Loading...
2006/02/14 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA CITY COUNCIL REGULAR ADJOURNED MEETING FEBRUARY 14,2006 The City Council meeting was called to order at 3:00 p.m. and adjourned to 3:30 p.m. due to lack of a quorum. The regular adjourned session of February 14, 2006 was called to order at 3:35 P.M. in the Council Chambers of Anaheim City Hall, 200 South Anaheim Boulevard. PRESENT: Mayor Curt Pringle, Council Members: Richard Chavez, Lorri Galloway, and Bob Hernandez. Council Member Harry Sidhu was absent. STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Dave Morgan, City Attorney Jack White, and City Clerk Sheryll Schroeder. A copy of the agenda for the meeting of the Anaheim City Council was posted on February 10, 2006 at the City Hall exterior bulletin board. Renewed Measure "M" Draft Transportation Investment Plan Presentation: Arthur Leahy, Chief Executive Officer of Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) updated Council and the public on efforts to renew Measure M remarking that Mayor Pringle was serving as the Chairman of OCT A's 20/20 Committee and playing an integral role in shaping the Draft Transportation Plan. Measure M, he stated, had been approved by the voters in Orange County in 1990 and had provided for a % cent transportation sales tax for 20 years ending in year 2011. He pointed out the projeds promised under Measure M had been completed or were underway. Specific to Anaheim, the City had received more than $168 million to widen streets, build new turn lanes, landscape roads, and install synchronized traffic signals and to complete several freeway improvements. In addition, Measure M dollars doubled the number of lanes on the 1-5 through Anaheim, added two lanes to SR-55 and two lanes on the SR-91 and the $500 million Garden Grove Freeway improvement project was underway and expected to be completed before the end of this year. He noted the OCT A Board had also approved a major investment in Metrolink rail service to enhance rail stations, parking and the rolling stock and to provide future service to the Anaheim Angels games. Bus service fare discounts were also provided for seniors and disabled bus riders. He emphasized all of those capital improvements to the transportation system had made significant travel enhancements to Anaheim and its residents, visitors and work force. He addressed the need for continuation of Measure M stating the growing population. employment, housing and traffIC related to more trips for work and recreational purposes and the future would only see increased intensification of the transportation system. He noted San Bernardino, Riverside and San Diego counties had already extended Measure M taxes while Los Angeles County's tax remained in perpetuity which meant all the surrounding counties would have funds to improve their infrastructures. He believed a strong rationale for renewing Measure M in Orange County was that the planned projeds identified in1990 were completed with the exception of the 1- 5 and the Metrolink service. Mr. Leahy reported CCTA had performed investment studies on the 405 freeway and the SR-91 and would be doing similar studies in South County later in the year ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES February 14, 2006 Page 2 however, he emphasized there were no funds to implement the projects outlined in the investment studies. The projects were becoming shelf ready but without an extension of Measure M, there would be no revenues for any system capacity expansion. He added that should the voters extend the sales tax, aCTA would then be able to begin new projects in 2007 by bonding against the revenue stream, which would also enable them to better compete for state and federal funds. The challenge to renew Measure M, he acknowledged, was that now a 2/3 majority of voters were required, rather than the 50 percent plus one formula necessary in 1990. Explaining the renewal process, Mr. Leahy indicated there must be a majority approval from the Councils representing a majority of the incorporated population of Orange County and it would have to be approved by the Board of Supervisors and by 2/3 of the aCTA Board. Following that, the renewal measure would require 2/3 voter approval from Orange County voters. The draft plan assumed a 30 year duration, rather than 20 year, and would provide for $11.9 billion dollars with 43 percent going to freeways, 32 percent to streets and roads and 25 percent to transit, the same as the existing distribution of funds. He noted the draft plan included a large investment in the SR-91 corridor and for the 1-5 in South County. He reported that cities in Orange County were supportive of the idea of having Measure M include a signal system component in order to increase speeds on local streets. Partnering with cities and groups of cities voluntarily was a consideration in that effort and he looked forward to creating joint powers agreements with cities, OCTA and Caltrans to decide how to improve the performance of the signal system. Mayor Pringle pointed out aCTA had initiated a pilot traffic signalization project toward that effort and had chosen Euclid from La Habra down to Fountain Valley, making Anaheim the largest city benefiting from the demonstration project. In terms of transit, Mr. Leahy stated Metrolink would be running on a 20 to 30 minute