Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-06-1987 City Council Agenda packet'EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NO. ,07 AGENDA ITEM MEETING DATE: May 6, 1987 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL ORIGINATING DEPT: Inspection Services SUBJECT: SDR -1542, PUBLIC STORAGE, 12299 SARATOGA SUNNYVALE ROAD FINAL ACCEPTANCE Recommended Motion: Grant "Final Acceptance" to the subject Building Site. Report Summary: The Public Improvements for the subjectaot has been satisfactorily completed and maintained for a one year period. Fiscal Impacts: None Attachments: 1. Memo Motion and Vote: Staff recommendation 3 -0. CITY MGR. APPROVAL RSS /dsm MEMORANDUM TO: City Manager FROM: Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Tract SDR1542 (Final Acceptance) Location: 12299 Saratoga- Sunnyvale Road All improvements required of Public Storage, Inc. and agreed to in the Agreement dated 6 -6 -84 have been satisfactorily completed. Therefore, I recommend the improvement security posted to guarantee that agreement be released. The following information is included for your use: 1. Developer: Address: iV4 s�4 04 2.. Improvement Security: Type: Surety Amount: $36,500 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 05070 (10U)867-3•138 Public Storage, Inc. 11828 Dublin Blvd., Dublin, CA. 94568 Issuing Co.: Aetna Casualty Surety Co. Address: Receipt, Bond or Certificate No.: 3. Special Remarks: Hartford, Connecticut 06115 83 SB 100021006 BCA DATE: 4 -17 -87 'EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NO. MEETING DATE: SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL Ma F, 1987 CITY MGR. APPROVAL ORIGINATING DEPT: Inspection Services SUBJECT: Construction acceptance for Tract 7798, John Chu, Montpere Recommended Motion: Grant "Construction Acceptance" to the subject Tract or Building Site._ Repoft Summary: The public improvements required for the Subject Tract or Building Site have been satisfactorily completed. This "Construction Acceptance" will begin the one (1) year maintenance period. Fiscal Impacts: None Attachments: 1. Memo describing development and borid. Motion and Vote: Staff rec Qnrendation 3-0.. 1 AGENDA ITEM 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 05070 ::+•••'.�......:.:.1 (408) 867 -3438 MEMORANDUM TO: Finance Department FROM: City Engineer SUBJECT: Bond Release for: Tract 7798 The work guaranteed by the bond listed below has been satisfactorily completed. I am, therefore, requesting that bond be released as follows: 1. Bond Type: 2. Amount: John Chu, Montpere 3. Receipt, Bond or certifidate no.: 8391 4. Date Posted: 5. Bond posted by: C W Assoc. 6. Work guaranteed: Street improvements 7. Account Number: Issue Bond release to: Name: Robert S. Shook City Engineer C W Assoc CASH $9,500 10 -4 -85 0001 -1045 Address: 11650 Dawson Dr. Los Altos, CA 94022 DATE: 4 -23 -87 'EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NO. �i� MEETING DATE: 5 -6 -87 ORIGINATING DEPT: ENGINEERING Repoft Summary: Fiscal Impacts: 1986 -87 Budget of $64,000. Attachments: Motion and Vote: Staff recommendation 3 -0. SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM CITY MGR. APPROVAL SUBJECT: Authorize and Advertise "Concrete Repair Years 1987 and 1988" at various locations in the City of Saratoga Recommended Motion: Authorize to advertise "Concrete Repair for Calendar Years 1987 and 1988 Concrete repair work consists of removal and replacement of concrete curb and gutter and sidewalk along various locations of the City of Saratoga. Bid documents have been corrected to reflect accurate quantities. The City has the option to perofmr work in the next fiscal year at the same unit prices if funds are budgeted. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY MEETING DATE: May 6, 1987 City Mgr Approval ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: Maintenance SUBJECT: Hakone Donation Recommended Motions Accept donation of $100 by Phyllis and Sy Kleinman for purchase of a speciman cherry tree to be planted at Hakone Gardens. Report Summary Mr. and Mrs. Sy Kleinman of Saratoga donated $100 to purchase a speciman cherry tree to be planted at Hakone Gardens in memory of Mr. Richard Doyle. Fiscal Impact Attachments Letter of acknowledgement to Mr. and Mrs. Kleinman Letter of acknowledgement to Mrs. Richard Doyle Motion Vote Staff recomnendation .3 -0.. SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL IR 7,6 Agenda Item April 13, 1987 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE SARATOGA. CALIFORNIA 95070 (408) 867 -3438 Phyllis and Sy Kleinman 14648 Placida Court Saratoga, CA 95070 Dear Mr. and Mrs. Kleinman, On bahalf of the City of Saratoga, I would like to thank you for your donation of $100.00 to be used to plant a speciman cherry tree in memory of Mr. Richard Doyle. A letter of notification has been sent to Mrs. Doyle. The cherry tree will