Minutes 2008-01-22MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
TUESDAY, JANUARY 22, 2008
COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 215 EAST BRANCH STREET
ARROYO GRANDE, CALIFORNIA
1. CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Ferrara called the Regular City Council meeting to order at 7:14 p.m.
2. ROLL CALL
City Council: Council Members Ed Arnold, Jim Guthrie, Joe Costello, Mayor Pro Tem
Chuck Fellows and Mayor Tony Ferrara were present.
City Staff Present: City Manager Steven Adams, City Attorney Tim Carmel, Director of
Administrative Services/City Clerk Kelly Wetmore, Director of Financial
Services Angela Kraetsch, Director of Public Works Don Spagnolo, Director
of Community Development Rob Strong, Director of Building and-Fire Mike
Hubert, Director of Parks, Recreation and Facilities Doug Perrin, and
Assistant Planner Jim Bergman.
3. FLAG SALUTE
Chet Cash, representing Arroyo Grande Valley Kiwanis Club, led the Flag Salute.
4. INVOCATION
Dr. Mayer-Harnish, Bahai Faith, delivered the invocation.
5. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS
5.a. Honorary Proclamation Declaring February 2008 as Grand Jury Awareness Month.
Mayor Ferrara presented an Honorary Proclamation declaring February 2008 as Grand Jury
Awareness Month. Robert Mire accepted the Proclamation on behalf of the San Luis Obispo County
Grand Jury.
6. AGENDA REVIEW
6.a. Ordinances Read in Title Only.
Council Member Costello moved, Council Member Arnold seconded, and the motion passed
unanimously that all ordinances moved for introduction or adoption at the meeting shall be read in
title only and all further reading be waived.
7. CITIZENS' INPUT. COMMENTS, AND SUGGESTIONS
Susan Flores, E. Branch Street, spoke about the Lucia Mar School District facility on Stanley
Avenue near Paulding Middle School and expressed concern about the lack of landscaping; the
junkyard appearance of the site; and the lack of erosion control and road improvements. She stated
that the District needs to be held accountable for the required improvements. She expressed further
concern that there was no access to the park; the buildings are substandard and in poor condition;
waste material has been left on the site; and the project should have been located in an industrial
zone.
Mayor Ferrara requested that City Manager Adams follow up on the matter.
Minutes: City Council Meefing
Tuesday, January 22, 2008
Page 2
8. CONSENT AGENDA
Mayor Ferrara invited members of the public who wished to comment on any Consent Agenda Item
to do so at this time. No public comments were received.
Mayor Pro Tem Fellows pulled Item 8.c.
Action: Council Member Fellows moved to approve Consent Agenda Items 8.a. through 8.g., with
the exception of Item 8.c., with the recommended courses of action. Council Member Guthrie
seconded. The motion passed on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Fellows, Guthrie, Costello, Arnold, Ferrara
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
8.a. Cash Disbursement Ratification.
Action: Ratified the listing of cash disbursements for the period January 1, 2008 through
January 15, 2008.
8.b. Consideration of Statement of Investment Deposits.
Action: Received and filed the report of current investment deposits as of December 31,
2007.
8.d. Consideration to Adopt a Resolution Accepting Easements and Improvements for
Conditional Use Permit Case No. 06-009 and Lot Line Adjustment Case No. 06-003,
Applebee's, Located at 1462 E. Grand Avenue.
Action: Adopted Resolution No. 4063 as follows: "A RESOLUTION OF THE C/TY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ACCEPTING EASEMENTS AND
IMPROVEMENTS .FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 06-009 AND LOT LINE
ADJUSTMENT CASE NO. 06-003, APPLEBEE'S'.
S.e. Consideration of Authorization to Declare the 1984 Van Pelt Fire Engine and the 1996
Hi-Tech Fire Engine as Surplus Property and Approve an Agreement with Fire Trucks
Plus, Inc. for Consignment and Sale of the Engines.
Action: 1) Adopted Resolution No. 4064 as follows: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE DECLARING THE 1984 VAN PELT FIRE
ENGINE AND THE 1996 HI-TECH FIRE ENGINE AS SURPLUS PROPERTY AND
AUTHORIZING THEIR SALE" and; 2) Approved Agreements with Fire Trucks Plus, Inc. for
consignment and sale of the engines.
