CC - 01-17-78 - Special Meeting0*
MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING
OF THE ROSEMEAD CITY COUNCIL
JANUARY 17, 1978 at 2:00 P.M.
1- PpROVED
CITY OF I?OS D?EA
DATA Special Meeting of the Rosemead City Council was called to order
by Mayor Cichy in the Council Chambers of the Rosemead City Hall,
8838 Valley Boulevard., Rosemead, CA., at 2:00 p.m.
The Pledge to the Flag was led by Councilman Hunter.
The Invocation was delivered by Councilwoman Trujillo.
ROLL CALL:
Present: Trujillo, Hunter, Taylor, Cichy
Absent: Imperial
Councilman Taylor, "I'd like a clarification - two people asked me
as we came into the council hall that they were told that they
would not be able to speak at the special meeting. Would you
clarify that please"?
Mayor Cichy, "We can treat t
regards to whether the chair
or not and it is the chair's
that anyone wishing to speak
Does that clarify it?._? O.P.
nat as a regular agenda item with
allows people to speak on each item
decision that as each item comes up
on those items can speak on them.
good".
Mayor Cichy, "Item #1 which is consideration of the Rosemead City
Ordinance consenting to bond issuance for certain public improve-
ments.
Mr. Tripepi, "This is an Ordinance of the City of Rosemead approving
the issuance by the Rosemead Redevelopment Agency Redevelopment
Project Area #1 Tax Allocation Bonds, Series B, for its corporate
purposes
Mayor Cichy, "Is there anyone wishing to speak do that item"?
City Attorney Dilkes, "Mr. Mayor, if I may, Mr. Beebe our Bond
Council is here and he and I conferred very briefly on the subject
of this Ordinance just before the meeting, and he had some technical
changes in the wording that he wanted to make".
Mr. Beebe, "For the record my name is James Warren Beebe. On Page 2
for clarification, I would suggest that there be added this ballot
proposition. Are we all looking at the same thing"?
City Attorney Dilkes, "I think what was read was the Ordinance itself.
In order on the Agenda as I recall is the Ordinance approving the
resolution placing that Ordinance on the ballot if approved and the
second, the third Agenda item is the Resolution placing the different,
the more general proposition". /
Councilman Taylor, "Yes"
This ballot proposition says, 'Shall the Ordinance approving
$9,930,000 Series B Tax Allocation Bonds be approved'-. I would
suggest that after the word "approving" you put your insert 'the
issuance of and I would suggest that after the word "bonds" you
put in "by the Rosemead Redevelopment Agency".
City Attorney Dilkes, "Do you think I'm reading from the right thing?'
Councilman Taylor, "I disapprove of that because under the law the
Redevelopment Agency has full authority to issue bonds without voter
approval. By so inserting that we are re-affirming that the
Redevelopment Agency to approve their own bonds. As it stands now,
it is a municipal propositon?-&Redev'elopmenteAgency=doestnoten'eed to
be 'inserted-",
Beebe, "Mr. Taylor, there wasn't anything tricky here, that wasn't
the point".
SCM - 1/17/78
Page 1
~
Councilman Taylor, "Is that true Mr. Beebe, what.I said"?
Beebe, "No, it is not".
Councilman Taylor, "It's not true that the Redevelopment Agency cannot
go ahead and issue the bonds on their own"?
Beebe, "That's right, it is not true anymore".
Councilman Taylor, "What is it, they have to come to the Council?
Correct','?
Beebe, "Correct"
Councilman Taylor, "But if it's on the ballot and the people vote
for it, it says nothing about the people approving it...Why would
you want to insert "Redevelopment Agency"?
Beebe, "Because they are the ones who are going to ...Well...to
distinguish it from the City issuing Bonds. I don't think there
should be a negative inference that the City is going to issue them".
Councilman Taylor, "The City is going to approve".
Beebe, "That's right,t- the issuance by the Redevelopment Agency
of these Bonds ...that's what .I believe the statute:: provides".
Councilwoman Trujillo, "Mr. Mayor, could Mr. Beebe please tell us
again where it is you are referring to"?
Mayor Cichy, "She.is asking where it should be. Didn't you all get
it?,' I can't see the sheet".
City Attorney Dilkes, "With respect to Mr. Beebe's comments, you have
before you a Resolution. It is the first of two Resolutions. That
Resolution submits to the voters the ordinance approving the specific
Redevelopment Bond issue. Obviously, the Ordinance would have to be
discussed by the Council, but the specific agenda item for your
action or non; action today is the Resolution submitting it to the
voters. In other words, if you are submitting the Ordinance to the
voters for their approval, it is not an Ordinance that you yourself
must act upon today ...you're submitting it as set up, you are sub-
mitting it to the voters for their approval. It is not here for
your approval or disapproval today.
Councilman Taylor, "What Councilwoman Trujillo is asking you is
at what point Mr. Beebe read from an Ordinance or from a Resolution
and then added a sentence she cannot find that place where that
particular insert is to be made":
Councilwoman Trujillo, "This resolution, oh, on the ballot measures".
City Attorney Dilkes, "It's in that little box on Page 2".
Beebe, "in my mind that makes it consistent with the Section 1 of
the ordinance which is attached as Exhibit A - Attachment A",
Councilman Taylor, "Mr. Dilkes had something to say".
City Attorney Dilkes, "You also had some changes to be made to
Attachment A,,.as I recollect".
Beebe,-."Oh-yes, I'm sorry"
City Attorney Dilkes, "You wanted to change the one 'paragraph"
Tripepi, "Section 2175,Warren."
Beebe, "That's true, .j_us'teac,min,utewll:-_
SCM - 1/17/78
Page 2
I
City Attorney Dilkes, "We're not tracking those resolutions through
trays".
Beebe, '%Let me find it, just a minute here. Attachment A Second
Paragraph for accuracy, should say, 'is everybody looking at it
now'? Should say on the fourth line instead of June 27th it should
say July 27th and then since, if this should be approved it will be
necessary to amend the date of sale whatever, make some other tech-
nical changes to the Resolution of sale. I would suggest that the
Resolution Numbers that are in the third "whereas," be omitted*eG
so that the paragraph would read "whereas the Agency, is considering
the issuance and sale of $9,000,000 odd Rosemead Redevelopment
Agency Redevelopment Project #l, Tax Allocation Bonds Series B'the
Bonds".
City Attorney Dilkes, "Can you read that language again".
Beebe, "Well, all right".
City Attorney Dilkes, "I don't think the Clerk got it all".
Beebe, "He will say, 'Whereas, the Agency is considering the issuance
and sale of $9,930,000 Rosemead Redevelopment Agency Redevelopment
Project Area #1 Tax Allocation Bond Series B (.-''Bonds').,".Bonds"
City Attorney Dilkes, "Strike everything from Resolutions on down".
Beebe, "I'd strike the Resolutions,all the references for the
Resolutions"..
City Attorney Dilkes, "Then you're not adding anything you"re just
deleting some of the verbage there"?
.Councilman Taylor, "I'd like to go back to the ballot insert and
have a clarification of what Mr. Beebe recommended the change be.
Beebe, "Mr. Taylor, should I read it?"
Councilman Taylor, "Yes".
Beebe, "Would that be all right?
Councilman Taylor, "Yes".
Beebe, "Shall the Ordinance approving issuance of $9,930,000 Series B
Tax Allocation Bond by the Rosemead Redevelopment Agency be approved"?
Councilman Taylor, "O.K. Another point of information, I'd like
Mr. Dilkes to explain why he drew it up this without the Rosemead
Redevelopment Agency inserted".
City Attorney Dilkes, "I guess in all candor the only reason I can
give is that I assume in Rosemead since Redevelopments has been as
much a political issue as it has been everybody knows that the Agency
is the issuing body. AS far as I'm concerned Mr. Beebe's language
in•addition that is quite constructive. I concur in his opinion that
it does not create either any misrepresentation or any undesirable
language.
Beebe, "Would there be any conflict with the State Law in the sense
now that we're putting an issue of redevelopment bonds or tax
allocation bonds of the Redevelopment Agency before the people rather
than the City, because under the law its City Enactments that go to
the people not Agency Enactments".
