2013/07/02 ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
OF JULY 2, 2013
The regular meeting of July 2, 2013 was called to order at 3:04 P.M. in the chambers of
Anaheim City Hall. The meeting notice, agenda and related materials were duly posted on June
28, 2013
PRESENT: Mayor Tom Tait and Council Members: Jordan Brandman, Gail Eastman, Lucille
Kring and Kris Murray.
STAFF PRESENT: Interim City Manager Marcie Edwards, Interim City Attorney Michael
Houston and City Clerk Linda Andal.
WORKSHOP — CONVENTION CENTER EXPANSION
Tom Morton, Executive Director, provided a history of investment in the Anaheim Convention
Center as it related to its success as a convention and meeting destination and to the
discussion of a possible 7th expansion of this facility. He reported that in 1960, a group of
businessmen came together with the goal of making Anaheim a year-round destination rather
than just a draw for spring and summer visitors to Disneyland. Out of that vision, the city
approved plans for the construction of an arenatorium and exhibit complex with a 7,500 seat
arena, a 100,000 square foot exhibit hall and 35,000 square feet of meeting space that opened
its doors in July of 1967. The first expansion immediately followed in 1974 driven by a strong
demand for additional exhibit spaces and another 100,000 square feet of exhibit space and
21,000 square feet of flexible space were added. The second expansion, he remarked,
reflected Anaheim's prominence in the meeting and convention industry, with the Marriott
opening in 1981, followed by the Hilton in 1984, and the added convention spaces plus hotel
rooms attracting large medical groups such as the American Heart Association. The 3rd
expansion was completed in 1990, with Hall D offering an additional 150,000 square feet of
exhibit space along with a 1,100 space parking structure and a 550 space underground parking
facility. This was followed by the 4th expansion which resulted in the conversion of the
underground parking spaces to an additional 150,000 square feet of exhibit space. The 5th
expansion, he stated, was one of the largest public works projects ever undertaken by the city,
with construction beginning in 1998 and open to the public in December of 2000. Phase 1
created Hall D wedge which increased space to a total of 220,000 square feet with Phase 2
bringing the facility space to 1.6 million square feet including the addition of a 200,000 square
foot exhibit space, a 38,000 square foot ballroom, new meeting rooms and a grand glass
enclosed lobby extending '/ mile in length. Mr. Morton indicated the most recent expansion, the
6th, resulted in the Grand Plaza opening January 2013 and adding 100,000 square feet of
multipurpose outdoor space with three water features, new landscaping and remarkable night
lighting.
Following that historical presentation, Mr. Morton provided details on the proposed 7th
expansion to the convention center, explaining it would be located on the current site of Car
Park 1, an existing 1,500 space parking structure in need of an approximately $40 million
upgrade. When completed, he noted, this expansion would consist of 200,000 square feet of
leasable, flexible space, or space that could be used as exhibit, ballroom or meeting rooms,
replacement of existing parking spaces, a climate controlled connection to the existing facility
and all necessary front of house and back of house space. He then introduced Charles Ahlers,
former Director of Anaheim/Orange County Visitors & Convention Bureau (VCB), to present the
merits of this expansion and why it was important to the Center's continued success.
City Council Minutes of July 2, 2013
Page 2 of 25
Mr. Ahlers reported the proposed 7th expansion was important to the future success of the
Anaheim Convention Center by: 1) retaining business such as NAM, Natural Products, UBM
Cannon, and Helicopter Association International as there was no longer enough exhibit space
to accommodate those groups; 2) capture larger groups like the American College of
Orthopedic Surgeons, Infocom, and American College of Cardiology and 3) to accommodate
concurrent events. Today, he explained, the ACC configuration did not allow for hosting
concurrent events, pointing out one mid-size group could take up two halls and all the meeting
space, thereby rendering the three unoccupied halls unsellable. With the expansion, he
emphasized, ACC could support the three remaining halls and enjoy the benefits of increased
transient occupancy tax(TOT), rent, parking, and catering.
Mr. Ahlers highlighted the point that eight major meeting destinations were considering
expansion because the meeting industry had changed over the past few decades. In the
1980's, he shared, associations and trade show companies derived revenue from the sale of
exhibit space and as more space was needed, more exhibit space was provided. After the
1990's recession, the sale of exhibit space plummeted and new sources of revenue were
needed. In the 2000's with corporations still unwilling to spend, education, certification, re-
certification and product launches offered new revenue streams with more space needed to
accommodate the new demands.
To speak to the importance of the meeting and convention industry, Mr. Ahlers remarked this
year TOT was on target to reach $100 million for the year, the single largest contributor to the
city's general fund budget. He added the resort district generated almost 50 percent of the city's
tax revenue but only required five percent of its landmass to do so. These revenues, while
servicing the city's debt, continued to contribute to police, fire, public works, parks and
recreation and many other city necessities improving the quality of life for all.
A ratio of meeting-to-exhibit space with 21 comparable and competing facilities, ranked
Anaheim extremely low, providing one square foot of meeting space to 10 square feet of exhibit
space. San Diego and San Francisco ranked at the top with a 1 to 3 ratio. Comparing ballroom
space, Anaheim with 38,000 square feet of ballroom space ranked near the bottom of the list
while competitors were able to offer not only more ballroom space but more square footage for
general session seating. In order to compete, Mr. Ahlers explained, Anaheim had to offer one
of the exhibit halls for large general sessions, not meant for that purpose and for some clients
not desired. Additionally, he remarked, out of the top 21 national markets, Anaheim at 813,000
square feet of exhibit space was in the middle of the pack, still too small for the anticipated
growth from many of its current customers. Anaheim's real competitors, he emphasized, were
the venues on the west coast; i.e., San Francisco, San Diego and Los Angeles. San Francisco
and San Diego were moving ahead with expansions while Los Angeles was on hold awaiting an
NFL decision. He pointed out venues that expanded would mean multiple year contracts since
there was such a large demand for west coast venues and even with these competing venues
offering more space, Anaheim would be able to capture new larger business and also have the
ability to run concurrent events. With approval of this project, he added, the ACC could be
marketed with more than 1 million square feet of space keeping ahead of the current demand
desired by clients and the flexibility of the expansion would provide both exhibit space and
meeting space.
City Council Minutes of July 2, 2013
Page 3 of 25
Status Quo Scenario:
If the Anaheim Convention Center remained as is, Mr. Ahlers stated, over time Anaheim's
biggest events would outgrow the current space. He predicted they would move to larger
venues and the annualized lost room night potential from existing business that could no longer
be accommodated plus new business that would not be attracted to Anaheim would total
260,000 room nights annually. In addition, the client base would erode from more lucrative
events including; national associations, trade shows and corporate events to SMERF (Social,
Military, Educational, Religious and Fraternal) markets; the Average Daily Rate (ADR) and
occupancy levels would erode; reduced visitor spending would occur; TOT and other tax
revenues beneficial to local governments would be reduced and job loss would go along with
the declining business. As a result, he pointed out, restaurants, airports, hotels and retail would
suffer the impacts as well and accelerate the downward decline of the economy.
He listed those clients/organizations that booked Anaheim regularly but were experiencing
growth gains with over 314,000 attendees in over 212,000 room nights. He stated that list
continued to grow with NAM, Natural Products, and American Wind Energy Association, as well
as other groups such as the American Heart Association, Healthy Care Information
Management Systems, and National Business Aviation Association who were interested in
Anaheim but currently could not be accommodated.
Mr. Ahlers ended his presentation with a video from Fred Linder, National Products Association
and Joe Lamond, NAM, encouraging the Convention Center's expansion allow for a continued
partnership with Anaheim as their businesses grew and required greater space. Mr. Ahlers
added that each year those two organizations represented 157,000 attendees to fill 82,000 hotel
rooms with a total economic impact of$124 million each year.
Feasibility Study:
Susan Sieger, Crosswords Consulting, explained Crosswords Consulting was asked to update a
previous feasibility study that was done on the recent convention center expansion to make sure
those findings were still valid. A three pronged approach was taken: a market analysis, financial
analysis, and cost benefits analysis. She indicated the market analysis showed there was a
demand for this space through researching lost business, destination packages, Anaheim's
desirability, industry trends, and whether business was actually growing and the answer, she
remarked, was always in the affirmative. She noted that historically the industry mirrored the
general broader economy but was 12-18 months behind. Most importantly, she explained,
users were making the decisions and flexibility and functionality were needed to increase
market ability and Anaheim's competitiveness. She viewed this proposed expansion as a
complement to the Grand Plaza. -
To demonstrate what happened to ACCs event activity during the fluctuations of the economic
climate over the last five years, she reported Anaheim's attendance held strong even while
there was a dip in the number of events with attendance staying around a million. She added
despite the conditions, Anaheim was still a draw that allowed successful competition for
business largely due to the hotel supply and the accessibility to other attractions. What was
surprising, she remarked, was the perceived price in value by customers believing they were
getting more than they were paying for, even though it was not an inexpensive destination, due
to the campus environment and a successfully run convention operation.
