Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes Council 032692t/ CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP MEETING CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS MARCH 26, 1992 The Special Meeting of the City Council of the City of Palm Beach Gardens, Florida, was called to order by Mayor Martino at 7:35 P.M., in the Assembly Room of the Municipal Complex, 10500 North Military Trail, Palm Beach Gardens, Florida. ROLL CALL The Assistant Deputy City Clerk called the roll, and present were Mayor Martino, Councilwoman Monroe, Councilman Kiselewski, and Councilman Aldred. Vice Mayor Russo was not in attendance. LANDSCAPE CODE Mayor Martino stated the first item of business is the Landscaping and Vegetation Protection Ordinance, and he recalled that the Council had been given two draft Landscape Codes. Staff had asked that Council choose which draft was preferred in the new land regulations. The Mayor asked Mark Hendrickson, City Forester, to give a brief history of the matter. Mr. Hendrickson stated that the comparison analysis given to Council shows the biggest changes in the present Landscape Code language. Council had asked that a Landscape Ordinance Review Committee be formed, and they met on March 22, 1989, to begin working on the draft. Mr. Hendrickson then introduced some Committee members who where present to answer questions -- Mr. Jeff Blakely of Blakely & Associates, Mr. Peter Bodycomb of Cotleur Hearing, and Mr. Steve Mathison of Mathison & Goldenberg. CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING, 3/26/92 PAGE 2 Mayor Martino stated that the Committee's draft was a radical departure from the old Code which was a more standard approach to typical landscaping seen throughout Palm Beach County, or where a community is paying attention to that area of its quality of life. The newer draft did some new things in that it gave more flexibility, basically that of a point system. Three projects were looked at to see what they would look like under the new system. Councilwoman Monroe said she wanted to hear comments from those who served on the Committee as to why they thought this was a good draft and perhaps come up with some additions which would improve it. The Committee members stated that Janet Olson should be given special recognition for the work she had done on the draft. Mr. Blakely stated that he likes this draft because a tremendous amount of time had been spent looking at codes throughout the country as far away as California and Oregon,that had diverse approaches to landscape design and environmental sensitivity. The best of these were analyzed to come up with what is believed to be a novel approach which allowed for a point system for current existing landscaping materials to come up with something that is very flexible in determining what is right for each specific site. Regarding visibility of signs, he commented this takes into account tree pruning methods. Mr. Mathison stated that they had worked a very long time to come CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING, 3/26/92 PAGE 3 up with this Code and added that there are some items in the consultant's proposed Code which could add some important elements to what has already been done, such as vehicular access and how that is addressed, plant quality and installation of plants and how those are controlled, and enforcement. He also stated that before the Code is adopted a discussion as to non - conformities of existing conditions needs to take place. Councilman Kiselewski had some comments concerning the three projects which had been looked at -- Gardens Square, the Admiralty Building and Pier One Imports. He mentioned that the only project that passed was Pier One Imports, and it was the only one on which he would have not accepted the landscaping. He asked if the "structure" of the document had been reformulated to do something about this. Councilwoman Monroe felt that it was not just a landscape issue but also an architectural issue as well. Councilman Kiselewski then stated that he would have difficulty trying to add anything more at Gardens Square since it is almost impossible to see the buildings now, and it doesn't pass. He said that, secondly, he has trouble trying to add to the simplicity of the Admiralty corner since this is a nice looking corner. To say those two projects would not meet our current Code and that Pier One Imports does, then he could not accept this proposal. Councilwoman Monroe mentioned that Gardens Square was a PUD and that when a code is adopted, that is what everything is judged CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING, 3/26/92 PAGE 4 by and that some leeway could be given depending on the type of landscaping that was installed, thereby letting them come in with less points. Councilman Kiselewski said that he had a problem with the point system which depended on the type of shrubbery or tree used. Mark Hendrickson answered that both drafts try to persuade Council to go towards preferred species rather than exotic plants which has been the case in the past. The point system directs people toward planting the proper plants rather than exotic plants. Mr. Shah's draft stated 50 per cent preferred species and the Committee's stated 75 per cent. The Comprehensive Plan stated that in coastal areas 90 per cent preferred species should 1 be planted. He stated he still felt the draft they have would allow a business such as Pier One to come in again, because they have the correct number of points per open space, as long as the unsightly elements of the property are