Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1968 05 07 CC MIN1968 05 07 CC MIN ×P$â˜ö INDEX MINVrE$ 5/6/68 A/D 67-I Monterey Avenue Hearing Opened Page I Purpose of Hearing n I Affidavits Publication, Mailing and Posting i• I Written Protests n I City Attorney Flandrick $ Assessment Eng Mr. Bevington Page 2 Assessment Eng Mr. Bevington Page 3 4 Testimony Joseph Renner Page 5 $ 9 Frank Ralvo Page 6 Alva He rron n 6 7 8 Ruth Winn n 6 Ed Dennin g Marianna Bennett Page 8 Written Protests overruled Page 9 Public Hearing Closed n 9 Res. 68-111 Confirming Assessment A/D 67-I Adopted Page 10 ices. 68-112 Parcel Map 745, 3586 Vineland Adopted Page II Budget Revenues 1968-69 Page 12 Account No. 1100 Approved n 12 Discussion re expenses of Boards Page 13 Salary of C. A.0. it 13 Discussion re Salary of Administrative Aide 13 Discussion re Soundscriber 13 Account No. 1400 Approved n 13 Account No. 1500 Approved and #1551 $50.00; #1561,- $150.00 Page 14 Added City Attorney Included in Retirement System if 14 Account No. 1761 Decreased 14 Account No. 2200 Approved 14 Account No. 2201 Chamber of Commerce held over Page 15 Account No. 3174 Van-Type Truck Police Dept, Approved 15 KCET TV Closed Circuit Educational held over it 15 Account No. 3300 Bldg. Regulation Approved n 15 Recreation $ Park 15 16 Attendance at League of Calif. Cities Mayors 8 Councilmans Page 16 Institute at Anaheim May 19-210 1968 Councilman Gregory) 1968 05 07 CC MIN ×P$â˜ö 6601787 ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE BALDWIN PARK CITY COUNCIL MAY 6, 1968 CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBER, 14403 East Pacific Avenue 5.30 P.A. The City Council of the City of Baldwin Park net in adjourned regular session at the above place at 5.30 p.m. Councilman Crites led the salute to the flag. FLAG SALUTE Roll Calls Presents COUNCILMEN ADAIR, CRITES, ROLL CALL GREGORY, MOREHEAD AND MAYOR MCCARON Absents FINANCE DIRECTOR D ICAN Also Presents CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER NORDBY, CITY ATTORNEY FLANDRICK, CITY ENGINEER FRENCH, PLANNING DIRECTOR CHIVETTA, CHIEF OF POLICE ADAMS, CITY TREASURER CODLING AND CITY CLERK BALKUS 1Mr, Lawrence C, Bevington, Engineer of 1AkarkD Do- Mayor McCaron stated that the hour off 5:30 ooclock P.M, having PUBLIC HEARING arrived, It was the time and place for hearing protests or objections against the assessment levied fang' improvement of CONFIRM ASSESSMENT A/D 67-1 Monterey Avenue Assessment District. A/D 67-I, MONTEREY AVE, City Attorney Flandrick stated that the purpose of this CITY ATTY. RE hearing was to permit property owners who were liable to be PURPOSE OF WEARING assessed for a portion of the cost of the district to present to the City Council for its determination written protests concerning either the grunt of such assessment or the manner is which the work was done. Mayor McCaron asked City Clerk Balkas 1f she had the affidavits relative to this hearing, I.e, Affidavit of PublIcstion, Affidavit of Mailing and the Affidavit of Posting, wherein City Clerk Balkus stated that she did. COUNCILMAN CRITES QED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL RECEIVE AND FILE MOTION MADE AND THE AFFIDAVITS OF PUBLICATION, MAKING AND POSTING. CDUNC I L- CARRIED THAT THE MAN MOREHEAD SECONDED. There were no objections, the motion AFFIDAVITS OF carried and was so ordered, PUBLICATION, &AILING AND POSTING BE RECID. AND FILED Mayor McCeron asked City Clerk Balkus If any written protests NINE 19D VAITTEN had been received against the district, wherein City Clerk PROTESTS RECEIVED Balkus stated that nine C91 written protests had been received. Letters of protest were read In full from the following NINE PROTESTS protestants: CONCERNING COSTS, ETC. READ IN FULL Charles S. Worsham, 1276 Millbury, Le Puente; Assessment 91B ILetters Ira two letters received) Official Files, Charles R, A Marianne C. Bennett, 4150 Center St,; k-ssestmvt *13 Mrs. Theresa Redwing, 4160 N, Center St.; Assessment #14 and 05 Mrs. Juanita A Stanley L, WI I1, 409 Walnut St.; Assessment #8 Frank E. A Alice M. Ralve, 4149 N, Walnut St.; Assessment #2 two letters received, Bertha Stoskus, 4111 N. Walnut St,; Assessment #6 Ai a Herron, 4135 N. Walnut St,; Assessment #3 Ruth L. Winn t Elnore Town#, 4129 N. Walnut St.; Assessment #5 Edward J. Denning, 4328 N. Maine Ave.; Assessment #13 QContInued9 1968 05 07 CC MIN ×P$â˜öAdjourned Regular Meting of the Baldwln Park City Council J"y 6D 19" Page 2 City Attorney Flandrick suggested that prior to entertaining any oral comoents from these who f10ed protests or any other oral comments that they might inquire of the City Engineer and the Assessment District Engineer a statement concerning the basis of the spread of the cost of the assessment and any consent he might have on the protests as filed, City Attorney Flandrick asked Mr, Bevington from the firm of Lockman and Bevington, 249 East Pomsna BWevard, Vanterey Park, if his firm was employed by the City in conjunction with the assessment district. Ar. Bevington stated it was. City Attorney Flandrick asked Air, Bevington basically what his firm performed by way of Engineering services. Mr. Bevington stated they were hired as tine Engineer of Work tae design and supervise the construction, and to spread the assessment. City Attorney Flandrick asked dlr. Bevington if he was the project engineer In charge of this particular project, Biro Bevingtoa stated that he was. City Attorney Flandrick asked Mr. Bevington if in his opinion the work as done was completed In accordance with the plans and specifications and to bis satisfaction and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, Are Bevington stated it was, City Attorney Flandrick asked fro BevinSton If the assessments were prepared In his office and under his direction, Xr, Bevington stated that they were. City Attorney Flandrick asked Or, Bevington if the assessments were spread in proportion to his estimate and oplnlm of benefit to such properties. Mr. Bevington stated that they were. City Attorney Flandrick