MINUTES OF THE TOWN COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON TUESDAY, JULY 10, 2007, AT 7:30 P.M. IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS OF THE STRASBURG TOWN HALL.
The meeting opened with the Pledge of Allegiance and the invocation was given by Vice Mayor Taylor.
ROLL Called with the following members present: Vice Mayor Taylor, and Council Members Le Vine, Mauck, Nicholson, Rinker, Terndrup, Wallace, and Whittle. Absent: Mayor Crisman.
Minutes of the June 12, 2007, Town Council meeting were approved as presented.
Vice Mayor Taylor welcomed all in attendance and said all communications had been directed toward the appropriate committees.
Vice Mayor Taylor said Mayor Crisman was absent because of a business trip to Atlanta, GA. Vice Mayor Taylor commended the Recreation Committee and Town Staff for all the work done on the July 4th Celebration.
Introduction of Visitors and Guests:
Vice Mayor Taylor recognized Mr. Douglas Arthur for his more than 35 years of service to the Town of Strasburg as Town Attorney. He presented him with a plaque and said a brick was being placed at Wayside Theatre in Mr. Arthur’s honor. Mr. Arthur said he could not think of any gift that would have meant more to him and he greatly appreciated the gift. He said his father, who served on the Council in the 1950’s, would be very proud, as would Mr. Paul Neal. Mr. Neal was Chief of Police during much of his tenure and now his son, Jay, is the Town Attorney.
Citizen Comments:
Non-Action Items:
Kim Bishop, 728 Crystal Lane, Strasburg, VA: “Vice Mayor and Council: I don’t know if you have noticed my absence from these meetings over many months, until last month, but I took a little break from all the Town’s business. As it was I had become disgusted with all the “window dressing” of the new found “civility”. Most of us, citizens, saw through the disguise. Anyway, I decided to come back and make a statement about the water billing, last month and truly was impressed with receiving comments to my concerns, during the meeting. Even if they did not come out to my liking I am very grateful that you have allowed minor discussions between the Council and citizens, even if it is still only one sided as opposed to back and forth, it was appreciated.
I was very disturbed, however, by the Town Attorney’s belittling of the Voices of Strasburg. The disrespect shown to a civic group of concerned citizens was disgraceful. I would like to state for the record that people, like me, opposed to the rezoning of the Island Farm stepped back from making statements to this Council, while awaiting the court’s decisions. However, with the Town Attorney’s need to attack this group, citizens, like me, will step up their voices once again. Don’t for a minute believe that there is only “one voice of Strasburg” because there are many voices and we will be encouraging them to come forward and speak, as well as write you letters, and call to show their support for THE LAW. Everyone seems to forget that the law was not properly followed. It is not the citizen’s fault that the Town and the developer did not cross all the “T’s” and dot all the “I’s”. Perhaps in the future the official representatives of the Town involved with law suits and disagreements will keep a civil tongue in their mouth, so as not to stir up the passions of the people. I know this isn’t what any of you want to hear, but I don’t feel like keeping quiet any longer…You want VOICES to show you our intent? Then you shall have them. Thank you.”
Reports and Communications from Town Officers:
Town Attorney Neal: Shenandoah County School Board easement has been worked out and is ready to go to a Public Hearing. He would like to do this in conjunction with the Crowder easement which he and Attorney Doug Arthur have been working on. The Sonner-Davison suit continues in the Circuit Court as the attorney for the defendants filed a request for an extension of time to file an answer as there had been a mix-up in a mailing for a court order to his office. The court has granted this extension. He concluded by saying he has not gotten the flag design release signed by Mr. Jeff Guenther, but will be doing so in the very near future.
Town Manager Fauber: He is currently working on the request for proposal with the Public Safety department for a facility needs assessment study. They have been working through the Public Safety Committee and he has received feedback from the committee members. This should be finalized this week and results will be released next week.
A progress meeting was held that morning (July 10) on the Bowman Mill Road project. This was a meeting of VDOT, the Town contractor, and Town Staff. Everything seems to be proceeding on schedule. No major complaints have been received; a lot of the clearing and grubbing has been done, along with the slope work and some of the storm drainage has been installed. Progress meetings, such as this, will continue to be held twice a month.
Staff is continuing to work with Margaret Struder on the bike event scheduled July 27 – 29. Registration has been slow, but the group will be proceeding as planned. They are in hopes next year’s event will be bigger.
