HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 1923-10-16 MinutesCOMMISSION
MINUTES
OF MEETING HELD NI OCTOBER 16, 1923
PREPARED itt THE OFFICE OF TNE.CITY CLERK
CITY HALL
406 Ootober 16th, 1923.
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA.
On the 16th day of Ootober, A. D. 1923, the Commission of the City of Miami, Florida,
met in regular session at the C ity Hall in Miami, Florida. The meeting was called
to order at 9:00 o'clock a. m., by Chairman Romfh and on roll call the following
members were present:
E. O. Romfh, J. E. Lummus, J. I. Wilson, J. H. Gilman, C. D. Leffler.
ABSENT: None.
READING OP MINUTES OP LAST MEETING
The Clerk read the minutes of the meeting of October 9th, 1923, which were oor-
rected to show the absence of I. C. D. Leffler, on account of sickness, and ap-
proved.
REMOVAL OF AUSTRALIAN PINES ON BRICKELL AVENUE
A petition from property owners on Brickell Avenue from S. S. 7th Street south to
S. S. 15th Road was received and, after being read, on motion of Mr. Wilson, se-
conded by Mr. Gilman, ordered filed. The petitioners asked that the City remove
the Australian pines growing along Brickell Avenue between the Streets named and
that other varieties of trees end palms be planted in the place of the trees removed.
After some discussion the following resolution was offered by mr. TAMMUZ:
RESOLUTION NO. 1038.
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO RE-
MOVE AUSTRALIAN PINES ON BRICKELL AVENUE BETWEEN
SOUTHEAST SEVENTH STREET AND SOUTHEAST FIFTEENTH
ROAD.
WHEREAS, petition of the property owners on Brickell Avenue from
S. S. 7th Street to 6. E. 15th Road, requesting that the Australian
Pines on the Avenue between the streets named be removed and that other
trees, palms and foliage be substituted for the trees so removed, has
been submitted to the Commission, and
WHEREAS, the Commission is in favor of the Australian Pines be-
ing removed and other trees, palms and foliage substituted,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED be the Commission of the City of
miami that the petition of the petitioners be, and the same is hereby,
granted and the City Manager be, and he is hereby, authorized and direot-
ed to cause the Australian pines on Brickell Avenue from 6. E. 7th Street
to S. E. 1.th Road, to be removed and otter trees, palms and foliage sub-
stituted in place thereof.
Motion by Mr. Lummes, secoeded by Mr. Wilson, that the said resolution be passed and
adopted. Roll ealled and the vote thereon was as follows: Afele: Messrs. Romfh,
Lummus, Wileon, Gilman, Leffler. EOEs: None. Motion unanimously carried and the
said resolution passed and adopted.
AUTHORISING WIDENING OF PAVING ON N.W. 32LD ST. UNDER PAVING CONTRACT NO. 37
petition and Waiver of Irregularity and Illegality, signed by property owners on N.
W. 32nd Street, octween L. Miami Avenue and E. W. 2nd Avenue, requesting that the
said street be paved to a width of eb feet instead of 18feet. On motion of Mr. Wil-
son, seeonded,the said petition was ordered filed with the Department of Finance and
a resolution ordering the change in the width of the paving was introduced by Mr.
Lummus:
RESOLUTION NO. 1039.
A RSSOLU2ION CHAliGING THE WIDTH OF PAVING ON N. E. 32ND
STREET FROM N. MIAMI AVENUE TO N. W. 21ID AVENUE FROM A
WIDTH OF 18 FEET TO A WIDTH OF 28 FSET.
