HomeMy Public PortalAboutCity Council_Minutes_1968-12-19_Regular 1968ADJOURNED MEETING
C O U N C I L M I N U T E S
CITY OF TEMPLE CITY
TEMPLE CITY CALIFORNIA
DECEMBER 19, 1968
Mayor Briggs called the adjourned meeting of the City Council to
order at 7:00 P. M. following which he led the Pledge of Allegiance to
the Flag.
ROLL CALL:
PRESENT: Councilmen - Harker, Merritt, Briggs
ABSENT: Councilmen - Beckley, Tyrell
Councilman Merritt moved to excuse the absence of Councilman Beckley and
Councilman Tyrell due to illness, Councilman Harker seconded, and the
motion carried unanimously.
Mayor Briggs stated this was the time and place for the continued
Public Hearing, re the formation of Temple City Lighting District No. 1.
Councilman Harker moved to re -open the Public Hearing, Councilman Merritt
seconded, and the motion carried unanimously.
The Mayor asked if anyone in the audience wished to speak. Mr.
Boyce F. O'Bannon, 10316 E. Olive St., presented another letter to the
Council and requested it be read in full.
City Attorney Martin read the letter of opposition to forming the
Lighting District in full, in which Mr. O'Bannon suggested the Council
consider paying the cost of all intersection lighting in the City. He
also felt that this proposed improvement should be delayed for one year
and that a master lighting plan be developed and all the citizens be
informed fully and well in advance of any consideration by the Council.
The Asst. City Manager advised there was a master plan proposed
but for future consideration, and at this time there were no plans to
make any improvements, but to transfer from the County the jurisdiction
over existing Lighting Districts, and to include City area where no
Districts exist, to the City for maintenance and energy. Any proposed
installations would be considered at a later time following the same
procedure of a public hearing as required for the formation of a District.
Mayor Briggs again emphasized there is no cost for installation if
made on existing poles, and the only cost is for maintenance, and energy.
If metal poles are requested,the areas receiving the benefit would have
to pay for their cost.
Mr. Sabino, 5211 Doreen, stated he made a survey and contacted
close to 200 property owners and they have been badly hurt with the
tremendous rise in real estate taxes. He felt this proposal was poorly
planned and came at the wrong time. He requested that it be put off a
little while to give the people a chance to study and digest the program
proposed.
Mrs. Stambol, 5727 N. Reno, stated she was opposed, that they have
sufficient lighting in her area, and she felt the City should devote
more time to beautifying the City and something should be done about
some areas where people do not clean up, and keep up their property.
Edna Rummel, 9536 Wedgewood, stated she fully agreed with Mr.
O'Bannon . She felt everyone should have the opportunity to know exact-
ly what it means and it should not be done suddenly.
Ben Short, 5930 Golden West, commented that there were many at the
meeting Dec. 3, and were aware of this meeting when the matter would be
taken up further and are not here at this time. He also stated that the
Council is charged with the operation of this City and certainly wish
to further improve the City and if the Lighting District is not formed
at this time they cannot do anything about additional lights etc.
Council Minutes, December 19, 1968, Page 2
Robt. Bock, 5328 Encinita, stated he felt the formation of the
Lighting District was an excellent thing for the City. Means greater
safety for his children, his wife, for women and older citizens which
is worth more than the dollars involved. He felt this very necessary
in Temple City.
No one else came forward to speak at this time.
Councilman Merritt moved to close the Public Hearing, Councilman
Harker seconded, and the motion carried unanimously.
Mayor Briggs stated it is now for the Council to decide whether
there is a need to communicate more with the citizens, whether the
Council should act now and move for the benefit of the City, or defer
for the reasons that have been stated. He felt there was no doubt
in his mind that they had not communicated with the people but the
question is what waiting another year will mean
Councilman Harker advised there has been a great deal of time
and effort put into the study of this proposed Lighting District.
Much occurred prior to Council consideration, which was done by the
Engineers. He felt it will result in benefit to Temple City whether
it is done next year or now. He stated he is a resident in an area
not paying lighting at the present time. As a Councilman he must be
responsible to the people and to their wishes. He stated during all
of this time he had not received one single contact for or against
the proposal orfrom the neutral side. He brought out we have been a
City since 1900 without a- Lighting District formed during that time
with no tragic events, no disasters, no increase in local crime rate
that could be contributed to our lack of light. Does feel our light-
ing is inadequate. The City Council is charged with the responsibility
of the welfare and safety of the community and take this very seriously.
The formation will only give us local control. After a great deal of
thought he stated his position would be in the interest of the community
and benefit to the City Council not to try to do this before the 31st
of December. He felt we are not going to lose a great deal by waiting
and taking a little more time and working on :this next year which
would bring the District into being July 1, 1970.
Councilman Merritt stated he disagreed with Councilman Harker
as he felt by doing so it could possibly be two or three years before
the program would be implemented, that we would have the same problems
then as we have had in the past. He had talked to many people that do
not have lights and want them, and some that have them and do not want
them. He felt we should get the program on the move.
