Loading...
10/20/2015 ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL REGULAR AND REGULAR AJOURNED MEETING OF OCTOBER 20, 2015 The regular meeting of October 20, 2015 was called to order at 3:00 P.M. and adjourned to 4:00 P.M. for lack of a quorum. The regular adjourned meeting of October 20, 2015 was called to order at 4:02 P.M. in the chambers of Anaheim City Hall located at 200 S. Anaheim Boulevard. The meeting notice, agenda and related materials were duly posted on October 16, 2015 PRESENT: Mayor Tom Tait and Council Members: Jordan Brandman, Lucille Kring, Kris Murray and James Vanderbilt. STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Paul Emery, City Attorney Michael Houston and City Clerk Linda Andal. ADDITIONS/DELETIONS TO CLOSED SESSION: None PUBLIC COMMENTS ON CLOSED SESSION ITEMS: William Fitzgerald suggested the City of Anaheim consider contracting with the Orange County Sheriff's Office and the Orange County Fire Authority in lieu of having the city's own public safety personnel, saving millions of dollars for the city and resulting in better public safety personnel for the community. Cynthia Ward addressed the closed session item regarding the Angel Stadium negotiations stating that only price and terms of payment could be discussed and every other detail regarding the stadium that had nothing to do with price and terms of payment must be discussed in public. Important because the community was entitled to know whether or not Arte Moreno was at the bargaining table. She also added that if Mr. Aitken was present and reporting to the City Council about stadium negotiations, his name was required to be listed on the agenda, per the Brown Act. At 4:08 P.M., Mayor Tait recessed to closed session for consideration of the following items. CLOSED SESSION ITEMS: 1. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS (Subdivision (a) of Section 54957.6 of the California Government Code) Agency Designated Representative: Chris Chase Name of Employee Organizations: Anaheim Police Association, Anaheim Fire Association 2. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS (Subdivision 54956.8 of the California Government Code) Property: 2000 East Gene Autry Way, Anaheim, CA (Angels Stadium of Anaheim), associated/adjacent parking lots and other property collectively identified as APNs 232- 011-02, 06, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 47, 48,50 and portions of Parcels 1 and 2 of Parcel Map No. 2006-262, recorded in the Office of the County Recorder in Book 357, Pages 25 through 34 of Parcel Maps, Orange County, California (as depicted on diagram available at the office of the City Clerk) Agency Negotiator: Paul Emery Negotiating Parties: Angels Baseball, LP, City of Anaheim City Council Minutes of October 20,2015 Page 2 of 29 Under Negotiation: Price and Terms of Payment Regarding Lease INVOCATION: Reverend Joel Van Soelen, Anaheim Christian Reformed Church FLAG SALUTE: Council Member Jordan Brandman Council Member Brandman recognized Frank Feldhaus, a veteran of WWII and the Korean War. He added that Mr. Feldhaus was a man actively involved in bringing the community together and sent his condolences to the Feldhaus family VISIT ANAHEIM COMMERCIAL: Jay Burress played a brief video that was designed to create a buzz about the Anaheim destination, reporting that the video was given six spots on a televised sports event recently held at the Anaheim Convention Center. ACCEPTANCE OF OTHER RECOGNITIONS (To be presented at a later date): Proclaiming October 7, 2015, as Opening Day, National Hockey League (Anaheim Ducks) Proclaiming October 18-24, 2015, as Friends of the Libraries Week Helen Carter thanked the city for recognizing the Friends of the Anaheim Library's efforts, raising funds to assist in various library programs, furnishing two recently rehabbed libraries and supporting the summer reading program. Proclaiming October 23-31, 2015, as Red Ribbon Week PFC Painter from the Tustin Young Marines thanked Council for recognizing Red Ribbon Week, adding that the Young Marines helped create better citizens by raising drug awareness. Greg Painter, Unit Commander, remarked the Young Marines was a youth organization building good citizens through veteran appreciation, community service, and drug use reduction through the Project Alert Curriculum. Proclaiming October 25-31, as National Lead Poisoning Prevention Week Cecile Truong, OC Health Care Agency, introduced her staff and thanked Council for bringing attention to lead poisoning, adding that it was still present in the county and in Anaheim and information about sources of lead and preventive measures could be found on their website. Proclaiming November 1, 2015, as Extra Mile Day ADDITIONS/DELETIONS TO THE AGENDA: None PUBLIC COMMENTS (all agenda items, except public hearings): Prior to receipt of public comments, a brief decorum statement was provided by City Clerk, Linda Andal. Cecil Jordan Corkern, Outreach Homeless Ministries, looked forward to seeing a solution to the homeless situation adding that he was trying to do his part as well. City Council Minutes of October 20,2015 Page 3 of 29 Ann Marie Randle-Trejo, Anaheim Union High School District(AUHSD) Trustee, stated she wanted to clarify for the record certain misleading statements on the September 15, 2015 agenda report regarding the AUHSD request for financial support. Regarding the former joint use agreement, Mrs. Trejo explained the school district took back the scheduling of fields and gyms because the city failed to properly supervise groups using their facilities, causing damage to the campuses in addition to not living up to the promise of giving schools priority use during non-school hours. She stated the $19 million in capital improvements were inflated numbers and paving sidewalks or trimming trees was not something the city did for schools. Regarding Anaheim Achieves, the school district paid $900,000 for the Anaheim Achieves program with a federally funded pass-through grant and the YMCA. She added Oxford Academy was in the city of Cypress but she pointed out 60 percent of the students that attended that Academy resided in Anaheim. Lastly, the GRIP program was paid for by a state grant that the school district helped write and the school district paid for community policing efforts at their own events. Al Jabbar, AUHSD trustee, stated he was disappointed with the city's response to a request for financial support for local schools, and felt that the students were being overlooked for political reasons. He appreciated Mayor Tait's support and again urged the City Council to step up and show that Anaheim schools were worthy of investment and that private corporations, such as Disney and the Angels, who should be encouraged to do the same. Council Member Murray responded as a point of personal privilege, that the city of Anaheim was investing millions of dollars in public schools, more than any other city in the County of Orange and would continue to do so emphasizing that everyone on the City Council cared about the children of this community and she hoped for a more collegial effort going forward. Council Member Vanderbilt also responded, stating that as far as the resolution proposed from the school district, he and Council Member Brandman had a dialogue with Mr. Jabbar at an event prior to the resolution being placed on the agenda and asked at that time that the discussion be centered around the issue of joint use facilities. He pointed out that the resolution that was submitted did not acknowledge that dialogue or the suggestion that had been proposed and included a broader spectrum of programs to be funded when presented to Council. Mayor Pro Tem Kring remarked she had asked a number of times for a definitive annual dollar amount the school district was requesting from the city and talked about the time line for the budget process and finding revenue sources. William Fitzgerald, HOME, spoke on a number of issues, including city council members, Anaheim police officers, racism, the homeless situation, the treatment of homeless advocates, and YouTube videos taken of Anaheim police officers. Julie Brunette remarked short term rentals should be regulated, there should be a limit on how many were located in a neighborhood, and the bed tax collected should be put into a special fund for those neighborhoods that were impacted. On another issue she indicated the intersection of Bayless/Cerritos needed a street light, asking the Mayor and Police Chief to walk that area with her. Cynthia Ward addressed earlier Council comments regarding school bond taxes listed on property tax bills stating the voters had a chance to vote on those bond issues while denied the chance to vote on the $200 million for the Convention Center expansion. Regarding a revenue stream to support city public schools, she suggested the city look at whether Disney was paying the city for the shared parking revenues on the Mickey and Donald parking structure and if they were not, suggested those revenues be put to use in the schools. She pointed to the tennis City Council Minutes of October 20,2015 Page 4 of 29 center as another alternative, stating that the city was required to do minor improvements per the contract, not build a multi-million dollar wedding center also pointing out that she could find no record that the tennis operator was giving lessons to disadvantaged kids. Addressing Item No. 5, she remarked there was one flat rate for Disney to reimburse police officer's time at $88/hour and she felt the cost should reflect pension and all other benefits that officers received. Mark Daniel, resident, spoke to the homeless issue, stating they needed help physically and psychologically, and that the city should be extending that help in any way possible. He stated arresting homeless advocates and confiscating the belongings of the homeless only compounded the problems. R. Joshua Collins, homeless advocate, read a scripture as he believed this would speak to a spiritual problem in Anaheim. He added the city should have people participating in meetings looking for solutions to the homeless situation that were actively involved, advocated for the homeless, and understood the dynamics in play. Lou Noble, homeless advocate, introduced Dennis Long, who had recently been evicted from his apartment. Dennis Long shared he was 51 and had lived in the city for 30 years and this April he lost his job and became disabled due to a traffic accident. When officers came to evict him, he could only take what he could carry and lost everything. He had been looking for shelters but found none available to him and after three days of being homeless he was afraid for the future. Mayor Tait thanked Mr. Long for having the courage to speak and asked Kristine Ridge, Assistant City Manager to offer her assistance. Mike Shortie, Orange resident, objected to the proposed homeless shelter to be located at 1000 Kraemer Place, stating it was in the middle of an industrial park with no facilities, no stores, no health care in that area. He was concerned about the safety for his family as one side of the river was Orange and the other was Anaheim, wondering who would have jurisdiction to make sure laws were upheld and to manage the influx of homeless this shelter would attract. He had seen the problems at Tustin/Lincoln when added security guards were needed and he did not want to see that happen at Kraemer. Thomas Schietwiler, resident of East Anaheim bordering north of La Palma, stated for the last seven months his area had a continuing problem with garage sales and sign postings, which he had submitted to the Mayor's office and to Code Enforcement Division. He added the problem was exacerbated by the lack of code enforcement presence in the area and a reluctance to issue citations. He requested the city's help in adopting a more aggressive enforcement approach. Mayor Tait requested the City Manager look into this matter and report back to Council. Jodie Mosely stated she was here to keep the focus on west Anaheim and efforts being made to keep crime out of parks like Twila Reid. She was supportive of many of the homeless programs, Coast to Coast, Illumination Foundation, CityNet