My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
SUPPLEMENTAL
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2023
>
041823 SPECIAL
>
SUPPLEMENTAL
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/18/2023 2:05:54 PM
Creation date
4/18/2023 4:00:45 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
4/18/2023
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
18
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Christina Casha <br /> From: Ellen Holmgren <br /> Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2023 11:49 AM <br /> To: Jill Miller; Mayor and City Council <br /> Cc: Pleasanton City Clerk; Pamela Ott;Tamara Baptista <br /> Subject: RE: Comment On Agenda Item 25:Water conservation mandate <br /> Dear Jill Miller, <br /> Thank you for your email regarding Item 25 on the City Council Regular Meeting Agenda for tonight, April 18, <br /> 2023. <br /> This email acknowledges receipt of your email to the Mayor and City Council, the City Manager, and City staff. <br /> Thank you again for your interest in the City of Pleasanton. <br /> Regards, <br /> Ellen Holmgren, Administrative Assistant <br /> City of Pleasanton <br /> From:Jill Miller <br /> Sent: Monday, April 17, 2023 8:35 PM <br /> To: Mayor and City Council <citycouncil@cityofpleasantonca.gov> <br /> Subject: Comment On Agenda Item 25: Water conservation mandate <br /> ***[EXTERNAL]This message comes from an external organization.Exercise caution when opening attachments or clicking links,especially from unknown <br /> senders.*** <br /> Dear Mayor and City Council: <br /> Regarding Agenda Item 25, please ignore staff recommendation to change the current <br /> MANDATED 15% water conservation to a VOLUNTARY 15% water conservation. Please keep the <br /> conservation level mandated, with fines for excess use. <br /> What's at risk if demand exceeds supply? The staff report spells it out: <br /> • Interrupted or no water service -- "large portions of the water system would no <br /> longer be able to provide consistent and reliable service" <br /> • Firefighting impacted -- "loss of water flow for firefighting" <br /> • Water quality concerns -- "potential for contamination of the water distribution <br /> system" <br /> As we enter warmer months and habitual increased demand, along with an anticipated above <br /> historical averages fire season, is this really the time to eliminate a water reduction <br /> mandate? Do we really want to gamble by adopting the staff recommendation? Sure, if <br /> demand is creeping up, staff can make the recommendation and the City Council can adopt the <br /> mandated conservation once again, but how long will those actions take, and how long after that <br /> 1 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.