HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/06/1988, COMM - BINDING ARBITRATION CHARTER AMENDMENT INITITIVE I AM GARY NEMETH, PRESIDENT OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO POLICE
OFFICERS ASSOCIATION.
IT IS MY BELIEF THAT THE MORE YOU AND THE CITIZENS OF OUR COMMUNITY
UNDERSTAND THE BASIC ISSUES AND COMPONENTS OF BINDING ARBITRATION,
THE QUICKER THIS CONCEPT CAN BE PUT TO REST IN FAVOR OF FAIR
TREATMENT FOR ALL CONCERNED.
MAYOR DUNIN STATED " ARBITRATION DESTROYS THE COLLECTIVE BARGAINING
PROCESS". I ASK "WHAT IS THE COLLECTIVE BARGAINING PROCESS IN OUR
CITY ?" THE ANSWER ACCORDING TO JOHN DUNN IS " THE MEET AND CONFER
SESSIONS DO NOT IMPINGE ON THE LEGISLATIVE POWER VESTED BY LAW IN THE
COUNCIL, BUT, RATHER, THEY PROVIDE A USEFUL CHANNEL BY WHICH
EMPLOYEES MAY PROVIDE SUGGESTIONS AS TO HOW THE COUNCILS DISCRETION
IN SALARY MATTERS SHOULD BE EXERCISED AND 'HELP PROMOTE OPEN
COMMUNICATION BETWEEN EMPLOYER AND EMPLOYEES. THIS IS WHAT THE CITY
TERMS "COLLECTIVE BARGAINING". OUR DEFINATION OF THIS IS "COLLECTIVE
BEGGING. "
MAYOR DUNIN ALSO STATED "THE PARTIES WOULD NO LONGER NEGOTIATE AND
COMPROMISE IN GOOD FAITH, BUT POSTURE TO PLACE THEMSELVES IN THE
BEST POSITION FOR AN ARBITRATION HEARING. " HOW CAN WE NOW NEGOTIATE
AND COMPROMISE IN GOOD FAITH, WHEN, BY THE CITY ADMINISTRATORS OWN
WORDS THE PROCESS IS ONE IN WHICH THE EMPLOYEE CAN ONLY OFFER
SUGGESTIONS TO THE CITY. WHERE IS THE COMPROMISE?
AS WE HAVE SEEN, THE CITY REFUSES TO TALK ANYTHING SHORTER THAN A
FIVE YEAR CONTRACT. WHEN WE HAVE ASKED FOR A SHORTER TERM, THE CITY
HAS REFUSED. WHEN WE HAVE PROPOSED BENEFIT CHANGES, THE CITY HAS
REFUSED TO TALK ANY BENEFITS EXCEPT THOSE THE CITY WANTS TO TALK
ABOUT. WHEN WE AGREED UPON A NEW LIST OF COMPARABLE AGENCIES, BASED
ON REALISTIC CRITERIA, THE CITY AGREED. AT LEAST TOBY ROSS AGREED TO
THE NEW LIST, BUT AS WE HAVE SEEN, THE CITY DOESN'T HAVE TO USE THE
LIST. THE CITY DOESN'T HAVE TO DO ANYTHING, AND THAT'S THE PROBLEM.
THERE IS NO MEET AND CONFER IN GOOD FAITH, WHEN THE BEST THE EMPLOYEE
ORGANIZATION CAN DO IS TO OFFER SUGGESTIONS, WITH NO COMMITTMENT BY
THE CITY TO MEET US HALF WAY. WHERE IS THE COMPROMISE ? WHERE IS
THE CARING ATTITUDE THE CITY IS SUPPOSED TO HAVE FOR THE EMPLOYEES
THAT ARE DEDICATED TO WORK HERE ?
WE HAVE TRIED TO CONTACT THE CITY COUNCIL ABOUT NEGOTIATIONS, AND
SENT YOU MATERIAL BECAUSE THE MESSAGE FROM CITY MANAGEMENT WAS YOU
REFUSED TO TALK WITH US. THE PROCESS HAS BEEN LEFT UP TO
MANAGEMENT, AND NOW WE ARE IN TROUBLE. WHERE DO WE GO WHEN WE
BELIEVE THAT THE CITY ADMINISTRATION IS NOT TREATING US IN A FAIR
MANNER ? WHO DO WE TALK TO WHEN OUR LAST RESOURCE HAS SAID NO TO
EVERY REQUEST THAT WE HAVE MADE ? WHO DO WE TAKE OUR CASE TO WHEN
EVERY AVENUE IS CLOSED TO US ?
