HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/15/1981City Council Minutes
December 15, 1981 - 7:00 p.m.
Page 2
C O N S E N T I T E M S
C -1 CLAIMS AGAINST THE CITY
On motion of Councilman Settle, seconded by Councilwoman Dovey, claims
against the City for the month of December 1981 be approved and ordered
paid subject to the approval of the CAO. Motion carried, all ayes.
C -2 COUNCIL MINUTES
On motion of Councilman Settle, seconded by Councilwoman Dovey, the
following minutes be approved as amended: November 16, 1981 - 12:10
p.m.; November 17, 1981 - 7:00 p.m.; November 24, 1981 - 12:10 p.m.
Motion carried, all ayes.
C -3 CLAIM AGAINST THE CITY - A. ANDREATTE
On motion of Councilman Settle, seconded by Councilwoman Dovey, the
claim against the City by Arthur Andreatte in the amount of $2,500 for
injuries sustained when claimant was allegedly subjected to false arrest
and inflicted with emotional distress be denied. Motion carried, all
ayes.
C -4 CLAIM AGAINST THE CITY - S. KATSURA
On motion of Councilman Settle, seconded by Councilwoman Dovey, the
claim against the City by Sotaro Katsura in the amount of $261 for
damages sustained when claimant overturned his motorcycle allegedly due
to sand in a city street be denied. Motion carried, all ayes.
C -5 CLAIM AGAINST.THE CITY - J. PRYOR
On motion of Councilman Settle, seconded by Councilwoman Dovey, the
claim against the City by John M. Pryor in the amount of $529 for
damages to his vehicle allegedly caused by a limb from a city tree
falling on it be denied. Motion carried, all ayes.
C -6 TRACT 772 MAP AMENDMENT REQUEST
On motion of Councilman Settle, seconded by Councilwoman Dovey, that
request by Vincent Fonte and Leonard.Blaser, subdividers, to allow an
amended map to be filed for Tract 772 for future consideration by the
City. Motion carried, all ayes.
C -7 WATER SERVICE REQUEST
Consideration of a report from the Community Development Director of a
request from Heloise S. Berry for water service to a parcel located 3590
Bullock Lane, outside the city limits.
Mayor Billig explained that the applicant had requested that this item
be continued to the next available agenda so that she could be present
for this item.
Upon general consensus it was agreed to continue this item to the next
available agenda.
C -8 SHRUBBERY TRIMMING REQUIREMENTS
After brief discussion it was moved by Councilman Settle, seconded by
Councilwoman Dovey, that the request by William Earl Tickell asking that
he-- not be required to comply with city shrubbery requirements be denied
consistent with the city ordinance.
Motion carried on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Settle, Dovey, and Mayor Billig
NOES: Councilmembers Dunin and Griffin
ABSENT: None
City Council Minutes
December 15, 1981 - 7:00 p.m.
Page 3
C -9 HISTORIC RESOURCES INVENTORY
On motion of. Councilman Settle, seconded by Councilwoman Dovey, the
following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 4693 (1981 Series),
a resolution of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo granting
approval of the application and the project agreement for Historic
Preservation grants and aide funds for a historic resources inventory.
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
a
AYES: Councilmembers Settle, Dovey, Dunin, Griffin, and Mayor Billig
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
C -10 WATER CONSERVATION POLICY
On motion of Councilman Settle, seconded by Councilwoman Dovey, that the
recommendation by the Water Resources Advisory Committee urging adoption
of a policy concerning the use of low water using plants for new develop -
ments be referred to staff to prepare a letter for the Mayor's signature
explaining that this is current city policy. Motion carried, all ayes.
C -11 PROMOTIONAL COORDINATING COMMITTEE GRANTS
Council considered resolutions approving agreements between the City and
the following organizations for Promotional Coordinating Committee
grants as adopted by the.Council on December 1, 1981:
1.
Associated Students
$1,000
2.
Children's Theatre
2,000
3.
Civic Ballet
2,000.
4.
Cuesta Belles
1,000
5.
Cuesta Boosters
500
6.
Mozart Festival
5,000
7.
Mustang Boosters
750
8.
SLO County Band
1,500
9.
SLO County Symphony
5,000
10.
SLO Vocal Arts Ensemble
1,000
On motion of Councilman Settle, seconded by Councilwoman Dovey, that
resolution No's 4694 through 5703 be adopted approving grant recipient
agreements as listed above.
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Settle, Dovey, Dunin, Griffin, and Mayor Billig
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
C -12 POLICY FOR COLLECTION OF SEWER AND WATER FEES
Council to consider staff reports and resolution regarding collection of
sewer and water fees.
Mayor Billig explained that two letters had been received requesting
that Council defer this item for a joint study session with Council and
interested parties as certain individuals had not had time enough to
evaluate the proposed rates.
i
J
1
1
City Council Minutes
December 15, 1981 - 7:00 p.m.
Page 4
Upon general consensus, Council referred this item to a study session
for a joint meeting with the City Council, staff, developers, consultant
and other interested parties.
C -13 SIDEWALK INSTALLATION - 380 BRANCH STREET
On motion of Councilman Settle, seconded by Councilwoman Dovey, to grant
a temporary exemption to Keith McMillan for a sidewalk requirement to
1 install sidewalk in front of his property.at 380 Branch Street. Motion
carried, all ayes.
C -14 TRAFFIC HEARING OFFICER APPOINTMENT
On motion of Councilman Settle, seconded by Councilwoman Dovey, to
approve the appointment as recommended by the Police Chief to appoint
the Traffic Safety Unit Sergeant as the Traffic Hearing Officer for
vehicle abatement appeals. Motion carried, all-ayes.
C -15 AGREEMENT FOR LEGAL SERVICES
On motion of Councilman Settle, seconded by Councilwoman Dovey, the
following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 4704 (1981 Series),
a resolution of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo approving an
agreement between the City and Anne M. Russell for legal services.
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Settle, Dovey, Dunin, Griffin, and Mayor Billig
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
C -16 ECONOMIC STUDIES - DOWNTOWN PARKING PROGRAM
On motion of Councilman Settle, seconded by Councilwoman Dovey, that the
report from the City Engineer on economic studies relating to the
Downtown Parking Program be received and filed. Motion carried, all
ayes.
C -17 OVERSIZED STRUCTURES AND VEHICLES ON CITY STREETS
On motion of Councilman Settle, seconded by Councilwoman Dovey, the
following ordinance was introduced: Ordinance No. 914 (1981 Series), an
ordinance of the City of San Luis Obispo adding Chapter 2 to Article 7
of the Municipal Code to provide for the regulation of transportation of
oversized and overweight structures and vehicles over city streets and
amending Chaptex 8, Article 8 to comply with the section.
