Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-04-1970 City Council Minutes SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MINUTES TIME'~ WEDNESDAY, MARCH 4, 1970 - 7:30 P.M. ~ PLACE: SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE, SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA TYPE: REGULAR MEETING ORGANIZATION A. ROLL CALL - The meeting was dalled to order at 7:30 P.M. All Councilmen were present. B. MINUTES - Moved by Mr. Robbins, seconded by Mr. Smith that the ~tnutes be approved as mailed with the following amendments: Page 2, Item III.A. Paragraph 2 should read: "Mr. Robbins felt that the basic idea was a good one; however, if Saratoga wants to have higher standards, would this still be possible?" Item B, Paragraph 2, line 2 should read: "Later it was stated ...... " Page 7, Item B.2, Para. 2 should read: "Mayor Tyler pointed out that it had been the consensus of the Council that there would be no trenching unless approved by the Director of Public Works". Carried and so ordered. II. BIDS AND CONTRACTS A.REQUEST FROM CALIFORNIA CABLE TELEVISION CORPORATION FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME IN WHICH TO RENDER INITIAL SERVICE TO SUBSCRIBERS. CALIFORNIA This item was discussed at 8:15 P.M. following the recess during which CABLE the Public Welfare Committee finalized its report. TELEVISION CORPORATION Mr. George Nishimara, a representative of Communications Systems Corp. and a resident of Saratoga, addressed the Council. He stated that his firmwas one of the three bidders qualified to bid on the Cable system in Saratoga. He stated that their bid contained a lot of pre-planning and pre-engineering in order to come up with their proposal. Mr. Nishimura understood that the present franchisee was asking to go overhead in their cable in some areas which was not in the specifications and he was asking that the Public Welfare Committee meet with his firm's attorney for further negotiation. He added that extensions do cost the City of Saratoga money as far as fees are concerned and in six months would run in the neighborhood of two to three thousand dollars. Mayor Tyler responded that it would be necessary to consider this request after hearing the report of the Public Welfare Committee and the Council was primarily considering the extension of time as stated on the Agenda. Mr. Smith reported that the Public Welfare Committee had metwith representatives of the franchisee on a number of occasions~ There is a request before the Council for an extension of the time in which to offer initial service to subscribers. The franchisee has also requested permission to install the CATV Cable overhead on existing poles from the head end on Bohlman Road to~Si~'~d~Oak Streets in lieu of undergrounding. In addition, California Cable TeIevision abked for relief from the requirement to bore all street crossings and has asked permission to trench across streets in certain~areas. The Public Welfare Committee recuamended that the City retain the re- qulrements that all street crossings be performed by boring and that no open-cut trenching be permitted in the surface of the street except where the Director of Public Works deems boring to be impossible or detrimental to the general welfare of the City. Where the CATV Contractor requests permission to trench across the street the Public Welfare Committee reconmended the following procedure: 1. The CATV contractor will try to bore each crossing before requesting permission to cut the street. 2. Upon receiving.request for permission to cut the street, the Director of Public Works, or his authorized representative will determine whether or not boring is possible. 3. Upon determining that boring is impossible or detrimental to the interest of the :City, the Director of Public Works may authorize open street cut or require installation of the conduit in an alternate location. CITY C~JNCIL MINUTES MARCH 4, 1970 4. Trench backfill in street areas will consist of cement-sand slurry from bottom of trench to street subgrade. Cement-sand slurry shall contain 2~ sacks of cement per cubic yard of slurry. 5. Street paving and base material shall be replaced in kind over the trench area except that a minimum of 2~ AC on 6" Aggregate base will be required. 