Loading...
1977/10/25 77-1165 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 25, 1977, 1:30 P.M. The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session. PRESENT: ABSENT: PRESENT: 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 PERSONNEL DIRECTOR: Garry McRae UTILITIES DIRECTOR: Gordon Hoyt TRAFFIC ENGINEER: Paul Singer SENIOR STAFF ASSISTANT: Lloyd Trapp BENEFITS & TRAINING MANAGER: Tom Tyre POLICE SERGEANT: Jim Webb ASSISTANT DIRECTOR FOR ZONING: Annika Santalahti INVOCATION: Invocation. Mayor Thom called the meeting to order and welcomed those in attendance to the Council meeting. Reverend George Brown from the Meiodyland Hotline Center gave the FLAG SALUTE: Councilwoman Miriam Kaywood~ led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. PROCLAMATION: The following proclamation was issued by Mayor Thom and unanimously approved by the City Council and accepted by Jeannine Taylor, Assistant Field Director: "National Diabetes Month in Anaheim" - November 1977 MINUTES: On motion by Councilwoman Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Roth, minutes of the Anaheim City Council regular meeting held October 4, 1977 were appoved with typographical corrections. MOTION CARRIED. 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 Roth seconded the motion. MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED. FINANCIAL DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY in the amount of $892,153.15, in accordance with the 1977-78 Budget, wera approved. RECESS - EXECUTIVE SESSION: By general consent, the City Council recessed into Executive Session. (1:37 P.M.) AFTER RECESS: Mayor Thom called the meeting to order, all CoUncil Members being present. (1:55 P.M.) 77-1166 .City .Hall, ~heim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 25, 1977~ 1:30 P.M. 123: COMPUTER EQUIPMENT SERVICES: Councilman Roth offered Resolution No. 77R-685 for adoption, as recommended in memorandum dated October 7, 1977, from Tug Tamaru, Data Processing Director. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 77R-685: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF 'ANAHEIM APPROVING THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF AN AGREEMENT WITH RAYTHEON SERVICE COMPANY FOR COMPUTER EQUIPMENT SERVICE 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-685 duly passed and adopted. 150: STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION GRANT PROGRAM 1977-78: (12-passenger van, 4,000-watt generator for a nature mobile program at Oak Canyon Nature Center and schools - $8,682) Upon clarification by Mr. Lloyd Trapp, Senior Staff Assistant, relative to the need and use of the subject van, Councilman Kott offered Resolution No. 77R-686 for adoption, as recommended in memorandum dated October 19, 1977, from James Ruth, Director of the Parks, Recreation and the Arts Department. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 77R-686: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING THE FILING OF AN APPLICATION FOR FUNDS PURSUANT TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION GRANT PROGRAM AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE SAID APPLICA- TION 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-686 duly passed and adopted. 153: EMPLOYEE NEGOTIATIONS - SALARY RESOLUTIONS (ALL WAGE RATES EFFECTIVE OCTOBER 14, 1977): Councilman Roth offered Resolution No. 77R-687 for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book.' RESOLUTION NO. 77R-687: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ADOPTING THE SALARY SCHEDULE MASTER AS THE SUPPORTING DOCUMENT FOR ALL SALARY RESOLUTIONS. 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-687 duly passed and adopted. 77-1167 ~ity Hall, ~naheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 25, 1977~ 1:30 P.M. Councilman Seymour offered Resolution No. 77R-688 for adoption as recommended in memorandum dated October 19, 1977, from Garry McRae, Personnel Director. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 77R-688: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ESTABLISHING RATES OF COMPENSATION FOR JOB CLASSES REPRESENTED BY THE INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS, LOCAL UNION NO. 47 AND SUPERSEDING RESOLUTION NO. 76R-673 AND AMENDMENTS THERETO. 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-688 duly passed and adopted. Councilman Thom offered Resolution No. 77R-689 for adoption, the provisions of which were included in Memo of Understanding with the Anaheim Fire Association signed November 8, 1976. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 77R-689: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ESTABLISHING WAGE RATES FOR FIRE ENGINEER'AND FIRE FIGHTER-PARAMEDIC EFFECTIVE OCTOBER 14, 1977. 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-689 duly passed and adopted. Councilman Roth offered Resolution No. 77R-690 for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 77R-690: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 76R-179, PERTAINING TO RULE 6, PREMIUM PAY, BY AME~ING SECTION 6.6 AND SECTION 6.7. 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-690 duly passed and adopted. Councilman Seymour offered Resolution Nos. 77R-691 and 77R-692 for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. ..RESOLUTION NO. 77R-691: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM PERTAINING TO THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF EMPLOYMENT OF REPRESENTED EMPLOYEES OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM. '~ 77-1168 ~ity Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 25~ 1977~ 1:30 P.M. RESOLUTION NO. 77R-692: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM PERTAINING TO THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF EMPLOYMENT OF CERTAIN EMPLOYEES 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 Nos. 77R-691 and 77R-692 duly passed and adopted. Councilman Thom offered Resolution No. 77R-693 for adoption ($7.75 per meal to be paid during the first year of the agreement, $8 the second year, and $8.25 the third year). Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 77R-693: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AUTHORIZING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF AN ACCOUNT ENTITLED THE "MEAL REIMBURSEMENT ACCOUNT" IN CONNECTION WITH THE PAYMENT FOR MEALS PURSUANT TO THE I.B.E.W. MEMO- RANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING OF OCTOBER 14, 1977. Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Roth and Thom Seymour and Kott None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 77R-693 duly passed and adopted. 12~; AMENDMENT OF SERVICES IN CONTRACT WITH GALBRAITH AND GREEN, INC.: In answer to Councilman Kott, City Manager William Talley briefed the Council on a report dated October 18, 1977, from the Personnel Director and elaborated on the three amendments proposed in the contract between the City and Galbraith and Green, re- sulting from a City audit. Mr. Tom Tyre, Benefits and Training Manager, further clarified the amendments and, relative to the peer review, explained that such review was sometimes done by the Orange County Medical Association (OCMA), but at other times by private physicians costing approximately $15 per incident. The peer review was solicited by G~lbraith and Green. If a bill came through that was higher than average for a particular 'pro- cedure, they first checked it with a source they had within their corporation at no cost. If it remained unresolved, however, it was sent out for an impartial peer review analysis. Councilman Kott considered peer review to be a function of the Orange County Medical Association at no charge and, as well, they would be more objective than one person. On motion by Councilwoman Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Thom, proposed amendments to the contract with Galbraith and Green were continued for one week during which time the Orange County Medical Association would be contacted relative to the matter. MOTION CARRIED. 77-1169 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTE~ ~ October 25, 1977, 1:30 P.M. 123: REQUEST BY MUNICIPAL DATA SYSTEMS (MDS) TO MERGE RETIREMENT PROGRAMS: In answer to Councilman Kott, Personnel Direct~r Garry McRae explained that a~; outlined in his memorandum dated October 18, ]977, th~~ only liability that MDS presently had outside of employee's current served.t, wa~ prior service, and in order to eliminate MDS a~ an employer, it was nece.~a~-y for someone to absorb the prior service cost w~ch amounted to $19,635, and which MDS had agreed to pay the City. On motion by Councilwoman Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Thom, MDS was authorized to merge their public employees' retirement system contract into the City's contract, and the Personnel Director was authorized to obtain the necessary documents. ~)TION CARRIED. ~56 & 160: PURCHASE OF EQUIPMENT - ENSTROM 28~i¢~ NELICOPTER (REPLACEMENT): Manager Talley briefed the Council on memorandum dated October 17, 1977, fromm t~e Police Department, recommending approval of the subject helicopter. Councilman Seymour posed several questions relative to the quietness of the proposed helicopter, as well as the availability of additional sound deadening capacity. Sergeant Webb explained that by its design, the Enstrom helicopter was inherently quieter because it had a turbo charger which acted as an effective muffler. Further, rather than restricting, it gave more horsepower which became greater at greater altitudes while also being 25 percent faster. To hi~ knowledge, they could not make or buy more effective sound-deadening equipment ~han was available on th~ craft and, within the department's budget, the purchase went as far as it could reas~nably go to insure the quietest helicopter possible. Sergeant Webb also clarified for Councilman Roth that since a trade-in was involved, the radio equipment in th~ present helicopter could be transferred to the new one. Thus, there would be no additional cost relative to communications. Discussion followed between Councilwoman Kaywood and Sergeant Webb regarding the decibel rating and safety factor; the Enstrom operating at 72 decibels and the Hughes operating at 81 decibels with a muffler. They could not use the entire quiet kit on the Hughes because performance level would become marginal when the craft was occupied by two police officers weighing over 200 pounds each. Although the safety margins were greater with the Enstrom, he did not want to infer that the Hughes helicopter was unsafe. On motion by Councilman Kott, seconded by Councilwoman Kaywood, purchase of an Enstrom 280C helicopter from Western Airmotive Company, Inc., in the amount of $65,078 was approved, as recommended in memorandum dated October 17, 1977, from Jimmy D. Kennedy, Captain (Acting Chief of Police). MOTION CARRIED. 158: APPRAISAL OF EXCESS LAND OWNED BY THE STATE: On motion by Councilman Seymour, seconded by Councilwoman Kaywood, Mr. Cedric White was authorized to appraise the excess land owned by the State located north of Ball Road, west of Harbor Boulevard and south of Citron Street, as recommended in memorandum dated October 18, 1977, from the City Engineer. MOTION CARRIED. 123: MOHLER DRIVE DRAINAGE REIMBURSEMENT AREA, AREA 3, DISTRICT 40: (Grant Warming- ton -- Tract No. 9333) Councilwoman Kaywood offered Resolution No. 77R-694 for adoption, as recommended in memorandum dated October 17, 1977, from the City Engineer. Refer to Resolution Book. 77-1170 ~ity Hall, Anaheim, CaJ~ifornia - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 25, 1977, 1:30 P.M. RESOLUTION NO. 77R-694: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF A REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT FOR DRAINACE FACILITIES (GRANT-WARM~NGTON BUILDERS). 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-694 duly passed and adopted. 123: WINSTON ASSOCIATES, REIMBURSEMENT FOR SECONDARY DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM JN WINSTON ROAD: Councilman Roth offered Resolution No. 77R-695 for adoption, as recommended in memorandum dated October 17, 1977, from the Utilities Department. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 77R-695: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF AN AGREEMENT WITH WINSTON ASSOCIATES TO REIMBURSE SAID DEVELOPER FOR INSTALLING 330 FEET OF WATER MAIN AS PART OF THE SECONDARY DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM IN WINSTON ROAD, AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT. 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-695 duly passed and adopted. 139: SB 655(GREENE), INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT REVENUE BOND ACT: On motion by Councilman Seymour, seconded by Councilwoman Kaywood, support of SB 655(Greene), Industrial Development Revenue Bond Act, was approved as recommended in memorandum dated October 19, 1977, from David Latshaw, Intergovernmental Relations. MOTION CARRIED. 131: FREEWAY MESSAGE SIGNS FOR HIGHWAY SAFETY: (Proposal by A1 Palladino -- see minutes Of October 11, 1977) Relative to the subject matter, Paul Singer, Traffic Engineer, confirmed for Councilwoman Kaywood that the location near the City of Anaheim at the I-5/Route 91 interchange was one of the locations the State had scheduled for a freeway message sign. Although they had considered the Canyon area where the Newport and 91 Freeways converged, it was not deemed to be a viable location. Councilman Roth reiterated his previous concern, the congestion on the Riverside Freeway (91) going west and converging with the Newport Freeway. Congestion could not be observed far enough in advance because of the bend in the road. If motorists could be warned ahead of time of such congestion, they would have alternatives open to them, but otherwise there were none. 77-117] City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 25, 1977, 1:30 P.M. Councilman Kott stated that he personally did not have any faith in the signs because, if they were effective, they would st~]l be in place at their previous locations in the Los Angeles area. He had also i~ec~ed with other people who were familiar with the business and from an accident/~fe point of view, the lag time with computer controls was greater than with helicopters, radio, paramedics dispatch, and the like. For the little good the signs m~ght accomplish, and because of efforts to trim the budget, he moved that the proposal be rejected. Councilman Thom seconded the motion. Before a vote was tal.~cn, Councilwoman Kaywood stated that apparently she and Councilman Kott had spoken to two different experts in the field. Those she spoke with indicated that, depending upon the manner in which the signs were used, they could be extremely helpful and a definite safety factor if strictly limited to a traffic situation. She, therefore, offered a substitute motion approving the freeway message sign proposal, subject to Caltrans absorbi~ mainte- nance and repair costs. Further discussion followed between the Council and Mr. Singer, wherein it wa~ ascertained that considerable lag time was experienced between the time the con-- dition occurred and the time of display on the sign. A vote was then taken on the first n~tion.offered by Councilman Kott rejecting the proposal and carried by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None Thus, the action made the second motion null and void. 160: PURCHASE OF EQUIPMENT - EIGHT 3-PHASE, PAD-MOUNTED~ SECTIONIN~ SWITCHES - BID NO. 3313: On motion by Councilman Thom, seconded by Councilman Roth, the low bid of S & C Electric Company was accepted and purchase authorized in the amount of $31,895.40, including tax, as recommended in memorandum dated October 19, 1977, from the Purchasing Agent. MOTION CARRIED. 160: PURCHASE OF EQUIPMENT - 15 kV URD CABLE - BID NO. 3314: On motion by Council- man Kott, seconded by Councilman Roth, the low bid of Alcoa Conductor was accepted and purchase authorized in the amount of $42,416.56, including tax, as recommended in memorandum dated October 18, 1977, from the Purchasing Agent. MOTION CARRIED. 160: PURCHASE OF EQUIPMENT - PLAY EQUIPMENT FOR SCHWEITZER PARK - BID NO. 3315: On motion by Councilwoman Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Seymour, the low bid of Wakefield and Associates for items 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 14, in the amount of $26,049.50, including tax, was accepted as the lowest and best qualified bid as the low bid received did not meet specifications; and the low bid of Game Time, Inc., on items 6, 7, 8, 8, 10, 11, 12 and 13, in the amount of $3,655.94, including tax, was accepted, and purchasesauthorized, as recommended in memorandum dated October 18, 1977, from Louis Keller, Buyer. MOTION CARRIED. 175: PUBLIC UTILITIES BOARD - INTEGRATED OPERATIONS AGREEMENT WITH SOUTHERN CALIFO~RNIA EDISON COMPANY: Utilities Director Gordon Hoyt gave the historical background leading to the culmination and fruition of an Integrated Operations Agreement between the City of Anaheim and Southern California Edison Company (SCE), negotiation for which started in January, 1971. The agreement would give 77-1172 City Hall, Anaheim, Ca]~fornia - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 25~ 1977, 1:30 P.M. the ability and provide the means for Anaheim to become involved in regional electric generation and transmission projects with savings resulting therefrom redounding to the benefit of the community. The 120-page agreement was briefed in a lO-page summary submitted with memorandum dated October 13, 1977, from Mr. Hoyt as Secretary of the Public Utilities Board (on file in the City Clerk's Office). At the October 12, 1977 Public Utilities Board (PUB) meeting, the Board recommended that the Council approve the agreement and authorize it's execution by the Utilities Director. Councilman Seymour questioned paragraph 4.3 on page 4 of t~le agreement dealing with contract termination, wherein it stated that on ten years' advance written notice by one party to the other, the agreement could be terminated. If tomorrow the City received such notification, that would mean in essence, in ten years it would no longer be in effect. Although that was correct, Mr. Hoyt stated that under Section 4.3, once notice of termination was given, the parties could negotiate a substitute agreement, and until such time as they did so, the agreement would be in force and effect. Since substantial benefits to Anaheim were involved, it was determined that the other party to the agreement should not be able to take those benefits away without a substitution providing for a continuing and ongoing relationship. Alan Watts, Utilities D~,partment Counsel, explained that the basic concept behind the language in the agreement evolved because negotiators on both sides could forese~i that in 25 or 30 years the cities involved would be close to becoming self-sufficien~] and thus it would be advantageous to both parties to terminate the agreement and change the relationship to an extent, and that was the principle behind the lO-year lead time. Mr. Hoyt clarified that the arrangement was a way of letting the cities pick up their fair share of reserve obligation, and instead of a percentage of load, a percentage of resources would be applied. RESOLUTION: Councilman Seymour offered Resolution No. 77R-696 for adoption as recommended in memorandum dated October 13, 1977, from the Public Utilities Board, authorizing an Integrated Operations Agreement with the Southern California Edison Company. Before a vote was taken, Councilman Kott stated that he believed that the Council's interests were to do the best for the citizens of Anaheim; however, he maintained there were still many unanswered questions relative to the matter. As well, the judgments of the ad hoc committee created to study the possible sale of the electrical utility would be moot if the subject agreements were approved. He, therefore, could not support the agreements at this time. Councilwoman Kaywood pointed out if the committee were to come to the conclusion that a sale should take place to Edison, there would be no problem Since the agree- ment was with Edison, and they would certainly not object. Councilman Kott countered that a large obligation would be accumulated by that time considering the 9 percent interest that would be charged on the loan being contemplate=. 77-1173 City .Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 25, 1977~ 1:30 Mr. Hoyt stated that i~ terms of the November 1, 1977 letter agreement, th~ was correct, but in the event the City did not participate, that money would n~t be due. If the commitment was made to go ahead and the investment tax credit (ITC) issue was resolved, which he felt confident it would be, then for that period of time the City was unable to pick up obligations at the City's cost of monev, they would be picked up by Edison at Edison's cost of money. The obligation would thus start immediately as stated by the Mayor. For purposes of clarification, Councilman Seymour stated that as he understo~d the matter, the first agreement was a building block which could make the entire program possible and enabling its continuation, without which, everything would all be for naught. However, if there was a negative vote on San Onofre, this basi, building block would permit the City to go into some other project. Mr. Hoyt confirmed that the Integrated Operations Agreement was the basic ment underlying the whole relationship and emphasized that, in fact, it would permit the entry into other projects if there was a negative vote on San Onofre. As well, the approval of the resolution had nothing to do with the argument pro or con on the sale of the electric utility or profitability of it as questioned by Councilman Seymour. The City had worked six and on~-half years toward the effort which would bring tremendous return and benefit to the City. A vote was taken on the foregoing resolution offered by Councilman Seymour. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 77R-696: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY O)UNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF AN AGREEMENT WITH SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY IN CONNECTION WITH INTEGRATED OPERATIONS AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE UTILITIES DIRECTOR 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 and Roth Kott and Thom None Mayor declared Resolution No. 77R-696 duly passed and adopted~ 175: PUBLIC UTILITIES BOARD - RECOMMENDATIONS RELATIVE TO CITY'S PARTICIPATION IN SAN ONOFRE NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION, UNITS 2 AND 3, AND RELATED AGREEMENTS: Mr. Hoyt elaborated on the findings of the independent consulting engineers review in- dicating the savings that would be available if the City participated in San Onofre Nuclear Generating Stations, Units 2 and 3; the cost of entry being $51 million. The first ten years the City would save approximately $42.8 million based on estimates at the time of the study, as compared to purchasing the City's entire power supply from Southern California Edison. Savings would begin when the project started generating electricity with $600,000 in savings the first year and $6.5 million by 1990. He considered the project to be an excellent one, locking in the cost of elec- tricity for the people of Anaheim with this one project, resulting in savings of many millions of dollars over the years. The three projects which Anaheim was currently studying -- Intermountain, Sun Desert and San Onofre -- would generate a savings from 1981 through 1990 of $362 million with an overall savings of 21.1 per- cent based on the estimates of R. W. Beck and Associates. He considered that 77-1174 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 25, 1977~ 1:30 P.M. entering into the subject agreement would be a great opportunity for Anaheim to gain control of the costs of wholesale electricity. He then elaborated on the number of agreements which, combined, were necessary for the project to proceed. Mr. Hoyt first explained that the reason he was not recommending execution of the agreement today was because of the investment tax credit question. They had discussed the matter with potential partners and legal counsel, as well as the staff of the American Pub];~~ Power Association, who had discussed the matter with the Edison Electric Institute. Mr. Hoyt had great confidence that the matter would be expediently resolved, but the problem was the creation of doubt in the mind of a number of companies. He was convinced that an adequate solution would result and no one would be liable for paying an unexpected $200 million or losing the ITC. This matter was covered in the first agreement in the series -- the November 1, 1977 letter agreement (on file in the City Clerk's Office) providing that the parties to the participation agreement for San Onofre would seek to resolve the question. Mr. Hoyt then read excerpts from the letter agreement outlining the steps that would be taken in relation thereto, making note of the fact that Anaheim and Riverside would share out-of-pocket costs, exclusive of SCE employee costs in seeking a ruling from the IRS, in the amount of $6,500 ($3,250 for each city). Mr. Hoyt then briefly outlined the remaining agreement, also on file in the City Clerk's Office: Supplemental Agreement for the Integration of Anaheim's Entitle- ment i~ San Onofre Units 2 and 3 -- the a~tual document by which Edison accepts the City's entitlement in the project and integrated with their system in accordance with the Integrated Operations Agreement. Edison-Anaheim San Onofre Transmission Service Agreement -- providing for the transmission of the City's share of energy from San Onofre to the Lewis Substation in Anaheim. San Onofre Units 2 and 3 Participation Agreement -- providing that all parties agree to participate and pay their share of the project costs and also providing that the construction agreement now existing would be amended to allow for participation by Anaheim and Riverside in the ownership and operating agreement and share in cost responsi- bilities and liability of the project. Mr. Hoyt emphasized that the project was a magnificent one for Anaheim and when the City entered into the agreement, people would thank the Council for years to come. It was the first step along the path of obtaining control of power supply costs in Anaheim. Mr. Hoyt recommended adoption of the resolution approving the agreements and autho- rizing the Utilities Director to execute same. One provision of the resolution, however, would require Mr. Hoyt to come back to the Council for them to make a determination relative to the tax credit of Edison and San Diego Gas & Electric so they would not be adversely affected and upon such determination, he could proceed and execute the agreements. In answer to Councilman Kott who inquired about the addition of employees, Mr. Hoyt explained that there was a provision in the existing budget for a contract adminis- trator position envisioned as a power contract engineer. It had not been filled because they froze positions in the department, but he anticipated filling it sometime in the future. He also requested that, by motion, the Utilities Director be appointed a member of the coordinating committee as the authorized representative of the City for the agreements. The City would further be involved in several aspects of adminii tration of the contracts and would need an insurance representative, a fiscal repre- sentative, engineering representative and coordinating committee representative. There were a number of positions to be filled, and he anticipated these could be 77-1175 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 25, 1977~ 1:3(I P.M. filled on a part-time basis using existing employees without the need for new additional people. On~-e the power was flowing, it would be possible they would need some accounting power contract people so that expenses and services would be properly accounted for. As questioned by Councilwoman Kaywood, Mr. Hoyt anticipated power generation would start October ], 1980 for Unit No. 1 since that date was set for integration, but at a 20 percent rating since nuclear units ran at approxhnately that rate during th,, first year. By October 1, 1981, they expected full-r,~ted capability of the proiect wi~t rein savings would start to come to Anaheim. The Mayor invited two members of the Public U~ilJties ~loard present to speak, Mr. Joe White and Mr. Jim Townsend. Mr. Joseph White, 80~ West Broadway, stated that, in bis opinion, there x4ere more doubts in the letter a,.~reomant than not. He qt~estion,~d the effective date of the ad valorem tax and wanted to know what it was going to cost as time went on. On November 1, 1977, ~f the City had to pay Edison $16,939,010, interest would be at 9 percent instead of !~ or 6.5 percent, whit-I, could go on until April 1979, at which time the matter ~!~ il,e ITC and the IRS r~li.ng would come before the court and, if there was an ad',z,~:~e ruling by the IRS, what the consequences would be for the City. Mr. Hoyt thereupon expi,~,~ed the alternatfves ,~pen to the City if there should be such an adverse ruling. 'rhe first priority was t:o prevent an adverse ruling in the parlence of tax mat ~rs and, if the indica~ i~-,n was that such a ruling was going to be made, discussio, :~;~uld take place with the IRS beforehand asking for with- drawal of the request. Then, there would be a num]~ar of avenues open; an effort could be made to amend I~i~ Internal Revenue Code to clarify the situation, a unit purchase from San Onofre, or the court could be asked to reform the contract. Mr. Hoyt emphasized that many joint projects were being dt~veloped across the country at present and he considered it inconceivable that Congress and the IRS, as well. as the President, would let an adverse ruling stand since, in fact, the administration en- couraged such joint projects. The consequences of the action being sustained would be horrendous since billions of ITC dollars would be lost because of commitments already made. Relative to the effect the transaction would have on ad valorem taxes and interest to the City, Mr. Hoyt explained that in the November 1, 1977 letter agreement, they attempted to fix that date, thus limiting the City's ad valorem tax liability to the value of the land and improvements at the time the City acquired interest. Although he did not know what the outcome would be, they were hoping not to extend ad valorem tax exposure because of the manner in which the letter agreement was drawn up. Further discussion followed between Mr. White and Mr. Hoyt regarding the economic feasibility of such an acquisition, at the conclusion of which Mr. Hoyt read the net result of the study of the independent consulting engineer (R. W. Beck and Associates) employed by the City Council stating that acquisition of ownership in the San Onofre Units would put a lid on escalating costs and provide electric power to consumers at a reasonable rate. Councilman Seymour, after ascertaining from Mr. Hoyt that Southern California Edison and San Diego's investment in the project was $2.1 billion, stressed to Mr. White that if the investment was, in his opinion, such a bad deal, a private 77-1176 ~ity Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 25, 1977, 1:31) F.M. corporation had to answer to their stockholders. TI~ point was that the corpora- tions had to make the i~lvestment in energy, and they concluded that investing over $2 billion in the subject project was the best they cc~ld make at present. Mr. White contended, how'ever, that SCE was already in the business, whereaa Anaheim would be on the ground floor and on the outside buying in at the very top of the market. Mr. Jim Townsend, 808 North Pine, member of the Public Utilities Board, reiterated his philosophy that it was socialism for any entity operated by city, county, state or federal government becoming involved in anything that was assigned at the begin- ning to other than a political body. He accepted the appointment to the PUB b~cause the electric utility was a fact and because the voters expressed their desir~ t~ participate in generation. Thus, to whatever capacity he was able, he would in its management to keep it in the black, but not necessarily because he appr~w~; of its operation. If everything went according to projections, the project be most beneficial to the City of Anaheim, but he did not believe that all factors could be taken into consideration at present because of the inability to know ~.~at would happen in the future relative to the economy. Although he was one of the two PUB members who voted "no", he did so because he did not understand the contract and not because he was saying it was wrong, bad or good. His remarks today were offered to express what he felt as a citizen that might be worth the Council's consideration in arriving at a decision. Although he was not in agreement with their positions all the time, Councilman Seymo~! commented that he was appreciative of both Mr. White's and Mr. Townsend's roles of devil's advocate, thus causing the system in process to be challenged and questioned. Councilman Seymour then questioned Mr. Hoyt at length on points of concern and matters he wished clarified relative to the agreements, specifically the partici- pation and ownership agreements; the major questions relating to contract termi- nation, the weight of Anaheim's vote under the operating agreement regarding the Board of Review panel, and further ramifications of the investment tax credit matter. Both Mr. Hoyt and Mr. Watts answered or clarified Councilman Seymour's queries. Relative to termination (page 40 of the participation agreement -- page 28 of the ownership agreement), it was confirmed that these were the sections to look to should the City wish to terminate the contract or if later the voters of Anaheim mandated the electric utility be sold if a positive decision was made on the agreements today. Mr. Watts further confirmed that if, in fact, the City were forced to sell their interest in the project, it would have to do so at the price of what was actually put into it and not at a profit, and such a stipulation was a carry-over from Exhibit "F" of the settlement agreement negotiated five years prior. Relative to the Board of Review to be established under the operating agreements (page 23 -- participation agreement), Mr. Hoyt explained that even though Anaheim's interest in San Onofre would be 1.66 percent, the City would have a 25 percent vote, sharing equally with the other three participants, Southern California Edison, 76 percent; San Diego Gas & Electric, 20 percent, and Riverside, 1.79 percent. 77-1177 City Hall, Anaheim, California- COUNCIL MINUTES -October 25~ 1977, 1:30 P.M. The project was set up with Southern California Edison as the Project Director and operating agency who would build, operate and maintain the units with their employees. However, each of the four participants w~ld have a vote and tt~e Project Director had to satisfy the Coordinating Boar~t that the annual budget was a fair one. Mr. Watts stated that the ownership agreement and the construction agreement would, in the future, be amended to specifically include both cities (Anaheim and Riverside) if both cities participated. Th~s, the matter would be submitted to the Council. Insofar as the operating agreement was concerned, it pertained to Unit No. 1, and at present there was no operatinR agreement for Units 2 and 3 even between San Diego and Edison. It would have to be prepared, negotiated and presented to the management of each organization, in Anaheim's case, the City Council. Relative to the $250 million investment tax credit, Mr. Watts stated that the question did not arise in the City's discussions with Edison until late August and the purpose of the November 1, 1977 letter agreement was to write around the problem. No party to the agreement was willing to execute the participation agreement or subsequent agreements with the contingent liability still pending, nor was Edison or San Diego willing to lose the ITC. They were trying to cover all bases and get all the agreements negotiated so that upon resolution of the ITC, they would be ready to go. Councilman Seymour stated that since the City was ready to go now, the ITC was Edison's problem. Thus, he questioned why Anaheim should have to spend 9 percent interest on money carried over when, as Mr. White stated, the City could be paying 6.5 percent. Mr. Hoyt stated that although the City did not owe Edison anything, the City bargained for a commercial arrangement that would cause them (SCE) to lose $200 million. He, therefore, did not consider it prudent to issue $30 million in revenue bonds without a participation agreement being executed, and the agreement could not be executed until the tax liability question was settled. Edison was still carrying the cost of the City's investment and that was the problem. He was confident that if the City was willing to go to bonds, Edison would be willing to accept that money and consider it Anaheim's share. If, because of the inability to solve the ITC, it was determined not to go ahead on the project and Edison now had a portion of the City's $51 million investment, then it would be a matter of litigation as to whose cost responsibility was involved. Councilman Seymour offered Resolution No. 77R-697 for adoption, authorizing execution of (1) Letter Agreement Among Southern California Edison Company, San Diego Gas & Electric Company and City of Riverside, (2) San Onofre Units 2 and 3 Participation Agreement for Integration of Anaheim's Entitlement in San Onofre Units 2 and 3 and (4) Edison-Anaheim San Onofre Transmission Service Agreement. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 77R-697: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF FOUR AGREEMENTS IN CONNECTION WITH THE CITY OF ANAHEIM'S PARTICIPATION IN SAN ONOFRE NUCLEAR GENERATION STATIONS (SONGS) UNITS 2 AND 3, AND AUTHORIZING THE UTILITIES DIRECTOR TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENTS ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM. 77-1178 ~ity Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 25, 1977, 1:30 P.M. Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour and Roth Kott and Thom None The Mayor declared Resolution No. 77R-697 duly passed and adopted. The Mayor stated that all previous statements of record made by him against parti- cipation in generation were hereby incorporated into the record of this meeting by this reference. On motion by Councilman Seymour, seconded by CouT~cilman Roth, the Utilities Director was appointed as authorized representative to the Integrated Operations Agreement and also Coordinating Representative for the City. MOTION CARRIED. RECESS: By general consent, the City Council recessed for 10 minutes. (4:15 P.M.) AFTER RECESS: Mayor Thom called the meeting to order, all Council Members being present with the exception of Councilwoman Kaywood and Councilman Seymour. (4:25 P.M.) 129: PUBLIC FIREWORKS DISPLAY PERMIT: On motion by Councilman Thom, seconded by Councilman Roth, application for Public Fireworks Display Permit filed by Astro Pyrotechnics for Cypress High School to discharge fireworks at Handel Stadium, Western High School, on October 29, 1977 from 8:30 P.M. to 8:35 P.M., was approved. Council Members Kaywood and Seymour were temporarily absent. MOTION CARRIED. Councilwoman Kaywood entered the Council Chamber. (4:26 P.M.) 108: APPLICATION FOR SOLICITATION OF CHARITY FUNDS: On motion by Councilman Roth, seconded by Councilman Thom, application by Good Shepherd Lutheran Home, for tele- phone solicitation of used materials and sale of those items to defray cost of caring for developmentally disabled, November 1 through December 31, 1977, was approved. Councilman Seymour was temporarily absent. MOTION CARRIED. CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS: On motion by Councilman Roth, seconded by Councilman Thom, 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 Raymond Murrillo for damages purportedly sustained as a result of actions by the Anaheim Police at Anaheim Stadium on or about August 19, 1977. b. Claim submitted by Mrs. George R. Olivera for property damages purportedly sustained as a result of tree topping by Park Maintenance on or about September 6, 1977. c. Claim submitted by Safeco Insurance Companies for personal injuries purportedly sustained by Michael Petko, a minor, at Rio Vista Park on or about July 27, 1977. 77-] 179 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 25~ 1977~ 1:30 P.M. 2. CORRESPONDENCE: The following correspondence was ordered received and filed: a. 114: City of Carson Resolution No. 77-201 suppmrting equitable representation for cities and the County of Los Angeles on SCAG committees apportioned on the basis of population. b. 175: Public Utilities Commission of the State of California, Notice of Filing Application for Rate Increase and Hearing Thereon, Application No. 57602 ~f Southern California Edison Company for authority to increase rates charged by it for electric service. c. 105: Community Redevelopment Commission - Minutes of October 5, 1977. d. 105: Community Services Board - Minutes of September 22, 1977. e. 105: Public Utilities Board - Minutes of August 18 and 25, and September 15, 1977. f. 117: Monthly report for September 1977 - C-~tk Treasurer. g. 148 & 155: H. L. "Bill" Richardson, State Senator, correspondence regarding the SCAG's future land use and planning plan. 3. 108: PUBLIC DANCE PERMITS: The follgwing permits were approved in accordance with the recommendations of the Chief of Police: a. Public Dance Permit for the Orange County Firemen's Annual Benefit Dance to be held at the Anaheim Convention Center on Saturday, October 29, 1977, from 9:00 P.M. to 1:00 A.M. (Lloyd L. Lowry, ICO, Inc., applicant) b. Public Dance Permit for the Latin and American Amateur Baseball Association, for a dance to be held at Carpenter's Hall, 608 West Vermont Avenue, on Saturday, November 5, 1977, from 9:00 P.M. to 1:30 A.M. (Gonzalo G. Gonzalez, applicant) Councilman Seymour was temporarily absent. MOTION CARRIED. 114: OPPOSITION TO CITY AND COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES TO AMEND SCAG BY-LAWS: (support position of City of Corona) Councilman Roth referred to a letter dated October 10, 1977, from the City of Corona emphasizing the fact that a recent resolution was adopted by the City and County of Los Angeles pertaining to fair and equitable representation of Los Angeles County in the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). Corona went on record strongly opposing the resolution which proposed to amend the SCAG by-laws requiring representation on all committees to be apportioned on the basis of population. Councilwoman Kaywood explained that the subject was scheduled on the SCAG Executive Committee agenda for December 1, 1977, and there were three different ways in which the Committee was going to evaluate the proposal. She recommended that any action be withheld so that a decision could be based on facts since the presumption that Los Angeles would take over SCAG by their proposed amendment, as stated by Council- man Roth, was not accurate. Councilman Roth, however, wanted Anaheim's position on the matter to be clear and moved that the City go on record in support of Corona's position on the matter. Councilman Thom seconded the motion. Councilwoman Kaywood voted "No". Councilman Seymour was temporarily absent. MOTION CARRIED. 77-1180 City Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 25, 1977, 1:30 P.M. Councilman Seymour entered the Council Chamber. (4:27 P.M.) 174.123: LINCOLN AVENUE MEDIAN ISLAND LANDSCAPING - CHANGE ORDER NO. 1: On motion by Councilwoman Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Thom, Change Order No. 1 for the Lincoln Avenue Median Island Landscaping from Euclid Street to Knott Street, in the amount of $30,090.07, was approved, bringing the original contract amount to $276,167.20, Acme Sprinkler Company, Contractor. MOTION CARRIED. CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS: Councilman Seymour offered Resolution Nos. 77R-698 through 77R-702, 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-698: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ACCEPTING CERTAIN DEEDS AND ORDERING THEIR RECORDATION. (Maria Cruz Pelayo Brambila; Roberto L. Saldiver, et ux.; Reid S. Woolf, et ux.; Donald B. Semon, et al.) 167: RESOLUTION NO. 77R-699: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY REQUIRE THE CONSTRUCTION AND COMPLETION OF A PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, TO WIT: TRAFFIC SIGNAL AND SAFETY LIGHTING INSTALLATION AT LA PALMA AND WOODLAND DR. AND MAGNOLIA AVE. AND WOODLAND DR., IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, ACCOUNT NO. 12-4309-712-16-0811; APPROVING THE DESIGNS PLANS, PROFILES, DRAWINGS, ANb SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION THEREOF; AUTHORIZING THE CONSTRUCTION OF SAID PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH SAID PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, ETC.; AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO PUBLISH A NOTICE INVITING SEALED PROPOSALS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION THEREOF. (Bids to be opened November 17, 1977, 2:00 P.M.) 176: RESOLUTION NO. 77R-700: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO VACATE AND ABANDON CERTAIN PUBLIC SERVICE EASEMENTS. (77-4A, north of Katella Avenue, west of Zeyn Street, public hearing set for November 15, 1977, 3:00 P.M.) 103: RESOLUTION NO. 77R-701: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING THE ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF ANAHEIM OF THE TERRITORY KNOWN AND DESIGNATED MOHLER DRIVE NO. 6 ANNEXATION. (4.9 acres located easterly of Santa Ana Canyon Road, northerly of Martella Lane) 151: RESOLUTION NO. 77R-702: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF AN ENCROACHMENT PERMIT AND AUTHORIZ- ING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE SAID ENCROACHMENT PERMIT WITH RONALD M. COHEN AND RICKI R. COHEN. (77-7E) (419 Dwyer Drive) 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-698 through 77R-702, both inclusive, duly passed and adopted. 77,1181 .City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTE: - October 25, 1977~ 1:30 P.M~ ORDINANCE NO. 3779: Councilman Seymour offered Ordinance No. 3779 for adoption. Refer to Ordinance Book. ORDINANCE NO. 3779: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (65-66-24(23), ML) Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom None None The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 3779 duly passed and adopted. ORDINANCE NO. 3780: Councilwoman Kaywood offered Ordinance No. 3780 for adoption. Refer to Ordinance Book. ORDINANCE NO. 3780: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (73-74-46(6), RS-HS-iO,O00, Tract No. 8465) Roll Call Vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Kott, Roth and Thom None None The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 3780 duly passed and adopted. ORDINANCE NOS. 3781 AND 3782: Councilman Thom offered Ordinance Nos. 3781 and 3782 for first reading. ORDINANCE NO. 3781: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (73-74-10(2), CH) 142 & 170: ORDINANCE NO. 3782: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING SECTION 17.08.071 OF TITLE 17, CHAPTER 17.08, OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO WAIVER OF PARCEL MAP REQUIREMENT. (authdrization by City Engineer) 173: MASTER PLAN REVIEW - OCTD: Councilwoman Kaywood noted a letter received from Council Members Robin Young and A1 Hollinden, Directors of OCTD, asking that cities meet to review the District's Master Plan to ascertain whether or not revisions were necessary from the time the plan was first put into effect. Financing, as well as service, would be discussed at a meeting to be held on Thursday, October 27, 1977, at 4:00 p.m., in Santa Ana City Hall, and the OCTD Board urged everyone to attend. She stated she would be attending the meeting. BLOCK WALL - WALNUT/CERRITOS CONDOMINIUM PROJECT: Councilman Seymour explained that there was an ongoing problem relative to the subject matter wherein the block wall running along the entire length of the project abutting single-family residences was being used as a walkway by children as a short-cut to school. At one point, because of complaints from the single-family residential area, as well as the condo- minium residents, the openings in the wall placed there initially were permanently closed precluding scattering of trash, foot traffic, motorbikes, etc., coming or 77-1182 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 25~ 1977~ 1:30 P.M. going from either area. The owners of the single-family residences with private backyards were now complaining because of this ongoing march of children along the wall to and from school, jumping off and going through yards to get to the school. He personally observed this occurrence in April or May and was of the opinion, after exploring possible alternatives with staff, that not much could be done to stop the children from so doing. Staff had also attempted to contact the Board of Directors of the condominium project to explain that the situation was dangerous and illegal., but to no avail. Thus, in order to get their attention, Councilman Seymour recommended that the matter be set for a public hearing indicating that the City was going to open up the wall; not that he considered reinstitution of the opening to be the best solution, but the public hearing would bring the two parties together to discuss the matter and come up with a potential restitution rather than ignoring it. Miss Santalahti noted for Council's information that the second phase of the condo- minium project was now being completed and that access was also being closed in this phase, thus it would be an opportune time for discussion to preclude further problems. On motion by Councilman Seymour, seconded by Councilman Thom, request for public hearing to be set relative to the traversing of children on the Walnut/Cerritos Condominium Project wall was approved. MOTION CARRIED. 116: CITY NEWSLETTER: Councilman Seymour referred to a memorandum received from the City's new Public Information Officer regarding the City's newsletter and asking Council disposition. He recommended that the Council respond at the next meeting regarding the money that was budgeted to reinstitute the newsletter, as well as when it would be published and the subject matter to be contained therein. Councilwoman Kaywood commented that at the time the matter was discussed at budget sessions, she suggested the only way to restore it would be upon full Council approval so that it would not be politicized. ADJOURNMENT: Councilman Thom moved to adjourn. Councilman Seymour seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. Adjourned: 4:40 P.M.