05-16-1966 - Regular Meeting - Minutes.0
MINUTES -OF THE REGULAR. ADJOURNED MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA
MAY 16, 1966
The adjourned regular meeting of the City Council was called to order
by Mayor Krieger at 8:00 P.M, in the West Covina City Hall. Councilman
Gillum led the Pledge of Allegiance.
POT.T. OAT.T.
Present: Mayor Krieger, Councilmen Gillum, Nichols,
Snyder, Gleckman
Others Present: Mr. George Aiassa, City Manager
Mr. Robert Flotten, City Clerk & Administrative Assistant
Mr. Herman R. Fast, Public Services Director
Mr. Harold Joseph, Planning Director (to 9:00 P.M.)
Mr. William Fowler, Building & Safety Director
Mr. Gerald Weeks, Administrative Assistant
Mr. Wallace Austin, Planning Associate
Mr. James Kay, Jr., Finance Director
Absent: Mr. Harry C. Williams, City Attorney
• RESOLUTION NO. 3366
ADOPTED
Mayor Krieger:
The City Clerk presented:
"A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY' COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA
EXPRESSING ITS APPRECIATION FOR
THE SERVICES OF NEWTON H. TEMPLIN
AND EXPRESSING SYMPATHY TO HIS
FAMILY ON HIS UNTIMELY PASSING"
Hearing no objections, we will
waive further reading of the
ab«d.Y:-:
Motion by Councilman Gleckman, seconded by Councilman Gillum, that said
resolution be adopted. Motion passed on roll call as follows:
Ayes: Councilmen Gillum, Nichols, Snyder, Gleckman, Mayor Krieger
Noes: None
Absent: None
Said resolution was given No. 3366.
SLIGHT MODIFICATION NO. 43
Jay Construction Company
Mayor Krieger: This was in the Review Board
.Minutes of April 28, 1966.
Has there been the required publication and mailing as required by
law:
City Clerk, Mr. Flotten: All those who are involved in
this item have written us letters
to the effect that they have waived all requirements for the ten-day
notice.
-1-
A
C, Co 5/16/66
SLIGHT MODIFICATION NO, - .4.3. m Continued
Page Two
(Maps were presented and Mr. Joseph gave a brief summary of this mattero)
Mayor Krieger-,
IN FAVOR
Mr, Jack Feifer
511 Glen Allen
West Covina
We are following
first 25 houses
impossible for u
This is the time and place for
the public hearing,
I am with Jay Construction; one
of the owners, The 25 that are
already built are duplicated by
the 25 that we want to build,
the same standards and specifications we had on our
and the loans have been already recorded, It is
s to go back to the loan company to make modifications.
There being no .further public testimony, the public portion of the
hearing was closed,
Councilman Nichols-. I received a communication this
afternoon, I would like to
repeat the gist of it and give the opportunity to staff to comment on
ita According to the story that I have received, this subdivision is
being developed in increments and there has been a previous increment
of 25 houses constructed.and the present 25 would be the subject of
concern here, The first 25 houses were constructed and the setbacks
on the first 25 houses are precisely identical with the setbacks
as proposed here which would include the basic variance plus the
minor variance handled by the Review Board and that in some fashion
this occurred in the first tract technically in an illegal sense
and that because of an oversight, inspectors from the City did not
catch or bring this matter to the attention of the Review Board for
a slight variance. The builder, having had ipso facto for the first
increment and having constructed it, naturally assumed that the
second 25 houses being identical in terms of setbacks would meet all
requirements and that subsequent to the trenching and plumbing on
this second tract that the matter of the two feet approximate
deficiency in setback was picked up and it was at that point and only
then that the builder was aware he was not in conformance with the
setback requirements and did come before the Review Board,
If this is the case, I will
ask the staff to respond, I feel there was an honest error made here
somewhere along the line and one I would not choose to criticize
but if that is the case certainly I feel the Council should follow
through and at least allow this current increment which is underway
to proceed comparative with the first increment,
Public Services Director, Mr, Fast-, Your information that you have
is basically correct with one
•exception, It is my understanding that the current application has
not started construction; is that correct?
Mr. -Fowler, Bldg.R Safety -Director: At the time that the plans
were filed for the second.
.increment the contractors were notified that the error showed on the
plans, Since,that the contractor has had forms already set in the
field and a certain amount of their plumbing work in, There haven't
been any inspections as such but some work has been accomplished
prior to the approval of the second set of plans which have not
been approved yet,
C,, Co 5/16/66 Page Three
'gLI`G'HT MODIFICATION .NO.,, -43 Continued
• Councilman Nichols° The contractor was notified of
this problem relative to the
setback before forms were set and plumbing was set in?