WE KNOW THAT BINDING ARBITRATION WILL PUT THE FAIRNESS BACK INTO THE
PROCESS WHERE IT HAS BEEN TAKEN OUT OVER THE YEARS. THE ARGUMENT
THAT THE PROCESSS WILL BE TAKEN OUT OF THE HANDS OF THE ELECTED
OFFICIALS IS COMPLETELY FALSE. THE PROCESS NEVER WAS IN YOUR HANDS
TO BEGIN WITH. WE HAVE TRIED TO REACH YOU, TO LET YOU KNOW WHAT IS
ACTUALLY TAKING PLACE, NOT ONLY IN NEGOTIATIONS, BUT IN THE RUNNING
OF OUR DAILY AFFAIRS. EACH TIME WE HAVE TRIED, WE HAVE MET UP WITH
THE CITY ADMINISTRATIONS BRICK WALL. THE COUNCIL PRIDES ITSELF IN
ITS OPEN DOOR POLICY, BUT THAT DOOR HAS BEEN CLOSED TO US.
DURING THESE NEGOTIATIONS WE DID ASK TO BE HEARD BY THE COUNCIL.
AN OFFICER FROM THE POLICE ASSOCIATION ASKED IF WE COULD MEET WITH
THE COUNCIL, NOT TO NEGOTIATE, BUT TO EXPLAIN OUR POSITION, AND WE
WERE REFUSED A HEARING. LATER, THAT SAME OFFICER WAS COUNSELED BY
THE CHIEF OF POLICE INDICATING THE COUNCIL MEMBERS WERE UPSET AND
EMBARRASSED REGARDING THE CONTACT.
HOW MANY TIMES HAVE YOU MET WITH US ? DO YOU KNOW THE ISSUES
WE ARE TRYING TO DEAL WITH ? WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME YOU TALKED TO A
POLICE OFFICER, FIREFIGHTER, OR GENERAL EMPLOYEE TO KNOW WHAT THEIR
CONCERNS ACTUALLY ARE ? ARE YOU GETTING YOUR INFORMATION FROM THE
CITY ADMINISTRATION, WHO HAS INSULATED YOU FROM US, AND WHO IS TRYING
TO COERCE US INTO A UNFAIR POSITION BECAUSE THEY KNOW THAT WE HAVE NO
WHERE TO TURN ? THE CITY REFUSES TO LET US TALK TO CITY COUNCIL
MEMBERS, ON ANY ITEM. SO WHO DO WE TALK TO ABOUT PROBLEMS AND
CONCERNS ?
BY USING BINDING ARBITRATION, YOU WILL NOT BE GIVING UP ANY AUTHORITY
TO ANYONE. THE OUTSIDE ARBITRATOR IS PICKED BY ONE MEMBER FROM THE
CITY'S SIDE, AND ONE MEMBER FROM THE EMPLOYEES SIDE. THEN THE ISSUES
ARE PRESENTED, THEN THE THREE PERSON BOARD MAKES A DECISIONS BASED ON
SEVERAL COMPONENTS, INCLUDING CHANGES IN THE CONSUMER PRICE INDEX,
THE WAGES, HOURS AND OTHER TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF EMPLOYMENT FOR
OTHER EMPLOYEES PROVIDING SIMILAR SERVICES, AND THE FINANCIAL ABILITY
OF THE CITY TO PAY THE COSTS OF THE AWARD. ONCE A DECISION IS MADE,
THAT DECISION IS GIVEN BACK TO BOTH PARTIES, AND THEY EACH HAVE A 10
DAY PERIOD TO AMEND THE DECISION BY MUTUAL AGREEMENT, BEFORE THE
DECISION IS MADE FINAL. WHAT COULD BE MORE FAIR ?
