilman Gurnee agreed that the City Council'must make a decision on`.reorga- nization tonight. 'He felt that some bugs might exist, but they must proceed. He favored scheme "G" with some minor modification. He .agreed that the City should proceed wi:th -.the organizations involving Community Services and Com- munity Development as.:soon as possible. -He. agreed with the.comments of Mrs. Hughes, that the.City.should have had a professional firm or individual submit `.a study on reorganization for the City. He'felt that over the past two years the Council had enough input to'make a decision.and should proceed. 1 He suggested that plani "G" should be amended to eliminate the A.A.O. from all three • major' depa. r•tments..and.have -:them.report directly to the Admi.nistrative Officer. He felt that the position:of Assistant Administrative Officer should be restudied to eliminate one level of.administration, which would up -grade the service directors in the various departments, and the Assistant Admini.s- -trati've Officer's position would.be unneeded;. although he-could be-kept to do work for the Administrative Officer on whatever he would like him to do. He stated he also objected to the reorganizational premise that no one in management level.or depar.tment'head level would ever be changed in status, reduced:in grade; -1a!d -off, or- whatever. He felt the- City-:shouId.attempt.to up= gradecnot only the personnel,.but the departments and service toithe City. Councilman Gurnee suggested that the City'Council adopt the reorganization plan with the.following� conditions: 1: Accept Plan "G"..•. 2. Change the position of Assistant Administrative Officer -from a:. position of line authority over departments to a staff position for.the Administrative Officer. - i .3. :Adopt a ten_week.time schedule forimandatory implementation of the reorganization. 4. Direct the City staf.f`.to consult with -the various commissions to. 1 devise methods of combining social service programming with the -.Recreation Commission; and.also ask-the Human.Relations-.Commissi.on licy statement- on'imp.lementation of their.portion to develop:a"po of the plan. _ :5: 'Establi -sh specific.and general.responsibilities for each position by ordinance or resolution of the C4,ty. - _. - 6. Re- assess the need for the Assistant Administrative.0•fficer position in six -months.after the'.new:organization has been in operation. City Council Minutes September 30, 1974 Page 6 7. Study the need for additional employee assistance for departments. -due to siphoning off of the 'various employees as part of the reorganization. 8. Appoint a Council subcommittee to: A.. Define positions and develop responsibilities and tasks of the chief Administrative Officer and the administrative sphere.' B. Re- evaluate the management posture of the City, studying Council, manager, and government structure. C.: Develop a.program for department and upper leve'I employee; evaluations whereby departments.and individuals would be' regularly monitored for performance, productivity, efficiency, and effectiveness. Councilman..Norris.suggested that in.light of the plans before the Council, the Council should let public discussion in on these proposals. Councilman Graham stated'he felt at this time he would support plan. "G" as proposed with further.study.of the human.resources.plan. Dave Williamson felt that he looked at his position as that of a coordinator within the various departments'of the Ci.ty. He felt hiss position was that of an assistant to Mr. Richard D. Miller, Administrative Officer. Mayor Schwartz stated he studied all the proposals for reorganization of the City departments. He felt that for a long.time a reorganization along functional lines was needed for-the City. He felt that over the:.yea,rs, ti.me and time again the Council had failed at.public hearings because of lack "of cooperation between the various' City departments; engineering, planning, and /or maintenance-and operation; to bring forth the right information for the Council to make:a decision. He felt the new organization, if.anything; should meet the needs of'not only work'in the public sector but also in private development w.ithout:long delays in separate departments getting approvals of the various ordinance considerations. He was aware that departments did not now cooperate on public or private development, which was a detriment -to both the public and private sector. He then presented his concept of what the Community Services and Community Development Departments would operate as proposed in scheme "G ". He also . felt that the :Assistant Administrative Officer would really be an assistant to the Administrative Officer and help operate the entire City with authority over all departments, and not limited to the Community Services or Develop= ment area. Finally, if the Council did not like the new organization being developed, then somewhere along the line the Council could change to another plan or system. He concluded that something had to be done, the City.was just not operating properly under the present organization and had not for a number of years. Councilman Brown reminded the City Council that when they hired.the Assistant Administrative Officer, his job was to coordinate and operate the Community Development Department of the City and not to become another Administrative Officer running the entire City. Mayor Schwartz opened the meeting to public input: Warren Dolezal;.developer,.spoke in support of keeping the engineering function separate from the general administration'or operation. He felt that utilities and engineering should be combined. He also.agreed with Councilman Brown that this reorganization should be done on a step -by -step basis, rather than all at one time.' He'was afraid that the present City proposal would just further separate the workers from;the professionals,:and he .f.elt,that Community Development would be improved with engineering and utilities staying in the Com- munity Services area and.not in. the ' planning area. He concluded that design, maintenance and operation of public-works should be under one department head or manager and not spread among two departments. 