6. Where open street cuts are permitted the CATV contractor will be required to restore the surface in such a manner that the restored street cut will be indistinguishable from adjoining pavement. Restoration to this standard will require either resurfacing of the entire street in kind or skillful blending of the final surface of the restored trench with the adjoining street surface, 7. Requirements 1 through 6 to the contrary notwithstanding, boring will not be required (a) on any street scheduled for resurfacing during the construction season inwhlch the installation of the CATV conduit is made; (b) on any street in which installation of sanitary sewers or underground utilities can be coordinated with CATV construction; or (c) on any street which is scheduled for reconstruction which can be coordinated with CATV construction. In lieu of pavement restoration in the areas affected by (b) and (c) the CATV franchise holder will reimburse the City for a prorata share of the cost of AC paving and Aggregate base. In lieu of final re- surfacing of areas covered by (a) The CATV franchise holder will reimburse the City for a prorata share of the surfacing cost. With regard to conditions 6 and 7, Mr. Smith explained that when cutting is allowed the franchiseewill be required to resurface the trench area so cuts will not be noticed. Where trenchresurfacing cannot be satisfactorily blended into ~be existing street, the franchisee will be required to resurface the e~re street from intersection to intersection. Relatively new AC pavements will require resurfacing with a one inch asphaltlc concrete cap. Other streets will require resurfacing with oil or screenings. With regard to the head end site, the b~l. ding and antenna towers must be shielded from view from the floor of the valley by screen planting. The proposed planting .shall be subject to the approval of the Planning Director. This is out of Saratoga but is still part of our sphere of influence and it is appropriate that we not permit erection of an eyesore. The franchisee has made a similar request to the County in regard to overhead construction along Bohlman Road. With regard to ~he extension to July 1, for first servioe, the Committee recommended approval of this request subject to submission by the franchisee of a letter of acceptance of the conditions outlined here; appropriate ratification of these conditions by their bonding company; and review and approval of these conditions by the City Attorney. In reply to a question from Mayor Tyler with regard to eliminating the requirement for oil and soreening~.on certain streets scheduled for re- surfacing after the installation of the CATV conduit, Mr. Smith replied that this would only refer to resurfacingscheduled during the 1970-71 season. In the original contract.there were no.pro~fsions made for instances where trenching was impossible and, in some cases, trenching may be mare desirable. Once permission to cut has been granted by the Director of Public Works, then the franchisee assumes the obligation to match the trench resurfacing to adjoining pavement even if this requires oil and screeningor ACcapptng'of the entire street°between adjacent intersections. The conditions outlined in this report should be put in final form and submitted to the franchisee. The franchiseemust then submit a letter of acceptance fr6ml=t. he-fbanchisee and ratification by the surety. The contract date for cd~m~letion of the entire system within one year from now (February 19, 1970) will remain in force. - 2 - OITY COUNCIL MINUTES MARCH 4, 1970 E.~l:~ay Carman, representing California Cable Television Corporation stated the Company would be more than pleased to accept the conditions of the Council and they are agreeable and continue to express their willingness to do a good job and see that the job is completed as promptly as possible. He expressed appreciation for the consideration given by the Council. Mr. Smith emphasized that the Committee had made their position very clear to the franchisee and would continue to watch the whole installation closely.. Boring will remain the rule and exceptions have to be proven step-by-step. It was the consensus of the Council that this was not the time to open up to another franchisee. Howevet if Cable T.V. is further r~niss this would certainly be considered. Mr. Huff stated that it was his feeling that it would be better to under- ground from the head end to Boh]m~n Road and added that the Committee did bring up the point that to go overhead, Cable Televislonwould need to seek a variance from the Planning Co~ission. Mr. Smith