05-05-1976 - Regular Meeting - MinutesMINUTES OF THE ADJOURNED REGULAR -MEETING OF CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA
MAY 5, 1976
n
LJ
The adjourned regular meeting of the City Council was called
to order at 7:55 A.M. by Mayor Nevin Browne at-Coco's Restaurant.
ROLL CALL
Present:
Mayor Browne; Councilmen: Miller,
Chappell, Shearer, Tice
Others Present:
P. Schabarum, County Board of Supervisors
R. Campbell, Asst. to P. Schabarum
H. Dynes, Asst. to P.,Schabarum
L. Preston,.City Clerk
M. Miller, Public Services Director
B. Freeman, Reporter, S.G.V.D.T.
M..Ward, Reporter, L.A. Times
C..Jones, League of Women Voters
Mr. Schabarum:
We have had get togethers of this kind
over the years-, but there seems to be
a considerable time span from one to
the next. We try
to condense these things to get around a
little better. I
hope the format is workable. As the case in
• the past, we have
asked the City Manager to give us a list of
the things on your mind. As a result of that, I do have a list
of questions that
were called in yesterday that we could go
through, if that
is your pleasure.
First Question:. Relationship of LAFCO and the annexation
policies, as well as the sphere of
influence.
Well, Ken and I both serve on LAFCO.
In so far as sphere of influence to the San Gabriel Valley, I
think it is pretty.well behind us. The cities know where an
invisible line is, where one city should be if annexation is
involved.
Where do I stand to bringing in cities?
It is and has been, in so far as that is concerned, my personal
preference that the majority of people ought to have the right
to make that decision themselves as opposed to the mandated
philosophy that -is and has prevailed in some legislation.
Going through the whole litany of pros and cons, I just think
• if the city is interested in annexing an island (I hope many
of them are because I like to see them included in cities), it
is a sales job on the part of the city to get those people
interested in becoming a part of the city.
CITY COUNCIL
Meeting with P. Schabarum
May 5, 1976
Page Two
We have a Community Services Legislation
which in the final analysis might prompt unincorporated parts
of the _county3r^to become part of the various cities. Passage of
• this legislation last year included Los-AAngeles County. Having
been adopted, the City of Los Angeles is in the process of
delivering the material that would be in.an application for a
County Unincorporated Service area.
Councilman Chappell: The application is very complicated;
it takes a long time to put together
all of the information requested. The
City of Los Angeles has made the indication, but has not come
forward any further than the original intent. I look for it
to be six to eight months to a year, if they are going to do
it. The League of California Cities is interested in it and
is trying to work with Los Angeles to get it done. Perhaps
the application is too complicated, and LAFCO will have to do
some work on it.
Councilman Tice: Would the County, from an economic
standpoint, gain? Economics -wise,
would we cut our costs down? Do
you think it would have anything to do with holding the line
or possible reductions?
Mr. Schabarum: That depends in large measure to what
cities various unincorporated parts
• of the County go to. If annexation
is to a contract city, not any noticeable,,A- if to the
independent, it might.
There are three points prevailing in
the chats I have had with other cities. (1) Because the City
of Los Angeles is in the development of information on the
application, we get it from the County that there is not the
interest in providing the information that there should be.
(2) My personal expect;a:t.on;= is that there will no doubt be
litigation to get a judicial explanation of "extended services."
It is -very ambiguous in the written law. (3) I am not going to
want to support the creation of just.one County -wide Unincorporated
Service area. The theory is that if such would come to pass, we
would have unincorporated areas in this part of the County
subsidizing the areas in other parts of the County. My interest
is to develop several proposals that represent service areas in
the spheres of influence in the several:c'ities. Recognize that
the fundamental issue is a requirement that the -people vote to
tax themselves to provide.the dollars which pepresent the cost
of the extended services in their particular area. Failing to
do that, the level of extended services shall be reduced, and
then, if that doesn't work right, the folks may push to annexa-
tion. It is a long drawn out exercise, not of any great
significance in the forseeable future.
- 2 -
CITY COUNCIL May 5, 1976
Meeting with P. Schabarum Page Three
Second Question: What about Lemon Avenue?
Simply put, we have been around and
around on that. It is on the Master Plan of Streets and
• Highways for the entire County. -It has been a joint exercise.
with the cities and the County over the years.
