Residents urge San Ramon council to pull ordinance amending Measure G language from consent calendar

Several San Ramon residents used the public-comment period at the Oct. 14 City Council meeting to ask that agenda item 5.3 (Ordinance 5.34) be removed from the consent calendar and restored to a full public hearing item.

Brian Swanson, a certified planner and identified as a San Ramon resident, said: "I rise tonight to have agenda 5.3, ordinance 5 34 removed from tonight's agenda and reclassified back to a full agenda item to further to be further discussed in public hearings at future city council meetings." He told the council the item was "far too significant to be buried among routine items."

Why it matters: Speakers said the ordinance contains text changes that would diminish public notice and the procedural protections they believe Measure G — the voter-approved hillside and open-space protection referenced repeatedly by speakers — provides. Several residents called the staff report and public notice insufficient and urged formal hearings and more time for public review.

Other residents reiterated similar concerns. Richard Curry, a 34-year San Ramon resident, told the council the matter "has had insufficient public input and comment, and it [is] inappropriate to include it on the consent calendar." Haraf Kathrani referenced the council record from a prior meeting and said that "measure g is ... a hillside and open space protection measure" and that, in his view, removing its protections requires returning the question to voters.

Younger speakers and community groups also expressed alarm. Anay Gandhi, a high-school sophomore, said volunteers tracking the issue "found that a law protecting our open spaces ... is being illegally abolished," and asked the council to bring Ordinance 5.34 back for a full hearing. Susie Ferris Senderkomm reviewed references to Measure G in the city's general plans and said she could not find a sunset clause; she asked the council to make any proposed legal basis for removing Measure G explicit to the public.

Council response and process notes: Mayor Mark Armstrong and council members did not take a final vote on Ordinance 5.34 during the Oct. 14 meeting. The mayor opened public comment and acknowledged the written submissions; staff confirmed they had received written comments from several speakers. At several points council members and members of the public urged more education and outreach: former mayor Greg Carr encouraged staff and elected officials to hold public briefings explaining state law and how it interacts with local voter initiatives.

What residents asked for: Multiple speakers asked for (a) removal of item 5.3 from the consent calendar, (b) multiple public hearings or town halls, and (c) clearer staff reports and notice so voters can assess proposed deletions or amendments to Measure G language. Several speakers cited the Brown Act in arguing that the public had not been given adequate notice of the ordinance's scope.

Status: The transcript of the Oct. 14 meeting records extensive public comment asking that item 5.3 be pulled and reviewed in open hearings. The council did not adopt or reject Ordinance 5.34 that night; a record of a formal council motion on that specific consent-item removal does not appear in the meeting minutes/transcript provided. Staff indicated that written comments submitted were on file.

Ending: Residents concerned about open space and voter protections said they will continue to press the council for in-person hearings and clearer written explanations. The council may address the ordinance on a future agenda; staff and the clerk have the written public comments on file and can provide additional materials on request.