HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/12/1973
MINUTES
July 12, 1973
The two hundred and seventh regular meeting of the Wheat Ridge City
Council was called to order at 6 35 p.m. at 7390 West 38 Avenue by
Mayor Albert E Anderson.
Aldermen attending were
Howard, Calvin Hulsey and
later
Dr. Paul Abramson, Mary Jo Cavarra, Robert
Ray Pepe. Alderman Joseph Donaldson arrived
Also attending were Mayor Anderson, City Clerk Louise Turner, City
Attorney Maurice Fox, staff personnel and approximately 100 interested
citizens.
Mayor Anderson announced that rezoning Cases WZ-73-12 and WZ-73-13
would not be heard because improper posting had occurred and the
hearing dates were determined to be August 9, 1973 for Case WZ-73-13
and August 23, 1973 for WZ-73-12.
Motion by Alderman Hulsey "I move we discontinue reading the balance
of the Minutes and approve them as written." Motion was seconded by
Alderman Abramson and passed 4-1 Alderman Howard voted "nay."
The continuation of a Public Hearing was held on a 3-way liquor license
for Happy Traveler West Inc. dba Happy Traveler at 4400 Ward Road.
Officers of the corporation - Virle Burd, President, Eugene Padon, Vice-
President, and T.J. Musselwhite, Secretary-Treasurer were present and
were represented by Benjamin Loye.
Mr. Loye presented Applicant's Exhibit No.6, a map with elevations
and petitions circulated by Mr. Padon and Mrs. Musselwhite with 146
names signed. They had contacted all but 11 homes within the mile
radius. No one other than the applicants and attorney appeared in
favor and no one appeared in opposition.
Complete proceedings were recorded by Court Reporter Ruth Carsh.
Motion by Alderman Abramson "I move that the matter of a 3-way liquor
license for Happy Traveler at 4400 Ward Road be tabled for one week for
a decision during the normal course of the meeting." Motion was sec-
onded by Alderman Cavarra and passed 6-0.
Public Hearing was held on the request for a 3-way liquor license for
Ambassador Seventy Development Corporation dba Tenstar Motor Hotel
at 12150 West 44 Avenue.
Report of an impartial city investigation by Edward Sullivan indicated
that out of 101 persons contacted, 65 signed in favor, 22 signed against,
11 had no opinion and 3 didn't care to sign Mr. Sullivan's map, report
and petitions were admitted as City'S Exhibits 1,2,3 and 4.
Officers of the applicant corporation - Emil Gimeno, President, Simon E.
Horne, Vice-President, Max Crum, Secretary and Art Lujan, Treasurer were
present and were represented by Benjamin Loye, attorney of 3785 Marshall.
Others present were Loyd Crum, Assistant Manager and Leo J. Mershon who
will be involved as will Mr. Gimeno in the construction of tile motel.
A roll of plans was submitted as Applicant's Exhibit A, Golf 0 Mat brochures
were marked Applicant's Exhibit B & C. Petitions circulated and presented
by David Hoke of Market Research Associates containing 297 signatures in
favor of the application were marked Exhibit D. It was noted that a green
circle on Exhibit 1 (city's) had been added by Alderman Howard.
No one else appeared either in favor or in opposition.
Complete proceedings were recorded by Court Reporter Ruth Carsh.
MINUTES - Continued - July 12, 1973
-2-
Motion by Alderman Howard "I move the matter of a 3-way license for
Ambassador Seventy Development Co~poration be taken under advisement
with a decision to be rendered next week." Motion was seconded by
Alderman Donaldson and passed 6-0.
A Public Hearinq was heard for a 3-way liquor license at Wheat Ridqe
Lanes at 6595 West 38 Avenue.
Owner and applicant Richard B. Hanscom was present and was represented
by Michael Villano, attorney from 4315 Wadsworth. Wheat Ridge Lanes
presently has a 3.2% beer on premises license, which would be surrendered
upon the granting of a liquor license.