Mr.. Fowler, Bldg-, & Safety Director: That I couldn't truthfully say,,
It has been common practice
in the construction industry to submit plans and at the same time in
the field commence preliminary work,,
Councilman Nichols: It is possible, then, that the.
contractor was in fact proceeding
with a program identical to the first program and had not to that
point been notified that he was not in conformance?
Mr.,Fowle:r, Bldg. & Safety Director: Yes,, (Presented photographs
and explained same,,)
Mayor Krieger: There is no question about the
at the"highest point of the elevation? fact that they do exceed 18 feet
,Mr;. Fowler, Bldg. & Safety Director: They do exceed 18 feet I would
say,,
• Mayor Krieger: The procedure that we are
following and hearing this
application is as a variance procedure,, I am going to pick up
where the Review Board left off and that is I can see where the
items 3 and 4 are satisfied as far as the showings for a variance
is concerned,, Is there anybody, staff or applicant, who can justify
the item ,:A, which is exceptional or extraordinary circumstances not
applicable generally to the other property or class of use in the
same vicinity or zone. This is what we are being asked to decide,,
Councilman Snyder: The fact that they had been
allowed to build previously
without being stopped; secondly, that they had their forms in seems
to me extraordinary circumstances. We may at this time have a
Council who wishes to interpret the conditions of'a variance
strictly, but in the past the variances have been rather broadly
interpreted,, That is no excuse for a sudden change, but it seems to
me this is the extraordinary circumstance,,
Councilman Nichols: The builder has in every sense
attempted to conform to the
requirements of the City and that a situation developed that can
develop inadvertently without unnecessary blame attaching itself to
anyone, that now enforced would work an undue hardship on the builder
and I think this is an unus4al circumstance and I would certainly
•feel that he has met the requirements for a variance even if in fact
the City itself has helped to create his own justification,,
Mayor Krieger: My comment on that point would
be this: I am not desirous
of going back over the first increment,, That has to stand or fall as
it presently exists and I don°t think it is within our power of thl�s
Council if it wanted to do anything about that situation,, But, we
do have it within our power and within our responsibility to decide
the specific matter on our agenda tonight on the showings and
requirements and the justification for a variance. Three members of
-3-
C, C, 5/16/66 Page.F°our
SLIGHT MODIFICATION NO 4*3 Continued
• this present Council sat on this particular matter when it came up
on the reduced lot size and that was to 6,000 feet because of the
types of property that was in that area,, I can only speak for myself
in voting upon the reduced lot size and I believe I was in favor of
the variance, By no means was that to denote or infer therefrom that
it was a granting of any variance in the construction of buildings
on those sites, We have before us the precise question as to whether
or not we are going to grant variances in front, side, and rear yard'
setbacks for buildings on that site, The Minutes of the Review`
Board was replete with inferences and implications as to what the
Council intended to do when they adopted this action in allowing a
smaller sized lot, As far as the showing for,a variance is concerned,
the.sresponsibility is primarily that of the applicant, but certainly
from the record or from our experience or from our general knowledge
as to what is going on we can in our own mind find whatever we want
under each of these four grounds as being facts in support of or not
in support of the showing, The comments of two of the Councilmen
suggest a heavy emphasis on that first increment, I am wondering if
this is anything else not necessarily indicating that in of itself
may not be enough, but is there anything else in this application
other than the first increment?
Councilman Snyder,, Maybe if we take a look at the
intent and purpose of -the
• area district part of our ordinance in determining lot size, the
intent is to determine density and it seems to me in reviewing
these lot sizes, in reducing these lot sizes by allowing a larger
house than would normally fit on this size of lot, we are not lowering
any standards; we are raising standards, We are not increasing the
density by allowing a larger house, We are allowing a better quality
house and, quite frankly, what harm are we doing in allowing this
better quality house even though in the past we have maybe by
mistake,allowed too small a lot?
Councilman Nichols, I agree with what you.have
stated and what Mayor Krieger
stated, However, I would go back and concur with one statement,
My own personal reaction is that probably the Review -.Board has
exceeded the intent of the Council in granting the 6,000 square foot
allowance and when in fact the Review Board states they did not
feel it was a new variance at all but an extension of a variance
granted by the Council., I believe that they are making an assumption
that is not based on fact and nothing in the Minutes at any time
indicated that the reduction from 79500 feet to 6,000 feet implied
the CounciV s intent to grant further reductions in the requirements
for setbacks, Because an error has been made, it would work an
undue hardship on the builder at this time to impose the full
requirements on setbacks through no responsibility,of its own and
through an unfortunate error and I believe that error should be
accepted as the City°s responsibility and not as an additional
condition that should impose greater burdens on the builder,
Mayor Krieger, Do we have within the City,
any experience now in the
69000 foot lot Size in new construction analogous at all to the
application before us tonight?
