1983/01/18City Hall, Anaheim,-California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 18, 1983, 10:00 A.M.
The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session.
PRESENT:
ABSENT:
PRESENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Pickler, Overholt, Bay and Roth
COUNCIL M~MBERS: None
CITY MANAGER: William O. Talley
CITY ATTORNEY: William P. Hopkins
ASSISTANT CITY CLERK: Leonora N. Sohl
PUBLIC UTILITIES GENERAL MANAGER: Gordon W. Hoyt
ASSISTANT PLANNING DIRECTOR--PLANNING: Joel Fick
TRAFFIC ENGINEER: Paul Singer
Mayor Roth called the meeting to order and welcomed those in
attendance to the Council meeting.
INVOCATION: Lt. A1 Robinson, The Salvation Army, gave the Invocation.
FLAG SALUTE: Councilwoman Miriam Kaywood led the assembly in the Pledge of
Allegiance to the Flag.
MINUTES: Councilwoman Kaywood moved to approve the minutes of the adjourned
regular meeting held October 28, 1982. Councilman Bay 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 ~3,077,923.28, in
accordance with the 1982-83 Budget, were approved.
CITY MANAGER/DEPARTMENTAL CONSENT CALENDAR: On motion by Councilman Pickler,
seconded by Councilwoman Kaywood, the following items were approved in
accordance with the reports, certifications and recommendations furnished each
Council Member and as listed on the Consent Calendar; Councilman Pickler
offered Resolution Nos. 83R-15 through 83R-20, both inclusive, for adoption.
Refer to Resolution Book.
i. 118: The following claims were filed against the City and action taken as
recommended:
A. Claims denied and referred to Risk Management:
1. Claim submitted by Joseph E. Durham for personal property damages
purportedly sustained due to actions of a City employee at 1822 West
Victoria Avenue, on or about December 4, 1982.
24
City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - Januar~ 18, 1983, 10:00 A.M.
2. Claim submitted by William Frank Fletcher for personal property
damages purportedly sustained due to a power surge at 1742 East Santa Ana
Street, on or about September 13, 1982.
3. Claim submitted by Mr. and Mrs. Melvin Groskreutz for personal
property damages purportedly sustained due to a prolonged power outage at
1623 West Ball Road, Apartment F, on or about November 30, 1982.
4. Claim submitted by Joselphine Sarno for personal property damages
purportedly sustained due to a power outage at 201 North Dale Street,
Apartment G2, on or about November 29 through November 30, 1982.
5. Claim submitted by Katherine G. Schroeder for personal property
damages purportedly sustained due to an 18-24" high piece of cement left
on the 57 freeway overpass on Lincoln Avenue, on or about October 29, 1982.
6. Claim submitted by Paul and Janet Reimche for personal property
damages purportedly sustained due to a prolonged power outage at 816-1/2
North Sabina, on or about November 30 through December 2, 1982.
7. Claim submitted by Doris Riding for personal property damages
purportedly sustained due to intermittent power at i940 West Elm Place, on
or about November 30, 1982.
8. Claim submitted by Jacqueline Murray for personal injuries purportedly
sustained due to poor lighting conditions at 135 South Lemon Street, on or
about November 17, 1982.
9. Claim submitted by Joem L. Dom for personal property damages
purportedly sustained due to a prolonged power outage at 2123 West
Broadway, on or about November 30, 1982.
10. Claim submitted by William J. Budrewica for personal injuries and
personal property damages purportedly sustained due to a traffic accident
caused by an inoperative traffic signal at the intersection of Gilbert and
Katella Streets, on or about October 8, 1982.
B. Claims allowed payment:
11. Claim submitted by Marguerite C. White for personal property damages
purportedly sustained due to actions of a City employee at 1849 West
Tamara Lane, on or about November 12, 1982. (~42.47)
12. Claim submitted by Sunset Builders for personal property damages
purportedly sustained due to actions of a City employee at the rear of
2150 Towne Center Place, on or about November 26, 1982. (~174.83)
2. The following correspondence was ordered received and filed:
a. 109: California State Board of Equalization, 1981-82 Annual Report.
