CCMIN111902 - Laserfiche WebLink

million dollars. The developer got a $4 million dollar break with a discounted building fee. Unfortunately, the School Board thinks that is now up for debate again. He did not understand how the School Board can set aside an agreement the City Council voted on and delay construction of the Neal school. The Agreement said it was to be built by August 2002. He does not feel there is a spirit of cooperation between the City Council and School Board. He believed the eastern portion of Pleasanton is being treated as second-class citizens. Students from that area are distributed among six different schools. Children on the same street do not go to the same school. Ms. Michelotti said she and Council have been very supporting of the concept of neighborhood schools for all of Pleasanton. She urged Mr. Juarez to continue to address the School Board, because the decision is in their hands. That agreement was not an easy thing to accomplish. She noted the Vineyard infrastructure was to have been constructed by developers at no expense to the taxpayers, but because of the economy it was necessary for the City and District to advance the funds. The City has made its best efforts to continue to pursue this and encourage construction of the school. Ms. Ayala suggested that this be brought up at the next School Liaison Committee meeting on Thursday and perhaps ask for reconsideration of the District's motion. Ms. Michelotti indicated she has had questions about funding. She said people may not be aware that historically, this is the lowest number of housing starts in the City. Some new to the community may not think that because they see what is happing on the Bernal Property. All the fees that would have come from that go to paying the debt to the City and County of San Francisco. She reiterated Council's support of the community and hoped collectively they could find a way to construct the school. Brace Torquemada, 3072 Alburni Court, said he has heard many statements about declining enrollment in elementary schools. He gathered enrollment information and prepared a spreadsheet. He produced a graph that clearly shows enrollment has gone up over the years. He said he had spoken to School Superintendent Casey who said he had not heard from the community that there was a need for another school and in fact heard the opposite. Mr. Torquemada started making phone calls and more people started attending School Board meetings to show their support for the new school as well as sending hundreds of email messages. At the last Board meeting there were over a hundred people in support of the school and six opposed to it. He did not feel the Board was listening to their position. The citizens spend hours researching facts and the Board is paying no attention. He felt there was a breach of the existing agreement because the Board is not using its best effort to construct the school as soon as possible. He applauded the efforts of the soccer association but was dismayed that it took thirty years to reach their goal. Neal School was committed to in 1998 and he hoped it doesn't take thirty years to be built. He thanked Council for its assistance in getting the road to the school built. The General Plan calls for 600 students per school and if that doesn't mean anything, then strike it from the Plan. The School Board is not following the General Plan. He believed the citizens lost $1.12 million in interest for a year and he said the actual cost is $2.24 million. The Board is talking about operational costs yet it just wasted $2.24 million. He also referred to the new winery in Ruby Hill that was just opened. He was shocked that a school Pleasanton City Council 7 11/19/02 Minutes