Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - CC - 1962.02.03,396 Bur.llngame, Callf onnLa Februar.y 3, 1962 An adjourned neeting from the regular meetlng of was held on the above glven date. Meetlng calle10:1! a.m. - Mayor Byrd ln the Chafu.. CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL Present - Counc ifroen:Absent - Counc ilrnen: suggestlon that a pu orde:: that Councll:na proposed transfen an ::ender a report basedation that the tran Januany L5, a962,d to order at Mayor Byrd announced that the meeting had been scheduled prim-arl1y to consLder the proposal to transfer the assessment andtax collection functions to the County offlces and such itemsof nNew Businessrr that may require Cou::c11 action. A letter from Fr.ank A. B1oom, former Tax Collector of the Cltyof Bunllngane, dated Januany 31, )-962, was read, whereln Mr. Bloom expressed hls obJectlon tc the proposed transfer. of dutles concludlng that rtit would be far more beneflcial for" Burlingame taxpayers f or. the County taxes on Burllngame property to becollected in the City Tax Office.n P'JRPOSE OF Councllman }lorgan advlsed that based upon the fact that becaus€of l11ne,ss, he was unable to be pnesent on the occaslon of thelntroduction of t hre subject at a pnlor Councll meetlng, hls Byrd - Johns on-Lore nz -Man t Ln-MonFan None hearing be scheduled was prompted i,n renz may repeat hls objectlons to theaddition, that t\e City Managen may on facts to substantlate hls reconmen. oc cur . bLicnLodindup s f,er The Chair invlted the tlme. Clty Manager to submlt his r:eport at thls The Clty lianager. opened the. Qlscusslon by statlng that whlle he respected nany Cor:ncilmants views to retain the Cityrs lndivlduality and the rlght of I home ruIe, trr ln hls opinlon, the argurnent lsnsomewhat pointlessrr particularly when the Coulty can perform the funetion of tax asgessment and tax collection more economlcally, being better equipped wlth electronlc and meclranical machinery too costly for purchas e bv the City. I The Clty ltlanager continuedr_statlng that the Clty curne: t1 approximately $2,700.00 to $3,000.00 on extra clerlcal ass t-o- pr"ocess tLe bilfs and to do the collecttng; $2,OO0.00 t expended for postage, stationen)r, etc., ln tenms of "out o money a1one. In comparlson, lt 1s estlnated that the maxi char"ge that the Counly can levy ls approxlmately $2,000.00 v I t s pends s tan ce pocke trt mum The Clty ltlanager. pointed to the fact that peraonnel ln both the Offlces of th!' Cily Clerk and the City Treasurer are nover- burdenedn with duties ln addition to the assessment and tax collection; wlth the transfer of these functlons, personnel could do a rrore efficient and complete iob on thefu' other asslgn- ments and responslbilltles that have lncreased due to the cityts gr owth. It was further pointed out by the City Manager that- lt-ls unfalr to the taxpayer to be requirira to make out two checks ln payment of taxes and- that lt i.s a duplicatlon of wonk. The City i'{ana ger advlsed that a new Statute, Section-143072 of the Govlrnneni Code permits a eity havlng an assessed valuatlon diffenlng from that of the county, to ad just-its tax rate- upward """ooai"Efy if contractlng with the County.-- It was noted.by the Cfto Uatie6r that the Council, Lrowever, st111 retalns ultimate control on nhow nuch property ls going to be taxed and how the money Is going to be sPent.' The City Itlanager stated that slnce 1950 the tax ro11 has lncreased approxlmately 2@ or 11200 raone tax bi11s. With the completion oftho upper" Ml1ls Estate, an addlttonal 2!0 bi11s will have to bepr.ocessed, addltlonal personnel may be enployed to meet the inc:reasedservlce cos ts. 3g? At the request of Councll, the City Manager was requested toneply to lnqulrles from the tr'Ioon. Mr:. A. G. Wes tcott r s lnqufu.y concer:ning the rnethod to be employedln contr.o1llng the cost of the servlce by the County, was answeredby the Ctty Attonney, who advlsed that authorlzatlon ls stlpulatedln the Government Code, whlch provldes for an agreement and also relmbursement to the County for lts expenses. A celling has beenfixed by the State Tregislature, 11[ of the flrst $25,000.00 of taxescollected, 7 /'lt, ot 15 on collectlons over; the sum collected to be deposlted ln the County trSalary I'und.n 'uI. B. Stdebotharn questioned the City l{anager for hls oplnlon onnhow much the Citf w111 be requlred to spend in the futu::e - par-tlcular.ly wlthln lhe next flve yean perl;d.n Replylng to Johr Cockroftrs lnqulrles concernlng the preparationof a trProspectustr to determine rtwha t the ser.vlce might bett and thetrcharge the Cor:nty w111 maketr the Clty Manap;er stated thrt in hls oplnlon lt was urnecessary to prepar.e a bnochur:e; the advantageto be derlved by the