MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL & WPC AUTHORITY
JULY 7, 2003
A REGULAR MEETING of the City Council & WPC Authority was held on Monday
July 7, 2003 in the Council Chambers.
Present was Mayor Owen J. Quinn, Jr., City Councilors Thomas C. Jerram, Paul F. Samele, Jr., Marie P. Soliani, Richard E. Dalla Valle, and James D. Reginatto, Corp. Counsel Albert Vasko, Comptroller Alice Proulx, Public Works Director Gerald Rollett, Purchasing Agent Charlene Antonelli, Building Official Francis Cardello, Superintendent of Streets Robert Lizotte, Data Processing Manager William Hoffman, Personnel Director Thomas Gritt, and Board of Finance member Bruce Cornish.
Mayor Quinn called the meeting to order at 6:45 p.m.
MINUTES #020
On a motion by Councilor Jerram, seconded by Councilor Reginatto, the Council voted unanimously to accept the minutes of the special joint meeting with the Board of Finance held May 19, 2003.
On a motion by Councilor Jerram, seconded by Councilor Reginatto, the Council voted with the exception of Councilor Samele who abstained, to accept the minutes of the special joint meeting with the Board of Finance held May 20, 2003.
OPEN TO THE PUBLIC #040
On a motion by Councilor Reginatto, seconded by Councilor Jerram, the Council voted unanimously to open the meeting to the public.
Tara Alciati, 171 Charles Street, inquired about the status of the drainage ditch on her property.
Mr. Rollett said he believed the paperwork had finally been negotiated on the key easement. Corp. Counsel Vasko will finalize all the easements giving the city access to the property to begin a city project.
Bill Knight, East Pearl Street, stated that a van parked on the sidewalk at the intersection of East Pearl and Wall Streets had made it difficult for him to negotiate his passage and had forced him to walk in the street. He reported that this was one of the busiest intersections near his home and asked that anyone report such incidents to the Police Department.
TORRINGFORD FARMS POND #150
On a motion by Councilor Jerram, seconded by Councilor Dalla Valle, the Council voted unanimously to table the matter concerning the Wetlands Enforcement Officer’s letter dated June 10, 2003 in regard to Torringford Farms Pond. (Tabled on 6/16/2003.)
CARDINAL ENGINEERING #170
On a motion by Councilor Jerram, seconded by Councilor Dalla Valle, the Council voted unanimously to authorize the payment of $7,500.00 from Northwest Interceptor Fund #302 to Cardinal Engineering, Inc. for sewer design and survey work performed on East Main Street/New Harwinton Road sanitary sewer improvements.
TRUMBULL CONSTRUCTION #180
On a motion by Councilor Dalla Valle, seconded by Councilor Jerram, the Council voted unanimously to authorize the payment of $15,414.52 from Sanitary Sewer Capital Improvement Fund #490 to Trumbull Construction for sanitary sewer improvements to Oakbrook Lane/West Horace Street and Perkins Street.
TRUMBULL CONSTRUCTION #200
On a motion by Councilor Reginatto, seconded by Councilor Dalla Valle, the Council voted unanimously to authorize the payment of $29,628.79 from Northwest Interceptor Fund #302 to Trumbull Construction for sanitary sewer improvements - Torrington Phase III Sewers, Contract 4 - Highland Avenue.
ARTHUR STREET #210
On a motion by Councilor Jerram, seconded by Councilor Dalla Valle, the Council voted unanimously to accept the recommendation from Planning & Zoning to abandon a section of Arthur Street.
On a motion by Councilor Dalla Valle, seconded by Councilor Samele, the Council voted unanimously to schedule a public hearing for July 21, at 7:00 p.m. on the proposed abandonment of a section of Arthur Street and change of a street name.
VANASSE, HANGEN & BRUSTLIN, INC. #250
On a motion by Councilor Dalla Valle, seconded by Councilor Soliani, the Council voted unanimously to authorize the payment of $10,118.64 from the Traffic Study Fund 0233-5910-0000 to Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, Inc. for services performed from 11/26/00 to 4/12/03.
THE HIRING OF PERSONNEL #275
On a motion by Councilor Dalla Valle, seconded by Councilor Soliani, the Council voted unanimously to authorize the Personnel Director to hire a Highway Maintainer, Purchasing Clerk, and Data Processing Assistant.
During a discussion Councilor Samele inquired whether the proposed positions were full time.