S.f. Consideration of Appointments to Architectural Review Committee.
Action: Approved: 1) Removal of Jacklin Pontarelli from the Architectural Review
Committee (ARC); 2) Appointment of Roger Frederickson to the ARC, and 3) Appointment
of Kyle Harris to the ARC.
8.g. Consideration of Funding Request for the Brisco Road/Halcyon Road -Route 101
Improvements to the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments.
Action: 1) Approved the funding proposal. to the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments
(SLOCOG) for State Transportation Improvement Program funding for Brisco Road/Halcyon
Road -Route 101 Improvements; and 2) Authorized staff to make adjustments to the
proposal as necessary to address Caltrans and SLOCOG concerns as long as they are
consistent with prior City Council direction regarding project alternatives and within the
proposed funding amounts and/or percentages.
Minutes: City Council Meeting
Tuesday, January 22, 2008
Page 3
8.c. Consideration of Approval of Minutes.
Recommended Action: Approve the minutes of the Regular City Council meeting of
November 27, 2007; the Special City Council meeting of December 11, 2007; the Regular
City Council/Redevelopment Agency meeting of December 11, 2007; and the Regular City
Council/Redevelopment Agency meeting of January 8, 2008, as submitted.
Mayor Pro Tem Fellows referred to the supplemental material distributed to the Council prior to the
meeting; which reflected modifications to the minutes of the November 27, 2007 Regular City
Council Meeting to include his comments concerning the Brisco Road/Halcyon Road -Route .101
Interchange Improvement Project.
Mayor Pro Tem Fellows moved to approve the minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting of
November 27, 2007, as modified; and to approve the minutes of the Special City Council Meeting of
December 11, 2007; the Regular City Council/Redevelopment Agency Meeting of December 11,
2007; and the Regular City Council/Redevelopment Agency Meeting of January 8, 2008, as
submitted. Council Member Guthrie seconded, and the motion passed on the following roll call
vote:
AYES: Fellows, Guthrie, Costello, Arnold, Ferrara
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
9. PUBLIC HEARINGS
9.a. Consideration of a Resolution Adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration, Designating
a Portion of Elm Street Park as an Off Leash Area for Use as a Dog Park, Approving
an Adopt-A-Park Agreement with the Five Cities Dog Park Association and
Authorization for the City Manager to Approve and Make Minor Changes and
Modifications and to Execute the Agreement.
Parks, Recreation, and Facilities Director Perrin presented the staff report and recommended the
Council: 1) Adopt a Resolution adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration, designating a portion of
Elm Street Park as an Off Leash Area for use as a Dog Park, approving an Adopt-A-Park
Agreement with the Five Cities Dog Park Association and authorizing the City Manager to approve
and make minor changes and modifications and to execute the agreement.
Council Member Arnold referred to the letter received at the beginning of the meeting (on file in the
Administrative Services Department) from the Law Offices of William Walter, representing the
apartment owner, and asked the City Attorney if the Mitigated Negative'' Declaration was the
appropriate environmental document for the project. City Attorney Carmel responded "yes".
Mayor Ferrara also referred to the correspondence and noticed the use of the term "regional dog
park" and stated he assumed this was more of a community oriented dog park. Director Perrin
stated that was correct.
Council Member Costello referred to the proposed use and operation of the facility by the Five
Cities Dog Park Association and inquired what would happen if they do not perform the tasks
satisfactorily. Director Perrin responded that the City could seek other volunteers to perform the
tasks; staff could potentially take over some of the tasks; or the City could close the dog park.
Minutes: Cify Council Meeting Page 4
Tuesday, January 22, 2008
Mayor Ferrara opened the public hearing.
The following members of the public addressed the Council:
Cvnthia Ecklund, President, Five Cities Dog Park Association, stated she was here to discuss and
respond to any concerns; however, she did not know what those concerns were yet.
Megan James, S. Elm Street, spoke in opposition to the proposed dog park.
Mayor Ferrara asked Director Perrin if he had a concept drawing to display that showed the
enclosed fenced area for the proposed dog park. Director Perrin referred to the concept drawing in
the staff report and explained that the area would be enclosed and dogs would not be running loose
in the park. He further explained there would be mutt mitts for pet owners to use for picking up after
their animals, and the Dog Park Association had agreed to come to the' park on a daily basis to
monitor the park and pick up any droppings that are left by animal owners and dispose of.them
properly.
Anthony Throckman, S. Elm Street, spoke in opposition to the proposed dog park.
Jennifer Hewitt, S. Elm Street, spoke in opposition to the proposed dog park.
Jerry Bunin, Oceano resident, spoke in support of the proposed dog park.
Mitch Mundahl, resident and representative of MFG Enterprises, referred to correspondence and
other information he printed from the Internet regarding dog parks that he submitted to the Council
(on file in the Administrative Services Department), and spoke in opposition to the proposed dog
park.
Bill Walter, attorney representing MGF Enterprises, referred to correspondence he submitted to the
Council (on file in the Administrative Services Department) opposing the proposed adoption of a
Mitigated Negative Declaration for the proposed dog park project, and stated there are enough
significant environmental impacts to require a full Environmental Impact Report. He requested the
Council deny the proposed project.
Cvnthia Ecklund, President of the Five Cities Dog Park Association, addressed concems expressed
by the public regarding noise, dog behavior, park appearance (landscaping/fencing), dog park rules,
trash disposal, parking, safety, water pollution, and special events in the park. She spoke in support
of the proposed dog park.
Mayor Ferrara requested a show of hands from members of the audience who were in support of
the project.
Pete Jenny, County Parks Manager, shared the County's experiences in managing its three dog
parks and noted they are working on a fourth dog park; explained that all parks were issued a
Mitigated Negative Declaration to address potential environmental impacts; and concluded by
stating that the County has had positive experiences associated with its dog parks.
In response to questions by Council, Ms. Ecklund explained that the project would have adouble-
gated entry to serve as a safety zone for unleashing the dogs prior to entering the park; the
Association would consider establishing a maximum capacity for the number of dogs permitted in
the dog park at one time; and that the proposed dog park is comparable in size to the site used
previously in Grover Beach; however, it had not been a fenced area.
Minutes: City Council Meeting Page 5
Tuesday, January 22, 2008
Resident of Fair Oaks Garden Apartments (no name given) responded to public comments about
noise and odor.
Lisa Camponi, Past President of the EI Chorro Regional Dog Park Association, spoke in support of
the proposed dog park.
Megan James, S. Elm Street, provided additional comments in opposition to the proposed dog park.
Mitch Mundahl, S. Elm Street, provided additional comments in opposition to the proposed dog
park..
Hearing no further public comments, Mayor Ferrara closed the public hearing.
Director Perrin clarified that Elm Street Park will continue to be an active City park, which is open to
the general public, and that the Dog Park will occupy a very small area. He noted that the Five
Cities Dog Park Association is a volunteer organization that has agreed to adopt the dog park
portion of Elm Street Park, if approved by the Council, and the organization will develop and
maintain the facility. He further discussed proposed landscaping, and the City's ability to close the
dog park for special events.
Council Member Guthrie asked for clarification on why the other side of the park was not used.
Director Perrin explained that the northern end of the park is a more active area of the park with
barbeque areas, sport classes, special events, and access to City equipment. He stated there is no
active recreational use at the southern end of the park.
Council Member Guthrie provided the following comments:
- Agreed that although every single environmental impact is not known, they are reasonably
known here;
- Has some personal experience with dog parks, having been at the dog park over at Oak Park
Road and that noise and dog waste were not issues;
- Said he does not believe that an Environmental Impact Report is warranted;
- Stated the proposed dog park is a reasonable use of the park;
- Stated the proposal is not without impact to the neighboring apartments; however, does not
believe the impacts areas serious as suggested by the neighbors;
- Pointed out that the City has the ability to remove the use based on the Adopt-a-Park
Agreement;
- Stated the City must balance recreational needs and desires of the community with those of the
neighbors;
- Expressed concern about parking; however, he noted that a lot of people would walk to the
park;
- Noted that if the public bus was unable to pull to the curb, that the issue would need to be
addressed;
- Noted that he looked at the other side of the park and acknowledged it would be difficult to
locate the dog park there;
- Stated he was prepared to support the project, and suggested a formal review and public
hearing one year after the dog park opens.
Council Member Costello provided the following comments:
- Agreed with most of Council Member Guthrie's comments;
- Acknowledged that the Five Cities Dog Park Association is volunteering to do clean up work and
Minutes: City Council Meeting Page 6
Tuesday, January 22, 2008
be a participating partner in the park; however, it is still a City park and complaints would be
directed to the City;
- Referred to the double gated entry and stated it would be used properly to control unleashed
dogs;
- Did not think people would double park to drop off their dog;
- Stated that if the dog park did not work, he would be willing to reconsider the use at some future
time;
- Would support reviewing the use in one year and if impacts were underestimated, would
reconsider the use.
- Believes adequate environmental review on the potential impacts was conducted and supported
the Mitigated Negative Declaration;
- Supported moving forward with the project.
Council Member Arnold provided the following comments:
- Stated the Mitigated Negative Declaration was complete and appropriate; did not believe any of
the impacts reach the level of significance;
- Stated that the park is for public use and the proposed area is not very usable for other park
uses and is an ideal location for the dog park;
- Stated that the proposed mitigation measures would address concerns;
- Stated that most people do not have experience with dog parks; has visited friends who live
near the Costa Bella park and was impressed by how it functioned;
- Stated he was excited about providing a dog park and suggested looking for more areas for
such a use;
- Noted that parking was going to be an issue but it would work itself out because people would
come at different times;
- Suggested painting the curb at the existing bus stop;
- Did not agree with concerns expressed about potential water pollution;
- Did not think odor would be an issue;
- Did not think a review provision after one year was necessary, but would support a status
report.
Mayor Pro Tem Fellows provided the following comments:
- Would not deny a dog park based on the scenarios expressed by the neighbors or approve a
dog park based on the dog lovers' promises and said he needed to rely on his own personal
experiences with dog parks and information provided by the County Parks Manager;
- He explained he had visited an unfenced dog park in Balboa Park and was amazed at the
discipline of the dog owners particularly with regard to picking up dog waste; he did not perceive
or anticipate a noise or odor issue;
- Stated the Mitigated Negative Declaration was well done and is accurate;
- Stated that the owners of the licensed dogs in the City were an unserved segment of the
community and this portion of the park would serve those people;
- Noted that dog parks were great for exercising dogs, their owners get exercise, and it is a good
social place;
- He referred to the letter from Mr. Walter and stated he was looking for a reference to dog parks
as it relates to case law, and noted that the only case referenced was an unfenced dog park;
- He supported the dog park.
Minutes: City Council Meeting Page 7
Tuesday, January 22, 2008
Mayor Ferrara provided the following comments:
- Said that when he was a dog owner, he wished a dog park was available;
- Stated he had visited a dog park in Arizona in a Planned Unit Development which was very
attractive, and from an operational standpoint there was a high degree of responsibility and
accountability by the individual dog owners in operating and maintaining the park;
- Acknowledged concerns of residents due to the unknown factor, especially with no experience
with such a facility;
- Stated that from this point forward, the lines of communication need to be established with the
adjacent apartment residents and management; and if there were questions, they must be
addressed right away;
- He stated the City has the responsibility to monitor and to mitigate as the need arises;
- Suggested that rather than revisiting the item with a public hearing, that staff provide a progress
report in one year;
- Noted that the City has the ability to close the dog park;
- Expressed support about concerns regarding the bus stop and making sure that the buses are
not impeded from stopping safely;
- Can move forward with approving the dog park.
Council Member Guthrie stated the reason he requested the public hearing was in order to provide
adequate notice to the adjacent property owners. Brief discussion ensued and it was determined
that the progress report could be mailed to the property owners and the apartment residents.
