Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMIN 1989 1101 CC REGMINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL Moorpark, California November 1, 1989 The Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of Moorpark, California was held on November 1, 1989, in the Council Chambers of City Hall located at 799 Moorpark, California. 1. CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 7:05 by Mayor Brown. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: The Pledge of Allegiance was led by a Scout from Troop #601. 3. ROLL CALL: Present: Councilmembers Clint Harper, Bernardo Perez, Scott Montgomery, Paul Lawrason and Mayor Eloise Brown. Steven Kueny, City Manager; Richard Hare, Deputy City Manager; John Knipe, Assistant City Engineer; Sgt. Dennis Carpenter, Police Department; Pat Richards, Director of Community Development; Susan Cauldwell, Administrative Assistant; Phil Newhouse, Director of Community Services; Paul Porter, Senior Planner; John Knipe, Assistant City Engineer; Cheryl Kane, City Attorney; and Lillian Kellerman, City Clerk. 4. PROCLAMATIONS, COMMENDATIONS, AND SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS: The following proclamation was read by Mayor Brown: A. Recognition of Scout Troop 601 for Work Performed at Monte Vista Nature Park 5. REORDERING OF, AND ADDITIONS TO, THE AGENDA: Councilmember Montgomery requested that 10.A. be moved ahead of the public hearings. CONSENSUS: By consensus the Council determined to hear 10.A. before the public hearing items. Mr. Kueny requested that two items be added to the agenda Rosenkrantz v. City of Moorpark as a Closed Session item and a report on the Senior Center addition as need for discussion arose after the posting of the agenda. MOTION: Councilmember Harper moved and Councilmember Montgomery seconded a motion to add the two requested items as 14.L. and 11.M. as need arose concerning the•�e items after the posting of the agenda. The motion carried by unanimous voice vote. 7. City Council Agenda November 1, 1989 Page No. 2 B. John Lane, 12581 Williams Ranch Road, addressed the Council and indicated that Tierra Rejada at Spring Road needed to be widened and that a restaurant that attracts foot traffic should be brought into the Town Center. C. Anna Bell Sessler, 6161 Gabber Road, discussed her concerns that boutiques should not be allowed in residential areas. D. Ruben Castro, 77 First Street, reported on the work done by Catholic Charities. He said a new theme called the "Community Share Program" was being initiated and they hoped it would help provide more services in the community. E. David Wilkinson, 4791 Elderberry concerns with changing the City's for enclosed patios. He said that not practical where homes are built he believed he should be allowed patio under the present standards, under the existing policy. COMr1ITTEE REPORTS: Ave, expressed his patio policy standards a 20 foot set -back was on small lots. He said his permit to build a since he had applied Councilmember Montgomery reported that the trees in the Peach Hill subdivision were marked if any of the Council wanted to see them. Mayor Brown reported that she had attended Camarillo's 25th anniversary celebration. She also reported on the Economic Development Committee meeting and the Arts Committee. 8. CONSENT CALENDAR: Roll Call Vote Required. MOTION: Councilmember Harper moved and Councilmember Montgomery seconded a motion to pull items 8.E. and 8.G. from the Consent Calendar and approve all other Consent items as submitted. Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote. A. Consider approval of minutes for the Adjourned Special Cit Council Meeting of September. 2,___1987,_ - Regular City Council Meeting of September 2, 1987, Adjourned City Council Meeting_of September 9,._1987,__ Adjourned Special City_ Council Meeting of September_ _16,_ 1987, Regular Ci q Council Meeting of September 16,___1!)87,_,Adjou_rned City Council Meeting of September 23, 1987., Special_City Council Meeting of October 7, 1987,_ Re_g 1_a r° City _ Council Meeting of October 7, . 1987,__Adjurned City _Council Meeting_of October 26, 1988. Staff Recommendation: Approve the minutes as processed. B. Consider approval of minutes for, the___Reqular City Council Meeting of October 4, 1989. Staff Recommendation: Approve the minutes as processed. City Council Agenda November 1, 1989 Page No. 3 C. Consider approval of Warrant_Register 1989/90: - Prepaid Warrants Nos. 10479 - 10482 10546 - 10552 10555, :10556, 10558 $ 56,909.54 - Payable Warrants Nos. 10575 - 10632 $479,670.91 D. Consider acceptance of Notice of Completion for High Street Improvement Project. Staff Recommendation: Authorize City Clerk to record Notice of Completion. F. Consider a report to the Council regarding review compliance and monitoring of stationary emission standards. Staff Recommendation: Receive and file the report. H. Consider approving Resolution No. _89-621 to rescind Resolution No. 87 -420, which authorized investment of city monies by the County Treasurer. Staff Recommendation: Approve Resolution 89- to rescind