Loading...
08/12/1974MINUTES ADJOURNED MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO MONDAY; AUGUST 12, 1974 - 7:30 P.M. CITY HALL Pledge Roll Call Present: John Brown,.Myron Graham,-T: Keith Gurnee, Jesse Norris and Kenneth E. Schwartz City Staff Absent: None Present: J. H. Fitzpatrick, City Clerk; R. D. Miller, Administrative Officer; A. J. Shaw, Jr., City Attorney; David Williamson, Assistant Administrative Officer; William'Flory, Director of Parks and Recreation; E. L. Rodgers, Police Chief; Wayne Peterson, Assistant City Engineer; Lee Schlobohm, Fire Chief; Robert Strong, Planning Director I. Continued discussion of the report by the Ad Hoc Task Force Committee on Resource Inventory and proposed amendments to Ordinance No. 604 (continued from the Council meeting of August 5 and 6, 1974). Mr: Frank Exter, Chairman of the Ad Hoc Task Force Committee on Resource Inventory again reviewed in detail the activities of the Task Force over the past seventeen weeks of study. He then stated; on behalf of the Task Force, that they recommend that the City Council be guided by the following two principles: I. The City has the responsibility to determine the availability and adequacy of municipal services and resources to any property in the City of San Luis Obispo and to make that information available to the public. 2. The citizenry of the City have the right to know the condition of the City's resources at all times in order that the City's costs for proposed increases in resource inventories can be measured against development benefits to the community. In order to realize these principles, the Task Force recommends: I. The City should develop and maintain up -to -date and rel.i ba le information on the current-and future capa- bility of the City's basic resources. 2.. The resource inventory system should include: a) Water sources b) Water distributions systems City Council Minutes August 12, 1974 Page 2 c) Fire fighting capability d) Sewage treatment capacity e) Sewage collection systems f) Parks and open spaces g) Land by use category h) Schools (coordinate with school district and college authorities) i) Storm drainage j) Police k) Library 1) Pedestrian and vehicular circulation 3. It is reasonable to expect department heads to certify as to the availability and adequacy of municipal resources. 4. The City Council should establish certification procedures. 5. The procedures to be used nance. 6. In instances where city 'd sufficient information to and adequacy of municipal accelerate its efforts to information. should be set forth.in an ordi- apartment heads presently have certify as to the availability resources, the City should collect, chart and map missing 7. The City should allocate adequate budget to correct inventory gaps and to maintain the total resource inventory constantly up to date. 8. In the meantime, it is reasonable to.expect department heads to proceed with a certification program and to do immediate localized investigations to ascertain and report on the status of resource capabilities for individual projects. Based upon presentations made to the Task Force by City department heads, the majority of the Task Force had the opinion that the present ability of City departme -t heads to certify as to the availability and adequacy of municipal resources exists now, except in the case'of sewage collection. because of the new regulation of the Water Quality Control Board and in the case of land use by category because of the pending revision of the General Plan. The Task Force concluded that there should be amendments to.the present draft of Ordinance 604. The Task Force recommends the following: There should be added to the preamble of Ordinance 604 the statement.that it is the City's responsibility to provide facilities for expected and reasonable future growth. 2. City standards and criteria should be.reviewed.and established before the adoption of.Ordinance 604 (and Section 2800.5 of the Ordinance 604 as presently written should be deleted). 3. The ordinance should reflect that the City has the responsibility to determine and allocate, between the City and the property owner; the costs of making improvements to public resources and facilities required as a condition of improvement to property according to the benefit conferred. 4. The ordinance should reflect that the City has the responsibility to act, within the City's financial resource capability and according to planning guide- lines, to resolve resource deficiencies. 