Loading...
03-16-1961 - Regular Meeting - MinutesMINUTES OF THE ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF WEST COVINA,`CALIFORNIA March 16, 1961 The meeting was called to order by Mayor Heath at 7:30 P. M. in the West Covina City Hall. ROLL CALL Present: Mayor heath, Councilmen Brown, Towner, Barnes, Snyder. Others Present: Mr. George Aiassa, City Manager Mr. Robert Flotten, City Clerk Mr. Harry C. Williams,, City Attorney SCHEDULED MATTERS HEARINGS EASTERLY ANNEXATION NO. 167' Hearing of Protests as required Hearing of Protests by Resolution No. 1997 adopted by the City Council on January 23, 1961. Hearing continued from February 27-, 1961. MAYOR HEATH:,: This is an adjourned meeting from the meeting of Monday, March 13. The purpose of the meeting tonight is to further discuss Annexation No. 167, concerning assessed valuation and any other pertinent information. The hearing,is still open. Anyone wishing to give testimony in this case tonight.please stand and be sworn in by our City Clerk. (Witnesses sworn.) MAYOR HEATH; Mr. City Attorney, do you want to start -first? MR. WILLIAMS I guess we might as well. First I would like to ask the City Clerk -- was the notice.of adjournment of this meeting from last Monday.posted on or near the council door, Mr. Clerk? MR. FLOTTEN: It was. MR. WILLIAMS: I would like to ask Mr. Mann.to testify. MAYOR HEATH: All right, will you state your name, please? MR. MANN: J. A. Mann. MAYOR HEATH: Give your address, please, Mr. Mann. MR. MANN: My business address is 510 South Spring Street, Los Angeles, California. MAYOR HEATH: Thank you. MR. WILLIAMS: What is 'your -occupation, Mr. Mann? MR. MANN: I am a real estate broker, and a real estate appraiser. T Adj. Co Co 3/16/61 EASTERLY ANNEXATION N0, 167 - Continued Page two MR. WILLIAMS: How long have you been engaged in the ap- praisal of real estate? 46 MR, MANN: Since 1933e` MR. WILLIAMS: Have you appraised both private and public property? MR, MANN: I have. MR. WILLIAMS: Real property. Would you name some of the owners'or public bodies for whom you have appraised property? MR, MANN; The public bodies, I have appraised for the Los Angeles School Department, for the Los Angeles County, for the City of Los Angeles, the State of California, the State of Cali- fornia Finance Department, for the City of Irwindale, City of El Monte, the Federal Housing Authority, U. So Public Housing Authority, U. So Corps of Engineers, Monterey Park, Claremont, City of Downey, City of Monrovia, -- I think that's primarily -- the Los Angeles Flood Control, Metropolitan Water District. MR. WILLIAMS: And have you also done appraisal work for private persons or firms?' MR, MANN: I have. I'm presently engaged in appraising some acreage for the Los Angeles Turf Club up in Arrowhead. I have appraised for American Potash and Chemical Company in Trona; American Red Cross; Chrysler Motors; Gallenkamp Shoe Company, -- oh, any number of others. Many of the banks; some of the insurance companies. MR, WILLIAMS: Are you familiar with the West Covina area, and particularly the area between West Covina and Pomona? MR, MANN: Yes, I am, MR. WILLIAMS: Have you done any work in that area? MR. MANN: I've appraised some property on barranca Street in Covina. I've appraised some property just east of the City of Covina, on a knoll formerly owned by Frank O'Neil. I have appraised property in West Covina, along Azusa Boulevard, for the State of California, and also in the City of Covina. I have appraised property on Azusa Boulevard for Mr, Jobe. I have ap- praised property in Pomona, some 1.60-odd acres, adjoining the subject property to the east, a part of Cal -Tech. MR. WILLIAMS: By the "subject property" you refer to the Bailey Ranch? MR, MANN: That is correct. MR. WILLIAMS: Are you familiar with the property known as the Bailey Ranch, lying southerly of the San Bernardino Freeway and east of the easterly most point of the city limits of West Covina? MR. MANN: I am. MR, WILLIAMS: Have you at the request of the City in- spected that property? Adj. Co Co 3/16/61 Page three EASTERLY ANNEXATION NO, 167 - Continued MR. MANN: I have inspected it, both for the -- at the re- quest of the City, and I inspected it before, when I was ap- praising the land for California Polytechnic College. MR. WILLIAMS: Are you familiar with the approximate 100 acres of that ranch which is included within West Covina's proposed easterly Annexation No. 167? MR, MANN: I am. MR, WILLIAMS: In your work as an appraiser have you formed opinions and done appraisal work and advice concerning the rela- tive value of different properties, different types of terrain, and different types of property? MR. MANN: I have; numerous times. MR, WILLIAMS: Do you know what the assessed value of the entire Bailey Ranch, which I believe is somewhere between 1000 acres and 1,100 acres, is on the last equalized - on the 1960-61 equalized assessment roll of the County of Los Angeles? MR. MANN: I do MR, WILLIAMS: WHAT IS THAT ASSESSED VALUE? MR. MANN: The land is assessed at $135,000.00, the im- provements at $3,010.00. MR. WILLIAMS: Our purpose .is to attempt to determine the part of the assessed value of the whole which is properly at- tributable to the 1,100 acres of that ranch included within West Covina's proposed Easterly Annexation No. 167. If that figure were determined simply on an equal area basis, what would be the assessed value? MR. MOORE: Mr. Mayor, may I object at this time for the record, please? We would like to object to any further questions of this witness, and any further answers, on the grounds that, as stated by your City Attorney, what you are driving at is completely immaterial, here, as to drawing out a portion of the assessed value of the whole property. We contend that the Code does not give this Council the power to do so. On the contrary, when properly interpreted the Code would prohibit you from doing so; that there is one single method provided in the Code; and that every question predicated on the City Attorney's statement of purpose here would therefore be immaterial and unlawful. Thank you. MR, WILLIAMS: I think, Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, that the Code not only permits but requires this line of questioning. The Code states that the value of a protest shall be the value of the property protesting as shown on the last equalized assessment roll. The Code makes it clear that there are times when you may annex to a city property without following property lines. You may split an ownarshipo Also there is no requirement that you follow assessment lines, This being so, the only way this body can determine the weight of this protest is to determine what is the assessed value of the portion of the property included in a larger over-all adjustment. Adj. C Co 3/1.6/61 Page Four EASTERLY ANNEXATION NO. 167 - Continued MR. MOORE: Mr, Mayor, we did not intend to get into a legal. argument with the City Attorney, I'm sure. However, to spell out N our contention here, again we say the Code does not provide for this type of apportionment, and we think that a proper interpre- tation prohibits it. In any event, we know that the Code says that it shall be the value as shown on the last equalized assessment roll, and we feel that this witness has already testified that when you look at the assessment roll of this 100 acres the only thing which can properly apply is $135,OO.00 for land and $3,010.00 for improvements. Now we did not choose to chop up the property, That was done by others. However, we think they should take the assessment roll as they find it, and that either there is an assessed value as shown on the roll of $1.35,00.00, plus the $3,010.00, or else there is a complete lack of power to go any further and to tear that figure up in this circumstance, Again, we don't want to argue the legal question, your Honor. MAYOR HEATH, I believe the Council has to determine in their own mind what is a fair assessed valuation of the property to de- termine whether they should continue with this hearing. I don't know how else you could possibly arrive at this assessed valuation except through the questioning of a person who has had experience along that line. At this point I would like to say that I would be interested in knowing an export's opinion of the assessed valuation of that prop- erty, and I would like to ask our City Attorney if he feels that we are within the law to proceed along this line. MR. WILLIAMS: I feel that you are, I feel that the property does have a value on the assessment roll. Obviously this 100 acres is assessed. I don't know what Mr. Moore's position is with respect to what is the assessed value of this, whether it's nothing, if it isn't separately shown, or whether he would attribute the value of the entire 1,100 acres to it. I'm inclined to think that neither one is the right answer. It's incumbent upon the Council to determine what part of the total assessment is attributable to the part of the property that is under the annexation proceeding; and that is the purpose of my questioning, if the Council please. MAYOR HEATH, Does the rest of the Council have any objection if I overrule the objection? MR, BROWN, I have none. MR. TOWNER: No MR, BARNES: No, • DR. SNYDER: No. MR, BARNES: I want to find out. MAYOR HEATH, All right, Mr. Williams, MR, WILLIAMS: You have in mind what the question was, Mr. Mann? MR. MANN, I would prefer to have you restate it. Adj. C. C. 3/1.6/61 Page Five EASTERLY ANNEXATION NO. 167 - Continued SIR. WILLIAMS: Very well. If the assessed valuation of the entire Bailey Ranch is spread equally over the entire area on an area basis, what would be the assessed value attributable to the 100 acres included within West Covina's Easterly Annexation District No. 167? MR. MANN: The assessed value of $135,000.00 covers 1,051.37 acres, according to the Assessor's calculation of the area. That shows $1,28.40 average per acre. So, multiplying 100 acres by the average, it would give $1.2, 840.00 assessed value of the 100 acres as part of the whole. MAYOR HEATH. That number was 12,840? MR. MANN. Correct, sir, MAYOR HEATH. Thank you. MR, WILLIAMS: Assuming that the assessment was not based upon an equal value throughout the area but that different parts of the property may have a greater actual cash value than other parts of the property, and that the assessment should be broken down in that fashion in order to determine the assessed value of the 100 acres, have you made any computations .in order to determine the value of the 100 acres, assuming these circumstances? MR, MANN. I have. MR, WILLIAMS: Would you please give the Council. the benefit of the method you used and the conclusion reached? MR. MOORE. Mr. Mayor, may the record show that our objection previously made goes to this entire line and each and every question? MR, WILLIAMS: Yes, I think the record may show that, without repeating the objection, that it stands as if repeated -- and overruled. MAYOR HEATH: (Nods head "Yes.") MR. MANN: As I understand your question, you want me to follow the procedure that I entered into in arriving at my opinion of the assessed value of the 100 Acres? MR. WILLIAMS: Yes. And then give what your opinion would be. MR. MANN. All right. MR, WILLIAMS. And the reasons for it, MR, MANN: First of all, gentlemen, in attempting to have an area of the property aside from the Assessor's statement of 1,051.37, I obtained a copy of the legal maps, called wall maps, and made a tracing of the particular property. That was at a scale of 600 feet to the • inch. Then I obtained from the City this aerial photograph (indi- cating map on wall), on which the City Engineers outlined the per- imeter of the Bailey Ranch. MR. WILLIAMS: Which is an exhibit in this case. Do you re- member, Bill, what it is -- B? MR, BLALOCK: It's in the record. MR. MOORE. B, I believe it was, the first, Mr. Culver's report. Adj. C. C. 3/16/61 Page Six EASTERLY ANNEXATION No. 167 - Continued MR. WILLIAMS-. B. MR. MANN: Then, taking that, I superimposed a tracing over the entire Ranch, and, as far as I was able to obtain from the measure- ments, I broke it up into squares containing in the main ten acres. It came out eventually at a little variance, because of the irregular scale of the map, as about 11 acres to the block. Then I superimposed on that these various terrain evidences as shown on the photograph, compared them with a topographical map, and then assigned from my own knowledge of land and experience that I've had in land the values on each of these 10 acres. In some instances there are as much as three different values within the ten acres. That is per -acre value. Then I determined from my studies there the areas of each class of land; in other words, flat land, rolling land, steep land, and so forth, Then I assigned values to each of those areas, relating the entire total, to the $.135,000.00 assessed value for the 1,051 acres. Taking the same study and segregating out to the area of 100 acres, I came to the opinion that the 100 acres had an assessed value, in accordance with my study of $44,400.00. MR. MOORE: Would you repeat that, please? MR. MANN: $44,400.00. MR. WILLIAMS: This figure of $44,400.00 in your opinion then would be the fair proportion of the total assessment of $135,000.00 which should be allocated to this 100 acres, if you consider the difference in value of the different acreages all over the entire Ranch? MR. MANN: That is correct. MR. WILLIAMS: Now, there are on the assessment roll I believe improvements of a value of $3,010.00. These I believe were entirely within the 100 acres. MR. MANN: They are, as far as I was able to determine, all within the 100-acre parcel. MR. WILLIAMS: I have no further questions, unless members of the Council wish to ask questions, or wait until Mr. Moore has asked whatever questions he wishes to ask. MAYOR HEATH: All right. MR. MOORE: May I proceed? MAYOR HEATH: You may. . MR. MOORE: ,Thank You. Mr. Mann, you stated that you took a tracing and broke it into some 10-acre squares and superimposedit on the aerial and on a topo map Have you ever been out on the ground out there? MR. MANN: Oh, yes. MR. MOORE: And when was the last time you were on the grounds? Adj. Co C. 3/16/61 Page Seven EASTERLY ANNEXATION NO. 167 - Continued MR. MANN: Tonight. MMR. MOORE: What did you see tonight? MR. MANN: I was checking the perimeter roads. MR. MOORE: What roads did you find on the perimeter, may I ask? MR. MANN: The road that turns over at Holt, and follows along the Freeway, entering back onto the Freeway; another road which leaves the Freeway at Via Verde and goes up along part of the perimeter, and goes on an underpass and comes back -- you go under the Freeway and either go into the hills on the north or return. The other day I checked the roads on the side to the west. I've driven over on the other side of the hills, and back to the college (indicating on map), coming over the roads over the hill. I've driven up in back of the college (indicating on map), around these roads. In fact, the whole perimeter of the property. MR. MOORE: Did you find any road that leads into the property for any substantial distance on any portion of this property other than the 100 acres? MR. MANN: No; except this fire road, which was locked and which I couldn't traverse. MR. MOORE: Other than the fire road there are no roads, public or private, leading into the property except on the 100 acres? MR. MANN: Oh, there are some farm roads of a nominal nature, but no highways. MR. MOORE: You wouldn't say that the position of the property, other than the 100 acres, has any accessibility to other public roads, would you? MR. MANN: Yes, I would say it does. MR. MOORE: Where was that? MR. MANN: At this underpass (indicating on map), approximately this point, Via Verde, the terrain is exactly at street level. MR. MOORE: For what distance back onto the property, thougb? MR. MANN: Oh, I would say -- I don't know exactly. I'd have • to make a guess. I'd say for several hundred feet. MR. MOORE: Well, did you see a fence between the road and the property up there? MR. MANN: Not at that -- yes, there is a fence. The entire property is fenced. MR. MOORE: Did you see a gate in the fence? MR. MANN: I don't believe there is one. Adj. C. C. 3/16/61 Page Eight EASTERLY ANNEXATION NO, 167 - Continued MR, MOORE: Do you know if the owner of this particular property has legal access to that road that you mentioned? 