CCMIN011183 - Laserfiche WebLink

445 }~TTERS INITIATED BY COUNCILMEMBERS It was moved by Councilmember Brandes, and seconded by Councilmember Mercer, that Resolution No. 83-11, urging Caltrans to expedite work on 1-580 so that the former diamond lanes will be paved for full use as soon as possible, be adopted. The roll call vote was as follows: AYES: Councilmembers Brandes, Mercer, Mohr, and Mayor Butler NOES: None ABSENT: Councilmember Wood Council instructed staff to send a letter of transmittal with the adopted resolu- tion to Caltrans immediately. CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS There were no City Council Committee reports presented at this meeting. REPORTS OF THE CITY ATTORNEY Consideration of Referendum Petition on Ordinance No. 1056 Mr. MacDonald presented his report (SR 83:12) dated January 5, 1983, regarding this matter. Certification of Petition It was moved by Councilmember Mercer, and seconded by Councilmember Mohr, that Resolution No. 83-12, certifying the referendum petition for City of Pleasanton Ordinance No. 1056 approving the Quail Creek Project, be adopted. The roll call vote was as follows: AYES: Councilmembers Brandes, Mercer, Mohr, and Mayor Butler NOES: None ABSENT: Councilmember Wood Consider Repeal of Ordinance Mr. Steve Weschler, 647 Orofino Court, stated the wording on the petition was direct and to the point; advising the City Council that the constituents are opposed to the Quail Creek project. He urged Council to repeal the ordinance approving the project and not to place the burden of costs for an election on the citizens of Pleasanton. He stated it should be evident from the number of signatures on the petition that people from the entire City are against this development. He advised that people in Vintage Hills represent about 1/6 of the registered voters and that people from other areas are concerned. Mr. Weschler stated it is felt that the cost to hold an election will be a waste of City money. He stated that people are con- cerned that this project had twice been denied by City Council then given a special hearing and approved by a 3-2 vote. Mr. Weschler asked Council to listen to what their constituents want and to repeal Ordinance No. 1056. Mr. Themas O'Donnell, Attorney representing Mr. Earp, stated that Council had made their decision on the facts as presented, that there has been no change in facts since approval of the project, and that there is no reason now to repeal the ordinance. He stated it is difficult for Council to be in this position that may be a threat; that the people have a right to express themselves, but Council is charged with a bonafide position and there is no support to change that position. He stated that while a large number of citizens have signed the petition, he felt there are also a large number of citizens unrepresented on this petition. He stated that the project will be a quality project, and that Council has no reason to change their vote other than political pressure. Mr. James Griffin, 3036 Chardonnay, stated that the people, the voters of Pleasanton, have voiced in the manner appropriate their feelings to the City Council. 3. 1/11/83