My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
CC Min 1997-06-23 Clsd
RedwoodCity
>
City Clerk
>
Minutes
>
1990-1999
>
1997
>
CC Min 1997-06-23 Clsd
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/5/2005 2:44:28 PM
Creation date
4/6/2004 9:13:22 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CC Index
CC Index - Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Type
Closed
Agency Type
City Council
Date
6/23/1997
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
25
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
<br /> . , I . . -, <br /> <br /> FY 1997/98 Budget, the Public Hearing on the extension of the Development Agreement <br /> was scheduled for the June 30, 1997 Council meeting, at which time all public comments <br /> '-- would be heard and considered by Council, and the Ordinance could be adopted, amended, <br /> or not adopted at all. <br /> In response to Councilman Leipzig's questions, City Attorney Schricker said, "In <br /> response to the earlier question regarding the distinction raised by Mr. Atherly at the <br /> Planning Commission, I believe Mr. Sorba from my office met with Mr. Atherly and Ms. <br /> Ford subsequent to that meeting to discuss further their concerns and their issues. In point <br /> of fact, as reflected in the minutes of the Planning Commission there is basically a <br /> confusion between taxes and Facilities Fees. GID 1-64 is a financing vehicle, it is a <br /> District by which taxes could be levied. But many years ago the City Council <br /> deauthorized the issuance of bonds which would be supported by taxes, and changed to a <br /> development fee approach to provide for funding new facilities in the Shores area. The <br /> Development Agreement is a necessary vehicle for the raising of facilities fees. The <br /> District levies taxes. I think Mr. Atherly did not understand that distinction. He viewed <br /> the District as having authority to simply flat out levy facilities fees. It's not quite that <br /> simple. Consequently, I think it is more of a confusion of legal concepts here, that <br /> hopefully was answered in a subsequent meeting with our office." <br /> In response to Council questions, City Attorney Schricker recommended that the Council <br /> introduce the Ordinance at this meeting in order to "preserve the continuity of the existing <br /> Agreement." <br /> - MEMO 6/24/97 <br /> Mayor Hartnett asked if anyone else wished to speak to this issue. No one came forward. <br /> INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCE <br /> MIS: RUSKIN/LA BERGE. TITLE READ. <br /> ORDINANCE APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF TillRD AMENDMENT <br /> TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH REDWOOD SHORES PROPERTIES (GID 1-64) <br /> (110); <br /> ADOPTED BY THE FOLLOWING ROLL CALL VOTE.: <br /> AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS BUCHAN, CLAIRE, HOWARD, LA BERGE, RUSKIN <br /> AND MAYOR HARTNETT <br /> NOES: COUNCILMAN LEIPZIG <br /> MINUTE ORDER NO. 97-130 <br /> ------______n______-----------------------------------------------------------------------______n______-------------- <br /> 1. Amend the City Ordinance to reflect the opening of the new City Hall Council Chamber <br /> - Removed from the Consent Calendar by Councilman Leipzig. <br /> ADJOURNED REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTW BOOK NO. 55 JUNE 23,1997 <br /> MINUTES Page~ O. 407 PAGE 5 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.