PC 062304 - Laserfiche WebLink

f. Discussion of Granite Construction Company located at the RMC Pacific Materials property, 1544 Stauley Boulevard This item was continued to July 14, 2004. 7. MATTERS INITIATED BY COMMISSION MEMBERS a. Discussion of "Vision Pleasanton" Brochure This item was continued from the Planning Commission meeting of June 9, 2004. City Manager Deborah Acosta McKeehan summazized the history of this item and noted that the Pleasanton Chamber of Commerce asked for the City's input for the items that made a good community. She noted that they discussed the diversity of the tax base, the City's work to create financial plans and policies that ensure a sustainable buildout, and public safety. She acknowledged Commissioner Arkin's concerns about the appearance of an ethical violation when City staffls names are used in a manner that might further a group's cause. She noted that staff did not intend this and was not aware of their names being included in the brochure. She noted that she would give the same information again to the Chamber under the same circumstances. She noted that they answered the Chamber's questions in a way that they would have answered any other citizen or group. Ms. McKeehan advised that since the brochures appeazed, she had spoken with members of the Chamber and requested that in the future, they not print staff s names as they were printed in the first run. She noted that they agreed to make that change in the next print run. She added that the City had worked closely with the Chamber in the past on various special events, such as technology forums and CEO events. Commissioner Sullivan noted that there had been concerns that the Chamber was attempting to produce their version of a General Plan Update, which was identified by Commissioner Arkin as the change of the Planning Commission. Commissioner Arkin believed that the issue was bothersome and noted that the Planning Commission was the lead agency in developing a General Plan. It appeared to him that the Chamber had developed a parallel General Plan and that staff had participated in the creation of that alternate General Plan. He would prefer that the Chamber work with the Planning Commission on the General Plan. Ms. McKeehan advised that she had had this conversation with several Commissioners and disagreed with Commissioner Arkin's assessment. She did not believe that the brochure met the scope of a legitimate General Plan. Commissioner Arkin noted that the document produced by the Chamber had all the elements of a General Plan and believed that it competed against the Commission's goals for the General Plan. Ms. McKeehan noted that she had spoken with the City Council about this item. She noted that she respected each Planning Commissioner and enjoyed good working relationships with each PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES June 23, 2004 Page 11 of 15