City Attorney Dilkes, "O.K. now, what we're doing, if approved, if
the resolution placing the ballot proposition is approved by the
Council. today, this bond issue would not say go to the voters, what
would go to the voters is the Enactment or refusal to enact the
Ordinance by the City Council approving the issuance. It's a step
different.Then let's see if I can reword it. Obviously, people who
vote for and against the ballot proposition will be voting for and
against the bonds. There is no legal authority to 'submit the bond
L'}= SCM - 1/17/78
Page 3
issue per say, to the voters. What can be submitted is an ordinance
of this City Council any Ordinance of this City Council. Since the
Council is legally required to approve the bond issuance we've
structured it so that approval is in the form of an Ordinance'to be
submitted to the voters. If the Council wishes to submit the matter
to the voters that is the only way that they may do so. So, the
Bonds per say are not before the voters, what is before the voters
is the Ordinance approving the issuance by the Agency.
Councilman Taylor, "All right, then you're sure and Mr. Beebe is
sure that this will have no effect as far as the validity of the
voter approval once it's on the ballot.
Beebe, "Or disapproval. It will make no difference, just for
accuracy".
Councilman Taylor, "I can accept that change".
City Attorney Dilkes, "The language that he added will not have any
effect on the Ordinance".
Mayor"Cichy-,.E:"RghtL's iv sure of that"
City Attorney. Dilkes_,"You are absolutely sure it will not have an
effect on the ordinance".
Councilwoman Trujillo, "Yes, a question for the City Attorney. Now,
as revised would whatever the voter decision is be binding? As the
language is revised?
Dity Attorney Dilkes, "This is structured to be done pursuant to
elections CCOde Sections 4017 whichnpermits the submission to the
voters by the legislative body of any Ordinance for a binding
decision by the voters. Decision by the voters of Rosemead on this
issue if submitted will be the law of Rosemead binding and not
advisory.
Councilman Taylor, "Further questions,. Mr. Beebe"?
Beebe, "Not at this time".
City Attorney Dilkes, "Thank you very much".
DISCUSSION BY COUNCIL
Councilman Taylor, "Mr. Mayor, I would like a clarification from the
City Attorney. When an election is held,, ifuahcandidate is elected
to office, when is the effective date of the election"?
City Attorney Dilkes, "The effective date of the election is the date
the votes are what, canvassed and confirmed by the City Council, 10
days after the election.'.'= I can't remember the precise number of days,
but it's the canvass then confirmation of the Council".
Councilman Taylor, "I would like to read a section here as of the
reason for the question as an example. 'This Ordinance shall not take
effect until approved by the voters, pursuant to Election.'_`Code 4017,
and shall go into effect pursuant to Election Code Section 4013.'
City Attorney Dilkes, "That is correct. Elections Code 4013 pre-
scribes that the ordinance if approved by the voters takes effect
10-days after the election. This is a special provision:'.
Councilman_vTaylor, "Mr. Dilkes, that's all right".
City Attorney Dilkes, "NO, I want to get the book'
Councilman Taylor, "O.K."
SCM - 1/17/78
Page 4
*0
Mayor Cichy, "DO you have any further questions"?
Councilman Taylor, "No, the Ordinances are drawn different and that
is why I ask Mr. Dilkes to clarify why he would prepare two different
Ordinances."
Mayor Cichy, "DO you have any other items for clarification at this
time"?
Councilman Taylor, "No, not at this time"
Mayor Cichy, "Is there anyone who wishes to speak on Item 1 at this
time"?
ADDRESSING THE COUNCIL:
Mr. Lloyd Alexander, 4040 No. Muscatel "I don't know whether this
is the place or not, but what I want to know is why they are taxing
me too, what I understand they are going to use this Bond money for,
I put my streets and gutters in under 1911 and it is available to
them out there and I don't see why I should have to pay for an
absentee landlord when:•hd-rknows you are going to put it in for him,
why not leave him stew a while, and well whenever it runs down,
condemn his property".
Ms. Holly Knapp, 8367 E. Whitmore St.. "My question, Mr. Mayor, are
directed to the Attorney with your permission. I have three questions..
I understand there is an alternative to the Bond Allocations, the
1911 Chapter 27 Act, which provides for curbs, sidewalks, street
improvements, and understandably this could be a hardship for people
on fixed income, such as senior citizens. Could their payment of
such improvements be deferred, or paid in installments, or added to
the property as a lien under the 1911 Chapter 27 Improvement Act?"
City Attorney Dilkes, "It does become a lien on the property, but I
know the problem is it's a lien that is subject to foreclosure, and
I don't know of any way it can be extended beyond the normal
statutory,-period let me turn this to Mr. Dickey...
Dickey, "Unclear on'tttape'%.
City Attorney Dilkes, "There is a provision in the Act that provides
for five year and tennyear installments system, I don't know that we
have ever tried that".
Councilman Taylor, "I would like to ask if I may Ms. Knapp another
question that I think is only half of what the Attorney answered.
Isn't there a provision in the State Law now that provides for
deferment of taxes of elderly senior citizens?"
CityA.•Attorney Dilkes, "That's correct"
Councilman Taylor, "Would you clarify that"?
CityAAttorney Dilkes, "It's a constitutional provision, and my_-recolle.ction
is i`sathat.,itpapplies fosassessmentsduader119Tlplmprovemen.ttACt;itbutm,i'm
not sure. ,DO you happen to know Warren?"
Beebe;,U"Ildontt think it does"
City Attorney Dilkes, "You don't think it does, O.K." It's the general
tax lien.
Beebe, "That's correct"
City Attorney Di,lkes, "No, Mr. Beebe is correct, theie'istnohextension
of that assessment". y
Mayor Cichy;, "Ms. Knapp"
Knapp, "Yes, havg another ques-tion....Is rherc
SCM"- 1/17178
'~hat_those citizens Page 5
l
99
Ms. Knapp, "Yes, I have another question...IS there a possibility
that those citizens who have paid for their improvements, sidewalks,
curbs and gutters could file a grievance against the City if others
receive free improvements".
City Attorney Dilkes, "I know of no such law suits that have ever been
brought, I rather doubt that a cause of action could be successful
and maintained for it, the general rule is that people have to be
treated equally at the same time and the same place, and people
necessarily receive different treatment at different times according
to the needs and exigencies of the community. It's an interesting
lawsuit, but no, I am inclined to think no that probably there would
be no cause of action".
Ms. Knapp, "In other words, it's never been done before"?
City Attorney Dilkes, "So far as I know, its never been done before"
Ms. Knapp, "But-there would be that possibility though".
City. Attorney Dilkes, "Oh ya, sure, you can put anything on a piece
.of paper and file it in the courthouse, but whether you stay there
or not is another matter I would be inclined to think that a suit
like that would not be successful.... The only challenges that I know
have been individuals who challenge the expenditures made by
government entities as being a gift of public funds. And in that
context there have been challenges made where somebody said, "I had
to spend X, Y, and z dollars for my own purposes and over here and
they gave it away to a business competitor, or my next neighbor..."
but I don't see this as being the type of situation in which that
kind of challenge could be made. These are fairly normal public
improvements, there is not, we are not dealing with right down to
land for private developers and then that, the, which is the kind of
thing which is the context of which those gift of public funds -
this is a difference. So that's a long answer. My answer is that I
doubt that somebody could successfully retain such a court trial".
Ms. Knapp, "Thank you, my last question, is there a possibility that
the Bond'holders could confiscate City property if the Bonds were not
paid in case the Jarvis Amendment becomes a reality, and the tax
increment decreases substantially"?
City Attorney Dilkes, "I am going to refer to Mr.Dickey and Sabo on
that".
Sabo, "She's talking about the Tax Allocation Bonds, and the answer
is the bond'holders take the risk, they can't go against any City
property".
City Attorney Dilkes, "In that regard, the constitutional provision,
I can't remember the exact language; but the constitutional
provision for tax allocation financing says that...'The tax increment
is computed by the increases in the assessed valuation times and I
believe statutory language is 'the then existing tax rate'".
Sabo, "It's just an allocation of taxes, it is not an imposition of
taxes, all it does is allocate existing taxes, whatever they may be".
Councilman Taylor, "I believe that the City Attorney stated that this
ordinance would become effective by the vote of the people under the
Resolution allowing it to go on the ballot",
City Attorney Dilkes, "That's correct, in response to your question
a little earlier, I went out to get a hold of the Code, because I
wanted to make sure things were properly explained ...Elections
Code 4013 says that if the majority of the voters, voting on a pro-
posed ordinance vote in its favor, the Ordinance shall become a valid
and binding Ordinance of the City. The Ordinance shall be considered
as adopted upon the date that the vote is declared by the legislative
body and shall go into effect 10 days after that effect, after that
date, I'm sorry In that regard, the Ordinance before you
approving the issuance of Rosemead Redevelopment Agency Bonds, ought
to be amended, Section 2 should simply read ...'`'This Ordinance should
f SCM - 1/17/78
- - Page 6
take effect pursuant to Elections Code 4013'. It could not be law to
take effect 10 days after enactment by the voters. Your question
made me wonder if I drafted the language right yesterday'.
