CCMIN041800 - Laserfiche WebLink

6. PUBLIC HEARINGS AND OTHER MATTERS Item 6a PAP-05, (SPA-99-01/PUD-99-16), Paul Fagliano Appeal of the P!anning Commission's decision to deny an application to amend the Vineyard Avenue Corridor Specific Plan and Planned Unit Develonment zoning nronosal to allow for a transfer of one future home site from Lot 22 to Lot 31 and the addition of one lot home site on Lot 30. Also consider the negative declaration prepared for the project. (SR 00:0822) This item was continued to the meeting of May 16, 2000. Item 6b Review of the School District's determination concerninll a cash flow shortfall for school facilities. (SR00:109) Michael Roush indicated Council had discussed this item in closed session and decided to open the public comment on the item, but to continue any decision until after a joint closed session with the School Board. Final action will be taken before June 15. He then presented the staff report. Mike Moran, 2321 Sandpiper Way, believed it was important that the School Board be able to function as it sees fit to maintain its high standards. It has been a very stable entity due to good long term planning of schools, sound finances and a focus on student needs. We may disagree on day to day decisions, but over the long term the schools in the District are nm very well. Recent actions have raised some concern about the financial stability of the District with respect to the developer fee agreement and amending the facilities list Exhibit B. One issue to note is the fact that School Board members can be held personally liable if they make decisions that harm the District financially. Political forces are important because the School Board needs to function in a stable manner and put together consistent long term plans. He indicated this is the first City Council that has been at odds with the School Board. Last fall the Mayor wrote a letter blaming the School District for the CAPP Initiatives, which happened in three differera cities in the Valley. The School Board must have more influence than he thought. The Mayor then pointed out he supported the CAPP Initiative. How does one blame someone for something he supports? He blamed the CAPP Initiative because the School District had sold the del Prado property. Mr. Moran opposed that decision too, but pointed out the School District could not have sold the property if the City had not rezoned it to residential. On February 8, many citizens attended a School Board meeting to complain about the damage that could occur if a fourth high school were constructed. The Mayor attended that meeting and made comments. He wrote a letter the next day saying it was not in the best interests of the City or the School District to negotiate a parchase agreement for the San Francisco Bemal Avenue property at this time. Two weeks later, the Mayor is quoted in the newspaper suggesting that the District take out a Pleasanton City Council 6 04/18/00 Minutes