serve as a lovely memorial for Mr. Doyle and will also serve to beautify the Gardens for the enjoyment of its many visitors for years to come. Again, thank you for your donation. We hope you will be able to visit the Gardens often. Sincerely, Roy Swanson Parks Supervisor Karen Anderson Martha Clevenger Joyce Hlava David Moyles Donald Peterson COUNCIL MEMBERS: April 13, 1987 Mrs. Richard Doyle 14632 Springer Court Saratoga, CA 95070 Dear Mrs. Doyle, It is always a difficult time when one loses a loved one and it is at those times when we are touched by people who care. Mr. and Mrs. Sy Kleinman wished to memorialize your husband by having a speciman cherry tree planted at Hakone Gardens in his memory. This most generous gesture on their part will enhance the gardens and serve as a reminder that life is continuous and eternal. We are thankful to Mr. and Mrs. Kleinman for considering Hakone Gardens for this memorial planting and will endeavor to see that the cherry tree is a credit to your husband's memory, and will give joy to the many visitors to Hakone for now and years to come. Sincerely, UTVW, 04 0 Ming? Ro, Swanson Parks Supervisor 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE SARATOGA. CALIFORNIA 95070 (408) 867 -3438 Karen Anderson Martha Clevenger Joyce Hlava David Moyles Donald Peterson COUNCIL MEMBERS: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 7 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL Agenda Item MEETING DATE: May 6, 1987 City Mgr Approval ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: Maintenance SUBJECT: Hakone Donation Recommended Motions Accept donation of 45 one gallon containers of Camellia Sasanguas by Mr. George Avery of Saratoga to Hakone Gardens. Report Summary Mr. George Avery of Saratoga has donated 45 one gallon containers of Camellia Sasaguas to Hakone Gardens. Fiscal Impact Attachments Letter of acknowledgement to Mr. Avery Motion Vote Staff recommendation 3-0. 1 Mr George Avery 20151 Seagull Wav Saratoga, Ca 95070 Dear Mr. Avery: OTVW 'X 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 (408) 867 -3438 Mar 31, 1987 This left r is to acknowledge your generous donation of 45 one gallon containers of Camellia Sasanguas to enhance the Camellia collection at Hakone Japanese Garden.Their addition to the garden will add a variety and class of Camellia that the garden has not had, their early b &oominq period will lengthen the season that the Camellias are in bloom, and the plants themselves will add beauty and form in the areas they are utilized in. The City accepts your donation and wished to graciously thank you for these plants and be assured that visitors and staff will enjoy them now and for many years to come. Sincerely Yours, Roy Swanson, Parks /Bldg Supervisor EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NO. /Q7/67 AGENDA ITEM OA MEETING DATE: May 6, 1987 ORIGINATING DEPT: Engineering SUBJECT: Pavement Management Program Reconstruction of Canyon View Drive Recommended Motion: Authorize advertising for the reconstruction of Canyon View Drive (thick overlay with fabric). Repoft Summary: Final determination is to provide a thick (3 overlay with a fabric mat rather than remove and reconstruct the entire pavement section. This procedure will be very much less disruptive to the access while providing an excellent structural section. Fiscal Impacts: Estimated cost is $100,000. Attachments: Staff Report. Motion and Vote: Staff recommendation 3 -0. SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL CITY MGR. APPROVAL gaCDSO REPORT TO MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SUBJECT: Pavement Management Program Reconstruction of Canyon View Drive RECOMMENDED MOTION: Authorize advertising for the reconstruction of Canyon View Drive (thick overlay with fabric). BACKGROUND: Canyon View Drive from Fourth Street to its upper limits was the pavement management program candidate for reconstruction this year. We retained the firm of Terratech to do soils exploration and make recom- mendations for alternative pavement sections. As a result of that exploration subsequent discussion and input from fabric manufacturers, it was decided to provide a thick (3 asphalt concrete overlay over a layer of fabric rather than remove and replace the existing pavement section. ANALYSIS: gUIW a DATE: 4/29/87 COUNCIL MEETING: 5/6/87 Due to high subsurface water content, removal and replacement of the exist- ing pavement could result in long delays together with extra expense to treat the material to mitigate the moisture problem. This, together with the very major access to homeproblems.all: along Canyon View Drive created by excavated 10 to 15 inches of material led us to furhter investigation. A thick (3 asphalt concrete overlay will provide an excellent surface and reinforce the existing structural section. A fabric mat will eliminate water penetrating the pavement either upward or downward. ownward. Minimal disruption to access will result. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: A thick overlay with fabric mat will provide the best situation during construction and add equivalent life to this street as total reconstruction. Rob EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NO. MEETING DATE: SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL May 6, 1987 CITY MGR. APPROVAL 10_L ORIGINATING DEPT: Cam. Service SUBJECT: Adjusted Refuse Collection Rates Recommended Motion: Adopt Resolution adjusting refuse collection rates in accordance with Council action of June 4, 1986. Report Summary: In 1986, the City Council agreed to an understanding proposed by the City Managers of Campbell, Los Gatos, Monte Sereno and Saratoga which contract with the Green Valley Disposal Company for refuse collection services. The understanding proposed by the City Managers outlined a formula whereby the contract cities would collectively divide the costs between them toward the objective of financing the refuse collection service provided by Green Valley within each jurisdiction. The agreement called for Saratoga to increase its rates by 10 or an average of $1.16 per month for the typical residential customer, during the next fiscal year. Additionally, staff is recommending that the hard -to -serve rates be adjusted to provide for even spacing between the various levels of service available in that rate category (the difference between each level would be $1.73 per month). Fiscal Impacts An increase in rates as proposed will generate approximately $17,500 more annually in franchise fees. Attachments: 1. Resolution adjusting rates 2. Joint City Manager report dated May 20, 1986 Motion and Vote: Staff recommendation 3 -0. AGENDA ITEM 7C BEING A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA MODIFYING RATES FOR REFUSE COLLECTION SERVICES WHEREAS, the Green Valley Disposal Company has requested a rate modification for refuse collection services in the City of Saratoga; and WHEREAS, the City Manager has examined the proposed modification and determined that it is in fact reasonable; and WHEREAS, the Cities of Campbell, Monte Sereno, Saratoga and the Town of Los Gatos agree that rates for refuse collection service should be based upon the actual cost of service within each juris- diction at the commencement of the 1987 -88 fiscal year; and WHEREAS, it is also the desire of the City Council to adjust the rates charged in the "hard -to- serve" areas of the City so that the cost increases evenly between the levels of service available in that rate category; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the rates for refuse collection services shall be increased in the City of Saratoga effective July 1, 1987, by the following amounts: Level of Service RESOLUTION NO. Current Monthly Rate, New Monthly Rate Flatlands: Unlimited $11.65 $12.81 Senior Citizen 5.40 5.94 Backyard $20.85 $22.93 Hard -to -Serve 1 can 8.05 8.85 2 can 9.05 $10.58 3 can $11.60 $12.31 4 can $12.80 $14.04 5 can $14.35 $15.77 Senior Citizen 6.55 7.20 Backyard $23.55 $25.91 Commercial increase 100 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that adoption of this resolution is con- tingent upon execution of compatible resolutions in the Cities/ Town of Campbell, Monte Serena, and Los Gatos. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 6th day of May, 1987, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: Deputy City Clerk MAYOR MEMORANDUM TO: Campbell City Council Los Gatos Town Council Monte Sereno City Council Saratoga City Council FROM: Kevin C. Duggan, City Manager Deborah Swartfager, Town Manager Don Wimberly, City Administrator Harold Peacock, City Manager v SUBJECT: Green Valley Disposal Rate Increase Request E.) DATE: May 20, 1986 RECOMMENDATION: That the Campbell City Council and Los Gatos Town Council adopt the attached resolution authorizing a 5.8% increase in refuse collection revenues; and that the Monte Sereno and Saratoga City Councils adopt the attached resolution authorizing an 11.5% increase in refuse collection revenues for the 1986 -87 fiscal year. HISTORY: In March, 1983, the cities of Campbell, Los Gatos, Monte Sereno and Saratoga executed a joint franchise agreement with Green Valley Disposal for refuse collection services. In prior years, each city had independent agreements with Green Valley, and rates were consistent among jurisdictions. It was determined that many advantages existed to the joint franchise approach including consistency of service standards, improved landfill planning ability, and increased effectiveness in monitoring financial records and cost accounting Procedures. During negotiation of this agreement, each city acknowledged that inequities existed in the consistent rate schedule which was in place at that time, recognizing differences in the