The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About03-18-2009 Supplemental Council AgendaBY WILL OREMUS DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER PALO ALTO DAILY NEWS Atherton "Paper or reusable is the question Palo Alto shoppers will face at grocery checkout counters beginning in September. The city council Monday night voted 7 -1 to ban plastic bags at supermarkets in hopes of re- ducing the stream of harmful litter in local creeks and the San Francisco Bay. The vote came over threats of a lawsuit by a plastics industry group, which argues that the SINCE 1995, YOUR LOCAL NEWS ADVERTISING LEADER East Palo Alto I Los Altos I Los Altos Hills I Menlo Park I Mountain View I Portola Valley I Stanford 1 Woodside Ci plastic ban is Industry law‘uit looms as Palo Alto grocers prepare to switch to paper ban will actually harm the environment by forc- ing shoppers to switch to paper bags. A grocers association criticized the city's decision to limit the ban to supermarkets while continuing to al- low plastic bags at pharmacies and convenience stores. The council partially addressed those issues by asking city staff to follow up with two pro- posals: one, to expand the plastic bag ban to all stores and restaurants, and another to place a fee on paper bags. The ultimate goal, officials said, BAG BAN From page 1 Barton said the city shouldn't risk a lawsuit over an ordinance that will directly affect just four stores. Palo Alto has seven supermarkets in all, but three Whole Foods, Mollie Stone's and Country Sun have already gotten rid of plastic bags on their own. He supported Burt's proposal to widen the ban to other stores-before mov- ing ahead. City staff said that might be compli- is to encourage shoppers to use reusable bags ev- erywhere they. :go: "We're going to hear a lot of grief initially," predicted Council Member Pat Burt, who pushed for a full ban as soon as possible. "But eventu- ally, I think we'll find that once we change our habits it won't be the end of the world." In voting against the ban, Council Member John Barton said he worries the city is opening itselfup to an expensive legal battle. In Febniary, a judge blocked a similar ban Manhattan Beach, t 4iiiin cated, however. The change to paper might be hard on small businesses, and custom- ers might not think to bring reusable bags when stopping into convenience stores or pharmacies. There were also technical questions, such as whether, the ban would apply to drug counters at pharmacies as well as checkout counters. In the end, Burt agreed to a suggestion by Council Member Yoriko Kishimoto to go ahead and pass' the limited ban, with the added condition that the city immediately WW PALOAL ODAtLYNEW CQ ti e ba E -mail Will Oremus at jvorerraus @dailynewsgroup.corn. Calif., saying the city didn't properly study the environmental impacts of shoppers' potential shift to paper bags. The ruling was a victory for the Save the Plastic Bag Coalition, whose attorney, Stephen Joseph, said Monday he also plans to sue Palo Alto. In preparing a "mitigated negative decla- ration" for the ordinance rather than a full envi- ronmental study, he said, the city made the same mistake Manhattan Beach did. BAG BAN, page 5 start studying a more comprehensive pol- icy. hi addition to exploring a wider•plas- tic prohibition, city staff will bring to the council a proposed fee on paper bags no later than Sept. 18, the date the supermar- ket ban goes into effect. The six -month grace period will give grocers time .to use up the plastic bags they already have and, if necessary, order more paper bags. Single Use Carr .44.. 4 4 4 i• Presentation to the Saratoga City Council amie McLeod RWRC Chair SC Council arch 18, 2009 s •r• .r•r• n•••1•4•: C dht)\idEprbgr ms to reduce, reuse, and recycle materials that otherwise would go to source ousehold Hazardous Waste Elements and Non disposal Facility Elements Countywide lnte• rated Waste Management Plan `Countywide Waste Siti e.uction Recyc ing emen State mandated responsibilities review of: ac s o sing e use a s a er as lc 0 0 0' Matragett impact) Clean up costs, clogged storm drains, flooding *,>Fines for polluting streams esthetics, community pride •L L Problem of waste stream (weight ;.-Poisoning, chokin -of marine mammals and birds epletion o nvironmental resources (paper bags) es ruc ion o wi te p as lc s oam :i -,1 F t f ,i i t .:i :.l.:.t i f .,v:ei t t t f i,. t i i i i.,,:; t. v.i.::. f 1 fil i 1 1 7 i .'...i, S f. }._.i: I.I.F ..i. i.i i S i 1 i...,: 1 i i F. I 1 1,1 i i t i .t i .v.i 3,..,.r 1 F.t1 Single Use Plastic Bags r T r x Y. r Consumed in very high volumes need to be clean many not recycled "biodegradable" bags need special p D to bedis.osable, not reusable Environmental impact GHG emissions, energy, Lid T June 2008 SCCCA reviewed issue, referred to cities, some cities referred to RWRC for regional approach. i:. +r.r :.rr •4i. •i -r +,r.r. *�t��'.:. ..k •4.4 r. .1'i .F.F.F r-. FF F.._...;F �r yr.... .0 August 2008 RWRC /TAC report on single -use model pro rams, policy issues, stakeholder input. Timeline 'rl'i I• i��r.�. h 1 January 2009 RWRC presentation to SCC April 2008 R1C /TAC report on plastic bags, input February 2009 SF Bay RWQCB fists 26 creeks "impaired." Dec yr` ber 2008 RWRC reviewed draft ordinance, public input, sent draft ordinance to cities /county for feedbac Too Late? Out of Our Control? Coyote Creek, Guadalupe River, an Tomas Aquinas Ir Creek, Saratoga Creek, Silver Creek, and Stevens Creek Ar. forces cities and county to institute multimillion-dollar cleanup plans or face fines, pending federal approval Feb. 2009: San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board listed 26 creeks as "trash- impaired" styrofo,. *io a ion 6 e.era ean fta �r A c Major offenders: plastic grocery bags an Options Active: incentive for behavioral change allows for transition successful case studies Aggressive: outright ban fast results, challenging fo businesses and consumers (SF Ignore: Do nothing problem grows, fines. no au ori y o implement ssive: educ.tion only slow results Itumately city /town county res onsi Requires behavioral c tinge, re -use o resources Stakeholder Input Support: no fee for business, al away) Bag Manu 0 uppo multi-use bag manufacturers, local entrepreneurs (Women's Initiative Training Center), CA Grocer Assn "help steer ship" oncern: single-use