Loading...
1970/05/04 City Council MinutesCall to Order Roll Call ROHNERT PARK CITY COUNCIL MINUTES May 4, 1970 The Council of the City of Rohnert Park met this fte in regular session commencing at 7 :05 p.m. in the City Offices, 435 Southwest Boulevard, Rohnert Park, with Mayor Smith presiding. Mayor Smith called the meeting of +he regular session to order at approximately 7 :05 p.m. and led the pledge of allegiance. Present: (5) Councilmen Buchanan, Hopkins, Roberts, Rogers and Smith Absent: (0) None Staff Present: City Manager Callinan, Assistant to the City Manager Albright, City Attorney Maxwell, Superintendent of Public Works Wiggins, and County Planner Gary Mann. Approval of Minutes Upon motion by Councilman Rogers, seconded by Councilman Hopkins, and unanimously approved, the minutes of April 20, 21, 27 Executive Session, 27, Regular Session, and 28 were approved. Approval of Bills Upon motion by Councilman Buchanan, seconded by Councilman Roberts, and unanimously approved, the bills presented for approval were approved in the amount of $$8,564.48. Communications Communications per the attached outline were brought to the attention of the Council. No action was taken on any communication except as noted specifically in these minutes. Stop Sign Councilman Roberts stated he had received a telephone call from Mrs. Earl Lorraine who requested a study be made re- garding possible installation of stop signs at the inter - section of Santa Barbara Drive and Burton Avenue. Council requested Mr. Callinan to follow -up on this. Easter Egg Hunt City Manager Callinan reviewed the Easter Egg Hunt matter and reported that the Recreation Commission had recommended the City contribute up to $$200.00 per year for eggs with manpower to be donated by various service clubs. Upon motion by Councilman Buchanan, seconded by Councilman Rogers, and approved, on a voice vote, an expediture of up to $200.00 per year for eggs for an annual Easter Egg Hunt was authorized. Councilman Roberts requested the record show he abstained from voting on the Easter Egg Hunt expenditure. Job Description for Councilman Rogers requested that action on the Job Descrip- Full -time Parks & tion for a full -time Parks and Recreation Director be de- Recreation Director ferred until the next regular Council meeting so more time Page -2- May 49 1970 could be spent considering it. No objections were made, therefore the matter was deferred until the next regular Council meeting. Length of Hair City Manager Callinan reviewed the matter of long hair, and Beards beards, etc. and read a portion of the City's "Swimming Poolk Code of Operation" which required swimming pool male person- nel to be clean shaven. City Attorney Maxwell reviewed legal aspects of the matter and recommended drafting a city policy regarding employee appearance for action or modification at the next regular Council meeting. Councilmen Hopkins and Buchanan indicated they felt City employees should not have long hair or beards. Councilmen Rogers and Smith stated they felt the City should "bend" with the current trends in hair styles. Councilman Roberts stated that he felt "well- groomed" should be the criteria. Action was deferred until the next regular meeting to allow City Attorney Maxwell and City Manager Callinan time to pre - pare suggested regulations. McsIAid petition City Attorney Maxwell reported that several petitions and communications had been filed in support of the City Manager and City Council and several letters received from signers of the "McQuaid" petition. Mr. Maxwell then read a report which he had prepared covering an analysis of the charges, the conflict of interest law, and investigation of the charges made in the petition filed April 20, 1970 by J.D. McQuaid. Mr. Maxwell's report is attached to the original of these minutes. Upon motion by Councilman Rogers, seconded by Councilman Buchanan, and unanimously approved by the following roll call vote, the petition filed by J.D. McQuaid on April 20,1970 and the report prepared by City Attorney Maxwell are to be submitted to the Sonoma County District Attorney for investi- gation. AYES: (5) Councilmen Buchanan, Hopkins, Roberts, Rogers and Smith NOES: (0) None Paul Golis requested permission to read a prepared state- ment. Mayor Smith refused and stated a public hearing was not scheduled and that Mr. Golis could speak on this sub- ject later in the meeting at Unscheduled Public Appearances slot on the agenda. .Mr. Golis asked that the record show he was not allowed to speak at this time. Mr. Golis remark- ed that it appeared there was still a conflict of interest and that action on this matter should be limited to those Councilmen not involved. He stated further that the report given by City Attorney Maxwell was not one which represent- ed the citizens of Rohnert Park, but appeared to represent the City Council and the accused. He then requested permis- sion to file a copy of his prepared statement in lieu of reading it. Permission was granted and a copy was filed with the Clerk. Page -3- May 4, 1970 Regulation of City Manager Callinan reviewed the matter of political signs Political Signs on display throughout the City. County Planner. Mann recom- mended the City adopt an ordinance regulating political signs and summarized the requirements in Petaluma, Santa Rosa, and the County. After a brief discussion, staff was requested to prepare for Council consideration, an amendment to the Zoning Ordin- ance concerning political signs. Rezoning MG District City Manager Callinan reviewed the matter of possibly re- on Westerly Frontage zoning on the westerly frontage road area and County Plann- Road er Mann read a staff report regarding same which recommended the area be rezoned to a general services commercial distric' Upon motion by Councilman Rogers, seconded by Councilman Hopkins, and unanimously approved, a public hearing will be set to amend the zoning ordinance from M.G.,General Indust - rial to C--G, General Services Commercial district for the area on the westerly frontage road, north of Hinebaugh Creek. Forsyth Realty City Manager Callinan read a letter from Forsyth Realty Service Station requesting a commitment for a service station site at the Site Request southeast corner of Commerce Blvd. and Rohnert Park Express- File 105 way. Mr. Callinan summarized previous requests for this corner and Council action taken at the February 20, 1969 meeting. County Planner Mann read a staff report which recommended no approval of the proposed use until applicant indicates satisfactorily what the relationship of the service station is to the total development of the southeast quadrant of Rohnert Park Expressway and Commerce Blvd. and how access points are designed so as to not impede through traffic. Discussion followed. Art Howard of Forsyth Realty was present and answered questions of the Council. A motion was made by Councilman Buchanan to deny without prejudice the request unless a service station was part of a larger development. Said motion was seconded by Mayor Smith and approved by the following roll call vote: .AYES: (4) Councilmen Buchanan, Hopkins, Roberts and Smith NOES: (1) Councilman Rogers Referral from County County Planner Mann summarized the application to the County on Application of of Sonoma of Messanan/Clark%Mi.fsud for General Commercial Messanan /Clark/Mifsud zoning on Santa Rosa Avenue north of Rohnert Park. A for General Commercial brief discussion followed. Zoning on Santa Rosa m Avenue Upon motion by Mayor Smith, seconded by Councilman Buchanan the Council recommended to the County denial of the re- zoning. Said motion was approved by the following roll call vote: Page -4- May 49 1970 AYES: (4) Councilmen Buchanan, Hopkins, Roberts and Smith NOES: (0) None ABSTAin (1) Cou:siiiivais Rogers Mr. Mann was requested to relay the Council's action to the County Planning Commission. Deer Meadow Village Victor Freeman of Western Hosts, John Stuber of Murray & File 0143 McCormick, and Kznya Tsuruta of Reay Architects were pre - sent to explain plans and answer questions about Deer Mea- dow Village development. They all participated in the discussion on the matter. Councilman Rogers