HomeMy WebLinkAbout1967 12-05 CC MIN131
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY, CALIFORNIA
December 5, 1967
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. Council members present:
Colburn, Harris, Hogue, Reid, Morgan. Absent: None.
ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIALS PRESENT: Foster, Linn, McLean, Minogue, Osburn,
Stockman.
The meeting was opened with salute to the Flag led by City Manager Osburn,
followed with invocation by E. H. Alsdorf.
Moved by Colburn, seconded by Harris, the minutes of the regular meeting of
November 28, 1967 be approved. Carried by unanimous vote.
DIRECTOR OF PLANNING STOCKMAN presented the Planning Commission recommendation
to approve the proposed ordinance providing for interim zoning establishing
the criteria for storage and/or impounding of wrecked automobiles within the
City of National City including all recommendations of the Commission; the
Planning Commission recommended no automobile wrecking yard be located east
of National Avenue. Moved by Colburn, seconded by Harris, the first reading
of the ordinance be held and it be adopted as suggested by the Planning
Commission including none be authorized east of National Avenue and that in
reference to Item C under No. 8 it be an 8' fence instead of a 6' fence and
under 8-C regarding the gates it include "or a fence within the boundaries
and within the entrance, an extra fence within the entrance." Vice Mayor
Colburn said the wording was getting long but the City Attorney knew to what
he referred. Councilman Harris said there was another change under Item 7
to include that the "Council" could grant... Included in motion and second.
City Attorney McLean asked if it should provide for the initial issuance of
a conditional use permit by the City Council or by the City Planning
Commission (Sec. 2-b). Vice Mayor Colburn said it didn't make any difference
to him. Councilman Hogue said it should be the Council. Included in motion
and second. City Attorney McLean summarized the changes as follows:
"Section II-B, the introductory sentence will be, 'Upon the recommendation
of the Planning. Commission, the City Council may without a public hearing,
grant a special use permit etc.' Page 2, Sub -Paragraph 7, 'Said vehicles
shall be disposed of in an expeditious manner and no vehicle shall be retained
in storage in excess of three (3) months from the date of impoundment. Upon
recommendation of the Chief of Police of the City of National City or order
of a court of competent jurisdiction, the City Council may grant an extended
period of time for the storage of vehicles.' On the next page in Sub -section
C, 'Gates for access shall be constructed of new material 8' in height; no
gate shall swing outward and shall be kept closed except when vehicles or
pedestrians are exiting or entering the premises; as an alternative to
closing the gate an interior screening fence may be erected in which case
the gate may be left open.'" Vice Mayor Colburn said he had not mentioned
"not east of National Avenue." City Attorney McLean said they would include
at the end of the first page, Section II-B that no permit be issued for
"premises located east of National Avenue." Councilman Reid said he was
against this as people had already bid in good faith; they left out the
over charge, said nothing about the storage; there is still something wrong.
Amended motion carried, by the following vote, to -wit: Ayes: Colburn,
Harris, Hogue, Morgan. Nays: Reid. City Attorney McLean said as the motion
was to read by title only and did not pass unanimously the ordinance w azld
have to be read in full. Moved by Harris, seconded by Colburn, the reading
of the Ordinance be by title only. The motion failed required unanimity by
the following vote, to -wit: Ayes: Colburn, Harris, Hogue, Morgan. Nays:
Reid. Mayor Morgan recommended the corrected ordinance be put on the next
Agenda. Moved by Harris, the Mayor's rec anmendation be approved. Motion
12/5/67
132
died for lack of second. The proposed corrected ordinance was read in its
entirety. Moved by Harris, the Ordinancebeadopted. The City Attorney
stated this was the first reading.
VICE MAYOR COLBURN said in view of the industrial park possibility and the
completion of 24th Street Terminal, and the fact there were some streets
within the industrial area which were useless, some should be opened and
possibly some should be closed; on some of the main streets there should be
a 4' setback with landscaping adhered to and other side streets a land-
scaped 4' setback might not be necessary. Moved by Colburn, seconded by
Hogue, the City Planner be authorized to start a study of streets in the
industrial area for a recommendation of street closings and openings.
Carried by unanimous vote.
VICE MAYOR COLBURN stated at the last two Finance Committee meetings, they
have referred to the finance picture in our City regarding a Finance Officer
as opposed to a City Treasurer and he believed information had been compiled.