•
•
In so far as the County is concerned,
there is' not and will not be for the forseeable future funding
for. that. When and if the unimproved property along the right-
of-way is brought into development, it is assumed that the
three jurisdictions (Walnut, West Covina, County) through which
the right-of-way follows would require the developer to develop
and improve Lemon Avenue according to the Master Plan of Streets
and Highways. I have no idea what development plans might be
for the various properties other than the south side of the
hill (in Walnut) seems to have some growth going along. That
may bring along development of the right-of-way there.
Councilman Chappell-: ;Is the County in the process of studying
their whole Master Plan of Streets and
Highways?
Mr. Schabarum: I am not aware of it on any County -wide
basis. Different routes and widths
are reviewed on an on -going basis as
something comes up. To my knowledge, it is not a broad study.
Mayor Browne: There is no priority development in
there.because of lack of funds, and
clearly stated, it is up to the
developers to give the dedication.
Councilman Shearer: By legislation you could erase the line
there from the•Plan and say it is no
longer in the Plan unless developed.
You could take it off to placate all of the people, but if
the hills are ever developed, there has to be a road.
Councilman Tice: There are other ingress and egress
.points along there.
Councilman Shearer: Mr. Seymour came the other night to
say they don't want anymore traffic on
Amar.
Councilman -Tice: Possibly Grand.
Councilman Shearer: The only way to keep the road from going
through there is to keep out development
and,:that would mean the agency would have
to buy it. -
Councilman Tice:, Who has that kind of money?
- 3 -
CITY COUNCIL May 5, 1976
Meeting with P. Schabarum Page Four
Mr. Schabarum: That is the. fundamental issue right
there. I think a good deal of the
local concern is founded on some mis-
information (a six lane freeway) and.has been blown out of
proportion as far as the Master Plan of Streets and Highways.
Point of priority, the priorities in
relation to the road budget, this project is very slim in any
budget and this route is not even on any long range list of
high priority budget items. I am looking at the moment at a
road budget for the First District for new construction of a
million dollars. That is nothing in terms of this. I have any
number of things that have been in process for three or four.
years that slowly come up to the top of the pile as work is
accomplished. That is something we have to live with, which
sort of moves on to the next question on ATC funding.
Third Question: IATC Funding.
There is and will be the current level
of funding for ATC to the cities for the next year. What might
be the case in the following years, I simply cannot tell you.
Unless additional revenues are generated to the highway pot,
it can be assumed that we will get to the point where we don't
have any new construction, just maintenance and repairs.
Mayor Browne: That is our concern with our streets.
• We see deterioration without funds to
rapair them.
How much of the gas tax funds were
diverted to the Rapid Transit District?,
Mr. Schabarum: Diversion of the gas tax funds to the
County budget came under Proposition 5.
Majority of the Board stipulated they
were going to reserve the taxable allowable for diversion in
subsequent years. This year an additional $13 million dollars
for rapid transit will be diverted. So, that is the amount of
money that the majority of the Board chose not to use for road
improvements,,but for a starter line.
It is a local match that would go
against what might come from the Feds. As part of the local
match, it is expected that the cities of Los Angeles.9and Long
Beach and the State CALTRANS would also make available their
maximum dollars that would be diverted. This match would
generate one to four dollars from the Feds. This year the
. City of Los Angeles chose not to do so. Long Beach has
indicated little intent to do so. CALTRANS has.said,; 'Weill
do it, we think, but your local SCAG is going to make the decision
4 -
CITY COUNCIL
Meeting with P. Schabarum
May 5, 1976
Page Five
as to which State highway projects shall be deferred to free
the money. I have been trying to get the policy changed to
get the money back into the highway fund. I have a hunch it
• will come to pass, but I can't bet on it.
A couple of the Sunset Coast.Line.;
programs include the same potential routes that the starter
line would. And so, if it is approved by the people, it would
be funded out of the sales tax rather than out of the other
mechanism, and the other would-be subject to diversion. If
it isn't approved by the people, a couple of the guys on the
Board will take the view that the people don't want it, so
we are not going to proceed with rapid transit and the money
will still come back. The Proposition 5 money decision has
been postponed until June 10, 1976, two days after the election.
Councilman Chappell: How can Los Angeles not do it if the
voters so indicated - not put their
money in the pot?
