Loading...
CC - 07-27-76MINUTES OF THE ROSEMEAD CITY COUNCIL ROSEMEAD, CALIFORNIA JULY 27, 1976 CALL TO ORDER - 8:00 p.m. A Regular Meeting of the Rosemead City Council was held„in,the Council Chambers of the Rosemead_City Hall,-8838 E., Valley 'Blvd „ Rosemead, California and called to-order by Mayor Trujillo. The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Mayor pro tem Taylor The Invocation was delivered by Reverend Bob Andersen of the Hellman.Ave. Baptist Church ROLL CALL: Present: Cichy, Imperial, Taylor, Trujillo Absent: Hunter (excused) Ex officio: Burbank, Dickey, Dilkes, Foutz, Fleischman, Tripepi, Young APPROVAL OF MINUTES: JULY 13, 1976 - REGULAR MEETING Councilman Cichy asked that the minutes be corrected to show Council approval of the City Manager's attendance at the IC14A Conference. - Page 6 It was moved by Councilman Cichy, second by Councilman Imperial to approve the minutes of July 13, 1976 as printed. Roll Call Vote as follows: AYES: Cichy, Imperial, Trujillo NOES: None ABSENT: Hunter (excused) ABSTAIN: Taylor (absent at that meeting) Councilman Taylor asked that the minutes of July 6, 1976 shown that Mr. Arturo Sandoval was in attendance.,No Objections to correction 1. PUBLIC, HEARINGS: A. INTENTION TO SELL PARCEL OF LAND AT 9206 GLENDON WAY Council confirmed the intention to dispost of this excess property. Mayor Trujillo requested anyone wishing to address the Council to please stand and be sworn. There were none. The Public Hearing opened at 8:10 p.m. No one responded and it closed immediately.. Council Approved the Saleof this property located at 9206 Glendon Way and as adopted by Resolution 76-36, the property shall be offered for sale on or after September 13, 1976. 2. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE: A. 14ARGARET BEDKE, 4718 Fendyke Ave., Rosemead addressed the Council regarding the license fee for solicitation by the Rosemead Panthers Band. Mr. Tripepi advised Ms. Bedke that local non-profit organizations can apply for a permit at the cost of $2.00... B. GAYLAIRD CHRISTOPHER, 3543 N. Bartlett Ave., Rosemead addressed the Council and presented a copy of the book outlining research in Rosemead by the "Rosearch Team". Title of Book: La Esperanza 3. LEGISLATIVE: A. ORDINANCE 418. REVISING THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ZONE. Attorney Dilkes asked that the Council approve the Negative Declaration dated May 3, 1976... So Ordered - No Objections.. Page Two Council Minutes July 27, 1976 • Attorney Dilkes read Ordinance 418 by,title. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF,ROSEMEAD REVISING THE P-D PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ZONE AND DELETING PART MOF THE ROSEMEAD MUNICIPAL CODE AND SUBSTITUTING A NE14 PART XX - P.-D ZONE THEREFOR It was moved by Councilman Cichy, second by Councilman Imperial to waive further reading and Introduce 'Ordinance 418, After discussion of sections 9120.3 and 9120.13 Councilman Cichy withdrew his motion with consent of the second= and this item was deferred`to the 'next regular meeting. B. ORDINANCE 419. CHANGING ZONE FROM C-1 TO R-3 (Zone Case 76-77) Attorney Dilkes asked that Council consider approval of the Negative Declaration dated May 17, 1976. So Ordered..:No Objections..' " Attorney Dilkes read Ordinance 419 by title. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD CHANGING THE ZONE FROM-:C-1 TO.R-3 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8907 E. MISSION DRIVE AND AMENDING THE ROSEMEAD MUNICIPAL CODE (ZONE CHANGE CASE NO. 76-77) It was moved by Councilman Cichy, second by Mayor Trujillo to waive further reading and Introduce Ordinance 419. Roll Call Vote as follows: AYES: Cichy, Imperial, Taylor, Trujillo NOES: None ABSENT: Hunter (excused) 4. CONSE14T CALENDAR: Item CC-D (6), was removed for discussion... CC-A RESOLUTION 76-38. CLAIMS AND DEMANDS 1975-76 Recomm: Waive Reading and Adopt CC-B RESOLUTION 76-39. CLAIMS AND DEMANDS 1976-77 Recomm: Waive Reading and Adopt CC-C NOTIFICATION OF EXTENSION OF HEARING FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 31238 Recomm: Approve Extension to August 10, 1976 CC-D TRAFFIC C01II3ISSION RECOMMENDATIONS Recomm: Approve Recommendations and Authorize Expenditures 1) Walnut Grove Avenue North of Norwood Place - Red Curb 2) Valley Blvd. between Rosemead Blvd. & Ivar - Time Limit Parking Modification 3) Sullivan Avenue & Garvey Avenue - Red Curb 4) Whitmore Street & Heglis Ave. - Additional Regulations 5) Walnut Grove Ave. & Scott.St. - Red Curb CC-E HUMAN RESOURCES COMMISSION/OUTSTANDING CITIZEN SELECTION Recomm: Accept Selection Criteria As Outlined..7/22/76 CC-F ACCEPTANCE OF GARVALIA/JACKSON IMPROVEMENT PROJECT Recomm: Accept Project & Authorize Payment to Contractor CC-G SET PUBLIC NEARING/CONFIRMATION OF ASSESSMENTS/GARVALIA & JACKSON IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS Recomm: Set Public Hearing for August 24, 1976 It was moved:by Mayor pro tem Taylor, second by Councilman Imperial to concur in the recommendations on the Consent Calendar. Roll Call Vote as follows: AYES. Cichy, Imperial, Taylor, Trujillo NOES: None ABSENT:: Hunter (excused) Page Three Council Minutes July 27, 1976 CONSIDERATION OF ITEM REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR CC-D TRAFFIC C011MISSION RECOMMENDATIONS>.c Recomm: ,Approve Recommendations and.Authotize"Expenditures 6) Loftus, East of Temple City Blvd. -'Truck Traffic Sign Mayor pro tem Taylor requested that this item be transcribed in the minutes verbatim.. Verbatim questioned but no objections... Mayor: Councilman Ta for Taylor: Perhaps Mr. Envall'would care to read that one Envall: Madame Mayor and Gentlemen of the City Council. At the Traffic Commission Meeting of July 1, 1976, Traffic Engineer Envall brought the Commission's attention to„the unnecessary truck traffic on the corner of Loftus east of Temple City Boulevard. At that.point,,there is split jurisdiction between the City of E1 Monte and the City of.Rosemead...Temple City Blvd. is a designated truck route