12-28-1970 - Regular Meeting - MinutesIt ,
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA
DECEMBER 28, 1970.
The regular meeting of the City Council was called to order by
Mayor Ken Chappell at 7:30 P,M. in the West Covina Council Chambers.
The Pledge of Allegiance was led by the Mayor; and the invocation
was given by Reverend Charles R. Simmons of the United Methodist
Church.
Pr)T.T. C`AT.T.
Present: Mayor Chappell; Councilmen Shearer, Nichols,
Young, Lloyd
Others Present, George Aiassa, City Manager
George Wakefield, City Attorney
Lela Preston, City Clerk
George Zimmerman, City Engineer
Richard Munsell, Planning Director
Bert Yamasaki, Ass°t'. Planning Director
Terry Brandt., Administrative Analyst, Jr.
Leonard Eliot, Controller
Ray Windsor, Administrative Assistant
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
December 14, 1970 Motion by Councilman Lloyd, seconded by
Councilman Young, approving minutes.
Lela Preston, Mr. Mayor, I have one addition .to.the.._.
City Clerk minutes, on page 13 in regard to the Weed
Abatement program. We need a motion to
receive and file the affidavit of mailing.
Councilman Lloyd: What happened on this, Mr. Mayor?
m
Lela Preston. The motion to receive and file the affidavit
of mailing was overlooked, we went right into -
the hearing portion.
Councilman Lloyd. Well it can't be incorporated in those
minutes, but it can be done by motion
in tonight's minutes. Am I correct
Mr. Wakefield?
Mr. Wakefield: That is the proper procedure. The minutes
City Attorney tonight should reflect that the affidavits
of mailing in connection with the Weed
Abatement proceedings were received and filed. Such a motion to
be incorporated in then minutes of this meeting.
Councilman Lloyd.
PUBLIC WORKS ITEMS
I will accept that as an amendment.
Seconded by Councilman Young, and carried.
Motion approving minutes of December 14, 1970,
carried.
PROJECTS NOS. SP-69008 LOCATION: Vine Avenue between Hollenbeck
(VINE AVENUE) AND and Citrus Streets, and west side of
SP-70019 (Hollenbeck Hollenbeck Street between Thackery Avenue and
Street ) Alaska Street.
(Council reviewed Engineer's report.)
Motion by Councilman Shearer, seconded by Councilman Young, approving
the plans and specifications for City Projects SP-69008 and SPm70017,
CITY COUNCIL 12/28/70
Page Two
PUB. WKS., #SP-69008 &
SP_70017
and authorizing the City
Engineer to call for bids.
Councilman Young°
A minor comment, Mr, Mayor m
I just wonder
if we could do this: without
publicizing the
amount of money available.
It seems like it
might .increase the size
of the bids.
Mr. Aiassa,
Normally we don't. This is
a budgetary
Account anyway.
Councilman Young-.
We know we have the money but
by stating in
here if there ,are excess funds
they can be
picked up for other uses a.
I thought the
bidders might want to
pick that up too and not leave
it on the table.
Mr. A.iasya`
Mr. Zimmerman has not been
very consistent in
his 'bidding estimates we
figure about
$ 75, 800 and, if it goes over
that he has
some tall explanations
to make.
Motion carried.
FREEWAY WIDENING LOCATION: :North side of .Frontage Road between
ACQUISITION OF A Vincent and Azusa Avenues.
PORTION OF LOT 288 (Council. reviewed Engineer's report.)
TRACT #164 72 .AND
PORTION OF LOT 3.3 Councilman Young, .A. question.. Is this City -
TRACT -�k17865 owned property? (Answer:
Yes.)
Motion by Councilman Young, seconded by Councilman Lloyd., authorizing
the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the right -,of. -way contract for
acquisition of the necessary freeway right-of-way for this location.
Motion carried; Councilman ,shearer abstaining.
RESOLUTION NO. 4275 The City Clerk presented,
,ADOPTED "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF WEST COVINA, AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND
CT, Y CLERK. TO EXECUTE THE CORPORATION GRANT
D.EE F CONVEYING TO THE STATE DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS THE NECESSARY RIGHT-
OF-WAY FOR FREEWAY WI.DEN:ING.00
Mayor Chappell-, Hearing no objections, waive further reading
of the body of ,said Resolution.
Motion by Councilman Young, seconded by councilman Lloyd, adopting
said resolution. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows:
AYES-. Councilmen Nichols, Young, Lloyd, Mayor Chappell
NOES, :None
ABSENT. None
ABSTAIN, Councilman Shearer
PLANNING COMMISSION
SUMMARY OF ACTION Motion by Councilman Young, seconded by
40 DECEM.BER. i6, 1970 Councilman Shearer, and. carried, accepting
REVIEWED BY COUNCIL and filing summary of action of the Planning
commission dated December 16, 1970
PERSONNEL BOARD
RETIREMENT - WIDOW' S Mr,, Aiass,a, Council has received a staff
CONTINUANCE ACT!JA.RI:AL report, and. both Mr. Windsor,
STUDY of the Personnel Department,, and Mr. Eliot,
City Controller, are present. This does
involve a $ 300 o fee. I believe the .report is self-explanatory and
the Personnel Board .recommended it. We would be stuck with the cost
of an -actuarial report, whether we joined the entire program or did
2 -
CITY COUNCIL 12/28/70 Page Three
PERS BD: Widow's Continuance Actuarial Study
it on an individual basis. This will give us a pretty good compre-•
hensive overall cost to the City for this benefit that is now
permissible under Assembly Bill #670
Mayor Chappell:
Mr. Aiassao
time to do this service
This actuarial cannot be done in-house?
No, this is done by the PE.RS staff and they
are the only ones that have accessibility
to the records. We actually pay them for their
for us.
Councilman Nichols,., Mr. Mayor, I don't think there is any question
at all but that this actuarial study will need
to be done. The Council is going to be, in
all probability, faced with. the consideration of, this matter and the
cost will _�ot be insignificant, yet the cost of the actuarial study
will be indeed if was come down to the wire and don't have the other
data we need. So I would move that the Council authorize the
expenditure of $300, to determine the cost to the City of the Widow's
Continuance Retirement Benefit.
Seconded by Councilman Young.
Councilman Young, I take it the $300. is available/perhaps
from some :savings somewhere?
Mr. Aiassa.: Yes, it is available from the Personnel
budge t
Motion carried on roll call vote as follows!
AYES: Councilmen Shearer, Nichols, Young, Lloyd, Mayor Chappell
NOES: None
ABSENT,, None
HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION
MINUTES OF NOV. 19, 1970
receive and file the minutes of
dated November 1.9, 1970
Motion by Councilman Young,
seconded by Councilman
Shearer, and carried, to
the Human Relations Commission
REQUEST .FOR JOINT Mr, Aiassao The report; I .received from
MEETING my liaison representative
Terry Brandt®is that February 15th would be
a desirable date in the Conference Room of
the City Manager's office. That is your odd
Monday ern February. If Council has no objections we can.give them
advance notice of that date.
Councilman. Shearer: Mr. Mayor, the 15th is a holiday under the
new ,system of celebrating h,:olidays on a
Monday, and Washington'-,-- Birthday was
changed to the 15th of February.
isMr. Ai.assa: I would suggest then that we hold the meet-
ing over to March to
Councilman Lloyd- I have no objection, but that is two and a
half months away. My point is if these
people would like to have a meeting, perhaps
we should refer it to staff to communicate with them, and see if they
want an earlier meeting date. I feel we should be responsive to
these Commissions and if they want a joint meeting we should try and
have it. I frankly believe that something more than 60 or 70 days
is extensive
Mr. Aiassa: We have had meetings with the Chairman and
3
CITY COUNCIL 12/28/70 Page Four
HUM.. R..EL, COM. JOINT MEETING DATE
it is not of a life or death nature and so I believe the March 1st
date will be al.l right°
Councilman Lloydz AfZ..right but I would like to have -staff
contact them and make sure that this date is
agreeable with them and Council advised that
it is agreeable.
Mr. Aiassa® Yes we will and it will tentatively be
scheduled for March to
Motion by Councilman Young, seconded by Councilman Lloyd, and carried,
setting March 1, 1971, as the tentative date for a Joint Meeting of
Council and the Human Relations Commission, in the City Manager's
conference room at 7�30 P.M.
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS'
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Motion by Councilman Young, seconded by
BOUNDARY CHANGE Councilman Lloyd, and carried, that the
request from the Board of Supervisors of the
County of Los Angeles, consenting to minor boundary change between
the City of West Covina and the County pertaining to North Orange
Avenue be received and filed-, and further directing the City Attorney
to prepare a Resolution correcting the boundary as requested.
CITY OF CUL'1ER CITY Motion by Councilman Young, seconded by
RE INS° COVERAGE IN Councilman Lloyd, and ca.rx_z-_dq, that City
FIELDS OF MUNICIPAL Council receive letter'f.rom City of Culver
LIABILITY City regarding insurance coverage in fields
of municipal liability and refer to City
Controller and City Attorney for a further report.'
CITE' OF .DUARTE Motion by Councilman Lloyd, seconded by
REPORT ON NATIONAL Councilman Young, to-receiVe and. --file this
CONFERENCE ON report,
COMMUNITY DRUG ABUSE
PROGRAMS Councilman Young, I take it this type thing
is referred to the
appropriate groups within
the City, for example the Hot Line would be interested in the
people involved in the Free Clinics and the Like.
Mr. Aiassa¢
CITY OF HAWTHORNE
RE SODUT ION ' ##4 2 5 3
and
CITY OF CULVER CITY
re UTILIZING SURPLUS
MILITARY AIRCRAFT IN
FIGHTING FOREST FIRES
Yes, we will circulate to the people interest-
ed.
Motion Carried,
Mayor Chappell- The City Manager will make
a report on this under his
agenda. Can we have a
motion to hold over until the City Manager's
agenda.
