My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN090799
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
1990-1999
>
1999
>
CCMIN090799
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/26/2010 10:53:17 AM
Creation date
10/12/1999 5:23:49 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
9/7/1999
DESTRUCT DATE
PERMANENT
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
26
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
would fall under the "no adverse impact rule" according to the agreement. DSRSD would <br />be allowed to use regional connection fees from our service area for the Clean Water <br />Revival Project. However, if the City has an alternative project that requires those funds, <br />DSRSD would be required to repay the City with interest. He also noted that the Regional <br />Board has not made a decision on groundwater injection. The Board is awaiting whether <br />DSRSD can demonstrate public acceptance, which is why there is an information program <br />and possibly surveys. At some point there will be a public hearing on that issue. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tarver felt there were some significant line items, such as the pipeline <br />rehabilitation, Clean Water Revival, pipeline expansion, etc. Pleasanton has not been <br />involved in the details of how the money is spent. It does review projects annually to see <br />what is reasonable. Pleasanton has said it does not support the Clean Water Revival project <br />and yet money is being taken from the regional funds for the information program. He is <br />concerned about approving an increase in fees, when there are still so many outstanding <br />issues such as the administrative fee, breakdown of how rehabilitation is done and how fees <br />will be charged for development to protect current ratepayers. He understands that the fee <br />is for the rehabilitation and expansion project of LAVWMA and that money will not be <br />spent until we have resolved the project and it is approved. <br /> <br /> Mr. Cusenza first responded to the question regarding odor control. Basically, all <br />these project allocations are estimates for 1999/2000. As an example, the odor control <br />allocation is $3.9 million. About $400,000 will be spent for operational changes, $500,000 <br />will be spent this winter, and the remaining amount will be spent when the wastewater <br />treatment plant expansion project goes to bid in a year or two. He reiterated that these <br />figures are estimates for purposes of the fee study. There is no commitment. All the <br />expansion projects will come back for review by the Liaison Committee and Council for <br />approval before going to bid. <br /> <br /> Mr. Lum indicated the regional funds that are being collected for application to the <br />LAVWMA projects or the treatment plant expansion could continue to be accounted for <br />separately and not be spent or obligated until the LAVWMA financing plan is completed <br />and approved by the member agencies. That may not be addressed in the agreement with <br />DSRSD, but he felt it represents the current process. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tarver said no decision has been made on whether to finance the project from <br />regional funds or separately. If the decision is to finance it separately, what happens? <br />Pleasanton has no control over what happens to the regional fund. <br /> <br /> It was moved by Ms. Dennis, seconded by Ms. Ayala, to approve the Regional <br />sewer expansion projects shown on Attachment 1 of Staff Report 99:269 for 1999-2000 <br />proposed by the Dublin San Ramon Services district (DSRSD) for expansion of the <br />regional wastewater treatment and disposal facilities; to adopt Resolution No. 99-117 <br />amending the Uniform Regional Sewer Connection Fees as shown on Exhibit B <br />increasing the fee from $4,550 per dwelling unit equivalent to $9,900; to introduce <br /> <br />Pleasanton City Council 21 09/07/99 <br />Meeting <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.