Councilman Taylor, "And 4017...is what"?
City Attorney Dilkes, :~^1'$017 is the provision of the Elections Code,
came into the Code in 1976, permitting the legislative body to submit
to the voters without a petition, Proposition 4, The repeal amendment,
or,enactment'of any ordinance, and it says that a proposition may be
.submitted, or a special election may be called for the purpose of
voting on a proposition, by Ordinance or Resolution".
Councilman Taylor, "F: ."My reason for asking for the two questions,
because there are two ordinances that are being considered for the
ballot they both'have different explanations and that was the only
reason for the questions... Now they are both consistent with what the
City Attorney has stated...Getting back to the question of the
Ordinance -
are we in proper order now talking of the Resolution and ordinance
in combination?"
City Attorney Dilkes,:{...'.'The only item formally to be acted upon
today, I guess there are really two items to be formally acted upon
today One, is the Resolution placing. on the ballot the Ordinance
consenting to $9,930,000 of tax allocation bonds... The resolution
placing the item on the ballot, is the only item to be.acted=upon,by
the Council. The Ordinance is obviously open for discussion, but it's
an attachment to the.resolution, and is not something that the
Council would vote'on today. The only other item for formal action
by the Council, is the resolution placing the permanent Ordinance
requiring submission to the ;voters in the same manner all such
tax allocation consent Ordinances".
I
Councilman Taylor, ..."Could we have the City Attorney read the
Resolution please?"
City Attorney Dilkes, read the Resolution by Title only:
RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ROSEMEAD, CALIFORNIA ORDERING THE SUBMISSION TO THE QUALIFIED VOTERS
OF THE SAID CITY THAT THE GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD IN
SAID CITY ON MARCH 7, 1978, AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO ISSUANCE OF
$9,930,000 IN TAX ALLOCATION BONDS.
I
Mayor Ci'chy,., "Because of the clarification by the City Attorney, if
there is anyone who is wishing to speak on that Resolution, then I
think they should do so at this time prior to any discussion, any
objection to that?"
Councilman Taylor, "I think that if the people"want to vote for being
on the ballot, by all means they should speak..
Mayor Cichy.., "Is there anyone wishing to speak on that Resolution
number that was just read"?
Councilman Taylor, "I guess they're waiting for us,to speak on it".
Councilman Hunter, "Mr. Alexander asked some good questions that I
have a prepared statement. I would like to read and have verbatim
in the minutesm I can elude to a couple of your questions
Mr. Alexander ,-but nothing of this will pertain to the.questions
that you asked: I'm sorry Ms. Knapp. If I might, Mr. Mayor, read
this statement.''.
alwwouldll'ke to give this particular group what it wants. I think
with the exception of possibly one or two in this room, everyone
knows my stand on this particular issue. However, I feel I would be
failing the City as a whole if I were to do so. First of all, the
SCM -.1/17/78
Page 7
type of Bond is a tax increment Bond and not a general obligation
bond, it is not for condemnation, it is not for driving people
from their homes, but for improvement that will benefit the entire
City. I-would not vote for a General Obligation Bond if this were
the case, which it is not. The suggestion that this go on the
ballot is as American as apple pie and motherhood... and not being
a GeneralnObligation~BOndi;jbut a~wayfofamanaginghtheicit zeris'.cmoney.
to receive the highest benefit, I-feel it is our responsibility as a
Council to do exactly what we were'elected to do, and manage what
is available to us with tax increments, which is not a General
Obligation, but a way of getting a better portion of the taxes not
yet totally generated.
This type of improvement we are suggesting to be done with the
bond monies, are for street improvements in an area that has been
neglected by past Councils. So many of the streets in the residential
areas have no.sidewalks. One case in point, the improvement of Del
Mar, which has been talked about for ten years and I know of and if
we do not implement this program, most likely it will be another ten
years.
One of the problems with this part of the City is that it was not
part of the original City, but was incorporated, in my opinion,
piecemeal... and has in many cases been treated as a stepchild.
The area from San Gabriel Boulevard to Del Mar is an area that has
a tremendous need, low income levels, many senior citizens, which
makeit doubtful that Chapter 1911 could be successfully implemented.
It is unlikely that there will be enough general fund money to bring
it up to the standards if should be in the next 7 to 10 years. This
area has the highest crime rate in our City, the most called for
police services in our City, and the most'difficult to clean by the
street sweeper.
Using the Bond monies for improvements - some of the general fund
money committed to this area could be reallocated to other parts
of the City also in need ...It is too bad once again that improvement
of an area has become a politicial issue and has no winners, without
the improvements we all lose.
Mr. Mayor, I hope that to the fine people that showed up today, this
would explain my position as to why I would vote against giving you
a right to vote on it...I think when you voted for,us five up here,
the four today, you gave us that responsibility, and when I was
sworn in I accepted that responsibility ...Thank you, Mr. Mayor:`.'.
Councilman Taylor, "I think everybody on this Council is in favor of
improving that area, any area of the City. I'm sure that Mr. Imperial
would also approve of it, it's not a question of saying we don't want
the streets paved, or we don't want curb and gutter there is a
valid way that it can be done through equal treatment throughout the
City, half of the City you might save, or up until this time, the
past 18, 19 years, people have been assessed for their curb, gutter
improvements. It's also a known fact that 50% of the land owners in
the area that's for improvement now are absentee landlords. Now try
to.rati-onalize people that will buy land in the City and not use an
incentive to upgrade that City, but the elderly people, and the people
that say','' 'I take pride in my City, I have to pay for my assessments,
I don't like it sometimes,' it's a hard fact, but they still end up
paying, and everyone of them were assessed for the past 18, 19 years;
now all of a sudden, landowners, and keep in mind it's approximately
50%, they will not reinvest, and we're saying the good people that
paid for_ther:own,, we:are> going to give it to the people who will not
invest in their own property.. As far as the improvements go, I don't
think one of us can say "No, we don't want it"....In regards to the
real issue, if th s_Council wants to come along and say, all right,
let's go ahead andimp_rove.-these streets and find out if.these people
want the curbs and gutters, I don't think there'is any petitions in
here of the people requesting these on each of those streets at
least half of them.
SCM - 1/17/78
Page 8
•0
Another point is that right now there is a court case, McNutt vs
Los Angeles-City-and many other Cities, Auditor, Controller and
such on a cconstitutional issue that Redevelopment Tax increment
bonding and it-ties into a lot of aspects, but that's unconstitut-
ional in the way that it's being abused. And Mr. Beebe, their
office put out 'a memo to us that Memorandum on August 29, 1977 -
subject was the McNutt vs City of Los Angeles and the other Cities
involved and it states that the law suit poses a direct and almost
threat to the payment of the outstanding bonds of your agency, the
Rosemead Redevelopment.Agency. In turn this also indirectly
threatens the credit of the City. Now there is a law suit going
right now and let's just say that when they review this situation
and find out that it is a tax shift, which they are now bringing
out, and I have reports here stating that this is clarified now,
they are shifting the taxes to the other people to makeup the
taxes that redevelopment agencies get from the improvements, and
the way this states here, right from Mr. Beebe's office, James
Warren Beebe, Edie I guess was the typist on it, but this tells me
that if that court hearing'is decided in favor of the people, how
do they get back the tax increment, when the bonds are already
floated, and as Mr. Beebe says, they take the risk. Well there's
clauses in there that allow for refunding of the bonds, if they
can't make it the Redevelopment Law states' that we must take what-
ever actions are necessary to protect those bonds. I'd like to
hear from Mr. Beebe -wwhat'would happen if they declared it uncon-
stitutional as far as the tax increment."