City Attorney Martin read in full a communication from Councilman
Tyrell as follows: he stated he had listened in full to the entire
tape of the Public Hearing; he felt it inequitable that those in ex-
isting lighting districts pay for intersection lighting and those not
in a district do not pay; the present proposal for a city -wide dis-
trict would carry the burden of all community lighting, intersection
lighting , heavily lighted areas and possibly on major business streets,
all of which he felt was an obligation of the citizenry as we all share
in the use of these lights; that there will be a second district or
taxing area wherein those streets or areas having on- street lighting
at the present time will be placed, wherein they will pay as has been
in the past, . for the services rendered to them. Under this as we
install additional lighting in the future this district will expand
until hopefully, it will encompass the entire City and we will be all
one district in a well- lighted, functional and equitable city; only
those people presently not sharing the lighting tax burden will feel
any increase, and it is not significant, some $2. or $3.00 per yr.:
if we can equitable cover expenses of government as in the past there
will be no reason for a city tax, and the City Council is unanimous in
not wanting one; the use of municipal funds over and above $10,000. or
even that sum, would be to curtail desirable programs for the balance
of the City, only to benefit of those presently not in a district.
Re areas of high lighting having high crime rate, the extra lighting
is put in for that specific purpose. It is a substantial deterrent or
Council Minutes, December 19, 1968, Page 3
the crime rate would be higher. He stated it is the responsibility of
the Council,being elected by the electorate,to plan these things for
the City and further procrastination of this necessary program is un-
warranted and certainly not in the best interests of our City. Remember
only protestants were solicited to appear at the hearing and you must
assume if they did not appear that they are in favor of it. We solicit
advice of our citizens at all times when given in a reasonable, factual
and courteous manner and we have always considered their remarks. The
ultimate decision however rests with the Council. Let us not waiver
in'carrying out our obligation.
Mayor Briggs stated he felt a great deal of concern because we
had not been able to communicate with the public as we wished to.
Some in the audience inferred this Council was trying to slip something
over on the people of this City. All of the Councilmen are men of high
integrity and deep concern for this City. He felt if deferred we might
be able to convey to the citizens the concern of the Council for the
residents living here. Mr. O'Bannon said many people were upset, why
were they not here to state their concern and ask for clarification.
Because of this he felt we should go ahead in spite of the fact that
some question this. So he was in favor of going forward with this for
our City, for the women, the children, and older folks who have to
walk our streets at night.
• City Attorney Martin stated there are only two options available,
either to terminate the proceedings or to pass Resolutions to formulate
the District.
Councilman Merritt moved to create the District. Councilman Harker
stated he was opposed.
City Attorney Martin read title to Resolution No. 68 -881 A RESOLU-
TION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMPLE CITY, CALIFORNIA, ORDER-
ING THE IMPROVEMENT DESCRIBED IN RESOLUTION NO. 68 -872, TO BE MADE, AS
DESCRIBED IN THE ENGINEER'S REPORT, DIAGRAM, AND PLAN REFERRED TO THEREIN,
PROVIDING FOR THE CONSOLIDATION OF ALL EXISTING LIGHTING DISTRICTS IN
TEMPLE CITY INTO A SINGLE DISTRICT PURSUANT TO THE "STREET LIGHTING ACT
OF 1919 ", ORDERING THE WORK AND LEVYING THE ASSESSMENT FOR SERVICE
NECESSARY TO MAINTAIN AND ILLUMINATE BY ELECTRIC ENERGY THE STREET LIGHTS
WITHIN THE SAID DISTRICT.
Councilman Merritt moved to adopt Resolution No. 68 -881, Councilman
Briggs seconded. Councilman Harker referred to his previous comment and
stated he was in favor of the District and that it would benefit the
community but for the reasons previously stated he was in opposition at
this time, and he would certainly work to the fullest extent next year to
bring this about.
Mayor Briggs stated Councilman Tyrell is not present and he has in-
dicated his feelings. As it stands the vote is 2 to 1 which is not a
majority of the Council which would require 3 yes votes. For this reason
he could not vote for the improvement. The roll call vote followed:
AYES: Councilman - Merritt
NOES: Councilmen- Harker, Briggs
The Asst, City Manager suggested the Council meet again on Dec. 23
at which time Councilman Tyrell could most likely be present and take
final action at that time
Mayor Briggs recommended that the Council consider this next year
and work with the people and move on a definite program. Hold meetings
at the City Hall, send out notices, set up say 6 sessions and let the
people come and ask questions, and to start moving on this after the
first of the year. Then everything possible would be done.
1
1
1
Council Minutes, December 19, 1968; Page 4
Councilman Harker stated that legally the Council had every right
to go ahead with formation of this District. The Council is sufficiently
concerned and he recommends to forget it this year.
Councilman Merritt felt the situation will he the same thing all
over again when it comes up in the future. We would have just wasted
possibly a year.
Mayor Briggs was deeply concerned re the confidence of the citizens.
He felt he could not vote yes on a 2 to 1 vote, and when only three
voting it should be a 3 - O vote. He would agree to another meeting.
Following discussion Councilman Merritt moved to continue this
to December 23d, 1968, in the Council Chambers at. 7:00 P. M., Council-
man Harker seconded, and the motion carried unanimously. Council
adjourned at 8:30 P. M.
ATTEST: