San Luis Obispo City Council
September 3, 2024

Page | 12

2. Qualifications. Describe your firm’s experience and qualifications to administer San Luis Obispo’s BMR Program, including processing Resale Restriction Agreements and Deeds of Trust; loan subordination and payoff transactions; compliance monitoring and certification; transfers and defaults. Include a list of jurisdictions for which you provide similar services. Provide an example of your experience in dealing with compliance issues (i.e., steps taken, outcome, etc.). (MAXIMUM

OF THREE PAGES)

3. Program Administration. Provide a detailed discussion of how your firm will implement and administer the BMR Program, including the protocol your firm will use for each of the tasks identified in the Scope of Services. Include a description of the anticipated interaction between your firm, the City, and BMR clients. Include an organizational chart which identifies the primary role of each team member (e.g., BMR inquiries, document preparation, monitoring, etc.). (MAXIMUM OF SIX PAGES, NOT INCLUDING EXAMPLES)
a. Provide example documents used to perform annual monitoring of both rental and ownership units.
b. Provide example application forms (pre-qualification, etc.) and helpful documents (e.g., FAQs, process, etc.) that an applicant would access on the dedicated webpage that would be set up for San Luis Obispo’s BMR program.

4. Cost.
a. Submit in a separate sealed envelope a cost estimate for each task in the Scope of Services (e.g., fixed fee for basic services, fee per transaction / sale). See attachment for example. b. Include any other costs associated with administering the BMR program. c. Include the estimated hours for each staff member assigned to each task, including the associated cost and hourly rate.
d. Include a not-to-exceed amount that would be contained in a potential agreement with the City.
e. Hourly rates may be used for pricing the cost of additional services (beyond the scope of services), as needed.

5. Additional Information. Provide general suggestions regarding the City’s BMR program or the requested scope of services. For example, provide suggestions on how the City might improve San Luis Obispo’s BMR program or finance the BMR Housing Administrator contract through a self-sustaining fee structure, etc.

6. Identify Key Staff. Provide a resume for the BMR Program Manager, main point of contact, and any other key staff who will be involved in the day-to-day administration of the City’s BMR program (e.g., interacting with applicants and city staff, preparing and recording legal documents, submitting reports, etc.).

Page | 13

7. References. Include the name, address, phone number, and email for a minimum of three (3) references for which you administer their affordable housing program.

8. Insurance Coverage. Provide a statement verifying that your firm meets the insurance requirements contained in Section L of these specifications. Identify carriers, A.M. Best ratings, types, and limits of insurance carried by your firm.

9. Terminated Contracts/Litigation. Please provide a list of contracts/agreements terminated for convenience or default within the past three years, if any. List any litigation that now affects or may affect the firm’s ability to perform work in the future.

10. Language Capabilities. Please describe your capacity to serve Spanish speaking clients in both written and speaking form.

J. PROPOSAL REVIEW

1. Proposal Review and Award Schedule. The following is an outline of the anticipated schedule for proposal review and contract award:

ACTIVITY CONSULTANT CITY SCHEDULE
RFP sent to qualified consultants/Legal Ad X September 4, 2024 Responses due X September 27, 2024
City response to consultants regarding
whether submittal will be considered through
subsequent interview
X
October 4, 2024
Interview consultants (If needed) X X October 7-11,2024 Consultant selection and contract execution X October 14, 2024 Initial kick-off meeting with staff team X X October 21, 2024 Transfer of Materials to Consultant X X October 21-25, 2024 Consultant Will Commence Administration X October 30, 2024

2. Ownership of Materials. All original drawings, plan documents and other materials prepared by or in possession of the Contractor as part of the work or services under these specifications shall become the permanent property of the City and shall be delivered to the City upon demand.

3. Release of Reports and Information. Any reports, information, data, or other material given to, prepared by, or assembled by the Contractor as part of the work or services under these specifications shall be the property of the City and shall not be made available to any individual or organization by the Contractor without the prior written approval of the City.

4. Copies of Reports and Information. If the City requests additional copies of reports, drawings, specifications, or any other material in addition to what the Contractor is required to furnish in limited quantities as part of the work or services under these specifications, the Contractor shall provide such additional copies as are requested, and City shall compensate the Contractor for the

Page | 14
costs of duplicating of such copies at the Contractor's direct expense.

5. Required Deliverable Products. The Contractor will be required to provide:
a. One electronic submission - digital-ready original .pdf of all final documents. If you wish to file a paper copy, please submit in sealed envelope to the address provided in the RFP. b. Corresponding computer files compatible with the following programs whenever possible unless otherwise directed by the project manager:

Word Processing: MS Word
Spreadsheets: MS Excel
Desktop Publishing: InDesign
Virtual Models: Sketch Up
Digital Maps: Geodatabase shape files in
State Plan Coordinate System as
specified by City GIS staff
c. City staff will review any documents or materials provided by the Contractor and, where necessary, the Contractor will be required to respond to staff comments and make such changes as deemed appropriate.

ALTERNATIVE PROPOSALS

6. Alternative Proposals. The proposer may submit an alternative proposal (or proposals) that it believes will also meet the City's project objectives but in a different way. In this case, the proposer must provide an analysis of the advantages and disadvantages of each of the alternative and discuss under what circumstances the City would prefer one alternative to the other(s).

7. Attendance at Meetings and Hearings. As part of the work scope and included in the contract price is attendance by the Contractor at up to [number] public meetings to present and discuss its findings and recommendations. Contractor shall attend as many "working" meetings with staff as necessary in performing work-scope tasks.

8. Accuracy of Specifications. The specifications for this project are believed by the City to be accurate and to contain no affirmative misrepresentation or any concealment of fact. Bidders are cautioned to undertake an independent analysis of any test results in the specifications, as City does not guaranty the accuracy of its interpretation of test results contained in the specifications package. In preparing its proposal, the bidder and all subcontractors named in its proposal shall bear sole responsibility for proposal preparation errors resulting from any misstatements or omissions in the plans and specifications that could easily have been ascertained by examining either the project site or accurate test data in the City's possession. Although the effect of ambiguities or defects in the plans and specifications will be as determined by law, any patent ambiguity or defect shall give rise to a duty of bidder to inquire prior to proposal submittal. Failure to so inquire shall cause any such ambiguity or defect to be construed against the bidder. An ambiguity or defect shall be considered patent if it is of such a nature that the bidder, assuming reasonable skill, ability and diligence on its part, knew or should have known of the existence of the ambiguity or defect. Furthermore, failure of the bidder or subcontractors to notify City in

Page | 15
writing of specification or plan defects or ambiguities prior to proposal submittal shall waive any right to assert said defects or ambiguities subsequent to submittal of the proposal.

To the extent that these specifications constitute performance specifications, the City shall not be liable for costs incurred by the successful bidder to achieve the project’s objective or standard beyond the amounts provided there for in the proposal.

In the event that, after awarding the contract, any dispute arises as a result of any actual or alleged ambiguity or defect in the plans and/or specifications, or any other matter whatsoever, Contractor shall immediately notify the City in writing, and the Contractor and all subcontractors shall continue to perform, irrespective of whether or not the ambiguity or defect is major, material, minor or trivial, and irrespective of whether or not a change order, time extension, or additional compensation has been granted by City. Failure to provide the hereinbefore described written notice within one (1) working day of contractor's becoming aware of the facts giving rise to the dispute shall constitute a waiver of the right to assert the causative role of the defect or ambiguity in the plans or specifications concerning the dispute.

K. FORM OF AGREEMENT

AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into in the City of San Luis Obispo on [day, date, year] by and between the CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as City, and [CONTRACTOR’S NAME IN CAPITAL LETTERS], hereinafter referred to as Contractor.

W I T N E S S E T H:

WHEREAS, on [date], City requested proposals for [______________], per Project No. [xxxx] WHEREAS, pursuant to said request, Contractor submitted a proposal that was accepted by City for said project;
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of their mutual promises, obligations and covenants hereinafter contained, the parties hereto agree as follows:

1. TERM. The term of this Agreement shall be from the date this Agreement is made and entered, as first written above, until acceptance or completion of said project.

Page | 16

2. INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE. City Specification No. ______ and Contractor's proposal dated [date] is hereby incorporated in and made a part of this Agreement and attached as Exhibit A. The City’s terms and conditions are hereby incorporated in and made a part of this Agreement as Exhibit B. The City’s Insurance Requirements are hereby incorporated in and made a part of this Agreement as Exhibit C. To the extent that there are any conflicts between the Contractor’s fees and scope of work and the City’s terms and conditions, the City’s terms and conditions shall prevail, unless specifically agreed otherwise in writing signed by both parties.

3. CITY'S OBLIGATIONS. For providing the services as specified in this Agreement, City will pay, and Contractor shall receive therefore compensation [xxxxxxx]. If there are installment payments? Contractor shall be eligible for compensation installments after completion of milestone Tasks -E as shown in the attached project schedule.

4. CONTRACTOR/CONSULTANT’S OBLIGATIONS. For and in consideration of the payments and agreements hereinbefore mentioned to be made and performed by City, Contractor agrees with City to do everything required by this Agreement and the said specifications.

5. AMENDMENTS. Any amendment, modification, or variation from the terms of this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be effective only upon approval by the City Manager.

6. COMPLETE AGREEMENT. This written Agreement, including all writings specifically incorporated herein by reference, shall constitute the complete agreement between the parties hereto.

No oral agreement, understanding or representation not reduced to writing and specifically incorporated herein shall be of any force or effect, nor shall any such oral agreement, understanding or representation be binding upon the parties hereto.

7. NOTICE. All written notices to the parties hereto shall be sent by United States mail, postage prepaid by registered or certified mail addressed as follows:

City Name
Dept.

Address
Consultant Name
Title
Address
Address

Page | 17

8. AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE AGREEMENT. Both City and Contractor do covenant that everyone executing this agreement on behalf of each party is a person duly authorized and empowered to execute Agreements for such party.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this instrument to be executed the day and year first above written.

CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO:

By: _____________________________________
City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM: CONSULTANT:
________________________________ By: _____________________________________ City Attorney Name of CAO / President
Its: CAO / President
L. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS - CONSULTANTS
Consultantshall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property that may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the Contractor, its agents, representatives, employees or subcontractors. General Liability, Errors and Omissions and Pollution and/or Asbestos Pollution Liability coverages should be maintained for a minimum of five (5) years after contract completion.

Minimum Scope of Insurance. Coverage shall be at least as broad as:

1. Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage (occurrence form CG 0001 or Claims Made Form CG 0002).

2. Insurance Services Office form number CA 0001 (Ed. 1/87) covering Automobile Liability, code 1 (any auto), or code 8, 9 if no owned autos.

3. Workers' Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and Employer's Liability Insurance.

4. Pollution and/or Asbestos Pollution Liability and/or Errors & Omissions.

Minimum Limits of Insurance. Contractor shall maintain limits no less than:

Page | 18

1. General Liability: $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage. If Commercial General Liability Insurance or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this project/location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit.

2. Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage.

3. Employer's Liability: $1,000,000 each accident, $1,000,000 policy limit bodily injury by disease, $1,000,000 each employee bodily injury by disease.

4. Pollution and/or Asbestos Pollution Liability and/or Errors and Omissions: $1,000,000 each occurrence/$2,000,000 policy aggregate.

Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the Entity.

Other Insurance Provisions. The following insurance provisions shall also apply:

1. The general liability, automobile liability, pollution and/or asbestos pollution and/or errors & omissions policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions:
a. The City, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers are to be covered as additional insureds as respects: liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of the Contractor; products and completed operations of the Contractor; pollution and/or asbestos pollution and/or errors or omissions, or automobiles owned, leased, hired or borrowed by the Contractor. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the Entity, its officers, officials, employees, agents or volunteers.

Note: Automobile, Pollution, Asbestos Pollution and/or Errors and Omissions insurance carriers may not name the City as Additional Insured. If the City cannot be named as Additional Insured, a letter from the insurance company confirming their position required. b. For any claims related to this project, the Contractor's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents or volunteers shall be excess of the Contractor'sinsurance and shall not contribute with it.
c. The Contractor's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability. d. Each insurance policy required by this clause shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be canceled by either party except after thirty (30) days prior written notice has been given to the City.