1 1 1 City Council Minutes August 12, 1974 Page 3 5. The ordinance should establish two levels of criticality: Level I: Level I includes life and safety support systems such as.water,(supply and distribution), sewer (collection and treatment), and flood control (storm drain).facili.ties. Inadequate facilities shall be the basis for permit denial and.hearings shall be held in accordance with the provisions contained in Ordinance 604 to determine appropriate remedial action. Level 2: Level 2:shall include safety and. security services such as fire, police, pedestrian and vehicular circulation, social; cultural and educational facilities such as youth centers, Libraries and schools. In- adequate Level 2 facilities shall be a basis for initiation of hearing procedures.as specified in Ordinance .604 to determine corrective solutions; however an inadequacy of Level 2 type facilities shall not be a basis for denying the issuance of permits. , 2. That Ordinance 604 be adopted-with the amendments recommended by the Task Force incorporated therein. The City Council discussed with Frank Exter some of the thinking behind the recommendations of the Task Force on ways and means of keeping up on the resource inventory of City facilities. Mrs. GlennaDeane Dovey= reviewed the reasons for the minority report for Council information. The primary objection was to the amendments which were recommended regarding the draft of Ordinance No. 604. She felt that some of the amendments needed clarification before incorporating them into the ordinance, and therefore raised the following questions: . Amendment #I: Where does the City's greater responsibility lie? To the present residents and taxpayers? To transient residents? To property owners or residents outside the city? To the developer? What is reasonable growth? Amendment #3: Is this not already a City policy? Why does it need to be in this ordinance? 6. The ordinance should provide that when a governmental entity other than the City of San Luis Obispo . requests additional resources, the request shall be processed in accordance with the procedure contained in Ordinance No. 604. In addition to the above, the Task Force makes the following general recommendations: I. That recognition be given to possible impacts which result from decisions -made by public agencies other than the City of San Luis Obispo and recommend that the City explore the possibility of establishing procedures to coordinate the development of these agencies and their affect upon City resources. 2. That Ordinance 604 be adopted-with the amendments recommended by the Task Force incorporated therein. The City Council discussed with Frank Exter some of the thinking behind the recommendations of the Task Force on ways and means of keeping up on the resource inventory of City facilities. Mrs. GlennaDeane Dovey= reviewed the reasons for the minority report for Council information. The primary objection was to the amendments which were recommended regarding the draft of Ordinance No. 604. She felt that some of the amendments needed clarification before incorporating them into the ordinance, and therefore raised the following questions: . Amendment #I: Where does the City's greater responsibility lie? To the present residents and taxpayers? To transient residents? To property owners or residents outside the city? To the developer? What is reasonable growth? Amendment #3: Is this not already a City policy? Why does it need to be in this ordinance? City Council Minutes August 12, 1974 Page 4 Amendment #4: As in Amendment #I, where does the City's greater responsibility lie? Which deficiencies should get attention first? How should the City '.s financial resource capability be determined? By the current budget? Bonding capacity? Taxing to the maximum limits? Revenue sharing funds? In considering Amendment #2, she agreed that standards and criteria should be adopted as soon as possible., but,felt that this direction should remain as part of the ordinance, as in Section 2800.5. The ordinance should be the law which required the establishment of such standards. In regard to Amendment #5, they requested the inclusion, under water in Level I systems, of a• distinct reference to fire fighting capability. Not spelling it out could conceivably lead to another situation such as the current problems in the Los Osos Valley. They did agree with the balance of the Task Force recommendations; however, they respectfully requested the Council's consideration of the minority viewpoint. Mayor Schwartz declared the public hearing open. Maritha Hughes. Executive Secretary.. San.Luis Obispo County Buildinq Contractors Association, stated she felt the recommendation submitted to the City Council on behalf of the Ad Hoc Task Force Committee was the majority feeling of the Committee: She further felt the Committee did a good job for the City and the City Council should accept their report on the basis and the feeling that it was submitted. Fred Strong, Executive Director, CEBES, felt the Task Force had come up with an extremely expert report and his organization endorsed their recommendations for Council consideration. He felt that only through implementation of the recommendations of the Ad Hoc Task Force Committee would the City really get a handle on their resources and just what they had available. Mrs. Caralas, Tanglewood Drive, asked if the Task Force recognized the limitations