1976/02/0476-93
Management Control Center~ 114 South Claudine, Anaheim,.....Ca...!ifornia'
CouMcIL HINUTES - February 4; 1976; 3:00 P.M.
The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in Adjourned Regular
Session.
PRESENT: COU~CIL ~fEMBERS: Kaywood, Seymour, Sneegas and Thom
ABSENT: COU~:CIL ~BERS; Pebley
PRES~,IT: LIBRARY BOARD: Schultz, Stanton and Dahl
ABS~qT: LIBRARY BOARD; Callen
PRESENT: ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER: William O. Talley
ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT: John Harding
CITY ATTORNEY: Alan R. Watts
DEPUTY CITY CLERK: Linda D. Roberts
LIBRARY DIRECTOR: William C. riffith
ASSISTANT LIBRARY DIRECTOR: Mary Lou Rowe
Mayor Thom called the meeting to order at 3:00 P.M.
ARTHUR YOUNG & COMP~2;Y RECOMMENDATIONS -.MANAGEMENT. ?RACTICES AUDIT, LIBRARY:
Copies of the recommendations submitted by 'Arthur Young & Company at the cOm-
pletion of the Management Practices Audit of the Library Department were
distributed and implementation of same reviewed by Mr. Griffith. Specifically
he reported that: the Library Board is currently conducting interviews for
security patrol service; that they will continue to show a postage account
(Mr. Talley reported that a revolving fund for duplicating, printing and post-
age will be created in the 1976-77 Budget and these costs will be charged back
to using departments); that they have investigated the use of book rental
services and the charges are higher than the cost to the Library to purchase
books; that a preliminary report on the automation of the circulation control
function has been prepared by Data Processing and the Library Department hopes
to have a proposal ready for the 1976-77 Budget to implement an automated
system on a limited basis; that they propose to cut back one shift on the book-
mobile with the opening of the branch libraries and will utilize this second
driver in the book collector position on a trial basis; that the Library Board
has met with the Anaheim City School District Board with regard to the George
Washington Community Center Project and the next phase would be for staff to
prepare a cost/benefit evaluation of that program; that the Arthur Young &
Company has indicated interest in performing the facilities review of the Main
Library however the Library Department would like to delay this review until
such time as the two branches are opened, as this would allow them an
opportunity to assess and evaluate whatever problems occur in the new buildings
before reevaluating the Main Library function.
ENHA~.~CLMENT OF BOOK COLLECTIONS AT T.HE.. EUCLID. AND SUNKIST BRANCIIES: }~ayor Thom
reiterated his concern as expressed at the last Joint Council-Library Board
meeting, that the size of the book and record collections for the two new
brs.qch libraries be enhanced prior to opening at least to the level of the
Haskett Branch. In response to Council concern evidenced at the last meeting,
Mr. Griffith presented a report prepared by the Technical Services Division of
the Library outlining the maximum number of materials which could be purchased
and processed by June 30, 1976. This report indicates that with a total sum of
$50,000 the Library would be able to increase the collection at each branch by
3,825 books and 235 phonograph discs. The money would be utilized as follows:
$&4,500 for materials; $2,500 for supplies and $3,00.0 for part-time personnel
(1,150 hours). This would increase the collection in each branch library by 8%
to 61% of capacity, whereas the previous proJ,ected opening day collection was
53% of capacity.
Extensive discussion regarding t'he book collections for the new branch
libraries was held between the Library Board'amd Council Members during which
there was a general consensus of opinion of both bodies that all efforts
possible should be taken to enhance the collections as much as possible prior
to opening day. Mr. Griffith pointed out that even with a supplementary book
budget of $50,000, the book collections would no.: be complete inasmuch as it
takes time to build a quality collection, which takes into account the require-
ments and use of the community patronizing the Library, and because new
materials would be required as they are published. It was noted that
contributing factors to ~he dilemma were that there ha~e been insufficient book
funds to enable the Library t~o build up a collection for these new branches and
the construction of the two branches was launched precipitately.
76-94
Management Control Center~ 114 South Claudina~ Anaheim~ California
COUNCIL MINUTES - February 4~. 1976~ 3:00 P.M.
