HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/17/1999, Agenda & PRELIMINARY 1999-2001 FINANCIAL PLAN tagenaa uistriDution List
.-?/98)
i. -Unpaid Subscriptions:
(All mtgs.unless o/w noted)
A ?resident
A- -esident
BIA eborah Holley
council agcnaa Chamber of Commerce
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO Cuesta College / K. Roberts
CITY HALL, 990 PALM STREET Bill Thoma / Chamber of Comm.
Co. Board of Spvrs.
Paul Hood, Co.Administration
Housing Authority
Monday, May 17,191 KCBX
KCOY
Wednesday, May 19,1 KCPR: (2) Gen.Mgr. & News Dir.
KDDB
KEYT
KGLO
7:00 P.M. BUDGET WORKSHOF KKJG
KSBY
KUHL
KVEC
KPRL
CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Allen K. Settle Library (front desk)
Mustang Daily
New Times (front desk)
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Fac.Bell / V. Montalban
Pac. Gas & Elec. / B.Burke
Planning Comm. (W Comm. Dev.)
ROLL CALL: Council Members John Ewar So. Calif. Gas / V. Sterling
Schwartz, ViCouncil of Govts / R. DeCarli
Vice Mayor Dave I
League of Women Voters
"elegram-Tribune (front desk)
not to exceed 15 minutes tota "is interest Action etr.
PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD I
I � E LO / Geoffry Land
The Council welcomes your input. You may address the Council b Red.forQual.Neigh / C.Sanders
City Clerk prior to the meeting. At this time, you may address the Sierra Club / Gary Felsman
items on the Consent Agenda. Time limit is three minutes. State SLO Property Owners Assoc. f
take action on issues not on the agenda, except that members Fred Strong (The Citizen) f
statements made or questions posed by persons exercising It Sonic Cable/Jackie
54954.2). Staff may be asked to follow up on such items. Staff rep UNOCAL/J. Bray
each item referred to on this agenda are on file in the City Clerk's C Telegram Tribune/S.Lyons
Peg Pinard/SLO County `
s
1. PRELIMINARY 1999-2000 FINANCIAL PLAN. (;
II.Subscriptions Paid or
May 17, 1999: Preliminary Financial Plan Reviev E` Provided
Programs. (3 Hours) (recr.mtcs.onlv) :
May 19, 1999: Continued Review; General Fund John Wiley esq.
CIP . Easter Rents, Inc.
( ) (3 Hours) IMS/S.Krautheim
EDA (Engr. Dev. Assoc.)
RECOMMENDATION: Review and consider the Prelim Ellenburg Capital Corp.
Linnenbach
2000. Local Government Services
RRM Design Group / LeeAnne
A. ADJOURN. Vista Information Services
Wallace, John L. & Assocs.
Walter Bros. Construction Co.
® A. J. Diani Construction
Fugro/McClelland
Regular City Council meetings are broadcast on KCPR,91.3 FM. The City of; Cannon Assoc.
in all of its services,programs and activities. Telecommunications Device for the Deaf(Sc ST O Assoc of Realtors
the meeting if you require a hearing amplification device.For more agenda information,u . 'nleY-
Horn
He„-itage Oaks Bank
I
g:\groups\clerk\agenda.lst\agdist.wp
I
council agenba
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
CITY HALL, 990 PALM STREET
Monday, May 17,1999
Wednesday, May 19,1999
ACTION UPDATE
7:00 P.M. BUDGET WORKSHOPS Council Chamber
990 Palm Street
CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Allen K. Settle
ROLL CALL: Council Members John Ewan, Jan Howell Marx, Ken
Schwartz, Vice Mayor Dave Romero, Mayor Allen K. Settle
PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD (not to exceed 15 minutes total)
The Council welcomes your input. You may address the Council by completing a speakers slip and giving it to the
City Clerk prior to the meeting. At this time, you may address the Council on items that are not on the agenda or
items on the Consent Agenda. Time limit is three minutes. State law does not allow the Council to discuss or
take action on issues not on the agenda, except that members of the.Council or staff may briefly respond to
statements made or questions posed by persons exercising their public testimony rights (Gov. Code Sec.
54954.2). Staff may be asked to follow up on such items. Staff reports and other written documentation relating to
each item referred to on this agenda are on file in the City Clerk's Office in Room 1 of City Hall.
1. PRELIMINARY 1999-2001 FINANCIAL PLAN. (STATLER/410-02)
May 17, 1999: Council review of the Preliminary Financial Plan Review; General
Fund Operating Programs. (3 Hours)
ACTION:
1) Council conducted an in-depth review of the Preliminary Financial Plan
for 1999-2001.
2) Council gave direction to staff to bring back for reconsideration, as part
of the Circulation Element Update, the existing policy recommending
the closure of the Broad Street off-ramp.
Council Agenda Tu. ay, May 18, 1999
May 19, 1999: Council Review of the General Fund Capital Improvement
Projects (CIP). (3 Hours)
ACTION:
1) Conducted an in-depth review of the CIP.
