Loading...
1964/02/197544 ~ity Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 18, 1964, 1:30 P.M. On roll call the foregoing Resolution No. 64R-120 was duly passed and adopted by the following vote; AYES; COUNCILMEN; Dutton, Chandler, $chutte, Krein and Coons. NOES: COUNCILMEN: None. ABSENT; COUNCILMEN; None. The Mayor declared Resolution No. 64R-120 duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 64R-121: Councilman Chandler offered Resolution Noo 64R-121 granting Variance Noo 1618 in accordance with the City Planning Commission's recommendations. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM GRANTING VARIANCE NO. 1618. On roll call the foregoing resolution was duly passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN: Dutton, Chandler, Schutte, Krein and Coons. NOES: COUNCILMEN: None. ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: None. The Mayor declared Resolution No~ 64R-121 duly passed and adopted. APPOINTMENTS - CITY pLANNING COMMISSION: On motion by Councilman Schutte, seconded by Councilman Chandler, Mr. Herbert I. Perry and 3ames A. Sides were reappointed members of the Anaheim City Planning Commission for the ensuing term. MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED. ADJOURNMENT: Councilman Krein moved to adjourn to February 19, 1964, 7:00 P.M. for the purpose of holding a Public and General Discussion on the proposed Anaheim City Charter, as recommended by the City Charter Committee, and also moved waiver of further notice of said adjournment. Councilman $chutte seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. ADJOURNED: 8:55 P.M. City Clerk City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 19, 1964, 7:00 P.M. ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING - ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL - FEBRUARY 19, 1964, 7:00 P.M. PRESENT: COUNCILMEN: Dutton, Chandler, Schutte, Krein and Coons. ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: None. PRESENT: ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT: Fred Sorsabal. CITY ATTORNEY: Joseph Geisler~ CITY CLERK: Dene M. Williams. FINANCE DIRECTOR: Douglas K. Ogden. Mayor Coons called the meeting to order. Mayor Coons welcomed those present~ and explained that the informal public discussion was scheduled to hear and receive any suggested changes that might be made, or might be incorporated in the Charter proposed for the City of Anaheim by the Anaheim Citizens' Charter Study Committee, a Committee appointed by the City Council for this purpose. 7545 City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 19~ 1964~ 7:00 Appreciation on behalf of the City Council to the Charter Study Gommittee for their outstanding service and efforts in compiling the recommended Charter was expressed by the Mayor. Mayor Coons further reported that copies of the proposed Charter, as recommended by the Committee, have been available to the general public, and that several copies have been distributed. Dr, Doty~ Chairman of said Committee, was invited to address the Council concerning the drafting of the proposed Charter. Dr. Dory, in recapitulating the Committee's activity, reported that the first task was to determine whether or not there should be a Charter form of 9overnment for the City of Anaheim. He explained the information obtained during this first phase, which encompassed seven or eight meetings, and further advised that the decision that Anaheim should have a Charter form of government was primarily based on the growth or size of the city, and not any other particular item. The second phase in formulating the Charter, the Committee felt the present form of government was a proper one, relative to the number of Councilmen and the method of se!ectlng a Mayor; however, the Committee felt the Council's role as a policy making body should be strengthened, and to this end, the offices of City Clerk and City Ireasurer were made appointive offices~ rather than elective, and the role of the various boards made advisory, rather than administrative. Dr. Doty further reported that the members of the Committee present at this meeting, were: Don Roth, Ralph Fliegner, Wayne Reedstrum, Richard Tevlin, Dr. Briggs, Joshua White, and Mary MacDonald, Secretary for zhe Committee. Dro Dory thereupon publicly thanked the City Council~ and various members of the City Administration, for the assistance and information given them in the drafting of the Charter° Mayor Coons thanked Dr. Dory and thereupon opened the meeting for general discussion. Received as evidence were the following: ao Dissenting opinion on the proposed Anaheim City Charter, submitted by Joshua White. bo Letter of information, dated January 30, 1964, from Harry C. Williams, Legal Counsel to said Committee° c. Letter pertaining to dissenting opinion, dated January 31~ 1964, from Felix $. LeMarinel~ (Copies of above correspondence furnished Council members.) Mr. Joshua White submitted detalled report of dissenting opinion, includin9 the present language and recommended changes concerning: ARTICLE Vo CITY COUNCIL a, Amendment to Section 500. b. A new section to foliow Section 501, Concerning eiigibiiity. Co Amendment to Section 502, concerning compensation. Amendment to Section 503, concerning vacancies. e. A new section to follow Section 505, concerning powers vested in City Council° ARTICLE VI. CIIY MANAGER a. Amendment to Section 606, concerning removal. b. Deletion of Section 607, concerning non-interference with administrative service. 