CITY OF PLEASANTON
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
March 1, 2022
This meeting was conducted in accordance with Governor Newsom' s Executive Order N- 29- 20 and AB 361 COVID- 19 pandemic protocols.
SPECIAL MEETING
Mayor Brown called the special meeting of the City Council to order at the hour of 5:45 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Present: Councilmembers Arkin, Balch, Narum, Testa, Mayor Brown
Absent: None
PUBLIC COMMENT — None.
ADJOURN TO CLOSED SESSION FOR THE FOLLOWING:
1. PUBLIC EMPLOYEE APPOINTMENT per Gov' t Code § 54957:
Title: City Manager
ADJOURNMENT — The special meeting adjourned at 6:59 p.m.
REGULAR MEETING
Mayor Brown called the regular meeting of the City Council to order at the hour of 7:04 p.m.
Councilmember Arkin led the Pledge of Allegiance and provided opening remarks.
ROLL CALL
Present: Councilmembers Arkin, Balch, Narum, Testa, Mayor Brown
Absent: None
CLOSED SESSION REPORT
City Attorney Dan Sodergren advised there was no reportable action.
AGENDA AMENDMENTS — None.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Councilmember Arkin recused from Items 7, 8, and 11. Councilmember Balch recused from Item 9.
City Manager
1. Approved meeting minutes of November 16, 2022
Community Development
2. Actions of the Zoning Administrator and Planning Commission
3. Adopted and waived full reading of Resolution No. 22-1276 approving and authorizing the City Manager to execute a Preannexation Agreement with Kevin Nguyen and Eleanore Yee for water and sanitary sewer connections to an existing residence located at 720 Mockingbird Lane in unincorporated Alameda County and authorizing an application to the Local Agency Formation Commission ( LAFCo) seeking approval from LAVWMA if needed for an out-of-area service agreement for the water connection; authorized connection of 720 Mockingbird Lane ( APN 949- 6- 1-6) to the City water and sanitary sewer systems, provided: all connection work is done to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; all costs are borne by the property owner; and the proposed extension of City services is approved by LAFCo, and LAVWMA, if needed
4. Adopted and waived full reading of Resolution No. 22-1277 approving the Altamont Settlement Agreement Education Advisory Board Expenditure Plan for FY 2022/ 2023
5. Adopted and waived full reading of Resolution No. 22-1278 accepting the list of general priority areas for future acquisition related to strategic planning and conservation evaluation consistent with the Altamont Landfill Settlement Agreement
6. Adopted and waived full reading of Resolution No. 22- 1281 approving the Annual Progress Report on implementation of the General Plan Housing Element and Growth Management Report for calendar year 2021 and authorizing submittal to the California Department of Housing and Community Development and the Governor' s Office of Planning and Research
7. Adopted and waived second reading of Ordinance No. 2232 approving the application for Planned Unit Development ( P) rezoning and development plan approval to construct a: 1) Two- story home and related site improvements on Parcel 1/ A ( fronting Martin Avenue); and 2) One- story home and related site improvements on Parcel 2/B (Fronting Trenery Drive) at 3707 Trenery Drive, as filed under Case Nos. PUD- 142 and P21- 0133 * Councilmember Arkin recused
8. Adopted and waived second reading of Ordinance No. 2233 approving the application for Planned Unit Development ( PUD) Development Plan approval to establish development standards for the construction of a single- family home with related site improvements at 3747 Trenery Drive, as filed under Case No. PUD- 144 *Councilmember Arkin recused
9. Adopted and waived second reading of Ordinance No. 2234 approving applications for Planned Unit Development ( PUD) development plan and Vesting Tentative Map for a 25- lot residential project located on a vacant parcel with APN No. 949- 16-6, as filed under PUD- 138 and vesting tentative subdivision map 8616 * Councilmember Balch recused Economic Development
10. Introduced and waive first reading of Ordinance No. 2235 extending the provisions of Urgency Ordinance No. 2219 for a 15 percent cap on commission charge by third- party food delivery services on Pleasanton restaurants for six months
Engineering
11. Authorized a funding allocation in the amount of$ 34, 557 from the Streets- CIP General Fund Fund 211) to supplement the previously collected funding for improvements to the frontage of 3520 Dennis Drive such that work is fully funded; authorized the City Engineer to enter into a reimbursement agreement with the VTPM 11110 subdivider to improve the frontage at 3520 Dennis Drive utilizing funding previously submitted by the PM 8291 subdivider * Councilmember Arkin recused
City Council Minutes Page 2 of 12 March 1, 2022
MOTION: It was m/s by Narum/ Testa to approve the Consent Calendar as recommended and as noted. Motion passed by the following vote:
Ayes: Councilmembers Arkin, Balch, Narum, Testa, Mayor Brown Noes: None
Absent: None
MEETING OPEN TO THE PUBLIC
12. Public Comment regarding items not listed on the agenda.
Mayor Brown opened public comment. There being no speakers, public comment was closed.
PUBLIC HEARINGS AND OTHER MATTERS
13. Adopt and waive full reading of Resolution No. 22-1279 accepting the midyear FY 2021/ 22 operating budget and amending the FY 2021/ 22 operating budget accordingly Finance Director Tina Olson presented the Mid- Year Operating Budget Report. She provided an overview of revised revenue estimates and recommended adjustments to expenditures and transfers with the goal to maintain a balanced budget and to ensure reserve levels are consistent with City policy.
Director Olson reported a projected $ 5.3 million surplus and staff is recommending it be allocated to the Capital Improvement Program ( CIP) reserve. The recommendation is based on expensive projects in the pipeline for which the City will need additional funding. She reported sales tax revenues are projected to be $ 2 million over budget and property tax looks to be as previously projected.
Director Olson reported there has been a 51% increase in General Fund Revenues over the last 10 years and 9% since 2021 which shows the City is rebounding from the pandemic. She noted the 9% includes the $ 4. 25 million American Rescue Plan Act ( ARPA) funds. She reported property tax is trending upwards but starting to flatten out which is consistent with trends reported by the City' s consultant. She reported sales tax has increased 25% since 2012 and 9% increase since 2021. She expressed concern regarding Transient Occupancy Tax ( TOT) and Recreation revenue which have not rebounded to pre- pandemic levels.
Director Olson provided an overview of General Fund Expenditures and reported the labor net was $ 1. 3 million and the non- labor net was $ 0. 9 million and provided expenditure details. She advised many contracts are increasing due to inflation. She noted the General Fund Contingency was reduced by
1. 3 million which was moved into Salaries. She reported General Fund Reserves of $ 600, 000 will be used to cover COVID expenses and allow $ 400, 000 to remain for Covid expenses in the future. She advised the General Fund Reserves are 26% of the Operating Expenses so there is a healthy operating reserve.
Director Olson provided an updated 10- Year General Fund Forecast. She advised CaIPERS provided the City with an updated annual contribution based on the large investment return they received last year and explained the assumption used to develop the forecast. The CaIPERS contributions will drop in FY 25/ 26 compared to what is projected and there will be a healthy General Fund Surplus by FY 30/ 31.
Director Olson reported the Water Operations Fund is reporting a $ 3. 2 million reduction in revenues due to drought conservation measures. She advised some of that will be offset by Zone 7's reduced City Council Minutes Page 3 of 12 March 1, 2022
purchase of water by $ 1.9 million. She reported staff will be bringing an item to the City Council on March 15 to look at implementing the drought rates it had approved in 2015.
Director Olson reported the Sewer Operations and Maintenance Fund shows a decrease in revenues and noted there are increases in expenditures. She reported the Golf Fund shows a $ 400, 000 increase in revenue and a $ 192,000 increase in expenses for staff. She recommends looking at the surplus at the year- end and looking to repay the General Fund loan to the Golf Fund. Lastly, she reported a 135, 000 decrease in revenues in the Internal Services Funds and a $ 656, 000 increase in expenses.
Councilmember Balch noted the pressure on the City' s Operating Budget will be relieved by the large return from CaIPERS last year. He inquired how quickly the City will realize the impact of that relief.