in the City. Baldwin Ave. is a designated truck route in the City of E1 Monte. Loftus Aves. between the two 'cities are not a designated truck route. So the recommendation - we do.not have it posted - we have truck routes posted for north-bound in the City on Temple City Blvd. with the truck route signs. And El Monte has the truck route sign for south-bound. So, in addition to that truck route sign it was recommended that we place a three ton weight limitation on Loftus Ave. That would be on our side and on the City of-El Monte::-They are, of course,''a'coordination type thing. Taylor: Madame Mayor, the memorandum or the request states none of this information. It just simply states unnecessary truck traffic. And that is my reason for asking the question - What's determined as unnecessary and - correct me if I am wrong - but Baldwin is a fairly heavily traveled street running all the way from the mountains through Arcadia, Temple City, - right down to the freeway. And when the truck traffic reaches the freeway, what we are proposing - it can only go eastbound. Unless it turns onto Loftus..I don't see the logic in it. Temple City Blvd. is also a parallel street to Baldwin running up to - above Temple City just into what might be Pasadena - I'm not sure where.. My question is this: Loftus is a fully improved street with four lanes plus two for parking? What is the logic of stopping the trucks coming down Baldwin from making a right turn on such fully improved streets? Envall: The logic behind that is that we try to keep trucks on major arteries. Such as Valley Blvd. - Garvey - streets of this nature. So, any trucks traveling south wishing to go to - inbound or into L.A., can use Valley to Temple City Blvd. and south, and I think they are directed in that respect. In the City of El Monte.. Taylor: Then the same would apply for traffic coming off at Temple City Blvd. The traffic is to be maintained on Temple City rather than going across Loftus to Baldwin? Envall: Correct Taylor: And in turn, the Flair Park is a highly industrial area. Any truck traffic - I can't give you the number of buildings that are over there. The only access they have to that area on westbound San Bernardino is to get off at Temple City Blvd. and loop around to Loftus under the Freeway - or they can continue onto Rosemead Blvd. , make the complete cloverleaf loop and come back around to Flair Drive or else go south on Rosemead. This particular street here - I still don't understand the logic that is preventing those trucks from using it. Envall: Well, as I say, this is split jurisdiction - and this was - oh a number of years ago when this was established by both cities as not a truck route. At that point and time there were a lot of complaints - I believe mostly from the City of E1 Monte There is a lot of apartments and residential ? there - and the street is heavy enough to carry it - let me put it this way. But it was a request by the City of El Monte and the City of Rosemead concurred at that point and time. Imperial: Being there is some question on this - I notice we have in the audience Commissioner Magallanes from the Traffic Commission. I would like some input from him on why the Traffic Commission felt that this should be - would you please Mr. Magallanes. Page Four Council Minutes July 27, 1976 • Mayor Would you identify yourself for the record.. Magallance: _Yes, Frank Magallanes, 3014 IT. Earle, Rosemead. Well the Commissioners and myself felt that since the - El Monte and Rosemead had made an agreement So we figured, why change it.. And this is,a regular truck route.. And besides the explanations of our Traffic Engineer - We felt that it was the best way.to.:handle that. Taylor: There are two points then that I would like to clarify then Madame Mayor - The City of E1 Monte asked or requested that the City reconfirm this agreement? Mr. Envall mentioned that we were asked by the City of E1 Monte.. Envall: No, the only thing that came up recently has been a police problem. Only the trucks with bill of ladings are legal on Loftus Drive. Those that are going to Flair Park are legal because that is the shortest route from a truck route to a truck route. So we don't discriminate against - if they have a bill of lading from Flair Park, they can use it.. But it is the other trucks that do not have to use it - that do not have a bill of lading that can use either Baldwin or Temple City Blvd. So that was the - the only thing was to reemphasize that it is not a truck route by the placement, of,additional restrictions."' And itl4as a police problem so this was thought by both departments-would probably satisfy the complaint. Taylor: I have no other questions, Madame Mayor, with the exception that I would like this conversation.in the minutes verbatim with regards.to truck circulation and traffic. Cichy: Question for Tor. Envall...Since the concept of this truck route came about with regards to E1 Monte - has there been any major changes in the environment with regards to the streets, the location, the housing that is there at this time? Envall:. No, actually this was brought about primarily because of the apartment development on the south side of E1 Monte. Of course, the City has added five or six new R-Is I believe on the south side which would add to the problem rather than deter from. Cichy: But the necessity for having this restriction is still there - even more so than at the time it was agreed to. Envall: I would. ? (seemed to be in agreement).. Discussion regarding verbatim minutes followed... It was moved by Councilman Cichy, second by Mayor Trujillo to approve the recommendation of the Traffic Commission to place an additional sign on the corner of Loftus, east of Temple City Blvd. for a three ton weight limitation on Loftus. Roll Call Vote as follows: AYES: Cichy, Imperial, Taylor, Trujillo NOES: None ABSENT: Hunter (excused) 5. AWARD OF ANNUAL TREE TRIMMING CONTRACT Director of Recreation & Parks Burbank referred to his memo dated July 26, 1976 which requests that the City Council waive the irregularities in the bidding, award the contract to Callahan Tree Service for the amount of $1,147.50, and authorize the Mayor to execute the Contract. Bids as follow: Callahan Tree Trimming $1,191.00 (adjusted to $1,147.50) Kennedy Landscaping $1,492.00 California Tree Service $1,621.00 It was moved by Councilman Taylor, second by Councilman Imperial to approve the foregoing recommendation. Roll Call vote as follows AYES: Cichy, Imperial, Taylor, Trujillo NOES: None ABSENT: Hunter (excused) Page Five Council Minutes July 27, 1976 6. DISCUSSION - CITY CHARTER • Mayor pro tem Taylor requested with no formal objection from the Council that this item be placed in the minutes verbatim'. 