Laserfiche WebLink
The roll call vote was as follows: <br />AYES: Councilmen Bubics, Cairo, Harding, McWilliams and Mayor Long <br />NOES: None <br />ABSENT: None <br />Set Public Hearing; Annexation No. 39, Lynwood Annex <br />Mr. Fales stated that this proposed annexation was also approved by the LAFC and <br />recommended that a public protest hearing on this annexation be set for May 3rd, 1965. <br />It was moved by Councilman McWilliams and seconded by Councilman Harding that <br />Resolution No. 65 -45, setting the public hearing date for Annexation No. 39, Lynwood <br />Annex for May 3rd, 1965 at 8:00 P.M., be adopted. <br />The roll call vote was as follows: <br />AYES: Councilmen Bubics, Cairo, Harding, McWilliams and Mayor Long <br />NOES: None <br />ABSENT: None <br />Mr. Fales stated that the Local Agency Formation Commission decided not to act on the <br />Kaiser Gravel Quarry Annexation until April 8, 1965. He said the reason for delaying <br />action was because this proposed annexation involves a philosophy of the agency. The <br />LAFC questioned why the City of Pleasanton was not annexing the entire Stanley Blvd. <br />area and the remaining Kaiser quarry area with the Kaiser Gravel Quarry annexation. <br />The Commissioners present, consisting of Mssers Byers, Oakes and Vivrette, stated <br />that the City boundaries should be extended as far as practicably feasible in terms <br />of services that can be provided by the City. The City was instructed to contact <br />the Kaiser Company regarding the annexation of their entire property. Mr. Fales <br />explained that the property owners on Stanley Blvd. that are not desirous of annexatic <br />at this time could cause the entire Kaiser annexation to be lost. The Stanley Blvd. <br />area being an inhabited area, and the Kaiser Company a single property owner, whould <br />result in an annexation election being defeated, if the previous position expressed by <br />a majority of Stanley Blvd. residents was reflected at the polls. <br />Mr. Fales stated that on March 11, 1965, the LAFC, by vote, indicated to the Alameda <br />County Board of Supervisors that they would like to have all proposed County service <br />areas referred to them in order that they can suggest that they not be formed ;f <br />it is feasable for the areas in question to be annexed to the City. The proposed <br />County service areas for fire protection in the Happy Valley, Stanley Blvd and Castle- <br />wood areas would be affected by such a recommendation. <br />Mr. Fales stated that the present annexation laws do not protect the people, but <br />tend to put them in a position where they cannot receive City services. He claimed <br />that the City of Pleasanton may be able to provide one of the best examples of what <br />can happen to a City in the State of California under the present annexation laws. Ni <br />Mr. Fales reported that the LAFC authorized the staff to communicate with Assemblyman <br />Knox and state that the City of Pleasanton would be happy to testify and present the <br />City as an example before the State Legislature to show the inadequacy of the State <br />Annexation Laws. <br />Mr. Fales stated that it was the opinion of the LAFC that the laws governing permits, <br />zoning, planning and other City decisions for the areas contiguous to the City Limits <br />should be made in Pleasanton and not in Oakland. <br />Mr. Fales stated that the LAFC urged the City of Pleasanton to firm up its boundaries <br />and annex as much territory as was feasible with regard to City services. <br />April 1, 1965 Population Estimate <br />Mr. Fales requested authorization for another population estimate to be conducted by <br />the State Department of Finance, at a cost of $190.00 effective April 1, 1965. <br />It was moved by Councilman Cairo and seconded by Councilman Bubics, that Resolution <br />No. 65-46, authorizing the staff to enter into an agreement with the State Department <br />of Finance for the purpose of conducting a population estimate, effective April 1, 19= <br />for a cost of $190.00, be adopted. <br />The roll call vote was as following: <br />AYES: Councilmen Bubics, Cairo, Harding, McWilliams and Mayor Long <br />NOES: None <br />ABSENT: None <br />Agreement with S.P.R.R. Re: Del Valle Interceptor Sewer C- <br />MR. Fales stated that this agreement is necessary in order for the Arroyo Del Valle <br />Interceptor Sewer to cross the Southern Pacific right -of =way on Ray Street. Mr. <br />Campbell presented maps and explained the route of this sewer line. <br />