Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Tarver referred to the resolution with the March 3 agenda <br />materials and believed that it should be changed in certain <br />respects. <br /> <br /> Mr. Mercer asked if anyone wanted to speak on this matter. <br /> <br /> Alan Winslow, 28 Castlewood Drive, believed that the language <br />included false and misleading statements. He felt that it was not <br />appropriate to include ballot arguments in the initiative. He felt <br />that the statement should be factual and neutral. <br /> <br /> Mr. Winslow presented proposed ballot language which read, <br />"Shall the General Plan of the City of Pleasanton be amended to <br />change the designation of the Ridgelands from agriculture, public <br />health and safety, to permit the construction of 2,640 residential <br />units and associated development." <br /> <br /> Mayor Mercer asked if Mr. Winslow thought that open space was <br />important to include. <br /> <br /> Mr. Winslow indicated that the open space had already been <br />permitted and therefore that portion of the General Plan was not <br />being amended, but "and to provide for open space uses as <br />economically feasible" could be added. <br /> <br /> Diane Habner, 3385 Lindon Way, agreed with Mr. Winslow's <br />suggestions and comments. - <br /> <br /> Becky Dennis, 838 Grey Fox Circle, believed that many <br />statements listed in the ballot language were false and misleading. <br />She referred to the ballot language and gave examples points. She <br />was also concerned with the statement that this plan would be at no <br />additional cost to the taxpayers. She felt that it should be <br />changed from "public health and safety zoning" to "the Pleasanton <br />Ridgelands Plan." <br /> <br /> Terry Spraggins, 7024 Corte De10ro, felt that the ballot <br />language should be honest and be straight forward. She indicated <br />that the average voter would not understand the language. She felt <br />that the ballot language should have both sides (for and against) <br />included. She shared the same concern that the adopted language was <br />misleading and biased. She asked that Council be as clear and <br />precise as possible to the voters. She referred to the resolution <br />and asked who would be signing the arguments. <br /> <br /> Ms. Acosta asked Council if it intended for the signatures to <br />come from the Executive Committee or from the Committee as a whole. <br /> <br /> Ms. Mohr answered it was to be the Executive Committee. <br /> <br /> Mayor Mercer thought that it was the whole Committee because <br />the Executive Committee is divided, 10-3. <br /> <br />3/5/92 2 <br /> <br /> <br />