Leaves and Returns City Manager Callinan reviewed the application for rezoning of Assessors Parcel No. 143- 060 -37 and advised that in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance notice of the public hearing had been mailed to property owners within 500 feet of the area and had also been published in the Press Demo- crat. Mayor Smith declared open the scheduled public hearing on the application of Western Hosts for rezoning Assessors Parcel No. 143- 060 -37. City Manager Callinan read a letter received from Val Smith (Mrs. Vernon P. Smith) which ex- pressed disappointment in the proposed zoning change since the area is a favorite playground of children. Ron Rasmussen, 530 Arlen Drive, was present and stated he had no objection to the rezoning but had several questions relative to�he proposed development. Mr. Billy Ayers in- quired as to the size of the units. Mr. Freeman of Western Hosts spoke and explained that Deer Meadow Village was a condominium type development with two and three bedroom units to be sold in the $20,000 and under price range and that small parks, a swimming pool, clubhouse, and storage area for residents owning campers, boats, etc. would be included. He also stressed that maintenance would be done by the developers.in order to insure uniformity of color and good appearance. Councilman Rogers left the Council Chambers at this point in the meeting, the time being 8.55 p.m. and returned at 8.56 p.m. Lillian Vaughn, 369 Bonnie Court was recognized and asked if the parks would be used by the general public or be re- stricted to use of the apartment residents. Mr. Freeman answered that for practical purposes there was no way to keep the public out, but assumed that generally they would be guests of residents in the development. Ron Rasmussen, 530 Arlen Drive, asked if there were plans for extending Transport Avenue near the railroad tracks Page -5- May 49 1 970 and was advised by City Manager Callinan that there were such plans. Jean Day, 7065 Beth Court, was recognized and asked how this development fit in with the bike and hiking trails planned in the development of Copeland Creek. Mr. Freeman answered it would be very compatible since the parks in Deer Meadow Village are planned along Copeland Creek. Referring to the plan submitted for the Deer Meadow Village Development and also the Site Utilization Plan prepared for Alicia-Park including the John Reed School site, Mr. Callinaz indicated certain proposed lots in the Deer Meadow Village Development on the south side of proposed Santa Alicia Drive that the City should acquire so that the Alicia Park and John Reed School site development would front on Santa Alicia Drive and not be hidden by a row of houses. Mr. Freeman indicated he was aware of the City's feelings in this regard, was waiting for an offer from the City, and would work co- operatively with the City on the matter. There being no one else wishing to be heard, the public hearing was declared closed. Upon motion by Councilman Buchanan, seconded by Councilman Roberts, and unanimously approved, the Council indicated approval of the requested zoning change, and acquisition of the additional park site along Santa Alicia Drive. Resolution No. 70-55 A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING DEED OF EASEMENT (Project 1969 -3) City Manager Callinan summarized the resolution. Upon motion by Councilman Buchanan, seconded by Councilman Hopkins, and unanimously approved, Resolution No. 70 -55 was adopted. Resolution No. 70-56 A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING DECD OF EASEMENT (Project 1969 -3) City Manager Callinan summarized the resolution. Upon motion of Councilman Roberts, seconded by Councilman Hopkins, and unanimously approved, Resolution No. 70 -56 was adopted. Resolution No. 70 -57 A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING GRANT DEED (Avram Avenue and Santa Alicia Drive, Improvement Project No. 1969 -3) City Manager Callinan summarized the resolution. Upon motion of Councilman Roberts, seconded by Councilman Buchanan, and unanimously approved, Resolution No. 70 -57 was adopted. Page -6- May 49 1970 Project 1969-3 Mr. Ernie Briggs and Mr. Nations of the Faith Presbyterian Faith Presbyterian Church were recognized and spoke briefly in objection to the Church Appearance assessment on the church property in connection with Project No. 1969 -3. City Manager Callinan advised that the church had been noti- fied, a public hearing had been held, and that the time for protesting the assessment had passed and the assessment was confirmed. Mr. Nat then read a portion of the sales agreement between the church and Alicia Homes relative to the improvement of Santa Alicia Drive. He was advised by Mayor Smith that any dispute with Alicia Homes was not a proper matter for the Council to act upon but was a Civil matter. Paul Collis spoke and stated he and :Maurice Fredericks had been stockholders in Alicia Homes and that they would meet with Mr. Briggs and Mr. Nations regarding the agreement. Recess Mayor Smith declared the meeting recessed at this point, the time being app'.°,ximmately 9195 P»:Ta:'�® # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # Reconvene Mayor Smith reconvened the meeting at approximately 9 :35 p.m. Resolution No. 70 -58 RESOLUTION ACCEPTING GRANT DEED (Golf Lakes Estates Park) City Manager Callinan summarized the resolution and terms of the purchase of the future park site. Upon motion of Councilman Roberts, seconded by Councilman Buchanan, and unanimously approved, Resolution No. 70 -58 was adopted. Resolution No. 70 -59 A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING MD OF EASEMENT (Portion of Hine - baugh Creek) City Manager Callinan summarized the resolution. Upon motion of Councilman Buchanan, seconded by Councilman Roberts, and unanimously approved, Resolution No. 70 -59 was adopted. Resolution No. 70 -60 A RESOLUTION DETERMINING TO UNDERTAKE PROCEEDINGS PURSUANT TO SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AND ASSESSMENT BOND ACTS FOR THE A04UISITION ED CONSTRUCTION OF IMPROVEMENT'S WITHOUT PRO- CEEDINGS UNDER DIVISION 4 OF THE STREETS AND HIGHWAYS CODE. (Country Club Boulevard Improvement Project No. 1970 -5) City Manager Callinan summarized the resolution. Upon motion of Councilman Rogers, seconded by Councilman Buchanan, and unanimously approved, Resolution No. 70 -60 was adopted. Page 7- May 4, 1974 Resolution No. 70 -61 A RESOLUTION APPOINTING ENGINEER AND ATTORNEYS (Country Club Boulevard Improvement Project No. 1970 -5) City Manager Callinan summarized the resolution. Upon motion by Councilman Rogers, seconded by Councilman Roberts, and unanimously approved, Resolution No. 70 -61 was adopted. Resolution No_ 70-.62 A RESOLUTION OF INTENTION TO ACQUIRE AND CONSTRUCT IMPROVE- MENTS (Country Club Boulevard Improvement Project No. 1970 -5) City Manager Callinan summarized the resolution. Upon motion of Councilman Buchanan, seconded by Councilman Hopkins, and unanimously approved, Resolution No. 70 -62 was adopted. Hospital Foundation City Manager Callinan summarized recent communications from Paul Golis, Secretary of the Rohnert Park Hospital Founda- tion, a March 20, 1970 letter from Sonoma County Health Facilities Planning Committee, and Council action to date in the matter. He reported that representatives of the Sonoma County Health Facilities Planning Committee had been invited to this Council meeting to explain the Committee's function to the Council. Mr. Paul Golis was recognized -and spoke in support of a separate planning area for Rohnert Park and Cotati fmr medical health facilities planning suggesting a 3 -1`2 mile radius with the Rohnert Park Expressway and U.S. 101 as the center. Maurice Fredericks, member of the Sonoma County Health Facilities Planning Committee, was recognized and intro- duced Morton Raphael, Executive Director, Louise Esch, Regional Planning Consultant, Vic Biswell and Dr. William Heneks of the Sonoma County Health Facilities Planning Committee. Mr. Morton Raphael made a verbal presentation on the .func- tions of the committee, medical health facilities planning, the different types of medical health facilities and