HomeMy WebLinkAbout1965 03-30 CC MIN53
National City, California, March 30, 1965
The special meeting of the City Council was called to order by Mayor Gautereaux
at 7:30 p.m. Council members present: Allen, Hogue, Morgan, Gautereaux.
Council members absent: Colburn.
ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIALS PRESENT: Carstens, Gautereaux, Hess, Osburn.
MAYOR GAUTEREAUX stated there were two items on the Agenda, one the issue of
the City Hall and the other pertained to presentation by the Telephone Company-.
concerning proposed constitutional amendment (S.C.A„17) on telephone franchise
tax.
The meeting was openedLwith salute to the Flag 1eckby City Manager Hess
followed with invocation by Mr, E. H. Alsdorf, 2105 "J" Avenue.
MAYOR GAUTEREAUX presented -a "key to the City" to Bobbie Ann Gardner,
National City Girls' Club, who received a $500.00 scholarship and trip to
New York for winning the Region9 Readers Digest essay 4Coutest. Mayor
Gautereaux announced she will be honored with a reception in National City
by representatives from every service club, Girls' Club Board of Directors
and Girls' Club Auxiliary on Sunday, April llth, from 2:30 to 5:00 p.m.
The Mayor recognized Helen Thomassen, Executive Director, National City Girls'
Club,
CITY MANAGER HESS stated the bids for the Civic Center opened on March 23rd
Were over the budget and recommended all bids received on that date be --
rejected. Moved by Alien, seconded by Hogue, the City Manager's recommen-
dation be aRproved. Carried, by the following vote, to -wit: Ayes: Allen,
Hogue, Morgan, Gautereaux. Nays: None. Absent: Colburn.
RESOLUTION NO. 8875, "RESOLUTION REJECTING BIDS FOR CONSTRUCTION OF CIVIC
CENTER" was read, Moved by Allen, -seconded by Hogue,, the Resolution be adopted.
Carried, by the following vote, to -wit: Ayes: Allen, Hogue, Morgan,Gautereaux.
Nays: None, Absent: Colburn.
Councilman Colburn arrived and took his place at the meeting.
CITY MANAGER HESS stated each member of the Council had a copy of a letter
from James W. Bird, architect, indicating ways the building may be built
within the budget. James W. Bird, architect, was present and stated the
following: A redesign of the main entrance is proposed and on the back side
of the Police level it is proposed to move the elevator and stairs within the
building;this takes from the design Af theexterior but reduces the enclosed
space by about 1,920 square feet and reduces the exterior roof slab by about
5,000 square feet; and a deferral of certain cabinet work, which could be
added at a later time;space has been added for the Engineering Department to
store soil samples and engineering equipment; the main Police facilities
would have covered carports in two areas and,, realizing the importance of
bringing the patrol cars all the way in for security, it is proposed this
portion remain. Mr. Bird continued the stairwell and elevator casement of
some 1,900 square feet becomes a portico with entrance straight in at parking
level; it is important to leave the elevator in the contract if possible; the
deleting of the bridge gives flexibility.
COUNCILMAN MORGAN asked how a person would get down to the parking lot if he
parked on National Avenue. Mr. Bird answered by steps; instead of a bridge
there would be a larger set of stairs and there would be sidewalks on both
sides where cars are parked. Mayor Gautereaux asked if the parking area
would be increased. Mr. Bird said it would be about the same. Mayor
Gautereaux asked if he was not changing the number of square feet within the
building by deleting some of those areas that would bring the building within
the budget. Mr, Bird answered it was examined closely as they felt the space
could not be diminished as it was the space requirement for the City of
National City looking ahead fifteen to twenty years, Councilman Hogue stated
he would walk down the steps from National Avenue, walk across and enter on
the second floor into the Council chambers; actually the main entrance would
3/30/65
54
be down in a hole. Mr. Bird stated it is about 8 feet below National Avenue
as you come down through the parking lot to the main entrance and is the level
where approximately 1O% of the City business is transacted. Councilman Morgan
asked Mr. Bird the cost of air conditioning and was advised it was about
$130,000.00. Councilman Morgan asked if it would be possible to eliminate the
air conditioning and have ventilation come in from the top. Mr. Bird
stated it would not work as there are interior rooms with no way of getting
natural ventilation. Councilman Morgan asked if it would be possible to put
air conditioning only in the rooms that needed it. Mr. Bird stated it would
be difficult but not necessarily impossible.
MAYOR GAUTEREAUX asked Mr. Bird if his proposed changes would bring this with-
in the budget and if not, what would be the area to be concentrated on if we
had to take another look at it. Mr. Bird stated he would rather look at all
facets right now. Councilman Hogue asked if money was available, oould an
entrance be built across so the building would not appear to be in a hole.
