Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-04-1976 City Council Minutes MINUTES SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL TIME: Wednesday, August ~, 1976 - 7:30 P.M- PLACE: Saratoga City Council Chambers, 13777 Fruitvale Ave., Saratoga, California TYPE: Regular Meeting I. ORGANIZATION A. ROLL CALL Present: Councilmen Brigham, Corr, KraUs, Bridges Absent: Councilman Matteoni B. MINUTES It was moved by Councilman Brigham and seconded by Councilwoman Corr the minutes of July 21, 1976 be approved. The motion was carried. -II. CONSENT CALENDAR A. COMPOSITION OF CONSENT CALENDAR It was moved bY Councilman Kraus ahd seconded by Councilman Brigham approval of the Consent Calendar composition. The motion was carried.' B. ITEMS FOR CONSENT CALENDAR 1.Joint Powers Agreement for Intergovernmental Employee Relations Services 2. Agreement Between the city of Saratoga and Alvina K. Santoro Re: Purchase of Easement for QU~to/Pol]ard Road Intersection Improvement 3. Payment of Claims ; It was moved by Councilman Kraus and seconded by Councilman Brigham the Consent Calendar be approved. The motion was carried. --~ ,~ *(Council~an-M~t't~oni arrived - 7:35 P~.M.) ~'I-II.' BIDS"AND'CONTRACTS" A.AUTHORIZATION TO CALL FOR BIDS FOR RE~-SURFACING WOODSIDE DRIVE AND WOODSIDE COURT It was moved by Councilman Kraus and seconded by Councilman Brigham the staff be authorized to advertise for bids for this re-surfacing project. The motion was carried. IV. PETITIONS, ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS A. PETITION FROM RESIDENTS OF RAVENWOOD DRIVE, MARILYN LANE, AND MARSHALL LANE REQUESTING SCHOOL BUSES USE SOBEY ROAD FOR ACCESS TO MARSHALL LA~ SCHOOL WHEN QUITO/POLLARD ROAD INTERSECTION IS COMPLETED The City Manager advised it would be his recommend~t_~i~_o~'_~ this ·petition be referred to the staff,in order that they might meet with the school district in an attempt to resolve this problem. Geraldine Barrett, a resident Of Marilyn Lane, commented that approximately 500 students are bussed to Marshall Lane School, and there are 3 buses that would be affected by this "No Left Turn" on ~,larshall Lane, and they would have to go down Ravenwood. She indicated that Sobey'Road runs directly Petition Re: School Buses to Marshall Lane School past the school and is in a less densely populated area. Also, she pointed out ~there are approximately 100 people who drive to the school, and these people would also be ~ffected by the "No Left Turn" and would be going down Ravenwood, creating a real traffic problem on Ravenwood. · Mrs..Barrett commented that they would like to see the buses put_on Sobey with_either a paved way for. the 'buses to turn, or use of Old-'~ood ,Way'y .She further commented that it has been rumored Quito School o~McC~9'~nd Quito.Road would be closed, and .if so, this may mean more children would go to Marshall Lane. ~t~6 ~ing ~o~:'-f~ther discuss.ion on this matte~~, the Council referred ~'t'~6 ~s~f~'.:~eqd6~'ti~g '~h~t"'~me~i~' b( ~~i"~'~'~' S~ho~]_'~ District in an attempt to Work'dut a ~ol~ti6~ ~o this ~obl(m~'and'report back to the Council~ B. ORDINANCE NO. 38.69 ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY CODE OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA PERTAINING TO THE DUTIES OF POUND MASTER AND IN REGULATING THE USE OF S~TEBOARDS, ROLLER S~TES, ETC. ON PUBLIC STREETS The Council .expressed concern with Section 2 of this ordinance pertaining to use of skateboards, etc. ,~'ic~i~' ~hat it would be difficult to enforce. . "~ ' ~ "~ ~' ~ '~ ' Councilman Matteoni indicated he would like to get some handle on the , scope of this problem:before taking any action on this portion of the ordianance. ' ~' ,. - It was moved b~ Councilwbman Corr and seconded by Councilman Kraus to . introduce Ordinance 38L69~ deleting S6ction 2~g~n~'~¥a~e60~s, ~-~6~T'~d'~T~~ the staff for review an~'r~oFt~ba(~'t(~h~ Council. 