04-03-1972 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

SB 325 FUNDS their letter dated March 21, 1972, Santiago Creek Greenbelt Plano Councilman Patterson stated that he would like to hear discussion from the Orange County Planning Department on requesting support for the Santa Aha River/ Councilman Patterson's motion, seconded by Councilman Evans, to request a representative of the Orange County Planning Department to be present at the next Council meeting to discuss their proposal for using SB 325 funds for the Santa Ana River/Santiago Creek Greenbelt Plan, was unanimously carried. On motion of Councilman Herrin, seconded by Councilman Yamamoto, and unanimously carried, Council received and ordered filed the following letters: Letter dated March 21, 1972 from Orange County Planning Department requesting support for the Santa Aha River/ Santiago Creek Greenbelt Piano Letter dated March 2~ 1972~ from City of Los Angeles requesting support for mass rapid transit development. AB 232 Councilman Patterson stated that the Meyers~Milias-Brown Act already allows employees ti/~e off from work for attendance in the meeting and conferring process, and that the proposed bill gives them, in addition, time to prepare and reply° I-Je stated that he is opposed to this amendment° On motion of Councilman Herrin, seconded by Councilman Patterson, and unanimously carried~ Council instructed the City Attorney to prepare a resolution, similar to that of Buena Park~ opposing Assembly Bill 232. CAPITAL IIViPROVEMENT Councilr~an Patterson requested clarification PROGRAA/i 1972 - 1977 as to the changes made in the Capital Improvement Program from the previous year, and the manner in which the Planning Commission arrived at these proposed changes. The City Manager stated that the Planning Commission is dependent upon expertise; that they issue a request through the Planning Director for in-put from the departments on what should be included in the long-term Capital Program. The Planning Director stated that generally speaking, the procedure is to take the in-put from various departments concerned, put it together in the time frame that has been suggested, and compare it with the original Capital Improvement Program outlined in the General Plan. He stated that the Charter calls for a 10-year plan, but the original program submitted with the General Plan provided detailed proposals for five years and a lump sum for the balance; that recent proposals have been for five years; that the Planning Commission does not normally attempt to make recommendations to Council on financing the improvements. Councilman Evans' motion to receive and file the Planning Commission report on the Capital Improvement Program for 1972-1977 was seconded by Councilman Herrin, and carried unanimously° CITY COUNCIL -137- April 3, 1972