Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - City Council - 1962-01-18 451 . City Council, Regular Adjourned - Meeting , ` Police Dept. & Council Chambers Bldg. .,, , , , . Redding, California � January 18,, 1962 7:00 P. M. The meeting was called to order by Mayor Puryear with the following councilmen present: Fulkerth, Martin, Moty, Simons and, Puryear.. _ : Also present were Cit.y Manager.,Cowden, City Attorney Redmon, Director of Finance Courtney, Director of Public Works Arness, Planning Dir.ector Evans, `. Airports Manager Owens, City A.ssessor Townsend, Ele�ctrical Superintendent Dais and Water Superintendent Gullixson. � � . . PRO,CLAMATION� .-� ,..'.'A•nti-�Communism. Day" , Cit,y A.ttor.ney.Redmon pre.sented Proclamation requested by the Redding Cha.mber of Commerce declaring February S , 1962 as "Anti-Communism Day". _� ' MOTION: Made.by Councilman 5imons,. seconded .b_y Councilman Fulkerth.to . . � ' approve Proclamation declaring �ebruary �, 1962 as "Anti-Communism Day" , ,. and the Mayor be authorized to sign said Proclamatian. The Vote: Unanimous ' Ayes . , RE A.NNEXA.TION - Area South of City � � Mr. George Van Eaton, 1426 Riviera Drive, advised many people in.the.area in . � . ,; ,:� which he :re,s,ide.d were anxious;for annexation, and it was their fe�eling a smooth � annexation would be of prime use to the City �of Redding. Using a map as a guide, he indicated certain areas designated as "A", "B", "C", "D" and "E", "E" being the area just south,of the.westerly boundary, "D'.' the Shasta Terrac.e .area.. "E" was uninhabited area (with less than 12 registered voters), "D", was residential area. A , B and C were the areas from the southern boundar of t � � " " " " " " y he present - _ "- city limits to a point near Riviera Drive,. bordering, along Highway 99 and con- , . , tained residential, retail, commercial, h�avy commercial and light`industrial areas. � , . . , ,. q , He suggested Council consideration that "E!' be annexed as Uninhabited area, and - ,. i . that "T�" follow as an inhabited annexatipn, as these areas were best suited for a smooth annexation; that annexation ,of, "A", ','B!' and '•'C" could follow without the risk of endangering the annexation of the- Riviera Drive area, and more time could be taken to talk with the property owners to enlighten them to the advantages of annexation. Planning Director Evans illustrated on a map the proposed bouridari'es and the land us e of the area involved, and s�tated a-11 the larid: in the�"unin�i"abited" �area was � developable and could be developed' as� residential. � - � � ' � � � City Attorney Redmon told councilmen that if only "E" and "D" were to be con- sidered for annexation, he would prefer "E" be annexed alone as "uninhabited" area, to be followed by the annexation �of ''D", however it was of prime importance for him to know just where the registered voters were before he could give con- sideration.to.:•the pr.oblem:.:.. .. . ....... Mr. Frank Kennedy, Chairman of the Annexation Committee of the Redding Chamber. of Commerce, spoke of the necessity of talking with Messrs . Harrison and Oaks ' for an understanding of their present feelings towards annexation. Mr. Bob Dicker, a member of the annexation committee of the Chamber of Com- merce, advised he had a telephone conversation with some of the business people of the area involved, and he was of the opinion the problems can be resolved with conversation, and the situation did not look as b�.ad as he had thought. ''Why not wait thirty days and talk with these people" he concluded. Councilman Moty stated he was of the opinion that annexation should be of the entire area, and the Chamber of Commerce should be given time to contact the 452 business people; that City was willing to continue to serve this s�:�'ea with water as long as tlie �anriexation procedure was progressing. ,He believed the area "E" would strengthen the annexation cause, and the people working on the annexation would find themselves the losers of strong support should ''E" and "D" annexation be separate from "A", ''B" and ''C". ' ' Mrs. 5enta Coots, advised she did not think the business area should be le£t out, however the annexation of the "E" area would pave .the way for..annexation of Shasta Terrace to the City, as' it was'conti'guous to ''E"' and the residents favored annexation. She also told councilmen the agreement�to'run the water pipe over certain private land terrriinated on July 25th and there had been rumors the renewal of this ag�reemerit might be que�s.tionable. • , , . . . . Mr. Alvin Cibula, legal courisel representing Mr. Buetke, himself; and otYier; property owners