01 - Laserfiche WebLink

are looking at that and a number of other issues and are committed to meeting in the next three weeks because of follow-up items requiring research. Thereafter, those results can be publicly discussed and shared with the Council. Councilmember McGovern said she looked at the ballot language and it actually states that Measure U restricts sewer capacity at 42 mgd, but this is an amount needed to service the existing General Plans of Pleasanton, Livermore and Dublin, which means this was in 1998. This does not take into account 2025, and she asked staff to identify the current usage and determine how close the City is to its allotment. She said also interesting is that the JPA also provides that if LAVWMA approves a new pipeline project, Pleasanton and Livermore will take the question of participating in this expansion component of the project to its voters. This means that even though there is an authorized additional millions of dollars in the current Measure U plan, the only way they could sell extra bonds would be for a new project of some kind. Ms. Wagner stated the way bond authorizations normally work is that they have a dollar cap and a project description. The cap was around $200 million in sewer revenue bonds that could be issued. The City only issued $142 million, so one would think there is still $60 million in authorization still outstanding. But that authorization was very project specific, and unless a new project can fit and it did not exceed the remaining authorization, then additional bonds could be issued. All three members would have to approve it in addition to the unanimous vote of the LAVWMA Board. Mr. Fialho added that the cap was $200 million and the project description was for the export pipeline. As to whether the future project could fit into the project description, conceivably, storage and recycled water or infrastructure that supports it could fit within that description. He noted that there are some exceptions where future sales would go to the voters if it fit the project description originally contemplated in 2001. Councilmember McGovern said the reason residents voted on this was because it would not cover development outside urban growth boundary, beyond the Pleasanton General Plan limits, and the housing cap. She questioned whether the Council, by amending these documents and refinancing bonds, was taking any control away from voters. Ms. Wagner stated no. Councilmember Sullivan agreed these issues need to be brought up because, for example, recycled water is a good thing but if it also allows added development because it is not being sent out through the pipeline, the Council needs to understand that. MOTION: It was M/S by Thorne/Cook-Kallio to adopt Resolution No. 11-478 approving Sewer Revenue Bond Refinancing by the Livermore Amador Valley Water Management Agency, authorizing execution of the Amended and Restated Sewer Service Contract and related matters. Motion carried by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Cook-Kallio, McGovern, Sullivan, Thorne, Hosterman Noes: None Absent: None 13. Consider the formation of an ad hoc Downtown Hospitality Guidelines Task Force for the purpose of developing a set of guidelines that addresses key elements in creating a positive and responsible environment for downtown vitality Director of Economic Development Pamela Ott gave the staff report, noting that the exploration of a Downtown Hospitality District was an item included within the PDA's broader hospitality downtown plan and discussed at the Council's priority setting session. At that time, it was the Council's intention that any discussion about creating guidelines or hospitality district be led by the City Council Minutes Page 14 of 16 September 6, 2011