President of Council Marjorie Harlow called Council to order on May 5, 2010, at 7:00 p.m.

    The governmental body and those in attendance recited the pledge of allegiance.

    Mrs. McNear took roll call. Present were Council members Diehl, Emerson, Galster, Hawkins, Squires, Vanover and Harlow.

    The minutes of April 21, 2010 were approved with seven affirmative votes.


    Mayor Webster said I’d like to read a communication from Senator Seitz concerning a piece of legislation we have on the agenda tonight. It reads: “After reading the April 23, 2010 article in the Community Press concerning sex offender notification, I wanted to let you know about Senate Bill 237, a bill currently before the Ohio Senate Judicial Criminal Justice Committee, which is intended to correct the Supreme Court ruling mentioned in this article. I am working with a sponsor to get this bill ready for Senate Committee passage. The bill is attached for your review.” “You are right to repeal your local ordinance as since 1999 much of that has been taken over by State Law starting with Senate Bill 5 in 2003 which incorporated my bill that requires community action notice within 1000 feet of schools and on through the Adam Walsh Act of 2007/2008. Sincerely, William Seitz”



Mr. Vanover made a motion to adopt and Mr. Squires seconded.

Mr. Vanover said Lieutenant Fields has been a lead dog. He was also involved in the CSI unit. Thank you.

Mayor Webster said it’s a bittersweet day for the City. We wish you a long and happy retirement. Without looking at the personnel folder I would guess there is not a single disciplinary action in there. There are not a whole lot of people who can say that.

Mr. Squires and Mr. Galster offered their congratulations.

Resolution R9-2010 passed with seven affirmative votes.

Chief Laage stated Brewster Rhodes who is the Regional Director for the Governor’s Office is here to present an item to Lt. Fields.

Brewster Rhodes presented a plaque from the State of Ohio formally recognizing Lieutenant Fields as he retires from the Springdale Police Department with thirty years of service. He has brought proficiency and expertise through many challenging assignments. He has been a tremendous asset to the State of Ohio and to the men and women who have had the opportunity to work beside him.

    Mayor Webster read a proclamation proclaiming May 9 to May 15, 2010 as Police Week.

    Lieutenant Fields and Captain Hafer accepted the proclamation.

    Chief Laage stated Captain Hafer has served as Assistant Chief since 1999. He began in Springdale in November 1973. He has received several letters of appreciation involving his excellent attendance record. He was nominated for a county-wide police appreciation award in 2008 for improvement in police operations in reference to his work on the license plate recognition system and street security program. Chief Hafer was involved in a high profile arrest and received a letter from the Director of FBI.

    Chief Laage said Lieutenant Fields has had an outstanding career in the Police Department. He joined the department in 1980. Lieutenant Fields spend a lot of time in Investigations. I wanted him in Investigations because of his ability to lead a good unit and get the results. In 2007 he became Administrative Supervisor. While head of Investigations he was involved in several high profile cases. He attended the FBI National Academy training program. He has always been a good cop and good leader.

    Chief Laage reported that police officers will participate in several Police Week events in honor of the 116 officers killed in 2009. The Police Expo will take place May 5 and 6. On May 10 a number of our honor guard will participate in the Greater Cincinnati Police Memorial march and some officers will go on their own time and bike 300 miles from New Jersey to Washington DC. A number of officers will travel to London, Ohio for the State memorial service.

    Lieutenant Fields said I want to thank each and every one of you. It has been a great ride. Since Day One the City of Springdale has been nothing but the best employer I’ve ever worked for. That’s why I’ve been here thirty years. You people make the difference so we can make a difference. I salute you and I thank you.


Mr. Vanover made a motion to adopt and Mr. Galster seconded.

Ordinance 17 -2010 passed with seven affirmative votes.


    Mr. Vanover made a motion to adopt and Mr. Squires seconded.

    Resolution R7-2010 passed with seven affirmative votes.


    Mr. Vanover made a motion to adopt and Mr. Squires seconded.
    Mr. Hawkins said in Resolution R7 & Resolution R8, the first whereas should read under the Ohio Revised Code Chapter “2950” as opposed to “2590”.

    Resolution R8-2010 passed with seven affirmative votes.


