HomeMy WebLinkAboutJUNE 20,1961
I
I
INVOCATION
PLEDGE OF
ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL
APPROVAL OF
MINUTES
(6-6-61 and
6-8-61)
HEARING
(l96l-62
Budget)
Jj SJ () tJ
INDEXED
RESOLUTION
No. 3393
-1 !~1
trNDE:xE1)
14:5379
M I NUT E S
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA
REGULAR MEETING
JUNE 20, 1961
The City Council of the City of Arcadia met in regular session in the
Council Chamber of the City Hall at 8:00 o'clock P.M., June 20, 1961.
The Invocation was offered by Rev. Willard C. Dorsey, Pastor of the
Arcadia Christian Church.
Mayor Pro Tempore Phillips led in the pledge of allegiance to the flag.
PRESENT:
ABSENT :
Councilmen Butterworth, Camphouse, Reibold, Phillips
Mayor Balser
Councilman Butterworth moved that the minutes of the Regular meeting of
June 6, 1961 be approved as submitted in writing; that the minutes of
the Adjourned Regular meeting of June 8, 1961 as submitted in writing
be amended by adding to the tenth paragraph thereof the following:
"and inasmuch as the City Attorney advised the Council that three votes
on this matter would be preferable," and that as thus.amended, said
minutes be approved. Mayor Pro Tempore Phillips seconded the motion
which was carried unanimously.
The City Clerk advised that notice of the hearing on the proposed 1961-62
budget had been published and that copies of said budget have been on file
in her office and available for public inspection, all as required by the
City Charter; also that no communications had been received with reference
thereto.
Mayor Pro Tempore Phillips thereupon declared the hearing open on the
proposed budget for the fiscal year 1961-62, and inquired if anyone
desired to be heard regarding the matter.
No one desiring to be heard Councilman Camphouse moved that the hearing
be closed. Motion seconded by Councilman Reibold and carried unanimously.
Councilman Camphouse commended the City Manager on his ability to assemble
a budget wherein the City of Arcadia maintains its tax rate in the face
of the higher cost of government.
It being the consensus of the Council that the budget be adopted, the
City Attorney presented, explained the content and read the title of
Resolution No. 3393, entitled: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING THE OFFICIAL BUDGET FOR THE
FISCAL YEAR 1961-62."
AYES: Councilmen Butterworth, Camphouse, Reibold, Phillips
NOES: None
ABSENT: Mayor Balser
Councilman Camphouse further moved that Resolution No. 3393 be adopted.
Motion seconded by Councilman Reibold and carried on roll call vote as
follows:
AYES: Councilmen Butterworth, Camphouse, Reibold, Phillips
NOES: None
ABSENT: Mayor Balser
1.
6-20-61
(1961-62
Budge t)
HEARING
(Driveways)
~(~~
INDEXED
ORDINANCE
No. 1129
(Introduced)
ZONE VARIANCE
(Rose)
TRACT
No. 26537
(Revised
Tentative)
:J 771
~EXED
14:5380
Councilman Butterworth made an observation regarding the fact that
although the budget amounted to almost four million dollars, the largest
in the history of the City, no Arcadia citizen had appeared at' this
hearing to question any portion of the budget; that he thought that
should the people have some question in their minds from time to time
about the appropriation of sums by this Council it might properly be
asked where they were on June 20, 1961 when this budget was adopted.
Councilman Reibold commented that perhaps this is a tribute to the
Council.
Councilman Phillips stated that this is a repetition of many such hearings
where usually only one or two persons appear, never more, and that he I
thought basically it is a tribute to the way the Manager assembles the
budget.
Councilman Camphouse concurred in Councilman Butterworth's concern.
Mayor Pro Tempore Phillips declared the hearing open on Planning Commission
Resolution No. 410 recommending the amendment of the Municipal Code as it
pertains to driveway requirements in Zones R-2, R-3-R and R-3 and adding
to the authority of the Modification Committee to'make minor modifications
of driveway requirements, and inquired if anyone desired to address the
Council regarding the macter.
No one desiring to be heard, and no communications having been received,
Councilman Camphouse moved that the hearing be closed. Motion seconded
by Councilman Reibold and carried unanimously.
The City Attorney thereupon presented, explained the content and read the
title of Ordinance No. 1129, entitled: "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SECTIONS 9254.2.9, 9255.2.l0
AND 9292.1.5 OF THE ARCADIA MUNICIPAL CODE AND ADDING A NEW SECTION
9253.2.10 THERETO."
Motion by Councilman Reibold, seconded by Councilman Camphouse and carried
on roll call vote as follows that the reading of the full body of
Ordinance No. 1129 be waived:
AYES: Councilmen Butterworth, Camphouse, Reibold, Phillips
NOES: None
ABSENT: Mayor Balser
Councilman Reibold further moved that Ordinance No. 1129 be introduced.
Motion seconded by Councilman Camphouse and carried on roll call vote
as follows:
AYES: Councilmen Butterworth, Camphouse, Reibold, Phillips
NOES: None
ABSENT: Mayor Balser
Mayor Pro Tempore Phillips declared that since no action can be taken I
until time for appeal elapses (June 23, 1961) the zone variance request
of Ralph G. Rose to permit the construction of a new dwelling on the
front portion of the lot and to retain the existing dwelling on the rear
portion of the lot at 535 East Camino Real (Planning Commission Resolution
No. 411) will be held over until the appeal period has passed.
The Assistant City Engineer referred to the revised tentative map of
Tract No. 26537 and explained that the subject tract received tentative
approval by the Council on February 21, 1961 subject to the acquisition
of certain land for street purposes; that subsequently the City Manager
negotiated with the owners at 260 and 242 West Duarte Road and secured
deeds for 30 feet of the land for Magna Vista Avenue subject to certain
work to be done by the subdivider; that because of the dedications
received it was necessary to make a change in the design of the intersection
2.
6-20-61
I
(Tr ac t
No. 26537)
14:5381
of Magna Vista Avenue and the north-south street; that a small change has
been made in the size of lot 3; that all of the lots are well above the
required area; that all lots except 3 and 4 will be 75 feet wide at the
building line, and that the revised plan is recommended for approval by
the Planning Commission subject to the following conditions:
1. Dedicate 30 feet of the property at 250 West Duarte Road for Magna
Vista Avenue.
2. Fulfill the conditions of tender of deeds for the property at 260 and
242 West Duarte Road.
3; Pay the trust presently existing along the north line of Magna Vista
Avenue.
4. Provide all necessary rear line utility easements.
5. The City shall dedicate the present barriers at the end of Magna Vista
Avenue.