Edward Sullivan reported that the City's impartial investigation indicated
that out of a hundred people contacted 52 signed in favor, 39 signed
against, 5 had no opinion and 4 didn't sign. The map ShOWing the mile
radius was labeled City's Exhibit No.1 and report and petitions submitted
by Mr Sullivan were Marked Exhibit No.2.
Mr. Villano submitted a map showing the neighborhood which was marked
Applicant's Exhibit A, petitions with 501 names in favor circulated by
Bonner Templeton were marked Exhibit B, petitions circulated by Da~id
Hoke with 326 signatures was marked Exhibit C, and petitions with 288
signatures in favor circulated within the bowling alley by Mr. Hanscom
was marked Exhibit D.
Appearing in favor in addition to the applicant were Michael Lankdon
of 3705 Marshall, Doris Bells of 3360 South Ivy Way, Denver, and Dennis
Philkowski of 4615 Webster.
No one else appeared in favor or in opposition
were recorded by Court Reporter Ruth Carsh.
Complete proceedings
Motion by Alderman Donaldson "I move the 3-way liquor license for
Wheat Ridge Lanes be tabled one week for decision." Motion was seconded
by Alderman Howard and passed 6-0
A request for a Temporary (one day only) Liquor License-Permit for the
Federation of German American Societies of Colorado was heard. Applicants
requested a permit to allow them to dispense 6% beer at their annual
picnic which will take place in Prospect Park on July 22, 1973.
Appearing on behalf of the Federation were Gerda Van der Straeton, secretary
and Claus Sternberg, past president.
Motion by Alderman Abramson "I move that a one day special permit for
the Federation of German American Societies to dispense 6% beer in Prospect
Park on July 22, 1973 and that a $1 DO fee be assessed." Motion was
seconded by Alderman Donaldson and passed 6-0.
A Public Hearing for consideration of amending the Land Use Plan from
Sheridan to Harlan Street and 26 Avenue to 29 Avenue was opened. Approx-
imately 75 citizens were present, and after numerous questions and consid-
erable discussion, it was determined by City Attorney Fox that
1 To be considered was amending the Land Use Plan portion of the
Comprehensive Plan in the area under consideration
2. That amending the Land Use Plan could include changing the zoning
on properties at the same time and that that would be done to some properties
in this case if the proposal were to be approved.
3 That the action was initiated by the City, so there was no
application for zoning change.
4. That the Land Use Plan can only be amended by the Planning Commission,
but that action by the Planning Commission is subject to approval of the
Ci ty Council.
5. That approval or disapproval of the Planning Commission's Resolution
would be the action to be taken by the Council.
6 That if proposal as presented is approved, it would include changing
the zoning of some who did not want their zoning changes.
MINUTES - Continued - July 12, 1973
-3-
7. That it was proper for the City to make a determination whether
a change was requested by 54% of the people, or not requested at all,
that the City has the right to apply reBsonBble regulations involving land
8. That this request was initiated by a portion of the residents
and is in part an attempt to alleviate non-conformity.
9. That such an attempt involving the entire City was considered
earlier this year, and the Planning Commission had recommended it be
done on a partial basis. Some of these comments were in answer to
questions from Aldermen Abramson, Howard and Pepe.
Glen Taylor, acting head of the Planning Department present a map showing
the area to be considered, the zoning proposed, the properties whose owners
favored the proposal and those opposed. He stated
1. The Mass Rezoning was a request by the residents of the area
bordered by 26 Avenue on the south, 29 Avenue on the north, Sheridan on
the east, and Harlan Street on the west, lying within the city limits
of Wheat Ridge.
2 The Planning Commission, after public hearing, wishes to amend
the Land Use Plan and the zoning of this area. The reason for the request
is to preserve a lower density in the neighborhoods, and reflect present
usage. It will be an upgrade of zoning.
