Laserfiche WebLink
they can thrive and we want to make sure those businesses that come to Pleasanton <br />recognize our issues in terms of traffic and circulation and the quality of life. <br />Councilmember Cook-Kallio said she did not quite understand how Stoneridge was a <br />leverage to building State Route 84 because State Route 84 is a benefit to Dublin, <br />Livermore and Pleasanton. It seemed to her that people would be doing something in spite <br />of themselves to take it off that list. She feels it is necessary for the entire region, so she <br />did not see this as a leverage, although she felt it was imperative that we do everything we <br />possibly can to ensure 580, 680 and State Route 84 is improved as much as we can <br />possibly get the funding for, and that may include things not thought of yet. This means <br />the more we work together as a region, the more apt we are to get federal and state funds. <br />She disagreed with the referendum and felt it is divisive in nature. She felt the Council <br />needs to make a decision and stick with it. A referendum at this point is prolonging the <br />ultimate decision. She thinks we have held public meetings, have had massive emails, <br />her phone has rung off the hook all week, there has been ample opportunity for the public <br />to weigh in over the course of years and years, and she does think we were elected to <br />make decisions on behalf of Pleasanton and this is one where we should make a decision <br />and leave it in the General Plan. <br />She also does not think the Council should tie it specifically to those improvements for the <br />same reason Councilmember Thorne mentioned; we need the flexibility. However, we <br />have circulation elements in the General Plan that deal with regional issues and she has <br />no problem with continuing to include those things in the General Plan as long as they are <br />not tied specifically to Stoneridge. Once you have tied these to Stoneridge, it may force us <br />to build it before we are ready or it may prevent us from building it when we are ready. So, <br />by making a statement in the General Plan that we think those regional things are <br />extremely important but not tying it together, she felt it would provide the flexibility. <br />She also likes the idea of either going through the County or through developers for the <br />funding of Stoneridge Drive. She feels this would be something that would be beneficial to <br />the City just from an economic viewpoint and she thinks this should be discussed down <br />the road. <br />Also, what has not been mentioned in any specific way is that there is an environmental <br />aspect to building the road. It is expensive to continue going all the way through Stanley or <br />all the way down I-580, and this is balanced with the problems with emissions from cars <br />also. <br />In summary, Councilmember Cook-Kallio said she was in favor of leaving it in the General <br />Plan, does not like the idea of tying this to a referendum in any way, shape or form, does <br />not want to tie this to conditions; however, she is amenable to including a structure in the <br />General Plan to address those regional issues and would hope that we could somehow or <br />another develop a better working relationship with our neighbors and get past personalities <br />and realize that these decisions we make will outlast all of us. So, it's not about the way <br />we particularly feel, but doing best for the entire region and most specifically for <br />Pleasanton. <br />Councilmember McGovern thanked everyone for coming and all ideas and thoughts <br />because it shows we have a thoughtful and intelligent group of people who are looking at <br />both sides of the issue. She is looking to maintain an increased public trust, wants to <br />City Council Minutes 20 May 1, 2007 <br />