HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/12/1974MINUTES
ADJOURNED MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
MONDAY; AUGUST 12, 1974 - 7:30 P.M.
CITY HALL
Pledge
Roll Call
Present: John Brown,.Myron Graham,-T: Keith Gurnee,
Jesse Norris and Kenneth E. Schwartz
City Staff
Absent: None
Present: J. H. Fitzpatrick, City Clerk; R. D. Miller,
Administrative Officer; A. J. Shaw, Jr., City
Attorney; David Williamson, Assistant Administrative
Officer; William'Flory, Director of Parks and
Recreation; E. L. Rodgers, Police Chief; Wayne
Peterson, Assistant City Engineer; Lee Schlobohm,
Fire Chief; Robert Strong, Planning Director
I. Continued discussion of the report by the Ad Hoc Task Force
Committee on Resource Inventory and proposed amendments to Ordinance
No. 604 (continued from the Council meeting of August 5 and 6, 1974).
Mr: Frank Exter, Chairman of the Ad Hoc Task Force Committee on Resource
Inventory again reviewed in detail the activities of the Task Force
over the past seventeen weeks of study. He then stated; on behalf
of the Task Force, that they recommend that the City Council be
guided by the following two principles:
I. The City has the responsibility to determine the
availability and adequacy of municipal services and
resources to any property in the City of San Luis
Obispo and to make that information available to
the public.
2. The citizenry of the City have the right to know
the condition of the City's resources at all times
in order that the City's costs for proposed increases
in resource inventories can be measured against
development benefits to the community.
In order to realize these principles, the Task Force recommends:
I. The City should develop and maintain up -to -date and
rel.i ba le information on the current-and future capa-
bility of the City's basic resources.
2.. The resource inventory system should include:
a) Water sources
b) Water distributions systems
City Council Minutes
August 12, 1974
Page 2
c) Fire fighting capability
d) Sewage treatment capacity
e) Sewage collection systems
f) Parks and open spaces
g) Land by use category
h) Schools (coordinate with school district and
college authorities)
i) Storm drainage
j) Police
k) Library
1) Pedestrian and vehicular circulation
3. It is reasonable to expect department heads to certify
as to the availability and adequacy of municipal resources.
4. The City Council should establish certification procedures.
5. The procedures to be used
nance.
6. In instances where city 'd
sufficient information to
and adequacy of municipal
accelerate its efforts to
information.
should be set forth.in an ordi-
apartment heads presently have
certify as to the availability
resources, the City should
collect, chart and map missing
7. The City should allocate adequate budget to correct
inventory gaps and to maintain the total resource
inventory constantly up to date.
8. In the meantime, it is reasonable to.expect department
heads to proceed with a certification program and to do
immediate localized investigations to ascertain and report
on the status of resource capabilities for individual
projects.
Based upon presentations made to the Task Force by City department heads,
the majority of the Task Force had the opinion that the present ability
of City departme -t heads to certify as to the availability and adequacy
of municipal resources exists now, except in the case'of sewage collection.
because of the new regulation of the Water Quality Control Board and
in the case of land use by category because of the pending revision of
the General Plan.
The Task Force concluded that there should be amendments to.the present
draft of Ordinance 604. The Task Force recommends the following:
There should be added to the preamble of Ordinance 604
the statement.that it is the City's responsibility to
provide facilities for expected and reasonable future
growth.
2. City standards and criteria should be.reviewed.and
established before the adoption of.Ordinance 604 (and
Section 2800.5 of the Ordinance 604 as presently written
should be deleted).
3. The ordinance should reflect that the City has the
responsibility to determine and allocate, between the
City and the property owner; the costs of making
improvements to public resources and facilities required
as a condition of improvement to property according to
the benefit conferred.
4. The ordinance should reflect that the City has the
responsibility to act, within the City's financial
resource capability and according to planning guide-
lines, to resolve resource deficiencies.
1
1
1
City Council Minutes
August 12, 1974
Page 3
5. The ordinance should establish two levels of criticality:
Level I: Level I includes life and safety support
systems such as.water,(supply and distribution), sewer
(collection and treatment), and flood control (storm
drain).facili.ties. Inadequate facilities shall be
the basis for permit denial and.hearings shall be held
in accordance with the provisions contained in Ordinance
604 to determine appropriate remedial action.
