Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/17/2004, B6 - REVIEW OF RULES PROHIBITING THE DISTRIBUTION OF ADHESIVE MATERIALS AT THE DOWNTOWN ASSOCIATION'S (D council Weine Dare 1/0 j acEnba RepoRt CITY OF SAN LUIS OBI SPO FROM: �� Orah Cash, Downtown Association Administrator Prepared By: Betsy Kiser, Prinicpal Administrative Analyst J SUBJECT: REVIEW OF RULES PROHIBITING THE DISTRIBUTION OF ADHESIVE MATERIALS AT THE DOWNTOWN ASSOCIATION'S (DA) THURSDAY NIGHT PROMOTIONS FARMER'S MARKET CAO RECOMMENDATION As recommended by the Downtown Association Board of Directors, uphold the Thursday Night Promotions (TNP) rules prohibiting the distribution of adhesive materials (given away or sold) at the TNP Farmer's Market. DISCUSSION Background of Rules Development In the late 1990's, a phenomenon known as "sticker graffiti" became prevalent in the downtown area, creating a significant problem for City Public Works crews and DA staff, who found themselves regularly engaged in sticker removal. With an increasing number of groups handing out adhesive materials at Thursday Night Farmer's Market, it became a common situation, particularly on Friday mornings, to find stickers on store windows, parking meters, poles, sidewalks, signs, and nearly ever other type of surface within reach. Not only was the increased workload significant with sticker removal activities, oftentimes removal damaged the painted surfaces of street poles and signs, necessitating repainting. In response to the escalating problems associated with sticker distribution, the City contacted the DA for assistance; and for awhile, the DA provided volunteer labor to help with sticker removal. Then, the difficulty of finding volunteers in a timely manner and the practice of handing out razor blades to volunteers created other problems and that program was ended. It was then that the TNP committee recommended, and the board approved, rules prohibiting the distribution of adhesive materials during Farmer's Market (Sections 6E, 17P and 17U of the TNP Rules). The Council approved the rules in 1998 and since that time there have been fewer instances of sticker vandalism and few complaints about the rules. History of Complaints The TNP rules prohibiting the distribution of adhesive material at Farmer's Market first came into question in January 2004 after the DA staff informed various political groups participating in the Market that stickers were not permitted. Mr. Tom Bordonaro, who wished to use bumper stickers as a way to promote the SLO County Republican Party, attended the February 11, 2004 (o-I CAR—Prohibition of Adhesive Materials at DA Farmer's Markets Page 2 TNP meeting. After discussion with the committee, DA staff and Mr. Bordonaro, a compromise was reached that appeared to meet the needs of all parties. That is, a facsimile of a bumper sticker could be displayed at a booth and people wishing to obtain a bumper sticker could sign up on a mailing list to receive one or be directed to a group's headquarters or office to obtain one. It was felt that this was a win-win situation because not only could the rules be observed but also the organizations would obtain contacts for their mailing lists and be assured that those receiving stickers were using them for the purpose for which they were intended. (See Attachment 1 for minutes from.the TNP Committee meetings.) Then on March 24, 2004, two representatives from the Democratic Central Committee attended the TNP Committee meeting to issue another complaint about the ban on sticker distribution at the market, stating that the rules violate the First Amendment right of freedom of speech. The committee explained the rationale behind the ban and informed the organization that if they wished to pursue it further, they could take the issue to the DA board and then to the City Council, which ultimately approves all TNP rules and regulations. On April 13, the Democratic Central Committee appealed to the DA board for revocation of the no-adhesive rules but the board denied the appeal and upheld the rules. (See Attachment 2,April 13 DA board minutes.) On Thursday, July 8, 2004, staff from the DA again had to remind several Farmer's Market participants that they were prohibited from distributing adhesive materials from their booths. The participants refused to comply with the request and on July 9, 2004, the DA revoked the booth permits for two refusing organizations. A revocation appeal hearing was held before the DA's TNP committee on July 14, at which time one organization agreed to comport with the existing rules and subsequently its permit was restored. The second organization indicated it would not participate in the Farmer's Market for the time being and would pursue amendment of the rules through the DA board and the City Council. DA staff and the TNP committee agreed that the matter should be considered by the board and the issue was agendized for August 10, 2004. In the meantime, the Council received a petition signed by an mixture of non-profit and political groups indicating a dissatisfaction with the DA adhesive material rules and requesting that the Council overturn the current rules on the grounds that they are arbitrarily enforced and impede their First Amendment rights. (Attachment 3) The letter was referred to the City Attorney, who responded in a memo to the Council, indicating the following: "A good argument can be made that: it is a reasonable time, place and manner restriction on speech, it is content neutral,it serves a significant governmental interest of keeping the city clean, it allows for ample alternative channels for communication, and, consequently, it does not violate the constitutional right of free speech." (Attachment 3) On August 3, 2004, a group of people representing a wide-range of non-profit organizations, attended the City Council meeting and during Public Comment, protested the no-adhesive rules on the grounds that. G-z CAR—Prohibition of Adhesive Materials at DA Farmer's Markets Page 3 1. To prohibit the distribution of bumper stickers is an infringement on one's.freedom of speech rights. (See Attachment 4); and 2. While the TNP rules address the distribution of adhesive material by participants having booths at Farmer's Market, the general public continues to distribute stickers on the street directly in front of the booths without regulation, defeating the purpose of the rules and impacting only those who are paid participants in the market. The petitioners requested that Council revoke the no-adhesive rules and Council directed staff to agendize the issue for the August IV' Council meeting, after the DA board had an opportunity to take action on it. On August 10, 2004, the DA board again reviewed the no adhesive rule and took testimony from a number of proponents advocating for a revocation of the rule. Also in attendance to answer questions was staff from the Public Works Department, who are currently responsible for clean- up in the downtown area with regard to adhesive material. After lengthy discussion, the board approved the staff recommendation to follow current practice and uphold the TNP rules prohibiting distribution of adhesive materials at Farmer's Market. (See Attachment 5 for August 10 Board minutes.) Rationale for Continuation of No-Adhesive Material Rules The rationale for maintaining the no-adhesive material rules for Farmer's Market remains consistent with the rationale for developing the policy initially: 1. Although the rules have no effect on the distribution of adhesive materials by those without booths at Farmer's Market (the general public and retail stores), the amount of "sticker graffiti" has diminished since the rules were instituted and therefore serve a constructive purpose. 2. Both the City's Public Works representatives and the DA staff concur that reversing the rule could (and most likely would) result in a return to vandalism caused by stickers placed on public surfaces. (See Attachment 6 for recent photos of"sticker graffiti" that occurs in the downtown even with the TNP rules.) While some groups have indicated that they would be willing to come downtown, when contacted, to remove "their" stickers, this process would be cumbersome to monitor and difficult to coordinate. There simply is insufficient staff to patrol the streets, identify the group associated with a particular sticker, contact the group, follow-up on the removal or ultimately have any type of enforcement for the removal. Furthermore, as indicated earlier, removal of stickers frequently damages paint and other surfaces. 