Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1970 05-19 CC MIN64 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY, CALIFORNIA STUDENT IN GO/ERNMENT DAY May 1, 1970 The regular meeting of the City Council of the City of National City was called to order at 7:30 p.m. by Mayor Morgan. ROLL CALL Council members and their student counterparts present: Camacho, Hogue, Reid, Waters, Morgan. ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIALS and their student counter- parts present: Bourcier, Foster, Kerr, McLean, Minogue, Osburn, Stockman. SALUTE TO FLAG AND INVOCATION The meeting was opened with salute to the Flag led by City followed with invocation by Student Mayor, Merle Newlan- MAYOR MORGAN welcomed the students, teachers and everyone Sweetwater Union High SChool. Manager Osburn connected with APPROVAL OF MINUTES Moved by Waters, seconded by Hogue, the minutes of the regular meeting of May 12, 1970 be approved. Carried by unanimous vote. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS COUNCILMAN WATERS inquired if any of the money the City was using to repair the streets in National City and to develop the streets come out of the General Fund or was it all gas tax money. City Manager Osburn replied of the money for streets, $65,000.00 a year is from the General Fund which is put into the Special Street Fund which is used for assistance in 1911 Acts and things of this sort; all other monies come from the gas tax and the Traffic Safety Fund. COUNCILMAN WATERS said a councilman should know what was going on in the City; he would like a report at the end of each month, to see what each de- partment has accomplished. City Manager Osburn said he gets a report from all the department heads; they were available in his office. MAYOR MORGAN told the City Manager he noticed in regard to the underground- ing of utilities the electrical company has not installed any lights between Division and 1st Street on Euclid Avenue. MAYOR MORGAN protested the subdivision passed last week (Sweetwater Mesa Subdivision Unit #1); he would not approve any subdivision in the City un- less there was an area set aside, a lot or two, for kids to play. Director of Planning Stockman said they were working on an ordinance that will re- quire recreation and play areas in all future residential and R-4 multiple,* subdivisions. MAYOR MORGAN said in regard to sending someone to Washington to testify be- fore the committee on Urban Development; it would be beneficial to the City and he would like to appoint the Vice Mayor and Mr. Watts. Moved by Waters, seconded by Hogue, the Mayor's recommendation be approved. Carried by unanimous vote. The PROCLAMATION urging citizens to purchase Buddy Poppies (Friday, May 22, and Saturday, May 23) was read. Moved by Reid, seconded by Camacho, the proclamation be adopted. Carried by unanimous vote. MAYOR MORGAN introduced Student Mayor Merle Newlan and said it had been a real pleasure for him to be around these students. Student Mayor Merle Newlan thanked the Mayor and said he had an enjoyable day and learned a lot. Councilman Hogue introduced his daughter, Student Councilman Fion Hogue. Councilman Waters introduced Student Councilman Del Vogel. Vice 5/19/70 65 Mayor Camacho introduced Student lice Mayor Heary Empeno. Councilman Reid introduced Student Councilman Cookie Remley. Student Councilman Remley said it was a great opportunity. City Attorney McLean introduced Student City Attorney Gary Escalante. Student City Attorney Escalante said about all he could say this was a lot of hard Work. City Manager Osburn stated he had two young men with him today: Bill Madison who did not attend the Council meeting and John Ramos who was present. Student City Manager Ramos said he enjoyed the day with Mr. Osburn and seeing how tough his job really is. City Engineer Foster said the Student City Engineer for the day was Hugh Edwards; he was with him all day but was not in attendance at the Council meeting. Director of Planning Stockman said she had Student Director of Planning Wayne Guerrini with her all day. Student Director of Planning Guerrini said he didn't realize City planning could be so involved and de- tailed; there is quite a bit of paper work behind City planning. Redevelop- ment Agency Director Watts stated students serving with the Redevelopment Agency were: Redevelopment Directors - Robert Bolata and Charles Plavi; Relocation Director - Hazel Johnson; Director of Real Estate - Ernest Thorn- burg; he thought the Student Relocation Director was trying to get a little inside information; she and her mother live in the redevelopment area. City Clerk Minogue introduced Student City Clerk Ken Johnson. Student City Clerk Johnson said he had a very wonderful day and wanted to thank everybody at City Hall; he was glad he had the opportunity he had today. City Treasurer Kerr said Student Assistant to the City Treasurer Barbara Taconi and Student City Treasurer Laurie Hazel had a good day in the office most of the day. Chamber of Commerce Manager Edith Sherman said the Student Chamber of Commerce Manager was Robert Hill; they had two student secretaries: Mary Jamison and Kay Scull. Assistant City Manager Bourcier introduced Student Assistant City Manager Howard Smith. Student Assistant City Manager Smith said it was an interesting experience and educational. Other students in the audience spoke: Student Superintendent of Sewers Imogene Townsend thanked Mr. Smith, Superintendent of Sewers, for the time he took to educate her on sewers. Student Director of Public Works James Eaves said his posi- tion was a tougn job; Student Fire Marshall Ron Malac stated his department really had some problems to take care of; Student Secretary to the City Manager Marin Ellorin said she didn't realize how much shorthand and typing there was to do; Student Building Inspector John Wirtz said he didn't remem- ber his full title, it was some sort of building inspector, they rode around most of the day and checked out a few buildings; he really enjoyed it and wanted to thank everybody; Student Recreation Superintendent J. B. Barton said he found the City has a lot of good recreational projects; Student Secretary to Chamber of Commerce Manager Kay Soul/ said she would like to thank Amber and all the other people; she didn't realize National City was such a large city. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS HELEN ALLEN, 1704 D Avenue, was present and said the same kind of lighting or traffic setup is needed at Highland and 8th that we have at Highland and 30th; she sat through 5 lights westbound at 3:30 on an ordinary afternoon at Highland Ave. trying to make a left turn. Mrs. Alien said in regard to trees which have been destroyed for street widening projects and paving projects, we need the oxygen supplied by these trees; she was going to ask if the Planning Department could also incorporate in the new ordinance about play areas in new subdivisions the requirement that trees must be planted or adequate landscaping to replace any oxygen loss through the destruction of present vegetation; she protested the removal of the tree on N Avenue. Mrs. Allen said there are other streets that need maintenance: 14th Street east of D; F Avenue north from 16th; and Palm for almost its entire length. JAMES A. TOWNSEND, 2120 E. llth Street, was present and said he read in the Star -News this Sunday about the problems connected with the purchase of houses taken by freeways. Mr. Townsend said if the report in the Star -News is correct about waiving right to protest future 1911 Acts as a condition to moving a house within the City, it is blackmail. Mr. Townsend said he bought 5 lots in the Hills of Paradise; there was no water or gas at the time; he qualified for gas service and promised to pay $1,000.00 over ten 5/13/70 66 years for water service so the water company would spend $800.00 to install mains from 10th Street up Paradise to llth, one block. Mr. Townsend said he was not opposed to progress; he only buys what he can afford and he can- not afford curbs and sidewalks on his frontage; he has $400.00 a month in- come, 3 kids and a wife'. MICHAEL B. ARY, 1931 A Avenue, was present and said there is a problem in respect to 19th, 20th and 21st Streets crossed by A and E Avenue: numerous accidents, especially on A Avenue and 20th Street. Mr. Ary said if they could get some type of yield sign or something to determine the right of way it would cut down on the accidents. Mayor Morgan recommended this be turned over to the Traffic Safety Committee for study. Moved by Hogue, seconded by Camacho, the Mayor's recommendation be approved. Carried by unanimous vote. ADOPTION OF RESOLUTIONS Moved by Hogue, seconded by Camacho, the resolutions be presented by title. Carried by unanimous vote. RESOLUTION NO. 10,095, "RESOLUTION URGING THE LEGISLATURE TO PROVIDE FUNDING FOR POLICE AND FIRE BENEFITS." Moved by Reid, seccnded by Hogue, the reso- lution be adopted. Carried by unanimous vote. RESOLUTION NO. 10,100, "RESOLUTION GRANTING A RESIDENTIAL PLANNED DEVELOP- MENT PERMIT PURSUANT TO ORDINANCE 1077 (R-4-PD Zone to Gerry L. Corpuz, to Move Building from 1939 E. 24th Street to 2910 E. loth Street National City)." Moved by Hogue, seconded by Reid, the resolution be adopted. Carried by unanimous vote. RESOLUTION NO. 10,101, "RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY AND SEDCO OF CALIFORNIA, INC." Moved by Camacho, seconded by Reid, the resolution be adopted. Carried by unanimous vote. RESOLUTION NO. 10,102, "RESOLUTION ACCEPTING CONVEYANCE OF REAL PROPERTY (Hanson and Weinberger)." Moved by Reid, seconded by Hogue, the resolution be adopted. Carried by unanimous vote. RESOLUTION NO. 10,103, "DEDICATION OF CITY OWNED PROPERTY FOR PUBLIC STREET PURPOSES (Nineteenth Street)." Moved by Camacho, seconded by Hogue, the resolution be adopted. Carried by unanimous vote. INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCES Moved by Camacho, seconded by Reid, the first reading of ordinancesbe by title. Carried by unanimous vote. ORDINANCE NO. , "An ordinance establishing sewer service charges." ORDINANCE NO. ployees." "An ordinance providing for overtime pay for City em- ADOPTION OF ORDINANCES ORDINANCE NO. 1243, "AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 962, ZONING ORDI- NANCE OF THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY, ESTABLISHING A COMMERCIAL MAJOR SHOPPING CENTER AND CONVENTION PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ZONE AND ESTABLISHING SAID ZONING ON ALL THAT PROPERTY WITHIN THE KOENIG ANNEXATIONS NC. 1 AND NO . 2," was presented for second reading. Moved by Hogue, seconded by Camacho, the ordinance be read by title. Carried by unanimous vote. The title was read. Moved by Camacho, seconded by Reid, the ordinance be adopted. Carried by unanimous vote. HEARINGS The CONTINUED REASSESSMENT HEARING ON THE 1911 ACT IMPROVEMENT OF I, J, L, 20TH, 22ND, 24TH STREETS, ASSESSMENT ROLL NO. 153 -R was held at this time. City Attorney McLean said they would recall that at the last hearing on the confirmation of the reassessment of this district the staff recommended a 5/19/70 67 continuance of the hearing pending reports from a consultant the City employ- ed; they were now ready to proceed with a presentation of the background material which they think the Council needs to make a decision in regards to the reassessment of District 153. The City Attorney instructed Civil Engi- neer Associate Onley to present to the Council a statement concerning the district itself, the type of work that was done and the extent of the assess- ments. Civil