CCMIN040296 - Laserfiche WebLink

Mayor Tarver amended his motion to include a dosed session on May 7, 1996 at 6:00 p.m. and to place the item on the May 7, 1996 open session for further discussion of a broader analysis of the issues related to Fair Board operation. Ms. Dennis asked if the meeting was necessary if an application is submitted. Mayor Tarver said it would not be necessary to have a closed session, but he still wanted the item on the agenda to discuss the issues. Mr. Pico wanted the City Attorney to discuss the issues now instead of waiting a month. Mr. Tarver wanted the Fair Board to have time to be present and present its position in response. Mr. Pico felt that was still possible. Mayor Tarver restated his motion, seconded by Mr. Pico, to schedule a dosed session at 6:00 p.m. on May 7, 1996 to discuss whether to f'de Htigation concerning the Hghts on the driving range if an application to the City for the conditional use permit for the Hghts has not been received; and on the snme evening schedule an item for discussion of the broader issues of the City's control of land use on the Fairgrounds and also request _ a member of the Fair Board to be present. The roll call vote was as follows: AYES: Councilmembers - Dennis, Mob. r, Pico, and Mayor Tarvet NOES: Councilmember Michelotti ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None Ms. Michelotti was not in favor of a closed session until the Fair Board responds that it will not submit an application. Mr. Roush indicated there are two jurisdictions (City and County) which are considered to be sovereign. The general rule is that if a government is acting as a government, another government cannot superimpose its regulations on it. For example, when the County built its courthouse in Pleasanton, the City could not impose its zoning regulations or building regulations on it because the County was acting as a separate sovereign outside the city's control. Where the issues become cloudy is when a governmental entity leases its property or acts like a private developer. In particular cases, that government stands to lose its exemption. There have not been many court cases that address this issue; most of those cases involve school districts. One example was when the lights of a football field bothered the neighbors, the city tried to exercise control, but the activity was found to be related to school activities and the city could therefore not exercise any controls. In this case, the County owns the property and has a contractual relationship with the Fair Association, which operates the Fairgrounds. There have been a few 04/02/96 -7-