screened. He further stated that landscape architecture tries to point you in the direction of what you want to see. Councilman Kiselewski stated that he has a problem with the fact that businesses will be able to trade off points if particular species of plants are used. Staff responded that the Admiralty Building failed the point system because it didn't have proper set backs not because it didn't have enough trees, and that they were trying to create more open space with this Code. Mr. Blakely stated that at Costco there would not have been as CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING, 3/26/92 PAGE 5 many problems in some instances had a landscape architect been used, that a professional would have caught certain problems. Councilman Kiselewski stated his concern that professional landscape architects would have a certain amount of job security. Mr. Blakely responded that under the present plan we have the professional involved only when it's a PUD. This plan would also eliminate the individual homeowners. Mr. Kiselewski asked that if there was any other city in the County which would require a professional landscape architect to do the work. Mr. Blakely responded that, on the contrary, they had made it easier for the non - professional to do a plan on those areas they felt needed a professional. Councilwoman Monroe stated landscaping is ongoing, growing, changing - -that each plant will grow and change and, therefore, you need to know its characteristics and requirements. Training is needed to know the requirements of these things to be sure that the best job has been done. Mr. Blakely referred to page 27, 153.40 Enforcement, E, which states that all landscape plans except individual single family and duplex properties shall bear the seal of a Landscape Architect licensed to practice in the State of Florida or be prepared by another licensed professional. He stated if this needs to be changed it can be done at this time. Mr. Hendrickson continued by saying this is new language and has not been in Design Plan /Research's plan in the past and that with CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING, 3/26/92 PAGE 6 the present language he was speaking about PUD versus site plan, and this is not in the landscape code. He explained that it's when you speak about PUD's that you speak about professionals doing the work. Councilman Kiselewski responded he would rather see that a landscape architect be required with a PUD and not require it for other areas. Councilwoman Monroe stated that maybe the Pier One problem could be solved by changing the whole front- -that a certain minimum will have to be there while still offering the point flexibilities. Mr. Hendrickson stated that regarding Pier One, where the Landscape Code mentions screening displays, this was meant to be outdoor displays. Screening of that area was not required and, therefore, they did not screen it. Councilman Kiselewski said he would rather think in terms of not telling people where they have to plant trees, but make provisions that would prohibit naked buildings. Councilwoman Monroe said there was something mentioned concerning foundation plantings which would not totally do it. Mr. Hendrickson asked if the Pier One site was objectionable because of the interior being visible from the outside. Councilman Kiselewski responded that the philosophy of the City is to provide adequate screening for the people who drive by to soften and hide the commercial aspects that occur in various areas. CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING, 3126192 PAGE 7 Councilwoman Monroe stated she felt that part of the problem was architectural and was not sure how to deal with that. Councilman Kiselewski said he did not have a problem with a solid wall. To have that much grass come right up to a wall whether it's glass or not doesn't fit what they have been trying to accomplish in trying to soften the commercial. At this point, there was some discussion concerning the Admiralty and its appearance as compared to Pier One. A discussion followed concerning what "softening" meant with Councilman Kiselewski stating that a business should not necessarily be visible from the main thoroughfare but from an interior street. He mentioned that the Mall is a good example w of softening. Staff inquired if it was the structure itself or if it was the product itself as it is with Pier One. Did Council want the structure softened and less visible or did they want the interior itself to be less visible; or should the building itself be scaled down. Mayor Martino made the comment that one of the things not liked is a form of strip commercial and for all intents and purposes is outlawed in Palm Beach Gardens. Protection is needed from this type of development, and Mayor Martino asked if staff could come up with some language to cover this. Mayor Martino noted that whatever Council decides he wanted to make sure that the code is "user friendly" and isn't so cumbersome that future members of the Council cannot understand what is going on. He CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING, 3/26/32 PAGE 8 stated that he didn't have any problems going either way, whether they want to stay with the traditional type or try for some imagination or flexibility. He also stated concern that this be used in conjunction with the other tools available throughout the new land use regulations so that they take into consideration a lot of what Councilman Kiselewski is talking about. He continued with saying that these land development regulations need to be compatible with