Staff is continuing to work with the archeological firm on the walking trail. The firm is scheduled to be in Town next week to do additional digging/study. He is in hopes this will be the last study needed.
Proposals for the engineering for the waste-water treatment expansion have been received and a meeting of the Utilities Committee will be scheduled to review these.
Director of Finance Mullins: Reported she has been working on closing out the budget for June 30, and starting on the new budget year. No financial reports were included in the packet because invoices are still being received from last year’s budget. The first bi-weekly payroll begins this week.
Town Clerk Keller: Reminded Council to turn in their VML registration forms if they were planning to attend the conference in October.
Director of Public Utilities Tewalt: Said they are continually working on the permit for withdrawal through DEQ.
Director of Public Works Rhodes: Sidewalk replacement is continuing. Area around Town Hall should be completed tomorrow and there will be some sidewalk replacement on Orchard Street. He is hopes of repaving Stickley-Borum Streets and Capon Road either by the end of this week or early during the week of July 15.
Council Member Mauck asked if there was any money in the budget for sidewalk extension from Forest Glen Apartments to Food Lion --- was this something that the Town could work on or was it VDOT? Mr. Rhodes said this is a VDOT right-of-way and the Town would have to go through that department before proceeding. Council Member Mauck said there are many pedestrians, bicyclists, etc. that use this area and she requested the Streets Committee work on this. Mr. Rhodes added this area does not lend itself well to sidewalks and additional right-of-ways would have to be gotten.
Council Member Rinker asked that as sidewalks are being replaced, if any thought has been given to put conduits under the sidewalks with the anticipation of ultimately putting in street lights. Mr. Rhodes said when major replacement is done on King Street, this will be done and they are looking at some of the intersections now. Council Member Rinker asked if there was a plan yet as to where the pods or posts would be located. Mr. Rhodes said Hometown Strasburg is working on that. Council Member Rinker said it would have been nice if a section of conduit could have been placed under the new sidewalk in front of the Town Hall. Mr. Rhodes said that would be easy to take care of as the conduit will have to be under the street.
Council Member Le Vine added he would like to see the sidewalk on Massanutten Street continue from the where the sidewalk ends on to Food Lion. He also thanked Mr. Tewalt for adding into the monthly report the operation capacities.
Police Chief Sutherly: In Chief Sutherly’s absence, Assistant Chief Wilkin reported the department answered 787 calls during the month of June. He added the Citizen’s Academy will be starting on Wednesday, July 11. The department also held a bike safety event; they hope to build on this next year and will have more publicity for it.
Town Planner Amos: She did not have any action items, but several informational items. The Economic Development Committee for the County met (this is a follow-up meeting from the Forum held recently). The Shenandoah Valley Partnership was discussed, what they do and what they can bring to the County. Another meeting is scheduled for August. She added eventually the County will have an Economic Development Coordinator if the County so decides.
Planner Amos said her intern, Jessica Putman, made a brochure on water conservation tips that was included in all water bills.
In conclusion, Planner Amos thanked Council Member Nicholson for helping with the mailing of the water report.
Standing Committee Reports:
Public Safety Committee: Did not meet, but the RFP about the needs analysis for the public safety building have been distributed. He read two letters included in the Council Packet from Gary Yew, Shenandoah County Fire and Rescue Department. The letters commended the Police Department and also Asst. Fire Chief Robert Scott. Council Member Mauck added Mr. Scott was made Chief of the Fire Department and Town Manager Fauber said he was also a Town employee.
Personnel Committee: Did not meet. Council Member Whittle said the committee will be meeting on Wednesday, July 25, at 7:30 p.m.
Public Utilities Committee: Did not meet, but will meet on Thursday, July 26, at 7:30, to go over the proposal on the waste-water treatment expansion.
Recreation Committee: Council Member Mauck said the committee met on Monday, July 9 and she thanked the Northern Virginia Daily for the coverage of that meeting. Chris Stubbs, Cedar Creek/Belle Grove National Historical Park, presented a history of the park since 2001 and the progress of the Advisory Committee and how it is working on a master plan that will be presented to the Department of the Interior who in turns passes it onto Congress for approval. If approved, the Park will be receiving money to begin a plan on how the Park will work. He also presented the concepts of the master plan and there are four different ideas. The first of these is going from the status-quo of when you leave the 3,400 acre park to a concept of the National Park Service having more control over that privately owned land. Mr. Stubbs is available for technical assistance to the Town and would be available to the Land Use Committee of the Comprehensive Plan. At the meeting, the quarry was discussed briefly and Council Member Mauck said she visited a quarry owned by a municipality in Pee Wee County, Kentucky. She has requested information from them on how this county handles the quarry.