bag manufacturers (retooling labo exploring whether more work to implement Busines owners Chambers of Commerce ors er o' current cost of bags (give Concern: ban, timing, implementation (re-programming register, reports), government bureaucracy. Support: reduced cost to tax payers, cleaner storm drains, flood control, aesthetics, community pride, environmental protection, ordinance exemptions (food, paper, restaurants food stam s, VVIC oncernost Driorda ehavioraLchanae, imDacLarilaw- Advocates Finding a Workable Solution Universa reco• nition: jborQls a •roblem` How to develo a solution for all stakeholders? Moving from... 4- 1) Education, outreach, recycling and enforcement (proposal from American Chemistry Council) 2) Being developed (behavioral change, small fee?) 3) Ban or fee (Palo Alto model, draft ordinance) RWRC Proposal Set itd§uted goa Each city chooses preferred method to achieve goals Transition phases if goals not being achieved ree- ase roac r et Metrics r arching options 4.. 7 American Cancer Society Colon Cancer Free Zone (CCFZ) More than 50,000 Colon Cancer is 90% Preventable Colon Cancer Free Zone: "Our mission is to increase public awareness of colon cancer and to help reduce the incidence of this disease to the lowest rate possible in each community where we launch this program." American Cancer Society Colon Cancer Free Zone Our Team: Counties, cities, churches, hospitals, service organizations, legislative offices, and companies such as: Xilinx, Linear Technology, Summit Microelectronics, Fairchild Semiconductor, SiRF Technology, Power Integration, QuickLogic, Synaptics, Cisco, Actel and Intel are committed to becoming Colon Cancer Free Zones. Go see your doctor and It could save your life. For more information Visit: www.cancer.org /coloncancer Contact: Julie at Julie.Shaver @cancer.org people die every year from colorectal cancer. Over 45,000 did not have to. Why Colon Cancer? Colon cancer is 90 percent preventable. Pre cancerous polyps normally take 5 -10 years to become cancerous. Find and remove the polyp and eliminate the cancer risk. Someone dies from colorectal cancer every 10 minutes. Colon Cancer affects both males and females equally. Colorectal cancer is the second leading cause of cancer death in the United States after lung cancer. 80% of people who get colon cancer have no family history; everyone is at risk. It is estimated that over 148,800 new cases are diagnosed and more than 49,960 people die from colorectal cancer each year. get tested! American Cancer Society What Can You Do? Screening is one of the best ways to prevent colorectal cancer as slow growing pre- cancerous polyps almost always precede colon cancer. Colon cancer is the only cancer today that is preventable through testing. Any of the ACS recommended tests are better than no test at all. The Colonoscopy test safely and reliably detects and removes the polyps throughout the entire colon before they become cancerous. Screening for polyps should begin at age 50. More than 90 percent of colon cancers occur in people age 50 or older. If you have a family or personal history of colon cancer or polyps, you should be tested before age 50. Colon Cancer screening is one of the top four most cost effective personal prevention health measures available. 1 .800.ACS.2345 1 www.cancer.org Being a Colon Cancer Free Zone City The "Zone" concept is most effective in local communities where person -to -person communication about screening is promoted and encouraged. These conversations between people who care about each other tend to eliminate misconceptions about screening and are effective in getting appointments set-up and actually kept. The simple message we hope to get out into our community is PREVENTION! Colon cancer is the #2 cancer killer, killing over 50,000 men and women in the U.S. each year! 90% of these deaths can be prevented by screening, especially by a colonoscopy, the only screening option which diagnoses pre- cancerous polyps in the entire colon. Colon cancer is the only cancer which is PREVENTABLE thmugh testing today. We can make our city colon cancer free ifyou listen, understand, andACT! Age is a factor in colon cancer: If you're 50 or older you need to be screened, it can save your life. The following are some ideas to consider in your city life that will help promote this effort an effort to save lives in your city. There is usually no cost to the city for these activities and theAmerican Cancer Society stands by to provide you with materials, speakers and resources. Annually March is national Colorectal CancerAwareness Month. Consider a proclamation at a council meeting during the month ofMarch and if possible have a speaker who has first hand experience tell their story. The American Cancer Society can help you find someone in your community who is passionate about the subject Have every city council member sign a pledge to be screened when they turn 50. Arrange to have your mayor or a council member speak atyourlocal Relay For Life —and highlight your Zone status. Have the local newspaper publish our one page fact sheet at least once a year. Invite a guest speaker from the distinguished list ofpeople who serve on the Zone committee (survivors, physicians, media leaders). They will be happy to make a briefpresentation to any meetings of city management groups such as Planning, Public Works, Redevelopment, Recreation Parks, etc. Year Round Feature your Colon Cancer Free Zone status on the official city web site with a link to more information about screening. Include the one page Zone fact sheet. Send Happy 50''' Birthday cards to city employees recommending they get screened for colon cancer ASAP. Consider a message about your city being a Colon Cancer Free Zone in your email tag lines at the bottom of official emails or faxes. When city council members have an opportunity to speak— depending on the audience— consider highlighting your city's Zone status and give a briefrun -down about how screening, particularly the colonoscopy test, can prevent colon cancer. "Everyone over 50 raise your hand!" Signage at City Hall and public meeting places stating "You have entered a Colon Cancer Free Zone" and list scteening guidelines. Police and Fire Departments should have basic information about screening and the Zone. They are well trained in saving our lives in other ways —this should fit right in. We'd be happy to make a presentation. Thank you for being an American Cancer Society Colon Cancer Free Zone. Your commitment will save lives. 