CCMIN063098 - Laserfiche WebLink

Ms. Acosta said staff was not counting on the backfill money. Staff would adjust expenditures to whatever the new program was. We can't constantly think something is going to change. We just have to wait and react to it. Once the decision is made as to what approach is going to be taken, staff will move forward with that; until the next change. Ms. Ayala appreciated that explanation for the public so they understand that local money is again being taken away from local control. She commented that citizens prefer local control of our own tax dollars and funds and feel the money is spent wiser and responses to public requests. She appreciated the explanation. Mr. Tarver commented that the State will say it is not taking funds from the City, that they will backfill the loss, but that has no real meaning. If they had moved to say when they repaid the PERS loan and the did some other things with the ERAF money that they would give it back because the State didn't need it, that's what the surplus is all about. The State has a surplus because it didn't need to transfer money from the cities anymore. They don't see that it should be returned to the cities. The State is now coming after another non-State fund. It is ludicrous that the State could be in control of city funds. Vehicle in-lieu fees were supposed to be constitutionally protected for the cities and yet there is a little provisions that says "if they are collected." The State has the ultimate say as to whether or not they are collected. Vehicle in-lieu fees should be for highway improvements and there should be a connection. Give the money back to the cities along with the property tax, where there is a logical connection between the services we provide for the property within the city and get a Constitutional protection. Then the State can do whatever it wants with the vehicle in-lieu fee. Ms. Michelotti asked how much money would be allotted to the West Las Positas Study over the next 18 months. Mr. Lum said $250,000 and cited expected expenditures: $350,000 for Project Study Report, $75,000 for trip reduction studies, $25,000 for project management, $100,000 for anticipated environmental work in the following year, or about $1 million eventually. Ms. Michelotti then referred to the funds for additional library hours. Mr. Bocian said about $528,000 total additional services would be spent. Ms. Michelotti then referred to the $2.5 million reserve on the Happy Valley golf course and asked what the total would be for procuring bonds, etc. Ms. Rossi explained that part of the reason the Happy Valley project is so expensive is getting the infrastructure. It is estimated about $14 million is needed for the property. A total of about $16-18 million for the golf course. The actual cost of the golf course alone is $6 million, the rest of the money is for infrastructure. Pleasanton City Council 6 06/30/98 Minutes