November 25, 2009 > Union City clarifies Masonic Homes Flatlands project
Union City clarifies Masonic Homes Flatlands project
Submitted By City of Union City
Union City staff believes the wording of the October 27, 2009 Council meeting summary (pg 25, November 4 issue of the Tri-City Voice Newspaper) requires clarification.
The original reads as:
"Update given for the Masonic Homes Flatlands Project review process. A ballot measure will be added to the November 2010 ballot. There have been 11 different public reviews. There may be four Council and Planning Commission meetings over the winter and spring.
Fiscal impact analysis of the Masonic Homes Flatlands Project presented and discussed. (Costs (negative impacts to the City's funds) and revenues (fiscal benefits to the City) considered."
The City Council has not yet voted to place the ballot measure on the November 2010 ballot and how many future public meetings are needed is not yet known. Therefore, the summary should read as:
"Update given for the Masonic Homes Flatlands Project review process. The applicant's requested City entitlements were discussed, as well as the public review held to date (11 public meetings and study sessions). The tentative schedule for future public meetings in the winter, spring and early summer was also discussed. For any development to take place in the flatlands area, the voters need to pass a ballot measure to remove the flatlands from the Hillside Area Plan boundaries. The City Council has not yet voted to place such a measure on the ballot."
The City Council did not discuss the fiscal impact analysis because it has not yet been prepared. The Council only discussed the assumptions that the economic consultant will use in preparing the fiscal impact analysis. Therefore the summary should read as:
"Fiscal impact analysis of the Masonic Homes Flatlands Project presented and discussed. The assumptions that will be used by the economic consultant to determine the costs (negative impacts to the City's funds) and revenues (positive impacts to the City's funds) were considered. The draft fiscal impact analysis is expected to be presented to the City Council in January 2010."
Ms. Walker's article "Why is the Masonic Homes Flatlands Project continuing apace?" (pg. 30, November 11 issue) overall is very objective and correct. However, the second and third paragraphs should be clear that the planning application is the Masonic Homes' application and they are requesting the approvals. Also Masonic Homes has not applied for amendments to the Hillside Area Plan, only a change to the boundaries.