Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
12/13/1994, 1 - AMENDMENT TO SECTIONS 8.16.040 AND 8.16.070 OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO MUNICIPAL CODE PROHIBITING SMOKING IN CERTAIN PUBLIC PLACES.
A�pII Ip�p' MEETING DATE: I1lu=111 city of San WIS OBISPO REM NUMBER: / A lllft�e COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT FROM: JEFFREY G. JORGENSE CITY ATTORNEY SUBJECT: AMENDMENT TO SECTIONS 8.16.040 AND 8.16.070 OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO MUNICIPAL CODE PROHIBITING SMOKING IN CERTAIN PIIBLIC PLACES. CAO INTRODUCE AN ORDINANCE TO PRINT AMENDING THE RECOMMENDATION: PROVISIONS OF SECTIONS 8.16.040 AND 8.16.070 OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING PROHIBITING SMOKING IN CERTAIN PIIBLIC PLACES. DISCUSSION: A. Regulation of Smoking in Places of Employment (§8. 16.040) On July 21, 1994 , the Governor signed into law Assembly Bill 13 (A.B. 13) , which establishes very restrictive regulations on smoking in specified places of employment. Because Proposition 188 failed to pass at the November election, A.B. 13 goes into effect on January 1, 1995. (The text of A.B. 13 is attached as Exhibit "A". ) While A.B. 13 applies statewide, and is intended to be the minimum standard for regulation of smoking in places of employment, it also allows more restrictive standards in local ordinances, both for places of employment and other public places generally. Because the City's smoking regulations are more restrictive than State 'law with respect to public places generally, but use a "consensus building" approach with respect to places of employment which in some instances may be less restrictive, it is difficult to reconcile the provisions of A.B. 13 and our current smoking ordinance, short of major revisions to both areas. As an alternative to such major revisions, it is recommended that Section 8. 16. 040 be amended as follows: F. Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, if any provision of this section conflicts with, or differs from, the standards established by Labor Code Section 6404 . 5, as it may from time to time be amended, then the most restrictive standard, whether from this section or Labor Code Section 6404 . 5, shall apply. It is the intent of the Council that this section be interpreted and applied in such a- manner as to prohibit the smoking of tobacco products in all enclosed places of employment to the fullest extent permissible by law. The effect of the proposed revision would be to greatly strengthen our regulations concerning places of employment, by bringing them into compliance with A.B. 13, -while still allowing a complete prohibition if " . . . an accommodation which is satisfactory to all affected nonsmoking employees cannot be reached . . ." (Section 8. 16.040 (B) ) . The proposed revision would also leave our more restrictive standards for smoking in public places intact. B. Violation - Penalty ( 8. 16.070) While there was a flurry of enforcement activity shortly after our smoking ordinance was amended in 1990, there has been widespread compliance since then, and there have not been any formal complaints or citations issued in more than 3 years. However, during the period of concentrated enforcement. in 1990, a weakness was uncovered in § 8. 16. 070 when a bartender was acquitted after a court trial because the judge determined that the word "serving" only applied to an instance when a person is actually being served a drink while smoking. This interpretation created some very practical enforcement problems. While the Court's decision is not binding precedent, it seems appropriate at this time to strengthen the provisions of § 8. 16. 070 to avoid any uncertainty with respect to future enforcement. The proposed amendment would add "accommodating" and "knowingly or intentionally permitting, " to "serving" as a violation of the ordinance. FISCAL IMPACTS Approval or denial of the proposed ordinance amendments will have no fiscal impact on the City. ALTERNATIVES 1. The Council may adopt the proposed ordinance, which is the staff recommendation. 2. The Council may take no action, which would leave the current smoking regulations in place. 3 . The Council may 'propose alternative amendments, or continue action, in which case direction should be given to staff on how the Council wishes to proceed. JGJ/sw Attachments: Exhibit A - Text of AB 13 Exhibit B - Legislative Draft Exhibit C - Proposed Ordinance Exhibit D - Current Smoking Ordinance /-1 CA AB 13 08/26/94 Paae 1 -alifornia 1993-94 Regular Session .nacted ASSEMBLY BILL No. 13 CHAPTER 310 Friedman T An act to add Section 6404 .5 to the Labor Code, relating to occupational safety and health. [Approved by Governor July 21, 1994. Filed with Secretary of State July 21, 1994 . ] LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST AB 131 T. Friedman. Occupational safety and health: tobacco products. The existing California Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1973 , administered and enforced by the Division of Occupational Safety and Health within the Department of Industrial Relations, prohibits any employer from occupying or maintaining any place of employment that is not safe and healthful. It also provides, under specified circumstances, for misdemeanor penalties with respect to violations of the act, except where another penalty is specifically provided. This bill would additionally prohibit any employer from knowingly or Intentionally permitting, or any person from engaging in, the smoking of tobacco products in an enclosed space at specified places of employment. The bill would specify that, for purposes of these provisions, "place of employment" does not include certain portions of a hotel, motel, or other lodging establishments, meeting or banquet rooms subject to certain exceptions, retail or wholesale tobacco shops, private smoker's lounges, cabs of motortrucks or truck tractors as specified, bars and taverns and gaming clubs subject to certain prescribed conditions, warehouse facilities, theatrical production sites, and medical research or treatment sites, employee breakrooms under prescribed conditions, patient smoking areas in long-term health care facilities, as defined, and specified smoking areas designated by employers with fewer than 5 employees. It would also specify that, for purposes of these provisions, an employer who permits any nonemployee access to his or her place of employment on a regular basis has not acted knowingly or intentionally if he or she has taken certain reasonable steps to prevent smoking by a nonemployee. This bill would also specify that the smoking prohibition set forth in these provisions shall constitute a uniform statewide standard for regulating the smoking of tobacco products in enclosed places of employment, and shall supersede and render unnecessary specified local ordinances regulating the smoking of tobacco products in enclosed places of employment. This bill would additionally provide that a violation of the smoking prohibition set forth in these provisions is an infraction punishable by Exhibit A /_J CA AB 13 08/26/94 Page 2 specified fines. It would further provide that the smoking prohibition shall be enforced by local law enforcement agencies, as specified, but would specify that the division shall not be required to respond to any complaint regarding a violation of the smoking prohibition, unless the employer has been found guilty of a 3rd violation of the smoking prohibition within the previous year. By establishing a new prohibition the violation of which is, under specified circumstances, an infraction, this bill would create a new crime and would thereby establish a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. The people of the State of California do enact as follows: SECTION 1. Section 6404 .5 is added to the Labor Code, to read: 6404.5. (a). The Legislature finds and declares that regulation of smoking in the workplace is a matter of statewide interest and concern. It is the intent of the Legislature in enacting this section to 'prohibit the smoking of tobacco products in all (100 percent of) enclosed places of employment in this state, as covered by this section, thereby eliminating the need of local governments to enact workplace smoking restrictions within their respective jurisdictions. It is further the intent of the Legislature to create a uniform statewide standard to restrict and prohibit the smoking of tobacco products in enclosed places of employment, as specified in this section, in order to reduce employee exposure to environmental tobacco smoke to a level that will prevent anything other than insignificantly harmful effects to exposed employees, and also to eliminate the confusion and hardship that can result from enactment or enforcement of disparate local workplace smoking restrictions. Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, it is the intent of the Legislature that any area not defined as a "place of employment" pursuant to subdivision (d) or in which the smoking of tobacco products is not regulated pursuant to subdivision (e) shall be subject to local regulation of smoking of tobacco products. (b) No employer shall knowingly or intentionally permit, and no person shall engage in, the smoking of tobacco products in an enclosed space at a place of employment. (c) For purposes of this section, an employer who permits any nonemployee access to his or her place of employment on a regular basis has not acted knowingly or intentionally if he or she has taken the following reasonable steps to prevent smoking by a nonemployee: (1) Posted clear and prominent signs, as follows: (A) Where smoking is prohibited throughout the building or structure, a sign stating "No smoking" shall be posted at each entrance to the building or structure. f' 7 CA AB 13 08/26/94 Page 3 (B) Where smoking is permitted in designated areas of the building )r structure, a sign stating "Smoking is prohibited except in designated areas" shall be posted at each entrance to the building or structure. (2) Has requested, when appropriate, that a nonemployee who is smoking refrain from smoking in the enclosed workplace. For purposes of this subdivision, "reasonable steps" does not include (A) the physical ejectment of a nonemployee from the place of employment or (B) any requirement for making a request to A nonemployee to refrain from smoking, under circumstances involving a risk of physical harm to the employer or any employee. (d) For purposes of this section, "place of employment" does not include any of the following: (1) Sixty-five percent of the guest room accommodations in a hotel, motel, or similar transient lodging establishment. . (2) Areas of the lobby in a hotel, motel, or other similar transient lodging establishment designated for smoking by the establishment. Such an establishment may permit smoking in a designated lobby area that does not exceed 25 percent of the total floor area of the lobby or, if the total area of the lobby is 2 , 000 square feet or less, that does not exceed 50 percent of the total floor area of the lobby. For purposes of this paragraph, "lobby" means the common public area of such an establishment in which registration and other similar or related transactions, or both, are conducted and in which the establishment's guests and members of the public typically congregate. (3) Meeting and banquet rooms in a hotel, motel, other transient lodging establishment similar to a hotel or motel, restaurant, or public convention center, except while food or beverage functions are taking place, including setup, service, and cleanup activities, or when the room is being used for exhibit purposes. At times when smoking is not permitted in such a meeting or banquet room pursuant to this paragraph, the establishment may permit smoking in corridors and prefunction areas adjacent to and serving the meeting or banquet room if no employee is stationed in that corridor or area on other than a passing basis. (4) Retail or wholesale tobacco shops and private smokers' lounges. For purposes of this paragraph: (A) "Private smokers' lounge" means any enclosed area in or attached to a retail or wholesale tobacco shop that is dedicated to the use of tobacco products, including, but not limited to, cigars and pipes. (B) "Retail or wholesale tobacco shop" means any business establishment the main purpose of which is the sale of tobacco products, including, but not limited to, cigars, pipe tobacco, and smoking accessories. (5) Cabs of motortrucks, as defined in Section 410 of the Vehicle Code, or truck tractors, as defined in Section 655 of the Vehicle Code, if no nonsmoking employees are present. �r� CA AB 13 08/26/94 Page 4 (6) Warehouse facilities. For purposes of this paragraph, "warehouse facility" means a warehouse facility with more than 100,000 square feet of total floor space, and 20 or fewer full-time employees working at the facility, but does not include any area within such a facility that is utilized as office space. (7) Gaming clubs, in which smoking is permitted by subdivision (f) . For purposes of this paragraph, "gaming club" means any gaming club as defined in Section 19802 of the Business and Professions Code or bingo facility as defined in Section 326.5 of the Penal Code that restricts access to minors under 18 years of age. (8) Bars and taverns, in which smoking is permitted by subdivision (f) . For purposes of this paragraph, "bar" or "tavern" means a facility primarily devoted to the serving of alcoholic beverages for consumption by guests on the premises, in which the serving of food is incidental. "Bar or tavern" includes those facilities located within a hotel, motel, or other similar transient occupancy establishment. However, when located within a building in conjunction with another use, including a restaurant, "bar" or "tavern" includes only those areas used primarily for the sale and service of alcoholic beverages. "Bar" or "tavern" does not include the dining areas of a restaurant, regardless of whether alcoholic beverages are served therein. (9) Theatrical production sites, if smoking is an integral part of the story in the theatrical production. (10) Medical research or treatment sites, if smoking is integral to the research and treatment being conducted. (11) Private residences, except for private residences licensed as family day care homes, during the hours of operation as family day care homes and in those areas where children are present. (12) Patient smoking areas in long-term health care facilities, as defined in Section 1418 of the Health and Safety Code. (13) Breakrooms designated by employers for smoking, provided that all of the following conditions are met: (A) Air from the smoking room shall be exhausted directly to the outside by an exhaust fan. Air from the smoking room shall not be recirculated to other parts of the building. (B) The employer shall comply with any ventilation standard or other standard utilizing appropriate technology, including, but not limited to, mechanical, electronic, and biotechnical systems, adopted by the Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board or the federal Environmental Protection Agency. If both adopt inconsistent standards, the ventilation standards of the Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board shall be no less stringent than the standards adopted by the federal Environmental Protection Agency. CA AB 13 08/26/94 Page 5 (C) The smoking room shall be located in. a nonwork area where no ine, as part of his or her work responsibilities, is required to enter. :or purposes of this paragraph, "work responsibilities" does not include any custodial or maintenance work carried out in the breakroom when it is unoccupied. (D) There are sufficient nonsmoking breakrooms to accommodate nonsmokers. (14) Employers with a total of five or fewer employees, either full-time or part-time, may permit smoking where all of the following conditions are met: (A) The smoking area is not accessible to minors. (B) All employees who enter the smoking area consent to permit smoking. No one, as part of his or her work responsibilities, shall be required to work in an area where smoking is permitted. An employer who is determined by the division to have used coercion to obtain consent or who has required an employee to work in the 'smoking area shall be subject to the penalty provisions of Section 6427 . (C) Air from the smoking area shall be exhausted directly to the outside by an exhaust fan. Air from the smoking area shall not be recirculated to other parts of the building. (D) The employer shall comply with any ventilation standard or other standard utilizing appropriate technology, including, but not limited to, mechanical, electronic, and biotechnical systems, adopted by the Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board or the federal Environmental Protection Agency. If both adopt inconsistent standards, the ventilation standards of the Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board shall be no less stringent than the standards adopted by the federal Environmental Protection Agency. This paragraph shall not be construed to (i) supersede or render inapplicable any condition or limitation on smoking areas made applicable to specific types of business establishments by any other paragraph of this subdivision or (ii) apply in lieu of any otherwise applicable paragraph of this subdivision that has become inoperative. (e) Paragraphs (13) and (14) of subdivision (d) shall not be construed to require employers to provide reasonable accommodation to smokers, or to provide breakrooms for smokers or