CCMIN082295 - Laserfiche WebLink

the property to be annexed, whether an agreement had been reached would then go to LAFCO. If the City did not want to annex this project at that point, the matter would be litigated. Ms. Mohr clarified that if we don't want the land and project and don't want to annex the property, could the issue be dropped. Mr. Roush replied that option was not automatically available. Gene Pons, 832 Abbie Street, suggested that whoever represents Pleasanton should be a strong negotiator who understands the full planning process. The after effects of what has been agreed to can bring consequences. The Hacienda Business Park originally was industrial development and now there is a housing development there also. David C. Jones, 1605 Rose Avenue, asked the Council to participate in the joint meeting and to get a consultant to conduct a fiscal analysis from the City's perspective. He did not feel litigation was the last option available. Christine Bourg, 45 12 Second Street, felt that citizen input was necessary but the ultimate decision needed to go before the citizens of Pleasanton. Ms. Mohr stated that Pleasanton is asking that the meetings be noticed and the Council members will most likely be sitting there even if Council is not at the table along with any members of the public. Ms. Michelotti said that workshops could be worked out if the City buys into the process. She suggested workshops be on-going with the process so that the public is able to give feedback and the Council is able to give feedback to the decision makers as they are in the process. Jack Dove, 4263 Vineyard, said compromise is available if the City wants to reach some agreement. He believed in representative government and felt Council should make the decisions and speak for the City. Cindy McGovern, 9206 Longview Drive, urged the Council not to continue the discussions on the joint planning process but to make a decision tonight. She felt the option of referendum and lawsuits will always be there so she urged the Council to continue to work on the joint process. If the land is not bought outright, how can Pleasanton dictate the land be left in its natural state. If good faith is not shown and some type of consensus is not reached with Alameda County and San Francisco City and County, how will that look if this matter goes to court? She urged Council to proceed and urged the staffs to get together. Matt Sullivan, 4324 Muirwood Drive, urged the Council to join in the joint planning process. He felt citizen input is necessary and applauded the workshops. 08/22/95 -10-