Loading...
2013/09/30ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 30, 2013 The special meeting of September 30, 2013 was called to order at 8:03 A.M. in the chambers of Anaheim City Hall. The meeting notice, agenda and related materials were duly posted on September 27, 2013. PRESENT: Mayor Tom Tait and Council Members: Jordan Brandman, Gail Eastman, Lucille Kring and Kris Murray. STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Marcie Edwards, City Attorney Michael Houston and City Clerk Linda Andal. FLAG SALUTE: Mayor Pro Tern Eastman In lieu of an invocation, Mayor Tait requested a moment of silence for contemplative thought or prayer. Mayor Tait requested City Attorney Michael Houston read Council Policy 1.6. Mr. Houston explained it had been adopted on April 17, 2012 pursuant to Resolution No. 2012 -31 and read as follows: it was the policy of the City Council that any member may, during City Council Communications portion of city council meetings, request an item be placed on a future city council regular agenda. So long as a majority of the council did not object to such request, the item would be agendized. The Mayor shall have the authority to place an item on a future regular agenda outside of an open city council meeting through the City Manager's office. Mayor Tait remarked that because he was concerned about the baseball stadium lease negotiations, he had asked the City Manager, while he still had that right, to place the Angels Baseball negotiations on every third future council meeting to allow the public a chance to weigh in on this matter until resolution was reached. ADDITIONS /DELETIONS TO SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA: None PUBLIC COMMENTS ON SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA William Fitzgerald, Anaheim Home, objected to certain actions to stop public discussion on certain matters. Mayor Tait responded to his comments stating members of the public had the right to free speech however; Mr. Fitzgerald's comments had crossed the line of civility. Mark Daniels, resident, urged council to work together as a team and end the disharmony which continued to divide the city and promoted an "us, against them" atmosphere. Amin David, resident, spoke in support of Mayor Tait and the need for public debate on matters affecting the community and objected to attempts to lessen the Mayor's authority. Wally Courtney emphasized council should be more concerned with protecting the city's finances and less with censuring the Mayor, elected by the citizens of Anaheim. Relative to baseball negotiations, Mr. Courtney offered the following: As a baseball fan, he attended 25 Angel's games this past season and spent no monies outside the stadium nor did anyone else in his party of four. City Council Minutes of September 30, 2013 Page 2 of 8 Mr. Houston, City Attorney, pointed out that at a special meeting, public comment was limited exclusively to the item on the agenda, unlike a regularly scheduled meeting in which the public could speak on any item within the subject matter jurisdiction of the legislative body. Mayor Tait asked if the Brown Act prohibited speaking on other matters, with Mr. Houston responding it did not. Eric Altman, OCCORD, objected to the timing of this special meeting, remarking it was highly unusual as seen by the numbers of speakers who wished to address the item and should have been considered at a regular council meeting for the public to hear and see their government in action. John Fleischman, County resident, stated each council member should respect the rights of colleagues to discuss matters, and it was in the chambers where council members had the opportunity to articulate and sway colleagues. He believed this amendment would have a chilling effect on public speech and the ability for representative democracy to do its job and urged a negative vote on this item. Mary Daniels, resident, strongly objected to lessening the Mayor's ability to add items to an agenda in an effort to silence his remarks, adding that he appeared to be the sole council person with the city's best interests in mind. Ms. Daniels disagreed with the terms outlined for baseball negotiations articulating her opposition to the potential giveaway of 150 acres of real estate surrounding the stadium. Vern Nelson, Orange County Blog, spoke in opposition to Item No. 1, addressing the need for open governance to discuss the people's business, and announcing he was also here to represent those who could not make an early Monday meeting time. Richard Ward, resident, remarked that the Mayor's voice had been a reasoned dissent on issues that were critical to the city and reflective of he and his family's opinion, asking that council not take action on the discussion item before them. Jeff Kirsch believed council actions restricting opportunities to discuss, inform and educate the public on issues of importance would have a negative impact on the city. David Zenger, resident, objected to the call for a special meeting to limit the ability of the mayor to agendize matters, and urged council to reject the amendment as outlined. Candice Richardson, Renew West Anaheim Committee, expressed her profound disappointment at the actions being considered today, remarking it was wrong and she no longer felt comfortable working towards neighborhood improvement in this type of environment. Helen Meyers, resident, expressed her disappointment with the direction council had taken, specifically for actions against Mayor Tait. She urged council to reject Item No. 1 and get back to making Anaheim a great city again. Glen Beckman, resident, spoke in opposition of Item No. 1, stating it would not be in the city's best interest to take such action. Paul Kott remarked it was the open and transparent debate on issues that made Anaheim great and to think otherwise was unethical, counter - productive and un- American. He added there City Council Minutes of September 30, 2013 Page 3 of 8 were more important issues to discuss than this item on the agenda asking council to move forward. Lonnie Meyers, resident, expressed his deep disappointment that council was considering such