CCMIN080796 - Laserfiche WebLink

Mr. Pico felt that is the point when the Council goes to the voters to amend the General Plan because of circumstances beyond its control. Mr. Tarver was not comfortable with all this speculation. You need to cross the bridges when you come to them and not adjust for hypothetical situations. We have approved the General Plan and set the housing cap and that is what we are asking the voters to approve. We must deal with circumstances as they come up. If there is good cause to request voter approval for a change to the Urban Growth Boundary, then it will be put before them. We are taking care of today and tomorrow must take care of itself. Ms. Michelotti said there is an effect on tomorrow. Ms. Dennis indicated Council is setting up the process for making decisions. It was moved by Mr. Pico, seconded by Ms. Dennis, to adopt a resolution to place measures on the ballot regarding the Urban Growth Boundary and the number of residential units at buildout. Ms. Michelotti did not support the motion because she felt the Council has voted unanimously to do what the public is in favor of, including an Urban Growth Boundary and housing cap. Unlike Napa, this is a Council sponsored initiative, coming from the top down. This is not just reaffirming what the Council has done. In ten years time when another group of citizens are ready to review the General Plan and to make changes, they should have the same ability that other citizens have had. The Councilmembers are the elected representatives who are supposed to make the decisions. After she voted with the rest of the Council to adopt an Urban Growth Boundary and a housing cap, she is going to look at any application to change that very carefully before making any change. That responsibility is not taken lightly. Ms. Michelotti referred to the comments of Deborah Kleffman objecting to this initiative because it is not from the people. For those reasons, Ms. Michelotti did not support the motion, but she did support the Urban Growth Boundary and the housing cap that were adopted. Ms. Dennis stated that she has participated in sponsoring and gathering signatures for an initiative. She referred to the ridgelands area that is now governed by regulations adopted by a Council sponsored initiative which prevailed over a citizen sponsored initiative. At that time she was disappointed by that outcome, however the reality is that the public has supported Council sponsored initiatives and given that past voter action, she sees no reason not to put something on the ballot that the citizens are in support of. She would not support this except that she has received numerous comments in support of this action. She felt public opinion was strong in opposing more than 29,000 housing units (which has basically been in the General Plan for almost twenty years) and changes to the logical growth pattern. A major change in those areas is a substantial change to the vision of the city and she felt the voters should be consulted on that. It is good policy. Council is not asking for the voters to make minor changes. In the future, Council will want to know what the new vision may be for the city. 08/07/96 -7-