Level 2: Level 2:shall include safety and. security
services such as fire, police, pedestrian and vehicular
circulation, social; cultural and educational facilities
such as youth centers, Libraries and schools. In-
adequate Level 2 facilities shall be a basis for
initiation of hearing procedures.as specified in
Ordinance .604 to determine corrective solutions;
however an inadequacy of Level 2 type facilities
shall not be a basis for denying the issuance of
permits. ,
2. That Ordinance 604 be adopted-with the amendments recommended
by the Task Force incorporated therein.
The City Council discussed with Frank Exter some of the thinking behind
the recommendations of the Task Force on ways and means of keeping
up on the resource inventory of City facilities.
Mrs. GlennaDeane Dovey= reviewed the reasons for the minority report for
Council information.
The primary objection was to the amendments which were recommended
regarding the draft of Ordinance No. 604. She felt that some of the
amendments needed clarification before incorporating them into the
ordinance, and therefore raised the following questions: .
Amendment #I: Where does the City's greater responsibility
lie? To the present residents and taxpayers? To transient
residents? To property owners or residents outside the
city? To the developer?
What is reasonable growth?
Amendment #3: Is this not already a City policy? Why does
it need to be in this ordinance?
6. The ordinance should provide that when a governmental
entity other than the City of San Luis Obispo . requests
additional resources, the request shall be processed
in accordance with the procedure contained in Ordinance
No. 604.
In addition to the above, the Task Force makes the following general
recommendations:
I. That recognition be given to possible impacts which
result from decisions -made by public agencies other
than the City of San Luis Obispo and recommend that the
City explore the possibility of establishing procedures
to coordinate the development of these agencies and
their affect upon City resources.
2. That Ordinance 604 be adopted-with the amendments recommended
by the Task Force incorporated therein.
The City Council discussed with Frank Exter some of the thinking behind
the recommendations of the Task Force on ways and means of keeping
up on the resource inventory of City facilities.
Mrs. GlennaDeane Dovey= reviewed the reasons for the minority report for
Council information.
The primary objection was to the amendments which were recommended
regarding the draft of Ordinance No. 604. She felt that some of the
amendments needed clarification before incorporating them into the
ordinance, and therefore raised the following questions: .
Amendment #I: Where does the City's greater responsibility
lie? To the present residents and taxpayers? To transient
residents? To property owners or residents outside the
city? To the developer?
What is reasonable growth?
Amendment #3: Is this not already a City policy? Why does
it need to be in this ordinance?
City Council Minutes
August 12, 1974
Page 4
Amendment #4: As in Amendment #I, where does the City's
greater responsibility lie? Which deficiencies should get
attention first?
How should the City '.s financial resource capability be
determined? By the current budget? Bonding capacity?
Taxing to the maximum limits? Revenue sharing funds?
In considering Amendment #2, she agreed that standards and criteria
should be adopted as soon as possible., but,felt that this direction
should remain as part of the ordinance, as in Section 2800.5. The
ordinance should be the law which required the establishment of such
standards.
In regard to Amendment #5, they requested the inclusion, under water
in Level I systems, of a• distinct reference to fire fighting capability.
Not spelling it out could conceivably lead to another situation such
as the current problems in the Los Osos Valley.
They did agree with the balance of the Task Force recommendations;
however, they respectfully requested the Council's consideration of the
minority viewpoint.
Mayor Schwartz declared the public hearing open.
Maritha Hughes. Executive Secretary.. San.Luis Obispo County Buildinq
Contractors Association, stated she felt the recommendation submitted
to the City Council on behalf of the Ad Hoc Task Force Committee was
the majority feeling of the Committee: She further felt the Committee
did a good job for the City and the City Council should accept their
report on the basis and the feeling that it was submitted.
Fred Strong, Executive Director, CEBES, felt the Task Force had come
up with an extremely expert report and his organization endorsed their
recommendations for Council consideration. He felt that only through
implementation of the recommendations of the Ad Hoc Task Force Committee
would the City really get a handle on their resources and just what
they had available.
Mrs. Caralas, Tanglewood Drive, asked if the Task Force recognized the
limitations of the General Plan when they were discussing the recommendation
"reasonable growth ".
Frank Exter stated the General Plan.was not used as a limiting factor in
their use of the term "reasonable growth ".
William Mc Keen felt the Task Force had done a good job, but he felt
the City Council should put this issue on the ballot so that the Citizens
of the community could vote on growth or non - growth patterns for the
community.
David Hughes, an attorney, opposed placing this issue on the ballot as
he felt it was too complicated an issue for the average voter in San Luis
Obispo to understand. Further, he felt the standards and criteria
should be placed in detail in the proposed ordinance so there would be
no confusion by anyone reading the ordinance.
Brian Lawler felt the growth definition should be included in the
ordinance so that there was no question as to what the citizens of San
Luis Obispo meant when they use the words "reasonable growth ".
1
C
L__J�I
City Council Minutes
August 12, 1974
Page 5
N. Weber, Flora Street, spoke in support of the Task Force recommenda-
tion on amendments to Ordinance No. 604.
Mr. Roca, 1701 Los Osos Valley Road, felt the City of San Luis Obispo
should not try to limit growth but should try for reasonable growth
' within their capabilities to serve the growth.
Mrs. B. Walters, 392 Christina'Way, stated she was in support of
growth control in order.to protect the air that we'all need to,
exist, because with growth comes pollution.
Mr. Hal Boyle, Task Force member, spoke in support of the Task Force
recommendation stating that these things were studied in detail and
the recommendations were not being made facetiously.
Art Jack, resident of San Luis Obispo, spoke in favor of clarifying
wording in the ordinance and to remove vagueness and confusion that
existed in the original ordinance.
Dr. Larry Field objected to the recommendation of the Task Force,
and stated the City had the responsibility to provide .facilities for
expansion and reasonable future growth. He felt it was wrong for
taxpayers to be forced to install facilities for people coming to
the community.
Elsie Schmidt felt the developers should pay for facilities to serve
their development, and they should not expect City taxpayers, who
were already burdened with supporting an antiquated system, to pay
for new people coming to the community.
Mayor Schwartz declared the.public hearing closed. -
A. J. Shaw, City Attorney, commented; on several words used in the
Task Force recommendation and felt they should'be clarified if
adopted by the City Council.
Councilman Brown. stated he agreed generally with the recommendations
of the Task Force, but felt the City Council should take the
recommendations, review them section by section, and approve them
in that way. '
Councilman Graham felt the public comments clarified the recommendation
of the Task Force, and he felt the City Council should how proceed
with its adoption and amendments to Ordinance No. 604.
Councilman Gurnee felt the Task Force recommendations reinforced the
need of an ordinance similar to Ordinance No. 604, although.he .
disagreed with the Task Force Committee's-recommendation regarding
facilities. He felt that the section should read "for expected and
reasonably planned future growth ". He agreed with adequate criteria
and standards being included in the ordinance, and he also wondered
why with all the time spent by the Task Force, no comment had been
made regarding financing of the needed facilities. For example, he
wondered why there was not a construction tax proposed to help make
up these deficiencies in the City's resources. He also felt the Task
' Force should have come up`.with criteria for facilities for development.
He hoped the City Council would direct the staff to prepare an
ordinance similar to Ordinance No. 604 for guidance of City staff
and citizens of San Luis Obispo which would include definitions
for full information. He also felt the staff should be directed to
City Council Minutes
August 12, 1974
Page 6
prepare a report on facilities, resources presently avai.lable in the
City which would include an inventory checklist, and a reporting
system to the City Council.
Councilman Norris stated he supported the findings of the Task Force
and hoped the Council would include them in an ordinance. He '
stated he too would support a resource inventory and a reporting
procedure, and he.also would support the adoption of standards and
criteria; but while this was being done, an ordinance should be
prepared which would include the standards. He felt the ordinance
should spell out the City Government's responsibility in.supplying
vital services to their citizens.