Introduced and passed to print on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Settle, Dovey, Dunin, Griffin, and Mayor Billig
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
C- 18/C -19 FEASIBILITY STUDY - SALINAS DAM AND SAFE ANNUAL YIELD STUDY
Consideration of a request for proposals to perform a Feasibility Study,
at the reconnaissance level for spill -way gates at Salinas Dam and to
perform a Safe Annual Yield Study at the Whale Rock Dam.
Mayor Billig requested that both of these items be continued until City
Council could have another study session to discuss the entire water
issue, and that these two items be discussed together as they were
City Council Minutes
December 15, 1981 - 7:00 p.m.
Page 5
related to the overall water
proposals for the Safe Annual
explained that the Whale Rock
specifications prior to their
would be meeting on January 7
a delay.
.3icture. With regard to the request for
Yield Study at Whale Rock Dam, she
Commission had requested to see these
being let. The Whale Rock Commission
so the timing would not mean that much of
Upon question by Councilman Dunin, Mayor Billig explained.that she was
not opposed to having a Safe Annual Yield Study done, but that it was '
extremely important that the consultant hired to do the project use an
accurate base -line data; and it should be done based on the right
motives and on the proper basis.
Councilman Settle agreed that an independent consultant should conduct
the study, not one presently working for State or City agencies, which
might slant the final outcome one way or the other.
Councilman Griffin felt that these projects were being done on a
piece -meal approach and would be willing to defer the matter until the
City knew where it was going with regard to the water. He could not
support spending $10,000 on a questionable item. He also felt the RFP's
should be more specific.
Mayor Billig agreed that a Safe Annual Yield Study should be done, that
the Council had agreed to have it done at budget time; she felt it
should be a comprehensive study with all the facts and using all the
proper figures.
Councilman Dunin stated that he felt that the Council was now trying to
"weasel" out of having the study done. He believed that the City had
more water than they were telling the people they had. He felt the
public was being mislead. The Council was afraid of the study because
it would show this fact. The study would give the City a proper footing,
the knowledge of how much the water the City actually had. He felt
strongly that the City must have the study; it should have been done a
long time ago.
On motion of Councilman Griffin, seconded by Councilwoman Dovey, to
table both items C -18 and C =19. The Council then continued discussion
of the motion.
Dave Romero, Public Services Director, agreed that he felt the City
should have this study completed. It was initiated by staff at Council
direction during the budget sessions. He felt these studies must be
done first and then a conjunctive use study to be done later.
Bob Mote, Utility Superintendent, explained that the original agreement
establishing the Whale Rock Commission has wording that binds the
Commission to use the Safe Annual Yield Study to determine the allotment
for each agency. He stated that no new study has been done, and the
Commission must live by the old one. The actual wording would require
the Commission to charge for the excess water used by others, and this
is becoming a real bone of contention between the agencies.
Mayor Billig again stated that the study should be done but not rushed.
We need to get a good base -line data from qualified independent firm.
The conjunctive -use study should not be even considered at this time as
the City does not own the Salinas Dam, and we should not be paying for a
study for something we do not own. 1
The motion was then amended to continue the request for proposals.to
perform a feasibility study for the spill -way gates at Salinas Dam for
Council meeting of January 14, 1982, at 12:10 p.m. with Fred Bold in
closed session. The matter of the request for proposals to perform a
Safe Annual Yield Study at the Whale Rock Dame be continued until after
the Whale Rock Commission discussion and recommendations were made.
Whale Rock Commission to meet January 7, 1982. Motion carried, all
ayes.
City Council Minutes
December 15, 1981 - 7:00 p.m.
Page 6
C -20 SLACK STREET STORM DRAIN
On motion of Councilman Settle, seconded by Councilwoman Dovey, the
plans and specifications for the "SLACK STREET STORM DRAIN ", City Plan
No. F -27, bid estimate $23,050 without contingencies be approved and
staff be authorized to call for bids. Motion carried, all ayes.
C -21 TURBINE GENERATOR - WHALE ROCK PROJECT
Dave Romero explained that no bids were received for the "TURBINE
GENERATOR FOR WHALE ROCK PROJECT ", bid estimate $11,500 without contin-
gencies.
On motion of Councilman Settle, seconded by Councilwoman Dovey, that
staff be authorized to extend the time for submittal of proposals.
Motion carried, all ayes.
A. RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION
Jeff Jorgensen, on behalf of the Mozart Festival, presented Mayor Billig
a Resolution of Appreciation and a picture for her efforts and the
city's support of this group.
1. ORDINANCE NO. 913 - REZONING 455 BRIZZOLARA STREET
Council held a public hearing to consider the final passage of Ordinance
No. 913, an ordinance amending the Official Zone Map of the City to
rezone property at 455 Brizzolara Street from R -1 -S (low- density residen-
tial, special consideration) to R -1 -PD (low- density residential, planned
development); Leo Evans, applicant (PD 1003).
Mayor Billig declared the public hearing open. No one spoke for or
against the proposed final passage. Mayor Billig declared the public
' hearing closed.
On motion of-Councilwoman Dovey, seconded by Councilman Settle, to give
final adoption to Ordinance No. 913.
Finally passed on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Dovey, Settle, Dunin, Griffin,. and Mayor Billig
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
2. TENTATIVE MAP FOR MINOR SUBDIVISION 81 -225
Council held a public hearing to consider a Planning Commission recommen-
dation to approve the tentative map for Minor Subdivision No. 81 -225 to
combine 6 lots into 1 lot located at 345 Marsh.Street;,C -R zone; Daniel
Kinnoin, Subdivider.
Henry Engen reported that the Planning Commission on 3 -0 vote recom-
mended Council adoption to approve the tentative parcel map subject to
the findings and conditions listed in the resolution.
Mayor Billig declared the public hearing open.
1 Dan Kinnoin, subdivider, stated he could go along with the Planning
Commission recommendation and would urge Council's support.
Mayor Billig declared the public hearing closed.
On motion of Councilman Settle, seconded by Councilwoman Dovey, the
following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 4705 (1981 Series),
a resolution of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo granting
approval of tentative map for Minor Subdivision No. 81 -225 located 345
Marsh Street subject to the findings and conditions listed therein.
City Council Minutes
December 15, 1981 - 7:00 p.m.
