Loading...
2003/05/06 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - ADJOURNED CITY COUNCIL MEETING MAY 6, 2003 The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in adjourned regular session. The Notice of Adjournment was posted at 3:00 P.M. on May 6, 2003 on the exterior door of the Anaheim Council Chambers, announcing the adjournment to 4:00 P.M. due to a lack of quorum. PRESENT: Mayor Curt Pringle, Council Members: Tom Tait, Shirley McCracken, Bob Hernandez and Richard Chavez. STAFF PRESENT: City Manager David Morgan, City Attorney Jack White, and City Clerk Sheryll Schroeder. A copy of the agenda for the meeting of the Anaheim City Council was posted on May 2,2003 at the City Hall outside bulletin board. Mayor Curt Pringle called the regular meeting to order at 4:15 P.M. in the Council Chambers of the Anaheim City Hall, 200 South Anaheim Boulevard. WORKSHOP: City Manager Morgan introduced Finance Director, William Sweeney, who presented the workshop on the transition to EDS, the City's contract services for information technology. Mr. Sweeney introduced members of EDS. During the presentation, Mr. Sweeney introduced the possibility of a joint powers authority, which would create joint ventures with neighboring cities, leverage existing data center, leverage existing resources and generate a revenue stream. He indicated that he had spoken to two cities and there was a possible third city interested. Mayor Pringle and other Council Members expressed their desire to explore other ideas and suggestions from EDS, like homeland security issues, etc. Council recessed and returned at approximately 5:15 INVOCATION: provided by Pastor Jerry Dirmann, The Rock FLAG SALUTE: provided by Council Member Hernandez PRESENTATIONS: Recognizing the 2003 Sponsors of Paint Your Heart Out Anaheim Paint Day. Recognitions to be presented at a later date: ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES MAY 6, 2003 PAGE 2 Proclaiming May 18 - 24, 2003 as Save a Life Week. Proclaiming May 12, 2003 as Meals on Wheels Day. Proclaiming May 2003 as Mental Health Month. Recognizing the Small Business Administration on its 50th anniversary. Recognizing the recipients of the Small Business Administration, Santa Ana District Office, 2003 Business Awards. At 5:20 P.M., Mayor Pringle recessed the City Council meeting until after the Redevelopment Agency meeting. Mayor Pringle reconvened the City Council meeting at 5:30 P.M. ADDITIONS/DELETIONS TO THE AGENDA: None PUBLIC COMMENTS: James Reade talked about retaliations for speaking at Council meetings. Larry Vandenberg spoke firefighters completing a recent bike ride from San Francisco to Huntington Beach to raise funds for the Orange County Burn Center. John Poole on Item A21, violations for conditional use permits, spoke about his experiences as the Code Enforcement Manager for many years. He said he did not want to see any changes made that would inhibit the city's standards and efforts to improve the city. He said sometimes criminal penalties had to be used to get people to do the things that they agreed to do. Gloria Mehi said that if it had not been for the efforts of code enforcement, the city would not have the community that everyone enjoyed now. Extreme violators had to have a consequence or there would not be a motivation to do what was right, she stated. Stephanie O'Neil spoke about the need for consequences and she requested the item be postponed and discussed at a public hearing for more community input. Allan Jeffrey noted that code enforcement was an insurance policy that the city depended on when someone forgot to follow the rules. He felt they needed more officers and needed "teeth" in the rules so the violators would cooperate. Lucille Kring spoke on Item A 18, campaign reform. She recalled when the city first imposed the campaign reform ordinance in 1999 and she said to date, no one had violated the laws and she wondered why the proposed changes were being made. Regarding the additional filing report proposed in the ordinance, she said she felt it ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES MAY 6, 2003 PAGE 3 placed an additional burden on a volunteer treasurer. Regarding office holder expenses, she said she did not believe there was a need to create the account since the city typically paid for elected official expenses. Shirley Grindle, speaking on Item A 18, said most of the changes to the ordinance were a result of the last election, where there were numerous violations. She said the proposed ordinance would tighten up the regulations. She noted that the overriding concern about the office holder account was that it could be misused for other than true office holder related expenses. With that concern, she submitted proposed amendments to the proposed ordinance, clarifying language to say the expenses "were expenditures reasonably related to city business". Mayor Pringle, without objection, permitted Ms. Grindle