My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN052008
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
2000-2009
>
2008
>
CCMIN052008
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/21/2008 4:09:35 PM
Creation date
8/21/2008 4:09:34 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
5/20/2008
DESTRUCT DATE
PERMANENT
DOCUMENT NO
CCMIN052008
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
16
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
Councilmember McGovern questioned how long development would be held up if the City <br />developed a hillside or grading ordinance through aCity-initiated process, and City Manager <br />Fialho said it would not be consistent with the way the City addresses its ordinance and he <br />believed it could take 6-12 months. Mayor Hosterman believed we could have language that re- <br />affirms language in the General Plan in order to give people the opportunity to say yes to a <br />deliberative process versus future Councils having to grapple with bad language. City Manager <br />Fialho said he heard Councilmember Cook-Kallio say, a measure to an alternative that would <br />describe a process that eventually would be ratified by the voters, but Mayor Hosterman say, <br />can you put up by way of a measure, existing General Plan policies in place as an alternative to <br />the Initiative, which are two different things. He said this can be done and can be part of the 30- <br />day process, if directed to do so. <br />Councilmember McGovern felt if the Council uses what the public has put forth and better define <br />items, it would augment the Initiative. Councilmember Sullivan believes there is a split <br />community on these issues, there is a right and wrong way to do this, we need information from <br />the report to make a decision, and his original thought about a task force was to bring people <br />together to arrive at an implementing ordinance and Initiative authors would like to participate in <br />this. But, if we put something competing on the ballot, we would drive a wedge between those <br />authors and aCouncil-driven process. <br />Councilmember Cook-Kallio said Council could put something on the ballot that clarified the <br />Council's intent which could include stakeholder comments. Councilmember Sullivan confirmed <br />that this process could be done prior to putting something else on the ballot in order to have a <br />cooperative measure. Councilmember McGovern supported coming back in a way that is not <br />competing but rather an adjunct to what Initiative the people put forward. <br />Mayor Hosterman said understanding the language in the Initiative cannot be changed, it will <br />either be adopted by the Council or it will be placed on the ballot. For the Council to have an <br />opportunity to have a deliberative process that is all inclusive, she believes we should ask staff <br />to come up with language opportunities that would allow the Council to do this and would make <br />clear to the community the Council's intent is to put together a hillside ordinance that we can <br />implement and that future Councils can support. She confirmed with Councilmembers that they <br />were amenable to looking at the language opportunities to use on the November ballot as well <br />as directing staff to prepare a report. <br />Vice Mayor Thorne confirmed there were time limitations to place an item on the ballot and <br />supported putting something on the ballot that defines a process and identifies the Council's <br />intent. <br />Councilmember Sullivan said the entire ordinance would not need to be developed by the time it <br />needed to go on the ballot, but rather work through issues of consistency and work with the <br />stakeholder group, because he was not supportive of a competing measure. <br />Mayor Hosterman said she does not want a competing measure but wants to engage the entire <br />community in the process. She does not think this can be done in the next 30 days, but the City <br />can put additional language on the ballot which gives people the opportunity for people to go in <br />a different direction and she believed this is important. City Manager Fialho voiced caution in <br />how the City approaches it, as it is bound by CEQA laws. He confirmed that the Council wants, <br />in addition to the Section 9212 analysis, to come up with conceptual ideas for how there might <br />be a complimentary and alternative measure that further refines the Initiative which the Council <br />can debate and discuss when the matter returns in June. He suggested holding off on the City <br />Attorney presenting an impartial analysis, as this is difficult without a Section 9212 report. <br />City Council Minutes 15 May 20, 2008 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.