advised that he and` those persons 'he represerited'w.ere_definitely in favor of the anriexation: ` ` - ' � ± , : , .. . . , Mr. Ray.'MeAx�thur- a�dvised he .had worked on snanyJ Water•Dis��ric:�' Committees < and he certainl. y looked forward tb .the development of-all;�this area,; that mueh revenue could be derived for .the City after .area ''E". was ,annexed and .water was made available. Dr. Martin asked if it would not be possible for�the _City.Cou_ncil; to declar,e its interition to supply the.reside�nts, of the�Riviera Drive ar.ea with wa,ter as ;soon as practica-ble by taking�in.the.uninhabited area :'E" .in ord.er.to .relieve,the xninds of the Riviera-Drive=peo.ple, ..in:th�e::meantime we make every effort to annex the entire area designated�"A", �":B�" ancl�"C"� of�subjeet map. ' ' Mayor Puryear advised the City Council will work and meet with any committee who wants to' rneet; that City Manager Cowden had expressed his:;w-illingness ,to work with the residents and business people of the area, and with the Ghamber. ,of Com- merce Annexation Committee, and deferred all action pending reports and recom- r� mendations of the various com-mittees working on this problem. "It will take � study and effort to get the job done" he stated. � .� �: 5ALE5 TAX ' � - The following statement was read by Councilman Moty: _ • .. . : "Mr. Mayor and Members of the City Council: I would like to bring up again .the subject. of tlie Cit.y's 25% sales tax con- tribution to 5hasta County. � 5irice making my thinking public on this subject at,our Gouncil meeting on December 4, 1961, I have had an opportunity to study a��research report prepared by the State Board of Equalization covering local sales tax revenues �� of-Califo'rnia cities and: counties� during: 1960. ; This::re:port�is•�-extremely. : revealing and ju>s.tifies:the .C:ity:of�.Redding'.s`insisting �on,;ar� adj.us.tment,of : its•-sales tax contr.ibution to .the county. � This report indicates` that of 362 c�ities having,sales tax revenues collected � ' � ` by-the� State Boa�Td �of Equa-lization, �o"ver� 40% do not give the; county an,�r share whatsoeve r of-their�s:ales� tax r.e.venues; �and approxi�ma''t�ely �92% contribute 15% or less to the county in whieh.the:y..:are.l;ocated. � Cities comparable to :Redding'are Red Bluff, Eureka, Oro,ville, Fresno, Bake`"rsfield; Stocktori arid�.Modesto: The'se cit'ies-,' l�ik`e Redding, are trading ce�ters`and�County'seats.� Fresno gives F.resno County only 8% of its sales tax revenues; Eureka gives Humboldt County only 15%; Oroville gives Butte County only I5%; Red Bluff gives Tehama County only 13%; Modes.to gives Stanislaus County only 7 1/2°jo; Stockton gives San Joaquin County only 5%; and BakersfieYd gives Kern County only 2. 3%. The 25% .contribution of� Redding �to Shasta County can not be reeonciled-with the percentage con- tributions of these t�ypical ci�ties: 453 Even more revealing is the fact that the average per capita sales tax contribution��of these comparable cities, based on population in un-, incorpo•rated areas, is $1 . 38; Redding'�s.per,capita,contribution is .;�3. 2�5-. . �� _.:. � -- , , . I appreciate the problems of financing county services and capital improvements that. confront the County Board of Supervisors .. I am al'so awar"e tYiat the residents of-our' city benefit �in�no small measure from these county services and capital improvements. The adjustment . of�'ou'r:sales tax 'contribution .to,t•he� county should rec.ognize these � _. �eounty.problems and city benefits. , , As you well know, however, the City�of Reddi�ng must. find,financing for projects which will. enable it to grow and prosper. Lack of finances can:ro�b-the c'ity:=of. its vitality and.atrophy its growth. .,The . Civ.ic.Audito.r.ium, �.par.ks:�clev.elopment-,- railroad,.overpas;s;..;the, sewage....,, . treatment facilities, are just a few of the capital impr,.ovements for., •� which financing,must be found. As new areas.are annexed, financing must be pro.vided for sites for. parks and other public'facilities, as well �'as'-for��eosts of acqui-ring power pole's and lines.�to� as�sure :thes� new. �' c'ity areas of the b'enefits of our low �electric.'rates�: � - ' - The obvious inequity in the existing sales tax split, coupled with urgent � nece�ssity for the Council to provide financing for city services:_ and capital improvements, makes it imperative that�tlie�sales tax contribution �'to the �County be 'reduced. ' A I2 1/2°jo �corit'ribution recognizes the county's financiaT problems'and the�benefits to:the�city of ..courity s.ervices, and is` well in.line with what cities:compa�rable: to' Redding are contributing,to their counties . ., ; . . . .. . Therefore; I recomxYiend that the Council approve reducing the City's sales tax contribution froxri 25% to 12 1/2°jo. � . ,. : , • r • � . " � �� / George.