Laserfiche WebLink
1 269 <br />with subdivisions of less than 5 lots - <br />Councilman Granger asked the Clerk to refer back in the minutes to a previous motion wherein he -,requested <br />a statement from the Planning Commission as to their policy setting up conditions in connection with <br />subdivisions of less then 5 lots. <br />Councilman Granger asked the City Attorney if the Planning Commission has the authority to act as a body of <br />Councilman Britschgi moved that the public hearing be continuted until the next Council meeting, September <br />11th, seconded by Councilman Spillers and carried. <br />PUBLIC HEARING, ADOPT ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING TAX RATE FISCAL YEAR 1956-57 The affidavit of publication was <br />ordered filed. Tom Tuite, Jr. asked if the 50@ Parking District assessment was included in the assessment <br />B I_ <br />district. He was informed that this was so. Councilman Weiss raised the question as to whether or not the <br />ordinance should be read, or a brief summary.made, so the people in the audience and the Council can know <br />what they are voting on. He wanted to adopt a policy to, have all ordinances read before they are voted <br />upon. Mr. Tuite asked about the $40,000 from the parking meters that has not been used and he -wanted to <br />know if this bdiild not be used.to.eliminate,the 50¢ assessment or at least reduce the amount. City <br />Assessor Brophy stated that he did not know where the $1103000 figure come from but the figures given to the <br />Council in his and.the City Treasurer's report are the figures on the City books. This was followed by <br />dicussion. Mr. Brophy stated that he would be glad to go. over the figures with Mr. Tuite in his office. <br />The Mayor stated that he would continut this hearing until Mr. Tuite checking these figures with Mr. Brophy. <br />Councilman Herkner moved to continute the public hearing until 9 o'clock, seconded by Councilman. Granger <br />and carried. <br />PUBLIC HEARING,ADOPT ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING TWO HOUR PARKING ON CEDAR STREET BETWEEN LATHROP AND MAIN STREETS. <br />9 a The affidavit of publication was ordered filed. This was followed by a short dicussion. There being no <br />1 protests, Councilman Spillers moved to close the public hearing, seconded by Councilman Herkner and carried. <br />rl <br />? CITY MANAGER REPORT ON BLIND INDUSTRIES SALES COMPANY APPLYING FOR GRATUITOUS PERMIT„ In his report the City <br />Manager stated that our local Chamber of Commerce had no information regarding this firm. The Better <br />Business Bureau of San Francisco, to whom they referred him, reports that they have very favorable reports. <br />Merchandise manufactured by the blind is purchased by them, and re—sold by means of personal and telephone <br />solicitation. Their main office is in Los Angeles, but branches are maintained in San Francisco and <br />Oakland. No permit fee is required in San Francisco, so they are operating there without cost in the way of <br />a license. The Better Business Bureau further advises that the reputation of the Executive Vice—President, <br />who signed the letter to the Council, is good. <br />Councilman Britschgi moved approval of the permit subject to a review in six months, seconded by Councilman <br />Spillers. Councilman Granger questioned whether or not a use permit could be issued in this case and he <br />stated that he would kike to fix it someway to give him 30 days and then have his case reviewed. Councilman <br />Britschgi changed his motion to review in 60 days which was agreed to by the second. The motion carried. <br />CITY MANAGER REPORT CONCERNING ADVISABILITY OF COUNTY COLLECTION OF TAXES AND ASSESSING. CONTINUED FROM AUGUST <br />27th. Councilman Britschgi stated that rather then have the Clerk read this he asked that this be set for <br />a study meeting and he so moved, seconded by Councilman Spillers and carried. <br />CITY ENGINEER REPORT ON SIDEWALK4, 300 BLOCK CHESTNUT — DRAINAGE PROBLEMS AND ESTIMATED COST OF REPLACING <br />DRIVEWAYS AND BROKEN SIDEWALKS. The costs involved, to be borne by the City, are estimated as follows: <br />25 square feet — remove and replace sidewalk @ $0.50 $12.50 <br />135 square feet — replace driveway @ $0.65 87.75 <br />20 