Loading...
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