Page 7
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Settle, Dovey, Dunin, Griffin, and Mayor Billig
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
3. TENTATIVE MAP FOR MINOR SUBDIVISION 81 -212
Council held a public hearing to consider a Planning Commission recom-
mendation to approve the tentative map for Minor Subdivision No. 81 -212
to create 3 lots from 1 lot located at 124 Highland Drive, R -1 zone;
Robert Strong, subdivider.
Henry Engen stated that the Planning Commission on a 3 -0 vote recom-
mended Council approval of the tentative parcel map with a negative
declaration on environmental impact and subject.to findings and condi-
tions listed in the resolution. He further explained that the Community
Development Department staff felt strongly that an added condition be
attached to the tentative map if it were approved dealing with the
access to the proposed lots 1 and 2 by way of a common driveway. The
Planning Commission did not feel this condition was needed. This would
be Condition 6 in the staff report. He continued that the subdividers
representative submitted a revised tentative map marked as alternative
"b" for Council consideration since the Planning Commission meeting.
The revised map incorporated the staff concern dealing with .the common
driveway access that the Planning Commission had deleted. The Planning
staff felt that the revised access serving lots 1, 2, and 3 was accept-
able and met their concerns. The revised map also adjusted the proposed
lot lines slightly making lots 1 and 3 a little smaller, and lot 2 a
little bigger in area. Staff recommended that the tentative map marked
as alternative "b" be approved as recommended by the Planning Commission
with one additional condition as follows: Item 11 "Final map shall show
access to lot 1, 2 and 3 by way of a common driveway to the approval of
the Community Development Director. Subdivider shall install said
driveway and record a common driveway agreement for said driveway,
consistent with city parking and driveway standards, prior to final map
approval."
Mayor Billig declared the public hearing open.
Rob Strong, representing Mr. and Mrs. Ward, stated the applicant agreed
with the Planning Commission recommendations and the additional condition
as submitted by staff and would urge Council approval.
On motion of Councilwoman Dovey, seconded by Councilman Dunin, the
following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 4706 (1981 Series),
a resolution of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo granting
approval of tentative map for Minor Subdivision No. 81 -212 located at
124 Highland Drive.
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Dovey, Dunin, Griffin, Settle, and Mayor Billig
NOES: None
ABSENT: None 1
4. AMENDMENTS TO MINOR SUBDIVISION 80 -155
Council held a public hearing to consider revisions to the approved
tentative map of Minor Subdivision No. 80 -155 to combine 6 lots into 2
lots and reflect abandoned street located at 920, 932 and 950 Olive
Street, C -T zone; J. Hempenius and L. Schultz, subdividers.
Henry Engen reported that the Planning Commission on a 3 -0 vote
recommended Council adopt the resolution granting approval of the
1
City Council Minutes
December 15, 1981 - 7
Page 8
amended tentative parcel map subject to original findings and the
revised condition listed in the resolution.
Mayor Billig declared the public hearing open. No one spoke for or
against the proposed tentative map. Mayor Billig declared the public
hearing closed.
On motion of Councilman Settle, seconded by Councilman Dunin, the
following resolution was introduced: Resolution No. 4707 (1981 Series),
a resolution of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo granting
approval of amended tentative map for Minor Subdivision 80 -155 located
at 920, 932 and 950 Olive Street.
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Settle, Dunin, Do'vey, Griffin, and Mayor Billig
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
5. DOWNTOWN PARKING PROGRAM
Council held a public hearing to consider public comment and possible
certification of the draft Environmental Impact Report to the proposed
Downtown Parking Program.
Terry Sanville, Senior Planner
Consultant, Earth Metrics, had
received on the draft EIR for
responses had been bound into
City Council review the final
meets the requirements of the
City and State EIR guidelines.
00 P.M.
explained that the City's Environmental
prepared written responses to the comments
the Downtown Parking Program. Those
the -final EIR report. He recommended the
EIR and certify that it is complete and
California Environmental Quality Act and
Mayor Billig declared the public hearing open.
Joan Leon, representing the League of Women Voters, stated that she had
several concerns as follows: 1) On page 10, she asked for additional
clarification with reference to the parking plan being inconsistent with
the general plan; 2) she did not feel the report addressed itself to
additional traffic on the downtown streets; 3) the additional burden on
the water and sewer;.4) increased noise; 5) water runoff;.6) air pollu-
tion; and 7) the cost for the mitigating of these measures.
Terry Sanville then responded to each of the issues and explained that
the sale of the parking lots had not yet been determined. He hoped that
would help clarify the League's concern as to the parking site not being
consistent with the general plan. He also explained that the sewer and
water service impact would be minimal, the increased noise would be at a
higher level but would still meet City standards, -the increased runoff
would be insignificant. He stated the EIR did address this by saying
that it would increase the pollution but not significantly. The parking
structure would use additional lighting and increased energy; however,
the design of the parking garage allows natural sunlight wherever
possible and although this had been tied down in the EIR, he felt there
needed to be a balance between security and energy conservation.
Councilman Dunin felt that the pollution problem would probably be worse
now as the cars are going around and around looking for parking places;
once the structure is built, this would be eliminated.
Terry Sanville stated that the cost of the mitigating measures could be
further studied and brought back later but EIR's do not normally address
this.
Councilman Settle stated he would like to see EIR's address the economic
factors more in the future.
City Council Minutes
December 15, 1981 - 7:00 p.m.
Page 9
On motion of Councilman Griffin, seconded by Councilman Settle, the
following resolution was introduced: Resolution.No..4708 (1981 Series),
a resolution of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo certifying
the final Environmental Impact Report for the Downtown Parking Program.
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES:. Councilmembers Griffin, Settle, Dovey.,. Dunin, and Mayor Billig
NOES: None '
ABSENT: None
6. APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION - A101 -81
Council held a public hearing to consider an appeal by Lindenthaler &
Courtney Associates, on behalf of Cabrillo Extended Care Center, of a
decision by the Planning Commission to uphold the Community Development
Director's action on environmental determination requiring an expanded
initial study addressing parking, traffic and circulation for property
located at 3033 Augusta Street; R -4 zone.
Henry Engen explained that the Planning Commission on an appeal upheld a
decision of the Community Development Director on a 3 -0 vote to require
additional information on potential environmental impacts associated
with the proposed project. The additional information was limited to
parking, traffic, and circulation. The applicant was now appealing this
action and had submitted reasons why an expanded initial study was not
needed: Staff would recommend that the appeal be denied and.the Commis-
sion's action to require an expanded initial study addressing the
parking traffic and circulation be upheld. The traffic study previously
submitted by the applicant as a part of the variance request was unsatis-
factory and inaccurate in staff's and the Commission's opinions. The
additional information submitted by the applicant as part of this appeal
could be a part of additional studies if required.