14ayor: Councilman Taylor could you begin'-that discussion-. ° • " Taylor: Madame Mayor - there was a couple of items that I needed clarified before the meeting - we had discussion - the City Attorney, I believe, gave us the approval or the O.K.,that we could adopt two resolutions tonight. One would be the- resolution. authorizing.the..Council to prepare. a charter, ;And the other would be a resolution authorizing'the.Councll'to'wiite an argument for the Charter e6 ;bb put ' on the ballot aid_the City Clerk may - also at'whatever.future time''allow an, argument against'a Charter. But the two critical items that I feel that we should at least start on now 1s at least the resolutions to start moving on the proposal of the charter. Mayor: As I understand it, the initial resolution that we would be dealing with would only be to appoint certain.members from the Council to prepare a Charter and bring it to the Council for review'.'. Attny Dilkes That.is correct. The Council can,essentially do.that either of two ways. You can appoint some of your own members-to confer with the City Attorney.. and City Manager and prepare the Charter= or 'you 'can essentially, I suppose, delegate it to.the.-City Attorney and City-Manager-to come in- with- a -Charter recommendation.' Whichever suits..you Taylor: As far as delegating it to any individual members, I don't have any preference on it In talking with the City Attorney - I would like open participation in the sense that for the next couple of weeks any Council Member or staff could go ahead and direct a question or proposal to the City Attorney. Primarily, in the past couple of meetings we have had a copy of the Temple City Charter - and the only reason that I refer to that is that it is a fairly simple Charter in the sense that there is only three pages of it - but yet it is a vehicle required. There has to be some form of a Charter. And I am not that concerned whether we have all of it in there, half of it, a quarter of it or more - that is why I feel it should be an open participation for all Council Members. And the fact that it is fully prepared and of such short type that there could be a quick review of it and at the next meeting things could be added or deleted. Cichy: Because a charter is a major reorganization of a city government, it would seem - and I am not quite sure - and perhaps the City Attorney could shed some light on this that we should probably start with the concept that there might possibly be a reorganization, go to public hearings to see if , in fact, there is enough support .for a reorganization, and then sit down at study sessions and look at the means that you want to use and the type of things that you might want to include in a charter. I'm not so sure there is enough support to go ahead and start working on a charter. Is there any necessity, Mr. Dilkes, for making a resolution that the City Council start working on one or directing staff to start working on one without first studying the issue? Attny. Dilkes: There is no reason that staff has to be directed to come in with anything prior to the Council's act. The only difficulty is - and I am now expressing my own opinion as a lawyer - A charter is something we must live with after it is adopted. It is essentially unamendable except by vote of the people and I think it would be a mistake to adopt any particular charter without having at least a study session to discuss its provisions and how they would be administratively implemented. Mayor Trujillo: To clarify a point that Councilman Cichy made..If I understand what you just said, Council can initiate a charter for the City. Attny. Dilkes: That is correct. There are two Mayor Trujillo: It doesn't have to be the public hearing route - because I know in some cities what they do is they hold public hearings and the Council will name certain people to a committee to come forth to the Council with a recommendation. .Page Six Council Minutes July 27, 1976 Attny pilkes: There are two methods of establishing a charter. The first is by petition of the people who'can come to a City Council and the„City Council is'essentially under direction'fiom the people to commence hearings on the chatter. `The second is essentially by Council initiation and I cannot off the top of my head recall whether public hearings are required in advance - although it seems unlikely that, they would.not be. I will be happy to make ,a specific check of that.