2. The automobile liability policy shall be endorsed to delete the pollution and/or the asbestos exclusion and add the Motor Carrier Act endorsement (MCS-90).

3. If General Liability, Pollution and/or Asbestos Pollution Liability and/or Errors & Omissions coverages are written on a Claims Made Form:
a. The "Retro Date" must be shown, and must be before the date of the contract or the beginning of contract work.
b. Insurance must be maintained and evidence of insurance must be provided for at least five (5) years after completion of the contract or work.

Page | 19
c. If the coverage is canceled or non-renewed, and not replaced with another claims made policy form with a "Retro Date" prior to the contract effective date, the Contractor must purchase "extended reporting" coverage for a minimum of five years after completion of the contract or work.
d. A copy of the claims reporting requirements must be submitted to the City for review.

4. The workers compensation policy shall be endorsed with a waiver of subrogation in favor of the City.

Acceptability of Insurers. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best's rating of no less than A:VII. Since Pollution and/or Asbestos Pollution coverages may not be available from an "Admitted" insurer, the coverage may be written by a Non-Admitted insurance company. A Non-admitted company should have an A.M. Best's rating of A:X or higher. Pollution and/or Asbestos coverages may also be written by a Captive Insurance Company or Risk Retention Group or Captive Insurance Company, the City will check with its Insurance Advisor for further information before approval.

Verification of Coverage. Contractor shall furnish the City with certified copies of endorsements effecting coverage required by this clause. The endorsements are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. The endorsements are to be on forms provided by the City, unless the insurance company will not use the City's form. All endorsements are to be received and approved by the City before work commences. As an alternative to the City's forms, the Contractor's insurer may provide complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, including endorsements affecting the coverage required by these specifications.

Subcontractors. Contractor shall include all subcontractors as insured under its policies or shall furnish separate certificates and endorsements for each subcontractor. All coverages for subcontractors shall be subject to all of the requirements stated herein.

M. PROPOSAL SUBMITTAL FORM – SAMPLE
A complete proposal must include the forms in this section plus the required insurance certificate.

THESE REQUIRED PROPOSAL DOCUMENTS SHALL BE ENCLOSED IN TWO SEPARATE SEALED ENVELOPES.

The first envelope shall be labeled “Qualification Proposal” and shall include the following proposal documents completed in full:

1. Information about the Proposing Firm

2. References

3. Statement of Past Contract Disqualifications

4. Insurance Certificate
The second envelope shall be labeled “Price Proposal” and shall include the Price Proposalform.

Page | 20
These envelopes shall be enclosed in a larger envelope that shall be sealed and addressed to the Department of Finance, City of San Luis Obispo, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401. In order to guard against premature opening, the larger envelope should be clearly labeled with the proposal title, specification number, and name of the proposing firm.

INFORMATION ABOUT THE PROPOSER
Firm Name
Mailing
Address
City, State, ZIP
Phone Number
FAX Number
Business Type (proprietorship/partnership/corporation)
Years Operating under this Firm Name
Insurance Company’s A.M. Best Rating
Authorized Representative
Title of Authorized Representative
Signature of Authorized Representative and Date

Page | 21

REFERENCES
Number of years engaged in providing the services included within the scope of the specifications under the present business name: .

Describe fully the last three contracts performed by your firm that demonstrate your ability to provide the services included with the scope of the specifications. Attach additional pages if required. The City reserves the right to contact each of the references listed for additional information regarding your firm's qualifications.

Reference No. 1:

Agency Name
Contact Name
Telephone & Email
Street Address
City, State, Zip Code
Description of services provided
including contract amount, when
provided and project outcome

Reference No. 2:

Agency Name
Contact Name
Telephone & Email
Street Address
City, State, Zip Code
Description of services provided
including contract amount, when
provided and project outcome

Page | 22
Reference No. 3
Agency Name
Contact Name
Telephone & Email
Street Address
City, State, Zip Code
Description of services provided
including contract amount, when
provided and project outcome
CURRENT CONTRACTS:

1. 2.

3. 4.

Page | 23

STATEMENT OF PAST CONTRACT DISQUALIFICATIONS
The proposer shall state whether it or any of its officers or employees who have a proprietary interest in it, has ever been disqualified, removed, or otherwise prevented from bidding on, or completing a federal, state, or local government project because of the violation of law, a safety regulation, or for any other reason, including but not limited to financial difficulties, project delays, or disputes regarding work or product quality, and if so to explain the circumstances.  Do you have any disqualification as described in the above paragraph to declare? Yes  No 
 If yes, explain the circumstances.

Executed on at _______________________________________ under penalty of perjury of the laws of the State of California, that the foregoing is true and correct. ______________________________________
Signature of Authorized Proposer Representative

Page | 24

PRICE PROPOSAL

Item 5h
Department: Public Works
Cost Center: 5201
For Agenda of: 9/3/2024
Placement: Consent
Estimated Time: N/A
FROM: Matt Horn, Public Works Director
Prepared By: Alex Fuchs, Mobility Services Business Manager SUBJECT: ADOPT A RESOLUTION APPROVING SLO TRANSIT TO PROVIDE

FARE-FREE TRANSIT DURING RIDESHARE WEEK

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Draft Resolution entitled, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, approving San Luis Obispo (SLO) Transit to provide Fare-Free Transit during Rideshare Week.”

POLICY CONTEXT
SLO Regional Rideshare is a division of the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG) that is dedicated to reducing the number of single occupant vehicles used for commuting by encouraging use of transit, biking, vanpool, and carpooling. The City of San Luis Obispo is a partner agency of SLOCOG and works closely to promote sustainable transportation through a variety of programs and events. This partnership directly supports the City’s Major City Goal of Sustainable Transportation, the Climate Action Plan, and multiple policies and programs of the City’s General Plan Circulation Element1.

DISCUSSION
Background
SLOCOG holds an annual event during the first full week of October called Rideshare Week aimed at promoting sustainable transportation methods to reduce traffic congestion and to improve air quality. Prior to the pandemic, participating transit agencies, including SLO Transit, offered fare-free transit during Rideshare Week. The costs of providing farefree services were reimbursed by SLOCOG via grant funding. Fare-free transit has not been part of Rideshare week since 2020 as agencies focused on adjusting operations in response to the pandemic.

1 Policy 2.1.3 – Work-based Trip Reduction – The City shall encourage employers within the city limits and work with the county to work with employers outside of the city limits to participate in trip reduction programs.

Program 2.2.1 – Agency Cooperation – In coordination with county agencies, the City shall support efforts in establishing county-wide trip reduction programs.

Policy 7.1.1 – Peak Hour and Daily Traffic – The City shall cooperate with County and State government to institute programs that reduce the levels of peak-hour and daily vehicle traffic.

Item 5h
In July 2024, SLOCOG notified City staff that a recommendation would be presented to their board on August 14 seeking approval to pilot a week of fare-free transit during this year’s Rideshare Week (October 7-11, 2024) and to coordinate with transit operators on public outreach and promotion. Attachment B is a copy of the SLOCOG staff report.

SLOCOG’s board approved the recommendation as well as the use of Low Carbon Transit Operations Program (LCTOP) funds to fully offset the cost of offering fare-free transit.

Rideshare Week is a great opportunity for the City to promote use of transit and other forms of sustainable transportation. The recommendation of this report is for Council to adopt a Resolution (Attachment A) approving SLO Transit to provide fare-free transit during Rideshare Week this year and in future years provided SLOCOG has funding allocated to reimburse transit agencies for costs associated with offering fare-free transit.

If approved, Mobility Services staff will coordinate with SLOCOG and other participating transit agencies on promotion of the event, report ridership activity, and reimbursement of associated costs after completion of the event.

Previous Council or Advisory Body Action
Even though SLO Transit participated in past Rideshare Week events including offering fare-free transit services, staff did not find record of previous related Council action(s).

Public Engagement
Rideshare Week and fare-free transit promotion will be coordinated between the participating agencies and advertised on social media, radio, print publications, and in Rideshare’s newsletter that is distributed to over 16,000 commuters, employers, and residents. Surveys will also be distributed to passengers and ridership data will be collected from transit operators at the conclusion of the campaign to evaluate the impact on ridership.

CONCURRENCE
SLOCOG staff concurs with the recommended action of this report.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) does not apply to the recommended action in this report, because the action does not constitute a “Project” under CEQA Guidelines Sec. 15378.

FISCAL IMPACT
Budgeted: N/A Budget Year: N/A
Funding Identified: Yes

Item 5h
Fiscal Analysis:

Funding
Sources
Total Budget
Available
Current
Funding
Request
Remaining
Balance
Annual
Ongoing
Cost
Transit Fund $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0
State
Federal
Fees
Other:

Total $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0
There is no fiscal impact to the Transit Fund. SLOCOG will reimburse the City to fully offset costs associated with offering fare-free transit during Rideshare Week.

ALTERNATIVES
Council could decide not to approve SLO Transit providing fare-free transit during Rideshare Week. This action is not recommended by staff because Rideshare Week is a great opportunity to promote use of transit and other forms of sustainable transportation.

Participating in Rideshare Week also aligns with multiple City policies and programs.

ATTACHMENTS
A - Draft Resolution approving SLO Transit to provide fare-free transit during Rideshare Week
B - August 14, 2024 - B-5 Rideshare Week Fare-Free Transit Pilot staff report

R ______
RESOLUTION NO. _____ (2024 SERIES)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS

OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING SAN LUIS OBISPO (SLO)

TRANSIT TO PROVIDE FARE-FREE TRANSIT DURING RIDESHARE
WEEK
WHEREAS, Climate Action, Open Space and Sustainable Transportation is a Major City Goal; and
WHEREAS, SLO Regional Rideshare, a division of the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG), operates programs to promote use of sustainable transportation modes, to reduce fuel consumption, and to improve air quality; and WHEREAS, one of the programs managed by SLOCOG is Rideshare Week which takes place the first full week of each October and encourages people to commute using transit, biking, carpool, and vanpool instead of driving alone; and WHEREAS, the City of San Luis Obispo and San Luis Obispo (SLO) Transit are partner agencies of SLOCOG and participate in their programs and events including Rideshare Week; and
WHEREAS, prior to 2020, SLO Transit offered fare-free transit during Rideshare Week and costs associated with providing fare-free transit was fully offset by SLOCOG via grant funding; and
WHEREAS, SLOCOG is interested in offering fare-free transit during Rideshare Week taking place October 7-11, 2024; and
WHEREAS, on August 14, 2024, SLOCOG’s board approved a pilot week of farefree transit during Rideshare Week and use of Low Carbon Transportation Operations Program (LCTOP) funds to offset cost of participating transit agencies that offer fare-free transit; and
WHEREAS, SLO Transit’s participation in Rideshare Week and providing fare-free transit during the event is a great opportunity to encourage use of transit by commuters as a sustainable transportation mode; and
WHEREAS, SLO Transit wishes to provide fare-free transit during the Rideshare Week event this year and in future years provided SLOCOG has funding allocated to reimburse the City for costs associated with offering fare-free transit.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo does hereby approve SLO Transit to provide fare-free transit during Rideshare Week as follows:

Resolution No. _____ (2024 Series) Page 2
R ______
SECTION 1. Approval. The City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo does hereby:

1. Approve SLO Transit to provide fare-free transit during Rideshare Week this year and in future years so long as SLOCOG has funding allocated to reimburse the City for costs associated with offering fare-free transit; and

2. Authorize staff to coordinate marketing, outreach, and promotion of Rideshare Week with SLOCOG and other participating transit agencies; and

3. Authorize staff to seek reimbursement from SLOCOG to offset costs associated with providing fare-free transit during Rideshare Week.

Upon motion of Council Member ___________, seconded by Council Member ___________, and on the following roll call vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

The foregoing resolution was adopted this _____ day of ______________ 2024. ___________________________
Mayor Erica A. Stewart
ATTEST:
______________________
Teresa Purrington
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
______________________
J. Christine Dietrick
City Attorney
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, on ______________________. ___________________________
Teresa Purrington
City Clerk

B-5-1

SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: AUGUST 14, 2024 ITEM B-5
SUBJECT:

STAFF CONTACT:

Rideshare Week Fare-Free Transit Pilot
Mallory Jenkins

SUMMARY
This report seeks approval from the SLOCOG Board to pilot a week of fare-free transit during Rideshare Week (October 7-11, 2024) and coordinate with transit operators on public outreach and promotion.