3/17/09 Bruce Schaefer 20905 Sullivan Way Saratoga, CA 95070 (408- 867 -5490 ISSUES WITH THE WEED ABATEMENT PROGRAM PROCEDURES No one has more interest in keeping my property safe from fire than I do. I definitely support a reasonable, practical, economical and effective process for controlling fire hazards. However, the process as specified by Saratoga is confusing because it is not in agreement with County dates /procedures or those of the Saratoga Fire Commissioner. Most of the required dates for clearing are too early. The inspection process is uncontrolled and risks financial abuse of homeowners. SUMMARY: 1. Procedures must be re- written to resolve contradicting due dates. 2. Abatement dates should be realistic either June 1 or possibly May 15, which is still before vegetation is dry enough to be a fire hazard, but won't require homeowners to pay unnecessarily for multiple clearings of re- growth. 3. Assessment charges for clearing work should be reasonable. 4. There should be no charge for the 1st inspection. If the inspector feels work is necessary, a warning letter must be sent to the owner specifying the problem with 15 days' notice to fix it. After 15 days, if the inspector makes a second visit to the property AND the problem is not fixed, the 2nd inspection may be charged and the abatement work may be ordered assuming the homeowner has received the letter. 5. I have scheduled Moe Kumre, County Weed Coordinator, for a visit on April 15 to my property to review the condition of vegetation growth on it. DETAILS: Contradictory Abatement Clearance dates: County says clear by April 1 or be charged $298 for inspection after April 1 and be scheduled for abatement by County. County also says clear by April 15 or County inspector (another inspection will order abatement. City of Saratoga says clear by April 15 or be charged $298 inspection fee. The 3v options (described above) are unclear and unreasonable. Saratoga Fire Commissioner Zambetti says beginning April 1 will advise property owners re: what needs to be done (no charges listed). Follow -up inspections will be initiated June 1 (no charges listed) and non compliant properties will have clearance done by City of Saratoga contractor after June 1, i.e., owner can clear anytime before June 1 without penalty. This is reasonable. Over the last several years, compliance dates have been arbitrarily set earlier and earlier. April compliance is arbitrary and unnecessarily early. It costs $800 to clear our hillside; requiring clearance in April will mean green, lush re- growth must be cleared again by June for another $800. Both my neighbor and I are retired and don't need an unnecessary $800 expense. Clearance of brush by June 1 or possibly May 15 is adequate fire protection and would not require a second costly clearing. Uncontrolled and excessive fees The way that City /County policy is written, after April 1 an inspector can arbitrarily charge homeowners $298 for a simple drive -by inspection without even notifying the homeowner that there is a problem. This uncontrolled process has no accountability and is wide -open for abusive charges to homeowners. Instead, any inspections raising concerns, should trigger a written notice to be sent to the homeowner stating the inspector's findings and 15 days' notice with an end date by which to complete clearing. After the stated end date, if clearance is not completed, fees may be imposed. This is approximately the procedure that Commissioner Zambetti outlines with an end date of June 1. Charging $113.50 /hour ($236,288/year!) for cutting weeds by hand is exorbitant. There should be realistic, non punitive charges for such work because, aside from County ordered clearances, some homeowners may actually wish to have the County contractor clear their property. Memo To: Mayor and City Councilmembers From: Aim Sullivan, City Clerk Date: March 18, 2009 Re: Agenda Item 16 SELECTION OF CONCEPTUAL WEBSITE HOMEPAGE DESIGN Attached are copies of email correspondence the City received regarding Agenda Item #16. Written Testimony from the Website Advisory Group March 17, 2009 From: nancy kirk [mailto:nangeoirk @hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2009 5:39 PM To: Crystal Morrow Subject: RE: Website Advisory Group 2nd Set of Conceptual Designs Hi Crystal, I prefer concept 3c, although would have liked Wildwood Park (appeals to kids photo- if you're going to have kids in picture). It covers all: Montalvo; downtown; small (large would be nicer) picture of HaKone; winery info. Nancy From: Bustamante, Michael [mailto :michael.bustamante @intel.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2009 5:52 PM To: Crystal Morrow Subject: RE: Website Advisory Group 2nd Set of Conceptual Designs Hello Crystal, The font type used for under city news is not thick enough to contrast with the grayish background and looks to broken. For someone with eye site issues this could be annoying. Cheer, Michael From: Donna Hernandez [mailto:herndzd @yahoo.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2009 2:41 PM To: Crystal Morrow Subject: Re: Website Advisory Group 2nd Set of Conceptual Designs Hi Crystal, I looked at the three designs and here are my comments: Concept 3c I don't like the way there are buttons overlapping a photo. Makes it too confusing and busy. Concept lc I don't like the wall in the background. Concept 2c This one is very nice. The only thing missing might be more color. Hope this is helpful. Donna Hernandez web designer From: mark_oh @juno.com [mailto:mark_oh juno.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2009 11:22 AM To: Crystal Morrow Subject: Re: Website Advisory Group 2nd Set of Conceptual Designs Hi Crystal, All three are great options... Going with any of these will server our community well. Thanks for letting us be a part of this project, and for directing our actions. GREAT JOB! Best regards, Mark Johnson PS Can't wait to see it "go live From: Ray Froess [mailto:ray @froess.