3. In a way, this is a very similar situation to those communities that regulate the sale of spray paint in their towns; it does not address the message but rather the method used to disseminate the message, which in both cases — spray paint and stickers — result in vandalism. �-3 CAR—Prohibition of Adhesive Materials at DA Farmer's Markets Page 4 4. The rule does not prohibit groups from disseminating their messages in any other manner except adhesive, leaving ample means to accommodate the message, including the use of buttons,postcards, flyers,banners,pins, hats, etc. CONCURRENCES The Public Works Department concurs with the recommendation to uphold the Thursday Night Promotions (TNP) rules prohibiting the distribution of adhesive materials (given away or sold) at the TNP Farmer's Market. (See Attachment 7) FISCAL IMPACT There is no fiscal impact associated with the approval of the recommendation. ALTERNATIVES 1. Suspend the rules for a six (6) month trial period. Allow stickers to be handed out on a trial basis, with appropriate documentation of sticker vandalism (photos, dates, times, etc.). While this approach would be cumbersome to administer if sticker graffiti increases, it would provide sufficient time and documentation to determine the efficacy of the rules. Staff believes this is a viable alternative, however, there may be difficulties with re-instating the rules once the trial period is over and if there is sufficient data to support continuing regulation. 2. Rescind the TNP rules prohibiting the distribution of adhesive materials at Farmer's Markets. This is not recommended for reason #1 stated above under rationale; that it could and probably would lead to a reoccurrence of"sticker graffiti" in the downtown. 3. Require a clean-up deposit from those desiring to distribute adhesive materials, in case their stickers end up on public and private property. This approach is not practical for reasons of perceived prior restraint and holding/ref ending money for sporadic attendees. 4. Explore the possibility of banning or regulating stickers, much like restrictions on spray paint and permanent markers in other communities. Such regulation may not be practical due to the difficulty of enforcement within businesses and it also presents a conflict for the DA in serving its members. ATTACHMENTS 1. Minutes from TNP meetings January 28, 2004 and February 11, 2004 2. DA Board of Directors minutes April 13, 2004 3. Farmer's Market Petition and City Attorney memo to Council 4. Letter from Stew Jenkins presented at August 3 Council meeting 5. DA Board of Directors minutes August 10, 2004 6. Photos of current"sticker graffiti" in the downtown area 7. Memo from Public Works Department 8. Sections 6E, 17P and 17U of the TNP Rules G:\Staff\Kiser\Downtown Association\Bumper Sticker Rule TNP 81104 ATTANEW 1 San Luis Obispo Downtown Association Thursday Night Promotions Committee January 28,2004 Downtown Association Minutes Present Guest Correne Weaver, Acting Chair Jim Haack Bob Walters Linda Jankay Sara Hazard Tunny Ortali Tom Maupin Maryann Stansfield, Staff Call to Order by Weaver 8:05 am Public Comment No Public Comment Consent Agenda Motion to approve consent agenda by Ortali, 2ne by Walters, PAIR Applications The Attractives Motion to approve by Walters, 2nd by Ortali Previous Week Report Stansfield: Due to Market complaints regarding Aero the entertainer Stansfield will call and rescind the approved application and cancel further booking dates; police informed DA that Michael Miers has been released and could show up at FM which he apparently did; Stansfield heard reports that he was creating several scenes and when she went to check it out he had apparently moved on. Sales are up; merchandise arids are working well andrcict' ns ie in ormed many politica groups that no stickers are allowed on the market; SLO County Republican party refused to comply, Stansfield informed them if they don't that it could compromise their eligibility to participate in FM. Ortali:Above in sales from weeks before; Miers was causing problems at the Market Jankay: Slow again for farmers Hazard: Crary busy again last week. Old Business Snow Night: More snow this year than ever; very busy this year and Parks and Rec did a great job managing the long lines; balloon sales were very high; FM electricity: still waiting to hear back from city to see if viable proposition; on going issue that has been brought up many times with the city;funding re: this issue has been biggest hurdle in past; need to do cost analysis; FM could pass on costs to those who use electricity; Stansfield to keep committee updated on progress Stansfield called SLO Perk to inform them of the FM Rules and Regulations violation due to their truck remaining on the Market during Market hours of operation. SLO Perk decided not to -S - ATTANN 9 San Luis Obispo Downtown Association Thursday Night Promotions Committee February 11, 2004 Downtown Association Minutes Present Guest Mike White, Chair Tom Bordonaro Bob Walters Correne Weaver Linda Jankay Sara Hazard Paul Brown Mike Ray Tom Maupin Maryann Stansfield, Staff Deborah Cash, Staff Call to Order by White 8:01 am Public Comment No Public Comment Consent Agenda Motion to approve consent agenda with attachment tabled until next meeting by Walters, 2ne by Hazard, PAIF. Applications Cal Poly Business Class 387 Motion to approve by White, 2nd by Walters, PAIF Chase Fleming and the Charmers Motion to approve by White, 2nd by Brown, PAIF The New Five Cents Motion to approve by Brown, 2nd by Walters, PAIF Lantern Festival Club Motion to approve by White, 2nd by Brown, PAIF Nima & Merge Motion to approve by Brown, 2nd by Walters, PAIF ticker Policy Questions/Ideas with SLO Republican Central Committee Tom Bordonaro: Bordonaro views stickers as essential tool for political groups and wants to find middle ground regarding TNP sticker policy. Current TNP policy states no adhesive materials can be used as give- a-ways during FM and Stansfield is enforcing rule to apply to all groups including political. Brown added that TNP must be fair and consistent regarding all rules and regulations and cannot make exceptions for one particular group. Bordonaro said the Republican Central Committee will comply with rule and thanked TNP for hearing his views. Stansfield to make informational flyer regarding this matter with a sample of photo copy solution. Alternative solution: Photo copy stickers and offer to mail to constituents Create mailing list of constituents Create stickers that"cling"—static electricity Old Business FM electricity: No timeline or budget as of yet but City supports idea of electric boxes for TNP use. Michael Mello of Amnesia not offering power and very eager to make sure DA and city follows through with proposed idea. Mello feels it is too much of a liability for businesses to offer electricity. On 1/ ATTR 6 SLO Downtown Association Board of Directors 13 April 2004 City Council Hearing Room Minutes Present Brad Bilsten Ellen Henry Howard Carroll Jeff Langford Tom Swem - Michael White Patty Carpenter Alex Gough Bob Seeley Frank Merson Brandon Downing, ex officio Deborah Cash, staff Kristin Ansari, staff Betsy Kiser Meeting called to order 7:35 AM. No public comment at this time. Motion to approve minutes of Langford, 2nd by Carroll. PAIF. Motion to approve minutes of Board Retreat by Langford, 2°d by White, PAIF. TNP Appeal Sandy Cook, Democratic Central Committee, appealed the TNP committee's decision to not allow stickers given out/sold at TNP as per rules and regulations. Feels being penalized for others' irresponsible acts/prior restraint. Motion to uphold bylaws regarding stickers on the basis that the request may induce damage to property by Carroll,2nd by Swem; PAIF. Taste of San Luis Date changed to September 8; 2'round of letters goes out this week. Utility Upgrade Langford said he was amazed how fast the project went on his section. Seismic Review �O'7 MOW MEMORANDUM From the Office of the City Attorney July 21, 2004 To: Mayor and City Council From: Jonathan P. Lowell, City Attorney 01-t' Subject: Farmers' Market Petition