lineal feet — furnish and install 211 -galvanized iron <br />pipe drains. @ $p1.00 20.00 <br />TOTAL ESTIMATED COST $120.25 <br />law to <br />set up a <br />policy on <br />planning. He further asked that the Attorney please check into the Charter and <br />t. <br />report <br />back at <br />some later <br />date. <br />Councilman Britschgi moved that the public hearing be continuted until the next Council meeting, September <br />11th, seconded by Councilman Spillers and carried. <br />PUBLIC HEARING, ADOPT ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING TAX RATE FISCAL YEAR 1956-57 The affidavit of publication was <br />ordered filed. Tom Tuite, Jr. asked if the 50@ Parking District assessment was included in the assessment <br />B I_ <br />district. He was informed that this was so. Councilman Weiss raised the question as to whether or not the <br />ordinance should be read, or a brief summary.made, so the people in the audience and the Council can know <br />what they are voting on. He wanted to adopt a policy to, have all ordinances read before they are voted <br />upon. Mr. Tuite asked about the $40,000 from the parking meters that has not been used and he -wanted to <br />know if this bdiild not be used.to.eliminate,the 50¢ assessment or at least reduce the amount. City <br />Assessor Brophy stated that he did not know where the $1103000 figure come from but the figures given to the <br />Council in his and.the City Treasurer's report are the figures on the City books. This was followed by <br />dicussion. Mr. Brophy stated that he would be glad to go. over the figures with Mr. Tuite in his office. <br />The Mayor stated that he would continut this hearing until Mr. Tuite checking these figures with Mr. Brophy. <br />Councilman Herkner moved to continute the public hearing until 9 o'clock, seconded by Councilman. Granger <br />and carried. <br />PUBLIC HEARING,ADOPT ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING TWO HOUR PARKING ON CEDAR STREET BETWEEN LATHROP AND MAIN STREETS. <br />9 a The affidavit of publication was ordered filed. This was followed by a short dicussion. There being no <br />1 protests, Councilman Spillers moved to close the public hearing, seconded by Councilman Herkner and carried. <br />rl <br />? CITY MANAGER REPORT ON BLIND INDUSTRIES SALES COMPANY APPLYING FOR GRATUITOUS PERMIT„ In his report the City <br />Manager stated that our local Chamber of Commerce had no information regarding this firm. The Better <br />Business Bureau of San Francisco, to whom they referred him, reports that they have very favorable reports. <br />Merchandise manufactured by the blind is purchased by them, and re—sold by means of personal and telephone <br />solicitation. Their main office is in Los Angeles, but branches are maintained in San Francisco and <br />Oakland. No permit fee is required in San Francisco, so they are operating there without cost in the way of <br />a license. The Better Business Bureau further advises that the reputation of the Executive Vice—President, <br />who signed the letter to the Council, is good. <br />Councilman Britschgi moved approval of the permit subject to a review in six months, seconded by Councilman <br />Spillers. Councilman Granger questioned whether or not a use permit could be issued in this case and he <br />stated that he would kike to fix it someway to give him 30 days and then have his case reviewed. Councilman <br />Britschgi changed his motion to review in 60 days which was agreed to by the second. The motion carried. <br />CITY MANAGER REPORT CONCERNING ADVISABILITY OF COUNTY COLLECTION OF TAXES AND ASSESSING. CONTINUED FROM AUGUST <br />27th. Councilman Britschgi stated that rather then have the Clerk read this he asked that this be set for <br />a study meeting and he so moved, seconded by Councilman Spillers and carried. <br />CITY ENGINEER REPORT ON SIDEWALK4, 300 BLOCK CHESTNUT — DRAINAGE PROBLEMS AND ESTIMATED COST OF REPLACING <br />DRIVEWAYS AND BROKEN SIDEWALKS. The costs involved, to be borne by the City, are estimated as follows: <br />25 square feet — remove and replace sidewalk @ $0.50 $12.50 <br />135 square feet — replace driveway @ $0.65 87.75 <br />20 lineal feet — furnish and install 211 -galvanized iron <br />pipe drains. @ $p1.00 20.00 <br />TOTAL ESTIMATED COST $120.25 <br />