Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Jeff Austin stated that working towards environmental stewardship was important, but that <br />the proposed initiative may be giving lesser consideration to some residential and <br />business community members. He stated the initiative does not make it clear who or what <br />the target is in the initiative, and asked that further discussion warrants more clarity. He <br />would like Save the Bay to know that the City has a commitment toward the environmental <br />future of Redwood City. <br /> <br />Peggy Bruggman urged the City to remove its countermeasure since it deals with only one <br />landowner (Cargill), and therefore is legally challengeable. She stated that the <br />countermeasure allows that (I don't understand this?) open space land uses be decided <br />by an unfair 51 % vote, whereas the initiative provides the two-thirds requirement and this <br />is not un-democratic. She stated it takes a two-thirds vote to fund activities on these open <br />spaces, and it should take a two-thirds vote to destroy them. <br /> <br />James Jonas (with time conceded by Lynn Chou Jonas), stated he is in the Dock Town <br />community, and that they are part of the unintended consequences. He stated the <br />importance of reading and understanding the Open Space measure, in that it implies more <br />than it actually says. He spoke to the actualities of the Open Space measure and how this <br />will affect the community and its unintended consequences. He stated that all parties <br />could do a much better job in addressing this issue together as other communities have <br />done. <br /> <br />Cherlene Wright, Chairperson of Citizens to Protect Redwood City, addressed the <br />language on the proposed initiative. She pointed out what she called the larger possible <br />financial impact and how this might be on the ballot language. <br /> <br />Marsha Cohen stated she expected public officials to support the majority of what the <br />community desired, and that in gathering petition signatures, there was a two out of three <br />affirmation for the proposed amendment. She spoke to the issue of unintended <br />consequences, the relationship between the City and Cargill, and Council's delay on <br />putting this amendment on the November ballot. She also spoke to a request of public <br />records she submitted to City Clerk Vonderlinden for correspondence regarding Cargill. <br /> <br />Carole Wong submitted her comments in writing, and also spoke about her concerns over <br />the unintended consequences. Ms. Wong opined that these do exist for certain property <br />owners whose buildings and/or docks spread out into open waters. She spoke to the <br />zoning concerns for these property owners and the number of properties affected by this <br />initiative. <br /> <br />Mayor Foust clarified the number of properties affected on the waterfront which is actually <br />565 versus 575 she had previously cited, which included multifamily dwellings, single <br />family homes, landscaping and commercial properties. <br /> <br />Nancy Keegan spoke in favor of protecting open space but does not support the ballot <br />measure since many residences are potentially affected by this. She spoke to the <br />ramifications of this, if ever these residents were to sell their homes, since this would have <br />to be disclosed to a potential buyer. She stated she is in favor of the alternate measure, <br /> <br />REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />MINUTES <br /> <br />JULY 28, 2008 <br />PAGE 8 <br />