3. Petitions signed by the residents show the following Of the
total 223 property owners in the area, 122 or 54.7% were for the proposed
rezoning, 32 or 14.35% were against it, and 69, or 3D 94% did not wish
to register an opinion.
Citizens speaking in favor of the proposal were
Al Kirby of 2876 Gray Street, spokesman for 200 people who had petitioned
for the change who stated
1. Most people had 50 foot lots which do not conform to the present
zoning district and consequently these people A. cannot improve their pro-
perty B. cannot remodel. C. Could not rebuild if disaster struck.
2. They do not want any more apartments because the area is overloaded
and this puts a strain on the water and sewer facilities as well as the streets.
3. A change from Residential-Three to Residential-one-C would retain
single family homes which would then conform and protect the integrity of
the community.
4. Commercially zoned areas should not be changed.
5. Present lot sizes conformed to the code 20 years ago but it had
been changed.
6. Though some might be affected adversely, the majority would benefit
and wmld conform.
Daniel Harrington of 2844 Depew who said
1. He lived in the heart of the area.
2. Wheat Ridge was created to preserve the residential community
not to have the blight of high density
3. The proposal would restrain this and allow the present use to
continue.
4. That it was not true that land values would be lowered.
5. That the term "obsolescense by invasion" applied to what is happening
to the area today.
6. That this is brought about by those "who want to live off the land"
as opposed to those who want to "live on the land."
7. The original use of the entire area was single family homes until
the county rezoned the south side of 29 Avenue to commercial a few years ago.
8 That his home had 125 foot frontage.
9 That there had been a change in the character of Residential-Three.
10. That he was asking that the original use be retained.
Mrs. Dias Schaefer of 2610 Benton who said
1. Her house had been for sale for five weeks
z. She has been unable to sell because of proximity of apartments
even though the appraised valuation on here home is comparable to other areas.
3 Apartments are in Edgewater immediately south of her property
and had been begun a month after she bought.
4. The requested change can't help her, but might help others from
having her problem.
MINUTES - Continued - July 12, 1973
-4-
5. Her only offer has been from the people who owned the apartments.
She asked if the proposal did not go through, could not anyone move
houses off and put up "high rises"~ She was advised to ask this question
of the Planning Department.
Richard Idler of 2659 Gray Street who said
1 He favored the proposal.
2. That the area was quiet prior to the building of apartments be-
hind him Now, it is characterized by speeders and noise and that there
is no buffer, if the proposal goes through his property would help
buffer others to the east
A show of hands indicated approximately 40 persons present in favor and
17 present opposed to the proposal
Speakinq in Opposition were
William Ross, attorney who said he represented 91 people who opposed the
proposal. He presented petitions to Council. He was asked by Alderman
Pepe to give the names of those on the petitions who resided in the area.
The list of names given is attached to the Minutes.
Mr. Ross stated
1 That the net effect if the proposal were accepted, would be that
lots would be rezoned, and that this was indeed a rezoning
2. That Residential-Three lots would become Residential-one-C
3. That people whom he represented were not of special interests or
commercial groups, but were concerned homeowners and long term residents.
4. That those he represented, the 91 names on the petitions were
shown in red on a map which he put on display
5. That under the law, owners of 20% of the land had a right to
file a protest and that the land owned by these people comprised 35%
of the area.
6. That these people owned 85o,000~uare feet out of a total of 2 4 million
and were in fact filing a legal protest.
7. That this proposal was unusual in that it proposed to reduce
intensity and most proposals were an attempt to increase intensity.
8. That the burden of proof was on the applicant to show that the
present zoning was improper and that the proposed zoning change was required
for the public health, safety and welfare or that conditions had changed.
9. That no case was presented by the City
10. Th~ no evidence had been given to show the present zoning was
improper.
11. There had been no professional help from the Planning Department
staff, and that a Denver Post article had pointed out a shortage of
personnel in the Planning Department.