Mayor Webster said the flood zone was brought to our attention by Mr. Galster. We have two flood zones in the City that have never had a baseline elevation established. We did a pretty elaborate study in 1985 that involved a lot of the area around Princeton Bowl where there was a lot of flooding. This is a continuation of that. At the time there was not a problem there and there still is not a flooding problem but FEMA has informed these folks that their homes and structures are in a flood zone. At least one lender has arbitrarily said you will have flood insurance to the tune of $250 to $300 a month. So these homeowners are hit with this out of the clear blue. As the documentation explains, there are seven different properties involved, and a second flood zone around Howard Johnson and the first Knolls Apartment Building. As far as we can tell, these are the only two that have not had the baseline elevation established. It is something we can do with a purchase order so there won’t be any legislation involved but I did want Council to know what we are doing. I’d like to make a full disclosure and tell you one of the properties is on the north side of West Kemper Road between Rose Lane and CVS that could potentially be part of a redevelopment plan in the future. I own property that could also be part of that plan. It could be construed that by doing this it could expedite the development plan which would benefit the Websters. We have to do a survey for all nine property owners. Mr. Shvegzda informed Council that a HEC-RAS study to establish base flood elevations in the Zone A areas can be completed for a total cost of $14,000.

Mr. Galster said these are flood zones that FEMA generated many, many years ago. If you want to challenge the validity of the flood zone you can have a survey done which shows the base flood elevation is at this elevation and your property is above that; therefore, you can get relief from the FEMA flood zone plan. The problem we get into here is that these flood plains and these maps were pretty much drawn at random when originally drawn. They don’t follow the contours of the land. If there is a low swale, they forget about the low swale and they are going to keep rising up and hit the additional properties. Unfortunately, when the maps were originally drawn, they were very random. The relief of the property owner is to get relief from FEMA by having a survey done. The problem is you can’t do a survey if there is not a base flood level established. There is no way for these property owners to appeal to FEMA to get relief that their houses are not in the flood plain. In order for a residential homeowner to do an evaluation of this whole creek to get a base flood level that happens on their property, I felt was a little improper. I think it’s a good plan to get all the flood plains that have not been evaluated and have the flood levels established. If you look at your map, Zone AE means that there has been an evaluation done. Zone A means there hasn’t been any. When the individual owner tries to get relief from the government agency, it’s extremely difficult.

Mr. Shvegzda stated we did double check with FEMA. The maps in the area were updated in 2005. There weren’t any additional studies done that they didn’t put into the plans. Once the base flood elevation is determined, it will probably be obvious that some are out. Some may not be out. This will give definition as to what this elevation is.

Mr. Thamann said one of the things I did not include was Mr. Shvegzda’s report for the flood insurance rate map, Zone A. It breaks down the required tasks to prepare the study and it also breaks down the cost for those two zones. One is Cloverdale to Grandin, and the Glensprings stream. The total cost is $14,000 to do the studies which also includes the Certificates of Elevation for all nine parcels involved.

Mr. Galster said an additional comment from a Planning Commission member, one of the few green fields we have left is between SR 4 and Rose Lane area. Every time we have had a developer looking to develop this site, a lot of time the density of that redevelopment ends up being so tight it doesn’t get a favorable review from Planning Commission. A lot of reason the density needs to get so tight is that they have this undevelopable land because they can’t build in the flood zone. An additional side benefit is that we will be able to accurately define where that flood zone is so that any future development that may happen on that property would have a better use of the land without trying to cram things in because so much of the land is undevelopable. The Mayor’s property is in the general area but it is not in the flood zone so I don’t think there is any conflict whatsoever.

Mrs. Harlow said many years ago a resident came to Council or BZA because they were being charged for flood insurance. It was just a corner of their property that was in that flood plain. The house was not in jeopardy of being there at all. Do we know if we have any problem similar to this in that neighborhood?

Mr. Shvegzda replied we’d have to look specifically at where that property is but I’m not aware of any.

Mr. Vanover said the tail of my property is in the flood plain. When this came up at refinancing we signed a waiver with the lender because it was just a small ribbon in a low spot. By this time we had had the 500 year storm in 1985 or 1986 and it wasn’t anywhere near close. Since then we haven’t had to deal with that issue. It may depend on the lender.

Mayor Webster stated it may depend on the lender but it’s my understanding that in your case there has been an established base flood elevation. That makes it a lot easier to get relief through FEMA. In this case, these two areas have not been evaluated.

