Minutes 1998 0803 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Minutes -City of San Leandro City Council and Page 8 San Leandro Redevelopment Agency Joint Meeting -August 3, 1998 Lou Filipovich, 15376 Laverne Drive, addressed the Council and stated it would be impossible to cover all his comments in three minutes, and he agrees with Mr. O'Neal. He protested all the fee increases and added that public property is not subject to the fee. He explained why he feels the City will be subject to a lawsuit due to the unfair dispersing of costs onto the residents resulting from these fees. Dana Johnson, 343 Farrelly Drive, addressed the Council, stating this is the first year that there has been a shortfall in the monies available to pay for these services. He does not believe there is a shortfall in funds available for these services, as was presented by staff. Donald Moore, 934 Portola Drive, addressed the Council in opposition to the proposed fees and stated the people are tired of it. Paul Vargas, 872 Portola Drive, addressed the Council in opposition to all four proposed fee increases. Justin Agrella, 1231 - 148` Avenue, addressed the Council and stated he is opposed to all the proposed tax increases. He feels the City should put those services out to bid. John Vargas, 872 Portola Drive, addressed the Council and stated the City should have sent out a form requesting a "yes" or "no" vote. He is opposed to the requested proposed increases. There being no further comments from the public, the Public Hearing was closed. M/S/C Loeffler and Glaze. Ayes: 7; Noes: 0 The City Manager responded to the comments made by the public, explaining certain aspects of the proposed fees. In response to a question by Council Member Nardine, he explained to the increases in the recycling fees due to the increase in the CPI. Vice Mayor Galvan commented on the noticing to the public and indicated he felt there should have been more time for response. He stated he feels there is a need to look at outside vendors for services; to look at curbside service to save over the long-term; to review the recycling contract at the end of its term; and to review the inefficiencies in street sweeping and storm-water operations that have been expressed.