HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 11/10/1998 *PUBLIC REVIEW COPY
Please do not remove
AGENDA from counter
ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL
MEETING
TUESDAY,NOVEMBER 10, 1998 -
City of Atascadero
6500 Palma Avenue,4'floor
Atascadero, California.
CLOSED SESSION,';6:30 P.M.:
1) Conference with negotiator over real property. (Govt. Code 54956.8)
Negotiator: City Manager Wade McKinney
Property: APN#028-152-001 (City of Atascadero)/Mr. John Dunn
2) Personnel: City Manager(Govt. Code Sec. 54957.6)
REGULAR SESSION, 7:00 P.M.:
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Council Member Clay
ROLL CALL: Mayor Carden
Mayor Pro Tem Johnson
Council Member Clay
Council Member Lerno
Council Member Luna
APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Roll Call
COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS AND REPORTS:
(On their own initiative, Council Members may make a brief announcement or a brief report on
their own activities. Council Members may ask a question for clarification, make a referral to
staff or take action to have staff place a matter of business on a future agenda. No formal action
by the Council will betaken unless an item is identified on the Agenda)
:
PRESENTATIONS:
1. Mayor Carden will present a Certificate of Appreciation to Howard Gaylord for his service
on the Traffic Committee.
2. Lt. John Couch will introduce new Police Chaplains to the Council.
3. Lt. William Watton will present Rev. Rollin Dexter with a plaque in recognition of past
service as a Police Chaplain.
4. Chief Mike McCain will present Firefighter Arnhart with a plaque in recognition of 18 years
of service to the community.
5. Chief Mike McCain will introduce the new Fire Captains, Keith Aggson and William White.
COMMUNITY FORUM:
('This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons wanting to address the Council on any
matter not on this agenda and over which the Council has jurisdiction. Speakers are limited to
five minutes. Please state your name and address for the record before making your
presentation. The Council may take action to direct the staff to place a matter of business on a
future agenda.)
A. CONSENT CALENDAR: Roll Call •
(All items on the consent calendar are considered to be routine and non-controversial by
City staff and will be approved by one motion if no member of the Council or public
wishes to comment or ask questions. If comment or discussion is desired by anyone, the
item will be removed from the consent calendar and will be considered in the listed
sequence with an opportunity for any member of the public to address the Council
concerning the item before action is taken.)
1. City Council Minutes—October 13, 1998 - (City Clerk recommendation: Approve)
[Marcia McClure Torgerson]
2. City Council Minutes—October 27, 1998 —(City Clerk recommendation: Approve)
[Marcia McClure Torgerson]
3. City Treasurer's Report—June 1998 - (City Treasurer's recommendation: Review and
accept) [Rudy Hernandez]
4. City Treasurer's Report—July 1998—(City Treasurer's recommendation: Review and
accept) [Rudy Hernandez]
5. City Treasurer's Report—August 1998—(City Treasurer's recommendation: Review
and accept) [Rudy Hernandez]
6. City Treasurer's Report— September 1998— (City Treasurer's recommendation: Review
and accept) [Rudy Hernandez]
2
7. Road Abandonment#98001 —Request to abandon easterly 550 feet(+/-) of Tecolote
Road (Davis) Fiscal Impact: Positive (Planning Commission recommendations: 1)
Council find the project would not have a significant effect on the environment and that
the Negative Declaration prepared for the project is therefore adequate under the
requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and 2) Council adopt
Resolution No. 1998-049, approving Road Abandonment#98001) [Paul Saldana]
8. Zone Change #98008 —Sign Ordinance Amendment Relative to Public Transit Facilities
(City of Atascadero) — Fiscal Impact: Negligible (Staff recommendation: Council
introduce, on second reading, waiving reading in full, Ordinance No. 354, amending the
Zoning Ordinance relating to signs) [Paul Saldana]
9. Joint Use of Facilities Agreement—Atascadero Unified School District—Fiscal
Impact: Net loss of approximately S3,000 in lost revenue from the AUSD (Staff
recommendation: Council authorize the Mayor to enter into a one year agreement with
the Atascadero Unified School District for the joint use of facilities) [Brady Cherry]
B. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
1. Revised Fee Schedule - Building & Safety Services — Fiscal Impact: Slight increase in
projected revenues for FY 1998-99 (Staff recommendation: Council adopt Resolution
No. 1998-050,, adopting a revised fee schedule for building and safety services) [Paul
SaldanaJ
2. Zone Change x#98006 and Variance #98004 — Proposal to expand Planned Development
Overlay Zone No. 10 onto adjacent site and vary from certain-zoning standards pertaining
to RV parks (Gearhart) — Fiscal Impact: Negligible (Planning Commission
recommendations: 1) Council find that the project would not have significant adverse
effects on the environment and that the Negative Declaration prepared for the project is
therefore adequate under the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA); and 2.) Council adopt Ordinance 355 for first reading waiving reading in full,
approving Zone Change #98006; and 3.) Council adopt Resolution No. 1998-048,
approving Variance #98004) [Paul Saldana]
C. MANAGEMENT REPORTS:
1. Investment Policy—Fiscal Impact: None (Finance Committee recommendation:
Council adoptResolution No. 1998-047 adopting the City of Atascadero Investment
Policy) [Rachelle Rickard]
D. COMMITTEE REPORTS
(The following represent standing committees. Informative status reports will be given,
as felt necessary):
1. S.L.O. Council of Governments/S.L.O. Regional Transit Authority
2. Finance Committee
3
3. Water Committees
A. SLO County Flood Control & Water Conservation District Water Resources
Advisory Committee
B. Nacimiento Water Purveyors' Contract Technical Advisory Committee
C. North County Water Task Force _
4. Integrated Waste Management Authority
5. North County Council
6. Air Pollution Control District
7. County Mayor's Round Table
8. Economic Vitality Corporation, Board of Directors
9. City/ Schools Committee
E. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION:
1. City Council
2. City Attorney
3. City Clerk
4. City Treasurer
F. ADJOURNMENT:
THE COUNCIL WILL ADJOURN TO THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING
IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING THIS MEETING.
Please note: Should anyone challenge any proposed development entitlement listed on this
Agenda in court, that person may be limited to raising those issues addressed at the public
hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City Council at or
prior to this public hearing.
4
City of Atascadero
WELCOME TO THE ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
GENERAL INFORMATION
The City Council meets in regular session on the second and fourth Tuesday of each month at 7:00 p.m.,
in the Council Chamber';of City Hall. Matters are considered by the Council in the order of the printed
Agenda.
Copies of the staff reports or other documentation relating to each item of business referred to on the
Agenda are on file in the office of the City Clerk(Room 208),and in the Information Office(Room 103),
available for public inspection during City Hall business hours. An agenda packet is also available for
public review at the Atascadero Library,6850 Morro Road.
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in
a City meeting or other services offered by this City,please contact the City Manager's Office, (805)
461-5010,or the City Clerk's Office, (805)461-5074. Notification at least 48 hours prior to the meeting
or time when services are needed will assist the City staff in assuring that reasonable arrangements can
be made to provide accessibility to the meeting or service.
TO SPEAK ON AGENDA ITEMS
Members of the audience may speak on any item on the agenda. The Mayor will identify the subject,
staff will give their report, and the Council will ask questions of staff. The Mayor will announce when
the public comment period is open and will request anyone interested to address the Council regarding
the matter being considered to step up to the podium. If you wish to speak for, against or comment in
any way:
• You must approach the podium and be recognized by the Mayor
• Give your name and address
• Make your statement
• All comments should be made to the Mayor and Council
• All comments limited to 5 minutes(unless changed by the Council)
• No one may speak for a second time until everyone wishing to speak has had an opportunity
to do so, and no one may speak more than twice on any item.
The Mayor will announce when the public comment period is closed, and thereafter,no further public
comments will be heardby the Council.
TO SPEAK ON SUBJECTS NOT LISTED ON THE AGENDA
Under Agenda item, "COMMUNITY FORUM",the Mayor will call for anyone from the audience
having business with the Council to:
• Please approach the podium and be recognized
• Give your name and address
• State the nature of your business
This is the time items not on the Agenda may be brought to the Council's attention. A maximum of 30
minutes will be allowed'for Community Forum(unless changed by the Council).
TO HAVE ITEMS PLACED ON AGENDA
All business matters to appear on the Agenda must be in the Office of the City Manager ten days
preceding the Council meeting. Should you have a matter you wish to bring before the Council, please
mail or bring a written communication to the City Manager's office in City Hall prior to the deadline.
I -
PRESENTATION
191 " ® 19 9
City Manager's Agenda Report
Wade G. McKinney
Introduction of New Police Chaplains and
Recognition of Rollin Dexter for Past Service
PRESENTATION:
Lt. John Couch will ''introduce the newest members of the Police Chaplain Program, Rev. Al
Jewell, Pastor Carl Billings and Pastor Steve Harms. The new chaplains join the current
chaplain, Rev. Matt ';Conrad, to provide chaplain services to the Police Department and the
citizens of Atascadero. Lt. William Couch will recognize Rev. Rollin Dexter for his past service
as Police Chaplain.
DISCUSSION:
I N:
Since 1980 the Police Department has had a Police Chaplain program that has provided chaplain
services to the Department and to the citizens of Atascadero. Chaplains are used to serve.the
members of the Department and their families, to assist the employees as technical consultants,
to give public assistance to those referred by the Department, and to be of assistance in
Police/Community relations.
The chaplains represent participation of churches in the local area. Al Jewell is the Director of
Men's Fellowship at l House of Prayer, Steve Harms, pastor of Evangelical Free Church, Carl
Billings, pastor of Hope Lutheran Church and Matt Conrad is the vicar of St. Luke's Episcopal
Church.
The chaplains will begin service with the Department upon completion of orientation training in
November.
Rev. Rollin Dexter, who initiated the Chaplain Program, will no longer be an active member. He
will be recognized for his service to the Department and to the community by presentation of a
plaque.
RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT: Police Department
000001
ITEM NUMBER: A - 1
DATE:-1 1/10/98
MINUTES
ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL
MEETING
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 13, 1998
INTERVIEW SESSION, 6:00 P.M.
Mayor Carden called',the Interview Session to order at 6:00 p.m.
ROLL CALL:
Present: Council Members Clay, Johnson, Lerno, Luna and Mayor Carden
Absent: None
Others Present: City Clerk Marcia Torgerson
1. Citizens' Transportation Advisory Committee
A. Interview and consider candidates
B. Select,by ballot, one citizen for appointment
The Council interviewed the candidates and selected, by ballot, Dennis Schmidt to be the
Atascadero delegate on the Citizens' Transportation Advisory Committee.
Mayor Carden adjourned the Interview Session at 6:50 p.m.
REGULAR SESSION, 7:00 P.M.:
Mayor Carden called the Regular Session to order at 7:00 p.m. and led the Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL:
Present: Council Members Clay, Johnson, Lerno, Luna and Mayor Carden
Absent: None
Others Present: City Clerk Marcia Torgerson
Staff Present: City Manager Wade McKinney, Police Chief Dennis Hegwood,
Community Services Director Brady Cherry,Administrative Services
Director Rachelle Rickard, Community and Economic Development
Director Paul Saldana,Assistant City Engineer John Neil and City
Attorney Roy Hanley.
000002
APPROVAL OF AGENDA:
MOTION: . By Mayor Pro Tem Johnson and seconded by Council Member Luna
to approve the agenda.
Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote. -
Mayor.Carden asked the City Clerk to report to the public the results of the Interview Session.
City Clerk Marcia Torgerson announced that the Council interviewed four applicants and Dennis
Schmidt was appointed by Council.
COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS AND REPORTS:
Mayor Pro Tem Johnson announced that all the Fire Departments in Central California were
together in our City yard where they practiced extracting people from damaged cars.
Mayor Carden asked if staff has addressed the request from the U.S. Department of Commerce,
Bureau of Census, that we appoint someone to be a go-between regarding the Census 2000. City
Manager Wade McKinney stated that the Community Development Department has been
working on the census project.
Mayor Carden asked the City Attorney to respond to a memo he received from the City of
Angels Camp asking for participation in a legal proceeding. City Attorney Roy Hanley said that
he would respond.
Mayor Carden stated that Dave Romero, Vice Mayor of San Luis Obispo and the President-elect
of the Channel Cities division of the League of California Cities, asked the Council to submit the
name of a member of the Council for consideration to be appointed to one of the eight policy
committees. He asked staff if this should be agendized. Mr. McKinney and Mr. Hanley stated
that the request is for interested Council Members and the Channel Cities division will be
making the appointments.
1. Traffic Committee Update[City Clerk]
City Clerk Marcia Torgerson updated the Council on the status of the Traffic Committee. She
stated that the three citizen members' terms expired in September 1998. One of the members,
Howard Gaylord, has submitted his resignation. Ms. Torgerson asked the Council to give her
direction as to whether they want her to contact the remaining members to see if they would like
to continue to serve on the committee, or recruit for new members. Mayor Carden stated that he
would like to have Mr. McKinney and staff review the Traffic Committee and make
recommendations to the Council as to composition, direction and charter of a Traffic Committee.
Council Member Clay stated that Howard Gaylord is an outstanding citizen and was a good
representative on the Traffic Committee.
CC 10/13/98 �0040�
Page 2 of 8
PRESENTATIONS:
Police Chief Dennis Hegwood will present new employee, Office Assistant Pat Schulz, to the
Council.
Chief Hegwood introduced Pat Schulz,new Office Assistant to the Police Chief. The Council
welcomed her.
COMMUNITY FORUM:
Eric Greening, 7365 Valle, 5`h Supervisorial District's representative on the Citizens'
Transportation Advisory Committee, welcomed Dennis Schmidt to the CTAC. He also spoke
about the money that is going to be available from CalTrans for local road repair, approximately
$880,000. He encouraged the Council to prioritize Atascadero's road improvement needs.
Dennis Schmidt, 8675 Santa Rosa Road,thanked the Council for appointing him to CTAC. He
explained some of his concerns of Atascadero's transportation needs.
Rush Kolemaine, P.O. Box 1990, spoke on the issue of transit signage. He explained his
suggestions of the appropriate signage along the transit routes in Atascadero. He also stressed
the importance of transit benches.
Mayor Carden closed the Community Forum period
A. CONSENT CALENDAR: Roll Call
1. City Council Minutes—September 22, 1998— (City Clerk recommendation: Approve)
[Marcia Torgerson]
2. No Parking Zone on Navarette Avenue—Establishing a No Parking 6:00 a.m. to 6:00
p.m. Monday through Friday Zone—Fiscal Impact: $400.00 (Staff recommendation:
Council adopt Resolution No. 1998-039 establishing a No Parking Zone on Navarette
Avenue) [Brady Cherry]
3. Passenger Loading Zone on Palma—Establishing a Passenger Loading Zone on Palma at
Traffic Way—Fiscal Impact: $50.00 (Staff recommendation: Council adopt Resolution
No. 1998-040 establishing a Passenger Loading Zone on Palma at Traffic Way) [Brady
Cherry]
4. No Stopping Zone on San Gabriel Road—Establishing a No Stopping Zone on the north
side of San Gabriel Road at the Elementary School—Fiscal Impact: $300.00 (Staff
recommendation: Council adopt Resolution No. 1998-041 establishing a No Stopping
Zone on the north side of San Gabriel Road at the elementary school) [Brady Cherry]
CC 10/13/98
Page 3 of 8 000004
5. Elimination of No Parking Zone—6895 El Camino Real—Modify existing No Parking
Zone to allow for parking of vehicles less than 6' in height—Fiscal Impact: $230.00
(Staff recommendation: Council adopt Resolution No. 1998-042 eliminating the No
Parking Zone at 6895 El Camino Real) [Brady Cherry]
6. 3-Way Stop at Sycamore and Miramon Avenues—Fiscal Impact: $400.00 (Staff
recommendation: Council adopt Resolution No. 1998-044 establishing a 3-way stop
intersection at Sycamore and Miramon Avenues) [Brady Cherry]
7. Montecito Avenue and San Anselmo Avenue Improvements—Agreement with Madonna
Construction, Inc. to construct the improvements—Fiscal Impact: $82,632.00 in Streets
and Bridges Impact Fee Funds (Fund 705) (Staff recommendation: Council authorize
the Mayor to execute an agreement with Madonna Construction, Inc. to construct the
Montecito Avenue and the San Anselmo Avenue improvements) [Brady Cherry]
8. SLOCOG and SLORTA Joint Powers Agreements—Ratification of updated and slightly
modified agreements between the City, SLOCOG and SLORTA—Fiscal Impact: None
(Staff recommendation: Council adopt Resolution No. 1998-037 ratifying the amended
Joint Powers Agreement for SLORTA and adopt Resolution No. 1998-038 ratifying the
amended Joint Powers Agreement for SLOCOG) [Brady Cherry]
9. Memorandum of Understanding with Atascadero Police Association—for FY 1998-99—
Fiscal Impact: $41,800.00 which is included in the Annual Operating Budget (Staff
recommendation: Council authorize the Mayor to execute a Memorandum of
Understanding for the Atascadero Police Association for Fiscal Year 1998/99) [Wade
McKinney]
Mayor Carden stated that he received a request from staff that Item#A-6 be tabled. Community
Services Director Brady Cherry stated that it will be brought back at a future meeting.
Mr. McKinney asked that Item#A-8 be pulled.
MOTION: By Council Member Clay and seconded by Council Member Luna to
approve Items #A-1,2,3, 4, 5, 7 and 9.
Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote.
RE: Item#A-8 - Mr. McKinney explained that he is requesting a simple modification to this
item. The SLORTA and SLOCOG JPAs are simply updating the JPAs into the current operating
methods of both agencies. He also explained that included in these JPAs is a City Managers'
Committee which has not been active for the life of these organizations. However, the City
Managers do try to meet monthly, but not formally. Mr. McKinney asked that the Council leave
the City Managers' Committee in the JPAs.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Eric Greening, 7365 Valle, asked if Atascadero amends this JPA, will all the other members
make the same change. Mayor Carden stated he will be taking it up at the next Mayor's meeting.
Mayor Carden closed the Public Comment period.
CC 10/13/98
Page 4 of 8 000005
MOTION: By Mayor Pro Tem Johnson and seconded by Council Member Clay
to approve Item #A-8 with the following amendment to the SLOCOG
JPA, Page 7,#3: keep "a). Administration Committee, comprised of
all managers and administrators of member jurisdictions;'; which will
make the new a. become b., the new b. become c., and the new c. -
become d.
Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote.
B. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
1. General Plan Amendment#98004 and Zone Change 498005 — 10801 El Camino Real
(AVSD) - Fiscal Impact: None (Planning Commission recommendations: 1) Council
find the Negative Declaration prepared for this project to be adequate under the
requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and the State and local
guidelines for implementation of the Act; and 2) Council adopt Resolution No. 1998-035
approving General Plan Amendment#98004; and 3) Council adopt Ordinance No. 352,
approving Zone Change #98005, by introducing for first reading by title only) [Paul
Saldana]
Council Member Clay stepped down because of a potential conflict of interest.
Mr. McKinney stated that the staff report is unchanged from the previous meeting and he
explained that the representative from the School District does not seem to be present. The
School District had stated earlier today that they would like to table this item. Mr. McKinney
stated that he explained to them that the Council has had this item on the agenda several times
and they would need to attend this meeting and explain to the Council their request. He
suggested that the Council continue the item to the end of the meeting in hopes that the school
representative will show up.
Mayor Carden asked for Council consensus to continue this item to the next regular GPA cycle,
which had a deadline of October 1, 1998.
There was consensus of the Council to continue this item to next regular GPA cycle, with a
deadline of October 1, 1998.
Mayor Carden announced that he will open this item up for public comment,however, he wanted
everyone to know that he had closed the Public Comment period on this issue at the last meeting.
He stated that since this item is being continued,the public can address the Council but it won't
be part of the official document.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Larry Finnegan, 505 Country Lane, San Luis Obispo, stated that he's the owner of Villa
Margarita on the adjacent property. He stated that he is confused by this process. Mayor Carden
explained that the item was being continued and that the public would be noticed when it is put
on the Council's agenda again.
CC 10/13/98
Page 5 of 8 000006
William Zimmerman, 6225 Lomitas Road, stated that he is glad that this item will be started
once again. He said that he hoped it would come before the Planning Commission first.
Community Development Director Paul Saldana said that it would.
Rush Kolemaine, P.O. Box 1990, stated that the School District is known for being less than
cooperative with the City.
Bill Maxwell, 10840 Los Pueblos,Villa Margarita Mobilehome Park, said that he understands
the School District took the property off the market.
Mayor Carden closed the Public Comment period
Mayor Carden said that there is a monumental increase in improved communication between the
City and the School District. He stated that he hoped that it continues and that a wedge is not
forced in between them.
C. MANAGEMENT REPORTS:
1. Falcon.Cable Franchise Agreement—Request to extend Franchise Agreement—Fiscal
Impact: Positive effect on the City's 5%franchise fee (Staff recommendation: Council
authorize the City Manager to send a letter to Falcon Cable indicating that the City will
extend the Franchise Agreement based upon the following conditions: 1) The cable
television system is upgraded to a Hybrid Fiber, Coax, 750 MHz system with a minimum
of 72 channels, 2) Falcon employs a construction coordinator to oversee the upgrade
project with an emphasis on cost containment and customer service, and 3) Falcon
notifies each affected subscriber before service is suspended as a portion of the
construction project) [Wade McKinney]
City Manager Wade McKinney gave the staff report and introduced Barry Egan, General
Manager of Falcon Cable.
Barry Egan, General Manager of Falcon Cable, explained that if we don't renew our franchise
agreement now, it will run 3 more years which would mean we would receive the existing
service for those 3 years. If we extend the franchise now, they will be doing improvements
starting right away. Mr. Egan answered questions of Council. The issue of PEG access was
discussed by the Council and questions were asked of Mr. Egan. He stressed that the City or
Falcon legally have no control of what type of programming is shown on PEG access.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Rush Kolemaine, P.O. Box 1990, stated he had questions of Mr. Egan. He referred to a prepared
statement that he submitted to the Council earlier this evening. (see Exhibit A)
Mike Murphy, 9320 Santa Clara Road,made suggestions of events that could be on a community
channel.
Paul Weems, 7982 Santa Rosa Road; said that whenever he has had trouble with Falcon service,
they come out and taken care of it. He supports the extension of the Falcon franchise agreement.
CC 10/13/98
Page 6 of 8 000007
Rush Kolemaine, P.O. Box 1990, stated that he is the most knowledgeable person in the Central
Coast on PEG access. He explained how PEG access works and how it can be controlled.
Barry Egan, General Manager Falcon Cable, explained that in SLO County there is PEG access
that Atascadero will have access to when the upgrade is complete.
Mayor Carden closed Public Comment period.
Mayor Pro Tem Johnson said that he sees in the survey, which is included in the staff report, the
public majority is not interested in PEG access.
Mayor Carden suggested that since the County already has a PEG access program, Atascadero
could, at a later date, enter into an agreement with the County to share the program. Mr. Egan
stated that would be acceptable with Falcon.
MOTION: By Mayor Pro Tem Johnson and seconded by Council Member Clay
to authorize the City Manager to send a letter to Falcon Cable
indicating that the City will extend the Franchise Agreement based
upon the following conditions:
1) The cable television system is upgraded to a Hybrid Fiber,
Coax, 750 MHz system with a minimum of 72 channels, and
2) Falcon employs a construction coordinator to oversee the
upgrade project with an emphasis on cost containment and
customer service, and
3) Falcon notifies each affected subscriber before service is
suspended as a portion of the construction project.
The letter shall also state that we want to discuss a potential re-opener
for PEG access should the demand arise in Atascadero in the future.
Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote.
2. Wil-Mar Disposal Request for Approval of Stock Mercer with U.S.A. Waste
Management— Proposed Amendment One to the Solid Waste Collection Franchise
Agreement-Fiscal Impact: None (Staff recommendation: Council authorize the Mayor
to execute the proposed Amendment One to the Solid Waste Collection Franchise
Agreement) [Roy Hanley]
City Attorney Roy Hanley gave the staff report and answered questions of Council.
PUBLIC COMMENT: None
MOTION: By Mayor Pro Tem Johnson and seconded by Council Member Luna
to authorize the Mayor to execute the proposed Amendment One to
the Solid Waste Collection Franchise Agreement with the following
amendment to Section H: Keep the first sentence, beginning with
"Franchisee" and delete the rest of the subsection.
Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote.
CC 10/13/98
Page 7 of 8 000008
3. Information Bulletin
D. COMMITTEE REPORTS
S.L.O. Council of Governments/S.L.O. Regional Transit Authority
Mayor Carden stated that we have received approximately$880,000 for rehabilitation, not
maintenance of roads.
Finance Committee
Council Member Luna stated they met last week and today and worked on the Investment Policy
which will be before the Council soon.
Water Committees
Council Member Clay stated that at their last meeting the discussion was on updating the Master
Water Plan for our area.
County Mayor's Round Table
Mayor Carden announced that they will be meeting Friday.
Economic Vitality Corporation, Board of Directors
Mayor Pro Tem Johnson stated that they are in the process of interviewing candidates for the
position of President of EVC.
E. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION:
City Council
Council Member Luna commended the City Attorney on his handling of the waste management
issue.
F. ADJOURNMENT:
Mayor Carden adjourned the Regular Session at 8: 45 p.m. to the Redevelopment Agency
meeting immediately following this meeting.
MINUTES RECORDED AND PREPARED BY:
Marcia McClure Torgerson, City Clerk
Attachments: Exhibit A-Prepared Statement by Rush Kolemaine, dated 10/11/98
CC 10/13/98
Page 8 of 8 000009
Exhibit: A
Atascadero City Council
Meeting Date: 10/13/98
R. S. Kolemaine / P.O. Box 1990/Atascadero CA 93423-1990/FAX/Fone8 - -
( 05)466 8200/elfenix®tcsn.net
Atascadero City Council
c/o City Clerk
6550 Palma Ave.
Atascadero CA 93422
11 Oct 98
REF: 13 Oct 98 Agenda Item # C-1(Falcon Cable Franchise Extension)
Gentlemen:
With regard to this issue as presented in the City Manager's Report, the following are
a number of points insufficiently discussed which I consider important to be reviewed in
greater depth by the Council.
ALTERNATIVES:
The City Manager offers only two alternatives for Council consideration at this time:
I. Initiation of aformal renewal process. (as provided by all federal telecommuni-
cations acts since 1982).The City manager correctly points out that staff has failed to
budget adequate time for this project and would therefore be unable to implement
such an effort... at this time, but that knowledgeable consultants in the field of cable
are available, but, that such could still require an undetermined amount of staff time
and estimated costs could fail somewhere within a $3,000 to $20,000 cost range.
A. While not unsympathetic to the argument presented regarding availability of staff
time, at least four considerations are not clarified and deserve to be, prior to any
decision in this matter by the Council:
1 . Just what does the federally-mandated process involve in terms of City
staff time ? Experience indicates that an open public process calling for input
by affected cable subscribers is required, something that prior councils have
failed to follow through with at any time since this city was incorporated 20
years ago, further, in adopting the SLO County cable franchise agreement, the
City embraced the County's failure to follow these federal provisions
established to provide local franchise regulators with a clear and
knowledgeable insight into franchisee practice and policies. In short,
Atascadero residents have not been properly served-by the responsible levels
of government in this area, regardless of staff's perceptions or personal
convenience.
2. In how many ways does the current Falcon franchise agreement fall
short/comply with the norms for such agreements ? Given the antiquated
form (late 1970's) of the City's franchise agreement (especially when compared
000010
Page 2/3
(continued)to other more modern agreements), attempting to extend such a document for 10
years into the future while requiring expanded service rising Hybrid Fiberoptic/Coaxial '750
MHztechnology.with 72 channel capacity, demands a technically qualified overview by the.
City in order to look out for the best interests of resident subscribers.
3. How much, precisely, would the services of a qualified consultant familiar with
the cable industry in general, and franchise requirements in specific, actually cost
the City versus what benefits that might be expected from having such expertise
employed on the City's behalf ? As an example an expenditure of $2,700 by the City
of Morro Bay for such services in 1997 has since resulted in (so far) an immediate
gain amounting to a reported $35,000, used to enhance that city's Government
Access (Ch. 54 on the Charter/Sonic system) capabilities and further usable in the
future by other PEG Access users.