Mr. Galster said if there is a base flood elevation established on your property and you can show that your building is above that base flood elevation, which is the 100 year flood, then you can get a map amendment from FEMA and be exempted from having to carry the flood insurance.

Mr. Diehl said I understand that two people are going to benefit from this. Can we do harm to any of the other seven properties?

Mayor Webster replied no. All we’re going to do is have survey work done and establish some baselines, give that information to FEMA, get some records changed so these people can get relief from this flood insurance.

Mr. Shvegzda said our attempt will be to define that elevation. Some will probably still be impacted.

Mrs. Harlow asked if anyone has an issue with this please bring it to the floor tonight so Administration will know what direction to go in.

Mr. Galster stated in the past we looked at redoing the big ditch by Perkins and putting a culvert in. Will any of the survey work we are doing now allow us to not have to do that survey work on that project that we’ve now pushed back in our budget?

Mr. Shvegzda said those plans are done.

Mr. Galster asked if those plans are done, wouldn’t you have needed to establish a flood elevation for that?

Mr. Shvegzda responded that is in an area that has already been established.

Mrs. McNear said we have a transfer for a liquor permit at 11305 Princeton Pike. In response to Mayor Webster, Mrs. McNear stated they are not open. I think they are just trying to hold onto the permit. There were no objections.

    Mrs. Harlow said I’d like to turn this over to Mr. Hawkins to discuss Rules of Council. If we are not able to get this done this evening I would think it might be more productive to schedule a meeting just to handle this. If it gets late I will ask for a table and we’ll move it to next Wednesday night.

    Mr. Hawkins stated we will go down the agenda. The first item regarding Section 30.02 regarding committees was the initial thing Madam President asked us to look into. We’ve also attached two pages of the Charter so you can see that regarding Planning and Board of Zoning Appeals. All the appointments to standing committees are determined by the president every two years when the president is elected except Planning Commission and Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) which are controlled by the Charter. Individuals are on those boards and commissions for a four year term. Except for Planning and BZA those can be changed at the president’s discretion or with five affirmative votes of members of Council. It’s the Rules and Laws committee’s suggestion that based on review those things should remain as they are.

    Mrs. Harlow said when I took office this time it was very difficult to move people onto committees because we have the at-large, we have the district. Had it not been for Mr. Diehl coming to me months prior and asking to be removed from the BZA committee and go to Finance, and Mr. Squires willingness to move over to BZA, I would have really had my hands tied as to what committees I could place members on. None of us really new about this document previous until the end of December. Mr. Parham has stated in the absence of written policy we should adhere to what we have always done in the past. That is, when a Councilperson was appointed to a standing committee, they had typically been appointed for their term, so that was the procedure I followed when I appointed committee members this past December. In the past, we looked at Public Works and Public Utilities, and since Mr. Shvegzda writes the report, I felt like Mr. Shvegzda should give the report because he was the only one who could answer the questions that the Council people had. I think we may need to consider bringing that back and to define the scope of those responsibilities. Under Public Works, that’s street, highways, sewer, sidewalks, buildings, grounds, extension and repair of such services. We pay capable people to really handle that for us but I will appoint two people from Council to be on that committee and bring it back with a definition of their scope of responsibilities. I don’t want to see anyone who is a Council member at a construction site with a shovel in their hand. The reason I am thinking of bringing back Public Utilities is because of the electric aggregation we have been talking about. The committee may not be very active right now but possibly in the future, there may be some potential for electric aggregation. When we look at this document, we have to look at when it was drafted. It was drafted in the late 1960s and a lot of things have changed. Public Works and Public Utilities were probably two of the most important committees you could sit on at that time because our city was growing and we were putting in sewers and street lights and constantly having developers come in. We are basically landlocked and anything we will be doing is redevelopment. We will bring the committees back with a definition of scope of responsibilities. I also looked at Public Welfare, Safety and Education. This is health and safety measures, legislative matters pertaining to the Police and Fire Departments and items pertaining to the public welfare or education. We have not had this on our standing list of committees for a long time and I don’t really believe we need it. Welfare is handled by a state or county agency. Safety is covered by our Police and Fire Departments. Education is covered by our Princeton City School District. For Rules and Laws we have review initial draft of ordinances before presentation to Council. In getting some history on this from the Mayor I understand we didn’t always have the excellent Law Directors and legal counsel that we have now. There was a time in our history when it was necessary for a committee to review the ordinances before they were brought before Council. How do you feel about changing the wording on this committee?