'The motion was carried. C. CONSIDERATION OF 1976-77 THROUGH~ 1978-79 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM The Counci.1 agreed to delay di. scMssion on this until following the public hearing oh the ~976-77 Fiscal Year Budget. IV. SUBDIVISIONS, BUILDING SITES AND ZONiING REQUESTS A. CONSIDERATION OF CHARLES REED~S REQUEST TO DELETE CONDITION' "A" UNDER SDR-1060 RE: STREET. IMPROVEMENTS The City Manager advised that the}i~ limit'fdr-~appealing this condition ~f~.:>:~(~T~a~ :~i ~ 6~" h& s exp i red', aTd~e6~m~6~e~' ~'~te~ be ~t for a Co~ittee of t~ ~Hole~ Meeting, at whlch time t~e'-c6u~il-coul-d ~i~d~' Mr .~d"~"~T~'U~'nd" h~ g~'i~h't'i~t the exi sting street. · The City Attorney advised that this is a condition which has been built into a portion of the improvement agreement, and it is po~sibl~ for the the Council to change a contract2. He further indicated it could .be referred back to the Pl.anning CommissiOn for a report and recommendation. Mr. Reed addressed t~e Council, ~ndicating that he found there was a deviation in the way Fruitvale Avenue was to run, which would jog th~ street away from his property to avoid some very large oak trees. He stated that these o~k trees do f~ont on an.SDR that required some work to be done on Fruitvale also, but this work was apparently waived. 'He indicated , '~ve~hg_~g h they-' 'd6~n t 'on Fr~i t~l~' ~ ~a~ ~ ~' ~i ~1 's i ~ ~'6~'. · He indicat~a'~hese to be SDR-1159, SDR-971 and SDR-649, and related the .details in each 6f these situations. ~ Request by Charles Reed (Cont'd.) Following further discussion of {his matter by the Council, it was moved by Councilman Brigham and seconded by Councilman Kraus to set this matter for discussion at the Committee of the ~lhole Meeting on August lOth, at which time, the Council would hear a report from staff regarding the F~u~ bf"th~3~SDR's mentioned bY Mr. Reed in relation to this situation. '~'mo~ion 'was' carried. VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. CONSIDERATION OF 1976-77 FISCAL yEAR BUDGET (Cont'd. 7/7, 7/21) The Mayor acknowledged an item o~ correspondence received on this matter from Jeffery Kalb, Chairman of the Saratoga Coalition for Tax Reform, outlining specific suggestions to decrease the budget amount. He then declared the public hear,ing open at 8:15 P.M. Jim O'Rourke, President, Greenbriar HomeownerS Association, addressed the Council'. Mr. O'Rourke requested to read in full the letter from Mr. Kalb, and then proceeded to do so. The letter proposes the following: l) Re-state the Source of Revenue section of the budget to reflect themost realistic estimated property tax revenue. Impact: Increase revenue $19,059, based on present-year taxes only. 2) Adopt the proposed revised budget. Impact: Reduce expenses $146,280. 3) Increase.the proposed ~ear-ending January 30, 1977 General Fund balance to $250,0Q0, from $207,472. Impact: Reduce ? spendable monies by $42,528. "The total result of this would be that there would be an excess of $122,811 which would in theory be returned to the taxpayers of Saratoga in the form of a lower tax rate..~F~cbgn~'~Ethat ~w~T~h~6~ ~e'6~ ~l'_of these proposed budge~ r'6v~ions~" how~'e~,-i't-Wodl~ ~pp6ar that we could give back somewhere between 0 and $122,811. We would'like to suggest a target of reducing the tax rate to 20¢ from the present 25~, back to where it was." Mr. O'Rourke commented that he would like-to propose that the Council present this proposal to the st~ff, and meet with the Saratoga Coalition for Tax Reform. Mayor Bridges indicated it would 6e his saggestion this proposal be scheduled for a Committee of the Whole Meeting .Tuesday evening, August lOth.. Will O'Connell, a resident of Columbine Court, and a member of Saratoga Coalition for Tax Reform, commented it is his understanding the tax rate has to be set"by September .lst, and if the Council would adopt it by that time. Mayor Bridges replied the Counc~i would adopt the budget before September 1. Mr. O'Connell indicated he was ~lso Co-Chairman of the DeHavilland Neighborhood Association, and their group would like ~o get together~TSo'__'. to Check out the facts in both ~he proposed budget, as well as the pro~ posal of the Coalition group. Russell Crowther, 20788 Norada Court, addressed the. Council. He stated that in going back to the budget that'was issued a ~ear ago and looking at the column entitled ~"Bua~'~z~5-7d~,~a~E6~p~i~ i~ ~:.