6. The City shall quitclaim the present sewer and drainage easement to
LeRoy Avenue. The subdivider shall do all necessary reconstruction of
sewers and drainage facilities to make them continuous in the new street.
7. Dispose of excess land along the north-south street in a manner satis-
factory to the City.
8. The City shall pay to the subdivider the amounts held in trust as a
share of the cost of opening the street to LeRoy Avenue.
9. The subdivider shall install continuous, full width street improvements
in Magna Vista Avenue and its connection to LeRoy Avenue as required by
the City Code, joining with the present improvements in Magna Vista Avenue.
Improvement plans and grades to be satisfactory to the City Engineer.
10. Pay the following fees and deposits:
5 Steel light posts
32 Street trees
3 Street name signs
8 Lots recreation fee
@135.00
@ 8.50
@ 35.00
@ 25.00
$675.00
272.00
105.00
. ..200.00
.$1252.00
Councilman Camphouse ~ that Council accept the recommendation of the
Planning Commission and approve the revised tentative map of Tract No.
26537 subject to the conditions above set forth. Councilman Butterworth
seconded the motion which was carried unanimously.
ANNEXATION
(Fifth Ave. at
Duarte Road)
I
4~/l1
llIDEXED
The City Manager advised that the City has received requests from three
property owners in the vicinity of Fifth Avenue and Duarte Road requesting
annexation to the City of Arcadia of their properties.
The City Manager added that the major portion of the property of two
owners is now within the City with only an 8.l foot wide strip in Monrovia
and the property of the other owner is entirely within the City of Monrovia;
also that a portion of Fifth Avenue within Monrovia is involved, and that
deannexation has been approved by the Planning Commission and City Council
of the City of Monrovia.
Councilman Butterworth MOVED that the Council instruct the City Attorney
to prepare the necessary resolution for deannexation from Monrovia and
annexation to Arcadia of that certain property shown on map presented
by the Engineering Department, in the vicinity of Fifth Avenue and Duarte
Road. Councilman Reibold seconded the motion which was carried
unanimously.
3.
6-20-61
PROPOSED
SOUTH
ARCADIA
ANNEXATION
11;"0
INDEXED
14:5382
The City Manager advised that inasmuch as the boundaries of the
proposed South Arcadia annexation No. 23 were altered by the elimination
of the southerly portion thereof, the Council on June 6, 1961 re-
referred the revised proposal to the Planning Commission for its report
or recommendation; that the Planning Commission has now readopted and re-
affirmed its report of January 12, 1961 regarding the revised annexation
area.
At: the suggestion of Councilman Camphouse, the City Attorney summarized
as follows the contents of Resolution No. 3391, entitled: "A RESOLUTION
OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, CONSENTING TO
THE COMMENCEMENT OF PROCEEDINGS FOR THE ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF ARCADIA
OF CERTAIN INHABITED TERRITORY IN THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF I
CALIFORNIA, CONTIGUOUS TO THE CITY OF ARCADIA AND DESIGNATED AS
'ANNEXATION NO. 23, SOUTH ARCADIA INHABITED (REVISED)'."
That it recites the referral of a proposal for the annexation of
inhabited territory to the Planning Commission, the Planning Commission's
report pursuant to section 35107 of the Government Code, the desire of
the Council to give its consent to the commencement of the proceedings
upon the condition that the electors within said territory be informed
at the time the petition for annexation is circulated that the question
to be submitted to the electors within said territory shall be whether
said territory shall be annexed to the City and the property in said
territory subjected to taxation after annexation to pay the amount of
money fixed to represent the value to the territory of municipal improve-
ments already paid for by City taxpayers; that the territory be officially
designated as "Annexation 23, South Arcadia Inhabited (Revised)"; gives
a general description of the property as easterly of Double Drive,
northerly of the Rio Hondo Wash, southerly and westerly of the existing
Arcadia city boundary, then gives a specific description of the external
boundaries of the territory.
That it then recites that pursuant co section 35147 of the California
Government Code the amount of money to represent the value to the
territory of municipal improvements already paid for by City taxpayers
is hereby fixed and determined to be the sum of $120,000; that consent
is granted for the commencement of proceedings in accordance with the
Annexation Act of 1913 for the annexation of this territory to the City.
That as provided in section 35147 of the California Government Code the
consent hereby granted is upon the condition thac the petition for
annexation of said territory to be circulated within said territory and
signed by the qualified electors residing therein shall contain a request
that the question submitted to the electors residing in said territory
shall be whether the territory designated as "Annexation No. 23 South
Arcadia Inhabited (Revised)" shall be annexed to the City and the property
in the territory subjected to taxation after annexation to pay $120,000
in five equal annual installments of $24,000 each, the amount of money
fixed to represent the value to said territory of municipal improvements
already paid for by City taxpayers.
That it then requires the City Clerk to certify to its adoption and to I
cause the written description to be submitted to the Boundary Commission
and to the Registrar of Voters as required by the Government Code.
In answer to Councilman Reibold's question as to what vehicle is used
to inform the people in the proposed area, the City Attorney replied
that the most effective way is through the news media. He added that
the annexation statutes do not purport to dictate the dissemination of
information on internal operations of the City, only that certain specific
items be set forth in the petition. That the proponents of the annexation
are required to cause to be published a notice of intention to circulate
the petition within the territory and that notice may be accompanied by
a statement not to exceed 500 words of the reasons of the proponents for
the annexation. That the City may, during the course of the proceedings,
cause to be disseminated certain detailed information.
4.
6-20-6l
l4:5383
At Mayor Pro Tempore Phillips' request the City Clerk read communi-
cations regarding the proposed annexation which stated in substance
as follows:
Mrs. Charles W. Phillips, 5548 Double Drive, dated June 14, 1961,
accepting the terms of annexation passed by the Council at the June 6,
1961 meeting.
Mr. and Mrs. Albert p. Nota, 5320 Double Drive, Temple City, dated
June 20, 1961, opposed to annexation fee.
I
Mr, and Mrs, B. A, Martin, residing in San Pedro, dated June 19, 1961,
owning property at 5220 and 5230 N. Florinda and lll08 E. Freer -
opposed to annexation fee,
,
Elizabeth Cleminson, residing at lll08 E. Freer, dated June 19, 1961,
and owner of property at 5212 N. Myrtus, 11124 E. Freer and 11130
E. Freer, and Laura W. Chambers, owner of 5213-15 Florinda - opposed to
annexation fee.
Mrs. G. Van Heule, Sr. and G, O. Heule, dated June 20, 1961 - opposed to
annexation fee.