WHEREAS, the contract has heretofore been let for paving to a width
of eighteen feet on Northwest Thirty-second Street from N. Miami. Avenue to
Northwest Second Avenue, and the property owners on said street, between
Miami Avenue end north west Second Avenue, have requested that this im-
provement be charged so as to give a pavement of twenty-eight feet in
width between curbs, together with curb and gutter, and such owners have
eigned a petition dated September 10th, 1923, in Which they waive all ir-
regularity and illegality in connection with the said assessment against
said lots er parcels, and each of said lots or parcela, and have agreed,
in writing, to pay the said assessment for said improvement of twenty-
eight feet wide between eurbs, together with curb and gutter in equal an-
nusl installments in each of the ten succeeding year at the time in said
years at ehich the general city taxes are due and payable, with interest
upon such deferred installments at the rate of six per centum per annum,
payable annually from the date of the confirmation of the assessment roll,
end have further agreed that if, at the date of the delivery cf their said
written waiver of irregularity and illegality, the said assessment roll
has not be confirmed, to thereupon file a similar waiver of irregularity
and illegality after the confirmation of the said assessment roll, and
WHEeEAS, the pruperty on said North-west Thirty-second Street from
Miami Avenue to Northwest Second Avenue aforesaid is described as follows:
Lots One (1), and Lots Twelve (12) to Twenty-one (21), both
inclusive, of Block "A", and Lots One (1) to Twelve (12), both in-
clusive of Bloch "B", Price's Addition to the City of Miami, and
'Atli; Thirteen (13) to Twenty-four(24), both inclusive, of Bleak
fourteen (14), and Lots Nineteen (19) to Twenty-eight (28), both
inclusive, and Lot Sight (6), of Block Thirteen (13), all in
WINDWARD PAR, of the City of Miami, Florida,
and
October 16th,
•1111•111• MI11E1111E1
WHEREAS, it appears from the communication of Charles W.
Mixray, Director of Public Service, to the City of Miami, that
the additional cost of the said proposed Change as requested by
the said property owners will amount to $3,925.00 under paving
contract No. 37, awarded to the John J. Quinn Company,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Commission of the
City of Miami that the said change of the said property owners
as aforesaid be, and the same is hereby, granted.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the said contract for paving
to a width of eighteen feet on Northwest Thirty-second Street
from Miami Avenue to Northwest Second Avenue be, and the same
is changed to paving to a width of twenty-eight feet between
Curbs, together with curb and gutter, to be built, at an addi-
tional cost of ;3,925.00 under paving Contract No. 37 with the
John J. czuinn Company.
B2 IT FURTHER RESCUED that a Copy of this resolution be
delivered by the City Clerk to the Director of Fineries, the City
Manager, and the Director of Public Service, and a copy to the
John J. Quinn Company.
Motion by Ltr. Lummus, seconded by Lir. Wilson, that the said resolution be passed and adopt.
ed. Roll called and the vote thereon was as follows: AYES: Messrs. Romfh, Lummus, Wil-
son, Gilman, Leffler. NOES: hone. Motion unanimously carried and the said resolution
passed and adopted.
INCREASING WIDTH OF 33RD STREET NORTHWEST BETWEEN N. MIAMI AVENUE AND R.W. 2ND AVENUE
A number of property owners on NW 33rd Street between N. Lliami Avenue and h. W. 2nd Ave.,
appeared before the Commission and asked that the said street be paved to a width of 28
feet instead of 18 feet. The City Attorney stated that it would be necessary for every
property owner on the Street to be widened to sign a waiver of irregularity and illegali-
ty before the change in the width of the pavement could be authorized. After some dis-
cussion the Commission gave their assurance that the change would be granted upon the
filing of the proper papers by the property owners.
REQUEST FOR ORDIrALCE eEC;UIRIII'G BOI;DS Or POR HIRE OARS OPERATED PAHTLY 1/ITHIN CITY
Mr. W. S. Maxwell, Secretary of Miami Llotor Club, appeared before the Commission and
requested the passage of an ordinance requiring automobiles operating for hire be-
tween the City of Miami and other cities and towns or places outside of the City of
Miami to execute bond for the protection of passengers and the public. Llr. II1xwell
was Bestirred that the proper ordinances would be passed to put into operation the ad-
ditional powers granted the City in Charter Amendments passed at the last Legislature.
POWER TO Re:::U ;Ty BILLBOARDS
OPIL ION uF CITY ATTORNEY
The City Attorney submitted to the Commission written opinion cn the proposed Bill Board
Ordinance and the power of the City to regulate or prohibit the erection of bill. boards.
The report was given pursuant to directions given at the last regular meeting and at-
tached to the communication of the 'City Attorney was the communication of the Jity Mana-
ger submitted at the regular meeting on OcteLe_ Oth, setting forth the need of such an
ordinance. On motion of i.r. 'eilson, seconded by Mr. Gilman, the said communications
were ordered filed and spread upon the minutes:
Jonnunication of City Manager:
City Jom::i.ssicn,
Miami, Fla.