I REALIZE THAT YOU GIVE THE DIRECTION TO THE APPOINTED CITY
OFFICIALS, TO CARRY OUT YOUR WISHES, AND AS JOHN DUNN STATED "IT IS
THE COUNCIL ALONE WHICH IS DIRECTLY RESPONSIBLE AND ACCOUNTABLE TO
THE VOTERS. ACCORDINGLY. ALL COUNCIL MEMBERS STRIVE TO BE RESPONSIVE
TO THE LEGITIMATE WANTS, NEEDS AND DESIRES OF THE COMMUNITY. " WHY
THEN ARE YOU SO UNWILLING TO BE RESPONSIVE TO OUR LEGITIMATE WANTS,
NEEDS AND DESIRES ? WE ARE MORE THAN WILLING TO DISCUSS OUR WANTS,
NEEDS .AND DESIRES AT ANY TIME, BUT WE WILL NO LONGER CONDUCT
COLLECTIVE BEGGING. WHERE YOU HOLD ALL THE CARDS, AND ALL WE CAN DO
IS MAKE SUGGESTIONS THAT FALL ON DEAF EARS.
I HOPE THAT YOU WILL NOW TAKE THE TIME TO RESEARCH BOTH SIDES
OF THIS VERY IMPORTANT ISSUE, BEFORE YOU DECIDE ON SUPPORT OR
NON SUPPORT OF THE BINDING ARBITRATION ISSUE. I CAN ASSURE YOU
THAT THE COMBINED POLICE AND FIRE ASSOCIATIONS, AND THE VOTERS
THAT SUPPORT US IN THE COMMUNITY, ARE DEDICATED TO THE PASSING OF
THIS CHARTER AMENDMENT. WE WILL BE LOOKING TOWARDS THE COUNCIL
FOR ACCOUNTABILITY TO THE COMMUNITY.
r -
�illllillll
city of sAn luis oBispo
990 Palm Street/Post Office Box 8100 • San Luis Obispo, CA 93403-8100
(805) 549-7140
August 26, 1988
MEMORANDUM
To: Pamela Voges, City Clerk
From: Roger Picquet, City Attorney
Subject: Proposed Charter Amendment (Police and Fire)
You have asked for my advice on the proposed Charter amendment for binding
arbitration for public safety wage disputes. Specifically, whether the
proposed amendment conforms to legal procedures for Charters.
Charter City status is afforded constitutional protections. However, the
state legislature may and has set out statutes addressing the process by
which a Charter is adopted or amended (Govt. Code section 34450 et sec . ) .
Section 34459 sets forth the requirement for signatures of 15% of the
registered voters. Section 34460 states that the petitions "shall be in
the form and shall be circulated and processed" in accordance with Section
4080 et seg. of the Elections Code. Section 4081 states that the propo-
nents of a Charter amendment measure shall comply with Sections 4002 and
4005. Section 4002 provides that the "notice of intention" shall be
signed by "at least one, but not more than three, proponents. "
The proposed measure has four proponents' signatures. This does not meet
Section 4002, nor can it fall within the doctrine of substantial
compliance.
Therefore, I recommend you reject the submitted proposed Charter amendment
as not meeting legal requirements as to form.
Please all if you have any questions.
RP:cac
CityOS�►1'1 WISOBISN
L.
990 Palm Street/Post Office Box 8100 • San Luis Obispo, CA 93403-8100
(805) 549-7140
September 1, 1988
MEMORANDUM
To: Pamela Voges, City Clerk
From: Roger Picquet, City Attorney
Subject: Charter Amendment Title and Summary
Enclosed please find Official Title and Summary for the ,proposed Charter
Amendment on compulsory and binding arbitration.
Please call me if you have any questions.
RP:cac
Enclosure
OFFICIAL TITLE AND SUMMARY
PREPARED BY CITY ATTORNEY
COMPULSORY AND BINDING ARBITRATION FOR
POLICE AND FIRE EMPLOYEE DISPUTES.
CHARTER AMENDMENT INITIATIVE
This measure would establish a procedure in the Charter by which disputes
between recognized employee associations for the Police and Fire Depart-
ments and the City, on all matters relating to the wages, hours and other
terms and conditions of employment, would be resolved through compulsory
and binding arbitration. The procedure would take effect after either the
City or the employee association involved in a given dispute declared that
negotiations had reached an impasse. The dispute would be submitted to a
three member Arbitration Board. Both the City and the employee associa-
tion would select one arbitrator each and those two individuals would
select the third arbitrator by a specified method.