stated that it was also a recommendation of the Committee that even if they are allowed to go overhead, service lines to subscriber should be underground. He suggested that the Council take no action on the request to underground to avoid action which might prejudice the variance application before the Planning Commission. If the Planning Commission turns down the variance, Cable Televlsionwould have the right of appeal, however, in this case it might be preferable to go underground. Moved by Mr. Dwyer for adoption of Public Welfare Committee report dated March 4~ 1970 recommending granting of the extension, establishing procedure for street crossings and deferring action on request to install overhead line along Bohlman Road. Seconded by Mr. Smith; carried and so ordered. Mayor Tyler thanked Mr. Nishimara. for his interest. B. C.O. ~1 - SARATOGA AVENUE WALKWAY Mr. Huff reported that the Management Committee recommends approval of Change Order ~1, Saratoga Avenue Walkway. Mr. Sanders stated that this change order provides for the extension of the Via Monte sidewalk across the front of the City owned property at Via Monte and Saratoga Avenue which was approved by the Council on January 7, It also provides for extension of the Saratoga Avenue Walkway from the point at whichit crosses Saratoga.Avenue at Herriman to the intersection of Shadow Oaks Way - Douglass Lane. This will permit school children from the Shadow Oaks area to reach'the walk or the crossing without being forced into the street in bad weather. The total cost of the two projects is $1,075. Moved by Mr. Smith, seconded by Mr. Robbing for approval of Change Order #1 Saratoga Avenue Walkway. Carried and so ordered. III. PETITIONS, ORDINANCES & FORMAL RESOLUTIONS A. ORDINANCE NO. NS-5.20 - Second Reading - Ordinance Amending Ordinance NS-5, re Site Approval Requirements and Exceptions Thereto. Mr. Huff reported that this Ordinance was introduced at the last meeting in a form slightly modified from the original draft. At the suggestion of the Council and the City Attorney it has now been re-typed as intro- duced and is ready for adoption. Moved by Mr. Dwyer for adoption of Ordinance NS 5.20, seconded by Mr. Smith; carried and so ordered. B. RESOLUTION NO. 524 - SARATOGA CAMPUS ASSESSMENT DISTRICT - Resolution Authorizing Application of Surplus as a Credit to Assessment. This Resolution authorizes the disposition of the remaining funds in the Saratoga Campus Assessment District to the Junior Coll~ge District. Moved by Mr. Smith for adoption of Resolution No. 524, seconded by Mr. Robbing; carLied and so ordered. - 3 - SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MINUTES MARCH 4, 1970 C. RESOLUTION NO, 525 - Resolution of Public Interest and Necessity for Neighborhood Park Facilities. This is the resolution determining that public interest and necessity demand the construction and completion of certain neighborhood park facilities. This is the initial action to put the Park Bond Issue on the June 2, ballot. Moved by Mr. Robbins for adoption of Resolution 525, seconded by Mr. Smith; carried unanimously and so ordered. D. ORDINANCE NO. 48 - Ordinance Calling Special Bond Election for Neighborhood Park Facilities on June 2, 1970. This is one mare procedural step in the move towards the June 2 bond election. Moved by Mr. Smith,. seconded by Mr. Robbins to introduce Ordinance No. 48 and w~ive the reading. Carried unanimously and so ordered. E. R/ZSOLUTION NO. 526 - Resolution Requesting Board of Supervisors of Santa Clara County to order Consolidation of Special Bond Election with Direct Primary Election. As described, this asks the Board to consolidate this with the June 2 Primary Election. Moved by Mr. '~m~l~{~ TM seconded by Mr. Robbins for adoption of Resolution No. 526. Carr~d~h~Tanimously and so ordered. F. ORDINANCE NS-3-ZC-50 - CHANGE OF ZONING FROM R-l, 10,000 (Single Famil~ Residential) and R-l, 40,000 (Single Family Residential) TO R-1-20,000 ~ (Single Family Residential) LOMITA AVENUE. (Application of Kate C. Pronger) This Ordinance was introduced at the time of Public Hearing at the last meeting and this would be the time for adoption of the Council so desires. This is in accordance with the General Plan. No one spoke at the Public Hearing.on February 18, and we have received no correspondence since then. Moved by Mr. Robbins for adoption of Ordinance NS-3-ZC-50, seconded by Mr. Smith; carried and so ordered. IV. SUBDIVISIONS, BUILDING SITES AND ZONING REQUESTS - None V. PUBLIC HEARINGS ~ None VI. ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS A. MAYOR - None B. FINANCE 1. Payment of Claims Moved by Mr. Sanders that we approve disbursements as printed and that the Mayor be authorized to sign them. Seconded by Mr. Robbins; carried and so ordered. MAYOR TYLER CALLED FOR A RECESS AT 7:45 P.M, TO ALLOW THE PUBLIC WELFARE ~ COMMITTEE TO CONCLUDE ITS MEETING. THE COUNCIL MEETING RECONVEHEB AT 8:15 P.M. C. COUNCIL COI~4ITTEE~ & COMMISION REPORTS 1. Argonaut Area Study Mr. Smith stated that t~is~study was initiated in response to a request froma resident of the Argonaut Area. The Council directed the Public Works Department to investigate the extent of improvements needed and estimated cost of these improvements. The Public Works Depa~ent reported the following costs: ITEM COST P.EK L.OT Street and Storm Drain Reconstruction $ 1,000.00 Sanitary SewerSConstruction 1,200.00 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MINUTES MARCH 4, 1970 . ITEM COST PER LOT Sanitary Sewer Annexation Fee $ 200.00 Sanitary Sewer Hook-up 100.00 - 350.00 Telephone Underground 830.00 Power Underground 630.00 Power Hook-up 300.00 - 500.00 TOTAL $ 4,260.00 - $4~710.00 The Cost excluding the Sanitary Sewer costs was estimated at $2,760.00 to $3,010.00, ~ncluding con~lete undergrounding of telephone and.power facilities.~~ It is the reconm~endation of the Public Welfare Committee that the City participate in a cooperative project to constr~/,ct these improvements provided that the project includes undergrounding of the utilities. The property owners would pay for the sanitary sewer construction, hook- up and annexation fee, one third of the cost of the street and storm drain improvements and telephone and power line undergrounding, and the cost of the electrical hook-up required on each lot. In connection with this report, Bob' Shook conferred with P.G. & E., the Pacific Telephone and Telegraph and the Cupertino Sanitary District. The cost information has beenconmmnicated to~the resident who first showed interest. The proposal for participation is in keeping with existing cooperative project policy with regard to storm drains. The City will also assist in undergroundingof utilities. Mrs. Cabby Sitney, a resident of the area, asked whether a large group had approached the City on the sanitation problem. She was one of the first residents of the area and was not aware that this was of concern to a large number of residents. It was pointed out that, although only a few residents had complained, it was understood that there was a serious problemwith septic tanks in some parts of the area. No action was taken'on the Committee Report. The staff was directed to tell those who had expressed interest in the project of the cost involved and L~he previous policy on participation and to advise them to take the initiative with regard to generating interest in the project among the property owners in the Argonaut area. 2. Park Drive Drainage Mr. Smith stated that the Committee has reviewed the basic solutions as discussed at the last Council meeting and have directed the Director of Public Works to proceed with preparation of the plans for a storm drain line running to Wildcat Creek across the Mist property. This will r~quire the City to obtain an easement from the Mists and Mr. Shook is proceeding with negotiations for this easement. Although the Committee recognized that each rain would create~a~n'Lu~ndesirahle situationon Park Drive, they felt it would be difficult, if ~ot"impossible, to generate the contract construction project in time to prevent future problems in the storm year. However, the Public Works Department will proceed as quickly as possible to prepare these plans and receive bids. The Committee Eurther zecommended that this project be a cooperative one and that the City participate to the extent of two thirds of the costs with the balance to be borne by the property owners. The cost will be approximately $15,000.00. Mr. Shook has been instructed to contact residents of the area~ to advise them of the proposed cost sharing formula. - 5 - ~ARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MINUTES MARCH 4, 1970 Park Drive Drainage (Continued) Mayor Tyler questioned the fact that the people who are causing the problem my not be the ones who benefit from this and therefore might not be willing to