Loading...
1981/12/0181-1389 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 1, 1981, 1:30 P.M. The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session. PRESENT: ABSENT: PRESENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Overholt, Kaywood, Bay, Roth and Seymour COUNCIL MEMBERS: None CITY MANAGER: William O. Talley CITY ATTORNEY: William P. Hopkins CITY CLERK: Linda D. Roberts PUBLIC UTILITIES GENERAL MANAGER: Gordon Hoyt POLICE CHIEF: George Tielsch DEPUTY CITY MANAGER: James Ruth RISK MANAGER: John Thomason TRAFFIC ENGINEER: Paul Singer ASSISTANT DIRECTOR FOR ZONING: Annika Santalahti POLICE DETECTIVE: Louis Martin POLICE DETECTIVE: Fred Davis POLICE DETECTIVE: Gary Churchill INVOCATION: Mayor Seymour called the meeting to order and welcomed those in attendance to the Council meeting. A moment of silence was observed in lieu of the Invocation. FLAG SALUTE: Councilman Ben Bay led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. 119: PROCLAMATIONS: The following proclamations were issued by Mayor Seymour and authorized by the City Council: 1. "Toys for Tots" - December 1-20, 1981 2. "Lungs for Life Week" - December 7-11, 1981 3. "1981Katella Knights Band and Pageantry Day" - December 12, 1981 The first proclamation was accepted by Captain Paul W. O'Toole and First Sergeant Dennis Bustillos; the second by Mr. Craig Harelson, and the third by Alexander DeLao, Director. 114: SUMM_ARY REPORT - TRIP TO MITO~ JAPAN WITH THE SISTER CITY EXCH~GE COMMITTEE: Councilman Overholt gave a brief overview of his trip to Mito~ Japan with the Sister City Exchange Committee to participate in the Fifth Annual F. xchange. A more complete report would be provided at the meeting of December 8, 1981. He also presented Mayor Seymour with a small token of appreciation and admiration, asked to be transmitted by Mayor Yoshio Kumagawa, the Mayor of Oriasu delivered to him (Overholt) to be delivered to the Mayor, Oriasu being the municipality in which Disneyland Tokyo was being built. MINUTES: Councilwoman Kaywood moved to approve the minutes of the regular meetings held August 18, September 8 and September 15, 1981, with an amendment to the minutes of September 8, Page 2, Paragraph 5 with the following to be added at the end of that paragraph--(tape stated 23 units). Councilman Roth seconded the motion. Councilman Bay abstained from voting on the minutes of September 15 only, since he was not present. MOTION CARRIED. 81-1390 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 1, 1981, 1:30 P.M. 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 Bay seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. FINANCIAL DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY in the amount of $874,764.12, in accordance with the 1981-82 Budget, were approved. CITY MANAGER/DEPARTMENTAL MOTION CONSENT CALENDAR: On motion by Councilman Bay, seconded by Councilman Roth, the following items were approved as recom- mended: 1. 160: Bid No. 3828: 2,916 feet of twelve-inch Ductile Iron Pipe. Award: United States Pipe and Foundry, $40,997. 2. 175: Approving a utility bill insert for calculating and comparing electric bills. (continued from November 24, 1981 meeting) Council discussion took place relative to the proposed bill insert to be used for calculating and comparing utility bills submitted under memorandum dated November 23, 1981 from Public Utilities General Mahager Gordon Hoyt wherein concern was expressed that the insert could cause additional confusion on the part of the customer and that more calls to the Utilities Department might result. In the final analysis and by general Council consensus, it was deter- mined that (1) the insert be available to customers upon request and (2) if a citizen called or visited the Utilities Department and questioned their bill, normal procedure would be to have a person from staff fill out the form on that customer's particular billing and mail it or hand it to the customer. Mr. Hoyt also confirmed for Councilman Bay that they now listed on the customer-retained portion of the Utility bill whether or not that bill was estimated. 3. 123: Authorizing an administration agreement for the employee medical plan with The First Fund Insurance Administrators, Inc., effective January 1, 1981, and terminating December 31, 1983, and authorizing the Human Resources Director to execute same. 4. 123: Authorizing an agreement with the Anaheim Union High School District for one-half of the cost for the construction of a block wall at the easterly terminus of Chanticleer Road, estimated to be $2,000, plus $225 in engineering costs. 5. 139: Adopting a position of support for the continuance of tax-exempt status of Small Issue Industrial Development Bonds which provide financing of those capital and equipment investment projects of private organizations which are an integral part of a comprehensive, coordinated community revitalization and economic development effort. MOTION CARRIED. 81-1391 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 1, 1981, 1:30 P.M. CITY MANAGER/DEPARTMENTAL RESOLUTION CONSENT CALENDAR: Councilman Roth offered Resolution Nos. 81R-550 and 81R-551 for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. 153: RESOLUTION NO. 81R-550: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT KENNETH G. CHUPIK IS DISABLED WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE PUBLIC F2iPLOYEES' RETIREMENT LAW FOR THE PERFORMANCE OF HIS DUTIES IN THE POSITION OF FIREFIGHTER. (effective October 16, 1981) 153: RESOLUTION NO. 81R-551: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT DERRALL L. GUEST IS DISABLED WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT LAW FOR THE PERFORMANCE OF HIS DUTIES IN THE POSITION OF POLICE OFFICER, MASTER INTERMEDIATE. (effective December 1, 1981) Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: Overholt, Kaywood, Bay, Roth and Seymour None None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 81R-550 and 81R-551 duly passed and adopted. 