Moved by Colburn, seconded by Hogue, the City Manager report regarding the
benefits, if any, from a Finance Officer in the City of National City.
Carried by unanimous vote.
MAYOR MORGAN recommended the appointment of Stephen Torres, 1544 E. 14th
Street, to the Traffic Safety Committee. Moved by Hogue, seconded by Harris,
the Mayor's recommendation be approved. Carried by unanimous vote.
CONSUELO RUBIO, Chairman, Sister City Committee, was present and thanked the
Council for making it possible for her and Mr. Rubio to attend, the Town
Affiliation Association of the United States, Inc. First Annual National
Conference in Los Angeles November 30th - December 2nd. Mrs. Rubio gave a
report on the conference. Mayor Morgan thanked Mrs. Rubio for her work on
the Sister City Committee.
MAYOR MORGAN thanked Mrs. Lorna Harris for the lovely poinsettias whiff
had placed in front of each councilman, mayor and other City employed.
E. H. ALSDORF, 2105 J Avenue, was present and said he recently returned from
a 3,000 mile trip and he had gone through cities looking to see how they
handled their disposal; every City should take care of its own refuse; there
are a lot of places in National City that could be filled and he still
advocated the filling of the Duck Pond.
LOU TOMPKINS, member of the Planning Commission, 2227 E. 16th Street, was
present and thanked the Council for the opportunity of attending the Under-
ground Utilities Conference the previous week in Los Angeles and said he
will make an official report on the conference through the Planning Commission.
CITY CLERK MINOGUE stated the first resolution listed on the Agenda (granting
permission to encroach in public right of way, 20th to 21st St....) should
be "... E'Avenue, 20th and 21st Streets;" in regard to the third resolution
listed authorizing execution of order to vacate and close 13th Street,
Quarter Section 129, she received a letter from the San Diego Gas and
Electric Company withdrawing their protest to the closing.
RESOLUTION NO. 9503, "RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF CORPORATION GRANT
DEED (S. & A. Investment Co.)," was presented. Moved by Colburn, seconded
by Harris, the reading of the resolution be waived and it be adopted by
reading of the title only. Carried by unanimous vote. The title was read.
Moved by Colburn, seconded by Harris, the Resolution be adopted. Carried by
unanimous vote.
RESOLUTION NO. 9504, "RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF ORDER TO VACATE AND
CLOSE 13TH STREET, QUARTER SECTION 129," was presented. Moved by Colburn,
seconded by Harris, the reading of the resolution be waived and it be adopted
by reading of the title only. Carried by unanimous vote. The title was read.
Moved by Harris, seconded by Reid, the Resolution be adopted. Carried by
unanimous vote.
12/5/67
133
CITY ATTORNEY McLEAN.stated the Chief of Police reported to Council by letter
the need for a temporary "no left turn" sign at the intersection of Highland
Avenue, Plaza Boulevard and loth Street.
RESOLUTION NO. 9505, "RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ERECTION OF TEMPORARY
TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNS AT THE INTERSECTION OF HIGHLAND AVENUE, PLAZA BOULEVARD
AND TENTH STREET," was presented. Moved by Hogue, seconded by Reid, the
reading of the resolution be waived and it be adopted by reading of the title
only. Councilman Reid asked that the signs be installed so that no one
could move them. Councilman Hogue said according to the Police Chief's
letter, the sign would be erected in the center of the intersection. Vice
Mayor Colburn said it indicated "no left turns" at the intersection regard-
less of which way you are traveling; and asked if the Plaza had been made
aware of this and if they had sufficient entrances to receive the traffic
and exits to expedite the relief of the traffic; his concern was in having a
"no left turn" in any direction. City Manager Osburn said a policeman was
there last year directing the traffic; this year they had hoped to put the
"no left turn" sign there and people going north on Highland could turn in
at 12th; going south on Highland they could turn into Ward's parking lot, or
go across the street; this only referred to the one intersection at loth
and Highland. Vice Mayor Colburn suggested they adopt the resolution but
allow the Plaza to hire their own traffic control at the peak hours; there
are certain hours of the day when the traffic does not warrant the "no left
turn." City Manager Osburn said he would rather remove the sign than have
someone other than a City policeman directing traffic on City streets. The
motion failed required unanimity by the following vote, to -wit: Ayes:
Harris, Hogue, Reid, Morgan. Nays: Colburn. The resolution was read in
its entirety. Moved by Harris, seconded by Reid, the Resolution be adopted.
