CCMIN100201 - Laserfiche WebLink

Mr. Freeman said the agreements are linked and signing the agreement provides for Neal Elementary. Obviously, it can't be completed by 2002 because the infraslxucture is not in place. The District sincerely believes the infrastructure will be available when necessary. There have been meetings with the infrastructure developers on a regular basis. He agreed the expense for the infrastructure seems to be exorbitant and there is still some cost engineering to be done. He affirmed the District is absolutely committed to bnilding Neal Elementary as soon as possible. That goal would not have happened without going to the new agreement. Under the 1993 agreement, the developers were saying it could not be built until 2006 at the earliest. The District is concerned with where people live; the developers are only concerned with the total number of students in the District and the spaces available for them. He believed this agreement is the first giant step to fulfilling all those goals. By itself, it does not automatically fulfill them. Sandra Lemmons, Assistant Superintendent for Administrative Services, referred to the questions about cash flows and planning facilities. As soon as the District became aware in August that development and the economy were slowing down, staff restructured cash flows using the scenario of only 75 homes per year to see what the District would be capable of accomplishing. They understood the developers' inability to supply the infrastructure and began discussions with the City about these issues. That is how the District reached the decision to set 2003 as the target date for Neal Elementary. There are ongoing meetings with developers and City staff to keep up with economic issues. District staff continually looks at changes in order to make their forecasts more accurate and they are not caught unprepared. With regard to the comment about the cash flow that does not list Neal Elementary, the purpose of that cash flow was to see how the District could fund the high school expansions. It did have the District's costs of the Vineyard infrastructure and it did show the District could begin to repay Neal about the time the two year would have extended. She did not show it on the cash flow, but she did address it in her presentation. Ms. Ayala asked if she meant the high school construction could continue without spending funds for Neal. Ms. Lemmons said that was tree, but other capital funds may have to be reallocated. She was confident those reallocated funds could be repaid in the next two to three years. Experts say the economy may go down, but it always comes back up. She said construction at Amador High School will provide ten additional classrooms and a new band/music/choir building. Ms. Ayala asked if construction had stopped due to her continuance of this item at the last Council meeting? Ms. Lemmons said there was a construction contract and the builder was on-site working. Due to the continuance, she called the architect and instructed him to stop work on design for the two-story classroom buildings at Amador and Foothill. That was done because of the continuance and because of the potential loss of funds due to the protracted period before the agreement was signed. She is confident there is enough cash flow to pay for everything in progress now. Pleasanton City Council 13 10/02/01 Minutes