0 MR, MANN: I believe he has. MR. MOORE: And what is the basis of your belief? MR. MANN: Because it's a service road, and it's separated from the Freeway. And the State Highway, in putting in service roads, permits access on and off of those roads. MR. MOORE: Well, did you check the deed, either to the State Highway, or that right of way, or to this property owner, to find out whether or not there was access? MR. MANN: No, sir, I did not. MR. MOORE: Mr. Mann, I'm asking this not to embarrass you or anything but merely to refresh my own .recollection. My recollection of that particular point along Via Verde Road is that if the fence were not there, you might drive an automobile from the road to the property, you would go no more that 10 or 15 feet before you started a steep incline. MR, MANN: Now, you can go further than that, Mr, Moore. You can drive in -- 0 MR. MOORE: How much further, may I ask? MR. MANN: I would say several, hundred feet. And then it be- comes rolling land, and could be, by grading, made into a service- able road. At the present moment it is not a road there at all. MR. MOORE: Now, based on your knowledge and experience as an appraiser, it's true, is it not, that if there were roads, either public or private, leading into this property, that would definitely affect the value, would it not? MR, MANN: Oh, yes. That is, let me say it in this way, that if the roads are of such nature that they would be usable, they could conceivably not be of any value if you're going to subdivide and wanted to use the property in another manner. MR. MOORE: But in its present state this property would be more valuable, would it not, if there were roads, say public roads, leading to the interior of the property? MR, MANN: In its present state, at the present moment, it is mainly a grazing land, and, of course, with better access it could conceivably have a better value, yes. MR. MOORE: Now drawing your attention to the 100 acres, would you describe the access and the accessibility of that portion of the property to public and private roads? MR. MANN: There is Lorengo Street, which is a loop street -- MR. MOORE: Is that Lorencita, may I ask? MR. MANN: Or Lorencita. I thought it was Lorengoo But, Lorencita; and there is a farm road leading to the farm property (Indicating on map). Adj. C. C. 3/16/61 EASTERLY ANNEXATION NO. 167 - Continued Page Nine MR. MOORE: And what about to the north of that 100 acres, Mr, Mann? MR. MANN: I don't believe there is anything. There is a service road along that -- that!s what I mentioned before. MR. MOORE The service road goes along the entire length of the 100 acres? MR. MANN: Oh, yes. MR. MOORE- Would you tell us your recollection of the topography of the 100 acres, please, as compared to the balance of the property? MR. MANN: (Indicating on map) I am pointing to an area which is in light color on this map, which is fairly flat. It has been farmed. Then it goes on to a knoll, where the improve- ments -- the barn and the houses. There is another knoll, and a somewhat higher but fairly flat area, also a fairly flat area southerly, extending a little bit into the 100 acres. Most of it is rolling lands covered with trees. MR. MOORE:' Now, Mr. Mann, on the basis of the method by which you broke this thing down -- and I'm talking about the drawing of your 10 to 11-acre parcels and superimposing them -- would you say that there might be as much as ten percent variation in your accuracy? MR. MANN: No, sir, I would say there wasn't that much. MR. MOORE: What would you say would be the variation, maximum? MR. MANN:, Well, I tried to make it as exact as I could get it. I didn't try by any method at all except to do it as accurately as possible, and I have no idea as to -- I don't think there is a great deal of variance there. MR. MOORE: Well, let me ask you this -- I have problems on looking at the topo map. I'm not trained to read one. Can you tell me the elevation of this point here (indicating on map)? MR. MANN: No, that would be impossible from -- without re- lating it to a topo map. MR. MOORE: All right. Now, can you tell me the elevation of this point here (indicating on map)? MR. MANN: No. I can merely relate that this is higher than this (indicating), and higher than that (indicating), and so forth. I couldn't give you a footage difference. MR. MOORE: Can you tell me the grade at this point here (indicating)? MR, MANN: No. I can tell you though, from visual, that it's very steep at that particular point. MR. MOORE: Visual from the -- Adj. C. C. 3/16/61 EASTERLY ANNEXATION NO. 167 -- Continued MR. MANN: Both from the -- obMR. MOORE: --- aerial? MR. MANN: From the map, and also on the ground. Page Ten MR. MOORE: All right, on a topo you have, I take it, dif- ferent -lines of different elevations? MR. MANN: Yes, sir. MR. MOORE: Now, between those lines you have absolutely no way of telling what the grade is, isn't that true? Let me give you an example. I don't want to confuse you. (Drawing on blackboard). Looking at it from a top view, you have one line here, and one line here, each being -- say this is 10 feet above sea level, and 10 feet. Now, looking at it from ground level, that could be conceivably like so, could it not (drawing on blackboard)? MR. MANN: No, I don't. believe -- MR. MOORE: Your 10-foot point here, and your 20-foot point here. 0. MR. MANN: No,.sir, because they don't draw them in that manner. MR. MOORE: How are they drawn? MR. MANN: Well, here is the point of 1.0 feet, here is one of 10 feet, here is one of 10 feet (drawing on blackboard), and those lines are connected. Here is one at 20 feet, one at 20 feet, an- other at 20 feet, and those lines are connected. MR. MOORE: Well now, between those two lines you drew you can't tell how much of it remains at 10 and then goes on up, or whether it's a gradual incline, can you? MR. MANN: Well, you can on a -- depending on how fine a scale the topo -- some topos are drawn as much as, or as closely as, one foot. MR. MOORE: What was the scale of the topo that you used? MR. MANN: I.think this is at five feet, as I remember, without examining it. MR. MOORE: Well, there would be variations which might cast some doubt on the absolute accuracy of your breakdown, this method, is that true? • MR. MANN: Well, I couldn't guarantee that the -- in fact, I didn't try to relate that this one was 25 feet, and down here was 30 feet, or reverse, or 10 feet (indicating on map). What I did was to take the character of the land as evidenced. I couldn't -- MR. MOORE: As evidenced by the aerial photo -- MR. MANN: By the aerial, and related to the topo for com- parison. The topo scale and this map scale are entirely different. Adj. C. C. 3/16/61 Page Eleven EASTERLY ANNEXATION NO. 1.67 - Continued MR. MOORE: Can you tell me the highest and lowest point of elevation on the 100 acres? 40 MR. MANN: I can, by this map. (Mr. Mann unrolls the map). MR. MOORE: Let me ask you this first. Can you tell me from the aerial photo? MR. MANN: No. MR. MOORE: Will you tell me from your map? MR. MANN: There are two contour intervals on this map. One is 25 feet, and another is 5 feet. MR. MOORE: Is it your testimony the range is from 5 to 25 feet? MR. MANN: No, there's two different scales on it. MR. MOORE: Oh, I see. Is there a variation between the scales? MR. MANN: No. There are two different -- one is a dotted line, one is a solid line. There is apparently a difference of 50 to 75 feet in that. Well, wait a minute. Excuse me. In the 100 acres, you said? I misunderstood the question. MR. MOORE: In the 100. MR. MANN: It runs as high --- the top point is 1,275 feet. MR. MOORE: Can I see where you are pointing there, please? MR. MANN: Yes, sir. MR. MOORE: 1,275 above sea level, or what? MR. MANN: Above the sea level point. MR. MOORE: And what i.s the low point? MR. MANN: The low point is about 700 feet. And that's a government map. This peak is even higher -- not higher, but is off the property. There is another high point of 1,875 feet. MR. MOORE: That's off the 100 acres? MR. MANN: No, that's on the 100 acres. MR. MOORE: What is the date of your map, Mr. Mann? . MR. MANN: There is another one at the bench mark at the Free- way there of 1,006 feet. MR. BLALOCK: May I ask him a question? MR. WILLIAMS: Yes, go ahead, Mr. Blalock. MR. BLALOCK: Where do you find any figures showing the lowest elevation on the 100 acres? Adj. C. C. 3/16/61 Page Twelve EASTERLY ANNEXATION NO. 167 - Continued MR. MANN: Well, by following these out (indicating on map on wall) . 40 MR. BLALOCK: Will you point it out to me? MR. MANN: Yes, sir. I'm looking for it. Following this line (indicating), you come down eventually to an indicated 700 feet. I found it here once. Take that line, and following back for contours brings us to 700, and following that on out -- MR. BLALOCK: Now, as a matter of fact you couldn't possibly follow that from the point you pointed out over -- MR. MANN: Oh, yes, you can. MR. BLALOCK: -- north of the knolls. MR. MANN: Oh, yes, you can. MR. BLALOCK: Will you take your pencil, and draw the line then and follow that 700 contour? MR. MANN: All right. Here is 800 right here. There is 8 -- saddle 75, 750, 725, and -- well, I miscounted that. There are 1, 2, 3, 4 lines. Now, this line, one of these lines, repeats itself. So be- tween the 800 and this heavy line the difference in the thing is 100 feet, the difference heavy, and in between the lines are light. MR. BLALOCK: And is that line that you indicated -- the 700 feet is the lowest point on the map? MR. MANN: No, probably another 25 feet long. MR. BLALOCK: Woid it interest you to know that the lowest point is 525 feet at that corner? If so, would that change your testimony? MR. MANN: That is not what is shown on this map. MAYOR HEATH: Which point did you point to? MR. MANN: All right, here is 800 feet, sir, (indicating). And that is a heavier line, would be 100 feet below that, 700 feet. And then the 25-foot interval -- MR. TOWNER: I.wonder if I could interrupt the testimony just a moment here. Could we have the map placed on the board so that the entire Council could see it? • MR. MANN: I don't think you can see it, but I would be glad to do it. MAYOR HEATH: Let me put this over here a minute. MR. TOWNER: Could we gather around the map and have the witness trace its course? MR. MOORE: May I ask one question in connection with this? You've seen the property? I Adj. Co Co 3/16/61 Page Thirteen EASTERLY ANNEXATION NO. 167 - Continued MR. MANN: Yes, sir. go MR. MOORE: Now, would you testify that, having seen this 100 acres, this map is accurate? MR. MANN: I -- MR. MOORE: That there is a 500-foot difference between the highest and lowest elevation? MR. MANN: I couldn't testify that this map exactly coincides with the land, because I didn't make the map, I wasn't present there. However, I found these maps fairly accurate. MR. MOORE: Well, did you find it fairly accurate with respect to this 100 acres if there is a 500---foot :difference? MR. MANN: I made no survey of it. MR. MOORE: Well, now, you said you've been on the land, and you know the land, and these studies are made from the map. Now, is there or is there not a 500-foot difference in elevation in the 100 -acres? MR. WILLIAMS: Now, did you say it was 500? MR. MOORE: The map says so. MR. MANN: I merely pointed out that the lowest point that I saw was 700 or 675 feet. The map shows two peaks of 1,378, and another peak -- I've forgotten now -- 1,275. MR. WILLIAMS: This isn't on the 100 acres though?' MR. MANN: Oh, I'm sorry. MR. MOORE: Now. MR. MANN: I'm very sorry. MAYOR HEATH: All right, I would like to ask if at the present time we could hold off any debate and let Mr. Mann show the Council the map and explain to them anything he has to explain. MR. MANN So may I -- MR. MOORE: Go ahead. MR. MANN: I'm sorry that I mis-- MR. WILLIAMS: You,might explain your testimony, Mr. Mann. I think you were referring to the entire property. • MR. MANN: I was. I was. MR. MOORE: That's right. MR. MANN: And the whole acreage. The.100 acres is not indicated on this map. It's down in this corner, That's where I made my mistake. (Indicating on map.) r Adj. C. C. 3/16/61 Page Fourteen EASTERLY ANNEXATION NO. 167 - Continued The contour lines are indicated. The heavy lines are the 100 lines. 