CCMIN080795 - Laserfiche WebLink

it has to take place for both parties. Mayor Tarver felt it was fundamental to get the structure down and understand the process and what the City is going to do. Mr. Roush stated that the staff needed clarification on two issues: the first is the refinement of the existing plan versus looking at a new plan. The second is the freeze; the County has responded back and feels the freeze is not warranted. Also, the citizens are not allowed to vote on an annexation; it is a LAFCO function. Ms. Mohr asked if the Council could not put before the voters the question of should we make an application for annexation. Mr. Roush stated it could be done in an advisory fashion. Mayor Tarver stated that if the property owner requests an annexation application, LAFCO would consider who should best service the property and make a determination. Ms. Michelotti stated that alternatives and trade-offs need to be considered. Ms. Dennis asked if San Francisco could force the City of Pleasanton to annex the site. Mr. Roush stated that the City is required to negotiate in good faith a tax sharing agreement the same as the County and if a tax sharing agreement is not reached, then the application does not get in front of LAFCO. Ms. Aeosta asked that the information be held for a special meeting on August 22. Ms. Combs asked that a staff report be available at City Hall so the community doesn't come in and read it at the meeting; and asked for the staff to prepare a summary on the history to date so that people can read it and come up to speed without additional discussion at the staff and Council level. Mayor Tarver continued discussion to the special meeting to be held on August 22, 1995. Item 4d Time line for annexation of San Francisco Water District Property. CIR95:43)_ This item was continued to the 8/22/95 agenda. 08/07/95 -16-