Herman H. Schneider, 5041 N. Florinda - opposed to annexation.
The Santa Anita Village Community Association, dated June 19, 1961,
opposed to annexation and suggesting that residents of the City be
polled for their approval.
Rancho Santa Anita Residents' Assn.,. date9 6.-20-6l,i..(Pre~ident: s';Res. .1017
Catalpa Street),opposed to annexation and request that the Council delay
their decision so that matter may be placed on the ballot at a City
election for the people to make final decision.
Mayor Pro Tempore Phillips then stated that an opportunity would now be
afforded those in the audience to address the Council on this matter,
specifically on the proposed levy of annexation fee. The City Attorney
commented that later in the annexation proceedings under the 19l3 Act
protest.hearings will be held, the adoption of Resolution No. 3391
merely being the consent of the Council to the commencement of proceed-
ings, which are lengthy.
The following persons then addressed the Council:
Mr. Howard p. Buchenberger, ll159 Daneswood Drive, stated in part that
he represents 12 residents favoring the annexation but objecting to the
fee; that they feel they should be given more credit for the sales tax
received by the City from the Live Oak business area; that they have an
Arcadia Post Office address and shop in and attend Arcadia churches.
I
In reply to a question propounded by Councilman Butterworth, Mr.
Buchenberger stated that if a fee were levied he would be of the
opinion that about 50% of those persons he contacted would be willing
to pay such fee,
Mr. Ivan G. Kazare, 5406 W. Marshburn, stated in part that he is
satisfied with the present status of the area, including the El Monte
School District; that he could not favor the proposed fee.
The City Attorney reminded the audience that the annexation per se has
no effect on the boundaries of the respective school districts involved,
The City Manager stated in part that a report compiled by the State of
California reflects the fact that annexation charges are made through-
out the State and that in approximately 70% of the states throughout the
Country a fee is levied, varying in amounts,
5.
6-20-6l
14:5384
Mr. Albert Cappellanti, 5121 Marshburn Avenue, stated in part that he
originally circulated a petition to annex to the City; that his area
has sidewalks, street lights and is well maintained; that he opposes
the fee and speaks for the majority of the owners in his small area.
Mr. Herman Hoehm, 1118 Fairview, Temple City, opposed to annexation
with or without a fee.
Mr. R. H. Lindberg, 11153 Danbury Street, stated in part that he
tepresents about five property owners in his area; that they are content
With the present status of the area but feel that something could be
gained by annexing to Arcadia by way of police and fire protection and
that if a fee policy is set by the City Council it would be satiSfactory'l
Mr. George A. Rettie, 11119 Danbury Street, stated in part that in dis-
cussions with several merchants on Live Oak Avenue he discovered that
should the residents of the area in question cease to patronize them,
their businesses would close. That at the time he purchased his home he
Was under the impression that he was residing in Arcadia. That with
teference to the manner in which the proposed annexation fee was
publicized through the press, brochures, leaflets, etc., that he had
tead various figures from $20 to $50 per parcel and that he felt the
people in the subject area should be advised as to the accurate fee
proposed to be levied.
tn answer to Councilman Butterworth's question as to whether or not the
people in his immediate area are against the annexation if a fee is
attached, Mr. Rettie replied in the affirmative.
Councilman Reibold commented for the enlightenment of the audience that
for each $1000 of assessed valuation the fee would amount to $6, citing
as an example that property assessed at $3000 would carry a fee of $l8
per year for five years.
Mrs. Dorothy Cowan, lll03 E. Lynrose Street, read a letter addressed to
the City Council, which enumerated various services the residents of the
subject area have rendered to the City (letter on file in the office of
the City Clerk). Mrs. Cowan stated in part that she is co-owner of a
business in Arcadia; that she endeavors to promote business for the City;
asked for reconsideration of the proposed levy and inquired if this
charge would set a precedent for all future annexations.
Mr. Jack E. Schmitz, 5639 Gary Park, owner of a toy shop in South Arcadia,
addressed the Council, stating in part that he represents two groups,
the business people and the residents of his street; that the business
development on Live Oak Avenue needs the patronage of the residents from
the area in question; that he has worked diligently for the annexation
with the thought that they would benefit from the services Arcadia
offers which would become available to them, but that recently the
tesidents have taken the attitude that they have all they need without
coming into Arcadia if a fee is levied. I
tn answer to Councilman Butterworth's query as to whether or not it would
be his feeling that should the fee be attached the residents with whom
Mr. Schmitz came in contact would vote against annexing, Mr. Schmitz
teplied in the affirmative. He added that he felt the fee is unreason-
able because the business district of the area was annexed without a
levy.
Mr. Bill Kelly, 11139 Miolann, inquired if the City has put into an
annexation motion any fee as to any prior annexations of the City, and
if not, why should it be considered at this time.
Mayor Pro Tempore Phillips stated in part that there have been relatively
few annexations to Arcadia, mostly to straighten boundaries.
6 .
6-20-61
14:5385
He referred to the annexation on Duarte Road and Baldwin Avenue
(Annexation No. l7-A), this having been delineated by the City in
order to gain control of both sides of Duarte Road and Baldwin
Avenue; however, that the proposed annexation was. outlined by the
residents of the area and is the largest ever considered; that the
Council members endeavored to arrive at a figure which 'would be agree-
able to all and one which each individual could support.
I
Mr. George Ducich, 11109 E. Daines Drive, stated in part that he would
appreciate knowing exactly what it would cost ~im to annex to the City,
inasmuch as the information derived from press coverage was not clear
to him.
Mrs. F. Tucker, 5131 Florinda, speaking for 16 families in the area,
stated in part that they are against the annexation in any form,
but most especially with the assessment attached; that they like the
El Monte School District and wish to so remain; that a show of hands
would be appreciated.
Mr. Harry Conover, 5545 Florinda, stated in part that his feelings
regarding annexation were well known to the City Council; that he
had felt he could speak for a large number of the residents but that
presently he could no longer do so; that his personal opinion is that
it would be a mistake not to endeavor to annex to Arcadia with or
without the fee; that it would be difficult to secure the 25%
signatures on a petition but that he would appreciate the opportunity
to work toward that end.
Mayor Pro Tempore Phillips then asked for a show of hands of those:
(1) opposed to annexing with a fee of $120,000 spread.over a five
year period. (Majority)
(2) in favor of annexation with a fee of $120,000 spread over a five
year period. (Approximately 15)
(3) against annexation with no fee. (Approximately 30)
(4) for annexation with no fee. (Less than majority)
I
Councilman Reibold suggested a question as to whether or not the group
present would prefer termination of the proceedings at this point if
a fee were levied. He continued, stating in part that some of the
reasoning connected' with the proposed fee could be explained as follows:
that he was personally against the annexation under any conditions
but that Mayor Pro Tempore Phillips favored the annexation without a
fee; that they were both assigned the task of working out a figure for
the proposed fee which was accomplished to the best of their abilities.
