1953/10/06 ~-'~'z ~y Hall Anaheim~ California~.. October 6, 1953 -- 10:00 A.M
............ ~.,, ~ ........... ·
The City Council of 'the City of Anaheim met in adjourned regular session.
PRESENT: COUNGiL~EN: Pearson, Wisser, Boney and Van ~'lagoner.
ABSENT : COUNCILMAN: Heying.
CITY ATTORNEY, PRESTON TURNER: Present.
CITY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER, KEITH A. ~3RDOCH: Present.
GILBERT STREET ANNFXATION.. Mr. Walker presented a petition signed by those persons
living on Lincoln and ~;mgnolia Avenues who are affected by that portion of the
description in which a difference of 100 feet exists.
CITY ATTORNEY stated that portests were limited to persons who own property within
~he fierritor¥ proposed ~.o be annexed., and must be filed prior to the time set for
the hearing of said p~otests. The property owned by the people who signed this
pe~ition is no+~ within the territory proposed to be annexed. Due to the fact ~hal
there ~as a call of 651.85 feet, more or less, to a certain point, and if that call
were construed according 6o 4he ac%ual number of feei~ specified in the call~ then
~..e line would extend over to the property of these people, and if a definite point
specified controls, %hen i~ would not go beyond the boundary intended~ and would no~
affect the property of' 'these owners whose signatures appear on said petition. The
course would be controlled by the definite monument specified in the call. This
pertion of tim description which was questioned was a call going "westerly along
the southerly right-of-%~ay line of said Lincoln Avenue, a distance of 651.85 feet~
more or less, to a point on the west line of ~he ~-of the ~-of the ~A~., Section
18, T4S, RiOT~, $.B.B. and M". , since tha~t was a call to ac_ a certain distance~ more
~r less, to a boundary line, tha~ boundary line would control.
The City Attorney cited a case wherein it was decided by a California
,~,ourt that the general rule was that the monument mentioned in a deed ,ould
control %he boundary of-the territory %herein.
/i~DIEbl]E: Supposing in two or three years from now the County Assessor decides
part of that should be taxed?
CITY ATTOR~Y: I feel certain 'thai situation will not arise. I have talked to
one of the Title Companies as to whether they would pass this sort of description.
And this is an accura±e description, and that the boundary line mentioned would
control. This line would not extend over on the other property. If I felt any
::{uestion about it~ ! would hesitate to approve the description. ~
AUDIENCE: That amount of footage, seems to me that later on would cause trouble.
\TTORNEY: Due to the fact that an excess of 100 feet exists would not change ~he
ru! e.
City Attorney further stated, that it wouldn't make any difference if
you mentioned any footage at ally it just doesn't control. Further stated~ he
ffelt safe in using this description.
&UDIENCF: ~.~,at Title Company was ~hat?
~.~ ~Y ATTOR!~Y: Orange County,
.:~'I!D!ENCE: !! d8~ntt seem to me to be good judgment that we shoUld' let' the City
take a piece of ~9operty; it just doesn't sound like good sense.
t'.~. POHLSTON: Stated that the biggest part of the annexation is south of Crescent.
Acreage against, the annexation is more than those that are for it. I can't see why
a matter of a group whose deals have gone through without being annexed to the City~
have the controlling say-so why everybody should be taken in south of Crescent. If
north of Crescent voted for i t~ they Nould win~ and if south of C~scen~ vo~ed for
~ + ~_hey would ~hrow it ou~
A[!i)!ENCF: All north of Crescent intend to live there and make their homes there,
?~e' don't fee! Ih. at now is tl~e right time tc go into the City. The ones with the
biqgest ac~age sre the ones tha~ are for il. I think that some %ha% have large
~c~? ~re ~O~in~ ~ now. ~ ~r~O ~ ~o+ ~bou~ ~20,000. in chicken equipment
e~uipmen%, ~nd withdrew :ni~ prot,~, ~nd now h~ m~de ~pplic~tion with U. S. Motors
for ~¥~ Zone. He withd~w for his own prctection,
'?.~YCR: 7]e have to determine what is best for the city in the long run. If we
i]ave to annex this area after it bas Peen developed, it will cause us trouble.
Ir ii:: is qoin9 ~o come iP the cit~ we rather have it come in a~ a time tha~ we
~v<::'uid have something to say about its deve]opment.
,",t.i~:iENC.~:-': If the annexation v;ent from the ;'Vest Anaheim City Limits Line and work
...... ~H~!l:!, AnBbein~__C2a!if__or. nia, October 6, ]953- I0:00
~.-~<.s ~ clear ~"~" .... i.~agnolia, then I would never say a thing.