So moved by Councilman Lloyd, seconded by
Councilman Young, and carried.
CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE Motion by Councilman Shearer, seconded by
RES, ##70-1312 re Councilman Lloyd, and carried, to receive and
"CHANGING ROLES OF file this Resolution.
CITIES".
CITY ATTORNEY
ORDINANCE NO. 1151 The City Attorney presentedz
ADOPTED "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF WEST COVINA, AMENDING THE WEST COVINA
MUNICIPAL CODE SO AS TO REZONE CERTAIN PREMISES. (Zone Change Applica-
tion No. 447 _ Queen's Medical Center,)"
4
CITY COUNCIL 12/28/70
CITY ATTORNEY: Ord. ##1151
Page .Five
Mayor Chappell: Hearing no objection- waive further reading
of the body of said Ordinance.
Motion by Councilman Shearer, seconded by Councilman Lloyd, adopting
said'.Ofdinanceo Motion carried on roll cell vote as follows.
AYES: Councilmen Shearer, Nichols, Young, Lloyd, Mayor Chappell
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ORDINANCE #1152 The City Attorney presented.,
ADOPTED ",AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF WEST COVINA, AMENDING .SECTIONS 6209 AND
6235.6 OF CHAPTER 2 ARTICLE VI OF THE WEST COVINA MUNICIPAL CODE
RELATING TO LICENSE FEES.AND COIN OPERATED WA.SBERS A_ND DRYERS AND
ADDING SECTION 6213 (f ) TO CHAPTER 2, ARTICLE VI OF THE WEST COVINA
MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO GROSS RECEIPTS."
Mayor Chappell: Hearing no objections waive further reading
of the body of said Ordinance.
Councilman Lloyd. Mr. Mayor, I would like to have an explana-
tion of that. We were involved in this coin
operated thing about a year and aihalf ago
and there was some problem relating to that, does this change
anything we have already done?
Mr. Wakefield: The matter to which. Councilman Lloyd refers
was the matter -of establishing a business
license charge for coin operated washing
machines. The principal operator of coin operated leashing machines
protested at that time the fact the City had established a flat rate
per mashing machine. In the .last session of the legislature a bill.
was passed prohibiting a. City from charging a business license .fee on a
flat rate basis and required the City to go to a gross receipts basis.
This Ordinance changes the basis of the payment of the business
license fee for coin operated washing machines to a gross receipts
basis and on the basis of the staff estimates will produce substan-
tially the same revenue. There is no basis in the change except in
the method of the setting of the busine.ss..license fee.
Councilman .Lloyd: I.have no further questions;, Mr. Mayor. Call
for the question.
Motion to adopt said Ordinance made by Councilman Lloyd, seconded
by Councilman Young, and carried on roll call vote as follows.
AYES: Councilmen Shearer, Nichols., Young, Lloyd, Mayor Chappell.
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ORDINANCE NO� 1153 The City Attorney presented:
ADOPTED 00AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF NEST COVINA, AMENDING SECTION 3191 OF THE
WEST COVINA MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO DECREASE IN MAXIMUM SPEED
LIMITS ON VALINDA AVENUE BETWEEN MAPLE: GROVE STREET AND SOUTH CITY
LIMITS."
Mayor Chappell: Hearing no objections waive further .reading
of the body of said Ordinance.
Motion by Councilman. Shearer, seconded by Councilman Lloyd, adopting
said Ordinance. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows:
AYES: Councilmen Shearer, Nichols, Young, Lloyd, Mayor Chappell
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
5
CITY COUNCIL 12/28/70
CITY ATTORNEY: Ordinance #1154
Page Six
ORDINANCE NO. 1154 The City Attorney presentedz
.ADOPTED "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF WEST COVINA, AMENDING CHAPTER 2 OF
ARTICLE IX OF THE WEST COVINA MUNICIPAL
CODE .RELATING TO SIGNS 00
Mayor Chappell: Hearing no objections„ Waive further reading
of the body of said Ordinance.
Motion by Councilman Young, seconded by Councilman Lloyd, adopting
said Ordinance. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows.
AYES: Councilmen Shearer, Nichols, Young, Lloyd, Mayor Chappell
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
RESOLUTION NO. 4276 The City Attorney presented.,
ADOPTED "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF WEST COVINA, DESIGNATING TAXATION DISTRICTS
FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1971-72 (Southerly Annexation No, 214).
Mayor Chappell: Hearing no objections, Waive further reading
of the body of said Resolution.
Motion by Councilman Lloyd, seconded by Councilman Young, adopting
said Resolution. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows.
AYES: Councilmen Shearer, Nichols, Young, Lloyd„ Mayor Chappell
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
RESOLUTION NO. 4277 The City Attorney presented:
ADOPTED "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF WEST COVINA, DESCRIBING A CERTAIN PORTION OF
CONSOLIDATED COUNTY FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
WH:IC.H HAS BEEN INCLUDED WITHIN THE CITY OF WEST COVINA AND DECLARING
THE SAME WITHDRAWN FROM SAND DISTRICT (Southerly Annexation No. 214)."
Mayor Chappell: Hearing no objections, Waive further reading
of the body of said Resolution.
Motion by Councilman Young, seconded by Councilman Shearer, a.d.optinj
said Resolution. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows.,
AYES: Councilmen Shearer, Nichols, Young, :Lloyd, Mayor Chappell.
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
RESOLUTION NO. 4278 The City Attorney presented:
ADOPTED "A .RESOLUT:ION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF WEST COVINA, CORRECTING, RELOCATING
AND ALTERING THE COMMON BOUNDARY BETWEEN
THE CITY OF WEST COVINA AND THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGEL.ES. (North Orange
Avenue.)"
Mayor Chappell: Hearing no objections, Waive further reading
10 of the body of said Resolution.
Motion by Councilman Lloyd, seconded by Councilman Young, adopting
said Resolution. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows. -
AYES: Councilmen Shearer, Nichols, Young, Lloyd, Mayor Chappell
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
CITY MANAGER
CAR LEASING Mr. Aiassa: Council has a written report
AGREEMENT on this as provided by the
City Controller. .Also there
is provided a breakdown of other agencies contacted and our findings
- 6
CITY COUNCIL 12/28/70 Page Seven
CITY MANAGER: Car Leasing Agreement
along with staff recommendation.
Motion by Councilman Lloyd, seconded by Councilman Young, that City
Council approver lease agreement as presented, between Nisei Leasing
and the City of West Covina; and further_ authorizes the Mayor and
City Clerk to execute the said agreement. Motion carried on roll call
vote as follows:
AYES: Councilmen Shearer, Nichols, Young, Lloyd, Mayor Chappell
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
TRAFFIC COMMITTEE Councilman Young: Mr. Mayor, I think this
MINUTES OF is one of the more diffi-
DECEMBER 15, 1970 cult reports of the Traffic
Committee because this first item we are
vacating parking between 8 A.M. and 10 A.M. and
the theory is that essentially it would be inconvenient to change the
sweeping hours. I am wondering if there are hours when there is no
parking there under any circumstances. Has there been a 24 hour
evaluation made in this area?
Mr. Zimmerman: Yes, Mr. Young, and we find in general these
are located near apartments, although not
always and that basically it is difficult to
predict when parking places will be occupied.
Councilman Young: They are, of course, residential parking
essentially, even though apartments. People
live there and I assume the theory is that
there is plenty of room behind the apartments or within the .apart
ment grounds for resident parking.
Mr. Zimmerman: Normally that is the case under the current
regulations calling for two parking spaces
per unit.
Councilman Young: What concerns me a little bit, we have a lady
that comes to our house a few.times a week
and spends a few hours helping clean up and
she happened to be there on a few occasions parked in the street
when the street sweeper came by and so we Widn°t get our street.
cleaned. I finally asked her to park in the driveway. I would hate
to have a no parking sign put up there between certain hours because
of that one lady. I wonder if it is that much of a problem and if
at alternate times it might be swept. For example, if two or three
weeks everything is swept at once..
Mr. Zimmerman: There is one case where we do that; however,
it happens to be a case where the city street
sweepers do go by the building almost daily
and ordinarily they sweep the street when they find it vacant as they
pass, but ordinarily the street sweepers because of the limited time
they have to function lit has to be done by :schedule and many times
there are some locations where it is not possible to sweep at all
because the street sweeper never coincides with that time.
Councilman Young: I recognize this but I think we are working
into a strong policy area and I am not sure
it is a policy we want to adopt. We will/
no doubt be ticketing cars, I doubt that we would have a tow awaya-
but we will be ticketing and bail will be posted and fines paid as a
result of that and I am somewhat reluctant to get into that unless
it is an extreme situation and I am not sure it is extreme,
Councilman Nichols: I would like to say I concur to a signifi-
cant extent with Councilman Young's concerns.
�P A
i
CITY COUNCIL 12/28/70 Page .Eight
CITY MANAGER: Traffic Com. Minutes
It seems to me we are approaching thus far the problems that have
arisen in the street sweeping area on a piecemeal basis attempting
to solve each particular problem as it arrives by establishing
differential parking regulations in various areas of the City. I
don't think this is a good policy. I think the first one you can
do and say it is a;._ unique problem and we will handle it this way
and maybe the second and third one, but I have noticed several where
we have changed the sweeping schedules to meet a complaint.
Generally these problems arise just in this way. The citizen calls
City Hall repeatedly and.repeatedly complains he is not getting his
cu.,rb swept, it may be on Service Avenue or across the street from a
public school, or almost any place where there are these parking
problems. I think that the long term solution to these problems
isn't the constant instituting of specific parking regulations at
specific hours to meet the needs of our street sweepers. I think
we may be faced with a more realistic finding that it is time to
go to sweeping these streets at the hours we will not have this
problem. This may make changing certain people's hours of work, but
essentially our City Forces are in the City to provide services to
the public and I am a little loathe to feel the only way we can pro-
vide answers to these problems is by enacting parking limitations
at certain hours at specific addresses. It will only serve to con-
fuse people and cause citations to be issued to people who are not
aware of being in that type of area. I would rather see us hold this
off and turn it back to staff and ask the City Manager with the
Traffic Committee to look into this area in greater depth, in terms of
the temporary parking limits we have already proposed and see how
extensive this may be or may become and see if possibly there isn't
some more effective way of handling this. I would hope we would go
along with Councilman Young's objection and 'I add my own to his and
propose we hold this matter over.
