Loading...
07-26-1976 - Regular Meeting - Minutes11 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA JULY 26, 1976 The regular meeting of the City Council was called to order at 7:30 P.M. by.Mayor Nevin Browne in the West Covina Council Chambers.. The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Councilman Ken Chappell; the invocation was given by the Reverend Larry Cole of the Community Presbyterian Church. ROLL CALL Present: Mayor Browne; Councilmen: Miller, Chappell, Shearer, Tice Others Present: Leonard Eliot, Acting City Manager George Wakefield, City Attorney Lela Preston, City Clerk Michael Miller, Public Services Director Ramon Diaz, Planning Director Harry Thomas, City Engineer Ross Bonham, Administrative Asst. Renee Futter, Administrative Aide Gus Salazar, Redevelopment Coordinator Chet. Yoshizaki, Asst. Redev., Coord. Patrick Rossetti, Assessment Engineer Bill Freemon, Staff Reporter, S.G:V.D.T. Eric Cohen, Staff Reporter, Sentinel PRESENTATION Mayor Browne presented a Resolution of Commendation to Coach John Skolinas commending the Cal Poly Pomona Baseball Team. APPROVAL OF MINUTES July 12, 1976 The following corrections were made to the minutes of July 12, 1976: Page 5, paragraph 2 should read: "...involved. This is something..." Page 54, Resolution No. 5280'should read: " A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA,.CALIFORNIA, DELEGATING RESPONSIBILITY TO THE CITY TREASURER FOR THE CUSTODY AND CONTROL OF PETTY CASH FUND IN SAID CITY." t Motion made by Councilman Tice, seconded by Councilman Chappell to approve the minutes of July 12, 1976, as corrected.. Motion carried. r CITY COUNCIL July 26, 1976 Consent Calendar Page Two CONSENT CALENDAR Mayor Browne explained the procedure of the Consent Calendar and asked if there were comments on any of the following • items: 1. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS a) SECURITY PACIFIC NATIONAL BANK b) MR. & MRS. R. VITAL 1918 E. GEMINI ST. WEST COVINA, CA. c) UNITED WAY 621 S. VIRGIL AVE. LOS ANGELES, CA. d) LEUKEMIA SOCIETY OF AMERICA, INC.. e) CITY OF EL MONTE f) CITY OF ROSEMEAD 2. PLANNING COMMISSION a) SUMMARY OF ACTION 3. YOUTH ADVISORY COMMISSION a) MINUTES MINUTES Copy of periodic report required to be filed by Trustee re Southwest Water Company. (Receive and file) Expressing appreciation for Council decision on the Gemini Street problem in the jamara Tract. (Receive and file) Request for charity solicitation license from September 15 to December 15, 1976. (Approved in prior years. Recommend approval) Request for charity solicitation license -from September 5 to Ocotober 5, 1976. (Approved in prior years. Recommend approval) Requesting support for Councilman Cluff as a candidate for the expected vacancy on the RTD Corridor D Board. (Refer to Mayor's Agenda Item G-2) Requesting support for Councilman Marvin J. Cichy for the expected vacancy on the. RTD Corridor D Board. (Refer to Mayor's Agenda Item G-2) July 21, 1976. (Accept and file) June 24, 1976. (Receive and file) July 8, 1976. (Receive and file) - 2 - CITY COUNCIL Consent Calendar 4. ABC APPLICATION July 26, 1976 Page Three Chief of Police recommends NO PROTEST a) Daniel Ramirez dba LIQUOR MANOR Barbara Jean Ramirez 943 South Glendora Avenue • 1632 Via Alegra San Dimas, Ca. b) The Akron dba THE AKRON 5120 Melrose 215 North Citrus Street Los Angeles, Ca. 5. CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES FILED WITH THE CITY -CLERK a) HAROLD J. RUPP 534 Tocino Drive Duarte, Ca. b) G. WILLIAM SHAEFFER) ATTORNEY ON BEHALF OF ROBERT CONATSER, DARWIN MULLINS, MAURICE RIPPER- GER & KENNETH E. BUTLER Re damaged tire caused by piece of steel reinforcing along curb at corner of Garvey and Lang Avenues on June.21, 1976. (Refer to City Attorney) Re additional salary benefits. (Deny and refer to City Attorney) c) ALLSTATE INSURANCE CO. Re traffic accident on March 19, ON BEHALF OF 1976 at Amar Road and Azusa . LAURETTA FRANKLIN Avenue. (Deny and refer to City Attorney) 6. TRAFFIC COMMITTEE MINUTES a) REVIEW ACTION July 20, 1976. (Accept and file) (Items I, II, V withdrawn.`Refer-to Pages 4 & 5) 7. CITY TREASURER a) REPORT FOR JUNE, 1976 (Receive and file) b) ANNUAL REPORT Annual Report of interest earnings for fiscal year 1975-76. (Receive and file) Councilman Shearer requested that items I and II of the Traffic Committee Minutes be removed from the Consent Calendar. Mayor Browne requested that item V of the.Traffic Committee Minutes be removed from the Consent Calendar. Motion made by Councilman Tice, seconded by Councilman Miller to approve the Consent Calendar • items with the exception of items 6 (1) and (II) and (V..). Motion carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Miller, Chappell, Shearer, Tice, Browne NOES: None ABSENT: None - 3 - CITY COUNCIL Consent Calendar July 26, 1976 Page Four ITEM CC-6.(I) & .(TI) Councilman Shearer: The recommendation TRAFFIC COMMITTEE of the Traffic Committee on items I and II is in response to a request for • additional "No Parking" adjacent to some driveways on North Garvey, and to switch the parking to the south side of the street which is adjacent to the Freeway. Since anyone parking on the south side of the street is going to want to walk to the other side of the street, will there be any problems with jay -walking? Mr. Wakefield: I am familiar with the area. I think there is no'particular liability problem with the restriction of park- ing to the south side of the street. It is true that the persons who park there will necessarily have to cross the street to get to their destination, but from a liability standpoint, I think there is no increase to the liability to the City. Councilman Shearer: Has the recommendation been reviewed with the merchants in the area? Mr. Thomas: This proposal was suggested by'one of the property owners in the area. We have discussed it with.other merchants; there was also a representative at the Traffic • Committee meeting (representing the Gas House) and he was in agreement. There is currently a problem in the area with curb. parking; the proposal will increase curb parking while decreasing several safety hazards that exist in the area. Motion made by Councilman Shearer,,. seconded by Councilman Chappell to accept and file Item CC-6.(I) and (II). Motion carried. ITEM CC-61(V) Mayor Browne: I have received several TRAFFIC COMMITTEE phone calls on this item,which was MINUTES originally requested by Mrs. Mayfield, regarding the left turn signal on Garvey Avenue and Azusa Avenue. There seems to be some concern in the area related to the determination given by the Traffic Committee in their recommendation that the request be denied at this time. (1) There are left turn signaliz- ations up and down Azusa Avenue which seems to conflict with`the peak traffic load reports. Did you actually take traffic counts at that signal? Mr. Thomas: Yes, these are actual manual traffic counts that were taken.during the peak • traffic period. What is shown in the tabulation is the highest four consecutive fifteen minute periods that were counted. We feel this is representative of the conditions that typically exist at this intersection. - 4 - i Y CITY COUNCIL July 26, 1976 Consent Calendar Page Five Mayor Browne: Are these counts any different than are at Merced, Vine and Cameron? • Mr. Thomas: We have not done any manual counting there recently. At the time that those areas were provided with left turn phasing, the criteria were somewhat different than they are now, mainly the conflict product, which is mentioned here at 100,000; at that time, under the State guideline, it was 50,000. This location would meet the old criteria, but it does not meet the present criteria. The City did request that left turn phasing be installed at this intersection in 1971 as part of the freeway widening. State denied it at that time on the basis that their projections indicated it would not meet the criteria for left turn phasing. In the event this location did meet that criteria, it would be a basis of requesting the State to install left turn phasing at their cost under their policy of accommodat- ing changes in traffic movements that occur from freeway widening that occur within five years of the opening day of the freeway. At the present time, this intersection is maintained by the State though the cost of the maintenance.is wholly borne by the City. Any modifications that would be approved would have to.be borne by the City if we could not • convince the State that they are needed. Mayor Browne: Are the current signals so equipped so that they could be modified without having to change the entire signal to incorporate left turn phasing? Mr. Thomas: I doubt that there are any specific accommodations for left turn phasing at the intersection. The usual situation with the type of equipment they have is to add minor maneuver controllers, underground conduit to accommodate the wiring