This is an archive of a past election.
See for current information.
LWV League of Women Voters of California Education Fund If you appreciate our service to voters, please consider helping us with a donation.
Smart Voter
Alameda County, CA June 8, 2010 Election
Measure D
Approval of the Development Plan for the Oak Grove Property
City of Pleasanton

Majority Approval Required

Fail: 8174 / 46.13% Yes votes ...... 9544 / 53.87% No votes

See Also: Index of all Measures

Results as of Aug 20 9:35pm, 100.00% of Precincts Reporting (44/44)
Information shown below: Impartial Analysis | Arguments |

Shall the Development Plan for the Oak Grove property be approved?

Impartial Analysis from Pleasanton City Attorney
Measure D allows Pleasanton voters to decide whether to adopt or reject a development plan for the Oak Grove property. This development plan, approved by the City Council through its adoption of Ordinance No. 1961, would create 51 lots for custom homes on a 562 acre site at the end of Hearst Drive, subject to conditions of approval.
The environmental impacts that would result from development of this project were analyzed in an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) certified by the City Council. The EIR considered project alternatives, described mitigation measures to eliminate or reduce most of the environmental impacts of the project, and adopted a statement of overriding considerations for what could not be mitigated. These are set forth in Exhibit A of Ordinance No. 1961.
Ordinance No. 1961 establishes Planned Unit Development (PUD) zoning that governs this site and subjects development there to conditions of approval (set forth in Exhibit B of Ordinance No. 1961) regarding site design regulations, grading requirements, air quality restrictions, protection of special status species, hazard abatement, disclosure requirements, construction limits, design guidelines, development standards, engineering requirements, tree preservation and mitigation, fire safety, geotechnical requirements, water quality protection, open space dedication, payment of school impact fees, traffic mitigation (including the payment of traffic related fees), as well as other building permit requirements. The conditions require the property owners to dedicate 496 acres of the site as permanent open space and to construct a regional trail and related improvements within the open space area.
The Oak Grove development plan addresses the creation of lots, and regulates house size and height; it does not approve the design of any particular home. Issues relating to design, siting, and construction of each home would be addressed in the future through the project's design review process. This process consists of City planning staff review, subject to appeal by any interested party, Planning Commissioner or City Council member to be considered at a public hearing before the Planning Commission or City Council.
The plans submitted to the City by the property owners' representatives, PUD zoning, EIR mitigation measures, and conditions of approval imposed by the City, collectively make up the development plan for the Oak Grove property approved by the City Council by its adoption of Ordinance No. 1961.
By their own terms, Ordinance Nos. 1961 (regarding the Oak Grove development plan) and 1962 (approving a Development Agreement for the Oak Grove project between the property owners and the City) are linked. Ordinance No. 1962 provides that if Ordinance No. 1961 is set aside by referendum, then Ordinance No. 1962 shall be of no force or effect.
Measure D is before the voters based upon City Council action to place it on the ballot after the City's receipt of a qualified referendum petition.
If voters approve Measure D, the Oak Grove development plan will go into effect.
If voters defeat Measure D, the Oak Grove development plan will be of no force and effect.
Dated: February 26, 2010

s/JONATHAN LOWELL, City Attorney, City of Pleasanton

Contact FOR Measure D:
Yes on Measure D Phone: 925-485-3772

Contact AGAINST Measure D:
Save Pleasanton Hills

  News and Analysis

Google News Search

General Links

City of Pleasanton
This election is archived. Any links to sources outside of Smart Voter may no longer be active. No further links will be added to this page.
Links to sources outside of Smart Voter are provided for information only and do not imply endorsement.

Arguments For Measure D Arguments Against Measure D
Vote Yes on Measure D
If approved Oak Grove will provide:
51 lots, all placed below 790-foot elevation, more than 200 feet below the ridgeline. Each home site is designed to fit within the existing trees and topography, shielding most of the homes from view and eliminating the need to remove Oak trees. It is the environmentally preferred alternative.
nearly 500 acres of open, natural, parkland protecting the most visible ridgeline in perpetuity.
one million dollars dedicated to improve traffic congestion, 4 times the required amount.
increased tax revenue to the City.
two million dollars to the school district, more money than the number of students developed homes would actually generate. This is the most conservative estimate.
a minimum of $200,000 annually from property taxes paid directly to the school district.

The Oak Grove Area is within the Sierra Club sponsored urban growth boundary of Pleasanton and is designated residential in our voter approved General Plan.
Six years ago two councilmembers initiated a collaborative process to design a project for the Oak Grove area. Originally, the General Plan allowed for 98 homes. Both councilmembers knew there must be a better plan.
Discussions occurred between the developer, the neighborhood stakeholders and the city. After nine public workshops and meetings and countless staff hours, a plan was presented to the council.
Public comment indicated that there was true collaboration. The property owners were praised for their part in the process. Comments from the councilmembers expressed pleasure in the open public process employed. The city council voted 4-1 in favor of Oak Grove.
The Oak Grove property will become residential one day. The approved plan creates a smaller, environmentally responsible neighborhood while providing incredible benefits for Pleasanton residents.
Vote yes on Measure D.
s/Cheryl Cook-Kallio City Councilmember
s/Jerry T. Thorne Vice Mayor
s/Jennifer Hosterman Mayor
s/Kurt Kummer Pleasanton Parks & Recreation Commissioner
s/Tanya L. Ludden Past President, Peralta Regional PTA District

