01/06/1982 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - January 6, 1982 D. STAFF - REPORTS, CORRESCMENCE PTID ACAAUNCEMENIS: l.a) Initiative Petition (coni.) MOTION FAUM DUE TO LACK OF SECOND: Perkins moved to terminate discussion of ordinance imposing a special tax for police protection services and to schedule it for a later meeting. After further discussion the following changes and/or additions were made to the proposed ordinance. On page one, paragraph two of Section 1, the phrases 'or to contract with another public agency' and 'or with another public agency' were added after . . .the County of Santa Clara. On page three, section 3 the following figures were added: a) Unimproved parcel. $2� acre or fraction thereof. . not to exceed $100 and b) improved residential parcel. . . .$200. The following residents addressed the Council concerning the City Manager's report on tax implications and also on the proposed ordinance. Frank Wheeler, 27174 Elena, suggested that negotiations with other agencies (other than Santa Clara Co nrY) be considered and the attempt should be made to internally absorb costs. Herman Spector, 27271 Ursula Lane, also suggested that other agencies be contacted. Andrew icon, 27360 Natoma Hood, had several questions regarding both the ordinance and the City Manager's irenn. He specifically raised questions regarding the figures which had been cited in the City Manager's memo on tax implications. Alma Wood, 12151 Stonebrook Drive, raised a question concerning the 1981-82 budget and was informed that it had been adopted and approved an tel• Louise Dronkert, 27431 Black Mountain Road, expressed serious concerns about this ordinance being brought up at the meeting with no notice. She felt more time for consideration was necessary Park Lane, questioned Leafs Th_r� 27272 Byrne the specific uses for which the ` funds could be used. Marc Kaufman, 14100 Donelson Place, also had questions regarding the figures raised in the City Manager's mann. Walter Starr, 13124 Byrd Lane, noted that cost increases in part appeared to be due to the increase in the size of the Town; however, this increase would not continue at such a rate. He questioned the result if the tax override were not defeated in April. Anthony Lagorio 300 3rd St., Los Altos, expressed confusion at the figures which had been inserted on page three of the proposed ordinance. MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIID: Moved by McReynolds, seconded by Nystrom and passed unanimously to waive further reading of ordinance # with amendents as noted by the City Attorney for page one, paragraph two of Section 1 and with the figures as suggested by the City Manages for page three, section 3. MOTION SECOMED AM CARRIED: Moved by McReynolds, seconded by Nystrom and passed the following roll call vote to introduce Ordinance #_• AYES: Mayor Proft, Councilors Hillestad, McReynolds and Nystrom NDES: Councilman Perkins E. SPECIAL ORDERS: 1. Public Hearings: a) Ordinance # amending Chapter 5, entitled "Zoning" by adding subsection (j) to Section 9-5.702 of Article 7 of the Los Altos Hills Municipal Code (FIRST RFADINO) �• Councibwmbers discussed this ordinance which proposed landscape screening and several questions were raised. Hoa would the ordinance be enforced? What were the exact definitions of such terns as "storage" and "screening'. 990