Councilman Young: If that is a motion I will second it since I
didn't make a motion.
Motion carried.
(Mayor Chappell stated the hour of 8 P.M. having arrived Council would
go into the Hearings and then return to the Traffic Committee Minutes
later.)
HEARINGS
UNCLASSIFIED USE PERMIT LOCATION: 616 East Lucille Avenue
NO. 164 - CLARENCE AND REQUEST: Approval, of an Unclassified
RITA CLARK Use Permit to allow a day care center
for 10 pre-school children on a 8,800
sq. ft. parcel located in an R.-1 zone.
Denied by the Planning Commission,
(Mr. Munsell, Planning Director, summarized staff report dated
November 18, 1970; also Planning Commission Resolution .No. 2298
denying; slides shown and explained.)
Mr. Munsell: I might point out that studies and
investigations made by the Commission reveal-
ed'that the additional children in the area
would violate the residential structure of the area and that this
kind of use should be located in the commercial areas or commercial
type structures. The granting of the unclassified use permit will
adversely affect the -General Plano The Commission said, therefore,
that this permit would be denied for those reasons. I might also
point out that staff had suggested a possible reduction of the children
from 10 to 6 and the Commission indicated that their feelings were that
without something unique in terms of the physical structure or location
of this property being in existence that something as different as the
CITY COUNCIL 12/28/70
HEARINGS o UUP ##164
Page Nine
number of pre-school children in a situation -of this type might be
disruptive to the chcknacter of the, neighborhood and undesirable.
THIS IS THE TIME AND PLACE FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING ON UNCLASSIFIED USE
PERMIT NO. 164.
IN FAVOR
Frank Wm. Boller
630 East Lucille
West Covina
children which was not
hood. I have lived'. in
(Sworn in by City Clerk.)
The only statement that I can make is with
respect to the presentation made in that it
would introduce a large number of pre-school
in keeping with the character of the neighbor -
.this neighborhood since 1,961,
Mayor Chappell: You are speaking in opposition 'to it?
Mr. Boller:. No, in favor of the permit. The :statement
was made that it would introduce a large
number of pre-school children which would
not be in keeping with the character of the neighborhood. It may not
be in keeping with the character of the neighborhood today but 4
years ago 10 preschool children were certainly quite in keeping with
the character of the neighborhood because 3 of them were mine and over
the years in that particular neighborhood there have always been large
numbers of pre-school children. So what I am doing is taking issue
with the statement that it would introduce a. large number of pre-school
children which would not be in keeping with the character of the
neighborhood. As a matter of fact the character of the neighborhood
is fluctuating from time to time as some f am.ilies,move in and out. I
feel that is not a point for disqualification of the unclassified use
permit.
Clarence E. Alspaugh (Sworn in by City Clerk.)
611 East Lucille What Mr. Boller says is substantially true.
West Covina I, myself, have two small children, one pre-
school and one in kindergarten. I send them
to a private school and it is a benefit to me personally to have this
because I canleave my children there whenever they get sick. :Not sick
enough to be in the hospital but with a small cold or something like
that and I can't send them to school. She is a very capable woman
and I think she will be doing the community a service by having the
school.
Mrs.. Goebel
(Sworn in by City Clerk.)
708 South Gretta
I have two small children, one 1% and one 3z.
West Covina
This home of Mrs. Cl.a.rk°s is an average home
and I take my kids there three days a week.
This neighborhood
seems to have several children and I can't see how
6 or even 8 kids
can disrupt the character of this neighborhood.
Also I notice that
Mrs. Clark°s house is very clean. I have looked
around because I
am very particular with whom I leave my kids with
and I have not been
able to find anyone as qualified as Mrs. Clark.
I think it would
be a shame if you would deny this license for taking
care of as many as
8 because she is very qualified. I have always
noticed she gives
the children loving care and takes good care of
them. She doesn't
take them out in the front yard so I don't see
how they disrupt
the character of the neighborhood. She has a very
nice backyard for
the kids to play in. Thank you.
Mrs. Robertson (Sworn in by City Clerk.)
1162 Del Vale I am divorced and I have a 2 year old little
LaPuente girl and it is necessary for me -to work to
support myself and my daughter. I feel that
people doing jobs like Mrs. Clark m babysitting children - are
doing a great deal to help the community and help people .in my
position. I feel that she is a very good woman and knows how to
take care of children very well and she gives them the loge and
attention they need and that they probably couldn't find as well. in
9 -
CITY COUNCIL 12/28/70
HEARINGS o .,. UUP ##164
Page Ten
a nursery school. Her house is orderly, like the other young lady
said, and as far as the children being disruptive, whenever I have
gone over there they have been in the. house or in the backyard .
and I don't see how 4 or 5 children can make that much noise where
%it will bother the neighbors. From what I can see it is a nice
neighborhood and I don't see how this would disgrace it in any way
at all.
Mr. M. Jo Esposita (Sworn in by City Clerk.)
703 South Glendora Mr. Mayor and gentlemen we have here names
West Covina of seventeen neighbors who claim they have
no objection to this and we would like to
have this put on your record, please. (Handed list of names to
the City Attorney and Council.)
Lita Horn (Sworn in by City Clerk.)
662 East Lucille I live next door and there is only a fence
West Covina between us so if I could ever hear any
noise or ever be bothered in anywvay I
surely would have been by now. She takes excellent care of these
children. They aren't even allowed in each others beds, she has a
special bed for each child. They have their naps, baths and food.,
The family is very high class. They are very.nice people. Their
house is so clean and their children are just especially nice. I
just wish I could think of something else to say about these people
because they are an improvement to our neighborhood, they are just
as 'welcome as can be. I couldn't tell you -which one of her children
is the nicest, they are so good and. so good to these babies that a
child is fortunate to be in this home. I know because I watched,
them. Thank you.
Clarence Clark , (Sworn in by City Clerk.)
616 East Lucille Ave., I have quite a piece in this little arrange -
West Covina ment. Mrs. Clark just naturally loves
children and the care sh.e ,t.;§,kes of these
children that aren't our own is as equal as .if they were our own,,
She has a license from the State to care for 3 and they told her if
she would like to take anymore she would have to get the permit, from
the City first® So we went through every .regulation that they
asked us to and we would appreciate it very much if you could favor
her with the permit that we have requested. We are not going to
make a big playground out of tthe place. As stated those children
are 99% of the time inside of the -house. No one -knew -we were even
taking care of children until, it was circwlarized that we 'were to get
this license. We are being asked to take these children. and she
will not take them until she is licensed to do so and that is why
we came here. If you people think we are degrading the neighborhood
we will have to accept that. We are willing if you would like to give
us a probationary period of 3 or 4 months and if there are any
complaints after that we will certainly go .along with you and say
"thank you!"., That is about all I can say.
IN OPPOSITION
Mr. A. Henson (Sworn in by City Clerk.)
1239 South Walnut Ave. I reside within 3001. of the proposed unclass-
West Covina ified use permit. I bought the property at
1239 South Walnut Avenue in 1956 and I have
resided there since that time. I pay taxes and I vote there. I
purchased the property because it was zoned for single family dwel.l.-
ingso The property across the street was also zoned-R-1 and was
empty and I was led to believe by the literature from the Chamber of
Commerce that the City of West Covina would live up to the concept
of single family dwellings and no commercial businesses in .residential
neighborhoods. I feel very strongly against the possibility of
another residential neighborhood being split apart.or broken up
into becoming partially a commercial establishment. Thank you..
10
CITY COUNCIL 12/28/70 Page Eleven
HERRINGS: UUP #164
Alfred Greiner (Sworn in by City Clerk.)
647'East Lucille I also reside within 3001 of the property
West Covina involved. I appeared here on November 18th
before the Planning Commissioners and at
that time voiced my disapproval of the proposed variance or the
granting of the unclassified use permit. Tonight we don't have
zany of our neighbors here that were present at the time of the
Planning Commission hearing. I appreciate the comments of
Mr. Clark and of the neighbors and some of the people that have
their children taken care of at this home. At the time of the last
hearing I didn't realize there was a day care center at the
Montesscari.School in the church and I didn't know this until one of the
Planning Commissioners. mentioned it - at the church at Mine and
Walnut which is right across from the Coronado School and that is
one of the things the Planning Commission pointed out, that we did
have such a day care center .in the immediate vicinity. They also
have one - Dolphin School, which is about two and a half blocks
south of this residence that we are talking about. Again I would
like to just voice my opposition and at the time of the Planning
Commission hearing it was mentioned we do not have.sidewalks on
these streets and the area as you have seen on the slides shown,
most of our children have to go by this particular house to go to
school north of use Again I just disapprove of having a business-
like venture in our block which is residential. Thank you.
John Alsop (Sworn in by City Clerk.)
710 East Lucille As I stated I live at 710 East Lucille and
West Covina have resided there for approximately 17 years.
I purchased my home because at -that time it
was a residential R-1 neighborhood and.I have lived there for seven-
teen years because I enjoy living in a residential neighborhood.
