My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
01 ATTACHMENTS
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2012
>
112712 Special Meeting
>
01 ATTACHMENTS
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/16/2012 4:42:30 PM
Creation date
11/16/2012 4:42:01 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
11/27/2012
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
DOCUMENT NO
ATTACHMENTS
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
99
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
measurable outcomes that they believe are very much tied to sustaining Pleasanton as the <br /> premier place in which to live and do business. <br /> Mayor Hosterman closed public comment. <br /> Councilmember McGovern supports the City Attorney preparing an impartial analysis as <br /> needed, said this was a citizen initiative and she felt the Council should go along with either Mr. <br /> Roberts' or Ms. Ayala's suggested language, to include the word, "citizen". <br /> Councilmember Sullivan agreed with the statements of Councilmember McGovern, said he <br /> thinks it is going to be very important that the community easily be able to differentiate between <br /> the two initiatives. He also believes that the ballot arguments in favor of the citizen's initiative be <br /> written by the proponents. <br /> Vice Mayor Thorne said he continues to believe the objective of the Council is to provide the <br /> community with a comprehensive hillside protection ordinance and this vision is shared by a <br /> vast majority of people. He does not think it serves any good to take cheap shots at the Council <br /> from those with opposing views. He hoped everybody could debate the issue in a civil manner <br /> and come up with an answer that is good for the entire community. He pledged not to take any <br /> cheap shots. <br /> Regarding the specific questions, he would have chosen a different ballot wording but agrees <br /> those who gathered the signatures need to be involved in the writing of the question. He would <br /> have opted for another question, but would go along with what is proposed, he supports the <br /> impartial analysis, which will be important to both Initiatives. <br /> Councilmember McGovern said she asked staff about what is affecting ridge views in hillsides <br /> currently, and she read from the Chamber of Commerce's letter, "PUD's must be consistent with <br /> the hillside policies of the General Plan. In Chapter 18.68 of the Code PUD District, including <br /> specific considerations and requirement for hill area development. Furthermore, most hill area <br /> development is required to prepare EIR's which provide an in-depth analysis of the impact and <br /> mitigation required. So although we don't have a comprehensive hillside ridgeline protection <br /> ordinance in place, we have the use of PUD and CEQA processes to protect hill areas, <br /> properties, and to address issues relating to hill area development based on our existing <br /> General Plan policies and programs." To her, what is being said is not currently correct, <br /> because we already have the things in place and they do not go away, and this means we do <br /> not have to agree on 10 units or less on hillsides. <br /> Councilmember Cook-Kallio agrees there should be a impartial analysis, appreciated <br /> Councilmember Thorne's comments about divisiveness, was concerned people get their <br /> information from editorials that do not show the entire picture. She looks at the potential <br /> measure as being something that is clarifying and for this reason she was concerned about <br /> Option 1 with the modification because it is divisive, it infers that it is all citizens; it is misleading <br /> and does not provide enough description. She would prefer Option 5, could live with Option 4, <br /> and does not like Option 1 because of it not being descriptive. <br /> Mayor Hosterman said she agrees with Councilmember Cook-Kallio, both should be more <br /> descriptive than one line and would support the direction of going with either Option 4 or 5. She <br /> feels the same way about a potential Council-sponsored measure on the next agenda item. <br /> Councilmember Sullivan said he was supportive of the language to include "citizens° because <br /> the citizens made this happen. His legal concern is that because the actual wording of the <br /> City Council Minutes 6 July 15, 2008 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.