�K.: Moty, �Councilman '': . Councilman Simons. concurred with the recommendation of Councilman Moty, however was of the opinion the % should l3e less than 12 1/2%, suggestirig �7 1/2% to 10% would be more equitable. - � Dr. �Mar.tin aoncizrred with' botli:councilmen; however.:suggested adjustment: should be somewhere along the lines between 8% and 10%...- . , Councilman'Fulkertli; 't'oo,`�concu'rred�:` �"This`is.. a- step•in the right'direetion" he stated. , , � . . . _ � . _ ' �.. . . .. 1VIayor` Puryea`r state�d"�the 'first st'ep was �to arr'ange a meetirig;with.tlie� Board of Supervisors and asked the City� M`anager to have the first item on=the:;agenda for the joint meeting of the Council and the Shasta•: Counby;�Board�:of Supervi�sors: to be held Monday, January 29th the sales tax contribution from the City of Redding. , : . _ , . : , � � � City Attorney Redman advised s'hould-the �coritr•ibution riot �be acceptable�to the Board of Superv'isors;'�an�or:diriance should' be adopted.amending.the City-Code that City's share�be �i'ncrease'd`from�_75% t'o 1�00%; that�under the Bradley Burns Law if the County does not agree with the contribution made by the City, the Coun�ty could repeal� the .County 5ales Tax Ordinarice; in which case the Board of E'qualization:would not: collect :the sales and use tax; that County -rnus.t agree with the"divi§ion'if Gity wi'shes to have�the sales tax collected by.the Board of Equalization: ', .. � , '_ • . � .. . � _ , _ ,. . . � . . • , . , ,. MOTIO•N:� Made �by:'.Councilman:-Fulke:rth, 'second�ed by Councilman Mar.tin�to accept the recommendation of.Councilman .Moty regarding the City's sales tax contribution to the County, leav'ing the per centage open, and that City negotiate with the Shasta County Board of Supervisors. � The Vote: Unanimous Ayes. 454 ORDINANCE - Front Yard Set.Backs, Enforcement Zoning Regulations City Attorney Redmon pres.ented proposed Ordinance No. 670, an ordinance amend- ing Sections 30-4, 30-5, 30-.6, 30-7 and 30-23 of the Redding City Code to provide for greater maximum front yard set-backs by use permit and additional remedies for enforcement of zoning,regulations . MOTION: Made by Councilman Simons, seconded by Councilman Martin the full � reading of Or.dinance No. 670 be waived and the City A.ttorney be directed to !•"' 'l scan same. The Vote: Unanimous Ayes. � Councilman Simons offered Ordinance No. 670 for first reading. ORDINANCE - Re Redding Parking Commission - f City Attorney Redmon presented pr.oposed Or.dinance No. 6-71 , an ordinance of the City of,Redding revising Article 11 of Chapter 18;o�f the Redding.City Code, 1959, to provide for the renaming of the "-Redding. Parking Commission" as ".Redding Traffic and Parking Commission" and expanding the duties and powers o£ such commis sion. MOTION:. ,Made by Councilman Moty, seconded by Councilman Fulkerth the ,� / full reading of Ordinance No. 671 be waived, and the Gity Attorney be directed to scan same. The Vote: Unanimous Ayes . Councilman Martin offered Ordinance No. 671 for first .reading. RE AIRPOR.TS , � ,' City Attorney Redmon requested clarification on inquiries regarding business activities at Redding Municipal Airport and Benton Field. Should these inquiries be r.eferred to the City Couneil, the Airport Commission or the Airports Manager? Councilmen were in accord the Airports Manager, the Airpor� Commis'sion and the City Manager should make independent studies and that due notice be given to , .. councilmen for their information; those people making the inquiries should be told that when plans have. been formulated, they will be notified. EASEMENT - Grandview A.ssessment District City Attorney Redmon submitted a sewer easement for .the Grandview Assessment District from the Pacific Gas and Electric Company. I3e stated he was satisfied with.the indenture and recommended its execution by the Mayor and City Clerk. MOTION-:. Made�b.y Councilman Simons, seconded by;Councilman Martin to approve the Sewer Easement for the Grandview Assessment District from the'Pacific Gas and Electric.�ompany and the Mayor and Cit.y. Clerk be autho.rized to sign on behalf �s'I,' of the City. The Vote: Unanimous Ayes. There being no further business., it was moved by Councilman Simons, seconded � by Councilman Martin the meeting be adjourned until 12:00 noon, Tuesday, January 23rd. Motion carried. APPROVED: Mayo r , Attest: �, � � - y����� �? � l�-�'(-�!;_..� �( _ -r ` t �- Ci y Clerk �