asked Ar, Bevington to describe his basic formula for spreading the cost of the district. Ore Bevington stated that the basic formula was one of benefit to the property involved in the district; that all of the properties in the district received frontage on the new street; that this adds additional value to the property; that there was better access even to the properties that wore already developed; that the street was a normal residential street; that the street was a safe street for trawling; tkat there was the ablOlty on the undeveloped plots to proceed with development end construction on a completed street. City Attorney Flandrick asked Are Bovington if the improvement Itself included riot only street loprovwents, as such, bast sewers, water service and the like, Are Bevington stated that this was correct; that there was a water line; that water laterals were run to each property; that there was a sewer line, with sewer laterals to each property; that there were driveways to each property, where they were requested by the property owners; that there was also a storm drain from the end of the property which cerrIes storm water run off out N1 a public street. City Attorney Flandrick stated that Mr. Bevington had beard the protests as read and asked Are Bevington If he would coaeaent to the Council on the protests and any general comment regarding all of the protests. lAr, Bevington stated that the first general cement should be that the petition had been carefully e Ined; that it was an exact description of the work that was to be'donei that it was signed by almost 65% of the affected property owners; that the signatures had been reexamined and that sera of the protestents this evening had signed the petltlon; that the City presented estimated costs at tine formation hear1T,g; that tae actual costs were less in all cases except fear one percel, that being QCentlnuedD 1968 05 07 CC MIN ×P$â˜ö C-CID3'789 Adjourned Regular IIAeeting of the Baldwin Park City Council fy 6, 1968 Page 3 parcel lion 4; that there were two QED sewer laterals that were placed serving that property by the request of the property owner as against the one which they had included in the estimate; that this was the only property where the final costs exceeded the as estimated coats; conversely it should be stated that the 1Yi nn as Parcel Nod 5 and the sewer lateral that was placed tar Parcel lye. 4 was eliminated; that taking the protests in the order that they were read, the general protest; that a number of the protests followed very much the same farm; that they protested as to the amauot of the final assessment; that the district was illegally forte ed by the Council; that there was no legal protest at the time of the formation to halt proceeding of the work, therefor the contractor had gone ahead and completed the street; that there was a comment 1 n general man the form protests, as he would cell them, of the taking of property without due process; that condemnation proceedings were started on ail of the properties; that the float value of the properties would be determined by the court, net by this Council and net by himself; that there had been general comment as to the enlargement off the district; that In his opinion this was a completely local street and that there would be no basis far benefit to the properties throughout the City of Baldwin Park and therefor- there would be no basis upon which the costs could be spread to other properties; that this in general would be his ceaawents as to the protests on Parcels 11, 13, 14, 15, 8 and 2; that Parcel No, 2 had had an additional protest as to the basis of the assessment; that as he had stated the basic assessment was far benefit; that front frontage was not the only factor and by the leer should net be the only factor considered; that there were individual items within the district, in than saw parcels have two sewer laterals; that some have two or three driveways; that therefore the benefits to the individual properties must be taken into consideration; that Parcel No. 2 also protested on the construction that was done across Parcel No. 16, the curb and gutter on Palm Avenue; that this was shown in the plans at the time of the public hearl,o9; that this work was done entirely at the cost of Mr, Shucks that wlr. Shuck was the owner of Parcel Me. 16 that a question was raised regarding the special atterney0s fees; that these districts were always handled by Special Bond Attor- neys so that the work would be correctly performed and acceptable to the bond company; that the next protest eras from Stoskus, Parcel no. 6; that they had commented on the debt Ilasttation; that this of course was waived in the petition; that the City Council had proceeded to hear a report en the cost, brat by the very act of the peti- tion itself the debt limitation restrictions were waived mead were not jarisdlctional Bus this case; that they had commented on the improvements, the placing of the curb, gutters, sidewalks, street trees and paving; that these were the present City standards and no greater than the present City standards; that any lot that would be devel- oped at this time in the City must be developed to these standards; that they had commented man the petition c1rculam tion and of course the City had no jurisdiction over that; that the petition form was given to the petition circulataar; that it was there for the property owners to read; that the extent of the improvements was stated on the petition and the attached map; that any cents that were made, were made by the petition circulator neat by the Clty; that they had coomented on the condition of the street; that he had reviewed the street this afternoon; that it would appear to him that the only damaged areas were those where chil- dren or others had thrown racks; that there were a number QContlnuedl 1968 05 07 CC MIN ×P$â˜ö6003'790 Adjourned Regular Aeeting of the Baldwin Park City Council May 6, 1968 Page 4 of rocks that apparently had been thrown and broken against the curb; that the