1985/03/19Cit~ Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - March 19, 1985, 10:00 A.M.
The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session.
PRESENT:
ABSENT:
PRESENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Bay, Pickler, Overholt and Roth
COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
CITY MANAGER: William O. Talley
ACTING CITY ATTORNEY: Jack White
CITY CLERK: Leonora N. Sohl
PUBLIC UTILITIES GENERAL MANAGER: Gordon Hoyt
ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER: Dale Pohlman
CITY ENGINEER: Gary E. Johnson
HUMAN RESOURCES DIRECTOR: Garry McRae
ASSISTANT DIRECTOR FOR ZONING: Annika Santalahtt
ASSOCIATE PLANNER: Dean Sherer
Mayor Roth called the meeting to order and welcomed those in
attendance to the Council meeting.
INVOCATION: Father A1 Ramos, St. Anthony Claret gave the Invocation.
FLAG SALUTE: Council Member Irv Pickler, along with a delegation of Campfire
Girls, led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
119: PROCLAMATIONS: The following proclamations were issued by Mayor Roth
and authorized by the City Council:
"Fair Housing Month" in Anaheim, April 1985,
"Campfire Month" in Anaheim, March 1985.
Colleen Hinker, District Chairman, and a delegation of Campfire Girls accepted
the Campfire Month proclamation.
MINUTES: Councilwoman Kaywood moved to approve the minutes of the regular
meetings held March 5, 1985. Councilman Pickler seconded the motion. MOTION
CARRIED.
WAIVER OF READING - ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS: Councilwoman Kaywood moved to
waive the reading in full of all ordinances and resolutions of the Agenda,
after reading of the title thereof by the City Clerk, and that consent to
waiver is hereby given by all Council Members, unless after reading of the
title, specific request is made by a Council Member for the reading of such
ordinances or resolutions in regular order. Councilman Roth seconded the
motion. MOTION CARRIED.
FINANCIAL DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY in the amount of ~2,295,968.64, in
accordance with the 1984-85 Budget, were approved.
REQUEST FOR CLOSED SESSION: The City Manager requested a Closed Session to
discuss a litigation matter.
216
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - March 19, 1985, 10:00 A.M.
The Mayor announced that a Closed Session would be held with the City's
Attorney to discuss a litigation matter pursuant to Government Code Section
54956.9A.
Councilman Pickler moved to recess into Closed Session. Councilman Roth
seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. (10:07 a.m.)
AFTER RECESS: The Mayor called the meeting to order, all Council Members
being present. (10:54 a.m.)
112: STATEMENT OF CITY MANAGER WILLIAM O. TALLEY - WITHDRAWAL OF SETTLEMENT
PROPOSALS FROM THE NEGOTIATING ARENA WITH THE CALIFORNIA ANGELS: Mayor Roth
stated that, due to a turn of events, he was asking the City Manager to make a
statement regarding litigation with the Golden West Baseball Company (Angels)
but before doing so stated, on behalf of the City Council, that while it was
unique and irregular to have the City Manager invited to sit on the dais with
the Council Members, it was being done as a show of unity of the Anaheim City
Council behind City Manager Talley. Negotiations with the Angels had been in
progress for a long time involving both Mr. Talley and the City's Liaison
Team. The turn of events yesterday concerned the entire Council. There was
optimism a week ago when the Council directed the City Manager to negotiate
ten service items with the Angels which were very important for both sides of
the lawsuit. Yesterday there was an attempt to finally ratify what the City
felt was an agreement. When both sides, the City and the Angels, felt they
gave too much, it was an indication to him that a fair settlement was reached
on the ten items. He reiterated, the Council was in support of Mr. Talley and
the item he was going to bring forth.
City Manager William Talley then read the following statement:
For many weeks, City representatives including myself, have worked with
Angels representative, attempting to reach agreement on some of the many
problems that lay between our two organizations.
On March 6, 1985, City representatives, including myself, met for over six
hours with Angels representatives working on a settlement agreement designed
to resolve many of the matters between us.
Following that meeting, the City and its Attorneys worked days, nights and
weekends to prepare an agreement which totals eighteen pages, plus a
three-page exhibit. During this time, the Angels repeatedly called me,
requesting to review this agreement.
The agreement in its present form contains numerous items as the City and
Angels have reached tentative agreement on many matters.
But there are some issues on which we could not agree. The Angels have
been told continuously during our meetings that the City was not prepared at
this time to settle some matters, or there were matters beyond the City's
ability to settle.
217
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - March 19, 1985, 10:00 A.M.
Yesterday, at approximately 1:40 p.m., an Angels representative met with
me and reviewed the settlement agreement. The Angels representative perused
the proposed settlement agreement and asked if it included two specific issues
which I had repeatedly told the Angels were not going to be part of the City's
proposal.
When I confirmed that those two issues were not included in the settlement
agreement, the Angels representative told me that if the City and the Angels
did not reach agreement by noon today, the Angels would bring fraud actions
against me personally.
I immediately withdrew all settlement proposals from the negotiating arena
and requested that the Angels' representative return the settlement agreement
I had given him. He refused, and left the meeting.
Later in the day, Angels attorney confirmed these threats in telephone
calls to the City's attorney. Today, the Angels sent a letter to the City
Council confirming their threats again.
It is my belief that no public official can represent his organization
with a threat hanging over him. I therefore request that the Angels bring any
action they believe apPropriate, and not use the threat of such action to
attempt to intimidate public officials with which they are dealing.
I cannot operate while being threatened. My actions, if I did, would be
subject to question and possible misinterpretation.
If any public official in the City, including the City Manager, has done
something for which they can be personally sued by the Angels, then the Angels
should go forward with that action. They should not attempt to use failure to
go forward as a bargaining chip to wrest concessions from the City. That is
not in the public interest.
I will not be subject to threats or coercion, and I will make public any
further attempts to influence my negotiations.