Each of the parties would submit a final settlement offer on the issues in
dispute to the Arbitration Board. The Board shall then select one of the
final settlement offers on each issue by deciding which of the two most
nearly conforms with certain factors or criteria including, but not
limited to, changes in the Consumer Price Index (CPI) , the wages, hours
and other terms and conditions of employment for other employees providing
similar services, and the financial ability of the City to pay the costs
of the award. The decision of the Board would be given to the parties and
they would have 10 days to amend by mutual agreement the Board's
decision. After the 10-day period was over, the Board's decision would be
made public and be binding upon both parties without the possibility of
any further administrative or judicial review. This measure would also
place in the Charter a general prohibition against strikes by police
officers or fire fighters and provide that any such employee found to have
engaged in a strike would be terminated from City employment, and could
not be rehired except as a new employee.
/00
1988
RECEIVED
F[Deenotesaction ead Person AUG 191988CITYCLtSSANW5CLERK CA
City Clerk City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93403 Clerk-orifi. R E C E IV ED
RE: 13 AUG AUG 19 1988
❑ OFFICE OF
CITY ATTORNEY
To the City Clerk:
Pursuant to Section 4002.5 of the Elections Code, it is requested
that a ballot title and summary of the enclosed petition be
prepared. Please contact either of the persons below if there
are any further steps necessary to accomplish the preparation of
the ballot title and summary and/or to otherwise complete the
initial filing of the petition with your office.
Thank. you for your consideration and assistance in this matter.
m t
503 Ellen W
Sa uis Obispo, CA 93401
even Morale
76 Mariposa
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
VIA�v
u �G
Michael Ward
2366 Sendero
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
'4
O� z -
Mic ae1 Hogan
1259 Stafford
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
RECEI . E ®
AUG 19 W
CITY CLERK
SAN LUTSOBSPO.CA
PROHIBIT POLICE AND FIREFIGHTER STRIKES!
REQUIRE IMPARTIAL ARBITRATION OF WAGE AND BENEFIT DISPUTES
Petition for Submission to Voters of Proposed Amendment
to the Charter of the City of San Luis Obispo
Notice of Intent to Circulate Petition
Notice is hereby given of the intention of the persons whose
names appear hereon to circulate the petition within the City of
San Luis Obispo for the purpose of amending the Charter of the
City of San Luis Obispo to prohibit strikes and to provide for a
process for impartial and binding arbitration to peacefully and
equitably resolve wage, hour and benefit disputes for police and
firefighters employed by the City of San Luis Obispo. A state-
ment of reasons for the proposed action as contemplated in the
petition is as follows:
At present, no equitable system exists for negotiating contracts
between City representatives and representatives of police and
firefighter organizations . State law is weak and the City
Charter is silent. This has resulted in protracted negotiations
and a very negative climate for employer-employee relations in
the City which would potentially lead to strikes and other job
actions by employees. This type of negative climate in labor
relations does not serve the interests of the City, the
employees, or the citizens.
This initiative prohibits strikes and provides for impartial
arbitration to resolve disputes in negotiations. Impartial
arbitration acts as an incentive for all parties to negotiate in
good faith and provides for fair and expeditious resolution of
disputes.
The charter initiative petition to be circulated in San Luis
Obispo provides for an impartial arbitration process nearly
identical to the "last best offer" arbitration process covering
firefighters and police officers in Palo Alto and San Jose.
Since the Palo Alto charter amendment passed in 1978, fire-
fighters have had to use arbitration only once. Firefighters
and police officers in San Jose have never had to use the
process adopted by their voters in 1980.
Impartial arbitration is fair; it' s unbiased; it eliminates
labor strife; and it works.
a4S ' t e ( ry N eth)
530 Ellen WaV San Luis Obis Californ 9340
Address
AvG�ST' 1
Date nature (Steve Morales)
76 Mariposa San Luis Obispo, California 93401
Address
1}c>r islt/1, 1 8�
Date Signature (Michael Ward)
2366 Sendero San Luis Obis o California 93401
Address
�� Ho an
Da signature g )
1259 Stafford San Luis Obispo, California 93401
Address
To the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo:
We, the undersigned, registered and qualified voters of the State
of California and residents of the City of San Luis Obispo,
pursuant to Section 3 of Article 11 of the Constitution of this
State, and Chapter 2 of Division 2 of Title 4, commencing at
Section 34450 of the Government Code, present to the City Council
of the City this Petition and request that the following proposed
amendment to the Charter of the City be submitted to the
registered and qualified voters of the City for their adoption or
rejection at an election on a date to be determined by the City
Council.