Mr. Beebe Mr. Tavlor, I sent that letter out to all of our
clients, the similar memo, because at that time, the case had just
been filed, and what I said there is correct. Since that time,
the many of those agencies that are involved in the law suit, have
issued bonds, and in fact yesterday, the City of Industry, which
was one'of the cities that is spoken of as abusing the law and had
filed various counteraction against the Western r_Center on Law and
Poverty, which was representing McNutt and the other people that
were involved, has issued, I think it was something like 35 million
or something of that sort, and apparently we don't get, we aren't
sure, but it seems as if the Western Center is not taking the
position that they were taking back in September that they were
going to try to block all these sales, that's so...We really don't
really know what the status of the law suit is now, whether they
are going to pursue it or whether theylieenot, in my_discussion with
Mr. McDermott, who is the Executive Directornof that'Agency down
here at one time he said that they were not interested in taking the
matter too-far, it was more of an idea of a way to get new legis-
lation, but I didn't believe that. I don't believe the people file
law suits just to drop it and use it as a pressure tactic, I have
to assume that they are going to carry it through,
There is a line of cases that deals with constitutional attacks such
as this, and this line of cases dealt, well maybee.you remember
the one man one vote situation that came up - the Serrano vs. Priest
situation - ittdealt with whether school bonds were properly authori-
zed, whether bonds of other agencies in which there was a one man
one vote problem were properly authorized.
In each of these cases, the Supreme Court of the United States and
other courts in the Country, came down with the rule that in these
cases the ruling would be made prospective rather than retroactive
or maybe to put it another,way, that this wouldn't they aren't .
going to stop government while the process is going through the
courts...and people can proceed under the laws as they then exist
with the protection of the contract clause of the Constitution, and
if a new rule is pronounced, it will be pronounced as being effective
as of the date of that decision, or some other equally fair date
that the court thinks that it should be put into effect,"
SCM - 1/17/78
Page 9
•_9 0 9
Councilman Taylor, "That's fine, thank you...Mr. Mayor the clarifi-
cation that I believe the last couple of sentences Mr. Beebe stated
that when the law is changed would become effective as of that
time, that is.part of the case in point, there is a rush on right
now to try to pass bonds because of the State Legislature right
now, the way things are going everybody is aware of tax reform right
now, and the more bonds that are sold right now the liability is
created before the law is changed and I believe he stated that the
City of Industry :just sold several million dollars ...we as a Council
receive what is know as the Stone - Youngberg Municipal financing
letter, this is dated January 5, 1978 it says, 'Selected recent
California Bond Sales, it goes through South Montebello, Monterey
Park, Industry, Culver City, Palmdale, Alhambra, Industry, Irwindale,
San Diego, La Mirada. Since September 13, theres been 182 million
dollars worth of redevelopment bonds sold.
Now if those bonds are held for 10 years such as our bonds are, that's
going to come up to roughly 365 million dollars worth of bonds that
people could not vote on...That's within the past three months...
right now the current liability of the County of Los Angeles as far
as not the County itself, the Auditor Controller, I was talking with
Mr. Guerrero last week and we are talking about the City of Rosemead
has a'total bonded indebtedness or liability of approximately,
$4,381,000 somewhere in there, that doesn't seem like a lot, but
when you project it over the period of 20 to 25 years, which are
what these bonds are for, the bonded liability for the Los Angeles
County residents comes to $1,119,000,000 and that's not in any of
these reports yet.
The Auditor-Controller has started compiling the figures. So when
we say it doesn't.cost the tax payers anything really, it's not a
tax shift, well where is that $1,119,000,000 going to come from?
That's not counting these bonds after October 1st, there's rat race
going on now to sell as much as they can. And the intent is to sell
it and obligate and then when they change the law, they're home free.
As far as tax reform goes, this Jarvis Amendment which was c: rc.u.Tated
State wide, all 58 Counties, it's the highest petition ever on record
in the State, with approximately 1.2 'million signatures... almost
double to qualify for the petition. The taxpayers saying,,stop playing
the games.:.we are fed up with all your home exemptions, business
exemptions, they just shift it to the next guy.
The intent of this Resolution today, is to
voters...Tell them what you are doing, and
There are other ways to put those curb and
share treatment, pay as you go, pay your o'
somebody else pay for it, and giving it to
it themselves.
say, let's put it to the
it's not the only way.
gutters in on a fair
an share, stop making
those who will not improve
There is all kinds of information that could go on and, on about the
tax shift. That's my main objection to it, I'll work with this
Council when they are willing to come up with a sound proposal that
will put in those curb and gutters, and streets but its always been
let's get the tax dollars."
Councilwoman Trujillo, "I've been discussing this with many people
throughout the City in the past few weeks and; the general consensus
that's communicated to me, is.y€yes" you know people would like to
see ce,r:tairi.nthiri.gs,i,ce:r.ta n.rstre e:ts=si mp'r owe d'-51;'
Others have seen streets improved and not seen the situation in the
community surrounding the streets improve. Others feel; well, I've
paid for mine, but you know perhaps you know we could do a major
city-wide project and get some things going, and perhaps it would
help the City.
However, they all seem to communicate some very basic things, and
that's what they feel for the most part, very few of them have seen
the presentations that have been going on. Those that did really
didn't feel that they got much information out.of the presentation:
They feel that full detailed information has not been made available
to the general public and that most people really don't understand
a-k.- SCM -1/17/78
,Page 10 _
• . 0 0
what's happening, or even have any knowledge about the bond issuance
possibility. And in general they must feel that any obligation of
this City, especially you know talking in perspective of projecting
that those bonds would not be paid off before the year 2000 that
they should have a right that they should have the opportunity to
1. Get all the full detailed information, get all the facts'and
figures, because most people do think that their intelligent enough
to make a decision, and that they be given the opportunity to vote
either yes or no.) It hasn't been yes we are for it or no we are
against it. They want some information, they want the opportunity
to go to the ballot box and vote either for or against. And you
know'it's just a very basic concept, a basic feeling, that you
know people grow up feeling that when you know we become adults
we can vote when we are 18, and there are things that are more
important sometimes than voting for or against candidates, and that
sometimes there are issues that really hit the pocketbook or, may
hit the pocketbook, or may have some overflowing effects to citizens
in the community and they just feel that as Americans they have a
right to go to the box and'say...either I am for or against it, that's
all, it's very simple."
Councilman Tayl'o'r , "Another aspect of putting this on the ballot,'
we are approximately l year away from perhaps abolishing the project
area No. 1. Its been 1972 - roughly 6 years since that project was
adopted. And as I mentioned the liability of the City is, approxi-
mately - I mean not the 'City the - I mean the Redevelopment Agency
----on tax increment to pay those Bonds off and such, I have it
right here but it's approximately 4~ million dollars. One year
from now, we would have set aside in the trust fund to pay off:those
bonds, approximately 431 million dollars to do away with. 'that type
of tax increment, tax shift, that is exactly what it is. This is a
report put out by the Rosemead Redevelopment Agency, dated May 2,
1977, Defeasance of Series A Tax Allocation Bonds ---AS of the year
1977-78, it would take $4,255,000 total amount required to defease
the bonds at fiscal year end. Not only that, but it's that project
is on the Ordinance books now for 40 more years.
For 5 years now, we have lived with it,.you, myself, Ms., Trujillo,
that was an issue that was decided by the people when they elected
us to the office because that was one of the big stance that we
took.
There's got to be control of Redevelopment. So for the next 40 years,
you and I, old'age may put us in our graves, but your grand kids
are still going to be there wondering how did we get this mess?
Tax reform will still be going on then, its.been. going on ever since
government created taxes. But the thing is, for another 40 years
we think, well gee - that's just Project Area 1, well the entire
City, this map I'm showing is still under Redevelopment - the entire
City, not just Project 1. One more year we stand the opportunity
of getting rid of the mess in Rosemead, and being honest about
municipal improvements.
So it goes on and on, you were not on the Council when the project
was adopted, or when the first bonds were sold. I was not - none
of us was there. Mr. Hunter was on at that time, that's past
politics. But you and I were not in charge of the Agency, or no
member of this Council was on their separate Redevelopment Agency
when they moved in and started acquiring property, thereby locking
us into that project to finish that one block.
Now say whether I am on this council next term or Ms. Trujillo, some-
one else comes in and gets a 3rd vote to start buying up property on
another corner. The thing is there is no control over this by the
people.
SCM - 1/17/78
Page 11
We are trying to put this on the ballot so they can have a say, but
we don't have to, and the law says that an Agency can do whatever
they choose.- It's going to go on and on and on unless we say now
wait a minute let's clear it up. One more year and it can be
cleared up. That's the.urgency for getting this on the ballot rather
than floating 9 million dollars of bonds which will take a minimum
of 12 years to pay off. 12 years? Perhaps nobody in this room will
be interested in the Cify.;, but that's the longterm liability. So
it goes on and'on there is no end to it.;'.