Over the last five years, she remarked, it was clear that convention/trade shows would be the
focus with 25 percent of events, garnering 59 percent attendance, and an average of 600,000
City Council Minutes of July 2, 2013
Page 4 of 25
attendees who averaged three nights per person, or 1.8 million people spending money in the
community. As to how much space was being used, she stated the practical maximum
occupancy was anywhere between 60 to 70 percent and Anaheim was approaching maximum
occupancy in both exhibit space and ballroom space. She added there was not an appropriate
mix of space that clients needed with 50 percent of tradeshows using all of the convention
space, which showed there was a real need for this space to move groups around and put them
in the right place to try for simultaneous events. The ballrooms were either used or not used at
all, so in these cases, groups were going off-site for their food functions and were needing every
bit of space available. She noted the Hilton and Marriott's ballrooms were significantly larger
than Anaheim's and she believed the proposed flex space would fulfill that need not being met
with only 38,000 square feet of ballroom space available. The other area, meeting space,
showed that 36 percent of conventions and 71 percent of Anaheim's tradeshows were using
more than 50,000 square feet of space currently, with more than a third using almost all of the
space. In addition there were only 43 meeting rooms while competitors offered twice that
amount of space.
Ms. Sieger stated the primary controllable reason for lost business at the ACC was space/date
availability which could be positively impacted by new flex space. Lost business translated to
500,000 attendees at three days per person with a considerable loss of potential revenues. The
goal was to ensure this flex space attracted those events thereby alleviating booking conflicts
and provided for more stand-alone events because there was 200,000 square feet of space
available. The availability of space was one of the key parts of this analysis, she emphasized,
and conversations with individual clients indicated that 78 percent would use additional space
for exhibits, and 90 percent would use it for both exhibit and ballroom meeting space. Another
point she mentioned was since this space was not contiguous, 44 percent of the respondents
did not require contiguous space and it could then be used by larger groups such as NAM,
which needed 1 million square feet of space.
Compared against its competitors, Anaheim had weathered the recession well, with attendance
at 571,000, ranking third among eight facilities surveyed. Ms. Sieger emphasized that she did
not believe this would last forever. Going forward and keeping the status quo meant losing
business over time, especially with competitors continuing to improve their products and
destinations. With the proposed expansion, the attendance was estimated to increase from 41
to 50 percent over the status quo, reflecting a range of 212,000 to 255,000 more attendees
each year at conventions/tradeshows. She added this was a fairly tight range of about 10 to 12
percent and about 40,000 more attendees; however if those persons stayed three nights and
spent about $250, each, it would generate a substantial increase in revenues. Mayor Tait asked
if Ms. Sieger was confident with that range, with Ms. Sieger responding she was confident that
estimates were reasonable and conservative, and reflected planning for the long-term where
estimates of attendance did not increase exponentially.
Discussing the cost benefit analysis, she explained, currently Anaheim was one of the few
convention centers operating at a profit of about $1.2 million annually. With the status quo
scenario, profits would decrease via the loss of big revenue generators that required more
meeting space for the future. Each year$500,000 would be lost versus a potential $2 million
gained annually with the proposed expansion in place. As far as revenues generated, Ms.
Sieger advised she considered only 70 percent of the TOT and 25 percent of TID, accounting
only for the high impact events, those attendees that stayed overnight, convention and
tradeshow participants, and also assumed only 85 percent would stay overnight and of those,
only 80 percent would stay in Anaheim hotels; she felt this was a conservative approach. What
City Council Minutes of July 2, 2013
Page 5 of 25
those figures generated was $7.8 to $9.4 million with all three tax sources combined and each
year the range of total taxes would be $27 million to $28 million dollars. Over a 30 year period,
she stated, the benefits generated from those tax sources would provide a range of$173.4
million to $235.7 million in revenues. With the associated spending generated from the
operating budget from exhibitors and attendees, she estimated, it would be between $472
million and $498 million each year, also generating 40 to 48 percent more jobs as well.
As to what this means to Anaheim, Ms. Sieger remarked, the proposed expansion
complemented other initiatives and capital investments already made and without it, a decrease
in those key areas would occur, especially when competing destinations upgraded their
products. She believed the expansion would maintain existing and attract new business,
provide for more simultaneous events, was consistent with what other markets were doing and
would enhance Anaheim's marketability and competitive position for the next 10 to 20 years.
Project Delivery:
Mark Vukojevic, City Engineer, reported that in partnership with the Finance Department and
Convention Center, Public Works would be responsible for the delivery of this expansion
project. He explained large construction projects of this nature utilized four basic delivery
models along with several possible iterations, all with pros and cons within broad categories of
funding, flexibility, cost, control, risk and time. The city typically used a traditional method called
design/bid/build, where the city selected the architect through a competitive process, the
architect then designed plans and specifications reviewed by the city, and 18-24 months later,
the project was bid and the lowest bidder typically awarded the construction contract. The
negative was the time it took to go through the process.
With a design/build model approved by the voters in 2010 and the option selected by the
department for project delivery, the city could select a contractor and architect simultaneously
as a single entity known as the design/build team, selected by a competitive process using
mathematical formulas and scoring to determine the best value for the city. He explained this
was an important trend in the industry and now maintained a 40 percent market share for large
vertical construction projects, i.e., projects above ground. In the convention center industry,
design/build was preferred and common place, as being the fastest way to build large turnkey
construction projects, saving time by multi-tracking design and construction concurrently with
construction able to begin while final details and final plans were not yet finalized.
For the Anaheim Convention Center, Mr. Vukojevic stated, staff saw a substantial benefit for the
early replacement of the parking structure. He advised that once preliminary layouts and
designs were determined, the demolition and replacement of the parking structure could begin,
an important feature as most of the parking construction could then be in service while the
expanded convention center space was being constructed above. He added time and cost
savings were one of the key values to design/build, the overall schedule was shorter, less
overhead for all parties, typically fewer change orders, and it was locked into today's pricing as
opposed to construction pricing in the future. Additionally, he stated, with the design/build
contract in place, the project became bonded, ground was broken and the Convention Center
could immediately begin marketing the space to lock in future contracts and revenue early. He
added with competitive selection based on best value, the teams competed with their creativity,
their price and their schedule in a package with a guaranteed maximum price, pointing out
staff's experience and the industry believed the design/build process promoted a higher level of
quality.
City Council Minutes of July 2, 2013
Page 6 of 25
He reported the city had issued a Request for Qualifications and was prepared to short list the
teams within the next week. Following that, a Request for Proposals would be issued in August
and the teams would be given 90 days to design, cost, and schedule their best packages. He
added that staff from Public Works, the Convention Center, and the Visitors and Convention
Bureau, along with advisement from City Attorney's office would review, evaluate, interview,
select, and negotiate with the design/build teams with the recommended finalists and their
guaranteed maximum price going to Council for approval in late 2013 or early 2014, with
physical construction beginning next summer.
Project Financing:
Debbie Moreno, Finance Director, provided a discussion regarding the affordability of the
proposed expansion and projected financial benefits. She stated estimates used were
conservative in nature and overall, the results would be achievable. The goals were standard for
any financing in today's market, i.e., taking advantage of historically low interest rates, creating
the lowest cost options to finance the project, maintaining level debt service, and maintaining
the city's credit rating. She added the most important goal was to undertake this project without
increasing the annual debt service load to the city and the general fund, pointing out that could
be accomplished by refinancing the existing debt to take advantage of lower interest rates and
the savings created. She explained the existing debt reflected $11.5 million plus an additional
$6 million available from the establishment of the ATID which was paying the debt service on
the Grand Plaza for a total of$17.5 million. She also pointed out the Grand Plaza debt would be
paid off by the time payments were required on the proposed expansion and those dollars
would also become available at that time. Furthermore, as the existing debt began to mature in
2020, the monies no longer needed to make that debt payment would also become available
and the city would end up paying $17.5 million annually, the same debt as was paid today, but
would also have an expanded Convention Center.
The benefits from this expansion, Ms. Moreno explained, would be new revenue above the
current figures of approximately $250 million, on the low end, or over$300 million on the high
end, made up of predominantly TOT which was already reduced for the impact of the 1997
resort bonds or LPMR. In addition, there would be an increase of sales and use taxes and a
modest increase in operating revenues to the Convention Center with new annual revenues
anticipated to provide general fund services of$6 million immediately, with nearly $13 million
earned at year 30. She emphasized that the debt service would be the same as it currently was
and all of the incremental revenue would immediately become available to provide services to
the community.
If expansion did not occur, she explained, the city was expected to begin to lose business as
event activity and the number of attendees began to decline with half of the overall losses
reflected in TOT and further losses seen in sales tax and convention center operations. She
added the impact of lost business was expected to be roughly $120 million over 30 years,
beginning at $3.5 million per year and increasing to about$5.5 million per year. The difference
between expanding and doing nothing over 30 years equated to a loss of$370 million on the
low end or$435 million on the high end of the range.