300 feetis the heavy line. Then the in between lines. The contour difference in this particular area is 25 feet. Therefore, if you follow these lines you will find in most instances there are four lines in between, indicating 25-foot intervals. So if this is 800 feet, this is 700 feet (indicating). Now if you can follow that line far enough -- there should be a mark, you can -see it.here -- if you follow that back all the way down, there is the 700 -- MR. MOORE: This red line isn't on the property? MR. MANN: There is a mistake in whoever drew this. MR. MOORE: In other words, you take your 100 out of here? MR. MANN: That's right. Yes. The 100 would be -- (indi- cating on map.) I'm so used to working with just that one section that I -- (indicating). MR. MOORE: Do you know the scale of this map? MR. MANN: Yes. No, no. One inch -- well, let's see -- the scale is 1 to 24,000. MR. MOORE: What is the scale of the aerial? MR. MANN:' The aerial is approximately 26.7 feet to the inch. Or, no, 267 feet to the inch. MR. MOORE: Roughly this would be about ten times the scale of this, would it not? MR. MANN: That is correct. MR. MOORE: Do you have one you made likewise for the topo? MR. MANN: No,'I didn't make one for the topo. MR. MOORE: How would you correlate -- MR. MANN: By taking -- MR. MOORE: May I finish the question? MR. MANN: Sorry. MR. MOORE: (Continuing) -- correlate from this particular transparency which you took off of this topo to this map which is ten times smaller? MR. MANN: Well, I took certain points and checked them to see that they were approximately the same. MR. MOORE: When you get down to a map ten times smaller the width of your pencil could make a substantial difference, couldn't it, two, three, four percent? MR. MANN: I wouldn't say in percentage. Adj. C. Co 3/16/61 Page Fifteen EASTERLY ANNEXATION NO, 167 - Continued MR. MOORE: What would you say in percentage? MR. MANN: I couldn't estimate what the width of a pencil would make in difference, but it is a small scales MR, MOORE: Now, Mr. Mann, let me ask you this: You've laid out a transparency on this aerial photo. Now, isn't it true that when you try to -"correlate that to the ten times smaller topo it's pure guesswork? MR. MANN: No, it is not guesswork. MR, MOORE: Well, is it substantially guesswork? MR, MANN: No. MR, MOORE: How accurate is it? MR. MANN: Because you can take a certain -- take for example the very corner on that map (indicating on map), and the very corner on that map (indicating), and you can get fairly accurate relation- ships. MR. MOORE: Well now, what do you mean by "fairly accurate" -- 90 percent accurate, 80 percent? MR. MANN: I'm not going to put a percentage on it. I can't. MR. MOORE: Well, could you put a percentage on the accuracy of your $44, 000 0 00 figure --- 90, 80, 70? MR, MANN: I would say my $44,000.00 is very accurate. MR, MOORE: Now, on what basis? You told me before you can't tell, me how high this point is, you can't tell the grade. Anyone with common sense would know that you can not to any accuracy on this map ten times smaller. You've got this overlay. Now, what is the accuracy of your figure? MR, MANN:. The accuracy of my figure is that, first of all, it's acreage, secondly of all I didn't relate it to the elevation of each foot, I took the area -- MR, MOORE: How about each acre? MR. MANN: I investigated each ten acres, and split the ten acres up into its component parts, of the different classes of land. MR, MOORE: I can see on your transparency here where it says approximately 10 acres on the area. How do you get to the topo especially? MR. MANN: I can't tell elevation from the aerial. As I say, I merely checked --- MR. MOORE: Merely checked. THE WITNESS: -- the accuracy of the photo, and the topo. The topo, the work I did was primarily from the photograph. MR, MOORE: I see. Now let me ask you this: Who retained you to do this work? MR. MANN: The City of West Covina. Adj. C. C. 3/16/61 Page Sixteen EASTERLY ANNEXATION NO. 167 - Continued MR. MOORE: And when were you retained? MR. MANN: The first part of March, I believe. I don't have the date with me, I'm sorry. MR. MOORE: Was it after March 1? MR. MANN: Yes, it was. MR. MOORE: Was it after march 5? MR. MANN: I don't recall. That's what I was looking for. N.R. MOORE: How many times did you go out to the property? MR. MANN: I went out to the property three times, not counting tonight. And I've been on the property prior to that, when I was investigating land values and property for the college. MR. MOORE: Did anyone tell you the purpose of your appraisal? MR. MANN: Yes, sir. I have -- would have to have that. MR. MOORE: Did they tell you -- Why would you have to have it? Would your appraisal make any difference depending on the purpose of the people you're working for? MR. MANN: The type of appraisal would have to be given to me. MR. MOORE: Would appraisals for different purposes -- would you come up with different figures? MR. MANN: For instance, in this appraisal here, it was entirely related to the $1,35,000.00 assessed value. I made no study of the appraised value of the land. MR. MOORE: You have no opinion at all as to market value of the 1.00 acres, or as to the whole? MR. MANN: No, sir, MR. MOORE: Now, you say you've been in this business since 1933. I take it you are familiar with the appraisal, of appraisal techniques, not of -- pardon me, assessments, assessment techniques? MR. MANN: Yes, sir. MR. MOORE: Fairly familiar would you say? MR. MANN: I would say fairly familiar, yes. MR. MOORE: And you could testify hereunder oath, could you not, that the appraisal on this property is unlawful? MR. MANN: I'm not an attorney. I couldn't do that. MR. MOORE: Well, you know, do you not, that the appraiser can not lawfully appraise a piece of property in a larger portion than 64.0 acres? MR. MANN: I have been told that, but I don't know. MR. MOORE: Well, do you believe it? If I told you, would you believe it? Adj. C. C. 3/16/61 Page Seventeen EASTERLY ANNEXATION NO, 167 - Continued MR. MANN: If you told me, I'd believe it. MR. MOORE: Well, all right. Now, if that were true, your $138,000.00 figure would be unlawful, would it not? MR. MANN: I can't make a legal decision, Mr. Moore. MR. MOORE: Well, assuming that it is unlawful to appraise a single parcel of land if it constitutes more than 640 acres. late. not? MR. MANN: I can't enter into an argument with you on the MR. MOORE: Well, this land is more than 640 acres, is it MR. MANN: It's 1,051.37 acres. MR. MOORE: And you found only a single figure on the assess- ment roll, did you not? MR. MANN: I don't know how he arrived at that figure. MR. MOORE: It was a single figure, was it not? MR. MANN:. It was a single figure of $135,000.00 plus the im- provements. 4bMR, MOORE: Now, isn't it true that in assessment practice, which as I believe is essentially appraisal practice, that if you would take approximately one-half of this property, or two-thirds of the property, and put separate assessments on it, that it might not bear any correlation to the $138,000.00, that the sum of each assessment might exceed $138,000.00? MR. MANN: I don't understand what you mean, Mr. Moore. MR. MOORE: Well, suppose you have 100 acres, a single parcel, and it's assessed at $100.00. Suppose I sell it off in two 50- acre parcels. Isn't it possible that each parcel would have an assessment of more than $50.00? MR. MANN: Anything is possible. MR. MOORE: Thank you. MR. MANN: I don't say that -- MR. MOORE: Did anyone tell you the total assessment value of land and improvements of this annexation area? MR. MANN: I don't understand that, either. What do you mean by anybody told me? I was the one who tried to work out an assessed value of that 100 acres. MR. MOORE: This is an annexation area which includes this property and some 14 other acres. Do you know the total assessed value of land and improvements of the last roll of the 1,100 acres and the 14 acres? MR. MANN: Know what the assessed value is of the four other parcels? Is that what you're getting at? MR. MOORE: That's correct, yes. Adj. Co C. 3/163/61 Page Eighteen EASTERLY ANNEXATION NO. 167 - Continued MR. MANN: Yes, sir. MR. MOORE: And who told you that? MR. MANN: I looked them up on the maps. MR. MOORE: Why? Were you asked to appraise those properties? MR. MANN: No. MR. MOORE: Were you told that -- MR. MANN: I knew they were in the annexation, so I looked them up. MR. MOORE: Well, you were retained to put an assessed value on 100 acres, were you not? MR. MANN: That is right. MR. MOORE: What relation does that have to the other 14 acres? MR. MANN: Nothing. MR. MOORE: But you took it and you found out the figure, did .you not? • MR. MANN: Yes. I find out a lot of things that -- MR; MOORE: Did anyone ever tell you that they would be very happy if your figure for the 100 were less than your figure for the total of the 14? MR. MANN: No, sir. MR. MOORE: Did anyone indicate that this was a majority pro- test situation? MR. MANN; I read the paper. MR. MOORE: I see. Did you read the transcript of the last hearing before this Council? MR. MANN: I read the transcript of Mr. Culver's testimony. MR. MOORE: That was two hearings ago. Did you read Mr. Schneiderman's testimony? MR. MANN: I don't know. I don't -- MR. MOORE: Have you any reason to disagree with Mr. Culver's testimony? 0 MR. MANN: Yes, I have. MR. MOORE: What would that reason be? MR. MANN: First of all, he picked out only the 100 acres, to put an appraised value without any relationship to the entire parcel. MR. MOORE: Did you ever talk to John Quinn about the proper method to do it? Adj. C. C. 3/16/61 Page Nineteen EASTERLY ANNEXATION NO. 167 - Continued MR, MANN: I didn't talk to John Quinn, but I talked to deputies. • MR. MOORE: Did you read Mr. Culver's testimony that he talked -to Johii'Quinn prior to his testimony and was told that that was the proper method? MR. MANN: I didn't read it as it was the proper method, I read where Mr. Culver had talked to Mr. Quinn. MR. MOORE: And based his testimony at least in part upon that talk, did he not? MR. MANN: Well, he wasn't -- he didn't appraise it as an assessment, he appraised it as the'fair market value, as he called it, without any relationship to the 1,100 acres. MR. MOORE: Well, Mr. Mann, if this 100 acres had appeared on the last equalized assessment roll as a single parcel, how would you appraise it? MR. MANN: I gave you that testimony. It's $44,400.00. MR. MOORE: Well, I changed the facts on you now. I said, if this 100 acres had appeared on the last equalized assessment roll as a single parcel, how then would you attempt to arrive -- suppose the figure were blurred and you couldn't read it, how would you attempt to arrive at what that figure should be? MR. MANN Well, I'd have to make a study and see, under those circumstances, what it was. I'm not -- I can't give you -- MR. MOORE: Let me ask you this: If you'd made such a study, would not one proper method be to find out the fair market value of the property and then find out the average ratio of assessed value to fair market value on similar property? For example, let's assume that you should think that the fair market value of the property were $100,000.00, and that the average ratio of assessments to fair market value in the area for sim- ilar property were, say, 22 percent. Would you not then con- clude that a proper figure might be $22,000.00 for assessment purposes? MR. MANN: Well, there would be a lot of other things enter into it, and I couldn't give you an answer to that intelligently without going into a good deal more study. MR. MOORE: Well, this is essentially the method that Mr. Culver used. Would you tell me what was wrong with the method? MR. MANN: Well, I don't know what method he used. I only read his'statement that he assigned so much per acre as the fair market value of the property. It had nothing to do with the assessed value. MR. MOORE: Now, you began your testimony saying that you had experience in relating the value of one parcel to another, or the value of a part to the whole. You said that you did this to find a percentage or a portion of the $138,000.00 attributable to the 100 acres. And the next step that I recall is, you came up with a $44,400.00 figure. Would you say that this 100 acres exceeds, say, 40 percent of the value of the whole? Adj. C. C. 3/16/61 Page Twenty EASTERLY ANNEXATION NO. 167 - Continued MR. MANN: It was not -- my $44,400.00 had nothing to do with the percentage of the whole. It was the character of the land involved in the 100 acres. It had nothing to do except using the basis of the whole. It was not on a percentage basis. If I took a percentage it would be 100 acres to the 1,000 acres. Then it would be $12,000.00, or whatever -- $128,000.00 -- wait a minute. $12,000.00. MR. MOORE: Now, Mr. Mann, you would not testify here, or any place, would you, that the 100 acres has an equal prorata value per acre with respect to the rest of the property, or a prorata value per acre? MR. MANN: On an assessment roll in most instances the assessor merely takes an average over the whole thing. He does not.in most instances break it down to the classification of land. MR. MOORE: Well, how does he get the figure in the first place? He builds it up, doesn't he,; step by step? MR. MANN: Not necessarily. He builds it up from the entire parcel. MR. MOORE: Well now, on a prorata basis what would be the assessed value of the best acre of land in the 100 acres (indi- cating on map)? On any basis. • MR. MANN: Well, I assigned the best land as $1,500.00 an acre. MR. MOORE: All right, then on a prorata basis you would say that, 100 acres, this land, would have an assessed value of $1,500,000.00? MR. MANN: No, I wouldn't say that. MR. MOORE: In other words, you would go from top to bottom, but you can't go from bottom to top? MR. MANN: I don't say that. I didn't say it in the first place. I said each character of a portion of the land stands on its own. MR. MOORE: Did you ever talk to Glenn Watson about this? MR. MANN: No, I have not. MR. MOORE: Did you ever talk to anybody in the Assessment Office about it? MR. MANN: I talked to one of the deputies there. I talked to one of the engineers and asked him how they arrived at the area • of the different classifications. The engineer told me that they did not arrive at that, that they took merely the perimeter and calculated the area. MR. MOORE: They didn't break this down to any segment or anything like that? MR. MANN: That is what the engineer told me. Adj. C. C. 3/16/61 Page Twenty -One EASTERLY ANNEXATION NO. 167 -- Continued MR. MOORE: Do you happen to recall the name of the deputy engineer or the engineer you talked,to? This is somewhat at vari- ance with testimony we had before. MR. MANN: I believe I have his name. The name I obtained was Dixon. MR. MOORE: This was an engineer you talked to? MR. MANN: Yes, sir. MR. MOORE: And did you talk to a deputy assessor? MR. MANN: I did, but unfortunately I haven't got his name. MR. MOORE: Now, forgetting about what the market value of this land might be as a whole or part, or any particular acreage, and based upon your