number of commercial accounts, and variations in residential density levels among the four cities. At that time it was agreed that progress should be made toward equity in refuse collection rates. In response to this, the Rate Review Committee (composed of one representative from each city) developed a cost accounting system in conjunction with Green Valley accounting staff. This system was refined and formalized with the Main Hurdman Cost Accounting Study of 1984. The methodology set forth in this document was utilized successfully in the 1984 -85 rate review; in 1986 field studies were conducted to update the assumptions and cost figures which are applied to this methodology. Tremendous progress has been made during the past three years toward establishing revenue requirements and rates based upon actual costs -to serve within the individual jurisdictions. This report will recommend an approach to reaching full self sufficiency by the 1987 88 fiscal year, thereby eliminating the need for substantial subsidies between cities. Page two Green Valley Disposal Rate Increase Request May 20, 1986 DISCUSSION: The proposed 1986 -87 fiscal year budget presented by Green Valley Disposal includes a total increase of 3% over the prior year. The rate review committee has reviewed this budget and finds the adjustment to be appropriate, in light of dramatic increases in insurance rates and a modest increase to employee costs. When distributed by jurisdiction in accordance with the Main Hurdman cost accounting plan, this budget yields the following total costs for the 1986 -87 fiscal year for all services: Campbell 52,498,985 I Los Gatos 1,946,833 Monte Sereno 196,422 Saratoga 2,048,678 The following breakdown details the respective total revenues being generated by jurisdiction, and illustrates the dollar amount and percentage difference which presently exists between revenues and expenditures: Total Revenues Shortfall Campbell $2,420,304 78,681 (3.3 Los Gatos 1,913,514 33,319 (1.7 Monte Sereno 169,711 26, (15.7 Saratoga 1,719,783 328,895 (19.1 On May 14, 1986 the City Managers from each jurisdiction met to review this issue and to formulate a consensus recommendation to be presented to each City Council. It was the recommendation of the group that revenue requirements be established in each City based upon the actual cost of service beginning in the 1987 -88 fiscal year, and that substantial progress be made in the upcoming fiscal year toward that goal. As,.revenue projectionand co "est ima t es can ar .s n ;op a ,e a 4.0 t,s.. r t0,,. •r vary '•from actual figures, •'`it wassug 4$„_tolerance_be,.permitted, shouldd' the''gap' between "`actual costs and revenues produced fall 2% short orA2$ in 'excess of pr8jection Exhibit A projects the level of increases which may be anticipated over the upcoming three years, should Green'Valley limit budget adjustments to three percent in each fiscal year. Although these figures are based upon conservative assumptions, they will allow cities to anticipate the magnitude of increases which may be required in future years. For example, should the City of Campbell authorize a 5.8% revenue increase in 1986 -87 as recommended, and should a 38 budget increase be requested in 1987 -88, the City of Campbell would be required to increase revenues by .5%. Assuming another 3% budget increase in 1988 -89, Campbell would be required to increase revenues by 3 Should Saratoga increase revenues by 11.5% in 1986-87 as recommended, and should a 3% budget increase be requested in 1987 -88, Saratoga would be required to increase Page three, Green Valley Disposal Rate Increase Request May 20, 1986 revenues by 10 This action would result in Saratoga producing revenues which are equivalent to expenditures within that jurisdiction. Should a 3% budget increase be requested in 1988 -89, Saratoga would require a 3% increase in revenue production. In Los Gatos, the 5.8% increase in 1986 -87 will result in no required increase in 1987 -88, assuming a budget increase of only 3%. A modest amount of excess revenue may be available in that year which would be utilized to offset increases required in other jurisdictions. It is anticipated that in future years, consistent percentage increases will be levied in all four jurisdictions, assuming that each city remains within the 2% allowance of their revenue requirement. Exhibit B provides examples of resulting rates should the proposed revenue increases be adopted in each city, and should these increases be spread evenly between all types of residential and c! :amercial services. It should be noted that the distribution of increases will be at the discretion of the jurisdiction as long as the revenue re :irement is achieved. For example, an agency may choose to increase commercii rates by a larger percentage than residential rates. As seen in the exh:. if spread evenly among service