Another aspect of the status quo scenario as the existing debt began to mature in 2020 and
revenues declined was that the revenue losses would grow exponentially over time and CarPark
1 would still need repair costing roughly $2 million per year for that debt payment. The
Convention Center would continue to decline and Anaheim would fall further behind its
competitors. As an example, she explained in Year 15 there would be $11.5 million in debt
City Council Minutes of July 2, 2013
Page 7 of 25
service savings, however the city would need to pay the debt service for replacement of the
parking structure, decreasing $2 million from that savings and lost business would likely reflect
another$4.2 million to be subtracted from that savings, leaving $5.3 million in the general fund
to pay for services. With the expansion, Anaheim could expect to get $7.2 million in new TOT,
almost another$1 million in sales tax and a little more in operating revenues for the Convention
Center. She pointed out that it would add $8.4 million to the general fund to provide core city
services which was $3.1 million higher than the status quo scenario. Over a 30 year time
period, she stated, staff estimated the expand scenario to produce $170 million more than the
do nothing approach. At the high end, the city could see a benefit of approximately $435 million
in 30 years.
Ms. Moreno ended her presentation stating from the results of this analysis, staff believed the
necessary funding to expand the Convention Center could be provided and this expansion
would keep the center and general fund tax revenues from declining and most importantly the
expansion would provide an immediate and significant improvement to general fund taxes
available for general fund services.
Mayor Pro Tem Eastman thanked staff for the comprehensive presentation, remarking she
could easily support the expansion given the financial analysis provided. Council Member Kring
concurred, supporting the idea of moving forward quickly to take advantage of an early
completion date. Council Member Murray thanked the resort businesses for implementation of
the ATID which not only upgraded the city's assets but also made investments in transportation
and mobility to the resort area that benefited residents and tourism alike. She remarked that the
growth in the marketplace was remarkable and the expansion was an essential component to
ensure growth was sustained and reinvestment into the city's core services was a direct
relationship to that growth. Council Member Murray remarked that low interest rates were
climbing asking if the city was prepared to move quickly to capture those low rates. Ms. Moreno
responded staff recognized interest rates were not long-term and had the ability to absorb an
increase and still hit those numbers presented in the financial analysis. Council Member
Brandman remarked this phase was a continuum of what Anaheim had done for 60 years and
was ready to take action to support the project.
Mayor Tait questioned why the design/build alternative was the best choice with Mr. Vujokvic
remarking it would save time and costs and was the perfect scenario since the city controlled
the land, funding, timing and environmental. With traditional construction methods, he
explained, it would be two years before being able to bid this project in 2015 and then another
two years under construction. While under design/build, from January of this year, the project
could be completed in three years, saving a year's worth of time and money by factoring in
overhead, materials prices and other escalations built into the contract. He pointed out in this
instance the city would attain a guaranteed maximum price from the contractors, and a
design/build team would be in a better position to offer options. He added the team would be
selected based on their maximum price, but also on who could maximize the most square
footage, the best layout and functionality with the best price.
Addressing consultant Susan Sieger, Mayor Tait asked why she was initially skeptical with Ms.
Sieger responding that she reviewed previous studies and was not sure the expansion would
bring about the desired results. However, she noted, after speaking with staff and looking at the
numbers, the Convention Center's lost business was exactly the size that allowed putting some
of those self-contained events in that space; it met the needs of the events were outgrowing the
space and from an economic perspective, the ideal was to book two 6,000 person conventions
City Council Minutes of July 2, 2013
Page 8 of 25
at the same time. She indicated it made sense from a market perspective and with feedback
from clients indicating 40 percent did not require contiguous space, that was an important point
in her review as well. As far as the analysis performed, Ms. Sieger remarked that although the
previous studies had been read, it was more prudent to begin from the bottom up to take into
account the recent recession. She added with an expansion it was easier to understand
historically what happened, even with the recession, as attendance and other characteristics
remained constants, and the changes that occurred were directly attributable to the economy.
To the question was an average growth of GDP assumed, Ms. Sieger replied they primarily
assumed an average growth in spending as it related to direct spending; i.e., attendees and
exhibitors, while keeping the incremental operating income constant during that entire period.
Mayor Tait wondered if the assumption was that the attendance and other direct spending
would grow annually by two percent with Ms. Sieger responding that it was the expectation that
the attendance would substantially increase because there would be 17-20 more events. The
reality was 80+ percent of customers expected their events to grow in the next five years. She
explained she took a more realistic expectation based on historical inflation in this market on the
spending figures and they were also conservative over what was currently used. She stated
from that perspective, the $250 person per day spending was relatively conservative and she
was comfortable that the inputs from the assumptions were conservative and reasonable
because Anaheim had never done that historically. The expectation was the Convention Center
would continue to do more of the same but would also grow some of the small, self-contained
events. Mayor Tait responded that it appeared the Convention Center could easily reach the low
end of the projected range and there was no risk in that scenario.
Mayor Tait, addressing the financing, stated it was assumed the expansion would create so
many additional room nights to pay for that financing, asking what that figure was. Mr. Morton
responded it was 260,000 additional room nights annually, a combination of retaining existing
business and getting incremental new business. He then asked if there was any point at which
the general fund was at risk with Ms. Moreno remarking the general fund was only at risk as
much as it was today, because it would be the same level of debt service with the expansion as
today and if the city only got 67 percent of its assumptions, it would still be better off in every
year and in the majority of years if no expansion was done.
ADDITIONS/DELETIONS TO CLOSED SESSION: None
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON CLOSED SESSION ITEMS:
Cecil Jordan Corcoran, Outreach Homeless Ministries, provided an update on his bible revision
to the community, remarking it could be the greatest thing for America.
At 4:23 P.M., Council recessed to closed session for consideration of the following items with
Mayor Tait reporting he would declare a potential conflict of interest and abstain from voting on
the Angels Baseball, Item No. 1.
CLOSED SESSION ITEMS:
1. EXISTING LITIGATION
CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATIORS
(California Government Code Section 54957.6)
Designated Representative: Ralph Andersen &Associates
Position: City Manager
City Council Minutes of July 2,2013
Page 9 of 25
2. PUBLIC EMPLOYEE APPOINTMENT
(Subdivision (b)(1) of Section 54957 of the California Government Code)
Title: City Manager
3. 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)
Agency Negotiator: Tom Morton
Negotiating Parties: Angels Baseball, LP, City of Anaheim
Under Negotiation: Price and Terms of Payment Regarding Lease
4. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL EXISTING LITIGATION
(Subdivision (d)(1) of Section 54956.9 of the California Government Code)
Name of Case: Darian Martinez v. Brault/City of Anaheim et al., Orange County
Superior Court Case No. 30-2012 00603976
5. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL EXISTING LITIGATION
Subdivision (d)(1) of Section 54956.9 of the California Government Code)
Name of Case: Moreno et al. v. City of Anaheim,Orange-Caunty Superior Court
Case No. 2012-00579998
At 5:24 P.M., Mayor Tait reconvened council session, requesting a moment of silence in
remembrance of the Granite Mountain firefighters, Prescott, Arizona, He requested the meeting
be adjourned to honor these heroes.
Michael Houston, Interim City Attorney, remarked the closed session had been continued and
would be reconvened following Agenda Item No. 15 on the agenda.
Invocation: Shaykh Mohammed Faqih, Islamic Institute of Orange County
Flag Salute: Council Member Jordan Brandman
Presentations: Recognizing Loara High School on their 50th Anniversary and
presentation by the Loara High School Choir
Mayor Tait welcomed Loara Principal, John Briquelet and David Rigsby, Choir Director and
members of the Loara High School Chamber and their patriotic presentation.
Recognizing Yvonne Gonzalez Duncan as the 2013 National LULAC
Woman of the Year
Mayor Tait recognized and congratulated Anaheim's Yvonne Gonzalez Duncan who was
awarded the Woman of the Year Orange County LULAC, the LULAC State Convention Woman
of the Year as well as the National LULAC Woman of the Year. Ms. Duncan indicated LULAC
was the oldest Hispanic organization involved in civil rights, education and health issues, and 11
scholarships, provided through LULAC's fund-raising efforts, would be awarded in Anaheim's
Downtown Community Center this month.
City Council Minutes of July 2,2013
Page 10 of 25
Acceptance of Other Recognitions (To be presented at a later date):
Recognizing the 2013 Anaheim Police Survivors and Scholarship
Fund recipients
Proclaiming July 4, 2013, as Independence Day
Anaheim Sporn, Community Services Department, accepted this proclamation on behalf of
neighborhood services, announcing the 25th July 4th celebration in Canyon Hills with day-long
events for families ending in a fireworks display at the Peralta Canyon Park.
Recognizing recipients of the Girl Scout Council of Orange County
Awards and the Anaheim Troop Honor Awards
Recognizing Sherry Cowen on her retirement from the Anaheim Chamber
of Commerce
ADDITIONS/DELETIONS TO THE AGENDA: At the request of staff and concurrence of the
city council, Item No. 7 on the agenda was removed.