Mr. Schabarum: The starter line has been principally
identified to run between downtown
Los Angeles and Long Beach, and all
of the council members who are not beneficiaries of that don't
support it. Enough of them to hold it up. Plus, Mayor Bradley
has focused primarily on the Wilshire corridors as the preferred
starter route. The problem at this point of time is that all
• of the routes are going to be so expensive that you are not
going to get much for the maximum dollars generated, assuming
a maximum allocation of the local agencies is $100 plus million
plus four matched by the Feds.
Councilman Tice: Who was the one that did the engineering
work on a fixed rail concept?
Mr. Schabarum: You mean Baxter's proposal? It was done
by his staff - a newsman, private
investigator anda few other highly
incoinpet:erl folks who put it together.
Councilman Tice: No one else?
Mr. Schabarum: Not in putting it together. The
original proposal has been the object
of critics. The results of the
reviews have been highly critical in many respects.
Councilman Tice: I have read them.
• Mayor Browner This City Council has taken an action
in opposition to the Sunset Coast*. L. ne..,
- 5 -
CITY COUNCIL
Meeting with P. Schabarum
May S, 1976
Page Six
Mr. Schabarum: I am very much aware of the good
judgment of the City Council.
• Mayor. Browne: As such, we received the packet
distributed by your office. On
the llth the.cities are meeting?
Mr. Schabarum: I think it is the 13th.
Mayor,Browne-: Are you going to be present at that
meeting?
Mr. Schabarum: Yes.
Mayor Browne: I'd intended on going to it. Hopefully,
we will be able to express our opinion.
In that direction, I am sure you are
going to need some backup.
Mr. Schabarum: I would just hope that anybody that has
an interest in arriving at a conclusion
would ask basic fundamental questions
on it. The packet I put out stimulates some questions. It
represents my analysis of that, and many of the points raised
by the consultants that were hired to analyze it as well.
She idea is, as you read in the
• ordinance, that a statioh location will be selected by both
the RTD and the city, additional costs will be allocated if
that city wants a more aesthetic feature. It is at the city's
expense. You should know by way of the explanation that I
have received, it also believes that the city will provide the
parking lots and surface street improvements for accessibility.
Councilman Tice: Pretty expensive.
Councilman Shearer: Originally, when they were planning the
E1 Monte busway, a parking facility was
planned in the City of San Gabriel,
funded by the agency conducting the bus. There was so much
objection locally, that the City Council said,` "We don't want
parking here. What does it do for us?"
For as much as I have commented on a
transportation center, really, it will do nothing for the city
pays for it - putting out and getting nothing back.
Mayor Browne: The city would be the transfer point
• of all feeder lines; that is the only
advantage.
- 6 -
CITY COUNCIL
Meeting with P. Schabarum
May 5, 1976
Page Seven
Councilman Chappell: It doesn't benefit you very much, if at
all.
. Mayor Browne: The Chamber of Commerce has an on -going
study in this division, and I don't see
the wisdom of it. I don't think it
will help to merely have another stop like E1 Monte.
Councilman Chappell: Have you made your.replacement for RTD
yet?
Mr. Schabarum:, I have been holding off a little bit
because I have a few other things I
want to make some points on. I am
still working on the Labor Agreement, for instance. There is
some momentum in the White House,
Councilman Chappell: Will they sign the original Agreement
for one year?
Mr. Schabarum: Well, it is two years, but about a year
running. Finally, as of last week, we
are getting some momentum going in two
Secre.t�ary:,,: ` of Labor offices. The White House said they have
to arrive at a conclusion.'
• One.of the things I am interested in is
trying to get the 2-way radios funded out of federal grant.
That is, 2-way radios to_go in the buses to be of assistance in
the vandalism and assault problems.
Councilman Chappell: They don't write that up too much,
do they?
Mr. Schabarum: No. We are going to have enough
trouble funding any kind of subsidy
to the Rapid Transit in the upcoming
year.
Councilman Chappell: What about using one of the several
defense funds, since, down the road,
the radios could be considered defensive?
Mr. Schabarum: The application has been filed and it
has been bouncing back and forth
between the District and UMTA for
months. I think it is a sure thing, just a matter of jarring
it loose. We are down to the point of going out for bid, I
• think.
Councilman Chappell: Just be something else that will be
vandalised in....