of the General Plan when they were discussing the recommendation "reasonable growth ". Frank Exter stated the General Plan.was not used as a limiting factor in their use of the term "reasonable growth ". William Mc Keen felt the Task Force had done a good job, but he felt the City Council should put this issue on the ballot so that the Citizens of the community could vote on growth or non - growth patterns for the community. David Hughes, an attorney, opposed placing this issue on the ballot as he felt it was too complicated an issue for the average voter in San Luis Obispo to understand. Further, he felt the standards and criteria should be placed in detail in the proposed ordinance so there would be no confusion by anyone reading the ordinance. Brian Lawler felt the growth definition should be included in the ordinance so that there was no question as to what the citizens of San Luis Obispo meant when they use the words "reasonable growth ". 1 C L__J�I City Council Minutes August 12, 1974 Page 5 N. Weber, Flora Street, spoke in support of the Task Force recommenda- tion on amendments to Ordinance No. 604. Mr. Roca, 1701 Los Osos Valley Road, felt the City of San Luis Obispo should not try to limit growth but should try for reasonable growth ' within their capabilities to serve the growth. Mrs. B. Walters, 392 Christina'Way, stated she was in support of growth control in order.to protect the air that we'all need to, exist, because with growth comes pollution. Mr. Hal Boyle, Task Force member, spoke in support of the Task Force recommendation stating that these things were studied in detail and the recommendations were not being made facetiously. Art Jack, resident of San Luis Obispo, spoke in favor of clarifying wording in the ordinance and to remove vagueness and confusion that existed in the original ordinance. Dr. Larry Field objected to the recommendation of the Task Force, and stated the City had the responsibility to provide .facilities for expansion and reasonable future growth. He felt it was wrong for taxpayers to be forced to install facilities for people coming to the community. Elsie Schmidt felt the developers should pay for facilities to serve their development, and they should not expect City taxpayers, who were already burdened with supporting an antiquated system, to pay for new people coming to the community. Mayor Schwartz declared the.public hearing closed. - A. J. Shaw, City Attorney, commented; on several words used in the Task Force recommendation and felt they should'be clarified if adopted by the City Council. Councilman Brown. stated he agreed generally with the recommendations of the Task Force, but felt the City Council should take the recommendations, review them section by section, and approve them in that way. ' Councilman Graham felt the public comments clarified the recommendation of the Task Force, and he felt the City Council should how proceed with its adoption and amendments to Ordinance No. 604. Councilman Gurnee felt the Task Force recommendations reinforced the need of an ordinance similar to Ordinance No. 604, although.he . disagreed with the Task Force Committee's-recommendation regarding facilities. He felt that the section should read "for expected and reasonably planned future growth ". He agreed with adequate criteria and standards being included in the ordinance, and he also wondered why with all the time spent by the Task Force, no comment had been made regarding financing of the needed facilities. For example, he wondered why there was not a construction tax proposed to help make up these deficiencies in the City's resources. He also felt the Task ' Force should have come up`.with criteria for facilities for development. He hoped the City Council would direct the staff to prepare an ordinance similar to Ordinance No. 604 for guidance of City staff and citizens of San Luis Obispo which would include definitions for full information. He also felt the staff should be directed to City Council Minutes August 12, 1974 Page 6 prepare a report on facilities, resources presently avai.lable in the City which would include an inventory checklist, and a reporting system to the City Council. Councilman Norris stated he supported the findings of the Task Force and hoped the Council would include them in an ordinance. He ' stated he too would support a resource inventory and a reporting procedure, and he.also would support the adoption of standards and criteria; but while this was being done, an ordinance should be prepared which would include the standards. He felt the ordinance should spell out the City Government's responsibility in.supplying vital services to their citizens. Mayor Schwartz felt the Task Force had done a good job for the City, and he felt that Ordinance No. 604 was not a growth or no- growth ordinance, but felt it was more a management tool for the City staff's guidance. He felt the ordinance was introduced .to force the City staff to be