CCMIN022096 - Laserfiche WebLink

Ms. Michelotti indicated there arc proposed meeting dates for March 14th or 21st. Wilson Powcll, 678 Everett Drive, Danville, complained that the City has not followed its policies and has not responded to his letters. Mr. Tarvet indicated he had responded in writing and by telephone. He explained the situation to the public: Powell was arrested 9/2/90; filed a claim 2/91; the matter was investigated and rejected; Powell filed a lawsuit which went to trial; the jury found the officers had not falsely arrested Powell and had not intentionally injured him; the jury did find the officers negligent in arresting him and awarded $25,000 in addition to $6,000 in court costs. The City paid $25,000 plus interest to Powell and his attorney in 1995 which was returned to the City because of a fee dispute between Powell and his attorney; a separate check in the sum of $24,000 was issued to Powell; and the remainder of the award was placed in a trust account to be distributed when it is determined who is entitled to the funds. The City has paid everything the jury and the court have indicated, the City does not intend to pay any more and will not debate the matter further or have further correspondence. Mr. Wilson claimed he was arrested because he had a foot injury. He again complained of the investigation procedure. He suggested instead of spending money on litigation, the City should spend it on training for the police officers. David Jones, 1605 Rose Avenue, objected to the fairground activities and felt this made it difficult to develop his property. Anne Lattner, 1644 Tanglewood Court, referred to a pond at the base of the knoll on the San Francisco property. She indicated there are three large barrels in the water and was concerned that they may be leaking and may contaminate the underground water table. Mr. Swift indicated there is a seasonal pond and staff would investigate and respond to Ms. Lattner. Gene Finch, 8019 Jorgensen Lane, spoke in support of the golf course on the San Francisco property and objected to spending $48,000 for a plan that the community does not support. He did not feel Council was operating in good faith by altering the recommendation of the Committee of Decision Makers. Mr. Tarver explained that it was important to get all the information possible. The consultant would look at a different plan than the one presented by San Francisco to get new ideas. There are many options that were not available at the time of the community survey and strongly felt the all options should be reviewed. Ms. Dennis felt this is an opportunity to review different configurations of the golf course and to see a plan without a golf course to understand what may be lost or gained by the golf course. It is a disciplined thought process that would be beneficial. We have always reacted 02~20~96 -4-