That their prime duty is to the people of Arcadia who have accumulated
certain assets through taxation, bonds, etc. That some of these
assets have no value to those in the area in question, such as sewers
and city. systems; however, the police, fire and library facilities do
have value. That they tried to allocate purely on assessed valuation;
that the area in question represents about an 8% increase and came up
with an amount of approximately 3.35%. That although this reasoning
may not meet with agreement it was his desire to explain the methods
used in reaching the conclusion. He then commented that his question
regarding termination of the proceedings at this point would undoubted-
ly be best settled by the circulation of the petition itself.
Mr. Conover again asked for passage of the resolution permitting the
circulation of the petition.
Councilman Butterworth stated in part that the question as to whether
or not to continue proceedings was a matter for the entire Council to
decide; that he had discussed the matter with several of the persons
in attendance and from the beginning he had thought that the area
could properly be a part of Arcadia; that he would not state reasons
at this time but that he did feel that a number of. persons have rendered
a very grievous injustice to the members of the Council, that is the
minority opposed to the proposed annexation, by the assertion that
7.
6-20-61
14:5385
statements have been made that the area is not worthy of coming into
Arcadia; that no such statement has been made, the reasons assigned
against such admission having been financial. He stated further in
part that the Planning Commission voted unanimously against the
. annexation, the Chamber of Commerce voted in favor but wanted to
assess a much larger fee than the one agreed upon by the Council.
That it would not seem any useful purpose would be served to continue
the proceedings. That he would personally prefer to give further
thought to the matter and that from the audience reaction at this meet-
ing it appears that an overwhelming majority of the people are opposed
to the annexation if the fee is to be a condition thereof. That the I
Council in good faith attempted to arrive at a compromise deCiSiOn", .
which is part of the way a government operates. That although he has .
been in favor of the annexation he now questions his decision because
it does not appear to be compatible with the wishes of the people in
the subject area and that it seems to him that to proceed would engender
ill will on both sides of Arcadia city lines.
Councilman Reibold commented in part that it appears to him that there
may be two ways in which to go: Council may pass on the matter on its
own motion or refer it to the people of Arcadia and that it still may
have to go to a vote of Arcadia residents.
Mayor Pro Tempore Phillips stated that he would hear further only from
Mr. Conover at this point and that audience discussion would then be
drawn to a close.
Mr. Conover stated in part that he appreciated the comments made; that
the annexation fee decision has stirred the residents of the subject
area into giving more thought to the matter; that in his opinion the
proponents should have an opportunity to circulate the petition. He
then again requested that the Council not vote against the matter at
this time.
Councilman Butterworth MOVED that the discussion be terminated, Council-
man Reibold seconded the motion which was carried unanimously.
Mayor Pro Tempore Phillips reminded the Council that the resolution of
intention which the City Attorney had practically read in full would
require some form of action at this time.
Councilman Butterworth stated in part that he personally preferred to
think about the matter and study the forthcoming minutes; also that
he would like to have Mayor Balser present when the vote is taken as
it is a matter of unusual importance. He suggested tabling the matter
until Mayor Balser's return,
Mayor Pro Tempore Phillips stated in part that he would not be present
at the next two regular Council meetings; that if it be Council's I'
desire to wait for a full Council he would not oppose it; that it has
been his observation that those opposing certain matters usually
come out in greater numbers than those in favor, That he would
personally rather see the matter brought to a vote at this time,
That he was not in favor of submitting the annexation ordinance to
the Arcadia electorate being willing to assume such responsibility
without the expense of an election.
Councilman Camphouse stated in part that he was reluctant to postpone
the matter; that it would mean no action could be taken until
possibly in the Fall as it is difficult to have a full Council during
the summer months. He called attention to the fact that the resolution
to circulate petitions received unanimous support; that he still does
not favor an annexation fee; that it would appear to be discriminatory,
making reference to the annexation on Baldwin Avenue south of Duarte
Road. That he still believes that the area in question should be part
of Arcadia without any fee attached, which program he would strongly
8, 6-20-61
,
I
I
RECESS
BID AWARD
(Protective
Coating -
Reservoirs)
.:fgC
INDEXED
14:5386
support. He then suggested that a date be determined when it is
known that all members of the Council will be present.
Councilman Camphouse thereupon MOVED that a definite decision on the
part of the City Council be set for the regular meeting of August 1,
1961 and be made the first item on the agenda following the hearings
for that date. Councilman Butterworth seconded the motion which was
unanimously carried.
Mayor Pro Tempore Phillips declared a recess at 9:45 P.M.
The meeting reconvened at 9:55 P.M.
The following bids were received June 5, 1961 for Protective Coating
Internal Surfaces of Steel Water Reservoirs, which were submitted to
the Council on June 6, 1961 and held firm by their action for a period
of 30 days as provided for in the notice inviting bids:
SCHEDULE A - Protective Coating Internal Surfaces Orange Grove #3 Reservoir
Edward A. Wopschall, Inc.
Stanley Roberts, Inc. (Alternate Material)
Acme Maintenance Engineering Co. (Alternate Material)
Stanley Roberts, Inc.
Acme Protective Coatings, Inc. (Alternate Material)
Acme Protective Coatings, Inc. (Alternate Material)
Acme Maintenance Engineering Co.
Acme Protective Coatings, Inc.
$13,398.00
14,102.73
l6,400.00
16,602.73
16,891.00
l7, 139 .00
17,500.00
l8,322.00
SCHEDULE B - Protective Coating Internal Surfaces Orange Grove #4 Reservoir
Edward A. Wopschall, Inc.
Stanley Roberts,Inc. (Alternate Material)
Acme Maintenance Engineering Co. (Alternate Material)
Stanley Roberts, Inc.
Acme Protective Coatings, Inc. (Alternate Material)
Acme Protective Coatings,Inc. (Alternate Material)
Acme Maintenance Engineering Co.
Acme Protective Coatings, Inc.
13,398.00
14,102.73
16,400.00
16,602.73
16,891.00
17,139.00
17,500.00
18,322.00
SCHEDULE C - Protective Coating Internal Surfaces of Orange Grove No.
3 and 4 Reservoirs
Edward A. Wopschall, Inc.
Stanley Roberts, Inc. (Alternate Material)
Acme Maintenance Engineering Co. (Alternate Material)
Stanley Roberts, Inc.
Acme Protective Coatings, Inc. (Alternate Material)
Acme Protective Coatings, Inc. (Alternate Material)
Acme Maintenance Engineering Co.
Acme Protective Coatings, Inc.
26,357.00
28,205.46
32,800.00
33,205.46
33,782.00
34,278.00
35,000.00
36,644.00
MOTION by Councilman Reibold, seconded by Councilman Butterworth and
carried on roll call vote as follows that the Council accept the recommen-
dation of the CitY Manager; that a contract for the Protective Coating
Internal Surface of Steel Water Reservoirs be awarded to Edward A.
Wopschall, Inc. in the amount of $13,398.00 for work under Schedule A of
the contract and that Schedules Band C be held firm.for a period of 30
days from June 20, 1961 with agreement of the contractor to afford the
City an opportunity to inspect the work being done on Reservoir #3 prior
to proceeding with Reservoir #4, predicated upon the fact that procedure
with both reservoirs can effect a saving of $439.00; that. any irregu-
larities or informalities in the bids or bidding process be waived; that
all other.bids be rejected, and that the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized
to execute such contract on behalf of the City for the
performance of the contract for work contained under Schedule A, in the
amount specified, in form approved by the City Attorney:
AYES: Councilmen Butterworth, Camphouse, Reibold, Phillips
NOES: None
ABSENT: Mayor Balser
9.
6-20-61
IMPROVEMENT
ORANGE GROVE
(?:~~
(?Lu.-i0 )<. ff
INDEXED
FOOTHILL
BOULEVARD
SIGNALIZATION
~
~'%>>
~,EUD
14:5387
The City Manager advised that although inquiries have been received
regarding installation of curb and gutter and widening of Orange Grove
Avenue and the City has offered to set grade and line stakes as well as
securing a contractor to make such improvement, no definite action' has
been taken. That plans have been prepared by the Engineering Department
for such work which would widen the existing 25 foot pavement to 40 feet;
that the Engineer's estimate of the cost is $1,848.33 of which amount
54% would be paid from Water Department funds and 46% from Capital Projects
funds. That starting at a point on the north line of Orange Grove Avenue
and approximately 550 feet west of Santa Anita Avenue the City owns 331
feet of frontage, the fire station occupying 152 feet and the Water
Department l79 feet.
MOTION by Councilman Butterworth, seconded by Councilman Camphouse and I
carried on roll call vote as follows that Council accept the recommen-
dation of the City Manager and authorize the improvement of that portion
of Orange Grove Avenue past City-owned property according to plans
prepared by the Engineering Department; and that the sum of $950 be .
transferred from the Reserve for Capital Improvement Projects Account
No. 285 in the General Fund to Capital Improvement Project Fund Account
No. 211:
AYES: Councilmen Butterworth, Camphouse, Reibold, Phillips
NOES: None
ABSENT:. Mayor Balser
The City Manager referred to a communication dated June 1, 1961 from the
State Division of Highways, setting forth the State's proposed improve-
ments to relieve traffic conditions on Foothill Boulevard between
Michillinda Avenue and Fifth Avenue and requesting the City's determi-
nation as to method of financing; that it is recommended that the
Director of Public Works be directed to advise the State Division of
Highways that such improvements will be financed from County Gas Tax
Funds by using the money presently scheduled for the improvement of
El Monte Avenue. He added that since receipt of said communication
preliminary plans have been received but there was insufficient time to
view them and report to the Council.
Councilman Camphouse MOVED that Council accept the recommendation of the
City Manager and authorize the Director of Public Works to advise the
State Division of Highways that the improvements on Foothill Boulevard
will be financed from County Gas Tax Funds by using the money presently
schedUled for the improvement of El Monte Avenue.
Councilman Reibold seconded the motion, commenting that he felt using
the money scheduled for El Monte Avenue would be in the best interests
of the City at this time and that when the City is ready to improve
El Monte Avenue such work go further than one block.
Discussion then ensued on the fact that the plans and specifications
for the project would not be completed until February, 1962. The City
Manager advised that the Division had been requested to at least install I
the traffic signalization at Second and Foothill Blvd. prior to the
opening of school the 1st of September. It was also felt that the
signal at Baldwin Avenue should be installed as soon as possible. .
Councilman Camphouse then ~ that his motion be AMENDED to include
that the Staff impress upon the Division of Highways the urgency of
expediting the completion of installation prior to the racing season.
Councilman Reibold seconded the motion which was carried on roll call
vote as follows:
AYES: Councilmen Butterworth, Camphouse, Reibold, Phillips
NOES: None
ABSENT: Mayor Balser
10.
6-20-61
ANNEXATION
(Camino Real
6< Mayflower)
FUND
TRANSFERS
14: 5388
MOTION by Councilman Reibold, seconded by Councilman Camphouse and carried
unanimously that the matter of the proposed annexation of properties on the
block bounded on the north by Altern Street, on the east by Mayflower Avenue,
on the south by Camino Real Avenue and on the west by Loganrita Avenue be
referred to the Planning Commission for recommendation to the Council.
MOTION by Councilman Camphouse, seconded by Councilman Reibold and carried
on roll call vote as follows that Council accept the recommendation of the
City Manager and City Controller and authorize the following budget adjust-
ments:
AM't FROM ACCOUNT NUMBER:
TO ACCOUNT NUMBER:
I $650 409-28 Council GenII Contingency
270 409-28 " " "
210 409-28 " " "
140 409-28 " " "
20 409-28 " " "
.!if ~ 775 409-28 " " "
~9 Debt Service '46 Sewer
Unapprop, Surplus
40l-30B Council-Official Meetings
402-1 City Hgr .-Regular Employees
402-l0 City Mgr,-Office Supplies
402-30A City Mg~,-Monthly Mileage
402-60 City Mgr.-Memberships 6< Pub,
431-31 Building-Consulting Fees
Debt Service 146 Sewer Interest
Approp .
AYES: Councilmen Butterworth, Camphouse, Reibold, Phillips
NOES: None
INDEXED ABSENT: Mayor Balser
I
CALL FOR
BIDS
RESOLUTION
NO. 3392
MOTION by Councilman Reibold, seconded by Councilman Butterworth and carried
on roll call vote as follows that Council accept the recommendation of the
City Manager and City Controller and authorize the transfer of the sum of
$230,498,48, representing 1960-61 admission taxes not yet transferred to
Capital Improvement Projects Fund, from Unappropriated Surplus Account No.
