My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN110795
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
1990-1999
>
1995
>
CCMIN110795
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/26/2010 10:54:18 AM
Creation date
5/20/1999 11:42:12 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DESTRUCT DATE
PERMANENT
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
26
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
Item 6k <br />R¢~luest by the F. ir Board for Council to initiate discussions regarding introduction of an <br />ordinance to allow the operation of a cardroom at the satellite waaering facility on <br />Fairgrounds nro_nertv. (SR95:373) <br /> <br /> Ms. Acosta presented the staff report. <br /> <br /> Ms. Mohr asked if Council introduced an ordinance for the card room on the <br />Fairgrounds, would that open up the discussion for reintroducing this to Main Street or any other <br />place in town. <br /> <br /> Mr. Roush replied no. Moreover, if the ordinance were enacted, it doesn't automatically <br />mean the card room would go in. That is a separate process similar to the conditional use <br />permit process. However, if a conditional use permit is issued and the operator relies on that, <br />Council will need good evidence to revoke or modify it. The permit cannot be automatically <br />revoked unless the conditions imposed arc violated. <br /> <br /> Mayor Tarvet commented that an ordinance needs two readings. Does this have to be <br />completed by January l st? <br /> <br /> Mr. Roush stated that it would have to be adopted before January 1, 1996. If Council <br />wanted to pursue this and it could not be put on for the November 21, 1995 agenda for the first <br />reading, it would need to be introduced on December 5. A special meeting would have to be <br />called sometime in December for the second reading of the ordinance. <br /> <br /> Mayor Tarver felt time was of the essence and felt that there would be considerable <br />public interest and input during the process. He felt there would be a considerable amount of <br />staff time devoted to this in the next two months to get it through. <br /> <br /> Ms. Acosta commented that nothing would prevent Council from adopting an ordinance <br />indicating that Council was willing to consider this. Then, if as a result of the hearings on how <br />the facilities were going to operate, Council ultimately came to a conclusion that Council could <br />not support it, the ordinance could then be repealed. <br /> <br /> Mayor Tarver asked if the Council has the right to revoke the ordinance any time and <br />for any reason, i.e., without cause? <br /> <br /> Ms. Mohr replied that the cause would have to be based on violations of the conditions <br />placed on the permit. <br /> <br /> Mr. Roush stated that in theory Council might be able to say that it could revoke the <br />permit at any time. However, once the permit is issued and subject to a number of conditions, <br />the applicant relies on those and invests money in the facility. That would remove Council's <br />discretion to suddenly change its mind about the use. <br /> <br />11/07/95 - 14- <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.