an action before them tonight. Cynthia Ward, resident, stated the people had a right to be informed on issues that affected them and public servants did not have the right to decide what was good for the people to know and what was not good for them to know. In addition, she remarked, the City Charter provided that a mayor was elected independently and had specific authority and responsibility set apart from city council members, and that lessening that authority would impact the Mayor's ability to do his job effectively. Cara Meyers, student, explained how recent council actions had affected her personally and changed her views toward members of the city council. Steve McKay, Canyon Community Coalition, remarked the privilege for Anaheim's mayor to place matters on council agendas was for the people's benefit, not his own, and to lessen that ability demonstrated a disregard for residents and taxpayers of this city. Jose Moreno, resident, remarked the public was watching this matter unfold and wondering how council could come to a decision to change procedures that every other government body utilized. He urged that no action be taken and government be allowed to work as it had in the past. An unidentified individual remarked that many Anaheim citizens supported the Mayor's viewpoint and felt shame that an action to lessen his authority was being considered. Donna Acevedo, speaking allegorically, told how the negotiations for Angels Baseball reached this point in time. Greg Diamond continued Ms. Acevedo's allegorical tale and ended by encouraging council to vote no on this item which limited the Mayor's ability to place items of public interest on any agenda. Paul Beckman, former East District chair, remarked the discussion item on this agenda was wrong on so many levels, adding that the mayor was elected by the people to represent them and that ability should not be lessened by the city council. Joanne Sosa spoke about changing history, redefining the role of mayor, destroying democracy and opposing free speech. She remarked city council members would be held accountable at the ballot box for their actions. No other public comments were offered. Mayor Tait invited Council Member Brandman to speak to his request to hold this special meeting. City Council Minutes of September 30, 2013 Page 4 of 8 AGENDA ITEM Discussion and action: D114 RESOLUTION NO. 2013 -151 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM amending City Council Policy 1.6 of the City Council Policy Manual relating to the manner in which members of the City Council may place matters on the agenda of a regular City Council meeting. Council Member Brandman explained this special meeting was requested as a technical cleanup of a discussion held last year when the subject of how matters were placed on an agenda was discussed. At that time he was in the audience as a member of another governing body with a differing policy, which was if any member of that body wished to place an item on a regular session agenda, agreement from at least one other member was needed. Mr. Brandman indicated he was not in favor of the current Anaheim council policy in which a council member could place a matter on an agenda and it could be vetoed if three members in council communications voted to do so; he felt that policy went against the Brown Act. He was also aware Anaheim's mayor had the sole authority to call a special meeting at any time within a 24- hour notice rule and was in agreement with that authority and did not want to see that aspect of the policy changed. With respect to the regular session business, Council Member Brandman felt there should be equality on the dais as well as full transparency and by each council member stating during council communications his or her request for an issue to be agendized, he believed that procedure provided that transparency and equality. Council Member Brandman also did not think it appropriate for any member of this council, through the City Manager, to be able to request an issue be placed on the agenda 24 hours before the agenda was published. For those reasons, he asked for this policy to be addressed this morning. He added for the record, it was not unusual to hold a special meeting in the morning, noting that other similar meetings had been held this year and as the purpose of this matter was to cleanup policy for agendizing regular session matters and assure a more seamless government, he believed it was appropriate to do so in this manner. Council Member Murray stated it was important to note that the role of the office of Mayor in Anaheim was defined by the voters, not by council policy; a true representative policy which would not be affected by any action taken today. She added that within the last 15 years, the voters elected to go with an independently elected mayor that had some specific authorities defined in the City Charter, including the ability to call for a special meeting but also wanted a legislative body that was cohesive and worked together to govern. She stated this item was a technical cleanup of council policy that did not affect the Mayor's office nor censure him in any way and in fact, improved transparency because nothing could be placed on an agenda unless it was requested in public by a member of the city council seated on the dais. She was supportive of this measure which would allow each member of the city council the right to request an issue be agendized in public and asked that ongoing misinformation and character assassination on this issue be stopped. Council Member Kring remarked that she wanted to clear up some misinformation; i.e., the statement made at previous meetings that Angels Baseball negotiations was purposely placed on the agenda the meeting after Labor Day because many people were out of town and would not find out about it, was not the case. She indicated this was her ninth year on the council and that meeting was the first held after a Monday holiday and she requested from this point forward no meetings be scheduled after a Monday holiday again. With that said, she emphasized that City Council Minutes of September 30, 2013 Page 5 of 8 every