knowledge and experience, in relation of one parcel, to another, could you testify here under oath that the 100 acres does not constitute at least 40 percent of the value of the entire parcel? MR. MANN: I'm not saying what percentage it is. As I say, I testified that in my opinion the assessed value would be $44,400.00. MR. MOORE: But you could not tell me then what percent of the whole that this 100-acre parcel has, regardless of whether it's for • assessed value purposes, fair market value, sale value, or any other value - you can't tell me that that constitutes less than 40 percent of the value of the whole, can you? MR. MANN: I didn't figure it that way, Mr. Moore, at all. MR. MOORE: Well, you've seen the property? MR. MANN: Yes. MR. MOORE: You're familiar with it? MR. MANN: Yes. MR. MOORE: Thoroughly? MR. MANN: Yes. MR. MOORE: You've made all your studies. You are experienced in relating parts of acreages to the whole of acreages. And then you can't tell me what percentage of the whole value that this 100 acres has? MR. MANN: I haven't figured it out, no. • MR. MOORE: But you can sit here and tell me glibly that for assessment purposes it has $44,4.00.00 as compared to $138,000.00? MR. MANN: Yes, because I figured it out in an entirely different method, and worked it out on the character of the land. I did not pay any attention as to the percentages of the whole. MR. MOORE: Well, would it be valid in an assessment, in an appraisal procedure, to determine what percentage of the whole the value of the 100 acres has, regardless of for what purpose? e Adj. C. C. 3/16/61 Page Twenty -Two EASTERLY ANNEXATION NO. 167 - Continued MR. MANN: If you took an average value over the entire 1,057 acres and then took a percentage of it, yes. 0 MR. MOORE: You mean a per -acre value? MR. MANN: Yes. MR. MOORE: I'm not interested in that. Let's take two different figures. Say we have 1,100 acres valued at $1,100.00, and we have 100 acres valued at $600.00, and that 100 is a part of the 1,100. Then you would testify, would you not, that the 100 is in excess or slightly -- around 60 percent of the value of the whole? IviR. MANN: No, I would not, under ordinary circumstances, unless it was exactly the same land all the way through. But if ;you're going to take different classes of land and try to average apples, pears, and peaches together -- you can't do it. MR. MOORE: Well, then what you are saying is, you can not compare values if they are different types of land? MR. MANN: I said you can compare values, because -- MR. MOORE: And how would you compare the value of the 100 to the value of the whole? • MR. MANN: I didn't do it that way, as I told,you, Mr. Moore. I told you that I had taken the 100 acres, classified the dif- ferent characters of land in it, assigned the values of each classification, and then worked it out in an addition of those areas, not on a percentage basis. MR. MOORE: Again would you tell me just what -- how was it explained to you as to the purpose of your appraisal? MR. MANN: The purpose of my appraisal? MR. MOORE: What you were trying to appraise. MR. MANN: The purpose of my appraisal was to spread the $135,000.00 over the 1,051 acres, in the relationship of the different classes of land and as they. ;sere located. MR. MOORE, How many different classes of land do you have there? MR. MANN: I have different values of from $40.00 an acre to $1,500.00 an acre. MR. MOORE: How many different classes, may I ask? • MR. MANN: Well, classes -- that is -- the different classes are represented by the values. MR. MOORE: Then how many different values do you have from forty to one thousand, five hundred? MR. MANN: Well., 40, 150, 200, 300, 400, 600, 1,000, and 1,500. That's eight different -- MR. MOORE: Eight different types of land, eight different values? Adj. C. C. 3/16/61 Page Twenty -Three EASTERLY ANNEXATION NO. 167 - Continued MR. MANN: Yes, sir. . MR. MOORE: I ask you again, did you read the transcript of the last hearing, or where Mr. Watson testified? MR. MANN: No, sir. MR. MOORE: Have you ever met Mr. Watson? MR. MANN: I know Mr. Watson, yes. I've worked for him. MR. MOORE: Did .you ever see any map in the Assessor's Office that indicated a breakdown along the lines that you mentioned? MR. MANN: No, sir.. MR. MOORE: Did you ever talk to Mr. Watson about this case? MR. MANN: No, sir. I was in the office when he was talking to Mr. Williams. MR. MOORE: Was this before you were retained or after you were retained? MR. MANN: After I was retained. MR. MOORE: But you never talked -- MR. WILLIAMS: By telephone. MR. MANN: I didn't see him personally. They were talking over the telephone. ` MR. MOORE: Mr. Mann, if you were to take away this 100 acres, with its access and so forth, can you tell me what the assessed value of the balance of the land would be? MR. MANN: I made no -- I can tell you the -- MR. MOORE: Other than by subtracting the two figures you have. MR. MANN: That would be as of this moment the only way I could. MR. MOORE: Well now, you said you made some notes about different land classifications and different values. Do you have those notes where we could add up the values and the balance of it? MR. MANN: Yes. MR. MOORE: Would you place them on the map somewhere? MR. MANN: Only the relationship of the 1,051. acres. I have • broken down the different land, total acreages of each class. MR. MOORE: Based upon your view of the aerial photograph? MR. MANN: Yes. And my studies of the land. MR. MOORE: Mr, Mann, could your figures be as much as ten percent inaccurate, in all honesty? I'm not trying to embarrass you. MR. MANN: No, I'm trying -- Adj. Co Co 3/16/61 Page lVenty-Four EASTERLY ANNEXATION NO, 167 - Continued MR, MOORE: On this method that you used isn't it true that you could be ten percent off one way or another? MR, MANN: I don't believe so. MR. MOORE: Could you be five percent off? MR, MANN: I wouldn't know. I dial it as accurately as I could. I worked long hours on it, and I don't ordinarily try to commit errors, either one way or the other. MR, MOORE: I'm sure you were trying to do a careful job. Based upon your experience in relating acreage, such as the 100 acres to the entire 1,100, and based upon your vast knowledge of this land, your topo maps, your breakdown, your aerial photos, isn't it true that this parcel is -- (indicating on map) -- it constitutes at least 40 percent of the value of the entire parcel, regardless of whether you're talking about value for assessment purposes, fair market value purposes, or any other purpose? It's 40 percent, isn't it, at least that much? MR, WILLIAMS: I think, Mr. Chairman, that question has been asked and answered at least two or three times. MAYOR HEATH: I think it has, MR, WILLIAMS: I don't see any purpose - MR. MOORE: I would like to have the answer read, Mr, Mayor, I don't think -- I didn't get it. MAYOR HEATH: I think the man has testified that he can not give you that information three or four times. I don't see any sense in your pursuing it any furthers MR. WILLIAMS: We have the value of the 100 acres. You have the value that's ascribed to the other. Just a mathematical de-. termination, whether that's 40 percent or not. MR, MOORE: Well, this I disagree with, Harry. I'm asking the man's -- his preparation, for one thing. I don't think he has done a proper job. Even if his method were proper, I think the testimony shows -- MR, WILLIAMS: Well, what do you think is the proper method? MR. MOORE: The proper method? -- would be to take $138,000.00 and put it on the entire 100 acres. That's the only thing that shows on the roll, If you assume that you can break it up, I think the proper method might be -- MR, WILLIAMS: Well, then you're never going to think what • we do is proper., Bill, because we don't think that. MR, MOORE: I will go on record that if you do anything other than try it as a majority protest, that that is improper, yes. I will also go on record, if I may, with all due respect, that it is our position here, and after reviewing everything, that no one in the City has had any intention of going along with us, regard- less of what the testimony may be. We think that - MR, WILLIAMS: Not if you say that the entire assessed val- uation on 1,100 acres should be attributable to 100, no, they don't have any intention of going along with you. Adj. C. C. 3/1.6/61 Page Twenty -Five EASTERLY ANNEXATION NO. 167 - Continued MR. MOORE: May I finish my answer, Harry? Assuming that this is wrong, then you have one of two proper methods. I say you can assess the 100 acres as a unit, because the only people that drew the line around that unit was either the City or the so-called proponents -- MR. WILLIAMS: But when you say "as a unit," it doesn't mean as a separate ownership. MR. MOORE: As a separate parcel, of property. That is the only thing included in this annexation proceeding. MR. WILLIAMS: Then you're assuming something that doesn't now exist. It has to be taken the way it does exist, doesn't it? MR. MOORE: Well, we didn't draw the annexation line, Harry. MR. WILLIAMS: The annexation line doesn't change the value of the property. MR. MOORE: Well, what is the value? MR. WILLIAMS: It certainly didn't change the value of the assessed value as of the last toll, because the annexation line hadn't been drawn at that time. MR. MOORE: Well, let's face it, I still think that's the best method you can use. The second method would be to take 100 acres percentage -wise, as a percentage of the whole. This Mr. Mann can not do, I'm asking him if it's not true that it constitutes at least 40 percent of the entire value. Now, it's a simple question. Does it, or doesn't it? MR. WILLIAMS: You have two figures, the value placed on the 100, and the entire value. It's pretty apparent how you can get the percentage, isn't it? MR. MOORE: Well, Harry, I want to state here and now, I don't think the $44,000.00 figure is valid. I think the figure was picked out less than $48,360.00, and then we started methods on trying how to arrive at it to substantiate it. MR. WILLIAMS: Do you think the County Assessor, when he said about $40,000.00, did the same thing? MR. MOORE: As I recall he didn't know what that $4.0,000.00 figure was. MR. WILLIAMS: He said the value of the 100 acres, as nearly as he could recall, was about $40,000.00. MR. MOORE: And then Mr. Watson tells us he looked at the map, and there was no $40,000.00 figure on it. MR. WILLIAMS: I didn't say there was a figure on the map, I just asked you if you questioned his answer as well. MR. MOORE: I don't question him along that line, no. I just don't think he had proper knowledge. But again, I think a proper method would be to take the 100 acres and find out what percentage of the whole, that is, if you're going to tear up the 138, Adj. Co C, 3/16/61 Page Twenty -Six EASTERLY ANNEXATION NO. 167 - Continued MR, WILLIAMS: Well, I can do that, • MR, MOORE: Well, how can you do it, Harry? MR, WILLIAMS: I just divide the whole by $44,400.00. MR. MOORE: But how did you get the $44,400o00.by this method, which I think is highly inaccurate? From a mechanical standpoint it's inaccurate. MR, WILLIAMS: Well, -- MR, MANN: I don't agree with that, Mr, Moore. MR. WILLIAMS: We have a man who is an appraiser opposed to one who is a lawyer. MR, MOORE: I think we are being somewhat disrespectful to the witness and Council, and for this I apologize. This we can argue later, May I have a moment to confer? MAYOR HEATH: Yes, sir. MR. MOORE: And thank you again for your kind indulgence, a1.1 of you 9 (Brief conference.) MR, MOORE: Mr, Mann, dial you do any appraisals in this area at or about the time the San Bernardino Freeway went through, as shown in the aerial? MR, MANN: You mean on the particular property? MR, MOORE: No, in this area, the general. east West Covina area. MR, MANN: I think I testified that I did do some on Azusa Boulevard. MR, MOORE: Did you know that the state paid Mr. Bailey about $3,500.00 an acre for the land it took from him? MR, MANN: No, I didn't know that. MR. MOORE: Had you known that would that change your thinking here tonight? MR, MANN: I didn't value this.dollar-wise. As I testi- fied, I merely spread the $135,000.00 assessed value over the property. • MR, MOORE: Now, is it not true that a proper method of ap- praisal, and perhaps one of the best indications we have of value, is a comparison with similar property? MR. MANN: If I was appraising this for its fair market value, yes. MR, MOORE: Well, suppose you were asked to put an appraisal on the 100 acres. Would you compare the 100 with some similar property? Adj. C. C. 3/16/61 Page Twenty -Seven EASTERLY ANNEXATION NO. 167 - Continued MR, MANN: I would compare it with similar properties, with sales of comparable properties, and relate it to the whole, • whatever it was covered, and many other points of investigation. MR. MOORE: Did you do this in this case? MR. MANN: No, sir. MR. MOORE: What made it improper in this case? MR. MANN: Because my request and my engagement was merely to spread the $135,000.00 over the 1,051 acres, and the value had nothing, in my opinion, to do with the assessed value at this moment. MR. MOORE: You say you are familiar with values in this area. Had you made any appraisal or assessment or arrived at a figure on the basis of comparable sales of similar property, do you think your opinion would be different? MR. MANN: Different than what, Mr. Moore? MR, MOORE: Different than the one you have given us, the $44.,400.00. MR. MANN: This is a breakdown of the assessment. • MR. MOORE: This I realize. MR. MANN: And had nothing to.do with the fair market value. I made no study of that of this property. MR. MOORE: Let's forget about fair market value, and let me ask you this: If you were asked to put an assessed value -- let's assume you're a Deputy County Assessor -- on this 100 acres, would you feel that it would be proper to compare this 100 acres with similar property in the area and determine what the assessed value of the similar property was and relate it to this property? MR. MANN: Yes, I would do that. MR. MOORE! But you did not do that here? MR. MANN: No, sir, because I was not required to. I merely took, as I said so many times, the $135,000.00 which existed. MR. MOORE: Mr. Mann, are you familiar with the average ratio of assessed value to fair market value, generally speaking? MR. MANN: Generally speaking, it ranges from double to four times ordinarily. . MR. MOORE: So your double would be public utility property, wouldn't .it?. MR. MANN: No, I've had commercial properties where the assessed value ranged all the way from -- I've sold property where