153: DISABILITY RETIREMENT APPLICATION OF FRED G. DAVIS: Finding and deter- mining that Fred G. Davis is disabled within the meaning of the Public Employees' Retirement Law for the performance of his duties in the position of Police Officer Master Advanced, to be effective December 1, 1981. In memorandum dated October 21, 1981, the Safety Employees Disability Retire- ment Committee (SEDRC) recommended that Mr. Davis be granted an industrial disability retirement to be effective December 1, 1981. Mr. Seth J. Kelsey, attorney, 1600 North Broadway, Santa Aha, stated they were prepared to present testimony not only of Detective Davis, but also of numerous other witnesses relative to Detective Davis' request that he not be retired on disability. He asked that the record of the proceedings include all of the medical reports submitted to the Disability Retirement Committee, as well as all of the personnel file of Mr. Davis inasmuch as it contained personnel evaluations and letters of commendation indicating his (Davis) ability to perform his job at satisfactory or better levels (record on file in the City Clerk's office). Mr. Kelsey then asked to present the testimony of Detective Davis and requested that he be sworn; City Clerk Linda Roberts thereupon administered the oath to Mr. Davis that the testimony he was about to give was true and correct to the best of his belief and knowledge. The testimony given by Mr. Davis in answer to questions posed by Mr. Kelsey was to substantiate his con- tention that he was able to return to work and to clarify that he did not wish to be retired. During the sworn testimony, Mr. Kelsey submitted as an exhibit memorandum dated February 20, 1980 from Lt. Robert Puckett to Sgt. Ronald C. Kasper, asking that it be made a part of the record (on file in the City Clerk's office). 81-1392 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 1, 1981, 1:30 P.M. Mr. Kelsey then asked if Detectives Churchill and Martin were present to testify; they were not present. Mayor Seymour suggested that the Council recess to give the Detectives an opportunity to be present in the Council Chambers. RECESS: By general consent the Council recessed for 10 minutes. (2:16 P.M.) AFTER RECESS: Mayor Seymour called the meeting to order, all Council Members being present. (2:45 P.M.) Mayor Seymour explained that with the concurrence of the City Attorney, as well as Mr. K~lsey, that the remainder of the agenda be taken up first since Detectives Churchill and Martin were not yet available. Later in the meeting (4:30 p.m.), Detective Louis Martin and Detective Gary Churchill arrived in the Council Chambers. City Clerk Roberts administered the oath to both Detectives Martin and Churchill that the testimony theY were about to give was true and correct to the best of their belief and knowledge. Attorney Kelsey then took sworn testimony from both Detectives Martin and Churchill respectively which substantiated testimony given by Mr. Davis that he was capable of performing his duties. Both detectives had received injuries sustained while working for the City, but they testified that the injuries sustained interfered with their ability to carry our their duties only to a minor degree and, further, that the City never applied for a disability retirement for them. Council questioning of the witnesses followed. Mr. Kelsey again requested that the entire personnel file on Mr. Davis as well as evaluations and commendations be made a part of the administrative record; City Attorney Hopkins confirmed that the record before the Council was as sub- mitted to the Safety Employees Disability Retirement Committee and this would be the record that would be considered as part of the administrative record. City Attorney Hopkins then took sworn testimony from Deputy City Manager James Ruth, Chairman of the Safety Disability Retirement Committee, substantiating the Committee's unanimous decision to seek disability retirement for Officer Davis; Mr. Kelsey then questioned Mr. Ruth. The City Attorney then took sworn testimony from the Chief of Police, George Tielsch, with the oath having been administered subsequent to his testimony swearing that the prior testimony and additional testimony was true and correct to the best of his belief and knowledge. Chief Tielsch, in the final analysis, stated that he concurred in the findings of the Committee that the injuries sustained by Mr. Davis rendered him permanently disabled from further performance of his duties as a Police Officer, Master A~vanced and that Mr. Davis be granted a disability retirement as of December 1, 1981. 81-1393 City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 1, 1981~ 1:30 P.M. Council questioning of Chief Tielsch followed, as well as questions posed by Mr. Kelsey. The Chief confirmed for Mr. Kelsey that the major basis for granting the disability retirement related to the medical reports they had before them from competent medical authority stating that Mr. Davis was not capable of performing his duties as a Police Officer, and not the amount of time lost from work. In concluding, City Attorney Hopkins stated that based on the record that had been submitted to the Council, as well as the oral testimony submitted, he recommended that the City Council adopt the resolution proposed by the Safety Employee Disability Retirement Committee granting a disability retirement to Fred Davis, effective December 1, 1981. Mr. Kelsey then stated that the standard for disability retirement under the Mansburger decision and the Government Code was where a person was substanti- ally and permanently incapacitated for the performance of their regular duties. Mr. Davis' regular duties while in the burglary detail were carried out, as the undisputed testimony set forth from Detectives Martin and Churchill substantiated. The time off was for numerous industrial injuries, but he was not to be penalized for that. That was, in fact, happening. Mr. Davis was being penalized for being subject, in the course of his duty, to a number of industrial injuries. He did have a disability, but the extent was no greater than any of those disabilities expressed by the Detectives who testified today and there had been no contrary evidence other than the con- clusion without any support for that conclusion by the Chief that Mr. Davis had difficulty carrying out his assignment in the commercial burglary detail. The only time lost from work in that assignment was due to industrial injuries. There were no permanent sequelae from any