council member knew this item was coming up for discussion on September 3` and received the agenda packet on the Friday before the meeting and members of the public could view it on the city's website at that time as well. If the Mayor placed an item on the agenda 24 hours before it was printed, the public received the information the same time the council did and council would not be aware of it unless they received a call from the City Manager or viewed it in their agenda packet. With the amended policy, if any request for an agendized matter was made during council communications, council and the public was well aware of what the agenda would contain. What was of concern, she remarked, was the fact the Mayor wanted to put Angels negotiations on every single meeting going forward when there was no more information to impart and the negotiators for both sides needed time to go through the bargaining process. She emphasized there was nothing in the Memorandum of Understandings that had been negotiated yet and there had been no giveaway of valuable property to the Angels' owner as had been misstated many times by the public; that was the genesis of this whole thing she added. Mayor Pro Tern Eastman emphasized that the city council did not purposely try to have meetings outside the normal scheduled dates and in this particular case, not all council members were available at any other time for this special meeting. With this amendment, she remarked, there would be more transparency as the public would know during council communications what issues would be agendized for future meetings and would have more time to learn the facts or meet with council members if there were questions or concerns raised. She spoke of the misinformation and rudeness of some who attended council meetings, emphasizing she expected the same courtesy when she spoke that she gave to others. Mayor Tait appreciated Council Member Kring's remark that the stadium issue was the genesis of this action today, as he believed that to be the case. He then read the preamble to the Brown Act as follows: In enacting this chapter, the legislature finds and declares that the public commissions, boards and councils and other public agencies in this state exist to aid in the conduct of the people's business. It is the intent of the law that their actions be taken openly and their deliberations be conducted openly. The people of this state do not yield their sovereignty to the agencies which serve them. The people, in delegating authority, do not give their public servants the right to decide what is good for the people to know and what is not good for them to know. The people insist on remaining informed so they may retain control over the instruments they have created. Mayor Tait expressed concern that the proposed action was in violation of the Brown Act, emphasizing that as long as he had been Mayor he had never stopped any council member from putting an item on the agenda. He believed in open debate explaining the only legal way to discuss matters with his council colleagues was during open public debate with proper notice. Mayor Tait read the following Section 54954.2(a2) of the Brown Act: a member of a legislative body or the body itself subject to rules and procedures of the legislative body may provide a reference to staff or other resources for factual information, request staff report back to the body or at a subsequent meeting concerning a matter or take action to direct staff to place a matter of business on a future agenda. Referencing that section, he then asked how the city could be consistent with that provision of the Brown Act if any one member's ability was limited. Mr. Houston responded the Brown Act did not preclude cities from enacting their own policies on the way matters were agendized and a number of cities had a variety of ways that regulated the way they placed items or the way they allowed their members to place items on an agenda. The important conclusion to take from this, he added, was that the legislative body determined how to place things on an agenda; city staff did not and the Brown Act did not make that City Council Minutes of September 30, 2013 Page 6 of 8 determination. Mr. Houston remarked there was one exception and that exception was for special meetings which were authorized in the Brown Act by statute in a separate Section 54956, i.e., that the Mayor or three members of the council could place an item on an agenda for a special meeting. The sentence Mayor Tait had highlighted earlier, did not, in Mr. Houston's interpretation, require any individual member to place something on the agenda and that was because of a preliminary statement which said a member of a legislative body or the body itself, subject to the rules or procedures of the legislative body may provide or take action to direct staff to place a matter of business on a future agenda. This statement did not provide a unilateral right for any member if the legislative body adopted rules of procedure that stated differently. Mayor Tait disagreed, remarking that state law took precedence over local law and if a local agency required two members to place an item on an agenda and the Brown Act stated one member had that right, he did not feel a local agency could diminish that right and be consistent with the Brown Act. Understanding that they disagreed, Mayor Tait asked the city attorney to get an opinion letter from the attorney general on that issue. Mr. Houston remarked he was confident in his opinion but understood Mayor Tait's request for a backup opinion adding that request would need to be agendized for action by city council to determine whether they would like to obtain that opinion. He added that an opinion of the attorney general could only be requested by certain statutorily defined entities, not a city attorney or at least, not an appointed city attorney, and in order to receive the opinion, the city would have to reach out to state legislators or other statutorily identified individuals. Mayor Tait remarked that Council Member Murray indicated she would like to make that motion, asking if it was an appropriate time to do