Currently, over $1M of Low Carbon Transit Operations Program (LCTOP) funds are programmed to provide free public transit during construction of the U.S. 101 South County managed lane project. If approved by the SLOCOG Board, up to $30k of these funds will be used for early implementation of the pilot during Rideshare Week, to offset the loss of farebox revenue otherwise collected from paying riders (excluding students and riders over 80). The Rideshare Week promotion will allow staff to evaluate the impact of free transit on ridership and public perception while identifying challenges prior to starting construction of the managed lane project.

RECOMMENDATION
Staff: Approve Rideshare Week Fare-Free Transit pilot using up to $30k of budgeted Low Carbon Transit Operations Program (LCTOP) funds and direct staff to coordinate with transit operators on outreach and promotions
SSTAC: Support staff recommendation
TTAC: Support staff recommendation
CTAC: Support staff recommendation

DISCUSSION
In April 2024, the SLOCOG Board approved the current Low Carbon Transit Operations Program (LCTOP) program of projects, which included funding for free public transit during construction of the U.S. 101 South County managed lane project, to help alleviate congestion during the construction. This report seeks approval to implement the pilot during Rideshare Week (October 7-11, 2024) and coordinate with fixed-route transit operators (RTA, SLO Transit, and Morro Bay Transit) on public outreach and promotion of the pilot project.

Rideshare Week is an annual event aimed at promoting alternative transportation methods to reduce traffic congestion and improve air quality across the state. The campaign is promoted regionally by SLOCOG’s Rideshare division. Held in early October, the initiative encourages commuters to try carpooling, taking public transit, biking, walking, or telecommuting instead of driving alone. Participants can join various activities, contests, and incentives organized by local agencies and employers to raise awareness about the benefits of ridesharing. By highlighting the convenience and sustainability of shared transportation options, California Rideshare Week strives to foster long-term behavioral changes that contribute to a greener and more efficient transportation system.

Staff are proposing to pilot free transit on fixed routes during Rideshare Week. Regular fares would still apply on all dial-a-rides and Runabout services. The pilot will allow staff to evaluate the impact on transit ridership and public perception while identifying challenges early, prior to starting construction of the managed lane project. The fare-free week will be advertised on social media, radio, print publications/newspapers, and in the Rideshare newsletter that is distributed to over 16,000 commuters, employers, and residents. Surveys will also be distributed to passengers and ridership data will be collected from transit operators at the conclusion of the campaign to evaluate the impact on ridership.

B-5-2
Public transit is an extremely efficient way to get people around and access to transit services is a critical component to ensuring mobility for all. Fare-free transit reduces barriers by not requiring advance purchase of a pass or needing an exact cash fare. Fare-free transit was previously included as part of the 2019 (and prior) Rideshare Week campaign(s) but was paused during pandemic years. The current availability of LCTOP funding fully offsets the loss of passenger fares associated with free service and provides a new opportunity to pilot fare-free transit promotion post-pandemic while collecting data on its impact.

Staff recommends using budgeted LCTOP funds to offer fare-free transit during Rideshare Week through coordination with transit operators on marketing and outreach. Additionally, staff will draft a policy and work with operators to mitigate potential negative impacts to the rider experience such as those who board without a destination, carry excess personal belongings, etc. All three of the fixed-route transit operators including SLO RTA, SLO Transit, and Morro Bay Transit have expressed their interest and support for the promotion, so long as funding is available to offset the cost of providing free service. SLO Transit’s (City of San Luis Obispo Transit) participation is tentative, pending City Council’s approval at their September 3rd meeting.

Examples of fare-free transit promotions:

Item 5i
Department: Community Development
Cost Center: 4008
For Agenda of: 9/3/2024
Placement: Consent
Estimated Time: N/A
FROM: Timmi Tway, Community Development Director
Prepared By: Hannah Hanh, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: SECOND READING AND ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE NO. 1739 (2024 SERIES) APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO TABLE 2-1 (USES
ALLOWED BY ZONE) IN TITLE 17 (ZONING REGULATIONS) OF THE

MUNICIPAL CODE

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt Ordinance No. 1739 (2024 Series) entitled, “An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, approving an amendment to Table 2-1 (Uses Allowed by Zone) in Title 17 (Zoning Regulations) of the Municipal Code with an exemption from environmental review (CEQA) (CODE-0224-2024).”

POLICY CONTEXT
Per Chapter 17.124 (Amendments – Zoning Regulations and Zoning Map), the City Council may review the proposed text amendment, including the Planning Commission’s recommendation, and take action based on consistency with the General Plan and State Law.

DISCUSSION
Previous Council and Advisory Body Review
On June 12, 2024, the Planning Commission reviewed the proposed text amendment and recommended the City Council introduce and adopt the Ordinance approving the amendment to Table 2-1 (Uses Allowed by Zone) in Title 17 (Zoning Regulations) of the Municipal Code (Resolution, Minutes).

On August 20, 2024, the City Council voted 5 – 0 to introduce Ordinance No. 1739 (2024 Series) approving an amendment to Table 2-1 (Uses Allowed by Zone) of Title 17 (Zoning Regulations) in the Municipal Code to add single-family and multi-family residential uses as conditionally allowed with approval of a Minor Use Permit in the C-N Zone.

If Council adopts the Ordinance, it shall be effective 30 days after its final passage.

Item 5i
Public Engagement
Each public hearing associated with this item has been noticed in compliance with the City’s notification requirements for a proposed text amendment. If the Ordinance is adopted, future single-family and multi-family residential development in the C-N Zone would be subject to approval of a Minor Use Permit, which is a discretionary review process that requires legal notices and a public hearing for each development project.

CONCURRENCE
The Council Agenda Report was reviewed by the Community Development Department, Finance Department, City Attorney, and City Administration for concurrence. If Council adopts the Ordinance, all relevant departments and divisions would have the opportunity to review any proposed single-family and multi-family residential development as part of the Minor Use Permit application process.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The text amendment is exempt under Section 15061(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines. This “Common Sense” exemption states that CEQA only applies to projects that have the potential for causing significant effect on the environment. Since the text amendment is a minor revision to Table 2-1 (Uses Allowed by Zone) in Title 17 (Zoning Regulations) that would conditionally allow residential uses with approval of a Minor Use Permit in the C-N zone, the scope of this action is limited to a text amendment where subsequent singlefamily and multi-family residential development would be subject to discretionary review.

Since these uses are subject to discretionary review, environmental review would be evaluated on a project-specific basis. It is also noted that there are existing single-family residences in some of the C-N zoned parcels. Therefore, there would not be additional environmental impacts for those parcels.

FISCAL IMPACT
Budgeted: No Budget Year: 2023-25
Funding Identified: N/A
Fiscal Analysis:

Funding
Sources
Total Budget
Available
Current
Funding
Request
Remaining
Balance
Annual
Ongoing
Cost
General Fund $0 $0 $0 $0
State
Federal
Fees
Other:

Total $0 $0 $0 $0

Item 5i
There is no upfront cost resulting from adoption of the Ordinance. If Council adopts the Ordinance, each subsequent residential development in the C-N Zone would require a Minor Use Permit application, which is an applicant-funded review process.

ALTERNATIVES

1. Council may decide to modify the Ordinance before adoption. Depending on changes proposed, modification of the Ordinance may require reintroduction and then adoption during subsequent public hearing, which will delay implementation of the Ordinance.

2. Council may decide not to adopt the Ordinance. This action is not recommended because it would not allow residential uses in the C-N Zone and facilitate additional housing opportunities throughout the City.

ATTACHMENTS
A - Ordinance No. 1739 (2024 Series)

O 1739
ORDINANCE NO. 1739 (2024 SERIES)

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO TABLE 2-1 (USES ALLOWED BY ZONE) IN TITLE 17 (ZONING REGULATIONS) OF

THE MUNICIPAL CODE WITH AN EXEMPTION FROM
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW (CEQA) (CODE-0224-2024)
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California on June 12, 2024, for the purpose of recommending an amendment to Table 2-1 (Uses Allowed by Zone) in Title 17 (Zoning Regulations) of the Municipal Code, pursuant to a proceeding under CODE-0224-2024; City of San Luis Obispo, applicant; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California on August 20, 2024, for the purpose of introducing an ordinance to amend Table 2-1 (Uses Allowed by Zone) in Title 17 (Zoning Regulations) of the Municipal Code, pursuant to a proceeding under CODE-0224-2024; City of San Luis Obispo, applicant; and
WHEREAS, notices of said public hearing were made at the time and in the manner required by law; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has duly considered all evidence, including the testimony of interested parties and the evaluation and recommendation by staff, presented at said hearing.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows:

SECTION 1. Findings. Based upon all the evidence, the City Council makes the following findings:

1. The proposed amendment to Table 2-1 (Uses Allowed by Zone) in Title 17 (Zoning Regulations) of the Municipal Code to add single-family and multi-family residential uses as conditionally allowed uses with approval of a Minor Use Permit is consistent with the intent of the Neighborhood Commercial (NC) land use designation and purpose of the Neighborhood Commercial (C-N) zone.

2. The proposed amendment to Table 2-1 (Uses Allowed by Zone) in Title 17 (Zoning Regulations) of the Municipal Code to add single-family and multi-family residential uses as conditionally allowed uses with approval of a Minor Use Permit would not alter the character of the City or cause health safety or welfare concerns because the amendment is consistent with the General Plan. In addition, the amendment would directly implement City goals and policies, particularly the Major City Goal for Housing & Homelessness, to support the expansion of housing options and facilitate housing production.

Ordinance No. 1739 (2024 Series) Page 2
O 1739

3. Parcels located in the C-N zone include historical residential uses that are currently nonconforming. The proposed amendment would allow these residential uses to become conforming and facilitate additional opportunities for these uses to continue and expand.

SECTION 2. Environmental Determination. The proposed amendment to Table 2-1 (Uses Allowed by Zone) of Title 17 (Zoning Regulations) has been assessed in accordance with the authority and criteria contained in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the CEQA Guidelines, and environmental regulations of the City. The amendment is exempt under Section 15061(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines. This “Common Sense” exemption states that CEQA only applies to projects that have the potential for causing significant effect on the environment. Since the text amendment is a minor revision that would conditionally allow residential uses with approval of a Minor Use Permit in the C-N zone, the scope of this action is limited to a text amendment where subsequent single-family and multi-family residential development would be subject to discretionary review. Since these uses are subject to discretionary review, environmental review would be evaluated on a project-specific basis. It is also noted that there are existing single-family residences in some of the C-N zoned parcels. Therefore, there would not be additional environmental impacts for those parcels.

SECTION 3. Action. The City Council hereby adopts an ordinance to amend Table 2-1 (Uses Allowed by Zone) in Title 17 (Zoning Regulations) of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code and add single-family and multi-family uses as conditionally allowed uses in the C-N zone as set forth and incorporated herein.

Ordinance No. 1739 (2024 Series) Page 3
O 1739
Table 2-1: Uses Allowed By Zone
Key: A = Allowed; MUP = Minor Use Permit approval required; CUP = Conditional Use Permit approval required M/A = Minor Use Permit approval required on ground floor along street frontage, allowed on second floor or above Land Use
Permit Requirement by Zoning District Specific Use
AG C/OS R-1 R-2 R-3 R-4 PF O C-N C-C C-R C-D C-T C-S M BP Regulations

AGRICULTURE
Agricultural Accessory
Structure A A
Animal Husbandry and
Grazing A A
Community Garden A MUP A A A A A
Crop Production A A A MUP MUP
Greenhouse/Plant Nursery,
Commercial CUP CUP

INDUSTRY, MANUFACTURING & PROCESSING, WHOLESALING
Fuel Dealer (propane, etc) MUP A
See also Sec.

17.74.060
Laboratory - Medical,
Analytical, Research,
Testing

CUP A A A A
See also Sec.

