Loading...
08/09/2022ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING OF AUGUST 9, 2022 The regular meeting of August 9, 2022 was called to order at 3:01 P.M. in the Council Chamber of Anaheim City Hall, located at 200 S. Anaheim Boulevard. The meeting notice, agenda, and related materials were duly posted on August 4, 2022. MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Pro Tem Trevor O'Neil and Council Members Jose Diaz, Gloria Sahagun Ma'ae, and Stephen Faessel. Council Members Jose F. Moreno and Avelino Valencia joined the meeting during Closed Session. [Mayoral vacancy] STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Jim Vanderpool, City Attorney Robert Fabela, and City Clerk Theresa Bass ADDITIONS/DELETIONS TO CLOSED SESSION: None PUBLIC COMMENTS ON CLOSED SESSION ITEMS: None CLOSED SESSION: At 3:01 P.M., Mayor Pro Tem O'Neil recessed to closed session for consideration of the following: 1. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS (Subdivision (a) of Section 54957.6 of the California Government Code) Agency Designated Representative: Linda Andal, Human Resources Director Name of Employee Organization: Anaheim Fire Association 2. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — ANTICIPATED LITIGATION (Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Subdivision (d)(2) of the California Government Code Section 54956.9): One potential case At 5:02 P.M., Mayor Pro Tem O'Neil reconvened the Anaheim City Council. MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Pro Tem Trevor O'Neil and Council Members Jose Diaz, Gloria Sahagun Ma'ae, Jose F. Moreno, Avelino Valencia, and Stephen Faessel [Mayoral vacancy] INVOCATION: Dale Moreland, Ball Road Church of Christ FLAG SALUTE: Council Member Stephen Faessel At 5:06 P.M., Mayor Pro Tem O'Neil called to order the Successor Agency to the Anaheim Redevelopment Agency (in joint session with the City Council). ADDITIONS/DELETIONS TO THE AGENDA: City Clerk Theresa Bass announced, regarding Item No. 04, a revised response letter to the Orange County Grand Jury had been distributed to Council and posted to the website, correcting a typographical error on page 8. She also announced that a revised Tentative Tract Map resolution was City Council Minutes of August 9, 2022 Page 2 of 44 distributed and posted for Council's consideration during Public Hearing Item No. 29, to include Conditions of Approval Nos. 11 — 13. PUBLIC COMMENTS (all agenda items, except public hearings): City Clerk Theresa Bass reported that a total of four (4) public comments were received electronically prior to 1:00 P.M. related to City Council agenda items and matters within the jurisdiction of the Anaheim City Council. [A final total of five (5) public comments were received electronically, distributed to the City Council, and made part of the official record]. — See Appendix. Peter Warner reported when improvements to the Anaheim Canyon Station are completed buses should be able to properly and safely turn around in the station. He advised Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) Routes 38 and 71 would then be able to make a better connection and would improve the train/bus rider experience and may improve ridership. R. Joshua Collins, Homeless Advocates for Christ, expressed support for the investigation of former Mayor Harry Sidhu and associated corruption on the City Council. He encouraged City Council to make godly decisions. He reported the Los Angeles, Anaheim, and Long Beach metropolitan areas have the most expensive rents in the nation according to CNBC and encouraged City Council to work for more affordable housing and walk-in shelters. Hari S. Lal, Esq. reported Anaheim has a population of 380,000 residents yet a new Mayor has not been appointed. He noted under Article 3.3 of the City Charter that City Council had a responsibility to appoint a new Mayor but this has never happened because of Mayor Pro Tem O'Neil. He encouraged another member of City Council to step up and show the integrity of the City. He encouraged City Council to approve the investigation so the public has a full understanding if anyone else on the dais was involved. He expressed concern that the Santiago Geologic Hazard Abatement District (SGHAD) is running out of money which would bring the possibility of a landslide in Anaheim Hills and asked the City to investigate the operation of the well. Mike Robbins submitted documents and reported the People's Homeless Task Force was successful in suing the City regarding the Anaheim Stadium deal which revealed the criminal activity of the cabal. He read a letter he recommended City Manager Vanderpool write to the Grand Jury that the City acknowledges that the criminal malfeasance is evidentiary in the Grand Jury proceedings and that all members of the dais who were a part of the cabal would resign. He advised there are not enough funds for grants for the Fiscal Year 2022-2023 Annual Action Plan because the members of the cabal have bankrupted the City. He advised the City could sell Anaheim Stadium for its real value or impose a gate tax at Disneyland to generate revenue and he hoped to see changes in the City sooner rather than later. Amin Nash, Arab American Civic Council, thanked City Council and staff who have met with community members regarding the Brookhurst Street Corridor Study. He recommended that points of discussion should be the equitable aspect of the Request for Proposals (RFP) market and real estate portion in regards to "mom and pop" shops, quality of life for business owners in the area, and lack of the designation of Little Arabia. Jonathan Echavarria, Field Representative for Assemblymember Sharon Quirk -Silva, submitted and read a letter from the Assemblymember in support of the Little Arabia designation which would honor the thousands of Arab Americans who live and work in the area and encouraging City Council to officially designate the area known as Little Arabia. City Council Minutes of August 9, 2022 Page 3 of 44 David Duran advised that the Grand Jury found a myriad of problems in the Angel Stadium sale and noted that a lack of transparency led to public distrust of the City Council majority. He advised the Grand Jury recommends that any future City Council decisions on any future sale of Angel Stadium be based on public input in the form of public workshops, compliance with the Brown Act, Service Level Agreements (SLA), and in accord with the City Council's oath to uphold the public interest. He advised there are $56,500,000 of spending decisions on the agenda and inquired how the public could trust that City Council is spending the money judiciously. He referenced the Grand Jury's recommendation that any future agreement of the City's disposition of the stadium property should allocate low and very low affordable housing units for the local workforce and noted many residents have been asking City Council to move forward on this for years. Masih Fauladi, Deputy Executive Director of the Council on American -Islamic Relations (CAIR), advised CAIR could not support Item No. 26 as written given the direction from City Council to staff to engage with a planning consulting firm as they believe it would disenfranchise the diversity of residents and businesses on the Brookhurst Corridor. He encouraged City Council to conduct more conversations with the community before the item is passed. He noted there needs to be commitments from City Council to ensure business owners and residents of the area are not unduly taxed and advised the Little Arabia designation should not be tied to the study and should be community -led. Mark Richard Daniels noted that, as of tomorrow, it has been 80 days since the City has had a Mayor, and he found it appalling. He advised that City Council, except for Council Member Moreno, has chosen not to select an Interim Mayor due to arrogance. He noted the City Council majority has lost the public's trust and encouraged them to resign. Wes Jones noted the City has not had a Mayor since Tom Tait left. He deemed former Mayor Sidhu a crime boss. He advised Item No. 04 was a massive piece of understatement. He encouraged City Council to pay attention to him while he is addressing them and noted the report did not adequately address the issues. Vern Nelson referenced the recent FBI raid of Mar-A-Lago and noted that at least three of the City Council majority are acting like they have nothing to worry about. He reminded residents that Council Member Ma'ae, Mayor Pro Tem O'Neil, and Council Member Diaz voted against any campaign reform and expressed his disappointment. He gave Council Member Faessel credit for supporting the Cleanup Anaheim Act and admitting there is a cloud above the entire City Council. He cited references of former Mayor Sidhu's arrogance and contempt. He advised trust is not coming back to City Council soon due to corruption in the City Council. He referred to Arte Moreno's attempt to obtain a lease from the City for Angell Stadium for $1 per year for 66 years and noted all, except for former Mayor Tait, were in lock -step with the idea. Aida Garcia expressed support for Item No 23 and opposition for Item No. 25. She advised the Mayor and City Council are bound by their fiduciary duties and to perform and maintain integrity. She advised in March 2019, the residents of Rancho La Paz came before City Council to request a rent stabilization ordinance which was opposed. She noted there was a great public outcry for rent stabilization which was passed by Governor Newsom statewide but noted mobile home parks were not included. She requested reparations from the City and to enact a rent stabilization order that includes mobile home parks and includes the City of Anaheim. Cassandra Perez, District Director for Congressman Lou Correa, read a letter on his behalf expressing his strong support for the proposed designation of Little Arabia, encouraging the City to continue to celebrate the rich and diverse cultures that have made it the largest city in Orange County. City Council Minutes of August 9, 2022 Page 4 of 44 Jose Arturo Robles spoke on behalf of Item No. 05. He advised his parents were heroin addicts and he spent 15 years homeless so in his experience, opioid abatement does not work. He recommended that the City should lean on non-profit organizations such as The Salvation Army. He reminded City Council that the City got in trouble with the stadium deal due to the Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) mandates. John Dunton reported he has been a community activist in Anaheim for 25 years. He advised there are still many homeless residents in the city and encouraged City Council to step in. He noted many residents addressed City Council about slumlord landlords and thanked Management Fellow Nick Gomez for contacting Code Enforcement to investigate. He encouraged City Council to stop violating residents' constitutional rights by asking for identification at the door. Carlos Leon, District 2 resident, advised that the Arab -American community in Anaheim has been advocating tirelessly for the recognition of Little Arabia and its contribution to the city. He called on City Council to recognize their hard work to celebrate their contributions to the City. James J. Guziak reported he is on the Board of Directors for SGHAD and explained that when it was created it was underfunded, noting that it was funded with litigation settlement funds. He advised that important dates to note are the landslide in Anaheim Hills in 1993, November 1996 when voters passed Proposition 218 which vastly impacted the way local governments fund their operations, and the founding of SGHAD in 1999. He reported that 75% of homeowners in the area did not purchase their property after the SGHAD was created and explained disclosure was not mandated at the time. He advised the City created a monster with Proposition 218. Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil advised that his staff would follow up with Mr. Guziak. Tamara Jimenez provided a brief overview of operations at Anaheim Lighthouse over the last year. She advised that the organization is a residential detox and treatment center licensed by the Department of Health Services and operating in Anaheim for over 20 years. She noted many of their patients are residents, with 133 being veterans and 83 seniors. She provided an overview of their community involvement and expressed Anaheim Lighthouse's strong support for Item No. 05 regarding the opioid abatement. Paul Hyek reported the OCTA board has decided to shut down a section of Route 123 which serves Anaheim Canyon Metrolink Station. He advised the homeless need to get off the tracks so they do not get hit by a train. He encouraged all bus drivers for the homeless shelters to have the proper licensing and endorsements. Ron Flores noted his hat says "Basta," which means "we have had enough," and advised that residents have had enough. He recommended that City Council appoint Council Member Moreno as Interim Mayor as he is the most qualified. He referenced the recent shooting of Juan Reynaga who was shot by local gangs. He advised it should not have happened as City Council was warned about bad lighting and crime in the area. He encouraged City Council to appoint Council Member Moreno as Mayor, noting he is the only one who could help fix Anaheim. Cecil Jordan Corkern reported he is working on gun law reports. He noted the subliminal messages and human trafficking with Disney are all in the past. He advised he is working on a report detailing mass shootings at 16 schools and is looking for a sponsor to support him. Gya Dhee referenced the shooting of Juan Reynaga at the corner of Acacia Street and La Palma Avenue by gang members. She noted that, as of now, there have been no arrests in the shooting. City Council Minutes of August 9, 2022 Page 5 of 44 She reported the crime index for Anaheim is 15 out of 100 and encouraged City Council to implement safety for its residents, look to fund law enforcement, and prosecute criminals. Angelica S. Galan (translation: Spanish) reported she is a resident on Pauline Street and reported the apartments are infested with mice, cockroaches, and bedbugs. She advised general maintenance is not occurring in her neighborhood. She noted residents are having issues with allergies and serious bed problems due to mold and vermin infestation. She reported the rent has been raised more than 10% in the last month and noted several residents who cannot pay the increased rent. She pleaded for City Council's assistance in investigating the mold in the building. Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil requested staff work with the Quality Rental Housing Program and the tenant to coordinate a visit to the property. Council Member Moreno advised Code Enforcement has already visited the property and met with some of the residents. He asked Ms. Galan to encourage other tenants to report their experiences to the City so the City could assist. John Nguyen, District 5 resident, spoke on behalf of Youth Leadership America and noted they have done a lot of work for Anaheim's youth. He advised it is a 100% volunteer -based organization and thanked City Council, staff, and the Youth Commission for their support. He invited City Council and residents to attend the Inaugural Youth Leadership Summit and Expo on August 20 at the Anaheim Convention Center. He reported registration for the event can be found at www.vlaexpo.org. Jesse S. reported crime in Anaheim is akin to Santa Ana and South Central and encouraged City Council to start addressing crime in the City. Mazatl Tepehyolotzin asked City Council to encourage the Anaheim Unified School District to remove Colonists as its mascot as it is offensive and harmful to minorities, Native Americans, and indigenous people. He presented a petition of 9,405 signatures to have the mascot Colonists removed. Jeanine Robbins, People's Homeless Taskforce, reported her group sued the City for Brown Act violations and helped to expose the corruption amongst City Council and staff regarding the sale of Angel Stadium. She noted Anaheim was amongst the highest rents in the country. She advised that although there are two housing developments on the agenda, one project would only produce 1.8 units of affordable housing and the other would produce no affordable housing. She advised the City is $2 billion in debt but is short police officers, fire personnel, parks, community services, and senior services. She believed the City Council majority represented their corporate donors instead of their residents, have financially broken the City, and should be in jail for their illegal actions. Bryan Kaye thanked the Council Members and police officers who participated in National Night Out. He provided an overview of his recent experience at a Police Review Board meeting. John W. Spring, retired college instructor, submitted documents and expressed concern regarding Russian mind control which is now being used on the young people of Orange County. Josefina Mejia (translation: Spanish), a resident at Euclid and La Palma, asked City Council for assistance for residents who are being abused by apartment owners. She advised she is threatened with eviction if she does not pay her gas or electric bill but that is not included in her contract and encouraged City Council to intervene. Council Member Moreno encouraged Ms. Mejia to speak with City staff so they could be of assistance. City Council Minutes of August 9, 2022 Page 6 of 44 Daisy Chavez, Vice Chair of the Police Review Board, provided a brief overview of her experience at National Night Out. She noted the most insightful information she received was from the Park Rangers about the services that they offer. She advised that she learned the Park Rangers are the ones who typically find individuals in park bathrooms who are dead or are overdosing. She advised they have requested access to Narcan and training but have been told there is no funding available. She encouraged City Council to investigate. Denise Barnes reported attending four food distribution centers and there were 425 cars in two hours alone at the Brookhurst Community Center, and 400 people at Magnolia Baptist Church and Hope Fellowship. She requested City Council attend the food distributions and engage with the residents who are going through bad times. She requested City Council help support the seniors. Mirvette Judeh expressed concern regarding Item No. 26 and felt it may gentrify the community. She does not want to see the plan price out existing residents and businesses. She noted Arab - Americans and Muslim -Americans have been an important part of the community and oftentimes feel ignored. She would like to see the designation of Little Arabia happen and avoid any further delays. Kenneth Batiste expressed concern that the City is $2 billion in debt. He referenced residents who are renting and living with potential health violations and noted that City Council wants to give landlords more power. He inquired why City Council would vote for a lifetime ban and noted it would impact families and children. He reported when real campaign reform was brought before City Council it was opposed by some Council Members and noted they are as much of the problem as former Mayor Sidhu. He commented that the only member of the dais who is interested in the residents is Council Member Moreno. He encouraged City Council to designate Little Arabia. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS: Council Member Valencia announced his participation at a recent Local 911 Heroes ceremony, recognizing kids and dispatchers that participated in calls that resulted in saving a life. He also reported his attendance at National Night Out at Ponderosa Park, noted the spectacular turnout, and thanked the Anaheim Police Department. He also thanked the City staff for organizing a staff/community basketball game at the Ponderosa Community center, he considered that both teams won, and he looked forward to future similar events. Council Member Faessel requested the meeting adjourn in memory of Pastor Bryan Crow who served as pastor of three (3) churches in Anaheim for over 50 years as well as Chaplain for the Anaheim Police Department. He also requested the meeting adjourn in memory of John Fenn, long- time District 3 resident and head usher of the Anaheim Stadium who rolled out the "Anaheim Way." Council Member Ma'ae displayed photos of her attendance and participation at the Creative Identity Luau, Maxwell Park Concert in the Park, and National Night Out. Council Member Diaz announced the next Maxwell Park Concert would be held on Thursday, August 11, 2022, at 6:30 P.M. He highlighted the local restaurant, Spicy Taco, located at the southeast corner of Lincoln Avenue and Knott Street. Council Member Moreno thanked staff for responding to requests and for their work addressing residents' concerns. He recognized the graduating class of the Emprenedor@s program, an 8-week program to support Spanish -dominant small business efforts, and encouraged the program to be expanded to other communities. He congratulated the Anaheim Elementary School District for being voted as the Best School District in North Orange County 2022, further noting they are the only City Council Minutes of August 9, 2022 Page 7 of 44 district in the country that provides music education to all students at all grade levels, further thanking NAMM for their support and resources. He noted this is the first week of school and congratulated the Anaheim Union High School District for receiving $23,000,000 in State funds to transform 13 schools into Community Schools. Mayor Pro Tem O'Neil reported he had recently spent some time on Beach Blvd. between Lincoln Avenue and Ball Road, acknowledged long-term efforts and improvements being made, and expressed concerns with the need for more continual enforcement to address criminal elements including drugs and prostitution, in the short term. He shared statistics of criminal incidents on Beach Blvd., as follows: 2017 — 278, 2018 — 622, 2019 — 580, 2020 — 534, 2021—1,122, and 2022 is on pace to exceed 2021. CITY MANAGER'S UPDATE: City Manager Jim Vanderpool shared that Anaheim Public Utilities (APU) has a variety of ways for residents and businesses to save on their utility bills. He noted that APU offers energy rebates on efficient appliances, lighting, and smart thermostats. For water savings, especially during the ongoing drought, they offer rebates for turf replacement, clothes washers, as well as leak repair assistance for income -qualified customers. He encouraged residents to visit www.Anaheim.net or call 311 to start saving energy and water. At 7:09 P.M., Mayor Pro Tem O'Neil recessed the Anaheim City Council to address the Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency agenda, reconvening the City Council at 7:11 P.M. CONSENT CALENDAR: At 7:11 P.M., the Consent Calendar was considered with Council Member Moreno pulling Item Nos. 04, 05 and 17 and Council Member Diaz pulling Item No. 15 for separate discussion and consideration. MOTION: Council Member Ma'ae moved to waive reading of all ordinances and resolutions and adopt the consent calendar in accordance with reports, certifications, and recommendations furnished each City Council Member and as listed on the consent calendar, seconded by Council Member Diaz. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES — 6 (Mayor Pro Tem O'Neil and Council Members Diaz, Ma'ae, Moreno, Valencia, and Faessel); NOES — 0. Motion carried. B105 3. Receive and file minutes of the Library Board meeting of June 13, 2022 and the Public Utilities Board meeting of June 22, 2022. D180 6. Accept the bid from H&H Auto Parts Wholesale, in the amount of $201,119.68 plus applicable tax, for the purchase of Chrysler auto parts for a one year period with up to four one-year optional renewals; and authorize the Purchasing Agent to exercise the renewal options in accordance with Bid #9591. D180 7. Authorize the Purchasing Agent to issue purchase orders, in an amount not to exceed $7,645,043 plus applicable taxes, for 96 City vehicles for the 2022/23 fiscal year. D180 8. Accept the bid from Northstar Chemical, Inc., in the amount of $105,840 plus applicable taxes and a 20% contingency, for the purchase of liquid alum for use by Anaheim Public Utilities for a one year period with up to four one-year optional renewals; and authorize the Purchasing Agent to exercise the renewal options in accordance with Bid #9585. AGR- 9. Accept the bid from ILJIN Electric USA, Inc., in the amount of $4,010,434 plus applicable tax, 13662 for the purchase of three (3) substation transformers for the Anaheim Public Utilities City Council Minutes of August 9, 2022 Page 8 of 44 Department and authorize the Purchasing Agent, or designee, to execute the Agreement for the Purchase and Sale of Transformers and all related documents, and to take the necessary actions to implement and administer the agreement in accordance with Bid #9586. AGR- 10. Determine the proposal submitted by Otis Elevator Company, in response to the request for 13663 proposal dated February 3, 2022, is the most advantageous to the City for completion of the 200 South Anaheim Boulevard Elevator Modernization Project (Project); award a Design -Build Agreement to Otis Elevator Company, in the amount of $1,942,096 with an additional contingency amount of $57,904 for a total of $2,000,000, to provide design -build services for the Project and waive any irregularities in any of the proposal documents; authorize the Director of Public Works, or designee, to execute the Agreement and related documents and to take the necessary, required, or advisable actions to implement and administer the Agreement, including any extensions; authorize de minimis changes that do not substantially change the terms and conditions of the Agreement, as determined by the City Attorney; determine that the Project to be performed under the Agreement shall be categorically exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act Sections 15301 and/or 15302 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations; and authorize the Finance Director to execute the Escrow Agreement pertaining to contract retentions. AGR- 11. Approve Amendment No. 2 to Cooperative Agreement No. C-4-1714 with Orange County 8561.2 Transportation Authority (OCTA) for the Anaheim Canyon Metrolink Station Improvement Project increasing the reimbursable funds to the City by $70,000 for a total of $343,000, compensating OCTA $39,800 for the construction of a protective slab over a City water line, and extending the termination date to December 31, 2023; and increase the Department of Public Works revenue and expenditure budget for Fiscal Year 2022/23 in the amount of $70,000. AGR-13664 12. Approve a Master Agreement for water construction, maintenance, repair, and immediate AGR-13665 response projects (Agreement), and approve a not -to -exceed award amount of $500,000 per AGR-13666 work order package, with a limit per contractor of $3,000,000 in total awards during each fiscal AGR-13667 year of the Agreement term, plus change order authorization in an amount not to exceed AGR-13668 $50,000 per occurrence, with total change orders per work order not to exceed $100,000 for a AGR-13669 five-year term with an optional 12-month extension to complete outstanding work order AGR-13670 packages or requests; authorize the Public Utilities General Manager, or designee, to execute AGR-13671 the Agreement separately with 12 contractors and such other contractors as may be pre- AGR-13672 qualified by the City in the future during the term of the Agreement and to take all necessary AGR-13673 or advisable actions to implement and administer the Agreements; authorize de minimis AGR-13674 changes that do not substantially change the terms and conditions of the Agreement, as AGR-13675 determined by the City Attorney; and determine that the projects to be performed under the Agreements shall be categorically exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act, Sections 15301, 15302, 15303, and/or 15304 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations (Arnaz Engineering Contractors, Inc.; Big Ben, Inc.; Ferreira Coastal Construction Co., Inc.; General Pump Company, Inc.; J. De Sigio Construction, Inc.; J.A. Salazar Construction and Supply Corporation, Inc.; J.R. Filanc Construction Company, Inc.; Mike Bubalo Construction, Co., Inc.; Paulus Engineering, Inc.; Stephen Doreck Equipment Rentals, Inc.; T.E. Roberts, Inc.; W.A. Rasic Construction Company, Inc.). AGR-13676 13. Approve an Environmental Services Agreement (Agreement) for as -needed environmental AGR-13677 services, with a not -to -exceed contract amount of $500,000 per consultant with authorization AGR-13678 for up to 15% in extra work, for a five-year term with up to two one-year extensions as needed AGR-13679 to complete ongoing projects; authorize the Public Utilities General Manager to execute the AGR-13680 Agreement separately with six (6) prequalified consultants and such other environmental AGR-13681 City Council Minutes of August 9, 2022 Page 9 of 44 services consultants as may be prequalified during the term of the Agreement and to take all necessary actions to implement and administer the Agreements; and authorize de minimis changes that do not substantially change the terms and conditions of the Agreement, as determined by the City Attorney (Atlas Technical Consultants LLC, EFI Global, Inc., Leighton Consulting, Inc., PSOMAS, Stantec Consulting Services, Inc., Vandermost Consulting Services, Inc.). AGR- 14. Approve a Collection Services Agreement (Agreement) with Ray Klein, Inc., dba Professional 13682 Credit Services, in an amount not to exceed $241,675 for the initial term and $48,335 per year for each of the one-year extensions, for collection services related to uncollectible utility closing bills for a five-year initial term and up to four one-year extensions; and authorize the Public Utilities General Manager, or designee, to execute the Agreement and related documents, and to take the necessary or advisable actions to implement and administer the Agreement. AGR- 16. Waive Council Policy 4.1 and approve the Master Service Agreement with Lexipol, LLC, in an 13683 amount not to exceed $146,890.35, for the maintenance and management of the Police Department's Policy Manual and Detention Facility Manual for a one year term beginning July 1, 2022, with two one-year renewal options; and authorize the Chief of Police to execute any amendments or optional renewals under the terms and conditions of the agreement. C330 18. RESOLUTION NO. 2022-073 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE C340 CITY OF ANAHEIM approving Addendum No. 12 to the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion AGR- Project Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report No. 339 and the Mitigation Monitoring 13685 and Reporting Plan No. 353 for the Fire Station 12 Project and determining its adequacy to serve as the required environmental documentation for the proposed project. RESOLUTION NO. 2022-074 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM dedicating certain city -owned property for City of Anaheim Fire Station 12 (APN 232-011-50, adjacent to 1900 South State College Boulevard between Gene Autry Way and Katella Avenue). Determine the proposal submitted by Soltek—ECC A Joint Venture, in response to the Request for Proposal dated October 13, 2021, is the most advantageous to the City for completion of the Design -Build Fire Station 12 (Platinum Triangle) Project; award a Design -Build Agreement to Soltek—ECC A Joint Venture, in the amount of $13,733,658 and a 15% contingency for a total amount not to exceed $15,793,707, to provide design -build services for the Project and waive any irregularities in any of the proposal documents; authorize the Director of Public Works to execute the Agreement and related documents and to take the necessary, required, or advisable actions to implement and administer the Agreement; and authorize the Finance Director to execute the Escrow Agreement pertaining to contract retentions. AGR- 19. RESOLUTION NO. 2022-075 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE 13686 CITY OF ANAHEIM dedicating certain City -owned property for public street and utility AGR- purposes (certain property located adjacent to Brookhurst Street, Assessor Parcel Numbers 13686.0.1 071-247-21 and 071-246-22). AGR- RESOLUTION NO. 2022-076 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE 13686.0.2 CITY OF ANAHEIM declaring a portion of City -owned property "Exempt Surplus Property" AGR- pursuant to California Government Code Section 54221 (f)(1)(B) [2202 W. Falmouth Avenue; 13686.0.3 includes determination that this action results in no binding commitment by the City to authorize or advance the disposition of any "exempt surplus property"; will not result in a direct City Council Minutes of August 9, 2022 Page 10 of 44 or indirect physical change to the environment; and does not constitute an "approval" of a "project" pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Sections 15004 and 15352]. Approve the Purchase and Sale Agreement with Delgadillo et al., in the amount of $4,882.41, and Grant Deed pertaining to the City's remnant parcel (2202 W. Falmouth Avenue) from the Brookhurst Street Widening from the SR-91 Freeway to La Palma Avenue; authorize the Director of Public Works, or designee, to execute all documents and to take the necessary or advisable actions to implement and administer the Purchase and Sale Agreement and as may be required to close escrow; and authorize the City Clerk to cause said Resolution Dedicating Certain City -Owned Property, the Grant Deed, the Wall Covenant, and the Covenant to Hold Properties as a Single Parcel to be recorded with the Office of the Orange County Clerk Recorder. Pilo 20. RESOLUTION NO. 2022-077 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM vacating one public utility easement and a portion of a second public utility easement, both located at 2941 West Lincoln Avenue, pursuant to California Streets and Highway Code Section 8330, et seq. - Summary Vacation (ABA2022-00415). T105 21. RESOLUTION NO. 2022-078 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM levying special taxes within City of Anaheim Community Facilities District No. 06-2 (Stadium Lofts). RESOLUTION NO. 2022-079 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM levying special taxes within City of Anaheim Community Facilities District No. 08-1 (Platinum Triangle). AGR- 22. RESOLUTION NO. 2022-080 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE 13687 CITY OF ANAHEIM approving the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act Subgrant Agreement between the City of Anaheim and the State of California for the term of April 1, 2022 through June 30, 2024 (in the amount of $846,357 for youth services; includes determination that approval of the Agreement is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15060(c)(3), 15061(b)(3), and 15378(b)(4)). M142 23. ORDINANCE NO. 6532 (ADOPTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM amending Section 1.12.060 (Claims for Money or Damages) of the Anaheim Municipal Code to incorporate claims presentation requirements previously set forth in the Anaheim City Charter (introduced at the City Council meeting of July 19, 2022, Item No. 09). Determine that this ordinance relates to organizational or administrative activities of governments that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes to the environment, and therefore is not a project within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the State CEQA Guidelines, Section 15378(b). D114 24. Approve minutes of the City Council meeting of May 17, 2022. City Council Minutes of August 9, 2022 Page 11 of 44 END OF CONSENT CALENDAR: 0144.6 4. Approve response to the 2021-2022 Orange County Grand Jury Report, "The Big A Lack of Transparency," and direct the City Manager to execute a letter and forward the response to the Presiding Judge of the Orange County Court and the Orange County Grand Jury. City Manager Jim Vanderpool reported the item is the City's response to the 2021-2022 Orange County Grand Jury Report regarding the Angel Stadium transaction. He advised the report focuses on the public process for the formerly proposed sale of the Angel Stadium of Anaheim site to SRB Management. He advised the report makes four findings and three recommendations that require a response from the City. He reported the draft responses have been distributed to the City Council for review. He explained that once approved by City Council, the City Manager's Office will send a letter to the presiding judge of the Orange County Grand Jury. Council Member Moreno requested Mr. Vanderpool explain the four findings and recommendations to the public. Mr. Vanderpool reported the first finding is that the City of Anaheim demonstrated a persistent lack of transparency and rushed decision -making in its handling of the stadium property transactions, exacerbating distrust by the public, State and local government officials, and even some members of its own City Council. He advised the City's response is that the City agrees that the timeframe between the Angels' initial offer to sell the property and City Council's decision to approve the initial Purchase and Sale Agreement (PSA) was an accelerated timeline. He noted the City disagrees that it demonstrated a "persistent" lack of transparency based on the evidence discussed in this report. He advised the City believes it did its best to provide transparency beyond the requirements of the Brown Act, fully realizing that more public outreach could have been done. Mr. Vanderpool reported the second finding is that the City's failure to timely disseminate and/or develop critical documents and information related to the stadium property transactions resulted in uninformed decision -making by City Council. He advised the City's response is that the City agrees that the timeframe between the Angels' initial offer to sell the property and the City Council's decision to approve the initial PSA was an accelerated timeline. He advised the City disagrees that critical documents were not timely developed or disseminated or that City Council's decision was uninformed based on the evidence discussed in this report. Mr. Vanderpool reported the third finding is that in conjunction with its alleged violations of the Surplus Land Act, the City limited creative affordable housing strategies with the stadium property transactions. He advised the City's response is that had City staff recognized it would have been remotely possible to expand affordable housing opportunities on the site, but given the fact that there was an existing long-term lease that would have taken up to 18 years to develop, the site would have limited the potential affordable housing interest in the site at this time. He explained the transaction did include a 15% affordable housing component. He advised staff acknowledges and does recommend that, should there be additional interest in pursuing a stadium sale, the City would continue to recommend maximizing affordable housing on the project. Mr. Vanderpool reported the fourth finding is that on multiple occasions, the City Council majority blocked the Council minority from adding items to its agenda relating to the disposition of the stadium property, stifling public discussion about the pros and cons of such a significant land transaction. He advised the City's response is it partially agrees with this finding in that the City agrees that there were multiple occasions when some Council Members attempted to add items to the agenda relating to the Stadium transaction and that they failed to receive the support due to the parliamentary procedures at that time. He advised staff finds that there were multiple opportunities for public City Council Minutes of August 9, 2022 Page 12 of 44 discussion about the pros and cons of the stadium transaction. He noted some could rightfully argue that there could have been even more, although countless hours were devoted to public hearings and discussion of various aspects of the proposed transaction and development project. Mr. Vanderpool reported the first recommendation from the Grand Jury is that any future agreement regarding the City's disposition of the stadium property should allocate low and very low-income affordable housing units for the local workforce including individuals who work in the entertainment, leisure, hospitality, and health services industries. He advised the City intends to require that affordable housing remain a component of any future redevelopment of the stadium property, in accordance with state affordable housing guidelines and requirements. He noted that the original stadium transaction included a 15% set -aside of affordable housing units for very low, low, and moderate (workforce) income households to be built on the stadium property. He explained under the law, the City likely cannot mandate preferential job categories for occupants of such housing but would work towards that goal. Mr. Vanderpool reported the second recommendation from the Grand Jury is that by December 31, 2022, City Council should develop and implement guidelines to ensure a minimum 30-day period of public analysis and City Council discussion of any public property sale and/or lease transactions. He advised that historically on projects of this size, the City has taken at least 30 days and likely extended time for public engagement on such transactions. He advised staff recommends that the City must retain the flexibility to conduct City business on a variety of timeframes but agrees that a period of at least 30 days could be implemented. Mr. Vanderpool reported the third recommendation is that by October 4, 2022, the Anaheim City Council should revise Policy 1.6 so that any member of the City Council may place an item on its regular meeting agenda. He reported that this has been rectified. DISCUSSION: Council Member Moreno inquired who was involved in drafting the response. Mr Vanderpool advised it was a collaborative effort between the City Attorney's Office and the City Manager's Office. Council Member Moreno inquired if Council Members were briefed or included in drafting the response. Mr. Vanderpool advised Council Members were not consulted on the draft response but were briefed on this item with other agenda items. Council Member Moreno inquired if it was determined why there was a need to accelerate the stadium transaction. City Attorney Robert Fabela explained that from January 2019 when discussions began to extend the Angels' unilateral ability to terminate the agreement, it was understood that the end goal would be the end of the year. He explained those staff members who were working understood that the reasoning behind the accelerated timeline was the goal was to have it done by the end of the year due to the expiration of the unilateral right to terminate the agreement and the impact of the implementation of the Surplus Land Act in 2020. Council Member Moreno noted in December 2019 a motion was made to extend Angels' opt -out by 30 days so City Council and residents could have an opportunity to review the deal and it was voted down. He advised that might be something to include in the response. Council Member Moreno noted that the response suggests the City was transparent in the stadium transaction and satisfied with those efforts. He advised the Public Information Office (PIO) released a myriad of statements based on studies produced by Arte Moreno or Angels Baseball, not on any City - based analysis. He reported at the time, that the PIO had released a fact sheet that City Council had discussed the topic 18 times and believed it should be referenced in the response. He does not City Council Minutes of August 9, 2022 Page 13 of 44 believe the response captures the role the PIO played in pushing this deal by making the public feel the deal was done when in fact it was not and basing its analysis on reports provided by Angels Baseball. He requested copies of the report information regarding the community outreach meetings that were held. He also requested to hear more from the public if the response is in alignment with the Grand Jury report findings. MOTION: Council Member Moreno moved to continue Item No. 04 to August 23, 2022, seconded by Council Member Valencia. DISCUSSION: Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil inquired about the timeline for a response to the Grand Jury. Mr. Fabela reported the City would need to respond within 90-days from the date received. Council Member Valencia reported he does not agree with all of the draft responses and noted he was not elected to City Council when the deal was approved. He advised he would not be able to support the response as written. Council Member Moreno advised the City did not receive a full deal proposal until November 2019 and SRB Management had not yet been created yet. He noted that former Council Member Barnes had repeatedly asked how the City could make a deal with an organization that did not exist. He advised the timeline of when City Council chose to move from a lease to a sale which is still a contention in the courts and is buttressed by an FBI investigation that states the move to a sale was decided in September 2019. He believed that needed to be added to the timeline and clarified. He