Mr. Schabarum: It is anticipated to have a,silent
alarm that the driver can trigger.
- 7 -
CITY COUNCIL
Meeting with P. Schabarum
Councilman Tice:
May 5, 1976
Page Eight
Where is the meeting on the 13th to be
held?
• Mayor Browne: At T. -'&'.J'D` Restaurant in Rosemead.
•
Mr. Schabarum:
Councilman Chappell:
Listen carefully to that rascal; he
is smooth.
I went to the meeting that he held.
Mayor Bradley is supporting the plan.
Mr. Schabarum: It is beneficial politically for him
to do it. More fundamentally included
in the plan, as it is now, is a subway
under Wilshire Blvd., which was not in the original plan.
Secondly, there will be allocation of substantial funds for the
program in downtown Los Angeles in exchange for the support.
As far as I am concerned, the peripheral cities are being had.
Councilman Chappell: Before Bradley became Mayor, he opposed
all of that stuff. Interesting how
he has changed his philosophy.
Mr. Schabarum: It is going to be a good debate. Most
of the cities have not taken the position
you have. Those that have supported it,
just simply are supporting the idea of putting it on the ballot.
From my point of view, that is not satisfactory.
Councilman Chappell: It is deceiving for the person on the
street who doesn't realize the concept
behind it. He becomes misle4'-'about
what the big problem is. I see a City Council approving it
to get it on the ballot, but the public reads the literature
in favor of it and all of the cities approving it, and it looks
like it has their support. It is difficult to get the message
over to the people. The cities that oppose it are not brought
out in the publicity or literature, as I see it. Our City Council,
in opposing it, had a difficult time in getting the message across.
Mr. Schabarum: There is a group being formed to
indicate opposition. I think it might
be well for some real strong discussion
on your part either at the Association or League meeting, too.
Councilman Chappell: I am surprised at the number of cities
taking a positive stand for lack of
information. We were invited to
Baxter's presentation of this at the Dorothy Chandler_;: Pavilion,
and, frankly, the eyewash was beautiful. I never saw a guy put
•
•
CITY COUNCIL May 5, 1976
Meeting with P. Schabarum Page Nine
the word across as well as he does. He did not put facts and
figures on the table at all, and probably doesn't even know
them a day at a time. As I remember, it did not have a subway
running down Wilshire Blvd.
Mr. Schabarum: No, it didn't. As a matter of fact,
he has been very much opposed to the
Wilshire Blvd. corridor in concept,
not to mention the subway aspect.
Mayor Browne: So, then, "he and Bradley have their
differences on that?
Mr. Schabarum: INo, they worked them out.
Fourth Question: Prevailing Wage
I hear you and know what.you are talking
about. I guess that which I would ask for in the way of some
help is to get a third vote to put the prevailing wage on the
ballot for November. I am going to make,a concerted effort to
get the vote of the Board of Supervisors. I tried for the
June election, but only got a second. If you all could assist,
that would sure help. I've got some help from the Whittier
folks.
Mayor Browne: Give us the background, and we will
work on it.
Councilman Chappell: Hayes' position is not supportive.
Mr. Schabarum: He was endorsed by the County Employee
Association.
Councilman Chappell: Is he running for re-election now?
Mr. Schabarum: Yes, and he has no major opposition,
but he didn't want to put it on the
ballot.
Councilman Shearer: Irrespective of the prevailing wage
clause, this term prevailing wage,
particularly in areas such as police
and fire, you can't compare private industry to a public agency.
A particular agency might be right up at the top in the way of
salaries, and then the cry is, "We want to be paid prevailing
wages." If,you are at the top, you are more than prevailing.
Mr. Schabarum: Part of my complaint is that the
prevailing wage then begins collective
bargaining.
- 9 -
0
C�
CITY COUNCIL
Meeting with P. Schabarum
May 5, 1976
Page Ten
Councilman Shearer: Take prevailing wage strictly, and
apply it by a more conservative
approach. You don't end up at the
top; somebody has to be at the top, but the top goes up and up
on the prevailing wage.