The proposed charter amendment reads as follows:
SECTION 713. Prohibition Against Strikes - Impartial and Binding
Arbitration of Police and Fire Department Employment Disputes
(A) Declaration of Policy.
It is hereby declared to be the policy of the City of San Luis
Obispo that acrimonious labor disputes with its public safety
employees are not in the public interest and should be avoided,
and that a method should be adopted for peacefully and equitably
resolving such disputes which might otherwise lead to strikes.
(B) Prohibition Against Strikes.
If any firefighter and/or police officer employed by the City of
San Luis Obispo willfully engages in a strike against the City,
said employee shall be dismissed from his or her employment and
may not be reinstated or returned to City employment except as a
new employee. The question of whether an employee charged with
participating in a strike or work stoppage did, in fact, engage
in such conduct shall be determined through the disciplinary
procedures applicable to employees generally. No officer, board,
council or commission shall have the power to grant amnesty to
any employee charged with engaging in a strike against the City.
(C) Obligation To Negotiate In Good Faith.
The City, through its duly authorized representatives, shall
negotiate in good faith with the recognized employee organiza-
tion(s) for Police Department and Fire Department employees on
all matters relating to the wages, hours, and other terms and
conditions of City employment, and including the establishment of
procedures for resolution of grievances concerning the interpreta-
tion or application of any negotiated agreement. Unless and
until agreement is reached through negotiations between the City
and the recognized employee organization(s) for the Police
Department and Fire Department employees or a determination is
made through the arbitration procedure hereinafter provided, no
existing benefit or condition of employment for said Police
Department and Fire Department employees shall be eliminated or
changed.
(D) Impasse Resolution Procedures.
All disputes and/or controversies pertaining to wages, hours, or
terms and conditions of employment which remain unresolved after
good faith negotiations between the City and the recognized
employee organization (s) for Police Department and Fire
Department employees shall be submitted to a three (3) member
board of arbitrators upon the declaration of impasse by the City
or by the recognized employee organization involved in the
dispute.
Representatives designated by the City and representatives of the
employee organizations involved in the dispute, shall each select
one arbitrator to the board of arbitrators within three (3) days
after either party has notified the other, in writing, that it
desires to proceed to arbitration. The third member of the
arbitration board shall be selected by agreement between the two
(2) arbitrators selected by the City and the employee organiza-
tion, and shall serve as the neutral arbitrator and Chairman of
the board. In the event that the arbitrators selected by the
City and the employee organization cannot agree upon the
selection of the third arbitrator within ten (10) days from the
date that either party has notified the other that it has
declared an impasse , either party may request the State
Mediation/Conciliation Service to provide a list of seven (7)
persons who are qualified and experienced as labor arbitrators.
If the arbitrator selected by the City and the employee
organization cannot agree within three (3) days after receipt of
such list on one of seven (7) to act as the third arbitrator,
they shall alternately strike the names from the list of nominees
until one name remains and that person shall then become the
third arbitrator and Chairman of the arbitration board.
Any arbitration convened pursuant to , this article shall be
conducted in conformance with, subject to, and governed by Title
9 of Part 3 of the California Code of Civil Procedure.
At the conclusion of the arbitration hearings, the arbitration
board shall direct each of the parties to submit, within such
time limit as the board may establish, a last offer of settlement
on each of the issues in dispute. The arbitration board shall
decide each issue by majority vote by selecting whichever last
offer of settlement on that issue it finds most nearly conforms
with those factors traditionally taken into consideration in the
determination of wages, hours, and other terms and conditions of
public and private employment, including, but not limited to,
changes in the average consumer price index for business
services, the wages, hours, and other terms and conditions of
employment of other employees performing similar services, and
the financial condition of the City and its ability to meet the
cost of the award.
After reaching a decision, the arbitration board shall mail or
otherwise deliver a true copy of its decision to the parties.
The decision or the arbitration board shall not be publicly
disclosed and shall not be binding until ten (10) days after it
is delivered to the parties. During that ten (10) day period,
the parties may meet privately, attempt to resolve their
differences, and by mutual agreement amend or modify any of the
decisions of the arbitration board. At the conclusion of the ten
(10) day period, which may be extended by mutual agreement
between the parties, the decision of the arbitration board
together with any amendments or modifications agreed to by the
parties shall be publicly disclosed and shall be binding upon the
parties. The City and the recognized employee organization shall
take whatever action is necessary to carry out and effectuate the
award.