4. Precisely, how much cost to the City would be entailed in establishing a PEG
Access capability for Atascadero residents and subscribers ? Again, experience has
indicated that contracting with a 501(c)(3) non-profit entity capable of, and obligated,
to impartially, operate PEG channels on a cable system need not entail any
substantial expenditure by a municipal government or franchising authority to
achieve. One such an entity, (known as ECA) in fact, has existed in within SLO
County since 1996, complete with By-law provisions adaptable to Atascadero City
needs, further capable of becoming legally self-supporting in time as necessary.
II. Council could require Falcon to provide PEG Access. The single most relevant
requirement required of the Atascadero City Council at this time, is simply
establishing the accessibility of Falcon channels for PEG usage. /t is particularly
relevant at this time simply because, under law, if not accomplished in October
1998 it cannot even be attempted by any future City Council within this franchise
at any time prior to the year 209 �1
A. Notwithstanding staff opinion that PEG would create a "negative financial impact",
staff has had no first-hand experience in this area, nor availed himself of better-informed
information on which to make such a judgment. Also seemingly not considered are other
benefits that the availability of PEG Access can predictably generate, including making it
possible to better inform the taxpaying and voting public. regarding City operations and
needs, making it possible for AUSD to deliver knowledge to school children living within
the Atascadero franchise area. and/or providing accurate local news for residents in a
timelier manner than would otherwise be possible using media currently available.
Accordingly, I must encourage the City Council at this time to take such steps as will
assure it of better information than has been included in the above report in order to achie'0
a positive improvement to those services previously denied in prior Falcon franchi
agreements) here.
Respectfully,
R. S. Kolemaine
000011
Page 3/3
F �c4n �A1e ssue
F
eraaairscon fusn
g '.
s
r
Ta.tlie editor
The T T story regarding City : Sp
of
veAtascadera efforts to p�+
improcable service tares? � E l �!Ial
;dents by City Manager Wade
McKuiney'(thatxan Sept.8)sug Mention is:
also made of an Calf `'
Bests that ottr city"finaIlybaa effort to finally addxess fhe '
put the;ball in Falcgn Cable's issue bf,a PEG(Public
court to puf up of shat upinso- Educational Governmental)
far.as the caliber of TY service Access channel on the table;for
available here thefirst fiine�ever
But I'm a little uncertain
!t
he 6M results of a survey ,
among cable subscribers I
h helped McKinney author areas
clear to.citizens in our area a9
could be.
Although 67 percent(of the 5
percent of.subscribers who
responded)who replied to
Falcon indicated theyhad"no ,
interest"in PEG programming
and 89 percent indicated they;
would be unwilling to'pay an ,
additiMal 21 cents per month:to
have PEG available to hem;few
if any of us have ever seen PEG
Programming,much;less made .
use of it to inform their neigli
bors of goings on in the cam-`
munity not visible or:entirely
available.on broadcast TY and. .
newspapers
As silly as asking blind peo= _
ple if they preferred red or
green,the survey does offer a;.
data baseline to measiure future,_
attitudes against Another 19
tin-
interest
ininterest in PEG and another.
percent said"maybe" ,per
centages broadcastnetworks
would;kill for these dais
The majorproblem:of course,
is Atascadero City Counc�I
must first instruct Falcon#o
make a PEG channel available ,
for strictly looal,noncommer : A
cial;:informational program
Ming for subscribers to view,as
provided by federal regulation -
for.the past 16 years
The forgotten concept is that
residents should have useful,
even vital;information deliv
&red to their.homes via Cable
crisis crossing our puhhc
rights of way,rather t}an mere
commef cfal enteftaiiiinent
Rust'Kolemaine: 000012
ITEM NUMBER: A - 2
DATE: 11/10/98
MINUTES
ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL MEETING -
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 27, 1998 .
CLOSED SESSION,6:15 P.M.:
Mayor Carden called the Closed Session to order at 6:15 p.m.
1) Conference with negotiator over real property. (Govt. Code 54956.8)
Negotiator: City Manager Wade McKinney
Property: Mr. & Mrs. Hensley, 9085 Morro Road
2) Personnel: City Manager(Govt. Code Sec. 54957.6)
3) Conference with legal counsel (Govt. Code Sec. 54956.9 (b))
Significant exposure to litigation.
City Attorney Roy Hanley announced that the Council gave direction to Mr. McKinney
concerning negotiating over real property.
REGULAR SESSION, 7:00 P.M.:
Mayor Carden called the Regular Session to order at 7:01 p.m. and Mayor Pro Tem Johnson led
the Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL:
Present: Council Members Clay, Johnson, Lerno, Luna and Mayor Carden
Absent: None
Others Present: City Clerk Marcia Torgerson
Staff Present: City Manager Wade McKinney, Police Chief Dennis Hegwood, Fire Chief
Mike McCain, Community Services Director Brady Cherry,
Administrative Services Director Rachelle Rickard, Community and
Economic Development Director Paul Saldana, and City Attorney Roy
Hanley.
000013
APPROVAL OF AGENDA:
MOTION: By Council Member Luna and seconded by Council Member Clay to
approve the agenda.
Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote. _
COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS AND REPORTS: None
PRESENTATIONS:
1. Police Chief Dennis Hegwood will introduce to Council the new Police K-9 Lesko and
his handler Officer Robert Molle:
Chief Hegwood introduced K-9 officer Lesko and his handler Officer Robert Molle. He told the
Council that even though they have been on the streets for a short period of time,they have
already proven themselves to be an effective crime-fighting tool.
Mayor Carden stated that this is an example where the community and the city have worked
together. He thanked Officer Molle for giving the extra time and effort involved with the K-9
program. Officer Molld thanked the Council for the opportunity.
2. Proclamation"Red Ribbon Celebration" October 23-31, 1998
Suzzi Crouch Recreation Coordinator, accepted the proclamation with some of the youth
participating in our Recreational Program.
Council Member Clay said that Suzzi is doing an outstanding job with the Recreational Program.
COMMUNITY FORUM:
Rush Kolemaine, P.O. Box 1990,told the Council that at their last meeting there were many
questions asked of the City Manager about PEG access. However,the City Manager did not
answer the questions. He asked the Council to instruct the City Manager to answer those
questions. He also asked the Council to seriously consider PEG access for Atascadero.
A. CONSENT CALENDAR: Roll Call
1. Del Rio Bridge Seismic Retrofit Project—Federal Aid Program Supplement No. 001-M-
Fiscal Impact: None (Staff recommendation: Council authorize, by minute order, the
City Manager to execute Federal Air Program Supplement No. 001-Mfor the Del Rio
Bridge Seismic Retrofit Project) [Brady Cherry]
CC 10/27/98 2
Page 2 of 4 UU0014
2. SLOCOPS DUI Grant Program- Multi-Agency DUI Enforcement/Education Grant—
Fiscal Impact: Negligible (Staff recommendation: Council adopt Resolution No. 1998-
046, authorizing the Atascadero Police Department to participate in a multi-agency DUI
enforcement/education grant program) [Dennis Hegwood]
MOTION: By Council Member Luna and seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Johnson
to approve Items#A-1 and 2.
Motion passed 5:0 by a roll--call vote.
B. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
1. Zone Change #98008 — Sign Ordinance Amendment Relative to Public Transit Facilities
(City of Atascadero)—Fiscal Impact: Negligible (Staff recommendation: 1.) Council find
the project would not have significant adverse effects on the environment and that, based on the
information contained in the record as it exists to this date, the Draft Negative Declaration
prepared for the project should be adopted as adequate under the requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and 2.) Council introduce, on first reading, waiving
reading in full, Ordinance No. 354, amending the Zoning Ordinance relating to signs.) [Paul
Saldanal
Community and Economic Development Director Paul Saldana gave the staff report and
answered questions of Council. There was Council discussion about the legal aspects of signage
on public property.
PUBLIC COMMENT
U LIC
Rush Kolemaine, P.O. Box 1990, stated that this topic was included in the report he prepared
regarding transit. Mr. Kolemaine stated that he supports staff's report with his suggested
modifications concerning size and location of signage.
Bill Zimmerman, 6225 Lomitas Road, Chairman of the Planning Commission. He stated that the
Planning Commission voted 5:1 against signs on benches. He urged the Council to consider
getting benches without signs.
Mayor Carden closed the Public Comment period
Council Member Luna and Council Member Lerno expressed concern about having transit signs
if it is not going to be profitable.
Mayor Pro Tem Johnson stated that he was not opposed to advertising on the transit benches if it
is tastefully done.
There was Council discussion about the design of the advertising. Staff said that they would be
coming back to Council with a policy for their review.
- CC 10/27/98 3
Page 3 of 4 000015
MOTION: By Mayor Pro Tem Johnson and seconded by Council Member Clay
to, 1) Find the project would not have significant adverse effects on
the environment and that,based on the information contained in the
record as it exists to this date,the Draft Negative Declaration
prepared for the project should be adopted as adequate under the
requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA);
and 2) Introduce, on first reading,waiving reading in full, Ordinance
No.354, amending the Zoning Ordinance relating to signs.
Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote.
C. MANAGEMENT REPORTS:
1. Information Bulletin
City Manager Wade McKinney reminded the Council that tomorrow, Wednesday October 28,
1998, the City is co-hosting with the BIA a presentation of Ms. Kennedy Lawson Smith, Director
of the National Historic Trust, specializing in Main Street Revitalization.
Mr. McKinney also announced that tonight is Alice Milham's (Atascadero News reporter) last
meeting. He stated that the City has appreciated working with her and her support.
D. COMMITTEE REPORTS: None. .
E. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION: None.
F. ADJOURNMENT:
Mayor Carden adjourned the Regular Session at 7:54 p.m. to the Redevelopment Agency
Meeting immediately following this meeting.
MINUTES RECORDED AND PREPARED BY:
Marcia McClure Torgerson, City Clerk
CC 10/27/98 4
Page 4 of 4 000016
ITEM NUMBER: A — 3
DATE: 11/10/98
... ■. ■ ■
r. ,
1 8
NOR -
A
CADS
City Treasurer's Agenda Report
Rudy Hernandez
Treasurer's Report - June 1998
RECOMMENDATION:
City Treasurer and Staff recommend that Council review and accept the June 1998
Treasurer's Report
REPORT IN BRIEF:
Cash and Investments'
Checking $ 397,901
Certificates of Deposit 1,029,681
LAIF 7,702,447
Cash with Fiscal Agent: 261,614
Cash;in Banks at June 30, 1998 $ 9,391,643
Deposits in Transit 12,634
Outstanding Checks (129,104)
Cash and Investments at June 30, 1998 $ 9,275,173
FISCAL IMPACT: None
RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT: Finance
ATTACHMENTS: Cash and Investments Activity Summary
Cash and Investments by Func
Time Deposits, Certificates of Deposit, Savings and Local
Agency Investment Fund
Schedule of Certificates of Deposit
Page i of 5 000017
CITY OF ATASCADERO
TREASURER'S REPORT
CASH&INVESTMENTS ACTIVITY SUMMARY
FOR THE MONTH OF JUNE 1998 -
CHECKING FISCAL
ACCOUNT INVESTMENTS AGENT TOTALS
Balance per Banks at
June 1, 1998 $ 250,887 $ 9,880,223 $ 260,346 $ 10,391,456
Receipts 1,156,863 1,905 1,268 1,160,036
Disbursements (2,159,849) (2,159,849)
Transfers In 1,400,000 250,000 1,650,000
Transfers Out (250,000) (1,400,000) (1,650,000)
Balance per Banks at
June 30, 1998 $ 397,901 $ 8,732,128 $ 261,614 9,391,643
Deposits in Transit 12,634
Outstanding Checks (129,104)
Adjusted Treasurer's Balance $ 9,275,173
CITY OF ATASCADERO
R DY ,RNANDE
Ci er
Page 2 of 000018
CITY OF ATASCADERO
TREASURER'S REPORT
CASH&INVESTMENTS BY FUND
JUNE 1998
RESERVED UNRESERVED
CASH(1) CASH(2) TOTALS
POOLED CASH
General Fund $ - $ 1,177,926
Gas Tax Fund 31,867
Development Fee Fund 1,164
Community Development Block Grant -
Police Development Fees Fund -
Fire Development Fees Fund 49,418
Parks&Rec Development Fees Fund 32,794
Drainage Development Fees Fund 222,314
Amapoa-Tecorida Fees Fund 138,277
Public Works Development Fees Fund 610,949
Street Maintenance Districts Fund 49,176
TDA Non-Transit Fund 174,222
Sidewalk Fund 45,669
Capital Projects Fund -
Camino Real Construction Fund 33,863
Dial-A-Ride Fund 79,140
Wastewater Operations Fund 2,715,058
Sewer Facilities Fund 2,979,926
Technology Fund 179,000
Assessment District#3 3,317
Assessment District#4 121,774
Assessment District#5 -
Camino Real Debt Service Fund 187,389
92 Street Improvement Assessment Fund 112,982
Assessment District#7 -
Assessment District#8 665
Assessment District#9 42,708
Assessment District#10 -
89 COP Debt Service Fund 74
Tree Plant Fund 23,887
Tree Association Fund -
Total Pooled Cash $ 492,796 $ 8,520,763 $ 9,013,559
CASH WITH FISCAL AGENT
Wastewater Operations Fund 5,152
Camino Real Debt Service Fund 203,206
92 Street Improvement Assessment Fund 53,256
89 COP Debt Service Fund -
Total Cash with Fiscal Agent $ 261,614 $ - 261,614
Total of All Cash $ 9,275,173
Page 3 of 5 0U0019
CITY OF ATASCADERO
TREASURER'S REPORT
TIME DEPOSITS, CERTIFICATES OF DEPOSIT,
SAVINGS AND LOCAL AGENCY INVESTMENT FUND
JUNE 1998
INVESTMENT INTEREST
AMOUNT EARNINGS
Orange County Investment PoolfIRAN $ - $ 1,609 (6)
Orange County Investment Poo - 51,206 (6).
Local Agency Investment Fund(3) 7,702,447 107,240
Certificates of Deposit(see attached.schedule) 1,029,681 25,317
TOTAL $ 8,732,128 185,372
Mid State Interest Received 2,742
TOTAL INTEREST RECEIVED $ 188,114 (5)
Notes:
(1) Reserved Fund Cash is specified for City debt service.
(2) Unreserved Fund cash can be used for normal operations of the City.
(3) On July 1, 1997, the City received$1,200,000 in the form of a Tax Revenue Anticipation Note(IRAN). The
City repaid this amount including $ 53,850 of interest (4.50% per annum) on June 25, 1998. The total
repayment($1,200,000+$53,850)was$1,253,850.
(4) June 1998 interest yields were as follows:
Orange County Not available
LAIF 5.67%
Mid-State 1.00%
(5) This is the actual amount deposited to City accounts and does not reflect interest amounts accrued but not
received. Also not included above are interest amounts earned in Fiscal Agent or County accounts, which are
used for bond retirement purposes. Furthermore, with the exception of the Orange County Investment Pool,
interest earnings are reported on a calendar year basis.
(6) On December 6, 1994, Orange County filed a Chapter 9 bankruptcy with the courts. The City recognized a
loss of.$1,155,283.04 on the OCIP for the 1994-95 fiscal year. The City is attempting to recover the
principal plus interest through a lawsuit filed against the OCIP. The interest received above is post-petition
interest for the period from Decemberl, 1994 through July 20, 1995.
Page 4 of 5
000020
CITY OF ATASCADERO
TREASURER'S REPORT
SCHEDULE OF CERTIFICATES OF DEPOSIT
JUNE 1998
PURCHASE MATURITY YIELD YTD
BANK DATE DATE RATE AMOUNT INTEREST
Bank of Santa Marr 1/27/98 7/20/98 5.01% $ 99,000.00 $ 2,539.65
Templeton
Bank of Americf 1/30/98 7/29/98 4.60% $ 99,000.00 $ 2,289.65
Atascadero
Los Padres Savings 2/8/98 8/12/98 5.00% $ 99,000.00 $ 2,505.70
Santa Maria
First Bank of SLO 2/19/98 8/19/98 5.40% $ 99,000.00 $ 2,877.88
San Luis Obispo
Wells Fargo Bank 2/22/98 8/22/98 4.50% $ 99,000.00 $ 2,227.50
San Luis Obispo
West America Bank 2/23/98 8/23/98 5.00% $ 99,000.00 $ 2,463.13
San Luis Obispo
First Bank &Trusl 2/28/98 8/28/98 5.48% $ 99,000.00 $ 2,614.20
Santa Maria
Santa Barbara Bank & 3/7/98 9/6/98 5.24% $ 99,000.00 $ 2,530.96
Trust-Santa Maria
Santa Lucia Bank 6/18/98 12/18/98 5.10% $ 38,681.00 $ 339.00
Atascadero I
Washington Mutua 6/21/98 12/18/98 4.89% $ 100,000.00 $ 2,490.03
San Luis Obispo
Union Bank 6/22/98 12/21/98 4.80% $ 9900.00 $ 2,438.96
Atascadero
$1,029,681.00 $25,316.66
Page 5 of 5 000021
ITEM NUMBER: A - 4
DATE: 11/10/98
Big" 21.0
�{lots R 1979 r',
CAD
City Treasurer's Agenda Report
Rudy Hernandez
Treasurer's Report- July 1998
RECOMMENDATION:
City Treasurer and Staff recommend that Council review and accept the July 1998
Treasurer's Report
REPORT IN BRIEF:
Cash and Investments
Checking $ 138,511
Certificates of Deposit 1,029,681
LAW 7,818,331
Cash with Fiscal Agents 262,678
Cash in Banks at July 31, 1998 $ 9,249,201
Deposits in Transit 54,325
Outstanding Checks (252,966)
Cash and Investments at July 31, 1998 $ 9,050,560
FISCAL IMPACT: None
RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT: Finance
ATTACHMENTS: Cash and Investments Activity Summary
Cash and Investments by Fund
Time Deposits, Certificates of Deposit, Savings and Local
Agency Investment Fund
Schedule of Certificates of Deposit
Page 1 of 000022
CITY OFATASCADERO
TREASURER'S REPORT
CASH&INVESTMENTS ACTIVITYSUM117ARY
FOR THE MONTH OF JULY 1998
CHECKING FISCAL
ACCOUNT INVESTMENTS AGENT TOTALS
Balance per Banks at
July 1, 1998 $ 397,901 $ 8,732,128 $ 261,614 $ 9,391,643
Receipts 747,964 115,884 1,064 864,912
Disbursements (1,007,354) (1,007,354)
Transfers In 100,000 100,000 200,000
Transfers Out (100,.000) (100,000) (200,000)
Balance per Banks at
July 31, 1998 $ 138,511 $ 8,848,012 $ 262,678 9,249,201
Deposits in Transit 54,325
Outstanding Checks (252,966)
Adjusted Treasurer's Balance $ 9,050,560
CITY OF ATASCADERO
EZ
City Treasurer
Page 2 of 5
000023
CITY OFATASCADERO
TREASURER'S REPORT
CASH&INVESTMENTS BY FUND
JULY 1998
RESERVED UNRESERVED
CASH(1) CASH(2) TOTALS
POOLED CASH
General Fund $ - $ 954,231
Gas Tax Fund 24,590
Development Fee Fund 1,179
Community Development Block Grant (10,053)
Police Development Fees Fund 3,234
Fire Development Fees Fund 57,192
Parks&Rec Development Fees Fund 51,805
Drainage Development Fees Fund 231,294
Amapoa-Tecorida Fees Fund 161,349
Public Works Development Fees Fund 632,609
Street Maintenance Districts Fund 49,742
TDA Non-Transit Fund 170,880
Sidewalk Fund 45,859
Capital Projects Fund (65,722)
Camino Real Construction Fund 34,212
Dial-A-Ride Fund 52,881
Wastewater Operations Fund 2,726,053
Sewer Facilities Fund 2,988,585
Building Maintenance Fund (5,292)
Technology Fund 178,680
Assessment District#3 3,418
Assessment District#4 121,974
Assessment District#5 (20)
Camino Real Debt Service Fund 189,195
92 Street Improvement Assessment Fund 113,957
Assessment District#7 (259)
Assessment District#8 672
Assessment District#9 51,395
Assessment District#10 -
89 COP Debt Service Fund 77
Tree Plant Fund 24,167
Tree Association Fund (2)
Total Pooled Cash $ 504,574 $ 8,283,308 $ 8,787,882
CASH WITH FISCAL AGENT
Wastewater Operations Fund 5,152
Camino Real Debt Service Fund 204,049
92 Street Improvement Assessment Fund 53,477
89 COP Debt Service Fund - -
Total Cash with Fiscal Agent $ 262,678 $ 262,678
Total of All Cash $ 9,050,560
Page 3of5 000024
CITY OF ATASCADERO
TREASURER'S REPORT
TIME DEPOSITS, CERTIFICATES OF DEPOSIT,
SAVINGS AND LOCAL AGENCY INVESTMENT FUND
JULY 1998
INVESTMENT INTEREST
AMOUNT EARNINGS
Orange County Investment Pool/TRAN $ - $ 1,609 (5)
Orange County Investment Poo - 51,206 (5)
Local Agency Investment Fund(3) 7,818,331 223,124
Certificates of Deposit(see attached schedule) 1,029,681 29,450
TOTAL $ 8,848,012 305,389
Mid State Interest Received 2,952
TOTAL INTEREST RECEIVED $ 308,341 (4)
Notes:
(1) Reserved Fund Cash is specified for City debt service.
(2) Unreserved Fund cash can be used for normal operations of the City.
(3) July 1998 interest yields were as follows:
Orange County Not available
LAIF 5.65%
Mid-State 1.00%
(4) This is the actual amount deposited to City accounts and does not reflect interest amounts accrued but not
received. Also not included above are interest amounts earned in Fiscal Agent or County accounts, which are
used for bond retirement purposes. Furthermore, with the exception of the Orange County Investment Pool,
interest earnings are reported on a calendar year basis.
(5) On December 6, 1994, Orange County filed a Chapter 9 bankruptcy with the courts. The City recognized a
loss of $1,155,283.04 on the OCIP for the 1994-95 fiscal year. The City is attempting to recover the
principal plus interest through a lawsuit filed against the OCIP. The interest received above is post-petition
interest for the period from Decemberl, 1994 through July 20, 1995.
Page 4 of 5 000025
CITY OFATASCADERO
TREASURER'S REPORT
SCHEDULE OF CERTIFICATES OF DEPOSIT
JULY 1998 _
PURCHASE MATURITY YIELD YTD
BANK DATE DATE RATE AMOUNT INTEREST
Los Padres Savings 2/8/98 8/12/98 5.00% $ 99,000.00 $ 2,932.04
Santa Maria
First Bank of SLO 2/19/98 8/19/98 5.40% $ 99,000.00 $ 3,352.25
San Luis Obispo
Wells Fargo Bank 2/22/98 8/22/98 4.50% $ 99,000.00 $ 2,598.75
San Luis Obispo
West America Bank 2/23/98 8/23/98 5.00% $ 99,000.00 $ 2,883.04
San Luis Obispo
First Bank&Trust 2/28/98 8/28/98 5.48% $ 99,000.00 $ 3,055.63
Santa Maria
Santa Barbara Bank& 3/7/98 9/6/98 5.24% $ 99,000.00 $ 2,961.47
rust-Santa Maria
Santa Lucia Bank 6/18/98 12/18/98 5.10% $ 38,681.00 $ 339.00
Atascadero
Washington Mutual 6/21/98 12/18/98 4.89% $ 100,000.00 $ 2,901.40
San Luis Obispo
Union Bank 6/22/98 12/21/98 4.80% $ 99,000.00 $ 2,834.96
Atascadero
Mid State Bank 7/20/98 1/15/99 4.76% $ 99,000.00 $ 2,948.05
Templeton
Bank of America 7/29/98 1/27/99 4.60% $ 99,000.00 $ 2,643.85
Atascadero
$1,029,681.00 $29,450.44
Page 5of5
000026
ITEM NUMBER: A — 5
DATE: 11/10/98
1918 1979 -
�ti
City Treasurer's Agenda Report
Rudy Hernandez
Treasurer's Report - August 1998
RECOMMENDATION:
City Treasurer and Staff recommend that Council review and accept the August 1998
Treasurer's Report
REPORT IN BRIEF:
Cash and Investments
Checking $ 397,852
Certificates of Deposit 1,029,681
LAIF 7,118,331
Cash with Fiscal Agents 443,923
Cash in Banks at August 31, 1998 $ 8,989,787
Deposits in Transit 9,896
Outstanding Checks (484,245)
Cash and Investments at August 31, 1998 $ 8,515,438
FISCAL IMPACT: None
RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT: Finance
ATTACHMENTS: Cash and Investments Activity Summary
Cash and Investments by Fund
Time Deposits, Certificates of Deposit, Savings and Local
Agency Investment Fund
Schedule of Certificates of Deposit
Page 1 of 5
00002'7
CITY OFATASCADERO
TREASURER'S REPORT
CASH&INVESTMENTS ACTIVITYSUMMARY
FOR THE MONTH OF AUGUST 1998
CHECKING FISCAL
ACCOUNT INVESTMENTS AGENT TOTALS
Balance per Banks at
August 1, 1998 $ 138,511 $ 8,848,012. $ 262,678 $ 9,249,201
Receipts 856,409 1,090 857,499
Disbursements (1,116,913) (1,116,913)
Transfers In 700,000 180,155 880,155
Transfers Out (180,155) (700,000). (880,155)
Balance per Banks at
August 31, 1998 $ 397,852 $ 8,148,012 $ 443,923 8,989,787
Deposits in Transit 9,896
Outstanding Checks (484,245)
Adjusted Treasurer's Balance $ 8,515,438
CITY OF ATASCADERO
UDY HERNANDEZ
City Treasurer
Page 2 of 5
000028
CITY OFATASCADERO
TREASURER'S REPORT
CASH&INVESTMENTS BY FUND
AUGUST 1998
RESERVED UNRESERVED
CASH(1) CASH(2) TOTALS
POOLED CASH
General Fund $ - $ 804,699
Gas Tax Fund (18,543)
Development Fee Fund 1,174
Community Development Block Grant (16,126)
Police Development Fees Fund 4,777
Fire Development Fees Fund 64,344
Parks&Rec Development Fees Fund 61,997
Drainage Development Fees Fund 232,309
Amapoa-Tecorida Fees Fund 164,045
Public Works Development Fees Fund 636,558
Street Maintenance Districts Fund 48,066
TDA Non-Transit Fund 170,618
Sidewalk Fund 45,859
Capital Projects Fund (264,376)
Camino Real Construction Fund 32,561
Dial-A-Ride Fund 21,440
Wastewater Operations Fund 2,679,278
Sewer Facilities Fund 2,986,497
Building Maintenance Fund (10,612)
Technology Fund 173,944
Assessment District#3 3,418
Assessment District#4 52,484
Assessment District#5 (20)
Camino Real Debt Service Fund 63,717
92 Street Improvement Assessment Fund 57,355
Assessment District#7 (259)
Assessment District#8 672
Assessment District#9 51,394
Assessment District#10 -
89 COP Debt Service Fund 80
Tree Plant Fund 24,167
Tree Association Fund (2)
Total Pooled Cash $ 253,006 $ 7,818,509 $ 8,071,515
CASH WITH FISCAL AGENT
Wastewater Operations Fund 5,152
Camino Real Debt Service Fund 328,465
92 Street Improvement Assessment Fund 110,306
89 COP Debt Service Fund - -
Total Cash with Fiscal Agent $ 443,923 $ 443,923
Total of All Cash $ 8,515,438
Page 3 of 5
CITY OF ATASCADERO
TREASURER'S REPORT
TIME DEPOSITS. CERTIFICATES OF DEPOSIT,
SAVINGS AND LOCAL AGENCY INVESTMENT FUND
AUGUST 1998 _
INVESTMENT INTEREST
AMOUNT EARNINGS
Orange County Investment Pool/TRAN $ - $ 1,609 (5)
Orange County Investment Poo - 51,206 (5)
Local Agency Investment Fund(3) 7,118,331 223,124
Certificates of Deposit(see attached schedule) 1,029,681 33,337
TOTAL $ 8,148,012 309,276
Mid State Interest Received 3,306
TOTAL INTEREST RECEIVED $ 312,582 (4)
Notes:
(1) Reserved Fund Cash is specified for City debt service.
(2) Unreserved Fund cash can be used for normal operations of the City.
(3) August 1998 interest yields were as follows:
Orange County Not available
LAIF 5.65%
Mid-State 1.00%
(4) This is the actual amount deposited to City accounts and does not reflect interest amounts accrued but not
received. Also not included above are interest amounts earned in Fiscal Agent or County accounts, which are
used for bond retirement purposes. Furthermore, with the exception of the Orange County Investment Pool,
interest earnings are reported on a calendar year basis.