Mayor Billig declared the public hearing open.
Jonathan Lindenthaler, representing the applicant, felt that there were
three primary issues to be addressed: 1) The parking demand on the
expansion of the facility, 2) impact on the neighborhood, and 3) increased
traffic on Augusta Street. He stated that he had no complaint with the
process used by the Community Development Department staff in determin-
ing that additional information was needed, but he felt that new informa-
tion had come to light, new figures were now submitted; and he felt an
agreement could be reached between staff and the developer regarding
these concerns. He explained that only a small percentage of the people
who would be working there would be driving cars. This was one reason
why the zoning ordinance was changed to allow 4 instead of 3 occupants
per parking space. He would not want this issue to hold up approval of
the use permit on this-project. The net effect of requiring an expanded
initial study would be two fold: 1) it.would require his client to
expend an additional $2,000 to have the.study completed and 2) the
additional time required to perform the study, get approvals, etc.,
would jeopardize his clients ability to live within his funding agree-
ments. He felt this timing was extremely crucial.
Mayor Billig declared the public hearing closed.
After brief discussion it was moved by Councilman Dunin, seconded by
Councilman Griffin, to uphold the appeal by Lindenthaler & Courtney and
not require the expanded initial study.
Motion carried on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Dunin, Griffin, Dovey, Settle, and Mayor Billig
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
City Council Minutes
December 15, 1981 - 7:00 p.m.
Page 10
7. APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION - U1007
Council held a public hearing to consider an appeal by Daniel Hall of a
decision by the Planning Commission denying his request to allow a
public spa complex at 3279 Broad Street; C -S -S zone.
Henry Engen reported that the Planning Commission denied the use permit
on a 3 -2 vote finding the proposed use would be detrimental to the
health, safety and welfare of persons living or working in the area and
that the proposed use would not be appropriate at the proposed location
and would not be compatible with surrounding land uses. The applicant
has since made several revisions to the proposed project and was appeal-
ing the denial to the Council. He stated that based on the revised
projects, the staff would support upholding the appeal and approving the
use permit with appropriate findings and conditions. The staff also
felt that the project could be compatible with adjacent land uses and
was a good transition use between residential and service commercial
uses.
Mayor Billig declared the public hearing open.
Daniel Hall, applicant, felt that Planning Commission concerns had been
addressed and hopefully all resolved. He would urge Council support of
his appeal.
Councilman Dunin questioned Condition 11 which reads, "use of the spas
shall not occur between the hours of 1:00 a.m. and 10:00 a.m. daily."
He felt that 1:00 a.m. might be too disruptive to the neighborhood if
allowed to stay that late.
After brief discussion it was moved by Councilman Dunin, seconded by
Councilman Settle, to adopt the following resolution: Resolution No.
4709 (1981 Series), a resolution of the Council of the City of San Luis
Obispo to uphold the appeal with an amendment to Condition 11 to reflect
the actual hours of operation.
There was general consensus that overturning the Planning Commission's
recommendation in this case was not a reflection on their original
decision but rather the Council was looking at a revised plan which now
incorporated the Planning Commission's concerns.
Passed and adopted on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Dunin, Settle, Dovey, Griffin, and Mayor Billig
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
8:30 p.m. Mayor Billig declared a recess. 8:45 p.m. City Council
reconvened, all Councilmembers present.
8. APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION - A99 -81
Council held a public hearing to consider an appeal by Mann Theatre
Corporation of a decision by the Planning Commission denying their
request to allow interior remodel of existing theatre to create two
theatres located at 1035 Monterey Street; C -C zone.
Mayor Billig explained that communication had been received today on
behalf of Mr. Bernard Coffman, the managing agent for Mann Theatres, and
requesting that their appeal be continued until the January 19, 1982,
Council meeting.
Upon general consensus, the City Council agreed to continue this item to
January 19, 1982, at 7:45 p.m. to allow the applicant additional time to
gather supportive material for their request.
City Council Minutes
December 15, 1981 - 7:00 p.m.
Page 11
9. WATER SERVICE CHARGES
Council held a public hearing to take public comment and consider a
resolution revising water service charges.
Mayor Billig explained that due to several communications being submit-
ted to the Council requesting clarification on an interpretation of the
city policy regarding the fees, that public testimony would be taken
this evening and this item may be continued to a future study session
for additional report.
Rudy Muravez, Finance Director, stated that the Water Rate Study was
prepared by Gerry Peasley and presented to the Council on November 3.
Mr. Peasley was a specialist on water rates; and the direction given
him was to review present rates and prepare the study based upon.the
current policies and practices of the PUC. so that the City could take a
business -like approach, make recommendations on current practices of the
City, and review other policies and ordinances of the City regarding
water rates. The review of rates to be exclusive of the profit and
return on investment. It was primarily to recover the cost of operating
the system. The major item affecting all of the rates within the report
was a recommendation that the City no longer use a cash basis of funding
capital improvements, but rather resort to the capital replacement
reserve. To come up with a replacement cost figure, he used an asset
evaluation and inventory made by Marshall Stevens in 1976. That replace-
ment cost was approximately $37 million at today's value for.a replace-
ment system. In this report he did estimate that by changing from
approximate cash -flow basis and just funding capital improvements as
they come up on a year -to -year basis to capital replacement would add
approximately $35,000 more a year which would be accumulated in reserves
and used when needed as the major components need replacement, using an
average life span of an average system of 50 years for the treatment
plant and the lines. The actual life span was much shorter because
various components wear out much quicker than 50:years. The equipment
wears out within five years, some in 20 years. Using 50 years, they .
divided $37 million by a 50 year period which would theoretically
replace about $740,000 worth of the system in a year or reserving its
replacement at approximately that rate. Current practice had been in
the area of $40,000 to $50,000 a year, hence, the city was falling
behind the times on its:replacement program. Not all of the.replacement
costs would be recovered by rates. He had allocated the interest
earnings on the reserves that had-accumulated to that capital.replace-
ment reserve. Acreage fees from new development would also be applied
to that capital replacement. The recommendation was.that we retain the
basis of meter size because meter size is what places the potential
demand upon the system. The rate is broken into two parts: 1)-readi-
ness-to-serve charge; and 2) commodity charges. The rate of the service
charge is based upon the meter size and its recovery. It does not
provide any cost recovery for the actual water itself, just for the
lines, mains, storage tanks, source of water and treatment facilities.