PUBLIC COMMENTS (all agenda items):
Cecil Jordan Corcoran, Outreach Homeless Ministries, spoke to national political issues.
Jill Kanzler, SOAR, attended the workshop on the Convention Center expansion, announcing
the Chamber membership was in strong support of this effort. She remarked the Convention
Center was a true community asset and its expansion would attract and accommodate new and
existing conventions and keep Anaheim competitive with other desirable venues.
Larry Larsen encouraged Council to require Charter Review Committee members to complete a
Statement of Economic Interest Form 700. He offered his perspective on other council actions.
Brian Chuchua supported having the Charter Review Committee complete a Statement of
Economic Interest Form 700. He also supported the Convention Center expansion and single
district electoral system.
James Robert Reade discussed the hardships and challenges facing Anaheim's motel kids and
the need for youths to play in Anaheim's parks free from threats of gangs.
Connie Rodriguez thanked Mayor Tait for visiting and speaking with the children of the
neighborhood and finding out about their problems and concerns. She also reported the police
substation security cameras were not working and should be replaced.
William Fitzgerald, Anaheim Home, offered his opinions on the political makeup of the city
council and their ties to corporate business.
Michael Baker, Boys and Girls Club, updated Council and the community on the ambitious goals
of the Boys and Girls Club. He opposed single member districts feeling it would intensify the
infighting between neighborhoods and would not hold council members accountable for their
actions citywide.
City Council Minutes of July 2, 2013
Page 11 of 25
Amid David supported the filing of Statement of Economic Interest Form 700s for each and
every commission and committee to bring about transparency for all.
Dorothy Rose announced the Orange County Symphony concluded the 2012/13 season with a
free concert on June 23rd at Pearson Park. She discussed the launching of a new program in
which used instruments could be donated and refurbished at a low cost rental for after school
music instruction in every school interested in being part of the program.
Jeff LeTourneau, Orange County Democratic Party, stated that although Anaheim was a
culturally diverse city, it was racially, culturally, economically and politically segregated and the
Orange County Democratic Party had passed a resolution in support of district elections
specifically urging the creation of eight districts as the best way to get fair representation for
minorities in Anaheim.
Vivian Pham, CAC, expressed distress that council rejected the CAC recommendation for single
member districts and increasing council seats to either six or eight. She opposed the hybrid
electoral system approved by council, remarking that model had precedent in violating the
California Voting Rights Acts. She urged council to put the CAC recommendations on the ballot
for June 2014 and let the citizens determine whether or not they wanted six or eight districts or
single member districts.
Martin Lopez, resident, spoke to the establishment of a Citizens Advisory Committee on
Elections whose goal was to promote the full participation of all residents, neighborhoods,
community groups and ethnic groups to study the electoral system. That process took place
with much expert advice and public testimony and the recommendations had been rejected by a
council that ignored the voice of the people no matter how often they spoke up.
Ron Bengochea spoke to Item No. 12, supporting the need for Charter Review Committee
members to file an economic conflict of interest form, opposed the trolley car alternative and
urged council to support the recommendations of the CAC committee and allow the voters to
determine the electoral process for the future.
Ross McCune, speaking on behalf of the Anaheim Chamber of Commerce, supported council's
decision to place residency-based council districts on the ballot as well as asking voters if they
wished to expand council seats to six plus an at-large mayor. Mr. McCune indicated the
Chamber supported these measures.
Greg Diamond objected to residency based district elections, remarking all arms of the U.S.
government were carved into districts and the community simply wanted an opportunity to
control who represented them and prevent the current imbalance of Anaheim's resources.
Kathryn Smith spoke to the need for annexation of county islands.
Jose Moreno, resident, supported the filing of economic interest statements for the Charter
Review Committee to bring about full transparency and then addressed council's appointments
to that committee, remarking that the five appointees represented by virtue of their zip codes
represented 193,000 residents of Anaheim, leaving 160,000 residents unrepresented. He
encouraged the remaining two appointees and/or taking action to increase the size of the
committee to represent the remaining sections of the city.
Gloria Ma'ae, Citizens Advisory Committee, offered background on the decision to recommend
the single district electoral system to the voters, remarking that at one point in the process there
City Council Minutes of July 2, 2013
Page 12 of 25
were five or six members who considered the hybrid electoral system a viable options. With
regard to the Charter Review Committee, she believed it was an important process and should
be recorded to allow the public access to the process.
Henry Vandermeier, Orange County Democratic Party, supported single district voting, with at
least six council seats.
CONSENT CALENDAR:
Mayor Tait reported he would record an abstention on Item No. 5 as his firm had worked with
Verizon in the recent past. Council Member Kring then moved to waive reading in full of all
ordinances and resolutions and to adopt the balance of the consent calendaraspresented, in
accordance with reports, certifications and recommendations furnished each City Council
member and as listed on the consent calendar, seconded by Council Member Brandman. Roll
Call Vote: Ayes — 5: (Chairman Tait and Council Members: Brandman, Eastman, Kring and
Murray.) Noes —0. Motion Carried.
1. Receive and file minutes of the Community Services Board meeting of April 11, 2013,
B105 Cultural and Heritage Commission meeting of April 18, 2013 and the Budget, Investment
and Technology Commission meeting of May 15, 2013.
2. Award the contract to the lowest responsible bidder, Hardy & Harper, Inc., in the amount
of$277,000, for the Royal Oak Road Improvements Project (Nohl Ranch Road to
AGR-7709 Crescent Drive) and authorize the Finance Director to execute the Escrow Agreement
pertaining to contract retentions.
3. Approve the appointment of Michael Houston to the position of City Attorney effective
AGR-7710 July 3, 2013 and the associated employment agreement.
4. Approve the Purchase and Sale Agreement and Grant Deed with Raymond A Masciel,
trustee of the Masciel Family Trust A, in the amount of$140,000, for the sale of surplus
AGR-7711 property located at 2516 West Glencrest Avenue and authorize the Public Utilities
General Manager or designee to take the necessary actions to implement and
administer the agreement(APN 071-295-19; ABA2006-00134).
5. Approve the Amended and Restated Site License Agreement with Los Angeles SMSA
Limited Partnership dba Verizon Wireless, a California Limited Partnership (Verizon),
AGR-2045.A authorizing Verizon to upgrade their interior cell site infrastructure to a distributed
antenna system at the Anaheim Convention Center and authorize the Executive Director
of the Convention, Sports & Entertainment Department to execute any other related
documents and take the necessary actions to implement and administer the agreement.
Mayor Tait recorded an abstention on this item. Roll Call Vote: Ayes— 4: (Mayor Pro
Tern Eastman and Council Members: Brandman, Kring and Murray.) Noes— 0.
Abstention— 1: Mayor Tait. Motion to approve carried.
6. RESOLUTION NO. 2013-106 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ANAHEIM requesting temporary closures to Caltrans 1-5 offramps for
R100 Disneyland Half Marathon (September 1, 2013; Southbound I-5 at Harbor Boulevard;
Southbound 1-5 at Disney Way; Northbound 1-5 at Katella Avenue).
City Council Minutes of July 2,2013
Page 13 of 25
7. RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
D175 THE CITY OF ANAHEIM designating Swallow Way south of Laketop Drive as a "Permit
Parking Only" street within Permit-Eligible Parking District No. 23.
This item removed from the agenda at the request of staff.
8. RESOLUTION NO. 2013-107 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ANAHEIM approving the Workforce Investment Act Title I Master
AGR-2738.M Subgrant Agreement between the City of Anaheim and the State of California for the
term of April 1, 2013 through June 30, 2015.
9. RESOLUTION NO. 2013-108 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
P124 THE CITY OF ANAHEIM accepting certain deeds conveying to the City of Anaheim
certain real properties or interests therein (City Deed No. 11582).
10. ORDINANCE NO. 6279 (INTRODUCTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE
M142 CITY OF ANAHEIM amending Chapter 14.40 of Title 14 of the Anaheim Municipal Code
relating to speed limits on city streets (Douglass Road).
D114 11. Approve minutes of the Council meetings of May 28, 2013 and June 10, 2013.
END OF CONSENT CALENDAR:
12. Discuss and consider a resolution amending and restating Resolution No. 2013-78,
which created the Charter Review Committee, to require committee appointees to file
Statement of Economic Interest, Form 700s, and further discuss Charter review matters
B105 and provide such guidance/direction to the Charter Review Committee and staff.
RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA, amending and restating Resolution No. 2013-
78 creating a Charter Review Committee and establishing the rules and procedures
governing the Charter Review Committee.
Paul Emery, Assistant City Manager, announced this item was an amendment to the charter
review resolution originally adopted May 28, 2013 to amend and restate the resolution to include
that the seven members of the charter review committee file statements of economic interest,
known as Form 700. In addition, he stated council had an opportunity to further comment or
provide guidance to the committee on their process. He noted the first meeting was scheduled
for July 18th at 6 P.M. with the sole order of business to be the selection by the committee for
the two remaining members.