2) Approved the portion of the proposed budget as it relates to vehicle
replacement with the following direction to staff:
a) bring back a review of the fleet management policy in the Fall,
b) defer vehicle purchases (with the exception of public safety and
specialized vehicles) until after the review, and
c) seek Council approval for replacement if staff determines there is
a need before the adoption of the budget(5:0).
3) CAO agreed to review and come back with a recommendation for a
reduced level of participation in the Performing Arts Center Equipment
CIP.
A. ADJOURNED.
2
council agenba
CITY OF SAN LUIS OB ISP O
CITY HALL, 990 PALM STREET
Monday, May 17,1999
Wednesday, May 19,1999
7:00 P.M. BUDGET WORKSHOPS Council Chamber
990 Palm Street
CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Allen K. Settle
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL: Council Members John Ewan, Jan Howell Manx, Ken
Schwartz, Vice Mayor Dave Romero, Mayor Allen K. Settle
PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD(not to exceed 15 minutes total)
The Council welcomes your input You may address the Council by completing a speakers slip and giving it to the
City Clerk prior to the meeting. At this time, you may address the Council on items that are.not on the agenda or
items on the Consent Agenda. Time limit is three minutes. State law does not allow the Council to discuss or
take action on issues not on the agenda, except that members of the Council or staff may briefly respond to
statements made or questions posed by persons exercising their public testimony rights (Gov. Code Sec.
54954.2). Staff may be asked to follow up on such items. Staff reports and otherwritten documentation relating to
each item referred to on this agenda are on file in the City Clerk's Office in Room 1 of City Hall.
1. PRELIMINARY 1999-2000 FINANCIAL PLAN. (STATLER/410-02)
May 17, 1999: Preliminary Financial Plan Review; General Fund Operating
Programs. (3 Hours)
May 19, 1999: Continued Review; General Fund Capital Improvement Projects
(CIP). (3 Hours)
RECOMMENDATION: Review and consider the Preliminary Financial Plan for 1999-
2000.
A. ADJOURN.
® Regular City Council meetings are broadcast on KCPR 91.3 FM. The City of San Luis Obispo is committed to include the disabled
in all of its services,programs and activities. Telecommunications Device for the Deaf(805)781-7410. Please speak to the City Clerk prior to
the meeting if you require a hearing amplification device.For more agenda information,call 781-7103.
councit ,�
j acEnaa Report
C I TY OF SAN L U IS O B I S P O
FROM: John Dunn, City Administrative Offic
Bill Stat ler,Director of Finance X-
SUBJECT: PRELIMINARY 1999-01 FINANCIAL PLAN
CAO RECOMMENDATION
Review and consider the Preliminary Financial Plan for 1999-01 at the budget workshops
scheduled for May 17 and 19, 1999.
DISCUSSION
Enclosed for your review and information in preparing for the May 17 and 19 budget workshops
are the following three documents:
■ Preliminary Financial Plan. This includes:
• The budget message from the CAO highlighting key issues facing us (Section A)
• Policies and objectives, including revised work programs for major City goals
(Section B)
• Simple graphics and charts summarizing the City's budget(Section C)
• Operating programs(Section D)
• Capital improvement plan(CIP)projects and funding sources (Section E)
• Debt service requirements (Section F)
• Changes in financial position for each of the City's operating funds (Section G)
• Financial and statistical tables(Section IT)
• Budget reference materials(Section I)
■ Appendix A: Significant Operating Program w Note. These appendices are
Changes. Thus appendix provides additional intended to be used as
supplemental resources in the
supporting documentation for each of the significant event that Council members have
operating program changes proposed in the questions on a program or project
Preliminary Financial Plan. An overview is included as they review the Preliminary
in the appendix that further describes its purpose, Financial Plan. In short,while the
organization and content. Council may to choose to read
the Appendices from"cover-to-
cover,"this same information is
■ Appendix B: Capital Improvement Plan Projects. summarized in the Preliminary
This appendix provides supporting documentation Financial Plan.
for each of the CIP projects proposed in the
Preliminary Financial Plan. An overview is included in the appendix that further
describes its purpose, organization and content. You will note that this is a very large
document. This is reflective of the very ambitious program that the Council has set for
1-1
Council Agenda Report Preliminary 1999-01 Financial Plan
Page 2
the next two years. The four year CIP for 1999-03 is the largest in the City's history,
both in terms of the number of projects and their costs.
The May 17 and 19 workshops are the first of several study sessions and public hearings
scheduled to review the Preliminary Financial Plan. One of the fundamental purposes of these
workshops is to review these documents with the Council in some depth. Accordingly, we do
not anticipate that the Council will have reviewed all of this material in detail by the May 17
workshop.
Best Place to Start The Budget Message and Budget Highlights (starting on page A-1) is
recommended as a good starting point in reviewing the Preliminary Financial Plan and in
preparing for the May 17 workshop. It has been written with the goal in-mind of discussing all
of the key issues reflected in the Preliminary Financial Plan in a concise but comprehensive
manner.
Focus of the May 17 and 19 Workshops. As summarized below, the primary focus of these
two workshops will be on General Fund programs and projects; a separate workshop has been
scheduled for May 25 to review enterprise fund programs,projects, revenues and rates.