Councilman Hogue said he was sure if the Chief of Police finds the sign will
not work and was causing too many problems, he would not do it. Vice Mayor
Colburn stated the Plaza merchants were not given an opportunity to discuss
it; they probably counted on the street being open. Carried by the following
vote, to -wit: Ayes: Harris, Hogue, Reid. Nays: Colburn, Morgan.
ORDINANCE NO. ,
(Making it unlawful
the first reading.
the Ordinance be by
read.
"An Ordinance Amending Section 30530 Municipal Code
to dump refuse on private property)," was presented for
Moved by Hogue, seconded by Colburn, the reading of
title only. Carried by unanimous vote. The title was
CITY ATTORNEY McLEAN stated the Mayor instructed him to prepare an ordinance
to require the installation of a half street in front of any property upon
which improvements in excess of $16,000.00 are constructed.
ORDINANCE NO. , "An Ordinance Amending Ordinance No. 962, Section 10 E .1,
of the Municipal Code Providing for the Paving of Streets," was presented
fox the first reading. Moved by Colburn, seconded by Harris, the reading
of the Ordinance be by title only. Carried by unanimous vote. The title was
read.
BILLS AUDITED BY THE FINANCE COMMITTEE were presented:
General Fund
Traffic Safety
Park
Retirement
Trust and Agency
Street
Drainage
Sewer
Civic
$10,518.00
2,031.56
1,511.00
13,618.75
50.00
169.42
75.00
287.71
Center 77.71
T OTAL $28,339.15
Moved by Hogue, seconded by Colburn, the bills be approved and warrants
ordered drawn for same. Carried, by the following vote, to -wit: Ayes:
Colburn, Harris, Hogue, Reid, Morgan. Nays: None.
12/5/67
134
PAYROLL AUDITED BY THE FINANCE COMMITTEE in the amount of $66,053.61, was
presented. Moved by Colburn, seconded by Reid, the payroll be approved and
warrants ordered drawn for same. Carried, by the following vote, to -wit:
Ayes: Colburn, Harris, Hogue, Reid, Morgan. Nays: None.
POLICE CHIEF CAGL.E'S evaluation of 4-way stops at 4th and Harbison and 2nd
and Highland and recommending a traffic count by made at these two locations
in about 6 months to determine how much east and west -bound traffic crosses
these north and south traffic routes, was presented. Moved by Harris,
seconded by Colburn, the Police Chief's recommendation be approved. Carried
by unanimous vote.
The notice of DIRECTOR OF PARK & RECR$ATICN MALEY as President of District
XII of the California Park & Recreation Society, San Diego County (for
information only), was presented.
The resignation of PATROLMAN JOHN H. HANSEN and the Police Chief's recommen-
dation it be accepted with sincere regret, were presented. Moved by Colburn,
seconded by Harris, the resignation be accepted and the proper recognition
be submitted. Carried by unanimous vote.
The retirement of WILLIAM H. DEES, Building Repairman, effective December 31,
and communication from the Director of Public Works, were presented. Moved
by Colburn, seconded by Reid, the retirement be approved and proper recogni-
tion be submitted. Carried by unanimous vote.
A communication from the CITY MANAGER filing three items with the City Clerk:
(1) Certificate of Insurance from The Travelers Insurance Company covering
Thomas A. Stollenwerk, dba San Diego House Movers, 4296 Menlo Drive, San
Diego (2) Faithful Performance Bond covering Malone Production, Inc., dated
November 27, 1967 (3) Minutes of the adjourned meeting of the Board of
Directors, South Bay Irrigation District, held Wednesday, November 8, 1967,
(no Council action necessary), were presented.
An application for premises to premises transfer on -sale beer license by
RAUL R. RICO, 543 Highland, was presented. Moved by Harris, seconded by
Hogue, the application be denied. H. L. Austin, 819 E. 5th Street, was
present and said he was not familiar with the procedures; he understood
there was a recommendation by the Chief of Police that the license not be
issued; he inquired if the Council was now voting on it. Moved by Harris,
seconded by Hogue, the motion be changed to "the application be protested" in-
stead of denied. City Manager Osburn said a supplement to the original
application for a license in the name of Mrs. Rico was received; all other
conditions were the same; it was recommended by the Chief of Police it be
protested. Carried by unanimous vote.