(5) On December 6, 1994, Orange County filed a Chapter 9 bankruptcy with the courts. The City recognized a
loss of $1,155,283.04 on the OCIP for the 1994-95 fiscal year. The City is attempting to recover the
principal plus interest through a lawsuit filed against the OCIP. The interest received above is post-petition
interest for the period from Decemberl, 1994 through July 20, 1995.
Page 4 of 5 000030
CITY OF ATASCADERO
TREASURER'S REPORT
SCHED ULE OF CERTIFICATES OF DEPOSIT
AUGUST 1995
PURCHASE MATURITY YIELD FTD
BANK DATE DATE RATE AMOUNT INTEREST
Santa Barbara Bank& 3/7/98 9/6/98 5.24% $ 99,000.00 $ 3,405.87
Trust-Santa Maria
Santa Lucia Bank 6/18/98 12/18/98 5.10% $ 38,681.00 $ -
Atascadero
Washington Mutual 6/21/98 12/18/98 4.89% $ 100,000.00 $ 3,312.77
San Luis Obispo
Union Bank 6/22/98 12/21/98 4.80% $ 99,000.00 $ 3,244.16
Atasca.dero
Mid State Bank 7/20/98 1/15/99 4.76% $ 99,000.00 $ 3,348.73
Templeton
AWank
of America 7/29/98 1/27/99 4.60% $ 99,000.00 $ 3,036.00
tascadero
Los Padres Savings 8/7/98 2/3/99 5.06% $ 99,000.00 $ 3,358.38
Santa Maria
Wells Fargo Bank 8/22/98 2/20/99 4.50% $ 99,000.00_ $ 2,994.75
San Luis Obispo
West America Bank 8/21/98 2/17/99 4.90% $ 99,000.00 $ 3,302.96
San Luis Obispo
First Bank&Trust 8/28/98 2/28/99 4.53% $ 99,000.00 $ 3,491.20
Santa Maria
First Bank of SLO 8/18/98 8/18/99 5.30% $ 99,000.00 $ 3,842.44
San Luis Obispo
$1,029,681.00 $33,337.26
Page 5 of 5
000031
ITEM NUMBER: A — 6
DATE: 11/10/98
r ni n ■
1 8 1 19 -
CAD��
City Treasurer Is Agenda Report
Rudy Hernandez
Treasurer's Report - September 1998
RECOMMENDATION:
City Treasurer and Staff recommend that Council review and accept the September 1998
Treasurer's Report
REPORT IN BRIEF:
Cash and Investments
Checking $ 821,108
Certificates of Deposit 1,029,681
LAIF 6,418,331
Cash with Fiscal Agents 262,642
Cash in Banks at September 30, 1998 $ 8,531,762
Deposits in Transit 2,241
Outstanding Checks (330,774)
Cash and Investments at September 30, 1998 $ 8,203,229
FISCAL IMPACT: None
RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT: Finance
ATTACHMENTS: Cash and Investments Activity Summary
Cash and Investments by Fund
Time Deposits,Certificates of Deposit, Savings and Local
Agency Investment Fund
Schedule of Certificates of Deposit
Page 1 of 5
000032
CITY OFATASCADERO
TREASURER'S REPORT
CASH&INVESTMENTS ACTIVITY SUMMARY
FOR THE MONTH OF SEPTEMBER 1998 -
CHECKING FISCAL
ACCOUNT INVESTMENTS AGENT TOTALS
Balance per Banks at
September 1, 1998 $ 397,852 $ 8,148,012 $ 443,923 $ 8,989,787
Receipts 872,029 1,222 873,251
Disbursements (1,148,773) (182,503) (1,331,276)
Transfers In 700,000 700,000
Transfers Out (700,000) (700,000)
Balance per Banks at
September 30, 1998 $ 821,108 $ 7,448,012 $ 2_,642 8,531,762
Deposits in Transit 2,241
Outstanding Checks (330,774)
Adjusted Treasurer's Balance $ 8,203,229
CITY OF ATASCADERO
ERNANDEZ
City Treasurer
Page 2 of 5
000033
CITY OFATASCADERO
TREASURER'S REPORT
CASH&INVESTMENTS BY FUND
SEPTEMBER 1998
RESERVED UNRESERVED
CASH(1) CASH(2) TOTALS
POOLED CASH
General Fund $ - $ 590,778
Gas Tax Fund 3,473
Development Fee Fund 1,174
Community Development Block Grant (30,645)
Police Development Fees Fund 7,030
Fire Development Fees Fund 71,071
Parks&Rec Development Fees Fund 75,218
Drainage Development Fees Fund 238,506
Amapoa-Tecorida Fees Fund 169,437
Public Works Development Fees Fund 606,621
Street Maintenance Districts Fund 48,066
TDA Non-Transit Fund 201,873
Sidewalk Fund 45,859
Capital Projects Fund (215,654)
Camino Real Construction Fund 33,784
Dial-A-Ride Fund 82,353 ,
Wastewater Operations Fund 2,627,986
Sewer Facilities Fund 2,992,385
Building Maintenance Fund (23,212)
Technology Fund 161,476
Assessment District#3 3,418
Assessment District#4 52,484
Assessment District#5 (20)
Camino Real Debt Service Fund 63,717
92 Street Improvement Assessment Fund 57,355
Assessment District#7 (259)
Assessment District#8 672 .
Assessment District#9 51,395
Assessment District#10 -
89 COP Debt Service Fund 80
Tree Plant Fund 24,167
Tree Association Fund (2)
Total Pooled Cash $ 253,007 $ 7,687,579 $ 7,940,586
CASH WITH FISCAL AGENT
Wastewater Operations Fund 5,152
Camino Real Debt Service Fund 203,543
92 Street Improvement Assessment Fund 53,948
89 COP Debt Service Fund -
Total Cash with Fiscal Agent $ 262,643 $ - 262,643
Total of All Cash Page 3 of 5 $ 8,203,229
000034
CITY OF ATASCADERO
TREASURER'S REPORT
TIME DEPOSITS, CERTIFICATES OF DEPOSIT,
SAVINGS AND LOCAL AGENCY INVESTMENT FUND
SEPTEMBER 1998
INVESTMENT INTEREST
AMOUNT EARNINGS
Orange County Investment POOUTRAN $ - $ 1,609 (5)
Orange County Investment Poo - 51,206 (5)
Local Agency Investment Fund(3) 6,418,331 223,124
Certificates of Deposit(see attached schedule) 1,029,681 37,399
TOTAL $ 7,448,012 313,338
Mid State Interest Received 3,621
TOTAL INTEREST RECEIVED $ 316,959 (4)
Notes:
(1) Reserved Fund Cash is specified for City debt service.
(2) Unreserved Fund cash can be used for normal operations of the City:
(3) September 1998 interest yields were as follows:
Orange County Not available
LAIF 5.64%
Mid-State 1.00%
(4) This is the actual amount deposited to City accounts and does not reflect interest amounts accrued but not
received. Also not included above are interest amounts earned in Fiscal Agent or County accounts, which are
used for bond retirement purposes. Furthermore, with the exception of the Orange County Investment Pool,
interest earnings are reported on a calendar year basis.
(5) On December 6, 1994, Orange County filed a Chapter 9 bankruptcy with the courts. The City recognized a
loss of $1,155,283.04 on the OCIP for the 1994-95 fiscal year. The City is attempting to recover the
principal plus interest through a lawsuit filed against the OCIP. The interest received above is post-petition
interest for the period from Decemberl, 1994 through July 20, 1995.
Page 4 of 5 000035
CITY OF ATASCADERO
TREASURER'S REPORT
SCHEDULE OF CERTIFICATES OF DEPOSIT
SEPTEMBER 1998
PURCHASE MATURITY YIELD YTD
BANK DATE DATE RATE AMOUNT INTEREST
Santa Lucia Bank 6/18/98 12/18/98 5.10% $ 38,681.00 $ -
Atascadero
Washington Mutual 6/21/98 12/18/98 4.89% $ 100,000.00 $ 3,710.87
San Luis Obispo
Union Bank 6/22/98 12/21/98 4.80% $ 99,000.00 $ 3,653.36
Atascadero
Mid State Bank 7/20/98 1/15/99 4.76% $ 99,000.00 $ 3,749.41
Templeton
Bank of America 7/29/98 1/27/99 4.60% $ 99,000.00 $ 3,415.50
Atascadero
.Los Padres Savings 8/7/98 2/3/99 5.06% $ 99,000.00 $ 3,770.94
Santa Maria
Wells Fargo Bank 8/22/98 2/20/99 4.50% $ 99,000.00 $ 3,378.37
San Luis Obispo
West America Bank 8/21/98 2/17/99 4.90% $ 99,000.00 $ 3,720.68
San Luis Obispo
First Bank&Trust 8/28/98 2/28/99 4.53% $ 99,000.00 $ 3,859.81
Santa Maria
First Bank of SLO 8/18/98 8/18/99 5.30% $ 99,000.00 $ 4,294.26
San Luis Obispo
Santa Barbara Bank& 3/7/98 9/6/98 5.24% $ 99,000.00 $ 3,846.27
Trust-Santa Maria
$1,029,681.00 $37,399.47
Page 5 of 5
000036
ITEM NUMBER: A - 7
DATE:
11/10/98
leis ® �9 e
,i
City Manager's Agenda Report
Wade G. McKinney
Road Abandonment #98001
(Portion of Tecolote Road: Davis)
RECOMMENDATIONS:
The Planning Commission recommends that Council:
1. Find that the project would not have a significant effect on the environment andthat the
Negative Declaration prepared for the project is therefore adequate under the
requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA); and
2. Adopt Resolution No. 1998-049, approving Road Abandonment#98001.
DISCUSSION:
Analysis: The right-of-way for Tecolote Road has existed in its present location since the
Atascadero Colony Map was recorded in 1914. In 1990, the road was improved and accepted by
the City. The right-of--way extends easterly a distance of approximately 1,200 feet from its
junction with Llano Road.
At present, the Tecolote Road right-of-way provides access to only one improved parcel located
at the intersection of Llano and Tecolote Roads. Other than that one parcel owned by others, the
right-of-way only serves vacant land under the ownership of the applicant. The applicant
proposes to abandon the easterly 550 feet of the right-of-way, beyond where the driveway to the
existing residence connects (Attachments A&B).
The applicant wishes to have the City abandon this portion of right-of-way in order to construct a
fence and gate across the existing roadway. The barricade would serve two purposes. First, it
would allow cattle to graze on both sides of the road. Second, it would prevent unauthorized
access to the area. The road presently terminates in an area that is not visible from other homes
or other streets. As a result, illegal dumping and other undesirable activities occur. Both the
Police and Fire Department support the proposed abandonment, but the Fire Department will
need their own lock on the gate so an existing fire hydrant will remain accessible.
00003'7
ITEM NUMBER: A - 7
DATE: 11/10/98
In order for the City to abandon the subject right-of-way, the Planning Commission must make a
finding of General Plan consistency and a Resolution must be adopted by the City Council and
then recorded upon compliance with any conditions.
General Plan Consistency -- Pursuant to the CA Government Code , "If a general plan or part
thereof has been adopted...no real property shall be...vacated or abandoned...until the location,
purpose and extent of such...street vacation or abandonment...has been submitted to and
reported upon by the planning agency as to conformity with said general plan or part thereof.
The location, extent and purpose of the proposed abandonment has been described above.
Tecolote Road is not mentioned specifically anywhere in the General Plan nor are there General
Plan policies that would seem to be affected by its abandonment. The Circulation Element
designates roads that should be improved and/or extended, but Tecolote Road is not listed. The
City's Engineering Standards discourage excessively long cul-de-sacs and the abandonment
would further that policy.
Abandonment -- Pursuant to the California Streets and Highways Code 2, "the legislative body
of a local agency may summarily vacate...a portion of a street or highway that lies within
property under one ownership and that does not continue through such ownership or end
touching property of another."
The proposed abandonment is consistent with this state requirement:
Planning Commission Action: The Planning Commission considered the proposed Road
Abandonment at a public hearing held on October 20, 1998 (Attachment Q. The Commission
concurred with staff's recommendations and adopted Resolution Nos. PC 1998-032 and PC
1998-033 (Attachments D & E). Resolution No. PC 1998-032 finds the proposed Road
Abandonment to be in conformance with the General Plan, as required by the above-referenced
Government Code. Resolution No. PC 1998-033 recommends that the City Council approve the
subject Road Abandonment application based on certain findings and conditions.
It should be noted that the Conditions of Approval originally recommended by the City Engineer
would have required the construction of a City Standard cul-de-sac at the point of abandonment.
Planning staff felt that such a requirement would be premature and would cause unnecessary
grading,potential tree removals and unwarranted costs to the applicant. If the applicant proposes
to subdivide the property in the future, cul-de-sacs can be required where appropriate. Planning
staff agrees with the general rule that dead end roads should terminate in a cul-de-sac, but feels
this case is an exception given the circumstances where there does not appear to be an adequate
public need to justify the potential environmental and monetary costs. In the end, the Planning
Commission voted to recommend approval of the abandonment without a requirement that a cul-
de-sac be constructed.
•
Section 65402
z
Section-8334(b)
000038
ITEM NUMBER: A - 7
DATE: 11/10/98
Conclusions: The proposed abandonment would prevent the dumping and other illicit activities
that have occurred in the area and would also release the City from the liability associafed with
road maintenance. The proposed Road Abandonment is consistent with the General Plan, would
be either neutral or beneficial to the environment and raises no substantial planning issues.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The City does not own the property proposed for abandonment, only the right to construct and
maintain a public street on the property. Considering that the construction and maintenance of a
public street is more a liability than asset,the abandonment would have positive fiscal effects.
ALTERNATIVES:
Alternative #1 —The Council could deny the proposed Road Abandonment. This alternative is
not recommended because it would not serve a public purpose and would allow illegal dumping
and other illicit activities to continue.
Alternative #2 — The Council could approve the proposed Road Abandonment with a condition
that requires the construction of a cul-de-sac at the point of abandonment. This alternative is not
recommended because it seems premature and it does not appear that an adequate public need
exists to justify the monetary and environmental costs potentially associated cul-de-sac
construction.
RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT: Community Development Department
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A—Location Map (General Plan)
Attachment B—Location Map (zoning)
Attachment C—Planning Commission Minutes
Attachment D—Resolution No. PC 1998-032
Attachment E—Resolution No. PC 1998-033
Attachment F—Negative Declaration
Attachment G—Resolution No. 1998-049
- 000039
x
0 9A 1 ®,
1918 a
1-97-9 Attachment A
can>�8gj� Location Map (General Plan)
Road Abandonment#9800
�b
/51 HSA
I
A040- �~�
OA
\N
1 r"
f�
PoeTlvt�1 To Pq Qc1vL
NoT ow�tEp
• J
ROAD W`,
LLANO V00
r
00
Nq CT ti) yi
`t
11 •..e
1I` tib.
J SANTA I
LVC1A
Y 7AN0 R
OAD
A...
r�
V u II
000040
MIS d 1979 Attachment B
Location Map (zoning)
Road Abandonment#98001
RS (
CANE /SANjA '.
1 I ,
f
ANT,
OA ���- _ 'SAN
�s L(FH)
F99�
2tGNr• LOa"i
'ToaE � A
ASAN iso 11E'i�
w
3 <
0
OAO
Y�
LLA
S
O O.
r- Oy,141
RS
1 (, J`
II
ry
RSS A TA
«C,A L(FH)
�--� 0
ANO RO
A
000041
s r
a a
1979
Attachment C
Egp Planning Commission Minutes
Road Abandonment#98001
Planning Commission Meeting-October 20, 1998
SUBJECT: B. HEARINGS,APPEARANCES AND REPORTS
1. Road Abandonment#98003-Portion of Tecolote Road(Catherine Davis)
Request that the City abandon a portion of the right-of-way for Tecolote Road.
(Staff recommendation: (1)Make a finding that, based on the information currently
contained in the record, the project would not have a significant effect on the
environment and that the Draft Negative Declaration prepared for the project is
therefore adequate under the requirements of the California Environmental Quality
Act(CEQA). (2)Adopt Resolution No. PC 1998-032,finding the subject Road .
Abandonment consistent with the General Plan pursuant to Government Code Section
65402. (3)Adopt Resolution No. PC 1998-033, recommending that the City Council
approve Road Abandonment#98001 based on certain findings and revised conditions).
Gary presented the staff report explaining that there was a disagreement between staff and the
City Engineer with regards to a Condition of Approval which requires a cul-de-sac. Staff feels
that the Engineers requirement would require some extensive environmental disturbance and that
the cost would be prohibitive to the applicant.
Gary responded to questions from the Commissioners.
There were questions regarding how the large parcel just beyond the road to be abandoned would
be accessed;how people would turn-around if no cul-de-sac and if the City would be giving up
something of value. Gary explained that the large parcel in questions was under the same owner-
ship and it would be accessed by the paper road; as far as the City giving up something of value,
Gary thought value would be gained-not lost-because the City would probably be giving up a
ability.
Chairman Zimmerman asked John Neil to comment on his recommendation for a cul-de-sac. John
said there should be an adequate turn-around provided at the end of that public road. The
American Association of State Highway Transportation Officials recommends a cul-de-sac type
structure at the terminus of all dead-end roads;in this case,the City Standard cul-de-sac radius of
34 feet would meet that requirement. He added, that he believed that anyone needing to turn-
around at the end of this road would have to use an existing driveway.
TESTIMONY:
Catherine Davis, applicant-said that she had obtained the signatures of eleven(11)of her
..
neighbors endorsing'the road abandonment attached hereto as Exhibit A including Dr. and
� g ( )� g
Mrs. Coughlin-who are the only people that own a house on that road.
. . . . . .closed to public testimony. . . . . .
000042
i g a 1 Attachment C,Page 2
CADEgp� Planning Commission Minutes
Road Abandonment#98001 -
Planning Commission Meeting-October 20, 1998
There was considerable discussion on the requirement of a cul-de-sac or a hammer-head type
turn-around. Commissioner Hageman wondered what the environmental disturbance would be if
the cul-de-sac was required and said if there's no turn-around provided cars and trucks will have
to use the neighbor's driveway. Gary responded that without a plan showing grading and fill,
there was no way of knowing the potential for tree removal and utility relocation.
The Chairman recognized Catherine Davis who said that the Coughlin have indicated that
phone and waterlines would have to be relocated and two(2) oak trees removed and they don't
want a turn-around
Commissioner Fonzi informed the Commissioners that she had driven her large van to the end of
the road and was able to turn around without using the Coughlin's driveway.
ACTION: Make a finding that,based on the information currently contained in the record,
the project would not have a significant effect on the environment and that the
Draft Negative Declaration prepared for the project is therefore adequate under
the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA).
Motion: Sauter
Second: Eddings
AYES: Sauter,Eddings,Fonzi, Arrambide, Clark
NOES: Hageman,Zimmerman
ABSENT: None
MOTION PASSED: 5:2
ACTION: . Adopt Resolution No. PC 1998-032,finding the subject Road Abandonment
consistent with the General Plan pursuant to Government Code Section 65402.
Motion: Sauter
Second: Eddings
AYES: Sauter,Eddings,Fonzi, Arrambide, Clark,Zimmerman
NOES: Hageman
ABSENT: None
000043
Attachment D
Resolution No.PC 1998-032
Road Abandonment#98001
RESOLUTION NO. PC 1998-032 -
.A RESOLUTION OFTHE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ATASCADERO FINDING THE PROPOSED ABANDONMENT OF A PORTION OF
TECOLOTE ROAD TO BE IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE GENERAL PLAN
(RA#98001: Davis)
WHEREAS, the applicant has filed a Road Abandonment application requesting that the
City abandon the easterly 550 feet of Tecolote Road; and
WHEREAS, the portion of the Tecolote Road right-of-way proposed for abandonment
serves only vacant property owned by the applicant; and
WHEREAS, the abandonment would allow the applicant to fence the property and
thereby prevent unauthorized access to the area and the illegal dumping and other undesirable
activities which have occurred because of that access; and
WHEREAS, the General Plan Circulation Element does not depict Tecolote Road as road
that should be improved or extended in the future,or needed for any other public purpose; and
WHEREAS, an Initial Study was conducted which indicates the proposed road
abandonment would not have a significant effect on the environment; and
WHEREAS, a Draft Negative Declaration has therefore been prepared and posted for the
proposed abandonment which, barring any new information to the contrary, is adequate under the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and
WHEREAS; the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero considered the proposed
abandonment at a public hearing held October 20, 1998;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission of the City of
Atascadero does hereby find Road Abandonment#98001 to be in conformance with the City of
Atascadero General Plan pursuant to Government Code Section 65402.
On motion by and seconded by the
foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety by the following roll call vote:
000044
AYES:.
NOES: -
ABSENT:
ADOPTED:
CITY OF ATASCADERO, CA
William Zimmerman, Chair
ATTEST:
PAUL M. SALDANA,Director
Community Development Department
- 000045
Attachment E
Resolution No. PC 1998-033
Road Abandonment#98001
RESOLUTION NO. PC 1998-033 _
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMIVIISSION OF THE CITY OF
ATASCADERO RECOMMENDING THAT THE CI'T'Y COUNCIL ABANDON THE
EASTERLY 550 FEET OF TECOLOTE ROAD
(RA#98001: Davis)
WBEREAS, the applicant has filed a Road Abandonment application requesting that the
City abandon the easterly 550 feet of Tecolote Road; and
WHEREAS, the portion of the Tecolote Road right-of-way proposed for abandonment
serves only vacant property owned by the applicant, does not continue through said ownership to
serve another and is considered excess right-of-way not required for public street purposes. The
abandonment is therefore consistent with, and allowed under, the abandonment procedures
contained-in Section 8334 of the CA Streets and Highways Code; and
WHEREAS, upon recordation of the abandonment the right-of-way shown on Exhibit A
hereto shall no longer constitute a public street right-bf--way. The applicant will be required to
indemnify and hold the City harmless from claims that may arise from the abandonment
procedure, and comply with other Conditions of Approval contained in Exhibit B hereto; and
WHEREAS, the abandonment would allow the applicant to fence the property and
thereby prevent unauthorized access to the area and the illegal dumping and`other undesirable .
activities which have occurred because of that access; and
WHEREAS, the proposed abandonment has been determined to be consistent with the
General Plan pursuant to Government Code Section 65402. The Circulation Element does not
depict Tecolote Road as road that should be improved, extended or needed for any other public
purpose; and
WBEREAS, an Initial Study was conducted which indicates the proposed road
abandonment would not have a significant effect on the environment; and
WHEREAS, a Draft Negative Declaration has therefore been prepared and posted for the
proposed abandonment which, barring any new information to the contrary, is adequate under the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and
WHEREAS; the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero considered the proposed
abandonment at a public hearing held October 20, 1998;
000046
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission of the City of
Atascadero does hereby recommend that the City Council approve Road Abandonment#98001 as
shown by Exhibit A and based on the Conditions of Approval contained in Exhibit B.
On motion by and seconded by , the
foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ADOPTED:
CITY OF ATASCADERO, CA
SWilliam Zimmerman, Chair
.ATTEST: '
PAUL M. SALDANA,Director
Community Development Department
OOVV,t
j
EXHIBIT A
Right-of-way Recommended for Abandonment .
Resolution No. PC 1998-033 r.
L4 I
y6
v i
OAO-��
i
ZS E FtRf_
SG
By A3>FLiCO3t-AT
Qp�
J
u
OADLLANO
:t.
O
2�
O
4 Oz. Y+
V" CT j I
Jv
i
f
ry
a
.r
A TA ` I
LUCIA
90 p
\ ,
ANO _�p
4 O, H
i
i
000048
EXHIBIT B
Recommended Conditions of Approval
Resolution No. PC 1998-033
1. The extent of the abandonment shall be limited to the easterly 550 feet+/- of
Tecolote Road,'as generally shown by Exhibit A hereto.
2. Prior to, or in conjunction with, the recordation of the abandonment, the applicant
shall record an indemnity agreement holding the City harmless from any claims
that may arise from the abandonment procedure. The agreement shall be
reviewed and approved by the City Attorney prior to its recordation.
3. The applicant shall provide easements for all existing public utilities and
waterlines within the segment of Tecolote Road to be abandoned. In addition, the
applicant shall allow the Fire Department to place their own lock on the gate so
that they can continue to access the area and the existing fire hydrant located
within said segment of Tecolote Road to be abandoned.
000049
1 g m a Attachment F
CADF,g� Negative Declaration
Road Abandonment#98001
CITY OF A.TASCA.DERO
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
6500 Palma Avenue Atascadero,CA 93422 805.461.5035
APPLICANT: Catherine C.Davis
PO Box 666
Atascadero, California 93423
(805)466-2666
PROJECT TITLE: Road Abandonment#98001
PROJECT LOCATION: Easterly 550 feet of Tecolote Road
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The applicant proposes that the City abandon the easterly 550 feet of Tecolote Road. The portion
of Tecolote Road proposed for abandonment serves only vacant property owned by the applicant.
The abandonment would allow the applicant to fence the right-of-way. The fencing would allow
cattle to graze on both sides of the road and would prevent unauthorized access to the area and
the illegal dumping and other undesirable activities that have occurred.
FINDINGS:
1. The project does not have the potential to degrade the environment.
2. The project will not achieve short-term to the disadvantage of long-term
environmental goals.
3. The project does not have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable.
4. The project will not cause substantial adverse effects on human beings either directly
or indirectly.
DETERAUNATION:
Based on the above findings, and the information contained in the initial study(made a part hereof
by reference and on file in the Community Development Department),it has been determined that
the above project will not have an adverse impact on the environment.
PREPARED BY: Gary Kaiser, Associate Planner
DATE POSTED: October 12, 1998
DATE ADOPTED: 000050
Attachment G
RESOLUTION NO. 1998-049
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO APPROVING
THE ABANDONMENT OF THE EASTERLY 550 FEET OF TECOLOTE ROAD
(RA 498001: Davis)
WHEREAS, the applicant has filed a Road Abandonment application requesting that the
City abandon the easterly 550 feet of Tecolote Road; and
WHEREAS, the abandonment would allow the applicant to fence the property and
thereby prevent unauthorized access to the area and the illegal dumping and other undesirable
activities which have occurred because of that access; and
WHEREAS, the portion of the Tecolote Road right-of-way proposed for abandonment
serves only vacant property owned by the applicant, does not continue through said ownership to
serve another and is considered excess right-of-way not required for public street purposes. The
abandonment is therefore consistent with, and allowed under, the abandonment procedures
contained in Section 8334 of the CA Streets and Highways Code; and
WHE
REAS, an Initial Study was conducted which indicates the proposed road
abandonment would not have a significant effect on the environment; and
WHEREAS, a Draft Negative Declaration has therefore been prepared and posted for the
proposed abandonment which is adequate under the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA); and
WHEREAS; the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero considered the proposed
abandonment at a public hearing held October 20, 1998;
WHEREAS, the proposed abandonment has been determined by the Planning Commission
to be consistent with the General Plan pursuant to Government Code Section 65402. The
Circulation Element does not depict Tecolote Road as road that should be improved, extended or
needed for any other public purpose; and
WHEREAS, upon recordation of this Resolution, the right-of-way shown on Exhibit A
hereto shall no longer constitute a public street right-of-way. The applicant will be required to
indemnify and hold the City harmless from claims that may arise from the abandonment
procedure, and comply with other Conditions of Approval contained in Exhibit B hereto.
000051
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVEDh h
t at the City Council of the City of
Atascadero does hereby approve Road Abandonment#98001 as shown by Exhibit A and based
on the Conditions of Approval contained in Exhibit B.
On motion by and seconded by the
foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ADOPTED:
CITY OF ATASCADERO, CA
HAROLD L. CARDEN III, Mayor
ATTEST:
MARCIA M. TORGERSON, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ROY A. HANLEY, City Attorney
000052
r.
><9><s a a9 Exhibit A
Cal Resolution No. 1998-049
L( H)
RS ( )
,Hf �SAHtA ,
IT _\
OA
-S
I
s�
L(FH)
99
C.bh,
P. S
2tGNT�.�'q`1
'To
AaAa7or��
0
• o
OAO
rI
LLA \
y02ry
O O
k
As 7 �j
�T
4
11
11
ri
SAR S
r�
Luc,, L(FH)
A
•� / 1 ! i iG►•V te0
�iO,O R0'.0
\\ 1
000053
EXHIBIT B
Resolution No. 1998-049
Conditions of Approval for Road Abandonment#98001
1. The extent of the abandonment shall be limited to the easterly 550 feet+/-of
Tecolote Road, as generally shown by Exhibit A hereto.