Attached is a petition signed by several local organizations and individuals objecting to a rule promulgated by the Downtown Association governing the Thursday Night Promotions, i.e. Farmers' Market, which provides"all giveaways (non-adhesive material only) must be pre-approved by the Committee. No adhesive materials of any kind will be allowed." In addition, also attached is an email from a Downtown Association Thursday Night Promotions subcommittee member, sent to an unidentified individual and copied to the City Council through the "contact us" portion of the City's website. In years past, adhesive stickers, usually handed out as part of assorted commercial promotions, found their way to being affixed, without owner permission, to both public and private property in and around downtown. The no adhesives rule was instituted to address this problem, and there have been few instances of sticker vandalism or complaints about the rule since its inception in 1998. A good argument can be made that: it is a reasonable time, place and manner restriction on speech, it is content neutral, it serves a significant governmental interest of keeping the city clean, it allows for ample alternative channels for communication, and, consequently, it does not violate the constitutional right of free speech. This petition came about after staff for the Downtown Association reminded a couple of different Farmers' Market participants on July 8, 2004, that they were prohibited from distributing adhesive materials from their booths. The participants refused to comply with the request that they cease distribution of bumper stickers. On July 9, 2004, the Downtown Association revoked the booth permits for the two organizations that refused to comply with the rules. A revocation appeal hearing was held before a subcommittee of the Downtown Association Board (the Thursday Night Promotions committee) on July 14, at which one organization agreed to comport with the existing rules and its permit was restored, and the other indicated it would not participate in the Farmers' Market for the time being and would pursue amendment of the rule by the Downtown Association Board. Staff and the subcommittee agreed that the matter should be scheduled for consideration by the Downtown Association Board. That board next meets on August 10, 2004, and the issue will be included on its agenda for that date 6 Mayor and City Council MACHMUff 3 July 21, 2004 Page 2 I met with the Downtown Association staff and representatives from the Police Department the afternoon of July 14. It was agreed that, in light of the fact that the Downtown Association Board will consider the matter and this could result in a change to the rules, strict adherence to the no adhesives rule would likely not be in anyone's best interests. Hence, at the July 15 Farmers' Market, the no adhesives rule was enforced only in the event that actual vandalism was observed. This seemed reasonable, especially since several people involved with different political organizations were aware that if individuals distributed bumper stickers on their own as they walked about the Market, they could do so-without violating the rule. A similar approach is expected to be followed at events in the near future while the matter makes its way through the administrative process. If someone is dissatisfied with the decision of the Downtown Association Board on August 10, the matter may be appealed to the City Council. In light of the pending discussion of this issue by the Downtown Association Board on August 10, it is suggested that the Council allow the Board to act. If an appeal is subsequently taken from the Board's decision, at that time the Council may fully consider the issue. Attachments cc: Ken Hampian Wendy George Deb Linden Mike McCluskey Gil Trujillo Deborah Cash MACHMENT3 Contacts: Peggy Koteen 544-1580 ;Bill Rosensteel 773-0331 July 11,2004 Dear Mayor and City Council Members: Numerous non-profit and political groups are tremendously dissatisfied with the Downtown Association's current rule restricting us from offering bumper stickers to the public. In 1998 when a related restriction was discussed with the city attorney,it was determined that the groups could offer bumper stickers. We appeal to you as elected officials to overturn the current rule that is arbitrarily enforced and impedes our first amendment rights. Distribution of bumper stickers,as well as pins and literature, is one of the ways in which we express our views to the public. At our farmers' market booth we display these items and ask for a donation in return. Though the Downtown Association allows us to have a fund-wiser four times per year,an ongoing source of income to cover our booth costs is necessary. In order for our non-profit groups to pay our $12 booth fee to the Downtown Association(up to 5524/year)and cover our copying costs, it is necessary to be able to continue the practice of including all these items at our booths. The arbitrary enforcement of this restriction of offering bumper stickers adds to our confusion The reasoning that has been given for this new enforcement is that the Downtown Association has sometimes discovered stickers on the stream and other inappropriate places. Years ago there was one group that was giving away lapel-sized stickers that ended up on the street If the problem were related to the small size of the stickers,then maybe it would be possible for the Downtown Association to insist that bumper stickers be a minimum size. If the problem is from radio stations giving away stickers,then that issue needs to be addressed Maybe requiring that groups request a donation for the bumper stickers will dissipate the problem. Those of us familiar with the allegation of unauthorizod placement of bumper stickers on locations in downtown San Luis Obispo believe this Wile is being enforced for a rarely exiswrit problem.In any case, the alleged unauthorized placement"problem" is one of personal responsibility. It is not done by the organization distributing the bumper sticker to adults who request one to support the cause or candidate identified thereon. We feel the presence of non-profit community based and political groups adds to and enhances the flavor of farmers' market and is a distinct benefit to the operation Patrons at farmers' market ask our groups for bumper stickers; this is particularly evident during political season. Most of our groups operate on extremely tight budgets. In order for us to continue our presence at farmers' market,we respectfully request that you intervene on behalf of the community to allow us to continue the practice of displaying not only literature but also bumper stickers. Please do not limit our freedom of speech. Sincerely, _ pr►n\✓�w c r f un RX A 114z � (9013EXT r LADA) 1At5r Wfjr� T LjWr" 5*4 LwS e�xSPo DJ`�S4 (i (a ed MIA6 Z Q /d ARRC &3 Contacts: Peggy Koteen 544-1580 ;Bill Rosensteel 773-0331 July 11,2004 Dear Mayor and City Council Members: Numerous non-profit and political groups are tremendously dissatisfied with the Downtown Association's current rule restricting us from offering bumper stickers to the public. In 1998 when a related restriction was discussed with the city attorney, it was determined that the groups could offer bumper stickers. We appeal to you as elected officials to overturn the current rule that is arbitrarily enforced and impedes our first amendment rights. Distribution of bumper stickers,as well as pins and literature,is one of the ways in which wv express our views to the public. At our farmers' market booth we display these items and ask for a donation in return. Though the Downtown Association allows us to have a fund-raiser four times per year,an ongoing source of income to cover our booth costs is necessary. In order for our non-profit groups to pay our $12 booth fee to the Downtown Association(up to$524/year)and cover our copying costs, it is necessary to be.able to continue the practice of including all these items at our booths. The arbitrary enforcement of this restriction of offering bumper stickers adds to our confusion. The reasoning that has been given for this new enforcement is that the Downtown Association has sometimes discovered stickers on the street and other inappropriate places. Years ago there was one group that was giving away lapel-sized