needed, and. installation of poles in the median islands. So, there is a substantial expense involved, possibly as high as $20,000. Mayor Browne: To satisfy the concerns of the persons inquiring into your rationale in this determination, could you come up with some cost figures.and explanation of the situation with the State?, Mr. Thomas': Yes. Motion made by Mayor Browne, seconded by Councilman Miller to accept and file Item 6 (5). Motion carried.. - 5 - . f 1 CITY COUNCIL July 26, 1976 General Agenda Items Page Six Award of Bids GENERAL AGENDA ITEMS AWARD OF BIDS PROJECT NO. BP-76003 HOLT AVENUE BRIDGE IMPROVEMENT OVER ESTEP WASH Location: Holt Avenue, west of Grand Avenue. Bids were received in the office of the City Clerk up to 10:00 A.M., on Wednesday, July 21, 1976, and thereafter publicly opened and read. Review Engineer's Report. Hold Over to August 9, 1976. Motion made by Councilman Shearer, seconded by Councilman Tice to Hold Over this matter until the regular meeting of the City Council, August 9, 1976. Motion carried. BID NO. 76-90 FURNISHING MAINTENANCE PROGRAM FOR AIR CONDITIONING/HEATING Bids were received in the Office of the Purchasing Agent up to 10:00 A.M., on Wednesday, July 14, 1976, and thereafter publicly opened and read. Review Engineer's Report. Award bid and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute maintenance agreement. Motion made by Councilman Shearer, seconded by Councilman Chappell that the City Council award Bid No, 76-90 to furnish air conditioning/heating maintenance to Western States Air Conditioning Company in the amount of $9,000.00 annually, and authorize the City Clerk and the Mayor to execute maintenance agreement. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Miller, Chappell, Shearer, Tice, Browne NOES: None ABSENT: None PUBLIC WORKS TRACT NO. 26283 ACCEPT GRADING WORK - COVINGTON BROTHERS Location: Woodside Village, Amar Road near Temple Avenue. Accept grading work performed by Williams Engineering and authorize release of Safeco Insurance Company of.America Faithful Performance Bond No. 2584330 in the amount of $140,385. (Staff recommends acceptance. • Motion made by Councilman Tice, seconded by Councilman Miller to accept grading work performed by Williams Engineering and authorize release of Safeco Insurance Company of America Faithful Performance Bond No. 2584330 in the amount of $140,385. Motion carried. - 6 - f • CITY COUNCIL. July 26, 1976 General Agenda Items Page Seven Public Works TRACT NO. 26290 APPROVE FINAL SUBDIVISION MAP - COVINGTON BROTHERS Location: Northerly of the inter- section of Temple Avenue and Amar Road. Council reviewed City Engineer's report.. RESOLUTION NO. 5282 The City Attorney presented: ADOPTED A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING FINAL MAP.OF TRACT NO. 26290 AND ACCEPTING AN AGREEMENT BY THE SUB- DIVIDER AND SURETY BONDS TO SECURE THE SAME. Motion made by Councilman Tice, seconded by Councilman Miller to waive further reading of -the body of said resolution. Motion carried. Motion made by Councilman Tice, seconded by Councilman Miller to adopt Resolution No. 5282. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Miller, Chappell, Shearer, Tice, Browne NOES: None ABSENT: None TRACT NO. 32719. APPROVE FINAL.SUBDIVISION MAP - BATTAGLIA ASSOCIATES Location: Northeasterly corner of Orange Avenue and Franciscuito Avenue. Council reviewed City Engineer s report. RESOLUTION NO. 5283 The City Attorney presented: ADOPTED A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING FINAL MAP OF TRACT NO. 32719 AND ACCEPTING AN AGREEMENT BY THE'SUB- DIVIDER AND SURETY BONDS TO SECURE THE SAME, Motion made by Councilman Miller, seconded by Councilman Shearer to waive further reading of the body of said resolution. Motion carried. Motion made by Councilman Miller, seconded by Councilman Shearer to adopt Resolution No. 5283. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Miller, Chappell, Shearer, Tice, Browne NOES: None ABSENT: None - 7 - • • • CITY COUNCIL General Agenda Items Public Works July 26, 1976 Page Eight TRACT NO. 30233 ACCEPT GRANT DEED - JOHN R. FITZGERALD Location: Adjacent to Holt Avenue, westerly of Grand Avenue. Council reviewed City Engineer's report. RESOLUTION NO. 5284 The City Attorney presented: ADOPTED A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING GRANT DEED EXECUTED BY JOHN R. FITZGERALD, AND DIRECTING THE RECORDATION THEREOF. Motion made by Councilman Tice, seconded by Councilman Miller to waive further reading of.the body of said resolution. Motion carried. Motion made by Councilman Tice, seconded by Councilman Miller to adopt Resolution No. 5284. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Miller, Chappell, Shearer, Tice, Browne NOES: None ABSENT: None THE VILLAS ACCEPT CORPORATION GRANT DEED - SOUTHPORT DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION Location: Westerly of Citrus Street, southerly of Montezuma Way. Council reviewed City Engineer s report. RESOLUTION NO. 5285 The City Attorney presented: ADOPTED A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING CORPORATION GRANT DEED EXECUTED BY SOUTHPORT DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, AND DIRECTING THE RECORDATION THEREOF. Motion made by Councilman Chappell, seconded by Councilman Miller to waive further reading of the body of said resolution. Motion made by Councilman Miller, seconded by Councilman Chappell to adopt. Resolution No..5285. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Miller, Chappell, Shearer, Tice, Browne NOES: None ABSENT: None CITY COUNCIL July 26, 1976 General Agenda Items Page Nine Public Works RESOLUTION NO. 5286 The City Attorney presented: ADOPTED A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA, • ACCEPTING CORPORATION GRANT DEED EXECUTED BY SOUTHPORT DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, AND DIRECTING THE RECORDATION THEREOF. Motion made by Councilman Miller, seconded by Councilman Chappell to waive further reading of the body of said resolution. Motion carried. Motion made by Councilman Miller, seconded by Councilman Chappell to adopt Resolution Noo 5286. Motion carried on roll.call vote as follows: AYES: Miller, Chappell, Shearer, Tice, Browne NOES: None ABSENT: None CITY ATTORNEY ORDINANCE NO. 1307 The City Attorney presented: ADOPTED AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF • THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA, ADDING PART 4 TO CHAPTER 3 OF ARTICLE VI OF, AND REPEALING SECTIONS 4117, .4118, 4119 and 4119.1 OF THE WEST COVINA MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO THE REGULATIONS OF GAMES OF SKILL AND SCIENCE. Motion made by Councilman Tice, seconded by Councilman Miller to waive further reading of the body of said ordinance. Motion carried. Motion made by Councilman Tice, seconded by Councilman Miller to adopt Ordinance No. 1307. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Miller, Chappell,..Shearer; Tice, Browne NOES: None ABSENT: None ORDINANCE NO. 1308 The City Attorney presented: ADOPTED AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF • THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SECTION .31.18 OF THE WEST COVINA MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO THE INSTALLATION OF TRAFFIC,CONTROL DEVICES. - 9 - G CITY COUNCIL Jury 26, 1976 City Attorney Page Ten Motion made by Councilman Shearer, seconded by Councilman Miller to waive further reading of the body of said ordinance. Motion carried. • Motion made by Councilman Shearer, seconded by Councilman Chappell to adopt Ordinance No. 1308. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Miller, Chappell, Shearer, Tice, Browne NOES: None ABSENT: None ORDINANCE NO. 1309 The City Attorney presented: ADOPTED AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA. AMENDING SECTIONS 2321, 2322, 2331 AND 2405 OF THE WEST COVINA MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO CITY BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS. Motion made by Councilman Chappell, seconded by Councilman Shearer to waive further reading of the body of said ordinance. Motion carried. Motion made by Councilman Chappell, • seconded by Councilman Shearer to adopt Ordinance No. 1309. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Chappell, Shearer, Tice, Browne NOES: Miller ABSENT: None ORDINANCE INTRODUCTION The City Attorney presented: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA, REVISING AND RECODIFYINGTHE PROVISIONS THEREOF REGULATING SIGNS.THROUGH ZONING (Amendment No. 135). Motion made by Councilman Shearer, seconded by Councilman Tice to waive further reading of the body of said ordinance. Motion carried. Motion made by Councilman Shearer, seconded by Councilman Tice to introduce said ordinance. Motion carried. RESOLUTION NO. 5287 The City Attorney presented; ADOPTED A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING HILLSIDE MODIFICATION NO. 5. Location: West of Citrus Street, south of South Hills Country Club, east of Sandy Hill Drive. OW110 CITY COUNCIL City Attorney 1 July 26, 1976 Page Eleven Motion made by Councilman Shearer, seconded by Councilman Miller to waive further reading of the body of said resolution. Motion carried. Motion made by Councilman Shearer, seconded by Councilman Miller to adopt Resolution No. 5287. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Miller, Chappell, Shearer, Tice, Browne NOES: None ABSENT: None PUBLIC HEARINGS WOODSIDE VILLAGE MAIN- Location: Generally east of Shadow TENANCE DISTRICT NO. 5 Oak Drive, south of Amar Road, east of Azusa Avenue, northerly of Gemini Street; and west of Azusa Avenue, north of Amar.Road, east of Lark Ellen Avenue. Council reviewed Engineer's report. Set for hearing on this. date for protests by Resolution No. 5262 adopted June 28, 1976. Motion made by.Councilman Shearer, . seconded by Councilman Tice to receive and file Affidavits of Publication, Posting and Mailing. Motion carried, Mr. Thomas presented slides of the areas.that are currently maintained by assessment districts in Woodside Village, and reviewed the Staff Report with the Council. Staff recommended consolidation of Maintenance Districts I and II, which had been established under the Improvement Act of 1911, into a benefit assessment district (Maintenance District No.5.) established pursuant to the 1972 Landscaping and Lighting Act. Mayor Browne: Madam City Clerk, have you received any written protests or objections to the formation of Maintenance District No. 5? Mrs. Preston: No, I have not. Mayor Browne: I understand that we have a petition to be presented by Mrs. Pam Nelson. Please come forward (we will open the !' Public Hearing on this matter) and present the petition to. our City Attorney for approval. i 0 • CITY COUNCIL July 26, 1976 Public Hearings Page Twelve Woodside Village - Maintenance District No. 5 PUBLIC HEARING OPENED Mrs. P. Nelson (Presented the petition to the Council 2817 Glenhurst P1. and the City Attorney.) West Covina, Ca. Mrs. Nelson was sworn in by the City Clerk.. Mayor Browne: How many parcels are represented? Mrs. Nelson: There are 515 signatures. Mayor Browne: 515 signatures or parcels? Mrs. Nelson: 515 signatures. Mrs. Nelson: What is 50 percent of the people? Mr. Wakefield: It is 50 percent of the area; not. 50 percent..of the residents or home- owners. It is estimated.that.there are 800 parcels involved in this area, 50 percent of which would be approximately 400 parcels. Mrs. Nelson: So, when you asked me if the signatures represented parcels, two signatures would be taken as one parcel? Mr. Wakefield: That is correct, if husband and wife each signed, residing in the same household. Mrs. Nelson: Was that figure proposed out of Maintenance District No. 5, or Maintenance District No. 1, as it belongs 1? Mr. Wakefield: It was proposed out of. Maintenance District No. 5 as it is proposed. Mrs. Nelson: That is Maintenance District Nos. 1 and 2 and all of the new homes? Mr. Wakefield: Yes. Mrs. Nelson: I would like to have the people in the audience who are protesting with me show their hands so that you know how many are in the audience. their hands.) (A sizeable number of persons raised - 12 - CITY COUNCIL July 26, 1976 Public Hearings Page Thirteen Woodside Village - Maintenance District No. 5 All of these homeowners are here to protest becoming a benefit district. It has been over a year, and.little has been done. You only have one thing in 40 mind after a year, and that is to still make us a benefit district. I was sent a letter by the City Manager dated August 11, 1975 requesting that I read the '72,Act; that is the benefit district. There have been a few things going on that we do not like. (1) We did not hear what happened to our subcommittee that Council ordered in September of '75 so that we could come up with a solution with the homeowners. We never heard. About a month ago, we called City Hall and asked what- ever happened. They told us there was going to be a meeting on the 14th of July. I was told on the phone about the meeting and I was told by a neighbor. I understand you did have mailings notifying people of the meeting; I did not receive one. Mayor Browne: May I ask at this time for Staff to discuss the mailings. Mr. Miller: The addresses used for the mailing were from the water billing list. To the best of our knowledge we • notified everyone in District No. I and District No. 2. Mrs. Nelson: I do believe I get a water bill,,but I did not get a notice. Mayor Browne: Were these mailed out separate from the water bills? Mr. Miller: Yes, they were. Mrs. Nelson: At that meeting nothing was resolved except the fact that we were going to be combined with District No. 2 (we are District No. 1), and that we were going to be made a benefit district. I asked the parties there how they could do that with- out notifying us, and I found out two or three days after that meeting that this Hearing was going to be held. You posted your Notice of Improvements for this over your Notice of Improvements for the lighting. No one in the City read those Notice of Improvements because like in your new Tamara homes, everyone is moving and approving because they are putting in land and they assume that is what you.mean; they do not know that you are talking about a benefit district. At that meeting they wanted us to come under the '72 Act, and they showed us figures. So, here we go again. The residents here tonight are in protest of losing the say-so in our District. Also, the right to vote whether we would like our taxes raised or,not. We do not wish - 13 - CITY COUNCIL July 26, 1976 Public Hearings Page Fourteen Woodside Village - Maintenance District No. 5 Council to have the say-so on whether to raise our taxes or not, at will or when you see fit for the cost of living or whatever. We feel we do need improvements, but do not feel it will cost as much as the Staff says. We would like a chance to have our vote on whether all of the homeowners involved would like to pay the higher taxes or not. I am referring to District No. 1. From the meeting on the 14th, I gathered that District No. 2 does not wish to be with District No. 1, nor does District No. I wish to be with District No. 2. You are throwing District No. 2, which has nice green slopes, into our District to make them pay for us, which is like what was happening with Glenhurst in Woodside. But, we are all Woodside. We would like to do this the democratic way; that is a vote by the people, not the vote of the Council or Staff. We have tried to work with the Council and the Staff, and only got one answer - a benefit district. Last year you gave me three options: (1) stay as we are, (2)'have an election, or (3) benefit district. At the meeting of the 14th., they gave us three options: (1) stay as we are, (2) have an election, or (3) benefit.district. But, they threw benefit district at us. Here we are tonight fighting to stay out of a benefit district. For a year, I have been telling you that we . do not have a choice. There are people who care, and,we do:not want a benefit district. .Mayor Browne: The Hearing is not over;.we have not, made a decision as yet. Mrs. Nelson: Even on the Agenda tonight, you refer to Maintenance District No. 1 not as Maintenance District No. 1; you refer to.it as Woodside Village, Maintenance District No. 5, which in my mind means that you have made up your mind. If I am incorrect, correct me. Maintenance District No. 5 is No. 1 and No. 2 combined into'a benefit district. Mr. Thomas: Yes, that is correct. Mrs. Nelson: So, in the Agenda, we are referred to as Maintenance District No. 5. Councilman Shearer: I think that is getting a little (I do not mean to be disrespectful) "picky." • That is what the Hearing is about. It is to determine whether or not we form Maintenance District No. 5. I do not know how else it could be titled, unless you want it to read "Whether Maintenance District No. l and No. 2 should be combined into No. 5." I would have no objection; it is a technicality. - 14 - 0 J CITY COUNCIL July 26, 1976 Public Hearings Page Fifteen Woodside Village - Maintenance District No. 5 Mrs. Nelson: I do not have the newspaper clipping with me that you advertised this • Hearing in, but does it state that No. 1 and No. 2 may be combined into No. 5, or does it talk about District No. 5? Mayor Browne: I did not read the statement. Mr. Thomas: I do not have the clipping, but we could read the resolution. Councilman Shearer: The fact remains that we are talking about forming Maintenance District No. 5. • Mr. Wakefield: Under the Tree Planting and Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, the first step in the procedure for the imple- mentation of the statute and the ultimate formation.or rejection of a proposal to form a district is the adoption of a resolution of