(on file)
25
City Hall, Anmheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 18, 1983, 10:00
b. 107: Planning Department, Building Division--Monthly Report for
December 1982.
c. 159: Public Works Department, Building Division--Annual Report for
1982.
d. 105: Community Center Authority--Minutes of December 13, 1982.
e. 105: Anaheim Youth Commission--Minutes of December 8, 1982.
3. 123: Authorizing an agreement with Warren, McVeigh & Griffin, Inc., in an
amount not to exceed ~10,000, for risk management consulting services and
waiving Council Policy No. 401 relating to competitive bidding.
4. 158: Authorizing payment in the amount of ~81,000 to Hubert Bevins for
modifications to the building at 336 South Anaheim Boulevard, as required by
the Anaheim Boulevard Street Widening Project, Account No. 13-792-7101-E2580
(R/W 2800-30).
5. 123: Authorizing an agreement with Recreation Systems, Inc., in the
amount of ~5,750 for architectural design services for the restroom/concession
building at Pearson Park Amphitheatre.
164: RESOLUTION NO. 83R-15: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY REQUIRE
THE CONSTRUCTION AND C~PLETION OF A PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, TO WIT: LINCOLN-
MAGNOLIA STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENT, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, ACCOUNT NO.
241-791-6325-E1240. (Bids to be opened February 17, 1983, 2:00 p.m.)
167: RESOLUTION NO. 83R-16: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM AWARDING A CONTRACT FOR THE INSTALLATION OF TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND SAFETY
LIGHTING AT KATELLA AVENUE AND CLAUDINA WAY/KATELLA WAY, IN THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM, FEDERAL NO. HES-L030(O07), ACCOUNT NO. 49-795-6325-E5250. (Steiny
and Company, Inc., ~54,610)
101: RESOLUTION NO. 83R-17: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM REJECTING ALL BIDS RECEIVED UP TO THE HOUR OF 2:00 P.M. ON THE 6TH DAY
OF JANUARY, 1983, FOR A PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, TO WIT: ANAHEIM STADIUM
RELOCATION OF 135' HIGH ADVERTISING TOWER. (Account No. 61-985-6325)
169: RESOLUTION NO. 83R-18: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM FINALLY ACCEPTING THE COMPLETION AND THE FURNISHING OF ALL PLANT,
LABOR, SERVICES, MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT AND ALL UTILITIES AND TRANSPORTATION
INCLUDING POWER, FUEL AND WATER, AND THE PERFORMANCE OF ALL WORK NECESSARY TO
CONSTRUCT AND COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, TO WIT: GROVE STREET
STREET IMPROVEMENT, E/O GROVE STREET, S/O LA PALMA AVENUE, IN THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM, ACCOUNT NO. 24-792-6325-E2820. (American Construction, contractor)
26
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - Januar~ 18, 1983, iO:O0. A.M.
165: RESOLUTION NO. 83R-19: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM FINALLY ACCEPTING THE CCMPLETION AND THE FURNISHING OF ALL PLANT,
LABOR, SERVICES, MATERIALS ~AND EQUIPMENT AND ALL UTILITIES AND TRANSPORTATION
INCLUDING POWER, FUEL AND WATER, AND THE PERFORMANCE OF ALL WORK NECESSARY TO
CONSTRUCT AND CCMPLETE THE FOLLOWING PUBLIC IMPROV~ENT, TO WIT: 1982-83
ALLEY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, ACCOUNT NOS.
24-793-6325-E3600 AND 01-793-6325-E3600. (Josip Kovac, contractor)
176: RESOLUTION NO. 83R-20: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO VACATE CERTAIN PUBLIC STREETS, HIGHWAYS AND
SERVICE EASEMENTS. (82-1A and 82-6A, setting February 15, 1983, 1:30 p.m. as
the date and time for the public hearings)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS.:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Kaywood, Pickler, Overholt, Bay and Roth
None
None
MOTION CARRIED. The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 83R-15 through 83R-20,
both inclusive, duly passed and adopted.