2. Prior to, or in conjunction with, the recordation of the abandonment,the applicant
shall record an indemnity agreement holding the City harmless from any claims
that may arise from the abandonment procedure.. The agreement shall be
reviewed and approved by the City Attorney prior to its recordation.
3. The applicant shall provide easements for all existing public utilities and
waterlines within the segment of Tecolote Road to be abandoned. In addition,the
applicant shall allow the Fire Department to place their own lock on the gate so
that they can continue to access the area and the existing fire hydrant located
within said segment of Tecolote Road to be abandoned.
000054
r
ITEM NUMBER: A - 8
DATE: 11/10/98
iais !
1979City Manager's Agenda Report
Wade G. McKinney.
Zone Change#98008
Sign Ordinance Amendment- Public Transit Facilities
(City of Atascadero)
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt Ordinance Number 354, an"Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Atascadero
Amending Chapter 15 of Title 9 of the Atascadero Municipal Code Relating to Signs on Public
Transit Facilities".
DISCUSSION:
On October 27, 1998, the City Council conducted a public hearing to consider amendments to
the City's sign ordinance to allow for signage on public transit facilities. The Council adopted
the ordinance and introduced Ordinance 354 for first reading.
The attached Ordinance 354 reflects the changes approved by the Council and is in final format
for adoption. The Ordinance will go into effect 31 days following its adoption.
RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT: Community Development
ATTACHMENTS:
A. Ordinance No 354
000055
ORDINANCE NO. 354
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO
AMENDING CHAPTER 15 OF TITLE 9 OF THE ATASCADERO MUNICIPAL
CODE RELATING TO SIGNS ON PUBLIC TRANSIT FACILITIES
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Atascadero held a duly noticed public
hearing on October 27, 1998 to consider an amendment to the City's zoning regulations
governing the placement of advertising signs on public transit facilities in the City; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that it is in the best interest of the City to
enact these amendments to the Atascadero Municipal Code to provide for the placement
of such signs; and
WHEREAS, the proposed amendments will not have a significant adverse impact upon
the environment and therefore the Negative Declaration meets the requirements of the
California Environmental Quality Act and is adequate.
THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO DOES
ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Section 9-15.005(d) is amended as follows:
"4. Public Transit Facilities: At the discretion of the Community Services
Director; advertising signs may be placed on buses and designated bus stop
benches used in connection with a public transit program provided by the City of
Atascadero. Signs on buses shall be limited to one (1) on each side, neither of
which exceed six (60 square feet. Signs on benches shall be limited to one (1)
sign which shall be placed on the back of the bench and which shall not exceed
10" x 36". Additional signs and/or modification signs associated with public
transit facilities may be approved through Conditional Use Permit process."
Section 3. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this
ordinance is held to be unconstitutional or invalid in whole or in part by any court, such a
decision shall not affect the validity of effectiveness of the remaining portions of this
ordinance, or any part thereof. If the application of any provision of this ordinance or any
person, property, or circumstance is found to be unconstitutional or invalid in whole or in
part by any Court, such decision shall be limited to the person, property or circumstance
immediately involved in the controversy,-and the application of such provision to other
persons, property and circumstances shall not be affected.
Section 4. The.City Clerk shall cause this Ordinance to be published once within thirty
(30) 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
Government Code; shall certify the adopting and posting of this ordinance; and shall
000056
cause this ordinance and this certification together with proof of posting to be entered
into the Book of Ordinances of the City.
Section 5. This ordinance shall go into effect and be in full force and effect on the 31St
day after its passage.
On the motion by and 'seconded by the foregoing
ordinance is approved by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
DATE ADOPTED:
HAROLD L. CARDEN, III, Mayor
City of Atascadero, California
ATTEST:
MARCIA MCCLURE TORGERSON, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ROY A. HANLEY, City Attorney
000057
i
ITEM NUMBER: A - 9
DATE: 11/10/98
i iii i!®
ieia ® 1979
City Manager's Agenda Report
Wade G. McKinney
Joint Facility Use Agreement
with the Atascadero Unified School District
RECOMMENDATION:
Council authorize the Mayor to enter into a one-year agreement with the Atascadero Unified
School District for the Joint Use of Facilities.
DISCUSSION:
Background: Previously, the City of Atascadero and the Atascadero Unified School District
have had an informal arrangement for the shared use of facilities which allowed either agency to
use the others facilities at no cost for youth activities and for a discounted rate for adults. This
arrangement is not a balanced arrangement due to the limited number of recreational sports
facilities owned by the City. As a result, the Community Services Department frequently uses
School District facilities to conduct recreation activities. The School District use of City
facilities is primarily for special events held at the Pavilion, but does include some use of athletic
fields.
In an effort to assure a balanced use arrangement so that neither agency is responsible to shoulder
an unfair cost to provide facility space, City and School staff have developed a proposed
agreement regarding the shared use of facilities.
Discussion: On Thursday, September 19, the Parks and Recreation Commission voted
unanimously to recommend approval to the City Council for the proposed Joint Use of Facilities
Agreement between the City of Atascadero and the Atascadero Unified School District.
The agreement is for the current fiscal year, July 1998 through June 1999, and calls for the
annual calculation of facility rental charges based on established charges by each agency
respectively. The charges are to be compared annually, with any difference of charges being
provided as a credit toward other agreements for exchange of funds or services. The credit must
be used during the same agreement year.
000058
ITEM NUMBER:____A_- 9
DATE: 11/10/98
FISCAL IMPACT:
Entering into the proposed agreement will cost the City approximately$3,000.00 in lost revenue
from the School District for Services other than facility use. The agreement provides the School
District with an$8,269.00 credit. Currently,the City pays the School District$5,300 in facility
rental fees.
RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT: Community Services
ATTACHMENTS:
Contract No. 98049
Comparison of Anticipated Facility Use
000059
CITY OF ATASCADERO _
CONTRACT # 98049
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE
ATASCADERO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT
AND THE
CITY OF ATASCADERO
This Agreement is made and entered into this date November 10,
1998, by and between the City of Atascadero, and the Atascadero
Unified School District, for the purpose of Joint Use of
Facilities.
1 . PARTIES
. 1 .1 C_itV _
1 . 1 .1 The City of Atascadero, Atascadero, California,
whose mailing address .for notice under the terms of this Agreement
is as follows:
City .of Atascadero
Attn: Director of Community Services
6500 Palma Avenue
Atascadero, California 93422
1.2 School District
1 .2.1 The School District is whose mailing address for
notice under the terms of this Agreement is as follows:
Atascadero Unified School District
Attn: Director of Business
5601 West Mall
Atascadero, California 93422
2. CONDITIONS
2.1 Compensation
The annual calculation of facility rental charges will
be based on established charges by each agency. The charges are to
FACILITY USE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY
AND THE ATASCADERO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT
000060
CITY OF ATASCADERO
CONTRACT # 98049
as a credit toward other agreements for exchange of funds or
services. The credit must be used during the same fiscal year
agreement and may not be carried over. The exact amount of the
credit is determined in Attachment A.
2.2 Determination of Charges
In determining the actual compensation received by
either party, only facility use data will be considered. Other
issues or charges for service are not considered in the calculation
of charges. Facility rental fees were determined by previously
established fee schedules in Attachment B.
2.3 Additional Facility Use Outside the Agreement
Any additional facility use not include in this
arrangement will be charged at the established facility rental
rates. The additional facility use fees may be taken as a charge
against a credit, if the entity requesting the use of facilities
has a credit determned by the agreement.
2.4 Facility Use Policies
Both agencies agree to abide by established facility Use •
Guidelines and clean-up procedures. Any clean-up or damage charges
will be paid di.rect..ly by the offending entity.
3. ALTERATIONS
Alterations to this agreement will not be made during the year,
unless any entire area of programming or activities is canceled or
eliminated. Minor reductions in the actual amount of rental time
compared to the requested amount will not affect the final balance
of fees charged.
FACILITY USE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY 2
AND THE ATASCADERO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT
000061
CITY OF ATASCADERO
CONTRACT # 98049
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement
on the date set forth opposite their respective names.
CITY OF ATASCADERO
Attest:
Date:
MARCIA M. TORGERSON, City Clerk
Date:
HAROLD L CARDEN III, Mayor
ATASCADERO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT
Attest:
Date:
DAN DODDS, Secretary to the Board of Trustees
Date:
ANDREW HAYS, President of the Board of Trustees
FACILITY USE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY 3
AND THE ATASCADERO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT
000062
CITY OF ATASCADERO
CONTRACT # 98049 '
EXHIBIT A
. ANTICIPATED VALUE OF AUSD USE OF CITY FACILITES $ 10, 447.50
ANTICIPATED VALUE OF CITY USE OF AUSD FACILITIES $ 18, 716.50
BALANCE C DUE TO AVSD AS A CREDIT FOR FY 98/99/ $ 8, 269. 00
COMPARISON OF ANTICIPATED FACILITY USE BY EACH AGENCY FOR FISCAL
YEAR 1998/ 1999 IS .,ATTACHED IN THE DRAFT REPORT.
FACILITY USE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY
4
AND THE ATASCADERO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT
000063
-RAFT
REPORT
Subject: City of Atascadero/ Atascadero Unified School District
Comparison of Anticipated Facility Use - 98/99
Summary of Recreation Division use of AUSD facilities*
Activity Facility Charge
Youth Fall/ Spring Volleyball AJHS Gym $ 1,496.00
Description hours rate total fee
Practice-6wks x 4dys x 2hrs x 2 leagues 96hrs $8.50/hr.= $816.00
Sat. Games- lOwks x 8hrs 80hrs $8.50/hr.= $680.00
Youth Sports Camps AJHS Gym $ 340.00
Description hours rate total fee
Girls B.Ball Camps x 5dys x 4hrs 20hrs $8.50/hr= $ 170.00
Girls V.Ball Camps x 5dys x 4hrs 20hrs $8.50/hr= $ 170.00
Youth Basketball AJHS & AHS Gyms $ 1,364.00
Description hours rate total fee
8wks x 8hrs 64hrs $13.00/hr= $832.00
lwk x 5dys x 4hrs 20hrs $13.00= $260.00
Games 8wks x 4hrs 32hrs $8.50= $272.00
Summer Swim Program AHS Pool $ 8,835.00
Description hours rate total fee
Weekends 5hrs x 23days 115hrs $19.00/hr $ 2,185.00
Swim Lessons 5days x 3hrs. x 9wks 135hrs $19.00/hr. $2,565.00
Lap Swim 5days x lhr x 1Owks 50hrs $19.00/hr. $ 950.00
Rec Swim 5days x 2.5hrs. x IOwks 125hrs $19.00/hr. $ 2,375.00
Lifeguarding Class 30hrs. 30hrs. $19.00/hr $ 570.00
Staff Training 10hrs. IOhrs. $19.00/hr. $ t 190.00
Summer Swim Program AHS Classroom $ 190.00
Description hours rate total fee
Lifeguarding Class 10hrs. 1Ohrs. $19.00/hr. $190.00
Youth Tennis Lessons AJHS Tennis Courts $ 500.00
Description hours rate total fee
2hrs x 50wks 100hrs. $ 5.00/hr $ 500.00
Youth Sports Camps AHS Football & Baseball Field $ 162.50
Description hours rate total fee
FootballCamp x 5dys x 4hrs 20hrs $ 5.00/hr= $ 100.00
Baseball Camp x 5dys x 2.5hrs 12.5hrs $ 5.00/hr= $ 62.50
Adult Volleyball AJHS Gym $ 1,122.00
Description hours rate total fee
I lweeks x 4hrs x 3leagues 132hrs $8.50/hr= $ 1,122.00
Adult Basketball AHS Gym $ 3,432.00
Description hours rate total fee
Sundays 1lweeks x 8hrs x 3leagues 264hrs $13.00/hr= $3,432.00
Adult Drop-in Basketball AJHS Gym $ 1,275.00
Description hours rate total fee
50weeks x 3hrs 150hrs $8.50/hr= $ 1,275.00
Total Proposed Charges by AUSD $18,716.50
000064
DRAFT
Summary of AUSD use of City facilities".
Activity Facility Charge
Boys Baseball Alvord Field $ 750.00
Description hours rate total fee
Practice & Games 150hrs $5.00/hr. $750.00
Girls Softball Paloma Creek Park $ 500.00
Description hours rate total fee
Practice & Games- 100hrs x $5.00/hr.= $500.00
Boys Soccer Paloma Creek Park $ 200.00
Description hours rate total fee
Practice & Games- 40hrs $5.00/hr.= $200.00
Special Functions/ Mtgs. Atasc. Lake Park $ 175.00
Description hours rate total fee
5 events $35.00= $ 175.00
Special Functions/ Mtgs. Rotunda Room $ -172.50
Description hours rate total fee
11.5hrs $15.00= $ 172.50
Oak Hills Sofball Tourney Paloma Creek Park $ 40.00
Description hours rate total fee
Practice & Games- 8hrs $5.00/hr.= $ 40.00
Special Functions/ Mtgs. Pavilion $ 7,650.00
Description hours rate total fee
17 AHS Special Events x 10hrs, 170hrs $45.0/hr $ 7,650.00
Summer Day Camp Swim Program AHS Pool $ 960.00
Description rate total fee
Rec Swim 2days x 10 wks x 35swimmers/day $1.50/swimmer. $ 960.00
Total Proposed Charges by City $10,447.50
Difference in use charges due to the School District $ 8,269.00
*- City use of AUSD facilities is based on actual requests for current and future
programs
**- AUSD use of City facilities is based on historical use patterns
000065
ATASCADERO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT
USE OF FACILITIES FEE SCHEDULE
NON-COMMERCIAL COMMERCIAL
SCHOOL SITE HOURLY RATE HOURLY RATE
DISTRICT OFFICE:
Board Room 12.50 25.00
HIGH SCHOOL:
IMC Building 22.00 44.00
Fine Arts Building 19.00 37.50
Classroom 8.50 16.50
Boys' Gym/Locker Room 13.00 25.50
Girls' Gym/VVrestling Room 6.00 12.50
Kitchen - New 17.50 35.00
Football Field Lights 13.00 26.00
Scoreboard (daily) 10.00 10.00
PIA System (daily) 15.00 15.00
Showers 5.00 5.00
Down MarkerslChainlYard Markers 15.00 15.00
JUNIOR HIGH:
Prather Building 12.50 25.00
Classroom 8.50 16.50
Gym 8.50 17.00
Kitchen 8.50 17.00
CARRISA PLAINS:
Multi-Use/Classroom 8.50 16.50
Kitchen 3.50 7.00
CRESTON:
Community Building 6.50 13.00
Classroom 8.50 _ 16.50
MONTEREY RD/SAN BENITO/SAN GABRIEL:
Multi-Use/Classroom 19.00 37.50
Kitchen 10.00 19.00
SANTA MARGARITA:
Multi-Use 12.50 25.00
Classroom 8.50 16.50
New Classroom 19.00 37.50
Kitchen 6.00 12.00
SANTA ROSA:
49 Multi-Use/Classroom 19.00 37.50
New Classroom 8.50 16.50
Kitchen 12.00 23.50
OAK HILLS:
Classroom 13.00 26.00
"NOTE:There is NO CHARGE for the use of Risers and Platforms (unless custodian is needed to Wq,ve to location)
FACILITY FEE SCHEDULE
SECURITY RESERVATION
FACILITY GROUP FEE DEPOSIT DEPOSIT
ATASCADERO LAKE PARR: (Reservations: 6: 00 a.m. to 10: 00 P.m. )
GAZEBO: A -0 -0- -0-
B $10.00/DAY -0- -0-
C $24 .00/DAY -0- -0-
BARBECUES 1 OR 2: -A -0- -0- -0-
Approximate Capacity: B $13 .00/DAY -0- -0-
150 people C $30.00/DAY -0- -0-
BARBECUE 3: A -0- -0- -0-
Approximate Capacity: B $ 8 .00/DAY -0- -0-
50 people C $18 .00/DAY -0- -0-
MAJOR SPECIAL EVENT: A -0- -0- -0-
(all open grass areas, B $300 .00 $250 .00* $40.00
bbq areas & gazebo) C $600 .00** $250.00* $40.00
*The City reserves the right to increase the amount of security
deposit-.for major special events with expected attendance over
1,000.
**Events requiring paid admission (i .e., commercial event
fundraisers) are subject to a basic rate, or 10% of gross ticket
sales, whichever is greater.
r
RANGER HOUSE:
Maximum Capacity: A $ -0- $10 .00 $ -0-
27 Dining/Conference B $ 5.00/HR $10 .00 $ -0-
49 Assembly/Dancing C $12 .00/HR $10.00 $ -0-
(1 hr. min. reservation)
17
00006
SECURITY RESERVATION
FACILITY GROUP FEE DEPOSIT DEPOSIT
ATASCADERO LAKE PARR PAVILION:
ROTARY ROOM:
Maximum Capacity: A $ -0- $250 .00 $ -0-
206 Dining/Conference ` B $15:00/HR $250.00 $60.00
440 Assembly/Dancing C $36.00/HR $250.00 $60:00
(2 hr. min. reservation) C $25.001HR (MONDAY THRU THURSDAY ONLY)
GRONSTRAND ROOM:
Maximum Capacity: ;A $ -0- $250.00 $ -0- .
100 Dining/Conference B $15.00/HR $250.00 $40.00 -
210 Assembly/Dancing C $24 .00/HR $250.00 $40.00
(2 hr. min. reservation) C $20.001HR (MONDAY THRU THURSDAY ONLY)
COMMUNITY ROOM:
Maximum Capacity: A $ -0- $ 40.00 $ -0- -
62 Dining/Conference B .$15_.,00/HR $ 40.00 $15.00
130 Assembly/Dancing C18-)00/HR $ 40 .00 $15.00
(1 hr. min. reservation) C 15.001HR (MONDAY THRU THURSDAY ONLY)
KITCHEN:
(This room may only be A $ -0-
reserved in conjunction , B $15.00/HR
with another Pavilion C $18 .00/HR
Room reservation) C $15.00/HR (MONDAY THRU THURSDAY ONLY)
(1 hr. -min. reservation)
PAVILION CLEANING FEES:
TYPE OF FUNCTION NUMBER OF PEOPLE PROFOSED FEE
Any assembly or function 150 or less $ 85.00
with food or drink More than 150 $110.00
Any assembly or function 150 or less $ 40.00
without food or drink More than 150 $ 55.00
The above-mentioned fees are primarily intended for larger private
receptions and fundraisers, and would not apply to any of the
following:
1 . Classification "A" users: City or School-sponsored
activities.
2 . Permanent and on-going renters.
3 . Any private function of less than 50 people that does not
include food or drink.
18
000068
CHARLES `PADDOCK ZOO:
ENTRANCE FEE: Ages 2 & Under $ -0-
Ages 3-15 $ 1 .50
Ages 16-64 $ 2 .50
Ages 65 & over $ 1 . 75
STROLLER RENTAL FEE: $ 1 .00
LARGE GROUP ADMISSION POLICY:
GROUPS OF 100 - 199: $ .50 DISCOUNT, REGARDLESS OF AGE
GROUPS OF 200 OR MORE: $1.00 DISCOUNT, REGARDLESS OF AGE
DISCOUNTS FOR GROUPS . UNDER 100 SHALL BE GRANTED ON AN
INDIVIDUAL BASIS BY THE ZOO CURATOR.
Advanced reservations required: call 461-5080 .
Payment shall be made in advance by the group leader.
TIGER GARDEN RENTAL POLICY:
ALL RENTAL FEES INCLUDE ZOO ADMISSION, AND ARE AS FOLLOWS:
GROUP SIZE RESIDENT NON-RESIDENT CLEANING .
DEPOSIT*
1 TO 25 $ 45. 00 $ 75.00 $ 25. 00
26 TO 50 $ 75. 00 $100.00 ., $ 25.00
51 TO 100 $150. 00 $175. 00 $100.00
ALL RENTAL RATES ARE PER HOUR WITH A MINIMUM OF TWO (2) HOURS.
* The cleaning deposit is refundable with satisfactory
cleanup. All decorations must be removed as part of the
cleanup procedures.
19
000069
SECURITY RESERVATION
FACILITY GROUP FEE DEPOSIT DEPOSIT
CITY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING:
4TH FLOOR ROTUNDA:
Maximum Capacity: A $ -01
-- $250.00 $ -0=
125 Dining/Conference B $10.00/HR $250.00 $40 .00
200 Assembly/Dancing C $24 .00/HR $250.00 $40 .00
(2 hr. min. reservation)
CONFERENCE ROOM 102/104:
Maximum Capacity: A $ -0- $ _p_ $ _0_
24 Dining/Conference B $ 5.00/HR $10.00
49 Assembly/Dancing C $12 .00/HR $10.00
(1 hr. min. reservation)
4TH FLOOR CLUB ROOM:
Maximum Capacity: A $ -0- $ -0- $ -0-
49 Dining/ConferenceBj $ 5.00/HR $ -0 . $10 .00
49 Assembly/Dancing $12 .00/HR $ -0- $10 .00
(1 hr. min. reservation)
SUNKEN GARDENS PARK: A $ -0- $200.00 $ -0-
B $38/D.IY $200.00 $40.00
.0 $90/DAY $200.00 $40.00
ATASCADERO YOUTH RECREATION CENTER:
Gymnasium: A $ -0- $250.00 $ -0-
B $15.00 $250*00 $40.00
C $24 .00 $250.00 $40.00
Dining Room/Kitchen A $ -0 $40 ..00 $ -0-
B $15.00 $40.00 $40.00
C $18 .00 $40 .00, $40 .00
20
0000'70
SECURITY RESERVATION
FACILITY GROUP/FEE DEPOSIT DEPOSIT LIGHTS
ALVORD FIELD•
BASEBALL FIELD: A/$ -0- $ -0 $ -0 $10.00/HR
B/$5.00/HR: $ -0- $ -0- $10.00/HR
C/$6.00/HR $ -0- $ -0- $10.00/HR
Field Base Rental (Optional) ALL GROUPS - $20'0.00 .
PALOMA CREEK PARR:
SOFTBALL FIELDS: A/$ -0- $ -0- $ -0 $10.00/HR
#1 and #2 B/$5.00/HR $ -0- $ -0 $10.00/HR
C/$6.00/HR $ -0- $ -0- $10.00/HR
Field Base Rental (optional) - ALL GROUPS $200.00
OPEN FIELDS: A/$ -0- $ -0_ $ -0- $
B/$5.00/HR $ -0 $ -0- $ -0-
C/$6.00/HR $ -0- $ -0- $ -0-
YOUTH BASEBALL
FIELD: A/$ -0- $ -0- $ -0-
B/$5.00/HR $ -0- $ -0- $ -0-
C/$6.00/HR $ -0 $ -0- $ -0-
BARBECUE AREA: (6:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. reservations)
Approximate A/$ -0- $ -0- $ -0- f
Capacity: B/$13/DAY $ -0- $ -0- '
100 people C/$30/DAY $ -0- $ -0-
PALO11A EQUESTRIAN
ARENA: NO FEE/MEMBERSHIP FOR NON-SPECIAL EVENT USAGE
SPECIAL EVENTS: A/$ -0- $200.00 $ -0-
B/$25/DAY $200.00 $ -0-
C/$60/DAY $200.00 $ -0-
Insurance: ALL GROUPS: $3 MILLION DOLLARS
Arena Preparation
For Special Events: ALL GROUPS: $ 40.00
(optional)
21
0000'71
SECURITY RESERVATION
FACILITY GROUP/FEE DEPOSIT DEPOSIT LIGHTS
TRAFFIC WAY PARR: -
SOFTBALL FIELDS: A/$ -0- $ -0- $ -0- $10.00/HR
#1 or #2 B/$5.00/HR $ -0- __ $ -0- 001hR
C/$6.00/HR $ -0- $ -0- $10.00/RR
Field Base Deposit: ALL GROUPS: $200.00
(optional)
22
0000'72
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 11/10/98
iaia a ie a
aCAM] +o/ -
j
City Manager's Agenda Report
Wade G. McKinney j
i
Revised Fee Schedule for Building & Safety Services
i
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends Council adopt Resolution 1998-050, adopting a revised fee schedule for
building and safety services.
DISCUSSION:
Background: In February of 1998, the City Council conducted a strategic planning session
which resulted in the creation of several goals, strategic initiatives and priorities for special
emphasis the Council desired to work on, including funding city services and community
development. As part of the continuing review of the Community Development Department,
staff reviewed the fees collected for building and safety services, particularly the fees associated
with plan review services.
The City charges two primary fees associated with the issuance of a building permit a "plan
review" fee and a "permit issuance fee". In addition, the Department collects other fees,
including development fees, tree protection/removal, grading and a variety of other fees that are
directly attributable to construction activities. The plan review fee is collected to off-set the
actual costs associated with the review of building plans in accordance with federal, state and
local regulations and uniform building standards. The permit issuance fee is associated with
permit processing and inspection services.provided by the City.
The building and safety fees were last adjusted in 1985 (Attachment "A"). The fee schedule that
was adopted was based on a formula developed by the Building Official at the time and based on
the 1985 Uniform Building Code ("Code") fees. The formula was developed to provide a
simplistic way of calculating fees as compared to the standards contained in the Code. Most local
jurisdictions adopt the fees contained in the Code, as they are calculated on average costs
associated with the services and can be used by the construction industry to calculate building
0000'73
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 11/10/98
permit issuance and plan review fees throughout California and the United States. Typically,
local jurisdictions revise the fee schedule every three (3) years when the Code(s) are updated by
the International Conference of Building Officials. However, the fees in Atascadero have not
been adjusted since their adoption in 1985, primarily because the fees were generally higher than
the Uniform Codes during the past13years. However, the fees are not adequate to address the
costs associated with plan review.
For example, during the 1997-98 fiscal year, the City collected an estimated $81,000 in fees for
plan check and review. The costs of staffing the plan check and review process was
approximately $98,600, creating a deficit of$17,600. The creation of the deficit is primarily
offset by the higher than average "permit" issuance fees.
Following the resignation of the Plan Check Engineer,the Community Development Department
contracted plan check and review services with Charles Abbott & Associates, a firm specializing
in providing municipal building and safety services. Currently, the firm receives 100% of the
plan check fee collected by the City, however, this arrangement is due to expire at the end of the
month, as the fees the City collects are less than the cost for the services. Likewise, local plan
review service providers have expressed concern with providing services to the City due to the
low amount collected by the City for plan review services. Contract plan check services typically
charge a percentage of the plan review fees charged by the City.
Anal. The current fees are comparable to those charged by most other jurisdictions within
the County. As the following chart shows, Arroyo Grande, the County and Paso Robles assess a
fee equal.to 65% of the Building Permit Fee, while the City of San Luis Obispo charges a plan
review fee of 100% of all permit and review fees. The 65%plan review fee is established as part
of the 1994 Uniform Building Code(s).
Ataseadero Arroyo CountyPaso San Luis
Grande Robles Obispo
Building Permit 1,599.60 685.00 960.00 952.00 952.25
Plan Review 379.11 445.25 634.00 618.80 1,199.74
Plumbing Permit 102.50 80.43 129.00 126.93
Electrical Permit 96.50 114.90 67.50 126.93
Mechanical Permit 77.00 22.98 42.00 126.93
Energy Review 96.00 133.30
SMIP Fee 13.33 11.13 11.30 10.50 11.26
Total I, 992 04 1,417 38` 1;919.61 1,819:80 . �2;667.34
Fees based on 1,500 square foot single-family residence.
The City's current plan review fee is calculated at 23.7% of the building permit fee. The fees are
proposed to be consistent with 1994 Uniform Code(s), which is currently applied in most
0000'74
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 11/10/98
jurisdictions statewide. The fees would result in a decrease in the permit issuance fee and an
increase in the plan review fee, as indicated in the following chart: -
Current Proposed
Building Permit 1,599.60 952.00
Plan Review 379.11 618.80
Plumbing Permit 129.00
Electrical Permit 67.50
Mechanical Permit 42.00
Energy Review 95.20
Disabled Access Review 95.20
SMIP Fee 13.33 13.33
Total 1,992.04 2,013.03
Fees based on 1,500 square foot single-family residence.
The new fee schedule would be determined based on the following factors:
• Building Permit Total Valuation of project(fee from Chart 3-A)
• Plan Review: 65% of the Building Permit Fee
• Plumbing: Total fixtures (based on Table 3-D of the building code)
• Electrical: Total fixtures (based on table 3-B of the building code)
• Mechanical: Total fixtures (based on Table 3-C of the building code)
• Energy Review: 10% of Building Permit Fee
• Disabled Access : 10% of Building Permit Fee
• SMIP: Collected on behalf of State, no change.