There are no business ventures on our immediate streets. We had a
display on the board tonight which indicated the nature of the
neighborhood namely that our particular neighborhood is rather
secluded and our street .in total residential which is approximately
two blocks in length. It is a good neighborhood for families
that have children and like to rear their children in that
atmosphere. I strongly oppose any variance whether it be for a day
care center or for any other nature because once we establish a
precedent wherein we allow such a variance in a particular
neighborhood then we have to give consideration to others asking
for a similar type variance. It is not that I: personally oppose
Mr. Clark°s petition. I certainly have no objection to Mr. Clark
or his wife attempting to make additional revenue or income for
caring for children and God knows I am not against children because
I have 3 of my own. I listened to Mr. Boller and I thought he was
very modest by saying he had 3 children when I know in fact he has
8 or 9. He practically had a day care center of hisown and one in
.the neighborhood is enough. I live in a home identical to the
Clarks. It is identical as to layout and lot size and. I am on
the'same side of the street. Speaking from that knowledge I
know our lots are very small, particularly in the back. We have
limited room to care for children. I have 3 of my own and I have
a difficult time keeping my 3 and the dog in the backyard and would
have a worse time if I. tried to -keep 10.
I think the City of West Covina, through
its General Plan, is trying to designate certain areas and.
neighborhoods for business, certain areas for R-1. This is a good
area and one I am proud to live in and rear my children in and as a
father and neighbor I am here voicing my objection to any variance
in that particular neighborhood. I have listened to the comments
of those people urging that Council reconsider the denial as
suggested by the Planning Commission and most of those people I think
have an interest in the matter because for the most part they are
those people that have their children in the. home. Again I say I
don't object to the Clarks. because I am confident from the remarks
made here that they are fine people, but that is not the issue we
CITY COUNCIL 12/28/70
HEARINGS° UU.P #164
Page Twelve
are confronted with. The issue is whether or not we should change
this neighborhood by giving an unclassified use permit and I think
it would be unjustified under the circumstances. Thank you.,
Mrs. Chris Kolvin (Sworn in by City Clerk)
1229 Russellee I have lived at 1229 for three years now.
West Covina We are buying the home. I have nothing
against the Clarks, personally -- themselves,
only I would like to say I have 5 children and I know what a handful.
they can be and I don't see how one woman can handle 10. I don't
know the age of her children and whether they can help her, whether
she has a teenage daughter, but I think she does, but still like another
gentleman said there is a Blue Dolphin School just two blocks up the
street and they are advertised on TV. Another thing I would like to
bring up, within 5 houses in our area, there are 19 children and I
would gather half of them are pre-school, which means they are playing
in the street due to the fact we do not have sidewalks and if these
people are bringing children to the home it means they are driving
and we will have a car problem. It is not a dead end street but
they will either make a turn into the driveway or make a U turn right
at the corner of Russellee and Lucille, and this I think is another
hazard because the child.ren.do play in the street. We have yards
but children are children. I like the area and we bought our home
for the area. I would imagine if allowed a permit - and I don't
know the laws as well. as I should, but we have a gentleman up the
street that owns a carnival and what is to stop hi7r. froin bringing
his equipment to the house and working on it and getting a. permit
and the next thing you know we will not be residential, it will be
commercial. Thank_ you.
REBUTTAL
Mr. Clark. Mr. Mayor and Councilmen, everybody has their
point and everybody has a good.point, but it
seems as though if .we get this license for
not 10 but just 3 additional children to what we have now it would
just amount to 3 more cars maybe only 2 cars more coming in at
various hours in that neighborhood and in. most cases the mothers
bringing children to our home would do so before these neighborhood
children ever got on the road. 90% of the children go the ether
way to school, and when the mothers come to pick up the children from
our home the other children are either in their yards, home in the
house or eating dinner. I have never seen more car. on the street
than it could carry and everybody drives very carefully in the
neighborhood. We protect our own children., I don't believe the
permit for 3 additional children would create any problem. There
even wouldn't be a sign in our neighborhood, so I.don't see how.
commercial businesses could enter into it at all.
As far as the other schools mentioned., they
do not take children in diapers, they are .for children 5 years and
up and most children are transported to school by bus and it doesn't
cover the same type of mothers that we help. I don't. :see how this
little thing of 3 additional children would commercialize any
neighborhood. I can't say any more and I thank you for your atten-
tion.
Mrs. Goebel. I think first of all we have to consider
what each person's right is in their own
home. I own a home in West Covina and I
know if I wished to take care of 6 children I know I am capable of
it. I have taken care of four and 1 had enough time to take care
of at least two more. A.person's home is his castle. I believe in
laws in restricting certain things but how-much:do you want to
restrict? You have to consider is 6 children going to commercialize
this neighborhood? No, not hardly. In fact 6 children you often
find in a family in this type of neighborhood. In fact Mrs. Clark's
home is one of the nicest homes in the neighborhood..and I think
you are taking away a person's right in the privacy of their own
- 12
CITY COUNCIL 12/28/70 Page Thirteen
HEARINGS: UUP #164
home. She is not stepping on anyone's toes., As far as the
neighborhood and the car situation -.well I drive into her driveway,
I don't make a U turn in the middle of the street, and I back out.
I think if you have teenagers in the house it would be more of a prob-
lem than people bringing kids in the morning and picking them, up...
Teenagers run in and out with their cars. I can't see that this
would be any type of argument .and also as far as having a carnival
on the street that is entirely different. This is just a matter of
adding a few more children to this home. I can tell you she is
thoroughly capable of doing it in her homes It is not going to
commercialize the neighborhood at all.
Mr. Alspaugh: As I stated before I have two children and.
sometimes in the summer I think I have ten
because the neighborhood children come over
and play in the backyard with my children and it is no harder to 'take
care of ten than four or six. I found this out. A statement was
made by one of my neighbors that there are two schools nearby taking
care of children. Well I couldn't send either one of my children
there because it would be economically. unfeasible. They require a
large payment and a payment for every function they have and you
have to furnish them a lunch - which would run over $.100. a month
for one child and if you have more than one child you couldn't possibly
do it and also they don't take children under 5 years of age.
.Mrs. Clark wants to take the .children under 5. You should go to see
her house - she keeps an immaculate house. She also gardens, raises
flowers and has the prettiest,._gard,en.o. I.was..over to her house the
other day and she had painted the inside of the house, taken care of
these children, they wereall clean and sometimes I wish my wife kept
my children in the same condition. She is a wonderful woman-, she is
one woman with four hands and is capable of doing more herself than,
two women. It would be a shame if she were not permitted. -this permit.
THERE BEING NO FURTHER PUBLIC TESTIMONY, PUBLIC NEARING CLOSED.,
COUNCIL DISCUSSION.
Councilman Shearer: Mr. Mayor, I was in attendance at the hearing
before the Planning Commission and there are a
number of new people here this evening. I am
glad to see that people are willing to come out for something rather
than just against something. It is the silent majority perhaps
speaking up.
I think we should clarify for some of the
people the word `°variance!- The application i's not for a variance.
The child day care is allowed by law in the Ordinance of the City
with an unclassified use permit. Whereas uses such -as a carnival or
any other type of commercial venture with the exception.I thinkjof
a mail order house is not allowed, even with an unclassified. use
permit. Are there any others Mr. Wakefield, which would be allowed
in R-1 zones? Other than child day care and mail order house?
Mr. Wakefield:
No sir, those are the only two types.
Councilman Shearer: These are the only two types of commercial -
if you want to call them commercial ventures,
allowed. And, as I understand it, there is
already a commercial venture on Lucille Street that is coisit-ting, cf
3e The applicationis not for a child care center because one
exists there now. The application is for an addition of 3 or a total
of 6e The original application was for 10, the recommendation of the
Planning Department was 6, and of course whatever is or is not
granted by the Council. But I am speaking of 6 as I unders-tand from
the last hearing that 6 would be acceptable to Mr. Clark rather than
the original application of 10. I am not prepared tonight, however,
to vote in favor of this unclassified use permit due to the fact that
at the last Planning Commission meeting I believe the staff was
- 13 -
CITY COUNCIL 12/28/70 Page Fourteen
HEARINGS• UUP #164
requested by the Planning Commission to look into the Ordinances
goverhingtthist-.type of use. Neither am I prepared tonight to vote
to deny. I feel we should refer this back to the Planning
Commission until such time as they have reviewed the Ordinance and
made their recommendations to it. I think we might be premature
to either approve or deny the application tonight pending any change
in the Ordinance within a matter of weeks or months. I would like
to hear from the other Councilmen. That is my position on this.
Councilman Nichols: I understand the basis of your comments
Councilman Shearer. If a further considera-
tion by the Planning Department and the
Planning Commission were imminent I could concur to hold the matter
over pending such a review, but in that the probability is that any
change or enactment of any ordinance change is not immanent, the
holding off of the matter would constitute a denial of the applica-
tion from a functional standpoint in my own mind If the delay was
a matter of more than a couple of weeks.
I would also like to reiterate the matter
of keeping children in your home in West Covina is.a matter of legal
right in all of our residential zones. C ,,Prdinances do presently
permit this and anyone may have for hire/up 3 children in their
home without a license or permit from the City. In fact up until
fairly recently you could bring more than 3 children into your home
in West Covina. Councilman Nichols_. not too many months ago,
expressed a concern about excessively large numbers of children coming
into the homes. In my own capacity as a.school Principal I had
occasion to know of a parent who was receiving county children and
there were 6 or 8 at one time and it was my feeling if this were
in fact the case, that we should provide some basis for the
City Council having -the opportunity to review larger numbers of
children, so we could in, f act,where necessary, establish particular
protections and unless my memory misserves me, it was at that time
that our.Ordinance was changed to require that these people come to
us for special permission for the encroachment of any more than
3 children in their home. We do have, in fact, all over the City of
West Covina, in our finest and our poorest neighborhoods, homes
where foster children are being cared for. So the issue is not really
shall someone have children in their homes or not. The issue is
can this be done and appropriately safeguard the residential
character of that neighborhoods In that this permit is a maximum.,
in that no business operation can occur except within the
limitations proposed by the City and we do not generally consider
the keeping of small numbers of children in homes in residential
neighborhoods a business operation in the sense that it would change
the character of the neighborhood. I think on the basis of the
fact that we are in fact doing.this and permitting this all. over our
City at the present time that I would be hard put to deny a similar
right in this neighborhood, without there being a sho`aing that the
numbers of children being placed, and/or the conditions under i7�rhibh
they are being placed, would in fact be detrimental to the neighbor-
hood and would in fact lead to the decline of the neighborhood's
standards.
