Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 4.01 Draft Minutes 07-26-1993 (2) f ,...... ,~,' ~. i. -' REGULAR MEETING - JulV 26, 1993 CLOSED SESSION From 6:00 to 6:30 p.m., the Council held a closed session to discuss Pending Litigation: 1) Butler vs. City of Dublin (640-30); and 2) Brown vs. City of Dublin (640-30), in accordance with Government Code Section 54956.9(a). * * * * A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Dublin was held on Monday, July 26, 1993, in the Council Chambers of the Dublin civic Center. The meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m., by Mayor Snyder. * * * * ROLL CALL PRESENT: Councilmembers Burton, Houston, Howard, -Moffatt and Mayor Snyder. ABSENT: None. * * * * PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE (610-20) Mayor Snyder led the Council, Staff and those present in the pledge of allegiance to the flag. * * * * RECYCLING PROGRAM WINNERS FOR MONTH OF JUNE 1993 (810-60) Assistant City Manager Rankin announced the five winners in the recycling program contest for the month of June, 1993. Savings Bonds which were provided by Livermore Dublin Disposal were presented to: Phyllis Kencke, Neil McLean, Larry Cauble, Kurt Freund, and Ellen Johnson. * * * * ALAMEDA COUNTY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY BOARD (470-50) 't Bruce Kern, Alameda County Economic Development Director mad~ ; presentation regarding the activities of the Alameda County Economic Development Advisory Board and its 1993-94 Draft Annual Report and Work Plan. Mr. Kern stated he hoped that avenues could be explored to strengthen the County and City's working relationship and in turn, further Dublin's economic development goals. They wish to discuss the priorities the way the City sees them. They see the City of Dublin as a client. They are dealing with some very significant issues and the economy is on everyone's mind. People are questioning what they are doing to address the issues. They have over 100 private firms that are members of the Economic Development Board. The Board oversees the . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CM - VOL 12 - 295 Regular Meeting July 26, 1993 \ . ,. '/ /' / ----------------------------------------------------------------~--~-- 4~ f COPIES TO: L~ . . program and addresses issues from a wide range of perspectives, contributing time, experience and resources, and offering their considerable credibility to advocacy efforts on behalf of business in the East Bay. Their mission is to enhance the competitive economic position of the County while maintaining its environment and quality of life by encouraging business growth, maintaining a competitive workforce and building a positive business climate. The Council thanked Mr. Kern for the very informative presentation. * * * * sian Ordinance Enforcement (400-30) Brad Sanders, owner of the Oak Warehouse stated he was present to discuss the Planning Department and actions of the Zoning Investigator. He requested that the city consider an investigation of the department. This is a serious matter. Specifically, the city is engaging in selective enforcement of the Sign Ordinance. There are a lot of conflicts in the City's ordinances. The Sign Ordinance is not in the Municipal Code and as he gets deeper and deeper into the Sign Ordinance, and according to 2 attorneys, they have told him it would probably be invalidated in a court. Mr. Sanders stated he would like to get a full clarification on this issue. His business provides lots of sales tax revenue to the City and it would be nice if the City were more forthcoming and pleasant in its dealings with businesses. He requested that the City conduct an investigation by an outside person of the City's sign Ordinance and its administration. Cm. Burton advised that the City council had received Mr. Sanders' letters and had also had comments from City Staff. He did not feel that any conclusions had been reached. with regard to comments about the Sign Ordinance and selective enforcement, he thought it would be wise to have a business commission. Staff currently works with the Chamber of Commerce to clarify some of the issues. He asked Staff to investigate forming a business commission, similar to the Planning Commission, which would deal with these types of issues and advise the City Council on business related issues. This would give a forum for businesses to discuss issues such as this. He asked Staff to bring the issue back before the Council. There is no excuse for someone to work with the City and come out mad. Mr. Sanders stated he just wanted to bring the issue to the attention of the City Council. Cm. Houston commented that it was interesting that this followed Mr. Kern's presentation and we were advised that Livermore and Pleasanton had both put together task forces. He felt if the city had something along the lines of the Planning Commission to represent the City, the Chamber and business people, they could solve some of these problems. Cm. Moffatt questioned what had happened to the Business Task Force. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CM - VOL 12 - 296 Regular Meeting July 26, 1993 . . Cm. Burton advised that it had a narrow focus to work with the downtown plan. He envisioned a business commission dealing with broader issues such as how do we get businesses to stay in the community. Cm. Moffatt agreed that the business community is certainly the City's lifeblood and the City could look into a situation of coordination with the business community. Cm. Burton stated the Council was on Mr. Sanders' side, but there are regulations that have to be maintained. Mr. Sanders stated he was talking about conflicts and presented what he referenced as his latest 4 page letter to the Council. No copy was submitted to the city Clerk for the record. Mayor Snyder asked if Mr. Sanders had obtained a business license in this community and if so, the effective date. Mr. Sanders stated he was not aware of this requirement initially. He had asked Mr. Rankin the authority for asking certain questions on the business license application. A lot of numbers are required and he questioned the legal basis for the City asking for this information. Mr. Sanders stated Mr. Rankin was somewhat put out by his questioning this, but this is how he is. This was over a week ago, and he is still waiting for a response. He also indicated whenever he calls or comes in, people always have to research things and they can never seem to answer his questions. Cm. Houston stated he brought up some good points, but the City needs to work toward a good solution and maybe make some positive changes. Mr. Sanders felt all businesses should be treated equally. City Attorney Silver clarified that just because the Sign Ordinance is not in the Municipal Code, this does not render it ineffective. Whether or not it is in the Municipal Code does not affect its validity. Cm. Burton felt some type of a sounding board is a necessity, and a business commission would provide this. Cm. Moffatt stated he would like to look into the different types of committees which could be set up. He didn't want it to just be people bashing the city. Cm. Burton stated he realized we don't have enough people to get too involved. We do, however, have a chance of losing businesses to surrounding communities and this upsets him. We need some kind of a business commission to deal with the business community. Mayor Snyder reminded everyone that the city attempted to create something like this a couple of years ago and there was clearly no interest on the part of the business community. He agreed with Cm. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CM - VOL 12 - 297 Regular Meeting July 26, 1993 . . Moffatt that this should not be a city-bashing group. The business community developed the sign Ordinance and it was a 3-year project. If there is a problem, the City Council should be aware. The Council has always said it did not want a proactive enforcement situation. Also, no one has mentioned all the new businesses that do come into town. Cm. Moffatt asked that Staff look into some of the parameters for forming some type of group. Cm. Houston stated Staff could come back with different structures, concepts, etc. Mr. Ambrose questioned the timeframe that the Council wished to see this accomplished. The Council clarified that Staff should come back with just a time table at the next City Council meeting of when it could be reviewed. * * * * Skateboard Park (290-10) Bud Cisneros, owner of the Dublin Skate Shop advised that they asked a few years ago for a skate park. He has now received plans and information that skate boarding is being prohibited. Kids need a place to go; they are part of our community. We need to find a place for these kids and he stated he was willing to work for this. Mayor snyder advised that the Park & Recreation Commission has the responsibility for reviewing this. Cm. Moffatt stated the Commission would be the first step to working through some of the problems. * * * * CONSENT CALENDAR On motion of Cm. Moffatt, seconded by Cm. Houston, and by unanimous vote, the Council took the following actions: Approved Minutes of Regular Meeting of July 12, 1993; Adopted RESOLUTION NO. 91 - 93 AUTHORIZING DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS TO SIGN RIGHT-OF-WAY CERTIFICATIONS IN CONNECTION WITH STATE AND FEDERALLY FUNDED ROAD PROJECTS (1060-10) Authorized Staff to advertise for bids for the Annual Slurry Seal Program, Contract 93-10 (600-30); Approved Warrant Register in the amount of $981,603.69 (300-40). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CM - VOL 12 - 298 Regular Meeting July 26, 1993 . . Cm. Burton requested that the item related to the Mortgage Credit certificate Program be pulled from the Consent Calendar for discussion. People should know that we have a method of providing some financial help to first time buyers. senior Planner carrington stated the City had about 10 people purchase homes in 1992 who utilized this program. They apply to the county Department of Housing & Community Development. There are similar programs in Livermore and Pleasanton. The requested contribution from the city of Dublin to help finance the program actually went down this year. On motion of Cm. Burton, seconded by Cm. Howard, and by unanimous vote, the Council authorized the City Manager to sign an agreement with Alameda County regarding the Mortgage Credit certificate Program (600-40) ; Cm. Moffatt requested that the item related to the collection service be pulled from the Consent Calendar for discussion. He stated he has found after being in business for over 20 years that when you assign an account to a collection agency you have to word things strongly. On page 4, paragraph 10 of the agreement, he felt use of the word "may" should be changed to "would" Cm. Houston felt that what he had discovered in his business was that a lot of times people are unaware of things put on a credit report. This would give them the latitude. He felt the language was positive and we should keep it the way it is. Mayor Snyder stated he agreed with Cm. Houston. It is a bargaining chip that you can throw out. No one would like to have this appear on a credit report if it can be avoided. Mr. Rankin advised that since this is somewhat of a new program, Staff could monitor it for a year and get some answers. Staff could review the procedures in the future. On motion of Cm. Moffatt, seconded by Cm. Burton, and by unanimous vote, the Council adopted RESOLUTION NO. 92 - 93 APPROVING AN AGREEMENT FOR COLLECTION AGENCY SERVICES AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH COMMERCE COLLECTION, LTD. (600-30) and RESOLUTION NO. 93 - 93 ESTABLISHING PROCEDURES FOR WRITE-OFF OF UNCOLLECTIBLE ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE (300-20) * * * * . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CM - VOL 12 - 299 Regular Meeting July 26, 1993 ... . VALLEY VOLUNTEER CENTER REQUEST FOR USE OF REGIONAL MEETING ROOM (200-10) Recreation Director Lowart advised that as has been the case for the past 3 years, the Valley Volunteer Center is again requesting free use of the Regional Meeting Room in order to conduct their management assistance workshop series for the non-profit community. It is anticipated that they would be conducting 25 workshops between September 1993 and June 1994. If the City were to_charge for use the room, the revenue generated would total approximately $1,450. waiving the use fees, the City would become a major donor for the of By VVC. Cm. Burton expressed concern that the City could be "cherry picked". He suggested the possibility of charging them for use of the room and then have the City donate the money. He questioned if the City could do something like this. Ms. Silver stated as long as the city went through the proper process, it would be just like making a contribution or providing funding to any group. Ms. Lowart advised that in the past, the City Council has felt this was a way of providing in-kind services to an organization that provides service to many different non-profit groups. Mayor Snyder pointed out that there is a major benefit to the community in doing this. Cm. Burton stated he was not questioning this at all; this was not his point. He was just questioning if this was going to be the City's policy. Mayor Snyder advised that this had not created a problem in the past 3 years. Cm. Moffatt stated he felt this was $1,400 worth of advertising for the City. Why get into a monumental problem with bookkeeping? Cm. Houston questioned if there were any costs associated with this. Ms. Lowart stated setting up and taking down the room costs were involved, but Staff tries wherever possible to work this in with, another group set up. On motion of Cm. Burton, seconded by Cm. Moffatt, and by unanimous vote, the Council agreed to allow the use of the Regional Meeting Room by the Valley Volunteer Center at no cost. * * * * . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CM - VOL 12 - 300 Regular Meeting July 26, 1993 . . STOP SIGN REQUEST - VILLAGE PARKWAY @ WINEBERRY WAY (590-40) Public Works Director Thompson advised that as part of the budget hearings for FY 1993-94, the Council determined to eliminate detailed traffic engineering studies by the city's traffic consultant. staff recently received a request from the Parkway Terrace Homeowners' Association for installation of stop signs on Village Parkway @ Wineberry Way. Staff advised the Association that no funds were available for a warrant study and the Homeowners' Association is requesting that the City Council consider the installation of stop signs and to reinstate traffic studies. Cm. Moffatt asked if, in the spirit of volunteerism, it would be possible for the people to do the footwork in collecting the data or if this would cause too much havoc. Mr. Thompson advised that someone would have to train them to do traffic counts. Mr. Ambrose advised that there is more than just traffic counts involved. We have items in the CIP for signalizing certain locations on Village Parkway. There are a number of