1977/09/1377-1013
qity Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 13~ 1977~ 1:30 P.M.
PRESENT:
ABSENT:
PRESENT:
The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session.
COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom
COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
CITY MANAGER: William O. Talley
CITY ATTORNEY: William P. Hopkins
CITY CLERK: Linda D. Roberts
FINANCE DIRECTOR: George Ferrone
FIRE CHIEF: James Riley
CITY ENGINEER: James Maddox
UTILITIES DIRECTOR: Gordon Hoyt
ASSISTANT DIRECTOR FOR ZONING: Annika Santalahti
Mayor Thom called the meeting to order and welcomed those in
attendance to the Council meeting.
INVOCATION: Reverend Randy Rhodes of the Melodyland Hotline Center gave the
Invocation.
FLAG SALUTE: Councilman William Kott led the assembly {n the Pledge of Allegiance
to the Flag.
PROCLAMATION: The following proclamation was issued by Mayor Thom and unanimously
approved by the City Council:
"Weight Watchers in Anaheim Week" - September 11 - 17, 1977
114: NO-FAULT AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE - PRESENTATION BY LONG BEACH CITY COUNCILMAN
ERNIE KELL: Councilman Ernie Kell of the City of Long Beach submitted an article
to the Council regarding a study made relative to the consequences of Michigan's
no-fault insurance system. He had previously mailed a packet of information to
the Council with his letter dated September 7, 1977 (on file in the City Clerk's
Office) containing an additional explanatory letter, a resolution of the City
Council of the City of Long Beach recommending that the League of California Cities
adopt a resolution supporting a National No-Fault Liability System, as well as
additional backup data. Mr. Kell then read excerpts from the two-page explanatory
letter and further briefed the Council on the no-fault insurance system and the
ongoing efforts to institute such a system in California and the nation.
On motion by Councilwoman Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Thom, the City Council
went on record in support of the resolution of the City Council of the City of
Long Beach recommending that the League of California Cities adopt a resolution
supporting a National No-Fault Vehicle Liability System. Councilman Roth voted
"No". MOTION CARRRIED.
Councilman Roth had wanted the opportunity to further evaluate the packet that was
presented and have the matter brought back in one week. However, he assured Council-
woman Kmywood, since he was the Voting Delegate to the League Conference, he would
defer to the wishes of the majority of the Council.
MINUTES: Approval of minutes was deferred for one week.
77-1014
City Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 13~ 1977, 1:30 P.M.
WAIVER OF READING - ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS: Councilwoman Kaywood moved to
waive the reading, in full, of all ordinances and resolutions and that consent
to the waiver of reading is hereby given by all Council Members unless, after
reading of the title, specific request is made by a Council Member for the read-
ing of such ordinance or resolution. Councilman Thom seconded the motion. MOTION
UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED.
FINANCIAL DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY in the amount of $5,370,862.64, in accordance
with the 1977-78 Budget, were approved.
123: REVISED REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT WITH REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY: Councilwoman
Kaywood offered Resolution No. 77R-610 for adoption, as recommended in memorandum
dated August 2, 1977, resubmitted September 7, 1977, from the Executive Director
of Community Development, Norm Priest. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 77-610: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
ACCEPTING THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF AN AGREEMENT WITH THE ANAHEIM REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION THEREOF.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Kaywood, Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 77R-610 duly passed and adopted.
174: ALLOCATION OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FUNDS (CDBG) FOR ENGINEERING
DESIGN: ($18,000 for water lines--S35,000 for alleys) On motion by Councilman
Seymour, seconded by Councilman Roth, the use of Third Year CDBG Funds for engineering
design for water lines and alleys in Neighborhood Preservation Area 4, was authorized,
as recommended in memorandum dated September 7, 1977 from the Executive Director of
Community Development. MOTION CARRIED.
174.123: YOUTH PAINT AND PICK-UP PROGRAM~ INSTRUCTIONAL SERVICES: (John Rush -
September 16, 1977 through June 30, 1978) Councilwoman Kaywood offered Resolution
No. 77R-611 for adoption, as recommended in memorandum dated September 6, 1977
from the Executive Director of Community Development. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 77R-611: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
APPROVING THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF AN AGREEMENT FOR INSTRUCTIONAL SERVICES.
(John Rush)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Kaywood, Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 77R-611 duly passed and adopted.
77-1015
City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 13~ 1977, 1:30 P.M.
128 AND 129: TERMINATION OF PARAMEDIC BILLING SYSTEM: Councilman Kott offered
Resolution No. 77R-612 for adoption, rescinding Resolution No. 76R-279, eliminating
paramedic service fees, as recommended in memorandum dated September 6, 1977 from
the Director of Finance, George Ferrone.
Before a vote was taken, Councilman Seymour questioned Finance Director Ferrone
relative to his September 6, 1977 memorandum and inquired if terminating the para-
medic billing system resulted in the elimination of work for two full-time people,
why was he was not reducing a position.
Mr. Ferrone explained that 8 to 10 people were working on paramedic billings and,
cumulatively, the 80 hours spent in so doing was equivalent to two full-time people.
The efforts of these people were being diverted from other responsibilities due to
the work load generated from paramedic billings, but there were many other needs to
which they could attend if the billing system was eliminated. He also explained
that since Ron Howard, who had been most involved in the system had moved to Redevelop-
ment, the billing effort had been dropped. The work was not presently being done,
and Mr. Ferrone did not contemplate replacing Mr. Howard's position.
Discussion followed between Councilman Seymour and Mr. Talley relative to the
matter, at the conclusion of which, Mr. Talley assured Councilman Seymour the
position as discussed with Mr. Ferrone did or would not appear elsewhere.
Councilman Roth was not in favor of eliminating the procedure, but was of the opinion....
that such billings should be turned over to a professional collection agency, rather
than writing them off, thus burdening the taxpayer.
Councilman Seymour maintained that the system was not created with the intent to
cover the cost, but the motivation was to eliminate to the greatest degree possible
the "band-aid" type of call. However, he assumed that the billing system was not
a deterrent to the minor call; therefore, he was in favor of its elimination.
The Mayor clarified that the system was adopted'on a trial basis and if it was not
determined to be a deterrent, the system should be dropped.
Fire Chief James Riley confirmed his understanding that when the Council entered
into the program, it was simply to deter unnecessary calls. The system did not
eliminate such calls, and he considered the amount of time spent in the billing
process to be of no value, plus the fact that a great number of complaints were
received, as the citizenry viewed paramedic service as they did fire and police
protection. They maintained they should not be billed over and above the taxes
paid for such services.
Patricia Clancy, 303 North Bush Street, interjected that the paramedics had come
to her aid approximately two years prior, and she had not yet received a billing.
She felt that billings should be sent to people who made use of the service. Mr.
Talley explained that prior to 1976, there was no billing system for the service.
Mr. Talley stated, in answer to Councilman Roth, that although the City did believe
in utilizing collection agencies, under the terms of the resolution many people
were excluded from the requirement to pay, and it was almost a matter of discriminatin
against those requested to pay.
~T
77-1016
City .Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 13~ 1977~ 1:30 P.M.
Councilwoman Kaywood noted that one of the original exclusions she questioned at
the time was the arbitrary age of 62. Some very irate ~eople expressed to her
they were not in the poor class and resented being placed in that category.
Councilwoman Kaywood also stated that, to her knowledge, no one was hired to handle
the attendant clerical aspects of the paramedics billing system. So no position
was created, with the result that many employees were inundated with additional
work and their regular workload kept piling up.
Councilman Kott was also of the philosophy that everyone should pay for services
as expressed by Councilman Roth, but conceded that the use of methods such as
collection agencies and Small Claims Court with people who would not, or felt they
should not, pay was a lost cause. Thus, it would be more practical to step aside.
A vote was then taken on Resolution No. 77R-612 as offered for adoption by Council-
man Kott. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 77R-612: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 76R-279 REGARDING THE ESTABLISHING OF FEES FOR PARAMEDIC
SERVICE.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Kott and Thom
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Roth
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 77R-612 duly passed and adopted.
MOTION: Councilman Seymour moved that the position vacated in the Accounting
Division be left open until such time as a report was received from the Director
of Finance or. City Manager Justifying the position. Councilman Kott seconded
the motion.
Before a vote was taken, Councilwoman Kaywood and the Mayor expressed their
opposition to the motion, and Councilwoman Kaywood reiterated that no one had
been hired to take care of the billing system which created an additional burden
on existing personnel.
At the conclusion of further discussion between Councilman Seymour and Mr. Ferrone,
in which Mr. Ferrone was requested to clarify some of the specifics of the burden
placed on the Finance Department, Councilman Seymour remained adamant in his con-
tention that one-half of the personnel, one position, be discontinued since the
program had now been discontinued.
A vote was taken on the foregoing motion and carried by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Seymour, Kott and Roth
Kaywood and Thom
None
MOTION CARRIED.
77-1017
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 13~ 1977~ 1:30 P.M.
115: AVENUE OF THE FLAGS PROJECT: Mr. Bill Erickson, 301 East North Street,
reported on staff recommendations which were submitted as a result of Council's
direction at the meeting of August 16, 1977 (see minutes that date) to report
back with an analysis of the two proposals submitted at that time.
Mr. Erickson then briefed the Council on staff's recommendations which were a part
of Exhibits 1 through 17, also including cost estimates by City departments relating
to the necessary improvements involved, as well as cost estimates on the flags, poles
and accessories from outside vendors.
Mr. Erickson explained that his original proposal was to use the entire Lincoln
Avenue realignment for 50 state flags whereupon he submitted a rendering of the
plan. He noted, however, that Parks, Recreation and the Arts'Department was of
the opinion it should be confined to the downtown area only. The PAC Committee,
Redevelopment Commission, and Anaheim Beautiful viewed the concept and gave their
approval. Public participation had also been initiated to help defray the costs
of the program, and Mr. Erickson indicated if approval was given, he would personally
sponsor the Wisconsin flag pole. Although he would await Council decision, he
reiterated his recommendation that 50 state flags be used on the entire Lincoln
Avenue realignment, working through Parks and Recreation and Traffic to insure the
project was handled in the best possible manner.
The Mayor stated that Mr. Erickson's idea was very unique and imaginative and he
fully supported it. He considered that the effect along the Lincoln realignment
would be a beautiful one and more appropriate than confining the concept to the
downtown redevelopment area. He felt it would add stature to the City's image
as being an international city, and the project was well worth the monies that
would be expended.
Councilwoman Kaywood was concerned relative to the expenditures involved. Although
the concept was a good one and looked beautiful on the rendering presented, mainte-
nance costs would be excessive. She suggested imbedding the State seal or flag
in the sidewalk covered with an epoxy finish requiring no further maintenance as
an attractive alternative. She also elaborated on some additional problems that
would be involved relative to the flag concept and concluded that, although she
thought the Avenue of the Flags project to be an excellent one initially, in practi-
cality, it would not work.
Councilman Seymour explained that he served on the ad hoc committee that was formed
to study the Avenue of the Flags concept. He was of the opinion that for their own
good reasons, staff had decided that the project should not be in the redevelopment
area of downtown Anaheim and continued to place barriers in the way of any successful
conclusion of the project. He referred to the last paragraph of memorandum dated
September 7, 1977 from James Ruth, Director of the Parks, Recreation and the Arts
Department wherein Council direction was requested relative to the alternatives
(3) presented in the memo. Councilman Seymour stressed that action taken by the
Council at the previous meeting directed staff to submit the feasibility of the
two proposals, along with ideas and recommendations, one at City Hall and the other
on Lincoln Avenue, not why it could not be done. There was no discussion that the
concept would be eliminated. He reiterated his feeling that staff had done every-
thing possible to place stumbling blocks in the path of a worthwhile, citizen-oriented
project and he observed such action at the meetings he attended wherein the matter
was discussed.
77-1018
City Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 13~ 1977~ 1:30 P.M.
Councilman Seymour stated that cost figures showed an expenditure of $72,334, but
a closer look would reveal that, of that money, all but $13,636 was going to be
spent anyway because patterned concrete was planned to be installed, as well as
trees and shrubs. He commented that although Councilwoman Kaywood's concept of
imbedding the flags or seals was worthwhile, it would (1) not be very visible,
with very little aesthetic value and (2) the average citizen would not walk across
a flag.
Councilman Seymour stressed that the project should be started and if staff wanted
a decision today, he was prepared to make one on Lincoln Avenue or a trade-off
with some type of configuration around the Civic Center Project.
MOTION: Thereupon, Councilman Thom moved that the Council authorize the initiation
of the Avenue of the Flags concept as presented by Mr. Erickson along Lincoln
Avenue in the redevelopment area from Harbor Boulevard to East Street utilizing all
50 state flags; staff to submit a report on how this would be accomplished. Council-
man Seymour seconded the motion.
Before a vote was taken, Councilman Roth stated that he supported the concept, but
his concern was taking an action today which'appeared too premature relative to
unanswered questions as to what was actually going to occur downtown.
Councilman Seymour explained that he did not intend to buy the flag poles today
· ince he was not prepared to be that specific. He was, however, prepared to re-
quest of staff how the project would be accomplished if it was done on Lincoln
Avenue.
A vote was taken on the foregoing motion and carried by the following vote.
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Seymour, Roth and Thom
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood and Kott
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
MOTION CARRIED.
153: EMPLOYEE GROUP DENTAL PLAN: On motion by Councilman Seymour, seconded by
Councilwoman Kaywood, the Personnel Department was authorized to solicit proposals
for employee group dental coverage, as recommended in memorandum dated September 7,
1977 from the Personnel Director. Councilman Kott abstained. MOTION CARRIED.
123: BIDDLE AND ASSOCIATES~ APPLICATION TESTS AND EEO MANAGEMENT TRAINING PROGRAMS
FOR FIRE AND POLICE PERSONNEL: Councilman Thom offered Resolution No. 77R-613 for
adoption, as recommended in memorandum dated September 7, 1977 from the Personnel
Director, with the proposed agreement to be completed by September 20, 1978. Refer
to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 77R-613: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
APPROVING THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF AN AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TO
DEVELOP APPLICATION TESTS AND EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY MANAGEMENT TRAINING
PROGRAMS FOR FIRE AND POLICE PERSONNEL AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE MAYOR
AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM.
77-1019
City .Hall, Anaheim, California- COUNCIL MINUTES - September 13~ 1977, 1:30 P.M.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Kaywood, Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 77R-613 duly passed and adopted.
174: INSTALLATION OF AUTOMATIC CROSSING GATES, BROADWAY AT SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANS-
PORTATION COMPANY~ SUPPLEMENT NO. 2 TO LOCAL AGENCY-STATE AGREEMENT NO. 07-5055:
Councilman Seymour offered Resolution No. 77R-614 for adoption, as recommended in
memorandum dated August 12, 1977 from the City Engineer. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 77R-614: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
APPROVING THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF SUPPLEMENT NO. 2 TO LOCAL AGENCY-STATE
AGREEMENT NO. 07-5055 WITH THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
RELATING TO FEDERAL AID IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS, AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY
CLERK TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Kaywood, Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 77R-614 duly passed and adopted.
164: DRAINAGE ASSESSMENT FEES, 1370 NORTH RED GUM: (Beam Investment) In answer
to Councilman Kott, City Engineer James Maddox explained that Beam Investment was
experiencing a slow cash flow situation and their letter received September 2, 1977
requested that they be permitted to pay the balance of their drainage fees of
$5,592 in five equal payments of $1,118.40 each, Further clarification with Beam
Investment confirmed that the intent was to pay it in five monthly installments.
He also clarified for Councilman Kott that the entire amount was due upon occupancy
of the building which was just occurring.
Brief discussion followed wherein the Mayor suggested, if approval was given, that
an interest charge be included or otherwise the matter could be construed as a
gift of public funds. City Attorney Hopkins stated that it could be determined
interest would~be due, however, it would not be mandatory and no significant
amount was involved. It was his opinion, therefore, that it would not be a gift
of public funds.
Councilwoman Kaywood left the Council Chamber. (2:45 P.M.)
The Mayor expressed an additional concern relative to a precedent being set; City
Engineer Maddox indicated this was the first such request and he did not anticipate
many like requests in the future.
On motion by Councilman Seymour, seconded by Councilman Thom, the balance of drainage
fees due on 1370 North Red Gum in five equal monthly payments of $1,118.40 at the
request of Beam Investment was authorized, subject to a 10-percent simple interest
charge. Councilwoman Kaywood was temporarily absent. MOTION CARRIED.
77-1020
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 13~ 1977~ 1:30 P.M.
Councilwoman Kaywood returned to the Council Chamber. (2:47 P.M.)
123: SPECIAL ENERGY CRISIS INTERVENTION PROGRAM: Mr. Talley briefed the Council
on memorandum dated September 7, 1977 from the Utilities Department relative to
the subject program and pointed out that on September 2, 1977, the Public Utilities
Board, by motion, defeated approval of participation by the City in the program.
Thus, staff recommendation and the PUB motion were in conflict.
RESOLUTION: Councilman Thom offered Resolution No. 77R-615 for adoption, authorizing
an agreement with the State of California in connection with the Special Energy
Crisis Intervention Program to provide relief for certain qualified, low income
utility customers August 1, 1977 to March 1, 1978.
Before a vote was taken, Councilman Seymour questioned Utilities Director Hoyt
relative to the negative vote cast by the citizen-appointed Public Utilities
Board.