Addressing the Council from the Audience:
Joseph A. Karnes, 9030 E. Steele St., Rosemead..."I've been a tax-
payer and a resident of Rosemead for 42 years, and I've seen things
happen in this community which a lot of you younger folks haven't
seen. But regarding this Redevelopment, I spoke against the
Redevelopment when it came up. I charged that they-... without that
Redevelopment they didn't need the Redevelopment. Well they met
for the birthday of, the 13th or 14th birthday of Rosemead and they
wanted to put it in, and I said thats because you people didn't live
up to your promises when you made the City of Rosemead.
4)
You are down in the dumps and now you want to call in Redevelopment
to pull you out... Redevelopment was a separate thing from - that was
called all this told us a rosy picture of Redevelopment - they were
going to have tax increment which was going to clear everything up,
and make a better place out of it than what we had, now Redevelopment,
I can't come to you the Redevelopment Agency and telling you how
your going to increase or decrease the money you make in Redevelopment,
you are supposed to be self supporting ---I as a citizen couldn't
critizesyou, although the County is critizing you because you are
taking a lot of money away from the County which will be increased
in our taxes.
Now, I by the same token don't think that we should float any bonds
to take care of a Redevelopment Agency over which we have no control.
Now I'know, I don't blame the people on the Council today because
this was put through with the exception of one man, that by the
rest, put through over the heads of the people, we-were going to get
so much out of it. Well now, I say that the Redevelopment has no
business to come to me and say that I am going to take care of
something because you can't take care of in your Redevelopment Agency.
I know why those people haven't got curbs and gutters, you're not
able to take care of from your tax increment. That's the fault of
the Redevelopment, why should I stand for your faults, why should they
tax me to put in curbs and gutters all these years and not pay for
the absentee owners and those people.
What I would suggest instead of rushing this through, and any bonds
that are floated that I'm effected in, I intend to have a vote on
it...I should have a vote on it, there will be a lot of criticism,
if we don't get that vote, because they are taxing me to put through
those bonds - or guaranteeing them anyway. _
So I say, why do we want to keep this off.the ballot and why can't
the people wait till this wonderful Redevelopment Agency can dig up'
enough money to take care of those curbs themselves. That's my
point."
Councilman Taylor, "I'd like to say something here, On January 4,
1978, the County Board of Supervi.sors has a new report where I
mentioned they are starting to review all Redevelopment Agencies
and it's interesting as Rosemead Project #2 was adopted in late '72
or '73. I don't recall the specific date,.but as an example for the
fiscal year 1972, the tax increment diverted from the County General
Fund, and I'm not, Rosemead comes first, they are talking about the
County fund here, we'll get to the Rosemead' also,... in 1971 - 72, the
County lost 2.6 million dollars; 1977-78, six years later, they have
lost 36 million dollars...In 1971-72 tax increment diverted from all
taxing jurisdictions 1971-72 - 7.4 million dollars. This report now,
6 years later, it's 107 million dollars this year, for those of the
SCM - 1/17/78
Page 12
people that saw the slide presentation there was a little frame in
there that showed the people, it was only costing the tax payers 2.18
out of the LOS Angeles~County Budget, which is well it was 72 million
dollars in October, when_the slides were prepared. Now it has
jumped 508 from 72 million to 107 million, for the past 6 years the
total there has been 310 million dollars that they have paid out,
largely to subsidize new shopping centers, commercial projects, which
is an intent, but. not the primary intent of Redevelopment.
So as these reports continue to come out and with tax reform, they
are going to'be very important, and I hate to see Rosemead get
tangled up in the messbf:adding to the burden, rather than solving
it before it gets much further."
George' K'anderachi, 2726 No. Gladys Avenue..."For the past 32.years,
I bought that property in '46 and since'I've lived there I have
built a two story apartment house in the back, I've improved my
property, and I was proud of it and the streets had no gutters,
no sidewalks, when I moved in there I tried to get curbs, gutters,
and sidewalks, finally I got a petition from Mr. Whiddon and I
contacted all the property owners, got'signatures and to get curbs,,,
gutters, and sidewalks, whichi_aboutoa ye_artlater•they broke ground
and we each paid approximately $300 for property owners, there was
some absentee owners, they approved and they paid it. So I don't
know why all of a sudden you come along you want 10 million dollars
in bonds to give somebody free gutters, free sidewalks.
I was able to come up with the $300, and I don't know why the rest
of them, if they.own their own property, especially an absentee
owner he is getting rent on the property and he can come up with
the 4-5 hundred dollars, whatever it's going to cost ...to improve
his property, I don't know why we need these bonds. If you want
the property improved, contact the owners, have them, like I did,
sign a petition, and have the curbs, gutters, and sidewalks put'
in.at their cost. Now if you people want to reimburse me my money,
fine, I will take it, but I can't see floating 10-= ll million
dollars worth of bonds and have me pay my taxes to pay off these
bonds to give someone free curbs, gutters, and sidwalks. So I
disapprove of it. I'd like to see it put on the ballot and have
the people informed in advance of what they are voting on before
you start messing around with 11 million dollars worth of bonds.
That's what I have to say."
Councilman Taylor,..,:"Mr. Mayor, can I make two points...
Mayor Cichy',..."Can we get to the point to where we'can have a motion
so that we can wrap it up? I'm going to be leaving in about 11
minutes.,,
Councilman Taylor,..."I know, the idea is that, and Herb I don't, when
I mentioned your name before that you are on the Council before, that
was politics, you were on it as a Councilmember doing the best job
you can and I was just referring back to the history of it - there's
other Councilmembers on this Council that agree with what the
Redevelopment is. doing now, it's not just Mr. Hunter, I've'been
opposed to it, it's just two sides of the issue.
Mr. Kanderachi referred to the 9 or 10 million dollars, but these
bonds will be for approximately 25 years date of maturity and for
10 years which is the earliest they can be called, it's not 9.9
it is approximately 21 million dollars that will cost out of tax
increment so it is over double..It's not like we pay as we go,
in reality for the next 10 years if we go down and improve those
project areas, we have to come up with at least 2 million dollars
every year. 1 million dollars for improvements and 1 million
dollars for interest. So the City putting it in over the next 10
years taking 1/2 million or a million dollars and improving the
streets, with the property assessments for the owner taking his
share of curb and gutter or such, you can accomplish the same thing.
Now there will be disagreement on that, but 21 million dollars over
10 years isn't that much when you split it back down to the' original
10 and let the City do it and the people rather than giving 10 million
SCM - 1/17/78
Page 13
• 6
•i
dollars away ininterest...AS Mr. Cichy says, he's going to leave
in 10-minutes or so,-... r;atl e-rt=th'an3.aot(conctinueu~to~ debates:the"
issue. -
The Motion has been read, I would move that we adopt it...
City Attorney Di'lk'es, ..."What I would like the. Colinc :1 to do is I
would like you to first to act on the Ordinance simply to approve it
as to form and then to act on the Resolution, either to approve it
or disapprove it..."
Councilman Taylor,..."Mr. Mayor, point of clarification, then the
Ordinance as it states has no effect whatsoever until voter approval.."
Mayor.Cichy...... Until approved by the voters or disapproved."
City Attorney Dilke's,..."Well if disapproved?"
Mayor Cichy,..."Nothing:"
City Attorney Dilkes,..."There would be no course or effect at all."
Councilman Taylor If that's the case I move that we approve the .
Ordinance - as to form only..."
Councilwoman Trujillo What is the Ordinance Number?"
Mayor Cichy,..."The Ordinance would take the number that it would take
at the time it came into our code after adoption, if adopted."
Councilwoman Truji'1'lo,..."I'll second the motion."
Mayor'Cichy,..."There has been a motion and seconded as to approving
the Ordinance as to form, is there any discussion?------All right,
I have a couple of comments to make with regards to this....
I would only vote for this Ordinance with regards to striking
Section 2, at the end of the Ordinance which states: This Ordinance
shall take effect 10 days after enactment by the voters at the
General Election of March 7, 1978."
City Attorney Dilkes,..."The Ordinance should now read:
This Ordinance' shall take effect pursuant to Election Code Section 4013.
Mr. Taylor pointed out a discrepancy between this and the other
Ordinance: ,It would take effect 10 days after the legislative body
declares the vote."