additional time to present her amendments. Ms. Grindle said the other two amendments she was proposing related to excess funds, giving three options; (1) give it back to the contributor; (2) give it to the city's general fund; or (3) donate it to any non-profit corporation. She noted that after considering it, she recommended deleting the last option, donating to a non-profit organization. She clarified that the intent of the office holder contributions were not in any way to be related to political gain or political purpose. She noted that it would also pertain to any excess funds after the outstanding debt was retired. She added that the amendments would not stop an officer holder from giving surplus campaign funds to non-profit corporations. Mayor Pringle noted that some of the new requirements required a greater degree of accountability and scrutiny, noting that Anaheim would be one of the few cities requiring a post election statement. He said the city would use the state requirements for the template and overlay the city's regulations. He noted his concerned with where Ms. Grindle saw the potential disposal of the funds to a non-profit entity would be a political purpose. He cited an example, using office holder funds to purchase tickets to a function at the Boy's and Girl's Club, buying tickets to an event with office holder dollars could be or could not be "reasonably related to city business". Ms. Grindle said a person could use campaign funds for that purpose. She said that by placing the restriction in the local ordinance, it allowed local interpretation and enforcement rather than having to wait six months or a year to get an interpretation from FPPC. She said the example of the Boy's and Girl's Club tickets should be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. Jim Bondsfield related his volunteer experience with the code enforcement division. He spoke against removing the conditional use permit process. Ed Perez mentioned the quick deed pertaining to the Freedman Forum and his documentation pertaining to that process. He noted recent communication breakdown with the Redevelopment Agency. He offered to work with Council on code enforcement regulations. ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES MAY 6, 2003 PAGE 4 Ken Chen, regarding Item A21, said he had received a notice of violation and worked with the division to rectify matters; there was no need to proceed to court. He was pleased with the process in place, having an ultimate weapon if needed. Regarding Item A 18, campaign reform, he noted that public integrity at the state level had created a perception in the mind of the public that the governor had not acted in the best interest of the state of California. He did not want those perceptions in the city and if reform was need, he would support it and he offered to work on a committee. He urged Council to move slowly with the process. Alma Rameriz spoke about issuing three types of Mexican passports. CITY MANAGER/DEPARTMENTAL CONSENT CALENDAR A1 - A20: Council Member Hernandez pulled Item A 18 for discussion. Council Member Tait moved, seconded by Council Member McCracken, to waive reading in full of all ordinances and resolutions and approve the following in accordance with the reports, certifications and recommendations furnished each Council Member and as listed on the Consent Calendar. Resolutions Nos. 2003R-74 and Ordinance No. 5856 were offered for adoption. Roll Call vote: Ayes - 5; Mayor Pringle, Council Members McCracken, Tait, Hernandez, Chavez. Noes - O. Motion carried. 118 A1. 118 A2. 105 A3. 173 160 A4. Reject certain claims filed against the City. Reject applications for leave to present four late claims. Receive and file minutes of the Park and Recreation Commission meeting held March 26, 2003 and the Application of Mickey's Space Ship Shuttle. Waive Council Policy No. 306 and authorize the Purchasing Agent to issue a purchase order to Schweitzer Engineering, in the amount of $105,160.76 (including tax), for thirty SEL relays for the Hannum Substation protection upgrade. A5. Accept the low bid of Inertia Engineering Inc., in an amount not to exceed $89,600 (including applicable taxes), for pre-assembled distribution switches, authorize the Purchasing Agent to issue a blanket purchase order for a one-year period with four one-year optional renewals and authorize the Purchasing Agent to exercise the renewal options in accordance with Bid #6369. 160 A6. Accept the low bid of Network Services, in an amount not to exceed $25,000 (excluding applicable taxes), for the rental of pagers and paging services, as required, for the Public Utilities Department from June 1, 2003 through May 30, 2004, with three one-year renewals and authorize the Purchasing Agent to exercise the renewal options in accordance with Bid #6383. 