09/15/2015ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL REGULAR AND REGULAR
AJOURNED MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 15, 2015
The regular meeting of September 15, 2015 was called to order at 3:00 P.M. and adjourned to
4:00 P.M. for lack of a quorum. The regular adjourned meeting of September 15, 2015 was
called to order at 4:01 P.M. in the chambers of Anaheim City Hall, located at 200 S. Anaheim
Boulevard.
The meeting notice, agenda and related materials were duly posted on September 11, 2015.
PRESENT: Mayor Tom Tait and Council Members: Jordan Brandman, Lucille Kring, Kris
Murray and James Vanderbilt.
STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Paul Emery, City Attorney Michael Houston and City Clerk
Linda Andal.
ADDITIONS\DELETIONS TO CLOSED SESSION: None
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON CLOSED SESSION ITEMS: None
CLOSED SESSION:
1. PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION
(Section 54957 (b) of the California Government Code)
Position Title: City Treasurer
2. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS
(Subdivision (a) of Section 54957.6 of the California Government Code)
Agency Designated Representative: Chris Chase
Position Title: City Attorney, City Clerk and City Treasurer
INVOCATION: Pastor Mark Bove, Calvary Chapel Anaheim
FLAG SALUTE: Mayor Pro Tem Lucille Kring
PRESENTATIONS: Recognizing 35th Anniversary of SENECA OC Canyon Acres Guided
Animal Intervention Therapy (GAIT) Program
Allison Maxon thanked the city and the community for being supportive of the GAIT program for
35 years, a program that served the mental health needs of vulnerable children, exposed to
violence, trauma and neglect. She explained the GAIT program brought together horses and
children to develop life and social skills.
Recognizing the Flag Day Essay Contest Winners
CJ Eastman announced that the Flag Day Essay Contest began through the efforts of Frank
and Sally Feldhaus twenty years ago to instill pride and respect for our country. Ms. Eastman
then introduced and recognized the winners from the various schools within the city of Anaheim.
ACCEPTANCE OF OTHER RECOGNITIONS (To be presented at a later date):
Declaring September 2015, as World Alzheimer's Awareness Month
City Council Minutes of September 15, 2015
Page 2 of 29
Declaring September 17 - 23, 2015, as Constitution Week and September
17, 2015, as Citizenship Day
Sharon Corsiglia, Daughters of the American Revolution (Mohave chapter), stated this
September marked the 228'" anniversary of the framing of the U.S. Constitution and she hoped
everyone would take the opportunity to reread the document that established the federal
government and basic human rights.
Declaring September 27, 2015, as World Tourism Day
Charles Harris, Visitors and Convention Bureau, highlighted and recognized the importance of
tourism for the City of Anaheim.
Declaring September 28, 2015, as Family Day — Get Involved/Stay Involved
— A Day to Eat Dinner with Your Children
Declaring September 15 - October 15, 2015, as Hispanic Heritage Month
Declaring October 18 - 24, 2015, as Freedom from Workplace Bullies Week
At 5:20 P.M., Mayor Tait called to order the Anaheim Public Financing Authority and Anaheim
Housing and Public Improvements Authority (in joint session with the City Council).
ADDITIONS/DELETIONS TO THE AGENDAS: None
PUBLIC COMMENTS (all agenda items): Prior to receipt of public comments, a brief decorum
statement was provided by City Clerk, Linda Andal.
Cecil Jordan Corkern, Outreach Homeless Ministries, gave a reading from the scriptures.
Larry Larson stated Anaheim Union High School District had defined the need of $1.3 billion to
bring school infrastructures up to today's standards, explaining this was just one district in the
city. He indicated the proposal to seek city assistance was specifically for campus infrastructure
and maintenance for all schools within the city limits and that no city funds would be used for
salaries, programs, teaching aids or supplies. He added that the recent $249 million bond
measure that passed was equivalent to address 20 percent of the district's needs, and while
none of this was the fault of the students, they suffered the impacts. He urged the city to get
involved and help improve the future of the youth citywide.
Kathy Heard supported Item No. 26, emphasizing this was an opportunity to support low income
families who lived in the midst of such wealth in Anaheim. She urged Council to approve Item
No. 26 and take this opportunity to build up the community.
Lou Noble expressed regret at the numbers of people who spoke against the homeless shelters
advocating on their behalf for a space to be safe. He added the problem would only worsen and
continue unless safe zones and shelters were made available.
R. Joshua Collins, Homeless Advocates for Christ, objected to statements made against the
homeless, citing statistics. He emphasized the urgent nature of this problem and objected to
placing dog parks in parks used by the homeless.
City Council Minutes of September 15, 2015
Page 3 of 29
Dr. Frank Donavan, Superintendent of Magnolia School District, offered the following
clarification regarding Item No. 27, the resolution asking for quality education and quality
schools. He wanted to ensure that the community understood Magnolia School District was a
separate entity, whose board and teachers were proud of their continued academic growth and
he provided data to substantiate his remarks. Dr. Donavan looked forward to continuing the
collaborative relationships with the City of Anaheim, asking that Council look at their
outstanding achievements and programs that focused on the whole child.
Tom Conneen explained he constructed many of the vacation rentals in Anaheim, pulling about
80 plus permits during the last few years, taking blighted homes and fixing them up while
improving the neighborhood.
Sam Olsen addressed vacation rentals, believing the city had in place regulations that could
address any impacts to neighbors. He also suggested forming a committee of owners and
managers to meet regularly with city officials along with neighbors to discuss their concern and
report back to the City Council. He believed Anaheim could be an example to all other cities on
how to manage short-term rentals correctly and that the tax revenue gained from those rentals
could be a blessing.
AI Jabbar, AUHSD trustee, spoke in support of Item No. 26. He recognized the existing
partnership with the City and its corporations but was hoping for additional financial investment.
He objected to Item No. 27, stating the language in the resolution disparaged public schools
when in reality there were now seven gold schools in Anaheim, both high schools and junior
high schools , one California Distinguished School and 1 P21 National Exemplary School, the
first in California. He recommended the city and the district work together to come up with
solutions for the schools and the youth of Anaheim.
Alfonso Rodriguez, teacher and resident, urged Council to visit the schools and see how
deteriorated some of the facilities actually were and consider how additional funds would help
Anaheim students compete on a national level with the goal of a better future.
Dean Elder, Anaheim High School teacher, remarked that many fellow educators and parents of
students had joined him from public schools across the city in support of Agenda Item No. 26.
He added this was an opportunity to work with schools to improve education and solve the
shortage of parks and recreational space for local sports leagues. He addressed funding, test
scores and added teachers strived to meet needs every day and the trustees had been
supportive of programs that met needs and was reflective in the recent awards and recognitions
Anaheim schools received. He added public funds were a resource for public education in
Anaheim, and that independent charter schools were not the answer as corporate charter
schools funneled public controlled taxpayer monies intended for the city's youth into the pockets
of corporations without any guaranteed return on their investment. He urged Council to support
the resolution in Agenda item No. 26 and oppose the resolution in Agenda Item No. 27.
Juan Alvarez, spoke in favor of Agenda Item 26, stating Anaheim's schools needed financial
help to ensure students were provided the same opportunity to achieve as any other student.
He explained he has two sons in the Anaheim district and wanted quality education.
Chuck Robinson, resident, addressed the short-term rental issues, remarking the first time he
was aware of the program was when a 3 bedroom, 1-1/2 bath unit built in 1954 was permitted
as a nine bedroom, seven bathroom structure at the end of his cul-de-sac allowing 29 people
City Council Minutes of September 15, 2015
Page 4 of 29
per night. He came to the city for help with Mayor Pro Tem Kring discussing the CUP process
and the ability for Mr. Robinson to give some input at that time, except the city then changed the
permit to a regulatory use permit which allowed no input. He followed up with photos to the city
outlining the violations adding that the STIR had been rented since June almost every night. He
had a petition of 40 names that were opposed to the unit and asked for the city's help. Mayor
Tait requested details be provided to the City Manager who would provide a report back to
Council.
Jim Arrogast remarked that a residence on Orange Avenue had received seven citations,
parked numerous cars onsite over the years, "jacked up" and wheels off, and was a real blight
on the neighborhood. Nothing was being done and he requested the city take some sort of
action as it had been going on too long. Mayor Tait requested the speaker discuss the details
with the City Manager who would report back to Council.
William Fitzgerald, Anaheim HOME, remarked that 45 years ago there had been an excellent
partnership between schools and the City's Park and Recreation Department. He linked the
loss of school funds to Disneyland and a political culture that supported tourism rather than
schools. He also voiced his opinion on the homeless situation and the city's reaction.
Cecile Eveland, West Ord Way, spoke in support of the proposed vacation rental moratorium,
asking that the city take it one step further and join several neighboring cities by banning all
short term rentals in the city of Anaheim. Last year a petition signed by 30 residents requested
the STRs in their neighborhood be denied and was now asking that the permit be revoked
permanently. She believed residents had a right to peaceful and uninterrupted enjoyment of
their properties and that their community be preserved. She explained STR's had no business
operating in a residential neighborhood with the accompanying noise, disturbances, trash,
strangers illegally parking and the lost privacy of the neighbors.
Jerry Rivera stated he was a resident and product of Anaheim city schools. He urged Council to
approve Item 26, a meaningful partnership with schools and students who would be the future
citizens, taxpayers, and voters of Anaheim.
Carmine Ruggiero, Della Lane, remarked the STIR property adjacent to his home was referred
to as the nightmare on Ord Way, a constant annoyance of noise, people jumping off the roof
into the pool with no supervision or restrictions. He indicated the Code Enforcement Division
was working on the problem, asking Council to provide assistance as well.
Richard Booth addressed the moratorium on vacation rentals, emphasizing there was no clear
definition of a pending application and he had received conflicting information from the City
Attorney's office and the licensing office about whether or not those who had applied for a short
term rental license were still permitted to go through the process if Council passed the
moratorium. In addition, the last sentence of the ordinance discussed the moratorium period or
any extension, and wondered if that section excluded pending applications while other sections
appeared to allow pending applications to be processed. He recommended Council hold off on
the moratorium until all details were clarified and bring it back at a future date. He also
supported the establishment of a joint committee with staff, rental owners, and managers
engaged in solve the problems of irresponsible owners and to balance the interest of STRs and
any impacts.