Director Olson explained that CaIPERS reported these numbers and has adjusted operations over the last several years to be more conservative.
Councilmember Testa reported she attended a CaIPERS workshop where they announced the 21% return. She advised they noted at the time they indicated the return will make an impact. Director Olson reported she attended a CaIPERS webinar and they anticipated savings. She explained nothing is happening for the next 3 to 4 years but then the savings will be realized.
Councilmember Testa inquired about the $ 600, 000 coming from the COVID Reserve. Director Olson explained it was part of the $ 1 million allocated General Fund Surplus in FY 20/ 21 to help departments recover pandemic- related expenses. She confirmed they were not related to the ARPA funds.
Councilmember Narum inquired why staff is recommending allocating $ 5. 3 million to the CIP Reserve instead of backfilling the Repair and Replacement Fund. Director Olson advised that backfilling the Repair and Replacement Fund is an option. She believes the Repair and Replacement Fund will be rebuilt quickly according to the financial plan at $20 million. She noted the amount is a policy decision.
Councilmember Arkin inquired if the $ 400, 000 for the Crisis Response Program is at risk. Director Olson advised it is sitting in a separate reserve and is not at risk.
Councilmember Arkin inquired about the General Fund loan to the Golf Fund. Director Olson explained the loan was to finance supporting infrastructure for the Golf Course. She advised the balance is $ 5. 5 million.
Councilmember Arkin noted the Sewer Operations and Maintenance Fund balance is 44% which is outside of the City policy of the maximum 40%. Director Olson advised the Water Committee is conducting a rate study and the balance of the fund is included in the rate study.
Mayor Brown expressed surprise regarding the net decrease in expenditures for Zone 7 water and inquired if that means residents are already cutting back on water usage. Director Olson advised it is a reflection of cutbacks to date and anticipated cutbacks through year- end.
Mayor Brown inquired about the $ 27, 500 contribution to the Pleasanton Unified School District' s PUSD) Solar Panel Project. Interim City Manager Brian Dolan advised the previous City Manager agreed to contribute to the project.
Mayor Brown reported she and Councilmember Testa attended a Livermore/ Pleasanton Liaison Committee and noted there was a contingency for Livermore Airport studies. Interim City Manager Dolan advised there is a consultant on board who is reviewing the materials.
Mayor Brown Mayor Brown opened public comment. There being no speakers, the public comment period was closed.
City Council Minutes Page 4 of 12 March 1, 2022
Councilmember Narum moved to approve the resolution adopting the midyear FY 2021/22 operating budget as recommended and as noted. She expressed delight regarding the increase in sales tax revenues for the City and hopes it is due to residents shopping local.
Councilmember Balch seconded the motion. He agrees with placing the $ 5. 3 million into the CIP Reserve in anticipation of upcoming projects where the City will be challenged to identify funding. He thanked the City staff for doing more with less staff as positions are not being filled as positions become vacant.
Councilmember Arkin noted she is happy to hear sales tax revenue is rebounding and expressed caution regarding the CaIPERS forecast. She expressed support for allocating the $ 5. 3 million surplus to the CIP Reserve for future projects.
Councilmember Testa expressed delight in such a robust rebound for the City.
Mayor Brown expressed support for allocating the $ 5.3 million to the CIP Reserve.
MOTION: It was m/s by Narum/ Balch to approve the resolution adopting the midyear FY 2021/ 22 operating budget as recommended and as noted. Motion passed by the following vote:
Ayes: Councilmembers Arkin, Balch, Narum, Testa, Mayor Brown Noes: None
Absent: None
14. Public Hearing — Appeal of the Planning Commission' s denial of design review application ( P20- 1053) to construct a new 1,069- square- foot two- story residential unit behind an existing commercial building located at 218 Ray Street
Councilmember Balch reported he heard this item while he was on the Planning Commission. He noted the City Attorney advised he could participate in the hearing as there was no action on the item when it came before the Planning Commission.
Community Development Director Ellen Clark reported the item is an appeal of an item previously denied by the Planning Commission.
