CCMIN071508 - Laserfiche WebLink

argument that was drafted by another source. It becomes a priority list based on the Elections Code. Mayor Hosterman opened the item for public comment. Kay Ayala submitted ballot question language for the sole purpose to make it less confusing to the public as she was concerned due to the developer-friendly (competing) initiative supported by three members of the Council. She also expressed concern with the Council addressing her ballot question first and the competing ballot question second. She supported Option 1 modified read, "Shall the Save Pleasanton Hills and Housing Cap Citizens' Initiative be adopted?" She questioned why the Council was doing this when people could simply vote no on the citizen's initiative. Allen Roberts said he supported Ms. Ayala's recommendation for Option 1, and suggested Option 1 read, "Shall the Citizens' Save Pleasanton Hills and Housing Cap Initiative be adopted"? Steve Brozosky suggested that the California Elections Code does not give the authority to the Council to draft the question that goes on the ballot; the Code is silent on it. For State Initiatives the Attorney General is required to set the ballot question. He did not believe it was right for the Council to establish the question, especially since it has decided to put a competing measure on the ballot against the citizen's initiative. If the Council will have the opportunity to name their own initiative, the citizens should have the same opportunity. Also, the staff report is confusing in that it states the City Council actually writes ballot arguments for this initiative, but in Section 8292A specifies the proponents get to actually write the statements in favor of the initiative, and he would welcome the Councilmember proponents of the citizen's initiative to join and help them. Mary Roberts addressed the Council concerning the Mayor's quote in the July 11`h issue of the Valley Times. Karla Brown read into the record an Editorial that appeared in the July 3" issue of the Valley Times. Scott Raty, representing the Chamber of Commerce, offered a letter to the Council for consideration regarding the Hills and Housing Cap Initiative and the Council's own proposed measure and read it into the record. He commended the Council for recognizing unintended short comings that often accompany initiatives and for demonstrating leadership in offering an alternative measure. He commended the Council for including a transparent and open process, and recommended Option 2, recommended slightly different wording of Option 3 as follows: Pleasanton Ridgelines Preservation and Growth Control Measure, they recommend minor modifications to Option 4 on page 3; "Shall the Pleasanton Ridgelines Preservation and Growth Control Measure be Adopted to Preserve Views of Scenic Hillsides and Ridges surrounding Pleasanton and affirm policies that protect hillsides and define housing units while respecting the Voter-Approved Housing Cap?" Regarding the question raised by Ms. Ayala regarding clarification between a citizen's sponsored versus a Council-sponsored initiative, he would look for clarification because Initiatives are generally the result of the petition process and measures are generally the result of the legislative bodies initiating something and it may be as simple as identifying the two. He said they will be planning to promote a document called Community Vision that has 45 City Council Minutes 5 July 15, 2008