In conclusion, Council Member Mauck thanked the Town Staff for an excellent job on the July 4th.
Finance Committee: Did not meet, but will be meeting on Wednesday, August 1 at 7:15 p.m. Council Member Le Vine encouraged all Members to attend due to the discussion on the Transient Occupancy Tax issue. Also to be discussed is the Town’s insurance and if a better deal can be gotten. He also said the Ordinance Committee has been looking into a tobacco tax and has asked the Finance Committee to look into this and he would like to defer this until the September meeting.
Council Member Le Vine moved for the adoption of the Inspection Fees as outlined in the Council Packet; second by Council Member Terndrup.
Discussion:
Council Member Le Vine thanked Director of Public Works Rhodes for bringing up this idea that “in a sense, the Town has been subsidizing these inspections. Mr. Rhodes idea was that the developers should pay a fair share.”
The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote with the following results:
Council Member Le Vine Yes
Council Member Mauck Yes
Council Member Nicholson Yes
Vice Mayor Taylor Yes
Council Member Rinker Yes
Council Member Terndrup Yes
Council Member Wallace Yes
Council Member Whittle Yes
Ordinance Committee: Council Member Terndrup reported the committee met on July 3 with the following persons present: Vice Mayor Taylor, Council Member Terndrup, Planner Amos, Chief of Police Sutherly, Planning Commission Chairperson Smith, and Elizabeth Wilkerson, Northern Virginia Daily.
There are three action items that will be voted on. The first of these deals with a phrase that was approved last month dealing with only one zoning designation – M1. The Planning Commission has recommended this phrase, “Other uses by review” be added to all zoning classifications for Special Use Permits to create consistent language throughout all zoning classifications.
Council Member Terndrup moved to use the phrase “Other uses by review” and replace current language in current zoning applications for Special Use Permits; second by Vice Mayor Taylor.
Discussion:
Council Member Le Vine asked if this would set any precedence, but was just saying Council would “entertain” any request for Special Use Permits. Planner Amos explained a recommendation would come from the Planning Commission and Council would have the final decision. Council Member Le Vine said then this would mean Council is “amenable to entertaining a special use permit, any kind of special use permit, in any of these areas.” Planner Amos said she thinks all sections of the zoning ordinances except for Section 2-11 currently allow Special Use Permits and most of these include a list of what is allowed in a special use permit; others currently read “other uses by merit.” The Planning Commission didn’t feel the word merit was descriptive enough and felt the wording “other uses by review” gave them more discretion to say whether to allow the special use permit in certain districts. She does not think it will set any precedence as to getting a permit or not.
Town Attorney Neal said applicants can do this now as it is “usually done by parallel tracks when they are trying to amend the ordinance to allow something by special use, you are actually applying for it at the same time. You are applying to amend the ordinance to allow and also be allowed a permit which is the same thing as other uses by review.”
Vice Mayor said it is actually more of a language change --- the word “merit” is being replaced with “review.”
The motion passed unanimously.
Council Member Terndrup continued by discussing Section 3-21.1 – General Standards for Portable Storage Containers. Information was included in the Council Packet and this ordinance will set forth a 14 day window for the use of these portable storage containers. The committee did not receive any comments from Council on this.
Council Member Terndrup moved to accept Section 3-21 for Portable Storage Containers; second by Council Member Le Vine.
Discussion:
Council Member Le Vine apologized for not asking this question earlier, but read from Section 3-21.5 asked if this is fiscal or calendar year. Planner Amos said it is a 12 month period from when you got the first container. Council Member Le Vine asked if this was clear in the definitions or should it be made clearer. Planner Amos said she feels the language could be changed without holding another public hearing. Town Attorney said the wording could be changed to read a “12 month period”, but a motion would need to be made to amend the original motion.
Council Member Le Vine moved to amend the motion so that 3-21.5, 3-21.3, and 3-21.2a wording be changed from per year to no more than two (2) times per 12 month period; second by Council Member Rinker. The motion passed unanimously.