CITY MANAGER OSBURN stated he was in Sacramento last Thursday in relation to
the salary survey; the Personnel Department of the State Cooperative
Personnel Service advised him they would be here on December 14th at 7:00
p.m.; he recommended next week the Council adjourn its meeting to the
Community Building Annex and invite the Civil Service Commission and the
City employees to attend; the people who made the survey would be here to
explain it. Moved by Hogue, seconded by Reid, the City Manager's recommen-
dation be approved. Carried by unanimous vote.
CITY MANAGER OSBURN stated Mrs. Lorna Harris requested a no fee solicitor's
permit to solicit money from the merchants for the National City Boys and
Girls Clubs. Moved by Colburn, seconded by Harris, the request be granted.
Carried by unanimous vote.
COUNCILMAN REID asked City Manager Osburn if he would notify the Civil
Service Commission and personnel of the time and date of the adjourned meet-
ing. The City Manager said he would.
CITY CLERK MINOGUE reported receipt of a communication from the League of
California. Cities in regard to underground utilities.
12/5/67
13S
CITY CLERK MINOGUE reported receipt of County Ordinance No. 3140 imposing a
documentary stamp tax on deeds, etc. and stated copies were given to the
City Manager and City Attorney and she forwarded National Cityts ordinance
levying a tax on the transfer of real property to the County Recorder who
will administer.
CITY CLERK MINOGUE reported receipt of the Order approving Compromise and
Release in the case of Wayne L. Brown vs. City of National City and State
Compensation Insurance Fund.
The CITY CLERK said the Claim of Grover S. Hickman was received and copies
referred to the City Attorney, City Manager, Chief of Police and the insurance
carrier; after the Agenda was prepared, she received a supplement to the
claim and the related claim of Patricia Gilderman, both of which were referred
to the same persons.
MRS. LORNA HARRIS, 726 E. 8th Street, was present and said two members of
the Boy's Club and she put up thirty-three candles on 8th Street; they are
6" on the inside measurement and 7 ' tall; she invited everyone to drive by
and see them.
The HEARING ON RESOLUTION OF INTENTION NO. 9496, IMPROVEMENT OF 20TH STREET,
24TH STREET, VALLE VISTA, GRANGER, VAN NESS, ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 150
was held at this time. City Clerk Minogue stated the Affidavits of the
Postings and Mailings and the Certificate of Publications were on file; a
Protest Petition containing 160 signatures was received; in addition, seven
letters of protest were received from Harry Taylor, 2105 Van Ness; Vincent
De Lucia, 1930 Granger Avenue; Curtis A. and Fredrica B. Cox (Assessment No.
112 and 113 - Lot No. 300); Woodrow W. and Norma M. Cecil, 1919 Prospect
Street; Mr. & Mrs. V. D. DeWitt, 2616 East 24th Street; Cosy M. Brower and
Mary L. Dunham; Mr. & Mrs. Logan A. Flough, 42 E. Ellis Street, Long Beach
(regarding their property at 2212 E. 20th Street). The City Clerk stated a
request from Mr. George A. Dewey had been received to remove his name from
the Protest Petition. Vincent De Lucia, 1930 Granger Avenue, was present
and stated he owned three parcels of land within the proposed assessment
district; he was present not only for himself but as spokesman for many
people in the proposed district; and asked the Council to suggest to the
Star News reporter that she publish facts in the paper; he asked the Mayor to
advise the people this was a recorded hearing and the records could be used
in court proceedings. Mr. De Lucia said he objected on five separate grounds:
(1) the district was instigated by the Council without the consent of the
people involved; (2) the excessive cost of the project; (3) irrigularity
of the boundaries of the district; (4) changes of grade; (5) his property
has already paid off one 1911 Act and he objected to being assessed twice
for street improvements. Mr. De Lucia said the Engineering Department
estimated the improvement would cost the property owners $174,849.70; in
addition the property owners would have to have retaining walls built or
replaced; in his case it would cost $2,300.00 to build a retaining wall on
his property; the district includes the mass area of the school; he under-
stood the Sweetwater Union High School District assessment was $21,644.00;
and that money will come from the taxpayers. Mr. De Lucia inquired if the
school grounds had been eliminated. Mayor Morgan said he was not sure;
everything would be taken into consideration after the meeting. Mr. De Lucia
said a considerable number of people attended the Sweetwater Union High
School District board meeting; and the Board sent a letter to the City Clerk
stating they voted to retract their first letter and would go on record as
generally favoring the improvements but to leave the decision to the other
property owners. Mr. De Lucia said the City did not have the right to
assess school property; the gentleman who controlled the busses and scheduling
for the school said the improvement was not necessary to safety; and he
challenged the Council to tell how the value of the school property was
determined. Mayor Morgan said he thought the Council understood; if they
got out of line State law would put them in line. Mr. De Lucia asked
Associate Civil Engineer Onley what the appraised value of the school was
12/5/67
136
in order that they might determine how much of a protest they have to have.