RECESS: By general consent, the Council recessed for five minutes.
(11:02 a.m.).
AFTER RECESS: The Mayor called the meeting to order, all Council Members
being present. (11:07 a.m)
175/123: REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT WITH ANAHEIM HILLS DEVELOPMENT - GRADING
AREA XIX: Councilman Roth moved to approve a reimbursement agreement with
Anaheim Hills Development Corporation for the construction of 16" and 12"
primary distribution mains within Grading Area XIX in the Anaheim Hills Area,
as recommended in memorandum dated March 12, 1985 from the Secretary of the
Public Utilities Board. Councilman Overholt seconded the motion. MOTION
CARRIED.
175/123: JOINT PLANNING AGREEMENT - MEAD/McCULLOUGH - VICTORVILLE/ADELANTO
TRANSMISSION PROJECT: Submitted was memorandum dated March 12, 1985 from the
Secretary of the Public Utilities Board, recommending approval of the subject
218
City Hall, Ana.heim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - March 19, 1985, 10:00 A.M.
agreement. Also submitted was report dated March 15, 1985 from the Secretary
of the Public Utilities Board, giving information supplementing the March 12,
1985 memorandum, outlining the estimated expenditures and projected benefits
noting that the City's maximum exposure of $500,000 associated with the AC
option and $350,000 associated with the DC option.
Before discussion of the subject item, Mayor Roth thanked Mr. Hoyt for the
report submitted in answer to his (Roth's) letters of January 14 and
February 13, 1985 relative to the fiscal responsibilities involved with the
Utilities. He noted, however, that the conglomerate debt service of
$3,200,000,000 or a debt service of ~1,000,000 until the year 2023 was
staggering. He was also going to be sending an official request for
clarification of the footnotes on Page 13 and 14 of the March 12, 1985 report,
which would indicate an additional amount of obligation of $2,380,000 that he
did not believe was totally explained in the report. The Council should look
ahead relative to additional amounts of obligations. Until he had
clarification of those footnotes, he was unable to support any additional
financial obligations to the City.
Questions were then posed to Gordon Hoyt, General Manager Public Utilities
Department, relative to the subject proposed agreement during which he
confirmed that this was ~fmply studying a proposal to get "home" from the Mead
area which was known would be necessary at the time of approval of
participation in the Phoenix/Mead line by the Council in 1982. When the study
was completed this would be the means to do that.
Mr. Dale Pohlman, Assistant General Manager, then narrated a slide
presentation which explained the details of the proposal, benefits,
preliminary cost estimates, break-even estimates, risks and maximum exposure
to the City. He also confirmed that the planning agreement did not involve
any commitment to construction at this time.
Councilman Bay stated as he understood, when the City first looked at the
transmission line and the Council made its decision to participate in the
study agreements, the odds looked good and now with a break-even point
estimate of 26 percent usage of the City's capability ~n that line, the
pro~ect looked even better at this time and it also looked as though the DC
line was the best way to go.
Mr. Pohlman stated that most of the effort had already been expended on the AC
alternative. The idea of extending the DC line was a relative newcomer to the
project. For the most part, the expenditures were related to the DC option.
The preliminary estimates showed dramatically that the cost were killowatt of
construction which was much less than the AC option.
MOTION: Councilman Pickler moved to authorize the Mead/McCullough -
Victorville/Adelanto Transmission Project Joint Planning Agreement, as
recommended in memorandum dated March 12, 1985 from the Secretary of the
Public Utilities Board. Councilman Bay seconded the motion. Councilman Roth
voted "no." MOTION CARRIED.
219
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - March 19, 1985, 10:00 A.M.
175/123: FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT WITH VOLT ENERGY SYSTEMS: Councilwoman
Kaywood moved to authorize the First Amendment to t'he agreement with Volt
Energy Systems, Inc., for energy audits and conservation support services,
extending the term to January 31, 1986, with compensation for the additional
term not to exceed $200,000, as recommended in memorandum dated March 12, 1985
from the Public Utilities Board. Councilman Overholt seconded the motion.
MOTION CARRIED.
CITY MANAGER/DEPARTMENTAL CONSENT CALENDAR: On motion by Councilwoman
Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Roth, the following items were approved in
accordance with the reports, certifications and recommendations furnished each
Council Member and as listed on the Consent Calendar; Councilwoman Kaywood
offered Resolution Nos. 85R-115 through 85R-121, both inclusive, for
adoption. Refer to Resolution Book.
1. 118: The following claims were filed against the City and action taken as
recommended:
Claims rejected and referred to Risk Management:
a. Claim submitted by Carol L. Wood for automobile damage sustained
purportedly due to actiohs of the City on or about February 4, 1985.
b. Claim submitted by Samuel William Eskew & Kathleen Jane Poston for
personal injuries sustained purportedly due to auto versus motorcycle on City
street on or about November 2, 1984.
c. Claim submitted by Jo Ann Miller Bridges for personal injuries
sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about October 26, 1984.
d. Claim submitted by Kendra Rose Lay for personal injuries sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about December 30, 1984.
e. Claim submitted by Jaqueline Propst for personal property damages
sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about September 24,
1984.
f. Claim submitted by Lidieth Fernandez for auto property damage due to
actions of the City on or about January 10, 1985.
g. Claim submitted by Catherine M. Ewoldt for auto property damage due to
actions of the City on or about February 25, 1985.
2. Receiving and filing the following correspondence: (on file)
a. 156: Police Department--Monthly Report for January 1985 and Fourth
Quarter Crime Analysis, 1984.
b. 105: Community Redevelopment Commission--Minutes of February 13, 1985.
c. 107: Planning Department, Building Division--Monthly Report for
February 1985.
220
CitY Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - March 19, 1985, 10:00 A.M.
d. 105: Public Utilities Board--Minutes of February 19, 1985.
e. 175: California Energy Commission and Development Commission, Docket
No. 84-BR-5, Notice of Hearings for the 1985 California Energy Plan.
f. 175: Before the Public Utilities Commission, Application No.