classes, the recommended increase woul:: result in a $1.20 adjustment to unlimited residential curbside service n Saratoga and a $.93 adjustment to their two can "hard -to- serve" rate. C': bell's unlimited curbside residential rate would he increased by $.36, while lie Los Gatos two can flatland rate would increase by $.39. In Monte Sere:. an increase of $.58 would result in the one can flatland collection rate, .i $1.50 in the curbside unlimited rate. In an attempt to maintain the present .nt franchise agreement and to make a firm commitment and progress toward me .ng each jurisdictions financial obligation, the proposed formula is be_ recommended to each affected City Council. It must be recognized that t. is a compromise approach, and that action by each agency is contingent upy: approval by each of the other three parties. Should this approach not be oted, it is anticipated that each agency will be required to negotiate it vidually with Green Valley Disposal, and possibly face litigation should fu_. financial obligations not be satisfied. As such, it is recommended each agency adopt this approach at their respective meeting during the we: June 1, 1986. is f:greenval (pg.3) EXHIBIT A REVENUE REQUIREMENT PROJECTIONS SARATOGA MONTE SERENO 1986-87 Revenue (Increased by 11.5%) 1,917,558 '189,228 1986-87 Expense 2,048,678 196,422 Deficit (131,120) (7,194) 1987 88 Revenue (before increase) 1,917,558 189,228 1987 -88 Expense (3% budget increase) 2,110,138 202,315 Deficit (increase required) (192,580) 10.0% (13,087) 6.9% 1988 -89 Revenue (before increase) 2,109,314 202,285 1988 -89 Expense (3% budget increase) 2,173,442 208,385. Deficit (increase required) (64,128) 3.0% (6,100) 3.0% 1986 -87 Revenue (increased by 5:8 1986 -87 Expense Surplus 1987 -86 Revenue 1987 -88 Expense (3% budget increase) Surplus /Deficit 1988 -89 Revenue 1988 -89 Expense (3% budget increase) Deficit (increase required) CAMPBELL LOS GATOS 2,560,682 2,024,498 2,498,985 1,946,833 +61,697 +77,665 2,560,682 2,024,498 2,573,955 2,005,238 (13,273) .5% +19,260 2,573,485 2,024,498 2,651,174 2,065,395 (77,689) 3.0% (40,897) 2.0% 'EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NO. YO MEETING DATE: May 6, 1987 CITY MGR. APPROVAL ORIGINATING DEPT: City Manager SUBJECT: Recommended Motion: Adopt the draft Conflict of Interest Policy as prepared by the City Attorney and City Manager; distribute copies to all members of Commissions and place in Commissioner Handbook. Direct City Attorney to prepare appropriate amendment to Local Conflict of Interest Code. Report Summary: Council has directed the staff to prepare a draft policy statement on conflict of interest relating to representing clients or business interests before the Council or a. Commission on which an individual sits as a member of the body. The policy would prohibit such relationship or activity as being inconsistent with Section 87100 of the Government Code and recommends this restriction be included in the local Conflict of Interest Code as authorized by Section 87300 of the Government Code. The policy would be more restrictive than state law, which requires disqualification from decision making by prohibiting engagement in said activity altogether. Fiscal Impacts: None Proposed Policy on Conflict of Interest Attachments: 1. Memorandum dated April 30, 1987, from City Manager 2. Proposed Conflict of Interest Policy Statement Motion and Vote: Continued to 5/20. SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM 7D UTVW ©2 0 1 Oc� MEMORANDUM 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 (408) 867 -3438 TO: City Council FROM: City Manager SUBJECT: Proposed Policy on Conflict of Interst DATE: April 30, 1987 RECOMMENDED MOTION Adopt the draft Conflict of Interest Policy as prepared by the City Attorney and City Manager; distribute copies to all members of Commissions and place in Commissioner Handbook. Direct City Attorney to prepare appropriate amendment to Local Conflict of Interest Code. BACKGROUND Following the resignation of Commissioner Pines at your April 1, 1987, meeting, the City Council directed staff to prepare a written conflict of interest policy for review and adoption by the Council at a subsequent meeting. Several months ago when the staff was working on the new Commissioner's Handbook which now acts as a guide to orient new members of commissions, the staff did work up a section on Conflict of Interest. ANALYSIS Using the current statement as a base, the draft statement expands on the business related nature of some conflicts especially as they apply to attorneys and architects and would prohibit engaging in any business relationship where a member of the Council or a Commissioner would be representing a client before body on which the individual sits (see paragraph 4 of the draft statement). This goes beyond the state law which limits such activity by disqualifica -_L tion (see