Loading...
1996/02/06CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL MINUTES FEBRUARY 6, 1996 PRESENT: ABSENT: PRESENT: The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in Special session. COUNCIL MEMBERS: Tom Talt, Bob Zemel, Frank Feldhaus, Lou Lopez, Tom Daly COUNCIL MEMBERS: None CITY MANGER: Jim Ruth CITY ATTORNEY: Jack White CONVENTION CENTER/STADIUM GENERAL MANAGER: Greg Smith ASSISTANT CITY CLERK: Ann Sauvageau A complete copy of the agenda for the meeting of the Anaheim City Council was posted at 12:20 p.m. on February 2, 1996 at the Civic Center kiosk, containing all items a shown herein. Mayor Daly called the Special Meeting of February 6, 1996 to order at 2:16 p.m. for a workshop session. City Manager, James Ruth. Staff has been working with the architect, Visitor and Convention Bureau and staff on a plan for the expansion of the Convention Center. They sro privileged today to have the architect present. He then introduced Greg Smith, General Manager of the Convention Center and Stadium who will introduce today's presentation. 124: ARCHITECT'S PRESENTATION ON CONVENTION CENTER ENHANCEMENT AND EXPANSION: Grsg Smith, General Manager, Anaheim Convention Center and Stadium. He gave an histodc overview leading to the meeting today most notably the fact that the firm of Coopers & Lybrand was commissioned to do a study and present a report - "Feasibility Analysis Related to the Potential Expansion of the Anaheim Convention Center" which was submitted to the Council st the meeting of August 22, 1995. He bdefed the findings of the study and also noted in concluding what could be expected if the expansion was done (positives) and what could be expected if not done (negatives). In discussion with tenants of the Convention Center, with no expansion, they indicated they will be forced to relocate their convention business. Staff has worked tirelessly with the architectural firm of HOK to come up with a master plan and conceptul design of the proposed expansion. The two primary individuals from HOK, Mr. John Connally and Mr. Steve Brubaker are present. Mr. Brubaker will give a "walk through" of the master plan. Mr. Steve Brubaker, Principal Design Architect, HOK. he gave an extensive multi-media presentation using charts, slides and an interchangeable scale model of the Convention Center. The presentation was in two parts - the first, having to do with interviews they had with user groups, tours taken of other facilities, urban studies that have been done, and a study of the spirit and place of Southern California. Secondly, they want to build the scheme that is proposed as a master plan both in the model and on drawings on the screen. They have spent some time with Greg Smith and his team establishing goals. A basic pdmary goal is the issue of maintaining market retention meeting the Coopers & Lybrand study, i.e., the 750,000 square feet of prime exhibit hall, 150,000 square feet of meeting rooms, and ballroom component with related concourse to correct the current shortage (only 450,000 square feet of prime exhibit hall space, small amount of meeting rooms and almost no lobby space. ) Among the slides shown were the Orlando, Atlanta, New Orleans, Long Beach, Los Angeles, San Diego, Seattle and Portland Convention Centers noting that convention centers are growing both in quantity and quality each showing a certain ~spirit of place" of the area in which they are located. Mr. Brubaker then elaborated on the spirit of Southern California showing slides of architectural styles that have emerged over the years - a collage of style and design of the Southern California imagery. Slides of the Anaheim Convention Center were also shown as well as slides of plans showing the existing configuration of the Convention Center and surrounding land uses and then overlayed with the proposals for expansion coordinating those with the model and the graphics displayed in front of the dais. He then bdefed each phase, I through VI, Phase I being the plan that will provide the market retention as outlined in the Coopers & Lybrand study. (Phase II relates to surface parking for the expansion, Phase II1, clean up of the loading docks and exhibit halls, Phase IV, the Katella Avenue frontage, Phase V, Katella Avenue and West Street, back filling over the surface parking with the parking now all underground, Phase VI, building a plenary hall and then an exhibit hall where the present arena now stands). Dudng Mr. Brubaker's presentation, questions were posed and input given by the Mayor and Council Members relating to the phases, sequencing, traffic cimulation, landscaping, time lines, etc. Greg Smith. He clarified that the recommendation in the study was to meet current market demand to build to 750,000 square feet (from the current 450,000) but also indicating as time progresses, 15 to 20 years from now, there will be in increased demand. If they were to build beyond market retention at this time, the occupancy rate would not support the cost of building. In this process, they are trying to identi~ where they can grow and subsequently where they will need to grow. The focus at present is on market retention, Phase I, which will be needed soon in order to remain competitive but keeping in mind that future expansion will be inevitable and where they can expand would be along the Katella frontage. The preliminary price tag for the first phase of the master plan that is necessary as identified by the Coopers & Lybrand study is approximately 150 million to 180 million dollars. The objectJve in the coming weeks and months will be to refine the contract estimates, consider the phasing opportunities, and look for participation from adjoining properties and subsequently evaluate the City's economic opUons. It is a challenge that will directly impact their ability in funding a City-wide program supporting other services within Anaheim. To provide additional background and perspective, he introduced Mr. Charles Ahlers, Chairman of the Visitor and Convention Bureau (V&CB) Mr. Charles Ahlers, Chairman, Visitor and Convention Bureau. They are impressed with the progress to date. The Coopers & Lybrand study has given a structure and specification to expand the Anaheim Convention Center. HOK has presented a marvelous design. If the guidelines are met, the City will retain its market share of the convenUon and trade show industry. If they do not act, Anaheim will lose its position in the market. The Phase I expansion will keep the City competiUve for the next several years. The economic impact created by Anaheim's ConvenUon and trade show delegate spending is 1.95 billion dollars a year equal to 12 Super Bowls or one Super Bowl a month. He emphasized, they would like to retain this money in the community. The industry, present today, is ready to embrace the HOK plan and to encourage the City to move forward with this plan. Mayor Daly then introduced members of the Community Center Authority Board who were present, Mr. Pat Patterson, Bob Hostettler, and