85-01-042, Southern California Edison Company for 1) Authority to Changes
Its Rates Effective June 1, 1985 by Increasing Its Energy Cost Adjustment
Billing Factors, Increasing Its Annual Energy Rate, Decreasing Its
Electric Revenue Adjustment Billing Factor, and Decreasing Its Steel
Surcharge Adjustment Billing Factor; 2) Authority, at Some Future Date, to
Reduce Its Energy Cost Adjustment Clause Rates to Reflect Fuel and Energy
Cost Savings Attributable to Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station Unit 1
Coincident With Implementation of the Major Additions Adjustment Clause
Rates; and 3) Review of the Reasonableness of Edison's Operations During
the Period From December 1, 1983 through November 30, 1984.
3. 108: Approving the following applications in accordance with the
recommendations of the Chief of Police.
a. 108: Public Dance Application, Nick E. Ramirez, for New Generation
Productions to hold a dance at the Anaheim Convention Center, April 6,
1985, from 8:00 p.m. to 1:00 a.m.
b. 108: Public Dance Application, Manuel Gomez, for Anaheim Dance
Promotion to hold a dance at the Anaheim Convention Center, March 23,
1985, from 6:00 p.m. to 2:00 a.m.
4. 108: Denying an application for a Public Dance Permit submitted by Don J.
Britt, to hold a dance at Pearson's Financial Service Hall, 3168 West Lincoln
Avenue, March 22, 1985, from 9:00 p.m. to 1:00 a.m., in accordance with the
recommendation of the Chief of Police.
5. 123: Authorizing a Second Agreement with the Assistance League of Anaheim
in the amount of ~15,000 to administer distribution of said funds to qualified
residents who have received notices of termination of utility services due to
nonpayment of bills.
6. 123: Authorizing an agreement with Jones, Haii, Hlil and White, to be
employed as Bond Counsel for the City on Housing Bond Issues, for fees not to
exceed $50,000 for any one issue.
7. 151: Authorizing a Parking Area License Agreement with L. C. Smull to
allow encroachment of parking lot improvements across a 60-foot public utility
easement at the northeast corner of Katella Avenue and Struck Street, as
requested by Business Properties to satisfy City requirement for parking space
for an office complex (84-4E).
City Engineer Gary Johnson answered questions posed by Councilwoman Kaywood
relative to the ability in an emergency to get to the utility mains that would
now be under the parking lot. He felt there would be no problem in that
respect.
221
City Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - March 19, 1985, 10:00 A.M.
8. 123: Authorizing the First Amendment to Agreement with Harry Kobzeff, dba
Kobzeff & Associates, in an amount not to exceed ~1,500, to include electrical
design in the scope of services for development of Mito Square.
9. 123: Authorizing an agreement with North Orange County Community College
District to provide theatrical performances and concerts in Pearson Park
Theatre, for the term April 1985 thru October 1987.
City Manager Talley confirmed that approval of the agreement also included
approval of season budgets and payments as outlined on Page 3 of the agreement.
10. 123: Authorizing a Cooperative Agreement No. 3236 S-1 with the State to
provide for landscaping of slopes of overpass approaches of Miraloma Avenue,
Sunkist Avenue, Tustin Avenue, Riverdale Avenue and La Palma Avenue along the
Riverside (91) Freeway, to be completed by December 31, 1986.
11. 123: Authorizing a time extension to an agreement with Wilson-Bryant &
Associates to prepare engineering plans and specifications for a construction
project to improve Orangethorpe Avenue from Imperial Highway to Kraemer
Boulevard, to extend the expiration date to June 1, 1985.
12. 123: Authorizing Service Agreement No. 07B-671 with the State Department
of Transportation to provide improvements on Harbor Boulevard from Broadway to
I-5 Freeway at a cost to the City of ~1,264.
13. 123: Authorizing the first amendment to the Equipment Rental Agreement
with Toro Pacific Distributing for the rental of new golf course turf
equipment, to reflect name change, now Pacific Equipment and Irrigation, Inc.,
and consenting to an assignment of a security interest to Imperial Bank.
14. 160: Accepting the bid of Tri Counties Officials Association in an amount
not to exceed $63,000 and authorizing the execution of a one year agreement
commencing March 1, 1985 for providing athletic officials to officiate the
adult sports leagues conducted by the Recreation Department, in accordance
with Bid No. 4174.
15. 160: Accepting the bid of Westinghouse Electric Company in the amount of
$58,037.12 for two each 6000 KVAR Padmount Capacitor Banks for Southwest
Substation, in accordance with Bid No. 4178.
16. 150: RESOLUTION NO. 85R-115: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT THE PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND
NECESSITY REQUIRE THE CONSTRUCTION AND COMPLETION OF A PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, TO
WIT: JOHN MARSHALL PARK IRRIGATION IMPROVEMENTS, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM,
ACCOUNT NOS. 16-812-7103-1202c AND 16-812-7103-12080. (opening of bids on
April 18, 1985, 2:00 p.m.)
17. 169: RESOLUTION NO. 85R-116: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT THE PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND
NECESSITY REQUIRE THE CONSTRUCTION AND COMPLETION OF A PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, TO
WIT: WEST ANAHEIM CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM,
222
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - March 19, 1985, 10:00 A.M.