Engineer Associate Onley said the map on the board desig- nated as Map 153 is the map of the Assessment District as established by the Resolution of Intention; it is what we will use for our diagram in this hear- ing; this hearing is on re -assessment, the re -assessment is called 153-R; the areas on the map colored green represent the written protests, 3.6% of the area involved. Mr. Onley said the work done within the District was paving and grading of the streets shown in gray, the crusher run base and AC pavement; only 7 streets within the district were improved: 24th Street and L Avenue were not paved under this contract; I Avenue, Jr Avenue, 21st, 20th Street and portions of 22nd Street were the only paved areas; the dotted areas are concrete work; where concrete work is not shown it means the con- crete work was already there, existing. Mr. Onley said the total cost of the original assessments for the district was $64,832.37; this amount was spread in this district; when the diagram was completed and approved by the Engineer of Work, he proceeded to estimate upon the lots and the parcels of land within this district the benefit arising from the work received by each lot or parcel of land and assessed the land in the assessment district the total amount of the cost and expenses of such worklminus the City contribu- tion)in proportion with the estimated benefits received by each of the sever- al of lots or parcels of land. Mr. Onley said at any place where the exist- ing concrete work was not to the grade of the street and people had already put the work in and paid for it and the City had approved of it, when this work was removed and replaced, it was paid for by the City; to specifically state any one spot would be difficult because this only shows the actual work done; but the City contribution within this district was slightly over 20% of the total cost. Mr. Onley related the method by which he apportioned the cost of this work against the parcels of land according to his opinion of the benefits received by the various parcels: concrete work done on this project was assessed directly to the adjacent property, this included drive- ways, alleys, curbs and sidewalks adjacent to the property; all other ex- penses in the district were then taken and spread areawise to all the parcels within the boundaries of the district; no concrete driveway, curb or side- walk was assessed against parcels which did not directly front upon the im- provement itself; non -frontage lots, in general, in this district, paid only for paving and incidentals to the paving which would be the grading, the base, the paving and the incidental expenses related thereto plus their own bond; any parcel will pay its own bond. Mr. 0nley said there were several instances of people suggesting some other method of assessing rather than what they call the National City Method; those methods were the 10% Method, the 70-30 Method (which the City of San Diego uses), the 60-40 Method (which is used by some bonding companies). Mr. 0nley explained the methods of assessing under the National City Method, the 70-30 Method, and the 60-40 Method. The City Attorney requested the tally sheet prepared by Mr. Onley showing the amounts of assessments to each of the 160 parcels within District 153 under the three methods be made a part of the proceedings. (See Exhibit A attached.) Mr. Onley explained in detail the various assessments shown on the tally sheet. Mr. Onley stated the certified appraiser who helped us also arrived at the conclusion that using the 60-40 Method worked a strain on the back properties. Mr. Onley said in his opinion 2 assessments figured under the 70-30, 60-40 Methods were out of line with the improvement and the appraiser shared his opinion and said that the particular assessment of $225.00 the City placed upon parcel 116 was a fair and just thing as far as equity was concerned; we're not talking about dollar amounts; wetre talking about equity. Mr. Onley displayed charts A through J depicting various hy- pothetical lot configurations and assessments to demonstrate how the differ- ent methods of assessment work. The City Attorney asked a number of questions which Mr. Onley answered. In answer to the City Attorneys question Mr. Onley said he had been making 1911 Act assessments for 23 years and he has consulted with attorneys up and down the state; he worked with Bill Stark, 5/19/70 68 Attorney deceased; he worked 9 years with William McKenzie Brown at Pasadena; he worked with the City of Escondido as a consultant, as well as Carlsbad and Imperial Beach before it was a City; he worked with the County of San Diego on 5 sanitation and sanitary districts; he worked on the Helix Irriga- tion District; he worked in the City of San Diego for 9 years in private engineering until we got a consultant; and he had been doing assessment work for National City for 12t years. The City Attorney asked, in his opinion, which of the 3 methods he described to the Council apportions the cost of the work to the various lots in proportion to the benefit the various lots have received. Mr. Onley said the area benefit method which they have been using in National City for the last 7 years. City Attorney McLean asked if that was the method of assessment they used in making up the Assessment Roll in District 153 as well as the Re -Assessment Roll. Mr. Onley said that was the method used in 153 when it came to making the re -assessment roll. Mr. McLean instructed him to follow the Court order and he followed the Court order; and in the Court order they used the same rule because they have to have an assessment to have a re -assessment and the Court directed them what to do and as the Attorney gave him his instructions, he followed them to the letter as far as adding the