the different needs they fill. Discussion followed during which all those mentioned above participated. Resolution No. 70 -63 RESOLUTION OF CITY OF ROHNERT PARK CONCERNING HEALTH FACILITIES PLANNING Upon motion of Councilman Rogers, seconded by Councilman Hopkins, and unanimously approved, Resolution No. 70 -63 was adopted by title. Sewer Plant F.W.P.C.A. City Manager Callinan summarized the program to date for Demonstration Project expansion of sewer facilities advising that Rohnert Park had No. 11023 DSX commitments to provide Cotati and Sonoma State College Page ®8- May 4, 1970 with sewer service as well as Rohnert Park. H. Richard Soennichsen of Yoder, Trotter, Orlobb and Associ- ates, engineers for the demonstration project, was present and explained briefly the plans for the Rohnert Park plant. He advised that the State Water Quality Control Board had approved the construction plans and specifications for the demonstration project and that calling for bids could be authorized upon approval from the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration which is expected within a week or so. A brief discussion followed. Upon motion of Councilman Buchanan, seconded by Councilman Hopkins, and unanimously approved, the Council approved the plans and specifications for the sewer plant demonstration project and a call for bide as authorized upon approval of the plans and specifications by the Federal Water Pollu- tion Control Administration. Golf Course Irriga- City Manager Callinan summarized the results of the lawsuit tion Contract Lawsu-it involving the Rohn -ert Park Municipal Golf Coivse irrigation system contract. Truck for Animal City Manager Callinan brought to the attention of the Coun -- Control Officer cil that a truck had recently been obtained through the Civil Defense Surplus Property Program and cleaned up and painted by City staff for use by the city's part -time Animal Control Officer. Swim Program for City Manager Callinan summarized the swim program for 4th, Elementary School 5th, and 6th grade students who are non -- swimmers in the Children Cotati School district. Since the school district is unable `Co contribute to the program again this Spring the City was asked to absorb the approximately $250.00 necessary for swim instructors to keep the program in operation. Upon motion by Councilman Buchanan, seconded by Councilman Hopkins, and unanimously approved, payment of approximately $250.00 for swim instructors was authorized to continue the swimming program with the Cotati School District. External Audit City Manager Callinan summarized the letter proposal dated for 1969 -70 April 28, 1970 from Touche, Ross, and Co. to conduct the external audit for the 1969 -70 fiscal year. Upon motion by Councilman Rogers, seconded by Councilman Buchanan, and unanimously approved, the proposal of Touche, Ross, and Co. was accepted. Resignation of City Manager Callinan mentioned the letter of resignation Officer McLennan from Officer. McLennan. Mayor Smith was requested to send a letter of regret to Officer McLennan. Paul Golis Paul Golis was recognized and requested permission to speak and Mayor Smith granted him five minutes. Page -9- May 4, 1970 Mr. Golis commented on the Council referring the petition (McQuaid Petition) to the District Attorney, rather than the Grand Jury; the need to fight for a hospital for Rohnert Park and his and Mr. Fredericks intervention'in the Southwest Blvd. grade crossing hearing before the Public Utilities Commission stating had it not been for their intervention the crossing probably would not have been obtained. He referred to City Attorney Maxwell as having procrastinated in the grade crossing matter and stated he intended to re- quest the Council to fire the City Attorney. City Attorney Maxwell City Attorney Maxwell responded that Mr. Golis's appearance in the grade crossing hearing consisted of harangueing the PUC hearing officer and that none of his remarks which appeared in the newspaper in response to Mr. Golis' state -.:. ments were being directed to Mr. Fredericks. Dennis McQuaid Dennis McQuaid requested time to read a prepared statement and was given three minutes. Several members of the audience spoke up in argument against this decision whereupon Mayor Smith started to adjourn the meeting. However, upon direc- tion of the remaining Councilmen and City Attorney Maxwell it was decided to let everyone who desired to speak to have an opportunity to do so. Mr. McQuaid then read his state- ment, a copy of which is attached to the original of these minutes. In response to Mr. McQuaid's remarks, City Attorney Maxwell stated he did not threaten libel but spoke privately to Mr. McQuaid after the meeting of April 20 and asked him if the signers of the petition were aware that the petition might possibly contain libelous material. Mr. McQuaid replied a newspaper reporter overheard the conversation and therefore it was not private. Councilman Hopkins suggested that the issues being discussed should have been raised before the election so that the voters could have settled the matter. Mr. Bergen of Alta Avenue was recognized and requested five minutes to speak so that he could donate his time to Mr. Golis. Maurice Fredericks was recognized and advised that he and Mr. Golis were associated in the PUC Southwest Blvd. grade crossing matter and anything said about Mr. Golis in regard to that matter should also be applied to him. Armando Flores, 7584 Blair Avenue, was recognized and re- quested that the petitions and his letter in support of the Council be filed with the Council prior to the meeting be read aloud. City Manager Callinan read the letter and Statement of Support with approximately 130 signatures affixed, which is attached to the original of these minutes. Billy C. Ayers, 7124 Brenda Way was recognized and stated that nothing in the petition filed by Dennis McQuaid on Page -10a May 4, 1970 April 209 1970 referred to the past election and he did not want his name attached to it in any way and that he had run what he felt was a good campaign. being business �• �• - Adjournment There Bing no fu:� �Ae: uusine ss he meeting was adjourneu at approximately 11 :30 P.M. D putt' Ci y Cl �'' " n Mw, .. , ,� .- �' >" � _., �.._ - � _ .. .._ ..,, ��� .� ;� _ �' �� _.-- �' �' y7 _ -r .-� .._ _. - _ __. t �` �.� � , tohnert Park City Council Zohnert Park, Calif. Mr. Chairman; Apil 28-70 It is not my usual way to back away from something once I start, houever in this case I think my -wife and. myself are justified in asking that our names be stricken from the petition, which is now in your prese,-qce. Our reasoning is first we did not know who was behind this move, secondly I have been made aware of the fact that this petition may be personally harming the families of Mr's Callinan, Rogers and Buchanan, and, lastly when I signed this petition I was not looking for a body to bury, but after all the month's of rumors, I thought this might help to settle the dust down again so that we could all get back to normal. Sincerely, Move to authorize the relocation of Codding Enterprises existing outdoor advertising structure that has to be relocated from the .interchange right of way with the understanding that the sign next to former entrance to the Cotati Raceway will be relocated south on the Codding Enterprises property approximately 1J feet from its present location with the following conditions (1) Permission is granted for five years at the end of which time the sign must be removed unless extension is granted by the City Council at that time upon application; (2) The existing sign must be cleaned up, repainted, old lumber replaced, and in general be given.., much better appearance than it has at present. However, in lieu of the restoration, a newer type sign of metal or wood construction with the approximate same overall dimensions may be erected. (3) Consideration be given to promoting Rohnert Park, especially"., MY 4P 1970' 0 - L I ky Counc i ? — City of Rohnert PaK, Rohnert Park, California Oentlemen: T herebq submit to you the attached Statements of 3upporh These documents are presented in an effort to ensure maximum governmental efftctencU through community support. T hope that this effort will aemonstrate that unlike many communities, the city of Ro4nert Park no, stlent ymaj o r i t y . The Ottzens of our My make conscientious, and dMtgent efforts to become well informed and be exprissive. KncerelU yours, Armando A Floras AAW wag the atttzeno whose stgnatures appear below,, Otsh to voice our sapnort for our City CounAl in qeneral and 1pectftcaliq for Wy Manager ','vter Oalltnarto Councilman Jack Buchonanp and CaunaSlman Jtmmy Rogers, we belteve thmt our recent election kas am an Opnortuntty to review the tanues of our Counatimen as AdOtdUals and Ov offtctalg. jven %nd thymertta elected public Tt is our We Wt the Coanatj consider the presstng datly Offatre of the etty and refratn from apenitng addtttonaj ttme an the allegmt confItct of OtereSt queotton. We belteve tt Nas been honvOly and fully. discussed, 8. 