Council Member Nicholson asked if there are any hardship provisions written into this and gave an example of having a house fire and repairs not being made within the 14 day period. Planner Amos said this is for a storage unit and not for construction dumpsters. Council Member Nicholson said he was not thinking of dumpsters, but if you needed to store you furniture. Planner Amos said currently the only route the person could take would be to go through the Board of Zoning Appeals for an extension of time.
Council Member Rinker asked what would be done about the portable storage units that are on properties now throughout Town. Vice Mayor Taylor said the discussion is only on the motion on the floor.
The original motion passed unanimously.
Polling Places
Planner Amos explained this would be an amendment to the Town Code under chapter 30, section 1. This would replace the current section stating where elections are to be held. She discussed this with Lisa McDonald the County Registrar, who told her that if the Town does not adopt this change, then would Town elections still be held in the Town Hall. Ms. McDonald said that was correct, but if amended then all elections, both Town and County, would be held in the same place which would be at the Strasburg United Methodist Church (SUMC). There are over 3,000 eligible voters for Town elections. In conclusion, Planner Amos said the Town could continue holding elections in the Town Hall or move the polling place to the SUMC. For clarification, Council Member Terndrup said Council is not voting on where to hold the County, State, or National elections; that has already been decided by the County. Council is only deciding on Town elections.
Council Member Terndrup moved to have the site of Town elections be moved from the Strasburg Town Hall to the Strasburg United Methodist Church at 114 West Washington Street; second by Council Member Whittle.
Discussion:
Council Member Rinker stated he thinks it is in “poor taste that the Board of Elections did not get in touch with the Town prior to setting a place where they thought they wanted it to be. I think this should have been a joint decision; I’m going to crack them on the knuckles publicly here and I think it is very, very poor taste on their part. I think they should have come to this Council and said ‘you folks have a choice in this Town as to where you would like to have the elections polls.’ Personally, I am going to vote against this. I don’t like going up to the Methodist Church; I think we need to separate church and state and I don’t think politics has a place in that church whatsoever. I think it is extremely bad taste, folks, extremely and I am disgruntled at the Board of Elections.” He continued by saying there is a nice fire hall that was previously used as a polling place. There are large bays and the trucks could be removed from the building and you would have enough room to accommodate a couple hundred people. He added he was prepared to make the suggestion to hold the elections in the Fire Hall. He stated he was going to vote against the motion and the reason was, “it is out of character; it is poor judgment on their part; they should have consulted us; I believe in separation of church and state.”
Council Member Le Vine said he would have preferred the elections stay at the Town Hall and he does not like the location of the SUMC. “On the other hand, I think my responsibility is to look out for the best interest for the Town and having two places is going to be confusing to people and because we have no choice with the County, it’s a done deal, I’m going to vote for this because I think in the best interest of the Town is to have one place that people go for all elections.” He said it was hard enough to get people to vote and he didn’t want to add to the confusion.
Council Member Terndrup said this was not the first time this had come up for discussion. This has been in discussion since November, 2006. There have been several meetings on this and it was brought up before Council before. “I don’t just want people to think like this has been dumped on you tonight. All of these questions have come up before the Electoral Board.” He continued by saying as a member of the SUMC, the church would prefer not to have elections in their building. The church is doing this as a public service because they were told this was the only site that the Electoral Board saw as reasonable. The Fire Hall was brought up and the “County’s answer was what happens if there is a call during the election.” The Mennonite Church was mentioned and the Board had concerns because this building was still undergoing construction or renovations. The possibility of a new public safety building was also discussed and “apparently Strasburg is within a very few numbers of legally going to two precincts and in 2011 that will happen – we will have two official precincts because our population would demand that.” This was the Electoral Board’s choice from all the other sites. The church had some liability issues and some handicap entrance issues that were resolved between the church and the County. As far as the church and state issue, the church is only offering their building as a public service and nothing more. It would be a lot less hassle for the church to not have elections be held in their building, but “this is what the County asked and so the Council of the Methodist Church has agreed to it; they would prefer that it be in the short term and that we be able to provide an alternative site as soon as possible.” He concluded by saying the County obviously feels the Town Hall is too small and there was concern about bad weather when people would not be under roof. They have looked at ways to move the line so voters would inside while waiting.