Resolution No. 87 -420. I. Consider approval of the__ Laws for_ the Association of Ventura County Cities. Staff Recommendation: Approve the By -Laws of the AVCC. The following items were pulled from the Consent Calendar for individual consideration: E. Minor Modification No. 2s DP 302 American Products. A request to install an exterior dust__ collection bin and cooling tower. Staff Recommendation: Receive and file the report. Councilmember Lawrason asked for clarification of the noise level at the south property line. Mr. Richards indicated that where the noise level was 65 decibels it was due to existino traffic. MOTION: Councilmember Lawrason moved and Councilmember Montgomery seconded a motion receive and file the report. The motion carried by unanimous voice vote. G. Consider a report to the Council regarding staff's request to amend the City's patio _x) - ol icy___stan_dards relating to enclosed patios. Staff Recommendation: Approve twenty (20) foot setback. Paul Porter reported that currently a ten foot setback in the rear year to the property line is required for patio covers. He said that applicants are now applying for patio enclosures which 10. City Council Agenda November 1, 1989 Page No. 4 completely enclose the patio. He said that the purpose of the required rear and side setbacks is to provide light and air and to preserve open recreational area in the rear yard while providing a buffer to the adjacent property owner. He said that staff recommended existing pool /spa and patio cover requirements be revised and a policy added for enclosed patio covers which establishes a minimum distance of' twenty feet from the rear property line. In response to Councilmember Perez, Mr. Richards said that the Community Development Director had the authority to defer decisions on applications to the City Council even if the application met current standards. The Council discussed that a substantial number of houses in the City have a minimum yard and would be prevented from building a patio cover if a 20 foot setback policy was adopted and that applications made within current guidelines should be granted. Councilmember Harper suggested the Community Development Committee review the matter and report back to the Council. MOTION: Councilmember Montgomery moved and Councilmember Harper seconded a motion to refer this item to the Community Development Committee for review and to allow permits which meet all requirements of the existing ordinance to be processed. The motion carried by unanimous voice vote. COMMENTS FROM COUNCILMEMBERS A. Appointment to Parks and Recreation Commission. Recommendation: Consider appointment to Parks and Recreation Commission. Councilmember Montgomery nominated Ronald W. Corzine to fill the current vacancy as a Parks and Recreation Commissioner. MOTION: Councilmember Perez moved and Councilmember Montgomery seconded a motion to accept the nomination of Ronald W. Corzine to the Parks and Recreation Commission. The motion carried by unanimous voice vote. 9. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Public Hearing Notice Requi- ements A_ proposed draft ordinance changing the current 300 ft_._ notice requirement to 1000 ft. with an exception - for o_ne_ single family residence seeking a zone va_r`ance. Staff Recommendation: Approve the proposed change and introduce Ordinance No. for first reading. (Continued from October 18, 1989, Item 9A.) City Council Agenda November 1, 1989 Page No. 5 CONSENSUS: By consensus the Council determined to continue this item to the meeting of November 15, 1989. B. Major Modification No. 3 to Planned _Community No. 3 - A proposal to modify the Specific Plan and Master Plan for PC -3 to allow the desi nated community focus area to include 11 acres of neighborhood _commercial uses and to eliminate streets from the circulation plan. Staff Recommendation: Approve the Major Modification with the exception that the dedicated streets shall remain. (Continued from October 18, 1989, Item 9.D.) Mayor Brown opened the public hearing. Mr. Kueny went over the Memorandum of Understanding between the City and Urban West Communities relative to PC -3. He said there was some disagreement as to whether the actions required of the Council actually included the elimination of the street that went around the perimeter of the site. He said that staff was of the opinion that it was not part of the understanding. He said that after reviewing the proposed draft site plan for the commercial project, the staff felt it might be possible, with the commercial development of the site, to eliminate the street. He indicated that consistent with the Memorandum of Understanding, it would be appropriate for the Council to defer that decision until action was taken on a CPD for the commercial site. Tom Zanic, Urban West, addressed the Council and said that the modification being requested was part of a larger issue. He said that Urban West's concern was with the planned road at the edge of the commercial community focus area. He said that in their mind, the redesignation of the entire community focus area as commercial was part of the agreement and it was on that basis that Urban West was committed to providing the community use building. He suggested that action be postponed until a commercial plan for development and a redesignation of the community focus area could be considered concurrently. CONSENSUS: By consensus the Council determined that a CPD should to be filed before considering the Major Modification. MOTION: Councilmember Harper moved and Councilmember Montgomery seconded a motion to close the hearing and re- calendar the item for a later date. The voice vote was unanimous. 