Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 070991 Agenda Item #B-1 Meeting Date: 8/13/91 ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JULY 9, 1991 Mayor Shiers called the meeting to order at 7:01 p.m. Councilman Dexter led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL: Present: Councilmembers Lilley, Borgeson, Nimmo, Dexter and Mayor Shiers Absent: None Also Present: Muriel "Micki" Korba, City Treasurer and Lee Raboin, City Clerk Staff Present: Henry Engen, Community Development Director; Art Montandon, City Attorney; Mark Joseph, Administrative Services Director; Andy Takata, Director of Community Services; Greg Luke, Public Works Director and Lt. John Barlow, Police Department CLOSED SESSION: Mayor Shiers indicated that staff had requested that the Closed Session scheduled for the end of the meeting be moved up. He reported that the Closed Session would be for the purpose of labor negotiations. By Council consensus, the meeting was adjourned to a Closed Session at 7:04 p.m. (Said Closed Session held pursuant to G.C. Section 54947.6) . At 7:15 p.m. Mayor Shiers reconvened the regular session. COMMUNITY FORUM: Pat Mackie, Paso Robles resident and member of the Citizens' Transportation Advisory Committee, urged Council to use skepticism when considering Caltrans' proposal for realigning Highway 41. CC7/9/91 Page 1 Agenda Item #B-1 Meeting Date: 8/13/91 A. COMMITTEE REPORTS (The following represent ad hoc or standing committees. Informative status reports were given, as follows. ) : 1. S.L.O. Area Coordinating Council/North Coastal Transit - Councilwoman Borgeson reported that the next meeting was scheduled for Wednesday, July 17, 1991 and gave an overview of the agenda. She announced that she had received a publication entitled, Myths and Facts about Transportation and Growth and indicated that she would leave it on the Council desk for review. 2. Recycling Committee - Mayor Shiers reported that the logo contest currently being sponsored by the Recycling Committee had been extended and that the committee was in the process of making bins for composting which would sell for $15.00/each. He stated that the committee had also put together a brochure on composting and reported that educational seminars were on-going. 3. Traffic Committee - Councilman Dexter reported that the committee had met and had discussed the possibility of reducing the speed limit around Atascadero Lake. Councilwoman Borgeson suggested that the committee give consideration to making the street around the Lake one- way. Councilman Dexter also reported that the committee had discussed red-curbing for various areas in the community. 4. County Water Advisory Board - Councilwoman Borgeson announced up-coming meeting dates and reported that each member of the board had been asked to respond to questions regarding State Water and forward their comments to the Board of Supervisors. 5. Economic Round Table - Councilman Lilley reported that the next meeting would be on the following morning (July 10) at 7:30 a.m. 6. County-wide Fee Study - Mark Joseph reported that the next meeting was scheduled for July 29, 1991 and would be held at the San Luis Obispo County Government Center. CC7/9/91 Page 2 Agenda Item #B-1 Meeting Date: 8/13/91 B. CONSENT CALENDAR: Mayor Shiers read the Consent Calendar as follows: 1. DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN FOR TEMPORARY EMPLOYEES IN LIEU OF MANDATORY SOCIAL SECURITY (Cont'd from 6/25/91 agenda) 2. RESOLUTION NO. 66-91 - ADOPTING NEW SALARY FOR CITY TREASURER 3. RESOLUTION NO. 65-91 - AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS TO ACT AS AGENT FOR THE CITY OF ATASCADERO IN MATTERS PERTAINING TO UMTA SECTION 18 CAPITAL ASSISTANCE GRANTS 4. AUTHORIZING THE PLACEMENT OF ANNUAL CHARGES FOR THE FOLLOWING ASSESSMENT DISTRICTS ON THE PROPERTY TAXES FOR FISCAL YEAR 1991-92: A. Resolution No. 60-91 - Chandler Ranch (Assess. Dist. #5) B. Resolution No. 61-91 - Seperado-Cayucos (Assess. Dist. #4) C. Resolution No. 62-91 - Marchant Way (Assess. Dist. #3) 5. AUTHORIZING ANNUAL ASSESSMENTS FOR MAINTENANCE OF CERTAIN IM- PROVEMENTS PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE IMPROVEMENT ACT OF 1911 (STREETS AND HIGHWAYS CODE, SECTION 5830) FOR THE FOLLOWING STREET MAINTENANCE DISTRICTS: A. Resolution No. 52-91 - Cayucos Avenue (Dist. #86-4) B. Resolution No. 53-91 - Falda Avenue (Dist. #86-1) C. Resolution No. 54-91 - Maleza Avenue (Dist. #83-3) D. Resolution No. 55-91 - Lobos Lane (Dist. #83-1) E. Resolution No. 56-91 - Pinal Escarpa (Dist. #86-2) F. Resolution No. 57-91 - San Fernando Road (Dist. #84-1) G. Resolution No. 58-91 - Sonora/Pinal (Dist. #83-2) H. Resolution No. 59-91 Aguila Avenue (Dist. #86-3) 6. ACCEPTANCE OF FINAL TRACT MAP 21-90, 9375 MUSSELMAN - Subdivi- sion of one lot into six airspace condominiums and a common area (Backer/Cuesta Engineering) 7. APPROVAL FOR EXPENDITURE FROM THE LOCAL TDA ALLOCATION FOR TRANSIT STUDY (UMTA SECTION 8) CC7/9/91 Page 3 Agenda Item #B-1 Meeting Date: 8/13/91 S. RESOLUTION NO. 68-91 - AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT WITH WHIRLWIND EXCAVATING TO CONSTRUCT ASPHALT CURBS AND DRIVEWAY AT PALOMA CREEK PARK Councilwoman Borgeson asked that items B-1 and B-7 be pulled for discussion. MOTION: By Councilman Dexter, seconded by Councilman Nimmo to approve the Consent Calendar with the exceptions of items B-1 and B-7; motion carried unanimously by roll call vote. Re: Item B-1 DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN FOR TEMPORARY EMPLOYEES IN LIEU OF MANDATORY SOCIAL SECURITY (Cont'd from 6/25/91 agenda) Mark Joseph presented the staff report and recommendation to authorize the City Manager to execute the necessary contracts for using a deferred compensation program for temporary and seasonal employees. He indicated that staff was currently working on a policy for seasonal employees and that this would be presented to Council at a future date. Councilwoman Borgeson asserted that it is the City's job to cover employees under social security benefits as protection for retirement and expressed concern for seasonal employees who might opt for extra cash rather than having funds withheld for social security purposes. Mayor Shiers asked whether or not employees could be given an option of signing up for either social security or deferred compensation. Mr. Joseph remarked that it was possible, but cautioned that it would add an administrative burden. In response to the mayor' s inquiry, he confirmed that the employees are already covered under State Disability Insurance. Councilwoman Borgeson asked the Administrative Services Director when the policy for seasonal employees would be complete. Mr. Joseph replied that it could be brought before Council in approximately two months. Councilman Lilley stated that the staff report answered his questions thoroughly and commented that some of the temporary/seasonal employees are young college-aged students who might need the additional cash to assist with schooling. CC7/9/91 Page 4 Agenda Item #B-1 Meeting Date: 8/13/91 Public Comment: Whitey Thorpe, 8025 Santa Ynez, opposed the deferred compensation plan stating that the City would be "side-stepping" the issue and claimed that this kind of action is one reason why the Social Security Administration is in a tight bind. Motion: By Councilman Nimmo, seconded by Councilman Lilley to accept the staff recommendation and authorize the City Manager to execute the necessary contracts for a deferred compensation plan for temporary and seasonal employees; motion carried 3:2 (Councilwoman Borgeson and Mayor Shiers opposed) . Re: Item B-7 APPROVAL FOR EXPENDITURE FROM THE LOCAL TDA ALLOCATION FOR TRANSIT STUDY (UMTA SECTION 8) Councilwoman Borgeson announced that she had received a letter pointing out that there are only two cities in the County that are using 100% of their TDA (Transportation Development Act) allocation. Those cities, she reported, are Morro Bay and San Luis Obispo, both of which have made a policy statement that they will fund transit. Councilwoman Borgeson indicated that she was in support of the Short Range Transit Development Plan and with the allocation. She urged the Council to take a stand and make a commitment to transit. In addition, Councilwoman Borgeson stated that she had and would continue to pull items relating to transit from the Consent Calendar because the issue was of great significance. She asked that staff schedule an item on a future agenda regarding transit. Greg Luke, Public Works Director, suggested that a presentation could be given by a member of SLORTA (San Luis Obispo Regional Transit Authority) . Public Comment: Eric Greening, 7365 Valle, expressed support for open and full discussion of area transit needs and TDA expenditures. MOTION: By Councilwoman Borgeson, seconded by Councilman Dexter to approve the expenditure from the local TDA allocation for transit study that will come under UMTA section 8; motion passed 50 by roll call vote. CC7/9/91 Page 5 Agenda Item #B-1 Meeting Date: 8/13/91 C. HEARINGS/APPEARANCES: 1. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 32-90, 585 Garcia Road - Subdivision of three parcels containing 12.5 acres into four parcels of 3. 12 acres each (Langille/Twin Cities Engineering) (Cont'd from 6/25/91 agenda) Henry Engen presented background information and recommendation to approve the tentative tract map. He responded to questions from Council regarding conditions of approval relating to utilities, driveway slope and emergency access. Public Comments: Conrad Langille, applicant, gave support for his request. Allen Campbell, Twin Cities Engineering, reported that adequate septic systems could be provided without additional tree removals. MOTION: By Councilman Nimmo, seconded by Councilman Lilley to approve Tentative Parcel Map 32-90 based upon the Findings and Conditions of Approval; motion carried 5:0 by roll call vote. 2. PRECISE PLAN 02-91 - Appeal by Mike Messer of Planning Commis- sion action upholding the appeal of Joyce Young and denying proposed single-family development at 9515 Lakeview Drive: A. Sewer Service Issue - Including report on Cease and Desist Area requirements Henry Engen introduced the item and provided a brief summary of related actions. Greg Luke, Public Works Director, reported that all requirements to provide sewer to Cease and Desist lots in the Lakeview Drive area (defined as Area "F"; Cease & Desist Order No. 81-60) have not been completed as ordered by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) . He emphasized that the RWQCB has not been active in enforcing the order, but could at any time use regulatory authority and noted that the staff report outlined a proposed sewer system to serve the area at an estimated cost of approximately $175,000. The program, he reported, needed additional work by staff before implementation and had been provided to give Council a framework for developing an area-wide solution with a cost analysis. The Public Works Director responded to Council questions regarding CC7/9/91 Page 6 Agenda Item #B-1 Meeting Date: 8/13/91 lots served by the proposed sewer system. Time frame for completion, he explained, would be approximately one year and proposed that costs be initially funded from the Wastewater Enterprise Fund. He clarified that the six City-owned lots in that area were not shown on the proposed plan and explained that a capital improvement project would be necessary to sewer those lots. Mr. Luke emphasized that reaffirming approval of Mr. Messer' s interim sewer system would not set a precedent for the sewering of the parcels owned by the City and recommended that Council direct staff to bring back a final report. Council agreed to hold action on Part A until Parts B and C were heard. B. City Attorney's Opinion —Regarding Planning Commission's hearing on appeal by Ms. Joyce Young The mayor reported that, in the opinion of the City Attorney, the appeal by Joyce Young of the precise plan had been legal. C. Precise Plan Appeal Henry Engen presented the staff report and recommendation to uphold the appeal of Michael Messer and approve Precise Plan 02-91 subject to proposed Findings and Conditions of Approval. One of the Conditions of Approval, he pointed out, was that the owner would contribute and buy into a sewer system. Mr. Engen added that the Cease &Desist Order noted serving the subject area with sewer was categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) because it mandates the redressing of an environmental issue, failed septic tanks, and proximity to the Lake. Councilwoman Borgeson disagreed with Mr. Engen' s interpretation of Finding Number 13 of Cease & Desist Order No. 81-60 and reported that she had called the California Regional Water Quality Control Board. She was told, she reported, that although the order itself was exempt from CEQA, the exemption did not apply to the issue of sewers. In addition, Councilwoman Borgeson reported that the representative she spoke to from the RWQCB had expressed concern for potential overflow and pollution of the lake by any private pump station installed in the area at lake side. The Public Works Director outlined a variety of safeguards that can be built into sewer systems. Councilwoman Borgeson recognized that there are back-up systems for public sewers, but pointed out that private pump stations may not have adequate back-up and/or be CC7/9/91 Page 7 Agenda Item #8-1 Meeting Date: 8/13/91 adequately maintained. Councilman Lilley asserted that "hearsay" testimony from the RWQCB obtained by Councilwoman Borgeson in a phone conversation was in conflict with the staff report and voiced objection to the method in which the information had been received and brought out during the public hearing. Councilwoman Borgeson reiterated that her source had shared concern for the impact a private pump station might have upon the lake and had also clarified that the sewering of Mr. Messer' s lot was not exempt from CEQA. The City Attorney explained that the categorical exemption referenced was with respect to the enforcement action of the order and that environmental review had been completed as required by the City Code for the precise plan. Addressing Councilman Lilley' s concerns, Mr. Montandon advised that when a councilperson receives information outside the context of a public hearing there could be due-process concerns. Concerns of this nature, he continued, could be remedied when a councilmember relays, during the public hearing, information received thereby giving other members of Council an opportunity to refute or rebut that information. Mr. Montandon explained that the rule on "hearsay" for administrative hearings is that it is admissible evidence for hearings, but that it cannot be the sole 'evidence on which a decision is based. He added that if ever the Council were to get to this point, he would intervene. Public Comments: Mike Messer, appellant, spoke on behalf of his appeal and asked the Council to stand behind its' own policy decision. He explained that his project meets all building requirements and stated that the method of hook-up proposed would satisfy the Cease & Desist order. Mr. Messer contended that allowing him to hook up would not set a precedent because his lot was the last one that could be and added that he was willing to participate in the future sewering of the entire area. Robert Huot, 3850 Ardilla, spoke on behalf of Mrs. Joyce Young of Atascadero. He indicated that he had no confidence in the system proposed by Mr. Messer and warned Council that an unfavorable precedent would be set if approval is given. Whitey Thorpe, 8025 Santa Ynez, asserted that the City's integrity was at stake and urged Council to stand by their previous action. Nesio Felli, 8320 Portola, recalled that when Atascadero became CC7/9/91 Page 8 Agenda Item #B-1 Meeting Date: 8/13/91 incorporated, the County had mandated that the area remain in open space and asked if the City was able to sell any of the lots it now owns in the lake area. The City Attorney responded that he believed the City could sell any of the lots at any time and that it did have the power to lift, through a number of actions, any restrictions on the lots there might be. Mr. Felli proclaimed that Mr. Messer would be better off building his home elsewhere. Eric Greening, 7365 Valle, commented that if Mr. Messer purchased the property after the "moratorium status", than he knew what he was getting. If however, he stated, he bought the property before, than any reasonable solution, with concern for the environment, should be approved. John Dearhart, 9134 San Diego Road, spoke in opposition to the proposed severing of Mr. Messer's lot and expressed concern for protecting the environment surrounding the lake. Adnan Varol, 9095 Lakeview, also expressed opposition to the project and shared concern for possible contamination of the lake. Deborah Smith, 8305 Azucena, commented that she was concerned for the environmental impact the project may have on the lake area and questioned the size of pipe proposed to be used in the temporary hook-up. Dorothy McNeil, 8765 Sierra Vista, wondered if precautionary back- up measures had been included into the Public Works Director' s estimate of $175,000 for the proposed sewer hook-up. Carl Lounes, 9550 Marchant Way, spoke in support of installing sewers in the area surrounding the lake because it would provide protection against pollution. Sarah Gronstrand, 7620 Del Rio Road, commented that she did not believe the integrity of the staff or the Council had been impugned; the gentleman who had made the arrangements on behalf of staff was no longer with the City and the Council had not been provided with adequate background information on which to base a reasonable decision. Mayor Shiers asked Council for consensus on Part A - Sewer Service Issue, and the following motion was made: CC7/9/91 Page 9 Agenda Item U-1 Meeting Date: 8/13/91 MOTION: By Councilman Nimmo, seconded by Councilman Dexter to direct staff to prepare specific recommendations based upon the conceptual proposal presented by Mr. Luke and to bring the matter back for further action; motion carried unanimously by voice vote. Councilwoman Borgeson remarked that she felt Council should have decided beforehand what they wanted to do with the City- owned lots, then look at the sewer issue. Mayor Shiers reported that he believed the lots along Lakeview deeded to the City at the time of incorporation were designated in the General Plan as open space. He noted that he would like to look at the issue when staff comes back with more definitive plans for sewer. Councilman Dexter suggested that this topic be a discussion item for a study session relating to property acquisition and use. Council discussion followed regarding Part C - Precise Plan Appeal. Councilman Lilley pointed out that the Cease & Desist order banned further septic tanks and indicated that he did not believe approval of a private interim sewer hook-up would set a precedent. The Public Works Director responded to a question from Councilwoman Borgeson regarding the proposed area-wide sewer system. He explained that the project would be complete in approximately one year and clarified that Mr. Messer would be required to contribute financially to and hook up to the system. Mayor Shiers indicated that he was not prepared to change his vote on the matter because the hook-up was inappropriate and he believed there was risk of potential environmental damage. MOTION: By Councilman Nimmo, seconded by Councilman Lilley, that the appeal of Mike Messer be upheld and Precise Plan 02- 91 subject to the proposed Findings and Conditions of Approval be approved; motion carried 3:2 with Councilwoman Borgeson and Mayor Shiers opposing. Mayor Shiers called a recess at 9:20 p.m. At 9:45 p.m, the meeting was reconvened. 3. SANTA CRUZ ROAD - Reconsideration of June 11, 1991, City Coun- cil action to not participate in the cost of improving Santa Cruz Road west of San Ramon Road (Kelly Gearhart) Mayor Shiers introduced the matter and reported that the City CC7/9/91 Page 10 Agenda Item #B-1 Meeting Date: 8/13/91 Attorney had advised the only part of the precise plan open for discussion was the issue of joint participation in cost of construction of a portion of Santa Cruz Road. The City Attorney further clarified that the precise plan and the environmental review for the plan have been completed and the appeal time has run. He added that the City Council had directed, as a condition of the project, that the road be put in and reiterated that the only issue is whether or not the City will participate in the cost. Greg Luke, Public Works Director, presented background and the staff report. He highlighted six prerequisites the City may wish to use when considering joint participation. Mr. Luke suggested additional language to #1: "The improvement should conform to the goals of the General Plan_, as set forth in the Circulation Element. " He noted that the Circulation Element, as part of the General Plan, will soon be updated and emphasized that any City participation in road improvements should be on major roads as set forth in the Circulation Element. Councilman Dexter expressed appreciation to the Public Works Director for the analysis. He clarified that he had originally abstained from the vote on this matter expecting the result to be different and pointed out that he was generally in support of the concept. The councilman proposed that the City contribute in an amount less than what was previously discussed. Councilwoman Borgeson asserted that development should pay its' own way and opposed City participation in road construction costs. She stated that the City can legally condition the project to construct the road and expressed fear that other developers would seek similar arrangements if the Council agreed to share in those costs. Councilman Lilley commended the Public Works Director for creative efforts to resolve the City's road issues and indicated support. Councilman Nimmo remarked that he did not believe approval would set precedence and stressed that the important issue was whether and to what extent the City and the land owner would benefit. He added that he thought the proposal was good public policy. Councilman Dexter suggested that the developer be required to construct the road and the City to participate with 20% of the cost, or approximately $10,000. Mayor Shiers extended appreciation to the Public Works Director for CC7/9/91 Page 11 Agenda Item #B-1 Meeting Date: 8/13/91 his report. He predicted that there would be significant differences in interpretations of the criteria used to judge whether or not a joint agreement is advantageous and commented that he expected numerous appeals as a result. Public Comment: Derek Weston, attorney representing Mr. Gearhart, pointed out that only one lot needs additional access. He indicated that the City wanted the road; the applicant did not ask for it and does not need it to gain the needed access. Mr. Weston proclaimed that the law is clear and the City cannot impose unreasonable conditions. Mr. Weston urged Council to approve the joint participation and not reduce the amount proposed for City contribution. George Luna, 10060 San Marcos, stated that he was speaking as a private citizen of Atascadero. Councilman Dexter challenged this statement indicating that because Mr. Luna was the chairman of the Planning Commission, he did not believe protocol allowed him to speak as a private citizen on matters before the Council. The City Attorney advised that in this instance there was no legal problem with him speaking on this item as it had not been before-- the commission. Mr. Luna continued. He stated that fairness and a commitment to orderly development dictate the formation of an assessment district to pay all costs for the road. Dorothy McNeil, 8765 Sierra Vista Road, strongly opposed to the proposal of the City contributing $20,000 for 500 feet of road so that the developer could gain access to his lots. Bob Huot, 3850 Ardilla, indicated that he agreed with the two previous speakers and added that he was surprised that a member of Council would challenge Mr. Luna' s right to speak. ---End of Public Testimony--- Mayor Shiers reported that he had not changed his mind on the matter and did not feel it was appropriate for the City to fund this development. Brief discussion followed. Councilman Dexter reiterated his proposal for adjusting the percentage of maximum participation from CC7/9/91 Page 12 Agenda Item #B-1 Meeting Date: 8/13/91 the City and made the following motion: MOTION: By Councilman Dexter to approve City participation by contributing $10,000. Motion died for lack of a second. Councilman Nimmo asked Mr. Weston to clarify what the applicant was willing to do. The attorney stated the developer had agreed to pay $32,000 towards road construction costs with a requested contribution from the City of $20,000. He reiterated that the owner did not need the road and that he did not believe the City had the power to require it. MOTION: By Councilman Nimmo, seconded by Councilman Lilley to approve the recommendation of staff with a $20,000 contribution by the City; motion carried 3:2 with Councilwoman Borgeson and Mayor Shiers opposing. D. REGULAR BUSINESS: 1. ANIMAL CONTROL PROGRAM - Proposed extension of County con- tract/AFAR budget/Status of agreement with Paso Robles A. Resolution No. 67-91 - Renewing agreement with the County of San Luis Obispo to provide Animal Control Services Mark Joseph presented the staff report and recommendation to renew the contract with the County to provide animal control services. He explained that while work was on-going for a cooperative effort with the City of Paso Robles to provide animal control services, the program was not yet ready for implementation. He reported that the City of Paso Robles had agreed to extend their own contract with the County and noted that the contract could be terminated with thirty days notice. Mr. Joseph reported that, in addition, staff was asking for direction with regard to funding the spay/neuter program. He reported that $9,000 had been appropriated for the service and indicated that the services could be obtained from either the County or from A.F.A.R. He outlined two recommended conditions he proposed be required of either provider: 1) that no administrative costs be charged for the service and 2) anyone receiving spay/neuter discounts must possess a valid animal license. Councilman Lilley indicated that he did not believe the first requirement was realistic. CC7/9/91 Page 13 Agenda Item #B-1 Meeting Date: 8/13/91 Mr. Joseph also pointed out that the matter of requested funding for A.F.A.R. had been held over and Council was being asked to act on the matter. Responding to Council questions, Mr. Joseph confirmed that the County's contract fee of $71,000/year did not include spay/neuter services. Discussion followed regarding joint efforts with the City of Paso Robles and members of Council expressed hope that staff would move forward as quickly as possible with negotiations. Public Comments: Sarah Gronstrand, 7620 Del Rio Road, urged Council to move away from "Big Brother" (County) . Pat Mackie, Paso Robles Pet Boarding, submitted a prepared statement (see Exhibit Ay supporting a joint effort between Atascadero and Paso Robles. He added that there is a need to establish better relations between the pet owner and animal control. Eric Greening, 7365 Valle, appealed to Council to support the "Spays for Strays" program and objected to the condition of licensing. He indicated that if A.F.A.R. is expected to have an affect on the outcome, it must have support from the City. Livia Kellerman, 5463 Honda, spoke in support of A.F.A.R. and its' many contributions to the community. Daphne Fahsing, A.F.A.R. Director, asserted that the City has lost ground in its, spay/neuter program because once the City's funds ran out in March of 1991, the County did not issue any more certificates. The result, she stated, has been numerous puppies and kittens, many of which had been dropped off on A.F.A.R. ' s doorstep. She proclaimed that if the City wants A.F.A.R. to provide the spay/neuter program it would need a total of $25,000; $13,000 accounting for the funding request already submitted to cover one annual salary and $12,000 for administering the program. Council discussion followed. Councilwoman Borgeson indicated support for A.F.A.R. Is request. Councilman Dexter and Mayor Shiers both agreed that the spay/neuter program should be a contractual arrangement. Councilman Nimmo suggested an interim agreement with A.F.A.R. until implementation of a joint animal control service CC7/9/91 Page 14 Agenda Item #B-1 Meeting Date: 8/13/91 with the City of Paso Robles. MOTION: By Councilman Lilley, seconded by Councilman Nimmo to direct City staff to negotiate with the appropriate representatives of A.F.A.R. , to prepare a proposed one- year contract for the administration and implementation of a Spay/Neuter Program of the same volume as was received during FY 1990-91 and to approve funds in the amount of $25,000 (approving AFAR's request for $13,000 for administrative fees and $12,000 allocation for costs directly related to the Spay/Neuter Program) ; motion carried 5:0 by roll call vote. MOTION: By Councilman Dexter, seconded by Councilman Lilley, to extend the meeting beyond 11:00 p.m. ; motion carried. MOTION: By Councilman Dexter, seconded by Councilman Lilley to approve Resolution No. 67-91 authorizing the execution of an agreement with the County of San Luis Obispo to provide animal control services; motion carried 5:0 by roll call vote. 2. ZONING TEXT CHANGE (ZC 07-91) - Consideration of request by Shirley Moore to permit initiation of a zoning text amendment to allow see-through fences Henry Engen gave the staff report and recommended that Council initiate consideration of the requested zoning text amendment and authorize staff to prepare the matter for review and public hearing. Brief Council questions followed. Public Comments: Shirley Moore, 8200 Curbaril, spoke in support of her request indicating that she believed it would allow for more progressive fencing. Mike Durham, local licensed fence contractor, stated that the amendment merits review and expressed support. Councilman Nimmo asked the Community Development Director whether or not the Council could waive the $825.00 fee in as much as the matter is a citywide issue. Mr. Engen indicated that Council had that discretion. CC7/9/91 Page 15 Agenda Item #B-1 Meeting Date: 8/13/91 MOTION: By Councilman Nimmo, seconded by Councilwoman Borgeson to waive the fee of $825.00; motion carried unanimously by roll call vote. There was consensus among the Council to proceed with the zoning text amendment. E. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION: 1. City Council - No additional comments. 2. City Attorney - None. 3. City Clerk - None. 4. City Treasurer Micki Korba requested that the early morning meetings of the Economic Roundtable Meetings not be held during the same week as City Council meetings. In addition, Ms. Korba reported that she had attended the Fourth of July celebration at Atascadero Lake where she observed fund-raising efforts made by the Atascadero Community Band. She objected to the kind of fund-raisers used by the Band and suggested that the City donate additional funds to the Band. Brief discussion followed. By consensus of the Council, the City Treasurer was asked to look into the matter and report back during the Mid-Year Budget Review. 5. City Manager Mayor Shiers indicated that the City Manager was at home resting from his long journey back to the United States. THE MEETING WAS ADJOURNED AT 11:21 P.M. TO A CLOSED SESSION FOR PURPOSES OF DISCUSSION REGARDING PENDING LITIGATION. Said Closed Session held pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(x) . MINUTES RECORD AND PREPARED BY: LEE YIRAZ BRJOn X City Clerk Attachment: Exhibit A (P. Mackie) CC7/9/91 Page 16 R E *Co Z' J AT.A=Z"­ Crry CLE;ri: To: Atascadero City Council From: Patrick J . (Pat) Mackie, Paso Robles Pat Boarding (236-4340) Date: JUIW 9, 1991 SUBJECT: NORTH COUNTY ANIMAL REGULATION DEPT. CNoCARD) For many Wears I have argued for a branch of the County 's Department of Animal Regulation in the North County . Your staff 's recommendation for a joint effort in this area by Atascadero and Paso Robles is even better . I strongly urge you to adopt your staff 's recommendations . In addition, I suggest you direct your staff to: 1) Form a joint planning advisory committee with Paso Robles . I suggest its composition to be Council representatives as co-chairs; reps from both cities ' staffs (admin. and/or police) ; possibly a rep From the County Health Dept; and three members of AFAR to represent the organization and the pet-owning public in general . 2) Arrange a Four- to six-month meeting schedule Cperhaps twice a month) that will , at the end of that time, result in: a) Objectives, policies and procedures, short and long range. b) Clarify legal ramifications, State and local . c) A suggested authorizing ordinance and operating procedures . d) A proposed budget and a cost-split basis, together with a system of supporting records. a) An estimate of potential off-setting income With a clear indication of where we are going and how we can get there, the political process can go to work . It 's my contention that we can get our own animal regulation department operating within a Wear, perhaps a day or two earlier . So I believe it will be necessary to continue the present system, sad as it is, for another year . Costs can easily be controlled by having all animal control services originating with the cities ' police departments . That is to say , the Department of Animal Regulation will not roll on any call unless requested. to do so by the Police Depts . Knowing the service costs, we can keep a running tab on the bill . For instance, even at DAR 's inflated costs, Atascadero could get nearly 1 , 300 animals picked up and housed in the pound for one night at the proposed yearly funding level of $iS,000 . That 's Five dogs a day , every working day of the year . Makes you wonder,. doesn 't it . There is a provision in the contract ( Item 20) For cities to audit DAR 'S books . To my knowledge, this has never been done .