February 22, 2000

The Town Council of the Town of Easton met today at 7:00 P.M. The meeting was called to order by the President of the Council, Mr. Willey, with the following members present: Mr. Ford, Mr. Mayer, Mr. Reed and Mr. Heinmuller. Also attending the meeting were Mayor C. Eugene Butler, Town Engineer Mr. Glass, Chief Harvey, Town Planner Mr. Hamilton, Assistant Town Planner Mr. Thomas and Town Attorney Mr. Kehoe

Mr. Mayer opened the meeting with prayer. He led those present in the Pledge of Allegiance.

Mr. Mayer made a motion to approve the minutes of the February 7, 2000 meeting as written, seconded by Mr. Ford and carried unanimously.

Mayor Butler presented Mr. Joseph Brummell of the Public Works Department with a ten-year service award. Mayor Butler stated that Mr. Brummell was a devoted employee and he was proud to present him with this award.

Chief C.R. Chance introduced the 2000/2001 Fire Department Line Officers. Vice President Mike Dickerson introduced the Administrative Officers and Board of Trustees. Chief Chance reviewed several items currently in progress. He stated that the officers of the Easton Volunteer Fire Department would like to thank the Mayor and Council for their continued support.

The President of the Council brought a memo from the Mayor to the floor recommending the appointment of Mr. Gelson Brooks as the Town of Easton’s representative on the Talbot County Parks and Recreation Board, replacing Mr. Ben Blue. Mr. Ford made a motion to accept the Mayor’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Mayer and carried unanimously.

The President of the Council stated that he was looking for a consensus on Ordinance No. 399, "AN ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN OF EASTON AMENDING THE EASTON ZONING ORDINANCE BY ADDING SECTION 608.2A.4.M TO IMPOSE A MAXIMUM SIZE LIMITATION OF 65,000 SQUARE FEET UPON ALL "BIG BOX RETAIL" STORES AND BY ADDING SECTION 803.5C(10) TO PROVIDE THAT THE EASTON BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS SHALL NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO GRANT A VARIANCE FROM THE 65,000 SQUARE FOOT SIZE LIMITATION." The President of the Council stated that numerous comments have been heard over several meetings. He stated that he would like the Council’s consensus so that the Town Attorney can write the appropriate legislation.

Mr. Ford stated that at the last public hearing, there was not a single voice in favor of this cap. Mr. Ford stated that he is going to support the Ordinance. He stated that limiting the square footage to 65,000 square foot does not change the definition of what a big box is in the Zoning Ordinance of the Town. Mr. Ford stated that it is still any retail establishment in a single building that occupies more than 25,000 square feet. He stated that approval of any big box retail establishment must go through the approval processes with both the Planning Commission and the Town Council with the requisite public hearing. Mr. Ford stated that he does not believe that the proposed cap encourages or intends to encourage big box stores of up to 65,000 square feet to apply for permission to locate in Easton. He stated that it simply prevents the application for stores in excess of 65,000 square feet. Mr. Ford asked the audience to keep in mind that this Council unanimously rejected an application containing a big box store in excess of 100,000 square feet within the last year. Mr. Ford stated that this decision was challenged in circuit court and upheld and is now being appealed in the Court of Special Appeals. Mr. Ford stated that he believes that the 65,000 square feet limit strengthens our efforts to keep commercial development closer in scale to what already exists in Easton without undermining the standards or review processes we have in place and does so without limiting the development options to the extent that good planning and good projects can’t be considered. Mr. Ford stated that he wanted to add to those remarks. He stated that to him, the Comprehensive Plan is a much more important document in this debate than the Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Ford stated that the Comprehensive Plan needs to state clearly and reinforce the sections on page 22 regarding shopping centers and development in this Town, and at least in this planning period, clearly state that shopping centers and sprawl commercial development are not wanted. He stated that review on the Comprehensive Plan should start immediately.

Mr. Mayer stated that he had approached this with as much energy and thought as anyone else on this Council. He stated that many of the things said by Mr. Ford had entered his mind and he thinks he is correct. Mr. Mayer stated that he supports this Ordinance.

