Loading...
03-13-1972 - Regular Meeting - MinutesMINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA MARCH 13, 1972. The regular meeting of the City Council was called.to order at 7:32 P.M., by Mayor Ken Chappell in the West Covina City Council Chambers. The Pledge of Allegiance was given. The invocation was given by Reverend Father Steven Lowrance of St. Christopher°s Church. R(1T.T. rAT.T. rleSunL: Mayor Chappell; Councilmen: Shearer, Nichols, Young, Lloyd Others Present: George Aiassa, City Manager George Wakefield, City Attorney Lela Preston, City Clerk H. R. Fast, Ass It. City Manager George Zimmerman, City Engineer Richard Munsell, Planning Director Leonard Eliot, Controller Allen Sill, Chief of Police Alec Andrus, Administrative Analyst William Fowler, Director of Bldg. & Safety APPROVAL OF MINUTES January 24, 1972 Councilman Shearer: Mr. Mayor, I have a correction on Page 17, midway down, -my remarks regarding Veteran's Addressing Service, sixth line the word "don't" should be removed and the sentence should read "I think most people will....". Motion by Councilman Young, seconded by Councilman Shearer and carried, to approve minutes as corrected. PRESENTATION OF RESOLUTIONS OF COMMENDATION 1) EDGEWOOD HIGH SCHOOL Mayor Chappell.: This evening it is FOOTBALL TEAM a real honor for me 2) WEST COVINA HIGH to make two preen SCHOOL FOOTBALL TEAM sentations on behalf of City Council, one to the Edgewood High Football Team and one to the West Covina High Football 'beam® for their championship football teams. (Read resolutions Nos. 4496 and 4495 commending both football teams and presented to coaches of each team. Member players of teams that were present were introduced to the audience.) CONSENT CALENDAR Mayor Chappell stated the procedure of the Consent Calend.a.r items, and asked if Council or anyone present had any comments on the follow- ing items-. to WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS a) DONALD L. BREN CO. b) WEST COVINA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE Re street name change, Woodbridge Drive to Fairgrove Avenue. (Refer to City Manager Item No. 1-3) Re International Spring Fair request for permit for motorcade and police escort on April 22, 1972 at 1:00 P.M., and permit to cover special activities and/or exhibits and/or banners for 2nd Annual International Spring Fair CITY COUNCIL 3/13/72 CONSENT CALENDAR - Cont°d. Page Two 0 c) McCOYBS MARKETS d) GALAXIE LITTLE LEAGUE e) MONTE VISTA SCHOOL P.T.A. f) LEUKEMIA SOCIETY OF AMERICA g) BAUER DEVELOPMENT CO. h) WEST COVINA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE i) BRUTOCO DEVELOPMENT COMPANY 2. PLANNING COMMISSION 3. PERSONNEL BOARD April 22 through April 29, (Refer to Staff for investigation and recommendation) Re shopping carts and request for ordinance similar to City of Paramount. (Refer to Staff and City Attorney) Request for parade permit and waiver of fee and bond. (Refer to Staff) Invitation to participate in school's Citizenship Day Program on March 15/72 (Los Angeles County Sheriffs Depart- ment Aero Detail Helicopter landing) (Refer to City Manager) Request for permission to solicit during period of May 15 through June 15, 1972, and waiver of license fee. (Approved in prior years) (Approve subject to Staff and City Attorney review) Request for release of bonds on Tract No. 29581. (Refer to Staff) Re problems of ingress and egress and signing for shopping area (Refer to Staff and Traffic Committee) Re Amendment No. 115 and Joint meeting with Planning Commission: (Council) Summary of Action of March 1, 1972. (Receive and file) Minutes of February 1, 1972. (Receive and file) Councilman Young: Mr. Mayor, one point. I don't particu- larly want the item withdrawn from the Calendar but on Item 1 (c) McCoy's Markets, the suggestion reads with regard to Shopping Carts and which I think is a pretty good idea. I am somewhat persuaded by Mr. Saul°s letter, but I think a provision might be considered that a market owner could grant permission for a cart to be taken away from its premises. Some markets, like the Center Market, I notice elderly people shop there and they take their groceries home in a shopping cart; I persume with permission of the management and I think this should be permitted. Councilman Shearer: Isn't it already illegal to steal shopping carts? If you take it without permission that is stealing. Councilman Young. There is a vast difference between stealing and taking.without permission. It is joy riding versus...... Councilman Shearer: I wasn't aware of that Attorney Youngs I won't pursue the subject further. On Item 1 (d) is there any reason why it should be referred to Staff? If there is no objection I am pre- pared to recommend approval without wasting staff°s time in a study and have it come back again. Mr. Aiassa: We were anticipating approval subject to Staff report. I would say as long as they comply with the regulations. - 2 CITY COUNCIL 3/13/72 Page Three CONSENT CALENDAR - Cont°do Mayor Chappell: Please note that correction, that approval is given. Motion by Councilman Shearer, seconded by Councilman Young, -.to appr.ove.;Consent Calendar 1 through 3. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Councilmen: Shearer, Nichols, Young, Lloyd, Chappell NOES: None ABSENT: None GENERAL AGENDA ITEMS PUBLIC WORKS 1) PROJECT NO. SP-72001 LOCATION: Various throughout City. PROJECT NO. 125-7016 °1 Levelglen and Sentous Avenues. (Council reviewed Engineer's report.) Motion by.Councilman Shearer, seconded by Councilman Young and carried, to approve plans and specifications for City Project No. SP-72001 (priority sidewalk program) and Project No. 1.25-7016 (Friendship Park Parking Lot) and authorize the City Engineer to call for bids. 2) PROJECT NO. MP-71004 LOCATION: Various throughout the City. (Council reviewed Engineer's report.) Motion by Councilman Shearer, seconded by Councilman Young and carried, to approve supplemental agreement for TOPICS study and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute same. 3) EASEMENT INDENTURE (Council reviewed Engineer's report.) & CONSTRUCTION & MAINTENANCE AGREE- Motion by Councilman Shearer, seconded VENT by Councilman Young and carried, to approve the agreement with a modifica- tion deleting Clause 15. RESOLUTION NO. 4526 The City Attorney presented: ADOPTED "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO ENTER INTO AN EASEMENT INDENTURE AND CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT WITH SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANSPORTATION COMPANY, A CORPORATION, AND CITY OF INDUSTRY." Motion by Councilman Young, seconded by Councilman Shearer and carried, to waive further reading of the body of said Resolution. Motion by Councilman Young, seconded by Councilman Shearer, to adopt said Resolution. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Councilmen: Shearer, Nichols, Young, Lloyd, Chappell • NOES: None ABSENT.- None 4) AZUSA AVENUE RE- LOCATION: Azusa Avenue, Workman SURFACING Avenue northerly to City limits. (Council reviewed Engineer's report.) Motion by Councilman Young, seconded by Councilman Lloyd and carried, to approve Agreement No. 7UT-4600 and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute same. Councilman Shearer abstained. 