intention. That resolution of intention was adopted some ' four weeks ago by the City Council declaring its intention to set a Hearing for this evening for the purpose of considering the formation of the Tree Planting and Landscaping and Lighting Act in .that district denominated in the Agenda and on the resolution as Woodside Village Maintenance District No. 5. The area proposed to be included in District No. 5 is described in that resolution and includes the area that is currently included in Maintenance Districts Nos. 1 and 2. So, what is before us this evening is the Public Hearing for the purpose of considering whether or not to form the district designated as Maintenance District No. 5. Mrs. Nelson: with the residents notified? Mayor Browne: Mrs. Nelson: Yes, but after we stood here last year and voiced our opinion, and after you gave Staff.the order to follow through and form a committee, why were we never Please continue with your presentation; we will look into that. I have finished my half. Mr. Seymour would like to speak. Mr. K. Seymour (Sworn in by City Clerk) 1724 Oakridge Circle The homeowners of Woodside Village West Covina, Ca. appreciate what the Council and Staff have done. They have spent a lot of time and money on developing figures and putting statistics together. Don't get the idea that we are completely negative. - 15 - CITY COUNCIL July 26, 1976 Public Hearings Page Sixteen Woodside Village - Maintenance District No. 5 Re the petition and the 515 signatures • that we have gathered, because of time and manpower limitations these were only gathered from Maintenance District No. 1. We did not include any of the Tamara Tract or District No. 2. We felt that as homeowners, and as individuals, each member of the home should have the right to voice their opinion. Both members did not have to sign the petition, but did so as a voice as to what they felt was the right alternative to choose. There are really two points that I would like to make. (1) We are talking about two problems, not one - the level of maintenance, quality of maintenance, and the cost. There is quite a disparity between what was originally in Maintenance District No. 1 and what we have in those areas today, as far as the quality or level of maintenance. We realize that cost enters the picture and creates a problem as far as manpower goes. Mr. Miller says that steps are being taken now alleviate some.of the manpower problems that exists in the area to get the proper work done in the common areas. Costs are not the only thing, the people who live next.to these common areas and look at them every day are upset as to the quality. We feel that there are other alterna- tives that have not yet been explored fully; i.e. outside •. contractors. We feel that maybe if an outside contractor was given the opportunity to maintain common areas, the level of maintenance might improve. We would like to see some exploration into the cost and feasibility of this. Another idea. to discuss would be not to accept any new common areas until the developer completely abandons the development. Most developers use these common areas as selling points, and note how they look when they are originally installed. But, they do not say anything about how they may look five years later. By not accepting a common area until a developer is completely finished with a particular development, it can increase the total revenues available for keeping up the current common areas, and keep the new common areas fully developed until such time that the City feels that. they can do it right. We do not feel that the benefit district would -truly be a benefit to everybody. We hope that Staff and this Council would take into consideration that maybe not everything has been explored yet; there are other alternatives than this, benefit district. Mr. W. Cumms (Sworn in by City Clerk) • West Covina, Ca. I would like to Join in what Mr. Seymour has suggested. It seems to me that there are certain criticisms of this proposal that this Council ought to take into consideration. - 16 - CITY COUNCIL July 26, 1976 Public Hearings Page Seventeen Woodside Village - Maintenance District No. 5 I notice in the proposal, and it is • rather significant to me, that at no time were the residents of the area advised that there was a requirement for written protests. The notices that went out suggested a Public Hearing. Our understanding is that a Public Hearing is an oral presenta- tion. Mayor Browne: All Public Hearings are oral. However, there being persons who live in the area who are unable to be present at the Public Hearing, have the option of.writing protest letters. Mr. Cumms: That was not indicated in the letter that was sent out, and..it would have given more people an opportunity to .express their views. As I read the resolution, it seems to me that there are two basis for it: (1) public interest and convenience, and (2) more than local or ordinary benefit. It seems to me that nowhere in the resolution or in the discussion has there been any statement to that effect. As you know, this is selective taxation. • You are selecting a particular group of people and increasing their taxes. I hope that the implications of this are not lost on the members of the City Council. This, to me, seems to be what the Senate Bill was intended to prevent. You are doing by indirection what is not permitted directly. It is discriminatory, as well, against the residents of Woodside.Village. I think that we oughtto look into other areas and see if the same sort of action is going to be taken by the City Council. If there are proposals, for example, in the South Hills area. My research so far does not indicate this where you gentlemen are residents. In this respect, there can be the suggestion of discrimination. Councilman Tice I am not a resident of the South Hills area. Mr. Cumms:, I was not looking in your direction. I would suggest that the best way to proceed is to join with what Mr. Seymour said, that is to post- pone your, action this evening.and to permit the residents to come • up with somealternative proposals. I also share his view that'I do not want you to think that we are totally negative. We appreciate the job that our Council is doing; we respect the effort and the time that you have been putting into this job. We know that it - 17 - CITY COUNCIL July 26, 1976 Public Hearings Page Eighteen Woodside Village - Maintenance District No. 5 is a big headache;you have to listen to disgruntled taxpayers. • So, we are not being in any sense negative, or trying to condemn you. But, we would suggest that there might be other alternatives which we would consider appropriate for an area such as this. Mr. D. Benson (Sworn in by City Clerk) 1327 Fairgrove I would like to speak in two capacities - West Covina, Ca. one as a homeowner in Maintenance District No. 2, and the second as a member of the Board of Directors for the Homeowners Association for the condominium complex known as Woodside's Townhomes No. 1, Inc. There are three points that I would like to.make, and I hope they fall on welcome ears. In my discussion with the Staff, it seems as though my subjects are consistent with their apparent direction to look for creative solutions to the problems that are at hand. I would like to register my protest in that I did not have a chance to sign the petition against' the arbitrary consolidation of Maintenance Districts Nos. 1 and 2 into one Maintenance District. I feel that the problems and maintenance of the two are considerably different and.should be separate. Having read some of the material furnished by the Finance Department of the City, it appears to me that the City Engineer has proposed a budget estimate of approximately $2,000/year/acre for the five acres described as Maintenance District No. 2. Those five acres were probably donated to the City in some part of the arrangements made with the developer in order that he might have the permission of the City to develop that area. I would like to assume that this was done so that the City could maintain some green areas and keep the density of population from being as bad as it could be. It appears, from that assumption, that the City has found the responsibility of those five acres in excess of what has been manageable. I come to that conclusion because it appears that the monies collected by the City for the maintenance of Districts Nos. l and 2 have been spent in the majority for District No. 1, and not District No. 2. I develop that con- clusion from the accounting of the City for the period ending May 31st. There appears to be an excess of monies allocated to that District (No. 2) and District No. 1 may be in the red. I, personally, do not have a solution. I would like to propose one; I would like the Council to take it under advisement. I would like to ask the Council to direct Staff to investigate if, in fact, the Council expects to pay more for the maintenance of District No. 2 than the rate currently paid by comparable organizations. To that extent, I would like to indicate not just city governments, and their attempts to reduce costs through private contractors, but also homeowner associations which have the same problems. I have found in my position that - 18 - CITY COUNCIL July 26, 1976 Public Hearings. Page Nineteen Woodside Village - Maintenance District No. 5 the expenses which my association incurs in maintenance of adjacent areas, which are basically level, that it has cost isus less than $2,000/year/acre. I would suspect that the City could maintain the areas under its responsibility for less than what we pay. The second thing I would like to request Council to direct Staff to do is to investigate if, in fact, Woodside Townhomes No. 1, Inc. might be allowed to maintain the five acres itself. As a consequence, this will reduce the tax liability to the homeowners to nothing. We appreciate that there are a good many questions that this may raise. The homeowners would no longer be able to use that for a tax write-off. But, if we can reduce the load to the home- owner by a significant amount, I think it is a viable alternative to the City and the homeowners in question. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED COUNCIL DISCUSSION Councilman Tice: It seems that we have several alternatives that could be carried out. One is to keep things the way they • are and just give the same level of maintenance, which may not be very much. Or, possibly an alternative that we have not explored whereby one or two homeowners groups (if they are strong) would form their own maintenance district to take care of those slopes and the rest of the area. They would prorate their own costs on that if they feel they can get it cheaper with a contracting service. Or, we could explore the possibility of a contracting service. I do not think there would be that much difference to maintain it in a first class condition. Or, we could form the District as has been proposed and get it in first class shape and keep it that way. Looking at the petition here and just "eye -balling" it, I would estimate that between 275 and 325 parcels are represented; that is getting pretty close to the. 400 (50 percent) signatures required. We have had a couple of meetings; we had some last year.and one this year and we still have not resolved anything. I think the only resolving we are going to do is with dollars to fix this up. • My own feeling is that right now I would just as soon leave it the way it is for the time being. If the homeowners and homeowners groups want to come up with some suggestions, I think we ought to take them under considera- tion. At the same time when we leave it the way it is, we will just provide the level of service that the funding calls for. .Heretofore, we have funded part of this out of our General Fund,, - 19 - CITY COUNCIL �J,,ly 26, 1976 Public Hearings Page Twenty Woodside Village - 1 Maintenance District No. 5 ' which is not quite right because that area does benefit the property owners, not the City as a whole, such as a median • strip. So, I would like to leave it the way it is until the property owners can come up with some suggestions that are acceptable to them, and to provide that level of service permitted by the funding available. Councilman Miller: I feel that a maintenance district needs to be self supporting; that is very important. Given the facts that have been stated here tonight, I concur with Councilman Tice. I feel we should leave it as is. True, sometime back it was proposed by Council that a subcommittee be formed. I do not know what has happened since then. I would think this would be one of 'the logical routes to go - form that subcommittee, come up with alternative ideas, and then go forward. At this point I would concur to leave it as it is. • Councilman Chappell: It would take four votes to pass on this tonight if we are near the required 400 signatures. . A year ago the homeowners and home- owner associations came in complaining about the quality of the maintenance, planting and lack of maintenance in,the area. This was a solution to rectify that. There is going to.be no solution that we are going to come up with that will not cost us more money than we are now spending. SB-90, in its wisdom, froze everything but inflation. There is not a person here who could run their home with freezing of the costs a couple of years ago or more; the City is no different - we have costs of materials, costs of labor, etc. So, we do have to look around and skirt the issue, so to speak, to continue to run the community. Just last meeting we passed a Maintenance District for the City of West Covina to which all of us up here will start to pay on in our taxes; it is an additional cost for maintaining of landscaping. So, we are not excluding ourselves.. The dollar figure is not comparable to what we are talking about here, this evening, but we have the problem with SB-90 freezing everything but inflation. • If the citizens in Woodside are happy to leave the landscaping the way it has been done, I say let's let.them keep it that way. If they want to work out on the areas 20 - CITY COUNCIL July 26, 1976 Public Hearings Page Twenty-one Woodside Village - Maintenance District No. 5 themselves and improve the areas around their homes, that will last about two or three times and then their camper, their boat or their home in the mountains, etc. will draw their time away from that and it will be right back to where it is now. I would be very willing to have them come up with some solutions to improve what they have been complaining about for sometime. It will not cost less than what we are spending right now, but it will cost more. If we could have a solution that would cost less, I would be all in favor of it. It appears that we do not have the vote even if we wanted to this evening. This will wait one more year. We are getting ready to establish tax rates. We will not be able to do anything in that area for another full year, if we do not pass on this this evening. So, we are "between the rock and the hard place" in attempting to improve the areas that'we would like to see maintained in a better manner. I am ready to go along with'my two colleagues who have just spoken and say that I will vote to hold • this off until next year so that our citizens will have an opportunity to meet, and give us their opinions and ideas of how.we can maintain the paseos and other open spaces in the area that we are not now maintaining properly. Councilman Shearer: It sounds as thought the majority has spoken. In a way I am pleased and in a way I am disappointed. As Councilman Chappell put it, we are 1°between the rock and the hard place." It is a very difficult situation that we find ourselves in. We could go back and talk for several hours about how this all got started. Most of the people in the audience were not around at the time, and do not know the back- ground. There were a number of mistakes made and unfortunately with these kinds of mistakes, they do not go away. If you make a mistake and build an Edsel, pretty soon you can kind of hide it, but unfortunately some of the mistakes that were made in the development of Woodside Village were made and.will stay with us, no matter what we do this.evening, no matter how long we postpone the inevitable. Mr. Cumms said this was selective taxation. I agree with him 100 percent. Leaving Districts Nos. • land 2 the way they are is also selective taxation because the only people who will be paying it will be the homeowners in the particular Districts. I do not see anything terribly sinister about that aspect. We recognized that going into this. We have selective taxation throughout - we have to pay taxes for unified school districts, people that are only within the.districts pay taxes to those districts; sanitation district, the flood control - 21 - CITY COUNCIL July 26, 1976 Public Hearings Page Twenty-two Woodside Village - Maintenance District No. 5 district, etc. So, the concept of selective taxation is not . new and I do not think is something sinister. It bothers me, though, to say we should let it stay the way it is. In looking over the signatures on this petition, I do not believe that 50 percent of the District has protested. But, be that as it may. Council can, in its wisdom, accept one person who wants to protest and vote the District down legally. If we accept the reduced maintenance, if we accept the concept that Maintenance Districts Nos. Land 2 are to be self-sufficient, they are not generating sufficient money for what they have cost the,City in the way of salaries, equipment or fringe benefits over the past few years. Up until this current fiscal year, these two Districts have been subsi- dized by a fairly heavy percentage out of General Funds against the better