May 17 Budget Workshop
■ Present overview of key budget issues, strategies and fiscal outlook.
■ Review fiscal policies and major City goals.
■ Review General Fund revenues and key assumptions.
■ Review and discuss General Fund operating programs.
May 19 Budget Workshop
■ Continue review of General Fund operating programs,if needed.
■ Review and discuss General Fund CIP projects.
■ Receive any follow-up direction from the Council for subsequent workshops and
hearings.
Remaining Budget Review Schedule
The following dates have been scheduled for review and adoption of the 1999-01 Financial Plan:
Council Budget Review Schedule—Remaining Steps
May 17 Budget workshop Preliminary Financial Plan review;General fund operating programs
May 19 Budget workshop Continued review; General Fund CIP projects
May 25 Public hearing Enterprise fund programs,projects,revenues and rates
June 1 Public hearing Continued Preliminary Financial Plan review
June 15 Public hearing Continued review and adoption of the Financial Plan
1-2
r
Council Agenda Report—Preliminary 1999-01 Financial Plan
Page 3
Major City Goals and Other Council Objectives
Consistent with Council priorities and direction, all efforts have been made to integrate the
results of the Council's goal-setting process into the Preliminary Financial Plan. The way this
has been accomplished is discussed at some length in the Budget Message. To facilitate the
Council's review of how these goals and objectives have been integrated into the Preliminary
Financial Plan, an index is provided in the Policies& Objectives section for this purpose.
As discussed in the Budget Message, all twenty eight of the goals set by the Council are reflected
in the Preliminary Financial Plan in some fashion.
If you have any questions about the enclosed materials prior to the May 17 budget workshop,
please do not hesitate to contact us.
ENCLOSURES
■ Preliminary Financial Plan
■ Appendix A: Significant Operating Program Changes
■ Appendix B: Capital Improvement Plan Projects
G:Budget Folders/1999-01 Financial Plan/Agenda ReporWPreliminary Financial Plan
1-3
5-17-1999 4:59PM FROM P. 1
FIEC0VED DATE
MEETING i1 AucNDA --
M AY 1 7 1999 —=1-ITEM # ,
SAO Ci 01' D OF SUPERVISORS f
COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER, Room 310 • SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA 93403-204D • 805.781.5450
Co"M O CDD DIR
PrCAO 0 FIN DIR
VACAO 0 FIRE CHIEF SUPERVISOR PEG PINARD
May 17, 1999 gkrroRm 0 PW DIR DISTRICT THREE
CLERKIORIG OPOLICE CHF
0 MGMT TEAM 0 REC DIR
City of San Luis Obispo 0__ o um DIR p
990 Palm Street o E3 PERS DIR
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Dear Mayor Settle and City Council Members,
You have a budget item before you tonight that has an important affect on neighborhoods—that
is the transfer of neighborhood services to the police department's jurisdiction. 1 understand that
the intent is,hopefully, for a more meaningful enforcement of existing ordinances.
Our neighborhood's recent experience with the police department has been very disappointing.
When called for a very loud noise disturbance by several residents, (the weekend of May 2),the
police department did initially respond and issue a warning. But then, for 7 hours,they failed to
return to the residence where a live rock band was playing outside with frill amplification even
though they received subsequent calls of the disturbance.
At one point,the dispatcher said that all of the officers were at an emergency. However, at the
very same time a patrol car passed near the source of the noise,waved at one of the residents and
continued on its way---and did not appear to be going to any emergency. So, for an entire day,
residents were subjected to the blasting noise of the amplifiers, could not even,go outside their
own homes on what was otherwise a beautiful day,and the police did nothing to enforce the
ordinance.
It is very disappointing for neighbors to have spent time getting the necessary ordinances in
place only to have those charged with enforcement let the neighborhood down. Had the officer
even opened his window he would have heard the noise. And how frustrating for everyone in
the neighborhood not to be taken seriously by it's own police department.
I hope this move will come with some clear direction from the Council. it's not ok to have rules
that are supposed to aid in respecting each other's ability to enjoy their property--only to have
those rules ignored. There needs to be more of a concerted effort as the enforcement follow-
through is sorely lacking.
Sincerely, L
Peg Pinard
Supervisor,District Three
ME. 113 AGENDA
DATE5 '_ITEM # 5=�.
�IIIIIV911111����QI�hII`����I e5s��
memomnbum
• o coo DIR
0 FIN DIN
B'gCAO l7 flRE CFI!E
RECEIVED SfARNEY 0PWDIR
D&ERKIORIO O POLICE CHF
DATE: May 14, 1999 MAY 1 4 1999 D Rami TEAM
DRECDIR
Um DIR
103 O PERE D I o
TO: City Council Members SLO CITY CLERK
FROM: Sandy Baer, Chairperson, Promotional Coordinating Committee�P
SUBJECT: Budget Requests
During the upcoming Study Session on May 17th, the Council will be considering three
budget requests which are of great importance to the Promotional Coordinating
Committee (PCC).
