|
|
|
Uploaded: Wednesday, March 5, 2008, 6:10 PM
Council tables Oak Grove hearing until judge rules
Vote likely to move to November if referendum battle succeeds
|
| The Pleasanton City Council Tuesday postponed indefinitely a possible public hearing on a citizens' coalition's request for a referendum on the proposed Oak Grove housing and open space project until an Alameda Superior Court judge decides if their plea can be heard.
Since Feb. 22, all eyes have been on Dept. 31, the courtroom of Judge Frank Roesch who heard arguments by lawyers representing the developers of the Oak Grove project and its opponents. Although he issued a temporary ruling two days earlier siding with the developers, it's his permanent ruling that counts and he has yet to issue it.
City Atty. Michael Rousch said he has seen judges completely reverse their temporary rulings after hearing the legal arguments in court. He believes Roesch could go either way.
At stake are land use plans for 600 acres of wooded hilltop land above Kottinger Ranch and Vintage Hills, property long owned by Jennifer Lin and her brother Frederic, who also developed Kottinger Ranch in the 1990s. They won approval from the City Council last fall to develop 51 large custom home lots on 77 acres of their property with a development agreement that also gives 496 acres free of charge to the city of Pleasanton for permanent use as parkland, hiking trails and open space. It would be the largest land grant ever given to Pleasanton.
Before the ink was dry on the agreement, however, a citizens' coalition called Save Pleasanton's Hills was organized by former councilwoman and 2004 mayoral candidate Kay Ayala and others to seek a voter referendum to overturn the council's action. In November and early December, the group collected more than 6,000 signatures calling for the referendum. The Alameda County Registrar's office later confirmed that more than 4,000 of the signatures came from registered Pleasanton voters, more than the 3,600 needed to qualify their petitions.
But the Lins sued to block the referendum, arguing that Ayala's group failed to adhere to state law in soliciting signatures by having all the information necessary for the public to inspect before they signed.
Ayala countered with a motion also filed in Superior Court seeking the dismissal of the Lins' suit on grounds that it violates a state statute that protects individuals from "Strategic Lawsuits against Public Participation, known as SLAPP.
It's these two legal issues that Judge Roesch is now reviewing.
If Roesch makes permanent his temporary ruling, the Ayala petition is cancelled out and the Lins can proceed with their development. If he reverses himself and supports Ayala, then the City Council must decide if it wants to rescind its approval or call for a public vote.
Tuesday, the council was poised to call for a vote if Roesch ruled for Ayala, and considered continuing the public hearing until Thursday or even Friday morning in case his ruling came then. All paperwork for a referendum, including 300-word opinions for and against the measure to overturn, must be submitted to the County Registrar by 5 p.m. Friday to qualify for the June 3 Primary, which a majority on the council wanted to do. In the end, however, the council agreed with Roush that there would be too little time to get everything ready by the March 7 deadline.
- Jeb Bing Are you receiving Express, our free daily e-mail edition? See a sample and sign-up for Express.
|
|
| Comments
|
Posted by Paulette Kenyon, a resident of the Val Vista neighborhood, on Mar 8, 2008 at 1:15 pm Proponents of the Save Our Hills initiative have claimed that those who agree with the settlement with the Lins are anti-democratic - that those who argue against this initiative project wish to block a healthy exercise in living democracy. But, I must remind those who are leading (or quietly behind the curtains, supporting) this campaign that a group of citizens (who also happened to support Brozosky and Ayala politically) shouted down the opportunity for a townhall meeting on the Iraq War - which in my mind, is a much more viable exercise in living democracy.
So, that argument is suspect, in my opinion - least when it comes to the leaders of this initiative. Kay also voted no on the USAPATRIOT Act resolution that passed, by a hair when it came before the last council. Steve voted no as well, although, to be fair, he hasn't publicly supported this initiative in any big way since he became a school board member.
In any event, as much as I don't want to see more houses - especially gigantic luxury homes - built in Pleasanton, I do think that the deal is a good one. I was one of the first people on board when the Save the Pleasanton Ridge initiative came into being. I was at the Sierra Club meeting where Save The Pleasanton Ridge was hatched. The big difference between the Ridge campaign and this Hill campaign is that it's easier to build homes on hills than on ridges. So, from the get-go, we had that advantage going for us. It was a victory; but, it was a victory more easily given up by builders, who would've found fewer viable lots to build on up there, had we not claimed victory. However, even then, it didn't stop the opposition from fighting against saving the ridge. So, if that was a difficult and costly enterprise, I can only imagine what this one will be like, on property that's easier to build upon.