Mr. Schabarum: Well, that happens. Right now, we have
details in the County budget for the
upcoming year. We have a budget
recommendation that has come from the Chief Administrative Office
(CAO) that proposed to raise the County tax rate to the maximum
under SB-90, an additional 36 cents. On top of that, he pro-
poses to set another provision in the law and motion that would
also increase it by another 5 cents for a total increase of
41 cents. He also assumes, by the way, that (1) general
revenue sharing is going to continue and that the County would
get an additional $50 million beyond what was currently antici-
pated under the program to expire at the end of the year; and,
(2) a ten percent increase in gs:sess:men't: evaluations. Not
withstanding all of that, it is still going to require the
reduction in services, prompting a layoff or phasing out of
2500 employees (more like 3500). That will give you an idea
of where our financial problems are.
Councilman Tice: Would the reduction be on an attrition
basis?
Mr. Schabarum.: Phasing out the employees in the time
frame necessary.
I am not supporting that kind of a
tax rate.
Councilman Chappell: Is a pay raise budgeted into the system?
Mr. Schabarum: Within the proposed budget is a
substantial amount of dollars in
anticipation of an increase in wages
and benefits. A month ago we authorized (in executive session)
a maximum pay package that the Administrative Officer could
negotiate with employee groups. That amount of dollars is
buried in the budget. In those meetings we had all of the
discussion on the prevailing wage and what it says.
It is more classification by classification.
There are some classifications that we would pay more than
comparable salaries in private industry, and some that we would
pay less. Law suits by the particular employee groups have
brought a resolution of the issue in their favor. A week ago
I received information of one suit in which they alleged that
- 10 -
•
CITY COUNCIL May 5, 1976
Meeting with P. Schabarum Page Eleven
they were not being paid the prevailing wage. The group won
the suit, and that is another $4,000 plus dollars. So, not
withstanding collective bargaining, we are also vulnerable to
particular groups of employees going to the courts and suing
on the basis of what they believe is their right under the
prevailing wage and most of the time they would win.
Councilman Chappell: You should -see the problem and put it
on the ballot.
Mr. Schabarum: One guy voted once contrary to the
point of view of the public he is
under, at least -in the past three
years I have been there. That is Ward on the last issue.
Mayor Browne: What control do you have over the
Chief Administrative Officer in
this, in the way of hiring?
Mr. Schabarum: Well, you have done that. You have
also assumed the responsibility for
mandated programs along with the
administration of the programs. Certain workload standards
are required as a result of labor negotiations or required by
the State or required by the Feds. Therefore, as that work-
load changes, generally up, it requires the bringi:ngc into being
of people to perform the responsibilities..
Mayor Browne:
Mr. Schabarum:
Councilman Shearer:
An analysis was not done properly
at the time it was presented?
Yes.
In your recollection.;:. '.Pete, has the
County ever said flat "no" to any in-
crease, such as we did two or three
years ago? No increase whatsoever?
Mr. Schabarum: No. First of all, there would not be
a majority of the Board supporting it
because it hits in the face of the
prevailing philosophy of the Board. Secondly, you stand the
reality of a law suit and the possibility of a strike. So,
there has been very little sentiment to move to that point.
Councilman Shearer: The City of San Francisco has found the
strike is inconvenient, but they are
still managing.
• Councilman Chappell: The people have not voted to eliminate
the prevailing wage; they did in San
Francisco.
L
CITY COUNCIL May 5, 1976
Meeting with P. Schabarum Page Twelve
Councilman Shearer: You never know until you try it.
Mr. Schabarum: The City of Los Angeles has the
• prevailing wage in an ordinance. In
the final balance, the County job -
position by position, all of our employees are not at the top
of the list. The City of Los Angeles has any number of
classifications well above the County. Long Beach has several
above the County on a related, but not specific, classifications.
The bus drivers in San Francisco got well above the salaries of.
our RTD people. So, it is sort of a whip -saw that has been
going on. We get our folks coming in and saying, "Look at my
counter part in the City of Los Angeles."
•
Councilman Chappell: Long Beach is supporting the prevailing
wage ballot measure. The Mayor, at
the group meeting with Hayes, was
trying to convince him to go that way, too. He has been invited
to several meetings, but to no avail at this moment.
Mr. Schabarum:
of recommendations
York City has had
prevailing wage.
it is going to be
way.
Fifthc Question:
of the question.
committee..