Rebuttal to Arguments For
The Truth:

  • Despite developer claims, City public documents reveal that Oak Grove will be locating buildings and access roads "mainly on the ridges" and the subdivision would "cut the top of the main ridge" of our Southeast Hills. Large houses will be visible from all over Pleasanton.
  • City documents identify that most of the traffic fees are for one traffic light, signal timing, and "traffic calming" for one neighborhood. This is not congestion relief for impacted Pleasanton streets.
  • Pleasanton Unified School District revealed that there is no approved school district fee agreement with this developer. Plus, one-time developer fees do not pay for teachers, counselors, or other operational costs.
  • The Oak Grove development plan is so environmentally destructive that the national Sierra Club opposes it.
  • What was envisioned as a collaborative process turned into a closed-door negotiation that excluded input from the larger community, disenfranchised the public, and led to a voter referendum of the City Council approval.
  • The developer sued our citizens and the city to prevent this public vote. The City website reveals that project supporters contributed thousands of dollars to the Mayor and two City Council members who voted for the project.

    If you voted to protect our ridges in the last election, then Vote No on Measure D.

    There's a better way to save open space. We saved Pleasanton Ridge - now let's save our Southeast Hills. Vote No on Measure D.

s/Matt Sullivan Pleasanton City Council
s/Valerie Arkin School Board Trustee
s/Karla Brown-Belcher Co-Chair Save Pleasanton Hills
s/Steve Brozosky Pleasanton City Council Member (2002-2006) Pleasanton School Board Trustee (2007-2008)
s/Ralph Kanz Consevation Director Alameda Creek Alliance
In November 2008 Pleasanton voters approved new ridgeline protections with Measure PP. Unfortunately, the Oak Grove housing subdivision was not included. Voters must take action again, and vote no on D to stop the developer from building on top of our ridgelines. This is the final step to protect the natural beauty of our hills.
Vote no to protect the natural contours of our scenic ridgelines.
Oak Grove allows 51 houses of up to 12,500 square feet along our ridgelines. Many will be prominently visible. Measure PP prohibits ridgeline development. Let's insist developers comply with current law.
Vote no to prevent massive grading and environmental destruction.
Oak Grove cuts up to 43 feet off the top of ridgelines and dumps 620,000 cubic yards of dirt- equivalent to 62,000 truckloads - destroying critical habitat for sensitive species. Houses will be built on land designated as highly prone to wild fires and susceptible to landslides and erosion.
Vote no to tell developers, "Don't Mess with our Ridges."
Oak Grove tries to justify building on ridgelines through payment of school fees and offering parkland. The developer has stated that they are paying $2M one-time fees to our schools. The truth is there is no current agreement with the school district. When these fees are determined, individual homeowners pay the fees not the developer. The school fees are for facilities and do not go toward the budget shortfall, nor do they fund any programs, teachers, counselors, etc. The destruction of our scenic hills is not necessary to gain these fees and parkland.
Ask the developer to return with a new plan that protects the ridgelines and the environment while keeping parkland for trails.
Vote no on D
Go to for more information.
s/Cindy McGovern Pleasanton City Council
s/Kay Ayala Pleasanton City Council (1996-2004)
s/Gregory O'Connor Planning Commissioner
s/Kris Weaver School Board (1998-2008)
s/Brian Arkin Sierra Club

Rebuttal to Arguments Against
Vote yes on Measure D
Understand the facts.
The Property has been designated for 98 homes since 1996. The owner agreed to the number proposed by neighbors reducing to just 51.
(General Plan)
No homes have been submitted or approved. Individual plans are subject to design review and can be appealed.
(Conditions of Approval)
The lots are placed to minimize impact on the environment, removing 58 trees. 900 trees will be planted and monitored for five years ensuring viability.
(Conditions of Approval)
$1,000,000 for road improvements, 4 times the city traffic fees.
School fees of at least $2,000,000 based on 5000 sq. ft.
If homes are the size those opposed are claiming, fees will be over $3,000,000
(PUSD fee is $8.62/sq. ft, capped at 7000 sq. ft. posted on website)
Property taxes and bond payments will generate over $500,000 per year to the school district and city.
(PUSD student generation rate applied to ADA per-student fees, plus voter approved bond measures; City's share is 25% of property taxes generated.)
Oak Grove is designated as residential. There will be development there. Through collaboration the city will get almost 500 acres of open space parkland, protecting the most visible ridgelines and providing a buffer, stopping development to the southeast forever.
(Development Agreement)
It is the environmentally preferred alternative.
(General Plan and EIR)
Environmental leaders, neighbors, school and business leaders and councilmembers support Oak Grove as the best plan.
Know the facts. The benefits to Pleasanton are huge.
Vote yes on Measure D
s/Cheryl Cook-Kallio City Councilmember
s/Jerry T. Thorne Vice Mayor
s/Jennifer Hosterman Mayor
s/Kurt Kummer Pleasanton Parks & Recreation Commissioner
s/Tanya Ludden Past President, Peralta District PTA

Alameda Home Page || Statewide Links || About Smart Voter || Feedback
Created: August 20, 2010 21:35 PDT
Smart Voter <>
Copyright © League of Women Voters of California Education Fund
The League of Women Voters neither supports nor opposes candidates for public office or political parties.