HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 06/27/2006 pip' p ■ i
irisp is azaz
CITY OF A TASCADERO
\ � CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA
Tuesday, June 27, 2006
7:00 P.M.
City Hall
Council Chambers
6907 EI Camino Real
Atascadero, California
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY: 6:30 P.M.
CLOSED SESSION:
(Immediately Following Redevelopment Agency Meeting)
1. PUBLIC COMMENT - CLOSED SESSION:
2. CALL TO ORDER
a. Conference with legal counsel - anticipated litigation
Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to subdivision (b) of
Section 54596.9: One Case
3. ADJOURN:
4. CLOSED SESSION REPORT
REGULAR SESSION: 7:00 P.M.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mayor Pro Tem Pacas
1
ROLL CALL: Mayor O'Malley
Mayor Pro Tem Pacas
Council Member Clay
Council Member Luna
Council Member (Vacant)
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 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. A maximum of 30 minutes will be
allowed for Community Forum, unless changed by the Council.)
APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Roll Call
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. A possible measure on the November ballot regarding the commercial
development of the southeast corner of Del Rio and EI Camino Real -
Council Member Pacas
A. CONSENT CALENDAR:, (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 Meeting Minutes - May 23, 2006
■ City Clerk Recommendation: Council approve the City Council meeting
minutes of May 23, 2006. [City Clerk]
2. City Council Special Joint Study Session Meeting Minutes— May 30,
2006
■ City Clerk Recommendation: Council approve the City Council Special
Joint Study Session meeting minutes of May 30, 2006. [City Clerk]
2
3. 2006-2007 Annual Overlay Program / Curbaril Avenue Paving Project
(City Bid No. 2006-003)
■ Fiscal Impact: $112,770 from Local Transportation Funds (06/07 Road
Rehabilitation Projects) and $393,000 from Urban SHA Funds 2004/05 &
2005/06.
■ Recommendations: Council:
1. Authorize the City Manager to execute agreement with R. Burke
Construction for $409,766.00 for construction of the 2006-2007 Annual
Overlay Program — Curbaril Avenue Paving Project; and,
2. Authorize the Administrative Services Director to allocate $393,000.00
in Urban State Highway Account funds (SHA) toward the Curbaril
Avenue Paving Project. [Public Works]
4. Wastewater Treatment Plant Sludge Drying Bed Expansion Project (City
Bid No. 2006-008)
■ Fiscal Impact: $500,000 from budgeted Wastewater Funds and $164,000
from Wastewater Reserves. Total project expenditures of$664,000.
■ Recommendations: Council:
1. Authorize the City Manager to execute agreement with Raminha
Construction Inc. for $577,000.00 for construction of the Wastewater
Treatment Plant Sludge Drying Bed Expansion Project; and,
2. Authorize the Administrative Services Director to appropriate
$164,000.00 from the Wastewater Fund reserves. [Public Works]
5. Police Vehicle Purchase
■ Fiscal Impact: $68,076.35 including sales tax, shipping fees, mandatory
California tire fee, and $500/unit discount for payment within twenty (20)
days of receipt of invoice. Funds are provided in the 2006/2007 City
budget.
■ Recommendation: Council authorize the purchase of three (3)
replacement police vehicles from Downtown Ford Sales in Sacramento,
California. [Police]
B. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
1. Motorcycle and Noise Ordinance Amendments / ZCH 2006-0116 (City of
Atascadero)
■ Fiscal Impact: None.
■ Recommendations: Planning Commission recommends Council:
1. Introduce for first reading, by title only, Draft Ordinance A, approving
Zone Change 2006-0116 Part A amending the noise ordinance
pertaining to cost recovery; and,
2. Introduce for first reading, by title only, Draft Ordinance B, approving
Zone Change 2006-0116 Part B amending the zoning ordinance to
repeal motorcycle riding as an accessory residential use. [Police]
3
2. Placing Sewer Service Charges on the 2006-2007 Property Tax Rolls
■ Fiscal Impact: The City will bill $1,622,651 in sanitation service charges
for Fiscal Year 2006-07.
• Recommendation: Council adopt the Draft Resolution placing sewer
service charges on the 2006-2007 property tax rolls. [Public Works]
3. Community Facilities District 2005-1 Annexation Nos. 2 (Morro Road), 3
(Tecorida), 4 (West Front), 5 (Dove Creek), and 6 (Vintage Homes)
• Description: Adoption of these Resolutions is part of the final necessary
steps for the establishment of Annexation Nos. 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 (the
Annexations) to fund new police, fire, and park services for these
developments.
■ Fiscal Impact: None.
■ Recommendations: Council:
1. Conduct the Public Hearings on each proposed Annexation, and direct
the City Clerk to collect and count the ballots.
Council to recess until ballots are counted.
2. Adopt Draft Resolution A, making certain findings, certifying the results
of an election and adding property to Community Facilities District No.
2005-1 (Public Services), Annexation No. 2 (Morro Road); and,
3. Adopt Draft Resolution B, making certain findings, certifying the results
of an election and adding property to Community Facilities District No.
2005-1 (Public Services), Annexation No. 3 (Tecorida); and,
4. Adopt Draft Resolution C, making certain findings, certifying the results
of an election and adding property to Community Facilities District No.
2005-1 (Public Services), Annexation No. 4 (West Front); and,
5. Adopt Draft Resolution D, making certain findings, certifying the results
of an election and adding property to Community Facilities District No.
2005-1 (Public Services), Annexation No. 5 (Dove Creek); and,
6. Adopt Draft Resolution E, making certain findings, certifying the results
of an election and adding property to Community Facilities District No.
2005-1 (Public Services), Annexation No. 6 (Vintage Homes).
[Community Development]
C. MANAGEMENT REPORTS:
1. City Council Strategic Initiative — Improve the City's Financial Condition
— Consideration of Sales Tax Increase
■ Fiscal Impact: The total cost of placing the measures on the ballot is
estimated to be approximately $3,000, which would need to be
appropriated from the General Fund balance.
■ Recommendations: Council:
1. Review and approve the Draft Sales Tax Ordinance language; and,
2. Submit to the voters a sales tax ballot measure and advisory
measures. [Administrative Services]
4
2. General Municipal Election November 7, 2006
■ Description: The City Council must -adopt resolutions to initiate the
election process, to combine our election with the County, to call a special
election to fill the position vacated by Council Member Scalise, and to
submit to the voters a sales tax ballot measure and advisory measures.
■ Fiscal Impact: The General Municipal Election is estimated to cost
approximately $20,000.00. The addition of the third Council Member on
the ballot is minimal. However, the addition of the ballot measure, and
advisory measure(s), is approximately$3,000.00.
■ Recommendations:
A. Council adopt the following Resolutions for the purpose of electing
three members to the City Council, a City Clerk, and a City
Treasurer:
1. Draft Resolution A, calling and giving notice of the holding of a
General Municipal Election to be held on Tuesday, November 7,
2006; and,
2. Draft Resolution B, requesting the Board of Supervisors of the
County of San Luis Obispo to consolidate a General Municipal
Election to be held on November 7, 2006; and,
3. Draft Resolution C, calling and giving notice of the holding of a
Special Municipal Election to beheld on Tuesday, November 7,
2006; and,
4. Draft Resolution D, requesting the Board of Supervisors of the
County of San Luis Obispo to consolidate a Special Municipal
Election to be held on November 7, 2006.
B. Council adopt the following Resolutions for the purpose of electing
three members to the City Council, a City Clerk, and a City
Treasurer; and to submit to the voters a sales tax ballot
measure and advisory measures:
1. Draft Resolution C, calling and giving notice of the holding of a
Special Municipal Election to be held on Tuesday, November 7,
2006; and,
2. Draft Resolution D, requesting the Board of Supervisors of the
County of San Luis Obispo to consolidate a Special Municipal
Election to be held on November 7, 2006; and,
3. Draft Resolution E, calling and giving notice of the holding of a
General Municipal Election to beheld on Tuesday, November 7,
2006; and,
4. Draft Resolution F, requesting the Board of Supervisors of the
County of San Luis Obispo to consolidate a General Municipal
Election to be held on November 7, 2006; and,
5. Draft Resolution G, setting priorities for filing written arguments
regarding a City measure and directing the City Attorney to
prepare an impartial analysis; and,
6. Draft Resolution H, providing for the filing of rebuttal arguments
for City measures submitted at Municipal Elections._[City Clerk]
5
C. COMMITTEE & LIAISON REPORTS: (The following represent standing
committees. Informative status reports will be given, as felt necessary):
Mayor O'Malley
1. County Mayor's Round Table
2. Finance Committee
3. Air Pollution Control District (APCD)
4. Economic Vitality Corporation, Board of Directors (EVC)
5. League of California Cities — Grassroots Network
6. City / Schools Committee
7. Economic Opportunity Commission (EOC)
8. SLO Council of Governments (SLOCOG) / S.L.O. Regional Transit Authority
(SLORTA)
Mayor Pro Tem Pacas
1.. Integrated Waste Management Authority (IWMA)
2. City/ Schools Committee
3. Atascadero Youth Task Force
Council Member Clay
1. S.L.O. County Flood Control & Water Conservation District Water Resources
Advisory Committee
2. Nacimiento Water Purveyors Contract Technical Advisory Group
3. North County Water Purveyors Group
Council Member Luna
1. Finance Committee
Council Member (Vacant)
1. Atascadero State Hospital Advisory Board
2. Local Agency Formation Commissions (LAFCO)
D. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION:
1. City Council
2. City Clerk
3. City Treasurer
4. City Attorney
5. City Manager
6
E. ADJOURNMENT:
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. Correspondence submitted at this
public hearing will be distributed to the Council and available for review in the City Clerk's office.
I, Shannon Sims, Deputy City Clerk of the City of Atascadero, declare under the penalty of perjury
that the foregoing agenda for the June 27, 2006 Regular Session of the Atascadero City Council was
posted on June 21, 2006 at the Atascadero City Hall, 6907 El Camino Real, Atascadero, CA 93422
and was available for public review in the Customer Service Center at that location.
Signed this 21stday of June, 2006 at Atascadero, California.
Marcia McClure Torgerson, C.M.C., City Cler
City of Atascadero
City of Atascadero
WELCOME TO THE'ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
The City Council meets in regular session on the second and fourth Tuesday of each month at 7:00 p.m., at the City Hall
Council Chambers, 6907 EI Camino Real, Atascadero. 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 and are available for public inspection during City Hall business hours at the Central
Receptionist counter and on our website, www.atascadero.org. 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. All documents submitted by the
public during Council meetings that are either read into the record or referred to in their statement will be noted in the
minutes and available for review in the City Clerk's office.
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 or the City Clerk's Office, both at (805)
470-3400. 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 0
• No person shall be permitted to make slanderous, profane or negative personal remarks concerning any other
individual, absent or present
• 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.
If you wish to use a computer presentation to support your comments, you must notify the City Clerk's office at least 24
hours prior to the meeting. Access to hook up your laptop to the City's projector will be provided. You are required to
submit to the City Clerk a printed copy of your presentation for the record. Please check in with the City Clerk before the
meeting begins to announce your presence and turn in the printed copy.
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 (not required)
• 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 14 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.
8
ITEM NUMBER: A- 1
DATE: 06/27/06
. .
CITY OFAT
SCADEROA
CITY COUNCIL
DRAFT MINUTES
Tuesday, May 23, 2006
7:00 P.M.
CLOSED SESSION: 7:00 P.M.
(Immediately Following Redevelopment Agency Meeting)
1. PUBLIC COMMENT- CLOSED SESSION: None
2. CALL TO ORDER
a. Conference with negotiator over real property. (Govt. Code
54956.8)
Negotiator: City Manager Wade McKinney
Property: Mr. Kelly Gearhart, 5955 Entrada Ave.
Negotiations will include price and/or terms of payment.
b. Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation
(Government Code sections 54956.9, subdivision (a).)
Case name unspecified as disclosure would jeopardize existing
settlement negotiations (Government Code section 54954.5,
subdivision (c).)
3. ADJOURN: 7:10 p.m.
4. CLOSED SESSION REPORT
City Attorney Patrick Enright announced that no reportable action was taken on either
item.
REGULAR SESSION: 7:00 P.M.
Mayor O'Malley called the meeting to order at 7:16 p.m. and Council Member Scalise
led the Pledge of Allegiance.
CC Draft Minutes 0523/06
Page 1 of 15 9
ROLL CALL:
Present: Council Members Clay, Luna, Scalise, Pacas and Mayor O'Malley
Absent: None
Others Present: City Clerk / Assistant to City Manager Marcia McClure Torgerson,
Deputy City Clerk Grace Pucci
Staff Present: City Manager Wade McKinney, Assistant City Manager Jim Lewis,
Administrative Services Director Rachelle Rickard, Public Works
Director Steve Kahn, Community Development Director Warren
Frace, Community Services Director Brady Cherry, Police Chief
John Couch, Fire Chief Kurt Stone, Deputy Public Woks Director
Geoff English and City Attorney Patrick Enright.
COMMUNITY FORUM:
Rick Comstock, Atascadero Ministerial Association, led those present in prayer.
David Broadwater spoke about the information he has received from the city regarding
their communications with the Rottman Group, and distributed a handout to Council
regarding his concerns. (Exhibit A)
Tom Colmeyer requested Council direct staff to initiate zoning code amendments for
Targe scale retail and discount stores and explained his reasons for the request.
Daphne Fahsing spoke about the lack of public notice regarding a survey recently sent
to the public but not to post office box holders.
Ann Ketcherside stated the City should be taking care of the weeds along Ensenada by
the creek.
Walter Riel stated he represent 60 people living along Navarette, Alta Vista and Linda
Vista, who oppose the cluster home development in that area. Mr. Real also expressed
his concerns about night time lighting in Atascadero.
Mayor O'Malley stated he had met with Mr. Riel's neighbors and discussed the Brown
Act with them.
Jono Kincaid spoke in support of the US Mayors Climate Protection Agreement and of
his efforts to personally contribute to the safety and protection of the environment.
Brandon Istenes spoke in support of Mayor O'Malley signing on to the US Mayors
Climate Protection Agreement.
CC Draft Minutes 05/23106
Page 2 of 15
10
Eric Greening stated he supported the previous two speakers, and expressed
disappointment that there was no agenda item regarding the concerns raised earlier by
Mr. Broadwater and urged that a written staff report on the subject be agendized.
John Heatherington asked if city staff has been pursuing Wal Mart for the last three
years and if they are now trying to evade public scrutiny of their actions.
James Istenes stated his disappointment that there was no action tonight regarding the
issues raised earlier by Mr. Broadwater.
Terry Sue Rosen spoke of the importance of keeping the downtown vital and not
impacting it by having a Wal Mart in town.
Marilyn Brown urged Council to sign on to the US Mayors Climate Protection
Agreement.
Bill Benham spoke about people parking in a marked no parking zone on Viejo Camino
due to activities at Paloma Creek Park. He had notified the Police Department and was
advised to bring the issue before the City Council.
Mayor O'Malley closed the Community Forum period.
Mayor O'Malley read from his email to David Broadwater.
City Attorney Patrick Enright clarified the Brown Act issues in question.
City Manager Wade McKinney reported on the city's interaction with the Annex project.
Community Development Director Warren Frace described the process for the public
workshop scheduled for May 30th
MOTION: By Council Member Luna to request staff to agendize discussing a
which would be a bi
square foot ordinance, g box ordinance.
Motion failed for lack of a second.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA:
MOTION: By Council Member Luna and seconded by Council Member
Scalise to approve the agenda.
Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote.
CC Draft Minutes 05/23/06
Page 3 of 15
COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS AND REPORTS: i
Council Member Clay stated he is bothered by the conspiracy theory put forth during the
Community Forum period, and explained that Council has directed staff to pursue
commercial retail for the sales tax base.
Council Member Luna referred to the survey received by the public and questioned the
percentage of every dollar of property tax the city receives. Administrative Services
Director Rachelle Rickard explained how the percentage is determined.
PRESENTATIONS:
y.
1. Proclamation declaring May 21 - 27, 2006 as "National Public Works
Week."
Council Member Scalise read from the proclamation and presented it to Public Works
Director Steve Kahn who presented Council with a bumper sticker.
2. Presentation by the San Luis Obispo County Visitors and Conference
Bureau on the Tourism Business Improvement District Proposal.
Joni Biaggini gave a PowerPoint presentation on the proposal and answered questions
of Council. (Exhibit B)
A. CONSENT CALENDAR:
�I
1. City Council Meeting Minutes — April 25, 2006
■ City Clerk Recommendation: Council approve the City Council meeting
minutes of April 25, 2006. [City Clerk]
2. Telecommunications Services.and Vital City Interests
• Description: Request from the League of California Cities that the City
Council adopt a resolution in support of the League's Telecom Policy &
Principles.
■ Fiscal Impact: None.
■ Recommendation: Council adopt the Draft Resolution adopting principles
for C9 g
Congress and the State Legislature to consider in their debate over a
new telecommunications regulatory framework. [City Manager]
3. Temporary Road Closure/Old Morro Road
■ Fiscal Impact: None.
■ Recommendation: Council approve the request from R. Burke
Construction for the temporary intermittent closure of portions of Old
Morro Road from May 31St through June 2"d, 2006. [Public Works]
CC Draft Minutes 05/23/06
Page 4 of 15
12
4. Temporary Road Closure/Atascadero Wine Festival
■ Fiscal Impact: $160.00 for the installation of Road Closed signs by Public
Works Staff.
■ Recommendation: Council approve the temporary closure of Palma
Avenue, from East Mall to West Mall, and East Mall, from EI Camino Real
to Palma, for the Annual Atascadero Wine Festival Winemaker's Dinner.
[Public Works]
5. Temporary Road Closure/ Calvary Chapel of Atascadero
■ Fiscal Impact: $160.00 for the installation of Road Closed signs by Public
Works staff.
■ Recommendation: Council approve the temporary closure of Palma
Avenue, from East Mall to West Mall, during the All City Prayer Meeting by
Calvary Chapel on June 11, 2006 from 3:00 — 9:00 p.m. [Public Works]
6. Weed Abatement Award (City Bid No. 2006-007)
■ Fiscal Impact: None. Funds are budgeted, annually, to cover the costs of
the weed abatement program, and are recovered through assessments on
property tax bills of those parcels abated.
■ Recommendation: Council authorize the City Manager to execute the
contract with Jack R. Bridwell for weed abatement. [Fire]
Items pulled: Council Member O'Malley, Item#A-6,
MOTION: By Council Member Luna and seconded by Council Member
Clay to approve Items #A-1, 2, 3, 4 and 5.
Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote. (O'Malley abstained on
Item #A-5) (Item #A-2 Resolution No. 2006-048)
Item #A-6: Mayor O'Malley opened public comment for this item.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Gretchen Gray explained the financial difficulty of complying with the city's requirement
for weed abatement,and suggested requiring structure protection only and making any
additional abatement a recommendation. She also recommended placing a ceiling on
what low income seniors would be required to spend on weed abatement.
City Manager McKinney stated the city has tried to keep weed abatement down to a
minimum to protect property and preserve the environment. He said staff can report
back on what the concerns are, what the issues are and what the industry looks like.
Nick Miller spoke about weed abatement and the difficulties of doing it on a large
property, and agreed with the concept of placing a ceiling on the fine and fees.
CC Draft Minutes 05P23/06
Page 5 of 15
13
Mayor O'Malley closed the Public Comment period.
MOTION: By Council Member Scalise and seconded by Council Member
Luna to.approve Item #A-6.
Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote. (Contact No. 2006-024)
Mayor O'Malley signed a letter regarding the city's support for the US Mayors Climate
Protection Agreement and presented a copy to Jono Kincaid.
B. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
1. Apple Valley Assessment Districts
■ Description: Annual approval of assessments for 2006/2007.
• Fiscal Impact: There is no fiscal impact to general residents within the
City.
• Recommendations: Council:
1. Adopt Draft Resolution A approving the final Engineer's Report
regarding the Street and Storm Drain Maintenance District No. 01 —
Apple Valley, and the levy and collection of annual assessments
related thereto for fiscal year 2006/2007; and,
2. Adopt Draft Resolution B ordering the levy and collection of
assessments for fiscal year 2006/2007 for Street and Storm Drain
Maintenance District No. 01 —Apple Valley; and,
3. Adopt Draft Resolution C approving the final Engineer's Report
regarding the Landscaping and Lighting District No. 01 — Apple Valley,
and the levy and collection of annual assessments related thereto in
fiscal year 2006/2007; and, .<
4. Adopt Draft Resolution D ordering the levy and collection of
assessments for fiscal year 2006/2007 for Landscaping and Lighting
District No. 01 -Apple Valley. [Administrative Services]
Mayor O'Malley announced that the staff reports for all three assessment districts will be
heard together.
Administrative Services Director Rachelle Rickard gave the staff report.
PUBLIC COMMENT
None
MOTION: By Council Member Scalise and seconded by Council Member
Clay to adopt Draft Resolution A approving the final
Engineer's Report regarding the Street and Storm Drain
Maintenance District No. 01 Apple Valley, and the levy and
CC Draft Minutes 05/23/06
Page 6 of 15
14
collection of annual assessments related thereto for fiscal year
2006/2007; and, adopt Draft Resolution B ordering the levy and
collection of assessments for fiscal year 2006/2007 for Street
and Storm Drain Maintenance District No. 01 Apple Valley;
and, adopt Draft Resolution C approving the final Engineer's
Report regarding the Landscaping and Lighting District No. 01
— Apple Valley, and the levy and collection of annual
assessments related thereto in fiscal year 2006/2007; and,
adopt Draft Resolution D ordering the levy and collection of
assessments for fiscal year 2006/2007 for Landscaping and
Lighting District No. 01 — Apple Valley.
Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote. (Resolution Nos. 2006-
049, 2006-050, 2006-051, 2006-052)
2. De Anza Estates Assessment Districts
■ Description: Annual approval of assessments for 2006/2007.
■. Fiscal Impact: There is no fiscal impact to general residents within the
City.
■ Recommendations: Council:
1. Adopt Draft Resolution A approving the final Engineer's Report
regarding the Street and Storm Drain Maintenance District No. 03 — De
Anza Estates, and the levy and collection of annual assessments
related thereto for fiscal year 2006/2007; and,
2. Adopt Draft Resolution B ordering the levy and collection of
assessments for fiscal year 2006/2007 for Street and Storm Drain
Maintenance District No. 03 — De Anza Estates; and,
3. Adopt Draft Resolution C approving the final Engineer's Report
regarding the Landscaping and Lighting District No. 03 — De Anza
Estates, and the levy and collection of annual assessments related
thereto in fiscal year 2006/2007; and,
4 Adopt Draft Resolution D ordering the levy and collection of
assessments for fiscal year 2006/2007 for Landscaping and Lighting
District No. 03 — De Anza Estates. [Administrative Services]
MOTION: By Council Member Scalise and seconded by Council Member
Clay to adopt Draft Resolution A approving the final
Engineer's Report regarding the Street and Storm Drain
Maintenance District No. 03 — De Anza Estates, and the levy
and collection of annual assessments related thereto for fiscal
year 2006/2007; and, adopt Draft Resolution B ordering the
levy and collection of assessments for fiscal year 2006/2007
for Street and Storm Drain Maintenance District No. 03 — De
Anza Estates; and, adopt Draft Resolution C approving the
final Engineer's Report regarding the Landscaping and
Lighting District No. 03 — De Anza Estates, and the levy and
CC Draft Minutes 05123/06
Page 7 of 15
15
collection of annual assessments related thereto in fiscal year
2006/2007; and, adopt Draft Resolution D ordering the levy and
collection of assessments for fiscal year 2006/2007 for
Landscaping and Lighting District No. 03 - De Anza Estates.
Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote. (Resolution Nos. 2006-
053, 2006-054, 2006-055, 2006-056)
3. Las Lomas (Woodridge) Assessment Districts
■ Description: Annual approval of assessments for 2006/2007.
■ Fiscal Impact: There is no fiscal impact to general residents within the
City.
■ Recommendations:
1. Adopt Draft Resolution A approving the final Engineer's Report
regarding the Street and Storm Drain Maintenance District No. 02 -
Las Lomas (Woodridge), and the levy and collection of annual
assessments related thereto for fiscal year 2006/2007; and,
2. Adopt Draft Resolution B ordering the levy and collection of
assessments for fiscal year 2006/2007 for Street and Storm Drain
Maintenance District No. 02 - Las Lomas (Woodridge); and,
3. Adopt Draft Resolution C approving the final Engineer's Report
regarding the Landscaping and Lighting District No. 02 - Las Lomas
(Woodridge), and the levy and collection of annual assessments
related thereto in fiscal year 2006/2007; and, - 0
4. Adopt Draft Resolution D ordering the levy and collection of
assessments for fiscal year 2006/2007 for Landscaping and Lighting
District No. 02 - Las Lomas (Woodridge). [Administrative Services]
MOTION: By Council Member Scalise and seconded by Council Member
Clay to Adopt Draft Resolution A approving the final
Engineer's Report regarding the Street and Storm Drain
Maintenance District No. 02 - Las Lomas (Woodridge), and the
levy and collection of annual assessments related thereto for
fiscal year 2006/2007; and, adopt Draft Resolution B ordering
the levy and collection of assessments for fiscal year
2006/2007 for Street and Storm Drain Maintenance District No.
02 - Las Lomas (Woodridge); and, adopt Draft Resolution C
approving the final Engineer's Report regarding the
Landscaping and Lighting District No. 02 - Las Lomas
(Woodridge), and the levy and collection of annual
assessments related thereto in fiscal year 2006/2007; and,
adopt Draft Resolution D ordering the levy and collection of
assessments for fiscal year 2006/2007 for Landscaping and
Lighting District No. 02- Las Lomas (Woodridge).
Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote. (Resolution Nos. 2006-
057, 2006-058, 2006-059, 2006-060)
CC Draft Minutes 05/23/06
Page 8 of 15
16
C. MANAGEMENT REPORTS:
1. City Council Strategic Initiative — Improve the City's Financial Condition
— Consideration of Sales Tax Increase
Fiscal Impact: The proposed sales tax measure would generate an
estimated $1.4 million in additional annual revenue. The total cost of
placing the measures on the ballot is estimated to be approximately
$10,000, which would need to be appropriated from the General Fund
balance.
■ Recommendation: Council direct staff to prepare a resolution and
ordinance for City Council consideration at the June 13, 2006 meeting to
place a '/z cent local sales tax override measure on the November 2006
ballot. The sales tax measure shall include language creating a ten-year
sunset provision and a citizen oversight committee. [Administrative
Services]
Administrative Services Director Rachelle Rickard gave the staff report and answered
questions of Council
PUBLIC COMMENT
Eric Greening suggested changing the wording for the expenditure of this increase from
roads to transportation and making it multi-modal.
Ann Ketcherside suggested saving the money it will cost to put this on the ballot and
commit to no more taxes.
Daphne Fahsing commented on the lack of public notice for this meeting and spoke
about the difficulty of this tax increase on the older population.
Lindsey Hampton commented that it would be a waste of the $10,000 needed to place
this issue on the ballot as it may fail.
Ursula Luna expressed concern that even with an advisory committee the Council will
be the final deciding body, and stated if the increase is to go toward the roads it must be
specified on the ballot.
Bob Kelley commented that there is a road crisis in Atascadero and he would be in
favor of a tax increase if the City Council allocated 95% to go towards needed causes in
town, including the Police and Fire Departments, but not toward bureaucracy.
David Jones spoke against raising the sales tax, which he stated is contrary to the
interest of the majority of the residents of Atascadero.
CC Draft Minutes 05/23/06
Page 9 of 15
17
Casey Bryson, Atascadero Firefighters Association, spoke of the need for economic
development and a sales tax increase or essential police and fire services would have
to be cut. He urged Council to allow the voters to decide if they want this tax increase.
Don Geissinger asked Council to consider directing the money from the tax increase
into roads and including the sunset clause.
Cindy Sazar stated her agreement with the comments of those who spoke against the
sales tax increase.
Mayor O'Malley closed the Public Comment period.
Staff addressed issues raised during the Public Comment period.
MOTION: By Mayor Pro Tem Pacas and seconded by Mayor O'Malley to
direct staff to prepare a resolution and ordinance for City
Council consideration at the June 13, 2006 meeting to place a
1/4 or 1/2 cent local sales tax override measure on the
November 2006 ballot. The sales tax measure shall include
language creating a 5 or 6 year sunset provision and a citizen
oversight committee. Staff is to return with an advisory
measure for the November 2006 ballot that will designate the
tax increase to be used for roads.
Motion passed 4:1 by a roll-call vote. (Luna opposed)
Mayor O'Malley recessed the hearing at 10:05 p.m.
Mayor O'Malley called the meeting back to order at 10:16 p.m.
2. City/Schools Joint Facilities Meetings
■ Fiscal Impact: Staff time to facilitate the lease and assist in the planning.
■ Recommendations: Council:
1. Direct staff to facilitate a lease agreement between Atascadero Unified
School District and Atascadero Youth Football League for the
development of athletic fields adjacent to San Benito School; and,
2. Direct staff to consult with the League to assist with park planning.
[Community Services]
Community Services Director Brady Cherry gave the staff report and answered
questions of Council.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Ann Ketcherside asked where the chicken hutches used to be and asked if something
has been done about cleaning that area up.
CC Draft Minutes 05/23/06
Page 10 of 15
18
Kurt Heinke, representing CCYFL, explained that they have their own insurance for
every field they use and spoke in favor of the fields for Youth Football.
Jerry Osorio, President AYFL, explained that with this field and the use of their snack
bar they could charge the kids less to participate.
Beth Lee questioned the hours the facility would be used and asked about lighting if it
was used at night.
Community Services Director Cherry reported that no lights are proposed for this site
and there will be no evening use.
Mayor O'Malley closed the Public Comment period.
MOTION: By Council Member Luna and seconded by Council Member
Clay to Direct staff to facilitate a lease agreement between
Atascadero Unified School District and Atascadero Youth
Football League for the development of athletic fields adjacent
to San Benito School; and, direct staff to consult with the
League to assist with park planning.
Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote.
01
3. Wake Board Event Request/ Atascadero Lake (Mobley s Board Shop)
■ Fiscal Impact: Up to $1,500 in park use fees, depending upon the areas
reserved.
■ Recommendation: Council approve the request to hold a Wake Board
Event at the Atascadero Lake July 22nd — 23rd, 2006, and waive the motor
boat prohibition for the two-day event. [Community Services]
Community Services Director Brady Cherry gave the staff report and answered
questions of Council
PUBLIC COMMENT
Nancy Koren read from a prepared statement against allowing the Wake Board event.
Joe Schwartz spoke against allowing the Wake Board event, and in favor of preserving
the peace and tranquility of the neighborhood and wildlife.
Jim Istenes stated he enjoys the solace of the lake and is concerned with the impacts to
the neighborhood and wildlife from this event and with the lack of proper notification to
lake residents.
CC Draft Minutes 05/23/06
Page 11 of 15
19
Eric Greening expressed concern regarding dumping of fuel into the lake from outboard
motors, lack of notification to the surrounding neighborhood, and no environmental
review.
Daphne Fahsing spoke against violating the motorboat and noise ordinances.
Susan Lara spoke against allowing the event and anything that would further negatively
impact the water quality of the lake.
Austin Miller, applicant, spoke in favor of the event and of its benefits to the community.
Sandy Jack stated it would be unfortunate if this event were approved, as this is a
passive lake heavily used on weekends.
Jono Kincaid commented that using the lake beyond its current use could be a slippery
slope and questioned if swimming is allowed as the wake boarders could end up in the
water.
Walter Riel stated his opposition to this event and against encouraging children to be
involved in motorized sports.
Dean Mansfield explained that the idea for this event was to allow,local kids to be
involved in a sport and to give them another option for things to do in town.
Mayor O'Malley closed the Public Comment period.
MOTION: By Council Member Luna to deny the request.
Motion failed for lack of a second.
MOTION: By Council Member Luna and seconded by Council Member
Clay to go past 11:00 P.M.
Motion passed 4:1 by a roll-call vote. (Luna opposed)
Mayor Pro Tem Pacas commented that it was unfortunate that this item wasn't better
noticed and she would have a hard time supporting it.
MOTION: By Council Member Scalise and seconded by Council Member
Clay to approve the request to hold a Wake Board Event at the
Atascadero Lake July 22nd — 23rd, 2006, and waive the motor
boat prohibition for the two-day event.
Motion failed 2:3 by a roll-call vote. (Luna, Pacas, O'Malley
opposed)
CC Draft Minutes 05/23/06
Page 12 of 15
20
Mayor O'Malley stated that the primary reason he had voted no was because of lack of
notification and that he would support something like this on a once a year basis, but it
must be notified and discussed.
4. Highway 101/41 Value Analysis
■ Fiscal Impact: None.
■ Recommendation: Council receive a report from Caltrans on the results of
the Hwy 101/41 Interchange Value Analysis Study and recommend an
alternative based on the information provided. [Public Works]
Mayor O'Malley announced that if the city does not get an extension from the California
Transportation Commission, it cannot go forward with any of the options.
Public Works Director Steve Kahn introduced Peter Brown who made the presentation.
Peter Brown, SLOCOG Transportation Planner, gave the staff report and answered
questions of Council.
Ron DiCarli, Executive Director of San Luis Obispo Council of Governments, explained
why the time extension is needed.
PUBLIC COMMENT
' would be strengthened if there is
Eric Greening asked if the city's case for the extension g
a clear indication of what the project is and if so then the decision should be make
tonight. He also asked when the actual choice would be made.
Don Geissinger suggested going with the original plan and not the two proposed
alternatives.
Terry Sue Rosen spoke against the use of traffic roundabouts, and encouraged Council
to get the extension and use the three bridges plan.
Ann Ketcherside suggested having another meeting on this and placing it at the
beginning of the meeting. She also spoke against the roundabout.
Mayor O'Malley closed the Public Comment period.
Mayor O'Malley asked Mr. DiCarli to explain how the presentation in Sacramento will
proceed. Mr. DiCarli explained they will be asking for an 18 month time extension
based on a value analysis that looked at delivering the project more efficiently, and
more cost effectively, but that additional time is needed to look at and work through the
two major alternatives in an effort to save a significant amount of money, to bring the
project in on budget, and to allow for public input.
CC Draft Minutes 05/23/06
Page 13 of 15
21
MOTION: By Mayor O'Malley and seconded by Council Member Scalise
to strongly support the request for a time extension, which
Mayor O'Malley and staff will make when they go to
Sacramento.
Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote.
5. Review of Park Conditions for Master Plan of Development Overlay #12
(Atascadero Avenue between Morro Road & Navaioa Road)
■ Description: Staff is requesting Council direction on how to proceed with
the conditioning of this project and park.
■ Fiscal Impact: None.
■ Recommendation: Council direct staff on how to proceed with the
processing and conditioning of the park feature of this proposed planned
development project. [Community Development]
Community Development Director Warren Frace gave the staff report and answered
questions of Council.
Ex Parte Communications
■ Council Member Clay stated he spoke with Kelly Gearhart today on the phone.
■ Mayor O'Malley stated he had numerous ex parte communications with people in
this neighborhood as well as the transfer neighborhood, the applicant and designers
of the project.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Jamie Kirk, applicant's representative, gave a presentation on the site and the process
thus far. Ms. Kirk answered questions of Council.
Walter Riel stated he represented 60 homeowners in the Linda Vista area and reported
there is a lot of opposition to the clustered development. He indicated he likes the idea
of the transfer of development credits.
Marge Mackay stated she thinks it is a crime to put apartments on this lot.
Sandy Jack, Parks and Recreation Commissioner, stated he is opposed to loosing any
area for parks and urged Council to consider keeping the park.
Mayor O'Malley closed the Public Comment period.
MOTION: By Council Member Scalise and seconded by Council Member
Luna to direct staff to proceed with the processing of the rezoning
of the pocket park and allow the transfer of development credits
from the Linda Vista project, Option No. 3, with full notification to
both neighborhoods.
CC Draft Minutes 05/23/06
Page 14•of 15
22
Mayor Pro Tem Pacas stated she was reluctant to move ahead without notification of
both neighborhoods. In addition, the Parks and Recreation Commission have not been
involved in considering how the park space would be used.
Council Member Luna withdrew his second.
MOTION: By Council Member Scalise and seconded by Council Member
Luna to proceed with the project with a low cost park option
and then cause a public process to investigate the potential
for the transfer of development credits to preserve the Linda
Vista hillsides and transfer the developments.
Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote.
D. COMMITTEE & LIAISON REPORTS:
None
E. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION:
City Manager
reported that the Youth Center goes to bid
City Manager Wade McKinney p
tomorrow, and there is a meeting with Union Pacific Railroad on Friday.
F. ADJOURNMENT:
Mayor O'Malley adjourned the meeting at 12:11 a.m. to the next regularly scheduled
meeting of the City Council on June 13, 2006.
MINUTES PREPARED BY:
I
Grace Pucci, Deputy City Clerk
The following items are available for review in the City Clerk's office:
Exhibit A—David Broadwater, handout
Exhibit B—Joni Biaggini, copy of PowerPoint presentation
CC Draft Minutes 05/23/06
Page 15•of 15
23
ITEM NUMBER: A-2
DATE: 06/27/06
SPECIAL JOINT
Tom '9 STUDY SESSION
� �
Atascadero City Council
Atascadero Planning Commission
DRAFT MINUTES
Tuesday, May 30, 2006, 6:00 p.m.
Atascadero City Hall
6907 EI Camino Real, Atascadero, California
PROPOSED COMMERCIAL PROJECT AT
EL CAMINO REAL AND DEL RIO ROAD
Mayor O'Malley called the meeting to order at 6:02 p.m.
ROLL CALL:
Present: Council Members Clay, Luna, Pacas and Mayor O'Malley
Planning Commissioners Fonzi, Kelley, Porter, Slane, O'Keefe and
Chairperson Beraud.
Absent: Commissioner Jones
Others Present: City Clerk / Assistant to City Manager Marcia McClure Torgerson,
Deputy City Clerk Grace Pucci
Staff Present: City Manager Wade McKinney, Community Development Director
Warren Frace, Police Chief John Couch, Fire Chief Kurt Stone,
Deputy Public Works Director Geoff English, Deputy Community
Development Director Steve McHarris and City Attorney Patrick
Enright.
CC/PC Draft Minutes 05/30/06
Special Joint Study Session
Page 1 of 12 25
ITEM NUMBER: A-2
DATE: 06/27/06
City Attorney Patrick Enright announced that Commissioner Jones was absent this
evening as he lives within 560 feet of the Highway 101 / Del Rio interchange and the
City is awaiting the opinion of the FPPC to determine if there is a conflict of interest
before he attends any of these meetings.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA:
Mayor O'Malley reviewed the agenda for the meeting and explained that no decisions
would be made this evening; there would only be public input and direction to staff.
MOTION: By Council Member Clay and seconded by Mayor Pro Tem
Pacas to approve the agenda.
Motion passed 10:0 by a roll-call vote.
JOINT STUDY SESSION: PROPOSED COMMERCIAL PROJECT AT
EL CAMINO REAL AND DEL RIO ROAD
DESCRIPTION: Property Location is approximately 40 acres located on the northeast
and southeast corners of EI Camino Real and Del Rio Road in Atascadero, CA. The
property owner is considering a master planned commercial center with housing. No
formal project applications for this project have been submitted to the City as of 5/25/06.
This workshop is the first step in a comprehensive project review process. The Council
will not be taking any formal action at this meeting.
INTRODUCTION AND WELCOME
Mayor O'Malley welcomed those present.
REVIEW OF PROCESS:
City Manager Wade explained the contacts between the City, the Rottman Group and a
variety of retailers.
Community Development Director Warren Frace gave an overview of the -hearing
process for this type of project and explained the purpose of the workshop this evening.
He explained that the public is invited to comment on this project either in person this
evening, through comment cards available in the City Hall Lobby or the City Website,
and that they can sign up to be placed on a mailing list for future meetings on this
project.
CC/PC Draft Minutes 05/30/06
Special Joint Study Session
26 Page 2 of 12
ITEM NUMBER: A-2
DATE: 06/27/06
PRESENTATION OF INITIAL CONCEPT FOR PROJECT AT EL CAMINO REAL AND
DEL RIO (The Rottman Group):
Keith Mathias, Rottman Group, gave the presentation.
Tom Morrell co owner of Mission Oaks at the Annex spoke about his unsuccessful
negotiations with Trader Joe's.
Tony Viasenor, broker, spoke about his contacts with potential co-tenants for the site
and the importance of having a major anchor in the project to secure those tenants.
CITY COUNCIL & PLANNING COMMISSION QUESTIONS:
Council Members and Commissioners asked questions of the applicant and staff and
gave their ex-parte communications.
Ex Parte Communications
■ Commissioner Kelley stated he met with the representatives of the Rottman Group
on May 17th at that time the conceptual plan was presented to him regarding a
possible layout for the proposed center. No disclosure was made as to any
possible tenants, and nothing was asked of him regarding his opinion of the project.
■ Commissioner Fonzi stated she had received many emails to which she did not
respond, and had conversations with citizens in the community. She also met with
Maury Froman and Keith Mathias, on site on May 25th. No commitments were
made, as this was informational only, and she looked at the plans as shown tonight.
■ Commissioner Porter stated he met with Keith Mathias and Maury Froman on May
18th, on site and looked at the same site plan as shown tonight. No other materials
were provided, looked at, or taken from that meeting and he gave no commitment or
opinion at that time.
■ Council Member Clay stated he met with the Rottman group early on when they
were putting these parcels together, and they told him they were trying to put a
number of parcels together for a commercial project. He then met with them
recently and was shown the plot plan. He had a number of telephone calls in
relation to those meetings for confirmations and he had telephoned them recently
regarding the format for this meeting tonight.
■ Council Member Luna stated that in May of 2005 shortly after returning from an
International Conference of Shopping Centers that was also attended by Assistant
City Manager Jim Lewis and Redevelopment Specialist Marty Tracey, Assistant City
Manager Jim Lewis told him there was a possibility of getting a Wal Mart in
Atascadero. In August of 2005 Mayor Tom O'Malley and he met with
CC/PC Draft Minutes 05/30/06
Special Joint Study Session .
Page 3 of 12 27
ITEM NUMBER: A-2
DATE: 06/27/06
representatives of the Rottman Group at Hush Harbor who said they had bought the
property and were going to go with the existing zoning, but were convinced by staff
to go for a big commercial project, and Wal Mart was mentioned by them. In
September he received an invitation to an Edna Valley Winery event from Maury
Froman of the Rottman Group, but he declined the invitation. At the end of October
Tom O'Malley and he met again with the representatives of the Rottman Group to
listen to their update of the project. On January 11, 2006 he received a copy of a
letter addressed to Mayor Tom O'Malley from the Rottman Group. The letter spoke
of the assembly of the properties and the attempt to secure a major anchor for the
proposed master plan and the necessity to rezone properties from residential to
commercial; Wal Mart was not mentioned. On May 16, 2006 he met with the
Rottman Group at Hush Harbor for a preview of what has been presented tonight.
He stated the representatives of the Rottman Group have always been very
courteous and open in their discussions with him.
Mayor O'Malley stated he and his wife have known Maury Froman's wife from the
time before she was married to Mr. Froman and they have had social contact for
some time. He stated he has had somewhere between 15 to 20 contacts over a
number of years with Maury Froman and other representatives of the Rottman
Group. Of those contacts about 1/3 were more social, 1/3 have been with projects
not related to this, and 1/3 were meetings related to-Del Rio and any potential
tenants. Two of those meetings were with Council Member Luna relating to their
positions on the Finance Committee and looking for potential retail sales expansion
in town. In addition, he met with them more recently when they were meeting with
all of the Council Members and Commissioners. He heard in his discussions with
Council Member Luna of the possibility of a couple of large anchors. At that time
nothing had been set, but Wal Mart, Lowe's, and a major grocery store, were
mentioned. He has had no contact with Wal Mart other than 4 or 5 non
management employees who live in Atascadero who have contacted him. He has
received numerous emails and had conversations in the street. He had written a
letter to Trader Joes stating they would be welcome in Atascadero.
■ Mayor Pro Tem Pacas stated she has heard from and corresponded with numerous
people on both sides of this issue. The first she heard of Wal Mart was from rumors
going around, not from any staff member or anyone from Rottman, or any Council
Member. She met with Rottman representatives Keith Mathias and Maury Froman
on May 17th and they gave much less information at that time then was given
tonight. The information given was very vague and involved the gathering of their
property, what they had put together, and thoughts on possibly changing the land
use. There was no discussion of possible tenants.
Chairperson Beraud stated she met with the Rottman Group on May 18th at City
Hall for one hour. At that meeting they went over plans and no promises were
made or questions asked.
CC/PC Draft Minutes 05/30/06
Special Joint Study Session
28 Page 4 of 12
ITEM NUMBER: A-2
DATE: 06/27/06
■ Vice Chairperson O'Keefe stated she met with the Rottman Group on May 18th at
which time they covered what was presented tonight but in less detail. She has
also received emails from the Oppose Walmart group
■ Commissioner Slane stated he met with Keith Mathias and Maury Froman on May
16th with Mayor O'Malley and received a brief preview of what was presented
tonight; no commitments were made. He has also had several contacts from
community members expressing their feelings over the rezoning.
PUBLIC COMMENT:
Tom Pomar, spokesperson for Oppose Wal Mart, stated his reasons for opposing the
rezone including; a rezone will mean getting a Wal Mart, a super Walmart will not bring
good jobs or benefits, and it may cause small stores to close. He thinks the rezone
should go to a vote of the public.
Mitch Paskin stated he hoped the decision on the rezone would be made by the elected
officials of the city, and asked several questions of the Rottman Group and staff.
Alitha Musgrave expressed concern regarding safety and crime in the large parking lots
that would surround Wal Mart, as they have no outside security.
Steven Good indicated he would like to see the developers provide Atascadero with a
shopping mall, he did not think it was necessary to duplicate what shopping already
exists a few miles away.
Leigh Perkins stated she opposes the rezoning and Wal Mart coming to Atascadero, as
it would endanger local businesses and the wage scale. She spoke about a lawsuit
against Walmart for discriminating against women, and stated that Wal Mart imports
merchandise from outside the United States.
Rosemarie Handy spoke in favor of keeping the small town atmosphere as stated in the
General Plan and in support of small businesses that would be impacted by a Wal Mart
store.
Joe Modica speaking for the Chamber of Commerce stated that the Chamber supports
commercial development at that site, but it is not taking a position on what anchor store
should be sought.
David Broadwater stated that the ex parte communications were unacceptable, and that
Wal Mart is predatory on other businesses in town. He said that roads and essential
services can be funded without a Wal Mart.
Marilyn Brown indicated she had no argument with commercial development in town;
however she is not in support of a Wal Mart superstore. She stated their business
CC/PC Draft Minutes 05/30/06
Special Joint Study Session
Page 5 of 12 29
ITEM NUMBER: A-2
DATE: 06/27/06
practices and treatment of employees is not acceptable, and they purchase from
overseas manufacturers that use sweatshops.
Eric Greening suggested that more information from staff regarding their ex parte
communications is needed and spoke about the negative impacts to the interchange at
Del Rio Road and Highway 101 from this project.
Ron Rothman spoke about the timing of the city questionnaire and stated that the
community as a whole should decide if this project is wanted.
Greg Barber stated he supports having some commercial development in this area but
not at the expense of poor quality sterile merchandise.
Robert Skinner spoke about Wal Mart paying their employees less than other
businesses forcing the taxpayers to subsidize their employees for needed services. He
is against the rezone and against Wal Mart.
Lynn Hunter indicated she would like to see homes and a little retail space at this site.
She stated that Atascadero can only grow so much because of its larger lots and must
therefore find other ways to fund needed services.
Ray Johnson explained that housing does not carry its weight to support needed
services. Since the General Plan was redone the city has lost commercial acreage so
good retail is needed to provide the cash flow necessary to run the community.
Tom Birkenfeld, President Atascadero City Firefighters, spoke in favor of rezoning this
area to commercial. He stated the city needs increased tax revenue to supply essential
services to the community and urged keeping an open mind and looking at any large
retailer interested in coming to Atascadero.
Jeff Willshusen, President Atascadero Police Association, expressed his support for
changing the zoning from residential to commercial to promote financial security for city
services.
Susan Brackten stated her opposition Wal Mart and addressed the morality of allowing
a corporation such as Wal Mart to move into the community.
Corinna Jones spoke against allowing a super Walmart in Atascadero. She stated that
in her home town in Colorado many local businesses closed when a Walmart came to
town.
Casey Bryson, Atascadero Firefighters Association, spoke in support of changing all the
zoning at this site to commercial, which will help provide financial support for city
services, parks and roads.
CC/PC Draft Minutes 05/30/06
Special Joint Study Session
30 Page 6 of 12
ITEM NUMBER: A-2
DATE: 06/27/06
Michael Sarnetta, Atascadero Firefighter, commented that Atascadero is growing in
population and he is concerned about maintaining city services which will also increase.
He stated that commercial development will give the city the opportunity to collect tax
dollars to provide essential services in the community.
Ashley Hatch spoke in favor of commercial growth to provide increased revenues to the
city, without which the alternative would be to increase taxes.
Peter Laughlin spoke about balanced growth and the highest and best use of
commercial land in this area. He stated this is an incredible opportunity to develop this
site in a smart way to benefit the community and that it was a wise placement of
commercial development.
Maria Hooper stated she supports downtown revitalization and protecting current
businesses. She does not support rezoning this area to commercial.
Tera Conrad indicated she had moved here for the quiet, peaceful atmosphere and
open space. She is opposed to heavy development and a super Walmart.
Steve Tillman read from a Kiplinger Letter article stating that many large retailers are
vying for space at the Del Rio Road and Highway 101 interchange. He spoke about the
effect a Wal Mart would have on local entrepreneurs and on the community and stated
he was against the rezone.
Chandra Keo stated she lives in the Colony Homes development next to this site and
outlined her concerns about traffic, turning out of her development onto EI Camino Real,
outside cars in the neighborhood, and outsiders using their park. She asked the city to
look at the impacts to her neighborhood from delivery trucks, parking, noise and lights
from the proposed project.
Michael Rosen thanked the Rottman Group for their willingness to pursue other
possibilities before presenting the community with this plan, and stated he would like
this to be developed under the existing zoning ordinances without a Wal Mart.
Mary Ann West stated the city should concentrate on building up the downtown area,
and expressed her objection to the way Walmart treats its employees and overseas
workers.
Bill White, Vice President Atascadero Professional Firefighters Association, spoke about
how the city has had to dip into reserves to maintain essential services, and stated the
importance of capitalizing on sales tax revenues for funding those services.
Scott Hallock, Atascadero Fire Department, commented that many acres in Atascadero
have been rezoned from commercial to residential, which lessens the potential for a tax
base. He stated this was an opportunity to take back some of that commercial property
to get back lost revenues.
CC/PC Draft Minutes 05/30/06
Special Joint Study Session
Page 7 of 12 31
ITEM NUMBER: A-2
DATE: 06/27/06
Lee Blanchette stated the concerns of the firefighters are real, but that there must be
another way to provide for those services.
Mark Phillips read a prepared statement from another resident stating their opposition to
Wal Mart. Speaking for himself, Mr. Phillips would like the developer to go back to the
drawing board and find another occupant for that space before it is rezoned.
Robert Cuthbert spoke about Wal Mart's employment activities and against allowing
them in Atascadero because of the negative impact to the community from the low
income jobs they bring.
Hannah Toman, representing the student body at Atascadero High School, spoke about
a recent poll done on campus, which found that 114 of 133 students thought that
Walmart would have a negative impact on local community.
Thomas Rush spoke about Paso Robles' experience with Wal Mart and how many
downtown stores and Kmart went out of business. He also remarked about how little of
Wal Mart's income goes into local banks, and of the problem of keeping them
permanently in the community.
Brandon Istenes spoke against rezoning this area, and stated that the environmental
impacts of Wal Mart would be against the tenets of the US Mayors Climate Protection
Agreement.
The speaker (no name given) stated she moved here from Napa because there was no
Walmart and that Atascadero is a unique and beautiful place that she would not like to
see spoiled by a Wal Mart.
Ian Wood, Atascadero High School student, stated he thinks the revenue problem is not
due to the lack of large stores, but because the state and federal governments are low
on money.
Cindy Smith spoke about the lack of benefits for Wal Mart employees and asked the city
to explore other options for this site.
Ann Hatch agreed that funds are needed, but she hopes there are other options besides
major retail. She would like to see resources brought to this community that would add
to the job base, education level and real estate market.
Zoe Radkee stated the city does not need Walmart.
David Pecci, Templeton High School student, suggested building a mall rather than a
super Walmart. He submitted a list of stores not currently in the County. (Exhibit A)
CC/PC Draft Minutes 05/30/06
Special Joint Study Session
32 Page 8 of 12
ITEM NUMBER: A-2
DATE: 06/27/06
Andrew Christy, Sierra Club, stated it would be counter to the intent of the US Mayors
Climate Protection Agreement to have a Wal Mart here, and spoke about the
environmental impacts to the community from Wal Mart
Mayor Pro Tem Pacas left the meeting at 9:00 p.m. and turned in a written
statement to the City Clerk (Exhibit B)
Livia Kellerman read from a prepared statement from the Baker Family against allowing
Wal Mart in the community. Ms. Kellerman questioned why Wal Mart would want to
come to Atascadero when others retailers would not, and asked that Wal Mart not be
put in Atascadero.
Robin Deary pointed out that Atascadero doesn't have to take Wal Mart just because
other retail stores don't want to be here. She is against rezoning until it is determined
what type of stores would be permitted.
John Heatherington spoke against Wal Mart's employment practices and their buying
from foreign sweat shops. He asked that no zoning changes be made until it is known
what the city is actually getting.
Barbara Spelina expressed concern regarding the impacts from a development this
large on the surrounding residential neighborhoods. She also spoke in support of the
downtown, and cited an example of how another small town brought in a large retailer
resulting in many small businesses in the downtown closing.
Randy Lawrence stated he lives near this site and, because one of the reasons he
came here was for the rural atmosphere, he asked that this area not be zoned
commercial.
Trish Ringley spoke against having a Wal Mart in town and urged the city not to rezone
this area unless it can guarantee something special for the site.
Nancy Vetter stated she doesn't think Wal Mart belongs here and would like more
interesting shops. Ms. Vetter also read from a prepared statement from Monica Carr
against allowing Wal Mart in the community.
Maggie White stated she supports commercial development at this site. She now goes
to other cities to shop and would like her money to stay in Atascadero.
Kathy DiGratsia commented that this was a good opportunity to galvanize the
community to help decide what should go into this site.
Christine Moore spoke against allowing Wal Mart to come into the area stating it isn't
needed and they have poor employee practices.
CC/PC Draft Minutes 05/30/06
Special Joint Study Session
Page 9 of 12 33
ITEM NUMBER: A-2
DATE: 06/27/06
Daphne Fahsing stated that though she doesn't want to see 180 homes on that
property, she would not like to see a Wal Mart there. She would be in favor of some
other retailer at the site.
Franka Landsky asked that the site not be rezoned especially if it is for a Wal Mart
store.
The speaker (no name given) stated there are better ways to get money than with Wal
Mart; he would prefer to see more educational opportunities available.
Mayor O'Malley closed the Public Comment period.
Keith Mathias, Rottman Group, responded to issues raised during public comment and
stated it was important to look at both sides of the issue. He commented that the
question to be answered is does the community want to rezone that land to commercial.
PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS:
Commissioner Slane indicated he was impressed with the turnout tonight and stated he
was worried about the future of Atascadero. He wants the town to grow economically
and thinks commercial property should be developed, but he doesn't necessarily think a
Walmart is needed. He would like to see the community work together as a whole to
explore other options.
Vice Chairperson O'Keefe made no comments.
Chairperson Beraud spoke about the great comments received and agrees that if the
city is going to rezone the area it must know what the rezoning is for. Whatever goes in
there should be special, and it would be good to limit the size of the stores allowed to
prevent super stores from being tenants. She supports a financial agreement with the
new development to support existing and downtown businesses.
Commissioner Kelley stated the community has spoken and he was impressed with all
the different generations that commented. He said that this will put smart growth to the
ultimate test and that there is a need for commercial development in town, but there is
also a responsibility to other businesses in town as well as the downtown, which is
owed some protection or safeguard. He thinks the door should be open to look into all
the alternatives that are available for the property.
Commissioner Fonzi indicated that the city has an incredible opportunity at this point to
build in a smart way. It is important to bring people here for reasons other than
shopping. She commented that the community can come up with something better than
what has been shown. It is important to be careful not to rezone until the city knows
what it is getting. She would like to see something that would support city services, but
at the same time being careful how that revenue is procured. She stated personally that
CC/PC Draft Minutes 05/30/06
Special Joint Study Session
34 Page 10 of 12
ITEM NUMBER: A-2
DATE: 06/27/06
she could not look herself in the mirror if she voted for Wal Mart, and urged taking time
. and doing this right.
Commissioner Porter thanked everyone from the community who turned out tonight. He
agreed this would put smart growth principles to the test. He stated there is only a
limited amount of commercial properties left and the city must be very careful on what is
done with this site. He is leaning toward developing this commercially rather than
having another 180 residences.
CITY COUNCIL COMMENTS:
Council Member Clay spoke in support of city staff and explained that Council had voted
unanimously in strategic planning to have staff seek out retail for the city. He stated he
is here to represent the entire community and that is how he looks at issues. He
indicated that leakage to other communities for shopping is a problem, and spoke about
the reduction of commercial and increase in residential development. He is supportive
of working out a development agreement to provide the downtown with funds. He
explained that there is a problem with the tax base and if the community wants services
and roads fixed then there must be more retail. He supports the rezoning of the
property to commercial rather than having 180 homes, and because this site is in the
redevelopment area there would be a large amount of tax revenue for the city.
Council Member Luna stated that he did not support the 2003 General Plan and to pass
that findings of overriding considerations had to be made, significant impacts were
identified. One of those impacts was the stress on police and fire by adding 10,000
new people to the.community and that resources would not be available for supporting
that increase of 10,000 people. He stated this is the position Atascadero finds itself in
now and there is a significant impact that must be addressed by either raising the sales
tax or with a Wal Mart. He thanked the Rottman Group for their presentation and stated
he did support this area being prime commercial, however at that time it was not
assembled as the huge parcel it is now and that this could only attract something like a
super Wal Mart. He thinks that what they have done here is an opportunity for
Atascadero, but he is not going to support any kind of rezoning while there is still the
potential that a super Walmart could occupy that space.
Mayor O'Malley stated he is concerned that Atascadero is in competition with other
regions and other cities and he does not want the city to be perceived as unfriendly to
business. He spoke of the importance of having some economic analysis on this
project to determine what the net impact on the community would be for different
business combinations. He also thinks it is important to continue with the community
process and stated this project will have an environmental impact report. He
commented that there is a better opportunity to meet infrastructure demands by looking
at larger projects. He stated he has no preconceived ideas of what should be done on
the parcel, and personally would rather see commercial development of some sort than
more residential. Mayor O'Malley indicated there are offsets for larger commercial
centers such as a development agreement to assist the downtown. He spoke about
CC/PC Draft Minutes 05/30/06
Special Joint Study Session
Page 11 of 12 35
ITEM NUMBER: A-2
DATE: 06/27/06
incentives and partnering with developers to bring in city revenues. He agrees this must
be thought through and done right, and he would support this being a prime commercial i
site, but the city must know what it is going to get.
Council Member Clay stated that the reason he supports a store like Wal Mart is
because it gives the city's workforce people and seniors the ability to stretch their
dollars.
ADJOURNMENT:
Mayor O'Malley adjourned the meeting at 10:12 p.m. The City Council and Planning
Commission adjourned to their next regularly scheduled meetings.
MINUTES PREPARED BY:
Grace Pucci, Deputy City Clerk
The following exhibit is available for review in the City Clerks Office.
Exhibit A— David Pecci, list of stores not currently in the county
Exhibit B—Becky Pacas, written statement
CC/PC Draft Minutes 05/30/06
Special Joint Study Session
36 Page 12 of 12
ITEM NUMBER: A-3
' DATE: 06/27/06
r.
leis , Ya e
Atascadero City Council
Staff Report — Public Works Department
2006-2007 Annual Overlay Program
Curbaril Avenue Paving Project
(City Bid No. 2006-003)
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Council•
1. Authorize the City Manager to execute agreement with R. Burke
Construction for $409,766.00 for construction of the 2006-2007 Annual
Overlay Program — Curbaril Avenue Paving Project; and,
2. Authorize the Administrative Services Director to allocate $393,000.00 in
Urban State Highway Account funds (SHA) toward the Curbaril Avenue
Paving Project.
DISCUSSION:
Background: In 2005, design plans for a road rehabilitation project on a section of
Curbaril Avenue from 101 to Highway 41 was completed along with plans for work on
portions of EI Camino Real, Portola Road and San Gabriel Road. Bids for the entire
2004-2005 Overlay Program were higher than the previously budgeted amount. As a
result, the City Council reduced the scope of the 2004-2005 Annual Overlay Program
by eliminating Curbaril, in order to stay within budget. Curbaril Avenue was then added
to the 2006-2007 Road Rehabilitation Program which also includes rehabilitation work
on sections of San Jacinto Road and Del Rio Road. Since the Curbaril Avenue portion
of the 2006-2007 Road Rehabilitation Program was already designed, this project- is
being bid and completed separately.
In May of this year, SLOCOG asked that we program the $393,000 in USHA monies to
a specific road project. These unbudgeted 04/05 and 05/06 USHA monies may be
spent by the City on any local road project. In order to comply with SLOCOG's request
to quickly spend these monies, staff recommends that we use these USHA monies on
the Curbaril Avenue Overlay project. This would then free up an equal amount of Local
Transportation Funds from the 2006-2007 Road Rehabilitation Program which would
allow us to add another section of road to that project.
37
ITEM NUMBER: A-3
DATE: 06/27/06
Analysis: On May 3, 2006, bids were advertised and _distributed for the 2006-2007
Annual Overlay Program — Curbaril Avenue Paving Project. Three bids were received
and publicly opened on June 5, 2006 at 3:00 p.m. R. Burke Construction submitted the
lowest bid in the amount of $409,766.00. The Engineer's Estimate for this project was
$548,200.00.
Conclusion: R. Burke Construction is the successful low qualified bidder. Staff
recommends that the City Council award the project to R. Burke Construction, and
authorize the City Manager to enter into an agreement for the 2006-2007 Annual
Overlay Program — Curbaril Avenue Paving Project.
FISCAL IMPACT:
EXPENDITURES
Design $20,000
Construction $409,770
Construction Support $35,000
Contingency $41,000
ESTIMATED TOTAL PROJECT EXPENDITURES $505,770
REVENUES
Local Transportation Funds (06/07 Road Rehabilitation $112,770
Projects
Urban SHA Funds 2004/05 & 2005/06 $393,000
TOTAL PROJECT REVENUES $505,770
ALTERNATIVE:
Do not Award Contract— Roads continue to deteriorate.
ATTACHMENT:
Bid Summary
38
Citof
Atascadero
Office of the City Clerk
BID SUMMARY
TO: Public Works Department
FROM: Marcia McClure Togerson, C.M.C., City Clerk
BID NO.: 2006-003
OPENED: June 5,2006,3:00pm
PROJECT: Curbaril Avenue Paving
Three(3) bids were received and opened today,as follows:
Bidder Amount
Granite Construction $415,977.00
P.O. Box 50085
Watsonville, CA 95077
Union Asphalt $422,493.00
P.O. Box 1280
Santa Maria, CA 93456
R. Burke Corporation $409,766.00
P.O. Box 957
San Luis Obispo, CA 93406
39
ITEM NUMBER: A-4
' DATE: 06/27/06
rc
1918 1 9
Atascadero City Council
Staff Report- Public Works Department
Wastewater Treatment Plant
Sludge Drying Bed Expansion Project
(City Bid No. 2006-008)
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Council:
1. Authorize the City Manager to execute agreement with Raminha
Construction Inc. for $577,000.00 for construction of*the Wastewater
Treatment Plant Sludge Drying Bed Expansion Project; and,
2. Authorize the Administrative Services Director to appropriate $164,000.00
from the Wastewater Fund reserves.
DISCUSSION:
Background: Current operation of the Wastewater Treatment Plant requires periodic
dredging of solids accumulated in the facultative lagoon. These solids (sludge) are
removed with a dredging apparatus and placed in a series of eight concrete drying beds for
moisture removal prior to relocation to a landfill. The limited capacity of the current drying
beds at the Wastewater Treatment Plant is not sufficient to handle the sludge removal
demands in light of the narrow window of allowable timeframes for land application. The
State Water Quality Control Board regulates this process and has limited the land
application of sludge to June through October. In addition, there is a requirement for a
three-month on-site drying period for sludge. As a result of weather related delays and the
regulatory requirements, the sludge removal process at the Wastewater Treatment Plant is
constricted and sludge must be routinely stored on-site for extended periods.
Analysis: The proposed additional drying beds will double our sludge bed capacity and will
assist with sludge removal from the facultative pond, which will help reduce odor problems
resulting from sludge build up in the pond. In addition, this sludge drying bed expansion
project will assist the Wastewater Operations staff in meeting minimum sludge drying
periods and local landfill acceptance timelines. This Capital Improvement Project will
substantially improve our sludge removal capability.
41
ITEM NUMBER: A-4
DATE: 06/27/06
On May 3, 2006, bids were advertised and distributed for the Wastewater Treatment
Plant Sludge Drying Bed Expansion Project. Eight bids were received and publicly
opened on June 5, 2006 at 2:00 p.m. Raminha Construction Inc. submitted the lowest
bid in the amount of $577,000.00. The Engineer's Estimate for this project was
$750,000.00.
Conclusion: Raminha Construction Inc. is the_successful low qualified bidder. Staff
recommends that the City Council award the project to Raminha Construction Inc., and
authorize the City Manager to enter into an agreement for Wastewater Treatment Plant
Sludge Drying Bed Expansion Project.
FISCAL IMPACT:
EXPENDITURES
Design $10,000
Construction $577,000
Construction Support $20,000
Contingency(10% of Construction) $57,000
TOTAL PROJECT EXPENDITURES $664,000
REVENUES
Budgeted Wastewater Funds (Fund 527) $500,000
Additional Appropriation from Wastewater Reserves $164,000
TOTAL PROJECT REVENUES $664,000
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Do not Award Contract
2. Reduce Scope of Project and Re-Bid
ATTACHMENT:
Bid Summary
42
Citof
Atascadero
Office of the City Clerk
BID SUMMARY
TO: Public Works Department
FROM: Marcia McClure Togerson, C.M.C., City Clerk
BID NO.: 2006-008
OPENED: June 5, 2006
PROJECT: Wastewater Sludge Bed
Eight(8) bids were received and opened today,as follows:
Bidder Amount
Wysong Construction $674,598.00
8720-B El Camino Real
Atascadero, CA 93422
MGE Underground Inc. $ 768,500.00
P.O. Box 4189
Paso Robles, CA 93447
Granite Construction $696,700.00
P.O. Box 50085
Watsonville, CA 95077
R. Burke Corpration $729,900.00
P.O. Box 957
San Luis Obispo, CA 93406
Raminha Construction Inc. $577,000.00
6805 Sycamore Road
Atascadero, CA 93422
Specialty Construction Inc. $744,300.00
645 Clarion Court
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Papich Construction $735,462.00
P.O. Box 2210
Pismo Beach, CA 93448
Whitaker Contractors $813,702.00
P.O. Box 910
Santa Margarita, CA 93453
43
ITEM NUMBER: A-5
DATE: 06/27/06
1918 1 9
d h.
Atascadero City Council
Staff Report - Police Department
Police Vehicle Purchase
RECOMMENDATION:
Council authorize the purchase of three (3) replacement police vehicles from Downtown
Ford Sales in Sacramento, California.
DISCUSSION:
The City currently replaces high mileage police vehicles in accordance with an
. established replacement plan. Two (2) marked patrol vehicles and one (1) unmarked
vehicle are scheduled for replacement due to their age and high mileage. Replacement
of the vehicles.is necessary to maintain a safe and reliable fleet and to keep repair costs
at a reasonable level.
Downtown Ford Sales in Sacramento, California offers Ford Crown Victoria Police
Interceptor vehicles under the current State of California contract #54-005 (PA #60048).
The purchase of these vehicles from Downtown Ford Sales is consistent with the City's
purchasing policy.
FISCAL IMPACT:
$68,076.35 including sales tax, shipping fees, mandatory California tire fee, and
$500/unit discount for payment within twenty(20) days of receipt of invoice. Funds are
provided in the 2006/2007 City budget.
ALTERNATIVE:
Defer replacement at this time. Not recommended due to increased on-going
maintenance costs.
45
ITEM NUMBER: B- 1
DATE: 06/27/06
1918 1 9
ArA�cAn�O/
Atascadero City Council
Staff Report - Police Department
Motorcycle and Noise Ordinance Amendments
ZC H 2006-0116
(City of Atascadero)
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Planning Commission recommends Council:
1. Introduce for first reading, by title only, Draft Ordinance A, approving Zone
Change 2006-0116 Part A amending the noise ordinance pertaining to
cost recovery; and,
2. Introduce for first reading, by title only, Draft Ordinance B, approving Zone
Change 2006-0116 Part B amending the zoning ordinance to repeal
motorcycle riding as an accessory residential use.
DISCUSSION:
Background: Staff brought to Council on 3/14/06 an evaluation of the effectiveness of
the motorcycle and noise ordinances that were adopted in May 2004. Council
deliberated on the information provided in the report and directed Staff to return to
Council with the following three amendments to the ordinances:
1. Noise Ordinance Exemption:
Amend Municipal Code Section 9-14.03 to exempt motorcycles and similar'2 or more
wheel vehicles from the provisions of the noise ordinance as long as the vehicles are
operated in compliance with the motorcycle ordinance.
2. Noise Ordinance Cost Recovery:
Amend Municipal Code Section 9-14.14 (b)(2), 9-14.14 (b)(3), and 9-14.14 (c)(1) to
change the cost recovery period for noise and motorcycle violations from 12 to 72
hours.
47
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 06/27/06
3. Amend Municipal Code Section 9-6.106(c) to add a condition prohibiting motorcycles
or similar 2 or more wheel vehicles to operate on any private property with exhaust
systems not in constant operation and properly maintained to prevent any excessive or
unusual noise, and any muffler or exhaust system equipped with a cutout, bypass or
similar device.
Since the ordinances are related to land use they were required to be considered by the
Planning Commission prior to returning to Council. Staff presented the evaluation of the
ordinances to the Planning Commission on April 18, 2006 along with ordinances
reflecting the Council direction to staff with respect to the suggested amendments.
The Planning Commission deliberated on the information presented and made two
recommendations to Council.
They agreed that increasing the number of hours pertaining to cost recovery from 12 to
72 would aid in the recovery of costs related to multiple responses to disturbances.
That text is contained in Attachment 2 as Draft Ordinance.A.
They denied the suggested two amendments that exempted motorcycles from noise
ordinance enforcement and that required them to have unmodified and properly working
exhaust systems. The Commission recommended that Council repeal the Municipal
Code section that regulates the use of motorcycles and similar vehicles as an accessory
use on private property. That text is contained in Attachment 3 as Draft Ordinance B.
Analysis:
Amendment 1 as suggested by Council. This exemption will clarify the conflict between
the two ordinances and allow for motorcycle riding on private property without being
subject to provisions of the noise ordinance. Violations of the motorcycle ordinance
would be addressed through voluntary compliance or the administrative citation
.process. It would maintain the currently allowed hours of operation and number of
vehicles allowed. This ordinance would continue to be a burden on police and code
enforcement resources and would still require reporting parties to participate in keeping
records of violations.
Amendment 2 as suggested by Council. The 12 hour time limit is not practical and
rarely applies to responses to significant problems. The expanded time period will serve
as a useful tool to encourage voluntary compliance and to recover appropriate response
costs when compliance does not occur. This amendment will apply to all noise
ordinance violations and to motorcycle 'ordinance violations if Council maintains a
motorcycle ordinance. Staff recommends Council adopt Draft Ordinance A as
recommended by the Planning'Commission.
Amendment 3 as suggested by Council. This amendmentwould require vehicles to
maintain proper exhaust systems. it adds a level of difficulty for enforcement. There
are numerous brands and models of vehicles that require significant training and
48
ITEM NUMBER: B- 1
DATE: 06/27/06
resources to identify improper exhaust systems. This amendment will also complicate
enforcement by requiring noise level readings to be made to compare with original
manufacturer specifications, some of which may not be available.
Draft Ordinance B as recommended by Planning Commission. This amendment would
repeal motorcycle riding as an accessory use on private property. This essentially
takes the situation back to before the motorcycle ordinance was adopted in 2004. At
that time violations were related to noise and enforced by the noise ordinance.
Enforcement at that time was difficult because it required police to actually take noise
level readings or rely on neighborhood petitions and the nuisance abatement process.
This option will also serve to ban motorcycle riding since many motorcycles exceed the
maximum 70 decibel level even when idling.
If Council is" inclined to accept the recommendation of the Planning Commission
regarding repealing the motorcycle ordinance, Staff recommends that Council
take the steps to ban motorcycle riding altogether. Enforcement of noise violations
related to motorcycles will place a significant demand on police and code enforcement
resources due to the nature of the documentation and evidence needed to take
enforcement action. Staff can prepare an ordinance to ban motorcycle riding on private
property and return to Council for adoption.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Council can adopt the amendments as suggested at the 3/14/06 Council meeting.
2. Council can deny the Planning Commission recommendation to repeal the
motorcycle ordinance (Draft Ordinance B) and direct Staff to return to Council with
an ordinance banning motorcycle riding on private property.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1: Planning Commission Minutes
Attachment 2: Draft Ordinance A
Attachment 3: Draft Ordinance B
i
I
49
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 06/27/06
Attachment 1: Planning Commission Minutes
CITY OF ATASCADERO
PLANNING COMMISSION
DRAFT MINUTES
Regular Meeting
Tuesday, April 18, 2006.— 7:00 P.M.
CALL TO ORDER
Chairperson Beraud called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. and
Commissioner Porter led the Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioners Fonzi, Kelley, Porter, Slane, O'Keefe and
Chairperson Beraud
Absent: Commissioner Jones
Staff Present: Community Development Director Warren Frace, Police Chief John
Couch, Deputy Community Development Director Steve McHarris,
Planning Technician Paul Tabone, City Attorney Patrick Enright and
Recording Secretary Grace Pucci.
PLANNING COMMISSION BUSINESS
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
50
ITEM NUMBER: B-1
DATE: 06/27/06
MOTION: By Commissioner Kelley and seconded by Vice Chairperson
O'Keefe to approve the agenda.
Motion passed 6:0 by a roll-call vote.
PUBLIC COMMENT
None
CONSENT CALENDAR
1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF THE REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING ON APRIL 4. 2006.
Commissioner Fonzi asked that the following statement be added to Item #3, page four:
"Commissioner Fonzi stated she was voting yes only because each new project would
be individually reviewed for impacts through the minor CUP Process." In addition she
asked for a correction to page five, paragraph one under Director's Report, second
sentence corrected to read...motocross task track facility...
MOTION. By Commissioner Fonzi and seconded by Commissioner
Kelley to approve Item #1 as amended.
Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote. (Porter abstained)
Commissioner Jones joined the meeting at 7:05 p.m.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORTS
2. TREE REMOVAL PERMIT 2006-0090
Owner: George Molfino, 6305 Flores Road, Atascadero, CA 93422
Project Title: TRP 2006-0090
Project 7055 Navarette Ave.,Atascadero, CA 93422
Location: APN 031-123-009
Project A request to remove one (1)' native Live Oak tree, totaling 24-inches in
Description: diameter.
Planning Technician Paul Tabone gave the staff report and answered questions of the
Commission.
PUBLIC COMMENT
51
ITEM NUMBER: B- 1
DATE: 06/27/06
George Molfino, applicant, spoke about his request and stated he would now prefer to
pay the mitigation fee rather than replanting.
Chairperson Beraud closed the Public Comment period.
MOTION: By Commissioner Fonzi and seconded by Commissioner
Kelley to adopt Resolution PC 2006-0031 to approve the
request to remove one native oak tree subject to conditions of
approval, and those conditions to read that the applicant will
be paying the mitigation fee rather than replanting.
Motion passed 7:0 by a roll-call vote.
3. TREE REMOVAL PERMIT 2006-0089
Owner. Josh Brard, 1950 N. Ferrocarril, Atascadero, CA 93422
Project Title: TRP 2006-0089
Project 1950 N. Ferrocarril, Atascadero, CA 93422
Location:
APN 049-012-021
Project Approve the illegal removal of four(4)native oak trees, two of which were 36-
Description: inches in diameter.
Commissioner Porter stepped down from consideration of this item stating that his
personal residence lies within 500 feet of the subject property.
Planning Technician Paul Tabone and Deputy Community Development Director Steve
McHarris gave the staff report and answered questions of the Commission.
PUBLIC COMMENT None
MOTION: By Vice Chairperson O'Keefe and seconded by Chairperson
Beraud to adopt Resolution PC 2006-0034 to approve the
request to approve the previous removal of four native oak
trees subject to the guidelines and mitigation required by the
Atascadero Municipal Code and Native Tree Ordinance.
Motion passed 5:1 by a roll-call vote. (Jones opposed, Porter
abstained)
PUBLIC HEARINGS
4.. ZONE CHANGE 2006-0116
52
ITEM NUMBER: B- 1
DATE: 06/27/06
Applicant: City of Atascadero, 6907 El Camino Real, Atascadero CA 93422,Phone: 461-
5000
Project'Title: Zone Change 2006-0116,Motorcycle and Noise Ordinance Amendments
Project Citywide
Location:
Project Commission consideration and recommendation of amendments to the Motorcycle
Description: and Noise Ordinance.
Ex Parte Communications
■ Chairperson Beraud stated that before this meeting she had obtained meeting
minutes from 2003/2004 meetings of the City Council and Planning Commission
and had followed up with Richard Moen, Ray Wilcox, Deborah Ingalls, Jim Griffin,
Jerry Robinson and Bob Briggs, who were having problems with motorcycle noise in
their neighborhoods. Chairperson Beraud reviewed the comments she had
received.
■ Vice Chairperson O'Keefe stated she had received an email from John Bollaro and
responded to him.
■ Commissioner Jones stated he had received multiple emails to which he did not
respond.
■ Commissioner Slane had contact with one citizen, Rick Mullen, who expressed
concerns about the motorcycle ordinance.
• Commissioner Kelley stated he was contacted by Rick Mullen.
■ Commissioner Fonzi stated she received emails that she read and did not respond
to.
■ Commissioner Porter stated he received emails that he read and did not respond to.
Police Chief John Couch gave the staff report and answered questions of the
Commission.
City Attorney Patrick Enright spoke about the conflict with the Noise Ordinance and the
exception for motorcycle use. Mr. Enright answered questions of the Commission.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Sorrel Marks spoke about the impacts of motorcycle noise to her home and garden and
expressed concern with the proposed ordinance. Mrs. Marks asked the Commission to
uphold the existing Noise Ordinance.
John Bollaro stated his concerns with the proposed Motorcycle Ordinance and the
impacts of burdensome recreation noise to private property.
53
ITEM NUMBER: B -1
DATE: 06/27/06
Sandy Hastings stated that off road motorcycle use should be banned from the city
limits and residential neighborhoods.
Bob Briggs commented on the change of the city from rural to urban and the noise and
environmental impacts from several motorcycle tracks in his neighborhood.
Doug Marks spoke of the noise impacts to his property from a motorcycle track on his
neighbor's property. Mr. Marks explained how this ordinance will create divisions within
neighborhoods, and asked that motorcycles not be exempted from the Noise
Ordinance.
Dennis Law, President of Central Coast Motorcycle Association, applauded the City for
adopting an ordinance that would strike a balance in competing interests and spoke of
the positive aspects of motorcycling.
Eric Greening stated that the Noise Ordinance should have no exemptions except for
essential public services. He spoke of other impacts from motorcycle usage and off
road tracks in addition to noise.
John Goers spoke against exempting motorcycle use from the Noise Ordinance, and
suggested that the city is no longer rural and the community in general should not be
asked to put up with the noise of a few.
Cindy- Sazar stated her agreement with the previous speakers that exempting
motorcycles from the Noise Ordinance defies logic.
Jerry Robinson spoke about the fallacies in the statistics presented tonight, and
encouraged the Commission to not exempt something that causes a lot of grief for a lot
of people.
Jim Patterson, County Supervisor, stated that there are other impacts in addition to
noise from motorcycles and other off road vehicles, and questioned if this activity is
compatible with residential neighborhoods. He commented that exempting motorcycles
from the Noise Ordinance is not the appropriate action to take; rather he would
encourage the city to work with the county to find an appropriate location for their use.
Dan O'Grady spoke about the exponential increase of noise from more than one
motorcycle. He stated that the ultimate property right is for peace and tranquility in
one's home and therefore he does not think this should be allowed.
Eric Greening suggested that residential neighborhoods would have additional impacts
from this use including impacts to air quality and economic impacts to home-based
businesses.
John Bollaro stated that placing a motorcycle track in the area would bring many more
riders from surrounding cities and create tremendous noise impacts.
54
ITEM NUMBER: B- 1
DATE: 06/27/06
A letter with attachments outlining efforts over the last 10 years to resolve motorcycle
issues in their neighborhood was received from Doug and Sorrel Marks. (Exhibit A)
Chairperson Beraud closed the Public Comment period.
Chairperson Beraud recessed the hearing at 8:48 p.m.
Chairperson Beraud called the hearing back to order at 8:55 p.m.
Commissioner Jones stated that the main issue is noise and this does.not cure the
problem for him.
Vice Chairperson O'Keefe stated that this is not the solution to the problem, it will be a
nuisance for the Police, and she agrees with the speakers who stated that the City of
Atascadero does not need motorcycle riding. She believes that the community has
changed to a more urban area and it is time Atascadero recognized that and made
better use of the Police Department. She commented that the problem is more than
just the tracks, as often people will work on their motorcycles at home and this involves
additional noise from revving the motor, etc., in addition she does not think this
ordinance will be enforceable.
Commissioner Porter commented that much of this has to do with cost recovery and the
problem with the ordinance will be enforcement. He stated there are many citizens who
feel there is no place for motorcycles, but he thinks there are others who do support the
use and that there should be a balance. Tracks are the main problem both for noise
and their effects on the environment and he would be in favor of adding something that
Would address tracks specifically.
Commissioner Kelley indicated that motorcycle use is a good activity, but the town is
changing and the ordinance as presented will be almost impossible to enforce, and will
require much Police time to execute. He stated the time has come to eliminate this use,
and that the tracks are a nuisance.
Commissioner Fonzi commented that Atascadero is different from many cities because
it has larger parcels; however she doesn't think the sound will stop at the property line.
She stated Atascadero has reached the point that it is now a city rather than a rural area
and this use is an encroachment on other peoples land and the ability for them to have
a quiet place to enjoy their homes. It was her opinion that the tracks are .the main
problem, and that eliminating motorcycles from the Noise Ordinance defies logic. She
cannot pass the recommendations as they stand.
Chairperson Beraud stated that the Motorcycle Ordinance is attempting to address
excessive noise, that State laws address transient noise, but here the city is dealing
with a stationary source of noise that is continuous. She believes if the exemption is
allowed, the city will be giving off road motorcycle riders preferential treatment over the
55
ITEM NUMBER: B-1
DATE: 06/27/06
rights of those who do not ride. She pointed out that those who commented tonight live
on large lots, but noise is still a problem, and that much of this appears to be
unenforceable and will be a burden on the Police Department.
Chairperson Beraud, cited several sections of the draft resolution that she does not
agree with and stated she could not make the following findings: that this is in the best
interest of the city, that there has been CEQA review, that allowing an increase in noise
is consistent with the General Plan, that this is an orderly or efficient use of the land and
that this will not result in significant environmental impacts.
MOTION: By Chairperson Beraud and seconded by Commissioner Jones to
send a negative recommendation to the City Council on Resolution
No. 1 denying the proposed changes to the Noise Ordinance and
on the second part of the Noise Ordinance allowing the increase in
time for cost recovery from 12 to 72 hours, and that the current
noise ordinance be upheld and the, Police Department will enforce
the ordinance with the use of their new equipment and backed up
by the code enforcement from the city.
Chairperson Beraud withdrew her motion.
MOTION: By Chairperson Beraud and seconded by Vice Chairperson
O'Keefe to omit 9-14.03(n) and increase the cost recovery
period from 12 to 72 hours and that all verbiage for the Draft
Resolution will not be included.
Motion passed 5:2 by a roll-call vote. (Kelley, Fonzi opposed)
MOTION. By Chairperson Beraud and seconded by Vice Chairperson
O'Keefe to recommend to the City Council the repeal of the
entire section 9-6.106(c) of the Code regarding motorcycle use
and let the Noise Ordinance be the enforcement tool for the
Police Department.
Motion passed 5:2 by a roll-call vote. (Kelley, Porter opposed)
COMMISSIONER COMMENTS AND REPORTS
None
DIRECTOR'S REPORT
Community Development Director Warren Frace reported that staff is investigating the
fence at Escondido and San Gabriel. Regarding code enforcement complaints from the
Planning Commission, the Fire Department has requested that Commissioners fill out
one of the Code Enforcement Complaint forms. Director Frace announced that
56
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 06/27/06
Assistant Planner Lisa Wilkinson has left and new planner Callie Ford has been hired.
He reported that the condo conversion issue is moving forward, and staff is looking at
rescheduling the joint study session for June 13th. In addition there is a tentatively
scheduled workshop with Council. for May 30th to review the preliminary development
plans for Del Rio Road and El Camino Real. Director Frace reviewed the agenda for
the next Commission meeting, and announced that there would be a presentation on
the tree inventory project on April 20th.
City Attorney Patrick Enright reported that he is working with the City Clerk to determine
a date for the AB 1234 training.
ADJOURNMENT
Chairperson Beraud adjourned the meeting at 9:50 p.m. to the next regularly scheduled
meeting of the Planning Commission on May 2, 2006.
MINUTES PREPARED BY:
Grace Pucci, Recording Secretary
The following exhibit is available for review in the Community Development Department:
Exhibit A— Doug and Sorrel Marks, Letter with attachments
57
Attachment 2: Draft Ordinance A
DRAFT ORDINANCE A
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO
CITY COUNCIL APPROVE ZONE CHANGE 2006-0116 PART A,
AMENDING MUNICIPAL CODE SECTIONS 9-14.03 AND 9-14.14
PERTAINING TO MOTORCYCLE NOISE STANDARDS
(City of Atascadero)
The City Council hereby finds and declares as follows:
WHEREAS, In 1983 the City Council of the City of Atascadero adopted certain
noise regulations and exceptions and placed them in Title 9 Chapter 4 of the Atascadero
Municipal Code; and,
WHEREAS, In 1992 the City Council of the City of Atascadero adopted Article
9 Chapter 14 of the Atascadero Municipal Code entitled noise, which Chapter contained
new regulations and new exemptions from the noise ordinance; and,
WHEREAS, in 2004 the City Council repealed the less stringent noise standards
established in 1983 to make it clear that the 1992 standards apply, and to make it clear
that the noise standard exceptions from 1983 were not intended to be repealed and
therefore they were renumbered into Chapter 14 to avoid confusion; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that additional regulations are
necessary in order to further reduce the harmful effects of noise on the community and its
citizens; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the cost of addressing noise
disturbances resulting from violations of State law and/or the Atascadero Municipal Code
ought to be borne by those creating and/or allowing the illegal noise disturbances;and
WHEREAS, the exemption of motorcycles and other similar two or more wheel
vehicles operated in compliance with the motorcycle ordinance clarifies the allowed use
in residential areas; and
WHEREAS, the period of 12 hours limits the occasions for cost recovery
measures to apply to repeat calls to noise complaints; and
58
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has determined that it is in the best
interest of the City to enact this amendment to protect the health, safety, and welfare of
its citizens by applying orderly development of the City; and,
WHEREAS, the laws and regulations relating to the State and local guidelines
for implementation of,the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) have been
adhered to; and,
WHEREAS, a timely and properly noticed Public Hearing upon the subject Zone
Change application was held by the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero at
which hearing evidence, oral and documentary, was admitted on behalf of said zoning
amendments; and,
WHEREAS, the Atascadero City Council, at a duly noticed Public Hearing held
on May 9, 2006, studied and considered Zone Change 2006-0116, after first studying and
considering the Planning Commission's recommendation, and,
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO
HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Findings for approval of zone text change.The Atascadero City
Council herby finds as follows:
1. The zone change is consistent with General Plan policies and all other
applicable ordinances and policies of the City.
2. Amendment of the zoning ordinance will provide for the orderly and efficient
use of lands.
3. The zone change will not, in itself, result in significant environmental impacts.
4. The proposed action is considered Statutorily Exempt from CEQA under
section15061(b)(3) since the action is a minor change to an existing ordinance
that is more environmentally restrictive
SECTION 2. Approval. The Atascadero City Council, in a regular session
assembled on May 9, 2006 resolved to introduce for first reading by title only, an
ordinance that would amend the City Zoning code text with the following:
9-14.14 Cost Recovery for Responses to Disturbances.
(a) Definition. The definitions in this section apply to the following terms as used in
this part:
59
(1) "Disturbance" shall include conduct creating any disturbing or loud noise,
including but not limited to violations of section 9-6.106 of the Atascadero
Municipal Code.
(2) "Response shall mean the arrival of a police officer at the scene of a
disturbance to render whatever service is reasonably required in order to
stop a disturbance.
(3) "Responsible party is any person who owns, leases or is lawfully in
charge of the property where the disturbance takes place, or any person
who organizes,controls or participates in a disturbance. If the responsible
person is a minor, then the parent or guardian who has physical custody
of the child at the time of the disturbance shall be the responsible person
who is liable.
(b) Responses to disturbances.
(1) No responsible party shall cause, permit or tolerate a disturbance.
(2) Whenever a police officer at the scene warns any responsible party
present to discontinue the disturbance, the responsible party shall be
liable for the actual cost of each subsequent response required for a
disturbance within 72 hours of the first response.
(3) At the first response, the responding police officer shall give an oral and/or
i
written warning to one or more of the responsible parties present that the
disturbance must cease immediately, and that if a second or subsequent
response to the disturbance is required within 72 hours following such
notice, a response fee shall be charged to any responsible party for all
responses after the first response.
(4) All responsible parties shall be jointly and severally liable for the response
charge regardless of whether or not a responsible party received an oral
or written warning pursuant to Section 9-14.14 (b)(c).
(c) Charging for responses.
(1) The response charge shall be the actual cost of police services including,
but not limited to,personnel and equipment, incurred for each subsequent
response within the 72-hour period following the first response.
(2) The bill or charges shall be served by the Chief of Police upon the
responsible party within thirty days after the last response to a
disturbance.
(3) The total amount of the response charge shall be deemed to be a civil
debt to the city and the director of finance may take such action to recover
60
the costs as the city is authorized to do by law for the recovery of a civil
debt. The bill of charges shall state the response fee.
(4) The bill of charges and any other notices required by this part shall be
served upon the responsible party in accordance with Chapter 12-1.06 of
the Atascadero Municipal Code. If the responsible party has no last
known business or residence address, then the scene of the disturbance
shall be deemed to be the proper address for service of notice.
(5) The bill of charges shall include a notice of the right of the person being
charged to request a hearing before the appeals hearing board within ten
days of service of the bill to dispute the imposition of a response charge or
the amount of the charge.
SECTION 3. Savings Clause. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause,
phrase, or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or
unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision
shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of the Section. The Council hereby
declares that it would have adopted the Ordinance, and each section, subsection,
sentence, clause, phrase, or portion thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more
sections, subsections, sentences, clauses, phrases, or portions are declared invalid or
unconstitutional.
SECTION 4. Publication. A summary of this ordinance, approved by the City
Attorney, together with the ayes and noes, shall be published twice: at least five days
prior to its final passage in the Atascadero News, a newspaper published and circulated in
the City of Atascadero, and; before the expiration of fifteen (15) days after its final
passage in the Atascadero News, a newspaper published and circulated in the City of
Atascadero. A copy of the full text of this ordinance shall be on file in the City Clerk's
Office on and after the date following introduction and passage and shall be available to
any interested member of the public.
61
INTRODUCED at a regular meeting of the City Council held on , and
PASSED and ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Atascadero, State of
California, on , by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
ATTEST: CITY OF ATASCADERO
Marcia McClure Torgerson, C.M.C., Tom O'Malley, Mayor
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Patrick L. Enright, City Attorney
62
Attachment 3: Draft Resolution PC 2006-0033
DRAFT ORDINANCE B
AN ORDINANCE OF THE ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL
APPROVING ZONE CHANGE 2006-0116 PART B, AMENDING
MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 9-6.106 PERTAINING TO
MOTORCYCLE USE IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS
(City of Atascadero)
The City Council hereby finds and declares as follows:
WHEREAS, In 1983 the City Council of the City of Atascadero adopted certain
noise regulations and exceptions and placed them in Title 9 Chapter 4 of the Atascadero
Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, In 1992 the City Council of the City of Atascadero adopted Article
9 Chapter 14 of the Atascadero Municipal Code entitled noise, which Chapter contained
new regulations and some new exemptions from the noise ordinance;and
WHEREAS, in 2004 the City Council of the City of Atascadero adopted Article
9 Chapter 6 of the Atascadero Municipal Code pertaining to residential use of
motorcycles and two or more wheeled vehicles; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that additional regulations are
necessary in order to further reduce the harmful effects of noise on the community and its
citizens; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the cost of addressing noise
disturbances resulting from violations of State law and/or the Atascadero Municipal Code
ought to be borne by those creating and/or allowing the illegal noise disturbances; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has determined that it is in the best
interest of the City to enact this amendment to the Official Zoning Map to protect the
health, safety, and welfare of its citizens by applying orderly development of the City;
and,
WHEREAS, the laws and regulations relating to the State and local guidelines
for implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) have been
adhered to; and,
WHEREAS, a timely and properly noticed Public Hearing upon the subject Zone
Change application was held by the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero at
63
which hearing evidence, oral and documentary, was admitted on behalf of said zoning
amendments; and,
WHEREAS, the Atascadero City Council, at a duly noticed Public Hearing held
on May 9, 2006, studied and considered Zone Change 2006-0116, after first studying and
considering the Planning Commission's recommendation, and,
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO
HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Findings for approval of zone text change. The Atascadero City
Council herby finds as follows:
1. The zone change is consistent with General Plan policies and all other
applicable ordinances and policies of the City.
2. Amendment of the zoning ordinance will provide for the orderly and efficient
use of lands.
3. The zone change will not, in itself,result in significant environmental impacts.
4. The proposed action is considered Statutorily Exempt from CEQA under
section 1506 1(b)(3) since the action is a minor change to an existing ordinance
that is more environmentally restrictive.
SECTION 2. Approval. The Atascadero City Council, in a regular session
assembled on May 9, 2006 resolved to introduce for first reading by title only, an
ordinance that would amend the City Zoning code text with the following:
Section 9-6.106(c) is amended as follows:
ruling is allowed si Neet to the following limitations•
(1) Ale mere than twe (2) sUeh Vehicles shall be operating at the same time
(2) Gperatlen is limited to a maximum of two (2) heuFs OR a day.
(3) Operation is limiter!to a maximi um of eight(8) hews in a week
(4) Netwithstandii;g the above, RG SUGh use shall be allowed PFGGF t9 ROOR GR
SuRdayS'
(5) Ne mini hike rpetorevnle dirt hike er similar two er meFe wheel vehicle
shall h�ppwated "�nI� the vehicle is at all times equipped with wn adequate
64
SECTION 3. Savings Clause. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause,
phrase, or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or
unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision
shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of the Section. The Council hereby
declares that it would have adopted the Ordinance, and each section, subsection,
sentence, clause, phrase, or portion thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more
sections, subsections, sentences, clauses, phrases, or portions are declared invalid or
unconstitutional.
SECTION 4. Publication. A summary of this ordinance, approved by the City
Attorney, together with the ayes and noes, shall be published twice: at least five days
prior to its final passage in the Atascadero News, a newspaper published and circulated in
the City of Atascadero, and; before the expiration of fifteen (15) days after its final
passage in the Atascadero News, a newspaper published and circulated in the City of
Atascadero. A copy of the full text of this ordinance shall be on file in the City Clerk's
Office on and after the date following introduction and passage and shall be available to
any interested member of the public.
65
INTRODUCED at a regular meeting of the City Council held on , and
PASSED and ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Atascadero, State of
California, on , by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
ATTEST: CITY OF ATASCADERO
Marcia McClure Torgerson, C.M.C., Tom O'Malley, Mayor
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Patrick L. Enright, City Attorney
66
ITEM NUMBER:. B -2
' DATE: 06/27/06
Iola s 1170
Atascadero City Council
Staff Report - Public Works Department
Placing Sewer Service Charges
on the 2006-2007 Property Tax Rolls
RECOMMENDATION:
Council adopt the Draft Resolution placing sewer service charges on the 2006-2007
property tax rolls.
DISCUSSION:
The Atascadero Municipal Code provides for the collection of sewer service charges on
the general County tax bills. Charges have been collected in this manner since the
County Sanitation District was dissolved in 1984. The attached Draft Resolution has
been prepared to accomplish the necessary collection through the 2006-07 property tax
bills. There is no increase in the sewer service rates. A Notice of Public Hearing has
been published noticing this action.
The relevant area of discussion during the public hearing is whether or not the property
owner is responsible for all or any portion of the sewer service charge that is listed on
Exhibit A. Any questions or concerns received during the public hearing should be
referred to staff for resolution.prior to submitting the charges to the County Auditor by
the July deadline.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The City will bill $1,622,651 in sanitation service charges for Fiscal Year 2006-07.
ATTACHMENTS:
Draft Resolution
67
DRAFT RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ATASCADERO ADOPTING SERVICE CHARGES
TO BE ADDED TO THE 2006-07
PROPERTY TAX ROLLS
WHEREAS, Council has duly held a public hearing concerning the addition of
the 2006-07 service charges to the 2006-07 property tax bills; and
WHEREAS, due notice was given to the public in accordance with Section 5473
of the Health and Safety Code; and
WHEREAS, at said hearing the attached report marked "Exhibit A" containing
such charges was duly received by said council; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing opportunity was given for filing objections and
protests and for presentation of testimony of other evidence concerning same; and
WHEREAS it is in the public interest that this body adopt the charges and
determine and confirm the report presented at the hearing.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of
Atascadero, as follows.
Section 1. That the recitals set forth hereinabove are true,correct and valid.
Section 2. That Council hereby adopts the service charges set forth on the
attached report marked "Exhibit A" which is hereby expressly incorporated herein by
reference as though here fully set forth; and Council hereby determines and confirms the
report containing such charges as set forth in said "Exhibit A and hereby further
determines and confirms that each and every service charge set forth in said report is true
and accurate and is in fact owed.
Section 3. That the charges as so confirmed and determined and adopted shall
appear as separate items on the tax bill of each parcel listed in said report, and such
charges shall be collected at the same time and in the same manner as ordinary County ad
valorem taxes are collected, and are subject to the same penalties in the same procedure
and sale in case the delinquency is provided for such taxes.
Section 4. The City Clerk shall file a certified copy of this resolution and said
Exhibit A with the County Auditor upon its adoption.
68
Resolution No.
Page 2
Section 5. This resolution is approved by at least a two-thirds vote of said
Council.
On motion by and seconded by the foregoing
Resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES
ABSENT:
ADOPTED:
ATTEST: CITY OF ATASCADERO
Marcia M. Torgerson, C.M.C., Tom O'Malley, Mayor
City Clerk
Patrick L. Enright, City Attorney
69
.EXHIBIT A
Due to the length of this document, it has not been reproduced as an attachment,
however, it may be reviewed in the office of the City Clerk
70
ITEM NUMBER: B-3
DATE: 06/27/06
1918 a 19 9
i
Atascadero City Council
Staff Report Community Development Department
Community Facilities District 2005-1
Annexation Nos. 2 (Morro Road), 3 (Tecorida), 4 (West Front), 5 (Dove
Creek), and 6 (Vintage Homes)
(Adoption of these Resolutions is part of the final necessary steps for the
establishment of Annexation Nos. 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 (the Annexations) to fund new
police, fire, and park services for these developments.)
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Council
1. Conduct the Public Hearings on each proposed Annexation, and direct the
City Clerk to collect and count the ballots.
Council to recess until ballots are counted.
2. Adopt Draft Resolution A, making certain findings, certifying the results of
an election and adding property to Community Facilities District No. 2005-
1 (Public Services), Annexation No. 2 (Morro Road); and,
3. Adopt DraftResolution B, making certain findings, certifying the results of
an election and adding property to Community Facilities District No. 2005-
1 (Public Services), Annexation No. 3 (Tecorida); and,
4. Adopt Draft Resolution C, making certain findings, certifying the results of
an election and adding property to Community Facilities District No. 2005-
1 (Public Services), Annexation No. 4 (West Front); and,
5. Adopt Draft Resolution D, making certain findings, certifying the results of
an election and adding property to Community Facilities District No. 2005-
1 (Public Services), Annexation No. 5 (Dove Creek); and,
6. Adopt Draft Resolution-E, making certain findings, certifying the results of
an election and adding property to Community Facilities District No. 2005-
1 (Public Services), Annexation No. 6 (Vintage Homes).
71
ITEM NUMBER: B-3
DATE: 06/27/06
REPORT-IN-BRIEF:
In May 2005, the City Council established Community Facilities District No. 2005-1 to
finance a portion of the cost associated with providing new services that are in addition
to those currently provided as a result of new residential development within the City.
The Government Code of the State of California, commencing with Section 53311,
allows the formation of such districts to provide a financial mechanism to pay for such
new services through the levy of a Special Tax against the properties that will receive
the new services.
On January 24, 2006, the Council held a public hearing regarding the future annexation
area and the proposed rate and method of apportionment of the special tax to be levied
within the future annexation area. Council then adopted Resolution No. 2006-013,
authorizing the future annexation of territory to Community Facilities District No.-2005-1.
The adoption of Resolution No.2006-013 on January 24, 2006, created a more efficient
annexation process. Future projects requiring annexation into this CFD will require only
one Council Meeting to hold a Public Hearing to formally annex the development into
the CFD.
The Resolutions before Council are the final necessary steps for the establishment of
Annexation Nos. 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 (the Annexations) for CFD 2005-1 to fund new police,
fire, and park services for the developments known as Morro Development, Tecorida
Condos, West Front Village, Dove Creek, and Vintage Homes, respectively. The CFD
will assess the designated residential developments an annual charge of$440 per year
($36 per month), 'which is subject to an annual escalator, to pay for the service
expansion needed to serve these additional residential units. The money collected can
only be used to fund new public services authorized to be funded by the Mello-Roos Act
and identified within the Rate and Method of Apportionment, and cannot be used to
support existing services.
DISCUSSION:
Background: The City of Atascadero has established a policy as part of the General
Plan that recognizes that determining the best use of land based solely on revenues to
the City is not good public policy. The City developed its General Plan using good
public land use policy and did not base land use policies simply to generate additional
sales tax. Policies of this type promote the development of quality housing projects but
they come at a cost. That cost is that new residential development must pay for new
services that are in addition to those currently provided. Part of the General Plan
requires:
"All residential projects of 100 or more dwelling units shall be required to prepare
a fiscal impact report prior to any discretionary approvals. The fiscal impact
72
ITEM NUMBER: B -3
DATE: 06/27/06
report shall analyze all revenues, service costs and facilities costs associated
with a project. The City shall require the establishment of facilities districts
and/or maintenance districts to cover revenue shortfalls on a project.
In August 2003, the fiscal impact reports for Dove Creek and Woodridge became
available. At the same time the City purchased a program (Taussig Study)to determine
the fiscal impact of projects. As the magnitude of the "loss" on each residential unit
became known, Council began to condition other residential development projects as
well. Finally, the Council mandated that all residential development coming before
them (regardless of size) be annexed into the Community Facilities District.
Analysis: Tonight before Council are five Resolutions. After the close of each separate
Annexation's Public Hearing, the City Council may adopt the respective Resolution,
which officially establishes the annexation of territory to Community Facilities District
2005-1, submits the levy of tax to the qualified electors, and if approved authorizes the
levy of special taxes within such Annexation.
After these Resolutions have been adopted, the last step in the process is to record an
amended notice of special tax lien with the San Luis Obispo County Recorder.
Conclusion: The developments proposed for annexation into the CFD were all
conditioned to be fiscally neutral through annexation into the CFD. If the
establishments of the Annexations for CFD 2005-1 are not approved, the project(s)
would not be able to meet their conditions of approval.
ALTERNATIVES:
Require the developer to meet the fiscal neutrality condition of approval through some
other mechanism.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Draft Resolution A, making certain findings, certifying the results of an election
and adding property to Community Facilities District No. 2005-1 (Public
Services), Annexation No.2 (Morro Road)
2. Draft Resolution B, making certain findings, certifying the results of an election
and adding property to Community Facilities District No. 2005-1 (Public
Services), Annexation No. 3 (Tecorida)
3. Draft Resolution C, making certain findings, certifying the results of an election
and adding property to Community Facilities District No. 2005-1 (Public
Services), Annexation No. 4 (West Front)
4. Draft Resolution D, making certain findings, certifying the results of an election
and adding property to Community Facilities District No. 2005-1 (Public
Services), Annexation No. 5 (Dove Creek)
73
ITEM NUMBER: B -3
DATE: 06/27/06
5. Draft Resolution E, making certain findings, certifying the results of an election
and adding property to Community Facilities District No. 2005-1 (Public
Services), Annexation No. 6 (Vintage Homes)
74
DRAFT RESOLUTION A
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA, MAKING CERTAIN
FINDINGS, CERTIFYING THE RESULTS OF AN ELECTION
AND ADDING PROPERTY TO COMMUNITY FACILITIES
DISTRICT NO. 2005-1 (PUBLIC SERVICES),
ANNEXATION NO. 2
(Morro Road/ Gearhart)
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Atascadero (the "City Council"), has
previously formed a Community Facilities District pursuant to the provisions of the "Mello-Roos
Community Facilities Act of 1982 being Chapter 2.5, Part 1, Division 2, Title 5 of the
Government Code of the State of California, as amended, said Article 3.5 thereof. The existing
Community Facilities District being designated as Community Facilities District No. 2005-1
(Public Services) (the "District"); and,
WHEREAS,the City Council has also established a procedure to allow and
provide for future annexations to the District and the territory proposed to be so annexed in the
future was designated as Community Facilities District No. 2005-1 (Public Services), Future
Annexation Area(the "Future Annexation Area"); and
WHEREAS, at this time the unanimous consent to the annexation of certain
territory within the Future Annexation Area to the District has been received from the property
owner or owners of such territory, and such territory has been designated as Annexation No. 2
("Annexed Area No. 2"); and
WHEREAS, there has not been at least twelve (12) registered voters residing
within the territory of Annexed Area No. 2 for each of the ninety (90) days preceding June 27,
2006, therefore, pursuant to the Act the qualified electors of Annexed Area No. 2 shall be the
"landowners" of Annexed Area No. 2 as such term is defined in Government Code Section
53317(f) and each such landowner who is the owner of record as of June 27, 2006 or the
authorized representative thereof, shall have one vote for each acre or portion of an acre of land
that she or he owns within Annexed Area No. 2; and
WHEREAS,the time limit specified by the Act for conducting an election to
submit the levy of the special taxes on the property within Annexed Area No. 2 to the qualified
electors of Annexed Area No. 2 and the requirements for impartial analysis and ballot arguments
have been waived with the unanimous consent of the qualified electors of Annexed Area No. 2;
and
WHEREAS,the City Clerk of the City of Atascadero has caused ballots to be
distributed to the qualified electors of Annexed Area No. 2, has received and canvassed such
ballots and made a report to the City Council regarding the results of such canvas, a copy of
which is attached as "Exhibit A" hereto and incorporated herein by this reference; and
75
WHEREAS, at this time the measure voted upon and such measure did receive
the favorable 2/3's vote of the qualified electors, and the City Council desires to declare the
results of the election; and
WHEREAS, a map showing Annexed Area No. 2 and designated as Annexation
No. 2 (the "Annexation Map"), a copy of which is attached as "Exhibit B" hereto and
incorporated herein by this reference, and a list of Assessor Parcel Numbers and landowners, a
copy of which is attached as "Exhibit C" hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, has
been submitted to the City Council.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, determined and ordered by the City
Council of the City of Atascadero as follows:
Section 1. Recitals. The above recitals are all true and correct.
Section 2. Findings. This City Council does hereby determine as follows:
A. The unanimous consent to the annexation of Annexed Area No. 2
to the District has been given by all of the owners of Annexed Area No. 2 and such
consent shall be kept on file in the Office of the City Clerk.
B. There has not been at least twelve (12) registered voters residing
within the territory of Annexed Area No. 2 for each of the ninety (90) days preceding
June 27, 2006 therefore, pursuant to the Act the qualified electors of Annexed Area No. 2
shall be the "landowners" of such Annexed, Area No. 2 as such term is defined in
Government Code Section 53317(f).
C. The qualified electors of Annexed Area No. 2 have unanimously
voted in favor of the levy of special taxes within Annexed Area No. 2 upon its annexation
to the District.
Section 3. Annexed Area No. 2. The boundaries and parcels of territory within Annexed
Area No. 2 and on which special taxes will be levied in order to pay for the costs and expenses of
authorized public services are shown on the Annexation Map as submitted to and hereby
approved by this City Council.
Section 4. Declaration Of Annexation. The City Council does hereby determine and declare
that Annexed Area No. 2 is now added to and becomes a part of the District. The City Council,
acting as the City Council of the District, is hereby empowered to levy the authorized special tax
within Annexed Area No. 2.
Section 5. Notice. Immediately upon adoption of this Resolution, notice shall be given as
follows:
A. A copy of the annexation map as approved shall be filed in the
Office of the County Recorder no later than fifteen (15) days after the date of adoption of
this Resolution.
76
B. An Amendment to the Notice of Special Tax Lien (Notice of
Annexation) shall be recorded in the Office of the County Recorder no later than fifteen
(15) days after the date of adoption of this Resolution.
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:
CITY OF ATASCADERO
By:
Tom O'Malley,Mayor
ATTEST:
Marcia McClure Torgerson,C.M.C.,
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Patrick L.Enright, City Attorney
77
EXHIBIT A
Certificate of Election Official and Statement of Votes Cast
78
Certificate of Election Official and Statement of Votes Cast
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO) ss.
CITY OF ATASCADERO )
The undersigned, Election Council of the City of Atascadero, County of San Luis
Obispo, State of California, does hereby certify that pursuant to the provisions of
Section 53326 of the Government Code and Division 12, commencing with Section
17000 of the Elections Code of the State of California, I did canvass the returns of the
votes cast at the
CITY OF ATASCADERO
COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2005-1
(PUBLIC SERVICES)
ANNEXATION NO. 2
SPECIAL ELECTION
in the City of Atascadero, held on June 27, 2006.
I further certify that this Statement of Votes Cast shows the whole number of votes cast
in the area proposed to be annexed to Community Facilities District No. 2005-1 (Public
Services) of the City of Atascadero for or against the Measure are full, true and correct.
VOTES CAST ON PROPOSITION A: YES
NO
VOTES CAST ON PROPOSITION B: YES
NO
WITNESS my hand this day of , 2006
City Clerk
City of Atascadero
79
EXHIBIT B
Annexation Map
80
W
yy. tb _ so
ZZ m
O 8 C �p� LL Y� OOW 0
ao3�� F3ojp` oZ� �tC m U
p Z
z
18 LL
r 0 3iN amgQ g w
Ln w& �OZ$mr�u �Iwz $
O � � MII, z
z , ,fi g z i N� J
U
O M J
YV LU
/ a
N vS U)
K
0 m
ZW
a
Z I- /V u
Off -, W
1= UW �m
ll. 0 aZ
f
Z � w
Q z /
O
d O m
2�
< Oa
� w
oQ
ZU
0 <
LL
0
_ 4T
U
CO
3^b It�'a2111� e
a�
w
8 e
�Gm�
81
EXHIBIT C
List of Properties to be Annexed
82
List of Properties to be Annexed
APN s Landowner(s)
031-242-012 MORRO ROAD HOMES, LLC
83
DRAFT RESOLUTION B
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA, MAKING CERTAIN
FINDINGS, CERTIFYING THE RESULTS OF AN ELECTION
AND ADDING PROPERTY TO COMMUNITY FACILITIES
DISTRICT NO. 2005-1 (PUBLIC SERVICES),
ANNEXATION NO. 3
(Tecorida / Gearhart)
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Atascadero (the "City Council"), has
previously formed a Community Facilities District pursuant to the provisions of the"Mello-Roos
Community Facilities Act of 1982", being Chapter 2.5, Part 1, Division 2, Title 5 of the
Government Code of the State of California, as amended, said Article 3.5 thereof. The existing
Community Facilities District being designated as Community Facilities District No. 2005-1
(Public Services) (the "District"); and,
WHEREAS,the City Council has also established a procedure to allow and
provide for future annexations to the District and the territory proposed to be so annexed in the
future was designated as Community Facilities District No. 2005-1 (Public Services), Future
Annexation Area(the "Future Annexation Area"); and
WHEREAS, at this time the unanimous consent to the annexation of certain
territory within the Future Annexation Area to the District has been received from the property
owner or owners of such territory, and such territory has been designated as Annexation No. 3
("Annexed Area No. 3"); and
WHEREAS, there has not been at least twelve (12) registered voters residing
within the territory of Annexed Area No. 3 for each of the ninety (90) days preceding June 27,
2006, therefore, pursuant to the Act the qualified electors of Annexed Area No. 3 shall be the
"landowners" of Annexed Area No. 3 as such term is defined in Government Code Section
53317(f) and each such landowner who is the owner of record as of June 27, 2006 or the
authorized representative thereof, shall have one vote for each acre or portion of an acre of land
that she or he owns within Annexed Area No. 3; and
WHEREAS, the time limit specified by the Act for conducting an election to
submit the levy of the special taxes on the property within Annexed Area No. 3 to the qualified
electors of Annexed Area No. 3 and the requirements for impartial analysis and ballot arguments
have been waived with the unanimous consent of the qualified electors of Annexed Area No. 3;
and
WHEREAS, the City Clerk of the City of Atascadero has caused ballots to be
distributed to the qualified electors of Annexed Area No. 3, has received and canvassed such
ballots and made a report to the City Council regarding the results of such canvas, a copy of
which is attached as "Exhibit A"hereto and incorporated herein by this reference; and
85
WHEREAS, at this time the measure voted upon and such measure did receive
the favorable 2/3's vote of the qualified electors, and the City Council desires to declare the
results of the election; and
WHEREAS, a map showing Annexed Area No. 3 and designated as Annexation
No. 3 (the "Annexation Map"), a copy of which is attached as "Exhibit B" hereto and
incorporated herein by this reference, and a list of Assessor Parcel Numbers and landowners, a
copy of which is attached as "Exhibit C" hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, has
been submitted to the City Council.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, determined and ordered by the City
Council of the City of Atascadero as follows:
Section 1. Recitals. The above recitals are all true and correct.
Section 2. Findings. This City Council does hereby determine as follows:
A. The unanimous consent to the annexation of Annexed Area No. 3
to the District has been given by all of the owners of Annexed Area No. 3 and such
consent shall be kept on file in the Office of the City Clerk.
B. There has not been at least twelve (12) registered voters residing
within the territory of Annexed Area No. 3 for each of the ninety (90) days preceding
June 27, 2006 therefore, pursuant to the Act the qualified electors of Annexed Area No. 3
shall be the "landowners" of such Annexed Area No. 3 as such term is defined in
Government Code Section 53317(f).
C. The qualified electors of Annexed Area No. 3 have unanimously
voted in favor of the levy of special taxes within Annexed Area No. 3 upon its annexation
to the District.
Section 3. Annexed Area No. 3. The boundaries and parcels of territory within Annexed
Area No. 3 and on which special taxes will be levied in order to pay for the costs and expenses of
authorized public services are shown on the Annexation Map as submitted to and hereby
approved by this City Council.
Section 4. Declaration Of Annexation. The City Council does hereby determine and declare
that Annexed Area No. 3 is now added to and becomes a part of the District. The City Council,
acting as the City Council of the District, is hereby empowered to levy the authorized special tax
within Annexed Area No. 3.
Section 5. Notice. Immediately upon adoption of this Resolution, notice shall be given as
follows:
A. A copy of the annexation map as approved shall be filed in the
Office of the County Recorder no later than fifteen (15) days after the date of adoption of
this Resolution.
86
B. An Amendment to the Notice of Special Tax Lien (Notice of
Annexation) shall be recorded in the Office of the County Recorder no later than fifteen
(15) days after the date of adoption of this Resolution.
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:
CITY OF ATASCADERO
By:
Tom O'Malley,Mayor
ATTEST:
Marcia McClure Torgerson, C.M.C.,
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Patrick L.Enright,City Attorney
87
EXHIBIT A
Certificate of Election Official and Statement of Votes Cast
88
Certificate of Election Official and Statement of Votes Cast
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO) ss.
CITY OF ATASCADERO )
The undersigned, Election Council of the City of Atascadero, County of San Luis
Obispo, State of California, does hereby certify that pursuant to the provisions of
Section 53326 of the Government Code and Division 12, commencing with Section
17000 of the Elections Code of the State of California, I did canvass the returns of the
votes cast at the
CITY OF ATASCADERO
COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2005-1
(PUBLIC SERVICES)
ANNEXATION NO. 3
SPECIAL ELECTION
in the City of Atascadero, held on June 27, 2006.
I further certify that this Statement of Votes Cast shows the whole number of votes cast
in the area proposed to be annexed to Community Facilities District No. 2005-1 (Public
Services) of the City of Atascadero for or against the Measure are full, true and correct.
VOTES CAST ON PROPOSITION A: YES
NO
VOTES CAST ON PROPOSITION B: YES
NO
WITNESS my hand this day of , 2006
City Clerk
City of Atascadero
89
EXHIBIT B
Annexation Map
90
S2 ¢ w
a
�- m
� �LL10 o m V
8
m I �� �m Z
a
cc
g Hun
� a
8
$ _ X30 € o Z
WN IOU 0
ioaz
n P
N
U
O �, s
W
M
M co o 9999
Q NZ
W J N N N N
A' yW0000
O (n ti Q0 ".o
Z w a
IL
z f'-
O —� a� z
H U LU
MW
w i. LL,-NMa
LL U U a'
`J z
w >
z W
Z cwo
D a2
U- U
s
�. O m `o v�
LU
0 Q o
z U z s
=OQ Q
m Q L c6 —
tL w --iA�pA A
O NP
U
CO
CO
c
91
EXHIBIT C
List of Properties to be Annexed
92
List of Properties to be Annexed
APN(s) Landowner(s)
030-213-011 GEARHART KELLY V & TAMARA
030-213-012 GEARHART KELLY V & TAMARA
030-213-013 GEARHART KELLY V & TAMARA
030-213-014 GEARHART KELLY V & TAMARA
93
DRAFT RESOLUTION C
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA, MAKING CERTAIN
FINDINGS, CERTIFYING THE RESULTS OF AN ELECTION
AND ADDING PROPERTY TO COMMUNITY FACILITIES
DISTRICT NO. 2005-1 (PUBLIC SERVICES),
ANNEXATION NO. 4
(West Front /West Front Village, LLC)
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Atascadero (the "City Council"), has
previously formed a Community Facilities District pursuant to the provisions of the"Mello-Roos
Community Facilities Act of 1982", being Chapter 2.5, Part 1, Division 2, Title 5 of the
Government Code of the State of California, as amended, said Article 3.5 thereof. The existing
Community Facilities District beingdesignated as Community Facilities District No. 2005-1
(Public Services) (the"District"); and,
WHEREAS,the City Council has also established a procedure to allow and
provide for future annexations to the District and the territory proposed to be so annexed in the
future was designated as Community Facilities District No. 2005-1 (Public Services), Future
Annexation Area(the "Future Annexation Area"); and
WHEREAS,at this time the unanimous consent to the annexation of certain
territory within the Future Annexation Area to the District has been received from the property
owner or owners of such territory, and such territory has been designated as Annexation No. 4
("Annexed Area No. 4"); and
WHEREAS,there has not been at least twelve (12) registered voters.residing
within the territory of Annexed Area No. 4 for each of the ninety (90) days preceding June 27,
2006, therefore, pursuant to the Act the qualified electors of Annexed Area No. 4 shall be the
"landowners" of Annexed Area No. 4 as such term is defined in Government Code Section
53317(f) and each such landowner who is the owner of record as of June 27, 2006 or the
authorized representative thereof, shall have one vote for each acre or portion of an acre of land
that she or he owns within Annexed Area No. 4; and
WHEREAS, the time limit specified by the Act for conducting an election to
submit the levy of the special taxes on the property within Annexed Area No. 4 to the qualified
electors of Annexed Area No. 4 and the requirements for impartial analysis and ballot arguments
have been waived with the unanimous consent of the qualified electors of Annexed Area No. 4;
and
WHEREAS, the City Clerk of the City of Atascadero has caused ballots to be
distributed to the qualified electors of Annexed Area No. 4, has received and canvassed such
ballots and made a report to the City Council regarding the results of such canvas,a copy of
which is attached as "Exhibit A"hereto and incorporated herein by this reference; and
95
WHEREAS, at this time the measure voted upon and such measure did receive
the favorable 2/3's vote of the qualified electors, and the City Council desires to declare the
results of the election; and
WHEREAS, a map showing Annexed Area No. 4 and designated as Annexation
No. 4 (the "Annexation Map"), a copy of which is attached as "Exhibit B" hereto and
incorporated herein by this reference, and a list of Assessor Parcel Numbers and landowners, a
copy of which is attached as "Exhibit C" hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, has
been submitted to the City Council.
NOW, THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED, determined and ordered by the City
Council of the City of Atascadero as follows:
Section 1. Recitals. The above recitals are all true and correct.
Section 2. Findings. This City Council does hereby determine as follows:
A. The unanimous consent to the annexation of Annexed Area No. 4
to the District has been given by all of the owners of Annexed Area No. 4 and such
consent shall be kept on file in the Office of the City Clerk.
B. There has not been at least twelve (12) registered voters residing
within the territory of Annexed Area No. 4 for each of the ninety (90) days preceding
June 27, 2006 therefore, pursuant to the Act the qualified electors of Annexed Area No. 4
shall be the "landowners" of such Annexed Area No. 4 as such term is defined in
Government Code Section 53317(f).
C. The qualified electors of Annexed Area No. 4 have unanimously
voted in favor of the levy of special taxes within Annexed Area No. 4 upon its annexation
to the District.
Section 3. Annexed Area No. 4. The boundaries and parcels of territory within Annexed
Area No. 4 and on which special taxes will be levied in order to pay for the costs and expenses of
authorized public services are shown on the Annexation Map as submitted to and hereby
approved by this City Council.
Section 4. Declaration Of Annexation. The City Council does hereby determine and declare
that Annexed Area No. 4 is now added to and becomes a part of the District. The City Council,
acting as the City Council of the District, is hereby empowered to levy the authorized special tax
within Annexed Area No. 4.
Section 5. Notice. Immediately upon adoption of this Resolution, notice shall be given as
follows:
A. A copy of the annexation map as approved shall be filed in the
Office of the County Recorder no later than fifteen (15) days after the date of adoption of
this Resolution.
96
B. An Amendment to the Notice of Special Tax Lien (Notice of
Annexation) shall be recorded in the Office of the County Recorder no later than fifteen
(15) days after the date of adoption of this Resolution.
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:
CITY OF ATASCADERO
By:
Tom O'Malley,Mayor
ATTEST:
Marcia McClure Torgerson, C.M.C.,
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Patrick L.Enright, City Attorney
97
EXHIBIT A
Certificate of Election Official and Statement of Votes Cast
98
Certificate of Election Official and Statement of Votes Cast
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO) ss.
CITY OF ATASCADERO )
The undersigned, Election Council of the City of Atascadero, County of San Luis
Obispo, State of California, does hereby certify that pursuant to the provisions of
Section 53326 of the Government Code and Division 12, commencing with Section
17000 of the Elections Code of the State of California, I did canvass the returns of the
votes cast at the
CITY OF ATASCADERO
COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2005-1
(PUBLIC SERVICES)
ANNEXATION NO. 4
SPECIAL ELECTION
in the City of Atascadero, held on June 27, 2006.
I further certify that this Statement of Votes Cast shows the whole number of votes cast
in the area proposed to be annexed to Community Facilities District No. 2005-1 (Public
Services) of the City,of Atascadero for or against the Measure are full, true and correct.
VOTES CAST ON PROPOSITION A: YES
NO
VOTES CAST ON PROPOSITION B: YES
NO
WITNESS my hand this day of , 2006
City Clerk
City of Atascadero
99
EXHIBIT B
Annexation Map
1-00
ddS mtl
�^$ � ��� �° 0 LWI.
LLJ
LLJ
�$
g � W
Y ON W
S.
F-�I o� S � $ 8 8z Q
LL
LU
N ffi 1 f5 I $c3 88 -j Ha w �Qy811�d wgw g
r
U
O �
F-
0 Cn
zW
z �
Q _I
I-- U W
W > 000
ZO yzM�m
Q z r� W Ed
a� 000
a
O J U
a.
It w
Q O LL LL. LL.m r N M
O LU
O � Z
r a
W F-
Z (�
O
Z U QLL
=) m
O ¢ _
Q _
O
RD
QOR�OIA —�`` .co �
U ti
101
EXHIBIT C
List of Properties to be Annexed
102
List of Properties to be Annexed
APN s Landowner(s)
056-131-017 WEST FRONT VILLAGE, LLC
056-131-018 WEST FRONT VILLAGE, LLC
056-131-019 WEST FRONT VILLAGE, LLC
103
DRAFT RESOLUTION D
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA, MAKING CERTAIN
FINDINGS, CERTIFYING THE RESULTS OF AN ELECTION
AND ADDING PROPERTY TO COMMUNITY FACILITIES
DISTRICT NO. 2005-1 (PUBLIC SERVICES),
ANNEXATION NO. 5 (Dove Creek/ Centex)
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Atascadero (the "City Council"), has
previously formed a Community Facilities District pursuant to the provisions of the "Mello-Roos
Community Facilities Act of 1982", being Chapter 2.5, Part 1, Division 2, Title 5 of the
Government Code of the State of California, as amended, said Article 3.5 thereof. The existing
Community Facilities District being designated as Community Facilities District No. 2005-1
(Public Services) (the ."District"); and,
WHEREAS,the City Council has also established a procedure to allow and
provide for future annexations to the District and the territory proposed to be so annexed in the
future was designated as Community Facilities District No. 2005-1 (Public Services), Future
Annexation Area(the "Future Annexation Area"); and
WHEREAS, at this time the unanimous consent to the annexation of certain
-territory within the Future Annexation Area to the District has been received from the property
owner or owners of such territory, and such territory has been designated as Annexation No. 5
("Annexed Area No. 5"); and
WHEREAS,.there has not been at least twelve (12) registered voters residing
within the territory of Annexed Area No. 5 for each of the ninety (90) days preceding June 27,
2006, therefore, pursuant to the Act the qualified electors of Annexed Area No. 5 shall be the
"landowners" of Annexed Area No. 5 as such term is defined in Government Code Section
53317(f) and each such landowner who is the owner of record as of June 27, 2006 or the
authorized representative thereof, shall have one vote for each acre or portion of an acre of land
that she or he owns within Annexed Area No. 5; and
WHEREAS, the time limit specified by the Act for conducting an election to
submit the levy of the special taxes on the property within Annexed Area No. 5 to the qualified
electors of Annexed Area No. 5 and the requirements for impartial analysis and ballot arguments
have been waived with the unanimous consent of the qualified electors of Annexed Area No. 5;
and
WHEREAS, the City Clerk of the City of Atascadero has caused ballots to be
distributed to the qualified electors of Annexed Area No. 5, has received and canvassed such
ballots and made a report to the City Council regarding the results of such canvas, a copy of
which is attached as "Exhibit A hereto and incorporated herein by this reference; and
105
WHEREAS, at this time the measure voted upon and such measure did receive
the favorable 2/3's vote of the qualified electors, and the City Council desires to declare the
results of the election; and
WHEREAS,a map showing Annexed Area No. 5 and designated as Annexation
No. 5 (the "Annexation Map"), a copy of which is attached as "Exhibit B" hereto and
incorporated herein by this reference, and a list of Assessor Parcel Numbers and landowners, a
copy of which is attached as "Exhibit C" hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, has
been submitted to the City Council.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, determined and ordered by the City
Council of the City of Atascadero as follows:
Section 1. Recitals. The above recitals are all true and correct.
Section 2. Findings. This City Council does hereby determine as follows:
A. The unanimous consent to the annexation of Annexed Area No. 5
to the District has been given by all of the owners of Annexed Area No. 5 and such
consent shall be kept on file in the Office of the City Clerk.
B. There has not been at least twelve (12) registered voters residing
within the territory of Annexed Area No. 5 for each of the ninety (90) days preceding
June 27, 2006 therefore,pursuant to the Act the qualified electors of Annexed Area No. 5
shall be the "landowners" of such Annexed Area No. 5 as such term is defined in
Government Code Section 53317(f).
C. The qualified electors of Annexed Area No. 5 have unanimously
voted in favor of the levy of special taxes within Annexed Area No. 5 upon its annexation
to the District.
Section 3. Annexed Area No. 5. The boundaries and parcels of territory within Annexed
Area No. 5 and on which special taxes will be levied in order to pay for the costs and expenses of
authorized public services are shown on the Annexation Map as submitted to and hereby
approved by this City Council.
Section 4. Declaration Of Annexation. The City Council does hereby determine and declare
that Annexed Area No. 5 is now added to and becomes a part of the District. The City Council,
acting as the City Council of the District, is hereby empowered to levy the authorized special tax
within Annexed Area No. 5.
Section 5. Notice. Immediately upon adoption of this Resolution, notice shall be given as
follows:
A. A copy of the annexation map as approved shall be filed in the
Office of the County Recorder no later than fifteen (15) days after the date of adoption of
this Resolution.
106
L
B. An Amendment to the Notice of Special Tax Lien (Notice of
Annexation) shall be recorded in the Office of the County Recorder no later than fifteen
(15) days after the date of adoption of this Resolution.
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:
CITY OF ATASCADERO
By:
Tom O'Malley,Mayor
ATTEST:
Marcia McClure Torgerson, C.M.C.,
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Patrick L. Enright, City Attorney
107
EXHIBIT A
Certificate of Election Official and Statement of Votes Cast
108
Certificate of Election Official and Statement of Votes Cast
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO) ss.
CITY OF ATASCADERO )
The undersigned, Election Council of the City of Atascadero, County of San Luis
Obispo, State of California, does hereby certify that pursuant to the provisions of
Section 53326 of the Government Code and Division 12, commencing with Section
17000 of the Elections Code of the State of California, I did canvass the returns of the
votes cast at the
CITY OF ATASCADERO
COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2005-1
(PUBLIC SERVICES)
ANNEXATION NO. 5
SPECIAL ELECTION
in the City of Atascadero, held on June 27, 2006.
I further certify that this Statement of Votes Cast shows the whole number of votes cast
in the area proposed to be annexed to Community Facilities District No. 2005-1 (Public
Services) of the City of Atascadero for or against the Measure are full, true and correct.
VOTES CAST ON PROPOSITION A: YES
NO
VOTES CAST ON PROPOSITION B: YES
NO
WITNESS my hand this day of , 2006
City Clerk
City of Atascadero
109
EXHIBIT B
Annexation Map
110
N � W
iq Nj witrt r Z W
0
Mug! ��� ��g �o � �g U.
t Hip
W SZW j� O� `Y
Fj.��Jlll � O
LL 3 m- .
mit
LU
oll
momo�m FO
H
U
O s
tc) Cf) o
O m ti 'li
Z W
Z
Q J A
� QW
"_ �
QZC/) ^o
LL C) 0 0
0 Zi x
QOU �
O 0 N O
ui
9 g q 99999999
Q Q 266 6
0� "� ,62
Q 0 �• W 200000000
W
� QLLI
m Q W
LL d Z
Oa
O V LJ
�
U O
LZ
O _
(� �4
EXHIBIT C
List of Properties to be Annexed
112
List of Properties to be Annexed
APN s Landowner(s)
045-331-002 CENTEX HOMES
045-331-004 CENTEX HOMES
045-342-001 CENTEX HOMES
045-342-002 CENTEX HOMES
045-342-003 CENTEX HOMES
045-342-004 CENTEX HOMES
045-342-005 CENTEX HOMES
045-342-013 CENTEX HOMES
045-352-005 CENTEX HOMES
045-381-010 CENTEX HOMES
113
DRAFT RESOLUTION E
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA, MAKING CERTAIN
FINDINGS, CERTIFYING THE RESULTS OF AN ELECTION
AND ADDING PROPERTY TO COMMUNITY FACILITIES
DISTRICT NO. 2005-1 (PUBLIC SERVICES),
ANNEXATION NO. 6
(Vintage Homes / Phillips)
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Atascadero (the "City Council"), has
previously formed a Community Facilities District pursuant to the provisions of the "Mello-Roos
Community Facilities Act of 1982", being Chapter 2.5, Part 1, Division 2, Title 5 of the
Government Code of the State of California, as amended, said Article 3.5 thereof. The existing
Community Facilities District being designated as Community Facilities District No. 2005-1
(Public Services) (the "District"); and,
WHEREAS,the City Council has also established a procedure to allow and
provide for future annexations to the District and the territory proposed to be so annexed in the
future was designated as Community Facilities District No. 2005-1 (Public Services), Future
Annexation Area(the "Future Annexation Area"); and
WHEREAS, at this time the unanimous consent to the annexation of certain
territory within the Future Annexation Area to the District has been received from the property
owner or owners of such territory, and such territory has been designated as Annexation No. 6
("Annexed Area No. 6"); and
WHEREAS, there has not been at least twelve (12) registered voters residing
within the territory of Annexed Area No. 6 for each of the ninety (90) days preceding June 27,
2006, therefore, pursuant to the Act the qualified electors of Annexed Area No. 6 shall be the
"landowners" of Annexed Area No. 6 as such term is defined in Government Code Section
53317(f) and each such landowner who is the owner of record as of June .27, 2006 or the
authorized representative thereof, shall have one vote for each acre or portion of an acre of land
that she or he owns within Annexed Area No. 6; and
WHEREAS, the time limit specified by the Act for conducting an election to
submit the levy of the special taxes on the property within Annexed Area No. 6 to the qualified
electors of Annexed Area No. 6 and the requirements for impartial analysis and ballot arguments
have been waived with the unanimous consent of the qualified electors of Annexed Area No. 6;
and
WHEREAS, the City Clerk of the City of Atascadero has caused ballots to be
distributed to the qualified electors of Annexed Area No. 6, has received and canvassed such
ballots and made a report to the City Council regarding the results of such canvas, a copy of
which is attached as "Exhibit A"hereto and incorporated herein by this reference; and
115
WHEREAS, at this time the measure voted upon and such measure did receive
the favorable 2/3's vote of the qualified electors, and the City Council desires to declare the
results of the election; and
WHEREAS, a map showing Annexed Area No. 6 and designated as Annexation
No. 6 (the "Annexation Map"), a copy of which is attached as "Exhibit B" hereto and
incorporated herein by this reference, and a list of Assessor Parcel Numbers and landowners, a
copy of which is attached as `Exhibit C" hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, has
been submitted to the City Council.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, determined and ordered by the City
Council of the City of Atascadero as follows:
Section 1. Recitals. The above recitals are all true and correct.
Section 2. Findings. This City Council does hereby determine as follows:
A. The unanimous consent to the annexation of Annexed Area No. 6
to the District has been given by all of the owners of Annexed Area No. 6 and such
consent shall be kept on file in the Office of the City Clerk.
B. There has not been at least twelve (12) registered voters residing
within the territory of Annexed Area No. 6 for each of the ninety (90) days preceding
June 27, 2006 therefore, pursuant to the Act the qualified electors of Annexed Area No. 6
shall be the "landowners" of such Annexed Area No. 6 as such term is defined in
Government Code Section 53317(f).
C. The qualified electors of Annexed Area No. 6 have unanimously
voted in favor of the levy of special taxes within Annexed Area No. 6 upon its annexation
to the District.
Section 3. Annexed Area No. 6. The boundaries and parcels of territory within Annexed
Area No. 6 and on which special taxes will be levied in order to pay for the costs and expenses of
authorized public services are shown on the Annexation Map as submitted to and hereby
approved by this City Council.
Section 4. Declaration Of Annexation. The City Council does hereby determine and declare
that Annexed Area No. 6 is now added to and becomes a part of the District.The City Council,
acting as the City Council of the District, is hereby empowered to levy the authorized special tax
within Annexed Area No. 6.
Section 5. Notice. Immediately upon adoption of this Resolution, notice shall be given as
follows:
A. A copy of the annexation map as approved shall be filed in the
Office of the County Recorder no later than fifteen (15) days after the date of adoption of
this Resolution.
116
B. An Amendment to the Notice of Special Tax Lien (Notice of
Annexation) shall be recorded in the Office of the County Recorder no later than fifteen
(15) days after the date of adoption of this Resolution.
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:
CITY OF ATASCADERO
By:
Tom O'Malley,Mayor
ATTEST:
Marcia McClure Torgerson, C.M.C.,
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Patrick L.Enright,City Attorney
117
EXHIBIT A
Certificate of Election Official and Statement of Votes Cast
118
Certificate of Election Official and Statement of Votes Cast
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO) ss.
CITY OF ATASCADERO )
The undersigned, Election Council of the City of Atascadero, County of San Luis
Obispo, State of California, does hereby certify that pursuant to the provisions of
Section 53326 of the Government Code and Division 12, commencing with Section
17000 of the Elections Code of the State of California, I did canvass the returns of the
votes cast at the
CITY OF ATASCADERO
COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2005-1
(PUBLIC SERVICES)
ANNEXATION NO. 6
SPECIAL ELECTION
in the City of Atascadero, held on June 27, 2006.
I further certify that this Statement of Votes Cast shows the whole number of votes cast
in the area proposed to be annexed to Community Facilities District No. 2005-1 (Public
Services) of the City of Atascadero for or against the Measure are full, true and correct.
VOTES CAST ON PROPOSITION A: YES
NO
VOTES CAST ON PROPOSITION B: YES
NO
WITNESS my hand this day of , 2006
City Clerk
City of Atascadero
119
EXHIBIT B
Annexation Map
120
N W
Z
LLI
� � � aww0Zd 1 00O LL
to w
ffi$ix! i 1 sg PES o
gg IswF-H 1 ami m Z
g tq� fyyppf��22 �
U
0w
cp
Q \ /
0
J V
Z W
Z ul)
_ w444
0
J /-% KD N N N
V L NZ
H 000 N
QLL W w
U_ N
N
Q
w> LU
Z LL Z
W
Q Z LL g N N
C z
IL
LL U 76
0 � -' od
m �
QOa o�
r�
w
o ¢
O Q Pio
mLLa
0
U
p`4
121
EXHIBIT C
List of Properties to be Annexed
122
List p of Properties to be Annexed
APN s Landowner(s)
030-281-014 PHILLIPS BILLY R II & JEANNE
030-281-015 CALIBER HOME DEVELOPMENTS INC
030-281-016 CALIBER HOME DEVELOPMENTS INC
i
123
ITEM NUMBER: C- 1
DATE: 06/27/06
iais o 1e78
Atascadero City Council
Staff Report- Administrative Services Department
City Council Strategic Initiative - Improve the City's
Financial Condition - Consideration of Sales Tax Increase
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Council:
1. Review and approve the Draft Sales Tax Ordinance language; and,
2. Submit to the voters a sales tax ballot measure and advisory
measures.
DISCUSSION:
At the May 23, 2006 City Council meeting, the Council directed staff on a 4-1 vote to
return to the Council with an ordinance placing a question on the November 2006 ballot
to raise the sales tax rate. The measure was to include a sunset provision, a citizen
oversight committee and an advisory measure.
The ordinance presented this evening is in draft form and would need to be adopted by
2/3 of the Council if a majority of Atascadero voters vote in favor of the sales tax
increase. The Ordinance includes the establishment of a five member Citizen Oversight
Committee. The committee is charged with reviewing the way the proceeds from the
tax increase are spent and must meet at least once per year.
The Council also directed staff to prepare language for an advisory measure on street
maintenance. Advisory measure language has been prepared for the ballot. The
advisory language is as follows:
ADVISORY VOTE ONLY. (#1)
If the proposed sales tax measure (Measure ) is approved, should at least 2/3
of the proceeds be used to fund road rehabilitation, construction and
maintenance with the remaining balance being allocated for fire, police and other
general governmental purposes?
125
ITEM NUMBER: C-1.
DATE: 06/27/06
The two-thirds number mentioned in the language assures that at least $1,000,000 (if at
'/2 cent rate) of the new tax money would go towards road maintenance. Staff would
like additional direction on the wording of the advisory measure.
Opinion of the Board of Equalization
Staff from the Board of Equalization, the agency that collects sales taxes in the state of
California, has issued the opinion that the "general purpose" status of the sales tax may
be in question with such a specific advisory measure and the creation of an oversight
committee. If the tax isn't "general purpose" a 2/3 vote would be required to enact it.
The agency is suggesting that the oversight committee be removed and the advisory
measure be restated to suggest that funds be used for roads without a specific amount
being stated for road improvements and police and fire services (the 2/3 language).
Such language would look like:
Advisory Measures: ALTERNATIVE LANGUAGE.
ADVISORY VOTE ONLY. (#2)
If the proposed sales tax measure (Measure ) is approved, should a portion of
the proceeds be used to fund road rehabilitation, construction and maintenance?
ADVISORY VOTE ONLY. (#3)
If the proposed sales tax measure (Measure ) is approved, should a portion of
the proceeds be used to fund improvements to police, fire and paramedic
services?
Ballot Language
The ballot language included in the sales tax ordinance is as follows:
(#1) ATASCADERO PUBLIC SERVICES PRESERVATION MEASURE. Shall the City
of Atascadero enact a one-half cent sales tax for a period of six years to help
preserve the safety and character of Atascadero, by funding essential services
such as road maintenance, firelpolice services, as well as other general
governmental purposes, with a requirement to publish an annual report on the
expenditures of the General fund, and establishing a` Citizens Oversight
Committee to review sales tax expenditures?
If the Council chooses to remove the citizen oversight committee from the ordinance,
there are still ways to ensure accountability. Language could be placed into the ballot
question that commits to an annual reporting of general fund expenses and requiring a
review on the tax every three years.
126
ITEM NUMBER: C- 1
DATE: 06/27/06
Ballot Measure: ALTERNATIVE LANGUAGE
(#2) ATA PUBLIC SERVICES PRESERVATION MEASURE. Shall the City
SCADER 0
of Atascadero enact a one-half cent sales tax for a period of six years to help
preserve the safety and character of Atascadero, by funding essential services
such as road maintenance, fire/police services, and other general governmental
purposes, requiring a published annual report on General Fund expenditures, and
requiring a public hearing by the City Council every three years to determine
whether the tax is still necessary?
Other Options To Consider
Sales Tax Rate
During the Council discussion at the May 23, 2006 meeting, the Council wanted to
continue comment on whether the tax proposal that went forward would be for 1/a cent or
1/2 cent. A 1/4 cent proposal would generate approximately $900,000 while a 1/2 cent
proposal would generate approximately $1,800,000. The amount of the increase
proposed in the ballot language is up to the City Council but it must be in 1/a cent
increments. Staff would like additional direction on the rate of the proposed sales tax.
Sunset Clause
. The Council expressed support for incorporating a sunset clause into the tax measure.
A sunset clause is language that terminates the tax after a certain date unless it is
reauthorized by the voters. The sunset language included in the tax ordinance is as
follows:
Section 3-15.17. TERMINATION DATE. The authority to levy the tax
imposed by this ordinance shall expire six years from the operative date of this
ordinance.
Staff is looking for direction as to whether the tax will sunset after four, five, or six years.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The total cost of placing the measures on the ballot is estimated to be approximately
$3,000, which would need to be appropriated from the General Fund balance.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Do not pursue an increase to the sales tax rate.
2. Ask staff for additional information.
ATTACHMENTS:
Draft Ordinance
127
ITEM NUMBER: C- 1
DATE: 06/27/06
DRAFT ORDINANCE
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO
ADDING CHAPTER 3-15 TO TITLE 3 OF THE ATASCADERO
MUNICIPAL CODERELATING TO A TRANSACTIONS AND USE TAX
TO BEADMINISTERED BY THE STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION
(SIX-YEAR SUNSET. CITIZENS OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE)
The City Council of the City of Atascadero ordains as follows:
Section 1.Authority. The City Council enacts this ordinance in accordance with the authority
granted to cities by Article XI, Section 7, of the California Constitution.
Section 2.Addition of Chapter. Chapter 3-15 is hereby added to Title 3 of the Atascadero
Municipal Code.
Section 3-15.01. TITLE, CITY AND TERRITORY. This Chapter shall be known as the
City of Atascadero Transactions and Use Tax Ordinance. The City of Atascadero hereinafter
shall be called "City." This ordinance shall be applicable in the incorporated territory of the
City.
Section 3-15.02. OPERATIVE DATE. "Operative Date" means the first day of the first
calendar quarter commencing more than 110 days after the later of the adoption of this ordinance
and chapter, the date of such adoption being as set forth below, and the approval of the voters of
the City of a measure approving the imposition of the transaction and use tax set forth herein;
provided that if the City shall not have entered into a contract with the State Board as required
herein prior to such date, the Operative date shall be the first day of the first calendar quarter
following execution of such a contract.
Section 3-15.03. PURPOSE. The purpose of this chapter is to achieve the following,
among other purposes, and directs that the provisions hereof be interpreted in order to
accomplish those purposes:
A. To impose a retail transactions and use tax in accordance with the provisions of Part
1.6 (commencing with Section 7251) of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code and
Section 7285.9 of Part-1.7 of Division 2 which authorizes the City to adopt this tax ordinance
which shall be operative if a majority of the qualified voters of the City voting on the measure
vote to approve the imposition of the tax at an election called for that purpose.
B. To adopt a retail transactions and use tax ordinance that incorporates provisions
identical to those of the Sales and Use Tax Law of the State of California insofar as those
provisions are not inconsistent with the requirements and limitations contained in Part 1.6 of
Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code.
C. To adopt a retail transactions and use tax ordinance that imposes a tax and provides a
measure therefore that can be administered and collected by the State Board of Equalization in a
manner that adapts itself as fully as practicable to, and requires the least possible deviation from,
128
ITEM NUMBER: C- 1
DATE: 06/27/06
the existing statutory and administrative procedures followed by the State Board of Equalization
in administering and collecting the California State Sales and Use Taxes.
D. To adopt a retail transactions and use tax ordinance that can be administered in a
manner that will be, to the greatest degree possible, consistent with the provisions of Part 1.6 of
Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, minimize the cost of collecting the transactions
and use taxes, and at the same time,minimize the burden of record keeping upon persons subject
to taxation under the provisions of this ordinance.
Section 3-15.04. CONTRACT WITH STATE. Prior to the operative date, the City shall
contract with the State Board of Equalization to perform all functions incident to the
administration and operation of this transactions and use tax ordinance; provided, that if the City
shall not have contracted with the State Board of Equalization prior to the operative date, it shall
nevertheless so contract and in such a case the operative date shall be the first day of the first
calendar quarter following the execution of such a contract.
Section 3-15.05. TRANSACTIONS TAX RATE. For the privilege of selling tangible
personal property at retail, a tax is hereby imposed upon all retailers in the incorporated territory
of the City at the rate of one half of one percent 0.5% of the gross receipts of any retailer from
the sale of all tangible personal property sold at retail in the City on and after the operative date
of this ordinance.
Section 3-15.06. PLACE OF SALE. For the purposes of this ordinance, all retail sales
are consummated at the place of business of the retailer unless the tangible personal property
sold is delivered by the retailer or his agent to an out-of-state destination or to a common carrier
for delivery to an out-of-state destination. The gross receipts from such sales shall include
delivery charges, when such charges are subject to the state sales and use tax, regardless of the
place to which delivery is made. In the event a retailer has no permanent place of business in the
State or has more than one place of business, the place or places at which the retail sales are
consummated shall be determined under rules and regulations to be prescribed and adopted by
the State Board of Equalization.
Section 3-.15.07. USE TAX RATE. An excise tax is hereby imposed on the storage, use
Or other consumption in the incorporated territory of the City of tangible personal property
purchased from any retailer on and after the operative date of this ordinance for storage, use or
other consumption in the City at the rate of one-half of one percent 0.5% of the sales price of
the property. The sales price shall include delivery charges when such charges are subject to
state sales or use tax regardless of the place to which delivery is made.
Section 3-15.08. ADOPTION OF PROVISIONS OF STATE LAW. Except as
otherwise provided in this ordinance and Chapter and except insofar as they are inconsistent with
the provisions of Part 1.6 of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, all of the provisions
of Part 1 (commencing with Section 6001) of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code are
hereby adopted and made a part of this ordinance and Chapter as though fully set forth herein.
Section 3-15.09. LIMITATIONS ON ADOPTION OF STATE LAW AND
COLLECTION OF USE TAXES. In adopting the provisions of Part 1 of Division 2 of the
Revenue and Taxation Code:
129
ITEM NUMBER: C- 1
DATE: 06/27/06
A. Wherever the State of California is named or referred to as the taxing agency, the
name of this City shall be substituted therefore. However, the substitution shall not be made
when:
1. The word "State" is used as a part of the title of the State Controller, State
Treasurer, State Board of Control, State Board of Equalization, State Treasury, or the
Constitution of the State of California;
2. The result of that substitution would require action to be taken by or against
this City or any agency, officer, or employee thereof rather than by or against the State Board of
Equalization, in performing the functions incident to the administration or operation of this
Ordinance.
3. In those sections, including, but not necessarily limited to sections referring to
the exterior boundaries of the State of California, where the result of the substitution would be
to:
a. Provide an exemption from this tax with respect to certain sales,
storage, use or other consumption of tangible personal property which would not otherwise be
exempt from this tax while such sales, storage, use or other consumption remain subject to tax by
the State under the provisions of Part 1 of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code,or;
b. Impose this tax with respect to certain sales, storage, use or other
consumption of tangible personal property which would not be subject to tax by the state under
the said provision of that code.
4. In Sections 6701, 6702 (except in the last sentence thereof), 6711, 6715, 6737,
6797 or 6828 of the Revenue and Taxation Code.
B. The word "City" shall be substituted for the word "State" in the phrase "retailer
engaged in business in this State" in Section 6203 and in the definition of that phrase in Section
6203.
Section 3-15.10. PERK 1T NOT REQUIRED. If a seller's permit has been issued to a
retailer under Section 6067 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, an additional transactor's permit
shall not be required by this ordinance.
Section 3-15.11. EXEMPTIONS AND EXCLUSIONS.
A. There shall be excluded from the measure of the transactions tax and the use tax the
amount of any sales tax or use tax imposed by the State of California or by any city, city and
county, or county pursuant to the Bradley-Burns Uniform Local Sales and Use Tax Law or the
amount of any state-administered transactions or use tax.
B. There are exempted from the computation of the amount of transactions tax the
gross receipts from:
1. Sales of tangible personal property, other than fuel or petroleum products, to
operators of aircraft to be used or consumed principally outside the County in which the sale is
made and directly and exclusively in the use of such aircraft as common carriers of persons or
130
ITEM NUMBER: C-1
DATE: 06/27/06
property under the authority of the laws of this State, the United States, or any foreign
government.
2. Sales ofro ert to be used outside the City which is shipped to a point
P P Y
outside the City, pursuant to the contract of sale, by delivery to such point by the retailer or his
agent, or by delivery by the retailer to a carrier for shipment to a consignee at such point. For the
purposes of this paragraph, delivery to a point outside the City shall be satisfied:
a. With respect to vehicles (other than commercial vehicles) subject to
registration pursuant to Chapter 1 (commencing with Section 4000) of Division 3 of the Vehicle
Code, aircraft licensed in compliance with Section 21411 of the Public Utilities Code, and
undocumented vessels registered under Chapter 2 of Division 3.5 (commencing with Section
9840) of the Vehicle Code by registration to an out-of-City address and by_a declaration under
penalty of perjury, signed by the buyer, stating that such address is, in fact, his or her principal
place of residence; and
b. With respect to commercial vehicles, by registration to a place of
business out-of-City and declaration under penalty of perjury, signed by the buyer, that the
vehicle will be operated from that address.
3. The sale of tangible personal property if the seller is obligated to furnish the
property for-a fixed price pursuant to a contract entered into prior to the operative date of this
ordinance.
4. A lease of tangible personal property which is a continuing sale of such
property, for any period of time for which the lessor is obligated to lease the property for an
amount fixed by the lease prior to the operative date of this ordinance.
5. For the purposes of subsections (3) and (4) of this section, the sale or lease of
tangible personal property shall be deemed not to be obligated pursuant to a contract or lease for
any period of time for which any party to the contract or lease has the unconditional right to
terminate the contract or lease upon notice, whether or not such right is exercised.
C. There are exempted from the use tax imposed by this ordinance, the storage, use or
other consumption in this City of tangible personal property:
1. The gross receipts from the sale of which have been subject to a transactions
tax under any state-administered transactions and use tax ordinance.
2. Other than fuel or petroleum products purchased by operators of aircraft and
used or consumed by such operators directly and exclusively in the use of such aircraft as
common carriers of persons or property for hire or compensation under a certificate of public
convenience and necessity issued pursuant to the laws of this State, the United States,.or any
foreign government. This exemption is in addition to the exemptions provided in Sections 6366
and 6366.1 of the Revenue and Taxation Code of the State of California.
3. If the purchaser is obligated to purchase the property for a fixed price pursuant
to a contract entered into prior to the operative date of this ordinance.
131
ITEM NUMBER: C- 1
DATE: 06/27/06
4. If the possession of, or the exercise of any right or power over, the tangible
personal property arises under a lease which is a continuing purchase of such property for any
period of time for which the lessee is obligated to lease the property for an amount fixed by a
lease prior to the operative date of this ordinance.
5. For the purposes of subsections (3) and (4) of this section, storage, use, or
other consumption, or possession of, or exercise of any right or power over, tangible personal
property shall be deemed not to be obligated pursuant to a contract or lease for any period of
time for which any party to the contract or lease has the unconditional right to terminate the
contract or lease upon notice, whether or not such right is exercised.
6. Except as provided in subparagraph (7), a retailer engaged in business in the
City shall not be required to collect use tax from the purchaser of tangible personal property,
unless the retailer ships or delivers the property into the City or participates within the City in
making the sale of the property, including, but not limited to, soliciting or receiving the order,
either directly or indirectly, at a place of business of the retailer in the City or through any
representative, agent, canvasser, solicitor, subsidiary, or person in the City under the authority of
the retailer.
7. "A retailer engaged in business in the City shall also include any retailer of
any of the following: vehicles subject to registration pursuant to Chapter 1 (commencing with
Section 4000) of Division 3 of the Vehicle Code, aircraft licensed in compliance with Section
21411 of the Public Utilities Code, or undocumented vessels registered under Chapter 2 of
Division 3.5 (commencing with Section 9840) of the Vehicle Code. That retailer shall be
required to collect use tax from any purchaser who registers or licenses the vehicle, vessel, or
aircraft at an address in the City.
D. Any person subject to use tax under this ordinance may credit against that tax any
transactions tax or reimbursement for transactions tax paid to a district imposing, or retailer
liable for a transactions tax pursuant to Part 1.6 of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code
with respect to the sale to the person of the property the storage, use or other consumption of
which is subject to the use tax.
Section 3-15.12 CITIZENS OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE.
A. Citizens Oversight Committee Established. There shall be a permanent citizens'
advisory committee called the "Citizens Oversight Committee (hereinafter "Committee"),
which shall annually review revenues and expenditures from the collection of the tax.
B. Committee Membership. The Committee shall have 5 citizen-members appointed by
the City Council. Appointees shall be residents of the City; however, no member of the
Committee shall be an elected official.
C. Committee Organization Procedures. ' The committee shall select one of its
members as Chairperson. The Committee shall follow the rules of procedure of the City
unless and until, upon the report and recommendation from the Committee, the City Council
adopts a specific set of procedural rules for the Committee.
D. Regular Meeting; Provision of Support Services and Information. The Committee
shall be subiect to the provisions of the Brown Act (California Government Code sections
132
ITEM NUMBER: C- 1
DATE: 06/27/06
54950 et seg.) and shall meet at least once each calendar year. A regular meeting schedule
shall be determined in accordance with the Brown Act and thereafter meetings shall be
noticed by the City Clerk The City Manager or his/her designee shall serve as executive staff
to the Committee. In addition to receiving materials directly related to the functioning of the
Committee, the Committee members shall also receive all agenda material and other primary
staff reports (other than those which are confidential)as are provided to the City Council.
E. Citizens Oversight Committee Functions. The Committee shall have the following
unction:
1. Annual Report: The Committee shall review an annual expense report of the
City relative to activities funded with the additional general purpose local sales
tax monies. Not later than the last day of the sixth month following the end of
the each City fiscal year, the Committee will present its findings and
conclusions to the City Council for its review.
Section 3-15.13. AMENDMENTS. All amendments subsequent to the effective date of
this ordinance to Part 1 of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code relating to sales and use
taxes and which are not inconsistent with Part 1.6 and Part 1.7 of Division 2 of the Revenue and
Taxation Code, and all amendments to Part 1.6 and Part 1.7 of Division 2 of the Revenue and
Taxation Code, shall automatically become a part of this ordinance, provided however, that no
such amendment shall operate so as to affect the rate of tax imposed by this ordinance.
Section 3-15.14. ENJOINING COLLECTION FORBIDDEN. No injunction or writ of
mandate or other legal or equitable process shall issue in any suit, action or proceeding in any
court against the State or the City, or against any officer of the State or the City, to prevent or
enjoin the collection under this ordinance,or Part 1.6 of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation
Code, of any tax or any amount of tax required to be collected.
Section 3-15.15. SEVERABILITY. If any provision of this ordinance or the application
thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of the ordinance and the
application of such provision to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby.
Section 3-15.16. EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance relates to the levying and
collecting of the City transactions and use taxes and shall take effect immediately and shall be
published within 15 days after adoption in a paper of general circulation published and circulated
within the City of Atascadero.
Section 3-15.17. TERMINATION DATE. The authority to levy the tax imposed by
this ordinance shall expire six years from the operative date of this ordinance.
133
ITEM NUMBER: C-1
DATE: 06/27/06
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City or Atascadero,
State of California, on by the following vote:
AYES
NOES
ABSENT:
CITY OF ATASCADERO
Tom O'Malley, Mayor
Attest:
Marcia McClure Torgerson, C.M.C., City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Patrick L.Enright, City Attorney
134
ITEM NUMBER: C-2
DATE: 06/27/06
_p ■A � i
1919 1978
Atascadero City Council
Staff Report - City Clerk
General Municipal Election
November 7, 2006
(The City Council must adopt resolutions to initiate the election process, to
combine our election with the County, to call a special election to fill the position
vacated by Council Member Scalise, and to submit to the voters a sales tax ballot
measure and advisory measures.)
RECOMMENDATIONS:
A. Council adopt the following .Resolutions for the purpose of electing three
members to the City Council,a City Clerk, and a City Treasurer:
1. Draft Resolution A, calling and giving notice of the, holding of a General
Municipal Election to be held on Tuesday, November 7 2006; and,
2. Draft Resolution B, requesting the Board of Supervisors of the County of San
Luis Obispo to consolidate a General Municipal "Election to be held on
November 7, 2006; and,
3. Draft Resolution C, calling and giving notice of the holding of a Special
Municipal Election to be held on Tuesday, November 7, 2006; and,
4. Draft Resolution D, requesting the Board of Supervisors of the County of San
Luis Obispo to consolidate a Special Municipal Election to be held on
November 7, 2006.
B. Council adopt the following Resolutions for the purpose of electing three
members to the City Council, a City Clerk, and a City Treasurer; and to submit
to the voters a sales tax ballot measure and advisory measures:
1. Draft Resolution C, calling and giving notice of the holding of a Special
Municipal Election to be held on Tuesday, November 7, 2006; and,
135
ITEM NUMBER: C-2
DATE: 06/27/06
2. Draft Resolution D, requesting the Board of Supervisors of the County of San
Luis Obispo to consolidate a Special Municipal Election to be held on
November 7, 2006; and,
3. Draft Resolution E, calling and giving notice of the holding of a General
Municipal Election to be held on Tuesday, November 7, 2006; and,
4. Draft Resolution F, requesting the Board of Supervisors of the County of San
Luis Obispo to consolidate a General Municipal Election to be held on
November 7, 2006; and,
5. Draft Resolution G, setting priorities for filing written arguments regarding a
City measure and directing the City Attorney to prepare an impartial analysis;
and,
6. Draft Resolution H, providing for the filing of rebuttal arguments for City
measures submitted at Municipal Elections.
DISCUSSION:
The General Municipal Election will be held on Tuesday, November 7, 2006. The terms
of two Council Members, Tom O'Malley and Becky Pacas will expire in November 2006.
Also, the terms of City Clerk Marcia McClure Torgerson and City Treasurer Joe Modica
expire in November 2006. The City Council must adopt a resolution to initiate the
election process. Also, to combine our election with the County, the Council must
adopt a resolution requesting consolidation with the County.
Special Election to Fill Council Vacancy
Council Member Wendy Scalise resigned effective May 29, 2006, leaving a vacancy
with an unexpired term of two years. The City Council, at their June 5, 2006 Strategic
Planning Workshop, called for a Special Election to fill this vacancy. The Special
Election shall be held on the next regularly established election date not less than 114
days from the call of the Special Election. The General Municipal Election of November
7, 2006, meets this requirement.
Ballot Measure for Proposed Sales Tax Increase
The City Council has considered placing a ballot measure on the November 7, 2006
ballot, proposing a sales tax increase. If the Council has decided to go ahead with this
ballot measure, specific language needs to be included in the Election Resolutions to
clarify for the San Luis Obispo County Clerk-Recorder the requested wording for the
November 7, 2006 ballots.
The City Council and/or registered voters may file with the City Clerk written arguments
in opposition or in favor of the ballot measure. The City Clerk has fixed July 11 , '2006
as the last day for submitting arguments for and against the ballot measure, and the
impartial analysis by the City Attorney. This will allow ample time for the 10-calendar-
day public examination period,. translation, typesetting, printing and submission to the
136
ITEM NUMBER: C-2
DATE: 06/27/06
County. A notice of this deadline will be posted on the front window of City Hall. A
Resolution setting the priorities for the filing of written arguments and directing the City
Attorney to prepare an impartial analysis will need to be adopted (draft Resolution G).
Also, the adoption of a Resolution providing for the filing of rebuttal arguments for the
ballot measure is required (draft Resolution H).
FISCAL IMPACT:
The General Municipal Election is estimated to cost approximately $20,000.00. The
addition of the third Council Member on the ballot is minimal. However, the addition of
the ballot measure, and advisory measure(s), is approximately $3,000.00.
ATTACHMENTS:
Draft Resolutions
137
DRAFT RESOLUTION A
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA, CALLING AND GIVING NOTICE OF
THE HOLDING OF A GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD
ON TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 7, 2006, FOR THE ELECTION OF CERTAIN
OFFICERS AS REQUIRED BY THE PROVISIONS OF THE LAWS OF
THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA RELATING TO GENERAL LAW CITIES
WHEREAS, under the provisions of the laws relating to general law cities in the State of
California, a General Municipal Election shall be held on November 7, 2006, for the election of
Municipal Officers; and
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO,
CALIFORNIA,DOES RESOLVE,DECLARE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. That pursuant to the requirements of the laws of the State of California
relating to General Law Cities, there is called and ordered to be held in the City of Atascadero,
California on Tuesday, November 7, 2006, a General Municipal Election for the purpose of
electing two Members of the City Council for the full term of four years; a City Clerk for the full
term of four years; and a City Treasurer for the full term of four years.
SECTION 2. That the ballots to be used at the election shall be in form and content as
required by law.
SECTION 3. That the City Clerk is authorized, instructed and directed to procure and
furnish any and all official ballots, notices, printed matter and all supplies, equipment and
paraphernalia that may be necessary in order to properly and lawfully conduct the election.
SECTION 4. That the polls for the election shall be open at seven o'clock a.m. of the
day of the election and shall remain open continuously from that time until eight o'clock p.m. of
the same day when the polls shall be closed, except as provided in § 14401 of the Elections Code
of the State of California.
SECTION 5. That in all particulars not recited in this resolution, the election shall be
held and conducted as provided by law for holding municipal elections.
SECTION 6. That notice of the time and place of holding the election is given and the
City Clerk is authorized, instructed and directed to give further or additional notice of the
election, in time, form and manner as required by law.
SECTION 7. That the City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this
Resolution and enter it into the book of original Resolutions.
138
City of Atascadero
Draft Resolution A
Page 2
On motion by and seconded by the
foregoing Resolution is hereby adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES
ABSENT:
ADOPTED:
ATTEST: CITY OF ATASCADERO
Marcia McClure Torgerson, C.M.C. City Clerk Tom O'Malley, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
iPatrick L.Enright, City Attorney
139
DRAFT RESOLUTION B
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA, REQUESTING THE BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO TO
CONSOLIDATE A GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON
NOVEMBER 7, 20069 WITH THE STATEWIDE GENERAL ELECTION
TO BE HELD ON THE DATE PURSUANT TO § 10403 OF THE
ELECTIONS 'CODE
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Atascadero, called a General Municipal
Election to be held on November7, 2006, for the purpose of the election of two Members of the
City Council, a City Clerk, and a City Treasurer, for a term of four years each; and,
WHEREAS, it is desirable that the General Municipal Election be consolidated with the
Statewide General election to be held on the same date and that within the city the precincts,
polling places and election officers of the two elections be the same, and that the county election
department of the County of San Luis Obispo canvass the returns of the General Municipal
Election and that the election be held in all respects as if there were only one election;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO
DOES RESOLVE,DECLARE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. That pursuant to the requirements of § 10403 of the Elections Code, the
Board of Supervisors of the County of San Luis Obispo is hereby requested to consent and agree
to the consolidation of a General Election with the Statewide General election on Tuesday,
November 7, 2006, for the purpose of the election of two Members of the City Council, a City
Clerk, and a City Treasurer for a term of four years each.
SECTION 2. That the county election department is authorized to canvass the returns of
the General Municipal Election. The election shall be held in all respects as if there were only
one election, and only one form of ballot shall be used.
SECTION 3. That the Board of Supervisors is requested to issue instructions to the
county election department to take any and all steps necessary for the holding of the consolidated
election.
SECTION 4. That the City of Atascadero recognizes that additional costs will be
incurred by the County by reason of this consolidation and agrees to reimburse the County for
any costs.
SECTION 5. That the City Clerk is hereby directed to file a certified copy of this
resolution with the Board of Supervisors and the county election department of the County of
San Luis Obispo.
140
City of Atascadero
Draft Resolution B
Page 2
SECTION6. That the City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this
resolution and enter it into the book of original resolutions.
On motion by and seconded by , the foregoing
Resolution is hereby adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ADOPTED:
ATTEST: CITY OF ATASCADERO
Marcia McClure Torgerson, C.M.C., City Clerk Tom O'Malley,Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Patrick L.Enright, City Attorney
141
DRAFT RESOLUTION C
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA, CALLING AND GIVING NOTICE OF
THE HOLDING OF A SPECIAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD
ON TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 7, 2006,FOR THE ELECTION OF CERTAIN
OFFICERS AS REQUIRED BY THE PROVISIONS OF THE LAWS OF
THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA RELATING TO GENERAL LAW CITIES
WHEREAS, under the provisions of the laws relating to general law cities in the State of
California, a Special Municipal Election shall be held on November 7, 2006, for the election of
Municipal Officers; and
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO,
CALIFORNIA, DOES RESOLVE, DECLARE,DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. That pursuant to the requirements of.the laws of the State of California
relating to General Law Cities, there is called and ordered to be held in the City of Atascadero,
California on Tuesday, November 7, 2006, a Special Municipal Election for the purpose of
electing one Member of the City Council for the unexpired term of two years.
SECTION 2. That the ballots to be used at the election shall be in form and content as
required by law.
SECTION 3. That the City Clerk is authorized, instructed and directed to procure and
furnish any and all official ballots, notices, printed matter and all supplies, equipment and
paraphernalia that maybe necessary in order to properly and lawfully conduct the election.
SECTION 4. That the polls for the election shall be open at seven o'clock a.m. of the
day of the election and shall remain open continuously from that time until eight o'clock p.m. of
the same day when the polls shall be closed, except as provided in § 14401 of the Elections Code
of the State of California.
SECTION 5. That in all particulars not recited in this resolution, the election shall be
held and conducted as provided by law for holding municipal elections.
SECTION 6. That notice of the time and place of holding the election is given and the
City Clerk is authorized, instructed and directed to give further or additional notice of the
election, in time, form and manner as required by law.
SECTION 7. That the City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this
Resolution and enter it into the book of original Resolutions.
On motion by and seconded by the
foregoing Resolution is hereby adopted on the following roll call vote:
142
City of Atascadero
Draft Resolution C
Page 2
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ADOPTED:
ATTEST: CITY OF ATASCADERO
Marcia McClure Torgerson, C.M.C. City Clerk Tom O'Malley, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Patrick L.Enright,City Attorney
143
DRAFT RESOLUTION D
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA, REQUESTING THE BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO TO
CONSOLIDATE A SPECIAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON
NOVEMBER 7, 20069 WITH THE STATEWIDE GENERAL ELECTION
TO BE ON THE DATE PURSUANT TO § 10403 OF THE
ELECTIONS CODE
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Atascadero, called a Special Municipal
Election to be held on November 7, 2006, for the purpose of the election of one Member of the
City Council for an unexpired term of two years; and,
WHEREAS, it is desirable that the Special Municipal Election be consolidated with the
Statewide General election to be held on the same date and that within the city the precincts,
polling places and election officers of the two elections be the same, and that the county election
department of the County of San Luis Obispo canvass the returns of the Special Municipal
Election and that the election be in all respects as if there were only one election;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO
DOES RESOLVE,DECLARE,DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. That pursuant to the requirements of § 10403 of the Elections Code, the
Board of Supervisors of the County of San Luis Obispo is hereby requested to consent and agree
to the consolidation of a Special Election with the Statewide General election on Tuesday,
November 7, 2006, for the purpose of the election of one Member of the City Council for an
unexpired term of two years.
SECTION 2. That the county election department is authorized to canvass the returns of
the Special Municipal Election. The election shall be held in all respects as if there were only one
election, and only one form of ballot shall be used.
SECTION 3. That the Board of Supervisors is requested to issue instructions to the
county election department to take any and all steps necessary for the holding of the consolidated
election.
SECTION 4. That the City of Atascadero recognizes that additional costs will be
incurred by the County by reason of this consolidation and agrees to reimburse the County for
any costs.
SECTION 5. That the City Clerk is hereby directed to file a certified copy of this
resolution with the Board of Supervisors and the county election department of the County of
San Luis Obispo.
144
City of Atascadero
Draft Resolution D
Page 2
SECTION6. That the City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this
resolution and enter it into the book of original resolutions.
On motion by and seconded-by , the foregoing
Resolution is hereby adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES
NOES:
ABSENT:
ADOPTED:
ATTEST: CITY OF ATASCADERO
Marcia McClure Torgerson, C.M.C„ City Clerk Tom O'Malley,Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Patrick L. Enright, City Attorney
145
DRAFT RESOLUTION E
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA, CALLING AND GIVING NOTICE OF
THE HOLDING OF A GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD
ON TUESDAY,NOVEMBER 7, 20069 FOR THE ELECTION OF CERTAIN
OFFICERS AS REQUIRED BY THE PROVISIONS OF THE LAWS OF
THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA RELATING TO GENERAL LAW CITIES
AND FOR THE SUBMISSION TO THE VOTERS QUESTIONS
RELATING TO INCREASED SALES TAX
WHEREAS, under the provisions of the laws relating to general law cities in the State of
California, a General Municipal Election shall be held on November 7, 2006, for the election of
Municipal Officers; and
WHEREAS, the City Council also desires to submit to the voters at the election questions
relating to increased sales tax;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO,
CALIFORNIA,DOES RESOLVE, DECLARE,DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. That pursuant to the requirements of the laws of the State of California
relating to General Law Cities, there is called and ordered to be held in the City of Atascadero,
California on Tuesday, November 7, 2006, a General Municipal Election for the purpose of
electing two Members of the City Council for the full term of four years; a City Clerk for the full
term of four years; and a City Treasurer for the full term of four years.
SECTION 2. That the City Council, pursuant to its right and authority, does order
submitted to the voters at the General Municipal Election the following questions:
Yes
No
Yes
No
146
City of Atascadero
Draft Resolution E
Page 2
Yes
No
SECTION 3. That the proposed complete text of the Ordinance submitted to the voters
is attached as Exhibit A.
SECTION 4. That the ballots to be used at the election shall be in form and content as
required by law.
SECTION 5. That the City Clerk is authorized, instructed and directed to procure and
furnish any and all official ballots, notices, printed matter and all supplies, equipment and
paraphernalia that may be necessary in order to properly and lawfully conduct the election.
SECTION 6. That the polls for the election shall be open at seven o'clock a.m. of the
day of the election and shall remain open continuously from that time until eight o'clock p.m. of
the same day when the polls shall be closed,except as provided in § 14401 of the Elections Code
of the State of California.
SECTION 7. That in all particulars not recited in this resolution, the election shall be
held and conducted as provided bylaw for holding municipal elections.
SECTION 8. That notice of the time and place of holding the election is given and the
City Clerk is authorized, instructed and directed to give further or additional notice of the
election, in time, form and manner as required by law.
SECTION 9. That the City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this
Resolution and enter it into the book of original Resolutions.
On motion by and seconded by the
foregoing Resolution is hereby adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ADOPTED:
ATTEST: CITY OF ATASCADERO
147
City of Atascadero
Draft Resolution E
Page 3
Marcia McClure Torgerson, C.M.C.City Clerk Tom O'Malley, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Patrick L. Enright, City Attorney
s
148
DRAFT RESOLUTION F
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA, REQUESTING THE BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO TO
CONSOLIDATE A GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON
NOVEMBER 7, 20069 WITH THE STATEWIDE GENERAL ELECTION
TO BE HELD ON THE DATE PURSUANT TO § 10403 OF THE
ELECTIONS CODE
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Atascadero, called a General Municipal
Election to be held on November 7, 2006, for the purpose of the election of two Members of the
City Council, a City Clerk, and a City Treasurer, for a term of four years each;and,
WHEREAS, the City Council is submitting to the voters questions relating to increased
sales tax; and,
WHEREAS, it is desirable that the General Municipal Election be consolidated with the
Statewide General election to be held on the same date and that within the city the precincts,
polling places and election officers of the two elections be the same, and that the county election
department of the County of San Luis Obispo canvass the returns of the General Municipal
Election and that the election be held in all respects as if there were only one election;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO
DOES RESOLVE,DECLARE,DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. That pursuant to the requirements of § 10403 of the Elections Code, the
Board of Supervisors of the County of San Luis Obispo is hereby requested to consent and agree
to the consolidation of a General Election with the Statewide General election on Tuesday,
November 7, 2006, for the purpose of the election of two Members of the City Council, a City
Clerk, and a City Treasurer for a term of four years each.
SECTION 2. That the measures are to appear on the ballot as follows:
Yes
No
149
City of Ataseadero
Draft Resolution F
Page 2
Yes
No
Yes
No
SECTION 3. That the county election department is authorized to canvass the returns of
the General Municipal Election. The election shall be held in all respects as if there were only
one election, and only one form of ballot shall be used.
SECTION 4. That the Board of Supervisors is requested to issue instructions to the
county election department to take any and all steps necessary for the holding of the consolidated
election.
SECTION 5. That the City of Atascadero recognizes that additional costs will be
incurred by the County by reason of this consolidation and agrees to reimburse the County for
any costs.
SECTION 6. That the City Clerk is hereby directed to file a certified copy of this
resolution with the Board of Supervisors andthecounty election department of the County of
San Luis Obispo.
SECTION 7. That the City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this
resolution and enter it into the book of original resolutions.
On motion by and seconded by the
foregoing Resolution is hereby adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES
ABSENT:
ADOPTED:
150
City of Atascadero
Draft Resolution F
Page 3
ATTEST: CITY OF ATASCADERO
Marcia McClure Torgerson, C.M.C., City Clerk Tom O'Malley, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Patrick L. Enright, City Attorney
151
DRAFT RESOLUTION G
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA,SETTING PRIORITIES FOR FILING A
WRITTEN ARGUMENT REGARDING A CITY MEASURE AND
DIRECTING THE CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE AN IMPARTIAL
ANALYSIS
WHEREAS, a General Municipal Election is to be held in the City of Atascadero,
California, on November 7, 2006, at which there will be submitted to the voters the following
measure:
If the proposed sales tax measure (Measure --) is approved, should at least 2/3 of the
proceeds be used to fund road rehabilitation,construction and maintenance with the
remaining balance being allocated for fire,police and other general purposes?
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO,
CALIFORNIA, DOES RESOLVE,DECLARE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. That the City Council authorizes
Tom O'Malley, Council Member in Favor
Terry Clay, Sr., Council Member in Favor
Becky Pacas, Council Member in Favor
George Luna, Council Member in Favor
members of that body, to file a written argument regarding the City measure as specified above,
in accordance with Article 4, Chapter 3, Division 9 of the Elections Code of the State of
California and to change the argument until and including the date fixed by the City Clerk after
which no arguments for or against the City measure may be submitted to the City Clerk.
SECTION 2. That the City Council directs the City Clerk to transmit a copy of the
measure to the city attorney, unless the organization or salaries of the office of the city attorney
are affected. The city attorney shall prepare an impartial analysis of the measure showing the
effect of the measure on the existing law and the operation of the measure. If the measure affects
the organization or salaries of the office of the city attorney, the city clerk shall prepare the
impartial analysis. The impartial analysis shall be filed by the date set by the City Clerk for the
filing of primary arguments.
SECTION 3. That the City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this
resolution and enter it into the book of original resolutions.
On motion by and seconded by , the foregoing
Resolution is hereby adopted on the following roll call vote:
152
City of Ataseadero
Draft Resolution G
Page 2
AYES
NOES:
ABSENT:
ADOPTED:
ATTEST: CITY OF ATASCADERO
Marcia McClure Torgerson, C.M.C.City Clerk Tom O'Malley, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Patrick L. Enright,City Attorney
153
DRAFT RESOLUTION H
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA,PROVIDING FOR THE FILING OF
REBUTTAL ARGUMENTS FOR CITY MEASURES SUBMITTED AT
MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS
WHEREAS, § 9220 and 9285 of the Elections Code of the State of California authorizes
the City Council, by majority vote, to adopt provisions to provide for the filing of rebuttal
arguments for city measures submitted at municipal elections;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO,
CALIFORNIA,DOES RESOLVE, DECLARE,DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. That pursuant to Sections 9220 and 9285 of the Elections Code of the
State of California, when the Clerk has selected the arguments for and against the measure which
will be printed and distributed to the voters, the Clerk shall send copies of the argument in favor
of the measure to the authors of the argument against, and copies of the argument against to the
authors of the argument in favor. The authors may prepare and submit rebuttal arguments not
exceeding 250 words. The rebuttal arguments shall be filed with the City Clerk,not more than
10 days after the final date for filing direct arguments. Rebuttal arguments shall be printed in the
same manner as the direct arguments. Each rebuttal argument shall immediately follow the
direct argument,which it seeks to rebut.
SECTION 2. That all previous resolutions providing for the filing of rebuttal arguments
for city measures are repealed.
SECTION 3. That the provisions of Section 1 shall apply at the next ensuing municipal
election and at each municipal election after that time.
SECTION 4. That the City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this
Resolution and enter it into the book of original Resolutions.
On motion by and seconded by the
foregoing Resolution is hereby adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ADOPTED:
154
City of Atascadero
Draft Resolution H
Page 2
ATTEST: CITY OF ATASCADERO
Marcia McClure Torgerson, C.M.C., City Clerk Tom O'Malley, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Patrick L. Enright, City Attorney
155