CCMIN111902 - Laserfiche WebLink

Mr. Roush said that in 1993 the City, School District and certain developers entered into a school facilities agreement. Under that agreement, the developers paid a higher rate for school impact fees than was required by state law in order that school facilities be built in a timely fashion. The City was part of the demographic review process since it has control over the number of housing units that would be allocated. The District would have an idea when homes would built and fees received. Over the course of time, that agreement was amended and the City's role in the agreement was changed so that its review and participation in school impact fees is substantially more limited than it was. He said it is hue that if the $8.5 million amount is changed then all three parties must agree to that. Ms. Ayala asked if a dosed session could be called because there may be litigation on this issue and new Councilmembers would need to be informed on past events. Mr. Roush said that based on current information, he did not believe litigation was imminent and a closed session would not be justified at this time. Mayor Pico said there could be discussion to inform new Councilmembers without a closed session. He suggested this be brought up under Matters Initiated by Council. Julie Testa, Toflano Court, also asked for Council help and support regarding Neal School. She wanted Council to direct Signature Properties to start construction now. The District expressed concern about infrashucture and the City stepped forward to make certain the road was built as soon as possible. She felt betrayed that the District is delaying the construction of Neal School. All indications show it is time to build the school. Current elementary schools are above capacity, the money is available from the developer's commitment, the infrastructure is in place and the District should make the decision to get started. At the request of the School District, the City included a General Plan provision regarding school size. She quoted from the General Plan. She asked Council to use all its resources to make certain the City abides by its General Plan. The Planning Commission recently indicated growth management should be closely followed to make certain there are enough schools to accommodate the students from projects already approved. She thanked Ms. Dennis and Ms. Michelotti for their years of sen4ce. Ms. Ayala said she has worked on this issue since joining the Council in 1996. It is frustrating that Ms. Testa and Mr. Kleffman have to continue to attend meetings to resolve this. She appreciated their tenacity and urged them to continue to ask for information. Rick Juarez, 1049 Pineto Place, indicated he was perplexed and angry after the last School Board meeting. The Board was given information by its own staff that the District had the capital budget, the operating budget, the growth numbers and the fact that the schools were in excess of the stated number of 600 students per school. It did not appear that the Board decisions were consistent with the facts presented to them and they did not respond to questions from the community. He believed the cost of delay was $1 million. Becanse of the delays of the School Board, it has lost interest on an $8.5 million loan. That $1 million is now lost. He felt there was a lot of misinformation on how schools are funded, constructed, and whether there is a need. He asked Council to get school funding back on the agenda. The District has lost a Pleasanton City Council 6 11 / 19/02 Minutes