interest and such that was supposed to be done. City Attorney McLean asked if so far as the Re -Assessment Roll was concerted and in establishing the apportionment of cost to each lot in the district in the re -assessment proceedings, had Mr. Onley assessed each lot according to the benefit each lot has received, in his opinion. Mr. Onley replied he had. City Attorney McLean asked if he had discussed each of the 3 assessment methods with Mr. Lee C. Johnson, a real estate appraiser of this state. Mr. Onley replied he did; he visited the district with Mr. Johnson and pointed out the various parcels of land in the district; Mr. Johnson questioned him and instructed him as to which parcels he wanted him to search out for him, which they did and presented him with the figures. Mr. Onley said he gave Mr. Johnson the entire Re -Assessment Roll plus the other methods to study. Mr. Onley said after his visits to the district he discussed with Mr. John- son the comparison of the method used by National City as against assessment derived by the 70-30 Method or the 60-40 Method; and Mr. Johnson agreed with him that the National City Method resulted in an assessment on the property equal to the benefit received by the property. Mr. Onley said Mr. Johnson specifically stated to him yesterday afternoon that there are no assessments in this particular assessment district in our original assessments that ex- ceed the value the land will receive from the improvements in the district; and he (Mr. Johnson) arrived at the decision that he didn't have any method that was any better than the one used. City Attorney McLean said he would like to have the record reflect he had distributed to the Council and he would make it part of the record of this proceeding a letter from Lee C. Johnson attached to which is a statement of his professional qualifications in which he reports to the City Council the results of a review of the assessments in District 153. (See Exhibit 3 attached.) The City Clerk read in full all protests received: Walter L. Mackey, 2014 K Avenue, Assessment No. 39; Nettie C. Stidham, 1920 J Avenue, Assessment No. 95; Ellen B. & L.T. Gottschall, 2019 J Avenue, Assessment No. 91; Mrs. Rose O'Keefe, 2020 J Avenue, Assessment No. 89; Carl W. & Lina A. Rasmussen, 2025 I Avenue, Assessment No. 88; Adelaide E. & Sidney N. Laverents, 1928-30 J Avenue, Assessment No. 96; H. Forte, 1025 E. 18th Street, Assessment No. 153. The City Attorney asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to be heard at this time. Mrs. Ellen 3. Gottschall, 2019 J Avenue (Assessment No. A.), was present and said she was sorry she was not impressed by these theoretical maps because they can show anything; what was being offered to this Council called the National City Method, is not a re -assessment; it's the original assessment plus interest. Mrs. Gottschall said a new member on the Council is not familiar with this and it-s tied to the very beginning of this district; when this district was formed, of course she should explain that she is on J Avenue a half a block away from 20th Street which is the street improved. (Mr. Onley pointed out Parcel No. 91, Mrs. Gottschall's parcel.) Mrs. Gottschall continued before this district was formed, her street (J) was improved; she had been told and it was also said in Court that when her street was improved it oas assessed under frontage; it was not; up until 1963 only the people on the front paid; she paid more than her neighbor who had more frontage and she was told when she asked why this was 5/19/70 that it was not assessed on frontage but on area; he has more frontage but you have more back, more square area; therefore, you pay more and by this same method (now called the National City ii,ethod) they went around the corner on 20th Street (the one which is now improved) to the middle of the block and the total cost was less than $25.00; the cost was $24.00 and some cents and they were told that was the cost of the intersection. Mrs. Gottschall said the intersections were in on 20th before it was improved this time; she was not against street improvements; she was for them; she was for every one that goes in but she was against the method by which they are done; she pays ex- actly the same per square foot as though her complete land fronted the street that was improved but she was a half -block away. Mrs. Gottschall said when she first started comparing assessments, Mr. Conley told her it looked unfair but the fault was not with the method but with the law; she asked him for the name of that law; she couldn't find it and it never was made available so she started researching the 1911 Improvement Act; she found no fault with the law which says the criteria for assessment is benefit; the law specifies no method but does specify benefit to be paid in proportion to benefit received by each; it is most clear that all improvement property doesn't benefit 100% in proportion to property fronting on the improvement. The 30-70, 60-40 Methods were not advocated by her attorney; they were simply suggested; .she checked with other cities in San Diego County and found that some of them use a 106 and some of them use a simple bulk figure of $50.00 for people off the street so that it doesn't have to go to bond; you may check that. Mrs. Gottschall said she and her neighbor in the back who was in the middle of the block on K as she was in the middle of the block on J, between the 2 of them, were paying 45% of the complete south side of 20th Street improvement. Mrs. Gottschall said 20th Street deadends on each end and is 4 blocks long; one block was removed when it was formed and she tried to find out how; it was taken out by, they said by a majority protest; she got a petition (they had she thought an 82% majority protest) and she