Laserfiche WebLink
<br />since she found conflicts to this in the report. The City Attorney spoke to this but deferred to <br />Planning Manager, Jill Ekas, who stated they are looking at the current conditionally, <br />approved elements that were not potentially affected by the initiative. <br /> <br />One Council Member asked about docktown development impacts and Mr. Yamamoto stated <br />it could affect these developments, but would speak to this further at the next meeting, and so <br />noted the concern. Council reiterated that the initiative seemed simple on the surface, but <br />still had gray areas in designation as to what is and is not a park in the plan. Council asked <br />for clarification on permissible approval of conditional uses. Discussion on legislative versus <br />administrative acts was held. Mr. Yamamoto spoke to the historical discrepancies and asked <br />questions with regard to Council's concerns in an effort to understand them better, and stated <br />he would bring back further information on the above. Ms. Ekas added they are still in the <br />process of understanding what affects this might have if the initiative passes. <br /> <br />Mayor Foust stated that the proponents for the initiative are saying that it protects open <br />space, and she looked for clarification on how open space is protected and other conditional <br />uses may be allowed. Special Counsel for the City, Tom Willis, spoke to this and clarified <br />administrative versus legislative acts, however, at this point it is not clear the impacts of the <br />initiative. <br /> <br />M/S Howard/Pierce to extend the meeting to 11: 15 p.m. The motion carried by unanimous <br />voice vote. <br /> <br />Council expressed continued concern over the language of the initiative and legislative <br />versus administrative action concerns. Mr. Yamamoto reiterated they are talking about only <br />lands covered by the initiative in the five designations of the General Plan and two in the <br />Zoning Code. Mayor Foust asked for a more intensive list or chart on all the properties <br />affected by the initiative, not just those designated as parks. Concerns over the hypothetical <br />costs attached to the initiative if it passes, for elections was stressed as well as looking at the <br />fact that there would be more elections than might otherwise be estimated by the proponents <br />of the measure. The Mayor referred to a letter that was sent by the Chamber of Commerce <br />and asked the City Attorney to address some of the points made. <br /> <br />Mayor Foust asked for information on how much time would be offered to the Council to <br />accommodate these elections and asked again for further information on whether or not this <br />initiative applied to the Port of Redwood City, the Oracle properties, CEQA, the City of <br />Belmont, private properties, senior center, area H and playing fields. <br /> <br />Mr. Yamamoto stated the he would make such a list with the understanding that they would <br />define as many areas as possible on the existing map. His best estimate was that there <br />would be a six-figure cost to special election. The concerns from the Redwood Shores <br />community were also noted as well as the wetlands and park area in the Precise Plan. <br /> <br />M/S Howard/Pierce to extend the meeting to 11 :30 p.m. Motion was carried by unanimous <br />voice vote. <br /> <br />CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING <br />MINUTES <br /> <br />MAY 19, 2008 <br />PAGE 10 <br />