10. COMMENTS FROM COUNCILMEMBERS: Councilmember Lawrason said he felt increased emphasis on enforcing the speed limit for trucks along Los Angeles Avenue ought to occur along with ticketing for double and triple parking of trucks on that street. City Council Agenda November 1, 1989 Page No. 6 Councilmember Perez reported on the Dia de Los Muertos Celebration. Mr. Kueny was was recognized by Mayor Brown for making the largest individual contribution to the Disaster Relief Fund. 11. DISCUSSION /ACTION ITEMS: A. Consider Temporary Commercial Use in Residential Zones - a report regardinq_ "Boutique" /Craft /Garage /Yard Sales. Staff Recommendation: Direct staff to create an ordinance so as to allow such uses within all residential zones. Mr. Richards indicated that the staff recommended that (1) they be directed to create an ordinance that will amend Ordinance No. 84 to allow for Boutique /Craft Sales with a Temporary Use Permit and provide an exemption for Garage Yard Sales; and (2) direct staff to set this matter for public hearing on December 6, 1989; and (3) the City adopt an interim policy to treat all requests for Boutique /Craft Sales as Temporary Uses, with the Director of Community Development given the authority to approve subject to applicable conditions imposed as deemed appropriate. The Council discussed the need for regulation of these retail sales uses and that home owner associations should be part of the notification process not just the surrounding neighbors. MOTION: Councilmember Harper moved and Councilmember Montgomery seconded a motion to approve the staff recommendation with an amendment to (2) to send the item to the Planning Commission for review prior to return to the City Council by the first meeting in February rather than on December 6th. The motion carried by unanimous voice vote. B. Consider waiving of Sidewalk_ Standard_ for PD -1064 (TOPA). Staff Recommendation: Approve waiver and agreement for installation of additional sidewalk. Mr. Kueny indicated that he recommended that the City accept the currently installed sidewalks and allow the balance of the public sidewalk at the corner of Spring Road and Los Angeles Avenue to be completed with the same light rocksalt finish; that TOPA deposit $15,000 in cash with the City by November 9, 1989; and that TOPA install sidewalks on the east side of Spring Road to the satisfaction of the City Manager from the corner of Spring Road and New Los Angeles Avenue north to the current terminus of the existing sidewalk. The sidewalk to be asphaltic concrete or concrete or some combination. TOPA to make the installation regardless of cost with the actual City Council Agenda November 1, 1989 Page No. 7 construction costs to be verified by the City Engineer. If construction costs are less than $15,000, the City shall refund the construction amount to TOPA and retain the balance for the purpose of installing a sidewalk on the west side of Spring Road north of Los Angeles Avenue. if construction costs are $15,000 or greater, the City shall refund the total $15,000 deposit to TOPA. The refund shall be provided to TOPA within 15 days after their written request of refund is received and the City Engineer's verification of construction costs. Paul Geinger stated that TOPA was in agreement with the staff's proposal as outlined by the City Manager. MOTION: Councilmember Perez moved and Councilmember Montgomery seconded a motion to approve the deviation from the standard sidewalk finish for PD -1064 and accept the proposal as outlined by the City Manager. The motion carried by unanimous voice vote. C. Consider proposed rate increase for Charles Abbott and Associate for Buildina and Safetv Services Aqreement. Staff Recommendation: Approve rate increase and modify agreement to include professional liability insurance coverage. Mr. Richards reported that staff had met with Charles Abbott regarding his intended rate increase. He indicated that Mr. Abbott noted a decrease in his estimated increase predicated upon a reduction in the actual cost of professional liability insurance. Mr. Richards said that at the conclusion of the meeting agreement was reached on an average 7.8% increase for professional services rates, the actual rates are to be as identified in the staff report, and that the agreement to provide Building and Safety Services would be amended to include professional liability insurance with the City named as additional insured. MOTION: Councilmember Harper moved and Councilmember