~n ~eve~opin9 any area, particularly tc the ~est of the City, we feel,
with '~:i-~e Orano. e County Flannina Com~,;ission, that it is essential that any
subdivisicr'~ be se~-~ered. There are enough areas in that section now developed
tbout sewers, and hence causing a particular health hazard. The only way to
se~,,'er.~ is throuah a Sanitary District or throuah annexation ±',o the clty. ~:~ost
.Developers in the area, and residents are interested in annexation because
?..e,e r ~-~rob !ems.
A~}DiZ~r': .:.sked how to become a Sanitary District.
~%~RDOC~: Sanitary District. would have to be form..ed, and enough of the residents
have to vote on it. The o~'nership of ~he ~,.lagnolia Line lies wi±bin the
established Sanitary Districts and Cities.
AUDIENCE: Count anyone within the city make appliCation to get in that sewer?
~;'~. ~RECEH: Connections have to be made at specific points.
/.tJD!ENCE: If we have water~ and so-forth put in, is %here a possibility of special
assessments put on?
~¢R. ~,MRDOCH: The City of Anaheim has not had Special Assessment Districts since
the late t~entys, or early thirSTs, even as large an area as to ~he N6r~h~ ~e can
assure you the sewers are not being ,[>ut. in on an AsseSsment District. ~
Asked if they had to pay for them.
iv?~. ~,,.%;RDCC.~.: Only when they are to be used. There is a connection charge to the
proF:,erty o~;ner, but you are not. assessed until they are used. As to an Assessment
D~.strlct~ i£ the people in the area viant an Assessment District, in which case they
~,:ou!d deter~ine that themselves. L~ith this present trend of development~ it doesn't
s~.en~ to be the best way ~o 90 about it.
,".UDiENG?:;; How c~uickly could we have ciiy water and utilities which we would be
~-aying for i,~nediate!y?
You won'% be payin? for them until you use them.{
,..Uu~._-NCE: ~Y?~at ~'ould be my advantage by being in the city?
~UDIENCF: If ~,~e went in the city could my property be placed in a ~:?~1 Zone?
!'.~. POHLSTO~; About the ~,.,tagnolia Trunk Line, how much sewage could the City of
Anaheim put in that line? :
% t 7{naheim had
The audience was assured ~ aGequaze capacity rights in the ~,~agnolia
Tr~,:r'~k Line.
The City Clerk read the portion of the ~Jinutes of the ~v~eting held
g;e~:tember 2$!h on which protests were ~iled accordin? to Assessor's Parcel Numbers.
Ti~e City Attorney stated they v~ere counted as separate parcels even
though one owner had more than one parcel., ,ill protests show the Parcel Number.
Co'unci!man Boney moved that the Council find that less than a majority
of the owners of separate parcels contained in the area proposed to be annexed to
!ho. Ci!y %yore filed in protest against the annexation. Councilman Van Wagoner
seconded the motion. ~OTION CARRIED.
RESOLUTION No. '~'-'=~' ~
=~o. Resolution No. 2253 wa= offered by Councilman Van ~agoner who
moved for its passage and adoption. Said Resolution was read in full by the City
~ie,~ rk.
Refer to Resolution Book, page
,i RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF TH¥~ CiTY OF ANA~I~,,'. CALLING A SPECIAL ELtEIION
ON THE 6th DAY OF NOVE~,~ER~ 1953~ IN CERTAIN TERRITORY IN Th~ COUNTY OF ORANGE
CO.~,.,7!GL~OUS TO THE CITY OF ANAHEI~ PROPOSED TO BF ANK~iXED TO SAID CITY OF ANAHEIM
?ROVIDING FOR il'i! HOLDING OF SUCH ELECTION AND SUB~ITTING TO T~E I':LECTORS RFSIDING
iN SUCH TERRITORY THY QUESTION ~.fHETHER SUCH TERRITORY SHALL BE ANNEXED TO, IRCORPoRATED
iN, A~D ~;dDE A PART OF SAID CITY OF ANAHEI~ AND THE PROPERTY IN SUCH TERRITORY BE,
,~FTER SUCH Ah~FXATICN, SUB3ECT TO T;JfATICN EQUALLY %:~ITH THE PROPERTY :~?ITHIN THE
CiTY OF ANA~~'',~,~, TO PAY ITS PRO RATA PORTION, BASED UPON ASSESSED VALUATION OF ALL
Cit,v ~a_!.l,. _ABahei~m~. California, October 6, 1953- 10:O0 A.M.