The proposed revisions to the fee schedule will result in minimal changes to the overall fee
charged. It would simply change the source and use of the fees charged for building permit
review and issuance.
The proposed revisions to the fee schedule are consistent with a number of City adopted policies.
The General Plan indicates that "the City should continue to take a ling range view of its fiscal
condition, and specifically, the possibility of enhancing revenues, in order to maintain, and
where possible and desirable, enhance current service levels of service"1
Conclusion: The proposed fee modifications will allow the City to effectively contract for plan
review services, is comparable with other jurisdictions in the County, consistent with the
Uniform Building Code(s) and meets the policies of the City, including the General Plan. The
' General Plan Fiscal Element Policy B-I (page IX-2)
000075
ITEM NUMBER: B - 1
DATE: 11/10/98
proposal will result in negligible changes to the fees charged to applicants for building permit
and review services.
FISCAL IMPACT: -
The proposed revisions will likely result in no change to estimated General Fund revenues
overall, but would result in a decrease in projected revenue estimates for building permit
issuance revenue and an increase to the plan check services revenue.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Leave the current fee schedule in place. Although this would result in the total building
permit and review fee to remain on par with other jurisdictions, it will not provide for the
City to completely recover its costs for plan review services. If this alternative is
considered, some modification to the current resolution should be made to allow for the
City to allocate revenue from the permit fee to the plan review account to pay for the
actual services incurred.
2. Revise the 1985 formula to be higher for plan review services and lower for the permit
fee. This can be accomplished by decreasing the modifier for the permit fee and
increasing the modifier for the plan review fee, resulting in a fee similar to the one
currently assessed and on par with other jurisdictions. However, the fee would remain
inconsistent overall with the Uniform fees adopted by most jurisdictions statewide.
RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT: Community Development
ATTACHMENTS: A. Resolution 5-85 (Current Fee Schedule)
B. Resolution 1998-050 (Proposed Fee Schedule)
C. Tables from 1994 Uniform Building Code(s)
0000'76
ATTACHMENT "A"
I
SRESOLUTION NO.- 5-85
A RESOLUTION OF THE ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL
ESTABLISHING FEES FOR PERMITS AND OTHER
ACTIVITIES UNDERTAKEN PURSUANT TO BUILDING
AND CONSTRUCTION REGULATIONS
WHEREAS, the Government Code provides that fees may be collected to
cover the costs of administering permit, plan review and inspection
activities; and
WHEREAS, it is appropriate to establish fees and deposits which cover
the cost of providing the services requested; and
WHEREAS, the International Conference of Building Officials has pre-
pared standardized fee schedules which are in widespread use, based on
their experience with permit, plan review and inspection activities;
and _
WHEREAS, the Planning Department has prepared estimates based on its
experience for building and construction regulation activities; and
WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing to consider this mat-
ter .on February 12, 1985 .
NOW, THEREFORE, the Atascadero City Council does resolve to establish
the following fee schedule for building and construction services.
Table 1
Building, Electrical, Mechanical, Plumbing, Retaining Wall and
Solar Permits
Valuation* Permit Fee
As determined by building official Valuation X .012
utilizing. "Building Valuation Data" (Minimum fee=$3 :9.0•-}
from Building Standards
Table 2
Grading Permits
Includes Plan Check
Volume Permit Fee
49 cubic yards or less $ 0.00
50 cubic yards to 999 cubic yards $ 50 .00
1,000 cubic yards to 4,999 cubic yards $100 .00
5,000 cubic yards or more $130.00 + $27.00 for
each additional
10 ,000 cubic yards or
fraction thereof.
*A copy of any contract may be required by the building official to
verify valuation.
0000'77 .
Resolution No. 5-85
Table 3
Sign Permits
Includes Plan Check
Valuation* Permit Fee
Valuation of sign (including any Valuation X .00987
electrical)
Table 4
Swimming Pool, Spas, and Hot Tub Permits
Includes Plan Check
Valuation* Permit Fee
I
Valuation of project cost (including Valuation X .00876
electrical, mechanical & plumbing)
Table 5
Miscellaneous Fees
Structural plan check Total permit fee (per
Table 1) ' X .237
Self-certified plan check (The building Total permit fee (per
official may waive city structural plan check Table 1) X .08
where plans are certified by a registered
architect, building designer, . or engineer
thereby limiting plan review to affected
City departments.)
Demolition (exclude Fire Department drills) $ 30.00
Compliance Survey $100.00
Building Relocation $350.00
Temporary Dwelling (including mobile home) $ 35.00
Mobile Home $200 .00
Inspection for which no fee is indicated $ 20.00/hr
(portal-to-portal)
Re-inspection (per Administrative Code $ 20.00/each
Section)
Inspections outside normal business hours $ 30 .00/hr
(portal-to-portal)
Replacement of Inspection Record Card $• 10.00
Replacement of Job Copy of Approved Plans $ 15.00
*A copy of any contract may be required by the building official to
verify valuation.
2
0000'78 \L
• `._ E. :- 'r-r, Y� .,�, ate„r.�°
Resolution No. 5-85 i
Cross-Connection Actual Cost
($225.00 deposit less $25 .00 to be retained
by City for its cost, with unused portion
of cost billed by Health Department to be
returned .to the permittee)
Driveway Encroachment $ 20 .00
Appeal
To Board of Appeals $ 50.00
To City Council $ 50 .00
•Investigation Fee (for *work commenced Equal to permit fee
without permit) required by this
Resolution
NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Atascadero does further
resolve to rescind Resolution No. 40-83 establishing the City's Build-
and Construction fee schedule. _
On motion by Molina and seconded .by Handshy ,
the foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety on the
following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilman Molina and Handshy, Councilwoman Norris and Mackey
and Mayor Nelson.
NOES None _
ABSENT: None
ADOPTED: February 12, 1985
ROLFE NELSON, Mayor
r
ATTEST
ROBERT M. J S, C ' Clerk
APPROVE AS T FORM:-- ,c-
ALLEN
ORM: cALLEN GRIMES, City Attorney
APPROVE AS TO C NT:
RALPH H. DOWELL, JR. , Acting City Manager
0000'79 a
ATTACHMENT "Bn
RESOLUTION NO. 1998-050 0
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA ADOPTING A
REVISED FEE SCHEDULE FOR BUILDING PERMITS
AND PLAN REVIEW SERVICES
WHEREAS, California Health & Safety Code Section 17951 provide the authority to local
governments to prescribe fees that are reasonably required to administer and process building permits,
including but not limited to plan examination,inspection,enforcement and other services; and
WHEREAS,the City's Building Official is required to perform plan reviews,inspections and other
services to safeguard the public health, safety and welfare;and
WHEREAS, the International Conference of Building Officials has prepared standardized fee
schedules which are based on average costs for permit,plan review and inspection activities;
WHEREAS, the fee schedules for these services must be revised from time to time to assure the
City recovers the costs associated with rendering such services;and
WHEREAS, the Building Official has conducted a review of the current fee schedule and has
proposed revisions to the fees; and
WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on November 10, 1998 to consider the
proposed revisions to the fee schedule.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO,
CALIFORNIA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The City Council hereby adopts the fees for Building and Safety permits,plan review
and other services set forth in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated here in by this reference.
SECTION 2. The Building Official shall determine valuation of construction projects using square
foot value for the type of construction as found in the latest publication of Building Standards as published
by the International Conference of Building Officials
SECTION 3. Upon the effective date of this Resolution, the fees adopted herein shall supersede
fees previously adopted by this City Council for those purposes. This Resolution does not supersede or
repeal any other portion of any other Resolution other than the fees,unless amended or repealed herein.
SECTION 4. The fees established in this Resolution do not exceed the estimated reasonable cost
of providing the service for which the fee is imposed.
i
000080
Resolution No. 1998-050
Page 2
SECTION 5. This Resolution shall become effective on December 1, 1998.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 10th day of November 1998.
I
Harold L. Carden,III,Mayor
Mayor
ATTEST:
Marcia McClure Torgerson, City Clerk
City Clerk
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council
on the 10th day of November 1998, by members of the City Council voting as follows:
AYES: Councilmembers:
NOES: Councilmembers:
ABSENT: Councilmembers:
000081
Resolution 1998-050
EXHIBIT A
1. Building Permit Fees
Total Valuation Fee
$1.00 to$500.00 $22.00
$501.00 to$2,000.00 $22.00 for the first$500.00 plus$2.75 for each additional
$100.00 or fraction thereof,to and including$2,000.00
$2,001 to$25,000.00 $63.00 for the first$2,000.00 plus$12.50 for each additional
$1,000.00 or fraction thereof,to and including$25,000.00
$25,001.00 to$50,000.00 $352.00 for the first$25,000.00 plus$9.00 for each
additional$1,000.00 or fraction thereof,to and including
$50,000.00
$50,001.00 to$100,000.00 $580.00 for the first$50,000.00 plus$6.25 for each
additional$1,000.00 or fraction thereof,to and including
$100,000.00
$100,001.00 to$500,000.00 $895.00 for the first$100,000.00 plus$5.00 for each
additional$1,000.00 or fraction thereof,to and including
$500,000.00
$500,001.00 to$1,000,000.00 $2,855.00 for the first$500,000.00 plus$4.25 for each
additional$1,000.00 or fraction thereof,to and including
$1,000,000.00
$1,000,000.00 and up $4,955.00 for the first$1,000,000.00 plus$2.75 for each
additional$1,000.00 or fraction
2. Plan Review Fees:
The plan review fee shall be 65%of the permit fee
3. Energy Conservation:
Plan review and permit fees shall be increased by 10%where compliance with California energy
conservation laws is required.
4. Disabled Access:
Plan review and permit fees shall be increased by 10%where compliance with California access
law is required.
5. Strong Motion (SMIP):
Permit fees shall be increased in amounts as required by state law to support the State of
California Strong Motion Instrumentation and Seismic Hazard Mapping Program.
6. Mechanical,Plumbing and Electrical Permit Fees:
Plan review and permit fees shall be based on Tables 3-13,3-C and 3-1)of the 1994 Uniform
Administrative Code.
000082
7. Miscellaneous Services Fees �
Fees for the following miscellaneous services shall be charged at actual cost plus 15%
administrative processing:
A. Inspections outside of normal business hours(minimum charge 2 hours)
B. Reinspection fees assessed under provisions of UBC Section 305.8
C. Inspections for which no fee is specifically indicated
D. Additional plan review required by changes, additions or revisions
E. For use of outside consultants for plan checking and inspections or both(including
administrative and overhead costs).
s
000083
ATTACHMENT "Ctt
1994 UNIFORM ADMINISTRATIVE CODE 3-B
TABLE 3-13—ELECTRICAL PERMIT FEES
Permit Issuance
1. For the issuance of each electrical permit ............................................... $22.00
s 2. For the issuing of each supplemental permit for which the original permit has not expired,
been canceled,nor tinaled .. $6.50
System Fee Schedule
(Note:The following do not include permit-issuing fee.)
1. New Residential Buildings
The following fees shall include all wiring and electrical equipment in or on each building,or other electrical
! equipment on the same premises constructed at the same time.
Multifamily.For new multifamily buildings(apartments and condominiums)having three or more dwelling
units constructed at the same time,not including the area of garages,carports and accessory buildings,per
square foot(0.09 m2) .................................................................. .045
Single-and two-family.For new single-and two-family residential buildings constructed at the same time
and not including the area of garages,carports and accessory buildings,per square foot(0.09 m2) ..... .050
For other types of residential occupancies and for alterations,additions and modifications to existing
residential buildings,use the Unit Fee Schedule.
2. Private Swimming Pools
For new private, in-ground swimming pools for single-family and multifamily occupancies including a
complete system of necessary branch circuit wiring,bonding,grounding,underwater lighting,water pumping
and other similar electrical equipment directly related to the operation of a swimming pool,each pool . 44.25
3. Carnivals and Circuses
Carnivals,circuses,or other traveling shows or exhibitions utilizing transportable-type rides,booths,displays
and attractions.
For electrical generators and electrically driven rides,each ................................... 22.00
For mechanically driven rides and walk-through attractions or displays having electric lighting,each ... 6.50
For a system of area and booth lighting,each ............................................... 6.50
For permanently installed rides,booths,displays and attractions,use the Unit Fee Schedule.
4. Temporary Power Service
For a temporary service pole or pedestal including all pole or pedestal-mounted receptacle outlets and
appurtenances,each .................................................................. 22.00
For a temporary distribution system and temporary lighting and receptacle outlets for construction sites,
decorative lights,Christmas tree sales lots,fireworks stands,etc.,each .......................... 11.00
Unit Fee Schedule
(Note:The following do not include permit-issuing fee.)
1.Receptacle,Switch and Light Outlets
For receptacle,switch,light or other outlets at which current is used or controlled,except services,feeders and
meters:
First 20 fixtures.each ............................................................... 1.00
ii Additional fixtures,each ............................................................. .65
Note:For multioudet assemblies,each 5 feet(1524 mm)or fraction thereof may be considered as one outlet.
ILII 2. Lighting Fixtures
For lighting fixtures,sockets or other lamp-holding devices:
First 20 fixtures,each ............................................................... 1.00
Additional fixtures,each ............................................................. 65
For pole or platform-mounted lighting fixtures,each ......................................... 1.00
For theatrical-type lighting fixtures or assemblies,each ....................................... IAO
3. Residential Appliances
For fixed residential appliances or receptacle outlets for same,including wall-mounted electric ovens;
f counter-mounted cooking tops;electric ranges;self-contained room,console or through-wall air conditioners;
space heaters;food waste grinders;dishwashers;washing machines;water heaters;clothes dryers;or other
motor-operated appliances not exceeding one horsepower(HP)(746 W)in rating,each.............. 4.25
Note:For other types of air conditioners and other motor-driven appliances having larger electrical ratings,
see Power Apparatus.
1 4. Nonresidential Appliances
For nonresidential appliances and self-contained factory-wired,nonresidential appliances not exceeding one
horsepower(HP),kilowatt(kW)or kilovolt-ampere(kVA),in rating including medical and dental devices;
21
00008
3-B-3-C 1994 UNIFORM ADMINISTRATIVE CODE
food,beverage and ice cream cabinets:illuminated show cases:drinking fountains.vending machines:laundry
machines:or other similar types of equipment,each .......................................... 4.25
Note:For other types of air conditioners and other motor-driven appliances having larger electrical ratings.
see Power Apparatus.
5. Power Apparatus
For motors,generators,transformers,rectifiers,synchronous converters,capacitors,industrial heating,air
conditioners and heat pumps,cooking or baking equipment and other apparatus,as follows:
Rating in horsepower(HP),kilowatts(kW),kilovolt-amperes(kVA)or kilovolt-amperes-reactive(kVAR):
Up to and including 1,each .......................................................... 4.25
Overland not over 10.each ........................................................ 11.00
Over 10 and not over 50.each ....................................................... 22.00
Over 50 and not over 100.each ...................................................... 44.25
Over100.each .................................................................... 66.50
Notes:
1. For equipment or appliances having more than one motor,transformer,heater,etc.,the sum of the
combined ratings may be used.
2. These fees include all switches,circuit breakers,contactors,thermostats,relays and other directly
related control equipment.
6. Busways
For trolley and plug-in-type busways,each 100 feet(30 480 mm)or fraction thereof ................ 6.50
Note:An additional fee is required for lighting fixtures,motors and other appliances that are connected to
trolley and plug-in-type busways.A fee is not required for portable tools.
7. Signs,Outline Lighting and Marquees
For signs,outline lighting systems or marquees supplied from one branch circuit,each ............. 22.00
For additional branch circuits within the same sign,outline lighting system or marquee,each ......... 4.25
8. Services
For services of 600 volts or less and not over 200 amperes in rating,each ........................ 27.25
For services of 600 volts or less and over 200 amperes to 1.000 amperes.each .. . 55.50
For services over 600 volts or over 1.000 amperes in rating,each . 111.00
9. Miscellaneous Apparatus,Conduits and Conductors
For electrical apparatus,conduits and conductors for which a permit is required but for which no fee is herein
setforth ........................................................................... 16.25
Note:This fee is not applicable when a fee is paid for one or more services,outlets,fixtures,appliances,
power apparatus,busways,signs or other equipment.
Other Inspections and Fees:
1. Inspections outside of normal business hours,per hour(minimum charge-two hours) ........... S44.25*
2. Reinspection fees assessed under provisions of Section 305.8,per inspection ................... S".25*
3. Inspections for which no fee is specifically indicated,per hour(minimum charge-one-half hour) .. S44.25*
4. Additional plan review required by changes,additions or revisions to plans or to plans for which an initial
review has been completed(minimum charge-one-half hour) .............................. S44.25*
*Or the total hourly cost to the jurisdiction,whichever is the greatest.This cost shall include supervision,overhead.
equipment,hourly wages and fringe benefits of the employees involved.
TABLE 3-C-MECHANICAL PERMIT FEES
Permit Issuance and Heaters
1. For the issuance of each mechanical permit............................ .................. $22.00
2. For issuing each supplemental permit for which the original permit has not expired,been canceled
orfrnaled ........................................................................... 6.50
' Unit Fee Schedule
(Note:The following do not-include permit-issuing fee.)
1. Furnaces
For the installation or relocation of each forced-air or gravity-type furnace or burner,including ducts and vents
attached to such appliance,up to and including 100,000 Btu/h(29.3 kW) ........................ 13.25
For the installation or relocation of each forced-air or gravity-type furnace or burner,including ducts and vents
attached to such appliance over 100,000 Btu/h(29.3 kW) .................................... 16.25
22
i
000085
1994 UNIFORM ADMINISTRATIVE CODE 3-C-3-D
For the installation or relocation of each floor furnace including vent ........................... 13.25
For the installation or relocation of each suspended heater,recessed wall heater or floor-moLmted
unitheater.....................................:.................................... 13.25
2. Appliance Vents
For the installation,relocation or replacement of each appliance vent installed and not included in an appliance
permit .................................................... 6.50
3. Repairs or Additions
For the repair of,alteration of.or addition to each heating appliance,refrigeration unit,cooling unit,
absorption unit.or each heating,cooling,absorption or evaporative cooling system,including installation of
controls regulated by the Mechanical Code ............................................... 12?5
4. Boilers,Compressors and Absorption Systems
For the installation or relocation of each boiler or compressor to and including three horsepower(10.6 kW),or
each absorption system to and including 100,000 Btu/h(29.3 kW) 13.15
For the installation or relocation of each boiler or compressor over three horsepower(10.6 kW)to and
including 15 horsepower(52.7 kW),or each absorption system over 100.000 Btu/h(29.3 kW)to and including
500.000 Btu/h(146.6 kW) ............................................................. 24.25
For the installation or relocation of each boiler or compressor over 15 horsepower(52.7 kW)to and including
30 horsepower(105.5 kW),or each absorption system over 500,000 Btu/h(146.6 kW)to and including
1,000.000 Btu/h(293.1 kW) ......................................................... 33.25
For the installation or relocation of each boiler or compressor over 30 horsepower(105.5 kW)to and
including 50 horsepower(176 kW),or each absorption system over 1,000,000 Btu/h(293.1 kW)to and
including 1,750,000 Btu/h(512.9 kW) ................................................... 49.50
For the installation or relocation of each boiler or compressor over 50 horsepower(176 kW),or each
absorption system over 1.750.000 Btu/h(512.9 kW) ........................................ 82.75
5. Air Handlers
For each air-handling unit to and including 10,000 cubic feet per minute(cfm)(4719 L/s),including ducts
attachedthereto .........................................:............................ 9.50
Note:This fee does not apply to an air-handling unit which is a portion of a factory-assembled appliance.
cooling unit,evaporative cooler or absorption unit for which a permit is required elsewhere in the Mechanical
Code.
For each air-handling unit over 10.000 cfm(4719 L/s) ....................................... 16.15
6. Evaporative Coolers
For each evaporative cooler other than portable type ......................................... 9.50
7. Ventilation and Exhaust
For each ventilation fan connected to a single duct ........................................... 6.50
For each ventilation system which is not a portion of any heating or air-conditioning system authorized by a
7
permit ..............................• 9.50
For the installation of each hood which is served by mechanical exhaust,including the ducts for
I� such hood ........................................................................... 9.50
8. Incinerators
t J For the installation or relocation of each domestic-type incinerator 16.25
For the installation or relocation of each commercial or industrial-type incinerator ................. 66.50
9. Miscellaneous
For each appliance or piece of equipment regulated by the Mechanical Code but not classed in other
a appliance categories,or for which no other fee is listed in the table .............................. 9.50
j' Other Inspections and Fees:
1. Inspections outside of normal business hours,per hour(minimum charge-two hours) ........... $44.25*
2. Reinspection fees assessed under provisions of Section 305.8,per inspection ................... $44.25*
3. Inspections for which no fee is specifically indicated,per hour(minimum charge-one-half hour) .. $44.25*
4. Additional plan review required by changes,additions or revisions to plans or to plans for which an initial
review has been completed(minimum charge-one-half hour) .............................. $44.25*
Or the total hourly cost to the jurisdiction,whichever is the greatest.This cost shall include supervision,overhead,
equipment,hourly wages and fringe benefits of the employees involved.
i
TABLE 3-D-PLUMBING PERMIT FEES
Permit Issuance
1. For the issuance of each plumbing permit ...............................................
$22.00
2. For issuing each supplemental permit for which the original permit has not expired,been canceled
orfinaled ........................................... ............................... 6.50
23
Will
000086
3-D-3-E 1994 UNIFORM ADMINISTRATIVE CODE
Unit Fee Schedule
(Note:The following do not include permit-issuing fee.)
1. Fixtures and Vents
For each plumbing fixture or trap or set of fixtures on one trap(including water,drainage piping and backfSo75
..................
protection thereof? ......... ...
. .
For repair or alteration of drainage or vent piping,each fixture ..... ............... ......... 4.25
2. Sewers,Disposal Systems and Interceptors
For each building sewer and each trailer park sewer ......................................... 22.00
For each cesspool ....................................... 33.25
For each private sewage disposal system..................................................1 66.50
For each industrial waste pretreatment interceptor including its trap and vent,excepting kitchen-type grease
interceptors functioning as fixture traps................................................... 17.75
Rainwater systems-per drain(inside building) ............................................. 8.75
3. Water Piping and Water Heaters
For installation,alteration,or repair of water piping or water-treating equipment,or both,each ........ 4.25
For each water heater including vent ..................................................... 11.00
For vents only,see Table 3-C.
4. Gas Piping Systems
For each gas piping system of one to five outlets ............................................ 5.50
For each additional outlet over five,each .................................................. 1.00
5. Lawn Sprinklers,Vacuum Breakers and Backflow Protection Devices
For each lawn sprinkler system on any one meter,including backflow protection devices therefore,.... 13.25
For atmospheric-type vacuum breakers or backflow protection devices not included in Item l:
1 to 5 devices ......... 11.00
...........................................................
0ver5 devices,each ............................................................... 2,00
For each backflow-protection device other than atmospheric-type vacuum breakers:
2 inches(50.8 mm)and smaller ...................................................... 11.00
Over 2 inches(50.8 mm) ....................................... 22.00
6. Swimming Pools
For each swimming pool or spa:
Publicpool ...................................................................... 81.50
Publicspa ....................................................................... 54.25
..................................
Private pool ................................... 54.25
Privatespa ...................................................................... 27.00
7. Miscellaneous
For each appliance or piece of equipment regulated by the Plumbing Code but not classed in other appliance
75
categories,or for which no other fee is listed in this code ......................................
Other Inspections and Fees:
. Inspections outside of normal business hours,per hour(minimum charge-two hours) ........... $44.25
2. Reinspection fees assessed under provisions of Section 305.8,per inspection ................... $44.25*
3. Inspections for which no fee is specifically indicated,per hour(minimum charge-one-half hour) .. S44.25*
4. Additional plan review required by changes,additions or revisions to plans or to plans for which an initial.25*
review has been completed(minimum charge-one-half hour) ..............................
*Or the total hourly cost to the jurisdiction,whichever is the greatest.This cost shall include supervision,overhead,
equipment,hourly wages and fringe benefits of the employees involved.
24
4
0000R17
ITEM NUMBER: B - 2
DATE: 11/10/98
40 Ail;
n
.w
1918 e ® 197v8
City Manager's Agenda Report
Wade G. McKinney
Zone Change #98006 & Variance #98004
(5000 Marchant Avenue: Gearhart)
RECOMMENDATIONS:
The Planning Commission recommends that Council:
1. Find that the project would not have significant adverse effects on the environment and
that the Negative Declaration prepared for the project is therefore adequate under the
requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA); and
• 2. Adopt Ordinance 355 for first reading by title only, approving Zone Change#98006; and
3. Adopt Resolution No. 1998-048, approving Variance#98004.
DISCUSSION:
Background: In January of 1996, the City Council approved zone change and variance
applications to allow for the existing Recreational Vehicle Park at 5000 Marchant Avenue
(Attachments A & B). The zone change established the current Master Plan of Development for
Planned Development Overlay Zone No. 10 (PD 10 Overlay) and the variance granted
exceptions to zoningordinance standards pertaining to minimum site area, fencing, setbacks and
waste disposal. The Recreational Vehicle Park has since been established and seems to be
operating without interfering with the use of surrounding properties:
Recently, a precise plan application was approved which allows for the construction of nine (9)
two-bedroom apartment units on the subject site, which lies adjacent to the existing Recreational
Vehicle Park (Attachment C). The apartments would be built where RV spaces are now being
proposed, but access to the apartments would be from Alcantara Avenue. Hence, the plan calls
for culverts in the creek and the removal of some large Oak trees along Alcantara Avenue.
On October 20, 1998,the Planning Commission considered the subject zone change and variance
applications. Following the public hearing, the Planning Commission voted to adopt Resolution
No. PC 1998-035 as recommended by staff (Attachment D). The Planning Commission
modified conditions of approval pertaining to road improvements. The modifications reflected
000088
ITEM NUMBER: B - 2
DATE: 11/10/98
the Planning Commission's concerns about saving trees and preserving the unnamed creek that
traverses the property (Attachment E).
Anal
Zone Change #98006 -- The subject site consists of two Colony Lots_ totaling approximately
1.25 acres. The site is in a designated Low Density Multiple Family area and is presently zoned
RMF-10. The applicant proposes to expand the PD10 Overlay Zone that currently applies to the
adjacent lot to include the subject site. Hence, the applicant is proposing to change the zoning
from RMF-10 to RMF-10(PD10). If the project is approved, the RV Park would be expanded
from 23 spaces on 1.42 acres to 40 spaces on 2.67 acres.
The proposal to expand the PD 10 Overlay onto the site would effectively add RV Parks to the
list of allowed uses for this particular RMF-zoned site, without affecting other similarly-zoned
property. Given the types of uses presently listed as allowable in the RMF zone, neither
approach would seem to conflict with the General Plan. The proposed Zone Change is the
preferred method of allowing the project because it limits impacts to a single site that appears
suitable.
Variance — The Variance application proposes exceptions to the same zoning standards for
which a variance was requested, and approved, when the existing RV Park was built. The •
exceptions pertain to minimum site area, setbacks and waste disposal standards contained in the
Zoning Ordinance'.
• MINIMIM SITE AREA — The Zoning Ordinance requires that RV Parks located within the
Urban Services Line (USL) be on a site of at least five (5) acres. The existing RV Park is on
approximately 1.42 acres and the proposed site is approximately 1.25 acres.
• SETBACKS — The Zoning Ordinance requires that RVs be located at least 25 feet from a
street right-of-way. In addition, the zoning standards would limit fencing to three (3) feet in
height along Tecorida Avenue, unless the fencing is setback from Tecorida Avenue a
distance of ten(10)feet. The applicant proposes to comply with the setback standards along
Alcantara Avenue, but proposes to continue the existing setback and fencing pattern along
Tecorida Avenue.
• WASTE DISPOSAL — The Zoning Ordinance requires that RV Parks provide individual
sewer connections to all RV spaces and that a common dumping facility also be provided.
The existing RV Park provides connections to individual spaces as would the expansion, but
neither would have a common dumping facility.
When the Zoning Ordinance was first adopted by the City in 1983, it was essentially the
County's Zoning Ordinance. Staff cannot explain the rationale behind the minimum site area
standard established in the County Zoning Ordinance. County staff made a distinction between
"overnight" parks such as the existing RV Park and "destination" parks. It could be that the
Section 9-6.180
000089
ITEM NUMBER: B - 2
DATE: 11/10/98
alreadydated standards adopted b the City in 1983 only anticipated the latter, where such
p Y
acreage would be needed for on-site recreational uses.