I think the experience of my 7 years on the
Council is that properly handled the day care of small children in
residential neighborhoods is an entirely normal thing. In fact
there are probably many more homes around the City right now where
children are being kept in violation of the law than where these
people are going through the public agencies by requirements.
By that I mean any Mrs. Smith down the street might well be keeping
4 or 5 children, babysitting in her home, doing it privately and
the City not even knowing it, in fact most of the neighbors not
even knowing it, but in this case because another governmental
agency is involved, these people must come through the City for that
permission. I am prepared to support the request because I think it
- 14 -
CITY COUNCIL 12/28/70 Page Fifteen
HEARINGS: UUP #164
is a-totally reasonable one as modified by the City with the
limitation of 6 children other than the homeowner's children in the
home during the daytime, which I think is a reasonable limitation
for this neighborhood and I don't think the use will be detrimental
and I am prepared to move the approval of the permit and vote for it.
Councilman Young: Mr. Mayor, I have a problem. I was elected
to office on April 14th, at least partially
by a strong homeowner endorsement, which
recognized my pledge to avoid commercial encroachment in the residen-
tial areas. At the time we were not discussing somebody babysitting
however, we were discussing shopping centers. I am frankly prepared
to concur in Councilman Nichols' remarks and vote in favor of this.
The opposition is based upon the commercial. encroachment. I. happen
to have used a babysitter about 12 years ago. It was an arrangement
where we paid this lady to look after our children :for a few hours
each day and it was not in my mind at that time a commercial venture.
I didn't view it as commercial and would in fact not let my children
be cared for under a strictly commercial situation. I think that
Mr. Clark has ably stated his position in the matter, that they are
doing nothing to disrupt the atmosphere of this neighborhood by
keeping 6 children other than their own essentially during the work-
ing hours of the day. I gathered also that for some of the people
this will not be a regular thing. I am especially moved by the
testimony of Mrs. Horn, the next door neighbor. I think this is
what we are talking about - what is the immediate disruption? I
think the disruption would be to the next door neighbors and they
don't appear to oppose this thing and I assure you that if this
passes we are not going to open the doors to carnivals or 7-11 Stores
in any residential neighborhood in this community. So I am prepared
to support the recommendation for 6 children.
Councilman Lloyd: I concur in the remarks that have just been
made by Councilman Young and Councilman
Nichols and I am really very much impressed
by the fact that Mr. Clark has engendered the support and everything
that he has among his neighbors. I am sorry to see that a neighbor-
hood split seems to be present at the present moment. I think one
of the things that should be considered in a. decision of this type is
the fact that we are urbanized and these problems are the problems
of living in a highly urbanized area and are the problems of every-
body. If we find good people who have clean homes and are willing
to open their homes to mothers and families that need this kind of
support we should give consideration to it and count ourselves
lucky that we have people that are willing to do these things. I
don't feel it is an encroachment of a commercial type and I think
it will probably be a basic benefit and I don't see any great draw-
backs. I honestly don't feel the traffic will be that bad. I would
not be offended if it were next door to me, so I would be in favor
of it.
Councilman Young: Mr. Mayor, just one further comment. I
don't know if everybody is aware of it or
not, but if this recommendation is
tofollowed and it appears to have 3 votes at this point, one of the
provisions here is that the whole situation will be reviewed in 1
year. I am sure that this Council will lend a responsive ear at
that time if there are problems and once again if there are problems
I would suspect they would result from immediate neighbors - next
door and not otherwise.
Councilman Nichols: Mr. Mayor, one further comment. Council-
man Young's comments led me to conclude
that the informed and considered objections
that have been expressed here and at the Planning Commission meeting
have in fact resulted in some circumspection on the part of everyone
involved. The applicant has agreed that fewer children would be
appropriate, the City has placed a 1 year l-imif'on the permit,
15
CITY COUNCIL 12/28/70 Page Sixteen.
HEARINGS° UUP#164
subject to renewal; and I think these restrictions that have been
imposed would tend to make this thing a more compatible type of
use than in its original -form.
Mayor Chappell: Mr, Munsel.l, a couple of questions. In
passing the recommendation for 6, will any
age group be established? Is there a maxi-
mum age that will be written into this? Was there any thought
given to that?
Mr. Munsell: We haven't run into a situation where a
child care center had been extended to older
children. It is not unthinkable that it
could happen and it might be well to place a reasonable age limit on
it but we haven't run into .it.
Mayor Chappell: Mr. Clark, I would .Like to ask you a question
if I may. What are the ,agea of the children you
contemplate that your wife will be caring for?
Mr. Clark° The Government has two classifications-, one
from 6 months to .5 years and then 5 years. on-
wards. My wife would like 'to have the little
ones. She doesn't want any of those that are of school ante, they can
go to the other places where they can get the sand box treatment, but
not the mother's care.
Mayor Chappell.: Thank you. I do notice that there are some
provisions here that. the Fire Prevention
Bureau will be .inspecting for the protection
of the children, and the Hea,lt�,nDepartment will also be looking in
and these are only granted on/ ndivi.du.al basis, so somebody down the
street that may not be as capable as Mrs. Clark seems to be, from
the testimony we heard tonight, may not be ,as capable and would be
disapproved. I think those things should be pointed out to the
people present, because they are important and i think one of your
concerns also. Mr. M.unsell do you have anything else that should be
called to attention before we have a motion?
Mr., Munsell
No sir.
Motion by Councilman Nichols, seconded by Councilman Lloyd, that
Council grant Unclassified Use Permit No. 164 subject to the limita-
tion of 6 children other than the applicant's own children, and
subject to the conditions included in staff recommendations on, Page 3
of the staff report dated November 18, 1970, Items 1 thru 60
Mayor Chappell: Do you. want to put a maximum age in?
Councilman Nichols: No, I wouldn't want to put a maximum age in.
My feeling was that almost exclusively these
children are in the eery small pre-school
age and by the time they reach the public school age the authorities
involved and the parents, feel that public schools can babysit very
adequately.
Mayor Chappell: Thank you, Mr. Principal.
Councilman Young: One of the requirements here is that the
property owner grant permission to the City
to remove the tree which is uprooting the
curb. Has that already been taken care of.? Is the property owner
aware of that requirement of the Engineering Department? It seems
somewhat unrelated to keeping little children in the backyard and
that is why I raise a question.
(The Clarks indicated the City could take the tree. They had, no
objections.)
CITY COUNCIL 12/28/70 Page Seventeen
HEARINGS: UUP#164
Councilman Shearer: Mr. Mayor, I will be voting "no08 on.ly.' with
regard to the fact that the Planning Commission
did request the study, -Jio.t with. feg'ard" .to_the .
matter of. the -individual case.
:Motion carried on roll call vote as follows:
AYES: Councilmen Nichols, Young, Lloyd, Mayor Chappell
NOES: Councilman Shearer
ABSENT: None
(THE CHAIR DECLARED A RECESS AT 9 P.M. COUNCIL RECONVENED AT 9:13 P.M.)
STREET VACATION PASS Hearing of protests and objections against the
AND COVINA ROAD AND vacation of a portion of Pass and Covina .Road
AMAR ROAD and Amar Road as described in Resolution
PROTEST HEARING No. 4254.
Mayor Chappell: Madam City Clerk do you have the following
affidavits relative to this hearing-, the
affidavits of publication and posting?
City Clerk: Yes, I do,
Motion by Councilman Lloyd, seconded by Councilman Young, and carried,
receiving and filing affidavits.
Mayor Chappell: Mr. Zimmerman do you have a statement to make
regarding the necessity of the public use of
the proposed vacation of Pass and Covina Road
and Amar Road?
Mr. Zimmerman: Yes Mr. Mayor. The closure of Pass and Covina
City Engineer Road is in accord with the City°s Master Plan
and is occasioned at this time by the develop-
ments of the Macco Corporation development and the Bren Company
development on each side of the present Pass and Covina Road. This
vacation ties in with the overall development of the area, both east
and west of Pass And Covina Roadland .Lark Ellen Avenue is to replace
Pass and Covina Road at a different and safer location as its
connection to Amar Road. The vacation of the small portion of Amar
Road which is included in this is recommended to eliminate the
section essentially abandoned with the realignment of the road
several years ago. The section of Amar Road proposed for vacation
is not needed for street and highway purposes at this time and the
portion of Pass and Covina Road proposed for vacation will not be
needed for street and highway purposes after Lark Ellen Avenue is
constructed from Amar .Road north to its connection with Pass and
Covina Road. Mr. Mayor, that concludes my report.
Mr. Wakefield: Mr. Mayor, as a part of the public hearing
City Attorney I would like to recommend that the description
of the property to be vacated as contained
in Parcel 2 be changed to complete the perimeter of the area that is
described. It is a technical change, but in checking out the
description on the map we found it needed some additional words added
to the description of Parcel 2 to complete the description. I would
propose that on Page 2 of the Resolution of Intention the second
paragraph at the end be added the following words: "Hence south-
easterly along said northeasterly nine to the other southerly line
of Amar Road 601 wide." This tech.ni�cal change simply corrects the
description to complete the outline of the area described.
So moved by Councilman Lloyd, seconded by
Councilman Young, and carried.
Mayor Chappell: Madam City Clerk have you received any
written protests or objections against the
abandonment of this street?
® 17
7
CITY COUNCIL 12/28/70 Page Eighteen
HEARINGS: Street Vacation Pass & Covina Rd.
City Clerk.
No, I have not
THIS IS THE TIME AND PLACE FOR. THE PUBLIC HEARING, FOR OR. AGAINST
THE VACATION OF PASS AND COVINA ROAD AND AMAR ROAD.