'-' "N'- f'- '- -
THE ~0, DED !? DtBT:DNz. ao OF SAID CITY OF ANAHEI~.,~. OUTSTANDING ON THE 8TH DAY OF
SEPTE~ER~ 1953~ OR Tt~.RETOFORE AUTHORI~D: DESCRIBING SAID TERRITORY AND DESIGNATING
il' BY' THE NA~£ OF GILBERT S~F_ET AN~X.,'~TION: EST~]P, LISHiNG AN ELECTION PRECINOT AND
POLLING PLACE IN SAID TERRITORY~ APPOilfrlNG Ti'~ OFFICERS OF £LECTION FOR SAID SPECIAL
~. .~u$~ OF NOTICE OF SUCH ELECTION.
=L~CTI05~ A~ PROVIDING FOR THE PJBLiCAT~''
On roll call the foregoing resolution was duly passed and adopted by the
foliowin9 vote:
AYES; COU~EIIJ~EN: Pearson~ Wisser, Boney and Van Wagoner.
NOES: COUM31L~N: Nome.
ABSENT: COU,~EILMAN: Haying.
The ~,;ayor declared the foregoing resolution duly passed and adopted.
ANAheIM UNION:HI,Ii SZ]HOOL REQUEST: ~,,ir. Demaree of the Anaheim Union High School
addressed the Council requestin9 the La Palms Ball Park be altered by the removal
of th~ fence in the right, field approximately 50 yards east, making the football
field in that area away from thc baseball mound~ and allowin9 a larger seating
?a~-city than is now possible
The City Council advised /:~r. Demaree that the matter would be looked inf. o.
RFSOLUTION NO. 2254: AWARD OF CONTRACT: Councilman Van ~/tagoner offered Resolution
No. 225~ and moved for 'its passage and adoption.
Refer to Resolution Book, page
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEI~ ACCEPTING A SEALED PROPOSAL
AND A?~'ARDING A CONTRACT TO THE LOV~ST RESPONSIBIZ BIDDER FOR ~THE FURNISHING OF ALL
=~ AND ALL UTILITIES AND TRANSPORTATION
PLA~rr~ L,~OR, $ERV!C....o~ MATERIALS A~XI)EQUIP~rNT~
I~LUDING PO~;~R~ FUEL AND ','~A/ER~ AND PERFORMING ALL ?~ORK NECESSARY TO CONSTRUCT AND
CO~,~I~TF~ THE FOLLOWING PUBLIC !'N~ROVEMEK~: HOUSTON AVSh!~_:~. CRFJ3CEN-F AVENgj~! TRUNK
$E~ER MAIN. (3ob No. lO01-J. E. Popovich)
On roll call the foregoing Resolution was duly passed and adopted by the
fo!!owin9 vote:
AYES: COU.~EILMEN: Pearson~ ~Hisser~ Boney and Van Wagoner.
NOES: COUNCILNEN: None.
~JBS~NT; COUNCILU~AN: Heyin9.
The N~ayor declared the foregoin? resolution duly passed and adopted.
GILBERT S =
TR~zET ANh~EXATION; The. Clerk brought up the Gilbert Street Annexation
again~ stating he wished to file a formal Certificate of $ufficiency~ also file a
Certificate pertaining to the parcels of property contained within the proposed
Gilbert Street Annexation. A list of parcels %o be attached %o the certificate.
CFRTIFICATE OF SUFFICIENCY~
;~4ERFA$, on the 8th day of September, 1953, the City Council of the City
of Anaheim, did receive petitions signed by twenty-nine (99) qualified electors,
which number represents more than one-fourth (-~-) of the qualified electors residing
;~ithin the territory proposed for annexation, to be known and designated as the
GILBERT STREET ,,NN~AT~ON, as shown by the Crange County Registration of Voter$~ and
I FURThl~R CERTIFY, that said petitions were circulated more than twenty-
one ~21) days after publication of Notice of Intention to Circulate such petitions,
I FURTHER CERTIFY, that at the time. of filing and presentation of said
Detitions~ said new territory proposed to be annexed to the City of Anaheim did not
fo~ a part of any other city or municipal corporation and that said territory was,
at the time of filing said petitions~ inhabited territory and is contiguous to the
~tv of Anaheim ~
IN '~VlT.~.~SS %%~EREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official
seal of the City of Anaheim this 8th dayof September, 1953.
Cit~-Clerk of the C~t~f of Anaheim
f99
~20
City ..... Hall, Anaheim, C. ali£ornia.,; .O.ctober 6, 1_953 - 10:00 A.M.
