My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN030470
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
1970-1979
>
1970
>
CCMIN030470
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/26/2010 10:47:07 AM
Creation date
11/19/1999 11:22:39 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
4
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
MINUTES <br /> of <br /> THE MEETING <br /> of <br /> THE CITY COUNCIL <br /> Pleasanton, California <br /> March 4, 1970 <br /> <br />CALL TO ORDER - PLEDGE TO FLAG <br /> Mayor Bernard Gerton called the Adjourned Regular Session of the City Council to <br />order at 8:00 P.M., and then led the pledge of allegiance to the fl~g. <br /> <br />ROLL CALL <br /> City Clerk Helen McCarty called the roll which is recorded as follows: <br />Councilmen Beratlis, Rega, Reid, Spiliotopoulos and Mayor Gerton were present. Mr. <br />Fales, City Manager, Mr. Edgar, Assistant City Manager, Mr. Hirst, City Attorney, <br />Mr. Campbell, Director of Public Works, and Mr. Castro, Director of Planning, were <br />present. <br /> <br />MATTERS CONTINUED FOR DECISION <br /> Mayor Getton announced that he had received a letter and resolution from the <br />Pleasanton Valley Homeowners Association which he had been requested to read at <br />this meeting. The letter and petition are recorded as follows: <br /> <br /> '~t the meeting of the Pleasanton Valley Homeowners Association last week, <br /> it was decided that we, the homeowners of the largest subdivision in the <br /> Valley should take an announced position regarding the suggested moratorium <br /> on rezoning. Accordingly, after much discussion, the following resolution <br /> was introduced by unanimous consent of those attending the meeting and from <br /> 1225 homeowners to whom we circulated a request to state their individual <br /> position in support of or against the resolution. <br /> <br /> The resolution was supported by a 10-1 majority. Therefore, we submit this <br /> resolution to you with a request that you read this letter and resolution <br /> publicly to the City Council and to all those assembled at the City Council <br /> meeting on March 4, 1970. <br /> <br /> 'Resolved: That we, the homeowners of Pleasanton Valley, support <br /> a moratorium on rezoning in the City of Pleasanton until such time <br /> as the present City General Plan has been reviewed by the General <br /> Plan Review Committee and approved by the majority of the residents <br /> of the City of Pleasanton with the results published. This will <br /> insure that the City is progressing in the best direction possible.' <br /> <br /> It is our hope that in making and submitting this resolution, we, who repre- <br /> sant 25% of the eligible voters can exercise some influence on your delib- <br /> erations and your ultimate decisions on this matter. Signed, Richard Patton, <br /> President" <br /> <br /> Mayor Gerton opened the meeting to the public after reading the original peti- <br />tion from the Committee for Planned PrGgress. <br /> Mr. Kenneth Bradshaw, Superintendeat of the Murray School District, reviewed <br />the boundaries of his District and pointed out the area that is within the City <br />L~mits of Pleasanton. Mr. Bradshaw stated that Murray School District is 4-5 <br />~onths behind on their building program. He reported that there are no funds from <br />the State Aid Building Fund and that space justification is based on enrollment <br />~nd the house count factor of 1.212 students per home. Mr. Bradshaw announced that <br />zhildren attending Besco School will be taught on a double-session program next fall. <br /> Mr. Bradshaw answered questions from the audience regarding the effect of mul- <br /> iple homes, by stating that the State does not make a distinction regarding multiple <br /> ~Jellings as they have not made an appreciable difference in enrollment. Mr. Brad- <br /> ,~aw also answered questions regarding the measure on the June State Ballot relating <br /> .a the increase on the limit to 7% interest on the sale of school bonds. <br /> Mr. Ted Lannin stated that in recalling Dr. Haskell's report of February 16, <br />.970, and Mr. Bradshaw's report, that it is self-evident that if the schools don't <br />.aep density growing they wont be able to make house counts to increase their <br />.ssessed valuation. Mr. Lannin suggested that the schools wait until June when <br />_he State Legislature can approve the higher interest rate for selling bonds. <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.