curbs were chipped in taro or three areas; that Mrs. Staskus had also cemented on the fact that she was missing one page out of the notice; that he would have no dent on this as it went oat from the City Clerk's office; that Mrs. Staskus had filed a written protest at the time of the protest hearing; that the next protest was from Parcel No. 3, Herron; that they requested a full statement of the expenses; that there was a copy of the assessorrent diagram and the full report on file In the City Clerkas office; that he also had a copy with him that they could look at; that It showed a full copy of the contracter0s expenses, exactly what was paid for each Item, a full copy of the Engineering costs, inspection costs, the crest of preparing the resolutions, notices, printing and advertising, cost of spreading the assess- ment, the cost of printing, servicing and cmllectlng the bonds and the cost of acquisition; that this had been on file In the City Clerk°s office since the 85th of April and could have been Inspected at any times that it would remain on file in the City Clerk's office; that the next protest was an Parcel No. 4, Winn and Young; that their comment was regarding the higher cost; that there was a shift In the sewer lateral; that each sewer lateral costs $193.91; that the difference In their cost was a matter of $6.00 or $8.00; that when you take Into account the fact that they received a $194.00 sewer lateral and the cost went up some $7.00 or $8.00 their actual cost was dropped by some $184.00 or $185.00; that the last protest was on Parcel No. 12, enning;-that there had been four pelaats brought up; 1. as to the splitting of the bonds are that I t wau ld not be all against one parcel; that this could be done at any there whew there was a legal lot split before the City; that at this there the property was one large parcel, 180 ft, of frontage on Center and 180 ft, of frontage on fnterey Avenue and some 300 ft. In depth; that Mr, 0enning had counted about the hodgepodge street; that there were s substandsrd lots there, beat the lots as they would now be split would apparently be standard with 60 ft, front- ages; that he had cemented as to the costs, and again the costs were lower than those given at the formation hearlng; that he had dented as to the petition waordlag; that this was a standard petItIon, which was used for this four and he thought it was quite exact; that It had been developed by the City of 19aldwin Park after many years; that I t odes exact as to the work to be done, the area tad be assessed, the boundaries oaf the district were very carefully outlined; that the Information was there for the persons to read If they wished to do so. City Attorney Flandrick asked Mr. 8evingtmn If In his opinion the cost spread for the non protesting properties was the same In proportion as those protesting here tonight. JAr. eevington stated that they were. City Attorney Flandrick asked Mr. 8evington If In his opinion the cost figure represented benefits derived by the properties by the construction of these improvements. Mr. eevington stated that a was correct. City Attorney Flandrick asked City Engineer French If he was familiar with the assessment district itself, the construction and the spread of the assessment. City Engineer French stated that he was familiar with oil aspects of tine project. City Attorney Flandrick asked City Engineer French If he agreed or disagreed with the answers given toe the questions that were put to Mrs Etevington. City Engineer French stated he agreed with Are eevingtones angers. C, con, t I hued D 1968 05 07 CC MIN ×P$â˜ö Adjourned Regular Aeet l ng off the Baa ldwin Park City Couvaci d Allay 60 1968 Page 5 TESTIMONY WAS G WEN by: TEST 1 AIDAIY Mr, Joseph Renner, Attorney At Low, representing Bertha Stoskus, JOSEPH RENNER, stated that the biggest pretest he had In Mrs. Stoskus° behalf ATTY, AT LAW, was that this Council had a duty as parents of this City to see REPRESENTING that the City and the taxpayer were treated falrly$ that this BERTHA STOSKt9S Covnci1 had permitted a street that was so expensive that it was like a new cadsilac being sold to people who could only afford a used ford; that this street cost $79,000,00 In an area where the total assessment market value before the street went in was $38,000.00j that the street was worth twice as smemch as the entire assessment district before the street was constructedl that many people signed the petition Tim the belief that the street would be free; that the City of Baldwin Park would be putting the street in; that that was why the saam people were protesting the assess- moment tonight that signed the petition In the first place; that when the notice was mailed stating that you cotmld protest; the notice stated that you my he heard on Vow protest and heard tee the average layman means, you may speak saint and the Co mclI would listen tin your oral words; that winch was not the casey that when you say that the pretests were soot made by the majority of the people fronting this Improvement, it was because they d1l not know that they were to f1le a amrJtten protest; that the City mislead them into believing that as oral protest would be in order; that the City Attorney knew Airs. Stuskus could not go to a court of few and ask for equity in this matter until she has filed a pro- test with this Council and this Council had on opportunity to correct what they considered coaafiscation of *rs. Sfskus° prop- ertyi that by the City's am estimate Mrs. Stoskus° property was worth $6,336.0(3, the part that has been Improved and that the assessment was $8,413.00] that this arcade a new worth of $14,749.001 that Mrs. Stoskus would never be Nbie to pay off the assessment of $8,413.00; that not only weld she stand to lose the two lets that face on the new Monterey Avenue Assessment district, but she stands to lose her home, which faces on ft 1nutg that he would like to have the Council just think for a e rent as to what would happen to their $50,000.00 home if the City In which they lived