Jim Reily and thanked them for the time they have given to the process. He also acknowledged Tom Leigler, Anaheim's first General Manager of the Convention Center and Stadium. Greg Smith. The plan is to continue refining the process and be back to the City Council again in another workshp session to give an update of the design. The goal is to have a master design completed in May. It is very important for the future of the City to master plan the very valuable Convention Center to provide a well thought-out program over the next 15 to 20 years. Mayor Daly. He has seen what he was hoping for in some of the concepts presented especially aiming high and planning for the future of the facility beyond the next expansion. The architect and staff has given the Council a great deal to consider and they look forward to seeing the next product with the finishing touches. City Manager Ruth. He thanked the Council for their attention and support for this major renovation/expansion project and also to members of the Community Center Authority in the audience who have been very dedicated and also members of the Visitor and Convention Bureau. Mr. Bill O'Connell, President of the V&CB is also present today; Mayor Daly invited Mr. O'Connell to comment. Mr. Bill O'Connell, President, Visitor and Convention Bureau. Mr. Ahlers covered everything except the urgency with which they view this issue. V&C would appreciate anything that can be done to speed the process along. The competition is keen and there is a need to have the expansion completed as soon as possible in order to be able to compete. Mayor Daly. He thanked the architect and staff for the detailed and informative presentation and again thanked all of the interested parties for taking time from their busy schedules to be present today on this important issue. ~,pJOURNMENT: By general Council consent, the Special Meeting of February 6, 1996 was adjourned (3:16 p.m.) LEONORA N. SOHL CITY CLERK CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL MINUTES FEBRUARY 6, 1996 PRESENT: ABSENT: PRESENT: The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session. COUNCIL MEMBERS: Tom Tait, Bob Zemel, Frank Feldhaus, Lou Lopez, Tom Daly COUNCIL MEMBERS: None CITY MANAGER: James Ruth CITY ATTORNEY: Jack White CITY CLERK: Leonora N. Sohl UTILITIES ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING MANAGER: Jafar Taghavi CODE ENFORCEMENT MANAGER: John Poole POLICE DEPARTMENT PERSONNEL OFFICER: Tom Engel PLANNING DIRECTOR: Joel Fick A complete copy of the agenda for the meeting of the Anaheim City Council was posted at 12:20p.m. on February 2, 1996 at the Civic Center kiosk, containing all items as shown herein. Mayor Daly called the meeting to order at 3:17p.m. REQUEST FOR CLOSED SESSION: City Attorney Jack White requested a Closed Session noting first that there are no additions to Closed Session items. PUBLIC COMMENTS - CLOSED SESSION ITEMS: There were no public comments relative to Closed Session items. The following items are to be considered at the Closed Session: CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9(a) - EXISTING LITIGATION: Name of case: In re: County of Orange, Debtor, U.S. Bankruptcy Court, Central District Case No. SA 94-22272. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9(a) - EXISTING LITIGATION Name of Case: Niehaus vs. City of Anaheim, et al., Orange County Supedor Court Case No. 73-71-29. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9(a) - EXISTING LITIGATION Name of Case: Nolan vs. City of Anaheim, et al., Orange County Superior Court Case No. 74-72-63 PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION: Title: Ciht ^ttorney CITY OF ANAHEIM~ CALIFORNIA COUNCIL MINUTES FEBRUARY 6~ 1996 CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR Property: Juliette Low School Negotiating parlies: City of Anaheim, Magnolia School District Under negotiation: Price and terms CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR Property: Anaheim Stadium Negotiating parties: City of Anaheim, Goldenwest Baseball Co., and Disney Baseball Enterprises, Inc. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Initiation of litigation pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 54956: one potential case. LIABILITY CLAIMS Claimant: Nancy Brown and Betty Scott Claimant: Hung Van Cao Agency claimed against: City of Anaheim Recess: Mayor Daly moved to recess into Closed Session. Council Member Feldhaus seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. (3:17 p.m.) AFTER RECESS: The Mayor called the meeting to order, all Council Members being present, and welcomed those in attendance to the Council meeting. (5:33p.m.) INVOCATION: Reverend Bryan Crow, Garden Church, gave the invocation. FLAG SALUTE: Council Member Frank Feldhaus led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. 119: PROCLAMATION: Recognizing February 11 - 17, 1996 as Vocational Education Week in Anaheim. Present to accept were representatives of the North Orange County Regional Occupation Program (NOCROP), Joanne Stanton, President, Board of Trustees ~ Mike Worley, Administrator, and Dr. Tom Kurtz, Superintendent. Mrs. Stanton explained that they were now calling the program, Career Education. She then explained the comprehensive approach used in preparing students for the world of work; Dr. Kurlz stated that next year will be the 25th anniversary of the NOCROP with a strong presence in Anaheim. He explained that thousands of CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL MINUTES FEBRUARY 6, 1996 students have gone through the program, both High School Juniors or Seniors, and adults. Mayor Daly. On behalf of the Council, expressed appreciation for all the hard work devoted to the program. It is one of the success stories in California. RECOGNITIONS AUTHORIZED BY COUNCIL THIS DATE TO BE MAILED OR PRESENTED AT ANOTHER TIME: 1. PROCLAMATION recognizing the Kiwanis Club of Anaheim on their 75th Anniversary. FINANCIAL DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY in the amount of $1,814,701.62 for the period ending January 29, 1996 and $3,077,958.34 for the period ending February 5, 1996, in accordance with the 1995-96 Budget, were approved. Mayor Daly recessed the City Council meeting until after the Redevelopment Agency and Housing Authority meeting. (5:45 p.m.) Mayor Daly reconvened the City Council meeting. (5:47 p.m.) ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA: There were no additions to agenda items. ITEMS OF PUBLIC INTEREST: Dwyer Beasley, 125 N. Gilbert, Anaheim. He is speaking to the South of Romneya Revitalization Plan and the rehabilitation of the units in the area. He was not in town on December 5, 1995 when the Housing Authority adopted the resolutions to condemn units not pumhased by the Authority (see Housing Authority Minutes of 12/5/95). He and his wife have owned one of the buildings since 1989. It was an Anaheim Beautiful award winner. He has also owned apartments in the City for over 20 years. He was dismayed when he found out his property was condemned. Lisa Stipkovich, Executive Director of Community Development said it would be exempted because she and other members of staff were aware of the condition of the property. Also, the condemnation price vs. what he owes was substantially less by $40,000 or $50,000. After eight years of work on the property, he is going to walk away with nothing. He feels there are other ways the project could be addressed. He does not think this was the best use of condemnation noting as an example the problems experienced in Orange on a project where the C~ spent 4.5 million on relocation alone. He feels a lot of money is going to be spent but is not sure it is going to be in the most productive interest of the City. Mayor Daly then posed questions to Mr. Beasley regarding notification and previous discussions with staff. He stated there have been several discussions on the South of Romneya Revitalization Project and a series of public discussions in the Council Chamber with all the proper notitication and legal notices in terms of condemnation. A whole series of properties were condemned and Mr. Beasley is correct, at a groat expense to the taxpayers. There is cleanup under way. He is disappointed that they did not hear from Mr. Beasley sooner since he is a property owner. He reiterated, thero have been many discussions and public forums on this matter. To come in after the fact and say it is a bad idea, he feels, does a disservice to those who are trying to do the right thing for the City. 3 CITY OF ANAHEIM~ CALIFORNIA COUNCIL MINUTES FEBRUARY 67 1996 PUBLIC COMMENTS -AGENDA ITEMS: Public input was received on Agenda item B5. See discussion under that item. MOTION: Mayor Daly moved to waive reading in full of all ordinances and resolutions to be acted upon for the Council meeting of February 6, 1996. Council Member Feldhaus seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. crrY MANAGERJDEPARTMENTAL CONSENT CALENDAR: On motion by Mayor Daly, seconded by Council Member Feldhaus, the following items were approved in accordance with the reports, certifications and recommendations furnished each Council Member and as listed on the Consent Calendar; Mayor Daly offered Resolution Nos. 96R-13 through 96R-17, both inclusive, for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. Al. 118: Rejecting and/or denying claims against the City. The following claims were filed against the City and action taken as recommended: Claims rejected and referred to Risk Management: a. Claim submitted by Nancy Gilmore Brown and Betty Scott c/o Edi O. Faal, Esq. for bodily injudes sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about June 30, 1995. b. Claim submitted by Pauline Leonard for property damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about December 6, 1995. c. Claim submitted by Joanne Yvorchuk cio Lawrence J. Kuhlman, esq. for bodily injudes sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about April 15, 1996. d. Claim submitted by Steve Patterson c/o Satin & Russell for property damage and bodily injury sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about June 12, 1995. e. Claim submitted by Hung Van Gao c/o Thomas Avdeef, Esq. for property damage and bodily injury sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about June 13, 1995. f. Claim submitted by Denny V. Wisco for property damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the city on or about November 8, 1995. g. Claim submitted by Southern California Gas Co. Cio Celeste Makuta, Esq. for Indemnity adsing purportedly due to actions of the City on or about March 25, 1993. (Main action: William Hitchcock vs. Southern California Gas Co.) 4 CITY OF ANAHEIM~ CALIFORNIA COUNCIL MINUTES FEBRUARY 6~ 1996 h. Claim submitted by See Myun Klm dba Sees Color Textiles, Inc. for property damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about June 28, 1995. i. Claim submitted by Romayne Malloy c/o Don Franklin for property damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about October 24, 1995. J. Claim submitted by Katsuumi Shiba for property damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about December 1, 1995. k. Claim submitted by Douglas Alien for property damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about December 17, 1995. 105: Receiving and filing minutes of the Community Redevelopment Commission special meeting held October 18, 1995. 105: Receiving and filing minutes of the Mother Colony House Advisory Board meeting held November 13, 1995. 105: Receiving and filing minutes of the Anaheim Public Library Board meeting held November 15, 1995. 105: Receiving and filing minutes of the Anaheim Public Library Board for December 27, 1995. 105: Receiving and filing minutes of the Golf Advisory Commission meeting held November 30, 1995. 173: Receiving and filing correspondence filed before the Public Utilities Commission of the State of California regarding an order instituting rulemaking on the Commission's own motion to develop revisions to general orders and rules applicable to siting and environmental review of cellular mobile radiotelephone utility facilities (Administrative Law Judge's Ruling on Proposal to Modify General Order 159). 173: Receiving and filing correspondence filed before the Public Utilities Commission of the State of California in the matter of the application of PCSTC, INC., dba Pacific Coast Sight Seeing Tours for certificate of public convenience and necessity to operate as passenger stage for scheduled and on- call sen/ice between Los Angeles International Airport and John Wayne Airport on the one hand, and of the cities of Anaheim, Fullerton, Orange and Buena Park on the other hand (Application No. 95-10-021 - Amended Protest of Buslink Corp.). 173: Receiving and filing correspondence filed before the Public Utilities Commission of the State of California in the matter of the application of PCSTC, INC., dba Pacific Coast Sight Seeing Tours for certificate of public convenience and necessity to operate as passenger stage for scheduled and on- call service between Los Angeles International Airport and John Wayne Airport on the one hand, and of the c'~Jes of Anaheim, Fullerton, Orange and Buena Park on the other hand (Application No. 95-10-O21 - Declaration of Zaher Fallahi in Support of Amended Protest of Buslink Corp,). Council Member Tait abstained on item A2. A3. 113: RESOLUTION NO. 96R-13 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF 5 CITY OF ANAHEIM~ CALIFORNIA COUNCIL MINUTES FEBRUARY 6~ 1996 ANAHEIM AUTHORIZING THE DESTRUCTION OF CERTAIN CITY RECORDS MORE THAN TWO YEARS OLD. (TRAFFIC ENGINEERING RECORDS.) 123: Waiving Council Policy No. 401, and approving the Agreement with IMS Services, in an amount not to exceed $90,000 to provide a Local Street System Pavement Management System and survey, and perform the FY 1995/96 annual non-destructive deflection testing on a portion of the Arterial Highway System. A5. 