other codes such as the Sign Code. Mayor Martino said he would like to make sure there is some kind of communication between these regulations. Mr. Hendrickson said he believed they had attempted to do that and went on to explain that landscape architects look at not just attractive landscaping plans but look at the Sign Ordinance and plan so there is no competition between landscaping and signage. He further explained that landscaping can sometimes cause problems for the police if it is put in the wrong place, because of lighting, etc. Mayor Martino asked if the points that Councilman Kiselewski wanted clarified or built into the ordinance would be a problem. The response was that it would not be a problem as long as there is a clear intent. Mayor Martino stated that he had a minor difference with what Councilman Kiselewski had stated, that he was a little concerned with having a non - professional because of some of the site plans that have been seen in the past. `- Councilman Kiselewski stated that he didn't like to see a CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING, 3/26/92 PAGE 9 landscape architect required for a project as small as a triplex. Mayor Martino then stated that he felt the Costco project looked amateurish because a professional was not involved. Councilman Kiselewski asked if the Committee had looked at the approach of having the professional designer use his flexibility in this new point system to develop his plan. In other words, if you have someone who doesn't know what he is doing, he has to follow the standards. However, if a professional does it, he can use the other part of the ordinance to follow. Mayor Martino asked for some direction at this point, and he said it seemed that they are leaning toward going with the Committee's document, and asked if there was a consensus of the City Council. Councilwoman Monroe said yes if certain amendments were made. Mayor Martino said they have some things they want to see included, and they need to begin doing that. For the moment, the Council is satisfied to proceed with the Committee's draft. Councilwoman said the Committee may want to take a look at the other drafts to see if there is anything they want to use from them. She asked if this addresses the use of f icus, the backf low preventer, and maintenance of the swales. Mayor Martino said he had one other question concerning who is responsible for being sure that all this happens. Mr. Hendrickson stated that the landscape architect of record is responsible for signing off that all plans and specifications were adhered to. Councilman Kiselewski asked that they think about the way a CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING, 3/26/92 PAGE 10 building code is written, for example. A building code is written so that if you don't know what to do it will tell you what to use and how. If a professional is involved, a professional can say he signed off, and it will work to meet a certain criteria. He stated he would still like to see this in the code. He went on to say that a building code gives you a minimum standard that you follow, and that if you have a professional involved you can take that and do whatever you want as long as that professional signs off. Mayor Martino stated that in the selection of the plant species he thought that is where the professional really augments what is already in there. Councilman Aldred said he noticed in the document that there are three trees which are not allowed in the City- -the Melaleuca, Australian Pine, and Brazilian Pepper. He noticed that the ficus hedge is permitted but that some people are leaning toward eliminating the ficus altogether as an acceptable tree because of their water consumption, and he asked if this was true. Mr. Hendrickson responded that the County has a long list of species which they would prefer not be propagated. It's not so much an elimination of the species that are already in place. Councilman Kiselewski asked if there was anything the City could learn from the County's list. The consultant responded that the County's list would preclude a strangler fig or a banyan tree. Councilman Aldred asked if on the point system, which he prefers CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING, 3/26/92 PAGE 11 since it offers more flexibility, is there any way to integrate xeriscape type mentality to grant more points towards plants that meet the xeriscape requirements and less to those that use more water such as the ficus. Mr. Hendrickson stated the point system gives more points for preferred species than non - preferred species. The ficus is not on the preferred list. Councilman Aldred asked if they could encourage two points if it is from the preferred list and only one if it is not. Mr. Hendrickson stated that all new landscaping would have to be irrigated, that every xeriscape concept has irrigation. The rule of thumb is that the irrigation system is designed so that it is only supplying water when it has to, that there is a probe in the ground to detect moisture. He stated that the irrigation system could be cut off to a point after the plants are established. A short discussion followed concerning certain aspects of xeriscaping. Mayor Martino stated the City has a Water Conservation Ordinance which was effective January 1, and he thinks there needs to be a tie -in with this. He also mentioned that landscape architects need to be aware that watering is no longer allowed between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 5 :00 p.m. Staff asked when they should come back to present the revised version and