There was a variable portion of the cost which would be recovered by the
actual use of water, but the readiness to serve charge is just a charge
for being able to serve a customer when you turn on your tap and request
water. In allocating it by the size of meter, he used a straight
proportional flow rate.and that simply meant that,the larger the size of
meter, the greater demand for water that the individual user can make
upon the system. The lighter charge portion of the rate was recommended
to go from 65 percent to 90 percent and the readiness to serve charge
was variable depending on meter size. It represented an approximate 21
to 42 percent increase depending upon where the meter size was to
proportional flow. One alternate-rate which he gave.the Council to
consider was life line rate, which is a system of the PUC regulations.
It was presented as an alternate proposed rate subject to PUC regulation
but the direction was to adopt PUC policies and practices. That was to
provide a reduced rate for the first three cu: -ft-. of flow to a prime
residence. Many cities have adopted lifeline rates, all private,
utilities are under the life line concept. Some cities have adopted
senior citizens and low- income rate concepts. He felt the easiest to
1
1
1
City Council Minutes
December 15, 1981 - 7:00 p.m.
Page 12
administer was life line rate at the present rate. Another element that
was contained in the report to change was that private fire protection
services be charged the same as regular water users with regard to the
readiness -to -serve charge. The private fire line is either a fire
hydrant on private property or a connection to a sprinkler system in a
commercial building. The reason for the recommended change to regular
readiness -to -serve charge rates is that the water system is finite.
They should be charged for the utilization based upon the demand which
is a function of meter size even though no water has actually passed
through that meter or through that pipe at some point in time. One of
the city's problems in the past had been the storage capacity. If you
turn on one hydrant in one line and another hydrant in another line,
only one of those hydrants can be served. Regarding that particular
recommendation, there was two things the current rate was based upon, a
meter size of four inches and although intended to be preferential for
the smaller size meter, it had the opposite effect. The smaller fire
lines, four inches down, were actually charged more than the regular
customer, however, the fire lines that were four inches upward were
charged substantially less than the regular customer. The rate for the
large customer is recognized to be a policy decision of the Council and
although the fire department has some input regarding that policy fault
as to whether there is a net benefit to the public and reduced rates for
private fire protection services, the recommendation was based strictly
upon the cost of service spaces, and there is a necessity for the
customer to see the value for encouraging private fire protection. The
final recommendations that Mr. Peasley made in his report was the
acreage fee, amended to be consistent with the ordinance. The existing
fee of $160 per acre does not meet the technical wording of the ordinance
which requires that it be on a replacement cost basis. An acreage fee
or a capital fee is a charge to new water customers based upon some
criteria in other Cities and maybe upon meter size The sole attempt was
to recover the cost of providing excess capacity over the years to those
users who prove that they are being able.to tie on are recovered. In
' order to provide a system, you maintain it according to some eventually
profitted need, meaning that during the course of several years, you
have excess capacity. There are several, but this one does require a
policy call as the rate depends strictly upon the reserves available to
the district and their use for its development, whether encouraging
development or controlling development: If they had ample reserves and
the policies were to encourage a large degree of development, the
acreage for the capital recovery fee would be low, thereby subsidizing
that development. The acreage fee is now recommended to go from $1,160
an acre to $5,700 an acre. The basis for that jump was strictly in the
interpretation of the ordinance requiring.then the replacement cost
value of the City be divided by the number of acres within the City to
give a cost per acre, and then as development ties on to the system,
their capital recovery fee that's developed is determined,by the size of
their particular parcel of property. The figure for capital replace-
ment fees is the same figure used for capital replacement reserve of $37
.million. He also mentioned there was recent legislation that exempted
parties in private fire districts from paying fire hydrant maintenance
charges to private water companies. If the city follows the PUC regula-
tions, private water companies can no longer charge governments for that
fund and, therefore, the water-system would no longer be able to charge
the general fund for that particular service.
Bill Hanley, Interim Administrative Officer,-reviewed some historic
background. There was a time when municipal water systems not only
re'captured operating and maintenance expense from user fees, but had to
be supported out of general:fund revenues and others because the munici-
palities simply did not apply.to_ the water system an enterprise.or
private utility kind of accounting to cover the cost of the system. It
was much easier to charge low rates, recapture the necessary cost of
operating and maintaining the system from general fund revenues and
subsidize the system. There:eventually came the point when municipali-
ties generally recognized that it was crucial to at least recapture
operating and maintenance costs of municipal utilities- -water systems,
wastewater treatment facilities, etc., from the user fees. During that
City Council Minutes
December 15, 1981 - 7:00 p.m.
Page 13
era municipalities typically.relied on bond issues to bail them.out of
the necessary capital-improvements and capital replacement that inevit-
ably faced the system...That.era has passed. That is simply too risky a
principle upon.which to rest the financing of capital replacement cost
for a $37 million system.. We are at the point.where it is clear.that
the general public, good business practices on the part of the Council
as the management Board of Directors for the system, requires that one
establish rates that recapture not only operation and maintenance, but
the capital replacement cost of that system over time. No privately ,
owned utility in the state or the country.could survive without operat-
ing on that principle.. It is particularly true of public agencies that
have to pass bond issues that require 2 /3.vote to rely on that kind of
financing. As of the present day, the capital reserve against a $37
million system, we have accumulated approximately lk to 1� million. We
do not have a prudent capital replacement.reserve and one.has to.be
incorporated. He urged that when the Council does analyze the.rate
structure at a study session, that that principle be.kept.in mind
because it will be important for the city in the coming years and.will
be an important contribution that this Council can make to sound fiscal
conditions for the future of the city.
Mayor Billig declared.the public hearing open.
Robert Tate, 177 Paso.Robles Drive, stated that a 27 percent increase is
quite a frightening jump as far as an essential-of life is concerned.
He had studied the.report very carefully and there were.many things in
the report that he didn't.understand. Imposing that.upon the people who
are already being hit-hard with inflation would be unfair. If those are
general funds that we are.replacing through this increase in rates, we
are actually increasing the tax rate; and this is something that is .
very serious. If this is going to.be done,. it should go.to the public.
Looking at the operating.expenses for 1981 -82, it is approximately 30
percent more for operating expense than 1980 -81. Additionally, there is
an imposed city utility tax of five percent, which the city is getting '
approximately $1 million. The city utilities gain about $80,000 which
is received from the water. He questioned if this added surcharge would
be added to the 27.percent which is projected. If this was the case he
felt there had been gross mismanagement by someone in the city as far as
these figures were concerned for the City Council to impose .a 27 percent
increase. Through Proposition 13, citizens have indicated that they did
not want an increase as far as expenditures are,concerned.