City Council Minutes of September 15, 2015
Page 5 of 29
Duane Stout remarked he came to work for the city in 1953 chauffeuring the then planning
director who looked at each property that would be considered on an agenda. The director's
focus was on whether the project was good for the neighborhood and good for the city and if
those questions were negative, the project was not recommended. Mr. Stout believed the STRs
were bad for the neighborhoods, having property values plummet for surrounding homes. He
supported the moratorium and was opposed to short term rentals.
Juan Martinez remarked he came out of the Anaheim school system and supported Item No.
26. He spoke to the benefits of keeping schools and libraries open on weekends as a safe
haven for students and of the positive mentoring and tutoring he received that made a
difference his life.
Julie Brunette, resident, explained that she had five STR's in her neighborhood and she had
worked with the property owner who had been cooperative. She was not opposed to vacation
rentals, just the ones that were causing problems and she urged the city to address the problem
owners and use the TOT collected as a source of enforcement revenue.
Valerie Van deZilver stated she managed over 30 vacation rentals in Anaheim and could point
to the positive impacts they had in neighborhoods bringing older homes up to date. She
emphasized owners wanted enforcement and rules and believed there was a way for vacation
rentals and neighbors to co -exist. She recommended that responsible parties be identified and
that complaints be directed to those responsible persons to correct them and to ensure guests
understood the rules. She added property owners and managers wanted to work together with
the city to find solutions to problems.
David Vill, Della Lane, strongly opposed STR's, stating the neighborhoods were being ruined
because vacationers were coming in to have a good time with no restrictions placed on them,
and wondering how permitting 400 vacation rentals could be justified to the voting public.
Mark Carlisle remarked the city has turned Twila Reid Park into a de facto homeless shelter with
the accompanying negative impacts to the residents near that park. The homeless bathed and
did their laundry in bathrooms, collected stolen shopping carts for their belongings and for
some, used drugs and alcohol on a regular basis and in general, disenfranchising nearby
residents. He wanted laws enforced by ending the ability to drink, do drugs, and camp overnight
in the park.
Theresa Carlisle remarked that she had brought photos that represented one day at Twila Reid
Park, asking Council to visit their neighborhood and park and see the problem and challenges
they faced. She suggested a hotline be provided so shopping carts could be confiscated
immediately instead of using Anaheim Anytime where it took 24 hours for the problem to be
resolved. She also suggested that if police could confiscate stolen items, they should be doing
the same for shopping carts, possibly adding a patrol car specifically for that task.
Jodie Mosely, speaking of West Anaheim concerns, remarked the residents near Twila Reid
Park wanted fairness as the city considered the homeless situation and the impacts to residents
who were bullied out of using the park. She added she was tired of asking the city to help and
to change what needed to be changed and the answer should not be to pack up and move out
of Anaheim. She wanted these problems addressed.
Jan Matson, remarked she lived on Bayless Street a walkable distance to downtown Disney, the
hotels, and the park entrance, adding that her neighborhood was coveted by investors in short
City Council Minutes of September 15, 2015
Page 6 of 29
term rentals because of its proximity to entertainment and because it was a well -kept
neighborhood. She stated when these homes were rented, there were issues of noise, busloads
of people and guests hanging outside the property late at night and that when the properties
were vacant which occurred in the off season, the vacant properties caused concern as well.
She emphasized a moratorium was a good beginning, however, residents needed a long-term
solution to preserve neighborhoods, especially when one neighborhood of 24 homes, had 18 of
them converted to STR's.
Scott Casteel, resident, spoke in support for the moratorium on all STRs permits. He thanked
Sandra Sagert for responding to questions for over two hours at a meeting where 50 neighbors
showed up, urging resolution for the impacts and to address the 5-10 applications that were
coming in weekly.
Former Senator Lou Correa, addressed Item No. 26, remarking that the same taxpayers for city
schools were the same taxpayers for city services and that this resolution provided an
opportunity to have the city and the school districts work together in a more efficient use of
taxpayer dollars. He noted that statistics showed that kids got into trouble from 2:00 PM to 6:00
PM and opening up the fields in the afternoons, evenings and weekends, and providing after
school programs meant there was a higher probability of those kids becoming productive
members of society.
Bob Messe, Bayless Street, stated Council had received his letter about the number of STR's
within 100 yards of his house, with his family surrounded by vacationers moving in and out
every weekend, pool parties, and a feeling he was living in a hotel district rather than a single
family residential area. He added when the STIR ordinance was adopted in 2014, no one could
have foreseen how fast this industry had taken off and there was nothing in the ordinance that
protected neighborhoods. He asked Council to approve the moratorium until a study
determined what limits should be placed on his new commercial boom that could impact so
many of Anaheim's residential areas.
Elaine Vaughn, James Way in the Westmont area, remarked she had also hosted a meeting at
her home where Sandra Sagert answered questions from 55 neighbors regarding vacation
rentals. She asked for implementation of the moratorium remarking that the problem was having
strangers driving in and out of your neighborhood on a regular basis. She felt the business had
no place in single family neighborhoods, supported the moratorium, and hoped any new
licenses would be denied.
June Hamze stated she moved from LA to Anaheim in 1972 to raise her children and send them
to good schools. Her children and grandchildren still live in the neighborhood although they
could no longer visit Twila Reid Park. She emphasized that living in a park should not be an
option for the homeless and it was the responsibility of local government to provide for the
safety of citizens in their homes and in their neighborhoods. She urged Council to make her
neighborhood safe and allow the residents to live in peace.
Francisco Aviles Pino spoke in support of the resolution regarding financial support for Anaheim
schools, hoping that the discussions resulting from this resolution were student focused and
student centered. He believed if the city invested in the youth, there would be more students
seeking higher education.
City Council Minutes of September 15, 2015
Page 7 of 29
Weston Saunders addressed short term vacation rentals, remarking he flew in from Utah
specifically for a chance to speak on this issue. He suggested the major concern was the
proliferation of rentals along with the complaints. He believed the existing code provided for due
process in vetting and eliminating poorly run operations, asking if the 300 complaints that had
been received were confirmed and if the three strike rule was being enforced. He asked council
to consider enacting the moratorium but not the urgency ordinance, asking that additional input
be received from property owners as well as nearby residents.
Kaiss Robles, Anaheim High School 2014, spoke of his personal challenges and dreams and
how programs such as GearUp, the Police Chief's Advisory Council, and his internship with the
Community Services Department were vital to changing his outlook on life. He hoped that
speaking about his experience as one of thousands of other students in the city, that it
encouraged Council to invest and improve Anaheim schools.
Rodolfo Acevedo remarked his involvement with the GOALS organization at Anaheim High
School was the reason he was here to advocate for Agenda Item No. 26, emphasizing that one
of the best ways this funding could help students was by helping to keep schools open on the
weekend, similar to schools in the city of Irvine. Providing a safe environment for kids to play
along with access to the internet for those students who fell behind because they did not have
access to a computer or the internet at home was necessary for student's success.
Sergio Nieto, spoke on behalf of Item No. 26, urging the City Council to invest in the youth that
would be the leaders of tomorrow. He hoped some of the funding could be used for
organizations like the BROS Club that developed students into good leaders or in keeping
school facilities open on the weekends
Daniel Ayala spoke in support of Item No. 26, stating he was a BROS member. He stated that
keeping schools open on the weekends would benefit all students, offering a safe place for
studying, tutoring and helping one another. He hoped to leave his school in a better place than
when he attended with the passage of this resolution.
Jeff LeTourneau emphasized people needed food, shelter and a place to sleep and the city
should start thinking about how to fix the problem rather than chasing them out of one park to
another part of the city. He also supported the Anaheim Union High School District request for
school funding and investing in the city's youth as a priority. He objected to Agenda Item No.
27, stating it supported for-profit charter schools and had nothing to do with access to
educational choices.
Dina Hernandez spoke in support of Agenda Item No. 26.
Elizabeth Jabaz, North James Place, Westmont, asked the Council to return her neighborhood
to what it originally was- a family oriented, stable neighborhood, not a commercial zone. She
strongly opposed short term rentals in residential areas.
Irma Pizano spoke against short term rentals
Annemarie Randle-Trejo, Trustee, AUHSD, appreciated those who spoke in support of Anaheim
schools and students. She reported eight schools had been designed as California Gold
demonstrating elevations in academic achievement as they transition to new state standards —
Anaheim, Savannah, Loara, Brookhurst, Dale, South Sycamore and Walker Jr. High. Five
City Council Minutes of September 15, 2015
Page 8 of 29
schools were ranked as California Distinguished schools: Cypress, Kennedy, Western,
Lexington and Walker while the Oxford Academy awarded a National Blue Ribbon School and
was representative of the entire district as it draws students from across the district and was
also ranked as the Number 1 school in Orange County. In addition Savannah High School was
a P21 National Exemplary School, the first and only in the state to be designated for its
innovative approaches to the 21st century teaching and learning. She went on to list the silver
and bronze medals as well, pointing out that these awards honored college and career
readiness measures.
Dr. Patricia Adelekan spoke in support of the students of Anaheim and investing in their future.
She encouraged the community to visit the schools and take an interest in a school, a
classroom, a teacher or a student and become a positive role model and resource going
forward. She spoke of the Youth on the Move nonprofit organization that helped youths succeed
in life through positive role models and retired teachers who partnered and mentored with
students and teachers. She invited all to attend the next Hall of Fame event for Youth on the
Move this October.
Ryan Ruelas, resident, remarked as a teacher in Anaheim High School he had been club
advisor to many different organizations, working with the BROS club that focused on increasing
the amount of Chicano Latino males at university level. He thanked Council for their generosity
to BROS as guest speakers and to their commitment in making Anaheim the first P21 city in the
nation. He urged Council to continue to invest in the youth and approve Agenda Item No. 26.
Jose Moreno, West James Way, supported the moratorium on short term rentals, remarking it
was time to step back and take a look at the impacts of this program on residents. Regarding
Item No. 26, he stated it was clear the city had invested in the children of tourists through its
budgetary decisions over the years and that now was the time to do the same for the children of
Anaheim.
