HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 02/27/2001 :�R �� AGENDA
4 1979
C" ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 27, 2001
7:00 P.M.
City of Atascadero
6500 Palma Avenue, 4t" Floor
Atascadero, California
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY: 6:30 P.M.
REGULAR SESSION, 7:00 P.M.:
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Council Member Johnson
ROLL CALL: Mayor Arrambide
Mayor Pro Tem Scalise
Council Member Clay
Council Member Johnson
Council Member Luna
APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Roll Call
PRESENTATIONS:
1. Proclamation declaring March 2001, "Grand Jury Month."
2. Presentation: Tree City USA
COMMUNITY FORUM:
(This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons wanting to address the Council on any
matter not on this agenda and over which the Council has jurisdiction. Speakers are limited to
five minutes. Please state your name and address for the record before making your
presentation. The Council may take action to direct the staff to place a matter of business on a
future agenda)
COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS AND REPORTS:
(On their own initiative, Council Members may make a brief announcement or a brief report on
their own activities. Council Members may ask a question for clarification, make a referral to
staff or take action to have staff place a matter of business on a future agenda. The Council may
take action on items listed on the Agenda.)
1. 3F Meadows Open Space Proposal
■ Staff recommendation: Council adopt draft Resolution supporting the
purchase of 770 acres in 3F Meadows by the Atascadero Land Preservation
Society. [City Manager's office]
A. CONSENT CALENDAR: Roll Call
(All items on the consent calendar are considered to be routine and non-controversial by
City staff and will be approved by one motion if no member of the Council or public
wishes to comment or ask questions. If comment or discussion is desired by anyone, the
item will be removed from the consent calendar and will be considered in the listed
sequence with an opportunity for any member of the public to address the Council
concerning the item before action is taken.)
1. City Council Minutes— Special Meeting - February 8, 2001
■ City Clerk recommendation: Council approve the City Council minutes of February
8, 2001 [City Clerk]
2. City Council Minutes—February 13, 2001
■ City Clerk recommendation: Council approve the City Council minutes of February
13, 2001 [City Clerk]
3. Acceptance of Phase 2 of Final Tract Map 98013 / Tract 2317 — 3900 Traffic Way
(Shores/Wilson Survey/RTC)
■ Fiscal Impact: Negligible: City already maintains Traffic Way
■ Staff recommendation: Council accept Phase 2 of Final Tract Map 98013 / Tract
2317 including the dedication of lot 41 for Public Park purposes and a portion of
Traffic Way for public acceptance. [Community Development]
4. Annual Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Goal
■ Fiscal Impact: None
■ Staff'recommendation: Council adopt annual Disadvantaged Business Enterprise
(DBE)participation goal. [Public Works]
B. PUBLIC HEARINGS: None
C. MANAGEMENT REPORTS:
1. 2000 Audit Report—Review and accept
■ Staff recommendation: Council review and accept the audit report for the fiscal year
ended.lune 30, 2000. [Administrative Services]
2
2. Mid-Year Budget Review
■ Fiscal Impact: Revenue Increase of$240,000. Additional Appropriations of
$249,460
■ Staff recommendation: Council adopt draft Resolution amending the 2000-01 Budget
• (Resolution No. 2000-027) [Administrative Services]
3. Youth/ Community Center Site Options
■ Approval of this recommendation will result in the availability of an additional one
million dollars of external funds for this project.
■ Staff recommendation: Council direct staff to prepare and bring back a draft
agreement with the San Luis Obispo County Office of Education for a partnership to
construct and operate a Youth/Community Center on the grounds of the El Camino
Real Continuation School and prioritize the remaining potential building sites.
[Community Services]
4. Information Bulletin
D. COMMITTEE REPORTS:
(The following represent standing committees. Informative status reports will be given,
as felt necessary.):
Mayor Arrambide
1. S.L.O. Council of Governments(SLOCOG)/S.L.O. Regional Transit Authority(SLORTA)
2. Water Committees
3. County Mayor's Round Table
• Ma or Pro Tem Scalise
1. Finance Committee
2. City/ Schools Committee
3. Economic Opportunity Commission (EOC)
4. Atascadero State Hospital Advisory Board
Council Member Luna
1. Finance Committee
2. Integrated Waste Management Authority (IWMA)
J. North County Homeless Coalition
Council Member Johnson
1. Economic Vitality Corporation, Board of Directors (EVC)
2. Local Agency Formation Commissions (LAFCO)
Council Member Clay
1. Air Pollution Control District(APCD)
2. City/ Schools Committee
E. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION:
1. City Council
2. City Attorney •
3. City Clerk
4. City Treasurer
F. ADJOURNMENT:
THE NEXT CITY COUNCIL MEETING WILL BE A REGULAR SESSION
SCHEDULED ON MARCH 13,2001,AT 7:00 P.M.
Please note: Should anyone challenge any proposed development entitlement listed on this
Agenda in court, that person may be limited to raising those issues addressed at the public
hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City Council at or
prior to this public hearing.
I, Marcia McClure Torgerson, the City Clerk of the City of Atascadero, declare under the
penalty of perjury that the foregoing agenda for the February 27, 2001 Regular Session of the
Atascadero City Council was posted on February 22, 2001 at Atascadero City Hall, 6500
Palma Ave., Atascadero, CA 93422 and was available for public review in the City Clerk's
office at that location.
Signed this 22"d day of February, 2001 at Atascadero, California. •
NA j 04
Marcia McClure Torgerson, City Cle#
City of Atascadero
4
City of Atascadero
WELCOME TO THE A TA SCADER 0 CITY COUNCIL MEETING
aThe City Council meets in regular session on the second and fourth Tuesday of each month at 7:00 p.m.,
in the Council Chamber of City Hall. Matters are considered by the Council in the order of the printed
Agenda.
Copies of the staff reports or other documentation relating to each item of business referred to on the
Agenda are on file in the office of the City Clerk(Room 311) available for public inspection during City
Hall business hours. An agenda packet is also available for public review at the Atascadero Library,
6850 Morro Road. Contracts, Resolutions and Ordinances will be allocated a number once they are
approved by the City Council. The minutes of this meeting will reflect these numbers.
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in
a City meeting or other services offered by this City, please contact the City Manager's Office, (805)
461-5010, or the City Clerk's Office, (805) 461-5074. Notification at least 48 hours prior to the meeting
or time when services are needed will assist the City staff in assuring that reasonable arrangements can
be made to provide accessibility to the meeting or service.
TO SPEAK ON AGENDA ITEMS
Members of the audience may speak on any item on the agenda. The Mayor will identify the subject,
staff will give their report, and the Council will ask questions of staff. The Mayor will announce when
the public comment period is open and will request anyone interested to address the Council regarding
the matter being considered to step up to the podium. If you wish to speak for, against or comment in
any way:
• • You must approach the podium and be recognized by the Mayor
• Give your name and address (not required)
• Make your statement
• All comments should be made to the Mayor and Council
• All comments limited to 5 minutes (unless changed by the Council)
• No one may speak for a second time until everyone wishing to speak has had an opportunity
to do so, and no one may speak more than twice on any item.
The Mayor will announce when the public comment period is closed, and thereafter, no further public
comments will be heard by the Council.
TO SPEAK ON SUBJECTS NOT LISTED ON THE AGENDA
Under Agenda item, "COMMUNITY FORUM", the Mayor will call for anyone from the audience
having business with the Council to:
• Please approach the podium and be recognized
• Give your name and address
• State the nature of your business
This is the time items not on the Agenda may be brought to the Council's attention. A maximum of 30
minutes will be allowed for Community Forum (unless changed by the Council).
• TO HAVE ITEMS PLACED ON AGENDA
All business matters to appear on the Agenda must be in the Office of the City Manager ten days
preceding the Council meeting. Should you have a matter you wish to bring before the Council, please
mail or bring a written communication to the City Manager's office in City Hall prior to the deadline.
��
•
k
"GRAND JURYAWARENESS MONTH"
MARCH, 2001
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Atascadero supports the
Grand Jury system which includes volunteer citizens serving the County of
San Luis Obispo for one year, after qualification by the judges of the
Superior Court from a list of applicants and final selection by random
drawing; and
WHEREAS, the Grand Jury has a tremendous responsibility to
ensure that governmental entities and prisons under its jurisdiction are
performing with efficiency, effectiveness, honesty and impartiality; and
WHEREAS, it is crucial that the Grand Jury carries out its
responsibilities in a open,fair and non discriminatory manner; insuring that
their actions are prompted by just and right causes and that the work of the
Grand Jury is never plagued by political interests or manipulated by special
'interests or media; and
WHEREAS, the Grand Jury must conduct its business in an ethical
manner recognizing it's responsibility for actions taken and that under no
circumstances would the Grand Jury manipulate the release of information;
NOW, THEREFORE, I, the Mayor of the City of Atascadero do
hereby officially proclaim March, 2001 to be
"GRAND JURY A WARENESS MONTH"
in order for all citizens to become better acquainted with the purposes of the
Jury and understand the responsibility given to and expected from the Grand
Jury.
J. Michael Arramhide, Mayor
City of Atascadero, CA
February 27, 2001
001
r
r
•
Tree City USA 2001
WHEREAS, in 1872, J. Sterling Morton proposed to the Nebraska Board of
Agriculture that a special day be set aside for the planting of trees, and
WHEREAS, this holiday, called Arbor Day, was first observed with the
planting of more than a million trees in Nebraska, and Arbor Day is now observed
throughout the nation and the world, and
WHEREAS, trees reduce the erosion of our precious topsoil by wind and
water, cut heating and cooling costs, moderate the temperature, clean the air,produce
oxygen and provide habitat for wildlife, and
WHEREAS, trees are a renewable resource giving us paper, wood for our
homes,fuel for our fires and countless other wood products, and
WHEREAS, trees in our city increase property values, enhance the economic
vitality of business areas, and beautify our community, and wherever they are
planted, are a source of joy and spiritual renewal, and
WHEREAS, A national Arbor Day Foundation program, Tree City USA,
recognizes U. S. towns and cities which develop comprehensive urban forestry
• programs, and
WHEREAS, the City of Atascadero has been recognized for thirteen years as a
Tree City USA by The National Arbor Day Foundation and continues its tree planting
and preservation practices, and
WHEREAS, Atascadero observes Arbor Day in March of each year and
celebrates the Festival of the Oaks each year in recognition of the importance of native
trees in the community, and
WHEREAS, the Atascadero Native Tree Association provides educational and
awareness programs for the community on the importance of continued renewal and
care of our native forest
NOW, THEREFORE, I Mike Arrambide, Mayor of the City of Atascadero, do
hereby proclaim the City of Atascadero as
"TREE CITY USA 2001"
And urge all citizens to support efforts to protect our trees and woodlands, and
participate in the educational activities planned by the Native Tree Association.
4
J.Michael Arrambide,Mayor
City of Atascadero, California
February 27, 2001
DATE: 02/27/2001
i e
Atascadero City Council
Staff Report - City Manager's Office
3F Meadows Open Space Proposal
RECOMMENDATION:
Council adopt draft Resolution supporting the purchase of 770 acres in 3F Meadows by the
Atascadero Land Preservation Society.
DISCUSSION:
0 The Atascadero Land Preservation Society (ALPS) has proposed the purchase of 770 acres in the
3F Meadows area. This purchase would eliminate 111 residential lots and provide open space
for public use and enjoyment. The property is located near the western edge of the City, south of
Highway 41, in some of the City's most sensitive terrain.
The effort will require significant local support. An information meeting is scheduled for
Monday, February 26`h at 7:00 p.m. at the Santa Rosa School Cafeteria.
The City's tree mitigation funds are a potential funding source for the. effort. The funds are
significantly less than the total needed. There is currently approximately $84, 936.00 in the Tree
Fund.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Letter from Atascadero Land Preservation Society, dated February 20, 2001
2. Letter from Atascadero Native Tree Association, dated February 17, 2001
3. Draft Resolution
002
Attachment - 1
Atascadero Land Preservation Society
P.O.Box 940,Atascadero,CA 93423
Atascadero City Council
City of Atascadero
6500 Palma Ave.
Atascadero, CA 93422
February 20, 2001
Honorable Mayor and Members of the Council,
I am writing as the President of the Atascadero Land Preservation Society
(ALPS) to ask for your support for our efforts to acquire the 770 acres 3F
Meadows expansion in fee or as an open space easement.
This stunningly beautiful property with its distinct scenic quality is visible
from many areas of Atascadero. The biological diversity of this large
watershed area is impressive as shown by the variety of habitats and the
number of plant and animal species-found and listed in the Master
Environmental Assessment. It includes blue, valley and coast live oak, bay
laurel, chaparral, native grasslands, and riparian corridors. It is a rare
example of near pristine coast oak woodland.
The development of this sensitive property would mandate costly city
services such as fire protection (high-risk fire hazard severity zone),
paramedic (over nine minute response time), police protection, street
maintenance and liability (many miles of steep roads) at the edge of the
city.
There are many goals of Atascadero's General Plan that support our efforts:
1. Preserve natural flora and fauna.
2. Scenic and sensitive land including creeks, riparian corridors, wetlands
and other areas of significant habitat value shall be protected from
destruction, overuse, and misuse by the use of zoning, tax incentives,
easements, or fee acquisition.
3. Tree-covered hills shall be preserved to retain the distinctive scenic
quality of the community.
4. Watershed areas of Atascadero shall be protected.
5. Purchase needed parklands for future development of park and
recreation facilities.
003
The following General Plan policies also support our efforts:
6. Tree-covered hills shall be preserved to retain the distinctive scenic
quality of the community.
7. Watershed areas of Atascadero shall be protected.
Keeping this beautiful property in permanent open space for public benefit
is the epitome of preserving the-rural character of Atascadero. Rarely are
communities given the opportunity to preserve the very essence of what
makes people come and stay.
We respectfully request that the Council passes a resolution in support of
our effort and where possible we would appreciate any assistance.
Sincerely,.
Marjorie Mackey
President
CC: Wade McKinney, City Manager
•
•
004
Attachment 2
February 17, 2001
Honorable Council,
As the President of the Atascadero Native Tree Association, I am writing this
letter to support a current negotiation being conducted by the Atascadero Land
Preservation Society (ALPS). As you know, ALPS has been researching the
feasibility of acquiring a large parcel of land on Atascadero's west side. The
identified land is within the city limits and contains approximately 770 acres.
The property is a collection of various landscapes all anchored within the oak
woodland ecology. The higher, north facing hills consist of Coast Live Oak, bay
trees and views to the Pacific. The middle-elevations have open meadows with
Blue Oaks and excellent examples of California chaparral. Scarce native grasses are
abundant in this area. The lower elevations contain Valley Oaks, Gray,Pines and-
seasonal drainages feeding Morro, Atascadero, and Graves Creeks. The land has
three perennial springs, a haven for native focal wildlife. It is an amazing fact that
this land has remained relatively untouched while being so close to our city.
Anyone-who-visits the site-today will see-California as it once was, untouched, with
nature's health intact. ,The property in total, is a pristine example of a vanishing
natural resource, the Coastal California Oak Woodland. Its skyline is easily
recognizable throughout the city.