Mr. Reed stated that he would like to thank Mr. Ford for his suggestion of a moratorium and for the Council and their support. He stated that it had given the Council time to think out what is really involved and also what residents’ views are concerning the Town’s growth. Mr. Reed stated that he is in favor of planned growth and would favor a study for a ten-year growth analysis of infrastructure needs and costs. Mr. Reed stated that mistakes might not be able to be changed later in years to come. He stated that we may have to look every day at the building of more communities and large retail stores and say it should not have happened. He stated that the Town may have to live with traffic congestion, which is why we appreciate what we have now. Mr. Reed thanked the Town staff for the staff research report of November 1, 1999 and for the video educational film produced by "The American Institute of Certified Planners" which was broadcast on Channel 15 for the public to view. Mr. Reed thanked the Talbot Preservation Alliance Report in response to President Willey’s invitation to the public to contribute to the efforts for the right decision. Mr. Reed thanked the Talbot River Protection Association for the laboratory data report prepared by Severn Trent Laboratories of Sparks, Maryland. He questioned if a study of the cost factors to the town, county and state had really been made. Mr. Reed stated that the Fire Department estimates if the big box moratorium is lifted, the initial investment for the first year would be $3,973,000 in addition to emergency medical costs, equipment and hospital needs. Mr. Reed stated that the cost of road improvements is unknown. He stated that it is unknown how much of the road improvement costs developers would pay for. Mr. Reed stated that the east-side road connector is only a line on a map. He questioned if land would have to be bought and who will be responsible for the upkeep of the road. Mr. Reed stated that more money would be needed for education of the children. Mr. Reed stated that he would like to call to attention that the Star Democrat and the Baltimore Sun reported that Maryland has lost 75% of farms this century. He stated that Baltimore, Somerset, Prince George and Talbot counties lost 80 to 83 percent of their farms.

Mr. Reed stated that he feels saddened for the farmers that want to sell their land for commercial and residential use but he feels that sprawl has to stop, especially larger growth in Easton and Talbot County or the beauty and serene life known now will be lost to future generations. Mr. Reed stated that we need to take a deep breath and think carefully on the decisions about to be made. He asked the Council to keep the 25,000 square feet limit on size until 2002. Mr. Reed stated that this will allow for analysis of all facts and what effects large growth will have on our Town and County. He stated that perhaps local vacant stores can be put to use and some combined into larger use. Mr. Reed stated that we do not have to rush and make mistakes that may create bigger problems to be solved later. Mr. Reed then stated that he is against the 65,000 square feet limitation.

Mr. Heinmuller stated that there had been a lot of testimony. He stated that he wanted to go over what was not heard. He stated that they did not hear testimony from people of color, people whose diversity of culture and age was as widely spread as it could have been or as the rest of population shows. Mr. Heinmuller stated that the Council had not heard from the children who in ten, fifteen, and twenty years from now will be working in Talbot County. He stated that he cannot guess what their thoughts are so his decision is much more difficult. Mr. Heinmuller reviewed the testimony heard from the community regarding endangered waters, new state water quality laws and pollution. He stated that we learned that there is really no documented proof that stormwater runoff from retail establishments in the Town of Easton exceed current government standards. Mr. Heinmuller stated that we did learn that Easton Utilities wastewater treatment facility has won state awards for their good management in reduction of TDML into the Choptank watershed and area sources of pollution are not a real concern to persons who want to talk about the limitation and growth. Mr. Heinmuller stated that we learned that we can create ordinances that control and limit the impact of development within the borders of Easton. He stated that we have learned that it does not necessarily stop growth and does not in any way change the impact of large development. He stated that we also learned that a 26,000 square feet building will have more buffering if built within the Town of Easton and will have more visual controls that are impact. He stated that this Council has a better opportunity to evaluate and accept or reject that project. Mr. Heinmuller stated that we have learned that other governments can take actions that will lead to worse solutions. Mr. Heinmuller recalled one person’s testimony early on that talked about Indian tribal leaders who should look at seven generations’ impact of their decisions and it is something that he would like to do. Mr. Heinmuller stated that there are decisions made beyond the Town Council that they cannot control. He stated that he feels that placing a 65,000 square feet limit, which is the product of compromise, and is the wrong thing to do because it will do exactly what people has said to them when it comes to growth. He stated that they will not get the opportunity to look at some not so great projects at 24,999 square feet.