Action: Council Member Guthrie moved to adopt a Resolution as follows: `:4 RESOLUTION OF
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ADOPTING A MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION, DESIGNATING A PORTION OF ELM STREET PARK AS AN OFF
LEASH PET AREA FOR USE AS A DOG PARK, APPROVAL OF AN ADOPT-A-PARK
AGREEMENT WITH THE FIVE CITIES DOG PARK ASSOCIATION AND AUTHORIZATION FOR
THE CITY MANAGER TO APPROVE AND MAKE MINOR CHANGES AND MODIFICATIONS.
AND TO EXECUTE THE AGREEMENT ;and further, to include that a year from the opening of the
park that the City would produce a dog park status report and mail a copy to the residents and the
owner of the apartment building at 400 S. Elm Street. Mayor Pro Tem Fellows seconded, and the
motion passed on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Guthrie, Fellows, Costello, Arnold, Ferrara
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
Mayor Ferrara called a recess at 9:00 p. m. The Council reconvened at 9:14 p.m.
9.b. Consideration of a Resolution Granting Consent to the San Luis Obispo County
Board of Supervisors to Create the San Luis Obispo County, Tourism Business
Improvement District within the Boundaries of the City of Arroyo Grande.
Assistant Planner Bergman presented the staff report and recommended Council adopt a
Resolution granting the San Luis Obispo County Board of Supervisors the ability to: 1) create the
San Luis Obispo,County Tourism Business Improvement District (BID) within the boundaries of the
Minutes: City Council Meeting Page 8
Tuesday, January 22, 2008
City of Arroyo Grande, and 2) grant the San Luis Obispo Board of Supervisors jurisdiction for all the
purposes in connection with creation and operation of the proposed San Luis Obispo Tourism
Business Improvement District, with input from the affected lodging businesses and participating
cities. Staff responded to questions from Council
Mayor Ferrara opened the public hearing.
Jonni Biaggini, representing the San Luis Obispo Visitors and Conference Bureau (SLOVCB),
responded to questions from Council concerning Business Improvement Districts (BID) and noted
that the effort to establish a County BID has been ongoing for three years. She. gave an overview of
how BID's are formed; explained that the money collected must be spent on tourism promotion;
listed other Counties who have passed a~BID; and explained that the BID law is set up to be
renewed annually, therefore, if the City decides to become part of the County BID and during the
year the City's hoteliers are not happy with the BID, the City has an opportunity to withdraw from
the BID. She further clarified that the funds would be an enhancement, not a replacement, for the
funds the SLOVCB currently receives and that the increased funds would provide greater resources
for tourism marketing and promotion. She responded to further questions from Council concerning
how the fee is assessed on the business owner, explaining that the business owner has to pay the
assessment; however, the owner can choose to pass the fee on to the hotel guest; and stated that
the fee is processed the same as the transient occupancy tax, therefore Federal employees and
guests who stay over 30 days are exempt from paying the assessment.
Upon hearing no further public comments, Mayor Ferrara closed the public hearing.
Council comments and discussion ensued regarding the .advantages and the disadvantages of a
Business Improvement District; acknowledgement -that a majority of hoteliers had not expressed
opposition to the formation of a BID; clarification that the BID Advisory Board consists of lodging
personnel who determine how the budget is allocated; that the City of Arroyo Grande would benefit
from participating in the BID; and that the City can monitor the program to determine continued
participation in the future.
Action: Council Member Arnold moved to adopt a Resolution as follows: "LI RESOLUT/ON OF
THE C/TY COUNC/L OF THE C/TY OF ARROYO GRANDE GRANT/NG CONSENT TO THE
COUNTY OF SAN LU/S OBISPO TO FORM THE SAN LU/S OB/SPO COUNTY TOUR/SM
BUS/NESS /MPROVEMENT D/STR/CT (SLOCTB/DJ': Council Member Costello seconded, and
the motion passed on the following roll-call vote:
AYES: Arnold, Costello, Guthrie, Fellows, Ferrara .
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
10. CONTINUED BUSINESS ITEMS
None.
11. NEW BUSINESS ITEMS
11.a. Consideration of Agricultural Buffer Policies Including Minimum Buffer Distance,
Allowed Land Uses and Landscape Standards of the General Plan and Development
Code.
Minutes: City Council Meeting Page 9
Tuesday, January 22, 2008
Community Development Director Strong presented the staff report and, recommended the Council
review agricultural buffer policies, including minimum buffer distance, allowed land uses and
landscape standards of the General Plan and Development Code and provide direction to staff.