123: Approving the new hourly rates proposed by Pacific Relocation Consultants to provide relocation services on an as needed basis. (Public Works Dept; I-5 Widening Project) 175: Approving an Alternative Undergrounding Program for the I-5 Freeway Widening Project, to underground six electric utility line crossings including the city line at South Street, the c~ line at Vermont Avenue, the city line at Midway Drive, the city portion of the line at Freedman Way, the Southern California Edison portion of the line at Katella Avenue, the Southern California Edison "O" line between Gene Autn/Way and Orangewood Avenue and the related City and Southern California Edison lines in Anaheim Boulevard, Haster Street, Katella Avenue, Manchester Avenue and Clementine Avenue. Authorizing the expenditure of $2,065,000 from the City's Underground Utility Fund for the undergrounding of the recommended city lines, including the approval of rescheduling of the La Palma/Kraemer, the Santa Ana/Citron and the Santa Ana Canyon Road undergrounding projects. Authorizing the expenditure of $1,505,000 from the City's Anaheim Resort Program Fund for the undergrounding of the recommended Southern California Edison lines including that such expenditure be paid under protest. Council Member Frank Feldhaus. He posed questions relative to the subject which were answered by Jafar Taghavi, Electrical Engineering Manager, Utilities Department (see Staff Report to the City Manager/City Council dated 1/29/96). Mr. Teghavi also confirmed for the Mayor that, technically speaking, all of the City's overhead lines are eligible for undergrounding except Southern California Edison lines and thus would have to be initially funded through the City's General Fund. City Manager, James Ruth. He emphasized this is a one-time opportunity to get the undergrounding at the lowest possible cost. Relative to Southern California Edison's stand not to fund the undergrounding of the lines, staff will do everything possible to obtain those costs from Edison. MOTION. Mayor Daly moved to approve the three proposed actions under Item A6. Council Member Zemel seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. A8. 160: Waiving Council Policy 306, and authorizing the Purchasing Agent to issue a Pumhase order to Valcom/Software Galeria, in an amount not to exceed $150,000 for software and software licenses for the period of March 1, 1996 through June 30, 1997. 153: Approving an increase in the mileage reimbursement rate from 30.0 cents to 31.0 cents per mile to match the increase approved by the Internal Revenue Service for 1996, in accordance with the Memoranda of Understanding for the various employee bargaining units. CITY OF ANAHEIM~ CALIFORNIA COUNCIL MINUTES FEBRUARY 6~ 1996 113: RESOLUTION NO. 96R-14 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE FOR THE CITY OF ANAHEIM (EFFECTIVE FOR THE 1996 CALENDAR YEAR). Al0. 184: Reviewing the need for continuing the Ninth Proclamation of the Existence of a local Emergency issued by the Director of Emergency Services on January 2, 1996, concerning the Santiago Landslide end Pegasus Landslide in the City of Anaheim; and taking no action to terminate the local emergency at this time. A11. 153: Approving a rate reduction for the Aetna Temporary Disability Income Plan to be effective March 1,1996. A12. 153: Approving 1996 renewal rates for the Kaiser "Q" Health Plan of $117.16 for single coverage and $307.31 for family coverage, effective Mamh 1, 1996; and authorizing the Human Resources Manager to sign the renewal agreement on behalf of the City. A13. 123: Approving an Amendment to Agreement with Magnolia School District to extend Park Ranger patrols to Juliette Low Elementary School through June 30, 1996. A14. 123: Approving an Agreement with Facilities Communications International Ltd., dba U.S. Telcom for the exclusive license to place pay telephones within the Anaheim Stadium and Anaheim Convention Center. A15. 130: RESOLUTION NO. 96R-15 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO APPROVE THE TRANSFER OF A CABLE TELEVISION FRANCHISE FROM M. L. MEDIA PARTNERS, LTD. DBA MULTIVISION CABLE TELEVISION, TO CENTURY COMMUNICATIONS CORP. AND ORDERING A HEARING THEREON. A16. 175: RESOLUTION NO. 96R-16 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AUTHORIZING SUBMITTAL OF AN APPLICATION FOR AN ACCEPTANCE OF A GRANT FROM THE CALIFORNIA INTEGRATED WASTE MANAGEMENT BOARD FOR A USED OIL RECYCLING PROGRAM; AND AUTHORIZING THE PUBLIC UTILITIES GENERAL MANAGER TO TAKE ANY AND ALL ACTIONS NECESSARY TO IMPLEMENT THE PROGRAM. (1996/98 LOCAL GOVERNMENT USED OIL OPPORTUNITY GRANT - THIRD CYCLE APPLICATION.) A17. 127: RESOLUTION NO. 96R-17 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM OPPOSING MEASURE "S", AN INITIATIVE BEFORE THE VOTERS ON MARCH 26, 1996, DEALING WITH REUSE PLANNING AT THE EL TORO MARINE CORPS AIR STATION. Mayor Daly. He asked for a separate discussion on this item just to emphasize the importance of this measure which will be on the March 26, 1996 ballot County wide. Measure 'S" claims to be a good planning initiative sponsored by s variety of groups in South Orange County who are concerned that an airport might be planned where e military airport now operates, Tourism is a vital part of the local economy and Orange County does not have a proper airport for the size of the County and the amount of people who want to travel to and from the County, It is important for the expansion of the Orange County economy and for the good of Anaheim that an airport option be available when El Toro closes in 1999. Measure 'S" precludes an airport on that property and that is the reason for opposing the measure. The voters of Orange County just over a year ago supported an initiative which would require that an airport be at least examined as one of the future uses of El Toro. Measure "S' would overturn the will of the people when they voted for Measure ~A". It is bad news because the measure, if approved, would preclude that property ever being used for a commercial airport. It would be bad for Orange County and Anaheim. CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL MINUTES FEBRUARY 6, 1996 Council Member Tait. He totally agrees. The measure will not only preclude an airport, but also, the way it is written, will most likely preclude anything else from being built on the property for the next 20 years. An airport would be a huge economic plus for the County and would generate an estimated 53,000 jobs. It is incumbent upon them as Council Members of Anaheim to oppose Measure "S" and which would show continued support for former Measure "A" passed overwhelmingly by the voters of Anaheim. Council Member Zemel. He echoes beth comments with special attention to the workshop held this afternoon relative to the expansion of the Convention Center and the ongoing need to provide access to convention and tourism areas. It is time the County got behind the opposition to Measure 'S'. He wholeheartedly supports opposition to this measure. A18. 