1964/03/267651
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - Marcb 26, %964, %:O0.P.M ....
The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in adjourned regular
session.
PRESENT:
ABSENT:
PRESENT:
COUNCILMEN: Dutton, Chandler (entered the meeting 7:15 P.M.),
Schutte, Kreln and Coons.
COUNCILMEN: None.
CITY MANAGER: Keith A. Murdoch.
CITY ATTORNEY: 3oseph Geisler.
CITY CLERK: Dene M. Williams.
Mr. Harry Williams, Legal Counsel, Citizens Charter Study Committee.
The meeting was called to order by Mayor Coons.
MEET /HE CANDIDATES PROGRAm: City Attorney Joseph Geisler called attention to
a letter received from the Anaheim-Rio Vista Homeowners Association, advising
of arrangements made for a "Meet the Candidates" program, April 1,.1964~
to be broadcast through closed circuit television to all elementary schools
within the city. Mr. Geisler further reported that the Association requests
permission to use a facsimile of the Seal of the City of Anaheim as the
background for the program, and in his opinion~ use of the Seal facsimile
was a matter of policy, to be determined by the City Council.
It was determined by the City Council that the use of a facsimile
of the City of Anaheim Seal for this occasion would be appropriate.
PROPOSED CITY CHARTER: Mayor Coons asked if anyone wished to present to the City
Council any new or different information concerning the proposed Anaheim
City Charter. (There was no response from the audience.)
Councilman Schutte requested clarification of present General Laws
as they pertain to dismissal of members of the Library Board of Trustees by
the City Council.
Mr. Geisler advised that the State Law provides for nppointment
of Library Board members, and the length of their terms, however, there is
no expression in the present law to the effect that the appointing body
(City Council) has the right of removal; the Library Board differs in this
respect from the Planning Commission and the Park and Recreation Commission.
In answer to a question of Councilman Schutte's, Mr. Geisler further
advised that the tax rate for the City is established after consideration is
given to the budget proposed by the Library Board of Trustees, and it must
be a rate to meet said budget, not to exceed thirty cents per One Hundred
Dollars assessed valuation.
Discussion was held by %he City Council, and noted were statements
made by Mr. Gray, wherein it was expressed that some provision should be
established permitting the Library Board to continue the specialized~opera-
tion of the Library in an administrative capacity. Also noted was the fact
that therehave never been any administrative problems with the Library.
However, under the present law9 once an appointment is made, the positions
are beyond the possibility of removal or recall by %he people.
At the conclusion of the discussion, it was the consensus of
Council opinion that all boards and commissions should be appointed in an
advisory capacity. .
S~CTION 710 - NEPOTISM: Discussion was held concerning Section 710, and it
was the general consensus of Council opinion that the section as written
correctly expressed the Council's position.
Mro Murdoch reported that Personnel Procedure Rule No. 30 was
being amended accordingly, and in line with Council instructions of %he
meeting held March 24, 1964. ~
Councilman Schutte asked for Council expression regarding area
representation, and whether this should be made a part of the Charter.
7652
Qi%¥ ~11, ~paheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - March 26, 1964, 7:00
Discussion was held concerning the care taken in selecting the
Citizens' City Charter Committee, in order to obtain broad representation.
Also noted was the vote of the committee, recommending the Charter, as
drafted, to the City Council.
Mr. 3oshua White addressed the City Council, submitting a reso-
lution adopted by the Anaheim 3unior Chamber of Commerce, recommending
the following: ~
1. /he membership of the City Council be comprised of six
councilmen and a Mayor.
2. This membership to be comprised of Two councilmen-at-large,
Four District Councilmen, and a Mayor to be chosen by the
Electorate.
Mr. White reported that these recommendations have been reviewed
and considered by the Special Project Study Committee for approximately
one month, and the reasons for said recommendations were as follows:
1. District Council representation provides the citizen with an
identifiable representative in City Government.
2o /he existing councilmen-at-large system does not recognize
sectional or district differences and could deny certain
sections or districts representation.
3° The combination district and councilmen-at-large system avails
the individual citizen to alternatives to City Government.
4. Two additional councilmen will increase the efficiency of the
City Council as the City reaches the population anticipated in
1975.
Mr. White further advised that they admit such a system does not
presently exist in the State of California; however in their opinion this
system is workable, and a similar system is in effect in a city in the State
of Delaware.
Councilman Dutton asked Mr. White if he knew of any problems in
any certain section of the city, and if so, what were the problems.
Mr. White replied that there were no specific problems, that
perhaps the greatest problem was that of public apathy, which he felt a
system such as the one recommended would eliminate. He gave as an illustra-
tion the failure of the Library Bond issue, caused primarily by'public
apathy.
Councilman Chandler asked under what authority the elected Mayor
would acquire administrative powers.