of those industrial injuries that interfered substantially with his ability to carry out his duties. He could not have gone out in the field with Detective Churchill, made arrests and done investigations if he was substantially incapacitated. The evidence militated against defining that he was disabled and he should not be penalized for losing a substantially number of time-offs, since that was not the standard. He encouraged them to review every one of the medical reports submitted particularly the conclusions of the doctors, since the weight of their evidence clearly showed that there was not substantial incapacity for the performance of duties within the legal standard of the Government Code. After questioning the City Attorney and Police Chief further, Mayor Seymour surmised that in making their decision if they should find in favor of the resolution, they could not consider the fact that Mr. Davis could continue in commercial burglary with some type of permanent injury and yet perform. They had to look at it in the light as if he were a Police Officer, Master Advanced classification, which meant he had to be physically capable of going out on the beat as they knew it. City Attorney Hopkins reiterated that the resolution specifically stated, Police Officer, Master Advanced--that he (Davis) was incapacitated for that type of work. 81-1394 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 1, 1981, 1:30 P.M. Mr. Davis stated it was his feeling that he could perform in any position on the Anaheim Police Department commensurate with any other individual his age. It would not be fair to compare him with a 21-year old officer. Discussion then followed between Council Members, Mr. Kelsey, Mr. Davis and staff revolving around the economics of the disability retirement from the standpoint of Mr. Davis and the City, at the conclusion of which, Mayor Seymour felt they should move ahead with another medical examination. The case was an unusual one since it involved an Officer who had experienced quite a number of accidents and who, if he decided to take what was being recommended today, would be better off taking that permanent disability. Mayor Seymour continued that there was one doctor, Dr. Moller, who indicated that a permanent and stationary condition existed, but he was the only one. The last doctor to examine Mr. Davis on A~gust 25, 1981 stated otherwise. He was, therefore, not prepared to make a decision and suggested that they either take more time, or if the Council was of a mind to order another medical exam- ination, he was prepared to make that decision. Councilman Overholt asked the advice of the City Attorney relative to a further examination. City Attorney Hopkins answered that if so ordered, it should either be by an agreed medical examiner to be selected with the concurrence of Mr. Davis and his attorney, an independent medical examiner in the Worker's Compensation area which would be one appointed by the Worker's Compensation Appeals Board or the City had the right to send Mr. Davis to another doctor, one considered to be an independent person who would give an impartial medical examination and opinion. He would recommend that they select a doctor that the Council and the Risk Management Division felt was an independent doctor and send Mr. Davis to that doctor. Councilwoman Kaywood felt that there was no need to continue a decision and no need for another examination, because all she could see if one or the other side disagreed, was another examination. They had more than enough documenta- tion to make a decision at this time. MOTION: Councilman Seymour moved that the City Manager order another physical examination of Mr. Davis by a dpctor of the City's choice and upon completion of that examination, that the results be brought back to the Council for further deliberation and a final decision. Councilman Overholt seconded the motion. Before a vote was taken, Mr. Davis stated if they were going to get an exam- ination that would be acceptable, he would suggest that it be given by a non- partisan, non-biased, agreed-upon medical examiner, rather than someone appointed by the City. Councilwoman Kaywood expressed her concern that there would be no end to the situation and ordering another medical examination would just be an additional expenditure of City funds. 81-1395 City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 1, 1981, 1:30 P.M. A vote was then taken on the foregoing motion. Councilwoman Kaywood voted "no". MOTION CARRIED. Mr. John Thomason, Risk Manager, clarified that the medical doctor chosen would be requested to evaluate Officer Davis in the light of his being able to perform all of the actions required of a Police Officer, Master Advanced. One of the reasons for the conflicting medical testimony was the fact that the doctors had been evaluating the various injuries. The ordered examination would be an evaluation of the total person to perform that job. Councilman Overholt stated that the opinion should be an evaluation of the statutory definition of a disability, a succinct medical opinion. Discussion and consideration of the foregoing disability retirement ended at 5:56 p.m. 172: TRAFFIC CAPACITY CONSTRICTION - LAKEVIEW AND LA PALMA AVENUES: Report dated November 16, 1981 relating to traffic capacity constriction at the intersection of Lakeview and La Palma Avenues was requested by Councilman Bay at the meeting of October 27, 1981 (see minutes that date) and discussion continued from November 24, 1981. MOTION: Councilman Bay moved that the Council concur in concept with option "c" of the subject report for the full development and improvement of the La Palma/Lakeview intersection, leaving open the time and funding until Mr. Norm Priest, Executive Director of Community Development, had time to study the matter and report back to the Council. Councilman Roth seconded the motion. Before action was taken, discussion followed between Council and staff at the conclusion of which, Mayor Seymour stated that although he supported the motion, he did not see that there would be any relief to the traffic conges- tion coming out of option "c" for a year; Councilman Bay stated he intended to revert to option "a" as an interim measure, with the $2,200 necessary for the modification to be appropriated from the Council Contingency Fund. Councilman Bay amended his motion to include the following: That option "c" as outlined in the report dated November 16, 1981 from the Traffic Engineer be initiated as an interim proposal, with funds to be appropriated from the Council Contingency Fund and reimbursed out of Redevelopment Funds on concurrence of Mr. Priest. A vote was then taken on the foregoing motion including the amendment. MOTION CARRIED. 