CCMIN090694 - Laserfiche WebLink

Mr. Tarver agreed a letter should be sent to the Fair Board and a separate letter to the County. David Jones, 1605 Rose Avenue, expressed his opposition to any closed meetings with the Fair Board and complained that there is no public input allowed to the Fair Board. He believed this was a corporation with no supervision or regulation by any entity. He reviewed his experiences with the fair and a history of activities planned since 1973. Mr. Tarver indicated the Fair Board does have to report to the Alameda County Board of Supervisors when its contract comes up for review and there is a difference in how a private corporation does business. He did believe that there could be more openness and more accountability. Mr. Tarver pointed out the waterslide is no longer an issue, since it has been approved by the City of Concord. Ms. Acosta indicated the budgets of the Fair Board have been available. Mr. Pico inquired about the new provisions of the Brown Act as they apply to political appointments and whether this would apply to the Fair Board. Mr. Roush said he would review the provisions and report back to the Council. Ernest Jones, 1725 Rose Avenue, indicated his belief that all activities on the fairgrounds are operated by private concerns. He did not believe they paid any rent or taxes. lie complained that Alameda County residents do not receive a discount for renting fairground facilities. He was in support of extension of Rose Avenue. lie also objected to the lack of citizen input regarding Fair Board activities. lie was opposed to the trailer park facility on the fairgrounds. Mr. Brandes indicated the waterslide is a dead issue and indicated petitions from Pleasanton citizens contributed to denial of the project. lie answered Ms. Mort' s question about the board by stating there are sixteen lifetime members and ten appointed members of the Board. That will be reviewed by the Board of Supervisors. He also indicated the Fair Board budget is reviewed by the County every year as well as by the Fair and Exposition Board of the State of California and is a public record. Mr. Tarvet summarized that a letter should be sent to the president of the Fair Board indicating Councfl's concerns about the development process as outlined in the draft letter and requesting the Liaison Committee be reactivated. Mr. Tarvet and Ms. Dennis were appo'mted to serve on that committee. A letter should be sent to the Board of Supervisors to indicate the City has corresponded with the Fair Board president, and agreeing the City has the same concerns as the County regarding the operation of the fairgrounds. He suggested strengthening the last paragraph to indicate Council's desire to be more involved. 09/06/94 - 14 -