The first is a request for additional grant funding. While the amount of funding for
cultural and tourism grants has increased each year by the cost-of-living, the PCC has
experienced a much greater increase in the number of grant applicants. In order to stay
within our budget, we have been forced to reduce the amounts granted to individual
• organizations each year. The cultural experiences provided by these non-profit
organizations are a critical part of what makes San Luis Obispo special,not only to the
community,but to our visitors, as well. We urge you to include the requested additional
grant funding in the upcoming Financial Plan.
The next two requests are closely related. The City currently spends close to $350,000 a
year in tourism promotion, and brings in over$3 million annually in Transient
Occupancy Tax. We know that promotion is important to entice visitors to our city,but
we have never been sure exactly which parts of our promotional program are the most
effective. Staff is requesting funding for an advertising conversion study which will
allow us to determine exactly how effective each activity is. Once the conversion study
has been completed in the first year of the Financial Plan,we are requesting $15,000 of
additional promotional funding in the second year to implement any new promotional
ideas which may arise from the study. Again, we strongly urge you to support this
request.
The PCC works hard to help the Council insure that San Luis Obispo remains a place of
cultural vitality, and that we use that vitality to attract tourism dollars. We greatly
appreciate your support for our efforts.
C�, 5
11WAO
UNCIL CDD DIR
RNEY RHIEF MEETING O AGENDA
CaERKRMG O POUCE CHF DATE ITEM #
❑M �T O REC DIR
MEMO o PM 'F
Date: May 16, 1999 '
To: Neil Havlik,Natural Resources Manager-
Council Members Jofin Ewan, Jan Howell Marx, Dave Romero and Mayor
Allen Settle
From Ken Schwart cil Member
Re: Greenbelt acquisition with Cal Poly cooperation
Copy: John Dunn, Ken Hampian and Arnold Jonas
Hopefiilly,you may recall in discussions at our May a meeting regarding the Ayers
property, I raised the issue of gaining Cal Poly's participation in greenbelt property
acquisitions and noted that I had written a `paper"on the subject a couple of years ago.
1Ae you, I have been plowing through the 1999-00 Financial Plan and its
recommendations about the Council's 28 goals. As I read the sections on Long Term
Water Supply,Neighborhood Preservation and Enhancement, Open Space Preservation,
and, especially, on Cal Poly Relationships I kept reflecting back to ideas I had set down in
this 1996 paper which I thought were still completely relevant to our present work So I
dug it out of my files and it is attached hereto.
R would please me if you could find a couple of moments to read it- or re-read it as might
be the case.
Mayor Settle's letter was the only response so the ideas may be dumb. Nevertheless,now
knowing that the Open Space Financing initiative faded and we've had to use General
Fund moneys and grants to achieve open space purposes, I continue to see value for the
City and for Cal Poly if the university would become involved, especially so if a campus
housing program is truly to be moved forward..
I know you all need more reading!!!!
RECEIVED
M av t 7 1999
SLO CITY COUNCIL
MEMO
To: John Dunn,Administrative Officer October 7, 1996
City of San Luis Obispo
Alex IImds,Director of Planning &Building
County of San Luis Obispo
Frank Lebens, Vice President for Financial Affairs
California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
Penny Rappa, Chairperson
Task Force on Open Sp a in cing, City of San Luis Obispo
OF
From: Ken Schwartz, Commission
San Luis Obispo County P :2 komm:isslon
Re: A proposal of potential mutual benefit to Cal Poly and to the City and County of
San Luis Obispo
During the last several weeks I have talked to each of you about an idea which has been slowly
forming in my mind as a result of the County Planning Commission's current hearings on an
update of the San Luis Obispo Area Plan, one of the thirteen Area Plans that comprise the
County's General Plan. This particular Area Plan is notable in that it comprises the area including
the City of San Luis Obispo, Cal Poly, the County Airport and agriculture and open space
environs much of which is under development pressure of some form or another. My idea
involves the cooperation of your agency/committee.
The Hearing Draft Plan prepared by County Planning and Environmental staff points up a number
ofbroad public and institutional concerns on which the Planning Commission is expected to
render land use and development judgments prior to recommending the Area Plan to the Board of
Supervisors for its hearings and find action.
Briefly,these concerns include(in no particular order or priority):
1. Correction ofthe currently lopsided job-housing balance. Workplaces(or"jobs")
outnumber housing availability in this planning area. (College classrooms generate
students and must be considered'workplaces!)
2. Determination of interim development standards should the City desire to annex portions
of the area.
3. Determination of development standards if the area is to remain under Countyjurisdiction.
4. Setting of reasonable time limits for City annexation or County approval of developments
in unincorporated areas under County jurisdiction.
Page 2
5. Adequacy of resources, especially water and sewer services,to support development.
6. Protection of production agriculture lands and scenic open space backdrops which give
identity to the area.
7. Development of a higher wage paying jobs base.
8. Protection of the County Airport.
9. Protection of air quality.
Concurrently the City is actively studying several long-term goals:
1. How to increase housing supply, especially for low and moderate income families and
students.
2. Augmentation of its water supply to gain a safe annual yield sufficiency as well as some
surplus to permit additional carefully screened development.
3. Acquisition by development easements- or possibly by fee purchase- of key properties
surrounding the City to create an open space "Greenbelt."
