pages: PlanningBoard/2005-11-14.pdf, 12
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
PlanningBoard | 2005-11-14 | 12 | Department's priorities. Board member Lynch stated he has never seen planning work plans in a Capital Improvement budget and felt it was questionable. Ms. Eliason explained the reason these items were put into Capital Improvements originally was that the projects are multi-year. She stated under previous administrations any money that was not expended during a year was swept back into the General Fund. So in order to secure monies, Departments created a Capital Improvement Program for their multi-year projects. Board member Lynch stated that method clearly was the wrong way to go and the wrong way to do it. He noted every jurisdiction runs studies, projects and consultants on multi- year projects and simply encumbered the funds because the California Code allows you to keep those encumbered funds. Board member Kohlstrand requested Planning Board input into the Planning and Building Department work program priorities. She inquired if the work program has traditionally come before the Planning Board. Ms. Eliason responded she did not believe any of the previous Planning & Building Directors have done that, but felt the Board's input into the work program is important. Board member Kohlstrand inquired if there was any restriction for the Boards or Commissions from providing some advisory input. Ms. Eliason responded the budget is a public document and the work program is something that the Board is obviously very interested in. Board member Lynch stated some jurisdictions have a joint meeting between their Board of Supervisors or their City Council and the Planning Commission. He noted the meeting provides an open discussion about work program priorities with community input. President Cunningham stated if nothing else the Board is looking for some intervention with the City Council and some discussion time. Ms. Eliason stated she would relay that to the City Manager's office. Board member Lynch stated this Board might even consider allocating some of its agenda time to meet with the City Council. In response to a question by Board member McNamara, Ms. Eliason explained the review process. Board member McNamara stated she felt the Board needed to know more about projects and their ranking before discussion. Vice President Cook stated she felt more attention should be given to the Civic Center Plaza as that is something the community is interested in. Board member Kohlstrand inquired if there was any progress on the City Manager attending a Planning Board meeting. Ms. Eliason responded a request was provided to the Assistant City Manager. Board member Lynch stated given the demand in the Bay Area for open space he was concerned that the Alameda Point projects were not self-funded. Ms. Eliason stated she believed the funding is deferred because the City does not own the property. Board member Lynch further inquired about golf course revenue for improvements. Ms. Eliason responded she would have to research that. She stated the Golf Department is considering a new clubhouse. Planning Board Minutes Page 12 November 14, 2005 | PlanningBoard/2005-11-14.pdf |