Mr. Gritt stated that the Purchasing Clerk was part time, the others were full time. The question he had at this time was whether we were back in the mode where it’s o.k. to go outside and fill a position if we have a vacancy that’s funded in the budget.
Councilor Jerram suggested proceeding cautiously, perhaps waiting until July 31 because the state still hadn’t finalized their budget and towns weren’t certain of state funding. Perhaps they could look at attrition and bring people back when there’s a more optimistic budget scenario. He then suggested taking care of these three positions and revisiting the issue at the beginning of August to see if the state’s budget is in place.
Councilor Dalla Valle inquired how the Purchasing Clerk’s position went originally from being a full time position to being part time now.
Mrs. Antonelli indicated that the position was budgeted for full time. However, she thought the work could be handled on a part time basis since they consolidated departments.
Councilor Samele pointed out that it was posted as a part time position. He asked if the position would become full time if they found there was enough work to justify it and the position was budgeted for full time.
Mr. Gritt said “I imagine that it could.”
Councilor Dalla Valle asked whether such a change would have to come back before the Council.
Mr. Gritt stated that the process would only entail presenting the Mayor with a requisition to move from part time to full time. There was a possibility of further changes and/or consolidation with the Assistant Treasurer’s position which they will revisit when that position becomes vacant.
Councilor Dalla Valle inquired whether a positive vote from the Council would give Mr. Gritt cart blanche to change it to full time.
Mr. Gritt stated that it would not have to be posted again as a full time position. The process in the past has been that the decision is made internally as long as there are monies in the budget to fund it. If additional funds were necessary then it would have to be approved by the Council.
Councilor Reginatto indicated that the Council has approved funds for a full time position and it would be beneficial for the city to handle the position on a part time basis.
Councilor Dalla Valle agreed that it was beneficial for the city. However, the city was in an exceptional position because they had instituted a hiring freeze. He asked to be notified if the Purchasing Clerk’s position was going to be made full time.
Mr. Gritt agreed to notify the Council should it turn full time. He inquired whether the Council would want him to report back to them for any other positions that may come up until August.
Councilor Dalla Valle thought it would be wise to do so until the state adopts its budget.
HIRE PURCHASING CLERK #570
On a motion by Councilor Dalla Valle, seconded by Councilor Jerram, the Council voted unanimously to authorize the Personnel Director to hire Pennie Zucco as Purchasing Clerk.
During a discussion, Mr. Gritt stated that hiring Ms. Zucco was somewhat outside of the city’s policy whereas they would usually make the position competitive and advertise. Ms. Zucco has filled in for the past year and a half on a part time basis, she has tested for the city and applied for other positions and has the skills to do the job. It is the Purchasing Agent’s recommendation to hire Ms. Zucco.
PUBLIC HEARING: #600 To consider repealing Article 1 of Chapter 128 of the Torrington Code entitled “Littering and Dumping” and substituting a new ordinance entitled “Littering and Dumping” in its place.
Mayor Quinn called the public hearing to order at 7:00 p.m.
Assistant City Clerk Joline LeBlanc read the legal notice.
Public Works Director Gerald Rollett expressed his concern over the proposed ordinance because it appeared to impact some of our solid waste issues and possibly the street department.
1) Authorized Private Receptacle should be better defined.
2) The definition of “Garbage” differs slightly from the one that exists in Section 128-5 of the Solid Waste Ordinance.
3) Under Litter, waste material isn’t defined. He asked, “does it mean both refuse and rubbish?” He suggested expanding on “tends to create a danger to public health, safety and welfare”, to include “that could negatively impact the utilization of both private and public property.”
4) Under Refuse,
A) He suggested adding “Municipal” solid wastes, to be more in line with definitions that exist in our current solid waste regulations.
B) He suggested eliminating the words “Street Cleanings”. He pointed out that the city routinely sweeps 165 miles of road in Torrington and, under this definition, they would make street sweepings ”refuse”, that would have to follow solid waste regulations. He didn’t believe that was the intent.
5) He expressed his concern over Section 4, A & B, that would allow the sweeping of sand, and ice and snow control materials from private parking lots into the street.
Councilor Jerram inquired whether the ordinance was redundant with State Statutes on littering.
Corp. Counsel Vasko indicated that, for the most part it was redundant. The ordinance came out of the Anti-Blight Committee and other committees regarding ways we could make the city cleaner, and mirrored Waterbury’s ordinance where the State’s Attorney was able to use it to clean up properties in Waterbury.