-. Imperial: I am a little bit in the dark on this situation. In all probability this whole thing transpired prior to my becoming a City Councilman. I don't recall at any one time or another requesting any information on a charter - let alone wanting one. I am trying to determine at this point how we'came to point where we are trying to draw up a charter. I have versed no interest in this at all - period. Until I received this write-up on it in my packet. I just wondered No. 1 - Who thinks we need a charter.. Why they think we need a charter..where we would benefit by a charter.. and maybe I can.draw some conclusions from there. At this point when we talk charter my teeth sort of chatter, because I'm thinking about loosing control, a little bit with a Charter vs. General Law City. Now I would like to know who's idea it is - whether it is Council or not - what we expect to gain from this and so forth before we go through one heck of a lot of work. Mayor Trujillo: yes,, Councilman Imperial - This is an item ,which. has:been discussed on and off over the past year. And you..are correct,. it was prior to, your, being. elected:,. , It has been an item where what we'did initially was we requested sample charters from ; wt various cities = because there aie'some things'tfiat can be put into a charter that are easier done that way than through'the'General Law System. However, Councilman Taylor perhaps you can give Councilman Imperial some background on the reasoning for a charter. Taylor: First off, the very night that Mr. Imeprial was elected or was on this Council - the following meeting, I requested, and it is in the minutes, that the new Council Members be given all the information on Charter Cities. I know the information was presented to them. This was back in March - here it is July now - July 22nd, a full copy again was given to the Council for review. There has been at least three occasions where discussion could have been brought about. The information has quite a bit as far as the pros and cons for a charter. There are 7 - 8 - 9 items that say what the advantages are for a charter and 2 or 3 that have any bearin~ as to the disadvantages - such as the rigidity..and !it. Imperial is correct, we are locked into a charter in the sense that only the people can change it and this is one of the reasons that I had proposed - or hoped that this Council would entertain a Charter in the sense that it does protect the people and only'the people can change it. After 3 1/2 years of some of the arbitrary, discretionary decisions that were made and people could do nothing about it. And I would like to invite Mr. Imperial to review the information that he has and should have before him tonight - and it fully lists the advantages. And March 6th, the information was offered to Mr. Imperial. Imperial: With due respect to Councilman Taylor, I consider myself invited. But what Councilman Taylor might consider an advantage might be a disadvantage to me. I would like to have him spell out specifics on the advantages and disadvantages then maybe I can look at this a little clearer. Now he did mention the fact that Councilmen - that I was given this information my first meeting..Maybe I was too excited at the time to notice it, being a new Councilman. I've been given information on many things and have requested information on many things - but that doesn't mean I want to buy it. Taylor: Or read it? Imperial: I've read everything that I received, Councilman Taylor, and If I have had any questions, prior to a City Council Meeting, I've also contacted the staff and that is the reason we pay them - I wish everyone would do the same. Hayor: Councilman Taylor - could you - rather than going into all the details ..the League analysis of the pros and cons of a charter - could you just give Council your own feelings as to why you think a charter would be of benefit to the City of Rosemead. Taylor: O.K., on page 7 , If Mr. Imperial has his material, he may read the major advantages and disadvantages..and there are 7 listed..and the headlines are: there are greater local authority for a charter city;2) Greater flexibility in the field of taxation; 3) Authority to establish debt and tax limits;4) Greater flexibility in financial administration; 5) Authority to determine organization; 6) Public review; 7) More secure local authority... The advantages for a General Law City: 1) A tendency toward undue limitations of charter - well that is nebulous in the sense that you put a charter in so you could have limitations. 2) Amendments are time consuming and costly.. A charter comes once in a City..Amendments are once or twice in five-or ten years.. Page•Seven • Council Minutes' duly 27, 1976 Co. Taylor contd.. _It has to be pretty serious. But there is this statement - time consuming .and costly..There is a couple of other items here 3) The broad construction of General Law meets different changing local needs..I don't have it,in this particular folder but it talks about - we have no rights guaranteed under a General Law where as a Charter does guarantee the rights of the citizens of a community. And as far as the specific concerns that I have, it has to do for one, that the City Council and it would be in the Charter - that the City Council shall be the Redevelopment Agency. In checking with Mr. Dilkes, he did not say that there was anything wrong with this as far a illegal. It is legal because the Redevelopment Law does say that we maybe the Agency.. But it would be locked in - and you yourself know, Mr. Imperial and Mr. Cichy were not involved at that time - you know how we were removed from the Agency after the people elected us for that very job. And I don't think thats fair that that type of thing can happen when the people vote their will..That is one of the major things.. The other item is that in a Charter, it states here that the advantages of a Charter City have more control over the initiative and the referendem process. There are three copies of this particular circular out - and this is one that fails to have the information that states - - here it is..A Charter is very specific in what is a municipal affair and what is a matter of state-wide concern. Now there are ways. in the Redevelopment Law where a community can participate if they are a charter city. But a General Law City is locked in by what the General Law says and we can't do much about it. But under Municipal Affairs - item 5 states that one of the advantages is the initiative and referendum process. I feel that there is something in there that should be in the Charter for the citizens of Rosemead and the electorate. Going over to state-wide concerns they list annexations as state-wide, labor relations, workman's comp., traffic regulations, alcoholic beverage taxation, water distribution systems, inter-municipal water - but that is the only ? is letting the people have a say on