nonsmokers. (f) (1) Except as otherwise provided in this subdivision, smoking may be permitted in gaming clubs, as defined in paragraph (7) of subdivision (d) , and in bars and taverns, as defined .in. paragraph (8) of subdivision (d) , until the earlier of the following: (A) January 1, 1997. (B) The date of adoption of a regulation (i) by the Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board reducing the permissible employee exposure level to environmental tobacco smoke to a level that will prevent anything other than insignificantly harmful effects to exposed /-7 CA AB 13 08/26/94 Page 6 employees or (ii) by the federal Environmental Protection Agency establishing a standard for reduction of permissible exposure to environmental tobacco smoke to an exposure level that will prevent anything other than insignificantly harmful effects to exposed persons. (2) If a regulation specified in subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1) is adopted on or before January 1, 1997, smoking may thereafter be permitted in gaming clubs and in bars and taverns, subject to full compliance with, or conformity to, the standard in the regulation within two years following the date of adoption of the regulation. An employer failing to achieve compliance with, or conformity to, such a regulation within this two-year period shall prohibit smoking in the gaming club, bar, or tavern until compliance or conformity is achieved.. If the Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board and the federal Environmental Protection Agency both adopt regulations specified in subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1) that are inconsistent, the regulations of the Occupational Safety Standards Board shall be no less stringent than the regulations of the federal Environmental Protection Agency. (3) If a regulation specified in subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1) is not adopted on or before January 11 1997, the exemptions specified in paragraphs (7) and (8) of subdivision (d) shall be inoperative on and after January 11 1997, until such a regulation is adopted. Upon adoption of such a regulation on or after January 1, 1997, smoking may thereafter be permitted in gaming clubs and in bars and taverns, subject to full compliance with, or conformity to, the standard in the regulation within two years following the date of adoption of the regulation. An employer failing to achieve compliance with, or conformity to, such a regulation within this two-year period shall prohibit smoking in the gaming club, bar, or tavern until compliance or conformity is achieved. If the Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board and the federal Environmental Protection Agency both adopt regulations specified in subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1) that are inconsistent, the regulations of the Occupational Safety Standards Board shall be no less stringent than the regulations of the federal Environmental Protection Agency. (g) The smoking prohibition set forth in this section shall constitute a uniform statewide standard for regulating the smoking of tobacco products in enclosed places of employment and shall supersede and render unnecessary the local enactment or enforcement of local ordinances regulating the smoking of tobacco products in enclosed places of employment. Insofar as the smoking prohibition set forth in this section is applicable to all (100 percent of) places of employment within this state and, therefore, provides the maximum degree of coverage, the practical effect of this section is to eliminate the need of local governments to enact enclosed workplace smoking restrictions within their respective jurisdictions. (h) Nothing in this section shall prohibit an employer from prohibiting smoking in an enclosed place of employment for any reason. (i) The enactment of local regulation of smoking of tobacco products in enclosed places of employment by local governments shall be suspended only for as long as, and to the extent that, the (100 percent) smoking prohibition provided for in this section remains in effect. In the event I'd CA AB 13 08/26/94 Page 7 oreviously enacted, and to enact and enforce new, restrictions on the ;cooking of tobacco products in enclosed places of employment within their jurisdictions, including a complete prohibition of smoking. Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, any area not defined as a "place of employment" or in which the smoking is not regulated pursuant to subdivision (d) or (e) , shall be subject to local regulation of smoking of tobacco products. (j) Any violation of the prohibition set forth in subdivision (b) is an infraction subject to subdivision (d) of Section 17 of the Penal Code and, notwithstanding Section 19.8 of the Penal Code, is punishable by a fine not to exceed one hundred dollars ($100) for a first violation, two hundred dollars ($200) for a second violation within one year, and five hundred dollars ($500) for a third and for each subsequent violation within one year. This subdivision shall be enforced by local law enforcement agencies including, but not limited to, local health departments, as determined by the local governing body. (k) Notwithstanding Section 6309, the division shall not be required to respond to any complaint regarding the smoking of tobacco products in an enclosed space at a place of employment, unless the employer has been found guilty pursuant to subdivision (j) of a third violation of subdivision (b) within the previous year. (1) If any provision of this act or the application thereof to any person or circumstances is held invalid, that invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications of the act that can be given effect without the invalid provision of application, and to this end the provisions of this act are severable. SEC. 2. No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to Section 6 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution because the only costs which may be incurred by a local agency or school district will be incurred because this act creates a new crime or infraction, changes the definition of a crime or infraction, changes the penalty for a crime or infraction, or eliminates a crime or infraction. Notwithstanding Section . 17580 of the Government Code, unless otherwise specified in this act, the provisions of this act shall become operative on the same date that the act takes effect pursuant to the California Constitution. END OF REPORT �- 9 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT Chapter 8 . 16 SMOKING PROHIBITED IN CERTAIN AREAS Section 8.16.040 Regulation of smoking in the workplace. Each employer who operates a workplace in the city shall, within sixty days of the effective date of the ordinance codified in this, section, adopt, implement and maintain a written smoking policy which shall contain, at a minimum, the following provisions and requirements: A. Any nonsmoking employee may object to his or her employer about smoke in his or her workplace. Using already available means of ventilation or separation or partition of office space, the employer shall attempt to reach a reasonable accommodation, insofar as possible, between the preferences of nonsmoking employees and smoking employees. However, an employer is not required by this section to make any expenditures or structural changes to accommodate the preferences of nonsmoking or smoking employees. B. If an accommodation which is satisfactory to all affected nonsmoking employees cannot be reached in any given workplace, the preferences of nonsmoking employees shall prevail and the employer shall prohibit smoking in that workplace. Where the employer prohibits smoking in a workplace, the area in which smoking is prohibited shall be clearly marked with signs. C. The smoking policy required by this section shall be announced within three weeks of adoption to all employees working in workplaces in the city and posted conspicuously in all workplaces in the city under the employer's jurisdiction. D. This section is not intended to regulate smoking in the following places and under the following conditions within the city: 1. A private home which may serve as a workplace; 2. Any property owned or leased by a state or federal governmental agency. (Ord. 1048 §. 1 (part) , 1985) E. Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, every employer shall have the right to designate any place of employment, or any portion thereof, as a nonsmoking area. �`., N�stw�.�hstand�.ng any flt�er iar©vl,s�.an o€.. �.� sectson, �f �:�1�' ���bv9.S�.�� t�� "�h�,� �4'Ct�t�Tt �".G�ii��•�•C�� w��r Ct7� C�3.�`�`�7:5 �`�011ti� 'moi standazds establ�.�sed �y' l�nr Ccde 5��t�+ort ;64fl4 ;B� as it may €cosi r�hetl�er from . this.,sact�.