CCMIN120688 - Laserfiche WebLink

391 what the law provides; he advised that this is a matter he will need to discuss further with the legal counsel for FPPC to try and get that matter clarified. In the interest of making sure that no one on the Council or Agency participates when there is a conflict, it was his recommendation that for purposes of conducting the first portion of the public hearing, that the three Councilmembers with potential conflict of interest by lot draw for the purpose of establishing a quorum (it takes three members to have a quorum to transact business). The Council/Agency should then open and conduct the public hearing. It was his understanding that with respect to the Stanley Partners appeal as with the Community Development Agency matter, that whoever gets the draw to participate will continue to serve as the voting member of the body when the matter is heard in the future. Councilmember Brandes asked if one of the three should dispose of their interest before the January 3rd meeting, would that change the situation. Mr. Roush stated his advice was based on continuing potential conflicts of interest with respect to the three members. If the FPPC comes back and says that one member does not have a conflict and two do, and one of the two with the conflict had participated, clearly that person would then not be allowed to participate. The person without the conflict would be allowed to participate because he/she would not be disqualified. The draw was conducted for the Stanley Partners items. (Councilmember Butler drew the YES note, and therefore will participate in the Stanley Partners items (9a, 9b, and 9c), and Mayor Mercer and Councilmember Mohr will abstain.) The draw was conducted for the Redevelopment Plan and Final Environmental Impact Report. (Councilmember Butler drew the YES note, and therefore will participate in the Redevelopment Plan and Final Environmental Impact Report item (item 9i), and Mayor Mercer and Councilmember Mohr will abstain.) PUBLIC HEARINGS item 9a AP-88-27, Appeal of a decision of the Planning Commission denying approval of the application of Earl Augusta and Stanley Partners (Case GP-88-6), to amend the Land Use Element designation of the General Plan from Medium Density Residential to Commercial and Offices or to any other land use designation in the public interest for an approximately one acre site located at 3963 Stanley Boulevard Consider Adoption of Negative Declaration Vice Mayor Butler declared the public hearing open on this item, and continued it Open to the meeting of December 20, 1988, 7:30 p.m., in the Pleasanton Council Chambers, at the request of the appellant. - 10 - 12-6-88