Mayor Cichy...... My statement still stands, I would only vote for
this Ordinance with the striking of.that section ...and the striking
of that section deals specifically with it going on the ballot...
I will vote for this Ordinance only with regards to the approval
of the recommendation as passed by the Rosemead'Redevelopment Agency
to issuing the tax allocation Series B Bonds. There are many issues
with regards to why you should vote; as a Councilman or as an Agency
member for the issuance of such bonds, but the overriding issue that
is apparent to most people in the community, is that if we.don't do
something with the rest of our community, then the good people in
this community should move out...I have children that go to school
in this community, I have one iintthe ffirrst ggr:0de_,7an'd TI hh)ave as
daughter who will probably'-go-to school here, if I stay here. The
statement was made that I don't know how much longer I may be here,
well I can tell you there's some friends ofmine and my wife's in
this community that are moving out, they are young people in this
community and they. are good citizens, but we don't start clfe:aning -
up the community, we'don't start doing something, and this`-is only
the basic step, anal it costs money, there is absolutely no doubt
about it that it costs money, to fight crime.
SCM 1/17/78
Page 14
00
.9
Three-years-ago, we-hired an additional 4 units,of police enforcement-.
in the City, -thatcosts taxpayers money. and do you realize where'that
money.is bei:ng spent? Exactly in the area where this project takes
place. It's completelycr diculous for the.citizens in the rest of
the p"art of this community to set there and say..."I don't want to
spend any money in that area, I'm getting no benefit out of it."
.You're right, you are getting absolutely nothing in front of your
house out of it, but you can help alleviate those problems of poverty
and crime, if you do something.in the<drea to improve that property,
it's going to help your property, cause more people want to come into
this community, more people will then say,''Im willing to buy a house`
in that community if you alleviate those problems.'" -
If you sit there and say It's going to cost me tax dollars
that's a great way to look at it, but what happens when the value of
your property goes up, because the'_rest:of the community improves,
what happens because the quality of education goes up, because the
neighbors that you have move in there. You sit there and you take
a blind attitude towards it, you sit there.and'people sit on a
government body for 4 years and they do nothing, they come here and
have absolutely nothing to day about clarifying those problems---
This is an elementary step in starting to clarify those.pr:oblems,
starting to eradicate thos pe proBlemsii~nttheuentreccommunity
I cannot vote for this ordinance as it exists
'C'oun'cilman Taylor ,..."Your reference to setting 4 years and doing
nothing, bringing no information;itandnincideintally, I would like
to propose that this entire conversation be'put out verbatim
any objections--?"
Mayor Ck,chy,..."Absolutely not."
Councilman Taylor,..."Fine, for the past year, starting from
March 28, 1977, I brought information to this Council regarding these
bonds, what we. could do to dissolve Resolution passing the original
15 million dollars.
I. am going to give you the dates, starting March 28, I brought it
to this Council, Agency, April 11, 1977, April 25, 1977, May 9, 1977,
May 23, 1977, June 27, 1977, July 11, 1977, July 25, 1977, incidentlg.
the last two dates, July 11, and 25 those two Agendas, you will not
find it there, but I specified that it be put on the Agenda...It did
not go on, going on, August 8, 1977, September 12, 1977, October 10,
1977, December 12, 1977, December 28, 1977, January 9, 1978,
January-17, 1978.
You count the times, you check the minutes, I'm getting copies of
ail those minutes and you can say what you want Mr. Cichy; it's
this Councilto now allow the citizens to participate, as far as the
police service it's true, we all voted to increase police service,
but that was on a City-wide basis.
The problems'we have. in the southern part of the City werethere when
we got it, on a pro-rated basis they've always been there. As far
as the education in this community, we have a good school system,
anybody'that has the time to read the official statement for the
sale of these bonds---it will praise the glorify Rosemead, the growth,
the improvements, the residential homes that are going inoC:Tfi.s'
Council starting with Ms. Trujillo and myself, when,we were elected,
and Mr. Hunter since he has been on, Mr. Imperial and Mr. Cichy,
have opened up a lot of residential construction. Go around and
look at the different areas, right across from the library such
such are some-, down in what was Project 42, people are building
homes in Rosemead, it's on the upgrade right now. so it's not going
to hell."
Mayor Cichy,..."You're blind."
Councilman Taylor,..:"I call for the. questions asit.was read
Mr. -Mayo-r -with Section 2.for a, vote. of the people."
SCM- 1/17/78
r%: ;a,':- • Page 15
*9
'Mayor Cichy;'.'.,."First of all, since the motion was made no one elset. _
has had a-chance to come in from the Council. Does either Ms. Trujillo
or -Mr.Hunter° have a comment?"
Councilman Hunter,..."I think my position is clear,.Mr. Mayor."
MayoYrCichy,..."The question has been called for -<Mra_sDiri` es_do you
have -a question?"
City Attorney Dilkes,..:"Was there a second?"
Councilwoman Trujillo,.'..";Yes."
Mayor~rCichy,..."Would you vote please-.-
VOTE :
AYES: Taylor; Trujillo
NOES: Hunter, Cichy
ABSENT:,Imperial
'MayoY ACichyr,~i.CENoe-A'ctioii-,"i, ACtien:"",
City Attorney Dilkes,..:"The Ordinance is not approved,as to form,
it is a 2 to 2 tie, that is as if the matter has not been raised,
if it is not approved, it could be brought up at another time;
without formal reconsideration procedures, but it is not approved
as of this date, that being the case there is no reason to proceed
to the Resolution itself since the Ordinance has not been approved."
Councilwoman Trujillo I have a question for the City Attorney -
What would be the deadline to approve,the Resolution that we have
before us today for the June election? For"the primaries?"
Councilman Taylor,..."Mr. Mayor, that is not on the. Agenda for ("r-o'
tonight."
Mayor Cichy.,..."That is -correct."
Mayor Cichy,..."I believe Mr. Dilkes can supply all the Council
with that information."
Councilman Taylor,..."We had one other Resolution, we.might as well
get the vote on that also, it is a simple.Resolution that 'states
that----SHALL THE ORDINANCE REQUIRING VOTER APPROVAL OF TAX ALLOCATION
BONDS BE ADOPTED
It is the same type of an idea, the reason for this Ordinance is there
was 15 million dollars in bonds issued or voted to issue approximately
5 years ago - no voter approval -pow we are coming back with
$9,930,000, no voter approval.
We are leaving in-the kitty $1,700,000 approximately for the next
Council or the next Council after that for another five years to
open it up and shove it for another 25 years down the road
The reason for this Resolution is that it goes on the ballot,. no
more the games, when you want to do something you tell the people
about it and you put it on the ballot. This is str'rc.tlyrregarding.
Tax Allocation Bonds." - - -
Mayor Cich;§...... Mr. Taylor, if you have a motion, please make a
motion."
Councilman Taylor,..."I would move that we adopt the Resolution,
Mr. Dilkesperhapsswould want to read that."
City Attorney Dilkes...... First the Resolution has to be read by
title and number and second I would like to have the Council act
first to approve as to form which is Attachment "A", which is the
Ordinance itself that would be submitted."
SCM - 1/17/78
Page 16
• •
•40.
Councilman Tayl.or I would like the City Attorney to read the
Ordinance." "
City Attorney D'ilkes...':"O.K. Let me begin-by reading the Resolution
by title-and number and then we will read Attachment "A" which is
the ordinance .''^-'C!,.Il.ir'-.c'fe--ik"c.t-eilime.~wh,attiiumber---the-eRes.olut-iqn,,wotild,-,
be.
City Clerk #78-8.11
City Attorney Dilkes...... RESOLUTION 78-8. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD, CALIFORNIA, ORDERING THE SUBMISSION
OF THE QUALIFIED VOTERS OF SAID CITY THAT THE GENERAL MUNICIPAL
ELECTION TO BE HELD IN SAID CITY ON MARCH 7, 1978, AN ORDINANCE
RELATING TO VOTER APPROVAL TAX ALLOCATION BONDS.
The Ordinance itself, that is the Ordinance to be submitted to the
voters for their enactment is attached as Attachment "A" to that
Resolution would read...