114: Approving minutes of the Anaheim City Council meeting held January 9, 1996. Roll Call Vote on Resolution Nos. 96R-14 throuoh 96R-17, both inclusive, for adoption: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Tait, Zemel, Feldhaus, Lopez, Daly NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 96R-14 through 96R-17, both inclusive, duly passed and adopted. END OF CONSENT CALENDAR. MOTIONS CARRIED. (Council Member Tait abstained from voting on A2.) BOARD AND COMMISSION ITEMS: A19/A2.0. 105: Approving the appointment of Slim Terrell as Representative to the Park and Recreation Commission (for a four-year term ending June 30, 2000) as elected by the Anaheim Union High School Distdct Board of Trustees at its meeting of December 14, 1995. (See letter dated 12-28-96 from the Anaheim Union High School District.) Approving the appointment of Chris Whorton as Representative to the Park and Recreation Commission (for a four-year term ending June 30, 2000) as elected by the Anaheim City School District Board at its meeting of December 5, 1995. (See letter dated 1-29-96 from the Anaheim City School District.) MOTION. Mayor Daly moved to approve the appointment of Slim Terrell and Chris Whorton as Representatives to the Park and Recreation Commission for four-year terms ending June 30, 2000 as elected by the Anaheim Union High School District Board of Trustees and the Anaheim City School District Board respectively. Council Member Zemel seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. 8 CiTY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL MINUTES FEBRUARY 6, 1996 ITEMS B1 - B4 FROM THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR MEETING OF JANUARY 18, 1996: DECISION DATE: JANUARY 25. 1996 INFORMATION ONLY - APPEAL PERIOD ENDS FEBRUARY 9. 1996 BI. 179; VARIANCE NO. 4285 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION: OWNER: LILLIAN RUNO, 1120 Kenwood Place, Fullerton, CA 92601 AGENT: YONG SIK CHOE, 18210 Yorba Linda Boulevard ~.401, Yorba Linda, CA 92686 LOCATION: 3035 I~est La Mesa Avenue: Properb/is approximately 1.47 acre, located at the northwest corner of La Mesa Avenue and Kraemer Place. To establish a retail golf store, with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces. ACTION TAKEN BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR: Variance No. 4285 APPROVED (ZA Decision No. 96-02). Approved Negative Declaration. B2. 179: VARIANCE NO. 4236 REQUEST FOR REVIEW OF REVISED PARKING STUDY: REQUESTED BY: UNIVERSAL ALLOY, A'I'TN: JOHN BALL, 2871 La Mesa Avenue. Petitioner has requested to review a revised parking study per conditions of approval of Variance No. 4236. ACTION TAKEN BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR: Revised parking study approved. B3. 179: SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCE REQUEST NO. 96-01: REQUESTED BY: ANAHEIM YAMAHA KAWASAKI, PETER HAHM, 616 E. Ball Road, Anaheim, CA 92805-5909 LOCATION: 125 East Ball Road Petitioner requests approval for a temporary banner in the ML zone at 125 East Ball Road. ACTION TAKEN BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR: Approved Special Circumstance Request No. 96-01, applicant allowed to have banners 36-days per calendar year (4, 9-day periods) (ZA Decision No. 96-03). B4. 197: SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCE REQUEST NO. 96-02: REQUESTED BY: DISNEYLAND, GREGORY S. CLAMP, 1818 South Harbor Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92805 LOCATION: 1717 South West Street Petitioner requests approval to allow banners for an additional 54 days beyond the perm;fled time period. ACTION TAKEN BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR: Approved Special Circumstance Request No. 96-02, applicant allowed to have banners an additional 54 days (ZA Decision No. 96-04). Council Member Feldhaus commented relative to the City's Banner Ordinance (see Council Comments), 9 CITY OF ANAHEIM~ CALIFORNIA COUNCIL MINUTES FEBRUARY 6~ 1996 B5. REQUEST FOR REHEARING: Continued from the meeting of January 9, 1996, Item BI. 179: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 284 CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT. CLASS 21: OWNER: GOCK WOEY JUNG, 433 South Vicki Lane, Anaheim, CA 92804 EL PAl=AlSO RESTAURANT, Attn: Eva Fragosa, 420 South Brookhurst Street, Anaheim, CA 92804 INITIATED BY: City-Initiated (Code Enforcement Division) 100 South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92805 LOCATION: 420 South Brookhurst Street. Property is approximately 0.50 acres located on the east side of Brookhurst Street and approximately 619 feet north of the centerline of Orange Avenue. (El Paraiso Restaurant). City-initiated request to consider revoking or modifying Conditional Use Permit No. 284 (to establish a restaurant and cocktail lounge) pursuant to Zoning Code Section 18.03.091 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: CUP NO. 284 Terminated (PC95-93) (5 yes votes, 1 no vote, and 1 abstained). Informational item at the meeting of August 22, 1995, Item B3. Letter of appeal submitted by Ralph B. Saltsman, Solomon, Saltsman & Jamieson, on behalf of the owner, El Paraiso Restaurant. At the meeting of September 12, 1995, Item B15, City Council considered the appeal of CUP NO. 284, and referred the matter to a hearing officer. That hearing was held on October 11,1995, by Hearing Officer Victor J. Kaleta. At the meeting of November 28, 1995, Item A16, the City Council adopted the Findings of Fact submitted by the Hearing Officer, denying the appeal and revoking Conditional Use Permit No. 284; and Council adopted Resolution No. 95R-193 terminating CUP NO. 284. A request for rehearing has been submitted by Ralph B. Saltsman on behalf of El Paraiso Restaurant, and scheduled for the meeting of January 9, 1996 and subsequently continued to this date as requested by the applicant and staff. Mayor Daly. He clarified that the Council has taken previous action on this matter by approving the report of the Hearing Officer which had been appointed. C.U.P. 284 was revoked and this is a request for rehearing submitted by a representative of El Paraiso. He asked the City Attorney to explain the legal requirements relative to this request. City Attorney White. This item is not a Public Hearing but merely a determination by the Council whether or not to grant a rehearing on their previous decision which was to terminate the C.U.P. The Council can listen to speakers and take their input; however, the testimony is not part of the record of the hearing which has been completed. As the Council recalls, they received a copy of the record to review and a recommendation from the hearing officer that set forth several alternatives, one of which was to revoke the C.U.P, which the Council did. The request by the applicant is that the Council reconsider that decision and set it for another hearing to possibly modify that prior decision. Mayor Daly. He asked for a show of hands of those present to speak against the request. There were approximately 20 people present in opposition to the request for a reheadng. The Mayor asked how many persons were present in support. There were approximately two people. 