Laserfiche WebLink
Item 6c <br />Reouest of P!eas~nWn Rllilroad Association to nlace an initiative on the November 1996 <br />ballot concernln~ the 9peration of a steam train between NHes Canyon and DOwntOwn <br />Pleasanton within the Alameda County Transportation Corridor. (3R96: 107) <br /> <br /> Randall Lum presented the staff report. <br /> <br /> Ms. Dennis inquired when the potiitions would have to be turned. <br /> <br /> Peggy Ezidro indicated that the petitions would have to be delivered by May 24, 1996 <br />in order to complete the necessary processing and checking of signatures. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tarver felt one issue was whether to put on the ballot a simple advisory question: <br />Do you want a train on those tracks two days a week? That would be a public sentiment test. <br />In the original request for federal funding, it was rejected because of community opposition at <br />that meeting. It would be nice to have the question of support answered before applying for any <br />further funding. That is different than an initiative that results in no environmental documents <br />or public hearings. It is not clear what the desired outcome is. Do we want a locked in <br />initiative that requires voter approval to change or an advisory vote to determine support of the <br />project? <br /> <br /> Ms. Acosta felt it was important, even in asking a if there is support of the project, to <br />also ask if there was support of using public funds, from whatever source. Usually, if you ask <br />a question about support of a project you get a very different answer when you include the costs. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tarver felt there could be several questions: do you support a train run by private <br />funds; do you support a train partially funded by the City of Pleasanton. <br /> <br /> Ms. Mohr felt that even if the voters turned it down, it could still go forward as a private <br />project. <br /> <br /> Ms. Acosta indicated that if there is a request for license in the transportation corridor <br />and there is opposition, it might be likely the license would not be approved. <br /> <br /> Ms. Michelotti indicated the Council had agreed to loan $30,000 for an environmental <br />study so it could determine the impacts of the train on the community. <br /> <br /> Ms. Acosta indicated originally it was to determine what is the project and once that is <br />clear, to determine the impacts of it. <br /> <br /> Ms. Michelotti stated the applicant is proposing an initiative so there would be no <br />environmental study but the County is saying it would still have to be done. An initiative would <br /> <br />04/16/96 <br /> -25- <br /> <br /> <br />