CCMIN050107 - Laserfiche WebLink

they can thrive and we want to make sure those businesses that come to Pleasanton recognize our issues in terms of traffic and circulation and the quality of life. Councilmember Cook-Kallio said she did not quite understand how Stoneridge was a leverage to building State Route 84 because State Route 84 is a benefit to Dublin, Livermore and Pleasanton. It seemed to her that people would be doing something in spite of themselves to take it off that list. She feels it is necessary for the entire region, so she did not see this as a leverage, although she felt it was imperative that we do everything we possibly can to ensure 580, 680 and State Route 84 is improved as much as we can possibly get the funding for, and that may include things not thought of yet. This means the more we work together as a region, the more apt we are to get federal and state funds. She disagreed with the referendum and felt it is divisive in nature. She felt the Council needs to make a decision and stick with it. A referendum at this point is prolonging the ultimate decision. She thinks we have held public meetings, have had massive emails, her phone has rung off the hook all week, there has been ample opportunity for the public to weigh in over the course of years and years, and she does think we were elected to make decisions on behalf of Pleasanton and this is one where we should make a decision and leave it in the General Plan. She also does not think the Council should tie it specifically to those improvements for the same reason Councilmember Thorne mentioned; we need the flexibility. However, we have circulation elements in the General Plan that deal with regional issues and she has no problem with continuing to include those things in the General Plan as long as they are not tied specifically to Stoneridge. Once you have tied these to Stoneridge, it may force us to build it before we are ready or it may prevent us from building it when we are ready. So, by making a statement in the General Plan that we think those regional things are extremely important but not tying it together, she felt it would provide the flexibility. She also likes the idea of either going through the County or through developers for the funding of Stoneridge Drive. She feels this would be something that would be beneficial to the City just from an economic viewpoint and she thinks this should be discussed down the road. Also, what has not been mentioned in any specific way is that there is an environmental aspect to building the road. It is expensive to continue going all the way through Stanley or all the way down I-580, and this is balanced with the problems with emissions from cars also. In summary, Councilmember Cook-Kallio said she was in favor of leaving it in the General Plan, does not like the idea of tying this to a referendum in any way, shape or form, does not want to tie this to conditions; however, she is amenable to including a structure in the General Plan to address those regional issues and would hope that we could somehow or another develop a better working relationship with our neighbors and get past personalities and realize that these decisions we make will outlast all of us. So, it’s not about the way we particularly feel, but doing best for the entire region and most specifically for Pleasanton. Councilmember McGovern thanked everyone for coming and all ideas and thoughts because it shows we have a thoughtful and intelligent group of people who are looking at both sides of the issue. She is looking to maintain an increased public trust, wants to City Council Minutes 20 May 1, 2007