on top of City facilities, so vital services could be continued to the citizens. He felt an adequate resource: inventory would also bring deficiencies to the City Council's attention in sufficient time. In that way, the Council could be aware of the problem and corrective action could be taken. He felt the City Council should order Ordinance No. 604 to be rewritten taking into consideration the suggestions of the Ad Hoc Task Force. He also felt the City staff should look into needed criteria to be placed in the ordinance for the guidance of staff and developers. !He concluded, he could not buy the Task Force recommendation that it was the City's responsibility to supply facilities for new develop- ment. He felt the City should proceed with gathering the resource inventory and report procedures should be established to inform , the Council and the public of conditions of the City's -resources. He felt the City staff should complete the criteria and standards sections for inclusion in.the ordinance and for public information. Councilman Norris felt the City Council should adopt all recommendations of the Task Force and include them in anew ordinance. 9:40 P.M. Mayor Schwartz declared a recess. 9:50 P.M. The meeting reconvened with all Council members present. The City Council then reviewed each section of the report by the Ad Hoc Task Force Committee and either accepted or amended the individual recommendations of the Committee as follows: Al. The City has the responsibility to determine the availability and adequacy of municipal services and resources to any property in the City of San Luis Obispo and make that information available to the public. The recommendation was adopted. A2. The citizenry of the City have the right to-know-the condition of the City's resources at all times in order that the City's costs for proposed increases in resource inventories can-be measured against development benefits to the community. The recommendation was adopted. Bl. The City should develop and maintain up -to -date and reliable information oh the current and future capability of the City's basic resources. The recommendation was adopted. B2. The a) b) c) d) e) f) g.) h) City Council.Minutes August 12, 1974 Page 7 resource inventory system should include: Water sources Water distributions systems. Fire fighting capability Sewage treatment capacity Sewage collection systems Parks.and open spaces Land by use category School.s (coordinate.with school district and college authorities) 1). Storm drainage j) Police k) Library 1). Pedestrian and vehicular circulation This recommendation was adopted.. B3. It is reasonable to expect department heads to certify as to the availability and.adequacy of municipal resources. The recommendation was adopted.. B4. The City Council should establish certification procedures. The recommendation was adopted. B5. The procedures to be used should be set.forth in an ordi- nance. The. recommendation was adopted. B6. In instances where Ci.ty.department.heads presently have sufficient information to certify. as to the availability ' and adequacy of munici.pal.resources, the City should accelerate its efforts to collect, chart and map missing information. The recommendation was adopted. B7. The City shoul.d allocate adequate budget to correct inventory gaps. and to maintain the total resource in- ventory constantly up to date. The recommendation was adopted. BB.. In the meantime; it is reasonable to expect department heads to proceed with.a certification program and to do immediate localized investigations to ascertain and report on the status of resource capabilities for individual projects. The recommendation was adopted. CI. There should be added to the preamble of .Ordinance 604 the statement that it is the City's responsibility to provide facilities for expected and reasonable future growth. The recommendation was adopted with Councilman Gurnee voting No. C2. City standards and criteria should be reviewed and established before the adoption of Ordinance 604 (and Section 2800.5 of the Ordinance 604 as presently written should be deleted). The recommendation was amended and adopted as follows: "City standards and criteria should be reviewed and established before adoption of Ordinance No. 604 ". City Council Minutes August 12, 1974' Page S C3. The ordinance should reflect that bility to determine and allocate, property owner, the costs of maki resources and facilities required ment to property according to the recommendation was adopted. the City has the responsi- between the City and the ig improvements to public as a.condi.tion of improve - benefit conferred. The C4. The ordinance should reflect that the City has the responsi- bility to act, within the City'-s financial resource capability and according to planning.guideli . nes, to resolve resource deficiencies. The recommendation was adopted as amended: Drop "planning" and substitute "General Plan Guidelines ". C5. The ordinance