Planning Director, Mr, Joseph, No, we do not,
-4-
C,, C,, 5/16/66
'SLIGHT MODIF°ICATI`ON NO-,- 4-3 m Continued
• Councilman Snyder;
Page Five
I don't think by granting this
we are carte blanche saying .we
are going to do so in the future,,
Mayor Krieger,, This lot size itself provides
certain exceptional and
extraordinary circumstances which are not to be read into and inferred
by any other applicant in support of his argument except as he may
analogize it -to a 6,000 foot lot and without it being construed in
any manner as precedent except to the applicant before us,, With
respect to Item No,, 2, the necessity for the preservation and enjoy-
ment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the
same vicinity and zone, I suppose!in my own consideration I would
have necessarily to look to Rml 6,000 and not R-1 725001,
Councilman Gillum; I believe there is additional
happens if this matter comes up again? land to be developed,, What
Councilman Nichols; I would say that should this
be granted the Council imposes
no precedent and no basis for any further request because of the
uniqueness of the circumstances,,
• Motion by Councilman Gleckman, seconded by Councilman Gillum, that
Slight Modification No,, 43 be approved subject to the conditions of
.the Review Board,, Motion passed on roll call as follows,,
Ayes; Councilmen Gillum, Nichols, Snyder, Gleckman, Mayor Krieger
Noes; None
Absent; None
AMENDMENT NO,, 75
Mayor Krieger; Item 1 is a phase out of non-
conforming signs,, May I ask
why the word "latter" was used instead of "earlier?`?
Planning Director, Mr,, Joseph; The intent was to keep the signs
up as long as they can so they
wanted to keep the latter date on the ordinance,, This is to amortize
the signs as long as possible,, The --three-year program was chosen
as just a reasonable period of time,, There may be changes in the
ordinance that occur between now and April 219 1968,, The wording is
specific that signs that are not conforming under this chapter as
of that date shall be removed
Councilman Snyder;
Mayor Krieger;
I think January, 1968 should be
better than April 21st,,
Item
signs
Department Code on sign construction covers
No,, 49 outside stairways,,
3 is the maintenance of
and the Building
that so we can skip that,,
-5-
C, C, 5/16/66
AMENDMENT NO, 75 Continued
• Planning Director, Mr, Joseph-,
Mayor Krieger-,
Page Six
This is a carry-over of -Ordinance
No, 325, It was requested by the
Building Department,
The next item is off-street
parking for conference and
meeting rooms,,
Councilman Snyder-, To require any establishment to
have parking to meet their maximum
capacity, for instance, something like this which may only meet once
a day or once a week, puts an undue burden on them, If they are the
sort of establishment that meets intermittently then if they do have
this kind of turnout then it really doesn't harm the -City to park down
the street,
Mayor Kriegers This wasn't set by the maximum,
..I was curious why you used the
restaurant analogy In arriving at this, Do you assume that people in
a meeting room sit as far apart as people in a restaurant?
Planning Director, Mr, Joseph-, I think so,
Councilman Nichols-, It has been my experience in.
. West Covina in the last few
years that we actually have�a shortage of parking at everyone of these
.Locations where gatherings occur, I think there always will be this
problem, I think this is a reasonable answer to it,
Mayor Krieger: The next one is.walls and
building lines on reverse corner
lots, This exception is more of a matter of permission than it is
a matter of exclusion; is that true?
Planning Director, Mr, Joseph-, Yes,
Councilman Nichols-, From thestandpoint of good
planning, why may I not come
to the front.of my property and build a six-foot wall?
Planning Director, Mr, Joseph: This goes back to the basic
foundation of zoning which
justified under the law in terms of the public peace, health, safety
andgeneral welfare, If you have a uniform -setback from the street
and permit light and air, the public peace, health, safety and -.
general welfare will be protected thereby. This is just history,
One of the concepts we have been thinking about for a couple of years
was relax.at:ron of certain of the old-time required setbacks in terms
of planned residential developments,
• Mayor Krieger-, The last item is pertaining to
the Review Board to permit
the Review Board to send -precise fans directly to the Planning
Commission when they feel the Commission should more properly
determine the matter, percentage up to 20o modification on the
matters heard before the Review Board and, in effect, it constitutes
a deviation of slight modification,
Councilman Snyder° Who makes the determination that
this is a Review Board matter or
a Planning Commission matter?
-6-
Co Co 5/16/66
AMENDMENT NO', '75. 'Continued
Page Seven
Planning Director, Mr, Joseph-, Staff at the counter,
Councilman Snyder-, If the Review Board determines
that the staff made a mistake,
they can refer the matter to the Planning Commission?
