CCMIN030392 - Laserfiche WebLink

129 to Section 4002.5 of the Elections Code which could be applicable to the ballot language. He felt that the concept that the development zone was an essential element in funding, at no cost to citizens, the buffer zone was missing from the language. Joslin Combs, 4443 Second Street, suggested that the third sentence, which addresses the numbers of residential units, in Option three, should be moved to be the first sentence of the City Attorney's proposed language. She felt that the word "general" should be added to sentences that referred to the appearance of the area. Ms. Combs believed that it should be made very clear the difference between open space and park land. She felt that the City Attorney's proposed language was very understandable and that Mr. Inderbitzen's was a little confusing. Dagmar Fulton, 4019 Peregrine Way, understood that this Plan was a General Plan amendment. She asked if Council could make changes to the language once it was adopted. She was concerned that the number of units could be changed. She felt it would be wise to adopt Option one of the City Attorney's proposal. Mr. Roush answered that some changes could be made to the Plan but it was not likely that the Council could on its own reduce the Plan by 500 or 1000 units. The only possibility that could result in a significant reduction of units is that persons within the buffer zone develop and thereby reduce the residential units or if all of the buffer zone units get purchased by a developer who then elects to reduce the number. Mr. Tarver read his ballot language proposal in order to get the audience's response. He indicated that he met with Ms. Scribner and that they worked very carefully on the wording to make it accurate and not distorted. Rick Dobbs, 3616 Courtsmith Court, stated that the ballot language needed to be very specific and not general. David Glenn, 5650 Foothill Road, President of the Residential Committee, agreed that the ballot language needed to be specific. He was concerned with the traffic on the rldgelines, and the parklands and trails. He suggested that wording concerning useable trails should be added to Option three. Frank M. Lehne, 5466 Foothill Road, asked that "80%" be added after the listing of 5,900 acres in Mr. Tarver's statement. Martin Inderbitzen reiterated his previous comments. He was very concerned in mentioning numbers in the ballot language because it could cause misconceptions and misunderstandings. 3/3/92 27