CCMIN121179 - Laserfiche WebLink

of State law. The underlying basis for that statement is one of the anti-discrimi- nation sections of the Government Code which states no City can discriminate against any housing based on method of financing and the law specifically calls out Federally or State subsidized housing and makes clear that should any do that it violates State law. Mr. Levine also stated that if the Council has a project with Federal subsidy and denies it for good reason, the proposed policy would give strong grounds to sue and he suggests the motion is inadvisable. ~ayor Brandes called for a vote on the motion~ which was as follows: AYES: Councilman Kephart and Mayor Brandes NOES: Councilmen Butler, Mercer, and Wood ABSENT: None It was moved by Councilmember Mercer, and seconded by Councilmember Butler, that Resolution No. 79-257, that the City of Pleasanton go on record and establish a policy that it will consider any and all opportunities to provide housing of all magnitude and all prices, all forms of financing or subsidizing and, that adequate housing is a real problem in the City of Pleasanton, and that the City Council re- cognizes the need and will do whatever it can to provide housing, affordable housing to as many people as possible recognizing restrictions of growth rate, the Residen- tial Allocation Program and other limitations, be adopted. The roll call vote was as follows: AYES: Councilmen Butler, Mercer, and Wood NOES: Councilman Kephart and Mayor Brandes ABSENT: None REPORTS OF BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS There were no reports of Boards and Commissions presented at this meeting. REPORTS OF THE CITY ATTORNEY Report Re: Drug Parap.hernalia Ordinance Mr. Levine presented his report dated December 5, 1979, regarding this matter. He displayed various drug paraphernalia devices which are for sale relative to drug- use. Councilmember Kephart elaborated on the various uses of the devices and stated the material displayed was definitely used for drug use. He stated the drug culture and language, use and abuse is changing daily and is difficult to keep up with. Mr. Donald Brody, 3521 Brand Avenue, Oakland, retained by concerned citizens of Northern California, addressed problems relating to enforcement of this type of ordinance. He stated this particular ordinance is under attack in almost every city where it has been adopted and lawsuits are pending. Mr. Brody advised that tempo- rary restraining orders had been issued and that cities agreed not to enforce the ordinance until the suimaredecided. He cited various court cases, i.e., Lakewood, Glendale, and Lawndale. Mr. Brody stated this particular statute contradicts State law, and violates the Fifth Amendment. He stated the ordinance would be discrimina- tory and would not be effective. Mr. Brody stated he would be willing to work with · the City Attorney to prepare a more workable and enforceable ordinance to regulate the sale of drug paraphernalia to minors. Mayor Brandes stated he felt that State law should be changed and maybe it could be done with enough cities working together to let the legislators know their feel- ings on this issue. 18. 12/11/79