Laserfiche WebLink
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLEASANTON <br /> <br /> ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA <br /> <br /> RESOLUTION NO. 81-16 <br /> <br />RESOLUTION OPPOSING ASSEMBLY BILL 9 AND ASSEMBLY <br />BILL 68 <br /> <br />WHEREAS, Assembly Bill 9 and Assembly Bill 68 are now pending <br /> in the California Legislature; and <br /> <br />WHEREAS, <br /> <br />WHEREAS, <br /> <br />AB 9 calls for a special election on June 2, 1981, and <br />AB 68 c/~lls for a special election on April 7, 1981, <br />to provide for the submission of the Water Facilities <br />Referendum Statute (Senate Bill 200) to the voters of <br />the State; and <br /> <br />SB 200, if confirmed by the voters, would authorize <br />the Peripheral Canal project as well as other water <br />development facilities and features to enable the State <br />Water Project to divert and export more water from <br />Northern California to Southern California~ and <br /> <br />WHEREAS, <br /> <br />the Peripheral Canal would seriously impair the main- <br />tenance of an adequate supply of water of good quality <br />for domestic, municipal, agricultural and industrial <br />uses in Contra Costa County, as well as for the preser- <br />vation and protection of fish and wildlife resources <br />and other environmental values of the San Francisco <br />Bay-Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Estuarine System; and <br /> <br />WHEREAS <br /> <br />SB 200 does not contain the water policy reforms, which <br />must accompany any new water facility construction <br />necessary to assure responsible management of our state <br />water resources; and <br /> <br />WHEREAS, <br /> <br />a special election would needlessly require additional <br />expenditures of public funds, estimated by the Secretary <br />of State to cost $12 million; and <br /> <br />WHEREAS <br /> <br />a special election would deny the people of California <br />the time needed to learn of the serious shortcomings of <br />current water planning in the State and to recognize <br />the need for a complete re-evaluation of future water <br />needs without massive expansion of the State Water <br />Project and construction of the Peripheral Canal; <br /> <br />NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLEASANTON RESOLVES <br />AS FOLLOWS: <br /> <br />Section 1: That the City Council of the City of Pleasanton stands <br /> in firm opposition to the passage of AB 9 and AB 68. <br /> <br /> <br />