CCMIN072390 - Laserfiche WebLink

388 Mr. Mercer suggested that an explanation of "by operation of -- law" be included in the Initiative so the people understand the process. Mr. Roush stated that language can be added that if the plan fails, the Initiative can only be changed by a vote of the electors of Pleasanton. He asked Council what it wanted to happen should the Initiative pass but the plan fail. Mr. Mercer replied that the citizens' committee should keep working until it comes up with something that is acceptable to the people. Mr. Tarver commented that Council appeared to be moving in the direction of putting the Initiative on the ballot. He suggested that Council enact the Initiative into law, if this is in the best interest of the people, and work towards the defeat of the other Initiative rather than put a competing Initiative on the ballot. Mr. Butler stated that the citizens would be presented with a better choice if there were two competing Initiatives. Ms. Mohr commented that having two Initiatives on the ballot is constructive and educational because voters would have the opportunity to decide. Mr. Roush stated that Council could take action tonight to put the Initiative on the ballot, subject to the approval of the final language at the August 7th meeting. Mr. Tarver indicated that he would not support the Initiative and that the reason he did not vote for the SPRC Initiative was because he felt that the proper thing for Council to do was to adopt that ordinance as law, based on the community's response to the Initiative drive. It was moved by Ms. Mohr, and seconded by Mr. Brandes, that Resolution No. 90-145 be adopted, expressing Council's intent to place a City Council sponsored Initiative on the November 6, 1990 ballot, subject to revisions being considered at its August 7, 1990 meeting. The roll call vote was as follows: AYES: Councilmember Brandes, Butler, Mohr, and Mayor Mercer NOES: Councilmember Tarver ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None 7-23-90 - 12 -