paragraph 1 of the draft statement), but attempts to respond to the standard contained in Section 87100 G.C., "No public official...5ha11 make, participate in making or in any way attempt to use his official position to influence a governmental decision in which he knows...he has a financial interest." Proposed Policy on Conflict of Interest FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS Although the suggested standard is currently more restrictive than State Law and FPPC regulations, there is nothing which would pro- hibit the City Council from adopting a more rigorous standard to its employees and Commissioners. As to whether the City Council has the authority to regulate the conduct of its own members beyond the standard set by::the State is not so clear. However, because it was apparent from the Council discussion on this matter that the City Council was not to be excluded from the policy, the City Council has been included. Council may wish to consider, with the advise of the City Attorney, what additional legislative remedy might be considered, such as a vote of censure, if a member of the City Council were to undertake an action which would be considered a violation of the proposed policy. Should the City Council agree to adopt the proposed policy, the City Attorney should be directed to prepare appropriate amendments to the local Conflict of Interest Code as provided in Section 87300 G.C. arry Peacock jm Attachment: Draft Conflict of Interest Policy Page 2 4/29/87 CONFLICT OF INTEREST D R A F T The general public is often unaware of the legal definition of conflict of interest. Conflict of interest involves making a decision as a public offical which would benefit one's own economic interests, one's relatives' economic interest, or a business in which one has an interest. If an official is confronted with a situation where he or she is to vote on a matter involving conflict of interest, he or she must abstain from voting and from participating in any way in the deliberations concerning an issue where a conflict of interest exists. When an individual Commissioner or member of the City Council engages in a business or profession where a client may have business before the body on which that individual sits, the law in California generally imposes an even stricter standard of conduct. Special rules to this effect apply to attorneys and architects. Because of the ability of a sitting Commissioner or Council person to influence colleagues and because they possess inside knowledge about the attitudes, values and perspectives of colleagues, the City must exercise great caution in assuring the public sees the City's decision making process as being not only open but fair and unbiased and free of improper influence as well. It is the policy of the City Council, therefore, to specifically prohibit a member of a Commission or a member of the City Council from engaging in any business relationship where they would be representing a client before the body on which an individual sits. While this policy may, in some respects, be more restrictive than required by law, the credibility of the City is important enough to suggest that the highest standard of conduct is to be expected. The Political Reform Act is intended to prevent conflicts of interest by requiring certain public officials to disclose financial interests which could foreseeably cause conflicts so that the public can be aware of them. City Councilmembers and Planning Commissioners as well as the City Manager and City Attorney are required to file annual statements. State laws on this subject are very detailed and are explained in a manual available in the City Clerk's office. If a public official has a question of whether a conflict of interest would be involved in any particular decision, he or she should consult with the City Attorney before making any decision which could create a conflict situation. Failure to do so could jeopardize an individual's position as a Commissioner or member of the City Council. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NO. a.R MEETING DATE: ORIGINATING DEPT: ENGINEERING SUBJECT: Recommended Motion: Release of Landscape Bond for Tract 6526 and Tract 6528. Report Summary: Blackwell Homes had provided landscape Bond for Tract 6526 and 6528. All Landscaping work has been completed and maintained for one year, therefore, the Landscape Bond for the above project should be released. Fiscal Impacts: None. Attachments: Motion and Vote: RELEASE OF LANDSCAPE BOND, Tract 6526 and 6528 PARKER RANCH Staff recommendation 5 -0. SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM 4' CITY MGR. APPROVAL MEMORANDUM TO: City Manager FROM: Director of Public Works and SUBJECT: Tract 6526 Sai 6528 (Final Acceptance) Location: Parker Ranch Prospect Road All la dscap_ii-g, required of TRACT 6526 and 6528 and agreed to in the Landscape Maintenance