RES-2009-022RESOLUTION NO. 2009- 022
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM (i) REISSUING A PROCLAMATION OF THE
EXISTENCE OF A LOCAL EMERGENCY IN THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM AS HERETOFORE PROCLAIMED BY THE
DIRECTOR OF EMERGENCY SERVICES OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM AND RATIFIED BY CITY COUNCIL
RESOLUTION NO. 2005 -17. AND (ii) DETERMINING THAT
THE NEED FOR CONTINUING THE LOCAL EMERGENCY
EXISTS
WHEREAS, Section 6.04.060 of the Anaheim Municipal Code empowers the
Director of Emergency Services of the City of Anaheim to proclaim the existence or threatened
existence of a local emergency when the City of Anaheim is affected or likely to be affected by a
public calamity and the City Council is not in session; and
WHEREAS, on or about February 9. 2005, conditions of extreme peril to the
safety of persons and property constituting a local emergency (the "Local Emergency arose
within the City of Anaheim caused by the continuing movement and displacement of land in the
vicinity of 357, 365 and 373 Ramsgate Drive, Anaheim, California (the "Emergency Area" or
"Disaster Area as more particularly described and shown on Exhibit A of the Proclamation of
the Existence of a Local Emergency by the Director of Emergency Services of the City of
Anaheim" issued on February 9. 2005, (the "Proclamation and
WHEREAS. on February 9. 2005, the Director of Emergency Services of the City
of :Anaheim did issue the Proclamation, at which time the City Council was not in session; and
WHEREAS. on February 10. 2005, the Director of Emergency Services of the
City of Anaheim did issue "Order No. 1 of the Director of Emergency Services Pursuant to
Proclamation of the Existence of a Local Emergency Issued on February 9, 2005" "Order No.
1"). a copy of which Order No. 1 was attached to City Council Resolution No. 2005 -17; and
WHEREAS, on February 15, 2005, the City Council adopted its Resolution No.
2005 -17 finding that the aforesaid conditions of extreme peril (the "impending peril did
warrant and necessitate proclamation of the existence of a local emergency and the issuance of
said Proclamation by the Director of Emergency Services, and for such reasons, the City Council
ratified said Proclamation and Order No. 1 issued pursuant thereto; and
WHEREAS, on March 2. 2005. at which time the City Council was not in session,
the Director of Emergency Services did issue "Order No. 2 of the Directory of Emergency
Services Pursuant to Proclamation of the Existence of a Local Emergency issued on February 9,
i
2005 "Order No. 2 a copy of which Order No. 2 was attached to City Council Resolution No.
2005 -27; and
WHEREAS, on March 8, 2005, the City Council adopted its Resolution No.
2005- 27 (i) reviewing the need for continuing the local emergency, (ii) determining that the
need for continuing the local emergency continued to exist, (iii) authorizing and ratifying certain
acts and orders by the Director of Emergency Services including said Order No. 2, and (iv)
approving and authorizing certain additional remedial actions relating to the impending peril; and
WHEREAS, on March 29, 2005, and April 12, 2005, the City Council did review
the need for continuing the local emergency and, by motion duly adopted at each such meeting,
did determine that the need for continuing the local emergency continued to exist, and, for such
reason. did not take action to terminate the local emergency; and
WHEREAS, on April 18, 2005, at which time the City Council was not in session,
the Director of Emergency Services did issue "Order Number 3 of the Director of Emergency
Services of the City of Anaheim Pertaining to Expanding the Area Subject to Proclamation of
Local Emergency" "Order No. 3 pursuant to the Proclamation of the Existence of a Local
Emergency issued on February 9, 2005. a copy of which Order No. 3 was attached to City
Council Resolution No. 200.5 -50; and
WHEREAS, on April 26, 2005, the City Council adopted its Resolution No.
