My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2016
>
041216
>
SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL
>
SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/30/2016 2:28:02 PM
Creation date
4/8/2016 4:34:37 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
4/12/2016
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
DOCUMENT NO
SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
23
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
think it will take growth-crazy Dublin to figure this out and try to recapture these sales with their <br /> own new Sam's Club or Super Walmart? What about the impacts from the new Ikea? • <br /> 5. There is no discussion of the effects that a future recession,which is more likely than not, will <br /> have on this project and the rest of the Pleasanton economy? A recession will certainly curtail <br /> the growth needed to support the Costco without damaging existing businesses. The <br /> assumption of never-ending growth to rationalize this project is foolish at best. <br /> 6. The Staff Report for the April 12th meeting states that this project is important to provide <br /> diversity to our economy. However, more retail that replaces what little light industrial zoning <br /> we have left is not diversity. When all our eggs are in the retail basket our economy is more <br /> susceptible to economic downturns. And jobs in light industrial, R&D, and commercial services <br /> are better paid,generally have benefits,and provide a much more resilient base to our economy <br /> that yet another big box store or fancy strip mall. <br /> 7. For the fiscal study,ALH says is relied heavily of the assumptions and methodology of the <br /> February 2015 fiscal analysis prepared by Brion &Associates for the developer, Nearon. The <br /> fiscal study should be a new, independently developed study that does not use an analysis <br /> prepared by the developer. This is further evidence that the ALH study should be peer <br /> reviewed. <br /> 8. The ALH study concludes that with the best case build out the annual revenue generated by the <br /> project of$2.3 million it would represent 2.3%of the roughly$100,000,000 city operating <br /> budget. However,since I believe that one of the drivers for this project is to use the revenue to <br /> fund future capital improvement projects, the revenue should be compared to the combined • <br /> operating and capital improvement budgets (including reserves) of$270,000,000. This results in <br /> a percentage of the combined budgets of less than one percent (.85%to be exact). This project <br /> is hardly the cash cow it's portrayed to be considering the numerous negative impacts on the <br /> community it will have. And this is the best case disregarding the significant problems with the <br /> analysis already pointed out! <br /> 9. Finally,there is still no information on the proposed City of Pleasanton subsidies for the <br /> developer on this project and how those will affect the short-term and long term fiscal benefits <br /> to the city. Without this information you cannot make an informed decision on moving forward <br /> with this project. <br /> I would appreciate a response to the points and questions either prior to or during the workshop on the <br /> 12th. <br /> Thank you, <br /> Matt Sullivan <br /> Resident of Pleasanton <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.