HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/24/19721
1
1
Roll Call.
City Staff
MINUTES
ADJOURNED MEETING OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING
JULY 24, 1972 - 7:30 P.M.
COUNCIL.CHAMBERS, CITY HALL
PRESENT: Councilmen Blake, Brown, Graham, Gurnee and
Mayor Schwartz
ABSENT: None
PRESENT: J. Fitzpatrick;.R. Miller;.A. Shaw; R. Young
I. At this time the City Council held a public hearing on the
recommendation of the Planning Commission to rezone 1423 Cal le Joaquin
from RC to CH -S.
R. Young, Planning Director, presented the recommendation of the
Planni.ng Commission stating the land.had been previously zoned an
automobile center and that the applicant had received approval for
a use permit for an automobile agency on the subject property. The
granti.ng of the use permit was ruled invalid by the Ci.ty Attorney and
it was stated that an ordinance amendment or rezoning would be required
to al low the use; therefore, the Planning Commission recommended that
the subject parcel be rezoned as the property to the west is zoned C -H -S
and is developed.with an automobile agency.
Mayor Schwartz declared the public hearing open.
James Kimball, applicant, appeared before the City Council supporting
his requested rezoning so that he could construct a new Chevrolet
agency facing on Calle Joaquin.
Charles.Dills,.Avalon Street, stated he was opposed to the recommended
rezoning as he felt it was poor use of the land as he did not feel
the proposed use could be considered a highway use. He felt that auto
dealerships should be. located in other parts of town and not along the
highway.
Mayor Schwartz declared.the public hearing closed.
Councilman Gurnee questioned the propriety of the! _recommended zoning
change. He felt the R -C residence - commercial was the best use of the
land.
Councilman Blake explained that the original zoning was made.under
County ordinance and when brought into the City, it was planned to
continue the commercial use. He also stated that the Planning Commission
had protected the area by adding the S designation.
Councilman Brown stated the proposal was logical and felt it was
correct use of the land and that it was an extension of the C -H use
which was adjacent.
Councilman Graham also felt the proposal was logical and that the City
was protected by the S designation.
City Council Minutes
July 24, 1972
Page 2
Mayor Schwartz stated he was aware of the history of this property and
that it was brought into the City under a County planned development
ordinance and the use intended was for development as an auto sales
subdivision and-he, too, felt this was a logical use of the land.
Councilman Gurnee continued to question the violation of the General
Plan by the proposed rezoning. He felt the use was too heavy for the
area. He felt auto sales- service was good use of the land but his
objections were to the violation of the General Plan by this rezoni.ng.
On motion of Councilman Blake, seconded. by Councilman Graham, the following
ordinance was introduced and passed to print: ORDINANCE NO. 557, an
ordinance amending the official zone map of the City of San Luis Obispo
(to rezone 1423 Calle Joaquin).
Passed to print on-the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Blake, Brown, Graham and Mayor Schwartz
NOES: Councilman Gurnee
ABSENT: None
2. At this time the City Council.held a :public hearing to consider
the enactment and adoption of a utility tax for the City of San Luis
Obispo.
Mayor. Schwartz.explained the reasoning of the City Council in consideri'nc
the enactment of a utility use tax on all utilities within the City
which would be 5% on gas, water, electricity, telephone and cable tele -..
vision service. The reason the Council .felt the additional revenue.was
needed was for the continued development of the recreational program for
the City, for the completion of the parks already started, for additional
personnel and equipment for the Police Department and also to move ahead
on the Capital.lmprovement Program.
The City Clerk presented a letter from the League of Women Voters
stating their qualified support for the adoption of the proposed utility
users tax. Their members were strongly in favor of preserving and .
protecting a variety of scenic and open spaces including land adjacent
to creeks, the Foothill "saddle ", San Luis Mountain.and Bishop's Peak
and the Laguna Lake shoreline and marsh lands. They were also aware
that whether the funds were federal, state or local, they all came
from the taxpayers. They felt that the conservation of land must be made
and that the City must have the funds with which to complete these projects.
They also supported improving the water and sewer systems and that these
should be paid for from this tax.
In conclusion the League supported the adoption of taxation measures which
would aid in preserving and protecting scenic and open spaces and which'
would contribute to the management of our water resources in ways which
are beneficial to the environment.
A. J. Shaw, City Attorney, reviewed the provisions of the proposed
ordinance to levy a 5% tax on all utilities within the City. He
specifically reviewed the sections dealing with the implementation of the
tax and the exemption provisions.
Mayor Schwartz declared the public hearing open.
1
1
1
City Council Minutes
July 24, 1972
Page 3
Joe Warnagieris was opposed to the enactment of the proposed utility
use tax as it was just an additional burden on the property owner and
tenant. He felt this tax would only increase the cost of utilities
as the cost of administration would be added by the utility companies.