17.74.060
Manufacturing - Heavy CUP CUP See also Sec.

17.74.060
Manufacturing - Light A A A
See also Sec.

17.74.060
Recycling
Recycling -
Collection Facility MUP MUP MUP A
Recycling -
Processing Facility MUP
Research and
Development A MUP A
See also Sec.

17.74.060
Salvage and Wrecking MUP
Warehousing, Storage, and Distribution
Outdoor Storage MUP MUP
Personal Storage A A
Warehousing and
Indoor Storage A A MUP

Ordinance No. 1739 (2024 Series) Page 4
O 1739
Table 2-1: Uses Allowed By Zone
Key: A = Allowed; MUP = Minor Use Permit approval required; CUP = Conditional Use Permit approval required M/A = Minor Use Permit approval required on ground floor along street frontage, allowed on second floor or above Land Use
Permit Requirement by Zoning District Specific Use
AG C/OS R-1 R-2 R-3 R-4 PF O C-N C-C C-R C-D C-T C-S M BP Regulations Wholesaling and
Distribution A A MUP

LODGING
Bed and Breakfast
Establishment MUP CUP CUP A A ASee Sec. 17.86.070
Homeless Shelter A A A A A A A A A A A A
See Sec. 17.86.150
and GC Sec.
65583(a)(4)
Hostel CUP CUP A A A
Hotels and Motels A A A CUP CUP
RV Parks CUP

PUBLIC AND QUASI-PUBLIC USES
Cultural Institutions CUP A A A CUP
Hospitals and Clinics
Clinic MUP MUP A MUP MUP MUP See Sec. 17.36.030.C
and Sec. 17.42.030.A
Hospital CUP CUP
Park and Recreation
Facilities A A A A A A A A A A A A A A
Parks and Recreation
Commission review
required.

Public Assembly Facilities CUP A MUP MUP M/A MUP CUP
Religious Assembly
Facilities CUP MUP MUP MUP MUP A MUP MUP A M/A MUP MUP MUP See 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000cc, et seq.

Schools - Colleges CUP
Schools - Primary and
Secondary CUP CUP MUP MUP CUP CUP CUP MUP CUP See Sec. 17.86.240 Schools - Trade Schools CUP MUP CUP MUP MUP
In the C-D zone, Trade
Schools are not
allowed on the ground
floor.

Sports and Entertainment
Assembly Facility CUP CUP

Ordinance No. 1739 (2024 Series) Page 5
O 1739
Table 2-1: Uses Allowed By Zone
Key: A = Allowed; MUP = Minor Use Permit approval required; CUP = Conditional Use Permit approval required M/A = Minor Use Permit approval required on ground floor along street frontage, allowed on second floor or above Land Use
Permit Requirement by Zoning District Specific Use
AG C/OS R-1 R-2 R-3 R-4 PF O C-N C-C C-R C-D C-T C-S M BP Regulations

RESIDENTIAL USES
General Residential
Housing Types
Single-Unit
Dwellings, Detached A CUP A A A A A MUP
Multi-Unit
Residential A A A A MUP
Boarding House CUP CUP MUP MUP
Caretaker Quarters A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A MUP
Continuing Care
Community MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP
Elderly and Long Term
Care MUP MUP MUP M/A M/A MUP
Family Day Care (Small
and Large) A A A A A A A A A A A A A
See Sec. 17.86.100
and H&SC 1597.40
Fraternities and Sororities CUP CUP Section 17.86.130
Hospice In-Patient Facility CUP CUP MUP CUP CUP MUP
Mobile Home Park A A A A
See GC Sec. 65852.7,
65863.7, 65863.8
Residential Care Facilities
- 6 or Fewer Residents A A A A A A M/A M/A M/A MUP Multiple state statutes Residential Care Facilities
- 7 or More Residents MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP Multiple state statutes Supportive and/or
Transitional Housing, with
On or Off-Site Services

A A A A MUP A A A A A A A A
See GC Sec.
65583(a)(5)
Farmworker Housing A A

MIXED USES
Mixed-use Development A A A A A A A A See Sec. 17.70.130

Ordinance No. 1739 (2024 Series) Page 6
O 1739
Table 2-1: Uses Allowed By Zone
Key: A = Allowed; MUP = Minor Use Permit approval required; CUP = Conditional Use Permit approval required M/A = Minor Use Permit approval required on ground floor along street frontage, allowed on second floor or above Land Use
Permit Requirement by Zoning District Specific Use
AG C/OS R-1 R-2 R-3 R-4 PF O C-N C-C C-R C-D C-T C-S M BP Regulations

COMMERCIAL USES
Adult Entertainment
Businesses A A
See Sec. 17.86.030
and GC Section
65850.4
Animal Care, Sales and Services
Animal
Boarding/Kennels CUP MUP MUP
Outdoor runs and
kennel areas shall be
allowed only in the C-S
zone. See also Sec.

17.86.170.

Animal Grooming A A A A A MUP
Animal Retail Sales MUP A A A A
Veterinary Services,
Large Animal CUP MUP MUP
Veterinary Services,
Small Animal A A A A M/A A
Banks and Financial Institutions
ATMs A A A A A A A A A
Banks and Credit
Unions A A A A MUP MUP MUP See Sec. 17.36.030.B and Sec. 17.40.030.A Check Cashing
Shops/Payday
Loans

MUP MUP
Business Services A A A M/A A A A
Cemetery CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP
Commercial Recreation -
Large Scale CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP MUP See Sec. 17.36.030.D and Sec. 17.86.110 Commercial Recreation -
Small Scale MUP MUP A A A A A A MUP
Day Care Center MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP A A A A M/A MUP MUP MUP MUP See Sec. 17.86.100

Ordinance No. 1739 (2024 Series) Page 7
O 1739
Table 2-1: Uses Allowed By Zone
Key: A = Allowed; MUP = Minor Use Permit approval required; CUP = Conditional Use Permit approval required M/A = Minor Use Permit approval required on ground floor along street frontage, allowed on second floor or above Land Use
Permit Requirement by Zoning District Specific Use
AG C/OS R-1 R-2 R-3 R-4 PF O C-N C-C C-R C-D C-T C-S M BP Regulations Eating and Drinking Establishments
Bars and Taverns MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP
See also Sec.

17.86.040 and Sec.

17.86.050
Restaurant A A A A A A MUP MUP
Restaurant with Late
Hour Alcohol
Service
MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP See Sec. 17.86.040
and Sec. 17.86.050
Food and Beverage Sales
General Market A A A A CUP See Sec.

17.26.030.B.1
Convenience Store MUP MUP MUP A A A A A MUP MUP MUP
See Sec.

17.26.030.B.1 and
Sec. 17.86.090
Produce Stand MUP MUP A A A A
Liquor Store MUP MUP MUP MUP CUP
See Sec.

17.26.030.B.2 and
Sec. 17.86.040
Food Preparation A A A
Funeral Parlors and
Internment Services MUP MUP A MUP
Instructional Services MUP CUP MUP M/A A M/A CUP A MUP
Maintenance and Repair
Services A A CUP
Offices
Business and
Professional Offices MUP A A A M/A M/A MUP MUP
In the C-S zone, a
MUP is required for
office uses on the
ground floor. See also
Sec. 17.36.030.B and
Sec. 17.40.030.A.

Medical and Dental
Offices A A A M/A MUP MUP See Sec. 1736.030.C
Personal Services A A A A MUP A MUP

Ordinance No. 1739 (2024 Series) Page 8
O 1739
Table 2-1: Uses Allowed By Zone
Key: A = Allowed; MUP = Minor Use Permit approval required; CUP = Conditional Use Permit approval required M/A = Minor Use Permit approval required on ground floor along street frontage, allowed on second floor or above Land Use
Permit Requirement by Zoning District Specific Use
AG C/OS R-1 R-2 R-3 R-4 PF O C-N C-C C-R C-D C-T C-S M BP Regulations Retail Sales
See Sec. 17.26.030.A,

17.30.030.A,

17.32.030, and

17.34.034.A and

17.36.030.A
Building Materials and
Services - Indoor A A A A A
Building Materials and
Services - Outdoor MUP A MUP A A
Extended Hour Retail MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP
General Retail MUP A A A MUP MUP
Large-Scale Retail CUP CUP CUP
Nurseries and Garden
Centers CUP A A
Theaters CUP MUP MUP MUP MUP
Only nonprofit theaters
are allowed in the PF
zone. See also Sec.

17.86.030.

Vehicle Sales and Services
Auto and Vehicle Sales
and Rental MUP CUP A MUP
Large Vehicle,
Construction and
Heavy Equipment
Sales, Service, and
Rental
MUP A
Service Stations MUP MUP MUP MUP A
See Sec. 17.86.250,
and Sec. 17.86.060.

Vehicle Services -
Major Repair/Body
Work

A A MUP
Vehicle Services -
Minor
Repair/Maintenance

CUP MUP A A MUP
Vehicle Services -
Washing MUP MUP CUP MUP MUP

Ordinance No. 1739 (2024 Series) Page 9
O 1739
Table 2-1: Uses Allowed By Zone
Key: A = Allowed; MUP = Minor Use Permit approval required; CUP = Conditional Use Permit approval required M/A = Minor Use Permit approval required on ground floor along street frontage, allowed on second floor or above Land Use
Permit Requirement by Zoning District Specific Use
AG C/OS R-1 R-2 R-3 R-4 PF O C-N C-C C-R C-D C-T C-S M BP Regulations

TRANSPORTATION, COMMUNICATIONS, & UTILITIES
Airport CUP CUP CUP MUP
Wireless
Telecommunications
Facilities

MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP
See Sec. 17.86.290,
47 USC Sec. 332(c)(7)
of the
Telecommunications
Act, Pub. Util. Code
Sec. 7901 et seq., GC
Sec. 65850.6
Freight/Truck Terminals A A MUP
Light Fleet-Based Services A MUP MUP
Media Production
Backlots and
Soundstages MUP MUP MUP
Broadcast Studios A A M/A A A A
Heliport CUP CUP CUP CUP
Parking Facilities CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP See Sec. 17.86.200 Public Safety Facilities CUP CUP
Transit Station or Terminal CUP CUP CUP MUP A
Utilities Facilities Ground-mounted
equipment in
residential zones shall
be screened by
landscaping to the
satisfaction of the
Director.

Facilities with Onsite
Staff CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP Facilities with No
Onsite Staff
(unmanned)

MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP Transmission Lines CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP

Ordinance No. 1739 (2024 Series) Page 10
O 1739
Table 2-1: Uses Allowed By Zone
Key: A = Allowed; MUP = Minor Use Permit approval required; CUP = Conditional Use Permit approval required M/A = Minor Use Permit approval required on ground floor along street frontage, allowed on second floor or above Land Use
Permit Requirement by Zoning District Specific Use
AG C/OS R-1 R-2 R-3 R-4 PF O C-N C-C C-R C-D C-T C-S M BP Regulations

CANNABIS ACTIVITY
Cannabis See Section 17.86.080
Specialty Cultivator MUP MUP MUP
Small Cultivator MUP MUP MUP
Nursery MUP MUP MUP
Manufacturing MUP MUP MUP
Distributor MUP MUP MUP
Microbusiness CUP MUP/
CUP
MUP/
CUP
MUP/
CUP
See Sec.

17.86.080(E)(12) for
specific requirements
per zone.

Testing CUP A A A
Director’s action
required. See also
Sec. 17.86.080(E)(9).

Retailer (Delivery) MUP MUP MUP
Retailer (Storefront) CUP CUP

SPECIFIC AND TEMPORARY LAND USES
Educational Conferences
Housing MUP MUP MUP MUP
Homestay Rentals See Sec. 17.86.160
Home Occupation See Sec. 17.86.140
Food Trucks See Sec. 17.86.120
Nightclubs and Live
Entertainment MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP
Office - Temporary See Chapter 17.113
Outdoor Temporary and/or
Seasonal Sales See Sec. 17.86.190 and Chapter 17.113
Parking Facility -
Temporary CUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP See Chapter 17.113 Safe Parking CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP See Sec. 17.86.230 Special Event MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP See Chapter 17.113 Vending Machine See Section 17.86.280

Ordinance No. 1739 (2024 Series) Page 11
O 1739
SECTION 4. A summary of this ordinance, together with the names of Council members voting for and against, shall be published at least five (5) days prior to its final passage, in the New Times, a newspaper published and circulated in this City. The Ordinance shall be effective thirty (30) days after its final passage.