3 • • CITY COUNCIL 3/13/72 Page Four PUBLIC WORKS: Azusa Avenue Resurfacing Motion by Councilman Young, seconded by Councilman Lloyd, to authorize payment for the work upon presentation of the bills by the State, from Account 125-72010. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Councilmen: Nichols, Young, Lloyd, Chappell NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: Councilman Shearer (Reason: Employed by the State) 5) PROJECT NO. MP-72010 LOCATION: Francisquito Avenue, Sunset Avenue to .Broadmoor Avenue. (Council reviewed Engineer's report) Councilman Young: Mr. Mayor, a question. I take it this means what it says in the information we have that "the developer's participation cost will be adjusted, if necessary, based upon actual bid prices." Would that mean if the joint price is less the developer gets the benefit sharing pro rata with the City and if the bid price is more than the estimate that the developer has to pick up the difference? In other words we have a fixed obligation of $10,500 and the developer stands to either benefit or be hurt depending on whether the bid is more or less than the estimate, is that correct? Mr. Aiassa: Mr. Zimmerman, will you confirm that? Mr. Zimmerman(: Mr. Mayor and members of Council, the bid is on the basis of unit prices normally, and the amount of work is split according to the physical work in the field that the developer is responsible for and the physical work the City is responsible for. On that basis the bid will be received and returned to Council for awarding but :mot will be the bid award rather than an estimated bid. Mr. Aiassa: Mr. Young's question - say the final bid comes in and the developers portion is higher and ours stays equal or lower, does the deve- loper pay the greater portion and we pay the lesser portion? Mr. Zimmerman: Yes, Mr. City Manager. Mr. Aiassa: In other words you just compute the total unit amount that will be charged to the developer and whatever it is - up or down - that is what his charge is? Mr. Zimmerman: Yes, Mr. City Manager. Councilman Young: Specifically the City puts $10,500 in this anyway it goes? Mr. Zimmerman: No, Mr. Young, We would anticipate the City would pay for the physical amount of work, whatever units of it at whatever bid price, that the City does. That also might be smaller. Councilman Young: It could be smaller or larger? Mr. Zimmerman: Yes. Motion by Councilman Young, seconded by Councilman Shearer and carried, that City Council approve, the plans and specifications and authorize the City Engineer to call for bids. YOUTH ADVISORY Mr. Aiassa: Mr. Mayor, there is one COMMISSION additional item. We - 4 - CITY COUNCIL .3/13/72 Page Five Youth Advisory Commission received a late communication and for some reason the Youth. Advisory Commission of West Covina did not respond to a City of Ontario invitation. You have a memorandum giving the details. It is a Youth in Action Conference and in discussing with staff to see what could be arranged to have representation, the money needed for the attendance of one or possibly two Commissioners and one staff member would be $13.00 to $18.00 per person for the attendance with the City furnishing transportation and they would not stay overnight. I would ask authorization for two Commissioners and one staff member at a cost not to exceed $50.00. Motion by Councilman Lloyd, seconded by Councilman Shearer, to authorize the attendance of two Youth Advisory Commissioners and one staff member to attend the Youth in Action Conference with an expenditure not to exceed $60.00. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Councilmen: Shearer, Nichols, Young, Lloyd, Chappell NOES: None ABSENT: None CITY ATTORNEY ORDINANCE NO. 1188 The City Attorney presented: 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 Application No. 461 Alvin W. Burnett, M.D., and Calvin Schneider, M.D.)" Motion by Councilman Young, seconded by Mayor Chappell and carried, to waive full reading of the body of said Ordinance. Motion by Councilman Young, seconded by Councilman Lloyd to adopt said Ordinance. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Councilmen: Shearer, Nichols, Young, L1oyd,.Chappell NOES: None ABSENT° None ORDINANCE The City Attorney presented: INTRODUCTION "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA AMENDING AND REPEALING VARIOUS SECTIONS OF THE WEST COVINA MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT, AND FEES FOR PUBLIC SERVICES." Mr. Wakefield: Mr. Mayor and members of Council, simply by way of explanation, this was an Ordinance which was drafted sometime ago and at that time the regulations promulgated by the Wage and Price Control Underwriters of the United States Government pursuant to the stabilization act of 1970 prohibited the increase of municipal fees in excess of the basic standard approved rate of 22/ without . special, permission from the Price Control Board. However, recently the regulations have been modified to remove entirely any restrictions upon increases in fees by City, County and other local agencies of government. As a consequence the ordinance is now before you for introduction. The main objective of the ordinance is to eliminate the specific :fees .fixed by ordinance and to provide that those fees may be fixed and adjusted from time to time by the City Council by resolution. If the ordinance is adopted by the Council then a resolution will be submitted to you at your next regular 5 • C] CITY COUNCIL 3/13/72 CITY ATTORNEY: Ordinance Introduction .Page Six meeting of the City Council to become effective at the same time the Ordinance becomes effective and that Resolution will establish the specific fees to be charged. This will mean that these fees can be adjusted from time to time by resolution without the necessity of an ordinance to make each individual change. Mr. Aiassa: Mr. Mayor, by the introducing of this. ordinance it will give Council two weeks to review in case they have any questions and if they do Staff will try and answer. Councilman Lloyd: I would like to have a briefing on just exactly how our fees stand. Just offhand, before we start raising fees - this amounts to $40,000 - Mr. Aiassa? Mr. Aiassa: Yes, we are only changing twenty-four fees and sixty-two we are leaving unchanged. Councilman Lloyd: I understand that, but the point is the other sixty-two can be changed. Mr. Aiassa: But the question is whether we can justify the change and on the twenty-four we can. Councilman Lloyd: But Mr. Wakefield, we can change the other sixty-two anytime we want to and we don't have to change the ordinance? Mr. Wakefield: That is correct. Councilman Lloyd: That is the point I am making. Not that essentially there is anything wrong with it, but it .is the whole routine of everything costing more and more in the business of doing business with the City. There is no doubt in my mind we are going to be very short of money in the next few years for obvious reasons and I am participating in.those reasons and that money will be withheld for redevelopment, etc. Nevertheless, I find increases here of twelve fees increased 100% and that is a lot of money. Even if it is say a $1.00 it goes to $2.00. Are we going to keep anybody out and is this thing really