�rrs; sir L�ahs<x� .Cade St3�4?Ti 'ti4;0� �, Sha3 atp3 isner�t 'a the Gpi� t aGt�01yt me sr ted:ancl applied �n such a manner as t lsrx�hihlt the smokoM ExUb.i t B .......................................... :::..... :::......::.....:....:::::::: :1:yv:`::.....ry.Yui........:.:i::.::'..: >y..............:::y'::0`......`.......................:"...........^...._............y::....i::::. ..:: ............................................................. ......!0:......:...........:i::: .... .........�:.y.....;::,y Section .8. 16.070 Violation--Penalty. Any person who violates any provision of Section 8 . 16. 030 or 8 . 16. 040 of this chapter by smoking in a posted no smoking area, or by failing to post or cause to be posted„a no smoking sign required by this chapter, or by serving ..q..x 2� n�nmcsxtc any person who violates this chapter by smoking .in a„ posted no smoking area, or;1a iawiz c 1 X.h., i�11� � te t.�i eha�gter� ley >smaTtn an a p+ sted no stnctking areas is guilty of an infraction; 'a'na is subject to punishment as provided for in chapter 1. 12 of this code. (Ord. 1048 § 1 (part) , 1985) ORDINANCE NO. (1994 Series) AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO AMENDING SECTIONS 8.16. 040 AND 8 . 16. 070 OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO MUNICIPAL CODE PROHIBITING SMOKING IN CERTAIN PUBLIC PLACES NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Section 8. 16. 040 is hereby amended by adding Section (F) to read as follows: 118. 16. 040 Regulation of smoking in the workplace. "F. Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, if any provision of this section conflicts with, or differs from, the standards established by Labor Code Section 6404 .5, as it may from time to time be amended, then the most restrictive standard, whether from this section or Labor Code Section 6404.5, shall apply. It is the intent of the Council that this section be interpreted and applied in such a manner as to prohibit the smoking of tobacco products in all enclosed places of employment to the fullest extent permissible by law. " SECTION 2 . Section 8 . 16. 070 is hereby amended to read as follows: 118. 16. 070 Violation--Penalty. "Any person who violates any , provision of Section 8. 16.030 or 8 . 16.040 of this chapter by smoking in a posted no smoking area, or by failing to post or cause to be posted a no smoking sign required by this chapter, or by serving or accommodating any person who violates this chapter by smoking in a posted no smoking area, or by knowingly or intentionally permitting any person to violate this chapter by smoking in a posted no smoking area, is guilty of an infraction, and is subject to punishment as provided for in Chapter 1. 12 of this code. " SECTION 3 . A summary of this ordinance, approved by the City Attorney, together with the ayes and noes, shall be published at least (3) days prior to its final passage in the Telegram Tribune, Exhibit C Ordinance No. (1994 Series) Page Two a newspaper published and circulated in said City, and the same shall go into effect at the expiration of thirty (30) days after its said final passage. A copy of the full text of this ordinance shall be on file in the office of the City Clerk on and after the date following introduction and passage to print and shall be available to any interested member of the public. INTRODUCED AND PASSED TO PRINT by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo at a meeting held on the day of 1994, on motion of , seconded by and on the following roll call vote: Ayes: Noes: Absent: Mayor Allen Settle ATTEST: City Clerk APPROVED: City Administrative Officer A o l -/3 SMOKING PROHIBITED IN CERTAIN AREAS Ordinance No.1172(1990 Series) BE rr ORDAINED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Chapter&16,Smoking Prohibhod In Certain Areae,is hereby amended to read as follow.: Chapter&16 Smoking Proha ted in Certain Areas Sections: &16.010 Purpose. &16.020 Definitions. &16.030 Prohibition In certain public places. &16.040 Regulation of smoking in the workplace. &16.050 Posting of signs. &1&060 Compliance. 6.16.070 Vfclation—Penalty. &1&080 Where smoking not regulated. &16.090 Severability &16.010 Purpose. Because smoking of tobiwoo or any other weed or plant Is a positive danger to health and a canes of material discomfort and a health hazard to those who we present in confined plows,and In order to servo public health,safety and welfare,the declared purpose of this chapter is to prohibit the smoking of tobacco or any,other weed or plant in certain areas which are Load by or open to the pubric (Ord. 1048 4 1 (part),1ti85) &16.020 Definitions. For the purpose of this chapter,the following words.hall haus the following meanings A. 'Bar means an area which is devoted to the serving of alcoholic beverages for consumption by guest on the promises and In which the serving of food is only incidental to the consumption of such beverage. B. 'Employes'freers any individual who receives remuneration for services periormsd within the city. Q '6mployee moans any person,partnership or owporation who employs the services of an individual person or persons. 0. 'Smoke•or'smoking'moans and includes the carrying of a pipe,dgar or dgwM of arty kind which is burning,or ft igniting of a pips,dgar or cigarette of any kind which Is burning. E 'Service Ens'means an Indoor fins or area where persons await servlet,of any kind,regardless of whether or not such service involves exchange of money. Such service shall Include,but is not limited to,arise,giving of Information,dime sorts or advice,and bander of money or goods. F. •ResturanC means any coffee shop,cafeteria,luncheonette,tavern.cocktail lounge,sandwich stand,soda fountain, private and public school cafeteria or eating establishment, and any other eating establishment organization,dub, Including veterans'dub,boardinghouse or guesthouse,which gives or offers for sale food to tM public,guest,patrons or ernpioyees as well as kitchens In which food is prepared on the premises for servirng elsewhere,khduding catering facilities. G. 'Retell Tobacco Store'means a retail store utilized primarily for the sale of tobacco products and accessories and In which the sale of other products Is merely Incidental. K 'Workplaos'means any interior spans under the control of a public or private employer which employees normally c oy a rlaas kreesfde�nce is Including, OlkPlaw under this s� (Ord.1areaft � (MV,1oyee 9es)conference morns,and &16.030 Prahlbition In certain public places Smoking shall be prohibited In the following places A. Sevators, museums, libraries, galleries. public transportation facilities open ft the public and service Tines of establishment doing business with the general public B.Waiting rooms,sleeping rooru or pubke hallways of every private or public health cars facility.Including.but not limited to hospitals,clinks,physical therapy tadWes.doctors'offices,and dentists'offices•,provided further,that this prohibition shall not prevent the establishment of a separate waiting room In which smoking Is permitted.as long as there also exist a waiting room in fns same facility in which smoking is prohibited. In bed space areas of health facilities used for two or more patients,slaking shag be prohibited unites all patient within the room are smokers and request M writing upon the health care faaWs admission forks to be placed in a room where smoking is permitted. G AN buildings.vehicles,or other enclosed areas occupied by city staff,owned or leased by the oily,or otherwise operated by 1M city,except In areas which the city administrator may designate as smoking areas. The city administrator may designate a smoking area oniy If the area Involved: 1. Is not regularly open to the public and 2. Does not require major room or building modification;and 3. Is not regularly oo vpied by nonsrmokem in any dispute arising under the smoking area dedgnatlons made by the dly administrator under this chapter,the right of fns nonsmoker shall be glen precedence. Q Within any building not open to the sky which is primarily used for of designated for the purpose@ of exhibiting any I otion picture,stage drama,lecture,mwkal radial or other similar performance whenever open to the public.except smoking which is a part of a sags performance,including all restroorm and any area commonly referred to as a lobby; E Within all public areas In sysry retail store,including.but not limited 61.rotas service estabtisf msrue,rsafi food production and marketing establishments,retail,grocery.and drug stores; F AD rezvocros open for public ws; G. Within every restaurant and bar. K All areas in a leundromat open 10 and available for use by the public. (Ord.1048 5 1 (pan).1985) L Within all areae available to and customarily used by the general public in as businesses and nonprofit entities patronized M the public.Including,but not limited to,professional offices and other offices,banks,hotels and motels. J. Nolwithstane ing any other provision of this section.any owner,operator.manager or other person who controls any eatabfishmerd or bcft descM*d in thi@ section may declare that entire establishment cc facility as a nonsmoking establishment &16.040 Regulation of smoking in the workplace. Each employer who operates a workplace in the city shall,within sixty days of the effective date of the ordinance codified In this section,adopt,Implement and maintain a written smoking policy which shall contain,at a minimum,the following provisions and requiements Exhibit D / —/� A. My nonsmoking employee may object to his or her employer about smoke in his or her workplace. Using already available means of ventilation or separation or partition of office space, the employer shall attempt to reach a reasonable socommodation,Insofar as possible,between the preferences of nonsmoking employees and smoking employees. However,an employer Is not required by this section to make any expenditures or structural changes to accommodate the preferences of nonamoking or smoking employees. 