judgment of the Council but because we had at the , time no better way to go. In 1972 or 1973, the Council loaned the Districts $15,000 so that the rate would not have to be raised higher than $0.75. So, the City has, out of.General Funds, been subsidizing these Districts which is, I think, unfair to the citizens who have received no benefit whatsoever. The concept of these common areas was adopted to enable the project to be developed using certain standards that were lower than the City Code standards; i.e. lot sizes. This enabled developers to keep the prices lower. I am not saying this to justify what has happened, but to help people understand what transpired and why we find ourselves in the situation that we are in today. Staff is already looking into the possibility of contract maintenance. This may be a solution, but it may not be an alternate to a benefit district; it may be a way to reduce the cost below what we are presently maintaining; but it may not answer the question of whether we have adequate funds. Rather than take action on this this evening, I would like to recommend that the matter.be held over. We have until when, Mr. Wakefield, to set the District? Mr. Wakefield: I think Mr. Rossetti has had some discussions with the County Auditor about the time within which the assess- ment diagram and roll needs to be filed. My.understanding is • that it is required to be filed.by the first of August. Mr. Rossetti: It was required to be filed by the first of July; we.were able to get an extension until the first of August. - 22 - CITY COUNCIL July 26, 1976 Public Hearings Page Twenty-three Woodside Village - Maintenance District No. 5 Councilman Shearer: Can that be filed and then held in • abeyance, and then decide "which side of the fence to jump on later?" Mr, Rossetti: You can enforce the assessment, and then make any change you want. But, that will be enforced for one year. The problem is that no.matter what we do, we are going to have to move from an ad valorem assessment into what is called "lump sum." If we wish to enforce the assessment tonight, I do not think we have a majority on the petition although I would have to check the petition signatures by area, then meetings could be held with the property owners and any solution could be applied next year. Councilman Shearer: Would the work that you have done be completely lost next year if we find ourselves in a similar situation a year from now? Mr. Rossetti: No, I have put it on benefits received. • From the input we have had (I think Staff has received one bid) costs are running pretty close to what we estimated for this particular District. If you want to keep this assessment, I have made it on the basis of dollars per person depending on the ratio. Next year I would still have the same basic assessment, except that it might be up or down in the total amount. The problem is that these people have been used to paying $60.00 per year and they are going to have to go up to $160.00; there is no other way to do it. If they can come up with a solution that will drop the rates below what they are paying now, I will be glad to hear.it because it will sure help me in my business. There is one other thing I would like to explain. District No. 1 and District No. 2 are separate. For the purpose of administrative purposes only are they combined into one No. 5. Each one stands on its own feet as far as the cost of maintenance and incidental expenses. They are two separate Districts financially and one does not help the other. Combination of them is for the purpose of filing with the County, otherwise they would incur additional costs of $2,00'0 or $3,000, so it is an administration savings. The level of maintenance in • each should be the same. Mr. Wakefield: I think the problem here lies in the fact that when the Resolution of Intention was adopted and notice of this Hearing was given, reference was made to the proposed assess- ments as prepared by the Assessment Engineer on file in the City. - 23 - CITY COUNCIL July 26, 1976 Public Hearings Page Twenty-four Woodside Village - Maintenance District No. 5 Engineer's office. These assessments have been prepared on an individual lot basis. Each individual property owner could have • gone to the City Engineer's office and found out prior to the date of this Hearing what the assessment would be on his individual parcel of land. If.we confirm the formation of the.District this evening, we in effect confirm the assessments as already prepared and on file. To change it would in effect destroy the intent of this Hearing because people who are not here tonight might have very well filed a protest had there been a different assessment proposed for their individual parcels of property. The Council must either act to estab- lish the District this evening or abandon the proceedings to be reinitiated at sometime prior to this time next year. Councilman Shearer: It always becomes a problem in govern- ment, I think, as to whether elected officials are to completely concede to the wishes of the.people, or are there.times when it becomes necessary to "bite the bullet." It becomes difficult. What bothers me is that we (everybody) have a huge investment in this area, and to not maintain those adequately may well result in an unreplaceable loss of a • considerable amount of dollars. Once the lawns are dead, you cannot go back and water them and they will become alive again. • On the other hand, the people in the area are the ones who will suffer the loss, and they have spoken this evening. I have to assume that they realize when they say, "We do not want this.District. We do not want the Council to be able to raise our taxes." that they recognize there is a price that has to be paid. That price is going to be even further deterioration of the areas that they are sometimes now complaining about. I think in this case I will agree with my three colleagues to let the people have their way, and see what we can manage this coming year. Maybe next year things will be better, maybe worse. So, I will agree, recognizing that this Council, a few weeks ago, took action to make the Lighting and Landscaping District fully self-supporting, and that we will no longer take several thousand dollars out of the General Fund to help subsidize Districts Nos. 1 and 2. That means that the monies that are collected this year will have to pay for some things that the. Districts did not have to pay for this year and that will mean less water, less fertilizer and less manpower. Councilman Tice: Since this is a public maintenance district, what problems would we encounter if the homeowners formed their own maintenance district? - 24 - CITY COUNCIL July 26, 1976 Public Hearings Page Twenty-five Woodside Village - Maintenance District No. 5 Mr. Wakefield: The homeowners or residents of a, • particular area do not have a legisla- tive prerogative to form a district themselves. The formation of a district is a prerogative of a city. It becomes a public entity with the authority to either tax or levy assessments, as the case may be. If the existing Maintenance Districts Nos. 1 or 2 were to be abandoned, then the homeowners in the area could voluntarily undertake the maintenance of the common areas, but there would be no complusion to do so. The probability is that when the members of the homeowners association find out how much it will cost in addition to what they are presently paying for the maintenance of the common areas, they would soon lose interest in the maintenance of the common areas. Councilman Tice: They would deteriorate further then than what they have in the last year or so because of costs, etc. • Councilman Shearer: With all due respect to the City Attorney, that is speculation on his part, and also on our part. Is it legally possible, though, that the City could do that if we so chose? Even on a trial basis, could we turnover the maintenance to a homeowners association? Mr. Wakefield: The City could contract with a home- owners association in Districts Nos. 1 or 2 for the maintenance of the open space areas within the current maintenance district. Councilman Tice: Is your homeowners group an incorporated group? Mr. Seymour: Our group comprises 240 courtyard homes throughout the Bren development. We are a legal entity -,state chartered and incorporated. ` Councilman Tice: Mrs. Nelson, do you have a homeowners association? Mrs. Nelson: We are just homeowners, not.covered by any of the groups in Woodside. Councilman Tice: Would you be willing to explore the possibility of a project maintenance district? Mrs. Nelson: Not to the extent that I would join the Woodside Homeowners because of their rules and regulations. - 25 - • CITY COUNCIL July 26, 1976 Public Hearings Page Twenty-six Woodside Village - MaintenanceDistrict No. 5 Mayor Browne: I quite agree with the comments made by all of my colleagues. We are "between the rock