4. Economic development strategies to attract new clean industry and encourage the
expansion of existing businesses.
5. Increased interaction with Cal Poly in the areas of fire service,public transit,water and
sewer service, and sports activities.
Likewise, Cal Poly is pursuing several programs and interests the effects of which appear to have
not only campus-wide implications,but community implications as well;these include:
1. Expansion of the student body and concurrent increases in faculty and staff and academic
facilities.
2. Adoption of the "Cal Poly Plan" accentuating that the higher-cost Poly programs will be
supported by special student assessments thus insuring the continuation of the
technical-professional education programs upon which Poly's reputation has been built.
(And recently accorded national accolades.)
3. Final construction touches on the Performing Arts Center.
4. Development of a new Sports Complex on the campus.
5. Exploration of the division of the campus into educational"precincts'!which would bring
together the faciTrties of each of the major colleges into more unified physical units.
Cooperation between the County and the City and Cal Poly has, over history,been an on again,
off again affair. The pursuit by each entity of its individual goals has often had ramifications upon
the other entities and has created considerable rifts that have been politically difficult to repair.
Occasionally,two of the three enities will act in unison,but seldom all three.
Page 3
My career has taken me into the decision making mechanisms of all three entities so I feel I have a
viewpoint which few others have. I served 36 years at Cal Poly as a professor of Architecture,
Director, Associate Dean and Interim Dean of the School(now College) of Architecture and
Environmental Design during which time Cal Poly grew from less than 4000 students to over
162000;I served 18 years with the City of San Luis Obispo, 8 years on the Planning Commission
and 10 years as the directly elected Mayor; and I am now completing my eighth year on the
County Planning Commission. I have shared in the decisions that have shaped the growth and
character of both the City and the County and to a lesser degree, Cal Poly. I know fast hand the
frustrations of accomplishing goals in one enity or the other because cooperation was not
forthcoming from the other(s). I could offer a litany of such frustrations.
In my opinion, a goodly part of such fiustrations has to do with the structure of powers within
California's hierarchical system of governance. Cal Poly, as a State agency, can act without
consideration of County or City ordinances;said differently,the County or the City cannot tell a
State agency what it must do or cannot do so long as that agency acts within State and Federal
law. Compliance with CEQA procedures is one example where State agencies are held to higher
review. Similarly,the County is not obligated to listen to the City and may do as it pleases
without recognition of City requests or objections. Again, CEQA applies. In instances of
disagreement, the City is the low man on the totem pole and winds up paying for the pipets tune.
At this moment there exists a rare opportunity for a tripartite cooperative action which I believe
would benefit all. The lead role,however,will have to be played by Cal Poly.
Here is the setting as I see it:
1. Cal Poly will grow. Even if campus officials were cool to the idea, it is highly unlikely that
CSU Trustees and/or the State Legislature would put an absolute enrollment lid on the
most popular campus in the system
2. Housing for students both on campus and off campus is tight and costly. Private
enterprise is predictably following the dollar. Housing in short supply increases rent.
Same for faculty and staff Cal Poly has not built any campus housing in ages.
3. Available land for low and moderate cost housing is virtually nonexistent in the City.
4. Land that might be annexed by the City in the so-called Airport Annexation Area has a
relatively low amount of land designated for housing. This is because of the airport itself
as well as land owners and business entrepreneurs who see the area better reserved for
business and industrial uses. Land zoned Commercial or Industrial also commands a
higher price.
5. The City is water short. Even with the drought experience,voters turned down the State
Page 4
Water Project. Supplemental water from the Naciemento Project is shill a few years away
(theoretically,the voters could turn it down). Annexations in the immediate future will
likely be in bits and pieces at best.
6. Both the City and the County would like to see Cal Poly participate in a fair share solution
to the housing demand it creates.
7. The best land for Cal Poly housing, including faculty and staffhousing,is situated on Cal
Poly land most of which is on the campus itself Support facilities as well as two
elementary schools are nearby.
8. Cal Poly still has a water surplus from Whale Rock Reservoir;Cal Poly declined to
participate in the State Water Project.
9. Cal Poly would bice the City to share in the costs of a new sports complex to be
constructed on the Cal Poly campus.
Financing of on-campus housing will be a headache,but acknowledgement of the cooperation
between the City and Cal Poly in carrying forth the Performing Arts Center project suggests that
the problems ofusing State lands for housing could be worked out with willing partnerships. I
understand one recent Masters'Thesis made a study of on-campus faculty housing.
The biggest rub I see has to do with campus agriculture lands. Virtually everything built on the
campus outside of the "academic core"takes valuable agriculture land away from the College of
Agriculture's educational programs. And that creates some tough campus friction- especially so
given agriculture's alunmi power base. The addition of on-campus housing coupled with the land
proposed for the Sports complex suggests a tough sell.
But, consider a couple of things that are happening . . . . .
1. The County continues to bolster its polices to protect the CounWs agriculture industry,
to protect production agricultural land, and to resist conversion of agriculture lands to
other uses. The County's"right to farm"policy typifies this position.