and the Kraemer Shelter. She added residents needed to feel safe in their own communities and she urged Council to consider a dog park as well as seeking successful businesses similar to the Packing House and various shopping and entertainment venues to bring about positive impacts to west Anaheim. Jill Kanzler, SOAR, reported on the successful Anaheim/OC Volunteer Fair, thanking Council Members Kring and Murray for co-chairing the event. She stated students and the general City Council Minutes of October 20,2015 Page 5 of 29 public pledged more than 5,000 hours of volunteer time to the Big Brothers, Big Sisters, the Bolsa Chica Conservancy, and the Illumination Foundation. Kathryn Bandoni, Orange County Conservation Corps and Charter School, stated that OCCC was one of 13 state-certified conservation corps in the state of California dedicated to the youth of Orange County with a mission to serve the most at risk youth population ages 18 to 25 for employment and educational services. Fifty percent of their clients were from Anaheim, while the Orange County Workforce Investment Board (WIB) and Santa Ana WIB made up the rest. The at-risk youths ranged from high school dropouts, homeless, prior gang affiliation, or current or foster youths with 99 percent basic skills deficient. She and six corps members were here to oppose the funding denial for the next year, remarking that in prior years NOCROP received 60 percent of the $600,000 plus grant with OCCC receiving 40 percent. She requested Council reconsider granting funding to two providers and include OCCC to address the multiplicity of needs of the youth population they served. Esther Landen, OCCC program manager remarked her organization had a successful history of serving Anaheim youth as part of an anti-gang task force for the city of Anaheim thatbegan in 1993. She spoke of the successes of the program and the high numbers of Anaheim youths that participated and earned a high school diploma with more than 83 percent either working or attending college. She added that OCCC awarded over$37,000 in scholarship funds to Anaheim youths that enrolled in the WEA program which they would not have been able to obtain through other means. Without WEA funding, OCCC would not have been able to offer paid work experience job training that was necessary for these participants to be self-sufficient and bring their families out of poverty, adding they were some of the hardest to serve youths in the city. She asked that Council reconsider the workforce investment funding in their favor. Omar Colima, resident, spoke of his success in the OCCC program, earning high school credits to get his diploma in January and appreciative of his first work experience when no other business would hire him. He supported the OCCC program and charter school for the future it offered to him. Selma Torres, resident, stated she had been in the OCCC program since 2014 and graduated with a high school diploma in 2015. Through their program she was able to work along with getting an education as OCCC was flexible with their schedules to ensure this happened. She added she was a high school dropout who now had a diploma and was enrolling in Cypress College for a better future because of receiving two scholarships from OCCC. José Lara, resident, remarked with OCCC's help he was able to get a job when he had no high school diploma or any previous work experience. He was attending the Charter School, stating it was better than any traditional continuation school because the teachers actually cared about the students. He added that he had also received an AmeriCorps scholarship through OCCC to help with his dream of attending UC Irvine. Elena Garcia, resident, spoke to her experience in the Orange County Conservation Corps. She enrolled in the program ten months ago to get back into school and completed her last quarter with straight A's. She appreciated the teachers who gave every student their full attention and resources to accomplish the work and looked forward to earning her diploma next January. She explained she was a mother of two and OCCC offered her the chance to earn money as she worked towards her diploma, and she believed she now had a future in sight. City Council Minutes of October 20, 2015 Page 6 of 29 Aisha Adnan remarked she was a refugee that had been helped through the Orange County Conservation Corps offering English language and other services for many refugees that had no understanding of their new country. She was working in a job that she was sure would not have been available to her without the help of the OCCC. Surra Al Imari stated she came to America last year from Iraq with no job experience and through the OCCC program, had gained experience and self-confidence and was now working. She supported the Conservation Corps for offering refugees an opportunity to fit in and have a future. June Hamze, resident, remarked she had seen some improvement in Twila Reid Park and encouraged the city to bring other social activities there such as a Farmer's market, an Art Festival, Christmas tree lighting celebration and other events and activities that would make the park a safe place for the neighborhood. She urged the city to step up to ensure all of Anaheim's parks were safe for neighboring families. Henry S. Barbosa remarked he had been the president of the OCCC the last several years and was now a volunteer member and offered comments and insights regarding the program. He explained that if Anaheim Workforce Investment Board ("WIB") cut OCCC funding, they could no longer serve the most economically and educationally disenfranchised youths in Anaheim. He urged the city to grant half of the WIB funding to the OCCC to provide services to those that needed a second chance to succeed in life. Alternatively, he suggested the Request for Proposal be reissued for a more transparent process to be rated by independent reviewers. He did not understand how the OCCC had been rated lower than in the past when they had exceeded every metric and expectation of earlier grants and urged the city to continue supporting their successful program. Frank Zepeda, Director of Education OCCC/Charter School, remarked what brought students to the OCCC Charter School was drug addiction, homelessness, incarceration, a whole gamut of situations that with counseling and direct educational instruction they could reengage with the community. These students were then able to compete in the job market and become contributing members of society. He was lobbying for grant funds on their behalf because he felt the Conservation Corps had a formula that worked with these youths and he hoped the City Council recognized that fact. Rene accused an Anaheim police officer of terrorizing the youth around the Ponderosa Park area because of the clothes they were wearing. She urged parents to file a formal complaint if their child was harassed. She also spoke to a police officer involved shooting on October 15th, asking for information on the well-being of this 22 year old male on probation and the name of the officer involved in the shooting adding that she had made a public records request for that information as well. Donald Dormeyer spoke to the homeless situation, recommending that instead of spending millions of dollars to buy and remodel a building to house the homeless, the money would be better spent directly on medical and psychiatric needs and recovery and job training programs. He added that such an operation could be run from vacant storefronts and mobile vans to reach the homeless where they congregated rather than creating a new and bigger problem for Anaheim in the future. He asked where the nonqualified homeless would go when they were turned away from the shelter. He opposed the police department setting aside five to 10 percent of beds for those jailed at night, remarking this rewarded bad activity with a warm bed and free City Council Minutes of October 20,2015 Page 7 of 29 food. He was also concerned that the Canyon Center for Advanced Technology, second to the Irvine Spectrum for attracting high wage jobs to an area, would be impacted by turning that area into a dumping ground for the homeless. April Allegro, Orange resident, expressed her concerns over the proposed homeless shelter on Kraemer Place stating it would become a magnet for the homeless that would spread out into the riverbed close to homes and parks. She asked about the public safety plan and how it would be enforced and whether the proposed site should be environmentally reviewed because of potential impacts. She stated it was not right to help one group at the expense of another and believed that would be the case with the location of the Kraemer Place shelter. Angie Armenta opposed the Kraemer Place shelter, stating her two grandchildren lived in close proximity to the shelter and played at Olive Park, two blocks away from the riverbed. She pointed out with the proposed plan there was no assurance of community safety, only promises made. Scarlette Almero, east Anaheim resident on La Palma, stated was following up on a letter she sent for sidewalks in two sections near her home. Public Works had promised that by the summer of 2015, grant funds would be used for a sidewalk near the bus stop at Whittier and La Palma and an area on La Palma near the 57 Freeway, both safety issues for pedestrians. She requested Council's assistance with Mayor Tait requesting the City Manager to apprise Ms. Almero when those sidewalk repairs were scheduled. Michael Chu, Orange resident, remarked he lived about a mile from the proposed homeless shelter on North Kraemer Place and had been promised information regarding the shelter from a community meeting held at Eastside Christian Church which was never followed up on. He stated those in opposition were drowned out by activists that did not live in the community and speakers were given 30 seconds to ask questions and to try to get information. The safety of the surrounding community was an issue to Mr. Chu, wondering how a one mile no loitering zone would be enforced for those that lived in the city of Orange. He asked the city to look at the impacts and not push this shelter through. Jennifer Sterling, Orange resident less than a mile from the Kraemer site, opposed the shelter and distressed that the recent community meeting regarding the shelter provider speakers with 30 seconds to give their opinion on the issue. The community believed the riverbed would not be a deterrent as stated by the county, but would instead be an invitation to the homeless and the cities of Orange and Anaheim would have to regularly police the riverbed to ensure no camping. She added that no entity appeared to have a plan to address the shelter overflow, and that her neighborhood was afraid for the future because there was already a problem in the riverbed impacting Orange parks, schools, and nearby communities. David Ramos, Sycamore Street resident, urged Council to approve speed lumps on Sycamore Street as a traffic calming measure to stop the speeding on Sycamore to Citron. David VIII was apprised by the Mayor that the public hearing on redistricting would take place later on the agenda. Anita Hynds was also apprised that appropriate time to speak on the short term rentals was when the item was considered later on the agenda. An unidentified speaker addressed Disney Corporation's influence in Anaheim politics, the homeless situation, and Zionism influence. City Council Minutes of October 20,2015 Page 8 of 29 Donna Kelly, Lennar Corporation representing PT Metro, remarked Item No. 15 on the consent calendar referenced the 2nd reading of the development ordinance approved two weeks ago, explaining if it was approved tonight, she would request withdrawal of Item No. 21 which was an extension to the development agendized as a matter of precaution. Chuck Robinson, long-term resident, expressed his opposition to short term rentals, remarking that the city allowed a nine bedroom, seven bathroom vacation rental to be built next to him, issued a business license and essentially turned an R-1 cul-de-sac into a business zone. He added 29 people could live in that house at any one time, onsite