Mr, White replied that certain administrative powers of the Mayor
would be provided in the City Charter.
The question was asked as to how district formation was proposed.
Would some be all industrial or all resic~ntial9 Would commercial be
divided equally between areas, or would d~strict boundaries gerrymander in
an effort to obtain equality in all districts?
Mr. White reported that he doubted if how specific districts
could be formed was analyzed by anyone, however if the Council considered
district representation, he felt certain the mechanics of districting could
be worked out; that not only should population be reflected, but area in
square miles should also be considered.
Mr. White thereupon asked if the Council had given serious con-
sideration to district representation.
Councilman Chandler replied that he personally had given a great
deal of thought to this proposal, and felt certain everyone on the Council
had considered it.
7653
Qi.~¥.Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - March 26, 1964, 7:00
~' MaYo{ Coons was of the opinion that this issue had been a part
of Council consideration for the past eight years that he has served on
the Council, and that the answer to Mr. White's question was,"¥es, the
Council has considered this many times." Mayor Coons further advised that
he has received telephone calls from opposite sections of the city, and
felt certain he had represented each in the same manner as he would, had
he been confined to one area or district.
Statements made by Councilman Chandler and Mayor Coons were
endorsed by Councilman Dutton, who questioned the abandonment of a highly
successful system in favor of one of an unknown quantity. Councilman
Chandler further advised that under the present system, the people now
have five councilmen to contact concerning their problems, instead of one.
Mr. White called attention to the tie vote of the Charter Com-
mittee concerning the two issues recommended by the Junior Chamber of
Commerce, and requested they be placed before the voters for final decision,
Councilman Schutte was of the opinion that the Charter would have
a better chance of carrying by adding the two proposals suggested.
Councilman Krein felt there was no reason to change the Charter
as recommended by the Committee; that if it became imperative later on, the
change could be made at that time.
SECTION 704 - CITY CLERK'S POWERS AND DUTIES: Attention was called to
Items (a) and (b), and it was determined that reference to "books" should
be changed to "records" in order to comply with the Charter, should records
be maintained on microfilm. ~
SECTION 504 - PRESIDING OFFICER: Discussion was held concerning the method
of electing a mayor, and to further clarify the method to be used, it was
determined that after the words, "shall elect", there be added "at o~en
meeting by roll call vote" one of its members as its presiding officer, etc,
Regarding interpretation of Council policies, the word "interpreting" was
ordered changed to "'communicating~'.
SECTION 502 - CONDENSATION: Mayor Coons referred to the present comPen-
sation of councilmen and mayor, advising that in his opinion, the present
salary schedule was completely ridiculous, as he and Councilman Schutte
were aware of the time required, acting as mayor, and all were awarefof the
time required performing the duties of councilman; and thereupon proposed
the salary be changed to "Four Hundred Dollars per month" for councilman,
and "Eight Hundred Dollars per month" for the councilman elected mayor. He
stated this would represent one-tenth of one per cent of the annual City
Budget, and requested the amounts be changed to this more realistic figure.
Mr. Williams reported that in all fairness to the Charter Com-
mittee, all agreed that the Council salary was much too low. .However, the
question bothering them was that every change placed in the Charter gathers
so many "No" votes; if an item was added that had been defeated at an electio~
it was the thinking of the Committee that the Charter's chances for success
would be less. Mr. Williams stated that if the Charter is successful, then
the issue could be placed directly to the people to vote upon; that unless
a Charter is obtained, there would never be an amendment. ~
Mr. White called attention to the fact that this issue was!one
noted in his "Dissenting Opinion", and requested the proposal as suggested
by him, wherein the City Council salary may be determined by Ordinance, be
considered. ~
It was the general opinion of the City Council that 'any Council
would hesitate to increase Council salary, and that this change at this
time would not materially affect the success of the proposed Charter.
Discussion was held concerning placing the measure on the forth-
coming June Primary ballot. ~
7654
Hall, ,Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUT£S - March 26, 1964, 7:,00 P,M,
Mr. George Strachan,. representing the Anaheim Chamber of Commerce,
advised that the Board of Directors have authorized him to direct a letter
to the City Council, requesting that the Charter issue not be placed on the
3une ballot, partly because of its chances of success at a primary election,
and partly to receive the Chamber of Commerce recommendations concerning
the salary of Councilmen and the Library Board situation.
Mr. Murdoch asked if the Chamber of Commerce had taken any action
on the possibility of recommending inclusion of school districting in the
proposed Charter because of pending legislation.
Mr. Strachan replied that this issue was discussed, however no
decision was reached~ as another meeting was scheduled to be held next Monday
night, Mr. Strachan advised that the committee was unaware that this might
be the final hearing before the City Council.
Mr. Don Roth was of the opinion that the proposed Charter should
be placed on the 3une ballot to stand on its own merits, as the cost would
be approximately Twenty-five Thousand Dollars to conduct a special election.