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2009 10:16 AM To: Crystal Morrow Subject: RE: Website Advisory Group 2nd Set of Conceptual Designs Crystal, all versions are too tall, even for my 1600x1200 display. The scroll bar on the right of the browser is misleading as the short length of the slider implies a much taller page. (Normally if a page were twice as tall, the scroll slider would be half the length of the window, etc.). Internet Explorer's Print Preview won't capture the bottom of the page, compresses it horizontally but still clips the side, and Shrink to Fit doesn't work. Saratoga Concept lc There could be a better balance in the size of fonts, use of white space, and icons to reduce the height. For example "Learn More Go" could be simply a link. The graphics with the word "City Option" are too large. The headings "Options" and "Quick Links" could be eliminated. Saratoga Concept 2c I like this version best as it's cleaner with the gradients and shading. Although I associate Saratoga with green, I really like the darker browns. Organization is better too. I'd replace the scroll list of City Services with a more space- efficient and easily- viewed list from Concept 3c. Remove the word "More..." from the poppies image. Saratoga Concept 3c The page is similar to Concept lc and like it is too partitioned. I prefer Concept 2c. Stylized Icons For topics, I prefer group F as they are the most intuitive. Ray Froess (408) 867 -4233 From: Kathleen [mailto:saratogakc @yahoo.com] Sent: Monday, March 09, 2009 8:23 PM To: Crystal Morrow Subject: Re: Website Advisory Group 2nd Set of Conceptual Designs WEB DESIGNER: I will response with more thoughts, but my first impressions is that Visitors to Saratoga are more important than residents, and residents should be consider citizens not residents. I do not want the city government services to look like a Chamber of Commerce website, so the winery, and things to do map sets, these visitors things should be on the second level... There should be more: City activities, and City Parks Featured, instead of wineries, and business on the front page! City OPTIONS need to be spelled out in the conceptual design "IN SIMPLE FUNCTION rather than as government design departments City ALL Meeting AGENDAS in ONE PLACE, City ALL Meeting MINUTES in ONE PLACE so you don't need to look up every department and they should be published as current news, Building permits, Business permits, Parks permits, Recreation activities, etc... Animal welfare, Wildlife protection, Roads, Safety, Traffic Lights, Fire Protection, Civic Theater productions, Village preservation, Community Orchards, Volunteer activities, (alphabetical order)... VERY IMPORTANT 1. Then JUST ONE BUTTON for Government City departments in alpha listing by function and telephone number in spreadsheet that is in printable version on 2 pages max, 2. Then a complete city directory by name of employee and their function title, and functions they do, then their telephone number, the hours the employee works 10am -6pm, THEN VERY IMPORTANT AN alternate person that they job share with for the hours they keep, the Administrative department secretary /administrator. Kathleen From: Paul Corinne Vita [mailto:pcvita @comcast.net] Sent: Monday, March 09, 2009 6:09 PM To: Crystal Morrow Subject: RE: Website Advisory Group 2nd Set of Conceptual Designs Hi Crystal, Thanks for including citizen feedback in the website design process. I like Saratoga Concept 2c. I like the pictures, Villa Montalvo, arch and Christmas tree and the California poppy, I like the simplicity of the website. I like the California poppy which reminds me of the orchard heritage of Saratoga. The other 2 designs have a large Visit Saratoga Wineries I'm not sure why wineries are featured so prominently. I don't think of wineries when I think of Saratoga. Corinne Vita From: Jim Schrempp [mailto:j_schrempp @audiblemagic.com] Sent: Monday, March 09, 2009 5:32 PM To: Crystal Morrow Subject: RE: Website Advisory Group 2nd Set of Conceptual Designs Hi Crystal, Thanks for letting us be part of the design project. You did a very good job at this. I looked at the newest three samples. From my perspective, I would be happy to be represented by any one of them. However, I find #1 (variation on design 2) to be the least desirable. For some reason my eye wanders over the page and it doesn't feel good to me. I think it may be too many sharp angles with dark to light shading. #2 (variation on design 3) is my favorite. It is bright, pleasing to the eye, and not overly busy. The third choice (Saratoga concept 3c) is very nice EXCEPT for the three links (visitors, residents, businesses) that overlay the picture. There is quite a bit of visual dissonance in the space between the button's margins and the photo behind. Perhaps some other button construction would make this better, but as -is my eyes hurt. I'm not a pro at this, but I include an image below that I think is easier to view. Please pass my comments on to the council. Best Regards, Jim Schrempp 14587 Oak Street Saratoga To, City Of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga Re: Notice of Hearing by Saratoga City Council March 18, 2009 at 7:00 PM on Proposed Order for Abatement of Hazardous Vegetation Property: 517 -22 -072 (15400 Peach Hill Road adjacent property) Sir /Madam: We are currently building a house at 15400 Peach Hill Road and this is adjacent to the 517 -22 -072 property to which the notice was sent. After the construction started in Late 2007 we have cleared all the "Hazardous Vegetation" on the both the properties and we continue to maintain these properties. Attached are pictures taken on March 17, 2009 that show that the property is cleared and there is no "hazardous vegetation" on this property. We would like to assure City of Saratoga and County Agricultural Commissioner that this property will be maintained clear of any hazardous vegetation. We will continue to clear the property when required. If there are any specific questions or concerns please contact us at 650 218 -7493 (raoa @comcast.net). Thanking you, V. Arimilli (Rao) 13934 Chester Ave, Saratoga, CA 95070 (Property owner for 517 -22 -071 and 517 -22 -072) cc: Moe Kumre, Office of the County Agricultural Commissioner March 18,. 