My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN080100
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
2000-2009
>
2000
>
CCMIN080100
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/17/2007 10:56:32 AM
Creation date
9/26/2000 7:43:23 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
8/1/2000
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
24
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Ms. Dennis asked if it was possible at a later time to put both plans that the <br />cotra'nunity has worked on onto the ballot for choice between the two. <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift said City Council has that decision that it could make at any time up <br />until the point when Council actually approves the plan. The development agreement <br />would limit the ability to do that. Council could do it at any time. He said that the <br />logical time in this process would be once the project gets before Council, lfat that time <br />it is felt it should bc on the ballot, Council could do so. <br /> <br /> Mayor Tarver said City Council needs to address this iramediately because <br />otherwise there is no opportunity to get it on the November ballot. <br /> <br /> Mr. Roush said if Council were to put something on the ballot, action would need <br />to be taken by August l0th. <br /> <br /> Mayor Tarver said that if Council wanted to have a public hearing as to whether <br />or not to put this omo the bailot and make a decision, it needs to be agendized for August <br />10th. All of the material needs to be ready, because what needs to be submitted must be <br />completed by August 11lh. Ite said there would not be much thine to work on the <br />agreements with Greenbriar and San Francisco as it relates to this project if a ballot <br />initiative is undertaken. <br /> <br /> Ms. Ayala asked Ms. Dennis if she would be interested in putting the 1900 unit <br />plan onto the ballot. <br /> <br /> Ms. Dennis said she felt that the people should have a choice between both <br />proposals. <br /> <br /> Mr. Pico said the problem is that there was not a 1900 unit plan at this point in <br />lime. San Francisco has not asked Pleasanton to continue processing that application and <br />we do not have an application to vote on or to even process. He said he is not aLLre it <br />would be possible to have an advisory measure that might be put onto the November <br />ballot. An advisory measure might give Council feedback from the contmunity. That <br />would be taking a risk with San Francisco that it might not agree and Ihen it could <br />withdraw from this whole process. The other factor to consider is that Omenbriar might <br />just walk away. He said Council would be taking a significant risk. To defer any kind of <br />a vote on this or to have a referendum that would delay any decision until sometime in <br />the spring of 2001 would probably kill this opportunity. He said he would not have a <br />problem in getting some feedback from the community through the ballot, understanding <br />tlmt there is a risk involved. The final approval cotrid be right allcr the election. <br /> <br /> Ms. Michelotti said if Council is going to start talking about what kind of plan <br />that is going to take place, then perhaps there should be something that is in between. <br />She said that maybe there should be something that shows giving the City a golf course <br /> <br />Pleasanton cily council 14 08/01/00 <br />Minutes <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.