8. If an accommodation which is satisfactory to all affected nonsmoking employees cannot be reached in any given workplace.the preferences of nonsmoking employees shall prevail and the employer shall prohibit smoking in that workplace.Where the employer prohibits smoking in a workplace,the area in which smoking is prohibited shall be dearly marked with signs. C. The smoking policy required by this section shall be announced within three weeks of adoption to all employees working In workplaces in the city and posted conspicuously in all workplaces In the city under the employer's jurisdiction. 0. This section is not Intended to regulate smoking in the following places and under the following conditions within the 1. A private horse which may serve as a workplace; 2 Any property owned or leased by a state or federal governmental agency. (Ord. 1048§ 1 (part),1985) E Notwithstanding any other provision of this section,every employer shall have the right to designate any place of employmnent or any portion thereof.as a noncrrhoking area &76.050 Posting of sigma Signs which designate smoking or no smoking areas established by this chapter shall be conspicuously posted in every room,building of other place so covered by this chapter. The manner of such posting shall be at the discretion of the owner. opwaw, manager or other person having control of such room, building or other place so long as clarity, sufficiency and conspiauumm are apparent In communicating the Intent of this chapter. (Ord. 194$§ t (part).1985) MGM CompGance. A. The city administrative officer or his designated representative shall be responsible for compliance with this chapter as to ballides which are owned,operated or leased by the dry. The finance director shell provide each business license applicant with a copy of this chapter. B. The owner,operator or manager of arty facility,business or agency within the purview of this chapter shall campy with the provisions of this chapter. Notice of these regulations shall be given to all applicants for a business license. Such owner, operator or manager shat post or cause to be posted all no smoking signs required by this chapter and shall not allow service to any person who violates this chapter by smoking in a posted no smoking area C. Any placeof employment conducted or operated without compliance with the provision of Section 8.16.040 of this chapter applicable thereto shall be and the same is declared to be a public nuisance. Whenever there N reason to believe such public nuisance exists,any affected employee or any resident of the city,in his or her own nems,may maintain an action in equity to abate sad prevent such nuisance and to perpetually enjoin the employer from maintaining or permitting It. Upon the granting of equile on e.16 Of this cdhapter shat be Gable for the attorneys fess,as a court of competentnay be determinedrisdiction,an bytther determined i toed by the party bringing acdork. Q The city admlNatratihie officer or his designee may enforce Sailors&16.040 of this insofar by either of to toGowlnp 1. Serving notice requiring the correction of any violation of tnet section;or 2 Requesting the dry attomey to maintain an action for Injunction to enforce the provision o ur Section SA ofolstim this chapter,to cause the correction of any such violation,and for assessment and recovery of a civil penalty of ing atomrnsys E employer who violates Section&16.040 of this chapter may be Gable for a dvG penalty,not to exceed five hundred dollars,which penalty shall be assessed and recovered in a civil action brought In the name of fns people of the city. Each day such violaton is committed or permitted to continue shaft constitute a separate offense and shat be punishable as such. My Penalty assessed and recovered in an action brought pursuant to this subsection shat be paid to the finance director of the dry. F. in undertaking the enforcement of Section LI 6.040 of this chapter,the city is assuming an undertaking only toft general welfare. promote nor Gable in money damages mdamanot�or otherwiseming toto arty persoor n who claimsnor is it goat(11)the dg any ory or obligation of its officers or employees brrean fts offiows and ched, any such obfigatiom and(2)the breach proximately caused Injury. (Ord.1948§ 1 (Carl),19&% 8.16.070 Violation-Penft Any person who violates any provision of Section 8.16.030 or&1&04001"chapter by smoking Ina pow vblatem s noM area,or by facing to post or cause to be posted a no smoking sign required by this chapter,or by serving any person fhtsaptat chapter off this code.smoking ei (Ord 10 5 f nposted 8 smoking area, is guilty of an Infradian,and le subject to punishment as provided for in 985) 8 76 08D Where ulated Nol mg�other provision of this chapter to the contrary.f following areas shall not be subject to the smoking astrictions of this chapter 1. Private residences,except when used as a child ewe or health rare facility. 2 Hotel and motel rooms rented to guesfa. 3 Retall tobacco stores. 4. Aprivate enclosed air=workplace occupied exclusively by smokers,even though such an office workpiace may be visited by nonsmokers. E Any wea exterior to the building in which the establishment or facility is located. L Any enclosed rooms in an establishment or facifty which are being used wwmy for private functions. 6.16.090 SeverabidY If any provision.dace,se.to toe or paragraph of this chapter or the application thereof to any person or circumstances shall be hold invalid.such imaridity,shall not affect the other provision of this declaredchapter hi h can be given effect without the invalid proviiion at application,and to this end ft provisions of this chapter are MEETING AGENDA j ,fE a'i 3 "c� ITEM# 1227 Sydney Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 December 13, 1994 Ef)dRUNCIL ❑ CDD DIR ❑ FIN DIR /Mayor Allen Settle AO ❑ FIRE CHIEF Council Member Bill Roalman ATTORNEY ❑ PWDIR Council Member Dave Romero CLEWJORIG ❑ POLICE CHF Council Member Dodie Williams ❑ MGMTTEAM ❑ RECDIR ❑ C I ❑ UTIL DIR Dear Honorable Mayor and Council Members: 1� ❑ PERS DIR . We do not envy you today. Choosing someone to fill a council vacancy from so large a field of applicants is a daunting task. Without a special election you cannot be certain your choice will reflect the wishes of a majority of voters. But we are weary of campaign rhetoric and are not eager to endure more. So we ask you to make this decision on our behalf, keeping the following points in mind: • Some of you have indicated a preference for Marc Brazil. However, obtaining the third-highest number of votes in the recent election does not prove he would obtain a majority in a new election with different opponents. • That candidate Brazil spent many hours campaigning does not mean he deserves your vote. Many of the applicants have given far more hours in service to our community. • That candidate Brazil outspent all other candidates has no bearing on his qualifications. Given the opportunity we would choose JANET KOURAKIS or WES CONNER. With their long service to San Luis Obispo they have proven themselves dedicated citizens. We believe either one would fairly evaluate all points of view and lend a needed conciliatory atmosphere to council deliberations. Thank you for your time and good luck tonight. Sincerely, Dale and Sharon Sutliff RECENE® Utt; 1 3 1994 CITY COUNCIL SANLU)q OBISPO, CA TING AGENDA DATE 12'13' ITEM i# December 12, 1994 MEMORANDUM TO: Council Colleagues/ �y ; FROM: Mayor Allen Settle" SUBJECT: COUNCIL NOMINATION PROCESS I would like to suggest a method of deliberation for the appointment process for Tuesday evening. Each Council Member will receive a list of the candidates on a transparency. Council Members would then be requested to circle five names on this list which would be given to the City Clerk. To meet Brown Act requirements, all names from each Council Member would be placed on the overhead projector. If any one applicant has at least three votes, that person's name can then be placed in nomination. If more than one candidate has at least three votes then the City Council would be free to discuss which of those names they would prefer to place in nomination. If the lists indicate that no applicant has received more than two names, the agenda item will be continued to Wednesday, Dec. 14th at 7:00 p.m. for further deliberation. This suggestion is being offered as a method of deliberation and no way precludes any Council Member from offering a recommendation. AKS:ss NCIL 0 CDD DIR 0 FIN DIR 0 FIRE CHIEF EY 0 PW DIM CSG 0 POLICE CHF RECEIVED 0 Iuclu TFAM 0 REC DIR DEC 12 1994. ° T � 0 UTIL DIR 0 PERS DIR CITY COUNCIL DAN LUIS OBISPO,CA 7ETING AGENDA LATE 1 Z'1319 ITEM # Mayor Allen Settle and Councilmembers RECEIVED Bill Roalman, Dave Romero and Dodie Williams DEC 7 1994 December 7, 1994 City of San Luis Obispo CITY COUNCIL MN Lula oalseD,re This is a copy of the remarks I made at last evening's Council meeting in support of Wes Conner's application for consideration of appointment to the City Council. It may be of assistance as you spend this week reviewing the qualifications of each applicant. Incidentally, I think it was prudent of you to not take any actions last night and give yourself time to carefully consider each of the many fine applicants who expressed their willingness to serve our city. Mr. Mayor, members of the City Council, my name is Ken Schwartz and I reside at 201 . Buena Vista in the city of SLO. Having sat where you sit as a former Mayor of SLO, I know the job demands for the position you must fill I was therefor pleased when Wes Conner determined to apply for the open council seat. I have known Wes for over 25 years. Allow me to list those attributes which I believe qualify Wes Conner for this appointment: * Wes thinks in comprehensive terms- to be a landscape architect one must absolutely do so. * Wes is "good" with people, a good listener and a fair and impartial decision maker- to be a respected university professor one must absolutely be so. ' * Wes believes in public service. His application lists his many services to SLO. He practices the citizen involvement he believes in. * Wes'many travels have given him a perspective of SLO that few of us have-he has seen how others live and the condition of their cities. As a result he understands the absolute need to balance community concerns for economic growth and environmental protection. I believe the appointment of Wes Conner would add to the Council a mature and reasoning individual As a landscape architect,Wes would bring a design training and expertise to the Council which would be invaluable in giving attention to those concerns that will assure that the city's visual quality will continue to be enhanced with future development. ank y u, WlqpwNCL O CDD O C d DIR O FIN DIA O FIRE CHIEF O PWDIR O POLICE CHF D M13MT TEAM O AEC DIA O UTILD PERS DIR I .-=:TING AGENDA DATE 12-13'9 ITEM # / DEVIN GALLAGHER PO Box 1826 • San Luis Obispo,California 93406 • phone 805/546-8435• fax 805/546-0318 Good Evening Mayor ...and :..Council Members My name is Devin Gallagher and I live at 1105 George Street I am here before you tonight because it is my social obligation to offer my skills and expertise to the citizens of this community by serving on the City Council. My background includes an extensive history of government service and contributions to this community that is detailed in my application submitted yesterday.I am currently a self employed owner/builder specializing in rehabilitation of historic residential structures and creating affordable housing on infill sites.Through this process I have developed a positive working relationship with City staff. My accomplishments include: the renovation of four San Luis Obispo primary historic structures;resulting in two Obispo Beautiful Awards of Commendation, and a placement on the National Register of Historic Places. At present I am involved in many local activities but am primarily focusing my energies on the KCBX Live Oak Music Festival and the Friends of Point San Luis Lighthouse Organizing Committee. I believe that my accomplishments and abilities are well suited to the tasks involved in governing this community.I would be honored to serve. I am a practical individual who can identify the critical issues facing this community and work with others to resolve them It is, after all, the compilation of little decisions that ib&es a io?'vn we 9anned and its citizen's lives rewarding. We,as a community,Wed to rgach beyond the unproductive banter of the growth verses no growth'conf. t that has for too long held us hostage. We need to rise to the understanding that we live here because of the high quality of this environment and that we canwe have an established economic base. We should identify the those impacts of growth that are not in our best interest,and find solutions that are creative and pragmatic.Few citizens object to another neighbor but almost all of us object to more congestion and pollution. I would like to work with this community to preserve the environment resources that we all desire while continuing to resolve the difficulties of providing affordable housing,effective circulation,and economic vitality. These community objectives can coexist. . Tonight,I am honored to have the support of Dr.Dan Krieger and Kathleen War6eld. RECEIVED DEC �up M6 1994 CITY CLERK SAN LUIS OEISPO, C:1 MMING AGENDA -�_ 647-2-- 94 ITEM # We are fortunate to live here on the Central Coast. Our climate, our geography, our people, our heritage all contribute to the good life. How we nurture and protect the good life is the basic question that all citizens would like answered. HOUSING BUSINESSES AIR WATER TAXES CLEANReceive [) TRAFFIC GREEN BELTS SECURITY SCHOOLS HOMELESSNESS DEC Q b 1994 This list is endless, but it is all part of the good life. 7fi'JM CITY CLERK San Luis Obispo no longer is an island here on the Central -'e81AI9tQsisRO.CA What we do in SLO impacts the entire region, and what happens elsewhere in the region impacts what happens in SLO. We must be aware of how others view us. We must be aware of how others feel about us. How many of you took the time to view the Pioneer Day parade in Paso Robles? Or the Colony Days activity in Atascadero? Or Cambria's Pineborado extravaganza? And most recently the Boat Parade in Morro Bay last weekend? Are you aware of the massive negative feelings in the North County about raising the height of the Salinas Dam? All the downstream Salinas River users in the north county are talking to one another, for the first time, about how to stop SLO from storing more water in Santa Margarita Lake. We must be aware! We must allay their fears. We must become their friends and associates if we hope to succeed in this new water effort. The cartoon strip POGO had a saying, "We have met the enemy, and they is us! " We should not be our own enemy! Issues affecting one portion of the county, affect all portions of the county, and we need to acknowledge that! We need to be active in searching out new business/industry for our city. We can be selective, we can romance those that want to move from the BIG CITY to a smaller area. There are plenty of them out there, it's just a matter of selection. With the beginning of a Space Port at Vandenburg our city should be on the front line for support business at VAFB. We can't sit back and relax and expect to survive. The trick is to live within parameters we have imposed upon ourselves. And, we should be able to do this. If the goal is to keep SLO as the financial center of the county, then we must work at that goal or else we will loose to the super city of Atascadero-Templeton-Paso Robles. Our city must be . dynamic, concerned, progressive, and innovative. Just because solutions worked well in the past is no reason to believe they are viable for the present or the future. What will our community and environment look like--be like-- in 10 or 20 years? It is up to us to make decisions today that will stand the test of time for tomorrow. It is not an impossible task, but it is a task that I want to be a part of! I appreciate the opportunity to speak to you this evening, and I wish you well in your search for a fifth council member. -I NG�E NG�ITEM # a� AGENDA I derley' Property Services Quality service since 1981 s December 6, 1994 Mayor and Members of the Council City of San Luis Obispo I would like to address you in person this evening concerning Devin Gallagher's application to serve on the City Council. However, prior commitments preclude my being at