290 in the General Fund to Reserve for Capital Projects Account No, 285:
AYES: Councilmen Butterworth, Camphouse, Reibold, Phillips
NOES: None
ABSENT: Mayor Balser
MOTION by Councilman Camphouse, seconded by Councilman Reibold and
carried on roll call vote as follows that Council accept the recommendation
of the City Manager and City Controller and authorize the sum of $540 being
appropriated from Reserve for Capital Projects Account No, 285 in the General
Fund to Capital Improvement Projects Fund Account No. 210, Duarte Road
Improvement, for the installation of four steel street light poles on Duarte
Road between Santa Anita and First Avenues:
AYES: Councilmen Butterworth, Camphouse, Reibold, Phillips
NOES: None
ABSENT: Mayor Balser
Councilman Camphouse MOVED that the Council accept the recommendation of
the City Manager and the Water Superintendent; that the plans and specifi-
cations for the installation of a water main in Second Avenue, from Duarte
Road to Fano Street be approved as submitted; that the City Clerk be
authorized to call for bids for such work in conformance with said specifi-
cations, expenditure for this purpose being provided for in the 1961-62
budget, Major Projects, Item 2, Main Replacement, said bids to be opened
July 3, 1961 at 11:00 A.M. and submitted to the Council at the regular
meeting of July 5, 1961. Councilman Reibold seconded the motion which was
carried unanimously.
The City Attorney presented and read the title of Resolution No. 3392,
entitled: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA,
CALIFORNIA, READOPTING THE OFFICIAL FIVE-STEP SALARY SCHEDULE FOR THE
VARIOUS POSITIONS IN THE CITY EMPLOY, ESTABLISHING AND REAFFIRMING THE
VARIOUS POSITIONS IN THE CITY EMPLOY, ASSIGNING NEW SCHEDULE NUMBERS TO
SUCH POSITIONS, AND ALTERING AND ADJUSTING THE MINIMUM AND MAXIMUM
COMPENSATION FOR ALL POSITIONS IN THE CITY EMPLOY, AND AMENDING ALL PRIOR
RESOLUTIONS TO CONFORM HEREWITH."
11.
6-20-61
RESOLUTION
NO. 3394
(Cordelius)
JgOr
INDEXED
14:5389
The City Attorney added that this resolution is similar to resolutions
adopted each year at this time after Council has made its budgetary
determinations and salary determinations, with the exception of the
addition of the last paragraph in Section 2, following the salary
schedule, which reads as follows: "The City Manager is hereby authorized
to hire a probationary employee at any step in the established salary
schedule and he is further authorized to grant a salary step raise for
any employee."
The City Manager explained that he had requested the City Attorney to
include this paragraph after consulting with the Personnel Officer; that
he was more particularly interested in the first portion of the paragraph
which would authorize him to hire a probationary employee at something I
other than the lowest step in the salary range; that he would have little
or no occasion to hire at steps D and E; that from time to time opportuniti
have arisen to employ individuals who might be better qualified than other
prospects for the position but require a salary above the first step; that
this also ~pplies to step increases in that after completion of the six
months probationary period, although an increase in salary is received,
the take-home pay is less than the beginning salary due to the pay increase
after six months being 5% while the deduction for retirement and OASDI
amounts to 11% for females and 9% for males, depending upon age.
In the general discussion that ensued it was the consensus of the Council
that while the City Manager's request was meritorious, the requested
authorization be limited to Steps A, B, or C and that the salary step
raise request be deleted from the resolution.
Whereupon Councilman Reibold MOVED that the final paragraph of Section 2,
page three, of Resolution No. :n92 as presented be amended to read: "The
City Manager is hereby authorized to hire a probationary employee at Step
A, B, or C in the establhhed salary schedule," and that the remaining
words in said paragraph be deleted. Motion seconded by Councilman
Camphouse and carried unanimously.
Councilman Reibold then MOVED that the further reading of Resolution No.
3392 be waived. Councilman Butterworth seconded the motion which was
carried on roll call vote as follows:
AYES: Councilmen Butterworth, Camphouse, Reibold, Phillips
NOES: None
ABSENT: Mayor Balser
Councilman Reibold further MOVED that Resolution No. 3392 be adopted.
Motion seconded by Councilman Camphouse and carried on roll call vote as
follows:
AYES: Councilmen Butterworth, Camphouse, Reibold, Phillips
NOES: None
ABSENT: Mayor Balser
I
The City Attorney presented, explained the content and read the title of
Resolution No. 3394, entitled: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, DENYING A CHANGE OF ZONE FROM R-2 TO R-3
OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT 747 TO 803 WEST CAMINO REAL IN SAID CITY." .
Motion by Councilman Camphouse, seconded by Councilman Butterworth and
carried on roll call vote as follows that the reading of the full body of
Resolution No. 3394 be waived:
AYES: Councilmen Butterworth, Camphouse, Reibold, Phillips
NOES: None
ABSENT: Mayor Balser
Councilman Camphouse further moved that Resolution No. 3394 be adopted.
Motion seconded by Councilman Butterworth and carried on roll call vote as
follows:
12.
6-20-61
RESOLUTION
NO. 3395
I
jJ/l~
'. ' ,
..~ ,-,
14: 5390
AYES: Councilmen Butterworth, Camphouse, Phillips
NOES: Councilman Reibold
ABSENT: Mayor Balser
The City Attorney presented, explained the content and read the title of
Resolution No. 3395, entitled: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO VACATE AND ABANDON
THAT PORTION OF DOSHIER AVENUE OFFERED FOR DEDICATION AS A PUBLIC STREET
IN SAID CITY, RESERVING THEREIN AN EASEMENT FOR STORM DRAIN PURPOSES,
AND FIXING A TIME AND PLACE FOR THE HEARING OF OBJECTIONS TO SUCH PROPOSED
VACATION AND ABANDONMENT."
Councilman Camphouse MOVED that the reading of the full body of Resolution
No. 3395 be waived. Motion seconded by Councilman Reibold and carried on
roll call vote as follows:
AYES: Councilmen Butterworth, Camphouse, Reibold, Phillips
NOES: None
ABSENT: Mayor Balser
. INDEXED Councilman Camphouse further moved that section 4 of Resolution No. 3395
-' ,. 'as. presented be amended to change the hearing date from July 18, 1961 to
August 1, 1961. Councilman Butterworth seconded the motion which was
carried unanimously.
