CCMIN090391 - Laserfiche WebLink

27 Mr. Butler stated that he was not in favor of sending the letter to the Alameda County Board of Supervisors because he does not know for certain whether or not the assessor used fair and appropriate m~thods in his assessment of Viacom. He added that the legitimate way to contest an unfair tax assessment would be for Viacom to challenge it in an appeal process, rather than for the Council to approach the Board of Supervisors. He indicated that he would not be opposed to sending a letter to the Alameda County Assessor because it is his actions the City is objecting to. Mr. Mercer stated that the letter could be sent to both the County Assessor, who is an elected official, and the Board of Supervisors, so the Board understands the City's position. It was moved by Ms. Mohr, and seconded by Ms. Scribner, to direct the City Manager to send a letter to the County Assessor and the Alameda County Board of Supervisors indicating the City's position with respect to the increased tax assessment of Viacom C~blevision property, as set forth in the Staff Report. The roll call vote was as follows: AYES: Councilmembers Butler, Mohr, Scribner, Tarver and Mayor Mercer NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None 13. REPORTS OF THE CITY ATTORNEY There were none. 14. COMMUNICATIONS There were none. 15. CITY COUNCIL CALENDAR Ms. Acosta informed the Councilmembers that the second Council meeting in October would coincide with the League of California Cities Conference and inquired if they would like to cancel that meeting. After some discussion, the Councilmembers indicated that they planned to be at the Council meeting. Mr. Mercer stated that the meeting would be held, as scheduled. Mr. Butler noted that the Council Calendar did not indicate the Council workshop scheduled for Tuesday, September 10th. 9-3-91