Councilor Jerram asked if there was any potential conflict with the fines of $100.00 a day versus the fines set from State Statutes.
Corp. Counsel Vasko indicated that the fines from the city and state could be levied at the same time.
MOTION TO CONTINUE #910
On a motion by Councilor Dalla Valle, seconded by Councilor Jerram, the Council voted unanimously to continue the public hearing to the next Council meeting. (July 21, 2003.)
VOTE TO TABLE: LITTERING & DUMPING #1050
On a motion by Councilor Dalla Valle, seconded by Councilor Jerram, the Council voted unanimously to table the vote to repeal Article 1 of Chapter 128 of the Torrington Code entitled “Littering and Dumping” and to substitute a new ordinance entitled “Littering and Dumping” in its place.
PUBLIC HEARING: #935 To consider amending the city’s Anti-Blight Regulations, specifically Section 161-10 to make a violation punishable by a fine or a civil penalty.
Mayor Quinn called the public hearing to order at 7:10 p.m.
Assistant City Clerk Joline LeBlanc read the legal notice.
Corp. Counsel Vasko stated that the change to the Anti-Blight Ordinance would make any violation a criminal offense so the State’s Attorney’s office could get involved in prosecuting violators, in addition to the $99.00 a day civil penalty.
Having no further comments or questions, Mayor Quinn closed the public hearing at 7:13 p.m.
AMEND ANTI-BLIGHT ORDINANCE #1070
On a motion by Councilor Dalla Valle, seconded by Councilor Jerram, the Council voted unanimously to amend the city’s anti-blight regulations, specifically Section 161-10 to make a violation punishable by a fine or a civil penalty.
ANTI-BLIGHT APPEAL HEARING: #1080 To discuss an appeal on a decision from an official charged with the enforcement of the Anti-Blight Ordinance.
Corp. Counsel Vasko indicated that the property located at 117 Water Street was cited for anti-blight violations by the Building Official Francis Cardello. Mr. Laliberte, the owner of the property, the Midland Group, LLC had appealed that decision.
J. R. Laliberte, 416 West Wakefield Boulevard, Winchester, stated that he was the owner, general manager, and member of the Midland Group, LLC and the sole partner in that company at this time, so, therefore the owner of the Old Firehouse. He indicated that he didn’t find any just cause behind the five items citing him for violations.
A. Extended vacancy: Mr. Laliberte indicated that he had been using the building as a warehouse for a floor covering operation and people are in the building three to five times a week taking equipment in and out.
B. Building not being maintained, there are broken windows and building is deteriorating:
Mr. Laliberte stated that there was one cracked glass in one of the garage doors, which he didn’t consider to be a broken window. There are no other broken windows in the building. In regard to the building deteriorating, he had someone repair the roof when the warmer weather came about and they haven’t found a drop of water in ninety days. The only place the building is taking any water is the back portion where the roof needs to be replaced, but it doesn’t affect the structure itself.
C. The building is attracting illegal activity and is a fire hazard: Mr. Laliberte didn’t understand how the building was attracting illegal activity when it is locked up tight and has more than $150,000.00 worth of floor covering equipment stored there. Someone would have to climb a ladder and break a window to get into the building. He never had a complaint from the Police Department about illegal activity, and didn’t find the building to be a fire hazard in any way.
D. It is a factor seriously depreciating property values in the neighborhood: Mr. Laliberte would need more facts to understand how this building, sitting there by itself, could affect the property values of the surrounding properties.
E. It is a factor creating a substantial and unreasonable interference with the reasonable and lawful use and enjoyment of other space or premises with the neighborhood: Again,
he didn’t understand how houses and buildings locked up tight, not boarded up in any way, could affect the premises around it.
Mr. Laliberte believed the allegations against his property were unfounded. He said “You need to nip this in the bud. You’re going to deter the Anti-Blight Commission’s authority and confidence in people if you use it in ways because the newspapers pushed you and complaining about a building not completely renovated. I find it ironic that six years ago or four years ago, I pushed the city to try to get an Anti-Blight Commission and find myself sitting here with something I find frivolous and unfounded.”
Mr. Laliberte pointed out that he was the first person to appeal an alleged violation and that it took the city some time to find the paperwork for him to appeal. He also noted that the letterhead for the Anti-Blight Commission had an incorrect phone number.