Ron Grudzinski (Sworn in by City Clerk.)
Donald L. Bren Co. Mr. Mayor and members of the City Council,
Sherman Oaks I have no comments to make at this time, but
perhaps a question to ask of clarification
regarding the administrative handling of the abandonment before you
this evening. The question I have primarily is, Willthis abandon-
ment once your action is taken this evening, Which at least from
what I have determined so far, is conditioned upon the construction
of Lark Ellen Avenue along. the Master Plan center line as adopted by
the City. Once that condition is met will there be any further ,re-
view by the City Council or will the process from that point on
become an administrative decision regarding the actualabandonment
of the right of -way?
Mr® Wakefield: Mr. Mayor and members of Council, the actual
City Attorney vacation of the right-of-way Will. require the
adoption of a resolution by the City Council.,
That proposed resolution will come back on your agenda for formal
adoption at the time the construction of Lark Ellen Avenue is
completed.
Mr. Grudzinski:
Then
there is no
further action to be taken
that
will require
a public hearing by the
City
Council?
Mr. Wakefield,.
No, the
public hearing
will be concluded
City Attorney
this
evening and
the matter will, be taken
under
submission
and the next step in the
process will be
the consideration
by the
City Council of -the
Resolution of Vacation.
Mr. Grudzinski: Thank you.
THERE BEING NO FURTHER PUBLIC TESTIMONY, PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED.
COUNCIL DISCUSSION,,
Councilman Young: Mr. Mayor, I would think this would be
something we would routinely adopt although
I gather that Mr. Grudzinski, representing
Bren Company, is somewhat concerned in the sense that until there
is a formal. adoption there is always the chance it won't be
adopted? Is that correct, Mr. Grudzinski?
Mr. Grudzinski: It is a. concern and perhaps I should explain.
I think part of the reason this is before
you is the result of a letter I addressed
to Mr. Zimmerman and this is relative to a condition placed on the
4-plex development which is due east of the subject abandonment.
One of the conditions placed on the Woodside Village tract was that
before the tract would be constructed as it was designed that the
Lark Ellen connection north -south from Amar northerly had to be
constructed on the Master Plan alignment. There was no way the
City could require the Bren Company or Umark to construct that
because the right-of-way is not part of Bren or Umark property. It
is on a dedicated right-of-way brought into the City, I believe,
through annexation. As a consequence, Bren Company had discussed
at that time that to facilitate this we would probably voluntarily
construct the two lanes of pavement required on the Lark Ellen
alignment and its Master Plan alignment. We are in a position of
constructing two lanes of pavement at the Lark Ellen center line at
the Master Plan location, which will in essence provide a direct
- 18
CITY COUNCIL 12/28/70 Page Nineteen
HEARINGS: Street Vacation Pass & Covina Road.
benefit to the property between the Lark Ellen. Master Plan alignment
(pointed out property on map). Once the lanes of pavement are con-
structed on Lark Ellen and Pass and Covina Road abandoned the
property within the center portion of these two streets will receive
quite a benefit. Namely, the additional acreage on the abandonment
of Pass and Covina plus the benefit received from a newly constructed
alignment of street along the Lark Ellen alignment. In relationship
to the Bren properties which are on this side of both of the streets
we will actually receive no direct benefit from this outlay of
capital. I know it is difficult because it is not really a problem
of yours, but I would have liked to oppose the abandonment of this
street until we could negotiate with Southern California Financial,
which will be the property owner of this property, to assume some
participation in the construction of those improvements because they
will be experiencing a direct benefit. But in evaluating the
situation I can't really ask the City to put themselves in the
position of taking one side or the other, except to say we feel. that
this property owner should be sharing because the benefit received
from the expenditure of funds will directly benefit their property,
and it is a negotiating point we will have to contend with. That is
why I asked the question, because our negotiations will have to take
place prior to the construction of this street,
Councilman Nichols: Mr. Mayor - until such time as the
Council acts on the Resolution of the
abandonment of Pass and Covina Road, the road
still sets there as a city street and I don't know what conversations
you may entertain before then, but go ahead and talk.
Mr. Grudzinski: Thank you, very much.
Mr. Aiassa: We will notify you of the date the Resolution
is accepted.
Councilman Shearer: A question with regard to the fee ownership
of this property. Once the City vacates it
as a street do we own the property? Is it an
easement or what is the status of the property itself?
-- ------- n.nd_m.embers of the Council,
cks run and the
CORRECTION 'evert to the
the City simply has
Page 19 of C. C. Minutes 12/28/70;
Mr- Zimmerman per?
Ly, dedicated, many
The property was originally dedicated he 1800's - all off
years ago - some time in the 1800's _ many to them°
off
the property westerly of Bren and so itlreverts
to the owner of the underlying fee.,, icated it reverts
the triangular
Iass and Covina Road
and the portion of Amar Road as cles-crineu _m—,,.,_--j report to Council
be taken under submission at this time by City Council until the
extension of Lark Ellen is completed. Seconded by Councilman Lloyd.
Councilman Nichols: One more question, Mr. Mayor. I am a little
bit confused by the designation of that
street as Lark Ellen Avenue. How do we get
Lark Ellen out of Pass and Covina Road?
Mr. Zimmerman: The Master .Plan does show a realignment of
Lark Ellen to go through a portion of the
19 -
CITY COUNCIL 12/28/70 Page Twenty
HEARINGS: Street Vacation Pass & Covina Road
Bren Company development, which is just easterly of Pass and Covina
Road and this realignment of Lark Ellen crosses Pass and Covina
Road and then continues on to a termination at Amar Road.
Motion carried.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
John Bo. King I am here to protest on the licensing of
663 North Yaleton Ave., the ABC application, the location is right
West Covina. next to the Safeway Store, at the corner of
Puente and Yaleton. This has come up several
times. First time in August, 1960; August 1963; December 28, 1964p
August 11, 1965; February of 1968 and now at the present time -
December 28, 1970. All at the same location.
Mr. Aiassa: Mr. Mayor, this is under the City Manager's
Agenda - Item 8-I.
Mr. King;- I sent the Council a copy of all of this.
I sent. the ABC a copy and a copy to Sacramento
and I received a copy back from Sacramento saying that the person
that had filed on this does not have sufficient funds to even pay his
license. So if he can't furnish his license I don't see where he is
any good at all. Furthermore it .is detrimental to the community,
you have to go right by the door to go into the Safeway Store. The
Fire Department and library is right opposite to the exit of this
and I don't believe any drunk will stop for a fire truck, which is
awful expensive and which I voted to have there, and also the
library. The library is used as much as the school by children coming
from all over to that library. There is only one sidewalk on Puente
for one block in front of that and none down Yaleton at all. All
the kids coming down Yaleton would be walking in the streets against
any truck driver coming out of there. It is straight across from
my house, just across a wall and I don't want it there. I have fought
it every time it comes up. I have a daughter just turned 18 and I
don't want her in such an environment as that. Another one 16 and
we have 3 children next door smaller and there are children up the
street much smaller than that, in fact they hardly get out of the
street for a car, you have to wait until they move out of the way of
the care They have been brought up in the street, just about.
A block and a half away there is a school house and less than a block
to the south is a park in which they are building a k.id°s playground.
It is no place for any -kind of a bar whatsoever. He still has the
sign of the Pizza Parlor Man thetre and the liquor sign in the corner
and up until the day of the 14th or 15th - I took a picture of it and
they didn't even have the date posted, they posted it back to the 9th,
after I talked to the Chief of Police and he called the Beverage
Department and the people were called that own it and they dated it
back. Not too many people have received letters on it yet but they
will before the9th is out. I haven't been able to get around myself,
I was in an automobile accident from a young -boy who got his license
one day, got his father's car that night and run through 3 lights
when he hit me and I have been out of work for. 2 years, since that
time. He was in the school at Sunset at .that time which was the last
chance for any child of that age to finish school because they have
been kicked out of all the rest of the schools. So on my behalf I
don't wish any bar whatsoever to go in there. A beer bar, liquor bar,
or anyway that they are trying to conceal. it to be a bar. Thank you.
(THERE BEING NO FURTHER ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, ORAL COMMUNICATIONS CLOSED.)
Councilman Young: Mr Mayor, would it be in order to continue
with Item I-8 at this time? (Council agreed
to do so.)
20
CITY COUNCIL 12/28/70 Page Twenty-one
CITY .MANAGER AGENDA
ABC APPLICATION Lela Preston: I believe Council has
FOR ON -SALE BEER LICENSE City Clerk received the Chief of
RUSSCO FOOD INDUSTRIES, INC. Police°s report on this
DBA PIZZA MAN application, stating he
1436 West Puente Avenue does wish to make a pro -
West Covina test.
Motion by Councilman Young, seconded by Councilman Lloyd, that the
request of the Chief of Police to protest the issuance of the license
at 1436 West Puente Avenue be granted.
Councilman Shearer: If a protest is made, what is the procedure,
is there a hearing held.?
Mr. Aiassa: No, if the Police Chief protests they normally
do not require a hearing. He submits all the
information we are receiving now. If the
Council requests a protest then they require them to post a date and
come down for a public hearing.
Councilman Shearer: Which is more effective?
Mr. Aiassa: The police protest.
Councilman Nichols: Mr. Mayor, in matters of these protests there
seems to be some confusion in that we have
Councilmen with us that haven't had 7 years of
experience and I would like to have the City Attorney inform me and
the Council as to the constitutional legal function of protesting.
What is the Council°s legal role and pre'roga.t:ive, and what is the
Chief of Police°s legal role?
Mr. Wakefield: Mr. Mayor and members of the Council, the
Alcoholic Beverage Control Act specifically
authorizes a Chief of Police of the City to
protest the issuance of an alcoholic beverage license.. As a matter
of practice in this City and most cities, the Chief of Police does not
actually file a protest unless he has been authorized to do so by the
City Council. The City Council has the same right to protest as any
other citizen would have a right to protest. If there are sufficient
protests the hearing may be held before the license is actually issued
or the application denied. The protest made by the Chief of Police is
the protest which is actually.recogn.i.zed by the statute of the State.