10 CITY OF ANAHEIM~ CALIFORNIA COUNCIL MINUTES FEBRUARY 6~ 1996 City Attorney White. He would suggest at a minimum to allow the applicant or legal counsel to make a statement realizing this is not a hearing. Mayor Daly. He invited the applicant or his representative to speak at this time regarding the subject. Ralph Saltsman, Attorney, Law Offices, Solomon, Saltsman and Jamieson, 426 Culver Blvd., Playa Del Ray, CA 90293. There is an extensive administrative record. What the Hearing Officer did alter concluding the hearing wes to issue three alternatives to the Council. Only one of them was the "death penalty" to the business which has been in business since 1962. The other two would alow the business to remain in business. What the administrative record reveals, rather than an aggravation of problems or issues facing the neighborhood generated by the business, is a deceleration to where most recently visits to the site have demonstrated that this is not an impact business any longer. The reason is, without the imposition of the conditions which were one of the conditions by the Hearing Officer, his client has engaged in self imposition of those conditions that appear to be working. Regarding the effectiveness, he suggested that they speak to staff. He requested that this business, which has been around in one form or another since 1962, be allowed to remain but under the stdct conditions recommended by the Hearing Officer. Council Member Feldhaus. Mr. Saltsman stated the business has been in operation since 1962 in one form or another. He is correct and for many years it was the Sampan Restaurant with no problems such as those with El Paraiso which started around 1989. Ralph Saltsman. It changed ownership in 1989 or 1990 and changed management more recently. It has been such that if the Council would look at the business from that point forward, it would not be a problem. Council Member Lou Lopez posed questions relative to the business that were answered by John Poole, Code Enforcement Manager. Mr. Pools explained, when the business changed from the Chinese restaurant to first the Pink Cadillac (and subsequently El Paraiso) that is when the complaints started. It was an entirely different format. There were complaints of noise in the parking lot, noise from the business, people loitering in the parking lot, meals not being sewed, etc. MOTION. Council Member Zemel moved to deny the request for a rehearing on C.U.P. 284. Mayor Daly seconded the motion. Before a vote was taken, Council Member Feldhaus asked for confirmation that if the rehearing is denied, then the C.U.P. will be revoked. City Attorney White. It keeps intact the Council's previous decision supporting the recommendation of the Hearing Officer that the permit be revoked. He also confirmed that the business can apply for another permit at a later time for whatever use is appropriate in the zone. A vote was then taken on the motion to deny the rehearing. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 13. CITY OF ANAHEIM~ CALIFORNIA COUNCIL MINUTES FEBRUARY 6~ 1996 D1. 179: CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING - RECLASSIFICATION NO. 94-95-09 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3776 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION: OWNER: DONALD A. MILLER, C/O Glenn Hellyer, 1225 W. Lincoln Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92805 AGENT: GLENN HELLYER, 1225 W. Lincoln Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92805 LOCATION: 301 S. Anaheim I~oulevard. Property is approximately 0.87 acre located at the southwest comer of Anaheim Boulevard and Broadway. For a change in zone from the CG (Commercial, General) Zone to the CL (Commercial, Limited) or a less intense zone. To permit a 3,075-square foot drive-through restaurant with an outdoor patio area. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: RECLASSIFICATION NO. 94-95-09 GRANTED, UNCONDITIONALLY (PC95-130) (7 yes votes). CUP NO. 3776 GRANTED (PC95-131). Approved Negative Declaration. HEARING SET ON: A review of the Planning Commission's decision requested by Council Members Lopez and Tait at the meeting of November 7, 1995. Public hearing continued from the meetings of December 5, 1995, Item D4, and January 9, 1996, Item D1 to this date. PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY: Publication in Anaheim Bulletin - November 23, 1995. Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - November 17, 1995. Posting of property - November 22, 1995. See staff report to the Planning Commission dated July 10, 1995. The subject Public Hearing was held on December 5, 1995 and continued to January 9, 1996 (see minutes of those dates) and subsequently continued to this date. Mayor Daly. He asked if a representative of the applicant was present. (No one was present). He noted that there is an overriding State law requiring action on projects within a certain period of time. City Clerk Sohl referred to letter dated February 2, 1996 from Glen Hellyer, Paul Kott Realtors, Agent for the applicant, requesting that the item again be continued for 30 days to allow continued dialogue with Redevelopment Agency staff. City Attorney White. Since the City received a written request for a continuance, the Council can grant that request. MOTION. Council Member Zemel moved to continue the subject Public Hearing for 30 days to March 5, 1998. Mayor Daly seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. Joel Fick, Planning Director. Before concluding, he stated that the most recent discussions have taken place with Redevelopment staff and, as the letter stated, the continuance is to allow those discussions to continue. 12 CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL MINUTES FEBRUARY 6, 1996 Cl. 108: POOL ROOM PERMIT APPLICATION - BOB'S FAMILY BILLIARDS: REQUESTED BY: MARY LYNN MARINEZ, 119 Chinook Road, #B, Randle, WA 98377 I~OCATION: 3015 West Ball Road, Anaheim, CA 92804 I~OB'S FAMILY BILLIARDS: Petitioner requests a permit to operate 14 billiard tables 3015 West Ball Road in Anaheim. Continued from the meeting of January 9, 1996, Item C1. Council Member Lopez asked for a report from the Police Department as to the types of violations that have occurred et the business. Tom Engel, Police Department. He gave an historic overview of the business from when it was first licensed in 1979 to present (also see staff report dated January 9, 1996 from the Planning Department/Code Enforcement Division recommending denial of the application and memorandum dated December 19, 1995 from Sgt. Steve WalkerNice Detail giving a summation of reports taken by the Police Department since January 1, 1995 (5) as well as the findings of Vice Investigators assigned to work the location between May and December, 1993.) City Attorney White. The applicant should be