Planning Director, Mr, Joseph-, Yes, but primarily it is con®
strueted with a matter such as
the Jay Construction problem, the matter that came up tonight. This
was a precedent setting matter but legally it was to come before the
Review Board, We don'"t want to have these matters that by law
have to go to the Review Board,
Councilman Snyder-, Move with respect to the date for
phasing out of signs under
Section 9221-8 be changed from April 219 1968 to the date of
the second regular Council meeting in January of 1968,
Mayor Krieger-, With the idea in mind that the
date would be fixed in the
ordinance rather than a reference to the second meeting?
Councilman Snyder, Yes,
. Action on Councilman Snyder°s motion, Motion seconded by Councilman
Gleckman, and carried,
RETIREMENT STUDY
Mayor Krieger-,
There has been an additional
report submitted dated May 12th
discussing costs,
Councilman Krieger-,
Mr, Aiassa, didn't we receive
repeatedly a figure that was
somewhere in the range of 110 to
120 thousand dollars?
(Mr. Joseph left the chambers at
9-,00 P,M,�
Mr:'o.:�.We.eks', Admiriketrat"ive`:Asst,
We originally had a figure of
$129,000, We actually had two
complete separate evaluations on
this, The first one was about
12.9 and we reduced it down, Each
of these evaluations have been
based on the salary at the time the
evaluation was made,
Councilman Snyder;
Perhaps -this cost also includes
• receiving disability benefits are
the fact that six employees now
being considered now,
Councilman Gleckman-,
Have we worked up any figures
had we. -stayed with Occidental
whether we are going higher or lower
or even, just for the sake of
knowledge?
Mr,- Weeks',,- Admiri_ strat ve'. Asst:.
The last figures I saw was
$1109000 and we have not
received the most recent bill from Occidental,
m7®
Co Co 5/16/66
Page Eight
RETIREMENT STUDY ® Continued.
Finance Director, Mr. Kay: That would include the six disability
cases but they were billing us for
is disability on the basis of four cases at which they were charging us $30
per employee per year and they had projected this as $95 per employee
per year for the fcur cases and we now have six cases. This $110,000
would have been somewhere between 110 to 145 depending on when their
actuaries completed their calculations.
Mayor Krieger: I was interested in the fractional
percentage reduction after the
phased contributions by Occidental. Is there a dollar equivalent
other than as incorporated within this report?
Mr. Weeks, Admin. Assistan,,11-. The .2867o of payroll which is re-
duced by percentage point of each
$100,000 transfer, comes down to $5,895 per year in the dollar amount
of the reduced annual premium,
Mayor Krieger -
Mr. Weeks, Admin, Assistant:
Mayor Krieger:
Mr, Weeks, Admin. Assistant:
Mayor Krieger -
Mr. Weeks, Admin. Assistant:
That is only in the first year,
isn't it? Doesn't it increase
the second year?
It actually decreases the second
year.
Isn't the annual, cost to the City
initially computed by multiplying
the 70618% against the payroll of
the City? I
Yes o
It is still a reduced percentage
applicable as against the total
payroll?
That's correct.
Mayor Krieger- These figures are being projected
upon an assumption that the payroll
remains as it presently is, $2,100,000. 1 don't assume that at all.
With respect to prior service, I assume that this will remain a con-
stant, or am I incorrect in that regard?
Mr. Weeks, Admin, Assistant:
Mayor Krieger,.
That is correct. Prior service
will continue to be 2.3% of pay-
roll for 30 years,
But this percentage multiple will
still increase for prior service
as our, payroll increases?
is Mr. Weeks, Admin. Assistant: ThaVs correct.
Mayor Krieger -
Mr. Weeks, Admin, Assistant:
So the annual cost you have projected
in these figures is only going to
hold true so long as we retain an
annual payroll of $2,100,000?
That's correct.
Co Co 5f16/66 Page Nine
"RETIREMENT STUDY e Continued
• Mayor Krieger: And the maximum amount of
percentage fractional reduction
that we can anticipate will be two and a half times ,,2860, is that
correct?
Mr. Weeks,. Admin. A§s stanto
Mayor Krieger-.
COMMISSION SALARIES
Councilman Snyder-.
That's right,,
The ordinance has been introduced
so we don't have to take any
action on this tonight,,
The salaries in regard to each
commission, are they paid whether
there is attendance or not?