He urged that the City Council put this matter on the next City ballot
so that the people would have the right to speak at the ballot box.
Mrs. Rose Barger opposed provisions of the ordinance requiring an
application for a refund from the low income citizen. She was
' opposed to the ordinance and felt it was demeaning for a citizen to
file an income statement.
Dennis Hynes, Oceanaire Drive, spoke in support of the proposed
ordinance as he felt some of the funds would be-used to protect the
environment and for recreation, also it would not be an increase of
the property talc but would be shared by all tenants and property
owners together.
Henry_W..Rible, 11, .felt the intent of the ordinance.was good but felt
the utility users tax was unfair to the poor. and the low income citizen.
He felt the proposal was poorly written and was unfair to.the poor
people. He felt the City of San Luis Obispo should not follow the lead of
a large city such as San Jose but should decide for themselves what to do.
He also objected.to the fact that all City Council meetings.were not
stenotypad so, that people could.see.what had transpired at Council and
Planning Commission meetings.
Sy Younq,'Judson Terrace, hoped some relief could be given to the
residents of this elderly complex.
Mr. John Ross, Manager of Judson Terrace Homes appeared before the City
of some relief for
Council stating that the proposed utility users tax was of particular
the elderly and low income residents.
concern.to the residents of Judson Terrace. He explained that the
an increase in the
Judson Terrace project was a non - profit retirement facility financed
sales tax and the property tax rates
by the Federal - government and sponsored by the First Baptist Church of
the utility tax.
San Luis Obispo. He continued that the project.had 120 residents, all
C. R. Shattuck,.Apartment Owners and
with incomes of under $5,000 annually or $6,000 per couple. He stated the
felt this
average income of the single dwellers was $2,575 per year and for
was a.tax that would be'passed on to
couples was $4,023 per year. He felt that if all the apartments were
hoped the Council
individually metered,.the utility bills would be exempt under section
would not adopt the ordinance.as the
6616 of the.Utility Users.Tax= Refund -Low income, but that none of the
almost prohibitive
apartments'were individual ly metered and were paid for by the 'management.
at this time.
Therefore, on the basis of their experience, a.yearly utility tax of
$930.10 would be added based on their past year's experience and this
would have to be passed on to the residents upon approval from HUD.
Therefore, he asked the City Council to make an exception of retirement
homes such as Judson Terrace which was non - profit and existed only to
provide adequate and dignified housing to those who.could not otherwise
afford it.
Joe Warnagieris was opposed to the enactment of the proposed utility
use tax as it was just an additional burden on the property owner and
tenant. He felt this tax would only increase the cost of utilities
as the cost of administration would be added by the utility companies.
He urged that the City Council put this matter on the next City ballot
so that the people would have the right to speak at the ballot box.
Mrs. Rose Barger opposed provisions of the ordinance requiring an
application for a refund from the low income citizen. She was
' opposed to the ordinance and felt it was demeaning for a citizen to
file an income statement.
Dennis Hynes, Oceanaire Drive, spoke in support of the proposed
ordinance as he felt some of the funds would be-used to protect the
environment and for recreation, also it would not be an increase of
the property talc but would be shared by all tenants and property
owners together.
Henry_W..Rible, 11, .felt the intent of the ordinance.was good but felt
the utility users tax was unfair to the poor. and the low income citizen.
He felt the proposal was poorly written and was unfair to.the poor
people. He felt the City of San Luis Obispo should not follow the lead of
a large city such as San Jose but should decide for themselves what to do.
He also objected.to the fact that all City Council meetings.were not
stenotypad so, that people could.see.what had transpired at Council and
Planning Commission meetings.
Sy Younq,'Judson Terrace, hoped some relief could be given to the
residents of this elderly complex.
Rudy Silva, Downtown Association, spoke in favor
of some relief for
the elderly and low income residents.
He urged
an increase in the
sales tax and the property tax rates
rather than
the utility tax.
C. R. Shattuck,.Apartment Owners and
Managers Association,
felt this
was a.tax that would be'passed on to
tenants and
hoped the Council
would not adopt the ordinance.as the
rents.we re
almost prohibitive
at this time.
City Council Minutes
July 24, 1972
Page 4
Bob Machado opposed the new tax as he felt the revenue to the City was
quite high and increased every year and he did not feel the money was
properly managed by the City.
J. B. MacDonald,.Realtor, objected to present proposals for a utility
users tax as he did not.feel there was enough information on the need
for,the funds. He urged that more study be made but first that a
broad based citizens committee be appointed to study the needs of the
city and the use of the revenue.
Richard Willett, Realtor, objected to the haste in considering the
adoption of the utility tax ordinance without consideration of the
spending program in the budget. Also the publicity on the $1.50 tax.
rate the City has had for over twenty years was phony because the
assessments had doubled over the years.