Frank Cardello presented the Council with pictures of the building which clearly showed the deterioration of the building. Bricks are ready to fall off, windows and doors are boarded up on the driveway side, and the property is overgrown and not being maintained.
Mayor Quinn inquired whether Mr. Laliberte was presently being fined.
Mr. Cardello said he didn’t believe he was being fined.
Councilor Dalla Valle said it appeared as though the fines would have gone into effect on the 28th of June, thirty days upon receipt of the letter, barring any appeal. He inquired whether the original deed specified that the corners of the building had to be repaired by a certain date.
Mr. Laliberte indicated there were tax credits that would have been available to him based on him doing some renovations to the building. There was no specific language other than the building had to be kept in the historical look when it’s renovated. Architectural Review would have to review any changes he would want to make to the facade.
Councilor Soliani asked Mr. Laliberte to list any major renovations he had done to the interior or the exterior of this building since he had purchased it from the city for $1.00 six years ago.
Mr. Laliberte said he had the roof repaired every year, and almost every year it held out through the winter. This was the first year that it did not hold through the winter months.
Councilor Soliani inquired whether he had obtained any permits to do any repairs to the building.
Mr. Laliberte said he wasn’t doing any demolition or roof replacements and wasn’t aware he needed a permit to bring some buckets of asphalt to the roof to do some repairs. He has his own manpower and therefore never hired an outside contractor to do the work.
Mr. Laliberte indicated that the recent publicity has not helped him find a suitable tenant who would support the expense of a mortgage. In fact, the publicity had rendered him several offers from people wanting to purchase the building for $2.00.
Mr. Laliberte reviewed the photos with the Council. The first picture showed the alley shared between his building and the adjoining building. It was his understanding that the land was actually owned by the property owner next door. He didn’t have a problem cleaning up the alley if he was asked to do so. The last four tenants in the building next door had dumped many items in the alley and they have never received a violation.
He indicated that there hasn’t been any brick work done to the building, but not one single brick had fallen in the six year’s he’s owned it. He did agree that there was a half dozen bricks that were very loose and he had every intention of having them removed in the next few weeks. The rest of the deterioration was caused by not having any heat in the building for ten years prior to his purchase of the building.
Councilor Soliani, member of the Anti-Blight Committee, indicated that they were looking to see some actual work done on the building rather than hearing reasons why the shrubs were overgrown, etc.
Mr. Laliberte said, “I was told that before. I made an appointment with the Building Inspector and my attorney, sat with him for a couple of hours, sent him a letter within 24 hours with a 60 day plan, and 35 days later, he sent me a certified letter saying I was violating the anti-blight. So I tried to come up with a plan that was satisfactory to the Building Inspector, and I’m not quite sure what changed his mind, but after making a verbal agreement with my attorney and myself, that if we put the things in writing we were going to do, and give him a written plan within 60 days, he’d be satisfied. Instead, this showed up.”
Mr. Cardello indicated that, when he received Mr. Laliberte’s letter, he sat down with the Anti-Blight Committee and decided that the time period he was giving him was too great and that it would never get done.
Corp. Counsel Vasko stated that Mr. Laliberte had been invited to appear before the Anti-Blight Committee on numerous occasions and he declined.
Mr. Laliberte indicated that he was called once to see if he could attend a meeting in two hours and he couldn’t.
Councilor Dalla Valle asked Mr. Laliberte if he had since drafted that plan.
Mr. Laliberte said “Not in writing. I would if I was given some time for it. I can tell you ahead of time, I’m not going to spend $200,000.00 on a vacant building that I don’t have a legitimate tenant for. I’ll take care of safety. The things that were sent to me in a letter a couple months ago by Frank Cardello were the whole list of things that he was concerned with. All the things that were safety, other than the six bricks on the side of the building, were all addressed within 48 hours of the first letter that I received from Frank Cardello.“
Councilor Dalla Valle indicated that the deed clearly stated that if he didn’t do this outside work within a certain amount of time, that the deed would revert back to the city and he would lose the property.
Mr. Laliberte said the deed says very specifically that, “In no circumstances, the city would ever take the building back.”
Councilor Dalla Valle thought the deed should be reviewed. First and foremost however, Mr. Laliberte should put together the plan he referred to. According to the regulations, the Council is to render a decision within ten days, and it would be helpful for them to have his plan in front of them before they make a decision.