Finance Director, Mr,, Kayo I don't know specifically,,
Councilman Gleckman-. The Planning Commission is paid
on attendance,,
• Councilman Snyder: If a regular meeting was
missed and there so happened
to be a regular adjourned meeting of that commission and the person
involved attended that particular adjourned meeting, I think he
should get paid,, It would have to be an adjourned meeting connected
with that particular commission,,
Mayor Krieger-. I think your point is taken
care of under the resolutions
of the Parks and Recreation Commission, Personnel Board, Planning
Commission, and Human Relations Commission,,
Councilman Snyder: I personally think that a $20m
payment is not worth cutting
the check for,, I think these people should have a raise,, Those
getting $20 should be raised to $30 and $60 for the Planning
Commission,,
Councilman Nichols: How long have these figures
been in effect?
Mayor Krieger: The Recreation and Parks was
June, 19649 the Planning
Commission was June, 1964; the Personnel Board was June, 1964; I
think we just established the Human Relations compensation about..a
year ago,,
Councilman Snyder: The Council up until -June of
1964 got $50 a month,, I think
after the Council got a raise in that election that year we raised
the commissions,,
Councilman Nichols: I believe that we can never
really compensate capable and
able citizens of our community for their services and the time they
spend,, I would concur that particularly in the light of the wide -
ME
Co C,, 5/16/66
-COMMISSION SAL-ARIES Continued
Page Ten
• spread readjustment of Councilmanic salaries in California, including
this City, that there should be at least a. modest revision to indicate
our feeling on this matter relative to the other commissions,, I think
the figures set by Councilman Snyder are reasonable ones,, They
certainly are in line relative to the Planning Commission and with
the better paying cities as shown on the survey that we have here,,
Councilman Snyder.- I think in regard to the Planning
Commission the $50 is $25 for-.
each meeting, and it should be amended to read $30 for eactr meeting,,
Councilman Gleckman.- I don't think the raise from
$50 to $60 is going to make much
difference; or a raise from $20 to $30,, When we talk about the
Council getting more money, it was a State Law and it wasn't an act
by the City Council or the people directly,, I am going to try to
figure the justification for the raise and it's always nice to raise
salaries,, I just don't understand this in this instance,,
Mayor Krieger.- I would go along with what
Councilman Gleckman has said
here,, It seems to me that the idea was a token compensation at
best,, If we are trying to maintain some type of a ratio as a suggested
.increase certainly doesn't go along with any ratio theory and I can't
see the significance of a nominal increase and I can't see the
necessity of any increase. We are never going to reach a point on the
Council or on the Commissions or Boards actually where you are going
to get compensated for the time spent if you do your job right,,
Councilman Snyder.- This is'not a big point with
me,, I merely brought it up
for review because I think we should review it occasionally,, I
wouldn't want to do this, personally, without full accord of the
Council,,
Move that amendments to the
three ordinances and one resolution be drafted granting $30,,00 per
meeting for a total of $60-,,.00 for Planning Commission; $30,,00 per
meeting for a total of $3040 per -month for the Recreation and
Parks Commission, Personnel Board, and Human Relations Commission,,
Mayor Krieger° The motion dies for lack of a
second,,
Councilman Nichols.- I would have been happy to
second that motion but it
apparently was not a feeling of unanimity, I would agree with
Councilman Snyder that the Council should be firm in its feelings
before we move into this sort of thing,,
REVOCATION AND SUSPENSION OF LICEN-SES
Councilman Snyder.- I brought this up because as we
become a headquarter city it is
possible that we might get businessmen of national distribution as
well as local businesmen who perhaps might be operating on a shady
business or on the fringe of a shady business and at the present
m10®
Co C. 5/16/66 Page Eleven
REVOCATION AND SUSPENSION 'OF 'LICENSES Continued
time should this happen we have no method of revocation or suspension
of a business license and no method of even refusing a business
license. You would be amazed how many people think the City has that
right. It seems to me that a copy of the ordinance from the City of
Azusa supplies such an ordinance or such a method without endangering
the right of'free enterprise- The person has the right of public
hearing and the City Council has the right �o refuse to issue or revoke
a business license for somebody who may be damaging the image of our --
City- I would like to see such an ordinance along these lines adoptedo
Mayor Krieger; I agree with what Councilman
Snyder says, In fact, the
language I believe is good even in the Section 6148 as far as
revocation. As far as the concept -.is concerned, I think it is
also desirous of our consideration.
Councilman Gillum- I notice this says "business
in an immoral or disorderly
manner". Would this cover such things as these topless entertainment
places? Would that fall under such an area?
Mayor. Krieger- I think only the City Attorney
would probably be able to
answer.that specific question although I do know that other municipalities
• seem to be particularly unsuccessful even though they have these types
of ordinances in banning that type of activity under this pre-emption.
Councilman Gleckman- May I suggest that we give this
copy to the City Attorney and
to the staff to come back with a recommendation with the idea, in mind
that the Council is interested in such an ordinance if it be:recomm
mended in the proper language as to what we desire?