other issues involved. Mr. Thompson advised that it would also be necessary to review distance and traffic accident data. Cm. Burton asked about having the homeowners pay for the study. Mr. Thompson stated there was a study done some time ago and it did not warrant a stop sign at that time. Nothing has changed that would impact this location. Mayor Snyder asked what would happen if we allowed a right turn only out of wineberry. Mr. Thompson stated we would probably end up with a lot of u-turns at Kimball Avenue. Cm. Howard asked about the study that was done on Village Parkway in order to change the design of the road when the Alcosta area is developed by San Ramon. Mr. Thompson stated the last he had heard from San Ramon was that they weren't going to realign the road as part of the development. Cm. Moffatt asked when the signals were scheduled to go in. Mr. Thompson advised that there were 3 signals listed, but none were funded. It could be 4 or 5 years unless we find some outside money. John Wagner, 8342 Mulberry Place advised that making a left turn bothers him. Shrubs take over 1/2 to 2/3 of the sidewalk. The right turn only would be a matter of convenience. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CM - VOL 12 - 301 Regular Meeting July 26, 1993 . . Cm. Moffatt asked if some of the brush were to be trimmed if this would improve the situation. Mr. Wagner stated it might; he wasn't sure whose responsibility this would be. Cm. Burton felt it would be the simplest thing to trim the bushes and then see how this works out. Mayor Snyder stated the consensus seemed to be to look at the maintenance situation and Mr. Thompson could come back with some kind of a report and also bring back the past study that was done. The council could discuss it in the future. Cm. Moffatt felt it should be left up to the citizens. If it doesn't improve with the cutting, then the people could let the city know. Mr. Wagner stated he would pass this information on to the Board. He questioned how much a stop sign would cost. He thought they might be willing to share costs. Mayor Snyder advised that stop signs are not the answer to everything. Once Davona is signalized, it will give them a break. * * * * LETTER FROM SENATOR DAN BOATWRIGHT REGARDING SENATE BILL 1234 (BERGESON) (660-40) city Manager Ambrose presented the Staff Report and advised that SB 1234 has a laudable objective to force the State Legislature to address the repeated annual state Budget crisis and would create a 12- member committee to make recommendations on changes in the existing state-local alignment. If the Legislature and Governor fail to act upon the committee's recommendations by July 1, 1994, SB 1234 specifically requires that all property taxes, local sales taxes, vehicle license fees and state sales taxes be sequestered as of that date. This could have serious operating consequences in terms of jeopardizing the City'S ability to provide even basic services. Mr. Ambrose advised that staff requested council direction to prepare a letter for the Mayor's signature opposing SB 1234. Cm. Burton stated he found it ironic that the State just doesn't seem to get it. Why don't they impound their salaries? Cm. Moffatt felt that state Government needs to be reformed, but he opposed the penalty. We should indicate in the letter that fiscal reform is needed in the State. This point should be made in the letter. Cm. Burton advised that the California Grange organization is circulating a referendum which says, "no budget, no pay". . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CM - VOL 12 - 302 Regular Meeting July 26, 1993 . . On motion of Cm. Burton, seconded by Cm. Moffatt, and by unanimous vote, the Council directed Staff to prepare a letter to local State Legislators opposing SB 1234. * * * * PUBLIC HEARING CITYWIDE STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 83-1 (360-50) Mayor snyder opened the public hearing. Public Works Director Thompson stated that none of the 3 assessment districts being discussed at this meeting were new. Noticing and hearing requirements changed in 1993 and require that notices be mailed to all property owners affected by the assessment district and that 2 public hearings be held. The first public hearing is for the purpose of taking testimony only; no action is to be taken by the Council until the second public hearing. Mr. Thompson advised that this assessment district funds the maintenance and repair cost of street lighting in the City of Dublin. The greatest portion (over 90%) is the cost for energy billed by PG&E. The proposed District cost estimate for FY 1992-93 is $351,489, including an accumulated reserve for future pole replacement. An estimated $145,388 will be carried over from 1992-93 in the form of reserves. $191,621 is proposed to be assessed to property owners for the 1993-94 street lighting costs. Mr. Thompson advised that notices were mailed representing 7,600 parcels in the City. As of July 22nd, 306 residential property protests and 28 commercial property protests had been received. Staff estimated that the area of property owned by those protesting is approximately 4.4% of the total assessable property area in the City. state Law provides that a protest consisting of owners of over 50% of the land area of assessable property would cause automatic abandonment of the assessment for 1993-94. Last year's assessment for a single-family house was $18.62 and the estimated single-family assessment for 1993-94 is expected to be approximately one dollar higher per single-family home. Cm. Burton questioned if this district had the 5% clause. Mr. Thompson stated none of the 3 districts have this clause. Robert Patterson, a Rolling Hills Drive resident stated he understood that with any of these assessment districts, the Governor could confiscate a portion of the monies. Mr. Ambrose advised that this was incorrect; he was probably confusing these assessment districts with Special District Augmentation funds and property taxes paid to certain types of special districts. This is an assessment district controlled solely by the city. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CM - VOL 12 - 303 Regular Meeting July 26, 1993 a ",j . I John Wagner stated he was opposed to any increases going onto the tax bill. He just received a notice about the garbage thing that would add $110 a year to his tax bill. His garbage rates went up over $15 per year. The City seems to be doing quite well. At the last meeting, the city Council raised taxes to take care of water that off to the Bay. One of these days, he will be retiring and he is sure he can afford to stay in California. He would like to see something done .to stop escalating the fees and as far as he is concerned, it is still a tax. A neighbor told him she could now deduct it with the rest of her tax bill, but he was not sure this is legal. runs not \ Mayor Snyder pointed out that this is not a new fee. This public hearing is necessary to increase the rate by about $1 per year. Mr. Ambrose advised that the rate is less than what the County was charging us over 10 years ago. Mayor Snyder stated these districts don't make money; they pay for the service provided. The garbage issue is not a part of this public hearing. However, a rate was established for recycling, for weekly pick-up service and the quarterly special pick-ups. Mr. Rankin clarified that part of the reason for the increased amount is that the rate covers the period of time between January through June. If there are funds left over, they will be able to use the surplus to offset rates next year. Mayor Snyder advised that the city must meet legal requirements regarding what it does with garbage now and in the future. Cm. Burton stated he hoped that Mr. Wagner will be able to retire here in Dublin. John Griffin, 1962 Trinity Avenue, Walnut Creek, stated he owns 3 duplexes in Dublin and is one of the 4.4% who protests. If he had known how the assessments were arrived at, he would have been here 10 years ago. He appreciates what the city council must do to make the City solvent, given what is going on in Sacramento. He felt it was unfair the way duplexes are assessed. It is unfair to assess $29.55 per unit. Mr. Thompson advised that he was proposing to change the assessment method for duplexes to 2 times the single-family home rate. with regard to assessing based on frontage, there would be no way to derive a benefit based on the frontage measurement. Cm. Moffatt clarified that Mr. Griffin's assessment will come down. Mayor Snyder pointed out that the amounts are based on safety and security lighting. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CM - VOL 12 - 304 Regular Meeting July 26, 1993 ----~J~-.-'-----'-.--- -- ~ u ....L.1' 'U',-' .:,..:r~--' . . Cm. Burton corrected Mr. Wagner in that not all single family lots are 70 feet wide. This would create a problem if the City had to go out and measure every single lot. This would be unreasonable as we have street lights allover the City, not just in residential areas. street lights are put in as part of the downtown area and as part of the whole street design. Mayor Snyder closed the public hearing. Mayor Snyder announced that the public hearing was continued to August 9th, at which time the Council will take additionally testimony and then act upon the Engineer's Report for FY 1993-94. * * * * PUBLIC HEARING - LANDSCAPING & LIGHTING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 86-1 VILLAGES @ WILLOW CREEK TRACT 5511 (360-20) Mayor Snyder opened the public hearing. Public Works Director Thompson presented the Staff Report and advised that the scope of work for this assessment district includes maintenance of common landscaping improvements within and adjacent to the Villages @ willow Creek Development. Landscaping is located on the west side of Dougherty Road from south of Amador Valley Boulevard to the northerly City Limits, along Amador Valley Boulevard from Dougherty Road to wildwood Road, along the west side of wildwood Road and Fall Creek Road, on willow Creek Drive, and certain landscaped areas within the Ridgecreek (single-family) development. The work performed includes bedding maintenance and pruning, irrigation systems, right-of-way fencing, walls, and entrance signs and trash removal. The District's boundaries include all of Tract 5511. As part of the review and approval of the 145-unit single family development and the other, mUlti-family Villages, certain landscaping maintenance was made a condition of approval. This assessment district was formed for the purpose of providing that landscape maintenance as an alternative to providing the maintenance through a homeowners' association. Mr. Thompson again explained that noticing and hearing requirements changed in 1993 and require that notices be mailed to all property owners affected by the assessment district and that 2 public hearings be held. The first public hearing is for the purpose of taking testimony only; no action is to be taken by the Council until the second public hearing. . The 1993-94 assessment is proposed to be $84.72 per single-family lot and $42.36 per condominium/townhouse lot, which is approximately 2.8% higher than last year's assessment. This assessment is artificially low, as Staff is again proposing to use a portion of the reserve fund (approximately $10,000) to offset the higher actual District cost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CM - VOL 12 - 305 Regular Meeting July 26, 1993 . . As of July 22, 1993, Mr. Thompson advised that 19 protests had been received. staff estimates that the area of property owned by those protesting is approximately 2% of the total assessable property area in this assessment district. No testimony was given by any member of the public relative to this issue. Mayor Snyder closed the public hearing. Mayor Snyder announced that the public hearing was continued to August 9th, at which time the Council will take additionally testimony and then act upon the Engineer's Report for FY 1993-94. * * * * PUBLIC HEARING LANDSCAPING & LIGHTING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 83-2 TRACT 4719 (360-20) Cm. Burton announced that due to a conflict of interest he would abstain from all discussion and voting on this item. Mayor Snyder opened the public hearing. Public Works Director Thompson presented the staff Report and advised that this assessment district maintains landscaping and irrigation on the slopes along Stagecoach Road and also on the interior slopes of the Dublin Hills Estates development on Agate Way and Coral Way. The Conditions of Approval for Tract 4719 required that a homeowners' association be formed to maintain certain common landscaping improvements within the Tract. Assessment District 1983-2 was formed at the request of the developer as an alternative to providing landscaping maintenance through the Amador Lakes and Dublin Hills Estates homeowners' associations. Mr. Thompson again explained that noticing and hearing requirements changed in 1993 and require that notices be mailed to all property owners affected by the assessment district and that 2 public hearings be held. The first public hearing is for the purpose of taking testimony only; no action is to be taken by the Council until the second public hearing. The 1993-94 assessment is proposed to be $228.72 per single-family lot and $38.68 per multi-family (condominium) lot, or a total of $21,351.36 for Amador Lakes. An alternate plan for an increased assessment for landscape work on the interior would be $265.36 per single-family lot. The assessment per mUlti-family lot would remain at $38.68 since the single-family homes provide 100% of the funding for the interior slopes. As of July 22, 1993, Mr. Thompson advised that 6 single-family protests had been received. Staff estimates that the area of property . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . CM - VOL 12 - 306 Regular Meeting July 26, 1993 . . owned by those protesting is appr6*i~ately 2.4% of the total assessable property area in this ~s~essment district. Mr. Thompson discussed a newly proposed schematic plan for re- landscaping the stagecoach Road slopes. This plan would accentuate the 15 corner monument areas with colorful perennial flowers and flowering trees, would place a hedgerow at the upper fence line on drip or bubbler irrigation, provide a row of bushes to outline the upper edge of the existing vinca groundcover on the lower 20 feet of the slopes, provide new tree clusters, and would return the upper middle one-third to one-half of the slopes to non~irrigated native grasses. The estimated cost for these improvements would be in the range of $80,000 to $100,000, and the savings in water and maintenance would be approximately $7,000 to $8,000 per year. Mr. Thompson advised that a consensus of the 10 homeowners (representing 7 homes) at a neighborhood meeting was to increase the assessment for the single-family homes to $300 for this Fiscal Year to begin making improvements to the slopes, and that the first priority would be the corner monument areas. Mr. Thompson stated that Mr. Ron