Mr. Paul was opposed to the utility users tax as he felt that it was
unfair to the elderly, the poor and the minorities, as it hit the
people who could.least afford to pay the tax.
Ron Dunin, Motel -Hotel Association, opposed the utility users tax as
he did not feel the citizens of the city understood what was being
proposed. He also felt the public did not-know what this great sum of
money would be used for. He felt the.motel -hotel owners and operators
would be severely hurt by the proposed tax as their business was
severely taxed now and that additional taxes on electricity would
really hurt their organization.
Francis Hendricks objected to Section 6616 limiting a refund to an
adjusted gross income of $3600 per household. He felt this limit
should be raised and also each utility should be set up at a maximum ,
amount of tax.
John Fairweather, Motel owner, opposed the enactment of the ordinance
as he did not feel the City needed the money and he did not feel that
the money would.be properly spent. He.gave as an example the recent
fiasco dealing with the tree planting on Monterey Street.
Mayor Schwartz declared the public hearing closed.
Councilman Brown felt that the proposed tax was a fair tax and that with
an increase in the income ceiling for refund to the low income, a fair
adjustment would be made.
Councilman Graham felt there was a need for City funds in order to
meet the desires of the people for example - - more police, more fire
protection, and the up -keep of existing parks. He also felt that
funds could be used for a recreational program. He was willing to
put the matter to.a vote of the-people for their consideration.
Councilman Gurnee stated he had an open mind on the subject for and
against the.adoption of the utility users tax but he felt further .
study and examination should be given to the public-on the need of
additional funds.for the City. He felt the ordinance should not be
adopted this evening but should be put to a vote of the people.
Councilman Blake explained what the Council was planning to do with
the money such as purchase open space, add to the park and recreation
program, add policement and firemen and a fire station, and move
ahead on the capital improvement program. He also explained that
1
I i
r—,
City Council Minutes
July 24, 1972
Page 5
the City Council was constantly being asked to add or improve services
to the citizens of the various neighborhoods of the city. He further
felt that putting this on the ballot was improper as the Council was
elected to operate the City and they should not go to elections with
each problem.
Mayor Schwartz presented a series of charts demonstrating the various
tax rates by agencies paid for by the citizens of the City and the
ratio of County taxes inside and outside the City and also the taxes
generated from the City property tax. He continued that the major
needs of the City were in the areas of capital outlay for the fore-
seeable future. Such items as parks, fire stations, police facilities,
improved water and sewer facilities to meet the growing needs of our
City. Additional funds were also needed for bike paths, a bus system,
etc. Further, it was up-.to the people to let the Council know just
what type.of city they wanted to live in. Also they should decide the
quality of life they wanted for the City of San Luis Obispo. He
agreed that the utility users tax hit everyone in the City, property
owner and tenant alike, but he felt it was a fair source of.money to
develop a program to make this city a better place to live. He
hoped the public would consider this tax in order to make this a finer
place to live.
A. J. Shaw, City Attorney, upon questioning, stated that a section
could be added giving refunds to such residences as Judson Terrace.
Homes for the elderly. .
Councilman Graham suggested that the Council should not adopt this
ordinance this evening but should allow further consideration at
additional public hearings.
On motion of Councilman Graham, seconded by Councilman Brown, that the
consideration of the utility users tax be continued to August 7, 1972.
Motion carried unanimously.
Mayor Schwartz called a recess at 9:25'P.M.
The meeting reconvened at 9:35 P.M. with all Councilmen present.
At this time the City 'Council held a public hearing,to consider
adoption of a construction tax for the City of San Luis Obispo.
A. J. Shaw-,:City Attorney, reviewed.for.the Council the San Jose
ordinance enacting and adopting an excise tax on the construction
of buildings and mobile home lots in the City of San Jose. He
recommended that this ordinance be considered as it had recently been
rewritten in light of current court decisions. He brought to the
Council's attention particularly Sections 16002 defining construction;
16003, defining a dwelling unit; and 16006, dealing with exemptions,
and 16007, the use of tax revenue. He also presented for the Council's
consideration two amendments for inclusion in the ordinance for the
City of San Luis Obispo. One, a credit for prior development costs
and, two, appeal decisions.
Mayor Schwartz declared the public hearing open.
Mr. Art Wilson, Secretary- Manager of the San Luis Obispo Building
Contractors' Association, read a prepared statement objecting to the
Council's consideration of the adoption of a construction tax
ordinance. He continued that the proposed construction tax was
discriminatory against the building industry which was already
penalized by high construction and labor costs. He also felt that
City Council Minutes
July 24, 1972
Page 6
the general tax payer should be responsible for some of the items that
the Council wished to spend the money on such as recreation and parks
and not burden the building contractors or the building industry.
He felt that in fairness the tax should not be considered by the City
Council and they should try to allow the building industry to find
its own level and pay.its own way.