Councilman Camphouse then moved that Resolution No. 3395 as thus amended
be adopted. Motion seconded by Councilman Reibold and carried on roll call
vote as follows:
AYES: Councilmen Butterworth, Camphouse, Reibold, Phillips
NOES: None
ABSENT: Mayor Balser
PERSONNEJ?;2 f MOTION by Councilman Reibold, seconded by Councilman Camphouse and carried
(Street ~unanimouslY that Council accept the recommendation of the Personnel Board
Foreman ~ and approve the revised class specification for Street Foreman.
Revised).:3;PJ ~",n
. r; JJIDE~
RECREATION MOTION by Councilman Camphouse, seconded by Councilman Butterworth and
COMMISSION carried unanimously that Council accept the recommendation of the City
(Bonita Park) Manager and hold over for consideration to June 29, 19&1 ~he matter of the
recommendation of the Recreation Commission to grant free use to the Arcadia
~: VO~ Pony-Colt League of the Bonita Park baseball lights for the 1961 baseball
\]. season, funds to be allocated to the Department of Public Works for this
purpose, and that not more than three representatives of said League be
rrNDEXEXl present to discuss the matter with the Council.
ARCADIA GOLF
COURSE
(Beer)
I
313/
rrNDEXEl'
Regarding the request of the Arcadia Golf Course, operators of the Par-3
Golf Course on City-owned property at 620 E. Live Oak Avenue, on January
3, 1961 Council voted in favor of the City Manager and City Attorney
preparing an amendment to their lease with the City giving the lessee an
opportunity to make an application to Alcoholic Bever~ge Control Board for
an on-sale beer license, said amendment to be submitted to the Council at
the next meeting for review. At the next Council meeting (January 17, 1961)
due to the receipt of communication from said golf company withdrawing
their request for the present due to the large number of protests received,
Council moved unanimously to accede to the wishes of the Arcadia Golf
Company and to take no further action to amend the lease.
The City Clerk announced that a communication had been received from said
Arcadia Golf Course again requesting modification of their lease with the
City to permit the sale of beer on said premises, the communication being
accompanied by petitions containing a total of 355 signatures (127 of
Arcadia residents in favor of the modification and two opposed; the
remainder being of residents from nearby cities in favor).
13.
6-20-61
l4:539l
Mr, Jerome T, Stewart, general partner of the subject company, addressed
the Council, stating in substance that in January they thought there was
public opposition and since they were operating a public recreation
facility they did not wish to offend anyone; that subsequently they have
recei~ed so many requests for beer from users of the course that they asked
such users to sign petitions as to their preference and the vote was over-
whelmingly in favor of the sale of beer, That in his opinion, to make the
golf course economically feasible this concession is necessary,
Mr, Stewart then read in its entirety a communication dated June 20, 1961
from the Arcadia Golf Course Men's Club, consisting of 80 members, stating
in substance that they felt this is a facility that will increase the I
popularity of the course; that it is their understanding that the only
objections came from certain church gro~ps who allegedly do not use the I
course; that this subjection to "blue law'" regulation by strangers is .
completely unwarranted; that the petitions show that the great majority of
the people using the course would enjoy this service,
Mr, Stewart also read a letter dated June 20, 1961 from the greens keepers
stating in substance that while performing their duties they pick up an
average of 3/4 of a barrel of empty beer bottles and beer cans in and
around the course, Mr. Stewart commented that this would indicate that
if people want to drink beer on the premises they will do so.
Mr, Stewart continued, stating in part that it is their intention, if the
request is granted, to sell beer only, as a convenience to the patrons;
also that basically their request is to have their lease modified inasmuch
as it is the prerogative of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Board to pass
upon the propriety of selling beer on the premises. That he felt that
sometimes public bodies are apt to be influenced by a vociferous minority,
In the general discussion that followed Councilman Reibold stated in part
that it was the subsequent protests that would have caused him to change
his vote; also that he had felt the protests were representative. That
the fact that the golf course is operated on City property presents a
unique situation, that the people have a right to express preference,
Councilman Butterworth stated in part that he had voted against the request
and could see no change of circumstances that would cause him now to change
his vote; also that he felt Mr. Stewart's remark regarding a vociferous
minority influencing public bodies was not entirely well taken in that it
inferred that Council's vote were propelled by a vocal minority, He added
that no one compelled the lessee to execute the lease, and that this is
not entirely a matter within the control of Alcoholic Beverage Control
Board but within the discretion of the Council.
Councilman Camphouse stated in part that he had not changed his op~n~on
and still favored amending the lease; that the subject matter had been
one of concern from an economic standpoint at the time the lease was
negotiated, which was prior to Councilman Butterworth becoming' a counCilmanl
To Councilman Reibold's remark that the protests seemed representative,
Mr, Stewart stated that as they wish to operate their business to meet
the approval of the majority he would withdraw the request if he could be
assured that it is the will of the majority.
After considerable further discussion, it appearing to be the consensus of
the Council that a vote taken at this meeting would be tied, Mayor Pro
Tempore Phillips suggested the matter be continued until there is a full
council.
Councilman Butterworth wondered what useful purpose could be served by
another hearing on the matter and inquired of the City Attorney if Council
could vote on the matter at this meeting and then defer the matter to the
next meeting at which time Mayor Balser could vote on it, to which the
14.
6-20-61
REFUND
I
J!~I
J:NDEXED
'I .J.
BUSINESS
PERMIT
'INDEXED.
COUNTY
BOUNDARY
COMMISSION
AUDIENCE
PARTICIPATION
COMMUNICATION
~~Ol
I
INDEnn
MECHANIC'S
HELPER
14:5392
City.Attorney replied that votes. at one meeting could not be added to
votes, taken at a .later meeting for the purpose of accumulating
suffici8~t votes for a motion to carry.
Whereupon Coupailman Butterworth MOVED that the matter be placed on the
agendacfor the ne~t.Council meeti~g (July 5, 1961), Councilman Reibold
seconded. the motion, which was passed by the Aye vote of Councilmen
Butterworth, Reibold .and Phillips; Councilman Camphouse abstained.
,
Motion by Councilman Butterworth, seconded by Councilman Camphouse and
carried on roll call vote as follows that the Mayor and City Clerk be
authorized to refund the sum of $10.87 to Melvin Blons and Stanley Ward,
partners, dba Merchant's Sampler Advertising, 11350 Ventura Blvd.,
Studio City, California, being the unused portion of the investigation
fee deposited in connection with their application for a business permit:
AYES: Councilmen Butterworth, Camphouse, Reibold, Phillips
NOES: None
ABSENT: Mayor Balser
MOTION by Councilman Reibold, seconded by Councilman Phillips and
carried on roll ..call vote as follows that Council approve the following
applications for renewal of business license permits, and that the
provis'ions of Section 6313;1 and 6313.2 of the Arcadia Municipal Code,
applicable to previously licensed businesses, be waived:
~ /q:t
:1'1'1,)
~ rJ 0 '(;'"
Harry Erickson )
Philip Hirschkoff )
John Orenstein )
Limousines for Hire'- Race Track
Service
AYES: Councilmen Butterworth, Camphouse, Reibold,.'Phillips
NOES: None
ABSENT: Mayor Balser
Mayor Pro Te~pore Phillips ordered filed notice from the County Boundary
Commission that El Monte has filed Annexation Proposal No. 257 (south
of Garvey Avenue) since this has no effect upon the City of Arcadia,
No one in the audience desired to address the Council.