INTRODUCED on the 20th day of August 2024, AND FINALLY ADOPTED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo on the ____ day of ____ 2024, on the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:
__________________________
Mayor Erica A. Stewart
ATTEST:
_________________________
Teresa Purrington,
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
__________________________
J. Christine Dietrick,
City Attorney
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, on ______________________. __________________________
Teresa Purrington,
City Clerk

Item 6a
Department: Community Development
Cost Center: 4001
For Agenda of: 9/3/2024
Placement: Public Hearing
Estimated Time: 30 minutes
FROM: Timmi Tway, Community Development Director
Prepared By: Ivana Gomez, Cannabis Business Coordinator SUBJECT: INTRODUCE AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND TITLE 17 (ZONING

REGULATIONS) OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE TO ALLOW CANNABIS

RETAIL STOREFRONTS TO CONDUCT RETAIL SALES BY DELIVERY

WITH APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT OR BY

AMENDMENT TO AN EXISTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT

RECOMMENDATION
Introduce a Draft Ordinance entitled, “An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, approving an amendment to Table 2-1 (Uses Allowed by Zone) in Title 17 (Zoning Regulations) of the Municipal Code with an exemption from environmental review (CEQA) (CODE-0401-2024).”

REPORT-IN-BRIEF
The Community Development Director, on behalf of the City of San Luis Obispo, has initiated proposed text amendments to Table 2-1 (Uses Allowed by Zone, Section §

17.10.020) of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code (SLOMC). These amendments are in response to prior City Council directives aimed at updating the City's Cannabis Program as discussed in the “Previous Council and Advisory Action” section below. Specifically, the proposed amendments to Table 2-1 will clarify that cannabis retail storefronts (“retail storefronts”) may engage in retail sales through delivery, subject to approval of a Conditional Use Permit (“CUP”) or by amendment to an existing Conditional Use Permit (Attachment A – Draft Ordinance).

POLICY CONTEXT
Pursuant to Chapter 17.24 (Amendments – Zoning Regulations and Zoning Map), the City Council may review the proposed text amendments, including the Planning Commission’s recommendation, and take action based on consistency with the overall objectives of the City Council, the Major City Goals, and State Law.

DISCUSSION

Item 6a
Previous Council and Advisory Body Action
On March 7, 2023, at the Annual Cannabis Business Program Update, the City Council provided direction to staff to update the Cannabis Program to allow retail storefronts to offer delivery services1. As a result, staff revised the program’s administrative regulations and application materials to allow retail storefronts to engage in delivery. These changes required thorough internal review and approval by the City Manager via City Manager Report.

Staff has identified a need to provide clear guidance in the zoning table pertaining to allowable cannabis activity and the processes for approval. Therefore, on August 14, 2024, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. PC-1089-24 recommending the City Council introduce and adopt an Ordinance amending Table 2-1 (Uses Allowed by Zone, Section § 17.10.020) of the Municipal Code to allow retail storefronts to conduct retail sales by delivery with the approval of a Conditional Use Permit, or by amendment to an existing Conditional Use Permit. The proposed amendments before the City Council for consideration implement Council’s previous direction to Staff, as well as the recommendation from the Planning Commission.

Background
There are two types of commercial cannabis retail activity – retail storefront and retail non-storefront (aka delivery-only). Retail storefronts, which are regulated under a Type 10 state license, sell cannabis goods directly to the public at their physical locations and may also provide delivery services under current state regulations. Pursuant to SLOMC Section § 17.86.080(E)(10)(b), the number of retail storefront permits is limited to three total within the City, and they are permitted in the Retail Commercial (C-R) and Service Commercial (C-S) Zones. However, the zoning regulations for commercial cannabis activity do not explicitly demonstrate that retail storefronts may also deliver in their respective zones. Retail non-storefronts (delivery-only businesses) operate under a Type 9 state license, conduct retail sales exclusively through delivery to physical locations within the state of California, and are permitted in the Service Commercial (C-S), Manufacturing (M), and Business Park (BP) Zones. In other words, although delivery-only businesses may only operate out of the allowable zones above, they may deliver to any jurisdiction within the state of California under state law, provided that such delivery is conducted in compliance with applicable regulations2. There is no limit on the number of these delivery-only businesses in the City, and there are currently no delivery-only businesses in the City.

1 City Council Meeting Agenda Packet (03-07-2023)
2 Pursuant to 4 CCR § 15416(d), operators engaging in delivery may deliver to any jurisdiction within the State of California provided that such delivery is conducted in compliance with all applicable laws and regulations.

Item 6a
All cannabis businesses must be located within the Cannabis Business Zone Overlay (Section § 17.86.080E(5)(b)) and are subject to the requirements of SLOMC Chapter 9.10 (Cannabis Regulations) and Title 17 (Zoning Regulations). Currently, there are two operational commercial cannabis businesses in the City, both of which are retail storefronts: Megan’s Organic Market and SLOCAL Roots. An additional retail storefront has been issued a Contingent Operator Permit and is awaiting approval of a Conditional Use Permit to commence operations. This will be the final retail storefront permitted in the City.

Proposed Amendments to Table 2-1 (Uses Allowed by Zone) The proposed amendments to Table 2-1, shown in underline in Figure 1, clarify the following:
 Retail non-storefronts engaging in delivery only are permitted to operate out of the C-S, M and BP Zones, with approval of a Minor Use Permit (MUP).  Retail storefronts, with or without delivery services, are permitted to operate out of the C-R and C-S Zones with approval of a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) or by amendment to an existing Conditional Use Permit.

Table 2-1: Uses Allowed By Zone
Key:

A = Allowed; MUP = Minor Use Permit approval required; CUP = Conditional Use Permit approval required
M/A = Minor Use Permit approval required on ground floor along street frontage, allowed on second floor or above
Land Use Permit Requirement by Zoning District Specific Use AG C/OS R-1 R-2 R-3 R-4 PF O C-N C-C C-R C-D C-T C-S M BP Regulations

CANNABIS ACTIVITY
Cannabis See Section 17.86.080
Specialty
Cultivator MUP MUP MUP
Small Cultivator MUP MUP MUP
Nursery MUP MUP MUP
Manufacturing MUP MUP MUP
Distributor MUP MUP MUP
Microbusiness CUP MUP/
CUP
MUP/
CUP
MUP/
CUP
See Sec.

17.86.080(E)(12) for
specific requirements
per zone.

Testing CUP A A A
Director’s action
required. See also Sec.

17.86.080(E)(9).

Retailer (Delivery
Only)

MUP MUP MUP
Retailer
(Storefront with or
without Delivery)

CUP CUP
Existing retail storefronts
that wish to provide
delivery services shall
modify their existing
Conditional Use Permit
to include delivery.

Figure 1: Proposed Amendments to Table 2-1

Item 6a

PROJECT ANALYSIS
Public Engagement
Each public hearing related to this item has been properly noticed in accordance with the City’s notification requirements for proposed text amendments. If the Ordinance for the proposed text amendment is adopted, retail storefronts will be permitted to conduct retail sales via delivery upon the granting of a CUP or the amendment of an existing CUP to allow delivery activity. The review process of a Conditional Use Permit application involves discretionary review, which requires legal notifications and a public hearing for each future project.

Consistency with Major City Goals
Economic Resiliency, Cultural Vitality and Fiscal Sustainability were prioritized as Major City Goals in the 2023-2025 Financial Plan to support a thriving and sustainable local economy and ensure fiscally responsible city operations. The proposed text amendments align with these goals by expanding retail sales options to include delivery for existing and future retail storefront businesses. This promotes economic well-being by providing more flexible sales avenues, thereby supporting the local economy and contributing to the city’s financial sustainability.

Consistency with State Law
The proposed amendments are consistent with current state regulations governing cannabis operations. State regulations permit retail storefronts to offer delivery services under a Type 10 license, provided they comply with specific operational and security requirements. By requiring retail storefronts to obtain a Conditional Use Permit or amend an existing permit to conduct delivery services, the proposed amendments ensure that local ordinances align with state-mandated standards, thereby ensuring that all cannabis delivery activities within the City adhere to stringent regulatory guidelines.

Consistency with the Zoning Regulations
Retail Commercial (C-R) Zone
The proposed amendments to Table 2-1 (Uses Allowed by Zone Section § 17.10.020) of the Municipal Code align with the purpose of the Retail Commercial (C-R) Zone to serve the entire community and the region, as well as tourists and travelers. By allowing retail storefronts to offer delivery services, the proposed amendments increase flexibility and convenience for residents, regional customers, and visitors. This supports economic vitality by enabling businesses to meet evolving market demands, promoting resilience and stability within the C-R Zone.

Service Commercial (C-S) Zone
The proposed amendments to Table 2-1 (Uses Allowed by Zone Section § 17.10.020) of the Municipal Code align with the purpose of the Service Commercial (C-S) Zone to provide services to meet local needs and demands of the region, including services and limited retail. By allowing retail storefronts to offer delivery services, the proposed amendments enhance the ability of businesses in the C-S Zone to adapt to market needs and expand their service offerings. This supports the zone’s objective of catering to both the community and the broader region, while promoting economic vitality and improving service accessibility.

Item 6a
Next Steps
Following introduction of the Draft Ordinance, the proposed amendments may be ordered to a second reading at a future City Council meeting and subsequently adopted. Existing retail storefronts who wish to engage in delivery may apply for an amendment to their existing Conditional Use Permit, which is subject to Departmental Review and Planning Commission approval. Future retail storefronts in the City may apply for a Conditional Use Permit to establish and operate a retail storefront and may opt to engage in storefront sales only or storefront and delivery sales at the time of application.

CONCURRENCE
The City has a designated steering committee comprised of representatives from the City Attorney’s Office, Police Department, Finance Department, Community Development Department, and City Administration to support the City’s Cannabis Program. The proposed amendments contained within this report have been reviewed and are supported by the steering committee as consistent with previous Council direction.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Adoption of the proposed amendments to Table 2-1 (Uses Allowed by Zone, Section §

17.10.020) of the Municipal Code has been reviewed in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. It has been determined that the amendments are exempt from environmental review under CEQA Guidelines Section § 15301(b)(3) (General Rule Exemption), which applies to activities that can be clearly seen to have no potential for significant environmental impact. The proposed amendments involve minor modifications to the regulations governing commercial cannabis retail storefront operations and are not expected to have any significant effect on the environment. However, project-specific environmental review will be required for any new commercial cannabis activity. Any new or existing cannabis retail storefront seeking a Conditional Use Permit or an amendment to an existing permit to engage in delivery services will be required to comply with all applicable state and local laws, including CEQA requirements.

FISCAL IMPACT
Budgeted: N/A Budget Year: 2023-25
Funding Identified: N/A

Item 6a
Fiscal Analysis:

Funding
Sources
Total Budget
Available
Current
Funding
Request
Remaining
Balance
Annual
Ongoing
Cost
General Fund $0 $0 $0 $0
State
Federal
Fees
Other:

Total $0 $0 $0 $0
There is no fiscal impact associated with the proposed amendments to the Municipal Code.

ALTERNATIVES

1. Modify the Ordinance. The City Council may modify the Draft Ordinance and introduce the revised ordinance.

2. Continue review. An action to continue the item should include a detailed list of additional information or analysis required to adopt the recommended changes.

3. Do not introduce and adopt the Ordinance. This is not recommended because this would be inconsistent with previous direction from the City Council on March 7, 2023 to allow cannabis retail storefronts to also deliver.

ATTACHMENTS
A - Draft Ordinance adopting an amendment to Table 2-1 of the Zoning Regulations to allow cannabis retail storefronts to deliver.