Mr. Laliberte said it would be helpful to get a list of things in which they are truly concerned about instead of putting five things on a piece of paper that are not valid.
Mr. Cardello stated that he couldn’t tell from the outside of the building and that he would have to go inside to investigate a bit further.
Councilor Jerram inquired whether Mr. Laliberte ceased all of his intentions and suspended all work once he received the letter from Mr. Cardello.
Mr. Laliberte said he received the letter and wasn’t certain whether he was going to be charged $99.00 a day or $700.00 a day. At that point he was better off hiring a demolition contractor and knocking the building down than paying fines for sixty days. He said, “taking it down would be a shame because the building is structurally sound. “
Mayor Quinn said he didn’t think it could be taken down. It was in a historic district.
Councilor Jerram stated that there were two issues at hand: 1) How could they manage the anti blight ordinance as well as taking into consideration Mr. Laliberte’s concerns and his original intentions to provide a plan where he ceased all progression of the plan once he received the citation, and 2) The original language provided for Mr. Laliberte as well as the city in his original acquisition of the building.
He asked Mr. Laliberte if it would be suitable for him to meet with Corp. Counsel Vasko and Mr. Cardello in order to address some of these concerns.
Mr. Laliberte said yes.
Councilor Jerram asked if two weeks would be satisfactory.
Mr. Laliberte indicated that he would need until the end of August because he was starting four huge commercial jobs out of state next Monday.
Corp. Counsel Vasko stated that the ordinance specifies that the city has ten days after the appeal hearing to render a decision, however, if the Council was to continue the hearing, the ten days would run from when the appeal hearing was closed.
Mr. Laliberte said “If we’re looking for a long term solution to the building, I’m interested in continuing, but if you’re only looking at the anti-blight, then I think you need to address the A through E issues that are actually on the violations and I don’t think that there’s legitimacy to all five of those issues on here.”
Councilor Dalla Valle pointed out that the anti blight regulations clearly state that once work commences, the fines cease. All they were looking for is for Mr. Laliberte to start working on the building. He suggested starting with the bricks because the facade was what people were looking at.
Mr. Laliberte said the building will continue to deteriorate as long as the building is not being heated.
Councilor Jerram stated that Mr. Laliberte knew there was no heat in the building when he acquired the property six years ago.
Mr. Laliberte said yes, however he didn’t quite understand that the drains all came through the building, but he definitely knew it after having someone try to repair it during the first six month’s of ownership.
Councilor Jerram said Mr. Laliberte certainly understood that he would have to heat the building at some point if he was to utilize it and insure its long term use, and that, in buying the building for $1.00, he certainly would encounter other expenses.
Councilor Dalla Valle inquired whether he was collecting money from his carpet business, and, if so, could he use those funds to take care of some of the problems.
Mr. Laliberte said it did earn a small amount of money. He stated that the brick work would cost well over $100,000.00 to repair.
Councilor Dalla Valle stated that cutting the brush would be a show of good faith.
Mr. Laliberte indicated that he did show good faith when Mr. Cardello and five other people showed up to walk through the building a few months ago and gave him a list of things they were concerned about and he tackled all the items within 48 hours.
Mr. Cardello noted that Mr. Laliberte was given an unsafe structure notice on February 10. He then came in to discuss the letter of things he was going to do that he never accomplished and Mr. Cardello presented it to the Anti-Blight Committee who said nothing would get done and decided to cite him for Anti-Blight.
Mr. Laliberte stated that the unsafe structure notice had a number of items listed that Mr. Cardello hadn’t even inspected.
Mr. Cardello stated that the carrying beams were rotted in the garage area.
Mr. Laliberte stated that they had paint peeling off of them.
Mayor Quinn said the Council could either sustain Mr. Laliberte’s appeal saying that the building should have been cited for anti-blight or deny his appeal. He stated that there was some willingness to look at the previous document that enumerated the violations and asked the Council if they were ready to continue this matter until late August to help Mr. Laliberte who had business concerns.
Councilor Dalla Valle said “On the condition that Mr. Laliberte do some of the brush work. A show of good faith on both parts. I think that would be more than reasonable on both parts.”
Councilor Jerram felt they should continue the matter until the first meeting in September. The Council could review the original document that gave Mr. Laliberte title to the property in the interim.
Councilor Dalla Valle also requested that Mr. Laliberte submit plans in writing of what his intentions were to repair the building prior to the September 2nd meeting.