1Q0 RECEIVED MAR 1 8 2009 CITY OF SARATOGA .Es.. �7 .r $t 41 4 ,vs ti'h: '1,• -r- geo 4 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: March 18, 2009 AGENDA ITEM: ORIGINATING DEPT: City Manager's Office CITY MANAGER: PREPARED BY: Ann Sullivan, City Clerk DEPT HEAD: Dave Anderson SUBJECT: Public Hearing on Resolution Ordering the Abatement of a Public Nuisance by Removal of Hazardous Vegetation (Weeds) RECOMMENDED ACTION: Open public hearing; listen to public testimony; and close public hearing. Consider any objections to proposed Order for Abatement of Hazardous Vegetation and sustain or overrule any objections as to specific properties. Adopt proposed Resolution Ordering Abatement (Attachment A) as to properties listed (with modification(s) if any objections are sustained. REPORT SUMMARY: On December 3, 2008 the City Council adopted a Resolution (Attachment B) declaring hazardous vegetation (weeds) to be a public nuisance. In addition, the adopted December 3, 2008 Resolution set January 21, 2009 as the public hearing date to take evidence regarding objections to the proposed Declaration of Nuisance as to Specific Properties requiring destruction and removal of hazardous vegetation (weeds). On January 21, 2009 the City Council adopted a Resolution Declaring Specific Properties to be a Nuisance requiring destruction and removal of hazardous vegetation (weeds) (Attachment D). That January 21, 2009 Resolution also set March 18, 2009 as the public hearing date to take evidence regarding objections to the proposed Declaration of Nuisance as to Specific Properties requiring destruction and removal of hazardous vegetation (weeds). The County Agricultural Commissioner serves as the Enforcement Officer for the City of Saratoga as to abatement of hazardous vegetation. On November 14, 2008, the County Agricultural Commissioner mailed a letter (Attachment C) to previously identified property owners informing them that additional weed abatement work was required on their property. In addition, the City Clerk of the City of Saratoga mailed a second notice (Attachment E) on February 26, 2009, to the same property owners infoiuiing them of the scheduled March 18, 2009 Public Hearing on the Order for Abatement, whereby the Saratoga City Council would be providing an opportunity for any person objecting to the declaration of nuisance or the proposed abatement thereof, to present such objections and the City Council would hear and determine any objections. Legal Notice of the Public Hearing on the Order for Abatement has also been duly published in the Saratoga News, with a list of the properties as to which abatement of hazardous vegetation is proposed to be carried out by the County Agricultural Commissioner. (Attachment F) Hazardous vegetation (including weeds or other materials) which is not abated on any noticed property by April 15, 2009, will be removed by the County of Santa Clara Agricultural Commissioner's Office and all abatement costs incurred by the County, together with an administrative fee in the amount of 150% of the costs of the actual abatement, shall be charged to the property owner. In addition, the owner of any parcel found to be non compliant as to abatement of hazardous vegetation on or after April 15, 2009 will be charged an inspection fee of $298.00 and the property owner will be scheduled for abatement by the County's contractor. If the property owner completes the abatement work before the County contractor performs the abatement, the property owner will not incur further charges. Nonpayment of the abatement costs, the inspection fee (if owed) and the administrative fee will result in the same being levied as a special assessment against the property, to be collected at the same time and in the same manner as ordinary real estate taxes. FISCAL IMPACTS: None to the City. CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION: The abatement of hazardous vegetation in the City of Saratoga which has not been completed by the property owner will not be conducted by the County Agricultural Commissioner ALTERNATIVE ACTION: None FOLLOW UP ACTION: None ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: A Notice of Public Hearing was published in the Saratoga News, posted at City Hall and mailed to the property owners affected. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A Proposed Resolution Ordering Abatement for consideration at March 18, 2009 Council Meeting Attachment B Resolution from December 3, 2008 Council Meeting Attachment C First Notice mailed to property owners November 14, 2008 Attachment D Resolution from January 21, 2009 Council Meeting Attachment E Second Notice mailed to property owners February 26, 2009 Attachment F Legal Notification to Public RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA OVERRULING OBJECTIONS AND ORDERING ABATEMENT OF HAZARDOUS VEGETATION (WEEDS) AS A PUBLIC NUISANCE WHEREAS, hazardous vegetation (weeds and other materials) has been declared by resolution of the City Council to be a nuisance as to specified properties in the City of Saratoga and public hearings were duly noticed and scheduled for March 18, 2009 for the City Council to consider whether such hazardous vegetation will be ordered abated by the County of Santa Clara Agricultural Commissioner's Office and the cost thereof charged to and collected from the owners of the properties from which the hazardous vegetation is removed should the property owners themselves fail to do so prior to April 15, 2009; and WHEREAS, the County Agricultural Commissioner has duly given written notice to all owners of property in the City of Saratoga whose property said Commissioner has found to continue to require abatement of hazardous vegetation; and WHEREAS, pursuant to said resolution and notice, the Saratoga City Council conducted public hearings on March 18, 2009 with respect to whether such hazardous vegetation will be ordered abated by the County of Santa Clara Agricultural Commissioner and the cost thereof charged to and collected from the owners of the properties from which the hazardous vegetation is removed should the property owners themselves fail to do so prior to April 15, 2009; and WHEREAS, at said public hearings all property owners having any objections to the proposed order for abatement were given reasonable opportunity to object to the proposed order for abatement of hazardous vegetation; and WHEREAS, after consideration of any and all objections to the proposed order for abatement, the City Council overrules any and all objections and finds that the requisite basis for adopting such order for abatement exist. that: NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Saratoga 