In the time frame of the last month,
the City of Los. Angeles had that Ad
Hoc Committee come forth with a series
to prevent ever facing a Ed41.bmma:Jlike_; New
to face. They recommended elimination of the
If we get enough votes to get it on the ballot,
funded in opposition by the unions all of the
Use of Revenue Sharing Funds regarding
Rehabilitation, Welfare and Health
I am not sure I understand the direction
The bill for :Mid=, alley;; Mental Health passed in
Simply put, this comes back to the
remarks I made a few minutes ago on the budget. There is going
to be a very substantial reduction from the .total dollars.
Again, in the whole budget package that the 'CAO has recommended,
it includes no subsidy to the RTD, revenue -sharing, general
revenue sharing funds for capital improvements. Based on the
level of funding of this year about to conclude, that is over
$50 million not anticipated to be funded next year. That gives
another feel as to what we are going to be faced with trying
to get something together. I hope you are not in similar
straights in your budget.
Mayor Browne:
No, we areno
stand not to
to supplement
t. We have
use Federal
dollars.
taken the
revenue sharing
- 12 -
CITY COUNCIL May 5, 1976.
Meeting with P. Schabarum Page Thirteen
Mr. Schabarum: That is smart. That is the way we
started out, but it got out of hand
when a couple of'the Board members
• started reacting to pressure groups who wanted funding. So,
now we are behind the 8-ball. This is a year where we are
down to the point where we just have no funds, and there is
not much we.can do. We have the interns and residents group
coming in next week. The other groups will continue to make
their point. But, if you don't have it, you don't have it.
Re the Board of Supervisors' reorgan-
ization, there are twopprincipal recommendations that the Bar
Association Committee put forward: (1) Create the office of
an elected mayor, and (2) Expand the size of the Board.
In the first instance, I indicated I
would be supportive of putting it on the ballot providing there
was appropriate language that would, in fact, make that individual
truly the Administrative Office of County Government, which means
it would take all of the administrative responsibilities of the
Board with the mayor, leaving the Board as a legislative body.
I don't know whether there will be three votes to put that kind
of thing on the ballot. There are going to be a couple of
Board workshops, one this morning, that will deal with the
details. I would hope that there is a proposal that makes sense
and will get on the ballot.
• On the subject of increasing the size
of the Board, I never have been and still am not enthusiastic
about the idea.
Councilman Chappell: Four or five.years ago I may not have
supported increasing the size, but with
the philosophy and thinking of the
Board today, it is possible that certain areas could vote and
get more people.like yourself sitting on the Board. If it went
the other way, it could be worse, but it is one area where
there could be hope. We need to get people more informed and
interested in what actually happens down to the ground level,
which we don't have today. I have sort of looked it over, and
in some ways I have supported it because of that reasoning.
Mr. Schabarum: My speculation is that those who would
come on the Board as a result of the
expansion would not be very close to
my point of view.
Councilman Chappell: You don't think so? It would depend
• on how you split the County up.
- 13 -
CITY COUNCIL May 5, 1976
Meeting with P. Schabarum Page Fourteen
Mr. Schabarum:That is right, and how it is going to
be split ' ''.: '; will be done by the
Board as it is now made up, and no
• lines will be involved to express the type of point of view
that I express, but of the majority.
Councilman Chappell,: There is a multitude of people who
think this way, but have no way to
say so. You might start getting those
kindsof people out working the districts and picking the type
of supervisor who would be more responsive to their problems.
Mayor Browne: If the County mayor came into being,
he would lift the budgetary factor off
of the Supervisors' backs, and adding
only one man to the existing Board could handle the situation.
Councilman Tice: Ken Hahn sent out a document a month
ago on the County mayor. In reading
that thing, the concept was fine, but
the way the department.was designed, it would be a weak mayor,
and all of the work would fall back on the Board.
Mr. S'ehabarum: I have a hunch that in the final analysis
that is what Ken is looking for. It
is not what I am going for It has to
be a strong office, wholly administrative. This falls to one
individual and he either rises or falls on his ability to
administrate.
Councilman Tice: Everything shifts back to the Supervisors
for final decision.
Mr. Schabarum:
Staffing a new office, no
the. -Supervisors' offices.
There are pros and cons in the whole
concept. It is going to cost more at
the upper administration levels.
feasible reduction in the staff in
Yes, with one guy in this office, all
of the administration role, from the point of view=:of.;` some,
might be good,/°some others,might be bad. Make it much of the
administrative activity and it is going to be less visible than
currently the case, a major plus. You are not going to have
five individuals calling a department head on a given day as to
how to administer his responsibilities.
