My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN111505
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
2000-2009
>
2005
>
CCMIN111505
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/17/2007 10:56:43 AM
Creation date
12/22/2005 2:47:16 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
11/15/2005
DOCUMENT NO
CCMIN111505
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
28
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
<br />The roll call vote was taken as follows: <br />AVES: Councilmembers - Brozosky, McGovern, Sullivan, Thorne, and <br />Mayor Hosterman <br />None <br />None <br />None <br /> <br />NOES: <br />ABSENT: <br />ABSTAINED: <br /> <br />Mr. Fialho clarified Council authorized him to execute an MOU subject to the operating <br />expenses and operating revenue from the BART Station being well defined and that only the <br />reserve established by the Cities and the County would be the last option for potential funding <br />and an accountability trigger that requires BART to inform the City before using that reserve. <br /> <br />Ms. McGovern asked staff to provide Council a copy of the final Funding Agreement <br />prior to it being executed. <br /> <br />Qg <br />Amendment to the Vinevard Avenue Corridor SDecific Plan Shared Infrastructure <br />Financina Proaram. (SR 05:322) <br /> <br />Mr. Brozosky recused himself from this matter, as he owned property within 500 feet. <br /> <br />Mr. Sullivan said he requested this item be pulled from the Consent Calendar because at <br />Council's last meeting, there was some suggested modifications to the Financing Program and <br />additional modifications were disseminated to Council today. He noted this item would require a <br />major infrastructure financing plan, which could have potential impacts on the taxpayers of <br />Pleasanton, and he believed this item should have a full public hearing where the pros and cons <br />could be discussed. He requested continuing this item to Council's December 6 meeting. <br /> <br />This item was continued to the December 6 regular City Council meeting. <br /> <br />Mr. Brozosky resumed his seat on the dais. <br /> <br />7. MATTERS INITIATED BY COUNCIL <br /> <br />Ms. McGovern requested staff to provide an updated report to Council regarding the <br />contamination of ground well water in the Happy Valley area. <br /> <br />Mr. Roush indicated several reports were available which included the baseline test <br />results, which he would provide to Council. <br /> <br />Ms. McGovern asked if there had been any further discussion about annexing properties <br />within the Happy Valley area into Pleasanton for connection to the City's sewer and water <br />system. <br /> <br />Mr. Roush believed staff would be providing a report to Council at the beginning of 2006 <br />outlining the potential costs to connect to the City's sewer and water system for the Happy <br />Valley residents and at this time, it might present an opportunity for discussion to see if <br />annexation might be something that the Happy Valley residents might want to consider. <br /> <br />Pleasanton City Council <br />Minutes <br /> <br />27 <br /> <br />11/15/05 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.