City Attorney McLean asked him what his question was. Mr. De Lucia said
what proportion of the value of the Granger Junior High School was included
in the $466,740.00 in the estimated true value of the land within the district.
City Attorney McLean said he did not think that calculation had yet been
made. Mr. De Lucia said, if the land was excluded as requested by the
School Board, the Petitioners would have more than the 50% protest required
by State law; he asked Associate Civil Engineer Onley if the cost of the
grading on 20th and Van Ness and the construction of the necessary retain-
ing wall and water pipe had been included in the computation of the cost of
the district improvement. Associate Civil Engineer Onley said he was
reluctant to answer questions here; it was a hearing where they should be
listening; he did not have the necessary papers with him but if someone
wanted to go to his office to look it up it would be easiir. City Attorney
McLean said if the Council wanted a question answered, they could request
the staff to answer if the information was available; the purpose of this
hearing under the 1911 Act was to provide the time and place where the
affected landowners might present their views on the project to the Council;
the place where the project is presented to the landowner is at the time the
City Engineer and Manager hold their hearing. Mr. De Lucia said they had to
know what was going on; the meeting was held but they were unable to get
information. Mr. De Lucia using the blackboard illustrated the following:
his next door neighbor has a lot similar to his but with curbs, sidewalk and
drain in was assessed $339.00; Mr. De Lucia was assessed $1,053.79; assuming
the project was divided into street work, sidewalks and curbs his assessment
would be for street work; a contractor w azld charge Mr. De Lucia $345.00 to
put his curbs and sidewalk in; if he had this d are, he would be paying
$708.00 for streets as opposed to $339.00 his neighbor would pay; another
neighbor with a lot twice the width of his and with sidewalks and curbs in
was assessed $344.00. Mr. De Lucia said a smaller property across the
street was assessed $1,286.32; since it had a smaller frontage he could get
the sidewalks and curbs in for $300.00; Mr. Smith who lives on Orange Avenue
put in his sidewalks with the permission of the Council at a cost of less
than $2.00 per foot; after the curbs and sidewalks were put in the City put
in their street at no cost to the property owners. Mr. De Lucia inquired
if they were second-rate citizens that they could not do the same thing;
some people were told if they didn't approve the district they wouldn't get
any drainage; that is coercion; Mr. Orley stated that this improvement does
not contemplate any drainage in Valle Vista; the streets are not necessary
for drainage; the $40,000.00 appropriated would not start to put the drainage
in; furthermore, Mr. Onley said there had been no engineering on the drainage
although there had been some minor plans drawn; the drainage would have to go
through the school property and they haven't contacted the school; if the
drainage is essential to the improvement, it should be included in the cost
of the project and the people be advised the cost of the total improvement;
the estimated $174,849.00 assessed against 238 property owners could develop
into a nightmare of cost upon cost for each and every one of them. Mr.
De Lucia said the costs to the property owners should be computed and determined
whether the property was over the 50% cost of land value and thereby illegal;
under Section 503 West Annotated Code it says the school grounds when said
grounds are being used as a school are not assessable (W. G. Whittier vs.
