📋
Extracted from Consolidated Report

This investigation was originally published as part of a larger consolidated report containing multiple investigations. View the consolidated PDF for the complete document.

San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury • 2005-2006

Area Advisory Council Resolution

19 pages
View PDF View Full Original

Findings and Recommendations 6 findings

F1 Page 88
There is no method or mechanism for verifying whether applicants for council status, or existing councils, meet the recognition criteria set forth in The Resolution.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1
Page 89
The Board of Supervisors should assume responsibility for assuring the conditions of The Resolution for recognition are met. The Resolution should be amended to establish a procedure for determining if groups applying for or claiming advisory council status meet the requirements of The Resolution. (Finding 1)
F2 Page 88
Multiple groups can lay claim to advisory council status in the same area.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2
Page 89
The Board of Supervisors needs to implement a method of resolving conflicts which arise from applications for recognition by competing councils in the same area. (Finding 2)
F3 Page 88
Advisory councils are listed as a “check-list item” on applications for county building permits.
No recommendations for this finding
F4 Page 88
Advisory councils receive training from the Planning Department.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4
Page 89
The Planning Department should reassess training of advisory council members and the manual used for this purpose to assure they include an extensive section explaining the purpose, reason for existence, role in the approval process, and legal status of the councils. It should clearly explain their role is strictly confined to soliciting community input for the purpose of giving advice during the approval process. The first sentence (and any subsequent sections) of the training manual for council members should be revised to eliminate any implication that official duties are assigned to the councils. (Finding 4)
F5 Page 88
County Counsel is obligated to defend legal actions against advisory councils and the county must indemnify councils against losses in litigation.
Related Recommendations (1)
R6
Page 89
County Counsel should provide council members with an explanation clearly defining the conditions under which the county will, or will not, provide legal defense and indemnification to the councils and their members. (Finding 5) Pg 87 of 252
F6 Page 88
Certain discretionary permit applications must be acted upon within time constraints defined by state law. Pg 86 of 252
Related Recommendations (1)
R7
Page 90
Advisory councils should respond to issues within the same time frame as is required of the Planning Department if their advice is to be considered. (Finding 6)

Additional Recommendations 2

These recommendations are not explicitly linked to specific findings.