2005- 50 (i) reviewing the need for continuing the local emergency, (ii) determining that the
need for continuing the local emergency exists, (iii) authorizing and ratifying certain acts and
orders by the Director of Emergency Services including said Order No. 3, and (iv) approving and
authorizing certain additional remedial actions relating to the impending peril; and
WHEREAS, between April 26, 2005, and December 8, 2005, the City Council
periodically reviewed the need for continuing the local emergency as required by Section 8630
of the Government Code of the State of California and, based upon information provided to the
City Council at or prior to each such review, has determined the need for continuing the local
emergency and has determined not to terminate the local emergency; and
WHEREAS, on December 8. 2005, at which time the City Council was not in
session, the Director of Emergency Services did issue "Emergency Order Number 4" entitled
"An Order of the Director of Emergency Services of the City of Anaheim Ordering (1) the
Continued Temporary Availability of Henning Way as Vehicular Access for Emergency
Vehicles. Public and Private Services. and Residents and Property Owners and Their Invitees to
the Properties in the Hidden Grove Lane /Fox Glen Drive Area Until Alternative Vehicular
Access to said Affected Area is Available, (2) Emergency Work by City Personnel and
Contractors to Provide. Construct and Maintain Alternative Vehicular Access to said Affected
Area. and the Construction of Erosion Control. and a Detention Basis to Protect Downstream
2
Public Drainage Facilities in the Vicinity of Hidden Grove Lane" "Order No. 4 pursuant to the
Proclamation of the Existence of a Local Emergency issued on February 9, 2005; and
WHEREAS, on December 20, 2005, the City Council adopted its Resolution No.
2005- 23 1 (i reviewing the need for continuing the local emergency, (ii) determining that the
need for continuing the local emergency exists, (iii) authorizing and ratifying certain acts and
orders by the Director of Emergency Services including said Order No. 4, and (iv) approving and
authorizing certain additional remedial actions relating to the impending peril; and
WHEREAS, the City of Anaheim, through a private contractor, has completed
implementation of the provisions of Order No. 4 by constructing a temporary paved emergency
access road along Hidden Grove Lane to restore vehicular access for emergency vehicles, public
and private services, and residents and property owners and their invitees to said thirteen
properties in the Hidden Grove Lane/Fox Glen Drive area; said project included the addition of
approximately 1,000 cubic yards of imported soil along the base of the landslide, re- grading a
portion of the easterly slope of Hidden Grove Lane, lining of the slope with jut mat, installation
of K -rail concrete barriers, construction of a temporary drainage system with desilting basins,
and installation of the temporary single -lane paved access road; and
WHEREAS, on March 22. 2006. following the completion of said project
implementing Order No. 4, the Director of Emergency Services issued Order No. 5 (i) rescinding
Paragraph of Order No. 4 which had required the continued temporary availability of Henning
Wav as vehicular access for emergency vehicles, public and private services, and residents and
property owners and their invitees to the thirteen properties in the Hidden Grove Lane/Fox Glen
Drive area. and (ii) issuing certain additional orders relating to said local emergency; and a copy
of which Order No. 5 was attached to City Council Resolution No. 2006 -051; and
WHEREAS, on March 28. 2006. the City Council adopted its Resolution No.
2006 -05 i (i reviewing the need for continuing the local emergency heretofore proclaimed by the
Director of Emergency Services of the City as ratified by Resolution No. 2005 -17, (ii)
determining that the need for continuing the local emergency exists, and (iii) authorizing and
ratifying certain acts and orders by the Director of Emergency Services including said Order No.