10. 2A 11. 130 130 17. 130 8. 10. 2A 11. 130 April 26, 1970 Ro4nert Park STAQUENT Q SUPPORT We, the citizens whose signatures appear below, wtsh to voice our support for our City Council in general and specifically for City Nhnager Peter Calltnan, Counctiman Jack Buchanan, and Councilman Jimmy Rogers. A believe tha opportunity to our Councilmen officials. t our recent election has given us an review the issues and the merits of as individuals and as elected publtc It is our hope that the Council con8ider the pressUg daily affairs of the city and refrdin from spending addKional Ame on the alleged conflict of interest question. We believe U has been honestly and fully discussed. 3. 40 7. 9. c- A/ V 1 15. l6 y fB 17. 19. 2 23. 24.1 310— April 26, 1970 Rohnert Park STATEMENT 2f gel the citizens whose signatures appear below, wish to voice our support for our City Council in general and specifically for City Manager Peter Calltnan,, CouncUman Jack Buchanan, and GounctIman Jimmy Rogers. We beNeve that our recent election has given us an opportunity to review the issues and the merits of our Councilmen as ind,tviduals and as elected pubac officals. It is our hope that t&e council consider the pressing daily affairs Of the city and refrain from spending aUltional time on the alleged conflict Of tnterest, questton. We bell teve it has been honestly and fully discussed. .AAM41 4 4101 - lay 10. V A 14 - pool- 15. ku U-1 it. 60" -7 60 17. 19. 20. M 1q; r 24. April S, 1970 ohnort Pork 444=42 AL WW11�04 sh tc VOW our UP our � t nera and specify for O t ;,. � CO!" ITV's councilman Jack Whananp and CoUnCUMan '3MMY Rogers. 0 behave nat our o election hos 00 an opnortantoy fo reptow the tosugg Of the 3 merits of our Muncilmen as MWOU01S and an WHO a to our We Mot the Counetl constder thO OrOSWO t l y offotrx of he Otty end rlfratn from apandtng addittanal time on the e onfHo Wtorest quosttcn. to belteve tt Mis been honestlY and MOO WOUSS01, o r � u� t VMSt On rf / ewe /(f l� j 1 Aortl 26, 1970 Rchnert Park 0 If, S �Vj1E1A4L1q11'NT �)F SUPIDORT We. the citizens whose signatures appear belowx,, .1 . wish to voice our support for our Gtty Council in general and specifically for City Manager Peter Calitnano Councilman Jack Buchanan, and Councilman Jimmy Rogers. We believe that our us an opportantty to of our Councilmen as Offtcials. recent election has given review the tssues and t4e merits tnUOduals and as elected public It A our hope that the Council consider the presstng daily affairs of the city anx-1 refratn from spending additional time on the alleged conflict of interest questton. We believe it has been honestly and fully Uscussed. 3 rt 2. Eno, 4. 16. "IT il K wr 5. 17 6. 19. 20. 9. 10. 22. z' I /+ 12. 9 6e we 0/ April P6, 1970 Rohnert Park gTATZMENT Q SOPPORP We, the Ntizens whose signatures appear below, KS to voice our support for our City Council in general and specifically for City Manager Peter Cal ltnan, J(jck Buchanan, and Councilman Jimmy Rogers. We believe that our recent election has given us an opportunity to rev Lew the issues and the merits of our Councilmen as individuals and as elected pabltyl offtVals. It is our hope that the 0ounAl consider the pressing datly affairs of the city and refrain from spending additional time to the alleged conflict of tntere st question. A believe it has been honesQy and falh discussed,, 13. 6'a 17. 18. 7 X-, a elf, 20. 21. 0 12 PS 24 . APAJ 16, 1970 Rohnort York'' I I A I A M I N z I E 222-2Z 1-4 � I =24 Te, the otttzena Mose Agnatares apoear below, stsh to VOW Our lupnort for our My Counatl tr;, general and speOfteally for O Monager Peter NNW% VanctIman Jack Suchonan, and Oaunctlman JiMmy Rojers, We believe Mat our recent MOW Nis given us an opporyanto to review Me taques ond the me rfm of our CoUnAlmon am AUViduals Ond as elected Pablo Officals* It te our hope that the Mnatl constdor tho pressing datly affatra of the atty and refrain from spenitng a4dittonal Me on the alleged confltot of interest questton. We belteve tf has been honey tly and fully discansed'' IN, CSTON L, 170 70 so Aprtl 26o 2970 Rohnert Park M= OF g:�UmTvggr N the ,;tgnCktures appear beloyop cittzens whose , ,vtsh to voice our pPort for our City Council to genera-1 and Soeciftcally for City Mlinage r E' ter Calltnan, 4n Jimmy Rogers. 0,oanct1m,an Jac% Buchanan, and Counctlyr s an p believe thot our recent eleation h u as given � opoortuntty to revielo the tssueS Ond the P�Wrtts Of Our Councilmen as tnrjtVt(jtmls and as elected Pub1c Offtcal" It is our hope thot the Council con tiler the presstng 0,ffetrs of the city and refrain from spending advi.tttonal ttme on the cQleged conflict of interest 014estton. We believe it hays been 40nestlY and fully dtscassed. 4- Y) 16o 5. 17. 6. 18. 70 19. 8. 9 01 All Iow 226 11* ?3. 1 2. P, 4. April 26, 1970 Rohnert Park IIAMAIZ IL 29== We. the ettizens whose Stgnaterse OPP ON Oar W mteh to votoo our support for our MY CounOU to general M speatftcallYfor COU manmgor Peter Alitnano CoUnOtIman jack 94040neno and counotiman immy Rages, we bed eve tat our recent eleetton has Oven us 04 apportunttq to rev tow the ts8mvs and tho MOMS Of our Couneilmon as inlivtduals and as elected PubItO rt y OUr hope tkot the Ooanotj Conotdor the presstng 40OU WOOS of the Otty-and refrOn from, spending editttenal time on the (,vJJOgO4 Conflict of %teraot questton, We belteve tt has bOeft h0n*019 Ond 010 lie X6, 5 6. 9. IN 110 120 16 Aprtl 26, 1970 Rohnert Park allisk0l A 41804,01"a Qv the ettizons Mhoge Stgnatures 000var We, Mh to VOW Our 840port for our MY oounotl W. A neryl and 00000 Am oe04110 Ma P ney" " CounatIrm-An Jack SUC%nono ond CounatlMon 4 MMY blerm. It beltsve th*t OOV rgognt elvotton US viven 39 On of opnortunttv to r*vtgw "ho " wrtts our Couneilmon *0 MUMMIS Ond CS it to Our hope Wt thq counetl eonstur the presAng Atly ofresrg of "the, Citu and refratn from spendtng adUttanal Me on the OWN confjtat of Wferest queattono We helteve to has been WOUSS040 ZA 190 F 20, 9. 21. 10. 24. X REPORT OF CITY ATTORNEY ON CHARGES SET FORTH IN PETITION FILED WITH THE CITY COUNCIL ON APRIL 20, 1970 A petition purportedly signed by twenty -two (22) citizens of the City of Rohnert Park, dated April 20o 1970, was read and filed with the City Council at its regular meeting on Monday, April 20, 1970. This petition made serious charges against certain public officers of the City alleging conflicts of interest. It is the purpose of this report to set forth the nature of the charges made, the applicable conflict of interest laws, the result of my investigation, and my conclusions. ANALYSIS OF THE CHARGES While the petition is somewhat rambling, the charges set forth therein can be broken down and generally described as follows: 1. That the City Manager, Peter M. Callinan, and Council- man Jack Buchanan ate partners with William Shiller, Director of Engineering for Storer T. V., in a business arranged by Councilman Jimmie Rogers. 2. That Councilman Jimmie Rogers engaged in another venture in one hundred (100) acres with William Shiller and Robert J. Brown in which Councilman Rogers has a ten percent (10%) interest. 