1968 339- 485 _ 1-8 to 4-15-1968

Browse Search

cost involved and which could not be duplicated at anything near the asking purchase price, but recognized the position taken by the Commission that purchase of this property should not jeopardize their long range projects and priorities. Mr. Dixon Arnett, member of the Park & Recreation Com- mission, advised Commission had voted five to one against purchasing this property at this time (1 member being absent) after a considerable debate of financial responsi- bilities involved for maintenance costs if this facility acquired in an estimated amount of $30,000 yearly; full discussion on priorities which had been held in abeyance for a number of years due to lack of funds; i.e., comple- tion of Community Park being #1 priority, which included creek covering expense and allied development of fields thereafter, expansion of Community Activities Building, completion of landscaping, etc. He advised #2 priority tied to recommendations of Winans Report for enhancement of neighborhood park facilities, exclusive of park bank program inRedwood Shores, priority of Canyon Road area for park acquisition and under negotiation at present time besides cost of development of same thereafter. Councilman Bury.concurred in recommendation made by Park and Recreation Com- mission, noting in particular deficiencies in parking at the Club for a City facility. He also remarked that he had attempted to check with a writer of an article on this matter in the Tribune Forum Column which had been mailed to him by Mr. Griffin and found the writer was unknown at the motel address given. He also felt Council should make a final decision, not a temporary one, in order Club would realize City not going to hold a possible purchase in abeyance. Councilman Henderson noted purchase of this facility would allow instant opera- tion for recreational use by City, and transportation could be made available by bus routing, besides the fact that City &nager's report had included fact that purchase could be made in stages. She also questioned whether a bond issue was being planned by the Park and Recreation Commission. City Manager advised Park and Recreation had been working on the ground work of a possible bond issue from a priority listing, but Council would be asked to make the decision whether this would be approved. This specific club pur- chase could not be included because of time element involved. He also stated that in his report to Council he had indicated a purchase procedure had been indicated that would make it possible to spread the financing over a period of time, but that in a subsequent meeting with Mr. Griffin, Sales Agent for the Club, and Mr. Pete Denevi, a co-owner of the Club, had indicated some reserva- tions as to whether this would be possible. Mr. Denevi, stating he was one of the owners of the mortgage on the Club, reported on their endeavors to put it on a paying basis and that Club actually is not on the market, listing had been given to Mr. Griffin, but now expired. He urged that Council stop further publicity on Club being for sale as this would hurt their business. He stated Club needed a liquor license and restaurant use and that he might request same from Council later. He stated again although Club not up for sale, they would be willing to consider selling. He asked that Council make a firm decision as to the purchase of the Club. FB 26'60