Not Just Legislative Acts

Measure W's language does NOT support the assertions that:

• Only legislative actions of the Council are subject to its provisions
• Uses currently allowed will continue to be permitted

1. Because Measure W uses designations of an outdated General Plan for Land Use, properties that have nothing to do with open space are locked in as "open space lands."  [Section 6a, B. Definitions (1)]
2. Uses currently allowed by Redwood City on these impacted residential, commercial, and not-for-profit properties are clearly defined by Measure W as "NON-open space use."  [Section 6a, B. Definitions (2)]
3. While "Section 6a, A. Voter Approval" specifies that legislative actions would require approval by 2/3 majority, "Section 6a.C. Implementation, Paragraph 4" contradicts this by itemizing all of the planning actions (both legislative and administrative) which may not be issued "unless consistent with the provisions of this Section 6a."  In particular, conditional use permits, planned community permits, or other discretionary entitlements for use (i.e., licenses and permits) are administrative actions.
4. If proposed/future improvements require permits, are "non-open space use" by definition [Section 6a, B. Definitions (2)], and occur on properties designated by Measure W as "open space lands", it is unclear whether a 2/3 vote would be triggered.
5. The section describing exceptions [Section 6a. D, Exemptions for Certain Projects, Paragraph 3] is silent on the permitting process for new projects involving existing "non-open space uses" on properties designated by Measure W as "open space lands."  Exceptions are allowed only in the following situations:
   1. Section D.1 applies to "projects" that already have a "vested right" prior to the effective date of the charter amendment.  That is, "Projects" that have already been approved and permitted at the time the charter amendment goes into effect.
   2. Section D.2 applies to compliance with State or Federal law where it does not allow voter approval.
   3. Section D.3 exempts "projects" that, if the charter amendment was applied, an unconstitutional taking of a landowner's property would result.
   4. Section D.4 exempts "projects" that, if the charter amendment was applied, the result would prevent the City from complying with its housing obligations under State law.
6. There is no language anywhere in Measure W that unequivocally states that "future improvement projects involving non-open space uses that were previously permitted on what is now defined as "open space lands" (before the effective date of the charter amendment) will continue to be allowed without 2/3 voter approval."

Implementation Examples

These illustrate Measure W's flawed construction:

• New projects for home improvements at properties along Valota & Madison are "non-open space uses" on "open space lands."  There are no exceptions in Measure W to cover this situation so a 2/3 vote could legally be required to approve the project.
• An improvement project to add a dock or change in design of an existing dock in Redwood Shores requires a Planned Development Amendment which is one of the administrative acts specified in Implementation Section C.4 that must comply with the provisions of Measure W.  There is no language in Exemptions (Section 6a.D) that covers this situation.
• An infrastructure improvement project to add a sewer line extension and individual hook-ups to floating homes at Docktown require permits (i.e., administrative acts) as specified in Implementation Section C.4.  Therefore, approval of this kind of project must comply with the provisions of Measure W.  There is no language in Exemptions (Section 6a.D) that covers this situation so a 2/3 vote could be legally required.
• Even if Planning Staff interpreted the Charter amendment as permitting projects (through administrative acts) that are "non-open space uses" on what Measure W defines as "open space lands," any disgruntled party objecting to such projects could legally demand a 2/3 vote to approve.  Homeowners would bear the cost of the campaign to convince voters; the City and taxpayers would bear the cost of additional ballots or special elections.

Implications

No matter how one interprets Measure W, if passed, a legal cloud of ambiguity hangs over impacted properties (that have nothing to do with open space) which only the courts will be able to resolve.

Inconsistent and Imprecise

In the meantime, the inconsistent and imprecise construct of Measure W:

• Leaves the door wide open for any disgruntled party (who dislikes the proposed improvement) to legally demand a 2/3 voter approval;
• Immediately becomes a disclosable event to prospective home buyers;
• Will unfairly burden impacted property owners in ways and magnitude that adjacent neighbors would not suffer;
• Will increase costs to the City (and taxpayers) to fund additional ballot measures and defend itself from lawsuits;
• Will hinder all actions (legislative and administrative) at the Port of Redwood City, delay passenger ferry service needed to respond and recover from an emergency or natural disaster that impacts land-dependent transportation, and curtail Port's permitting authority and deny the Port the ability to review projects that could have an impact on commerce, navigation, and recreation in the Port area;
• Will divert funds away from essential City services; and,
• Will not protect all of Redwood City's parks nor restore wetlands.