Laserfiche WebLink
112 <br /> <br /> 8, MATTERS INITIATED BY COUNCILMEMBERS <br /> <br /> There were none. <br /> <br /> 9. CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS <br /> <br /> a. Livemore Amador Valley Water Management Agency/Tri- <br /> Valley Wastewater Authority <br /> b. Alameda County Congestion Management Agency <br /> c. Tri-Valley Transportation Council <br /> d. San Francisco Property Steering Committee <br /> e. Association of Bay Area Governments <br /> <br /> Tri-Vallev Transportation Council <br /> <br /> Mr. Pico asked that staff get copies of the schedule of the <br /> Tri-Valley Transportation Council's meetings to Council. He was <br /> concerned that the schedule is going to be difficult to meet. <br /> <br /> Ms. Mohr asked what the progress was on the Economic <br /> Development Committee applications and what the deadline for <br /> applying was. <br /> <br /> Ms. Acosta stated that March 5, 1993 was the closing date and <br /> there have been three applications received. She suggested a two- <br /> week extension of the application period so that staff could <br /> readvertised and do a mailing to certain interested groups. <br /> <br /> Mayor Tarver pointed out that Ms. Mohr was appointed to the <br /> ABAG Regional Planning Committee and League of California Cities <br /> Revenue and Tax Committee. He was also appointed to the Economic <br /> Development Advisory Committee from the Mayor's Conference. <br /> <br /> MTC <br /> <br /> Mayor Tarver referred to the Congestion Management Agency <br /> meeting and stated that he was concerned that MTC does not believe <br /> that the BART station was going to pass its screening process and <br /> be eliminated. He asked staff to review and report back to Council <br /> on Senator Boatwright's bill and MTC Resolution 1876. <br /> <br /> ~ast Bay Regional Park District <br /> <br /> Ms. Mohr askedMr. Pico to be sure that the East Bay Regional <br /> Park District sees that the property if recently purchased stays <br /> open and not fenced off. <br /> <br /> Mr. Pico explained that at the last meeting there was <br /> discussion on keeping continued access to that property. He did <br /> not believe that the Park District would be fencing in the <br /> property. <br /> <br /> 3/2/93 8 <br /> <br /> <br />