CCMIN022189 - Laserfiche WebLink

267 Vice Mayor Butler stated members of Council and the Agency would now hear any statements or testimony from those present in opposition to the Redevelopment Plan or Final Environmental Impact Report. Mr. Thurman Caudill, 4715 Augustine Street, stated he has had previous experience with redevelopment and has investigated it in other places and has seen the mayhem that it causes. He stated that when redevelopment was considered in Pleasanton thirteen years ago it was defeated because it would only benefit a few businessmen and the rest of the City would suffer the consequences. He is concerned that the Redevelopment Plan will last for twenty-eight years. He stated that in fairness for liberty and justice for all it is a dictictorial situation. Pleasanton has done well without it, and he does not want to put the City in jeopardy with this Redevelopment Plan. He strongly opposed it. Mr. Stanley Rathbone, 325 Ray Street, stated that what started out to be a small project of upgrading Main Street has turned into a monster and should be rejected. He stated he is in favor of sewer and water improvements but felt they could be done in the Capital Improvement Program. He asked if his property would be tied up so that he could not sell it. Vice Mayor Butler stated it is his understanding that Mr. Rathbone would be free to sell his property at any time. Mr. Thomas P. Pico, Jr., 795 Neal Place, stated his remarks are to the Plan and the Environmental Impact Report. He stated he came from the City of Antioch, which had a Redevelopment Plan. At that time he was in favor of the Plan; there are some positive things about a redevelopment plan but also some negative things. In Pittsburg there is sixteen blocks of housing that has been condemned. He stated he is in favor of preserving Pleasanton's historical downtown and he concurs with the scaled-down Specific Plan. He stated he is adamently opposed to the Redevelopment Plan as a funding mechanism. He stated Downtown Pleasanton is a model, not a blighted community. Pleasanton has an excellent tax base, traffic system, schools, senior housing, library, police and fire services, parks and recreation, business parks, etc. He expressed concern regarding the ultimate veto power of this Agency over other agencies and the creation of another layer of bureaucy at a time when public trust is at an all-time low. He did not feel it is right that only three members of Council can participate in the decision regarding this matter; a vote of the public should be required. He stated that public improvements could be financed without the Redevelopment Plan. He expressed concern that this Agency will go on forever once it is created. He thanked Mayor Mercer for encouraging him to get involved and attending the Community Development Agency meetings and for being a member of the Project Area Committee. He urged Council to reject the - 10 - 2-21-89