thought if it could be done there it could be done in the next 2 blocks so she got a petition signed by 89% of the people in the next 2 blocks and that was turned down flat. Mrs. Gottschall said one inequity was outstanding; it's No. 133 (Mrs. Gottschall asked Mr. Onley to point this out); I Avenue deadends at this property (which is in apartments, 20 apartments; the lot itself is about 200' x 120', 4 times the size of her lot) providing their only access to off-street parking; this property is paying less than she was; and there is just no comparison in the benefit. Mrs. Gottschall spoke of a previous hearing where the Council asked for another assessment; the letter from Stone & Youngberg and quoted from the Decision of the Court, Gottschall vs. N. C. No. 315537: "I feel that she has filed a class action in this proceeding. She attempted to do so and I feel that she did do so. It will not just be to her benefit, but be to the bene- fit of all of the parcels in Improvement District 153... THE COURT: the improvement, I am saying that the way it was done here, in this Court's view, is improper with special emphasis on the propriety of charging the lots that are half a block back from the improvement the same per -square -foot figure as the lots right adjacent to it... Some other method will have to be de- signed or an appellate court will have to tell me I am wrong." Mrs. Gott- schall said no other method has been designed; that is a direct order; that is the Court's Opinion; some other method of doing this, or an appellate court tell him he is wrong; this goes to procedure after the trial; this is from the California Code of Civil Procedure. Mrs. Gottschall said she does not think that this reassessment complies with the rulings of the Superior Court of the State of California, the Reassessment Act of the California State & Highway Code and she hoped their own good judgment of justice; she had the penalty for failure to conform to a Peremptory Writ; when a Peremp- tory Mandate has been issued (they have a copy of it) and directed to any inferior tribunal, corporation, board, or person if it appears to the Court that any member of such tribunal, corporation, board or person upon whom the writ has been personally served has without just excuse, refused or neglected to obey the same, the Court may, on motion, impose a fine, not exceeding $1,000.00; in case of persistence in a refusal of obedience, the Court may order the party to be imprisoned until the writ is obeyed, and make any orders necessary and proper for the complete enforcement of the writ. Walter L. Mackey, 2014 K Avenue (Assessment No. 39), was present and said he did. not 5/19/70 70 think any of them could add much to what Mrs. Gottschall said except he thought they should add that according to what the Judge said that this should be done and if we don't take it into consideration and get a re- assessment he didn't think they had much law in this city; he thought they were all going against it if they don't because this was decided in a court of law; if we can't go by what our law says we don't have much of a place; he thought they would agree with him, he remembered that Mr. Hogue in one of the earlier meetings said "1 hope this is taken to a court of law." Mr. Mackey said it was in the records; their assessments, so far as he was con- cerned, was way out of proportion; they always have been and actually there was nothing more they could say, they would just have to wait and see what happens but he didn't think it was over yet. City Attorney McLean asked if there was anyone else to be heard. The City Attorney asked Mr. Onley to point to Assessment 133 and relate to the Council how he arrived at the assessment on Parcel 133, the factors you considered. Mr. Onley said Parcel 133 fronts on 18th Street and has an entrance on 1 Avenue; they will notice it just has gray here and it doesn't have any concrete work being done in front of the parcel which is indicative to him that this parcel had already put in some concrete work; going back to benefits, estimated benefits derived, we're looking at a parcel that's got what we call the straight line theory, 20' of frontage, not 200'0 it's only 20' of frontage; when you estimate the benefit of a parcel with 20' of frontage you find another parcel that is similar and see what happened there and then use good common sense because you surely couldn't charge it because of its area for something it is not getting; he was not talking about apartments; he didn't know what was on there and didn't really care because he assessed off of this flat map and it doesn't show anything of which he has to assess off of; he didn't know what was on the properties; you have to think that way; yoL., have to think that this is nothing but a piece of flat land and keep that in mind when you do this; so he finds himself a parcel that seems to be getting about the same amount of benefit and that would be the parcel next to it right across the street which is Parcel No. 134; he will think about these two parcels and he was sure if they looked at the records they would find the assessments were pretty nearly the same dollarwise, because you have to keep in mind what benefit this piece of property is going to derive from the improvement; Parcel No. 133's assessment was $356.34 and Parcel No. 134's assessment was $309.51; at the time he thought these were very fair assessments and he had not changed his thinking; there are many parcels in the district that have gone through the same situation; this isn't something new; they do this all the time, large parcels with very small frontages and frontage on other streets we have to take into consideration; Mr. McLean informed him again you have to take into consideration what people have already done that is part