CC MIN 01182022 - Laserfiche WebLink

measures either in conflict or support of its guiding principles and presents them to its Board for a two- thirds vote. City Attorney Sodergren clarified the State law prohibition is against spending public funds to advocate for oragainst a ballot measure. He advised the FPPC clarified the Council making a statement on the record does not qualify as expending public funds. In response to Mayor Brown, Mr. Rhine advised land regulations could conceivably conflict with a city's Climate Action Plan (CAP) and make a State mandate to have a CAP become challengeable. In response to Mayor Brown, Mr. Rhine explained the State does not act as a mediator to help with situations involving adjacent cities overbuilding and forcing transportation issues onto its neighbor. In response to Mayor Brown, Mr. Rhine reported the Board taking a formal "no position" on a local control ballot measure is a strong signal given Cal Cities' mission. He advised it is only temporary acknowledging there are a lot of things to still figure out and unanswered questions. He confirmed they cannot amend the measure's text because signatures are being collected. Mayor Brown opened the public hearing. Christine Bourg advised she would like to see something to prevent more inappropriate buildings like the one on Harrison Street. She noted she would sign the initiative and encouraged others to do so. Becky Dennis advised it is risky for the City Council to endorse the initiative because Pleasanton has been found by courts to have violated housing discrimination law using a growth control measure approved by the voters. She advised it would put the City in a confrontational position with the State while trying to get its Housing Element certified. She noted the City Council has discussed providing housing for Pleasanton's essential workers earning less than 60% of the Annual Median Income. She noted the measure speaks only of local control and not affordable housing so it gives the opposite impression. Jill Miller advised the meeting has a theme of loss of local control between the forced redistricting and this item's attempt to prevent State micromanaging. She noted it is a complicated issue and the measure should be approved. She advised it is not against housing, the environment, or affordable housing but rather about keeping decisions where they belong. She encouraged the City Council to make a statement in favor of the measure so the City has a say in what happens to it. Andre Pegeron advised growth is inevitable and should be embraced. He explained there are plenty of job opportunities but not a lot of houses. He advised people should have an option to live near where they work and noted State housing initiatives provide more affordable housing closer to work, lowering pollution and prices. He advised this is why Cal Cities says going against the measure undermines environmental justice, public health, and Fair Housing goals. He encouraged building housing to solve the crisis noting educators like himself can barely afford to live where they work in Pleasanton. Jovita Mendoza reported several cities have signed the petition before it is even on the ballot and noted the concerns are all red herrings. She explained her goal is to give land use back to cities so the decision-makers are closest to residents. She noted the State has committed no funds to affordable housing and expects cities to pay through bonds. She advised her ask of the State is to open the State's 1.2 million vacant homes to families. She urged the City Council to bring back local control through this initiative. JoAnna Jensen expressed concerns about what the CVRA considers a protected class and why white people cannot sue because they are not considered a protected class. She expressed support for local City Council Minutes Page 9 of 17 January 18,2022