HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 06/11/1991 PUBLIC NOTICE
ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Atascadero City Council will
meet on the following dates for the purpose of Budget Hearings:
* Tuesday, June 11, , 1991 at 5:30 p.m. for reviewing the
siscal Year 1991-92 Budget (excluding community agency
funding requests) .
June 19, 1991 from 3:00 to 6:00 p•m. to receive and
discuss Community Agency Funding Requests.
Said Public Hearings are open to the public and will be held
at the City .Administration Building, 6500 Palma Avenue, 4th floor
Rotunda Room.
Dated., 5/30/91
.L`�E DAY&K, ity lerk
* PUBLIC REVIEW COPY a�
PLEASE DO NOT REMOVE
FROM COUNTER
* NOTICE: THE COUNCIL WILL MEET IN OPEN SESSION AT 5:30 P.M.
i FOR PURPOSES OF A PUBLIC HEARING CONCERNING THE
PROPOSED 1991-92 FISCAL YEAR BUDGET (EXCLUDING
CM04UNITY AGENCY FUNDING REQUESTS) .
AGENDA
ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
ATASCADERO ADMINISTRATION BUILDING
6500 PALMA
FOURTH FLOOR, ROTUNDA ROOM
JUNE 11, 1991
7:00 P.M.
This agenda is prepared and posted pursuant to the require-
ments of Government Code Section 54954.2. By listing a topic on
this agenda, the City Council has expressed its intent to discuss
and act on each item. In addition to any action identified in the
brief general description of each item, the action that may be tak-
en shall include: A referral to staff with specific requests for
information; continuance; specific direction to staff concerning
the policy or mission of the item; discontinuance of consideration;
authorization to enter into negotiations and execute agreements
pertaining to the item; adoption or approval; and, disapproval.
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, available for public inspection during
City Hall business hours. The City Clerk will answer any questions
regarding the agenda.
RULES OF. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION:
* Members of the audience may speak on any item on the agenda.
* A person may speak for five (5) minutes.
* No one may speak for a second time until everyone wishing to
speak has had an opportunity to do so.
* No one may speak more than twice on any item.
* Council Members may question any speaker; the speaker may
respond but, after the allotted time has expired, may not
initiate further discussion.
* The floor will then be closed to public participation and
open for Council discussion.
Call to Order
Pledge of Allegiance
Roll Call
City Council Comment:
Proclamations: California Peace Officers Association "Special
Olympics Torch Run Days", 6/17 6/18/91;
"Zoo and Aquarium Month", June, 1991
COMMUNITY FORUM:
The City Council values and encourages exchange of ideas and
comments from you, the citizen. The Community Forum period is
provided to receive comments from the public on matters other than
scheduled agenda items. To increase the effectiveness of Community
Forum, the following rules will be enforced:
A maximum of 30 minutes will be allowed for Community Forum,
unless Council authorizes an extension.
All remarks shall be addressed to Council, as a whole, and
not to any individual member thereof.
* No person shall be permitted to make slanderous, profane or
personal remarks against any Council Member, commissions and
staff.
A. COMMITTEE REPORTS (The following represents ad hoc or standing
committees. Informative status
be ill w
reports given, as felt
p
necessary. ) :
)
1. S.L.O. Area Coordinating Council/North Coastal Transit
2 Solid/Hazardous Waste Management Committee
3. Recycling Committee
4. Economic Opportunity Commission
5. City/SchoolCommittee
6. Traffic Committee
7. Downtown Interim Sign Committee
8. County Water Advisory Board
9. Economic Round Table
10. B.I.A.
11. Colony Roads Committee
12. County-wide Fee Study
B. CONSENT CALENDAR:
All matters listed under Item A, Consent Calendar, are consid-
ered to be routine, and will be enacted by one motion in the form`
listed below. There will be no separate discussion on these items.
A member of the Council or public may, by request, have any item
removed from the Consent Calendar, which shall then be reviewed and
acted upon separately after the adoption of the Consent Calendar:
1. MAY 28, 1991 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES •
2. RESOLUTION NO. 45-91 - ENDORSING THE DESIGNATED DRIVER PROGRAM
• AND COMMENDING THOSE PARTICIPATING
3. AWARD BID #91-7 - PURCHASE OF 12-PASSENGER RECREATION VAN
4. RESOLUTION NO. 43-91 - CREATING A POLICY RELATED TO CAPITAL
PROJECT FUNDING (Cont'd from 5/28/91)
5. RESOLUTION NO. 46-91 ADOPTING AN AMENDED CITY CONFLICT OF
INTEREST CODE
C. HEARINGSIAPPEARANCESz
1. ZONE CHANGE 03-91 (City of Atascadero) (Cont'd from 5/28/91)
A. Ordinance No. 222 - Amending Section 9-3.651 (Establish-
ment of Planned Development Overlay Zone No. 7) of the
Zoning Ordinance by the addition of development standards
(Recommend motion to waive reading in full and approve on
first reading by title only. )
D. REGULAR BUSINESS•
1. FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS STUDY (Cont'd from 5/28/91)
• A. Resolution No. 38-91 - Authorizing the execution of an
agreement with Crawford, Multari & Starr to develop a
computerized Fiscal Impact Model
B. 1991 Central Coast Section APA Award
2. WEED ABATEMENT BID CLARIFICATION (Cont'd from 5/28/91)
3. RUSSIAN STUDENTS EXCHANGE - REQUEST FOR FINANCIAL SUPPORT
4. AUTHORIZE AGREEMENT FOR IMPROVEMENTS ON A PORTION OF SANTA
CRUZ ROAD
5. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2A-91, 905 EL CAMINO REAL - Request to
change land use designation from Retail Commercial, Recrea-
tion, and Suburban Residential to Commercial Park and
Recreation (Daven Investments/Cosmic Astro Corporation/Guy
Greene)
6. AUTHORIZATION TO PURCHASE EARTHQUAKE INSURANCE
7. LETTER FROM COUNTY ENGINEER RE: COUNTY MASTER WATER PLAN
UPDATE PRESENTATION
8. PROPOSED NORTH COUNTY ANIMAL CONTROL PROGRAM (Verbal)
• 3
E. INDIVIDUAL. DETERMINATION ANDIOR ACTIONS
1. City Council
2. City Attorney
3. City `Clerk
4. City Treasurer
S. City Manager (Out of town Vacation, June 12 through June 17)
* NOTICE: THE CITY COUNCIL WILL ADJOURN TO WEDNESDAY, JUNE
19, 1991, FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONDUCTING A PUBLIC
HEARING TO RECEIVE AND DISCUSS COMMUNITY AGENCY
FUNDING REQUESTS RELATIVE TO THE 1991-92 BUDGET.
SAID HEARING WILL BE HELD IN THE ROTUNDA ROOM, FROM
3:00 TO 5:00 P.M.
4
i
P R O C L A M A T I O N
California Peace Officers' Association
"SPECIAL OLYMPICS TORCH RUN DAYS"
June 17-18, 1991
WHEREAS, Special Olympics provides participants with the
opportunity for successful experiences in sports, which develops
confidence and builds a positive self-image; and
WHEREAS, On June 17th and 18th, the Special Olympics torch
will be run through San Luis Obispo County on its way from Sacra-
mento to UCLA for the California State Special Olympics Games; and
WHEREAS, Men and women from the various law enforcement agen-
cies in the County, including the City Police, County Sheriff,
California Highway Patrol, State Parks and Beaches and others, will
be carrying the torch to raise funds for Special Olympics; and
• WHEREAS, a special ceremony will be held on June 17th at 12:30
p.m. at the Atascadero Police Department to celebrate the efforts
of these peace officers as the torch comes through our City;
NOW, THEREFORE, The Atascadero City Council hereby declares
June 17th and 18th as,
"Special Olympics Torch Run Days"
and urges all citizens to give their support to this unique and
highly beneficial program, which gives the developmentally disabled
their best opportunity to experience athletic competition and share
in a mainstream community event.
ROBERT B. LILLEY, Mayor
City of Atascadero, CA
June 11, 1991
•
• •
especial Olympics of SancLuis Obispo Countj*
P.O. BOX 1164 • SAN LUIS OBISPO • CA 93406 • (805) 544-6444
M
OFFICERS AND May 29 , 1991
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
PRESIDENT
GREG COATES r
J
Robert Lilli
VICE PRESIDENT Mayor
GUY PAUL HACKMAN Atascadero City Hall
6500 Talma
SECRETARY Atascadero , CA 93422
PHIL GAMMONS
Dear Mayor Lilli :
TREASURER
FRED RUSSELL On June 17th and 18th the Special Olympics torch will be run
through San Luis Obispo county on its way from Sacramento to
UCLA for the California State Special Olympics Games . Men
and women from various law enforcement agencies in the
JAN BECKHO HADJIAN county including the City Police , County Sheriff, California
DICKBLx Highway Patrol , State Parks and Beaches and others will be •
DOUG FI IPPONI RG carrying the torch to raise money ' for Special Olympics .
DOUG FILIPPONI
JIM GARDINER We will be holding a special ceremony on June 17th at
JEFFREYHERTEN 12 : 30 pm at the new Police Station to celebrate the efforts
MIKE HESSER of these peace officers as the torch comes through
ROB ROSSI Atascadero . We are hoping that you can join us in
LINDA SHEPHARD presenting a proclamation announcing the two days as the
California Peace Officers ' Association Torch Run days .
DIRECTOR EMERI"IR;S Please let us know ( 544-6444) whether or not you will be
VICrORIAL. SACKSTEDER able to join us for the ceremony .
Thank you for your past and continued support of Special
Olympics .
Sincerely ,
AREA DIRECTOR Y2-1-jljja�
MARY ELLEN GIBSON
Mary Ellen Gibson
Area Director
•
Created by The Joseph P. Kennedy Jr. Foundation
Authorized and Accredited by Special Olympics, Inc.
PROCLAMATION
"ZOO AND AQUARIUM MONTH"
JUNE 11, 1991
WHEREAS, The zoological parks and aquariums of North America
provide important cultural and recreational experiences for over
115, 000, 000 people each year; and
WHEREAS, Their commitment to education fosters and enriches
the appreciation of wildlife in over 20,000,000 school children
each year; and
WHEREAS, They have become refuges and sanctuaries vital to the
conservation of the world' s vanishing wildlife; and
WHEREAS, They actively conduct research to better care for and
preserve the diverse wildlife of the planet; and
WHEREAS, Zoos and aquariums serve the needs of both humans and
wildlife by bringing people and animals together, thereby adding to
human awareness, understanding, concern and commitment to wildlife;
• THEREFORE, be it known that I, Robert Lilley, Mayor of the
City of Atascadero, do hereby proclaim the Month of June, 1991 as,
"ZOO AND AQUARIUM MONTH" in the City of Atascadero.
FURTHERMORE, Atascaderans are urged to recognize and take
pride in the great achievements of the many members of our City
staff, Zoological Society and community for their hard work in
having recently obtained national accreditation of the Charles
Paddock Zoo, signifying the maintainence of the highest profes-
sional standards in this type of facility.
ROBERT B. LILLEY, Mayor
City of Atascadero, CA
June 11, 1991
MEE',",'. AGENDA
DATE: 6/.11491 ITEM#
ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL
MINUTES
MAY 28, 1991
Mayor Robert Lilley called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m.
Councilman Dexter led the Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL•
Present: Councilmembers Nimmo, Shiers, Dexter and Mayor
Lilley
Absent: Councilwoman Borgeson
Also Present: Muriel Korba, City Treasurer and Lee Dayka,
City Clerk
Staff Present: Ray Windsor, City Manager; Art Montandon, City
Attorney; Mark Joseph, Administrative Services
Director; Steve DeCamp, City Planner; Greg
Luke, Public Works Director; and Bud McHale,
Police Chief
CITY COUNCIL COMMENT:
• Mayor Lilley reported that financial help was being solicited to
assist with the Soviet Union Student Exchange Program. He
recognized the City was struggling with a tight economy and asked
staff to look into whether or not aid could be given.
In addition, the mayor indicated that he had received calls in
opposition to the City' s purchase of the "E.G. Lewis Desk" . He
stated that it was his hope that the Council would receive private
and public support for this acquisition. Other members of Council
noted that they, too, had received public comments on this matter.
Introduction of Atascadero City Hall Volunteers
Mayor Lilley introduced and extended a debt of gratitude to the
following citizens who are contributing their time and efforts, on
a volunteer basis, to the City' s Information Office:
Martha McCutheon Irene Bishop
Marj Mackey Thelma Tibbals
Sandye Tillson Betty & Jim Terrell
The City Manager acknowledged Alicia Lara, Personnel Coordinator
CC5/28/91
Page 1
and Georgia Ramirez, Administrative Secretary, who had implemented
and are supervising this program.
PROCLAMATION:
Mayor Lilley read the proclamation for Tri-Counties Small Business
Opportunity Day", June 11, 1991.
COMMUNITY FORUM:
There were no public comments.
A. COMMITTEE REPORTS (The following represents ad hoc or standing
committees. Informative status reports were given, as
follows. ) :
1. Recycling Committee - Councilman Shiers reported that the
committee had met and deferred to Item #C-3 regarding the
Green Waste Recycling Program.
2. Economic Opportunity Commission - Councilman Dexter
indicated that this commission would be hosting a special
recognition program for E.O.C. 's volunteers in the near
future.
3. City/School Committee- Councilman Dexter reported that
this committee had met and discussed a cooperative effort
to maintain, despite budget cuts, the School •
Resource/D.A.R.E. Officer.
4. Traffic Committee Councilman Dexter gave a brief
overview of the committee' s purpose and reported that
they had met and discussed seven items.
5. Downtown Interim Sign Committee - Mayor Lilley reported
that visual and written materials were being put together
in the form of a pamphlet to highlight the committee' s
proposal for signing and the use of awnings in the .
downtown business district. Input, he said, from
business owner' s was being solicited.
6. Economic Round Table - Mayor Lilley announced that
P.G.&E. was hosting a retreat for the purpose of
focussing on the committee' s mission on June 8, 1991.
7 . Colony Roads Committee - The City Manager indicated that
the Clerk had received and distributed a status report
from Mary Gayle, Assistant City Attorney (see Exhibit A) .
CC5/28/91
Page 2
Additional Council Comments:
iMayor Lilley announced that he had attended the kick-off of the
county-wide "Designated Driver Program" and reported that a
proclamation recognizing those who were participating in the
program would be on the next agenda.
Councilman Nimmo reported that he had attended a hearing held at
City Hall by the County committee charged with devising the plan
for implementing the collection of developer fees for the County
for capital improvements. He noted that he had voiced opposition
to the County' s plan to require the cities to collect additional
building fees imposed for capital improvements that may or may not
be of benefit to the City. The City Manager indicated that the
concept does not sit well with county-wide city managers.
B. CONSENT CALENDAR:
Mayor Lilley read the Consent Calendar as follows:
1. MAY 14, 1991 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
2. CONSOLIDATED TREASURER'S REPORT - APRIL, 1991
3. REQUEST TO SEER BIDS FOR WASTEWATER EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT
4. RESOLUTION NO. 41-91 - ESTABLISHING NEW ROAD NAMES ("PRADO
• LANE" AND "CHANDLER LANE") FOR TWO ROADS CURRENTLY NAMED "SAN
RAFAEL COURT" (Road Name Change 01-91)
5. RECONSIDERATION OF THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR TENTATIVE
TRACT MAP 22-90
6. MODIFICATION OF CONDITION OF APPROVAL FOR TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP
12-89, 10785 EL CAMINO REAL (Colombo/North Coast Engineering)
7 . FISCAL IMPACT MODEL, PHASE II
8. RESOLUTION NO. 43-91 - CREATING A POLICY RELATED TO CAPITAL
PROJECT FUNDING
9. RESOLUTION NO. 44-91 - AUTHORIZING MODIFICATIONS TO AGREEMENTS
WITH JOHN WALLACE & ASSOCIATES REGARDING PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
PROVIDED FOR THE SYCAMORE ROAD BRIDGE AND THE LEWIS AVENUE
BRIDGE PROJECTS
10. AWARD OF BID #91-6 FOR PERFORMANCE OF ANNUAL WEED ABATEMENT
Mayor Lilley pulled Item #7 to receive an opinion from the City
Attorney. The City Manager pulled Item #8 to request a
CC5/28/91
Page 3
continuance. The City Treasurer pulled Item #10 for clarification
of rates.
MOTION: By Councilman Nimmo, seconded by Councilman Shiers to
approve the Consent Calendar, Items #B-1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6,
and 9; motion carried unanimously by roll call vote.
Re: Item #B-7 . FISCAL IMPACT MODEL, PHASE II
Mayor Lilley proposed continuing this matter until the City
Attorney' s opinion had been rendered.
MOTION: By Councilman Dexter and seconded by Councilman Nimmo to
continue Item #B-7; motion carried 4:0.
Re: Item #B-8. RESOLUTION NO. 43-91 - CREATING A POLICY RELATED
TO CAPITAL PROJECT FUNDING
The City Manager requested continuing this matter until the next
meeting.
MOTION: By Councilman Dexter and seconded by Councilman Shiers to
continue item #B-8 until the next regular meeting; motion
passed 4:0.
Re: Item #B-10. AWARD OF BID #91-6 FOR PERFORMANCE OF ANNUAL WEED
ABATEMENT (Recommendation: To award the contract
for hand work and tractor work to Vines of Life
Landscape Care) ,
Micki Korba, City Treasurer, brought attention to the fact that the
apparent low bidder' s 1/2 hour rate was lower than the full hourly
rate. The City Manager urged Council to award the bid and direct
staff to clarify the question.
MOTION: By Councilman Nimmo and seconded by Councilman Shiers to
approve the award of the bid subject to clarification of
half-hour/hourly rates and to direct staff to report back
at the next regular meeting; motion carried 4:0 by roll
call vote.
C. HEARINGS/APPEARANCES:
1. ANNUAL WEED ABATEMENT - PROTEST HEARING
Mayor Lilley opened the public hearing.
Public Comments:
Tom Bench, 7503 Carmelita Avenue, objected to the abatement notice
CC5/28/91
Page 4 •
he had received reporting that he had cut the weeds one week prior
to the inspection. The City Manager indicated that the matter
• would be clarified and that he personally would get back in touch
with Mr. Bench.
Paul Miller, resident of Templeton, complained about the previous
year' s abatement. He disputed the administrative charge and the
hourly rate.
MOTION: By Councilman Nimmo, seconded by Councilman Shiers to
order the Fire Chief or his authorized representative to
abate the nuisance of noxious or dangerous weeds on the
lots identified in Resolution No. 30-91; motion
unanimously carried.
2. ZONE CHANGE 03-91 (City of Atascadero)
A. Ordinance No. 222 - Amending Section 9-3.651 (Establish-
ment of Planned Development Overlay Zone No. 7) of the
Zoning Ordinance by the addition of development standards
(Recommend motion to waive reading in full and approve on
first reading by title only. )
Steve DeCamp, City Planner, gave the staff report. He recommended
a change in language in the proposed "Standard H" as follows: "Two
story residences shall have a second floor that is limited to 75%
of the habitable area of the first floor inclusive of the garage. "
• Councilman Nimmo asked Mr. Decamp whether or not the planned unit
development nearing completion on Sinaloa Avenue would have been
precluded if the 1/2 acre minimum was in force. The City Planner
stated that it would have.
Lengthy discussion followed regarding the proposed half-acre
minimum lot size. Mayor Lilley shared concern for the protection
and preservation of multiple family dwellings. He pondered whether
the Council has the right to impose lifestyle standards and warned
against assuming that all residents desire the amenity of home
ownership.
Responding to a question from Councilman Nimmo on a minimum number
of homes per planned development, Mr. DeCamp suggested a minimum of
four, but indicated that he would prefer six to eight. Mr. Nimmo
proposed that a standard setting the minimum of four homes with the
applicable set-backs be used to dictate the size of lot, rather
than specifying that the lot must be 1/2 acre.
Public Comments:
Warren Miller, 5805 Cascabel, stated that he currently had an
CC5/28/91
Page 5
application pending for a planned unit development. This project,
he said, would be eliminated if the 1/2 acre minimum lot size was
imposed. He opposed this standard because he believed it would
undermine the concept of affordable housing.
Deborah Hollowell, Cuesta Engineering, favored Councilman Nimmo' s
suggestion of using a minimum number of units and was supportive of
the revision to "Standard H", as proposed by staff.
Eric Greening, 7365 Valle, asked that consideration be given for
"meaningful" yard space. He proposed a standard of requiring that
at least one-third of the yard receive at least three hours of
sunlight to ensure yards that can be fully used by the residents.
Whitey Thorpe, 8205 Santa Ynez, opposed the 1/2 acre minimum,
asserting that practicality is more important than a set size.
Council comments followed. Councilman Nimmo stated that he was
prepared to limit units to four, but was no agreeable to setting a
1/2 acre minimum.
Councilman Shiers indicated that he favored the 1/2 acre minimum
lot size for the parent lot because it would protect and preserve
the supply of rental stock. He added that PD' s recently built are
not "affordable" .
Councilman Dexter also shared concern for saving the "bank" of
rental housing and asked Mr. DeCamp if a variance or a minimum lot
square footage could be applied. The City Planner advised against
the use of a variance in regard to planned unit developments and
further explained that "Standard G" addresses unit size to lot
size.
Mayor Lilley asserted that the Council is obligated to balance the
rental stock and proclaimed that he was not in favor of the 1/2
acre minimum lot size. He added that he did not have any problems
with all other proposed standards.
Mr. DeCamp noted that the 1/2 acre standard is less significant
compared to other standards and if deleted, the ordinance could be
workable.
Mayor Lilley recognized the absence of Councilwoman Borgeson and
entertained a motion to direct staff to prepare an alternative
ordinance deleting the 1/2 acre minimum standard and bring the
matter back when a full Council was present.
MOTION: By Councilman Nimmo and seconded by Councilman Shiers to
continue the matter until the next meeting with an
alternative draft ordinance for further public hearing
CC5/28/91
Page 6
and decision; motion passed unanimously.
• The City Manager announced the matter would be again before Council
on June 11, 1991.
3. URGENCY ORDINANCE - UTILITY TRANSMISSION FACILITIES (City
Council-initiated)
A. Ordinance No. 224 - An interim ordinance of the Council
of the City of Atascadero amending the Zoning Ordinance
by requiring Conditional Use Permits for the installation
of certain previously allowed utility transmission facil-
ities within residential zones
(Recommend motion to waive reading in full and adopt on
first reading by title only -- Urgency Ordinance requires
a 4/5 vote)
Mayor Lilley noted that a letter had been received from Wayne E.
Cooper of Pacific Gas & Electric Company outlining their position
regarding jurisdiction to regulate design and site location of
public utility facilities and suggested, in light of this, that the
matter be continued.
The City Manager reported that the reason behind the urgency
ordinance was to give the City something on the books to address
the issue that brought the matter to light (GTE cellular
transmission facility) , clarifying that this action does not affect
• PG&E. He indicated that, having conferred with Mr. Cooper and the
City Attorney, he believed adoption of the urgency ordinance would
be in the best interest of the City. Within the forty-five days in
which the ordinance would be in affect, Mr. Windsor remarked, staff
would work with PG&E in preparing the permanent ordinance and
addressing their concerns.
There were no public comments.
MOTION: By Councilman Nimmo and seconded by Councilman Shiers to
adopt Ordinance No. 224 as an urgency measure; motion
carried 4:0.
Mayor Lilley called a recess at 8:55 p.m. Meeting reconvened at
9:17 p.m.
D. REGULAR BUSINESS•
1. REQUEST TO CONSIDER DIAL-A-RIDE EXPANSION - PRESENTATION BY
SLO COUNTY
Richard Randise, representing San Luis Obispo County, presented the
request for Dial-A-Ride service to Templeton. He reported that the
CC5/28/91
Page 7
County would budget $10,000 toward a trial period.
Responding to the mayor' s inquiry, Mr. Randise indicated that a .
similar proposal had been given to the City of Paso Robles and that
the ultimate goal would be for both cities to provide service to
and from Templeton.
Councilman Shiers voiced concern for deterioration of the level of
service currently being given to Atascadero due to the added
service. Mr. Randise explained that the County was recommending
that the additional runs be scheduled during off-peak hours and
that the first priority would be with the City.
The City Manager indicated that conceptual endorsement was being
requested of Council and reported that staff would then proceed to
prepare an in-depth report with a cost analysis.
Greg Luke, Public Works Director, reiterated that the costs
associated with the pilot program would be paid by the County and
emphasized that the City could terminate the service if it did, in
fact, impact current level of service to the community.
MOTION: By Councilman Shiers and seconded by Councilman Dexter to
support, in concept the extension of Dial-A-ride service
to Templeton; motion unanimously carried.
Public Comment:
Eric Greening spoke in support of the proposed extension of service
pointing out that presently there is very limited north-bound
transit service.
2. PAVILION PROJECT STATUS REPORT (Verbal)
A. Request to approve Change Order #1
Mr. Windsor brought attention to a correction on the change order,
explaining that the total cost savings would be $122,800 rather
than $124,700.
The Public Works Director presented a status report on the
construction and highlighted the changes which resulted in the cost
savings. He reported that the projected completion date. was
February 1, 1992 and explained that he would be providing Council
with monthly work schedules to allow accurate tracking of the
project. In addition, Mr. Luke noted that he anticipated a cost of
approximately $10,000 in concrete work and pointed out that
irrigation plumbing could be retrofitted for serving future
landscaping.
ccs/28/91
Page 8
MOTION: By Councilman Shiers and seconded by Councilman Dexter to
• approve the amended Pavilion Change Order No. 1; motion
unanimously carried.
3. STATUS REPORT ON THE GREEN WASTE RECYCLING PROGRAM
The Public Works Director presented the status report and
recommended that the Green Waste Recycling Program be extended from
June to September free of charge to Wil-Mar customers. In
addition, he explained that Wil-Mar had indicated willingness to
not only continue this service but to share the cost of public
education and advertising on a 1: 1 basis.
The City Manager pointed out that no additional appropriations
would be necessary.
Public Comment:
Eric Greening contended that he was not in favor of drop-off sites
for green waste because it would increase automotive trips and be
difficult for those who do not drive.
The Public Works Director clarified that residential pick-up would
not be eliminated and that drop-off sites would be a supplement to
the present service. Mr. Greening indicated that he understood and
thanked Mr. Luke for his explanation.
• Councilman Shiers pointed out that the public also has the option
to drop off full pick-up loads at the Dirtman' s site.
By common consensus, the City Council gave authorization to
(1) Extend the existing Green Waste Recycling Program from
June to September free of charge to Wil-Mar customers, and (2)
To share the cost of public education and advertising with
Wil-Mar on a 1:1 basis.
4. REQUEST FOR SUPPLEMENTAL SUPPORT FOR COUNTY'S SPAY/NEUTER PRO-
GRAM
The City Manager introduced the subject noting that staff ' s
recommendation to deny the County' s request for additional funds
was not an argument against the importance of the spay/neuter
program, but rather a concern for the General Fund.
There were no public comments.
MOTION: By Councilman Nimmo and seconded by Councilman Dexter to
not approve augmenting the current level of $9,000 for
Fiscal Year 1990-91; motion passed 4:0.
CC5/28/91
Page 9
S. PUBLIC WORKS DEFERRED IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENTS (City Attorney)
The City Attorney asked Council to confirm staff 's approach and •
direct staff to continue their pursuit of construction or payment
for required improvements.
There were no questions from Council and no public testimony.
MOTION: By Councilman Dexter, seconded by Councilman Nimmo in
accord with recommendations from the City Attorney to
direct staff to continue and get back to Council with
recommendations as to bonding and other security changes
deemed appropriate for consideration; passed 4:0.
6. PROPOSED CHAMBER SIGN ORDINANCE REVISION (Mayor Lilley)
Mayor Lilley indicated that Council had not given specific
direction regarding the Chamber of Commerce' s draft sign ordinance
and asked that this matter be addressed.
Mr. Windsor, referred to Henry Engen' s Report to Council dated
3/26/91 and read a portion of the Zoning Ordinance. He recommended
that Council direct staff to develop its , own report, based upon
the proposed ordinance, with recommendations to the Planning
Commission.
He continued that the Commission would then hold a
public hearing and, as a result, staff would then come back to the
Council with their own recommendations based on input received from
that hearing. Mr. Windsor noted that this was in concurrence with
Alternative #2 of Mr. Eng e '
s
n report.
Public Comment:
Whitey Thorpe, 8205 Santa Ynez, suggested that the Council not let
anyone mess around with the present ordinance because it is good
enough as it is.
MOTION: By Councilman Nimmo and seconded by Councilman Shiers to
direct staff to take the Chamber's draft proposal to the
Planning Commission for recommendation as to whether to
initiate a text amendment; motion carried 4:0.
7 . SET BUDGET HEARING DATES
Mark Joseph, Administrative Services Director, suggested dates.
By common consensus, Council agreed to review the proposed
Fiscal Year 1991-92 Budget on Tuesday, June 11, 1991 at 5:30
p.m. (prior to the regular meeting commencing at 7:00 p.m. )
and to meet on Wednesday, June 19, 1991 from 3:00 p.m. to 6:00
p.m. to receive and review community agency funding requests.
CC5/28/91
Page 10
Council also agreed that if a third meeting was necessary, a
• date certain would be announced.
Mr. Joseph indicated that staff would tentatively schedule formal
adoption of the budget for the regular meeting to be held on June
25, 1991.
E. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION ANDIOR ACTION:
1. City Council
Mayor Lilley acknowledged Councilman Dexter's attendance at the
Veterans of Foreign Wars Memorial Service held on May 27th, 1991
and presented to the City Manager for appropriate display the
M.I.A.P.O.W. flag received from the VFW.
Councilman Dexter noted that a recent newspaper article reported
that there are still over 7, 000 service men and women unaccounted
for.
Councilman Shiers reported that he had received correspondence
regarding "Nacimiento Water" asking for some direction from
Atascadero. He suggested that Council may wish to discuss this
matter. Mayor Lilley added that he, too, had been asked where the
Council stands on this subject as well as "State Water" . He asked
the City Manager to communicate with Atascadero Mutual Water
Company for a response regarding both issues and bring this back as
an agenda item. Mr. Windsor pointed out that the original master
plan as well as the updated master plan for the water district, as
part of the City' s General Plan, indicates both as priorities. He
stated that he would send a letter asking what the water company' s
current position is and what action they intend to take. In
addition, the City Manager announced that the Council is on record
by resolution to the Board of Supervisors urging communication with
Monterey County over the allocation from Nacimiento Lake.
(Resolution No. 6-91) .
Mayor Lilley announced that he would be participating in a
television program to be aired on the following day on Channel 15.
He reported that the owner of the station is very interested in
programming local events in the City of Atascadero and indicated he
personally would follow-up in an effort to take advantage of this
kind of promotion for community events.
2. City Attorney
Art Montandon requested a closed session for the purpose of
discussions relating to current litigation, O'Keefe v. City of
Atascadero. He asked that the session be held at the end of the
meeting and noted that it would require a unanimous vote by the
CC5/28/91
Page 11
Council.
3. City Clerk - None.
4. City Treasurer - None.
5. City Manager
Mr. Windsor reported that he had distributed an opinion from the
City Attorney regarding American Classics' freeway signage. He
explained that he had not formally notified the business of the
opinion and asked for authorization to do so. By common consensus,
Council gave such approval.
MOTION: By Councilman Nimmo and seconded by Councilman Dexter to
adjourn to closed session for the purpose of discussions
relating to litigation, O'Keefe v. City of Atascadero;
motion passed 4:0.
The open session was adjourned to a closed session at 10:21 p.m.
MOTION: By Councilman Nimmo, seconded by Councilman Shiers to
adjourn back into open session and adjourn the meeting;
motion unanimously carried.
THE MEETING WAS ADJOURNED AT 10:32 P.M. THE CITY COUNCIL WILL MEET
TO REVIEW THE PROPOSED FISCAL YEAR 1991-92 BUDGET AT 5:30 P.M. ON
TUESDAY, JUNE 11, 1991.
MINUTES RECORDED D PREPARED BY:
i
LE DAYKA) RAB IN, City Clerk
Attachment: Exhibit A - Colony Roads Status Report from Mary
Gayle, Burke, Williams & Sorensen
CC5/28/91
Page 12
'I
05,- 28/91 15'-59 $ 805 482 9834 EWS UENTURA CO. 02
CC5/28/91
EXHIBIT "A"
• BLTHI{N, W YLLY MS 4�C SOJ,?HC N:SY.N
�DIJ t [iN-r c:r7!',n r.l•+ivt
n r1ANGE COUNTY Orri c:[ .tulle r L05 ANC.;r 8 V�FItL
(:ISTII 5:'I4dET, SUITE L tJ
.i2^:: 9R15T: :IHLt7 CAMARILLO, ('ALIFGRNIA 5330101 LWEFT C5 AGE .F: �, t;M IF bCY NIA 06C'7
?.UfTE (340
CAI.IFOi7Nl4 �2Ct 2�± [9r?`:,} f-111! .f4 c•.11 (e'!3)
i71a) Sa5.555 r. T__ECo Pt( w'. (i+i:'•,I bFe:: is tl�4 ItLECCArE R: (?)31 ?1 A•:7Ah
R EC 'E' IV E D
IJAY 2 81991
May 28 , 1991 ATASCADERO
CITY CLERK
FACSIMILE TRANSMISSION
ORIGINAL TO FOLLOW
Direct Line: 805-9873468
File Number: 02352-004
The Honorable Mayor Robert Lilley and
Honorable Councilmembers
• City of Atascadero
City Hall
Atascadero, California
Re: Status Report on Road Review
Dear Mayor Lilley and Councilmembers,
Last week, I spent the better part of three days in
the San Luis Obispo County Clark's office reviewing official
records related to the road matter in the City. This letter
will serve as a status report and reassessment of the tasks
required in order to assist the City in its selection of
road dedications anticipated to be received from Wells Fargo
Bank and the current Trustee of the remnants of the holdings
of E.G. Lewis.
A. To date, I have completed the following:
1. Grantor Indexes and Actual Deeds for Years.
1921-1930 - Requires Looking at Actual Deeds Because
There Is No Grantor Index: I have examined portions of
these records. These are those contained on the oldest
reels of microfilm in the official records. One can
05/28/91 15:59 a 8.05 482 9834 BWS VENTURA CO. 03
Atascadero Mayor and Council
May 28, 1991
Page 2 •
only work at these reels about two hours at a time
because of their poor quality. I have examined about
350 pages and estimate that there are about 600-1000
pages yet to examine. Not every page contains a deed
from Lewis to a buyer but, because there is no index,
each document must be examined to determine the name of
the grantor.
2. Grantor indexes and Actual Deeds for Years
1930-1944: I have examined the grantor index to compile
a list of deeds granted by Oscar Willett (the first
trustee) , Paul Bone (Trustee of a separate trust Willett
set up) and Anglo American National Bank (after
foreclosure on portions of the Lewis property) to
certificate holders in the scheme set up by Willett to
reimburse Lewis0s creditors. Of the approximate 1939
pages of deeds, I have examined 232 pages and recorded
the information. •
3 . 1 have formulated a strategy for recording the
information learned from the deeds in both graphic and
file form which is readily usable and easily understood.
4 . I have begun recording on the City map those
deeds examined and, where applicable, grants of any
rights in streets, roads, alleys, streambeds, minerals
or related portions of property.
B. I have yet to examine the following records:
1. For Year 19211930: The remainder of the reel
described in jA1 above.
2. For Year 1930-1944: Examine the
Willett/Bone/Anglo deeds not yet examined (approximately
1700 pp. ) and the Grantor index and deeds from Jesperson
during this period (number unknown at this time) .
3 . For years 1945- to present: Examine the
Grantor indexes and all deeds listed therein from
Jesperson, Elmer Lee and Gordon Davis to property owners
in the original Atascadero subdivisions created by Lewis
05/28/91 15:00 $ 305 482 9834 BWS VENTURA CO. 04
At.ascadero Mayor and Council
May 28, 1991
Page 3
(the number of deeds here is unknown, but my review of
Court records for Lee and Davis (none are avilable► for
Jesperson) leads me to believe that there will be no
more than 754-1000 deeds) .
4 . Complete graphic and file recording of those
deeds examined and, where applicable, grants of any
rights in streets, roads, alleys, streambeds, minerals
or related portions of property.
I am sure that you are, like I am, overwhelmed at
the scope of the project which has been uncovered in the two
weeks since I last reported to you. I am doubtful that we
can bring the project to completion within the scope of the
estimated cost I gave you on May 14, but I have a plan to
reduce the cost to the barest minimum.
To date, the research begun after May 14, 1991 has
consumed about 22 hours of my time. Up until I completed
last week's work, my active work on the research was
necessary to plan the approach and determine that the
desired results could be achieved. At this point, we
believe that we can bring our paralegal up to San Luis to do
the research. After one day's training with me, we believe
she can adequately review the documents listed above. Her
billing rate is $80 an hour and we would accomplish twice as
much work at a little over half the cost by using her. We
would need to charge her expenses for hotel and meals during
her stay, but would not charge for her travel time. I
estimate that that would bring the true billing rate to $92
per hour as opposed to the $150-175 we are charging for my
services on this matter.
Under our present authorization, no action is
needed by the Council until your June 11 meeting unless you
want to stop the work at this point. I will continue to
give you regular reports on the progress so that you will
know at regular intervals what has been done on the project
and what remains to be done.
05123{91 16:01 $ 805 482 3834 BWS VENTURA CO. 05
. P
Atascadero Mayor and Council
May 28, 1991
Page 4
I would be pleased to respond to questions or
comments from the. Council as you request. If I am not
advised to the contrary, I will proceed with putting the
above-described plan of action into effect with Ms. Coon
commencing her work on or about the first or second week of
June.
Cordially,
Mar R dus Gayle
of HURKE, WILLIAMS & SORENSEN
MRG:lvc
cc: Ray Windsor
Henry Engen
Greg Luke
Arther R. Montandon, Esq.
MEETI AGENDA
DATE E L l 1/91 ITEM# B_.?..._..
RESOLUTION NO. 45-91
• A RESOLUTION OF
THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO
ENDORSING THE DESIGNATED DRIVER PROGRAM
AND
COMMENDING THOSE PARTICIPATING
WHEREAS, The North County Designated Driver Program was offi-
cially launched by the Cities of Paso Robles and Atascadero, in
conjunction with the California Highway Patrol, on Tuesday, May 21,
1991; and
WHEREAS, The goal of this program is to provide alternative
means of transportation for those persons who would otherwise have
to drive under the influence of alcohol; and
WHEREAS, The City Council heartily supports this effort to
further reduce incidents of drinking and driving and wishes to
extend deep appreciation to Marigrace Convertino-Waage of M.A.D.D. ,
Ron Ghan, Branch Manager of Anheuser-Busch/Pacific Beverage in
Santa Margarita, and Lieutenant John Barlow of the Atascadero
Police Department for their leadership and ongoing efforts to make
this program a success; and
• WHEREAS, The City Council wishes to additionally recognize and
commend the following local businesses for their participation in
the Designated Driver Program:
1. McCarthy' s Bar and Grill
2. Rogue's Den
3. Club Soda
4. The Dugout
S. The Hillhouse Restaurant
6. Country Touch Cafe
7. The Half-Way Station
8. E1 Toro Restaurant
9. Players Restaurant
NOW, THEREFORE, The City Council of the City of Atascadero
urges every north County resident to participate when and where
appropriate in the Designated Driver Program so that we may become
the role model for driver safety whenever alcohol is consumed.
On motion by Councilmember , seconded by Council-
member , the foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in
its entirety on the following roll-call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
�"` ABSENT:
Resolution No. 45-91
Page 2
ADOPTED:
CITY OF ATASCADERO, CA
By:
ROBERT B. LILLEY, Mayor
ATTEST:
LEE DAYKA, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ARTHER R. MONTANDON, City Attorney
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: •
RAY WINDSOR, City Manager
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM: B-3
CITY OF ATASCADERO
THROUGH: Ray Windsor, City ManagerMEETING DATE: 6/11/91
Ch
FROM: Andrew J. Takata, Director </
Department of Community Services
SUBJECT:
BID NUMBER 91-7 - 12 PASSENGER VAN PURCHASE
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the City Council award Bid Number 91-7, in the
amount of $16,558.26 to:
Capitol Ford, Inc.
919 West Capitol Expressway
San Jose, California 95136
(408) 265-6000
DISCUSSION:
• Of six bids received, Capitol Ford was the lowestr'
$16,558.26 p ice at
BACKGROUND:
The 1980 Ford van (#E2IGHHD3368) , now utilized by the Department of
Community Services, is considered obsolete, and recommended by
staff for surplus. The van would also require major modification
to meet California Highway Patrol codes for passenger transport.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Funds sufficient to fund this purchase have been allocated for
fiscal year 1990/91
AJT:kv
;van
• Attachment - Proposals received
City Clerk Summary
TO: Andy Takata BID_SUMMARY
Director of ommunity Services
FROM: Lee Dayka
City Cle
BID NO. : 91-7
OPENED : 5/22/91 2:00 A.M.
PROJECT: 12-Passenger Van
The following proposals were received and opened as follows:
Bidder Year/Model Total Price Discount
,,Capitol Ford, Inc. Not specified $16,558.26 None
919 West Capitol Exp'way 9
San Jose, CA 95136
Ted Miles Jeep-Eagle ' 90 Dodge Ram 350 16,632. 13 None
7380 E1 Camino Real
Atascadero, CA 93422
Hysen-Johnson Ford Not specified 17,282.24 None
P.O. Box 3759 •
San Luis Obipso, CA 93403
Rancho Grande Motors ' 91 Rally G3500 18, 155. 00 .5%
1404 Auto Park Way
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Johnson Ford/Linc./Merc. ' 91 Ford Clubwagon 18,394.90 None
45640 23rd St. W.
Lancaster, CA 93536
Atascadero Ford ' 91 Ford Clubwagon 18,495.94 None
3850 E1 Camino Real
Atascadero, CA' 93422
Attachments: 6 proposals
c: Cathy, Finance
City of Atascadero
BID RESPONSE FORM
Request for Bid #9i-07
In response to your bid invitation and in accordance with your
conditions and specifications, we agree to furnish and deliver a
12-passenger van to the City of Atascadero Community Services
Department, located at 6500 Palma Avenue, Atascadero, California,
as specified, for the bid price quoted below.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
1 Each 12-Passenger Van Subtotal $ 15621
Sales Tax 937.26
----------------
TOTAL 16P558.26
Address of local service facility:
----------------
Nearest Ford Agency
Parts delivery schedule:
• To the CITY PUR SI AGENT: C,P�
1
In complian with the a ove invitati n for bid , and subject to
all the conditions thereof, the undersigned offers, and agrees,
if this bid be accepted within 60 days from the date of the
opening , to furnish any or all of the items upon which prices are
quoted , at the price set opposite each item, delivered at the
point as specified and , unless otherwise specified within fifteen
days after receipt of order .
Discount of net-% will be allowed for payment within 30 days
from date of delivery. Order must be received no later than
June 15, 1991 for a 1991 Buil Sidder..9a
itol Ford
------------- RURT-I------------- - ------ord IncI --------
IMPORTANT_I_NSTRUCTI�NS_TO_BIDDER
Bids must be sealed and By__ _ � -�-___addressed to : ( u orized signatur
Tit l.e_V_ice_Pre_s2_N_t1_F.1t _.],rotor
City of Atascadero
City Clerk Phone:_408_265=59QQ_--_________
6500 Palma Avenue Address_9-Lg_WeEt-C .piD1-Ex;:rPs way
Atascadero , California 93422
Bid #91-07,5/22/91 ,2:00 pm Date: M�,X_21}_1991_
PLEASE STAPLE ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION TO THIS RESPONSE SHEET.
•
Powertrain coverage
After the basic coverage ends,
Your warranty provides you with
l
El
continuing coverage on your
r/'. �/ vehicle's powertrain parts.
r✓�` /� NOTE: You are responsible for proper
maintenance of your vehicle as
indicated in the Maintenance
Schedule of your Owner Guide.
Here are details about your powertrain
coverage.
How long does powertrain coverage last?
Coverage on powertrain parts begins when the
- 12-month or 12,000-mile basic coverage ends.
Powertrain coverage lasts four years or 50,000
Basic coverage miles after the warranty start date,whichever
occurs first.
Your warranty begins with a What is covered?
period of basic coverage; here are Under powertrain coverage, the warranty
details about this coverage. continues to cover defects that are found in the
factory-supplied materials and workmanship of
the following parts of the engine, transmission/
How long does basic coverage last—and transaxle, and axle and drive systems on
what does it cover? gasoline and diesel-fueled vehicles.
These engine parts are covered:
Basic coverage begins at the warranty start date • camshaft timing drive components and
and lasts for 12 months or 12,000 miles,which- cover
ever occurs first..Under basic coverage, all parts • cylinder block, heads, and all internal parts
of your car or light truck (except tires and non- • diesel fuel injection pump and lines
Ford engines) are covered for defects in factory- engine sealing
supplied materials and workmanship. flywheel •
• manifolds
The following components and systems are oil pump and pan
covered for 12 months, regardless of the mile- supercharger and associated parts
age you put on the vehicle: • turbocharger and associated parts
• valve covers
• the Ford radio, radio/tape deck, and valve train
Water pump
compact disc components.
and
These transmission/transaxle parts are
• these factory-installed systems: covered:
• case, all internal parts, seals and gaskets
- air conditioner • clutch cover and housing
- heater -- - • torque converter and converter housing
rear window defroster
- heating elements in outside rear-view These axle and drive parts are covered:
mirror
• driveshaft and universal joints
electrically heated windshield • front and/or rear drive axles and all
internal parts
• transfer case and all internal parts on four-
. wheel-drive vehicles
Who pays for warranty repairs during
powertrain coverage?
ow
Under/ powertrain coverage, each time you take•
your vehicle to a dealer to repair a covered
powertrain part, you will have to pay the first$50
of the warranty repair charges. However, you
will not have to pay this $50 charge if the part is
also covered under the emissions warranties.
City of Atascadero
BID RESPONSE FORM
Request for Bid #91-07
In response to your bid invitation and in accordance with your
conditions and specifications, we agree to furnish and deliver a
12-passenger van to the City of Atascadero Community Services
Department, located at 6500 Palma Avenue, Atascadero , California,
as specified, for the bid price quoted below.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
em U 1 Each 12-Passenger Van Subtotal
f�Ly �/w,wJow -
r' /211? co•v ed C/B.J+r.. ro.-��e�•c. /°/,fie cl;' r Sales Tax
(�cSS�wjyzo2
Address of local service facility: TOTAL
�y/P ;7q'--'a0
Parts delivery schedule:
• To the CITY PURCHASING AGENT:
In compliance with the above invitation for bid , and subject to
all the conditions thereof, the undersigned offers , and agrees,
if this bid be accepted within 60 days from the date of the
opening , to furnish any or all of the items upon which prices are
quoted , at the price set opposite each item, delivered at the
point as specified and , unless otherwise specified within fifteen
days after receipt of order .
Discount of _____/ will be allowed for payment within 30 days
from dite of delivery.
--------------------------------BIDDER Bidder_��f_
IMPORTANT INSTRUCTIONS TO - �' -�' -----------
---------------------
Bids must be sealed and _ -
addressed to : uthorized signature)
Title
---------------
City of Atascadero ----- -----
City Clerk Phone:
6500 Palma AvenueAddress --------/--'�- ------
Atascadero , California 93422 TZ �ItWJg3Fi--E5 r-
Bid #91-07,5/22/91 ,2:00 pm Date :
�L� cnir�n 2eaJ-------
Atascadero, CA 53422
PLEASE STAPLE ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION TO THIS RESPONSE SHEET.
i
a YS E N
"1OHNSON
i
—"Vr
FORD DON WRIGHT
tEP FLEET MANAGER
EAGLE
LINCOLN
MERCURY
12200 LOS OSOSVALLEY RD.PO.BOX 3759SAN LUIS OBISPO,CA93403 Ity Of Atascadero
1-800-726-0043 805-544-5200
ID RESPONSE FORM
Kequest for Bid 491-07
In response to your bid invitation and in accordance with your
conditions and specifications, we agree to furnish and deliver a
12-passenger van to the City of Atascadero Community Services
Department, located at 6500 Palma Avenue, Atascadero , California,
as specified, for the bid price quoted below.
---------------------------------------------------------
// O
1 Each 12-Passenger Van Subtotal
,315 �0C �.
Sales Tax Z
----- 1--- ---
TOTAL 12Z�Z_=-_—
Address of local service facility: ---
/Z7-'00 (.o,$ 010S U�}c,c.6y,per. 5,4.,v (,ut S Og/f PO
Parts delivery schedule:
To the CITY PURCHASING AGENT: •
In compliance with the above invitation for bid , and subject to
all the conditions thereof, the undersigned offers, and agrees,
if this bid be accepted within 60 days from the date of the
opening, to furnish any or all of the items upon which prices are
quoted , at the price set opposite each item, delivered at the
point as specified and , unless otherwise specified within fifteen
days after rete' tof order .
Discount of will be allowed for payment within 30 days
from date of de ivery.
--------------------- - ------ Bid =rr� _✓_ ��s_-r/_.To/t/�j/to_�1�
I
M_PORTANTT INSTRUCTIONS--TO--BIDDER
Bids must be sealed and By_
addressed to : a th r ' d signature)
_
i e _J�LV1=='� ___
City of Atascadero • !_=j� � ------ ---
City Clerk Phane _
6500 Palma Avenue Address
Atascadero , California 93422
Bid #91-07,5/22/91 ,2:00 pm Date• f---�-
PLEASE STAPLE ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION TO THIS RESPONSE SHEET.
ill� -fSE JOHNSON FORD . LINCOLN . MERCURY • JEEP • EAGLE
E�� Fci✓LI S
l OE S N O T
� II
12200 LOS OSOS VALLEY ROAD P.O. BOX 3759 SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93403 (805) 544-5200 (800) 726-0043
��.
City of Atascadero
BID RESPONSE FORM
Request for Bid #91-07
In response to your bid invitation and in accordance with your
conditions and specifications, we agree to furnish and deliver a
12-passenger van to the City of Atascadero Community Services
Department, located at 6500 Palma Avenue, Atascadero, California,
as specified, for the bid price quoted below.
------------------------------------------
1 Each 12-Passenger Van Subtotal
Sales Tax
7
Address of local service facility: TOTAL ZJ7'`
Parts delivery schedule:
To the CITY PURCHASING AGENT: •
In compliance wits the above invitation for bid , and subject to
all the conditions thereof, the undersigned offers , and agrees,
if this bid be accepted within 60 days from the date of the
opening , to furnish any or all of the items upon which prices are
quoted , at the price set opposite each item, delivered at the
point as specified and , unless otherwise specified within fifteen
days after receiq of order .
Discount of _ _% will be allowed for payment within 30 days
from date of de ivery.
_________ Bidderv�/c j
IMPORTANT INSTRUCTIONS TO_HIDDER_
Bids must be sealed and By- �,j --E-c,�
addressed to : ( authorized signature)
City of Atascadero -----------
City Clerk Phone: -
6500 Palma Avenue Address-,,� 17�� �%moi
Atascadero , California 93422 t�/ ,�Lir�_
Bid #91-07,5/22/91 ,2 :00 pm Date : -'
PLEASE STAPLE ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION TO THIS RESPONSE SHEET.
•
.Y
RANCHO
• GRANDE MOTORS
SLO
1404 Auto Park Way
P.O. Box 4960
San Luis Obispo, CA 93403-4960
(805) 543-4745 Fax (805) 543-4956
TD
R0.r CIO
III
_ s
-7D
BLACK PONTIAC OMS SUBAAu ISUZU SAAM
City of Atascadero
BID RESPONSE FORM
Request for Bid #91-07
In response to your bid invitation and in accordance with your
conditions and specifications, we agree to furnish and deliver a
12-passenger van to the City of Atascadero Community Services
Department, located at 6500 Palma Avenue, Atascadero , California,
as specified, for the bid price quoted below.
-------------------------------------------------
1 Each 12-Passenger Van Subtotal 17 191 50
7% Sales Tax
Address of local service facility: TOTAL _181324_90------
Atascadero Ford
3850 E1 Camino Real
Parts delivery schedule: Atascadero , Ca . 93423
To the CITY PURCHASING AGENT:
In compliance with the above invitation for bid , and subject to
all the conditions thereof, the undersigned offers, and agrees,
if this bid be accepted within 60 days from the date of the
opening , to furnish any or all of the items upon which prices are
quoted , at the price set opposite each item, de1ivere
point as specified and , unless otherwise specified witfiin fifteen
days after receipt of order .
Discount of __Y___% will be allowed for payment within'-30--- days
from date of delivery.
________________________________ Bidd Johnson_Ford_Lincoln-Mercury
IMPORTANT_INST_RUCTIONS_TO_BIDDER
Bids must be sealed and
By
- --y addressed to :to : (authorize signature)------
Title_Commercial Sales Manager
City of Atascadero -
City Clerk Phone:_S8Q5�_ 949=X586_
6500 Palma Avenue Address_ t}56[�9_23TS1_-L
Atascadero , California 93422 -----
J_________
_L�.cas.� _.��.
Hid #91-07,5/22/91 ,2:00 pm Date: __512j.L9j................
PLEASE STAPLE ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION TO THIS RESPONSE SHEET.
T,
N AUTO CENTERS ANTELOPE VALLEY
RENO A CAR It Vehi ies
LANCASTER ' ft Vehicles
V,
45640
l.,
';• 45640 North 23rd Street ',Vest California ornia 93536
j (805) 949-3586
Fleet Quotation Page 1 of Date May 21 , 1991
Customer Name
euanut Cit of Atascadero
Y Truck Series Check Type of Option
one Clubwagon ( 12 Pas ) °otde Standard warranty
1991 For Cl11 ubwa on 12 mo/ 12, 000
E21 mile
bumper to per
@mnPk
711A zero deductible
1 CID 5 . 8 Liter Electronic Fuel
In 'ected V-8 En ine as (excluding tires)
nic 4 Speed Auto Overdrive 48 mo/50, 000 mile
10 AMP Alternator 44E Powertrain @
7 AH 35CLA) maintance free batter $50 deductible
Pnwp� n Service may be performed a
m
Hi h ca acit air conditionin with Atascadero Ford
3850 El Camino Real
A x ' ' r heater front & rear ) 574 Atascadero , Ca . 93423
Recover S stem h lint
all doors to s ecs .
Dual cloth ca tians chairs
2 cloth assen er benches 3 ass
h finch 4 ass
Seatbelts for all sea s nvi rs 2
Ammeter Oil Pressure Tempera ure ,
Gas direct readin • instrumen a io
Sri ht lowmount ;swin-qaway mirrors
Ill
ip Iter. mouldin
P 5/75R X 15XL BSW All season tir s 17, 156. 50
5 6 . OK 8 hole wheels Doc Fee 35 . 00
h m n als - Tax 7% 1 , 203. 40
107-91
m nu les FPS- 12090-91
3 Sets f keys
2153-91
otal Bid $18 , 394 . 90
leet Ma ager
SON AUTO CENTER ANTELOPE VALLEY Recreational
® RENT-A-CAR Vehicles
LANCASTER
•
45640 North 23rd Street West • Lancaster, California 93536 (805) 949-3586
OPTIONAL WARRANTIES
1991 Ford Extended Service Plan "TOTAL" ( see attached brochure )
3 year warranties/ Zero Deductable
50 , 000 Mile $460 . 00
75 , 000 Mile $670. 00
100 , 00 Mile $980 . 00
4 Year/Zero Deductable
50 , 000 Miles $570. 00
75 , 000 Mile $815 . 00
100, 00 Mile $1160. 00
5 Year/ Zero Deductable
50, 000 Mile $650 . 00
75 , 000 Mile $930. 00
100 , 00 Mile $1290 . 00
6 Year/Zero Deductable
50 , 000 Mile $705 . 00
75 , 000 Mile $1030 . 00 •
100 , 00 Mile $1365 . 00
1991 Ford Extended Service Plan "PLUS" ( see attached brochure )
3 Year/Zero deductable
50 , 000 Mile $330 . 00
75 , 000 Mile $480 . 00
100, 00 Mile $690. 00
4 Year/Zero Dedu6table
50, 000 Mile $415 :00
75 , 000 Mile $585. 00
100, 00 Mile $835 . 00
5 Year/Zero Deductable
50,000 Mile $470 . 00
75 , 000 Mile
� $670 .00
100 , 000 Mile $925 . 00
6 Year/Zero Deductable
50 , 000 Mile $510 . 00
75 , 000 Mile $715 . 00
100 ,000 Mile $980 . 00
•
City of Atascadero
BID RESPONSE FORM
Request for Bid #91-07
In response to your bid invitation and in accordance with your
conditions and specifications, we agree to furnish and deliver a
12-passenger van to the City of Atascadero Community Services
Department, located at 6500 Palma Avenue, Atascadero, California,
as specified, for the bid price quoted below.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
1 Each 12-Passenger Van Subtotal _____1Z449,QQ .....
Sales Tax
TOTAL 18495.94
Address of local service facility:
----------------
3850 E1 Camino Real, Atascadero, CA
Parts delivery schedule: DAILY
• To the CITY PURCHASING AGENT:
In compliance with the above invitation for bid , and subject to
all the conditions thereof, the undersigned offers, and agrees,
if this bid be accepted within 60 days from the date of the
opening , to furnish any or all of the items upon which prices are
quoted , at the price set opposite each item, delivered at the
point as specified and , unless otherwise specified within fifteen
days after receipt of order .
Discount of _____Y. will be allowed for payment within 30 days
from date of delivery.
__ B i d d e r ATASCAD FORD, INC.
------------------------------ --ASC -D, INC
Bids must be sealed and By_______
addressed to : (autho ' ze ignature)
Title--clenera--Sati-es-i►fanagsr------
City of Atascadero
City Clerk Phone:_C805) 466_9464 _________
6500 Palma Avenue Address3850 El Camino R�a�,_________
-------------
Atascadero , California 93422 Atascadero) CP39AZ2 ________
Bid #91-07,5/22/91 ,2:00 pm Date: SL�;��2_______________
PLEASE STAPLE ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION TO THIS RESPONSE SHEET.
• PLEASE SEE ATWEM FOR ADDITIONAL I16ORMTIOi
J
'j 0
3850 EL CAMINO REAL ATASCADERC, CA 93422 ,8051 45o-�a c
Description of Make-up of Vehicle:
1991 FORD CLUB WAGON 12 PASSENGER VAN
5.0 L V8 FI Engine
4 speed Auto Transmission
Maximum Output Alternator
High Capacity Battery
PS
PB
Air
HD Radiator
Vinyl with Cloth Inserts Seats
5 Wheels/Tires
Maximum Cooling Capacity Cooling Rec. System
CA Emissions
Two each Parts, Opertor's and Repair Manual
Three (3) sets of Keys
w
K
.3
J
I� .
J
• 3850 EL CAMINO REAL ATASCADERO. CA 33,1 -
22 i305i16o-=�0=
WARRAN'PY
Factory and component manufacturer's standard:
Basic 12 months/12,000 miles
Emissions 5 years/50,000 miles
Power Train 4 years/50,000 miles
Extended Warranty (available at extra cost)
FORD ESP PLUS 50.00 deductible
4 year/50,000 $585.00
5 year/50,000 $625.00
6 year/50,000 $655.00
FORD ESP TOTAL 50.00 deductible
4 year/50,000 $675.00
5 year/50,000 $730.00
• 6 year/50,000 $765.00
Please see attached brochures for information
as to whether the "plus" or the "total" is the
Plan you would require.
4
-a
"i
,y
4
•
3
• I
City of 4tascadero
Purchasing Agent
6500 Palma Avenue
Atascadero . CA 93422
NOTICE OF BID AWARD
Issue Date
Hid No .
Resolution No .
You are hereby notified that the commodities andior services
listed have been awarded to you subject to the terms and
conditions of the bid number shown and to the Genera! Conditions
Of this Notice of Hid Award :
V
E
N
O
0
R •
'E•`� QUANT I T`! UNIT OESCR I PT I CN PRICE
Purchasing Department
9v:
Vendor ' s rpecresentative
rFzone
MEETING AGEND
DATE-L-11/91 ITEM# �_4
(Cont'd from 5/28/91)
• RESOLUTION NO. 43-91
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA
CREATING A POLICY RELATED TO
CAPITAL PROJECT FUNDING
WHEREAS, it is expressly prohibited to expend funds on capital
projects without Council authorization; and
WHEREAS, there are occasions when additional funds are
required for capital projects after bids have been awarded and work
has begun; and
WHEREAS, in order to recognize the importance that timing can
and does have on project costs.
NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved that the Atascadero City
Council does hereby adopt the following policy:
Staff with concurrence of the City Manager shall have the
discretion to make up to 10% adjustment on a specific project
up to $10,000 with the understanding that such action shall
receive Council ratification at the next available scheduled
• Council meeting. In the event that an increase in cost
exceeds $10, 000, staff must either wait for the City Council
to act on such change at the next available scheduled Council
meeting or request that Council convene a special meeting
requiring 24 hours notice.
On motion by Councilmember , seconded by
Councilmember , the foregoing resolution is
hereby adopted in its entirety on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ADOPTED:
ATTEST: CITY OF ATASCADERO
By:
LEE DAYKA, City Clerk ROBERT B. LILLEY, Mayor
•
M E M O R A N D U M
•
To: City Council
From: Ray Windsor, City Manager
Subject: Capital project overrun approval
Date: May 13, 1991
As tonight' s agenda reflects, the fire station parking lot project
incurred considerably more expense than we had anticipated. This
issue came to light at the time I was on vacation and, after dis-
cussing it with Greg Luke and Mark Joseph and being apprised that
the cost could grow even greater if there were further delay while
waiting for the next Council meeting, I directed Mark to contact
each member of the Council informally to obtain authorization to
continue the project. This action on my part was a judgment call
and raises the issue of legality with respect to the expenditure of
unbudgeted funds without benefit of a special meeting.
Under the circumstances, and in order to avoid criticism or legal
• problems in the future, I would like to suggest that Council adopt
a policy with respect to capital projects of under $25, 000 which
would allow staff, with the Manager' s concurrence, to make a
variance of up to 10% of the contracted price where time and cir-
cumstances warrant, with the understanding that a notice of such
change would be brought back to the City Council for ratification
at the first possible regular meeting following. This would mean
that any project of up to $25,000 in scope which, through unknown
circumstances, required an additional appropriation in excess of
10% of the contract price could only be authorized by either
waiting for the first appropriate regular Council meeting or by
calling, through the issuance of a 24-hour notice, a special Coun-
cil meeting.
RW:cw
c: Department Heads
City Attorney
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL Meeting Date: 6/11/91
CITY OF ATASCADERO
Agenda Item: B-5
Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager
From Lee Raboin, City Clerk))",,'/
SUBJECT:
Amended Conflict of Interest Code.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Resolution No. 46-91 adopting an amended Conflict of
Interest Code.
BACKGROUND:
During my attendance at the League of California Cities City
Clerk' s New Law and Election Seminar last December, I became aware
of new legislation (AB4143) which requires the City Council, as the
code reviewing body, to review said code on an annual basis. This
• law becomes effective January 1, 1992.
I point out that the City' s Conflict of Interest Code has not
been revised since adoption of Resolution No. 10-80 in June of 1980
(copy provided) . At my request, Mary Gayle has reviewed the code
and is recommending that the City Council adopt an up-dated
Conflict of Interest Code more in keeping with State law.
ANALYSIS:
Input has been received from department heads as to the
specific designated employee titles and these have been
incorporated into "Exhibit All . The scope of denoted individuals
has been widened and I would point out that it is being recommended
that members of permanent advisory bodies other than the Planning
Commission (Parks & Recreation Commission, Board of Appeals and
Traffic Committee) be among those designated filers.
Attachments: Resolution No. 46-91
Resolution No. 10-80
•
RESOLUTION NO. 46-91 0
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA
ADOPTING AN AMENDED CONFLICT
OF INTEREST CODE
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Atascadero has
previously adopted a Conflict of Interest Code to apply to certain
officers and employees of the City (Resolution No. 10-80) ; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Atascadero desires to
amend the Conflict of Interest Code to make it applicable to all
commission and committee members and certain additional public
officials.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Atascadero
does resolve as follows:
Section 1. That the attached Conflict of Interest Code be,
and hereby is, adopted as the Conflict of Interest Code for the
City of Atascadero.
Section 2. Any and all previously adopted Conflict of
Interest Code or codes for the City of Atascadero, including but
not limited to Resolution No. 10-80 (Chapter 15, Section 2-15. 01
through 2-15. 05, as amended) , are hereby rescinded. •
On motion by Councilmember , seconded by
Councilmember , the foregoing resolution is
hereby adopted in its entirety on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ADOPTED:
ATTEST: CITY OF ATASCADERO
LEE DAYKA, City Clerk By:ROBERT B. LILLEY, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ART MONTANDON, City Attorney •
A T T A C H M E N T
RESOLUTION NO. 46-91
• CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE
OF THE
CITY OF ATASCADERO
SECTION 1. Purpose. Pursuant to the provisions
of Government Code Sections 87300, et sea. , the City of
Atascadero (hereinafter-referred to as "'City") hereby adopts
the following Conflict of Interest Code. The provisions of
this Code are in addition to those contained in Title 9,
Chapter 7 of the Government Code (Section 87100 et sea. ) .
Except as otherwise indicated, the definitions contained
in-the Political Reform Act at Title 9, Chapter 2 of the
Government Code (Section 82000 et sea. ) regulations of the
Fair Political Practices Commission (2 California Code
Regulations section 18100 et sea. ) and any amendments to the
Act or regulations are incorporated herein and apply to this
Code. It is the purpose of this Code to provide for the
disclosure of assets and income of designated employees
which may be materially affected by their official actions,
and, in appropriate circumstances, to provide that
designated employees should be disqualified from acting in
order that conflicts of interest may be avoided.
• SECTION 2. Designated Positions. The positions
listed in Exhibit "A" are designated positions. Officers
and employees holding those positions are designated
employees and are deemed to make or participate in the
making of decisions which may foreseeably have a material
effect on a financial interest. This Code does not
establish any disclosure obligation for those individuals
specified in Government Code section 87200; such persons are
covered by this Code only for disqualification purposes and
all provisions of Section 6 herein relating to "designated
employees" are applicable to such individuals.
SECTION 3. Disclosure Statements. Designated
positions shall be assigned to one or more of the disclosure
categories set forth in Exhibit "B". Each designated
employee or official shall file an annual statement
disclosing that employee's or official's interest in
investments, business positions, interests in real property
and source of income designated is reportable under the
category to which the employee's or official's position is
assigned in Exhibit "B".
• -1-
SECTION 4. Place and Time Filing. •
(a) All designated employees or officials required
to submit a statement of financial interests shall file the
original with the City Clerk's office. Designated employees
or officials who are required to file statements of
financial interests under any other agency's conflict of
interest code, or for a different jurisdiction, may expand
their statement of financial interests to cover reportable
interests in both jurisdictions, and file copies of this
expanded statement with both entities in lieu of filing
separate and distinct statements. Each copy of such
expanded statement must be signed and verified by the
designated individual.
(b) The City Clerk's office shall make and retain
a copy of the statement.
(c) A designated employee or official required to
submit an initial statement of financial interests shall
submit the statement within 30 days after the effective date
of this Code, disclosing interests held including reportable
investments, business positions, and interests in real
property on the effective date of this Code, and income
received during the twelve (12) months prior to the •
effective date of this Code.
(d) All persons appointed, promoted, or
transferred to designated positions shall file initial
statements not more than 30 days after assuming office.
(e) The first statement of financial interests
filed by a designated employee shall disclose the designated
employee's reportable investments, business positions, and
interests in real property as those investments, positions,
and interests in real property exist as of the effective
date of this Code or the date the designated employee
assumed office, whichever is later, and income received
during the preceding twelve (12) months.
(f) Annual statements shall be filed by March 30th
of each year, by all designated employees or officials. Such
statements shall disclose reportable investments, business
positions, interests in real property, and income held or
received at any time during the previous calendar year or
since the designated employee took office if during the
calendar year.
-2-
•
• (g) Every designated employee who leaves office
shall file, within 30 days of leaving office, a statement
disclosing reportable investments, business positions,
interests in real property, and income held or received at
any time during the period between the closing date of the
last statement required to be filed and the date of leaving
office.
(h) A designated employee who resigns his or her
position within 30 days following initial appointment is not
deemed to assume or leave office, provided that during the
period between appointment and resignation the individual
does not make, participate in making, or use the position to
influence any decision of the city or receive or become
entitled to receive any form of payment by virtue of being
appointed to the position.
SECTION 5. Contents of Disclosure Statements.
Disclosure statements shall be made on forms supplied by the
City Clerk's office and shall contain the following
information:
(i) Contents of Investment and Real Property
Reports. When an investment or an interest in real property
is required to be disclosed, the statement shall contain:
• (1) A statement of the nature of the
investment or interest;
(2) The name of the business entity in which
each investment is held and a general description of the
business activity in which the business entity is engaged;
(3) The address or other precise location of
the real property;
(4) A statement whether the fair market value
of the investment or, interest in real property equals or
exceeds one thousand dollars ($1,000) but does not exceed
ten thousand dollars ($10, 000) , whether it exceeds ten
thousand dollars ($10,000) but does not exceed one hundred
thousand dollars ($100,000) , or whether it exceeds one
hundred thousand dollars ($100, 000) .
For purposes of disclosure, H interest in real
property" does not include the principal residence of the
designated employee or any other property which the
designated employee utilizes exclusively as the employee's
personal residence.
•
-3-
Investments and interests in real property which •
have a fair market value of less than $1, 000 are not
investments and interests in real property within the
meaning of the Political Reform Act. However, investments
or interests in real property of an individual include those
held by the individual's spouse and dependent children as
well as a pro rata share of any investment or interest in
real property of any business entity or trust in which the
individual, spouse and dependent children own, in the
aggregate, a direct, indirect or beneficial interest of 10
percent or greater.
(j ) Contents of Personal Income Reports: When
personal income is required to be disclosed under this
Code or pursuant to the Political Reform Act, the statement
shall contain:
(1) The name and address of each source of
income aggregating two hundred fifty dollars ($250) or more
in value, or fifty dollars ($50) or more in value if the
income was a gift, and a general description of the business
activity, if any, of each source;
(2) A statement whether the aggregate value
of income from each source, or, in the case of a loan, the
highest amount owed to each source, was at least two hundred •
fifty dollars ($250) but did not exceed one thousand dollars
($1, 000) , whether it was in excess of one thousand dollars
($1, 000) but not greater than ten thousand dollars
($10,000) , or whether it was greater than ten thousand
dollars ($10, 000) ;
(3) A description of the consideration, if
any, for which the income was received;
(4) In the case of a gift, the name, address
and business activity of the donor and any intermediary
through which the gift was made; a description of the gift;
the amount or value and the date on which the gift was
received;
(5) In the case of a loan, the annual
interest rate and the security, if any, given for the loan.
J ^'Income^' is defined in Title 9, Chapter 2 of the
government Code (Section 82030) . That definition is
attached hereto as Exhibit "'C"'.
-4- •
A designated employee's income includes his or her
community property interest in the income of his or her
spouse but does not include salary or reimbursement for
expenses received from a state, local or federal government
agency.
(k) Contents of Business Entity Reports. When the
designated employee's pro rata share of income to a business
entity, including income to a sole proprietorship, is
required to be reported, the statement shall contain:
(1) The name, address, and a general
description of the business activity of the business entity;
(2) The name of every person from whom the
business entity received payments if the designated
employee's pro rata share of gross receipts from such person
was equal to or greater than ten thousand dollars ($10, 000)
during a calendar year;
(3) Income of a business entity is required
to be reported only if the direct, indirect, or beneficial
interest of the designated employee and his or her spouse in
the business entity aggregates a ten (10) percent or greater
• interest. In addition, for purposes of subparagraphs 2 and
3 of this subsection, the disclosure (of persons who are
clients or customers of a business entity is required only
if it is reasonably foreseeable that the client or customer
may be materially affected by the decisions of the
designated employee;
(1) Contents of Business Position Disclosure.
When business positions are required to be reported, the
designated employee shall list the name and address of each
business entity in which he or she is a director, officer,
partner, trustee, employee, or in which he or she holds any
position of management; a description of the business entity
in which the business is engaged, and the designated
employee's position with the business entity;
(m) Acquisition or Disposal During a Calendar
Year. If any otherwise reportable investment or interest in
real property was partially or wholly acquired or disposed
of during the period covered by the statement, the statement
shall contain the date of acquisition or disposal.
SECTION 6. Disqualification. Designated
employees shall disqualify themselves from making,
participating in the making of, or in any way using their
official position to influence a governmental decision when
-5-
it is reasonably foreseeable that the decision will have a •
material financial effect distinguishable from its effect on
the public generally, on the designated employee, or a
member of his or her immediate family, or on:
(n) Any business entity in which the designated
employee has a direct or indirect investment worth one
thousand dollars ($1, 000) or more;
(o) Any real property in which the designated
employee has a direct or indirect interest worth one
thousand dollars ($1,000) or more;
(p) Any source of income, other than gifts and
other than loans by a commercial lending institution in the
regular course of business on terms available to the public
without regard to official status, aggregating two hundred
fifty dollars ($250) or more in value provided to, received
by or promised to the designated employee within 12 months
prior to the time when the decision is made;
(q) Any business entity in which the designated
employee is a director, officer, partner, trustee, employee,
or holds any position of management; or
(r) Any donor of, or any intermediary or agent for •
a donor of, a gift or gifts aggregating two hundred fifty
dollars ($250) or more in value provided to, received by, or
promised to the designated employee within twelve (12)
months prior to the time when the decision is made.
For purposes of this section, indirect investment
or interest means-any investment or interest owned by the
spouse or dependent child of a designated employee, by an
agent on behalf of a designated employee, or by a business
entity or trust in which the designated employee, the
designated employee's agents, spouse, and dependent children
own directly, indirectly, or beneficially a ten (10) percent
interest or greater.
No designated employee shall be required to
disqualify himself or herself with respect to any matter
which could not legally be acted upon or decided without his
or her participation. If a person is legally required to
participate, such individual shall:
(1) disclose as a matter of public record the
existence of the financial interest;
-6-
•
. (2) describe with particularity the nature of
the financial interest before participating in making the
decision;
(3) state the reason there is; no alternative
source of decision-making authority; and
(4) participate only as required by law where
participation is legally required for the agency to act.
The fact that the vote of a designated employee who is a
member of a voting body is needed to break a tie does not
make his or her participation legally required. A person is
not legally required to participate if it would have been
possible to convene a quorum made up of
other members of the agency who are not disqualified under
Government Code sections 87100, whether or not such other
members are actually present at the time of disqualification
(California Code Reg. 518701) .
A designated employee required to disqualify
himself or herself shall notify the City Manager and the
City Clerk in writing, and the City Clerk shall record the
person's disqualifications. In the case of a voting body,
this determination and disclosure of the disqualifying
interest shall be made a part of the agency's official
• record.
SECTION 7. Assistance of the Commission and
Counsel. Any designated employee who is unsure of his or
her duties under this Code may request assistance from the
Fair Political Practices commission pursuant to Government
Code Section 83114 or from the attorney for his or her
agency, provided that nothing in this section requires the
attorney for the agency to issue any formal or informal
opinion.
SECTION S. Violations. This Code has the force
and effect of law. Designated employees violating any
provision of this Code are subject to the administrative,
criminal and civil sanctions provided in the Political
Reform Act, Government Code Sections 81000-91014. In
addition, a decision in relation to which a violation of the
disqualification provisions of this Code or of Government
Code Section 87100 or 87450 has occurred may be set aside as
void pursuant to Government Code Section 91003.
• -7-
E I H I B I T &AN
•
DESIGNATED EMPLOYEES AND DISCLOSURE CATEGORIES
The following positions entail the making or
participation in the making of decisions which may
foreseeably have a material effect on financial interests:
Designated Position Disclosure Categories
Building Inspector 1
City Attorney, Assistant 1
City Clerk 1
City Engineer 1
City Manage, Assistant 1
Consultants—/ 1
Community Development Director 1
City Planner 1
Director of Community Services,
Assistant 1
Senior Planner 1
•
Consultants shall be included in the list of designated
employees and shall disclose pursuant to the broadest
disclosure category in the code subject to the following
limitations.
The City Manager/Executive Officer may determine in
writing that a particular consultant, although a
"designated position^', is hired to perform a range
of duties that is limited in scope and this is not
required to fully comply with the disclosure
requirement described in this Section. Such written
determination shall include a description of the
consultant's duties and, based upon that
description, a statement of the extent of
disclosure requirements. The City
Manager's/Executive officer's determination is a
public record and shall be retained for public
inspection by the City Clerk in the same manner and
location as this Conflict of Interest Code.
-8- .
• t Of J
Exempt facials 1
Fire Chief 1
Police Chief 1
Public Works Director 1
Senior Civil Engineer 1
Members of all permanent City
Commissions, Boards and
Committees not otherwise required
to file Conflict of Interest
Statements 1
Fire Captain 2
Police Lieutenant 2
Police Sergeant 2
Chief Waste Water Operator 2
Streets Supervisor 2
Exempt Officials include:
The Mayor, City Council, Members of the Planning
Commission, City Manager, City Attorney, Director
of Finance and Assistant Director of Finance who
are all required to file disclosure statements
pursuant to state law and thus are not specifically
listed herein. If State law or regulations exempt these
• officials from filing Conflict of Interest statements, then
they shall file the form appropriate for their positions,
Disclosure Category 1.
-9-
E % H I B I T NBN 0
CATEGORIES OF REPORTABLE ECONOMIC INTERESTS
Designated Persons in Category NiN Must Report:
All investments, interests in real property,
income, and any business entity in which the person is a
director, officer, partner, trustee, employee, or holds any
position of management. These financial interests are
reportable only if located within and subject to the
jurisdiction of the City, or if the business entity is doing
business or planning to do business in an area subject to
the jurisdiction of the City, or has done business within an
area subject to the jurisdiction of the City at any time
during the two years prior to the filing of the statement.
Designated Persons in Category N2N Must Report:
(s) All investments in real property located within or
subject to the jurisdiction of the City.
(t) Investments in any business entity which within the last
two years has contracted or in the future foreseeably
may contract with the City. •
(u) Income from any source which within the last two years
has contracted or in the future foreseeably may contract
with the city.
(v) His or her status as a director, officer, partner,
trustee, employee, or holder of a position of management
in any business entity which within the last two years
has contracted or in the future foreseeably may contract
with the City.
-10- •
• EXHIB IT ~C~
82030. INCOME.
(A) "'Income"' means (except as provided in subdivision B) :
A payment received, including but not limited to any
salary, wage, advance, dividend, interest, rent,
proceeds from any sale, gift, including any gift of food
or beverage, loan, forgiveness or payment of
indebtedness received by the filer, reimbursement for
expenses, per diem, or contribution to an insurance or
pension program paid by any person other than an
employer, and including any community property interest
in the income of a spouse. Income also includes an
outstanding loan. Income of an individual also includes
a pro rata share of any income of any business entity or
trust in which the individual or spouse owns, directly,
indirectly or beneficially, a 10 percent interest or
greater. "Income, " other than a gift, does not include
income received from any source outside the jurisdiction
and not doing business within the jurisdiction, not
planning to do business within the jurisdiction, or not
• having done business within the jurisdiction during the
two years prior to the time any statement or other
action is required under this title.
(B) "'Income" does not include:
(1) Campaign contributions required to be reported
under Chapter 4 (commencing with Section 84100) .
(2) Salary and reimbursement for expenses or per diem
received from a state, local, or federal government
agency and reimbursement for travel expenses and
per diem received from a bona fide educational,
academic, or charitable organization.
(3) Any devise or inheritance.
(4) Interest, dividends, or premiums on a time or
demand deposit in a financial institution, shares
in a credit union or any insurance policy, payments
received under any insurance policy, or any bond or
other debt instrument issued by any government or
government agency.
•
-11-
Government if the filer sells the securities or the •
commodities futures on a stock or commodities
exchange and does not know or have reason to know
the identity of the purchaser.
•
-13- •
�L
RESOLUTION NO. 10-84
ADOPTING A CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODS
F� b8 GED EMPLOYEES OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO
T H E C I T Y C 0 U N C I L
City of Atascadero, California
WHEREAS, the Political Reform Act of 1974, California
Government Code Section 81000 , et seq. , requires that
governmental entites in the State of California adopt
Conflict of Interest Codes; and
WHEREAS, said Act requires that local governmental
entities include certain designated employees within the
provisions of Conflict of Interest Codes; and
WHEREAS, the City of Atascadero desires to comply with
the conditions of said Act.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Council of
the City of Atascadero does hereby adopt a Conflict of
Interest Code for Designated Employees of the City of
Atascadero as required by the Political Reform Act of 1974
and said Code is attached hereto as Exhibit A and by re-
ference made a part hereof.
On motion by Councilman Nelson and seconded by
Councilman Highland , the foregoing resolution is hereby
adapted in its entirety on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Highland, Mackey, Nelson, Stover and
Mayor Wilkins
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ADOPTED: June 23, 1980
ROBERT J. WILKIN , JR. , Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
RRA . WARDEN, City Jerk ALLEN GRIMES, City Attorney
•
C C
CITY OF ATASCADERO
CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE
Section 1. Introduction
In compliance with the Political Reform Act of 1974 , Calif-
ornia Government Code Section 8100, et seq. , the City of Atas-
cadero, hereby adopts this Conflict of Interest Code which shall
be applicable to all designated employees of the City. The re-
quirements of this Code are in addition to other requirements of
the Act such as the general prohibition against conflicts of in-
terest contained in Government Code Section 87100, and to any other
state or local laws pertaining to conflicts of interest.
Section 2. Definition of Terms
The definitions contained in the Political Reform Act of
1974 , the regulations of the Fair Political Practices Commission
2 Cal.
( Adm. Code Sections 18100 et any Y. ) , and amendments to
the Act or regulations, are incorporated ted by reference into this
Conflict of Interest Code.
Section 3. Designated Employees
The persons holding positions listed in Appendix A are de-
signated employees. It has been determined that these officers
and employees make or participate in the making of decisions
which may foreseeably have a material effect on financial interest
Section 4. Disclosure Statements
A designated employee shall be assigned one or more of the
disclosure categories set forth in Appendix B. It has been deter-
mined that the financial interests set forth in a designated
employee's disclosure category are the types of financial interests
which he or she foreseeably can affect materially through the con-
duct of his or her office. Each designated employee shall file
statements of economic interest disclosing his or her financial
interests as required by the applicable disclosure category.
Section 5. Place of Filing
All designated employees required to submit a statement of
economic interests shall file the original with the City Clerk
who shall be the filing officer for all designated employees.
Section 6. Time of Filing
(a) Initial Statements. All designated employees employed by
the City on the effective date of this Code shall file
statements within thirty days after the effective date
of this Code.
•
(b) Assuming Office Statements.
• (1) All persons assuming designated positions after the
effective date of this Code which are merit system
positions, shall file statements within thirty days
after assuming the designated positions.
(2) All other persons appointed, promoted or transferred
to designated positions after the effective date of
the Code, shall file statements within ten days after
assuming office.
(c) Annual Statements. All designated employees shall file
statements no later than March 15.
(d) Leaving Office Statements. All persons who leave desig-
nated positions shall file statements within thirty days
after leaving office.
Section 7. Contents of Statements
(a) Contents of Initial Statements. Initial statements shall
disclose any reportable investments and interests in real
property and management positions held on the effective
date of the code.
(b) Assuming Office Statements. Assuming office statements
• shall disclose any reportable investments and interests
in real property and management positions held on the
date of assuming office.
(c) Contents of Annual Statements. Annual statements shall
disclose any reportable investments, interests in real
property, and income and management positions held or
received during the previous calendar year provided,
however, that the period covered by an employee' s first
annual statement shall begin on the effective date of
the Code or the date of assuming office whichever is
later.
(d) Contents of Leaving Office Statements. Leaving office
statements shall disclose reportable investments, in-
terests in real property, and income and management
positions held or received during the period between
the closing date of the last statement filed and the
date of leaving office.
Section 8. Manner of Reporting
Disclosure statements shall be made on forms supplied by the
City of Atascadero and shall contain the following information:
2
f
(a) Contents of Investment and Real Property Reports
When an investment or interest in real property l/ •
is required to be reported, 2/ the statement shall
contain the following:
(1) A statement of the nature of the investment or
interest:
(2) The name of the business entity in which each
investment is held, and a general description
of the business activity in which the business
entity is engaged.
(3) A statement whether the fair market value of the
investment or interest in real property exceeds
one thousand dollars ($1, 000) , exceeds ten thousand
dollars ($10, 000) , or exceeds one hundred thousand
dollars ($100, 000) .
(b) Contents of Personal Income Reports
When personal income is required to be reported, 3/ the
statement shall contain:
(1) The name and address of each source of income
aggregating two hundred and fifty dollars ($250)
or more in value if the income was a gift, and
a general description of the business activity, if •
any,of each source.
l/ For the purpose of disclosure only (not disqualification)
an interest in real property does not include the principal
residence of the filer.
2/ Investments and interests in real property which have a
fair market value of less than $1, 000 are not investments
and interests in real property within the meaning of the
Political Reform Act. However, investments or interests
in real property of an individual include those held by the
individual 's spouse and dependent children as well as a pro
rata share of any investment or interest in real property
of any business entity or trust in which the individual,
spouse or dependent children own,in the aggregate, a direct,
indirect or beneficial interest of 10% or greater.
3/ A designated employee' s income includes his or her community
property interest in the income of his or her spouse.
3 •
• (2) A statement whether the aggregate value of income
from each source was one thousand dollars ($1,000)
or less, greater than one thousand dollars ($1, 000) ,
greater than ten thousand dollars ($10 , 000) ;
(3) A description of the consideration, if any, for
which the income was received;
(4) In the case of a gift, the name and address of the
donar, a description of the gift, the amount or
value of the gift, and the date on which the gift
was received.
(c) Contents of Business Entity Income Reports
When income of a business entity, including income of
a sole proprietorship, is required to be reported, 4/
the statement shall contain:
(1) The name, address, and general description of the
business activity of the business entity:
(2) In the case of a business entity which provides
legal or brokerage services, the name of every person
who paid fees to the business entity if the filer' s
• pro rata share of fees from such person was equal to
or greater than one thousand dollars ($1,000) .
(3) In the case of a business entity not covered by
paragraph (2) , the name of every person from whom
the business entity received payments if the filer's
pro rata share of the gross receipts from such person
was equal to or greater than ten thousand dollars
($10, 000) .
(d) Contents of Management Position Reports
When management positions are required to be reported,
a designated employee shall list the name and address of
each business entity in which he or she is a director,
officer, partner, trustee, employee, or in which he or
she holds any position of management, a description of
the business activity in which the business entity is
engaged, and the designated employee' s position with the
business entity.
4/ Income of a business entity is reportable if the direct,
indirect, or beneficial interest of the filer, spouse
and dependent children in the business entity aggregates
• a 10% or greater interest. In addition, the disclosure
of persons who are clients or customers of a business
entity is required only if the source is within one of
the disclosure categories of the filer.
4
C
(e) Acquisition or Disposal During Reporting Period
In the case of an annual or leaving office statement, •
if an investment or interest in real property was
partially or wholly acquired or disposed of during
the period covered by the statement, the statement
shall contain the date of acquisition or disposal.
Section 9. Disqualification
Designated employees must disqualify themselves from
making, participating in the making or using their official
positions to influence the making of any governmental decisions
which will foreseeably have a material financial effect, dis-
tinguishable from its effect on the public generally, on:
(a) Any business entity in which the designated employee
has a direct or indirect investment worth more than
one thousand dollars ($1, 000) ;
(b) Any real property in which the designated employee
has a direct or indirect interest worth more than one
thousand dollars ($1, 000) ;
(c) Any source of income, other than loans by a commercial
lending institution in the regular course of business,
aggregating two hundred fifty dollars ($250) or more
in value received by or promised to the designated •
employee within twelve months prior to the time when
the decision is made; or
(d) Any business entity in which the designated employee is
a director, officer, partner, trustee, employee, or
holds any position of management.
No designated employee shall be prevented from making
or participating in the making of any decision to the
extent his or her participation is legally required for
the decision to be made. The fact that a designated
employee' s vote is needed to break a tie does not make
his or her participation legally required for purposes
of this section.
Section 10. Manner of Disqualification.
A designated employee required to disqualify himself or
herself shall notify his or her supervisor in writing. This
notice shall be forwarded to the City Manager who shall record
the employee's disqualification. Upon receipt of such statement
the supervisor shall reassign the matter to another employee.
5
In the case of a designated employee who is a board member
or commissioner, notice of disqualification shall be given at
• the meeting during which consideration of the decision takes
place and shall be made part of the official record of the
board or commissioner.
•
•
6
APPENDIX A
Designated Employees •
Designated Positions Disclosure Category
City Attorney 1,2
Planning Director 1,2
Associate Planning Director 1,2
Director of Finance/City Treasurer 1,2
Police Chief 1,2
Fire Chief 1,2
Public Works Director 1,2
Public Works Superintendent 4 ,5,6
Building Inspectors 1,2
Police Sergeant 4 ,5, 6 •
Fire Captain 4 ,5,6
Consultants* 1,2
* With respect to consultants, the City Manager may
determine in writing that a particular consultant is hired
to perform a range of duties that are limited in scope and,
thus, not required to comply with the disclosure requirements
described in these categories. Such determination shall in-
clude a description of the consultant' s duties and, based upon
that description, a statement of the extent of disclosure re-
quirements. The City Manager shall forward a copy of this
determination to the City Council. Nothing herein excuses
any such consultant from any other provisions of this Conflict
of Interest Code.
•
7
APPENDIX B
• Categories of Reportable Economic Interests
General Provisions
When a designated employee is required to disclose in-
vestments and sources of income, he need only disclose invest-
ments in business entities and sources of income which do business
in the City, plan to do business in the City or have done business
in the City within the past two years. In addition to other acti-
vities , a business entity is doing business within the City if it
owns real property within the City. When a designated employee
is required to disclose interests in real property, he need only
disclose real property which is located in whole or in part within
or not more than two miles outside the boundaries of the City or
within two miles of any land owned or used by the City.
Designated employees shall disclose their financial interests
pursuant to the appropriate disclosure category as indicated in
Appendix A.
Category 1. All-Inclusive Reportable Investments
A designated employee in this category shall disclose all
reportable investments (worth more than $1, 000) :
• (a) Owned by the designated employee, his or her spouse or
dependent children;
(b) Owned by an agent on behalf of the designated employee;
(c) Owned by any business entity controlled by the designated
employee (i.e. , any business entity in which the desig-
nated employee, his or her agents, spouse and dependent
children hold more than a 50% ownership interest) ;
(d) Owned by a trust in which the designated employee has
a substantial interest (i.e. , a trust in which the
designated employee, his or her spouse and dependent
children have a present or future interest worth more
than $1, 000) ;
(e) Representing the pro rata share (worth more than $1, 000)
of the designated employee, his or her spouse and de-
pendent children,of investments of any business entity
or trust in which the designated employee, his or her
spouse and dependent children own, directly, indirectly
or beneficially, a 10% interest or greater.
• 8
"Investment" means any financial interest in or security
issued by a City of Atascadero-related business entity, including,
but not limited to, common stock, preferred stock, right, warrants 0
options, debt instruments and any partnership or other ownership
interest.
A business entity is "City of Atascadero-related" if and
only if the business entity or any parent, subsidiary or other-
wise related business entity: (i) has an interest in real property
within the jurisdiction, (ii) does business in the City of Atascadero,
or (iii) did business or plans to do business in the City of Atas-
cadero at any time during the period commencing two years prior to
and ending one year after the time the designated employee is re-
quired by this Code to file his or her next Statement of Economic
Interests or to disqualify himself or herself with respect to a
City of Atascadero decision. (The term "parent, subsidiary, or
otherwise related business entity" shall be construed as specifically
defined by the Fair Political Practices Commission) .
No asset is deemed an "investment" unless its fair market
value exceeds $1, 000.
The term "investment" does not include a time or demand
deposit in a financial institution, share in a credit union, any
insurance policy, or any bond or other debt instrument issued by
any government agency.
Category 2. All-Inclusive Reportable Interests in Real Property •
A designated employee in this category shall disclose all
interests (worth more than $1, 000) in real property located within
the jurisdiction if the interests are:
(a) Held or owned by the designated employee, his or her
spouse and dependent child; or
(b) The pro rata share (worth more than $1, 000) of interests
in real property of any business entity or trust in which
the designated employee or spouse owns, directly or in-
directly or beneficially, a 10% interest or greater.
"Interest in real property" includes any leasehold, beneficial
or ownership interests, or any option to acquire such an interest,
in real property, but does not include the principal residence
of the filer.
Real property shall be deemed to be "located within the
jurisdiction" if the property or any part of it is located within
or not more than two miles outside the boundaries of the City of
Atascadero or within two miles of any land owned or used by the
City of Atascadero.
9
Category 3 All-Inclusive Reportable Income
• A designated employee in this category shall disclose all
income of the designated employee for any City of Atascadero-
related source aggregating $1000 or more (or $25 or more in the
case of gifts) during the reporting period.
(a) "Income" means, except as provided in subsection (b) ,
income of any nature from any City of Atascadero-related
source, including but not limited to any salary, wage,
advance, payment, honorarium, award, gift, including
gift of any food or beverage, loan, forgiveness or pay-
ment of indebtedness, discount in the price of anything
of value unless the discount is available to members
of the general public without regard to official status ,
rebate, reimbursement for expenses, per diem, or con-
tribution to an insurance or pension program paid by any
person other than an employer, and including any community
property interest in income or a spouse from a City of
Atascadero-related source. Income of an individual also
includes a pro rata share of any income of any City of
Atascadero-related entity or trust in which the individual
or spouse owns, directly, indirectly or beneficially, a
ten percent (10%) interest or greater.
A source, business entity or trust in "City of Atascadero-
related" if and only if he, she or it: (i) resides in the
• jurisdiction, (ii) has an interest in real property within
the jurisdiction, (iii) does business in the City of
Atascadero or (iv) did business or plans to do business
in the City of Atascadero at any time during the period
commencing two years prior to and ending one year after
the time the designated employee is required by this
Code to file his or her next Statement of Economic Interests
or to disqualify himself or herself with respect to a
City of Atascadero decision.
(b) "Income" does not include:
(1) Campaign contributions required to be reported under
Chapter 4 of the Political Reform Act of 1974;
(2) Salary and reimbursement for expenses or per diem
received from a state or local government agency and
reimbursement for travel expenses and per diem re-
ceived from a bona fide educational, academic or
charitable organization;
(3) Gifts of informational material, such as books,
pamphlet, : reports, calendars or periodicals;
•
l j�
(4) Gifts which are not used and which, within thirty days
after receipt, are returned to the donar or delivered •
to a charitable organization without being claimed as
a charitable contribution for tax purposes;
(5) Gifts from an individual 's spouse, child, parent,
grandparent, grandchild, brother, sister, parent-in-
law, brother-in-law, sister-in-law, aunt, uncle, or
first cousin or the spouse of any such person; pro-
vided that a gift from any such person shall be con-
sidered income if the donar is acting as an agent or
intermidiary for any person not covered by this para-
graph;
(6) Gifts of hospitality involving food, beverages, or lodging
provided to the designated employee, if such hospitality
has been reciprocated within the filing period. "Recipro-
city" as used in this subsection includes the providing
by the designated employee to the host of any consideration,
including entertainment or household gift of a reasonably
similar benefit or value;
(7) Any devise or inheritance;
(8) Interest, dividends or premiums on a time or demand
deposit in a financial institution, shares in a credit
union or any insurance policy, payments received under
any insurance policy, or any bond or other debt instrument
issued by any government or goverment agency.
(9) Dividends, interest or any other return on a security
which is registered with the Securities and Exchange
Commission of the United States Governments;
(10) Loans by a commercial lending institution in the regular
course of business.
(c) "Honorarium" means a payment for speaking at any event, parti-
cipating in a panel or seminar or engaging in any similar
activity. For purposes of this subsection, free admission,
food, beverages and similar nominal benefits provided to a
filer at an event at which he or she speaks, participates
in a panel or seminar, or performs a similar service, and re-
imbursement or advance for actual intra-state travel and for
necessary accommodations provided directly in connection with
the event are not payment and need not be reported by the
designated employee.
An honorarium must be reported as a gift unless it is clear
from all of the surrounding circumstances that the services
provided represented equal or greater value than the payment
received. If it is clear from the surrounding circumstances
that the services provided were of equal or greater value
than the payment received, the honorarium is income, not a gi�
lm
. When the designated employee claims that the honorarium
is not a gift, he shall have the burden of proving that
the consideration is of equal or greater value unless
the designated employee is a defendant in a criminal
action.
A prize or award shall be disclosed as a lift unless the
prize or award is received on the basis of a bona fide
competition not related to the designated employee 's
official status. Prizes or awards which are not disclosed
as gifts shall be disclosed as income.
Category 4 . Less-Inclusive Reportable Investments
A designated employee in this category shall disclose
those, and only those, Category 1 reportable investments which
pertain to a business entity, a business activity of which is
that of:
(a) Providing within the last two (2) years, or foreseeably
in the future, services, supplies, materials, machinery
or equipment to the City of Atascadero.
(b) Conducting a business in the City of Atascadero which
requires a business license therefor pursuant to ordi-
nances _ of the City.
• (c) Sale, purchase, exchange, lease or rental, or financing,
for its own account or as broker, of real property or
construction thereon of buildings or structures.
Category 5. Less-Inclusive Reportable Interests in Real Property
A designated employee in this category shall disclose those,
and only those, Category 2 reportable interests in real property
where the property or any part of it is located within or not more
than 500 feet outside the boundaries of the City of Atascadero.
Category 6. Less-Inclusive Types of Reportable Income
A designated employee in this category shall disclose those,
and only those types of Category 3 reportable income which are
derived from a source, an activity of which is that of:
(a) Providing within the last two (2) years, or foreseeably
in the future, services, supplies, materials, machinery
or equipment to the City of Atascadero.
(b) Conducting a business in the City of Atascadero which
requires a business license therefor pursuant to ordi-
nances of the City.
12
t
C_
(c) Sale, purchase, exchange, lease or rental , or financing
for its own account or as broker, of real property or the•
development, syndication, or subdivision of real property
or construction thereon of buildings or structures.
•
•
13
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL
• CITY OF ATASCADERO Item No: C-1
Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager Meeting Date : 6-11-91
File No: ZC 03-91
Via: Henry Engen, Community Development Director
From:PAOSteven L. DeCamp, City Planner
SUBJECT:
Adoption of amendments to the Zoning Ordinance to include
specific development standards for projects proposed in Planned
Development Overlay Zone V .
RECObMNDATION:
1 . Waive reading of Ordinance No. 222 in full and approve by
title only; and
2 . Approve Ordinance No. 222 on first reading.
• BACKGROUND:
The Council held a hearing on the draft Ordinance establishing
development standards for PD 7 Overlay Zone projects on May 28,
1991 . The Staff report presented at that hearing is attached to
this report as Attachment B. At the conclusion of the May 28th
hearing, the Council directed staff to prepare an alternate set
of development standards that eliminated the requirement that the
parent lot or lots be at least 1/2 acre in size. The revised
development standards are Attachment A to this report .
The City Attorney has indicated that this item need not be
referred back to the Planning Commission for their further review
or comment prior to Council action.
ANALYSIS:
The 1/2 acre minimum size for the parent lot in PD projects was
suggested as a means to insure (1) that the project site would be
large enough to provide design flexibility; and (2) that smaller
lots would remain available in multiple family zones for more
traditional apartment development . The 1/2 acre size is also
reflective of the General Plan' s requirement for 1/2 acre minimum
lot sizes in residential multiple family zones .
It is staff' s opinion, however, that the other standards proposed
• for PD 7 projects will be productive in fostering the type of
projects desired, with or without the 1/2 acre minimum lot size.
Lot coverage, setback, building density and bulk, as well as
other critical site design considerations are addressed by the •
remaining development standards . It should be noted that these
concepts were discussed informally with the Planning Commission
at the conclusion of their June 5th meeting. The general
consensus of the Commission was that the 1/2 acre minimum lot
size is not, indeed, the most critical element in producing
desirable projects .
Some discussion was held at the Council' s earlier hearing
relative to the imposition of a standard establishing a minimum
number of dwelling units to be included in a PD 7 project rather
than a minimum lot size. Staff believes that this concept has
merit and has, therefore, included draft language setting a 4-
unit minimum in the revised standards . Such a standard would
help ensure a sense of residential "community" or "neighborhood"
within planned development projects and reduce the likelihood of
such projects becoming merely "small lot subdivisions" .
It was suggested at the May hearing that the size of the
guest
parking space required by standard (m) be reduced from 1O, X20'
to 9' X 18' to maintain conformance between this standard and the
other parking requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. Staff
believes that this suggestion also has merit, and recommends that
the standards be modified to allow the smaller guest parking
space.
Finally, a last review has indicated that a side setback •
requirement for new corner lots was inadvertently deleted from
earlier drafts of the proposed standards . This requirement has
been reinserted within standard (f) and provides a minimum side
setback of 12 (twelve) feet on the street side of corner lots .
ATTACHMENTS : A - Revised Development Standards
B - May 28 Staff Report
EXHIBIT A
•
9-3 . 651 . Establishment of Planned Development Overlay Zone No. 7
(PD7) : -T4:te A Planned Development Overlay Zone No . 7 4:-a may be
established
. 1. 192) in multiple family residential zones . The following
development standards are established shall be applied to all
projects within Planned Development Zone No 7 •
(a) iqre A Master Plan of Development of the site -i-a shall
be approved.
All
construction and development shall be done in
conformance with the approved Exhibit master plan. Any
medifieetien in density will req--' -- - rezening.
Medifieation ef the Master Plan site design fney b-e
reser -n@E fer a eend+tierxal Use
Perm T--(Sem--a n 9 2 . 199) .
{a}}- in approving a Master Plan ef Bevelepment, the level of
_d. _d to
Plot
1 provided that the Master
determination.
• :}-� No subsequent PletP-lan, Preeise Plan, eendi : _
Use Pew-it, er Tentative Parcel or Tract Map shall
be approved unless found to be consistent with the
approved Master Plan of Development . Aret
afftendment to a Master Plan of Develepment-,
ieluding--c endue n s-the reef,shall be
eeeemplished as set ferth in Sidbseetien (a) of
this Sieben.
*LL A Proposed planned development project shall consist of
no fewer than four (4) residential units .
(cD The parent lot or lots shall have frontage on a public
street .
LE-1 Each dwelling unit shall be subject to review under the
City' s Appearance Review Guidelines .
_LZ Building setbacks shall be as follows :
Front yard at residence - 15 feet
Front yard at garage - 20 feet
Side yards (combined) - 10 feet
*Side yard (corner lot) - 12 feet
Rear yard (single-story) - 10 feet
Rear yard (two-story) - 15 feet
• _LcLZ Building coverage (residence plus garage footprint)
shall not exceed 35% of the individual lot area
Landscaping shall constitute a minimum of 40% of the •
lot area. The measurement of landscaped areas shall be
exclusive of driveways, patios, decks, etc
(h)_ Two story residences shall have a second floor that is
limited to 75% of the habitable area of the first
floor.
(i) All mechanical equipment, including HVAC units and
utility meters, shall be screened from view from
adiacent streets and properties
(1) Exterior fencing shall be consistent throughout the
proiect . Design and appearance of fences and/or walls
shall be compatible with the design of the dwelling
units .
(kk) Accessory buildings (sheds, etc) will be allowed;
however, the footprint of such accessory buildings will
count toward the maximum percent of allowable building
coverage.
(1Z Each proposed lot shall have a minimum frontage of
forty-five (45) feet, except that lots at the end of a
cul-de-sac may be forty (40) feet .
* (m) Parking for two resident vehicles shall be provided in •
a garage with minimum interior dimensions of 20' X 20'
One quest parking space of at least 9' X 18' shall be
provided on each individual lot . The driveway area may
be used to satisfy the quest parking requirement On-
street parking shall not be used to satisfy the parking
requirements .
(n) Private open space shall be provided for each
residential unit at a ratio of 300 square feet for the
first two (2) bedrooms . Each bedroom in excess of two
(2) shall cause the private open space to be increased
by 50 square feet . The required front yard setback
area shall not be used to satisfy the open space
requirement; however, side and rear setback areas may
be utilized. The minimum width of the private open
space area shall not be less than ten (10) feet .
(0)_ Individual trash collection shall be used for each
residential unit . Provisions shall be made for storage
of trash cans within the garage or fenced area.
(P)_ All utilities, including electric, telephone and cable,
along the frontage of and within the PD shall be
installed underground.
( r) Alterations or additions to established dwelling units
shall be subiect to the density standards of the
• underlvinQ zone and shall be reviewed pursuant to the
City' s Appearance Review Guidelines
SL)_ All dwelling units shall be equipped with water
conservation devices to include low-flow shower heads
and toilets, and drip irrigation-systems . -
NOTE:
rrigationsystemsNOTE:
Language to be a-�=
Language to be added
*Language revised since 5/28/91
•
•
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF ATASCADERO Item No : C-2 •
Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager Meeting Date: 5/ 28/91
File No: ZC 03-91
Via: Henry Engen, Community Development Director
From: 00steven L. DeCamp, City Planner
SUBJECT:
Amendment of the Zoning Ordinance to include specific development
standards for projects to be undertaken in Planned Development
Overlay Zone V .
RECOI=NDATION:
1 . Waive reading of Ordinance No. 222 in full and approve
by title only; and
2 . Approve Ordinance No. 222 (as amended below) on first
reading.
BACKGROUND: •
The City Council and the Planning Commission have both expressed
concern regarding the lack of standards to guide the design and
review of projects to be undertaken within the PD 7 Overlay Zone.
Indeed, even project applicants have expressed a desire for more
specific guidance for project design.
The attached draft ordinance contains the design standards
developed by the Planning Commission following numerous study
sessions and a public hearing held on April 16, 1991 .
ANALYSIS:
The Planning Commission (as well as staff) believes that
residential development within PD 7 Overlay Zones provides a
viable, alternative style of housing that is otherwise
unavailable within Atascadero. For residents, this type of
project provides for a wider variety of housing types and costs .
For the City, the recently completed Fiscal Analysis (Crawford
Multari & Starr) indicates on page 86 that " [f] rom a fiscal
standpoint, single family units produce more revenue than multi-
family ones . " This rational is followed on page 87 by
recommended Policy A-3 :
"The City shall allow a variety of housing types in multi- •
family zones . Specifically, the City will allow (subject to
• discretionary review and after considering other factors
such as environmental impacts, neighborhood compatibility,
affordability and project design) planned development and/or
condominium projects which allow detached units on
individual lots or as airspace condominiums in multi-family
districts . "
The suggested design guidelines articulate specific minimum
standards for PD 7 projects . The attached staff report dated
April 16, 1991 provides a brief statement of the rational for
each of the proposed standards . The standards have been crafted
in such a manner as to insure that significant flexibility
remains for the project designer to accommodate individual site
characteristics as well as provide for architectural creativity
and individuality.
Additional analysis has revealed that proposed standard "h" may
be overly restrictive and may inhibit architectural flexibility
to a significant degree . Staff therefore recommends that this
standard be modified to read 75% of the bitab = rct oss area
of the first floor. " This modification will insure that the
Commission' s desire to decrease the bulk of two story structures
will be implemented while retaining additional flexibility for
the building designer.
• ATTACHMENTS : Exhibit A - Draft Ordinance No. 222
Exhibit B - PC Staff Report (April 16, 1991)
Exhibit C - PC Minute Excerpts (March 19, 1991)
Exhibit D - PC Minute Excerpts (April 16, 1991)
•
EXHIBIT A
3
ORDINANCE NO. 222
AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO •
AMENDING SECTION 9-3. 651 (ESTABLISHMENT OF PLANNED
DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY ZONE NO. 7) OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE
BY THE ADDITION OF DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
(ZC 03-91; City of Atascadero)
WHEREAS, the proposed zoning ordinance text amendment is
consistent with the General Plan as required by Section 65860 of
the California Government Code; and
WHEREAS, the proposed amendment is in conformance with
Section 65800 et seq. of the California Government Code
concerning zoning regulations; and
WHEREAS, the proposed amendments will not have a significant
adverse impact upon the environment . The Negative Declaration
prepared for the project is adequate; and
WHEREAS, the Atascadero Planning Commission held a public
hearing on April 16, 1991 and has recommended approval of Zone
Change 03-91 .
NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Atascadero does
ordain as follows :
Section 1 . Council Findings . •
1 . The proposal is compatible with the surrounding land
use and zoning.
2 . The proposal is consistent with the General Plan
land use element and other elements contained in the
General Plan, and specifically, policies pertaining to
residential development .
3 . The proposal will not result in any significant
adverse environmental impacts . The Negative
Declaration prepared for the project is adequate.
Section 2 . Zoning Text .
The Zoning Ordinance text is hereby amended by the deletion
of Section 9-3 . 643 (d) and the amendment of Section 9-3 . 651 as
shown on the attached Exhibit A.
Section 3 . Publication.
The City Clerk shall cause this ordinance to be published
once within fifteen (15) days after its passage in the Atascadero
News, a newspaper of general circulation, printed, published, and •
circulated in the City in accordance with Section 36933 of the
q
Ordinance #222
• Government Code; shall certify the adopting and posting of this
ordinance and shall cause this ordinance and this certification
together with proof of posting to be entered into the Book of
Ordinances of the City.
Section 4 . Effective Date .
This ordinance shall go into effect and be in full force and
effect at 12 : 01 a.m. on the 31st day after its passage.
On motion by and seconded by
, the foregoing Ordinance is approved
by the following role call vote:
AYES :
NOES :
ABSENT:
DATE ADOPTED :
By:
ROBERT B. LILLEY, Mayor
• City of Atascadero, California
ATTEST:
LEE DAYKA, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT
RAY WINDSOR, City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ART MONTANDON, City Attorney
PREPARED BY:
HENRY ENGEN, Community Development Director
EXHIBIT A •
9-3 . 651 . Establishment of Planned Development Overlay Zone No . 7
(PD7) : Vie- A Planned Development Overlay Zone No . 7 4.-a may be
established
I . io in multiple family residential zones . The following
development standards are estabiished shall be applied to all
projects within Planned Development Zone No 7 •
(a) She A Master Plan of Development of the site 3s shall
be approved. as shown en Hxh4-bit B whieh is hereby made
All
construction and development shall be done in
conformance with the approved Exhibit master plan. An
MOdifieatien ef the Master Pjan site design may be
i
the level of
i cucac
a._ ._d to
,_ Piet -provided the—Master
Plan
.Jet. a
-(e}_CjjL No subsequent Piet Pian, Preeise—Plan, Genu tie •
Use Perfn-iter Tentative Parcel or Tract Map shall
be approved unless found to be consistent with the
approved Master Plan of Development . Afty
ineluding eenditiens thereof, shall be
aeeemplisheel as set ferth in geetie_
rrTa7—vzf
this Seetien.
(c) The parent lot or lots in combination must be no less
than one-half (1/2) acre.
The parent lot or lots shall have frontage on a public
street .
(e) Each dwelling unit shall be subject to review under the
City' s Appearance Review Guidelines .
_Building setbacks shall be as follows :
Front vard at residence - 15 feet
Front vard at garage - 20 feet
Side yards (combined) - 10 feet
Rear yard (single-story) - 10 feet
Rear yard (two-story) - 15 feet
W Building coverage (residence plus garage footprint)
shall not exceed 35% of the individual lot area. •
U/
Landscaping shall constitute a minimum of 40% of the
• lot area. The measurement of landscaped areas shall be
exclusive of driveways, patios, decks, etc .
(h) Two story residences shall have a second floor that is
limited to 75% of the habitable area of the first
floor.
�i All mechanical equipment, including HVAC units and
utility meters, shall be screened from view from
adl acent streets and properties .
Exterior fencing shall be consistent throughout the
Project . Design and appearance of fences and/or walls
shall be compatible with the design of the dwelling
units .
,(k) Accessory buildings (sheds, etc) will be allowed;
however, the footprint of such accessory buildings will
count toward the maximum percent of allowable building
coverage .
(1) Each proposed lot shall have a minimum frontage of
forty-f '.ve (45) feet, except that lots at the end of a
cul-de-sac may be forty (40) feet .
(m) Parking for two resident vehicles shall be provided in
• a _ garage with minimum interior dimensions of 20' X 201 .
One quest parking space of at least 10' X 20' shall be
provided on each individual lot . The driveway area may
�)e used to satisfy the quest parking requirement . On-
street parking shall not be used to satisfy the parking
requirements .
(nZ Private open space shall be provided for each
residential unit at a ratio of 300 square feet for the
first two (2) bedrooms . Each bedroom in excess of two
shall cause the private open space to be increased
by 50 square feet . The required front yard setback
area shall not be used to satisfy the open space
requirement; however, side and rear setback areas may
be utilized. The minimum width of the private open
space area shall not be less than ten (10) feet .
(o) Individual trash collection shall be used for each
residential unit . Provisions shall be made for storage
of trash cans within the garage or fenced area.
(p) All utilities, including electric, telephone and cable,
along the frontage of and within the PD shall be
installed underground.
• SgZ Alterations or additions to established dwelling units
shall be subiect to the density standards of the
underlying zone and shall be reviewed pursuant to the •
City' s Appearance Review Guidelines .
, r) All dwelling units shall be equipped with water
conservation devices to include low-flow shower heads
and toilets, and drip irrigation systems .
•
•
MEETING z
DATE_LL 1
• MEMORANDUM
To: Honorable Mayor, City Council and City Treasurer
Via: Ray Windsor, City Maamr
From: Arther R. Montandonty
Attorney
Subject: Resolution No. 38-91, Fiscal Impact Study charged to
developer fees
Date: June 3, 1991
Inquirer: May the costs of a computerized fiscal impact model to
evaluate the impact of new development be charged as a
developer fee to new development?
Response: Though an argument may be made that this cost should be
part of the developer fee, a more conservative and
legally-defendable position would be to charge this as
overhead and a processing cost.
• Background:
The City Treasurer has asked about the propriety of charging,
as part of the City's developer fees, the costs of the computerized
fiscal impact model ($22, 000.00) . She stated that, at a recent
seminar she attended, it was reported that the State would initiate
audits of municipalities' fee programs to ensure strict compliance.
The City Council has asked that I review her concerns and ren-
der an opinion to guide their decision in this matter.
Discussion:
Developer fees are to be adopted pursuant to Government Code
Section 66000, et seq. These sections require certain findings to
be made prior to imposing and collecting developer fees. The fee
must defray all or a portion of the cost of a public facility re-
lated to the development project; also, the City Council must find
that there is a "reasonable relationship" between the fee's use and
the type of development project (Government Code Section 66000) .
The Fiscal Impact Model will be used to assess the financial
impact upon the City of development projects. It could be argued
that this information is required to plan for and design public
• 1
facilities. Also, the new development requires the study of such
financial impacts. As such, when this was first considered, it was •
my opinion to include this cost in developer fees.
With the new information regarding close scrutinyb
the
State, a more conservative approach may be warranted, whch still
allows the City to recover its costs. This a
the cost of this study and computer model to ooverhead anproach dallocproces-
sing costs pursuant to Government Code Sections 65909.5 and 66014.
In this manner, the City could, over time, recover the cost.
ARM:cw
•
2 •
•
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL Agenda Item: -B-4- B-7
CITY OF ATASCADERO
Through : Ray Windsor , City Manager Meeting Date: -5-,1-14,19+ _ 5/28/91
From: Mark Joseph , Administrative Services Director '+
SUBJECT: Developing a Fiscal Impact Model (Phase II of Crawford ,
Multari and Starr contract ) .
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends adoption of Resolution No .
3e-91 authorizing the City Manager to execute an agreement with
Crawford , Multari and Starr ( GMS) to develop a fiscal impact
model .
BACKGROUND ANALYSIS
The first phase of this project was approved by Council and
• completed in December , 1990. The result was the Long-Range
Fiscal Analysis for the City. The second phase is to develop a
computerized fiscal impact model , to assist in evaluating
economic , and certain non--economic , issues relating to new
development . Mike Multari ' s attached letter best clarifies the
proposal and time frames.
The $22,000 has been budgeted (one-half in FY 90-91 ; the
balance is scheduled for FY 91-92) out of Developer Impact Fees.
Phases III and IV, relating to the development of a
computerized land use data base and Geo-based Information System
( GIS ) , have been addressed through the purchase and installation
of the Computer Network in Community Development and Public Works
as authorized by Council in the current budget .
•
RESOLUTION NO. 38-91
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA
AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT WITH
CRAWFORD, MULTARI & STARR
TO
DEVELOP A COMPUTERIZED FISCAL IMPACT MODEL.
The City Council of the City of Atascadero, California, hereby
resolves as follows:
1. The City Manager is hereby authorized to execute an
agreement with: Crawford, Multari & Starr to construct a
Computerized Fiscal Impact Model, and all other
agreements or documents required to effectuate the terms
of agreement.
2. The City Manager is hereby authorized to make minor
corrections or modifications of a mathematical or
clerical nature.
3. The Finance Director is hereby authorized to: appropriate •
funds, if necessary; release and expend funds; and issue
warrants to comply with the terms of this agreement.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of
the City of Atascadero held on the 28th day of May, 1991.
CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA
By:
Robert B. Lilley, Mayor
ATTEST:
Lee Dayka, City Clerk
•
Crawford Multari & Starr
, g • arcnitecture • puc ! ic pct ' V
April 18, 1991
Mark Joseph, Director
Administrative Services
City of Atascadero
6500 Palma Avenue
Atascadero, CA 93442
Dear Mark,
As you requested, attached is a brief work program, schedule and budget for the next phase of
the Fiscal Planning Project. I have also enclosed an agreement for services if this proposal meets
with your approval.
In sum, we will provide a fiscal impact model which can be used by the City staff to evaluate
individual projects as well as changes in zoning or amendments to the general plan. The model
will be "user friendly"; that is, it will be largely menu driven so that little technical knowledge of the
software is required.
We will include 24 hours of training time. We expect that about half of that time will be used to
teach the appropriate staff persons how to use the model and half will be reserved for responding
• to questions or problems that arise as staff begins to use it.
We have also budgeted for two presentations, one each to the Planning Commission and to the
City Council. We, of course, can make additional presentations on a time-and-materials basis, if
necessary.
Because of work loads, we will not be able to begin until about June 1. We will have a schematic
system design, including diagrams and some explanatory text, for the staff to review by July 1.
The model and procedures manual will be delivered by September 1. Training and presentations
to the Commission and Council would take place during September, or whenever deemed
convenient by the City.
Our budget remains the same as in the original proposal: $22,000.
If you need more information, or if any of this needs to be changed, please give me a call. Thank
you.
Sincerely,
Michael Multari
Principal
•
H�guera St.. Suite 202 San _u s Cb spo cA y31G' 305 5� c�
MEETIM7, AGENDA
DATE 6/11/91 ITEM# D(B
• May 24, 1991
Mr.Paul CrawfordFCFI VED MQ
Mr.Michael Multan Y 3 Q '
Mr.Karl Mohr
641 Higuera St. Suite 202
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
RE: 1991 Central Coast Section APA Awards
Gentlemen:
Congratulations! The Awards committee has selected the Atascadero Long Range
Fiscal Analysis for the Central Coast Section outstanding planning award for a
Specific Planning Project and the San Luis Obispo Zone Phone for an outstanding
planning award for plan implementation. With these categories, both awards are
eligible for submittal at the State level under the category of a Specific Planning
project.
Awards for the Zone Phone will also be presented to Mr. Glenn Goodman, Mr.
Allan Massicotte, and Ms. Holly Frank.
• Awards for the Atascadero Long Range Fiscal Analysis will also be presented to the
g
City of Atascadero, Professor Prem Pangotra, Professor Steven French, and Mr.
Steven Nukes.
I look forward to seeing the awards recipients at the APA Central Coast Section
awards dinner on June 7, (Friday). If you wish to provide any exhibits or handouts,
or make a short presentation upon the receipt of the award, please coordinate that
effort with Jan Hubbell at 564-5470. Details regarding dinner selections and cost
may also be provided by Jan.
Cordially,
Carolyn Johnson
Awards Chairperson
CC: John Bauke Jan Hubbell
211 E Victoria #E City of Santa Barbara/Community Development
Santa Barbara, CA PO Box 1990
• 93401 SantaBarbara, CA 93102-1190
Mr. Alex Hinds •
Ms. Holly Frank
County of San Luis Obispo
County Government Center
Department of Planning and Building
SLO, CA 93408
Mr. Glen Goodman
Mr. Alex Massicotte
County of San Luis Obispo
County Government Center
Department of Technical Services
Mr. Steven Nukes
1250 Peach St.
SLO, CA 93401
Mr. Henry Engen
City of Atascadero
PO Box 747
Atascadero, CA 93423
Professor Steven French •
Cal Poly
Community and Regional Planning Program
SLO, CA 93407
Professor Prem Pangotra
Cal Poly
Community and Regional Planning Program
SLO, CA 93407
•
MEETIN AGENDA
DATE 611/91 ITEM! D-2
• MEMORANDUM
DATE: 5/31 /91
TO: Ray Windsor, City Manager
FROM: Mike McCain, Acting Fire Chief
SUBJECT: Weed abatement contract bid/weed abatement program
questions
Per your request during our conversation on 5/29/91 , the contractor,
Stephen Vines, was contacted to clarify the half-hour rate indicated
on the bid sheet. Mr. Vines stated he made an error on the bid sheet
and that the half-hour rate should have been $8.00, not $7.00 as
shown.
Mayor Lilley had a question regarding the use of assessor's parcels
numbers to identify parcels for abatement rather than street
• addresses. The map books used to identify parcels and information
submitted to the County Assessor's Office is identified by
assessor's parcel number only. Use of the assessor's parcel number
for all records not only simplifies communications between the
agencies, it also helps to reduce errors due to incorrect or
inconsistent street addresses.
This year the mailing labels for the weed abatement notices sent out
were prepared by Steve Hicks, Building Official. Previously the
information was provided by the County Assessor's Office. The
Community Development Department computer system does have the
capability of providing the street address, in addition to the
assessor's parcel number. At this time, however, addresses are not
indicated for all parcels. Perhaps in the future we will have the
information for all parcels and can include it on the notifications
sent to property owners.
Mayor Lilley also had a question regarding errors in sending weed
abatement notices to property owners who do not have weeds on
their properties. The identification of lots requiring abatement is
done by a visual inspection of all parcels in the city. As assessor's
. parcel maps are used to conduct this inspection and do not indicate
Memo to City Manager •
5/31 /91
Page 2
street addresses, at times there is difficulty in determining lot
lines. In those instances notices are sent to hopefully the correct
parcel owner, as well as to adjoining property owners in order to be
sure the correct property owner is notified. Property owners of
parcels which contain pastures or crops lands are sent notices to be
sure they are aware those areas are exempt from abatement only as
long as they are being used for pastures or that crops must be cut at
harvest time. All parcels identified are included as an exhibit to
the resolution declaring weeds a nuisance. Only properties
identified on the exhibit may be abated by the city if the property
owner does not abate the weeds, therefore notices are sent out
somewhat liberally.
If you would like additional information or if I can answer any other
questions regarding the weed abatement program, please let me •
know.
MIKE MCCAIN �- -1
MM:pg
BID SUMMARY
•TO: Peggy Green
Fire Departme
FROM: Lee Dayka
City Clerk
BID NO. : 91-6
OPENED : 5/14/91 2:00 A.M.
PROJECT: 1991 Weed Abatement
The following proposals were received and opened as follows:
Name & Address of Bid Price Discounts
Contractor Part I Part II Available
(Tractor) (Weed-Eater)
Pacific Fence Co. 25. 00/hr. No bid 1.5%
P.O. Box 99 15.00/1/2 hr.
Morro Bay, CA 93443
Vines of Life Landscape 27.50/hr. 15.50/hr. 5.0%
1879 Brighton, #B 14.50/1/2 hr. 7. 00/1/2 hr.
Grover City, CA 93433
•Young Brothers Const. 30. 00/hr. 17. 00/hr. -0-
P.O. Box 1176 20.00/1/2 hr. 8.50/1/2 hr.
Atascadero, CA 93423
Jack Bridwell 30.00/hr. 16. 00/hr -0-
11600 Viejo Camino 20.00/1/2hr. 10.00/1/2hr.
Atascadero, CA 93422
Greg Rosenthal Const. 36.00/hr. 18. 00/hr. 1.0%
840 Fawn Lane 18. 00/1/2 hr. 9.00/1/2 hr.
Paso Robles, CA 93446
B&H Communications 40.00/hr. 18.75/hr. 1.0%
P.O. Box 92 25.00/1/2 hr. 11. 00/1/2 hr.
Santa Margarita, CA 93453
Brett' s Tractor Service 55.00/hr. 30. 00/hr. -0-
735 Walnut Drive 40. 00/1/2 hr. 20. 00/1/2 hr.
Paso Robles, CA 93446
Attachments: 7 proposals
is
•
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL Agenda Item: D-3
CITY OF ATASCADERO
Through : Ray Windsor , City Manager Meeting Date: 6/ 11/91
From: Mark Joseph , Administrative Services Director
SUBJECT: Support for Soviet Student Exchange
RECOMMENDATION: Staff seeks direction from Council on how to
proceed .
BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS:
At the May 28, 1991 Council Meeting , Mayor Lilley noted the
efforts of Steve Worford , who is coordinating a student exchange
between Atascadero High school students and 23 Soviets (21
students, 2 advisors) . They are scheduled to arrive in New York
City on June 22, 1991 .
• Mr . Worford expects to need approximately $9,000 to cover
travel expenses from New York City to Atascadero . He anticipates
that he will have about half of the costs and is still seeking
donations . Although the e>:change is planned for this year , Mr .
Worford hopes to see this project become an annual event .
In FY 89-90, Council authorized $500 for a similar program -
- Soviets , Meet Middle America .
OPTIONS:
1 . Council can include Mr . Worford ' s request as part of
the FY 91--92 Community Group Funding process ( scheduled
for June 19, 1991 ) .
2 . Council can author- i ze a donation out of ct r,-ent
appropriations .
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: 6/11/91
• CITY OF ATASCADERO
AGENDA ITEM: D=4
Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager
From: Greg Luke, Director of Public Works
RECOMMENDATION:
Authorize the Public Works Director to enter into an agreement with
Mr. Kelly Gearhart to contribute $20, 000 towards the construction
of approximately 500 feet of Santa Cruz Road as shown on the
attached map.
BACKGROUND
Mr. Kelly Gearhart is proposing to develop three parcels located at
the far north end of San Ramon Road (see enclosed vicinity map) .
Two of the parcels front on a portion of Santa Cruz Road which has
not yet been constructed. The Public Works Department initially
conditioned Mr. Gearhart's project to fully construct approximately
• 500 feet of Santa Cruz Road and use this road for access to the two
adjoining properties.
After engineered improvement plans were prepared, it was
determined that constructing this portion of Santa Cruz Road would
cost approximately $50, 000. The high cost was due to provisions to
protect a regional gas pipeline that crosses the road and the large
quantity of fill needed to bring the road to match the grade of the
existing San Ramon Road.
The high cost of constructing Santa Cruz caused Mr. Gearhart to
seek other ways of accessing his property. He subsequently
presented a plan whereby several small driveways could be
constructed to provide the needed access. While the series of
driveways would technically meet his access requirements, this
approach would make it difficult for Santa Cruz to be constructed
in the future.
DISCUSSION
The completed portions of Santa Cruz in the northwest section of
the City serves a large area. Currently, residents using this road
must travel an indirect route to reach Santa Cruz. As the area
grows out and traffic increases, direct access to Highway 101 will
greatly improve traffic circulation.
•
To complete this linkage, Santa Cruz must be constructed on the
Kelly property and a bridge constructed across Graves Creek. Other •
minor road improvements must also be made on the existing portion
of Santa Cruz. However, Santa Cruz is 90% complete and only the
improvements described above are necessary to create a major new
access point to the northern portion of the City.
The issue before the Council is whether to participate in a joint
effort with ,Mr. Gearhart to construct the unbuilt portion of Santa
Cruz Road. In staff's opinion the $50, 000 cost to construct this
road is an excessive requirement to place on a project that would
construct three houses, particularly when the applicant has an
alternative (and less expensive) means of acquiring access to the
properties. As discussed above, the City would realize substantial
benefit from the construction of Santa Cruz.
The proposal before the Council is for the City to enter into an
agreement with Mr. Gearhart to construct 500 feet of Santa Cruz
Road, according to City standards, with the City contributing
$20, 000 towards the construction cost. Mr. Gearhart would be
responsible for all remaining construction costs. Upon completion,
the road would be taken into the City road system. The applicant
has indicated his concurrence with this arrangement.
OPTIONS:
1. The Council may indicate that constructing Santa Cruz Road is
a reasonable requirement of the project and direct staff to 0
condition the project accordingly.
2. The Council may choose not to pursue the construction of Santa
Cruz Road at this time and opt for access by private driveways.
FISCAL IMPACT:
If staff recommendation is approved, $20, 000 would be expended from
the gas tax fund.
•
IM,
IRM
fir,
Will
•
SANTA CRUZ ROAD
(SITE j -,
\ SANTA GRL)z RaAD
40
� �� •.� - 101
FVTvRE Q
IMPRo✓EME�I/TS •• O
V� lz-
Ex�STi vG
IMPRp✓EME&('5 �v O U E t O
/4�
1
1
VICINITY MAP
NO SCALE •
r
'r
• REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF ATASCADERO Item No: D-5
Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager Mtg. Date: 6/11/91
From: Henry Engen, Comm. Dev. Director VA File No: GP Cycle 2-91
SUBJECT:
Preliminary review of the General Plan Amendment application
submitted for review and action in the second cycle of 1991.
RECOMMENDATION:
Per the Planning Commission' s recommendation, initiate consider-
ation of General Plan Amendment 2A-91 (905 El Camino Real - Daven
Investments/Cosmic Astro Corporation/Guy Greene - request to change
land use designation from Retail Commercial, Recreation, and
Suburban Residential to Commercial Park and Recreation) .
BACKGROUND:
• At their May 21, 1991 meeting, the Planning Commission considered
the second cycle for 1991 General Plan Amendments. After review
and discussion, the Commission recommended initiation of the one
amendment request filed. No additional amendments were recommended
by the Commission. There was no public testimony as reflected in
the attached minutes excerpt.
HE:ps
Attachments: Staff Report - May 21 , 1991
Minutes Excerpt - May 21, 1991
CITY OF ATASCADERO Item: lij"� •
STAFF REPORT
FOR: Planning Commission Meeting Date: May 21, 1991
BY:J0ADoug Davidson, Senior Planner File No: GP Cycle 2-91
SUBJECT:
Preliminary review of the General Plan Amendment application
submitted for review and action in the second cycle of 1991.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Commission should recommend consideration of General
Plan Amendment 2A-91 to the City Council, as shown on the
attachments.
Furthermore, staff is not recommending that the City initiate
any other amendments at this time, because the Land Use Update
program is nearing fruition.
BACKGROUND: •
The application period for the second cycle of 1991 closed on
April 1, 1991. The purpose of this report is to allow the
Planning Commission an opportunity to comment on the proposed
Amendment and to approve or modify the associated study area.
Also, the Commission can initiate additional amendments to the
General Plan at this
time, however, as stated above, this is not
recommended. Consistent with prior practice, the corresponding
Zoning Ordinance text and/or map revisions will be processed
concurrently.
PROPOSED AMENDMENT:
The City received one individual request this cycle for a General
Plan amendment. The application proposes the following:
GP-2A-91 - 905 El Camino Real (Daven Investments/Cosmic
Astro Corp./Guy Greene - former Rochelle
property) .
General Plan Amendment From Retail Commercial,
Recreation, and Suburban Residential to
Commercial Park and Recreation.
•
•
Zone Change - From CT (Commercial Tourist) , L
(Recreation) , RS (Residential Suburban) with FH
(Flood Hazard Overlays) to CPK (Commercial Park)
and L (Recreation) with FH (Flood Hazard) and PD
(Planned Development) Overlays.
The application seeks to recognize the site constraints to
residential development, such as the railroad right-of-way and
flooding potential, by proposing a Recreational Vehicle (RV)
park. This would expand the recreational zoning of the 103 acres
site to 76 acres and eliminate the portion designated for single
family residential development. In conjunction, the proposed
commercial area increases from 10 acres to 27 acres with a
Commercial Park designation replacing that of Commercial Tourist.
The CPK zone is to allow for aro osed auto mall.
P P
Since this land was prezoned and annexed to the City in 1984, the
special characteristics and development constraints of the site
have been apparent, but never analyzed beyond a conceptual stage.
The proposed auto mall and RV park present a different set of
development issues than the original proposal; thus the
previously certified Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is not
adequate. The applicants have authorized the City to select a
• consultant for a supplementary EIR and submittal of the proposed
work scope is imminent.
Staff believes that this request can be reviewed independent of
the General Plan Update program. In fact, this amendment request
is the appropriate method to conduct analysis and environmental
review for a large site with a number of development issues. A
PD Overlay or Specific Plan area would be incorporated into the
review as a means to limit the scale of the project to the
preferred option. It is also anticipated that the approved, but
not recorded, Tentative Parcel Map would be revised to reflect
the ultimate development scheme.
ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A - Zoning Map
Attachment B - General Plan Land Use Map
Attachment C - Conceptual Site Plan
Attachment D - Development Statement
•
ATTACHMENT A
CITY OF ATA ZONING MAP
�M, �• •• • SCADERO
s: GPA 2A-91
3c COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT •
SITE
i" Req
P ( F/j
RS ( F
�, i TAIIFFIC�
1'
•
O
W / \
r, \
n1 ��
Y iR �• 6
iN A
s
IIAQCIA
-,� .
1 •
i
�.
� 1 C
�l
ATTACHMENT C
f
CITY OF AT CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN
ASCADERO
•�N
GPA 2A-91
CIAW COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT •
i
}
------------------
---------------
---------------------i
ROVER
Fp
ti
\ i i wo
ATASCAC!RO (- �O MALL
711;
/ `1
1 V
920
90
7w r
7r.0
SECTION - "OPwONTAL SCALD i'= :00• VERTICAL SCALE, 1'- 40'
=P,�orcTY GUY GREENE. PLANNER •
ATTACHMENT D
GPA 2A-91
• GUY GREENE • LAND PLANNER • 7339 Yucca Via, Tucson, Arizona 85704 (602) 742 0267
Application, General Plan Amendment/Zone Change
Rochelle property
Supplemental Development Statement/Environmental Information
Property Description.
The property comprises approximately 103 acres, and is divided physically into two
areas, by both natural topography and cultural features. The northern portion of
the land is associated with the Salinas river channel/floodplain/terrace, and is
bordered on the south by the Southern Pacific Railroad. The upper terrace appears
to above the 100-year flood limit, although we have not found a precise definition of
this limit. The area of this portion of the property is about 76 acres.
The southern portion, about 27 acres, is bounded on the north by the railroad and on
the south by Highway 101 and an interchange. It is higher in elevation than the
southern section, and is typical of the gently-rolling oak-grassland of this region.
Soils appear to be uniform, and alluvial in origin. Expansive clays may exist on the
property, but would not be highly significant in relation to the proposed uses. The
land has been used for agriculture, and is therefore more vulnerable to erosion than
• would be the case if it were undisturbed. Development would benefit this condition.
Vegetation includes grasses, Valley and Live Oak, Willow and Cottonwood. There
appear to be no nesting areas or evidence of continual use by wildlife.
The railroad, the freeway, and the river separate the propery from those surrounding
it on all sides except the southeast. The adjacent property along the river is public,
and vacant. Adjacent to the upper area, between the railroad and the freeway, are
four single-family lots, one of which is owned by the applicant. They are part of a
residential neighborhood of mixed single-family and high-density multi-family
dwellings. The proposed development would occur on a terrace considerably below
these adjacent properties.
Police and fire services are 10-12 minutes away. There is at present no sewer service
to the property, and the developer proposes to install a package treatment plant with
an acceptable level of treatment. The property is served by the Atascadero Mutual
Water Company. At this time, no agreement exists with this company, but the owner
has completed a well on the property which appears to be entirely adequate for the
proposed development. An existing P.G.& E. easement traverses the property in an
east-west direction adjacent to Graves Creek.
•
ATTACHMENT D (cont. )
Proposed Development.
The property is presently zoned Commercial-Tourist, Recreation, and Residential
Suburban. The presence of the river, with its attendant flood hazard on the north,
the freeway on the south, and the railroad down the middle, constitutes a group of
deterrents to permanent, single-family residences. We propose, therefore, to expand
both the commercial and recreational uses in a manner which seems particularly
appropriate to the this somewhat unusual property.
The accompanying plan shows the recreation zone expanded to include all of the
northern, or river-oriented area, in the form of an RV park. There are approximately
440 spaces on 25 acres leaving, in addition to the recreation areas, over 50 acres of
open space. The park would have direct access to the freeway, but would not be
visible from it nor, for the most part, from the surrounding properties. RV's are not
vulnerable to flooding; they are unaffected by shallow water, and in the event of
severe flood warnings, can quickly be moved. From the standpoint of long-range
planning, this use has the advantage of keeping this 76 acres as a single parcel
without significant structural elements.
The upper area is shown as a commercial use in its entirety, which seems in keeping
with the fact that the area is clearly a single physical entity, with no apparent reason
for dividing it. A small part of the southern edge of the property abuts three or four •
residential lots, but they would be separated vertically, the commercial area being
some twenty feet below the top of the adjacent property.
The auto mall is the suggested use, becuase there appears to be a demand for such
a facility in Atascadero, and it would generate a substantial volume of business
without a corresponding volume of traffic.
This application does not attempt to provide complete information on details of
various environmental aspects of the property or the program because there exists
a previously prepared EIR, much of the basic information in which has not changed,
and because it is our understanding that an EIR up-date will be required, a
procedure with which we concur and to which we agree.
GUY GREENE • LAND PLANNER - 7339 Yucca Via, Tucson, Arizona 85704 (602) 742 0267
•
May 15, 1991
Mr. George Luna, Chairman
Planning Commission, City of Atascadero
6500 Palma Avenue
Atascadero, California 93422
Subject: Rochelle property, General Plan Amendment 1D-91/Zone Change 02-91
Dear Mr. Luna:
I find it difficult to make the trip from Tucson to attend the Tuesday meeting on the
above subject, for which I apologize.
I have worked closely with your staff in preparing this application; Henry Engen,
Steve DeCamp and Doug Davidson have all been extremely helpful in providing
advice and direction.
• Staff is, I believe, concluding negotiations for the preparation of an EIR up-date for
the project, and we will be pleased to provide such additional reports or studies as
may be required to establish the viability of the program.
I hope that the Commission will find it possible to initiate the processing of the
application, which I think is essentially sound in its proposals. I have always found
it a pleasure to work in Atascadero, and I look forward particularly to this project.
It is rewarding to accomplish something which benefits not only the client, but the
community as well.
Sincerely,
reene
c. Doug Davidson
•
PC 5/21/91 - MINUTES EXCERPT
Cbmmissioners Highland and Kudlac. •
Commissioner Hi d observed that as a whole, the Commission
seems to have minor rences with priorities previously
discussed. He noted that staff`h��s done a good job in putting
this together. Perhaps next year,`t CIP can be reviewed
again with possible adjustments made to priorities.
Chairperson Luna concurred.
2. Preliminary review of General Plan Amendment application
submitted for review and action in the second cycle of
1991.
Doug presented the staff report noting that the proposed land
use designations are generalizations because of the General
Plan Update process, and are subject to change as the project
is reviewed. The proposed General Plan Amendment can be
looked at independently of the overall Update program. Mr.
Davidson reported that the scope of the project had just been
received by staff earlier. As well, a traffic study has been
submitted which addresses a wider overall area of traffic
factors.
No public comment was given.
Commissioner Waage stated that there appear to be many •
barriers to project approval (i.e. , lack of sewer, railroad
right-of-way issue, etc) . The problems appear to be
unsolveable.
Mr. Decamp cautioned that this project can not be dismissed
without reviewing it as the project deserves "its day in
court" . He added that the railroad right-of-way is a critical
concern which has been relayed to the consultant. Discussion
continued.
MOTION: By Commissioner Highland, seconded by Commissioner
Lochridge and carried 6:0 to recommend
consideration of General Plan Amendment 2A-91 to
the City Council.
Chairperson Luna called a recess at :55 p.m. ; meeting
reconvened at 9: 05 p.m.
3. Review and discussion,on status report on Update of Noise
Element/Ordinance.-
Mr.
lement/Ordinance:Mr. Davidsonpreysented the staff report noting that the Noise
Element (one of seven State mandated elements of the General
Plan) is a planning document which provides a policy framework •
within which potential noise impacts may be evaluated.
r '
•
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL Agenda Item: D-6
CITY OF ATASCADERO
Through : Ray Windsor , City Manager Meeting Date: 6/11 /91
From: Mark Joseph , Administrative Services Director
SUBJECT: Earthquake Insurance
RECOMMENDATION: Staff seeks Council approval to purchase
Earthquake Insurance.
BACKGROUND:
The City ' s total property insurance premium for FY 91-92 is
estimated at $7,339. Our insurance policies have traditionally
excluded earthquake and flood coverage, generally because of the
high premiums involved . Preliminary research indicates
earthquake insurance would cost more than the City ' s other
• property insurances combined .
The issue is, should the City add the extra coverage,
particularly in light of City Hall being both a historical site
and an unreinforced masonry building , as well as Atascadero being
so close to the Parkfield Fault?
Staff supports the additional insurance. It ' s a significant
expense, but the risk of losing City Hall is far more serious.
Because an earthquake is a very realistic possibility, insurance
is the most prudent short-term alternative, until such time as
City Hall is reinforced . At that time, although it may remain a
useful expense, it may not be as urgent .
With Council ' s support , staff will work with the City ' s JPA
( Self-Insurance Group ) to find the best policy and report back to
Council ( in July or August ) .
FISCAL IMPACT
Because the City ' s liability insurance premium has dropped
from last year , staff feels the City could absorb the extra cost
in FY 91-92.
•
MEETING AGENDA
DATE r1i� REM#
LUIS OBISPO COURTY
J910
GOVERNMENT CENTER • SAN LUIS OBISPO,CALIFORNIA 93408 • (805) 549-5252
CLINTON MILNE
County Engineer
GLEN L. PRIDDY 410
DEPUTY COUNTY ENGINEER
NOEL KING COUNTY
ENGINEERING
SPECIAL DISTRICTS ADMINISTRATOR
DEPARTMENT
ROADS
TRANSPORTATION
May 23, 1991 TRANSIT
FLOOD CONTROL
WATER CONSERVATION
COUNTY SURVEYOR
IAL DISTRICTS
City of Atascadero SPECIAL
WASTE
6500 Palma Ave. Room 207
Atascadero, CA 93422
Subject: Master Water Plan
Dear Robert Lilley, Mayor:
Earlier, at the request of Supervisor David Blakely, I provided you with a copy of the County's
• Master Water Plan Update.
In the Summer of 1986, 1 appeared at each of the council meetings of the seven cities to brief
them about the Plan. Since that time, there have been changes on the councils and it would
now appear appropriate to review the Master Water Plan again. I think this would be most
appropriate in light of the actions that will be taken on the State Water Project, and also on
the interest now being shown on the Nacimiento Water Supply Project. If you agree, then
request that you set up some time at one of your council meetings for me to review the Master
4— Water Plan.
Sincerely,
� 6/11/91 - NOTE TO COUNCIL:
CLINTON MILNE STAFF REQUESTS COUNCIL DIRECTION ON
County Engineer WHETHER, AND THEN WHEN, A PRESENTATION
SHOULD BE MADE. DUE TO NUMBER OF HEARINGS
mwtrpin.ltr.ams SCHEDULED FOR JUNE 25TH, STAFF WOULD REC-
OMMEND THE IST MEETING IN JULY OR OTHER.
cc: Harry Ovitt, Supervisor District 1
Bud Laurent, Supervisor District 2
Evelyn Delany, Supervisor District 3
Ruth Brackett, Supervisor District 4
David Blakely, Supervisor District 5
Bob Hendrix, County Administrator