01 - Laserfiche WebLink

Vice Mayor Testa suggested staff to rewrite the letter and requested the Legislative subcommittee discuss a different letter at its next meeting. Councilmember Narum expressed her opinion the Governor's language and tone were regrettable. She stated none of the Councilmembers are intending to knowingly violate state housing laws. She did not understand why political capital would be expended on this matter when there are bigger matters such as Senate Bill 9 and Senate Bill 10. She noted all agendas and staff reports are on the internet and easily findable along with being televised and available on YouTube. She commented anyone who wants to check on the Council can do it as they are not hiding. She advised she cannot support the item and spending the City's political capital in this way given the City intends to comply with the state housing laws. Councilmember Arkin commented she is in favor of a letter being sent but not the one submitted by staff. She expressed support for some portions of the letter and noted it is unnecessary to chastise the Governor for the tone of his statement in the letter. She expressed her belief the State can find a better use for the $4.3 million proposed for the HAU, echoing comments from Councilmembers Balch and Narum about the meetings being public. She stated the approach is creating animosity. In response to Mayor Brown's inquiry, Mr. DeLuca confirmed that if the letter came back to the next City Council meeting on February 16, the timing would still be fine. Mayor Brown expressed her approval for the concept of a letter. She countered Ms. Dennis' comments about the lawsuit by stating it was 15 years ago and it overrode a housing cap approved by voters. She defended her voting record by citing 100% certified Housing Elements since the lawsuit and could defend signing the letter with a straight face. She noted second story ADUs were not required by the State. She stated the letter's context is strong and important in working collaboratively to eliminate unfunded mandates. She believes the letter's tone should be that the City intends to comply with RHNA and other housing matters. Mayor Brown suggested staff with the Legislative Subcommittee to either modify the letter or recommend not sending it. She stated the City should have its voice heard just as residents express their opinions to the Council. Councilmember Balch stated his agreement with Mayor Brown's opinion that taking the matter to the Legislative Committee is a wise move. He added the budget is not finished and expressed his hope Pleasanton' representatives in the Senate and Assembly will elevate the City's concerns. He stated his belief there is ample time as this is just the first month of what is typically a 5-to-6- month process and agreed with Councilmember Arkin's assessment of many better uses for this money. Vice Mayor Testa stated the incoming housing legislation is why the City needs to send a message in response to the Governor's adversarial message. She added she would like an opportunity to educate the community on what is going on with SB 9 and SB 10 noting the local surprise over the ADU legislation. She expressed her belief the residents want the City to stand up to these bills and others including this year's RHNA numbers. City Manager Fialho stated the subcommittee meets on Thursday. He added the typical procedure is for the committee to take these comments and help staff frame the letter for the Council. MOTION: It was m/s by Arkin/Brown to have staff return with a revised letter on February 16th, taking into consideration Council comments and input from the Legislative Subcommittee. Motion passed by the following vote: City Council Minutes Page 11 of 12 February 2, 2021