My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN110607
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
2000-2009
>
2007
>
CCMIN110607
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/7/2007 5:07:13 PM
Creation date
12/7/2007 5:05:30 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
11/6/2007
DESTRUCT DATE
PERMANENT
DOCUMENT NAME
CCMIN110607
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
17
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Mayor Hosterman called for a break and thereafter, the Council reconvened its regular meeting <br />with all members present. <br />15. Approved the Financing Plan for the Bernal Specific Plan as recommended by the Bernal <br />Financing Committee and directed staff and the Committee to regularly update the Plan to <br />track current expense and revenue information; include a copy of the Plan with any <br />report/recommendation concerning Program related capital expenditures; and update the <br />Plan as part of the Bi-annual Capital Improvement Budget <br />Economic Development Fiscal Officer Wagner said the property is a total of 318 acres with a <br />total of about 300 acres that would be available for development as the Bernal Park. There is an <br />active sports facility similar to the City's sports park, with lighted fields and amenities and <br />approximately 250 acres dedicated for open space park. It will have a grand meadow design <br />with over 1,000 trees and some have referred to it as Golden Gate Park. There will be a youth <br />center, a community center and a civic arts center and she described the possible uses for <br />each. She said staff developed capital costs projected to be $128.9 million and operating costs <br />over a 17 year financing plan total about $31.9 million. The operating costs are estimated to be <br />$1.8 million, on an annual basis over 17 years, so it escalates approximately 5% per year. By <br />the 17"' year in the plan, operating costs are estimated to be over $3 million per year. Therefore, <br />the total financing plan is $160.8 million. <br />Ms. Wagner presented a PowerPoint presentation outlining the Committees work. <br />Councilmember Sullivan confirmed the $80,000 amount would be a function of organized sports <br />participants in the community for all parks. Ms. Wagner also noted this fee would not require <br />voter approval. <br />Councilmember McGovern asked how often would the City would need to go back for an <br />election on a parcel tax, and she noted it was every four years for the school districts. Ms. <br />Wagner said the City could tie it to some period of time such as 20 or 30 years and it would <br />need to sunset. <br />Councilmember McGovern said the committee also spoke of donating things to the park as a <br />way of fundraising, whether it was for a tree landscaping plan or whether it is benches or other, <br />public items and she confirmed the City dedicates $1 million for this. The Committee also <br />discussed the fact that once people are using the park, there might be a possibility of a bond to <br />be re-looked at, however, the survey results showed people wanting the City to use the funds it <br />has and then return to the taxpayer when it needs to. <br />Councilmember Thorne said in going through funds available, it would take at least 30 years to <br />build the park out if we relied on our current revenue streams due to capital costs going up <br />every year. Also, the other Tri-Valley cities would be looking at the TOT tax as well for other <br />purposes and most will go up to 12% as well. <br />Councilmember Sullivan confirmed that the City currently does not have $110 million in funds. <br />Ms. Wagner said the Committee asked staff to run out the scenario just funding it with the $2.5 <br />million transfer. The problem is that eventually the operating costs are equal to $2.5 million, so <br />there is no excess transfer from the general fund to the CIP program. So, they could not <br />implement 100% of the project. <br />Councilmember Sullivan asked Ms. Wagner to again display the phasing plan and she <br />described it. He questioned whether the plan was to build out phases 2, 3 and 4 before the open <br />City Council Minutes 14 November 6, 2007 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.