Mr. Talley pointed out that in any event, whether the supplementary book
budget is provided or not, the Council and Library Board will be facing the
problem of having incomplete book collections on opening day and should plan to
take some steps to advise the patrons of what actions the City is taking to
correct the situation.
The matter of where funds might be located to provide for a supplemental
book budget was addressed. It was pointed out that although originally
$1,000,000 was allocated for the two branch libraries, $200,000 of thi8 sum was
transferred elsewhere and the actual transfer for the construction and
ancillary library costs was $800,000. Mr. Talley advised that it is
anticipated the construction costs will come to about $35,000 over the current
appropriation, and therefore the Council, if it elects to provide a supple-
mentary book budget at this time, is looking for $85,000 in additional funds
for Library purposes.
Mr. Talley advised that if Council determines this item is of sufficiently
high priority, they might authorize a transfer from the 1975-76 carry-over funds
in that amount~ and he would recommend this be taken from the Broadway Storm
Drain Project as this would cause no delay. However these funds would have to
be reappropriated from some source at a later date.
>Sr. Talley further recommended that the book processing be completed as
much as possible through the use of CETA personnel as this would save the
Library Department the personnel costs.
Mr. Griffith stated that he recognized the savings in using CETA personnel
for this book processing project and would use as many CETA employees qualified
to do the work as he coUld.
At the conclusion of discussion, on motion by Councilman Seymour, seconded
by Councilwoman Kaywood, the City Council authorized the Assistant City Manager
to transfer $50,000 from the 1975-76 budget carry-over funds to provide for a
supplemental book budget to enhance collections at the Euclid and Sunkist
branch libraries. Councilman Pebley absent. MOTION CARRIED.
Briefly discussed were the Library Department's ~750,000 in capital hold items
and the recent recommendation by the Assistant City Manager that certain
capital hold items be released. Mr. tlarding advised that these items might be
released by requests to the Assistant City Manager's Office, on a priority
basis.
At the conclusion of discussion, on motion by Councilman Seymour, seconded
by Councilwoman Kaywood, the City Council recessed to 7:30 P.M., Management
Control Center, to conduct a joint work session with the City Planning
Commission. Councilman Pebley absent. MOTION CARRIED. (4:17 P.M.)
The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in Adjourned Regular
Session for the purpose of conducting a second work session with the
City Planning Commission on the Community Development Block Grant
Second Year Application.
PRESENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS; Kaywood, Seymour and Thom
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Pebley and Sneegas
PRESENT: PLA~;ING COMMISSION MEMBERS; Herbst, King, Morley,
Johnson and Tolar
ABSENT: PLA~.?ING COMMISSION MEMBERS; Barnes and Farano
PRESENT: Community Redevelopment Commission Member: tterb Leo
ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT: John Harding
CITY ATTORNEY: Alan R. Watts
DEPUTY CITY CLERK; Linda D. Roberts
PLANNING DIRECTOR: Ronald Thompson
HOUSING DIRECTOR; Rosario Mattessich
COM)R~NITY DEVELOPME~fr PROGRAM CONSULTA~NT: Alice McCullough
Mayor Thom called the meeting to order at 7:30 P.M. He briefly
recapitulated that at the first public hearing on the Community Development
Block Crant Proposal for the second year held on January 27, 1976, there was
76-9,5
Management Control....Cen..terl 114 South Claudinal Anaheim~ California
.C.OUNC!.L_MINUTES_ -...February 4, 1976, ...3:00 P.M.
virtually no public input although there were persons present who were at the
Council meeting primarily to see and hear about the proposal.
Mr. Mattessich explained that the scheduling has been revised to extend
the first year program to June 30, 1976, coinciding with the Cityts fiscal year
end. This allows additional time to submit the second year application to
SCAG. He explained that the final draft of the second year application must be
submitted to the clearinghouse by March 22, 1976. During the review period
changes in the budgeted amounts may be accomplished internally so long as these
changes do not constitute more than 10% of the total budget. To accomplish
changes exceeding this amount, the City would have to go through an amendment
process with citizen participation and public hearings.
Four budget plans identified as Plans "A", "B", "C" and "D" were presented
and reviewed with Council Members and Planning Commissioners and the
differences between Plans "C" and "D" noted. (Copies of sample budgets "A",
"B", "C" and "D" on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Commissioner blorley stated that he felt the water and sewer improvements
to be a high priority for health and safety reasons.
During discussion of the four plans it was again noted that although it is
important to use the money in visible ways in order to improve the credibility
of the program, the underground improvements, i.e., sewer and water system, are
fundamentally necessary and logically the first step towards improvement of the
target areas. It was also noted to be an important factor that these under-
ground improvements be scheduled first so as to eliminate the possibility that
a newly paved street would have to be torn Up to replace or improve water and
sewer systems at a later date.
Mr. Mattessich pointed out that the goal is to have a well balanced
program which provides not Oust for public improvements but also for improve-
ment of the housing stock in the City.
Councilman Seymour stated that he favored Plan "D" of the four plans pre-
sented since it seems to strike at his concerns as expressed at the last
session but while the things which are needed are taken care of, as many
dollars as possible are also used to provide visible improvements. He
questioned what the $20,000 for crime prevention would provide, and
Mr. Mattessich advised that they intend to provide one Community Relations
Advisor who would be an experienced Police Officer, bilingual, who would
volunteer for the position to work directly in the community development target
areas.
Mayor Thom pointed out that there is to his knowledge a concerted effort
in the central portion of the City for a multipurpose youth oriented center and
questioned what is intended to be accomplished with $35,000 budgeted for this
item.
Mr. Mattessich advised that these budget figures are tentative and can
still be changed. They considered that with this sum they might locate an
existing building which could be rehabilitated. It was noted that this sum
could also be utilized as a dosmpayment for a building with other payments from
the second and third year programs; or it might be incorporated with another
item such as open space to provide a larger budget.
Commissioner Johnson observed that all four budget plans include .an
expenditure of at least one-quarter of the total sum (between $2'00,000 to
$283,000) on public works type improvements. He noted that these four plans do
not really leave the Council much of an option. He therefore felt that the
program requires a good public relations selling program to obtain public
participation and approval for the public works segmemt.
Councilwoman Kaywood questioned the category entitled "youth paint and
pickup crews" and was advised that this is a program to provide Jobs for youth
in the community.
Mrs. McCullough reported that this type of program has been extremely
successful in the east Los Angeles area for the past three years. They have
M_ana8ement Control Center! 114 South Claudine; Anaheim; California
COUNCIL MINUTES - February 4~ 1976; 3:00 P.M.
employed approximately 130 young people to paint homes and garages, clear
vacant lots, tear down dilapidated fences and build new ones. An indirect
result of the program has been a reduction in the occurrences of vandalism and
graffiti.
Community Redevelopment Commissioner Leo pointed out that the redevelop-
ment plan called for tleritage Park to be located in the southeast corner of
Target Area "1" and suggested perhaps a joint effort with Redevelopment and
Community Development glock Grant Funds might produce a youth center in that
lo cat ion.
Councilman Seymour stated that he would agree with that suggestion for a
permanent facility, but he felt the situation requtred a more immediate interim
solut ion.
The $10,000 allotment for historical preservation was discussed and it was
noted that this money could be used to restore private property such as the old
Salvation Army Church so long as the public is granted access once the restora-
tion is complete. Mrs. McCullough also explained that this money could be
utilized to purchase materials for restoration projects conducted by civic
groups such as the Anaheim Heritage Com~nittee.
coUncilman Seymour questioned the housing assistance goals and ratios
shown which indicate projections of 508 units for non-elderly and 520 units for
elderly. In view of the fact that the main emphasis in creating the Anaheim
Itousing Authority was to provide housing assistance for the elderly who would
otherwise have to move out of the City, he questioned why this ratio has been
used.
Mr. Mattessich explained that HUD requires the City work towards its own
identified housing needs. Currently the City of Anaheim's identified housing
assistance needs for the elderly amounts to 25% and non-elderly at 75%. HUD
will not accept housing assistance goals unless they are consistent with the
City's defined needs. Mr. Mattessich stressed that housing assistance is one
of the "strings attached" to the Community Development Program and that this is
clearly spelled out in the legislation creating the program. HUD will not be
as ready to accept a second year program as they did the first and will be
particularly critical in :his area. They will require in the future that the
cities collect more data and make more realistic efforts toward determining
what the housing needs are and what they will attempt to do to meet them, with
special emphasis on the types of housing necessary for the people who work
within the city.