said they were proceeding with the Committee's ordinance. CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING, 3/26/92 PAGE 12 Mayor Martino stated that they would do the Concurrency first and as they get into the balance of the Land Development Regulations they would start to look at the rest. Councilwoman Monroe stated that they might want to compare it with the next project as a working comparison. Mayor Martino made a statement concerning Prosperity Center, saying not to forget they made some concessions and promises to the neighborhood and also made a promise to themselves that what they had on the other side of the street they would like to duplicate on this side of the street. CONCURRENCY STEM Mayor Martino stated the last time they met on this subject they W went through the entire packet and made language changes. Mr. L. Lindahl stated they made the requested changes. He stated that concurrency management could be quite complex if that is the desire and direction of the Council. They approached it from the standpoint of using a number of other sources of information that had already been approved by other governmental bodies and were working successfully in meeting the statutory requirements of DCA in dealing with performance standards and levels of service. He also stated that at the same time they recognized that there will be a need to develop a process in the City to implement the concurrency management system; that they recognize there are various users of the system within the City; and there is the need for the City from structural, legal, and sufficiency standpoints to meet certain basic requirements in the Concurrency CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING, 3/26/92 PAGE 13 Management System. This is to safeguard the fact that adequate public facilities are in place to meet your performance standards and levels of service. They structured this document using that kind of criteria in balancing it to make it as workable, as straightforward and as non - complex for the user and also for implementing it in the City from a staff standpoint. Mr. Lindahl went on to say that even with that level of effort it will still require major effort on the part of reorganizing some processes and procedures within the City. Mr. Lindahl again stated that they did try to approach it from a balanced standpoint. They made the changes; the ones that were added were highlighted in yellow on the text that was made available to Council. He went on to explain that the deletions were not shown on the documents, but that in the future they would have a method of showing what was deleted. Mayor Martino stated that it was not necessary to go through the whole text again since this had been done before. Councilman Kiselewski asked how this could be modified as time goes on. He also inquired if this has to be filed with DCA. Staff said it was reviewed only by DCA if a grant had been received from them, and in this case there had been no grant. Councilman Kiselewski then asked if all they were going to do with the document would be to independently put it in the land regulations and /or adopt it by separate ordinance. Mr. Lindahl stated they had always talked about putting them with `-' the LDR's so there would be a full and complete manual of LDR's CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING, 3/26/92 PAGE 14 and it would include concurrency, again following the practice that was discussed last time when they were developing consistent definitions throughout all the LDR's, and concurrency would carry that consistency into its definitions and have references back to the LDR's. In response to an inquiry from Council regarding timing, it was stated that all could be adopted separately. Mayor Martino stated that the idea was to get it on the books as soon as possible. Mr. Lindahl said it does not have to be sent to DCA, that it is a part of composite LDR's that do not have to all be adopted under one ordinance. It was thought to move this forward because in terms of timing relative to the adoption of the Comp Plan being overdue, this needed to get on the books as soon as possible. He also made the comment that it does reflect the fact that there are outside suppliers of services that are the subject of concurrency -- traffic and solid waste. Those two items and major roads, collector and arterial, inside the City Limits of Palm Beach Gardens are governed by the County and the Countywide Traffic Performance Standards and countywide by the Solid Waste Authority (now the County Commission). It was noted that the Authority is still formed by the Legislature of the State of Florida and is not part of the County Commission. Mr. Lindahl stated that the County Commission sits as the Authority. What we do in management of our concurrency Standards CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING, 3/26/92 PAGE 15 is to integrate it with Palm Beach County in terms of those two outside suppliers of services. Mr. Lindahl noted we also have a third outside supplier of service, but we have a direct linkage with Seacoast Utility with water and wastewater, but the City is a member of the Board. In fact, it carries more weight than any other governmental entity on that Board. Councilman Kiselewski suggested that the appropriate thing to do would be to put this into a draft ordinance for a first reading and a workshop. Mayor Martino said that the consultant did a marvelous job, but said there were some things he was not sure of. Concurrency is new to a lot of people and he didn't want a document that had the same problems