    Mr. Hawkins responded the Rules and Laws committee as the two most novice Council members did not know what this entailed. We now have more knowledge of what has gone on in the past. We have a strong viewpoint that it needs to be there but we wanted to bring it up because obviously it was something that had not been happening and had not been happening before us because Council wasn’t aware of where this document was. Now that the history cleared up why this was here, it is probably not necessary for Rules and Laws to review all the legislation that will come before Council.

    Mr. Galster said it looks to me like there are items that are going to be tweaked. There will be items that need to be corrected for typographical and/or identification errors. I don’t know that this work session is going to get us through to the changes that you may desire for description of a certain board or committee. We have the two newest members of Council working on this. I admire the work you have done but it must have been monumental just figuring out where to start and not understanding this document. My recommendation is that we have a small subcommittee that would recommend the changes that you would like to have made. That can be an extension of Rules and Laws or its own subcommittee, and get the typographical changes, the definition changes you want and bring that back before the body as a whole to vote on. There is no way for us to vote tonight to change things. There’s no way for me to object as an example to the changing of the wording that you might want to have for Public Works definition, if in fact, I don’t know what the change is. So I don’t know how much productive back and forth we’ll have in reviewing this document until we at least sit down as a subcommittee and come up with the actual changes that are requested.

    Mrs. Harlow replied I think you are right. I think it will take quite a bit of work to take this document from the 1960s to 2010. That’s why I wanted to do a work session. We have the gender issues, title changes, time of meeting. I’m all for putting the time in and making sure we are all very comfortable with this and that we make the changes that need to be made.

    Mayor Webster said I’d like to make sure that all the committees are accounted for and it’s clearly defined how those are filled, who’s the appointing authority, are they elected by their peers. It may be redundant of things in the Charter but I think it should be clearly spelled out and also the term of the appointments should be spelled out, and a clear definition of what is a standing committee and what’s a special committee. If we did nothing else with this document but cleaned up the gender and changed the start time, that would go a long way to making this a great document.

    Mr. Vanover said in my sixteen years up here this is the first time I’ve seen this document. Looking over Rules and Laws obviously things have changed but the committee is operating the way it did when I sat on the committee. I think the delineation of appointments because the numbers with four district people and three at large, if the president is an at large person, then you are talking four and two. If it’s a district person it’s three and three. The potential for turnover is there every two years. It’s long overdue and I think it will alleviate anxiety and criticism of anybody sitting in the president’s chair.

    Mrs. Harlow stated when you don’t have something written down and you don’t have it defined by term, then you do as Mr. Parham said, and fall back on the past. I think this will make the job of the next person sitting here a whole lot easier.

    Mr. Galster said I just want to make sure there is a separation of what Mr. Vanover is talking about. There is nothing in this document that deals with anything about at large or districts as far as appointments to boards. That is a Charter driven issue and I think it needs to be kept as a separate issue. There is nothing in this document that addresses Planning and BZA, so if there is a desire to change that it would be a Charter change issue.

    Mrs. Harlow said it was not our intention to change that or to go to the voters and ask for any change.

    Mr. Galster responded this document is not tied to being district or at large in any of its statements about district or at large personnel.

    Mrs. Harlow replied it is not tied to that but when you have two Council persons who are serving on those committees and they are on there for a four year term, it ties your hands as to what you can do.

    Mr. Galster stated if we change this document, and then if we want a change about the at large and district and the four year term on Planning and BZA, that would be a separate exercise we would go through, and if it that were changed, then we could come back and change this again. I want to make sure we are only dealing with one document at a time or otherwise we’re going to get awfully confused.

    Mrs. Harlow said I have not heard of anyone making any recommendations to any Charter or the term limits on the Charter at all.

    Mr. Galster said then I think we are limited to a subcommittee limited to three Council members and Administration. Perhaps you want Rules and Laws to spearhead it with an extra Council person to rewrite it with everybody submitting whatever changes they want to have considered by that committee so it can be brought before City Council.