Oliver Rodriguez, Alexa Rosa and Berlin Ballad, students at various Anaheim schools, invited
the community to attend the annual Anaheim Performing Arts Conservatory Gala on September
26th at Cook Auditorium, a fund raiser for arts in schools (www.anaheimhs.oM ).
Mike Diaz, Westmont neighborhood, agreed with the moratorium vote in practice but not in
principle because he wanted short term rentals banned all together. He pointed out that this
legislation opened the gates for vacation rentals because it implied they should exist, although
none of his neighbors would agree. He asked Council to unwind the regulation that they put in
place and stop this business as Aliso Viejo did.
Mayor Tait responded that the regulation did not create the vacation rentals, they were in
Anaheim long before and the Ordinance was the city's attempt to put controls in place.
Marisol Ramirez asked the Council to support and invest in Anaheim schools and its students,
the future workers, parents, and homeowners of Anaheim.
An unidentified speaker stated she had raised her son through the local schools and that this
was to be her "forever" home. She remarked her son was a teacher in the AUHSD and that she
worked in the office at Walker Jr. High for 25 years, encouraging the city to support the school
district in any way possible. She was also concerned with the proliferation of short term rentals
in family neighborhoods, especially housing tracts within walking district of the Resort. She
City Council Minutes of September 15, 2015
Page 9 of 29
emphasized the loss of peace and quiet and was looking at STR's originally built for small
capacity and now renting out with a capacity for 22 vacationers. She supported the moratorium
and working together to find a resolution to bring back neighborhoods
Dan O'Brien, Sycamore Jr. High, supported the city helping out the school districts, remarking
he would like to be able to play sports with his friends because Anna Drive had no outdoor
space for its residents.
Yesenia Rojas urged the city to support Agenda Item 26 to provide better resources for the
students. She shared that she and other parents had asked the Sycamore Jr. High School to
open their gates for students outside of school hours and had been told there were no funds to
support the gates being open. She stated this collaboration between the city and the schools
would benefit not only the kids on Anna Drive, but the entire city was well.
Talmadge Price, owner of STRs in the area offered his perspective as a property owner. He
stated he ultimately decided on Anaheim because it had Disneyland as an anchor and he
wanted to offer family -friendly homes. He explained that in 2011 he spoke to the city and was
told there was no difference between a short-term rental versus a long-term rental. He
appreciated the city's policy to control and regulate STR's, noting that it addressed occupancy,
trash, noise and parking, but felt that enforcement needed to improve and that the moratorium
was necessary to stop the proliferation of STRs to allow Code Enforcement to catch up. He
suggested using TOT revenues to help get the resources for Code Enforcement efforts but was
opposed to not allowing building permits to be issued for anyone with an STIR because it meant
that certain repairs, such as replacing a leaking shower, could not be done.
Julie King managed four vacation rentals in Anaheim for eight years and every single property
she acquired was blighted and brought up to date. She added that with the creation of the
regulations, she attended the meeting in which owners were asked to speak and appreciated
that effort, emphasizing all the owners and managers wanted to abide by the rules; she shared
that she put a rule book in each of her homes and had given her phone number to residents.
She added she worked with the neighbors, paid taxes, and did not place a burden on schools
and recommended using rental TOT as a source of revenue for the schools.
Maria Rosa Guzman remarked she had been involved in the community for many years and
recognized how difficult it was for students to find a safe place to study and play. She hoped
the city would approve the collaboration with the school districts, improve the schools, and
support the youth of tomorrow.
Jeanine Robbins stated she lived south of Stoddard Park, a neighborhood of 55 homes of which
eight were STRs and two more were being remodeled for that purpose. She emphasized that
one of the homes was originally a four bedroom/2 bath and was now expanded to six bedrooms
with four bathrooms that would accommodate 22 people under the current regulations, a
practice that was destroying the small bedroom community. She also mentioned that three
major rental websites currently listed 470 short term rental units in Anaheim stressing that
visitors should be using the over 55,000 hotel rooms in the city and leave the neighborhoods to
the neighbors.
Cecilia Ochoa asked Council to support Palm Lane School, an effort by parents to use the
"parent trigger law" to provide a quality education through the charter school program. She
City Council Minutes of September 15, 2015
Page 10 of 29
asked Council not to support the school district financially, because parents did not want them
to use the money for things that were not related to school.
Sylvia Lino, resident, asked the city to help provide programs and services for the children in
Palm Lane Elementary specifically because the students were in trouble, academically. She
discussed her personal issue with a child testing below grade level and her requests to the
school for tutoring services were denied. She believed if additional funding support was given,
that better programs and services to help the students would become available.
Alan Bender, vacation rental owner, had listened to the comments and he believed it had come
down to rental properties that were not adhering to the rules and regulations. He remarked
there were many rental property owners who were conscientious and should not be punished
because there were some owners who did not follow the rules. He was an advocate of enforcing
the rules and getting rid of those that did not, adding that he ensured his homes were rented to
families and not to graduation party celebrations.
Ryan McIntosh stated since the new ordinance was adopted, he and his wife managed 15
properties of their own and for other families who invested in Anaheim. He stated the city spent
a number of months researching STRs and unanimously adopted a responsible STIR ordinance
that addressed the complaints and concerns from neighbors stressing the first step to take was
to focus on better enforcement before enacting a moratorium. He suggested using the TOT
collected for STRs for the community who were concerned about homeless shelters, access to
libraries, tutors, and ensuring kids had tools for success.
Linda Lehnkering, Anaheim Poverty Task Force, offered statistics relating to homelessness
stating that the Poverty Task Force rejected the dog park solution as ineffective and
counterproductive as it would only displace the homeless into adjacent alleys and other nearby
areas. She stated the Task Force urged the city to focus on real solutions to help the community
understand the problem and to support best practice solutions.
Bob Cerince stated he was a Poverty Task Force member and a resident of west Anaheim near
Modjeska Park, an area that had been impacted by the homeless and could appreciate the
concerns of residents. He agreed with an earlier statement that it was not right that people lived
in parks and challenged Council to continue what they had been doing over the last several
years working to find suitable housing and get people off the streets as it was the only real
solution. He supported the Kraemer shelter moving forward and urged Council to continue
efforts that worked.
Lauren Wilson, West Tanya Lane, stated her neighborhood had about 12 vacation rentals and
she was now looking at moving because there were so many transient renters going in and out
of her neighborhood. She found it difficult to understand how 21 people in one rental house was
approved for a single family residential area when other types of commercial businesses were
not allowed.
Anna Maria, resident, spoke in support of Item No. 26. regarding homelessness, she also
supported shelters or rehabilitation centers to get the homeless out of the parks. Regarding
short-term rentals, she remarked that many of the STRs had improved the look of the
neighborhood but she could not support STRs that allowed more than 15 persons, because
anything larger was detrimental to neighborhoods.
City Council Minutes of September 15, 2015
Page 11 of 29
Diane Waldrin, Westmont area, stated she just learned that a home was undergoing remodeling
in her neighborhood and would become a short-term rental allowing large numbers of renters,
adding that there were already seven in her neighborhood. She wondered why these homes
did not have to apply for a variance where they would be required to get permission from their
neighbors and that it was unfair to the rest of the neighborhood.
Eric Frogart, remarked he was on the association board for Kaleidoscope Condos adjacent to
Disneyland, stating that more and more STRs were now operating out of this condo location; he
added the association determined not to restrict STRs. For Kaleidoscope, the vacation rentals
worked as the association was able to determine how many renters the condos could
accommodate. For other parts of the community, he felt it was a different scenario and hoped
the city could find a balance for those communities who were faced with more huge numbers of
renters in a home. He thought neighborhoods should be allowed a say and that regulations
should be enforced.
Danielle Couch, vacation rental owner, remarked when she decided to operate STRs she found
out what was permitted and regulated and had not had one single complaint. She believed the
majority of STRs were careful to rent to families visiting Disneyland and had put significant
investment in the homes to upgrade them, and most did not want to turn them into party homes.
She thought the regulations needed to be enforced as well as the three strikes rule and that the
concentration of STRs in a neighborhood should be considered.
Britta Wagner remarked she was on the original Anaheim Rental Alliance and owned three
STRs that had been operating for six years with zero complaints. Involved in the drafting of the
STIR ordinance, she was disappointed that the regulations were not enforced and was in favor
of the moratorium because the rate of growth for this industry should be controlled. She added
that putting this ordinance in place, the city invited people, not just investors, to start this home
venture. She asked for a chance to have a seat at the table and work with the city again, stating
there were people now in escrow buying homes and spending their life savings with no idea this
situation was going on, and she hoped the city would take those pending applications into
consideration.
Jose Paulo Maqcalas, a product of Anaheim schools, stated he was an at risk youth at one time
and that it wasn't until a teacher at Loara took an interest in him that his life changed for the
better. He was now a teacher at Loara and had passed his qualifying exams and was a
doctoral candidate at Chapman University. He emphasized the students had been working hard
and were doing great things, regardless of the Register article, and would continue to do well
because of teachers that cared about the community and supported approval of Item No. 26 on
the agenda.
Francisca Diaz, Westmont neighborhood, was concerned about vacation rental homes in her
neighborhood because her home was uniquely situated on a narrow lot with six neighbors on
the back, two of them STIRS. She was distressed over the lack of privacy and did not feel safe,
asking the city to address her concerns.
Cynthia Ward, stated she was celebrating the second anniversary of CATER, working with
people interested in taking back their community. She was opposed to the proliferation of
vacation rentals in the city, adding that she did not want to see 400 STIRS moving into her
neighborhood and wondered how much transient occupancy tax had been received via STIRS so
far. She stressed that property taxes provided more revenue to the general fund than TOT, and
City Council Minutes of September 15, 2015
Page 12 of 29
when economic subsidies were backed out, was more stable and less volatile to economic ups
and downs and yet the city was not investing in schools and neighborhoods. Speaking to the
grand jury letter, she stated if Council approved it as written, they were ignoring the charter that
set limits on Council's authority and should rethink their position and stop mortgaging the city's
future.