123: C-K LIMITED PARTNERSHIP - DEFERRING INSTALLATION OF CURBS~ GUTTERS~ AND SIDEWALKS: On motion by Councilman Roth, seconded by Councilman Overholt, an agreement was authorized with C-K Limited Partnership deferring installation of curbs, gutters, and sidewalks for the property located at 3071 East Coronado Street, approved at the Council meeting of September 15, 1981 under Resolution No. 81R-436 (Reclassification No. 61-62-69(94)) and as recommended in memorandum dated November 25, 1981 from the City Attorney's office. Councilman Bay abstained since he was not present at the September 15, 1981 meeting when the matter was discussed. MOTION CARRIED. 81-1396 City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 1, 1981~ 1:30 P.M. 105: APPOINTMENT TO THE PROJECT ~RIEA COMMITTEE (PAC) AND THREE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONS: Consideration of an appointment of a member to fill a vacancy on the Project Azea Committee for the term ending June 30, 1983, was submitted. (continued from November 24, 1981 meeting) Mayor Seymour reported that he had received a request from two Council Members to continue the subject appointment either one or two weeks and at that time, they could also consider filling vacancies existing on the Golf Course Commission, Community Services Board and Youth Commission. (The five remaining terms on the Youth Commission were also due to expire December 31, 1981.) Councilman Bay moved to continue appointments to fill the vacancies existing on the four subject commissions for two weeks. Councilwoman Kaywood seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. 162: REQUEST FOR THE USE OF A CITY-OWNED PARKING LOT - ALANA CLUB OF ORANGE COUNTY: A request by Bill J. Rardon, in letter dated October 20, 1981 for permission to use the City-owned parking lot located at the northwest corner of Broadway and Lemon Street to conduct a rummage sale (continued from the meeting of November 24, 1981), was submitted. Mr. Bill Rardon, Manager, was present and confirmed for the Mayor that he had discussed the matter with the City Attorney's office and agreed to provide an insurance binder ho'lding the City harmless and that the lot would be cleaned by the Alana Club after the event which was to be held December 12 and 13, 1981, on a one-time basis only. MOTION: Councilman Roth moved to approve the request of the Alana Club to use the City-owned parking lot at the northwest corner of Broadway and Lemon Street on December 12 and 13, 1981, to conduct a rummage sale, subject to providing an insurance binder and lot clean-up by the Alana Club after the event. Councilwoman Kaywood seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. 108: ANAHEIM WEALTH SPA - REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL EXTENSION OF THE PERIOD OF ABATEMENT: Request by Mr. David Saller, Anaheim Health Spa, 1771 West La Palma Avenue, for an additional extension of the abatement period pursuant to Code Section 18.89.040 relating to Adult Entertainment, was submitted. On motion by Councilman Roth, seconded by Councilman 0verholt, consideration of the subject request was continued one week, as requested by staff and agreed to by Mr. Saller. MOTION CARRIED. 129: PUBLIC FIREWORKS DISPLAY PERMIT: On motion by Councilman Bay, seconded by Councilman Overholt, application for a Public Fireworks Display Permit sub- mitted by Disneyland Entertainment Division was approved to discharge fire- works on December 3, 1981, for one-and-a-half minutes between approximately 8:00 and 8:30 p.m., in the guest parking lot at the Park, as recommended by the Fire Marshal. MOTION CARRIED. 81-1397 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 1~ 1981~ 1:30 P.M. 107: CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING - 1981 EDITION OF NATIONAL ELECTRICAL CODE: To consider adoption of the 1981 Edition of the National Electrical Code, with amendments thereto, and adding a new Chapter 15.16 to Title 15 of the Anaheim Municipal Code (continued from the meeting of November 3, 1981--see minutes that date). Mayor Seymour asked Mr. Bryan Vaughan, Chairman, Building Codes Committee, Orange County Chapter, Building Industry Association of Southern California, Inc., if he had received a copy of the extensive staff report dated November 23, 1981; Mr. Vaughan answered that he had not received a copy. The Mayor felt that Mr. Vaughan should have an opportunity to read the report and suggested a one-week continuance of the matter; Councilwoman Kaywood objected to any continuance since she contended that Mr. Vaughan could read the report at the meeting, as well as the fact that in considering something that could cause fires, the longer they waited, the worse the situation could become. MOTION: On motion by Councilman Overholt, seconded by Councilman Bay, public hearing on the adoption of the 1981 Edition of the National Electrical Code, with amendments thereto, was continued to December 8, 1981, 3:00 p.m. Councilwoman Kaywood voted "no". MOTION CARRIED. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2270: Application by Robert W. and Janet M. White, to permit a billboard on ML zoned property located at 806 North Brookhurst Street, with Code waivers of a) permitted location, b) maximum size, c) maximum height. The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution PC81-217 reported that the Planning Director had determined that the proposed activity falls within the definition of Section 3.01, Class 11, of the City of Anaheim guidelines to the requirements for an EIR and is, therefore, categorically exempt from the requirement to file an EIR and further, denied CUP No. 2270. The decision of the Planning Commission was appealed by Jay Kingry, Metropolitan Outdoor Advertising, agent, and public hearing scheduled and continued from the meeting of November 10, 1981. The Mayor asked to hear from the applicant or applicant's agent. Mr. Jay Kingry, representing Metropolitan Outdoor Advertising, 101 East Huntington Drive, Arcadia, spoke in favor of the granting of CUP No. 2270, to permit the proposed billboard of 672 square feet which was allowed by Code under a Conditional Use Permit. It was a unique location in that there was no imposition on residential property or blocking of other business signs. The location was compatible with surrounding land uses. In making a contract with Mr. and Mrs. White, the owners of the property, they told him it was their goal to sell or improve the property within the next three to five years. He, therefore, negotiated a five-year lease with them, but in that lease it stated that he would have to remove the sign anytime upon a 60-day notice that the 81-1398 City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December ir 1981~ 1:30 P.M. property was going to be improved. Further, if the Council read the CUP, he asked that all seven conditions recommended by staff (outlined on Page 9-d of the staff report to the Planning Commission) be deleted with the exception of Item No. 5 because the sign would not require water, street lighting, trash receptacles, police protection, etc., but only electricity. Theirs was an inanimate object imposing on no one. During the course of Council questioning of Mr. Kingry, ne stipulated that the sign would not be visible from the freeway and that he was agreeable that the permit would expire at the end of five years. Councilwoman Kaywood expressed her concern that the sign was more than doubled than that allowed and that many times a temporary use became permanent. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION: On motion by Council- woman Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Roth, the City Council ratified the determination of the Planning Director that the proposed activity falls within the definition of Section 3.01, Class 11, 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. MOTION CARRIED. Councilwoman Kaywood offered a resolution denying Conditional Use Permit No. 2270, upholding the findings of the Planning Commission for all the reasons stated. Mayor Seymour stated he was going to oppose the resolution since the location and property upon which the billboard was to be placed would not adversely impact anyone; Councilman Overholt stated he was going to oppose the resolution for the same reasons articulated by the Mayor and further considering the stipulations made by the applicant, that the use would last less than five years. Councilman Bay stated he was going to support the resolution to deny based on the precedent effect of a sign twice what the ordinance permitted as well as being 35 feet high with 27 feet being permitted. He agreed with the findings of the City Planning Commission. A vote was taken on the foregoing resolution and failed to carry by the following vote: Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood and Bay Overholt, Roth and Seymour No ne 81-1399 Cit~ Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 1, 1981, 1:30 P.M. Councilman Roth offered Resolution No. 81R-552 for adoption, granting Conditional Use Permit No. 2270, reversing the findings of the City Planning Commission and further: (1) eliminating Condition Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 6 and 7 of Interdepartmental Committee recommendations; (2) in the event new construction takes place, the sign will be removed; (3) that the C.U.P. will expire in five years; and (4) that the sign will not be sighted from the Santa Aha Freeway. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 81R-552: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2270. Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Overholt, Roth and Seymour Kaywood and Bay None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 81R-552 duly passed and adopted. PUBLIC HEARING -- CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2104 - EXTENSION OF TIME: Submitted by George and William Nichols, requesting an extension of time to Conditional Use Permit No. 2104, to permit a public dance hall on CL zoned property located at 919 South Knott Street. The request for extension of time was approved by the Planning Commission, to expire September 2, 1982. A review of the Planning Commission's action was requested by Councilman Roth at the Council meeting of October 27, 1981 (see minutes that date), and public hearing scheduled tais date. The City Clerk announced that staff was requesting a continuance to January 5, 1982, 3:00 p.m., to allow time for the submission of a sound study previously authorized by the Council. The Mayor asked if anyone was present to speak on the requested extension of time; there were two people in the Chambers audience who were present on the subject request, but they indicated they had no problem with the matter being continued. MOTION: On motion by Councilman Roth, seconded by Councilwoman Kaywood, public hearing on the extension of time to Conditional Use Permit No. 2104 was continued to January 5, 1982, at 3:00 p.m. MOTION CARRIED. 176: PUBLIC HEARING - ABANDONMENT NO. 81-8A: In accordance with application filed by Beam Development Company, public hearing was held on proposed abandonment of a portion of Canyon Rim Road located on the south side of Canyon Rim Road, west of Serrano Avenue, pursuant to Resolution No. 81R-529 duly published in the Anaheim Bulletin and notices thereof posted in accordance with law. 81-1400 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 1~ 1981, 1:30 P.M. Report of the City Engineer dated October 2, 1981 and a recommendation by the Planning Commission were submitted, recommending approval of said abandonment subject to the following conditions: 1. That a public utility easement be reserved to accommodate existing electrical facilities. 2. Removal and reconstruction of the existing street improvements within the abandonment area are to conform to the precise grading plan for Tract No. 10941. 