Council Member Mauck said she agreed with Council Member Rinker. “I think the Board could have done a better job in studying it. The Mennonite Church was not approached; they do have adequate parking there. The facility will be finished by October. Since we didn’t have a Democratic or Republican forum, they didn’t have a vote in June so the push to have this finished was supposed to have been for that in June, didn’t happen. I feel that with the restriction of parking - the bank parking that is taking up the Methodist Church parking, the daycare center, and the funeral home - this is an accident waiting to happen for a polling place. I agree, I understand you want to have your voting in one place, but I disagree with the polling station at this time so I will not vote in favor of this.”
Council Member Rinker added to previous comments that “it is a public safety issue and not only that, in this Town we’ve got areas that are going to be growing and the traffic conditions up there are horrendous. I didn’t see one Board member standing before this Council anywhere; I didn’t have one Board member contact me; I didn’t have any conversations with any Board member; did anyone else on this Council actually, other that Scott (Council Member Terndrup), have any interactions with any Board member on the Electoral Board about this matter? (Council Member Mauck shook her head signifying she had). I didn’t and in fact I put in a call and didn’t get a call back. As far as that goes, I don’t think they’ve made a valid effort to find out what the Council would really like to have down here. The Methodist Church, I guess they could have said no; what would they have done if they would have said no? Apparently I hear they didn’t want it there so they say no, what’s the Electoral Board going to do, force them to do it? I don’t think so.” He concluded by saying he thinks it is a bad decision, a bad place to have it, and unsafe.
Council Member Nicholson said, “I am like Don (Council Member Le Vine), I hate to see it at two places, but while I look at it as a public safety issue, I think here is a real safety issue also because you have people out in the street, cars going in and out, people walking so I don’t see how it could be a worse public safety issue than we have right here.”
Council Member Whittle said, “Logistically I agree with going to one place. I think there is a public safety issue at both places.” He said he would be voting for this just so all voting would be done in one place.
On a roll call vote, the motion passed with the following results:
Council Member Le Vine Yes
Council Member Mauck No
Council Member Nicholson Yes
Vice Mayor Taylor Yes
Council Member Rinker No
Council Member Terndrup Yes
Council Member Wallace No
Council Member Whittle Yes
Article 2: Submission and Review of Minor Sub-divisions:
Council Member Terndrup proposed this as a discussion item and explained this is an administrative policy that is currently in effect. The Planning Commission has recommended it be placed into an ordinance. It allows “Town administration discretionary approval for the division of land into three parcels or less.” The Ordinance Committee discussed this matter and the Planning Commission recommended extending the time period between petitions from one to five years. There was also some discussion as to restricting this to only residential applications. Council Member Terndrup said he wanted to just have some discussion on this as he knows Council has some questions and comments.
Discussion:
Council Member Le Vine agrees with the Planning Commission recommendations. Given there are so many houses that have been approved, he thinks it is a good idea for Council to have some control over how many new houses or residences are added. He is most concerned with allowing the land to be divided into as many as three lots. He knows it saves the applicant money and time. He thinks it is a good idea to have the administrative possibility, but he feels it should be two lots, once every five years. He is worried it is a way to get a lot more houses into Town without Council having a say.
Council Member Mauck asked if the Planning Commission hadn’t recommended changing it from three lots to two. Planner Amos said that was the Planning Commission’s recommendation. It was discussed in Ordinance Committee and it was decided to go with three lots. Council Member Mauck said she agreed with Council Member Le Vine that it should be no more than two lots.
Council Member Rinker asked if he owns a piece of property and divides it into two lots, “then I can’t re-divide it into two pieces for five years?” Council Member Le Vine said he would not be able to do this administratively. The lots can be re-divided again if the applicant goes through the Planning Commission. Council Member Rinker agreed it should only be allowed to be divided into two lots.
Council Member Terndrup said he thinks the recommendation for three lots came from Staff as they felt three lots would better suited for what has been done in the past. Council Member Rinker said the current policy is two lots. Planner Amos said two lots would be fine.
Council Member Terndrup asked about wording in 209.1 when it read “he;” should it be changed to he/she. Town Attorney Neal said Virginia Code makes everything sex neutral.