ACCOUNT NO. 49-795-6335-E5350, FAU #M-3041(218), MINORITY BUSINESS ENTERPRISE
PARTICIPATION PROJECT-GOAL DBE 10% WBE 1%. (opening of bids on April 18, 1985)
18. 164: RESOLUTION NO. 85R-117: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM AWARDING A CONTRACT FOR THE CORONADO-VAN BUREN STORM DRAIN
IMPROVEMENT, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, ACCOUNT NO. 46-791-6325-E1420. (Awarding
a contract to the lowest and best responsible bidder, Valverde Construction,
Inc., in the amount of ~350,926)
19. 169: RESOLUTION NO. 85R-118: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM AWARDING A CONTRACT FOR THE KATELLA AVENUE STREET IMPROVEMENT,
ACCOUNT NO. 24-799-6325-E9010. (Awarding a contract to the lowest and best
responsible bidder, Nobest Inc., in the amount of ~367,813.18, for Katella
Avenue Median Island Improvement)
20. 179: RESOLUTION NO. 85R-119: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM TERMINATING ALL PROCEEDINGS IN CONNECTION WITH CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT NO. 124 AND DECLARING RESOLUTION NO. 7104 NULL AND VOID. (Terminating
Conditional Use Permit No. 124, to permit a motel and high-rise commercial
development on property located at 1414 and 1460 South Harbor Boulevard, Red
Lion Inn, in accordance with the conditions of approval of Conditional Use
Permit No. 2661)
21. 158: RESOLUTION NO. 85R-120: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM ACCEPTING AN EASEMENT DEED CONVEYING TO THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY FOR AN EASEMENT FOR ROAD AND PUBLIC UTILITY PURPOSES.
(R/W #3465)
22. 158: RESOLUTION NO. 85R-121: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM ACCEPTING CERTAIN DEEDS AND ORDERING THEIR RECORDATION.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Kaywood, Bay, Pickler, Overholt and Roth
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 85R-115 through 85R-121, both inclusive,
duly passed and adopted.
153: WAGE RATES FOR UNREPRESENTED PART-TIME CLASSES: Submitted was report
dated March 12, 1985 from the Human Resources Director Garry McRae,
recommending that there be no change in rates for five of the subject classes
but that there be an increase in rates for other such classifications
effective March 22, 1985.
Garry McRae, Human Resources Director, then answered questions posed by
Councilman Bay relative to the statement made in the subject report that the
weighted average increase across the 39 classification was 4.2 percent.
Sixteen of those (41 percent) were increases of 10 percent or over and 31
(79 percent) were over 4.3 percent. He noted that pay increases nationally
were averaging approximately 4.3 percent.
223
City Hall., Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - March 19, 1985, 10:00 A.M.
After Mr. McRae's explanation, Councilman Bay surmised that the weighting
factor took into account total dollars expended and the total dollar
differences in the salary increases would be less than 4.2 percent of the
total dollars expended.
Mr. McRae confirmed that the dollars would reflect the averages.
Councilman Pickler offered Resolution No. 85R-122 for adoption. Refer to
Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 85R-122: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM ESTABLISHING RATES OF COMPENSATION FOR UNREPRESENTED PART-TIME JOB
CLASSIFICATIONS AND SUPERSEDING RESOLUTION NO. 84R-120 AND AMENDMENTS
THERETO. (Effective March 22, 1985)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Kaywood, Pickler, Overholt and Roth
Bay
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 85R-122 duly passed and adopted.
End of Consent Calendar Items. MOTION CARRIED.
160: CONCRETE REPAIR AT ANAHEIM STADIUM: Councilwoman Kaywood moved to waive
Council Policy No. 306 and authorize the Purchasing Agent to issue a purchase
order to J&M Epoxy Unltd. in the amount of ~26,383.75 (including tax) for
concrete repair at Anaheim Stadium, as recommended in memorandum dated
March 18, 1985 from the Purchasing Agent. Councilman Pickler seconded the
motion. MOTION CARRIED.
123/153: SECOND AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
AND WILLIAM O. TALLEY: Councilman Pickler moved to approve Second Amendment
to the Employment Agreement between the City of Anaheim and William O. Talley,
as recommended in memorandum dated March 13, 1985 from the City Manager.
Councilman Overholt seconded the motion. Councilman Bay abstained. MOTION
CARRIED.
144: RESIGNATION FROM THE ORANGE COUNTY HEALTH PLANNING COUNCIL:
Councilwoman Kaywood moved to accept with regret the resignation of Janet
Parry from the Orange County Health Planning Council for the term ending
July 14, 1985 with the resignation to be effective as of June 1, 1985 as
requested by Ms. Parry. Councilman Pickler seconded the motion. MOTION
CARRIED.
Councilwoman Kaywood asked that a letter of thanks be sent to Ms. Parry for
her service to the City and also for the courtesy of giving the Council the
time to find an alternate.
Mayor Roth asked if Ms. Parry had an alternate and, if so, had the alternate
been approached to see if there was interest in being appointed as the
224
City Hall, Ana..h. eim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - March 19, 1985, 10:00 A.M.
delegate; City Clerk Sohl stated that she would contact the alternate, Pat
Fron.
108: APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC DANCE PERMIT - THOMAS GERALD CAMMAROTA:
Councilman Pickler moved to approve an application for a Public Dance Permit
submitted by Thomas Gerald Cammarota, to hold a dance at the Lincoln Hall,
3168 West Lincoln Avenue, on March 30, 1985, from 9:00 p.m. to 2:00 a.m., in
accordance with the recommendations of the Chief o~ Police. Councilman Roth
seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
108: APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC DANCE PERMIT - DENISE LOUISE MacDONALD:
Councilman Bay moved to approve an application for a Public Dance Permit
submitted by Denise Louise MacDonald, to hold a dance at the Anaheim West
Division Hall, 3168 West Lincoln Avenue, on April 6, 1985, from 8:00 p.m. to
2:00 a.m., in accordance with the recommendations of the Chief of Police.
Councilman Pickler seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
CITY PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS: The following actions taken by the City
Planning Commission at their meeting held March 4, 1985, pertaining to the
following applications were submitted for City Council information.
It was noted that the 22-day appeal period for these items would conclude on
March 26, 1985.
