CCMIN100300 - Laserfiche WebLink

Mr. Pico inquired if the Liaison Cormnittee would be dissolved. Mr. Roush said the School Impact Fee Committee would be dissolved, but there would still be a School District Liaison Committee. He agreed the final documents could be presented to Council for review before execution. Mr. Pico felt the City was losing its fight to object to new development on the basis of concerns about the adequacy of school facilities. Mr. Roush indicated that had already been taken away by Proposition IA and SB 5O. Ms. Michelotti felt this agreement achieves something no other community has been able to do to fund necessary facilities. She said the School Liaison Committee will take over the role of the Impact Fee Committee and reports will come back to Council and the School Board jointly. Ms. Dennis indicated she would like to hear from the School Board on whether it has confidence this agreement will address the facilities concerns to build out. Cindy McGovem, President of the Pleasanton School Board, indicated many developers in the community are not signators to the current agreement. To reach agreement with them is the way to cover all the new development. Secondly, the Board wants to work closely with Council and will develop a school facilities plan and will continue to review that with the Council. Every January staff reviews projected student enrollment based on the number of housing units to be built. This commudity has set quality standards for its schools, far above other communities in the state. Through this agreement, the District is trying to maintain that quality. The District prefers to have an agreement that covers everyone rather than to engage in litigation. The District believes this agreement will meet the District's needs, the increased costs of construction, the increased costs of land, etc. The goal is still to open Neal Elementary by 2002. She wanted to work with the Council on this and believed this agreement will accomplish the goals. Ms. Ayala asked Mr. Freiman to respond to some questions. Harold Freiman, an attorney for the School District, indicated SB 50 changed the landscape for school dislricts. The Cooperative Fee Agreement is with only two developers and is the vehicle where the City has the most active role. He wanted to redefine the City's role to work the same with other developers. Most developers are covered by the FIg Fee Agreement (where the City has less of a role) or the Giiat Agreement (where the City has no role). What is troubling is that there are three different agreements with different developers. The District has to approach problems with different groups and in different ways. The goal is to get everyone on the same level. The concept is not to cut the City out of the process. Pleasanton City Council 6 10/03/00 Minutes