Gentlemen:
Miami, Florida,
October 9th, 1923.
From a case we recently had in the Municipal Court, it seems that
the City lees ne law to prevent the erection of bill boards, sign boards,
and other similar advertising boards over the streets and sidewalks of the
Jity. .
I would recommend that an ordinance be passed hot only to enable
the City to prohibit the erection cf other sign boards, but to have au-
thority to order those down that have already been erected and that are
more or lees ob ectionable.
Respectfully,
F. E. rWHARTON
City Manager
Communication of City Attorney:
The City Jornmission,
Miami, Florida.
Miami, Florida, .
October 16th, 1923.
eentlenen: Re: Proposed Bill Board
Ordinance.
Referring to the letter of the City Manager to you under date
of Oct ber 9th recommending the passage of an ordinance to prohibit the
erection of si n beards and containing authority to order those down
that have already been erected, I beg to advise that ordinances intend=
ed to secure a free and uninterrupted passage through the streets situa-
ted in a populous neighborhood by restraining and regulating erections
over a portion of the travelled way, areclearly within the legitimate
scope of tee power confided to municipalities, and it seems to be con-
ceded that where a ei ri constitutes an obstruction which tends to hinder,
delay, into .,.:Code, or in some way endanger the use of the sidewalk by
pedestrians, its removal can be enforced under the police peter. In a
number of states the courts uphold the power of a municipal Corporation
to compel the removal of awnings, signs and other projections which en-
Ootober 16th, 1923.
oroaoh upon sidewalks and public ways, notwithstanding that they
may have been constructed at considerable expense. Other states
hold that this oannot be done, and we are confronted with two deoi-
alone of our own Supreme Court, Which is the controling law in
this state upon the subject.
The first case is that of Anderson v. Schackelford decid-
ed in 1917 anu reported in 76 So. Rep. page 343, wherein the court
holds in effect that a muhicipality is without power to prohibit
by ordinance the erections of signs which are neither lewd, vulger,
nor obscene, upon the theory that the power of a municipality re-
gulating bill boards cannot be exercised unless the bill board or
signs is itse1 u nuisance, and that the declaration in an ordi-
nance that bill boards or signs within any given territory are nui-
sances, does not make such signs nuisances, but in order to remove
them, they must be proved in a court to be a nuisance within the
law. Axed the court in that case says that in case of doubt the
doubt should be resolved against the municipality, and it is fur-
ther stated, in effect, that unless the oonetruction of said bill
board be dangerous to the public by falling or being blown down, or
constructed of such materials and in such a manner as to endanger
life or property, or to increase the danger of loss by fire, or to
have painted or displayed upon it obscene language characters or
words tending to injure and offend the public morals, the City is
without right to interfere with such signs or bill boards.
The court goes on to say that the fact that such sign or
bill board offends the aesthetic or refined tates of other persons
gives no power to the city to remove them or prohibit their ere-
ction.
The case which I have cited above arose in Lake City,
Florida, under an ordinance declaring certain bill boards or signs
to be nuisances, but the court hold that that was merely a state-
ment on the part of the municipal authorities which carried no
weight of its cm and which would have to be proved in a court of
justice to be true before the ordinance could be effective, and the
person violating the ordinance was discharged en a writ of habeas
corpus le,; the supreme Court.
In another case in this state of S. H. Eress & Company
against the City of Miami, decided in 1919, while the question did
not relate to signs of bill boards, it did relate to the power and
the right of a property owner in the use of his property, and the
court held that a municipality could not deprive a person of his
property or property rights by declaring by ordinance, or other-
wise, that to be a nuisance, which in fact is net a nuisance.
In the case cited, an ordinance was passed after the
construction and excavation was begun which in effect declared it
to be a nuisance, and the court held that the municipality could
not arbitrarily refuse to grant a permit, nor, under the guise of
regulations, place an additional burden upon the abutting owner
or make regulations that in effect would deprive him from exercis-
ine his rights as an abutting owner. The attempted enforcement of
'this ordinance cost the it something in the neighborhood of
4800.00. j am, therfore, of the opinion that the passage of an
oldinance declaring the erection of bill boards or signs to be
a nuisance, could not be enforced except as against the erection
of such bill boards and signs es could be proved in a court of law
to be actual nuisances to the public. The mere declaration in en
ordinance that such erection constituted a nuisance would be un-
availing to the flty.
have, of curse, in this opinion, given ycu the parti-
culare of the law as stated by the ._Aipreme Court of Florida which
is controling so far as we are concerned. There are many courts
of ther states that take a different view and uphold the muni-
cipalities in their efforts to prohibit the erection of signe
and bills boards.