An unidentified speaker remarked property owners saw their property as an investment or a
home, and finding new ways to generate wealth and build jobs was part of the American
folklore. He believed through licensing, zoning, permitting, and regulations for visitors, STRs
and neighborhoods could co -exist and homeowners would prosper.
Victoria Michaels, resident, remarked that city council members had promised to serve the
citizens of Anaheim and now those citizens were asking for support for Anaheim's public
schools and their students, urging Council to end the politics, remember the promises made,
and to support the citizens of Anaheim and its public schools.
Myrvette Judah, spoke in support of Item No. 26, remarking many city schools had suffered
through years of budget cuts while the city appeared to be doing well. She felt the city should
address the hopes and dreams of its children and contribute to the public schools and also
recommended creating a foundation to develop successful leaders in the 21st century with
corporations benefiting from doing business in Anaheim s part of that funding effort.
Joanne Sosa, spoke about Item No. 25 and questioned whether STR operators received
education and training with the Board of Regulation Hospitality Industry to ensure compliance.
She spoke about comments by other speakers, asked if enforcement was being carried out, and
if TOT had been collected and audited.
Brian Chuchua, resident, spoke in support of funding Anaheim public schools.
COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS:
Mayor Pro Tem Kring responded to comments regarding a proposed dog park at Twila Reid
Park. In response to a comment regarding her attention during public comments, she explained
that she used her Pad to view the city's agenda in addition to writing down each speaker's
name and statements offered during public comments.
CITY MANAGER'S UPDATE: None
This was a joint Public Financing Authority, Housing and Public Improvement Authority and City
Council agenda item and the staff report was applicable to and heard by each agency. Each
agency would separately take action to consider a resolution approving a response to the
Orange County Grand Jury report titled, "Joint Powers Authorities: Issues of Viability, Control,
Transparency, and Solvency" and direct the city manager to execute a letter on behalf of the
City Council and forward the response to the Presiding Judge of the Orange County Court and
City Council Minutes of September 15, 2015
Page 13 of 29
the Orange County Grand Jury. Each agency would then take separate action on their
response.
1. CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Approve the response to the Orange County Grand Jury report titled, "Joint Powers
D144.6 Authorities: Issues of Viability, Control, Transparency, and Solvency" and direct the City
Manager to execute a letter on behalf of the City Council and forward the response to
the Presiding Judge of the Orange County Court and the Orange County Grand Jury.
At 9:13 P.M., Debbie Moreno, Finance Director, provided a staff report to each agency on the
2014/15 Orange County's Grand Jury review of joint powers authorities (JPA's), indicating there
were 71 JPA's currently in the County of Orange. She indicated the grand jury had four
concerns with regard to JPA's, as listed:
• the first was the viability of the JPA's with Redevelopment Agencies (RDA) as members
since RDA's were eliminated in 2012;
• the use of JPA's by government organizations to be controlled by a single government
entity;
• the lack of true disclosure and transparency of the organization and financial information to
taxpayers and;
• the extreme debt to revenue ratio's from JPA's which brought into question their solvency.
Ms. Moreno stated that the California Penal Code required responses from each local
government agency within 90 days of the grand jury's report issuance. She added that
specifically, the Orange County Grand Jury had a total of ten findings and eight
recommendations countywide with Anaheim and its financing authority JPA required to respond
to four of the findings and three of the recommendations.
GRAND JURY FINDINGS: She indicated the Grand Jury found that JPA's created by a city with
a redevelopment agency that no longer existed served no public benefit and had the potential
for misuse or obfuscation of public funds and recommended the termination of these JPA's.
Staff did not agree with this finding as the Successor Agency replaced the Redevelopment
Agency as members of the JPA and that this recommendation was contrary to purposes of state
law and would place an enormous financial burden on the city and its residents and taxpayers.
The Grand Jury also found that the Anaheim Public Financing Authority (APFA) had excessive
debt and recommended an aggressive plan to reduce the APFA public debt with staff
disagreeing with this finding and recommendation as well. Ms. Moreno reported the city and the
APFA had cost-effective financing arrangements for critical infrastructures such as water,
electric power and sewer, and revenue producing assets such as the Anaheim Resort and
Anaheim Convention Center. Ms. Moreno stressed that implementation of the recommendation
would require the early retirement of the APFA's debt. She explained that early retirement of
authority obligations would be uneconomical and given the long-term nature of the financial
assets, unfair to the city's current residents, businesses, and taxpayers.
Countywide, the grand jury also found that JPA's had the potential to obfuscate taxpayer
visibility and lead to a general lack of transparency. Ms. Moreno pointed out that staff did not
believe there was a potential issue with the misuse of public funds related to the debt issued by
the city's JPA's since funds were deposited with corporate trustees and all actions were taken at
noticed public hearings following public input. All public funds were accounted for in the audited
City Council Minutes of September 15, 2015
Page 14 of 29
financial statements which were then made available to the public on the city's website. She
also noted that the City and its JPA's solely operated for the benefit of the public and continued
to seek ways to increase transparency to the public as evidenced by the city's current FY
2015/16 budget and pointed out the long-term debt section that listed each outstanding issue
with a payment funding source, the issuing authority, date issued, the maturity date, and interest
rates at time of issuance. The Department also included outstanding balances as of July 1,
2015 and the total amount due for each of the next five fiscal years followed by a debt service
scheduled for each issue by fiscal year through maturity. She added that staff would continue to
look for ways to improve transparency and understandability.
Ms. Moreno ended the report indicating that responses were required from each of the
governing entities, the Anaheim Public Financing Authority, the Anaheim Housing and Public
Improvement Authority and the City Council in accordance with California Penal Code Sections.
Mayor Tait stated he would not be signing these responses as he agreed with the findings of the
Grand Jury and understood that the Finance Director Debbie Moreno would sign those
response letters if the item was approved by a vote of the Authority. As background, he
explained, that he opposed using a JPA to borrow $200 million to expand the Convention
Center as the City Charter stated that to borrow more than $50,000, the voters would have to
approve the bonds, which resulted in bypassing the charter and state law.
Council Member Vanderbilt remarked the Grand Jury took issue with a process used by many
cities while Anaheim, in particular, had been tested via a lawsuit by a private organization with
the city prevailing, asking if that had any bearing on the Grand Jury's report. City Attorney
Houston replied the bond transaction referenced in the Grand Jury report was a bond
transaction between the APFA, the city and bond investors, and a reverse validation action was
filed, with the city prevailing. He added that action was above reproach regarding legality and
was supported by Supreme Court case law which authorized transactions of that type. He
added that the grand jury weighed in from a policy perspective and their report had no legal
bearing on the actual transaction, they were voicing an opinion. Council Member Murray asked
if there was an appeal filed to the Supreme Court's ruling with Mr. Houston responding an
appeal had been filed and dismissed. She then inquired whether the City Attorney supported
staff's responses to the Grand Jury findings with Mr. Houston explaining that he had participated
in the drafting of this report and believed it was legal, ethical, and appropriate based on the
city's protocols and processes used for many years. Council Member Vanderbilt remarked the
Grand Jury looked at both general law and charter cities and did not appear to make any
exception to charter cities. Mr. Houston responded the city charter did not prevent the bond
transaction from occurring based on binding California Supreme Court case law, adding that the
Grand Jury expressed an opinion and the City was disagreeing with that opinion. Mayor Tait
responded that it might have been legal because of Supreme Court decisions; however, the
Grand Jury was stating cities should not do it.
MOTION: Mayor Tait then moved to deny staff's Grand Jury Response, seconded by Council
Member Vanderbilt for purposes of discussion.
DISCUSSION: Council Member Murray understood the discussion was centered about the
Convention Center bonds, asking if these joint powers authorities also approved infrastructure
bonds, including public utilities and basic infrastructure for the residents. Ms. Moreno
responded that a large portion of the outstanding debt for the APFA was for the benefit of water
and electric utilities; and that just to provide basic infrastructure to residents, it would require
City Council Minutes of September 15, 2015
Page 15 of 29
scheduling two years in advance to put it on a ballot versus being able to move forward to take
advantage of lower interest rates when they occurred. Council Member Murray responded this
was not just about investments that had an economic benefit, it was about the general
infrastructure of the city that used this process for decades and had been upheld in the courts,
and was why she would not support the denial. Council Member Vanderbilt suggested requiring
a 4/5 vote or some other element as part of the Council's consideration, wondering if there was
some language that could be included in the response letter so the Mayor could support.
Council Member Kring remarked she would be supporting the response letters drafted by staff
and had no interest in making it more difficult to pass bonds in the future with a 4/5 vote.
ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES — 1: Mayor Tait. NOES — 4: (Council Members Brandman, Kring,
Murray and Vanderbilt). Motion to deny Grand Jury responses failed.
MOTION: Council Member Kring then moved to approve staff's response to the grand jury,
seconded by Council Member Murray.
DISCUSSION: Council Member Vanderbilt remarked other safeguards could be added to the
letters, asking if Council Member Kring would consider modifications. Council Member Kring
remarked this motion was to support the responses to the Grand Jury and she did not want to
complicate them at this point in time.
ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES - 3: (Council Members Brandman, Kring and Murray). NOES — 2:
Mayor Tait and Council Member Vanderbilt. Item No. 1 was approved as presented. Motion
carried.
At 9:50 P.M., Mayor Tait, with the consent of council, adjourned the Anaheim Public Financing
Authority and the Anaheim Housing and Public Improvement Authority, reconvening the Council
session at 9:51 P.M.
CONSENT CALENDAR: Mayor Tait removed Item No. 25 from the consent calendar for further
discussion. Council Member Brandman then moved to waive reading in full of all ordinances
and resolutions and to adopt the balance of the consent calendar as presented, in accordance
with reports, certifications and recommendations furnished each City Council Member and as
listed on the consent calendar, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Kring. Roll Call Vote: Ayes — 5:
(Mayor Tait and Council Members: Brandman, Kring, Murray and Vanderbilt.) Noes — 0. Motion
Carried
8105 2. Receive and file minutes of the Sister City Commission meeting of July 20, 2015 and
Public Utilities Board meeting of July 22, 2015.
D116 3. Approve a recognition to be presented at a later date recognizing the 100th Anniversary
of Santa Ana College.
