Laserfiche WebLink
e. Adoption of Resolution No. 81-381, approving Fifth Amendment to Agreement between <br /> City of Pleasanton and Kennedy Jenks (Cathodic Protection for Interceptor Sewer), <br /> and authorizing the appropriate City officials to execute the agreement. <br /> <br /> f. Adoption of Resolution No. 81-382, final acceptance of Tract 3297, Pleasanton <br /> Meadows Townhouses, Unit 1. <br /> <br /> g. Adoption of Resolution No. 81-383, approving Ballistic United Soccer's request <br /> for permission to request a donation for admittance to the Holiday Classic Soccer <br /> Tournament to be held at the Pleasanton Sports and Recreation Park, November 27, <br /> 28, 29, 1981. <br /> <br /> h. Adoption of Resolution No. 81-384, amending the 1981-82 Budget to provide the <br /> funds for the City to participate in a computer service alternatives study with <br /> five other agencies (cities of Davis, Woodland, Livermore, Benicia, and the Dublin <br /> San Ramon Services District)., the City's share not to exceed $5,400.00. <br /> <br /> i. Proclaim the month of November, 1981, as Soroptimist Month in Pleasanton. <br /> <br /> The roll call vote was as follows: <br /> AYES: Councilmembers Butler, Kephart, Mohr, Wood, and Mayor Mercer <br /> NOES: None <br /> ABSENT: None <br /> <br />}~TTERS INITIATED BY COUNCILMEMBERS <br /> Councilmember Butler requested that an item be placed on the agerids of November <br /> 24, 1981, for discussion regarding the peripheral canal issue. <br /> <br /> CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS <br /> Livermore-Pleasanton Water Reclamation Agency~ Wastewater Reclamation Study <br /> Councilmembers:Butler requested that this item be discussed after Reports of the <br />City Attorney on the agenda. <br /> <br />MEETING OPEN TO THE PUBLIC <br /> Mr. Jack Schieman, 5307 Sonoma Boulevard, Apt. 2, pastor of Trinity Lutheran <br />Church, stated that he was the most long-term tenant of this apartment complex owned <br />by Mr. Cuesta. He advised that Mr. Cuesta had recently circulated a notice that he <br />intended to convert the apartments to condominiums and requested signatures of the <br />tenants relative to conversion. Mr. Schieman stated that he and one other tenant <br />refused to sign. He advised there are eight apartments and with only six signatures <br />agreeing to conversion that Mr. Cuesta would not meet the requirements of the ordi- <br />nance of 85% agreement of tenants, to allow for conversion. Mr. Scheiman stated that <br />since then he and the other tenant who refused to sign to agree to conversion had re- <br />ceived eviction notices from Mr. Cuesta. Mr. Scheiman requested Council to reconsider <br />the condominium conversion ordinance as he felt he had been very unfairly treated as <br />a result of the requirements contained therein. He added he felt other tenants had <br />signed out of fear of eviction. He also questioned the legality of the document <br />circulated by Mr. Cuesta for signatures agreeing to condominium conversion. He asked <br />if staff had Xeviewed this document. Staff-advised they had not. Mr. Schieman con- <br />cluded by stating the eviction had caused a great hardship on him, both physically <br />and emotionally. ' <br /> <br /> After considerable discussion, it was moved by Councilmember Mohr, and seconded <br />by Councilmember Wood, instructing staff to prepare a report regarding a proposed <br />amendment to the condominium ordinance to possibly eliminate the exemption clause; <br />to prohibit retaliatory evictions; and also requiring the converter to provide the <br />City with a copy of all notices transmitted to tenants. <br /> <br /> 2. 11/lo/81 <br /> <br /> <br />