My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2017
>
060617
>
SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/8/2017 11:28:00 AM
Creation date
6/6/2017 11:52:21 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
6/6/2017
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
DOCUMENT NO
SUPPLEMENTAL
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
13
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
F at M "nom it <br /> i /� -y o evfor e� s c v�,t o v, C t z s <br /> ,s%b <br /> Res ov� <br /> Le rowt ' <br /> • <br /> June 6, 2017 SUPPLEMENTAL { dATl EIMAL <br /> Provided to the City Council <br /> Nelson Fialho After Distribution of Packet <br /> City Manager, City of Pleasanton <br /> 123 Main Street Date (p ` 7— / 7 <br /> PO Box 520, Pleasanton, CA 94566 <br /> Mr. Fialho, <br /> We were surprised to find discussion of the Johnson Drive Economic Zone infrastructure project ("JDEZ" "the <br /> Project") nestled within the hearing scheduled for June 6, 2017, without proper notice to those parties who have <br /> expressed interest in being kept apprised of developments dealing with that project. <br /> As you are aware, the City maintains a page specific to the Project. The appropriations and allocations proposed <br /> in the budget under discussion at the June 6 hearing reflect the City's policy priorities for the JDEZ. That the <br /> City failed to update the JDEZ page or provide notice to those parties who have requested to receive notice <br /> about potential City activity regarding the Project is troublesome to say the least. <br /> The City has provided interested parties no notice of this meeting, well short of the notice requirements to <br /> provide feedback and input on this critical process. Members of the public cannot be expected to meaningfully <br /> review a complex document and provide analysis and feedback beyond observations. This is an unacceptable <br /> situation if the City is serious about soliciting meaningful public participation in the planning process, and <br /> frustrates the purposes of public noticing requirements that are long-standing City policy. <br /> While we welcome the opportunity to hear from City staff and elected officials about the specific details of <br /> what is planned for the JDEZ, we would ask the City to continue this hearing and decline to make any final <br /> decision at the June 6 hearing or to finalize the city budget without providing this information. We would also <br /> request that the City provide on-the-record updates as to the status of negotiations with developers regarding the <br /> funding for the Project, to the extent permissible by law. This is the only way to keep residents fully informed <br /> and empower them to participate meaningfully in the planning process for the JDEZ. <br /> Thank you for your time and attention to this matter. <br /> Best regards, <br /> Matt Sullivan <br /> Pleasanton Citizens for Responsible Growth <br /> P.O. Box 1323, Pleasanton, CA 94566 ^' ResponsibleGrowthPleasanton @gmail.com <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.