O ______
ORDINANCE NO. _____ (2024 SERIES)

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO TABLE 2-1
(USES ALLOWED BY ZONE) IN TITLE 17 (ZONING REGULATIONS) OF

THE MUNICIPAL CODE TO ALLOW CANNABIS RETAIL

STOREFRONTS TO CONDUCT RETAIL SALES BY DELIVERY WITH

APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT OR BY AMENDMENT
TO AN EXISTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT. THE PROJECT IS
EXEMPT FROM ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW (CEQA) (CODE-0401-2024) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California on August 14, 2024, for the purpose of recommending an amendment to Table 2-1 (Uses Allowed by Zone) in Title 17 (Zoning Regulations) of the Municipal Code, pursuant to a proceeding under CODE-0401-2024; City of San Luis Obispo, applicant; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California on September 3, 2024, for the purpose of introducing an ordinance to amend Table 2-1 (Uses Allowed by Zone) in Title 17 (Zoning Regulations) of the Municipal Code, pursuant to a proceeding under CODE-0401-2024; City of San Luis Obispo, applicant; and
WHEREAS, notices of said public hearing were made at the time and in the manner required by law; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has duly considered all evidence, including the testimony of interested parties and the evaluation and recommendation by staff, presented at said hearing.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows:

SECTION 1. Findings. Based upon all the evidence, the City Council makes the following findings:

1. The proposed amendments to Table 2-1 (Uses Allowed by Zone, Section §

17.10.020) of the Municipal Code are consistent with the State of California’s Department of Cannabis Control regulations.

2. The proposed amendments to Table 2-1 (Uses Allowed by Zone, Section §

17.10.020) are consistent with previous City Council direction on March 7, 2023, to update the Cannabis Program to allow cannabis retail storefronts to offer delivery services.

3. The proposed amendments to Table 2-1 (Uses Allowed by Zone, Section §

17.10.020) are consistent with the City Council's broader goals of regulating cannabis businesses to ensure public safety and compliance with state laws.

Ordinance No. ______ (2024 Series) Page 2
O ______

4. The proposed amendments to Table 2-1 (Uses Allowed by Zone Section §

17.10.020) of the Municipal Code are consistent with the Major City Goal (Financial Plan 2023-2025) to implement initiatives that reinforce a thriving and sustainable local economy as well as to ensure fiscally responsible and sustainable city operations by strengthening existing cannabis businesses, promoting the economic well-being of the community.

5. The proposed amendments to Table 2-1 (Uses Allowed by Zone Section §

17.10.020) of the Municipal Code are consistent with the purpose of the Retail Commercial (C-R) Zone to serve the entire community and the region, as well as tourists and travelers.

6. The proposed amendments to Table 2-1 (Uses Allowed by Zone Section §

17.10.020) of the Municipal Code are consistent with the purpose of the Service Commercial (C-S) Zone to provide services to meet local needs and demands of the region, including services and limited retail.

SECTION 2. The Land Use section entitled, “Cannabis Activity” of Table 2-1 (Uses Allowed by Zone, Section § 17.10.020) of the City of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code is hereby amended as follows:

Table 2-1: Uses Allowed By Zone
Key:

A = Allowed; MUP = Minor Use Permit approval required; CUP = Conditional Use Permit approval required
M/A = Minor Use Permit approval required on ground floor along street frontage, allowed on second floor or above
Land Use
Permit Requirement by Zoning District Specific Use
AG C/OS R Regulations -1 R-2 R-3 R-4 PF O C-N C-C C-R C-D C-T C-S M BP

CANNABIS ACTIVITY
Cannabis See Section 17.86.080
Specialty Cultivator MUP MUP MUP
Small Cultivator MUP MUP MUP
Nursery MUP MUP MUP
Manufacturing MUP MUP MUP
Distributor MUP MUP MUP
Microbusiness CUP MUP/
CUP
MUP/
CUP
MUP/
CUP
See Sec.

17.86.080(E)(12) for
specific requirements per
zone.

Testing CUP A A A
Director’s action required.

See also Sec.

17.86.080(E)(9).

Retailer (Delivery
Only) MUP MUP MUP
Retailer (Storefront
with or without Delivery)

CUP CUP
Existing retail storefronts
that wish to provide
delivery services shall
modify their existing
Conditional Use Permit to
include delivery.

Ordinance No. ______ (2024 Series) Page 3
O ______
SECTION 3. Environmental Determination. Adoption of the proposed amendments to Table 2-1 (Uses Allowed by Zone, Section § 17.10.020) of the Municipal Code has been reviewed in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. It has been determined that the amendments are exempt from environmental review under CEQA Guidelines Section § 15301(b)(3) (General Rule Exemption), which applies to activities that can be clearly seen to have no potential for significant environmental impact. The proposed amendments involve minor modifications to the regulations governing commercial cannabis retail storefront operations and are not expected to have any significant effect on the environment. However, project-specific environmental review will be required for any new commercial cannabis activity. Any new or existing cannabis retail storefront seeking a Conditional Use Permit or an amendment to an existing permit to engage in delivery services will be required to comply with all applicable state and local laws, including CEQA requirements.

SECTION 4. Action. The City Council hereby adopts an ordinance amending Table 2-1 (Uses Allowed by Zone, Section § 17.10.020) of the Municipal Code to allow cannabis retail storefronts to conduct retail sales by delivery with approval of a Conditional Use Permit or by amendment to an existing Conditional Use Permit.

SECTION 5. Severability. If any subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Ordinance is, for any reason, held to be invalid or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalid or unenforceability shall not affect the validity or enforcement of the remaining provisions of this Ordinance, or any other provisions of the City’s rules and regulations. It is the City’s express intent that each remaining portion would have been adopted irrespective of the fact that any one or more subdivisions, paragraphs, sentences, clauses, or phrases be declared invalid or unenforceable.

Ordinance No. ______ (2024 Series) Page 4
O ______
SECTION 6. A summary of this ordinance, together with the names of Council members voting for and against, shall be published at least five (5) days prior to its final passage, in The New Times, a newspaper published and circulated in this City. This ordinance shall go into effect at the expiration of thirty (30) days after its final passage.

INTRODUCED on the ____ day of _____ 2024, AND FINALLY ADOPTED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo on the ____ day of ____, 2024, on the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:
_____________________
Mayor Erica A. Stewart
ATTEST:
_________________________
Teresa Purrington
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________
J. Christine Dietrick
City Attorney
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, on ______________________. _____________________
Teresa Purrington
City Clerk

Item 6b
Department: Community Development
Cost Center: 4006
For Agenda of: 9/3/2024
Placement: Public Hearing
Estimated Time: 30 minutes
FROM: Timmi Tway, Community Development Director
Prepared By: Michael Loew, Deputy Director/Chief Building Official SUBJECT: INTRODUCE AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION

15.04.020, SUBSECTION N, MODIFYING THE QUALIFICATIONS FOR

APPOINTMENT TO THE CONSTRUCTION BOARD OF APPEALS

RECOMMENDATION

1. Introduce a Draft Ordinance entitled, “An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, amending Section 15.04.020, Subsection N, of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code,” which will remove the local requirement to maintain an Accessibility Board of Appeals pursuant to Health and Safety Code 19957.5; and

2. Adopt a Draft Resolution entitled, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, amending the Advisory Body Handbook for revision to the Construction Board of Appeals Bylaws,” which will remove the residency requirement and change the qualifications for disabled access representatives.

POLICY CONTEXT
City Charter Section 1202: Eligibility, Appointment, and Length of Terms – permits nonregistered voter and non-city resident participation on citizen committees, commissions, boards, and authorities depending upon the nature and purpose of the advisory body, as determined by City Council. City Council approval is required to amend the Advisory Body Handbook revising the participation requirements for committee members.

The specific qualifications for appointment to the Construction Board of Appeals are established under Municipal Code Title 15.04.020 Section 113 and in the Advisory Body Handbook under the Bylaws of the board.

DISCUSSION
Background
The City’s Construction Board of Appeals (CBOA) is established to provide the following functions:

Item 6b

1. To determine the suitability of alternate materials, methods of construction, and other specifications set out in the City’s adopted Uniform Codes.

2. To interpret the provisions of the City’s adopted Uniform Codes and to hear and decide appeals of orders, decisions or determinations made by the Chief Building Official, Code Official or Fire Marshall relative to the application and interpretations of the adopted Codes of Title 15.

3. To conduct hearings and provide the second level of administrative review for contested Administrative Citations issued pursuant to the adopted codes of Title 15 or otherwise issued by the Chief Building Official. To serve as the acting Housing Appeals Board required under California Health & Safety Code section 17920.6, and to also serve as the appeals body for any other adopted codes found within Title 15 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code, including disability access requirements imposed by the California Building Standards Code and the California Health & Safety Code.

CBOA Membership Requirements
The CBOA provides the Chief Building Official with technical oversight and has had a vacancy since April 1, 2022. The vacant position was previously filled by a member of the community who had a physical disability as defined by the California Building Code. The requirement for a physically disabled community representative has been established locally through the CBOA Bylaws and the municipal code.

The current membership requirements found in the Bylaws, reads as follows:
“The Construction Board of Appeals (CBOA) consists of seven members.

Members must be residents and registered voters of the City pursuant to the City of San Luis Obispo City Council Policies & Procedures Manual.

Five of the seven members shall be qualified by experience and training to pass on matters pertaining to building construction and building service equipment, hazards of fire, explosions, hazardous conditions or fire protection and who are not employees of the City. Two members of the Board shall be physically disabled persons, as defined in the adopted California Building Code. Board members may serve simultaneously on other non-technical City advisory bodies pursuant to the City of San Luis Obispo City Council Policies & Procedures Manual.

Each term of office will be for four years. There is no limitation to the number of consecutive terms of appointment.”
Additionally, there is a local requirement under Section 15.04.020, Subsection N of the Municipal code to establish an Accessibility Board of Appeals pursuant to Health and Safety Code 19957.5. The CBOA currently acts as the Accessibility Board of Appeals.

The proposed amendments to the municipal code are included in this report as Attachment A.

Item 6b
According to the Health Safety Code, an Accessibility Board of Appeals is required to have a specific membership. The board should be five people with the following qualifications:
“Two members of the appeals board shall be physically handicapped persons, two members shall be persons experienced in construction, and one member shall be a public member.”
CBOA Membership Revisions Proposed through Resolution
The Construction Board of Appeals and staff are recommending updating the Membership and Terms found in the Bylaws through Resolution (Attachment B). The new language would read as follows:
“The Construction Board of Appeals (CBOA) consists of seven members.

Five of the seven members shall be qualified by experience and training to pass on matters pertaining to building construction and building service equipment, hazards of fire, explosions, hazardous conditions or fire protection and who are not employees of the City. Two members of the Board shall be physically disabled community representatives* and shall be exempt from residency requirements.

Each term of office will be for four years. There is no limitation to the number of consecutive terms of appointment.
*Physically Disabled Community Representative Definition:

Preference will be given to individuals who are registered City of San Luis Obispo voters and who identify as an individual with a physical disability or a close connection with a member of the physically disabled community, such as an individual who works in a professional or advocacy capacity serving the physically disabled community, has a physically disabled household or family member/loved one, serves as a caregiver, or similar connection. However, if recruitment for this position does not result in sufficient qualified registered City voters, membership may be considered for:
 A physically disabled community member who lives outside the City limits, but within the County of San Luis Obispo; or
 A community member who lives outside the City limits, but within the County of San Luis Obispo that has a close connection with the physically disabled community.”1

1 Staff is proposing a different structure to the proposed bylaws that differs from the precise language presented to the CBOA in April of 2024; however, there are no changes in the substance of the language.

Item 6b
The proposed revisions will maintain a local requirement for having physically disabled representation on the CBOA but grant the Council discretion in appointing members to the body if recruitment efforts for the physically disabled community representative positions continue to fail. With this language, only the two physically disabled community representative positions will be exempt from voter registration and residency requirements. Examples of these potential appointees may include designers who specialize in disabled access codes, such as Certified Access Specialists, or those with close relation to people with physical disabilities. The purpose of these changes is to allow for a wider pool of candidates who may live outside of the City but work for an engineering or architecture firm that does business within the City.

CBOA Membership Qualification Revisions Proposed through Ordinance In addition to the changes being proposed to the Bylaws through the Resolution described above, a new ordinance is also necessary to ensure consistency between the bylaws and municipal code language. The amendments will remove the local requirement of creating an Accessibility Board of Appeals pursuant to the Health and Safety Code.