contribute. He believed that under State Law, when'we allow someone to build it is upon the City to not~let them worsen drainage problems for anyone else. To cover this sort of expenditure, we collect storm drain fees. He felt strongly that this was the way this money should be used. -~ . ~ Mr. Smith stated that even if the'~ity were to pay the total cost, there would be a delay in get~ng this underway, securing rights-of-way, etc. By way of explanation, Mr. Dwyer stated that this particular problem had not come up previously because there was a natural water way through a piece of proper~y. When this property was sold, this drain-off was closed. Mayor Tyler~eq~eSted~that the Conmittee give this a lot of thought, He had no objection to the Committee Report because authorization was given to go ahead with the engineering report. Mr. Dwyer stated that most of the run-off comes from across the street. He added that this was the type of problem that should be discussed-by small committees of citizens who could look into the long range.aspects rather than just emergency situations. Mr. Robbins suggested looking backTin the' records to review the policy which has been followed in the past. Moved by Mr. Sanders, seconded by Mr. Robbins for adoption of the Committee Report dated March 3, 1970 and referral of the cooperative project policy to the Policy Committee. Carried and so ordered. 3. P~6spect Road Striping On November 5, the Public Welfare Comn~ttee recommended that Prospect · Road be striped to provide four traffic lanes and a median in areas in which the ultimete width has been constructed. The Committee also recommended that ' the median be extended across three streets - Scully, Kristy and Woodside to prohibit left turns into or out of these streets. Since that time, this problem has been reviewed with the staff and with representatives of Brook- view, Prides Crossing and BlUe Hills Homeowners Associations on the south side of Prospect, and with the representative of the Westbrook Homeowners Association from the north side of Prospect. The Public Welfare Conm~ttee now reconmends that a median opening be provided at Scully to permit left turns across the center line at Prospect but that neither Kristy nor Woodside Drive be provided with a median opening and further that the staff be directed to confer with the City of San Jose in an effort to ensure construction of sufficient travel lanes on the narrow sections of Prospect to provide for four lanes of traffic along the entire length of the road from Saratoga Avenue to SaratOga-Sunnyvale Road. Moved by Mr. Smith for adoption of Public Welfare Committee report dated March 3, 1970. Seconded by Mr. Sanders; carried and so ordered. 4. S~ring Clean-up Mr. D~-yer reported that Green Valley Disposal Company agreed to perform the Spring Clean Up on Friday, April 3, which falls in the time period requested by Prides C~ossing Homeowners Association. Moved by Mr. Dwyer, seconded by Mr. Smith that April 3 be the Annual Spring Clean Up Day. Carried and so ordered. D. DEPARTMENT HEADS & OFFICERS - None E. CITY MANAGER 1. Mr. Huff stated that he had received from Deputy Chief Kirby a brief outline of the affect of proposed annexation of Los Gatos to Central Fire District for information of the Council. They have also contact seven of the nine homeowners groups and offered to me~t with them and explain the procedure - 6 - SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MINUTES MARCH 4, 1970 in detail. LEAGUE 2.' Copy of Legislative Bulletin f~om League of California cities indicating OF CALIF. that there is a Bill in Assembly Committee (AB 98) which would require CITIES submission of police or fire s~tarymatters_to binding arbitration in the event no agreement is reaCHed between City and employee organizationS. This will have impact on Saratoga in the long run and it migbt~b~W~ll to contact our Assembly representative. Without objection, ~ity Manage~ to follow through on this request subject to Management Committee's apprOVal. DISCLOSURE 3. This Bulletin also reported onthe progress of.the Monagan Bill on OF ASSETS' Disclosure of Assets. April 6is the current deadline for candidates and Aprilll5 for other public officials. TAX RATE - 4. In relation to the bond electign, the City Council must approve a tax BOND rate.statement indicating the estimated maximum tax increase required ELECTION to support bonds and the tax rate in the first fiscal year after the bonds are issued. Without objection, referred to the Management Committee. VII. COMMIrNICATIONS A. WRITTEN R6Y, ANDERSON 1. Letter from Roy Anderson, i9268 DeHavilland DriVe reporting a COM!