Mr. Bird said it could be done. Councilman Morgan suggested advertising in
the Los Angeles and San Francisco papers and in The Transcript at least in
the area and we advertise for bids on the original and revised plans. Mayor
Gautereaux asked Mr. Bird if we were to go back to bid with the original set
of plans, would the recommended addendum discourage contractors from bidding
both ways. Mr. Bird replied that it would be difficult to say. Mayor
Gautereaux asked if his recommendations for the changes were concise enough
to do what Mr. Morgan suggested without too much difficulty. Mr. Bird stated
when you list dozens of items to be considered you end up in confusion in -
bidding and you may or may not give proper information relating to the alter-
nates; he would prefer to go with just the building less this portion.
Councilman Morgan stated we already have the original plans and plans would
have to be prepared so if we accept this, it would have to be different from
the original plans; two sets of plans are necessary. Mr. Bird stated no
matter which way it goes, he felt they had that particular angle covered;
they had a set of documents complete in all respects as revision drawings
and either route could be taken. Mr. Bird stated his own recommendation
would be to take this much out of the building and.,have a base bid on the
total project with this as a deducted alternate. Moved by Morgan, seconded
by Gautereaux, the architect's recommendation be approved. Vice Mayor Allen
stated he was not sure he would go along with this particular situation, a
lot of time had been lost and we might wind up at another standstill and
have to go to bid again; nothing has been taken out that couldn't be replaced
as money becomes available. Councilman Morgan stated what they intend to do
is put these bids out exactly as before; all of the things listed will be
alternates and the Council then can include certain items and the alternate
can be included in the contract when awarded to a bidder. Mayor Gautereaux
stated it would give us a basic bid on the original structure besides a
deletion of certain items in the addendum, giving us two final answers to
arrive at a price for which we can award the contract. City Manager Hess
stated it can be done in the same amount of time as outlined and the only
difference is that it calls for an evaluation as to whether or not you want
to accept the package deal or if you want to pick up some of the alternates
and still stay within the budget; it would require very little delay except
that Mr. Morgan's motion, if passed, would call for extra study to determine
the actual amount bid and the low bidder, which would be a small amount of
time compared to the possible total benefits. Councilman Morgan stated he
would prefer the bids to open on a Wednesday or Thursday. Councilman Colburn
asked if the motion included the areas we would advertise the bid. Mayor
Gautereaux stated Mr. Bird automatically puts these plans in the Los Angeles
and Phoenix offices and there is nothing to preclude him from putting
them in the San Francisco office and any daily publication of the trade
magazines subscribed to by every major builder in California. Councilman
Morgan asked if it would be advertised in The Transcript in Los Angeles and
San Francisco. Mr. Bird stated it would be statewide. Motion carried, by the
following vote, to -wit: Ayes: Allen, Colburn, Hogue, Morgan, Gautereaux. Nays:
None. City Manager Hess stated it was suggested the bids be opened on a
Wednesday or Thursday and the day would have to be determined to include in
the Resolution; Mr. Bird's tentative schedule indicates we could advertise on
the 8th and 15th of April and the bid opening could be on Wednesday, April
21st; authorization to proceed would have to be subsequent to the 21st,
depending on the length of time required to evaluate the bids; starting of
3/30/65
55
word,. o A x:LL 4Jtb would ue conrancent kx14on the date the contract is awarded,
Moved by Morgan, seconded by Gautereaux, the,date for opening of the bids be
set for Wednesday, April 21, 1965. Vice Mayor Allen Stated it would requite
calling a special Council meeting if the bids were opened on a Wednesday.;
Mayor Gautereaux stated it would be hard to evaluate bids and know Whether
or not it would be necessary to call a special meeting prior to the following
Tuesday. City Manager Hess stated the architect will evaluate the bids and
advise the City Council as to the low bidder, at which time a special Council
meeting could be held perhaps on Thursday or Friday of the week of the 19th
to award the contract, Carried by unanimous vote,
RESOLUTION NO, , a resolution approving wage scale, approving amended plans
and specifications and authorizing advertising for bids for construction of
Civic Center and setting bid opening at 3:00 p.m. Wednesday, April 21, 1965,
was presented. Moved by Morgan, seconded by Allen, the reading of the Resolution
be waived and it be adopted by reading of the title only. Carried by unanimous
vote,
RESOLUTION NO. 8876, "RESOLUTION APPROVING WAGE SCALE, APPROVING AMENDED PLANS
AND SPECIFICATIONS AND AUTHORIZING ADVERTISING FOR BIDS FOR CONSTRUCTION OF
CIVIC CENTER," Movdd by Morgan, seconded by Alien, the Resolution be adopted.