The language of Health & Safety Code 19957.5 is permissive as to the creation of a local accessibility appeals board. This has been confirmed by a 1982 Attorney General opinion (Attachment C), which concluded that a “written appeal under Health and Safety Code section 19957.5 regarding an action taken by a local building department in enforcing building access requirements for physically handicapped persons does not require that an appeals board be appointed to consider the matter.” However, if a local jurisdiction creates an accessibility appeals board pursuant to 19957.5, then it must be made up of individuals with the specific qualifications, as noted above.

The recommendations to the Council will eliminate the requirement created in the municipal code to appoint an accessibility appeals board, as defined by Health and Safety Code §19957.5. The attached draft ordinance includes new language identified by underlines, and the proposed language to be removed is identified by being stricken out (Attachment A). By referencing the Health and Safety code in establishing an accessibility board of appeals, the City must comply with the qualifications established in state statute, as noted above in this report. Rather, CBOA members and staff are proposing to maintain this representation by broadening the definition of “Physically Disabled Community Representative” and establishing the requirements for this in the bylaws. Ultimately, these amendments will not result in eliminating representation of the physically disabled community on this advisory body. Rather, continued representation is recommended due to the expansive nature of access standards that apply to new and existing built environments.

Previous Council or Advisory Body Action
On November 15, 2022, Council adopted Resolution No. 11377 (2022 Series) amending the Human Relations Commission’s (HRC) purpose statement and bylaws section of the Advisory Body Handbook. The amendment expanded the residency requirements for two of the commissioner positions allowing up to two members to be residents and registered voters of San Luis Obispo County or Cal Poly campus with a significant connection to the

Item 6b
City of San Luis Obispo. The HRC amendments were supported by the HRC itself as well as the Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) Taskforce.

On December 5, 2023, Council adopted Resolution No 11462 (2023 Series) amending the Mass Transportation Committees bylaws section of the Advisory Body Handbook.

The amendment modified the residency requirements for the person with disability position, and providing a pathway for the position to be filled by an individual who represents the physically disabled community.

On April 25, 2024, during a Regular Meeting, the Construction Board of Appeals voted to recommend the amendments as proposed in this report.

Public Engagement
The proposed amendments were discussed at a public meeting of Construction Board of Appeals on April 25, 2024. This item is on the agenda for the September 3, 2024, Regular City Council meeting which also allows for public comment and followed the required postings and notifications.

CONCURRENCE
The current Construction Board of Appeals membership and Office of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion concurs with these recommendations.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) does not apply to the recommended action in this report because the action does not constitute a “project” under CEQA Guidelines Sec. 15378.

FISCAL IMPACT
Budgeted: NA Budget Year: 2024-25
Funding Identified: NA
Fiscal Analysis:

Funding
Sources
Total Budget
Available
Current
Funding
Request
Remaining
Balance
Annual
Ongoing
Cost
General Fund $0 $0 $0 $0
State
Federal
Fees
Other:

Total $0 $0 $0 $0
These Advisory Body Handbook and Municipal Code amendments have no fiscal impact.

Item 6b

ALTERNATIVES

1. Council could decide not to approve the recommended changes to the qualifications of the CBOA. This action is not recommended by staff because there has not been any disabled access representation on the CBOA since April 1, 2022.

2. Council could decide to approve staff’s recommendations in part. Council could direct staff to maintain voter registration requirements, residency requirements, or not permit a close relation of a physically disabled person to be considered the physically disabled community representation. This action is not recommended by staff because the purpose of the recommendations is to increase the candidacy pool for this advisory body and allow the Council to exercise discretion in appointing future members.

3. Council could decide to approve staff’s recommendations and direct staff to seek alternative recommendations to further expand the qualification list.

According to the Advisory Body Handbook, each body should review their Bylaws by May of every odd numbered year. Staff will be reviewing all bylaws with the CBOA within the next 8 months and would recommend returning with any additional expansions to the qualification list and any other recommendations from the board at that time. The recommendations for this item were

ATTACHMENTS
A - Draft Ordinance Amending Municipal Code Section 15.04.020 Subsection N B - Draft Resolution amending Construction Board of Appeals Bylaws C - 1982 Opinion of Attorney General

O ______
ORDINANCE NO. _____ (2024 SERIES)

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SECTION 15.04.020, SUBSECTION

N, OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO MUNICIPAL CODE
WHEREAS, the membership requirements for appointment to the Construction Board of Appeals is established in the City of San Luis Obispo Advisory Body Handbook and the Building Construction and Fire Prevention Code of the City of San Luis Obispo, 2023; and
WHEREAS, the Building Construction and Fire Prevention Code of the City of San Luis Obispo, 2023 is adopted under Title 15 of the City of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the disability representative position of the Construction Board of Appeals has been vacant since April 1, 2022; and
WHEREAS, expansion of eligibility for the disability representative position could assist in filling the vacancy; and
WHEREAS, the requirements for membership are established locally; and WHEREAS, the language of Health & Safety Code §19957.5 is permissive as to the creation of a local accessibility appeals board; and WHEREAS, the amendments herein do not require the City Council to make express findings for local amendments not considered a “building standard” as defined by Health and Safety Code Section 18909(c).

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows:

SECTION 1. Environmental Determination. The project is exempt from environmental review per CEQA Guidelines under the General Rule (Section 15061(b)(3)). The project involves updates and revisions to existing regulations. The proposed code amendments are consistent with California Law, specifically the California Health & Safety Code Sections 17958.7 and 18941.5. It can be seen with certainty that the proposed Municipal Code text amendments will have no significant effect on the environment.

SECTION 2. Findings. The City Council finds that each amendment referred to in the ordinance are reasonably necessary and are not considered a “building standard” as defined in Health and Safety Code Section 18909(c).

Ordinance No. _____ (2024 Series) Page 2
O ______
SECTION 3. Subsection N of Section 15.04.020 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows:

N. Amend Chapter 1, Division II, Section 113 to read as follows:
113.1 General. In order to hear and decide appeals of orders, decisions or determinations made by the building official, code official or fire code official relative to the application and interpretations of the California Building Standards Code, the Uniform Housing Code, the Uniform Code for the Abatement of Dangerous Buildings, and the International Property Maintenance Code, and standards referenced by Title 15 of the City of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code, there shall be and is hereby created a Board of Appeals. Said Board shall also serve as the Housing Appeals Board and the Local Accessibility Appeals Board referenced in the California Building Standards Code. The building official or fire code official shall be an ex officio member and shall act as secretary to said board but shall have no vote upon any matter before the board. The Board of Appeals shall be appointed by the applicable governing authority and shall hold office at its pleasure. The board shall adopt rules of procedure for conducting its business and shall render all decisions and findings in writing to the appellant with a duplicate copy to the building official.
113.2 Limitations on authority. An application for appeal shall be based on a claim that the true intent of this code or the rules legally adopted hereunder have been incorrectly interpreted, the provisions of this code do not fully apply or an equally good or better form or construction is proposed. The board shall have no authority to waive requirements of this code. For appeals relating to accommodations for the disabled, the authority of the board shall include the ability to authorize reasonable alternatives to disabled access requirements imposed by the California Building Standards Code.
113.3 Qualifications. The board of appeals shall consist of seven members, five of which who are qualified by experience and training to pass on matters pertaining to building construction and building service equipment, hazards of fire, explosions, hazardous conditions or fire protection systems and are not employees of the jurisdiction. For matters subject to the appeal process referenced in H & S Code 19957.5 paragraph (b) regarding accommodations for persons with physical disabilities, the board of appeals shall include two additional members who shall be persons with disabilities as defined in the California Building Code.

SECTION 4. The Chief Building Official and Fire Code Official are hereby authorized and directed to transmit a copy of this ordinance to the California Building Standards Commission as required by California Health and Safety Code Section 17958.7.

Ordinance No. _____ (2024 Series) Page 3
O ______
SECTION 5. If any provision of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the City of San Luis Obispo hereby declares that it would have passed each and every remaining provision irrespective of such holding in order to accomplish the intent of this ordinance.

SECTION 6. A summary of this ordinance, together with the names of Council members voting for and against, shall be published at least five (5) days prior to its final passage, in The New Times, a newspaper published and circulated in this City. This ordinance shall go into effect at the expiration of thirty (30) days after its final passage.

INTRODUCED on the ____ day of ____, 2024, AND FINALLY ADOPTED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo on the ____ day of ____, 2024, on the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:
___________________________
Mayor Erica A. Stewart
ATTEST:
_______________________
Teresa Purrington
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_______________________
J. Christine Dietrick
City Attorney
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, on ______________________. ___________________________
Teresa Purrington
City Clerk

R ______
RESOLUTION NO. _____ (2024 SERIES)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS

OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE ADVISORY BODY

HANDBOOK FOR REVISION TO THE CONSTRUCTION BOARD OF

APPEALS BYLAWS
WHEREAS, in accordance with the Charter of the City of San Luis Obispo, the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code, and its own resolutions, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo appoints individuals to serve on its advisory bodies; and WHEREAS, bylaws have been adopted to aid those advisory bodies in conducting their meetings fairly, smoothly, efficiently and in accordance with law; and WHEREAS, pursuant to City Charter section 1204, the City Council, following recommendations from its advisory bodies, is to review any proposed recommended changes to the bylaws of the advisory bodies for approval; and WHEREAS, the disability representative position of the Construction Board of Appeals has been vacant since April 1, 2022; and
WHEREAS, expansion of eligibility requirements for the disability representative position could assist in filling the vacancy; and
WHEREAS, the City's Construction Board of Appeals reviewed its bylaws at its April 25, 2024 Regular Meeting and have recommended a revision of its bylaws to promote greater participation on the board; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to City Charter section 1202, non-registered voters and noncity residents may participate on citizen committees, commissions, boards, and authorities depending upon the nature and purpose of the advisory body, as determined by the City Council; and
WHEREAS, at its Regular Meeting of September 3, 2024, the City Council reviewed proposed changes to advisory body bylaws, as recommended by the Construction Board of Appeals and staff.

Resolution No. _____ (2024 Series) Page 2
R ______
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo that the “MEMBERSHIP and TERMS” established in the bylaws of the Construction Board of Appeals are hereby amended to read as set forth and incorporated herein as Exhibit A. This amendment shall be effective upon final adoption of Ordinance No. XXXX (2024 Series), amending Section 113 of Section 15.04.020 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code.

Upon motion of Council Member ___________, seconded by Council Member ___________, and on the following roll call vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

The foregoing resolution was adopted this _______ day of ______________ 2024. ___________________________
Mayor Erica A. Stewart
ATTEST:
______________________
Teresa Purrington
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
______________________
J. Christine Dietrick
City Attorney
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, on ______________________. ___________________________
Teresa Purrington
City Clerk

Resolution No. _____ (2024 Series) Page 3
R ______

EXHIBIT A

CONSTRUCTION BOARD OF APPEALS BYLAWS
Amended by Resolution No. ______ (2024 Series)
MEMBERSHIP and TERMS
The Construction Board of Appeals (CBOA) consists of seven members. Five of the seven members shall be qualified by experience and training to pass on matters pertaining to building construction and building service equipment, hazards of fire, explosions, hazardous conditions or fire protection and who are not employees of the City. Two members of the Board shall be physically disabled community representatives* and shall be exempt from residency requirements.

Each term of office will be for four years. There is no limitation to the number of consecutive terms of appointment.
* Physically Disabled Community Representative Definition:

Preference will be given to individuals who are registered City of San Luis Obispo voters and who identify as an individual with a physical disability or a close connection with a member of the physically disabled community, such as an individual who works in a professional or advocacy capacity serving the physically disabled community, has a physically disabled household or family member/loved one, serves as a caregiver, or similar connection. However, if recruitment for this position does not result in sufficient qualified registered City voters, membership may be considered for:
 A physically disabled community member who lives outside the City limits, but within the County of San Luis Obispo; or
 A community member who lives outside the City limits, but within the County of San Luis Obispo that has a close connection with the physically disabled community.

