CCMIN021484 - Laserfiche WebLink

CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS There were no City Council Committee Reports presented at this meeting. MEETING OPEN TO THE PUBLIC Mr. Steve Hughes, 587 Touriga Court, cited a recent sewerage overflow problem at the mobile home park on Vineyard Avenue, and the run-around by city, county, and state agencies that the residents had encountered in trying to get the situation rectified. He presented an ordinance for review by Council, which would allow the City to assumeresponsibility for the enforcement of the mobile home parks act and related regulations of the California Administrative Code. After discussion, Council instructed staff to prepare a report re- garding this matter, for review at a future Council meeting. Mr. Hughes also expressed concern relative to the City ordinance requiring a water deposit from rentors, and requiring the property owner to be responsible for any water bill not paid by a rentor. Mr. Hughes presented a letter from Thomas Treto, Harris Realty Company, dated February 14, 1984, urging Council to eliminate this ordinance, and possibly increase the users original deposit, which would reduce the City's exposure. Council- member Mercer explained the reasoning for the ordinance and stated that very few property owners are affected by it. Mr. Walker stated that staff is inclined to feel that a water deposit is not necessary, that it is costly to administer, and he would like to eliminate it. Mr. Paul Ebright, 5416 Blackbird Drive, representing Pleasanton Today and Tomorrow, reviewed a sequence of events that happened on this date relative to the submittal of rebuttal arguments in connection with the April 10 Referendum Election. He stated that PT&T submitted their rebuttal at approximately 4:40 P.M., and asked at that time if Council had submitted their rebuttal argument. Their representative was told that the Council rebuttal statement was being drafted at this time. The representative asked if he could see the rough draft and was told that it was only in scratch note form and that he would not be able to review it at this time. PTgT~s representative turned in their rebuttal argument at the City Attorney~s office. He left the office but returned about ten minutes later expressing concern that Council might review PT&T~s rebuttal statement before turning in their statement. He was advised that no one had seen PT&T's rebuttal statement and that he could take all copies of that statement with him at this time. He left the office without takin~ copies of the rebuttal statement. Mr. Ebright asked if any Councilmember or any staff person had read PT&T~s rebuttal argument before prepara- tion of Council's rebuttal statement. Councilmembers and staff stated they had not seen or read the rebuttal statement of Pleasanton Today and Tomorrow. Mayor Butler explained that Council's statement had been prepared for signature at the Council meeting tonight, and that rebuttal argument statements would be available to both parties at the same time. Mr. Ebright stated that the close of business at City Hall is at 5:00 P.M., and he felt that Council~s statement should have been completed by that time. Mr. Richard Combs, 4857 Harrison Street, representing Pleasanton Today and Tomorrow, stated that PT&T had spent many hours preparing their rebuttal statement in order to turn it in before 5:00 P.M., on the deadline date of February 14, 1984. He stated he had pre- sented the rebuttal statement to the City Attorney~s office at 4:40 P.M. He stated that he asked for a copy of the City Council rebuttal and was told that it was not ready. He advised he left the City Attorney's office at that time but came back ten minutes later to get the copies of PT&T's rebuttal statement that were left in the City Attorney's office. He stated he again asked for a copy of Council's draft statement, to determine if it reflected any knowledge of PT&T's rebuttal. He was again told the statement was in draft form and could not be released at this time. Mr. Combs stated he felt Council should have had their rebuttal prepared by 5:00 P.M., and that PT&T is unhappy at being placed in this position. Mayor Butler explained that he was not willing to give Mr. Combs a copy of the rebuttal statement before the other Councilmembers had read and signed the argument, which could only be done shortly before the Council meeting tonight. He stated the rebuttal statement has now been signed and PT&T is entitled to see it. 5. 2/14/84