parking regulations had been lifted with the moratorium, and renters could park wherever they wanted. Mayor Tait inquired if there had been anything in the short term rental ordinance that had been rescinded with Michael Houston responding nothing had been rescinded and the moratorium that was enacted only prevented the application of new permits. An unidentified speaker addressed the homeless crisis proposing the city offer real help, by way of offering resources, creating job opportunities and job training, and allowing individuals to regain their ego and self-worth. Investing in homeless shelters would help, but she believed investing in long-term housing would make a significant difference in Anaheim. Larry Larsen thanked the members of council that had supported the Anaheim Union High School's request for a budget line item in future city budgets for public schools, remarking it was sorely needed for all the schools and students in Anaheim. Addressing Mayor Pro Tern Kring's request for an amount for that line item budget, he suggested two percent of the annual budget for ten years, adding that no suggestion had ever been made that the city's public safety budget should be impacted by this request for funding. An unidentified speaker residing on Pebble Creek Lane in Orange spoke in opposition to the proposed Kraemer Homeless Shelter. The site in question she felt was not adequate, that it consisted solely of offices. She had proposed the James Musick Honor Farm as an alternative site to the County of Orange or the abandoned bus depot in Santa Ana adjacent to the homeless population in Santa Ana and urged Council to rethink the location. Greg Diamond pointed out the City Council could only speak about price and terms of payment for the Angel Stadium lease as it was identified in that manner for closed session Item No. 2, and he hoped the City Attorney would be asked to comment on that matter as it was his understanding that the city's negotiator, Wiley Aitken, would attend that meeting even though his name had not been included on the agenda. Referencing the homeless situation he was opposed to the city reinstating enforcement of the no camping in parks ordinance, and suggested the ordinance be suspended. He also suggested the Carl Karcher property between Lemon and Harbor Boulevard south of the 91 freeway was a better site than Kraemer Place, an area the city purchased that could be outfitted with modular housing and offered a safe place for the homeless to stay away from the general public. He also disagreed with Mayor Pro Tem Kring's comments on the advantages of creating dog parks. Mayor Pro Tern Kring, as a point of personal privilege, responded to Mr. Diamond's remarks explaining she had been advocating for dog parks in the city since 1998 and opened the first site in La Palma Park this spring with the second to be opened in Anaheim Hills in a few months. She stated the La Palma dog park was successful and available for dog walkers 24/7, with statistics revealing that crime had dropped substantially in that area. She hoped to see a City Council Minutes of October 20,2015 Page 9 of 29 dog park in Twila Reid Park to encourage community socializing in the same manner and seeing crime dissipate as a result. Ricardo Toro, Rio Vista resident, read a letter sent to Council Member Vanderbilt thanking him for meeting with neighbors and listening to their concerns regarding the proposed homeless shelter. The letter also requested that any future forums offered by the county use a different format to allow a more productive and respectful participation by residents. Mr. Toro also recommended Council Member Murray, who was actively involved in supporting the homeless shelter, consider meeting with Rio Vista residents as well, as they were interested in hearing details of the proposed shelter. Brian Chuchua addressed Mayor Pro Tern Kring's comments on dog parks and their impact on the homeless. With no other speakers coming forward, Mayor Tait closed the public comments. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS: Council Member Murray remarked, for the public's benefit, that the was currently giving more than two percent of the city budget annually to support public schools, $5.7 million annually and more than any other Orange County school. She also pointed out that private enterprises were also contributing millions of dollars in programmatic support and further emphasized there was tremendous commitment on behalf of the city and she looked forward to sitting down with the schools to see what shape and form that would take. CITY MANAGER'S UPDATE: None CONSENT CALENDAR: Mayor Tait removed Item No. 6 from the consent calendar for further discussion and declared a potential conflict of interest on Item Nos. 11, 14 and 15 as his firm had worked this past year for Verizon and for Lennar Corporation. Council Member Vanderbilt stated he would declare a potential conflict of interest regarding Item No. 6 as he had been substitute teaching for that school district. Mayor Pro Tern Kring then moved to waive reading in full of all ordinances and resolutions and to adopt the balance of the consent calendar as presented, in accordance with reports, certifications and recommendations furnished each city council member and as listed on the consent calendar, seconded by Council Member Murray. Roll Call Vote: Ayes—5: (Chairman Tait and Council Members: Brandman, Kring, Murray and Vanderbilt.) Noes—0. Motion Carried 8105 1. Receive and file minutes of the Parks and Recreation Commission meetings of July 22, 2015 and August 26, 2015 and Sister City Commission meeting of August 24, 2015. 2. Approve recognitions to be presented at a later date recognizing Make A Wish D113 Foundation on its 35th anniversary, 2015-2016 Miss Anaheim Fall Festival and Court, Altrusa Creative Writing Project Winners and Police Chiefs Neighborhood Advisory Council Member Peggy Kruse. D128 3. Approve carryover expenditure appropriations, in the total amount of$48,376,718, from fiscal year 2014/15 to fiscal year 2015/16 for projects previously approved by the City Council but not yet completed. City Council Minutes of October 20,2015 Page 10 of 29 AGR-9418 4. Accept the proposal and approve an agreement with Administrative Resource Options, in an amount not to exceed $138,594 annually, for mail management services for the City for a three year period with up to two one-year optional renewals, and authorize the Purchasing Agent to exercise the renewal options, in accordance with Request for Proposal #8495. AGR-1756.A.1 5. Approve the First Amendment to Agreement with Disneyland Resort for two additional police officers to provide police services at the Disneyland Resort. 7. Approve and direct the City Manager to execute the Workforce Innovation and AGR-9419 Opportunity Act and CalWORKs Agreements with various training contractors for the AGR 9420 provision of occupational skills training and authorize the Workforce Development AGR-9421 Manager to administer the agreements (Dialysis Training Institute, LLC; E. Cubics, LLC dba QBICS Career College; and Smog Tech Institute, Inc.). D175 8. Approve speed lumps on Sycamore Street between Harbor Boulevard and West Street as a traffic calming measure. D175 9. Approve an amendment to the seven-year Transportation Capital Improvement Program to include the Green Alley Bio-Infiltration Project for Measure M2 funding. AGR 4704.1 10. Approve the Final Map and Subdivision Agreement with Lyon Integral Anaheim, LLC for Tract No. 16908 for property located at 2211 E. Orangewood Avenue. 11. Determine that the project authorized herein is categorically exempt under the California A123 Environmental Quality Act, Section 15303 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, approve the model License Agreement to attach, install, operate, and maintain telecommunication facilities on City of Anaheim street light poles, authorize and direct the Public Utilities General Manager to execute the License Agreements with wireless telecommunication providers so long as such agreements are in substantial conformance with the agreement, as determined by the City Attorney's Office, and authorize the Public Utilities General Manager to take such actions as are necessary, advisable, or required to implement and administer the agreement. Mayor Tait recorded an abstention on this item. Motion by Mayor Pro Tern Kring to approve, seconded by Council Member Murray. ROLL CALL VOTE:AYES— 4: (Mayor Pro Tern Kring and Council Members: Brandman, Murray and Vanderbilt). NOES—0. ABSTENTION— 1: Mayor Tait. D175 12. RESOLUTION NO. 2015-270 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM designating Elm Avenue from Gilmar Street to west end of Elm Avenue and Gilmar Street from Broadway to south end of Gilmar Street as "Permit Parking Only" street within Permit-Eligible Parking District No. 25. D175 13. RESOLUTION NO. 2015-271 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM designating Susanne Street from Claudina Street to Philadelphia Street, Charlotte Avenue from Claudina Street to Philadelphia Street, and Philadelphia Street from 930 S. Philadelphia Street to 100.6 Philadelphia Street as City Council Minutes of October 20,2015 Page 11 of 29 "Permit Parking Only" street within Permit Eligible Parking District No. 38 ("Charlotte Avenue"). 14. RESOLUTION NO. 2015-272 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE P110 CITY OF ANAHEIM vacating portions of Westside Drive and Granville Drive as shown on Tract No. 16589 pursuant to California Streets and Highway Code Section 8330, et seq. - Summary Vacation (Abandonment No. ABA2015-00305). Mayor Tait recorded an abstention on this item. Motion by Mayor Pro Tern Kring to approve, seconded by Council Member Murray. ROLL CALL VOTE:AYES—4: (Mayor Pro Tern Kring and Council Members: Brandman, Murray and Vanderbilt). NOES— 0. ABSTENTION— 1: Mayor Tait. C280 15. ORDINANCE NO. 6344 (ADOPTION)AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF AGR-3750.A ANAHEIM amending certain sections of Chapter 18.20 (Platinum Triangle Mixed Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone) of Title 18 (Zoning) of the Anaheim Municipal Code (Introduced at Council meeting of October 6, 2016, Item No. 25). ORDINANCE NO. 6345 (ADOPTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM approving that certain Amended and Restated Development Agreement No. 2005-00008C by and between the City of Anaheim and PT Metro, LLC and authorizing the Mayor to execute said agreement for and on behalf of the City (Introduced at Council meeting of October 6, 2016, Item No. 25). Mayor Tait recorded an abstention on this item. Motion by Mayor Pro Tern Kring to approve, seconded by Council Member Murray. ROLL CALL VOTE:AYES—4: (Mayor Pro Tern Kring and Council Members: Brandman, Murray and Vanderbilt). NOES—0. ABSTENTION— 1: Mayor Tait. 16. ORDINANCE NO. 6346 (INTRODUCTION)AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF M142 ANAHEIM amending Section 1.05.030 of Chapter 1.05 of Title 1 of the Anaheim Municipal Code (Personnel System-Scope)to designate Executive Managers appointed pursuant to an employment agreement as members of the exempt service. The consent calendar ended at 7:39 P.M. END OF CONSENT CALENDAR: 6. Approve and direct the City Manager, or his designee, to execute a Workforce A123 Innovation and Opportunity Act Agreement with North Orange County Regional Occupational Program, in an amount not to exceed $673,163, to assist local disadvantaged youth to prepare for the workforce and authorize the Workforce Development Manager to administer the agreement. Council Member Vanderbilt indicated he had a potential conflict of interest as he worked with North Orange County Regional Occupation Center recently and would record an abstention on this item and left the dais at 7:23 p.m. John Woodhead, Director of Community Economic Department, reported the city was the recipient of Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) funds for programs designed to City Council Minutes of October 20,2015 Page 12 of 29 assist local disadvantaged youths to prepare them for further education, job training, and successful transition into the workforce. The Workforce Investment Boards or WIBS were responsible for the selection and funding of those youth service providers by awarding contracts on a competitive basis and the WIB was also responsible for selecting and funding those youth service providers by awarding contracts on a competitive basis. Mr. Woodhead indicated the WIB used a Request for Proposal process to solicit bidders qualified to operate such programs and received a total of five proposals, which were evaluated and scored by four raters. The criteria used for rating the proposals were program design and content, demonstrated ability, past performance, and cost reasonableness. A recommendation by the Anaheim Youth Council, a WIB subcommittee, was then submitted to the Anaheim Workforce Investment Board who approved the funding and selection of the North Orange County Regional Occupational Program (NOCROP), the top rated proposal. Mr. Woodhead stated that the Request for Proposal policy guidelines required that the top rated proposal be selected for funding consideration after contract execution by the City. The agreement now before Council would provide NOCROP up to a maximum of$673,163 to implement a comprehensive youth services program under WIOA for program year 2015-16. He explained that an appeal had been received on July 16th, of the youth procurement results from the Orange County Conservation Corps (OCCC), one of the five bidders under the RFP. Per WIB appeal rules, the WIB formed an ad hoc committee of its board members and conducted a hearing on August 11, 2015 to hear OCCC's appeal and allow them to present evidence. Mr. Woodhead remarked that the committee did not find any compelling evidence or argument by OCCC to support their appeal and recommended denial. At their September 10, 2015 meeting, the WIB denied the appeal based on the Ad Hoc Committee's recommendation and upheld the selection and funding of the NOCROP as the WIOA Youth provider for program year 2015-16. Mr. Woodhead further explained that under this contract there was no impact on the general funds and that sufficient funds were available in the departmental budget for FY 2015/16, and restricted for such programs. Mayor Tait inquired if the City Council approved the Request for Proposal before it was advertised with Mr. Woodhead responding the process per federal regulations was first initiated with the Youth Council Subcommittee of the WIB, and they along with staff developed a concept for the Request for Proposal. It was then submitted to the entire WIB board for approval and issued. He added the City Council was the awarding body and that generally policy decisions under WIOA were largely left to the Workforce Investment Board and it subcommittees. Mayor Tait remarked that in the past the majority of funds, about 60 percent were awarded to NOCROP and the Orange County Conservation Corps received about 40 percent and he felt there was wisdom in having those two types of services involved. NOCROP served those who were on the right track and wanted job skills and might be thinking about college, while the Conservation Corps addressed those disadvantaged youths who had somewhat fallen off the rails and through determination, were trying to get back on track. He did not want to take that safety net away and was uncomfortable awarding to one entity and not the other. He suggested sending the process back to the WIB, reevaluating the policy change of selecting one service provider and to consider funding both entities. Council Member Kring requested Reuben Aceves address the function that OCCC provided. Mr. Aceves responded that the Orange County Conservation Corp did serve high risk, out of City Council Minutes of October 20,2015 Page 13 of 29 school youths, adding that the proposal reviewers were asked to ensure scores reflected that a comprehensive youth program would continue to serve high risk youths, both in school and out, as well as disabled youths. He added that the OCCC received a respectable score of 80 percent and another organization had also received 80 percent while NOCROP scored over 90 percent. He further added that the same question had been raised by one of the board members at the September 10th meeting, and he had outlined a plan that would assure the WIB and the community that all youths eligible to receive funding from the OCCC would continue those services through NOCROP and no youths would be lost. Ms. Kring wondered how the mayor's request could be implemented when the bid proposals had already been evaluated. Mayor Tait suggested that a new Request for Proposal process be conducted. Council Member Brandman supported that request, stating the city should be consistent with WIBS regarding the funding apparatus and that it was the responsibility of the city as the policy body to send the matter back to the Workforce Investment Board. MOTION: Council Member Brandman moved to reject this recommendation and send this matter back to the Workforce Investment Board with a new policy to consider the selection of two providers, seconded by Council Member Murray. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES—4: (Mayor Tait and Council Members: Brandman, Kring and Murray.) NOES—0. ABSTENTION — 1: Council Member Vanderbilt. Motion Carried. Council Member Vanderbilt returned to the dais at 7:40 P.M. 17. Consider[re]appointing two City Council Members to the Audit Committee. 8105 APPOINTMENT: Mayor Tait (currently held by Mayor Tait) Mayor Tait remarked he would like to continue on the Audit Committee. Mayor Pro Tem Kring moved to reappoint Mayor Tait to the committee, seconded by Council Member Brandman. Mayor Tait was unanimously reappointed to the Audit Committee. APPOINTMENT: Council Member Vanderbilt (vacant) Mayor Tait nominated Council Member Vanderbilt to the Audit Committee, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Kring. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES—4 (Mayor Tait and Council Members: Brandman, Kring and Murray.) NOES—0. ABSTENTION — 1: Council Member Vanderbilt. Mr. Vanderbilt was appointed to the Audit Committee. B105 18. Consider appointments to the Community Center Authority to complete an unexpired term through June 30, 2019 and to the Community Services Board to complete an unexpired term through June 30, 2019. Community Center Authority: Appointment: (unscheduled vacancy of Billie Joe Wright) Community Services Board: Appointment: (unscheduled vacancy of Ernesto Medrano) City Council Minutes of October 20, 2015 Page 14 of 29 With the consent of council, this item was continued to November 3, 2015. 19. This is a public hearing regarding the formation of and boundaries for six City Council districts to be reflected in a districting map, including, without limitation, consideration, discussion, modification and potential action (including action directing staff to prepare E127 an ordinance for consideration at an upcoming meeting) on the districting map recommended in the Final Report of the Anaheim Advisory Committee on Electoral Districts ("Committee") identified as the "Recommended Plan (Map 3)" in said Committee report; to consider, discuss and act (including action directing staff to prepare an ordinance for consideration at an upcoming meeting) on which four City Council districts will hold elections in 2016 and which two City Council districts will hold elections in 2018; and such other matters as may be related to formation of six City Council districts. Linda Andal, City Clerk, reported tonight was the first of three required public hearings on this matter. Michael Houston introduced the Electoral Committee's counsel, Ben DeMayo, indicating he was available to answer questions during the presentation. Ms. Andal also recognized the city's demographer Justin Levitt for dedicating countless hours to the process working with both the Committee and community members drafting district maps. BACKGROUND: Ms. Andal reported that at the November 3, 2014 general election, Measures L and M were placed on the ballot. Measure L passed by 68 percent which changed the electoral method in which the voters would elect city council members from at-large to by-district elections. Beginning with the November 2016 election, city council members would then be required to reside in the district in which they were elected, and only those residents of that district could elect them while the mayoral seat remained at large. Measure M passed at 54 percent and increased the city council size from five to seven members, which would also begin with the November 2016 election and as a result of this measure, the city was now required to create six city council district boundaries. Ms. Andal stated the Council adopted a resolution establishing a Council appointed Advisory Committee of five retired Superior Court Judges in April. The City Attorney's office then reached out to 41 retired judges and from that, 14 submitted an application. At the April meeting, four judges were randomly selected, with Justice Ed Wallin, retired appellate court justice, appointed as the only Anaheim resident. The other four volunteer retired judges were: Stephen Sundvold, who served as Vice Chair, James Jackman, Nancy Wieben-Stock, and Thomas Thrasher. Ms. Andal indicated the resolution tasked the Committee with holding at least two public meetings per month throughout the City to receive public input and was also asked to make a recommendation on district boundaries and report back to Council by October 6th. The Committee completed their tasks and at the October 6 meeting, Chairman Justice Wallin presented the Final Report, which included the Recommended Map, Map 3; and Council unanimously approved the Report. Once the Committee was selected, Ms. Andal stated staff identified community outreach as a significant component to this process, involving the city departments from the onset as their operations could be affected by the creation of district boundaries. The Planning Department provided the ability for an online interactive GIS map, available to the public for viewing including overlays of any of the 39 maps that were considered by the Committee. City Council Minutes of October 20, 2015 Page 15 of 29 She further advised that Ames and Associates, an outreach firm was used to develop a comprehensive outreach plan titled "Shape Anaheim's Future," and through this process, all information was translated into Spanish and various others requested languages, such as Tagalog. In addition, Ms. Andal reported a designated webpage was created that included the ability to translate all pages and documents into Spanish, Vietnamese, Korean and Chinese, offering other information including meeting agendas, minutes and meeting videos, as well as the district mapping tool that allowed residents to create their own draft map, submit it, and work directly with the city's demographer. The webpage also hosted all draft maps that were submitted to the Committee including the overlay tool that allowed residents to enter their address on any selected draft map to see in which district they would reside. The outreach was extensive and included e-post cards which was a grass roots effort to pass forward specific meeting information to identified communities and group leaders (in English and Spanish), press releases, social media, utility bill inserts, newsletters and city magazines. A number of public service announcements were also created by Anaheim residents, including Justice Wallin, which aired on the city's local channel, Time Warner, YouTube and the city's website. A one page Fast Facts was placed at most City Facilities and departments used field personnel to hand out this information if questions were asked. Ms. Andal emphasized the outreach efforts ensured all communities had access to the process and the ability to participate and join the conversation. Ms. Andal provided an overview of the process reporting the Committee then held its first meeting in May and by September had held 10 meetings throughout the city resulting in over 700 in attendance and 32 maps submitted by the public. The meetings took place at City Hall, Brookhurst Community Center, East Community Center, Ponderosa Resource Center, and Western and Loara