of this improvement and this was one of the things he took into consid- eration on this assessment; that's why the assessment is small; it appears to be small; it's $371.63 on the reassessment and the like parcel was $372.55 so he couldn't see that there was any, too much difference. Mrs. Gottschall said she was protesting this as a part of this district that is assessed; the assessment act was taken off frontage in 1953; it was taken off although it was considered; in exceptional cases where there was small frontage but a very large back lot which benefitted greatly it was to be considered; that is one of the basic reasons that the Assessment Act was changed to be taken by district instead of by frontage alone; Parcel 133 demonstrates that; she didn't say it had 200' of frontage; she said the size of it was 200 and some feet by 120; the frontage on the street is only, as you say, maybe 20' but it is a large parcel of land and used by apartments or potential apartments with the frontage on 13th, a large frontage which could not be used for parking; the only access to this place would be from 1 Avenue which was paved and for which they paid a very small portion. Mrs. Gottschall request- ed Lot 129 be pointed out. Mrs. Gottschall continued that lot happens to be 43', has 43' of frontage and runs back 100' and their total assessment was $570.00; if they had even sidewalks and curbs that they paid for, there were only 45' of them and would only be a couple hundred dollars, it would still be more, they would be paying more than that large parcel of land that does benefit from that improvement. City Attorney McLean asked if there was anyone else to be heard. The City Attorney said it was up to the Council to 5/19/70 71 decide whether it wants to assess the district according to the method re- ferred to as the National City Method or to assess the district according to the 70-30 Method or the 60-40 Method or the so-called 10;" Method, or if by some other form of assessment in the istrict; the Council is obligated to apportion the cost of the work in this district against the lots in propor- tion to the benefits received by each lot; they have presented them with 4 alternative methods and the staff has stated that it feels the method referred to as the National City Method does apportion the cost of the work to the lots in proportion to the benefit the lots receive from the work; the question now is what the City Council desires to do in regard to the assessments. Council- man Hogue asked the City Attorney if he thought that the Council has complied with the ruling of the Judge. City Attorney McLean said yes, everybody can have their own opinions about that; his opinion was supposed to count with the City Council and it was his understanding of the Couxt's analysis of these proceedings that the Court was concerned that the Council had not fully delib- erated on whether or not the non -frontage owners are being charged for work beyond the amount of benefit that non -frontage properties were receiving; he specifically asked the Judge whether he had some opinion about a proper method of apportioning the costs and the Judge said no, but the Council should re-evaluate whether or not the cost of the work was being apportioned to the lots in relationship to the benefits each of the lots received from the work and consider specifically and carefully the precise issue of how much of the cost of the work non -frontage property should bear... it is not enough to make a re -assessment and reduce the dollar charge to a person who is object- ing to the district; the adjustments and assessment have to be done systemat- ically and with some reason other than simply to placate somebody; so, if they reduce the cost of non -frontage lots that has to be done because the Council finds from all the evidence that the ncn-frontage lots are being charged more in cost than they receive in benefit; also the Courts have told them on past occasions (and he was speaking generally, not to the City of National City but within California) one way to test whether you have put costs against properties according to the benefit they have received is to look at the cost of the assessment and ask whether or not the market value of a particular lot has gone up in an amount equal to the assessment. The City Attorney said the statement of the appraiser before them (as well as what they have told them verbally about their conferences with the) states the assess- ments are according to benefit. Mayor Morgan asked if there were any other questions. I1oved by Hogue, seconded by Camacho, seeing no one approach the bench, the hearing be closed, the City Council go on record as continuin9 to use the method employed by our Engineerin9 Departmentt_Mr. Onley, for assess- ing the districts and that this method be acceptor the assessment of this area. Mayor Morgan said he bought a lot in this area; he read the amendment to the escrow: "You will hold the $756.75 deposited to the above escrow, by the seller, plus $80.00 accruing from funds due the seller, for 5/1z,)/70 72 payment of street assessment, until the assessment is confirmed, and paid. In the event the assessment is less than tne amount being held, you will re- fund the difference to Mr. Jerauld and disperse the funds to pay the assess- ment. However, if the amount being held is not sufficient to cover said agreement, the seller herein agrees to deposit the difference. End of the amendment." The Mayor asked the City Attorney what his legal holdings to vote on this motion. City Attorney McLean said as he understood the Mayor's interest in this lot, it would not change the amount of the assessment against that lot or change the purchase price to him and so he could not see legally that he had an interest in the district that would