frequency all day long, seven days a week, perhaps 18 hours a day and community bus services were being considered as well. He believed other cities or group of cities might wish to circulate bus lines for specific service areas that could coordinate well with OCT A regional bus service as well as the Metrolink service. He pointed out having funds available for cities in this area would be a way of improving circulation. Measure M would also continue the discounting of fares for seniors and the disabled community, particularly important as the population in Orange County aged. Mr. Leahy indicated the Anaheim Regionallntermodal Center (ARTIC) project was of high merit to the board and was the centerpiece of the commuter link service effort. He added the Board also intended to engineer a competitive grant program for helping to clean up water associated with storm drain runoff to the oceans. Explaining the safeguards within the draft plan, he stated there would be an independent annual audit and the annual report to the taxpayers. The board would also review the plan every ten years and should they conclude a change was needed, it would return to the voters for their approval. The administrative cost was still limited to one percent and the State of California would receive again received a minimal 1.5 percent to collect the tax and give it back. The Citizens Oversight Committee would continue to review the plan each year to determine if it was in conformance and make those findings known to the public. He ended his presentation stating the OCT A Board had approved the draft plan in January and it was now in a public review period until the end of March. In late April, 2006, the Board would approve a final plan which would then go forward to cities through May and June for their consideration. If at that time, a majority of the cities with a majority of the population request to put it on the ballot, it would go before the County Board and the OCT A Board in July with the public ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES February 14, 2006 Page 3 voting on November 7th. He noted during the current period, OCTA would conduct educational outreach alerting citizens the renewal efforts were underway and inviting them to participate but that per state law that advocacy effort would discontinue in July. Mayor Pringle thanked Mr. Leahy for the presentation pointing out there would be zero funding for transportation projects if the Measure M extension was not approved. If it was approved, he remarked, there was a proposal for 18 percent of funds to be in straight tumback funds for local streets and another $1.8 billion in competitive grants for cities which augured well for Anaheim. Of the 43 percent of Measure M going to highways, Mayor Pringle emphasized the single largest project was work on the 91 freeway for additional lanes, addressing choke points and intersections as well as for development of an elevated roadway to move from the SR-241 to the SR-15 providing at least four lanes of additional capacity through the canyon. Additionally it would reduce a portion of the tolls on the 241 to encourage use of the roadway. He emphasized over $1.5 billion of the $4.7 billion for highways, the largest single expenditure, would be on the 91 freeway and was a significant investment in the Anaheim community. Mayor Pringle pointed out Anaheim had two Metrolink stations, and the one by the Stadium would be the premier focal point supporting high speed rail projects both to Ontario Airport and onto Las Vegas as well as a superspeed train connecting to downtown Los Angeles. In addition there would be $1.2 billion available to those communities for competitive connections to those Metrolink stations. He ended his comments by stating Anaheim residents would see an overwhelming amount of investment in the community if Measure M were extended for another 30 years. Council Member Chavez believed the time frame should be longer than 30 years and asked if 30 years had been recommended as it was more palatable to voters. Mr. Leahy indicated the Board had considered other time periods, but that 30 years was chosen believing it would get the most voter approval. Council Member Chavez asked what the outlook would be should Measure M renewal fail. Mr. Leahy stated the Board was outreaching to all cities, the private community, business, labor, and environmental groups and had spent a great deal of time trying to determine what would be acceptable to voters as a spending plan. If it failed, in 2011 the sales tax ended and it would be up to the board and business community to decide when to go forward again. He remarked it had taken three attempts before the measure passed in 1990. Mayor Pringle stated he had initially opposed Measure M as it was imposing a new tax but that it was easier to point to the continuation of a tax rather than the establishment of a new one. He felt the resources had been distributed appropriately and that the public had seen direct benefits and results from the tax. Council Member Hernandez asked if Mr. Leahy had taken the historical allocations given for transportation improvements prior to Measure M and projected those allocations through the Measure M period and determined what the shortfall would have been. Mr. Leahy did not have that specific information, however, stated Measure M funds were used to match state and federal dollars in many projects. Council Member Hernandez felt that information would make a strong argument in support of Measure M. ADDITIONS/DELETIONS TO CLOSED SESSION: None PUBLIC COMMENTS ON CLOSED SESSION ITEMS: None At 4:20 P.M., Mayor Pringle moved to closed session for the following items: ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES February 14, 2006 Page 4 CLOSED SESSION: 1. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - EXISTING LITIGATION Subdivision (a) of Government Code Section 54966.9 Name of case: City of Anaheim v. Angels Baseball, LP, et al., Orange County Superior Court Case No. 05CC01902. 2. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS Agency designated representative: Joel Fick Employee organization: Anaheim Firefighters Association, Local 2899 Mayor Pringle reconvened Council session at 5:20 P.M. Invocation: Reverend Gary Spykerman, Grace Bible Church FlaG S8lute: Council Member Hernandez ADDlTIONSIDELETIONS TO THE AGENDA: NONE REPORT FROM CLOSED SESSION: Providing details on the Angels Baseball litigation, Mayor Pringle stated there were two elements to the litigation; one related to damages and the other related to injunctive relief. Damages were sought because an entire season had been played without the "Anaheim" name and the City believed there were damages resulting from that action. He stated that portion of the litigation had been presented to a jury and had resulted in a loss to the City. He added the injunctive relief hearing with the City requesting the Anaheim name to be returned to the baseball team would be heard before a judge on March 2nd and he was optimistic of the outcome. No decisions on how to proceed would be made until the final result was heard on March 2nd. PUBLI'C COMMENTS (ALL MATTERS EXCEPT PUBLIC HEARINGS): David Standzy of Drop LA.com, was supportive of Council's efforts to pursue litigation against the Angels and was grateful for their efforts. William Fitzgerald, Anaheim Home, spoke in opposition to litigation against the Anaheim Angels. Jerry Mazenko also spoke in support of Council's efforts in the baseball litigation. Allen Davis opposed the pursuit of litigation against the Anaheim Angels and addressed the legal fees accrued. James Robert Reade read his list of 10 respected Anaheim residents. Trish Hachten recommended Anaheim establish a dog adventure park and offered her services as a volunteer. Richard Crawford supported Council's efforts at retaining the name of the Anaheim Angels. Fernando Negrette, speaking on behalf of the Anaheim Firefighters Association, expressed admiration for Council in making tough decisions and supported their efforts in the Angels litigation. ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES February 14, 2006 Page 5 William Bloom fully supported Council in the litigation against the Angels baseball team believing the lawsuit was done in a responsible manner. Another Anaheim resident stated his support of Council's actions in the Angels litigation. Eric Tafoya supported Council's actions in the Angels litigation. Alma Ramirez stated there was no comparison in losing by not succeeding than in losing by not tryi ng. Richard Sanchez supported Council's actions in the Angels litigation. Howard Garber addressed the issue of outrageous statements made during public comment portion of the agenda believing they should not be tolerated. Martha Rasmus announced the Ms. Anaheim Program event occurring on March 11th at the Heritage Forum. Mayor Pringle remarked that each Council Member took their job seriously and had made a unanimous decision to pursue litigation with the Angels baseball team. He stated every member of Council was pleased with the direction taken but not pleased with the outcome of the jury verdict and that Council's job was not to show up a week or two after the fact and second guess the outcome but to show up and make the tough calls and defend the Anaheim taxpayers' assets. He thanked residents for supporting the Angels acknowledging it was their taxes that paid the Stadium property tax of $700,000, $280,000 for liability insurance and from $500,000 to $600,000 on the original debt service for the stadium annually. He emphasized the City was honored to have a baseball team in Anaheim and wanted this team to remain in the City. Del Smith, representing Anaheim in Washington, DC, provided an update on the City's federal advocacy investment. As background, he stated President Eisenhower got Congress to enact the Interstate Act and in 1991 it was changed to the Intermodal Act and ARTIC was used as an example to convince Congress to broaden the scope of that legislation. In 1991, Anaheim received $14 million for ARTIC, and in 1998, received another $9 million for the Gene Autry Way component of ARTIC. He added it was a primary objective of last year's reauthorization, but was zeroed out before passage of the federal budget in the final minutes, although $800,000 for the Anaheim I ntelligent Transportation System was received. He stated the project was still alive and the City had a request for $5 million in place for 2007 appropriations. He noted $42 million was needed to buy the property and another $29 million needed to finish the Gene Autry Way Project. City Manager Dave Morgan asked Mr. Smith to update Council on homeland security and the family justice