Councilman Nichols: Mr. Mayor the reason I asked for that comment
is because I wanted to clarify a point and that
is when the Chief protests he generally
indicates he has been authorized to make a protest. Although the law
authorizes a Chief of Police to register a protest, in the practical
political sense it is recognized in the ABC and everywhere else that
when a Chief of Police makes a protest he is doing so in fact in con-
currence with the political body of the community. So in fact the
Chief°s protest is the Council°s protest and when the Council votes
"protests6 we are automatically stating that we are directing our
Chief to protest for our City, for the Chief, and for all of use So
I think the Council ranks probably almost as high as the Chief in this
procedure.
Mayor Chappell: Thank you.
Motion carried.
TRAFFIC COMMITTEE MINUTES Councilman Young: I had a question on
(Council Review Continued Item 2. We dis-
cussed this about a
month ago and agreed at that time that we were opposed to that
extensive no parking area on Cameron Avenue. The problem we are
up against now is there is apparently a definite feasibility problem
as far as having a left lane slot off of Azusa in both directions and
- 21 -
CITY COUNCIL 12/28/70 Page Twenty -.two
CITY MGR. AGENDA: Traffic Como Minutes
I have received complaints, admittedly just from my wife which is a
pretty important complaint because I have to live with it, and it is
with regard to making the left turn from Azusa onto Cameron going
west on Cameron. If there is a car parked on the curb then the traffic
is dangerously congested right at that corner. I would like to raise
the question once again as to the necessity at this time for left turn
lanes on Cameron accommodating the car on Cameron wanting to get on
Azusa, Cameron being a four lane street. My experience with it and I
have a lot is that it is not a problem particularly for left-tur-hi,ng
.cars, so I raise that question and I again register my dislike for
cutting off parking in front of residences - residential parking on
the street,
Councilman Shearer: I believe the last time we discussed this was
the west side of Azusa and we did deny the
recommendation for no parking on the north
side of Cameron west of Azusa, which was directly in front of the
houses fronting on Cameron. I believe this is on the other side of
the Methodist Church and the houses opposite the church which do not
front onto Cameron but on Alaska and the next street. Therefore, it
is not the same situation as denying the right to park in frontof
your house. This is on the side of the house.
Councilman Young: I admit I didn't go out and look at it.
because I was late in reading aty packet, I
read it tonight.
Mayor Chappell: There are quite a few times in the day when
making a lefth:and turn on Cameron, especially
when school is out and on rainy days it is
more noticeable and it is a bearcat to make a lefthand turn there.
Councilman Young: I think there is a safety hazard existing
on Cameron Avenue and that would be on the
northwest corner of Azusa and Cameron. There
is a house on that corner that faces Cameron, it is right on the
corner and the way the left turn lane is constructed, the number two
traffic lane going westbound, if there is a car parked there that
number two traffic lane is practically impossible, Do you know what
I am referring to, have I described it well enough?
Mr. Zimmerman: Yes - the Traffic Committee reviewed the
question in light of the Council°s discussion,
of a month ago and the situation on the west
side of Azusa is that on the southerly side of Cameron is vacant
property and on the north side residences facing on. Cameron Avenue
and for that reason we modified the original design of the left turn
slots as far as the paint striping- on the 'pavement is concerned and
=ved..them.over several feet in an effort to accommodate the thinking
that? --there should be no parking restriction in front of the houses
facing on Cameron. So there is some improvement over the so-called
standard location of striping and there is several extra feet in
there which accommodates a minimal parking lane as well as the
thru lanes of traffic on the west side of Azusa Avenue.,
Mayor Chappell: Did you want to add a recommendation. or
motion on this?
Councilman Young: No, I am just going to fade out.
Motion by Councilman Lloyd, seconded by Councilman Young, and carried,
receiving and filing the minutes of the Traffic Committee dated
December 15, 1970.
WEST COVINA CITY Councilman Nichols: Is this a budgeted. item
EMPLOYEES ASSO. REQUEST Mr, Aiassa? (Answer: Yes)
FOR FUNDS
- 22
CITY COUNCIL 12/28/70 Page Twenty-three
CITY MGR, AGENDA: `-C'CEA REQUEST FOR FUNDS
Motion by Councilman Nichols that the City Council authorize the
disbursement of $950.00 of budgeted funds from the Account
Noo 121-737.7 be forwarded to the West Covina Employees Association
for partial defrayment of expenses involved in Annual Installation
Awards Dinner and Christmas Dance. Seconded by Councilman Lloyd.
Councilman Lloyd: I don't remember this being in the budget
last time,
Mr, Aiassa: Yes it was. Normally we require them to
supply an itemized listing of expenses. I
think Council should ask for this.
Councilman Lloyd: I have heard of a lot of fringe benefits
but $9.50.00 in support of this.' I think we
are in times of economic stress and. I think
that this represents the funds of the taxpayers and that there should
be close scrutiny on any expense of this type. Nobody is picking up
the tab for me to go to a pasty. I frankly can't do it for my own
employees. And I am not against all the fringe benefits that there
are, but under the circumstances I think it is a. pretty healthy item.
Mayor Chappell: I think in light of what Councilman Lloyd
is saying then, that in our next budget
session - Mr. Aiassa - you. should emphasize
this area to the Council.
Mr. Aiassa: Let me elaborate a bit and U,e can debate it
in the 71-72 budget session. Ther6 used to
be two separate affairs. One, on a night
when the employees received their service award pins. This was a
separate affair at which time the Council and employees met, and we
found that a lot of the employees, some years ago, did. not have the
funds to bring their wives to the affair because it ran $7.00 or
$10.00 per couple and at that time Council felt in order to have
good attendance we would pay the expense of the employee. This
would normally allow him to come and he could pick up the expense
of his wife. Now they have combined the annual awards dinner and the
Employees' Christmas Party and I think Council should probably give
some consideration next year on how they would like to handle this
in the future. We have done it in this manner for two years that I
know of.
Councilman
Young:
The employee still pays for his rife?
Mr. Aiassa:
NoIhe does not,
Councilman
Young:
It seems like I paid,
Mr. Aiassa:
You are not a member.
Councilman
Young:
Then it was only those that were not members
that paid,' I am, happy to pay, by the way.
of Mr. Aiassa:
There was another condition which was not
very favorable, which eas that the Associa.m
tion required them to pay an extra $3.00
to provide
refreshments and entertainment and this is why I think
the Council
should
require a report on the number of employees
attending,
etc.
Councilman Nichols: Yes, I would like to
second will accept -
will be subject to an
attendance and disbursements provided to the
amend my motion, if the
that the reimbursement
accounting of the
City Council.
Councilman Lloyd-. I accept it.
23
i
CITY COUNCIL 12/28/70 Page Twenty-four
CITY MGR. AGENDA: WCCEA REQUEST FOR FUNDS
Councilman Shearer: Mr, Mayor - for clarification, if I am not
mistaken everyone in attendance including
all employees paid $3.00.
Mr. Aiassa: Yes that gave them little tabs for drinks.,
The City does not pay for liquor. Two free
drinks were given.
Councilman Shearer: At the time I thought I got an awfully good
bargain because I had a very good steak
dinner. The employee does pay something
plus the Employees Association donation„
Mr. Aiassa: Yes. Since the City has provided this fund
we have had a rather large turnout of
employees whereas before we had a limited
turnout. I have protested the activity
because it was held out of the City and I have stated since the City
is providing part of the money that it be held in the City of West
Covina, since we are trying to promote our merchants and restaurants.
This year it was held at the Elk°s Club in West Covina.
Councilman Young: Mr. Mayor, I just wanted to comment that I
shared Councilman Lloyd's concern when I
viewed this item in the budget. I am con-
cerned, as I am sure we all are, with employee morale and I think we
have good morale and I am sure this contributes to it, but I am also
concerned about the expenditure of funds for a lot of things that we
can manage without in a period which is undoubtedly one of increasing
austerity in budgets and government programs. I am sure we will review
this appropriately at budget time.
Motion carried on roll call vote as fo.11owa:
AYES: Councilmen Shearer, Nichols, Lloyd, Young, Mayor Chappell.
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
DUES FOR THE UPPER Mr. Aiassa: This item,is in the budget
SAN GABRIEL VALLEY and is an authorized item,
WATER ASSOCIATION which requires your approval.
Motion by Councilman Young, seconded by Councilman Lloyd, approving
payment of $100.00 to the Upper San Gabriel Valley Water Association
covering dues for 1971. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows:
AYES: Councilmen Shearer, Nichols, Young, Lloyd, Mayor Chappell
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
AD HOC COMMITTEE Mr. Aiassa:
REPORT ON RESIDENTIAL
MOVE -ON HOUSES
matter that Council might want to refer
the possibility that he come forth with
on one of the three alternatives, along
Councilman Young.
Councilman Young:
Mr. Aiassa:
This report is on the move -on
house. There are three
alternatives presented to the
Council. I believe this is a
back to the City Manager with
a positive recommendation
with the cost factor„
So moved by Councilman Lloyd, seconded by
Mr. Mayor, we reverted back to the existing
ordinance prior to the adoption of the
emergency ordinance, is that right?
Yes. This came about by one house moved into
the Bainbridge area.
Councilman Young:
Will the City Manager have a definite
recommendation by the next. Council meeting?
- 24 -m
CITY COUNCIL 12/28/70
CITY MANAGER AGENDA., Move -on Houses
Mr. Aiassa: Yes.