Mayor Tait remarked the responsibilities of the Charter Review Committee carried great weight
and to be transparent, he believed it was important that a statement of economic interests of
each member of that committee was required and moved to do so, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem
Eastman for purposes of discussion.
Mayor Pro Tem Eastman remarked that when this advisory committee was established and its
members appointed, they were not advised that the appointment required a Form 700, and for
that reason was not supportive of this action at this time. Council Member Kring remarked the
1999 charter committee was not required to file a statement of economic interests nor was the
City Council Minutes of July 2,2013
Page 14 of 25
Citizens Advisory Committee on Election, and she felt it was inappropriate to require this
committee to do so and would not support the action. Council Member Murray inquired whether
all members or commissions, advisory or not, were required to disclose potential financial
conflicts of interest on matters before them with Mr. Houston, Interim City Attorney, responding
in the affirmative explaining the city's own code required members of commissions, advisory or
not, to disclose and recuse themselves if there was a financial conflict of interest when making
decisions regardless of whether or not a Form 700 was filed. Council Member Murray remarked
Form 700 was for elected officials or those that directed regulatory or financial aspects of the
city and would not support the motion as well, with the understanding that any member must
recuse themselves from voting on an item in which there was a potential conflict of interest.
Council Member Brandman inquired why a Form 700 was not required for the Citizens Advisory
Committee during the application process with Mr. Houston responding it was a typical standard
that advisory bodies did not possess decision-making power of government and was not
required by state law to file Form 700's. Following up on that remark, Council Member
Brandman asked how that standard was put in place. Mr. Houston remarked there was a 1993
Fair Political Practices Commission advisory opinion that determined a charter review body
which was advisory in nature was not required by state law to file Form 700. Mr. Brandman
asked if that opinion was considered when the Citizens Advisory Committee on Elections was
created with Mr. Houston advising he was not present during the time. The City Clerk restated
the City's Attorney's comment that advisory bodies were not required to file Form 700 and
therefore when the CAC was created the council did not direct staff to include that requirement
in the resolution, the resolution was presented without that requirement. Ms. Andal added had
the council directed staff to include the requirement, the resolution would have had the
provision. Council Member Brandman stated that since the CAC was not required to file a Form
700, he would not break precedent and require the charter review committee to do so and would
not support the motion.
Mayor Tait asked how many other committees filed Form 700's with Ms. Andal responding there
were over 650 designated filers in the city, including staff and four boards and commissions, the
Planning Commission, Housing and Community Development Commission, Community Center
Authority, and the Public Utilities Board. Mayor Tait confirmed that designated filers were
required to report gifts and sources of income and added that non-filers were not required to
report gifts. Mayor Tait remarked that because this committee carried great weight to make
decisions on the constitution of the city, a document that would govern the city, he believed that
because a committee did not file a form in the past, did not mean it shouldn't be done now. Roll
Call Vote: Ayes — 1: Mayor Tait. Noes —4: (Council Members: Eastman, Brandman, Kring and
Murray.) Motion Failed.
13. Discuss demographic information and other matters related to district elections and the
City's electoral system, including discussion and action on i) an ordinance establishing
M142 residency districts for Council Members with election to occur at-large by citywide vote,
ii) a proposed Charter amendment establishing residency districts for Council Members
with election to occur at-large by citywide vote (June 3, 2014 election), and iii) a
proposed Charter amendment increasing the City Council from four to six, with the
Mayor elected separately and at large.
ORDINANCE NO. 6280 (INTRODUCTION)AN ORDINANCE OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM amending Title 1 of the Anaheim Municipal Code to add Chapter
1.25 (Residency Districts for City Council Members), Sections 1.25.010 through
City Council Minutes of July 2, 2013
Page 15 of 25
1.25.050 inclusive, to establish residency districts and require City Council Members be
from residency districts and elected at large.
AND/OR
RESOLUTION NO. 2013-110 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA, calling and giving notice of the holding of a
Special Municipal Election on Tuesday June 3, 2014 (or such later date as provided
herein) and ordering the submission of proposed amendments to the City Charter to the
electors of said City at said election (Measure No. - Require City Council Members
be from residency districts and elected at-large).
AND/OR
RESOLUTION NO. 2013-109 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA, calling and giving notice of the holding of a
Special Municipal Election on Tuesday June 3, 2014 (or such later date as provided
herein) and ordering the submission of proposed amendments to the City Charter to the
electors of said City at said election (Measure No. - Increase City Council Members
to six).
AND/OR
Motion: Alternative Direction
City Manager Marcie Edwards announced that at the June 11th meeting, council directed staff to
calendar a discussion related to demographic information and other matters related to district
elections in the city's electoral system. Additionally, council directed staff to prepare an
ordinance and two charter amendments relating to elections for discussion and potential action.
Greg Garcia, Deputy City Manager, reported that during the June 11th meeting there had been
discussion about the demographic information that was presented to the CAC as part of their
work and a specific request made for further analysis on the demographic impacts of certain
electoral changes within Anaheim, in which demographer Dr. Peter Morrison would address.
Mr. Garcia provided a brief biography on Dr. Morrison, remarking he was a retired senior staff
demographer with the Rand Corporation and family director of Rand Population Research
Center providing testimony on litigation regarding California Voting Rights Act and other topics
of applied demographic analysis. He added in the field of redistricting, Dr. Morrison constructed
and evaluated numerous proposed redistricting plans for California jurisdictions and also served
on the US Census Bureau Advisory Committee on populations statistics.
Dr. Morrison stated his comments would address: 1) how the demographic context of this city
could expand or limit opportunities for minority voters to elect favored candidates to the city
council; 2) how this demographic context evolved historically, how it would change in the future
and the lessons that could be distilled from elections held since 2002; and 3) discussion of a
more complete understanding of how two different election systems could work in the future —
one being the current at large system increased to a larger number of seats, and election by
single member districts.
Regarding Anaheim's demographics, he indicated there was a long term consideration about
how demography could either reinforce or restrict electoral prospects for some numerical
minority group in the population, in this case Latinos. When council members were elected at
large, Latinos could rally their overall voting strength to elect not just one top vote getter but also
candidates who managed to win by finishing second or third. Under the at large system, he
stressed a candidate could place second or third and still win a council seat when electing at
City Council Minutes of July 2, 2013
Page 16 of 25
large; it wasn't necessary to come in first. When council members were elected by districts, it
would enable Latinos to focus their most concentrated voting strength in a particular part of the
city which could be a district drawn for that purpose in order to elect the single top vote getter
from that district. He added another minority group could derive a similar advantage in some
other district where its eligible voters happen to be concentrated. The logic was different under
a single member district system, where design was to empower the group by enabling voters to
elect their single favorite candidate in that one district. In the long-run, he pointed, out these two
approaches presented a quandary in balancing interests that unified a local community with
interests that distinguished or divided its members, a process that could separate groups going
forward. The points to remember from this discussion, Dr. Morrison stated, were: 1) Latinos
would gain electoral strength as Anaheim's population evolved because the demographic
context was changing in a way that was certain to intensify Latinos electoral strength in the
future; 2) in reality, many adults in this community were not eligible to vote but would be in the
future; and 3) past council elections suggest how future Latinos could get elected.
Anaheim's Changing Demographics:
From a city of 14,000 in 1952, to a third of a million residents by the turn of the century,
Anaheim had been a growth leader in the state and the nation for the last half of the 20th
century. Since Year 2000, numerical growth tapered off but the proportions of particular groups
in this population continued to change and Latinos expanded more than any other group in that
population. Currently, he remarked Latinos were present just about everywhere in the city, but
higher in the western 2/3 of Anaheim. Latinos represented 31 percent of the population in 1990,
47 percent in year 2000, 53 percent in 2010 and now represented a majority of all residents with
Asians also becoming a small but increasing presence in the city. Relating to the adult Latino
population eligible to vote, the proportions changed; in 2000 there were 24 percent of eligible
Latino voters and 35 percent in 2010, with no accessible data available to show the ratio for
1990. Looking at today's population of eligible voters who would soon turn 18, tomorrow's
eligible Latino voters would be 68 percent, meaning two out of every three young adults to turn
18 in the coming years were going to be Latinos. This, he pointed out, would be a dramatic
difference in the population of Anaheim as the future unfolded year by year, making participation
very important. He added in future years most of the new eligible voters would be Latino and at
the same time, there would be a gradual loss of elderly non-Latino voters and Latinos would
become as numerous among voters as non-Latinos with participation becoming the most
influential role in terms of which group was having the most influence in elections.