123: STATUS REPORT CANYON PLAZA SHOPPING CENTER: Mr. Harry S. Rinker,
submitting a status report dated January 7, 1983, relating to Canyon Plaza
Shopping Center access from Imperial Highway, and requesting an additional
6-month extension of time to the Temporary Access Agreement dated November 10,
1981. Submitted was a report from the City Attorney dated January 12, 1983.
Mr. Alan Watts, Attorney for Mr. Pinker, confirmed for Councilwoman Kaywood
that, as stated in the report, they contemplated a traffic report study would
be completed by the end of January, and during early February a further
meeting with the Council liaison committee and City staff would take place.
He did not have any idea at this time as to the finalization of a permanent
solution.
City Attorney William Hopkins explained for Councilman Bay that the current
extension of the Temporary Access Agreement would expire January 22, 1983,
unless the Council took action to terminate the agreement. Otherwise, it
would automatically be deemed extended to July 22, 1983.
MOTION: Councilman Bay moved to receive and file the status report submitted
by Mr. Harry Rinker dated January 7, 1983, and by the terms of the agreement
that the Temporary Access Agreement be extended to July 22, 1983. Councilman
Overholt seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
103: SANTA ANA CANYON ANNEXATION NO. 11: Councilman Pickier offered
Resolution No. 83R-21 for adoption, to initiate annexatlon~proceedings for
Santa Ana Canyon Annexation No. 11, as recommended by the Planning Director in
his memorandum dated January 13, 1983, and setting the date and time for a
public hearing as Tuesday, February 22, 1983, at 1:30 p.m. Refer to
Resolution Book.
27
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 18, 1983, 10:00 A.M.
RESOLUTION NO. 83R-21: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM INITIATING ANNEXATION PROCEEDINGS FOR SANTA ANA CANYON NO. 11
ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AND FIXING A TIME, DATE AND PLACE OF HEARING
OF SAID PROPOSED ANNEXATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 35220 OF THE GOVERNMENT CODE
OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. (public hearing set February 22, 1983, 1:30 p.m.)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Kaywood, Pickler, Overholt, Bay and Roth
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 83R-21 duly passed and adopted.
159/142: ORDINANCE NO. 4387: Councilwoman Kaywood offered Ordinance No. 4387
for adoption. Refer to Ordinance Book.
ORDINANCE NO. 4387: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING SUBSECTION
.050 OF SECTION 1.12.050 OF CHAPTER 1.12 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE
RELATING TO BIDS ON PUBLIC PROJECTS.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MMMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Kaywood, Pickler, Overholt, Bay and Roth
None
None
The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 4387 duly passed and adopted.
107/179: ORDINANCE NO. 4388: Councilwoman Kaywood offered Ordinance No. 4388
for adoption. Refer to Ordinance Book.
ORDINANCE NO. 4388: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF
THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (82-83-12, MHP (Mobile Home
Park Overlay Zone), 2111 South Manchester and 300 West Katella Avenue,'
Orangewood Acres and Riviera Anaheim Mobilehome Parks)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MRMBERS:
COUNCIL M~MBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Kaywood, Pickler, Overholt, Bay and Roth
None
None
The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 4388 duly passed and adopted.
179: ORDINANCE NO. 4389: Councilman Pickler offered Ordinance No. 4389 for
adoption. Refer to Ordinance Book.
ORDINANCE NO. 4389: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF
THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (66-67-61(102), C-R, 1630
South Harbor Boulevard)
28
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 18~ 1983, 10:00 A.M.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MMqBERS:
COUNCIL M~MBERS:
COUNCIL MMMBERS:
Kaywood, Pickler, Overholt, Bay and Roth
None
None
The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 4389 duly passed and adopted.
179/108: ORDINANCE NO. 4382: Councilwoman Kaywood offered Ordinance No. 4382
for an amended first reading.