160 164 169 12.3 12.3 108 000 182 161 12.3 ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES MAY 6, 2003 PAGE 5 A7. Award the contract to the lowest responsible bidder, Pierre Sprinkler and Landscaping, in the amount of $61 ,300.47, for the Vermont/Citron Irrigation Improvements and approve and authorize the Finance Director to execute the Escrow Agreement pertaining to contract retentions. A8. Award the contract to the lowest responsible bidder, All American Asphalt, in the amount of $374,557.43, for the Cerritos Avenue Improvement Project from State College Boulevard to Anaheim Boulevard and approve and authorize the Finance Director to execute the Escrow Agreement pertaining to contract retentions. A9. Approve the First Amendment to Agreement with RJM Design Group, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $195,000, for professional design services for the Beautification/Aesthetic Improvements Project on Convention Way from Harbor Boulevard to the Convention Center. A10. Approve the agreement with The Keith Companies, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $220,000, for consultant services for the State College Boulevard/Ball Road I ntersection I mprovements Project. A 11. Approve Rule No. 2.01, pertaining to Transient Occupancy Tax, as required by Anaheim Municipal Code Section 2.12.025. A 12. Approve the request to waive fees for the use of Peralta Park and Yorba Regional Park for the 2003 Michelle Carew Tournament conducted by Canyon High School. A13. Approve an agreement with the Anaheim Arts Council, in the expenditure amount of $5,000, to conduct the 11 th Annual Children's Art Festival at Center Street Promenade on May 17, 2003 for community entertainment and related educational activities during the event. 12.3 A14. Approve the recommendation from the Anaheim Workforce Investment Board for the selection of training agencies for the delivery of occupational skills training to participants under the Workforce Investment Act through June 30, 2004. A 15. Approve the One-Year Action Plan for fiscal year 2003-2004 for federal Community Development Block Grant, HOME and Emergency Shelter Grant funding, authorize the City Manager to execute required grant documents and authorize the Executive Director to execute all required fiscal year 2003-2004 federal documents and contracts, including individual subrecipient agreements that are consistent with the approved funding recommendations. A16. RESOLUTION NO. 2003R-74 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM approving the Workforce Investment Act Title I Master ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES MAY 6, 2003 PAGE 6 Subgrant Agreement between the City of Anaheim and the State of California for the term of April 1, 2003 through June 30, 2005. A17. ORDINANCE NO. 5857 (INTRODUCTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM amending various sections of the Anaheim Municipal Code and adding new Section 18.04.135 to Chapter 18.04 of Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal code relating to zoning (Second units and senior second units). A 18. ORDINANCE NO. 5858 (INTRODUCTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING Chapter 1.09 of Title 1 of the Anaheim municipal Code relating to Campaign Reform. Council Member Hernandez, referring to Ms. Grindle's proposed amendment number one, asked if the word "reasonably related" could be changed to "specifically related", stating that he felt it was stronger. He explained that the city was a leader in the state and this would again show the city was taking a leadership role. Council Member Hernandez moved to amend the wording in that section to read "specifically related" rather than "reasonably related". Mayor Pringle noted that the suggested changes from Ms. Grindle were not yet a part of the proposed ordinance; they were her suggested changes to the proposed ordinance presented to Council last week. Council Member McCracken seconded the motion for discussion. Council Member McCracken questioned the office holder account, asking if an elected official could have two open accounts. Mayor Pringle explained that a current office holder could open a second account as a campaign account for a future office. Council Member McCracken asked if a current office holder had a campaign account, must they dispose of the excess funds and close that account before opening an office holder account. City Attorney White said the way it was proposed in the draft ordinance was that after an election, the campaign committee for that election, as long as it had retired all of it's debt, could then be converted to what would be known as an office holder account and money could then be collected into that account up to the $1,000 limit and the money would not be usable for election or re-election, but would have to be used for office holder expenses. Council Member McCracken wondered if she could currently use the balance of funds in a campaign account as an office holder account, to which Mr. White responded yes. Mr. White responded to a question by Council