1966 219-246 _ 6-20 cont. to 7-25-1966

Browse Search

�Zl Staff recommended that the low bid of Fay Improvement Company be accepted and that all other bids be rejected. Councilman Keekley moved to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5087 AWARDING CONTRACT FOR CON- STRUCTION OF MUNICIPAL MARINA PARKING LOT CONDITIONED UPON APPROVAL BY THE STATE DIVISION OF SMALL CRAFT HARBORS; REJECTING ALL OTHER BIDS RECEIVED; AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF CONTRACT FOR SAID WORK CONDITIONED UPON APPROVAL BY THE STATE DIVISION OF SMALL CRAFT HARBORS; AND DIRECTING RETURN OF SECURITY DEPOSITS. Councilman Rosselli questioned reason for large differential in the bids. City Engineer explained large amount of imported fill needed and felt degree of differential among bidders depended upon availability of source and access to same at time contract awarded. Motion seconded by Councilman Petersen and carried unanimously on roll call vote, Councilman Bury being noted absent. Discussion of proposed Ordinance amending Ordinance No. 1128 to permit transfer of assessing function to a District Assessor ment covered the following three items Staff report stated proposed amend - (1) to permit appointment of a District Assessor; (2) to clarify bond registration provisions: (3) to permit additional powers to be conferred on a previously formed district. City Manager commented on the detailed summary prepared by the City Attorney which was submitted to Council concerning this proposed amendment, and that Mr. Dave Miller and Mr. James Kubelbeck, of DMJM were present to make additional statements. Mr. Miller stated this proposed action had been reviewed in detail at the various "Public Information Clinics" previous to the adoption of the Feasibility Report. Mr. Miller stated rationale of this proposal trent into the feasibility report as a very key element in this study. He reviewed the statements previously sub- mitted on the justification for the District Assessor concept. Mr. Kubelbeck stated two basic principles involved in pro- posal for District Assessor: retirement of the debts should be on an equitable basis on benefits received and to equalize within the District the assessment of property. He stated analysis made on this issue had been borne out by recent State legislation. (A.B. 80 & 81) Further, it was felt assessment ratio of 25% of market value was the only criteria to protect present land owner and future residents in the District, and inasmuch as it was felt legislation would not be in effect until probably 1971 at the earliest, and since control not yet provided to maintain 25% of fair market value, it was felt crucial this recommendation for a District Assessor the only possible way to assess District properties, whether devel- oped or undeveloped, on an up-to-date basis at 25% across the board. Councilman Granger questioned tax relationship between County and District Assessor recommendation. Mr. Kubelbeck advised responsibility of the County Assessor remains identical to what it is now with inclusion of the Shores property for all County taxes, the District Assessor to have the sole responsibility for District taxing purposes only. Councilman Rosselli moved to introduce Ordinance relating to Redwood City General Improvement Districts and (a) amending Sections 203, 204 and 1307 of Ordinance No. 1128 and adding Section 1310 to Ordinance NO. 1128, to permit assessment, -7-11-1,4