Associate Planner Megan Campbell provided a brief overview of the site on 218 Ray Street. She advised a letter of support was received from two adjacent properties. She advised letters of concern was received from property owners on Walnut Drive. She reported in 2002 a two- unit 2,400 square foot apartment building was approved on the subject site and required four in-lieu parking spaces although the project was never constructed.
Associate Planner Campbell explained the current project proposal is in the same location as the 2002 project and would construct a new 1,069 square foot two- story residential unit in the rear of the lot behind an existing commercial building, along with a 434 square foot carport. She reported the project complies with its land- use designation and is located in the C- C Zone. She advised the subject lot is within the Downtown Revitalization District, the Core Overlay, and the Downtown Specific Plan ( DSP).
She noted the site has a land- use designation of Downtown Commercial in the DSP. She reported DSP LD- P 20 notes that ground- floor residential is permitted if certain conditions are met. She advised the Downtown Design Guidelines also apply to the subject property and staff feels the guidelines are met.
Associate Planner Campbell provided a brief overview of the building design and staff found the design is compatible with existing buildings. She advised staff finds that locating the new unit behind the existing commercial building minimizes its visibility from the street. She site design does include some minor modifications including relocating some of the parking and trash enclosures to accommodate the City Council Minutes Page 5 of 12 March 1, 2022
united and advised staff finds them suitable. She advised the project will add trees to the existing landscape.
Associate Planner Campbell explained the site with the new unit requires 12 parking spaces including 2 spaces for the residential unit and 10 spaces for the commercial unit. She advised in the Applicant' s appeal, detail was added that advised the carport would be assigned in its entirety to the residential unit with the other surface units being assigned to the commercial property. The project would comply with the required parking for the residential unit as it provided two code- compliant spaces within the carport.
She reported the project is including an additional 9 parking spaces outside of the carport which all comply with the code. The Applicant is proposing 1 in-lieu parking fee which is permitted in the Municipal Code. She reported in the appeal, the Applicant offered to allow the 9 commercial parking spaces to be opened to the public on the weekends.
Associate Planner Campbell explained the Municipal Code offers many parking solutions in this zoning district including parking variances, agreements with nearby lots, reductions in parking requirements if property owners create easements between lots and allows for in-lieu payments to offset parking requirements. She advised the project is requesting 1 parking site be provided through an in-lieu payment of$ 22,000. She noted in-lieu payments have been accepted by the City in the past.
Associate Planner Campbell reported the proposed project will be Green Point Rated and will include drought- tolerant landscaping, an electric vehicle charger, and solar panels. She advised the area is a positive location for a new residential unit given the proximity to the Altamont Commuter Express, amenities such as shopping, and potential employment locations.
Associate Planner Campbell reported the Planning Commission reviewed the project in January and was supportive of many aspects including building design, and the site design. She noted most of the Planning Commission' s discussion centered on parking with some supporting in- lieu parking and some opposing it. She reported the Planning Commission denied the application by a vote of 3-2. She reiterated that the Applicant advised they would dedicate that parking space to the residential unit in the appeal paperwork which was not clear during the Planning Commission' s review of the application. She advised staff has added the carport assignment to the residential unit as Condition of Approval No. 07.
Associate Planner Campbell reported that staff recommends the City Council approve the appeal and the application through the resolution and approve the in-lieu parking agreement.
Councilmember Narum inquired if a parking study was conducted. Associate Planner Campbell advised staff did not conduct a parking count.
Councilmember Narum inquired if an off-site parking option was discussed with the Applicant as an alternative to paying the in-lieu parking fee. Associate Planner Campbell reported the Applicant could obtain an agreement with neighboring property within 300 feet of the subject lot as an alternative. Staff would need to review a proposed off- site parking agreement. She deferred to the Appellant to speak regarding this topic.
Councilmember Balch inquired if the Applicant could build a ground floor Accessory Dwelling Unit ADU) on the property. Community Development Director Clark clarified that since there is not a primary residential unit on the property, an ADU could not be built on the site. She does not believe the site would be eligible for a Senate Bill ( SB) 35 application because it is a single unit only.
