Laserfiche WebLink
STATEMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC ON AGENDA ITEMS <br />DEANNASAKO <br />(At this time Deanna Sako, Deputy Director, Finance Department, came forward to address members <br />of the Charter Commission.) <br />MS. SAKO: You have several documents today on the various education processes and the <br />charter ballot wording. I am referring to the one in the PowerPoint presentation, but when I <br />looked at the wording, they were all very similar. My first concern is not understanding how <br />the whole process works perhaps; but in the ballot language we seem to have left out the <br />words, "public access" before the "open space and natural resources preservation fund." I <br />wouldn't want there to be a technicality at the end, because we go very specifically when we <br />name the fund, so in the charter amendment language the title is actually, "Public Access, <br />Open Space, and Natural Resources Preservation Fund, so in (1) on the proposed ballot <br />amendment for CA -15, I guess if you could perhaps change that to, "establish a public <br />access, open space, and natural resources preservation fund." <br />Also, in (2) of the proposed language, it starts out with, "appropriating additional revenue," <br />and this is not a fund that we actually appropriate, or get a budget from. It is available at any <br />time for spending, based on the PONC's (Public Access, Open Space, Natural Resources <br />Commission's) priorities. Maybe a better word might be, "allowing" additional revenues, <br />because unless we actually get a grant, there would be nothing else to include. So a <br />suggestion would be to change, "appropriating" to "allowing." <br />Under (3) where it talks about specifying that this fund shall be used solely to purchase or <br />otherwise acquire lands or property entitlements in the county for public outdoor recreation <br />and education, that could be misleading. If you just read those words, it almost sounds like <br />we want outdoor pools, or hunting areas, or something; and really in the charter amendment <br />language it is very specific in terms of including "... access to beaches and mountains, <br />preservation of historic or culturally important land areas and sites, protection of natural <br />resources, significant habitat or ecosystems including buffer zones, preservation of forests, <br />beaches, coastal areas, natural beauty and agricultural lands and protection of water shed <br />lands to preserve water quality and water supply." I just wouldn't want the voters to be <br />misled as to what outdoor recreation might include. <br />Then, in terms of the language being presented, I guess on the educational part where the <br />voters get to learn more about the requirements, I'm not sure in terms of if it's really <br />necessary to include the moratorium language in there. I realize that it did happen, but I <br />would think the Charter Commission would want to be neutral and just present the facts to <br />the voters. <br />In addition, either in the ballot language or in the narrative portion, somehow explaining <br />more what outdoor recreation and education actually includes. That's all I have, thank you. <br />MS. JARMAN: Excuse me, Deanna, will you be here for awhile? <br />2 <br />