CCMIN110672 - Laserfiche WebLink

10, 1972. Mr. Leonard pointed out the following six provisos of the restricted growth proposal as probably the most controversial of the policy: restriction of type and locations of economic activities and new industries; provide tax in- centives to small families and single people; expand all aspects of planned parenthood programs; impose tax penalties on economic developments that generate the greatest population increase; restrict growth to specific areas by limited accessibility and urban services such as transportation, sewer and water; and reform local tax structures. He further stated the proposed policy would be one of slow growth, retarded growth or stagnation, and he asked whether it would be possible for the Bay Area to achieve the quality of life and economic vitality it desires. Councilman Mori stated he could not support the Position Paper because he felt it was an oversimplistic solution to a highly complex problem, and that population was not the crux of the Area's problems, it was improper and poor planning. Councilman Kinney agreed with Councilman Mori's statements. Mayor Reid seated there had to be a starting point and this Position policy is a reasonable approach and not in conflict with the local growth policies we are trying to achieve. Councilman Herlihy stated it is important to the City of Pleasanton and the Amador Valley to look at a moderate growth rate policy. He further stated this Position Paper says they want to do more comprehensive planning, and he felt the City should support this. It was moved by Councilman Mori, and seconded by Councilman Kinney, to oppose Position Paper Two, Formulation of Regional Growth Policy. The roll call vote was as follows: AYES: Councilmen Kinney and Mori NOES: Councilmen Herlihy, Pearson and Mayor Reid ABSENT: None It was moved by Councilman Herlihy, and seconded by Councilman Pearson, that Resolution No. 72-191, supporting Position Paper Two, Formulation of Regional Growth Policy, and authorizing the City of Pleasanton delegate to vote in favor of it at the ABAG General Assembly Meeting on November 10, 1972, be adopted. The roll call vote was as follows: AYES: Councilmen Herlihy, Pearson and Mayor Reid NOES: Councilmen Kinney and Mori ABSENT: None Councilman Herlihy stated it should be emphasized that it is vitally important for ABAG to explore the possibilities of local tax reform. Report of the City Attorney~ ~e: Final draft of the Agreement with VCSD and Builders regarding Sewer Service This matter was continued to the meeting of November 8, 1972. REPORTS OF BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS Review of letter from the Valley Planning Committee~ Re: Ultimate City Boundaries Mr. Edgar presented a letter from the Valley Planning Committee regarding this' matter. Mr. Castro presented a map, displaying the ultimate city boundary between the City of Livermore and the City of Pleasanton, and requested authorization to address a letter to the Local Agency Formation Commission for them to look into the ultimate city boundary in their "sphere of influence" study, stating the primary areas of concern were in the School District and Park District. It was moved by Councilman Pearson, and seconded by Councilman Mori, that the staff be authorized to address a letter to the Local Agency Formation Commission, urging their review of the ultimate Pleasanton-Livermore city boundary lines in their "sphere o£ influence" study as proposed by the Valley Planning Committee. The roll call vote was as follows: AYES: Councilmen Herlihy, Kinney, Mori, Pearson and Mayor Reid NOES: None ABSENT: None 3. 11/6/72