1 1 `1 " City Council Minutes September: 3O",c 1974 Page 7 Bob Garing`,,1Civ1l:Engineer, opposed:the p:lacement:of-an : engineering.function under anon- professional engineer; a planner ,:and`he -felt the-Administrative Officer should.be.in.charge and responsible for all departments.of the.City without:intermediary staff.betweenl, departments.-; He felt-that engineering. and design should report directly to the-Administrative Officer. Robert Williams; civil engineer,'fel.t that the engineering service or function should not be placed under a planner or community development function.- ' Engineering; design „s'upervision,.'inspection and maintenance and operation should be under a professional engineer and not a planner.. He too supported scheme "F” of Councilman Norris as ,a compromise between the placing of-plan- ning in charge of the City operation and staffing with a competent development operation and still .keep.- engineering,`:design, supervision,-,'inspection,-and maintenance and operation under a competent, professional director.: 'Fred Strong, CEBES- agreed with-Counci-Iman:Gurnee's concept'to re.l'ieve the Assistant Admi-nistrative :Officer of the community development and community services area and :let him be a general: assistant:to-the'Administrative O'fficer'.' -He:also. felt the Council should be aware of-the different concepts of the planning and engineering where there is practical work being done, and he fe I t there wou I d a I ways be conf l-i cti between p l anni ng- and ' eng i neer i ng:. - He- fe I t the one -stop counter could be implemented without reorganization or tearing the entire City. apart. Don Smith supported plan "G" with the amendment by Councilman:Gurnee by dropping the Assistant Administrative Officer. Fred Schott, civil engineer, felt that placing the engineer under Community Development was not .a correct.:a'pp' roach-, as-you wound have:a, person mak'.ing engineering decisions who d-id:not have the expertise or training and-who would be unable to assume the responsibilities of the job if problems arise. [.He also felt that the proper.function of community services should be under a professional engineer. He' aIso.di'sagreed with the: concept o:f the Almin.i"s - trative Officer that because six cities had adopted the new organization, the City of San Luis Obispo shoul,d also do,it:. He-felt that if the City -had problems, then; the,City- Council' should direct' the, Admin.istrative Officer to correct the problem and see that departments work together for the .goodness. of the City and its citizens, and not throw out or tear down a good organization. Arnold Volny did not agree with the complete reorganization of the City in order to initiate a one =stop counter for_ development within the City. He felt that it should be the duty of the staff to work together to enforce the City regulations and to implement a one' -stop . counter -:now if th.is was what the City Council desired. 0 Mayor Schwartz closed public input. Counci [man Gurnee moved: that the City Counci -l:j adopt -p Ian-`G": as: amended: :and implement the'Community'Service and Community Development Departments immedi- ately; that the Assistant' 'Administrative;Officer'be relieved from 11ne•respon- sibility in Community Development and be assigned to the Administrative Officer as. an assi'stant;'and that: plan "G` be 'implemented in--its entirety in ten weeks. Motion I-ost - for''lack of a second.. - Councilman Brown felt that the public input justified his suggestion to do the reorganization in a:pubIid meeting and - not:to do -it at. one. time with :the Assistant - :Administrative Officer n i- direct supervision of Commun.i:ty:Develop- ment and Community Services Departments. He felt that engineering, design',T inspection and supervision should be.combined'with the water and sewer operation in an" engineering' sect .Ion.: Councilman Graham ;stated that-he was opposed to relieving'the:Assistant Admin- istrative Officer from I i ne responsibility. He felt that when ,Mr.1 W i I I.i arison was hired, he was to coordinate the Community Development and Community Services Departments, and he`did not want him to be doing special studies -:.for the Administrative Officer or have no responsibilities at all. He felt he should do what'he was' - hired to do and!mo less':' 0 City' CounciI Minutes September 30, 1.974 Page 8 Councilman Norris felt there was very little support from the.public -for the Williamson plan V.'