Member McCracken, saying that an office holder could not transfer office holder account funds to a campaign account for a ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES MAY 6, 2003 PAGE 7 different election. Funds collected in an office holder account could only be used in the city for that office they were elected to he explained and at the end of that four-year term of office, the funds left in the account would have to be disposed of. Mayor Pringle explained that when a candidate is elected and they have excess funds from their campaign account, the official has the right to spend those dollars in a variety of ways. If there were no excess funds, the official had until December 31 st to raise for any outstanding debt but if the office holder raised after January 1 st of the next year, it would create a mechanism by which that would be an office holder account. The City Attorney added that as long as there was no debt from the election, the official could use that committee as their office holder account and collect money up to the $1,000 limit into that account used only for expenses of holding office. In addition, a new committee could be established for the next election, whatever the year. Funds left in the office holder account at the end of the term could only be disposed of by either giving it to the city general fund or returning it to the contributors or giving it to charity. Council Member Hernandez moved to amend his motion to include the proposed three changes provided by Ms. Grindle on this date, including changing the word "reasonably" to "specifically". Mayor Pringle noted his concern regarding the denial of excess funds being donated to a charity. He said he would not support that change. Council Member Chavez said he also would not support the change. Vote on the amendments: Ayes - 2; Council Members McCracken and Hernandez. Notes - 3; Mayor Pringle, Council Members Tait and Chavez. Motion defeated. Mayor Pringle offered the introduction of Ordinance No. 5858. 179 A19. ORDINANCE NO. 5856 (ADOPTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM amending the zoning map referred to in Title 18 of the Municipal Code relating to zoning (Reclassification No. 2002-00090, 2865 West Lincoln Avenue) (Introduced at the Council meeting of April 29, 2003, Item A24). 114 A20. Approve minutes of the Council meeting held April 29, 2003. END OF CONSENT CALENDAR 179 A21. Discussion concerning civil or criminal penalties for zoning violations (conditional use permits) (Requested by Mayor Pro Tem Tait at the Council meeting of April 29, 2003). ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES MAY 6, 2003 PAGE 8 Council Member Tait clarified that this was a discussion and he appreciated the statements from the public. He noted his concern was from complaints he received pertaining to a threat of criminal prosecution and he felt that if someone was inadvertently in violation of their conditional use permit or inadvertently violating a code, it seemed the first response from the city was a letter indicating possible criminal penalties. He thought there might be other ways to address the penalty and the issue. Mayor Pringle said he understood Council Member Tail's concern was with the city charging a criminal penalty to someone for violation of code enforcement issue or a conditional use permit, not the civil penalty. City Attorney White explained that when a conditional use permit is issued and there are conditions to be complied with, if the operator violates one or more of those conditions, the code requires that if the city wishes to enforce those conditions, that it has to schedule a noticed public hearing in front of the Planning Commission to consider either modifying the conditions or revoking the conditional use permit. He noted about four years ago, staff proposed to Council an extra tool which would have said, in addition to bringing the permit back for modification or revocation, that the violation of any of those conditions would be a criminal offense and the city could take that to court and seek to enforce the violation. After discussion, the Council rejected that suggestion, he added, so the code did not currently have a provision that says the city can enforce violations of CUP conditions by taking it directly to court as a criminal violation. What the city did in 1999, he informed, was to add, on a split vote of Council, a provision that said the violation of any condition of a CUP would be regarded as public nuisance under the city's nuisance ordinance, which was Chapter 6.44. He noted the problem was that chapter of the code provided that any violations themselves could be enforced criminally. He said that in the four years since that provision had been adopted, staff had never interpreted it that way, as wanting the authority to go to court, but it could be technically read to say that the power did now exist, although it had never been used in the