ORDINANCE NO. 4382: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHE/M AMENDING VARIOUS
CHAPTERS, SECTIONS, SUBSECTIONS, PARAGRAPHS AND SUBPARAGRAPHS OF TITLE 18 OF
THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO HEALTH SPAS AND PHYSICAL FITNESS
CENTERS. (to allow as a conditionally permitted use in the Anaheim Canyon
Industrial area and as a permitted primary use in all commercial zones in the
City)
119/156: C(IMMENDATION OF POLICE WATCH CCMMANDERS: Mayor Roth asked the City
Manager to send a memorandum to Acting Police Chief Jimmie Kennedy commending
the outstanding cooperation and police work of the Watch Commander on duty
Friday night, January 14, 1983, Lt. DePaola, and on Saturday night,
January 15, 1983, Sgt. Kurtz, with regard to problems that occurred on both of
those nights.
REQUEST FOR CLOSED SESSION: The City Manager requested a Closed Session to
discuss personnel and labor relations with no action anticipated; the City
Attorney requested a Closed Session to discuss litigation and potential
litigation with no action anticipated.
Councilwoman Kaywood moved to recess into Closed Session. Councilman Pickler
seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. (10:25 a.m.)
AFTER RECESS: The Mayor called the meeting to order, all Council Members
being present. (12:15 p.m.)
112: ELIZABETH FISHER VS. CITY OF ANAHEIM: Councilman Roth moved to
authorize the City Attorney to settle Municipal Court, North Orange County
Judicial Distrlet Case No. A-32033 for a sum not to exceed ~6,000 (glizab,th
Fisher vs. City of Anaheim). Councilman Bay seconded the motion. MOTION
CARRIED.
114/106: TRIP TO SISTER CITY, MITO~ JAPAN: Mayor Roth requested permission
to lead the 75- to 100-member delegation being planned to Anaheim's Sister
City of Mito, Japan, as well as the opening of Disneyland-Tokyo, for
approximately 15 days in April. He would be absent from two Council
meetings. As well, he would expect the same courtesy extended to other Mayors
or leaders of similar delegations that his expenses be paid for air fare and
hotel accommodations amounting to $1,650. To avoid escalation of the cost, he
requested that amount be authorized and paid immediately.
29
City Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 18~ 1983, 10:00 A.M.
MOTION: Councilman Pickler moved that permission be granted for Mayor Roth to
lead a delegation to Mito, Japan, and the opening of Disneyland-Tokyo, for
approximately 15 days in April, and approving the budgeted expenditure of
~1,650 for air fare and hotel accommodations. Councilman Overholt seconded
the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
RECESS: Councilman Roth moved to recess to public hearing time at 1:30 p.m.
Councilman Overholt seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. (12:17 p.m.)
AFTER RECESS: The Mayor called the meeting to order, all Council Members
being present with the exception of Councilman Pickler. (1:30 p.m.)
176: PUBLIC HEARING - ABANDOk~4ENT NO. 82-7A: In accordance with application
filed by California Castles, Inc., public hearing was held on proposed
abandonment of a former Southern California Edison Company public utility
easement acquired by the City, as Successor, located east of Beach Boulevard,
south of Stonybrook Drive, pursuant to Resolution No. 82R-615, duly published
in the Anaheim Bulletin and notices thereof posted in accordance with law.
Report of the City Engineer dated December 17, 1982, recommended unconditional
approval of said abandonment.
Mayor Roth asked if anyone wished to address the Council; there being no
response, he closed the public hearing.
ENVIROKMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION: On motion by
Councilwoman Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Bay, the City Council ratified
the determination of the Planning Director 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 was absent. MOTION CARRIED.
Councilwoman Kaywood offered Resolution No. 83R-22 for adoption, approving
Abandonment No. 82-7A. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 83R-22: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM VACATING A PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT, LOCATED EAST OF BEACH BOULEVARD,
SOUTH OF STONYBR00K DRIVE. (82-7A)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MMMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Kaywood, Overholt, Bay and Roth
None
Pickler
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 83R-22 duly passed and adopted.
