My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
01
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2021
>
031621
>
01
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/12/2021 1:24:27 PM
Creation date
3/12/2021 1:24:19 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
3/16/2021
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
29
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
the City is reviewing seven responders. She expects to bring a recommendation to Council in late <br /> March or early April and clarified that staff reviews the applicants. <br /> In response to Mayor Brown's inquiries, Director of Finance Olson confirmed the City did not start with <br /> a 50-50 split between PARS Capital Growth and PARS Conservative. She advised that last year, <br /> staffers were given the option of adding PARS Conservative to their portfolio which is part of why that <br /> number has increased. She explained she did not have an opinion on where the balance between the <br /> funds should be but stated the City has some time to take a little more risk as there are 10 years until <br /> the obligation shift detailed earlier by City Manager Fialho. She noted she is comfortable with the <br /> current split. <br /> City Manager Fialho reported the City envisioned using the PARS Conservative Fund like a money <br /> market in case of emergency. He expressed support for the practice and noted the City has one of the <br /> largest Section 115 Trusts in the state. He explained Pleasanton is often cited as a model for other <br /> similar-sized cities. He advised the balance between the funds can be reassessed in the future if <br /> needed based on economic and fiscal conditions. <br /> In response to Councilmember Balch's inquiry, City Manager Fialho confirmed the middle portion of the <br /> pension obligations shift will begin around 2027. <br /> Mayor Brown noted there were no speakers. <br /> Councilmember Balch noted the City has grown in cost over the past year despite the pandemic hiring <br /> freeze and staff reductions due to raises and pension expenses. He commented that the Water Fund, <br /> Sewer Fund, and Storm Drain Proprietary Fund, are operating at losses. He added the City purchased <br /> more water from Zone 7 due to the shutdowns of Wells 5 and 8. He expressed concern that only one <br /> CaIPERS asset exceeded the 7.15% stated so he believes this rate will be challenged in the future. He <br /> reiterated there were no differences between staff and auditors. <br /> MOTION: It was m/s by Narum/Balch to accept the CAFR Report for Fiscal Year 2019/20. Motion <br /> passed by the following vote: <br /> Ayes: Councilmembers Arkin, Balch, Narum, Testa, Mayor Brown <br /> Noes: None <br /> Absent: None <br /> 17. Adopt and waive second reading of Ordinance No. 2213 approving amendments to Chapters <br /> 18.08, 18.28, 18.32, 18.36, 18.44, 18.46, 18.84, 18.88 and 18.106 of the Pleasanton Municipal <br /> Code to comply with state legislation for accessory dwelling units *Councilmember Balch voted <br /> "no" on introduction <br /> Senior Planner Shweta Bonn reviewed revisions to the ordinance based upon the Council's direction to <br /> adopt the ordinance amendments except for the prohibition of two-story ADUs. She advised the <br /> revisions state a two-story ADU could still occur if the ADU is 16 feet or less in height or if the ADU is <br /> the result of a conversion of existing space even if the space is over 16 feet in height. <br /> Senior Planner Bonn reported two revisions that require consideration are ADUs in new Planned Unit <br /> Developments (PUD) and clarifying changes for setbacks on corner lots and landscape screening. She <br /> advised ADUs greater than 16 feet in height would be determined at the point of PUD approval <br /> because potential impacts are evident to potential buyers. She advised consideration could also be <br /> given regarding standards for future ADUs in a PUD, and the ADU could count towards the City's <br /> Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) totals. <br /> City Council Minutes Page 5 of 17 February 16, 2021 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.