what has been done and you know that there has been quite an abuse of that power. Mayor: Yes - and in addition to that Councilman Taylor, I might add that in a charter you can make provisions - such as dividing the City into districts, where at all times you have representation from all areas of the city - You can also make provisions for electing a Mayor at large..There are a number of provisions that you can make.. In a Charter granted the fact that if there is an amendment or if people want something changed in a charter, it goes through the referendum process ...But I don't know if this has answered any of your questions or not.. Imperial: Madame Mayor, you have answered some points for me. To me, there might be some good points - there might be some bad points, but..over all, it is generally not acceptable to me.. I think we are referencing the past several times during this conversation. We have had some problems in this City so far as redevelopment is concerned in the past but I believe that these things have changed somewhat in perspective. Now what I would like to do at this point is I would like to ask our City Manager how he feels this redevelopment law has changed, what he feels that the good points and the bad points are; in so far as a Charter City is concerned and again vs. a General Law. Mayor: Councilman Imperial I think that is kind of an unfair question for our City Manager because he has to go with the direction of the Council - but Frank if you want to respond to that.. Tripepi: Maybe it is not really unfair. Lets direct ourselves to the first part of the question - I think which deals with redevelopment..I can answer it briefly by directly referring to Councilman Taylor's concern . about the Redevelopment Agency and the fact that right after he was elected to the City Council - the City Council..the Majority of the City Council then removed itself as the body of the Redevelopment Agency and assigned it to another five individuals. If that is the only concern with which we are dealing on... the redevelopment issue, then with all honesty and fairness to Councilman Imperial I don't know if Montoya's legislation--proposed legislation and that that has passed to become effective will address itself to that issue. I don't think it does. However, with respect to new bonds being floated, the establishment of any new Project Areas, I would assume the establishment of another agency - that would all be, in my opinion, taken care of under Montoya's new amendments to the Redevelopment Act- and at that point I really think it doesn't matter who the Agency is, they will be bound by State Law to comply with certain conditions - One of those conditions I think which Councilman Taylor is primarily concerned is that. it would have to go to many public hearings, and a vote of the people - and at that time Redevelopment would be a refererdable issue where it has not been in the past. That is, I guess the first part of the question.. Page Eight, Council t4inutea July 27, 1976 City Manager Tripepi contd... The next_part,;,;in,relationship to Charter Cities. There are as you say advantages and disadvantages: In relationship to where management stands, procedurally, it`would be more cumbersome, I do believe, to change a charter than it would-to 'operate-under the provisions of the general laws of the State of California. I might add that the advantages that we'd gain operationally or, I guess a good example would be - well, SB 90 has kind of taken that also except the ceiling as .far.as lighting district - but the City Council.Council could..adopt a utility users tax if they so desired. General Law Cities in the State..,are,prohibited from doing so. That is one oflthe,major revenue raisers or revenue producers'that would be available to a Charter City. The other concern that I have would be the matter of cost, to amend a charter. I realize that there have been some statements made this evening that indicate that you live with a charter and perhaps it is amended every three years - maybe once every two years - or perhaps even five years. But if I made a mistake - and on this one I am going to have to turn to the City Attorney, as I did on the 1st part of my first answer; if.citizens can qualify a petition; and direct it to the Council requesting any change whatsoever in the charter - I de believe at that point and time the Council would direct a special election if there is not a municipal election coming up. Whereas, under the provisions of the General Law, at that point and time it would not bereferendable because the City would be bound by the provisions of the State and that is where the changes would have to come from. And so, I would have to ask Ed if that is correct - butI think the charter could be amended... Attny Dilkes: Let me correct one thing..As I presently understand it, the Redevelopment Legislation currently being considered in Sacramento that is being referred to as the Montoya package 'is not yet enacted. My understanding is that it has passed the Assembly and has not passed the Senate. Whether it will:or will not be bought, I don't know. There is no question but that State Law would essentially take priority in the field of Redevelopment. If the Council chose to adopt a Charter which provided that the City Council must be the Agency Board - and in my opinion that would be a premissable exercise of municipal affairs powers - and this Council would have the capacity to draft a charter which did that. But, as I think Frank pointed out, what the charter does, it can also undo. And, I am not clear in my own mind - I really haven't thought that one all the way through. I am not really sure whether that provides any more substantial protection or not. It probably does. Taylor: Under Section 33204 of the Redevelopment Law, it simply states, A Charter City may enact its own procedural ordinance and exercise the powers granted by this part. What is a procedural ordinance Mr. Dilkes? Dilkes: A procedural ordinance would be an ordinance of the type