should establish two levels of criticality: Level I: Level 1 includes life and safety support systems such as water (supply and distribution), sewer. (collection and treatment), and flood control (storm drain)facilities. Inadequate facilities shall be the basis for.permit denial and hearings shall'be held in accordance with the provisions contained in Ordinance 604 to determine appropriate remedial action. Level 2: Level 2 shall include safety and security services such as fire,.police, pedestrian and vehicular circulation, social, cultural and educational facilities such as youth centers, libraries and school.s. Inadequate Level 2 facilities shall be a basis for initiation of hearing procedures as specified in Ordinance 604 to'determine corrective solutions; however an inadequacy of Level 2 type .facilities shall not be a basis for denying the issuance of permits. Level 1 was adopted as amended: add "water (supply, distri- bution and fire flows) ", with Council approval.of. appeals. Level 2 was adopted as amended: "with Council approval of appeals ". C6. The ordinance should provide .that when a governmental entity other than the City of San Lu'is Obispo requests additional resources, the request shall be processed.in accordance with the procedure contained in Ordinance No. 604. The recommenda- tion was adopted. DI. That recognition be given to possible impacts.which result from decisions made by publ.ic.agencies other.than the City of San Luis Obispo and recommend that the City explore the possibility of establishing procedures to coordinate the development of these agencies and their affect upon City resources. The recommendation was adopted. D2. That Ordinance 604 be adopted with the amendments recommended by the Task Force incorporated therein. The recommendation was adopted. After reviewing the Ad Hoc Task Force Committee's report, on motion of Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Graham the City staff was directed to proceed with a rewrite of the ordinance which would include procedures for resource inventory and reporting procedures. Motion carried, report to be submitted to the City Council on September 16, 1974. 2. Councilman Gurnee submitted for the Council's consideration a recommendation that the Council order a charter amendment to be placed on the November ballot which would change the method of establishing compensation for the Mayor and Council Members. This would increase the Mayor's present salary from $250 per month to $750 per month, and increase the Council Members monthly pay from $150 to $500 per month n 1 1 City Council Minutes August 12, 1974 Page 9 and also to include in the charter amendment a method for annual cost -of- living adjustments in both the Mayor's and Council Members' salaries. Councilman Gurnee stated he realized the subject of pay increases for elected City Officials was certain to be an inflammatory issue, but he was convinced the Council and citizens would support increases in a reasonable and justifiable position. On this.basis, he stated that since 1967.the City Council had been receiving their present salary and the cost of. living had increased over 32 per cent. He also stated that since 1967 the Council.meeting load had increased substantially, with the Council meeting at least-four times per month, including many noontime sessions and other special meetings to consider the increasing workload of City business. He felt with the changing responsibilities of City Government, the increasing size of the City, and the increasing level of services, the Council should be more fairly compensated for their time. He also stated the City budget had tripled since 1966/67, which was a further indication of the increasing Council workload, demanding more attention and. time of Council Members. He stated the proposed pay increase for Council Members would still be $140 per month below the lowest paid full -time City position at this time,.and the Mayor's salary.would be less than 90 per cent of the City's total employee work force. He suggested that the charter amendment include a provision for annual salary adjustments, which would assure that elected officials' salaries would keep at a regular pace with fluctuations in the cost of living and was worded in such a way ' to require an increase or decrease. in salary commensurate. with percentage changes in the cost of living index. In conclusion, these increased salaries would certainly imply that those-elected to City office would be expected to devote more time to the duties. of that office. The salaries were not so high to consti- tute a full -time job, but they were high enough to warrant the election of people who would be expected to be more-accessible to the citizenry and spend more time on the job. Mayor Schwartz declared the public hearing open. Maritha Huahes. Executive Secretarv. SLO Countv Buildina.Contractors Association, stated she was in support of a slight increase in the Council