slapped a lien of $70,000x00 as an assessment ors a street behind them; that he would respectfully request that this assessment be spread over the entire City of Baldwin Park, rather than on these people lam this low in- come area. City Clerk Ba l kus stated that the minutes of the format ion hearing, October 4, 9967 reflected that all pretests together, coral and w tten was approximately thirty C30D percent based upon frontage, Air. Joseph Renner, Attorney At Law, stated that tare reason Sr. Shuck AIR. JOSEPH RENNER, withdrew his protest was because he was the only minas who received a ATTY. AT LAW free street; that the went that the City paid him was the mount that the street cost. Mr. Bevington stated that the City acquired a full si'cty 1.601 ft. of frontage off of the Shuck property; that this woos turned over to an appraiser who worked for the City awed he had furnished the f l g- ores for the amount which should be paid for the frontage property which Air. Shuck was giving upj that a sixty GG3D ft. frontage would have been a complete legal lots that Air. Shuck had a let facing on Palm Avenue, which he could have legally split off and made a lot out of its that instead the City acquired It to open up the street for the rest of the property owners; that In the opinion of the appraiser that did the appraIs1hg Mr. Shack In effect lost a full lot; that this was the reason that time amount that was paid for his property came very close to the total assessment. lsont R hued 10 1968 05 07 CC MIN ×P$â˜öAdjourned Regular M<eet I ng a v' the 8e ldwl n Park City Council May 6, 1968 Page 6 Mr. Frank Ralvo, 4149 forth Walnut, stated that In regards tai FRANK RAIVO, 4049 Mfr, Shuck°s property that he still had his let; that they took N. Walnut a lot away from him *R, Pa0w, hut they paid hive full vague for It; that he now had a lot an fanterey Avenue that he previously had no access to before; that he got a street free and his land too. City Clerk 8aalkus stated for purposes of clarIfficatIon that at the public hearing en the ff tIon of the district Mrs. Redwine and Mr. Herron had evade a statement. Mrs. BsOkes read In full their statements from the minutes of October 4,. 1967. Mfr. Alva Herron, 4039 North Walnut, stated that he would like ALVA HERRON, 4139 an estimate of the costs, such as EagIneer-Ing, what It cost to N. Walnut drag the plans,, what the bid was, etc., wherein the assessment diagram and report were shown to Mr, Herron. Ruth Winn, 4829 North Wagnut, asked why s of the assessments RUTH WINN, 4129 ran higher than others. N. Walnut Mr. Sevington stated that the a asses pt was rather complex; that If they took out the individual item, such as driveways, sewer laterals, water laterals and extra Items that were acquired such as Mr. Shuck°s curb, gutter and sidewalk the front of hIb property; that the ruining costs were spread on a footage basis, with that portion being e4ua0, bout becaaise of a00 the various individual Items, for Instance Mars. Wtrdcaastle had) 180 ft. o4 front- age, but she only had one driveway; that certaaWy the net cost would vary based on the Individual Items that were Installed,, ut the basic street Improvement, sewer line, waater Me and storm drain were equal for the propertles; that Or. Herron was given credit In the district for the ffict that he had already donsted his property tai the street. Ruth WInn, 4129 North Walnut, stated) she had deducted what the RUTH WINN City had allowed her on the property; that the total assessment for the 098 ft, was $02,920.00; that she would end up with three 43D sixty-sloe R66D ft. lets; that Ar, ilerron had a sixty C60D ft. lot; that there was a dIfffference of $6.00 a ft. Mr. 8evIngten stated that the iierroxn property did not go through to the other properties; that the Winn property did go through; that these properties a would either have deeper lots, or bigger or better lots sir the potential ot3 ending ap with mare lots; that for this reason there was a factor ono these properties of the frontage that was placed Into the ssses ent to equalize the benefit between a small lot 84 ft. deep and the potential of these lots which would be 140 or 150 ft. deep or by proper design a greater number of lots than six W could be dchleved. Mayor Ma Caron asked) I ff there were s of these lots that had been split prior to this ssaaessmen t d I str I ct and I ff there was an agree- ment assigned by a previous wrier ststlng they would participate In the development off this street whenever It became feasible to Construct the street. Mr. 8evington stated that there were some properties acquired by the City as part of previous lot upOltso Mr. AGva Herron, 4139 North flaaut, stated that of the actual ALVA HERRON, 4039 bld fiats an awful price f:*r Arawinag up plans end surveying; that N. Walnut It had been previously stated that the Herron property did snot go through to Walnut; that this was root tree; It did Va through to Walnut; that It hod been stated that this street was of no vague to the City; that en he land! built, his house thaw thirty C301 ft. In the back had b'aeen Important; that he had been unable to get a perms t aunt N 0 he dig:: ii ateaii thus farad, th:ttt he ordered why I t was so va 1 uA'h l a hhef sad, of nv~~ vague to the C° I ty new. Gfi;on~' I n uad D 1968 05 07 CC MIN ×P$â˜ö 0003'793 Adjourned Regular Aleoting of the Baldwin Park City Council May 6r 1961;< Page 7 Alr Bevtngton stated that regarding AIr, Herronts first ca~went on the Engineering and inspection costs, that the engineering came directly out of the American Society of Civil Engineering handbook as to the size of the project and the amount that should be charged per project; that perhaps Mr, Herron should also be aware of the fact that their office had done all of the engineering, paid ail of the salaries and often carried one of these assessment districts for as long as a year; that the la- spection ran less than 391; of the cast of the contract; that he felt this was a very low inspection ratio; that the engineering Included the surveying cost; that three 3) people had quoted on the surveying for this project; that the final surveytog,for the project ran about 50% of what was initially estimated; that this required constant inspection; that there had been an inspec- tor on the job all the time, Sr. Herron stated that there had not been an inspector on the AIR, HERRON job all the time, because he had looked for an inspector when they had dumped old concrete an his approach and there had burn no inspector on the job all that day, A1r. Bevington stated that he would take exception to Alr, Herroats statement; that there had been an inspector on the job at all times when any construction was going an that required inspection. Alr, Bevington stated that whether Mr, Herron•s property wept clear through or not that legally there was a lot created at the rear portion facing onto this street; that as far as they were concerned AIr. Herron may own contiguous property out in same other area, but this could not become part of the assessment district or could not be assessed; that the Herron property had already been split, Mr. Ed Denning, 4142 North Bresee, stated that AIr, Bevington had ED DEMING, 4442 stated that the petition was read by the people and understood Ai, Bresee by them, Alr. Bevington stated he did not say that; that what he had said was that the petition was very clearly stated and the map of the improvement was very clear, if the people read it. City Attorney F(andrlck stated that the question of the petition was raised by the property owners, specifically Mr. Donning, at the time of the first protest hearing, that what happened to that petition has been subject to about fifteen 15) different Inter- pretations; that it was certainly not relevant to this hearing; that this was a question of shall the cost as proposed be assess- ed against the properties and was the work done properly; that the Issue of whether the district was formed properly had already been resolved. AAr. Donning stated that he had not been aware of the petition; AIR. DENNING that he had seen it for the first time when he had obtained a copy from the City; that he read the petition and did not under- stand It; that the 1911 Act required 60% petition and on the very same petition the people waived their right of debt limitation; that after spending $1200.00 with his attorney; that his attorney had said the City could have initiated this improvement without a petition; that he had been told at the meeting of October 4, 1967 that his oral protest would be recounted, but that the petition waived all of his rights, then he found out that page 3 of the notice delivered to him was missing; that on page 3 of that notice it had stated that it was obligatory to put a protest in writing. Alayor AIcCaron stated that the total of protests, oral and written, at the October 4, 1967 meeting had not been over 35%. Continued) 1968 05 07 CC MIN ×P$â ˜ö0003794 Adjourned Regular Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council May 6, 1968. Page 8 Air. Denning stated that his attorney had said this was legal, AIR. DEMING but it was Immoral, unjust and exhorbitant; that not a person in this district could pay from $30.00 a month to $146.00 a month on an assessment; that every single one of them would lose their property. Marianna Sennett, 4150 Center Street, stated that she agreed MARIANNA BENNETT, with Mr. Denning; that they had a lot 90 x 270 ft., which was 4150 Center St. split into two 2) lots; that they owed $4,5W.00 against It the way it stood; that it was a thirty 301 year old house; that with this assessment they would trice around $19,000.00 or more; that you could only sell a lot in Baldwin Park for around $6,004.00; that including taxes, insurance, etc. their payments would now be about $190.00 a month; that they had four children and would probably lose their property over this; that if this was a moral City Council she hoped they could sleep nights. Councilman Morehead asked how many lots were involved in this assessment district, wherein Mr. Bevington stated that there were sixteen 16) different property owners. Councilman Morehead asked how many people had signed the petition requesting that the improvement be constructed, wherein Mr. Sevington stated that thirteen 13) property owners had signed the petition. Councilman Morehead stated that before the contract was awarded ail property owners were notified of the estimated cost sad that the actual cost had resulted in a lower cost than the estimated cost; that when 656 of the property owners had signed the petition he had had no choice but to go along with the majority; that the end result had been that a street had been improved; that now the same people who had signed the petition were protesting against the cost. Mr. Alva Herron, 4139 North Walnut, asked how it was known that MR. ALVA HERRON 16 people signed the petition, wherein City Engineer French stated that when the petition was brought In It was verified ay the circulator; that the names were correlated with the owner- ship as shown on the equalized assessment roll; that If there was a discrepancy between what was shown on the last equalized assessment roll and the signature on the petition, they required some proof of ownership; that the petition was filed with the Council by the circulator based upon his statement that he ob- tained the signatures; that the City did not call each signer an inquire if they did sign the petition. Mayor McCaron stated that a formation hearing had been held and all property owners notified; that the point of whether the signa- tures were genuine or not was not of a material thing at the present time. Mr. Renner, Attorney At Law, stated that Mrs. Stoskus was AIR. REAMER, ATTY. concerned because same one had said that she must have known AT LAW that her protest had to be in writing because she made a written protest; that she had made a written protest because she had found out by a round about way, not through page 3 of the notice. Mayor McCaron stated that her protest was