prevent him voting on the assessment. Councilman Waters said since he was not here when this was taking place and he felt at this time he could not make a qualified decision, not being in on the original, he would abstain from voting. Motion carried by the following vote, to -wit: Ayes: Camacho, Hocjue, Reid, Morgan. Nays: None. Abstaining: Waters. RESOLUTION NO. 10,104, "RESOLUTION CONFIRMING REASSESSMaNT ('if, 1,71, ILt, 20th, 22nd, 24th Streets, Assessment District No. 153)," was presented. Moved by Hogue, seconded by Waters, be read by Carried by unanimous vote. The title was read. Moved by Reid, seconded by Hogue, the resolution be adopted. Carried by the following vote, to -wit: Ayes: Camacho, Hogue, Reid, Morgan. Nays: None. Abstaining: Waters. Mayor Morgan said this closes the hearing of Re -Assessment District No. 153-R. MAYOR MORGAN recognized Will Hyde, Sweetwater Union High School government teacher, former Mayor and newly -elected Councilman of Chula Vista, who was present in the audience. REPORT OF CITY ATTORNEY CITY ATTORNEY McLEAN stated he would be out of tom next week and that he had arranged for substitute legal counsel. APPROVAL OP BILLS AND PAYROLL BILLS AUDITED BY THE FINANCE COMMITTEE were presented: General Fund $16,945.50 Traffic Safety 2,200.54 Idark 59.37 Gas Tax 2106 61,172.93 Special Street 1,353.40 Sewer 116.8; Civic Center 1,38.31 Total $84 316.94 Moved by Waters, seconded by Reid, the bills be approved and warrants drawn for same. Carried by the following vote, to -wit: Ayes: Camacho, Hogue, Reid, Waters, Morgan. Nays: None. PAYROLL AUDITED BY THE FINANCE COMMITTEE in the amount of $91,733.53 was presented. Moved by Reid, seconded by Camacho, the payroll be approved and warrants drawn for same. Carried by the following vote, to -wit: Ayes: Camacho, Hogue, Reid, Waters, Morgan. Nays: None. REFERRALS The City Manager's report in regard to the funding requested by Mr. Henry Collins, Director, Narcotics Prevention & Education System, Inc. and recommending that to avoid selecting one program over another the City not fund any of the programs was presented. Moved by Hogue, seconded by Reid, the City Manager's recommendation be approved. Henry Collins, 1513 Roose- velt Avenue, was present and stated he anticipated funds would be forth- coming for his program; he was asking only for $900 contribution of in -kind funding from the City; there are 134 adult and ;4 juvenile addicts in National City who need immediate help. Ernest Azhocar, 1315 Lanoitan Avenue, was present and stated he is a member of the Board of the Sweetwater 5/19/70 73 Carried by unanimous vote, Union High School District, and only today took money out of his own pocket to provide transportation to a young man who had to travel north for help with his narcotics problem because he could. not get help here, MRS, ELLEN B. GOTTSCHALL, 201,; ji Avenue, approached the microphone and said she would like to challenge Mr. Reid's vote on the 1911 Act re -assessment (No, 153-R) as he owns property within the district. Motion to approve the City Manager's recommendation (re funding Narcotics Prevention & Education System) carried by the following vote, to -wit Ayes: Hogue, Reid, Morgan. Nays: Camacho, Waters. NEW BUSINESS The City Clerk's report of the result of opening of sealed bids for the aEAUTIFICATION OF EL TOYON ?ARK, CALIF, B-121, PHASE 11, CONSTRUCTION, PLANTING MATERIALS, SOIL MATERIALS (Gerald T. Sullivan, dba G,T.S, Co, Unit A -03234648/ unit'a $21/933,441 Unit C $7,502,00; T. 3, Penick & Sons, Inc. Unit A 06,60700, Unit 3 $25,552,12, Unit C $$1573,00; Valley Crest Land- 'caf)?' Inc. Ur!" A no bid, Unit 3 $26!075,14, Unit C $100903,00; R. 3, Hazard Contracting co. Unit A $31,03900; Unit P no bid, Unit C no bid; Imperial Landscape Co, Unit A $67;031,80, Unit B $46,110.85, Unit C $9,436 .50) was presented. The City Cleric reported the certificate of publication of the notice to bidders and the affidavit of posting were on tile. The City Manager recommended the low bids of R, E. Hazard Contracting co. for Unit A and Gerald T Sullivan dba G.T.S. Co, forUnits 3 and'C be aWarded and all other bids rejected? Moved by Waters, seconded by Camacho; the City Manager's recommendation be approved. Carried by unanimous vote, A communication from FIRE CHIEF BACON recommending the elimination of Cer- tain police telephones (six in Fire Station No, Two District) which were installed in conjunction with the municipal fire alarm system was presented. Moved by Hogue, seconded by Reid, the recommendation of the Fire Chief be approved. Carried by unanimous vote, A ccmmunication from the DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS, State of California, advising that $43,944.00 will be apportioned to National City as its share in the allocation of Federal TOPICS funds for the 1970-71 fiscal year and listing rules regarding the use of the funds was presented. Ordered filed by unanimous vote. The request of FLORA F. XNIGHT, 1431 L Avenue for a time extension until September 15, 1970, for weed abatement on her properties at which time she will request permission to burn was presented, City Manager Osburn stated the Fire Chief reported the Fire Prevention Inspector inspected the proper." ties and recommended a regretful denial. Moved by Hogue, seconded by Reid, the recommendation of the Fire Chief be amovedi Carried by unanimous vote. A communication from the MAYTIME BAND REVIEW COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN expressing thanks for the support, planning and cooperation received from all depart- ments of the City was presented. Ordered filed by unanimous vote. A communication from the PRESIDENT, CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, stating the Board of Directors, on recommendation of the Maytime Band Review