the meeting and I must offer this letter instead. I am most pleased to be in a position to endorse Devin's application. I have known Devin for many years, and have watched his industry, enthusiasm, and determination as he has pursued every project he has undertaken. He has many skills which would serve you well on the council: he works well with people, is a consensus-seeker, and has an attitude and approach which help him find unique solutions -to difficult problems. Not only am I familiar with Devin's work in the business world, but we hang out together at KCBX's Live Oak Music Festival. Devin has been a lifesaver there more than once. He is always willing to give more time than he has, go further than most, and he still comes up smiling. Devin will always do his very best to find solutions which work for everyone. If you choose to appoint him to the vacant position on the Council, you will have acquired an asset you might otherwise find it impossible to obtain. I recommend him to you. Sincerely, Kathleen Warf ' d DEC On 6 1994 owner 7fN CITY CLERK SAN LUIS OBISPO,CA member community OSlOCOtgnf Residential and Homeoxvners Association Dlanagemcnt . Home Repairs and Sen-ice 820 Walnut Street • San Luis Obispo, California 93401 (805) 544-9093 • FA.X (805) 544-6215 '"FETING AGENDA / ..ATE 13'` ITEM #_ December 77 1994 Allen Settle, Mayor City of San Luis Obispo Dear Mr. Settle: As a citizen of San Luis Obispo, I urge you to come to the only fair and reasonable solution to appointing a council member for the vacant seat. I truly believe that Marc Brazil is the correct choice. First, as many have argued, he should be appointed because was the third highest receiver of votes in the general election. But, the question you should ask yourself is "Where were all these other people when it was time to step up and run for City Council in the General Election?". Mark Brazil is the only person in the selection pool (now that Pat Veesart has dropped out) who had the courage to run a campaign. As you know, it takes a lot of spirit and hard work to run a campaign for city council. All the others who have indicated an interest now are unjustly trying to avoid the rigors of a campaign, while still having the honor and power of a city council seat. If this issue goes to a special election, I'll bet the field would be significantly slimmed down. The council should definitely avoid a costly special election and make its first important decision of the term without dividing the community. Please show the people of San Luis Obispo that this council is reasonable and fair by making the only reasonable choice for the vacant seat. I think you should know that my opinion is .not guided by any special interests. I do not even know Marc .Brazil, but I truly believe that his appointment to this vacant seat is the only fair solution. Sincerely, CJS CIL ❑]DIR qiu' ie Bolger [103 ❑ 1445 Prefumo Cyn Rd. #16 ❑ EFRECEIVED y ❑San Luis Obispo, CA 93405 CLERWORIG ❑ HF DEC 7 1994 M13UT TEAM ❑C D ILE ❑ SANG UiS 091SP0 CA OR IEETI ,rAGENDA games L, Killian DATE STEM it 1685 CORONA COURT SAN LUIS OBISPO. CALIFORNIA 98401 • (806) 646-837a COUNCIL '3 CDD DIR CAO ❑ FIN DIR December 8, 1994 ACRO ❑ FIRE CHIEF ATTORNEY O PW DIR Mayor Allen Settle cLERw�DwG ❑ PoucECHF City Hall ❑ MGMT TEAM O RECD1R 990 Palm Street ❑ READ FILE ❑ UT1L D1R San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 FlUr ❑ PERS DIR 1A FA C-51&411 F Dear Allen: ` I am writing to urge you to support Walter Millar's candidacy for the open seat on the City Council. I have known Walter for five-and-a•half years. He is a person of high integrity and character. He is bright, energetic, caring, committed, and highly competent He is my friend, but more to the point, I believe him to be the best candidate for this open position because: • he is superbly qualified • he is a consensus builder • the only agenda he would bring to the Council is his genuine desire to serve the entire community of San Luis Obispo Walter brings to this position a broad base of applicable experience. His background in..city management, as a police officer, and as-a-practicing-attorney-- uely— qualifies him for the Council. He has had first hand experience in provi ing city services and in budgeting and he knows the importance of a professional city staff. Additionally his involvement in school and child related issues has made him acutely aware of the necessity to retain local control. But tome more important than the accomplishments Walter can demonstrate in his resume are his character, his integrity, his beliefs, and his values. This is a critical time for our community. I don't believe we need further rhetoric and divisiveness. Walter has the ability to listen to what people have to say. Whether he agrees or disagrees with a particular point of view, he listens to it and respects the right to that point of view. He is not tied to any faction in the city. He believes in approaching issues by looking for the common ground upon which consensus can be built and issues can be resolved rather than focusing on counter productive philosophical differences. He believes in protecting our physical environment, but does not subscribe to the notion that the Quality of Life and Economic Vitality are mutually exclusive. In fact, he believes that they are interdependent and that a key element of Quality of Life is the economic vitality that allo_we nur rhilAren and grandch�the oppo€tunity to live here and productively raise their families. It is this continuum, from generation to generation, that will ultimately determine the real value of;the Council's decisions. I believe that Walt Millar will bring a much needed balance to the Council.As an appointed member he would have no agenda to push beyond using his experience to work constructively with the other members of the Council. RECEIVED DEC 0 8 1994 CITY CLERK CAM i i uS r)Rlcz.pr) r;h SENT DY:SAN LUIS PRINTBCOPY :12- 8-94 1:40PM 8055460834- 8057817109:# 3 Mayor Allen Settle December 8, 1994 Page 2 I believe that he Is uniquely qualified to help deal with the critical Issues facing our community and I know that he will work diligently and effectively with all the members of the Council to improve the overall Quality of Life for every citizen of San Luis Obispo. f Time is short and you have a number of excellent candidates to choose from but, if you can, take the time to meet and get to know Walter. Explore his views on the issues facing the city. I think you will find the time well spent. Thank you very much for your consideration. I know you are facing a pivotal decision that will effect the entire community now and in the future. I wish you all the best in making this decision and I urge you to carefully consider Walter Millar for this position. Respectfully 0 James L. Killian )LKJmk MEETING AGENDA I DATE ITEM 0. 1 STEVEN R. WATHEN 4403 Poinsettia Street San Luis Obispo, California 93401 (805) 541-4954 rATTORNEY OUNCIL ❑ CDD DIR AO ❑ FIN DIR December 8, 1994 CAO ❑ FIRE CHIEF ❑ PW DIR Mayor Allen Settle LERIGORIG O POLICE CHF Y GMT TEAM ❑ REC DIR City Council DFILE ❑ UTIL DIR San Luis Obispo, CA E ❑ PERS DIR Dear Mayor Settle, Thank you for considering my application for appointment to the Council . I know that I am in good company with the other candidates you are considering. In what may be a difficult choice I wish you the best of luck. I have been at many council meetings and have personally headed many other board meetings and committees. When I ask myself how truly competent a team member I would be, I feel sure you would be pleased with my performance. There is a choice to try to politic one's way into gaining this appointment. I will not. I believe we have many mutual friends who could call you for input, but be assured that any calls you may get on my behalf are unsolicited and I have, in fact, asked my friends and supporters not to call . On the other hand, I have supplied a list of names that would be excellent references for you to contact as you consider my application for the Council. I believe that I would be an asset to the San Luis Obispo City Council and give the Council the balance that will help to tackle current issues and create new vision for San Luis Obispo. Again, thank you for your time and consideration. I would be very interested in meeting with each of you again and look forward to hearing from you. Wi sincere regards, LJ .4- L, RECEIVED Steven R. Wathen DEC 7 1994 ; SAN LUIS COUNCIL CA,/ E -FETING AGENDA L� ` ITEM # December 10, 1994 RECEIVED DEC 12 1994 cLTr couNclu AOCIL ]UTILDIR R SAN LUIS OBISPD, i10 O HIEF:Mayor Alan Settle EY City Hall CLERKIORIG CHF990 Palm Street ❑ M TEAM RSan Luis Obispo, CA 93401 ❑ REAPIRRe: Council. Vacancy 18 �. Dear Mayor Settle: As a result of the recent election a vacancy has been created on the Council, and the members are