that exists in the City of Los Angeles. The ordinance activating the Redevelopment Agency Board also established a series of procedures which that Board had to govern itself by. There is no question in my mind that it would be a permissible act for this City Council - This City to include a provision in its Charter making the Council the Board. And that would essentially be a charter provision which would in effect take precedence over the procedural ordinance. Taylor: But the fact that it is stated in the Redevelopment Law that the Agency may be the Council - the charter would not be in conflict with state law thereby and the fact that a procedural ordinance requires - or we are allowed to use a procedural ordinance..we could establish the procedure to be followed in the adoption of a redevelopment plan. Is that not correct? Dilkes: That is absolutely correct. Taylor: And in that procedure there could be possibly - this is where there has to be clarification on the initiative and referendum - there could be voter participation or electorate. There are cases - and I will give you one that we have right here in Rosemead..no where in the Redevelopment Law does it state that there can be a dissolution of a Project Area. It is not mentioned in there at all really - and yet, Mr. Watson, our previous City Attorney - the opinion that he gave us (-and I have it right here among all these papers)..since it was not in conflict with the redevelopment law, we were entitled to do it. The procedure in so doing was not governed by the redevelopment law - it was by the procedure that was more or less recommended - or in the election code - not necessarily in the election code requiring a public hearing for safety purposes you might say - let the public participate. But the procedure that could be established in the adoption of a plan or a project area - I feel that the people could participate more. Page Nine Council Minutes July 27, 1976.. Charter Discussion contd. Taylor: Another interesting point of information - that was not in the information but I think Mr. Imperial should read was the minutes of the Agency and Council for the adoption of Project Area No. 2..The number of I:eople that spoke that night in opposition to it and it made no difference - the public hearing was a farce-the law said that you had to have it so they had it. But read those minutes and see what happened. Go back to Project 1 and read those minutes where the opposition was something like 9 to 1. 88 requests against the project and I believe 9 or 11 for it. And it took 11 minutes for the Council or the Agency to overrule those people and adopt the project. These are the kinds of things that I want to project or let the people protect themselves with. Mayor: We have been going over the pros and cons of the Charter and really what we wanted to deal with tonight was: a) Should the Council appoint a committee composed of its own members to present a tentative charter to the Council for review in study session or something. And I think really that until we have that type of document before us we really can't make a decision as to whether it is something we even want to present to our voters. Imperial: I listened to what Councilman Taylor said. I realize what happened in this community in so far as redevelopment and events leading up to it. I would like to take the position at this time that I would like to see what Assemblyman Montoya's Bill in actuality does say. Whether it covers this area. If not - then I think that this City Council could also think in terms of protecting that citizen out there with what might be an Ordinance, a Resolution - whatever the case might be - but not having to go into adoption.of a charter_;city unless we can prove that it is completely beneficial to this City. Taylor: May I ask Mr. Imperial if he read the legislative bulletin of July the 19th, 1976 on Montoya's Bills? Mayor: This is from the League. Imperial: Yes,.Councilman Taylor. Taylor: Can you tell me what was in those three bills as far as the stand to be taken on it? Imperial: I can't seem to recall all of it at this point - but I seem to recall that there did have to be a vote of the people for a redevelopment project - is that correct? Mayor Trujillo: It does deal with the item of referendum. Mr. Dilkes perhaps you..... Imperial: That is my point of contention - I would like to see exactly what comes from out of that State Assembly and the Senate before we react or push a button or whatever you want to call it Councilman Taylor. Taylor: There is about four pages of what is happening to those bills in the Assembly and the Senate. And if I may state what is being proposed-As of July 19th the recommendation is to oppose the remainder of Montoya's Redevelopment package.. The people don't understand - not through their own fault so to speak - that we have what is-a legislative arm of municipal government which is the League of California Cities. We're all aware - we get these notices every week - on direction what to do. Oppose Montoya's bills - January 6th of this year - Oppose Montoya's bill. Right in this information tonight we have the League has been advising us on April the 1st, April the 13th, April the 23rd, April 29th, May the 7th, May 14th, May 21 - Oppose unless amended. It has been going on for a couple of years and they have amended everything out of it where the people have anything to say. So again, the information is in this - in the hands of this Council to read. Mayor: O.K. Thank you Councilman Taylor. Imperial: I've looked at this and I realize that there is an opposition by the League of California Cities to Assemblyman Montoya's bills - I am opposed to it myself in many aspects. And one of them is their low income housing, project he is talking about - he can call it Senior Citizen Help or whatever he wants to but I feel like I can read into it too. But that is neither here nor there. I still did ask - or still did suggest that we wait until we find out exactly what comes out of that