Mr. Hoyt first confirmed the Mayor's statement that it was basically an argument
by Jim Townsend that the City should not accept government money. He added that
less than a dozen people would take advantage of the program, and the cost of
administration would be approximately $900. He also clarified for Councilman Roth
that it would not cost more in paper work than would be realized.
vote was taken on the foregoing Resolution. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 77R-615: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
APPROVING THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF AN AGREEMENT WITH THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
IN CONNECTION WITH THE ENERGY CRISIS INTERVENTION PROGRAM AND AUTHORIZING THE
MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Kaywood, Seymour, Ko6t, Roth and Thom
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 77R-615 duly passed and adopted.
105: HOUSING COMMISSION RESIGNATION: On motion by Councilman Thom, seconded by
Councilwoman Kaywood, the resignation of Ms. Josephine Montoya from the Housing
Commission was accepted with regret, and the unscheduled vacancy to be posted
accordingly. MOTION CARRIED.
160: RECORDING SYSTEM - COUNCIL CHAMBER: The Mayor referred to a communication
received from the City Clerk relative to malfunctioning of the recording equipment
used to tape Council meetings and specifically bank No. 2 which failed during the
meeting of September 6, 1977,~thus, a whole tape did not record. Although bank
No. 2 had since been repaired, Bank Nos. 3 and 4 were still inoperable.
The Mayor thereupon recommended that consideration be given to purchasing another
recording system that could be used temporarily until a new facility (City Hall)
was built. The expenditure would be from the Council Contingency Fund. Bids
should be solicited and the equipment purchased and installed.
77-1021
~ity Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 13~ 1977~ 1:30 P.M.
Councilman Seymour supported the recommendation and further indicated that it
was not too early to discuss the matter with the architect to determine what type
of recording equipment would be used in the new City Hall. If a large expenditure
was made in recording equipment now, it could be moved out of the old facility
and into the new.
The Mayor stated that relative to his recommendation, the amount would be under
$5,OOO.
City Clerk Linda Roberts, stated that Property Maintenance was looking into a
temporary replacement which could be used by another department, board or commission
when the move to a new City Hall took place.
Councilman Seymour wanted assurance that the matter would come back to the Council
with specific numbers before a final decision was made.
Thereupon, Councilman Thom moved to authorize the solicitation of bids for the
prospective recording equipment that would meet temporary needs, and subsequently
be brought back to the Council for final determination. Councilwoman Kaywood
seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
Councilwoman Kaywood commented that she would prefer to have a system that would
be useful in another department rather than purchasing equipment at this point in
time and then having to build around it in the future in the new building.
RECESS: By general consent, the City Council recessed for 5 minutes. (2:55 P.M.)
AFTER RECESS: Mayor Thom called the meeting to order, all Council Members being
present. (3:00 P.M.)
PUBLIC HEARING - RECLASSIFICATION NO. 77-78-7~ VARIANCE NO. 2960~ AND EIR NO. 204:
Application by Sent-Pac Corporation, for a change in zone from RS-A-43,000 to
RM-1200 to construct a 198-unit apartment complex on property located on the north-
west corner of Lincoln Avenue and Bel Air Street with code waivers of:
a) permitted encroachments into required yards
b) maximum building height
c) minimum structural setback
d) required block wall
Review of subject reclassification, variance and EIR was requested by Councilwoman
Kaywood at the Council meeting of August 23, 1977 and public hearing scheduled
this date.
The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC77-168 certified EIR
No. 204 as being in conformance with the California Environmental Quality Act
and City and State Guidelines and, further, granted Reclassification No. 77-78-7,
subject to the following conditions:
1. That the owner(s) of subject property shall deed to the City of Anaheim a
fifteen- (15) foot radius property line return at the northwest corner of Lincoln
Avenue and Bel Air Straet.
77-1022
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 13~ 1977~ 1:30 P.M.
2. That all engineering requirements of the City of Anaheim along Lincoln Avenue,
including preparation of improvement plans and installation of all improvements such
as curbs and gutters, sidewalks, street grading and paving, drainage facilities
or other appurtenent work, shall be complied with as required by the City
Engineer and in accordance with standard plans and specifications on file in
the Office of the City Engineer; that street lighting facilities along Lincoln
Avenue and Bel Air Street shall be installed as required by the Director of Public
Utilities; and/or that a bond, certificate of deposit, letter of credit, or cash,
in an amount and form satisfactory to the City of Anaheim shall be posted with
the City to guarantee the installation of the above-mentioned requirements.
3. That the owner(s) of subject property shall pay to the City of Anaheim the
sum of sixty cents (60¢) per front foot along Lincoln Avenue and Bel Air Street
for tree planting purposes.
4. That trash storage areas shall be provided in accordance with approved plans
on file with the Office of the Director of Public Works.
5. That fire hydrants shall be installed and charged as required and determined
to be necessary by the Chief of the Fire Department prior to commencement of
structural framing.
6. That subject property shall be served by underground utilities.
7. That drainage of subject property shall be disposed of in a manner satisfactory
to the City Engineer.
8. That the owner(s) of subject property shall pay to the City of Anaheim the
appropriate park and recreation in-lieu fees, as determined to be appropriate by
the City Council, said fees to be paid at the time the building permit is issued.
9. That appropriate water assessment fees, as determined by the Director of
Public Utilities, shall be paid to the City of Anaheim prior to the issuance of
a building permit.
10. That a six- i6) foot masonry wall shall be constructed along the east property
line.
11. That a grading permit will be obtained prior to any grading or on-site excavation
activities.
'12. That mitigating measures contained in Environmental Impact Report No. 204,
certified by the Planning Comm4ssion on August 1, 1977, will be complied with.
13. Prior to the introduction of an ordinance rezoning subject property, Condition
Nos. 1, 2 and 3, above-mentioned, shall be completed. The provisions or rights granted
by this resolution shall become null and void by action of the City Council unless
said conditions are complied with within one year from the date hereof, or such
further time as the City Council may grant.
14. That Condition Nos. 4, 6, 7, 10 and 12, above-mentioned, shall be complied
with prior to final building and zoning inspections.
77-1023
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 13~ 1977, 1:30 P.M.
The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC77-169 granted Variance
No. 2960, in part, subject to the following conditions:
1. That this Variance is granted subject to the completion of Reclassification
No. 77-78-7, now pending.
2. That the owner(s) of subject property shall submit a letter requesting termina-
tion of Conditional Use Permit No. 1643.
3. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with
plans and specifications on file with the City of Anaheim marked Exhibit Nos. 1
through 3, as corrected by the petitioner.
4. That Condition Nos. 1 and 2, above-mentioned, shall be complied with prior
to the commencement of the activity authorized under this resolution, or prior
to the time that the building permit is issued, or within a period of one year
from date hereof, whichever occurs first, or such further time as the Planning
Commission may grant.
5. That Condition No. 3, above-mentioned, shall be complied with prior to final
building and zoning inspections.
Miss Santalahti described the location and surrounding land uses. She outlined
the findings given in the staff report which was submitted to and considered by
the City Planning Commission.
Miss Santalahti also pointed out that the developers had submitted a letter to
her dated September 12, 1977 responding to some of the comments that Councilwoman
Kaywood made relative to the Environmental Impact Report and, upon the request of
Councilwoman Kaywood, read the letter into the record which dealt with the matter
of refuse removal at the subject site.
The Mayor asked if the Applicant or Applicant's Agent was present and desirous
of being heard.
Mr. Richard Bracamonte, President of Sent-Pac Corporation, 7029 Paramount Boule-
vard, Pico Rivera, stated that the company's architect and geologist were also
present to answer any questions.
Councilwoman Kaywood stated that the letter read by Miss Santalahti answered most
of the questions she had, but she also expressed some additional concerns which
she wanted clarified; her greatest concern being that building not begin on top
of a source of odor since afterward, there would be no way to eliminate it.
In answer to additional questions posed by Councilwoman Kaywood, Mr. Bracamonte
and Mr. Gerald A. Nicoll of G. A. Nicoll and Associates, a certified engineering
geologist, clarified the following:
1. Excavation of the dump site would take approximately two months and the "cap"
or the top part of the dump would be moved in sections while the rest of the dump
would be covered, thus precluding the release of odor. The material would be
removed by trucks and it was assumed that the contractor would take precautions
so the removed fill would not be a safety hazard or litter the highways while it
was being transported to the Brea dump.
77-1024
City Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 13~ 1977~ 1:30 P.M.
2. The depth of odors normally went to the point of water penetration or depth
of gas circulation. In this case, as in most dump sites in the Southern California
area, noticeable gases did not exceed approximately one foot below the original
ground. The odor-producing medium was primarily the refuse fill, and once the trash
was removed, the source was gone. Even if all the odor-causing material was not
removed, it would not be enriched or enhanced but would dissipate over a long period
of time. After excavation was complete, there would be no source of odor and there
would be a minimum of a three-foot cap of soil where refuse fill remained, thus
eliminating the future possibility of odor.