3. That since the operation of Storer T. V., Councilman Rogers has leased premises to Storer T. V. and his wife is employed by Storer T. V. 4. That it is the "duty of each of the members of the City Council" to regulate cable television for the benefit of the City and they have "failed to provide the necessary standard of facilities" because of the above alleged conflicts of interest. When the above charges were characterized in the petition as being "corrupt and illegal" it is readily apparent that the Councilmen and City Manager were being charged with criminal conduct and a breach of the high degree of integrity required of public officials. THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST LAW The California law on conflict of interests governing -1- general law cities is set forth in Article 4 and Article 4.6 of Division 4, Title 11 of the Government Code, and can be generally classified as (1) conflicts of interest arising out of contracts, sales, or purchases, and (2) conflicts of interest arising out of "non-contractual financial interests". Section 1090 of the Government Code provides that City Officers shall not be financially interested in any contract made by them in their official capacity or by any body or board of which they are members. Section 1091 of the Government Code defines a "remote interest of a public officer" in such contracts and in its definition includes the relationship of landlord or tenant of the contracting party. In the case of a remote interest the contract is not invalid and the public officer is required to declare his remote interest in the contract and abstain from voting on any matter relating to the contract. The California law concerning conflicts of interest arising out of a non-contractual financial interest is set forth in Section 1120 of the Government Code and requires simply that any member of a public body "shall disclose any direct, personal financial interest in any non-contractual matter coming before such governing body . . . . . Severe penalties are established for the violation of any of these code sections. The contract in question by the petition was a franbhise awarded to Storer T. V. granting permission to use the public streets or rights of way for the purpose of installing a cable television system to serve the City of Rohnert Park. REPORT OF INVESTIGATION OF CHARGES In reporting as to the results of my invest igation, I will take each of the charges spearately as set forth above.,., 1 -2- i A. The charge that City Manager, Peter M. Callinan, and Councilman Jack Buchanan are partners with William Shiller, Director of Engineering, for .'$torer T. V. in a business arranged by Council- man Jimmie Rogers. On April 20, 1969, Jack D. Buchanan, Peter M. Callinan and William F. Shiller entered into a.written partnership agreement known as Rohnert Park Enterprises which agreement was recorded on April 20, 1969, in Book 2390 at Page 864 of the Official Records of Sonoma County. The partnership agreement, which was prepared by Rohnert Park Attorney, Larry Swenson, provides that each of the three partners owns an equal interest in the business and share equally in any profits or losses. They are required to make equal capital contributions and have equal rights of management and control. The purpose of the partnership is to "deal with real and personal property for investment purposes ". Specifically, this partnership purchased seven older type residential properties within the City of Rohnert Park located primarily on Arlen, Adrian, and Ava Streets. It was the purpose of the business to fix up and repair the residences and then resell them. The initial capital needed by the partnership was borrowed from the Sierra National Bank by virtue of a promissory note signed by each of the three partners. The properties were purchased from the creditors of a Mr. Jaroslaysky. The seller in this transaction was represented by Rohnert Park Attorney, Maurice Fredericks. Councilman Rogers is a duly licensed real estate broker and is employed as a salesman by the Bart Mitchell Real Estate firm. Councilman Rogers, acting in his capacity as a real estate salesman, handled this sale and Mitchell Realty received a commission of 6% which is the standard fee normally charged for the sale of improved property. The commission was not paid in cash but was paid in the form of a promissory note secured by a second deed of trust on all of the properties which note is to be paid as the properties are resold. To date two of the properties have been improved and resold; two have signed sales agreement on them; one other has been remodelled and is ready for sale and the two remaining houses have the same tenants as at the time of purchase. -3- j e }7 .:t t; „t,t roa:, 3 clidex;;:an_ trt' 0101 no t >.:_+ {. _ .. _:.3 'E. asw .3. ,,.o ..5 Ct3`§ j, ?_C 1l ;a` +.... A r,tl a, s:is s: =l Aloft .p _$.. ,.i': c. .: as .rxr ,z ±.l. ?'?s'..>S.?.. Qj k.0 ....... adf In .��;�ir .,r:a;t<� €} 'Yai ()a"' e �: ��'oC.r.! t':Sl £, s omade C:,ea;a . a'.35i .,a„(:?, n.: l Z -x.i. ,:3ie£ .*".::3_P£a.r; lm;po fx>.. .; .t1. n 03 iy.a '):. , ... ,.5,5't; ': "i ?'`s ° sn: ,T , antiuo f 'Z z;; gf.'si r t!a m u2. 6a.; to Bjdplx f o3,£p fiis'fis', a -1,; - Nox di,,. ,_agff 01 e.[: C £,(le' :t f.$ a .> edl 'k) :,7 a;,¢ jauq 'a:.s'..' .,. `3; 1` i?.).) .>nv, m l "n :- (o..';ti islonablesi "4qiv.l xab.Yt. -ao ; a no .. i.: >% _. it M<a oa').r ,,.:i;nq °f itW?fE:?= .%:J ',> _:.} M! :' ..3 9"t.& "3. #Lid W ,I . ➢£. o "mod Maple e na :i`°,. n ;,,-i ap- Iftt£. arf n °7 .] t, - C x .i ..).;i ?:: . ;';;; .,£it!.:f ! _ {., J 5. ::3 S i`.:3 ®3: f.£:. -u -,s1 :# ',,r� aqL Xrs si.'�N ,. V. -sop, _r?K fs':t ,,e..ifS..3r.3.iw;(:- f, cama^, ?xC,_t. i'3.r:>s3AYm. id! ni :f;9.t.>4 DP s3fiT ..�f...3 `% E'7 K P:.:b..3.L �. �Y..t a.3 &i 8j.. a' -f SY 3, .f, ,:)n T-1 . ' -._E e . i -e.... e ry ai'.i a i _. W.`.,'...: -' 1108 s_ 'aYS `£xallY Y;?„�... E >> zs s3 $3;3' f.'t t t.pat as �: na :s a"�:.. 9: >1 >.gas max a uz 'tf1s.0z;'(.00 a.£,'d W Pa'i.%;ns na":k:aJ &ikJs a �aftxlinn'f4ff)D MW1, ..;t L x `3n s"a y f aam _ 1ofi 9: Ib4l. b zz sigp "r. iffl' '59.[ Y;s,{'b a %Sall4x' 3, xae 3o't J:lw,CSa'i'. »*°,' #':' } °7.Y:i'!' °: :: -tfi 'F £:F n€.3lamimi;m') A pso .a b C,aq ion m° S X talmaifrImon a3.di' YJ' .3i.. o'°x`q "to .d..,@ a 3d.l bnonou 0 yd Manse .x;;a .)..se S". €on Y10002molq a - .0 Mao! d s as S`. Wag g e:sw " ud, binzt 3C ) e? :: C'tt ". L a S' 7 r', a`:t £3f< Ii_ 'CT .Us no 'btr>°„.T z... `?rr b;=3l,? :e1 sd e E.j S.`- + {+"+y ., di % owl ,.7.7 .; b oT Afm"s—£ .ta Pa:"7 no ..::3i. a,2 .t.::.'3% -t S vrid OWJ i...v 7igeft{ >.`. )m! 941 WO €a �t `.s'. t., t `�'t:)t".r x_x ":Y 5.'n.,f. ..:Yid S3� t. .��^3 a:ltiJ7t`XEa'C C€�:"). ce, ;;, „y„; OWN 4i:. us ✓1104 ? iai..a.er.'.r.'x= William Shiller is employed by Storer T. V. as engineer in charge of its Western Division Engineering Operations. The records of the corporation indicate that he is not an officer or director of the company. The report of a national recognized accounting firm indicates that the partnership at the conclusion of the calendar year 1969 was losing money. on May 2, 1969, the City Manager advised the City Council, both orally and in waiting, of the exact nature of his interest along with the interest of Councilman Buchanan and Councilman Rogers and the nature of the activity of the partnership. Prior to going into the venture 'hey had requested my advice as City Attorney as to whether it constituted any type of violation of the conflict of interest laws of the State of California and I advised him that it did not. It should be noted that the local newspaper, The World, also published an article concerning this business activity on August 8, 1969. From the above factual situation it is readily apparent that such a partnership a;rangement did not give either of the Councilmen or the City Manager any interest in the franchise of Storer T. V. or any financial interest in the company, and thus, could not possibly be construed as a violation of the prohibition against any interest in a contract awarded by the City, nor could such a partnership arrangement violate any of the prohibitions against "non-contractual conflicts of interest" because the activities of this partnership have not on any occasion had reason to come before the governing body of the City. The commission received forthe sale by Councilman Rogers was the standard