Mayor Schwartz felt the Task Force had done a good job for the City,
and he felt that Ordinance No. 604 was not a growth or no- growth
ordinance, but felt it was more a management tool for the City staff's
guidance. He felt the ordinance was introduced .to force the City
staff to be on top of City facilities, so vital services could be
continued to the citizens. He felt an adequate resource: inventory
would also bring deficiencies to the City Council's attention in
sufficient time. In that way, the Council could be aware of the
problem and corrective action could be taken. He felt the City
Council should order Ordinance No. 604 to be rewritten taking into
consideration the suggestions of the Ad Hoc Task Force. He also
felt the City staff should look into needed criteria to be placed
in the ordinance for the guidance of staff and developers. !He
concluded, he could not buy the Task Force recommendation that it
was the City's responsibility to supply facilities for new develop-
ment. He felt the City should proceed with gathering the resource
inventory and report procedures should be established to inform ,
the Council and the public of conditions of the City's -resources.
He felt the City staff should complete the criteria and standards
sections for inclusion in.the ordinance and for public information.
Councilman Norris felt the City Council should adopt all recommendations
of the Task Force and include them in anew ordinance.
9:40 P.M. Mayor Schwartz declared a recess.
9:50 P.M. The meeting reconvened with all Council members present.
The City Council then reviewed each section of the report by the Ad
Hoc Task Force Committee and either accepted or amended the individual
recommendations of the Committee as follows:
Al. The City has the responsibility to determine the availability
and adequacy of municipal services and resources to any
property in the City of San Luis Obispo and make that
information available to the public. The recommendation was
adopted.
A2. The citizenry of the City have the right to-know-the condition
of the City's resources at all times in order that the City's
costs for proposed increases in resource inventories can-be
measured against development benefits to the community. The
recommendation was adopted.
Bl. The City should develop and maintain up -to -date and reliable
information oh the current and future capability of the
City's basic resources. The recommendation was adopted.
B2. The
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
f)
g.)
h)
City Council.Minutes
August 12, 1974
Page 7
resource inventory system should include:
Water sources
Water distributions systems.
Fire fighting capability
Sewage treatment capacity
Sewage collection systems
Parks.and open spaces
Land by use category
School.s (coordinate.with school district and college
authorities)
1). Storm drainage
j) Police
k) Library
1). Pedestrian and vehicular circulation
This recommendation was adopted..
B3. It is reasonable to expect department heads to certify as
to the availability and.adequacy of municipal resources.
The recommendation was adopted..
B4. The City Council should establish certification procedures.
The recommendation was adopted.
B5. The procedures to be used should be set.forth in an ordi-
nance. The. recommendation was adopted.
B6. In instances where Ci.ty.department.heads presently have
sufficient information to certify. as to the availability
' and adequacy of munici.pal.resources, the City should
accelerate its efforts to collect, chart and map missing
information. The recommendation was adopted.
B7. The City shoul.d allocate adequate budget to correct
inventory gaps. and to maintain the total resource in-
ventory constantly up to date. The recommendation was
adopted.
BB.. In the meantime; it is reasonable to expect department
heads to proceed with.a certification program and to do
immediate localized investigations to ascertain and report
on the status of resource capabilities for individual
projects. The recommendation was adopted.
CI. There should be added to the preamble of .Ordinance 604
the statement that it is the City's responsibility to
provide facilities for expected and reasonable future growth.
The recommendation was adopted with Councilman Gurnee
voting No.
C2. City standards and criteria should be reviewed and
established before the adoption of Ordinance 604 (and
Section 2800.5 of the Ordinance 604 as presently written
should be deleted). The recommendation was amended and
adopted as follows: "City standards and criteria should
be reviewed and established before adoption of Ordinance
No. 604 ".
City Council Minutes
August 12, 1974'
Page S
C3. The ordinance should reflect that
bility to determine and allocate,
property owner, the costs of maki
resources and facilities required
ment to property according to the
recommendation was adopted.
the City has the responsi-
between the City and the
ig improvements to public
as a.condi.tion of improve -
benefit conferred. The
C4. The ordinance should reflect that the City has the responsi-
bility to act, within the City'-s financial resource
capability and according to planning.guideli . nes, to
resolve resource deficiencies. The recommendation was
adopted as amended: Drop "planning" and substitute "General
Plan Guidelines ".
C5. The ordinance should establish two levels of criticality:
Level I: Level 1 includes life and safety support systems
such as water (supply and distribution), sewer. (collection
and treatment), and flood control (storm drain)facilities.
Inadequate facilities shall be the basis for.permit denial
and hearings shall'be held in accordance with the provisions
contained in Ordinance 604 to determine appropriate remedial
action.
Level 2: Level 2 shall include safety and security services
such as fire,.police, pedestrian and vehicular circulation,
social, cultural and educational facilities such as youth
centers, libraries and school.s. Inadequate Level 2 facilities
shall be a basis for initiation of hearing procedures as
specified in Ordinance 604 to'determine corrective solutions;
however an inadequacy of Level 2 type .facilities shall not
be a basis for denying the issuance of permits.
Level 1 was adopted as amended: add "water (supply, distri-
bution and fire flows) ", with Council approval.of. appeals.
Level 2 was adopted as amended: "with Council approval of
appeals ".
C6. The ordinance should provide .that when a governmental entity
other than the City of San Lu'is Obispo requests additional
resources, the request shall be processed.in accordance with
the procedure contained in Ordinance No. 604. The recommenda-
tion was adopted.
DI. That recognition be given to possible impacts.which result
from decisions made by publ.ic.agencies other.than the City
of San Luis Obispo and recommend that the City explore the
possibility of establishing procedures to coordinate the
development of these agencies and their affect upon City
resources. The recommendation was adopted.
D2. That Ordinance 604 be adopted with the amendments recommended
by the Task Force incorporated therein. The recommendation
was adopted.
After reviewing the Ad Hoc Task Force Committee's report, on motion of
Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Graham the City staff was
directed to proceed with a rewrite of the ordinance which would include
procedures for resource inventory and reporting procedures. Motion
carried, report to be submitted to the City Council on September 16,
1974.
2. Councilman Gurnee submitted for the Council's consideration a
recommendation that the Council order a charter amendment to be placed
on the November ballot which would change the method of establishing
compensation for the Mayor and Council Members. This would increase the
Mayor's present salary from $250 per month to $750 per month, and
increase the Council Members monthly pay from $150 to $500 per month
n
1
1
City Council Minutes
August 12, 1974
Page 9
and also to include in the charter amendment a method for annual
cost -of- living adjustments in both the Mayor's and Council Members'
salaries.
Councilman Gurnee stated he realized the subject of pay increases
for elected City Officials was certain to be an inflammatory issue,
but he was convinced the Council and citizens would support increases
in a reasonable and justifiable position. On this.basis, he stated
that since 1967.the City Council had been receiving their present
salary and the cost of. living had increased over 32 per cent.
He also stated that since 1967 the Council.meeting load had increased
substantially, with the Council meeting at least-four times per
month, including many noontime sessions and other special meetings
to consider the increasing workload of City business. He felt with
the changing responsibilities of City Government, the increasing
size of the City, and the increasing level of services, the Council
should be more fairly compensated for their time.
He also stated the City budget had tripled since 1966/67, which was
a further indication of the increasing Council workload, demanding
more attention and. time of Council Members. He stated the proposed
pay increase for Council Members would still be $140 per month below
the lowest paid full -time City position at this time,.and the Mayor's
salary.would be less than 90 per cent of the City's total employee
work force. He suggested that the charter amendment include a
provision for annual salary adjustments, which would assure that
elected officials' salaries would keep at a regular pace with
fluctuations in the cost of living and was worded in such a way
' to require an increase or decrease. in salary commensurate. with
percentage changes in the cost of living index.
In conclusion, these increased salaries would certainly imply that
those-elected to City office would be expected to devote more time
to the duties. of that office. The salaries were not so high to consti-
tute a full -time job, but they were high enough to warrant the
election of people who would be expected to be more-accessible to
the citizenry and spend more time on the job.
Mayor Schwartz declared the public hearing open.
Maritha Huahes. Executive Secretarv. SLO Countv Buildina.Contractors
Association, stated she was in support of a slight increase in the
Council Members' and Mayor's salary, but felt the Council Members
were performing a duty and service to the community and were not in
the job for financial gain. She felt the proposed increases were
just too ..high.
