Laserfiche WebLink
23 <br /> <br /> Ms. Fulton believed that Pleasanton should not get involved in <br /> a Joint Powers Agreement which excludes property owners. This <br /> could lead to a lawsuit. This process denies the rights of the <br /> taxpayers. <br /> <br /> Ms. Scribner asked Mr. Roush that if Measure K failed and <br /> there was a settlement plan could it be taken to the voters under <br /> Measure M. <br /> <br /> Ms. Roush answered yes... <br /> <br /> Ms. Scribner stated that she was under theunderstanding that <br /> there was nothing in the Ridgelands Plan that precluded a <br /> settlement of any kind. What would happen if Measure K passed and <br /> Council decided to enter into a settlement or if a settlement were <br /> court ordered. <br /> <br /> Mr. Roush answered that if Measure K passed, the voters would <br />have approved a General PlanAmendment, which establishes a certain <br />plan for the Ridgelands, and the plan includes some residential <br />uses. The settlement outline proposal listed proposed uses for <br />agricultural and open space, which would be in conflict with <br />Measure K. Council would have to reach an agreement consistent <br />with the General Plan. He was very concerned with taking action <br />when there were General Plan policies against it. The safest <br />conduct would be to take it back to the voters. He was not sure <br />that a court would authorize a settlement which was inconsistent <br />with a City's General Plan. <br /> <br /> 'Mr. Tarver restated his original motion that Council should <br />investigate options to determine whether or not this settlement <br />would be feasible with no action until after the election. He did <br />not believe that the Committee investigated the option thoroughly. <br />He liked the idea of knowing what the alternatives would be should <br />Measure K would fail. He stated that if tainting the election was <br />giving the alternatives to the voters and making them fully aware <br />of what the options were, then he agreed to taint the election. He <br />felt this alternative was owed to the voters. He did not author <br />the JPA proposal but simply supported it. He did not think it was <br />asking too much to investigate every alternative. This is a <br />regional issue and we should get along with our neighbors. This <br />property is within Hayward and until a bill was passed to force <br />Hayward to de-annex, it would not do so. The legislative intent of <br />the LAFCO law is' to encourage and provide planned, efficient urban <br />development patterns with appropriate consideration of preserving <br />open space land within those patterns. He was not certain that <br />this lawsuit was defendable and that Pleasanton was on shaky ground <br />which why a settlement should be considered. <br /> <br /> Ms. Scribner stated that she had always been annoyed when she <br />was forced to vote for something that was later nullified or forced <br />to vote on one option when there were many solutions to the <br /> <br />5/5/92 23 <br /> <br /> <br />