~.~ Budget for 1975-76, he notes tha~'the totals are the'~meT but fUnd~-appe'ar have been shifted from one account to another. -3- 1976-77 Fiscal Year Budget (Cont'd.) The City Manager .pointed out to~Mr__.Cr_o~_w_t_her~_th_a!t he is 'comparing two preliminary budgets, and\n~'6~'the final ad6pted b~d~ei~ for 1975~76. Mr. Crowther commented that he h~d assumed that ~based on the proceedings which he sat through last year that this was the~ adopted budget. He stated that the kind of th~ng that concerned the~m was that Storm Waters went down from $75,000 to $45,000, ~and perhaps ~ecause it was a dry year, a $30,000 reduction was pumped into planning and Administrative Services. He funther commented that in the' prior budget Account 3222 is now replaced by Account 31, and it was previousl~ listed as "Street Maintenance",!and it shown here as~T~.(.~:o_~'31"i~T~_~d~'~G~'~s being b.udget~_d for $310,000, and the budget he ha~ sh~s ~h~s as $296,000. He ~6~mm~nted~' that this budget also indicates that included in the Stre6t Maint'eh~nce is the re- surfacing of roads, and in the current proposed ~lbudget,~'~ie amount has been increased from $310,000 for 1976-77 to $~56~'T300~° Als~~, ~in Account 46, Gas Tax Special Matching, that account went from $327,000~last year to $457,000 this year, and shown in the breakdown of it in the back is $100,000 for Annual Street Re-surfacing. Therefore, he stated it looks to him like the budget which included street re-surfacing last year is still there, and in fact, it was increased by $30,000, and in addition, $100,000 was put under Gas Tax S, pecial Matching ~for Annual Street Re- surfacing. He stated that it would be his view ithat if it appears in Account 46, Account 31 should b6 reduced by $10Q,O00, and that perhaps this would be an 'added sourceo~ achieving the ~eduction Mr. Kalb asks for in his letter. Mr. Crowther commented that in reading through ~he budget, he personally believes there are many areas where it can be cgt, and on behalf of the Arguello Homeowners Association and the Saratoga Citizens Group to Save Our Dollars/Save Our Hills~ he would 1.ike to strongly support Mr. Kalb's request fora cut in the'tax rate. He stated that in comparing back to the 1974-75 Actual, the 1966-77 Budget is up 75 percent, and cutting it back as Jeff Kalb, and the Saratoga Coalition for Tax Reform have requested would still result in a 40 percent budget increase, relative to what was actually spent in 1974-75. ~ The City Manager indicated he would like to clar~ify that the estimated actuals which are in the proposed budget were estimated back in March or April, and the finals might be dif_ferent tha~._t~h_0s.e_. '_ S_e_Cfn~ly_, there is $75,000 for street re-surfa__cingfi~ th'~'.1975-76.0per~a.t_~g was pull ed out, and this i s ~comi~g?out -of'Ga~ T~'i~' ~he Ca~i t~l 'Improve- ment Program; however, there i~"no~pli~'t'i6~y ' Paul McCarty, a resident of Winter Lane, addressed the Council. He stated that he would suggest the Council review what has been proposed. Mr. McCarty indicated it was his understanding the .increased assessed valuation in Saratoga is 21.4 percent over last year, andSunless he has been singled out for some special treatment,~he believes this is rather low. He indicated his assessed valuation'went up 30 percent this 'year, and this is on top of another 30 percent last year. Therefore, he commented that there must be somewhere in Saratoga his counterpart who only got about a 13 percent increase. The City Manager explained that'the assessed value average reflects all of the property in Saratoga -- both Commercial ~nd Residential. He stated that based on their analysis last year, the increases have been spread over a 2-year period, and last year it was found that everyone had been hit equally over a 2-year period. ~ Joan Herschwoods, Vice Chairman~of