given the opportunity to speak. He would, however, like to clarity that this is not a revocation hearing, but a determination on denying an application. Such licenses are personal to applicants and permit holders. When Mr. Wallace passed away in 1987, his permit expired. This is a request for a new license in the name of a new license holder. It is not a revocation of Mr. Wallace's license. Mr. Ralph Saltsman, Attorney, Solomon, Saltsman and Jamieson, representing the applicant. He feels the term applicant is incorrect. Since the death of Mr. Wallace in 1987, the business has been in operation continuously and has regularly and annually paid the fees required by the City for the 14 pool tables which are at issue this evening. He respectfully disagrees with Mr. White since, if it is the Council's ultimate action tonight to deny the application, he believes what the Council will be doing is to revoke an existing business. As recently as a few weeks ago, the latest fees have been paid by the business to remain in business. The Council has to be fully aware that if a revocation is to take place, a due process hearing has to precede that action. What the Council may, in fact, do this evening is enact that revocation and take away an existing business from Mr. Wallace's widow. He reiterated, the Council should then understand it is a revocation without due process. There is a representative of the family present to discuss the factual issues that were responded to in questions by the Council by the Police Department. Mayor Daly asked if the Council was under any obligation to hear from any other speakers; the City Attorney answered, no. In his opinion, this is not a Public Hearing. The Council has the discretion to hear as many or as few people they want. Relative to Mr. Saltsman's comments, it has been clear for many years in the Anaheim Municipal Code that a license when granted is personal to the licensee. It is not transferable and would expire upon the demise of the permit holder. The business has been in operation since Mr. Wallace's death but the operation has not been lawful because it does not have the requisite license since the prior operator is deceased. The fact that the business license was regularly and routinely issued by the City is not evidence that the City has condoned violation or stopped from asserting the fact that a new license is required. A business license is purely for revenue raising and not regulatory. The only regulatory document is the pool room permit, the bottom line being, there is not a revocation in this case but an issue of denying a new application. Ralph Saltsman. The problems addressed by the Police Department related to an interim management during the period of time when the business was going through probate following the death of Mr. Wallace. With probate concluded, the Alcoholic Beverage Commission (ABC) has taken action and what was paramount to them was to assure that the person running the business during probate have nothing to do with the business in 13 CITY OF ANAHEIM~ CALIFORNIA COUNCIL MINUTES FEBRUARY 6~ 1996 the future. ABC specifically delineated there be no participation of Mr. Bell. He (Bell) is not part of the operafion at this point. In fact, the applicant to the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control is Mr. Wallace's widow. W'~th respect to the most recent incident, he has been told that the person arrested a few days ago was arrested as he was walking by the billiard parlor, if that were the only issue before the Police Department and City Council, he does not believe it would be a disqualifying factor. All of the other problems were under the rein of Mr. Bell and he is gone. The operation of the business is now back in the hands of the family, specifically, Mr. Wallace's widow. Her present residence is in Washington. Council Member Feldhaus. She lives out of state and in order for her to be able to run the business will have to make regular appearances at the location and there will have to be a qualified manager which he believes is an additional condition of the ABC; Council Member Lopez also expressed concern that she will not be able to run the bus~ness if she lives in Washington and questioned who would do so. Ralph Saltsman. It is a valid question and he supposes what the Council could do is to allow the business to continue but make that an additional condition -- that the ABC licensee be on site to manage it. MOTION. Mayor Daly moved to deny the pool room permit application for Bob's Family Billiards to operate 14 billiard tables at 3015 W. Ball Road, Anaheim. Council Member Zemel seconded the motion. Before a vote was taken, City Attorney White recommended that the motion be one to deny the pool room permit application on the grounds that by reason of the location where the pool room is located, the conducting or carrying on of the pool room would be detrimental to the public health, public order, or public morals based upon findings set forth in Code Enforcement Division staff report dated January 9, 1996 and for the reasons set forth in the said report and the report from Sgt. Steve Walker of the Anaheim Police Department dated December 19, 1995. Mayor Daly amended his motion to incorporate the findings as articulated by the City Attorney; Council Member Zemel concurred in his second. Council Member Tait. He agrees with the City Attorney that it is a new application but has a problem with the fact that because the owner passed away, his widow will lose the business.. He would like another week to evaluate the matter and to discuss it further with the Police Department. MOTION. Council Member Tait moved that the matter be continued one week. Council Member Lopez. The attorney representing the business has made no attempt to say that the business owner is going to be on the premises to run the business. They are being asked to approve a permit for a person who lives out of state. Council Member Zemel. He is supporting the motion to deny the pool room permit and not the continuance based on the findings as stated and not specifically as to whether the owner will be on the premises or not. He feels the findings stand on their own so he cannot support the continuance. Council Member Tait's motion to continue the matter for one week died for lack of a second. A vote was then taken on the motion to deny the pool room permit as amended. Council Member Tait abstained. MOTION CARRIED. 3.4 CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL MINUTES FEBRUARY 6, 1996 C2. 