CERTIFICATE OF CITY CLERK IN R£FE:.RFNC£ TO GILBERT $TRPET ANNEXATION.
~NSR~A$, on the 28%h day of September, 1953, a Public was held by the City
Council of the City of Anaheim to hear all written protests theretofore filed ob-
jeciing to the calling of a Special Election, or the annexation of territory described
in Resolution Number 2237~ to the City of Anaheim, and
~'~R~A$, at said Hearin9 there were 26 written-letters of protest received
covering twenty-six (26) parcels of property made by the owners thereof of property
within the territory proposed for annexation; one protest representing one (1)
parcel was withdrawn by letter received from Harold D. Gregg before the filing of
protest was accomplished.
NC;q, THEREFORE, Ir CHARLES E. GRIFFITH, City Clerk of the City of Anaheim~
hereby certify that I have checked not less than sixty-six parcels of property within
the proposed Gilbert Street Annexation, as set forth on the Assessor's ~aps, County
of Orange~ Caiifornia~ and that these maps showing parcels as referred to herein are
filed in the office of the County Assessor of Orange County, as a part of %hat office's
permanent records.
IN ?,~IT~$S ~HERFOF~ I have hereunto se~ my hand and affixed ~he officia1
seal of the City of Anaheim ~his 6th day of October, 1953.
.......
Oity Cle~of the City ~~aheim
APP£iCAIION FOR TAXI STAND submitted by E. A. Slagle was referred to the Police
Co~issioner for report at next meeting.
.EXECUIIVE COMMITTEE, J.O.S: It was moved by Councilman Van Wagoner that Councilman
Wisser be appointed as "Member" of the Executive Board of the Joint Outfall Sewer
replacing Councilman Boney, and that Councilman Boney be named "Alternate Member".
Motion seconded by Councilman Boney. MOTION CARRIED·
RESOLUTION NO. 2255: Councilman Boney offered Resolution No. 2255 and moved for
its passage and_ adoption.
Refer to Resolution Book, page
A RESOLUTION OF THE CIIY COUNCIL 0~ THE CITY O~ ANAHSI~ APPOIN/IN6 COUNSILMAN CHA$.
A. ?=_ARSON AS A ~N~ER OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE ORANG~ COUN/Y WATER DISTRICT
IO SERVE UPON SAID BOARD OF DIRECTOR$ AS A RFPRESENTAIIVE ~RO~,~ THF CITY OF ANAHeim.
On roll call the foregoing resolution was duly passed and adopted by the
following vote;
AYES; COUNCILMEN; Pearson~ Wisser, Boney and Van Wagoner· ~
NOrS: COUNt2 ILM~N: None.
ABSENT: COUNG ILMAN; Heying.
The ~vlayor declared the foregoing resolution duly passed and adopted.
DISTRIBUIION OF MIDWAY CIIY PURCHASE: The City Auditor was authorized %o make
distribution o£ 6he purchase and sale agreement with ~;gdway City Sanitary District~
as per said Agreement of Sale and Purchase, dated hpril 25, 1952, in the amount of
$91,069.54 on mo%ion by Councilman Boney, seconded by Councilman Wisser. MOTION
~ ARR I ~D
4-?~AY STOP SIGN,:_LENDN AND NORTH SIS: Chief of Police made surveys at various
times of the days of September 28th and 29th, and reported that the conditions
at present do not warrant the making this intersection a 4-way stop.
Said report was submitted, read and ordered received and filed~ on motion
by Councilman Van ¥'~agoner, seconded by COuncilman Wisser. kK)TION CARRIED.
PRO]!ZS/: RNZONING OF ~fR ULLIOTT'S PROPHR~ .... C~_2_o: Petition signed by Jack O. Polley,
~ ~ . . and others,
~,uv.nile Protection Chairman, Lincoln P T.-~ ^. in protest to the rezoning
of ~aid property ;~as submitted, read and ordered referred to the City Planning
Commi ssi on.
~ · ·
CO~3NICAIIO~'~ from the J C Penny Company commending the Fire Department and Power
~.~e~'~ p~..rtmen~~ * for their_ part in restoring their activities to normal after the recent
fire~ September 22~ 1953~ '~as submitted and read·
g99
,City f!al)_~ ~naheint, ea!'fornla~ October r~
~- · 1953 - i0'00
~.~(%:i_~, D~;~7 i. Fin:'~ '~as o:~d~rcd ~'cccived and fii~d when approved by the
~DJOU Elqh D.
~-~ City Clerk