Councilmember Arkin inquired if it is just a dental office in the commercial property. Associate Planner Campbell reported the property also contains the personal office of the Applicant.
Councilmember Arkin inquired what in-lieu parking fees have been used for in the past. Interim City Manager Dolan advised the funds have been used for Downtown parking projects in the corridor.
City Council Minutes Page 6 of 12 March 1, 2022
Councilmember Testa inquired if there was an option for the property to be subject to SB 9. Associate Planner Campbell clarified the subject property would not be subject to SB 9.
Councilmember Testa inquired how an off-site parking agreement is even possible. Associate Planner Campbell advised the Municipal Code allows the off- site parking through a Conditional Use Permit CUP) and specifically states it would be in perpetuity as long as the CUP exists.
Mayor Brown recalled the City Council allowed Walnut Court to be permit- only parking because that area is so heavily parked by others in the region.
Mayor Brown inquired if the parking space must be used for parking only and cannot be occupied by other items. Associate Planner Campbell advised there is not a condition that the space must be used for parking but it can be added.
Mayor Brown inquired if parking was allowed on another lot whether an easement would be recorded on the deed. City Attorney Sodergren confirmed there would be a recorded document as well as the CUP.
Mayor Brown inquired about the parking lift and noted that Director Clark had previously stated a parking lift could probably not obtain a design review approval. Director Clark clarified the project was modified from the time it was reviewed by the Planning Commission and at the time, the parking lift was located within the uncovered parking spaces and there was concern it would not pass design review.
She noted it has since been moved into the carport area and is better screened.
Applicant Wassim Naguib reported the project was deficient in half of a parking space but needed to round up to 1 parking space. He advised the Adobe Plaza property owner expressed support for the project. He noted the dentist' s office is only open two times per week and noted there are available parking spots even when it is open for business. He advised he is unaware if the Adobe Plaza property owner has surplus parking spots. He advised the City has allowed in-lieu parking fees on other projects.
He reported he has his office on the second floor and does not have many visitors. He advised he has been working with the community to make the parking lot available when the lot is not in use for business. He referenced the letters of opposition of residents from Walnut Avenue and advised they already have permitted parking during business hours. He does not see a real issue with the parking and noted it seems he is offering more than he trying to obtain concessions from the City.
Mayor Brown noted there are two surface parking spaces for the residential unit and inquired if the third space with the parking lift was added to allow for additional capacity. Mr. Naguib confirmed that was the case.
Mayor Brown explained the Downtown Specific Plan is looking for the worst- case scenario when it comes to computing the parking spaces and noted the current use is very low.
Mayor Brown opened the public hearing. There being no speakers, the public hearing was closed.
Mr. Naguib explained the parking was calculated based on the full square footage of the building. He advised he is willing the open the parking lot on weekends for public use and pay the in-lieu parking fee to resolve any issues. He noted there are not currently any parking issues in the area.
Councilmember Arkin reported she has no issue regarding the plan of the building and the parking is the only issue she sees. She encouraged the Applicant to not use the car lift due to maintenance and safety issues. She recommends conditioning it on obtaining the use of an additional parking space from an adjacent business such as Adobe Plaza.
City Council Minutes Page 7 of 12 March 1, 2022
Councilmember Arkin inquired if the approval can be conditioned on obtaining another parking spot on an adjacent property. City Attorney Sodergren advised it would be conditioning the approval to secure another spot through the Municipal Code' s CUP process.
Councilmember Arkin moved approval of the project, adding the condition the Applicant secure one spot with a neighboring business, and no parking lift. Mayor Brown asked for a friendly amendment that the parking spaces in the residential unit stay clear so they can be used for parking only.
Councilmember Arkin agreed to the friendly amendment.
Councilmember Testa seconded the motion for discussion. She expressed concern regarding adding a parking burden in the Downtown area. She advised her concern is the Downtown retail vibrancy and having enough parking. She noted she is not comfortable with the lift or with the off-site parking.