stickers that ended up on the street- If the problem were related to the small size of the stickers,then maybe it would be possible for the Downtown Association to insist that bumper stickers be a minimum size. If the problem is from radio stations giving away stickers,then that issue needs to be addressed Maybe requiring that groups request a donation for the bumper stickers will dissipate the problem Those of us familiar with the allegation of ur authorized placement of bumper stickers on locations in downtown San Luis Obispo believe this rule is being enforced for a rarely existent problem. In any case, the alleged unauthorized placement"problem"is one of personal responsibility. It is not done by the organization distributing the bumper sticker to adults who request one to support the cause or candidate identified thereon. We feet the presence of non-profit community based and political groups adds to and enhances the flavor of farmers' market and is a distinct benefit to the operation. Patrons at farmers' market ask our groups for bumper stickers; this is particularly evident during political season.. Most of our groups operate on extremely tight budgets. In order for us to continue our presence at farmers' market,we respectfully request that you intervene on behalf of the community to allow us to continue the practice of displaying not only literature but also bumper stickers. Please do not limit our freedom of speech. Sincerely, _ r S A - MACHMEW I Council Agenda Tuesday, August 3, 2004 Action Update PRESENTATION Mark Shaffer, Executive Director Ride-On TranFihe 'on, gave a presentation regarding the various Ride-On Services offereCity of San Luis Obispo. PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGEN (not to exceed 15 minutes total) The Council welcomes your input. You may address the C cit by completing a speaker slip and giving it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. At this time,you may address t Council on items that are not on the agenda or items on the Consent Agenda. Time limit is three minutes. State law es not allow the Council to discuss or take action on issues not on the agenda,except that members of the Council or ff may briefly respond to statements made or questions posed by persons exercising their public testimony rights(Gov ode Sec.54954.2). Staff may be asked to follow up on such items. Staff reports and other written documentation rel ' g to each item referred to on this agenda are on file in the City Clerk's Office in Room 1 of City Hall. Kathleen McFadden, San uis Obispo, expressed appreciation for the.ballot measure committee S e San Luis Obispo, and asked Council to consider the voice of the people a d to suspend action on the Marketplace items on the agenda. Gary Fowler, Sa uis Obispo, expressed concern regarding many of the issues he has brought u o Council in the past, especially the senior center and the cost of the Nacimie Water Project for seniors. Michael of er San Luis Obispo, asked Council to suspend action on the Marketplace project and to allow voters to decide the issue. Pep-gy Koteen, San Luis Obispo, asked Council to change the Downtown Association's rule banning distribution of adhesive materials, such as bumper stickers, at the Thursday Night Fanners Market. She stated that it is a violation of freedom of speech. Bill Rosensteel. Republican Party, read a letter from Tom Bordonaro asking Council to look into the Downtown Association Farmers Market rule prohibiting political materials with adhesive (letter on rile in the City Clerk's Office). Tom Hutchings, Green Party, thanked Council for agendizing the bumper sticker issue. Gail Lightfoot, Libertarian Party, also spoke in protest of the adhesive bumper sticker ban. Sanford Cook, Democratic Party, also spoke in protest of the adhesive bumper sticker ban and asked Council to take immediate action. 2 1p��z' MACHMENT1 Council Agenda Tuesday, August 3, 2004 Action Update Evelyn Delmartini, Republican Women, also spoke in protest of the adhesive bumper sticker ban. Linda Donnelly, Morro Bay, also spoke in protest of the adhesive bumper sticker ban. Council directed staff to place this issue on the August 17th Council meeting. Cliff Branch San Luis Obispo, asked Council to look into the problem of unattra ve gateways to the City, especially the Corp Yard area. Council referred this issue o staff. Eugene Ju . San Luis Obispo, spoke on behalf of the Save San Luis Obispo ballot measure co ittee and asked Council to suspend action on the Marketplace project. Dennis.Adams. a ressed concern regarding Downtown Association issues. Tenn Movlan, San L 's Obispo, stated that he is new to the community and a member of the Save n Luis Obispo committee, and asked Council to allow the voters to decide the Ma etplace issue. CONSENT AGENDA The Consent Agenda is approved o\pb e motion. Council Members may pull consent items to be considered after Business items. Theic may comment on any item on the Consent Calendar. C1. APPROVE MINUTES OF MO AY JUNE.28 2004 SPECIAL MEETING TUESDAY JUNE 29 2004 SP IAL MEETING AND TUESDAY JULY 6 2004 REGULAR MEETING. (REYNOL S) RECOMMENDATION: Waive oral reading d approve as presented. ACTION: Approved as amended. (5:0). C2. FINAL PASSAGE OF AN ORDINANCE P EZONING VARIOUS AREAS OF THE DALIDIO ANNEXATION SITE ANDA ROVING A_PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE RETAIL C MPONENT KNOWN AS THE MARKETPLACE (R 108-02). (MANDEVILLE/\o. 1449 RECOMMENDATION: Grant final passage to Ordina (2004 Series), which upholds an appeal of the Planning Commission's proof a proposedprezoning for the Dalidio Annexation and prezones: 4the property to C-R- PD, Retail-Commercial with the Planned Developmening; 8.1 acres as OS, Office with the Special Consideration overlay zoninas R-3-S, Medium- 3 GOOD JOBS, SMALL CLASS SIZES, & AFFORDABLE HEALTH CARE Steal Jenkins For State Assembly 33rd District A New Deal for Califomia August 3, 2004 David Romero Mayor City of San Luis Obispo Hand Delivered Subject: Farmer's Market Rules against distributing Bumper Stickers. Mayor Romero, and council members Schwartz, Settle, Ewan, and Mulholland As the Democratic Candidate for your State Assembly Representative, I want to ask for your help fulfilling the oath of office you, and each of us has taken, upon taking any office of public trust. I know each of you cherishes the duty of your oath as much as you do your own children and family. Each public servant has swom to uphold the Constitution, and to defend it against all enemies, foreign or domestic. But those of us who have held public office know that often upholding the Constitution mean defending our charter against well intentioned actions of our friends and even friends of this great charter. While I have not chosen to print or distribute bumper stickers in my own campaign thus far, the freedom of any person to press upon their bumper a reflection of their thoughts or,the identity of their chosen candidates, must not be infringed. And that free speech right is infringed when a rule is made preventing the distribution of those stickers in the most public square of our community—San Luis Obispo's Farmer's Market. I urge each of you to do your duty, fulfill your oath, protect your democracy and strike down this dangerous, if well intentioned, ,51few JenkinsDolinocratic Nominee 33rd StateAs6&rhbly District 1336 Morro Street,San Luis Obispo CA 93401 Phone:805-541-5763 Home:80S-S43-6463 Fax 80S-547-1608 www.electstewienkins.ora Email:electstewienkins@sbcglobal.net Printed on recycled paper.labor donated.Hect Stew Jenkins for State Assembly,ID 1260412. Contributions to Political Campaigns are not tax deductible. Endorsed by Leon Panetta,former Whitehouse Chief of Staff:Bill Lockyer,Attorney General;Lois Capps,Congresswoman;Jack O'Connell,Superintendent of Public Instruction;Shirley Bianchi,County Supervisor,UFCW;Rebecca Carey,Sana Maria; Allen Settle.San Luis Obispo Council Member,Cuesa College Federation of Teachers;California Faculty Association; California Council of Democratic Clubs,partial list. R�RC�M 5 SLO Downtown Association Board of Directors 10 August 2004 City Council Hearing Room Minutes Present Brad Bilsten Tom Swem Jeff Langford Ellen Henry Howard Carroll Patty Carpenter Kathi Main Frank Merson Bob Seeley Dave Booker, ex officio Brandon Downing, ex officio