commission and was made in the normal course of his occupation and in no way affects his position as a Councilman. B. The charge that Councilman Jimmie Rogers engaged in another venture in one hundred (100)_ acres with William Shiller and Robert J. Brown in which Councilman Rogers has a 100/. interest. -4- 9,--; V A XS1012 yd beyalgan A MAM SdT mookinvaqO PAxasulms nalelvia rimumv an ac; qPman mr. 11A Ion a! SA lad! .yommoo f ) Sm m1noxh,-, mail pullnuunns nolaufman ad! jai AMCUOD vl& od! bamlv% xotysris4m yl,-D Artl jag-cojn! 2M ao aludsa 10SX0 SM 10 n" 511;' -, oA F)3'3,6 nrvmdowl '-'Plop 01 loilq a q1dm1SnJxOq SO 10 YOW-1oz me yonmTIA vlio an eolvbr, ym 10 1011000 adi 10 nolls161V 10 mqyJ Yns hSIUMISUOY JA IsMadw OJ IS&I WIN bualvbm 1 has minicallso �Lo Od! No mmu 1091MA, SdT laqOgewen lanal sd-k ji, -, -39jr f3 O&S IX Mai bib K. vllvi,los Pagninva n- Ri. ,y. a.. -Jv1P Ion b1f) Memapmax4m qMmunly, z daua jsdj Sairlons"O grij Q jeamejul Ins uspz"nam o&,, nEquioz) add n! IMONSA-1i ,�,fus ',f-t A", noWdidolq adj 10 n0110101V a an b935-x1arloo -Z)C( Jon, bluo') -Xon yJ'1D of(1 Y'd -hqh-(sWm Insxino") r, ni ynG Yns SIS101V imemapnoaxs q1duann1inq S dome "Jesa-9:1ni A(" mjo1f1f1o!:) lzvj*SS`fln,,,,-,.:) iz on" Jhafflsps nomaga bsd yus no Jon evad aelliv-i.1of�, OdT vli.,) w1i ao ybod s.mo-,) of blobnolm wad l SSW MISPOR yd, nolisqvOna aid to scluon IsmXOG x1i qby,'jt r:odnalfflm=-,) msmflonuaD S as ac)i,3-lnoGq u-e;f YBW an n if SJ7iHO3` UOD wadi qpa"5 1 €t T zap -6sIE-rim, -,anc) cm, jL3 WS 10MAR MOMW dAh'i Amway- etad g f! 0-2n The facts in this connection clearly show that in December of 1969, Councilman Rogers, in his capacity as a real estate salesman for Mitchell Realty Company, handled the sale of a large parcel of real property situated east of the City of Rohnert Park from the previous owner, Hubert George Comstock, to William Shiller and Robert J. Brown. Robert J. Brown is a friend of Mr. Shiller and is not directly connected with Storer T. V. The standard real estate commission, as set forth by the Sonoma County Multiple Listing Service, on large acreage parcels is 10% of the sales price. In this instance, Councilman Rogers, instead of taking his real estate commission in cash in the amount of 10% of the sales price, took a 10% interest in the real property instead. The title to this property is now held 45% by William Shiller, 45% by Robert J. Brown and 10% by Jimmie W. Rogers. The deed is recorded in Book, 2437 page 764 cfthe official Records of the County of Sonoma. There was no contract with the City involved in this transaction and thus could not violate the conflict of interest laws concerning an interest in a City contract, nor has any thing concerning this property, which is situated outside of the city limits, ever come before the City Council and thus could not be in violation of any conflict of interest arising out of a non-contractual matter. Clearly, there is no conflict of interest involved in this transaction. C. 'The charge that since the operation of Storer T.V. Councilman Rogers has leased premises to Storer T. V. and his wife is employed by that firm. Approximately eight (8) months after the award of the franchise to Storer T. V. that company rented premises owned by Councilman Rogers and presently continues to occupy those premises as their local office. Subsequent thereto and continuing to the present date, Councilman Roger's wife is employed in the office of Storer T. V. -5- 30 Yon" W it) v"Way:02 y1mayknul nAwn No 100vol OPM V "T baiwainno YWOIA� To, Q IMM 1HAdd IR A) ,01W lae Y;3 VOWOMO.n nwiss Lanz Qxz%Sje qj., 21 afavist Upswas spins -M, now,"no wANQ OfQ11UM YWAY") ,aaspax qWdAWWOD SOOSIMA A&I 12 .&AMY oafsa vdi to NOI 'd 02b load won W plaquiq Stv 01 01 1 too Oamonf 'PIMPI(I WI NO! but _I ,_S .5 QyTO y Am& Onluds M MODW MAIM MAN W IMW! MY 7noa at knhnK"n Q h9sb -)Q: aJ: YAW OW elin j1EYWY, (M a6w wnyd!,I` oil 0j" TOW lon NUMA S061 bas PAM Yns and non 30=j000 VKD a A 0101400 Ps 10AUX90noo awn,i, ,ellwis V110 Odj W Waluo bolnWAV no rKI"M VA"Yonal aid! , While the earnings of the wife of Councilman Rogers are community property, her emplo8ment did not start until a consider- able period of time from and after the award of the franchise to Storer T. V. and thus, could not give rise to a conflict of interest in the award of that contract or affect its validity. Under Section 1091 of the Government Code of the State of California, the relationship of the landlord or tenant of the contracting party is defined as a "remote interest" and the public officer is required to declare his interest and abstain from voting on any matters concerning such contracting party. Council- man Rogers sought my advice in this regard and I advised him of his obligation to abstain from voting and in each case since becoming a landlord of the Storer T. V. Company Councilman Rogers abstained from voting on matters concerning that company. That this is true is clearly documented by the official minutes of the City Council. The essence of this charge is that because of the purported conflicts of interest, as set forth above, the City Council and the City Manager have failed to require of Storer T.V. the proper standard of service to the community. The facts show that four competing bids were submitted for the Rohnert Park CATV franchise. On November 16, 1967, the then City Council, by a unanimous vote, awarded the franchise to Storer T. V. At the time of the award of the contract, the City Council expressed a concern as to the ability of Storer T.V. to provide Channel 12 (Chico) because of its distance away from the city and the fact that approval of the FCC would be required. The ordinance adopted by the City Council established especially stiff regulations concerning the strength of the signals to be provided and required that the franchisee press to final conclusion an application before the FCC to obtain Channel 12. Storer T. V. -6- 1V 54% owid lo 21 Wrixog Mt wrim wj in 612 1 On, ibi F) -I; xc"' "5�:si Uj opidspal" WIN 10) bygm W 1931" 505 owxy Safi No w"awl QQ� 10 1DAN000 S Ul SAM OVID 10a MUM Nudl MW X T AOMKW�� -tl''A -tn Molleynn jary) 16 "IYEWS Ojj nj j2q7on-In: A. VVIG 10 aid! to MOD quamna9voD "A 741 IV% nollwom Is& ("'f WOWS! suit ac q1darmlialm ad! wn "jamejai 910mal" a as bonlash) Q y0sq amma ""Undn WIS jaSMA old sm"J"n�el:) u", Pno =11noo Won jo W& mul"ba I Lou 511pal M"T ul a"'I'vb"3 yt, MMAR onoo 1500 A bna qolJov nh� awspow awnUmm" �v JGdT glysimm" IS M Painagnaw SIEW1001 U0 PAlov mys WmAndadc' In ..>:; .J' 1001110 add yd .Uwwoo YAW 30'� W I l'o -i 'c�� aJ-)J: I)Tm""'P f to mods smu 0- ai Sp'jc'd�) YNG Udi ovodo 010a Joe nz j.xqwA ao ajoulaw boinqu.." .V.T mylow to 0AUP91 01 bollsa SVO4 lopk3mai"', '.�IJ -Ct'wufo') oflJ" 0.-' !ka st)"J" a'-,"Sw abld Y'uc-)t JzfIJ w0de, "Aj jast 51 lownevoo no Oaldomll VT &) xwwl ANMW a"! ="l G0j w%w ado bsbows Sjov -y'(" YND nadJ Saj Msalmon adi ao blawo W" ViO' .V.T 10101H to YNAUS 901 01 ons wys yawn vywG505 ON W wumosd 0011upw ad b0may 091 edi 10 QV0a_ ax Wdo Ravi nod b"A YAO wd"'w' skip, Qwwoj wK 1D to d1pnolls ad l Inkoloo Viii D, 01 Baonq Sm ACS. ansl SW Mi ba, uwsl 500 Fwniww" .V A 7jxo,P KA WmAn alsido aj own ad! 010"ad nUjjnWlqq0 as did file an application with the FCC and at the hearing of the application to bring Channel 12, and the resultant 49er football games to the City of Rohnert Park, the applicant was strongly opposed by television stations KGO and KPIX, along with the 49er football team and the National Football League. in a ruling handed down as a result of this hearing, the FCC allowed Storer T. V. to bring in channel 12, but in line with its prior decisions regarding blackout of the local areas, the Commission forbid Storer T. V. from carrying 49er football games. The City Council upon the recommendation of.the City Manager required Storer T. V. to file an appeal with the FCC of this exception and the FCC has set a public hearing as the result of this appeal on the general question of local blackout of sporting events. The matter is now pending before the FCC and has been vigorously prosecuted by Storer T. V. The large amount of expense incurred by Storer T. V. in connection with these FCC hearings is