My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN051810
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
2010-2019
>
2010
>
CCMIN051810
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/27/2010 12:00:48 PM
Creation date
7/27/2010 12:00:47 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
5/18/2010
DESTRUCT DATE
PERMANENT
DOCUMENT NO
CCMIN051810
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
10
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
Councilmember Sullivan said he served as alternate on the CMA a few years ago. The CMA <br /> was in the middle of a long -range planning exercise for 35 years, and he questioned if the group <br /> would start over. Mr. Dow said the process is an update of that plan; the new process to update <br /> the countywide transportation plan will be very different than the one done in the past. They will <br /> utilize planning techniques to work out gaps in transportation systems, identify problems, and <br /> from that perspective, will arrive at recommended solutions. It will not be identifying favorite <br /> projects, but rather identifying and quantifying problems and putting projects on the same <br /> playing fields and discuss solutions and priorities. He said this has not been done previously in <br /> countywide transportation plans. <br /> Councilmember McGovern questioned if the allocation for funding would be approved by a <br /> simple majority or 2/3 votes. Mr. Dow said adoption of the plan would be approved by a simple <br /> majority of the new ACTC Board. <br /> Vice Mayor Thorne said he believes the timing of the consolidation is important, but voiced <br /> concerns about the voting distribution. He has always had concerns that transportation plans <br /> are always Oakland- oriented because of the vote distribution. He hoped projects in Alameda <br /> County will not be discriminated against because of the distribution. However, he supported the <br /> consolidation and would like to see many more agencies consolidating, as well. <br /> Councilmember Sullivan also voiced concern with the voting distribution, stating it has always <br /> been by population, and decisions were very political and geared toward high population <br /> centers. Mayor Hosterman felt that in more recent years Pleasanton has experienced much less <br /> of this, and programs have been much more evenly spread across the entire county. <br /> Councilmember Sullivan disagreed and said he has seen just the opposite with regard to the <br /> Triangle Study and TVTC. It seems that allocations of the board should be based upon <br /> congestion or transportation issues. Everyone realizes 1 -580 is a huge problem and he <br /> suggested there be more votes where the problems are identified versus where there are none. <br /> He said there could be a minority of the actual members passing something because they have <br /> multiple votes, and to him this is not democracy but a political exercise. He supported the <br /> consolidation, but was not comfortable with how votes are allocated. <br /> Mr. Fialho said the City of Oakland currently has more votes and they are not happy the <br /> consolidation which will take votes away from them. Mr. Dow agreed and said Oakland currently <br /> has 8 out of 35 votes. Through the consolidation, they would receive 4 out of 27 votes. He <br /> reiterated that the County is very diverse, its needs are very different, and speaking from major <br /> needs - funding perspective, the northern part of the county's needs are in the transit side. Those <br /> needs in the east part of the county are more capital- intensive. He said Mayor Hosterman is <br /> correct; within the last 10 years, in looking at who gets the most in terms of capital dollars, it is <br /> this area. In adding up the CMA bond, the investment for Route 84 and 1 -580 interchanges and <br /> other improvements add up to over $4 million in the last 10 years, which is significant. He <br /> agreed that more needs to be done given congestion, available land, and pass through traffic, <br /> and noted that 1 -580 is the second most congested corridor in the entire Bay Area. <br /> Councilmember McGovern supported consolidation and asked that the Commission, in their <br /> annual report, show taxpayers exactly how much money is saved from the consolidation. She <br /> also asked Mr. Dow to take back the Council's concerns about the voting distribution. Mayor <br /> Hosterman noted that the consultant had projected $600,000 to $1 million would be saved from <br /> the consolidation. <br /> City Council Minutes Page 5 of 10 May 18, 2010 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.