High Schools. Ms. Andal reported that over the course of this process, the Committee reviewed 32 public maps, two consultant test maps and five consultant draft maps, for a total of 39 maps, and on August 19th, the focus of their attention was centered on five maps. On August 26th, the Committee determined certain communities of interest such as the Colony and the Ponderosa community were best kept together and as a result decreased their focus to three maps for further study. Finally, on September 8th, the Committee tentatively selected Map 3, as amended (a slight technical amendment to the east border of District 5 and District 6) and directed staff to prepare a final report. The final report was unanimously adopted by the Committee on September 16th with Map 3 as the Recommended Plan. Ms. Andal explained that during the mapping process, staff worked with various city departments to determine and identify whether any boundaries would have an effect on the city's operation and found there were none. In a slide presentation, she pointed out maps that were used to highlight services as well as ensuring communities of interest that were raised during the process were kept together. One map identified boundaries for each elementary school district as many comments received related to communities of interest around local elementary schools. Another community expressed they desire to keep both sides of the County islands in the same district, i.e., District 2. Another slide highlighted the high schools, the fire stations and city libraries, resulting in a library in or bordering each of the districts. Concluding her presentation, Ms. Andel introduced the city attorney, Michael Houston to discuss the Committee's rationale, the public hearing process, and possible city council action. Continuing with the slide presentation, Michael Houston presented the Committee's rationale for selecting Map 3 as the Recommended Plan. The Committee determined the Plan met a number of traditional lawful districting criteria including criteria related to topography and City Council Minutes of October 20,2015 Page 16 of 29 geography, cohesiveness, contiguity and compactness of territory, and cohesion of communities of interest. Regarding population, the Recommended Plan had a population deviation between the more populous and the least populous district of only 1.4 percent, which was well within the legal deviation. Specifically, he pointed out, the deviation between District 1, the most populous district and District 3, the least population showed a deviation of 787 total population. The map also followed major roads as dividing boundaries, using Magnolia, Euclid, East Street and State College to form significant boundaries between districts. It also kept many communities of interest cohesiveness such as elementary school attendance areas, the Arabic business community along Brookhurst, the historic Colony neighborhood and residential areas such as the Ponderosa neighborhood and other natural and manmade boundaries were honored such as Interstate 5. In addition, he stated, compliance with Section 2 of the Federal Voting Rights Act was met, there was only one majority Latino citizen voting age population district, District 3, but there were also two districts where the citizen voting age population was a plurality, Districts 4 and 5, all based on census 2010 data. These districts, he remarked, was likely to have a higher percentage today as a result of the trends and likely to increase as population growth occurred. He added that public testimony during the Committee process indicated broad support for this type of map as well as the breakdown of districts rather than establishing more majority districts. Mr. Houston pointed out that tonight was the first in a series of three public hearings with the other two scheduled for November 17th and December 8th. During these hearings Council would be asked to make decisions on two primary points; i.e. recommend discussion and consideration of selecting a districting plan or map to adopt by ordinance and identifying which of the four districts would be put on the November 2016 ballot and which two should be placed on the November 2018 ballot. He stated if, after holding tonight's hearing, Council had a preferred map, they could direct the city attorney to prepare an ordinance adopting that plan which could then be introduced at the upcoming November 17th hearing, adding that he would recommend this direction be made by a motion and vote of the Council. If direction was not given tonight, Mr. Houston explained, additional meetings would be needed in order to comply with state law. With respect to identifying the districts to place on the ballot, that direction should be given after City Council had identified the preferred map, and that direction could be given tonight or November 17th, if such an ordinance was introduced. He pointed out that such direction should occur, at the latest, at the time an ordinance was introduced identifying a map and the action recommended was by a separate motion after consideration of the Plan. Lastly he remarked, Council had full discretion to identify which of four districts would be placed on the 2015 ballot and which two districts would be placed on the 2018 ballot. Mayor Tait commented that there had not been much discussion on the timing of the districts, which should be considered in 2016 and which should be left to 2018 and he would like to hear from the public on that issue, possibly putting that decision off until November 17th if Council concurred. Mayor Tait opened the public hearing for comments. Mark Daniels remarked Map 3 was the people's map and he hoped Council would adopt it without any amendments. Redistricting was about the future of Anaheim and it would begin tonight and he looked forward to the future. Marisa! Ramirez, resident/OCCORD member, spoke about the process with a coalition of agencies working in partnership to engage community participation and raise consciousness City Council Minutes of October 20,2015 Page 17 of 29 about the issues, and, to be part of the solution. In September, parents, teachers, workers and students began collecting signatures, families gathered to speak about district boundaries together, residents went door to door and spoke to their neighbors, and faith-based leaders spoke to their congregations about the change that was coming to Anaheim. She presented over 213 signatures from residents in Anaheim favoring Recommended Map 3 as the Anaheim electoral district boundaries, adding that the coalition would continue educating residents and encouraging participation. Francisco Aviles Pino remarked he resided in the Rio Vista neighborhood, an area where many families supported Measures L and M last November. He talked of his involvement in getting those measures passed and urged Council's consideration of District 5 as one of the districts to be considered for election in 2016. He emphasized the community was united through representation and was why District 5 should now be considered for the ballot in 2016. William Fitzgerald recommended a random number selection for those districts to be considered in the 2016 election, as he felt any other method would be unfair. He spoke about his opposition to the at-large electoral system, politics in Anaheim and its ties to big corporations. Mayor Tait remarked he generally chose to ignore Mr. Fitzgerald's comments, but was compelled to respond to the offensive characterization of Frank Feldhaus, a World War II and Korean War veteran and community leader in Anaheim. Council Member Murray also clarified that Mr. Fitzgerald's comments on public school funding was not correct, that Anaheim had identified in its current budget, $5.7 million in funding that benefited neighborhood schools and additional funding in the five year capital improvement plan that was adopted by Council, which did not supersede or replace the annual funding that was currently going to Anaheim schools. Oscar Reyes commended the judges, Linda Andal, Ben DeMayo and Justin Levitt for their professionalism and respectfulness during this process and to the community for supporting the Recommended Map. He asked Council to approve Recommended Map 3. Mayor Tait thanked Mr. Reyes for his interest and efforts in creating the recommended map referred by the panel of judges as the Reyes map, stating it was a historic event that would change how Anaheim was governed. Martin Lopez, resident, remarked he was amazed at how the panel of judges was able to bring a large group of people into consensus even when at times not everyone was on the same issue or page. He voiced his support for the Recommended Map that had overwhelming support of the community and that addressed all the important criteria: compactness, contiguity, and clear boundaries. He thanked everyone involved for their service and urged Council to approve the Recommended Map and direct the city attorney to prepare an ordinance approving same. Bobby Donelson, Sherwood Village, supported Recommended Map 3, remarking when he saw the clear boundaries of the map with natural breaks, he thought it made sense and that the city would be much better off with district representation. For the 2016 ballot, he recommended the district(s) that were not currently represented should be on the ballot. Regarding derogatory comments applied to Disney, he supported the organization, stating they hired union workers, and as a retired union member, he believed labor federations in the state of California had brought about significant improvements versus states that did not support unions. City Council Minutes of October 20, 2015 Page 18 of 29 Arturo Ferraras, Ponderosa resident, remarked his community had suggested a districting map however when they participated in the process of selecting maps, it was clear there were others that represented the future of Anaheim. They withdrew their map and fully supported the Reyes Map which would give every citizen full representation and an equal voice. He asked for Council's consideration to approve Map 3 and congratulated city staff, the Committee and Justin Levitt for being accessible to all as they worked through this democratic process. Ron Bengochea remarked that initially he was not in favor of district elections, but after attending the initial meetings, he was encouraged about the process and the community that was wholly involved, that he submitted a map that was based on geography and did not meet the required criteria. He stated he felt the Reyes map met all criteria and he strongly encouraged the city to approve the map and the will of the residents of Anaheim. An unidentified person remarked a group of citizens went through the redistricting process with great effort to create a map that would benefit the entire city. An unidentified resident stated that as Anaheim developed and grew, the idea of reflecting the diversity of cultures in the city was important through district representation and he urged that all cultures come together in common goals. He expressed concern with Zionist activities and monetary support given to various interest groups. An unidentified speaker stated she had been an involved activist for Measures L and M, which made district elections possible in Anaheim and spoke to the unity among different cultures and beliefs that brought people together in support of Recommended Map 3. She expressed this map would give the people of Anaheim a voice that many felt had not been heard. She hoped Council would approve the map. Greg Diamond stated originally the discussion was whether Anaheim should have districts in which people in one district would vote for their own representative or whether people would run from individual districts but would be voted on at large. He had worked on a map with Brian Chuchua and others to ensure there was one map that was done fairly, adding that he was glad to state there were other maps that were fair, as well as the Reyes Map. He spoke about the mapping criteria and the judges' careful consideration of equality in the districts to come to a decision on Map 3. He emphasized the map was the people's map as they went door to door talking to everyone, making calls, and doing the research. He endorsed the city's acceptance of this map without amendment. Regarding the 2016 ballot, he supported elections in the three majority Latino districts, 3, 4 and 5, because the point of this process was to bring more Latinos into politics. With no other comments offered, Mayor Tait closed the public hearing. MOTION: Mayor Pro Tem Kring made a motion to direct staff to prepare an ordinance approving the Recommended Plan (Map 3), seconded by Council Member Murray. DISCUSSION: Mayor Tait thanked everyone involved, particularly the panel of judges who volunteered their time and wisdom, Justin Levitt for his hard work, the city attorney for his guidance and the city clerk who quarterbacked this historic process and did an incredible job. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES— 5: (Mayor Tait and Council Members: Brandman, Kring, Murray and Vanderbilt). NOES—0. Motion Carried. City Council Minutes of October 20, 2015 Page 19 of 29 MOTION: Mayor Tait moved to table Council action to November 17, 2015 to determine which four council districts would hold elections in 2016 and which two districts would hold elections in 2018, seconded by Council Member Murray. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES— 5: (Mayor Tait and Council Members: Brandman, Kring, Murray and Vanderbilt). NOES—0. Motion Carried. 20. This is a public hearing relating to extending for 186 days, the effective period of Ordinance No. 6343, which imposes a moratorium, with certain exceptions relating to short term rentals within the city as follows: M142 Determine that the interim urgency ordinance extending the effective period of Urgency Ordinance No. 6343, is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) and 15060(c)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines because it will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment and is not a project, as defined in Section 15378 of the State CEQA Guidelines. ORDINANCE NO. 6347 (ADOPTION) AN INTERIM URGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM extending for one hundred eighty-six days the effective period of urgency Ordinance No. 6343, which imposes a moratorium, with certain exceptions, on the issuance or renewal of use permits, variances, building permits, business licenses or any other entitlements or permits providing for the use, commencement, establishment or operation of short-term rentals within the City of Anaheim pursuant to California Government Code Section 65858 (A copy of the full text of the proposed ordinance is available for review in the Office of the City Clerk). David Belmer, Planning Director, reported tonight's public hearing pertained to the proposed extension of Urgency Ordinance No. 6343 regarding permits for short term rentals in the city of Anaheim. In terms of background, the city's ordinance regulating short term rentals (STRS) dated back to May 2014, when it was first adopted after holding public workshops and considerable analysis to deal with this emerging issue, known as vacation rentals. He stated at the time it was adopted, the city had about 200 STRs with those numbers now reaching slightly less than 400. He indicated that was due to an emerging shared economy through websites such as VRBO and HOMEAWAY.com and the general popularity of vacation rentals with most of those STRS concentrated in and around the Resort area. He added that the combination of proliferation and concentration of the STRs together with code enforcement challenges created a number of community concerns including their compatibility in single family residential neighborhoods and because of those issues, Council adopted a 45 day moratorium on September 15th with no new permits issued during that period. Mr. Belmer indicated that during the moratorium outreach with STR owners and operators, as well as impacted residents, was conducted with two individual workshops being held. He shared about 90 STR owners and operators attended on October 1st and 97 residents participated on October 8th. The format for both workshops were the same with group round table discussions that generated ideas and suggestions as to how impacts could be mitigated and each of the round tables then reporting the findings to the entire group, which led to a more dynamic group discussion. Mr. Belmer believed the workshops were successful and collectively generated a significant number of ideas and suggestions to improve the situation. What was learned from the City Council Minutes of October 20,2015 Page 20 of 29 workshops was there were two groups with differing opinions as to how issues should be resolved and what the long-term future of short term rentals in Anaheim should be. The owners and operators believed the rentals could be compatible in residential neighborhoods under certain terms and conditions and were committed to complying with the existing ordinance and/or amendments that might be considered providing it did not prevent their ability to operate. He added that the owners and operators viewed enforcement as the key to ensuring the short term rentals were compatible in residential neighborhoods. The overwhelming consensus of the residents was that STRs were not compatible in residential neighborhoods and their preference was to have the ordinance repealed and the existing STRs phased out. A secondary option was to participate in good faith discussion about suggestions and solutions that could be done through modifications of the existing ordinance or by other measures to improve the situation. The areas of commonality, he reported, was that both groups recognized that additional enforcement would be key, particularly more proactive enforcement and agreement on the benefit of a three strike provision, although the owners and operators felt that component should be used only when serious violations occurred. In addition, both groups indicated there should be better communication between the owners and operators and their neighbors; both suggesting that a private security firm was a way to augment the city's code enforcement efforts, particularly during the evening hours. Further discussion was suggested regarding a cap on the number of vacation rentals in a neighborhood and a method to address the concentration of rentals that was currently the case. Mr. Belmer pointed out Anaheim was not the only city dealing with this issue and in fact it was occurring throughout the county, state and nation. Many of those cities had adopted ordinances at the time thinking they had the best provisions as possible to try and ensure compatibility but as their popularity had grown and issues evolved, many cities realized their ordinances should evolve as well. He pointed out staff was researching best practices. As this point, Mr. Belmer stated an extension to the moratorium was requested to allow for further research and outreach and to present those recommendations to Council in the form of public workshops with the goal of having a potential amendment to the existing ordinance before the six month moratorium had expired. During that six month extension, the following would occur: No new permits would be approved or renewed; ownership changes would be considered, existing license holders would continue to operate, and those applications that were pending would continue to be processed and provided they could demonstrate compliance with the city's current ordinance, they could potentially be approved. Under that moratorium, the existing operators could maintain and improve their properties but an increase in bedrooms would be not allowed; strict enforcement of the current ordinance would occur during the moratorium and the $200,000 budget increase would provide for two additional code enforcement officers dedicated to STR enforcement particularly during the evening and early morning hour. To facilitate that effort, a phone hotline as well as email address was now created exclusively for this use to facilitate resident's concerns. Mr. Belmer also pointed out, if approved, the six month moratorium would expire on May 3, 2016 and required a 4/5 vote of the council. Mayor Tait opened the public hearing for comments. William Fitzgerald, Anaheim HOME, spoke in support of short term rentals, remarking every neighborhood had malcontents and those malcontents would be voicing their opinion in opposition tonight to deprive their neighbors from using their legal property rights. City Council Minutes of October 20,2015 Page 21 of 29 David Vill opposed short term rentals in single family neighborhoods, discussing the negative impacts it brought to the community and the fact this license would hurt more people than it would help. Diana Haugen spoke in opposition to short term rentals, listing the negative impacts; i.e, feeling unsafe with strangers coming in and out of the neighborhood, early morning noise, and the quality of life impact to the neighborhood. Julie King, short term rental owner/Anaheim Rental Alliance board member, submitted a study she stated she provided to the Council yesterday. The study was conducted last year on the local economic impact of STRs in Los Angeles for 2013, remarking it accounted for$1.4 billion in economic activity and 12,300 job generators for L.A. and she wanted that information be part of the record. She provided details of the study relating to spending and visitors and tourism. She emphasized that STRs were an important component of Anaheim tourism and that new found revenues had been generated for Anaheim and she encouraged that those revenues be set aside for the neighborhoods and also encouraged the city to conduct a specific economic study on Anaheim to determine the true impact to the city. Joshua Rich explained he was a Hollywood motorcycle stuntman, and had worked on feature films, TV and commercials for most of his working life; he also supplemented his income as many other actors did in the industry, by renting out their homes for short periods of time while working abroad. He stated he was not a venture capitalist attempting to exploit homes for profit, but was simply a private homeowner trying to make a living in Hollywood, and concerned that the ability to temporarily rent his home would be taken away. Britta Wagner, owner of three STR properties in Anaheim and a member of the ARA, submitted for the record an email she sent to the City Council earlier for the record. She hoped the conversation on short term rentals would continue, adding that the workshops had provided an opportunity for owners to suggest ideas and make recommendations towards a solution for STR impacts. She believed the issue was with the larger homes and many bedrooms, and believed a cap on the number of STRs in neighborhoods could help with that issue. On a personal note, she remarked with three properties operating for six years, she had never received a complaint, did not rent to locals or others who were looking for party homes, and had a "no party or eviction policy". Christi D'Antonio appreciated the opportunity to comment as a short term rental owner and delivered for the record an email that had been sent to Council on the matter and looked forward to a resolution of the issues and peaceful coexistence for all. Bobby Donelson, Sherwood Village, remarked his HOA had a meeting coming up on Monday that he hoped would eliminate short term rentals in Sherwood Village. In 2011, there were four vacation rentals with no problems noted; however there were now 52 STRs out of 221 units which was not good for the neighborhood. He wanted the ordinance rescinded and the short term rentals gone, remarking they had changed the physical characteristics of the community and it was a resort area, and no longer a neighborhood. An unidentified speaker, representing 30 or more vacation rental owners, requested the city review those STR owners who were in the permit process but not finalized when the moratorium took effect, so they would not be at a disadvantage. Another important fact to consider was that the STRs brought in $700,000 in transient occupancy tax for the first two months and the City Council Minutes of October 20, 2015 Page 22 of 29 speaker requested that