ORDINANCE NO. (Whatever Ordinance number it takes on) THE PEOPLE OF
.THE CITi OF,' ROSEMEAD DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
(Mr. Dilkes read Attachment "A")
Section 1 Rosemead Municipal Code shall be amended to add Section 2715
to read as follows:
"VOTER APPROVAL OF TAX ALLOCATION BONDS. THE CITY COUNCIL
SHALL GRANT ITS CONSENT TO THE ISSUANCE OF ANY.TAX ALLOCATION
BONDS ONLY BY ORDINANCE. SUCH ORDINANCE SHALL NOT BECOME
EFFECTIVE UNTIL SUBMITTED TO AND APPROVED BY MAJORITY OF THE
VOTERS CASTING VOTES IN AN ELECTION TO APPROVE SUCH ORDINANCE."
Then Section 2 simply states the effective date be in accordance with
the code.
Motion would be in order to waive further reading of the Resolution
and adopt it..."
City Manage r.-Tripepi;..."Mr. Dilkes, call to your attention the sheet
that was given out by Mr. Beebe, I believe that's the replacement
section for that section."
i
City Attorney Dilkes,..."Oh J,_-0.,R.. I'm sorry, in conversation with
Mr.. Beebe yesterday afternoon and'this morning, he commented that it
may be the wish of the Council if they decide to submit this matter
to the voters, not to seek voter approval of refunding bonds and other
things which are done to protect and preserve the security of out-
standing bonds, that is bonds outstanding today, the consequence of
which he drafted a revision to the language that was originally pro-
posed that would read just exactly as the section was just read and
additional language is added at the end which would read:
This section shall not apply to the issuance of refunding bonds or
any other type of obligations or to the taking of any other actions'
or proceedings necessary to protect and preserve the rights and
securities of the holders of the Rosemead Redevelopment Agency Tax
Allocation Bonds presently outstanding, as of the effective date
hereof, or such Tax Allocation Bonds of the Agency the issuance of
which has been approved by.the voters.
I think Mr. Beebe's addition is more than constructive - The Agency
or City Council may choose to issue Bonds simply to protect the
security of outstanding bonds. That's called refunding whether that's
something you may wish to submit to the voters or not, I'm not sure.
It's a technical matter, but I think it is one that ought to be
considered.
SCM --1/17/78
Page 17
•o
Councilman Taylor I would like to point out something that I
said a little while--ago when I mentioned to'the people about
refunding bonds, Mr.-Beebe made the statement that the bond holder
takes the' risk,' he may lose what he has, this clause as 'I stated,
refunding, they sell more bonds,' and they go on for 10, 15, 20,
25 years, it's a perpetual type thing, it!s an eccellent clause as
it states -
'This section shall not apply to the issuance of refunding
Bonds or any other type of obligation. What is or any
other type, that is everything. Or to the taking of any
other'.other actions that is court proceedings which we are
required to do to protect the bond holders. Other actions
or proceedings necessary to protect and preserve the rights
and security of the holders of the Rosemead Redevelopment
Agency Tax Allocation Bonds.'
Now, there is a trip planned to go to New York to sell the bonds.
New York people are going to protect their rights and their
security, they can condemn:property in the City of Rosemead,
declare it blighted and we are going to build into it to protect
their dollar, but not your rights. Outstanding as the effective
date hereof or such, and I don't have nothing against New York,
they got enough financial problems of their own, or such tax
allocation bonds of the Agency the issue of which has been approved
by the voters, I'm against that section because it's a built in
refunding issue, which is the proposal states, it goes on and on,
if:th'ey lose money, we are obligated to sell more bonds for what-
ever length of time it takes.
As far as the motion to pass this Resolution, I have an interesting
question. If we don't act on this right now Mr. Dilkes, and say
we awe rentohinoveifor- adjournment right now, so Mr. Cichy can go to
Sacramento, I"believe is that where you are going Marv?
Mayor Cichy,..."That's correct."
Councilman Taylor,..:"If we don't act on this right now it takes a
majority vote to adjourn this meeting V?. Is that correct??'
City Attorney Dilkes,..."The meeting can be.adjourned by a majority,
if there is less than a majority it can be adjourned by less than a
majority. I think what you are alluding to is how much"time is there
left to put anything on the ballot."
Mayor Cichy,..."Right."
City Attorney Dilkes,..."That is what the Council wants to do and the
answer is that January 21 is the deadline ...I spoke with Paul Marshall,
of Martin and Chapman yesterday and because the ballot propositions
have to be translated into Spanish and a whole lot of other things
he seemed to think that the last practical date that we could con-
ceivably act is January 20, and even then Ms. Poochigian is going to
have to essentially line up translations on a turn around one day
basis."
Councilman Taylor,..."Mr. Mayor, what is on the ballot as far as the
Spanish translation, could that be done in 4 hours, translate that
ballot insert?"
M'ayo'r Cichy,..."Not if I do it."
Councilman Taylor I couldn't do it either."
City Attorney' D'i'lke's...... I would have to ask the c ty-?Cle'rk~k"." .
Councilman Taylor,..."Perhaps let's go back'to the City Attorney, all
we are talking about is a ballot insert, are we not?"
SCM - 1/17/78
Page 18
City At't'o'rneP'Di'lke5,..."The. insert on the.. ballot, the precise
wording on the proposition has to be..."
Mayor Cichy,..."O.K.' The ballot insert and the heading."
City Attorney D'i'lkes,..."One other item that has to be acted on.
If the Council ever gets to the Resolution itself, is that and
Code provides that the City Attorney be authorized to do an-analysis
of the measure ...I have to be authorized to do that,.I don't have
to be'authorized, the Council may decide to do it any may decide
not to, if in fact there is an analysis to be produced, that too
must be translated into Spanish.
The Council I guess'in theory could authorize the submission of
arguments, practically speaking, there is so little time I'm not
sure that it mechanically can be accomplishe'd...but if that is
done, those two must be translated, that would mean in sum~the
translation of something on the order of 2 - 3'thousand words potentially.'
Councilman Tay16r,..."It seems like evening meetings are the best for
myself, Mr. Imperial I don't know what the rest of the Council the
best time would be there, but I would move that we adjourn this
meeting to Thursday night at 8 p.m."
Mayor Ci'chy,..."Fine, I'm afraid I can't be there so I won't vote
for it."
Councilwoman Trujillo I can be there on Thursday, but I don't
know if anyone else.can."
Councilman Taylor We have to adjourn it to a time or there will
be no chance to discuss this issue."
Councilman Hunter,..."What about Saturday morning?..."
Councilman Taylor,:."Deadline."
Councilman Taylor,..."Thursday, January 19, would be an appropriate
time, that's after Mr. Cichy, may be back from Sacramento... that is
about the only alternative that we have got."
Mayor Cichy,..."No, we have next Monday night when the Agency meets."
Councilman Taylor,!.."No, the deadline is past."
Mayor Cichy,..."Well, Mr. Taylor, I'm going to have to leave ...like
in 1 minute, I've got a 10 minutes would youtilike to make a motion?"
Councilman Taylor,..."Just walk out, it's up to you."
Councilman Hunter,..."This point I understand what Mr. Taylor is
doing, and I don't have any objections to that, I do object to him
deliberately stalling you from catching an airplane, and I personally
think that he has got all the miles out'o£ this meeting as far as the
press concerned as he can get...let's start over Saturday morning
again."
Mayor Cichy,..."Mr. Taylor, if you can get three votes to call a
special meeting between now and then..."
Councilman -Taylor I'm ready to leave right now so you can catch
your airplane, Mr. Hunter you don't object to Thursday night?"
Councilman Hunter I most certainly do, I told you I wouldn't be
here. Mr. Taylor we just can't you know, I missed a meeting and
agreed to give you a special meeting, which for four years, you con-
stantly insisted that a special meeting was wrong. Now. that you
needed one I signed a paper for you, only because 'I missed my second
meeting because I was ill, now damnit, enough is enough. Mr. Mayor
are you going to adjourniitcorwiahat?',
SCM - 1/17/78
Page 19
it 0•
M'ayo'r C'ichy,.,.."Mr. Taylor has made a motion, is there -a second.
on the motion with ..the. Resolution?".
'C'ounc'ilwoman''Tru'jill'o,..."I'll se'c'ond for Thursday, but I don't..."
Mayor Cichy...... No the motion with 'regards to the -Resolution."
Councilman Taylor,..."I withdraw the motion."
Councilwoman Trujillo,..."You didn't make the'motion."
Councilman Taylor I asked him to read it but I withdraw the
motion so there is no action on that one."
MayorCichy;..."Do you.have another motion?".
Councilman Taylor,..."hope, I don't right now.