3. There would be at least 10 feet of fine grain soil and a visquine barrier
between the new development and existing mobile home park, not meant to prevent
migration of gases or gaseous odors, but meant to inhibit them. A plastic sheet-
ing would be placed over the refuse fill in the area near the mobile home park,
thereby diminishing any odor to an imperceptible amount. It was reiterated that
without source material, there would be no significant source of odor.
4. The surface of the area would be inspected and approved by the developers
prior to allowing any new fill being placed thereon, or when the excavation of
new foundations occurred. A footing inspection was also required by the City
as part of the City's grading ordinance and they (developers) would include that
as part of the final foundation design report.
5. Although it was unlikely that any major water or gas lines existed underground
at the subject site, they could be easily shut off during construction if intercepted
by construction equipment. Thus far, the 30 or 40 borings excavated on the property
produced no evidence that such lines existed. A precaution was always made so that
any party authorized to perform work on the site should be aware that such improve-
ments might be present. It would be the civil engineer's responsibility to evaluate
their presence and consequences relative to construction.
The Mayor asked if anyone wished to speak in favor or in opposition.
Dr. Joseph Butterworth, 285 West Monroe, stated that earlier in the summer, the
developer requested that he contact some of the neighbors to hold informational
meetings to discuss the project and answer any concerns. On July 25, 1977, 25
residents from the tract to the east of the proposed development attended and
they generally favored the project and wanted to see it come to fruition as it
was the best project that had thus far been proposed. He also understood that
a similar meeting was held at the mobile home park to the west and the sentiments
expressed were the same.
Councilwoman Kaywood asked Dr. Butterworth if his question was answered relative
to the methane gas from the adjoining piece of property.
Dr. Butterworth was satisfied that the proposed methane shield would solve that
concern and added that not only the odor was discussed at the meeting of July 25,
1977, but also density, traffic flow and the overall general plan.
Councilwoman Kaywood emphasized for Councilman Kott that the many questions posed
were not brought up or answered at the Planning Commission meeting and they did not
appear in the minutes. When she originally asked those questions, there were no
answers available and she felt, because of their importance, they required answers
before proceeding.
77-1025
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 13~ 1977~ 1:30 P.M.
There being no further persons who wished to speak, the Mayor closed the public
hearing.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 204 - CERTIFICATION: Environmental Impact Report
No. 204 having been reviewed by City staff and recommended by the City Planning
Commission to be in compliance with City and State Guidelines and the State of
California Environmental Quality Act, the City Council acting upon such information
and belief does hereby certify, on motion by Councilwoman Kaywood, seconded by
Councilman Seymour, that EIR No. 204 is in compliance with the California Environ-
mental Quality Act and City and State Guidelines. MOTION CARRIED.
Councilwoman Kaywood offered Resolution No. 77R-616 for adoption authorizing the
preparation of the necessary ordinance changing the zone as requested, subject to
the conditions recommended by the City Planning Commission, and Resolution No. 77R-617
for adoption granting Variance No. 2960, in Part, subject to City Planning Commission
recommendations, including clarifications articulated by the applicant and applicant's
representative in the foregoing testimony. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 77R-616: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO
ZONING SHOULD BE AMENDED AND THAT THE BOUNDARIES OF CERTAIN ZONES SHOULD BE
CHANGED. (77-78-7, RM-1200)
RESOLUTION NO. 77R-617: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
GRANTING VARIANCE NO. 2960, IN PART.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Kaywood, Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 77R-616 and 77R-617 duly passed and adopted.
PUBLIC HEARING - VARIANCE NO. 2955: Application by Sheldon and Constance Golison,
to construct two commercial buildings on CL zoned property located southwest of
Orange and Magnolia Avenues, with code waivers of:
a) minimum number of parking spaces (denied)
b) maximum building height
c) minimum building setback (deleted)
Review of subject variance was requested by Councilwoman Kaywood at the Council
meeting of August 23, 1977, and public hearing scheduled this date.
The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC77-162 recommended that
the subject property be declared exempt from the requirement to prepare an environ-
mental impact report pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental
Quality Act and, further, recommended that Variance No. 2955 be granted, in part,
subject to the following conditions:
77-1026
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 13~ 1977~ 1:30 P.M.
1. That all engineering requirements of the City of Anaheim along Magnolia Avenue
and Orange Avenue, including preparation of improvement plans and installation of
all improvements such as curbs and gutters, sidewalks, street grading and paving,
drainage facilities or other appurtenent work, shall be complied with as required
by the City Engineer and in accordance with standard plans and specifications on
file in the Office of the City Engineer; that street lighting facilities along
Magnolia Avenue and Orange Avenue shall be installed as required by the Director
of Public Utilities; and/or that a bond, certificate of deposit, letter of credit,
or cash, in an amount and form satisfactory to the City of Anaheim shall be posted
with the City to guarantee the installation of the above-mentioned requirements.
2. That the owner(s) of subject property shall pay to the City of Anaheim the
sum of sixty cents (60¢) per front foot along Magnolia Avenue and Orange Avenue
for tree planting purposes.
3. That trash storage areas shall be provided in accordance with approved plans
on file with the Office of the Director of Public Works.
4. That fire hydrants shall be installed and charged as required and determined
to be necessary by the Chief of the Fire Department prior to commencement of
structural framing.
5. That subject property shall be served by underground utilities.
6. That drainage of subject property shall be disposed of in a manner satisfactory
to the City Engineer.
7. That appropriate water assessment fees, as determined by the Director of
Public Utilities, shall be paid to the City of Anaheim prior to the issuance of
a building permit.
8. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with
plans and specifications on file with the City df Anaheim marked Revision No. 1
of Exhibit Nos. 1 and 2; provided, however, that (a) the minimum number of parking
spaces for commercial uses shall be provided as required by Code, (b) that an eight-
(8) foot high block wall shall be constructed on the south and west property lines,
(c) that a ten- (10) foot wide landscaped buffer shall abut the west and south prop-
erty lines and be planted with trees on twenty- (20) foot centers, according to the
type of tree planted, to effectively screen the commercial buildings from the adjacent
residential areas, (d) that a mansard-type roof shall be constructed on the rear
portion of the building adjacent to the south property line to match the roof design
on the front of the building, and (e) that see-through-type gates shall be provided
at the east and west ends of the building adjacent to the south to the eight- (8)
foot block wall.
9. That Condition Nos. 1 and 2, above-mentioned, shall be complied with prior to
the commencement of the activity authorized under this resolution, or prior to
the time that the building permit is issued, or within a period of one year from
date hereof, whichever occurs first, or such further time as the Planning Commission
may grant.
10. That Condition Nos. 3, 5, 6 and 8, above-mentioned, shall be complied with
prior to final building and zoning inspections.
77-1027
City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 13~ 1977~ 1:30 P.M.
Miss Santalahti described the location and surrounding land uses. She outlined
the findings given in the staff report which was submitted to and considered by
the City Planning Commission.
The Council directed several questions to staff, at the conclusion of which, it was
clarified that the petition previously submitted dated July 14, 1977, signed by
55 residents opposing the original three waivers requested was submitted prior
to the matter being heard by the Planning Commission. Since then, two of the
three waivers were no longer valid because of the number of parking spaces which
were now in conformance since the gross floor area was reduced and the minimum
building setback was deleted. The only remaining waiver referred to maximum
building height. Although residents did appear at the first Planning Commission
meeting to express their concerns, they were satisfied with the developer's
revised plans the second time around.
The Mayor asked if the Applicant or Applicant's Agent was present and desirous
of being heard.
Mr. Hal Moorehead, Investors Real Estate Services, 2790 Harbor Boulevard, Costa
Mesa, explained for Councilwoman Kaywood that his company was purchasing the
property and from his recollection, the present owner purchased the property in
1966. Prior to that, he had no knowledge of ownership.
Councilwoman Kaywood was concerned that the property was a self-inflicted hardship
since it was originally left out of the residential parcel. Subsequently, it was
to be a commercial office with a service station but instead, only a service
station was built leaving the two hardship parcels.
Mr. Moorehead agreed that the problem was created many years ago and the matter
wa6 broached at the Planning Commission meeting.
Councilwoman Kaywood stated that the neighborhood was a very nice one and it was
extremely important to preserve the integrity o~ residential areas, otherwise it
would be a matter of contributing to the deterioration of more neighborhoods.
There were many custom homes in the area so there was no justification in claiming
the property was not suitable for residential. She reiterated she did not want to
see a use placed on that property that would deteriorate the neighborhood, especially
a blanket approval of commercial use' which would mean that, for example, a liquor
store would be permitted.
Miss Santalahti interjected that off-sale liquor was permitted by right in a
commercial zone.
Councilwoman Kaywood suggested that some kind of restriction be placed on permitted
uses as she would be opposed to a liquor store at that location right across from
an elementary school.
Miss Santalahti stated that there had been restrictions placed on uses of property
stating simply that only certain given uses were allowed and specifically prohibiting
others.
77-1028
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 13~ 1977~ 1:30 P.M.