Councilman Seymour stated that his concern might best be expressed as
beJ.ng in the area of administration of the City's housing assistance program.
Since there are those individuals in this community who believe that the
creation of a housing authority was detrimental as it would cause an influx of
low income families, Councilman Seymour emphasized that it is very important
that the administration of the program ensure that the type of individual who
takes advantage of social benefit programs, such as welfare and subsidized
housing, rather than being willing to work, is not included in the City of
Anaheim's ttousing Assistance Program. tte pointed out that should this situa-
tion occur because of the politics involved, the City might lose a very ~ood
program.
Mr. Mattessich replied that he is sensitive to this problem. He advised
that their emphasis has been to attempt to assist low-income working families
caught in the rent escalation problem, by affording ~hem a better opportunity
in living quarters. He noted that it is necessary to have a good mix of
income, so as to spread the assistance funds further. He advised that they
have not as yet had too much success in the form of applications for housing
assistance from low-income working families, but will attempt to promote this
program for what it is, a tax break for lower-income working families.
Councilman Seymour advised that he would have no problem supporting the
type of program just described.
76-97
~.anagement Control Center ~..114 South Claudina~ Anaheim~ California
C.OUNCIL MINUTES .- Febr..uar~ 4~ 1976~ 3:00 P.~4.
Councilwoman Kaywood pointed out that it is important for the success of
the redevelopment area that a mix of income groups and ages be attracted to the
downtown area so that not just the elderly would be living there.
Mrs. M¢Cullough described the areas which they plan to designate as
secondary areas for the purpose of Code enforcement and rehabilitation of
certain homes, as opposed to the primary Target Areas 1 through 4. The
decision to expand into these areas in which housing repair funds might be used
was made because of the rather slow response initially for housing repair
funds.
At the conclusion of discussion and comparison of the four plans, on
motion by Commissioner Iferbst, seconded by Commissioner Tolar, the City Plan-
ning Commission recommended that the Council present Plan "D" at the public
hearing, February 10, 1976, as the plan which most closely approximates the
Cityts intent for use of the second year Com~nity Development Block Grant
Funds. MOTION CARRIED.
On motion by Councilman Seymour, seconded by Councilwoman Kaywood, the
City Council accepted the recommendation of the City Planning Commission and
determined that Plan "D" would be presented to the public on February 10, 1976.
Council Members Peb ley and Sneegas absent. MOTION CARRIED.
Commissioner Tolar raised the points that more than one of these plans
should be presented at the public hearing so that there is an alternate choice
for the public, ite stated that he has been concerned with the City's com-
munication with the public, noting that this is one of the biggest jobs in
redevelopment. He felt the citizens would view their opportunity for input as
more viable if more than one plan was presented.
Mayor Thom stated that although Commissioner Tolar's point was a good one,
he felt from his experience at the January 27, 1976 public hearing, when four
different budgets were presented, that this was very cumbersome and proved
confusing to the public, thereby dissipating their participat, ibn. He stated
that Plan "D" provides a conceptual budget plan which most closely approaches a
consensus of opinion reached through efforts and discussions held to date. The
figures are still flexible and can be changed after input from the public and
therefore it should provide a good point of departure.
Other areas in the City in need of rehabilitative efforts were pointed out
to the Council and in particular the Chevy Chase Drive, Robin, Wren, Bluejay
area was discussed. Mr. Harding reported on a successful meeting held with
tenants of that area and the self-help program they have initiated.
ADJOUFi'~MENT - PLANNING COMMISSIOI'~: On motion by Commissioner Johnson, seconded
by Commissioner Herbst, the City Planning Commission meeting was adjourned.
MOTION CARRIED.
ADJOUR~NMENT - CITY COUNCIL: Councilwoman Kaywood moved to adjourn. Councilman
Seymour seconded the motion. Council Members Pebley and Sneegas absent.
MOTION CARRIED.
Adjourned: 9:05 P.M.
PJ~ONA ~. HOUGARD, CITY CLERK