1. the recitals set forth above are true and correct; and 2. the hazardous vegetation (weeds and other materials) on the properties listed in Exhibit A attached hereto continues to be declared a nuisance; and 3. the hazardous vegetation (weeds and other materials) on the properties listed in Exhibit A attached hereto is ordered abated by the County of Santa Clara Agricultural Commissioner's Office on or after April 15, 2009; and 4. all abatement costs incurred by the County, together with an administrative fee in the amount of 150% of the costs of the actual abatement, and (as to the owner of any parcel found to be non compliant as to abatement of hazardous vegetation on or after April 15, 2009) an inspection fee of $298.00; and 5. if the property owner completes the abatement work before the County contractor performs the abatement, the property owner will not incur further charges; and 6. nonpayment of the abatement costs, the inspection fee (if owed) and /or the administrative fee will result in the same being levied as a special assessment against the property, to be collected at the same time and in the same manner as ordinary real estate taxes. The above and foregoing resolution was passed and adopted by the Saratoga City Council at a regular meeting held on the 18 day of March 2009, by the following vote: AYES: NAYES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: Ann Sullivan, City Clerk Chuck Page, Mayor County of Santa Clara 71711 d FI1vTcrI1t 1 i Trwyc:mizi CCI .k;XitC ijiviSiCe? (41.:‘; ).:s..;.-*;' 2E6-2.16n November '4. 2008 Ifio1P0k IAN NO I lIF 1 BAT li 4 1 'P.EDS Dr Propeity Ceemer: iho C oiinfi of 11 (L i Ill I tlifeed Ahatern.:::rt Frapmrn to pro:ent cr ppsi35rty one the area .:ium2Lridinq from posihk f re fhe Courf provii,frig 1.1s in on 2nd notice packet to a.s pi o th Preliraim. enctiu eind ly, and 7.''‘o not hs.tate to call us ti:r claFiNaCon to ether !kJ FITY,It)11. !ias Qr ..1.:112.pi iEtolui.ivri i.cur r..ilziperiiy as one ht rri ial fir; hazards from vit.:4d:3 jurisdiction F,T;FICILJCiti7.: rb Midi cl.)11:6i.ir atater Drcer to require yeu to pUblic nowing si■11! L held on he, 11 io p1 lo thc otfeehed notice pH heaCrig rirOVii:1■2'_:, En oppc.itnity rise any ob:ectic.ns to the requiren-.enE that yDU veg oniclehrl.:41ro fear rt'opr prier tc the. deadline prcii:cleC if% the attachLI a,i-atemer.t If flit PICCl2In (.21 'yuu; pi u.i Lye '4ui r 1t public heE,rin.j..ilii-2 Courry ilS Ci0nt1 With Ihc Am' lay :-11;-11.-1 111.7. pem-1 in€.131:Iutiori of your prope7i.y to datennine whell or rot .ha haa be-en hanrdc, hiezord'rig to Mn mum ire Srifety Sto.ndards (see a bccohurt::• het] n :ifter tie ...Ah-FiteniHnt :Cr voter notice coo .1:it r i;2)2 yiNJ of re5porsibility netiesisarii ioril; prior to t deadl'ne tor Yriur jurfsckticr. If czin the n'oatement prior to rie Lour impcctio.1 OF propry, you will be r. for the cs o the inspLiction and you propeFy vil ii ,tduIecl for biTernent r,iinir8c.fril If you clorimlE-31e th lb:it:Went Nod before. th.s. th abiatomcnf, yob vil nnt incur :urthnr cithr t-lar, the eLs. f abiA:airrierit osrk L. 1.:r.trripI by a Ccl-rry ccntractr, cho rge3 rlu3 2 Co umv Eldrninistmtivl chicioss of 2t4 nl&n( tho 1.11 properi arvrpni co-ice:11s. Fees DM zletai!ed :n .tacf Ed price 1st. Thu a5sesin or. you': proorly tax bill (.3 the. chrc t, your j_i:13c1lot:on. Notice ot ti d3t t E meeting ',cid be FiEcteu a riD2gticiri rri-vd;rhpil by yol I- i.r (tyricAlly fl Ihcic IFIA thrF,e day5 prior to ineetirly, Yuki can avriici all costs by completing tne aLlotur.spv yourialf ac-cordinc) to minimum Fir:: Sf.ty Standavun enclonied bro.chur-e) prior to ilia -1;faternient doaane for your jurisdiction and maintaining the Riiinirriurn Fire aai.'city Standards fhr the duration of fro scnson, which typically runs through October. Parcels will bs rsrrioved from Ulu program aftcir throe (1) consecutive ye 1 of volontar; conipli:Ance (work cornufoimod prior 10 Lli dJirEij iijrJ 1.. S ilZ"Ca A3 r 1 nly LS:(11:i4; :cLU 13, 11. NOTICE OF HEARING BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA Notice is hereby given that the City Clerk of the City of Saratoga, California, has set Wednesday, the 18 of March 2009 at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers at 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, California, as the time and place for public hearings on adoption of a RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA ORDERING THE ABATEMENT OF PUBLIC NUISANCE BY REMOVAL OF HAZARDOUS VEGETATION. Notice is further hereby given that on January 21, 2009 the City Council of the City of Saratoga adopted a RESOLUTION DECLARING HAZARDOUS VEGETATION GROWING ON SPECIFIED PROPERTIES TO BE A PUBLIC NUISANCE. The properties specified in said Resolution as having hazardous vegetation growing thereon and thereby constituting a public nuisance are described in the chart below. At the March 18, 2009 public hearings described above, the City Council will provide an opportunity for any person objecting to the declaration of nuisance or the proposed abatement thereof to present such objections and will hear and determine any objections by the owners of properties on which a nuisance has been declared to exist. The Council may sustain or overrule such objections and shall notify both the owner and the Enforcement Officer of its decision within ten days after the conclusion of the public hearing. The decision by the Council shall be final. Notice is further given that upon failure by the owner to abate the nuisance within 30 days after notice to abate the nuisance is mailed to said owner, the hazardous vegetation (including weeds or other materials) will be removed by the County of Santa Clara and all abatement costs incurred by the County, together with an administrative fee in the amount of 150% of the costs of the actual abatement, shall be charged to the owner. PLEASE ALSO BE ADVISED THAT IN ADDITION THE OWNER OF ANY PARCEL FOUND TO BE NON COMPLIANT AS TO ABATEMENT OF HAZARDOUS VEGETATION ON OR AFTER APRIL 15, 2009 WILL BE CHARGED AN INSPECTION FEE OF $298.00 AND THE PROPERTY WILL BE SCHEDULED FOR ABATEMENT BY THE COUNTY CONTRACTOR. If you complete the abatement work before the County contractor performs the abatement, you will not incur further charges. Nonpayment of the abatement costs and the administrative fee will result in the