Robert Baker, 900 Del Rio, also speaking on behalf of Stan Bell, felt
that staff's interpretation of the Peasley. report is.completely in
error. As a waterline contractor, he would repute the replacement
estimates. The system now being built will last much longer than 50
years. Some small items might fail in five years but it.just isn't
happening. This was just one example of the report that distorts the
numbers. He would like to have time to study this, have accountants
come up with a more viable solution to be equitable for everybody. As
it is, it is totally inequitable for developers and for the general
public.
Don Smith agreed with the previous speaker. He stated he had submitted
a 3;1 page letter and was hoping the Council had had a chance to read it.
He felt the proposed water rate increases were insensitive and could be
credited better by having a life line rate. Three hundred cubic feet
was only k of.what the average family needs, and he feels that this
should be looked at very carefully. He agreed with Mr. Baker that we
don't need large amounts of funds to replace the water system. As an
engineer, he did not feel the city needed this kind of money to replace
the system. We should not use cash reserves. We have ;� million in the
bank and in the last three years, we've gained $430,000 per year on an
average. He didn't feel the city needed that much in reserve. One of
his major..concerns was having too much money and then being wasted. He
felt a rate increase was necessary but should be very carefully and very
sensitively done.
City Council Minutes
December 15, 1981 - 7:00 p.m.
Page 14
Jim Kimball, Kimball Motors, spoke primarily to the removal of the
current preferential rate for private fire protection services and using
regular rate service rates instead. In 1972 he built his dealership,
and was required to put a fire hydrant 300 feet into his property. He
thought it was a good idea at the time although he paid in excess of
$8,000 for a meter, 300 feet of trench, 300 feet of line and a hydrant.
After several months of operation, he realized he was getting two water
bills, and he only had one meter working. He determined he was being
charged $50 every other month for having the fire prevention. He went
along with it until 1978 after he had paid $1,500 into the fund. He
feels he is being charged for something and not getting anything in
return. After appealing to the Council he was given a refund. He was
very upset to now find his bill is going from $30 every other month to
$300 every other month. He questioned whether he even needed an 8 -inch
line. He had checked with his insurance company to see whether it made
any difference to have a hydrant or not. There is no allowance given
for it. He is not really protesting the $300 charge; he is really
protesting any charge for private fire fighting systems. He felt he
paid taxes for fire prevention just as any other dealer in town and
because he was trying to be a little more careful, he is being penalized
for it. He felt the charge was very unfair and would protest the whole
thing.
Mr. Jacobson, 2828 Augusta Street, stated that in 1973 -74 he was informed
Mayor Billig declared the public hearing closed.
Councilman Dunin suggested that those who addressed the.Council.ask the
staff for the backup data to study. He also could not justify the
he could use the fire hydrant on the street in front of his home. As
the project proceeded, he was informed he would have to have a fire
hydrant on the property. The line in the street was 6 inches, but he
was forced to put an 8 -inch line onto the fire hydrant which is about
300 feet back. So far, he had not used the fire hydrant. He felt it
was unfair that some people build a new project, put a new sidewalk in,
the city puts in a fire hydrant; and yet not charged. The other person
who has a fire hydrant on his property has to increase his fire line to
8 inch from a 6 -inch supply line-. He would urge the Council to look at
'
this.
Phil Humphrey, 1316 Cavalier and a builder, stated he could certainly
understand the requirements to have funds available to replace the
system as needed. He admitted he hadn't had sufficient time to review
the documents that were prepared by Peasley, however, he did question
some of the formulas used to get to those numbers. Between the sewer
water fees and the footage fees a new home would have additional costs
of, between $2,300 and $2,500 per home. With the additional permit fees,
contract fees and everything else, this amounts to about $3,000 a.house.
He had stood in-front of Councils in past,years and been questioned why
developers couldn't build houses and sell them in the City of San Luis
Obispo for $40,000. Lots.today are $50;000 alone and now the city
proposes increasing fees from $500 to $3,000 a home. These fees are
going to be passed directly on the homeowners. Affordable.housing
cannot be obtained this way. He.would like the opportunity to be
involved in the study session. He felt it was important to realize that
all these things get passed on; and there is ,a burden enough on people.
Steve Smith, representing the Fire-Department, briefly touched on the
issue of fire protection lines but felt it was a policy.decision.on the
Council's part. Past.Councils historically had supported the concept of
helping to pay for fire prevention and:paid for fire lines of citizens
primarily because of the overall safety of.the general community.and to
maintain public fire protection. Also, the private hydrants normally
provide the property owner with a larger supply of water for extinguish-
'
ing a fire. They differ greatly from hydrants on-public streets.in that
they primarily and almost totally service.strictly that property. They
are not a shared use by other property owners in the area,as are public
hydrants on the street. He agreed it wouldn't hurt to.look into it
further before a decision is made.. I ..
Mayor Billig declared the public hearing closed.
Councilman Dunin suggested that those who addressed the.Council.ask the
staff for the backup data to study. He also could not justify the
City Council Minutes
December 15, 1981 - 7:00 p.m.
Page 15
$800,000 a year for replacement fund. .The.readiness -to -serve charge is
one issue-and paying for the installation of.the hydrant all one's life
without actually using any water was another.
Councilman Settle agreed to defer this to a study session and hoped
interested individuals would try to come.up with various cost calcula-
tions and.the premises upon which these figures are based and get,it
back to the Council prior to the next meeting.
Councilman Dunin agreed with Councilman Settle's comments.
Councilwoman.Dovey questioned Dave Romero and asked if he could come up
with a figure, not now, but at the study session, that if he had a wish
list and all wishes were granted to.upg=ade the system, assuming it
could be done within a year at.today's dollars, how much money would it
cost? This would assume everybody had.:plenty of water pressure;.fire
flow,.cleaned lines, enough water -going to the right places, loop.
systems, whatever it would take to make it absolutely ideal which, of
course, could never be gained, but this.would give a perspective as to
costs:
Councilman Griffin questioned if the capital reserve funding.require-
ments recommended by the consultant included or anticipated any water
system - facilities which had not been approved.
Rudy Muravez answered.no. It was based exclusively.upon.replacement
value of the existing plant.
Councilman Griffin questioned how accessible the funds.would be,for
purposes other than actually replacing the plant or the system
facilities.
Rudy Muravez. stated that at the present, the only legal restriction is
the city charter restriction which states that any monies developed by
the utility system be expended on the utility system. There was no
legal restriction on operating funds. They may be used for operation or
for any other enterprise which brings revenue back into the utility
fund.