108: pOOL ROOM PERMIT APPLICATION - BELLAS DE NOCHE: REQUESTED BY: Daniel Jimenez, 2205 South Manitoba Drive, Santa Ana, CA 92704 LOCATION: 1827 West Katella Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92804 BELLAS DE NOCHE: Petitioner requests a permit to operate three billiard tables at 1827 West Katella Avenue in Anaheim. John Poole, Code Enforcement Manager. This application is brought before the Council tonight for a change of ownership. The business has had no problems with Police or Code Enforcement. Staff is recommending approval as outlined in his report of February 6, 1996 subject to the four conditions listed on page 1 of the report (report made a part of the record). Council Member Feldhaus. He questioned the requirement for an outside security guard on Friday and Saturday nights. If there is no history of problems, he does not see why they had to go through the additional expense of a security guard. John Poole. These are conditions that were carried forward from the previous approval. The only thing added was closing the door of the building because of the possibility of a noise problem. They are standard conditions for all pool rooms. The conditions imposed have precluded problems from occurring. Staff feels the conditions are necessary so that there will be no problems in the future. Mr. Poole then answered additional questions wherein he reported that the business is a beer bar with three pool tables. A survey was conducted of the surrounding residential and commercial area and no one had any objection to the issuance of a pool room permit for the property. Mayor Daly. If the business wanted to expand beyond the current square footage and the number of pool tabtas, he asked if they would have to return for an amended permit; Mr. Poole clarified that was correct. MOTION. Council Member Zemel moved to approve the pool room permit application for Bellas De Noche, 1827 W. Katella Avenue, Anaheim. Mayor Daly seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. C3. 148: Discussion regarding the establishment of policy and procedure for voting on issues at Orange County League of Cities meetings. (Requested by Council Member Zemel at the meeting of January 23, 1996.) Council Member Zemel. His concern was relative to votes that have taken place that he has not been aware of and where he felt if he had input, the votes would not have gone the way they did. As an example, he received a letter a few days ago thanking him for the Council's support for a recommendation on the Air Quality Management District Board. Those are the type of things that cause him to think about the City's representation at the League and how they put together a consensus of thought. It is set up for failure. Council Members do not have the opportunity to discuss issues because of the Brown Act. He is hesitant to offer e motion to change the current procedures but what he would like to do is request that a staff person, preferably a government relations typo person, be assigned to review the League's agenda and give a synopsis of what the vote is about and what is going to take place. It will afford the opportunity to give input to the Mayor or the voting member as to how they feel about the issue. His request is a little less formal than what he proposed last week (see minutes of 1/23/96). They can subsequently look at the matter again in a few months. 3.5 CITY OF ANAHEIM~ CALIFORNIA COUNCIL MINUTES FEBRUARY 6~ 1996 Mayor Daly. He and Council Member Zemel discussed the matter and felt that there should be a bit more notice to the Council on upcoming issues and more regular reporting on the status of some of the issues. For instance, the County landfill system is one activity that is very important to Anaheim. Those kinds of items could be flagged in a timely manner as well as any other such items that come before the League. The more staff input they have in terms of flagging the major issues upcoming on the League agendas and anything else that is pe~nent in the way of local government decision making where Anaheim is affected, the better Council Member Zemel. He stated this will be a welcome change and will give the opportunity for input. C4. 114: COUNCIL COMMENTS: Council Member Feldhaus. He feels there is a need to take a look at the City's banner ordinance to try to make it more 'user friendly" to businesses. Right now, it is a difficult process. Thirb/days a year is the limit and if they want 60 days, it has to be back to back in a calendar year. He feels it is necessary to take another look at the ordinance to see what can be done and would like the matter agendized for future Council discussion. Mayor Daiy. He surmised that Council Member Feldhaus is requesting a report on the evolution of Anaheim's regulation of banners on businesses, what some other cities do, and the current procedure; Council Member Feldhaus. He would like to make the ordinance more lenient. People who are trying to make a living are getting cited and he feels there needs to be a procedure to help such businesses. Joel Fick, Planning Director. He will be happy to prepare a report for the City Manager/City Council. The challenge is to strike the delicate balance between the needs of the businesses for temporary adveRtising, and the residents. Code Enforcement does receive a large number of complaints on people who abuse the temporary advertising. In the last one to two years with some of the changes implemented by the Planning Commission and Council opening up the process, it has been working much better. The code now allows four, nine-day pedods so actually each separate period can cover two weekends where previously prior to that amendment, there were only two consecutive pedods that could be granted. The Zoning Administrator, without a hearing, can meet those special needs. He will be happy to put the information together in a report and present it to the Council. Council Member Lopez asked for information on what it takes to get such a permit, City Clerk $ohl. She asked for clarification that the Council's direction is to place the matter on a future Council agenda when the staff report is completed; Council Member Feldhaus stated that would be acceptable, Mayor Daly. As a follow up to today's workshop on the proposed expansion of the Convention Center, there was a great deal of information presented to the Council with the final master plan product to be submitted in May. There were many alternatives and ideas laid out for them. It would be of benefit if the Council had the maximum opportunity to talk through those alternatives and ideas prior to finishing the master plan rather than after the plan is complete. He asked that the City Manager think about setting up individual briefings. City Manager Ruth. He will be happy to do so. The presentation today was really a two-hour presentation compressed into one. He would be pleased to provide one-on-one briefings and make staff available between now and the time the master plan is complete, to give an update. 16 CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL MINUTES FEBRUARY 6, 1996 Mayor Daly. The scale model presented will also be helpful if it could again be made available. C5. 11;~: REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION ACTIONS: City Attorney Jack White stated that there are no actions to report ADJOURNMENT: By general Council consent, the City Council Meeting of Februa~ 6, 1996 was adjourned (7:02 P.M.), LEONORA N. SOHL CITY CLERK