Very respectfully,
A. J. ROSE
City Attorney
REDAMTTIOL OF CITY TAX SALE CERTIFICATE RO. 1515 PART OF COSTS PAID BY OITY
The City Attorney reported that there was sold by the City for City Taxes on June
Eth, 1922, as shown by Certificate Re. 1515 for the taxes of 1921, the property
described in said certificate and that as shown by the certificate of the Clerk of
the Circuit Court the cost of redemption of such certificate ie 4192.85, and that
the C. J. Eolleman Company claim to be the owners of the property and have offered
to pay the taxes thereon, amounting to 16.5,30, and it was doubtful whether or not
the said tax sale was valid. Thereupon a resolution authorizing payment of part of
the costa of redeeming the said Tax Sale Certificate was offered by Mr. Gilman:
RESOLUXIOL LO. 1040.
A RESOLUTION APPRuPRLITIEG THE SUM OF 447.43 FOR
THE PURPOSE 02PAYIl;G .PART OF TH.& COSTS OF REDEEM-
IEG TAX ,iALE CERTIFICATE AS SET FORTE ID TEE RESO-
LUTIOE.
WHEREAS, the City Attorney reports that there was sold by the City
for City Taxes on June Eth, 1922, as shown by Certificate No. 1515 for
the taxes of 1921, the property described in said certificate and that
as shown by the certificate of the Clerk of the Circuit Court the cost
of redemption is 4192.85, and
WHEREAS, the J. Holleman Company claim to be the owners of the
property and have offered to pay the taxes thereon, amounting to 41212473,''
and it is doubtful whether or not that the said tax sale was valid, now,
Thezefore,
Ootober 16th,
BE IT RESOLVED by the Commission of the City of Miami that the
sum of 27.E.5 be, and the same is hereby, appropriated for the pur-
pose of paying to A. Engler, purchaser of said Tax Certificate No.
1515, the balanoe of the amount necessary to redeem the said Tax Cer-
tificate, the additional amount of 166.30 to be paid by the C. J.
= Holleman company
n
ii BS IT FURTHal RESOLVED that the said amount of .1;27.6:; be, and
w' is hereby appropriated from the proper fund for the purpose herein -
a before set forth.
a
...,
M Motion by Mr. Gilman, seconded by itr. Lefler, that the said resolution be passed and
adopted. on roll call the vote thereon was as follows: AYES: Messrs. Romfh, Lum-
=
= taus, Wilson, Gilman, Leffler. NOES: none. Motion unanimously carried and the said re-
solution passed and adopted.
mi PROTEST AGAINST LICENSE' TAX ON SIGN SHOPS
I.
M
• Communication from the C.ommeroial Sign Company under date of October 10th addreesed to
a the City Commission protesting against the license tax imposed on sign Shops by Ordi-
a mance lio. 193 was received and on motion of Mr. Wilson, seconded by Mr. Luanne , was or -
M dered filed and spread upon the minutes:
iuTff
•
Miami, Florida,
Oct. 10th, 1923.
ea Board of City commissioners,
City.
Gentlemen:
Vie wish to make a protest at what we oonsider an unjust and
prohibitive license fee as drafted by a committee of ODE sign shop in
this City.
pi comparison with other bus inesaes with a larger investment
and employing more men, your tax on us is ridiculous and in taking this
stand we believe you are not in keeping with the progressive spirit ef
Miami.
IL
4
The smalier shops in all lines of business make up the majori
ty and the majority make or break Miami com:nercially.
we would be pleased to hear from you on this matter.
Re ep ea tfully ,
SIGI.i CO.
The Commission declined to make any change in the License Tax imposed on Sign Shops.
CONFIRLMIG P1ELI1E11;ARY ASSESSMSliT ROLLS OV COMPLETED 11.1PR0VELLEHTS
This being the date set for receiving remonstrances to the confirmation of Prelimin-
ary Assessment Rolls on Sidewalk Improvement Lc. 33, Sanitary Sewer Improvensnt Do.