3O
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 18~ 1983, 10:00 A.M.
103: PUBLIC HEARING - CERRITOS--FREEWAY ANNEXATION: Submitted by the
Planning Department, to consider the annexation of two unincorporated County
islands having a combined area of approximately 47.46 acres located in the
vicinity of Cerritos Avenue and the Orange Freeway (Route 57).
The Mayor asked if anyone wished to speak.
Mr. Jay Adam Sills, 11260 Platte Drive, Riverside, Foundry Investments, owner
of the real property located at 14242 Winston Road, submitted a letter of
protest to the proposed annexation. The objection to the annexation is based
on the belief it would not be in their best interests.
There being no further persons who wished to speak, the Mayor closed the
public hearing.
Councilwoman Kaywood asked how much property Foundry Investments owned.
Mr. Joel Fick, Assistant Planning Director--Planning, answered that he had not
had a chance to read the letter just submitted. However, assuming that it was
a protest of 8.8 acres, that particular parcel had the majority valuation of
the privately-owned parcels. As he understood the Municipal Organization Act,
two options were available to the Council at this time. They could terminate
the annexation or request the Executive Officer of LAFCO to request the County
Assessors office to assign a value to the publicly-owned parcels, including
the CalTrans property.
Mayor Roth stated he had a memorandum from the City Attorney recommending that
the matter be held over for two weeks to obtain a value of the publicly-owned
properties.
MOTION: Councilwoman Kaywood moved to continue a decision on the Cerritos
Freeway Annexation for two weeks, to allow an opportunity for LAFCO to assign
a value to the publicly-owned parcels. Councilman Roth seconded the motion.
Councilman Pickler was absent. MOTION CARRIED.
Councilman Pickler entered the Council Chambers. (1:38 p.m.)
175: JOINT HEARING--INTERMOUNTAIN POWER PROJECT: A joint hearing with the
Public Utilities Board to consider downsizing of the Intermountain Power
Project from four units to two units.
Chairman of the Public Utilities Board (PUB), Mr. Ken Keesee, called the Board
to order, all Board Members being present, with the exception of Wynn Anderson.
Mayor Roth asked to hear first from the Public Utilities General Manager.
Mr. Gordon Hoyt, Public Utilities General Manager, first introduced the
following people who were present in the Chambers audience and who were
subsequently prepared to answer any questions of the Council or the Board:
31
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 18, 1983, 10:00 A.M.
Reece Nielsen, Chairman of the Board, Intermountain Power Agency (IPA); Joseph
Fackrell, Executive Officer, IPA; William Batt, Financial Manager, IPA; Ronald
Rencher, Attorney, IPA; James Anthony, Project Director, Los Angeles
Department of Water and Power (LADWP); Roger Dutton, Project
Architect-Engineer, Black & Veatch; Michael McCarthy, Financial Advisor,
Goldman Sachs; Peter Freund, Financial Advisor, Goldman Sachs; Fenn Putman,
Senior Managing Underwriter, Salomon Bros.; Winston Peterson, Consulting
Engineer for Anaheim, R. W. Beck and Associates; Alan Watts, Attorney for
Anaheim, Rourke and Woodruff; Robert Ferdon, Bond Counsel for IPA, Mudge Rose
Guthrie & Alexander.
Mr. Hoyt then gave a presentation addressing the major issues of the
Intermountain Power Project (IPP) modification, those being, the reduction of
Utah Power and Light Entitlement in IPP, their continuing financial
obligation, refunding of IPA bonds, payments-in-aid of construction, first
supplemental bond resolution, coordinating committee voting rights, options on
contracts for Units No. 3 and 4, and renewal rights beyond June 15, 2027. Mr.
Hoyt's presentation was supplemented by slides, printed copies of which were
submitted to the Council and the Board (on file in the City Clerk's office).