2. At the urging of the local agricultural community,the County Planning Commission and
the County Water Resources Advisory Board are both recommending to the Board of
Supervisors a policy wherein underground waters will be reserved for agriculture use;
urban areas and expanding urban areas will be expected to use other waters.
3. The City is very interested in creating a greenbeltringing the city with open space, a
goodly portion of which is in production agriculture watered with individual wells.
4. The City has reserved funds for the purchase of open space easements or, should
purchase be necessary because of a proposed public use,to purchase key parcels in fee
Page 5
simple. On October 1,the City Council took action to acquire land or easements on two
parcels of such land.
5. The City will have an Advisory Measure on the November ballot asking voters if
they would be willing to form an assessment district taxing themselves at $4.38 per
month per household/business to finance acquisition of open space- 25% of the
assessment to be used for park acquisition and purchase of playground equipment.
The proposal I make cabs for the following actions:
1. The County Planning Commission add a paragraph to the discussion on California
Polytechnic State University found on page 4-29 of the staff recommended Public Hearing
Draft of the San Luis Obispo Area Plan,to read:
"Cal Poly is encouraged to acquire by gift, lease or fee We those production
agriculture lands shown within the City's "Greenbelt Plan"which would be
beneficial to Cal Poly's agricultural programs. Such acquisition to allow Cal
Poly to replace campus agriculture lands which would be lost to the expansion of
academic buildings, sports facilities, and on-campus housing. Such acquisitions to
be designated as agriculture and open space lands in perpetuity."
Thereafter:
2. Cal Poly,the City, and the County's Agriculture Commissioner sit down together,identify
each of the agricultural parcels the City has included in its Greenbelt proposal and
determine those parcels which because of soil type, parcel size,water availability, existing
farm structures, distance from campus, etc., could be used by the College of Agriculture
to further the objectives of its agriculture programs.
3. Cal Poly,with assistance from the County and the City or a nonprofit organization,
initiate a program directed to the owners of parcels deemed suitable for College of
Agriculture programs of the desire of Cal Poly to acquire those parcels and explaining the
tax benefits and other perks that may accrue to the property owners for gifts of such lands
to Cal Poly. Such benefits might include the property owner's right to occupy and farm
the land for some mutually agreeable time prior to Cal Polys actual need for the land.
4. Cal Poly seek CSU Board of Trustees(or Legislature) approval for an annual budget
allocation for fee acquisitions of priority agriculture lands within the greenbelt area that
may not be available by gift. Such acquisitions would permit expeditious replacement of
campus agricultural education lands needed for carrying out the goals ofthe campus
master plan.
5. Cal Poly hold itself to a fair-share responsibility for repairing the shortage created within
Page 6
the City and the County of low and moderate income housing stock
6. Cal Poly initiate,with City planning assistance, the planning and phased construction of
an on-campus housing "community". Such housing to include additional student housing
including married student housing as well as housing for faculty and staff This endeavor
should explore the potential for financial assistance from the State and Federal
governments,the Cal Poly Foundation as well as the private sector.
7. Water saved from the off campus relocation of agriculture lands be allocated to support
a campus housing comity.
8. Further monetary ventures between the City and Cal Poly be placed on'hold'until the City
has an opportunity to study Cal Polyls response to proposals for sharing in the repair of
the community housing deficit.
In conclusion:
Cal Poly plays a valuable and influential role in San Luis Obispo City and County communities
both economically and culturally. Less obvious are the cooperative ventures between Cal Poly
and the City which created the Whale Rock Reservoir and financially aided the improvements of
the Citys waste water treatment plant both of which were and are important to the technical
aspects of a functioning city and campus.
There are,however, impacts that Cal Poly has on San Luis Obispo that have a downside. Some
examples: first, Cal Poly is located geographically in the County;Cal Poly is notin the City,yet
virtually all traffic entering the campus does so via City streets. Second, as a State agency, Cal
Poly pays no property taxes and no part of the sales tax revenues generated on campus come to
the City. Third,when Cal Poly experienced very rapid growth 15 - 18 years ago,the housing
stock available to low and middle income working people was decimated. 4, 5, 6, 7, or 8 students
got together(and continue to do so) and, at a very reasonable cost to themselves, offered
landlords a rent that was a collective sum beyond the ability of white and blue collar families to
match. Those uprooted families are now to be found in outlying communities such as
Baywood-Los Osos, Morro Bay, Santa Margarita,Atascadero and the five cities area to the
south. The loss of families with school age children saw the closing of one Junior High school
and the re arrangement of the use of several elementary schools in the City. Conversely,the
schools in the outlying communities became impacted.
One does not have to scratch too deeply to find anger and bitterness still existing. Many of the
jobs of these displaced persons continue to exist in SLO. Consequently, each work day sees a
heavy influx of outside automobiles along with the congestion and air pollution they create.
Page 7
In moving into single family neighborhoods, students created- and continue to create- a whole
new level of problems including TGIF parties, degradation of house and garden care, automobiles
in excess of the number normally found at an R 1 house,loud music, etc. The reaction to such
problems has seen the formation of the Residents for Quality Neighborhoods(RQN)
organizations throughout the city. These people are not happy with students in their single family
neighborhoods.