the assessed value was greater than my sales price. MR. MOORE: So you're saying that the ratio is approximately one-fourth the fair market value, and perhaps in some cases on up to one-half of the fair market value? Adj . C. C. 3/1.6/61. Page Twenty --Eight EASTERLY ANNEXATION NO. 167 - Continued MR. MANN: It could be either way, up or down. I've seen it vary. • MR. MOORE: It couldn't go down, it doesn't go down much more than 20 percent, below 20 percent? MR. MANN: I have actually sold property, Mr. Moore, that the assessed value v;Jas higher than the sales price. MR. MOORE: Do you have any more of it for sale? MR. MANN: No. But I've actually -- MR. MOORE: Let's assume -- say between the 25 and 50 per- cent figure -- if you assume that this 100 acres is worth approx- imately thirty-five hundred an acre, which would give it a value of, I believe, $350,000.00, and then looking to the average assessed value of the property in the area, what would your assessment be on that basis? MR. MANN: Well, I'd have to make a complete study of that, which I haven't done, Mr, Moore. MR. MOORE: j"el.l, I think it's a question of mathematics. It would be somewhere within One-fourth of $350,000.00 and one- half or $350,000.00, MR, MANN: Well., I say, if you want to do it on purely mathematical -- but I didn't understand your question that way. You were relating it to this 100 acres. MR. MOORE: The question is this: Assuming that this .1.00 acres has a fair market value of $350,000.00 -- that figure I get from thirty-five hundred per acre that the state bought it for some years ago -- and further assuming, as you testified, that the average assessed values will run from 25 percent of fair market value up to 50 percent, then the assessed value of this property would be somewhere from 25 percent of the $350,000.00 on up to 50 percent of the $350,000.00. MR. MANN: Arithmetically that is correct. But no other way. MR. MOORE: Now, Mr. Culver has testified that this property has a fair market value of $550,000.00. He based that on sales of comparable property in the area. He made a study of the ratio of assessed value to fair market value in the area, and his figure was approximately a 22 percent ratio. In other words, the assess- ments were 22 percent of the fair market value. Would you have any reason to think that that testimony was anything other than absolutely correct? MR. MANN: Well, I couldn't answer that without investigating it further. Just as a bald statement I wouldn't accept it, unless -- • MR. MOORE: You would not accept Mr. Culver's testimony under oath? MR, MANN: I would accept it as far as it went; but I'd have to know in what manner it was arrived at, from what comparable properties, and so forth. MR. MOORE: Well, you read the testimony of the hearing at which he testified, as I take it? Adj. Co Co 3/16/61 Page Twenty -Nine EASTERLY ANNEXATION NO, 167 - Continued MR. MANN: What, sir? MR. MOORE: You read the testimony of the hearing at which he testified? MR, MANN: I read the transcript, yes. MR, MOORE: Dotiyou recall that:he put in an exhibit which was his appraisal report? MR, MANN: I didn't see the exhibit, no. MR. MOORE: You did not see his appraisal report? MR. MANN: No,,; sir, MR. MOORE, Did you ask to see it? MR. MANN: No,: sir. I was not appraising this, as I said so many times, in that manner. MR, MOORE: Nr,o.Mann, I think I have exhausted all the ques- tions I can think of!o Mr. Mayor, I would like to ask, since Mr. Mann has relied upon his,transparencies and topographical map, that they go into evidence as part of ,the record, • MR, WILLIAMS: Better mark them. MR, MOORE: Well, may we call them 1, 2 and 3? We've been using A and B for ours. Are these yours, by the way? MR. WILLIAMS.:!, I guess they are going to become ours, Which one do you want to mark? MR. MOORE, Just those; they are all there, I don't know what they are, really. MR, MANN: Well, this is the perimeter taken from the 600 scale wall. map. MR, WILLIAMS,. Of the entire range? MR. MANN: Of!!th.e entire 1,100 acres. Then we have this little piece cut out on that map. MR, WILLIAMS:'' We will, mark that Exhibit to (The document',:above-referred to was marked Exhibit No. 1. and received.) MR. MOORE. This would be the transparency of the aerial photo? MR, MANN: The perimeter being the green line, as I've shown here. MR. MOORE: On our Exhibit B? MR, MANN: Yes. MR. WILLIAMS:' This is the transparency broken down into approximately 10-acre squares, Adj. Co C. 3/16/61 EASTERLY ANNEXATION NO. 167 - Continued MR. MANN: Ten to 11-acre squares. MR, WILLIAMS: Exhibit 2 (The document, above -referred to was marked Exhibit No. 2 and received.) MR. MOORE: And this would be No. 30 MR. WILLIAMS: No. 3 would be the topo map, MR, MANN: Well, the topo map belongs to the City. Page Thirty MR. WILLIAMS° It's a regulation government topo map, MR. MANN: Yes, a government topo map, which belongs to the City anyhow. (The document above -referred to was marked Exhibit No. 3 and received.) IVtR, MOORE: All right, thank you very much, Mr, Mann. MAYOR HEATH Anyone else wishing to give testimony? MR, WILLIAMS: Unless the Council wants to ask some questions. • MAYOR HEATH. All right. Dr, Snyder? DR, SNYDER: I'll wait. MAYOR HEATH: Councilman Towner? MR. TOWNER: Oh, I have no questions, DR, SNYDER: Here is one question: If we say that the assessed value is usually one-fourth of the fair market value, we should know what the market value is, or what was paid for this land. Then we could figure it out pretty quick --- what the recent sale price was. MR, MOORE: As I take it, neither one of our expert witnesses would testify as to what the market value of the whole property was. I certainly would not agree that the price paid was fair market value as of the day of the last equalized assessment. It might have been more, it might have been less. MR, WILLIAMS: We figure that's immaterial anyway, because the Assessor has put a value on the whole thing -- the only thing that's material.. MR, MOORE: May I also state this, Dr. Snyder, that the sales • price was not broken down for the entire 1,100 acres. DR, SNYDER: It was paid by the acre? MR, MOORE: No, it was paid by the whole. MR, WILLIAMS: Lump sumo MR. MOORE: In fact, I thought Forest Lawn was buying 1,100 acres, and have recently found out it was somewhat less. It was a lump sum figure without any apportionment at all, Adj. C. C. 3/16/61 Page Thirty -One EASTERLY ANNEXATION NO. 167 - Continued MR. MANN: With the frontage, the hills, and anything else -- I just don't think it would be helpful to figure it. . DR. SNYDER: According to your line of reasoning in ques- tioning Mr. Mann this would be a fair way of arriving -- this would be a similar way of arriving at the assessed value, as Mr. Culver dial? MR. MOORE., As to the assessed value of the whole only. DR. SNYDER: That's the way Mr. Culver arrived at the assessed value, MR. MOORE: No, Mr. Culver did not consider the assessed value of the whole. I think when we talk about the whole -- I don't want to get into any argument here -- the assessed value of the whole is $13€3,000.00, as shown on the roll. DR. SNYDER: What I mean is, he gave a value for the whole. MR. MOORE: No, Mr. Culver I believe, explicitly testified that he did not value the whole at all, he valued the 100 acres only. MR. BLALOCK: May I suggest, Dr. Snyder, we paid considerably more than five times $135,000.00. • MAYOR HEATH: Then, if that be the case, it is not necessarily true that the assessment is 20 percent of the sales price, is it? MR. MANN: That is correct, MAYOR HEATH: It could be much less? MR. MANN: Considerably less, yes. MR. MOORE: The testimony I rely on, as far as Mr. Culver's testimony, is based on average assessments throughout the area, and they are shown in his report and I think well substantiated. MR. BROWN. Mr,. Mayor, I have a question of Mr. Yoore, MAYOR HEATH: Mr. Brown. MR. MOORE: Of me? MR. BROWN: Yes, You say that Culver's statement is 22 per- cent of the fair market value? MR. MOORE: I'll read it, if I may, Mr. Brown, MR. BROWN: I missed this one. • MR. MOORE: Reading from Page 14 of the transcript of the hearing of February 14th: "These studies I made are the sales. The ratio of assessed value of sales prices averaged about five to one; or, -in other words, the assessed value averaged about 20 to�22 percent, of the sales price. "I did not base it on that alone . . he goes on in his testimony. Adj. Co C. 3/16/61, Page Thirty -Two EASTERLY ANNEXATION NO, 167 - Continued MR. BROWN: The 1957 Council -- I, think you remember that 'Nest Covina got a terrific slug of taxes, and our assessment • throughout West Covina was approximately 47 percent of the fair market value -- this was by known sales that had been through escrow -- where in some other areas the 20 and 22 percent seemed to be very true, especially in the Toluca Lake District in that time. I'm sure that Councilman Barnes is familiar with this. I'm wondering, in three years, just about three years, hoer it could drop so much, because I never felt that on my tax bill. MR. MOORE: Mr, Brown, May I point out, from Page 15 of Mr. Culver's report, he explicitely sets out each and every sale upon which he relies, and in his data he gives the sales price, the date of the sale, the amount of the acreage, and the assessed valuation, Now, I would agree it's somewhat unusual to drop from 47 down to 22, but here is the current of 1959-60. You have a'copy in the record. But in any event, we would be very happy to use the 47 percent figure. MR. TOWNER: It seems to me that we've had different approaches as to how to find the assessed valuation of the property, and we've heard testimony as to how the Assessor dial it, as to how Mr. Culver did it on behalf of Forest Lawn, now we have Pare Mann, who is giving us what be calls a fair proportion of the assessed valuation used by the Assessor as related to the 100 acres. • I think what we are going to have to do now is take these methods under consideration and decide which one is appropriate and correct, and determine whether, using that method, the 100 acres outweighs the other portion of the property that's not protested, or doesn't. I think there is some evidence in the record that we ought to all review at this time, since there has been some period of time between hearings, unless the Council wants to reach a decision tonight. MAYOR HEATH: I think there are some important questions first. Dr. Snyder? DR. SNYDER: Well, it seems to me that: Mr. Mann has appraised this with a great deal of care, and in great detail, much more so than Mr. Culver did. And from his explanation it seems that he has arrived at the only possible way to spread this assessment. I don't know how else it could be done. Any other way it is just drawing figures out of the air. But he has carefully gone into detail, appraised the topography, the access and so on, in arriving at his figures. MAYOR HEATH: Well, I think I have to agree with you, Dr. • Snyder, I have been trying to reconcile myself to the fact that you could take a percentage of the market value and come up with an assessed valuation, and I can't seem'to do that. If we compare $1,650,000.00 versus $135,OOO,00, I thinly I come up with a different number than 22perrcent, DR. SNYDER: Well, if you take the figure of fourteen -fifty an acre, which I believe is what was paid for this, equally over the whole acreage, supposing that would be the fair market value, then 100 acres would be $145,OOO.00, and one-fourth of that would be $36,000.00 -- arriving at it another way. Adj. Co C. 3/16/61 Page Thirty -Three EASTERLY ANNEXATION NO. 167 - Continued MRo TOWNER: I don't think we should try to be our own experts here. We've got the expert testimony, and I think we ought to weigh that and balance ito MAYOR HEATH: I think we ought to limit our discussion right now to questions which, would help us to make a decision. After we have asked all. the questions, we then decide whether we can make an answer to it at this time. MR, MOORE: May I ask one more question before Mr. Mann leaves the stand? It will be very helpful to me and the Council, MAYOR HEATH: Since it's open, yes. IvR. MOORE: Thank you. Mr. Mann, you said you classified -- I think you classified level, .rolling, steep, et cetera? MR, MANN: That's right. MR, MOORE: And all the level land in the area you put a value on, and all of the steep a value, and so on down the line? MR. MANN: Yes, sir, MR, MOORE: Now, if you had level land here, would you value • this land the same as level land up here? (Indicating on map.) MR, MANN: No. MR. MOORE: And how would you differentiate that in your valuation? MR, MANN: Well, the character of the land, not only as to the topography, but its desirability, It's tree -bearing. This land in here has been farmed, this has been farmed. (Indicating on map.) This land here is very rocky and dry, has very few trees. These hills are softer, as is evidenced by looking at them, and also as the sharpness of these ridges are shown by more erosion. This side is more rolling. (Indicating on map,) MR. MOORE.1, Well, what: I mean is, if this land is level., all, this is level, how did you make a difference between the two? MR, MANN: 'Well, by my knowledge, and by the fact of this is not as good a land, even though it's level. MR. MOORE: Well now, on your report did you have "level., good," and "level, bad," or how did you break it down? MR, MANN: I did that by --- dollar -wise. That's shown in here. is MR. MOORE: Could I see it? It's somewhat confusing. MR. MANN: Yes. MR. MOORE: Didn't you have a list of eight different classi- fications on your acreages? MR, MANN: Yes. MR. MOORE: Could I see that, please? Adj. Co Co 3/16/61, Page Thirty -Four EASTERLY ANNEXATION NO. 167 - Continued MR, MANN: Sure. 0 MR. MOORE: Maybe I can save some time by just seeing it. MR, MANN: Now, there is the 1,052 acres (indicating), the 605 acres - MR. MOORE: Throughout -- MR, MANN: Of the poor lands That's way up the River Mountains, which have very little utility, Then it scales on down -- this 222 acres, which is steep, but not as bad as that land, Then there was 124 acres, which was a little better, more use. And so on. MR. MOORE: In other words, not strictly on topography alone? MR. MANN: No, no. AIR. MOORE: Whether it's level, steep, or otherwise? MR. MANN: No. MR. BLALOCK: Get a copy of that, please. • MR, MOORE: Could we get a copy of Ahis one also, his breakdown? MR, WILLIAMS: Shall we call this No. 4.? MR, MOORE Please (The document above -referred to was marked Exhibit Noa 4 and received.) MR. MOORE: Did you make any differentiation