center. Mr. Smith indicated that soon after 911, an official from Homeland Security visited Anaheim and started a series of events which culminated in Anaheim being the lead city of four other cities that is part of the Regional Technology Program. For the Family Justice Center, Mr. Smith would be seeking $5 million on Anaheim's behalf. Mayor Pringle thanked Mr. Smith for his update and clarified that the City sought a variety of methods after the failure of receiving federal funds for ARTie and was looking to a partnership with OCT A to secure land for the ARTIC Station. This, he pointed out, meant the funds being sought for ARTIC was not contingent upon the purchase price of the land. He stated the City was continuing to explore all avenues rather than relying solely on federal funds and was continuing to work with the County of Orange for land for the ARTIC station near Angels Stadium. ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES February 14, 2006 Page 6 CONSENT CALENDAR: Item NO.6 was removed by Councilmember Hernandez for separate discussion. Council Member Chavez moved to approve the balance of the consent calendar Items 1 - 16, seconded by Council Member Galloway to waive reading in full of all ordinances and resolutions and to approve the following in accordance with the reports, certifications and recommendations furnished each Council Member and as listed on the Consent Calendar. Roll Call vote: Ayes - 4; Mayor Pringle, Council Members: Chavez, Galloway and Hernandez. Absent - 1; Council Member Sidhu. Noes - O. Motion carried. MOTION: calendar. C/G Waive reading in full of all ordinances and resolutions and adopt the consent 1 . Receive and file the Monthly Financial Analysis presented by the Finance Director for three 0117 months ended September 30,2005 and the Treasurer"s Investment Portfolio Report for 0128 January 2006. 2. Approve and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the agreement with KFM 3955 Engineering, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $280,000, for consultant services for the Kraemer Boulevard/La Palma Avenue Intersection Improvements Project. 3. Reject all bids submitted for the construction of the Anaheim Police Department Helicopter 0160 Air Support at the Fullerton Airport. 4. Review the need for continuing the local emergency heretofore proclaimed by the Director D175 of Emergency Services as ratified by City Council Resolution No. 2005-17, and the subsequent orders issued pursuant thereto, concerning land movement and property damage in the vicinity of 357, 365 and 373 Ramsgate Drive in the City of Anaheim, and, by motion, determine that the need for continuing the local emergency exists. 5. Accept the low bid of Pak West Paper & Packaging in a not to exceed amount of 0180 $40,330.32 (including tax) for Johnson Wax cleaning products for the Convention Center for a period of one year, with three one year optional renewals and authorize the Purchasing Agent to exercise the renewal options, all in accordance with Bid #6708. 7. Determine on the basis of the evidence submitted by CREAlNexus Anaheim Corners, LLC, 3290 that said property owner has complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of Development Agreement No. 2004-00002 for the 2005-2006 review period for the Stadium Lofts Project in the Platinum Triangle. 8. Approve and authorize the execution of a contract with the County of Orange, Probation 3956 Department, to provide Deputy Probation Officers on an overtime basis to work with the Anaheim Police Department in conjunction with a grant award from the California Office of Traffic Safety. ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES February 14, 2006 Page 7 9. RESOLUTION NO. 2006-18 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY 0160 OF ANAHEIM authorizing the Chief of Police or his designee to submit a grant application on behalf of the City of Anaheim to the State Office of Emergency Services. for the Fiscal Year 2006 Urban Areas Security Initiative (UASI) Grant Program and if awarded. authorizing acceptance of such grant on behalf of the City and amending the budget for Fiscal Year 2006-07 accordingly. 10. RESOLUTION NO. 2006-19 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY 0154 OF ANAHEIM adopting a Memorandum of Understanding establishing terms and conditions of employment for employees in classifications assigned to the Peace Officers 'Unit represented by the Anaheim Police Association. RESOLUTION NO. 2006-20 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM for paying and reporting the value of employer paid member contributions under the Public Employees' Retirement System for Safety Police Employees. 11. RESOLUTION NO. 2006-021 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY 0154 OF ANAHEIM implementing the Pre-Tax Payroll Deduction Plan for service credit purchases to all miscellaneous and all safety groups. 12. RESOLUTION NO. 2006-022 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY 0175 OF ANAHEIM authorizing the Director of Public Works to apply for funds for the Transportation Enhancement Activity (TEA) program under the 1998 Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century for Lincoln Avenue Median Improvements - Phase 1 Project (East Street to Evergreen Street). 