12. That Fenton Street is a barrier in that west of Fenton homes were
well maintained and east of it was a "diferent story II
13 That owners might sell one more time and after that older homes
in the area would be "unmarketable "
14. It would be for the "good of the City to leave it the way it is."
15 A 50 foot lot can't be sold.
16 The way the matter had been brought up would not stand judicial
review.
17. That such action would be arbitrary, capricious and confiscatory
and amount to taking property without due process of law.
18. That the City has two choices 1. To turn down the proposal.
2 To limit it to the area west of Fenton.
19 That if approved as rezoned the City will have to create an additional
Board of Adjustment to take care of those who rent basements, and those who
will ask for Residential-Three zoning.
20. Residential-Three is the best use of 50 foot lots. Owners won't
be able to sell them as Residential-One-C.
21. That the best cared for properties east of Fenton Street are
apartment properties.
22. That letters went to all property owners east of Fenton Street.
23. That 50 foot lots are marketable only if they can be joined.
MINUTES - Continued - July 12, 1973
-5-
.from
24. In answer to a questlon~~lderman Cavarra, he said that his
statement of no professional input was not based solely on a Denver
Post article which quoted a Planning Department Technician but also
on fact that there had been no presentation at the Planning Commission
Meeting, and no input from the staff or department at this level, only
a fact sheet from Mr. Taylor of Public Works.
It was pointed out by member of Council that the map had been made
partly by Mr. Walker, former Director of Planning, and Robert Barr,
former Current Planner.
Henry Nieto, attorney representing the Hart Estate said
1. This was an emotional issue.
2. That the plan reflected the request of a group of citizens
and what they wanted.
3. That most requesting it lived west of Fenton Street.
4. That there was a basic difference in character east of Fenton
and west of Fenton.
5 That Council be asked to drive through the area.
6. That he was in sympathy with those west of Fenton, but that the
area east of Fenton was different and was not well maintained.
7. That Residential-Three was a good zoning east of Fenton, and
if developed as such would be an upgrading.
8. Fifty foot lots were not marketable and not developable.
9. A developer could put in high quality, high density and cost
of destruction was zero , and in such a case land was redeemable price-
wise, otherwise there was no way for it to go but down.
10. High density development would mean traffic flow to it from
Denver, not through it. Most apartment dwellers worked in Denver.
11. R-1 Schools have said many times that apartments generated
fewer children than single family homes, not more.
12. That effect on and compatability with the entire community must
be considered. That flux in the Planning Department has been admitted.
13. That both he and Mr Ross had been present at the Planning
Commission meeting
City Attorney Fox clarified that the two attorneys had been present and
made some comments at the time of the Planning Department decision, but
had not made a presentation as this one tonight, because they had not
been retained until after the time of the Planning Commission hearing.
In answer to a question from Alderman Abramson pertaining to a protest
from more than 20% of the people, City Attorney Fox stated this was not
a zoning and the 20% law did not apply.
George Henckel of 5645 West 27 Avenue who said
1. That he had lived there 51 years and it had always been Residential-
Three.
2. That apartments had been built in front of and behind him.
3. That he had lost his water rights
4. That the Planning Department "just scratched property that is
devaluated already."
5. If property is Residential-Three, it should stay Residential-Three.
6. That these people didn't want to have apartments, but that none
of them had appeared to help him when he tried to fight it with the county.
7. That the apartments were here now, and surrounded him and he
wanted to build in conformity to what is around him and would not be
allowed to do so.
8. That apartments are needed for young people who can't afford
homes
9. That mass transportation is needed and there would be people here
to support it.
Jim Homberqer of 5509 West 26 Avenue who stated
1. He had known the zoning on his property was Residential-Three when
he bought it.
2. He had for years intended to build a double and now would not be able
to.
3. That he was surrounded by apartments, a nursing home, a car wash
and didn't see what difference it would make.