Lawrason seconded a motion to approve the staff recommendation. The voice vote was unanimous. D. Consider temporary moratorium for certain R-1 and _R_ -E zoned areas in the city. Staff Recommendation: Approve ordinance enacting moratorium. Mr. Richards reported that staff has been concerned with the possibility of residential land divisions occurring without the ability to condition and control the development process as outlined in the RPD process. He said the current R -1 and R -E zones only regulate such matters as lot size, setbacks and height restriction, no architectural elevation review would be done. He said the recommendation was that the Council enact a City Council Agenda November 1, 1989 Page No. 8 limited moratorium which would allow the City the ability to consider the benefits of modifying the zoning on certain properties to an RPD zone. The Council discussed that only lots less than one acre would be affected by an urgency ordinance and the length of time required to accomplish a zoning change. In response to Councilmember Montgomery, Ms. Kane explained the state law regulating moratoriums. Mayor Brown expressed her concern over enacting a moratorium and what would happen to those making applications during the period the moratorium was in place. MOTION: Councilmember seconded a motion to ordinance imposing a creation of parcels in acre, until such time the affected parcels. dissenting. Montgomery moved and Councilmember Harper have the staff bring back an urgency moratorium of 45 days to prohibit the the R -1 and R -E zone of less than one (1) as the RPD zoning could be established on The motion carried 4 -1; Mayor Brown E. Consider establishing position_ of Public Works Director. Staff Recommendation: Establish position of Public Works Director. Mr. Kueny reported that the Council had previously directed staff to study the establishment of an in -house City Engineer position. Mr. Kueny indicated that with other pressing priorities, an in -house City Engineer study had not been completed but that he felt the City should move forward and establish a Public Works Director position to be filled on an interim basis while the study was finished. He said a number of important public works items could be completed without affecting the existing City Engineering contract. Councilmember Lawrason asked how quickly the Public Works Director position could be filled. Mr. Kueny indicated that he believed the position could be filled in November. MOTION: Councilmember Harper moved and Councilmember Lawrason seconded a motion to approve the staff recommendation to establish the position and authorize the City Manager to make an appointment for a period not to exceed six months with the amendment that the appointment was provisional, and to appropriate $18,000 from the Gas Tax Fund Reserve and $6,000 from the General Fund Reserves to fund the position. The motion carried by unanimous roll call vote. City Council Agenda November 1, 1989 Page No. 9 F. Consider need for additional _clarification of Assessment District refunds concerning lower income senior citizens and procedures for refund requests. Staff Recommendation: Direct staff as deemed appropriate. The Council discussed the proposed procedures developed by the Budget and Finance Committee to implement a rebate for the annual assessments for AD 84 -2 and AD 85 -1. The procedures are as follows: 1. Owner occupant with rebate only on property granted a homeowner's exemption. 2. Demonstrate that there is no tax delinquency on the property and the assessment(s) for which the rebate is requested have been paid. 3. Gross family income may not exceed two- third's of the then current County median income; the most recent state and federal tax return must be presented to verify family income and family size. Regardless of the above, persons who feel that special hardship circumstances exist and who meet other applicable criteria may apply for a rebate. The City Council's Budget and Finance Committee shall make a determination on all such requests with a confidential report to Council on all approved requests. 4. Persons granted property tax assistance under the Gonsalves- Deukmejian - Petris Property Tax Assistance Law upon presentation of proof of such assistance and meeting items 1 and 2, above, shall be eligible for rebate. 5. A rebate may be requested between January 1, and May 31 of any fiscal year for assessment due and payable during that same fiscal year consistent with the above criteria. No rebate will be granted for delinquent assessments paid during any subsequent fiscal year. 6. Staff will issue press releases concerning the rebate process in January, April and July of each year. The rebate procedure will also be contained in the Engineer's Report for both Assessment Districts. 