3. The sprinkler system located within the abandonment area shall be discon- nected from the City's system and connected to the Homeowner's Association system, subject to the approval of the Parkway Maintenance Supervisor. Mayor Seymour asked if anyone wished to address the Council; there being no response, he closed the public hearing. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION: On motion by Council- woman Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Overholt, 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. MOTION CARRIED. Councilwoman Kaywood offered Resolution No. 81R-553, approving Abandonment No. 81-8A. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 81R-553: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM VACATING A PORTION OF CANYON RIM ROAD, WEST OF SERRANO AVENUE. (81-8A) Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Overholt, Kaywood, Bay, Roth and Seymour None No ne The Mayor declared Resolution No. 81R-553 duly passed and adopted. 123/164: PUBLIC HEARING - LAKEVIEW SEWER REIMBURSE~fENT DISTRICT AND LAKEVIEW SEWER REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT: To consider adoption of a local sanitary sewer plan and map for the Lakeview 0ffsite Sewer Reimbursement area encompassing the undeveloped area south of Peralta Hills to the Orange City Limits and Tract Nos. 8116, 8117 and 9864; and approval of a reimbursement agreement therefor. Report of the City Engineer dated November 6, 1981 was submitted recommending the establishment of sewer fees for the Lakeview Sewer District at $890 per acre and entering into the subject reimbursement agreement with Texaco-Anaheim Hills, builders of a portion of the off-site sewer system. 81-1401 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December It 1981~ 1:30 P.M. The Mayor asked if anyone wished to speak to the subject reimbursement district and reimbursement agreement; there being no response, he closed the public hearing. Councilwoman Kaywood offered Resolution No. 81R-554 for adoption, adopting a sewer plan and map for the Lakeview Offsite Sewer Reimbursement area encompas- sing the undeveloped area south of Peralta Hills to the Orange City Limits and Tract No. 8116, 8117 and 9864. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 81R-554: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COONCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ADOPTING A LOCAL SANITARY SEWER PLAN AND MAP FOR THE LAKEVIEW OFFSITE SEWER REIMBURSEMENT AREA PURSUANT TO SECTION 17.08.430 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE. Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL M_EMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Overholt, Kaywood, Bay, Roth and Seymour None None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 81R-554 duly passed and adopted. MOTION: Councilwoman Kaywood moved to authorize a Lakeview Sewer Reimburse- ment Agreement with Texaco Anaheim Hills, Inc. Councilman Overholt seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. Before closing, the City Attorney confirmed for Councilwoman Kaywood that the agreement was signed by the Vice President of Texaco Anaheim Hills which he believed was still the correct designation, but he would check to see that no name change was involved before finalization. CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS: On motion by Councilman Roth, seconded by Council- woman Kaywood, the following actions were authorized in accordance with the reports and recommendations furnished each Council Member and as listed on the Consent Calendar Agenda: 1. CORRESPONDENCE: The following correspondence was ordered received and filed: a. 105: Community Center Authority--Minutes of November 9, 1981. b. 105: Project Area Committee--Minutes of November 10, 1981. c. 175: Before the Public Utilities Commission, Application No. 61035, in the matter of the Application of Southern California Edison Company for an Ex Parte Order authorizing rates pursuant to its Conservation Load Management Adjustment Clause (CLMAC), to be made effective for electric service rendered on and after 3anuary 1, 1982, to recover Solar Rebate Program expenses. d. 105: Anaheim Public Library Board--Minutes of September 16 and October 21, 1981. 81-1402 City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 1, 1981, 1:30 P.M. e. 140: Anaheim Public Library Monthly Statistical Report--October, 1981. 2. 129: CONTRACT CHANGE ORDERS: In accordance with recommendations of the City Engineer, the following Change Orders were approved: a. Fire Station No. 6, 1330 South Euclid Street~ Contract Chan~e Order No. 2: Authorization for Contract Change Order No. 2 in the amount of $1,634.40, bringing the original contract price to $31,846.40. Account No. 24-915-7107. Martin Resnick Construction, contractor. b. Fire Station No. 8~ 4555 East Riverdale Avenue~ Contract Chan~e Order No. 3: Authorization for Contract Change Order No. 3 in the amount of $10,328.77, ~-~inging the original contract price to $500,697.91. Account Nos. 11- and 47-914-7107. Magnus Company, contractor. MOTION CARRIED. CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS: Councilwoman Kaywood offered Resolution Nos. 8IR-555 and 81R-556, for adoption in accordance with the reports, recommendations and certifications furnished each Council Member and as listed on the Consent Calendar Agenda. Refer to Resolution Book. 164: RESOLUTION NO. 81R-555: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY REQUIRE THE CONSTRUCTION AND COMPLETION OF A PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, TO WIT: LINDA VISTA RESERVOIR REROOFING PROJECT, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, ACCOUNT NO. 53-619-6329-26410-34200; APPROVING THE DESIGNS, PLANS, PROFILES, DRAWINGS, AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION THEREOF; AUTHORIZING THE CONSTRUCTION OF SAID PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH SAID PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, ETC.; AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO PUBLISH A NOTICE INVITING SEALED PROPOSALS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION THEREOF. (Bids to be opened on December 31, 1981, at 2:00 p.m.) 164: RESOLUTION NO. 81R-556: A RESOLUTION OF IHE 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: MAGNOLIA AVENUE STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENT, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, ACCOUNT NO. 13-791-6325-El120. (Nick Didovic Construction Company) Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL ~MBERS: Overholt, Kaywood, Bay, Roth and Seymour None No ne The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 81R-555 and 81R-556, auly passed and adopted. 