01 - Laserfiche WebLink

John Baum said that Wal-Mart appears to have followed the correct process and complied with all applicable regulations. He asked the Council to deny the appeal and said he would have preferred Councilmember Sullivan to make his comments prior to the public hearing. Linda Martin sympathized with property owner and acknowledged the need for an anchor store, but wished they had come forward with a business that would add variety to Pleasanton and benefit everyone as a whole. Robert Thomas said the application meets all zoning and PUD requirements and the issue should never have come this far. He stated that Councilmember Sullivan's argument, if strong enough to mandate this level of public attention, should have been presented at the beginning of the public hearing. Kay Ayala asked the Council to deny the appeal and uphold the ordinances and laws of Pleasanton. Mike Henneberry, United Food and Commercial Workers Union Local 5 (UFCW), confirmed the Council's receipt of an email letter submitted by UFCW. The letter asked the Council to refrain from a vote, pending more information on Wal-Mart's corrupt and illegal business practices. David Miller said that as elected officials, the Council is tasked with serving the people and the law; the law in this case is clear. He asked the Council to deny the appeal. Mayor Hosterman closed the public hearing. Dorothy Anderson reiterated her earlier statements and thanked everyone for sharing their position. Deborah Heron, Wal-Mart Public Affairs, noted that the applicant has proposed only to reuse an existing building with an allowed use. She spoke to several concerns raised by the public, stating that Wal-Mart is prepared to operate the store and its deliveries within the boundaries established by the conditions of approval. Once operations begin, any member of the public is free to address concerns to the center's property manager, who would then contact the store manager and work with the complainant to determine the appropriate response and solution. Judy Davidoff, land use counsel for Wal-Mart, said the issue should be focused on the use, not the user and that the name of the tenant is irrelevant. Both staff and the Planning Commission have found the use to be consistent with the Zoning Ordinance and PUD, and no evidence has been presented to rebut this position. She stressed that the PUD is a document that the property owner has a right to rely on and that it does not become valid simply because Wal-Mart is involved. Councilmember Sullivan said his goal in this has been to support the democratic process and allow the Pleasanton community to provide input on the decisions made by their elected representatives. Based on the letter submitted by UFCW, he requested Council support to continue the item and direct staff to do the following: • Prepare a legal opinion as to whether, based on recent allegations, allowing Wal-Mart to open a new grocery store in the City of Pleasanton presents any potential liability; • Explore the introduction of an ordinance or policy that could bar businesses indicted on, convicted of, or under investigation for federal crimes from doing business in Pleasanton; • Provide information from the Council and all City staff involved with the project as to whether they have 1) ever received money, merchandise or anything of value from Wal-Mart, 2) ever received anything of value from the Chamber of Commerce Political Action Committee (PAC), 3 and what contributions, if any, Wal-Mart has made to the PAC. City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 7 May 7, 2012