necessary? I am not prepared to vote on it this evening. I would like to have a staff briefing on it. Mr. Aiassa: Councilman Lloyd, actually tonight you are only introducing it and after briefing if Council doesn't wish to go forward you can stop it on the 27th. Councilman Lloyd: No argument on that, but you are asking me to vote on something that I don't know enough about. I would like a briefing before voting on it and I would like this held over. If the rest of the Council, wish to vote they may do so but I will not until I know more about it. It may be very justifiable but on the face value of what I saw my notations here say I am not .ready to go forward and that is the Sway I stand. Councilman Young: I think Councilman Lloyd makes a good point. I would be willing to have it .introduced but I have a couple of questions and this may not be the time to answer these questions. One being, what is the criteria for the proposed new fee structure? An arbitrary criteria or based upon some cost involved in rendering the service, this is a service function which is there for the protection, of the public and the protection of the owner of the property against defective work by contractors, etc. Is there some relationship - 6 - CITY COUNCIL 3/13/72 Page Seven CITY ATTORNEY: Ordinance Introduction between the service performed and the fee charged? Secondly, the parties most affected by this new fee program have they been advised of this ordinance so they have an opportunity to be heard? I think that would be very important. Those are my comments. I would not object to the introduction tonight but at the same time we have operated since 1950 at this rate and another couple of weeks might . not be fatal to the City in deference to Councilman Lloyd's feeling on this. Councilman Shearer: I have a couple of questions dealing with the Ordinance as it now stands, although I have no objection to introducing it tonight. The first one has to do with Page 2, the last item regarding "Advertising Vehicles". Following the strict interpretation of this present ordinance does that prohibit things such as the name and address on service vehicles, etc., or bumper stickers that might say "Vote for ..."" certain members of Council or some other public office? I realize the intent but sometimes we can get ourselves trapped in ordinances such as hedge heights,etc. that are difficult to administer. Mr. Wakefield: Councilman Shearer is correct, this particular section of the ordinance would prohibit the operation of a vehicle for advertising purposes and would include the vehicle which simply contained a banner announcing the name of a particular candidate for a particular office with appropriate notations that the candidate be supported without first obtaining a permit from the Street Superintendent, in this parti- cular case, or the City Traffic Engineer. We have no other ordinance which is specifically applicable to such vehicles and in the absence of some determination that the advertising structure on the vehicle was unsafe or a hazard to traffic the Traffic Engineer would be obligated to issue a permit. Councilman Shearer: And without a permit it would be illegal? Mr. Wakefield: Yes. Councilman Shearer: Does this include saying on the side of the pick-up truck - phone such and such for service? Mr. Wakefield: Technically, yes. Councilman Shearer: Then I would like to see the ordinance re- written in some manner before we go to the expense of publishing this whole 14 page document in the newspaper, and before we even.introduce it - that something be done that would not make law abiding citizens like myself, illegal for displaying bumper stickers thereby making us criminals. Granted, I doubt that there would be any prosecution but if someone complains then we have a problem, as we have in the hedge height. Also, I have another question with regard to page 3, which refers to signs, etc. I assume the street includes the parkway area - is that correct? (Mr. Wakefield answered "yes".) What kind of a provision do we have for removal of such signs? Particularly on Saturday and Sunday I see such signs directing people to the West Apartments next to -the West Covina High School and a number of other signs throughout the City? If these are illegal do we have city forces that can immediately remove the signs or do we have to go through a process of some sort? Mr. Wakefield: There is no specific provision in the ordinance for the removal of such temporary signs. We have the same kind of a situation with respect to signs announcing garage sales, homes for sale, apartments for rent, and .,sirmilar signs of that. nature. There is no 7 CITY COUNCIL, 3/13/72 Page Eight CITY ATTORNEY: Ordinance Introduction specific provision in our Ordinance other than this which is applicable to such signs. Councilman Shearer: There is a section in the Street and Highways Code, a provision applicable to State Highways . and County roads where they can, be removed without notice. In my opinion we should have something of that nature which would enable the City without going through a long process to remove these things. We have an ordinance that prohibits it and by the time it is processed in order to rectify it the deed is done. Lastly, we had a situation recently where someone was complaining about water in the streets. Section 41.02 also on page 3, prohibits any water flowing onto the City streets, which again makes all of us criminals because I. am sure every time we water our front lawn something does flow into the street. And again I refer to the Street and Highways Code section 725 which states "it is illegal to discharge in a way in which it causes damage." I think something of that nature should be written into our ordinance which would not allow a neighbor to get upset with me and call up and say - you are discharging water in violation of this section, and then again it becomes an administrative problem. In that regard I would like to see the ordinance not introduced tonight and perhaps these three points discussed and possibly write in a little leeway. Councilman Nichols: I agree with the points Councilman Shearer has raised. I think we reach the times occasionally when we attempt to legislate beyond the capability in government to enforce. Two points in particular, I think we are treading on dangerous constitutional ground as well as on certain practical ground in trying to enforce controls over the ability of people to advertise on their vehicles and in the area of discharging water I think it should be worded in' such a way as to protect the interests of the City relative to damage but not attempt to make criminals out of the average citizen who waters the parkway between his walk and the street. I think those two areas should be reworked or stricken out so that we do not try and tangle ourselves in .legislation that becomes unenforce- able and becomes a little bit ludicrous on the face of it. Mayor Chappell: It looks like the general impression is 'that we should refer this back until our next meeting. May we have a motion? Councilman Young: in this area we should we have the power to do the City of West Covina problem. Councilman Nichols: Councilman Young: One comment. on Councilman Shearer°s .first