With respect to waste disposal, all of the individual spaces are proposed to be connected to
sewer. The City does not encourage dump facilities being connected to public sewer because
that amount of concentrated effluent entering the system at once can be disruptive to the system.
The standard may be intended to accommodate RVs passing through the area but not planning to
stay overnight at the park. If that is the case, dumping facilities can be found elsewhere in
Atascadero (at the sewage treatment plant and at Folkins & Folkins gas station).
Setback areas adjacent to a street are areas where no structures (including fencing) over three (3)
feet in height are permitted. This standard is intended to preserve neighborhood character in
residential zones by avoiding streets that look like alleyways. The subject RV Park abuts a short,
narrow section of Tecorida Avenue that is, for practical purposes, an alley. The street does not
provide primary access to any of the abutting uses and will likely never be a through street that
accommodates a significant amount of traffic. The applicant wishes to extend RV spaces and
fencing along Tecorida Avenue as a continuation of the pattern that presently exists. This seems
reasonable, as a 10-foot setback just for the expansion area would be of little public value and
could create a maintenance problem.
Planning Commission Action: The Planning Commission considered the subject Zone Change
and Variance applications at a public hearing held on October 20, 1998. The Planning
Commission concurred with staff's recommendations and voted to adopt Resolution No. PC
1998-035. Resolution No. PC 1998-035 recommends that the Council approve the subject Zone
Change and Variance applications based on certain findings and conditions. As noted above, the
Planning Commission modified recommended conditions of approval because they wanted to
ensure the preservation of trees.
Conclusions: The applicant's proposal to expand the existing RV Park onto the subject site, as
conditioned by the Variance, would be compatible with existing uses in the area. Proposed plans
are to improve portions of the site that are suitable for development and at the same time
preserve sensitive areas, such as the creek and a number of large native trees. The project is
consistent with the General Plan, would not have significant effects on the environment and
would seem to fit well in the neighborhood.
FISCAL IMPACT:
If the project is approved, the existing Recreational Vehicle Park would be expanded to include
seventeen(17) more recreational vehicle spaces. If the project is not approved, it is likely that
apartments would be built on the site. The apartments would generate more in terms of
. development fees than would the Recreational Vehicle Park; however, the Recreational Vehicle
Park would generate more in terms of business license fees, sewer connection fees and transient
occupancy tax than would the apartments. The fiscal effect of either project is negligible.
000090
ITEM NUMBER: B - 2
DATE: 11/10/98
ALTERNATIVES:
Alternative#1 --The Council could recommend that no changes be made to the existing zoning.
Under this scenario, the Variance would be a moot point because the proposed use of the
property would not be allowed. The site would probably be developed as apartments.pursuant to
the approved the Precise Plan.
Alternative#2 —The Council could recommend approval of a modified version of the proposed
project. The Council could accomplish this by recommending approval of the Zone Change and
Variance applications based on Conditions of Approval which differ from those contained
herein. Depending on the extent of the modifications, the Council may or may not have to
reschedule action to allow for further staff analysis and/or environmental review.
RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT: Community Development Department
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A-- Location Map (General Plan)
Attachment B --Location Map (zoning)
Attachment C --Approved Site Plan for Apartments (PP #98001)
Attachment D -- Resolution PC 1998-035
Attachment E -- Planning Commission Minutes
Attachment F --Negative Declaration
Attachment G -- Ordinance 355
Attachment H --Resolution No. 1998-048
000091
Attachment ALocatio� Map (General Plan)
ZC#98006 : Variance -98114
It=mi —,
OW
�� il��l► '� I, Attachment B
,
ZC#98006 & Variance#98004
=-
01
ELI
t
11th �. '•. : .
'rai •
gar • /�j�
® ®p ® IA
>►9,: A Attachment C
�Egp Approved Site Plan for Apartments
ZC#98006 & Variance#98004 -
�2
01
- X11
v
N
r r l \\ \
`� �• X31
x
-00094
Attachment D
Resolution No. PC 1998-035
ZC#98006 & Variance#98004
RESOLUTION NO. PC 1998-035
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF _
ATASCADERO RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL
APPROVE ZONE CHANGE#98006 AND VARIANCE #98004
(Lots 24 & 25,Block UA,Atascadero Colony: Gearhart)
WHEREAS, the applicant has filed Zone Change and Variance applications to allow for
the expansion of the existing RV Park located at 5000 Marchant Avenue; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero, at its regularly
scheduled meeting on October 20, 1998, studied and'considered the subject Zone Change and
Variance applications; and
WHEREAS, the Zone Change applications would expand Planned Development Overlay
Zone No. 10 to the subject site and amend the Master Plan of Development correspondingly; and
WHEREAS, the Variance application would allow exceptions to Zoning Ordinance
requirements relative to minimum site area, waste disposal and setbacks; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has determined that it is in the best interest of the
City to approve these applications to protect the health, safety and welfare of its citizens by
applying orderly development of the City; and
WHEREAS, the laws and regulations relating to the preparation and public notice of
environmental documents, as set forth in the local guidelines implementing the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), have been adhered to; and
WHEREAS, absent additional information submitted into the record after this date, the
project does not have the potential to cause significant adverse effects on the environment and the
Negative Declaration prepared for the project should therefore be adopted; and
WHEREAS, a timely and properly noticed public hearing on Zone Change#98006 and
Variance#98004 was held by the Planning.Commission of the City of Atascadero on October 20,
1998 at which hearing evidence, oral and documentary, was admitted on behalf of said
applications.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero finds as follows:
1. The Variance does not constitute a grant of special privileges inconsistent with the
limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zoning district in which such
property is situated.
000095
2. There are special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape,
topography, location, or surroundings, and because of these circumstances, the
strict application of the Zoning Ordinance would deprive the property of privileges
enjoyed by other property in the vicinity and in the same zoning district.
3. The Variance does not authorize a use which is not otherwise authorized in the
zoning district.
4. The granting of such Variance does not, under the circumstances and conditions
applied in the particular case, adversely affect the health or safety or persons, is not
materially detrimental to the public welfare, nor injurious to nearby property or
improvements.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission hereby
recommends approval of the subject Zone Change and Variance applications as shown in Exhibits
A and B hereto and subject to the Conditions of Approval contained in Exhibit C hereto.
On motion by and seconded by , the
foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety by the following role call vote:
AYES;
NOES:
ABSENT:
ADOPTED:
CITY OF ATASCADERO, CA
William Zimmerman, Chair
Attest:
Paul M. Saldana, Director
Community Development Department
000096
r.
Isis v . Exhibit A
�E$p Resolution No PC 1998-035
Location of Property to be Rezoned
AVI
K— o ri / �S MBq lLq
cr
N r4
A �
Y A
___--
�. _-. ._
i- FROM: RMF-10 L
TO : RMF-10(PD10)
LA
W ."H �C >
� �'fd•Y
00009'7
Iola1 D Exhibit B
�F$p� Resolution No PC 1998-035
Master Plan of Development for Site .
3n'3
_
di
I k
n
• h3 1 ] ,p�y� Zalz•
'�4c s •� •C�C: I
•..f �1 i
tl .." C
n ... \
/
.N
000098
EXHIBIT B
Resolution No. 1998-035
Conditions of Approval for Variance#98004
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
1. This Variance approval is for RV Park expansion only. All development shall conform to
the Master Plan of Development shown in Attachment B hereto and the provisions of
Planned Development Overlay Zone No. 10. Any modifications of the project shall be
approved by the Community Development Department; substantial modifications shall be
considered Zone Changes and shall require approval by both the Planning Commission and
City Council.
2. Prior to occupancy of the subject site, all parcels used for RV Park purposes (including
existing) shall be merged to ensure the site is operated and maintained under a single
ownership.
3. All public improvements shall be constructed in conformance with the City of Atascadero
Engineering Department Standard Specifications and Drawings or as directed by the City
Engineer.
4. The applicant shall enter into a Plan Check/Inspection agreement with the City. The
applicant shall pay all outstanding plan check/inspection fees prior to the final inspection.
5. The applicant shall obtain an encroachment permit prior to the issuance of building
permits.
6. The applicant shall be responsible for the relocation and/or alteration of existing utilities.
All new utilities (water, gas, electric, cable TV, telephone, etc.) shall be installed
underground or as approved by the Community Development Director. The applicant
shall extend all utilities to the property frontage or to the public utility easement.
7. The applicant shall construct all drainage facilities in conformance with the City Standard
Specifications.
8. The applicant shall submit a grading and drainage plan, prepared by a registered civil
engineer, for review and approval by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of building
permits.
9. The applicant shall show both the pre-developed and post-developed 100-year limits of
inundation on the grading and drainage plan. The applicant shall submit the drainage
calculations required to demonstrate that the finish floor elevations of all proposed
0
000099
structures are at least one foot above the base flood elevation. The drainage calculations
shall be submitted for review and approval by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of a
building permit. The drainage calculations shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer.
10. The applicant shall secure all public improvements or improvements in the public right-of-
way with a 100% performance guarantee and a 50%labor&materials guarantee prior to
issuance of an encroachment permit. Prior to the final inspection, the applicant shall post
a 10%maintenance guarantee to cover the improvements for a period of 1 year from the
date of the final inspection. The guarantee amounts shall be based on an engineer's
estimate submitted by the project engineer and approved by the City Engineer. The
estimate shall be based on City standard unit prices. The securities posted for this project
shall be approved by the City Attorney. The performance and labor& materials securities
will be release by the City 35 days from the date a Notice of Completion is filed with the
County and upon posting of the 10%maintenance guarantee.
11. The applicant shall submit road improvement plans prepared by a registered civil engineer
for review and approval by the City Engineer. Road improvement plans shall conform to
the requirements of the City Standard Specifications, Section 2 -Preparation of Plans. R-
value testing shall be done, and the pavement section designed by a registered civil
engineer to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Road improvements shall include, but
not be limited to the following:
A. The applicant shall improve Tecorida Avenue, as required by the City Engineer
and Community Development Director, from Marchant Avenue to the southerly
property boundary. Improvements shall be in conformance with the Native Tree
Ordinance to minimize tree removals along Tecorida Avenue. Improvements shall
provide minimum City Standards for Fire Access.
B. Offers of dedication shall be provided for all public improvements constructed
outside of existing rights-of-way. Offers of dedication shall be recorded prior to
the final inspection.
C. The applicant shall construct the improvements necessary to eliminate the ponding
of storm water on the easterly side of Alcantara Avenue near the northeasterly
property corner.
12. The applicant shall monument all property corners for construction control and shall
promptly replace them if disturbed.
13. The applicant shall acquire title or interest in any off-site land that may be required to
allow for the construction of the improvements. The applicant shall bear all costs
associated with the necessary acquisitions. The applicant shall also gain concurrence from
all adjacent property owners whose ingress or egress is affected by these improvements.
000100
14. The applicant shall provide public utility easements for all utilities which are to be
relocated outside of the existing rights-of-way. Recorded.copies of the easements shall be
submitted to the City Engineer prior to the final inspection -
15. The applicant shall submit a written statement from. registered civil engineer that all
work has been completed and is in full compliance with the approved plans and the
Uniform Building Code(UBC)prior to the final inspection.
16. A Mylar copy and a blue line print of as-built improvement plans, signed by the registered
engineer who prepared the plans shall be provided to the City Engineer prior to the final
inspection. A certification shall be included that all survey monuments have been set as
shown on the parcel map.
17. The California Department of Fish and Game shall review and approve plans prior to the
issuance of building permits.
18. No common dumping facility may be provided for use on site.
000101
f, s ■ a
i$ e Attachment E
�Egp Planning Commission Minutes
ZC#98006 & Variance#98004 —
2. Zone Change#98006/Variance#98004-6250 Alcantara(Gearhart/Cannon Assoc.)
Zone Change application to expand existing Planned Development Overlay Zone No. 10
onto the adjacent lot to the west, and the Variance application seeks flexibility from
zoning standards related to minimum site area, setbacks,waste disposal and fencing.
(Staff recommendation: (1)Find the project would not have significant adverse effects on
the environment and that, based on the information contained in the record as it exists to
this date, the Draft Negative Declaration prepared for the project should be adopted as
adequate under the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA).
(2)Adopt Resolution No. PC 1998-035, recommending that the City Council approve
Zone Change#98006 and Variance#98004 based on certain findings and Conditions of
Approval).
Gary Kaiser provided the staff report and informed the Commission of a couple of changes. He
pointed out that on Page 1 of Attachment C under(b)Allowable Uses there were only 6 uses
listed and there should have been 8:
"7. Recreational Vehicle Park(See Section 9-6.180)"
"8. Caretaker's Residence(See Section
Gary also added a Condition No. 17 to read as follows:
"17. The California Department of Fish and Game shall review and approve
plans prior to the issuance of building permits."
Gary informed the Commissioners that the applicant was not proposing any tree removal;
however, the removal of several large oaks and several large Sycamore Trees could be required in
order to satisfy the recommended conditions for road improvements.
The Commissioners had questions regarding the lot merger,how to assure short term or transient-
type occupancy only and drainage. Chairman Zimmerman submitted a flyer from the subject RV
Park(attached hereto as Exhibit"B").
TESTIMONY:
John Falkenstien Cannon Associates(applicant's agent)-stated that this is a clean, quiet,
effective use for this property. There will be no encroachments in to the creek;no impact into the
flow line of the creek; and no creek realignment with the expansion of this use but there would be
a creek crossing if the property was used for apartments or even as a single family residence.
John said if the applicant isn't required have an access on to Tecorida, a couple of spaces could be
eliminated in the back of the park to provide a turn-around area so vehicles could exit on to
Marchant..
000102
191$ ® 19 Attachment E,Page 2
�11Egp Planning Commission Minutes
Zone Change#98006 & Variance#98004
David Low, 6500 Alcantara- said he and his wife were originally opposed to the RV Park in their
neighborhood. He admitted that they were wrong;that the Gearhart's have done a really good,
job of running the Park;he and his neighbors have had no complaints. David said he was in favor
of the extension of the RV Park.
Mike Murphv. 9320 Santa Clara-spoke.in favor of the proposal;it's a good location and will
bring people and their money in to the community.
Bill Bright, 11875 Santa Lucia-was in favor of the RV Park extension;the park is managed well
and there is a good turnover of visitors.
Kelly Gearhart, applicant-wanted to confirm that his RV Park was not a permanent destination;
that the most people stay is a week;that the money is in the daily rentals. He said his Business
License doesn't allow permanent residence in the park.
. . . . . . . .closed to public testimony. . .
Chairman-Zimmerman-said he couldn't support this project before and didn't think he could
P J
support it now. He was still concerned with the vehicles exiting on to Morro Road.
Commissioner Arrambide, said this RV Park was in the spirit of what Atascadero needs;minimum
intrusion;neighbors like it;visitors buy gas here-shop here-it's good for Atascadero and he
supports it.
Commissioner Eddings-agrees with Commissioner Arrambide-visitors will spend money in
town;Atascadero could use more businesses like this.
Commissioner Hageman-would rather see apartments built instead of the RV extension.
Commissioner Fonzi does not want to see any Sycamore Trees removed or any closure at the
end of Tecorida.
There was considerable discussion with regards to egress/access;fire access;tree removals, and
road improvements to Tecorida and Alcantara.
John Neil explained that if the applicant wasn't required to improve Alcantara at this time,there
would not be a future opportunity. Commissioner Clark wondered if the improvements would
require tree removal and curb,gutter and sidewalk. John responded that there would be tree
removal and confirmed the curb,gutter and sidewalk requirement.
Gearhart, said he wanted to improve The applicant,Kelly G p e Teconda to provide the necessary fire
access but didn't want to improve Alcantara;he wanted to avoid the tree removals that would be
required for that improvement.
000103
rt
■ m n a m
918 , .19 Attachment E,Page 3
�E110/ Planning Commission Minutes
Zone Change#98006 & Variance#98004
After more discussion, it was the consensus of the Commission that conditions be added
regarding dumping facilities and Fish and Game approval;Condition 1113 be revised and
Condition 11A be deleted.
. . . .the Chairman called for a break @ 9:08p.m. asking the Director and City Engineer to come
up with some language for revised conditions-the meeting reconvened @ 9:20 p.m. . . .
Paul Saldana, read the revised language for 11B and the language for Condition No. 18 as
follows:
"11B. The applicant shall improve Tecorida Avenue,as required by the City Engineer and
Community Development Director,from Marchant to southerly property boundary.
Improvements shall be in conformance with the Native Tree Ordinance to minimize
tree removals along Tecorida Avenue. Improvements shall provide minimum City
Standards for Fire access."
"18. No common dumping facility may be provided for use on site."
ACTION: Find the project would not have significant adverse effects on the environment and
that,based on the information contained in the record as it exists to this date, the
Draft Negative Declaration prepared for the project should be adopted as adequate
under the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA).
Motion: Sauter
Second: Eddings
AYES: Sauter,Eddings,Hageman, Clark, Arrambide,Fonzi,Zimmerman
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
MOTION PASSED: 7:0
ACTION: Adopt Resolution No. PC 1998-035, recommending that the City Council approve
Zone Change#98006 and Variance#98004 based upon the findings and Condi-
tions of Approval as amended, as follows:
"Condition No. 11A would be deleted."
"Condition No.1113 would be amended so as to conform to the ruling as read into
the record by Planning Director Saldana."
"Condition No. 17 would be added stating that the Fish and Game approval would
be granted prior to the release of any building permits."
"Condition No. 18 would be added that there be no common dumping facility
provided for use on site."
000104
r.
�s, ■ e Attachment E,Page 4
CAD�,p Planning Commission Minutes
Zone Change#98006 & Variance#98004
Motion: Sauter
Second: Eddings
AYES: Sauter,Eddings, Clark, Arrambide,Fonzi
NOES: Hageman,Zimmerman
ABSENT: None
MOTION PASSED: 5:2
000105
Y aa 1 a Attachment E,Page 5
�EBp Planning Commission Minutes _
Zone Change#98006 & Variance#98004
EXHIBIT "A"
PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES ; 10/20/98
We,the undersigned, are in the neighborhood of Tecolote Road in Atascadero. We understand
that the owners,the Estate of Gordon T. Davis, have applied to the City of Atascadero, to
abandon the end of Tecolote Road and the cul de sac.
Because of increasing vandalism,illegal dumping, teenage parties, and fire hazard,we support this
abandonment and encourage the Atascadero Planning Commission and City Council to accept this
request.
NAME ADDRESS SIGNATURE & DATE
/vim C� nuc
,4V7A- LLJOW
G UTA,,
S zro6o t_Cl' A)//
000106
Attachment E,Page 6
Planning Commission Minutes _
' Zone Change#98006& Variance#98004
We;the undersigned, are in the neighborhood of Tecolote Road in Atascadero. We understand
that the owners,the Estate of Gordon T. Davis,have applied to the City of Atascadero to
abandon the end of Tecolote Road and the cul de sac.
Because of increasing vandalism,illegal dumping,teenage parties, and fire hazard, we support this
abandonment and encourage the Atascadero Planning Commission and City Council to accept this
request.
NAME ADDRESS SIGNATURE & DATE
1w1719 Sta4( ggoo 5,z4, Lk emu-
.,� d/ 4 /
000107
1918 a 1 9 Attachment E,Page 7
Eg�p Planning Commission Minutes _
Zone Change#98006 & Variance#98004
"8"
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
. OCTOBER 20, 1998
to
4A
IL
Q
ii• :• _ -Z od
,•:: 4N N
Q
Atascader0 Aja Acte kV rk
5000 Marchant Atascadero,CA 93422•.(805)461-0543
o E m rn>a w ca c
W Z ? 1Z5y caL o a� c a a3 c c m ao° 'am o t6 c c(aa a
F- Q w w0 °' ° ° � ca= ac iu� � � oa ate= o-. c >,a m° E �
H = �� Y E �cmamo ma mmia.Q°? v°i om `a va= C: =a? m0
Z Q w ~ a-w ¢ ° mN �. o °tea ccm`- - m n ° ¢:_ y � � o
0= Q CL y >N Cin m > - ai C (a >_ ° -� !�— ao+y'YL m. ''. °
J —, QWF}Q- >� H � ¢Sooai CC a) mmviayiao mEm � � acaa 3� > o
Q _ O w > - _ C Q N a a — C C O y C --°` c c .N C to m y T cC .f0
a: aW w > >.ao 'a = 3 mca-- c=_ amcts m3 - y ° c
O W J w > Q i 'a.2 O y y ° E 8 a)m m >_ >, ° °L y d m m'-
Q w � 0w- Z Qm ° � cm E� ya� mccc3 °.°n � >.Zcin Ei r
0. > a:}cccn ¢ c� oa- m= �� ao CLa) ca 0 c-c•a c.0 m o m
F-a. 0wui 0 cc wE y m N c01� �-a ° > o mb TY aj v y• a ° Co = Co CD
Q JF- Z-jwca c-- --'�, 5Eca _ a� a-° = 3mcr-(5 ° Nn �Y 0Y ycD a -,U)
V Q WWw �Cn aca Eomu) '3ccE 3ca 0y � a «. vi � caN EtCd c O yfQ ° ca
LL a=te W >m aia aT0 mO=z m m a- y ° m aS m `p .y m O C j O
Q W w ti OC m ai U >. m N m r m m v-
Q J '� � Z —aoi c m mm ca n.� rnm�e as c y:> `ate ami nN fl.J. �. °�� o.�
�- Q'� v?��-6Y � � �_ � U) E'ccSo> Q �� a = o��' E ao >> ®OU10€
.- N 0 0 N rn co 5_ 3 O_ 4 m d 3 ccs CC�n rri n cr_ rri m•n r� .ri
Ye 1 a Attachment E,Page 8
�1Egp Planning Commission Minutes _
Zone Change#98006& Variance#98004
$ 24.00 plus tax nightly
$150.90 plus tax weekly z uur
IUI Au,APTH St
i NJed Aa
i al!N [IV i
aapeoseldl
s
r- „__ - 3 n N 3 A V 1N V H '
'
>
I
IL
N
`(
�IQ.,
\
01
0 I I` .• - vi � � --_ � / � mac. ., I I
U i i,.
r:
W i I� _ --'_-_ •�I it 2 %
i 4
�� 000109
Attachment F
Negative Declaration
g _
ZC#98006 & Variance#98004
CITY OF ATASCADERO
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
6500 Palma Avenue Atascadero,CA 93422 805.461.5035
APPLICANT: Kelly Gearhart
6205 Alcantara Avenue
Atascadero, California 93422
(805)466-2776
PROJECT=E: Zone Change 998006&Variance 998004
PROJECT LOCATION: 5000 Marchant Avenue
(Lots 24&25,Block UA, Atascadero Colony)
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The applicant proposes to expand the existing RV Park at the above location from 23 spaces to
40 spaces. A Zone Change application has been filed to expand Planned Development Overlay
Zone No., 10(PD10 Overlay)to include the subject site. The PD10 Overlay currently applies only
to the existing RV Park. The Zone Change would allow for the same use on the subject site and
establish a Master Plan of Development to which all development must conform. The zoning of
the site, then, is proposed to be changed from RMF-10 to RMF-10(PD10). A Variance
application has also been filed. The Variance seeks an exception to zoning standards pertaining to
minimum site area, fencing and waste disposal. Exceptions to these same zoning standards were
granted when the existing RV Park was approved.
FINDINGS:
1. The project does not have the potential to degrade the environment.
2. The project will not achieve short-term to the disadvantage of long-term
environmental goals.
3. The project does not have impacts which are individually limited,but cumulatively
considerable.
4. The project will not cause substantial adverse effects on human beings either directly
or indirectly.
DETERMINATION:
Based on the above findings, and the information contained in the initial study(made a part hereof
by reference and on file in the Community Development Department),it has been determined that
the above project will not have an adverse impact on the environment.
PREPARED BY: Gary Kaiser,Associate Planner
DATE POSTED: October 12, 1998
DATE ADOPTED:
1100110
ATTACHMENT G
ORDINANCE NO. 355
AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ATASCADERO AMENDING MAP 17 OF THE OFFICIAL ZONING
MAPS BY ADDING PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY ZONE NO. 10 TO THE
EXISTING LOW DENSITY MULTIPLE FAMILY(RMF-10)ZONING OF CERTAIN
REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 6250 ALCANTARA AVENUE
(ZC 98006; Gearhart)
WHEREAS, the proposed zoning map 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 amendment 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 October 20, .
1998 and has recommended approval of Zone Change 98006; and
WHEREAS, a timely and properly noticed public hearing on Zone Change 98006 was
held by the City Council of the City of Atascadero on November 10, 1998 at which hearing
evidence, oral and documentary, was admitted on behalf on said Zone Change application.
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.
3. The proposal will not result in any significant adverse environmental impacts. The
Negative Declaration prepared for the project is adequate.
Section 2. Zoning Mai
Map number 17 of the Official Zoning Maps of the City of Atascadero on file in the City
Community Development Department is hereby amended as shown on the attached Exhibit A .
which is hereby made a part of this ordinance by reference.
000111
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 Government Code; the Clerk
shall also 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:
HAROLD L. CARDEN III, Mayor
ATTEST:
MARCIA M. TORGERSON, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ROY A. HANLEY, City Attorney
000112
�. Big ■
r.
R Exhibit A,Page 1
Zoning Map Amendment _
Ordinance 355
_ - .;.;
�� �•• / N � CSA
r4
r Y
A40
�
-�� - EXIS i i,JU RV PA2K �.
M v
FROM: RMF-10
TO : RMF-10(PD10)
FH
o
1p 11
l4 J
000113
a1 a Exhibit A,Page 2
CMAA3Egp Expanded Master Plan of Development
Ordinance 355 -
g x;
3nN3AG
r
sw
t
3.
� 7 J
I r // 1/ �• �/s ST
i
' iso" I r• l / ..\
1 \
'k• �:7f�' 'rte
iV
000114
ATTACHMENT H
RESOLUTION NO. PC 1998-048
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO
APPROVING VARIANCE#98004 TO ALLOW AN EXCEPTION TO THE ZONING
ORDINANCE WITH RESPECT TO MINEWTE SITE AREA, SETBACKS AND WASTE
DISPOSAL REQUIREMENTS IN A RV PARK
(Lots 24 & 25,Block UA,Atascadero Colony: Gearhart)
WHEREAS, the applicant has filed the subject Variance application to allow for the
orderly expansion of the existing RV Park located at 5000 Marchant Avenue; and
WHEREAS, the Variance application would allow exceptions to Zoning Ordinance
requirements relative to minimum site area, waste disposal and setbacks; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero, at a regularly scheduled
public hearing held October 20, 1998, voted to recommend approval of the subject Variance
application;and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that it is in the best interest of the City to
approve these applications to protect the health, safety and welfare of its citizens by applying
orderly development of the City; and
WHEREAS, the laws and regulations relating to the preparation and public notice of
environmental documents, as set forth in the local guidelines implementing the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), have been adhered to; and
WHEREAS, the project does not have the potential to cause significant adverse effects on
the environment;the Negative Declaration prepared for the project is therefore adequate; and
W EREAS, a timely and properly noticed public hearing on Variance#98004 was held by
the City Council of the City of Atascadero on November 10, 1998 at which hearing evidence, oral
and documentary, was admitted on behalf of said applications and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Atascadero finds as follows:
1. The Variance does not constitute a grant of special privileges inconsistent with the
limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zoning district in which such
property is situated.
2. There are special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape,
topography, location, or surroundings, and because of these circumstances, the
000115
3. The Variance does not authorize a use which is not otherwise authorized in the
zoning district.
4. The granting of such Variance does not, under the circumstances and conditions
applied in the particular case, adversely affect the health or safety or persons, is not.
materially detrimental to the public welfare, nor injurious to nearby property or
improvements.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council hereby approves the
subject Variance application as shown in Exhibits A hereto and subject to the Conditions of
Approval contained in Exhibit B hereto.
On motion by and seconded by , the
foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety by the following role call vote:
AYES;
NOES:
ABSENT:
ADOPTED:
CITY OF ATASCADERO, CA
Harold L. Carden III, Mayor
Attest:
Marcia M. Torgerson, City Clerk
Approved as to form:
Roy A. Hanley, City Attorney
000116
MIS <9 9 Exhibit A
Resolution No. 1998-048
1J4 � zY 3
�Z x
Ar
•.2. r ..
;W
r.
J
f K
q r
, r
/
/ J( ::I may, ",.• i
1w
000117
r .