Deborah Cash, staff Kristin Ansari, staff Christine Mulholland Betsy Kiser Tim Bochum Jay Walter John Borchert Tunny Ortali Call to order by Bilsten 7:35 AM. Motion to approve minutes by Swem, 2nd by Langford, PAIR TNP Rule Review Cash/Ansari gave staff report Public Comment: Robert Cook People do care, want to express themselves; alternative: allow stickers; doesn't believe ruling of time, place, manner Bill Rosensteel Handed out letter; didn't see any political stickers in slide show; read Tunny Ortali's letter Sanford Cook (�-1Y ATTACH d5 Doesn't agree that bumper stickers are graffiti; case law to support this; Higuera St. is public; rule passes the silly test; has given out 550 Kerry bumper stickers in the last seven weeks; requests to reverse rule Evelyn Delmartini Asked rule to be abandoned Peggy Koteen Expressed that some groups do not have headquarters where adhesives can be obtained Asked about year rule instated Asked to rescind rule Paul Brown Serious issue, everyone has their own angle;being right doesn't mean battle is worth fighting; committee's recommendation was to amend rule allowing stickers if removal accomplished within 24 hours of notification Closed public comment session Motion by Merson to approve staff recommendation [Follow precedent and uphold TNP Rules prohibiting distribution of adhesive materials]; 2od by Seeley Discussion Ortali discussed history of rule; thinks those who want to give away stickers should hand out by walking. Booker Asked about if rule had been rescinded prior. Langford Thinks it's silly to have a rule that prohibits stickers when others can walk by in the same area and hand them out. Thinks this item should be decided by Council. Merson Not a free speech issue; is a cleanliness issue; to participate in event,have conditions that people must comply with; rule in place for particular reason, Seeley As chair of Design; concern is look and beauty of Downtown; graffiti is blight; all or nothing. Sween No executive committee meeting in August to review committee's recommendation Booker MACHM.ENT ,15 Thinks this is a common sense issue; shouldn't divide Downtown; do rules make sense Mulholland Item is on agenda for August 17 Borchert Scrapes off 25-35 a week; if he goes on vacation, when comes back, over 100; all days of the week Bochum Regarding parking meters; previous parking maintenance person continually scraping stickers, vandalism occurred; also occurs o/s Downtown, even worse; DT is fortunate to have-a p/t resource; would encounter more stickers if rescind rule, can't effectively enforce removal. Henry Her building is tagged with graffiti; wantsto keep Downtown beautiful; would like to see more help for Kristin to enforce Sanford Cook Is carrying a copy of constitution in pocket; a lay student of constitutional law Main Market fees pay for the privilege of participating in the event The rule is one vehicle we have to minimize the problem On a vote: Motion passes, Langford and Carpenter vote no. Seismic Retrofit Update Carroll.said staff report will be available today; Gough said his and Carroll's letter brings a couple of new items to consider Wilmore said a person already on staff may be considered for the part time.seismic coordinator Carroll said Council needs to be sensitive to communication, timeliness, front end load, coordinate elements early on Langford made a motion to accept letter;2❑d by Carpenter; PAIF. Marketplace Project Mulholland said second referendum will be hitting streets soon; because items were divided into separate actions; some in public confused about tax reimbursement scheme Gough asked about probability of project going to County; Mulholland said a study has been performed by EDA that concluded the project probably couldn't happen in the County mainly due to water, hydrology issues, shallow, low perk soil; should call the bluff, take risk 6 - 17 -�-- r v I 6 41 ��' ° L C o � 0� ° c° i J�- oa 5 ; �, _ MACHMENT(9 f m t� r l p � i, fl � J � MACHMOM 0L[ Public Works Response: City Public Works Department is in favor of the Thursday Night Promotions Rule stating that no stickers or adhesive materials are allowed to be given away. Before the rule was put into effect, Public Works staff spent many Friday mornings cleaning stickers off of downtown equipment and street furniture. It was not only time consuming but it took the workers away from projects they had planned to work on. The City's policy has always been to remove graffiti as soon as possible, and the stickers downtown were treated as a kind of graffiti. A big reason that there is not a"sticker problem" in the downtown today is because of the current rule and the strict enforcement by the Thursday Night Promotions staff. - ANNEW9 E. All monies generated by sales or solicitations, excluding direct material costs, must go to the Not-For-Profit group, not to individuals within the group. The Committee may request a full accounting. F. The organization must submit its application no less than three (3)weeks in advance of the desired attendance date. Upon review and approval by the Committee and payment of fees, a space will be assigned. Participants are not guaranteed space in the location of their choice. G. If food items are to be sold, the organization must have the necessary written approval from the San Luis Obispo County Health Department prior to receiving a permit. H. Participants shall keep their area clean during the activity and leave the space and surrounding area clean afterward. I. Participants will be required to reimburse the Downtown Association for any costs incurred relating directly to their activity. 6. POLITICAL, RELIGIOUS AND OTHER INFORMATIONAL GROUPS A. Approved applicants will be given space on a first-come, first-served basis according to space availability. Participants are not guaranteed space in the location of their choice. Additional spaces maybe temporarily provided for special events or occasions, e.g. election season. B. All groups or individuals wishing to disseminate information,pass petitions, or promote political,religious, or personal beliefs are strongly encouraged to submit a signed application no less than three (3)weeks in advance of the date desired. Upon review and approval of the application by the Committee the applicant's name will be added to the list desiring space. The Committee will not discriminate on the basis of race, religion, creed, color, gender, political beliefs, national origin, age, physical disability or other basis prohibited by law. C. Applicants whose format is determined to be entertainment shall not be eligible for a space allocation under this section,but shall be regulated by Section 7. D. Participants may not harass, follow, or intimidate Downtown visitors or Downtown Association staff. Activity that impedes the flow of pedestrian traffic is not allowed. Applicants must stay within their assigned space. Activities that are conducted.in such a manner as to interfere with the goals or purposes of TNP may result in immediate revocation of the permit. (o E. Handbills may only be posted with City or property owner approval. No stickers or adhesive materials are allowed at TNP. l ((J Z 1 1 - ATIACHME99 M. Tattooing,permanent cosmetics and body piercing may not be performed or administered during TNP. Body piercing does not include piercing the leading edge or earlobe of the ear. N. The Committee reserves the right to refuse participation to any applicant. 