Saratoga Coa~lition, stated that many people feel they are being taxed out of their h~rd-earned middle-class status by this new property tax assessment~ She stated that they are asking the Council to he~p this group set an example that they can take back ~o~ the County, and if they can say::""~u~'~'~i~T'~'~"~e"a'~6~'c~t'~d 1976-77 Fiscal Year Budget Cont'd. effort", an~ "bur cities have been able. to cut back", they can say: "Please help us and do the same." It was then moved by Councilman ,~Brigham and seconded by Councilwoman Corr to continue the public hearing tothe August 18th meeting, and a discussion Y~'gar~t__i~S~_M~:'Kalb's request be set .for the August lOth Committee of the Whol~ Meeting. The motion was carried. B. ORDINANCE NO. 60.2, AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 60, THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA, BY ADDING ARTICLE FOUR THERETO RELATING TO SPECIAL SUBDIVISION SITUATIONS, AND SECTIONS .SERIES 30 UNDER SAID ARTICLE FOUR GOVERNING COMMUNITY~ HOUSING (CONDOMINIUMS ET AL) CONVERSIONS (Cont'd. 7/2//76) The Mayor re-opened the public hearing on this matter at 8:40 P.M. Jerry Lohr, representing Saratoga Foothills Development ~orporation, addressed the Council. He indi(ated he reported 2 weeks ago there were 15 residents ~'~'~kside in fav, or of the convers.ion, and he has since been called>by~ional members. He~w~6'~'~h~r~"~sil~i~litv, ~i'i~.~'~e~'~ion were held at Creekside ar~t'l~h'6'~e'/~:"ff6~'l~s x/6'tTd'~n fa~6~ofcohversion, and this were done under the terms proposed in the ordinance, the Ordinance could be adopted with this exception. The City Attorney replied this would be a possibility, if the ordinance didn't become effective until this happened. Also, the Council could delay a~option of this ordinance. Councilwoman Corr asked Mr~ Loh~ if under these.conditions he would still allow those people who did not Want to purchase:their units to live there as long as they wanted. Mr. Lohr replied that the developer is now in a position to be able to arrange long-term fihancing, and anyone who wisfied to remain renting for the next 15 years could do this,~ and this would~be put into the deed when the project is converted. Mayor Bridges asked if he was, correcLin understanding the portion of the · ordinance the developer would be ,hung. up on is 'the inventory of apartments, or the required percentage. Mr Lohr replied this is correc~,-j~n~ ~hey woul~ thee' ~_di~na~e ~i~'~i~hi s. one secti on we~'i~l~d.~ Councilman Kraus indicated one Of his concerns is the sfact that if you have an area where you.have a majCrity of the people who want to continue to live there and to buy their unit, he would have difficulty in saying they can't do this. The City Manager explained that the purpose of the ordinance is ~o try and preserve the rental housing which is now existing which has been depleted over the last several years,-and conversion of this project would eliminate a good portion of the rental hoOsing remaining ~n Saratoga. Councilman Matteoni indicated h~ had expressed~e~'va~'i'GnT~'t"~he ~1 weeks ago, in that he sees ~he advantage in~servih'~'~ithih th~ ..... ~6~munity a housing mix that allows rental unit~ to exist; at the same time, he was confronted with the fact that economically this is not going, and the interest is in condominiums. He indicated he found himself caught in a dilemma in trying to balance the desire for a mixed housing element, and in looking at 'the people who are here and w~nt to s't~ 'on the basis that they own a piece of Saratoga. He wondered~ if we are encouraging - 5- Ordinance No. 60.2 (Cont'd.) apartment development, or is it the fact that the market is such that ~"Wh~'~6k'~to~develop to a density that could be apartment would ~ath~v~l~ condominiums. He indicated he had a lot of mixed reactions as to what the-City was trying to accomplish. Mayor Bridges commented that if'we do keep zoning for rental units in order to conform with the General Plan and to maintain a housing mix, and this is constantly being eaten-up by condominium conversions, this then requires a change in the land use General Plan to keep adding area for.that. Mr. Van Duyn indicated there are only 80 remaining apartment rental units in the city-rp~fid.