point, 3184 Page 2 - Advertising Vehicles.I think until we have a nuisance existing not put this on the books at all, assuming it and it is not pre-empted. I don't think has received any complaints here or has a And we do control sound trucks, we do have a ordinance on the sounds emitting from trucks. I would like to see that come out completely except for what we have on the books which appears -to be adequate. Motion by Councilman Shearer, seconded by Councilman Young and carried, to refer this item back to staff until the next regular Council meeting. - 8 - CITY COUNCIL 3/13/72 HEARINGS ZONE CHANGE APPLICATION NO. 462 PRECISE PLAN NO. 625 LAWRENCE and CHRISTINE CARSON • design for a 14-unit addition to Page Nine LOCATION: 2333 and 2335 West Garvey Avenue. REQUEST: Approval of a change of zone from N-C to S-C and approval of a precise plan of an existing motel. (Mr. Munsell, Planning Director, summarized, Planning Commission Resolution No. 2384, which recommends approval of the Zone Chang, e.I and the Precise Plan with conditions. Slides shown and explained') THIS IS THE TIME AND PLACE FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING ON ZONE CHANGE NO. 462 AND PRECISE PLAN NO. 625. IN FAVOR Lawrence E. Carson My wife and myself are the owners of the 2329 W. Garvey Ave., motel Stan -Mar. I have no particular points West Covina to bring up in connection with the property but I would like to make myself available for any questions that may arise. I would mention only one thing and that is our long range program for the motel. You might say this that we are going through now is Phase I. We do have an old motel and as Mr. Munsell mentioned the problem of considering the entire until brings up a lot of problems in connection with parking and setbacks and various other things and as we continue to develop, this will automatically clear up. We have the 14-unit on the lot to the west of us and we need probably two or three years before we can make our next step and that will probably be :tearing down the units to the east.. They are old and by replacing them with probably a 2-story structure at that time we can bring our C-2 property regarding parking to conform to S-C. We have a rather closely supervised operation and we have never had any problem with parking. We see all individuals to their room and carefully supervise their parking, so by doing this we have never had any problem. The new units conform to the zoning. There is one question that we raised, we did ask for permission to do without the 31 wall because they are a. problem in connection with a motel. In our neighborhood they soon get the usual neighborhood signs that the kids put on and they are also subject to accident and pretty soon you have a maintenance problem and really the only thing you can do is paint the wall, but by working with the Planning Department I think we have a :solu-- gion. (Explained type of wall to be put in.) If there any any questions? Mayor Chappell.: Not at this time. We may have during Council discussion. THERE BEING NO FURTHER PUBLIC TESTIMONY PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED. COUNCIL DISC7SSION. Councilman Lloyd: Mr. Mayor - I can't understand how he manages to get along with two cities! I am in favor of. this. !' Councilman Young: I am also favorably disposed. Mayor Chappell: I have one question - Landscaping. I do not see it listed in here. (Mr. Munsell explained landscaping .is spelled out in the precise plan and a building permit is not issued unless landscaping meets requirements.) Motion by Councilman Shearer, seconded by Councilman Lloyd and carried, - 9 - CITY COUNCIL 3/13/72 Page Ten HEARINGS: ZC NO. 462 and PP NO. 625 to approve Zone Change Application No. 462 and .Precise Plan No. 625. WEST COVINA MAINTENANCE LOCATION: Area southerly of Maplegrove DISTRICT NO. 3 Avenue between Valinda Avenue and Pass & Covina Road. (Council reviewed Engineer's report.) Mayor Chappell: This is a protest hearing on the formation of Assessment District No. 3 for maintenance of the area known as Summerplace Village, located southerly of Maplegrove Avenue between Valinda Avenue and Pass and Covina Road. Madam City Clerk, do you have the affidavits of posting and publication? Lela Preston: Yes, I do. City Clerk Motion by Councilman Young, seconded by Councilman Lloyd and carried, to receive and file affidavits of posting and publication. Mayor Chapell: Mr. Public Service Director may we have your statetiz@nt on the formation of Maintenance .District No. 3? H. R. Fast: Mr. Mayor and members of Council, this District is to be an. u.nactivated open space Maintenance District formed as a requirement to the approval of Tentative Tract No. 23308, The formation of an unacti.- vated Maintenance District allows a Homeowner's group to function in the upkeep of the District, protects the City and the development in that the City could assume maintenance in the event the Homeown.e.r°s group failed to function properly. Mayor Chappell: Thank you. Madam City Clerk, have you received any written protests or objections against the formation of Maintenance Distrct No. 3? Lela Preston: No, I have not. City Clerk THIS IS THE TIME AND PLACE FOR THE PROTEST HEARING ON THE FORMATION OF MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3. THERE BEING NO PUBLIC TESTIMONY PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED. RESOLUTION NO. 4527 The City Attorney presented: ADOPTED "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COtJWC T, OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA ORDERINGTHE FORMATION OF WEST COVINA MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3 IN ACCORDANCE WITH.RESOLUTION OF INTENTION NO. 4519.11 Motion by Councilman Lloyd, seconded by Councilman Young and carried, to waive further reading of the body of said Resolution, Motion by Councilman Lloyd, seconded by Councilman Shearer, to adopt said Resolution.. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Councilmen: Shearer, Nichols, Young, Lloyd, Chappell NOES: None ABSENT: None CITY ATTORNEY (Agenda Continued) MEMORANDUMS -OF UNDER- Mr. Wakefield: Mr. Mayor and members STANDING of Council, this is a Resolution which implements the two Memorandums of Understanding which the City Council approved at your last meeting with reference to both the Miscellaneous employees and the .Fire .DSpartment employees. • CITY COUNCIL 3/13/72 Page Eleven CITY ATTORNEY: Memorandums of Understanding Resolution RESOLUTION NO. 4528 The City Attorney presented: ADOPTED "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 1277, THE C.LASSIFICA- TION AND SALARY RESOLUTION, RELATING TO EMPLOYEES COMPENSATION AND BENEFITS. "" Motion by Councilman Young, seconded by Councilman Shearer and carried, to waive full reading of the body of said Resolution. Motion by Councilman Lloyd, seconded by Councilman Young, to adopt said Resolution. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows. AYES: Councilmen: Shearer, Nichols, Young, Lloyd, Chappell NOES: None ABSENT: None Mr. Wakefield: Mr. Mayor, and members of City Council, there is one item which is not included in the Resolution and which has been adopted by Council which relates to the Memorandum of Understanding between the City and the Firemen's Association and that relates to a departmental rule which imposed a residency requirement insofar as the sworn members of. the Fire Department were concerned, This departmental rule along with other departmental rules was previously approved by City Council and in order to fulfill the Memorandum of Understanding it would be necessary to adopt a Resolution. RESOLUTION NO. 4529 The City Attorney presented: ADOPTED "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY, OF WEST COVINA APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE RULES OF THE FIRE DEPARTMENT RELATING TO THE PLACE OF RESIDENCE OF DEPARTMENTAL EMPLOYEES." Motion by Councilman Shearer, seconded by Councilman Lloyd and carried, to waive full reading of the body ofsaid Resolution. Motion by Councilman Young, seconded by Councilman Lloyd, to adopt said Resolution. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Councilmen: Shearer, Nichols, Young, Lloyd, Chappell NOES: None ABSENT: None THE CHAIR CALLED A RECESS AT 8.30 P.M. COUNCIL RECONVENED AT 83 45 P.M.. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None. CITY MANAGER LANDSCAPING MAINTENANCE CONTRACT landscaping in the Civic will be up June-8tho I Council to negotiate and submit to Council at the can go to bid. This is due to the fact that the Mr. Aiassa: As you know we have a con- tract with the County to maintain and service the Center area and our present contractorstime would .like to have authorization from the meet with the County representatives to next meeting a formative type of bid so we one of the items I prefer to go to bid on County is sharing the expense. Motion by Councilman Nichols, seconded by Councilman Lloyd, to authorize the City Manager to negotiate with the County of .Los Angeles for the landscape maintenance of the Los Angeles County and West Covina Civic Center area and bring back its recommendation. for action by Council, Councilman Lloyd: What is this - on a notice it is costing the County will put one to one basis? I $26,592 - does that mean in a like amount? CITY COUNCIL 3/13/72 Page Twelve CITY MANAGER: Landscaping Maintenance Contract Mr. Aiassa: The amount in the contract now is�$26,952 and the County and the City shares it 50-50, but our new contract may be somewhat larger because we have a bigger area to service. . Motion carried. PROGRESS PAYMENT TO Mr. Aiassa: Council has a staff report FESTIVAL OF ARTS on this item. And the SAFETY TOWN uniqueness of this project is that not everybody can build this type of unit. Through Mr. Sata and others, we dis- covered there are firms that do build this type of structure and the firm that does also builds floats for the Rose Parade. We are pro- viding the material and they are building it. Motion by Councilman Shearer, seconded by Councilman Young, to approve payment of $9, 000 to the Festival of Artists., Inc:.:,. '.for' work to date on the Safety Town project pedestrian simulator. Mayor Chappell: Mr. Aiassa, how long before this project will be completed? (Mr. Aiassa did not have date of completion available° Mr. Sata agreed with Councilman Nichols that.the date was sometime in April., but did not have the exact date with him.) Motion carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Councilmen: Shearer, Nichols, Young, Lloyd, Chappell NOES: None ABSENT: None STREET NAME CHANGE Mr. Aiassa: Staff has submitted a TRACT NO. 24006 report to Council on this, WOODBRIDGE DRIVE This street doesn't have anyone living on it at present and the name change is also approved by the developer. RESOLUTION NO. 4530 The City Attorney presented: ADOPTED "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA CHANGING THE NAME OF WOODBRIDGE DRIVE TO FAIRGR.OVE AVENUE WITHIN THE CITY OF WEST COVINA. Motion by Councilman Young, seconded by Councilman Lloyd and carried, to waive full reading of the body of said Resolution. Motion by Councilman Lloyd, seconded by Councilman Young, to adopt said Resolution. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Councilmen: Shearer, Nichols, Young, Lloyd, Chappell NOES: None ABSENT: None JOINT STUDY SESSION Mr. Aiassa: We polled the Planning WITH PLANNING Commission and it was . COMMISSION suggested the Joint Study Session with regard to Amendment No. 115 be held at 4:30 P.M. on March 20th, and that it be a dinner type meeting. Four members of the Commission can attend, one cannot - he is going to be out of town. Mayor Chappell: We have- askedfor tY is ' jo.int- meeting with the Planning Commission so they might b.r.ing us up to date on the M..F-20 and MF-15 zoning. Is there any discussion? 12 - CITY COUNCIL 3/13/72 Page Thirteen CITY MANAGER: Joint Study Session Motion by Councilman Lloyd, seconded by Councilman Young, to hold a Joint Study Session with the Planning Commission at 4:30 P.M. on March 20, 1972, relating to Amendment No. 115. Councilman Young: A question. Are we going to accept the letter from Brutoco offering to make Mr. Davies available again, and other interested parties like Dale Ingram, asking them to participate in the meeting? (Discussion followed on whether the hearing had been held open or closed. Mr. Munsell and Mr. Fast advised it had been closed.) Mr. Aiassa: You could have your joint meeting with the Planning Commission and Council, and then on the 27th we can give notice to reopen the hearing, if you so desire? Councilman Young: What I have in mind is these people had some very good points and they made them fast and it is a very comprehensive thing we are trying to get across and if we sit down with just the Planning Commission and staff viewpoints, well I don't think we are getting anywhere. I think we might as well just pass the ordinance and say we don't care, because that is what it amounts to then. Mr. Aiassa: Mr. Wakefield, can the Council reopen the hearing or do we have to republish notices, etc., for the meeting of .March 20th? Mr. Wakefield; If the hearing was actually closed then the City Council has two alternatives, it may either approve the Ordinance as recommended by the Planning Commission, or the Council may refer the Ordinance back to the Planning Commission for further consideration and further recommendation in the light of whatever conclusions the Council may have come to with reference to the substance of the ordinance itself. There is no procedure available to Council to sit down with the Planning Commission in what in effect would be a joint session to hear from opponents or proponents of the proposed ordinance. It seems to me that under the circumstances as they now exist the purpose of the joint session is -to simply express individually to the members of the Planning Commission and have the Planning Commission react to some of the objections expressed regarding the ordinance itself and to whatever changes may be necessary.then the matter could be referred back to the Planning Commission for further consideration in light of those changes and the Planning Commission could make a further recommenda- tion to the City Council. This does not provide a procedure -again for a rehearing of the matter by'-the--Planni:ftg:"Commission- unless the Planning Commission itself elects to readvertise the matter and send out notices to the affected property owners and have a new hearing and in effect begin all over again. .Councilman Shearer: I would definitely not like to see us going through that process again because as I recall 0 there were 2200 notices sent out and if they have a hearing we must also have a hearing so that would be 4400 notices x 8(,' each. Don't we have the right to ask questions of those who testified during the hearing? Mr. Wakefield: Yes, Councilman Shearer. This again is a hearing on a change of zone and the Council is not precluded from asking questions of either opponents or pro- ponents. 