7~46 ,City Hall~ Anaheim~ Qalifornia - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 19~ 1964~ 7:QO P.M, ARTICLE X. PERSONNEL SYSTEM a. Amendment to Sec%ion 1000, concerning merit principle, Per- sonnel Director, Personnel Board and Personnel Rules. ARYICL5 XII. FISCAL ADMINISTRATION a. A new section, to follow Section 1202, concerning submission of budget to City Gouncilo b. Amendment to S~c~ion 120a. Co Amendment to Section 1205. ARTICL5 XV. MISCSLLAN~OUS a. A new section, to follow Section 1502, concerning Charter amendment. Mr. White, in commenting on Section 502 - Compensation of Councilmen, was of the opinion that the compensation should be established by ordinance, and that no fixed or specified amount should be set forth in the Charter. Regarding Section lO00, concerning the Personnel System, Mr. White reviewed the present system and the newly adopted Personnel Rules and regulations, noting objections thereto concerning Rule 1, Rule 3, pertaining to Salary Recommendations made by the Personnel Director under the direction of the City Manager; concerning Rule 11 he asked if seniority in previous positions was maintained. Mr. White advised that the Personnel System recommended in the proposed Charter was basically the same as adopted in the Riverside Charter, and in his opinion, there should be established a Personnel Board composed of impartial and unbiased members. He thereupon read his recommendation to Section 1000, which he felt would provide a flexible system and further pro- vide for a check and balance system to the improvement of personnel admin- istration. Mr. White explained the operations of the Supervisory Selection Board established by North American Aviation, and further felt his recommended change would establish rules contributing significantly to the employee morale, eliminating grievances and their results. Mr. Wayne Reedstrum, 517 Falcon Street, advised of the multitude of issues covered by the Charter Committee, and the one issue taking the greatest amount of debate to finally resolve was Council district repres- entation, as opposed to election of Councilmen at large; that the issue was determined by an eight to seven vote of the members, and in his opinion a vote that close could not be considered decisive. He thereupon recommended that either the issue of district representation be incorporated in the Charter, or placed on the ballot along with the Charter as an amendment, for the decision of this issue by the voting peopleo Dr. Dory addressed the Council regarding the dissenting opinion submitted by Mr. White, and advised that all of these matters were issues thoroughly discussed by the Committee; further, the Committee attempted to draft the Charter omitting details, as far as possible, thereby creating a policy document. This policy document does not preclude the establishment of detailed operations, such as the establishment of a Personnel Board, or Capital Program operation. Mr. John Simpson, 3309 Deerwood Drive, addressed the Council in support of Mr. Reedstrum's contention, that both issues that came before the Committee and were decided on an eight to seven vote, that is district representation, should be decided by the voting public; and recommended that these two issues be placed on the June ballot for decision, and the Charter itself placed on the November ballot. 75~7 City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 19~ 1964~ 7:00 P.M. Mr. Don Roth, 2863 West Rome Avenue, reported that many issues were decided by the Committee on an eight to seven vote~ not just district representation. Mr. Roth further advised that one issue that he had voted in favor of was the elimination of the positions of City Clerk and City Treasurer as elective offices. He stated that since that time, he has s~rongly considered this, and if given the opportunity~ would now reverse his vote and vote to retain these offices as elective offices. Mr. John Ward, 215 Echo, called attention to Section 1211~ Con- tracts and Public Works, and suggested that this section either be interpreted in advance, or amended to have added - that the cost of special spare parts and cost of special training of personnel be included in purchases. He gave as an example the purchase of a new pump~ wherein the low bid was sdbmitted on an unusual pump that might cost a great deal of money for maintenance and spare parts, Councilman Chandler advised that the wording might be changed to more clearly set out that The bid be given to the lowest and the best bid, after determining all facts~ Mayor Coons advised that this is presently a part of the State law, and there have been bids awarded to other than the lowest bid, after determining all facts. Dr. Stewart A. Briggs, 1877 Beacon Street, regarding Section 1211, suggested the City Manager investigate ~he cost to determine if the dollar amount set forth in this sectlon would lend itself economically for the city. Regarding the Library Commission, he advised that it is his philosophy to remove educational institutions as much as possible from the field of politics° He thereupon referred to a literal interpretation of this proposed provision. Dr~ Briggs further advised that he wished this question of district representation had been somewhat compromised with sufficient election at large and still sufficient election in areas for representation. Regarding the suggestion of Mr. White concerning personnel, Dr. Briggs felt this might be an area where more details in the Charter would be advantageous. Further discussion was held between Dr. Briggs and the City Council concerning the Library Board° Councilman Chandler pointed out that' the