Mr. Willey stated that when he looks back at the testimony that has been given with this issue, he finds very few people in agreement with the 65,000 square feet. He stated that if this is turned down, he wonders what has been accomplished with this moratorium process over the seven months. Mr. Willey stated that the zoning rules have been improved and projects have been turned down. He stated that for many reasons he cannot support this ordinance and thinks that it should be turned down.

At 7:26 P.M., the President of the Council opened the public hearing on the request of

William L. and Sue H. Gallagher for a Planned Redevelopment District (PRD) project (proposed for the old Creamery Building) located at 411 Needwood Avenue to subdivide the lot into two parcels and permit a beauty shop and offices within the building.

The Town Attorney stated before the public hearing formally begins, he would like to inform the Council that one of his partners represents Mr. and Mrs. Gallagher, the owners of this property, and he would like to sit out on this matter.

Mr. Fountain was present representing, the Warringtons, the contract purchasers of this property.

The Town Planner stated that the Planning and Zoning Commission had reviewed this PRD (Planned Redevelopment District) application at their December meeting. He stated that this was an old industrial site and they were not sure what the best use would be. Mr. Hamilton stated that there is a rail trail there now and they thought they should open it up for flexible uses and they created it as an overlay district, which allows a great bit of flexibility. Mr. Hamilton displayed an overhead site plan of the area. Mr. Hamilton stated that what the applicant wants to do is subdivide the site into two lots and only if a PRD application is approved, can they be allowed under that review to subdivide it into smaller lots. The Planning Commission reviewed an application, which involves multiple uses in the building. He stated that they started out with a hair salon and other potential uses, a studio apartment and offices with no prospective tenant. Mr. Hamilton stated that the Planning Commission has two concerns. One is the open space requirement that can only be met if they take off the ramp system that comes up to the building. The applicant states that they can leave the ramp and make four parking spaces off street and the second is parking. Mr. Hamilton stated that the Planning Commission recommended four to zero to approve this.

Mr. Mayer questioned the Town Planner on the historical status. Mr. Hamilton stated that he has no knowledge of that designation by the State of Maryland.

Mr. Tom Fountain stated that he represents Mr. and Mrs. Warrington who are the contract purchasers of the property, which is the old Creamery property. He stated that it is currently one lot improved by what some remember as the old Jasper’s. Mr. Fountain stated that the proposal is to subdivide this one lot into two separate lots, one of a little over 11,000 square feet and the Creamery property, which would be approximately 7,500 square feet. He stated that his clients want to buy the Creamery, restore it and save it. He stated that approximately 1,400 square feet would be Mrs. Harrington’s hair salon and the balance would be office use and possibly a studio apartment residential use. He stated that the PRD zone is intended to preserve areas which are neglected or dilapidated. Mr. Fountain stated that the Creamery is in serious need of attention. Mr. Fountain discussed the preservation of the ramp and the open space issue. He stated that the old Jasper’s building is occupied by Mr. and Mrs. Gallagher and there appears to be plenty of parking on-site for that use. Mr. Fountain stated that he felt the parking issue is not a problem. He stated that it was their belief that the PRD complies with the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Fountain stated that the proposed PRD use would not create a burden on public use and facilities or create traffic congestion. He stated that the purpose of this project is to protect and restore the existing creamery. Mr. Fountain stated that they believe that the proposed development is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood, which is a mix of commercial, industrial and residential uses. Mr. Fountain stated that the preservation and restoration of this building from its current state will not adversely affect property values but rather will enhance property values. Mr. Fountain stated that for all these reasons, he believes that the Town Council can find without any question, that the proposal for the subdivision will exactly fit the requirements for the proposed redevelopment district. He asked the Council to please consider it favorably. Mr. Fountain stated that the Warringtons were present if there were any questions.

Mr. Reed discussed the large trucks that are in the area and wondered if there would be a problem with the on-street parking with these trucks in route. Mr. Fountain stated that he did not believe this would be a problem. Mr. Fountain discussed other parking, which could be used. Mr. Reed asked how many employees Mrs. Warrington employed. Mrs. Warrington stated that there are four. Mr. Reed questioned if the drive would be paved. Mr. Fountain stated that they would need to study what had to be done in order to preserve the ramp.

Mr. Mayer questioned if historical status had been asked for this building. Mr. Fountain stated that he believes that this application is in progress.