Historical Election Results:
In November 2012, Dr. Morrison pointed out a strong Latino candidate, John Leos, finished third
and there were several other Latinos running which might have split the vote and why Mr. Leos
received only 14 percent of the vote and did not win a council seat while the second runner-up
received 18.7 of the vote and was able to attain a council seat. In November 2010, Mr. Leos
again finished third, not good enough to win and again there was another Latino candidate
getting second place who was elected, Lorri Galloway with 22.6 percent of the vote. In
November 2006, the election was close with Richard Chavez finishing a strong third, the third
instance of a Latino candidate finished third and in 2002 there were two Latino candidates who
placed first and second. He added a statistical summary going back ten years of elections
included 18 candidates classified as Latinos, 29 non-Latino whites, and 14 others. Over this ten
year period, he explained, 64 candidates ran, and Latinos counted for 18 of those candidates or
28 percent. Of the 12 winners in those six elections, 42 percent were Latinos even though only
28 percent of those who ran were actually Latinos.
City Council Minutes of July 2, 2013
Page 17 of 25
To forecast what would have occurred during those elections if three seats were up for election,
Dr. Morrison stated out of 64 candidates running, there would have been 18 winners under this
format and of those, eight Latinos would make up 44 percent of all winners, two percentage
points higher than what actually happened. He indicated the win/rate increased when there
were more seats available since more people could be winners but he underscored that in terms
of the Latino share of the electorate there was a disproportionately higher share of Latinos
winning. Specific to Anaheim, he stated if council changed to eight members, the win rate
would still be higher at 50 percent for Latinos although for the total proportion among Latinos
who won, 38 percent were now lower than it was before by two percent. He added six council
seats seems to offer the most opportunities for Latinos to win elections in,Anaheim and was at
the core of an argument one could make in favor of an at large system with more seats.
Single Member District Elections:
Dr. Morrison stated the logic behind single member districts was to empower a group by
enabling its voters to elect their single favored candidate from that one district and from this
starting point, it was necessary to determine where eligible Latino voters were most heavily
concentrated.
He presented Council with a city map showing the concentration of eligible Latino voters in
shades of red citywide, pointing out any single member district would have to pick up those
heavily concentrated areas in order to form a single member district with enough people in it to
qualify as 1/4th or 1/6th of the population and still have a population of eligible voters of which
Latinos would constitute the majority; the boundaries could then be changed to connect different
areas without the appearance of gerrymandering. He also showed the Council maps he had put
together of precincts where John Leos could have finished first, where he could have finished
second and also areas in which he might have finished either first or second. The key points of
this demonstration were: 1) Latinos would gain electoral strength as the population evolved; 2)
the city should distinguish between appearance and reality; i.e. many adults were not eligible to
vote but all of those Hispanic citizens now under 18 would be able to vote in the near future; and
3) there were opportunities for future Latino candidates to get elected under either system and
certainly if the at large system was increased to six council seats.
Council Member Murray had hoped to see a variation of maps with four, six and eight council
seats, wondering if having an eight person council increased or diminished a Latino's change of
getting elected. Dr. Morrison answered that he could not speak to the precinct levels, however,
the tables he provided showed that going from four seats to six improved Latinos' prospects as
there were so many instances in which Latinos managed to finish third in past elections. His
conclusion was that in increasing from six seats to eight, the benefits of Latinos getting elected
diminished slightly because at 4th place there were many non-Hispanics who managed to place
4th as well as Latinos. The most important message to take away from this discussion, in terms
of Latinos presence in the electorate, was that with 30 percent of the current voting age citizens,
their percentage of winners was much higher than that. He added that when you go forward and
say what's going to happen when Latinos were 40 percent of the electorate presuming they
would vote for Latino candidates, there would be a lot of people finishing and perhaps more
Latinos finishing 4th. He added it might be that history was not a perfect guide in going from
third to fourth place but it made a strong case in going from second to third in each election.
Mayor Tait suggested voting on each component of this item separately with Mr. Houston
stating those items could be separated into independent items for action by a majority vote of
the council.
City Council Minutes of July 2, 2013
Page 18 of 25
Michael Houston briefly reported on the three items prepared for council's consideration. The
first was a proposed residency district ordinance which would establish residency districts for
members of the City Council, meaning city council candidates must be residents of the districts
in which they were elected by the voters of the entire city on an at large basis. The proposed
ordinance would be used for elections commencing on November 2014 and required council by
resolution or ordinance to establish districts no later than March 1 of next year. He further
explained while the proposed ordinance did not require the establishment of an appointed
districting committee, nothing in the proposed language prohibited council from later adopting
an ordinance or resolution creating such a body. Additionally establishment of districts or
changes in boundaries would not abolish or terminate the term of any existing council members.
Mr. Houston indicated the change to the city's electoral system would occur upon the effective
date of the ordinance which would be 30 days following second reading or if council were to
approve this item tonight and presuming it would be on July 23rd meeting for second reading,
the ordinance would be effective on August 23rd. In addition, he stated, there were two
proposed charter amendments; one was an amendment to change to residency district
elections similar to the proposed ordinance just described and with the same caveats. He
added if this charter amendment was adopted by the voters, it could not be repealed without
voter approval.
The second charter amendment, he explained increased the size of the council to six and would
also amend a number of sections in the city charter to increase the number of city council
members from four to six beginning with the November 2014 election. The mayor would
continue to be separately elected and this amendment provided for a transition to elect the
newly created council seats as follows: At the November 2014 election, four council seats (two
existing and two new)would be up for election. Following that initial election, lots would be
drawn and one council member would serve a two-year term with the other three members
serving four year terms. Those members would serve for four years and be elected every fourth
year thereafter. The other three members would be elected at the November 2016 election. In
addition, he remarked, there were some conforming amendments made to other sections of the
charter to reflect a majority of four votes required where in the past three were needed.
Mr. Houston explained the attached resolutions and proposed charter amendments also
included provisions: 1) calling for an election to coincide with the June 3, 2014 statewide
primary, taking in account SB 311 if enacted, which would flip that date to November 2014; 2)
changes designed to be implemented on the November 2014 election providing state law
allowed for an election to be held prior to that; 3) language regarding conflicting or
complementary ballot measures that if two conflicting ballot measures were both approved by a
majority vote, the one receiving the highest number of votes would prevail. He pointed out there
were a number of charter sections that were not included however council might wish to
consider an amendment based on policy matters at a later date or by the charter review
committee, such as term limits. He added if the size of council was increased, those council
members receiving a short term of two years as explained earlier would be limited to a single
subsequent term based on the current charter.
Mayor Tait inquired what would happen if both Items 13 and 14 were approved for the ballot and
both passed by the voters. Mr. Houston responded the one receiving the highest number of
votes would prevail. If neither received 50 percent plus 1 of the votes, then the current charter
provision would remain, with one exception, if the ordinance was adopted there would be
residency districts because the ordinance did not require a charter amendment. If the first
ordinance was approved, he explained, at large residency districts would take effect. Mayor
City Council Minutes of July 2, 2013
Page 19 of 25
Tait stated the CAC odvimmd, after much debate, to simply put the matter of districts or no
districts to a vote of the people and he felt the information provided today further complicated
the issues.
Council Member Murray disagreed remarking the expert testimony was to provide information
on demographics, not politics. Whether or not a change in the electoral system achieved its
stated obientivea, she felt was an important part of the equation and that it appeared a six
member council gave greater change for success for Latino voters and an eight member council
while providing greater access, would not get the same results. Regarding the CAC's
reconmnnandaUona, she pointed out, they wanted the office of mayor to remain at |arge, an
increase in the size of council to six or eight, and asked for the issue of districting to go to the
voters but were split on a single district or residency based district. She added the plan before
council today did keep the faith with CAC recommendations and would also place it on the June
ballot so there would be no delay as had been often repeated.
Council Member Murray presented a Power Point presentation of her research that showed in
2002. council was 50 percent represented by Hispanic members, Richard Chavez and Robert
Hernandez and two Caucasians, Tom Tait and Shirley McCracken. Three of those members
lived in Anaheim Hills and the other two in the flatlands. In 2004, 100 percent of the council was
Hispanic or other ethnic minority group, Richard Chavez, Lorri Ga|1ovvoy, Harry Sidhu and
Robert Hernandez. Three of those four were Latino members. She noted the mayor stayed in
the same at large ayatenn, a four year term but in council makeup, a 75 percent Hispanic or
ethnic minority remained. In 3000. council makeup was 75 percent Hispanic or other ethnicity
(Lorri Galloway, Harry Sidhu and Bob Hernandez), again 50 percent Hispanic. In 2010, there
was a shift in the nnayor, but the designation stayed the same from an ethnic standpoint with 50
percent Hispanic or other minority designation (Harry Sidhu and Lorri Galloway). In this last
election of 2012, Harry Sidhu and Lorri Galloway termed out and two new members were
elected, both Caucaaimno, but precinct data showed Jordan Brandman was by far the preferred
candidate among Hispanic-based precincts. She pointed out if council seats had been
increased to six in the this last election, John Leos and Jennifer Rivera would have been elected
and serving today, adding that Jennifer Rivera had no money in her race, no endorsements and
did not even attend debates but was successful in securing 4th place in this last election. She
added that reality negated arguments made that the only way to be a successful candidate in
Anaheim was to have enough money and endorsements behind you.