I believe that the ramifications of these "downsides" are not fully understood by the Cal Poly
administration and certainly not by the CSU Trustees. Something needs to be done. The private
enterprise sector appears incapable of responding to the.satisfaction of the students. Cal Poly, in
my opinion,has an obligation to intercede. It cannot continue to dump 1, 2, 300 or more students
per year into the housing market and expect to maintain sunny relationships with the community
or cooperation with campus initiatives that ask for City financial participation.
K and it is a critical IF, campus agriculture land is the stumbling block to Cal Polys cooperation
in providing housing, then there is not likely to be a better time than now to rekindle inter-agency
cooperation in solving both individual and communal problems. Cal Polys investment in the
City's Greenbelt acquisition program could well turn into synergistic opportunities for preserving
production agriculture lands, for bolstering agricultural education,for establishing a Greenbelt,
and for generating the land necessary for creating a state of the art campus housing community
for students, married students and faculty and staff families who cannot make entry into the local
housing market.
I would be happy to receive any response you may have to this idea.
c: SLO City Council members
SLO County Planning Commissioners
G�tY off. sAn
444 *o cityof luis oBispo
ty
OFFICE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
e0/$ O� 990 Palm Street■San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249■805n81-7119■FAX 805/781-7109
October 8; 1996
Mr. Ken Schwartz
201 Buena Vista Avenue
San Luis Obispo, CA 93405
Dear Ken:
Thank you very much for your proposal pertaining to the mutual benefit for agricultural and
housing land use policies between the City, the County and Cal Poly. Please let me know what
information you receive from Frank Lebens and Alex lfmds to your proposal. I will ask John
Drum and Arnold Jonas to give the City Council their reactions so they can forward these to you
from the City.
I like your innovative approach and appreciate you taking the time to think through this proposal.
Please call me at any time or perhaps to meet in the near future to discuss your ideas and
prospects for implementation.
Sincerely,
Allen K Settle
Mayo'
AKS:ss
c: City Council
John Dunn
Ken Hampian
Arnold Jonas
® The City of San Luis Obispo is committed to include the disabled in all of its services,programs and activities.
Telecommunications Device for the Deaf(805)781-7410 !1
MERG AGENDA
DATE 5 ' REM 0s4�,
�IlVlllpl�lll����l�lllll�ll� ess��
MCMORAnbum
• ❑CDD DIR
❑FIN DIP,
B_'�CAO O FIRE CHIEF
RECEIVED t�'ATroRNEY ❑PwDIR
tLERRIORIO O POLICE CHF
DATE: May 14, 1999 MAY 1 4 1998 01°°'T' °o unl ole
O�� O PEN DI i o
TO: City Council Members SLO CITY CLERK
FROM: Sandy Baer, Chairperson,Promotional Coordinating Committee�P
SUBJECT: Budget Requests
During the upcoming Study Session on May 17th, the Council will be considering three
budget requests which are of great importance to the Promotional Coordinating
Committee (PCC).
The first is a request for additional grant funding. While the amount of funding for
cultural and tourism grants has increased each year by the cost-of-living, the PCC has
experienced a much greater increase in the number of grant applicants. In order to stay
within our budget,we have been forced to reduce the amounts granted to individual
organizations each year. The cultural experiences provided by these non-profit
organizations are a critical part of what makes San Luis Obispo special, not only to the
community,but to our visitors, as well. We urge you to include the requested additional
grant funding in the upcoming Financial Plan.
The next two requests are closely related. The City currently spends close to $350,000 a
year in tourism promotion, and brings in over$3 million annually in Transient
Occupancy Tax. We know that promotion is important to entice visitors to our city,but
we have never been sure exactly which parts of our promotional program are the most
effective. Staff is requesting funding for an advertising conversion study which will
allow us to determine exactly how effective each activity is. Once the conversion study
has been completed in the first year of the Financial Plan, we are requesting $15,000 of
additional promotional funding in the second year to implement any new promotional
ideas which may arise from the study. Again,we strongly urge you to support this
request.
The PCC works hard to help the Council insure that San Luis Obispo remains a place of
cultural vitality, and that we use that vitality to attract tourism dollars. We greatly
appreciate your support for our efforts.
•
5-17-1999 d:59PM FROM P. 1
a
ID
MEETING AbADA
DATE 1�' ITEM # 1 OF SUPERVISORS
COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER. Ronm 370 • SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA 93408-2040 • 805.781.5450
000WL O CDD DIR
E`CAO ❑FIN DIR
MACAO ❑FIRE CHIEF SUPERVISOR Pr_-G PINARD
May 17, 1999 g4TTORNEY ❑PW DIR DISTRICT THREE
CLERKIORIO fd'POLICE CHF
City of San Luis Obispo ❑O MGMT TEAM ❑I. DIR
❑UMTIL DIR 1�
990 Palm Street ❑1 ❑PERS DIR
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Dear Mayor Settle and City Council Members,
You have a budget item before you tonight that has an important affect on neighborhoods--that
is the transfer of neighborhood services to the police department's jurisdiction. 1 understand that
the intent is,hopefully,for a more meaningful enforcement of existing ordinances.