The President of the Council asked for questions or comments from the audience.

Mr. Roland Willis stated that he and his wife have a hair salon on Erickson Drive. Mr. Willis stated that his concern is pertaining to when he recently built their salon and applied for a parking waiver, they were required to have so many parking spaces per square feet of building space. He asked if this application is subject to the same guidelines.

The Town Planner stated that each use requires different parking standards. However, in the PRD district, because of the uniqueness of this zoning, there is a great deal of flexibility. Mr. Hamilton stated that the Planning Commission and the Town Council ultimately makes the decision and due to the preservation, there is the authority within the ordinance to waive the parking requirements.

Mr. Willis expressed his concern and stated that it is not fair to require one business to make an investment in expensive real estate and exempt another one.

Mr. Fountain explained the purpose of the PRD. Mr. Fountain discussed a PRD versus Erickson Drive.

Mr. Mark Bower, Chairman of the Talbot County Historic Preservation Commission stated that the purpose of a zone like this is to preserve the buildings there. He stated that this is a perfect example of smart growth.

There being no further comment, the President of the Council stated that he would hold the record open until Friday, 4:00 P.M. for written comments and closed the public hearing at 7:48 P.M.

At 7:49 P.M., the President of the Council opened the public hearing to discuss the annexation Resolution 5684 for the petition of Philemon K. Croft, Co-Trustee Trust U/W Mary Lockwood Hardcastle Wright; Randall D.B. Croft, Co-Trustee Trust U/W Mary Lockwood Hardcastle Wright; and Louis C. Wright, Trustee U/P P. Kennard Wright, Jr. for the annexation of 3.176 acres lying contiguous to the existing boundaries of the Town of Easton, generally described as being south of MD. Rt. 33 (St. Michaels Road).

The Town Planner, Mr. Hamilton, discussed the application. He stated that the Ratcliffe farm had recently been annexed into the Town of Easton. Mr. Hamilton stated that it was discovered that part of the entrance road down to the site, half of the road was in the town limits and half the road was out after the annexation. He stated that all of the approvals were conditioned on the annexation of the entirety of the road into the town and this is exactly what this application is to do. The Town Planner stated that the Planning Commission has reviewed this application and unanimously recommended that this annexation be approved and the A-1 zoning be applied.

Mr. Joseph Stevens was present on behalf of the applicant. He stated that Argonaut Land Company agrees to purchase this area which is proposed for annexation from the Wright family, the petitioner this evening for the annexation. Mr. Stevens reviewed the history of the site and the condition of the PUD approval. Mr. Stevens asked the Council to look upon the action favorably and approve the annexation.

The President of the Council opened the hearing for public comment.

There was none.

The President of the Council stated that the record would be held open until close of business Friday for written comments.

The President of the Council read the title of Resolution No. 5684, (AS AMENDED), "A RESOLUTION TO ANNEX CERTAIN LANDS OWNED BY PHILEMON K. CROFT AND RANDELL D.B. CROFT CO-TRUSTEES TRUST U/W MARY LOCKWOOD HARDCASTLE WRIGHT; AND LOUIS C. WRIGHT, TRUSTEE U/P P. KENNARD WRIGHT JR. TO THE TOWN OF EASTON LOCATED ON THE SOUTHERLY SIDE OF MARYLAND ROUTE 33 AND CONSISTING OF 3.176 ACRES OF LAND, MORE OR LESS, AND TO PROVIDE FOR THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE ANNEXATION" into the record. The President of the Council closed the public hearing at 7:55 P.M.

The President of the Council asked the Council for consensus on the application of Ruff Express, Inc. (the owner/developer) for a reclassification from Select Industrial (I-1) to Planned Unit Development (PUD) to allow construction of a 90 room hotel on lots 27, 28 and 29 at the Glebe Business Park.

Mr. Ford stated that the Planning and Zoning Commission by a three to one margin concluded that the size, scale and location of the proposed Courtyard by Marriott were inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Ford stated that he agrees with that conclusion and stated that the proposed use is clearly not a permitted one in the industrial zone.

Mr. Mayer stated that one thing that he believes has occurred, is that the Easton Airport has changed their route of plans. He stated that if he is correct, the planes will fly directly over the hotel and he is not sure this will be a great place for a hotel. Mr. Mayer stated that he does not support this reclassification.