Mayor Cichy,..."If there is no other business to be conducted..."
City Attorney Dilkes,..."There was on the floor a motion and second
on the second Resolution..
Unanimous,. ."No there wasn't."
Counc'i'lwoman Trujillo,..."He requested that it be read."
Councilman Taylor I made the motion, I started to, you read it
and I withdrew the motion."
City Attorney Dilkes...... Does the City Clerk have anything?"
-CitynC'3erkiE~l-leri.;,_}:.Jh don.,Saih'avd anything."
Councilman Hunter,..."Mr.. Mayor, I don't understand why the Attorney
is asking the city Clerk, I thought only one thing could be con-
sidered at a special meeting."
City Attorney Dilkes...... The matter before the Council, the last
Agenda item before the City Council was the second ordinance and
Resolution and there had been. a motion and that apparently has been
withdrawn, I did not catch that, and I was afraid that we were
adjourning a meeting with that hanging."
Mayor -Cichy,..."I will ask for -a motion to adjourn this special
meeting.
Councilman Hunter,..."Second"
CouncilmanTaylor,..."Mr. Mayor, I will not move till we'set a
definite date to reconvene this before the deadline."
Mayor Cichy,..."There has been a motion and a second to adjourn, all
those in favor signify by saying Aye.
Hunter, M-ayor:: "Aye
Taylor, Trujillo:.."Noe
Councilman Taylor I asked for a roll call vote."
Councilwoman Trujillo;..."I said, no."
Councilman Taylor It is two to two."
Mayor Cichy,..."It is two to'two, there is no-other-business to be
conducted..... that's what I am going to do."...........
Coun'ci'lwoman'Trujillo,..."You can call a special meeting - you don't
even have to call a special meeting."
C-,ty- A*'tornay'Dilke ,.,."The=me i no' eaten fm- 'hr Council t.., b_
""vct_ine. u.. adjournment - ,h adjournment _ t M` r'1~17/78
Page 20
Mayor Cichy,..."It is two to two, there is no other business to be
conducted...That's.what I am going to do.
City Attorney D.ilk'e's,•..."There is no reason for the Council to be
voting on the 'adjournment, the adjournment is something which is
done by the Chair, unless the majority of the Council wishes to
compel the Chair to do something."
MayorCi'chy,.-.."Gary, I am leaving."
City Attorney Dilkes,..."You can adjourn the meeting to another day
or to adjourn the meeting to the next regular meeting of the' City.,
Council..."
Councilman Taylor,..."Mr. Mayor, I object to that, would you get the
Municipal Code of the City of Rosemead, Section 2712."
Mayor Cichy,..."I have been instructed by the CCity Attorney, the
C:Chair. can adjourn the meeting, I am leaving Mr.-------"
Councilman Taylor Catch your plane. He is going to research that
we are not. adjourned yet."
Councilman Taylor,..."Ellen, would you get Roberts Rules,of order?"
City Attorney Dilkes looking up code - Council talking amongst themselves.
City Attorney Dilkes,..."2712 simply refers to Roberts Rules of
order.."
Councilman Taylor,..."All right. We are practicing Roberts Rules of
Order and we can call for a question of adjournment of the body."
City Attorney Dilkes,..."Mr. Taylor is correct."
Councm`anv_Taylor,..¢:",, e' havehasquestionlandad=jo_urn¢en'tfSh'Utif
Mr. Cichy wants to go that is his perogative."
Mayor Cichy,..."In effect there are no other items to be discussed."
Councilwoman Trujillo There was a motion for adjournment, right?"
Mayor Cichy,..."Right, and the motion failed. We are still in.
,session.,
Councilman Taylor,..."We are still in session."
Ci`y Atto.r?-~-y Dilkee.
Mayor-Cichy,.tr."The motion failed."
Councilman Taylor,..."We are still in session." .
City Attorney Dilkes,..."Mr. Taylor is right. The question now I
cannot answer frankly, I have absolutely no idea...but obviously
the body cannot be kept in session indefinitely because of the dead-
lock vote.
'Mayo'r Cichy,..."It is like a lockin, like a lockout."
City 'Atto'rney Dilkes...... It verges on involutary services:.."
Mayor Cichy...... The chair will make a decision, the meeting is adjourned."
Ccun.cilmanTaylor,..."MY..,:_At.torn I would like your opinion before
Mr. Cic y rus es out the door.
Councilman Hunter No, Mr. Taylor, I am rushing also, I am not
going to Sacramento, I am going to work."
--Counci'lm'an -Taylor,...."O.K."
.City Attorney Di-lkes,..."O.K'. Two members of the Council'h'ave''i'eff-t, the
quorum is broken."
SCM - 1/17/78
Page 21
*4
Councilman Taylor,.•.."And under the rule I believe that the remaining
members can adjourn. this meeting to. a-fixed time whichI movethat
we adjourn to 8-p.m. Thursday evening, is that correct Mr. Dilkes?"
'City'At't'orney -Di lkes,..."O-.K.',-less -than a majority of Council may
adjourn from time to time ...No, it is not in Roberts Rule of Order',
Page 54956 of the Government Code."
Counc'ilman' Taylor,..."Would you get the Government Code'please, Ellen?"
Council talking amongst themselves while Ellen is getting
the 'Government Code.
Councilwoman Trujillo,:-.."When the quorum is broken, the quorum is
broken. Isn't it?"
City Attorney Dilkes...... No, the quorum is broken
As a general rule you wait to call for a quorum.
a quorum. You cannot accomplish that less than a
adjourn the meeting to another time and so far as
adjourn a special.meeting as well as they can adj
meeting.
that is correct.
Attempt to obtain
majority they
I know they can
Burn a regular
Ellen -gonegtooge_tifhetGove'rnmenteCode'.t:;la. ,
Councilwoman Trujillo,..."Even when the Mayor has adjourned the
meeting?"
Rest of the Council are talking while waiting for Ellen.
City Attorney Dilkes...... Government Code Section 549.55 provides that
less than a quorum may adjourn a meeting from time to time. Since
the legislative body of a local agency may adjourn any regular
adjourned regular special meeting or adjourned special meeting to a
time and place specified in the order of adjournment. Less than a
quorum may so adjourn from time to time based on 54955. It would
be my opinion that Council may adjourn this meeting to another time
and place. I think as a courtesy it would be worth it to inform
any of the remaining council members which may still be in the
building that is something which can be~done.
Councilman Taylor I agree, Mr. Dilkes."
City At torney'Dilkes,..."May I have permission to exit, I just saw
one of them."
Councilman Taylor I move that we adjourn to 8 p.m. Thursday this
week."
Councilwoman Trujillo,..."Does it, it takes a motion? Second.
There's no vote., How can you vote without."
Councilman Taylor,..."That is one thing we can legally do'."
Councilwoman Trujillo We can't vote without a quorum."
Councilman Taylor,..."Legally, we can do that though."
City Attorney Dilkes...... Consentative by.both members that date and
time?."
Councilwoman Trujillo,..."B p.m. Thursday."
City Attorney'Dilkes,..."Both members say aye'."
Councilwoman Trujillo,.:."Now, wait, O.K. we should clarify now that
bringing on the last Ordinance that was being read."
'C'i'ty Attorney'D'i-lkes,..."Yes, Government Code Section 54955 says and
I quote,,'Less than a quorum may adjourn from time to time."
SCM - 1/17/78
Page 22
•q
Councilman Taylor,,.,.."To continue the business Roberta."
City At't'orney. Dilkes,....."It's now less than-a quorum. Adjournment
proceedings are-'that you adjourn to a specific time and 'place. You
may adjourn a regular and adjourned regular or a special or adjourned
special meeting to a time and place 'specified by the 'order of
adjournment. Less than a majority of this council may adjourn this
meeting to a time and place of your joint choosing. And you may do
so either by record vote or you may do so simply by consent order
between you.
Councilman Taylor Is that all right Roberts?"
Councilwoman Trujillo 8 o'clock.'Thursday."
City Attorney Dilkes,..."Is there objection to that date?"
Councilwoman Trujillo,...."No, I would prefer 7 o'clock."
City Attorney Dilkes,..."No objection to that Councilman Taylor."
Councilman Taylor What, for 7,o'clock?" 7 o'clock is fine."ni;
then.
Councilman Taylor Adjourn then."
Respectfully submitted:
City Cler o the C' y of Rosemead
APPROVE
SCM - 1/17/78
Page 23