Councilman Nichols- I don't object to further
exploration as indicated by
Councilman Gleckman. Do you have any knowledge, Mr. Mayors as to
whether this.law or any similar law has been challenged as to its
constitutionality?
Mayor Krieger- I do know that the courts have
passed upon the rights of the
governmental body after a hearing conducted under the -requirements
of due process to suspend --and revoke licenses and yes, it --has
been.acted upon favorably. I have the impression that Mr. Williams
being the City. -Attorney of Azusa had something to do with the
preparation of this particular ordinance.
Councilman Nichols- If a business is in your
community and that business
has some condition that developed around it oo for example,
alleged disorderly conduct m® normally the community's recourse
or the individual's recourse is to bring an action under the vio-
lation of some other law that involves disorderly conduct and there is
a legal proceeding and the person may demand a jury trial and he is
either guilty or not guilty of that and subject to any punitive
actions that the law might hold. Here a City official may make a
preliminary determination that some person is in fact violating a
law and you have created under this a procedure for by-passing a normal
judicial procedure and bringing it before the Council and saying
this person is disorderly or they are doing something else; therefore,
-11®
C, C, 5/16/66 Rage Twelve
'REVOCATION AND SUSPENSION OF -LICENSES Continued
we are going to hold a hearing and the Council sets itself up as a
judicial body, makes a finding and revokes a license based upon a
finding that this disorderly condition did exist, You are really,
in effect, setting up in a different way to try what is alleged to
be probably a violation of any one of a number of things,
Mayor Kriegera I don't think the courts have
ever said that governmental
agencies can preclude the recourse to the courts. A determination of
this type or any other quasi judicial or administrative agency would
always be appealable to the courts on the basic questions as to
whether or not the respondent is afforded due process of law by the
hearing body and'whether or not there was substantial evidence to
support the record and the actions of the hearing body,
Councilman Snyder: My intent is again since we are
becoming a larger City and may
have large firms located here for instance, the so-called house
siding firms who advertise over the radio and draw up fake contracts m®
one located in West Covina, I think if they were cited by the FHA
or somebody for numerous and gross infractions of the FHA rules
and convicted, which at the present don't have any way to revoke
their licenses m® I personally think it should involve a conviction
•but again I think this can be stated in broad terms and we have to
trust the judgment of the Council,
Motion by -Councilman Snyder, seconded by Councilman Gillum, and
carried,.that the staff and the City Attorney be instructed to draft
an ordinance regarding revocation and suspension of business licenses
similar to the Azusa Ordinance; that the City Attorney and staff take
full recognition of the comments made by the Council this evening,
CITIZENS' BLUE RIBBON COMMITTEE
Mayor Kriegere You have the draft of a proposed
letter to be sent throughout the
City of West Covina in accordance with my recommendation to the Council
of last week, You also have a list of the priorities for the
Citizens' Blue Ribbon Committee, I asked the City Manager to provide
the City with cost figures if you wish to go ahead with the direct
mailing,
City Manager, Mr, Aiassao The cost for --addressing and
labels is $6,50 per thousand
with a total figure of approximately $768,75 and probably with
another $75 or $80 we can include the postcard -because we are only
going to pay what is returned. This is for 159000 letters,
Councilman Snyder; I think this is a good letter,
I think the first job would be
to finish our interviews and then set up an ad hoc or initial blue
ribbon committee to select the larger committees out of our responses,
I don't think the Council will have the time to do it by ourselves
and I don't think the staff should do it,
_12-
C, Cc 5/16/66 Page Thirteen
CITIZENS' BLUE RIBBON COMMITTEE Continued
Councilman Gleckman- I think the letter is well
written and well prepared,
I don°t care if we do get a large response, This to me is not only
a way in which we can get the citizens in our community interested
but also informed and it is a twofold plan as far as I°m concerned,
I think this is something we have needed for a long time,
Councilman Nichols- I think we should give some
consideration -.as to whether
we want to move out initially in all fourteen areas. The letter is
excellent, I believe it should go out, The only question is that at
the conclusion of the letter itself you indicate that you are inviting
each and every person who receives this to respond by utilizing a
postcard indicating a first, second, and third -committee appointment.
You do not say that they will or will not be invited to participate.
