CCMIN121195 - Laserfiche WebLink

Mayor Tarver moved for reconsidemtion of that motion. He further clarified that he does not intend to create more concern from the existing business community; he is only addressing commercial/industrial projects that are approved in the future. It was moved by Mayor Tarvet, seconded by Mr. Pico, to reconsider imposing new fees, taxes, bonds, or other revenue sources to offset the impacts of business sector projects on park and recreation facilities. ROLL CALL AYES: Councilmembers Pico, Dennis and Mayor Tarvet NOES: Councilmember Michelotti ABSENT: Councilmember Mohr ABSTAIN: None In response to Ms. Michelotti, Mayor Tarver noted that the motion reconsiders which projects would have a park condition. With the current direction, staff would not add such a condition. Further discussion resulted reviewing the history of the park fees imposed on businesses, not imposed on some businesses, etc. Mr. Tarver reiterated that this reconsideration is only as to new projects. Mayor Tan, er asked if anyone in the audience wanted to comment. lohn Hashman, representing Providian Bancox'p, 4920 Johnson Drive, advised Providian was not part of the consensus negotiations and the amounts were calculated without its input. Providian supports the idea of parks and infrastructure for Pleasanton. It feels broader business support should be sought which would raise additional funds and lower the amount of the fee. Mr. Hashman understood that only the third building on Providian's project is subject to the park contribution. If Providian had not come to the City when it did, it would not have been conditioned with park fees for its employees. Therefore, it does not feel it is appropriate that its building be subject to this condition. He agrees with Mayor Tarver's opinion that existing businesses should not have this park fee assessed to them. When the park's location is determined, Providian will be able to determine more clearly the level of benefit its employees will receive and will also be able to help determine what amount it should pay. Another clarification Mr. Hashman wanted to pursue is whether the assessment is basexl on the total square footage and total number of employees or only the square footage of the third building. Jeff Brinton, Brobeck, Phleger & Harrison, One Market Plaza, San Francisco, representing AT&T, stated his appreciation for being granted additional time to look at the proposal. AT&T has not been able to clarify precisely what the impacts would be to AT&T. 12/11/9~ - 11 - City Council Minutes