He briefed each document, elaborating upon the salient points contained
therein. The documents included an approval and financing schedule, economic
evaluation--major IPP assumptions and major Edison rate assumptions, the
balance of which were charts and graphs showing projections of Anaheim's
annual power cost with the proposed share of two IPP units, estimated
cumulative savings in power supply costs for Anaheim, estimated annual costs
of power supply, proposed shares in a two-unit, 1500 MW generating station in
Utah and 1600 MW transmission system to Southern California, demand
requirements and energy requirements from firm sources 1983 to 2000 and
projected demand requirements 1983 to 2000. (Also see brochure entitled City
of Anaheim--Public Utilities Department. The cover document in the brochure
was report dated January 10, 1983, from the Public Utilities General Manager,
outlining the recommendation to approve an Amendatory Power Sales Contract
between the Intermountain Power Agency and the City of Anaheim, which would
reduce the size of the Intermountain Power Project from a 4-unit, 3000 MW
electric generating plant to a 2-unit, 1500 MW electric generating plant;
provide that the California purchasers may finance the southern transmission
system and consenting to Articles V and VI of the First Supplemental Power
Supply Revenue Bond Resolution, as well as approving the Lay-off Power
Purchase Contract among Utah Power and Light Company, the City of Anaheim and
the Intermountain Power Agency~ providing the terms and conditions by which
Anaheim would acquire 3 percent (45,000 KW) of contract generation entitlement
share in the Intermountain Power Project. Anaheim's Contract Generation
Entitlement Share, together with Anaheim's Generation Entitlement Share, would
give Anaheim a 13.225 percent interest in the project (198,375 KW), Anaheim' s
present Generation Entitlement Share of the 4-unit project being 10.225
percent, or 306,750 KW. The documentation contained detailed information and
data on the entire issue with 16 attachments, Tab No. 1 through 16 (documents
on file in the City Clerk's office). Mr. Hoyt, in explaining the alternatives
that were open to them, pointed out that if the project were terminated, the
City would have to pay $8,786,000 a year for the next 38 years.
32
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - Januar~ 18, 1983~ 10:00 A.M.
Questions were then posed by Councilman Bay relative to whether an economic
penalty was to be assessed to Utah Power and Light in requesting a reduction
of their entitlement in IPP which were answered by Mr. Hoyt, Mr. Robert
Ferdon, Bond Counsel for IPA, Mudge Rose Guthrie & Alexander, 20 Broad Street,
New York City, and Mr. Joe Fackrell, Executive Officer, IPA. Mr. Fackrell
also pointed out it was their feeling this was the last go-around on changing
participation. At this time, they were able to change the scope of the
project without any participants suffering great harm.
Public Utility Board Members Ken Keesee, Jim Townsend, Richard Haynie and Carl
Kiefer posed questions relative to certain aspects of the proposed
modification, during which Mr. Townsend expressed his concern regarding the
effects of inflation, which he considered to be the dominant factor in the
whole picture on future projections. The questions and concerns raised were
answered by Mr. Winston Peterson, Consulting Engineer for ,~maheim, R. W. Beck
and Associates, 200 Power Building, Seattle, Mr. Ferdon and Mr. James Anthony,
Project Director, Los Angeles Department of Water and Power.
Public Utilities Board Member Joe White stated the subject project tied in
with all their commitments and investments, and he felt a recap of those
projects starting in 1975 with the passage of Proposition A was in order.
After giving an historic overview of those projects, Mr. White stated at this
point, he would reluctantly retain the 10.225 percent of Anaheim's present
generation entitlement share of IPP. He also felt that another major issue
had not been broached, i.e., what effect would the Washington Public Power
Supply System potential default on bonds have on the City's ability to sell
their bonds.
In concluding, Mr. White stated that they had the backup documentation on the
proposal before them less than eight days, and he would not vote yes on any
contract that he had not read or could not understand. If they could not have
sufficient time, his vote was "no." He also questioned and refuted some of
the projections in the chart entitled, "Estimated Annual Cost of Power
Supply," Attachment No. 4 in the brochure.
