Laserfiche WebLink
2O7 <br /> <br /> Mr. Mercer explained that voters, in general, do not vote on <br />it; registered voters within the bounds of the property to be <br />annexed have the opportunity to vote on whether they want to be <br />annexed or not. With regard to the costs of annexation, all <br />planning, expansion of services and other expenses are paid for by <br />the property owners. <br /> <br /> Mr. Don Temple, 6409 Alisal, mentioned that over the past <br />seven years, residents have worked hard and diligently to arrive <br />at some solution that would permit continued city growth in the <br />area without losing the established rural environment. He <br />recommended the adoption of Option 2. <br /> <br /> Mr. Mercer asked Mr. Temple if he, as a property owner, would <br />prefer to know what was going to be built on the property before <br />it was annexed, and would it bother him to have the annexation <br />process started and moving, knowing that during that period the <br />Council would work with the neighbors. <br /> <br /> Mr. Temple replied that he had no problem with the annexation <br />provided that the final decision would not be made until an <br />agreement was reached on what would be done. <br /> <br /> Mr. Mercer asked the Assistant City Attorney if the <br />application for annexation returns to the Council for final action <br />after it goes through LAFCO and the County Board of Supervisors. <br /> <br /> Mr. Beougher replied in the affirmative. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tarver inquired if specific zoning were required. <br /> <br /> Mr. Beougher said yes. <br /> <br /> Mr. Temple stated that the earlier annexations developed very <br />rapidly without a specific plan, and the impact on the area was <br />very significant. He added that the residents were concerned <br />about the traffic and the preservation of the rural environment <br />and wanted some assurance that this annexation would be for the <br />best interest of all and not just the property owners within the <br />area. <br /> <br /> Mr. Mercer indicated that there have been annexations in the <br />past where the uses of the properties were not changed. If the <br />property owner wanted a change, he could request that; but the <br />City would not impose that change on the property owners. He <br />added that the annexation and Specific Plan could be structured to <br />meet their concerns. <br /> <br /> Mr. Brandes asked the Assistant City Attorney at what point <br />during the annexation process would it be determined if a vote <br />were to be held. <br /> <br /> -10- <br /> 8-1-89 <br /> <br /> <br />