MOTteN by Councilman Camphouse that Council accept the recommendation
of the City Manager and order the communication..dated June 14, 1961 from
Huntington Associates, comprising local insurance' brokers, with regard
to the insurance award "recently made by the City, be referred to the
Insurance Committee for reply. Councilman Butterworth seconded the
motion.
To Councilman Butterworth's query regarding the statement in said letter
that said brokers were not notified in time and that the insurance
market was subsequently closed to them, the City. Manager replied that
they were mailed an invitation to bid at the same time as all others;
that the successful bidder received the invitation to bid tWQ or three
days after Huntington' Associates. Counci'lman But-terwort-h then .stated
that he thought this should be made part of the record and the City
Manager replied that the original letter is now on file with the.City
Clerk and the reply of the Insurance Committee will be made part of the
minutes when available.
The above motion was then carried unanimously.
MOTION by Councilman Butterworth, seconded by Councilman Camphouse and
carried unanimously that Council accept the recommendation of the City
Manager and approve the specifications for a Mechanic's.Helper.
15.
6-20-61
SANTA ANITA
RESERVOIR
(Completion)
J 3 t"f'
iINDEXED
CAMPHOUSE
(Fi re
Hazard)
/h~f
14:5393
The City Manager advised that under date of November 1, 1960 Council
granted an extension of completion date to the Christie Company for the
completion of Santa Anita Reservoir No.3 and appurtenant work to
January 31, 1961 provided said Christie Company paid the cost of any
inspection charges incurred by the City after December 16, 1960. That
all the wo~k contemplated under the contract was completed on April 1,
1961, and that after review of the construction log by himself and the
Water Supe~intendent it is felt that further extension should have been
granted beyond the January 31, 1961 date due to circumstances beyond
the contractor's direct control.
Whereupon Councilman Camphouse MOVED that all the work contemplated
under the construction contract with Christie Company for the
construction of Santa Anita Reservoir No.3 and appurtenant work be
accepted by the City and that inspection costs from and after January
31, 1961, totaling $1,340.36, be withheld from the final payment to
contractor in lieu of liquidated damages. Motion seconded by Councilman
Butterworth and carried on roll call vote as follows:
I
AYES: Councilmen Butterworth, Camphouse, Reibold, Phillips
NOES: None
ABSENT: Mayor Balser
Councilman Camphouse spoke about the matter of disposal of burning
cigarettes; that there should be some uniformity in the laws effecting
same which would help alleviate the fire hazard prevalent in Southern
California, and inquired as to the status of request he had previously
made that the staff consider an ordinance to that effect. He was
advised that the staff was working on the matter.
APPOINTMENTS TO VARIOUS COMMISSIONS AND BOARDS:
(Recreation)
.,...--
(Heal th &
Sanitation)
~
(Planning)
~
(Planning)
.......--
(Rec rea tion)
~
Motion by Councilman Reibold, seconded by Councilman Phillips and carried
unanimously that Mr. Robert H. Watkinson be reappointed to the
Recreation Board for a term running consecutively from July l, 1961
to June 30, 1965. (RESPONSIBILITY - BALSER-REIBOLD).
Motion by Councilman Reibold, seconded by Councilman Butterworth and
carried on roll call vote as follows that Mrs. Crapo Johnson be re-
appointed to the Health and Sanitation Commission for a term running
consecutively from July l, 1961 to June 30, 1965. (RESPONSIBILITY-
REIBOLD-PHILLIPS);
A~ES: Councilmen Butterworth, Reibold, Phillips
ABSTAINED: Councilman Camphouse
NOES: None
ABSENT: Mayor Balser
Motion by Councilman Butterworth, seconded by Councilman Reibold and
carried unanimously that Mr. George Forman be reappointed to the Planning
Commission for a term running consecutively from July 1, 1961 to June
30, 1965. (RESPONSIBILITY - BUTTERWORTH-PHILLIPS).
I
Motion by Councilman Camphouse, seconded by Councilman Butterworth and
carried unanimously that Mr. H. T. Michler be reappointed to the Planning
Commis~ion for a term running consecutively from July 1, 1961 to June
30, 1905. (RESPONSIBILITY - PHILLIPS-CAMPHOUSE).
Motion by Councilman Phillips, seconded by Councilman Camphouse and
carried unanimously that Mr. Elbert Souders, a school official, be
reappointed to the Recreation Board for a term running consecutively
from July 1, 1961 to June 30, 1965. (RESPONSIBILITY - NOT CHARGEABLE).
16.
6-20-6l
14:5394
,Water Board
/
Motion by Councilman Phillips, seconded by Councilman Reibold and
carried unanimously that Mr. Wm. H. Stout be reappointed to the
Water Board for a term running consecutively from July 1, 1961 to
June 30, 1965. (RESPONSIBILITY BALSER-PHILLIPS).
Phillips re
. . Ord, 1071
~
Mayor Pro Tempore Phillips inquired as to the status of his request
of June 6, 1961 that the staff prepare the conditions imposed under
the original zoning as cont~ined in Ordinance No. 1071 and their
effec~ on t~e six lots on the. north side of Naomi Avenue, east of
Baldwin Avenue, in the Miller.hearing, and was advised that the
matter is on the pending agen4a and the requested information will be
forthcoming shortly,
I
, t' ~
ADJOURNMENT
,,;'{
~~io~ by Councilman Campho~~e, seconded by Councilman Reibold and
~art:ied unanimously that th,\,.meeting adjourn, (11: 6~ . P.M.)
~',: "',~.I' .
.. ..' ,_ l ~
r ~ ~ f'\~'.
. 'r~('l
,
,r;
mrY
. ,,," (Mayor Pro Tempore
. '" . l. _ .~.
l
l~'\<'" '.:
>' ',n ,. . ~ ..1,.
.,
., .
:..
ATTEST:
~})L~/
City Clerk
.,.
'-":
i.'
I
l7,
6-20-61