1.3 CITY COUNCIL 3/13/72 CITY MANAGER: Joint Study Session Page Fourteen Councilman Shearer-. Would this meeting on the 20th be considered a continuation of the Council discussion at our previous meeting? Mr© Wakefield: The meeting at which the matter was taken under consideration by the City Council 0 has been concluded. What you are looking forward to now is a joint session with the Planning Commission for the purpose of reviewing the provisions of the ordinance itself. It seems to me at this point in time there really isn't any procedure or any opportunity to bring others in. I suppose what you are leading up to really is equivalent to staff comment or staff suggestions with reference to specific provisions of the Ordinance. And again in a change of zone pro- ceeding the City Council is not bound by the same technical rules as are applicable in the case of variances or the granting of special. use permits where Council is required to act upon evidence submitted to it. I would assume that if you desire to ask specific individuals to be present at the meeting for the purpose of expressing whatever professional opinion or comments they may have with .reference to the Ordinance as proposed there really wouldn't be any legal objection to that. Councilman Shearer: In that case I would suggest we .let them come and if we want to ask a question we can. Not give them a freehand but only to answer a question if asked. Councilman Young: I agree with Councilman Shearer. I take it the remarks of Mr. Ingram have been reviewed by the staff, also the remarks of. Mr. Davies, so there will be some answers or perhaps even changes made relative to those remarks. Is that a fair assumption? Mayor Chappell.- We have the minutes of that meeting available to use so we should study the minutes. Also it would be well for the'Planning. Commission to have ._copy so: they can ..see what `was' said' also. . Mr. Aiassa: Do you want a copy of the Planning Commission minutes also? Mayor Chappell: Yes that, should be in the packet we receive. Councilman Nichols: Mr. Mayor, did I understand the thrust of the comments, that there is a desire to have individuals of the public on hand at the Study Session with the Planning Commission and Council? Councilman Young: It is my desire and it is based on the reason for sending it back, which was that many of us had questions raised in our minds by the people who testified at the hearing in opposition. We have one party, Mr. Brutocao who wants to be exempt from the operation of the ordinance and there are questions involved. We had numerous comments by Mr. Ingram specifically attacking various portions of the proposed ordinance. At the time this statement was made by Mrs. :Ingram the Mayor promised to answer questions and he didn't get them yet, and we had an expert brought in by Mr. .Brutocao who is available to us. I have no objections to that further input, I feel we really should have it. Councilman Nichols I don't want to seem offensive Councilman Young, but I really have a rather strong feeling that a Study Session between this ® 14 CITY COUNCIL, 3/13/72 Page Fifteen JOINT STUDY SESSION Council and one of its appointed bodies should be exactly that a relationship between a Council and .its body and not in any sense a public hearing or a time for testimony.. The Council has devices and the Planning Commission has devices for readvertising and re- opening the hearing and if the Council in its wisdom feels that the Planning Commission did not give proper attention to all of the 0 views that were expressed before the Council - well Council can certainly direct the Planning Commission to readvertise and reopen the matter. I think it is well enough to say that people can come and answer questions but experience teaches us that it will notbe that, that it will be a hearing without stature, and if there are differences on this issue between the Planning Commission and Council it is rather hard and difficult to have an open exchange of views with those we have appointed to work in this area with lay citizenry present giving testimony which undoubtedly will run counter to some of the views the Planning Commission is presenting. I have no recollection of any precedent in the City°s operation for turning a Study Session between the Council and one of its bodies into a testimonial type of activity. I am surely prepared and willing to hear from my own point of view and I urge the Commission to hear from its point of view any input that might be available from outside groups, although those same groups had ample opportunity to testify before the Planning Commission hearing when this matter came up. But to propose a supposedly candid and frank discussion between the Council and the Commission with any other individuals who may desire to be present I think would be self-defeating and tend to limit the candor of the dis- cussion between. the Council and the Commission and will cause the Commission to feel that it has been repressed or limited in some fashion in its functioning. I really do feel that the Study Session per se should be exactly that. Obviously we cannot exclude anyone desiring to be presents but I would not favor at all any situation that would lead to other people giving testimony and offering opinions, and counter statements made by the Planning Commission in front of the Council. So with that I will rest on my viewpoint. Councilman Shearer: I think I will go along with what Councilman Nichols said. I didn't mean to imply I was in favor of reopening the hearing. I was just exploring the opportunity if there was a way it could be done. I was prepared to vote for the ordinance two weeks ago and I think I am still prepared, but I am willing to listen to a mutual discussion between our body and the Planning Commission, I. think it would be unwise to open it up for general discussion, Councilman Young, I yield to the experience of Councilman. Nichols with regard to opening it up, which was not what I really had in mind. What I had in mind specifically is the fact I am a layman and all of us are in this area and not prepared to deal with some of the questions raised by those experienced in this field with, respect to this ordinance, If we pass it I. hope we pass it correctly, I. will go along with that, and when it comes before the Council again I am sure we will have the opportunity then to ask questions if we so choose. Councilman Lloyd: I think there is one question that should be answered that is exactly where we left the item, at the .last meeting. Whether we continued it with the hearing open, or closed the hearing, or what? 15 CITY COUNCIL 3/13/72 Page Sixteen CITY MANAGER: Joint Study Session Mr. Aiassa: Mr. Mayor - there was a motion by Councilman Nichols"that this matter be.hel.d over until the second meeting in March with the hearing closed and that in the interim staff be directed to attempt to arrange a joint study session between the City Council and the Planning Commission so the Council can further h.ave: the benefit of the thinking of the Planning Commission." Councilman Nichols: Let me hasten to add for the benefit of anyone that might think I was attempting to close anything off ® when this comes back before the Council the only thing that has been closed off is the matter of the public hearing which requires to reopen for general testimony further notices, but again Mr. Brutocao or Mr. Davies, or whomever, ifthey have an interest might well choose to be here at that time and if there are elements that come out of our dis- cussion that are still unanswered that would be an appropriate time for Council to direct further questions and get answers from these people in the audience during the time of Council discussion prior to a decision. So you would gain the benefit of any of that wisdom you might seek without intervening it into a Study Session between the Council and the Planning Commission. Councilman Young: That is all I am asking for,, And notto belabor the point but if it comes up to Council for adoption there is still the right granted to the public in the municipal code to speak to the ordinance before there is a vote on it, that is apart from the public hearing. Councilman Nichols: Of course the hearing is closed although again these people could seek to address the Council. under Oral Communications, or any Councilman has always been granted permission to seek answers to his questions, so I am sure we can gain the benefit of the wisdom of those that might choose to offer it through any interest expressed by yourself or others. My concern was solely that we might involve ourselves in a three -corner discussion which would be unproductive at this particular session. Mayor Chappell.: Mr, Aiassa, not too long ago we had a very unsatisfactory joint meeting with the Recreation and Park Com.misiion - I think we should either meet upstairs or in the Police Department, where we can sit across from each other at a table and discuss. We can open the meeting here and adjourn to an appropriate room. Will you arrange that? Mr. Aiassa: Yes, Mr. Mayor. Motion carried. SAN GABRIEL HOT LINE Mr. Zimmerman: FEDERAL GRANT PROPOSAL Council asked that Hot Line and other present and these representatives are here also received a report on this from staff. Mr. Mayor and members of Council, at a recent Council meeting City the representatives of interested agencies be tonight. You have Councilman Nichols: I have one question, Mr. Mayor. I; would like some appropriate commentary on it. There appears to be a direct contradiction within the bulk of the material submitted to Council. On page 2 of the City Staff°s summary of the program at the beginning of the 2nd paragraph on that page there is a statement "it must be emphasized that the police participants will not be listening in - .16 CITY COUNCIL 3/13/72 Page Seventeen CITY MANAGER-. HOT LINE on the live calls placed through Hot Line." Then on the cover sheet of the application with the California Council. on Criminal Justice the lower portion of the paragraph on the bottom of the page infers a 'policeman would be involved .in working with the crisis calls handled by Hot Line. Then on the first page of the project • summary statement, the bottom paragraph indicates "police officers would get firsthand authentic insight...." and on page 2 at the bottom paragraph it states "experience as a Hot Line listener...." and then a paragraph in the middle of the page states "the training program will consist of 45 hours of instruction with 27hours in a lecture and study setting and 18 hours working as Hot Line listeners." There appears to be a difference of opinion as to what the role of the officers would be in that respect and I think that matter should be clarified for the benefit of the Council. That .is the only question I have. Mr. Zimmerman: My understanding is that the use of a tape will be employed and Hot Line listening will not basically be done by police offiers. I think Mrs. Reynolds might speak more effectively to this. Mrs, Louie Reynolds The term "listener" I think is what we are 1446 Hollencrest Drive misunderstanding. They will not be on the West Covina line and this has been something we have hashed out among ourselves on the Board. Because there were times when. we thought that it might be done that way, but tapes will be used. We have talked to many of the Chiefs involved in the Hot Line and Chief Sill himself, if I may refer to a conversation that we had, suggested this would be a very poor relationship between Hot Line and the young people of the community and he feels and we feel too,.that it.is a lot simpler and a lot less time consuming to use tapes and thereby cut out a lot of things that really are not important in the training itself. So we will not use police on the phones but we will use tapes. Councilman Nichols: This was probably the fundamental. concern that I had, that the use of officers might be prejudicial to the operation in some way and reflect back in a negative sense on the City. I do have some other reservations but I am sure that those who work with Hot Line and have their heart and soul committed to this activity have weighed all the things and probably more than I have been able to weigh them and if they feel it is meritorious and not detrimental in terms of long range funding and support then I will hold my reservations in abeyance and vote to support the City"s endorsement of the project and the sponsorship of the application. Councilman Young: Mr. Mayor, as long as Mrs. Reynolds is here - and I concur with Councilman Nichols but to clarify the record, my understanding is that Hot: Line is still going to need as much assistance as it has always needed. .it still has its program of fund raising to function and this is purely a training adjunct which will. not in any.'.manner relieve you of any present obligation or need to raise money, is that correct? Mrs. Reynolds: Yes, that is right. We must have continued support from the Cities involved, This idea wasn't Hot Line's at first, we had, law enforcement people come and say we think you have something in creative listening in the nonjudgmental concept m will you share it? And that is why we got into it to begin with. So yes, we must have your continued support. This is totally different than the listening service we have for the young people and the calls are now numbering 4000. We would just really appreciate your support and thank you all for your past support ® as a taxpayer and resident of the City I appreciate it. I would also like to say that 17 rn U • CITY COUNCIL 3/13/72 CITY MANAGER: HOT LINE Page Eighteen Mr. Zimmerman and everyone has worked so hard putting it together and the Community Services Department, really Dan Fleming who wrote the initial program ® all have been so very helpful and we appreciate it very much. Councilman Shearer: I have two questions. What direct benefit will the Hot Line program receive if this grant