Councilmember Narum advised she is uncomfortable with the motion. She inquired what would happen if the Applicant is unable to obtain an off-site parking agreement. She would rather see a parking county study of the property. She expressed support for using the lift and believes it is a creative way to solve the parking problem Downtown. She agrees with conditioning the parking spaces in the carport to remain clear for parking so they are not used for storage. She would like to see the modification of Condition of Approval No. 16, Hours of Construction, be modified to a Saturday start time of 9:00 a.m.
She advised she is unable to support the motion as it stands.
Mayor Brown inquired about the noise levels of using the car lift. Associate Planner Campbell reported she does not have a decibel limit for the car lift.
Councilmember Balch expressed concern that denying the use of the car lift due to maintenance and safety concerns. He expressed support for allowing the use of the car lift as an innovative solution to the parking problem. He believes the car lift will be used and believes the impact will be minimal. He advised the dentist's office is being used during the day. He expressed support for supporting staff's recommendation for approval with the added modification of requiring the residential parking spaces remain clear, modifying the hours of construction on Saturday, and allowing the in-lieu parking fee.
Mayor Brown expressed support for the project. She inquired about the child safety features of the car lift. Mr. Naguib reported the car lift is keyed and cannot be operated without the key. He advised other car lifts are being used in Pleasanton. He acknowledged the car lift is mechanical but does not believe it to be noisy. Mayor Brown expressed support for an agreement with an adjacent business parking space.
Councilmember Balch requested that Councilmember Arkin remove the language that prohibits the use of the car lift. Councilmember Arkin agreed to change her motion to make the use of the car, require the Applicant obtain the use of an adjacent business parking space, require the carport parking spaces to remain clear for parking use, and revise the Saturday construction hours to start at 9:00 a.m.
Councilmember Testa inquired how the off-site parking space helps the existing parking burden Downtown and is unsure the Applicant can obtain such a parking agreement. She expressed concern about how the parking agreement satisfies DSP requirements. She expressed opposition to the in- lieu parking fee and does not believe it honors the requirements of the DSP.
Mayor Brown disagreed and advised there is an underutilized parking lot next door and noted easements are recorded on deeds and are quite common. She believes Adobe Plaza is out of proportion to the great number of parking spaces to the number of buildings. She expressed support for requiring the Applicant be required to obtain a parking agreement.
Councilmember Narum agreed with Mayor Brown. She inquired if a parking study would be required if the use changed in the commercial building. Associate Planner Campbell advised staff would look at City Council Minutes Page 8 of 12 March 1, 2022
the zoning and what is allowed and would require a zoning certificate where the use is one of the contemplated uses. Interim City Manager Dolan advised the parking requirement would most likely be the same if there were a new commercial use in place. He advised the process is specifically defined in the Zoning Code.
Councilmember Narum inquired what would happen if the owner of Adobe Plaza does not grant the Applicant the use of the parking space. Associate Planner Campbell explained the Applicant could not then meet the conditions and could not build the project. Interim City Manager Dolan advised the Applicant should be given flexibility in pursuing other commercial properties or residential properties for the same treatment as long as they are within 300 feet of the property.
Councilmember Testa expressed concern that the City would allow the Applicant to obtain a parking space from a residential property. Interim City Manager Dolan advised it requires a CUP from the Planning Commission and would have to be reviewed.
Interim City Manager Dolan inquired if the Applicant could obtain the same parking agreement from a residential property. Associate Planner Campbell advised she would look up the code but does not believe it specifies the zoning.
Councilmember Balch noted he would be comfortable in conditioning that the Applicant would have to find a spot within 300 feet under the Municipal Code.
Councilmember Testa expressed concern regarding the fact that the parking agreement creates the illusion that the parking demand has been met Downtown.
MOTION: It was m/s by Arkin/ Testa to adopt and waive full reading of Resolution No. 22- 1280 approving an application for a design review at 218 Ray Street, as filed under Case Nos. P20- 1053; as recommended and as noted. Motion passed by the following vote:
Ayes: Councilmembers Arkin, Balch, Narum, Testa, Mayor Brown Noes: None
Absent: None
15. Introduced and waived first reading of Ordinance No. 2236 adopting district elections for City Councilmembers, establishing district boundaries, and amending Chapter 2.04 of Title 2 of the Pleasanton Municipal Code
City Attorney Sodergren advised the item codifies the decision the City Council made on February 24, 2022, for a final district map and the sequencing of elections. He reported the map selected was the Tangerine Map as identified in the previous public hearings and reported Districts 1 and 3 elections would begin at beginning of the General District Elections in 2022 and Districts 2 and 4 would begin in the election of November 2024.