Mr. Reed stated that he hates to see a project like this not come to Easton. Mr. Reed stated that he hopes they can find another suitable location. He stated that he would vote against putting the hotel in an industrial site.

Mr. Heinmuller stated that this is an excellent proposal and he hopes that the project can come to Easton but not in an industrial park. Mr. Heinmuller stated that he votes against the project in an industrial setting because he feels the Comprehensive Plan should be supported.

The President of the Council informed the Town Attorney that he has a consensus on the application.

The President of the Council brought Resolution No. 5688, "A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN OF EASTON ESTABLISHING A TWENTY MINUTE TEMPORARY LOADING ZONE IN FRONT OF 28 SOUTH HARRISON STREET" to the floor. He asked for questions. There were none.

Mr. Heinmuller made a motion to approve the Resolution, seconded by Mr. Reed and carried unanimously following a roll call vote.

The President of the Council brought Resolution No. 5689, "A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN OF EASTON AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A SUBRECIPIENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE TOWN OF EASTON AND THE HOUSING AUTHORITY OF THE TOWN OF EASTON REGARDING COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FUNDS TO ACQUIRE LAND AND CONSTRUCT 12 NEW HOMES FOR LOW AND MODERATE INCOME PERSONS" to the floor. He asked for questions. There were none.

Mr. Ford made a motion to approve Resolution No. 5689, seconded by Mr. Mayer and carried unanimously following a roll call vote.

The President of the Council brought Resolution No. 5690, "A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN OF EASTON AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN EASEMENT AND RIGHT-OF-WAY AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE TOWN OF EASTON AND EASTON-AB COLONIAL MANOR, LLC" to the floor.

The Town Attorney discussed the easement and right-of-way Resolution and the elements leading to this resolution. He stated that the gravel road, which provides access to the site, is on the adjacent property and wanders back and forth across the boundary line. The Town Attorney stated that he is satisfied that the Town’s interests are protected and this will put into effect what the Council had intended to do when imposing previous conditions.

Mr. Mayer moved Resolution 5690, seconded by Mr. Ford and carried unanimously following a roll call vote.

The President of the Council brought Resolution No. 5691 to the floor authorizing the Mayor and Town Clerk to execute documentation implement a Purchasing Card Program. He asked for questions.

The Town Clerk stated that the Purchasing Card Program is essentially a credit card for the Town’s governmental use. He stated that there are certain occasions where the purchase order system is unworkable and everyone ends up using their personal credit card.

Mr. Mayer moved Resolution 5691 for approval seconded by Mr. Ford and carried unanimously following a roll call vote.

The President of the Council stated that the next three ordinances are for a first reading.

The President of the Council introduced Ordinance No. 403, "AN ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN OF EASTON ADDING CHAPTER 5A TO THE TOWN OF EASTON CODE TO ADOPT THE MODEL ENERGY CODE/1995."

The President of the Council introduced ordinance No. 404, "AN ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN OF EASTON REPEALING AND REENACTING WITH AMENDMENTS CHAPTER 13A OF THE TOWN OF EASTON CODE (PROPERTY MAINTENANCE) TO ADOPT THE INTERNATIONAL PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE/1998."

The President of the Council introduced Ordinance No. 405, "AN ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN OF EASTON REPEALING AND REENACTING WITH AMENDMENTS CHAPTER 6 OF THE TOWN OF EASTON (BUILDING CODE) TO ADOPT THE BOCA NATIONAL BUILDING CODE/1996 13^TH EDITION."

The President of the Council suggested the Council members speak with the Town Engineer or Ms. Shilling, the Assistant Town Attorney for clarification on these three ordinances.

Mr. Mayer made a motion to introduce Ordinances 403, 404 and 405 for a first reading.

Mr. Heinmuller asked for a public hearing for public comments. The President of the Council set the public hearing for April 3 at 7:15 P.M.

The President of the Council stated that there is a request for a proposed amendment to Section 510.3C(2) and D of the Zoning Ordinance. The Town Attorney stated that this would be to correct a technical mistake. The President of the Council set this public hearing for March 20 at 7:15 P.M.

