BOOK 26_1955-11-28 to 1957-06-17

Browse Search

■ ---- - -- --- ---- - procuring of the necessary order authorizing the trustee to convey the property. As estimate of the cost of this is the sum of $100.00. 3. In the event it is determined that there is no potential public use for any portion of the property, the County should be advised that the City is not interested in acquiring all or any portion of the property and, therefore, the property would be assessed for the cost of the improvements, based on the assumption that the County abandon its interest in the property to the holder of the reversion. An early determination should ba made so that the County of San Kotao may be advised as to the Cityts intentions in this matter and that proceedings may be taken to acquire the reversionary interest if it is determined that all or any portion of the property should be acquired. It was their suggestion that some information be obtained from Mr. Brophy as to the potential value of these parcels so that a determination can be made as to whether or not the City is ultimately likely to incur any net expense. Councilman Weymouth moved that the City Attorney be instructed to proceed with negotiations, seconded r by Councilman Spillers and carried. Councilman Stout offered RESOLUTION 2236 URGING THE CALIFCRNIA STATE LEGISLATURE TO ENACT LEGISLATION REDUCING OR REMOVING CERTAIN HIGHWAY AND SALES TAXES PRESENTLY ASSESSED UPON URBAN PASSENGER BUS OPERATIONS and moved its adoption, seconded by Councilman Granger and carried on roll call, Council- man Herkner being noted absent. COiMMUNICATION FROM SENATOR DOLWIG REGARDING STATE HIGHWAY ROUTE ##107. Senator Dolwig referred to our Resolution 2214 and stated that he had talked to the Division of Higlvrrays on this matter and it has been agreed that a new highvray route will be adopted, going from Bayshore and Willow Road to the new proposed Junipero Serra, somewhere near Sandhill Road. At the present time, Woodside Road is part of the State Higl;way route, which will not be changed. The Division informed Senator Dolwig that it a more direct route from Five Points to the Bayshore can.be worked out, that additional legislation will not be necessary because they will merely change the specific location of that X11 8 portion of 107 from Main street to Spruce Street. The Mayor asked that the letter be filed. FURTHER DICUSSION REGARDING WATER DEPARTMENT FINANCES AND INDEBTEDNESS, COUNCILMAN WEISS. Councilman Weiss read the following prepared statement: Mr.. Mayor and gentlemen - In pursuing this matter of the $330,000 more or less indebtedness of the Water Department, I call attention to the fact that Councilman Granger publicly stated that it is his feeling that this question is being raised because of an intent on my part to pick on him, since he is the only member now on the council who was involved. He further stated that the records are there for all to see, that he acted in good faith and on City attorneys advice. I fully agree with him that the records such as they are, are there. Those same records will clearly show that at no time have I endeavored to imply or blame any one individual. Correct analysis will show that my sole purpose in pursuing this matter is, not to involve any individual but to have the propriety of the grants, agreements, etc. determined once for all, including their legality and gonformance to our laws and ordinances, etc. We must realize that said indebtedness is quite a burden to the taxpayers and in fact will soon result in the necessity of a raise in the water rates. The servicing of an indebtedness of better than a quarter of a million of dollars is not peanuts. I have examined much of said records and I am firmly of the opinion that there is a possible question of the legality of at least a portion of the indebted- ness, and that there is a possibility that if not all at least some of it might be salvaged. Not being an attorney, my reasoning is that of a layman and the elected representative of the people, and is predicated on the following points amongst others: 1. 1 do not believe that the council had the right under the law to enter into such an agreemtn when we consider the provisions of ordinance ##494, adopted in 1943, c and the provisions of our city charter. 2. That a valid contract did not exist at any time, because the council over- stepped its authority in antering into the agreement which resulted in the suit filed by the Land Development Company and the consequent settlement and court decree ordering the payment. . 3. That aside from the foregoing, neither the purported contract or agreement as evidence by resolution #288, adopted in 1946, has been scrupolously followed or executed by the sub -dividers. I