Page Twenty-five
Councilman Nichols., The only question I raise - is there any
thinking on the part of the City Manager
that this should be an item that might be
brought to the attention of the Planning Commission in the event
that Commission might have other ideas or suggestions for the
Council? I know it is not a constituted Planning Commission
function in that it is not a change in zone,
Mr. Aiassa: No. The Ad Hoc Committee had Mr. Yamasaki on
and he represented the Planning Department
and brought it into focus with the Building
Department. It is kind of an administrative thing,, These buildings
will not be moved into any locality unless approved by zoning and
also building codes. What I am concerned about is that we are going
to have a large number of houses relocated because of the freeway
displacement and will probably receive a number of requests and that
is why I am a little bit hesitant to let this thing set in abeyance
and I will bring a firm recommendation 'to you at the next. meeting.
Motion carried.
USE OF SURPLUS Mr. Aiassa. You have a proposed .resolu-
MILITARY AIRCRAFT IN tion on, the use of surplus
FIGHTING FOREST FIRES military aircraft in fighting
forest fires. If Council has
no objections to the recommendations of the staff, I will read the
resolution heading for your adoption. This will. cover all the items
regarding the surplus aircraft.
RESOLUTION NO. 4279 The City Manager presented.
ADOPTED "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY' OF WEST COVINA, REQUESTING THE .LEAGUE
OF CALIFORNIA CITIES AND THE MEMBER CITIES IN .LOS ANGELES COUNTY
AND STATE AND NATIONAL LEGISLATORS TO APPROVE THE PROGRAM OF
UTILIZING SURPLUS MILITARY AIRCRAFT -IN FIGHTING FOREST FI.RES.BO
Mayor Chappell: Hearing no objections waive further reading
of the body of said Resolution.
Motion by Councilman Young, seconded by Councilman Lloyd, adopting
said Resolution.
Councilman Shearer: I am all for forest fire fighting of course,
my question which concerns me - where did all
this originate? The first thing I recall
seeing is the communication from Culver City Council. Do the experts
in fighting fires want this type of air support? If not, who am I
to say something authorizing their use of this?
Mr. Aiassa:
available to them now.
Councilman Shearer:
Mr. Aiassa:
If anything this will provide them the
accessibility of acquiring these planes
without a lot of -red gape and -which are nbt
Do they want them?
Yes.
Councilman Lloyd: Mr. Mayor, if Councilman Shearer will allow
me, I think I can answer his question because
I do have some knowledge in this area. Yes
indeed they would like to have access to this and, they have asked
repeatedly for new aircraft over and above the B-171s and the aircraft
they have been using. In addition to that there has.been a. strong
editorial comment both by TV and radio -- I get all of the editorial
- 25 -
CITY COUNCIL 12/28/70 Page Twenty-six
CITY MANAGER AGENDA: Surplus Military Aircraft
material and this really preceded the resolutions from the various
cities. So there is indeed.. strong feeling towards this type of
activity, Whether it should be a KC91 or some other type of air -
craft I really don't know and I don't think that is the important
facet. Any aircraft which is available that has a greater capacity
than what they have now would be wanted. The answer is "yes" and_
they even feel they might have been able to reduce a good deal of the
fire loss in the Malibu area if they had this type of equipment.
Yes, they are in favor of it.
Mr. Aiassa: Also the County Fire Department is eligible
for this type of equipment through this pro-
gram.
Councilman Shearer: What I wanted to be sure of is that they do
want it and can use, .it.
Motion carried on roll call vote as follows:
AYES: Councilmen Shearer, Nichols, Young, Lloyd, Mayor Chappell
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
EXECUTION OF WATER Mr. Aiassa: I would like this item to be
AGREEMENT WITH carried over because Mr. Garnier
SUBURBAN WATER CO. of Suburban Water Company is
not available, he had to leave
on the 23rd and did not return until today and his attorney would like
to look it over. So I would like to carry it over to our next
regularly scheduled meeting.
So moved by Councilman Nichols, seconded by
Councilman Young, and carried.
CITY CLERK
APPLICATION FOR MAIL Motion by Councilman Young, seconded by
ORDER BUSINESS Councilman Lloyd, and carried, referring
Mrs. Ine M. Ingenluyff this application to staff.
dba Excelsior Enterprise
1135 S. Broadmoor Avenue
CITY TREASURER'S REPORT
MAYOR'S REPORTS
Motion by Councilman Nichols, seconded
by Councilman Young, and carried, receiv-
ing and filing City Treasurer's report
for the month of November, 1970.
COUNCILMEN APPOINTMENTS Mayor Chappellz If any of you have any
TO VARIOUS COMMITTEES schedule problems
please let me know so
we may make corrections.
The appointments are: Planning Commission - Councilman Nichols,
and Councilman Lloyd, alternate.
Councilman Nichols: Mr. Mayor, I have a problem on that. That is
my PTA meeting night. I always try to get
the Planning Commission assignment in the
summer months.
(Mayor Chappell said a change would be made and the representative
to the Planning Commission would be set at a later meeting.)
Mayor Chappell: Recreation & Park Commission: Councilman
Shearer and Councilman Nichols, alternate.
Personnel Board: Councilman Young, and Councilman Shearer, alternate.
- 26
CITY COUNCIL 12/28/70 Page Twenty-seven
MAYOR'S REPORTS
Human Relations Commission: Counc.ilman.Ll.oyd, and Councilman Young,
alternate. (Councilman Lloyd advised due to his school nights on
Wednesday and Thursday he would be unable to make the Commission
meeting on Thursdays.) Chamber of Commerce: Mayor Chappell, and
Councilman Young, alternate. School Board: Councilman Lloyd, and
Mayor Chappell, alternate.
I will get back to you on the replacements
for the Planning Commission and the Human Relations Commission at
our next meeting. Councilman .Lloyd you can't make it on Wednesdays
and Thursdays, and Councilman Nichols you can't. make it on the
third Wednesday of each month.
CITY OF PASADENA Mayor Chappell: You have before you a
LETTER letter from the City of
Pasadena requesting a
meeting with our legislators in Sacramento, for a, dinner meeting.
I would like to have the concurrence of Council for Mr. Aiassa and
myself to attend this. They will have all the cities of this end
of the Valley attending this meeting on Revenue and Taxation in Local
Government.
Councilman Young: I am all in favor of it and I hate to seem a
little picky but it seems like in good
economics directly related to revenue and.
taxation would bring the four people down here to meet the twenty-five
or so that are supposed to go up there. If they reversed the meeting
site they would save the taxpayers several hundreds of dollars.
However - I guess...
(Discussion followed; Mr. Aiassa said they are probably in session
at present; Councilman Shearer said "when you are doing the asking
you are not in a position to ask them to come -to you." Councilman
Nichols asked the Mayor if funds were needed for the trip and if so
in what amount.)
Mr. Aiassa: Yes funds will be needed and T do not know
the exact amount. We will have a. council
meeting before this date so I will report
back to you with a, cost figure,.
COUNCIL COMMITTEE Councilman Lloyd. We had a meeting on
REPORTS Sister City with
Mr. Brandt and the City
Manager. We definitely have some problems. However, we have some
programs and we made a recommendation that a special Blue Ribbon
Committee be formed for a review of this. We are definitely in
trouble as many of the Cities are. Some cities seem to do very
well on it and others do not. I think we have arrived at a point
of decision, one not required by Council tonight, but one which
merits consideration. If we are not going to do this program and
apparently we are not doing much with it at the present moment
and I am not sure how much should be done, but if we are not going
to do it perhaps we should relinquish our City and let somebody else
that wants to participate do so. And if we are going to participate
then we are going to have to have more activity and interests on
several levels. Mr. Aiassa or Mr. Brandt - do you have any further
comments on our meeting?
Mr. Aiassa: The only comment I would have is that we
are planning on having a meeting this week
or the first of next week with the .President
of the Sister City Foundation and advise him that we are at a
stalemate. And one thing I am concerned about which I will have to
go to the City Attorney on, is on the existing by-laws, as t.o its
identity with the City. If Mr. Wakefield will review them and give
us a report back - we may find we have a nondest.ructible organization.
- 27 -
CITY COUNCIL 12/28/70
COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS
Page Twenty-eight
Councilman Lloyd: Well we are not trying to destroy it, only
trying to get it going.
Mayor Chappell: We will then expect a further report. I
would like to say that in our community is
a hockey team from Sweden playing each
evening in our local arena,, also two teams, one from Canada and one
from Calgary - in a tournament here sponsored by our West Covina
Hockey Association. If you have any time at all it might be of
interest for you to get out and view this. These boys from Sweden
I watched Sunday night and the boys from Canada - it is a good brand
of hockey and it is interesting to me that they could get teams from
as far away as Sweden through an invitational. Councilman Lloyd
was the Master of Ceremonies Sunday evening. I thought I would call
this to your attention, the awards will be made Thursday evening at
10 o'clock. I think it would be something worth getting over to,
if you could.
DEMANDS Motion by Councilman Young, seconded by
Councilman Shearer, approving demands
totalling $320,415.11.as listed on demand sheets C745-746. This total
includes payroll. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows:
AYES: Councilmen Shearer, Nichols, Young, Lloyd, Mayor Chappell
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
Mayor Chappell: I would like to ask that a motion be made
adjourning this meeting in memory of
Bob Gingrich, who we all know passed away.
Mr. Aiassa: I have one further item - I would like Council
to authorize that we draft an appropriate
resolution in behalf of Bob Gingrich's widow
for the services he gave the City for thirteen years.
RESOLUTION NO. 4280 - Commending Robert Gingrich
Motion by counci man -Lloyd, seconded by Councilman Young, that an
appropriate resolution be drafted for Bob Gingrich's widow for his
years of service to the City, and that it be perma plaqued. Motion
carried on roll call vote as follows:
AYES: Councilmen Shearer, Nichols, Young, Lloyd, Mayor Chappell
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ADJOURNMENT Motion by Councilman Lloyd, seconded by
Councilman Young, and carried, adjourning
this meeting at 10:12 P.M. in memory of Robert Gingrich.
APPROVED:
MAYOR
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK