HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 12/26/1979 1
J
AGENDA ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL
Regular Meeting
December 26 , 1979 7:30 p.m.
Atascadero Administration Building
Call to Order
Pledge of Allegiance
Invocation
Roll Call
Public Comment
A. CONSENT CALENDAR
1. Minutes of the special meeting of December 8, 1979
(RECOMMEND APPROVAL)
2. Minutes of the regular meeting of December 10, 1979
(RECOMMEND APPROVAL)
3. Treasurer' s Report, 11-20-79 through 12-17-79
(RECOMMEND APPROVAL)
B. HEARINGS', APPEARANCES AND REPORTS
Note: Planning matters will be heard first
1. Acceptance of Final Map, AT 78-143 Hendrix
2. Request for extension of time, Tentative Parcel Map
CO 78-46 - Holmes (Hilliard)
3. Request for extension of time, Tentative Parcel Map
CO 78-98 Stinchfield (Stewart)
4. Consideration of variance to moratorium on condominium
conversions - Tentative Tract No. 866 , Lenzi/Morris
Gannage, 3750 El Camino Real
C. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
1. Consideration of rescinding County ordinance dealing with
road deposit projects - Cayucos and Largo Street matter
2 Selection of architect for remodeling Administration Building
3. Selection of Police Chief
4. Set date to interview Public Works Director/City'Engineer
5. Consideration of joining JPA for employee health insurance
benefits
D. NEW BUSINESS
1. Consideration of Addendum to self-insurance JPA to include
health insurance
2. Setting salary and advertising for Police Chief's secretary
E. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION
1. City Council
2. City Attorney
3. City Manager ""I� � �^ �� ��� �C`
•`)''L`�"�`9 ��r,,,�;��a-,, o,,�,,, ,e.��.�,� .Com, �.�- , )
MINUTES - ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL
Regular Meeting
December 10, 1979 7:30 p.m.
Atascadero Administration Building
The meeting was called to order at 7: 30 p.m. by Mayor Wilkins
with the Pledge of Allegiance. Mayor Wilkins also gave the invo-
cation.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Councilmen Highland, Mackey, Nelson, Stover and Mayor
Wilkins
ABSENT: None
PUBLIC COMMENT
(1) A gentleman complained about the trucks on El Camino
damaging the road.
A. CONSENT CALENDAR
1. Minutes of the regular meeting of November 26 , 1979
(RECOMMEND APPROVAL)
MOTION: Councilman Mackey moved for the approval of the Consent
Calendar. The motion was seconded by Councilman Stover
and unanimously carried.
B. HEARINGS, APPEARANCES AND REPORTS
1. Appeal of Jack E. ,Bray from Focused Environmental Impact
Determination on Zauft Conditional Use Permit ED78-197
Mr. Warden stated that since the Planning Commission had con-
sidered this matter, additional information had been received from
the applicant which would answer the EIR issues and negate the
appeal. The matter would then be referred back to the planning
process for a _conditional use permit.
Ellen Rognas fromtheCounty Environmental Coordinator' s office
reviewed the additional information that answered the various EIR
questions.
Councilman Highland wondered if an EIR was necessary at this
point since the conditions could be placed on the Conditional Use
Permit.
MOTION: Councilman Highland moved that Project ED78-197 be
given a negative declaration. The motion was seconded
by Councilman Nelson and unanimously carried.
MINUTES - ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL
Regular Meeting December 10 , 1979
Page Two
Councilman Highland noted that his motion does not mean that
the Council approves the project or that it is going to be approved;
it still has to go through the Planning Commission and City Council
through the Conditional Use Permit process which includes public
hearings.
Comments in opposition to the proposed racquet ball/health
club were expressed by Stephanie Hughes, Rick Webber, Louie Borjes,
Maynard Farnsworth, and others. Comments in favor of the project
were provided by Richard Allen and Jack Bray.
2. Acceptance of Parcel Map AT 78-235, Darnal
Larry Red of the County Subdivision Review Section reviewed
this matter. The County Engineering- Department has found the map
to be consistent with the General Plan and the City Planning Commission
has recommended to Council acceptance of the map.
MOTION: Councilman Highland moved for the approval of Parcel
Map AT 78-235. The motion was seconded by Councilman
Nelson.
Mr. Warden requested that approval include adoption of Resolu-
tion No. 18-79 accepting the 'ten foot widening as a part of the
City road system.
Councilman Highland amended his motion to include adoption
of Resolution No. 18-79. The amendment was accepted by
Councilman Nelson and the motion was unanimously carried.
3 . Acceptance of Parcel Map AT 77-233 , Carmelita Avenue and
Barranco Road
Larry Red reviewed this matter for Council and noted a finding
of General Plan consistency and approval by the City Planning
Commission.
MOTION: Councilman Nelson moved for approval of Parcel Map
AT 77-233 . The motion was seconded by Councilman
Highland and unanimously carried.
4 . CO 78-125, West-Stewart, extension of time request
Larry Red reviewed this item and noted that the Subdivision
Review Board had recommended denial of an extension because the
minimum lot size did not comply with the ,General Plan. The Planning
Commission, however, had recommended granting the extension since
the applicant, had made substantial progress towards completion of
the Final Map.
MINUTES - ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL
Regular Meeting December 10, 1979
Page Three
There was considerable discussion on this matter with Council-
man Highland not favoring the extension. He did not feel that he
could approve the project when it got to the permit stage.
MOTION: Councilman Highland moved that the extension be denied.
The motion was seconded by Councilman Nelson.'
There was further discussion with comments from Acting
City Attorney Fred Metzger. He felt that the Council had approved
similar time extensions and should remain consistent. Mayor Wilkins
was in favor of at least giving the applicant a six month extension.
Councilman Nelson withdrew his second and Councilman
Mackey seconded the motion. It was carried with
Councilman Nelson and Mayor Wilkins voting no.
5. AL 79-01, Iverson/Beckwith Bray, lot line adjustment
Mr. Red reviewed this project. The Subdivision Review Board'
had recommended approval with the conditions contained in their
minutes of November 7 , 1979; the Planning Commission had concurred
in that recommendation.
MOTION: Councilman Highland moved that the lot line adjustment _
be approved with the conditions contained in the Sub-
division Review Board minutes of November 7, 1979. The
motion was seconded by Councilman Nelson and unanimously
carried.
6. Public hearing on application of James Watson for a
Tentative Tract Map #770 to allow a subdivision of a
4 .47 acre site into 3 parcels, Atascadero Road.
Larry Red reviewed the project and stated that it had been
approved by the Subdivision Review Board with the conditions listed
in their minutes of October 3 , 1979 which included road improvement
requirements. The applicant had requested exception to the road
improvement requirements. The Planning Commission, at their meeting
of November 19, 1979, approved the Subdivision Review Board' s con-
ditions including the road requirements.
Robert Hilliard, representing the applicant, did not feel the
road improvements were necessary since no increase in traffic was
likely because very few lots in that area can be split.
MOTION: Councilman Highland moved that Council endorse the
recd mendation of the Planning Commission for General
Plan consistency and approval of the project in accor-
MINUTES ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL
Regular Meeting December 10, 1979
Page Four
dance with the Subdivision Review Board meeting minutes
of October 3, 1979, with deletion of condition number 1
under Streets.
Mr. Hilliard also requested deleting number 11 under Fire
Protection, installation of a fire hydrant, and number 14 under
Design regarding street names for the road. There was further dis-
cussion about the necessity for the fire hydrant and the feeling
on the part of Council that they would like recommendations from
the Fire Department on this requirement.
Councilman Highland amended his motion to include the
deletion of items 11 and 14. The motion was seconded
by Mayor Wilkins.
Councilman Highland amended his motion to include the
provision that approval be subject to the review of
the Fire Chief to assure that proper fire protection
is afforded. The amendment was accepted by Mayor
Wilkins and the motion carried unanimously.
7. Public hearing on application of George Molina for a
Tentative Parcel Map (CO 79-33) to allow a subdivision
of a 1. 5 acre site into two parcels, Traffic Way
Mr. Red reviewed this project. The Subdivision Review Board,
at their meeting of November 7 , 1979, had recommended a finding of
General Plan consistency and approval subject to the conditions
and road improvements specified. The Planning Commission concurred
in this recommendation.
Mr. Molina objected to the curb, gutter and sidewalk improve-
ments , stating that they should not have to be constructed until
a building permit was applied for.
Mr. Red reviewed the provisions for curb, gutters and side-
walks and stated that the applicant had not requested an exception
to this condition to the Engineering Department, therefore, no
recommendations were made regarding elimination of this condition.
Councilman Highland felt that these requirements could be
built into the building permit process and was in favor of elimi-
nating them at this time.
MOTION: Councilman Highland moved for approval of the Tentative
Map subject -to the conditions of the Subdivision Review
Board meeting minutes dated November 7, 1979, with con-
ditions 1, 2, 4 through 14 and eliminating condition 3.
MINUTES - ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL
Regular Meeting December 10 , 1979
Page Five
The motion was seconded by Councilman Mackey and
unanimously carried.
8. Public hearing on application of Barry Aggson for a
Tentative Parcel Map (CO 69-91) to allow a subdivision
of a 5 acre site into two parcels, San Fernando Road
Larry Red reviewed the project noting a Subdivision Review
Board recommendation at their meeting of November 7 , 1979, finding
inconsistency with the General Plan and for denial, along with
recommendations for road improvements. The Planning Commission
had recommended for approval, subject to conditions 1-18 as established
by the Subdivision Review Board.
A presentation was made by Leonard Lenger.
MOTION: Councilman Highland moved for approval of the Tentative
Map subject to conditions 1-18 of the Subdivision
Review ,Board meeting minutes of November 7, 1979.
The motion was seconded by Councilman Mackey and unani-
mously carried.
9. Public hearing on application of Tom Pahler for a Tenta-
tive Parcel. Map (CO 69-43) to allow a subdivision of a
2. 45 acre site into two parcels, San Gabriel Road
Larry Red reviewed the project and stated that the Subdivision
Review Board had recommended a finding of General Plan consistency
and approval. The Planning Commission had concurred in that _recom-
mendation, but added an additional condition that the easement for
access to Parcel "B" be a meandering one designed to preserve the
existing trees. Mr. Hilliard advised that his client had surveyed
the property and determined that they could comply with this addi-
tional condition.
MOTION: Councilman Highland moved for approval of the Tentative
Map subject to conditions 1-13 of the Subdivision Review
Board meeting minutes dated November 7, 1979 as amended
by the Atascadero Planning Commission. The motion was
seconded by Councilman Mackey and unanimously carried.
RECESS 9: 08 p.m. RECONVENED 9: 15 p.m.
10. Appearance of Howard Marohn concerning City acquisition
of property for parking purposes
Mr. Marohn addressed the Council' s decision to explore the
purchase of property across from the Administration Building on
MINUTES -- ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL
Regular Meeting December 10, 1979
Page Six
East Mall for parking purposes. He felt that such a large expen-
diture should receive more discussion. He reviewed alternatives
to purchase of the property for parking and suggested consideration
be given to using portions of the Sunken Gardens and yard area in
front of the Administration Building. He also suggested contacting
the school district ,to determine their interest in purchasing the
property with the City.
Mr. Warden advised Mr. Marohn that he had already contacted
the school district relative to their interest in a joint venture
with the City and they had responded that they would like more
information as to costs. The Council authorized an appraisal of
the property which will answer this question. He reminded the
Council that this matter had been brought to the Council at a regular
meeting and, after discussion, referred to the Planning Commission
who in turn discussed the matter at a regular meeting and recommended
that the parking lot use was consistent with the General Plan.
They recommended acquisition. The matter was further discussed at
another Council meeting with direction given to the City Manager to
secure two appraisals:
Councilman Mackey stated that the property had long been
desirable as a part of the Administration Building and she advised
Mr. Marohn that a grant was being sought for its purchase Council
was -adamently against any use of the Sunken Gardens or Administration
Building grounds for a parking lot.
11. Appearance of Mike Lucas regarding the Atascadero Emblem
Contest
Mr. Lucas passed around three final drawings selected by the
Council committee to screen the finalists. Council reviewed and
selected the drawing depicting the Administration Building surrounded
by a wreath of cattails drawn by Ken Gouff of. Atascadero. For a
motto, Council selected "Vision of one, work of many. "
Mayor Wilkins thanked Mike Lucas and the Committee for their
many hours of work on this contest.
C. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
1. Consideration of Council meeting date, Christmas Eve,
December 24th
Council decided to set Wednesday, December 26 , 1979, for the
second Councilmeeting in December.
MINUTES - ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL
Regular Meeting December 10, 1979
Page Seven
2 . Consideration of Councilman Mackey's committee proposals
Councilman, Mackey discussed her suggestions establishing
various committees.
As to the .Parking Committee: Mayor Wilkins stated that the
Chamber of Commerce is in the process of revitalizing their parking
committee.
As to the Park and Recreation Committee: Mayor Wilkins
suggested that Councilman Mackey contact the Zoological Society
to find out if they have suggestions as to the needs of the Zoo.
As to the Beautification Committee: Mayor Wilkins did not
feel that the Council needed to appoint a committee on this matter;
if a group of citizens wished to make recommendations as to beauti-
fication, they could do so.
As to the Litter Committee: Council felt that service clubs
might wish to provide containers for various places throughout the
City.
As to the Emergency Services Committee There was discussion
on this with Mayor Wilkins stating that the cities in the County
were in the process of developing a joint effort to arrive at coor-
dinated emergency plans.
As to the Alternative Energy Committee: Council felt that
individuals could look into this themselves for their own homes;
after a building department is established there may be some oppor-
tunity for researching funding sources.
D. NEW BUSINESS
1. Resolution No. 19-79 authorizing examination of State
Board of Equalization Sales and Use Tax reports
MOTION Councilman Highland moved for the adoption of Resolution
No. 19-79. The motion was seconded by Councilman
Stover and unanimously carried.
2. Resolution No. 20-79 adopting a Council Conflict of
Interest Code
MOTION: Councilman Highland moved for the adoption of Resolution
No. 20-79. The motion was seconded by Councilman
Mackey and unanimously carried.
MINUTES - ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL
Regular Meeting December 10, 1979
Page Eight
3. Resolution No. 21-79 of intention to grant electric
franchise to Pacific Gas and Electric Company
MOTION: Councilman Highland moved for the adoption of Resolution
No . 21-79. The motion was seconded by Councilman
Stover and unanimously carried.
4. Resolution No. 22-79 of intention to grant gas franchise
to Southern California Gas Company
MOTION: Councilman Highland moved for the adoption of Resolution
No. 22-79. The motion was seconded by Councilman
Stover and unanimously carried.
E. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION
1. City Council
(a) Councilman Mackey stated that the City of Morro Bay
is attempting to change the name of Atascadero
State Beach in Morro Bay to Morro Bay State Beach. She said that
that property was originally purchase by E. G. Lewis and, because
of its historical nature, the name should remain Atascadero State
Beach. She requested Council authorization to make a presentattion
in opposition to the name change at the hearings on this matter.
MOTION: Councilman Highland moved that Councilman Mackey be
authorized to speak at the hearings in opposition to
the name change for Atascadero State Beach. The
motion was seconded by Councilman Nelson and unani-
mously carried.
(b) Councilman Nelson stated that he had received ques-
tions from merchants about securing business
licenses. Mr. Warden said that people need to get their licenses
from the County; the present ordinance is regulatory rather than
revenue generating.- The County supposedly receives only what it
costs to process the license. The City will take over administering
the business license tax ordinance in July, 1980.
(c) Councilman Stover reported that during a Council
of Governments meeting a ride-sahring program had
been discussed and will be implemented for the Atascadero area.
(d) Mayor Wilkins stated that he felt the City should
take definite action against the revenue limitation
initiative which is being circulated in Atascadero. Fred Metzger,
. Acting City Attorney, was of the opinion that the ordinance is
MINUTES - ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL
Regular Meeting December 10, 1979
Page Nine
illegal and suggested that the City seek declaratory relief action
from the courts to enjoin circulation of the petition.
There was considerable discussion as to the merits of having
the courts determine the validity of the ordinance at this time or
after the issue has been presented on the ballot and voted for.
MOTION Councilman Stover moved that Council take action to
determine the validity of the ordinance at this time.
The motion was seconded by Councilman Highland and
carried with Councilmen Mackey and Nelson voting no.
2. City Attorney
Mr. Metzger had nothing to report
3. City Manager
(a) Mr. Warden advised that the City Offices were
relocating in the Administration Building to
Rooms 201-203.
(b) Mr. Warden requested an executive session to dis-
cuss personnel matters and stated that there would
be no announcements at the conclusion of the meeting.
The meeting adjourned to executive session at 10:45 p.m. and
it was noted that the next regular meeting of the Council would be
on Wednesday, December 26, 1979.
Recorded by:
MURRAY L. WARDEN, City Clerk
By: Ardith Davis
Deputy City Clerk
t
4 • S A3
3
TREASURER'S REPORT
November 20 through December 17, 1979
BALANCE as of 11/19/79 $ 5,922. 38
RECEIVABLES•
Per attached deposit listing 54 ,416.44
PAYROLL:
11/21 $1, 814. 77
12/5 $1, 814.77 ( 3,629. 54)
PAYABLES:
Per attached Expenditure List ( 52,257. 79)
BALANCE as of 12/17/79 $ 4 ,451.49
OTHER FUNDS:
Petty Cash 49. 48
Local Agency Investment Fund
State of California 130, 000. 00
Time Deposit, Mid State Bank
13. 9% int. , mature 4/25/80 100,000. 00
TOTAL: $234,500. 97
DEPOSIT LISTING
November 20 through December 17, 1979
Date Source Amount
11/26 State Gas Tax (10/79) $ 15,019. 61
11/29 State - Highway Carriers 1,244 . 94
Publication sales 17.65
12/12 County Revenues (11/79) 6,548. 78
Atascadero County Water District - closing 1,552. 76
12/13 State Motor Vehicle "in lieu tax" (11/79) 30,032. 70
TOTAL: $ 54,416.44
EXPENDITURE LIST
November 20 through December 17, 1979
PAYROLL:
11/21 Checks 1124 , 1125, 1126 $ 1, 814. 77
12/5 Checks 1139, 1140, 1141 1,814.77
$ 3,629. 54
PAYABLES:
Dated Check No. Vendor Amount
11/21 1127 IRS - FWH 11/3-11/16 $ 437. 40
11/21 1128 San Luis Blueprint maps 43. 17
11/21 1129 Western Cities Magazine, ad 96. 00
11/21 1130 Daily Press ad 30. 40
11/21 1131 Jobs Available - ad 56. 10
11/21 1132 Santa Maria Times - ad 22 .95
11/21 1133 Fred Metzger - Atty services 490. 00
1.1/21 1134 Bancroft-Whitney Co. - code books 333. 90
11/21 1135 Atascadero News - ad 51. 60
11/21 1136 U.S. Post Office - postage 30. 00
11/27 1137 Blue Cross - Medical Ins. 149. 60 `
11/30 1138 Local Agency Investment Fund 10,000. 00
12/5 1142 IRS - FWH 11/17-11/30 437. 40
12/5 1143 EDD - SIT 11/3-11/30 162. 20
12/5 1144 M.L. Warden - car allowance 11/79 150. 00
12/5 1145 A. Grimes, Atty. Serv. 11/1-11/7 343. 00
12/5 1146 K&F' Leasing - dictaphone 105. 80
12/5 1147Arrowhead Water 11/79 15. 00
12/5 1148 Cal West Photo - projector 258. 64
12/5 1149 Paper Works - copy 11/9-11/30 285. 58
12/5 1150 Radio Shack - tapes 40. 58
12/5 1151 Fresno Bee - ad 47. 46
12/5 1152 Daily Press - ad 44. 80
12/5 1153 Western Office Prod. - supplies 30. 86
12/5 1154 Telegram Tribune - ad 91.20
12/5 1155 Atascadero News ad 144. 90
12/5 1156_ SLO Co. Planning services 653.20
12/5 1157 City Treasurer - petty cash 48.81
12/11 1158 Fred Metzger Atty Serv. 11/16-
11/30 427. 15
12/11 1159 Pacific Telephone Sery to 11/20 191.00
12/11 1160 PERS actuarial study 90. 00
12/11 1161 PG&E street lights - serv. to
11/30 1,626. 45
12/11 1162 Western Office Prod. - supplies 160. 72
12/11 1163 M. Warden - LOCC seminar 116.50
ry
Expenditure List
11/20/79 to 12/16/79
Page Two
PAYABLES: (Cont. )
Dated Check No. Vendor Amount
12/11 1164 City Treasurer _ petty cash $ 38.67
12/11 1165 ICMA - publication 6. 75
12/13 1166 Local Agency Investment Fund- 3510.00..00
$52 ,257.,79
TOTAL: $ 55, 887. 33
I
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: Atascadero City Council
FROM: Planning Consultant/Director
SUBJECT: Planning Commission Meeting of December 17, 1979
The following items were acted upon by the Planning Commission
and are forwarded to the City Council for final action:
1. Acceptance of Parcel Map AT 78-143 Hendrix, et al.
The Planning Commission recommends acceptance of the
Final Map.
2 . Time Extension for CO 78-46 - Holmes (Hilliard)
The Planning Commission recommends granting a time extension
of one year.
3. Time Extension for CO 78-98 - Stinchfield (Stewart) .
The Planning Commission recommends granting a time extension
of one year.
4. Variance to Condominium Moratorium for Tentative Tract No. 8661
Lenzi/Morris., ` Gannage (Maddalena) .
The Planning Commission recommends that the variance not
be granted since the applicant was unable to satisfy all of the
mandated Findings set forth in the moratorium ordinance. The appli-
cants contended that they were substantially through the approval
process; that a substantial investment had been made in the project
including fees paid to the County, preparation of engineering plans;
and various bond agreements; and, that the moratorium would adversely
affect their financing, commitment. Planning Commission discussion
centered on when the applicants decided to change the project from
an apartment to a condominium; on the reasons that the Commission
previously supported the moratorium; on the desirability of having
condominium projects comply with any requirements that would result
from the soon-to-be completed study; and, on the inability of the .
applicants to satisfactorily demonstrate how this particular project
was different from other projects affected by the moratorium. The
Planning Commission discussion and action can be summarized by the
following Findings
a. The strict application of the provisions of the moratorium
to this particular condominium project may result in some
,
Memorandum - Atascadero City Council
December 20, 1979
Page Two
difficulties or hardships but. these seem necessary
because of the nature of the problem resulting in the
adoption of the moratorium and the need to complete
ongoing studies.
b. There are no exceptional circumstances or conditions
applicable to this condominium project that do not apply
to other condominium projects that are at similar or
more advanced stages.
C. The granting of the variance for this condominium project
would not be materially detrimental to the public welfare.
Submitted by: Concur:
LAWRENCE STEVENS MURRAY ARDE
Planning Consultant/Director City Ma er
kp
12/20/79
Q§193408
+ (805) 549-5252 COUNTY
SRO LUIS OO COV 0 ENGINEERING
DEPARTMENT
DOOM A101 . COURTHOUSE ANNEX � SAN LUIS OBISPO � CALIFORNIA
GEORGE C. PROTOPAPAS ROAbS
County Engineer TRANSPORTATION
FLOOD CONTROL
CLINTON MILNE
WATER CONSERVATION
DEPUTY COUNTY ENGINEER
SURVEYOR
GUY PREWITT
SPECIAL DISTRICTS
SPECIAL DISTRICTS ADMINISTRATOR ..
December 6 , 1979
City of Atascadero
Veterans Memorial Building, Room 106
P. 0. Box 747
Atascadero, CA 93422
Attention Mr. Murray Warden,
City Administrator
Subject: Acceptance of Parcel Map AT 78-143
Gentlemen:
Your consideration of the approval of Parcel Map AT 78-143,
a proposed subdivision by Rex Hendrix, et al, is requested.
It is our
RECOMMENDATION
that your Honorable Council act upon the attached resolution, °
and authorize the Clerk to sign the map.
Discussion:
A finding of consistency with the General Plan in accordance
with Section 66473. 5 of the Subdivision Map. Act was made by
the Board of Supervisors of the County of San Luis Obispo on
March 12 , 1979.
Attached is a vicinity map and layout of Parcel Map AT 78-
143. The .total area of this development is 4. 92 acres with
minimum lot areas of 0.72 acres. The area is zoned R-A.
The road will be maintained by San Luis Obispo County; water
service will be from Atascadero Mutual Water Company;
sewage facilitieswill be maintained by community sewers.
Respectfully,
aRE C. P 0TTOPAPAS
County, Engineer
GCP/JRE/ald
RESOLUTION NO. 23-79
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING A FIVE FOOT WIDENING OF A
CERTAIN ROAD 'INTO THE CITY ROAD SYSTEM
CITY ROAD NO. 4027
The following resolution is hereby offered and read:
WHEREAS, the City of Atascadero, County of San Luis
Obispo, State of California, has been duly requested to
accept a certain offer to dedicate for additional widening
of a road presently in the maintained system in said City;
and
WHEREAS , the County Engineer by letter dated December
6 , 1979, has duly recommended that the City Council:
Accept the offer of dedication for public use of
a five foot strip along San Gabriel Road, and
reject without prejudice the 25 foot and 20 foot
radius as shown on Parcel Map AT 78-143.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AND ORDERED by the City
Council of the City of Atascadero:
1. That the offer to dedicate for the five foot
widening of City Road No. 4027 as shown on Parcel
Map AT 78-143 is hereby accepted into and made a
part, of the City Road System, to be maintained in
kind, and shall and does constitute a public
highway in the City of Atascadero.
2 . That the City Clerk be and hereby is authorized
and directed to record a copy of the resolution in
the Office of the County Recorder of the County of
San Luis Obispo.
Upon motion of Councilman , seconded by
Councilman , and on, the following roll call vote
to-wit:
�i
AYES:
NOES
ABSENT:
ABSTAININGc
the foregoing resolution is hereby adopted.
ATTEST: Mayor of the City of Atascadero
Clerk of the City of Atascadero
Co. Eng./JRE/ald
ay 0 so ao 200 too
\. ti89G1s
..
1`-�lin
1 ria.���R_I
T`( 0-Z4'Oe4W 0•Z4 0ion
311.40'
�� V 130.78 CMJ L• 190-6I'G�
Rot nw1L W� JdRSGR 17
FQ L SC.'T PLR
10 .N OrtcR {>�TAA1.A SCALd 1".100
N e9°40rc17G i�o4C►�
.+►..,.,�,..,,. D4Dt6A.T10N I II 3
II I
t •
r b PP►RGEI. �
AG. ..NET
i• 1.40 AC XSS I • OF mvtc&11W TDAy�6 3oz3
i,? III I � cw-17• /
• Tp• L K
1 •1 a` ���` Z70 67
4 \ /
II �606G'1E,a.1T�lrw�Clsn�
Ji Jr� % I�� I 3
Iv. 7- P.W.C:(rIS0.--+� N3
'
#4 4,
R4, III
414 � 3�.,
:Z7
12
(�
'' pp►RCEL G �
mwy1
N N Loi AGl'ZESS ..
N ((1!6 Q.R. 1•AO� ��
a s N Gb►�l'40•E ul CR1j zlot
n
i` T
n v nNi L u� w IGE
N 13'04 Oq ►.10 TA►g (R'17
3-Ig.ra'Clt-I>
1 N T9'o4�o9•a 1,.31«
2 2 1 N TYG1'41
a 11:�5'c1
-6
Sri
LEGEND : REFERENCES BASIS OF BEARINGS
O MT I/ell. IB Reea t i4 '3 Ms 4-, TME BASIS OF 8"R1N65 WAS V,C Y
PIN WIC-4r, P.E L1,> R-1 Bio RS 6G TAKEN 7V dF TIM- cawTEY+taNa
■ M O-A-5 AO NMW. P%-?-P%-?- I lln OR 19RC ogj+W IZ.10 L- Awa. E&TWOO&Z NO !GALE
• FR w RN lwleAr9-9 1M3 0;z5c>.? TWO Fc--O CG MoAk7M%W" 1N
vMr t-1). a-t WOO Om 4®o W WA-&,AMAD 19, NAOTBp 10 as.
1`R " NoTw.p. Nano 4ebe r- PGR R•1.
M 4G M06WMv*4T IN
•
Nsn A. RocowAx, Director Telephone(805)549-5600-
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Courthouse Annex
.SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA - 93108
December 6, 1979
Honorable City Council and Planning Commission
City of Atascadero, California
Dear Ladies and Gentlemen:
The following time extension request is referred to your Council with
a recommendation for approval from the Subdivision Review Board.
C078-46 (Holmes - Hilliard)
Respectfully submitted,
LARRY J. RED, Supervisor
Subdivision Review Section
ca
cc: County Engineer
County Health Department
REPORT OF THE SUBDIVISION REVIEW BOARD MEETING DECEMBER 5, 1979
RE: CO 78-46, PROPOSED LOT DIVISION OF LOT 5, BLOCK 22, ATASCADERO
COLONY, DEL RIO ROAD, CITY OF ATASCADERO.
(A-1-22: LOW DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) (HOLMES - HILLIARD)
SRB Members in Attendance: Acting Chairman, Larry Red, John Hofschroer,
Bill MacDonald, Jerry Erickson, John Wallace
Planning Commissioner in Attendance: George Rathmell
S
Legal Counsel Present: None
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
This application proposes a subdivision of a 10.85 acre site into 4
parcels, l at 3.15 acres and 3 at 2.5 acres. The site is located on
the south side of Del Rio Road, east of Highway 101 in the City of
Atascadero.
Zoning: A-1-22: "Light Agriculture" (22 acre minimum)
General Plan: 1978 Atascadero Area General Plan: "Low Density Single
Family Residential" (22 acre minimum without sewer
service)
COMMENTS
The subject tentative map was to expire on December 19, 1979. On
October 30, 1979, the applicant's engineer requested an extension of
time.
A review of this request shows that the Zoning District and General Plan
remains basically unchanged at this time. The Lot Division Ordinance
allows a 12 month time extension to be granted to a maximum of 2 years.
RECOMMENDATION
Although it appears the City Planning Commission and City Council
will take final action on this project, the Subdivision Review Board
may still take action on this matter. Any action taken will likely
constitute an informal recommendation to the City Council. It
should be noted this staff report and the recommendations are
based on County policy, procedure, and ordinances.
After review and discussion of Tentative Parcel Map CO 78-46, the
Subdivision Review Board recommends to the City Council that a one-
year extension be granted to December 19, 1980, subject to the
original conditions of approval as set forth in the minutes of the
Subdivision Review Board meeting dated December 6, 1978.
DISCUSSION
Applicant's engineer attended the meeting.
The Subdivision Review Board unanimously adopted the preliminary report
as amended.
•� 1 �._ • ,fid
1�►`� � '•• �� mss— ��� 1.� �����`�
NOW-
Mal -11*0 Ila
ArMIN � •_
I
® 11
° 01
- zt��/�
Ln .O
y ti �\
tea,0 >
tl �)
e '
r"a
rn
ry
r o
ml "YxL, i r
m) Ort Ov- m Dtn FAz „A L = om Ip
1 � �
N
Lp V. O
m n DNOt� 0Or'•-� Pm 7b o m ° ° ; nA z< L
o T 3 zoo < o n m A D ~ D o
P x 0310 P n c+ yo^ r,+.A _ in” LSOD T'1
o o n R1
➢N Cl V1 �,� A. G O < 0 0 9 L PO n.z n P � A �D 'L r a.n S A � 1 N
oox
rr� v °°
mA.v I- �y i... T (iJo � „ �DI� � D _ nr oo .-+ N °=F.Ac
m
N O
o r m D A L n a
1 � V � � N • D N V A F N P U �� 1�{ � 2 V n , 1� � r 'i
i SLq
z
� y
P `'
I
NBn A. RoaoWAY, Director Telephone(805)549-5600
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Courthouse Annex
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA-93408
December 6, 1979
Honorable City Council and Planning Commission
City of Atascadero, California
Dear Ladies and Gentlemen:
The following time extension request is referred to your Council with
a recommendation for approval from the Subdivision Review Board.
CO 78-98 (Stinchfield Stewart)
Respectfully submitted,
LARRY J. RED, Supervisor
Subdivision Review Section
ca
cc: County Engineer
County Health Department
REPORT OF THE SUBDIVISION REVIEW BOARD MEETING DECEMBER 5, 1979
RE: CO 78-98, PROPOSED LOT DIVISION OF LOT 11, BLOCK LB ATASCADERO,
LOCATED ALONG VENADO AVENUE, CITY OF ATASCADERO.
(R-A: LOW DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY) (STINCHFIELD - STEWART)
SUPERVISORIAL DISTRICT #1 (884: 7/24/78)
RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL OF TIME EXTENSION REQUEST
SRB Members in Attendance: Acting Chairman, Larry Red, John Hofschroer,
Bill MacDonald, Jerry Erickson, John Wallace
Planning Commissioner in Attendance George Rathmell
Legal Counsel Present: None
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
This application proposes a subdivision of a 2.7 acre site into 2 parcels,
one at 1.59 acres and one at 1.19 acres each. The site is located along
Venado Avenue, City of Atascadero.
Zoning: R-A: "Suburban Residential" (20,000 sq. ft. lot size)
General Plan: 1978 Atascadero General Plan: "Low Density Single Family"
(11-2 acre minimum)
COMMENTS
The subject Tentative Map was to expire on November 27, 1979. On
November 5, 1979, the applicant's engineer requested an extension of
time. The applicant's engineer stated the reason for the extension was
because of "extensive improvement design and construction." A review of
records indicates that only check prints have been submitted. The
applicant has had approximately 11 months to meet conditions and record
the Final Map.
RECOMMENDATION
After review and discussion of Tentative Parcel Map CO. 78-98, the
Subdivision Review Board recommends to the Board of Supervisors that
a one-year extension be granted to November 27, 1980, subject to the
original conditions of approval as set forth in the minutes of the
Subdivision Review Board meeting dated November 1, 1978.
DISCUSSION
Applicant and engineer attended the meeting and explained that they were
waiting to construct the road. Improvement plans have not been submitted
but have been prepared, according to the applicant's engineer.
The Subdivision Review Board unanimously adopted the preliminary report
as amended.
'�f.�r`L��,•. \ f�P'l, #,,V C K'
7310,1 30 � � t
fo
c ' '�/. , ,L.'��` �""r•-.,�V �` \`("'moi,•�• ! \ L `.v
��i ' .' ,� 'COY"i��r�r���^'�Z�` -►. ,F �: � ?9
'+� =•tom'°ut
:of. 00
y
,, \ ` N 1 , 1v . -'tom' •\ \ ` �SC 1.0
a: •7. I `amu A. /, /' 4 �'. � •?�� `,/�� �,t�•�J'�`'-���r , ' �S C��r`•
\`fir;. '`• i �,. 'O , /' .�, '„— � �"' y� 1,1a�� — � ,
IE
01
c A4
.. . i +` � /, .r :sP <`� Z r•� ' �i y�'• j i� ., +. �sue �\� l.2'�.
Q y ti`• S.. .n. a �ti \
OA
e�►R� .•
� � �� �. �h�..��•, ,•9��; ,'�
LL
Tank
oN
TN
e /
70 x:l4/B ' � y / �`7 C' I}%/07411*
6{•]
' �e�•� �P-.T' CAL R O
� �•r C� IYI -�} v) •Z �' • �•"�i:•i�. \,., �-' ���.1�Vj I \ Yr c \:.7
ry
.. . ire per•• :..-•,.� _1`1,\'�^,5��\. / I�B ! �� .y! "-f:,�. 1'�� •• _-1 � r` •
• ' �: • K Ate''•
O
y •.•%'�S.J•C/ i`�.' /• • 'O� 1� • •• r I
!I PAY /` ;�.�k �/✓ r'
` �.� •�::. , -� �__�,•,•_ _.f`ti•,y� �p-00
w b����I•'�. jai � ��• ��..,'''�;• '`: �
• '
�. 1A�`A �•�r\ �• A �� � .:s'7� keit \ • •�. yam' \�•\ •'dei � C'+r�✓`v���
' r 9 �• 'rQ0 44
` � •.. �• �,�Z,_,� Z+�J� ,• •yam �! � [�s.• :•'. .�
vi
t / ,� �+ ,� •�t/� ., RO ��9.:••�' '�• 8 Yom'' ''' � �..'
G itito is
"'{
J f.1
..:�. , ,_..,......., w:.✓,WrdNdJ�w:..a,.........,..� ..wA• ,.wer. ia�"7-�'�w= -�.�� _ ..sLn•.�w,...
f W g ay
� 'ffI �]�l •o
CL
Dw'
m LL� ° I r V -
� J zTrc r �
Y 0 mcu�c Y® to ODCL >2 e, u da- cr Q M
J FN _ O
d > T
J i-4 o 1LLL
m O Q W F uj zz m
r- l CD
Z U S OG
— rC'
j `O _ orxW'mco
==Za r 4 O d
Cf 3 w u
W
N
Z 1 OJ 4/� J p~[ Z T", y c : W i o 3� W L to
O. V, I�1 W O H J1 r, ` Y^� u r J W(2 JI F/�� W
Ow/ U 1 , LL N W Z p\ V M T d YI }� y J
1L.LL V co
woc
0 O o oFFoc.xn� y oC °oO. W1:U Y Q
� �. Q �` T ae <w.LL w o" � W v w Z11-12 J N � -I�
V• Q- V > > Q4 w zpm xy QmQ j.. ..
0 Q In cC
at
u N 0 HpWciaHr W r4oxo
e4 a
V)
Alecnxy
vi
a
lu
qt
NIL
A O
� a
• o00 ``V <u
�e
L.. . rv• e.. ....,.G`•••;*s t =•`�1^'3+•-t,v snn
-].-�..�,...,-'•,•••� -� -�- r" j — - . .e•_• °fix
e���^• - °_ � 5✓^ �l`L' � .�'^ J� �*off � .. y
Y / 1
ob
.•vim bT� irk /, .A� / �` , !.� �.� �� /W`r� r +y
1NL
I �
OF
kei'
r t �
h, u
►� I - t. -4
s
` i ,ter �.. •,.,1i. ; �,1 n+F'_4 A ¢�' +"•'1
j
u.
,i;: /- ,ra.., 1>•.h� � -0 a �:
FJ
-\•..., ^ ,. ,��..1 N` 1� ' 3,,.' ,� ' �¢1 1 it ��'.: ..j ,y,y11+II1.��1 f SIYu,yy;,r,r`....
' `mak.' •�- � 1 I "� �;� %-D w _dw)' /..,FY '►"y r,t
rew
96
�rrs•�'+ \ /- _NII'2o 70'�✓� i ., .t ...._ .. / '�. \ r. �� tr.° 'Sf �"
r 4
r � w
u 0
T* Y I
40
00.
�ti I
ep /N 1
W
N7' �. .�'• . ti r.
December 14 1979
RE: TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 866, 3750 El Camino Real,
Lenzi, Morris, Gannage (Maddalena)
REQUEST:
Variance to Ordinance No. 12 creating a moratorium on approvals
for condominium uses , condominium subdivisions , and condominium
conversions.
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT:
The applicants propose an air space condominium subdivision on the
2,1-acre site for the purpose of constructing 25 multiple family
residential units. The site is located on the southerly side of
E1 Camino Real between San Anselmo and San Benito.
Zoning: R-4-B-2-Dl
General Plan: "High Density Multiple Family"
STATUS OF PROJECT:
The project was issued a Negative Declaration on March 7, 1977 and
was conditionally approved under the departmental review process
on July 13, 1978. That approval was extended for six months until
January 13, 1980 at the applicant' s request. Structural plans were
filed on September 5 , 1979 for plan check and were returned to the
architect for corrections approximately three weeks ago. The
tentative map application was submitted on November 6 , 1979 but was
returned to the applicant because of the moratorium.
County Planning Staff has indicated that the following factors
affect proceeding with the project:
There is no evidence that certain conditions that must be
compiled with prior to issuance of permits have been accomplished.
These include submission and approval of certain engineering
plans (grading, drainage, street improvement, etc. ) and approval
of building plans by the Fire Department.
- It is unlikely that the applicant can obtain building permits
and reach a satisfactory stage of construction (completion of
foundation and rough framing)prior to the expiration of the
time extension. While an additional six month extension could
be applied for, the change in the project from an apartment to
a condominium might be a reason for denial of another time
extension.
TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 866
December 14 , 1979
Page Two
- The project was never indicated to be a condominium at any
time and this change would necessitate reconsideration of
the project under the departmental review procedure. Further-
more, it was indicated that the application would probably
be elevated to a hearing process (similar to a Conditional
Use Permit) since this can be done at the discretion of the
County Planning Staff.
- The tentative map would not be accepted for filing as long
as the moratorium remained in effect and would not have been
processed because of the change in project status (apartment
to condominium) and the associated time extension/departmental
review situation.
STATUS OF MORATORIUM:
The moratorium was adopted as an urgency matter on November 14 , 1979
and remains in effect for 120 days until March 14 , 1980 unless
extended. Section 6 makes provision for granting a variance to the
moratorium if the following findings can be established:
1. That strict application of the provisions of the, moratorium
to a particular condominium project would result in practical
difficulties or unnecessary hardships inconsistent with the
general purposes and intent of the moratorium.
2 . That there are exceptional circumstances or conditions appli-
cable to the condominium project that do not generally apply
to the other projects covered by this moratorium.
3. That the granting of a variance would not be materially
detrimental to the public welfare.
The Planning Commission would recommend an action by City Council
based upon these findings.
The study, including a draft ordinance, for consideration by the
Planning Commission is tentatively scheduled for the meeting of
January 7 and it seems probable that the entire process including
adoption of an appropriate ordinance can be completed long before
expiration of the moratorium.
DISCUSSION:
There does not appear to be substantive reason to grant a variance
from the provisions of the condominium moratorium.
While money has been expended for various County .fees and engineering/
design costs, these have been on the basis of an apartment project and
the project has always been so represented (until November 1979) before
TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 866
December 14, 1979
Page Three
public agencies. In fact, the project can proceed on that basis
and obtain permits and be constructed. Most of the money expended
would have been expended whether or not the project was an apartment
or a condominium.
Changes in the lending market have apparently resulted in a decision
to change the nature of the project from an apartment to a condominium
and this necessitates additional public review (i.e. , tract map,
resubmittal for departmental review, etc. ) which cannot be accommodated
in the time frame set forth for the financing commitment. Many
projects are adversely affected by the lack of availability of suit-
able financing.
While the project appears to be well designed, in compliance with
current development standards, and would be consistent with the
general plan now under consideration, there is no way to ascertain
its degree of compatibility with procedural or other regulations
that would result from the current condominium study. It should also
be pointed out that this study should be completed within the very
near future.
It is also likely that there are a number of similar projects at a
similar, or even more advanced, stage of review which would demand
similar favorable treatment for their projects. Approval of the
request could cast doubt about the urgency expressed by the adoption
of the moratorium.
Typically, consideration of variance requests should be based upon
certain special or unique circumstances applicable almost exclusively
to the characteristics of a particular project (i.e. , unusual topo-
graphy making setbacks impractical, substantial physical, improvements
already completed, etc. ) . Economic and financial factors should not
be considered acceptable under the hardship criterion and certainly
there is no "vested right" established for this project as a condo-
minium. The project should properly follow the procedures set forth
in existing regulations as temporarily modified by the moratorium.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that ,the variance not be granted.
ACTION:
The Planning Commission should make an appropriate motion setting
forth its Findings to approve (or deny) the request as an advisory
recommendation for transmittal to City Council.
LAWRENCE STEVENS
Consultant/ Planning Director
RECEIVED DEC 7 1979
November 28, 1979
Atascadero City Planning Commission
6501 Lewis Avenue
Atascadero, Ca 93422
Re: The Village Oaks (Condominium Subdivision) Tract 866.
Dear Sirs: :
The intent of this letter is to provide the Planning Commission
with a brief history of the above referenced project for the
purpose of requesting a variance, as per Section 6 of the new
condominium moratorium.
This project was conceived in 1976 and proposed to the county
in January 1977 by a sir. Nichols. Later that year he received
approval of his departmental review. Apparently due to a prob-
lem with his partnership he decided to liquidate in early 1978.
Our group purchased the project in August of 1978 and proceeded
to file new applications, with the County of San Luis Obispo, so
that we might get the project underway.
However, the real thrust to obtain our permits did not begin to
occur until March of 1979 when our sale closed. Since then we
have applied for and received building permits, pending minor
plan corrections by the architect, and turned in our tenative
map application. The moratorium has now halted the latter pro-
cess,
Consequently, besides the fees which have been paid to and
accepted by the County for some time, in excess of $6,000.00,
we have also incurred and paid fees to Cal Trans and P.G.&E. ,
$2,500.00, as well as, architectural, engineering and attorney
fees, $22,000.00, to see that this project is developed and
designed as an enhancement to the community.
We have also received a construction financing committment in
excess of one million dollars which has to be signed by January
4, 1980 and a 100% completion bond which also has to be signed
at the same time. Both of these coramittments now seem in jeop-
ardy.
Lenzi Design and Development
$ c �xk �Sj.528-5456'
Mactor's License :umber 296=99
P. O. Box 5, Atascaaero, Ca 93422
November 28, 1979
Atascadero City Planning Commission
Re The Village Oaks (Condominium Subdivision) Tract 866
Page 2
This project is a new condominium project designed by
professional atchitects under the directives of the uniform
building code, meeting all requirements of the county depart-
mental review and having staff approval. It is a project with
alot of time, effort and concern having been spent to ensure
that it will be completed properly.
Therefore, we would request of the Planning Commission and
City Council a hearing for the purpose of granting a variance
to our project, because of the difficulties and unnecessary
hardships we are now experiencing due to the moratorium. Thank
you for your co-operation.
Very tr Y Yours,
C. Lenzi 41-1
LENZI DESIGN & DEVELOPMENT
CL/sel
cc: Morris
Gannage
file
_M_E_M_.O_R A_N—D—U M_
TO: City Council
FROM: City Manager
SUBJECT: Largo and Cayucos Streets/Road Deposit Program
At the November 26th meeting, you deferred any action
on this ma�ter in order to allow the property owners an
opportunity to work out a solution with the County. It is
my understanding that they have done so. The question then
remains as to the Council' s desire to continue or to abandon
the road deposit program. In view of the difficulties the
County has encountered in administering the program and in
view of their cancelling it and the inherent difficulties
in the program keeping pace with increased building costs;
it is my recommendation that the Council repeal the ordinance
governing the program.
As you are aware, we adopted all of the County ordinances
at the time the City became operational. Each of those
ordinances remains in effect until specifically superseded
by Council action. Attached hereto is an ordinance cancelling
the County' s road deposit ordinance which I recommend for
your adoption. It is my understanding that the monies
involved will be refunded by the County to each of the persons
who have made deposits and that upon adoption of the attached
ordinance, monies will no longer be collected for this pro-
gram. It is also my understanding that the property owners
intend to pave the roads at their own expense and to maintain
them as private roads.
fR
L WARDEN
712-20- 9
i
ORDINANCE NO. 13
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO AMENDING ORDI-
NANCE NO. 2 DECLARING AN URGENCY AND PROVIDING THAT
THE ORDINANCE SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO ORDAINS as follows:
Section 1. County Ordinancesin Effect as City
Ordinances Amended.
San Luis Obispo County Code adopted by City of Atascadero
Ordinance No. 2 is amended by deleting entire Chapter 13.16 re-
lating to Deposits for Improvements of Non-County Roads
(Sections 13.16 .010 through 13.16 .090)
Section 2 . Declaration of Urgency.
This ordinance is an urgency ordinance and is for the imme-
diate preservation of the public peace, health, and safety. The
facts constituting the urgency are these; the City of Atascadero
isnewlyincorporated and comprises territory formerly unincorpo-
rated. It is necessary that this ordinance take effect immediately
in order to assure continuity in the application, administration,
and enforcement of the ordinances and policies of the newly incor-
porated city.
Section 3. Taking Effect.
This ordinance, being an urgency ordinance for the immediate
protection of the public health, safety, and general welfare, con-
taining a declaration of the facts constituting the urgency, and
passed by a four-fifths (4/5) vote of the Council shall take effect
immediately upon its adoption.
Section 4 . 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 this City; shall certify to the adoption and publi-
cation of this ordinance; and shall cause this ordinance and its
certification, together with proof of publication, to be entered
in the Book of Ordinances of this City.
AG: f -1-
12/20/79
ORDINANCE NO. 13
The foregoing ordinace was introduced, adopted, and ordered
published at a meeting of the Council held on , 1979 ,
by the following vote:
Ayes:
Noes:
Absents
Robert J. Wilkins , Jr. , Mayor
ATTEST:
Murray L. Warden, City Clerk
Approved as to form:
Allen Grimes, City Attorney
-2
M_E_M_O_R A N_D U M
TO: City Council
FROM: City Manager ]-
SUBJECT: Selection of architect
The committee appointed to consider architects' pro-
posals met and, after reviewing the submissions, interviewed
representatives of three firms. Upon completion of the inter-
views, the committee is recommending the retention of the
firm of A. H. Stephenson associated with Elliott 0. Stephenson.
Mr. Stephenson has considerable knowledge of the building
itself, has .lived in Atascadero since his childhood and is
extremely interested in the building as an attribute to the
community. His background is extensive and, based upon his
experience, should be able to do a `creditable job.
If the Council agrees with this recommendation, it would
be appropriate to approve the City Manager entering into a
contract with Mr. Stephenson for the completion of the work
pursuant to his, proposal. After your approval, the City
Attorney will review necessary contractual documentation to
assure meeting appropriate legal requirements. Mr. Stephenson
has estimated an overall cost of $150,000 for the remodeling
and furnishings. The budget now has $75, 000 for the remodeling
of the Police Department which would be applied as a part of
the overall remodel project.
rec end your concurrence with the committee's action.
Y WARDEN
ML :ad
12-20-79
c �
M E M O RAN D U M
TO: City Council % fir" �11
FROM: City Manager
SUBJECT: Interview of Public Works Director/City
Engineer applicants
Our application date for the position of Public Works
Director/City Engineer closed on December 7th. We had
. surprisingly few applicants for the position. I am unable
to account for this lac-K of interest. However, we do
have two who are very well qualified on thebasisof their
resumes. I would suggest, therefore, that the Council
interview these applicants January 5th. If neither appears
suitable, then we could go out and re-advertise recognizing
that it would be two to three months before we could have
another selection opportunity. I suggest proceeding with
the interviews. On of these applicants may be eminently
well qualified for the position.
00'aZ
MU RAY . WARDEN
LW:-ad
12-20-79
C
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: City Council
FROM: City Manager
SUBJECT: Employee health insurance - JPA
Attached is a memo from the Finance Director with which
I concur. Please note that the benefit plan would be
administered through the JPA and is tailored to the City' s
needs. The costs are those previously approved by the
Council with the City paying only for the employees ' coverage
and the employee paying for the family's participation.
I recommend your approval.
Y LGARDEN
M :ad
12-20-79
_M_E M O_R A N_D U M_
TO: City Manager
FROM: Finance Director
SUBJECT: Employee Medical Coverage
Attached is. a draft of the Health Benefit Plan under
the Joint Powers Agreement for the City of Atascadero with
a proposed effective date of January 1, 1980. This plan
has equal or better benefits than those contained in our
temporary Blue Cross Plan. Major medical benefits have a
lifetime maximum of $1,000,000 with a per calendar year
deductible of $100 per individual and $300 per family. The
policy pays 80% of the first $2,500 for all other charges,
after deductible, and 100% for all over $2 , 500. Dental
benefits, whish are not a part of the temporary plan, have
a maximum ofer ear, $25 deductible per individual •-
per calendar year, an pays 50% on dentures, bridge work,
etc. , and 80% of all other covered expenses.
This policy also offers, at the employees' expense, Life
Insurance and Accidental Death and Dismemberment, AD&D, at
$. 35 per $1,000 to a maximum of $7, 500.
Cost per employee is $40. 40 with the cost per family
of $67. 99. These are the same figures briefed to Council
in ourmemorandumof 11/5/79.
It is recommended that Council give favorable considera-
tion to implementing the JPA Health Benefit Plan January 1,
1980. It is further recommended that the City pay the employee's
cost and that each employee may have deducted from their pay
those costs for family participation. Further, that Staff
take action to cancel the temporary Blue Cross Plan at the
appropriate date to insure no loss of coverage, and, that
our share of JPA Document Services, $1, 750, be authorized for
payment from reserves.
cooce,.� f+w�awawo
RALPH H DOWELL, JR
RHD:ad
12-19-79
CHAPTER 4. PROPOSAL I-OR STOPLOSS COVERAGE
LIFE INSURANCE AND ACCIDENTAL DIEAI'H & DISMEMBERMENT
S 7,50 per covered employee $ .35 per 1 .000
N'THLY AGGREGATE STOPLOSS COVERAGE
Monthly Deposit Facto
For Medical/Dental/with Mater ty
50 Employe $40.40
30 Families 67.99
Maximum monthly s ploss point $4,060
Maximum annual cost $48, 720
A 0REGATE AND $5, 000 SP IFIL STOPLOSS CO TO JPA
Expected annual cost $ 14,612
50 Employees $ 12. 12
30 Families 20.39
EXPECTED COSTS Or PLAN '(DALLY
Expected incurred cla s (under $5 ,000 ) $23,386
Expected paid clai ( under $5,000 ) 18, 108
Claims; administr ian ( Foundation )
Depos
itand 14,612
TOTA $38, 192
2
Re $ 1 528
pected interest 9 5.5 $ 2
CHAPTER 4. PROPOSAL FOR STOPLOSS COVERAGE 4-1
CHAPTER 5. SUMMARY OF BENEFITS
MAJOR MEDICAL BENEFITS
LIFETIME MAXIMUM - PSYCHIATRIC $20,000
LIFETIME MAXIMUM ALL BENEFITS $ 1 ,000 ,000
DEDUCTIBLE Per Individual , Per Calendar Year $ 100
MAXIMUM FAMILY DEDUCTIBLES Per Calendar Year $300
PERCENTAGE OF PAYMENT - Per Calendar Year
PSYCHIATRIC OUT-OF-HOSPITAL - after deductible 50%
PSYCHIATRIC IN-HOSPITAL - same as any other illness
Limited to 30 days per confinement, 60 days
lifetime maximum
ALL OTHER COVERED CHARGES - after deductible
First $2 ,500 80%
Over $2,500 100%
,.,. ROOM RATES
Hospital and Convalescent Average Semi-Private Rate
Intensive Care Twice Average Semi-Private Rate
Convalescent Nursing Home Care further limited to same
number of days as immediately preceedinq hospital stay
SUPPLEMENTAL BENEFI'T'S no deductible
Supplemental Accident Benefit - per accident $500
Annual Multiphasic Examination $50
DENTAL BENEFITS
MAXIMUM PER YEAR $750
DEDUCTIBLE - Per Individual , Per Calendar Year $25
PERCENTAGE OF PAYMENTafter deductible
Dentures , bridgework , inlays, crowns and gold fillings 50%
All other covered expenses 80%
Limitations apply ,to some benefits - see the Benefits and
Limitations provisions .
CHAPTER 5. SUMMARY OF BENEFITS 5- 1
t
M_E M O_R A_N_D_U M_
TO: City Council
FROM: City Manager
SUBJECT: Addendum to JPA insurance
The attached Addendum to the JPA establishing our
self-insurance is necessary in order to implement the
employee medical package as a part of the JPA. The Addendum
has been reviewed by the City Attorney and approved by each
of the City Managers of the nine cities involved. The
Addendum is satisfactory as to form and content and carries
out the intention of the Council in joining the JPA.
Recommend your approval.
®RAY WARDEN
:ad
12-20-79
KIN DLER bl LAUCCI
ADDENDUM
TO
JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT
ESTABLISHING THE CENTRAL COAST SELF INSURANCE FUND
WHEREAS, the Cities of Arroyo Grande, Atascadero, Grover City,
Morro Bay, Paso Robles, Pismo Beach, Santa Paula and San Luis Obispo
have entered into a Joint Powers Agreement relating to Workers'
Compensation.
WHEREAS, said Agreement establishes the Central Coast Self
Insurance Fund and establishes a'procedure for the administration of
self-insurance generally.
WHEREAS, said cities intend to enter into a similar agreement to
provide self-insurance relating to Employee Benefits.
WHEREAS, the following state laws, among others, authorize the
cities to enter into this Agreement
a.. Government Code Section 990.4 permitting a city to provide
insurance and self-insurance in any desired combination;
b. Government Code Section 990.8 permitting two or more cities to
enter into art Agreement to jointly fund such expenditures under the
authority of Government Code Sections 6500 - 6515;
C. Government Code Sections 6500 6515 permitting two or more
cities to jointly exercise under an Agreement any ,power which is common
to each of them.
-1-
- L naiN 1J1.C.it t~l.AUC;C;I
WHEREAS, each of the cities desire to enter into an Agreement with
ea(!li of the others for the purpose of insuring against various risks
jointly, rather than individually.
WHEREAS, after obtaining studies and recommendations, each city has
determined that it is economically practical and for its public benefit
and in its interest to do so;
NOW, THEREFORE, it is agreed as follows:
All of the terms of the existing Joint Powers Agreement are
incorporated herein and made a part of this Agreement, except for
Paragraphs I, III, IX, X, XI, and XII, which are not a part of this
addendum.
I. AUTHORITY AND PURPOSE
This Agreement is made under the authority of Government Code-
Sections 6500 6515 between the following cities : ARROYO GRANDE,
ATASCADERO, GROVER CITY, GUADALUPE, ,MORRO BAY, PASO ROBLES, PISMO BEACH,
SANTA PAULA, and SAN LUIS OBISPO. The purpose of this Agreement is to
exercise jointly powers common to each city by (a) pooling on a self-
insurance basis various risks in excess of established deductible
amounts and up to a jointly selected maximum; (b) jointly purchasing
excess insurance coverage over the self-insured maximum; (c) creating
and maintaining a central loss fund to pay the cost of the self-insured
portions of losses insured against; (d) implementing a Risk Management
Program; and (e) providing for inclusion in the future additional cities
which desire to become parties to the Agreement.
-2-
1
KI N DIER&LAUCCI
11. DEFINITIONS
(1) The "Fund" means the Central_ Coast Self Insurance, Fund. A
public self-insurance fund established by an existing Agreement and
separate and apart from the parties to this Agreement;
(2) "Board" is the governing board of the Fund•,
(3) "Administrator" is the claims administrator hired by the board
to administer claims and make or recommend payments from the central
pool.
(4) "Consultant is the insurance broker and riskmanagement firm;
(5) "Central Pool or Pool Fund is the fund created by the Fund
for the purpose of paying the cost of covered losses and administration;
(6) "Covered Losses" are those losses resulting from claims by
employees which are covered by the city and are insured by the Fund;
(7) "Member means a member of the Board and includes an alternate
member;
(8) "Operating Fund" is the fund established by the Fund for the
purpose of paying insurance premiums, administration and other costs.
III. TERM OF AGREEMENT
This Agreement becomes effective upon execution by cities whose
combined number of participating employees exceeds 200, as attested by
the signatures and dates of execution hereof and shall continue in
effect until terminated as provided herein. ARROYO GRANDE, ATASCADERO,
GROVER CITY, GUADALUPE, MORRO BAY, PASO ROBLES, PISMO BEACH, SANTA
PAULA, and SAN LUIS OBISPO will become participating members effective
upon individual execution of this Agreement. The board may accept
additional members after consultation with and the concurrence of the
majority of the governing bodies of the member agencies.
-3
KIN DLER t':&LALJCCI
IV. DUTIES, POWERS AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF FUND
The Fund, or its designees, shall be responsible for the receipt,
processing, review and payment of all covered claims. The Fund shall
receive, collect, invest and disburse monies paid as premiums by member
agencies. The Fund is empowered to take all actions necessary to carry
out the purposes of this Agreement. The Fund may hire or contract with
persons or firms as required to carry out its legal, accounting and
administrative duties and responsibilities.
The Fund may establish revolving funds as necessary from which the
administrator may pay claims.
The Fund shall be empowered to determine contribution rates on a
fiscal year basis and by April will determine excess contributions
required and will determine the method by which contributions will be
paid to the Fund. Each member agency consents to audit of its records
and agrees to supply all information necessary to establish the
contribution rate. Cumulative records will be maintained of each
agency's proportionate contribution to the Fund and losses experienced.
V. ADMINISTRATION
The Board shall select an administrator of Employee Benefit claims
after consultation with and concurrence of a majority of the governing
bodies of the member agencies. The Board shall direct the Administrator
e
of the Fund. The initial Administrator shall be Medical Care Foundations
of Santa Barbara, San Luis Obispo and Ventura Counties. The Board shall
review and report to each of the governing member agencies the
feasibility of continuance of the program annually, but not later than
March 1.
-4-
KIN DL ER t,~LAUCCI
The Board shall select a Risk Management,Consultant after
consultation with and (-oncurren(-e of a majority of the governing bodies
of the member agencies. The Board shall direct the Consultant of the
Fund. The initial Consultant shall be Kindler & Laucci. Tentative
agreements relating to Administration and Risk Management with the above
designated firms are accepted subject to final review, and execution by
the Board.
VI. FISCAL YEAR
The "fiscal year" of the Fund is the period from the first day of
July of each year to and including the 30th day of June of the following
year.
VII, FUND'S "INSURANCE POLICIES
Pursuant to the payment of monthly deposits by each city to the
Fund, a plan Document indicating the plan of benefits provided to the
City by the Trust Fund will be issued. Each Plan Document incepts on
the date the agreement is executed between the City and the Trust Fund.
The terms of each Plan Document will determine the liability of the
Trust Fund.
In addition, a Summary Plan Description will be issued by the Trust
Fund to each participating employee. The SPD will summarize the terms
and provisions of the Plan Document.
In the event of dispute the terms and provisions of the Plan
Document will prevail.
-5-
tiny ul.tac t~L.AUUUI
VIII. MONTHLY DEPOSITS .
The Monthly Deposit by each City is in payment for the coverage
specified ineachPlan Document. Each city by the act of paying the
monthly deposits accepts the coverage provided by the Plan Document. The
Fund is responsible for the coverages specified in each Plan Document
above the City's retention. Each city is responsible for the retention
applicable to it under the Plan Document. The retention may vary from
one city to another and the Fund shall take the amount of the retention
into consideration in calculating the amount charged to each city for
risk covered. The term "loss" includes claims paid, and incurred legal
costs and all other costs related to the handling, and satisfaction of
the claim.
IX. EXCESS COVERAGE
The Fund shall be protected from paid catastrophic losses in excess
of $20,000 per individual claim and in the aggregate in excessof fund
deposits for all cities through the purchase of excess reinsurance. The
Board shall have no power or authority to incur any obligation on the
part of or chargeable to participating agencies in excess of the
requirements for contribution to the Fund as specified herein. A
participating agency shall not be obligated in any manner to contribute
money to the Fund in excess of the respective contribution as set forth
herein, except that the member agencies may be assessed by the Board in
its discretion for excess losses as herein provided.
X. ESTABLLSHMENT AND ADMINISTRATION OF FUNDS
(a). The Board shall establish the following funds:
1. Trust Fund Account broken down within the Fund by
expected losses and catastrophic reserves;
2. Separate drawing accounts for claim payments.
-6
KI N DLLK t-LAUCCI •
(b) . The Board may establish such other funds as it considers
necessary:
(c) . Except for purposes of investment funds shall be
separately maintained and not mingled with Worker's
Compensation Funds, or Liability Central Loss Fund. The
Worker's Compensation Funds are not available for payment
of liability claims and the Liability Central Loss Fund
is not available for Worker's Compensation Funds.
Employee Benefit Funds are not available for the payment
of liability or Worker 's Compensation claims.
(d) . The Trust Fund Account shall be used only for the purpose
of paying the covered losses for which the Fund is self-
insured, and for establishing a reserve to cover probable
future payments for claims not settled. In fulfilling
the claims administration function, all claims, checks
shall be issued through the Fund including those for
claims below and including the deductible amount. The
Fund: will bill on a monthly basis each city for the
contracted deposit amounts. The deposit amount may vary
monthly depending on changes in Employee enrollment.
(e). Operating Fund is for the purpose of paying excess
insurance premiums, broker 's fees, adjusting fees,
administrator, consultant, legal fees, employee salaries,
risk management and loss prevention services and such
other operating expenses as the Board directs.
-7
KINDLER&LAUCCI
XI. RESERVES
Excess cash reserves shall be maintained in the Trust Fund for
potential liability. If, in the opinion of the risk manager and the
Board, excess reserves exist in the Trust Fund, no rebate of those
reserves may be made to the participating cities. Excess reserves may
be used to reduce future premiums.
XII. EXCESS LOSSES
In the event that the total losses and loss adjustment expenses of
the Fund in .any fiscal year exceed the budgeted Trust Funds for said
fiscal year, the Board may in its discretion recover said excess. An
assessment for excess losses will be applied to each entity to recover
the excess losses for the fiscal year in which the excess loss occurs.
Each entity will pay its pro-rata share of the excess losses for
the fiscal year in which the excess losses occur. Each entity's pro-
rata share will be based on the ratio of each entity's loss as a portion
of total losses for the fiscal year times the excess losses which have
occurred during the fiscal year.
The determination of total losses for a fiscal year shall include
all claims occurring during such fiscal year and all related expenses.
With respect to losses the term "loss" includes all claims paid and ,
incurred plus legal costs and all other costs related to the handling
and satisfaction of the claim. It is recognized that the full amount of
losses as they occur in a fiscal year cannot be fully determined until
all claims have been paid. The Board must make its final determination
within one year after final resolution of all claims relating to said
fiscal year.
-8-
&IN VI&H tom'1.AUUUI
XIII. LOSS RECORDS
The Fund shall maintain or have maintained accurate loss records
covering all claims paid and for such other matters as it requires or
directsf be maintained. Said records shall include all matters required
in the existing Joint Powers Agreement.
The Board shall insure that a complete and accurate system of
accounting of the Fund shall be maintained at all times consistent with
established accounting procedures. The Fund will vile annually with
participating agencies, within two months after the close of the fiscal
year, a complete statement of income and expenditures made during the
prior fiscal year. The Fund will maintain a cumulative monthly
statement of all claims paid. Said monthly cumulative report shall also
include a cumulative statement of payments made on behalf of each member
agency. The Fund will furnish all agencies with a summary of the method
used in determining assessments against each of the agencies of the
projected premiums for the following fiscal year and shall do so no
later than Harch 15th so that agencies can exercise their option to
terminate.
Books and records of the Fund shall be open to inspection at all
reasonable times by representatives of the cities. The Board shall
either make an annual audit or contract with a certified public
accountant to make an annual audit of the accounts and records of the
Fund. In each case, the minumum requirements of the audit shall be
those prescribed for the annual audits for City Governments under
appropriate Government Code Sections and shall conform to generally
accepted auditing standards. Audit costs are a charge against the
operating funds of the Fund.
-9
KIN DLLR&LAUCCI •
XIV. INITIAL DEPOSIT OF PREMIUM
The Trust Fund and Operating Fund shall be established initially by
the deposit of a sum of money by each agency party hereto based on the
level of benefits established in the Plan Document for each City.
The payment schedule for fiscal year 1979/80 shall be based on the
Monthly Deductible Factor assigned to each of the agencies for the plan
year ending June 30, 1980 and shall be adjusted pro-rata based on date
of membership. The foregoing deposits will be adjusted for each
subsequent fiscal year as herein provided. The specified monthly amount .
shall initially be deposited in the Fund on or before January 10, 1980
or date of membership.
A participating agency shall not be obligated for any additional
charges to the Fund in excess of the respective contribution as set
forth herein, except member agencies may be assessed by the Board for
excess losses as herein provided.
XV. CHARGES TO CITIES
The consultant shall calculate annually the amount of the premium
payments for risk coverage required by member cities. The board shall
approve each charge before it takes effect. Premium payments will be
determined by the Board based on the recommendations of its
Administrator and Consultant. Each risk coverage charge shall be
calculated in a reasonable and prudent manner. For second and
subsequent years, the risk coverage charge to each City may include a
surcharge for loss experience in addition to the standard insurance
premium. In connection with its determination of insurance premium
-10
hl N 01k 1{&1AUM •
rates the Consultant will use recognized insurance practices and shall
consider , among other factors, the loss history of each individual
entity. The consultant shall make premium recommendations and the board
shall make final determination.
I
Interest shall accrue on past due obligations at the rate of ten
percent (10%) per annum and each entity agrees to indemnify the Fund for
any expense resulting from failure to pay the sum due on or before the
due date.
XVI. FUND FUNCTIONS AND RESPONSI13ILITIES
The Fund shall perform the following functions in discharging its
responsibilities under this agreement.
(a). Provide claims management services;
(b). Provide claims recovery and services;
(c) . Negotiate and purchase excess insurance policies;
(d) . Provide loss analysis control by use of statistical
analysis, data processing, record and file keeping
services. The purpose of this information is to
identify high exposure benefit areas, and to
evaluate proper level of self-retention and
deductibles;
(e). Conduct audits to review the participation of each
city in the program. Each entity consents to
inspection of its records and contracts and to be
audited by representatives of the Board for purposes
of assessing each City's participation;
—11—
(f). Select legal counsel;
(g). Perform other functions as required by the Board for
the purpose of accomplishing the goals of this
agreement.
XVII. CITY RESPONSIBILITIES
Each city.has the following responsibilities:
(a). Appoint its representative and alternate to the Fund
Board;
(b). Cooperate fully with the Fund in reporting claims;
(c). Establish a claims procedure;
(d) . Provide Worker's Compensation Coverage;
(e). Require 30 days written notice of cancellation or
material change of any insurance policy provided for the
benefit of a city's employees.
M. Upon withdrawal from the Fund, City shall remain`
responsible for any claim expense and any other costs
which it has incurred while a member of the Fund and for
any losses as specified in Article XIX herein.
XVIII. CANCELLATION
By a two-thirds vote of the Board for non-compliance with this
agreement, the Fund may refuse to issue a Plan Document or may cancel any
Plan Document issued by it effective as of the close of the fiscal year. In
the event that the loss history of an individual entity significantly
exceeds the loss history of the other participating entities, the Board, by
two-thirds votes, may elect to cancel the Plan Document of an individual
-12-
KI N DLEIt t,�P LAUCCI
entity and terminate its participation in the Fund effective as of the
close of the fiscal year. The Board will provide at least 90 days
notice to an entity of its intention to terminate that entity's
participation and will provide an adequate opportunity to respond.
XIX. TERMINATION AND WITHDRAWAL
This agreement may be terminated upon the consent of all the
parties to it. A city may withdraw as a party to the agreement at the
end of any fiscal year upon the giving to the Fund three months prior
written notice of its intent to withdraw. In the event a city
voluntarily elects to withdraw from the Fund said city shall be entitled
to its contributions to the Trust Fund after all claims and other
obligations have been satisfied. Any compensations due any member , at
the time of withdrawal, shall only be paid should the Fund possess cash
reserves which in the opinion of the Board of Directors, the Risk
Manager, and the Administrator, exceed the amounts necessary to meet the
current and future costs of the collective claims filed or expected to
be filed on behalf of (the) plan participants. Subject to the
foregoing, distribution of such compensations shall generally be on the
basis of 1/5 of the total eligible portion of such contributions to be
paid within the year of withdrawal with the 4/5 remainder to be retained
by the Fund until such time as the Fund shall be terminated. An entity
shall not be liable for future losses effective as of the last day of
the fiscal yeas after the date of its withdrawal but shall remain liable
for all excess losses occurring prior to the date of its withdrawal. An
entity shall give not less than 90 days written notice of its intention
-13-
KIN DLLR&IMM 10 10
to withdraw and the withdrawal shall be effective as of the close of the
fiscal year. The right to recover a contribution relates to that amount
placed in the Trust Fund as a reserve for losses and not to
administrative expenses, excess policy costs and other expenses actually
incurred by the Fund.
XX. DISPOSITION OF ASSETS UPON TERMINATION
Upon complete termination of this Agreement by all cities and the
settlement of all liabilitiesandclaims, including incurred but not
reported claims, all property of the Fund shall be divided among the
cities in a ratio equalto that of the total amounts paid by the cities
to the Fund for the five fiscal years preceding the year in which the
agreement is terminated.
XXI. NOTICES
Notices to cities under this agreement shall be sufficient if
delivered to the office of the City Clerk. Notices to the Fund shall be
sufficient if delivered to the office of the Chairman of the Board of
Governors.
XXII.MISCELLANEOUS
(a) The section headings in this agreement are for
convenience only and are not to be construed as modifying
or governing the language in the section referred to.
(b). Whenever in the agreement consent or approval is
required, the same may not be unreasonably withheld.
XXIII.AMENDMENT
This agreement may be amended by resolution of the city councils of
two-thirds of the then participating cities.
-14-
KIN ULCK t�LAUCCI
XXIV.BOARD MEETINGS AND RECORDS
(a). by-laws` and Regulations: The hoard may adopt by-laws,
procedures and regulations which are not inconsistent
either with applicable law or with this agreement .. The
risk manager shall send to each city each by-law and
regulation and amendment promptly after its adoption by
the Board.
XXV. POWERS
The Fund is authorized, in its own name, to do all acts necessary
for the exercise of all powers provided for herein including, but not
limited to each of the following:
1. Make and enter into contracts;
2. Incur debts, liabilities and obligations but no debt,
liability or obligation of the Fund is a debt, liability or
obligation of any city which is a party to this agreement;
3. Acquire, hold or dispose of real and personal property;
4. Receive contributions and donations of property, funds
services and other forms of assistance from any source;
5. Sue and be sued in its own name;
6. Employ agents and employees;
7. Acquire, construct, manage and maintain buildings;
8. Lease real or _personal property including that of a member
city.
-15-
KINDLER&LA.UCCI
IN WITNESS 4llIIsRE.OF the parties iat,reto have executed this agreement
by their officers.
DATED;
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE CITY OF GROVER CITY
by
CITY OF MORRO BAY CITY OF PASO ROBLES
by
CITY OF GUADALUPE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPU
by
CITY ON PISMO BEACH CITY OF ATASCADERO
by
CITY OF SANTA PAULA
by
-16-
• � 0�k
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: City Council
FROM City Manager
SUBJECT: Police Department clerical assistance
With the hiring of a new Police Chief, it is necessary
to provide him with support so that he can start getting
the department organized. One of the first positions to be
considered is that of the Police Chief' s secretary. This
will provide him with the capability for putting together
job specifications, job classifications, advertising, internal
police rules and regulations as well as other administrative
tasks involved in the formation of a new Police Department.
Our original hiring schedule called for this position
to be filled in January. I would like to advertise as soon
as possible and would like to establish that position at a
salary of $890. 00 per month. This salary is comparable to
that of the Planning Secretary and to other cities within
the County for similar positions. It is contemplated that
this job will be more than just clerical/typing in that it
will probably call for the individual to be responsible for
Police Department records, dispatch or at least training
for dispatch functions, and other specialty items within the
department.
I would request your approval of the salary so that I
*W.:-a ise d test for the position.
WARDEN
12-20-79