elected City Council was the only body accountable to the voting public, and asked if it was reasonable for the one body accountable to the public to have no control over the actions of the Commission, once it is appointed. Mayor Coons adv:sed that to h:m, this was a key point; that under the present State law, the City Council appoints a Library Board~ but once appointed, has no power of removal or impeachment, and no recourse on the part of the voters, in the event an ~ndividual was appointed to the Library Board who proved not to serve the best interest. Councilman Chandler was of the opinion that the problem discussed, while not clear under the State statutes, could be made clear in the Charter, if it was desired to maintain the Library Board as an administrative body. Mr~ Joseph Geisler, City Attorney, in answer to Councilman Schutte's question~ advised that a provision of removal of any member of any Commission could be written into the Charter; however, an administrative agency, where the City Council has the power of removal, would basically cease to be an administrative agency. Councilman Chandler advised that he would have no objections to the Library Board, the Planning Commission and the Park and Recreation Commis- sion being entirely responsible for those activities~ except for the fact that as a Councilman, he had the responsibility for the appointment, with no romo~y to rectify a possible mistake in appoint~gt. 7548 City Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 19, 1964~ 7:00 P.M. Discussion was also held concerning the right of the Library Board to levy taxes, Reference was made to the Park and Recreation Commis- sion which, under the State law, is an autonomous board, and although this board never exercised their autonomy power, they, on their own initiative, in 1957 re-drafted the ordinance establishing control under one administra- tive head, resulting in the Park and Recreation Commission becoming an advisory boardo Mr. Ben Schroeder, 1659 Cris Avenue, member of a local school board, called attention to Assembly Bill No. 46, sponsored by Mr. Unruh, presently pending before the Special Session of the State Legislature. He advised that should this bill be passed, it would abolish all local school district boards except in Charter cities where the Charter provides for the school board to be under the City Council; that in effect, there would become one County board to administer all of the schools in the County of Orange. Mr. Schroeder further advised that if the law remains as it is, he would be opposed to the City Council having anythin9 to do with the school boards; but if this bill passes, he would personally rather have the school boards under local control rather than County, where there would probably be only one member of a seven member board representing this area. He further felt this bill should be followed closely, in the'event it would become to %he best interest of Anaheim citizens to have this a part of the City Charter. Regarding the method of filling vacancies on the Park and Recrea- tion Commission, Mr. Schroeder asked if the proposed Charter would change the present procedure. Mayor Coons explained that the present ordinance provides for the method of appointments to the Park and Recreation Commission, and that the proposed Charter stipulates that all existing ordinances will remain in full force and effect, upon the adoption of the Charter. Considering the suggestions of Mr~ Reedstrum and Mr. Simpson, Mr. Geisler, in answer to Councilman Schutte"s question, advised that these suggestions would require research on the part of his office, before advising whether or not they could be accomplishedo Mr. Robert Faust, member of the Charter Committee, pointed out that the Committee worked approximately thirteen months, and each member worked hard, seriously, and to his best efforts; that there were many arguments discussed by members of the Committee for many hours, and the Charter as proposed and submitted to the City Council and public was endorsed by the Committee by affirmative vote, with the exception of one dissenting vote, of all members present. In his opinion~ the proposed Charter should not be impeached or attacked by any of the Committee members who are pledged to support it as proposed, as it would be misleading to the people if the general public felt that the Charter Committee, as an official body, were now suggesting changes. Mr. White advised that he spoke on only those portions of the pro- posed Charter to which he disagreed, and further advised, regarding district representation, in his opinion there s'hould be area representation and Councilmen at large; and stated that at present, there was no representa- tive from West Anaheim. Councilman Chandler advised that he was a resident of the westerly section of Anaheim~ Councilman Dutton, regarding representation from the westerly section of Anaheim, advised that the majority of our population lives in the westerly section, and have a right to elect someone to the City Council, if they so desire° 7549 ~ity Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 19, 1964~ 7:00 P.M. Mr~ White referred 'to and read his suggested new section to Article ×II, Capital Program, and felt that had such a program been in effect, it was possible that the bond issue on the City Hall and Library would not have failed in the recent October election. Mr. Robert Faust reiterated that while many o£ these issues were decided on an eight to seven vote~ all of these matters came up for review on the final vote~ which was fourteen to onel and again repeated that he would not want the general public to get the impression, or be mislead, in thinking that the statements made by certain members o£ the Committee were an endorsement o£ the Committee. Mayor Coons asked if anyone present who had no connection with the Charter City Committee wished to address the Council. Mr. Jo R.