same being levied as a special assessment against the property, to be collected at the same time and in the same manner as ordinary real estate taxes. All interested persons may appear and be heard at the above time and place. If you challenge any order of abatement in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice or in written correspondence delivered to the City Council at, or prior to, the public hearing. In order to be included in the City Council's information packet, written communications should be filed on or before noon on Wednesday one week before the meeting. A copy of any material provided to the City Council on the above hearing(s) is on file at the Office of the Saratoga City Clerk at 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, California. Questions may be addressed to the City Clerk, 868 -1269. APN 366 -48 -003 366 -49 -001 366 -49 -014 366 -50 -003 366 -50 -031 386 -13 -059 386 -50 -036 389 -06 -017 389 -17 -002 389 -17 -010 389 -26 -014 389 -26 -015 389 -30 -002 389 -38 -027 393 -04 -005 393 -26 -034 393 -42 -005 397 -03 -032 397 -04 -014 397 -04 -022 397 -04 -027 397 -04 -097 397 -05 -009 397 -05 -028 397 -05 -042 397 -05 -061 397 -05 -099 397 -06 -046 397 -06 -073 397 -08 -025 397 -08 -076 397 -17 -010 397 -18 -034 397 -18 -037 397 -18 -038 397 -18 -039 397 -18 -071 397 -28 -033 397 -28 -034 397 -40 -016 2009 SPECIAL WEED ABATEMENT PROGRAM COMMENCEMENT REPORT CITY OF SARATOGA STREET Parker Ranch Road Star Ridge Court Continental Circle Diamond Oaks Court Star Ridge Court Cox Avenue P.O. Box 640790 P.O. Box 2067 18950 Afton Avenue 18854 Afton Avenue 18531 Allendale Avenue 18551 Allendale Avenue 19010 Portos Drive 13428 Christie Drive 20255 Glasgow Drive 262 E. Hamilton Ave. STE 20210 Merrick Drive 14222 Chester Avenue P.O. Box 67249 P.O. Box 9270 14730 Sobey Road 14565 Chester Avenue 18510 Sobey Road P.O. Box 97 14416 Old Wood Road 14324 Cordwood Court P.O. Box 700400 18564 Vessing Road 18632 Woodbank Way 15729 Los Gatos Bl. #200 P.O. Box 54400 13046 Twelve Hills Rd. 14890 Baranga Lane 14835 Baranga Lane 14855 Baranga Lane 20100 Bonnie Brae Lane 14710 Vickery Place 12 Bayview Avenue 12 Bayview Avenue 14553 Via De Marcos ADDRESS 12356 Parker Ranch Road Saratoga, CA, 95070 12637 Star Ridge Court Saratoga, CA 95070 21439 Continental Circle Saratoga, CA 95070 21301 Diamond Oaks Court Saratoga, CA 95070 12693 Star Ridge Court Saratoga, CA 95070 18597 Cox Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 P.O. Box 640790 San Jose, CA 95164 P.O. Box 2067 Saratoga, CA 95070 18950 Afton Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 18854 Afton Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 18531 Allendale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 18551 Allendale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 19010 Portos Drive Saratoga, CA 95070 13428 Christie Drive Saratoga, CA 95070 20255 Glasgow Drive Saratoga, CA 95070 D 262 E. Hamilton Avenue STE D Campbell, CA 20210 Merrick Drive Saratoga, CA 95070 14222 Chester Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 P.O. Box 67249 Scotts Valley, CA 95067 P.O. Box 9270 Rancho Santa Fe, CA 92067 14730 Sobey Road Saratoga, CA 95070 14565 Chester Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 18510 Sobey Road Saratoga, CA 95070 P.O. Box 97 Santa Clara, CA 95052 14416 Old Wood Road Saratoga, CA 95070 14324 Cordwood Court Saratoga, CA 95070 P.O. Box 700400 San Jose, CA 95170 18564 Vessing Road Saratoga, CA 95070 18632 Woodbank Way Saratoga, CA 95070 15729 Los Gatos Bl. #200 Los Gatos, CA 95032 P.O. Box 54400 Los Angeles, CA 90054 13046 Twelve Hills Rd. Clarksville, MD 21029 148990 Baranga Lane Saratoga, CA 95070 14835 Baranga Lane Saratoga, CA 95070 14855 Baranga Lane Saratoga, CA 95070 20100 Bonnie Brae Lane Saratoga, CA 95070 14710 Vickery Place Saratoga, CA 95070 12 Bayview Avenue Los Gatos, CA 95030 12 Bayview Avenue Los Gatos, CA 95030 14553 Via De Marcos Saratoga, CA 95070 397 -40 -017 397 -43 -008 403 -24 -008 410 -40 -018 503 -09 -021 503 -13 -039 503 -13 -067 503 -13 -101 503 -13 -117 503 -13 -143 503 -13 -144 503 -13 -145 503 -14 -007 503 -14 -008 503 -14 -034 503 -14 -036 503 -15 -061 503 -16 -015 503 -18 -026 503 -18 -097 503 -26 -009 503 -27 -098 503 -28 -004 503 -28 -005 503 -28 -006 503 -28 -007 503 -28 -008 503 -28 -075 503 -28 -089 503 -29 -027 503 -29 -029 503 -29 -041 503 -29 -096 503 -29 -099 503 -29 -118 503 -29 -124 503 -30 -001 503 -30 -002 503 -30 -003 503 -30 -011 503 -30 -020 503 -30 -054 503 -30 -060 503 -31 -054 503 -31 -088 503 -31 -098 503 -53 -053 503 -72 -014 503 -72 -028 503 -72 -036 14577 Via De Marcos 18540 Allendale Avenue 4966 El Camino Real Unit 21201 Lumbertown Lane 22060 Mt. Eden Road 15209 Blue Gum Court 22121 Lindy Lane 13947 Vista Regina 22121 Lindy Lane 1850 Pruneridge Avenue P.O. Box 3458 P.O.Box 3458 13745 Pierce Road P.O. Box 707 13615 Vaquero Court 13641 Vaquero Court 21258 Chadwick Court 13540 Surrey Lane 12901 Foothill Lane 12969 Foothill Lane P.O. Box 3132 P.O. Box 610544 20895 Canyon View Drive 20905 Sullivan Way 14645 Big Basin Way 20931 Canyon View Drive 106 Heintz Court 20851 Canyon View Drive 20867 Canyon View Drive 21352 Saratoga Hills Road 2601 W. Cedar Lane 1080 Chestnut St. Unit IF 20887 Michaels Drive 21050 Saratoga Hills Road 20850 Saratoga Hills Road 21421 Saratoga Hills Road 13810 Pierce Road 1134 Little Oak CL 13845 Pike Road 15 Sausal Drive 36 Shore View Avenue 13990 Pike Road 14180 Perata Court 14150 Dorene Court 13966 Albar Court 13921 Damon Lane 10222 Carmen Road 520 Mill Creek Road 21531 Saratoga Heights P.O. Box 382 14577 Via De Marcos Saratoga, CA 95070 18540 Allendale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 4966 El Camino Real Unit Los Altos, CA 94022 21201 Lumbertown Lane Saratoga, CA 95070 22060 Mt. Eden Road Saratoga, CA 95070 15209 Blue Gum Court Saratoga, CA 95070 22121 Lindy Lane Cupertino, CA 95014 13947 Vista Regina Saratoga, CA 95070 22121 Lindy Lane Saratoga, CA 95070 1850 Pruneridge Avenue Santa Clara, CA 95050 P.O. Box 3458 Saratoga, CA 95070 P.O. Box 3458 Saratoga, CA 95070 13745 Pierce Road Saratoga, CA 95070 P.O. Box 707 Onetangi, Waiheke Zealand 13615 Vaquero Court Saratoga, CA 95070 13641 Vaquero Court Saratoga, CA 95070 21258 Chadwick Court Saratoga, CA 95070 13540 Surrey Lane Saratoga, CA 95070 12901 Foothill Lane Saratoga, CA 95070 12969 Foothill Lane Saratoga, CA 