during the six month moratorium the owners, residents and the city worked together in a positive manner to find an outcome that would benefit all the stakeholders. Frances Noteboom, STR owner, remarked that it was difficult to see so much contention and misguided statements made. With regard to the STR workforce, she stated all vendors were licensed with the City. In addition, every renter was invited into their home to explain how close the homes were to each other and to be respectful of neighbors. She added that as a resident herself, she had offered to speak to any of the neighborhoods and neighbors and would like to extend that offer once again. For the record, she submitted letters she had emailed to the Council this week. Patricia Scanlon, former employee and 54 year resident, stated she lived between two STRs, one that advertised it could sleep 23 people by adding a second story and putting a driveway in their back yard to accommodate the second story. Living close to the Convention Center, she stated vendors spent the night in their cul-de-sac unloading exhibit materials making it impossible to sleep. She added the STRs had created much unhappiness and inconvenience to her and that two years ago, she could have sold her home for$800,000 and today it would not be sold to a family because no family would wish to live between two hotels. She asked that Council give that aspect of vacation rentals some thought. Martin Lopez, Sherwood Village, emphasized his condo community went from four STRs to 57 with two or three units currently being remodeled for that same purpose. His neighborhood was disrupted drastically and he wondered if all STT units were paying the city transient occupancy taxes. The increase in HOA maintenance had gone up as a result, the enforcement of noise, drinking and use of community pools did not happen as most residents did not want to confront renters who were partying. He stated residents were demanding the HOA board members amend the CC&R to prohibit short term rentals or owners would take legal action to defend their own property rights. Regardless of the outcome, he stated, the expense would be costly to the HOA and could potentially lead to special assessments. He asked the City Council end short term rentals in the city. Clara Turner, OCCORD, addressed the short term rental issue from a policy perspective. Based on data gathered from websites that listed STRs, OCCORD believed there were closer to 600 vacation rentals operating in the city than the nearly 400 identified by staff. Her organization supported the proposed extension of the moratorium adding the policy should be stronger than the existing policy, should prohibit STRs of whole units, whole houses and whole apartments, and should also prohibit unsupervised short term rentals of any kind. More importantly, the ordinance should be enforceable and it should be illegal for websites to continue listing rental units that were violating the city's code, allowing the city to take legal action against these sites if they continued to broker transactions that were not legal. The policy also needed options for legal recourse by residents that provided for a private right of action so individual residents could seek injunctions or other legal actions against people who were violating the STR ordinance in their neighborhoods. Steve Ackerman, resident, requested the city support the supermajority of residents in the city and direct staff to not only extend the moratorium but to also draft appropriate language to completely abolish the short term rental program in the city. He concurred with the previous speaker as to a ban on advertising to control illegal units and the ability for residents/neighbors to have some legal recourse to protect neighborhoods. He urged Council to end the short term rental program. City Council Minutes of October 20,2015 Page 23 of 29 Theresa Copple, submitting documents, explained she was a school teacher and an owner of one vacation rental, and spoke of the care she took in having a well maintained property. She indicated this past month her HOA voted to change the CC&R's and now had 77 percent in favor of vacation rentals so she had the support of her community. She remarked this was her family business and she would like to continue to operate this smaller-size home. Victoria de Gomez wondered why the city was allowing businesses to operate in a residential area and was completely opposed to vacation rentals because it disturbed the peace of surrounding neighbors, adding that the American dream was to own a home, but not one that had a business going on each side. Maritza Gonzalez stated she moved into her Anaheim home six years ago to raise her children and now found that her neighborhood was becoming an area of short term rentals with three in operation in her cul-de-sac and one in the permit process, with a potential of bringing in 46 renters. She felt it was important that STR permits should only be issued with the approval of the neighbors, using a petition process which the city had requested for other types of permits or requests. Elaine Vaughn, resident, remarked she had a short term rental across from her that allowed for 30 people in a home that had been converted into seven bedrooms and four baths. She supported a complete ban on short term rentals in the future, citing the various impacts she and her neighbors put up with; noise, nuisance, parking problems, and no code enforcement. Adam Waugh remarked he and his wife use their home (but did not live there) when it was not being rented out and had never received a complaint in the 3 1,6 years they had been operating their vacation rentals. This was his college fund and he was appreciative of the city's efforts at managing the short term rental program and staff's effort at finding some common ground between the residents and the owners/operators. He added both sides wanted to avoid any late night disturbances and wanted any issues that came up to be resolved as quickly as possible. Luisa Lam, Sherwood Village, remarked she was surrounded by 10 short term rental units in her condominium development and living there had become a nightmare because rental guests treated the entire development as a resort. In her community 57 of the 220 condo units were short term rentals and those owners had used intimidation tactics to get the rest of the residents to concur, stating otherwise the development would be converted to Section 8 low income housing and/or sober living or halfway housing. She urged the city to ban short term rentals in Anaheim, the only solution that could work for its residents. Ghianny Valencia, resident, explained as a worker at the Disneyland Hotel, she was concerned about the long-term effect short term rentals would have on Anaheim's hotel workers by affecting the amount of hours worked or possibly job loss. In addition these vacation rentals had an impact on the amount of regular rental housing in the city, increasing rental costs and impacting the local workforce. An unidentified speaker remarked this situation was similar to the Uber vs. taxi battle and he recognized that it was a touchy subject and was sure the city would find a solution. Anita Hynds remarked she was here to voice her opinion after reading a Register article that the city did not want short term rentals in Anaheim. She pointed out the city had approved a short term rental ordinance, and owners were permitted licenses to rent those homes. In addition City Council Minutes of October 20, 2015 Page 24 of 29 there were many real estate agents who specialized in renting short term units, and the improvement and investments in those homes made them an attractive place for tourists. As a short term rental owner, she had invested in the short term rental program because the city had an ordinance in place that approved them, asking that the ordinance be amended rather than banned. Len Gao stated his primary income as a retiree was from a short term rental, emphasizing that over the last four years he had received no complaints on his operation. He supported the three strike regulation and enforcement of all regulations, asking that the city retain the STR ordinance along with stricter enforcement. Tony owned one vacation rental home in Anaheim for the past two years with no complaints. He recommended the city implement stronger regulations to address all impacts and possibly having the owner pay for each complaint. He emphasized short term rentals were doing well in California, earning revenues for the city and the owners. Larry Barnes stated he was completely against short term rentals in the city, supported an extension of the moratorium, as proposed, and believed it should be extended to applications that were filed before September 15th and not approved. He believed neighborhoods had been transformed from homes into businesses by people that did not occupy those homes and repeatedly rented them in a short-term basis solely for the purpose of personal profit. He added the city had an opportunity to undo a wrong, and urged a ban on these rentals. Jeannine Robbins, resident, stated one speaker said there were not many residents at this hearing complaining about the rentals, and she pointed out that the Planning Department did not notify the residents about the hearing as they had the short term rental owners until she spoke to staff and they agreed to send out notices to residents for which the department had addresses. She suggested a perimeter be set from the Disney resort and everything regarding short term rentals should be sent to residents within that perimeter. She asked Council to support the residents on this ban and if not approved, the community was prepared to put this to a ballot and ban STRs with their votes. An unidentified speaker stated that through three to four hours of basic research, he was able to discover close to 60 percent of short term rental owners that were not adhering to the requirements of the short term rental ordinance, that is: short term rental were required to stay a minimum of three nights at the property, they may not be used for bachelor or bachelorette parties, weddings, parties, conferences or similar events, and the maximum number of vehicles should not exceed the number of off street parking available. Lastly, he pointed out the ordinance stated it was a violation to advertise an unpermitted short term rental in Anaheim, sharing the data he collected from VRBO and HomeAway showed there were at least 400 residences available in Anaheim, which means 200 were being illegally operated. He emphasized a significant number of STRs were operating without a license, the owners were not adhering to the ordinance regulations, and the city should be aware of these facts and take appropriate action against those operators. Mike Leveland, West Ord Way, stressed that short term rentals could not be monitored or regulated and he wanted the problem gone. Lauren Wilson, Tonya Lane, spoke in opposition of short term rentals for many reasons, with problems occurring regionally, nationally, and in other countries. She wanted the program City Council Minutes of October 20, 2015 Page 25 of 29 banned adding that businesses were not appropriate in residential neighborhoods and the loss of community was overwhelming. She believed tourists would continue to visit Disneyland whether or not there were short term rentals available and the hotels would fill the need as had been done in the past. Pam Donaldson, Sherwood Village, detailed the specific impacts she had seen from short term rentals taking over her condominium community. She added there were some retired residents in Sherwood Village and they did not have the ability to move out and she wanted the problem to end. Fred Cornejo, Tonya Lane, recognized that the City Council would likely extend the moratorium today, which would make little difference to residents who were impacted by STRs. Homes would still be rented out, in competition with hotels, and in his opinion, businesses should not be operating in single family resident neighborhoods. He encouraged Council to consider the rights of the residents versus businesses that were destroying communities. Anna