- He felt there was some support'for his proposal, plan "F ", and -also public support for the Brown plan for the Community Development and Community Services and the engineering and utilities section;.therefore, he supported plan "F" on a phase basis. Mayor Schwartz again reviewed for the Council and staff the comments from the public.regarding the various plans for.reorganization. He. stated he would - support plan "G" as presented. He would oppose a.time limit for implementation of the reorganization. He felt the reorganization would work, and he hoped the ' City staff would cooperate in this implementation. On motion of Councilman Gurnee, seconded by Mayor Schwartz that the City Council adopt plan "G" and implement the Community.Service and Community Development Departments immediately; that the Assistant Administrative Officer be relieved from responsibilities in the Community Development and Community Services area and be assigned to the Administrative Officer as'an assistant;. and; no acfion be taken on the Human Services Department at this time; and that this be. referred to staff and the Human Relations Commission for further refinement. Motion carried on the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilman Gurnee, Mayor Schwartz, and'Councilman Graham NOES: Councilmen Brown and Norris" ABSENT: None Councilman Brown felt that this proposal .would bring many problems to the City, was being implemented too rapidly without a lot of thought and preparation. Councilman Norris felt that the City was not ready for this type of organization, was being implemented too rapidly without full thought. On motion of Counc.ilman.Gurnee, seconded by Councilman Graham the staff was directed to draw up specifications for each job in each department within the City organization. Motion carried on the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmen Gurnee and Graham and Mayor Schwartz NOES: Counciamen Brown and Norris ABSENT: None 4. Request from Joanne Fenton, Women's Resource Center, for permission to use Mission Plaza Park on October 26, .1974 from 8:30,A.M. to 6:00 P.M., with permission.to sell wine was approved on motion of Councilman'Brown, seconded'by Councilman Gurnee. Motion carried, all ayes. 5. Memorandum from Charles Dil'Is, acting Chairman, Citizens'. Advisory Committee, requesting that the City Council take steps to appoint new members to the Citizens' Advisory Committee. On motion of Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Gurnee the City Clerk was authorized to advertise for applicants for the Citizens' Advisory Com -. mittee. 6. On motion of Councilman Brown, seonded by Councilman Gurnee the ' following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 2672 (1974 Series), a resolution increasing the 1974/75 budget (adding.account 50 -12- 5062 - 705.,. Mission: Plaza; and 01A -01'- 2003 -035, Newsletter). Passed and adopted on.the following roll call-vote: AYES: Councilmen Brown,:Graham, Gurnee, Norris and Mayor Schwartz 1 1 1 :.City;Council :Minutes September 30, 1974 Page 9 NOES: None ABSENT: None 7. On motion of Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Gurnee the following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 2673 (1974 Series), a resolution adjusting the 1974/75 budget (capital outlay water project and revenue sharing accounts). ._ Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmen Brown, Gurnee, Graham, Norris and Mayor Schwartz NOES:! None ABSENT: None -:.. 9. Memorandum from the.Waterways Planninq.Board recommendi -ng Council approval of application no. 080, request of Ray Bunnell to construct waterway improvement at Field & Cox Build.ing;-.84 Santa.: Rosa .Street:; approved'.by_ the Waterways Planning Board. Also, application no. 081, request.of. Dean - Robinson for permission to conduct grading work along the bank of Stenner Creek down- stream from the Santa Rosa Street bridge, approved by the Waterways Planning Board. On motion of Councilman Gurnee, seconded by Councilman Brown the recommendation of the Waterways.Planning Board was accepted and the work was authorized to proceed. B -1 The City Clerk reported on the following bids received for the following listed equipment: Item No. 1 One Turf Tractor TORO PACIFIC DIST. 16212 S. Broadway no bid Gardena B. Hayman Co. Inc. 9525 Sorensen Ave. $4,915.00 Santa Fe Springs H.V. Carter Co. Inc. 1700 E. 14th St. $6,456.00 Oakland West Point Industries, Inc. 1320 W. 16th St. no bid Long Beach DEVIATIONS Toro Pacific Distributing Delivery - up to 30 days A.R.O. Item No. 2 One 5 gang Fairway Mower $2,511.50 $2,750.00 $3,220.00 no bid On motion of Councilman Graham, seconded by Councilman Brown that the low bids B. Hayman Company on item 1 for $4,915.00 and Toro Pacific Distributors on item 2 for $2,511.50 be accepted. Motion carried, all ayes. On motion of Councilman Graham, seconded by Councilman Brown the following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 2674, a resolution increasing the 1974/75 budget (increasing golf course Capital Outlay - Utility Tax - by $1,009.90). City Council Minutes September 30, 1974 Page 10 Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmen Graham, Brown, Gurnee, Norris and Mayor Schwartz NOES'. None--, - ..:..._ .... ABSENT: None Councilman Norris moved that.thefineeting adjourn.. Motion ilost.for lack-of a second. After discussion by the City Council, it was moved by Councilman Gurnee, seconded by Councilman Graham that the City Council extend the.:meeting of September 30, 1974 after 12:00 P.M. for an Executive Session. Motion carried, Councilman Norris voting no. The :City Council then adjourned tolExecutive Session..- The meeting adjourned:on mot•ion.of Councilman: Graham, seconded:by Council man•:Brown:to 8:00.P.M. Tuesday; October 1;.1974. APPROVED: December 2, 1974 patrick� City.Clerk 1 1