~LAINT RE Violation of City Ordinanc~ NS-3-5.4. 'VIOLATION OF CIT~ORD~ Mr. Walker reported that his Bepartment did not have ~n.opportunity to meet with the Director of Public Works and possibly the Sheriff to determine whether there is a traffic problem. There might be some benefit'to marking the intersection better than the way it is now which might be helpful in s~lvi~the egress from the subdivision onto Cox Avenue. Mr. Walker e~plained the method of determining if?~Tf~nce is in violation of the ordinance. The Planning Department is of the opinion that the fence around the corner does not violate the City of Saratoga Zoning Ordinance NS-3-5.4, however, in November, 1968 we did not require the shrubbery to be trimmed by Mr. Afra (owner of the corner in question) bec~us~ it did cause a sight distance problemj He will take immediate ateps to have this trimming accomplished again. Mr. Anderson addressed the Council. He wished to take exception to the opinion expressed by Mr. Walker's findings. He stated tha.t he was an engineer by trainfng ~nd, although he had made n~ attempt to 'measure the distance involved, he feltsthere was a substantial enc~0achment. He felt that the action taken ~t the time of his 1968 reference to the Violation was woefully inadequate to cope with the problem. He pointed out that growth of the shrubbery reached full maturity in amatter of months afterwards and no further action had been taken by the proRerty owner since that time. In the.intervening year the density of traffic on Cox has;steadily incre~s~dan~ it fS also quite fast which constitutes a definite hazard.' He Stated that thfs. is the second time he had com- .plained about the violation of~a City Ordinance.I. Mr. AndersOn re~erredto .a~other ~iolation'~t the corner of Cumberland and Cox wh~re there is a packing shed which has been there for many years and a fence adjacent tQ ~he packing.shed on Cumberland street side. He felt this,waS an even'greaterhazard. He entreated the Council to give this very serious consideration to avoid a serious ~ccident or injury. In the case of the arterial stop at DeHavilland' and Cox the situation is such that if you obey the vehicle code and remain behind the markedI%B~f~line you are=unable to see further down - 7 - ~ SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MINUTES MARCH 4, 1970 " Cox to the west tha~ one quarter bl~ck. It makes.it necessary for one to break the law by creeping .out into Cox in order to gain sufficient visibility along the street. Mr. Walker statedthat'in Mr. Anderson's first letterof November, 1968 he. stated that de~d restrictions of subdivisions required a certain-measurement of 50 feet along the property lin~, however, the Zoning Ordinance is not that restrictive because it requires fifty feet along each curb extension ' which raakes it somewhat less than ~t wourd be if measured from the property line. There is somewhat of an encroachment of the fence as it comes around the corner and extends slightly into this sight distance t~iangle. As far as Mr. Walker could determiRe, it did not have much to do with sight distance to the west. Mr. Walker stated that he would certainly go out and take another look-and will ask for a report.from the Department of Public Works and the Sheriff' s Department. WithoUt objection, referred to staff for further study and report. ~_~E PERMIT 2. Letter from John I. McEwan, 20615 Beonar~ Road, supporting the request ~D presently before the Planning Commission, requesting a Use Permit for a COUNSELLING family counselling service to be located on Cox Avenue at Quito ShopDing SERVICE Center and urging the Council tO grant the request. CONFERENCE 3. Letter from the League of' Women Voters announcing sponsorship of a.public SAN ~OSE conference relating to the proposal for a San Jose Metropolitan Airport METROPOLITAN in the South Bay area '~nd asking f6r participation on March 12. AIRPORT 4. Letter from James Naugle, Prides C~ossing Homeowners Association formally SPRING requesting the City to consiHer designation of the week of March 30 through CLEAN UP April 4 for special trash collection. QUITO & 5. Letter from Mrs. Louis Lef~on, 117 Casitas Bulevar, Los Gatos concerning POLLARD installation of a traffic light