In answer to Councilwoman Kaywood, Mr. Moorehead stated that as of yet they had
no specific tenants in mind, but that it would be a neighborhood center for the
small businessmen. Although they were talking to a few prospective tenants, they
had not signed,~nor received a letter of intent from anyone.
Miss Santalahti clarified for Councilwoman Kaywood that there were no further com-
plaints from any of the neighbors. At the first Planning Commission hearing, the
objection was relative to the two-story building which they thought was going to
abut the property line. They did not have a concern with the one-story building
and they were satisfied particularly when the buffering was discussed and the
proposed installation of an 8-foot block wall.
The Mayor asked if anyone wished to speak either in favor or in opposition.
Barbara Vernengo, 2617 Westhaven Drive, directly adjacent to the property in
question, explained that she was the one who brought in the two previous peti-
tions and what the residents objected to originally was the possible parking
problem that would be created overflowing into the residential area. They defi-
nitely objected to and still did, the two-story building. They asked for an
8-foot wall and did receive it. One thing they did not want was a fast food
service or anything at all that served liquor, inside, outside or anywhere.
Also, there was a 7-11 store not too far from the residential area that
was continually being robbed and had since gone out of business. They were
opposed to anything of that nature being located on the subject property.
The Mayor pointed out that unless the CL zone was restricted, a number of uses
would be permitted such as a convenience food market.
Mrs. Vernengo indicated that although she did not know how such restrictions could
be. accomplished, the residents did not want on-sale liquor in that area and she
was backed up by the 55 signatures previously submitted.
Further discussion followed between Council, staff and Mrs. Vernengo which revealed
that the residents considered the neighborhood as one designed to be low-keyed and
construction of a two-story building would detract from the original design and
they were adamant in their opposition to any 24-hour business. Staff indicated
that there was a possibility of visual intrusion from the windows in the proposed
two-story facing west, but it would be between 50 and 60 feet from the base of the
proposed building to the west property line along with the installation of an
8-foot block wall.
Councilwoman Kaywood then read the list of permitted uses in the CL zone so that
Mrs. Vernengo could stipulate those as being an objectionable use from the residents'
standpoint in order to preclude any conflict after the project was built.
In conclusion, it was ascertained and reiterated that the residents did not want
anything with a 24-hour use, establishments that sold liquor in any form and any
use that encouraged people to loiter. Some specific uses mentioned were a bus
depot, laundry and dry cleaning establishments, sauna or turkish baths, restaurants
and the like.
77-1029
.~ity Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNC%L MINUTES - September 13, 1977, 1:30 P.M.
Mr. Alan Adams, 2790 Harbor Boulevard, Costa Mesa, explained that relative to
sight intrusion from the two-story building, the line of sight was less for the
two-story building than a one-story built within the 10 feet permitted. Thus,
the intrusion would be no more than from a one-story home built within that
distance.
Further discussion followed relative to possible instrusion, the type of Commercial
uses anticipated on the second floor, and other related matters.
There being no further persons who wished to speak, the Mayor closed the public
hearing.
Councilman Seymour asked the applicant if he would stipulate to the following two
conditions restricting the use of the property: (1) that there would not be any
operation or occupancy beyond the hour of 11:00 P.M. and (2) no liquor sales to
be conducted on the property.
Mr. Moorehead expressed that the question gave him great concern because he was
being asked to make judgments at this point in time that he could not make because
he did not know who his prospective tenants.were going to be and thus, Councilman
Seymour was asking him to unnecessarily restrict the field of business people who
he may be able to place in the center. These centers usually had convenience food
markets and sometimes small fast food operations which may or may not have a beer
and wine privilege. They reduced the total gross square footage of the building
to accommodate parking. Thus, they could not have any type of food operation be-
cause of the seating requirement and therefore parking requirement. Mr. Moorehead
did not believe it was necessary to place any further restrictions than what had
already been placed upon him by the City Code.
Councilman Seymour emphasized that he only asked if Mr. Moorehead would stipulate
to the conditions because he had real reasons for so doing. He did not want to
see a use on that property nor would he vote for one that would disturb the peace
and tranquility existing in that neighborhood e~pecially during sleeping hours.
He would not, under any conditions, permit the sale of liquor, including beer and
wine, on-sale or off-sale, across the street from an elementary school. He then
reiterated his question relative to the stipulations. The Mayor clarified that
the stipulations would become part of the variance.
Mr. Moorehead stated he could not make stipulations because they anticipated the
possibility of locating a convenience food market in that center, which markets
sold beer and wine off-sale.
Miss Santalahti pointed out that two or three years prior, the Planning Commission
or the Council restricted a convenience food market from off-sale liquor but they
were permitted to come back after one year and since no problems were involved, the
restriction was eliminated. Although she could not recall if the hours were also
restricted, if they were, they were subsequently allowed 24 hours.
Councilwoman Kaywood expressed that her real concern was that, even if stipulations
were made by the present owners, ownerships change so quickly that future control
was lost just as the original owner of the property had every reason to include the
parcel in the residential portion which would have precluded the problems now being
encountered 21 years later. If Stater Brothers market was just one block to the
77-1030
City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 13~ 1977~ 1:30 P.M.
north and an Alpha Beta one block to the south, she saw no reason for a convenience
market to be on every corner just as gas stations.
Councilwoman Kaywood waited for another Council Member to offer motion on the
EIR finding because she did not wish to do so; however, she wanted to offer the
resolution denying Variance No. 2955 because, if it were approved, it would be
a step in the opposite direction of everything the Council maintained relative
to the preservation of residential neighborhoods.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - NEGATIVE DECLARATION: On motion by Councilman Roth,
seconded by Councilman Seymour, the City Council finds that this project will have
no significant effect on the environment since the Anaheim General Plan designates
the subject property for general commercial land uses commensurate with the proposal
and the parcel has been zoned for commercial use for several years and is, therefore,
exempt from the requirement to prepare an environmental impact report. Councilwoman
Kaywood voted "No" because she maintained the proposal would impact the neighborhood.
MOTION CARRIED.
Councilman Seymour offered Resolution No. 77R-618 for adoption denying Variance
No. 2955 with the understanding to the applicant and property owner that although
he believed a hardship was involved and in order to recognize this fact, he would
be more than happy to support the request for variance with the stipulations as
previously articulated. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 77R-618: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
DENYING VARIANCE NO. 2955.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 77R-618 duly passed and adopted.
108: PUBLIC HEARING - ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE - GAMING PREMISES PERMIT: The Mayor
stated that the Council had before it a request from the representative of Mr.
Joseph London for continuance of the subject matter to September 27, 1977 or
such other date that would be convenient to the Council.
City Attorney Hopkins explained that he was directed to serve an Order to Show
Cause on Mr. London on August 16, 1977 and that was served both by mail and per-
sonally and a notice placed in the Anaheim Bulletin on August 29, 1977 advertising
the scheduled public hearing. He was prepared to present evidence to the Council
as directed and there were a number of people in the Chamber who wished to testify
in the matter; however, the decision was at the Council's discretion.
Councilman Seymour responded that although he was prepared to hear the matter, he
was concerned that should the City Council find cause for removal of the permit
for operation, he had little doubt the matter would be litigated and if litigated
in the Courts, the judge or jury would look unkindly on the fact that the Council
had not granted some reasonable amount of time for continuance. For that reason,
77-1031
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 13~ 1977~ 1:30 P.M.
he was inclined to grant the continuance although he wanted it continued a week
beyond September 27, 1977 because of Councilman Roth's anticipated absence on
that date since he was the Voting Delegate to the League of California Cities
Conference.
A brief discussion followed relative to an appropriate time for continuance, wherein
City Attorney Hopkins stated that one of the parties that would be involved in
the presentation for Mr. London would not be available on October 4, 1977.
Thereupon, Councilman Seymour moved to grant a continuance of the Order to Show
Cause why the Gaming Premises Permit issued to Mr. Joseph London, Camelot-Anaheim,
should not be revoked, to September 27, 1977, at 6:30 P.M., in the Council Chamber,
subject to a continuance fee. Councilwoman Kaywood and Councilman Thom voted "No".
MOTION CARRIED.
176: PUBLIC HEARING - ABANDONMENT NO. 77-1A: In accordance with application filed
by George D. Shambeck, Hall & Foreman, Inc., public hearing was held on proposed
abandonment of a recorded easement for ingress and egress in return for an easement
for the same purpose in a new location located at the northeast corner of Imperial
Highway and La Palma Avenue, pursuant to Resolution No. 77R-585 duly published in
the Anaheim Bulletin and notices thereof posted in accordance with law.
Report of the City Engineer dated August 9, 1977 was submitted recommending approval
of the abandonment.
The Mayor asked if anyone wished to address the Council; there being no response,
he closed the public hearing.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION: On motion by Councilman Kott,
seconded by Councilman Seymour, the City Council ratified the determination of the
Planning Director that the proposed activity falls within the definition of Section
3.01, Class 5, of the City of Anaheim Guidelines to the requirements for an environ-
mental impact report and is, therefore, categorically exempt from the requirement
to file and EIR. MOTION CARRIED.