Mayor Brown opened the public hearing.
Jackie Byerly expressed support for the Tangerine Map passed by the majority of the City Council. She noted some say it separates the Ventana Hills neighborhood but the same people believe it is a good thing that the Downtown area is divided and has two representatives. She expressed opposition to the Green Map as it will cause residents to lose a Councilmember who is experienced, knowledgeable, and whose intent and courage are well- recognized. She noted the Lime Map would also prohibit the Councilmember to run for office in the future and believes it to be a disenfranchisement.
City Council Minutes Page 9 of 12 March 1. 2022
Councilmember Balch inquired if any of the maps will prohibit any of the City Councilmembers from running for office. Thomas Willis, Olson Remcho, advised the maps will not prohibit anyone from running for office but it is just an issue of when they run.
John Bauer reported he sent an email to the City Council expressing his opinion of the vote. He reported the Tangerine Map prevailed by a 3-2 vote and noted it is obvious that some of the City Council do not agree with the map. He advised the discussion of gerrymandering came up last Thursday and encouraged the City Council to vote unanimously to accept the democratic vote taken last Thursday.
Vicki LaBarge expressed concerns regarding the Tangerine Map and is appalled that Mayor Brown and Councilmembers Testa and Arkin think dividing a neighborhood is acceptable when there are options in the Lime and Green Maps that do not divide neighborhoods. She referenced the district formation criteria and noted the State law shall not adopt district boundaries to favor or discriminate against a political party. She advised on February 3rd the City Council agreed that neighborhoods should not be divided but now agreed to divide Ventana Hills and Mission Park. She encouraged the City Council to not adopt the Tangerine Map but to adopt the Lime or Green Map.
Justin Brown expressed concern for accepting the Tangerine Map as the districting plan for the next 10 years. He advised his concern with the Tangerine Map is that it fails to preserve known communities of interest. He noted Ventana Hills should neither be divided along a secondary road nor should it be separated from Mission Park. He advised the counterargument that residents are receiving more representation is simply untrue. He noted the Tangerine Map is not easily identifiable and understandable by residents. He encouraged the City Council to delay the vote to modify the Tangerine Map or select a map that satisfies the requirements.
Kelly Cousins expressed support for the Tangerine Map and the district election sequencing. She trusts the opinion of the consultants who have deemed the map is fully compliant with State and Federal voting laws. She commended the City Council for providing a fair and transparent process.
Jocelyn Combs reported she had submitted a map similar to the Tangerine Map but believes the Lime Map is a better match for Pleasanton. She encouraged the City Council to adopt the Lime Map.
Mayor Brown closed the public hearing.
Councilmember Arkin inquired if the maps submitted by Mr. Wagaman were in legal compliance with the law and the process. Mr. Willis confirmed the maps are legally compliant with the California Fair Maps Act.
CouncilmemberTesta inquired if any of the maps were gerrymanderedor manipulatedby outside influences. Mr. Willis reported he does not believe the maps to be gerrymandered.
CouncilmemberTestareferencedMr. Willis's commentsat the previousCity Councilmeetingthatthere is no legal risk to the City with any of the maps that had been drawn up by the consultant demographer and the conditions that exist that would normally create that risk do not exist in Pleasanton.
Mr. Willis explained he cannot guarantee if someone will sue but advised he did state that when someone challenges a map the claims most often seen are not seen in the maps for Pleasanton.
Councilmember Testa reiterated the City Council did not initiate this process. She inquired if the factors that this process was designed to correct do not exist in Pleasanton. Mr. Willis advised the standard claims that are often brought forward by redistricting are not present in his opinion. He noted a particular neighborhood may feel harmed but that is the nature of making the maps.