To address comments that the current council was not providing services to the communities
and particularly to those most impacted by density or a downturn in the ecVnonny, she
emphasized, that was false and pointed to the recently approved budget which reinvested
millions of dollars in core city services in all neighborhoods of the city.
Ms. Murray then requested the three items before council for consideration be taken as a whole,
an election model responsive to the CAC and providing opportunities for access to all ethnic
communities, including the Asian population and asking for council's support.
Mayor Tait moved to bifurcate the three items on the agenda, to consider them individually,
seconded by Council Member Brandman. Roll Call Vote: Ayes —2: (Mayor Tait and Council
Member Brandman). Noes — 3: (Mayor Pro Tem Eastman and Council Members Kring and
Murray). Motion failed.
City Council Minutes of July 2, 2013
Page 20 of 25
Mayor Tait read a letter from the CAC chair dated May 17th, remarking that the discussion over
the last year was district or no district. He added that to throw in a complicated at-large system
that didnot require a vote of the people was beyond him and questioned why thiswould be
placed before the vote of the people since it didn't require a vote of the people and he would not
support approving all three items together. Council Member Kring provided her reasons to
support the item and remarked the presentation by Dr. Morrison and Council Member Murray
was fact driven and she would support going forward with these amendments. Mayor Pro Tern
Eastman remarked she believed these amendments addressed two mjor issues often raised
by the public, the lack of representation from neighborhoods and increasing the number of
council seats.
Council Member Murray moved to: i) Introduce an ordinance establishing residency districts for
Council Members with election to occur at-large by citywide vote, ii) approve a resolution for a
proposed Charter amendment establishing residency districts for Council Members with election
to occur at-large by citywide vote (June 3, 2014 election), and iii) approve a resolution for a
proposed Charter amendment increasing the City Council from four to six, with the Mayor
elected separately and at large, seconded by Council Member Kring. Discussion and debate
continued. Roll Call Vote: Ayes —3: (Council Members Eastman, Murray and Kring). Noes - 2:
(Mayor Tait and Council Member Brandman). Motion Approved.
14. Discuss and act on a resolution proposing Charter amendments to require the City
Council establish districts and further requiring Council Members be residents of and
K1l00 elected by single member districts, with the Mayor remaining at-large (June 3, 2014
election).
RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA, calling and giving notice of the holding of a
Special Municipal Election on Tuesday June 3, 2014 (or such later date as provided
herein) and ordering the submission of proposed amendments to the City Charter to the
electors of said City at said election (Measure No. - RequireCounoi| Mennbersbe
residents of and elected by districts).
AND/OR
Motion: Alternative Direction
Michael Houston remarked that Mayor Pro Tem Eastman requested staff prepare a resolution
and charter amendments requiring city council members be residents of and elected by single
member districts and the proposed amendments before council would provide for district
elections with the November 2014 election unless there was a change in state law to prevent
that. Districts would then be created by city council and boundaries adjusted periodically with
the proposed charter amendments retaining the present number of city council members unless
there were to be another charter amendment to reflect that change. He added the
establishment of districts or boundary changes would not abolish or terminate any existing
council members in their term of office.
Mr. Houston indicated the amendment also contemplated a mapping ordinance or resolution
would be enacted after approval of this measure in time for the opening of the next candidate
filing period, hovvever, he pointed out, the charter amendment also provided if maps were
created prior to that, for instance under an ordinance allowing or establishing residency districts,
that map could be used and while this did not require a districting committee to be appointed,
City Council Minutes of July 2, 2013
Page 21 of 25
council was not prohibited from doing so. He remarked discussion earlier talked about election
dates and ramifications to those dates based on potential changes to state law and conflicting
and complementary ballot language laws. In addition, there was a conforming charter
amendment addressed, specifically Section 503 would be amended to require vacancies in a
council member's seat be filled by someone who was a resident of the district where that
vacancy occurred.
Mayor Pro Tem Eastman remarked she had this placed on the agenda for her own benefit, to
ensure her decision was in the best interests of the city based on her research, discussions with
other constituents, and expert testimony before forming her conclusions. She believed the
demographics and historical data backed up the need to have representatives from specific
segments of the community and that residency based districts provided for that opportunity.
She also concurred that increasing the number of council seats would accomplish that goal as
well. She was comfortable taking the step of residency based districts and increasing council
seats to six and would also be supportive of a review of campaign limits and increasing the
neighborhood councils to six to rise up community leaders through that process.
Mayor Tait remarked he respected both viewpoints, but he believed districts provided better
government and regardless of differences, believed the citizens should make the decision in
how they were governed. He then moved to approve a resolution proposing Charter
amendments to require the City Council establish districts and further requiring Council
Members be residents of and elected by single member districts, with the Mayor remaining at-
large (June 3, 2014 election), seconded by Council Member Brandman. Roll Call Vote: Ayes —
2: (Mayor Tait and Council Member Brandman). Noes — 3: (Mayor Pro Tern Eastman and
Council Members Kring and Murray.) Motion Failed.
15. Consider appointments to city Boards and Commissions where those terms expire June
30, 2013. All scheduled vacancies will be for a term of four years, expiring June 30,
BlOS 2017, except the Sister City Commission appointments where the term is for three years,
ending June 30, 2016.
Budget Advisory & Technology Commission:
Appointment: Abdu|rnacieedAbdu|rannan
(vacancy of Kevin Baker)
Appointment: Stephen Faessel
(vacancy of Ajay Khetani
CouncilnennberBroncmannonn/nmtad4bdulnageed,4bdulran7annbztheBudoetAdwoory&
Technology Commission, Council Member Kring nominated Dominic Daddario and Council
Member Murray put forward Stephen Faessel.
Vote for Mr. Abdu/raman reflected: Ayes— 5. Noes— 0.
Vote for Dominic Daddario reflected:Ayes -1 (Council Member Kring;Abstentions— 4
Tait and Council Members: Brandman, Eastman and Murray).
Vote for Mr. Faessel reflected:Ayes— 5. Noes— 0.
Mr. Abdulrannan and Mr. Faessel were appointed to the Budget Advisory & Technology
Commission.
City Council Minutes of July 2, 2013
Page 22 of 25
Community Center Authority:
Appointment: Charles Ahlers
(vacancy of Diane Quezada-Singer)
Council Member Kring nominated Charles Ahlers to the Community Center Authority and
Council Member Brandman nominated Ed Munson.
Votes for Mr. Ahlers reflected Ayes— 5. Noes— 0.
Votes for Mr. Munson reflected Ayes— 2 (Mayor Tait and Council Member Brandman;
Abstentions— 3 (Council Members Eastman, Kring, and Murray). Council Member Brandman
therefore moved by affirmation to support Mr. Ahlers with the concurrence of council.
Mr. Ahlers was appointed to the Community Center Authority.
Cultural and Heritage Commission:
Appointment: Bradley Pettigrew
(vacancy of Erin Benedict)
Appointment: Alphonso Rodriguez
(vacancy of Alone Larsen)
Council Member Kring nominated David Haywood to the Cultural and Heritage Commission,
with Council Member Brandman nominating Alfonso Rodriguez and Council Member Murray
nominated Bradley Pettigrew.
Vote for D. Haywood reflected Ayes— 2: (Council Member Eastman and Kring);Abstentions— 3:
(Mayor Tait and Council Members Murray and Brandman).
Vote for B. Pettigrew reflected Ayes— 5: (Mayor Tait and Council Members: Brandman,
Eastman, Kring and Murray.) Noes— 0.
Vote for Mr. Rodriguez reflected Ayes— 3 (Mayor Tait and Council Members Brandman and
Murray). Abstentions— 2 (Council Members Eastman and Kring).
Mr. Pettigrew and Mr. Rodriguez were appointed to the Cultural and Heritage Commission.
Housing and Community Development Commission:
Appointment: Gail Anderson
(Central District; vacancy of Steve Rosco)
Mayor Pro Tem Eastman nominated Gail Anderson to the Housing and Community
Development Commission, who was unanimously appointed.
Appointment: Norma Kurtz
(At-Large; vacancy of Donald Yvaska)
Council Member Kring nominated Jeff Evans to the Housing and Community Development
Commission and Council Member Brandman nominated Norma Kurtz.
Vote for J. Evans reflected Ayes— 2 (Council Members Eastman and Kring);Abstentions— 3
(Mayor Tait and Council Members Brandman and Murray)
City Council Minutes of July 2, 2013
Page 23 of 25
Vote for N. Kurtz reflected Ayes— 3 (Council Members Brandman, Eastman and Murray); Noes
— 0. Abstentions— 2: (Mayor Tait and Council Member Kring)
Vote for John Leos:Ayes— 1 (Mayor Tait);Abstentions— 4 (Council Members Brandman,
Eastman, Kring and Murray)
Ms. Kurtz was appointed to the At Large seat of the Housing and Community Development
Committee.