Per Mathiesen stated objection to the salary increase recommended,
felt the Council duties were a service to the community and to the
citizens and were not for financial gain. He was opposed to the
salary increase.
David Hughes asked why the City Council felt they need such a
tremendous increase in their salaries.
Councilman Gurnee again I.isted seven reasons why he felt the City
Council should receive an increase in salary.
Mayor Schwartz declared the public hearing closed.
City Council Minutes
August 12, 1974
Page 10
Councilman Brown stated he was opposed to a salary increase for
part -time, elected officials. He felt the money should be spent
on full -time staff and urged the City Council not to put this propo-
sition on the November ballot. '
Councilman Graham stated he would support a salary increase in line
with the cost of living, but would not agree with the amounts suggested
by Councilman Gurnee. He felt it was too high and was not fair and
he therefore would not support the recommendation.
Councilman Norris stated he was opposed to a request for a raise in pay
for members of the City Council. He was opposed to putting such an
idea on the ballot. He said he considered being a councilman as his
community service activity, and he felt -he served the people as their
councilman. He also felt the Council must think about the large
number of citizens who served the City on Planning Commissions and
other advisory bodies when they did not even get any salary and here
the Council was asking for a tremendous increase. He felt the duty
of the Councilman was to listen to the people, sit on the Council, and
set policy. He felt it was not the duty of the CIty_Councilmen to_
hang around City Hall and interfere in the day -to -day ac_tiv.ities o_f ^!
Administration and Department Heads. He was opposed to cluttering
up the ballot with a raise and in pay proposals for members of the
City Council. He would oppose any action to increase the salaries.
Mayor Schwartz stated he was in support of a salary proposal which would
increase the salary in proportion to the cost of living increases.
He also felt that in light of increased workload for the Mayor and
City Council, some increase in salary should be made. He felt that ,
as the years went by, elected City Officials were going,to be spending
more and more time on City business. But, he was opposed to the amount
being proposed by Councilman Gurnee. He felt that some day the
citizens of San Luis Obispo would have to face the cost of attracting
better people to spend more time on City Government business and the
way to attract these people might be by paying higher salaries.
Councilman Gurnee stated seeing the way the Council felt-he asked
that the matter be withdrawn and not considered by the City Council.
3. Discussion of City Hall organization was continued to an
adjourned meeting to be held on Thursday; August 15, 1974.
4. Council review of the newsletter format was also continued to
the meeting of August 15, 1974.
5. Memorandum from Robert Strong, Planning Director, requesting
Council consideration of the disposal of clean fill material from the
Cross -Town Feeder Project to be deposited on locations within the
Laguna Lake Park site in areas where prior materials had been placed
but further fill was needed. It was estimated that approximately
4,000 cubic yards of material (500 truck loads ±) would be available,
and at least a portion of this amount could be accommodated at the
park property, dumped but notspread or compacted.
The deposit sites would be selected away from,the lake and shoreline 1
to prevent siltation or other adverse environmental impacts under
normal conditions. The Laguna Lake Park Master Plan was - pending
preparation, and the material would be stockpiled until plans revealed
whether it should be redistributed, spread, or compacted in place.
City Council Minutes
August 12, 1974
Page II
He continued that it was his understanding that the City had
utilized this site for deposit of materials in the past, and had
periodically dumped occasional loads of surplus, clean fill in.
the area even recently, but the proposed stockpiling activity was
of sufficent magnitude to be more apparent to the public, and.should
be considered by the Council rather than continued without their
specific consent.
He.-concluded, based upon the information available, the staff
recommended that the Council authorize the request. To assure
that the public was informed, a negative declaration would be.filed
on this proposal; enabling further notice and additional opportunity
for appeal Lf any person was aggrieved by the determination.
(The Planning Commission would consider any appeal and could consult
with_ other advisory committees, if necessary, to resolve any
concerns.)
Wayne Peterson, Assistant City Engineer, spoke in support.of the
memorandum from Robert Strong allowing the City to. place clean fill
materials at certain points within Laguna Lake Park from the Cross -
Town Feeder Project..