    Mr. Forbes stated to Mr. Galster’s point, you have to think and recognize the distinction here between boards and commissions which are generally governed by the Charter and Council committees which are set out in these Rules of Council. It’s very easy to start talking about them interchangeably. They are not. Yes, there are Council appointments made to Planning Commission and Board of Zoning Appeals. Those are commissions and boards governed by the Charter. You can talk about that but as Mr. Galster pointed out, that’s a different process but for this exercise I think it’s important that you just focus on the committees of Council and the rules state what those standing committees are. It also talks about special committees and the ability to do that. It’s at Council’s discretion but it either falls into one of the existing standing committees or it’s appropriate to potentially create a special committee for this topic. Let’s not get those things confused.

    Mrs. Harlow asked if we were to create a special committee, how many people should that comprise?

    Mr. Forbes responded generally committees are made up of no more than three Council members. If you have four then you have a quorum. I would suggest if you are going to create a special committee for this topic, my suggestion is create the committee, appoint the members and have an end date. Special committees go away when the job is done.

    Mrs. Harlow said I’m not sure how to proceed with this. I don’t want to negate any of the work Mrs. Emerson and Mr. Hawkins have done on this. I would like to table this, think about it and see if I want to add one more member to work with the Rules and Laws committee or have a special committee, but all Council people will have a voice in the document. I think we only have one Council person who doesn’t use e-mail exclusively. I think we could work around Mr. Squires with copies. I think we could get information out there and work through the document one area at a time.

    Mayor Webster said special committee members have to have the concurrence of Council. To follow up on the point Steve and Jeff made about trying to keep the documents separate, bear in mind it’s not just BZA and Planning spelled out in here. It’s also the Volunteer Fireman’s Dependents Board which has a three line description. It doesn’t tell how many members. It doesn’t say how long it should serve. Without going through Charter I would think we would want to expand on this a little bit. It mentions the Board of Health in here but nowhere in here or in Council’s Rules is there a provision for a liaison from Council to Board of Health. I think that’s a glaring oversight.

    Mrs. Emerson said I’m just a little confused on the task you are asking. It looks like in Rules and Laws you can make any moves of any committees at any time, and you are able to make appointments to special committees with the concurrence of the majority of Council. The other two committees you cannot. So the flexibility is there. I’m confused if we’re not changing the Charter, how changing the Rules and Laws will lighten up any flexibility for the president in the future.

    Mrs. Harlow responded your husband sits on BZA. One of my openings would have been BZA. I was not comfortable putting a husband and wife team on BZA. I sought counsel from Mr. Forbes and he said there is nothing illegal about it, but is it right. I don’t think it is. My choice was not to put you on BZA.

    Mrs. Emerson said that would have been my choice also because I would have declined.

    Mrs. Harlow said I had to put you somewhere. I asked where you want to go and I try really hard to use people’s strengths. But it came to a point that I have people that I have to move forward and put into committees and I didn’t have openings for them. I didn’t have much movement because in the absence of having a document like this or having a time frame for the committees we did what we’ve always done, four year terms. As Mr. Parham said, without written policy you fall back on procedure and that’s what we had done.

    Mrs. Emerson said as Rules and Laws states here, you can move people as you choose.

    Mrs. Harlow replied I can but we did not know this in December. We had not seen this document. Even Administration did not know where this document was buried. I did not feel it was right to take people who were sitting on a committee and move them because new people came on.

    Mrs. Emerson stated but you are allowed if someone requests to be moved off a committee that’s supposed to be a four year term, you’ll take their request also.

    Mr. Hawkins said I think what Mrs. Emerson is getting to is in the most general reading of the Rules of Council document, it’s indicating that appointments to standing committees shall be made by the President of Council as soon as practical after his election (which should be his or her election). Every two years we elect a president. Every two years we have one person come off BZA and Planning and one person stay. Besides those two individuals who stay on Planning and BZA, the president has wide discretion to do whatever they want with regard to all the other committees and boards and commissions. Now that we have this document, you now have that freedom at that point to do whatever you want. I think what Holly’s touching on is that there probably is no need to change that because we have uncovered that. Initially, I think the mindset was when I’m appointing people to these committees I only have to work with folks that have just been elected or re-elected to move around. That’s not the case.

    Mrs. Harlow replied it’s not now. It was then.

    Mr. Hawkins I said in terms of where we are going now, you have that freedom. That seems like one issue that’s taken care of by discovering this document. Everyone is up for grabs except that one individual on Planning and BZA.