The chance to save such a beautiful and scarce natural resource is a once in a
life time opportunity. Fortunately, the property's owner recognizes the value of this •
land and is most interested in seeing it preserved for the enjoyment and the
education of future generations. ALPS has beeri actively pursuing the negotiation
for several months and is currently deliberating with conservancies and land trusts
to acquire this property. One only needs to pick-up the local newspapers to read of
many of these groups activities preserving,land within San Luis Obispo County,
usually in the coastal areas. These groups will supply the majority of the funds
needed to secure and protect this property. However, local funds are always part of
these deals which brings me to point of this letter,
We, the Board of Directors of the Atascadero Dative Tree Association can
think of no better use for the City's Tree Mitigation Fund than to assist in the
purchase and protection of this land. It is one of the tree fund's stated mandates to,
when possible, preserve native oak woodlands. This property could not be better
suited to meet-that mandate-:We,-therefore, respectfully request the.Council
authorize use of all available tree funds for the preservation of this incredibly
valuable properly.
Respectfully Yours,
Bruce Bonifas,-Pre ident •.
G05
Attachment - 3
DRAFT RESOLUTION
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
• THE CITY OF ATASCADERO
EXPRESSING SUPPORT TO THE ATASCADERO LAND
PRESERVATION SOCIETY IN THEIR EFFORTS TO PURCHASE 3 F
MEADOWS AREA
WHEREAS, the Atascadero Land Preservation Society(ALPS) is working to acquire 770
acres in the 3F Meadows area; and
WHEREAS, this purchase in an opportunity to protect this beautiful land for current and
future generations; and
WHEREAS, the City's General Plan supports the preservation of open space; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has taken specific policy steps including the Atascadero
Smart Growth Principles to make known its policy to preserve open space.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council does hereby resolve as follows:
1. The City Council encourages all community members to join in the effort with
ALPS to purchase the property for open space.
2. The City Council supports the effort and will take reasonable steps to assist ALPS
• in the funding and development of this project.
On motion by Council Member and seconded by Council Member
the foregoing Resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ADOPTED:
ATTEST: CITY OF ATASCADERO
Marcia McClure Torgerson, City Clerk J. Michael Arrambide, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
• Roy A. Hanley, City Attorney
G06
ITEM NUMBER: A-1
DATE: 02/27/2001
DRAFT MINUTES
SPECIAL MEETING
ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL
Thursday, February 8, 2001
4:00 p.m.
PLANNING COMMISSION
PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION
INTERVIEWS AND APPOINTMENTS
Mayor Arrambide called the Special Meeting to order at 4:10 p.m.
ROLL CALL:
Present: Council Members Clay, Johnson, Scalise and Mayor Arrambide
Absent: Council Member Luna(came in at 4:35.p.m.)
Others Present: City Clerk Marcia McClure Torgerson
Staff Present: City Manager Wade McKinney and City Attorney Roy Hanley.
PUBLIC COMMENT: None
CC 02/08/01 J
Pagel '`
ITEM NUMBER: A—1
DATE: 02/27/2001
INTERVIEWS AND APPOINTMENTS:
1. Planning Commission
■ City Clerk recommendation: Council interview the our candidates and select, by
ballot, three citizens to serve on the Planning Commission.
City Clerk Marcia McClure Torgerson explained to the Council that she had advertised for the
two vacancies but the third vacancy, created by the resignation of Hal Carden, was not
advertised. There was a brief discussion with the City Attorney. He assured the Council that
there is no requirement to specifically advertise the number of vacancies.
There was consensus of the Council to fill all three vacancies in the following manner:
1. Appoint two citizens to the full-term vacancies; and
2. In a separate vote, appoint one citizen to the two-year term.
The Council interviewed the four candidates and appointed Kim Jeanes and Jonelle Norton to
the full-term vacancies. Their terms will expire in February 2005.
The Council voted a second round and appointed Kevin Blaser to fill the vacancy created by
the resignation of Hal Carden. Kevin's term will expire in February 2003.
2. Parks & Recreation Commission
• City Clerk recommendation: Council interview the five candidates and select, by
ballot, three citizens to serve on the Parks & Recreation Commission.
The Council interviewed the five candidates and appointed Barbie Butz, Eric Gobler and Gail
Kudlac to the full-term vacancies. Their terms will erxpire in February 2005.
ADJOURNMENT:
Mayor Arrambide adjourned the Special Meeting at 7:00 p.m. to the next Regular Session on
Tuesday, February 13, 2001 at 7:00 p.m.
MINUTES PREPARED BY:
Marcia McClure Torgerson,City Clerk
CC 02/08/01 p
Page 2 - tJ O
ITEM NUMBER: A-2
DATE: 02/27/2001
,
� �In �; DRAFT MINUTES
as ® 1798
ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 13, 2001
7:00 P.M.
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY: 6:30 P.M.
REGULAR SESSION, 7:00 P.M.:
Mayor Arrambide called the meeting to order at 7:01 p.m. and Council Member Clay led the
Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL:
Present: Council Members Clay, Johnson, Luna, Scalise and Mayor Arrambide
Absent: None
Others Present: City Clerk Marcia McClure Torgerson
Staff Present: City Manager Wade McKinney, Police Chief Dennis Hegwood, Acting
Fire Chief Kurt Stone, Administrative Services Director Rachelle Rickard,
Public Works Director Steve Kahn, Acting Community and Economic
Development Director Warren Frace, Technology Director Andrew Fruin,
and City Attorney Roy Hanley.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA:
MOTION: By Council Member Clay and seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Scalise to
approve the agenda.
Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote.
PRESENTATIONS:
1. Proclamation declaring February 27, 2001 "Spay Day USA"
CC 02/13/01 009
Page I -
Mayor Arrambide presented the proclamation to Kayce Daniels of the North County Humane
Society.
2. Proclamation declaring March 8, 2001 "California Polytechnic State University History
Day"
Mayor Arrambide read the proclamation. The proclamation will be sent to Cal Poly as a
representative was unable to attend this meeting.
COMMUNITY FORUM:
Ann Ketcherside, 7585 Santa Ysabel, stated Mayor Arrambide has violated the conflict of
interest laws by: 1) voting on an item involving the property next door to his, and 2) hiring an
individual on the Planning Commission who was "like a relative" to him. Ms. Ketcherside said
she feels that the Mayor should step down due to these perceived violations of the conflict of
interest laws. Additionally, she presented a document regarding the planned school next to the
State Hospital and requested the City Council write letters to Atascadero Unified School District
and to the public giving them the okay to disapprove the school for the third time. Ms.
Ketcherside feels that the community does not need a school located next to Atascadero State
Hospital.
Richard Hill, 8400 San Gabriel, expressed his feelings and frustrations in a prepared statement he
read concerning the current litigation he is involved in with the City of Atascadero.
Ray Jansen, 6655 Country Club Drive, read his most recent letter to the editor concerning
affordable housing.
George Marrett, 8225 San Diego Road, Vice President of El Camino Homeless Organization
(ECHO), asked the Council to support ECHO by endorsing the organization.
Linda Hall, Cambria, congratulated Council Member Luna on his appointment to the Coastal
Commission. She addressed the Council on issues concerning companion animals and the limit
laws for dogs and cats.
Richard Hill, 8400 San Gabriel, continued to read his prepared statement.
Mayor Arrambide closed the Community Forum.
COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS AND REPORTS:
Council Member Johnson stated a concern he had regarding the neighborhood General Plan
meeting he attended. He felt that the maps organized by individual groups at the meeting were
not what were presented to the larger group as a whole. He expressed concern regarding the
information flow from the individual groups to the final reports.
Council Member Clay encouraged the media to.advertise the spay/neuter program. He also
expressed how pleased he was that community members are showing concern for the homeless
CC 02/13/01 010
Page 2
and the issue of affordable housing. He would like to see these issues addressed in the General
Plan Update.
• Council Member Luna stated that the issue of affordable housing has been discussed since he has
been on the Council (1992) and for four years prior to that on the Planning Commission.
Mayor Arrambide stated that he had attended another community meeting held at the Pavilion
concerning the future 3F Meadows project. During this meeting, members of the Atascadero
Land Preservation Society (ALPS) suggested they purchase the property and leave it, in
perpetuity, as open space for the community.
Council Member Luna suggested the Council direct staff to come back with an agenda
item/resolution in support of the ALPS option.
A. CONSENT CALENDAR:
1. Special Joint City Council/Planning Commission Minutes—January 17, 2001
■ City Clerk recommendation: Council approve the Special Joint City Council /
Planning Commission minutes of January 17, 2001 [City Clerk]
2. City Council Minutes—January 23, 2001
■ City Clerk recommendation: Council approve the City Council minutes of January
23, 2001 [City Clerk]
. 3. Acceptance of Phase II of Final Map 97003 / Tract 2271 — The Lakes (Midland Pacific /
Cannon Associates)
■ Fiscal Impact: None
■ Staff recommendation: Council:
a. Accept Phase II of Final Tract Map 97003/Tract 2271; and
b. Reject all Public Utility Easements shown on the Phase II final Tract Map
[Community & Economic Development]
4. Regulation of Telecommunications Systems—Proposed Ordinance
■ Fiscal Impact: No negative impact. Possible positive impact by imposition of
franchise fees and minimizing damages to road system.
■ City Attorney recommendation: Council adopt, on second reading by title only, an
ordinance of the City Council of the City of Atascadero, relating to the regulation of
telecommunications systems which utilize public streets, rights-of-way, or other
public property. [City Attorney]
MOTION: By Council Member Luna and seconded by Council Member Johnson
to approve the Consent Calendar.
Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote. (#A-4— Ordinance No. 379)
•
CC 02/13/01 Oil
Page 3 -
B. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
1. Dissolution of Street Maintenance Districts
■ Fiscal Impact: Loss of$2,100 annually •
■ Staff recommendation: Council:
a. Receive public testimony regarding dissolution of the Street Maintenance
Districts; and
b. Approve the draft Resolution, dissolving maintenance districts involving
Aguila Avenue, Cayucos Avenue, Falda Avenue, Lobos Road, Maleza Avenue,
Pinal/Escarpa Avenues, San Fernando Road, and Sonora/Pinal Avenues,
established under the provisions of the Improvement Act of 1911 [Public
Works]
Public Works Director Steve Kahn gave the staff report and answered questions of Council.
PUBLIC COMMENT
George Dodge, 5670 Lobos Lane, expressed his opposition to the dissolution of the Maintenance
District for Lobos Road. (see Attachment A)
Gene Pimentel, 2060 San Fernando Road, stated his opposition to the dissolution of the
Maintenance District for San Fernando Road.
Sheila Every, 5600 Aguila Avenue, stated she was unaware that Aguila is not a City maintained
road until she read about it in the newspaper. She asked if a street is not a City street, then who
owns the street and who is to maintain it.
•
Dorothy Dodge, 5670 Lobos Lane, stated she is opposed to eliminating the Maintenance District
for Lobos Lane. She has lived on Lobos Lane for over 20 years, has maintained the road and is
pleased with this way of dealing with road maintenance.
Ron Walters, 2025 San Fernando Road, inquired what it would mean to those who live on the
effected streets if the Maintenance District is dissolved. Additionally he asked, if the agreement
changes, can the road be made private and be blocked to through traffic.
Dick McCracken, 5660 Lobos Lane, expressed his opposition to the elimination of the
Maintenance District for Lobos Lane.
Gary Miyamoto, 5400 Aguila Avenue, encouraged the Council to leave the current Maintenance
District as it is until a workable assessment district plan is set in place.
Steve Vin, 5640 Lobos Lane, said he is against the elimination of the Maintenance District on
Lobos Lane.
Dave Rasmussen, 3725 Falda Avenue, asked for clarification of how the money would be taken
from each district and then applied to a project for that district.
Robert Churchill, 2040 San Fernando Road, stated that he would like the Council to consider •
adopting San Fernando Road as a City maintained road.
CC 02/13/01 012
Page 4
Sheila Every, 5600 Aguila Avenue, wished to clarify that only five houses out of 26 on Aguila
Avenue are in the Maintenance District.
• Gene Pimentel, 2060 San Fernando Road, stated that the reason the road did not meet City
standards was that it was narrowed in order to save the oak trees in the area.
George Dodge, 5670 Lobos Lane, indicated that Lobos Lane is very lightly traveled and this was
why the road held up as well as it has for 17 years.
Anton Kramer, 5155 Escarpa Avenue, agrees with the other speakers that the Maintenance
District has worked well so far and he is in favor of retaining it until another solution is found.
The City Clerk read into the record 2 letters, turned in by Dorothy Dodge, written by Lobos Lane
residents who are opposed to the dissolution of the Maintenance District: Miriam Fakharri
(Attachment B) and Donald Bovee (Attachment Q.
Mayor Arrambide closed the Public Comment period
There was lengthy Council discussion concerning the details of this issue.
Mayor Arrambide commented to the audience that the Council is aware that the public comment
tonight indicates that they are happy with their roads and they don't want the process to be
changed. He assured the audience that the Council will review this issue carefully and will make
an educated decision.
MOTION: By Council Member Luna and seconded by Council Member Johnson
• to continue Item # B-1 until assessment districts are further studied in
June 2001.
Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote.
C. MANAGEMENT REPORTS:
1. Cost Allocation and Development Impact Fee Study—Agreement
■ Fiscal Impact: $89,125
■ Staff recommendation: Council:
a. Authorize the Mayor to execute an agreement with Revenue and Cost
Specialists, L.L.C. for a Master Facilities Plan, Development Impact Fee
Report, a Cost Allocation Plan and a User Fee Study; and
b. Authorize the Administrative Services Director to appropriate $89,125 from
the Reserve Find. [City Manager]
City Manager Wade McKinney gave the staff report and answered questions of Council.
PUBLIC COMMENT: None
•
CC 02/13/01 013
Page 5
MOTION: By Council Member Johnson and seconded by Mayor Pro Tem
Scalise to authorize the Mayor to execute an agreement with Revenue
and Cost Specialists, L.L.C. for a Master Facilities Plan, Development
Impact Fee Report, a Cost Allocation Plan and a User Fee Study; and •
authorize the Administrative Services Director to appropriate $89,125
from the Reserve Fund.
Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote. (Contract#2001-004)
2. Personnel Rules and Regulations—Update
■ Fiscal Impact: None
■ Staff recommendation: Council adopt draft Resolution establishing Personnel Rales
and Regulations. [City Manager]
City Manager Wade McKinney gave the staff report and answered questions of Council.
PUBLIC COMMENT: None
MOTION: By Council Member Clay and seconded by Council Member Johnson
to adopt draft Resolution establishing Personnel System Rules.
Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote. (Resolution No. 2001-006)
3. City of Atascadero Telephone System—Update Recommendation
■ Fiscal Impact: S19,635
■ Staff recommendation: Council authorize the City Manager to enter into an
agreement with Tedas Inc. for a phone and voicemail system for the City of .
Atascadero, [City Manager]
City Manager Wade McKinney gave the staff report and introduced Technology Director
Andrew Fruin and asked him to explain the details of the proposed new telephone system. They
answered questions presented by the Council.
PUBLIC COMMENT
John McGoff, 9192 Maple Street, expressed his concern with the process followed to obtain
these bids. He stated the wide difference in the bids leads him to believe the companies were not
bidding on the same product.
John Nielsen, President of Tedas Inc., explained the difference between the products of the
companies in this bidding process.
Mayor Arramhide closed the Public Comment period
MOTION: By Council Member Luna and seconded by Council Member Clay to
authorize the City Manager to enter into an agreement with Tedas
Inc. for a phone and voicemail system for the City of Atascadero.
Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote. (Contract#2001-005)
•
CC 02,13,01 014
Page 6
4. Information Bulletin
Council consensus to have two youth members, one from junior high school and one from high
• school on the committee.
D. COMMITTEE REPORTS:
Mayor Arrambide
1. Water Committees: They met with a new committee who's goal is to move the other
existing water committees into action regarding a North County solution to San Luis
Obipso's interest in our water.