0. The Committee will not discriminate on the basis of race, religion, creed, color, gender, political beliefs, national origin, age or physical disability or any basis prohibited by law. rthen ny vendor, club, group, or persons participating in TNP must comply with all of the Non-compliance, including offensive conduct,may result in immediate revocation permit. If a permit is revoked an appeal maybe made, first to the TNP Committee,o the Downtown Association Board of Directors, and finally to the San Luis ObispoCouncil. During the appeal process a space will be held for the participant providingll fees are paid. Q. The Committee reserves the right to revoke the permit and/or order the removal of all equipment and material (belonging to a participant) from the street for any reason deemed necessary by the Committee to better meet the goals and purposes of TNP or for public health, safety and welfare. R. Participants are not allowed to use vehicles within designated market area during market hours. For special events or promotions, however, the TNP Committee may approve vehicles on an exclusive basis. The TNP Committee reserves the right to limit or prohibit the number of support vehicles per event. Set Up begins at 530 PM, at which time vendors may drive onto the TNP area to their assigned space (they may enter barricaded area), unload their items and remove their vehicle from the TNP area until 9 PM takedown time. At 9 PM,vendors may then again return through the barricades to their spaces and load their vehicles. Barricades will be removed at 9:30 PM and streets are reopened for public vehicular access. Drivers must proceed with caution. The following guidelines, given to all participants for set up and take down, state (in part): -TNP officially begin at 6 PM and ends at 9 PM. Higuera St. is barricaded from all side entries and at both ends at approximately 5:.30 PM, at which time vendors may begin setting up. - Do NOT stop vehicles or set up booth space until after 5:30 PM. - Do NOT block the center lane of Higuera Street at any time; pull to the side lane and unload your vehicle. -NO VEHICLES (EXCEPT THOSE USED FOR OCCASIONAL DISPLAY PURPOSES AND NOT DRIVEN) ARE ALLOWED ON HIGUERA STREET BETWEEN 6PM-9PM. If vendor is running late or wants to leave early, all equipment must be carried in/out. ,2-Z, ATTACHMETr - Drivers must exercise extreme caution and drive at a low rate of speed during the 5:30—6:00 PM set up and 9:00—9:30 PM take down. Drivers must heed all directions issued by TNP Coordinator regarding safety. In no case may any vendor, visitor or any person drive,move or operate a vehicle onto the TNP area during the 6—9 PM TNP activity. S. Permits may be revoked for the following reasons: (The same rules for revocation apply to all members.) 1. Sale or transfer of business. 2. Closure of business. (Exceptions may be made for renovations that do not exceed 60 days.) 3. Non-compliance with Downtown Association, City of San Luis Obispo or County of San Luis Obispo Health Department regulations. 4. Non-payment of prescribed fees within the designated time period. 5. Poor attendance. T. Appeal Process for Permit Revocation Any participant or applicant denied a permit or whose permit is revoked may appeal the denial/revocation in the following manner: File formal complaint within 10 (ten) days of the denial/revocation (obtaining complaint form from Downtown Association office) stating nature of complaint and requesting appeal to be agendized at the next earliest or desired meeting date of the Thursday Night Promotions Committee. If complainant disagrees with determination of Committee, complainant may then repeat the procedure appealing that decision to the Downtown Association Board of Directors. Should the complainant disagree with the determination of the Board of Directors, the complainant should contact the City. of San Luis Obispo City Clerk about appealing the decision to the City Council. Fiveaways (non-adhesive material only) must be pre-approved by the mittee. No stickers or adhesive materials of any kind will be permitted to be distributed, given away or offered. V. No pets/animals are allowed at TNP without pre-approved authorization and only in limited and controlled circumstances. Animals utilized to assist disabled persons are excepted. PLEASE OBTAIN YOUR PERMIT FROM THE DOWNTOWN ASSOCIATION OFFICE PRIOR TO THE THURSDAY NIGHT -Z3 Page 1 of 3 RED FILE RECEIVED Allen Settle-The.Bumper Sticker Problem ME-gTING AGEND AUb 17 2004 RATE ITE gip CITY CLERK From: <Billn]oanR@aol.com> To: <dromero@slocity.org>, <jewan@slocity.org>, <cmulholland@slocity.org>, <kschwartz@slocity.org>, <asettle@slodty.org> Date: 8/16/2004 4:37 PM Subject The Bumper Sticker Problem 16 Aug 04 i 6UNCiL LCDD DIR I,RT CAO -1N DIR TO: San Luis Obispo Mayor Dave Romero 10 ACAO FIRE CHIEF Councilmembers John Ewan, Christine Mulholland, Ken Schwartz, Allen Settle PTTORNEY _LPW DIR 'p CLERK/ORIG _ POLICE CHF DEET HEA09 er REC DIR FROM: William M. Rosensteel, Jr., Republican Party, San Luis Obispo County TIL DIR A/ e — nr;_ SUBJECT: Item 6, 17 August 04 Agenda, Review of rule prohibiting the -- distribution of adhesive materials at the Downtown Association's (DA)Thursday Night Promotions (TNP)at Farmers' Market. The Republican Party of San Luis Obispo County (RPSLO) is being treated differently than other groups dispensing adhesive stickers at Thursday night Farmer's Market. The RPSLO is prohibited from dispensing adhesive stickers at their booth while other groups are openly or surreptitiously distributing adhesive stickers from their booth(s). Such unequal treatment is in violation of the U.S. Constitution. HISTORY OF THE CURRENT"NO BUMPER STICKERS" PROBLEM Thursday, 8 July 2004 - Republican Party of San Luis Obispo County (RPSLO) and the San Luis Obispo Republican Women Federated (SLORWF) were summarily ejected from the Thursday night Farmer's Market by Kristin Ansari, representing the Thursday Night Promotions (TNP) for refusing to remove bumper stickers and other politically related stickers from their respective tables. The ejection was confirmed in 12 July 2004 letter signed by Deborah Cash of the DA citing DA Rules and Regulation Sections 6E and 17U, among others, as the reason for the ejection and permit termination. Wednesday, 14 July 2004 -Tom Bordonaro, Bill Rosensteel and Linda Donnelly, RPSLO; Evelyn Delmartini and Chris Lewis, SLORWF; Sandy Cook, SLO Democrat Party, Gail Lightfoot, Libertarian Party; Peggy Koteen, Animal Emancipation, Atheists United, Green Party; Sam Blakeslee, current 33AD Republican Assembly candidate; and Matt Kokkonen, former 33AD Republican Assembly candidate, all spoke at TNP meeting.TNP offered to reinstate RPLSO and SLORWF if they would obey the no sticker rule.Tom Bordonaro, Chairman, RPSLO Chairman, declined. SLORWF later, after meeting with their Board of Directors, opted to accept the offer. Thursday, 15 July 2004 - SLORWF, sans bumper stickers, occupied their usual spot on Higuera Street at Farmer's Market. Bill Rosensteel, RPSLO, walked HIguera Street urging voter registration and handing out bumper stickers --free speech as guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution. Many bumper stickers were dispensed in this manner. Sandy Cook, SLODP, also adopted this method of bumper sticker distribution. Between the Republicans and Democrats hundreds of political file://C:\Documents%20and%2OSettings\slouser\Local%2OSettings\Temp\GW 100001.HTM 8/17/2004 Page 2 of 3 bumper stickers have been distributed at Farmer's Market since 8 July 04, and there has not been one reported incident of a political bumper stickers being affixed in downtown SLO as a result of Farmer's Market activity. Tuesday, 3 August 2004 -At the SLO City Council (SLOCC) meeting, several people at public comment portion, spoke in favor of eliminating the TNP bumper sticker rule, and restoring RPSLO to their spot at.Farmer's Market. SLOCC agreed to put item on Agenda for Tuesday, 17 August 2004. Tuesday, 10 August 2002 - Bill Rosensteel, RPSLO; Sandy Cook, DPSLO; Evelyn Delmartini, SLORWF; Peggy Koteen, Green Party; Robert Cook, DA member; all spoke at the DA Board of Directors meeting and urged repeal of the no adhesive material rule. After much discussion, mostly among themselves and with little additional input from the proponents, the DA BoD voted to retain the rule. At this 10 August meeting it was learned by RPSLO that since 14 Jul 2004, the no adhesive rule had been suspended. This was the first the RPSLO knew of the"no adhesive" rule suspension. The RPSLO had been acting under the DA position of no adhesives as stated in their letter of 12 July revoking their Farmer's Market permit. Had DA informed RPSLO of the rule suspension RPSLO would have immediately reapplied for our previous space at Farmers Market. We feel this failure to inform RPSLO is not an oversight, but deliberate act on the part of DA, thus furthering the adversarial and contentious relationship between RPSLO and DA on this issue. Further, the SLO Council Agenda Report prepared by Betsy Kiser, Administrative Analyst, inititialed by her and Deborah Cash, DA Administrator, states (Pg. 2, Para 3), "DA [staff(person not identified)] had to remind several Farmer's