Nahas, who represents the Amador Lakes development (which pays 60% of the costs based on the established District formula), did not feel there would be enough return in savings for the proposed expenditure and is not in favor of increasing the assessment. As an alternative to raising the assessments for the stagecoach Road slopes, a proposal has been made to leave the assessments the same as the 1992-93 assessments for the single-family homes and use the money to further improve the interior slopes on Agate Way and Coral Way. This would increase the proposed assessment from $228.68 to $265.36 per single-family home and would raise $5,232 for Fiscal Year 1993-94. Adoption of the Alternate B Engineer's Report and Resolution would reflect these changes. Sara Tamblin with David Gates & Associates presented conceptual drawings which showed how they arrived at what they were proposing. Five different zones were reviewed horticulturally, visually and for irrigation. Mitchell Netta, an original homeowner in the district stated he felt the landscaping had filled in pretty good at this point. It is as good as it has ever looked. He expressed concern that there is a certain amount of patchwork occurring in this area. He encouraged the city Engineer and city Manager to seek continuity. A lot of rocks are being put in where landscaping was previously. The City should make sure the contractors are meeting their contractual obligations. He was opposed to the new plan. The cost of the project outweighs the benefits. The original plan was never completely followed through on. He was not in favor of the alternate plan and the slight increase in assessments. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CM - VOL 12 - 307 Regular Meeting July 26, 1993 . . Bob Fasulkey, resident in the district stated it was nice to see people doing something conceptually to improve the area they live in. He passed some photographs of certain areas around. They feel they are in a Catch 22 situation. The area is not being properly maintained. The money is being misspent on contractors doing weeding. A lot of money is being collected each year. It doesn't make sense to pay more money to have less. More money is not the solution. Money better spent is the answer. We should forego any increases at this time and relook at the whole project from the bottom up. We need to have an independent landscape contractor look at the area. Mayor Snyder asked about the possibility of the City looking at some way of returning the property to the people who live there rather than having an assessment district. The City has been through 10 years of consternation on an annual basis. From the very beginning, it was felt this was not a good program. He has always been disenchanted with what has gone on; and felt we need to look at something different. Mr. Fasulkey stated an assessment district was established before the first house was sold. The homeowners never made this decision. They could discuss this with the group. He questioned how people protest. Mr. Thompson explained the process and advised that they can still file a protest prior to the next hearing on August 9th. If over 50% of the land area protests, it would wipe out the whole assessment district. Tony Bartholemew expressed his opposition to the assessment. He could not see taking landscaping out to get something they really don't want. The landscaping looks fine just the way it is. He thought it might be a good idea to return the land to the homeowners. Scott Lingen, a Topaz Circle resident stated he was very proud of the work they have done. He was also opposed to the alternate presented, particularly at a price tag of $8,200. Greg Alden, an original homeowner in the district felt this whole assessment district, considering the square footage, has been greatly underfunded to maintain the plant material. The basic problem is just not enough money to get done what needs to be done. He doesn't feel they are far enough along to consider the concept presented. The plan doesn't include the interior slopes and he was uncomfortable with the cost versus water savings issue. Perhaps they need to have a few more neighborhood meetings. They had not considered the possibility of the city giving them the land back. He was of the opinion that the district is simply underfunded. He was not sure we should be using MCE Corporation. We should consider looking at an outside firm. He would not object to having the assessment doubled or even tripled to get the job done. Ron Nahas presented some background information and advised that this district was originally created due to a City requirement that the lots must be maintained. They wanted a continuous look. Everyone has . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CM - VOL 12 - 308 Regular Meeting July 26, 1993 . . been frustrated with this district. He wants to be cooperative, but they simply cannot afford what has been proposed. Mayor Snyder asked about the concept of creating a homeowners association rather than the assessment district. Would it be beneficial or feasible? Mr. Nahas stated homeowner associations bothered him in the past and his opinion has not changed over the years. It is very hard to get the job done. His preference would be to reduce the area to be maintained. If they could plant it densely with shrubs and trees and then turn the slopes above the trees back over to the homeowners, they would be more than happy to take over the frontage and maintain it. They are willing to work with Mr. Thompson and with the people to find a solution. Mr. Ambrose clarified that if a' protest is made against the assessment district, it would be against the $228.72 amount and not the higher alternative amount which was just for discussion. Rich Savilla, a Topaz Circle resident, stated he was extremely disturbed initially by cutting away the top portion. Stagecoach is starting to come in and look good. The interior slopes, however, look like garbage. The entrances were planted but never maintained. They are not getting the maintenance needed; this is the problem. Plants have been put up there that never should have been put up there. Jeff Shaddy stated the amount of water savings is very interesting. Flooding in some of the areas along Stagecoach should be looked at. The protest form was sent out in the mail, and apparently all 2.4% showed up at this meeting. The recommendation to raise the assessment would give an opportunity to put in some more plants on the interior slopes. This would be a good move. The plans that were presented tonight look like what they requested them to do. Spending money on the interior slopes to see what works would be a good idea. Daryl Hoon felt that the cost of this far outweighs any benefits and he strongly opposed this special assessment. Mayors Snyder closed the public hearing. Mayor Snyder announced that the public hearing was continued to August 9th, at which time the council will take additional testimony and then act upon the Engineer's Report for FY 1993-94. * * * * PUBLIC HEARING - REVISIONS TO MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 5.100 REGARDING PARKS AND RECREATION AREAS AND FACILITIES (290-10) Mayor Snyder opened the public hearing. Recreation Director Lowart presented the Staff Report and advised that this is the second reading of an Ordinance which would amend Dublin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CM - VOL 12 - 309 Regular Meeting July 26, 1993 . . Municipal Code Chapter 5.100 dealing with Parks and Recreation Areas and Facilities. The amended