95070 P.O. Box 3132 Saratoga, CA 95070 P.O. Box 610544 San Jose, CA 95161 20895 Canyon View Drive Saratoga, CA 95070 20905 Sullivan Way Saratoga, CA 95070 14645 Big Basin Way Saratoga, CA 95070 20931 Canyon View Drive Saratoga, CA 95070 106 Heintz Court Los Gatos, CA 95032 20851 Canyon View Drive Saratoga, CA 95070 20867 Canyon View Drive Saratoga, CA 95070 21352 Saratoga Hills Road Saratoga, CA 95070 2601 W. Cedar Lane Milwaukee, WI 53217 1080 Chestnut St. Unit 1F San Francisco, CA 94109 20887 Michaels Drive Saratoga, CA 95070 21050 Saratoga Hills Road Saratoga, CA 95070 20850 Saratoga Hills Road Saratoga, CA 95070 21421 Saratoga Hills Road, Saratoga, CA 95070 13810 Pierce Road Saratoga, CA 95070 1134 Little Oak CL San Jose, CA 95129 13845 Pike Road Saratoga, CA 95070 15 Sausal Drive Portola Valley, CA 94028 36 Shore View Avenue San Francisco, CA 94121 13990 Pike Road Saratoga, CA 95070 14180 Perata Court Saratoga, CA 95070 14150 Dorene Court Saratoga, CA 95070 13966 Albar Court Saratoga, CA 95070 13921 Damon Lane Saratoga, CA 95070 10222 Carmen Road Cupertino, CA 95014 520 Mill Creek Road Fremont, CA 94539 21531 Saratoga Heights Saratoga, CA 95070 P.O. Box 382 Saratoga, CA 95070 503 -75 -008 503 -75 -018 503 -78 -004 510 -05 -004 510 -05 -034 517 -22 -072 /s /Ann Sullivan, City Clerk PUB: 03/04/09 14670 Quito Road 14930 Vintner Court 819 Via Juan Pablo 15234 Bellecourt Avenue 18805 Cox Avenue Unit 210 13934 Chester Avenue 14670 Quito Road Saratoga, CA 95070 14930 Vintner Court Saratoga, CA 95070 819 Via Juan Pablo San Juan Bautista, CA 95045 15234 Bellecourt Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 18805 Cox Avenue Unit 210 Saratoga, CA 95070 13934 Chester Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 GYnpnramd GltD*a22J556 February 26, 2009 Dear Property Owner: CITY OF SARATOGA 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 (409) 868 -1200 Re: Notice of Hearing by Saratoga City Council March 18, 2009 at 7:00 p.m. on Proposed Order for Abatement of Hazardous Vegetation This letter will follow up on the letter to you dated November 14, 2008 from the County Agricultural Commissioner. The County Agricultural Commissioner serves as the Enforcement Officer for the City of Saratoga for the abatement of hazardous vegetation. You are receiving this letter because as of the Enforcement Officer's last inspection, additional weed abatement work was required as to your property. On January 21, 2009 the City Council of the City of Saratoga adopted a RESOLUTION DECLARING HAZARDOUS VEGETATION GROWING ON SPECIFIED PROPERTIES TO 13E A PUBLIC NUISANCE. Your property was one of the properties specified in said Resolution as having hazardous vegetation growing thereon and thereby constituting a public nuisance. For that reason you are being mailed the following Notice: NOTICE OF HEARING BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL MEMBERS: 1df Hunter Kathleen King Susie Nngprif Howard Miller Clwck Page Notice is hereby given that the City Clerk of the City of Saratoga, California, has set Wednesday, the 18 of March, 2009 at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers at 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, California, as the time and place for public hearings on adoption of a RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA ORDERING THE ABATEMENT OF PUBLIC NUISANCE BY REMOVAL OF HAZARDOUS VEGETATION. At the March 18, 2009 public hearing described above, the City Council will provide an opportunity for any person objecting to the declaration of nuisance or the proposed abatement thereof to present such objections and will hear and determine any objections by the owners of properties on which a nuisance has been declared to exist. The Council may sustain or overrule such objections and shall notify both the owner and the Enforcement Officer of its decision within ten days after the conclusion of the public hearing. The decision by the Council shall be final. NOTICE IS FURTHER GIVEN that upon your failure to abate the nuisance on your property by April 15, 2009, the hazardous vegetation (including weeds or other materials) will be removed by the County of Santa Clara Agricultural Commissioner's Office and all abatement costs incurred by the County, together with an administrative fee in the amount of 150% of the costs of the actual abatement, shall be charged to you. PLEASE ALSO BE ADVISED THAT IN ADDITION THE OWNER OF ANY PARCEL FOUND TO BE NON COMPLIANT AS TO ABATEMENT OF HAZARDOUS VEGETATION ON OR AFTER APRIL 15, 2009 WILL BE CHARGED AN INSPECTION FEE OF $298.00 AND THE PROPERTY WILL BE SCHEDULED FOR ABATEMENT BY THE COUNTY CONTRACTOR. If you complete the abatement work before the County contractor performs the abatement, you will not incur further Notice of Hearing on Proposed Order for Abatement Of Hazardous Vegetation Hearing Date: March 18, 2009 Notice Date: February 26, 2009 If you complete the abatement work before the County contractor perfonns the abatement, you will not incur further charges. Nonpayment of the abatement costs, the inspection fee (if owed) and the administrative fee will result in the same being levied as a special assessment against the property, to be collected at the same time and in the same manner as ordinary real estate taxes. All interested persons may appear and be heard at the .Hearing scheduled for the above time and place. If you challenge any order of abatement in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice or in written correspondence delivered to the City Council at, or prior to, the public hearing. In order to be included in the City Council's information packet, written communications should be filed on or before noon on Wednesday one week before the meeting. A copy of any material provided to the City Council on the abo.ve hearing(s) is on file at the Office of the Saratoga City Clerk at 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, California. Questions may be addressed to the City Clerk, 408- 868 -1269. If you have a question about what additional work is required, please call Moe Kumre at 408 282 -3145. If you have a question about the scheduled hearing, please call City Clerk Ann Sullivan at 408 -868 -1269. Thank you for your consideration of this information. Very truly yours, l Dave Anderson, City Manager cc: Moe Kumre, Office of the County Agricultural Commissioner