Members' and Mayor's salary, but felt the Council Members were performing a duty and service to the community and were not in the job for financial gain. She felt the proposed increases were just too ..high. Per Mathiesen stated objection to the salary increase recommended, felt the Council duties were a service to the community and to the citizens and were not for financial gain. He was opposed to the salary increase. David Hughes asked why the City Council felt they need such a tremendous increase in their salaries. Councilman Gurnee again I.isted seven reasons why he felt the City Council should receive an increase in salary. Mayor Schwartz declared the public hearing closed. City Council Minutes August 12, 1974 Page 10 Councilman Brown stated he was opposed to a salary increase for part -time, elected officials. He felt the money should be spent on full -time staff and urged the City Council not to put this propo- sition on the November ballot. ' Councilman Graham stated he would support a salary increase in line with the cost of living, but would not agree with the amounts suggested by Councilman Gurnee. He felt it was too high and was not fair and he therefore would not support the recommendation. Councilman Norris stated he was opposed to a request for a raise in pay for members of the City Council. He was opposed to putting such an idea on the ballot. He said he considered being a councilman as his community service activity, and he felt -he served the people as their councilman. He also felt the Council must think about the large number of citizens who served the City on Planning Commissions and other advisory bodies when they did not even get any salary and here the Council was asking for a tremendous increase. He felt the duty of the Councilman was to listen to the people, sit on the Council, and set policy. He felt it was not the duty of the CIty_Councilmen to_ hang around City Hall and interfere in the day -to -day ac_tiv.ities o_f ^! Administration and Department Heads. He was opposed to cluttering up the ballot with a raise and in pay proposals for members of the City Council. He would oppose any action to increase the salaries. Mayor Schwartz stated he was in support of a salary proposal which would increase the salary in proportion to the cost of living increases. He also felt that in light of increased workload for the Mayor and City Council, some increase in salary should be made. He felt that , as the years went by, elected City Officials were going,to be spending more and more time on City business. But, he was opposed to the amount being proposed by Councilman Gurnee. He felt that some day the citizens of San Luis Obispo would have to face the cost of attracting better people to spend more time on City Government business and the way to attract these people might be by paying higher salaries. Councilman Gurnee stated seeing the way the Council felt-he asked that the matter be withdrawn and not considered by the City Council. 3. Discussion of City Hall organization was continued to an adjourned meeting to be held on Thursday; August 15, 1974. 4. Council review of the newsletter format was also continued to the meeting of August 15, 1974. 5. Memorandum from Robert Strong, Planning Director, requesting Council consideration of the disposal of clean fill material from the Cross -Town Feeder Project to be deposited on locations within the Laguna Lake Park site in areas where prior materials had been placed but further fill was needed. It was estimated that approximately 4,000 cubic yards of material (500 truck loads ±) would be available, and at least a portion of this amount could be accommodated at the park property, dumped but notspread or compacted. The deposit sites would be selected away from,the lake and shoreline 1 to prevent siltation or other adverse environmental impacts under normal conditions. The Laguna Lake Park Master Plan was - pending preparation, and the material would be stockpiled until plans revealed whether it should be redistributed, spread, or compacted in place. City Council Minutes August 12, 1974 Page II He continued that it was his understanding that the City had utilized this site for deposit of materials in the past, and had periodically dumped occasional loads of surplus, clean fill in. the area even recently, but the proposed stockpiling activity was of sufficent magnitude to be more apparent to the public, and.should be considered by the Council rather than continued without their specific consent. He.