42 and Highway Improvement Lo . 154, it was announced thatthe Commission vas ready
to receive the remonstrances of all persons intereeted in or affected by the said im-
provements. There being no remonstrances filed to the confirmation of the said
preliminary AseesEnnent Rolls the same were confirmed and the collection of the amounts
assessed therein ordered by the following resolutions:
Resolution Lo . 1041, confirming the Assessment Roll on Sidewalk District No. 33 wa a
offered by 1.1r . 1,111111111.18 and is as follows:
DISTRICT SK-33.
Ic.,e
RES OLUT ION NO. 1040.
SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENT NO. 33.
WHERE.A.' , the c ity ',3ommission of the C ity o f Mlami, Florida, met
on the 1 nth day of L.cto Der , 1923, pursuant to the notice of said meet:, ,
ing under Section 56 of the .3ity C.Tharter, to hear all written °Nee-
tiona to the confirmation of the preliminary assessment roll of side-
walk improvement I. . 3.3, District sk-33 by any person whose property
is described in said preliminary roll; and
WEESEA3, the Jommissicr, of the City of Miami, having received
and considered all written remonstrances filed to the confirmation of
the preliminary roll by any persons whose property is described in
said roll
THEREPUirn ,SE1 OLVED by the oramiss ion of the 01ty o f Mia-
mi that the prima facie assessment, as indioated on said preliminary
assessment roll, be and is i_r, all things Confirmed and sustained ag-
ainst any and all lots or parcels of ground described thereon.
BE if RESOLVED, that the sums and amounts against each
of the lots or parcels of ground in said preliminary assessment roll
are less than the amount that eaoh of said lots or parcels of ground
is benefited by said improvement and that such amounts are in propor-
tion to the special benefits, and that the proyurtion of said costa
to be pa id by said :;ity o f miami on account of highway intersection
is the sum set opposite to the same therein.
The total cost of the said improvement, in the sum of 31,494.39,
is hereby approved br.d c:nfirmed.
BnIi FURTEER RESOLVED that ten (10) daye after date of this
nonfir .a lion of said assessment roll the same be delivered to the Di-
rector of Finance, and the nirector of Finance is hereby, ordered,
thirty (30) days after date of this resolution to make colleotions
of the assessments therein as required by law.
Motion by ;.Ir L ummus, seconded by 1.1r ilson, the t the said resolution be passed and
adopted. :o11. a1leU axd the vote thereon was as follows: AYi$: Messra. RoMfh,
Lummus, il so n, Cilrna, neff Ler . DOES Done Motion unanimously carried and the .
said resolution paused and adopted.
•
.6
•
• -1+1.-A4
vuueuer J.QI4, 1v4a.
ee.iFefeeee-
SR-42
Resolution No. 1042, oonfirming the Preliminary Assessment Roll on Sanitary
sewer Improvement No. 42 was offered by Mr. Gilman:
RESOLUTION NO. 1042.
DISTRICT SR-42. SANITARY SEWER =PROW:MP:NT NO. 42.
WHEREAS, the City Commission of the 'City of Miami, Florida, met on •
the 16th day of October, 1923, pursuant to the notioe of said meeting un-
der Section 56 of the City Charter, to hear all written objections to the
oonfirmation of the preliminary assessment roll of Sanitary Sewer ImproVe-
ment No. 42, District Sr-42, by any person whose property is described in
said preliminary roll; and
WHEREAS, the Commission of the City of Miami, having received and
oonsidered all written remonstrancee filed to the confirmation of the pre-
liminary roll by any persons whose property is described in said roll.
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVEL by the Camillus ion of the City of Miami that
the prima facie assessment, as indicated on sa id preliminary assessment
roll, be and is in all thiegs confirmed and Busts ined against any and all
lots or parcels of ground described thereon.
BE IT FUR21iER RESOLVED that the sums and amounts against each of the
lots or parcels of ground in said Preliminery Assessment Roll are less
thare,the amount that each of said lots or parcels of ground is benefited
by said improvement and that such amounts are in proportion to the spe-
cial improvement benefits, and that the proportion of said cost to be
paid by said C ity of Miami on account of highway intersection is the sum
set opposite to the same therein.
