CCMIN091603 - Laserfiche WebLink

Mayor Pico referred to the comments made with regard to Sunol, as that area is part of the Pleasanton Water Township District. He inquired as to whether there is a specific exemption for providing water to those properties. Mr. Roush said only to the extent the City is already legally obligated to provide water. For example, there are certain properties within the former Pleasanton Township Water District, to which this policy would not be applicable. For those residents, some of who might be closer to the City limits, who might be requesting water and sewer, the staffreconunendation would remain as is. For outlying areas, where sewer is not being request and only water, there would be an exemption because the City is legally obligated to provide that utility to those residents. Mayor Pico agreed that if the City is legally required to provide water, such as in the Pleasanton Township Water District, this policy should not apply to those properties. He believed the policy is reasonable with respect to undeveloped properties. He believed it ought to be the differential between what the County is charging and what the comparable City fee is. The issue for him is that if someone does build and they signed a preaunexation agreement and at some future point an annexation takes place, those people would not be required to pay the fees since they have already built the house. Fundamentally, he agreed with the policy for undeveloped properties. Ms. Hosterman strongly agreed with the speakers. The broader public policy issue really outweighs the equity issue, that being the need to provide for the health and safety of the entire community. The issues that concern her were an imposition of an additional fee that would possibly discourage property owners from connecting to the system and whether the amount should be applied to all properties or only those that are undeveloped. She was concerned about burdening people with fees who were not actually annexed into the City. She was uncertain how this would work and would like to make this as easy as possible for people who chose to hook up to both City water and sewer and also annex their property into the City. Ms. Ayala provided an explanation using an undeveloped piece of property as an example. The owner(s) choosing to develop the property would be required to pay all these fees. She agreed with the Mayor relating to the differential and believed that anyone who chose to hookup to sewer and water who has an existing house should not be subject to the fees. It would only be for undeveloped properties. Mr. Brozosky mentioned that he had asked staffto look into this. He did not think it was fair that someone in our city who was trying to develop a piece of property had to pay all these fees while someone in the County next door did not have to pay the same fees, yet they were using City parks and facilities. Ms. Host~m~an was unclear in the matter. She provided the example of the Remer neighborhood and asked if it were tree that there were individual property owners who are currently annexed into the City. She asked if annexation would have to occur Pleasanton City Council 22 09/16/03 Minutes