Market participants that they were prohibited from distributing adhesive materials..." and, 'The participants refused to comply with the request the DA revoked the booth permits for two refusing organizations". The "several Farmer's Market participants,"and the "two refusing organizations," whose booth permits were revoked are not identified in their Agenda Report. This is very significant, for the DA admits by the facts outlined in paragraph 2, page 3, that their enforcement of the rule was applied to only two organizations out of several who refused to comply with the rules.Those two organization are as previously stated -The Republican Party of San Luis Obispo, and the San Luis Obispo Republican Women Federated. This is clearly violation of the U.S. Constitution. The RPSLO is of the position the San Luis Obispo City Council direct the Downtown Association and Thursday Night Promotions to remove "No stickers or adhesive materials are allowed at TNP," sentence from Section 6E, and "No stickers, or adhesive materials of any kind will be permitted to be sold, distributed, given away, or offered,"from Section U. Further, that the remaining portion of Section U also be eliminated as pre-approval of non-adhesive material is considered prior restraint where censorship may be imposed. Should the San Luis Obispo City Council fail to satisfactorily address the issues outlined in this letter, the RPSLO may have to seek legal redress. Such action could result in significant adverse publicity and cost to the City of San Luis Obispo. Sincerely, file://C:\Documents%20and%20Settings\slouser\Local%20Settings\Temp\GW}000O1.HTM 8/17/2004 Page 3 of 3 I William M. Rosensteel, Jr. Member, Republican Party of San Luis Obispo cc: Tom Bordonaro, Chairman, Republican Party of San Luis Obispo file://C:\Documents%20and%20Settings\slouser\Local%20Settings\Temp\GW 100001.HTM 8/17/2004 Page 1 of 2 c.AAo�uclL �o DIR RECEIVED Allen Settle-Dalidio Development Agreement CAO 2'FIRE CHIEF N0Rh1Ex to-I. 2MLERKIORIG 2?OUCE CHF From: "Jana Zimmer" <janazimmer@cox.net> © (DEPT flEADS ZREC DIR SLO CITY CLERK To: <dromero@slocity.org> — - JlUTIL DIR Date: 8/16/20047:18 PM %I IIS DI{1 Subject: Dalidio Development Agreement CC: <asettle@slocity.org>, <cmulholland@slocity.org>, <jewan@slocity.org>, <kschwartz®sREQd'rJ,E ME ING�GEi\1DA► Dear Mayor Romero and Council Members: DATE$L'W—" ITEM # C� You are in receipt of correspondence from our client,CPR,and others, including Richard Schmidt, Patti Taylor,and Michael Sullivan which addresses numerous reasons why the proposed Development Agreement should not be adopted. As attorneys for CPR we wish to add the following: 1. The CAO's recommendation to adopt the ordinance approving the Development Agreement and staying its effective date will cause a waste of public funds because the validity of the Development Agreement will have to be litigated pending the election results. We understand that the City has already engaged outside counsel to defend its decision approving the project. The Council should not adopt the ordinance approving the Development Agreement until after the election resolves the legal issues. The expenditure of public funds in defense of a project which may be defeated at the polls is manifestly a waste of those funds. We request, pursuant to the Public Records Act,copies of any contract engaging outside counsel,their hourly rate,and a statement of the extent of commitment of public funds to the defense of the project. 2. Proposed Ordinance No. 1452 relies on an erroneous statement of law. Section 7 states that'['in light of the adoption of overriding considerations and incorporation of the mitigation measures,the project and Development Agreement will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment'. This is manifestly false. As a matter of law,under CECIA a statement of overriding considerations does not eliminate environmental impacts; it recites that the approving agency has found,based on evidence,that the impact will occur, but that other considerations are more important. 3. The Development Agreement raises new issues regarding environmental impacts of project components or related projects which clearly have not been addressed in the EIR,because they have not been previously disclosed to the public,as set forth in other public comment received prior to your August 3 hearing. 4. Apart from the fact that none of the statement of benefits to be received as recited in Sections H 1 through 9 is supported by the evidence,the City's own approvals reflect that Item 10,the provision of affordable housing, isnot a part of the project and will require separate environmental review and separate discretionary approvals.Nevertheless,the Agreement inappropriately purports to'vest'a right to a housing project.With respect to the term of the Development Agreement itself,Section 3.2(ii) recites that the term for the housing portion shall be 15 years from the Effective Date. Contrary to the provisions of Gov.Code Section 65865.2,the Agreement fails to specify the maximum size and height of the proposed buildings to be part of the housing development. See,also, Section 4.5 which purports to provide the vested rights associated with the Development Agreement to the unapproved business park and housing components. It should also be noted that the Development Agreement is inconsistent with the General Plan,as the project is inconsistent with the General Plan, as set forth in the Petition for Writ of Mandate filed by our clients and which you have already received. 5. The acknowledgement in Section I of the a'voluntary'charitable contribution to the City in the conservation of land is highly inappropriate. A dedication or contribution of land that is contingent in any way on the approval or construction of a project is not voluntary for tax purposes, or for any other purpose. 6. Section J fails to set forth in identifiable terms the precise expenditures and dedications by Developer that are over and above those required by law, if any. Unless those dedications are demonstrably greater than those otherwise legally required,they cannot be consideration for the added benefits granted to the developer by the Development Agreement. 7. Section 3.3 purports to authorize extension of any subdivision maps for the term of the Development Agreement, regardless of whether that term would extend beyond the maximum time authorized by the Subdivision Map Act. 8. Section 4.2 sets forth that the Project Plan includes components that remain subject to discretionary review,and that if any component is denied,the Developer can withdraw from the agreement.Thus,theoretically,the Developer can develop the retail component and, on pretext of a denial of a future discretionary application on another component,can withhold performance of his obligations in relation to the retail component.This,would deprive the City and the public of the benefit of this'bargain'and,in effect,sets up a contract that may unlawfully impair the future exercise of the City's police power. 9. Section 5.2.5 appears to improperly insulate this development from future emergency ordinances generally applicable to property owners related to insufficient sewer capacity,water supplies or other utilities. Similarly,the DA inappropriately insulates the project from any otherwise applicable building moratorium. file://C:\Documents%20and%20Settings\slouser\Local%20Settings\Temp\GW}000O1.HTM 8/17/2004 Page 2 of 2 10. Section 5.6 inappropriately codifies the unlawful and excessive parking ratio adopted as part of the project approvals. 11. Section 7.4 inappropriately limits the City in the defense of its own decision,and will lead to unnecessary expenditure of taxpayer funds in the processing of further approvals in defense of the litigation which is pending,and while the approvals are stayed by the referendum petition. 12. Section 8 should specify that fees to be paid by Developer shall be those fees in effect at the time that building permits are issued. This section grants this developer a retroactive fee reduction which is highly inappropriate,and effectively a gift of public funds. The impacts of use of groundwater for irrigation, in lieu of reclaimed water,or well water, have not been adequately addressed. All new taxes which are applied City wide must be applied to this development, regardless of their effect. 