Upon.question by Councilman Griffin, Rudy Muravez stated consumption per
100 feet doesn't have a time requirement on it. Readiness -to -serve
charge is on a.monthly basis. Consumption is consumption regardless of
the meter reading. It is billed on a two month basis. All consumption
within .a two month period is 90 cents per 100 cubic feet.
Councilman Griffin suggested that the Council seriously consider,the
issues that have been raised together with several related matters. The
water rate issue is just part of the need to develop and:implement a
comprehensive water system management plan. In the past the City had
considered rates as a element. He felt a.comprehensive plan ought to
include management and financing, and that financing ought to-deal with
service charges and the development and adoption of a formal reserve
policy. That reserve policy ought to come:before the deliberations and
decisions with respect to the water service rates. He compared setting
of service rates with the establishment of property .tax rates established
after determining needs. Reserve policy ought to include debt service,
capital replacement, property contingencies, and major maintenance. He
would hope that the Council would first consider the formal adoption of
a reserve policy before establishing the rates. The second element of
the water management plan should address service expansion and construc-
tion. There is a yield-study proposed later on the agenda which did not
appear to be.part of a more expanded approach to water service. The
Council.should look carefully at the long range goals and objectives as
to what the City wants to do with respect to this very important water
program. The third element ought to be a comprehensive capital improve-
ment program, one that looks in the future 5 to 10 years. These elements
ought to be explored in the study session also. He would also hope that
the study session will ask for public participation.
City Council Minutes
December 15, 1981 - 7:00 p.m.
Page 16
Councilman Dunin generally agreed with what was said by the other
Councilmembers that the water system be addressed in a business -like
manner so the enterprise is fully funded. It also should be very clear
to the person paying the bill. He would like to separate out the charge
of actual water used from that of capital improvement on the bill so the
person knows exactly what they are paying. Business people should not
be singled out and charged for a service which is allowed to everybody
else. He feels it should be excluded because-that has nothing to do
with the use of the water - -it has to do with the fire protection.
Further, the utility tax should not go back to the general fund as it
gets lost in all kinds of niceties which the city can no longer afford.
He would like this to be considered and would definitely like explained
how'the report showed the reserve fund being funded to the tune of
$800,000 a year. It just doesn't make sense to him.
Councilwoman Dovey asked staff to respond to the statement that• "a fire
hydrant doesn't cost other people anything" i.e. a hydrant that's
required with a development project. Is it true that any new hydrant
installed other than a private one is paid for by the property it's
going to benefit?
Rudy Muravez stated, yes, that it was city policy.
Councilwoman Dovey stated that hydrants are not free for other people
either.
He did believe that when the city addressed'the question of fire lines
charges (not hydrant charges) it is primarily that the smaller lines are
Rudy Muravez then commented on observations made regarding technical
response with regard to the capital reserve with current technique. He
did-feel the city should separate.changing the benefit of the current
technique today for the benefit of the future. That means to say that
all of our lines in the ground today are not going to last 100 years.
We are right now paying for past technique, and we are also paying for
the fact that we have not kept up with an active replacement program in
the past. Our lines that are currently in the ground that will be
coming up within the next 20 years for replacement are based upon old
technique- -they will have to be funded. The new technique is fine but
we will want to reap the benefits of that for.at least another 50 years
in which case it will be estimated beyond this projected life span of
the existing system.
He stated that with regard to comments made.to the increased cost of
operating the water system in the 1980 -81 report, the 1980 -81 recorded
costs included in his report were prior to the audited report, but they
did match very closely with the final audit report with minor variations
of,those actual expended.with regard to 1981 -82 of the current year.
The city budget is used for this.basis and, ironically,.it was
Proposition 4 that brought about the increase. Propostion 4 required
that the city adopt cost of County procedures and in those County
procedures which.were adopted in 1981 -82, they found that substantial
costs were not being charged to the water engineering, administration,
and other areas. For instance, there were huge legal fees that are
being charged to retain and protect our source of supply in Salinas and
Whale Rock, just one example. There were a number of other billing
charges and administrative charges with services performed by other
departments directly relating to water. But because they were not
charged by the water department, they were included,in past operating
expenses. Regarding.the source of supply, there was a tremendous
increase between recorded cost of 1980 -81 and 1981 -82 primarily because
of a $100,000 rebate given by the County of San Luis Obispo for past
expenditures that had accumulated in reserve of that allowed by the
Corps of Engineers for the operation of Salinas Dam. We.have adopted a
replacement cost reserve system as an owner of the Whale Rock Commission
for.the Whale Rock project. Also, the,cost of source of.supply of Whale
Rock and the fishing program for.another $50,000 had not been approved
previously. All the elements are directly.related to supplying water to
the City.
He did believe that when the city addressed'the question of fire lines
charges (not hydrant charges) it is primarily that the smaller lines are
City Council Minutes
December 15, 1981 - 7:00 p.m.
Page 17
really being fully charged relative to regular customers. Those lines
would receive a substantial reduction as opposed to a substantial.'
increase. If the Council.wished to subsidize that portion of.it,.that's
a policy call. It also.was based upon an assumption that .a good .number
of those lines are sprinkler systems and it might be wise to break out
sprinkler systems from fire hydrants because in sprinkler systems they
bill the owner who receives a substantial cutback, only protection.
There is a benefit received for a specific service provided within a
specific margin. That would be one way of addressing the problem of
equality of fire line charges for breaking off sprinkler systems -from
fire hydrants.
Councilman Dunin felt it should be paid from the general fund because a
person that gets the water doesn't necessarily fish. Regarding the
hydrants, when the developer includes the hydrant, the cost of the
hydrant is shared by those that buy the houses. When you put the.
hydrant on property of business, the business has to pay for it and
that's the big difference.. He.also did not.feel the present.generation
should have to pay for all the mistakes of past generations and.still
provide in the future.
Mayor Billig had no further concerns other than what had already been
stated by the Council. She would urge the staff at the study session to
speak in language that everyone can understand. There are often times
reports from professionals when they have to come to the lay public
which is very difficult for them to analyze and to understand all the
rational behind why something's being done.
Councilman Dunin felt it was a good•.idea.to:make a distinctionebetween-_the
sprinkling system and the hydrants but also bearing in mind that when
the person puts in the- sprinkling::system,.it will cost them $6,000 to
$10,000 or more and if the businesses with sprinkling systems have
insurance rates reduced, the general public is also benefitting because
he spent $10,000 on the sprinkling system.
Bill Hanley briefly underscored Councilman Griffin's suggestion that a
water system financing policy be adopted as a part of the approach to
take at the study session. That was essentially what was embodied in
the report, the financing pieces. There were other elements that.