13. ORDINANCE NO. 6016 (ADOPTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM 0160 adding new Chapter 6.05 to Title 6. Public Health and Safety. of the Anaheim Municipal Code regarding public safety radio system coverage. (Introduced at the Council meeting of February 7, 2006. Item #16). 14. ORDINANCE NO. 6017 (ADOPTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM C280 amending the Zoning Map referred to in Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code relating to zoning (Reclassification No. 2005-00171). (601 S. Western Avenue) (Introduced at the February 7.2006 Council meeting. Item #17). 15. Approve and ratify the emergency construction contract with Alliance Streetworks, Inc., in 3957 the amount of $187.891. for grading, lining of slope and temporary drainage system and a desalting basin for the emergency access lane at Hidden Grove. 16. Approve the regular meeting minutes of January 31,2006 and adjourned regular meeting of February 7, 2006. ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES February 14, 2006 Page 8 End of Consent Calendar: 6. Waive the competitive bid process and authorize the Purchasing Agent to issue a purchase 0180 order in an amount not-to-exceed $224,345 (including tax), to Verdasee Solutions Incorporated, for the purchase of a complete Radio Frequency Identification System (RFID), including software, wireless mobile data receivers, and RFID tags for the Fire Department. Chief Roger Smith stated the Radio Frequency Identification System being considered by Council was the latest in technology to allow the Department to be able to conduct better personnel accountability and to track inventory controls in a warehouse system. By being able to geographically locate suppression firefighters on the ground, the Department would be able to provide better rescue if necessary. Council Member Hernandez wanted to bring some attention to this item as it piggybacked onto homeland security and Anaheim being on the cutting edge. A very important component of homeland security and disaster response was the initial use of the RFID to track multi-casualty patients. He emphasized this system would allow the department to do things efficiently and effectively with technology and streamlines the process. Council Member Hernandez moved to approve Item No.6, seconded by Council Member Chavez. Roll Call vote: Ayes - 4; Mayor Pringle, Council Members: Chavez, Galloway and Hernandez. Noes - O. Absent: 2; Council Member Sidhu. Motion Carried. Report on Closed Session Actions: None. Council Communications: Council Member Hernandez reminded the public of a significant milestone that had occurred 60 years ago on February 18th, the decision on Mendez vs. Westminster Schools was given to end segregation of Mexican American children in the school system Council Member Galloway wished all a Happy Valentine's day. Council Member Chavez spoke with pride of the opening of the Tiger Woods Learning Center to help children in the community. He pointed out it was a center to teach children about academics and was targeted at children at risk for completing school. He emphasized that Tiger Woods used his own funds to build this facility and did so because he had played golf at the Dad Miller's Golf Course as a youth. He also stated the Angels litigation was an emotional issue and members of Council had attended the trial almost every day and he believed Anaheim had done the right thing and had fought a good fight and would now wait for judge's ruling on March 2nd. Mayor Pringle commented that he had received a call from Mayor Villaraigosa who said he was sorry that Anaheim did not prevail in the lawsuit. His point was that Los Angeles had one team and they were as proud of the Los Angeles Dodgers as Anaheim was proud of the Anaheim Angels. The Mayor also noted he and the Police Chief had met with the new Mayor of San Diego to develop a relationship as he tried to do with many of the largest cities in the state so they could join together in common efforts such as receiving a fair share of federal and state transportation dollars. ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES February 14, 2006 Page 9 He pointed to the opening of the Tiger Woods Learning Center indicating Maria Shriver and former President Bill Clinton had attended with comments that were precise in terms of the value of education and the benefit to be received by Anaheim school children. He noted that in most cities this type of event would have been significant and well publicized but that in Anaheim, other events had overshadowed this one. He emphasized that Tiger Woods contributed $5 million of his own money and asked all of his corporate partners to invest in Anaheim as well, resulting in a $25 million educational facility. He also commented on the spectacular solar windows within the facility put in place with Anaheim Public Utility funds. Using Japanese technology with photovoltaic cells within the glass which generated power as the sun hits the glass and shaded the window as the sun became more intense not only saved energy but generated it at the same time and was a novel way for the Utilities Department to reinvest in the community. He pointed out that Tiger Woods mother acknowledged she was more proud of her son for the opening of this Center that she was of any other of his accomplishments. Adjoumment: At 6:35 P.M. with the consent of Council, Mayor Pringle adjourned the meeting of February 14, 2006.