EXHIBIT B
Resolution No. 19_98-049
Conditions of Approval for Variance#98004
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
1. This Variance approval is for RV Park expansion only. All development shall conform to
the Master Plan of Development shown in Attachment B hereto and the provisions of
Planned Development Overlay Zone No. 10. Any modifications of the project shall be
approved by the Community Development Department; substantial modifications shall be
considered Zone Changes and shall require approval by both the Planning Commission and
City Council.
2. Prior to occupancy of the subject site, all parcels used for RV Park purposes (including
existing) shall be merged to ensure the site is operated and maintained under a single
ownership.
3. All public improvements shall be constructed in conformance with the City of Atascadero
Engineering Department Standard Specifications and Drawings or as directed by the City
Engineer.
4. The applicant shall enter into a Plan Check/Inspection agreement with the City. The
applicant shall pay all outstanding plan check/inspection fees prior to the final inspection.
5. The applicant shall obtain an encroachment permit prior to the issuance of building
permits.
6. The applicant shall be responsible for the relocation and/or alteration of existing utilities.
All new utilities (water, gas, electric, cable TV, telephone, etc.) shall be installed
underground or as approved by the Community Development Director. The applicant
shall extend all utilities to the property frontage or to the public utility easement.
7. The applicant shall construct all drainage facilities in conformance with the City Standard
Specifications.
8. The applicant shall submit a grading and drainage plan, prepared by a registered civil
engineer, for review and approval by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of building
permits.
9. The applicant shall show both the pre-developed and post-developed 100-year limits of
inundation on the grading and drainage plan. The applicant shall submit the drainage
calculations required to demonstrate that the finish floor elevations of all proposed
S
000118
structures are at least one foot above the base flood elevation. The drainage calculations
shall be submitted for review and approval by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of a
building permit. The drainage calculations shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer.
10. The applicant shall secure allpublic improvements or improvements in the public right-of-
way with a 100%performance guarantee and a 50%labor& materials guarantee prior to
issuance of an encroachment permit. Prior to the final inspection, the applicant shall post
a 10%maintenance guarantee to cover the improvements for a period of 1 year from the
date of the final inspection. The guarantee amounts shall be based on an engineer's
estimate submitted by the project engineer and approved by the City Engineer. The
estimate shall be based on City standard unit prices. The securities posted for this project
shall be approved by the City Attorney. The performance and labor& materials securities
will be release by the City 35 days from the date a Notice of Completion is filed with the
County and upon posting of the 10% maintenance guarantee.
11. The applicant shall submit road improvement plans prepared by a registered civil engineer
for review and approval by the City Engineer. Road improvement plans shall conform to
the requirements of the City Standard Specifications, Section 2 -Preparation of Plans. R-
value testing shall be done, and the pavement section designed by a registered civil
engineer to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Road improvements shall include, but
not be limited to the following:
A. The applicant shall improve Tecorida Avenue, as required by the City Engineer
and Community Development Director, from Marchant Avenue to the southerly
property boundary. Improvements shall be in conformance with the Native Tree
Ordinance to minimize tree removals along Tecorida Avenue. Improvements shall
provide minimum City Standards for Fire Access.
B. Offers of dedication shall be provided for all public improvements constructed
outside of existing rights-of-way. Offers of dedication shall be recorded prior to
the final inspection.
C. The applicant shall construct the improvements necessary to eliminate the ponding
of storm water on the easterly side of Alcantara Avenue near the northeasterly
property corner.
12. The applicant shall monument all property corners for construction control and shall
promptly replace them if disturbed.
13. The applicant shall acquire title or interest in any off-site land that may be required to
allow for the construction of the improvements. The applicant shall bear all costs
associated with the necessary acquisitions. The applicant shall also gain concurrence from
all adjacent property owners whose ingress or egress is affected by these improvements.
000119
14. The applicant shall provide public utility easements for all utilities which are to be
relocated outside of the existing rights-of-way. Recorded copies of the easements shall be
submitted to the City Engineer prior to the final inspection
15. The applicant shall submit a written statement from a registered civil engineer that all
work has been completed and is in full compliance with the approved plans and the
Uniform Building Code(UBC)prior to the final inspection.
16. A Mylar copy and a blue line print of as-built improvement plans, signed by the registered
engineer who prepared the plans shall be provided to the City Engineer prior to the final
inspection. A certification shall be included that all survey monuments have been set as
shown on the parcel map.
17. The CaliforniaDepartment of Fish and Game shall review and approve plans prior to the
issuance of building permits.
18. No common dumping facility may be provided for use on site.
0001`'®
ITEM NUMBER: C -1
DATE: 11/10/98
fer8 = 0 19 8
CAI
City Treasurer's..Agenda Report
Rudy Hernandez
Investment Policy
RECOMMENDATION:
Finance Committee', recommends Council adopt Resolution 1998-047 adopting the City of
Atascadero Investment Policy.
DISCUSSION:
Background: The City originally adopted an interim investment policy in 1993 (Resolution 144-
93) and revised that interim investment policy in May 1995 (Resolution 31-95). State
government code requires that the investment policy be reviewed annually and it was the
. consensus of the City Treasurer and staff that the investment policy needed a major overhaul.
The new investment'policy was presented to and approved by the Finance Committee.
Summary: The general objectives of the investment policy in order of importance are safety,
liquidity and yield. The investment policy requires investment officers to use the prudent man
rule, to exercise duediligence, to follow written procedures and to follow the investment policy.
The City Treasurer, the City Manager and the Director of Administrative Services are all
authorized to .undertake investment transactions on behalf of the City, however the City
Treasurer is generally responsible for idle cash management. The Finance Committee is
responsible for providing general investment strategies for the future and for reviewing the status
of investments.
The policy also establishes internal controls, a conflict of interest policy, procedures and
minimum qualifications for financial institutions and broker/dealers with whom the City invests,
and a safekeeping/custody policy for securities.
The proposed policy narrows (from the current investment policy) the type of investments that
the City may participate in and establishes maximums for these investments. The following
instruments are permitted by-the proposed policy:
000121
ITEM NUMBER: C - 1
DATE: 11/10f98
Type Maximum Investment
State Treasurer's Local Agency Investment Fund $20 million •
U.S. Government Issues 40%of the City's portfolio
Bankers Acceptances 30%of the City's portfolio
Commercial Paper 20%of the City's portfolio
Certificate of Deposits& Passbook Savings No limit
Money Market Mutual Funds 20%of the.City's portfolio
(The above percentages are not recommendations,but instead are the maximum allowable investment in the type of investment
instrument.)
The policy calls for diversification of the City's investments and maturities. It is intended that
all investments will be held to maturity and that the City will not invest in instruments with
maturities longer than 5 years without matching the investment to a specific project or cash flow
need.
The investment policy also addresses due diligence requirements, prohibited investments,
legislative changes, cash management, evaluation of investment performance, investment
reporting and investment policy review.
Analysis: The proposed investment policy provides a broad set of investment guidelines
designed to insure the safety of the City's investments. The policy does not set specific
investment strategies,but instead is designed to act as a framework for the Finance Committee, •
City Treasurer and staff to work within when determining investment.strategies now and in the
future.
FISCAL IMPACT: None.
RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT: City Treasurer
Finance Department
ATTACHMENTS: Resolution 1998-047
Investment Policy(Distributed separately)
000122
RESOLUTION NO. 1998-047
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ATASCADERO,ADOPTING THE CITY OF ATASCADERO
INVESTMENT POLICY
:WHEREAS,The City Council of the City of Atascadero desires to prudently invest idle
funds of the City to maximize use of taxpayer funds;and
WHEREAS, the California Government Code Section 53600.3 states that"all governing
bodies of local agencies or persons authorized to make investments decisions on behalf of those
local agencies investing public funds pursuant to this chapter are 'trustees and therefore
fiduciaries subject to the prudent investor standard.", and
WHEREAS, the California Government Code Section 53646 requires all local agency
governing boards to annually adopt an investment policy and requires the Treasurer or Chief
Financial Officer to provide an investment report to the legislative body at least quarterly; and
WHEREAS, the California Government Code. Section 53607 authorizes the legislative
body to delegate investment authority and responsibility to the Treasurer for a period not to
exceed one year but renewable annually,upon review; and
WHEREAS, the City of Atascadero first adopted its interim investment policy in 1993,
revised that policy in 1995 and that policy is in need of updating
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Atascadero that the City of Atascadero Investment Policy, attached hereto, is adopted and that
the City Treasurer is hereby authorized to carry out this policy, on behalf of the City Council. .
On motion by and seconded by the foregoing
resolution is approved by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Harold L. Carden III
Mayor
ATTEST:
Marcia McClure Torgerson, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Roy A. Hanley, City Attorney
000123
INVESTMENT
POLICY
City of Atascadero
1998
TABLE OF CONTENTS
• P�
I. OVERVIEW................................................................................ 1
Introduction
Scope
General Objectives
Standards of Care
II. INVESTMENT AUTHORITY AND RESPONSIBILITIES .. ..................... 4
Authorized Investment Officers
Investment Procedures
Internal Control
Conflicts of Interest
III. ELIGIBLE FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS............................................ 6
Selection of Eligible Financial Institutions
Safekeeping and Custody
IV. AUTHORIZED INVESTMENTS...................................................... 8
Investment Types
Due Diligence Requirement
Prohibited Investments
• Legislative Changes
V. INVESTMENT PARAMETERS........................................................ 11
Diversification
Maximum Maturities
VI. CASH MANAGEMENT....................................:............................ 12
VII. EVALUATION OF INVESTMENT PERFORMANCE............................ 13
Benchmark Comparison
VIII. INVESTMENT REPORTING.......................................................... 14
IX. INVESTMENT POLICY REVIEW AND ADOPTION............................. 15
X. APPENDICES
Appendix 1: Glossary... . ....................................................... 16
Appendix 2: Related Government Codes..................................... 24
1. OVERVIEw
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this document is to provide guidelines for the prudent investment of the City's
temporarily idle cash and outline policies, for maximizing the efficiency of the City's cash
management system. The ultimate goal is to enhance the economic status of the City while
protecting its pooled cash.
SCOPE
Included in the scope of the City's investment policy are the following major guidelines and
practices which are to be used in achieving the City's primary investment objectives:
Investment Authority and Responsibilities
Eligible Financial Institutions
Authorized Investments
Investment Parameters
Cash Management
Evaluation of Investment Performance
Investment Reporting
• Investment Policy Review and Adoption
It is intended that this policy cover all funds and investment activities under the direct authority of
the City. These funds are accounted for in the Annual Financial Report and include the general
fund, special revenue funds, debt service funds, capital project funds, enterprise funds, internal
service funds and agency funds.
Subject to the prior written consent and approval of the City Treasurer and City Manager,
financial assets held and invested by trustees or fiscal agents are excluded from this policy.
However, such assets are nevertheless subject to the regulations established by the State of
California pertaining to investments by local agencies as well as the related bond indentures.
•
1
1. OVERVIEW (continued)
GENERAL OBJECTIVES
The primary objectives, in priority order, of investment activities shall be safety, liquidity, and
yield:
1. Safety
Safety of principal is the foremost objective of the investment program. Investments shall
be undertaken in a manner that seeks to ensure the preservation of capital in the overall
portfolio. The objective will be to mitigate credit risk and interest rate risk.
a. Credit Risk
The City will minimize credit risk, the risk of loss due to the failure of the security
issuer or backer, by:
• Limiting investments to the safest types of securities
• Pre-qualifying the financial institutions, broker/dealers, intermediaries,
and advisers with which the City will do business
• Diversifying the investment portfolio so that potential losses on
individual securities will be minimized.
• b. Interest Rate Risk
The City will minimize the risk that the market value of securities in the portfolio
will fall due to changes in general interest rates,by:
• Structuring the investment portfolio so that securities mature to meet
cash requirements for ongoing operations, thereby avoiding the need to
sell securities on the open market prior to maturity
• Investing operating funds primarily in shorter-term securities, money
market mutual funds, or similar investment pools
2. Liquidity
The investment portfolio shall remain sufficiently liquid to meet all operating requirements
that may be reasonably anticipated. This is accomplished by structuring the portfolio so
that securities mature concurrent with cash needs to meet anticipated demands (static .
liquidity). Furthermore, since all possible cash demands cannot be anticipated, the
portfolio should consist largely of securities with active secondary or resale markets
(dynamic liquidity). A portion of the portfolio also will be placed in money market mutual
funds or local government investment pools which offer same-day liquidity for short term
funds.
2
1. OVERVIEW (continued)
GENERAL OBJECTIVES (continued)
3. Yield
The investment portfolio shall be designed with the objective of attaining a market rate of
return throughout budgetary and economic cycles, taking into account the investment risk
constraints and liquidity needs. Return on investment is of secondary importance
compared to the safety and liquidity objectives described above. The core of investments
are limited to relatively low risk securities in anticipation of earning a fair return relative to
the risk being assumed. Securities shall not be sold prior to maturity with the following
exceptions:
a. A security with declining credit may be sold early to minimize loss of principal.
b. A security swap would improve the quality,yield, or target duration in the
portfolio.
c. Liquidity needs of the portfolio require that the security be sold.
STANDARDS OF CARE
The City operates its pooled idle cash investments under the "Prudent Person Rule" which
• obligates a fiduciary to ensure that:
"...investment shall be made with the exercise of that degree of judgment and
care, under circumstances then prevailing, which persons of prudence, discretion
and intelligence exercise in the management of their own affairs, not for
speculation but for investment considering the probable safety of their capital as
well as the probable income to be derived."
Investment officers acting in accordance with written procedures and this investment policy and
exercising due diligence shall be relieved of personal responsibility for an individual security's
credit risk or market price changes, provided deviations from expectations are reported in a timely
fashion and the liquidity and the sale of securities are carried out in accordance with the terms of
this policy.
3
• H. INVESTMENT AUTHORITY AND RESPONSIBILITIES
AUTHORIZED INVESTMENT OFFICERS
Idle cash management and investment transactions are the responsibility of the City Treasurer or
designee. The City Council has authorized the following officials to undertake investment
transactions on behalf of the City:
City Treasurer
City Manager
Director of Administrative Services
The Finance Review Committee, consisting of the City Treasurer, City Manager, Director of
Administrative Services and two (2) members of the City Council, shall meet at least semi-
annually to discuss the status of current investments, strategies for future investment, and other
investment matters deemed relevant, and shall report to the City Council as necessary.
INVESTMENT PROCEDURES
The authorized investment officers as stated above, in accordance with the City of Atascadero
• Investment Policy, are responsible for administering an investment program which:
• Adheres to the Statement of Investment Policy
• Prioritizes safety and liquidity
• Determines risk and optimizes return
• Provides for a system of due diligence in making investment decisions.
INTERNAL CONTROL
The Director of Administrative Services is responsible for establishing and maintaining an internal
control structure designed to ensure that the assets of the City are protected from loss, theft or
misuse. The internal control structure shall be designed to provide reasonable assurance that
these objectives are met. The concept of reasonable assurance recognizes that (1) the cost of a
control should not exceed the benefits likely to be derived and (2) the valuation of costs and
benefits requires estimates and judgments by management.
i
4
H. INVESTMENT AUTHORITY AND RESPONSIBILITIES (continued)
INTERNAL CONTROL(continued)
Accordingly, the investment officer shall establish a process for an annual independent review by
an external auditor to assure compliance with policies and procedures. The internal controls shall
address the following points:
• Control of collusion
• Separation of transaction authority from accounting and recordkeeping
• Custodial safekeeping
• Avoidance of physical delivery securities
• Clear delegation of authority to subordinate staff members
• Written confirmation of transactions for investments and wire transfers
• Development of a wire transfer agreement with the lead bank and third party custodian
CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
The City adopts the following policy concerning conflicts of interest:
1. Officers and employees involved in the investment process shall refrain from personal
business activity that could conflict with proper execution of the investment program
or which could impair their ability to make impartial investment decisions.
2. Officers and employees involved in the investment process shall disclose to the City
Clerk any material financial interest in financial institutions that conduct business with
the City of Atascadero and they shall further disclose any large personal
financial/investment positions that could be related to'the performance of the City's
portfolio.
3. Officers shall refrain from undertaking personal investment transactions with the same
individual with whom business is conducted on behalf of the City.
5
III. ELIGIBLE FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS .
s
SELECTION OF ELIGIBLE FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS
All financial institutions and broker/dealers who desire to become qualified for investment
transactions must supply the following as appropriate:
• Audited financial statements
• Proof of National Association of Securities Dealers (NASD) certification
• Proof of state registration
• Completed broker/dealer questionnaire
• Certification of having read and understood and agreeing to comply with the City's
investment policy.
In selecting financial institutions for deposit or investment of funds, the authorized Investment
Officers shall consider the credit-worthiness of the institution.
1. Deposits The City will only deposit funds with an institution that has a rating of at least "A"
as assigned by an established rating service based on quarterly financial information provided
by the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal Home Loan Bank Board (i.e., The Financial
Directory). Ratings will be monitored on a quarterly basis and any downgrade in rating below
"A" will be reported to the Finance Review Committee together with a recommendation for
possible action.
2. Brokers/Dealer Investments must be purchased directly from the issuer,from an institution
licensed by the state as a broker-dealer, from a member of a federally regulated securities
exchange, or from a brokerage firm designated as a primary government dealer by the Federal
Reserve Bank. Broker/dealers shall be selected by creditworthiness (e.g., a minimum capital
requirement of$10,000,000 and at least five years of operation).
From time to time, the investment officer may choose to invest in instruments offered by minority
and community financial institutions. In such situations, a waiver to the above criteria may be
granted. All terms and relationships will be fully disclosed prior to purchase and will be reported
to the appropriate entity on a consistent basis and should be consistent with state or local law.
These types of investment purchases should be approved by City Council in advance.
The authorized Investment Officers will maintain. a file of the broker/dealers with which it is
currently doing business which will include the firm name, contact person, telephone number, and
current audited financial statements.
6
III. ELIGIBLE FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS (continued)
SAFEKEEPING AND CUSTODY
All trades, where applicable will be executed by delivery vs. payment (DVP) to ensure that
securities are deposited in an eligible financial institution prior to the release of funds. Securities
will be held by a third-party custodian as evidenced by safekeeping receipts.
•
•
7
IV. AUTHORIZED INVESTMENTS
i
INVESTMENT TYPES
Investment of City funds is governed by the California Government Code Sections 16429.1 and
53601. Investments may not have a term or maturity at the time of investment of longer than that
authorized by Section 53601 or five years unless the City Council has granted prior express
authority.
It should be noted that while the Government Code specifies the maximum percentage of the
portfolio which may be held in each type of investment at any one time, fluctuations in the
portfolio balance will prevent strict adherence to such restrictions. Therefore, percentage
limitations shall apply to investments at the time of purchase.
Consistent with the GFOA Policy Statement on State and Local Laws Concerning Investment
Practices, the following investments will be permitted by this policy and are those defined by state
and local law where applicable:
1. State Treasurer's Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF)
Government Code Section 16429.1: The City may invest a maximum of $20 million
pursuant to LAIF policy (effective 9/11/94). LAIF is a diversified investment pool
administered by the California State Treasurer. Monies invested with LAIF are pooled
• with State monies in order to earn the maximum rate of return consistent with safe and
prudent treasury management.
The LAIF handbook including LAIF policies and restrictions shall be available in the
City's Administrative Services Department. A thorough investigation of the pool is
required on a continual basis. (See Due Diligence Requirement on page 10.)
2. U.S. Government Issues
Government Code Sections 53601 (b) and (e): A maximum forty percent (40%) of the
City's portfolio may be invested in U.S. government obligations, U.S. government agency
obligations, and U.S. government instrumentality obligations, which have a liquid market
with a readily determinable market value.
3. Bankers Acceptances
Government Code Section 53601 (fl: Up to thirty percent (30%) of the City's portfolio
may be invested in Bankers Acceptances which are defined as bills of exchange or time
drafts, drawn on and accepted by a commercial bank, which are eligible for purchase by
the Federal Reserve System, although no more than 15% of the portfolio may be invested
in Bankers Acceptances with any one commercial bank. Additionally, the maturity periods
cannot exceed 270 days; however, Bankers Acceptances are seldom marketed with
maturities in excess of 180 days.
•
8
IV. AUTHORIZED INVESTMENTS (continued)
INVESTMENT TYPES (continued)
4. Commercial Paper
Government Code Section 53601 (e): A maximum of twenty percent (20%) of the City's
portfolio may be invested in highest tier (e.g. A-1, P-1, F-1 or D-1 or higher) commercial
paper as rated by Moody's or Standard and Poor's rating service. Issuing corporations
must be organized and operating in the United States, have $500 million total assets, and
have at least an "A" rating (by Moody's or Standard and Poor's) on debt other than
commercial paper. The maturity period cannot exceed 1 year. The 20% of portfolio
limitation may be increased to 30% if the dollar-weighted average maturity of the entire
amount does not exceed 31 days. "Dollar-weighted average maturity" means the sum of
the amount of each outstanding commercial paper investment multiplied by the number of
days to maturity, divided by the total amount of outstanding commercial paper.
5. Certificates of Deposit and Passbook Savings Accounts
Government Code Section 53601: There is no limit as to the amount of the investment
portfolio that may be deposited in certificates of deposit or passbook savings account.
California law requires that public funds be collateralized. The depository must secure its
• public fund "accounts by maintaining with the agent of the depository government
securities having a market value of at least one hundred ten percent (110%) of the value of
the public fund accounts. If a depository uses mortgage-backed securities (i.e.,
promissory notes secured by first mortgages or first deeds of trust) as collateral for public
deposits, the market value of the mortgage-backed securities must be at least one hundred
fifty percent (150%) of the value of the public fund accounts.
The collateralization requirement may be waived to the extent that funds are federally
insured (currently up to $100,000 per institution). For deposits equivalent to the
maximum insured amount, security may also be waived for interest accrued on the deposit
provided the interest is computed by the depository on the average daily balance of the
deposits, paid monthly and computed on a 360-day basis.
6. Money Market Mutual Funds
Government Code Section 53601 (k): Shares of beneficial interest issued by diversified
management companies that are money market funds registered with the Securities and
Exchange Commission under the Investment Company Act of 1940 (15 U.S.C. Sec 80a-1
et seq.)
•
9
IV. AUTHORIZED INVESTMENTS (continued)
DUE DILIGENCE REQUIREMENT
As stated, a thorough investigation of an investment pool or mutual fund is required prior to
investing and on a continual basis. At a minimum, the following information shall be on file for
each pool and/or mutual fund:
1. A description of eligible investment securities, and a written statement of investment
policy and objectives..
2. A description of interest calculations, how interest is distributed, and how gains and
losses are treated.
3. A description of how these securities are safeguarded (including the settlement
process),and how often these securities are priced and the program audited.
4. A description of who may invest in the program, how often, and the size of deposits
and withdrawals.
5. A schedule for receiving statements and portfolio listings.
6. Whether reserves, retained earnings, etc. are utilized by the pool/fund.
7. A fee schedule, and when and how fees are assessed.
8. Whether the pool/fund is eligible for bond proceeds and/or will it accept such
proceeds.
•
PROHIBITED INVESTMENTS
The City of Atascadero shall not invest in any investment instrument/pool/fund unless specifically
allowed under the "Investment Types" section of this policy.
The City of Atascadero shall comply with Government Code Section 53631.5 which states "A
local agency shall not invest any funds pursuant to this article in inverse floaters, range notes, or
interest-only strips that are derived from a pool of mortgages" and that "A local agency shall not
invest any funds pursuant to this article in any security that could result in zero interest accrual if
held to maturity."
LEGISLATIVE CHANGES
Any State of California legislative action that further restricts allowable maturities, investment
types or percentage allocations will be incorporated into the City of Atascadero Investment Policy
and supersede any and all previous applicable language. If the City is holding an investment that
is subsequently prohibited by a legislative change, the City may hold that investment, if it is
deemed prudent by the Finance Review Committee, until the maturity date to avoid an
unnecessary loss.
10
V.INVESTMENT PARAMETERS
i
DIVERSIFICATION
The investments shall be diversified by:
• Limiting investments to avoid overconcentration in securities from a specific issuer or
business sector (excluding Local Agency Investment Fund and U.S. Treasury
securities),
• Limiting investment in securities that have higher credit risks,
• Investing in securities with varying maturities, and
• Continuously investing a portion of the portfolio in readily available funds such as
local government investment pools (LAIFl, or money market funds to ensure that
appropriate liquidity is maintained in order to meet ongoing obligations.
MAXIMUN MATURITIES
In order to minimize the impact of market risk, it is intended that all investments will be held to
maturity.
To the extent possible, the City shall attempt to match its investments with anticipated cash flow
requirements. Unless matched to a specific cash flow, the City will not directly invest in securities
maturing more than five (5) years from the date of purchase or in accordance with state and local
statutes and ordinances. The City shall adopt weighted average maturity limitations (which often
range from 90 days to 3 years), consistent with the investment objectives.
Investments may be sold prior to maturity for cash flow, appreciation purposes or in order to limit
losses, however, no investment shall be made based solely on earnings anticipated from capital
gains.
Because of inherent difficulties in accurately forecasting cash flow requirements, a portion of the
portfolio should be continuously invested in readily available funds.
11
• VI. CASH MANAGEMENT
In order to obtain a reasonable return on public funds, the following cash management practice
will be followed:
1. Maintain maximum in of all City funds not required to meet immediate cash.
flow needs.
2. Except for cash in certain restricted and special funds, the City will consolidate cash
balances from all funds to maximize investment earnings. Investment income will be
allocated to the various funds based on their respective participation and in accordance
with generally accepted accounting principles.
3. Maximize the City's cash flow through immediate deposit of all receipts, use of direct
deposit when available, and appropriate timing of payment to venders.
4. Maximize cash flow information available through the use of only one operating bank
account.
•
12
• VII. EVALUATION OF INVESTMENT PERFORMANCE
The investment portfolio will be designed to obtain a market average rate of return during
budgetary and economic cycles, taking into account the City's investment risk constraints and
cash flow needs.
BENCHMARK COMPARISON
The investment portfolio shall be structured to optimize the return given the risk constraints and
cash flow needs.
Investment performance shall be continually monitored and evaluated by the Finance Review
Committee. Investment performance statistics and activity reports shall be generated on a monthly
basis for presentation to the City Council.
In evaluating the performance of the City's portfolio in complying with this policy, it is expected
that yields on City investments will regularly meet or exceed the average return on a two-year
U.S. Treasury Note. However, a variance of .5% positive or negative from the benchmark is
considered reasonable by the Finance Review Committee for evaluation purposes.
13
VIII. INVESTMENT REPORTING
The City Treasurer shall prepare and submit a monthly investment report to the City Council. This
report will include the following elements relative to the investments held at month-end.
1 Face value.
2. Security description.
3. Coupon rate.
4. Maturity date.
5. Investment rating.
6. Investment type.
7. Purchase date.
8. Cost of security.
• 9. Purchase yield.
10. Estimated market value.
11. Amortized premium/discount.
12. Listing of investment by maturity.
13. Statement relating the report to the Statement of Investment Policy.
14. Statement that there are sufficient funds to meet the next six months' obligations.
14
• IX. INVESTMENT POLICY REVIEW AND ADOPTION
The Statement of Investment Policy shall be submitted annually to the City Council for adoption.
The policy shall be reviewed at least annually to ensure its consistency with the overall objectives
of the City and its relevance to current law and financial and economic trends. Any modifications
made thereto must be approved by the City Council.
15
• Appendix 1: Glossary
The following is a glossary* of key investing terms, many of which appear in GFOA'S Sample
Investment Policy.
Accrued Interest The accumulated interest due on a bond as of the last interest payment•made
by the issuer.
Agency A debt security issued by a federal or federally sponsored agency. Federal agencies are
backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. Government. Federally sponsored agencies (FSAs)
are backed by each particular agency with a market perception that there is an implicit
government guarantee. An example of federal agency is the Government National Mortgage
Association (GNMA). An example of a FSA is the Federal National Mortgage Association
(FNMA).
Amortization - The systematic reduction of the amount owed on a debt issue through periodic
payments of principal.
Average Life - The average length of time that an issue of serial bonds and/or term bonds with a
mandatory sinking fund feature is expected to be outstanding.
• Basis Point - A unit of measurement used in the valuation of fixed-income securities equal to
1/100 of 1 percent of yield, e.g., "1/4" of 1 percent is equal to 25 basis points.
Bid -The indicated price at which a buyer is willing to purchase a security or commodity.
Book Value - The value at.which a security is carried on the inventory lists or other financial
records of an investor. The book value may differ significantly from the security's current value
in the market.
