Loading...
04-25-16 MINUTES OF AN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITX OF RQLLING HILLS,CALIFORN�A MONDAY,.APRIL Z5,201.G CALL TO ORDER An adjourned regulat� rneeting of the City Council of the City of Rolling Hills was called to order by Mayor Dieringer at 7:03 p.m. in the City Council Chamber at City Hall, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Raliing Hills, California. R�LL CALL Councilmembers Present: Black, Mirsch,Pieper, Wilson and Mayor Dieringer. Councilmembers Abser�t: None. Others Preserit: Raymond R. Cruz, City Manager. Mike Jenkins, City Attorney. Yolanta.Schwartz,Planning Director. Heidi Luce, City Clerk. Terry Shea, Finance Director. Jim Walker,F:inance Consultant. Beate Kirmse, 2 Chuckwagon Road. John Nunn, I Crest Road West. Mike and Marcia Schoettle,24 Eastfield Drive. Paul Mayhack, 52 Eastfield Dri�e. Mike Baumann, 25 Eastf eld Drive. Dan Nguyen, 5 Buggy Whip Drive. "� Raghu Mendu, 1 Reata Lane. Howard Weinberg, Attorney Diana Nuccion, 18 Porluguese Bend Road. Hal Light, Attorney. Ruben Green, Consulting Arborist. Tina Greenberg, 32 Portuguese Bend Road. Geraldine Belleviile, 12 Crest Road East. Jim Aichele, 14 Crest Road West. OPEN AGENDA- PUBLIC COiWIMENT WELCOME None. CONSENT CALENDAR Matters which may be acted upon by the City Council in a single motion. Any Counci�member may request removal of any item from the Consent Calendar causing it to be considered under Council Actions. A. Minutes -Regular Meeting of April 1�, 201b. RECONIlI�NDA�.'ION: Apprave as presented. — B. Payment of Bills. RECONIlI�NDA'I`ION: Apprave as presented. C. Financial Statement for the Month of March, 2016. RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented. D. Consideration of appxoval of City empioyee compensation adjustments for the Administrative Assistant, City Clerk/Executi�e Assistant and Planning Director. RECOTVIMENDA'I'�ON: Approve as presented. E. City Council Fire Fuel Reduction Ad Hoc Comanittee meeting notes of March 31,2Qi6 RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file. Counciimember Wilson rnoved that the City Cauncil approve the items on the consent calendar as presented. Councilrriember Pieper seconded the motion,which carried without objection. -1- h PRESENTATION Supervisor pon Knabe County of Los Angeles�Board of Supervisors�Fourth District Su�ervisor Knabe addressed the City Council to ex�ress his appreciation to the City Council and the residents for tl�eir support during his 20 years as 4 District Supervisar. Mayor Dieringer presented a Certificate of Commendation to Supervisor Knabe in recognition of his d.edication and commitment to the citizens of the County during his term as Supervisor. Mayor Dieringer suggested taking the items listed i�nder Matters from StafF out of order recognizing that they would likely be brief matters. Hearing no objection, she so ardered. COMNIISSION ITEMS None. MATTERS FROM STAFF QUARTERLY SCHEDULE OF INVESTMENTS REPORT FOR THE QUARTER ENDING MARCH 31, 2016. Finance Director Shea presented the investment report for the quarter ending March 31, 2016. He stated ttzaY rates are higher than last year at .44% and active deposits are up approximately $333,000. He noted that the Ca1PERS CERBT investment earnings are also up slightly. Mayor Pro Tem Black moved that the City Council receive and file the investrnent report for the quarter ending March 31, 2016 as presented. Councilmember Pieper seconded the mo�ion,which carried without objection. FY 2016/2017 BUDGET PREPARATION DOCUMENTS �) FY 2015/201b YEAR-END REVENiTE AND EXPENDYTURE PROJECTIONS 2} FY 2015/2015 YEAR-END PROJECTIONS BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS 3) FY 2016/2017 CONSUMER PRICE INDEX(CPn ADNSTMENT F�R BUDGET AND SOLID WASTE COLLECTION SERVICES Jirn Walker, Budget Consultant presented the staff report containing the 2016/17 budget preparation documents including the year-end revenue and expenditure projections, the proposed CPI increase for budget pxeparation and solid waste collection services; and the year-end budget adjustrnents. Following brief discussion, Mayor Pro Tem rr�oved that the City Cauncil receive and file the budget preparation documents as presented. Councilmember Pieper seconded the motion,which carried without objection. CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS INVESTMENT POLICY; FINANCIAL, BUDGET AND DEBT POLICIES; FUND BALANCE POLICY; AND RES�LUTI�N NO. 953 —ASSET CAPITALIZATI�N POLICY. Finance Director Shea presented the staff report pertaining to the City's financial policies. He stated that staff recommends that Treasury Direct Funds be removed from investment policy because those funds are nat availabie; and with regard to the Finance, Budget and Debt Policy, that the po�icy be changed to eliminate submitting the City's annuai budget to the Government Finance Officers Association {GFOA) every other year and to submit the Camprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) annually instead of e�ery other year. Discussion ensued concerning the rnerits of submitting �he CAFR to the GFOA for the annual award. Foltowing brief discussion, Mayor Pro Tem Black moved that the City Council amend the financial, budget and debt policy to eliminate sending the Budget and CAFR to the GFOA for recognition. Councilmember Pieper seconded the motion,which carried without objection. Councilmember Pieper moved that the City Council approve the investment policy as amended to eliminate Treasury Direct accounts; approve the financial, budget and debt polici�s as arr�ended to eliminate sending the CAFR to the GFOA annually for recognition; and ta appro�e the fund balance policy and asset capitalization poiicy as presented with no changes. Mayor Pro Tem Black secanded the motion, which ca�ied without objection. Minutes City Council Meeting 04-25-16 -2- Recognizing that there were mernbers of the community present to address the City Cauncil regarding the items listed under New Business relating to the public forum on a possible ballot measure to repeal ar amend Measure B, Mayor Dieringer suggested taking that matter out of arder as well. Heaz�ing no abjection, she so ordered. NEW BUSINESS DISCUSSION AND PUBLIC FORUM ON A POSSIBLE BALLOT MEASURE TO REPEAL OR AMEND MEASURE B RELATING TO VIEW PRESERVATION. Mayor Dieringer introduced the item and asked for staff's introductory rernarks. Planning Director Schwartz stated that there are two additional correspondence received after the agenda packet was prepared and they have been placed an the dais and made available far the public. She stated that one correspondence is frorn Lynn Gill proposing amended language for�he View Preservation Ordinance. She further reviewed the background on this matter stating that th.is matter was agendiz�d at the direction o� t�e City Council to receive resident input relative to how they feel about Measure B —what is good about it and what needs revision. Mayor Dierir�ger called for public comments an this matter. Beate Kirmse, 2 Chuckwagon Road addressed tYie City Council to ask what problems need to be addressed. She stated that in order #o fix it, residents need to know what the problems are. In response, Mayor Dieringer stated that the informataon is available on the City's web site and reviewed the City Council's previous discussions on this matter. Councilmember Pieper further explained the background on the issue. Ms. Kirmse suggested that the City should have publicized thrs matter better. She stated that she does not believe trees should be cut to improve views. John Nunn, 1 Crest Raad West addressed the City Council stating that he does not believe the original ordinance is balanced. He stated that the ardinance should include mandatary arbitration. He further stated that the cunrer�t ordinance favors the �iew seeker and Measure B has restored a certain amount of fairness _ and is more balanced. Mike Schoettle, 24 Eastfield Drive addressed the City Council stating that the City should not be involved in the legal issues regarding view matters but rather the City shot�id fund arbitration between the parties and not take a side in the matter. Marcia Schoett�e, 24 Eastfield Drive addressed the City Counci� to take responsibility for Measure B and s#ated it was nat her intent to cause atnbiguity — she was simply trying to save trees. She stated that the City shouid be fa.ir in thi,�rnatter and not take a side. Paul Mayhack, 52 Eastfield Drive addressed the City Council stating that his issue isn't with existing trees,but rather new trees that are planted and allowed to g;row into the�view. Mike Baurnann, 25 Eas�eld Drive addressed the City Council stating that his concern is with regard to the maturity issue. He stated that if the view existed and has been rnaintained matuxe trees should no� be exempted fram trimming. Dan Nguyen, 5 Buggy Whip Drive addressed the City Council stating that the City should be involved in the process and there needs to be clear,balanced definitions for everyone to follow. Raghu Mendu, 1 Reata Lane addressed the City Council sta.ting that there should be balance between trees and views, but Measure B shifted the balarice too far toward trees. He suggested tha� Measure B be T- repealed and rewritten. Howaxd Weinberg, Attorney addressed the City Cauncil on behalf of the Occhipinti Farniiy (Crest Road East). He stated that the way Measure B is vvxitten, it will slowly take views away completely and suggested that measure be placed on the ballot to undo Measure B and puts something in place to more precisely defines what a view is and what is allowed with regard to carridors. He suggested creating incentives far neighbors to wark together. He fixrther suggested �here be specific measures