thanked staff for clarifying that former Mayor Sidhu did not sign any affidavit or sworn testimony to the effect of the issue. Council Member Faessel requested Council Member Moreno repeat his reasons for the continuance. Council Member Moreno noted he just highlighted three areas of language that he would like to see included, clarified, or aligned well in the response. He also advised this is the first time City Council has had an opportunity to discuss the item together, which is important because it ultimately becomes the City Council's response to the Grand Jury as authored by the City Manager. He noted it behooves the City to have the public's input on this item as well. Council Member Faessel advised there were 51 footnotes of where the Grand Jury sought the information. He commented that the Grand Jury did not interview any City Council or staff and almost all of the information derived was from various staff reports and the media. He inquired why there was not a greater level of investigation and asked the City Attorney to elaborate on the process. Mr. Fabela advised he was only familiar with the state rules that create a grand jury in every county and there may be local rules each one follows. He advised they are not bound by strict rules of evidence and can look at the hearsay statements from the media. He explained it then goes before the presiding judge for review, to the agency for review and response, and then gets filed. He reported interviewees remain confidential. Council Member Faessel inquired how City Council could add responses from the public into the response. Mr. Fabela expressed concern from a Brown Act perspective but noted there is no real process for this. Council Member Faessel inquired what authority the response gives to the Grand Jury. Mr. Fabela did not believe the response is legally binding but there is a moral obligation for the City to honor its commitments. City Council Minutes of August 9, 2022 Page 14 of 44 Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil referenced Council Member Faessel's point regarding the research that was conducted or not conducted by the Grand Jury in developing their findings is the reason why the City has an opportunity to respond. He advised the Grand Jury has four distinct findings the City responded to based on the facts and the data the City has in the record. He believed everything is addressed but believed it has allowed the City to set the record straight in some areas. He noted the report encompasses his best recollections and does not believe there needs to be additions to adequately respond to the findings. He expressed support for the response standing on its own as presented. Council Member Diaz agreed with Council Member Faessel that the investigation did not dig deep enough. He agreed with the response as proposed. Council Member Moreno advised the report states the Grand Jury met with current and former elected officials during their investigation, officials from the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD), concerned community members, reviewed City Council agendas, minutes, and staff reports, relevant websites, County Assessor Parcel information for the 16 properties in escrow, the Surplus Land Act and alleged SLA violations, and correspondence between HCD and the City. He advised the Grand Jury also reviewed City Council meetings, reviewed legal pleadings filed by the People's Homeless Task Force of Orange County, and attended a People's Homeless Task Force of Orange County court hearing. Lastly, he advised the Grand Jury reviewed numerous articles in local newspapers covering the stadium deal, along with the FBI's investigation of alleged corruption during the stadium property deal. He noted it seems they took a rigorous approach. Council Member Moreno noted Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil was a member of the dais who held up the PIO's fact sheet saying there were 18 discussions on the item which turned out to be misinformation. He believed that the details on how the PIO contributed to this should be included in the response. He noted the lack of transparency led City Council to make uniformed decisions. Council Member Valencia inquired if there would be an issue if any member of City Council revealed if they were part of the Grand Jury investigation. Mr. Fabela opined the Grand Jury would have a problem with that and would argue it would violate court rules. Council Member Faessel advised he was comfortable with the response but acknowledged two members of the dais were not. He advised in the spirit of transparency and the feedback that the City goes too fast on these items, he would support the continuance of the item until August 23, 2022. Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil expressed support for continuing the item to ensure the City submits as much accurate information as possible with as much consensus as possible amongst the City Council, although he does not anticipate any changes. Council Member Diaz expressed support for continuing the item. MOTION: Council Member Moreno moved to continue Item No. 04 to August 23, 2022, seconded by Council Member Valencia. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES — 6 (Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil and Council Members Diaz, Ma'ae, Moreno, Valencia, and Faessel); NOES — 0. Motion carried; item continued to August 23, 2022. City Council Minutes of August 9, 2022 Page 15 of 44 D116 5. Ratify and authorize direct receipt of settlement funds, in the anticipated amount of $12,000,000 over 18 years, with the first year partial amount anticipated at $300,000, to be used for approved opioid abatement purposes. Council Member Moreno requested a brief staff report so the public could understand the source of the funding. City Attorney Robert Fabela reported this was a procedural issue pertaining to a lawsuit the City participated in at the beginning of 2019 against various pharmaceutical companies. He explained the case began in the State of California and was then consolidated nationally. He advised in 2021 the State of California and the California public entities' counsel reached an agreement to resolve all opioid-related claims against three large opioid distributors. He advised that City Council approved the City's participation in those settlements in December 2021. He explained part of the settlement is that the funds will be distributed to public entities under a particular formula and is anticipated to be $12,000,000 over 18 years. He reported the funds can only be used for approved abatement uses, such as opioid abuse treatment services, services for opioid-addicted pregnant people, opioid treatment for incarcerated people, etc. Mr. Fabela reported staff elected to receive the funds directly and have the program administered by the City which allows the City to decide how to spend the money on approved abatement expenses but obligates the City to undertake the related expenditure and reporting requirements. He advised the decision regarding direct receipt of funds needed to be made by August 5. He clarified these are not taxpayer funds. DISCUSSION: Council Member Moreno inquired if the lawsuit was a class action lawsuit against pharmaceutical companies holding them liable for the opioid epidemic and its impact on states and local communities. Council Member Moreno inquired if there was already a plan for how the funds would be used. Police Chief Jorge Cisneros reported those funds would be used for a program to help those who are addicted to opioids. He noted it important that the City manage the funds so they can be incorporated in conjunction with other existing third -party programs. Community Preservation Manager Sandra Lozeau reported staff is going through the information of both settlements to determine how the funds can be used. She noted there is a lot of opportunity for treatment and prevention and staff has reached out to partner organizations to elicit their ideas. She advised the settlement also assists with mental health so there is opportunity for programs and services that will impact the City directly. Council Member Moreno inquired if the City was still participating in Drug -Free Anaheim. Police Chief Cisneros reported the City disbanded funding for Drug -Free Anaheim but the Be Well OC program is available. Council Member Moreno inquired if the Drug -Free Anaheim was disbanded due to funds or its effectiveness. Police Chief Cisneros advised it was disbanded due to the onboarding of Be Well OC. Council Member Moreno expressed support for keeping it in-house. MOTION: Council Member Moreno moved to ratify and authorize direct receipt of settlement funds, in the anticipated amount of $12,000,000 over 18 years, with the first year partial amount anticipated at $300,000, to be used for approved opioid abatement purposes, seconded by Council Member Diaz. City Council Minutes of August 9, 2022 Page 16 of 44 DISCUSSION: Council Member Faessel noted he was pleased to see Ms. Jimenez from Lighthouse in the audience. He noted they do not always eye to eye but he agrees Lighthouse does a fantastic job. He expressed surprise that there was no more Drug -Free Anaheim. He referenced Ms. Chavez's public comments about the need for Park Rangers to have a Narcan program and encouraged staff to consider that program for these funds. He expressed support for receiving the funds directly and the plans for collaborative care. Council Member Ma'ae expressed support for keeping the funds in Anaheim. She recommended that if a Narcan program was going to be considered for the Park Rangers it should also be considered for the Parks Maintenance staff. She expressed concern about going too deep into who should be able to administer Narcan. MOTION: Council Member Moreno moved to ratify and authorize direct receipt of settlement funds, in the anticipated amount of $12,000,000 over 18 years, with the first year partial amount anticipated at $300,000, to be used for approved opioid abatement purposes, seconded by Council Member Diaz. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES — 6 (Mayor Pro Tem O'Neil and Council Members Diaz, Ma'ae, Moreno, Valencia, and Faessel); NOES — 0. Motion carried. AGR- 15. Approve the First Amendment to Agreement with e-PlanSoft for Electronic Plan Review to 12104.1 extend the use of software licenses for a period of up to five years and increasing the total not to exceed amount to $1,144,845. DISCUSSION: Council Member Diaz thanked staff for continuing to make the plan check process easier for residents and developers. MOTION: Council Member Diaz moved to approve the First Amendment to Agreement with e- PlanSoft for Electronic Plan Review to extend the use of software licenses for a period of up to five years and increasing the total not to exceed amount to $1,144,845, seconded by Council Member Ma'ae. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES — 6 (Mayor Pro Tem O'Neil and Council Members Diaz, Ma'ae, Moreno, Valencia, and Faessel); NOES — 0. Motion carried. AGR- 17. RESOLUTION NO. 2022-072 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE 13684 CITY OF ANAHEIM ratifying the execution of an amendment to a Memorandum of Understanding with the County of Orange extending the contract term for one year and the acceptance of funding on behalf of the City of Anaheim for the Juvenile Justice Crime Prevention Act (JJCPA), and authorizing the Chief of Police or his designee to execute all required documents. (North School Mobile Assessment and Resource team (NSMART) pilot program; funding in the amount of $236,174). Police Chief Jorge Cisneros reported the item is for the City to accept funding from the Juvenile Justice Crime Prevention Act (JJCPA) for a pilot program in Orange County known as the North School Mobile Assessment and Resource Team (NSMART). He explained NSMART is a pilot program that investigates threats of violence and violent crimes committed that impact school campuses. He explained that NSMART is comprised of investigators from Orange County police agencies and clinicians from the Orange County Health Care Agency. He advised in July 2019, Anaheim Police Department (APD) assigned an investigator to this team providing essential services to Anaheim schools. He reported the partnership strengthens the relationship between APD and the school community. He advised that during the last academic year, NSMART conducted 49 investigations with 61 % of the investigations resulting in no threats to the schools and the remaining 39% resulted in soft diversions or criminal filings through the District Attorney's Office. He explained the NSMART team's efforts enhance school safety, provide an invaluable service to the community, City Council Minutes of August 9, 2022 Page 17 of 44 and relieve police officers to respond to other critical incidents. He advise the funding from JJCPA will cover one investigator position for Fiscal Year 2022/23 and noted there is no local match required. DISCUSSION: Council Member Moreno reported many families are worried about things that are being brought into the schools. He advised Anaheim's youth are struggling with mental health and are looking for ways to deal with their conditions and succumb to destructive behavior. He expressed support that APD is working collaboratively with other agencies. He expressed support for the item as it brings a model of collaboration to bring support to educators, families, and youth who may be struggling. He requested a future presentation be made to City Council after the pilot. MOTION: Council Member Moreno moved to approve RESOLUTION NO. 2022-072 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ratifying the execution of an amendment to a Memorandum of Understanding with the County of Orange extending the contract term for one year and the acceptance of funding on behalf of the City of Anaheim for the Juvenile Justice Crime Prevention Act (JJCPA), and authorizing the Chief of Police or his designee to execute all required documents. (North School Mobile Assessment and Resource team (NSMART) pilot program; funding in the amount of $236,174), seconded by Council Member Diaz. DISCUSSION: Council Member Faessel referenced members of the public who spoke regarding the shooting of Juan Reynaga. He inquired if a program like this would be able to address a circumstance like that incident. Chief Police Cisneros expressed condolences to the Reynaga family for their loss. He advised that APD continues to investigate the case day in and day out and he has faith that the Homicide Unit will prevail in that matter. He explained the item has to do with threats in schools. He reported following Mr. Reynaga's shooting, a community meeting was immediately held with residents and noted another community meeting will be held soon. He explained that APD has been working on its trust relationship with residents and would continue to work collaboratively with other City departments and partners within the county to move this forward. He reiterated that violent crime is a very small portion of crime overall. MOTION: Council Member Moreno moved to approve RESOLUTION NO. 2022-072 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ratifying the execution of an amendment to a Memorandum of Understanding with the County of Orange extending the contract term for one year and the acceptance of funding on behalf of the City of Anaheim for the Juvenile Justice Crime Prevention Act (JJCPA), and authorizing the Chief of Police or his designee to execute all required documents. (North School Mobile Assessment and Resource team (NSMART) pilot program; funding in the amount of $236,174), seconded by Council Member Diaz. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES — 6 (Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil and Council Members Diaz, Ma'ae, Moreno, Valencia, and Faessel); NOES — 0. Motion carried. D116 25. Discuss and review the bid proposals submitted to the Request for Qualifications for an independent investigation/audit regarding former Mayor Harry Sidhu's and the City Council's campaign contributions and potentially related contracts and agreements along with an evaluation of staff's involvement, if any, and whether any serial communications/meetings in violation of the Brown Act occurred in the context of the facts alleged in the federal investigation, including possible selection of a vendor to conduct the independent investigation/audit and selection of a neutral to administer and oversee the investigation. City Manager Jim Vanderpool reported that on June 21 staff presented information on how an investigation could be conducted utilizing an outside law firm with a presiding retired judge to oversee the process. He advised that City Council reviewed the draft outline of the Request for Proposal City Council Minutes of August 9, 2022 Page 18 of 44 (RFP), amended the proposed scope based on their discussions, and provided direction to staff to post the RFP. He reported only two submissions were received by the July 7 deadline. He noted the Request for Quote (RFQ) was reposted to allow for additional bids and was due by July 29, 2022, at 5:00 P.M. Mr. Vanderpool reported four bids were received by Brower Law Group, Hanson Bridgett, JL Group, King, and Spalding. He advised the proposals in their entirety were attached to the staff report that was published by the City Clerk on Thursday. He reported representatives from all four law firms were present should City Council have specific questions regarding their submittal or other questions related to their qualifications. Mr. Vanderpool reported the City received additional interest in providing neutrals to oversee this process. He reported Hon. Richard Aronson, Hon. Luis Cardenas, Hon. Raymond Ikola, Hon. Sheila Sonenshine, and Hon. David Thompson are from JAMS and Hon. Clay Smith is from Judicate West. He advised their biographies were attached to the staff report DISCUSSION: Mayor Pro Tem O'Neil expressed thanks that there are more neutral judges to choose from as well as additional firms interested in conducting the audit. He expressed hope that City Council would be able to make a selection tonight. Council Member Diaz commented that it is irrelevant to investigate former Mayor Sidhu's 2012 campaign and he does not want the taxpayers to pay for that. He would like to focus on which current contracts or recent land entitlements related to campaign contributions. He also advised he would like to hear from each law firm. He noted all of the retired judge's biographies are very similar and he would want to go with the lowest bidder. Council Member Valencia expressed support for an investigation taking place and one that would provide residents with answers that they rightfully deserve in a timely and also fiscally responsible manner. He hoped the investigation adds clarity to the unfortunate situation the City has undergone as opposed to creating more skepticism and mistrust. He advised the RFP that was put out was well intended but had a lot of loose ends and could lead to the potential misinterpretation of opinions and potentially open-ended findings. He believed the residents deserve facts at the end of the day. Council Member Valencia referenced the Scope of Work and advised Item No. 01 is already public and is available to the public so he does not see the need to pay a third party to restate what is already known. He recommended modifying the language in Item No. 02 from "correlation" to ,'violations committed between campaign contributors, campaign contribution recipients, and City business/activities." He explained if changes to No. 02 were accepted, then Item No. 03 would just be repetitive of Item No. 01. He recommended changing Item No. 04 to read "identifying City contracts and grants made to entities in connection with campaign contributions and audit how the funding was used." Council Member Valencia reported he struggled to understand Item No. 05 so he asked for clarification from staff. City Attorney Robert Fabela reported he believed No. 05 was a product of what was pitched when City Council wanted to define the scope of work. He agreed that the clause that states "that included financial interests and influence" is a little bit confusing to him but he thinks it means there were allegations that came up from the FBI investigations of meeting outside of the public regarding policy issues. He believed the request was to investigate to determine whether any of those meetings constituted an improper serial meeting in violation of the Brown Act. He advised if City Council has a different view on that, now was a good time to raise it. City Council Minutes of August 9, 2022 Page 19 of 44 Council Member Valencia noted he believed the language in Item No. 06 was repetitive. He recommended removing Item No. 07 completely as he did not believe it was the best use of tax dollars to have the same entity conducting the investigation also provide the City with a recommendation of what they believe needs to change in terms of policy and could be addressed at a later time if need be. Lastly, he recommended modifying the language for Item No. 08 to "evaluating to what extent if any city staff was involved in participated in or party to violations or illegal activity" to focus on specific illegal activity that staff may or may not have been involved in. He recommended input from the dais on his recommendations. Council Member Faessel advised he was not clear about what payments were being referenced in Item No. 04 and felt it needed clarification. He expressed support for the investigation. Mr. Fabela advised the RFP was a conglomeration of ideas that were proposed but have already been approved by City Council. He explained he was uncomfortable with making changes at this time. He further explained that City Council is not bound to the scope of work and can change the scope and provide guidance to whoever City Council selects. He clarified that the item is to select from those who submitted an RFP and explained there would be opportunity to provide direction once someone is selected. Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil thanked Mr. Fabela for the clarification. He noted in reviewing the proposals there was some uncertainty as to the scope of work and would require extensive communication with staff and elected officials upon commencing the project. He referenced Hanson Bridgett's proposal which recommends the first step is to hold a kick-off meeting to clarify the scope of work and phase of the project. He noted the JL Group bid has similar language. He advised he believes all of the bidders understand what is needed as they all have experience in conducting these types of investigations. Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil requested a representative from Hanson Bridgett address City Council. He commented that Hanson Bridgett indicated the timeline was an estimated seven (7) to ten (10) months to complete the project but was willing to discuss a potential two (2) to four (4) month timeline. He requested a comparison of what the briefer timeline would include. Alfonso Estrada, partner with Hanson Bridgett, explained the briefer timeline would be a narrowing scope at the outset as there is only a general idea of the investigation at the onset. He advised if the scope was narrowed to a point where the timeline could be shortened, it would allow them to get City Council, staff, and the public answers to the questions of the investigation as soon as possible. Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil inquired if it was feasible to have a phased approach where there is a more accelerated high-level investigation and report back every 30-days areas where the City may need to dive deeper in some areas. Mr. Estrada advised that the method should be standard practice for any investigation into complex issues that are involved here. He explained step one is to gather data and information from the City and potentially elected officials along with any public filings that have been made. He explained that thereafter, they would brief the City Attorney's Office and anybody else who would be involved in the review process on initial findings and next steps. He noted it is never simple and is usually complex and involved. Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil advised the proposal was on an hourly basis with a seven (7) to ten (10) month timeline and noted it would be difficult for the City to appropriate funds based on that information. Mr. Estrada explained it would be irresponsible for him to try and formulate a number. He noted if it was a more condensed version of the investigation and information is quickly found then it is going to be less expensive than a more involved investigation. He explained Hanson Bridgett works City Council Minutes of August 9, 2022 Page 20 of 44 cooperatively with cities, special districts, and counties on these types of investigations and has specific and unique expertise throughout the State of California. Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil inquired if Mr. Estrada could provide an estimate as to the number of weekly hours that might be devoted to this project. Mr. Estrada advised that there would probably be anywhere from 100 to 150 billable hours in the first month or two depending on the findings, interviews, and conducting credibility assessments which are critical to these types of investigations. He believed that would not be the average Hanson Bridgett would operate on until conclusion but felt 150 hours was the average. Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil inquired about the hourly rate. Mr. Estrada explained the rates would vary between the partners, the Brown Act experts, and associates depending on the work needed. Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil inquired what would be the role of the former FBI agent on Hanson Bridgett's staff. Mr. Estrada clarified he is not on the staff but works for a partner firm to do forensic accounting work. Council Member Faessel noted Hanson Bridgett conducts conduct, ethics, fraud, conflict of interest, election law, and Brown Act investigations. He expressed interest in their involvement with the City of Santa Clara Stadium Authority and inquired if that gives Hanson Bridgett extra special knowledge of what might be in the investigation or does it create a conflict. Mr. Estrada agreed their expertise is exactly what the City is looking for. He explained his partner, Steve Miller, handled the Levi Strauss stadium and contracting for the County of Santa Clara and does not believe it is a disqualifying factor and believes it sets Hanson Bridgett apart. Council Member Faessel inquired if Hanson Bridgett was planning on dissecting the vacated Angels Stadium contract. Mr. Estrada explained Hanson Bridgett's plan is to define the scope before beginning the work. He clarified they intend on looking into lobbyists, campaign contributions, and what may have flowed not only from that but from other dealings of City officials. Council Member Diaz inquired if Mr. Estrada was familiar with the list of retired judges and inquired if he felt there was a conflict. Mr. Estrada advised he does not recognize anyone on the list. Council Member Moreno inquired if anyone in Mr. Estrada's firm or proposed members of the team contributed to any candidates in the past or present. Mr. Estrada advised the answer is no. Council Member Moreno explained the current records retention policy at the city is 90 days as it relates to City emails. He inquired, with that in mind, how Hanson Bridgett could verify communications that could show malfeasance in these contracts or quid pro quos or serial communications amongst City Council Members, the Mayor, and contractors. Mr. Estrada advised that email is usually the first place he starts in almost any investigation. He advised he would look at the subject of an investigation's email history, and review any City -issued cellphones and records that are kept on file with the City Clerk's office that are typically held for more than 90-days. He explained that depending on the investigation, there are other independent ways to get that information. He agreed with Council Member Moreno that a 90-day retention policy could be somewhat limiting in some investigations. Council Member Moreno inquired if Hanson Bridgett would have to obtain permission from each City Council Member and staff member to review their City issued phones. City Council Minutes of August 9, 2022 Page 21 of 44 Mr. Estrada explained that it depends on the entity. He referenced a recent City of San Jose case where the City determined if someone conducted City business on their cell phone, there would be some legal authority to be able to seek information. Council Member Moreno inquired if the content of text messages could be included. Mr. Estrada explained those would need to be obtained although a search warrant but a record of the text message would be included. Council Member Moreno inquired how Hanson Bridgett would determine whether these transgressions or malfeasance were simply the act of one or a couple of actors versus a systematic mode of operating in a pay -to -play culture. Additionally, he inquired if they only look at what is illegal or do they also reveal unethical behavior. Mr. Estrada advised that the devil is in the details and noted this is a very public investigation with concerns from the public who want and deserve answers. Council Member Moreno inquired how confident Hanson Bridgett is about finding if the wrongdoing was widespread or if it was just the Mayor and the cabal, to which Mr. Estrada advised their success is based on their experience and noted they have been successful in investigations exactly like this one. Council Member Moreno inquired if anyone from King and Spalding or proposed members of the team have contributed to any candidates in the past or present. David Willingham, King and Spalding, advised no one on the team have made any contributions. Council Member Moreno explained the current email records retention policy in the City is 90 days. He inquired, with that in mind, how King and Spalding could verify communications that show malfeasance in these contracts or quid pro quos or serial communications amongst City Council Members, the