faced.with the very difficult task of choosing a person to provide a wholeness to the board. Under any circumstances choosing an individual to fill the vacancy would be a difficult task, but in the present case this is acerbated by the fact that it is one of the first significant actions the new Council must take. A number of qualified and dedicated individuals have submitted their names for consideration, and any. of those individuals would probably be a good choice. However, there is only one candidate who has subjected himself to the scrutiny of the electorate and expended a substantial number of hours, and personal funds, to place his name in contention for a seat on the City Council. Marc Brazil not only participated in a process available to those who have submitted their names for consideration, but by the number of votes cast he was the runner-up in the competition. It is my opinion that Marc Brazil possess the skills, qualifications and background which would make him an excellent choice for this vacancy. In addition to these factors, the spirit of fairness should certainly weigh heavily in his favor as the logical appointment, as he was the next choice of the citizens of San Luis Obispo. When weighing the factors in this matter, and the qualifications of each of the candidates, I sincerely hope that you consider the fact that Marc Brazil is the only candidate who has taken the initiative to expose himself to the general public in the very demanding election process, and this fact, coupled with . his qualifications and position as the runner-up in the election, .place him in the position of being the obvious candidate to fill the vacancy. Mayor Alan Settle December 10, 1994 Page 2 I strongly urge you to appoint Marc Brazil to fill the vacancy on the San Luis Obispo City Council. Sincerely, Mary Jo Devitt 1690 San Luis Drive San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Telephone: 805/541-1650 DEC-12-'94 MON 08:38 ID: CDF SLU 805-5436909 TEL NO: MEETING # 6E�4 __.. TE 1213- ITEM # Post-IP brand fax transmittal memo 7671 w er page. . >b 6LQJ S "oe" 00. Robert Lewin & Harlie Schmidt Dept. Phone 1336 Pismo Street Fear San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 (805)541-461$ The Honorable Dr. Allen Settle Mayor of San Luis Obispo City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo CA 93401 12/08/94 Dear Allen, Just a quick note as I know your time is valuable. Deciding who to pick as a councilmember is a difficult decision and one that the council and the city will live with during a decisive period. Whomever you decide to pick, I have every bit of confidence that it will be the correct decision. I would however, like to express my confidence in Steve Wathen as the most qualified person for the position of City Councilmember. Steve is an articulate, responsible, caring individual who is well suited for this position. I think you and he would form a strong bound and insure that the city is propelled in the proper direction. Like you, Steve is not stalwart on issues, but able to find compromise and solutions. Good luck in making this decision. I stand behind you completely in your final decision. Sincerely, 90PI/I Robert Lewin P.S. Congratulations and good luck on becoming our mayor. Let the games begin! 1 OILI"VNCII ❑ CDD DIR GAO ❑ FIN DIR RECEIVE 7 TTORNEY ❑ FIRE DIR CHIEF ,DEC. 12 19V4 0 ❑ RPEC OIC HF MN Luis OBISPO.CA ❑ C IlE ❑ PERS DlR WALTER MILLAR "A ITING AGENDA 1159 VISTA DEL LAGO _1iTEf?ITEM # l SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93405 805-541-4418 December 11 , 1994 Council Member Dodie Williams City of San Luis Obispo R G 888 Morro St. DEC 12 1994 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 SAN�Nc 081STClr, CA Dear Mrs. Williams, Thank you again for taking the time to call and discuss the upcoming Council appointment with me. I enjoyed speaking with you and I learned a great deal. During our conversation we were discussing the people who had signed. my petition. After becoming sidetracked on one of the names we did not revisit the topic. I thought that I should provide you with a more complete response. The following are some of the citizens who signed on my behalf: Dana and Katie Asper-Nelson are owners of Hurley's Pharmacy (Hurley's is one of two independent pharmacies in the city) Marie Tritt is a six grade teacher at C.L. Smith. Varian Tritt is the owner of Physician's Billing Service. Tim Edson is the owner of" Mo Hotta Mo Betta Foods".. Tim Irving is an engineer at Diablo Canyon. Shirley Irving is a homemaker and a mainstay of the C.L_ Smith volunteer programs. Brian Hagler is a C.H.P. sergeant. Martha Hagler is a teacher at Pacific Continuation School. Jim Killian is the owner of San Luis Print and Copy. Angie King is an attorney specializing in Elder Law. The remaining people are known to me through my work at C.L. Smith and Boy Scouts of America. I am very pleased that these fine people were willing to support my appointment and I wanted to tell you a little more about them. Thanks again for calling . Continued success in your work on the Council. S 'lice ell r� , FAOMLJ❑ IIRo ' CHIEFIRWalter Millar CEDHF DIRlDIR DIR ...cETING AGENDA DEC 1994 DATE&A- ITEM # 1 December 8, 1994 CITY CLFRK Ur COUNCIL 0 CDD DIR .,AN LUIS ODOM. G,`, O RN DIR �A10 O RRE CHIEF IxATTORNEY 0 PW DIR Honorable Mayor & Council Members OKLERIGORI0 0 POLICE CHF City of San Luis Obispo 13 MGVr TEAM 0 REC DIR 990 Palm Street do FILE 0 UTILDIR San Luis Obispo, CA 0 PERS DIR Dear Mayor Settle and Council Members Roalman, Romero & Williams, I am writing this letter to relay a few thoughts I have regarding. the appointment of the council seat vacated by Mr. Settle during the recent election. I do not, envy any of you in the decision you must make regarding this situation, but life must move on and a decision must be made for the benefit of this city and those who choose to reside here. Each of you have stated over and over again that the City of San Luis Obispo is a beautiful place to live and that the well being of her economy and future prosperity are paramount for the future. These are all very admirable statements but now the time has come to reinforce those '.statements With actions. The clock is ticking and time is running out. In April of this year I was approached by Marc Brazil. and asked for my support in the upcoming election for the city council of San Luis Obispo. Upon my first meeting, I did not give Marc a clear indication of my support, but as time moved on, I realized that this young man had what it would take to make a difference in this city. My original thoughts were proven correct in the dedication and determination that he put forth in the steps that followed to November 8th. It seemed as though he never rested, continually moving. I told him on several occasions that if he did not slow down, he would drop. But his response to me was that there was a job that needed to be done and slowing down would not get that. job done. Not only was he trying to run his campaign, work full time, but study as well. That in itself should tell you a little about Marc. He is determined! Our city needs new ideas if she is to maintain the quality of life that we have all grown so accustomed to enjoying. San Luis Obispo is not the fabled city of Brigadoon where we all wake up for one day each year. The world around us is changing and we must be prepared to grow with that change. The problems of yesterday are not the same problems we face today. I have heard numerous times from people in our city that Marc does not have the experience necessary to maintain a seat on our council. In the first place, I was not aware that there were any prerequisites for this elected position. Secondly, I believe that Marc brings with him more experience than any of us could hope to obtain in the political arena. How . much more than responsible positions in Washington D.C. could we ask for? Human Resources, Budget Planning, Community Service at the national level, and the list goes on. Do these qualities and experience not speak for themselves? I guess 1 could fall back on the old adage "The People Have Spoken". That is something you may not want to hear, but we are a democracy. Each of you represent the constituents who placed you in office. What about the 6,000+ constituents who would have liked to place Marc in office. Do their voices go unheard. Because Mrs. Williams received a few less votes than Mr. Roalman, does that make her voice any less valuable? No, it does not. I do not know what else to say except to make the correct choice and place Mark in the .5th seat. Show me that you have the best interests of the city in mind. Allow for change, presentation of new ideas, and most importantly, the democratic process to continue. �Retfully, 7 Carl M. Lemon II 2548 Augusta San Luis Obispo, Ca. 93401