CCMIN072099 - Laserfiche WebLink

Mr. Lum indicated the level of protest determines the next course of action. If there are less than 25% of the voters in the area protesting and landowners owning less than 25% of the assessed value of land protesting, the Council must order annexation. If there is more than 25% (but less than 50%) of the voters or more than 25% of the landowners owning 25% or more of the assessed value protest, then Council must call for an election. If more than 50% of the registered voters in the area protest, then the procedure must be terminated and the City could not reapply to the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) for the same annexation for at least one year. The City could submit a different application for annexation. Mr. Lum said staff is going through the protests that have been received and if there are any irregularities, staff will contact the person who submitted the protests. Mr. Howell understood the process. He just wanted to make sure there is an election. A1 Spotorno, resident in Happy Valley, referred to all the comments regarding the bypass road. He said the Spotomo family has no development agreement. Two and a half years ago he submitted a draft memorandum of understanding to provide land for the road and set forth the density under the specific plan. That agreement has never been signed and there is no approved PUD. He did not want people to be misled that there is bypass road now or in a few years. There may never be a bypass road until there is a fair agreement with the Spotorno family. Mark Armstrong, 279 Front Street, Danville, representing the Spotomo family, indicated he has heard rumors that the Spotorno family is not interested in implementing the Specific Plan. That is not the case, but if the CAPP initiative is adopted, the bypass road and the project on the Spotomo property is in jeopardy because that would require the voters of Pleasanton to approve the Spotorno project and road. The matter was then continued to a special meeting on July 29, 1999. Item 6b Discussion of Analysis of Pleasanton Public Planning Initiative and determination of whether to call for a special election. (SR 99:213) Deborah Acosta presented the staff report. Ms. Michelotti asked when the analysis would be reviewed. Ms. Acosta said the tentative date is August 24, 1999. Mark Hillenbrand, 4761 Mason Street, said growth is becoming a big issue in the Valley. Growth is not all just in Pleasanton, but also in the surround communities. He felt there was a difference between aggressive growth and planned progress. We cannot control Dublin, San Ramon and Livermore. He was worried about those areas and would address that under Item 6d, the sewer treatment plant expansion. Pleasanton City Council 8 07/20/99