Agreement dated April 21, 1982 have been satisfactorily completed. Therefore, I recommend the improvement security posted to guarantee that agreement be released. The following information is included for your use: 1. Developer: 2. Improvement Security: RSS /dsm Address: OEUT ©1 A` Cod( 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 (408) 867 -3438 BLACKWELL HOMES P. 0. Box 817 Campbell, Ca. 95008 Type: SECURITY BOND Amount: $135,000.00 Issuing Co.: American Insurance Company Address: Recailpit Bond ar Cgxkit&x.: Bond #6338863 3. Special Remarks: RELEASE BOND. DATE: 4! March 12, 1987 Mr. Robert Shook, City Engineer City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, Ca. 95070 RE: Fireman Fund 4- 8 Bond #S C6-359171 6526, Unit 1 6528, Unit 2 Common Facilities Dear M. Shook: Yesterday Roy Swanson of your Parks Department and my landscape contractor inspected the planting and Mr. Swanson gave us final approval. Several months ago Dan Trinidad inspected the trail system and it was approved at that time. Would you please take the necessary steps to release the bond on these improvements. Very truly yours, Ken Bla ell KB /af BLACKWELL HOMES P.O. 80X 817 125 EAST SUN NY0AKS AVENUE C A M P E E L L, C A L I F. 95008 PH 378 -5340 MAR 13 198 ESV Jm EERIN TITLE ORDER NO UECOROIN gF_ By AND WHEN 'ECOROED MAIL ro CALIFORNIA RECONVEYANCE COMPANY P.O. Boa 8200 Northridge, California 91328 L J On OCTOBER 13 19 87 at at SPACE ABOVE THIS LINE FOR RECORDER'S USE YOU ARE IN DEFAULT UNDER A DEED OF TRUST, GATED MAY 0 7, 1985 UNLESS YOU TAKE ACTION TO PROTECT YOUR PROPERTY, IT MAY BE SOLD AT A PUBLIC SALE. IF YOU NEED AN EXPLANATION OF THE NATURE OF THE PROCEEDING AGAINST YOU, YOU SHOULD CONTACT A LAWYER. NOTICE OF TRUSTEE'S SALE NO 212141EQU THE 110 WEST TAYLOR STREET ENTRANCE OF T ICOR TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY 09:00 A.M., in the City of SAN JOSE County of SANTA CLARA State of California, CALIFORNIA RECONVEYANCE COMPANY, a California Corporation, as duly appointed Trustee under that certain Deed of Trust executed by DAVID R. SMITH, AN UNMARRIED MAN as trustors, recorded on MAY 13, 1985 ,as Instrument No. 8 4.Q6140 in Book J343 Page 782 of Official Records of SANTA CLARA County, State of California, under the power of sale therein contained, will sell at public auction to the highest bidder for cash, or check as described below, payable at the time of sale in lawful money of the United States of America, without warranty express or implied as to title, use, possession or encumbrances, •ail nglii, title and interest now held by it as such Trustee in and to the following described property situated in the aforesaid County and State, to wit: LEGAL DESCRIPTION ATTACHED AS SCHEDULE "A" APN: 391 -56 -044 The total amount of the unpaid principal balance, interest thereon, together with reasonably estimated costs, expenses and advances at the time of the initial publication of this Notice are 7 4, 733. 26 Currently dated Cashiers Checks or Certified Checks payable to the Trustee or bidder are acceptable to Trustee provided proper identification is available. From information which the Trustee deems reliable, but for which Trustee makes no representation or warranty, the street address (es) or other common designation of the above described property is: 13675 QUITO RD. SARATOGA CA 950 70 Said property is being sold for the purpose of paying the obligations secured by said Deed of Trust including fees and expenses of the Trustee and of Sale. AUGUST 26, 198 7 Dated CALIFORNIA RECONVEYANCE COMPANY, as said Trustee By 11./r2-C— /1 +t•�,'` Suzan e Kelly Executive Dl ice President 620 1142.296/62 (R9/116)1O Address of Trustee: 9451 Corbin Avenue Northridge, California 91328 Telephone No. (818) 701 -2575 SCHEDULE "A" All that certain real property in the City of Saratoga, County of Santa Clara, State of California, described as follows:' Parcel One: Beginning at a point in the center line of Quito Road, said point being the Southeasterly corner of Tract No. 1791, Quito Road Rancho, a flap of said Tract being recorded in Book 73 of !laps, at Pages 26 and 27, Santa Clara County Records; thence along the Southerly boundary of said Tract and the Southerly boundary of Lot 27, as shovn on said Tract, South 80 deg 15' 30" West 123.52 feet to an iron pipe at an angle point therein; thence continuing along said Southerly boundary, South 88 deg 56' 15" W. 35.54 feet; thence parallel with the center line of Quito Road, as shown on said Tract No. 1791 South 5 deg 18' 45 East 73.35 feet to an iron pipe; thence North 88 deg 46' 15" E. 159.00 feet to the center of Quito Road above referred to; thence_along said center line North 5 deg 18$ 45" West 91.58 feet to the Point of Beginning, and being a portion of the Quito Rancho. Parcel Two: Beginning at the intersection of the Southerly line of Lot 27 as said Lot is shown upon that