-concluded, based upon the information available, the staff recommended that the Council authorize the request. To assure that the public was informed, a negative declaration would be.filed on this proposal; enabling further notice and additional opportunity for appeal Lf any person was aggrieved by the determination. (The Planning Commission would consider any appeal and could consult with_ other advisory committees, if necessary, to resolve any concerns.) Wayne Peterson, Assistant City Engineer, spoke in support.of the memorandum from Robert Strong allowing the City to. place clean fill materials at certain points within Laguna Lake Park from the Cross - Town Feeder Project.. Bill Flory, Park 8 Recreation Director, stated that the proposed area to be filled with the dirt from the Cross -Town Feeder had been set aside as a wildlife sanctuary which prohibited vehicles, but the Park Department had no objection if fill was clean, without debris, and was placed in areas where fill would be needed for future develop- ment. Ery Johnson, Laguna Lake resident, objected to allowance of dumping on the City park property, any more dumping at least at the magnitude of 4,000 cubic yards.. He also questioned the present dumping of dirt on this property. He hoped the City Council would take disciplinary action on the employees who had allowed the desecration of the park property by the tremendous amount of dirt that had been dumped there in the last few weeks. Don Cross, Laguna Lake resident,. opposed to the continued dumping on City park property 'of dirt fill and was.also opposed to.the new proposal being submitted by the City staff. Mrs. Dorothea Rible, Laguna area resident, stated she too was opposed to the present dumping and to the proposal by.the City. She felt the City Council should follow its-own grading and permit regulations. She then reviewed the history of all the problems that had ever existed in the Laguna Lake area, particularly on the City park property. She felt if this dirt plus the sixty truck loads she estimated that had been dumped in the last couple of weeks started to fill the lake, she was sure that future problems would cause flooding to the residents. The City Council attempted by_ questioning the staff as to whom and what had been allowed to be dumped in the park property to date. None of the staff members knew of anyone having been given per- ' mission to dump fill in the Laguna Lake area; except that the Park Departt men' occasionally took a pick -up load of clean that and put it in the park property. After discussion, on motion of Councilman Gurnee, seconded by Councilman Brown that the City Council deny the request of the City Council Minutes August 12, 1974 Page 12 City staff, that.they be.required to find a new site for the Cross - Town Feeder dirt, and further that .the City staff be directed .. . to find out who had been dumping fill on the property, have the fill removed, and instruct all personnel.that there.would be no dumping or filling in-any flood plain by City departments. Motion carried, 1 all ayes. 5B. Communication from the Assistant County Administrative Officer informing the City Council that as part of the comprehensive animal control program that was being gone into by the County of San Luis Obispo, a.door -to -door canvass is required in order to find out how many.dogs were involved within the areas. At the present time, all.the.unincorporated areas had been canvassed and a dog census taken, and they would now like to proceed within the City of San Luis Obispo. The approximate cost of. the census would be in the area of $1,500 to $2,000 and.would take appr.oximately:two weeks. There would be ten people conducting the census in the field. The County stated that if in the final analysis the City Council did not proceed to accept the contract as proposed, then there would be no obligation to pay the cost of the census.. The City Clerk reported to the City Council that the money had been budgeted.for the last two years to handle a dog census for the City, but until the matter of enforcement had been settled, the money had not been spent, so there were sufficient funds if the Council wished to proceed and he so recommended. On motion of Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Graham that , the City Council authorize the County of San Luis.Obispo to proceed with the animal canvass. 5C. On motion of Councilman Graham, seconded by-Councilman Brown the following resolution was introduced: RESOLUTION NO. 2652 (1974 Series), a resolution of the Council of the.City of San Luis Obispo confirming liens upon real property parcels for weed abatement costs for the fiscal year 1974/75. Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmen Graham, Brown, Gurnee, Norris and Mayor Schwartz NOES: None ABSENT: None 6. Consideration of Golf Course lease and /or purchase was continued to August 19, 1974. 7. Consideration of current legislation was continued to August 19, 1974. 8. Consideration of amendments to the E.I.R. quidelines.was continued to August 19, 1974. City Council Minutes August 12, 1974 Page 13 9. Memorandum from Robert Strong regarding .joint City Council and commission meetings was continued to August 19, 1974. 1 On motion of Councilman Gurnee, seconded by Councilman Graham the meeting adjourned to 12:10 P.M. Thursday, August 15, 1974. APPROVED: November 4, 1974 1 1 . H. PATRICK, CITY CLERK