01 MINUTES REGULAR 07-15-08 - Laserfiche WebLink

Allen Roberts said the City Council sponsored initiative will compete with the initiative signed by over 5,000 voters which he felt was not the right position for the Council to be taking. The proposed initiative would not have any direct effect because it only creates a process to propose a plan to protect the hillside at some point in the future. He said the ballot measure is a plan to create a plan and he believes that the actual purpose of it is to confuse voters and to trump, with the poison pill, the voter-sponsored initiative. He said Pleasanton already has a plan to protect its hillside-the 1996 General Plan. What has happened is that Oak Grove is what initiated citizen's action to change hillside protection. He said the Council is trying to subvert the initiative process by proposing aone-year timeframe for a plan to protect the hillsides, which really cancels the citizen's initiative and not really protect the hillsides. Richard Pugh said he is concerned with the process, believes that the proposal for the ballot the City is sponsoring should not occur, he does not believe the Council should be placing any rushed proposal on the ballots in response to a citizen's initiative. Given there have been many years that have lapsed with no ordinance offered other than through the citizen's initiative, the preferable course of action would have been to do nothing. He would then ask citizens to vote at the election and decide on the matter. Creating a sudden measure sends a message that the next time citizens believe there is a matter of pressing support they face the risk of having constitutionally protected work nullified. He is concerned therefore that there is a danger this would discourage public participation in the city which is not in our long-term interests. Karla Brown said if the Council moves forward with the Council initiative, it should also look at the cost of engineering studies, EIRs and technical studies which is a significant expense the City is burdening its citizens with. Julie Testa said while she supports the concept of getting through the process and get along, she believes it is disingenuous to suggest that the proponents of the initiative have been negative. She thinks the fact that 3 members of the Council are putting a competing initiative on the ballot is undermining the citizen process, which is divisive. Mayor Hosterman closed public comment. Mayor Hosterman reiterated that the citizen's initiative language is set and the language would allow for the definition of a unit to include assisted living facilities and extended stay hotels. She does not think that was the intent of the backers of this initiative. What would happen is if the language is allowed to move forward without giving the Council an opportunity to write something that is sensible, the City would have to count those units against the voter approved cap on housing, which would seriously hamper this Council's ability to move forward with affordable housing projects and transit-oriented development. Therefore, she believes Council majority will support giving the community the opportunity to get on board through adoption of a strong ordinance protecting hillsides forever, but also written in such away it can be implemented and can safeguard our opportunities to continue to provide balance in future development for the people of Pleasanton. Councilmember Cook-Kallio referred to the staff report, said if the correct term for the item is Council-sponsored as a measure, it should be changed to "measure." She said she did not like in Option 1 the term "management" because it implies things are simply being moved around. She preferred a term like, "control." She does want to control growth. City Attorney Roush said the term "initiative' is fine, but if the Council wants to use the term "measure" it could also. City Council Minutes 11 July 15, 2008