My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
BOOK 26_1955-11-28 to 1957-06-17
RedwoodCity
>
City Clerk
>
Minutes
>
1955 to 1957 Book 26
>
BOOK 26_1955-11-28 to 1957-06-17
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/16/2017 10:17:41 AM
Creation date
10/16/2017 10:00:08 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CC Index
CC Index - Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Type
Regular
Agency Type
City Council
Date
11/28/1955
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
510
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
469 <br />4. That several other contractors or subdividers besides the Land Development <br />Company involved�in the original dispute were granted similar rights notwithstanding <br />the provisions of Ordinance 494 and 631, <br />Gentlemen, I have previously stated that not any of us are competent to <br />determine the legal ramifications involved. There is the probability that the con- <br />sent and court decree can and should have been appealed. There is always the posdib- ' <br />ility of a taxpayers suit to enjoin further payments to determine the city's rights. <br />It is therefor my belief that if as Councilman Granger has stated that his conscience <br />is clear, and certainly ours should be, then there should be no reason for our refusal <br />to have this matter property determinedr' Certainly Councilman Granger should be in a <br />position to second a suitable motion that will permit of the obtaining of such a legal <br />opinion. <br />I therefor again offer the following motion: "I move that the entire matter and <br />related questions be referred to the city attorney for exploration, determination of <br />legal questions and problems involved, and that he submit his opinion as to the valid- <br />ity <br />alidity of any all matter involving the Carson-Minekton-Land Development water deal with <br />the city, and in the event the press of other matters and current work in his department <br />is of such volume as would prevent his giving this matter reasonably dilligent and <br />expeditious attention, he submit suitable recommendation of other means of approach <br />to the problem and as will permit an early and proper determination and action to <br />resolve this question once 'f or all. <br />Louis Weiss, Councilman <br />Councilman Weiss moved that the entire matter and related questions be'referred to the City Attorney for <br />exploration, determination of legal questions and problems involved, and that he submit his opinion as to <br />the validity df any and all matters involving the Carson -Monckton -Land Development water deal with the <br />City, and in the event the press of other matters and current work is his department is of such volume as <br />would prevent his giving this matter reasonably diligent and expeditious attention, he submit suitable <br />recommendation of other means of approach to the problem and as will permit an early and proper deter- <br />mination and action totesolve this question once and for all. This was follwed by discussion. Councilman <br />Granger stated that he is sure that the Council at the time of the action acted in good faith and there <br />was no violation and as such he was not going to second the motion. Councilman Granger stated that he is <br />sure that the Council at the time of the action acted in food faith and there was no violation and as such <br />he was not going to second the motion. Councilman Stout was of the opinion that this should lie referred <br />to•the City Attorney for his recommendation before taking further action. 'This was followed by discussion <br />in regard to the possible cost of hiring an outside attorney. The City Attorney was of the opinion that <br />the research on this'particular item would take 'an attorney approximately six weeks continuous work. <br />Councilman Granger stated that they had the approval 6f two attorney at the time of the previous action and <br />if there was any doubt then they should let a tax payer file a tax payers uit. This was followed by <br />discussion after which the motion lost on roll call vote with Councilmen Granger, Spillers, Weymouth and <br />Mayor Royer voting No and Councilman Herkner being noted absent. <br />COMMUNICATION FROM ENGINEER CHARGES RANDLETT REGARDING WITHDRAWAL OF A PORTION OF LOTS 1, 2, 3, and 4, EATON <br />AVENUE VILLAS, FOR ANNEXATION TO SAN CARLOS BECAUSE OF AVAILABILITY OF SEWERS. The Clerk read the letter <br />from the City Engineer which reads in part as follows: <br />. . ItInasmuch as Redwood City cannot serve these properties with sanitary sewer facilities, it is our <br />recommendation that the disincorporation be approved so that San Carlos can provide sewer disposal service, <br />and the California Water Service Company can provide water service along De Anza Avenue. Storm drainage <br />is provided through the San Carlos storm drain system. If some legal arrangements could be worked out <br />to control the minimum'size of lots into which this property might be subdivided, in order to satisfy the <br />present owners along Eaton Villa Place, we would so recommend. <br />The City Clerk advises that the assessments against these properties on De Anza Avenue for street <br />improvements are delinquent and subject to considerable penalties. The delinquent assessments amount to <br />$5,057.63, plus a considerable accumlation of unpaid interest and penalties. Tess unpaid assesments, <br />interest and penalties would probably have to be paid off prior to any dis-incorporation from Redwood City." <br />The Clerk read a petition from the property owners on Eaton Villa Place wherein they protested the <br />annexation of portions of Lots 1, 2, 3 and 4 on Eaton Avenue Villas, Redwood City, to San Carlos. They <br />would like to see the lots in question conform to the size of the improved properties on Eaton Avenue <br />Villas. They feel if these lots are annexed to San Carlos they will be broken up into small lots. There <br />were twenty signatures on the petition. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.