as to the location of the particular acreage on the land? MR, IEIANN: Now, may I understand your question, Mr, Moore? MR, MOORE. Let's say there are two pieces of land that are identically comparable as to farmabilit.y, soil test, elevation, level, everything else, one located here, and one here (indicating on map) . MR, MANN: Well, I made a difference between this -- this land is sloping, on a downgrade, rocky. This land is almost flat. (Indicating on map.) MR, MOORE: This I know. Let's assume they are identical. • as far as topography, soil, -- everything is identical except that this is in this corner, and this is in this corner. (Indicating.) MR. MANN: Well, its surroundings, the fact that it has less water, has less desirability from its neighborhoods This is across the street from a high grade.residential dis- trict, This has a school, which has a certain influence. All of this area in here does not have that desirability, Adj. C� C. 3/16/61 Page Thirty -Five EASTERLY ANNEXATION NO, 167 -- Continued MR. MOORE: I take it the proximity of the Freeway has nothing to do with your ideas? MR, MANN: Well, the Freeway had -- all of those things fitted in through my determination. MR. MOORE: And all these things, you broke the thing down from available water, surroundings, Freeway, topography, steep, not so steep, rocky, not so rocky, -- you got eight, and only eight different classifications? MR. MANN: Yes MR, MOORE: Thank you. MR. MANN: In other words, I could have broken it down to 500 actually, but I thought practically that eight was sufficient. MR. MOORE: Thank you. Thank you again, Mr. Mayor. MAYOR HEATH: Any other questions? MR. TOWNER: As I recall, Mr. Mann, you had some figures that you used in proportioning this valuation -- $40.00, $150.00, $200.00, and so on; is that correct? MR, MANN: Yes, sir. MR, TOWNER. Does your Exhibit that you used show where you placed these valuations? MR. MANN: Yes, they are indicated on this map. MR. TOWNER: They are indicated on the exhibit? MR, MANN: Yes. MR, TOWNER, Then I won't need to ask any questions, MAYOR HEATH: Anyone else wish to --- MR. TOWNER: Well, except maybe I should ask, just for the record here -- 'the $1,500.00 valuation of property, where does that lie? MR. MANN: That is the best land, lying up in this corner (indi.cating), with the service road, the proximity to the better houses, and it is in the very upper north-westerly corner of the Ranch and the 1,500 acres. • MR. TOWNER: I see, And the $1,OOO.00 valuation, is that also within the 1.00 acres? MR. MANN: Yes. INIR, TOWNER. I see. Thank you MAYOR HEATH: Councilman Brown, any further questions? Ad. Co Ca 3/16/61 page Thirty -Six EASTERLY ANNEXATION NO. 167 - Continued MR. BROWN: No. But I would like to hold this meeting over, I would like to further study Mr. Culver's report. I can't see • where his --. where you can take the valuations and assessments together, MAYOR HEATH: ;'le.11,we don't have to hold the hearing over for that. MR. BROWN: No, not necessarily. DR. SNYDER: I didn't hear DJro Dro-wn's sta-tement. MAYOR HEATH: Ile said that he would like to study Mr. Culver's report, and I said that the meeting, or this hearing, wouldn't have to be held open For him to do that studying. MR. BROWN: There have been t-,,�:o different markets used. One took market value, and one took assessment value; and if you're trying to tie that one in with assess -rents, by briefly looking over Mr. Moore's -- I don't see where he tied in the assessment and market value together, MAYOR HEATH: Any further questions? MR. BARNES: I would like to ask Pair. Williams a question., Mr. Wil.l ianis, we are concerned in this area only with assessed valuations as far as I can see, and this is the reason for the ex- perts, to get in and do these studies. We had assessed valuation of $135,000.00, and this is to prepare the cor.iparison. W:'lat has the market value got to do 4�,iith the assessed valuation? There's been a lot of conversation about market: value, and I ,, as .<rondering .ghat part this played in ,,,hat jie were to ,fudge MR. WILLIlMS: Well, in my opinion it doesn't play a part, except that it could perhaps have been used as one of the m::ethods of spreading the assessed value. We kno,�, what the assessed value of the total is. MR, BARNES: Yes. MR. WILLIAMS: And our duty is to determine what the assessed value of part of it is. A determination based upon the nature of the property, of'the proportion that should be assessed to this 100 acres, has been testified to. It would appear to raze that if Mr. Culver's -method were follo.=ied, he would have to testify not only to the market value of the 100, but to the market value of all the rest of the Ranch, so that the assessed value that was produced would have come out $135,000.00. And ..when he gives an assessed value of only a 100-acre portion, not in any way related to the actual assessed value that's on the rolls, in my opinion that is absolutely valueless. MR, TOWNER: May I aska question of the City Attorney? MAYOR HEATH: All right, MR, BARNES: Go ahead, Frank, I want to ask one more MR. TOWNER: The question related to procedure, that's all. MAYOR HEATH: Do you have another question? Adj. Co C, 3/16/61 rage Thirty --Seven EASTERLY ANNEXATION NO. 167 -- Continued MR, BARNES: No, I would like to do as Mr. Brown suggested, in that we have Mr. Culver's testimony and we also have Mr. Mann's testimony, and we have two different figures. I believe Mr. Cul- verts, as I recollect, was around $40,OGOa00, was his testimony, and I believe Mr—Mann's is $44,400,00, and I would like to look over the two methods before --- I mean, the t-wo of them together, or compare them. MAYOR HEATH: Dr, Snyder, do you have any further question': DR. SNYDER: I have no further questions. MAYOR HEATH: Do you think Councilman Towner, you have a question. for the City Attorney, or -.- MR, TOWNER: lVel.l., I t1link that :.re need to refresh ourselves on the prior testi.t«ony in order to give .it all its proper evalua- tion; and I understand also that there is still an existing court order restraining us from adopting any ordinance in this matter in the event the did happen to make that determination, is that right? MR. WILLIAMS: Yes. And I don't think the Council has been informed of this, that by stipulation the hearing has been continued from the 22nd of March to the 3rd of April. MR, MOORE: 21st of March, harry, MR. WILLIAMS: «yell., it had been continued from the 21st to 'the 22nd, Bill, at the request of the judge. 11 MR, r`.00RE: This 1 don't kno-w, I've been out of town, I41-0 glad to know it now,. MR, E ILLIAMS: This was verbal between myself and Pen Priest, fro,. the J1ls t to the 22nd. Now, this was based upon the assumption that: there would be a decision in this matter now, or very quickly. If it's delayed, there will be a still further continuance of this, I think, be- cause it: will have to be -- assuming 'that this is approved, there ,;gill have to be ari-iendments of the pleadings before this hearing comes on, MR MOORE: If I might, Harry, please, -- this assumes that you will find against our very meritorious position. I think it also assumes that you think that j il.l be -the end of this matter. liov✓ever, I think Harry will tell you that, even though you might determine there is not a majority protest, the proper thing then for you to do is determine whether or not, on the basis of fair- ness and public interest, you want to continue with this annexa- tion, You are certainly not required to go ahead with it, even in the absence of a majority protest, although you are required to terminate it if there is one. MR. WILLlAM3: That's right. MRo 1,4OO1E: And in the event you should find against us --- although I don't possibly see how you could do it in your wis- dom and good judgment --- there just might be so,;ze comments ive might want to put forth, as just on -the basis of sheer fairness and public interest, that we think that it would be unwise and unjudicious for the City to go ahead in any event. Adj. C. 0 Page Thirty -Eight EASTERLY ANNEXATION NO. 167 - Continued Is that corryet Harry'? MR. WILLIAMS: Yes. MAYOR HEATH: Thank you., Do you have any further questions, Counciloran Towner? MR. WILLIAMS: That is, the part of it about voluntarily not having to go aheaa if --- MR. MOORE: Right, MR. WILLIAMS: -- if they find there is not a majority pro- test, I agree vi,th Bill. The rest of it I'm not sure I dd MR. MOORE. But if you agree with my assumption, you agree with my conclusim. YAYOR HEATH,"". Any further questions by any - member of the council? 1; Ma. TOWNER: Aell, I'm wondering -- maybe I misunderstood mr� Eooreo Was it your thought that you would give some testimony or evidence on the question of whether or not it was in the public interest to go anyad in the event we made the other determination? MR, MOORE: We would flatly make a bended-knee plea and give you what we thinkarecogent reasons why you should not go ahead. MR, WILUAMS: I think at this stage, however, the Council's next step is to make a finding as to whether or not there has been a majority protest. MR. BARNES: Yes. MR. WILLIAMS: There has been a protest by Forest Lawn.. There has been no other protest. The Forest Lawn protest repre- sents this 100 acres, You have to determine - you have the figures of the assessed values of the other four Darcels. you have to de-- termine whether A not the protest of Sorest Lawn, based upon the assessed -value of 100 acres, is a majority protest or less than a majority� Having ma6e that determination, as Hr. Moore has just said, if you find thathe Forest Lawn protest is a majority, you call take no further proceeding and dismiss this annexation. If you find that it is not a majority protest, you still are not compelled to go forward with it. You may, upon reasons other than the weight of the protest, terminate these proceedings. MR. M100RE: �'Or for ).-Io reason. Mry R. WILLIAHS: hhaG: MR. MOORE: Or for no reason, MAYOR HEATH: Dr. Snyder. Adj. C. C, 3/16/61 Page Thirty --Nine EASTERLY ANNEXATION INTO. 1-67 -- Continued DR. SNYDER: I personally see no reason to hold this over. We've had testimony f-roia three different sources on the assessed • value of this land, and two of then, Mr. Culver, and the best in -- formation ,,e could ,obtain from Mr, Schneiderman, indicate that -there is not a ±,�a j orc ity protest. Mr. Culver ? s information ;soul d indicate that there i,,!a s. However, I __... MAYOR HEATH: Well, pardon my interruption, Dr.. Snyder. The point I'm getting to right now is whether ,;,.-e should close the hearing or not, I ''think this would be .the first matter of action. IMR. TOWNER: Well, again, let me come back to this question of public interest. I'm wondering why, if there is going to be -that kind of testimony, -,�e don't receive it -tonight. I+.,IR. MOORE: If I could state my position, I think it would be so;.lewhat improper to get to that stage of the proceeding be- fore you determine -vhether or not it's a majority protest. MR. WILLIAMS: That's Y:iy feeling, too. Actually this is not a hearing in the formal sense of the tis;ord. You don't hold a hearing in -the sense of hearing people's desires and ;,i.shes. All -that this hearing is designed to do is to r;Iake the de ter -urination: there has been or there has not been at this hour set for hearing a majority written protest, That you should do. After you have done that I think it's perfectly proper to lis-- -ten to people, though this is not in the true sense of the word a hearing. it's si_,ply - you si;Iply allo-w people to address the Council, if they :lash to. But to conclude this phase of the thing, before anything else is done you should determine whether or not there is a _,,i,,aJority protest. ItUiYOI? HEATH: ',Ie ca n't do that until ,>>e close the hearing. I'm bound to close this hearing yet sorneho,:! or another. SIR. 'i'ILLI�;IIa: I don't think that's i;-iportant 1,H1. I;I00I1E: 1.11e have no further testimony in that regard, M r , P'.'I a y o , MAYOR HEATH: Thank you. Councilman Brown, do you have any further questions? MR. DROWN: No. MAYOR HEATH: Councilman To-,,v ner? MR. BROWN: �e can asICK questions after the hearing is closed. They just can't give testimony, that's all.. . MR. TOT'?NER: No, I have no questions. MR. BARNES: No questions. MAYOR HEATH: Dr. Snyder? DR. SNYDER: No further questions. MAYOR HEATH: Then we will declare the hearing closed. Now are there any further questions, further discussion? Adj . C. C. 3/16/61 EASTERLY ANNElyATION NO. v? • Continued Page Forty ikM, . TUNER: ?'Tell, I recognize that maybe Dr. Snyder has the entire testimony in miind any ;T.,ould like to Mal=.:e a decision tonight. On the other hand, I gathered from ;some of the discussion that the 40 ogler Councilmen \.7ould like to review some of the evidence. Per -- hags we can do that. DR. SNYDER: I don't like to point, out that Mir. Culver's fi.g-- ures and testimony are so riliculous as to be invalid. i[e con.es up an assessed valnation of $110,000.00. We have two other witnesses, Mr. Mann, who comes up �iit.h a figure of $44,4.00.00, and hlr. Schneiderman, ujho I believe came up -�Tit.h $40, 000.00, or in that area. And Mir. Culver's testimony is so far out of line with t,,>io other witnesses that I just don't kno�,- hog;,, it can be considered valid. I don't even see ho`-v it can be co.iz- sidered as valid testimony. No matter ho;i you arrive at it, if � put it on a prorata basis, if you -take i..,rha R;, was actually paid for the land - and they talking about fair market value ' you co:;Ie up with less than the required protest. MAYOR HEATH: Further discussion`: 11R. I don't mean 'to indicate that I'm flatly against it, I Have the testimmony in Mind inysel.f . But I am just interested in the position taken by Mir. Sro vn and 1!i!r. -. • it4i; . �. try? � i;e:! 1, I thin',,- we leave got some comparative figures here. Like Pr. Snyder says, we have Mir. !Mann with $44,400.00, and 11Ir. Culver v'i.th $110,000.00, and another gentlemen with $40,000.00. A difference of opinion, of course. They are three to one -- I clean, two -to one in this case. As far as our judgment of it is concerned, I would like to ask a auestion of .the City Clerk. ' hat ;ras the a s:::,essed of -the other properties? MR. FL©TTEN: The land was assessed at $17,400.00, and the _mprovements at $30,000.00, a tonal of $43,300.00. .