Expenses of any arbitration convened pursuant to this article
including the fee for the services of the Chairman of the
arbitration board, shall be borne equally by the parties. All
other expenses which the parties may incur individually are to be
borne by the party incurring such expenses.
(WLW399)
Angelo's Italian Restaurant Franklin Realty Woodstock's Pizza Parlor
969 Monterey Street 965 Monterey Street 1015 Court Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 San .Luis .Obispo, CA .93401 San .Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Anderson Ho* The Lunch Box Mannikins Tailoring
955 Mon* eet 957 Monterey Street 1016 Morro Street
San T ^A 93401 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
General Appliance Center Ann's On The Corner
952 Higuera Street 951 Monterey Street
�.1 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
°.0• ��c9
�b',teYZa�a�5�0� Stiff
J-10 Soot vQa�et McCarthy's Cocktail Lounge 'Assembly Line
r�,10 9 aha Gem 1019 Court Street 970 Higuera Street
�e as rc 1c� 9 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
e�` rye
>e�e{�
le{Q�5e4R0��jvsj�� �Qo� isa's Place Kennedy Nautilus Center
�
gJ-o& ara °�5,c 'liguera Street 570 Higuera Street
Flo �j ,C,.So°a �°°o tis Obispo, CA 93401 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Mr. a� bvOe0�l� SG4` investment Group Mr. Jesse Norris
1 Bueu c�o1,St�`5�� �44�' -eet 2047 Wilding Lane
San Luz 4�e �ya9�4o¢s Z� ,1po, CA 93401 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Z
Chamber
'
1039Chorro S 4°5'eiy -nt Association 3026ttSouth iHiguera gn pStreet
San Luis Obis �q met` 93406 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
o
00 sSG se °��a �9 ATTN: 'Mr. Vic Montgomery
P.C. .row
4 ILIHG'LIST QR
Court,..4treet,«L
9/8/88
r. vic ,Leri.L116 4p1r% IRO §od o9dinhi- t KSBY " 1 Chamlel 4
83 Marsh Street 112 Broad: treet .4 67 [Pill $ eet
an Luis Obispo, CA 93401 San Luis Obi o, CA 93401 San Luis Obi o, CA 93401
kir. ,Bob B(Vsr KKUS 98 League of Women Voters
P•G� . 396 Buckley Road 4444 Orcutt Road
P.O. Box-592 San Luis Obispo, CA " 93401 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
San Luis Obispo., CA 93406 Attn: John Richards Attn:. : Adele!§.tera n
Mustang Daily Ken Schwartz Planning Commission
CPSU, SLO 201 Buena Vista In Box downstairs
Room 226 Graphic Arts San Luis- Obispo, CA .. 93401
San .Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Mr. Rich Ferguson Randy Skaggs Zir. Duane Morris
Sierra Club 905 El Capitan Way 1'69 Cerro Romauldo
Rocicy Canyon Star Route San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Creston, CA 93432
Nr. Richard De Blauw Hr. Pierre Rademaker Mr. Kurt Kupper
144 Alta Vista Way 82 Chuparrosa Drive •798 Evans Road
Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Mr. Brian Starr Mr. John Kuden Hr. John E. King
2650 Augusta 265 South Street King Corporation
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 P.O. Box 630
San Luis Obispo, CA 93406
Mr. Alex Madonna Hr. Sandy Merriam . Mr. Rob Strong
Madonna Construction 235 Chaplin - The Planning Hill
184 Higuera Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 One Buena-Vista Avenue
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
4r. Bob Williams Mr. ael De N Mr. Allan Cooper
1523 Shoreline Road 1673 S 756 Broad Street
)ak Shores uis Obispo, 401 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Iradley, CA. 93426
,arry and Alfi Martinelli Hr. Fred Baur Loretta Gingg
;an Luis Tallow 518 High Street 214 Madonna Road
'redo Road San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 San Luis Obispo., CA 93401
an Luis Obispo, CA 93401
r. Paul Jones Hr. Richard Schmidt K > ne
Chan
