HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/20/1989, 1 - COUNCIL OPTIONS REGARDING COURT STREET II�B�IpI�I�IIIIIIIII AII�II "J i MEETING DATE:
c� o san �UIs osispo 6/20/89
am COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT ITEM NUMBER:
FROM: John Dunn, City Administrative Offic
SUBJECT: Council Options Regarding Court Street
CAO RECOMMENDATION:
Consider and act upon request by Councilmember Settle to
put a referendum on the November ballot.
DISCUSSION:.
Councilman Settle has requested that Council place a referendum on the November
ballot regarding the Court Street Planned Development (Ordinance 1135, 1989
Series) . The Superior Court recently rejected the request by petitioners backing
the original referendum because it failed to comply with state law (see order,
attached) . As such, this measure could not be put on the November ballot.
However, under Election Code § 4017, Council has the option of fashioning its own
"voluntary referendum" to be placed on the November ballot. Council could make
this a "yes"/"no" vote on the Court Street Ordinance. Or alternatively, Council
could seek other input from the public regarding downtown development policies in
general , e.g. , "shall the downtown office projects contain a child care center, "
"open space," etc. If Council wishes to pursue this option then direction should
be given to staff to come back to the next regular meeting with recommended
language.
It is important to bear in mind that, as the property owner in this instance, the
City has entered into an agreement with the developer which could put the City of
San Luis Obispo at some risk of legal action should the City place a voluntary
referendum asking for a "yes"/"no" vote on Court Street on the ballot. Council
may wish to further discuss this in closed session.
attach: court order
Memorandum from Councilman Settle
1 LYON &. .PICQUET
Attorneys at Law
2 ROGER PICQUET #077764
1104 Palm Street
3 P.O. Box 922
San Luis Obispo, CA 93406
4 Telephone: (805) 541-2560
5 Office of the City Attorney
City of San Luis Obispo
6 VICKI J. FINUCANE #107979
990 Palm Street
7 P .O. Box 8100
San Luis Obispo, CA 93403-8100
8 Telephone: (805) 549-7140
9 ATTORNEY FOR RESPONDENT
10 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
11 COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
12 MELANIE C. BILLIG; ALLEN K. SETTLE, ) NO. 66404
Individually and on Behalf of All )
13 PETITIONING ELECTORS , ) JUDGMENT DENYING
PEREMPTORY WRIT
14 Petitioners, ) OF MANDATE
15 v )
16 PAM VOGES , CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF )
SAN LUIS OBISPO, )
17 )
Respondent. )
18 )
19 The above matter came before this Court for hearing on
20 June 6 , 1989 , in Department IV, Judge Harry E. woolpert
21 presiding, pursuant to verified petition of Petitioners
22 MELANIE C. BILLIG and ALLEN K. SETTLE and Alternative Writ of
23 Mandate issued under the seal of this Court and served on
24 Respondent in the manner provided by law. Michael. Nolan
25 appeared as attorney for Petitioners and Roger Picquet
26 appeared as attorney for Respondent PAM VOGES, City Clerk of
27 the City of San Luis Obispo. Respondent having filed an
28 answer to the petition, each side having submitted a memoran-
1 dum of points and authorities in support of their respective
2 contentions , arguments having been presented and the cause
3 submitted for decision, and findings not having been re-
4 quested,
5 IT IS ORDERED THAT:
6 1 . The peremptory writ applied for in this action is
7 denied; and
8 2 . The Alternative Writ of Mandate issued in this
9 action is discharged.
10 Dated: 1989 .
11
12
Judge of Superior Court
13
14 Judgment entered on 1989 , in the ;
15 Judgment Book, Volume No. Page
16 FRANCIS M. COONEY
County Clerk-Recorder
17
18 By:
Deputy Clerk
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
MEETING AGENDA
DATE .?o- 9 ITEM #
Agenda Item for June 20 , 1989
To: Pam Voges
City Clerk
City of San Luis Obispo
From: Allen Settle
Councilmember
Re: PUBLIC VOTE TO REPEAL COURT STREET PROJECT ORDINANCE
I want this item placed on the June 20, 1989 agenda with the
following content:
The trial court has ruled that the referendum
petition signed by 3700 citizens is invalid for
technical reasons .
However, the public outcry against the Court Street
Project demonstrates the public's concerns, and their
desire to have a vote on the project.
u' Therefore, I request that the City Council approve
a motion to place an .ordinance on the November ballot
which repeals Planned Development Ordinance No. 1135
which approved the Court Street Project.
.�Oewws action by Lead Ponm
Respond by:
Councii
L CAO
J City Atty.
�CkAc-orifi.
❑
RECEIVED
JUN 6 1989
CITY CLERK
SAN LUIS OBISPO,CA