CCMIN100692 - Laserfiche WebLink

89 superlative job in bringing all the concerns to Council in advance of becoming a problem in the community. Mr. Tarvet stated that Council is at the mercy of the traffic models and assumptions and other people saying what they can and can't do. If the schools have not had a problem in eleven years and they have lost~'100 students a year, then they were really in bad shape. Mr. Tarver's children attended Harvest Park and they were in an overcrowded school. If the school is losing 100 kids a year, then that should not have been necessary. Mr. Tarver indicated that Pleasanton just went through a drought situation where residents were asked to cut back on water use, yet whenever Zone 7 was asked if there was enough water, it said there was enough for the General Plan build out. Now the schools are saying they can handle the student load. Mr. Tarver does not see that happening. Traffic assumptions were that there would be a 50/50 split and it has not happened. Now the assumptions are being changed. Mr. Tarver agreed that at the time of approvals everything is done to mitigate impacts, but now, ten years later, things are different. Mr. Tarver applauded efforts to get the developers and school district together to solve problems. Mr. Mercer stated the school district passed an $85 million bond issue, but the money does not come overnight. It must be generated by the sale of bonds, which takes a number of years. The District has to have money to pay off the bonds, which limits the amount of bonds to be sold per year. The school has that money on top of all the money paid by developers. Now state law has changed so that the maximum to be collected is $2.65 per square foot. To say the school district has no money is just not correct. The school district has been moving along building facilities as it could build them and the City joined with the District to build other facilities to improve the school system, such as the gymnasiums, giving it cash, and helping to get City and County of San Francisco property at a reduced rate, etc. To say that 1,800 houses will be built and Council has approved the units without being aware of impacts and provided for them is not correct. During this election time, it is important that the public understands the real situation that exists, not what is in the newspapers or reported by candidates. Ms. Mohr pointed out that when you look at the list of projects approved for future growth, 1,700 of the 2,800 units are in only two projects (the Hacienda apartment project and the Ruby Hill project). Ms. Scribner indicated there is a misconception among the public that the City has control over the schools. That is the function of the School Board and Council only assists with project conditions, etc. It is important to look at the numbers of units 10/6/92 15