Library Board:
Appointment: David Haywood
(vacancy of Lana Petrullo)
Council Member Murray nominated David Haywood to the Library Board and Council Member
Kring nominated Thomas Peters.
Vote for D. Haywood reflected Ayes—3 (Council Members Brandman, Eastman and Murray).
Abstentions— 2 (Mayor Tait and Council Member Kring)
Vote for T. Peters reflected Ayes— 2 (Mayor Tait and Council Member Kring);Abstentions— 3:
(Council Members Brandman, Eastman and Murray)
Council Member Murray, by affirmation moved to support Mr. Haywood's appointment.
Mr. Haywood was appointed to the Library Board.
Park and Recreation Commission:
Appointment: Eric Anderson
(vacancy of Richard Crawford)
Appointment: Jim Levy
(vacancy of Dhiru (Dave) Vadodaria)
Council Member Eastman nominated Eric Anderson to the Park and Recreation Commission;
Council Member Kring nominated Jim Levy and Mayor Tait Nominated John Leos and Ken
Rulon.
Vote for E. Anderson Reflected Ayes— 4 (Council Members: Brandman, Eastman, Kring and
Murray) Abstention— 1 (Mayor Tait)
Vote for J. Levy reflected Ayes 4 (Council Members: Brandman, Eastman, Kring and Murray);
Abstention — 1 (Mayor Tait)
Vote for John Leos reflected Ayes— 2 (Mayor Tait and Council Member Eastman);Abstention—
3 (Council Members Brandman, Eastman and Kring)
Vote for Mr. Rulon reflected Ayes— 2 (Mayor Tait and Council Member Kring); Noes— 0.
Abstentions— 3 (Council Members Brandman, Eastman and Murray)
Mr. Anderson and Mr. Levy were appointed to the Park and Recreation Commission.
City Council Minutes of July 2, 2013
Page 24 of 25
Planning Commission:
Appointment: Mitchell Caldwell
(vacancy of Stephen Faessel)
Council Member Eastman nominated Mitchell Caldwell and Council Member Kring nominated
Jeff Evans.
Vote for Mr. Caldwell reflected Ayes—4 (Mayor Tait and Council Members: Brandman,
Eastman and Murray) Abstention— 1 (Council Member Kring). Ms. Kring withdrew her
nomination and changed her vote to aye.
Mr. Caldwell was unanimously appointed to the Planning Commission.
Public Utilities Board:
Appointment: Chip Monaco
(vacancy of Pat Carroll)
Appointment: David Wain
(vacancy of Charles Peltzer)
Council Member Murray nominated Chip Monaco to the Public Utilities Board, Council Member
Brandman nominated George Cahill and Mayor Tait nominated John Leos and Council Member
Kring nominated David Wain.
Vote for Chip Monaco reflected Ayes— 5. Noes— 0.
Vote for Mr. Cahill reflected Ayes— 2 (Council Member Brandman and Murray);Abstentions— 3
(Mayor Tait and Council Members Eastman and Kring).
Vote for John Leos reflected Aye— 1 (Mayor Tait);Abstentions—4 (Council Members:
Brandman, Eastman, Kring and Murray)
Vote for Mr. Wain reflected Ayes—2 (Council Member Eastman and Kring);Abstentions— 3
(Mayor Tait and Council Members: Brandman and Murray)
A revote was taken for the second seat:
Revote for Mr. Cahill (Vote: 2-0-3;Ayes— 2 (Council Member Brandman and Murray); Noes - 0:
Abstain— 3 (Mayor Tait and Council Member Eastman and Kring)
Revote for Mr. Wain reflected Ayes— 5; Noes— 0.
Chip Monaco and David Wain were appointed to the Public Utilities Board.
Sister City Commission:
Appointment: Jackie Filbeck
(vacancy of Cynthia Coad, term ending June 30, 2016)
Council Member Kring nominated Jackie Filbeck who was unanimously appointed.
- -
I
NJ9IQ APO
01,10 lepuy 'N epu!
Er if' t`
`pa , qns Klin 'ads-2J
.upJed uyop pue `alauJeM
we!II!M 'uo4sJn41 aoe `Japed apeM 'pea4S assay WW1. s!ne.al `ee ow;ueiO `nape°
s!neJJ_ `Je6!ddnz;aJ3ee `Jeus!IN uses `pmo4ea u!;sna `spaoN won ` P9WLIM uo1SBIQ IIamPIeO
pagou `e!zue)peIN Jaydo;sugQ `gsJew ou 'eso4:1 duoy;uy 'NoefAoM u!na}I 14eJagsy maJpuy
:sae446!4aJ!4 euozuy 66 4o daowew u! pawnofpe sem 6u!;aaw a4} `'INld 17Z:01. jrb :;uewuano(py
.d(n f}o 1,Addey elle pegs!nn pus 6inqsAlloo40 awe a44 4o Aaesaan!uuy
44091 sr44 uo wopaai4 s,AJTunoo mno 4o °Nods aH 44!m cmi,kel 40)IJom
944 pepuewwoo pue 4u9na>laed s,JaWJed pue J!ed qof `J!ed 44Ie9H a4;4o ssaoons 941 40 a)jods
0sle aH isa}uoa dess3 sseupu!N all jo 6u!uu!m meg pue dieAooem s,elepy 4o a)lods 4!el node j
!n6eisnr elapy 'epei!w s,w!ageuy 4o pew; pus Alp a4;u! sale Opo4sly s!y;4o uo!;eJo;saJ
Pa;46!!g6!y 4e4;;uene >t3ed s,JeWJed ay}Pus J!ed 44ISeH ago 4o ssaoons a4;pa;eagala0 `J!e.d
qor In4ssaoons e uo spoils meg mol deunlgi Japan I!aunoa pejueq; uewpuew8 Jagwelitj (louno3
•daa6ans
meoueo;u9093 woaj laano0aa s,!n6aJenr elapy 4o pue euoz!Jy u! san!I m!a414sol oym sJa446!49.44
61, 8144 4o se!I!we4 ay}04 seoualopuoo Jag pessaadxa `esnoH 6upped ay}4o uo!}eao}saa
ay4 pessnos!p eqS •4oeuuoo o; a qe Siem sgof 00I7`c pus smejeas qof 000`9 uey;emow
4a!ym u! J!ed gar419 a4}Ja ssaoons ay}w panlonu! 1(e paivan pus dep!lo4 a4}AOfue 04 dem
ales pue 9934 a `swan° pue apexed Apr 40 44r 6u!woOdn ay;o}a ods deaann megwe ij l!ounoa
*sll!H w!ayeuy u! eoeid 6ui je;
s}Uana pue apeJed ding 40 4o,a4; paounouue pus s3a;46t4amy euozU'61. ay;Jo sa l!we4 944 0}
saauelopuoa lay passemdxe eqs •94e6936uo0 pue 39449604 ewoo moo sJog46!eu 9394M seoeld
Inc! `pe)gewam eqs suepme6 Apunwwoo 4snf 4ou 'wane mel!w!s 304 d4!3 ay; u! seems Jay4a oTu!
)loos o;44e4s pa;senbei pus ;vans>!aed s,mewJed InJsseoons ay4 4a mods 6uuN ieqwevl l!0un0a
*d;!unwwoo s!4;o4 le!oads /LISA awooaq
peg 04m IJ!6 6unod e `!n6emenr elepy uo e4epdn us pep!nomd osie pus 4uaw4Jedep 9U4 04.19A0
u0!;!u600aa leg} 6u!wn;aq pinom eqs 6u!){3ewem `4uewnoop 6u!uueld o!6eie s pue e6emenoa
4o spmepue4S s,4uewpedeQ ai!d ay4 Jo4 papmeme pmemy suo!}enouul 4o qnH ueplo° Et0z
a44 6u!n!aoem 4o JOWL{ ay;peg osle eqS '6u!;edi0!ped =pop pue sJaa4unlon OOi,Jano 144!M
`J!e3 1-1;1e8 4119093 944 4o sseoons ey;u! panlonu! eso1-14 Ile paNue44 uew4se3 we aid Joden
:SNOIIVQINl1NWOQ IIQNfOQ
'940A snow!usun e uo suo!4e!4o6au 4oei4uoo ay;04 40afgns Ja6euej Alio 40 uo!4!sod 044
1I!4
ol spJemp3 a!OJew pa40a(as fOunaa d4!a au) pa4Jodam uoIsnoH Iae1O!IN dawo y APO w!Ja4ui
:SNOIlad NOISS3S O3SOla NO 111Od321
•6u!;aaw 044 peue uooem 4!el Joden pus "W'd ZO:O t ;e uo!sses pesop W034 pawn49J I!ounoo
'swa4! uo!sses pas0la 6u!u!ewei
944 Jap!suOO 04 uo!sses pesop o4 pesseoem IIOunoo `lurid OL:6 4V :NOISS3S 03SO13
SZ JO SZ aged
£IOZ`Z Alnf}o salnumi ipuno)A�fD