My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN071508
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
2000-2009
>
2008
>
CCMIN071508
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/12/2009 4:42:25 PM
Creation date
10/29/2008 12:42:25 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
7/15/2008
DESTRUCT DATE
PERMANENT
DOCUMENT NO
CCMIN071508
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
19
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
City Manager Fialho said staff believes they have put forth a measure that reflects the Council's <br />majority interest in preserving the southeast hills and are not looking at the bigger, longer <br />picture. However, the ordinance that gets potentially developed could be more encompassing <br />than what is reflected in the measure. <br />Mayor Hosterman opened the item for public comment. <br />Steve Brozosky said the Council initiative does two things; one is policy to re-affirm the general <br />plan that is already in place and secondly, advisory, to put in place some real hillside protection <br />and to define a housing unit. He said it is important to note that initiatives cannot legally direct a <br />legislative body to act. So you cannot put anything in an initiative that tells a legislative body to <br />do something in the future. Therefore, he did not understand why people should vote no on the <br />citizen's initiative. He also did not see how any of the suggested titles by staff are accurate. <br />There are many protection initiatives but there is nothing in the initiative that is protection; just <br />preserve what we already have and we will have a potential plan in place that will preserve it. <br />Councilmember Sullivan said this was similar to his question. This tells the Council to create a <br />plan but it does not mean it must adopt a plan or ordinance. City Attorney Roush said this is a <br />possibility, but again, the entire discussion concerning what the plan is going to involve is part of <br />the findings of this particular measure. The policy that the Council would be asking the voters to <br />re-affirm and re-adopt is in Section 3, the existing General Plan policies. <br />Mayor Hosterman recognized there is language contained in the initiative which cannot be <br />implemented so what the Council is trying to do is to get to the same ends in ensuring the <br />preservation of all surrounding hillsides. She is hoping to get community support to do so in <br />such a way with language that this Council can implement. <br />Anne Childs said a few weeks ago, Councilmember Thorne told her that he went out to talk <br />about the citizens' hillside initiative and heard the majority of them say they wanted something <br />done quickly. However, the initiative being considered tonight does not look like the right <br />response because the Council proposes 1.5 years to develop a hillside protection ordinance <br />which is not quick action, nor will the Council establish a moratorium on hillside development in <br />the meantime which would ease people's sense of urgency. Many people will have doubts due <br />to Council's actions over the past 9 months. She also objects to the proposed language of the <br />initiative and she is focusing specifically on the purpose of the initiative because she finds it <br />imprecise and misleading. She asked the Council to clarify whether or not a protection measure <br />will be in place immediately if the City's initiative passes. Also, the poison pill measure is not <br />mentioned, which is the primary purpose of the initiative, and the consequences of two yes <br />votes should be stated upfront so voters know the relationship between the two initiatives. <br />Dick Quigley saluted the Council for seeing the shortcomings of the citizen's initiative, urged the <br />Council to move forward and approve the City-developed initiative ordinance to protect the <br />ridgelines, hillsides and open space for the community and region. He applauded the action and <br />discussion at the June 26 meeting and other open public forums. He said EBRPD has a $500 <br />million bond measure for acquisition to parkland in two counties, private hillsides and view <br />sheds are not the property of near neighbors or neighborhoods and we should not have <br />neighborhoods fighting amongst each other with the Council being the navigator. <br />Kay Ayala said she does not think this is the right thing for the Council to do, thinks the Council <br />should let the citizen's initiative move forward and if the Council does not like it, get everyone to <br />vote no on it. She said the initiative shall take effect if a majority of the votes cast on the <br />initiative are in favor of its adoption. If the majority of the votes cast are in favor of adopting this, <br />City Council Minutes 10 July 15, 2008 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.