CC Min 2008-07-28 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

was set in place as of March 13, 2008, and no further changes could be made to its language by Council's efforts. The City Attorney stated that zoning is not the issue here for the seven homeowners; the issue is the General Plan Land Use Designation. If Council were to consider amending it, it would go through a General Plan amendment like any other project, which included a CEQA review, etc., and he expected,that this would be probably part of the new General Plan process which is already underway. Mr. Willis reiterated that, even if all this were done, those lands would still be listed as they are in the language of the proposed initiative, and would still be subject to the two-thirds vote. The City Attorney moved on to the sections of the countermeasure regarding election selections and time periods. Mr. Willis stated the countermeasure was drafted in a manner that would not require a special election. He stated that this way they would have an election 88 days after a development was voted on, with the earliest statewide election and/or a general municipal election to try and reduce costs in that area. He stated they had also drafted an exception in this area in the event of an emergency election or concern. Council continued to ask questions about the Cargill site and how to protect or prevent extensive development in that area in their countermeasure. The City Attorney stressed it was not a"this" and/or "thaY' issue, and restated that even prior to the initiative being brought forth, there were checks and balances in the system with respect to any development, whether it be Cargill or anybody else. He stated, for any development, there would have to be the full CEQA process and at the end of that process, they would have to go through a full-blown Environmental Impact Report. On the Cargill measure there was consensus to add the requirement "regarding" future Development of Cargill Lands". There was consensus to have this included. The Mayor stated to the community members that a project has not yet been approved for the Cargill lands, nor is Council in support of any project that is being shopped at this time. She also talked about the General Plan process, its price tag of $1.6 million to which they expect the community to be engaged in over a 20-month process. The Vice Mayor further stated that Council's work is not based on its opinions on what should or should not be developed or preserved when it comes to the Cargill lands, but their work is to protect the community and its residents. Council asked for an explanation of what would happen if two initiatives are put to ballot and both pass. The City Attorney explained by giving the following example: -Measure A and Measure B would reach ballot and the majority voting process. -Both Measure A and Measure B reach the 50% approval mark, but Measure a received 60% of the vote and Measure B received 55%. -Measure A would then go into effect. And/or by further example: REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 28, 2008 MINUTES PAGE 11 MINUTE BOOK NO. 62 Page No. 179