2. S.L.O. Council of Governments (SLOCOG) / S.L.O. Regional Transit Authority
(SLORTA): The SLOCOG Board adopted a resolution for Ray Johnson which will be
given at the next meeting and presented by Mayor Arrambide. 2002 State Transportation
Improvement Funds (STIP) is estimated to be $45 million. SLOCOG will begin to
program those monies in December 2001. Sixteen good applications have been received
by SLORTA for the next director; deadline is this week. Cal Trans projects for
Atascadero are: 1) beautify and modernize the US 101 roadway at $1,300,000 by 2006,
2) construct operational improvements on US 101 $6,100,000 by 2006, 3) construct
median barriers on US 101, $3,200,000 by 2004, and 4) construct northbound US 101
auxiliary lanes from Traffic Way to San Anselmo, $800,000 by 2003.
Mayor Pro Tem Scalise
1. Economic Opportunity Commission (EOC): Meets Thursday, and Mayor Pro Tem
Scalise distributed copies of an update of EOC's position on a variety of projects.
2. Atascadero State Hospital Advisory Board: Met with the Advisory Board who is happy
to have a representative of the City with them. They meet quarterly.
Council Member Luna
1. Integrated Waste Management Authority (IWMA): 10,000 recycling guides are coming
out; Council will receive copies.
Council Member Johnson
1. Economic Vitality Corporation, Board of Directors (EVC): Meets next week.
2. Local Agency Formation Commissions (LAFCO): Meets tomorrow.
Council Member Clay
1. Air Pollution Control District (APCD): They are discussing extending the burn
regulation period until May 2002. Their greatest concern is to reduce burning and
encourage green waste pickup and mulching. Duke Energy has reduced their emissions
from 9 tons to 3.5 tons this year.
2. City / Schools Committee: Committee met and agreed to meet every three months
rotating from school to city location. Regarding use of school facilities, the committee
prefers either minimum or no charge whenever youth utilize the facilities. The school
• cannot legally participate in the funding of the Youth Center. The issue of closing off the
road between City Hall and the Printery during school hours will be brought forward to
the City Council in the future.
CC 02/13/01
Page 7 015
E. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION: None
F. ADJOURNMENT:
Mayor Arrambide adjourned the meeting at 9:45 p.m. to the next regular session on February 27,
2001, at 7:00 p.m.
MEETING RECORDED AND MINUTES PREPARED BY:
Marcia McClure Torgerson, City Clerk
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A—Prepared statement by George Dodge
Attachment B —Prepared statement by Miriam Fakharri
Attachment C—Prepared statement by Donald Bovee
•
CC 02/13/01 1
Page 8
Attachment: A
Atascadero City Council
GEORGE & DOROTHY DODGE February 1.3, 2001
5670 Lobos Lane
Atascadero, Ca 93422
• (805)466-2466
Email gdodge@calinet.com
The Council is considering the removal of Lobos Lane from Nogales to the end of the street from
its status as a "Maintenance District". A little history, the district was formed in 1983 and after
the initial assessment to pave the street the property owners have paid in$22.00 per year($2.00
retained by the county for the collection) During that time they have requested maintenance only
once at an approximate cost of$5,500. There is currently a balance of approximately $5,000 in
the trust account. At the present time there are only about two small areas that need maintenance.
So while no one would argue that over the long term $20.00 per year will probably not be
enough to maintain the road properly it has worked to at least this point and probably for another
few years. The road is only approximately a 1000 feet long and the $20.00 has adequately
maintained it. We on Lobos would probably have no problem voting to increase the $20.00 to a
more realistic amount if necessary. So what is the problem?
First since the district was created by the residents doesn't it have to be terminated by them?
Second to stop the current collection before a new collection is established is like throwing away
your old car before you buy a replacement. We throw away this maintenance before a new
system is in place and we may not have a usable road by the time you get a city wide assessment
district in place. In addition, failure to repair the road could impact the stability of the hill in
• some areas and create serious erosion problems.
Third to include Lobos Lane in a larger assessment district would mean that we would lose
control over the maintenance of the road. Since Lobos Lane is a dead end it is likely that through
roads would be maintained first and then their wouldn't be funds for Lobos.
Fourth the residents currently help maintain the road by watching how trucks turn, by keeping
debris off the road and even some minor repairs. This would not be the case if they did not have
a direct relationship with the fund that maintains the road. The road is narrow and goes up around
a hill, it can not be brought up to any city standard without major impact on the houses and the
area. Most certainly many oak trees as well as other trees would be lost and the natural beauty of
the area destroyed.
Fifth, to establish a larger city wide assessment district requires a vote with 50 percent of all the
property owners in the district voting in favor, not fifty percent of those voting. I can't see you
getting much more than a fifty percent response much less a fifty percent positive vote. It is
much easier to accomplish assessment districts on a small scale where the benefit is directly
related to those voting than on large scale districts where people have trouble finding the direct
benefit to them. I speak from experience.
Sixth we are happy with the system the way it is and the majority indicate they would be in favor
• of an increase in the $20.00 if necessary to properly maintain the road.
017
Attachment: B
Atascadero City Council
February 13, 2001
February 9, 2001
This is in regards to the letter I received about dissolving the maintenance district of Lobos Lane. •
g g
As resident of Lobos Lane I disagree with this idea for several reasons.
One - Why change something that is working just fine.
Second - What would happen in the meantime? While you are looking into a city wide
assessment district if we were to need service?
Third - If you lump us in with other streets we have no control over our funds. Because we are a
deadend street and fairly small, we would be left out. The other streets would have a higher
priority. Lack of maintenance would cause erosion which would put the beauty of our
neighborhood and houses at risk.
Fourth=If no district were created and the city took over the street, we would again lose our
beautiful neighborhood, many oaks would have to be removed to meet street standards.
So as I see it we lose with any other option than the current one. Why change?
Sincerely,
•
•
013
Attachment: C
February Cit Council
Donald de la Guerra y Hartnell Bovee
1869 California Street Suite#5
• San Francisco,CA 94109-4542
E-Mail: don.bovee@worldnet.att.net
Voice: (415)-775-4141
Fax: (415) 775-4147
01/02/01
City of Atascadero
Department of Public Works
.6500 Palma Avenue
Atascadero, CA 93422
Re: Street Maintenance Districts
Dear Members of the City Council:
I am in receipt of your letter to property owners regarding your intent to
• desolve the Street Maintenance Districts. As you are aware there were
initial assessments for these roads being built. Since then there has been
little or no city maintenance of Lobos Lane and Encima over the years that
my family have owned property here. You now want to roll us in with all of
the other former non city maintained roads to a city wide assessment
district. Many of the local roads I have notice needs pothole and other
repairs.
I am protesting the dissolution of the Maintenance Districts at your
upcoming meeting. I believe this could lead to the door being opened for
the City of Atascadero to make severe changes to the current landscaping
and charm to all of the owners on Lobos Lane. We do not want anymore
traffic on these roads or to have them widened to suit a very limited
number of persons. We all have kept this neighborhood in an attractive
and well maintained state. I also understand that the monies contributed
to the fund still has several thousand dollars remaining. Please do not roll
j
ghborhood in your proposed plan.
y yours,
Vve
Owner of 5650 Lobos Lane property-Atascadero, CA
019
ITEM NUMBER: A-3
DATE: 02/27/2001
i
iais '... 197_9
Atascadero City Council
Staff Report - Community Development Department
Acceptance of Phase 2 of Final Tract Map 98013 / Tract 2317
3900 Traffic Way
(Shores / Wilson Survey / RTC)
RECOMMENDATION:
Council accept Phase 2 of Final Tract Map 98013 / Tract 2317 including the dedication
of lot 41 for Public Park purposes and a portion of Traffic Way for public acceptance.
DISCUSSION:
Tentative Tract Map 98013 was approved by the City Council on November 9, 1999 in
conjunction with General Plan Amendment 98002 and Zone Change 98004 (Davis
i Property Cluster Subdivision). The tentative map approval allowed the subdivision of
39.9± acres into 36 single-family lots, 3 industrial lots, 1 parkland lot and 1 open space
lot as shown on Attachment 1. The tentative map approval allows for the recording of
phased final maps. This acceptance is for the second phase Final Map consisting of 14.2
± acres, which will create 11 single-family lots, a 6.42-acre public park, public utility
easements and a portion of Traffic Way.
Pursuant to California Government Code Section 66440 the approving legislative body
(City Council) can not deny a final map that is consistent with an approved tentative map.
Staff has determined that the Final Map is consistent with Tentative Tract Map approval
98013, and all conditions of approval imposed by the City Council have been satisfied.
The Final Map includes the dedication of Traffic Way, an arterial street for public
acceptance.
FISCAL IMPACT: Negligible: City already maintains Traffic Way
ATTACHMENTS: Attachment 1: Approved Tentative Tract Map 98013
Attachment 2: Final Map Phase II
Attachment 3: General Plan/Zoning Map
i
020
ITEM NUMBER: A-3
DATE: 02/27/2001
Attachment 1
Approved Tentative Tract Map 98013/Tract 2317
Shores/Wilson Survey/RTC
15 '
X51
� 4 —
1
i
1 U• � y ;; 1
1 11 /1 1'
;1 ly } }
1 1 a Final Map
Phase 2
d o ►}
IS
Oi s
ti I }
(k 1 1
1 1
0
ITEM NUMBER: A—3
DATE: 02/27/2001
• Attachment 2
Final Map Phase 2
Shores/Wilson Survey/RTC
in ASI.
Yee
N�
Q
8 $�
� a3�tl a g Iiis
as
.sssal
}.SLtilti'ib8p lit'
y '• tZ
@lal '�"s at o a 3a/
9
Jzz
tib
iia%
ggR L
oil—
gig e
/ / O
03
. m
g S �'\
CO
do S(gy8
t �
, J CO $ v
ro
g F S
aa yy � sYt
C,
��eeoeAoeeeeAo���x°
AeeoAeeo.
►AooeoeoA.
ieioieieieiel Alp.,i`.
.eeeoeoeeeo
1
e000eeooeoA oAAeeeooeeo
eeoeooeeoeee
oieiesoi�.
ooeee000eeese.
leeeeeeeeAeAeee
ieAooeeeoeeeseoeoA
.oeoeeeoeoeeoeoeoeo�
��eeoAoeAAeeeeeeeoeAeeoeeAoeeeooAeoee.' t�,
. �� oeeAeoeeeeeeoeeeoeoeooeeeooeoe®ooeo®�.
�Aeoeeoeooeoeeso.e.
�AAAeeeoe000eeeoee.
�ooAoeoeeeeeeeeeoe
.�eeooeoeeAoee�_�����e®oeAeeo®Aoeeo®
eA�e�o�o�o��o�o��®A®so�e�♦�eeo�e�®
A♦:e=o=o=e=o=e=®®-/o®♦moo-®®i'o'♦:
�A�e�e�Aje�e�AjM19T- '_ - ►��.
ljjq® - ♦ ?� � ��eee ♦eeeAeeeA
1�®A`* «�� �,� _ �eejA1A�e�AejeeejejAAeeeeee�.
•® 6 � e•♦♦'eeAeeAeeeeeeeeAAeeeee'
®eoA�� �000eioioiAioioieieieieiei�.
® � ♦oeoeeoeoeAe
So ®��e®:�� pies � ♦eAeeeAeeeAA♦
®®A�"�AOe1. r, ♦eAeAeAeAeeA
(� ' ♦A�1M®AA®A®qA �e ��AAAAeeeAeeeeeeeeeAee��
® .'+M►'®`®�w�®®s "- �AAoeeeoeeeeeeeeeeAeee�
+o MAI a ♦Aeooeeoeeo.
®A® P-14-MA
♦ � �eee�A�e�e�e�e�e�e�e���
/� + ..1�t•��Q�. e� �AeeeeeeAeeeAeeAAeeee�
®. . • �0' ��eio"®®� ��eee�o�A�o�A�Aeooeee.
. •• ',9's� '��llB� A�oe+eeoo:�
FAR
. �eeeeooeee�
�eAeeeeoe0000eoA��
',�_ �� oe000eeeeoo..•
ITEM NUMBER: A-4
DATE: 02/27/2001
1918 ' 1 8
W.
Atascadero City Council
Staff Report — Public Works Department
Annual Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Goal
RECOMMENDATION:
Council adopt annual Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE)participation goal.
DISCUSSION:
Revisions have been made to the DBE Program with the passage of TEA 21. All local agencies
must establish their own DBE program and set specific goals using an accepted methodology.
Local agencies are now required to monitor contracts for DBE compliance, and to name a DBE
Liaison Officer.
As required, a Public Notice has been published providing 45 days for review and comment on
the proposed goal. No comments or requests for review have been received.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Staff time to monitor DBE Program.
ATTACHMENT: DBE Goal Submittal
DBE Program
it
094
ITEM NUMBER: A-4
DATE: 02/27/2001
ANNUAL OVERALL GOAL INFORMATION
TO: CALTRANS DISTRICT 5
District Local Assistance Engineer
The amount of overall goal, methodology, breakout of estimated race-neutral and race-conscious
participation, and any DBE program updates are presented herein in accordance with Title 49 of the
Code of Federal Regulations Part 26, and as described in the Local Assistance Procedures Manual.
The City of Atascadero submits our annual overall goal for your review and comment. We propose an
annual overall DBE goal of 8 % for the Federal Fiscal Year 2000/2001 , beginning on October 1;2000
and ending on September 30, 2001.
Methodology
City of Atascadero's overall goal for the Federal fiscal year FY 2000-01 is the following: 8% of the
Federal financial assistance in FHWA-assisted contracts. This overall goal is broken down into 5%
race-conscious and 3% race-neutral components.
Base Figure: # of DBE's (Construction) 109 = 10%
# of Construction Contractors on NAICS 1117*
• This figure was calculated as follows:
• SLO COUNTY (829) 100% of Firms Listed= 829
• Monterey County (833) 10% of Firms Listed= 83
• Santa Barbara County (10 11) 10% of Firms Listed= 101
• Kern County(1049) 10% of Firms Listed= 104
025
ITEM NUMBER: A-4
DATE: 02/27/2001
• Base Figure: # of DBE's (Engineering) 41 = 5%
# of Engineering Firms on NAICS 807*
• This figure was calculated as follows:
• SLO COUNTY (541) 100% of Firms Listed= 541
• Monterey County (298) 10% of Firms Listed= 30
• Santa Barbara County (1115) 10% of Firms Listed= 112
• Kern County (123 7) 10% of Firms Listed= 124
The City of Atascadero acknowledges and is pursuing the Public participation requirement of the DBE
Program. Results will be incorporated in the submittal.
Breakout of Estimated Race-Neutral and Race-Conscious Participation
Of the overall annual 8% goal for DBE participation, the City of Atascadero projects meeting 5% of
the goal utilizing race neutral methods, including making efforts to assure that bidding and contract
requirements facilitate participation by DBE's and other small businesses; unbundling large contracts
to make them ore accessible to small businesses; encouraging prime contractors to subcontract
portions of the work that they might otherwise perform themselves; and providing technical
assistance, and other support services to facilitate consideration of DBEs and other small businesses.
The remaining 3% of the goal is anticipated to be accomplished through race-conscious measures,
which includes establishing contract specific goals on contracts with contracting possibilities, when
needed, to meet the City of Atascadero's overall annual DBE goal.
�Zal-lrt4
DBE L' ison Office Date
•
040
•
MIN
.a:� •_ . .ate
CITY OF ATASCADER.0 �
DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS
ENTERPRISE (DBE)
PROGRAM
20*
0z7
•This Program is in accordance with Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations Part 26
DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS ENTERPRISE (DBE) PROGRAM
City of Atascadero
I Definitions of Terms
The terms used in this program have the meanings defined in 49 CFR §26.5.