1. VARIANCE NO. 3450: Application submitted by Emkay Development and Realty
Co., Inc., to construct a warehouse facility on ML zoned property located at
1950 South Anaheim Boulevard, with Code waiver of minimum required front yard
setback.
The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC85-62, granted
Variance No. 3450, and granted a negative declaration status.
2. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2665: Application submitted by Emkay
Development and Realty Co., (Copierland), to permit retail sales of copiers on
ML zoned property located at 1950 South Anaheim Boulevard, with Code waiver of
minimum number of parking spaces.
The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC85-63, granted
Conditional Use Permit No. 2665, and granted a negative declaration status.
3. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 200: Application submitted by Marjorie
Antghes, Margaret Peter, Arne Atkinson and City, to consider alternate
proposals of ultimate land uses including but not limited to low-density
residential designation and low-medium density designation on approximately
3.2 acres located at the northeast corner of Sunkist Street and South Street.
The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC85-66, denied
General Plan Amendment No. 200, and granted a negative declaration status.
4. RECLASSIFICATION NO. 84-85-26: Application submitted by Verla W. Brown,
for a change in zone from RS-A-43,000 to RM-2400, to construct a 4-unit
apartment complex on property located at 680 South Sunkist Street.
225
Cit~ Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - March 19, 1985, 10:00 A.M.
The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC85-67, denied
Reclassification No. 84-85-26, and granted a negative declaration status.
5. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2666: Application submitted by Anaheim Country
Inn, to permit wedding services/receptions and meeting/seminar functions in
conjunction with an existing bed and breakfast inn located at 856 South Walnut.
The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC85-68, granted
Conditional Use Permit No. 2666, and granted a negative declaration status.
6. VARIANCE NO. 3461: Application submitted by Robert Allan and Catherine
Gretg Denholm, to establish a two-lot subdivision on RS-7200(SC) zoned
property located at 6710 East Johnston Circle, with the following Code
waivers: (a) minimum lot area, (b) minimum lot width and frontage.
The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC85-70, denied
Variance No. 3461, and granted a negative declaration status.
7. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2350--EXTENSION OF TIME: Application submitted
by Theodore Ander, Attorney, (Robert's Room), requesting an extension of time
to Conditional Use Perml~ No. 2350, to permit a cocktail lounge on CG zoned
property located at 819 South Euclid Street.
The City Planning Commission approved an extension of time to Conditional Use
Permit No. 2350, to expire July 12, 1985.
8. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 201: Application submitted by Southern Pacific
~ndustrial Development Company, to consider an amendment to the Land Use
Element of the General Plan, to consider alternate proposals of ultimate land
uses including but not limited to general industrial and commercial on
property located on the northwest corner of Katella Avenue and Lewis Street.
The City Planning Commission denied General Plan Amendment No. 201, with the
recommendation that Council review General Plan Amendment No. 201. (85-64)
RECLASSIFICATION NO. 84-85-27: Application submitted by Southern Pacific
Industrial Development Company, for a change in zone from ML to CO, to
construct a 3-story commercial office building on property located at the
northwest corner of Katella Avenue and Lewis Street.
The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC85-65, granted
Reclassification No. 84-85-27, with the recommendation that Council review
Reclassification No. 84-85-27.
Councilwoman Kaywood was concerned that the applicant was requesting a
reclassification which would change the zone from ML to CO totally surrounded
by industrial which would set off another round of reclassification requests.
She would prefer the CUP process since her major concern was in changing the
zoning.
At the conclusion of Council discussion on the issue, Acting City Attorney
Jack White, also clarified that there was no absolute prohibition against the
226
City Hal~., Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - March 19, 1985, 10:00 A.M.
City Council hearing dialogue from the public outside of a public hearing on a
reclassification.
Mr. Robert Mickelson, representing Century-American, then stated in answer to
Councilwoman Kaywood that he did not believe his client would oppose approval
of the project under a CUP, the problem being, however, that the project would
have to back through the entire processing procedure.
After additional discussion, a consensus of the Council Members (Bay, Pickler
and Roth) indicated that they were not in opposition to the reclassification
which had been approved by the Planning Commission; Councilwoman Kaywood then
declined to set the matter for a public hearing.
9. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2658: Application submitted by Atlantic
Richfield Co., (Arco AM/PM Mini Market), to permit a freestanding automatic
teller machine kiosk in conjunction with an existing convenience market with
gasoline sales on CL(SC) zoned property located at 5700 East La Palma Avenue,
with Code waiver of minimum number of parking spaces.
The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC85-61, denied
Conditional Use Permit No. 2658, and granted a negative declaration status.
The Planning Commission's decision was appealed by the applicant and,
therefore, a public hearing would be scheduled at a later date.
10. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2664: Application submitted by Burton Zoul,
('7~11 Food Store), to permit a convenience market with gasoline sales and
off-sale beer and wine on CL zoned property located at 101 West Ball Road.
The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC85-69, denied
Conditional Use Permit No. 2664, and granted a negative declaration status.
The Planning Commission's decision was appealed by the applicant and,
therefore, a public hearing would be scheduled at a later date.
City Clerk Leonora Sohl noted that any member of the public or the Council had
the opportunity to set any of the remaining items for a public hearing until
Tuesday, March 26, 1985, at 5:00 p.m. noting that the Planning Commission
items were presented to the Council one week early due to the fact that there
no Council meeting was anticipated on March 26, 1985.
11. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2599 (READV.)--REVISED PLANS: Application
submitted by Commonwealth Financial Corporation, to permit a 7-story, 224-room
hotel complex with on-sale of alcoholic beverages on RS-A-43,000 zoned
property located on the south side of Frontera Street and east of Glassell
Street, with the following Code waivers: (a) minimum number of parking
spaces, (b) maximum structural height.
The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC85-71, granted
Conditional Use Permit No. 2599, and previously approved a negative
declaration status.
227
City Hall, Anaheim, .California - COUNCIL MINUTES - March 19, 1985, 10:00 A.M.