Palm Beach County had with theirs. The Mayor had a legal question concerning procedure with an ordinance or legislative act, re: when an exemption is allowed to expire or has an automatic termination. He stated that if a legislative act creates something a legislative act should take it away, and that from the standpoint of protecting the City legally he wanted to know if this was appropriate. Attorney Brant said that it was a matter of policy. In other words, Council can determine if it has automatic termination. Councilman Kiselewski stated this was discussed last time, and they tried to make it so clear that if somebody did not act it was terminated. Mr. Lindahl stated that the original draft would require an act of the City Council even in the absence of a request for an CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING, 3/26/92 PAGE 16 extension by the applicant. It was decided in the workshop that if the applicant does not request an extension, and that is the only condition, then it would automatically clear the books in that capacity and then can be restored to all the services that it would affect. Mr. Lindahl also stated that it was made clear in the annual report that if development orders do expire both the consumption of capacity and the re- establishment capacity would be kept track of. Mayor Martino asked if the City is libel if there is not a subsequent act to take it away. Attorney Brant responded that a privilege is being given. If the privilege is not exercised, it is lost. He stated that all the ground rules are laid out in sufficient form where they are put on notice, that it is a right given, which must be exercised within a certain time period otherwise the right terminates, if that is the desire of the Council. He gave an example that the City could include a "tickler" that the City shall prior to termination notify the parties that they have 60 days to comply. In this instance the burden falls back to the City which is not foolproof, and felt that in his opinion this is where the City could become libel. Mayor Martino asked if there was a problem if the City does not set up criteria to measure expirations. Attorney Brant stated no, that the Council makes a policy saying there is a certain period of time to do this. Councilman Kiselewski compared the situation to having a driver's CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING, 3/26/92 PAGE 17 license which expires in three years, that it is the responsibility of the driver to renew the license or lose it. Attorney Brant stated that the parties would not be entitled to a hearing of any kind. He said that you first determine if the period of time is reasonable, that this is the foundation. Attorney Brant stated that there has to be a subpolicy, that the objective of the exercise is there are other people who may not have this privilege. Mayor Martino asked if there was anything in the document for creating an exemption for projects that are in the system now. He wanted to know if the City is forever vesting anything when an exemption is created. Staff responded there was one exception that was forever and that is a recorded plat. Mayor Martino mentioned that the County had a two -year period to exercise the exemption which is now up. Mr. Lindahl responded they now have an ordinance for an extension of that, but this is not what we have. He said the City's is different in that those lots which would qualify for an exemption have an exemption forever. They are in the system as committed but as yet unused or unbuilt units. The reason they incorporated that as a simplification is there are no ghost subdivisions proliferating the City of Palm Beach Gardens like those in unincorporated Palm Beach County. Mr. Lindahl stated that Palm Beach County has a whole set of problems that the City of Palm Beach Gardens does not have, and there was no reason to get into CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING, 3/26/92 that complexity. PAGE 18 Councilman Kiselewski asked for a status report on Ballen Isles and was told by Mr. Lindahl that this is a project with a development order in which there are time schedules. If the time schedules are not met, then they have to come before the City Council to address the items that are in this ordinance that demonstrates their efforts to move forward and why they were unable to achieve those dates plus supplemental information. Councilman Kiselewski inquired what would happen if the Council at that point and time decided not to grant that extension; and questioned if the Council would have the right to have Ballen Isles restored to the way it was before? Mr. Lindahl said that the City Council could say that the balance of the PUD is no longer valid. The consumption of that capacity is then put back. Councilman Kiselewski asked if the City had the right to call in any bonding that it has. Mayor Martino stated he didn't believe this is a concurrency question and that it goes beyond this ordinance. Staff responded that if there is no renewal, then when that person comes to renew their vacant area, it would have to meet the same criteria as any new project. Mayor Martino asked at what point would they be allowed to make a decision on what to do with traffic capacity and does it have to be done by a legislative act. Mr. Lindahl responded that any portion of the project that has CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING, 3/26/92 PAGE 19 received approvals, is under some form of surety, and has moved into that level of development would be vested, would be "uncompleted approved ". He