H Objectives/Policy Statement (§§26.1, 26.23)
The City of Atascadero has established a Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) program in
accordance with regulations of the U.S. Department of Transportation(DOT), 49 CFR Part 26. The City
of Atascadero has received Federal financial assistance from the DOT, and as a condition of receiving this
assistance, the City of Atascadero will sign an assurance that it will comply with 49 CFR Part 26.
The Agency recognizes that certain modifications are necessary to adapt the program for use in
connection with design-build contracts,. and has therefore established certain procedures applicable to
design-build DBE contracts under the DBE Program. Public Contract Code Section 4109 requires
•subcontractors to be identified by the prime contractor for the subletting or subcontracting of any portion
of the work in excess of one-half of 1 percent of the prime contractor's total bid. Exceptions are only in
the cases of public emergency or necessity, and then only after a finding reduced to writing as a public
record of the awarding authority setting forth the facts constituting the emergency or necessity. The
written public record of the awarding authority/Agency as to either emergency or necessity is attached
hereto.
It is the policy of the City of Atascadero to ensure that DBEs, as defined in part 26, have an equal
opportunity to receive and participate in DOT-assisted contracts. It is also our policy:
To ensure nondiscrimination in the award and administration of DOT-assisted contracts;
To create a level playing field on which DBEs can compete fairly for DOT-assisted contracts;
To ensure that the DBE Program is narrowly tailored in accordance with applicable law;
To ensure that only firms that fully meet 49 CFR Part 26 eligibility standards are permitted to
participate as DBEs;
To help remove barriers to the participation of DBEs in DOT-assisted contracts; and
To assist the development of firms that can compete successfully in the market place outside the
DBE Program.
The Public Works Technician has been delegated as the DBE Liaison Officer. In that capacity, Valerie
Humphrey is responsible for implementing all aspects of the DBE program. Implementation of the DBE
program is accorded the same priority as compliance with all other legal.obligations incurred by the City
of Atascadero in its financial assistance agreements with the California Department of Transportation
(Caltrans).
028
City of Atascadero has disseminated this policy statement to the City Council and all the components of
our organization. We have distributed this statement to DBE and non-DBE business communities that
perform work for us on DOT-assisted contracts by publishing this statement in general circulation,
minority-focused and trade association publications. •
III Nondiscrimination (§26.7)
City of Atascadero will never exclude any person from participation in, deny any person the benefits of,
or otherwise discriminate against anyone in connection with the award and performance of any contract
covered by 49 CFR Part 26 on the basis of race, color, sex, or national origin.
In administering its DBE program, the City of Atascadero will not, directly or through contractual or
other arrangements, use criteria or methods of administration that have the effect of defeating or
substantially impairing accomplishment of the objectives of the DBE program with respect to individuals
of a particular race, color, sex, or national origin.
IV DBE Program Updates (§26.21)
City of Atascadero will continue to carry out this program until the City has established a new goal
setting methodology or until significant changes to this DBE Program are adopted. City of Atascadero
will provide to Caltrans a proposed overall goal and goal setting methodology and other program updates
by June 1 of every year.
V Quotas (§26.43)
City of Atascadero will not use quotas or set-asides in any way in the administration of this D�
program.
VI DBE Liaison Officer(DBELO) (§26.45)
City of Atascadero has designated the following individual as the DBE Liaison Officer: Valerie
Humphrey, Public Works Technician, City of Atascadero, 6500 Palma Avenue, Atascadero, CA 93422
Ph 805-461-5020 Fx 805-461-7615, e-mail vhumphrey@atascadero.org In that capacity, Valerie
Humphrey is responsible for implementing all aspects of the DBE program and ensuring that the City of
Atascadero complies with all provisions of 49 CFR Part 26. This is available on the Internet at
osdbuweb.dot.gov/main.cfin. Valerie Humphrey has direct, independent access to the City Manager
concerning DBE program matters. An organization chart displaying the DBELO's position in the
organization is found in Attachment A to this program.
The DBELO is responsible for developing, implementing and monitoring the DBE program, in
coordination other appropriate officials. Duties and responsibilities include the following:
1. Gathers and reports statistical data and other information as required.
2. Reviews third party contracts and purchase requisitions for compliance with this program.
3. Works with all departments to set overall annual goals.
4. Ensures that bid notices and requests for proposals are available to DBEs in a timely manner.
5. Identifies contracts and procurements so that DBE goals are included in solicitations (both rac
neutral methods and contract specific goals) and monitors results.
6. Analyzes City of Atascadero's progress toward goal attainment and identifies ways to improve
progress.
029
7. Participates in pre-bid meetings.
8. Advises the CEO/governing body on DBE matters and achievement.
9. Chairs the DBE Advisory Committee.
�10. Participates with the legal counsel and project director to determine contractor compliance with good
faith efforts.
11. Provides DBEs with information and assistance in preparing bids, obtaining bonding and insurance.
12.Plans and participates,in DBE training seminars.
13. Provides outreach to DBEs and community organizations to advise them of opportunities.
VII Federal Financial Assistance Agreement Assurance (§26.13)
City of Atascadero will sign the following assurance, applicable to all FHWA-assisted contracts and their
administration as part of the program supplement agreement for each project:
The recipient shall not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, or sex in the award and
performance of any DOT-assisted contract or in the administration of its DBE Program or the
requirements of 49 CFR part 26. The recipient shall take all necessary and reasonable steps under 49
CFR part 26 to ensure nondiscrimination in the award and administration of DOT-assisted contracts. The
recipient's DBE Program, as required by 49 CFR part 26 and as approved by DOT, is incorporated by
reference in this agreement. Implementation of this program is a legal obligation and failure to carry out
its terms shall be treated as a violation of this agreement. Upon notification to the recipient of its failure
to carry out its approved program, the Department may impose sanctions as provided for under part 26
and may, in appropriate cases, refer the matter for enforcement under 18 U.S.C. 1001 and/or the
Program Fraud Civil Remedies Act of 1986 (31 U.S.C. 3801 et seq.).
VIII DBE Financial Institutions
It is the policy of the City of Atascadero to investigate the full extent of services offered by financial
institutions owned and controlled by socially and economically disadvantaged individuals in the
community, to make reasonable efforts to use these institutions, and to encourage prime contractors on
DOT-assisted contracts to make use of these institutions.
Information on the availability of such institutions can be obtained from the DBE Liaison Officer. The
Caltrans Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Program may offer assistance to the DBE Liaison Officer.
]X Directory (§26.31)
City of Atascadero will refer interested persons to the DBE directory available from the Caltrans
Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Program website at www.dot.ca.gov/hq/bep-
X Overconcentration (§26.33)
City of Atascadero has not identified any types of work in DOT-assisted contracts that have a
overconcentration of DBE participation. If in the future City of Atascadero identifies the need to address
overconcentration, measures for addressing overconcentration will be submitted to the DLAE for
Opproval.
030
XI Business Development Programs (§26.35)
City of Atascadero does not have a business development or mentor-protege program. If the City of
Atascadero identifies the need for such a program in the future, the rationale for adopting such a progr�
and a comprehensive description of it will be submitted to the DLAE for approval.
XII Required Contract Clauses (§§26.13, 26.29)
Contract Assurance
City of Atascadero ensures that the following clause is placed in every DOT-assisted contract and
subcontract:
The contractor or subcontractor shall not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, or sex
in the performance of this contract. The contractor shall carry out applicable requirements of 49 CFR
part 26 in the award and administration of DOT-assisted contracts. Failure by the contractor to carry out
these requirements is a material breach of this contract, which may result in the termination of this
contract or such other remedy as recipient deems appropriate.
Prompt Payment
City of Atascadero ensures that the following clauses or equivalent will be included in each DOT-
assisted prime contract:
Satisfactory Performance
The prime contractor agrees to pay each subcontractor under this prime contract for satisfactoo
performance of its contract no later than 10 days from the receipt of each payment the prime
contractor receives from City of Atascadero. Any delay or postponement of payment from the above
referenced time frame may occur only for good cause following written approval of the City of
Atascadero. This clause applies to both DBE and non-DBE subcontractors
Release of Retainage
The prime contractor agrees further to release retainage payments to each subcontractor within 30
days after the subcontractor's work is satisfactorily completed. Any delay or postponement of
payment from the above referenced time frame may occur only for good cause following written
approval of the City of Atascadero. This clause applies to both DBE and non-DBE subcontractors.
XIII Monitoring and Enforcement Mechanisms (§26.37)
The City of Atascadero will assign a Resident Engineer (RE) or Contract Manager to monitor and track
actual DBE participation through contractor and subcontractor reports of payments in accordance with
the following:
i
031
After Contract Award
After the contract award the City of Atascadero will review the award documents for the portion of items
•each DBE and first tier subcontractor will be performing and the dollar value of that work. With these
documents the RE/Contract Manager will be able to determine the work to be performed by the DBEs or
subcontractors listed.
After Design-Build Contract Award
As described in the Section entitled "GOOD FAITH EFFORTS" below, each proposer for an Agency
design-build contract will be required to submit a DBE Performance Plan as part of a responsive
proposal. Following award of a design-build contract and during both the design and construction
portions of the project, the design-build contractor will be required to submit documentation, in the form
of progress reports described below, to show that the design-build contractor is meeting the contract
goal for the project, or if the goal is not being met, the design-build contractor must submit satisfactory
evidence that it has made good faith efforts, in accordance with that Section, to meet the goal. Evidence
of good faith efforts, as described in 49 CFR Part 26 Section 26.5349 and Appendix A, will be monitored
by the Agency throughout the duration of the design-build project.
Preconstruction Conference
A preconstruction conference will be scheduled between the RE and the contractor or their representative
to discuss the work each DBE subcontractor will perform. The contractor will promptly provide the
Agency with the information required by the form entitled "Local Agency DBE Information" upon
selection of any DBE or other subcontractor not previously identified by the design-build contractor.
W
uring the course of the contract, differences must be explained and resolved by either making
orrections or requesting a substitution.
Before work can begin on a subcontract, the local agency will require the contractor to submit a
completed "Subcontracting Request," Exhibit 16-B of the LAPM or equivalent. When the RE receives
the completed form it will be checked for agreement of the first tier subcontractors and DBEs. The RE
will not approve the request when it identifies someone other than the DBE or first tier subcontractor
listed in the previously completed "Local Agency Bidder DBE Information," Exhibit 15-G. The
"Subcontracting Request"will not be approved until any discrepancies are resolved. If an issue cannot be
resolved at that time, or there is some other concern, the RE will require the contractor to eliminate the
subcontractor in question before signing the subcontracting request. A change in the DBE or first tier
subcontractor may be addressed during a substitution process at a later date.
Suppliers, vendors, or manufacturers listed on the "Local Agency Bidder DBE Information" will be
compared to those listed in the completed Exhibit 16-I of the LAPM or equivalent. Differences must be
resolved by either making corrections or requesting a substitution.
Substitutions will be subject to the Subletting and Subcontracting Fair Practices Act (FPA). Local
agencies will require contractors to adhere to the provisions within Subletting and Subcontracting Fair
Practices Act (State Law) Sections 4100-4144. FPA requires the contractor to list all subcontractors in
excess of one half of one percent (0.5%) of the contractor's total bid or $10,000, whichever is greater.
statute is designed to prevent bid shopping by contractors. The FPA explains that a contractor may
,The
not substitute a subcontractor listed in the original bid except with the approval of the awarding
authority.
032
The RE will give the contractor a blank Exhibit 17-F, "Final Report Utilization of Disadvantaged
Business Enterprises, First Tier Subcontractors" and will explain to them that the document will be
required at the end of the project, for which payment can be withheld, in conformance with the contract.
Construction Contract Monitorin •
The RE will ensure that the RE's staff(inspectors) knows what items of work each DBE is responsible
for performing. Inspectors will notify the RE immediately of apparent violations.
When a firm other than the listed DBE subcontractor is found performing the work, the RE will notify the
contractor of the apparent discrepancy and potential loss of payment. Based on the contractor's
response, the RE will take appropriate action: The DBE Liaison Officer will perform a preliminary
investigation to identify any potential issues related to the DBE subcontractor performing a commercially
useful function. Any substantive issues will be forwarded to the Caltrans Disadvantaged Business
Enterprise Program. If the contractor fails to adequately explain why there is a discrepancy, payment for
the work will be withheld and a letter will be sent to the contractor referencing the applicable
specification violation and the required withholding of payment.
If the contract requires the submittal of a monthly truck document, the contractor will be required to
submit documentation to the RE showing the owner's name; California Highway Patrol CA number; and
the DBE certification number of the owner of the truck for each truck used during that month for which
DBE participation will be claimed. The trucks will be listed by California Highway Patrol CA number in
the daily diary or on a separate piece of paper for documentation. The numbers are checked by
inspectors regularly to confirm compliance.
The contractor will provide DBE Progress Reports to the Agency with each invoice and will provide
annual report on or before August 1 of each year of the design-build contract. Each report must also
include a narrative summary stating whether the contractor is on target with respect to the DBE goal set
forth in the design-build contract, whether the goal has been exceeded (stating the amount of the excess),
or whether the contractor is behind target(stating the amount of the deficit).
Providing evidence of DBE payment is the responsibility of the contractor.
Substitution
When a DBE substitution is requested, the RE/Contract Manager will request a letter from the contractor
explaining why substitution is needed. The RE/Contract Manager must review the letter to be sure names
and addresses are shown, dollar values are included, and reason for the request is explained. If the
RE/Contract Manager agrees to the substitution, the RE/Contract Manager will notify, in writing, the
DBE subcontractor regarding the proposed substitution and procedure for written objection from the
DBE subcontractor in accordance with the Subletting and Subcontracting Fair Practices Act. If the
contractor is not meeting the contract goal with this substitution, the contractor must provide the
required good faith effort to the RE/Contract Manager for local agency consideration.
If there is any doubt in the RE/Contract Manager's mind regarding the requested substitution, the
RE/Contract Manager may contact the DLAE for assistance and direction.
•
033
Record Keeping and Final Report Utilization of Disadvantaged Business Enterprises
The contractor shall maintain records showing the name and address of each first-tier subcontractor. The
records shall also show:
1. The name and business address, regardless of tier, of every DBE subcontractor, DBE vendor of
materials and DBE trucking company.
2. The date of payment and the total dollar figure paid to each of the firms.
3. The DBE prime contractor shall also show the date of work performed by their own forces along
with the corresponding dollar value of the work claimed toward DBE goals.
When a contract has been completed the contractor will provide a summary of the records stated above.
The DBE utilization information will be documented on Exhibit 17-F and will be submitted to the DLAE
attached to the Report of Expenditures. The RE will compare the completed Exhibit 17-F to the
contractor's completed Exhibit 15-G and, if applicable, to the completed Exhibit 16-B. The DBEs shown
on the completed Exhibit 17-F should be the same as those originally listed unless an authorized
substitution was allowed, or the contractor used more DBEs and they were added. The dollar amount
should reflect any changes made in planned work done by the DBE. The contractor will be required to
explain in writing why the names of the subcontractors, the work items or dollar figures are different from
what was originally shown on the completed Exhibit 15-G when:
• There have been no changes made by the RE.
•
The.contractor has not provided a sufficient explanation in the comments section of the completed
• Exhibit 17-F.
The explanation will be attached to the completed Exhibit 17-F for submittal. The RE will file this in the
project records.
The local agency's Liaison Officer will keep track of the DBE certification status on the Internet at
www.dot.ca.gov/hq/bep and keep the RE informed of changes that affect the contract. The RE will
require the contractor to act in accordance with existing contractual commitments regardless of
decertification.
The DLAE will use the PS&E checklist to monitor the City of Atascadero's commitment to require
bidders list information to be submitted to the City of Atascadero from the awarded prime and
subcontractors as a means to develop a bidders list. This monitoring will only take place if the bidders list
information is required to be submitted as stipulated in the special provisions.
City of Atascadero will bring to the attention of the DOT through the DLAE any false, fraudulent, or
dishonest conduct in connection with the program, so that DOT can take the steps (e.g., referral to the
Department of Justice for criminal prosecution, referral to the DOT Inspector General, action under
suspension and debarment or Program Fraud and Civil Penalties rules) provided in §26.109. City of
Atascadero also will consider similar action under our own legal authorities, including responsibility
determinations in future contracts.
•
034
XIV Overall Goals (§26.45)
Amount of Goal
Ci of Atascadero's overall goal for the Federal fiscal year FY 2000-01 is the following: 80/ f •
City g Y g o o the
Federal financial assistance in FHWA-assisted contracts. This overall goal is broken down into 5% race-
conscious and 3% race-neutral components.
Methodology
Base Figure: # of DBE's (Construction) 109 = 10%
# of Construction Contractors on NAICS 1117*
• This figure was calculated as follows:
• SLO COUNTY(829) 100% of Firms Listed = 829
• Monterey County(833) 10% of Firms Listed= 83
• Santa Barbara County(1011) 10% of Firms Listed= 101
• Kern County(1049) 10% of Firms Listed= 104
Base Figure: # of DBE's(Engineering) 41 = 5%
# of Engineering Firms on NAICS 807*
• This figure was calculated as follows:
• SLO COUNTY(541) 100% of Firms Listed 541 •
• Monterey County(298) 10% of Firms Listed= 30
• Santa Barbara County(1115) 10% of Firms Listed= 112
• Kern County(123 7) 10% of Firms Listed= 124
The City of Atascadero acknowledges and is pursuing the Public participation requirement of the DBE
Program. Results will be incorporated in the submittal.
Breakout of Estimated Race-Neutral and Race-Conscious Participation
Of the overall annual 8% goal for DBE participation, the City of Atascadero projects meeting 5% of the
goal utilizing race neutral methods, including making efforts to assure that bidding and contract
requirements facilitate participation by DBE's and other small businesses; unbundling large contracts to
make them ore accessible to small businesses; encouraging prime contractors to subcontract portions of
the work that they might otherwise perform themselves; and providing technical assistance, and other
support services to facilitate consideration of DBEs and other small businesses. The remaining 3% of the
goal is anticipated to be accomplished through race-conscious measures, which includes establishing
contract specific goals on contracts with contracting possibilities, when needed, to meet the City of
Atascadero's overall annual DBE goal.
035.
Process
Starting with the Federal fiscal year 2002, the amount of overall goal, the method to calculate the goal,
*and the breakout of estimated race-neutral and race-conscious participation will be required annually by
June 1 in advance of the Federal fiscal year beginning October 1 for FHWA-assisted contracts.
Submittals will be to the Caltrans' DLAE. An exception to this will be if FTA or FAA recipients are
required by FTA or FAA to submit the annual information to them or a designee by another date. FHWA
recipients will follow this process:
Once the DLAE has responded with preliminary comments and the comments have been incorporated
into the draft overall goal information, the City of Atascadero will publish a notice of the proposed
overall goal, informing the public that the proposed goal and its rationale are available for inspection
during normal business hours at the City of Atascadero's principal office for 30 days following the date of
the notice, and informing the public that City of Atascadero comments will be accepted on the goals for
45 days following the date of the notice. Advertisements in newspapers, minority focus media, trade
publications, and websites will be the normal media to accomplish this effort. The notice will include
addresses to which comments may be sent and addresses (including offices and websites) where the
proposal may be reviewed.
The overall goal resubmission to the Caltrans DLAE, will include a summary of information and
comments received during this public participation process and City of Atascadero's responses. This will
be due by September 1 to the Caltrans DLAE. The DLAE will have a month to make a final review so the
City of Atascadero may begin using the overall goal on October 1 of each year.
0XV Contract Goals (§26.51)
City of Atascadero will use contract goals to meet any portion of the overall goal City of Atascadero
does not project being able to meet by the use of race-neutral means. Contract goals are established so
that, over the period to which the overall goal applies, they will cumulatively result in meeting any
portion of the overall goal that is not projected to be met through the use of race-neutral means.
Contract goals will be established only on those DOT-assisted contracts that have subcontracting
possibilities. Contract goals need not be established on every such contract, and the size of contract goals
will be adapted to the circumstances of each such contract (e.g., type and location of work, availability of
DBEs to perform the particular type of work). The contract work items will be compared with eligible
DBE contractors willing to work on the project. A determination will also be made to decide which
items are likely to be performed by the prime contractor and which ones are likely to be performed by the
subcontractor(s). The goal will then be incorporated into the contract documents. Contract goals will be
expressed as a percentage of the total amount of a DOT-assisted contract.
XVI Transit Vehicle Manufacturers (§26.49)
If DOT-assisted contracts will include transit vehicle procurements, City of Atascadero will require each
transit vehicle manufacturer, as a condition of being authorized to bid or propose on transit vehicle
procurements,• to certify that it has complied with the requirements of 49 CFR Part 26, Section 49. City of Atascadero will direct the transit vehicle manufacturer to the subject requirements located on the
Internet at http://osdbuweb.dot.gov/programs/dbe/dbe.htm.
036
XVII Good Faith Efforts (§26.53)
Information to be Submitted •
City of Atascadero treats bidders'/offerors' compliance with good faith effort requirements as a matter of
responsiveness. A responsive proposal is meeting all the requirements of the advertisement and
solicitation.
Each solicitation for which a contract goal has been established will require the bidders/offerors to submit
the following information to City of Atascadero, 6500 Palma Avenue, Atascadero, CA 93422] no later
than 4:00 p.m. on or before the fourth day, not including Saturdays, Sundays and legal holidays,
following bid opening:
1. The names and addresses of known DBE firms that will participate in the contract;
2. A description of the work that each DBE will perform:
3. The dollar amount of the participation of each DBE firm participation
4. Written and signed documentation of commitment to use a DBE subcontractor whose participation it
submits to meet a contract goal;
5. Written and signed confirmation from the DBE that it is participating in the contract as provided in
the prime contractor's commitment; and
6. If the contract goal is not met, evidence of good faith efforts.
7. A DBE Performance Plan containing a detailed description of the design-build
contractor's planned methodology for achieving the DBE goal stated in the contract,
including a description of the good faith efforts the design-build contractor intends to
undertake to achieve that goal.
8. A design-build proposal must also include an affidavit that the proposer will either •
attain the DBE goals for the design-build contract or will exercise good faith efforts to do so.
Demonstration of Good Faith Efforts
The obligation of the bidder/offeror is to make good faith efforts. The bidder/offeror can demonstrate
that it has done so either by meeting the contract goal or documenting good faith efforts. Examples of
good faith efforts are found in Appendix A to part 26 which is attached. . If it is a design-build contract,
each contractor proposing will be required to submit a DBE Performance Plan as part of a responsive
proposal and good faith efforts.
The following personnel are responsible for determining whether a bidder/offeror who has not met the
contract goal has documented sufficient good faith efforts to be regarded as responsive: Office of the
Director of Public Works for the City of Atascadero.
City of Atascadero will ensure that all information is complete and accurate and adequately documents
the bidder/offeror's good faith efforts before a commitment to the performance of the contract by the
bidder/offeror is made.
•
037
Administrative Reconsideration
Within 10 days of being informed by City of Atascadero that it is not responsive because it has not
Wocumented sufficient good faith efforts, a bidder/offeror may request administrative reconsideration.
Bidder/offerors should make this request in writing to the following reconsideration official: Steven B.
Kahn, Director of Public Works, City of Atascadero, 6500 Palma Avenue, Atascadero, CA 93422 Ph 805-461-
5020 Fx 805-461-7615. The reconsideration official will not have played any role in the original
determination that the bidder/offeror did not make document sufficient good faith efforts.
As part of this reconsideration, the bidder/offeror will have the opportunity to provide written
documentation or argument concerning the issue of whether it met the goal or made adequate good faith
efforts to do so. The bidder/offeror will have the opportunity to meet in person with the reconsideration
official to discuss the issue of whether it met the goal or made adequate good faith efforts to do. The
City of Atascadero will send the bidder/offeror a written decision on reconsideration, explaining the basis
for finding that the bidder did or did not meet the goal or make adequate good faith efforts to do so. The
result of the reconsideration process is not administratively appealable to Caltrans, FHWA or the DOT.
Good Faith Efforts when a DBE is Replaced on a Contract
City of Atascadero will require a contractor to make good faith efforts to replace a DBE that is
terminated or has otherwise failed to complete its work on a contract with another certified DBE, to the
extent needed to meet the contract goal. The prime contractor is required to notify the RE immediately
of the DBE's inability or unwillingness to perform and provide reasonable documentation.
•In this situation, the prime contractor will be required to obtain City of Atascadero prior approval of the
substitute DBE and to provide copies of new or amended subcontracts, or documentation of good faith
efforts. If the contractor fails or refuses to comply in the time specified, City of Atascadero contracting
office will issue an order stopping all or part of payment/work until satisfactory action has been taken. If
the contractor still fails to comply, the contracting officer may issue a termination for default proceeding.
XVIII Counting DBE Participation (§26.55)
City of Atascadero will count DBE participation toward overall and contract goals as provided in the
contract specifications for the prime contractor, subcontractor, joint venture partner with prime or
subcontractor, or vendor of material or supplies. See the Caltrans' Sample Boiler Plate Contract
Documents previously mentioned. Also, refer to XI, A. "After Contract Award."
XIX Certification (§26.83(a))
City of Atascadero ensures that only DBE firms currently certified on the Caltrans' directory will
participate as DBEs in our program.
XX Information Collection and Reporting
Bidders List
•The City of Atascadero will create and maintain a bidders list, consisting of information about all DBE
and non-DBE firms that bid or quote on its DOT-assisted contracts. The bidders list will include the
name, address, DBE/non-DBE status, age, and annual gross receipts of firms.
038
Monitoring Payments to DBEs
Prime contractors are required to maintain records and documents of payments to DBEs for three ye
following the performance of the contract. These records will be made available for inspection up*
request by any authorized representative of the City of Atascadero, Caltrans or FHWA. This reporting
requirement also extends to any certified DBE subcontractor.
Payments to DBE subcontractors will be reviewed by the City of Atascadero to ensure that the actual
amount paid to DBE subcontractors equals or exceeds the dollar amounts stated in the schedule of DBE
participation.
Reporting to Caltrans
City of Atascadero - Final utilization of DBE participation will be reported to the DLAE using Exhibit
17-F of the Caltrans' LAPM.
Confidentiality
City of Atascadero will safeguard from disclosure to third parties information that may reasonably be
regarded as confidential business information, consistent with Federal, state, and local laws.
Wade G. McKinney, City Manager Date:
This Disadvantaged Business Enterprises Program is accepted by: •
[Signature of DLAE] Date:
•
039
APPENDIX A TO PART 26--GUIDANCE CONCERNING GOOD FAITH EFFORTS
•I. When, as a recipient, you establish a contract goal on a DOT-assisted contract, a bidder must, in order
to be responsible and/or responsive, make good faith efforts to meet the goal. The bidder can meet this
requirement in either of two ways. First, the bidder can meet the goal, documenting commitments for
participation by DBE firms sufficient for this purpose. Second, even if it doesn't meet the goal,the bidder
can document adequate good faith efforts. This means that the bidder must show that it took all necessary
and reasonable steps to achieve a DBE goal or other requirement of this part which, by their scope,
intensity, and appropriateness to the objective, could reasonably be expected to obtain sufficient DBE
participation,even if they were not fully successful.
II. In any situation in which you have established a contract goal, part 26 requires you to use the good
faith efforts mechanism of this part. As a recipient,it is up to you to make a fair and reasonable judgment
whether a bidder that did not meet the goal made adequate good faith efforts. It is important for you to
consider the quality, quantity, and intensity of the different kinds of efforts that the bidder has made. The
efforts employed by the bidder should be those that one could reasonably expect a bidder to take if the
bidder were actively and aggressively trying to obtain DBE participation sufficient to meet the DBE
contract goal. Mere pro forma efforts are not good faith efforts to meet the DBE contract requirements.
We emphasize, however,that your determination concerning the sufficiency of the firm's good faith efforts
is a judgment call: meeting quantitative formulas is not required.
III. The Department also strongly cautions you against requiring that a bidder meet a contract goal (i.e.,
obtain a specified amount of DBE participation) in order to be awarded a contract, even though the bidder
makes an adequate good faith efforts showing. This rule specifically prohibits you from ignoring bona fide
good faith efforts.
61V. The following is a list of types of actions which you should consider as part of the bidder's good faith
efforts to obtain DBE participation. It is not intended to be a mandatory checklist, nor is it intended to be
exclusive or exhaustive. Other factors or types of efforts may be relevant in appropriate cases.
A. Soliciting through all reasonable and available means (e.g. attendance at pre-bid meetings,
advertising and/or written notices) the interest of all certified DBEs who have the capability to
perform the work of the contract. The bidder must solicit this interest within sufficient time to allow
the DBEs to respond to the solicitation. The bidder must determine with certainty if the DBEs are
interested by taking appropriate steps to follow up initial solicitations.
B. Selecting portions of the work to be performed by DBEs in order to increase the likelihood that
the DBE goals will be achieved. This includes, where appropriate, breaking out contract work
items into economically feasible units to facilitate DBE participation, even when the prime
contractor might otherwise prefer to perform these work items with its own forces.
C. Providing interested DBEs with adequate information about the plans, specifications, and
requirements of the contract in a timely manner to assist them in responding to a solicitation.
D. (1)Negotiating in good faith with interested DBEs. It is the bidder's responsibility to make a
portion of the work available to DBE subcontractors and suppliers and to select those portions of
the work or material needs consistent with the available DBE subcontractors and suppliers, so as
to facilitate DBE participation. Evidence of such negotiation includes the names, addresses, and
telephone numbers of DBEs that were considered; a description of the information provided
• regarding the plans and specifications for the work selected for subcontracting; and evidence as to
why additional agreements could not be reached for DBEs to perform the work.
040
(2)A bidder using good business judgment would consider a number of factors in negotiating with
subcontractors, including DBE subcontractors, and would take a firm's price and capabilities as
well as contract goals into consideration. However, the fact that there may be some additional
costs involved in finding and using DBEs is not in itself sufficient reason for a bidder's failure to •
meet the contract DBE goal, as long as such costs are reasonable. Also, the ability or desire of a
prime contractor to perform the work of a contract with its own organization does not relieve the
bidder of the responsibility to make good faith efforts. Prime contractors are not, however,
required to accept higher quotes from DBEs if the price difference is excessive or unreasonable.
E. Not rejecting DBEs as being unqualified without sound reasons based on a thorough
investigation of their capabilities. The contractor's standing within its industry, membership in
specific groups, organizations, or associations and political or social affiliations (for example
union vs. non-union employee status) are not legitimate causes for the rejection or non-solicitation
of bids in the contractor's efforts to meet the project goal.
F. Making efforts to assist interested DBEs in obtaining bonding, lines of credit, or insurance as
required by the recipient or contractor.