By letter dated March 25, 1985, Councilwoman Kaywood set this item for review.
End of Planning Commission Informational Items. MOTION CARRIED.
127: DISCUSSION--FIREWORKS ISSUE: To consider placement of the fireworks
issue on the ballot. At the meeting of January 22, 1985, the following motion
was made by Councilwoman Kaywood and seconded by Councilman Bay and continued
to this date (see minutes of January 22, 1985):
MOTION: Authorizing placement of the question on the June 1986 ballot as to
whether the residents of Anaheim want to ban the sale of safe and sane
fireworks in the City.
Mayor Roth stated the Council was being asked to take action today approving a
ballot measure for an election that would take place 14 and 1/2 months from
now. He felt it "smacked" of political activity particularly by Councilwoman
Kaywood who had used the issue time and again to run for Mayor of the City.
He (Roth) had been the brunt of the target as if he were the only one
opposed. He felt discussions by the Council had misled citizens into
believing that their action would outlaw bottle rockets and dangerous
fireworks when, in fact,, those were already against the law. The proposal
would not affect public displays such as those at Dtsneyland and the stadium.
Records would show that the biggest fireworks-related fire was due to one of
the public fireworks displays at Disneyland resulting in a one half
million-dollar property loss. He was, however, not opposed to those
displays. Relative to his political philosophy and experience in Elected
Office, it was easier when problems arose to ask government to regulate
people's daily lives. The Council in this case had an opportunity to do
something different, i.e., suggest that parents and individuals not purchase
fireworks and when there was no market, the fireworks stands would disappear.
He was opposed to placing the issue on the ballot at this time.
Councilwoman Kaywood stated the issue was as clear as it was intended to be,
and a long time away from the next large election in June of 1986. She would
like to have had the issue on the ballot when she first proposed it years ago
in answer to the many people in Anaheim who had begged to have the ability to
vote on the issue and the ability to do so would not place the Council in a
position to ban fireworks. Being so far ahead of the election date would take
it out of the political arena. In the meantime, the City Attorney could work
on the language for the ballot.
Councilman Pickler stated he had been opposed to placing the issue on the
ballot since his tenure on the Council and during that time accidents or
mishaps relating to fireworks were almost nil. He saw the petition that was
signed in opposition which was approximately 3 years ago. He believed that
safe and sane fireworks helped to keep out the illegal fireworks. Many
non-profit groups would be deprived of funds used for many worthwhile
projects. He questioned how many times government regulations had to be
placed on the backs of people who wanted and enjoyed such things. If the
citizens wanted to put the issue on the ballot, then they should do so as they
said they would. He did not receive one phone call since the last time the
matter was discussed.
228
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - March 19, 1985, 10:00 A.M.
Councilman Bay, speaking in support of the motion, stated it had nothing to do
with a debate on whether they wanted fireworks or not but whether the Council
wanted to let the people vote for what they wanted. In the survey he
commissioned, nearly 70 percent of the people responding did not imply that
they did or did not want fireworks, but said that they would like to vote on
the matter. He did not believe the Council ever heard him argue for or
against fireworks but he would continue to argue that on a question with so
much interest in the City, the people should be allowed to vote and decide
it. In his opinion, government was imposing fireworks on people that said
they did not want fireworks. It is way past the time that the Council went to
the public and got their vote, yes or no, and to then abide by that vote.
Councilman Overholt recalled the long public hearing held 2 or 3 years ago at
which time the subject was discussed and exhaustively explored where people
representing both sides were heard. He disagreed with Councilman Bay in that
he felt the issue was whether the use of fireworks in the City posed a threat
to the City and he felt the Council should make that decision. He had
received very few phone calls both from people asking him to get rid of
fireworks and others saying that it was not government's business. He decided
to look at the issue on its merits and the issue to him was whether the sale
and use of fireworks posed a threat to the City and particularly what had been
labeled safe and sane. Illegal fireworks had not been allowed in the City for
a long period of time. Much of the testimony previously given about the
"horrors" of safe and sane fireworks had to do with someone taking those
fireworks, augmenting them and making something dangerous out of them.
Perhaps a sparkler or piccolo pete was not safe and sane and should be
banned. In his opinion, truly safe and sane fireworks were no more a threat
or less of a threat to the City than the professional fireworks displays. His
vote as before was going to be "no" to put the issue on the ballot, but he
would be first to support efforts to ferret out any of the fireworks in the
safe and sane category which are in fact, neither safe nor sane, in order to
preclude them posing a threat to the City. He felt it was a proposed ballot
proposition that should not be on the ballot. If the Council chose to put the
issue on the ballot then there were many similar issues that should be put on
the ballot as well. If the Council did not have the courage to represent the
people in the City and make decisions whether popular or not, then they should
not be on the Council. He reiterated his vote was going to be "no" again. He
felt that Councilwoman Kaywood was absolutely sincere in her efforts and
disagreed that it was a politically motivated issue.
Before concluding, Councilwoman Kaywood stated in the past when the Fire Chief
and the Department gave their recommendations to the Council and reported on
the situation in other cities, it was proven that when no safe and sane
fireworks or fireworks at all were permitted, anything detonated was
considered illegal and facilitated enforcement and cut down on fires,
insurance and cost to the taxpayers. Thousands of people had talked to her
over the years who were adamant and opposed to fireworks and saw no reason why
the Council would not permit them to vote on the question.