Mission School District); to include the grounds within the assessment
district is illegal; the people should be advised that if the school grounds
are assessed and if the school does not pay the City must pay. Mr. De Lucia
asked whether or not any inquiries of availability of Federal funds for this
project had been made; no effort was made to secure County funds; Granger
Avenue is a feeder street that feeds into the County just like 18th Street;
the people on 18th Street only paid 60% of the cost; Granger Avenue is also
a highway. Mr. De Lucia cited the estimated assessments of various parcels
within the district and said they were computed by the Street Supervisor
under the 1911 Act and according to the benefit the property would receive
and asked if the Council could reconcile these differences. Mayor Morgan
said the Council has no laws in the City of National City to set this
assessment up; the 1911 Act was enacted in 1911, so the State law tells them
how they can assess the property. Mr. De Lucia said that was true but there
12/5/67
137
was leeway in the manner in which it was set up; they don't have to go
zigzaging all through the town; he called attention to "interesting and
unwarranted" exemptions; on the north side of 20th Street you have a cut out
section; and inquired why these people were not included in the district.
Mr. De Lucia continued, County area was included and a previous error was
that they forgot to ask the County of San Diego if they could assess these
poor people down here; they have gone beyond Granger Avenue to assess people;
and on Van Ness Avenue, the only way out is to use this street but they have
been taken out of the district. Why? Many of the lots face on La Siesta
Way and the owners have to go to 20th or 24th Street to get out; and inquired
why they weren't included in the district. Mr. De Lucia reminded the Council
they were elected by the people to govern equally and fairly but he couldn't
see where the fairness was; it should be a General Fund project. Mr.
De Lucia inquired if the Council was coznigant of what they were doing to
the financial status of many of these people; many are living on Social
Security and on a fixed retirement; many of them would not be able to afford
some of the pleasures of life because of the expense. Mr. De Lucia read an
item in the September 2nd issue of the California Farmer regarding property
taxes and the way property is assessed. Mr. De Lucia said approximately 160
names were secured against 238 on the Petition which is 68% of the property
owners or better; he had been informed that Council intended to override the
objections of the people; the United States Supreme Court handed down a
decision of one man one vote; he believed if the Council failed to use the
majority of the people, it could be classed as arbitrary, unreasonable and
abuse of discretion and a failure to follow standards set by the legislature
and akin to fraud; if this irregular district is permitted to stand, it was
in violation of the guarantees of the Federal constitution. Mr. De Lucia
referred to Mock vs. City of Santa Rosa (126 Cal. 330) "damages may be
recovered against the officials of the Council personally and individually
for a wrongful exercise of their official function or in excess of their
official powers and duties." Mayor Morgan asked the people in the audience
for whom Mr. De Lucia was speaking to stand up. J. D. Morrison, 1826 Granger,
was present and said he felt they were entitled to answers to some of their
questions; they had never received clear answers to anything they asked; he
understood this was the last hearing; permits to do the work themselves had
been denied; until Wednesday he had the only permit he knew of that had
actually been given; he understood the Planning Commission or the Engineering
Department told their contractor if he came down with the authorization from
the property owners he would be granted a permit; he was to go in that day
to get the permits and wanted to know if they had been granted. Mrs. Dischert
(in the audience) said they were. Mr. Morrison asked if when they put their
curbs and sidewalks in would they be charged the same price, the difference,
or would they be forced to pay the full assessment. Mayor Morgan said that
had not yet been studied. Mr. Morrison said that was what they ran into all
the time. The Mayor said he could not give him that information now. Mr.
Morrison said the City Attorney should be able to answer that. The Mayor
said this was a problem the engineers would have to work out. Mr. Morrison
said this was what they ran into every time they asked a question; they
couldn't get an answer to nothing. Mayor Morgan said it cost money to study
this out; unless they were going to do it, there was no use in spending the
City's money. Mr. Morrison said the property owners started trying to put
in curbs and sidewalks on Granger Avenue before this was on paper and they
were stopped; if they wanted it in so bad, why stop them when they were try-
ing to put it in themselves. Mayor Morgan said he wouldn't stop them from
putting in a street. Mr. Morrison requested again they have an answer to
their questions; the 1911 district should be rejected and not go any farther
until more answers were received; the Council should go no farther on it
until they can sit down and tell them exactly what was going to happen.