Councilman Kott offered Resolution No. 77R-619 for adoption approving Abandonment
No. 77-1A as recommended by the City Engineer in his memorandum dated August 9,
1977. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 77R-619: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
ORDERING THE VACATION AND ABANDONMENT OF CERTAIN PUBLIC SERVICE EASEMENTS.
(77-1A, northeast corner of Imperial Highway and La Palma Avenue)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Kaywood, Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 77R-619 duly passed and adopted.
105: APPOINTMENT TO FILL THE UNEXPIRED TERM ON THE PROJECT AREA COMMITTEE: On
motion by Councilman Seymour, seconded by Councilman Kott, appointment to fill the
unexpired term on the Project Area Committee ending June 30, 1978, was continued
one week. MOTION CARRIED.
77-1032
City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 13~ 1977, 1:30 P.M.
158: SALE OF CITY-OWNED PROPERTY - ORANGEWOOD AND RAMPART STREET: On motion by
Councilman Seymour, seconded by Councilman Thom, the proposed agreement with
Matlow-Kennedy regarding the sale of City-owned property at Rampart Street and
Orangewood Avenue and lease of a portion of the Stadium parking lot, was continued
for one week as recommended by the City Attorney. MOTION CARRIED.
158: NOTIFICATION OF SALE OF PUBLIC PROPERTY TO APPROPRIATE AGENCIES: Councilman
Kott offered Resolution No. 77R-620 for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 77R-620: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
GIVING NOTICE OF ITS INTENTION TO SELL CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY AND OFFERING SAID
PROPERTY TO VARIOUS PUBLIC AGENCIES FOR PARK, RECREATIONAL OR OPEN SPACE PURPOSES.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Kaywood, Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 77R-620 duly passed and adopted.
105: REQUEST FROM THE LIBRARY BOARD TO REVIEW THE "MINI-MALL" CONCEPT: The Mayor
referred to a letter dated August 31, 1977 (on file in the City Clerk's Office)
from Elizabeth Schultz, Chairman of the Library Board, requesting that the Board
be allowed to review the proposed temporary mini-mall concept to be located between
the Central Library and the Police Facility buildings if the proposal should come
to fruition. He noted that no decision would be made relative to the mall concept
until the first meeting in October.
Mrs. Elizabeth Schultz, Chairman of the Library Board, stated that she wanted the
mini-mall concept to be a benefit to all concerned, but commented that it would
impact the Library program.
On motion by Councilman Thom, seconded by Councilwoman Kaywood, authorization was
given to the Library Board to review the mini-mall concept proposal should the
project become reality. MOTION CARRIED.
RECLASSIFICATION NO. 74-75-5 AND VARIANCE NO. 2626 - EXTENSION OF TIME: Submitted
by Dr. George Kirkelie, Jr., requesting an extension of time to Reclassification
No. 74-75-5 and Variance No. 2626, proposed CO zoning to construct a commercial
office building with various code waivers on property located at 1811 East Center
Street.
On motion by Councilman Thom, seconded by Councilman Roth, an extension of time
to September 10, 1978 on Reclassification No. 74-75-5 and Variance No. 2626 was
approved. Councilman Kott abstained. MOTION CARRIED.
162: PRESENTATION - H.E.R.E. RAPE CRISIS CLINIC: Dee Spring, Director, H.E.R.E.
(Help Eliminate Rape Everywhere) housed in the Woman's Centre in Placentia, first
briefed the Council on statistics involved in the crime of rape basically in Orange
County relative to the number that took place compared to those reported, the low
conviction rate of the small number reported, and ,the like. The purpose of the clinic
77-1033
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 13~ 1977, 1:30 P.M.
was to change the environment for the rape victims since the crime of rape was
generally accepted and ignored with the victims having to prove their innocence.
Their purpose was to educate the public in these areas and emphasize the psycho-
logical trauma, sometimes for life, that victims subsequently experience. Ms.
Spring elaborated in detail on the foregoing matters and further outlined the
program being carried on by the clinic to correct the inequities relative to the
crime, the services offered to the rape victim herself, the costs involved, and
the staff manning the clinic. Her specific reasons for appearing before the
Council were four fold: (1) to acquaint the Council with the program and extend
an invitation to visit the centre and meet the staff; (2) Solicit the Council's
cooperation with other agencies to begin a long chain of events to change the
environment for the rape victim; (3) Training of Police Departments in this
sensitive area in order for them to understand the problems of the rape victim;
and (4) Secure a letter of support for the concept to be included in a Grant
proposal in the process of being submitted, as well as consider the idea of
helping the clinic to produce sponsors to help them gain their objectives; the
idea being to ask five cities to cooperate and sponsor the clinic collectively
which was necessary relative to the hard match on grant funds.
She concluded that even if the clinic was awarded the grant, they would have to
be self-sufficient within three years and plans were already afoot concerning
public fund raising. Everything at the centre was free, as they could not ask
for fees for rape counseling since the public did not feel that rape victims
should be charged for anything. She wanted the Council's care and concern
as well as their support and cooperation in the form of a small amount of financing
and sponsorship to continue the clinic.
In answer to Councilwoman Kaywood relative to the referenced grant, Ms. Spring
explained that they were applYing for an LEAA grant and needed approximately
$10,000 in hard cash. Their objective was to get five cities to contribute $2,000
each to make that match. In this way, they would be a county operation, rather
than under the auspices of one city, and they had thus far approached Orange, Brea,
Tustin and Yorba Linda.
Councilwoman Kaywood explained that she had seen a recent article on the clinic
and was impressed with the work they were doing. She had also received a call
from a woman locally who expressed her thanks for the kindness extended to her
by the Anaheim Police Department following a rape attack.
Ms. Spring stated that the Anaheim Police Department had a very fine rape unit,
and she was pleased to work with them, and she could not say that of all
police departments.
Councilman Kott thanked Ms. Spring for enlightening the Council with her presentation
and admired her for so doing. He asked, however, what she could offer as realistic
possibilities in solving the problem.
Ms. Spring emphasized that it was important to get the people in the County to
work together on the matter and secondly, to be able to collect the evidence
necessary to prosecute the rapist. Most hospitals did not cooperate by not keeping
up the chain of evidence. Also, the victim was scared of codified codes and what
would subsequently happen to her in court. It was necessary to gain her trust so
she would prosecute. Without that, there was nothing they could do.
77-1034
.qity Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 13~ 1977~ 1:30 P.M.
Councilman Kott considered the matter to be a problem of society where laws had to
be changed and modified, and judges had to interpret such cases differently.
Although he could not disagree in the sense that their purpose was a very humane
one, he did not feel that money could bring about a solution to the cause of the
problem.
MOTION: Councilwoman Kaywood disagreed in that when volunteer help 'was involved,
money was a necessity. She also stressed that the pra~blem was a very deep and
severe one and it was joked about so often in our culture that people tended to
overlook it, yet it became a lifetime trauma for the victim, as Ms. Spring pointed
out. Councilwoman Kaywood thereupon moved that the City expend $1,000 from the
Council Contingency Fund to support the program and that a letter of support be
submitted to be included in the LEAA Grant Application. Councilman Thom seconded
the motion. Councilmen Seymour and Kott voted "No". MOTION CARRIED.
Councilman Seymour explained the reason why he voted "No". He was not opposed
to the request because he considered it to be fair and reasonable and he also
had no problem with the letter of support. He was concerned that the City
approved $1,000 where he would have preferred $2,000, however, only on the basis
that the clinic was successful in getting four other cities to go along with the
proposal which would give the $10,000 necessary for matching funds. He considered
that the foregoing motion was poorly constructed, and the City had given $1,000
to something that may not occur.
Councilwoman Kaywood offered to amend her motion accordingly. Relative to the
monetary support of $1,000, she had inadvertently noted that $5,000 was needed
for the hard match.
Councilman Seymour moved that Anaheim submit a letter of support to be included
in-the clinic's LEAA Grant Application with an expenditure up to a maximum of $2,000
from the Council Contingency Fund, provided the clinic was able to raise the remaining
$8,000 needed as matching funds, and subject to the approval of the LEAA Grant and
that the present motion rescinded the first motion offered and approved. Council-
woman Kaywood seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS: On motion by Councilman Roth, seconded by Councilman
Seymour, the following actions were authorized in accordance with the reports and
recommendations furnished each Council Member and as listed on the Consent
Calendar Agenda:
1. 118: CLAIMS AGAINST THE CITY: The following claims were denied and referred
to the City's insurance carrier or the self-insurance administrator:
a. Claim submitted by Mrs. Shirley R. Harshman for property damages purportedly
sustained as a result of a chuck hole in the street on Mira Loma, west of Kraemer,
on or about August 23, 1977.
b. Claim submitted by Betty Lee for food spoilage purportedly sustained as a
result of a power loss on or about August 26, 1977.
c. Claim submitted by Southern California Gas Company for property damages purport-
edly sustained during installation of water service on Via Santiago, south of Serrano,
Anaheim Hills, on or about August 11, 1977.