Hal Boyle, Building Trades, opposed the proposed ordinance as he felt
it was discriminatory and unfair to people who were trying to come to
San Luis Obispo to live. He felt that this tax was another step to
stop the growth of the City and he was opposed and felt the Council
should not consider this tax.
Ron Benzer, contractor, felt_the utility tax was a good tax for pay as
you go development but he felt the construction tax was unfair and
discriminatory as it was aimed not at the developer but was passed on
to the ultimate purchaser of the residence who was paying a high price
already for living quarters.
Dan Danley, Realtor, objected to the intention of the Council to adopt
a construction tax which was one of the tools being used by this
particular Council to stop growth and leave things as they were with
no provisions for new residents or new construction. He felt this
construction tax was an injustice to the people who wished to build
and live in San Luis Obispo. He felt the ordinance would hurt the
low income and minority groups who were looking for some place to
live and could not afford to do so now. This tax would make the cost
of living that much higher.
Mayor Schwartz declared the public hearing closed. '
Councilman Gurnee stated that at no time had he advocated a policy of
no growth for the City of San Luis Obispo. He felt that what he would
support was a program of planned development which would require each
new building to buy into the required capital improvements to serve
the area. For example, new developments should pay for new parks,
park facilities, fire.stations and its equipment.
Councilman Blake felt that developers in San Luis Obispo now paid for
off -site improvements to develop their tracts. They paid for sewer
fees, water fees and permit fees and he hoped the Council would not
consider this ordinance but would put it aside as he felt this industry
was taxed sufficiently.
Councilman Brown felt that the construction tax was a fair tax as it
allowed people who were moving into new homes or developments to pay a
share of the going City concern. But he hoped that the rates of tax
could be developed which would not be discriminatory to pay for some
of the capital improvements needed to serve the new developments.
Councilman Graham felt that if the Council did not adopt the construction
tax, they should adopt an ordinance increasing existing fees on develop-
ments and for permits, which could then be allocated to capital improve-
ments needed by the new.developments. He would not support the adoption '
of a construction tax as presented.
Mayor Schwartz fe-It that the existing residents paid over and over again
for each new increment of public service to serve new developments, as
each new development and resident added to the burden on public services.
City Council Minutes
July 24, 1972
Page 7
Councilman Gurnee felt that the figure presented by the City depart-
ments should be re- evaluated for accuracy and need for improvements.
Councilman Blake felt that the tax would only affect the new - comers
who were coming to live in San Luis Obispo and buy a home. He suggested
than an ad hoc committee be appointed to study the San Jose ordinance
and make recommendations to the Council to either adopt, amend or
drop this item from consideration.
Councilman Graham stated he did not feel the City was now getting a
good quality of building in subdivisions. He felt rather than adopt
a construction tax that the City Council should look into existing
regulations and up -grade rules and regulations to deliver a good
quality house. He also felt that he would rather adopt a utility tax
as being fair to the people than the construction tax.
Councilman Blake moved that the City Council place a one year moratorium
on consideration of the construction tax after adoption of the utility
tax. Motion died for lack of a second.
On motion of Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Gurnee, that the
City Council continue the study of the construction tax for additional
input from the public to the August 14, 1972 meeting. Motion carried
' unanimously.
4. On motion of Councilman Blake, seconded by Councilman Brown,
the meeting adjourned.
APPROVED:
1
siir�
H. PATRICK, CITY CLERK
He continued that
he believed that each
new development in the City
should pay
enough
in order to buy into
the City. He continued that
the amount
or rate
of tax still had to
be established by the City
Council, and also
whether the rate should be of full value or a
percentage
of the
needed cost.
Councilman Gurnee felt that the figure presented by the City depart-
ments should be re- evaluated for accuracy and need for improvements.
Councilman Blake felt that the tax would only affect the new - comers
who were coming to live in San Luis Obispo and buy a home. He suggested
than an ad hoc committee be appointed to study the San Jose ordinance
and make recommendations to the Council to either adopt, amend or
drop this item from consideration.
Councilman Graham stated he did not feel the City was now getting a
good quality of building in subdivisions. He felt rather than adopt
a construction tax that the City Council should look into existing
regulations and up -grade rules and regulations to deliver a good
quality house. He also felt that he would rather adopt a utility tax
as being fair to the people than the construction tax.
Councilman Blake moved that the City Council place a one year moratorium
on consideration of the construction tax after adoption of the utility
tax. Motion died for lack of a second.
On motion of Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Gurnee, that the
City Council continue the study of the construction tax for additional
input from the public to the August 14, 1972 meeting. Motion carried
' unanimously.
4. On motion of Councilman Blake, seconded by Councilman Brown,
the meeting adjourned.
APPROVED:
1
siir�
H. PATRICK, CITY CLERK