Oscar A. Halvorson, 1824 Granger Avenue, was present and said he understood
this was the last meeting on the district; what was done tonight would be
the law; they were w rndering if they could put the curbs and sidewalks in
themselves or if they had to do it through the City; if this was the last
meeting they wouldn't have any more to say about it. Mayor Morgan said he
did not know if this was the last meeting or not. Mrs. Dischert, 2238
12/5/67
138
Granger Avenue, was present and said this thing was unfair for all of them;
Orange Street gets theirs done because they have someone in the Engineering
Department living there; Q Street is getting theirs because they have a
relative living there; no relatives of the Engineering Department lives on
Granger Avenue and therefore they were getting pushed. Logan A. Flough, 42
E. Ellis Street, Long Beach, was present and said they have property at
2212 E. 20th Street, Lot 20; he understood their assessment would be close
to $600.00; the curbs are already there and were built by the City; he
understood that would all be pulled out now and he couldn't afford this; he
was on a pension. Mayor Morgan said if the City gave him the permit and the
grade on the curbs and sidewalks he put in and the City had to change them,
it would have to be at the City's expense. Mr. Flough said he had had a
stroke and only got $133.00 a month and inquired if they could live on that
amount; he could not afford the improvement. Mrs. Barclay was present and
said she represented her mother, Mrs. Waters, who lives at 3126 E. 20th
Street; this is a poor area; Mr. Flough's statement was typical of many who
live in the area and the assessment would truly be a hardship on them; the
ones not opposed to it are ones who do have an income which changes as the
cost of living changes; sane of the people living there do not have as much
income as Mr. Flough; one gentleman, 81 years old, receives a Social Security.'
check of approximately $72.00 a month; out of this he must live and must
save money for his property taxes; at the protest meeting he stated he could
not accept any further bills; he would have to lose his home. Mrs. Barclay
said at the corner of 20th and Van Ness at the dead end there is a water
tank and it is a public utility; the px7perty cannot be assessed; it must be
assumed by the property owners in that area; it is at the crest of a hill;
six feet will be taken from that hill leaving the water tank at the top of a
tall bank; the bank will have a retaining wall put in at the cost of
$3,500.00; that $3,500.00 plus whatever it cost to remove 6' plus putting
in the sidewalks in that area plus this street, all of that is being assumed
by the property owner; therefore, the property owners in this area are
actually being assessed three times; they are being assessed for the frontage
on the property, for whatever this cost for the water company and she could
only get the figure of $3,500.00 for the retaining wall; she could get no
figure of what it would cost for the actual street work in the area; for
the schools in the area they are being taxed for that; they say the school
board will pay it but actually the people pay it; she asked that the district
be rejected because it will be a terrific burden on the people in the area
on a fixed income. Nicholas Molitor, 2344 Granger Avenue, was present and
said Mr. Onley said he would come over but he didn't come over; he wanted
to know what his assessment was; he had 135' of curb in and was assessed
$2383.81; he asked if his curb was included in that; he was on a pension
also and could not afford that. Associate Civil Engineer Onley said Mr.
Molitor's assessment was $2,383.81. Mr. Molitor said he had been told the
last time he wa.s up there that there was a mistake in it; he had been
charged for 125' that he sold. Associate Civil Engineer Onley said he
hadn't had a chance to check this out and would have to do the whole assess-
ment over to find it; if it became necessary he would, but there was no
point in spending the time and the money to check it out; he would never
have to pay more than the final assessment anyway. Mayor Morgan said he
would like Mr. Onley to check it out and answer Mr. Molitor's question; he
inquired if there was an error in Mr. Molitor's assessment. Associate Civil
Engineer Onley said he could not tell unless he did the whole assessment
over. Mayor Morgan asked that Mr. Molitor's assessment be checked to see
if there was an error in it and to let Mr. Molitor know. William Dischert,
2238 Granger Avenue, was present and said when there weren't answers to
their questions he didn't see how this could be voted on tonight; he would
never vote on anything that he didn't know something about. Mrs. Mary Jo
Geideck, 1912 Granger Avenue, was present and said from what she understood
this was the final hearing on this 1911 Act and if they did not lay it over
until next week they would vote on whether to put it through or abandon it;
she inquired, how would they get the answers to their questions before the
Council voted on it. Mayor Morgan said he did not know what the Council
was going to do. Mrs. Geideck asked when they could get some answers before
the Council voted. Mayor Morgan said he had tried to answer every question
12/5/67
139
put before him and they had held public hearings. Mrs. Geideck said they had
received the same answer then. Mayor Morgan asked Associate Civil Engineer