Mr. Winston Peterson answered Mr. White on the latter, explaining that the
chart under Table 4 was not a depiction of Edison rates, but only a depiction
of the total dollars to be paid to Edison for power~ and included substantial
amounts of growth and usa§e as projected by the City of Anaheim. He also
explained that relative to the situation in Washington and Montana broached by
Mr. White, there was a dramatic difference with regard to how the projects
were put together and why. In the northwest, the purpose was load growth,
whereas relative to IPP, it was to displace purchases over which the City had
less than adequate control. For Los Angeles, it was to get off the purchase
of oil. He reiterated it was the absence of load growth that was causing the
difficulty in the northwest.
Mr. Fenn Putman, Senior Managing Underwriter, Salomon Bros., 1 New York Plaza,
New York City, then addressed the issue of the possible default of bonds in
the northwest and any affect it would have on the IPP project. During his
33
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 18, 1983~ 10:00 A.M.
presentation, he clarified that relative to the Washington Public Power Supply
System, the amount of the bonds was not ~28 billion, but approximately ~2.25
billion currently outstanding on projects 4 and 5, which were the projects in
question. He explained that there was no question that the situation in the
northwest over 1983 would probably deteriorate from what it was today. The
question the City ought to be concerned with was whether that would lock the
City out of the market to continue the progress of their project. If that was
the case, it would be a serious problem, but he did not believe, nor did the
co-managers believe that would happen. It might raise the cost of funds, but
would not stop them from going to the market. If careful attention was not
paid to the project there could be a problem. The Washington Public Power
Supply System offered an opportunity to look at their own situation and make
certain the City did not follow suit.
Public Utilities Board Member Dale Stanton then spoke to the issue stating
that although the cost to "scrap" the project did not bother him, what was of
real concern, if they did not go forward on the project, they would lose the
advantage of getting less expensive power than they were going to get in the
future. Further, they had been searching for alternate sources of power,
which this coal-fired plant provided. It also included a transmission line
which he felt was one of the nicest features of the project.
The Mayor then asked to hear from anyone who wished to speak.
Mr. Pete Nozero, 1230 South West Street, stated that he had worked on two past
committees for the Chamber of Commerce. At this time, he was not speaking for
the Chamber, but as an individual. Also, he had not had an opportunity to
submit a minority report to the Chamber on the subject issue. He then
submitted four sheets, the first two of which referred to Tab No. 1 of the
report submitted to the Council and Board, one entitled, "Without Termination
Costs (~000), Difference in Total Annual Power Costs (IPP-O--IPP-2)," the
other--"With No Growth in Energy Requirement--Total Annual Power Costs," the
both listing figures from 1984 through 1986 (on file in the City Clerk's
office). Mr. Nozero briefed the data contained therein. In concluding, he
recommended first that the project be terminated but failing that, he would
put a hold on it until they found out the effect of the Washington Public
Power Supply System case or that they stay at 10.225 percent participation and
not increase it to 13.225 percent as proposed.
Later in the meeting, Mr. Hoyt stated that in speaking with Mr. Peterson, he
(Peterson) was having difficulty trying to analyze the numbers submitted by
Mr. Nozero, which may have been a simplification in approach.
Councilman Overholt then referred to letter dated January 14, 1983, from
George T. Kilishek, Chairman of the Board, Anaheim Chamber of Commerce,
requesting that the Council defer decision until their Board meeting on
January 27, 1983. He wanted to know whether they were in a position to delay
a decision today.
34
City Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 18~ 1983~ 10:00 A.M.
Mayor Roth explained that the Chamber Task Force voted 4 to 1 in support, as
well as the Executive Board, but that was not their official position until
the Board met on January 27, 1983.
Julie Emerson, Anaheim Chamber of Commerce, 130 South Lemon, clarified that in
order to get a quicker response to the Council, they were polling the Board of
Directors by mail and telephone and expected answers by Friday.
In answer to further questions posed, Mr. Mike McCarthy, Financial Advisor,
Goldman Sachs, addressed the issue of long-term interest rates, Mr. William
Bart, Financial Manager, IPA, spoke on the time frame for selling the bonds,
and Mr. Robert Ferdon spoke to the future refunding of outstanding bonds.