Clty far outwe lghs any dlsadvantage. Repeatlnghls prevlous statements concernlng nout of pockettr expenditures andstatlng that approxlmately thLr'ty porcent of the comblned $6e,OOO.OOyear.ly payr.o11 of both the Offices of the Clty Clerk and the Clty Treasuren ls used ln the assessment and colleetlon of taxes; 1n tenms of nman hoursrr the savlng would be SlhrO0O.OO; however, there ar.e other dutles asslgned to the personnel 1n the two offices. Continulng to neply to 1nquir.1es, the City Manager stated that therels no lntentlon to reduce the present staff. fn neply to Mr. Bl-oomrs lnqulnles concerriing the Cityrs transfen of necords pertainlng to assessments and tax books to the County, theClty Manager advlsed that all work r^rJ,Il be done bv the County accordlng to law; Councll advl"ses what the tax rate w111 be, there w111 be one blll only antl under the new Law the Ctty can ::alsethe tax rate; however, wLth the sales tax revenue, this no doubt, w111 bq unneces sary. I',fu. B1oom, ref errlng to the f ixed cel1lng rate, stated that inhls oplnlon, the County may ralse the county tax rate to obtainaddltlonal funds fon the service. fn rep1y, the Clty Managen stated that 1t is lmpr"obable wlth the present equlpment used bythe County and the efflclency of the system. fn reply to an lnqufu.y concer.nlng the collection of bonds and special assessments, the Clty Attorney advlsed that Sectlon 51501of the Gove::nment Code provldes that the County wl1l collectnspeclal assessmentsn ln addltlon to the property tax; reverythlng that goes on the secured noI1n ln additlon to personal propenty on nentals. E. J. Lelsrs lnqulry concer:nlng the aboli.shment of ItAssessorrr andnTax Co11ectorn -positlons and Ehe posslble reductlon ln salarles was replled to by the City C1er.k, who advlsed that the positlon !.s an electlve one to whlch he ls elected as rClty C1er.ktr andthat the posltlon of nAssessortt ls an ex-officlo one. A further. lnqufu.y fnom the f1oor. questloned whether the proposed step would not be consldened a move toward metnopolitan govennment, wlth the Clty Manager r.eplylng negatlvely. Wl11lam P. Bnl8ham questioned the City Manager. on trhow many people have requested thls servlce" and in reply the Clty Manager pointed out that Cor:nci1 members are elected to represent the Clty; the subJect under dlscusslon ls a matter of nt::ustn and to be decldedby Councll actlon. 398 Speaklng on the number" of civic and lndustrial organlzationsexpresslng approval that the service be transferned to the Countyand in reply to Mr. Br.lghamrs questlons, the Clty Managen statedthat he had not recelved petltlons from indivlduals and was .not 1n a posltlon to state how many lndlvlduals wer"e ::epnesentedin the organlzations. In reply to the questions of Councilman Lorenz concerning hLsbellef 'ln metropolltan government, the City Managen advised thathe belleved in the prlncipal of nhome rulen and decisions made when appropriate. Alsl: ln reply to Councllman Lorenzrs questlon whether the pnoposed step was one toward metropolltan government, the Clty Managen replled negatlvely, statlng that lt ls a matten ofrrefficlencyrl neconomyrr and nr:rlnistenlal routlne.rt The Clty Manage:: ln r"ep1y to Councllman Martinrs questi.on, advised that there are four, posslbly five citles in San I{ateo County cumently not contnacttng wlth the County for this servlce. Councllman },lorgan observed th:t based on terms of populatLon, approximately one-ha1f of the County total does not have the County perform thls servlce. Councllman l'{organ r. referr.lng to the Clty Managerls statements conce'.nlng t]ne 30% or l+O% of the Clty Clerkrs and the City Treasurerrs payroll allocated for assessing and tax collectlonfunctions and ihe reported roverloadn of work, questloned theCity Manager on what other functlons this percentage would apply; how many people will be affected by the proposed change, wouldsalaries be neduced and personnel dlschanged. The Clty Manager stated that there was no lntentlon to reducesalarles or to dlscharge personnel; that other functionsincluded accounting, maintenance of records, lndexing of mlnutes, pa;mo11, e tc. Following funther questloning, Cor:ncllman Mo::gan lllustrateda polnt wheneby a hardshlp may be claimed if one b111 ls necelved and the combined amount cannot be met at one tine bythe taxpayer. Tt was Councilnan Monganrs opinlon that a betten service would be rendered by contlnulng the present policy ofpernittlng taxpayers to pay theh l-ocal taxes In person. In repIy, the City Manager advlsed that the due date for the payment of both the clty and the county taxes occurs at the s ame tLme. At thls point, the Chafu entertalned a motion to resolve the lssue, wlth Council neservlng the prlvllege of speaklng on the ques t i.on . Councilman Morgan moved that the proposa1' to transfer the ass6ssment and tax collection functlons to the County offices, be reJected, seconded by Cor:rrc11man Lorenz. 