7. Rebates of City -wide assessments of both Assessment Districts will be funded by the City's General Fund. Rebates of special zone of benefit assessments will be funded by the respective zone of benefit for that District. MOTION: Councilmember Montgomery moved and Councilmember Perez seconded a motion to approve the procedures as outlined. The motion carried by unanimous voice vote. City Council Agenda November 1, 1989 Page No. 10 G. Consider report from Council Ad Hoc Committee concernin Downtown Area Concerns. Staff Recommendation: Direct staff as deemed appropriate. Councilmember Perez went over the committee report on establishment of a Neighborhood Awareness Committee. MOTION: Councilmember Montgomery moved and Councilmember Perez seconded a motion to authorize the ad hoc committee to proceed with area meeting and presentation of the proposal in the report of the Council Committee "RE: Establishment of a Neighborhood Awareness Committee ", invite suggestions for committee members and procedure; establish date of first committee meeting and attend; and work with committee to determine procedures of committee. The motion carried by unanimous voice vote. H. Consider report on flashing yellow_ beacons in Virginia Colony area. Staff Recommendation: Receive and file the report. Mr. Knipe reported that Caltrans has promised to investigate the possibility of installing additional traffic control devices to warn motorists of the roadway alignment including the City's suggestions of flashing yellow beacons in advance of the Princeton Avenue and South Condor curves, as well as chevron alignment signs through the curves. A response is expected from Caltrans by the end of the month. CONSENSUS: By consensus the Council determined to receive and file the report. I. Consider a report back_ _ to the Council regarding conditioning developments to __provide performance bonds. Staff Recommendation: Continue requiring Performance Bonds for all commercial and industrial development projects. Paul Porter gave the staff report. He said that the implementation of a performance bond provides an incentive for a permittee to adhere to the conditions of approval and indicated that staff would also encourage the Council to consider the establishment of a fee to pay for future project condition compliance. In response to Council discussion, Ms. Kane indicated that an ordinance should be adopted that set forth the terms under which a performance bond would be subject to forfeiture so a developer had an understanding of the circur•istances and process involved in a forfeiture. Councilmember Harper said he believed the ordinance should have language addressing the requiri�ment that landscaping be maintained. City Council Agenda November 1, 1989 Page No. 11 MOTION: Councilmember Montgomery moved and Councilmember Harper seconded a motion for a draft ordinance to be brought back to the Council setting forth the conditions under which a developer would be subject to forfeiture of a performance bond and setting forth the process; ordinance to include condition that would require landscaping to be maintained as a continuing obligation. The motion carried by unanimous voice vote. J. Consider a report to the Council regarding the Caston Trust General Plan Amendment occurring in the County area of Santa Rosa Valley. Staff Recommendation: Direct staff to send a reply to County Resource Management Agency objecting to both the General Plan Amendment and the adequacy of the Environmental Impact Report. Councilmember Harper indicated his support of the staff's position on the matter. Mayor Brown said she believed a letter should be sent indicating that the County should not approve a project which is dependent upon the City's participation in funding road improvements outside of the City boundaries. CONSENSUS: By consensus the Council determined that the staff and the Mayor should respond to the County of Ventura that the County should not approve a project which is dependent upon the City's participation in funding road improvements outside of the City boundaries. K. Consider installation of light shields_ on street lights. Staff Recommendation: Direct staff as deemed appropriate. Mr. Newhouse reported that there is a $50.00 per pole installation charge for each light shield. He said the total cost to install light shields on all street lights would be $85,050. Councilmember Montgomery suggested that the Public Works Committee review the matter. Motion: Councilmember Harper moved and Councilmember Montgomery seconded a motion to refer the item to the Public Works Committee for review. The motion carried by unanimous voice vote. L. Consider a report to the City_Council__regarding a Sphere of Influence Study. Staff Recommendation: Defer action on this matter until further progress is made on the General Plan Update. Mr. Richards gave the staff report and indicated that the staff recommendation was to postpone a Sphere of Influence Study until City Council Agenda November 1, 1989 Page No. 12 much later in the General Plan Update process or at the conclusion of the process. He said that staff was of the opinion that PBR is obligated to perform at least a general review of the potential for annexation as part of the current contract and would pursue that matter with them. Councilmember Lawrason indicated that he wanted to know what the City's