certain flap entitled, "Tract No. 1791, Quito Road Rancho which Nap was filed for record in the Office of the Recorder of the County of Santa Clara, State of California on October 19, 1956 in Book of daps nuabered 73, Pages 26 and 27, with the Northeasterly corner of that certain 1,480 acre parcel of land described in the Deed from Angelo Aspesi, et ux, to Howard B. Bennion, et ux, recorded on June 8, 1960 in Book of Official Records, nuabered 4816, Page 542, Santa Clara County Records; thence from said point of beginning and along the Southerly line of said Lot 27, N. 88 deg 56' 15" E. 1.97 feet to the Northwesterly corner of the certain parcel of land described in the Deed frog Johnnie Aspesi, et ux, to William James Gallagher, et uz, recorded April 10, 1962 in Book of Official Records, numbered 5532, Page 146, Santa Clara County Records; thence along the Westerly line of said land Deeded to Willies James Gallagher, et ux, S. 5 deg 18' 45 E._ 73.35_feet to the Southwesterly corner thereof; thence along the Westerly prolongation of the Southerly line of said land Deeded to William James Gallagher, et ux, S. 88 deg 46' 15" W. 1.97 feet sore or less to a point on the Easterly line of said 1.480 acre parcel of land above referred to; thence along last said line, N. 5 deg 18' 45" W. 73.35 feet sore or less to the Point of Beginning. May 7, 1987 ©g H I 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 (408) 867 -3438 Katie Kriegs Valley Institute of Theater Arts P.O. Box 999 Saratoga, California 95071 Dear Ms. Kriegs: Thank you for your letter of April 7, which has been referred to me for reply. The Saratoga City Council will be considering the parking situation along both sides of Oak Street in the near future. Your letter has been forwarded to the Community Services Director, who is in charge of our Public Safety Commission. Any modifications in our traffic laws or our manner of enforcing traffic laws would be considered by that Commission. The Commission will be making a recommendation on the matter to the City Council, and you will receive an agenda at the Council meeting at which it is to be discussed. Please let me know if you need further information. Thank you for letting us know of your opinion in this area. Sincerely, ,Grace E. Cory Deputy City Clerk cc: City Manager Community Services Director COUNCIL MEMBERS: Karen Anderson Martha Clevenger Joyce Hlava David Moyles Donald Peterson GENERAL DIRECTOR Judith Lyn Sutton BOARD OF DIRECTORS Samuel Balton, M.D. William Craycroft Glen A. Drummond Greg Grodhauss William Kamin G.P. Largent, M.D. Daniel E. Leckrone Carol Lohr John F. Mallory Christopher Menkin William F. Morrison David Mosby Charles Newman Pamela Nobel Bob Odineal Bill Peck Ann Peterson Joseph F. Pruss Sue Robert Joanne Gale Rosso Frank Rosso Betty Lou Rowe Virginia Schlomann Karen Scott Janice Sexton Duane Serrano Judith Lyn Sutton Jay M. Supkoff Charles Swan John B. Swartz Michael R. Talley Robert van der Toorren Candi Wozniak Barbara Yamamoto DIRECTOR'S CIRCLE ($1000 Contributors) Samuel Paula Balton Richard Jeannette Beverly William Julie Craycroft Glen Sandra Drummond Dan JoAnn Erlin W. Donald Head Floyd Jean Kvamme Mr. Mrs. Jerome Lohr Christopher Menkin Mr. Mrs. Donald B. Miller Charles Newman Betty Willys Peck Edward Robert Sue Robert Frank Joanne Rosso Betty Lou Rowe David Karen Scott Perrin Jean Smith Jay Shirley Supkoff John Judith Swartz Charles B.J. Tucker Candi Wozniak Valley Institute of Theatre Art April 7, 1987 Joyce Hlava Mayor, City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 Dear Mayor Hlava: Cordially, tie Krieg Operations Manager cc: Mary Jean Fenn Book -Go -Round P.O. Box 999 Saratoga, California 95071 Tel. (408) 867 -2395 41% /IA-14 APR 91987 944 With the advent of our summer season approaching rapidly, we ask that this matter be taken under advisement at the earliest opportunity. Please do not hesitate to contact us if there are any questions we can answer regarding this request. We hope the City Council will assist us in better serving our community. We at VITA would like to request that the City Council vote h.c ,,.o.✓ to remove the one -hour parking restriction from the northwest /��Zi _7J side of Oak Street in downtown Saratoga. As VITA has grown over the years, we have added to our permanent staff, which now numbers 17 and is still growing as we begin our 1987 season. The parking restriction, apparently a holdover from Village Library days, is no longer applicable and significantly impacts our daily operations. Parking in this area is extremely limited, as you doubtless know, and cars parked across the street from our office for any length of time exceeding an hour are ticketed regularly. This situation is difficult not only for our staff but also for the many community volunteers who give their time to assist in the office, board members, donors, and ticket purchasers.