Bill Flory, Park 8 Recreation Director, stated that the proposed
area to be filled with the dirt from the Cross -Town Feeder had been
set aside as a wildlife sanctuary which prohibited vehicles, but the
Park Department had no objection if fill was clean, without debris,
and was placed in areas where fill would be needed for future develop-
ment.
Ery Johnson, Laguna Lake resident, objected to allowance of dumping
on the City park property, any more dumping at least at the magnitude
of 4,000 cubic yards.. He also questioned the present dumping of
dirt on this property. He hoped the City Council would take
disciplinary action on the employees who had allowed the desecration
of the park property by the tremendous amount of dirt that had been
dumped there in the last few weeks.
Don Cross, Laguna Lake resident,. opposed to the continued dumping
on City park property 'of dirt fill and was.also opposed to.the new
proposal being submitted by the City staff.
Mrs. Dorothea Rible, Laguna area resident, stated she too was opposed
to the present dumping and to the proposal by.the City. She felt the
City Council should follow its-own grading and permit regulations.
She then reviewed the history of all the problems that had ever
existed in the Laguna Lake area, particularly on the City park
property. She felt if this dirt plus the sixty truck loads she
estimated that had been dumped in the last couple of weeks started
to fill the lake, she was sure that future problems would cause
flooding to the residents.
The City Council attempted by_ questioning the staff as to whom and
what had been allowed to be dumped in the park property to date.
None of the staff members knew of anyone having been given per-
' mission to dump fill in the Laguna Lake area; except that the Park
Departt
men' occasionally took a pick -up load of clean that
and put
it in the park property.
After discussion, on motion of Councilman Gurnee, seconded by
Councilman Brown that the City Council deny the request of the
City Council Minutes
August 12, 1974
Page 12
City staff, that.they be.required to find a new site for the Cross -
Town Feeder dirt, and further that .the City staff be directed .. .
to find out who had been dumping fill on the property, have the fill
removed, and instruct all personnel.that there.would be no dumping
or filling in-any flood plain by City departments. Motion carried, 1
all ayes.
5B. Communication from the Assistant County Administrative
Officer informing the City Council that as part of the comprehensive
animal control program that was being gone into by the County of
San Luis Obispo, a.door -to -door canvass is required in order to
find out how many.dogs were involved within the areas.
At the present time, all.the.unincorporated areas had been canvassed
and a dog census taken, and they would now like to proceed within
the City of San Luis Obispo.
The approximate cost of. the census would be in the area of $1,500
to $2,000 and.would take appr.oximately:two weeks. There would be
ten people conducting the census in the field. The County stated
that if in the final analysis the City Council did not proceed to
accept the contract as proposed, then there would be no obligation
to pay the cost of the census..
The City Clerk reported to the City Council that the money had been
budgeted.for the last two years to handle a dog census for the City,
but until the matter of enforcement had been settled, the money had
not been spent, so there were sufficient funds if the Council wished
to proceed and he so recommended.
On motion of Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Graham that ,
the City Council authorize the County of San Luis.Obispo to proceed
with the animal canvass.
5C. On motion of Councilman Graham, seconded by-Councilman Brown
the following resolution was introduced: RESOLUTION NO. 2652 (1974
Series), a resolution of the Council of the.City of San Luis Obispo
confirming liens upon real property parcels for weed abatement costs
for the fiscal year 1974/75.
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Graham, Brown, Gurnee, Norris and Mayor Schwartz
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
6. Consideration of Golf Course lease and /or purchase was
continued to August 19, 1974.
7. Consideration of current legislation was continued to
August 19, 1974.
8. Consideration of amendments to the E.I.R. quidelines.was
continued to August 19, 1974.
City Council Minutes
August 12, 1974
Page 13
9. Memorandum from Robert Strong regarding .joint City Council
and commission meetings was continued to August 19, 1974.
1 On motion of Councilman Gurnee, seconded by Councilman Graham the
meeting adjourned to 12:10 P.M. Thursday, August 15, 1974.
APPROVED: November 4, 1974
1
1
. H. PATRICK, CITY CLERK