in place to determine what view existed. Following public cornment, the public farum on this matter was continued to the next City Council Minutes City Council Meeting 04-25-16 -3- meeting scheduled for Monday, May 9, 2016 beginning at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chamber at City Hall, 2 Portuguese Bend Road,Rolling Hills, California. Councilmember Mirsch moved that the City Council direct staff to place signs at the gates informing residents of the May 9�'public forum on this matter. Councilmember Pieper seconded the motion, which carried without objection. PUBLIC HEARINGS CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING FOR CONSIDERATION OF TWO APPEALS OF COMMITTEE ON TREES AND VIEWS RESOLUTION NO. 2015-03-CTV SETTING FORTH FINDINGS RELATING TO TRIMMING OF TREES AT 15 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD DUE TO VIEW IMPAIRMENT FROM �$ PORTUGUESE BEND RQAD. LOCATION OF TREES: 15 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD PROPERTY OWNER: MR. AND MRS. HASSOLDT COMPLAINANTS: DR. AND MRS. NUCCION 18 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD Mayor Dieringer introd�xced the item and asked for staff s comments. Planning Directar Schwartz presented the staff report and background on this matter. She stated that the first public hearing on this matter was held on November 23, 2015 and the City Cauncil visited the properties on March 21, 2016. She sta.ted that at the field trip, the City Council determined that the Nuccions had a view from fhe designated viewing area as defined by the Zaning Or�inance and that�he trees on the Hassoldt property do abstruct the view. She stated that today, the City Council will continue the public hearing, take public �estirr�any and consider the information received. She further reviewed the infozmation recei�ed including ari aerial pha�agraph and list of trees subrnitted by the Nuccions as requested by the City Council at the November meenng; a certification from Brandon Gil�, Arborist regarding the measurement of the trees on the Hassoldt property submittec� by the Nuccions today; a correspondence from Ha� Light submitted on behalf of �he Hassoldts containing aerial photographs of the area; a declaration from a Registered Consulting Arbarist regarding the maturity issue submitted by Mr. Light; and a correspondence from 11�, Weinberg providing tree measurements and calc�lation extrapolating the age of the trees and height in 2010 based on the definition o#'mature previously adapted by the City Council. Ms. �chwartz stated that based on the appeals, the City Council should determine if the Nuccians established by clear and convincing evidence that the view existed in 2009 when they acquired the property; is the view abstruc�ed now; and were the trees mature in 2009. She stated the once those matters are determined, if applicable, the City Council should stnzcture any restorarive action in such a way to provide view corridars not a panoramic view. In response to Mayor Pro Tem Black, P�anning Director Schwartz reviewed #he paints on appeal which i�clude: The appeal by Mr. and Mrs. Hassoldt(tree owners)has been filed on the basis that: • The Nuc�ions have not established, by clear and convincing evidence or at all, the existence of a protected view over Number 15 {�5 Portuguese Bend Road); • Each of the trees subject to the complaint are exempt because they were mature an April 22, 2009 (when the Nuccions acquired the property); • Other vaxions bases far the appeai. o The Hassoldts were not properly noticed of the view compiaint case filed by the Nuccions o The View Ordinance fails to provide procedure to req�ire service of view complair�t o Upholding the CTV resolution would be in excess of the jurisdiction of the City o The remediation actions will provide an unobstructed view and not "view corridors" to the Nuccians o No view existed when the Nuccions acquired the property and therefore the decision of the CTV is unIawfu� o The Nuccions have failed to establish by "clear and convincing evidence" that they had a �iew when they purchased the property and that the trees were not mature when they acquired the property. The appeal by Dr. and Mrs. Nuccion (complainants)has been filed on the basis that: Minutes CFty Councrl Meeting 04-25-l 6 -4- � The Comrnittee erred in its decisio� that the two Qlive trees subject to the complaint were mature when the Nuccions purchased the property, and axe therefore not eligible for remediation; and • The Committee abused i#s discretion by rejecting one arborist report that concluded that the Olive �ees were not mature and accepting another arborist report that concluded that the Olive trees were mature; and that the decision of the Committee to render those irees mature is not supported by substantial evidence. In response ta Mayor Dieringer regarding the second point