_________________________
________________________________________________________________________

TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
State of California

GEORGE DEUKMEJIAN
Attorney General
:

OPINION : No. 81-1002
:
of : JANUARY 28, 1982
:

GEORGE DEUKMEJIAN :

Attorney General :
:

Rodney O. Lilyquist :

Deputy Attorney General :
:

THE HONORABLE BARRY KEENE, MEMBER OF THE CALIFORNIA
STATE SENATE, has requested an opinion on the following questions:

1. Does the submission of a written appeal under Health and Safety Code section 19957.5 regarding an action taken by a local building department in enforcing building access requirements for physically handicapped persons require that an appeals board be appointed to consider the matter?

2. What is the scope of the review powers of an appeals board appointed pursuant to Health and Safety Code section 19957.5?

3. May a city council or county board of supervisors render the same decisions for the same matters as may be rendered by an appeals board appointed pursuant to Health and Safety Code section 19957.5?
1 81-1002

CONCLUSIONS

1. The submission of a written appeal under Health and Safety Code section 19957.5 regarding an action taken by a local building department in enforcing building access requirements for physically handicapped persons does not require that an appeals board be appointed to consider the matter.

2. The scope of the review powers of an appeals board appointed pursuant to Health and Safety Code section 19957.5 is limited to approving or disapproving the local building department's interpretations of Health and Safety Code sections 19955- 19959 and enforcement actions taken thereunder.

3. A city council or county board of supervisors may render the same decisions for the same matters as may be rendered by an appeals board appointed pursuant to Health and Safety Code section 19957.5 if local law so allows.

ANALYSIS
The Legislature has enacted a statutory scheme (Health and Safety Code 19955-19959)1 specifically requiring that public accommodations or facilities constructed in California with private funds2 be accessible to physically handicapped persons. Such facilities include auditoriums, hospitals, theaters, restaurants, hotels, motels, stadiums, and convention centers (see § 19955); also covered are passenger vehicle service stations, shopping centers, offices of physicians and surgeons, and office buildings (see § 19955.5).

Under the statutory scheme, the local governmental body required to enforce the access requirements is the building department of each city and county. Section 19958 states:
"The building department of every city, county, or city and county shall enforce this part within the territorial area of its city, county, or city and county. . . .
"'Building department' means the department, bureau, or officer charged with the enforcement of laws or ordinances regulating the erection or construction, or both the erection and construction, of buildings." 1 All section references hereafter are to the Health and Safety Code unless otherwise indicated. 2 Buildings and facilities constructed with public funds are required to be accessible to physically handicapped persons pursuant to Government Code sections 4450-4458. 2 81-1002

The questions presented for analysis concern the enforcement actions taken by local building departments and the methods by which such actions may be reviewed.

1. Appointment of an Appeals Board
The first question presented is whether the filing of a written appeal regarding an enforcement action taken by a building department requires the appointment of an appeals board under section 19957.5. We conclude that it does not.

Local building department officials occasionally will be faced with complex problems in interpreting and enforcing the statutory access provisions. Of particular significance in this regard is the language of section 19957:
"In case of practical difficulty, unnecessary hardship, or extreme differences, a building department responsible for the enforcement of this part may grant exceptions from the literal requirements of the standards and specifications required by this part or permit the use of other methods or materials, but only when it is clearly evident that equivalent facilitation and protection are thereby secured."
In 1976 the Legislature amended the statutory scheme to include a provision, section 19957.5, authorizing the appointment of an appeals board to review decisions made by local building department officials. (Stats. 1976, ch. 700, § 1.) The statute provides:
"(a) Every city, county, or city and county may appoint a local appeals board composed of five members to hear written appeals brought by any person regarding action taken by the building department of the city, county, or city and county in enforcement of the requirements of this part, including the exceptions contained in Section 19957.
"(b) Two members of the appeals board shall be physically handicapped persons, two members shall be persons experienced in construction, and one member shall be a public member.
"(c) The appeals board shall conduct hearings on written appeals made under Subdivision (a) and may approve or disapprove interpretations of this part and enforcement actions taken by the building department of the city, county, or city and county. All such approvals or disapprovals shall be final and conclusive as to the building department in the absence of fraud or prejudicial abuse of discretion. The appeals board shall adopt regulations 3 81-1002

establishing procedural rules and criteria for the carrying out of its duties under this part."
In the situation presented to us for consideration, a written appeal has been submitted, challenging an action taken by the local building department in enforcing sections 19955-19959. Must an appeals board be created in order to review the written appeal?
We believe that the answer may be found by applying well recognized principles of statutory construction. The cardinal rule in interpreting a statute is to "ascertain the intent of the Legislature so as to effectuate the purpose of the law." (Select Base Materials v. Board of Equal. (1959) 51 Cal.2d 640, 645; accord, California Teachers Assn. v. San Diego Community College Dist. (1981) 28 Cal.3d 692, 698.) In determining legislative intent, we first turn to the words of the statute (Moyer v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd. (1973) 10 Cal.3d 222, 230), giving the language its usual and ordinary import. (People v. Bellici (1979) 24 Cal.3d 879, 884.) Here, the Legislature has used the word "may" in authorizing cities and counties to appoint local appeals boards. "May" is usually permissive, as distinguished from "shall" which is ordinarily mandatory. (Webster's New Internat. Dict. (3d ed 1966) pp. 1683, 2085; Hogya v. Superior Court (1977) 75 Cal.App.3d 122, 133.) Moreover, section 19957.5 contains both "may" and "shall" within its provisions. "It has been held where the Legislature has used both words in the same section it must be presumed to have attached to them their ordinary meanings. (National Automobile etc. Co. v. Garrison, 76 Cal.App.2d 415, 417; Cannizzo v. Guarantee Ins. Co., 245 Cal.App.2d 70, 73.)" (Hogya v. Superior Court, supra, 75 Cal.App.3d 122, 133, fn. 8; accord, In re Richard E. (1978) 21 Cal.3d 349, 353-354.) This interpretation is consistent with the Legislature's declaration that for purposes of interpreting the provisions of the Health and Safety Code, "'shall' is mandatory and 'may' is permissive." (§ 16.) We have found nothing in the statutory scheme to suggest a different interpretation.

Since the creation of an appeals board under section 19957.5 is discretionary with each city and county, the submission of a written appeal challenging a building department decision cannot act to force creation of such a board.

In answer to the first question, therefore, we conclude that the submission of a written appeal regarding an action taken by a local building department in enforcing the 4 81-1002

provisions of sections 19955-19959 does not require the appointment of an appeals board under section 19957.5.

2. Powers of an Appeals Board
The second question presented concerns the scope of the review powers of an appeals board created under the provisions of section 19957.5. We conclude that the board is limited to reviewing decisions made by the local building department with regard to the provisions of sections 19955-19959 and it may not delve into matters outside the scope of the legislative scheme.

The key language of section 19957.5 requiring interpretation is contained in subdivision (a) [the board shall "hear written appeals brought by any person regarding action taken by the building department . . . in enforcement of the requirements of this part, including the exceptions contained in Section 19957"] and in subdivision (c) [the board "may approve or disapprove interpretations of this part and enforcement actions taken by the building department . . . ."]
Besides those principles of statutory construction mentioned with regard to the first question, we note that "legislation should be construed so as to harmonize its various elements" (Wells v. Marina City Properties, Inc. (1981) 29 Cal.3d 781, 788) and "the various parts of a statutory enactment" must be considered "in the context of the statutory framework as a whole." (Moyer v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd., supra, 10 Cal.3d 222, 230.)
Applying these principles, we believe that when the Legislature authorized appeals boards to approve or disapprove "enforcement actions taken by the building department," the Legislature was referring only to actions taken with regard to enforcing sections 19555-19559.

In the context of the statutory scheme as a whole, no other definition of "enforcement actions" is appropriate. Subdivision (a) of section 19557.5 refers solely to "enforcement of the requirements of this part [sections 19555-19559]." Although section 19958 speaks in terms of a building department official "charged with the enforcement of laws or ordinances regulating the erection or construction, or both the erection and construction, of buildings," such generalization is merely for purposes of identification in defining "building department;" it does not purport to constitute a grant of authority such as is contained in the first sentence of the statute: "The building department of every city, county, or city and county shall enforce this part within the territorial area of its city, county, or city and county." (Italics added.)
5 81-1002

Reading these various provisions together in light of the "principle that administrative agencies have only such powers as have been conferred on them, expressly or by implication, by constitution or statute" (Ferdig v. State Personnel Bd. (1969) 71 Cal.2d 96, 103), we conclude in answer to the second question that the powers of an appeals board appointed under section 19957.5 are limited to approving and disapproving the local building department's interpretations of sections 19955-19959 and enforcement actions taken thereunder.

3. Powers of a City Council or County Board of Supervisors The third question presented concerns whether by authorizing the creation of an appeals board, the Legislature intended to preclude any other administrative review of access decisions made by local building departments. In other words, if an appeals board is not established, may a city council or county board of supervisors review access decisions made by the building department, and if an appeals board is created, may the board's decision be reviewed by a city council or county board of supervisors? We conclude that the Legislature did not intend to remove any appellate review authority held by a city council or county board of supervisors.

Local governments may and frequently do put appeal procedures in their local ordinances. (See Cal.Const., art. XI, §§ 1-7; Board of Permit Appeals v. Control Permit Bureau (1960) 186 Cal.App.2d 633, 639-640; Sato, "Municipal Affairs" in California (1972) 60 Cal.L.Rev. 1055, 1077-1081 (hereafter "Sato").) Does section 19957.5 preempt this power, or does it merely suggest a particular manner in which the appeal process may be implemented?
We view this matter as again one of statutory interpretation to which may be applied the previously mentioned principles of construction. The phrase that demonstrates the Legislature's intent concerning the issue at hand is found in subdivision (c) of section 19957.5: "All such approvals or disapprovals [by the board] shall be final and conclusive as to the building department of the city, county, or city and county." (Italics added.

The Legislature has expressly declared that an appeals board decision only binds the local government insofar as constituting the decision of the building department. If the Legislature had intended to cut off any further administrative appeal to a city council or county board of supervisors, it could easily have used other language. (See Tracy v. Municipal Court (1978) 22 Cal.3d 760, 764; Safer v. Superior Court (1975) 15 Cal.3d 230, 237- 238.) Section 19957.5 simply does not purport to affect any rights of appeal other than to establish that the decision of an appeals board constitutes the decision of the local building department.
6 81-1002

Accordingly, if local ordinances allow, a city council or county board of supervisors may review decisions of a city or county building department in interpreting and enforcing the provisions of sections 19955-19959. Where an appeals board has not been created, the department's decision could go directly to the city council or board of supervisors. Where an appeals board has been created, its decision would take the place of the building department administrator's decision and be reviewable as such to the city council or board of supervisors if local law so provides.

We have found no expression of legislative intent in the statutory scheme as a whole to support a contrary conclusion. While the Legislature has directed local building departments to administer the access provisions, we do not believe it has addressed the issue of whether a local building department decision may be reviewed by a city council, board of supervisors, or other body. The designation of the building department as the enforcement agency (§ 19958) merely reflects the fact that the access requirements would normally be within its area of expertise rather than within the province of some other department such as police, fire, or sanitation.3 Also, the specification of certain qualifications for members of an appeals board (§ 19957.5, subd. (b)) cannot be said to preclude review outside the building department appeals board process.

Although the issue is a close one, we believe that in order for the Legislature to deny review of city and county building department decisions by locally elected representatives, more expressive language is required than is now contained in sections 19955-19959. This is especially true in this field of the law where the "home rule" constitutional grant of authority to charter cities and counties may affect such a legislative decision. (See Cal. Const., art. XI, §§ 3-5; Sonoma County Organization of Public Employees v. County of Sonoma (1979) 23 Cal.3d 296, 315-316; Rivera v. City of Fresno (1971) 6 Cal.3d 132, 135; Sato, supra, at pp. 1077-1081.) In answer to the third question, we conclude that a city council or a county board of supervisors may render the same decisions for the same matters as could be rendered by an appeals board appointed pursuant to section 19957.5 if local law so provides.
*****
3 The Legislature has made this abundantly clear by defining "building department" for purposes of the statutory scheme as "the department, bureau, or officer charged with the enforcement of laws or ordinances regulating the erection or construction, or both the erection and construction, of buildings." (§ 19958.)
7 81-1002