G. Making efforts to assist interested DBEs in obtaining necessary equipment, supplies, materials,
or related assistance or services.
H. Effectively using the services of available minority/women community organizations;
minority/women contractors'groups; local, state, and Federal minority/women business assistance
offices; and other organizations as allowed on a case-by-case basis to provide assistance in the
recruitment and placement of DBEs.
V. In determining whether a bidder has made good faith efforts, you may take into account the performance
other bidders in meeting the contract. For example, when the apparent successful bidder fails to meet the contriw
goal, but others meet it, you may reasonably raise the question of whether, with additional reasonable efforts, the
apparent successful bidder could have met the goal. If the apparent successful bidder fails to meet the goal, but
meets or exceeds the average DBE participation obtained by other bidders, you may view this, in conjunction with
other factors,as evidence of the apparent successful bidder having made good faith efforts.
•
G4i
APPENDIX B
TO BE USED FOR DESIGN-BUILD CONTRACTS
The following are hereby incorporated into the Agency's Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE)
Program:
II Objectives /Policy Statement (§§26.1, 26.23)
At the end of the first paragraph, add the following:
The Agency recognizes that certain modifications are necessary to adapt the program
for use in connection with design-build contracts, and has therefore established certain procedures
applicable to design-build DBE contracts under the DBE Program. Public Contract Code Section
4109 requires subcontractors to be identified by the prime contractor for the subletting or
subcontracting of any portion of the work in excess of one-half of 1 percent of the prime contractor's
total bid Exceptions are only in the cases of public emergency or necessity, and then only after a
finding reduced to writing as a public record of the awarding authority setting forth the facts
constituting the emergency or necessity. The written public record of the awarding
authority/Agency as to either emergency or necessity is attached hereto (See Appendix Cfor sample).
•
XIII Monitoring and Enforcement Mechanisms (§26.37)
At the end of the first paragraph below "After Contract Award", add the following paragraph:
After Design-Build Contract Award
As described in the Section entitled "GOOD FAITH EFFORTS" below, each proposer for an Agency
design-build contract will be required to submit a DBE Performance Plan as part of a responsive
proposal. Following award of a design-build contract and during both the design and construction
portions of the project, the design-build contractor will be required to submit documentation, in the form
of progress reports described below, to show that the design-build contractor is meeting the contract
goal for the project, or if the goal is not being met, the design-build contractor must submit satisfactory
evidence that it has made good faith efforts, in accordance with that Section, to meet the goal. Evidence
of good faith efforts, as described in 49 CFR Part 26 Section 26.5349 and Appendix A, will be monitored
by the Agency throughout the duration of the design-build project.
At the end of the first paragraph below "Preconstruction Conference", add the following sentence:
The contractor will promptly provide the Agency with the information required by the
form entitled "Local Agency DBE Information" upon selection of any DBE or other subcontractor not
• previously identified by the design-build contractor. During the course of the contract, differences must
be explained and resolved by either making corrections or requesting a substitution.
042
At the end of the fourth paragraph below "Construction Contract Monitoring", add the following
paragraph:
The contractor will provide DBE Progress Reports to the Agency with each invoice and
will provide an annual report on or before August 1 of each year of the design-build contract. Each
report must also include a narrative summary stating whether the contractor is on target with respect to
the DBE goal set forth in the design-build contract, whether the goal has been exceeded (stating the
amount of the excess), or whether the contractor is behind target(stating the amount of the deficit).
XVII Good Faith Efforts (§26.53)
At the end of the third paragraph below "Information to be Submitted", add the following items:
7. A DBE Performance Plan containing a detailed description of the design-build
contractor's planned methodology for achieving the DBE goal stated in the contract,
including a description of the good faith efforts the design-build contractor intends to
undertake to achieve that goal.
8. A design-build proposal must also include an affidavit that the proposer will either
attain the DBE goals for the design-build contract or will exercise good faith efforts to do
so.
At the end of the first paragraph below "Demonstration of Good Faith Efforts", add the following
sentence: •
If it is a design-build contract, each contractor proposing will be required to submit a
DBE Performance Plan as part of a responsive proposal and good faith efforts.
Wade G. McKinney, City Manager Date:
This Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Program for design-build contracts is accepted by:
[Signature of DLAE] Date:
•
APPENDIX B
04 -31
ITEM NUMBER: C- 1
DATE: 02/27/2001
n -
1918 � : p 1 791 8
Atascadero City Council
Staff Report -Administrative Services
2000 Audit Report
RECOMMENDATION:
Council review and accept the audit report for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2000.
DISCUSSION:
The firm of Moss, Levy and Hartzheim performed the audit and a representative of the firm will
attend the Council meeting to present the audit.
GENERAL FUND
The City's financial condition continued to improve inl999-2000. The California economy was
strong as was the local real estate market. Property taxes for the City increased by nearly 7%
and sales tax increased by more than 6. %. The City is emerging from the difficult financial
times of the early 1990's. Total staffing is less than the census preceding the financial problems
and a significant deferred maintenance liability has grown. While the City has made significant
strides improving the annual financial picture, the long-term financial challenges will continue to
require special attention.
At June 30, 2000, the City had an Unreserved General Fund Balance of $2,464,023. This
represents a reserve of approximately 24% of annual budgeted and other expenditures (or
approximately three months of operations), however this does not account for the estimated $9.7
million in general fund deferred maintenance and unfunded liabilities. In essence the reserve is
earmarked for items like cash flow, leave liabilities, equipment replacement, major building
improvements and liabilities. While the City Council could reprogram these funds, in reality
there is only a small portion of the reserve that is not already programmed for future or ongoing
expenses.
In fiscal year 1999-2000, the City spent over $3,390,000 on capital expenditures. Wastewater,
streets and drainage projects included the Wastewater Treatment Plant Upgrade, Atascadero Mall
Overlay Project, the Portola Road Overlay Project and numerous other streets projects Other
capital expenditures included computer purchases, the financial/permitting system, several
vehicles and small building improvements.
ATTACHMENTS:
General Fund Summary and Comparison
Financial Statements for the Year Ended June 30, 2000 04 el
� 'n 00
7 O In 00
l0 00 '+ M
N N
u ao 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o o
tw u a .-, O 'rt V) 00 00 V 0, 00 00 \C N a1 s` D\ W) r` s`
00 --1 t) N N r- 00 ll0 V: �0 00 N l- �0 - O O 00
�O vl M O In N w 0\ 00 r` O D ME 00
v7 N O 01 O
L Ii O 1
u V
A, w
O 00 O 01 O Lr) to M 00 0\ "t 01 01 r` 0\ 00 W)
00 00 O � \.D O O l- N In N O O N M
�--� \0 � o0 N N O 01 N oo N O^
R L v7 ,--i l\ O C O It 00 N --i ,T N •--� d' M M N. d'
u
y
w
z
0
My u "o In 01 vl M r- Zt O� M r-
�y to W "T M \�o O N N 00 "T �O N 00 M 'n
Q O = a R cl 00 lo In .-• O Cl It 01 W) v'i r- lO r-
� '-
O R O > M M M M O\ W)
O V y 69 69 0�
C ON
Q ^O O \,o tn .-1 M 00 Nr CT Vl �O N t- M ct CT M t-
.-1 O W) 00 rt M \O O l- l- 7 N in M t- 00 00 kn oA
U >40 O CT O0 "O ll llO .t W et 0 00 .-i 1n M C l l� t� O�
N cC �O .-i .•-i C�1 N 7 CT CT CT (7� O `V' -4 M M
O N �O 00 O M -1 [� CT �O 00 7 01 �o M IT
H 5 W M V r N 7 .--1 k N N N .••i 7 N .--1 H In 7 y O
Q F N N N
O4 ti� ti 69 fiR
0.
o
E"� A .`n. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O
1" z GTy 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O vl v') O 'IT C) O tr) O V) d- o
U `� O O O N O O vl C 0 N O� N M O M M `O
r- O O M r- O r O N r O vl \�o M O S 00 �O
+-' 7 O O O r- O I'0 01 O .--i N 01 O v'1 v'1 N M 00 m
y o tri M N V N M --+ V r-
W N N 00
ca O
* o0 3
m Nt a\ r- w �o 110�o l� 0o N [T o 00 � N t` O � N � x
C1 � � n d• V. 01 09 ' O 01 �O O rlI'D ClI'D �0 N yy
r•�+ 00 00 V �t N �D M l� a n h O ti
ti
C) 'T �--� 00 V7 M W O1 O1 N M r- M w 00 N r- O p. y
o ++ V �o •+ M M 00 �o N 1.0 00 N ,T M w) 00 O 00 N
M u � M N d' � �1' •-+ N '-+ N N M --� --� �t � � h
Q Q N Cq O; y .c
C
y
0 -
.. y
u �
cl, N
Ch
z G y
En
`n N O o
En C,
otn
Y
Z w a ani ani r4l
ccs E - w
p, F" "s > a'"i y b v ami
W e ac a a1 w cq O 0 O � ") a N ; i
W ai H G4 F-1 U Gk.
94 O
C7 C4 �
045
•
y00
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o
u y a W! O •- o\ N O �.O to T ct V t- 00 t` v7 0\
i b0 W1 M fl 00 O �--� O\ o\ V'1 M N Wl --! M ,1' '[r [- 00 M N
C C O - I'D Ii' - - Mci N O\ .•-. .--i .--�
a U c
N 01 C% 00 00 M O1 � %C O 00 00 N 't O N O,
O l" vi V 1.0 � O1 r- O M O � V) t` t` O M M M l- to
00 r- M ON V) O 110 M
y --� M v 0 "o 7 .4 - 00 M N Vn vi 00 M M O N "D h
Ge
z
0
ya� M CN O vl V') W) O 110O O O� tet' �-+ O M vl O O M O
00 M l- 00 l� O� O 00 011 l- M N l- M 00 M M O� --�
00 N
a O O > .�-� LnM ao\ O M O ,Ny Ln "1' O1
to to M "t o o , \Z a o t- to %C o o r o
M M [- M M M N O1 'ct to !? M ON ao r
V w p 00 N N llD 7 O\ N O� et O� O W o N It \D O N �O
b N ctt '.y O, M .-•i O O r 00 Ln O\ O O\ m .-i 00 ON 1.0 M M
kn O M \D M 4 C' 00 00 O N 00 O\ O e
W M v .-1 .-i M 'IT 00 N M 'IT M ti ti M r r-
06' -00
O O H" ti 6e ` a
F- A 000000 0000 0 00000000 O o
v7 M o\ vl M [- 't Vn 110 o\ O O kn In N O\ M �.O N 00 It
U O O M 00 O - 110 l- V O1 (D to - ON 00 07 N N M O
\O o1 M -q 00 M M l- M N N 116 00 N O\ M 00 \O .-•, M
+' 9 O\ V) � ',t M 'ct IO M O\ W W O kn O 1.0 C`
N M � 00 N \O 00 - M M N O N
W cfl boa
z
w
O� to O O\ O \D M h O .-i O\ l- N O1 N kn M N O 00 00 Itt
D\ r t- O\ .-i In N .•i kn \O -4 r .-i N In ri �10 in O I"
O� 00 M M O� lD O M O 7 M W� lr
.-. O N M .-i in �10 N M M 00 "t N O\ \D \D M 00 7 O 7 1n
\D IT a1 N 7 [- t- O\ t- N 7 kn t` N O O -4
M V M 'T O\ M in t- 10 M M M \D 00
VI
ti
as x o
r. W
y t cNd -0O O 'c� O
cd
c� ¢ � .� H z
C* o
v � H
• �' CIS '" ami x '"> o ami
aUUU �IU ¢ A; a° w3 U Up: wpm. NWC-0O
W
046
ITEM NUMBER: C-2
DATE: 02/27/2001
iais '° p is
Atascadero City Council
Staff Report - Administrative Services
Mid Year Budget Review
RECOMMENDATION:
Council adopt draft Resolution amending the 2000-01 Budget (Resolution 2000-027).
DISCUSSION:
Financial Status: General Fund revenues are estimated to be approximately $525,000 higher than
the same time last year. More than $200,000 of this increase is due to an accounting change in
the way PERS is reported. The remaining $325,000 increase is based on general increases in
most revenue accounts, including property taxes, sales tax and motor vehicle in lieu. Property
taxes are up 5% (or $76,000) over the previous year, while sales tax revenues are up over 9% (or
$89,000).
Salaries and benefits increased over the same period last year. The majority of this expense is due
to a change in the accounting method for PERS. The additional increase is a result of the new
Memorandums of Understanding with the employee groups and the recognition of leave
liabilities for employees that have separated from the City. Operations have remained consistent
from year to year, while capital outlay has increased. More projects were budgeted in the current
year and the projects generally appear to be getting done faster.
Citywide, revenues and expenses appear to mirror the general fund. Revenues in other funds are
up slightly over the previous year and appear to be right on target or slightly ahead of budgeted
figures. Expenditures are also up but still expected to come in as budgeted.
Budget: Staff is proposing the following budget adjustments as part of this mid-year review.
Staff recommends increasing general fund budgeted revenues as follows in order to reflect the
larger than expected increases in these revenues:
■ Sales Tax- $150,000
■ Motor Vehicle In Lieu Fees- $40,000
■ Interest Income- $50,000
ITEM NUMBER: C-2
DATE: 02/27/2001
Staff also recommends the following changes to general fund expenditures.
■ Recognition of Leave Liabilities ($146,280)- As discussed in our Comprehensive Financial
Strategy, the City does not recognize accrued leave liability for employees as it is earned and
has not funded this liability. As employees leave, the City is required by accounting
standards to recognize this liability as an expense.
■ Fire Overtime ($15,000)- The fire department has experienced a higher than normal
overtime expense during the current fiscal year. Staff is working to insure that the operations
are consistent with the provisions of FLSA. Coupled with operational requirements this has
resulted in a higher than budgeted expense. The appointment of Battalion Chief Stone to
Acting Chief also impacts overtime as it has created an empty slot on one of the fire shifts.
This means that if one firefighter on the shift gets sick or cannot make the shift, a firefighter
will have to be called in on an overtime basis to cover.
■ Zoo Personnel ($8,500)- The zoo has experienced a personnel shortage due to several long
illnesses of key zoo staff. In order to cover zoo shifts, temporary staff had to be called in.
■ Other Employee Services Adjustments ($24,500)- Other minor salary adjustments need to be
made to reflect actual MOU experience and a refinement of labor cost projections.
■ Outside Legal Services ($10,000)- Based on current litigation, it appears that an additional
$10,000 is needed for outside counsel. (It has been our policy to budget outside legal services
at slightly below average level.)
■ Outside Legal Services ($15,000)- It is recommended that Council appropriate an additional
$15,000 for outside legal expertise regarding personnel matters.
■ Technology ($17,880)- As technology becomes a more and more integral part of each
department's operations, it is becoming apparent that current staff cannot keep up with
demand. In an effort to temporarily alleviate demand on staff, additional funds are requested
for temporary help to install new computers and. for first line service help for the
departments. This would allow technology staff to focus on Council and staff priorities such
as web site development, the firewall and phone system projects.
■ Elevator ($10,500)- The original budget included $10,500 of CDBG funds that were to be
used for updating the elevator control panel to ADA standards. Unfortunately due to the
numerous restrictions that using CDBG funds would place on the entire project, staff
estimates that this could double the cost of the entire project. It is recommended that Council
reprogram the CDBG as part of their annual funding cycle and that they appropriate an
additional $10,500 from the general fund for this project.
■ Additional Building Improvements ($1,850)- It is recommended that Council appropriate an
additional $1,850 for minor repairs and maintenance of the Administration Building.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Revenue Increase $240,000. Additional Appropriations of$249,460
048
DRAFT RESOLUTION
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA •
AMENDING 2000-2001 FISCAL YEAR BUDGET
RESOLUTION 2000-027
WHEREAS,the City Council adopted Resolution 2000-027 setting forth the budget for fiscal year
2000-2001 and;
WHEREAS,the City Council hereby wishes to amend said budget;
NOW,THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED,by the City Council of the City of Atascadero that the
Fiscal Year 2000-2001 Budget is amended as follows:
SECTION 1. The appropriation amounts for the general fund are adjusted as follows:
As Previously Amended
Bud eg ted Adjustment Budget
GENERAL FUND $9,949,315 $249,010 $10,198,325
SECTION 2. These changes are effective immediately upon adoption of this resolution.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 27th day of
February, 2001. •
CITY OF ATASCADERO
By:
J. Michael Arrambide, Mayor
ATTEST:
Marcia McClure Torgerson, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Roy A. Hanley, City Attorney
is
050
1.( 00 (p CO r r 0 00 r LO
Q e r 6) ',I: (p OR � OO 7 � Or M 7
00 CO
rl- "t O O 00 O (p r "t O 6) r 00 'fit 00
LO M N It CO ',t cM t M �t 't LO N M It
(0 LO (p 00 to (p Nt O O 6) LO O N
r O O (p LO Ldp 1- 00 O0 LLQ (p O 6) Cl) 00 1-
0') co N LO N O O ti1,- O Cl) O O N N O
w N --1 (1 r 00 6) M (O O q' r M 00 M N t: r N
�- Q O N 00 O Cl) O 6) (p Cl) d r CO M CO N N
Z C J M F Cp h O Ln h O r In ct f� c} M r
W N V Z Q N N r r O In N 00
r
a. N p
x rn LL
W rn
r
O
Q F N N O O 07 CO O (p O M O (.C) LO r r N
r O (C) LO r LO It 1-- "t Nt V LO LO O I c
m Q 11- (p O O r- Lf) LL•) N L( 00 (p (C r 00 M Lf
W 0) p Q O - - (p N CO M00 r LO h Nt 0 (p 6) (.0 u
D e2 O p 6) Ln O O 1- ct M (p 00 LL) O I-- r 'ct M r c N
F- H V' 6) N N (p 'tt r N 00 N r N O O`
W p Q Q r N r c
w } 64 EA �, N
c c
ca
o
y E
O O O O O O O O OO O a)O OO OOOOOO OO O
O O O O a) y
LO (0 (D (p 1l- 00 O M (D � O LLQ It Co O0)o) m
e r r (O 00 ;� CO 't M N U7 00 M O 114: (p -p t N
O r- 00 - N 00 00 M M 00 O I- N0 r- E m
LO M N 00 It LO M It Lc) It 't 't M N It N t a)
N CA
> C •O
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O LO 0 0 Lo LP Q) m yp 3
p F O O M CD It I,- O O O M r (`') (D ti ti o
w w L[) O 00 Ln O O 00 O r Ln (p cp M r I, N O O
ZN 6
0 00 O (O LO �t I- rt O LO N M — O M00 (O m N >, m
w p d' O ) COO r I,- LO 00 00 rt O LO r O r n O
p (p co O N Ln co r ti O O r- (D r r r y O 3
Q m N N r O (p N O c y
6R r r ( N o- L)
N E ::
d O
> 0 lOA
• h ' O O O O O O O O O a o v o p
O O O O M 00 tp (p (OLLI
p Z O O O O N 00 M It It y o m 6
CL F- r N r N N O O c
N O N w o '5
O d Q o a
NQ EA cuo
y m
y O U a) y
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O LO O O U.) LL) c c o Z c
O O M O I�t I- O O O Cl) CO LO r h r O0 O o o a) E
ZW LO O 00 LO O (p 00 O r LO M f- O r M I-- @ y 70
Q
w (� 00 O O LC) 't I_ N' O Ln N 6') M 00 M O ( m
p t LLQ N 6) t r 1,- O 00 'ItcY c7 M r It O O lom
p (p (O 6) N LO 00 r r- 00 r- (p r 6) r O _U U
V m N N r- 6) O C 6) v a) y o
In
Cc
c o c
EE :3 y
O) U O O N
w d' 00 r- r t- M �h O N (p 00 N N r M M - � r w`O
F. (p 00 LO 0) r LO N O N r (p 6) N O 1� Nt c >O L y
o Q J LC) V (p 00 ct h O N ti L LL) lzt O (p O o
`
N p Q (p O UL) r N r 00 LO 00 O LO r It M It (O t o o n
O (p "Zr (p It 1l- 00 N (D r 00 r O O N 4- M E
V
F- F- Ln O N N (p It It 1l- N co N a`) o y
O Q Q d M `- m O C
LU t a n
w Ei? Ff3 a c c v
O C O p
Ql Oo 0 C a) N
CL NCD a) O
O d asa) o 0
LA L y ca >
d �_ m m o ° n
N
yd y
x O - O C 0) � c c� y cu O
y cu cn -4 .V .D N G) N C y a) y o d M
N ~ 0) c 2. '- U) d O a J v N
LL x L IL O cn
•C 023 H CE 0 -O '� > ��' N N c O R c -CD 0 Co 0 0
v7 > 7 F- 3 0) O G) > m o a
U) iri p �= p) p = O iu cq F- Z o E a m
L
Q o
o a)
W mticnO Lac a>i c E a) CL m 3 a
Z 4) UJ d � UEW- 0 CL
'W'^^ w w
V N M �
C,•5
} 0 0 0 0 0 0 0cu00 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 o o 0 0 @ 0 0 0 0
�! r 0 0 0 CO 0o I,- C In 't O C O 00 r (o It
Q CO O O O r O N O ct r 00 N M N
O O O O N O O 0 LO r "t loo M N o>
co Ln rt LO L() LO I%t N rt 0 d co LO
(n (o It 0 0 O r CO N (0 CO O O O O N co Ln Ln •
co N w O (D co (o co N 00 O U') LO m � 00 It O
�J J Q o (Cl (o (o N N M N N 0o co O co 00 ti V r r N
(n w N r 00 (o v N M O r r M a- Co
40) LO Ln 0) O O LO (p r r M 00 M LO
Z O } o ff N N r r M
W OQ �> F-
X y z
W
Q
Z
Q LL, o " O O r 0 r- ti O O O LLQ N co co (h
W r M �t N r CO r- M t` O r- O (o ti M (o
QJ co r It co co (0 N co co Ln M m It It 0) LO
rn p Q t` O (0 M � r- O O N M r- d' Ln r- �
Z O t` r` 0') CM coCCo N N C0 r r O
W U O ~ r N N M r r r r
LLJ IX
U
W p W Q
} ER 64 Ffl ff-J
o o 0 0 0 o o o 2 0 0 0 0 0
O C C O r- O r C ti Cfl O C O (o I�t N r
e O O O ti Cl? O N O 00 r (-o r�
LO O 00 Co LO O co O O (. 00 Cl) N
M LO Cl) It Cl) Cl) Nt LO Nt It LO Cl) Nt
N
p O ' ' O O O O ' O O O ' O O O O O O
W ~ Cl Cl) M N r M Oo O 00 Cl) t- O O 00
p LU r (O ti ' cF O C0 O Co M r
Z 0 00 (O N r M cl O r r N S M O r
W p ti LO Cl) N r M � ti V It M d
Qr (0 N d' (o M M r r Cl)
(fl Ef3 ER ER
00 00 00 00
N
p
W Z 0o 00 00 00
LU
r O t` ti
a
N 0 j
CD a Q (s (�
N
O ' ' O O O O ' O O O ' O O O O O O
F- O M CO N r M O O Cl, Ln r- 0 N 00
Z L J O h r- r (Cpl ' O O (CP, O (o r
W (7 00 (0 'd' M It N M '�t It M N r
p r` LO M N r Cl) LO LO N "t r
Vm r (0 N d' (DM Cl) r r M
cfr W ef3
W
LU r LO ' Ln r r 0 ' r O U O O d' It M r LO O LO
F- r ti (0 LO 00 Cl) r O Q 00 0 — O CM r 00 O
o Q J M (o M M C0 O M J r- L() t` O 00 00 ":t Ci O
C, p Q r .- co ti ti (0 M C0 a oo N CO LL) Ln ao O It
N O (o ti It O V) ti M O 04 1:T "T �
F- F- r N r r N wUl r r r
p Q Q
W
Q
C N
C �
LL U
rn a
@ m w m
Z c y cn
a) r W (D (D w
U) LL O U r
E CD
Z Q > O N! W 7 X O 0 > tri cn � k O
H > O C U
x o L L (D o 0 W J 0 0 w
a, N ai H uoi - o Co :° .. aNi o� «° =
Q o O d Z
W C a? Y N c E Q Lmo Z = � t t-o c E CL coo H Z
Z � C� OF- QwOU U > U O CL OU
Q w H W w
o 0 o a o o a o 0 a 0 0 0 0
o a o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
N I- O r O O M 00 r 0 0 M O O It r U)
Q o O C\! : O O CO N CO O M O N It co O O
O O m U) f` O O f` Co (O I� O Cl O co co
(D L() •V' Ln Ln -f O It d' It LO It co Nt
C r
O O ' O r O to O 00 O LO ti U) -,t 00 Ln O r N
tY o r CO to O O 00 CO (D ti r CO U) r d' -t CD N U) 00 �
Q o M N U) r O N ";t 0: t- O r O h O M O N r
o f U) In O O N m (D LO N ti ct LO 'ct - O (D N CD
ZO r o ? 00 O � 00 � co O O O U) 't (A r O t- U) O
uj CD J C, LO M O N It 0o (0 CD
CL LO U W V r N r CV
X C6 Z
N Q
p � LL ' Ef? ER b4 EFT
a W U) O ' LO No O r CO h L() O O N O N r Ln et N
W H M O Cl) N Cl) Cl) O LO r C) LO M O 00 L() N r- r-
MLn OO (O M Lf) V CO CO O r M r M M LL) (D 00 t-
C Q N N CC r-:O (fl M U)CO �t Ln r-- (M U) r (D
W U O r r In d r r (rO rl- It O O CSO N CO
r r r
> WQ Q Q r
NW W
0 0 co 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 co o 0 0 0 0 0 0
r O C co N r CO "t I` (O C M O LO (D r o N
e N r M r N UO N O r O ct O L!) N U)
(O LO 00 O r N O U) co N � � ('7 I- co 00
�F O LO m N CD N U) O O It In It M It
0 O O ' O O O O O O O O ' O O O O O O O O
W LO O LL) U) LO LO LL) O It O O d O 0) O O 00 't
C L U M U) DD r 0o M M L() r (O r tt ":tC M N
h N CT O "t r (D Cl) r 00 (D (D 6) (D ti- LO Ln 0)
Z
LU zO (D 00 C) U) N d' ti Nt MLO O U) M r- ti r
LU m It Nt r r V 't N t- M U) O O CN
HT ffl E9 Ef3
CO
• (V
C6
°w z � � � � a
U) W N N N N
r r r r
CL
N 0 j
O a o
o Q EA EH ER ER
N
O O ' O O O O O O O O ' O O O O O O O O
F
Cl O O U) U) O O O I�t O O It O 0) 0) O 00 "ItZ W O U) L() r CO O O L tt r O r r ":t ";t M M N
W 0 U) N r- O It 0) It Cl) r 00 (O (D O (D Iq LL) U) 0')
p LO U) 00 O M r q ti 't Cl) U) O LO M I` t` r
:3 It It r r It N t- M U) O 0) N
U m r r r r v
EfT 69 ER yg
W O O N N (T r (D (O O LO LL) 00 O 00 M 00 N O M LO
F L() 00 ti O Ln 00 00 N h 't O 00 O Cl) LO B O O Cl) O
o Q J N M O M ((Z 'Il O 00 N CO d 00 O C l O N L() O lqLn
NQ CT) N � O0 00 Cl) N M O 00 r t- M (0 LO - LO 00 U)
U H CN N N O d M Ln O r It N N
W Q Q p
W Z
>- = U9 EtT 61, EfT
LL
W
U
Z o
p
ZU) °? (n o d
W c0i U) LL U L
3
fA Z ani c a uj w a)
Q > U) t6 a E � � � c Eo > � � a E
(n a°i o O LL v o2S o > `a) ami W 0 Z w v
c
Ziri a) _3 = W iiiFu 2 4, �cn ai � 3 >. CD _
W p c u a) Fes- = E a caCLF Z y c � � c ami H � E 6- cu 0)
C) F' Z
> U � O Qw00 > d0O � CL
~O m w W
G53 -
o o0 0 \00
\ \ \ \
\ \
O O C O co LO co O
CC O co ,OLO
It M coo M
c
(n iDO m O CO M CO N •
� O Co 00 ti CO i COr r
W a c V O L() I` V O A N Ln
(n W N J 00 Ln N O d' N Il- LC)
Z O } o N It v Lt� LOU') (D
W J M
Q
CL CD X z a
0 LL
Q
w W M O M LOC') It N r OMD
0) Q J N U) � O (D (A LO I`
Z o) 0 a — e- S M V M �
O
N N t- 14-
N N
w U V
w W a
a/ }
69. 64
0 0 0 o Lp o 0 o
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
OD co CD It O O
e r- O O O h 0
Cl co O LC) O to
V I c`')
O O Cl (D ' U') O LO LC)
'It O Cl d' LO O LO 00
LU W O LL) (fl � r- CC �
az (D It C7 CO (D r- _O O O a) O
Mw m LC) CD �t M
a
o 64 61)
U)
w Z
N w
O
� a �
N 0 N
c a Q 64
N
O O O O ' LC) O LO LO
Z f. O OLC) CdLO O o � �
w W
U Cl) (0 O_ O0 0) O
> > O qt
U m
6 Ef3
W Cl LC) ' LC) ' h ' ti N
o ND Q J Cr � � N
CD U Q Cl) N LO O
O N N h I-
U
p Q Q
W
4)
U
C
N
m
Q N
N d
Z 0 aNi
LL E O 'C
r_ O d
Z d (/j Q E
Z N i N 0 w C •
O O O
LU F� C N m H C E Q m F' Z
H 0)
0� u Xwov GJ
0 a w
0
CSS W � N N
O O p
♦�+ C1 Ca O rn �
O
• � w N M
L � O
y w
A �
0
a� co 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
't^ O b �M•t 7 Obi O
N
H �
W
zQ b O O O O O
C0
A V O W 7 N O
V w o
O
0 �
N
N z 2 w o 0
A ¢ E w
W < U a
zs
0
z 3 o 0
FT+ q F
W F r O r
¢ m
N Q U A O Q M O N
• W � �i 7 gyp. .N-.
Q �
fff
W O
O O O O
A N ¢ U N O O O O p
0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
� m
69
h
N
A W z U
w a o ¢
U �
U � a
O yj
q C, on 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
W O N �° ' O M O O a\ O O N O O
o ? o n - o lo o vi o, o a a 0 0 0 0 �
W O O` O: q ao tai ri O N N vi 4\ O 7 0 �O 1� l O O O vi
•-' M n 7 H M M M ^" M N M �
j w v
w F
cn F W
A o
0K C Z v y W a
�4 2.0
H F, O on � .ti G7 0..
O F a .5 c x o c a
A U v u�i a •� a m c W Fv4 ¢ •c A o .`°. .] v� r y ro >, w n F
�i LQ
F.
