Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Joe Madley spoke of his concerns regarding Save the Bay and reiterated that there were <br />unintended consequences to the initiative, and he brought up the seven residential <br />properties which are designated as park property, which may at some point in time have <br />been purchased by the County to expand the park areas. He stated this did not happen, <br />and the General Plan would now need to address this, and that some items in the <br />upcoming new General Plan might come up under this two-thirds voting process if it is <br />passed. He urged the community to vote against the charter amendment. <br /> <br />Mayor Foust thanked all the speakers. She asked the City Attorney to give his short <br />presentation prior to a Council break and the ensuing Council discussion. <br /> <br />The City Attorney stated the staffs countermeasure addressed only the Cargill lands. He <br />cited the previous maps and specifics to the parcels of lands which are identified as Open <br />Space and would be affected by the initiative. He had photographs taken of the affected <br />lands, and in showing the photographs to Council and public, they can all work with a better <br />understanding of the scope of the countermeasure and the proposed initiative measure. <br />He had a member of the planning staff (Saleish Mehra) walk Council and those present <br />through the photographs of the 41 private properties involved, while also giving an <br />overview of these photographs in reference to their placement on the map with also <br />updated GIS maps done by the planning staff. <br /> <br />The Mayor stated there were also properties along Redwood Shores that were not depicted <br />in the photographs, due most probably to the logistics of getting these photographs, but this <br />represents 575 waterfront properties. The Vice Mayor asked about the Pacific Shores <br />parcel and if it is one of the parcels that is under consideration in the future as a ferry <br />terminal. The City's planning staff stated this area is not in an area that would be impacted <br />by the ballot initiative. The City Attorney stated that another issue that plays a role, under <br />the proposed initiative measure, is that the San Francisco Bay waters have not been <br />specifically looked into. The Mayor asked for clarification of this issue at a future time. <br /> <br />Council took a 15-minute break at 9:30 and resumed at 9:45 p.rn. <br /> <br />Council Discussion <br />Council spoke to the letter received on July 15th from the attorneys for Save the Bay, and <br />whether or not this letter posed any reason for changing what has already been proposed <br />in the countermeasure. The City Attorney stated the letter had been discussed and was <br />under analysis but no particular conclusions had been reached. Outside Counsel, Tom <br />Willis, stated the scope of the July 15th letter was to respond to the contentions about the <br />Open Space vote, and it did not address the issue of whether or not the countermeasure <br />could speak to just one parcel of land or not. He stated the Mayor had already asked for <br />further clarification on this aspect. Administrative versus legislative roles and tasks were <br />again discussed. Especially at issue are residential lands and their now designation as <br />park lands and how they are affected by the initiative. The City Attorney stated that the <br />advice in his staff reports had not changed, and to be clear there are uncertainties in the <br /> <br />JOINT SPECIAL CITY COUNCIUREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY BOARD <br />MEETING MINUTES <br /> <br />JULY 21, 2008 <br />PAGE 9 <br />