City Council Minutes Page 10 of 12 March 1. 2022
Councilmember Testa noted that from the beginning of the process the City Council wants to represent in the best interest of the entire City. She moved to approve the Tangerine Map and district elections.
Councilmember Arkin seconded the motion.
Councilmember Balch advised he is unable to support the motion for the Tangerine Map and noted the reasons stated at the previous City Council meeting. He expressed concern that the communities and neighborhoods are being divided. He expressed disappointment that the City Council could not come up with a map that it unanimously supports. He stated he remains open to working with the dais to try to achieve a map that would receive a unanimous vote. He expressed concern that the current map would stifle residents' voices and choices at a cost to the City neighborhoods. He does not understand how the Tangerine Map is a superior choice to the other map options. He encouraged voters to volunteer for a committee or commission, to run for office, and to register and vote this November. He asked his colleagues to explain how the Tangerine Map is superior to the Green or Lime Map.
Councilmember Narum reported she has had numerous conversations after the vote of February 24 for the Tangerine map with residents who are located in various neighborhoods all over the city. She advised she cannot support the Tangerine map because it divides a community of interest using residential streets versus arterial streets. She encouraged residents to run for the City Council so there can be healthy, inclusive discussion about issues facing the City and is willing to meet with anyone interested in learning more about serving on the City Council. She expressed hopes the dais will seriously consider one more attempt at finding a map that they all can support.
Councilmember Arkin reiterated the City did not choose this process. She recapped the redistricting process and noted it has been a lengthy process with every opportunity for the community to engage.
She noted it comes down to the fact that some people do not like the map that was chosen. She explained that every map had advantages and disadvantages but the City Council had to pick legally compliant one. She reiterated she did not want to divide Ventana Hills and Mission Park and it could not be done with the demographer. She likes that three districts in the Tangerine map share a core part of the City. She also liked that there are multiple communities of interest in each district which means a higher likelihood of finding a candidate to run for office. She noted the City Council represents all residents of the City. She is happy to talk to anyone on this topic. She expressed support for the motion.
Mayor Brown echoed the comments of Councilmember Arkin. She advised the purpose of the California Voting Rights act is to have fair, elected representation. She knows the City Council has disagreed and there is a potential split vote but she hopes the City Council can put it behind them. She advised the City Council intends to serve all residents of the City.
City Attorney Sodergren asked for clarification on who seconded the main motion. Councilmember Arkin confirmed she seconded the motion.
MOTION: It was m/s by Testa/ Arkin to introduce and waive first reading of Ordinance No. 2236 adopting district elections for City Councilmembers, establishing district boundaries, and amending Chapter 2.04 of Title 2 of the Pleasanton Municipal Code as recommended and as noted. Motion passed by the following vote:
Ayes: Councilmembers Arkin, Testa, Mayor Brown
Noes: Councilmembers Balch, Narum
Absent: None
COUNCIL REPORTS
Councilmember Arkin reported attendance at a Livermore Amador Valley Transit Authority ( LAVTA) meeting and the Tulancingo Sister City dinner.
City Council Minutes Page 11 of 12 March 1, 2022
Councilmember Balch reported attendance at a StopWaste meeting.
Councilmember Testa reported attendance at the LAVTA meeting, at the Tri- Valley Affordable Housing Commission meeting, and a Livermore/ Pleasanton Airport Liaison Committee meeting.
Councilmember Narum reported attendance at the East Bay Community Energy ( EBCE) meeting and noted Stockton is looking to join the EBCE.
Mayor Brown reported attendance at the Livermore/ Pleasanton Liaison Committee meeting to hear residents' concerns about noise and the curfew periods. She reported Kim Damiani as the new Chair of the Board of the Pleasanton Chamber of Commerce.
MATTERS INITIATED BY COUNCIL
Councilmember Arkin inquired about the next steps for the Livermore/ Pleasanton Liaison Committee.
Interim City Manager Dolan briefly outlined next steps from the last committee meeting.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 9:51 p.m.
Respectfully su+mitted,
elyn K on•
Ci Clerk
City Council Minutes Page 12 of 12 March 1, 2022