is approved? Mrs. Reynolds: The existing Hot Line program will benefit by the hiring of a full-time Director. That is where we benefit and that is where in between the funding time and the time the funding runs out we have to skip and jump and do a lot more things to assure that we can continue to keep this Director at a later date. The rest of the money goes to the Police Officers for their training in overtime. They are actually paid for their trzningo Councilman Shearer: Mr. Aiassa, then the police time will be on overtime and not part of their regular duty time? Mr,,.A.iassa: I have the Chief of Police here - but my understanding is that this will be overtime. Councilman Shearer: It will not take away from the normal duties of the Police Department? Mr. Aiassa: No, it will not. Our complement will stay the same. Mayor Chappell: Are there any other questions? Thank you very much Mrs. Reynolds. Mr. Aiassa: One further comment to answer Mr. Shearer we will not diminish staff just to cover the Hot Line program. Motion by Councilman Shearer, seconded by Councilman Young and carried, that Council express its affirmative support of the San Gabriel Valley Hotline°s grant proposal for police training and the City sponsorship of this proposal. Mr. Aiassa.*. Mr. Mayor ._ I believe there is an action. required in,regard to the filing of this application. Is that right Mr. Wakefield? Mr. Wakefield: Yes, the application has to be ultimately prepared and signed on behalf of the City but the crux of the action tonight is .for the approval of the sponsorship by the City and then the application may be executed by the appropriate City officials and transmitted to the California Council for Criminal Justice for final action. The motion is adequate at this time. Councilman Young*. Mr. Aiassa: Of course the three Councilmen up for reelection have to be reelected because the final action takes place after that date. Yes, I believe that is so. Motion carried. e • CITY COUNCIL 3/13/72 Page Nineteen CITY MANAGER - Cont°do CIVIC CENTER PARKING Mr. Aiassao Council has received. a. STRUCTURE staff report and a. recommendation and we also have Mr. Frank.Sata present tonight to answer any questions Council may have. Council is asked to review and accept the plans and specifications and direct the Public Authority to proceed. with the advertising for formal bids. We also have a set of plans and specifications available for review. As you will remember we started out with a working -.model and went from that to the final design. We have signed a parking agreement with the County for the utilization of the facility and have gone through all the necessary paperwork. Councilman Shearer: Do we have an architectural drawing? Mr. Aiassa: Yes. Councilman Shearer: I would like to see that. Frank Sata Mr. Mayor and members of Council, there was Architect one point that was not covered in the report. 99 Soo Raymond Ave., I would like to address myself to the fact that the preliminary estimate made to you and the preliminary amount approved by the Council we are pleased also to submit at this time at the completion. of our drawings the same estimate. To the best•of our knowledge we feel, this is a very fine estimate. Councilman Shearer: In your plan do you have a pictorial. rendering of the structure? Mr. Sata: No, we only developed the working model and the overall site plane Councilman Shearer: Mr. Mayor, I would like to see the plans. (THE CHAIR CALLED A RECESS AT 9:30 P.M. FOR THE PURPOSE OF REVIEWING THE PLANS, COUNCIL RECONVENED AT 9:37 P.M.) Motion by Councilman Lloyd, seconded by Councilman Young and carried, to accept and approve the final plans and specifications and authorize the Los Angeles County -West Covina Civic Center Authority to proceed with the advertising for formal bids on the subject structure. MAYOR'S REPORTS PROCLAMATIONS: Mayor Chappell: I am asked to proclaim the following .items and, if there is no objection. by Council., I will so proclaim: ORT Day m March 15, 1972; KNIGHTS OF COLTUMBUS DAY - March 29, 1972; CAMPFIRE GIRLS' WEEK. March 1.9-25, 1972, SECOND ANNUAL INTERNATIONAL FAIR. WEEK April 22-29, 1972; TOLUC.A DAY - April 26, 1972; PUBLIC SCHOOLS WEEK - April 24-28, 1972; MT. SAN A.NTO:NIO RELAYS WEEK. - April 24-30, 1972-, and NATIONAL PARKS CENTENNIAL WEEK. ® March .19-25, 1972. Hearing no objections, so proclaimed. COUNCILMEN'S REPORTS Councilman Shearer: Two quick items, We received a letter in. the mail addressed to the Civic Leaders regarding some project affecting the Sister City. If it hasn't been done, I would .request a. copy be sent to the Sister City Committee, (Mr. Aias;sa advised it has been done.) 19 • U CITY COUNCIL 3/13/72 COUNCILMEN'S REPORTS Page Twenty Councilman Shearer: I would like to extend an .invitation to my colleagues to attend the opening game at 1.10 30 A. M. March 18 at Walmerado -.ark of the E;dgewood Boys Division baseball game. You will be appropriately introduced by me as Master of Ceremonies and I am sure your presence will. be greatly appreciated. Councilman Lloyd: I would ask City Council to have the City Attorney introduce a resolution honoring Marie Mills retiring .President of Mt. San Antonio College since its inception in 194E and prior to that time she served in the local school district.. This is a lady that has done tremendous service to our community and it would be very nice to recognize this service. I would make a motion to that effect and that the resolution be perma plaqued. RESOLUTION NO. 4531 The City Attorney presented: ADOPTED "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA HONORING .MARIE MILLS FOR HER MANY YEARS OF SERVICE TO MT. SAN ANTONIO COLLEGE AND TO THE COMMUNITY." Motion by Councilman Young, seconded by Councilman Lloyd and carried, to.waive full reading of the body of said Resolution. Motion by Councilman Lloyd, seconded by Councilman Young to adopt said Resolution, Motion carried on roll call vote as follows'. AYES: Councilmen. :shearer, Nichols, Young, Lloyd, Chappell NOES: None ABSENT: None Councilman Lloyd: Mr. Mayor, one further item, I have had several overtures and I spoke very briefly to the City Manager in this regard, the people of the press want to be up in this area of the Council, Chambers and while I am not trying to tell the City Manager how to run his staff, etc., I was suggesting that some proviso be made for bringing the press right up here and even Mr. Wakefield. Don't you think he should also be up here? Mr. Aiassa: We are working on that Mr. Lloyd and we will try and have a solution for you on the 27tho DEMANDS Motion by Councilman Young, seconded. by Councilman Shearer, to approve demands totalling $305, 301. 52 as listed on Demand Sheets C®801A, and C-802 through 804. This total includes payroll. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES. Councilmen: Shearer, Nichols, Young, Lloyd, Chappell NOES-. None ABSENT-. Drone EXECUTIVE PERSONNEL THE CHAIR CALLED THE EXECUTIVE SESSION AT SESSION 9:45 P„M. COUNCIL CONVENED TO THE COUNCIL PRIVATE CHAMBERS. RECONVENED AT 9057 P.M. ADJOURNMENT: Motion ;by Councilman Shearer, Councilman Lloyd and carried, at 9.57 P.M., to Monday, March 4�30 P.Mo APPROVED, ATTEST. MAYOR seconded by to adjourn 20, 1972, at CITY CLERK - 20