    Mrs. Harlow responded I think it would be a good idea to tie the term in there for a two year term because the president is elected for a two year term. The Council member would serve for the duration of the president’s term. If a president decided Mr. Diehl, you can be on Finance this month but two months from now I’ve decided I want somebody else on Finance. According to this document I have the right to do that and I don’t think that’s something you want to get into. I don’t think that would be productive for the City.

    Mr. Diehl stated on the contrary, I totally disagree. If I’m on the Finance Committee and am very inept, I need to get off.

    Mrs. Harlow said of course, and I think you can do that with a recall vote of five members of Council. I think a two year term gives the Council member an opportunity to learn their job and then in two years I think it’s really important that people switch up. Mr. Galster, I’m not saying this as negative to you at all. Please do not take it this way. You’ve sat on Planning for sixteen years. I believe you began as a resident. In these tough economic times I think you are the best person to be sitting there. If a developer comes in here I don’t want to be trying to tell the developer how many caliper inches of trees, how much parking he needs because I have no experience with that. If the developer comes in to meet with Planning and people on Planning Commission have experience then the developer is going to be that much more willing to work with the City to develop properties that we have. But having you in that seat for that many years, it also prevents another Council person from growing into that seat. I think that’s something we might want to look at in the document also. I think it’s really important that everybody have a turn.

    Mr. Galster responded that’s not part of this document.

Mrs. Harlow stated no, it’s not. That would just be up to the next Council to decide that. Do you see where I’m going? We all need to grow into the positions.

Mr. Galster said I understand while the experience is good it doesn’t create as many opportunities of other Council members on those boards. A district person is the only person who can replace me. It’s this board’s decision as a whole to make. I understand that this is a document that a lot of Council people have not seen much of but I just don’t want to make it seem that it’s been buried and never been before the light of day because Ordinance 39-2003 was passed on October 1, 2003 by every member of this Council except for the two new members. While it may not be used very often, it’s not like it has been sprung upon us. It’s been there and we have made adjustments to it in the past.

    Mrs. Harlow asked to table this item this evening. I’ll do some reflecting on it and bring it forward again.

    Mr. Forbes said the only other comment I would make from a procedural standpoint is that these rules are part of your codified ordinances so when it gets to the point that Council is ready or considering any changes to this, you are amending the codified ordinances. And also to Mr. Galster’s point, they have been part of the codified ordinances since their inception. They’ve been in the code book.

    Mayor Webster said that will take care of itself because every year we have the codification brought up to date. If Council passes something the changes will automatically get pulled in with the next update.

    Mr. Galster said when you consider the names you want to consider for the formation of the special committee, I think it would be extremely important to have at least one member of Rules and Laws considered for any special committee that is formed because of any research that has been done.

    Mrs. Harlow said I totally agree. My dilemma was trying to figure out the third person as I feel Mrs. Emerson and Mr. Hawkins should stay on the committee. We’ll discuss this at our next Council meeting.

    Bike Safety Day                         -     May 8    Planning Commission                         -     May 11
    Board of Health                         -     May 13
    BZA                                 -     May 18
    Housing Committee                         -     May 19



ODOT agreement for traffic light upgrade             -    May 19
Agreement with CLGBP for health insurance        -     May 19
Accepting public right away –Thompson Thrift         -    May 19
Princeton scholarship students resolution             -    May 19

Mayor Webster said our City Administrator was at a City Manager conference last week. Due to budget restraints he paid his own way. He said last year there were about 2200 at this conference. This year there were about 600 and a lot of them paid their own way.

Mrs. Harlow said I believe I heard on the radio that there was a city managers conference scheduled in Cincinnati and it was postponed for six months to see if the economy picks up.

Mr. Galster asked will the health insurance agreement have an emergency clause?

Mr. Thamann responded it may have an emergency clause but we wouldn’t start the program until August 1.

Mr. Galster said so we intend to have two readings.

Mr. Thamann answered I would have to double check to make sure how soon USI, who is the broker for the Center for Local Government, needs that document but we think we can go with two readings. If they tell us we have to do it sooner we may have to have an emergency clause.


Council adjourned at 9:08 p.m.

                        Respectfully submitted,

                        Kathy McNear
                        Clerk of Council/Finance Director

Minutes Approved:

Marjorie Harlow, President of Council

__________________________, 2010