Committee, acted to recommend that consideration be given in the next fiscal budget for pro- viding an adequate stadium for events such as the MaYtime Band Review awards ceremony and the Lions Clu4 4th of July celebration was presented. Moved by Camacho, seconded by Reid, it be referred to the Finance Committee. A communication from the ?RESIDENT, SOUTHWESTERN COLLEGE, stating one of their major objectives was to provide cultural and recreational activities for the benefit of the citizens of the South Bay area; the College has been planning certain facilities with the City of Chula Vista to he available to all residents of the Junior College District; and the College would be pleased to include National City in planning for the future was presented. Ordered filed by unanimous vote. 5/19/70 74 A communication from ALERT C. BOYER requesting a traffic count be taken in front of his business property located at 421 North Highland Avenue was pre- sented. Moved by Hogue, seconded by Waters, it be referred to the Traffic Safety Committee. Carried by unanimous vote. The Minutes of the regular meeting of the TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMITTEE of May 13, 1970, were presented. Moved by Hogue, seconded by Camacho, the items be considered one at a time. Carried by unanimous vote. Moved by Hogue, seconded by Camacho, Item (al New 4usiness (to have curb painted red on the west side of Cleveland Avenue for a.diancF of 15/ north and southof 19thnaINStreet)beapproved/Maa seconded by Morgan in regard to Item (b) New Business the valet parking and yellow zone be removed and the area revert to general parking. Motion failed by the following vote, to -wit: Ayes: Waters, Morgan. Nays: Camacho, Hogue, Reid. Moved by Hogue, seconded by Camacho, it be referred back to the Traffic Safety Committee for further study. Carried by unanimous vote. Moved by Hogue, seconded by Camacho, items (cil...rnofd,andeliewat. Harold Dodd for diagonal parking south side of 7th Street between Roosevelt and National and the bus stop on north side of 8th St. west of National be moved; removal of (d) from Agenda; and holding over of itee) for next a9endal be approved. Carried by unanimous vote. Moved by Hogue, seconded by Camacho, item (f (recommendation to install T.-markings on Highland Ave- nue from 13th to 16th Street) be approved. Carried by the following vote, to -wit: Ayes: Camacho, Hogue, Reid, Waters. Nays: Morgan. Moved by Waters, seconded by Reid, in regard to item (g) that no traffic signal be installed at the intersection of the South Bay Freeway and Sweetwater Road. Carried by unanimous vote. Moved by Waters, seconded by Hogue, items (h) jJ and (j1 be accepted (Item (h) laid over to next meeting; ii) no action taken; and (j) recommendation to the Cit Manager that a sketch be resent- ed to the Comznittee showing the intencled rnarkings for the newly widened portion of Plaza Boulevard. Carried by the following vote, to -wit: Ayes: Camacho, Hogue, Reid, Waters. Nays: Morgan. A communication from H. D. SMITH (former Police Chief) in appreciation of the adjustment to his retirement check was presented. Ordered filed by unanimous vote. A communication from the ASSITANT CITY MANAGER in regard to the Annual Ins- titute on Government at San Diego State College, June 11, 1970, was pre- sented. Ordered filed by unanimous vote. A communication froth the CITY MANAGER filing 3 items with the City Clerk (No Council Action Necessary) was presented: (1) Letter from San Diego County Water Authority dated 5/4/70 enclosing tabulations showing changes in quantity of water stored in San Vicente Reservoir as of 4/30/70 and aver- age monthly water deliveries in c.f.s. by Authority to member agencies for fiscal year 1969-70 through 4/30/70/ (2) Letter from San Diego County Water Authority dated 5/8/70 covering committee meetings scheduled; (3) Audit report for fiscal year ended 0/30/69 for Justice Court of the National Judicial District. REPORTS CITY MANAGER OSBURN reported copies of the tentative budget was placed on each Councilman's desk and stated a Finance Committee meeting could be scheduled. CITY CLERK MINOGUE reported receipt of Notices of hearings before the Pub- lic Utilities Commission in the Matter of the Application of the Pacific Telephone & Telegraph Co. for authority to increase certain intrastate rates which were on file. CITY CLERK MINOGUE invited everyone to attend the Fiesta in our sister city Tecate on Sunday, May 24, 1970; all proceeds to go to the building of needed vocational classrooms at the secondary school. 5/1y/70 75 DIRECTOR OF PLANNING STOCA'MAN presented the Planning Commission recommenda- tion that the Student Commissioners be peralitted to attend the Institute for Planning Commissioners with their expenses (estimated cost $101) to be paid by the City. The Council expressed some concern over proper chaperon- age for Miss Large. Mrs. Stockman said she could accompany Miss Large. Moved by Hogue, seconded by Camacho, the recommendation be approved. Carried by unanimous vote. DIRECTOR OF PLANNING STOCKMAN recommended the application for Zone Variance No. Z-73 by Eddie Glaspie, 2211 Beta Street (reduction of rear yard setback) be placed on the Council Agenda of June 9. Moved by Camacho, seconded by Reid, the recommendation be approved. Carried by unanimous vote. The CITY TREASURER'S FINANCIAL STATEMENT for the month ended April 30, 1970, was presented. Ordered filed by unanimous vote. Moved by Camacho, seconded by Reid, the meeting be closed. Carried by unanimous vote. The meeting closed at 10:20 p.m. City Clerk City of National City, alit. The foregoing minutes were approved by the City Council of National City at the regular meeting of May 26, 1970. No corrections Correction as noted below. Mayor, Cit ationai City, California 5/19/70