77-1035
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 13~ 1977~ 1:30 P.M.
d. Claim submitted by Joseph William Ronspiez for personal injuries purportedly
sustained as a result of actions by the Anaheim Police on or about July 10, 1977.
e. Claim submitted by Eugene R. Howard for property damages purportedly sustained
as a result of heavy oil on the street (100-300 North Crescent Way) on or about
August 14, 1977.
f. Claim submitted by Danny Lynn Qualls for personal injuries purportedly sustained
as a result of action by the Anaheim Police on or about July 9, 1977.
2. CORRESPONDENCE: The following correspondence was ordered received and filed:
a. 105: Community Services Board - Minutes of July 14 and August 11, 1977.
b. 105: Golf Course Advisory Commission - Minutes of August 18, 1977.
c. 105: Housing Commission - Minutes of August 3, 1977.
d. 117 & 175: Monthly reports, July 1977 - Treasurer's, Electrical and Water.
e. 107: Monthly Report, August 1977 - Building.
3. 108: PRIVATE PATROL APPLICATION: The following permit was approved in accordance
with the recommendations of the Chief of Police:
a. Private Patrol Application for Johnson Investigation & Patrol, 1152 Kraemer,
to provide general investigation and patrol guards. (J. J. Johnson, III, applicant)
MOTION CARRIED.
108: ENTERTAINMENT PERMIT: Application by Adolfo Marron for the Los Amigos Bar,
900 North Anaheim Boulevard, for mariachi music,~ Monday through Sunday, 12:00
P.M. to 2:00 A.M., was submitted.
On motion by Councilwoman Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Seymour, application
for Entertainment Permit for the Los Amigos Bar, 900 North Anaheim Boulevard, for
mariachi music, Monday through Sunday, 12:00 Noon to 2:00 A.M. was approve~ as
recommended by the Chief of Police, with clarification that 12:00 P.~M.'~was 12:00
Noon. MOTION CARRIED.
108: ENTERTAINMENT PERMIT: Application by Norman F. Phillips for the Crescendo,
1721 South Manchester, for Las Vegas-type shows, Monday through Sunday, 10:00 A.M.
to 2:00 A.M., was submitted.
MOTION: Councilman Seymour wanted to be assured that the Police Department had
officially investigated the subject request resulting in their recommendation
of approval relative to the Las Vegas-type shows indicated. He, therefore, moved
that consideration of the Entertainment Permit Application for the Crescendo for
Las Vegas-type shows be continued for one week for further investigation by staff.
Councilman Thom seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
77-1036
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 13~ 1977~ 1:30 P.M.
108: PUBLIC DANCE HALL PERMIT: Application by Norman F. Phillips for the Crescendo,
1721 South Manchester, for dancing Monday through Sunday, 10:00 A.M. to 2:00 A.M.,
was submitted.
Councilwoman Kaywood questioned the starting time of 10:00 A.M. for dancing, as
well as that same time indicated on their application for an Entertainment Permit
(see previous item).
A brief discussion followed relative to the matter wherein City Attorney Hopkins
read the applicable Code section prohibiting dancing between the hours of 2:00 A.M.
and 9:00 A.M.
MOTION: Councilwoman Kaywood thereupon moved that the subject Public Dance Hall
Permit Application for the Crescendo, for dancing Monday through Sunday, 10:00 A.M.
to 2:00 A.M. be continued one week, and while the investigation was in progress
relative to the Entertainment Permit, clarify if the applicant wanted dancing to
begin at 10:00 A.M. or a later hour. The motion died for lack of a second.
On motion by Councilman Thom, seconded by Councilman Roth, application by Norman
F. Phillips for the Crescendo, 1721 South Manchester, Application for a Public
Dance Hall Permit for dancing Monday through Sunday, 10:00 A.M.to 2:00 A.M. was
approved. Councilwoman Kaywood voted "No". MOTION CARRIED.
CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS: Councilman Roth offered Resolution Nos. 77R-621 through
77R-623, both inclusive, for adoption in accordance with the reports, recommendations
and certifications furnished each Council Member and as listed on the Consent
Calendar Agenda. Refer to Resolution Book.
158: RESOLUTION NO. 77R-621: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM ACCEPTING CERTAIN DEEDS AND ORDERING THEIR RECORDATION. (L. W. Howard,
et'al; Anaheim Foundry Co.; Galaxy; Harold J. Bircher, et ux.; Dorothy D. Link)
169: RESOLUTION NO. 77R-622: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM FINALLY ACCEPTING THE COMPLETION AND THE FURNISHING OF ALL PLANT, LABOR,
SERVICES, MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT AND ALL UTILITIES AND TRANSPORTATION INCLUDING
POWER, FUEL AND WATER, AND THE PERFORMANCE OF ALL WORK NECESSARY TO CONSTRUCT AND
COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, TO WIT: SUNKIST STREET TRAILER PARKING
BAYS, S/O SOUTH STREET AT JUAREZ SCHOOL AND S/O WAGNER AVENUE AT GUINN SCHOOL, IN
THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, WORK ORDER NO. 875. (R. J. Noble)
113: RESOLUTION NO. 77R-623: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM AUTHORIZING THE DESTRUCTION OF CERTAIN CITY RECORDS, DOCUMENTS, INSTRUMENTS,
BOOKS AND PAPERS MORE THAN TWO YEARS OLD.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Kaywood, Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 77R-621 through 77R-623, both inclusive, duly
passed and adopted.
77-1037
City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 13~ 1977~ 1:30 P.M.
108: ORDINANCE NO. 3767: Mr. Bill Cooper, Instructor for the Los Angeles College
of Massage and Physical Therapy and owner of a massage establishment in Anaheim,
607 South Archer, requested to speak to and against the proposed ordinance for the
following reasons with related comments:
1. There was a place for legitimate massage in which he was involved; it is an
art that has been around for a long time with no sex orientation in it whatsoever.
2. The word "massage" has been used to promote sex, and he took issue with that
connotation.
3. His clientele included youngsters (little league wrestlers) and married couples,
and he also took issue with the fact that under the proposed ordinance, legitimate
massage and sex parlors would be "lumped" together. Provisions should be made for
the legitimate operator.
4. The proposed ordinance, while it restricted employees to the age of 18 or older,
also restricted clientele to 18 or older, thus limiting his clientele.
5. He had never been arrested nor any of his girls. As well, he policed his estab-
lishment to preclude any illegal acts and worked closely with the Police Department
in this regard.
6. He was 100 percent in accord with the intent of the City in adopting the proposed
ordinance, but he would oppose it in court on the basis of what he stated with
reference to the legitimate operator.
Further discussion followed relative to Mr. Cooper's points of contention.
Mayor Thom stated that although he understood Mr. Cooper's problem, especially
revolving around the use of the word "massage", he did not know how Anaheim could
control massage establishments and at the same ~ime keep out the undesirable
businesses without using that word. If the word "massage" were to be eliminated,
then all such business would come into Anaheim as massage parlors. As well, the
18-year age limit for both clientele and operator was necessary, in the opinion
of City Attorney Hopkins, because previously various establishments did not restrict
the age to 18, thus rendering the former ordinance ineffective.
Councilman Seymour stated that the proposed ordinance would not put Mr. Cooper out
of business. However, it would create more red tape for the legitimate operator,
but basically only when opening a new establishment. It would forestall such an
opening for a time, but that would be the only effect.
Councilman Kott stated first that Mr. Cooper should not be in a position of opposing
the City on the proposed ordinance because both he and the City were on the same
side. While he commended Mr. Cooper for speaking with Sargeant Flannagan of the
Anaheim Police Department on the matter unsuccessfully as previously stated, that
avenue was not the end of the road. The best method would have been to contact the
City Attorney, City Manager, or the City Council who were ultimately responsible for
making changes. Since Mr. Cooper indicated he represented the California Professional
Massage Association, Councilman Kott suggested that it would be better to involve
77-1038
City Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 13~ 1977, 1:30 P.M.
those people and subsequently make a presentation to the City Attorney to ascertain
possible remedies. The dialogue would be beneficial even though he could not guar-
antee the outcome would be one of approval.
Councilman Kott left the Council Chamber. (4:53 P.M.)
The Mayor commended Mr. Cooper for his interest, but stated there was no other
way to go relative to the matter and, thereupon offered Ordinance No. 3767 for
adoption.
Before a vote was taken, Councilwoman Kaywood asked the City Attorney if, relative
to bingo, the proposed ordinance would allow bingo in any commercial zone with no
requirement for a conditional use permit.
City Attorney Hopkins explained that with respect to bingo, it was excepted from
the requirement for a conditional use permit even though it was restricted by the
limitation of 18 years of age and older by State law. Bingo would be a permitted
use in CL, CO, CG and CR zones not requiring any special conditional use permit.