four years it had been in effect. Mayor Pringle responded that a property that had a conditional use permit that oversaw its operational guidelines, the city had a variety of tools, and the ultimate tool wasn't necessarily sending the owner to jail. On a violation of a conditional use permit specifically, the action could be that the city says you can no longer operate your business by revoking the permit. City Attorney White said yes, that was the way, by code, that the city was supposed to do it, revocation of the permit was the first step and if the permit was revoked and they continued to operate without the permit, then the city was to the point of either enforcing it criminally or civilly. If the city was to use the civil route, they would seek an injunction against the operation of that use, if the city prevailed, they would get an order from the court saying they could no longer operate that use, if the operator still did not comply with the court order, the city would have to go back into court and try to enforce that order and the only way to enforce violation of a court order was contempt. He said the way courts enforce contempt was to put people in jail. ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES MAY 6, 2003 PAGE 9 Council Member Tait said if the city went through that process to revoke a CUP because they were in violation and they still operated in disregard for that order, he said he would agree there needed to be a criminal penalty. Mr. White added that there was still remedy after the Council revoked a CUP, the property owner or operator could challenge that decision on revocation in court by seeking a writ of mandate saying that the Council was unreasonable in revoking the permit. He noted there were failsafe points in the system that benefited the property owner, the citizen. Council Member Tait said his concern was the hundreds, possibly thousands, of letters sent out threatening criminal prosecution, often against residents who might not understand the system. For minor violations, he said he felt that was heavy handed. City Attorney White said that staff would be happy to review the letters that went out and the way the city interfaced with the public on these types of matters, using a softer approach. He noted the process could be reviewed and look for ways to make it better and more customer friendly. Council Member Tait noted that the ordinance that was adopted in 1999, if not being used, should be removed from the books. Council Member Chavez said he agreed that the city could be more customer friendly and the threat of criminal prosecution could be intimidating to the many small businesses in the city. He added that this process also affected small businesses that do not operate under a conditional use permit. Mayor Pringle asked how many code enforcement violations were recorded last year and Mr. White said about 12,200 in the CDBG area and Mayor Pringle said they all got a letter saying they were in violation, adding that they were not all criminals, not all bad people. Mayor Pringle asked how many people did the city file criminal charges against last year and Mr. White said for zoning violations there were 14 cases of the 12,200 in the CDBG area. Mayor Pringle said out of the 12,000 cases, most everyone complied and Mr. White agreed. Council Member McCracken said she did not think the process was off track, she felt the communication, the letter, was the problem. She noted the letter was written in a very legalistic manner, suggesting the city look at the way they communicate, possibly using a series of letters. Mayor Pringle gave an example of a person who owned a business and when they purchased the business they thought it was built to proper code and yet there was a sign on the property that the city said was not to code, remove it. He felt it was okay to discuss and try to work out the problem. He felt there was a higher level of imitation when the city said they were going to file criminal charges against the owner. He finalized by saying he could support a criminal charge against the most egregious ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES MAY 6, 2003 PAGE 10 operator that refused under all steps to bring his property that was potentially worthy of condemnation. City Attorney White said with Council's approval, he wished to bring back some suggestions on how things could be changed and to give Council a fuller understanding of the way the process was currently set up. He noted he would need a few weeks to completely assess the process and the correspondence. He agreed with the Mayor to return the first meeting in June. Report on Closed Session Actions: None. Council Communications: Council Members remarked on various community functions. Adjournment: There being no further business to come before the City Council, Mayor Pringle adjourned the meeting at 7:18 P.M. Respectfully submitted: dk;# ~ Sheryl! Schroeder, CMC City Clerk