CCMIN120299 - Laserfiche WebLink

Mr. Pico referred to Option D and suggested moving the statement following (2) "submit to the voters the final plan for community facilities and public uses on the site" to follow the first statement in (1). Mayor Tarver suggested taking "for community facilities and public uses" and putting that after "San Francisco Bemal Property" at the beginning, so it reads "by issuing general obligation bonds... and 37 + acres for commercial development... and (2) submit to the voters the City' s plan for public uses." Ms. Michelotti reiterated her belief that people need to be informed of the potential development. Ms. Ayala felt the emphasis should be that 85% of the property is for public use. The commercial entitlement is only there to help buy the property. If you can't explain what the 85% is going to be at this time, you certainly can't explain what the 15% of the property will be used for. She felt it would be less confusing to the people to just state the acreage. Mr. Pico believed the shorter the question, the better. He also suggested changing the description on the 37 acres to "commercial/retail". Bruce Lymbum, representing San Francisco, felt that the language was generally good, but preferred that the parenthetical statements be included, so the voters are fully aware of the potential entitlement in order to minimize the possibility of a referendum at a later date. Mayor Tarver wanted to increase the chances the measure will pass and felt the statements about development overshadowed the public uses. Mr. Roush reminded everyone that the impartial analysis will include information about the potential entitlements for development. Ms. Ayala felt that people will be voting for 85% of the property to be public use and open space. If a two-thirds majority vote is achieved, she did not think Mr. Lymbum would have to worry about a referendum. Mr. Arkin felt that if the parenthetical statements are included, people will read the ballot language and think they are voting on 374 homes. He felt they should read the question and think they are voting to pay $50 million for 85% of the land in public use. Mayor Tarver said the voters will be voting on a package. The commercial/ residential development is part of the package in order to get the balance of the purchase price. At this point, it is unknown what the public uses or entitlements will be. He did not want to put the maximum numbers on the ballot because it is unknown what will happen in the entitlement process. Council would like to have everything in place to tell Pleasanton City Council 9 12/02/99 Minutes