and the hard place" and I would like to find the "soft spot" in this instance. However, we have a situation that was brought upon us, and we have to be the mediators.in a sense. Last year, it is true, people came before us requesting additional maintenance and planting in a given area which was left in a natural state. I think that is what opened up this pandora's box. The Council did direct Staff to form a committee with the one group. How- ever, we have had four people speak before us tonight, and each one of them had some logic in what they had to say. Hopefully along with it, they might be able to come up with some solutions. I think the consensus among the Council is unanimous that we are'not going to take any action in forming this District tonight. However, we are still going to have the problem. I think it is indicated here that there are concerned people that will take the time to do -some research on their own. I would propose at this time that the four people who have spoken tonight, if they so wish to volunteer, sit on a committee, as representatives of the Districts Nos. l and 2, with Staff and we will instruct Staff to follow through this time to get input before next year rolls around. The Committee and Staff should explore alternatives and avenues of approach so that, hopefully, we might be able to alleviate the situation to some degree. It bothers me to think that we have a new area being.built up in Maintenance District No. 1, and we are $20,000 a year insufficient at this rate. With an additional $20,000, we will be some $40,000 in the red at the end of this next year. I would say that as long as.we have a petition with 515 signatures on it out of Maintenance District No. 1 only, that the people have spoken out and we are responsive to them. Hopefully we can resolve the problem with the Committee of four people and any other citizens with constructive viewpoints, and the Staff and perhaps a Council delegate, without having to place a mandatory assessment on the Districts. Believe me, we do not want to raise taxes one bit, however, I think you have to recognize the situation that we are in. Councilman Chappell: We are not going to have a $40,000 deficit because we are not going to spend the money; we are going to have $40,000 less maintenance. I do not know if anyone has looked at their water bill lately. We pay the same bill for maintaining these areas as our citizens do.. Our water bills have gone up considerably. So, look forward to getting far less in this next year than you have been getting. I hope that the groups who have come here to oppose this tonight, those who have worked hard to get the signatures to have this project - 26 - CITY COUNCIL July 26, 1976 Public Hearings Page Twenty=seven Woodside Village - Maintenance District No. 5 turned down, will start working equally as hard in the direction of coming up with a solution because we are not going to be able • to maintain, plant or water those slopes even as much as we did last year. If I had my choice I would vote to put Maintenance District No. 5 into operation, but we are elected by the community and we are here to respect their wishes. I would venture to say that of the 515 who signed this, there will probably be about 500 who wish they hadn't signed this petition about a year from tonight. But, so be it. Council has gone on record that you are in for a real bad year down there as far as maintenance goes. We hope that by the time that we come to this project next year that we have a solution to keep that area.in shape and improve it like we thought we would be able to do this year had we passed Maintenance District No. 5 this evening. Councilman Shearer: Another thing I would like to point out is that one of the employees currently working in Maintenance District No. 1 is a CETA employee; that is sort of a free ride. His salary, benefits, etc. have not been coming out of.the District, nor out of the General Fund of the City, but out of the CETA money that comes from the Federal government. We • have no guarantee that that funding will last past January 1, 1977. So, if the CETA program is. stopped, there.goes something else. Councilman Tice: To the four individuals who have . spoken, I do hope that, if a solution, is arrived at, you will be the messengers to the rest of the people who you will represent. Mayor Browne: I would also suggest that in your meetings you take the individual assessments by lot, review that, compare it with the existing rates, and use that as a comparative basis. Mr. Wakefield, we have a petition here. In your judgment, would that constitute a majority protest? Mr. Wakefield: If it is the desire of the City Council to abandon the proceedings, no specific action will be made with reference to the protests. From my quick look at the petition, I am of the opinion that there is less than a majority protest • filed. But, I would simply recommend to the Council that you receive and file the protests, and that a motion be made to abandon the proceedings for formation of Woodside Village Main- tenance District No. 5. - 27 - t k' CITY COUNCIL July 26, 1976 Public Hearings Page Twenty-eight Woodside Village - Maintenance District No. 5 Motion made by Councilman Shearer, seconded by Councilman Tice to receive and file the petition of protest. Motion carried. Motion made by Councilman Shearer, seconded by Councilman Tice to abandon the proceedings for the formation of Woodside Village Maintenance District No. 5. Motion carried. MAYOR BROWNE CALLED A RECESS AT 9:30 P.M. CITY COUNCIL RECONVENED AT 9:50 P.M. 1975-76 WEED AND RUBBISH Location: Throughout the City. ABATEMENT ASSESSMENT HEARING OF PROTESTS Motion made by Councilman Chappell, seconded by Councilman. Miller to receive and file Affidavit of Posting. Motion carried. Mr. Thomas re.vigwed the Staff Report with the City Council. (Hearing of protests set for this date pursuant to City Council Resolutions Nos. 5106) 5198 and 5240.) The City Clerk reported that no • written protests had been received on this matter. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED No one from the audience addressed the issue. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED COUNCIL DISCUSSION The City Attorney presented; A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF RESOLUTION NO. 5288 THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTED CONFIRMING THE REPORT OF THE STREET SUPERINTENDENT DATED JULY 21, 19765 MADE PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE GOVERNMENT CODE CHAPTER 13, ARTICLE 2, SECTIONS 39574 THROUGH 39576.5, LEVYING THE ASSESSMENT FOR THE WEED AND RUBBISH ABATEMENT FOR 1976. Motion made by Councilman Shearer, seconded by Councilman Tice to waive further reading of 'the body of said resolution. Motion carried. • Motion made by Councilman Chappell, seconded by Councilman Miller to adopt Resolution No. 5288. Motion carried on roll call vote.as follows: AYES: Miller, Chappell, Shearer, Tice, Browne NOES: None ABSENT: None - 28 - CITY COUNCIL Oral Communications ORAL COMMUNICATIONS CITY ATTORNEY (CONT.) RESOLUTION NO. 5289 ADOPTED July 26, 1976 Page Twenty-nine None. The City Attorney presented: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING THE DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERVICES OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA TO PURCHASE CERTAIN RECREATION EQUIP- MENT FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE CITY. Motion made by Councilman Shearer, seconded by Councilman Tice to waive further reading of the body of said resolution. Motion carried. Motion made by Councilman Chappell, seconded by Councilman Miller to adopt Resolution No. 5289. Motion carried on roll.call vote as follows: AYES: Miller, Chappell, Shearer, Tice, Browne NOES: None ABSENT: None APPROVAL OF AGREEMENT The City Attorney presented an Agree - FOR FIRE ALARM BOX ment for Fire Alarm Box Maintenance MAINTENANCE within the City for the next fiscal year. In response to question by Councilman Tice, Mr.Eliot presented a clarification of costs for this service.. Mayor Browne: How many units are we talking about? Mr. Eliot: 30 units. Motion made by Councilman Tice, seconded by Councilman Miller that the City Council waive any competitive bidding procedures and approve.of and authorize the Mayor to execute the contract with the Oremco Company effective August 1, 1976. The Council and Mr. Eliot reviewed the Agreement, noting the services which will be rendered, the availability of other contractors, and the manpower situation at this point within the.Communications Department of the City. • follows: Motion carried on roll call vote as AYES: Miller, Chappell, Shearer, Tice, Browne NOES: None ABSENT: None - 29 - CITY COUNCIL July 26, 1976 City Attorney Page Thirty ORDINANCE INTRODUCTION The City Attorney presented; AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA) • AMENDING SECTIONS 6218, 62193 6220, 6226.5, 6227, 6233, 6234, 6235.1 AND 3612 OF THE WEST COVINA MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO BUSINESS LICENSES. Motion made by Councilman Chappell, seconded by Councilman Miller to waive further reading of the body of said Ordinance. Motion carried. Motion made by Councilman Chappell, seconded by Councilman Miller to introduce said Ordinance. Motion carried. RESOLTUION NO. 5290 The City Attorney presented: ADOPTED A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA, PRESCRIBING THE ACCOUNTING PROCEDURE APPLICABLE TO CITY DEPARTMENTS WITH I REFERENCE TO MISCELLANEOUS CASH RECEIPTS. Motion made by Councilman.Chappell, seconded by Councilman Miller to waive further.reading.of the • body of said resolution. Motion carried. Motion made by Councilman Chappell, seconded by Councilman Miller to adopt Resolution No..5290. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows: i AYES: Miller, Chappell, Shearer, Tice, Browne NOES: None ABSENT: None i RESOLUTION NO. 5291 The City Attorney presented: ADOPTED A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST'COVINA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SECTION VII OF THE SALARY RESOLUTION NO. 1277 RELATING TO THE AUTHORIZED POSITIONS IN THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE. I i Motion made by Councilman Tice,. seconded by Councilman Miller to waive further reading of the body 'of said resolution. Motion carried. 0 - 30 - CITY COUNCIL City Attorney July 26, 1976 Page Thirty-one Motion made by Councilman Tice, seconded by Councilman Miller to adopt Resolution No. 5291. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Miller, Chappell, Shearer, Tice, Browne NOES: None ABSENT: None ORDINANCE INTRODUCTION The City Attorney presented: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA, FIXING THE COMPENSATION TO THE CITY CLERK, Mr. Wakefield: The Ordinance fixes the compensation payable to the incumbent City Clerk at an amount which is equal to the current salary prescribed for the City Clerk, plus the salary paid for the Administrative Clerk position in the City Clerk's office. Motion made by Councilman Miller, seconded by Councilman Chappell to waive further reading of the body of said Ordinance. Motion carried. Councilman Shearer: Is this something that has to be done • by Ordinance? I see paperwork being generated here on the wild assumption that we should be able to grant some adjustments in salaries sometime in the future. This is normally handled by a change in the resolution. If we set one salary in the City by Ordinance, then we have to go through the Ordinance updating process. Is it possible that this could be done by resolution? Mr. Wakefield: The compensation payable to the elected officers of the City, the City Clerk and the City Treasurer, is required to be fixed by Ordinance. Motion made by Councilman. Miller, seconded by Councilman Chappell to.introduce said Ordinance. Motion carried. MAYOR BROWNE RECESSED THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONDUCTING THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING.AT 10:10 P.M. COUNCIL RECONVENED AT 10:25 P.M. CITY MANAGER • REVISED RATE SCHEDULE FOR B.K.K. LANDFILL. RESOLUTION NO. 5292 ADOPTED The City Attorney presented:. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE MAXIMUM RATES FOR WASTE DISPOSAL AT THE B.K.K. COMPANY LAND- FILL IN THE CITY OF WEST COVINA. - 31 - CITY COUNCIL July 26, 1976 City Manager Page Thirty-two Mr. Eliot reviewed the Staff Report with the Council, noting that the attached maximums are equiva- lent to the rates charged by the County Sanitation Districts • as of July 1, 1975. Therefore pricing in this area is not out of line with other sanitary landfills in the Los Angeles basin. Motion made by Councilman Chappell, seconded by Councilman Miller to waive further reading of the body of said resolution. Motion carried. Motion made by Councilman Chappell, seconded by Councilman Miller to adopt Resolution No. 5292. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Miller, .Shearer, Chappell, Tice, Browne NOES: None ABSENT: None APPROVAL OF PURCHASE Mr. Eliot reviewed the Staff Report OF XEROX MACHINE IN with the Council. POLICE DEPARTMENT Motion made by Councilman Shearer, seconded by Councilman Tice to approve entering into a Purchase Agreement with the Xerox Corporation for a 3600 copy machine totaling $21,280.1ess down payment, sales tax and equipment placement charges with the total monthly payments, including full maintenance, of $562.48 for a five year period. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Miller, Shearer, Chappell, Tice, Browne NOES: None ABSENT: None REQUEST FOR BLOCK PARTY The Council received a request for a.block party to be held on July 31, 1976, from Bruce Huntley, 2703 Dawn. Ridge Place, West Covina. Motion made by Councilman Shearer, seconded by Councilman Chappell to approve the request. Councilman Miller: I am not against block parties, but I am against blocking off public right - 'of -ways, so my vote will be :'no.'.' Motion carried, 4 in favor, l opposed (Miller) - 32 - CITY COUNCIL City Manager PARK SITE RELOCATION WOODSIDE VILLAGE Held Over from July 12, 1976 July 26, 1976 Page Thirty-three Location: Area southwest of Nogales Street and the proposed Shakespeare Drive. Mr. Diaz: The issue that was raised at the last meeting was the question of having a bridge connecting the two phases of the park. As indicated on the Staff Report (July 26, 1976), the feeling is that rather than constructing a bridge, it is a lot more feasible to connect a pedestrian type of crossing at the best place in the creek bed depending upon the final configuration of it. As.far as accessibility to the park area, this will not be a problem; the developer has guaranteed us accessibility. Therefore, Staff would recommend Council approval of the park relocation. Councilman Chappell: I was the one who posed the question. What I wanted to know was who was going to provide the method by which people could get from.one side of the park to the other`. With this type of bridge, how are we going to get the lawnmowers, etc. from one side to the other? • Mr. Diaz: The maintenance vehicles will have to come around, but that does not. present a problem as far as the Recreation and Park Department is concerned. The accessibility is guaranteed.. Councilman Chappell: That is what I was concerned about. Motion made by Councilman Chappell, seconded by Councilman Miller to approve the park site relocation of the eight acre. park to an area southwest of Nogales Street and the proposed Shakespeare Drive. Motion carried. MAYOR'S REPORTS PROCLAMATIONS Mayor. Browne: If there are no objections from the Council, I will declare "Better Water for People Week''.August 8 14.1 1976. PRESENTATION Mayor Browne: We have received a Certificate of Appreciation awarded to the West Covina City Council for outstanding service.to the West Covina Independence Day Parade Committee. I think we have to compliment the Parade Committee for the outstanding parade that they put on in our City this year. Hopefully, we will have another one next year. - 33 - CITY COUNCIL July 26, 1976. Mayor's Reports Page Thirty-four RTD CORRIDOR"D" Motion made by Councilman Chappell, BOARD VACANCY seconded by Councilman Tice to nominate Mr. C. Storing. Motion made by Councilman Shearer, seconded by Councilman Miller to nominate Mr. A. Perez. (Mayor Browne indicated that after talking with both gentlemen, he would be inclined to cast his vote for Mr. Perez.) Motion made by Councilman Shearer, seconded by Mayor Browne that the Council instruct Councilman Chappell to cast the vote for Mr. Perez, as long as he is in the running. At such time that it becomes obvious that Mr. Perez is not in the running, that Mr. Storing would be the Council's close second choice. In the event neither gentlemen are in the running, Councilman Chappell should use his best judgment as to whom to support. Motion carried.. COUNCILMEN'S REPORTS/COMMENTS Councilman Chappell: I do think that the Mayor should write letters to the Parade Committee in appreciation of the Independence Day Parade; to Mr. Shulman in appreciation for the concerts he is putting on at the Fashion Plaza; and to the Sr.. Citizens Committee for the excellent program at the Eastland Shopping • Center last.weekend. (Mayor Browne concurred.) APPROVAL OF DEMANDS Motion made by Councilman Shearer, seconded by Councilman.Tice to approve Demands totalling $953,126.41 as listed on Demand Sheets U.C.B. 56286 through 56500 and B.A. No. 419. Motion carried on roll call vote as follows: AYES: Miller, Chappell, Tice, Browne NOES: None ABSENT: None Shearer, ADJOURNMENT Motion made by Councilman Shearer, seconded by Councilman.Chappell to. adjourn the meeting at 11:00 P.M. until Wednesday, July 28, 1976, at 6:00 P.M: Motion carried. • ATTEST: CITY CLERK APPROVED: MAYOR - 34 -