options were and expressed concern in postponing the Sphere of Influence Study. The Council discussed putting a City workshop together and inviting the Director of LAFCO to attend. CONSENSUS: By consensus the Council determined to hold an evening study session with the staff; the Director of LAFCO to be invited as a resource person. M. Consider Senior Citizens Addition - Additional Costs. Mr. Newhouse went over the additional square footage needed for storage to be in compliance with Health Department regulations and said it was recommended that the $4,725 for that be appropriated from the previously approved project contingency of $13,083. He reported the staff recommendation to be as follows: 1) Approve request for four day extension for date to begin construction of project; 2) Hold McCarthy Construction harmless for any action arising out of any portion of the Senior Center additions being constructed within the Southern California Edison easement right -of -way; 3) Approve amending the contract work in the amount of $4,725 for the additional square footage which would bring the new total for the Senior Center to $266,375. 4) If Council approves the additional paving as described, direct staff to solicit additional proposal for work to be performed. MOTION: Councilmember Harper moved and Councilmember Perez seconded a motion to approve the -staff recommended action, (2) to be amended to say as approved by the City Attorney and the City Manager; (4) to be deleted and a new (4) added that the staff be directed to establish a ground- breaking ceremony. The motion carried by unanimous voice vote. 12. ORDINANCES: A. Consider second reading and__adopti_on_ of Ordinance No. 115. An Ordinance updating Building Codes - Proposed Building, Electrical, Mechanical and Plumbing Codes. City Council Agenda November 1, 1989 Page No. 13 MOTION: Councilmember Harper moved and Councilmember Montgomery seconded a motion to read Ordinance No. 115 in title only. The motion carried by unanimous voice vote. Cheryl Kane, the City Attorney, read the ordinance in title only. MOTION: Councilmember Harper moved and Councilmember Montgomery seconded a motion to declare Ordinance No. 115 read for the second time and adopted. The motion carried by unanimous voice vote. B. Consider first reading of Ordinance No. 116. An Ordinance creating the office of Director of Finance. MOTION: Councilmember Harper moved and Councilmember Montgomery seconded a motion to read Ordinance No. 116 in title only. The motion carried by unanimous voice vote. Cheryl Kane, the City Attorney, read the ordinance in title only. MOTION: Councilmember Harper moved and Councilmember Montgomery seconded a motion to waive further reading and declare Ordinance No. 116 read for the first time. The motion carried by unanimous voice vote. 13. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS: Councilmember Harper indicated he would like to discuss the allocation agreement with Griffin Homes. 14. CLOSED SESSION: MOTION: Councilmember Montgomery moved and Councilmember Perez seconded a motion to adjourn the meeting to Closed Session at the hour of 10:40 p.m. for a discussion of all items but 14.G. A. Personnel. B. Potential litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(b)(1). C. Potential litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(c). D. Litigation concerning City of Moorpark vs. Moorpark Unified School District. E. Litigation concerning Moorpark Unified School District vs. City of Moorpark. F. Negotiation for real property at 289 Casey Road (former high school site - Moorpark Unified School District) pursuant to Government Code Section 54945.8. City Council Agenda November 1, 1989 Page No. 14 G. Litigation concerning City of Moorpark vs. Southern California Edison. H. Litigation concerning Villa Del Arroyo vs. City of Moorpark. I. Litigation concerning City of Moorpark vs. Fedelety Corporation (Arroyo Vista Park). J. Litigation concerning Ventura County Community College District vs. City of Moorpark. K. Litigation concerning the County of Ventura vs. City of Moorpark The motion carried by unanimous voice vote. AT THIS POINT in the meeting a recess was declared by Mayor Brown. The meeting reconvened into Closed Session at the hour of 10:50 p.m. Present in Closed Session were Councilmembers Clint Harper, Paul Lawrason, Scott Montgomery, Bernardo Perez and Mayor Brown; Steven Kueny, City Manager; Richard Hare, Deputy City Manager; Pat Richards, Community Development Director; John Knipe, Assistant City Engineer; and Cheryl Kane, City Attorney. John Knipe left the Closed Session at 11:02 p.m. and Pat Richards left the Closed Session at 11:31 p.m. The meeting reconvened into open -session at the hour of 12:42 a. m. Steven Kueny, City Manager announced that items 14.A., 14.F. and 14.I. were not discussed and there was no action to report out of Closed Session. 15. ADJOURNMENT: MOTION: Councilmember Perez moved and Councilmember Montgomery seconded a motion to adjourn. ThE! motion carried by unanimous voice vote. The meeting adjourned at 12:42 a.m. Paul Lawrason, Mayor