in the Nuccion appeal, Mr. Weinberg stated — that when the Committee came to its conclusion w�ith regard ta the issue of the rnaturity of the �live trees was based on a feeling that the trees were rnahue; but since that time, the City Council adopted Resolution 1182 which provides guidelines as to how rnaturity is determined. He further stated that in using those guidelines to determine maturity of the Olive tree specifically, it was found during the photographic analysis that the trees were actually #aller than the rnaxirnum height provided for in the definition, which indicates that the threshold needs to have flexibility. He suggested that the City Council could use its discretion to determine that the Olive trees may not be mature. In response to Mayor Dieringer, City Attorney Jenkins suggested that this would be the appropriate time to call for comments from the appellants in this matter;tlien hear from the public an the anatter after whick� time the appellants couid offer any rebutta.l cosnments and then the City Council could engage in deliberation in the matter and ask for clarification from th.e parties where necessary. He further stated in response to Mayor Dieringer that if the City Council wishes to remand this case back to the Committee on Trees and Views to review based on the newly adopted standards, it would be appropriate to make that motion now,but the Cxty Council is not obl'rgated to do so. In response to Mayor Dieringer, Planning Director Schwartz stated that staff has no knowledge as to the accuracy of the tree height projections submitted by the Nuccions. Mayor Dieringer called for public comment. Diana Nuccion, 18 Portuguese Bend Road addressed tiie City Council sta.t�ng that when they purchased � their property in 2004 it was in a state of disarray and abandoned and they did not talce photographs at that time because they were focused on finishing the house not documenting the view because Measure B did not exist at that time. She sta.ted that the phatographs she submitted as evidence af the view were taken after they moved into the house. Howard Weinberg, Attorney, addressed the City Council on behalf of the Nuccions to further explain the information that was submitted with regard to the tree height projections as they relate to the maturity of the trees. He stated that based on this evidence, the two Olive tzees �nay be considered mature, but none of the other tr�es were mature in 2009. He stated that in tlzeir opinion, the City Cotxncil has received the evidence it needs to canclude that there was a view, that the trees irnpede that view, thaf the impairment shauld be remediated and that the trees were not mature with the exception of possibly the twa Olive trees. Discussion ensued concezn.izig the informatian that was submitted with regazd to �he tree height projections as they relate to the maturity of the trees. Mr. Weinberg reiterated his point that the City Council could use its discretion to determine that the Olive t�ees may not be mature based on the analysis presented. In response to Mayor Dieringer regardi.ng t.�.e 2010 photogxaphs submitted, N1r. Weinberg stated that witl�respect to the height of the trees in 2010, the Nuccions provided testimony that when they purchased the house, they owned it or lived there for a year before they took thase photographs and no trees were cut between the hme they bought the house and the time these photographs were taken. Further discussion ensued concerning the burden af praof related ta the existence of the view and the maturity issue Hal Light, Attorney addressed�he City Council on behalf of the Hassoldts stating that the burden of proof is for the applicant to provide clear and convincing evidence as to whether or not there was a view when they acquired the property. He further explained the details of their appeal stating that they assert that the Nuccions have not presented clear and canvincing evidence that the view existed in 2009 when they acquired the property. He fiu-ther explained the Google Earth images that were submitted as evidence that it was �ikely that the trees were tapped in 2010 although the Nuccions test�fied that the trees were nat trimmed until 2011. Mr. Light further pointed out that they believe there is a discrepancy as to the date the photographs submitted as evidence that the view existed in 2010 were taken. Mayor Pro Tem Black commented that when the previous City Council heard testimony related to the issues surrounding the Minutes City Council Meeting 04-25-16 -5- un�ergrounding af the utility lines on the property (in the late 2000's), there were several reference made at that time to the property having a panoramic view and he observed the view as it existed. With regard to the maturity issue, Mr. Light stated that their arborist is present to address the City Council arid answer questions. Mr. Light