13. Section 10.2 impermissibly reduces the Developers obligation to acquire offsite Open Space(even assuming a court were to determine this to be lawful under the General Plan),and inappropriately obligates the City and the taxpayers to pay any'excess' amounts. 14. Section 11.1.3 inappropriately assigns to a private negotiation the approval of replacement obligations for construction and financing of freeway interchange improvements which are adequate for the Project. The Project as approved specifies the interchange which must be completed,and any substantial change must undergo additional environmental review and public hearings. this DA cannot lawfully vest rights to construct a project other than the project presented by the applicants. 15. Section 11.2 purports to require the City to exercise its powers of condemnation to acquire land necessary for the Freeway Interchange which Developer is not able to acquire. The Agreement fails to specify that all costs of such acquisition,including condemnation and litigation resulting therefrom, must be borne by Developer. See R. Schmidt's objections to methods of appraisal. 16. Section 11.6.1 inappropriately authorizes issuance of grading permits for the Project irrespective of the status of the Freeway interchange. The City would thus allow irremediable alteration and damage to the existing natural environment without assurance that the Freeway interchange will actually be built,despite acknowledging that its construction is integral to the project. Similarly, C of O for the Project should not be approved until the Freeway interchange is built,such that the impacts to be mitigated by these roadway improvements are not allowed to occur without completion of the improvements. These are material changes to the Project and mitigations as presented in the EIR and in the mitigation monitoring program. 17. Section 14.2 inappropriately allows amendments to the agreement without public review. In summary while the project approvals themselves were unlawful and inappropriate,the'vesting'of those approvals for a fifteen year period is arbitrary and capricious. There is no benefit to the City or its taxpayers in this arrangement,only risk. Since the final version of the Reimbursement Agreement is not available,we cannot comment further on its deficiencies. We therefore ask that you stay any action until the election on the referendum petition occurs,and/or the litigation challenging the approvals is resolved. Very Truly Yours, Timmer&Marcus, LLP By: Jana Zimmer file://C \Documents%20and%20Settings\slouser\Local%20Settings\Temp\GW}000O1.HTM 8/17/2004 — Paa 1 of 1 - FRECEIVED Allen Settle- More on Agenda Item 6 - Bumper Stickers AUb 17 2004 SLO CITY CLER From: <BillnJoanR@aol.com> To: <dromero@slocity.org>, <jewan@slocity.org>, <cmulholland@slocity.org>, <kschwartz@slocity.org>, <asettle@slodty.org> Date: 8/17/2004 8:28 AM Subject: More on Agenda Item 6- Bumper Stickers 17 Aug 04 CIL /C"CDD DIR A�CAO .eFIN DIR I T0: San Luis Obispo Mayor Dave Romero ACAO � FIRE CHIEF ATTORNEY GPw DIR Council Members John Ewan, Christine Mulholland, Ken Schwartz, Allen Settle ; CLERK1ORIG 2-POLICE CHF ❑ DEPT EADS 20`REC DIR FROM: William M. Rosensteel, Jr., Republican Party, San Luis Obispo County r, Cl. U T IL DIR DP SUBJECT: Item 6, 17 August 04 Agenda, Review of rule prohibiting the / distribution of adhesive materials at the Downtown Association's (DA)Thursday Night Promotions (TNP)at Farmers' Market. 1. In addition to request outlined in previous letter on this subject,The Republican Party of San Luis Obispo (RPSLO) is requesting the San Luis Obispo City Council (SLOCC) direct the Downtown Association (DA) and it's Farmer's Market arm,Thursday Night Promotions (TNP), to immediately rescind its revoking the RPSLO permit for Farmer's Market space at.719 Higuera in front of Michael's Optical and restore them to that location effective Thursday, August 19, 2004. 2. Further, that such action be done without the requirement of submitting a RED FILE new request form and waiting for approval of the Downtown Association at a ME :-TING AGENDA subsequent meeting. Should the normal DA approval process have to be followed it DATE ITEM #IALLP will lessen the number of Farmer's Market dates available to the RPSLO between now and the November 2nd election. Sincerely, William M. Rosensteel, Jr. Member, Republican Party of San Luis Obispo cc: Tom Bordonaro, Chairman, Republican Party of San Luis Obispo file://C:\Documents%20and%2OSettings\slouser\Local%2OSettings\Temp\GW IOOOO1.HTM 8/17/2004 Mayor Dave Romero RED FILE City Hall ME ING AGENDA 990 Palm Street E. T=, /� 0 ITEM # AI San Luis Obispo,CA 93401 August 12,2004 Dear Mayor Romero: The rule(#8, para 3)adopted by the Thursday Night Promotions Committee(TNP)of the Downtown Association (DTA),with the approval of the City Council,that prohibits"adhesive materials"being distributed at the Thursday Farmers'Market deserves your consideration,and begs for rescission. Despite the claims of the DTA members and your own current City Attorney(as reported by the DTA staff),this is definitely and precisely a First Amendment issue.Your previous City Attorney believed this to be so in 1998. In your consideration of this rule I entreat you to keep in mind that whatever you may think of commercial expression, political speech has a long-standing protection that far exceeds that of commercial speech.Any solution that treats them as equal is on its face unconstitutional.The special protection afforded political speech is firmly cast in rulings by the Supreme Court of the United States. The protection of expression in the first amendment protects all political speech,even sedition, under our democratic law and the precedents long-established by the Supreme Court and state courts.The constitution and the rulings stemming from it make no differentiation as to"time, place,and materials",except in certain narrow rulings on the access of the public to private property,which Higuera Street is not. The DTA/TNP rule 17U directs that the TNP must pre-approve materials;this likewise violates the first amendment by invoking prior restraint on political expression. The right to free expression by private citizens on the public common is at stake. Despite your council's granting a charter to the DTA,and permitting them to close Higuera Street for the purpose of conducting these Thursday Night Promotions,Higuera Street remains the public common. Beyond the first amendment issue, no governmental body should ever pass a discriminatory rule. If the merchant ten feet behind my booth can sell or distribute"adhesive materials"from his or her place of business without hindrance— if the private citizen walking on Higuera Street three feet in front of my booth can distribute"adhesive materials"- and if I cannot do the same in my booth, I am discriminated against. Equal protection and the fourteenth amendment now also become an issue. Finally, (and as a vacationing Superior Court judge from Los Angeles County said to me at the booth recently)if the only test a rule can pass is the"silly test",it is no rule at all.This rule is silly.The DTA evidence of vandalism by misguided individuals shows no political stickers.The experience of city employees who remove stickers shows that almost without exception the stickers are commercial. The DTA position is a blatant case of false logic based on the long-disregarded idea of post hoc ergo propter hoc, i.e., because some result follows an act,it must be as a result of the act The rule has been in place,off and on,for several years.The DTA says that the absence of stickers on buildings in the downtown area is because they passed the rule—which they freely call an"ordnance".Your city employee says that the stickers are still around—invariably commercial—but we don't see them because he takes them down when he finds them. Please rescind this silly rule without further delay. Please reinstate the RepublicaJal tbooth's permit,agate Q without delay. "OUNCIL CDD D;R Sincerely, CAO FIN DIR ACAO FIRE CHIEF ATTORNEYPWDIRCLERK ORIG POLICE CHF D.Cook DE T H ADS REC DIR C Ir 33rdAssembly District Democratic Committee � _ UTILn.,,__Volunteer,San Luis Obispo County Democratic Central Committee Registration B ^ cc: Downtown Association, Deborah Cash,Administrator