`�'.oe s any member of the Council need ti.Iie -to r -- v7.ev this information before they , iake a decision, or are the facts secure enough i..n their Minds that they can take action tonight? Is there anyone on the Council .rho feels this should be held over? le-t tie asiy -this. This is a procedure question that I had in Fzind earlier, I asked about the existing court order, and you said that there was a continuation of the • hearing over to the date of April 3, and as I understand it the restraining order remains in effect until the matter is heard by the Court; is that right? 111. WILLIAI+-IS:' Yes. The City would be restrained from passing, but not from introducing, the ordinance. You are not restrained from making the decision as to whether or not there is a majority protest; and if you determine that there is not a majority protest, you are not restrained fro-m introducing the ordinance thereafter. 1 Adjo C. C. 3/16/61 page Forty --One EASTERLY ANNEXATION NO. 167 - Continued ielR. uR0'`;rliT: Although I first suggested this be held over, upon reconsideration and trying to remer.ber sol;te of itrlr. Culver's state- ments, as far as I'm concerned, if we had about a ten --minute recess I can refresh myself on his. MR. TO *fNER: I'm f,-yonder ing i:i a consideration of evidence in a case lime this W• we have the documentary evidence as well as the testimony, and whether the City Council can adjourn and con- sider that evidence in recess, and then cone back and discuss it publicly? I don't mean in recess to get together, but I mean in recess -to revie;-i the testimony. MR. WILLIAMS: All you propose to do is look at the matters that were offered in evidence? MR. TOE NER: Yes. MR, WILLIAMS: Oh, yes, you can do that. MR. TO?i;'NER: May I move then that we recess to revie;.�i this evidence? MAYOR HEATH: All right, we will take a 15• minute recess. (Short: recess taken.) MAYOR HEATH: The meeting will col:.e to order. • Well, ilembers of the Council, S:e have had a chance to fools over some of the evidence to refresh our mel,Iory. Is there any further discussion? (No response.) MAYOR HEATH: Any further questions? MR. TOW?TER: No. I would say that I'm satisfied that I have the testimony in Mind, and the documentary evidence in mind. I'm ready to vote on it tonight, if the other Councilmen are ready. MAYOR HEATH: Ready? DR. SNYDER: I'II ready. MAYOR HEATH: Sounds like we're ready -to tale action. %That i.s your pleasure, gentlemen? IR. TC'c?TLR: cell, I -:-could say it certainly seers to Ine ::hat the weight of the testimony is that the protest is not a majority protest, and I thinly ;�,e .3,ould on this record have to be bound to rind thatiay. • Dig.. SNYDER: Is that a motion or statement? MR. TOIVINER: Is there some particular wording on a motion here that would conform to the statute? 1,11Z. 117ILLIAMS: A notion finding that there is not a majority protest -. I think the motion should be that the Council finds that protest has not been i:�ade by the o°iners of one --half of the value of the territory as shotin by the last equalized assessment roll as set -forth in section 3531.3 of the Government Code. C . 3/16/61 gage Forty --Two EASTERLY ANNE) ATION NO. 167 - Continued MR. TO°INER: I so move. MR. BROi;!N. Second. MAYOR HEATH: It's been mioved and seconded. Roll call. TJR. FLOTTEN: 1r'. Bro,..!n?_ MR. BROWN: Aye. MR. FLOTTEN: Mr. Towner? ItiIR . TOWNER : Aye. MR. FLOTTEN:. Mr. Barnes? MR. BARNES: Aye. MR. FLOTTEN: Dr. Snyder? DR. SNYDER: Aye. MR. FLOTTEN: Mayor Heath? MAYOR HEATH: Aye. A majority protest has not been found. • MR. l ILLIAI S: Now it's proper to hear anyone you wish to rear, because, having made this finding, you are free no/i'i either to introduce an ordinance which ,,,vould be a step toward the co£r_ple- tion o:£ the anise ;ati.on, or to drop the proceedings for any reason, or, as B:.11 says, for no easo,.2. A-,nd you could no,,.F' hear anyone you t-,.!is £ to, si:'�.p.iy €'.." a3 different subject' nov.-, not the evidence a -to 'iya;,'_d„ue, @} 1"b: as- to hrze question of t Nether or not you ought -to C!� i's XiPIYOR Pxy.',,ATH, is 'this in agree£i'cent -wi i h. the Council? It's in agree-Laent .,.e. MAYOR HEATH: noes anyone wish to give ­ i,R. !7ILLLMV.2: Is .there any need of keeping IVIr. Mann any longer:' IVIAYOR HEATH: I don't think so, since there will be no further discussion on. it, MR. MfOORE: No, sir. e:AYOR 1I AT 1: Than you very ,,mtich, Mr. Mann. • (Witness excused.) MAYOR HEATH: Is there anyone in the audience =;,,ho would life to address the Council at this tine? MR. MOORE: lCir. Hlayor, if I may, in ;cutting aside all of our legal problems and assessed value, I would just like to point out on.e thing, You kno`�,-, why we do not .want to be annexed. The answer is pure and simple. T'?e want a cemetery on some 406 acres. I'e have reason to believe by taking out this 100 acres, this takes out the choicest part of it. There is just no doubt about it. Adj. C. C. 3/16/61 Page Forty ---Three EASTERLY RLY ANNEXATION NO. 167 - Continued This is the gateway to the proposed Forest Lawn Cemetery. This is the reason, pure and simple. There is no objection because there is a personality probl.er:: in West Covina or anything else, it's a purely business approach by a property owner who is in business, and it is for that reason: one, to let us believe we will not get a cemetery permit on this portion, and, tio, without this portion it just destroys the -rest of the 406 acres, forgetting about the bal- ance of this large piece of property. Number two, I trunk you people kno-:!, the oviners of these prop- erties here (indicating on map). You recall. some tv-.,o years ago there was a proposed annexation in the area by the City of Highland Knolls, and the avo% ed purpose of that proposed incorporation was to block the City of ',:'est Covina :from. this ' anneJ.-ation (indicating on map). It was a race, because the people north of the Freeway, the peo le in this entire area here, and the Hoard of Supervisors in their wisdom, put the boundary on the reevray and determined there were less than 500 acres, and they didn't have an election. ?gut I think you kno�i there is no love lost in that area between residents and the City of Vlest Covina. I think it's pretty plain that this entire annexation was a de- fensive move against Forest Lawn. Now why, when Forest Lawn does not taunt to be annexed, because of the business problem, and I don't believe that these people viant to be annexed in the abstract, why would you want to take it up? I don't think that at the present • t.i.r�e you have a tax problem. I ,lust don't know. Nov.;, the permit for th.e cemetery has been denied by the County. I wonder vdiat effect it would have if :° e had to start this thing all over again. T -�-,ionder if this property had been purchased by so�­ eone other than Forest La -:in, nether or not anyone else in the annexation area -would be ,villing, or at least be silent, as to this annexation. And primarily for these reasons, gentlem4en: it is not only that vie - do not want to be annexed to „lest Covina, we don't want to be in-. eluded in any new proposed incorporation, which I understand has been filed. Ve don't ;giant to be annexed by any other city. Tile .want to stay gust exactly -the �;;ay it is and try again for a cemetery permit. This, of course, -could destroy it. Again, had this property been o.vned by anyone except Forest Lavin I don't think this annexation would be before the Council now. I think and I say this --- I'r« not guessing, I'm saying it with a little in.ore basis in fact than I thinIT I can tell you ---- the objec- tion against ;Forest La:'n. is a prima example of mass hysteria. It was pror;aoted by a business competitor, has absolutely 'no connection to any property here, here, or any place in this area, including this (indicating on map) . - Had this not been Forest Lawn property these people I don't believe would have gone along. It ;could never have gone this far. Now for this reason v7e think it is basically unfair from, our. • standpoint to continue it. We l-,,7onder ..what the relationship in -the -future will be as far as the City is concerned. We've got another problem, being a new proposed city. This is not going to help -the City o-f' ,est Covina. As I see it, you're herrimed in completely. This is not going -to help your future plans at all. We would suggest, drop this for -the present time. We are not going to annex. ?'ae are going to try and fight the incorporation here (indicating on map) . Drop this, see ,-.hat we can do by getting to- gether on the ;;hole thing at a later time. I think we would be much better off. Ad-J. C. C. 3/16/61 Page Forty --Four EASTERLY ANNEXATI©N NO. 1.67 -.. Continued Perhaps even.leave that out (indicating on miap.), because those people don't really -:ant tocome in. But I see no evidence }whatsoever, any real affirmative desire on the part of anybody to go along with this annexation. The only consent that you can possibly conclude is just the silence. I -think the silence vdas brought about by the fear, an unfounded fear,of a cemetery in this area, And vje thi,Fk that is not a groper reason to use this City, and we think that's just what's happening. It's gone so far, the City of ;Pest Covina is being used. The fear is at least not for the present going to materialize. Novi, I know that you people have great powers with respect to annexation, with respect to the future of your City. I don't see any real benefit to the City, unless it is, again, a defensive measure. And I don't thinly ;you should be negative in your annexca-- tion., I think you should be positive. No one has yet indicated -to me any good reason why this an- nexation should go forward. No one on the other property. No one has appeared.. No one in the City. Nothing. We are on the defensive. I'ie are required here in effect to assume the burden to tell you why it. should not be done. As property o,=:tners, and as a lawyer who deals in this type of thing almost every day, I would like to see the City take tine positive, tell us -shy it should be done - not tell us, but show us. No one has done that yet. And yet -ive are here night after • night, as now, telling you vahy it shouldn't be done. again, un- less there is no real good positive reason I can't see why it should go forward. And, too, if it goes forward, what real benefit its there when you chop up a good piece of property? We're going to be in at least t1.vo jurisdictions, possibly three, with the possibility of eventually being in four. And to impose that burden: on a prop erty o,..,lner is, I think, to say the least, un;;iise and unfair. Now, why haven't any of these people come forward (indicating on r:ap) to give -you people a reason why you should do this? 7.e haven't heard of it. There is not a word of testimony in the record. I still think it's nothing r!.ore than a defensive :rove, that if it were not the Forest Lawn these people would not be here. Perhaps they were part of this thing two years ago, battling the City of crest Covina. The only change is, this is Forest La Jn. 4r'e knotiJ now Forest Lawn is not going to get the cemetery permit; still would not like to be in -the City. For that reason ,�we don't feel it's to the best interests of the City of lest Covina, or. to us, or to the other people. But -%i-th that �,!e conclude, and thank you for the titre, and leave it up -to you. Thant, you. • MAYOR HEATH: Mr. Itioore, on behalf of -the Council I ;would like to answer your statement, if you don't mind. MR. 110ORE: Be very happy to hear then, Ivlr. Iviayor. I'rYOR 112A -H. I can't help but think, and I don't mean this in a derogatory vay .--- I can't help but think that you have not been givers all the information. :possibly you've been given some :;:isinfor.-neation. MR. MOORE: Mainly it's a lack of infor:,iation, more than any- thing else, Mr. Mayor. I'm in the dark about this thing, to be truthful.. Adi . C o C e 3/103/61 page Forty --Five EASTERLY ANNEXATION NO, 167 - Continued MAYOR HEATH: Iell, I very briefly might run over one or two things here, possibly three, not to provoke an argument, but to bring out some facts. The first thing, I believe you made a statement that if that territory was in the City you would not get a cemetery permit. I don't knoi exactly where you got the basis of this, because I know that -that statement has not come from r,:.e, or from Mr. To"�,�ner, ODuncilman Towner, ho ~.:-as on the Annexation Corzmmj.ttee, and I ques- tion whether it has come from any other governing body. IAAR. 1,60.01RE: I would agree, Ire Mayor, that the basis for my statement has no connection at all .�,,ith any mer:iber of the official family of the City of Vest Covina --- none ,,ihatevero IiiAYOR HEAT11I: `.,`ell, 1.F,,e have no agents who can spear for use MR. MOORE: Well again, I'm not saying that it's a City prob- len;i, but it's what we've been led to believe, one of the reasons was to keep that area from becoming a cemetery. Again, I'm not going any further than that. MAYOR HEATH: All right, I think that's -- we have both talked far enough. So long as the point is clear, that it has never been rLade in the xorm of a state.,,ent that a cemetery -kilould be banned if that was in the City. . The second thing, this Annexation 165 along the Free -,'lay was considered for better than five years, where the people in that area appeared in the City Council chambers time after time, re- questing us to do something on annexation. Finally, when the :Zigh- .land Knolls decided -to incorporate, Hest Covina stood back for the first time to let the people .sake their o,.