5; and
WHEREAS, on April 11. 2006 and April 25, 2006, the City Council did review
the need for continuing the local emergency and, by motion duly adopted at each such meeting,
did determwe that the need for continuing the local emergency continued to exist, and, for such
reason_ did not take action to terminate the local emergency: and
WHEREAS, because the need for continuing the local emergency as heretofore
proclaimed was not thereafter reviewed by the City Council on or before May 16, 2006, the City
Council adopted its Resolution No. 2006 -099 on May 30, 2006, reissuing the Proclamation and
determining that the need for the local emergency continued to exist; and
3
WHEREAS, on June 20, 2006, July 11, 2006, July 25, 2006, and August 8, 2006,
the City Council did review the need for continuing the local emergency and, by motion duly
adopted at each such meeting. did determine that the need for continuing the local emergency
continued to exist. and. for such reason, did not take action to terminate the local emergency; and
WHEREAS, Section 8630 of the Government Code of the State of California
requires that the City Council shall review, at least every 21 days, the need for continuing the
local emergency and to proclaim the termination of the local emergency at the earliest possible
date that conditions w arrant; and
WHEREAS. because the need for continuing the local emergency as heretofore
proclaimed was not thereafter reviewed by the City Council on or before August 29, 2006, the
City Council adopted its Resolution No. 2006 -209 on September 12, 2006, reissuing the
Proclamation and determining that the need for the local emergency continued to exist; and
WHEREAS. on October 3, 2006. and October 17, 2006, the City Council did
review the need for continuing the local emergency and, by motion duly adopted at each such
meeting, did determine that the need for continuing the local emergency continued to exist, and,
for such reason. did not take action to terminate the local emergency; and
WHEREAS, because the need for continuing the local emergency as heretofore
proclaimed was not thereafter reviewed by the City Council on or before November 7, 2006, the
City Council adopted its Resolution No. 2006 -239 on November 13, 2006, reissuing the
Proclamation and determining that the need for the local emergency continued to exist; and
WHEREAS, on November 28. 2006, and December 12, 2006, the City Council
did review the need for continuing the local emergency and, by motion duly adopted at each such
meeting. did determine that the need for continuing the local emergency continued to exist, and,
for such reason, did not take action to terminate the local emergency; and
WHEREAS, because the need for continuing the local emergency as heretofore
proclaimed was not thereafter reviewed by the City Council on or before January 2, 2007, the
City Council adopted its Resolution No. 2007 -005 on January 9, 2007, reissuing the
Proclamation and determining that the need for the local emergency continued to exist; and
WHEREAS. on January 30. 2007. February 13, 2007, March 6, 2007, and March
20. 2007. the City Council did review the need for continuing the local emergency and, by
notion duly adopted at each such meeting, did determine that the need for continuing the local
emergency ontinued to exist. and. for such reason. did not take action to terminate the local
emergency: and
WHEREAS, because the need for continuing the local emergency as heretofore
proclaimed was not thereafter reviewed by the City Council on or before April 10, 2007, the City
Council adopted its Resolution No. 2007 -047 on April 17, 2007, reissuing the Proclamation and
determining that the need for the local emergency continued to exist; and
4
WHEREAS, on May 8, 2007, May 15, 2007, June 5, 2007, and June 19, 2007, the
Cit) Council did review the need for continuing the local emergency and, by motion duly
adopted at each such meeting. did determine that the need for continuing the local emergency
continued to exist, and. for such reason. did not take action to terminate the local emergency; and
WHEREAS, because the need for continuing the local emergency as heretofore
proclaimed was not thereafter reviewed by the City Council on or before July 10, 2007, the City
Council adopted its Resolution No. 2007 -125 on July 17, 2007, reissuing the Proclamation and
determining that the need for the local emergency continued to exist; and
WHEREAS, on August 7, 2007, August 21, 2007, September 11, 2007,
September 25, 2007, October 9. 2007, October 23, 2007, November 6, 2007, November 27,
2007, December 18, 2007, January 8. 2008, January 29, 2008, February 12, 2008, March 4,
2008, March 18, 2008. April 8, 2008. April 22, 2008, and May 13, 2008, the City Council did
review the need for continuing the local emergency and, by motion duly adopted at each such
meeting, did determine that the need for continuing the local emergency continued to exist, and,
for such reason. did not take action to terminate the local emergency; and
WHEREAS, because the need for continuing the local emergency as heretofore
proclaimed was not thereafter reviewed by the City Council on or before June 3, 2008, the City