O A ° a 04 C v cC a cn v o :: y •� ;:
K°
o = .d Q
H z ' U '� a
Pw � U wO �NAUA U Owz
� CJ
5
V ¢ W ¢ N W ¢ 4 U' a U Q ¢ U F
U U U U U U
ITEM NUMBER: C-3
DATE: 02/27/2001
1918 p 1979
Atascadero City Council
Staff Report - Community Services Department
Youth/ Community Center Site Options
RECOMMENDATION:
Council direct staff to prepare and bring back a draft agreement with the San Luis Obispo County
Office of Education for a partnership to construct and operate a Youth/ Community Center on the
grounds of the El Camino Real Continuation School and prioritize the remaining potential
building sites.
REPORT IN BRIEF:
City staff and the Atascadero Youth Community Center Design Team are currently working with
Heiser and Associates, Inc. to prepare the programming portion of the design process for the
proposed Youth/ Community Center. Kirk Heiser, Principal Architect for Heiser and Associates
will present the findings of the Community Workshop and survey process to the City Council in
the near future.
Following the programming portion of the design process, the Architect will need direction
regarding the specific site location for the Youth/ Community Center. The current proposed site
is an area behind Traffic Way Park, on the grounds of the Public Works Corporation Yard. This
location, although suitable in some respects, is not optimal. In addition, the projected costs for
the type of facility being discussed in the Community workshops may significantly exceed the
allocated funds for this project.
In light of these circumstances, and in response to two recently developing options, staff felt it
necessary to have the City Council re-address the issue of site location. The following report
outlines five options for the location of the proposed Youth/ Community Center, including the
staff recommended location on the campus of a continuation school that will be constructed next
year by the County Office of Education. This cooperative project, if approved, would provide up
to one million dollars in matching funds from the State of California.
G��
ITEM NUMBER: C-3
DATE: 02/27/2001
DISCUSSION:
On Tuesday, January 23, 2001, the City Council authorized the Mayor to enter into an agreement
with Heiser and Associates to provide design services to the proposed Atascadero Youth/
Community Center. Heiser and Associates has begun a process to determine the communities
needs and desires regarding the potential program areas of the Youth/ Community Center using
information gathered from two teen surveys, a recently held community workshop, and meetings
with the Youth/ Community Center Design Team.
Upon completion of this process to determine the community desires for programming, Heiser
and Associates will prepare and present a report to the City Council outlining their findings.
This report will include a prioritized list of the programming areas, (amenities and/or rooms) and
determine some approximate construction costs for each. Based on the estimated construction
costs of each amenity/ room, the Architect will present potential scenarios to determine if a
facility that meets the community desires can be designed and built within the established project
budget.
Preliminary reviews by staff of the community desires for programming areas indicate that the
highest community interests are for a facility that includes the following amenities/rooms:
■ Multi-purpose room- a room sufficiently large enough to accommodate indoor sports such
as basketball and volleyball, dances and theatre events.
■ Teen lounge- an area for teens to "hang-out," with couches, music, videos, books,
magazines, etc.
■ Game room- an area adjacent but separated from the teen lounge for games, such as arcade
games, pool, ping pong, etc.
■ Computer/Technology room- a computer room for playing computer games, surfing the
net, homework assistance and school projects.
■ Sound/Film studio- a room for music recording and listening, band rehearsals and recording
and video production and editing.
■ Cafe or Snack & Food area- the student surveys indicated that the highest interest level
among 6`", 7" and 8`h graders in Atascadero is for a snack bar.
■ Office/ Storage/ Restroom space- although not ranked highly in the Community workshop,
these spaces would be critical necessities for the effective operation and conduct of the
Youth/ Community Center.
Following direction from the City Council regarding the programming areas and the project
budget, the Architect will begin to prepare building and site design plans. The building and site
design plans will be site-specific and require a soil analysis test and a topographical survey.
The City Council, in a Youth/ Community Center workshop held on March 16, 2000, directed
staff to discontinue efforts to renovate the Masonic Temple building as a Youth Center, and to
pursue options to design and construct a Youth/ Community Center on the grounds of the
Atascadero Public Works Corporation Yard which is located directly behind Traffic Way Park.
The City Council provided this direction after reviewing the suitability of five potential sites for
ITEM NUMBER: C-3
DATE: 02/27/2001
• the proposed Youth/ Community Center. The sites reviewed were:
1. Paloma Creek Park
2. Atascadero Lake Park
3. Printery Building
4. Traffic Way- Corp. Yard
5. Traffic Way- Softball field
Summary: Since the time that this direction was provided to staff by the City Council, two
developments have surfaced that have prompted staff to ask the City Council to further review
the issue of site selection. The first issue is an inquiry by the San Luis Obispo County Office of
Education to partner with the City for the construction of Youth/ Community Center on the
grounds of the new El Camino Real Continuation School. The County Office of Education has
indicated that up to one million dollars in matching funds may be available through a state grant,
if the following conditions are met.
■ The facility must be built on an existing State approved school site.
■ The funds are available to build a Multi-purpose building, gymnasium or library only.
■ The proposed facility must not currently exist on the campus.
■ The partnering agency must fund half of the project.
■ The School agency and the partnering agency must enter into a joint-use agreement.
• ■ The County Office of Education is offering this proposal for this funding cycle only. They
have another project proposed for the next grant funding cycle.
The second development is the potential relocation of the National Guard Armory to an
alternative site in Atascadero, which would allow for the possible renovation of the existing
Armory to a Youth/ Community Center. Recently, City staff met with a high-level
representative of the California National Guard who spoke very favorably regarding the request
to relocate the Atascadero Armory to an alternative site in town.
Analysis: As a result of these two developments and of a need to provide the Architect with a
specific building site location, staff is requesting that the City Council re-visit the issue of site
selection for the proposed Youth/ Community Center and prioritized the following potential
Youth/ Community Center sites:
Revised List of Potential Locations for the Youth/ Community Center
1. El Camino Real Continuation School site
Advantages:
■ Potential matching contribution of up to one million dollars from a State
grant, via the San Luis Obispo County Office of Education would allow for
• significantly upgraded facility.
■ Additional funding may would allow for construction in as soon as fiscal-year
2001-2002. If funds are not approved in FY 2001-2002, the project may be
funded in the following fiscal-year.
C5�3
ITEM NUMBER: C-3
DATE: 02/27/2001
■ High density area of town. •
■ Provides recreation opportunities in a low-income/disadvantaged area.
■ Access to Public Transportation. Direct route shuttle service along El Camino
Real to the site.
■ Potential partnership with County Schools for maintenance/ operational costs
■ Property not currently intended for other uses.
■ The County Office of Education would be responsible to administer the design
and construction, saving the City significant staff costs.
Disadvantages.
■ No room for future expansion or addition of adjoining facilities
■ Not centrally located near Jr. High or Senior High School. Distance from
schools may limit effectiveness as an after-school Teen Drop-in Center.
■ Potential community dissent due to proximity to the State Hospital
■ Joint-use agreement with the County Schools may limit use during school
hours.
■ Requires approved plans by the State of California DSA by June 30, 2001.
Timeframe may not allow for DSA approval in time to qualify for grant funds.
2. Atascadero Lake Park/ Adjacent to Alvord field
Advantages:
•
■ This site has ample room for a sizeable facility with additional space for
exterior storage, improved parking and other potential exterior facilities.
■ Minimal site demolition and preparation required.
■ Lack of partnership with another agency provides for unlimited use of the
facility for City functions/activities.
Disadvantages:
■ Not centrally located near Jr. High or Senior High School. Distance from
schools may limit effectiveness as an after-school Teen Drop-in Center.
■ Potential parking conflicts with other uses at the Lake Park, particularly on
weekends.
■ This site may be better suited for other potential facilities and uses.
■ City would be sole user/ operator and shoulder entire cost of construction,
operation and maintenance.
■ Additional funds necessary to construct the desired facility based on
community input.
■ Limited current access by public transportation.
•
C35 �
ITEM NUMBER: C-3
DATE: 02/27/2001
•
3. Traffic Way Park/ Corporation Yard
Advantages:
■ Centrally located to downtown, in close proximity to the Skate Park, Junior
High and Senior High. Well suited in the short-term for an after-school Teen
Drop-in Center.
■ This site has ample room for a sizeable facility with additional space for
exterior storage, improved parking and other potential exterior facilities.
■ Minimal site demolition and preparation required.
Disadvantages:
■ This site is currently being used by the Public Works staff for storage and
other uses. These functions would need to be moved to another location.
■ This site may be better suited for other potential facilities and uses.
■ City would be sole user/ operator and shoulder entire cost of construction,
operation and maintenance.
■ Additional funds necessary to construct the desired facility based on
community input.
■ May not be compatible with long-term redevelopment plans for the downtown
• area.
4. National Guard Armory site
Advantages:
■ Centrally located to downtown, in close proximity to the Skate Park, Junior
High and Senior High. Well suited in the short-term for an after-school Teen
Drop-in Center.
■ This site has ample room for a sizeable facility with additional space for
exterior storage, improved parking and other potential exterior facilities.
■ Current facility may be remodeled/ renovated as a Youth/ Community Center,
potentially saving of construction costs.
■ It is desirable to relocate the National Guard Armory from the downtown area.
■ Three to one matching funds available from the Federal Government to
relocate the Armory to an alternative location.
■ Potential partnership with the Atascadero Unified School District for the
expansion of the Arts Academy campus to jointly use the facility.
Disadvantages:
■ Suitable property for the relocation of the Armory would need to be
• purchased.
■ The City may be potentially responsible for one-fourth of the construction
costs of a new Armory facility
■ If no agreement were reached with the Atascadero Unified School District for
GGt�
ITEM NUMBER: C-3
DATE: 02/27/2001
joint-use, the City would be sole user/ operator and shoulder entire cost of •
construction, operation and maintenance.
■ Additional funds necessary to construct the desired facility based on
community input.
■ Potential increased cost for the entire project.
■ Potential significant delay of the project until the Armory is relocated.
■ May not be compatible with long-term redevelopment plans for the downtown
area.
5. Alternative A.U.S.D.-owned downtown site (requires AUSD agreement)
Advantages:
■ Potential matching contribution of up to one million dollars from a State
grant, via the Atascadero Unified School District would allow for significantly
upgraded facility.
■ Site may be centrally located to downtown, in close proximity to the Skate
Park, Junior High and Senior High. Well suited in the short-term for an after-
school Teen Drop-in Center.
■ Potential partnership with the Atascadero Unified School District for the
expansion of the Arts Academy campus to jointly use the facility.
Disadvantages: •
■ Requires cooperation of the Atascadero Unified School District to secure a
suitable location on District property in the downtown area and to enter into a
joint use agreement. AUSD has not yet been formally approached regarding
this option.
■ May not be compatible with long-term redevelopment plans for the downtown
area.
■ Must apply for competitive state grant funds potentially available in future
years.
Conclusion: Based primarily on the potential for an additional one-million dollars in funding for
this project, and on the positive benefit that the Youth/ Community Center will have on this high
density neighborhood, staff feels that the El Camino Real Continuation School location is the
best location option. This additional funding may allow for a more desirable Youth/ Community
Center to be built sooner than the option of building the facility on existing City property with
the existing funding source available for this project.
Staff recommends that a draft agreement with the San Luis Obispo County Office of Education
for a partnership to construct and operate a Youth/ Community Center on the grounds of the El
Camino Real Continuation School be brought back for you approval. In addition, staff requests
that the City Council prioritize the remaining potential building sites so that if the El Camino •
Real Continuation School site does not receive appropriate approval and funding, staff will then
proceed with the second alternative.
ITEM NUMBER: C-3
DATE: 02/27/2001
• FISCAL IMPACT:
Approval of this recommendation result in the availability of an additional one million dollars of
external funds for this project. Approximately $104,000.00 has been allocated for the design
services of a Youth Community Center of the construction cost of $870,000.00. Approval of
building construction cost in excess of$870,000 will result in a design services cost increase of
10% of the increased construction costs.
ALTERNATIVES:
Alternatives listed above in the body of the staff report.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment#1- Site Map- El Camino Real Continuation School location
Attachment#2- Site Map- Atascadero Lake Park location
Attachment#3- Site Map- Traffic Way Park/ Corp Yard location
Attachment#4- Site Map-National Guard Armory location
•
CG -2
Attachment - #1
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-002
January 2,2001
Page 15 of 33
EXHIBIT B: Overall Site Plan/EI Camino Access •
CUP 2000-0012
-_7
I,1p.
1.-....... , i
r , r
ul
' I
♦ 4 'I
' E.iii[[[ %r \ ` _ ..L. �• � -
0Q'�5 €� iJ .J r'v� I,. {�v i:�i ���,` �•} 1 � }{i}i s 8' 4
j =DDDg=P -
(iif(�� � %3vli � ,•r.`_'`J•.'"r���`%�� :i.'E :�a.��: }�r�` :-1 /r, 1 �•' I
�II[I, ���€� �$[R, -� �.v/�i-t.�_,i�'1��jr ���• -�`�ij\, l�.r'',t: 1 ♦`'�i'� r. '
ire '_'�TT"•��r-/� ,6',r,Y s„�;t�^j,Jn c , , ;..` -._}- ' �:
� -" ' � -- �'''`r 7-f 1- 1i��1 � t `p: t f i`• �.:� • yµlci``� ::�''�-i
�ismt-T' '7t^••,�-'-
- - - - 063
PAY 19 '92 13:23 PURK I SS Ru:=;E,RS t
- • 1n9 Pik? Attachment - #2
n
I � D s �
> ALp
CL
Siam
NP 0
It • O.
�j1►r �,,�,#�k. kat,' { $ r_
L! o
9L \\•
_ y • t /i •0:4 9
••••••111 1'
r �
�°� ( t'y Y � 'C'� � n�i. p. ti_' �•_� '� ifs Z � ,
UAN
to
Olt
Ae
nj
n to
1 f � recreation systems incorporated
UW44CASA,ro,utrnvo,wck"amtrarvneMN p1a ONO
i a
Its no.Mf0•.d••,lunwi•n cam-JIM II'll
71-7777
1
Attachment - ##3
-mom g
�ttt�:;I selaloossy sulwaid 0830yosviV 30 AM E a R 12
k�llt6E:� ue6aH 01J3 emaoe31401V
V1
0 �1 N M
vi
I $. ;w fix? '�' ,�•1\\ l\\\\ 11 „' lig El IN
1 +
413
i
i t1
`1 \_------�` Z?
L1 a � , „ �_--- ----- d
1 8 \I I
o
1-
it �..
1 �
vw
0
O � "
GG5
Attachment - #4
0
W
i' x �•. tootoo
'
�1VIN
J rtor���-Cotte -raZug x� SapB " �_(5zo
¢v�ca
w � r
a t�
02 a Cl. \U
dy m m
ip
cy s CN N
}
N X
c
/'�
��v�
t / N n
s J
� W
)
3 = Q
O 19 W
tnb
U
q 4 _ Q 1j W (� $�•g �
//� Q WOW
v/ N Cl
rl
fsy`" K�
oto
5(oz p S6 6, r to y
fo j M G;,>po '�.✓ ``D/ o�a �F t .
` 8$
Q
Zana
Fn
• J4 b cam' y�N SM Ix k 3 3
W�O
(; G 6
ITEM NUMBER: C-4
DATE: 02/27/2001
:3
1818 ® 1979
Atascadero City Council
City Manager's Office
Information Bulletin
A. Employee Update
Jeri Rangel Senior Accountant Hired 2/13/2001
Timothy Kennedy Reserve Firefighter Hired 2/08/2001
Jared A. Strouss Reserve Firefighter Hired 2/15/2001
067