Mayor Ferrara invited comments from those in the audience who wished to be heard on the matter,
and upon hearing no public comments, he closed the public comment period.
Mayor Pro Tem Fellows clarified that he had wanted to specifically discuss the possible modification
of the "make-up" of the buffer and stated that the City would benefit from a guide on the structure
and type of plants that can be included in the buffer in order for it to perform the job that it is
intended to do. He referred to the staff report and spoke about the need for updating the LESA
Model to reflect local conditions. He also referred to Ordinance No. 550 which includes a phrase
regarding limited commercial uses within the agricultural buffer, and stated he wanted some
clarification on that issue. He acknowledged staffing constraints and stated he was in favor of the
second Alternative in the staff report to instruct staff to include additional agricultural buffer analysis
and alternatives as part of the update to the Agriculture, Conservation and Open Space Element
during 2008. He reiterated that this should include information such as how the buffer should be
constructed and landscaped based on its size.
Council Member Guthrie concurred that better guidance on the make-up of the buffers is needed.
He suggested that this could be a Cal Poly project. He also said the Council needs to clarify
whatever the mitigation measures are for conversion of agricultural land and would like to take a
look at the mitigation guidelines before the Council considers a new project. He stated that when
reviewing buffers, the Council should also look at alternatives for smaller agricultural buffers and
their composition.
Council Member Arnold stated he did not want to unwrap the entire policy, and that the existing
policies were working well. He acknowledged the challenges of the Cherry Creek project. He was
supportive of seeking assistance from Cal Poly; however, he could not support spending a lot of
staff time looking at buffers because there are so many variables and exceptions. He supported the
existing agricultural conversion policies that are in place and stated that he was comfortable
reviewing projects on a case-by-case basis as they come forward. He stated he was not in favor of
a major review; however he would support some review if desired by the Council. He agreed that
the LESA Model does not work for the City; that it appears to be designed for large parcels, and it
should be used only if it is modified to reflect local conditions.
Council Member Costello agreed that there should not be a major review of the' buffer policy, and
the existing policies are working well. He noted the policies could be improved and assistance from
Cal Poly to look at specific needs and refinemehts would be an excellent opportunity. He agreed
that looking at buffer composition is worth reviewing; however, he did not want to commit a great
deal of additional staff time to this issue.
Mayor Ferrara agreed with Council Members Arnold and Costello and stated that the-buffer policies
the City has in place seem to be working; however, it could be better and enhancements that have
been mentioned would be beneficial. He stated that he would prefer to give Cal Poly a defined
project to create a menu of potential agricultural-buffer designs, including a pictorial display with
specific mitigation examples: He said it was important to note that the City should also consider the
wishes of the property owner living next to active agriculture who may not support a buffer zone.
Minutes: City Council Meeting Page 10
Tuesday, January 22, 2008
i
Following further discussion about agricultural buffers, Mayor Ferrara summarized the discussion ~ I
by noting that the outcome of the Cherry Creek project was favorable; however, the process needs
to be refined to provide more guidance and references, which would provide an enhancement to
existing policies.
Action: Mayor Pro Tem Fellows moved to instruct staff to include additional up-to-date agricultural
buffer analysis and alternatives as part of the update to the Agriculture, Conservation and Open
Space. Element during 2008, and to further explore the idea of involving Cal Poly students, and to
include review of the LESA Model. Based on Mayor Pro Tem Fellows motion, Mayor Ferrara
summarized and clarified that the motion included further examples and analyses of specific plant
species, trees, and models of buffer zones that could be used and requesting that Cal Poly
undertake the project. Mayor Pro Tem Fellows indicated that was correct. Mayor Ferrara seconded
the motion and then clarified that if the City is going to give Cal Poly a project, it must be a
significant and wmprehensive project to satisfy a class requirement.
The motion passed on the following roll-call vote:
AYES: Guthrie, Arnold, Costello, Fellows, Ferrara
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
11.b. Consideration of City Policy and Regulations Regarding Placement of Basketball
Hoops in the Public Right-of-Way.