The total cost 0± the se id improvement, in the sum of ;;;9,037.26, is
hereby approved and confir d.
Bi IT FURTHER i01,1,V2D, that ten (10) days after date of this con-
firmation of said assessment roll the same be delivered to the Director
of Finance , urld the Director of Finance is hereby ordered, thirty (30)
days after date of this resolution to make collections of the assessments
therein as required by law.
Motion by ;.:r ;limn, seconded by ,,Ir . Leffler, the" the said resolution be passed
and adopted. On roll call the vote thereon was as follows: AY: Messrs. Romfh,
L ummus , ;J1:flan, Leffler. NOES: None . otion unanimously carried and
the sa id res olution passed and a dopted.
11-154
Resolution No. 1043, confirming preliminary assessment roll on Highway Improve-
ment Ho . 154, was introduced by Mr. Leffler and is in full as follows;
RESOLUTION NO. 1043.
DI,3TRIOT H-154 HIGHYAY I M2H0 VELE•21T NO. 154.
the Jity .;oramiss ion of the City o f L1iui, 1orida, met on
the 16th day of oct„.ber, 194,3, pursuant to the no tice of said meeting
under section 56 o f t Le City ;harter, to hear all written objections to
the Co r_firata 1,ion of the prel 1:,inory ass t roll of Hiehwae Improve-
ment Lc. 154, District E-1E4 by any person whose property is described
in said pre1ii nary roll; and
WHEREA.i, tne comeeiesion o f tee ,;ity of iIj5lfli, having receivedos and
considered all written cemenstrw.ce s filed to the confirmation of the pre-
1 im ine ry roll ey any pa rsons vicso pr pert;' is described in said roll.
B I; .01.7ED by t Di 3 omm is s ion o f the (.3i ty c f Miami
that the prima facie assess%;ent , as indicated on said preliminary assess-
ment roll, be and is in 11 thin,.;s confirmed and sustained acr.ainst any
and all lo ts or s reels ± round described thereon.
13:-.1: IT 1-",'H2liER RE6OL1/1.;D, that the sums and amounts against each of
the lots or :arcels of ground in said preliminary assessment roll are less
thIn the amount tha t each of said lots or :arcels of grounds is benefited
by said impr uvement '.id the t ',non amounts are in proportion to the special
benefits, a nd that the proportion of said cost to be paid by said 3 ity of
Miami on nccourit hif[nyzy intersection is the sum sot opposite to the
SEINE ther e in.
The total cost of the said improvement, in the surn of 7,442 .88, ia
hereby approved and confirmed.
IT 1,",:e:THEI-; RESOLVED, that ten (10) days eftsr date of this con-
-fi ion f ¶d .Issessment roll the same be delivered to the Director
of , and the Director of Finance is hereby, ordered, thirty (30)
days uftef of this resolution to make collections of the assesements'
therein as requiredq by law.
!,:oti on by . Leffler, sea unded by Lummus, the 1, the 'aid:resolution be passed and adopted.
the vote thereon was as fellows: idessre Roinfh, Luminus, Wilson, Gilman,
Leffler. DO.12,6: bcze. Lotion unanimously carried and the said resolution passed and
adopted.
;del uUedi..IENT
There being no further, business to some before the Board at thie meeting, on motion duly ;
made and seconded, ',he meeting was adjourned.
AiTEST:
• r-
crr»v oF not
DOCUMENT
INDEX MEETING D.T.
October 16, 1923
ITEM NO
DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION
1
2
3
4
5
6
AUTHORIZE CITY MANAGER TO REMOVE AUSTRALIAN PINE
TREES ON BRICKELL AVENUE
CHANGE IN WIDTH OF 32ND STREET BETWEEN NORTH MIAMI
AVENUE AND N.W. 2ND AVENUE
APPROPRIATING THE SUM OF $27.55 FOR THE PURPOSE OF
PAYING PART OF THE COSTS OF TAX SALE CERTIFICATE
SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENT NO. 33
SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. 42
HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENT NO. 154
COMMISSION
ACTION
R-1038
R-1039
R-1040
R-1041
R-1042
R-1043
RETRIEVAL
CODE NO.
01038
01039
01040
01041
01042
01043