A vote was then taken on the motion made by Councilwoman Kaywood and seconded
by Councilman Bay at the meeting of January 22, 1985 and failed to carry by
the following vote:
229
City. Mall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - March 19, 1985, 10:00 A.M.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Kaywood and Bay
Pickler, Overholt and Roth
None
MOTION: Councilman Overholt moved to instruct the Fire Chief to advise the
Council of specific safe and sane fireworks, if any, which in the opinion of
the Fire Department do pose a hazard to the City preliminary to the Council
urging that those particular fireworks be deleted from the safe and sane
category. Councilman Roth seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
179: ORDINANCE NO. 4585 - RELATING TO COMMERCIAL SALES OFFICES AND SALES
BUSINESSES IN INDUSTRIAL ZONES: Amending Title 18, adding new Subsection .095
to Section 18.61.020, Subsection .145, amending Subsection .605 and repealing
Subsection .400, all of Section 18.61.050 of Chapter 18.61 of the Code,
relating to commercial offices and sales businesses in industrial zones. This
matter was discussed at the meetings of March 5 and March 12, 1985 where
extensive discussion took place and input received (see minutes those dates).
Mr. Bill Dunlap, Cabot, Cabot and Forbes, stated that they had reviewed the
added language to the amended ordinance and saw no objection to it. They
wanted to move forward if the Council so agreed.
Councilman Overholt referred to the new language in the proposed ordinance,
specifically, "...any use which is found to encourage retail sales of products
or merchandise..." he could see a situation where some function could be
carried on in a facility that would be deemed to encourage retail sales of
products on merchandise that would not attract people into the area or allow
retail sales but the activity could be found to encourage retail sales of
products on merchandise. The City did not want to attract customers, traffic,
etc. into the industrial area for other than industrial business. The
ordinance was talking about the industrial area, but it did not say that. He
felt in an effort to be more specific, the ordinance was getting into such a
degree of specificity, that it was moving away from what the developers
wanted. He did not see a need for that sentence at all but if added, it
should be framed in a way that would not encourage an interpretation that
could eliminate any activity which could ultimately result in retail sales.
He had no ob3ection to adding additional language but felt that portion
compounded the ambiguity.
After extensive discussion between Council Members relative to the issue
raised by Councilman Overholt including input from Acting City Attorney Jack
White, the Mayor asked if anyone else wished to speak on the proposed Code
amendment with the new wording.
Mr. Gene Hoggatt, Santa Fe Land Improvement, stated that no one seemed to be
confused about the intent of the Council and the developers wanted to move
ahead. The City Council was the final say on what was going to be done. He
felt it was more appropriate that the Council look at each project as it was
presented.
Mr. Bill Latham, Anaheim Chamber of Commerce reaffirmed the Chamber's position
of protecting the integrity of the industrial area. They were concerned when
they accepted something and then heard another interpretation.
230
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - March 19, 1985, 10:00 A.M.
When they worked as a group to develop strategies and then came to the Council
hoping to move on, they became confused and did not know what to do. The
Chamber felt they could work within the guidelines of the proposed ordinance.
The industrial community was not the one who came forward and requested a
change. He reiterated they had no problem with the ordinance laid upon the
industrial community. However, industry was satisfied with the existing
conditions. The statement contained within the proposed ordinance
(Subsection .605) tended to to make them think they were protected from the
influx of traffic into the industrial community.
Councilman Overholt still had concern relative to the wording. He felt it was
confusing since it did not specifically refer to retail sales of products on
merchandise in that particular industrial area. He did not want to vote no on
the ordinance when the time came, but he felt they had ended up with a
"sloppily" drafted ordinance.
Councilman Pickler offered Ordinance No. 4585 for an amended first reading.
Refer to Ordinance Book.
ORDINANCE NO. 4585: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ADDING SUBSECTION
.095 TO SECTION 18.61.0Z0, ADDING SUBSECTION .145, AMENDING SUBSECTION .605
AND REPEALING SUBSECTION .400, ALL OF SECTION 18.61.050 OF CHAPTER 18.61.050
OF CHAPTER 18.61, OF TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING.
Council Members Kaywood, Bay, Overholt and Roth expressed support for the
proposed ordinance as presently worded.
179: ORDINANCE NO. 4588: Councilman Roth offered Ordinance No. 4588 for
first reading. Refer to Ordinance Book.
ORDINANCE NO. 4588: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING THE ZONING
MAP REFERRED TO IN TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIMMUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING.
(Amending Title 18, 79-80-25(2), RM-3000(SC), south of Nohl Ranch Road, east
of Anaheim Hills Golf Course (TT 10967).
REQUEST FOR CLOSED SESSION: The City Attorney requested a Closed Session to
discuss pending litigation; the City Manager requested a Closed Session to
discuss a personnel matter and labor relations.
The Mayor announced that a Closed Session would be held with the City's
Attorney to discuss the aformentioned items pursuant to Government Code
Section 54956.9A and 54957.
Councilman Roth moved to recess into a Closed Session and lunch break.
Councilman Pickler seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. (1:00 p.m.)
AFTER RECESS: The Mayor called the meeting to order, all Council Members
being present. (1:58 p.m.)
176: PUBLIC HEARING - ABANDONMENT NO. 83-20A: In accordance with application
filed by J.G.D. Company, Inc., public hearing was held on proposed abandonment
of a former Southern California Edison Company public utility easement
231
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - March 19, 1985, 10:00 A.M.
acquired by the City, as successor, located north of Orangethorpe Avenue, west
of Orangethorpe Place, pursuant to Resolution No. 85R-85, duly published in
the Anaheim Bulletin and notices thereof posted in accordance with law.
Report of the City Engineer dated February 4, 1985 was submitted recommending
approval of said abandonment.
Mayor Roth asked if anyone wished to address the Council; there being no
response he closed the public hearing.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION: The City Engineer
determined that the proposed activity falls within the definition of Section
3.01, Class 5, of the City of Anaheim guidelines to the requirements for an
Environmental Impact Report and is, therefore, categorically exempt from the
requirement to file an EIR.
Councilman Pickler offered Resolution No. 85R-122 for adoption, approving
Abandonment No. 83-20A. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 85R-122: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM VACATING A FORME~ SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY PUBLIC UTILITY
EASEMENT ACQUIRED BY THE CITY, AS SUCCESSOR, LOCATED NORTH OF ORANGETHORPE
AVENUE, WEST OF ORANGETHORPE PLACE.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Kaywood, Bay, Pickler, Overholt and Roth
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 85R-122 duly passed and adopted.