It is conceivable that only a relatively few peoplemight respond
and that virtually all who do respond would be used, But, it is also
conceivable that the response may be beyond that which you could
possibly utilize and you may lose in the public realations sense by
not being able to utilize the full volume of' people who might
respond, My thinking in that sense would be that peihaps it would
be -better to invite their response to the Mayor by letter or response
if' they would be interested or of any thoughts on this subject and
then your survey shows this response and you can move from there,
Mayor Krieger- I would hope we get an avalanche,
Frankly, I don't think that will
be the problem, If you accept the 14 committees and we were to
constitute these committees by appointment of 20 each, we can use
300 people, I would be very gratified if we have that kind of
response, If we have a greater response than that, then as far as
I°m concerned it puts a greater burden but a pleasant one upon us
and probably more particularly me to make sure that there are no
hurt feelings or ill will generated by this, I think the initial
overture can only create good will and we are really talking about
our follow-up so we don't lose the good will that we create,
Councilman Nichols- I don't think we have the
facilities to start 14 different
committees and keep them going, I think when a committee is created
there has to be a continuing on, a liaison with the City staff and
elected Councilmen in order that these people will become informed
and learn and move to an answer. My only concern is that we move. -
off too broadly initially and get a setback that would be harmful,
Councilman Snyder- I would agree,
Councilman Nichols- If we could take five or six -and if
this letter could be modified to
•the extent that not all committees may be started immediately but
those who responds their names would be kept ready and..avaiiable and
move out in five or six and see how we can follow them, how the
thing begins initially, the mechanics of it, and then --as soon as we
see we can move ahead into additional committee areas, all well and
good,
Mayor Krieger- If that is the consensus of the
majority of the Council, I
suggest in the third paragraph of the letter rather than use the
words "are now being created" and then gauge your creation by the
extent of your response,
-113-
Co Co 6/1.6/66
'CITIZENS' BLUE RIBBON COMMITTEE m Continued
Councilman Gleckmana
Page Fourteen
I agree with that,,
Councilman Gillum: Most of these are in areas where
they would have to work with
staff people, We have asked the staff to work on the up -dating of
the General Plan and things of this typed I am wondering if we get
into too many of these are we going to put another burden on these
people obtaining information for these blue ribbon committees?
Mayor Krieger.- This is an experiment in local
government and I would tend to
think we are going to gauge our speed and our direction by what we
experience, It is extremely difficult when you are experimenting to
know each step that you are going to experience --although you might
hypothesize as to what developments might occur,
Councilman Nichols° If we find we need people to
add to our staff for this -
research work, perhaps we can consider that when the time comes,
Motion by Councilman Snyder, seconded by Councilman Gillum, that
$19000.00 from Unappropriated Reserve be appropriated for the sending
of letters as indicated from the draft of May 16, 1966 inviting
ISparticipation of citizens in blue ribbon committees, Motion passed
on roll call as follows. -
Ayes: Councilmen Gillum, Nichols, Snyder, Gleckman, Mayor Krieger
Noes: None
Absent: None
LIST OF MAJOR ITEMS REQUIRING
COUNCIL STUDY MEETING
Mayor Krieger: The Council agreed informally
that one of the matters of
utmost importance would be a series of study meetings on items of
concern, We have a tentative list dated May 9th of major items needing
possible study sessions,
Councilman Nichols: I object to bringing --the water
study back this soon,
Mayor Krieger: The reason this was put up
close to the top was because
of the report itself as to how --far in'the future the validity of
that report might be projected,
Councilman Nichols: That is a valid point,
Councilman Snyder: I would like to see two --items
added to the study list,
The first one is there has been an unwritten policy but never stated
policy on better control or chanelling of public information. -and
public relations and I think we need a study session on this, --In
other words, is the Mayor to be the public relations spokesman, the
City Manager, how this is to be handled. In that line, I think we
have to have a study session regarding a City tabloid or brochure or
ml4®
C. C. 5/16/66
Page Fifteen
LIST OF.MAJOR_ITEMS REQUIRING COUNCIL STUDY MEETING.- continued:
some sort of a City newspaper or newsletter that could possibly be
instituted and the best way of doing this. I would like to see these
• two things put on study session.
I have known for a long time and it has
been pointed out by several people we have interviewed, that our policemen
in some respects are our public relations arm. They are the only officials
of the city many people meet and are sort of like officers and soldiers
overseas; they are our diplomatic arm. This should be a personnel session;
I would like to have a study session on the effectiveness of our Police: De-
partment as a public relations agency. This involves many areas, It in-
volves the enforcement of the laws, and perhaps maybe they are too diligent
sometimes in the enforcement of the laws. I am not saying this is true, I
am saying it is possibly true. I feel very strongly about this. We should
have a study session; you can list it as police public relations,
Mayor Krieger:
Are there any objections to adding
that?
Councilman Nichols:
No, because he has stipulated that
there is no issue or current problem,
Councilman Snyder:
I am not saying that; I may have some
problem that I don't want to bring up
at a public meeting.
Mr. Aiassa:
Can I ask one question? As a priority
item, do you want to devote an entire
session to the police relations?