so. Mr. Houston remarked that a request for an item to be agendized would be appropriate under council communications. Mayor Tait asked why this issue could not have been handled at a regular council meeting with Council Member Brandman responding he thought it was appropriate to handle technical cleanup of council policy in between regular sessions. Mayor Tait was perplexed as to how limiting discussion on matters would increase transparency stating it was the public's right to hear issues and limiting his ability to agendize those issues was the opposite of being transparent and that there were often votes that reflected 4:1 stating his motion might not be seconded. Council Member Kring remarked if Mayor Tait wished to put something on the agenda during council comments she would be more than happy to second that motion and then inquired whether she could move to eliminate the need for a second and that the policy be amended to read that any council member during council communications could request an item be agendized. Mayor Tait indicated he could support that motion. Mr. Houston concurred that such a policy could be adopted. Council Member Kring then moved that during council comments at a regularly scheduled meeting, any one of the council members could ask to have a matter agendized, seconded by Council Member Brandman. . Mayor Tait remarked that helped but there was still the issue that should something arise between scheduled council meetings, which was normally a two to three week's time frame, there was no way the mayor had the ability to agendize an issue which was essential for getting the work of the city done. Council Member Murray stated she was in full support of the amended motion which would allow every member of the council to agendize an item in public and allowed for greater and more enhanced public input than under the current policy. The City Charter, she added, did not identify special powers subscribed to the office of mayor related to governance and should the Mayor believe there should be additional powers, the Charter Commission that is currently in the process of reviewing the charter could hear and consider those recommendations. With that she asked to proceed with the item that was moved and City Council Minutes of September 30, 2013 Page 7 of 8 seconded. Mayor Tait re- emphasized this action would take away his ability to put something on the agenda between meetings, essential to running the city. He added that policy could also be changed to allow council members to take that same action. Council Member Murray disagreed, asking how granting a right to any council member to agendize matters in private versus in public improved governance or improved compliance with the preamble to the Brown Act. Mayor Tait responded that requesting an item be agendized through the City Manager still allowed for public discussion on that matter, which in his opinion was not in private or secret and offered a path to address issues that came up between scheduled council meetings. Council Member Murray felt the ability to call for a special meeting addressed that concern recalling that at this point in time, the Mayor had called for a special meeting three times. Mayor Tait indicated he had called for special meetings on items of concern, the baseball stadium negotiations because the public had short notice of the agenda item and he wanted to hear from the public before taking action on proposed negotiations. He again requested a special meeting another time with regard to districting in an effort to take action to make a deadline for the November election and the third time was to require a vote of the people before approving a $158 million developer tax subsidy. Those were significant issues and the Mayor wanted an opportunity to discuss those issues along with receiving public input. Council Member Murray restated that the matter before council today was about basic equanimity and that most cities allowed for any member of the council to request to agendize an item in a future agenda in public. Any other special privileges or governing authority, she believed, should be brought to the Charter Review Committee for public discourse and eventually follow up with a ballot process. Council Member Murray remarked the mayor had used the special meeting privilege many times, including trying to restore a salary for his personal council aide adding that these requests should be done in a public venue at the council dais. She indicated this action would not prevent his ability to place an item on the agenda and did not affect his Charter privileges. The Mayor disagreed stating his powers would be reduced and further responded that he had called a special meeting regarding his aide's salary because her pay was decreased during a budget hearing under the broad guise of adopting a $1.4 billion budget, and he felt that action should be discussed in public. Brief discussion ensued regarding the Mayor's aide's salary with Mr. Houston indicating the discussion was off the subject. Mayor Tait restated there was a motion by Council Member Kring to approve RESOLUTION NO. 2013 -151 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM amending City Council Policy 1.6 of the City Council Policy Manual relating to the manner in which members of the City Council may place matters on the agenda of a regular City Council meeting, seconded by Council Member Brandman, and calling for the vote. Roll Call Vote: Ayes — 4: (Mayor Pro Tern Eastman and Council Members Brandman, Kring and Murray). Noes — 1: Mayor Tait. Motion to amend Council Policy 1.6 approved. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS: Mayor Pro Tern Eastman asked that meeting participants be respectful of council member's comments from the dais and that cheers or comments not offered. Mayor Tait expressed his disappointment with today's action, remarking it was a mean - spirited and harmed the office of the mayor. ADJOURNMENT: With no other business to conduct, Mayor Tait adjourned the September 30` special council meeting at 10:00 A.M. City Council Minutes of September 30, 2013 Page 8 of 8 mak4l Linda N. Andal, CIVIC City Clerk