still counted at the formation hearing; that ail oral and written protests had not been sufficient to warrant cancelling the district; that those properties that were already dedicated were obligated to go along with whatever improvement was to be put in In the area; that everyone seemed to think that Council could take this cost and assess it to the entire City; that this was erroneous; Continued) 1968 05 07 CC MIN ×P$â ˜ö 0003'795 Adjourned Regular Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council May b, 1968 Page 9 that no one should expect someone else to carry their obliga- tions for them. Mr, Kenning stated that the citizens of Baldwin Park expected AIR. DENNING the City Council to take care of them; that he had asked City Engineer French if there was any precedent on the 1911 Street Improvement Act, which could be used to improve an entire street; that City Engineer French had told him they used it all of the time; that the only street he knew of where It had been used for an entire street, was Jerry Street; that he had lots listed on Jerry Street for $5,000.00; that they had been listed for over ten 10) months; that they were not selling; that every single member of the City Council should be concerned about the indi- viduals in Baldwin Park; that he would lose his property to the bond holder, unless he could switch the bond to other lots; that this would prolong the agony; that he would like to know whether the City Council cared or not if he lost his property; that Baldwin Park was now a poverty area; that it had been declared a poverty area; that because of this when they sold property now the Insurance companies In cooperation with the Federal Government cut the cost to the seller; that if he were sitting on the Council and one person lost their home he would feel It on his conscience; that the petition had been ambiguous and un- intelligable to the layman; that he had physical evidence why one of these petitions was marked $2,000.00 per lot. Mayor AlcCaron stated that the City did net go out and solicit this petition. Councilman Crites stated that he felt the Council had acted In good faith on the basis of the petition; that he believed that the assessment had been spread out in a proper manner; that he felt they were having the protests because the total figure was what It was. City Attorney Flandrick stated that if Council desired they could continue the hearing for further 6tudy; that prior to the close of the hearing they should consider the protests as such; that if they felt that the protests should be overruled, n other words if the spread of the assessment was proper under the ev(- dence given by the Assessment Engineer,. then at this point a motion would be appropriate to overrule all the written protests as received and thereafter close the hearing. Mr. Renner, Attorney At Law, stated that Mayor McCaron had stated that it would be illegal for the Monterey Assessment District to be expanded as the people had asked; that he wondered if this was correct, wherein City Attorney Flandrick stated it was. Mr. Renner, Attorney At Law, asked Mr. Flandrick if he had an authority for that statement, wherein Mr. Flandrick stated Section 5000 et. seq. of the Streets and Highways Code; that he was sure that Mr. Renner was familiar with it and knew that you could not spread costs against property that was not benefited. MAYOR MCCARON MOVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OVERRULE ALL OF THE MOTION MADE AND WRITTEN PROTESTS AS RECEIVED. COUNCILMAN MOREHEAD SECONDED. CARRIED THAT COUNCIL Roll Call. There were no objections, the motion carried and OVERRULE ALL OF THE was so ordered. WRITTEN PROTESTS AS RECID. As there was no one else in the audience desiring to speak PUBLIC HEARING either in behalf of or In opposition to the Monterey Avenue DECLARED CLOSED Assessment District 67-1, Mayor McCaron declared the public MONTEREY AVE. A/D hearing closed. 67-1 Continued) 1968 05 07 CC MIN ×P$â ˜ö 0003'796 Adjourned Regular Meeting of the So Idwin Park City Council May 6, 1968 Page 10 City Attorney Flandrick stated that a draft of a resolution had been prepared in the alternative form; that the resolution would confirm the diagram and order its recording. RESOLUTION NO. 68-111 CONFIRMING RES. NO. 68-111 ASSESSMENT IN A/D 67-1 MONTEREY CONFIRMING ASSESS- AVENUE) AM IN A /D 67-1 MONTEREY AVE.) City Clerk Balkus stated that after the third paragraph should AFTER 3RD PARAGRAPH be added WHEREAS, written protests were received from the SHOULD BE ADDED following property owners; and said Council having duly' WHEREAS, WRITTEN considered sold protests, by motion, overruled the same." PROTESTS WERE RECEIVED FROM THE FOLLOWING PROPERTY OWNERS; AND SAID COUNCIL HAVING DULY CONSIDERED SAID PROTESTS, BY MOTION, OVERRULED THE SAME." COUNCILMAN MOREHEAD MOVED THAT RESOLUTION NO. 68-111 BE ADOPTED RES. NO. 68-111 AS AMENDED AID THAT FURTHER READING 4,E WAIVED. COUNCILMAN ADOPTED AS AMENDED ADAIR SECONDED. Roll Call. There were no objections, the motion carried and was so ordered. 00- AT 7:08 P.M. COUNCILMAN MOREHEAD MOVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL 7:08 P.AI. COUNCIL RECESS FOR THIRTY 30) MINUTES. COUNCILMAN ADAIR SECONDED. RECESSED FOR There were no objections, the motion carried and was so THIRTY 301 ordered. MINUTES 00- 1968 05 07 CC MIN ×P$â 1968 05 07 CC MIN ×P$â ˜ö0003'798 Adjourned Regular Aleeting of the Baldwin Pork City Council Alay 6, 1968 Page 12 COUNCILWOMAN GREGORY MOVED THAT RESOLUTION NO, 68-112 BE RES. NO. 68-112 ADOPTED AND THAT FURTHER READING BE WAIVED. COUNCILMAN ADOPTED ADAIR SECONDED, There were no objections, the motion carried and was so ordered. Chief Administrative Officer Nordby stated that in preparing C.A.O. RE ESTIMATED- the proposed budget they had tried to estimate optimistically, REVENUES PROPOSED yet conservatively; that they had estimated Account No. 917, BUDGET 1968-69 Sales Tax, at $325,000.00; that the same rate of S.35 was projected for the Recreation and Parks for the coming year; that the $.61 