We certainly appreciate the opportunity
• to meet with you. These kind of meetings are very helpful to
me. Too often the extent of our information is what we hear in
the newspapers, which is not always complete. There is a lot of
complicated stuff that we have to deal with. These are very
- 14 -
CITY COUNCIL May 5,1976
Meeting with P. Schabarum Page Fifteen
helpful in setting the records straight. Atf-,this'�point in time,
I think wet --,,can put ourselves in a position of being a little
more on the offens.e on several things that are coming down the
• line, i.e. the Coast.'tlne initiative, prevailing wage.
Councilman Miller: What are the cost factors on the
restructuring of the County? Hahn's
report said it would cost less than
the current structure?
Mr. Schabarum: That Is an assumption that he makes
without supportive evidence. The Bar
Association Committee also made the
same assumptionowithout evidence. On the other hand, I make
the contrary assumption without any basis either. Simply
looking at the State Legislature, and this measure would be to
restructure the County in a manner like the State level, costs
of both offices have gone up substantially over the last eight
or nine years -far more than the gross national product,
inflation, whatever. I don't see it as a realistic conclusion.
Councilman Chappell: Last- night the paper printed the number `
of various staff members in each of
the';dstricts; big difference in numbers.
No ceiling on how many you can have in your office, on how much
you can spend?
• Mr. Schabarum: That is the case at the State Legisla-
ture. The budgets of each group are
not chal.l6nged. So, they keep going.
I must acknowledge that is similarly the case at our Board.
Councilman Chappell: You probably have the largest area in
mileage, yet you have a far smaller...
Mr. Schabarum: Baxter has the square miles...
•
Councilman Chappell: But, the population is about the same,
and you are spending a couple hundred
thousand dollars less than the other
Supervisors.
Mr. Schabarum: Thank you all very much.
(The meeting with Mr. Schabarum
concluded at 9:05 A.M. when Mr. Schabarum had to leave.)
- 15 -
CITY COUNCIL May 5, 1976
Interviews/City Manager.: Page Sixteen
INTERVIEWS/CITY
MANAGER Mayor Browne: We have a decision to
make. We have a list of applicants
for interview on the City Manager's
position. We .have to come up with interview dates. The
weekends are pretty well taken up, so we will have to hold the
interviews on week days.
Councilman Chappell: It appears to be the only way we can
do it within a time spans_. We are
in a hurry.to get a City Manager. I'd almost say that the
sooner you can callaa meeting, the better.
Councilman Shearer: We only have half'of the picture. We
may find•a situation where some of the
applicants may have some very difficult
travel times. We may have to meet more than once to interview
five of them.
Councilman Chappell: Let us adjourn this meeting.to a 5:00
or 4:30 P.M. meeting Thursday or
Friday of this week. Once we get the
names, the Mayor can instruct the City Manager to contact
those people and check on their availability. If all five of
them say that they can come anytime, then we can set the date,
but there may be some who say no. They may have budget
. situations in their own city and can only come a certain day.
We might have to split it up.
Motion made by Councilman Chappell,
seconded by Councilman Tice to have ,�,!,n Ladj:ouined.,,meet.in'g at =5: 00 :..
P.M. on Monday, May 10, 1976, to set up City Manager interview
dates.
Councilman Shearer: I would also suggest that at the time
when we meet to discuss a time to
interview,,we lay down some mutually
agreeable ground work. We should agree on basic questions.
My thought is to have some common questions that we agree on,
and se.t up an organized interview so we don't just go in.
Other questions may develop or evolve from the basic underlying
questions, but it would be well to have some sort of uniform
approach for at least part of the interview, rather than all
five of us cold.
Councilmen Chappell and Councilman
Tice agreed to amend the motion to include interview format
• discussion. Motion carried. The meeting will be held in the
City Manager's Conference Room.
- 16 -
CITY COUNCIL May 5, 1976
Adjournment Page Seventeen
ADJOURNMENT Motiori•.rnade by Councilman Chappell,
seconded by Councilman Tice to adjourn
the meeting at 9:20 A.M. until May 10,
• 1976, 5:00 P.M. in the City Manager's
Conference Room. Motion carried.
APPROVED:
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
•
MAYOR