~'~F~i~at~l'9~T9'~ i~ ~1 'p~FCe~'dY+~e~o~Sin'g"T market right now i~'i'h'~&~t~eA~6~(6~" He'~xpl~iHe~%h~'{'Wh&t'is being suggested is a 2 percent base as the proportion for the mixed element for apartment units in the c'ity, whfch is appreciably lower than most of the other cities in the County. He stated that the problem is t~at even some of the condominium proposals have had difficulties in selling. He further commented that the only information that would give us an idea of what might be the future desire for development in a type of unit Mr. Kraus was suggesting is the Senior Citizen Housing Task Force Stud~. Mr. Van Duy~ stated there is some land available for additional mQlti- family development, however very few, and it is not intended by the General Plan to actually change ~hat Multiple-Family classification. Mr. Lohr explained that what they have found 'iT'~hat.-~w~i.th- this kind ~of qual~.BEQ~;'~i~{~economically works out bett~O~ t~o(e' ~Go~la who h~ve suffici~t ~ncomes to own.. He further indicated that this particular project is out of the price range and is not Senior Citizens or Retire- ment Housing. With regard to a question asked two weeks ago: "Why aren't developers developing apartments here in Saratoga"~ Mr. Lohr indicated to his knowledge, there are no undeveloped multiple zoned properties in the City of Saratoga. ~, Counei.lman .Knaus asked if what Mr. Lohr says is correct that there is nothing l~ft~='~h~r6'~6'~Fu~llng wi~h thi~?' 'I~ th~'i's'no ~-M :zodiaC' to be built on in the city at this time and we don't plan to rezone any to that, he commented that the only hope we would have is those existing apartments. Mr. Van Duyn indicated that Mr. [ohr is correct in that the majority of the lands which would afford multiple-family residential development are "P-A", and under "P-A" zoning, you can, with a conditional use permit, provide the ability to put multi~family on the property. However, the cost of this may be prohibitive, and the possibility of changing the land use might be a little restrictive. He indicated it is being found there is an over-abundance of "P-A" zoned land, ahd secondarily, we have "R-M" lands that are being under-used right now, and not being put to their capabl~ "R-M" classification. He stated. the City is only asking for a 2 percent mix over a total of 8,500 dwelling units, which would be 170 units. It was then moved by Councilwoman Corr and seconded by Councilman Brigham the public hearing be closed. The motion was carried. The public hearing was close~ at 9:15 P.M. Mayor Bridges asked if there would be an application process whereby a developer indicates he wants to convert, and how this could be conditioned. Ordinance No. 60.2 (Cont'd.) The City Attorney commented tha~ one method would be to put back into Section 30.3 what formally was exception "a", providing for a certain percentage vote by the complex. Another method would be to delay passage of the ordinance until there is an accomplished factor. Councilwoman Corr indicated she Would not like to see this Section go back into the ordinance as she believes the Planning Commission had a reason for taking it out, and that is the discrimination in renting if the people wodld n6t be interested in later ~onversion. ~O~TT{his particu~a~ ~it'wilt~ i ?'~r~ddf~H~F ~l~u~e,..'