Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem A - Revised Minutes Page 8 Page 8 — City Council 5/23/2016 There was general discussion regarding the placement of the swings, Seal Pup equipment, shade structure, benches and clarification that the noted one to one ratio related to the playground area and not equipment. Council Member Miller stated that he would not approve the project as he has not seen the plans and specifications and requested confirmation that the Centennial Committee was providing $70,000 for park improvements. Resident Alayna Anderson expressed her concern regarding reducing the number of swings and suggested that eliminating the increased number of benches may provide room for additional swings. MillerSloan moved, second by DeatonVar+papa, to adopt Resolution No. 6645, approving plans and specifications for the Eisenhower Park Tot Lot Rehabilitation Project CIP No. PR1602; award a construction contract to R.E. Schultz Construction in the amount of $173,579; authorize the City Manager to approve contract changes not to exceed $17,500; and approve Budget Amendment No. BA16-11-02 allocating additional General Funds in the amount of $50,000 to Eisenhower Park Tot Lot Rehabilitation Project No. PR1602, subject to having four swings in the park..- AYES: Massa-Lavitt, Varipapa, Deaton, Sloan, Miller NOES: None ABSENT: None Motion carried PUBLIC HEARING I. Street Lighting District No. 1 - Adopt Resolution No. 6647 confirming the diagram and assessment, either as originally proposed or as revised. Adoption of the resolution shall constitute the levy of the assessment for Fiscal Year 2016-2017. Director of Finance/City Treasurer Victoria L. Beatley presented the item summarizing information provided in the agenda staff report. She stated that at the April 25, 2016 City Council meeting, the Council adopted a resolution initiating the annual levy of assessments, a resolution approving the Engineer's Report and a resolution of intention setting the date for this public hearing. She then stated the purpose of this assessment is for the maintenance and servicing of arterial street lights which provide an area wide special benefit to all assessable parcels within the district whether or not such parcels are in close proximity to such lights and the maintenance and servicing of streetlights in close proximity to certain lots and parcels that provides a local special benefit to such lots or parcels. She then spoke regarding the cost of maintenance being greater than the levied assessments requiring $43,000 of General Funds. At the inquiry of Council Member Deaton, Director Beatley informed the City Council that the City would need to follow Proposition 218 requirements to increase the assessments so that General Funds are not required.