BOOK 19_1942-09-08 to 1945-05-07

Browse Search

Mrs. Therese W. Coffey, 12 Hyde Street, also spoke in behalf of Mrs. Rice, ' stating she was an honorable person and knew that at the end of the war would discontinue the rooming house. Councilman Britschgi asked Councilman Granger if it wasn't the practice of the Civilian Defense office to encourage people to open their homes to take care of war workers. Councilman Granger replied that it was not. The San Mateo County War Housing Office asked for listings and people could list their homes and rooms with the Civilian Defense who would, in turn, notify the War Housing Office. Councilman Anderson stated the he tried to live up to the ordinances and be believed the motion before the Council was out of order, stating that the Council did not have the authority to grant a permit in violation of the ordinance, asking City Attorney McCarthy if,this was not correct. City Attorney McCarthy replied that it was. He believed the motion should be to enforce the ordinance by requiring the abatement of the practice of running a rooming and boarding house in the first class residential zone. Councilman Anderson stated that he would vote for a motion to abate the r nuisance and carry the proceedings on the agenda from month to month. In that way there would be no doubt that the condition would exist after the duration by simply withholding action until the end of the present hostilities. Councilman Armstrong stated that he.would have to vote against such a motion but with the consent of the second he would withdraw his motion. Councilman McNulty would not consent to withdrawing his second. ' Mrs. John Gill spoke in behalf of Mrs. Rice, stating Mrs. Rice was beautifying the property and offering a home to a number of people. She said she was in favor of Councilman Anderson's thought of abating it and placing it on the agenda from month to month. Councilman Armstrongasked the City Attorney that assuming the Council declined to issue a permit to continue the rooming house, if it would not be the duty of the City Manager to abate the nuisance. City Attorney McCarthy replied that It would be because it is in violation of an ordinance. Councilman Armstrong then said he was going to let his motion stand. Councilman Anderson asked City.Attorney McCarthy if this house could be de - Glared a nuisance to which Mr. McCarthy replied that a continued violation of an ordinance is a nuisance. Councilman McNulty stated that he wanted the ordinances of the city lived up to and this was in violation of the ordinance. Councilman Granger asked I4'Ir. Werder, as one of the petitioners against the rooming house, whether he would be in favor of Mr. Anderson's suggestion. Mr. Werder replied that he had no objection to Mrs. Rice conducting a rooming and boarding house in connection with the war effort but that he was living in a first class residential zone and did not like. to see such encroachments in that district. He asked what assurance there would be that the rooming house would be abated at that time., He asked if other people were going to be allowed to do the same thing.