---- ~ councilman Matteoni indicated he would like to see a section for those units for which there had been an application on file before the emergency ordinance pertaining tocondominium conversions was created, and the con- ditions for approval be laid/D((i'~j'~'built into the Subdivision Map as covenants and restrictions. ~""' ~ Mr. Van Duyn suggested if the Codncil desires to allow this application to proceed, they'should adopt th.is ordinance, but not make it effective {or 6 months. Councilman Kraus indicated he would have a problem approving something like this, and believes'it should be worked out so if the~e is. an appli- cations-regardless of who-haS it,C-'-'w~"shodl'~ ~6'o~6m~h~.'' -~ Following additio.na]'discussion ~oncerning this proposed 'ordinance, it was the concensus of the Couhcil to continued this matter to the next regular meeting, and request the staff to come back with wording to pro- vide for a condition that would'hrotect those people who choose to rents, who ar6 ~e~'a prior aphFic~o~]~so, a ~pecific procedure outL~ ......... ~jn~i~g. the. g~i~eli~eTo~' ~O~'a~nBi~i6~.' Councilman Matteoni asked Mrs. Cgrr when the Senior Citizens Task Force's final report would be coming out'~ as he felt this would '6~ the only place where we might have multiple units for rental. Councilman Corr replied the Task~ FoKce is formulating its peco~enda~ions at the present time, and in the course of their deliberations', they are seeing already one proposal approved with 20 units of rental for Senior Citizen housing. Also, a grant has been received for sev6ral more additional units; however, this is not in the immediate future. Therefore, C. RESOLUTION NO. 779, A RESOLUTION:OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA ADOPTING A CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE APPLICABLE TO THE MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL, THE'CITY MANAGER, AND THE PLANNING DIRECTOR, PURSUANT TO THE POLITICAL REFORM ACT OF 1974 The City Manager explained that under the p~ovisions of the Political Reform Act of 1974, Proposition 9, each local agency is required to adopt a Conflict Of Interest Code. He advised the Fair Political Practices Commission has indicated that the City of Saratoga must have this Code adopted and submitted to the Commission for review and approval prior to October. lO, 1976. The Mayor then opened the public hearing at 9:26 P.M. . There being no further comments on this matter, it was mOved'by Councilman Kraus and seconded by Councilman Brigham the public hearing be closed. The motion was carried. The publi9 hearing was closed at 9:26 P.M. -7- Resolution No. 779 (Cont'd.) It was then moved by COuncilwoman Corr and seconded by Counci!lman Brigham Resolution 779 be adopted. The motion was carried.- VII. ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS A. MAYOR -' B. COUNCIL AND COMMISSION REPORTS 1. Planning Commission Report Re: RecommendationlforCReZoning from "A" (Agriculture) to "R-l-lO,O00" (Single- Family Residential) 4.45+ Ac~es Located at 12650 Saratoga Avenue The Council c6nCurred in the Planning Commi~sion's recommendation tp set this matter for public h~aring before the City Council on September 1~ 1976.' ,. . C. DEPARTMENT HEADS AND OFFICERS D. CITY MANAGER ' 1. Report Re: SB-1277 (California Coastal Zone) It was moved by Councilman Brigham and seconded'by Councilwoman Corr the Council support thi~ bill, based on the la'test amended version, dated June 24, 1976, and so indicate this to the appro- priate state repre~entativesL The motion was carri'ed. 2. <!~provements to Saratoga Historic Park ............. tt was moved by Councilman Kraus and seconded by Councilman Brigham the Notice of Completion be ~iled, and the bond released. The motion was carried. 3. Report Re: SB-1714 The Ci. ty Manager reported th'is billgotout of the Assembly Committee on Local Government on AuguSt 5th, on a 7 to 0 vote, with a recommen- dation that it be put on the consent calendar before the Assembly. 