05/20/1998 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

4 4.4 Approved agreement with Zanker Road Resource Management, LTD for disposal of yard waste — Reso #29-98 4.5 Approved recommendation for approval of contracts with Town Geologist for design of landslide repairs-Reso #30-98 4.6 Accepted grant of storm drain easement on Lands of Vidovich — Resolution #31-98 Item Removed: 4.3 Approval of agency agreement for a Countywide AB939 Implementation Fee - Resolution # Siegel asked for clarification of the implementation fee. Staff responded that this fee was approximately $7,500 and the monies were used to fund AB939 related costs. MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Siegel, seconded by Hubbard and passed unanimously to adopt Resolution #28-98 approving an agency agreement for a Countywide AB939 Implementation Fee. 5. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 5.1 Request from Mr. Schoendorf regarding interpretation of Town Municipal Code concerning undergrounding of utility lines Michael Schoendorf, 13145 Byrd Lane, referred to the correspondence he had written over the last several months on the issue of underground utility installations. He believed the ordinance had been misinterpreted and should be clarified so that in the future residents did not experience the confusion he had had with his neighbor. He specifically referred to a letter from John Krug, Service Planning Supervisor, PG&E and did not agree with Mr. King's opinions. Mr. Schoendorf stated that he had the documents to support that the lateral from the pole was not part of the distribution but part of the secondary which was covered by Town ordinances. MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Hubbard, seconded by Dauber and passed unanimously to direct staff to clarify ordinance section 8-204 to read: "Every electrical, telephone and other utility service lead-in shall be constructed and placed underground so that no portion thereof shall remain aboveground at any place between the street or easement line supply and the structure which such lead-in serves. No new utility pole or overhead line shall be installed, except for repair or maintenance purposes." 5.2 Statement of Position on AB 1776 (Motor Vehicle Tax) Reso # N, i Johnson stated that fourteen out of the fifteen Santa Clara County cities had stated their opposition to the repeal of the motor vehicle tax. Hubbard believed this tax was an appropriate tax for use of roads, etc. Sigel stated that the loss of this revenue would be fiscally damaging to the Town and Dauber also commented that this tax accounted for a signficant amount of the library budget. She also asked why local governments had not gotten back the ERAF property tax monies. Casey believed the people had been overtaxed and this was a good step in beginning to reduce taxes. She believed Governor Wilson when he said the money would be returned to the local governments by other means. May 20, 1998 Regular City Council Meeting