Maria, resident, spoke in support of the STR owners and the harassment she had received from her neighbors. She urged the city to continue the program, terminate the owners that were not following the rules, and come up with a solution for rental owners who followed the regulations. Robert Palumbo, resident, supported the moratorium and the complete repeal of the ordinance permitting short term rentals. He talked about the specific negative impacts in his neighborhood, with 17 to 19 people coming out of a nearby home and the challenges in trying to live with that kind of situation. Mayor Tait announced for technical reasons, the council meeting would be briefly recessed at 11:00 P.M. The meeting was called back to order at 11:04 P.M. Martina Ortiz, Morgan Lane resident, talked about her personal challenges as a young mother with short term rentals in her neighborhood. She requested that as a homeowner, she be notified when future short term rental meetings came up, so she could attend and understand the issues. If anything, she wanted the opportunity to become educated on the issue and for Council to hear more than one side of the issue. Talmadge Price stated he operated several vacation rentals in Anaheim and wanted to set the record straight regarding previous comments on parking on his home sites. In addition, he was here to work with residents to come up with solutions that addressed the problems people were talking about. He noted the current code addressed many of those issues and getting owners to use their best practices in addition to amending the code to address any new issues was the solution. He looked for a way to coexist and work together and believed by sitting down and addressing problems, a way to coexist could be found. An unidentified speaker remarked he had two properties and before he purchased them, he asked the city how the short term rental program worked and had the two properties permitted before they were rented. He stated these rentals were his retirement and he would not be a problem to nearby residents as he set up reasonable rules and made sure they were being followed. As a general contractor he had invested $400,000 on each property and maintained them to the highest degree. He did not want to lose the ability to have a business based on other people's opinions, urging the city to enforce and/or strengthen the current regulations. City Council Minutes of October 20, 2015 Page 26 of 29 Myrvette Juda, realtor, pointed out when an appraiser looked at a home, they looked at any upgrades, the age of the roof, and how many tenant occupied properties versus homeowner occupied properties there were; if there was a higher percentage of tenant occupied properties, the property value was decreased. Now with neighborhoods where four or five homes were up for sale, this has become a long-term problem for Anaheim. She advised, investors would come in and buy these properties and convert them to short term rentals destroying the value of the neighborhood. Her advice was to get rid of the short term rentals; it was bad for the city and the residents. Jose Moreno, James Way resident, supported the moratorium and suggested a process to get input from residents by each member of council conducting three meetings with residents in each of the districts that had just been approved, and ask residents what they thought about this issue. She shared there were six or seven STRs in his neighborhood that had been purchased on short term sales because of the recession. One home had been advertised as seven bedrooms, that was possible by renovating a four bedroom house, and putting in bunk beds. He emphasized that no family would purchase this home as a single family unit. He was concerned with losing the integrity of the neighborhood and the safety of his children with 15 unknown renters going in and out of the neighborhood. He was open to listening to owners with short term rentals, but at the end of the day, he supported keeping the integrity of the neighborhood. Greg Diamond remarked that as more homes were converted to short term rentals, the rents in general increased because of the lack of housing stock and eventually it could add to the homeless population. He felt Council had taken action too quickly on drafting a short term rental ordinance and not enough consideration on zoning laws that prevented businesses moving into residential neighborhoods. He added right now for a traditional bed and breakfast that was owner occupied, a conditional use permit process was required white the STRS without being owner occupied were allowed to operate. He suggested various scenarios, having a building superintendent, or bonding against repeat offenses that would drag down neighbor's property values and continual violation of nuisance laws, putting a cap on the number of bedrooms and number of beds in a room and ensuring that regulations were enforced. An unidentified individual stressed the importance of families who lived in the neighborhoods before the STR businesses began operating. She trusted each one of the council members, stating she knew they would protect her and her family as they considered the issues and heard their comments. She was opposed to short term rentals in residential neighborhoods and wanted families who would live there in the long term and become part of the community. An unidentified speaker spoke against short term rentals, stating he did not understand why businesses were allowed to operate in residential areas and the recent proliferation of the vacation rental homes exacerbated the conditions. He would attend all the meetings, and continue to make his point known, stating the community did not need this kind of problem. Ryan McIntosh remarked he was a short term rental owner and managed other properties and in the last three years enjoyed success in developing relationships with neighbors in the community. He was concerned about the misinformation being dispensed and hoped to be able to work with staff to find common ground together and to do the right thing. He supported the moratorium as a time to figure out how to make this program work. City Council Minutes of October 20, 2015 Page 27 of 29 Staff explained to Orval Miller that he could not yield his time to a speaker who had already provided comments. Mr. Miller then stated that Mr. McIntosh, the prior speaker, had never reached out to his neighbors and that was the misinformation Council was hearing tonight. Mike Robbins stated that the public was asking for a ban on short term rentals and sought no other option. With no other comments, Mayor Tait closed the public hearing. MOTION: Council Member Brandman moved to determine the interim urgency ordinance extending the effective period of Urgency Ordinance No. 6343, was not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) and 15060(c)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines because it would not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment and was not a project, as defined in Section 15378 of the State CEQA Guidelines and to adopt ORDINANCE NO. 6347 AN INTERIM URGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM extending for one hundred eighty-six days the effective period of urgency Ordinance No. 6343, which imposes a moratorium, with certain exceptions, on the issuance or renewal of use permits, variances, building permits, business licenses or any other entitlements or permits providing for the use, commencement, establishment or operation of short-term rentals within the City of Anaheim pursuant to California Government Code Section 65858, seconded by Mayor Pro Tern Kring. DISCUSSION. Mayor Tait liked the idea of shared economy and of a homeowner having someone stay in their house or a situation like the stuntman who rented his home when he was working elsewhere because he still lived in the home. He requested the moratorium in the first place, because the city had received more and more complaints about STRs. He believed if every owner followed the rules that there would still be a problem because vacation rentals changed the fabric of a community. The extended moratorium would allow for further research and discussion and provide data for Council to make a decision. Council Member Murray supported the motion but wanted to make sure residents were invited to every meeting that was conducted and their input received during the moratorium as the city considered options. She hoped to have a solution that worked for everyone. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES — 5: (Mayor Tait and Council Members: Brandman, Kring, Murray and Vanderbilt). NOES—0. Motion Carried. Regarding Item No. 21, City Attorney Houston stated that with the approval of Agenda Item No. 15, the applicant would withdraw Item No. 21. 21. AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2005-00008 OWNER: PT Metro, LLC, Donna Kelly, 25 Enterprise, 3rd Floor, Aliso Viejo, CA 92656 AGENT: Hunsaker and Associates, Ted Frattone, 3 Hughes, Irvine, CA 92618 A123 Location: The subject property is commonly known as 1404 East KateIla Avenue (A- Town) and consists of approximately 43.1-acres generally located west of State College Boulevard between KateIla Avenue and Gene Autry Way in an area of the City of Anaheim known as "The Platinum Triangle". Project Description: Request to amend Development Agreement No. 2005-00008 to extend the term for a period of six months until June 13, 2016. The City Council will City Council Minutes of October 20, 2015 Page 28 of 29 consider whether the previously certified Platinum Triangle Expansion Project Final Subsequent EIR No. 339 for the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project is the appropriate environmental determination for this request. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: Recommended City Council approve Amendment No. 2 to DAG2005-00008 (Resolution No. 064) VOTE: 5-0 (Commissioners Bostwick, Dalati, Henninger, Ramirez and Seymour voted yes. Chairman Lieberman and Commissioner Caldwell were absent) (Planning Commission meeting of September 9, 2015). RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM determining that the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project Subsequent Environmental Impact Report No. 339 for the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project, including updated and modified Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 106c, and previously approved Addenda thereto, serve as the appropriate environmental documentation and no further environmental documentation need be prepared for the request by PT Metro, LLC to amend Development Agreement No. 2005-00008 in the form of Amendment No. 2 to Development Agreement No. 2005- 00008. ORDINANCE NO. (INTRODUCTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM approving that certain Amendment No. 2 to Development Agreement No. 2005-00008 by and between the City of Anaheim and PT Metro, LLC and authorizing the Mayor to execute said agreement for and on behalf of the City. REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION ACTIONS: Relating to Closed Session Item No. 2, Michael Houston reported City Manager Paul Emery was the Property Negotiator on behalf of the City and in the event another negotiator was identified it would be properly noticed pursuant to the Brown Act. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS: Mayor Pro Tem Kring announced the Fall Festival and Halloween Parade to be held on October 24, requested staff look into having a Farmer's Market at Twila Reid Park and spoke of the success of the Bootcamp Games Fundraiser which raised $4,500 in support of homeless veterans. Council Member Vanderbilt requested staff look into adjusting the restroom hours at Twila Reid, per a request made by the public, and make a recommendation to the City Council. Mayor Tait stated he would adjourn this meeting in memory of Frank Feldhaus, former Anaheim Council Member. City Council Minutes of October 20,2015 Page 29 of 29 ADJOURNMENT: At 11:56 P.M., with the consent of Council, Mayor Tait adjourned the October 20, 2015 meeting in memory of Frank Feldhaus. Respctfully submitted, /7 ) LindaN.N. Andal, CMC City Clerk