at!the intersection of Quito and Pollard Roads and widening of Pollard.. Without objection, referred to Department 'of Public Works for further study.. PIERCE 6. Letter from Bernard P. Borow, 21848 Via Regina about the condition of ROAD Pierce Road. Mr. Huff stated that!the contractor had assured us he was going to start work on February 24. His next schedule was Monday, March 2 and they ha'd a problemwith a sewer. pump which delayed them. Following this the.rain began. The contract'is with the Cupertino Sanitary District who makes arrangements with their contractor. Fir. Huff noted that Pike Road and Via Regina were private r~ads. The City Attorney pointed out that we have an ordinance which requires. that the contractor has to back fill and surface within a certain period of time, otherwise there are penalties. Usually, we do not require a bond because the Sanitary District is another public entity. Mr. Huff was Of the opinion that one of the cont~actor's people should be on the road enough so that'when an. area becomes bad enough they can re- pair i~ to make it passable without waiting until the entire surface can be restored. Council authorized Mayor Tyler to inform the Sanitary DiStrict that we were~Inot satisified with progress to date. COMMENDAT- 7. Letter from John P; PfeSfon, 1~795~ Saratoga ViSta Avenue conmending Mr. ION ~. VOL. John Campbell and the entire Volunkeer Fire Department for their prompt FIRE DEPT. and professional actions in~response to.his callfor help. .City Clerk instructed to forward .a~cBpy to the Fi~e ~hief and Fire Department. ARCHITECT. 8.' Reconmendation from the,Planning C~n~nission that the time is right ~o' ADVISORY appoint the Ar~hitecturaI Advisoryi Conmaittee. .Suggestions to be sub= COMMITTEE mitted to Mayor Tyler. - 8- SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MINUTES MARCH 4, 1970 B. ORAL COMPLAINT - 1. Mr. James Naugle, Vice-President, Prides Crossing Homeowners GREEN VALLEY Association reported on a meeting he ~ttended with the Policy DISPOSAL& Cormnittee regarding problems his group is having with Green PRIDES CROSSING Valley and special trash pick-ups. He noted they were pleaded HOMEOWNERS that the Council had adopted their suggestion with regardto ASSOCIATION the spring clean up datei They are currently faced with a bill which is in contention as to the rate charged and extra dharges~. At the conclusion of the~meetingwith the po!ic~ Comittee, Mr. Naugle understood that he was going to be'asked ~ meet with- Green Valley and iron out some of these problemS.. Mr. Naugle discussed Green Valley rates in general as well as the competitive rates and what the. next Step would b~ t~ clarify and resolve this. M~. Dw~er ~elt!it~would ~e ~rmriSe for Mr. N~ugle~to place City staff in what is essentially a bargaining position between Green Valie~ DispOsal Company'and~the ~ssociation. Hewas interested in havi~g~a'repo'rt, in. writing, las~ to any further ideas Mr.'Naugle might have. Mr,. Smith.'stat&d tha't his n~ders[anding had been that Mr. Na~gle Would be able to voice complaints'at a meetipg with a representative from Green Valley, one of which would be the complaint about the amount of the charge. AS to any specific contra~t, the 'City is not party to Prides Crossi'ng HomeownersIAssociation dealings with Green Valley Disposal Company and Mr. Smith was reluctant to participate in action on .behalf of the home~ners group. It was his understanding that the Committee was going to go ahead and discuss the whole matter with'Green Valley. Mr. Smith did express appreciation forget.forts of Mr. Naugle and the Prides Crossing Homeowners Association. The City Attorney slated that in instances where bins are used there is no rate specified and the franchise itself leaves it up to agreement between the homeowner and the company. The current scavenger coDtraCt expires in 1972. Mr. Naugle felt strongly ~that the Council does have a responsibility to arbitrate such differences. He presented his suggestions at the l~st meeting of th~g~ Cormntttee and he will put ~them in writing and cooperate in an~a~ossible. VIII. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Tyler acknowledged the presence of Planning Commissioner Kraus, Joe cowan, P.G. & E., Miss Mary Moss, Good Government Group, Mr. Jim Naugle, Mrs. Slade, League of Women Voters and Mrs. Sitney, Candidate for the City CoUncil. The meeting adjourned at 10:30.P.M. Respectfully submitted, HUff~~