State Senatd. Page Ten Council Minutes July 27, 1976 Taylor: That is after the deadline for getting it on the November ballot. Mayor: It " 11 " So then it is killed again until - I believe that there is a requirement of so many days after an election - and then to put it to a vote of the people - correct me if I am wrong - but that would cost us $10,000 approximately for a special election - is that approximately correct? Young: Probably not that much if we would consolidate - but it does run a minimum of $6,000 Mayor: Alright - can I ask a question.. Are there school board elections coming up next year in March or April. Young: The State Code allows only three - two election dates in the odd numbered years and three in the even numbered years-.s6 what we do is to gear towards those election dates and the school board tries to gear towards ours. Of 77 Mayor: Is there a School Board, Election coming up then? „ Young: 'Not Shat I am aware.,of... Mayor: I thought there was - the Garvey School District or something. Councilman Taylor- this is an item you brought up - do you have a motion that you would like to make? Taylor: Yes Madame Mayor..You have a resolution before you - I would like it on the record the actions that were taken.by ;this Council..I would propose a resolution that the City Council be authorized to prepare a Charter for the electorate of the City of Rosemead - that they alone would have the right to accept or deny or refuse. Mayor: Alright - That would be Resolution No. ? Young: 76-40... Mayor: Allright - and there would have to be a correction? That would be in the paragraph after the section where it names the Council Members ...You would have in accordance with Division 4, Chapter 3, Article 4 of'ihe Elections Code... Is there a second to that motion? If not, I will second it for purposes of discussion.As there any further discussion? Cichy: A Charter seems to be a very simplistic idea with regards to how to run a City Government - and I think many ambitious City Governments take it on because they want to provide for a different tax base..or they think they need their own police department..fire department.. - They want to control things and have a little more power over each of these inidividual units and sometimes they disguise this desire by saying - well everybody needs to vote on everything.. Well if that is the case, then you don't need a City Council - we will just put everything up to a vote of the people every time. In the last four years major changes have been made in the City Government. An entire new Council was reelected with the exception of one person and he was reelected after being defeated on the same major issue before and he was reelected because he made statements that he would never vote for another redevelopment project. I don't see where the specific point being to restrict the right of voting or to help people vote on projects within a charter is a major issue for adoption of a charter. Out of three (let me finish) Out of three Hundred and Seventy some Cities in the State of California, approximately twenty-eight are charter cities. Out of those charter cities - all of those.charter cities seem to have redevelopment projects.. Out of those major cities..which are San Diego, Long Beach, Los Angeles, San Francisco, San Jose..those cities who all have charters have major problems. They have financial problems, they have employment problems, they have labor problems..we don't have those problems. I think we are doing just fine the way we are - and until I receive some substantiation from the public through a public hearing through the adoption or presentation by members of the Council of a legitimate charter-for legitimate reasons for having it.. for discussion and arguments out in the open by the entire Council, I would not be in favor of a Charter. Po..e Fl e..o.. ~ ~ • Council Minutes July. 27, 1976 Taylor: Mr. Cichy was elected.to this, Council a;'year and a"quarter ago.. 15 or 16 months ago.. This has been up for the past year and on December 23 - item 115 had to do with the same thing before us tonight - the same information-Temple City Charter-Here is a note ..memorandum from "Mr. Tripepi.. Attached for Council's review and utilization are those materials utilized by the City of Temple City for adoption of its charter. I would like to point out that our City Attorney's will have a resolution for your consideration at the Tuesday night meeting ( this was in December). Should the Council wish to have this item placed before the citizens as a ballot measure, I would recommend that it be prepared for the November, 1976 election rather than our March Municipal,Election. So.. we are off almost another year of putting it...all of this time some input could have been given by any Council Member, but there has been no interest in it..to even pursue it..It could go on dragging out and the people will never have any firm resolution. Sure the Council has been changed. But it is teetering on a very narrow margin in all honesty of one vote. Imperial: I think the answer was just given by Councilman Taylor. In this whole year there has been no indication of any interest in this thing. That should say it right there. Cichy: If I was proposing a major project, and I wanted it brought forward and the Council to study it - and something as drastic as a charter change, I would be bringing it up before the Council every meeting.. I would presenting evidence to the rest of the Council.. I would be talking to them trying to get something done. This hasn't been done. I noted that the idea was brought up prior to my first election. And then it has been brought up twice since then. This is the third time it has been brought up. Other than having copies from a couple of other cities - no major push - no major information has been placed on it-That isn't the way you run government-You want something that is important shoved through you want it brought before the people - then do something about it-Nothing has been done on it. Taylor: The important thing brought before the people would be the choice of that charter presented or offered to them by the elected representatives that they could then decide whether it is good or bad. That is the whole idea. Get it out where they can see what it is all about and vote on it. Mayor Trujillo: Before I call for the question on this item because we have been discussing it at length - I would like to just add that my reason for supporting the resolution is just to get exactly what Councilman Cichy has said..Get something down on paper that this Council can review. We have been talking about a nebulous area and none of us can get a handle on it. Because we have seen sample charters from other cities and we have some feelings either for or against charters. But I think until we develope something that we can study we cannot even make that basic decision as to whether it should be brought before the electorate. So I will call for the question - would you vote please... Roll Call Vote as Follows: AYES: Taylor, Trujillo NOES: Cichy, Imperial ABSENT: Hunter (excused) Mayor: No Action... The Meeting Recessed at 9:25 p.m 7. APPOINTMENTS: A. BOYS' CLUB BOARD OF DIRECTORS The Meeting Reconvened at 9:35 p.m. There being no objections, Mayor Roberta Trujillo and Councilman Jay Imperial were appointed to the Boys' Club Board of Directors. B. TRAFFIC COMMISSIONER (to fulfill term of Joe Alexander to October, 1977).. NOMINATIONS AS FOLLOW: Councilman Imperial Mr. Ken Reeves Mayor Trujillo Mr. Bill Davila Councilman Taylor Mr. Sam Morales Page. Twelve Council Minutes 7/27/76 Mayor Trujillo asked.for Roll Call Vote as follows "REVISED" the vote in order of nomination.. (Mr. Ken Reeves) AYES: Cichy, Imperial' NOES: Taylor, Trujillo ABSENT: Hunter (excused) Roll Call Vote as follows: AYES: Trujillo NOES: Cichy, Imperial ABSENT: Hunter (excused) Roll Call Vote as follows: YAES: Taylor, Trujillo NOES: Cichy, Imperial ABSENT: Hunter (excused) (No Appointment) (Mr. Bill Davila) (No Appointment) (Mr. Sam Morales) (No Appointment) Mayor Trujillo asked that this Appointment be placed on the next regular agenda... 8. COMMUNICATI011S : A. WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE:" 1). MID-VALLEY MANPOWER CONSORTIUM BOARD OF DIRECTORS/PROGRAM PRESENTATION This letter from Sergio Cabanillas. Executive Director of the Mid-Valley Manpower Consortium requested that the City Council consider a formal presentation by the Consortium so that a decision could be made to the possibility of Rosemead joining the Manpower Consortium. "REVISED" Reference was made to the West-San Gabriel Valley Manpower Consortium and Council agreed to invite both Agencies to a meeting on August 3, 1976. Council also agreed to hold a budget study session on 8/3/76 following these presentations. B. MATTERS. FROM CITY OFFICIALS: Councilman Cichy: 1) Referred to the generator in the budget..suggesting that staff check the possibility of obtaining government surplus items.. 2) Suggested that recent outgoing Commissioners and Chamber President be presented formal City Commendation.. 3) Stated that although clean-up has been started in the redevelopment areas, 'there is still work to be done. 4) Asked for an update on locations in the City where stagnant water lays..referring specifically.to areas on Whitmore and Zapopan Park. 5) Suggested that the office furniture taken from the City Manager's office be replaced 6) Requested updated information relative to bicycle paths.. Mayor pro tem Taylor: 1) Requested an update on rightaof-way acquisition on San Gabriel Blvd. 2) Asked that the "Bingo" Ordinances of toehr cities be reviewed. 3) Asked if the possible annexation under current consideration should be budgeted.. 4) Asked for a copy of the updated Zoning Map indicated'on the last demands list. 15), Referred to Assemblyman Montoya's current legislation relative to redevelopment. 6) Asked about workman's compensation insurance coverage or'iack thereof for volunteers working in City Hall. Page Thirteen • Council Minutes July 27, 1976 7) Requested follow-up from the Sheriff's Department and the L.A.Police Department on an erroneous report. 8) Asked status of wading pool at Rosemead Park. Director of Parks & Recreation Burbank stated that the pool will be used but that there was a problem with the pump system. 9) Requested a Resolution be prepared which would ask the Board of Supervisors to direct the Assessor's office to report with their annual Assessed Valuation the taxes that are disbursed to redevelopment agencies. City Attorney: 1) Reported that the City's Conflict of Interest Code is due on or before October 10, 1976...and suggested that Council consider possibly in a study session who is to be covered in Rosemead. Mr. Dilkes stated that several models of the required code will be in the City Clerk's Office for Council perusal. City Clerk Young: 1) Referred to Off-Year Campaign Statements due in her office no later than July 31st. 2) Advised Council of a petition signed by 12 residents of Muscatel and Palm Creek Drive. It was consensus of Council that this requested annexation and the Landisview Lane annexation proposal be combined into one request to the Local Agency Formation Commission. Mayor Trujillo: i 1) Requested follow-up on study of "Adult Businesses".. City Attorney Dilkes replied that this item is currently before the Planning Commission. Mayor pro tem Taylor: 10) Referred to litigation pending on Higheliff Street. Attorney Dilkes requested an executive session to confer on this item. Meeting Adjourned to Executive Session at 10:05 p.m. Meeting Reconvened at 10:15 p.m. It was unanimous decision of Council to give the City Attorney authorization to negotiate on the problem in question.. Mayor Trujillo extended the Council's congratulations to City Clerk Young on her recent marriage... There being no objections.. Mayor Trujillo adjourned the meeting to Tuesday, August 3, 1976 at 6:30 p.m. in the Conference Room of City Hall. Meeting Adjourned at 10:17 p.m. YOR OF THE CITY OF OSE14E Z`~