70 Peach 921 112 Broad Street 46an. Luis Obispo, CA 93401. San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Sabisp , 93401
Hark Kenyon Mr. Thomas Swem tVEC - Radio
Applied Navigation Device 1223 Higuera 3 McMill
4251 South Higuera 'Suite 102 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 San Lu ispo,. CA 93401
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
sue: —cvva-rarrnermp-A. Calrtornia-Cooperage
P.O. Box '1796 ' '65 Monterey-Street ' 870 Industrial Way
San Lul*, Obispo, CA 93401 n Luis Obispo, CA 93401 ;an Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Union Local 0403 Courtney and Associates County. Board of Supervisors
3710 Broad Street 870 Industrial Way County Government Center
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 San Luis Ob)Lspo, CA 93408
J. J. Parsons Terry Orton
643 A Howard Street Westland Engineering County Administrative Officer
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 1037 Mill Street County Government Center
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 San Luis Obispo, CA 93408
Derrel's Mini Storage Hi• jack' Foster LAFCO
3265 W. Ashlan Southfork Place County Government Center
Fraffio, 'aA 93711 Paso Roblks, CA 93446 r Courthouse Annex A 205
San Luis Obispo, CA 93408
Kelvin Jones Vic Montgomery/Keith•Gurnee Mr. Paul Crawford
229 E. Ormond Road" RRM Design Group County Planning Director
Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 3026 South Higuera Street County Government Center .
San' Luis Obispo, CA 93401 San Luis Obispo, CA 93408
'dilliams Bros. Markets Inc. Rick.Webster Citizens for Responsive
P.O. Box 305 Laguna Hill Estates Government
Santa Maria, CA 93435 P.O. Box 5260 ATTN: Melanie Billig
San Luis Obispo, CA 93406 1460 Mill Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
tollie Cavaletto Eva Vigil Sierra Club
125 E. Tefft Street 1368 Sonrisa Court San Luis Obisspo, C738 Higuera popCA 93401
'.0. Box 97 San Luis'Obispo, CA 93401
lipomo, CA 93444
Mr. Roy Hemf ,: .-
Jim- Hoffman SLO County Land Conservancy
225 La Canada P.O. Box 12206
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401: San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 San Luis Obispo, CA 93406
vane and Carolyn Dewey John Benson Lea liomen' V 6.
'.0. Box 6485 1378 Fairway Drive 16 Car Coi
;os Osos, CA 93412 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Luis bis o, CA 340
r,r ATTN: Maggie Cox
is. :Sheri Conley Janet Kirk - SLO Chamber of Commerce
outhern-California Gas P.O. Box 13935 1039 Chorro Street
.0. Box 3249 Terminal Annex San Luis Obispo, CA 93406 San Luis Obispo, CA' 93401
DO Angeles, CA 90051
iy Davis, Corp Staff Norman and Mary Ann Jolmson Private Industry Council
rleman Co., Inc 1710 Diablo Drive P.O. Box 1221
,0. Box 1762 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 San Luis Obispo, CA 93406
!tchita, KS 67201
B-24-88 meeting
PC Agenda
1. Warren Hoag
County Planning Dept.
Count Government Center
San Luis Obispo, CA 93407
1. RRM Mont ry 1. Bert Forbes
2415 Leona
3026 . Hig San Luis Obispo, CA 934 1
VRML
Luis Obispo, CA 93401
2. William Adams
French Hospital
PO Box 8127
San Luis Ob spa, CA 3401
3. Greg Bauer 3. S ven D. lts
3536 S. Hig era, e. 240 14 Higue a Street
San Luis Ob spa, A 93401 San LUis 0 ispo, CA 93401
4. Jahn Mitch 11
1012 Pacif•c reet
San Luis 0 is o, CA 93401
6. Steve Kahn 6. Jack Fo er
Central C st Engineering PO Box 161
396 Buck Road San Lui Obispo, CA 93406
San LUis ispo, CA 93401
6. Kenny z•n
860 Uinta Collados
San L is bispo, CA 93401
5. Sa ation Armv 5. EOC
PO Box1407 880 I dustrial Way
S LUis Obispo, CA 93406 San L is Obisp , CA 93401
5• Beverlyl5tewart 5. Stev Henderson
People's Shelter HRC
PO Box x{610 Cit of San Luis obispo
San Luis Obispo, Ca 93404