MOTION #2350
On a motion by Councilor Dalla Valle, seconded by Councilor Jerram, the Council voted 4-1 to continue Mr. Laliberte’s anti-blight appeal until September 2, 2003, contingent upon the brush work being done and a plan being submitted. Councilor Soliani opposed,
Councilor Reginatto inquired whether Mr. Cardello would submit a detailed letter of what needed to be repaired.
Mr. Cardello indicated that Mr. Laliberte will have to get an engineer to tell him what has to be done.
Councilor Dalla Valle pointed out that the anti-blight issue had nothing to do with the interior of the building. Mr. Laliberte would need to come back to the Council with his plan to repair the facade of the building, including the shrubs, the brush, litter, etc.
TORRINGTON HIGH SCHOOL PAYMENTS #2490
On a motion by Councilor Jerram, seconded by Councilor Samele, the Council voted unanimously to authorize the following payments from the Torrington High School Building Fund #285:
Area Glass & Mirror Co. Invoice dated 3/24/03 $ 2,923.00
Bell Electrical Contractors Invoice #11702 $ 2,083.40
Bell Electrical Contractors Invoice #11715 $ 1,353.50
Industrial Time & Systems Inc. Video Hook-ups & Equipment $44,150.00
SMALL CITIES #2510
On a motion by Councilor Dalla Valle, seconded by Councilor Jerram, the Council voted unanimously to authorize the payment of $2,829.00 from Small Cities Fund #261 to O’Connor Building & Remodeling for work performed on project 143-105.
SECTION B #2530
On a motion by Councilor Samele, seconded by Councilor Dalla Valle, the Council voted unanimously to consider business in Section B.
TRANSFER OF FUNDS #2550
On a motion by Councilor Dalla Valle, seconded by Councilor Jerram, the Council voted unanimously to authorize the transfer of $1,637.00 from various line items in the Social Services 2002-2003 Budget to the Eviction Account which is overdrawn, and referred it to the Board of Finance.
PROVISIONAL ACCEPTANCE: HILLENDALE BLVD #2570
On a motion by Councilor Jerram, seconded by Councilor Dalla Valle, the Council voted unanimously to grant Provisional Acceptance to a 686 foot section of Hillendale Boulevard, in the Pleasantview Subdivision.
RAFFERTY FINE GRADING #2600
On a motion by Councilor Dalla Valle, seconded by Councilor Samele, the Council voted unanimously to accept the recommendation from the Public Works Director to extend Rafferty Fine Grading’s contract at the following bid prices for the year 03-04 paving program:
Reclaiming of pavement, 1-2,500 sy: @ $2.85/sy
Reclaiming of pavement, 2,500 + sy: @ $1.37/sy
Liquid Calcium Chloride: @ $1.00/Gal
BUS: DEPT HEADS #2620
On a motion by Councilor Dalla Valle, seconded by Councilor Reginatto, the Council voted unanimously to consider business presented by Department Heads.
BUS: MAYOR & MEMBERS #2670
On a motion by Councilor Samele, seconded by Councilor Jerram, the Council voted unanimously to consider business presented by Mayor Quinn and members of the City Council.
Councilor Jerram recognized the Forbes Flyers for competing in Florida for the National Tournament for Jump Rope and four of the teams were invited to compete on National Championship Sunday and they all performed admirably. Although none came home with a trophy, the age group 11 to 14 consisting of three of jumpers Anais Nieves, Lauren Marchand and his own daughter Allison, came in first place in their age division, and when they added a fourth, Nicole Morrison to their team, they came in second place. They will appear on ESPN and will be exhibiting their talents in Bangor, Maine later this summer.
Councilor Jerram inquired whether there had been an update on the D.E.P.’s investigation of Woodridge Lake’s sewer problem and how it might impact Highland Avenue.
Mr. Rollett indicated that he still had not received any comments on the scope of services the city had submitted to the D.E.P. to protect our interests.
Councilor Dalla Valle inquired about Gaylord Lane.
Mr. Rollett indicated that the city used the first twelve foot section of gravel as Mr. Schapp’s driveway apron, as directed. Beyond that, the city was doing nothing.
ADJOURNMENT #2880
On a motion by Councilor Jerram, seconded by Councilor Dalla Valle, the Council voted unanimously to adjourn at 8:00 p.m.
ATTEST: JOLINE LeBLANC
ASST. CITY CLERK
| 
