CCMIN050592 - Laserfiche WebLink

31 May4, 1992 City Council Members Pleasanton, Ca. 1 -ndies and Gen~emen: Recently Mr. Tarver appeared before the Planning Commition to remind us of our responsibilities to uphold the letter of Measure M. Mr. TaPten propos~ tomffht asks an awful lor~ Some of which is obvious, a lot of which is not so obvious but that as a sponsor of this .1PA before you, he proposes to ignore the lviandates of Measure M our City law it is painfully obvious. On the surface avoiding legal a~tion and the associated costs is a reasonable idea. But, there is an old saying; "You dance with the one who brought ya! ' -Measure M had nearly 10,000 cili72ns vote yes and another 9,600 residents vote no against the opposing measure. Th~se citizen asked yon to leadthemmacqmmxg: One, .a gusrantee that Pleasanton residents d~eide the future of the Ridgelands? This JPA proposal places the City Council of Hayward, the Greenbelt Alliance and the County Board of Supervisors up as a T-ather knows best !~roup.' I would suggest to you that the vote of the people has more force and influence than these minority voices. In the case of Hayward were dealing with the forc~ and personality not of a great city and its citizens. Not to long ago that city vor~t 7-0 to de-annex to Pleasanto~ One election !; t~r and the politics of one man and his personal agenda have changed tlz previous generation of good will. That's what I call a mmonty voice. Measure M also requires the creation of open, accessible, usable and permanent open spsee. Mr. Taryen .IPA leaves off to many adjectives. This JPA describes only open space, it says nothing about open or usable. Our current Ridgelands Plan has been criticzeal for too little delail. When you debate this issue later ask Mr. Tarver or Mr. Ivanoff how much this new agriculture mitigation fee will cost each household in Pleasanton and will Hayward and other county residents share pmporUonately? Further, since this proposal is before you as away to avoid legal costs ask how much the potential law suits from over 1001and owners will cost Pleasanton when we along with the other JPA members are sued for ignoring their property rights? The third Measure M mandate was to guarantee the citizens a vote. I submit to you the intent of thai language was not you voting on behalf of the citizens or Mr. Tarver and ihe minority voice pumng forth what riley feel is good for everyone. No, the total populalion is reqmred to vote. Our city anomey should advise you on the potential value and legal costs that might be associated with law suits by Citizens who might feel their rights liave been