sections include: clarifying the language prohibiting unauthorized private use of parks for a profit; use of skates and skateboards in the parks; and prohibiting consumption of alcoholic beverages at the Dublin Senior Center. No one from the public gave testimony relative to this issue. Mayor Snyder closed the public hearing. On motion of Cm. Moffatt, seconded by Cm. Howard, and by unanimous vote, the Council waived the reading and adopted ORDINANCE NO. 5 - 92 AMENDING CHAPTER 5.100 OF THE DUBLIN MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING PARKS AND RECREATION AREAS AND FACILITIES * * * * CERTIFICATION OF REFERENDUM PETITION (630-30) city Clerk Kay Keck advised that she had completed the signature checking on a referendum petition which was filed against the city council's approval of the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan, and had certified the petition as sufficient. The Staff Report presented the Council's 3 legal options, which are: 1) Repeal Resolution No. 53-93 in its entirety; 2) Place the issue on the ballot at the City'S next regular General Municipal Election in November, 1994; or 3) Call a Special Election and request consolida- tion on the November 2, 1993 ballot. Ms. Keck explained that if the Council chose to call a special election and place the issue on the November 1993 ballot, certain actions were required. Working within the guidelines of the Elections Code, Staff had developed draft ballot language which the Council should review and approve. Staff proposed that the ballot language (which must be no more than 75 words) read: "Shall City council Resolution 53-93, which approves a General Plan Amendment for Eastern Dublin, a constitution for all future developments, with comprehensive, long term policies regarding: . preserving ridgelands and open space . providing future housing and job opportunities . providing new school facilities . providing new park and recreation facilities and which also approves a Specific Plan for Eastern Dublin and makes findings and adopts an environmental review program under California environmental laws, be adopted?" with regard to costs, a proposal by the Acting Registrar of Voters has been placed on the Board of Supervisors' agenda for consideration on Tuesday, July 27th, whereby consolidated election costs to cities in . . -. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CM - VOL 12 - 310 Regular Meeting July 26, 1993 . . Alameda Counties would be substantially increased. staff estimates that if the issue is placed on the November 1993 ballot, the city would incur costs of approximately $12,500. The adopted 1993-94 Budget does not include funding for a special election and therefore, an additional appropriation of $12,500 would be required. The next issue dealt with whether the Council wished to submit ballot arguments and rebuttals in favor of the measure. If so, Ms. Keck explained that it would be appropriate for the Council to designate a member or members to write the ballot argument and rebuttal. Ballot arguments (containing no more than 300 words) must be submitted to the City Clerk no later than 4:00 p.m., on Monday, August 16,1993. Rebuttal arguments (no more than 250 words) would need to be submitted no later than 4:00 p.m., on Thursday, August 26, 1993. In summary, Ms. Keck advised that after considering the options, if a special election is called for November 2, 1993, the Council should: 1) review and approve the ballot language; 2) adopt the Resolution; 3) approve an additional appropriation of $12,500 to the Elections Budget; and 4) appoint a member or members of City Council to write ballot and rebuttal arguments supporting the measure, if so desired. Cm. Moffatt stated his suggestions would be to put this to a vote of the people as soon as possible. Cm. Burton stated there has been a lot of concerns expressed regarding who signed the petitions and how. He had no problem having people vote on this. There were compromises made, but since they did not meet everyone's ideas, we are left with one way to resolve this. He felt that when people know the facts, they will realize we have a good plan. Mark Evanoff with Greenbelt Alliance encouraged the City Council to withdraw the General Plan Amendment and begin the process of preparing a new plan. This would avoid the cost of having a special election and avoids the expense of litigation. The wastewater plan for this Valley includes having a firm urban boundary. It also makes sense to withdraw the GPA in light of the 3 separate traffic studies. He discussed the levels of service on the roads and highways. Cm. Burton stated while he appreciated the concerns about all these issues, he assumed if they had their wishes, we would have nothing. He felt it was right to let the people vote. Mr. Evanoff stated the Greenbelt Alliance and several other groups have submitted testimony several times. The testimony has done nothing. They still encourage strong policies related to phasing and an urban limit line. Cm. Moffatt asked if the Greenbelt Alliance will also be opposing the North Livermore GPA and also if they would be opposing the fact that traffic over the Altamont will be at Level F. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CM - VOL 12 - 311 Regular Meeting July 26, 1993 . . Mr. Evanoff stated they feel it makes sense to rethink Dublin's plans because what is being proposed is not going to work. Cm. Moffatt advised that some of the new concepts coming before the Tri-Valley Transportation Council are very exciting to see with regard to how some of the problems can be solved. Many of the concepts are in the embryo stages now. . Mr. Evanoff stated he agreed that the TVTC is a good forum to solve these issues. A spirit of cooperation is needed. The model shows that if the Dougherty Valley, Tassajara, East Dublin and North Livermore go forward, it doesn't work. We should all be working together to come up with a plan that does work. Cm. Moffatt stated we are talking about long range types of concepts to figure out what's the best use for the land. You have to do this before you can put in a road system. Letting the people vote on it might be the best thing to do. Mr. Evanoff reminded the Council that if this plan is rejected at the polls, the city cannot go forward for a year. Cm. Burton stated this has gone on for 8 years and considering what his group has asked, it will take a long time to reach agreement. He asked what Mr. Evanoff felt were the reasons that people signed the petition. Mr. Evanoff stated each person that signed the petition could answer that question. The Greenbelt Alliance doesn't feel the plan has specific enough language. Cm. Burton stated he was glad to see people getting involved. He did not feel that the petitions necessarily reflect the Greenbelt Alliance's attitudes. He complimented Mr. Evanoff for the good job he had done in staying with this. Marjorie Labar agreed with Mr. Evanoff; the plan is fatally flawed, especially the EIR. We should do back and rethink this plan. In terms of placing the referendum on the ballot, she took exception to the ballot language proposed. About 80% of the language should be deleted. Cm. Moffatt asked what language specifically she felt should be del~ted. Ms. Labar advised that they were told initially that nothing was set in concrete. We should simply state as to whether the resolution concerning the plan should go forward. It is unfortunate that Dublin voters have to do this twice in one year. This seems to be the only forum to get the City Council's attention. We should simply state the issues and confine the other issues to the ballot argument. Dan Rodriguez stated he knew this project had gone on many many years. Some people just want to stop it at any cost. He was sorry to see it . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CM - VOL 12 - 312 Regular Meeting July 26, 1993 . . go to an election. We should vote on it in November, 1993 and get on with it. Janet Lockhart stated she was representing 2 separate organizations. The Chamber of Commerce was very interested in having a voice tonight in making a statement. Unfortunately, there was a conflicting BART Forum meeting tonight. SB 1234 was discussed earlier and she used this as a prime example of why Dublin needs to be concerned about its tax base and our ability to extend it with future commercial growth. She read a letter from the Chamber Board of Directors. "The Dublin Chamber feels strongly that if our community is to maintain and attract new business, we must provide our merchants with a sound base and an opportunity to grow and prosper in the future. The land east of Dublin represents a healthy commercial area and an ideal opportunity to expand our existing tax base." Ms. Lockhart stated the Chamber is also very interested if this goes to an election, they feel it should happen in 1993 and request that the Council please not put our City on hold for another year. Ms. Lockhart stated the second organization she represented was the Dublin Coalition for Local Planning which is a local grassroots organization made up of residents from throughout our community. Their statement was, "The General Plan Amendment considered by our Council represents a sound plan and a wonderful opportunity for the residents of Dublin to manage and control our future growth. The land in question is prime development area which will most certainly be developed by either Alameda County or one of the surrounding cities. The residents of Dublin will greatly benefit by the ability to consider and vote on future plans for this area. A ballot in November is not the arena to argue specific developments because there are none and when it is time for development plans, our community will have an opportunity to give input and ideas and indeed vote on the specific plan. Taking control of this area will afford all Dublin residents a voice in their future." Margaret Tracy, speaking as an individual, advised that at the latest Zone 7 meeting, a policy was passed by 5 members for permanent water conservation. This means we have water limits. We also have smog and traffic congestion and crime. These problems need to be addressed through regional solutions. She encouraged the Council to consider these environmental impact reports that have given evidence of traffic levels that are unacceptable. If cutting back on the planned development is one way to make levels of service that are acceptable, then that needs to be done. It's important to work with other governments to achieve these goals. We should relook at the East Dublin plan; have some phasing and make it a natural expansion of the City. Let a definite line be established for each phase. On motion of Cm. Burton, seconded by Cm. Howard, and by unanimous vote, the Council directed Staff to place the referendum on the November 2, 1993 ballot. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CM - VOL 12 - 313 Regular Meeting July 26, 1993 . . On motion of Cm. Burton, seconded by Cm. Howard, and by unanimous vote, the Council approved the ballot language and adopted RESOLUTION NO. 94 - 93 CALLING FOR A SPECIAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO SUBMIT A REFERENDUM REGARDING THE EASTERN DUBLIN GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO THE VOTERS OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN; REQUESTING CONSOLIDATION WITH THE STATEWIDE ELECTION ON NOVEMBER 2, 1993; REQUESTING THE ALAMEDA COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS TO ALLOW THE REGISTRAR OF VOTERS TO CONDUCT THE ELECTION; AND AUTHORIZING CERTAIN PROCEDURAL MATTERS The Council also approved an additional appropriation of $12,500 to the Elections Budget. Cm. Burton stated he would like to be on this committee representing the Council and Cm. Moffatt volunteered also. Mayor Snyder clarified that everyone could have input. On motion of Cm. Houston, seconded by Cm. Howard, and by unanimous vote, the Council appointed Cm.'s Burton and Moffatt to write the ballot and rebuttal arguments. * * * * TRI-VALLEY AFFORDABLE HOUSING COMMITTEE REPORT AND DRAFT LETTER REGARDING AB 51 (430-80) Senior Planner Carrington presented the Staff Report which addressed the history of the Tri-valley Affordable Housing Committee and outlined its goals and objectives and activities during 1993. Mr. Carrington also advised that during the past 3 months, the Committee has reviewed and commented on AB 51, which would have allowed the joint provision of affordable housing and the sharing of credit for its provision toward their fair share of the regional housing need only if they had already provided 25% of the needed very low and low income housing as determined by the Council of Governments. AB 51 would allow communities to share resources to develop affordable housing. Research by the League of California cities and the city of Pleasanton indicated that approximately 2/3 of the cities in California would not meet this requirement. When this was pointed out, the legislation was revised to provide for a sliding scale to allow participation. Mr. carrington stated that he had been advised that proponents of AB 51 will not attempt to pass it this year, the possibility exists that language proposed by HCD may be included when AB 51 is reintroduced next year. staff requested that the City Council review the draft letter responding to proposed changes to AB 51 and either give direction on the content or direct that it be signed by Chairman Tom Vargas and be sent to Senator Boatwright,' Tom Cook, Director of HCD, and the Southern Alameda County Association of Realtors. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . CM - VOL 12 - 314 Regular Meeting July 26, 1993 . . Mr. carrington advised that San Ramon recently sent a letter from the City council. Cm. Burton stated he felt the emphasis of the TVAHC was to spend the majority of its time in figuring ways for Danville and San Ramon to buy in and put their low cost housing in Dublin. Mr. carrington advised that this had not been proposed. Cm. Burton felt that we would be opening a door; once you give them a chance, they will try to dump on Dublin. He was not opposed to sending the letter, but his point was it is apparent to him that Danville sees they can't put in affordable housing. He asked if the clause about the City that is affected being able to refuse was still in the bill. Mr. carrington advised that the language probably changes on a weekly basis as the different committees look at it. Mayor Snyder stated there has always been the feeling that the city accepting the low cost housing has a right to refuse it from the other jurisdictions. Cm. Burton felt the whole idea has lost its perspective; it is a bad bill and a bad idea. If cities can't afford to build affordable housing, we should deal with that, but don't make it so cities can buy into other cities territory. He did not feel the drafted letter reflected Dublin's position. Mayor snyder stated he doesn't agree with a lot of the amendments which change the concept of what they started out to do. It begins to take the power away from the locals. There needs to be a way to address this critical area in the state. Cm. Houston felt the letter should go out from the City. Cm. Burton agreed to just let the committee do their thing. We're opposing all the amendments to the legislation and the letter is okay for what it is intended to do. AB 51 is really dangerous, especially with all the amendments. Mr. carrington stated hopefully the group can shepherd some decent legislation in the next year. On motion of Cm. Burton, seconded by Cm. Houston, and by unanimous vote, the Council directed that the letter be sent out signed by the Mayor on behalf of the City to Senator Boatwright, Tom Cook and the SACAR. * * * * . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CM - VOL 12 - 315 Regular Meeting July 26, 1993 . . COMMENTS ON NORTH LIVERMORE DRAFT GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT AND DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (420-50) senior Planner Carrington advised that a copy of the North Livermore General Plan Amendment and Draft EIR was sent to the City of Dublin on June 10th for review and comments no later than July 27th. The proposed North Livermore GPA area contains approximately 14,600 acres and proposes 12,780 dwelling units, 13,000 jobs and a population of 30,000. It's been a long process and in the last year, the Livermore City council directed the preparation of a GPA, not a Specific Plan, for a community of 30,000. Mr. Carrington stated Staff had prepared a draft letter with several comments related to Dublin's concerns. with regard to regional facilities such as 1-580, Vasco Road, SR 84, they state they are not going to make any improvements to any of these facilities, yet the traffic LOS will improve. The plan includes a policy that they shall not improve any regional facilities. Thus, one of Dublin's comments relates to how Livermore can mitigate these traffic impacts without making any improvements to roadways. Cm. Burton questioned if Dublin was really interested in letting Livermore develop north of 1-580 and if they think we are just going to sit here and do nothing. Are we planning to do anything other than just sending comments. Mayor Snyder stated this is the process and knowing Livermore, he was sure they would address Dublin's concerns in a rightful manner. This is just the technical part of the process. On motion of Cm. Burton, seconded by Cm. Houston, and by unanimous vote, the Council authorized Staff to send comments to the city of Livermore. Cm. Moffatt asked when a formal LAFCO decision would be made. Mayor Snyder responded not until there is a formal application; there is nothing before LAFCO at this time. LAFCO has dismissed all issues between the City of Dublin and City of Livermore without prejudice. * * * * COMMENTS ON EAST COUNTY AREA PLAN DRAFT GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT AND DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (420-50) Senior Planner Carrington presented the Staff Report and advised that on June 16th, the Alameda County Planning Director sent a copy of the East county Area Plan Draft EIR for review and comments, which are due on or before August 4, 1993. The Alameda County Planning Commission is scheduled to hold a public hearing on the Plan on August 19th at 7:00 p.m., in the Dublin City council Chambers. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CM - VOL 12 - 316 Regular Meeting July 26, 1993 . . Mr. carrington explained that the East County Area Plan is proposed to supersede the Livermore Amador Valley Planning unit General Plan and Open Space Element adopted by the Alameda County Board of Supervisors in November of 1977. The planning area consists of 418 square miles, including the cities of DUblin, Livermore, Pleasanton, a portion of Hayward and surrounding unincorporated areas. Staff was concerned that the County Planning staff has decided that they are going to modify Dublin's adopted plan. The County has removed low density areas east of Fallon Road. It is proposing that 3,200 acres of open space be set aside in areas that the City has designated for other land uses. Mayor snyder discussed the spirit of the Cortese Knox bill with regard to open space. He did not think it appropriate to have western Dublin identified as a sphere of influence situation for the City, and then have them designate it as permanent open space. This seems to be a direct conflict. Mr. Carrington stated the reason for county government and land use planning is to provide long term general plans for unincorporated areas. This would mean that it would be outside the spheres of influence for cities. Cm. Burton questioned if Dublin should have official representation at the August 19th public hearing. From a policy standpoint, the Council did not believe the County should be involved in Dublin's sphere of influence. Mayor Snyder and Cm. Burton both indicated they would attend the public hearing. On motion of Cm. Burton, seconded by Cm. Moffatt, and by unanimous vote, the Council authorized Staff to send comments to Alameda County. * * * * OTHER BUSINESS Tri-Vallev Council (140-80) Mr. Ambrose advised that Dublin would be hosting the next meeting of the Tri-Valley Council sometime in September. The Council determined that the meeting would be held on Thursday, September 30th at the willow Tree restaurant. * * * * . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CM - VOL 12 - 317 Regular Meeting July 26, 1993 . . Completion of Dublin Boulevard Extension (820-20) Mr. Ambrose requested direction from the council with regard to a ribbon cutting of the newly completed Dublin Boulevard extension project. The Council determined that a ribbon cutting would be held at 9:00 a.m., on Tuesday, August 17th. Staff ~hould determine the precise location and invite representatives from BART, Alameda County, city of Pleasanton, the NPID, etc. * * * * Neiqhborhood Watch National Niqht Out Proqram (580-40) Mr. Ambrose advised that a flyer had been Police Services hosting a barbecue for all as part of the National Night Out Program. evening, August 3rd at Kolb Park. distributed regarding Dublin Neighborhood Watch Groups It will be held on Tuesday * * * * Smokinq Control Ordinance (560-90) Cm. Moffatt indicated that everyone is seeing things from him regarding the Smoking Ordinance. There was a survey taken and a large percentage of restaurants in Dublin indicated they would like to see a total ban on smoking within their businesses. Cm. Burton stated he read the information and this is certainly an issue with a lot of people behind it. He personally felt that if it is private property, it gets to be a choice. Cm. Moffatt felt it relates to 2 issues; one of liability and the other being health. Mayor Snyder advised that when the issue comes before the Council, the subject can be discussed in more depth. * * * * Dublin Little Leaque (130-40) Cm. Houston referenced a letter received from Little League thanking the City for the great job Staff did this year. They also talk about consideration for a batting cage and some score booths for next year. They indicated they were building and funding the batting cage. This is a good thing; Pleasanton sports Grounds has this and he felt it helps the program. * * * * . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CM - VOL 12 - 318 Regular Meeting July 26, 1993 . . ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was adjourned at 11:30 p.m. * * * * Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk * * * * . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CM - VOL 12 - 319 Regular Meeting July 26, 1993