Callable Bond - A bond issue in which all or part of its outstanding principal amount may be
redeemed before maturity by the issuer under specified conditions.
Call Price The price at which an issuer may redeem a bond prior to maturity. The price is
usually at a slight premium to the bond's original issue price to compensate the holder for loss of
income and ownership.
Call Risk-The risk to a bondholder that a bond may be redeemed prior to maturity.
*This glossary has been adapted from an article,entitled"Investment terms for everyday use,"that appeared in the April 5, 1996,issue of Public
Investor,GFOA's subscription investment newsletter.
16
Appendix 1: Glossary(continued)
Cash Sale/Purchase - A transaction which calls for delivery and payment of securities on the
same day that the transaction is initiated.
Collateralization Process by which a borrower pledges securities, property, or other deposits
for the purpose of securing the repayment of a loan and/or security.
Commercial Paper - An unsecured short-term promissory note issued by corporations, with
maturities ranging from 2 to 365 days.
Convexity - A measure of a bond's price sensitivity to changing interest rates. A high convexity
indicates greater sensitivity of a bond's price to interest rate changes.
Coupon Rate - The annual rate of interest received by an investor from the issuer of certain types
of fixed-income securities. Also known as the "interest rate".
Credit Quality - The measurement of the financial strength of a bond issuer. This measurement
helps an investor to understand an issuer's ability to make timely interest payments and repay the
loan principal upon maturity. Generally, the higher the credit quality of a bond issuer, the lower
the interest rate paid by the issuer because the risk of default is lower. Credit quality ratings are
• provided by nationally recognized rating agencies.
Credit Risk - The risk to an investor that an issuer will default in the payment of interest and/or
principal on a security.
Current Yield (Current Return) - A yield calculation determined by dividing the annual interest
received on a security by the current market price of that security.
Delivery Versus Payment (DVP) - A type of securities transaction in which the purchaser pays
for the securities when they are delivered either to the purchaser or his/her custodian.
Derivative Security - Financial instrument created from, or whose value depends upon, one or
more underlying assets or indexes of asset values.
Discount - The amount by which the par value of a security exceeds the price paid for the
security.
Diversification - A process of investing assets among a range of security types by sector,
maturity, and quality rating.
•
17
• Appendix 1: Glossary(continued)
Duration - A measure of the timing of the cash flows, such as the interest payments and the
principal repayment, to be received from a given fixed-income security. This calculation is based
on three variables: term to maturity, coupon.rate, and yield to maturity. The duration of a
security is a useful indicator of its price volatility for given changes in interest rates.
Fair Value - The amount at which an investment could be exchanged in a current transaction
between willing parties, other than in a forced or liquidation sale.
Federal Funds (Fed Funds) - Funds placed in Federal Reserve banks by depository institutions
in excess of current reserve requirements. These depository institutions may lend fed funds to
each other overnight or on a longer basis. They may also transfer funds among each other on a
same-day basis through the Federal Reserve banking system. Fed funds are considered to be
immediately available funds.
Federal Funds Rate-Interest rate charged by one institution lending federal funds to the other.
Government Securities - An obligation of the U.S. government, backed by the full faith and
credit of the government. These securities are regarded as the highest quality of investment.
securities available in the U.S. securities market. See "Treasury Bills,Notes, and Bonds."
Interest Rate- See "Coupon Rate".
Interest Rate Risk - The risk associated with declines or rises in interest rates which cause an
investment in a fixed-income security to increase or decrease in value.
Internal Controls - An internal control structure designed to ensure that the assets of the entity
are protected from loss, theft, or misuse. The internal control structure is designed to provide
reasonable assurance that these objectives are met. The concept of reasonable assurance
recognizes that 1) the cost of a control should not exceed the benefits likely to be derived and 2)
the valuation of costs and benefits requires estimates and judgments by management. Internal
controls should address the following points:
1. Control of collusion - Collusion is a situation where two or more employees are working in
conjunction to defraud their employers.
2. Separation of transaction authority from accounting and record keeping - By separating the
person who authorizes or performs the transaction from the people who record or otherwise
account for the transaction, a separation of duties is achieved.
3. Custodial safekeeping - Securities purchased from any bank or dealer including appropriate
collateral (as defined by state law) shall be placed with an independent third party for custodial
safekeeping.
18
Appendix 1: Glossary (continued)
4. Avoidance of physical delivery securities - Book-entry securities are much easier to transfer
and account for since actual delivery of a document never takes place. Delivered securities
must be properly safeguarded against loss or destruction. The potential for fraud and loss
increases with physically delivered securities.
5. Clear delegation of authority to subordinate staff members - Subordinate staff members must
have a clear understanding of their authority and responsibilities to avoid improper actions.
Clear delegation of authority also preserves the internal control structure that is contingent on
the various staff positions and their respective responsibilities.
6. Written confirmation of transactions for investments and wire transfers - Due to the potential
for error and improprieties arising from telephone and electronic transactions, all transactions
should be supported by written communications and approved by the appropriate person.
Written communications may be via fax if on letterhead and if the safekeeping institution has a
list of authorized signatures.
7. Development of a wire transfer agreement with the lead bank and third-party custodian - The
designated official should ensure that an agreement will be entered into and will address the
following points: controls, security provisions, and responsibilities of each party making and
receiving wire transfers.
Inverted Yield Curve - A chart formation that illustrates long-term securities having lower yields
• than short-term securities. This configurations usually occurs during periods of high inflation
coupled with low levels of confidence in the economy and a restrictive monetary policy.
Investment Company Act of 1940 - Federal legislation which sets the standards by which
investment companies, such as mutual funds, are regulated in the areas of advertising, promotion,
performance reporting requirements, and securities valuations.
Investment Policy - A concise and clear statement of the objectives and parameters formulated
by an investor or investment manager for a portfolio of investment securities.
Investment-grade Obligations - An investment instrument suitable for purchase by institutional
investors under the prudent person rule. Investment-grade is restricted to those obligations rated
BBB or higher by a rating agency.
Liquidity - An asset that can be converted easily and quickly into cash.
Local Government Investment Pool (LGIP) - An investment by local governments in which
their money is pooled as a method for managing local funds.
Mark-to-market The process whereby the book value or collateral value of a security is
adjusted to reflect its current market value.
•
19
Appendix 1: Glossary(continued)
Market Risk - The risk that the value of a security will rise or.decline as a result of changes in
market conditions.
Market Value Current market price of a security.
Maturity - The date on which payment of a financial obligation is due. The final stated maturity
is the date on which the issuer must retire a bond and pay the face value to the bondholder. See
"Weighted Average Maturity."
Money Market Mutual Fund - Mutual funds that invest solely in money market instruments
(short-term debt instruments, such as Treasury bills, commercial paper, bankers' acceptances,
repos and federal funds).
Mutual Fund - An investment company that pools money and can invest in a variety of
securities, including fixed-income securities and money market instruments. Mutual funds are
regulated by the Investment Company Act of 1940 and must abide by the following Securities and
Exchange Commission (SEC) disclosure guidelines:
1. Report standardized performance calculations.
2. Disseminate timely and accurate information regarding the fund's holdings, performance,
• management and general investment policy.
3. Have the fund's investment policies and activities supervised by a board of trustees, which are
independent of the adviser, administrator or other vendor of the fund.
4. Maintain the daily liquidity of the fund's shares.
5. Value their portfolios on a daily basis.
6. Have all individuals who sell SEC-registered products licensed with a self-regulating
organization (SRO) such as National Association of Securities Dealers (NASD).
7. Have an investment policy governed by a prospectus which is updated and filed by the SEC
annually.
Mutual Fund Statistical Services - Companies that track and rate mutual funds, e.g.,
IBC/Donoghue, Lipper Analytical Services, and Momignstar.
National Association of Securities Dealers (NASD) - A self-regulatory organization (SRO) of
brokers and dealers in the over-the-counter securities business. Its regulatory mandate includes
authority over firms that distribute mutual fund shares as well as other securities.
20
Appendix 1: Glossary(continued)
Net Asset Value - The market value of one share of an investment company, such as a mutual
fund. This figure is calculated by totaling a fund's assets which includes securities, cash, and any
accrued earnings, subtracting this from the fund's liabilities and dividing this total by the number
of shares outstanding. This is calculated once a day based on the closing price for each security in
the fund's portfolio. (See below.)
[(Total assets) - (Liabilities)]/(Number of shares outstanding)
No Load Fund -A mutual fund which does not levy a sales charge on the purchase of its shares.
Nominal Yield - The stated rate of interest that a bond pays its current owner, based on par value
of the security. It is also known as the"coupon," "coupon rate," or"interest rate."
Offer - An indicated price at which market participants are willing to sell a security or
commodity. Also referred to as the "Ask price."
Par-Face value or principal value of a bond, typically $1,000 per bond.
Positive Yield Curve - A chart formation that illustrates short-term securities having lower yields
than long-term securities.
• Premium- The amount by which the price paid for a security exceeds the security's par value.
Prime Rate - A preferred interest rate charged by commercial banks to their most creditworthy
customers. Many interest rates are keyed to this rate.
Principal - The face value or par value of a debt instrument. Also may refer to the amount of
capital invested in a given security.
Prospectus - A legal document that must be provided to any prospective purchaser of a new
securities offering registered with the SEC. This can include information on the issuer, the
issuer's business, the proposed use of proceeds, the experience of the issuer's management, and
certain certified financial statements.
Prudent Person Rule - An investment standard outlining the fiduciary responsibilities of public
funds investors relating to investment practices.
Regular Way Delivery - Securities settlement that calls for delivery and payment on the third
business day following the trade date (T+3); payment on a T+1 basis is currently under
consideration. Mutual funds are settled on a same day basis; government securities are settled on
the next business day.
i
21
Appendix 1: Glossary(continued)
Reinvestment Risk - The risk that a fixed-income investor will be unable to reinvest income
proceeds from a security holding at the same rate of return currently generated by that holding.
Repurchase Agreement (Repo or RP) - An agreement of one party to sell securities at a
specified price to a second party and a simultaneous agreement of the first party'to repurchase the
securities at a specified price or at a specified later date.
Reverse Repurchase Agreement (Reverse Repo) - An agreement of one party to purchase
securities at a specified price from a second party and a simultaneous agreement by the first party
to resell the securities at a specified price to the second party on demand or at a specified date.
Rule 2a-7 of the Investment Company Act - Applies to all money market mutual funds and
mandates such funds to maintain certain standards, including a 13-month maturity limit and a 90-
day average maturity on investments, to help maintain a constant net asset value of one dollar
($1.00).
Safekeeping- Holding of assets (e.g., securities)by a financial institution.
Serial Bond - A bond issue, usually of a municipality, with various maturity dates scheduled at
• regular intervals until the entire issue is retired.
Sinking Fund - Money accumulated on a regular basis in a separate custodial account that is
used to redeem debt securities or preferred stock issues.
Swap -Trading one asset for another.
Term Bond - Bonds comprising a large part or all of a particular issue which come due in a single
maturity. The issuer usually agrees to make periodic payments into a sinking fund for mandatory
redemption of term bonds before maturity.
Total Return - The sum of all investment income plus changes in the capital value of the
portfolio. For mutual funds, return on an investment is composed of share price appreciation plus
any realized dividends or capital gains. This is calculated by taking the following components
during a certain period.
(Price appreciation) + (Dividends paid) + (Capital gains) = Total Return
Treasury Bills - Short-term U.S. government non-interest bearing debt securities with maturities
of no longer than one year and issued in minimum denominations of$10,000. Auctions of three-
and six-month bills are weekly, while auctions of one-year bills are monthly. The yields on these
bills are monitored closely in the money markets for signs of interest rate trends.
22
Appendix 1: Glossary(continued)
Treasury Notes - Intermediate U.S. government debt securities with maturities of one to ten
years and issued in denominations ranging from$1,000 to $1,000,000 or more.
Treasury Bonds Long-term U.S. government debt securities with maturities of ten years or
longer and issued in minimum denominations of $1,000. Currently, the longest outstanding
maturity for such securities is 30 years.
Uniform Net Capital Rule- SEC Rule 15C3-1 outlining capital requirements for broker/dealers.
Volatility- A degree of fluctuation in the price and valuation of securities.
"Volatility Risk" Rating - A rating system to clearly indicate the level of volatility and other
non-credit risks associated with securities and certain bond funds. The rating for bond funds
range from those that have extremely low sensitivity to changing market conditions and offer the
greatest stability of the returns ("aaa" by S&P; "V-1" by Fitch) to those that are highly sensitive.
with currently identifiable market volatility risk("ccc-"by S&P, "V-10" by Fitch).
Weighted Average Maturity (WAM) - The average maturity of all the securities that comprise
a portfolio. According to SEC rule 2a-7, the WAM for SEC registered money market mutual
• funds may not exceed 90 days and no one security may have a maturity that exceeds 397 days.
When Issued (WI) A conditional transaction in which an authorized new security has not been
issued. All "when issued" transactions are settled when the actual security is issued.
Yield - The current'crate of return on an investment security generally expressed as a percentage
of the security's current price.
Yield-to-call (YTC) - The rate of return an investor earns from a bond assuming the bond is
redeemed (called) prior to its nominal maturity date.
Yield-to-maturity - The rate of return yielded by a debt security held to maturity when both
interest payments and the investor's potential capital gain or loss are included in the calculation of
return.
Zero-coupon Securities - Security that is issued at a discount and makes no periodic interest
payments. The rate of return consists of a gradual accretion of the principal of the security and is
payable at par upon maturity.
•
23
Appendix 2: Related Government Codes
Government Code \ TITLE 2. GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA \
DIVISION 4. FISCAL AFFAIRS \ PART 2. STATE FUNDS \ CHAPTER 2. SPECIAL
FUNDS\Article 11. Local Agency Investment Fund
GOV §16429.1 There is in the State Treasury the Local Agency Investment Fund, which fund is
hereby created. Notwithstanding Section 13340, all money in the fund is hereby appropriated
without regard to fiscal years to carry out the purpose of this section. The Controller shall
maintain a separate account for each governmental unit having deposits in this fund.
Notwithstanding any other provisions of law, a local governmental official, with the consent of the
governing body of that agency, having money in its treasury not required for immediate needs,
may remit the money to the Treasurer for deposit in the Local Agency Investment Fund for the
purpose of investment.
•
24
Appendix 2: Related Government Codes(continued)
Government Code \ TITLE 5. LOCAL AGENCIES \ DIVISION 2. CITIES, COUNTIES,
AND OTHER AGENCIES \ PART 1. POWERS AND DUTIES COMMON TO CITIES,
COUNTIES, AND OTHER AGENCIES \ CHAPTER 4. FINANCIAL AFFAIRS \ Article
- 2. Deposit of Funds
GOV § 53601. The legislative body of a local agency having money in a sinking fund of, or
surplus money in, its treasury not required for immediate needs of the local agency may invest any
portion of the money that it deems wise or expedient in those investments set forth below. A
local agency purchasing or obtaining any securities prescribed in this section, in a negotiable,
bearer, registered or non-registered format shall require delivery of the securities to the local
agency, including those purchased for the agency by financial advisors, consultants, or managers
using the agency's fund, by book entry, physical delivery, or by third party custodial agreement.
The transfer of securities to the counterparty bank's customer book entry account may be used
for book entry delivery. For purposes of this section "counterparty" means the other party to the
transaction. A counterparty bank's trust department or separate safekeeping department may be
used for the physical delivery of the security if the security is held in the name of the local agency.
Where this section does not specify the limitation on the term or remaining maturity at the time of
the investment, no investment may be made in any security other than a security underlying a
• repurchase or reverse repurchase agreement authorized by this section, that at the time of the
investment has a term remaining to maturity in excess of five years, unless the legislative body has
granted express authority to make that investment either specifically or as part of an investment
program approved by the legislative body no less than three months prior to the investment:
(a) Bonds issued by the local agency, including bonds payable solely out of the revenues from a
revenue-producing property owned, controlled, or operated by the local agency or by a
department,board, agency, or authority of the local agency.
(b) United States Treasury notes, bonds, bills, or certificates of indebtedness, or those for which
the faith and credit of the United States are pledged for the payment of principal and interest.
( c) Registered state warrants or treasury notes or bonds of this state, including bonds payable
solely out of the revenues from a revenue-producing property owned, controlled, or operated by
the state or by a department, board, agency, or authority of the state.
(d) Bonds, notes, warrants, or other evidences of indebtedness of any local agency within this
state, including bonds payable solely out of the revenues from a revenue-producing property
owned, controlled, or operated by the local agency, or by a department, board, agency, or
authority of the local agency.
25
• Appendix 2: Related Government Codes(continued)
GOV§ 53601 (continued)
(e) Obligations issued by banks for cooperatives, federal land banks, federal intermediate credit
banks, federal home loan banks, the Federal Home Loan Bank Board, the Tennessee Valley
Authority, or in obligations, participations or other instruments of, or issued by, or fully
guaranteed as to principal and interest by, the Federal National Mortgage Association; or in
guaranteed portions of Small Business Administration notes; or in obligations, participations, or
other instruments of, or issued by, a federal agency or a United States government-sponsored
enterprise.
(f) Bills of exchange or time drafts drawn on and accepted by a commercial bank, otherwise
known as bankers acceptances. Purchases of bankers acceptances may not exceed 270 days
maturity or 40 percent of the agency's surplus money that may be invested pursuant to this
section. However, no more than 30 percent of the agency's surplus funds may be invested in the
bankers acceptances of any one commercial bank pursuant to this section.
This subdivision does not preclude a municipal utility district from investing any surplus money in
its treasury in any manner authorized by the Municipal Utility District Act (Division 6
(commencing with Section 11501) of the Public Utilities Code).
• (g) Commercial paper of "prime" quality of the highest ranking or of the highest letter and
numerical rating as provided for by Moody's Investors Service, Inc., or Standard and Poor's
Corporation. Eligible paper is further limited to issuing corporations that are organized and
operating within the United States and having total assets in excess of five hundred million dollars
($500,000,000) and having an "A" or higher rating for the issuer's debt, other than commercial
paper, if any, as provided for by Moody's Investors Service, Inc., or Standard and Poor's
Corporation. Purchases of eligible commercial paper may not exceed 180 days maturity nor
represent more than 10 percent of the outstanding paper of an issuing corporation. Purchases of
commercial paper may not exceed 15 percent of the agency's surplus money that may be invested
pursuant to this section. An additional 15 percent, or a total of 30 percent of the agency's surplus
money may be invested pursuant to this subdivision. The additional 15 percent may be so
invested only if the dollar-weighted average maturity of the entire amount does not exceed 31
days. "Dollar-weighted average maturity" means the sum of the amount of each outstanding
commercial paper investment multiplied by the number of days to maturity, divided by the total
amount of outstanding commercial paper.
26
Appendix 2: Related Government Codes(continued)
GOV§ 53601 (continued)
(h) Negotiable certificates of deposit issued by a nationally or state-chartered bank or a state or
federal association (as defined by Section 5102 of the Financial Code) or by a state-licensed
branch of a foreign bank. Purchases of negotiable certificates of deposit may not exceed 30
percent of the agency's surplus money which may be invested pursuant to this section. For
purposes of this section, negotiable certificates of deposit do not come within Article 2
(commencing with Section 53630) except that the amount so invested shall be subject to the
limitations of Section 53638.
(i)(1) Investments in repurchase agreements or reverse repurchase agreements of any securities
authorized by this section, as long as the agreements are subject to this subdivision, including the
delivery requirements specified in this section.
(2) Investments in repurchase agreements may be made, on any investment authorized in this
section, when the term of the agreement does not exceed one year. The market value of securities
that underlay a repurchased agreement shall be valued at 102 percent or greater of the funds
borrowed against those securities and the value shall be adjusted no less than quarterly.
(3) Reverse repurchase agreements may be utilized only when either of the following conditions
are met:
(A) The security was owned or specifically committed to purchase, by the local agency,
prior to December 31, 1994, and was sold using a reverse repurchase agreement on
December 31, 1994.
(B) The security to be sold on reverse repurchase agreement has been owned and fully
paid for by the local agency for a minimum of 30 days prior to sale; the total of all reverse
repurchase agreements on investments owned by the local agency not purchased or
committed to purchase, prior to December 31, 1994, does not exceed 20 percent of the
base value of the portfolio; and the agreement does not exceed a term of 92 days, unless
the agreement includes a written codicil guaranteeing a minimum earning or spread for the
entire period between the sale of a security using a reverse repurchase agreement and the
final maturity date of the same security.
27
Appendix 2: Related Government Codes(continued)
GOV§ 53601 (continued)
(i) Repurchase Agreements (continued)
(4) After December 31, 1994, a reverse repurchase agreement may not be entered into with
securities not sold on a reverse repurchase agreement and purchased, or committed to purchase,
prior to that date, as a means of financing or paying for the security sold on a reverse repurchase
agreement, but may only be entered into with securities owned and previously paid for, for a
minimum of 30 days prior to the settlement of the reverse repurchase agreement, in order to
supplement the yield on securities owned and previously paid for or to provide funds for the
immediate payment of a local agency obligation. Funds obtained or funds within the pool of an
equivalent amount to that obtained from selling a security to a counterpary by way of a reverse
repurchase agreement, on securities originally purchased subsequent to December 31, 1994, shall
not be used to purchase another security with a maturity longer than 92 days from the initial
settlement date of the reverse repurchase agreement, unless the reverse repurchase agreement
includes a written codicil guaranteeing a minimum earning or spread for the entire period between
the sale of a security using a reverse repurchase agreement and the final maturity date of the same
security. Reverse repurchase agreements specified in subparagraph (B) of paragraph (3) may not
be entered into unless the percentage restrictions specified in that subparagraph are met, including
the total of any reverse repurchase agreements specified in subparagraph (A) of paragraph (3).
• (5) Investments in reverse repurchase agreements or similar investments in which the local
agency sells securities prior to purchase with a simultaneous agreement to repurchase the security,
may only be made upon prior approval of the governing body of the local agency and shall only be
made with primary dealers of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
(6) (A) " Repurchase agreement" means a purchase of securities by the local agency pursuant
to an agreement by which the counterparty seller will repurchase the securities on or
before a specified date and for a specified amount and the counterparty will deliver the
underlying securities to the local agency by book entry, physical delivery, or by third party
custodial agreement. The transfer of underlying securities to the counterparty bank's
customer book-entry account may be used for book-entry delivery.
(B) "Securities," for purpose of repurchase under this subdivision, means securities of the
same issuer, description, issue date, and maturity.
(C) "Reverse repurchase agreement" means a sale of securities by the local agency
pursuant to an agreement by which the local agency will repurchase the securities on or
before a specified date, and includes other comparable agreements.
•
28
Appendix 2: Related Government Codes(continued)
GOV§ 53601 (continued)
(i) Repurchase Agreements (continued)
(D) For purpose of this section,-the base value of the local agency's pool portfolio shall
be that dollar amount obtained by totaling all cash balances place in the pool by all pool
participants, excluding any amounts obtained through selling securities by way of reverse
repurchase agreements or other similar borrowing methods.
(E) For purposes of this section, the spread is the difference between the cost of funds
obtained using the reverse repurchase agreement and the earnings obtained on the
reinvestment of the funds.
(j) Medium-term notes of a maximum of five years maturity issued by corporations organized and
operating within the United States or by depository institutions licensed by the United States or
any state and operating within the United States. Notes eligible for investment under this
subdivision shall be rated in a rating category of "A" or its equivalent or better by a nationally
recognized rating service. Purchases of medium-term notes may not exceed 30 percent of the
agency's surplus money which may be invested pursuant to this section.
(k)(1) Shares of beneficial interest issued by diversified management companies that invest in the
• securities and obligations as authorized by subdivisions (a) to 0), inclusive, or subdivision (m) or
(n) and that comply with the investment restrictions of this article and Article 2 (commencing with
Section 53630). However, notwithstanding these restrictions, a counterparty to a reverse
repurchase agreement is not required to be a primary dealer of the Federal Reserve Bank of New
York if the company's board of directors finds that the counterparty presents a minimal risk of
default, and the value of the securities underlying a repurchase agreement may be 100 percent of
the sales price if the securities are marked to market daily.
(2) Shares of beneficial interest issued by diversified management companies that are money
market funds registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission under the Investment
Company Act of 1940 (15 U.S.C. Sec. 80a-1 et seq.).
(3) If investment is in shares issued pursuant to paragraph (1), the company shall have met either
of the following criteria:
(A) Attained the highest ranking or the highest letter and numerical rating provided by not
less than two nationally recognized statistical rating organizations.
(B) Retained an investment adviser registered or exempt from registration with the
Securities and Exchange Commission with not less than five years' experience investing in
the securities and obligations authorized by subdivisions (a) to 0), inclusive, or subdivision
• (m) or (n) and with assets under management in excess of five hundred million dollars
($500,000,000).
29
Appendix 2: Related Government Codes(continued)
GOV§ 53601 (continued)
(k) Shares of beneficial interest (continued)
(4) If investment is in shares issued pursuant to paragraph(2), the company shall have met either
of the following criteria:
(A) Attained the highest ranking or the highest letter and numerical rating provided by not
less than two nationally recognized statistical rating organizations.
(B) Retained an investment adviser registered or exempt from registration with the
Securities and Exchange Commission with not less than five years' experience managing
money market mutual funds with assets under management in excess of five hundred
million dollars ($500,000,000).
(5) The purchase price of shares of beneficial interest purchased pursuant to this subdivision shall
not include any commission that the companies may charge and shall not exceed 20 percent of the
agency's surplus money that may be invested pursuant to this section. However, no more than 10
percent of the agency's surplus funds may be invested in shares of beneficial interest of any one
mutual fund pursuant to paragraph (1).
• (1) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in this section, Section 53635, or any
other provision of law, moneys held by trustee or fiscal agent and pledged to the payment or
security of bonds or other indebtedness, or obligations under a lease, installment sale, or other
agreement of a local agency , or certificates of participation in those bonds, indebtedness, or lease
installment sale, or other agreements, may be invested in accordance with the statutory provisions
governing the issuance of those bonds, indebtedness or lease installment sale, or other agreement,
or to the extent not inconsistent therewith or if there are no specific statutory provisions, in
accordance with the ordinance, resolution, indenture, or agreement of the local agency providing
for the issuance.
(m) Notes, bonds, or other obligations that are at all times secured by a valid first priority
security interest in securities of the types listed by Section 53651 as eligible securities for the
purpose of securing local agency deposits having a market value at least equal to that required by
Section 53652 for the purpose of securing local agency deposits. The securities serving as
collateral shall be placed by delivery or book entry into the custody of a trust company or the trust
department of a bank which is not affiliated with the issuer of the secured obligation, and the
security interest shall be perfected in accordance with the requirements of the Uniform
Commercial Code or federal regulations applicable to the types of securities in which the security
interest is granted.
•
30
Appendix 2: Related Government Codes(continued)
GOV§53601 (continued)
(n) Any mortgage pass-through security,collateralized mortgage obligation, mortgage-backed or
other pay-through bond, equipment lease-backed certificate, consumer receivable pass-
through certificate, or consumer receivable-backed bond of a maximum of five years maturity.
Securities eligible for investment under this subdivision shall be issued by an issuer having an
"A" or higher rating for the issuer's debt as provided by a nationally recognized rating service
and rated in a rating category.of "AA' or its equivalent or better by a nationally recognized
rating service. Purchase of securities authorized by this subdivision may not exceed 20
percent of the agency's surplus money that may be invested pursuant to this section. [As
affected by 1996 legislation]
•
31
Appendix 2: Related Government Codes(continued)
Government Code \ TITLE 5. LOCAL AGENCIES \ DIVISION 2. CITIES, COUNTIES,
AND OTHER AGENCIES \ PART 1. POWERS AND DUTIES COMMON TO CITIES,
COUNTIES, AND OTHER AGENCIES \ CHAPTER 4. FINANCIAL AFFAIRS \ Article
2. Deposit of Funds
GOV § 53631.5. (a) A local agency shall not invest any funds pursuant to this article in inverse
floaters, range notes, or interest-only strips that are derived from a pool of mortgages.
(b) A local agency shall not invest any funds pursuant to this article in any security that
could result in zero interest accrual if held to maturity. However, a local agency may hold
prohibited instruments until their maturity dates. The limitation in this subdivision shall not apply
to local agency investments in shares of beneficial interest issued by diversified management
companies registered under the Investment Company Act of 1940 (15 U.S. SEC. 80a-1, and
following) that are authorized for investment pursuant to subdivision (k) of Section 53601.[As
affected by 1995 legislation]
•
32