~ White, 809 West Broadway, referred to the forthcoming election in two years, when a majority of the Council will be elected, and of the possibility of a three-man slate that could be elected, thereby changing the actions of the City of Anaheim completely. He further stated that they could appoint a new City Clerk and City Treasurer, to which he would be opposed, as he felt these two offices should be responsible to the voters instead of to the C'ity Council. Mr. Lou Herbst asked what consideration was given to increasing the Council membership to seven. Dr. Dory replied that consideration was given from the present number of five up to nine; tha~ the final decision to retain the number of five was the present number on the City Council, which were doing an adequate job, and 'there apparently was no particular reason to increase this number. Further, the dangers of getting too many on the City Council were set forth by 'their legal counsel~ Mro Williams. Mr. Herbst felt the City Council were the ones to determine the number of Council membership, as only the Council would be aware of the work load two additional members might assume. Mayor Coons advised that in his opinion, the addition of two Councilmen would not reduce the present work load of the City Council, as every Councilman would be required to make himself knowledgeable of every issue coming before the Council., in order to be qualified to cast an intelligent vote~ Councilman Dutton stated that if the number of Councilmen was increased~ in his opinion it could tend to increase absenteeism, and cited as an example the nine-member City Planning Commission. Councilman Schutte advised that because of the size and growth of the City, in his opinion it would be advisable to have seven districts represented by seven Councilmen. Mr. Ben Schroeder requested an explanation as to how the Committee arrived at a dollar and cents compensation figure for Councilmen. Dr. Doty advised that according to Mr. Williams~ experience, this question of compensation became an issue in the election, and therefore felt with the present compensation maintained, it might forestall this particular item from becoming an issue in an election. Mr. Schroeder stated he would be inclined to agree with the sug- gestions of Mr. Joshua White concerning this portion of the Charter, that the compensation of Mayor and Councilmen be established by ordinance, and become full time positions and compensated accordingly. Mrs. Claudia Peters, 2645 Carnival, advised that she expected to hear remarks from the City Council concerning the proposed Charter; and further advised that in her opinion 'the size of the City should be con- sidered and reflected throughout the Charter. City Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 19~ 1964~. 7:00 P.M. At the conclusion of the discussion, it was determined by the City Council that another meeting be scheduled March 4, 1964, 7:00 P.M., to con- tinue the public discussion on the proposed Charter. PROCLAMATION~ $I, CATHERINE'S MILITARY 5CH004 - SEVENTY-FIVE YEARS; On motion by Councilman Coons, seconded by Councilman Schutte, May 2, 1964, was proclaimed "St. Catherine's Military School Day in Anaheim", in recognition of the School's Diamond Anniversary. MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED. ADJOURNMENT: Councilman Du%%on moved to adjourn. Councilman Chandler seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. ADJOURNED: 9:15 P.M. S I GNED'. '~~ ~City Clerk City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - February 25, 1964, 1530 The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session. PRESENT: COUNCIIJ~EN; Chandler, $chutte, Krein and Coons. ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: Dutton. PRES£NT: CITY MANAGER; Keith A. Murdoch. ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY: 3chh Dawson. CITY CLERK; Dene Mo Williams. CITY ENGINEER! 3ames P. Maddox. ZONING COORDINATOR: Martin Kreidto Mayor Coons called the meeting to order. MINUTES; Approval of the minutes of the Anaheim City Council meetings held February 4, 5, 11, 18 and 19, 1964, was deferred one week, March 3, 1964. RESOLUTION NO~ 64R-122: Councilman Krein offered Resolution No. 64R-122 for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING AND DIRECTING THE PAYMENT OF DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY AS OF FEBRUARY 25, 1964. (Warrants Nos° 29955 to 30227, both inclusive, totaling $618,068.13) On roll call the foregoing resolution was duly passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN: Chandler, Schutte, Krein and Coons. NOES; GOUNGILMEN; None. ABSENI: COUNCILMAN: Dutton. Mayor declared Resolution No. 64R-122 duly passed and adopted. WARRANT: On motion by Councilman Krein~ seconded by Councilman Schutte, warrant in the amount of $7,900°00 to State of California Department of Water Resources to accompany plans for their review of Walnut Canyon Reservoir, was authorized. MOTION CARRIED. PUBLIC DISCUSSION - STREET NA~E CHANGES, LOS ANGELES STREET AND ANAHEIM ROAD: Council consideration of proposed street name changes for Los Angeles Street and Anaheim Road, was continued from the meeting of February 11, 1964, to this date for an informal public discussion.