Town Attorney Neal said subdivisions are different than zoning. “In making zoning decisions, you have fairly wide latitude. In subdivisions, Virginia law is that if someone meets the requirements to subdivide, you are entitled to it by a matter of right. So, if you have a parcel that is big enough to divide into three parcels and you meet all of the requirements, you are entitled to that. It is not something that can be denied. The way the Virginia Code reads there are certain things that have to be in a subdivision. There is a second section that reads ‘you may have these provisions in your subdivision ordinance.’” If lot size, setbacks, etc. are met, it can’t be readily denied.
Council Member Terndrup said this ordinance is not something that stops anybody from going to the Planning Commission.
Council Member Terndrup moved to adopt 209.1 changing the wording in “a” to read “the proposal is to divide a parcel of land into not more than two (2) lots” and the language in the rest of the ordinance as presented in the Council Packet would remain the same; second by Council Member Rinker.
Discussion:
Council Member Whittle asked if the vote would be on 209.1 a – d and Vice Mayor Taylor said it would be.
The motion passed unanimously.
Council Member Terndrup said the Ordinance Committee will recommend a new ordinance to permit a 25 cent tax on cigarette sales in Strasburg. The ordinance will go to Public Hearing before Council in August and information will be forwarded to the Finance Committee in September.
Chief Sutherly presented the Ordinance Committee with an ordinance proposal to limit the number of dogs and cats allowed per household. There is a “pet occupancy ordinance” in Front Royal. There has been a complaint by a citizen that has triggered this. Council Member Terndrup said he believes the Front Royal ordinance limits the number of dogs to five per household. The Public Safety Committee was asked to look into this issue. Further discussion involved the issue of unwanted pets, particularly cats, and how this creates problems.
Chief Sutherly also asked the committee to look into an ordinance to require bicycle helmets for all riders under the age of 16. Moped safety was also discussed and all of this will be looked at by the Public Safety Committee.
Town Attorney Neal has given the committee information on spot blight and this will be considered at the September meeting which will be the next meeting on September 5 at 7 p.m.
Buildings and Grounds Committee: no report
Streets Committee: Did not meet, but will be meeting on July 16 at 7:30 p.m.
Special Committee Reports:
Strasburg Heritage Association: no report
Chamber of Commerce: Town Clerk Keller reported the Strasburg Chamber of Commerce Board met this morning. A presentation was given by Ms. Toni Mehling and Mr. Bob Privott regarding a new magazine they are starting. This area magazine is devoted to the Shenandoah Valley from Winchester to Lexington. The first copy will be back from the press on Friday and will feature a story on Strasburg as a “dayscape.”
In other business, Jeff Taylor was appointed to the Board. The Football Mania tickets are on sale now at the cost of $20 each. The Chamber will make a profit of $14 for each ticket sold and there is the possibility of winning $500 per week for 17 weeks, if you are very lucky.
The Oktoberfest Committee will be meeting on July 13 at 7 p.m. at the home of Mari-Anne Fowler. Christmas plans are proceeding nicely. The next Chamber Mixer will be held on Thursday, September 20 at the Allstate Insurance Office and Board members asked that all elected officials try to attend this.
Hometown Strasburg: Carla Wallen thanked the Council for letting them be a part of the budget process and they hope to spend the money wisely. At their last meeting it was discussed how to proceed with the grant writing. They invited Mayor Crisman and Council Member Le Vine to this meeting because they feel it is very important that Hometown work closely with the Town so that we don’t go off on a tangent and try to get a grant on something the Town doesn’t back. Ms. Margaret Struder is helping the group with grant writing. In conclusion, plans are proceeding slowly on the pocket park beside the Fire Hall.
Old Business:
Council Member Mauck asked if updates would be received on all the updated ordinances. The changes will be forwarded to Municode and updates will be forthcoming.
Council Member Mauck had asked a question before the meeting about the vote on the budget at the June meeting. Town Attorney Neal said his first thought was that since the budget didn’t change the tax rate or impose any new rate, he thinks the vote is alright, but he will do further checking.
New Business:
Committee Dates:
Public Safety Committee Thursday, July 26 6:30 p.m.
Personnel Committee Wednesday, July 25 7:30 p.m.
Public Utilities Committee Thursday, July 26 7:30 p.m.
Recreation Committee Monday, August 13 6:30 p.m.
Finance Committee Wednesday, August 1 7:15 p.m.
Ordinance Committee Wednesday, September 5 7 p.m.
Buildings and Grounds Thursday, July 26 6:30 p.m.
Streets Committee Monday, July 16 7:30 p.m.
Being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 8:45 p.m.