D144.6 4. Receive and file the Orange County Grand Jury report titled, "Unfunded Retiree
Healthcare Obligations - A Problem for Public Agencies?"
D144.6 5. Approve the response to the Orange County Grand Jury report titled, "Mello -Roos:
Perpetual Debt Accumulation and Tax Assessment Obligation" and direct the City
Manager to execute a letter on behalf of the City Council and forward the response to
the Presiding Judge of the Orange County Court and the Orange County Grand Jury.
City Council Minutes of September 15, 2015
Page 16 of 29
8105 6. Appoint Valentina Purtell to the Anaheim Workforce Investment Board, representing the
public sector, to a four year term ending September 15, 2019.
X117 7. Approve the Investment Portfolio Report for August 2015.
D154 8. Approve the 2016 Health and Welfare Plan Rates and direct the Human Resources
Director to execute all required provider agreements.
D180 9. Waive Council Policy 4.0 and authorize the Purchasing Agent to purchase an 800
Megahertz communications equipment and related services as needed, in the amount of
$1,421,596, from Motorola Solutions, Inc. for the Countywide Coordinated
Communications System, in accordance with the Orange County Contract Equipment
Price Book.
AGR -9224 10. Approve and direct the City Manager to execute a Rooftop Antenna License Agreement
with Judicial Council of California for use of rooftop space at the North Justice Center
located at 1275 N. Berkeley Ave., Fullerton, for a wireless antenna tower.
AGR -9235
AGR -9236 11.
Approve and authorize the City Manager to execute Workforce Innovation and
AGR -9237
Opportunity Act Vendor Agreements with various training contractors for the provision of
AGR -9238
occupational skills and on-site job training and authorize the Workforce Development
AGR -9239
AGR -9240
Manager, or his representative, to administer the agreements (American Career College,
AGR -9241
Inc., Brownson Technical School, Inc., California Truck Driving Academy, Inc., E.
AGR -9242
Cubics, LLC dba. QBICS Career College, Fortuna Education, LLC dba. Career College
AGR -9244
of California, IEC US Holdings, Inc., dba. Universal Schools & Colleges of Health &
AGR -9245
Human Services, Integrated Digital Technologies, KD Education, LLC, dba Healthstaff
AGR -9246
Training Institute, Kensington College, Inc. dba. Bristol University, KML Enterprises
AGR -9247
Career Development, LLC and Career Development Solutions, LLC, QPE Technical
AGR -9248
Institute, Inc., Stanbridge College, Emazing Lights, LLC, and Reborn Cabinets).
12.
Approve the Temporary Construction Easement Agreement with Ismael Mendoza, in the
AGR -9249
amount of $500, for property located at 1200 South Athena Way for the Ball
Road/Sunkist Street Intersection Improvement Project (RNV ACQ 2015-00576).
13.
Approve an Agreement for Acquisition of Real Property (Partial Acquisition) with Ramez
AGR -9250
Amman and Sona Khdryan, in the acquisition payment amount of $84,000, for property
located at 2208 West Coronet Avenue for the Brookhurst Street Improvement from 1-5 to
SR -91 (R)W ACQ2013-00460).
AGR -9251
AGR -9252 14.
Approve agreements with thirteen consulting firms, in an amount not to exceed $250,000
AGR -9253
a fiscal year for each firm, for on-call Public Works landscape architectural services for a
Y p
AGR -2758.8
AGR -9254
three year term with the option to renew each annually for up to a maximum of three
AGR -9255
additional years, at the sole discretion of the Director of Public Works Architerra Design
AGR -6299.A
Group, BGB Design Group, Clark & Green Associates, Cornerstone Studios, Inc., David
AGR-9257
Evans & nn Associates, David Volz Design,Y p Y Hirsch & Associates, Inc., L Ca ou a, Inc.,
AGR -6298.A
AGR -9259
Michael Baker International, Nuvis, Richard Fisher Associates, Stantec, and V2C Group,
AGR -9260
Inc.).
AGR -5258
AGR -3173.[.2 15.
Approve two Second Amendments to Agreements with MGT of America, Inc., in the total
AGR -3752.0.2
amount of $111,100, for the development of a citywide cost allocation plan ($54,850)
City Council Minutes of September 15, 2015
Page 17 of 29
and SB90 claiming services ($56,250) for fiscal years ending June 30, 2015, 2016 and
2017 and authorize the Finance Director to take actions to implement and administer the
agreements.
16. Approve the First Amendment to Agreement with Blais and Associates extending the
AGR -6398.A contract term until June 30, 2017 and an additional $100,000 of contract authority for
continued grant funding services.
17. Approve the City's Annual Power Content Label and energy supply reports in
accordance with Assembly Bill (AB) 162, authorize and direct the Public Utilities General
ots2 Manager, or designee, to attest as to the accuracy of the information contained in the
AB162 Reports and Annual Power Content Label report, and submit those reports to the
California Energy Commission.
18. Certify that the landfill gas Renewable Power Purchase and Sale Agreement with
AGR- Bowerman Power LFG, LLC complies with the California Energy Commission's (CEC)
7998.1.0.2 Greenhouse Gases Emission Performance Standard (EPS) as enumerated in Senate
Bill 1368, and authorize the Public Utilities General Manager, or designees, to prepare,
certify, attest, execute, and deliver any and all documents and take such further and
additional actions as may be required to comply with CEC EPS regulations.
19. Approve the Second Amendment to the Long -Term Power Purchase Agreement dated
AGR -5895.2 August 11, 2003, with Iberdrola Renewables, LLC, formerly known as PPM Energy, Inc.
and Iberdrola Renewables, Inc.; and authorize and direct the Public Utilities General
Manager to execute the Second Amendment, and any related documents, and take the
necessary, required, or advisable actions to implement and administer the agreement,
as amended.
20. Determine that the exchange of property tax revenues between the City of Orange and
A203 the City of Anaheim is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
pursuant to Section 15060(c)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines because it will not result
in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment and is
not a project, as defined in Section 15378(b)(5) of the State CEQA Guidelines.
RESOLUTION NO. 2015-252 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ANAHEIM agreeing to accept property tax revenues from the annual tax
increment generated from the detachment of a 395 square foot parcel of land located at
2300 South Lewis Street and 2237 South Manchester Avenue from the City of Orange to
the City of Anaheim pursuant to the Cortese -Knox -Hertzberg Local Government
Reorganization Act of 2000.
R100 21. RESOLUTION NO. 2015-253 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ANAHEIM supporting the brave men and women that serve as law
enforcement officers and fire and military personnel for their selfless dedication to the
country and their communities in choosing a career path that often puts them in harm's
way in the name of protecting the public good and honoring the core values that make
America the greatest country on earth.
P124 22. RESOLUTION NO. 2015-254 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ANAHEIM accepting certain deeds conveying to the City of Anaheim
City Council Minutes of September 15, 2015
Page 18 of 29
certain real properties or interests therein (City Deed Nos. 11904, 11905, 11906, and
11907).
P124 23. RESOLUTION NO. 2015-255 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM accepting a deed conveying to the City of Anaheim certain interests
in real properties (City Deed No. 11908).
24. ORDINANCE NO. 6342 (ADOPTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM amending the zoning map referred to in Title 18 of the of the Anaheim
czso Municipal Code relating to zoning based upon the finding and determination that said
amendment is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) pursuant to Section 15060(c)(2) of the State CEQA Guidelines (Reclassification
No. 2015-00281) (DEV2015-0068) (2300 South Lewis Street and 2237 South
Manchester Avenue; Portion of Ponderosa Mobile Home and RV Park) (Introduced at
Council meeting of September 1, 2015, Item No. 22).
END OF CONSENT CALENDAR:
25. Determine that this urgency ordinance imposing a moratorium, with certain exceptions,
M142 on the issuance or renewal of use permits, variances, building permits, business
licenses or any other entitlement or permit providing for the use, establishment or
operation of Short -Term Rentals is not subject to the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) and 15060(c)(3) of the State CEQA
Guidelines because it will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect
physical change in the environment and is not a project, as defined in Section 15378 of
the State CEQA Guidelines.
ORDINANCE NO. 6343 (ADOPTION) AN URGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY
OF ANAHEIM adopting an interim measure imposing a moratorium, with certain
exceptions, on the issuance or renewal of use permits, variances, building permits,
business licenses or any other entitlements or permits providing for the use,
commencement, establishment or operation of Short-term Rentals within the City of
Anaheim (A copy of the full text of the proposed ordinance was available for review in
the Office of the City Clerk).
David Belmer, Director of Planning/Building, announced this item pertained to a moratorium on
short term rentals or STRs, recommended because of the increasing number of complaints from
residents regarding both the proliferation and concentration of the STRs in the city. Staff had
been requested to look at modifying or amending the existing ordinance to address the issues
raised. He added, during this same time, the number of applications received on a weekly basis
was increasing, and staff was therefore presenting a moratorium that would stop any application
for new permits until staff, Council and various stakeholders could work collaboratively to
address or present potential amendments to ensure STRs were operating consistent with single
family neighborhoods.
Providing background, Mr. Belmer remarked the ordinance that was adopted in 2014 did not
create short term rentals; STRs were already an emerging issue in southern California,
especially in resort community areas. After participating in several workshops, Council adopted
an ordinance regulating and creating operational standards for STRs and at that point in time, it
City Council Minutes of September 15, 2015
Page 19 of 29
was estimated the city had about 200 STRs. Now that number, he emphasized, had doubled to
400, half of which were permitted while the other half were pending review.
Some of the operational requirements owners must follow included enforcing parking standards,
establishing a known point of contact in the event issues arose, required parking standards and
occupancy limits (i.e., 3 persons per bedroom plus two in each residence). In addition, the
ordinance required a payment of transient occupancy tax (TOT) because the operation was
similar in concept to a hotel. He presented a map that showed the concentration of STRs, both
licensed and pending, and the totals within census tracts. In staff's viewpoint, the concentration
of STRs was one of the factors that led to recommending a moratorium because this policy had
the impact of transforming single family residential neighborhoods. He also summarized the
types and magnitude of complaints received; i.e. noise and late night activity, cars parked in
public streets, and large groups of renters at one time (which he stated did not necessarily
mean renters were exceeding occupancy limits, but was reflective of too many people in the
home). He indicated STRs were also transforming single family homes into mini -motels, looking
to convert as much of the square footage in the home as possible to bedrooms, which increased
the allowable occupancy count resulting in some homes being significantly larger in comparison
to neighboring homes where floor plans were not altered. He added those homes that reflected
a series of bathrooms and bedrooms as former dens and living rooms were modified to
bedrooms, and this, presented a concern to staff as well.