Relative to parking as also questioned by Councilwoman Kaywood, Mr. Hopkins explained
that all of the requirements for the establishment which would be related to the
parent organization would apply to zoning, and all permit requirements of the bingo
ordinance, Chapter 7.34, would be reviewed by the City Attorney's Office and the
Planning Department. Before it was approved, the Planning and Zoning people would
also review the matter and if there was a zoning problem, that would be ascertained
before final approval.
Councilman Thom offered Ordinance No. 3767 for adoption. Refer to Ordinance Book.
ORBINANCE NO. 3767: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM REPEALING SECTIONS
18.41.015.050, 18.41.050.190 OF CHAPTER 18.41; 18.42.025.070, 18.42.050.130
OF CHAPTER 18.42; 18.44.025.050, 18.44.050.040 OF CHAPTER 18.44; 18.45.025.060,
18.45.050.040 OF CHAPTER 18.45; 18.46.025.060, 78.46.050.040 OF CHAPTER 18.46;
18.48.015.050, 18.48.050.030 OF CHAPTER 18.48; TITLE 18, AND ADDING NEW SECTIONS
IN THEIR PLACE AND STEAD, AND ADDING NEW SECTIONS 18.41.020.060 TO CHAPTER 18.41;
18.42.020.140 TO CHAPTER 18.42; 18.44.020.430 TO CHAPTER 18.44; 18.45.020.480
TO CHAPTER 18.45; 18.46.020.660 TO CHAPTER 18.46; AND 18.48.020.070 TO CHAPTER
18.48, TITLE 18, OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (requiring
Conditional Use Permits for massage establishments and figure model studio
establishments) ·
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
TEMPORARILY ABSENT:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Kaywood, Seymour, Roth and Thom
None
Kott
None
The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 3767 duly passed and adopted.
77-1039
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 13~ 1977, 1:30 P.M.
Councilman Seymour left the Council Chamber. (4:57 P.M.)
ORDINANCE NO. 3768: Councilwoman Kaywood offered Ordinance No. 3768 for adoption.
Refer to Ordinance Book.
ORDINANCE NO. 3768: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF
THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (67-68-13(9), RS-7200, Tract
No. 9482)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
TEMPORARILY ABSENT:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Kaywood, Roth and Thom
None
Kott and Seymour
None
The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 3768 duly passed and adopted.
Councilman Kott returned to the Council Chamber. (4:58 P.M.)
ORDINANCE NOS. 3769 AND 3770: Councilman Roth offered Ordinance Nos. 3769 and
3770 for adoption. Refer to Ordinance Book.
ORDINANCE NO. 3769: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF
THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (76-77-22, RM-1200)
ORDINANCE NO. 3770: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF
THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (76-77-64, RM-2400)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
TEMPORARILY ABSENT:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Kaywood, ~Kott, Roth and Thom
None
Seymour
None
The Mayor declared Ordinance Nos. 3769 and 3770 duly passed and adopted.
Councilman Seymour returned to the Council Chamber. (5:00 P.M.)
120: COMPLAINT RELATIVE TO EXCAVATION OF PROPERTY: Councilwoman Kaywood asked
staff to investigate the complaint received in a letter from Mr. Cliff Doubek,
146 Orange Hill Lane, relative to excavation of a portion of his property by the
Warmington Company.
119: COMMENDATION - "DAD MILLER 100 GOLF COMMITTEE" AND GOLF COURSE STAFF: Council-
man Roth expressed his appreciation for the hard work and dedicated service given
by the Dad Miller 100 Committee, Mr. Tom Liegler, Stadium-Convention Center-Golf
Director and his staff at the City's First Annual Championship Golf Tournament and
subsequent banquet. He recommended that the people involved be formally commended
by a letter signed by all Council Members.
77-1040
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 13~ 1977~ 1:30 P.M.
105: REMOVAL OF HACMAC COMMITTEE MEMBER: The Mayor explained that in a letter
received from Mr. Mike Perry, HACMAC Chairman, he was advised that one of his (Thom's)
appointees to the committee, Mr. Ron Trunk, had been absent from seven of nine meet-
ings held. Pursuant to established HACMAC policies, he thereupon moved that Mr.
Trunk be removed from the HACMAC Committee and further, expressed his appreciation
for the time Mr. Trunk was able to give to the Committee. Councilwoman Kaywood
seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
148: ORANGE COUNTY DIVISION~ LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES - DUES STRUCTURE: The
Mayor referred to a memorandum from the City Manager regarding the subject wherein
it was reported that all but the City of Huntington Beach had capitulated in favor
of paying their 1977 annual Orange County Division League dues in spite of their
previous stand favoring the $500 minimum fee with a pro rata share thereafter. As
indicated by Councilwoman Kaywood who attended the last League meeting in San
Clemente, Ms. Caroline Ewing, Executive Director of the League, submitted her res-
ignation partly because of the budget without the dues payments and the ill feeling
caused by the controversy, there was no way to accomplish anything. He was sorry
to hear of the resignation since he held Ms. Ewing in high regard. He also agreed
with her comment that the League was nothing other than a social club under the cir-
cumstances.
Councilwoman Kaywood wanted Anaheim to reconsider their position relative to the
dues structure, thus returning to the former role of leadership, instead of destructive
behavior that was occurring as of late.
Councilman Roth stated he was impressed with Ms. Ewing's remarks as reported in
the September 10, 1977 Orange County section of the Los Angeles Times which con-
cluded with a statement relative to its having become a social organization.
Councilwoman Kaywood stated that what she was referring to at the end of the article
was they should not recruit her replacement until they decided what the job was
going to be because, under the present circumstances, with no money and no direction,
there would be no point in recruiting a second ~erson. Councilwoman Kaywood main-
tained if the Division was going to be a viable one, more money would have to be
involved and a director hired who would be paid accordingly.
A brief discussion followed between Councilwoman Kaywood and the Mayor relative to
matter wherein the Mayor asked if the Council wished to change their previously
stated position concerning the minimum entry fee of $500.
Councilwoman Kaywood stated that if Anaheim did not change its position, the City's
members and representatives could no longer represent the City, and Anaheim would
no longer have a vote in the Orange County Division of the League. Thus, anybody
appointed to committees or the like would be appointed without a vote from Anaheim.
Councilman Seymour took issue with the Mayor and Councilman Roth relative to their
capitalizing on an unfortunate choice of words since both of them were aware if
they wanted to make the Orange County Division of the League a social club, they
could do so, but much good had been accomplished by the Division. The real issue
was the City's position on the dues structure. He would have voted against any
amount if it were discussed in the framework of being a social group, and he con-
sidered it unfair that it be referred to as such.
77-1041
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - September 13~ 1977~ 1:30 P.M.
Councilman Seymour continued by explaining when the issue first arose regarding some
formula per capita or flat fee, he suggested a smaller initial entry fee, rather than
starting with $500 with the idea that a precedent would be set and, thereafter, the
amount could be escalated. At this point, he maintained that Anaheim had held out
as long as it should for the sake of the hard line drawn by the Council. He would
rather be bendable in order to save the relationship Anaheim had with other Orange
County cities in order to be able to continue to lobby in the best interests of the
City and the County. Numerous successes in the past would suggest that the City
do so; therefore he objected to holding the hard line any longer on two points:
(1) the Orange County Division of the League of California Cities was not a social
club, and (2) he would prefer to capitulate and reverse his previous position on
the $500 entry fee and favor the lower fee, thus setting a precedent with the
possibility of perhaps next year getting closer or to the $500 figure. He concluded
by stressing it would be a serious mistake for the City to withdraw its membership
in the Orange County Division of the League and was supportive of the compromise
alternative.
Councilwoman Kaywood clarified that a precedent would be set with the $100 base and
the other cities did understand this was a first step.
MOTION: Councilman Seymour moved that Anaheim amend its previous position and con-
form to the proposed $100 base fee for League dues with a pro rata share thereafter.
Councilwoman Kaywood seconded the motion. The motion failed to carry by the follow-
ing vote:
AYES:
NOES:
COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood and Seymour
COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kott, Roth and Thom
The Mayor confirmed for City Manager Talley, regarding his request for Council direc-
tion in the matter, that in view of the failure of the foregoing motion there was
no change in the City's position to remain firm in its stand on the $500 base entry
fee.
105: APPOINTMENT TO MOTHER COLONY HOUSE ADVISORY BOARD: The Mayor requested Council
consideration and nomination to membership on the Mother Colony House Advisory Board
of Mr. Glenn Fry.
On motion by Councilman Thom, seconded by Councilman Seymour, Mr. Glenn Fry was
appointed to serve on the Mother Colony House Advisory Board. MOTION CARRIED.
ADJOURNMENT: Councilwoman Kaywood moved to adjourn. Councilman Roth seconded
the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
Adjourned: 5:12 P.M.
LINDA D. ROBERTS, CITY CLERK