CCMIN041696 - Laserfiche WebLink

Ms. Mohr asked what prohibits DSRSD from doing that, whether we want them to or not. Mr. Roush said nothing prevents DSRSD from doing that; what would happen is that LAVWMA would not transmit the DSRSD proposal as a LAVWMA proposal. DSRSD can still transmit the proposal on its own behalf and has in fact done that. Ms. Dennis indicated the EBDA proposal was directed to LAVWMA, therefore this agreement addresses the EBDA proposal to LAVWMA. Mr. Tarver indicated that EBDA has clearly said it only wants to deal with LAVWMA, not a single agency for services to the valley. If that holds true, EBDA will reject the DSRSD proposal. Ms. Michelotti indicated we had an agreement with DSRSD and that would have been a majority project too. Now we are in partnership with Livermore. She feels this is a legal questions to be settled by LAVWMA. The roll call vote was as follows: AYES: Councilmembers - Dennis, Pico, and Mayor Tarver NOES: Councilmembers - Michelotti and Mohr ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None Item 6a Amendment tO the PIe, asantQn Municipal code regarding cost recovery for extended detention of juveniles in the custody of the Police' Denartment. (SR96:77) Police Chief William Eastman presented the staff report. Ms. Dennis asked what percentage of people were "recalcitrant" and what were their explanations for delays in picking up the juvenile. Chief Eastman indicated that in the last five years, it was a very small number. In a good year, three to five occasions; in a bad year, perhaps eight or ten. He reiterated that if there is a good reason for delay, the police department will work with the people. This is not a situation where a fine is imposed if they are five minutes late. Ms. Dennis asked how the department would draft the ordinance to permit someone other than a legal guardian or family member to pick up a juvenile. 04/16/96 -23-