Carried, by the following vote, to.owit: Ayes: Alien, Colburn, Hogue, Morgan,
Gautereaux, Nays: None,
COUNCILMAN COLBURN stated the people of National City deserve a new Civic
Center building and favoredthe action taken tonight but it has proven one
thing: erecting a building on the side of a hill is more expensive than
erecting a building on flat ground; erecting a building for the pleasure of
location as opposed to the possibility of enjoying the matching funds that
were available at one time was a gross error. Councilman Colburn stated he
thought it was a shame it ended up like this and is costing the citizens so
much money just to enjoy a particular location. Councilman Hogue stated
during his campaign one of the comments against the site was the fact that
it was a hole in the ground and it was his opinion that when the building is
finished it will look like it is setting in a hole, 8 feet below the street
level. Councilman Morgan stated at the time the building on "D" Avenue was
proposed he studied the plans and evaluated them and the best he could figure
for the building in that location was $1,800,000.00 and if we had gone to bid,
that building would have cost somewhere between $2,000,000.00 and $2,500,000.00,
E. H. Alsdorf, 2105 "J" Avenue, was present and stated there are sunken gardens
in California and he had seen some very pretty ones, that 8 feet is not a very
deep hole; he hoped there would not be too many additional orders for change
when the Civic Center is erected.
JOE MINOGJE, 1105 E. Fourth Street, was present and stated the people of
National City voted for that building when they voted for the Civic Centex;
it seems a shame to have to modify it and asked if it was clear in every-
body's mind if a bid is received on the original plan and within the budget,
that it will be accepted without question. Mayor Gautereaux stated this is
the intent of the Council. Mayor Gautereaux thanked Mr. Bird for his pre-
sentation and stated a realistic look was taken at this project and it is
still conceivable we will be able to have some of the things in the original
plan and he was sure when the building is finished the people of the City
will be highly complemented, and he appreciated Mr. Bird's continued effort
in this regard.
MR. BEN RECORDS, Manager, Pacific Telephone Company, National City, was present
and spoke in regard to the proposed Senate constitutional amendment (Telephone
franchise tax). Mr. Records stated the proposed amendment was sponsored by
the League of California Cities and the County Supervisors'Association; and
would authorize the levy of a 1% tax on the gross intrastate revenues of
California companies, which would be in addition to State and local taxes paid
by the Telephone Companies; the tax would be collected by the State Board of
Equalization and, after administrative costs were deducted, the balance would
be distributed to cities and counties on the basis of population. Based upon
1964 revenues, a 1% tax paid in 1965 would mean 10.3 million dollars. Passage
of the constitutional amendment requires a 2/3 vote of the Legislature and if
passed by the Legislature, it would go on the ballot at the next statewide
3/30/65
56
election; the tax would become effective January 1, 1966, with ii4Ment due
January 1, 1061.
MR. RECORDS stated that similar Legislative attempts in 1959, 1961 and in
1963 failed; in 1961 the Telephone Company took a neutral position on the
proposal, they opposed the 1963 proposal and they are unalterably opposed to
the present proposed amendment; the primary reason being that subscribers
to telephone service are already paying greater State and local tax per
capita than customers of electric and gas utilities. Mr. Records continued
taxes imposed on utilities are ultimately paid by the utility customers; it
would be a mistake to assume this would be a landfall for the cities because
if S.C.A.17 gets to the voters, they will know this will be just another tax
for them to pay. Mr. Records stated the proponents of S.C.A.17's main point
seems to be that somehow telephone companies are getting a "free ride" and
the extent to which a business contributes to local government can not be
measured in just one form of exaction, in this case franchise payments; in
any such calculation must be included other taxes and charges common to the
utilities and charged as expenses of operation, which include ad valorem
taxes, motor vehicle taxes and business license taxes..
MR. RECORDS stated in 1964 the Public Utilities Commission ordered reductions
in Pacific Telephone's rates totalling over $40,000,000.00 and ordered retro-
active refunds to subscribers amounting to approximately $80,000,000.00; the
cases are being contested in the State Supreme Court; rates on long distance
phone calls were reduced this year; toll rates throughout the nation were
reduced during the last five years in excess of $100,000,000.00. Mr. Records
stated the Company's expenses continually rise and, out of necessity, they
have embarked on their largest construction program to cost $445,000,000.00
and, in consideration of all of these facts and looking toward the future,
any additional tax would not only be detrimental to the industry but would
be discriminatory to their users. Mr. Records stated they would be remiss
in their duties to their users if they did not oppose this tax. Councilman
Morgan moved this be placed on the Agenda for the next regular meeting. Motion
died for lack of second.
MAYOR GAUTEREAUX thanked Mr. Records for presenting this to the Council. Mr.
