Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOrdinances - No. 132Ordinance No, I32 Ordinance No. 132 does not have a City Seal on the following documents and also does not have P City Seal on the pages in the Ordinance Ledger Volume No, 2’ Page No. 137. ORDINANCE NO+ 132 - AN ORDINANCE APP~OVI~G THE .ANNEXATION OF THE SOUTH- ERN ADDITION TO LODI, TO TEE CITY OF LODI. WHEREAS, on tae 11th day of March, A. D. 1922, a petition was pre- sented to the Board of Trustees of the City of Lodi. asking that, certain new territory, therein descrlbed, be an- nexed to the City of Lodi, and that 211 election be called and held in said new territory upon the question whether .said new territory shall be annexed to, incorporated in and made a part of the City of Lodi, and the.. property therein be, after such an- nexation, ‘subject to taxation equally with the property within said City of ‘Lodi, to pay all of the bonded indelit- edness of said City outstandin;? at the date of the filing of said petition. for annexation, or theretofore author- ized; and, ’ WHEREAS, said Board of Trustees did thereafter, pursuant to said lieti- tion, by Resolution No. 246, call a 69- cia1 election in said new territory u?on the question .set forth in said potilion, and did cause notice thereof to be given and published at least once a week for four weeks prior to the day fixed for said election, in “The Stock- ton Daily Record,” a daily newspaper of general circulation printed and PL b- lished outside of the.City. of Lodi, but in San Joaquin County, and did dcsig- nate .said new territory by the name of ‘:Soathem Addition to Lodi”: and, WHEREAS, said special election was. pursuant to said notice held in said territory on Tuesday, the 23rd day of.May, A. D. 1922, and the ques- tion so submitted to the electors re siding in said territory; as .requested, in said petition and set forth in said notice, was whether said new terr5 tory be annexed to, -incorporated iu and made a part of the City of Lodi, and the property therein after such annexation. be, subject to taxation equally with the property within said City of Lodi, to pay all of the bonded indebtedness of said City outstanding at the date of the filing of said psti- tion for annexation and at the date of the first publication of said notice of election (as said bonded indebtedness including the amounts thereof is set forth in said notice of election.) WHEREAS, said Board of ‘Trustees did thereafter, to-wit, on the 5th day. of June, A. D. 19’22, canvass the re- turns of said,election and declare the result thereof, that the total number of votes cast in said outside territory was One Hundred Sixteen (116); that the total number of votes cast in said territory in favor of. such annexation. was ‘Eighty (80) ; that the total‘num- ber of votes cast in. said ter- ritory against such annexation was Thirty-four (34)) and that Two (2) ballots were spoiled, and that the necessary majority of votes cast in said outside territory rewired by law to be cast was in favor of said an- nexation. Now Therefore. be it ordained bv the Board of Trustees of the City of Lodi, as follows: Section 1. That the annexation to the City of Lodi of the followiig described unincorporated territory, designated as Southern Addition to Lodi, under the provisions of that cer- tain Act of the Legislature of the State of California, entitled, “An Act to provide for the alteration of the boundaries of and for the annexation &territory to municipal coi’porations. for the incorporation of such annexed territory in and as-part thereof, and for the districting, government and municipal control of such annexed territory,” approved, June 11, lH3, and all acts amendatory thereof and supplementary thereof, and pursuant to the proceedings heretofore had and taken and the election held in said Southern Addition to Lodi, on Tues- day, the 23rd day of May, A. D. 1922. as set forth above, be and the same is hereby ratified, confirmed and ap proved: which said territory is con- tiguous to the City of Lodi, County of San Joaquin, State of California, and is more particularly bounded 2nd described as follows: ComAencing at a point on the West line of Cherokee Lane, 1940 feet South of the North line of Section 12, TGwn- ship 3 North, Range 6 East, Mount Diablo Base and Meridian, and iun- ning thence South and along said West line of Cherokee Lane to its intersection with the North line of Poplar Street, as said Street is de- lineated and so designated upon that certain Map entitled, “Lodi Barnharl Tract,” filed November 5th. 1906, at 3:05 P M., in the office of the Couoty Recorder of the County of San Joa- quin, State of California; thence Westerly along said North line of Poplar Street and its Westerly pro- duction to the East line of School Street: thence Northerly along the said east line of School Street to its intersection with the south boundary line of the City of Lodi; thence east- erly along said south boundary line of said City of Lodi, to the point cf Section 2 That the Clerk of the Board of Trustees of the City of Lodi shill forthwith, upon the taking ePvt of this ordinance, make and certify, under the seal of the City of LodJ, ana trausmit to the Secretary of State of the State of California, a copy of this ordinance, giving the date of its passage. Section 3. This ordinance shall take effect and be in full force and effect thirty days, from and after its final passage and publication. gT hereby approve and sign the fore- going ordinance this 12th day of June, 1922 , beginning.” __ F. 0. BALE, President of the Board of Trustees of the City of Lodi, pro-tem. I hereby certify that the foregoing ordinance No. 132 was read and in- - troduced for passage at a regular meeting of the Board of Trustees of the City of Lodi on June 5, 1922 and was thereafter passed and adopted Gn the 12th day of June, 1922and at an- adjourned regular meeting of said Board by the following vote: Ayes: Trustees, Hickok, Mettler, Hale. ’ Noes: Trustees, none. Absent: Trustees, Rich, Shattuck. Said ordinance was tliereupon signed and approved by the President pro-tern of the said Board of Trustees. J. F. BLAKELY, City Clerk.