SR 06:158 - Laserfiche WebLink

language, and if three or more Council members intend to sign the argument, discussion about the argument language needs to take place at a noticed public hearing. Staff recommends that all five members of the City Council sign a direct argument in favor of the initiative measure. To do this, staff recommends that the Council select a committee of two Council members to draft the argument language (which is limited to 300 words). This draft language would then be discussed at the June 20th City Council meeting. Staff further recommends that June 23rd be established as the deadline for submitting direct arguments. In addition to the direct argument in favor of the initiative measure (which staff recommends be signed by all five Council members, as noted above), the direct argument against the initiative measure would be due on this same date. The Council also must determine whether or not to allow rebuttal arguments. The Council's past procedure has been to allow rebuttal arguments. Staff recommends that this procedure be followed for the City-sponsored measure on the November 2006 ballot. State law specifies that rebuttal arguments are due ten days after the direct arguments, so staff recommends that the deadline for rebuttal arguments be set as July 3rd. The City Council may call a special meeting between June 23rd and July 3rd if it needs to discuss the wording of a rebuttal argument (which is limited to 250 words) if a direct argument against the initiative measure is submitted by the June 23rd deadline. The proposed Election Calendar, attached as Exhibit B, sets June 23rd as the deadline for the submission of direct arguments, and July 3rd as the deadline for submission of rebuttal arguments. These deadlines are incorporated into Exhibit A. Full Text of Initiative Measure. Staffs proposed full text of this initiative measure is attached to Exhibit A. This text, along with the Sub-area Land Use Plan figure, would be included in the sample ballot and voter pamphlet sent to each registered voter. The full text clarifies that voters are considering a range of potentially permitted land uses within each sub- area, lists which uses are allowed for each sub-area, but does not establish any requirement that each of the listed Potentially Permitted Land Uses by Sub-Area actually has to be developed, nor imply specific commitment to the location of a particular use within a sub-area. (See Section 3.C.) The full text also clarifies the exclusion of the Phase I community facilities (fire station, school, and community park) from the initiative measure. (See Sections 2.F. and 4.) Because of the limited size of the elections materials and their black and white format, staff recommends using the Sub-area Land Use Plan as the exhibit to accompany the full text of the initiative measure, but not including the detailed colored Illustrative Site Plan. Initiative Procedures. Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached resolution, Exhibit A, placing the Bernal Property Phase II Land Use Initiative on the November 7, 2006 ballot, select ballot question Option I, set June 23, 2006 as the deadline for direct SR 06:158 Page 4 of?