Laserfiche WebLink
Ms. Acosta said the ballot question is limited to 75 words. <br /> <br /> Ms. Michelotti said the people need to understand that this initiative will amend the General <br />Plan. She said the ballot language does not talk about changing the number of units allowed on <br />medium density properties. <br /> <br /> Mr. Pico said the ballot language cannot include everything in the initiative. He felt Option <br />No. 2 was more precise than Option No. 1. <br /> <br /> Ms. Michelotti felt the public needed to understand that it is voting on a Zoning change, <br />General Plan change, Development and PUD application, etc. She wanted the ballot language to <br />include "legislative actions" not "development projects." <br /> <br /> Vice Mayor Ayala liked Option No. 2 but listing the five areas to be redesignated and <br />including the term "CAPP Initiative". <br /> <br /> Ms. Michelotti did not support Option No. 2. <br /> <br /> Mr. Pico felt the language needed to reference the word "CAPP". <br /> <br /> Vice Mayor Ayala suggested "Shall the CAPP Initiative be adopted to amend the General <br />Plan, etc." as provided in Option No. 2, but listing the five areas to be redesignated and changing <br />(b) to "by designating certain development projects". <br /> <br /> Ms. Michelotti wanted "legislative decisions" in the language. <br /> <br /> Mr. Pico supported Option No. 2 with the changes outlined by Ms. Ayala. <br /> <br /> Ms. Michelotti asked if the language would include the medium density issues. <br /> <br /> Vice Mayor Ayala said the language is limited to 75 words and the entire initiative will be <br />included in the ballot statement. <br /> <br /> Ms. Michelotti still wanted the language to include "legislative actions". <br /> <br /> Vice Mayor Ayala reiterated again that the entire language of the initiative would be <br />included in the ballot statement and that the ballot language is limited to 75 words. She also felt <br />more words could confuse the voters. <br /> <br /> Ms. Michelotti felt the proposed language would give the public the idea that it is voting on <br />projects that have ten or more units or commercial development plans that have buildings 55 feet in <br />height, and not be aware that it also has to vote on changes to the General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, <br />PUD applications, etc. She felt the language she proposed better clarified the initiative. <br /> <br />Pleasanton City Council 8 08/03/99 <br />Minutes <br /> <br /> <br />