CCMIN100698 - Laserfiche WebLink

to approve a contract to prepare an EIR for a proposed development on the Ridgelands. He referred to an existing development on Foothill Road that is very visible. He urged Council to be very careful in reviewing future developments on the ridge so they will not be so visible. Further, based on the 1998 baseline traffic study, he felt there is ample justification for considerable deliberation prior to approval of new development. In regards to the public review process, he commented that the City has a well designed system that calls for public officials to conduct public business in public. He felt public officials need to use discretion in interpreting these principles and suggested that private meetings with parties without staff members present should be avoided. He said the public is best served by full disclosure at all times and at every opportunity. Robin Puri, 3108 Joanne Circle, requested that the City's Administrative Citation hearings be placed back in the domain of the Pleasanton Municipal Court. She received an administrative citation on November 13, 1997 and January 8, 1998, alleging a violation of Section 7.08.010 of the Pleasanton Municipal Code. She said the citations were issued by Roy Ficken based on complaints made by her neighbors. She requested a hearing that was held on February 19, 1998. She said the decision from the hearing officer received on March 11, 1998 upheld the complaint. But the police report stated Officer Mullen sat in front of the residence at 3108 JoAnne Circle for approximately 15 minutes and the dog was quiet. She felt the hearing officer was not qualified to conduct administrative hearings. She said the appeals process does not provide for a remedy because the case is heard de novo. She read a letter written by Renee Perko of the City Attorney's office stating that on January 8, 1998 the dog barked on and off from 5:00 p.m. to 10:30 p.m. The incident was witnessed by James and Paris Sortino and Officer Jeff Anadon. However, Officer Jeff Anadon's report noted that the dog barked while he was on the scene at 10:08 p.m. She felt Officer Anadon could not have witnessed the incident. She felt Ms. Perko's report was biased. She had asked Ms. Perko to remove certain words from the letter but Ms. Perko refused. She said the memo does not state that the dog wears a barking collar or that the dog is not outside past 10:00 p.m. At the appeal hearing Ms. Perko admitted she had been in contact with the Sortinos and that the Sortinos had given her information from a mediation meeting. She said the incompetence and blatant disregard for the law exhibited by the Hearing Officer and Ms. Perko clearly demonstrates that the City Attorney's office is not the appropriate venue for administrative hearings. The hearings should be returned to the Pleasanton Municipal Court. Therefore she felt she should not have to pay the fine levied. Ms. Ayala asked if she has worked with staff on any of the discrepancies. Ms. Puri said no. Michael Roush said the procedure was adopted by Council because the complaints were not being handled efficiently through the Munidipal Court system. The administrative hearings are heard by the City's Hearing Officer, Gary Galliano. If a person is not satisfied with the decision, they have the right to take the matter to the Municipal Court. This is what happen in Pleasanton City Council 5 10/06/98 Minutes