4. Report Re: Alternative. Courses of Action on'Initiative Mea'sure The Mayor outlined the 4 alternative courses of action, as follows: Hold a special election as directed by the courts, between , j T;Tth October 12th. Hold an election consoliaated with the November General Election, requiring that the proponents of the measure stipulate allowing ~or the consolidated:~ election in place of the'special election. Appeal the Court's ruling and try to get a decision on the merits, thus delaying the election. Do nothing, and wait for!the property owners to appeal or enjoin the City from holding an elec[ion. The Council-agreed to call an Executive Session to consider this matter, and then reconvene the meeting to take the appropriate action. AdjoUrned to ExecUtive Session at.lO:30 P.M., add resumed the meeting at 10:50 P.M. Report Re: Initiative Measure (Cont'd.) Councilwoman Corr indicated she would favor supporting Recommendation No. 2. It was her understanding the proponents have indicated they would accept consolidating with-the NOvember General Election. Councilman Matteoni commented that he has heard Mr. Crowther indicate -'~fll'i~gn~"~6 go-o~the November Election; however, the indication in tennis 6fthe ~d~.n the Council's packet is to the cont~ary~ He indicated some weeks ago, a suggestion was made by the City Attorney, knowing the judgement had been granted,' that it wasn't necessary to send the writ immediately. Rather, it could be held or sent with a cover letter indicating that it ishouldn't be signed or made effective until a particular date, and itSwas his feeling Russ Crowther had indicated that he would talk to his attorneyin this regard, but this never happened. He stated he would be very strong in terms of the petitioner supplying the stipulation by Friday of this week, or otherwise, he would be inclined to go with .Alternative No. 3 and continue With the appeal. It was then moved· by Councilwoma'n Corr and seconded by Councilman Kraus that it be the intention of the :Council to place the initiative measure on the ballot, if the City obtai]ns the stipulation from-the proponents no later than Friday, August 6th, that the mattersmay go on the_November General Election ballot, :~'~6~6H~t~e t~'6~ ~h'~s of 'the:' '~&~F~:~il~Y~'~"~'~l~ctiOn. If the s~'pulation is not receivedF that '~t be~the Council's intention to ~'a6ea~'wi~6"~h~6a'T."'T~e~otid~"was "~a~ried~ ~' ~ .... ' VIII. COMMUNICATIONS A. WRITTEN 1. Richard Martin, 13981 Pike Road, and Marlene Duffin, 21241 Canyon View Drive, requesting the City to initiate action to LAFCO to have those portions within the city limits which are now'within the Black Mountain Resource Conservation District, pulled out. It was moved by Councilman Kraus and secondea by Councilman Brigham the staff be directed to prepare the appropriate resolution to implement this request. The motion was carried. 2. Jean Foss, President, American Association of University Women, enclosing a copy of her letter to the Governing Board of WeSt Valley College, recommending to that Board that they·reject the presently proposed stadium project at West Valley College. - Noted and filed. 3. Charles F~ Hunter, 20846 Meadow Oak Way, expressing throughts con- cerning the City's "potentiaI litigation" discussions ·in Executive Sessions. - City Manager to:respond. 4. John Svilich, Chairman, Saratoga Festival and Parade Committee, requesting permission for closure of State Highway 9 and 85 for the llth Annual Fall Festival an~ Parade. It was moved by Councilman Kraus and seconded by Councilman Brigham Resolution 786, Requesting Permission for Temporary Closure of State Highway on September 18, 1976, be adopted. The motion was carried. 5. Copy of a letter from Carol La Marre, Vice President, West Valley Taxpayers ~nd Environmental Association, to William, Chairman, Local Government Committee, ~upporting ~B~l_79]~.._~._-~N~ and filed. -9- B. ORAL C. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF PUBLIC GROUP'REPRESENTATIVES The Mayor-acknowledged the presence of public group r~presentat~ves this evening, as followS: Ialeen Granlund, President,.~aratoga Chamber of Commerce Norm Martin, Saratoga Planning Commissioh - Gene Zambetti, Saratoga Planning~ Commission Margaret Dunn, Good Government Group IX. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Councilman Kraus and seconded by Councilman Brigham the meeting be adjourned to an Executive Session for'discussion of Personnel Matters, and also, to an Adjourned Regular Meeting on tuesday, August lOth, Re: the Initiative Measure. The motion was carried. -The meeting was adjourned at 10:45 P.M. spectfully submitted, Rober