The Mayor then asked if anyone else wished to speak.
Mr. Pat Patterson, 924 North Helena Street, stated he was not speaking as a
Member of the Chamber, although he was Chairman of the City-County Government
Committee of which the IPP Committee was a portion. He was, however, speaking
as a private citizen and wanted to express his concern at the lack of time
they had to consider important issues that came before the City. He asked
that they take all the testimony and expert opinions under advisement and make
a decision not today, but in ten days or two weeks.
Councilman Bay asked for a response on the request for a continuance and the
effect it might have.
Mr. Hoyt answered that one week would not be a big problem, but to go past
next Tuesday would be getting close to a problem, because they needed all of
the approvals of all of the participants by January 31, 1983, in order to go
forward with the financing schedule.
Mayor Roth stated at this time, he felt that the Council could make a
decision, but he first asked that the Public Utilities Board take an action on
the question.
MOTION - PUBLIC UTILITIES BOARD: Board ~ember Stanton moved to (1) adopt the
recommendations in memorandum dated January 10, 1983, from the Public
Utilities General Manager, approving an Amendatory Power Sales Contract
between the Intermountain Power Agency and the City of Anaheim, and approving
the Lay-off Power Purchase Contract among Utah Power and Light Company, the
City of Anaheim and Intermountain Power Agency, which provided the terms and
conditions by which Anaheim would acquire 3 percent (45,000 KW) of contract
generation entitlement share in the Intermountain Power Project; Anaheim's
contract generation entitlement share, together wit'h Anaheim's generation
entitlement share would give Anaheim a 13.225 percent interest in the project
(198,375 KW). Board Member Haynie seconded the motion.
A vote was then taken on the foregoing motion and carried by the following
vote:
35
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - January 18, 1983~ 10:00 A.M.
AYES:
ABSTAINED:
NOES:
ABSE~f:
BOARD MEMBERS:
BOARD MM~BERS:
BOARD M~MBERS:
BOARD MMMBERS:
Stanton, Kiefer and Haynie
Keesee
White and Townsend
Anderson
Councilman Overholt stated he was concerned that the Chamber had not had an
opportunity to carry out their procedure to make a recommendation one way or
the other. He felt there had to be a very good reason to act today, rather
than to give the Chamber an opportunity to at least have a telephone poll by
Friday, or to have them review the issue at their Board meeting of January 27,
1983.
Mr. Hoyt reiterated that there would be no problem delaying a decision for one
week, but he was concerned over any delay beyond that.
MOTION: Councilman Overholt moved that the matter be continued for one week
for final action by the Council. Councilman Roth seconded the motion.
Before a vote was taken, Mr. Les Riddell, President and Chief Executive
Officer, Anaheim Chamber of Commerce, explained for Councilman Overholt that
they had been working as close as possible with the Utility Department, and
that their Board was as informed as it possibly could be. He also clarified
that the poll they were taking was not a telephone poll, but a written
ballot. They were following a normal procedure and they would expect that an
action would be taken by the deadline on Friday.
A vote was then taken on the foregoing motion of continuance. MOTION CARRIED.
Mayor Roth asked that the matter be placed at the beginning of the meeting on
next Tuesday.
ADJOUR/%MENT - PUBLIC UTILITIES BOARD: On motion by Board Member Townsend,
seconded by Board Member Stanton, the Public Utilities Board adjourned.
MOTION CARRIED. (4:28 p.m.)
RECESS - CLOSED SESSION: By general consent, the Council recessed to Closed
Session. (4:29 p.m.)
AFTER RECESS: The Mayor called the meeting to order, all Council Members
being present. (5:05 p.m.)
ADJOURkMENT: Councilman Bay moved to adjourn. Councilman Roth seconded the
motion. MOTION CARRIED. (5:05 p.m.)
LINDA D. ROBERTS, CITY CLERK
BY
Assistant City Clerk
36