0n the questlon and at some length, Councilman Johnson setforth her. reasons for approvlng the proposed transfe:', statlngthat the best interest of the Ctty of Burllngame would be ser"ved by contractlng wlth the County for the servlce; cognlzant that the City Treasurer ls reluctant to release a portlon of the dutLes of that offlce, lt would re1leve, however, the existlng pr.essure; the City of Burllngame ls a part of the County of San Mateo, theref or.e, the Ctty would not be rrglvlng lntt to the Cor:nty; lf proved r:nsatlsf actory, the Clty may, by mutual consent, agaln assume the functions and ln conclusion, the City would be rernLss ln not taklng advantage of the savlng to the people of the corununlty. Councllman Lonenz stated that ln hls oplnion, the proposal totransfer the functions to the County ls a step toward trmetnopolltan government, soclallsm and communlsm.n Referring to the statementthat the function may be resumed at a Later. date, Councilrnan Lor.enz stated that the Clty nwould be loslng the efficlency by golng backto old ways .' Councllman Martints statement Lncluded only that he would osecond the remarks made by Cor:ncllman Johnson.n 3e9 of the Clty Manage:: wasefflclency; howeven, in values and human v alue s It made by the people comlngnot rrsee this constant Mayor Byrd stated that the recormendation commendable fr:om a standpolnt of buslnesshls opinion, Council should trweigh d011ar: and that any change 'to be made should be forward and so statingtt and that he could chlpplng away of the peoplets nights.rt Upon advlce of the City Attorney that OIILIIANCE {Q. 7,+8, author.lzlnthe transfen of the assessment and tax collection duTies to the County 0fflces, was scheduled for second reading, Councilman Morgan,wlth the consent of hls second, Councllman Lorenz, wlthdrew hls mot 1on. Councllman Johnson thereup on moved that OEDINANCE N0. 7[B nAn Ordlnance Addlng Artlcle !A to Part TfI oI the BnrTln[ame Ordinance Code and Provldlng fon the Transfer of the Assessment and Tax Collectlon Duties of the City Assessor and Clty Tax Collectorto the Assesso:r and to the Tax Collector of the Cor:nty of San Mateo and Repeallng A11 Pr.ovlslons of the 0r,dlnance Code ln Confllct Ther"ewlthn be adopted, seconded by Councilman Martln. A Ro11 Ca11 vote was :.ecorded as follows: Ayes: Councllmen: Johns on-Mart ln Noes : Councllmen: Byrd -Lore nz -Mor': an ORDTN.A.NCE NO.J[8 was declared defeated. 1. ANTT-CO1.I].IT'NIST PROCI,AMATTON Mayo:: B;rrd announced receipt of two communlcatlons fron Burl lngame nesidents questlcning hls slgning of an Ant1-Conrnunlst Proclamation recently and read hls replies to each. Mayor Byrd stated that if ca11ed upon to do so as Malror, he would continue to s lgn rtAntL- 0ommunls tn ?roclamations . 2 SUBJECTS REFERRED TO BY COUNCTLI:A}I i'iORGAN Councllman Mongan requested Councll conslderatlon to the following: 1. Ihe effect the development of the Keyston properties on Bayshore Hlghway sha11 have on the plans the City may have ln the developmentof lts shor.eline propertles; 2. That the representatlves of the State Personnel Board Cooperatlve Ser:vlce, cun::ently conductlng an employee cl"asslficatlon-wage survey,also confer. wlth membons of the Clty Councll. The Clty l'fanager in reply to the above, advlsed that a r.erort fr.omthe State wll1 be submltted f fu'st to Councll. 3. That a ffum cou::se of actlon be taken ln connectlon with the Cltyrs easernont adJacent to the new Pollce Statlon. The Clty Attorney advlsed that the Counc11- previowly has a.r t'rorizedhls offlce to file an action to determine the Cityrs authorlty onthe ls sue . l+. That a report be glven on the closlng dates to place lssues onthe forthcomlng Apnl1 electlon bal1ot. Furthe::, that Councll discloseplans, lf any, on proposltions that may be placed on the ba11ot. 400 The City Attorney advlsed that a report on closing dates forballot issues, will be submltted to Council at the regular:meeting, Monday, February !. Councilman Morgan advised of hls intentlon to lntroduce a motlon at the next regular meetlng to withdraw from afflliatlonwith the Association of Bay Area Governmsnts (ABAG). I,1r. George Keyston, in reply to Councilman Uors'ants inqulry,stated that the property referred to on the Bays hore Highway 1s not for sale; however, Council was assured of his lntentionto cooperate with any plan advanced by the City of Burlingameor the County of San Mateo. The meeting was thereafter reguJ-arly adjourned at 12:0! p.n. Respectlully submitted, MRBFAT K. City Clerk l,JiirTE l*rlnon'4" APPBOVED: A}IDREW C. Mayo:. BYRD ,<..1Q+#"( U