Council adopted its Resolution No. 2008 -072 on June 10, 2008, reissuing the Proclamation and
determining that the need for the local emergency continued to exist; and
WHEREAS, on June 24. 2008, July 15, 2008, and August 5, 2008, the City
Council did review the need for continuing the local emergency and, by motion duly adopted at
each such meeting, did determine that the need for continuing the local emergency continued to
exist. and. for such reason, did not take action to terminate the local emergency; and
WHEREAS, because the need for continuing the local emergency as heretofore
proclaimed was not thereafter reviewed by the City Council on or before August 26, 2008, the
Cite Council adopted its Resolution No. 2008 -153 on September 16, 2008, reissuing the
Proclamation and determining that the need for the local emergency continued to exist; and
WHEREAS, on September 30, 2008, October 14, 2008, October 28, 2008,
Nov ember 18, 2008, December 2, 2008, and December 16, 2008, the City Council did review the
need for amtinuing the local emergency and. by motion duly adopted at each such meeting, did
determine that the need for continuing the local emergency continued to exist, and, for such
reason. did not take action to terminate the local emergency; and
WHEREAS, because the need for continuing the local emergency as heretofore
proclaimed was not thereafter reviewed by the City Council on or before January 6, 2009, the
Council adopted it Resolution No. 2009 -002 on January 13, 2009, reissuing the Proclamation
and determining that the need for the local emergency continued to exist; and
5
WHEREAS, because the need for continuing the local emergency as heretofore
proclaimed was not thereafter reviewed by the City Council on or before February 3, 2009, it is
necessary for the City Council, by adoption of this resolution, to reissue the proclamation of the
existence of a local emergency as theretofore proclaimed by the Director of Emergency Services
and ratified by the Citv Council by the adoption of its Resolution No. 2005 -17; and
WHEREAS. the City Council hereby finds that the need for continuing the local
emergency continues to exist at this time: and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 866(a) of the Government Code of the State of
California, and on the basis of expert opinion or other reasonable basis, the City Council hereby
finds as follows:
1. The aforesaid Emergency Area is the subject of gradual earth movement
as defined in Government Code Section 866(a); and
2. An impending peril to persons and/or property exists as a result of said
gradual earth movement; and
3. The City Council has determined appropriate remedial action to abate such
impending peril in the manner hereinafter set forth; and
WHEREAS, the City Council heretofore determined and/or hereby determines
that those certain measures identified in the Proclamation, Order No. 1, Order No. 2, Order No.
3, Order No 4 and Order No. 5 (collectively referred to herein as the "remedial measures
constitute appropriate remedial actions to abate said impending peril; and
WHEREAS. pursuant to Section 8630 of the Government Code of the State of
California. the City Council has this date reviewed the need for continuing the local emergency.
NOW. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council hereby
determines that the need exists for continuing the local emergency due to the continued existence
of the impending peril.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council hereby proclaims and
reissues he Proclamation of the Existence of a Local Emergency as heretofore proclaimed by the
Director of Emergency Services on February 9, 2005, and ratified by the City Council by its
Resolution No. 2005 -17 as adopted on February 15, 2005.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that, pursuant to Section 866(a) of the
Gov ernment Code of the State of California, the City Council hereby determines that those
certain remedial measures identified in the Proclamation, Order No. 1, Order No. 2, Order No. 3,
Order No. 4 and Order No. 5 constitute appropriate remedial actions to abate the impending
per ;1.
6
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the officers, employees, agents and
contractors of the Citv of Anaheim are hereby authorized to implement said remedial measures,
and the acts heretofore undertaken to implement said remedial measures are hereby ratified and
approved
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that, except as may be expressly superseded by
any provision hereof, Resolution Nos. 2005 -17, 2005 -27, 2005 -50, 2005 -231, 2006 -051, 2006-
099. 2006 -209, 2006 -239, 2007 -005. 2007 -047, 2007 -125, 2008 -072, 2008 -153, 2009 -002 and
the Proclamation shall remain in full force and effect.
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION is approved and adopted by the City Council
of the City of Anaheim this 1 Oth day of February, 2009, by the following roll call vote:
AYES: Mayor Pringle, Council Members Hernandez, Sidhu, Galloway, Kring
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: NONE
ABSTAIN: NONE
ATTEST
i
A41 Vii_. A IL.-
CITY OF A IM
By
CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
7
MAYOR OF T IT OF ANAHEIM