was only about 5} % of an $11.0 per $100.00 tax rate; that once the tax rate was increased to the statutory limit they would have no latitude and until same great need arose he had,;submitted a budget at the same rate. He explain- ed that this City had established a limitation and worked toward that end; that one of the items that was not totally resolved was the expense account of Boards and Commissions. He stated that the revenue for the current year from Account No. 951, Alcohol Beverage License was estimated at $16,000.00, but this should be Increased to $18,000.00; that they had estimated a little too high on property taxes, and the reason for this was that there had been a cut back In construction and the assessed valuations had not increased at the same rate as previously. He explained there were a number of Items that were yet to be considered in the various departments in which these accounts occurred; that City Clerk Balkus had stated that the Soundscriber machine eras reaching its last few months of service; that this had been in last year's budget too for some $1,800.00; that he had hoped to have this custom`. built in a new facility, however if there was no hope for the equip- ment to lest they would have to act earlier. He stated that he had an appointment with s representative of the Crossing Guards at 9:30 a.m., May 7, 1968 to try to resolve any differ- ences; that they were paid $1.75 an hour presently and they would like $2.00 an hour; that the survey showed $1.77 on hour; that in the appropriations he had set forth a $10,000.00 contingency; that the Planning Commissioners were now paid a flat fee per month in accordance with the Code which they felt was not adequate; that this would have to be resolved after more study; that lost year the Chamber of Commerce had been paid $16,000.00; that his philosophy concerning this was, If all the departments requests were being reduced that they should be included; that he had again recommended the same amount; that another Item which did not appear was the pay for Street Maintenance workers; that the salary survey showed that they were 8.88 under the cities they surveyed; that he had originally reccnawinded 5% and had now changed his mind to 7} S; that this additional 7# S would amount to approximately $3600.00, which would be allocated to about twenty 20) men; that all of the recommended salary in- creases had been worked into the budget with the exception of the Street Maintenance men; that the total amount of in- creases would be in excess of $55,000.00. Mr. Nordby said that he was recommending an increase in the City's partlel- potion on each employees major medical benefits from $7.00 to $10.00 adding dental benefits and tripling the life insurance from $1,000.00 per employee to $3,000.00, he said he had not made a salary recommendation for the Administrative Aide or himself. Page 1, City Council, Account No. 1100. No changes were ACCOUNT NO. 1100 made in this account. CITY COUNCIL APPROVED Continued) 1968 05 07 CC MIN ×P$â˜ö 0003'799 Adjourned Regular Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council May 6, 1968 Page 13 Councilwoman Gregory stated she felt something was needed for special meetings that members of Council might like to attend. Chief Administrative Officer Nordby stated that the policy concerning personal expenses for the City Council, Boards I nd Commissions and staff members was not too clear; that he felt before the budget discussions were over that they should arrive at something more specific; that possibly one way to do this would be to list the organizations to which the City be- longed and who would be expected to represent the City and how many; that he had first become concerned when the City's newly created Recreation and Park Comaisslon had indicated their intent to attend a meeting in San Diego; that for everyone to attend seemed excessive to him and a duplication; that in most instances one member and a staff member could attend and bring back to the particular group the necessary information; that he could not say if the funds projected in the Council's budget were adequate for this purpose, however they did compare with the previous years funds; that the City belonged to a tremendous multiplicity of organizations covering a wide variety of subjects; that he felt it was important for the City to be represented; that It was sometimes difficult to evaluate the returns from same of the organizations to which the City belonged. Further discussion followed.- Mayor AcCsron stated that Chief Administrative Officer Nordby's salary was considerably under the lowest salary listed on the salary survey. As there were no objections, Layer McCaron stated Chief C.A.O. SALARY Administrative Officer Nordby's salary would be Increased by INCREASE APPROVED $2400.00 a year. $2400.00 A YEAR Chief Administrative Officer Nordby stated that the position AWAIN. AIDE of Administrative Aide was difficult to compare because of the DISC, OF DUTIES varied descriptions of the duties for this particular title; that $350.60 was set by the Code for City Clerk; that the amount of $500.00 was for the duties of Administrative Aide; that most of the duties of the Administrative Aide In the City related to the apsignment of the City Clerk; that from time to time he did make assignments, however he was working without a full time assistant; that the City of Baldwin Park was extremely fortunate in having some one with the particular capabilities of this City's employee elected to that position; that generally there was a conflict when there was an elected and appointed official working side by side. It was the consensus of Council opinion that this item would HELD OVER TO be held over to another session. ANOTHER SESSION Councilwoman Gregory stated that she did not feel they should RE SOUNDSCRIBER wait for a new Civic Center to purchase a new soundecriber; that this was an important Item. Mayor McCaron stated this item would be held over. HELD OVER Discussion followed concerning the possibility of seine improve- DISC. RE SPEAKERS ment for the speakers in the Council Chambers.. IN COUNCIL CHAWERS Finance Department, AccountNo. 