Mr. Belmer explained staff began looking at potential modifications to the ordinance that could
be presented to Council, with a provision to address the concentration of STRs in a
neighborhood as a priority, in addition to limiting the size to ensure the home maintained its
character in a single family neighborhood. Staff believed the $250 fee should be revisited to
ensure there were sufficient resources to enforce existing or additional regulations as many of
those issues occurred on evenings and weekends. If approved, the ordinance would take effect
immediately and STIR applications would no longer be accepted and the city would have no
more than 400 STRs unless or until Council decided differently.
Mr. Belmer remarked a number of property owners commented earlier in the meeting with some
implying the moratorium would affect existing operations, which was not the case. Anyone
currently licensed and lawfully operating, even during the moratorium would be able to continue
to do that. He noted as currently drafted, staff was proposing to continue processing those
applications that had been filed before the effective date of this ordinance so those pending
applications would be processed and assuming they complied with all provisions, those permits
could be issued. Staff also allowed for a change of ownership, consistent with most ordinance
provisions, because it was in the city's best interest to know who the owner was and/or the
responsible agent. The moratorium was for a 45 day period, consistent with state law, although
he pointed out; there was the potential for extension. Addressing enforcement, Mr. Belmer
emphasized that the city was diligently enforcing the current ordinance, and at this point there
were approximately 125 enforcement actions taken that ranged from inspections, verifying
reports to administering citations and in certain cases, he indicated, staff was contemplating
referrals to the city attorney. That enforcement would continue through the moratorium, looking
at how to reallocate existing staff resources to make some of them available during evenings
and weekends. He also wanted to ensure a continued discussion with existing licensees to
make sure they understood this Council expected strict enforcement of the ordinance that would
remain in place and unchanged during the moratorium.
City Council Minutes of September 15, 2015
Page 20 of 29
The next step in the process, Mr. Belmer explained, was for staff to continue efforts to evaluate
potential amendments to the ordinance; concentration provisions and potentially limiting the
number of bedrooms. He added staff would also evaluate the minimum number of stays, which
was currently three nights, as well as consider the transitory nature of the operation that caused
neighbors concern. He anticipated returning to Council on October 20'h with a report on
efforts/status during the 45 moratorium and providing a preliminary recommendation at that time
with the possibility of recommending an extension to the moratorium if it was necessary to vet
all the issues staff believed was worth Council's consideration.
Mayor Tait remarked that at one end of the spectrum there was the AIRB&B where someone
rents out an extra room and the homeowner was there as well, an alternative with little impact
versus renting out a home to between 20 to 30 people in the middle of a residential
neighborhood, a possibility no one had envisioned. He added that property owners were saying
just enforce regulations while staff stated those regulations were being enforced. He thought
the problem was exacerbated when there were two to five STRs on a small street as it changed
the nature of a neighborhood and that the impact in Anaheim with Disneyland as a draw brought
up a significant demand to residents close to Disney, driving home prices up. He emphasized
neighborhoods were social capital and important to the community and the city, and he thought
neighborhoods could function with one or two STRs, but that any more could do real damage,
and it was up to the city to figure out the ratio at some point.
MOTION: Mayor Tait moved to approve the moratorium and adopt Urgency Ordinance No.
6343, OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM adopting an interim measure imposing a moratorium, with
certain exceptions, on the issuance or renewal of use permits, variances, building permits,
business licenses or any other entitlements or permits providing for the use, commencement,
establishment or operation of Short-term Rentals within the City of Anaheim, seconded by
Mayor Pro Tem Kring.
DISCUSSION: Mayor Pro Tem Kring reported she lived close to Disneyland so her
neighborhood was affected and had heard from neighbors the problems they experienced,
especially in the Della/Ord area. She would like the following to be considered by the task
force: identify the STRs that were not permitted, reconsider the regulation that allowed for three
people in a living room and four persons in each bedroom as it put too much pressure on
infrastructure, and look at the concentration of STRs in a neighborhood either by census tract or
another method.
Council Member Brandman inquired if staff met with the Anaheim Rental Alliance regularly
before recommending and bringing the moratorium forward. Mr. Belmer responded when the
existing ordinance was drafted, there was considerable outreach efforts that took about 18
months to complete. He explained that currently with five to ten new applications being received
each week, the thought was to bring the moratorium forward as quickly as possible to the
Council, without the time constraints of meeting with stakeholders. He added as potential
amendments to the ordinance were drafted, he expected to meet with interested parties. He
envisioned the amendments be a staff -initiated effort, and would dialogue with stakeholders,
including the Anaheim Rental Alliance and various residents that contacted the city and shared
their views. Council Member Brandman explained that he initiated the establishment of an
ordinance regulating STRs and felt it was fair to the stakeholders who had been involved in this
process to be given the chance to meet with staff before taking a vote on the moratorium. He
added he was not opposed to the moratorium, but thought the previous process should be
honored and that there would be no harm in waiting until October 6th to take this vote.
City Council Minutes of September 15, 2015
Page 21 of 29
AMENDED MOTION: Mr. Brandman then moved to amend the previous motion to postpone
action on Item No. 25 until the October 6, 2015 agenda, seconded by Council Member Murray.
DISCUSSION: Mayor Tait appreciated Mr. Brandman's thoughts; however, he believed the
emergency moratorium gave the city a chance to go through that outreach process, bringing
parties together and discussing concerns and for that reason would support the amendment.
Council Member Brandman responded that staff indicated that unless a request for a task force
had been made, there would be no task force and he was not comfortable in moving forward
without the same process that was used two years ago. He stated he also did not believe what
was being presented to Council this evening was completely thought-out and that the additional
time would be a benefit, not harm.
Council Member Kring pointed out that she had specifically asked the Planning Director to
create a task force engaging those on both sides of the issue and supported approving the
moratorium and giving some relief to impacted neighborhoods.
Council Member Murray remarked there had been legitimate and concerning issues raised
regarding STRs, asking why variances would allow these type of changes to residences. Mr.
Belmer responded there was no difference between a residential homeowner and a property
owner of a short term rental, either one could modify a single family home and go through the
same building permitting processes or planning process (if required) and that he was not aware
of any variances given. He believed what Council was hearing were residents physically
reacting to the change in neighborhoods when some of those homes became significantly
larger, such as one homeowner who converted their garage to an additional bedroom, and
added another garage. He pointed out that was not a variance; the code allowed the remodel
assuming all the required setbacks were met. Council Member Murray wondered how a nine
bedroom house could be built in a neighborhood that did not support that type of housing and
why it would not require a conditional use permit or variance to exist. Mr. Belmer responded
that the code did not limit the number of rooms that could be modified physically. He
emphasized this was one of the areas staff would study in the ordinance because of potential
impacts in the future. Council Member Murray emphasized that every resident living next to one
of the STRs should have a direct line to reach a city staff person to address their concerns and
she hoped the transient occupancy taxes being paid by these rentals would directly support the
neighborhood and be part of the discussion as well.
Council Member Brandman remarked the bulk of the complaints he had heard from residents,
including prior to the adoption of the ordinance, was code enforcement issues and it was his
understanding that was still the issue. Sandra Sagert, Community Preservation Manager,
confirmed that it started with code enforcement issues; however she was now seeing
complaints about the integrity of the neighborhood as well; i.e. homes being significantly
modified from their original footprint. She stated there were 198 licenses approved and about
189 currently pending, which would take about three to six months to go through the process.
Council Member Brandman added that he would be calling for an emergency appropriation of
$200,000 to take effect immediately to pay for the overtime to get code enforcement officers out
in the neighborhoods and make sure all residents' concerns were immediately met.
Mayor Tait remarked if there was a lack of enforcement, the city needed to address that but in
his opinion the bigger issue was stopping the modification of a four bedroom house to an eight
bedroom house and renting to 25 people at a time on a continual basis. Council Member
Brandman remarked that staff was 90 days to six months away from completing the pending
City Council Minutes of September 15, 2015
Page 22 of 29
applications and waiting until October 6`" would allow staff to offer a fuller presentation. Council
Member Kring explained she could not support the continuance, remarking the current process
of 311 or Anaheim Anytime was not working for residents and a new system would have to be
put in place.
ROLL CALL VOTE: on the motion by Council Member Brandman to postpone this item to
October 6, 2015, seconded by Council Member Murray. AYES — 2: (Council Brandman and
Murray). NOES — 3: (Mayor Tait, and Council Members Kring and Vanderbilt). Motion Failed.
MOTION: Mayor Tait moved to adopt the Urgency Ordinance No. 6343 AN URGENCY
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM adopting an interim measure imposing a
moratorium, with certain exceptions, on the issuance or renewal of use permits, variances,
building permits, business licenses or any other entitlements or permits providing for the use,
commencement, establishment or operation of Short-term Rentals within the City of Anaheim (A
copy of the full text of the proposed ordinance is available for review in the Office of the City
Clerk), seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Kring.
ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES — 4: (Mayor Tait and Council Members Kring, Murray, and
Vanderbilt). NOES —1: Council Member Brandman. Motion Carried.
At 10:40 P.M., Mayor Tait briefly recessed the Anaheim City Council meeting for technical
purposes, reconvening at 10:52 P.M.
26. Discuss the resolution approved by the Anaheim Union High School District asking for
D116 annual financial support from the City of Anaheim and authorize and direct staff to create
a line item in the City's budget to provide additional support for Anaheim schools.
Mayor Tait stated he requested this item be placed on the council agenda as the Anaheim
Union High School District (AUHSD) had passed a resolution requesting the city put a line item
in its budget to invest in the schools. He viewed this as an invitation from all school districts in
the city of Anaheim stating there were several reasons to consider this request. He pointed out
Anaheim lacked enough park space for its population and a joint use agreement between the
city and a school district made sense to use field space when schools were not in session and
in return, the city could help defray some of that field maintenance upkeep. He added that the
community did not differentiate between schools and the city because they think the two were
connected and to him, it made sense to foster a closer relationship with the school districts by
putting a line item in next budget for school investment and consider options/funding at that
time.