undoubtedly not warranted by the size of the local Rohnert Park CATV system but has been accomplished because of the requirements: of the Rohnert Park City Council and the City Manager. Because of the present inability of Storer T. V. to carry 49er football games as the result of the FCC rulings, the CityManager, at the request of the City Council, negotiated a reduction in the rates established by the original ordinance. As the result the City of Rohnert Park has the lowest monthly service charge of any system owned by Storer T. V. and the rate is less than any other city CATV system in the Sonoma County area. ,Since the adoption of the Rohnert Park CATV ordinance the FCC has assumed jurisdiction over local CATV systems and at the present time it is at least questionable as to the extent to which the City can regulate and control the operations of its franchisee. -7- An examination of the records at City Hall indicates that the City Offices have not received any substantial number of complaints concerning the quality of service provided by Storer T. V. One exception to this is the complaint registered at a City Council meeting by Councilman Vernon Smith concerning the delay he had encountered in requesting regpits to his service. Following this complaint the City Council required Storer T. V. to come before the City Council.and make a full report upon its procedures in promptly handling compUints or service calls, following which the City Council directed the City Manager to make an investigation of the records of Storer T. V. This was done and the City files reflect that a complete check was made of all complaints made by bustomers to Storer T. V. going back almost to the time of the inception of the service. An exmination of these records indicates that Storer T. V. has, with few exceptions, promptly responded to complaints and that a substantial portion of the complaints were due to a faulty set rather than faulty cable service. The City Council and the City Manager have also raised the question of locally originated programs by Storer T. V. Normally, a CATV operator cannot be required to provide local programs until the size of the system has at least reached !$00 customers. The present Rohnert Park system has approximately 900 customers and the size of the system undoubtedly does not warrant the large expense which local video tape equipment would require. However, the City Council and the City Manager have pressed Storer T. V. for this type of service to the community and that company has indicated that it will do everything possible to bring this service to the community at a much earlier date than would normally be anticipated. I have found nothing in my investigation which would indicate that the City Council and the City Manager have not at all times vigorously enforced the contract with Storer T. V. so as to bring to the residents of the community the best possible CATV service. _g_ a �"'.-J' F .ISM zft yns bavlaDsl son evni agA110 y1jo Sal 1,H-j yd 10 y3W:s1;j(-) �) ff-J YKO bONSIMPDX J1"I..CSQW00 ..di aMJ s'lo „v ncqa iloqel .{.M. f Won, pnAWMAW c ails, ONVISM as MIM42%my1 yalbuod yljqmomj IN' ,no lispilawn! ns sAam 01 'OfD Jb )Jo�F)-Kj:k) anfil YJW D.-fiJ 'Jbvs snob asw ONAT .v „'v xq-10.12 '1'. C ;}3 t:.,... Ki yd sbam njUniquco fIs j:() qr 10 sOij '"11 Oj JOOMIS VNEd V T 10 nallaulms M nollqovw'i -1' OJ behaoquem lipway wO', dJ1w Pw-f V T J. fi-'1' 10 o j645'j. bnjs j9p, vlfvo't z 0,- '-)IYE) boalsm anin ,vow xapnns?� yjiD otij P,'jvr, I.L- _n f(_,) '.::Y f. ') i, SdT V > T IS) 012 yd Owelpolq beism.,pl-KO yffsool' '3.0 no1j'p-sup -:'�"'Hj JOXMS�) :tc)Js'.t9qO VTA) a bodomm Inset is and ma Joy gd,.k 1c) qX1.2 qrfl 11-'nu Vuls"UMS msd M910YO AXW1 J'S nc,'OA Jnoewlq �dT aiqwf,)J?.wn -cm yl; +$�Jdxjohnu w0jays adl �o %x3: L' -)14J bn-r. oaqm'oJafj') 00Q J ' n 9'"(j up jq�3j bv Iol fin.3.1i 'w af1i-' •ril hnn 11MMOO YHO 9-d-t .a3Qupsw Blum Y"U"OUD tMij (K WHIM aO SqYj OW 101 V T 1=18 bamogy ovsd 01 Wdlea, paillylave Ob I,,'-'iw "I JBdi bsls�)Ibv� 86d yrizqmcm Jodi bnK--> and! nomb 1SWISS Mum a JB �Mj OJ O!Div �u alcO Mow AMM al, �'Xtiff:ton 'b a >. qv (rl I odi T V.1012 AM jusmonwD odd Ownwa'.';'n"n a1mbipal ad! 01 1011d al as -OwMea VTAO CONCLUSION Respectfully submitted, 7 � x� HARD B. MA ELL City Attorney�W 5-Mreoiew7 OF TA MtQvAd 1 197 aaAot f-t- A►a V, it 70 tOrF'0U'&*"!4e Gentlemen of the Councill It, is my opinion, that you would be well. advised to take the steps, proposed this evening by Mr. Paul Golis- I have independent, reasons for, urging you to do so,* First-, I wish to speak about the situation in which Couneilman Rogers and Buchanant and Ci:LV Manager Callinam, find themselves*, To ,gu gentlemen, I say this;. K1&&AV,4f4 Op ANY ro-v rft" 8), &77VAPFoOy oirff R&414rlb To You have a duty p as public. I instill in the citizens of Robert C. officialst to Park confidence that 'Wcity government is an honest one. You have a duty to remove even the appearance of illegality from the exercise of your public trust,. We, as eltizenst have a right to demand that you comply with this duty, This was really the issue on which the U. S. Senate recently rejected the nominations of Judges, Hoynesworth and Carswell and Fortas to the Supreme Court: These men could not remove the Meaxanee of illegal conflicts of interest. People have a right to confidence in their, publie. institutions. you have no right to do anything which destroys that confidence. Also., you must set an example,. If it looks life the city councilmen are "on the takell't why, should our policemen and firemen act any differently,? Look. at Newaxkt bbw Jersey. When the mayor put his hand in the till, it wasn't long before the police ehief*s hand was there toov Soonthe whole city was corrupt. Gentlemeni, we don't want, that to. happen here. Secondly# (X think, some comments are in order with regard, to the rumors that the city officials named in our petition axe, considering bringing; a libel suit against the signers of the petition. I believe that 4libel" has been injected into this issue as an attempt to scare and intimidate not anly the petitioners, but also other citizens who might desire to speak, out regarding the conduct of our officials.. In order to expose this threat of a libel suit for the scare tactic it is-1 I have researched the applicable law and will. discuss the Ray points of that law at this time. I invite Mr. Maxwells who brought. up the subject, of libel to me person• nally after I read the petition two weeks akat or any other attorney or authority on the law of., libel to debate the following points with me Libel suits brought, by, public officials against exities of their official con— due-+, are governed by the famous United States Supreme Court. Case of New,-York. Times v, Sullivan. In this easej, the supreme. Court did not allow an award of money to an Alabama police chief about whom, a Civil Rights group had made some inaccurate charges. The court said the following things in its decision: "The First Amendment requires that debate, on tubJia issues, should be uninhihitedp GC, -r"f,> 4,V1>EP P46Z robust and wide opens and such debate may well include vehementt aaustiat and some- times unpleasantly sharp attacks on government and public. officials." Tfhe protection of the constitutional guaxautee of freedom of speech and press does not turn upon.the truths popularity or social utility of the ideas and beliefs which are offered.11' "Injury to official reputation affords no,more warrant for repressing speech that would otherwise be free thandoes factual error; criticism of official conduct does not lose its constitutional protection merely because it is effective criticism and hence diminishes official reputations," "The constitutional guaranty of freedom of speech and press prohibits a public official from recovering damages for a defamatory falsehood relating to his official conduct unless he proves that the statement was made with 'factual malievs," that iss with knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not; such a qualified privilege of honest mistake of fact is required by the First, and Fourteenth Amendments." Now if you gentlemen who raised the possibility of a libel suit were. ac4luaiteed with the law of libel as explained by the Supreme Courts surely it would immediately have been obvious to you that the concerhe&I citizens who signed our petition come within the protection of the privil*V set down by that decision. Before bringing a libel suit, you must have some evidence thatwe had lost our privilege to speak out,t either because 1) we had knowled&-of the falsity of our statement' r or 2) we spoke with reckless disregard of the truth or falsity bf our statement. Is there any basis for such a conclusion? Look at the evidence, gentlemen. The business associations of the Councilmlea Rogers and Buchanen and of City Manager Gallinan with Mr. Schiller of the Storer Cable T.V. company are admitted by them., and are matters, of public record. Councilman, RogeA*Iease agreement with and his wife's employment by Storer are not open to dispute. 