1400 was approved as presented. FINANCE DEPT. ACCT. NO. 1400 APPROVED AS PRESENTED' Continued) 1968 05 07 CC MIN ×P$â 1968 05 07 CC MIN ×P$â˜ö 0003801 Adjourned Regular Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council May 6, 1968 Page 15 that this had to work over a long period of time; that he felt Account No. 2201, Chamber of Commerce should be raised to $18,000.00. Council woan Gregory suggested this matter be held over; ACCT. NO. 2201, that she was sure the Chamber of Commerce needed the extra CHAMBER OF COMMERCE money, but she felt that Council should give the personnel HELD OVER at City Hall all of the consideration they could first. i the only way to solve the deficiencies of equipment and personnel in the Police Department would be to makeup adjustment in the tax rate; that he would rather have satisfied personnel and a few less than needed than have as many as they would like to have and have everybody unhappy. Mayor McCaron inquired what the difference In the duties of a policewoman and patrolman were. Chief of Police Adams stated that top pay for a patrolman end a policewoman were the same; that the policewoman was assigned to the detective bureau where she worked with very small children and any other female involved. Mayor McCaron inquired what specific use would be made of EXPLANATION OF USE the Van Type Truck, Account No. 3174, Police Department. FOR VAN--TYPE TRUCK, Chief of Police Adams stated it would be used for a mobil ACCT. NO, 3174, command post and would probably last for ten 101 years once POLICE DEPT. it was equipped. Chief Administrative Officer Nordby stated that about six weeks ago Chief Adams and he had attended a meeting at KCET in Holly- wood, the Educational Television Channel; that they had seen a demonstration of closed circuit TV and the way It would work with the District Attorney's office and outlying communities in relaying valuable information by closed circuit; that he would like to return to this Item at a later time and ask Chief Adams to explain the details; that the cost would be around $3600.00 for membership prorated among the member cities; that the program did have some value in fighting crime; that this might be left open for some consideration depending on what was left of the $13,000.00 contingency fund when they were through with the budget, Account No. 3300, Building Regulation, was approved as presented. ACCT, NO. 3300 BLDG, REGULATION APPROVED Chief Administrative Officer Nordby stated that for the RECREATION AND Recreation and Park Department they had tried to carry over PARK DEPT, somewhat the same activities they were Involved in last year for ten months; that the park building was nearly completed; that this probably would require a slight increase n the staff of maintenance personnel to maintain the structure; that they were considering the scheduling of events at the park building at this time which would be presented to the Council as to who or what kind of organization should be eligible for activities in the new building; that Account No. 7373, Other Improvements, on page 155, was a ball park; that they war* negotiating the project with the school district to be located on the Sierra Vista Site; that he felt this was in line with the Councills desire to utilize school property wherever It was possible; that it saved the City a tremendous amount in acquisition money; that they had attempted to set aside some funds for the development of the Big Dalton Park. Continued) 1968 05 07 CC MIN ×P$â˜ö0003802 Adjourned Regular Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council May 6, 1968 Page 16 ACCT. NO. 7374, Councilman Crites inquired how the Recreation and Park Depart- MOTOR VEHICLES, ments garbage and trash was to be hauled away as there was no PARK DEPT. NO provision in Account No. 7374, Motor Vehicles. City Engineer PROVISION VEHI- French stated that the Public Works Department had taken over CLES TRANSFERRED the vehicles and were maintaining and using them; that an TO PUBLIC WORKS arrangement had been worked out far Mr. Lucas to call Public works for whatever he needed. Mayee McCeron stated that Account No. 7353, Recreation and Park, indicated there was money for vehicle maintenance. Mr. Nordby explained this money was for upkeep and repair of other machine- ry used in the parks. Mr. Nordby further stated that the purpos- ed budget had not been submitted to the Recreation and Park Commission as after reading the Code he did not feel that this was part of their responsibility; that it was not customary to submit the budget to advisory boards. Councilwoman Gregory stated the board was familiar with budgets and had been submitting a proposed budget for a number of years; that she felt the Comission had thought that the Chief Adminis- trative Officer would be working with them on the proposed budget and that this was how the misunderstanding came about. 00- COUNCILMAN MOREHEAD MOVED THAT COUNCILWMAN GREGORY BE AUTHORIZED MOTION MADE AND TO ATTEND THE LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES MAYORS AND CEHBiCILMENS CARRIED THAT COUN- INSTITUTE AT ANAHEIM HEADQUARTERS AT DISNEYLAND HOTEL, MAY 19-21, CILWOMAN GREGORY 1968 AND THAT HER EXPENSES NOT EXCEED $125.00. COUNCILMAN CRTTES BE RUTH. TO ATTEND SECONDED, There were no objections, the motion carried and was LEAGUE OF CALIF. so ordered. CITIES MAYORS AND COUNCILMENS INSTI- TUTE AT ANAHEIM HEADQUARTERS AT DISNEYLAND HOTEL, MAY 19-21, 1968 JC THAT HER EXPENSES 00- NOT EXCEED $125,00 AT 9:40 P.M. COUNCILMAN MOREHEAD MOVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL 9:40 P.M. ADJ. TO DAY, MAY 13, 1968, AT 7:00 P.M. COUNCILMAN MONDAY, MAY 13, ADJOURN TO ADAIR SECMED. There were no objections, the nation carried 1968 AT 7:00 P.M. and was so ordered. 00- THELMA L. BALKUS, CITY CLERK CA 1968. APPR D: 1,«'Jf v Date of Distribution to City Council jg,~g 31 Date of Distribution to Departments L-~~~ 1968.