MINUTES - Continued - July 12, 1973
-6-
Mr Kirby summarized that if the proposal is not passed residents will
be surrounded by apartments
Motion by Alderman Donaldson "I move that consideration of the proposed
change in the Land Use Plan and rezoning be taken under advisement for
one week and a decision be rendered on it one week from tonight."
Motion was seconded by Alderman Abramson and passed 6-0
Ordinance No. 135 was introduced by Alderman Donaldson and read.
Motion by Alderman Abramson "I move that Ordinance No. 135 pertaining
to a use tax be adopted on first reading and be published and posted."
Motion was seconded by Alderman Donaldson and passed 5-0.
Ordinance No 134 amending Ordinance No. 117 by providing pay adjustments
was brought up for second consideration. A series of possible Motions
for amendments was presented by Walter Johnson, Staff Administrator.
The title of Ordinance No. 134 was read
Motion by Alderman Abramson "I move that the title of Ordinance No. 134
having been read, the Clerk dispense with reading the balance of the
Ordinance" Motion was seconded by Alderman Pepe and passed 6-0.
Motion by Alderman Howard "I move we go into an Executive Session "
Motion was seconded by Alderman Cavarra and voted tied 3-3 with negative
votes from Aldermen Hulsey, Pepe nnd Abramson. Mayor Anderson voted
"nay" to break the tie and defeat the Motion.
Motion by Alderman Abramson "I move that in Section 3, Ordinance
reenacting clause that Grade 33 be changed to Grade 35 - $869 - at
per hour." Motion was seconded by Alderman Hulsey and passed 5-1.
134,
$5.01
Howard"vote~
nay.
"I move that in Section 3, Ordinance 134,
Grade 42 'City Engineer' be changed to
seconded by Alderman Hulsey and passed 6-0.
Motion by Alderman Cavarra
reenacting clause that under
Chief Engineer" Motion was
Motion by Alderman Donaldson "I move that in Section 3, reenacting
clause that the following steps be shown Detective/Corporal $935 (A) _
$982 (B), Sergeant $1007 (A) - $1058 (B), Lieutenant $1084 (A) _ $1139 (B)."
Motion was seconded by Alderman Cavarra and passed 6-0.
Motion by Alderman Abramson "I move that Section 4, Ordinance 134, adding
clause, Section 8 of Ordinance 117, be renumbered Section 5 and the following
added as Section 4 Section 4 Amending Clause, Section 5, Director and
Special Staff Pay. Section 5 of Ordinance 117 is hereby amended by deleting
"$1350" from Director of Planning and substituting $1386, by deleting
"$1400" Director of Public Works, and substituting $1470, by deleting
"$1050" Chief Building Inspector and substituting $1168, by deleting
"$610" City Clerk and substituting $701, and by deleting '~466" City
Treasurer and substituting $536" Motion was seconded by Alderman Cavarra.
Alderman Howard stated he would vote against the Motion as presented
because he opposed raising the salary of the City Clerk to $701 and
the salary of the City Treasurer to $536, that he would like to amend
the Motion with 2 Motiore and moved "To amend the Motion by deleting
$701 for the City Clerk" Motion to amend was seconded by Alderman Pepe
and was defeated 4-2. Aldermen Abramson, Cavarra, Hulsey and Donaldson
voted "nay."
Question was called on Motion as stated by Alderman Abramson and Motion
passed 4-2. Aldermen Howard and Pepe voted "nay."
Motion by Alderman Abramson "I move that renumbered Section 5, Ordinance
134, effective date be deleted and the following substituted as Section 5
'Section 6. Emergency Clause. The provisions of this Ordinance are
necessary for the immediate preservation of the public health or safety
for the following reasons 1 To establish a just pay schedule for employees
2 To establish a pay grade for a new position of Chief of Engineering
which has been found essential for the orderly development of the city.
MINUTES - Continued - July 12, 1973
-7-
I further move that Section 6, Validity clause, be renumbered Section 8
and a new Section 7 be inserted as follows Section 7. Effective Date.
This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force five (5) days following
publication following final passage with adjustment to be made as of
August 1, providing it shall have been passed by an affirmative vote
of three-fourths (3/4) of the members of the City Council, otherwise
said Ordinance shall take effect thirty (3D) days after publication
following final passage." Motion was seconded by Alderman Donaldson.
Motion passed 6-0
Motion by Alderman Pepe "I move we go into an Executive Session."
Motion was seconded by Alderman Cavarra and was defeated 4-2.
Aldermen Abramson, Donaldson, Howard and Hulsey voted "nay."
Motion by Alderman Pepe "I move that Ordinance No 134 (amending
Ordinance No. 117 by making pay adjustments) be adopted as amended and
be ordered published and posted." Motion was seconded by Alderman
Donaldson and passed 5-1. Alderman How3rd voted "nay."
Motion by Alderman Abramson "I move that pay for Chief of Police be
raised from $1220 to $1400, effective August 1, 1973." Motion was
seconded by Alderman Cavarra and passed 6-0
Motion by Alderman Hulsey "I move that the monthly pay for the Director
of Public Works be raised from $1220 to $1400, effective August 1, 1973."
Motion was seconded by Alderman Abramson and passed 6-0
Motion by Alderman Hulsey "I move that the monthly pay for the
and Recreation Director be raised from $1000 to $1170, effective
1973." Motion was seconded by Alderman Cavarra and passed 4-2
Howard and Pepe voted "nay."
Parks
August 1,
Aldermen
Motion by Alderman Pepe
Inspector be raised from
was seconded by Alderman
voted "nay."
"I move that monthly pay
$1030 to $1168, effective
Donaldson and passed 5-1.
for the Chief Building
August 1, 1973" Motion
Alderman Abramson
Motion by Alderman Cavarra "I mOV8 that the monthly pay for the Staff
Administrator be raised from $778 to $885, effective August 1, 1973 "
Motion was seconded by Alderman Donaldson.
Alderman Pepe stated he would vote "nay" because this was not fair pay
for the Staff Administrator. Vote was called and Motion tied 3-3 with
Aldermen Abramson, Pepe and Howard voting "nay." Mayor Anderson voted
"nay" breaking the tie to defeat the Motion
Motion by Alderman Pepe "I move that monthly pay for Staff Administrator
be raised from $778 to $925, effective August 1, 1973." Motion was seconded
by Alderman Howard and passed 5-1. Alderman Hulsey voted "nay."
Motion by Alderman Abramson "I move that the City Treasurer prepare
budget amendments as required to support Ordinance No. 134 and these
Motions" Motion was seconded by Alderman Howard and passed 6-0.
Motion by Alderman Abramson "I move that the 38 Avenue Paving
be scrapped and the funds be rechanneled into other projects."
was seconded by Alderman Donaldson.
Project
Motion
Alderman Abramson explained that many other areas need work done badly,
and could benefit instead of putting $200,000.00 into 38 Avenue
Alderman Pepe asked Glen Taylor if it were possible for him to come up
with a program for rechanneling. Mr. Taylor answered "no" and added the
only possible way would be to contract out all work.
Alderman Abramson explained that much could be done on local streets in
ail wards if $200,000.00 were not going inLo 38 Avenue.
MINUTES - Continued - July 12, 1973
-8-
In answer to Alderman Donaldson's question as to why he opposed four
lanes of paving from Wadsworth Blvd. to Dudley Street, Alderman Abramson
said
1 .
2.
3.
5 lanes.
4
west it
5.
next to
6
through
DRCOG.
The energy crisis might continue 20 years
The City should not be creating useless land covered with asphalt.