�!n decision. ,;Then this dial not come about favorably, the people along the Free-�-vay came to the City again and said, 11-Would you give us a firm answer, either yes or no:' Will you let us annex`" MR. MOORE: I'nn fury familiar vrith this, Mr. Mayor. Entirely. MAYOR HEATH: At that tine the Ranch i-ias under the ownership of Mr. Bailey, and 'the Council of crest Covina at that time had con- ferences with IIro F•ailey to bring the Ranch into the City. So this is not a new move by any means As Councilman Towner and I explained to Mr. Llewellyn and I,ir Blalock in a committee meeting, the City of West Covina has not decided, if this annexation goes through, -crhat would be Tut on that property. it -was ,pointed out that Je are no-,,,{ undergoing a master planning assignment,, and it's a ;Natter of public record that this master plan states that property outside the city limits for a distance of a quarter of a mile should be contained in the study of the master plane If you will check your measurement along the Freeway you ,ii.11 find that the measurement is about 2,500 feet. It's a little bit more than a quarter of a mile. But we went out that way because that is the territory that is going to be contained within this study. Councilman Towner and I made it clear at that time that we have not said we. are against the cemetery on that property. We have not said we are against anything on that property, but that the property will be under study in our master plan, and when the master plan. is complete i=,re would then know better what should go in that area, Adj o C. C. 3/16/61 Page forty -Six, EASTERLY ANNEXATION NO, 167 - Continued I have just tried to clarify a fear points officially. MR. IJtOO?E: 'm very happy to hear it. I'r: fully familiar. with -the No. 165 annexation matter. Completely. I do know --- perhaps you were at the boundary hearing at that time .. the sole arguiaent made v�?as that if we don't get this in- corporation �I7est Covina is going to chop us up, and the people north would be divorced from the people south. MAYOR HEATH: You know, as much as I, though, that on an inhabited annexation it's still the people who decide. MR. MOORE: It's not within your province, I realize that, too. I also know that in an uninhabited annexation the people in some cases have nothing to say. And this is the problem that .ie are faced with, We are not people, rre are property o;7rners. The property does not consist of --- we ,sere not consulted about the 100 acres. This 100 acres takes the guts out of the entire piece of property. Now, granted you have your problems with your City of West Covina, your one -quarter mile, whatever distance it might.be, sur-- roundi.ng it. TVe,have the problems of our property. I don't think, and I don't say that this City does it._.• I do know some cities that have an annexation program quite apart frora what the property o.;iners have in mind. They push these things tir:i.e and time. They gerryr_lander them. They have people down at the Board's office every day. You heard Mr. Watson testify that this was designed so that ve couldn't protest. Hesaid that, and I think it's in the record. MAYOR HEATH: Who was that? MR. MOORE: Mr. Watson said that. He was down checking this thing for boundaries. It Sias designed so tn!^t if the owner of this property protested, that the assessed value %Vould be less than this over here, Which is in accordance with your determination here to- night. Now, had you taken any naore would there be any doubt that we as property owners could have put a stop to this annexation? 1'he thing is, we -thine it's som2i::hat unfair to us to chop it up like that. Granted again you have your problems, we have ours, .ve do not see at this time ho-�-i this helps your problea;3s, .:chile at the same time ;7e kno it hurts ours. if this annexation -,;;iere to drop I don't see any hare: at all to the City of lVest Covina. That is not to say that at some f uture tir;:e the whole thing r:iight :fell be in the City of ?;lest Covina as ;a cemetery, or something else. Let's forget about the cemetery for the moment. But again, we've got the Highland Knolls thing wrapped around this way. We've got the City of Wal- nut down here. We've got some County territory left in here (indi- cating on map). What does it do to this property? It's a butcher job. Now, without criticism of the City, vie think that the hardship on us outweighs what ;-,Je have been told and what we have learned to be the benefit to the City at the present time, whereas to drop the annexation ;could not be a hardship to the City but would be a benefit to us at this time. That's the .gay it is. It's a value judgment, and it's up to you people. Adj. C. C. 3/1-6/61 Page Forty --Seven EASTERLY ANNEi'IATION NO. J.67 -- Continued m R. BLALOCK,: J,,,Jayor, I woutld just like to i'llake one state-. went with reference to what at least one of the property owners thought he v,,,as accomplishing by putting his property in as a part of this annexation, lVir, Letson. I -talked to Mr. Letson in the presence of witnesses at one of the Regional Planning Commission hearings, and he made the statement to me -that the reason he came into this annexation Y..Tas to stop Forest La,�%ln from getting a cem- etery, period. MR. MOORE: In that connection I might add, if that's the only reason somebody -wanted to come in my City, I don't think I'd want them. A 1 1'iAYOR 11E 11TH- , ell., not to prolong any further -- Mr. Letson never made that comment to me, and in fact I don't even --- I met Mr. Letson in here one night. MR. B L ALOCK: fle made it in -the presence of two nee-,�spaperi-il-en in Los Angeles and !-,.,,',AYOR HEATH: Is there any -further discussion? Do you have any further discussion on this tonight? 11ow far do you TVant to go on this? Do you want to introduce this ordinance? 1MR. BXI'2NES. I think we should ask the City Attorney. MAYOR HEATH: We are restrained fro,,--fll the second reading of it. MR. TO1,7NE11- I think on this portion of the consideration, as to j.ihetlaer or not this property should be brought into the City, I haven't talked -to any of these property o-,,-,iners here as to the reason that they v..lant to come into the City, and I don't know that it par- ticularly affects the Council as to -why these people Y,-,a!Ke up their minds to come in. I think ­,vhat v,,.7e are interested in is whether or not this is a desirable annexation -from, the standpoint of the City of Test Covina. As I understand it, under our ordinance the property, if annexed, comes in under the existing County restrictions, and this would obtain there until it's practical to study it and determine v?hat City restrictions might be put on it in the viay of use. it seems to me that this gives a:rzple opportunity to all interested people to determine,,ghat should be done r,,ith this particular piece of property; and I think, as far as the City of 17est Covina is con- cerned, it appears to me in any event to be a desirable annexation. It's geographically, socially and economically tied in with the area of influence in the City. It seems to be a normal annexation or expansion of the City's boundaries and one I think that has normally been anticipated for some time. MAYOR HEATH: Dr. Snyder? DR. SNYDER: Mr. Moore suggested positively, and I think Mr. • Towner has stated it rather positively. I couldn't add anything to the statements. I think this is a desirable annexation from the standpoint of the City of 17est Covina, and comments by the people in the area as to why they-wai-.tt to come in have no bearing on the annexation really. MAYOR HEAT'H: Councilman Brown, do you to comment? I'AR. BROWN: No. 1 Adj. C. C. 3/16/61 Page Forty -.Eight EASTERLY ANNEXATION NO. 167 - Continued MR. BARNES: I would only reiterate what the other gentlemen have said. I've been on the Council for quite some time, and we have considered this area for many years. However, during the time of these people trying to incorporate their area we took a hands -off attitude. But our intention, since the other parcel was annexed, was to annex this area, and I don't think this is anything new. MAYOR HEATH: Do we want to take action on this first reading tonight, gentlemen? MR. BROWN: Let me consider that. I have a comment. Prob- ably I have been the only Councilman that ever held out against this annexation, which was just prior to this one, and I still don't see where it benefits the City particularly. Just for the record. MR. TOWNER: You are referring to which, 165? MAYOR HEATH: 165. MR. BROWN: Any of that area up there that was stated they didn't want to come into the City, or part of them didn't. And I have always been opposed to taking in those developed hillsi.tes because the development is substandard to our City standards and would do nothing but cost us money. A vacant.piece of land I look a little differently upon. • MAYOR HEATH: Well., gentlemen, do you want to act on this first reading tonight? This is the third time I've asked. MR. TOWNER: I think we might as well introduce the ordinance. MR. WILLIAMS: The title of the ordinance is, "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of West Covina, California, Approving the Annexation to, Incorporating in and Making a Part of said City of West Covina Certain Uninhabited Territory outside the said City and Contiguous thereto, known as Easterly Annexation District No. 167. " MR. TOWNER: I move we waive further reading of the body of the ordinance. MR. BARNES: Second. MAYOR HEATH: Moved and seconded. All those in favor -- MR. WILLIAMS: Roll call. MAYOR HEATH: Roll call. MR. FLOTTEN: Mr. Brown? • MR. BROWN: Aye. MR. FLOTTEN: Mr. Towner? MR. TOWNER: Aye. MR. FLOTTEN: Mr. Barnes? MR. BARNES: Aye. MR. FLOTTEN: Dr. Snyder? Adj. C. C. 3/16/61 EASTERLY ANNEXATION NO. 167 - continued DR. SNYDER: Aye. • MR. FLOTTEN: Mayor Heath? MAYOR HEATH: Aye. (Motion carried.) MR. TOWNER: I move the introduction. MR. BARNES: Second. Page Forty -Nine MAYOR HEATH: Moved and seconded. Roll call again. MR. FLOTTEN: Mr. Bro,xin? MR. BROWN: Aye. MR, FLOTTEN: Mr. Towner? MR. TOWNER: Aye. MR. FLOTTEN: Mr. Barnes? MR. BARNES: Aye. • MR. FLOTTEN: Dr. Snyder? DR. SNYDER: Aye. MR. FLOTTEN: Mayor Heath? MAYOR HEATH: Aye. (Motion carried.) (Whereupon, at 10:00 o'clock, p.m., the hearing of the above - entitled matter. ,vas closed.) MAYOR HEATH: Anything else to cote before this meeting' Councilr,izan Towner has sor<ething here. COUNCIL1.'11AN TO I)NE R: I met with the Personnel Board on Tuesday night. They have a proposal on a letter for::, which, I believe, was transmitted to the Council, concerning a proposed salary ad -- ,ministration progra:-a. They have recormsended this program -to the Council, but they would like to meet with us :For discussion before they take further action on it, so that there bill be complete • understanding i-rith the Council members is the report becomes final. MIAYOR HEATH- ;','hat nights do you have open to meet ..,ith the Personnel Board? COUNCILI.-AN TOWNER: They actually asked for -tire date of March 22, but that's the date that Yfe sheet with the architects and it is not available. They -�,Tanted -to meet with us next -�veek so -they could get the progra:n going. MAYOR N>ex ,eek, I,.�tonda y, is a planning night. Do you .Aunt to hold it then? Adj � Co C. 3/16/61 age Fi4'ty x COUNCILMAN BLAIR.IES0 °_ou b'e got about '!scree things to study, �:hich you held over. One is the Tholmpson property. I don't kno, x hether it was a study of the report by the staff but there ,were several things held over to study. Another: ,ras the Bowker property • site study. COUNCILMAN TOWER: It ,,,as suggested that it be, and it was held over, COUNCILMAN BROWN: But, they, the applicants, were to be notified, CITY MANAGER AIASSA: Mayor Heath, I think Mr. Blalock has something. MR. BLALOCII: Well, before I leave, I want to express our appreciation of the manner in �,.hich we've been received, but not in all thing;. It's been a pleasure to .-:feet each one of you individ- ually, and personally, and ;,,,e still o,,n the property, and liv-e probably will be seeing a great- de?3_ of' each other in years to code 7Vhen Forest Le; -in Memo:r=ial. Park is established, KI'ffO R HEATH: -� 1 y much. Do ,dot. Have something, to I Tc.�af_I� you very i you something, study for Iv onday? (Mayor to Council) COUNCILI,,IAN BROWN: I -think we study too much now. CITY MANAGER AIASSA: 1,11eet with the Personnel Board first, and then in the extra tire, deal with these items. We can review them -- bring it tip after that. MAYOR HEATH: How about Monday night at 7: 3C P. M. COUNCILMAN SNIDER: All right with me, COUNCILMAN TOP'r'NER: Eight o'clock is much more preferable to riie, IitAYOR HEATH: Eight o'clock? (All agreed upon 3:00 P .Iva° ) CITY 11ANAGErL AIASSA: I,rr. Towner, do you ,rant Fie to notify the Personnel Board'? COUNCILI`IAN TOr} NER: All of you got a copy of the Personnel. Board report, Read it to kno-w ;ghat they have in mind. This is a ne.,, approach, • COUNCILMAN SNYDER: Is this the one that George brought up? COUNCILMAN BARNES: No. COUNCILMAN TOWNER: The City Planning group was going to con- sider this type. CITY MANAGER AIASSA There is a report. I reported to you that night, Adj. C. C. 3/16/61 Page Fifty -One COUNCILMAN SNYDER: When do we appear in court, now? MAYOR HEATH: April 1st. • CITY ATTORNEY WILLIAMS: April 3rd, 9:30, is the present date. MAYOR HEATH: Well, that looks like it could be put off too. are you supposed to be notified of it. CITY ATTORNEY They should notify the City. a (Discussion) '1 1�1'AYOR }EATS:Hov.., maicn time before the appearance does a subpoena have to be served? CITY, ATTORNEY WILLIA2[iS: You can be subpoened immediately before the hearing comes up. The only thing I know, is that a court would probably not find you in contempt if you don't get there because of a practical impossibility, because you .-.iere subpoenaed when you -were 40 miles a -way t-wo minutes before the hearing. I think this would be acceptable as an explanation. COUNCIL I-,IAN SNYDER: The only reason I asked is the next week, of the third, I ar . not going to be in to;m, MAYOR 1-1EATH, AnNithing else? CITY CLERK FLOTTEN: We request that you give us permission to proceed with Annexation No. 168. This has to be done by resolution. RESOLUTION NO. 20633 Annexation 168 The City Clerk presented: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA CON- SENTING TO THE CO!,flVIENCEIvIENT OF PROCEEDINGS FOR THE ANNEXATION OF (3=11'11,71 INHLBITED TERRITORY DESIG!,TA= AS "SOUT_11',.`ESTERLY ANNEXATION DISTRICT No. 1681, Its AYOR 1JEATI-7: 1-17ea-ring no objections, --.7e -will -,,vaive further. 0 reading of the body of the resolution. 1,,7otion by Councilman Towner, seconded by Councilman Snyder, that said resolution be adopted. 1,5otion passed an roll call as f o 11 0-vi s: Ayes: Councilmen Brown, Towner, Barnes, Snyder, Mayor Heath, • Noes: None Absent: None Said Resolution was given No. 2063. Meeting was adjourned, APPROVED ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE I, Harold Kogler, Stenotype Reporter, do hereby certify: • That the foregoing proceedings c& the Meeting of the City Council of the City of ;rest Covina regarding Easterly Annexation No. 167 - Hearing of Protests, were taken before me at the time and place noted, and weretaken down by me in Stenotypic shorthand and thereafter transcribed into typewriting under my direction and supervision, and that this transcript is a true record of the proceedings concerning said matter. I further certify that I am neither a relative or employee or attorney or counsel of any of the parties, or a relative or employee of any counsel to said action, nor financially interested in the outcome thereof, IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto subscribed my name this 20th day of March, 1961, Court Reporter 0