City Manager Adams reported that Council Member Arnold had requested a continuance of this
item due to the fact that a number of homeowners interested in the issue were not able to be
present tonight.
Action: Council Member Arnold moved to continue the item to the February 26, 2008 Regular City
Council Meetirig. Council Member Guthrie seconded, and the motion passed on the following roll-
call vote:
AYES: Arnold, Guthrie, Costello, Fellows, Ferrara
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
12. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS
a. MAYOR TONY FERRARA:
(1) San Luis Obispo Council of Governments/San Luis Obispo Regional Transit
Authority (SLOCOG/SLORTA). SLOCOG Board discussed issues regarding the
STIP funding cycle. SLORTA has appointed an interim Transit Manager.
(2) South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District (SSLOCSD). Council Member
Guthrie attended the last meeting as the alternate.
(3) Other. None.
b. MAYOR PRO TEM CHUCK FELLOWS:
(1) South County Youth Coalition. Did not meet in December. No report. Meets on
Thursday.
Minutes: City Council Meeting Page 11
Tuesday, January 22, 2008
b. MAYOR PRO TEM CHUCK FELLOWS (cont'd):
(2) County Water Resources Advisory Committee (WRAC). Was out of town for last
meeting. No report:
(3) Other. None.
c. COUNCIL MEMBER JOE COSTELLO:
(1) Zone 3 Water Advisory Board. Did not attend meeting; however, he noted that the
Habitat Conservation Plan is still under consideration and $950,000 has been spent
over the last four years; there are plans to seek action from the legislature.
(2) Air Pollution Control District .(APCD). Meets tomorrow; will be considering
implementation of the 2008 Lawn Mower Exchange Program and the Carl Moyer
Incentive Program.
(3) Fire Oversight Committee. Met in December; reported that Oceano Community
Services District is pursuing an Agreement similar to the City's Agreement with
Grover Beach for the Firefighter Program.
(4) Fire Consolidation Oversight Committee. No report.
(5) Other. None.
d. COUNCIL MEMBER JIM GUTHRIE:
(1) South County Area Transit (SCAT). The Board discussed timing issues with the
. new bus routes; coordinating efforts with SLORTA.
(2) California Joint Powers Insurance Authority (CJPIA). No report.
(3) .Other. Attended the SSLOCSD meeting as the Alternate; reported that the plant is
operating well; reported that no competitive bids were received fora $350,000
project, so the District will be doing the project in-house.
e. COUNCIL MEMBER ED ARNOLD:
(t) Integrated Waste Management Authority Board (IWMA). No report. City staff
attended the last meeting.
(2) Economic Vitality Corporation (EVC). The EVC is continuing to raise money for
the Tourism Study; City Manager Adams is working with local businesses to
participate in the Study.
(3) Other. None:
13. CITY COUNCIL MEMBER ITEMS:
In response to earlier public comment, Mayor Ferrara requested again that City Manager Adams
contact Lucia Mar Unified School District regarding its maintenance facility due to concerns about
drainage and run-off: City Manager Adams stated he would follow up on the matter and noted that
an occupancy permit had not yet been issued.
14. CITY MANAGER ITEMS:
None.
15. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS:
Mayor Ferrara reported he had recently attended a League of California Cities Policy Committee
meeting and had also participated in the Leadership Academy. He stated that while in Sacramento,
he, Council Member Arnold, and City Manager Adams met with the City's contract engineer about
issues relating to the Brisco Road/Halcyon/Route 101 Interchange Project and expressed concern
Minutes: City Council Meeting Page 72
Tuesday, January 22, 2008
about apparent conflicts with Caltrans regarding the project. He reported that City Manager Adams
prepared background information, which he presented to Assembly Member Sam Blakeslee and
that he had an opportunity to discuss the issues the City is facing concerning the project and
competing for State funding in the upcoming STIP cycle.
16. STAFF COMMUNICATIONS:
None.
17. COMMUNITY COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS:.
None.
18. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Ferrara adjourned he meeting at 10:50 p.m.
Tony Ferrar a r
ATTEST:
Kelly Wetm re, C~j y Clerk
(Approved at CC Mtg o2 "a(o ZooB )
i