further explained the 1954 aerial photograph submitted which shows a r�ng of trees on the property at 15 Portuguese Bend Road stating that he believes the process whereby maturity is determined is flawed. Ruben Green, Registex�ed Consulting Arborist addressed the City Council stating that it is not a standard prac�ice to determine tree maturity sole�y based on a percentage of a maximum height and spread. He sta.ted that factors need to be considered including the trees age, the clirnate, the specie and the condition of the tree. Discussion ensued concerning possible ways to determine maturity. Mayor Dieringer called for public commen�. Tina Greenberg, 32 Portuguese Bend Road addressed the City Counci� to ask if it would be possible for the City to not rnake a decision if there is not enough evidence. She further suggested in the future using age as a determination of rnaturity and that tlie City encourage residents to document their�iews. Beate Kirmse, 2 Chuckwagon Road addressed the City Council to suggest that there should be photographic evidence of the view from 2009. Geraldine Bellville, 12 Crest Road East addressed the City Council to suggest that there should be a timeline on view cases and that more research be done with regard to the maturity issue. She asked if the City Counci�has to make a decision. Jim Aichele, 14 Crest Road West addressed the City Co�anciI stating that the View Ordinance has always favored views and serves to divide the City. He suggested the City should not be involved in view issues. Mayor Dieringer called far rebuttal comments. Mr. Light s�ated that the photo of the view submitted by the Nuccions as evidence from 7uly 2010 appears, based on the metadata in #he photograph, to actually have been taken in July 2011. He asked that Mr. Weinberg address #his issue. He suggested that the pho#os are �he same photograph. Mr. Light reasserted their position that the Nuccions have not submitted clear and convincing evidence tl�at the view existed when they acquired the property in Apri12009. Mr. Weinberg stated that the photos may have been taken aroexnd the same time, but they are not the same photograph. He stated that all of the photographs submitted as prior photographs show that there was a view previously. He stated tha� the City Council has been provided with photographic evidence and tes�imony frorn the Nuccions that they had a view. Hearing no further public cornrnent, Mayor Dieringer closed the public hearing. In response to Mrs. Belle�ille's inquiry, City Attorney Jenl�ins stated that an application has been rnade under the ordinance and the applicant is entitled to a decision. He stated that the City Council's decision should be based on the e�idence that has beeri presented and what is ian the record of the proceedings. He fi,�rtlier reviewed the matters before the City Council. in response to Mayor Pro Tem Black regarding previous public testimony and personal experience during consideration of an unrelated rnatter on this property asserting that the property did have a panoramic view, City Attomey Jenkins stated that absent definitive answers as to exactly when the testimony was given and when the view was seen, the City Council has to detertnine how much weight can be given to that evidence and its relevance to this proceeding. City Attarney Jenkins stated that the City Council may wish ta focus an the evidence included in the packet arid heard tonight. In response to Mayor Dieringer, City Attorney Jenkins stated that it is not unusual for land use decision- making bodies to not reqi.Fire testimony to be made under oath. He further explained the burden of proof requirements as they apply to the ordinar�ce and Measure B specifically. Discussion ensued concerning the burden of proof with regard to the maturity issue. City Attorney 3erikins stated that as he interpre#s Measure B,the clear and convincing evidence standard does not apply to the issue of maturity. Minutes City Council Meeting 04-25-16 -6- in response to Mayor Dieringer regarding establishing the protected view, City Attorney Jenkins stated �hat the City Couricil first needs to determine if there is a view, which has already been determined; and if there is a view, was that view there,by clear and convmcing evidence, wheri the properiy was acquired. �f yes, then the City Council would determine if the view is impaired by maturing or mature trees. Discussion ensued concerning the burden of praof with regard to the issue of mature vs. maturing. Councilmernber Piepex com�nented that based on the evidence presented, he believes that only the Olive trees are considered mature; and moving forward based on that assumption, those trees would be exempted from action and the Nuccions would be provided with corridor views on either side of those trees, which is consistent with previous application of the