81-1403 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 1~ 1981~ 1:30 P.M. 170: FINAL MAP - TRACT NO. 11482: Tract is located at 1524-1532 West Orangewood Avenue and contains a 9-lot, proposed RS-7200 zoned subdivision. On motion by Councilman Roth, seconded by Councilwoman Kaywood, the proposed subdivision, together with its design and improvements, was found to be con- sistent with the City's General Plan, and the City Council approved Final Map, Tract No. 11482, as recommended by the City Engineer in his memorandum dated November 23, 1981. MOTION CARRIED. 142/156: ORDINANCE NO. 4289: Councilman Bay offered Ordinance No. 4289 for adoption. Refer to Ordinance Book. ORDINANCE NO. 4289: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM REPEALING TITLE 4, CHAPTER 4.75 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE AND ENACTING A NEW TITLE 4 CHAPTER 4.75 PERTAINING TO THE TOWING OR IMPOUNDING VEHICLES FROM PRIVATE PROPERTY. Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Overholt, Kaywood, Bay, Roth and Seymour None None The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 4289 duly passed and adopted. 142/107: ORDINANCE NO. 4290 - RELATING TO MOBILEHOME PARK CONVERSIONS: Adding Section 18.02.051 to Title 18, relating to mobilehome park conversions. The City Clerk announced that a Mr. John Dailey wished to address the Council. Mr. John Dailey, Chairman, Golden State Mobilehome Owners League, Inc., stated, having read the proposed Ordinance in its entirety, he found it to be appropriate for the Council to adopt since it would bring Anaheim into line with the State Law. The Ordinance would help the peace of mind of mobilehome owners, but the Council should go a step further and pass a mobilehome only zoning in Anaheim. He then asked that the mobilehome owners who were present in the Chambers audience representing the many parks in Anaheim to stand; there were approximately 50 to 60 people present. He concluded it was time now for the Council to stand up and be counted and to do something for the mobilehome owners in the City. Mayor Seymour then took the opportunity to speak on behalf of the City Council and to commend them for showing the leadership and courage to go "out on a limb" to consider exactly what Mr. Dailey spoke about--permanent zoning for mobilehomes. Staff, under the direction of the Council, had been studying permanent zoning for mobilehome parks and were also presently hard at work trying to identify a relocation park which would hold a large number of mobilehomes. He then gave brief history of all the Council had done and were in the process of doing to accomplish permanent zoning for mobilehomes in Anaheim. 81-1404 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 1~ 1981, 1:30 P.M. Mr. Floyd Farano, Attorney, 2555 East Chapman, Fullerton, representing Westwinds and Riviera Mobilehome Park stated that his clients and his office strongly supported the proposed ordinance and would be disappointed if the Council did not enact it. Councilman Bay offered Ordinance No. 4290 for adoption. Refer to Ordinance Book. ORDINANCE NO. 4290: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ADDING SECTION 18.02.051 TO CHAPTER 18.02 OF TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (mobilehome park conversion) Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNC IL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNC IL MEMBERS: Overholt, Kaywood, Bay, Roth and Seymour None None The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 4290 duly passed and adopted. RECESS: By general consent, the Council recessed for 10 minutes. (3:52 P.M.) AFTER RECESS: Mayor Seymour called the meeting to order, all Council Members being present. (4:07 P.M.) 142/108: ORDINANCE NO. 4291: Councilman Overholt offered Ordinance No. 4291 for adoption. Refer to Ordinance Book. ORDINANCE NO. 4291: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ADDING SECTION 4.52.100 TO TITLE 4, CHAPTER 4.52 PERTAINING TO PEDDLERS AND SOLICITORS. (curbside numbering permit required) Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Overholt, Kaywood, Bay, Roth and Seymour None None The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 4291 duly passe~ and adopted. ORDINANCE NO. 4287 - PROPOSED RM-1000 RESIDENTIAL~ MULTIPLE-FAMILY ZONE: B~ding Chapter 18.35 to Title 18, proposed RM-1000 residential, multiple- family zone, pertaining to clustered dwellings. The item was discussed at the meeting of November 24, 1981 (see minutes that date). Councilman Roth explained for the Mayor that at last week's Council meeting when he (Seymour) was not present, the proposed ordinance was amended by Councilman Bay by two-to-one vote (Councilman Overholt being absent as well) to require a four-fifths vote of the Council for approval of a RM-1000 zone designation on a piece of property (Section 18.35.140). He thereupon asked the City Attorney if there were any other ordinances on reclassifications of property requiring a four-fifths vote of the Council; City Attorney Hopkins answered "no". 