For safety, a turn lane is required, so there must be either 3 or
Transition to 2 lanes should be at Wadsworth, because the farther
is the more traffic is channeled into the residential neighborhood.
Bicycles and pedestrians are safer on a separated path and safer
two lanes or three, not four or five.
Citizens have made it clear they do not want major arterials
the City. He asked if Alderman Hulsey was now in agreement with
Alderman Hulsey stated
1. This was not making a freeway but was only widening 6 blocks to
the hospital where traffic is heavy.
2. That it should be paved and widened to the hospital and there
needed to be a transition area.
3. That there was an obligation to asphalt paving, that bids had been
taken and a contract awarded.
Question was called on Motion to scrap 38 Avenue project, and Motion was
defeated 5-1. Alderman Abramson voted "aye."
Mayor Anderson asked for Mr Taylor to discuss the cost of expanding the
project and what it would entail.
Mr. Taylor stated
1. There is 50 feet existing from Wadsworth to Yukon Street
2. Between Yukon and the hospital the catch basins are 25 feet
from the center of the road.
3 There would be 4 lanes to Balsam, then 5 to Cody, 4 to Dover,
3 at Dudley and then back to the normal configuration.
4 Additional ROW had been discussed with the staff at Lutheran.
5. Three catch basins would have to be relocated in the 5 lane area.
6 Additional cost would be $29,000.00, $6,500.00 of which would go
to move the catch basins.
7. The contract would be renegotiated and in answer to a question from
Alderman Abramson that renegotiation could not be for an amount that would
be considerably less and the price per ton is less on large jobs.
As to source of money, Walter Grande stated $42,000.00 was available in
unallocated Federal Revenue Sharing Funds and the use tax will make
$75,000.00 available.
Citizen Comments were made by
Bud Lahrer of 3838 Dover who said
1. He was "appalled at the action this Council is trying to ramrod
to the community."
2. A former plan had been approved and had appeared to be acceptable
with three lanes at the hospital.
3 Suddenly, the plan was changed and if it hadn't been for the Sentinel
no one would have known.
4 The people had on numerous occassions such as at the Grange, said
they wanted no expressways and that was what was being started with 5 lanes
which would regardless of what was said here, be extended later to Youngfield.
5. The Grange meeting demonstrated the feeling of the community and
no one wanted 5 lanes.
Alderman Pepe said this was not starting a freeway.
Alderman Abramson said he had asked that it be heard next week at a
reasonable hour
Motion by Alderman Abramson
and died.
"I move we adjourn." Motion was not seconded
MINUTES - Continued - July 12, 1973
-9-
A Resolution for a net change of Budget was prepared by Walter Grande,
introduced by Alderman Pepe, numbered No. 235 and read.
Motion by Alderman Hulsey "I move Resolution No. 235 be approved as
read." Motion was seconded by Alderman Donaldson.
Alderman Abramson recommended it be reviewed by Treasurer James Malone
Question was called and Motion passed 4-2. Aldermen Abramson, and
Cavarra voted "nay."
Motion by Alderman Hulsey "I move the Mayor be authorized to contract
with Asphalt Paving Company for additional work at a price not to exceed
$29,000.00." Motion was seconded by Alderman Howard and passed 4-2.
Alderman Cavarra voted "nay" and Alderman Abramson voted "nay" stating
that voting for this Motion was violating the public trust.
Ordinance No 132 was brought up for discussion and it was decided if
no action were taken, the Mayor's veto of the Ordinance would stand.
No action was taken.
Meeting was adjourned at 1 35 a.m.
)
~ .-/'
I ""7;_.tJ;?~., -/:...;, _--2--. -r r , /
Louise F. Turner
City Clerk
"""""'#t "".3:'
'" ':--' --'
/Ci/ /7_Jc~ _.
HI'
T If-
., [
~r IV~3[:--1/
t- ~tnrS[Jn
\ivrTl
""klro
~ l] S r-;v
'rci Ll
T i nliiTJ W;
LCLlf
[1J 1
SCJlzm-.3l! I
[mmillrlui~i
! ~i ,J L'i
I !"11\/[:;
r' ,llclh~cJn
[, l... r.~.,s
-1; C 11 ~ \!
; rlflr]
I 1 F~r;r
I'ill.pr
pnni,flrli,lln
,'l1rt -i nc?
Helfrich
:~!Jh'~ns
\.Jr1 If.lr- T' r
r- 1.i,,1 j-.d
: i rl If L 1
Lin II t
L r- ,cz ( ")
~- L.I n V hi! r
( 'J)
( )
Co)
( )
( , I
r. ,:';::'
i ~i I
( " 1
!C1np;;
~c'llirB
'lcndcnCl
YClllrlt
['-':(3 UIl
hi I cl1ur,ll
,J 110 t
[-Ii 1 de l' Cl r' , )
11'Ilnin (')
(? ')
IJr~~T'\1
I"nirlllt
\ i~rtsr:'li
lilliLlms
lllflChcz
[I ILlnrm~
'rClII"O
lrorm ] p II
rT'PI I'~
I' unn
'r~lh m
I) [Jill p
I':rlrshon
I jltin~-2:
I pr r; "n
I~ Cl\1 P I
Chlolprn
f'brinl lil
Eitel
-,hi 'J Ie,!
-,)
-J \
')
y
T
, I
) )
'1
MINUTES - Continued - July 12, 1973
-10-
III
Y 'I T I
I I
L II' I
I) I ,If-
I I .-
~i I.]
III F]
'17 I
'1
lIlts
r-;CJ4 c) !
'1
~') r
,
lpnt(ln
""lJ )[I~lP!d
~ ,
.. ,m f:'
I r:; J 10 j ,
I (t r tlr] p
l~ciJ P.
" ! I ,m~
'7 1 , rN>l
C" 1 "t 1--
I[J1 ;ir;r~~J
rJil;?
I-'ll I P
. " tll
. 'J l,t; Il
17
1
') ~ ] '7
f-_~] t, r-l n
1nt"
) "~l
L j tnn
1~1l I] S P.
'["JSP
r:Il,lsP
:'h P
" lot
",-'3n
7 I)
] ! l ~
i I r '\1
L'l[./- ?J r
! L rJ + \-1
s:) Iq
I. "fi t '1
",
, u
Lth
7 , !h I B
, , ,
r"771+ [ BIIPld
~'71 , 11r:f'r:111
'721 '1 r-'r- C1lll
IJ~n 1!1j"lf1li1
r) fll 11 ilil:-lP
'iI-f] ,h se
r)\ll OJ lip-plOW
, gS me~J
, r1 t::) ;-HT'RS
5 '] 'J ! '11 j+h
sr)l-l S 1,1 '-'8th
, .
11 l ~ t. ~
'1 ! n r C J ,I .J. '7F1th
d
'1 1 ntr; , , 1 b JBClir-1l
'JfH.l 1Rntfln
--)["1,1+7 ~8n fJ fl
." ')C~ lpntrm
'r ')] lnntln
'11:17 :(?'Tt-!ln
OF, )4 ir;nton
f~1 3 m !IL fjlj~h
r)r )1 mo'~
. 7
" 1 !7 {n.ntrln
1'77 1'lPS
'll I \rr:f~S
'1 7S r; :1i f"l f'
" 7 ~-, f' t. -m
-lrlll 0 lJrOP1JJ
)i^'j cr, UP-]"iJ]
('''t::) , , ;fl~!
"r.41 , \mr.s
JfJ3i- h_-Jsr;
G( 3 ~~ I. , 7t"h
t i 1 \! p..
~; h
\/ B.
i J p.
\VP.
Vr~ .
1[---'1
IV8.
-I t_"
v ~.
uP
\I ~.
V8.
V8.
i Ii
~;