HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC_9_08_2026_Public Comment Received by Email1
From:John Billings <>
Sent:Tuesday, September 8, 2026 10:53 AM
To:City Clerk
Subject:Zoning of 3660 El Camino Real
Follow Up Flag:Flag for follow up
Flag Status:Flagged
As I understand, the new General Plan would have the zoning for 3660 El Camino Real be Commercial.
I'm requesting to keep a mixed use option open as the 2 parcels to the immediate south are mixed use
and multifamily. Directly across the street the property is zoned MU-3.
It seems there will continue to be higher demand for residential than commercial as on-'line retail has
put a big hit on non-service commercial. Rather than adding housing by loading a neighborhood with
ADU's, a planned residential development seems preferential.
As I own the property outright, Richard Low of ADS in Cambria has proposed a joint venture mixed use
project with a low income housing focus. We are in the early stages of planning what we hope would be a
legacy project in the best interest of the community.
thank you for your consideration,
John Billings
ATTENTION: EXTERNAL SENDER. Use caution when opening links and attachments.
Public Comment Received by Email
9/08/26
City Council Meeting
Item H1
1
From: Justin Kelton <justin@sla.md>
Date: September 4, 2026 at 1:28:54 PM PDT
Subject: Please Remove From Consent Agenda For Review & Consideration, Item 6
Dear Mayor and Council Members,
I am writing to share concerns regarding the proposed resolution supporting the Paso
Robles-led Alliance model for countywide ambulance services.
I support the stated goals of improved response-time accountability, better technology
and dispatch, expanded behavioral-health resources, greater transparency, and
continued improvement in patient care. However, the more fundamental question is
whether the City should enter into this new arrangement at all, given the significant
financial and operational commitments it could create.
The proposed Alliance would require millions of dollars in startup costs, yet it remains
unclear what financial responsibility each participating city would assume or what its
maximum potential exposure could be. Before moving forward, the City should
understand its responsibility for startup expenses, operating deficits, capital
expenditures, fleet replacement, administrative costs, and unforeseen liabilities.
The financial projections also appear to rely significantly on PPGEMT reimbursement
revenue. That revenue should be viewed cautiously given potential changes recently
considered by CMS that could tie reimbursement more closely to Medicare rates and
substantially reduce the revenue anticipated under the Alliance model. The Alliance
should be evaluated financially under scenarios in which this revenue is significantly
reduced.
There is also an important difference between projected benefits and actual financial
obligations. Greater efficiency, additional revenue, and improved services are
Public Comment Received by Email
9/08/26
City Council Meeting
Item D6
2
anticipated, but they have not yet been demonstrated. The costs and liabilities of
creating this new system, however, would be very real.
The Council should also consider whether describing the Alliance as a more “local and
community-based” model accurately reflects its structure. The Alliance would still
subcontract ambulance operations to a private provider, including the proposed
involvement of American Medical Response (AMR), a large national ambulance
company. This raises a reasonable question about how substantially different the
Alliance would be from the existing private-provider model.
The existing ambulance system already provides personnel, equipment, infrastructure,
and decades of operational experience without requiring cities to make any startup
investment. San Luis Ambulance is also charging $1300.00 less than the maximum
rates permitted under the existing County structure.
Many of the proposed improvements—including stronger performance standards, better
technology, greater transparency, improved response accountability, and expanded
specialized services—could potentially be achieved through contractual and operational
requirements without creating an entirely new organizational and financial structure.
For these reasons, I believe the City should first determine whether joining the Alliance
is necessary and whether its benefits justify the financial and operational risks, rather
than assuming participation is the appropriate course.
At a minimum, the Council should have clear answers regarding:
1. Total startup costs and each city's financial responsibility.
2. The City's maximum potential financial exposure.
3. Responsibility for operating deficits and future capital expenses.
4. The impact of potential reductions in PPGEMT reimbursement.
5. Measurable improvements over the existing ambulance system.
6. Long-term administrative and operational costs.
7. Financial and contractual consequences if a city later withdraws.
This is an important decision involving essential public safety services and potentially
significant long-term financial obligations. I respectfully encourage the Council to
carefully consider whether the City should support or enter into this arrangement in the
first place, and to weigh the demonstrated benefits of the existing system against the
projected benefits and potential liabilities of the Alliance.
Thank you for your consideration and your service to the community.
JUSTIN KELTON
President / CEO
805-543-2626
✉ justin@sla.md
궼궾궽 3546 S. Higuera Street, San Luis Obispo, CA
93401