Councilman Snyder:
No.
Mr. Aiassa:
Can we include that with the public
relations newspaper and make that one
study session?
Councilman Snyder:
Yes,
Mayor Krieger:
No, we want to determine first of all
whether or not this tentative list
does not contain items that
you would like to see on the list; and then
secondly, we have extracted
from this list certain items that have been
calendered during June, and
if you want to vary that.
Councilman Snyder:
I think we should have a joint meeting
with the involved members of the Cham-
ber regarding the base study to make sure this is taking the directions
and scope that we intended
from our viewpoint.
Councilman Gleckman:
I agree, That is the way the contract
reads.
Mayor Krieger:
On the scheduling of this session, do
you have any suggestions, revisions,
comments to make?
Councilman Gleckman:
Traffic relief on Center Street or on
•
the Vincent Avenue Interchange, if
that problem doesn't show up on a
priority list, I would like to see it
there.
Mayor Krieger:
There was a meeting with the Plaza
property owners last Wednesday and
there is to be a follow-up meeting, an activation of that committee
formed Wednesday morning at
9:15 and Councilman Gillum is to be the
Council, representative,
_15-
Co ;Co 5/16/66
Page Sixteen
LFAPUE COMMUNICAT.C+iN`RE:.:;`,
FED3RAL HIGHWAY FUNDS
Mayor Krieger:
This is for your information only.
•
r
R SOLUTION NO, 3367
The City Clerk presented:
AnnE;xation 200
"A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
ADOPTED
THE CITY OF WEST COVINA CONSENTING TO
THE COMMENCEMENT OF PROCEEDINGS FOR
THE ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN INHABITED
TERRITORY DESIGNATED AS 'SOUTHERLY
ANNEXATION DISTRICT NO. 2001"
Motion by Councilman Snyder,
seconded by Councilman Gillum and carried,
that this matter be added to
the agenda,
Mayor Krieger:
Hearing no objections, we will waive
further reading of the body of the
resolution.
Motion by Councilman Gleckman, seconded by Councilman Gillum, that said
resolution be adopted. Motion passes on roll call as follows:
Ayes: Councilmen Gillum, Nichols, Snyder, Gleckman, Mayor Krieger
Noes: None
Absent: None
Said resolution was given No.
3367.
COUNCILMANIC REPORTS
JUNIOR CHAMBER REPORT
Councilman Nichols:
Mr. Aiassa, are you getting any re
sponse in your efforts to get the in-
formation on the Junior Chamber survey
that occurred some time ago?
City Manager, Mr, Aiassa: You received a copy of.my letter to
the Chairman of the Junior Chamber of
Commerce and we have been assured they will have a report for use .
Councilman Nichols: If it is not forthcoming by Friday,
would you inquire of them again so
you can tell us what is happening as of our next meeting?
City Manager, Mr, Aiassa: Okay,
VALINDA MEETING
Councilman Nichols: I have been made aware through an
article in the San Gabriel Valley
Daily Tribune that a committee of citizens from the Valinda area num-
bering some 20 according to the reports, are conducting a meeting and
I believe this meeting is scheduled for this coming Wednesday evening
in the Valinda area and it is a protest meeting as the story reported
• against efforts on the part of other citizens in that area to annex to
the City of West Covina. I would be interested to have a report returned
to the Council on the nature of that meeting if no other Councilman has
an objection. I think it would be of interest if someone from our staff
could be present at the meeting and indicate the nature of the public
feelings as expressed. Also, for the record, it has been reported to me
that a number of people who are attempting to create opposition to the
interest in annexation as expressed by a number of the citizens in the
in the Valinda area, that a number of people are directly connected with
the County of Los Angeles in their employment and I would be very inter-
ested in finding as a Councilman if this City knows of any calculated
effort on the part of County employees in connection with their employ-
-16-
Co C 5/16/66 Page Seventeen
VALINDA MEETING m Continued:
Councilman Nichols Continued:
• ment to agitate in the Valinda area and attempt to prevent the citizens
from that area in expressing their own feelings relative to annexation.
If this is true, I think the Board of Supervisors should be notified;
a complaint should be filed regarding the conduct of such County em--'
ployeeso
MAYOR'S REPRESENTATION OF THE CITY
Councilman Gleckman: I would like to compliment the Mayor
for his excellent representation of_
the City. I, as one Councilman, thank
you.
INTERVIEWS
Mayor Krieger: We do have an interview session Friday
night starting at 7:30.
•
There being no further business, motion by Councilman Gillum, seconded
by Councilman Snyder, and carried, that this meeting be adjourned at
10:15 P.M.
ATTEST:
UJ
—TTTY--CrE—RK
APPROVED 12 19 v
-17-