Councilman Griffin mentioned that really need to be incorporated as
well, but he felt it was an important step to take because what the city
was now dealing with was an ad hoc approach to water rate setting.
Mayor Billig stated.that staff should perhaps break out from the resolu-
tion and put together at least a skeleton of.a more comprehensive type
of approach as had been suggested rather.than.just putting it in a
resolution, and hoped that all the basis had.been.covered so the broad
parameters of some kind of a management plan could be looked at the
study session.
Councilman Dunin stated he would like to see a 5-year-projection.
10. SUBLEASE OF SAN LUIS OBISPO COURTHOUSE BY YMCA
Consideration of a request from the YMCA for Council authorization to
sublease the San Luis Obispo racquetball center as a YMCA facility
(continued from 12/1/81). 1
Geoff Grote, Legal Assistant, explained that there were four issues
before the Council this evening:
1. The San Luis Obispo County Family YMCA be-permitted to operate the
Courthouse facility as a family YMCA and to expand on the now limited
uses to include those necessary to the operation of a full service YMCA.
Staff would recommend that the Council approve in concept other uses for
the site as requested by the YMCA and authorize the City Attorney to
enter into agreements between the city, BKB partners and the YMCA to
Li
1
1
City Council Minutes
December 15, 1981 - 7:00 p.m.
Page 18
allow for the expanded uses during the time that.the YMCA is operating
the facility.
2. The YMCA be permitted to to put up appropriate signs designating the
Courthouse facility as a YMCA.
Staff would recommend Council approve in concept the YMCA's right to
place appropriate signing on the site provided that all signs be approved
by ARC.
3. To consider reducing the monthly rent of the Courthouse facility
commencing December 1, 1981. The rent now being $200 a month and 2
percent of the gross sales.
Staff would recommend that.Council let the rent remain.at $2,400 per
year as it is such a minimal amount given the value of the land.
4. The issue'of rent differential for members vs. non - members.
Staff would recommend that in the event Council wished to authorize the
YMCA to establish a court fee differential, Council should place a cap
on this differential at 25 percent; in other words YMCA not be allowed
to charge a non YMCA member a court fee in excess of 25 percent greater
than the rate for members.
David Farmer, Director of the YMCA, differed with staff with regard to
allowing full service YMCA. He did not feel that they were asking any
special treatment that all other YMCA's had the same allowed uses. With
regard to issue #2, he could go along with the signing requirements upon
ARC approval. He felt this was true, also, of the issue with regard to
the differential between members and non - members for reduced rates.
This is standard practice throughout the YMCAs and felt it created a
larger incentive for the public to join, participate and as a result
make more money and so the city's profits would also be increased.
Maurine Dixon, Program Director for the YMCA, further explained that all
programs were attempting to be self- sustaining or at least at the break
even point.
Jim Gaul, also representing the-YMCA, would urge Council.support to
waive the rental fee for at least the first year. He stated that
participation has doubled since they have opened the facility and the
YMCA took over. He would urge the Council to continue its support of
the YMCA.
Jim Stockton, Parks and Recreation Director, felt that this was a good
facility for the YMCA to have. He would have no-problem for their
request for the signing, but he questioned their request to have the
rent waived as financing was a problem for all recreational facilities;
he cited the City as a prime example. 1.
Upon question by Don Smith, Geoff Grote explained that the YMCA was not
asking specific approval for alcoholic beverages to.be served on the
premises. This was a condition of the original ground lease that this
was an allowed use.:
Upon question by Councilman Dunin, George Thacher, City Attorney,
explained that if.the Council wished to do so., they could waive the
rents entirely, that this would not be illegal, as this was a non - profit
organization and the uses for a public facility..
Councilman Dunin explained that he would have a problem with reducing
the rents.
Councilman Settle agreed that the existing rent was minimal and should
be continued.
City Council Minutes
December 15, 1981 - 7:00 p.m.
Page 19
Councilwoman Dovey would also support the minimal rent but could waive
the 2 percent gross fee. She felt that to forego rent here would be
precedent setting.
After brief discussion and upon general consensus, Council resolved each
issue as follows: 1) YMCA request for full services be approved; 2)
appropriate signing be allowed upon ARC approval; 3) monthly rent of
$200 to remain, 2 percent of the gross requirement be waived; 4) rate
differential for members vs. non - members be allowed; and 5).requirement .
not to allow reserved court time deleted. (5 -0)
C O M M U N I C A T I O N S
A. WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT GRANT
Henry Engen gave a brief report on the Wastewater Treatment Plant grant
and explained additional questions that were raised in a communication
from the State.Division.of Water Quality regarding their interpretation
of the "fair and equitable" grant contract provision to require additional
services be provided to the unincorporated areas.
Dave Romero, Public Services,Director, also•questioned a letter received
by him dated December 11 also from the State Water Quality.Control
disallowing the sludge gas generator to be made a part of the grant.
Additionally, the first two conditions of concept approval, which were:
1) Initiate Phase I construction prior to March 1, 1982, and 2) receipt
of final plans and specifications for Phase 2 by June 1, 1982. He felt
that both of these dates were extremely premature given the normal turn
around time for acceptance.:
After brief discussion and upon general consensus, staff was authorized
to work with Michael Sloss, from the Water Quality Control Board, on
clarification of certain requirements regarding the extension,of time
for initiating Phase I construction and submittal of plans and specs for
Phase II, deletion of "fair and equitable" provision and appeal to allow
the sludge gas generator remain as part of the grant. (5 -0)
B. POST OFFICE UPDATE
Mayor Billig informed the Council that she had received a firm commitment
from the Federal Government that the Post Office facilities would remain
downtown and that a portion of the building would be leased out for
office sites.
C. CAL TRANS BEAUTIFICATION DESIGNS
Mayor Billig stated she had been approached by Bob Wright and Jesus
Garcia, of Cal Trans, to solicit Council's comments and suggestions at
the concept to allow murals be placed on the overpass abutment of the
State Highway located under at Santa Rosa Street.
After brief discussion and upon majority consensus, the Council agreed
in concept to allow murals on State highway overpasses; however, this
location may not be appropriate as they felt it was a potential traffic
safety problem with cars slowing to view the murals. (3 -2, Council -
members Dovey, Dunin and Griffin voting no).
There being no further business to come before the City Council, Mayor
Billig adjourned the meeting at 12:15 a.m. to Friday, December 18 at '
3:30 p.m. in the Public Services Conference Room, City Hall for Closed
Session to discuss Personnel Matters.
,zZ,/, ///",
amela oges, t Clerk
CT
APPROVED BY COUNCIL: 1/19/82