81-1405 City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 1, 1981, 1:30 P.M. Mayor Seymour explained that he had reviewed the proposed ordinance particu- larly in relationship to the four-fifths vote amendment over which he had some serious concerns. He questioned whether it would be in violation of the City Charter since the Charter stated that a majority vote on ordinances would be deemed approval. Secondly, setting the City Charter aside, he doubted whether a four-fifths vote would hang together very long since it only took three Council Members to change, amend, adopt or repeal any ordinance. Further, any one Council Member could set a matter for a public hearing. Thus, the public interest as far as an open and complete hearing process was already protected, and the four-fifths vote requirement was inappropriate. Councilman Bay then reiterated his reasoning behind requiring a four-fifths vote, basically that once the RM-1000 zone was established by a simple majority of the Council, it would not be used only for the special projects for which it was intended, but would proliferate throughout the City and be used as much as RM-1200 and RM-3000 and the variances granted thereto. He considered the proposed ordinance another serious change to density usage throughout the City. He did not feel that reducing standards or requirements would solve any problems in the City, but would create more. He would, there- fore, have to oppose the proposed change in the ordinance on the basis that the special projects involved could have been handled individually, unless the four-fifths vote requirement was included in the ordinance. MOTION: Councilman Seymour moved for an amended first reading of Ordinance No. 4287, excluding Section 18.35.140 entitled, Required Vote For Reclassification of Property. Councilman Roth seconded the motion. Before a vote was taken, Councilwoman Kaywood stated she agreed with Council- man Bay and further felt the ordinance could be a very serious way to open the door to something the Council could not see at this point. It set up a new zone and the prospects were frightening. Mayor Seymour then asked the City Attorney to provide them with a written opinion as to the validity of a four-fifths vote requirement on such an ordinance; Councilman Bay stated he would be interested in the City Attorney's opinion on possible legal problems, and he would subsequently abide by that opinion. Perhaps it would not be the way to handle the matter, and it would no doubt force him back to opposing the RM-1000. A vote was then taken on the foregoing motion. Council Members Kaywood and Bay voted "no". MOTION CARRIED. 173: LOZANO TAXI CAB: Councilman Bay stated that at the previous meeting (see minutes November 21, 1981) he made statements about issuing an Order to Show Cause hearing on Lozano Taxi Cab. Since then, he had received information from the Business License Department and the Police Department with some detail on what complaints there had been, citations, etc. His concern was relative to the allegations made during the previous Council meeting where it was alleged that Lozano Taxi was "playing" franchise with their license. He found from information supplied by staff that was true four 81-1406 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 1, 1981, 1:30 P.M. or five months ago, that Mr. Lozano was notified and since corrected the situation. As of now, he (Bay) could find no evidence of violations to their business license nor any reasons extensive or serious enough to call for a Show Cause public hearing. He asked the City Attorney to further advise the Council on the requirements of that business license as it related to franchise or allowing people to put the name of their taxi company on a cab not owned by them, etc. He reiterated, he was not calling for a Show Cause public hearing at this time because he did not have enough documented cause to do so. 120: REPORTED PROBL~S - FUN CENTER~ PROSTITUTION/HARBOR BOULEVARD~ STOP. ER CABLE: Councilman Bay referred to data he had on the following: complaint relative to the Fun Center across from Anaheim High School received from Dale Schroder, Principal; complaint from the manager of Harbor Inn Travel Lodge concerning prostitution activities on Harbor Boulevard, vicinity of Convention Way to Wilken Way; complaint from Pacific Coast Builders regarding problems created by Storer Cable TV during their installation of cable within Tract No. 9749. The City Clerk confirmed that the matters were being investigated by staff and a report would be submitted to the Council. REQUEST FOR CLOSED SESSION: The City Manager requested a Closed Session to discuss personnel labor relations. Councilman Bay moved to recess into Closed Session. seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. (5:57 P.M.) Counc i lman Ove rho 1 t AFTER RECESS: Mayor Seymour called the meeting to order, all Council Members being present. (6:07 P.M.) 153: LETTER OF UNDERSTANDING - AMEA - GENERAL CITY EMPLOYEES UNIT: Council- man Seymour offered Resolution Nos. 81R-557 and 81R-558 for adoption, the first adopting a letter of understanding between the City of Anaheim and the Anaheim Municipal Employees Association, General City Employees Unit, amending the Memorandum of Understanding to include additional job classifications, and the second establishing rates of compensation for classes represented by the AMEA, General City Employees Unit, both as recommended in memorandum dated November 23, 1981 from Human Resources Director Garry McRae. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 81R-557: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ADOPTING A LETTER OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AND ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION, GENERAL CITY EMPLOYEES UNIT. RESOLUTION NO. 81R-558: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 80R-548 WHICH ESTABLISHED RATES OF COMPENSATION FOR CLASSES REPRESENTED BY THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION, GENERAL CITY EMPLOYEES UNIT. 81-1407 City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - December 1~ 1981~ 1:30 P.M. Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Overholt, Kaywood, Bay, Roth and Seymour None None The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 81R-557 and 81R-558 duly passed and adopted. 114: ESTABLISHING COUNCIL POLICY NO. 405: On motion by Councilman Bay, seconded by Councilwoman Kaywood, Council Policy No. 405 was adopted, effective November 24, 1981, pertaining to the processing of hotline complaints from current City employees as recommended in memorandum dated November 16, 1981 from the Human R~sources Director: "It is the policy of the City Council that a copy of all hotline complaints from current City employees concerning wages, hours, and working conditions shall be referred by the City Clerk to the employee's operating department and to the employee organization which represents the employee's classification." ADJOURNMENT: Councilman Roth moved to adjourn. Councilman Bay seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. (6: 10 P.M. ) LINDA D. ROBERTS, CITY CLERK