176: PUBLIC HEARING - ABANDONMENT NO. 84-4A: In accordance with application
filed by Mr. Norm Priest, Redevelopment Agency, public hearing was held on
proposed abandonment of a right of way easement for pole and pipe lines lying
within the Redevelopment Project, located north of Broadway, between Harbor
Boulevard and Helena Street, pursuant to Resolution No. 85R-86, duly published
in the Anaheim Bulletin and notices thereof posted in accordance with law.
Report of the City Engineer dated February 6, 1985 was submitted recommending
approval of said abandonment.
Mayor Roth asked if anyone wished to address the Council; there being no
response he closed the public hearing.
Before action was taken, Councilwoman Kaywood asked if in relocating the
poles, if they were going to be underground.
The item was trailed until later in the meeting until an answer could be given
(2:02 p.m.).
232
City Hall,. Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - March 19, 1985, 10:00 A.M.
Later in the meeting (2:21 p.m.) Dean Sherer, Associate Planner, confirmed
that the existing utilities would be relocated in dedicated streets and would
be underground.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION: The City Engineer
determined that the proposed activity falls within the definition of Section
3.01, Class 5, of the City of Anaheim guidelines to the requirements for an
Environmental Impact Report and is, therefore, categorically exempt from the
requirement to file an EIR.
Councilwoman Kaywood offered Resolution No. 85R-124 for adoption, approving
Abandonment No. 84-4A. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 85R-124: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM VACATING A FORMER RIGHT OF WAY EASEMENT FOR POLE AND PIPE LINES LYING
WITHIN THE REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT, LOCATED NORTH OF BROADWAY, BETWEEN HARBOR
BOULEVARD AND HELENA STREET.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBER~:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Kaywood, Bay, Pickler, Overholt and Roth
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 85R-124 duly passed and adopted.
176: PUBLIC HEARING - ABANDONMENT NO. 84-11A: In accordance with application
filed by Royale Guest Home of Anaheim, public hearing was held on proposed
abandonment of an electrical easement to allow the building of additional
rooms to the present facility for senior citizens located at 525 West La Palma
Avenue, pursuant to Resolution No. 85R-87, duly published in the Anaheim
Bulletin and notices thereof posted in accordance with law.
Report of the City Engineer dated February 4, 1985 was submitted recommending
approval of said abandonment.
Mayor Roth asked if anyone wished to address the Council; there being no
response he closed the public hearing.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION: The City Engineer
determined that the proposed activity falls within the definition of Section
3.01, Class 5, of the City of Anaheim guidelines to the requirements for an
Environmental Impact Report and is, therefore, categorically exempt from the
requirement to file an EIR.
Councilwoman Kaywood offered Resolution No. 85R-123 for adoption, approving
Abandonment No. 84-11A.
RESOLUTION NO. 123: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
VACATING A FORMER ELECTRICAL EASEMENT TO ALLOW THE BUILDING OF ADDITIONAL
ROOMS TO THE PRESENT FACILITY FOR SENIOR CITIZENS LOCATED AT 525 WEST LA PALMA
AVENUE.
233
City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - March 19, 1985, 10:00 A.M.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Kaywood, Bay, Pickler, Overholt and Roth
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 85R-123 duly passed and adopted.
123: ASSIGNMENT OF LEASE AGREEMENT TO ANAHEIM HOTEL ASSOCIATES: Councilman
Roth moved to approve a consent to assignment of lease agreement to Anaheim
Hotel Associates, a California Limited Partnership and an estoppel certificate
relating to that certain lease agreement between the City of Anaheim and
Wrather Inns, Inc., dated August 17, 1976, and authorizing the Mayor and City
Clerk to execute said documents. Councilman Pickler seconded the motion.
MOTION CARRIED.
129: HOME FIRE SPRINKLERS: Councilman Pickler reported on his attendance at
a demonstration held by the Coalition of Home Fire Sprinklers on Wednesday,
March 13, 1985 where he witnessed a three-phase demonstration of the
quick-response sprinkler for homes. He felt that the Council should consider
the possibility of requi~ing the installation of sprinkler systems in new
homes and asked that staff submit a study to the Council on the matter with
the possibility of proposing an ordinance. He also asked that Chief Simpson
make a presentation to the Council in April relative to the pros and cons of
the issue.
101: SUPER BOWL MEETING - PHOENIX ARIZONA - MARCH 13 AND 14, 1985:
Councilman Overholt reported on his attendance at the subject meeting which he
felt was worthwhile attending for the City of Anaheim.
Mayor Roth who also attended, reported that a great deal of interest was
generated in the possibility of the Anaheim Hilton being the Host Hotel
Headquarters in 1987 when the Super Bowl was going to be played in Pasadena.
It would be excellent for the City and have far reaching impact financially.
The Headquarters Hotel housed the media, commissioners, banquet, etc.,
activities which normally attracted some 5,800 people which would mean
approximately $360,000 in profits plus the prestige of having the City host
the Headquarters Hotel. He then commented on the people with whom he spoke at
the meeting who had nothing but high praise for the facilities offered at
Anaheim Stadium and who wanted their facilities to be like Anaheim Stadium
either when built new or remodeled.
RECESS - CLOSED SESSION: Councilman Roth moved to recess into Closed Session,
Councilwoman Kaywood seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. (2:22 p.m.)
AFTER RECESS: The Mayor called the meeting to order, all Council Members
being present. (5:24 p.m.)
ADJOURNMENT: Councilman Roth moved to adjourn. Councilman Bay seconded the
motion. MOTION CARRIED. (5:25 p.m.)
LEONORA N. SOHL, CITY CLERK
234