Onley if he answered these questions when they came in. •-Mr. Ctaiy said he
had taken an awful beating tonight only because he had been honest; he had
tried to answer every question. Mrs. Geideck said he had answered a lot of
their questions but they had asked questions of the Council and received
none; only the Council could answer whether or not they will take into con-
sideration that the school is in the middle of the district and there is a
majority protest of the property owners within the district omitting the
school. Mayor Morgan said that would be determined on the legality of it;
he didn't know; they go by the law. Moved by Harris, seconded by Reid,
the hearing be brought to a close and the matter
be laid over until next week for these protest percentages to be added and a
report to be received from the staff. Mr. De Lucia said he hadn't finished
reading the article in the magazine; throughout the State of California a
similar situation exists as to charges against property owners and the
property owners being up in arms and they more or less called it a taxpayers
revolt; taxpayers do not pay their taxes but take the money they would give
to the tax department and put it in a savings and loan or bank at 5% or
better and at the end of the year with no money coming in the Council has to
retrench; the people aren't losing very much; if their taxes are $1,000.00 at
the end of the year they pay their assessment plus a 6% penalty; it only
cost them $10.00 to try to teach the Council a little economy; if there
were enough people to try it it might open some doors. Mayor Morgan said in
the City of National City every street that is put in is put in by the City
Council with the money, drainage projects, every public building in the City,
every Civic Center and every progressive thing, businesses that come into
the City, every recreation, every park and every swimming pool and every-
thing they have in the City, all the taxes collected in the entire City of
National City wouldn't even pay the Police Department; you have police pro-
tection, fire protection, all of these protections you have, but all of the
money coming in from property taxes that this City receives doesn't even
pay your Police Department; look at the facilities you get; you get a
bargain out of this City. Mr. De Lucia said there was no dispute to that;
many of the projects the Mayor spoke of were grants; the City of National
City sold an enormous piece of property to the Navy which was the citizens
property; that money was used for other purposes; he inquired what would
happen when all of the property was gone. Moved by Harris, seconded by
Reid, the motion be amended to'`the hearing be continued until next week for
reports from the staff on the percentages of protest: Mr. J. D. Morrison
asked it be put in the motion that the hearing be laid over until they
received their answers; they were only asking what they were entitled to know.
Carried by unanimous vote. Councilman Hogue stated the dissention was
caused by two facts: these people felt some questions they need to ask had
not been answered; the Engineer and City Manager who hold the hearing prior
to this type of hearing should try to remember these types of questions and
give the information next time so there won't be such an embarrassing situa-
tion again, such as someone wanting an answer and it not be ready for them;
the second thing is they might send a note to the people next time giving
the understanding the hearing is for them to plead or to state their reasons
why they object or the reasons why they are for this; the purpose of the
hearing is for the Council to listen to their pleas and to decide one way
or the other; at a hearing like this, unless they themselves had questions
they should refrain from conversing with them and give them time to keep
their train of thought and let them present what they want to; he was under
the impression tonight that the one gentleman was speaking for the entire
group; he said he was; and then emotionally the people he represented became
upset at the discussion between him and someone on the Council; they then
took their turn; this should be eliminated so that one person could speak for
the group if we would allow him to go ahead and finish his presentation of
his facts and try to keep it orderly and do it according to set rules, Mayor
Morgan said they set a new policy; there will be an informal, informational
hearing before these 1911 Acts cane up and the hearing officers will hear
and know what the questions are before they actually have the protest hearing;
that will be done before they go ahead with a 1911 Act from now on. Councilman
12/5/67
140
Harris asked if they could have someone from the Enaineering Department to
be there to answer any -questions. Mayor Morgan said he had worked with the
people, talked with a lot of people in this district, and Mr. Onley had
been working practically full time on this 1911 Act for several weeks now;
that's about all he does; he didn't quite understand why he hadn't answered
the questions; he's an expert at it and he thought he had done a good job;
when anyone canes in there he spends time with them and answered every
question that he knew of; if it's putting in curbs and how much they would
cost and all of this, that's another problem.
Moved by Harris, seconded by Reid, the meeting be closed. Carried by
unanimous vote. The meeting closed at 9:37 p.m.
ATTEST:
f CITY CLERK
MAYOR, CITY OF IAT'ONAL CITY, CALIFORNIA
12/5/67