Our neighborhood's recent experience with the police department has been very disappointing.
When called for a very loud noise disturbance by several residents, (the weekend of May 2),the
police department did initially respond and issue a warning. But then,for 7 hours,they failcd to
return to the residence where a live rock band was playing outside with full amplification even
though they received subsequent calls of the disturbance.
At one point,the dispatcher said that all of the officers were at an emergency. However,at the
very same time a patrol car passed near the source of the noise,waved at one of the residents and
continued on its way---and did not appear to be going to any emergency. So,for an entire day,
residents were subjected to the blasting noise of the amplifiers,could not even go outside their
own homes on what was otherwise a beautiful day, and the police did nothing to enforce the
ordinance.
It is very disappointing for neighbors to have spent time getting the necessary ordinances in
place only to have those charged with enforcement let the neighborhood down. Had the officer
even opened his window he would have heard the noise. And how frustrating for everyone in
the neighborhood not to be taken seriously by it's own police department.
I hope this move will come with some clear direction from the Council. It's not ok to have rules
that are supposed to aid in respecting each other's ability to enjoy their property---only to have
those rules ignored. There needs to be more of a concerted effort as the enforcement follow-
through is sorely lacking.
Sincerely, L
op
Peg P1nazd
Supervisor,District Three
"FETING AGENDA
JE L-1.=ITEM #=_
From: "rcholc" <rcholc®gateway.net>
• To: "Allen Settle" <asettle®ci.san-luis-obispo.ca.us>, . . .
Date: 5/17/99 4:17pm
Subject: Budget Workshop-Meeting date 5-17-99-Re:
Office COUNCIL O CDD DIR
Iff,CAO 0 FIN DIR
13 ACAO 0 FIRE CHIEF
erATTORNEY 0 P DIR
eCLERKfOR1G B'POLICE CHF
May 17, 1999 ❑ MGMT TEAM O REC DIR
❑ ❑ UTIL DIR }
Honorable Mayor and City Council members: ❑ [3FERS DI II 4�
This e-mail is to advise you that the RQN Board of Directors has voted to
support the following proposals that Chief Gardiner will be presenting to the
council this evening:
1. That a Code Enforcement Officer be hired in the building department to
handle all building code violations.
2. That the Office of Neighborhoods Services be transferred from the building
department to the police department.
We are supporting these proposals in hopes that they will allow for more
meaningful enforcement of the existing ordinances which protect our
established neighborhoods .
Our goal is to be on a par with the city's economic and environmental efforts.
To that end, we have some concern that the NSO could lose its identity and
eventually be absorbed by the police department. Vital to the function of
this office is that it remains intact, accessible to the residents, and be an
advocate for the protection of the city's established neighborhoods.
We request the council insure :
a. . That NSO has its own physical office within the police department or
at some other location that is desirable and accessible to the public.
b. . That the Neighborhood Services Manager report directly to a Captain or
the Chief of Police.
c. . That new programs added to this office be enhancements and/or
consistent with the concept of neighborhood preservation.
Sincerely yours,
Cydney Holcomb
Co-Chair, RQN
CC: "Jim Gardiner" <jgardiner®ci.san-luis-obispo.ca.us. . .
RECEIVED
Mev 1 6 1999
SLO CITY COUNCIL
11
1
f°°1°""�"M1111 council memomnbum
May 17, 1999 MEETINGAGENDA
TO: City Council DATE $_� q�ITEM #
FROM: John Dunn, City Administrative Of i tom_
SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR INFORMATION—COUNCIL MEMBER MARX
Attached is a request from Council Member Marx for supplemental budget information. We are
gathering the requested information, and it should be available by Thursday afternoon. We will
provide the information to all Council members at that time (with the exception of the line item
detail, which we will be happy to provide to the other Council members upon request).
7��
�D DIR
IN DIR
ErF1RE CH-KPW DIR
OLICE C::F
OREC DIR
a(UflL DIR
ERS DIR
RECEIVED
MAY 1 8 1999
SLO C 1T`l CI E RK
From: Jan Marx
To: BSTATLER
Date: May 16, 1999 (Sunday) 11:30am
Subject: buget review
Bill, The budget is very well written, quite easy to read and relates well to the Council Goals. I
compliment you and your staff on the excellent job you have done of"herding cats."
ITo help me think it through in practical terms, I would like to request a copy of the line-item
budget, hopefully tabbed to correspond to the Financial Plan. I would also like a review of the
CDBG funds, allocated and unallocated, as well as a copy of the guidelines. Allocating $ or
making cuts is difficult without more bottom line information.
Questions--for instance--how did the departments do last year meeting their budgets? Is there
any fat that can be cut out before we dip into the general fund for enterprise or special funds?
Where/where else could CDBG funds be used? Should there be a franchise fee for the parking
fund?How much are we over budget, over all? How much do we need to cut?How much is in
the contingency fund? Is there waste that could be reduced? Where? Etc. --are hard to answer
when the data is either in several places in the document or not there.
Thank you,
Jan Howell Marx
CC: JDUNN, ASETTLE