further stated any portion of the land that is not into final development plans and not subject to surety is out there waiting for the next level of development and could be curtailed if they defaulted on meeting time obligations of the Development Board. if it were Council's decision to call it quits on the PUD, then that capacity of traffic would be restored. Mayor Martino asked if they are exempting rezonings, and the response was yes since there is not sufficient information to establish concurrency. Mr. Lindahl stated that an examination of adequate public facilities is always looked at. Councilwoman Monroe said they should be able to get a concurrency reservation. She questioned the fact that the developers will have to go to different agencies for their permits and the time involved to do this and wondered if they could come to the City. She also wondered if it would not be better to say in this ordinance that all permitting would be funneled through the City rather than their working with the other agencies independently and then let our staff send it downtown. This would be when the "clock starts running ". Mr. Lindahl responded that he would prefer not to put this in the ordinance since it is a procedural aspect. He also stated a concurrency certification for traffic performance must be -- obtained from the County, and this is in the ordinance since it CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING, 3/26/92 PAGE 20 is required. He stated the way the ordinance is written when the City gets into staff meetings with the County there will be a number of options on how to specifically implement the procedure where the City and County are communicating with each other. He stated that it is not necessary to be that specific in the ordinance concerning procedural aspects and how they will be undertaken. Councilwoman questioned what was meant by the word "evidence" on pages 18 and 19 of the report. Mr. Lindahl stated that evidence would be an order to issue a concurrency certificate, that there would have to be a sign - off from the County. There was considerable discussion between Councilmembers Monroe and Kiselewski and Mr. Lindahl concerning the possibility of staff administering the entire concurrency application. Mayor Martino said why not leave it as it is, and once it is adopted ask the Planning and Zoning Department to provide Council with the administrative procedures they intend to work under and then refine those. Councilwoman Monroe questioned some of the language (the words "conform" and "evidence "), and Mr. Lindahl said he would check further for possible substitutions. Councilwoman Monroe said to say simply that the trips to serve that project have been reserved by Palm Beach County, and then Palm Beach County will determine how much time they will reserve. Mayor Martino then said he would like to place the draft on first CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING, 3/26/92 reading. PAGE 21 Mr. Lindahl recommended that it be placed on first reading and suggested that Mr. Walton and he select a couple of consultants that regularly deal with the City from a planning and engineering standpoint and let them review the document. Mayor Martino said they should put it on the table and ask for comments, particularly from the home builders and to also send a copy to any of the service providers that the City deals with and have them review it. He stated this would indicate that the City is interested in intergovernmental cooperation and wants the service providers to be as comfortable with our system as possible. Mr. Lindahl stated they would take handle this and select a planning and engineering consultant. Councilman Kiselewski suggested that it be sent to some of the developers who have projects similar to Ballen Isles. Mr. Lindahl said the document is written to recognize the necessity to keep track of adequate public facilities; and if someone simply is not moving at all, then there is capacity on the books that is being taken away from someone else, and then there is the ability to free up that capacity. Councilman Kiselewski asked if the Foundation had any input in the document, and Mr. Lindahl stated his office had not been contacted by any landowners or their agents. Mayor Martino stated that putting it on first reading undoubtedly will bring out some people. CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING, 3/26/92 PAGE 22 Mr. Lindahl stated that the biggest issue will be meeting time schedules in the development orders. He stated he knew the land owners would take the position that if they have a development order they would prefer to have the whole development order vested and not be subject to the concurrency management regardless of whether or not they meet their time schedule. He stated this will involve a policy decision. Mayor Martino asked if they could now get the document in ordinance form so it can be put on first reading and allow Mr. Lindahl sufficient time to interface with the people that might be necessary, and then look at an appropriate date. Mayor Martino said that at first reading and public hearing the document will just be put on the table. Mr. Lindahl will be given some time to complete his work, and then have a workshop -type public hearing, and then the formal public hearing. CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING, 3/26/92 PAGE 23 ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:30 APPROVAL AA- Mayo: Vice P.m. r Martino Mayor Russo Jade Holloman Administrative Secretary Councilman Aldred Councilwoman Monroe l C4 ounci an Kiselewski