My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 020812
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
2010-2019
>
2012
>
PC 020812
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/10/2017 3:14:47 PM
Creation date
8/10/2017 2:30:37 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
2/8/2012
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Commissioner Olson indicated that the reason for his inquiry is because this would go <br />back to the security procedures at the Club, if, in fact, a person with a firearm was <br />allowed in the Club. <br />Ms. Rondash explained that one of the conditions requires a Scanshell 800 ID scanner <br />that would scan the ID of everybody entering the Club; therefore, the person who was <br />shot and the people who were in the Club just prior to, at the time of, or subsequent to <br />the shooting would have had their ID's scanned. <br />Commissioner Blank stated that he is a security, risk, and fraud analyst and noted that <br />fake ID's are relatively obtainable. He added that short of installing a metal detector, it <br />would be close to impossible to keep firearms out of the Club. <br />Ms. Stern indicated that Condition No. 17.e. also requires all patrons to be searched <br />with a full pat -down and the use of a metal detector as well. <br />Ms. Rondash clarified that this would work if the customers were attempting to conceal <br />the weapon but would not really control what happens outside the club. <br />THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED. <br />George W.M. Mull, Counsel representing Diamond Pleasanton Enterprise, Inc., <br />Business Owner, stated that he appreciated the City's concerns and that they all of this <br />very, very seriously. He clarified for Commissioner Olson that the shooting that took <br />place in January occurred after closing in the parking lot, so there was no indication that <br />there was a firearm ever allowed in the Club. He added that they enforce security <br />pat -downs of every single person by a gender- appropriate person and that they use a <br />metal detector wand and that there is no indication that a weapon was brought into the <br />Club that night. He noted that that these are unfortunate incidences that did happen <br />and asked for the Commission's understanding that they have the same interests and <br />are on the same page as the City. <br />Mr. Mull stated that Club Neo is an extremely well -run club with security that is well <br />above and beyond anything that the Conditions of Approval call for, but certain <br />incidences have happened even with that level of security. He noted that on the night of <br />the shooting, there were 29 security officers on duty, patrolling inside the Club as well as <br />in the parking lot, managed by their Security Coordinator, a twenty -year veteran of the <br />San Jose Police Department who was in charge of the San Jose entertainment district <br />and had run security for very large events at the Shoreline Amphitheater. He added that <br />they are using the most sophisticated approach and the most trained persons, but <br />things still happened. <br />Mr. Mull stated that his client, Ms. Wolfes, was before the Planning Commission in 2010, <br />and based on the conditions that were put in place then and the amount of occupants <br />that were allowed, she decided to move forward and invest in this club and open it with <br />the idea that they would have 812 people. He noted that the club operated through the <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, February 8, 2012 Page 5 of 23 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.