The President of the Council stated that in the Council’s packet was a letter from Mr. Gelson Brooks, Plant Operations manager, Talbot County Public Schools requesting waiver of permit fees for renovation of Easton Middle School. The President of the Council stated that he did not know what the amount to be waived is. The Town Attorney stated that Mr. Brooks will be contacted for specifics.

The President of the Council brought to the floor invoices totaling $447,563.31 for approval. Mr. Mayer made a motion to approve payment, seconded by Mr. Reed and carried unanimously.

Mayor Butler stated that tomorrow there are various meetings scheduled for EBMA’s Shut the Town Day. Mr. Ford stated that the day begins at 9:00 A.M. at the Avalon.

Chief Harvey reported that the Second Annual Golf Outing will be held May 19 at the Easton Club to benefit the PAL Center.

Chief Harvey stated that the Police Department is in preliminary negotiation with the local cable channel about putting on a police sponsored show to make the public more aware of some of the policies and procedures. He stated that they are soliciting input from the community for any items they would like addressed. Chief Harvey stated that it will be approximately a fifteen-minute show and could later be expanded to address additional issues.

The Town Engineer stated that they are anticipating the start of the Goldsborough Street colonial streetlight upgrades and additional landscaping next week. He reported that starting today, there are some crews out performing storm drain maintenance. The Town Engineer stated that there will be replacement of the single poles at Glebe and Washington. He stated that starting today, they will begin their preparation of North Easton Park, Moton Park and Idlewild Park.

Mr. Heinmuller questioned the status of the new traffic light at Harrison and Washington Street. The Town Engineer stated that they had to get some dedications to do curb widening there on the east side of the intersection. He stated that everything has been ordered and they are ready to put it up. He reported that they are coordinating the upgrades with the construction of the Easton Utilities building.

Mr. Heinmuller discussed the lighting at the Health Department. He asked the Town Engineer to review the project to determine the impact of the lighting on the neighborhood.

Mr. Mayer questioned the Town Engineer on the snow removal. The Town Engineer stated that each time, they take the opportunity to learn from what they have experienced. He stated that they had two storms in the same day. He stated they will be critiquing their procedures.

The Town Attorney discussed Talbot County’s Bill 756. He stated that this bill was introduced by Mr. Philip C. Foster and it pertains to limitation of square footage of building supply and lumberyards within a three-mile radius of a corporated municipality in Talbot County. He stated that there will be a public hearing held in early March and Council members may want to respond. The Town Attorney stated that the Planning and Zoning Commission is in favor of closer cooperation between the Town and the County and sharing with the County the information that the Town has generated throughout the entire moratorium process. He stated that the Planning and Zoning Commission was unable to make a recommendation at that time due to the fact that they had not yet seen it.

Mayor Butler suggested having a spokesman at Talbot County’s meeting concerning Bill No. 756. He suggested Mr. Kehoe speaking on behalf of the Town.

Mr. Roger Ballman, 221 S. Hanson Street stated that the County Planning and Zoning Commission meets on that issue on March 2. Mr. Kehoe clarified that the County Planning and Zoning Commission is making a recommendation to the County Council the same way our Planning and Zoning Commission does to our Council. He stated that the decision-maker is the County Council.

The President of the Council discussed the incorporated municipalities meeting with the County Council.

Mr. Ford stated that he hopes to see everyone at the EBMA’s Shut the Town Down Day.

The President of the Council stated that he has a letter from the Talbot County Council stating that they would like to support the S.A.V.E. (Students Against Violence Everywhere) Peace Pole at Thompson Park. Mayor Butler stated that the request to erect a Peace Pole had been sent to the Park Board. He stated that the Park Board recommended that the County Council erect the pole at the Courthouse. The President of the Council stated that he would like to have a few more details regarding the Peace Pole.

Ms. Kay Wendowski, Easton Club stated that if anyone wants to get in practice for the police golf tournament, the interface community is doing a golf tournament April 13 for the benefit of Choices, a pregnancy crisis center.

Ms. Wendowski discussed the A.A.U.W. Youth Forum March 4 at MEBA.

There being no further business, Mr. Mayer made a motion to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Mr. Reed and carried unanimously.

There being no further business, the President of the Council adjourned the meeting at 8:23 P.M.

_______________________________________

Town Clerk