Records stated in regard to comments of Mr. Hess last week, the Telephone
Company never refused to pay the City of National City a business license fee.
Councilman Hogue stated Mr. Records said this could put a burden on the users
of this facility and then that it would be unfair to the Telephone Company
because the monies would come out of the Telephone Company's profit. Mr.
Records stated in regulated utilities a certain rate of return is allowed
and when you are asked to pay additional taxes, the customers end up paying
the tax; the point everyone should understand is the reason for the franchise.
Mayor Gautereanx stated Mr. Records was taking the position of supporting and
protecting the users relative to this utility; the Utilities Commission told
the Telephone Company they overcharged their customers and about $40,000,000.
ought to be returned (Mr. Records interrupted to say they didn't tell them
they overcharged them, they said we were making too much money), so now you
are going to the courts to fight this to say "No, we are not making too much
money on our customers, we don't want to give this money back to the sub-
scribers" and by the same token you say you are taking the position to protect
your customers and, if so, why are you in the courts trying to preclude what
the Public Utilities Commission says ought to be returned to the customers.
Mr. Records stated they were fighting for their existence and referred to
the reprint from Fortune magazine showing Pacific Telephone Company third
from the bottom in earnings and said the proposed rate reduction of the Public
Utilities Commission will plummet them to the enviable position of being at
the bottom. Mr. Records said in this state they have 14% of the total Bell
System plants to maintain andit will go downhill if they are not put in a
better position to attract financing; they are challenging the Public Utilities
Commission on the fact the Telephone Company has been asked to make a refund
of earned revenue which they were allowed to make in the first place, Mr.
Records stated the Telephone Company has had no rate increase since 1958;
they have to get into the financial structure of the business and find out
what the Public Utilities Commission has disallowed in their earnings and it
is too comprehensive to take t:.p at this time.
3/30/65'
57
MR. RECORDS stated the Telephone Companies shouldn't pay a franchise tax in
cities as other utilities do because, for example, it is not necessary for
the welfare of the people in other areas to be interconnected with the gas
pipes of the people in National City; in order to provide service the
Telephone Companies must connect with each other and extend their communi-
cations throughout the state and there is no comparable statewide interest in
the provision of gas, electricity or water, Mr. Records said the state
Supreme Court granted a statewide franchise to the Telephone Companies.
CITY MANAGER HESS said he agreed this is not an item for debate because ob-
viously and ultimately it will probably be decided by the electorate. The
City Manager said he felt it an extremely generous offer that the Telephone
Company is willing to pay a business license; under our existing Ordinance
they would pay $100.00 a year and should S.C.A.17 pass, it would mean some
$20,000.00 a year to the City of National City. City Manager Hess stated the
Council should bear in mind the League is representing us, we pay to belong
to the League of California Cities; their research analysts are working on
behalf of municipalities and counties. Mr. Hess stated municipalities are in
no position to determine which taxes they may impose, this is a field that
has been preempted by the State and we have no dictatorial powers as to type
of legislation. Mr. Hess stated he felt very strongly the Council should go
on record as supporting S.C.A.17 'and make it known not only to our legislators
but to the electorate in National City that a franchise tax for the Telephone
Company is not only just but is in the best interests of our community and
urged the City Council authorize the City Attorney to prepare resolutions
supporting S.C.A.17, Moved by Allen, seconded by Gautereaux, the City Manager's
suggestion to support the recommendation of the League of California. Cities
in regard to S.C.A.17 be approved. Councilman Morgan stated he was not in
favor of more tax, the people pay enough and it is time we stopped taxing
people and live within our means. Vice Mayor Allen stated we are not passing
this law; we are merely accepting the recommendation of the League of California
Cities and alerting our lawmakers in Sacramento that we would be in favor of
having this go on the ballot. Councilman Morgan asked Mr. Records if this is
on the ballot and they spend ten million or fifty million to defeat it at the
Polls, would this be put on their rates. Mr. Records stated he was not
qualified to answer. Mayor Gautereaux stated he concurred in the motion; in
1963 when the League attempted to put the facts before the cities of California
relative to the measure we were not informed of the profoundness of it, the
Telephone Company was very effective with every one of their managers coming
before this Council supporting their position and very effectively wiped out
the League of California Cities' position. The Mayor said the measure is
before us again and the League has made an effort to inform us from the stand-
point of municipal administration and the equitable thing is to let the people
decide the matter. Carried, by the following vote, to -wit: Ayes: Allen,Hogue,
Gautereaux. Nays: Colburn, Morgan.
MOVED BY MORGAN, seconded by Allen, the meeting be closed. Carrier by unanimous
vote. The meeting closed at 9:14 p.m.
ATTEST:
l.'✓L-l-1 4 S R 4-
Deputy City Clerk
3/30/65