'Whether this situation.eame about as an induce_, ment for-the original award of the contract is a malte4ish to be investigated. Our belief that we, as citizens) are not adequately represented by our council in dealing with the Storer franchise is an, opinion to which we are entitle(4 if only from the apparentconfliet of interest occasioned by these officials, business dealings with Mr. Schaller* Finallyp as 11r. Maxwell. can attest, I have stated that if any portion of our statement is proven to be untrue or inaccurate# I personally will offer a public retraction. Mr. Maxwell said that-my offer to retract merely goes to lessen d - ages not to remove the libel. Howeverf if you check you will find that in a case 2 where privilege is in question am offer to retract is also evidence of the speaker-'s good intentions and worthy motives. The conclusion-, theA is that way, as concerned citizenst had not abused our privilege to speak.out about the conduct of public officials --f and if we have not forfeited our privileges; no libel action can succeeds even if, and I emphasize the some portion of the petition can be proven false. Now despite this state of the law on libels which.I believe I have fairly and accurately statedp Ur. Maxwell and others chose to inject the possibility aflibel into the discussion. Vhy, did*K they do so? One answer might be that those who spoke of "libel" were not aware of the state of the law as it applies,, to criticism of public: officials. Now such ignorance on the part of non- lawyers is understandable and excusable. No one would demand or expecti.that those outside the legal profession should be familiar with such a technical, area of the law. However, I find it haxd to believe that an attorney of the preeminence and reputation of Mr. Maxwell would raise the issue of libel withouta strong acquaintance with the legal principals involved. Therefore we mustlook-to another possible reason for injecting the spectre of libel into this debate. The other possibility is that those who talk-hd of' "libel suits "' hoped to scare and intimidate those citizens who would d :�e to question the conduct of thiir, public officials. I believe that this was the motivating factor for such talk and the evidence indicates that., as a tactics it has achieved a modicum of'suecess. For one signer of the petition.has backed out. and I would estimate that there are dozens of citizens in this community who would have subsequently join*d the faithful 21, weV it not for the open threat of a libel action. Though. I am willing to accept Kignorance of the law" as an excuse for the libel talk- which was startedt I am fairly well convinced that its purpose was to inhitit the citizens that you men represeAp, that it was intended to repress our• right and our duty to speak out, on public issues. I find it extremely disturbing to find among those who raised the libel issue the-one who raised the issue to me personnally an# attorney — our city at-torneyp, Mr. Maxwell* Mr. Golis has recommended for various reasons that the council. remove Mr. Maxwell from office. If you reach the conclusion.. which I think is warranted., that Mr. Maxwell raised the issue of libel in order to intimidate the citizens of this cityk citizens: whom he is sworn to serves then you. should also consider that as a reason for asking him to step down. I will conclude nW remaxiKs by asking you# gentlemen of the councils you leaders of our cummunityt yo*epresentatives of us citizens# to ponder the following words of Justice Brandeis;s, in his opinion in, the case of lVhi#key v. California: 3 "Those who, won our independence believed that public, discussion is a political duty; and that this should be a fundamental principle of the American government. they recognized the risks to which all human institutions are subject. but they !knew that order cannot be secured merely throu."11, fe—ar of plainishment for its infraction, that it is hazardous to discourage thogght., hope and imagination; that fear, breeds repression; that repression breeds hate; that hate. menaces stable government; that the path of safeW lies in the opportunity, to discuss freely supposed grievances and proposed remedies; and that the fitting remedy for evil.counsels is good ones. Believing in the power of reason as applied through public discussions they esehewed silence coerced by law — the argument of force in its worst form. Recognizing the occasional tyrannies * of governing; majorities., they amended the Constitution so that free speech and assembly should be guaranteed.11 Gentlemen of the councill, you must believe"in the power of reason as applied through public discuss-ion."' And believing in it,, you must, eschesItsilence coerced'. by" +-,he threat of libel suits.. We will. not be coerced into silenaeo We have brought- you our grievances. You must answer,. Answer — with.remediest Answer with answerst Thank you Added remarks: insert in page 1. I must pause here to ask -the council to note two inaccuracies in Mr. May-well's report tonight* fie attacked the petitioners for using the words "corrupt and illegalt" implying that a closer perusal of public records could have alerted us that our chaxges are without merit. As Mr. Maxwell should know, words such as "corrupt and illegal" and even "conflict of interest" axe conclusions of law which axe drawn from What the law calls "ultimate facts". He has not shown any fact which we alleged to be untrue. fie disputes only our conclusions. But it is neither our conclusions, nor his, that matter. We will await with him the conclusions of the District Attorney and, hopefully, the Grand Jury* I submit therefore that Mr. Maxwell's charge that we should have checked the public records more closely is without merit, for his own checking of those records has led him to agree with each of the facts we alleged. The second item in Mr. Maxwell's conclusion to his report is his reference to the petitioner's having a right to make � "fair commentt" and his cleax implication that we have abused that privilege. It is perhaps academic., but you councilmen should be aware that Mr. Maxwell is referring you to a legal standardq namely "fair Oomment", which has not been the law since 1964. 1 shall now tell you what the law of libel is today, what it has been in fact for some six, years. Ohnert Pe) C' .ty Council A�pvil 28-70 Pohnort; Pf,.rls g Mr. chr?innt:tt ; it is not my usual ring to back r) -w -y from oometh;inC� once :I start, hoi %ever -in this case i;afe €:srad. myfs €A.f are, justified. in z7 ' :ira thn,t our names he str:i.ckoll frox -a the peti t.iong which is now in your presence. Our reasoning is first wP, dlid -aot R iov,,' 1a11.0 s=tars be—hind this move,, :secondly 1 have hc;en made aware of the fact that this petition may he personally hs.rminp the "asra, lies 0f Mrg s (, l:l a n n9 flop ers s.nei Ruch�n.€.n, aa�d 1 vstly; sahex sa.g�.ed `thy s petition :I vices not looking for a body to bury, hilt a :I'te�° aII the month's of rumors, I thought this s° ighi h l to settle the dwst down a; °rs. n so that we could all et; hack to no-rmal. Sincerely, � Jl6 &s`6��:v'° m..... �. e��r64��e%_. ._E�..4v:,�„s� sic, =�v- asb.R,c... _v. - :u<..�,�. , .�.... V__....__. __ _..__ _.. 1 C__,VA IZ-7-14-V 9 1% 1 w- C �r iifi a ,mss. __, � ._ _.._ _.. _. .. ......