I had hoped with Pleasanton almost built out, that the growth v. no growth wars could quiet down. When City Council reached agreement on the draft General Plan Land Use Element early this year, it seemed that the council and community were coming to consensus about Pleasanton’s future. But that consensus would be shattered by the poorly worded and unnecessary Peoples’ Hillside Initiative (Measure PP on your November ballot).
Measure PP is primarily a NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard) Initiative. City Council approved the Oak Grove project last November by a 4-1 vote, and that triggered this NIMBY Initiative. A citizens’ committee made up from adjacent neighborhoods endorsed the final project design by a substantial majority. The approved density is only half the density stated in the General Plan.
So a minority of that neighbor committee broke away and started both a referendum and an initiative, against Oak Grove and other projects like it. They incorrectly believe that city politicians can interpret the stated density as meaning any density between zero and the stated density. In their view, allowing even 50 percent of the stated density is a political gift, and dedicating a 490-acre public park is too small of a gift back.
If a neighborhood minority can take away all of the property owners’ rights in Oak Grove and similar properties, with no regard for the general plan or the Constitution, then the incentive for political gouging is too great, and the political wars will never end.
* That is good news for the lawyers who will litigate the tricky clauses and ambiguous wording of this NIMBY initiative.
* That is good news for people who see our city government primarily as entertainment–a circus in which outcomes do not matter.
* But this NIMBY initiative is bad news if you want city government that develops consensus, provides good service, is predictable, and is fair.
* This NIMBY initiative is bad news if you want parks and trails, and quality of life. (e.g. 490-acre park on Oak Grove.)
* This NIMBY initiative is bad news if you want the general plan update finally completed, and a general plan that embodies a community consensus around a worthy vision for Pleasanton.
The far better alternative is the initiative sponsored by our City Council (Measure QQ on your November ballot). Measure QQ sets up a consensus process to develop a hillside ordinance consistent with general plan hillside policies.
[These views are strictly mine. I am not (yet) associated with the “No on Measure PP” Committee, if there is one.]
Peter MacDonald was formerly the city attorney for the city of Pleasanton from 1982-1988 and formerly the chair of the Pleasanton Downtown Association board of directors. He practices law from his firm in downtown Pleasanton.