MOTION: Mayor Tait then moved to place a line item in the next budget for investment in
Anaheim schools with no funding and no conditions, seconded by Council Member Brandman.
DISCUSSION: Council Member Murray requested a staff report.
Greg Garcia, Deputy City Manager, reported the AUHSD had passed a resolution by its Board
of Trustees requesting the city of Anaheim provide annual financial support to Anaheim Schools
by creating a budget line item and no details or specifics had been given about the request by
the Anaheim Union High School District staff.
Providing an overview on Anaheim schools, Mr. Garcia indicated there were seven school
districts operating within city boundaries, representing 63 schools and 60,000 kids: Anaheim
Union High School District, Anaheim City School District, Orange Unified School District,
City Council Minutes of September 15, 2015
Page 23 of 29
Magnolia School District, Placentia/Yorba Linda Unified School District, Savannah School
District, and Centralia School District. He presented a chart outlining the districts, their
enrollment and the number of schools in Anaheim, explaining it did not include the 50 plus
private schools in Anaheim that provided various levels of K — 12 instruction. He also presented
a map of the ten high schools and seven junior high schools and a map of the 46 public
elementary schools and their school districts as well.
Mr. Garcia explained that after review of all city department programs, he estimated that the
city's annual financial commitment to Anaheim's public schools was roughly about $5.7 million a
year. That took into account three main areas: facilities/joint use, programming, and public
safety. Facilities/joint use reflected the cost associated with providing certain facilities at no cost
to school districts as well as staffing expenditures associated with those facilities (about $1.1
million annually). Programing included a breakdown of all city programs embedded in schools
or closely associated with schools such as Project SAY, which was fully funded by the city at
about $2.7 million annually. Public Safety was the third area of support and included public
safety support to schools that was above and beyond regular calls for services, such as Safe
Schools Program, at a total annual cost of $1.9 million. Lastly, in addition to this $5.7 million
annually, staff looked at some of Anaheim's recent capital improvements that directly impacted
schools and over the past five years saw an investment of nearly $20 million in capital
improvements throughout the city of Anaheim that directly benefited some school sites.
He explained that for many years, the city had joint use agreements and other types of
partnerships with school districts citywide for the use of the city's recreational facilities at no cost
to them. The agreements provided for shared use of city playfields, sports facilities for both
students and residents, and one example of such an agreement was the use of Glover Stadium
and Dee Field in La Palma Park and how those properties were used by many local schools for
football and baseball games, graduation, band reviews, and other large events at no cost to the
schools. In addition, Brookhurst Park, Juarez Park, Yorba Regional Park, and the city golf
courses were used by students as well. The City also made space available at all community
facilities for student groups and other clubs that needed places to meet at no cost to them and
had an arrangement with the AUHSD for the use of the city's Convention Center as well (four
times a year for various banquets and dinners at no cost to them).
Programming, he remarked, included after school programs and various other enrichment
programs intended to enhance and supplement educational opportunities as well as provide
further support for at risk youth, with the best example being Project SAY (Supporting Anaheim
Youth), a development program that offered ages 13-17 with direct outreach that helped
students develop the ability to reach short and long-term goals. There were six full-time city
staff working in schools and helping students gain academic success, fully funded by the city
and currently in 10 different school sites. GRIP was another program run by the Police
Department similar to Project Say, providing counseling in the schools. The city also committed
to enhancing supplemental education opportunities by increasing funding this past year for
mobile recreation, also known as Fun On Wheels where units went directly into neighborhoods
and provided not only recreational opportunities, but after school homework. Based on their
popularity and the fact staff determined homework assistance was one of the services
neighborhoods wanted most, a new community program funded in this last budget was
scheduled to start next Monday in city parks around the city. It was called STARS (Study Time,
Arts, Recreation and Sports) and was a new free after school drop in program at eight city
parks, with staff on site to provide homework help and anticipated to expand to 10 parks in the
near future. Mr. Garcia emphasized that all the programs were evaluated each year as part of
the annual budget process.
City Council Minutes of September 15, 2015
Page 24 of 29
Regarding public safety, Mr. Garcia stated the major program was Safe Schools which provided
a team of police officers that gave individualized services to each school in Anaheim and were
on site. It also provided special enhanced security at numerous special events, such as football
games, graduation, and other important events that went above and beyond the regular police
service. In addition, Police and Fire provided schools with educational tools, workshops, and
safety programs both off site and on site. He added the city funded the crossing guard program
as well, managed by the Police Department and responsible for providing crossing guard
services throughout the city.
Lastly, he remarked, under capital improvement, there were a number of Public Works projects
that were constructed in collaboration with schools for improvements such as traffic signals in
front of schools, sidewalk improvements, crosswalks and other right-of-way improvements. The
city often partnered with schools on larger capital projects forjoint use opportunities, for
example, the Ponderosa Library which was co -located on a city park next to Ponderosa
Elementary school where the city contributed to the funding of that building and its operation,
city staff on site, and operating the facility after school hours. The Public Utility Department also
partnered with schools regularly on infrastructure improvements and had also supported
programs related to energy efficiency such as solar panel installation and rebates for such
programs, as well as offering water and energy efficiency audits at no costs to schools.
Because the AUHSD resolution touched on encouraging corporate partnership, Mr. Garcia
commented on ACT Anaheim, a program funded by Disney, Angels Baseball and the Ducks,
committing over $3 million for the first three years to provide multi-year funding to various
Anaheim nonprofit organizations who worked with youth in the community. The goal was to
meet the needs of Anaheim's youth as outlined in the Anaheim Youth Services assessment, a
comprehensive study done in 2013 to highlight gaps in services towards youths.
Elaborating on the Joint Use Agreements, Mr. Garcia stated the city had a long history of
partnership with all school districts, beginning in the late 1950"s with an agreement through the
high school district for activities in La Palma Park. Currently, there were all kinds of agreements
in place, not only with school districts but with individual schools for use of their facilities that
allowed the city to open up more play fields and shared space for the public at large. As of
today, there was a comprehensive agreement with the Anaheim City School District, Anaheim
Union High School District, two schools within the Orange Unified School District, one school in
the Placentia/Yorba Linda School District, one school in the Savannah District, and one with the
Magnolia School District. He indicated the contract with ACSD was the most comprehensive as
it allowed the city to schedule and use athletic fields on all school campuses for community use
during non -school hours. In return, the city provided ACSD and schools with green space, the
exclusive use of adjacent parks during schools hours. He noted that prior to 2005 that same
type of arrangement was in place with the AUHSD until it was amended at their request, and
they chose to take back the scheduling of their fields. He added comments had been made
about improving access to all school facilities after hours and on weekends, and he believed this
was one of the areas to begin discussions with all school districts to create more comprehensive
use agreements that would open up play space for everyone to use. He further added that staff
was already looking at ways during the budget process to ensure partnerships and would
continue to evaluate those opportunities annually.
Council Member Murray remarked that the city had already been making major investments in
the Anaheim Schools annually and that one of the biggest issues raised by students and the
community had to do with joint use agreements for school facilities. She wondered why the
AUHSD had requested an amendment to their joint use agreement when they took back the
City Council Minutes of September 15, 2015
Page 25 of 29
scheduling of their fields and facilities. She asked if there had been outreach from the AUHSD
on their proposal such as limits, sunset clauses, taxpayer oversight or city involvement with Mr.
Garcia responding no outreach had been received. She wondered why the resolution was
brought up at this point in time and also wondered if any other of the cities AUHSD served had
received a similar request for investment. She added that she would assume any funding would
be spread evenly to the schools and with 63 schools the cost would be significant, wondering
where those revenues would be found or taken from core city services. Her preference would
be to start with joint use agreements because facility use was the top priority of speakers, such
as the BROS organization, an active group requesting access to schools after hours and on
weekends, a good starting place with an immediate positive impact on the community and
minimum cost impact to the city.
Mayor Tait responded that the discussion was about investing in school facilities, possibly using
the $7 million earmarked for renovations of a privately run tennis center, used to fix up fields at
several city schools and get a bigger bang for the buck. He added the line item was simply
about intent without being binding. He suggested the AUHSD brought up this request in
response to the city's economic spending; that is, the $200 million expansion of the Convention
Center, a $158 million subsidy for a luxury hotel developer, and a 45 year agreement with
Disney that the city would not enact an admission tax for visitors. He stated investment in
Anaheim's youth would offer a long-term economic impact for the city.
Mayor Pro Tem Kring listed numerous bond measures on her property tax bill, asking why the
school districts could not live within their budgets and how those bond measures impacted
residents on fixed incomes. She pointed to the success of the Magnolia School District whose
Superintendent talked about living within their means and still exceeding standard performance
scores in many subjects. She added since this resolution addressed investing in all school
districts, she wondered why Anaheim City School District was expending $700,000 on an
appeal of the judge's decision approving Palm Lane Elementary as a charter school. She also
wondered where the funding would come from, remarking once that line item was in the city
budget, funds would be expected every single year. She also pointed to the city funding after
school programs that were doing so much for students and families, adding that she did not
know what else the city could do to support schools and for those reasons she would not
support this resolution.
Mayor Tait responded this item was about finding projects that made sense for both the city and
school to partner together. However, he pointed out that some cities did write a blank check to
schools, naming the city of Irvine and that those questions had not been posed when
considering the $200 million Convention Center expansion. Council Member Murray remarked
the city of Irvine funded a foundation that determined how money was spent that was similar in
concept to Anaheim Change Together or ACT grant initiative and pointed out that Anaheim had
exceeded the amount Irvine contributed to their schools with $5.7 million annually in programs
and services plus $19 million in annual capital expenses. She emphasized that expanding the
joint use agreement was the best place to come together and partner on something that would
be impactful to the people and students. She added that creating a line item with no parameters
did not make sense to her, because the money had to come from somewhere and the city had
already made public safety and investing in neighborhoods a priority.
