CCMIN030380 - Laserfiche WebLink

MINUTES of THE MEETING of THE CITY COUNCIL March 3, 1980 CALL TO ORDER Mayor Frank Brandes, Jr., called the continued Regular Meeting from February 29, 1980, to order at 6:00 P.M., at the City Hall Conference Room. ROLL CALL The roll call is recorded as follows: Councilmembers Butler, Kephart, Mercer, Wood, and Mayor Brandes were present Mr. Walker~ Acting City Manager, and Mr. Levine, City Attorney, were present. FURTHER DISCUSSIONREGARDING REVIEW OF BIDS AND AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR SPORTS PARK~ PHASE III. (.Continued from 2-26-80 and 2-29-80) Councilmember Wood recommended that the Sports Park be completed in its entirety, as presented in the report of the Acting City Manager dated February 21, 1980. Councilmember Mercer stated he was opposed to this, not that he was against .parks but he hoped that the improvement of the McManus property would include some of the improvements to the Park. After discussion, it was moved by Councilmember Wood, and seconded by Council- member Butler, that Resolution No. 80-48, authorizing total completion of the Sports Park, Phase III, and after review of the bids award contract for completion of the park to Watkins and Bortolussi, Inc., in the amount of $477,950, and amending the 1979-80 Capital Improvement Budget by $118,000 to cover the additional cost, be adopted. The roll call vote was as follows: AYES: Councilmen Kephart, Wood, and ~hyor Brandes NOES: Councilmen Butler and Mercer ABSENT: None REQUEST FOR AMICUS PARTICIPATION IN SIGNIFICANT APPELLATE ACTIONS Mr. Levine presented his report'datedMarch 3, 1980, regarding this matter. After brief discussion, it was moved by Councilmember Butler, and seconded by Councilmember Mercer, that Resolution No. 80-49, approving that the City request to be named as Amicus and Join in the following Amicus briefs being prepared by other cities at this time with no cost to the City: (1) Music Plus Four v City of West.- minister, an appeal from a trial decision invalidating a drug paraphernalia ordi- nance substantially the same as that adopted by the City; (2) Bownds v. City of Glendale, a case raising on appeal the legal sufficiency of Glendale's Housing Element, and attempting to have a Judicial determination of the controversy re- lating to the nature of the State Housing Element Guidelines, whether mandatory or advisory; and (3) Perez v. City of San Bruno, an appellate decision challenging a City's right to withhold on utility*service for non-payment of another utility bill (i.e., no water, if sewer not paid); and authorizing an expenditure of $350.00 to send to the City of Ttburon to assist them in preparing briefs to be presented to the United States Supreme Court in the matter of Agins v. Tiburon relative to inverse condemnation actions for loss of value due to down zoning, be adopted.