OCT 1933 TO MAY 1946 - Laserfiche WebLink

1170 Pleasanton, California, March 99 193,6. The Town Council of the Town of Pleasanton was called to order in adjourned session on the above written date by Mayor.Thomas'Orloff. Present at roll call were: Councilman Madsen, Rivolta, Olesen, and Orloff. Councilman Amaral was late. The Clerk then presented Ordinance No. 172, An Ordinance Fixing the Periods for the Fiscal Years of the Town of Pleasanton to begin on the 1st day of July of each calendar year and terminate on the 30th day of June of the following calendar year.This resolution had been introduced by Councilman Amaral at the regular meeting held March 2nd. There were no objections from the Councilmen as to the adoption of the ordinance and same passed with all voting favorably on same* The Clerk then brought up the matter of the municipal election on T'uesday April 14th and advised the Council that immediately'following the last meeting the application of Fred Snarey as an election officer was filed by Councilman. Madsen in whose possession the application was at the time of the last meeting. There was no objection from the Council with regards to Mr. Snarey being appointed and accordingly the'Clerk was instructed to prepare the necessary resolution with reference to the Notice of Election. Accordingly the Clerk presented Resolution No. 1580 in Re: Notice of Election which was adopted on motion of Councilman Olesen, seconded by Councilman Madsen and with all the Councilmen in favor of same. Mr. Rodrigues, Street_ Superintendent, presented figures to the Council in connection with the reapirs to be'made on the grader. The figures were from the G & L Auto Service and concerned $60 to $70 for used block etc. and approximately $110.00 for new block. Discussion followed among the Councilmen with reference to which would be most acceptable. At the conclusion of same, Councilmen Olesen suggested that a good second hand block would cover the needs of the Department and there were no 'objections from the other Councilmen to same being secured. Mr. Rodrigues,accordingly`was authorized to proceed with the work. The Clerk offered a new ink well which had been left for approval and which cost $2.75. Same was recommended to Councilr►ian Rivolta as being in line with what he,had wanted for the Council table.. There was no action with regards to whether the Clerk should procure one or more,of them. Mr. Paulsen advised the Council that he had concluded using the mixer of C.A.1Rruce & Sons that day and same had been returned to -thdm. He also advised that the mixer would be needed later when work started with reference to the next unit. Mayor Orloff asked the Clerk to read that section of the minutes of December 2nd with regards to the slopewall on lower Division Street and at which time Eir. Richards appeared before the Council in connection with his property there. Follow- ing the reading of these minutes, Mayor Orloff discussed the improvement which had been placed along the property, what had been done of recent weeks and the satisfying results which had followed during the rainy period when the wall had prevented further embankment from being,washed away by the heavy rains. He stressed the point. that no one could deny that the work had really accumplished something, that a good job had been done, and that he regretted that Mr. Richards was tying up the work by'refusing to sign the,necessary. papers, giving the Town title to the property concerned by the improverrlent and which belonged to iar. Richards. A short discussion then followed between Mr. Richards and Mayor Orloff. At OAiconclusion,- Attorney Nilson advised that in taking a deed f rom Mr. Richards they did so knowing that he was the owner of same , and that thile the property was not clear on account of the deed of trust existing,that nevertheless the town was not concerned with the deed of trust or the parties holding same, but the one in whose name the pxperty was in. Mr. Richards then explained the attitude of Mr. Lucas, whose wife was the holder of the deed of trust and to the effect that he (Mr. Richards) was not objection to the signing of the deed, but that Mr. Lucas, on behalf of his wife,was objecting. Mr. Richards also mentioned that Mr. Harding of the First National Bank had become interested in the proposition and that he had had certain advice.from Mr. Harding with regards to the matter. Mr. Smallwood of the First National Bank was present in the audience and the mayor questioned him with regards to anything owed by Mr. Richards to the bank and the attitude of the bank toward the matter. Mr. Smallwood could not answer as to the disposition of the bank because he advised that the matter "had not been presented to the Directors of the Bank" but that he personally felt that there would be no objection. Mayor Orloff then advised that I-,,r. and Mrs. Lucas were not objpecting but that certain obje - tions were being advanced by Mr. Harding. A short discussion then followedarnong the Councilmem,, At its conclusion Councilman Rivolta questioned Mr. Richards as to how he felt regarding the value of the improvements made along,his property. He stressed.the point that ter. Richards should'feel very well disposed towards the town on account of the slope wall being so built -as to prutect his (Mr. Richards) interests, and that it was very evident that the Richards property had taken on a higher valuation on account of the improvements. Attorney Nilson then advised Mr. Richards to give the town title to the property and permit the town to complete the slopewall. Mr. Nilson advised that the work should be completed and that Inr. Richards is legally bound to sign the deed and that he should not hesitate at this time to do same on account of the existing deed of