CCMIN070296 - Laserfiche WebLink

B~IIQt items in November Mayor Tarver thought that the people should be able to vote on three major components: growth management, the Urban Growth Boundary line, and the housing unit cap. The citizens should have the option to control their destiny with relation to those issues. Ms. Mohr indicated Council has reviewed stacks of paper, and the Committee has spent hundreds of hours reviewing material and this is the foundation. The issues we are now ready to fight about are the peak of the pyramid and without knowing all this background information, a person cannot truly make a well-informed decision on the final critical issues. She would love to believe the voters of Pleasanton are willing to spend the time necessary to read all of this, but they do not have the time or interest to devote that kind of effort and would rather have Council make the decisions. That is what it is elected to do. She is concerned that on this kind of initiative, the voters will be left to make decisions, based on a 200 word ballot statement and whatever 15 second soundbites get out in advertising, quotes in the newspaper or on campaign signs. That is not the way to do the kind of business so critical to the well-being of the City. She felt it was placing an undue burden on the voters to expect a reasoned, well-informed decision. That is a burden Councilmembers assumed and we should make the tough decisions as well as the easy ones. The voter approval of what we do is by their acceptance and the disapproval is by referendum or initiative. Mayor Tarver says he wants to hear the voice of the people and that was done when we were elected. Mr. Tarver felt Ms. Mohr had just spoken against the democratic process. He felt the argument was whether we trust the citizens to make these critical decisions for the future of Pleasanton. Mr. Pico indicated Ms. Mohr had voted to place other measures on the ballot. He could not accept puffing some items on the ballot and not doing it at other times. He believed the wording on the ballot should not ask them to ratify the Council's decisions, but rather whether the people want to mend the General Plan so they have the right to vote on future changes to two or three key areas. What Ms. Mohr described as the tip of the pyramid, Mr. Pico believed was the foundation instead. The issues he wanted the people to vote on are: whether to mend the General Plan with respect to the permanent urban growth boundary line; whether to be able to vote on any changes to the total dwelling units (i.e. population) cap; and whether to have a growth management cap of 350 units plus what is approved for the San Francisco Water Department property. Ms. Michelotti believed in a democracy and representative government. If you don't want to make the hard decisions, don't run for election. That is what the people are electing you to do. She spends 40+ hours a week working for the City and reading all the written material submitted. We are elected to do a job. She has seen three General Plan reviews take place and in all those incidents, when the citizens drafted a revised General Plan, the matter did not go to the voters. Four hundred residents have attended meetings, we have a Steering 07/02/96 -28-