ordinance. He further commented that the next issue to determine is what view existed in 2009 when the Nuccions acquired the property. He commented that he too remembers discussions abou# a panoramic view from this property when an unrelated matter was before the Planning Commission, but he is bothered by the inconsistent date stamp on the photos although he knows from experience tl�at it is passible for a da.te stamp to be incorrect on a photograph. He stated that given the time and diligence that the Committee on Trees and Views put into this case and the new evidence submitted, he is inclined to deny both appeals and uphold the Commi#tee's decision with rega�rd to the maturity issue. Discussion ensued concerning the "2009" cut marks as referenced by the Committee. Mayor Dieringer cornrnented that s�ie believes that the clear and convincing evidence standard should also appiy to the issue of maturity and that if the trees were mature then there is no view. She further expressed concern that if there was trimming done in 20U9 and the photos submitted were from 2010, then the�hotos don't accurately depict the view from 2009 and the data used to determine maturity is faulty. Further discussion ensued concerning whether or not the applicant has submitted evidence that the view existed in 2009 when they acquired the property. Mayor Pro Tern Black commented that everyone involved wi.th�he property laiows there was a view although it isn't clear whether it was 2008 or 2009, but the City Council has received evidence and testimony fram the Nuccions that the view existed in 2009. Councilmember Miz�sch suggested that the Ci#y Cow�cil consider one item at a time; first, did a view exist in 2009? Further discussion ensued concerning whether or not the applicant has submitted evidence that the view existed in 2009 when they acquired the property and the discrepancy in the date stamp on the photos and the e-mail carirespondence. Councilmember Mirsch commented, in response to a previous comment by Mr. Light, that she was not on the Committee on Trees & Views when this case was considered and she did not see this property's view prior to the City Council's consideration of this case. Further discussion ensued conceming what view existed when the Nuccions acquired the properly in 2009 and the evidence submitted. Mayor Dieringer cornmented that in researching this matter personally, she found a photo from a real estate listing in 2011 that showed the trees having been topped. City Attorney J�nkins comrnented that since the photograph referenced isn't in the recor�., it shouldn't be taken into consideration. Following further discussion, consideration of the evidence presented and deliberation, the folIowing motions were rnade: Councilmember Mirsch moved tlaat the City Council find, based on the evidencE, that the applicant had a view when they acquired the properly. Councilmember Pieper seconded the motion. Following discussxon, the rnotion carried with Mayor Dieringer opposed. Councilmember Pieper moved that the City Council fmd, based an the evidence, that two Olive trees under consideration were mature when the Nuccions acquired the property and thus, exempt from remediation; that the remainder of the trees under cansideration were not mature when the Nuccions acquired the property and further setting forth the restarative act�ions to abate the view impairment as � determined by the Committee on Trees and Views. Councilmember Wilson seconded the motion. Following discussion,the motion carried with Mayar Dieringer opposed. Councilmember Pieper moved that the City Council direct staff to prepare a Resolution denying both appeais, Mayor Pro Tem Black seconded the modon, which carried with Mayor Dieringer opposed. OLD BUSINESS Nane. Minutes City Council Meeting 04-25-16 -7- MATTERS FROM THE CITY COUNCIL AND MEETING ATTENDANCE REPORTS Mayar Pro Tem Black suggested that in order to help residents understand the evolution of the tree and view issues, that staff be directed to prepare a poster showing the facts regarding the cases considered under the old view ordinance and the new one. Following brief discussion, staff was directed to prepare the poster. He further suggested that the City Council consider having a discussion in the fixture regarding �lacing a height limit on newly planted trees. CLOSED SESSION None. ADJOURNMENT Hearing na further business before the City Cauncil,Mayar Dieringer adjourned the rneeting at 11:12 p.m. ta an adjourned reg�xlar meetir�g of the City Council scheduled to be held an Monday, May 9, 2016 beginning at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chamber at City Hall, 2 Portuguese Bend Raad, Ralling Hills, California. Respectfully submitted, --. Heidi Luce City Clerk Approved, �� ' �� ,. � �'�� � ��� ? , �r°,� �� �..� o ea Dieringer Mayor � Minutes City Council Meeting 04-25-16 -$-