Council Member Vanderbilt stated there was a history of working together with school districts
and he recommended facilities use as the first goal to seek because there was a dual purpose,
the citizens of Anaheim whether or not they had children could use these facilities and there
City Council Minutes of September 15, 2015
Page 26 of 29
were plenty of examples of this happening and appeared to be appreciated by all. He
suggested adding the designation "facilities" to the line item.
Council Member Murray remarked she could not be supportive of an opened ended program
and amending the budget in a non-specific way. Mayor Tait replied this was a statement of
intent only and gave the school districts a seat at the table. Council Member Murray stated the
schools already had a seat at the table and the city was spending nearly $6 million in programs
and services to the schools and another $20 million in capital funding. Discussion continued
relating to the same subject.
Mayor Tait reminded Council there was a motion on the table to approve Item No. 26 as
presented, seconded by Council Member Brandman.
DISCUSSION: Council Member Vanderbilt proposed an amendment to the motion that
specified the line item in next year's budget to invest in Anaheim schools specifically be linked
to "facilities and joint use" with Mayor Tait and Council Member Brandman accepting that
amendment.
Council Member Murray stated she would rather see a motion to postpone and move forward
with a discussion as a starting point related to joint use agreement for the next council meeting.
MOTION: Council Member Murray then moved to postpone this item for 45 days to allow staff
to enter into discussions with Anaheim Union High School District as well as any other districts
that would like to participate on the subject of expanding joint use agreements for city facilities,
seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Kring.
ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES — 2: (Mayor Pro Tem Kring and Council Member Murray.) NOES —
3: Mayor Tait and Council Member Brandman and Vanderbilt. Motion Failed.
MOTION; Mayor Tait moved to place a line item in next year's budget to invest in Anaheim
schools specifically linked to "facilities and joint use" and that it be for both the school and city
mutual benefit.
ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES — 3: (Mayor Tait and Council Members Brandman and Vanderbilt).
NOES — 2: (Mayor Pro Tem Kring and Council Member Murray). Motion Carried,
27. RESOLUTION NO. 2015-256 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ANAHEIM supporting Anaheim's public schools, and offering to work in
R100 continued partnership with all City School Districts to ensure students in the City have
equal access to a quality education, including support for programs, policies, and
educational choices provided in state law to empower parents and students to close the
achievement gap (aka The "Anaheim Parent and Student Empowerment Act").
Council Member Murray remarked this item was about continuing partnerships with school
districts to outline for the community that the city was committed to supporting schools both for
program services as well as facilities and that commitment would continue at today's level in
order to provide parents additional educational choices and options similar to the GOALS
Academy that was supported by Anaheim City School District last year. She stated that parents
asked for additional choices and any way the city could partner and bring educators, community
leaders, city leaders, parents and families together to find ways to elevate and close the
achievement gap for some of the schools that were struggling was an important step to take.
City Council Minutes of September 15, 2015
Page 27 of 29
MOTION: Ms. Murray then moved to approve RESOLUTION NO. 2015-256, A RESOLUTION
OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM supporting Anaheim's public schools,
and offering to work in continued partnership with all City School Districts to ensure students in
the City have equal access to a quality education, including support for programs, policies, and
educational choices provided in state law to empower parents and students to close the
achievement gap (aka The "Anaheim Parent and Student Empowerment Act"), seconded by
Mayor Pro Tem Kring.
DISCUSSION: Mayor Tait stated he did not agree with the resolution and would not support it
as he believed it sent a harsh message to Anaheim public schools that in his opinion were doing
well and moving in the right direction. Mayor Pro Tem Kring remarked there should be choices
in education for parents and that this resolution supported those choices and was not a
reflection of the performance of public schools. Council Member Murray added that the
resolution was specifically broad in how it talked about choices for parents stating the city
wanted to work with all the districts on strategic planning reforms and options for parents and
that if the city was being asked to step up and do more financially for schools, the city in return
was asking that schools step up and ensure every child had equal access to a high quality
education.
Mayor Tait read a recital from the resolution regarding "several school districts in the City of
Anaheim unfortunately listed as having among the worst performing schools in the county,
including Anaheim Union High School District", stressing that sent a negative message to
residents at a time when the city should be supporting schools. Council Member Vanderbilt
asked if this recital was the only objectionable clause in the resolution, would Mayor Tait be
supportive if it were stricken; Mayor Tait responded there were still other objectionable points.
Mayor Pro Tem Kring remarked this resolution was simply offering parents who believed their
children were not getting the education there were entitled, to have choices. Mayor Tait
answered he agreed with having choices for parents but disagreed with identifying the Anaheim
Union High School District as having half their schools failing to meet state standards despite
having the highest level of per capita funding in the state. He listed the awards and recognitions
received by AUHSD schools, indicating eight of their campuses were designated as California
Gold Ribbon Schools, five as California Distinguished Schools, and the Oxford Academy ranked
as a National Blue Ribbon school based on overall academic excellence. For those reasons, he
would not support this resolution.
Council Member Vanderbilt explained there were several recitals in the resolution he would
consider as not appropriate and inquired if there was any support for him to amend that motion
to approve the resolution and delete those specific recitals (No. 6, 11 and 15). Council Member
Murray responded she was open to his suggestion, but believed the 15th recital was factually
correct. There was considerable discussion on the appropriateness of various resolution
clauses with Mayor Pro Tem Kring weighing in as well.
AMENDED MOTION: At the end of the discussion, Council Member Murray remarked she
would accept deletion of the 6th recital and the 15th, if Council Member Vanderbilt could support
the resolution. Council Member Vanderbilt moved to amend the motion to approve Item No. 26
as presented and deleting the 6th and 15th recital, Mayor Pro Tem Kring seconded the motion.
DISCUSSION: Mayor Tait indicated he did not agree with the resolution, including the
statement that the line item requested by the AUHSD would have no restrictions, taxpayer
City Council Minutes of September 15, 2015
Page 28 of 29
oversight or accountability as well as the statement "the potential to divert vital city funding for
Anaheim police, fire, parks, and roads and closing the gaps with escalating pension liabilities."
MOTION: Council Member Murray called for the question, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Kring.
ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES — 3: (Mayor Tait and Council Members Kring and Murray). NOES —
2: Council Members Brandman and Vanderbilt. Motion failed for lack of a 2/3 vote.
Discussion continued on the merits of the resolution recitals, with Council Member Murray
asking if Council Member Vanderbilt would approve the resolution with the deletion of recitals 6,
and 15. Discussion continued with Council Member Vanderbilt stating he would like to add two
more recitals for deletion, for a total of four, Recitals 6, 10, 12 and 15 and moved to do so; no
second to that motion was received. Motion Failed.
Council Member Murray stated if Mr. Vanderbilt was not supportive of the amendments, she
would like the resolution to be considered intact. Discussion continued and both Mayor Tait and
Council Member Brandman emphasized they would be voting against Item No. 27
MOTION: At the conclusion of the discussion, Council Member Vanderbilt offered four
amendments to the motion to approve Item No. 27 and the amendment was the deletion of
recitals 6, 10, 12 and 15, seconded by Council Member Murray for purposes of discussion. Ms.
Murray requested clarification on why those recitals should be deleted with Council Member
Vanderbilt responding that it was his understanding that the recitals contained additional
qualifiers that he felt were not germane to what he understood was the purpose of the resolution
and would feel more comfortable if the resolution did not include them. Council Member Murray
remarked she would accept the amendments proposed if Council Member Vanderbilt was
supportive of the overall resolution.
ROLL CALL VOTE to amend the original motion to approve Item No. 27, which deleted recitals
6, 10, 12 and 15. AYES — 3: (Mayor Pro Tem Kring and Council Members Murray and
Vanderbilt). NOES — 2: (Mayor Tait and Council Member Brandman). Motion to amend carried.
MOTION: Motion by Council Member Murray to approve RESOLUTION NO. 2015-256 , A
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM supporting Anaheim's
public schools, and offering to work in continued partnership with all City School Districts to
ensure students in the City have equal access to a quality education, including support for
programs, policies, and educational choices provided in state law to empower parents and
students to close the achievement gap (aka The "Anaheim Parent and Student Empowerment
Act") as amended, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Kring.
ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES — 3: (Mayor Pro Tem Kring and Council Members Murray and
Vanderbilt). NOES — 2: (Mayor Tait and Council Member Brandman).
REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION ACTIONS:
Mayor Tait reported on the following actions for Closed Session Item No. 2: a 2.5 % raise wa:
approved for the City Attorney by a vote of 4-1 (Ayes: Mayor Tait and Council Members Kring
Murray and Vanderbilt; Noes: Council Members Brandman); a 5% raise was approved for the
City Clerk by a vote of 3-2 (Ayes: Mayor Tait and Council Members Kring and Murray; Noes:
Council Members Brandman and Vanderbilt).
City Council Minutes of September 15, 2015
Page 29 of 29
COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS:
Mayor Pro Tem Kring requested the meeting adjourn in memory of Margie Hilgenfeld-Field, who
had been serving this community since 1925.
Council Member Murray thanked the City Council for supporting the resolution supporting public
safety - police, fire and military personnel.
Council Member Brandman requested a budget appropriation in the amount of $200,000 for
code enforcement to address the short-term rentals and homeless issues.
He spoke of his attendance at the "A Country called Syria" exhibit at the Muzeo and announced
the grand opening of the exhibit at Chapman University on September 30'h. He further
requested a resolution be placed on the October 6th agenda urging the President and Congress
to increase the number of refugees allowed into the United States, to work with like-minded
nations to preserve lives and dignities of the refugees, and to reform Section 8 housing and
other HCD funding to provide priority to refugees. He also suggested staff work with community
stakeholders, Bill Dalati and Nahla Kayali, in drafting the resolution.
Mayor Tait requested information and a possible policy regarding texting at the dais be
agendized addressing whether there were any Brown Act issues and also that a policy be
established that text messages for the purpose of transparency not be allowed or that they be
made public.
ADJOURNMENT: At 1.19 A.M., Mayor Tait adjourned the September 15, 2015 meeting in
memory of Margie Hilgenfeld-Field.
es tfully submitted,
Linda N. Andal, CIv1C
City Cleric