Now that it's gone this far and Kay has gotten alot of support from citizens, it seems that citizens will be footing the bill for an initiative process. So...maybe since it's costing us, people will be willing to support paying for this chunk of land rather than doing something else - like lending money to the schools to save their programs that are being cut. Who knows? Maybe miracles do happen. I'm a pragmatist(not a radical leftist, as Tom Tuttle keeps calling me); so, I'm hoping that the sane and reasonable will find solutions to this new dilemma. Perhaps, it is possible for a better deal, once you pull the whole city onboard. Although, my gut tells me that it may be unlikely that we will get the park that some of us had hoped to get if the Lins offer is turned down; and, this will be a waste of time and money, not the breath of fresh democratic air that the pushers of this intiative claim. With all this democracy in the air, can we have the Iraq townhall meeting now?
|
|
Posted by i was there, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Mar 8, 2008 at 3:07 pm Just for the record, Steve Brozosky was seen more then once in front of a store collecting signatures for the referendum. That's active support for the referndum!
|
|
Posted by Jerry, a resident of the Oak Hill neighborhood, on Mar 8, 2008 at 10:28 pm Of course you can have your townhall meeting. Find a space such as the city library, or where ever, that can be used free of charge and have at it. Why do you insist on having this debate at a city council meeting. Why not have it at a location where pro/con can argue and not interfere with the business of the citizens of Pleasanton. Where would one find a better example of "living democracy". I would wager you would find little or no opposition to such a meeting.
At a recent City Council meeting, Councilmember Sullivan mentioned a townhall meeting such as you desire and received no support from the council, so you just may be out of luck there. But all is not lost, you can still speak about any subject you desire (well, almost any subject) during the public comments portion of the council meetings. One gentleman rambles on about something during this portion of all the council meetings.
One would hope you aren't hinting that those that don't agree with your way of thinking are less entitled to "democracy" than you. From what I observed, the group of citizens that supposedly "shouted down" your proposal for a townhall meeting were exercising the same rights we all enjoy. They just had more support and a more convincing argument. If you need to place blame somewhere, place it where it most likely fits - on the council members that wouldn't support your adgenda. But wait, they were also exercising their democratic right.
IMO, it doesn't matter how Kay, Steve, or anyone else, voted on an issue or if someone chose to collect signatures or chose to man a "Don't sign" table. They were exercising their rights as citizens.
If this referendum is upheld of course the citizens will "foot the bill" for an election process, just as they do when any citizens initative is placed before them. As for not getting a park, does anyone not believe some type of development will be approved for Oak Grove. It may not be what the developer is proposing at this time but some type development will be there.
Thank you for fighting for the Pleasanton Ridge. You, and others, have assured the beauty of the Ridge is there for all to enjoy. With the great weather we're having now, it's becoming more beautiful each day. As I sit on my deck in the mornings I'm amazed at the colors that appear.
As for school funding - that's being debated elsewhere on this forum.........
|
|
Posted by think big, not small, a resident of the Pleasanton Meadows neighborhood, on Mar 8, 2008 at 11:07 pm "As for school funding - that's being debated elsewhere on this forum........"
it may be debated elsewhere on the forum, but it's not mutually exclusive. everything is interrelated. sorry you can't see that. think big picture instead of focusing on the details of a component of the big picture.
|
|
Posted by Jerry, a resident of the Oak Hill neighborhood, on Mar 9, 2008 at 1:23 am think big, not small,
Wow!!!!! Not mutually exclusive!!! Everything is interrelated!!! The big picture!!!
Sorry I couldn't see that, too...
Thanks for pointing it out, I'll try harder next time.... :)
|
|
Posted by anon, a resident of another community, on Mar 9, 2008 at 1:50 pm What does Iraq and the Patriot Act have to do with Save Our Hiils? Nothing. Paulette Kenyon, it would help the debate if you could stay on topic.
|
|
Posted by think big, not small, a resident of the Pleasanton Meadows neighborhood, on Mar 9, 2008 at 9:42 pm Jerry, your refrigerator is running.
|
|
|
| |
|
Send this story
Print this story