Mr. Williams was requested to comment on the proposed school
legislation.
\
Mr. Williams advised %hat presently, under the Constitution, the
School District boundaries can not be altered to be included in a Charter]
that this has not been possible since approximately 1956, and if included in
the Charter, would be totally ineffective and could nullify the Charter.
Further, the Unruh Bill (A.B. 46) has been changed, and if adopted, it would
not apply to those cities which have not had School District boundaries
co-extensive with city boundaries, as adopted by Charter.
Councilman Chandler asked Mr. Williams if the Charter permitted
the appointment of an administrative commission under the 3oint Powers Act,
such as with a School District, and the School District administering the
program.
Mr. Williams advised that a Charter was a'restriction of power,
and the Council would have any power that was not restricted, and under
the proposed Charter~ such a contract could be'entered into under the 3oint
Powers Act,
Amendments as proposed by the City Council were again reviewed, and
Mr. Geisler was of the opinion that a separate provision should be included
regarding the vote of the Council to the effect that, "Voice or visual vote
shall be made by the City Council on all items, roll call votes shall be
required on all ordinances and resolutions~ and upon the request of any
Councilman, roll call vote shall be made on any motion."
At the conclusion of the discussion, on motion by Councilman Krein,
seconded by Councilman Du%ton~ the proposed City Charter as presented by the
Citizens City Charter Study Committee and amended by the City Council~ was
approved and authorized to be submitted %o the vote of the people for final
decision.
Mayor Coons called for a roll call vote.
Roll Call:
AYES .. COUNC IL~EN..
NOES: COUNCI L~EN:
ABS F_NT: COUNCILMEN:
Dui%on, Chandler, Schutte, Krein and Coons.
None°
None.
Mayor Coons declared the MOTION CARRIED.
On motion by Councilman Krein~ seconded by Councilman Dutton, the
City Attorney was authorized to prepare necessary resolution requesting the
Orange County Board of Supervisors to consolidate and include the proposed
City Charter measure on the 3une Primary ballot.
7655
City Hail, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTRS - March 26, 19.64, 7:00
Mayor Coons called for a roll call vote.
Roll Call:
AYES: COUNCILMEN:
NOES: COUNC I LMEN:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN:
Dutton, Chandler, Schutte, Krein and Coons,
None.
None.
Mayor Coons declared the MOTION CARRIED.
TRANSFER OF FUNDS: On motion by Councilman Chandler, seconded by Councilman
Dutton, transfer of necessary funds from the Contingency Fund to cover all
election costs and charges, was authorized. MOTION CARRIED.
ADJOURNMENT'. Councilman Krein moved to adjourn.
the motion. MOTION CARRIED. (9:07 P.M.)
City Clerk
Councilman Chandler seconded
Cttv Hall. Anaheim,. Ca.ltforn.~a - ~0UNC. IL MINUTES -March $1.,.
The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session.
PRESENT: COUNCILM~N: Dutton, Chandler, Schutte, Krein and Coons.
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: None.
PRESENT: CITY MANAGER: Keith A. Murdoch.
CITY ATTORNEY: Joseph Geisler.
CITY CLERK: Dene M. Williams.
CITY ENGINEER: 3ames P. Maddox.
ZONING COORDINATOR: Martin Kretdt.
PERSONNEL DIRECTOR: Roy Heissner.
Mayor Coons called the meeting to order.
MINUTES: On motion by Councilman Dutton, seconded by Councilman Krein,
minutes of the Anaheim City Council meeting held March 17, 1964,
were approved. MOTION CARRIED.
~E~TA~IVE MAPS~ TRACTS NOS. 5438, 5449, AND 5495 (Reclassification No. 60-61-86}:
Developer, Ardmore-Development Co., tracts located as follows:
TRACT NO..5438: Located on the' west side of Chippewa Avenue north of
'Crescent Avenue, and contains 3.5 acres, proposed for subdivision ihto
4 condominium lots comprised of 142 parcels of air space and 72 dwelling
units (R-3 Zone).
%RA~T NO. 5449: Located at the stub end of Gramercy Avenue, east of
Chippewa Avenue, containing 3.2 acres, proposed for subdivision into
one condominium lot comprising 76 parcels of air space and 59 dwelling
units (R-3 Zone).
TRACT NO~. 549D: Located west of Chippewa Avenue between Glenoaks and
Greenleaf Avenues, containing approximately 10.3 acres, proposed for
subdivision into 2 condominium lots comprising 179 parcels of air
space and 102 dwelling units (R-3 Zone).
Mr. Kreidt noted the location of the subject property, and
the uses and zoning in the immediate area, advising that the purpose ~f
subject tract map was to subdivide air space and dwelling units into a'
total of 7 condominium lots. Also noted was the fact that the land area