Mayor, and contractors. Mr. Willingham explained there are several ways to get additional communication. He understands there was a preservation notice and a subpoena issued for communications going backward. He explained personal cell phones may be in question and it just depends on whether or not they were used for official City business. He advised certain additional methods can be employed depending on the recovery of forensics. He advised his firm has a history of significant and serious investigative work. He noted there are three federal prosecutors on the team, one was the U.S. Attorney, and several have significant public corruption experience, both prosecuting and defending. He explained they conduct these investigations for a living and are very serious about being able to get to the truth of exactly what happened. Council Member Moreno inquired how King and Spalding would determine whether these transgressions or malfeasance were simply the act of one or a couple of actors versus a systematic mode of operating in a pay -to -play culture. Mr. Willingham explained they would follow the facts where they go by finding communication, talking to the people who were involved in decisions, talking to staff, and then deciding about what decisions were made and why. Additionally, he advised they would dig into the forensics and look at what money was paid and what decisions were made before or after that money was paid. He noted the outcome would hopefully be to issue a report that conveys a certain sense of public trust in this entity. Council Member Moreno requested Mr. Willingham elaborate on what forensics means in this context. Mr. Willingham advised it could be looking at the forensic examination of the contributions City Council Minutes of August 9, 2022 Page 22 of 44 also known as following the money. He noted you follow the money and then try to connect the dots between that and official actions and then build it out. Council Member Moreno inquired how confident King and Spalding is about finding if the wrongdoing was widespread or if it was just the Mayor and the cabal. Mr. Willingham explained this is what his firm does for a living. He advised one of the partners on the team was hired by the Governor to investigate fraud in connection with the Employment Development Department (EDD). He reported he gets hired to do personal and/or institutional investigations all the time by public entities and by nonpublic entities and that is because they find what happened. He expressed confidence in being able to give this body a full and clear picture of what happened and who was involved. Mayor O'Neil noted King and Spalding was the only firm that had a hard dollar price of $1,500,000 to $2,000,000, which is roughly double the number of hours. He inquired if there are things within their scope that would not be included in that of the other potential contractors. Mr. Willingham advised he believes all of the contractors agree that the scope of work needs to be accurately defined. He advised the neutral that is hired will govern the contractor and help define the scope of work. He agreed with Council Member Valencia that there was some repetitiveness in the categories. He noted that is not much more work than the other firms are describing. He advised they offered that figure as an accurate or worst -case portrayal of what they thought they could get to so the dais could make an accurate decision and have some budget certainty. Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil inquired how King and Spalding would work in phases. Mr. Willingham advised the first phase that needs to be done is an analysis of the campaign contributions from the public records which is where they would employ the much cheaper dollar rate with the forensic accountant to match up the contributions to certain potential conduct that happened by the Council body. He advised another initial important phase would be seen what electronic evidence existed and noted he could not give an estimate until he knows how much data there is in connection with this investigation. He explained once that is complete then the oral investigation would commence by talking to elected members and staff members who were involved in some of those decisions as well. He noted that could be a second phase. Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil advised King and Spalding proposed a specific blended rate as an alternative to individual attorneys billing at different rates. He inquired if there was a fee schedule for those individual rates. Mr. Willingham advised there was not a fee schedule and those individual rates for him and his partner are quite a bit higher than the blended hourly rate at lower for the other ones. He advised that was a great mix of taking their rates down so the City would get top -tier talent to conduct and organize the investigation and utilizing some of the associates who have the experience to do the meat of the work. Council Member Faessel inquired if King and Spalding performed any investigatory or other work for the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD). Mr. Willingham advised one of his partners has conducted environmental law work for MWD and does some work for those types of entities but he has not done any investigatory work for them. City Council Minutes of August 9, 2022 Page 23 of 44 Council Member Ma'ae inquired how many of these types of investigations King and Spalding conducted. Mr. Willingham advised he conducted dozens if not hundreds of investigations. He reported as a federal prosecutor he was the supervisor in a major fraud section and conducted similar investigations. He noted if looking at his personal history that number would triple. He explained his firm conducts these serious and thorny investigations regularly. Council Member Ma'ae commented that the dais knows there has been wrongdoing by certain members but there are other members of the dais who would love to see their names cleared. She inquired how often King and Spalding comes across a situation where there was no wrongdoing. Mr. Willingham advised it happens periodically if not often, but depends on what the investigation entails. He gave an example of the case of one of his current clients. He reiterated that if hired they would follow the facts wherever they go. Council Member Diaz inquired if Mr. Willingham was familiar with the list of retired judges and inquired if he felt there was a conflict. Mr. Willingham advised there was no conflict of interest but his firm works with several of the judges both as mediators and fact finders. Council Member Moreno inquired if King and Spalding look at both the legal and unethical behavior per their State ethics training. Mr. Willingham advised they would if it was part of the scope of work. He believed if the scope of work were to be narrowed to focus on potential criminal wrongdoing and/or violations of the Brown Act or other things, they might comment upon it, but he does not think it is going to be part of the scope for them to outline all the ethical issues and or the potential fixes for those ethical issues. Steven Brower, Brower Law Group, reported they are an eight (8)-person litigation group in Orange County. He advised he opened his firm four years ago after leaving Buchalter Law. He noted all of his clients insisted on coming with him which included the City of Anaheim who have been his clients twice and are currently being represented on insurance matters which it is not a conflict of interest or a problem. He advised he is one of the top electronic discovery experts in the country and would give the City some more specific answers about the email. He reported he recently signed a second engagement agreement with a managing partner at his former firm Buchalter Law Group to personally hire him as his attorney for one of his business ventures. Mayor Pro Tem O'Neil noted there was some hesitation and trepidation by members of the dais in the perception of signing with a firm that already has a connection to the City, albeit in a different matter, but there is a perception that this is also a City contractor who is hired to audit City contracts. Mr. Brower explained he worked with the City on an insurance matter and worked on another police conduct matter. He understands the City Attorney's Office is not part of the scope or the focus of any investigation. He mentioned Tracey Matthews's name because he wanted to disclose he knows her but she is not a client. Council Member Faessel inquired if Brower Law Group has performed any investigatory or other work for the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California. Mr. Brower reported his firm has no connection with that entity. City Council Minutes of August 9, 2022 Page 24 of 44 Council Member Moreno inquired if anyone from Brower Law Group or proposed members of the team have contributed to any candidates in the past or present. Mr. Brower advised one of his associates, Lee Fink, contributed to Council Member Moreno's campaign but that is the only one at his firm. Council Member Moreno explained the current email records retention policy in the City is 90 days. He inquired how Brower Law Group could verify communications that show malfeasance in these contracts or quid pro quos or serial communications amongst City Councilmembers, the Mayor, and contractors. Mr. Brower advised he is one of the top e-discovery experts and has been doing this type of work for 42 years. He explained there probably is a backup of the email for disaster recovery purposes. He confirmed it is illegal to obtain the content of text messages from the provider unless there is a criminal investigation. Council Member Moreno inquired if there were text exchanges between some of the key players in the cabal could the City voluntarily provide permission to obtain those records? Mr. Brower advised that it is allowed if voluntary although he would need to review the City's policy. He advised he has special mapping software that could show how often someone is emailing someone else and would be using it in the investigation. Council Member Moreno inquired how Brower Law Group would determine whether these transgressions or malfeasance were simply the act of one or a couple of actors versus a systematic mode of operating in a pay -to -play culture. Mr. Brower explained the best way to find the facts is to follow the transactions that did not go right. He believed that even finding some transactions would satisfy the City Council and the public. He referenced the corruption in the City of Bell where many went to prison and only two or three transactions were found that did not go right. Council Member Diaz inquired if Mr. Brower was familiar with the list of retired judges and inquired if he felt there was a conflict. Mr. Brower reported he knows four of them well professionally and has no conflict. Council Member Diaz inquired about the Brower Law Group's timeline. Mr. Brower advised that when he reviewed the scope of work he almost did not submit a proposal because the scope as written implies that all 1,500 City employees should be interviewed. He believes eight (8) to ten (10) months makes sense to him but he does not see a shorter version of the investigation. Council Member Moreno inquired what the Brower Law Group's estimate would be, to which Mr. Brower advised his estimate would be $750,000 to $1,250,000. Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil noted the JL Group proposal estimated six (6) months as well. He inquired if they saw any potential for a phased approach or a high-level look that would then provide more insight for more specificity. City Council Minutes of August 9, 2022 Page 25 of 44 Jeff Love, JL Group, advised their approach is to look at the investigation from a high level and then come down and hit the issues they think are important initially. Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil inquired if JL Group has experience conducting similar investigations regarding elected officials. Mr. Love confirmed his firm has the experience and explained they are an investigative firm with attorneys. He advised all they do is neutral fact-finding investigations and do not engage in advocacy because they feel it is inconsistent with doing investigations. Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil inquired about the estimated costs of the investigation. Mr. Love reported it would be between $500,000 and $750,000 but they would need to have a very refined scope of the investigation. Council Member Faessel inquired if JL Group has performed any investigatory or other work for the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California. Mr. Love reported no one in his firm has worked with the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California. Council Member Moreno if anyone from JL Group or proposed members of the team have contributed to any candidates in the past or present. Mr. Love advised no one in the firm has ever donated to anyone in the City of Anaheim. Council Member Moreno explained the current email records retention policy in the City is 90 days. He inquired how the JL Group could verify communications that show malfeasance in these contracts or quid pro quos or serial communications amongst City Councilmembers, the Mayor, and contractors. Mr. Love explained that retention policies are problematic but noted people are very good about keeping emails, even some emails that they later wished they did not keep. He advised some people receive emails that are outside of the retention policy so those are also reviewed. He explained they take a broader approach when it comes to email retention. Council Member Moreno inquired if JL Group utilizes similar strategies or efforts that have been discussed by other firms to look at phone records. Mr. Love advised everyone is now relying more and more on electronic evidence. He advised his firm has a forensic consultant who is highly skilled and can examine devices. He noted if a City employee has a City cellphone, it can be examined. He explained this is an investigation but could be considered a name -clearing investigation for certain people as well. He noted that some may be reluctant to turn over their phone as there may be personal information on them but nothing relevant to the investigation. Council Member Moreno inquired if personal phones are used for City business would personal information such as family birthday party photos and private communication become available? Mr. Fabela advised that private information is not included in the public record. Mr. Love advised that would be a perfect thing for a neutral or a special master to keep away from the investigative firm to protect people's reputations and their privacy. City Council Minutes of August 9, 2022 Page 26 of 44 Council Member Moreno inquired how JL Group would determine whether these transgressions or malfeasance were simply the act of one or a couple of actors versus a systematic mode of operating in a pay -to -play culture. Mr. Love reported he is relatively confident they could discover it. He explained how broad it is depends on the number of events and the facts as they present themselves. He explained the entire firm, except for one attorney, all have extensive law enforcement backgrounds. Council Member Diaz inquired if Mr. Brower was familiar with the list of retired judges and inquired if he felt there was a conflict. Mr. Love advised no one in his firm has any conflict with any members of the panel. Council Member Moreno asked Mr. Estrada about the estimate for Hanson Bridgett. Mr. Estrada estimated the work in the range of $600,000 to $900,000, depending on the complexity and the scope. Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil thanked the bidders for being in attendance and answering City Council's questions. He noted that all of the firms are qualified and have done similar types of work, and some come with different expertise and approaches. He expressed concern that Brower Law Group could be a perceived conflict in that the City has been in the past, and currently is, a client albeit in a completely unrelated matter. He reported King and Spalding have the highest rate when other firms have competitive ranges. He noted he liked Hanson Bridgett's approach to the bid but expressed concern about the seven (7) to ten (10) month timeline. He reported, for him, it is a toss-up between Hanson Bridgett and JL Group but he was anxious to hear from his colleagues. Council Member Faessel requested Mr. Estrada return to the podium. He noted his biography shows that he has conducted an internal investigation for the City and requested additional information. Mr. Estrada advised he conducted an Internal Affairs investigation for the Anaheim Police Department and misconduct of the City's employees. He noted it was all done while he was an independent third party investigator. Council Member Faessel inquired how recent those investigations took place. Mr. Estrada advised the most recent investigation took place in 2017. He explained he did it as an independent third party neutral and is familiar with the City's administrative regulations due to those investigations. Council Member Diaz advised he is not comfortable with Brower Law Group and does not think they fit the need of the City. He noted he liked the JL group because they are not a law firm and only do investigations. He advised the neutral retired judges all look the same to him and encouraged City Council to consider the least costly one. He expressed support for the JL Group and felt that they are the best fit. Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil noted that Hanson Bridgett's involvement with the City, albeit again completely unrelated, cast some concern that prior work may affect future results. Council Member Faessel advised he is more interested in a positive way with Hanson Bridgett's work with the City of Santa Clara and the Santa Clara Stadium Authority which aligns with what the City is City Council Minutes of August 9, 2022 Page 27 of 44 going through. He noted he is more interested in their talents working with sports groups than his internal affairs investigations. He advised he would be comfortable with Hanson Bridgett. Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil agreed that the different experience that the firm brings outweighs the concern in his opinion. He noted the dais is still faced with having to pick just one firm. Council Member Moreno advised he was going to abstain from the item as he was not aware one of the partners at one of the firms had donated to his campaign. Mayor Pro Tern O'Neill requested Council Member Moreno clarify the firm. Council Member Moreno confirmed the group was Brower Law Group. Council Member Ma'ae advised her choice is between Hanson Bridgett and JL Group. She noted the history between Hanson Bridgett and the City may be a concern but would like to know additional details. She noted the connection with the Brower Law Group is just too close to home with too many connections to Anaheim. Mr. Estrada clarified his work with the City that was at his previous law firm and not done with Hanson Bridgett. He reiterated Hanson Bridgett has never done work for the City. Council Member Valencia expressed appreciation for every intent each firm has put forth. He advised his selection dwindles to Hanson Bridgett and JL Group. He noted the scope of the investigation is also a very critical component of how the City moves forward and would like that to be discussed at the appropriate time. Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil explained to avoid any perception of conflict the only firm with no ties to the City in any way is the JL Group. He noted he is leaning towards supporting the JL Group for that reason. He explained that the dais wanted to have a completely impartial and uninfluenced investigation and that there be as much consensus amongst the City Council as possible. MOTION: Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil moved to retain JL Group to conduct the independent investigation/audit, seconded by Council Member Ma'ae. DISCUSSION: Council Member Faessel noted that he appreciates what he has heard from the dais regarding JL Group but he keeps going back to the work that Hansen Bridgett has done in Santa Clara and it pushed him in that direction. He acknowledged that Mr. Estrada conducted some internal affairs investigations when he was not associated with the current firm. He advised he is leaning towards Hanson Bridgett because they may have special knowledge of sports teams and what the City is dealing with now. He agreed the City should be unanimous on any choice it makes. Mayor Pro Tem O'Neil advised he does not disagree that experience would be helpful but is also mindful that the nature of the investigation is relative to the entire scope. He explained that potential conflicts associated with contracts and contributions from the Angel Stadium transaction may have been the nexus that started the need for all of this but is one small component of all of the contracts and all of the contributions that will ultimately be investigated. Council Member Faessel noted he is perplexed why Council Member Moreno is abstaining due to a contribution made to his campaign at some point in the past from a firm the City is not even considering at this point. He noted he is bothered by the abstention and encouraged Council Member Moreno to reconsider his vote. City Council Minutes of August 9, 2022 Page 28 of 44 Council Member Moreno advised he was unaware that a member of a firm that the City could potentially work with had contributed to his campaign. He advised he was going to stand by his abstention and do what is asked of the City Council by ordinance as much as it pains him to step out of the vote. Mr. Fabela noted that if Council Member Moreno intended to be consistent with his proposal, it sounded like the contribution came in well ahead of the 12 months as indicated in the ordinance. Council Member Moreno maintained his abstention. Council Member Valencia inquired if the scope would be modified at a later date. Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil confirmed the scope would be modified. MOTION: Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil moved to retain JL Group to conduct the independent investigation/audit, seconded by Council Member Ma'ae. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES — 5 (Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil and Council Members Diaz, Ma'ae, Valencia, and Faessel); NOES — 0; ABSTAIN — 1 (Council Member Moreno) Motion carried. DISCUSSION: Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil thanked all of the firms for their submittals and for being in attendance to answer questions. MOTION: Council Member Diaz moved to select Hon. Clay Smith as the neutral to administer and oversee the investigation, seconded by Council Member Ma'ae. DISCUSSION: Council Member Faessel would like to hear, other than costs, the pros and cons of each of the potential neutrals. He would like to hear City Council debate each neutral. Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil clarified Council Member Diaz's point that these are all retired judges who are capable of serving in the role. Council Member Moreno advised he does not want to select someone just because they are the lowest bid. He referenced the cost of $1,500,000 to $2,500,000 that was referenced in the media and inquired if that was inclusive of the neutral. Senior Administrative Analyst Lylyana Bogdanovich reported the neutral would be an additional cost from the $1,500,000 to $2,500,000. She explained the $1,500,000 to $2,500,000 the media used was taken directly from King and Spalding. Council Member Moreno inquired if cost was the only concern. Council Member Diaz advised that when looking at the biographies, they all have over 20-years' experience as a retired judge and he sees no difference. He believed the difference is Hon. Clay Smith has lower overhead. Council Member Valencia inquired if there is a sense of how many hours a neutral would be involved in the process. Ms. Bogdanovich advised it would be difficult to determine the amount of hours and encouraged City Council to inquire with JL Love. Mr. Love advised JAMS is not bashful about charging but he does not have a good sense about how many hours would be required. City Council Minutes of August 9, 2022 Page 29 of 44 Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil requested Mr. Love provide an indication on the neutral relative to the number of hours the JL Group would be putting into the case. Mr. Love believe it would be 10 to 1 to the work JL Group is doing. Council Member Ma'ae noted her decision to select Hon. Clay Smith was based on the fact that all of the firms had worked with all of the neutrals and he had the most reasonable cost. Council Member Faessel advised he looked at their backgrounds to see if they have had dealings with work the City is proposing. He referenced Hon. Clay Smith's biography where it states "I'm painfully aware of the high cost, both financial and emotional of protracted legislative of litigation" and maybe that is the reason for the lower cost. He noted Hon. Clay Smith was a Planning Commissioner in the City of Brea so he clearly understands government to a degree. He believed it was important for City Council to be unanimous in its decision. Council Member Moreno advised he had the similar conclusion as Council Member Diaz but the conversation with the firms helped guide his decision. He advised he is looking at the two neutrals in the middle and is looking for someone who has experience related to finance or complex litigation. Mayor Pro Tem O'Neil advised that when the City puts out a Public Works project bid it typically accepts by default the lowest responsible bid. He explained that all of the neutrals are qualified to do this work and would provide the necessary neutral oversight. He does not see how this is a get what you pay for situation. He does like that Hon. Clay Smith served on a Planning Commission and felt like he would have the insight relative to campaign contributions that are typically given and taken in the context of City Council Members. Council Member Faessel advised that Mr. Love reported that JAMS is not shy in charging and that Hon. Clay Smith is part of Judicate West. He also liked that Hon. Clay Smith was a member of the Planning Commission. He believed it was important to be unanimous on the decision. MOTION: Council Member Diaz moved to select Hon. Clay Smith as the neutral to administer and oversee the investigation, seconded by Council Member Ma'ae. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES — 5 (Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil and Council Members Diaz, Ma'ae, Valencia, and Faessel); NOES — 1 (Council Member Moreno); Motion carried. At 10:16 P.M., Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil took the agenda out of order to consider Public Hearing Item Nos. 29, 30, and 31 prior to the remainder of the End of Consent Calendar. PUBLIC HEARINGS: C220 29. CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION CLASS 32 DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO.2021-00188 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.2021-06121 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 19177 OWNER: Judy Maria Boisseranc Gentry, 33582 Astoria Street, Dana Point, CA 92629 APPLICANT: Chris Segesman, Bonanni Development, 5500 Bolsa Avenue, Ste. 120, Huntington Beach, CA 92649 PROJECT LOCATION: The approximately 0.93-acre property is located at 1442 North Dale Avenue, approximately 225 feet east of the northern terminus of Dale Avenue. REQUEST: The applicant requests approval for an 18-unit, two-story, single-family attached residential development with 10-percent of the units affordable to moderate income buyers, with an affordable housing development incentive, and a density bonus. The request includes the following land use entitlements: (i) a Conditional Use Permit for a single-family attached City Council Minutes of August 9, 2022 Page 30 of 44 residential development with modified development standards; and (ii) a Tentative Tract Map to establish a 1-lot, 18-unit condominium subdivision. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The City Council will consider whether a Class 32 (Infill Development) categorical exemption is the appropriate environmental documentation for this request under the California Environmental Quality Act, pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15332. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: Approved Development Permit No. 2021-00188, Conditional Use Permit No. 2021-06121 (PC2022-068) and Tentative Tract Map No. 19177 (PC2022-069) with added conditions of approval to: (i) require that the Tentative Tract Map depict location of the easements for ingress/egress, vehicular access, sewer, public utilities, and incidental purposes described in the easement legal rights as depicted on the encumbrance map, and include provisions ensuring the perpetual maintenance of those easements; (ii) require compliance with South Coast AQMD rules to minimize construction emissions of dust particulates; and (iii) require owner/developer to repave portions of private roadway within the Parkdale HOA community that are used during construction activity. VOTE: 6-1 (Chairperson Meeks and Commissioners Vadodaria, Kring, Perez, Heywood, and Mouawad voted yes; Commissioner White voted no) (Planning Commission meeting of July 6, 2022) Appealed by: Parkdale Town Home Owners Association, represented by Meredith Gill. RESOLUTION NO. 2022-081 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM approving Conditional Use Permit No. 2021-06121 (DEV2021-00188) (1442 North Dale Avenue). RESOLUTION NO. 2022-082 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM approving Tentative Tract Map No. 19177 (DEV2021-00188) (1442 North Dale Avenue). Approved, as revised. Planning and Building Director Ted White reported the item is an application for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) and Tentative Tract Map to establish a 1-lot, 18-unit condominium subdivision with two (2) affordable housing units. He advised the Planning Commission approved the project with a 6-1 vote and was appealed by Meredith Gill, Parkdale Town Home Owners Association (HOA). Mr. White reported the property is located east of Dale Avenue and south of the 91 Freeway and was developed with a single-family home and accessory structures. He advised the property is surrounded by the Parkdale Town Home community on three sides. He reported the proposed project meets the density permitted with the Low -Medium General Plan land use designation with a 5% density bonus allowed per State law. Mr. White reported there would be two affordable housing units at the moderate level and the project is using the RM-3 zone development standards. He advised there would be a mix of 2- and 3- bedroom units and would be constructed within three (3) two-story buildings. He explained each unit would have an attached 2-car garage and the project meets zoning code requirements for projects that include affordable housing. He advised there are two (2) existing easements for access and utilities crossing the Parkdale community and the property would be accessed using Dale Avenue on Pepper Tree Drive. Mr. White reported the item was appealed by the Parkdale HOA for several reasons. He advised the appellant requested the project not be approved until an agreement is negotiated between the applicant and the Parkdale HOA for easement area maintenance and cost allocations for use of the water and sewer infrastructure. He explained the City does not have a role in these private City Council Minutes of August 9, 2022 Page 31 of 44 negotiations and staff does not believe consideration of the project should be delayed based on the status of these private agreements. Mr. White reported the appellant opposes the use of the existing water and sewer lines on the Parkdale property as requested and requested a flow meter test which was completed. He explained that the required water for the proposed project would be provided by the existing public water system located on the Parkdale property and managed by the City of Buena Park. He noted the project would connect the existing public water system within the existing utility easement and advised the City of Buena Park has issued a "will -serve" letter for the project. He reported public sewer is also provided by the City of Buena Park and a "will -serve" letter was also issued. He explained the public sewer terminates at Dale Avenue and converts to a private sewer within the Parkdale HOA. He reported the applicant submitted preliminary information demonstrating the adequate capacity to serve the development within the existing sewer line. He explained final plans documenting compliance with the California Plumbing Code would be required before the issuance of building permits. Mr. White reported the appellant requests construction street closure plans be provided by the applicant before project approval. He advised the City does not play a role in these private negotiations and staff does not believe they are grounds to delay the consideration of the project. Mr. White reported the appellant also requests a 6- to 8-foot perimeter wall and that the walls be shown on the plan. He advised the plans already show a six -foot -high block wall separating the proposed project site from the Parkdale HOA. He noted a wall is not required by the Zoning Code but the six-foot wall as noted in the plans would be required at the time of construction. Mr. White reported the appellant opposes any development that uses the existing easements and existing infrastructure, indicating that development would create a burden on Parkdale HOA. Mr. White reported the Planning Commission did add Conditions of Approval to the project based on the concerns of Parkdale residents ensuring maintenance of the existing private easements in perpetuity and requiring the developer to repair any damage caused to the private roadway from construction. He advised a revised resolution was provided to City Council including these conditions Mr. White advised the Planning Commission approved the project and it meets the goals of the General Plan. He noted it would provide affordable housing and is consistent with the City's policy identifying affordable housing as a priority. He advised that staff recommend upholding the decision of the Planning Commission. He noted that should City Council deny the project or require development at a lesser density, it would be required to make written findings citing a significant, quantifiable direct and unavoidable impact based on objectives identified as a public safety and health standard that staff would need to prepare. DISCUSSION: Council Member Faessel inquired what is on the property now. Mr. White reported there is a single-family residence on the site which owned all the land until it was subdivided and the Parkdale Town Home community was developed. Council Member Faessel inquired if the property was surrounded by Buena Park, to which Mr. White confirmed the property is surrounded by Buena Park. Council Member Faessel inquired if the private sewer line considered an additional 18-unit flow when it was built. Mr. White agreed they probably did not but that would need to be evaluated and is required in the project. He agreed there could be some changes to the existing sewer line based on analysis before the issuance of building permits. City Council Minutes of August 9, 2022 Page 32 of 44 Council Member Faessel inquired which entity approved the original water and sewer lines. Mr. White advised the public water system is owned by Buena Park and that the actual building permits would have been issued by the City of Anaheim. Council Member Faessel inquired if Public Works Director Rudy Emami has expertise on this site. Mr. Emami reported the applicant has conducted some flow analysis on the line and found that the amount of flow in the existing line was 50% of capacity so they have quite a bit of room. Council Member Faessel inquired when a line is required to be increased. Mr. White interjected and explained that because this is a private sewer system it would not be controlled by the Public Works Department. He advised it would be controlled by the California Plumbing Code that is not based on a flow but the number of fixtures generated into the system. Council Member Ma'ae inquired about the reason for the concerns. Mr. White explained the Parkdale HOA has concerns about the impact on their infrastructure. He believed they are looking for collaboration and cooperation with the developer. He noted they would like to have firm commitments and an understanding of some of the plans before approval of the project. Council Member Ma'ae noted many meetings were held and inquired why this was not resolved during those discussions. He explained the City's responsibilities have been met and the project is ready to move forward. He advised the private discussion of who is going to pay for what is forthcoming but the HOA would like to have them settled before approval. Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil inquired if there were any ex-parte communications with interested parties. There were none from the dais. Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil opened the public hearing. Meredith Gill, Parkdale HOA, advised the residents want a written commitment from the developer for a maintenance agreement and the sewer and water lines. She advised the original property has a septic system and well water. She explained there have been water and sewer issues in the past and advised Buena Park and the City of Anaheim have pointed fingers at each other so residents would like to see a written commitment. She reported the HOA had a meeting with the developer on July 28 and they were told there were plans and they were public record. She noted the HOA recently obtained copies of the plans. She advised the HOA should not have to submit the agreement which should be prepared by the developer. She advised any assistance from the City would be helpful. Chris Segesman, applicant, provided a PowerPoint presentation providing an overview of the project to familiarize City Council with the development. He provided a brief overview of the community outreach meetings with residents of the Parkdale community to obtain their input. He referenced a letter from Bonanni Development covering the facts of the project to City Council. He explained there are legal easement rights to the property that have been in place since Parkdale was developed. He explained the need for the easements and presented the tract maps and a grant deed that shows the easement language. Mr. Segesman advised the project has acquired a "will serve" letter for water and sewer from the City of Buena Park. He advised Buena Park maintains the water lines up to the buildings. He presented that there is an existing sewer lateral that comes into the project. He explained the plans have to City Council Minutes of August 9, 2022 Page 33 of 44 comply with the California Plumbing Code before building permits are issued. He presented the Conditions of Approval as deemed by the Planning Commission which include perpetual maintenance of the easement, maintenance of ingress/egress easement to repair any damage to the easement during construction, and parking management land. Mr. Segesman reported they originally proposed a three-foot wall and left it to the Planning Commission to decide and noted they decided on a six-foot wall. He advised there was concern regarding ingress/egress and they would be adding three proposed stop signs for safety. He advised they are committed to working with them to determine the cost of the maintenance agreement. City Clerk Theresa Bass reported that six (6) electronic comments were received and distributed to City Council and posted on the City's website. — See Appendix. Dave Snowdon advised one of the problems residents have had is that the community outreach is below acceptable. He noted in the first meeting with the developer he stated "we are going to agree to disagree but I am going to do it anyway" which set the tone. He also explained he would not put anything in writing. He advised nothing has been approved by the HOA. He further explained the City of Buena Park also needs to approve the sewer modifications. He advised the sewer map is incorrect and weaves through the Parkdale complex and goes to the south right by the park. He inquired why the developer cannot use the existing connection and tear up the streets which will impact the Parkdale community. He reported the HOA has not seen a copy of the flow test but has seen a copy of the engineering report that claims everything is fine. He explained the residents would like a flow test because they do not know the condition of the sewer. He expressed concern regarding parking during construction and expressed concern regarding the height of the wall. He noted residents would like an eight -foot wall. Christina Russo reported she has lived at Parkdale for 30 years and her garage is next to the development. She expressed concern regarding the sewer and water lines. She expressed concern regarding the existing sewer and encouraged the developer to have their sewer line elsewhere. She advised there is already a parking issue and that the new development would also impact the community. Jack Bailey reported he has been a resident for 35 years and advised the agreement for the easements was put in 50 some years ago for 160 units for Parkdale and one farmhouse. He advised he is not against the development of the property but is concerned about the financial burden of the sewer/water lines, utilities, and roads that comes out of their dues. He presented a letter from the City of Buena Park dated May 2, 2022, that states the developer/owners would need to execute a sewer maintenance agreement. He advised the HOA has requested several documents that have not been received. Vern Nelson noted he does not trust people who state "let's agree to disagree" and would not put anything in writing. He knows 1.8 of the units would be affordable but if it is anything like what has happened previously with City Council, it would be rubber-stamped. He explained that if Council Member Diaz received contributions from Bonanni Development in the past year he would have had to recuse himself had the Cleanup Anaheim Act passed but he helped kill it. He referenced the Anaheim Stadium deal and noted former Mayor Sidhu was smart enough to know how valuable the deal was as he was planning on receiving a $1,000,000 kickback. He advised the City Council majority had no excuse not to know what a bad deal it was. Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil closed the public hearing. City Council Minutes of August 9, 2022 Page 34 of 44 DISCUSSION: Council Member Moreno thanked Mr. Segesman for including affordable housing in the project. He noted City staff has suggested that City Council should not get involved in private dealings. He inquired why Mr. Segesman would not just sign the document as presented by Parkdale. He explained they have been in communication with the HOA for a year but demanded the agreement in writing right before the Planning Commission meeting. Mr. Segesman reported he emailed Ms. Gill several times before they could get another meeting with the Parkdale community and only five (5) to nine (9) residents attended. He reiterated they are committed to coming up with an agreeable and reasonable agreement for maintenance based on what percentage they use and what Parkdale uses. He explained they need to have an approved project before they could sign a maintenance agreement. Council Member Moreno inquired how the developer could be bound to stay at the table until there is a reasonable resolution. Mr. Segesman advised that some of Parkdale's requests have been unreasonable such as recommending they install their sewer system and pave the street beyond the easement. Council Member Moreno inquired if the developer would agree to a binding agreement that the issue would go to arbitration should they not be able to agree. Mr. Segesman hoped it did not get to that point. He noted he received a letter from their lawyer on Monday but it has not been reviewed by their counsel. Mr. Segesman agreed to arbitration. City Attorney Robert Fabela advised that Council Member Moreno cannot do that as a condition of the permit. Council Member Faessel requested Mr. White explain how the State density bonuses work. Mr. White reported State law requires local jurisdictions to adopt a local ordinance to help provide housing incentives. He explained they are complex formulas but in this case, it was 10% of the total units coming to 1.8 units that afford the developer a Tier 1 incentive. Council Member Faessel noted the City had no involvement other than the density had to be adopted according to State law. Council Member Faessel inquired if the density of 18 units per acre applies to the surrounding community as well. Mr. White explained that Parkdale is allowed a density of 18 units per acre but was not built to that density. Council Member Faessel noted it seems to him that the HOA and the developer are not too far apart. He noted what the HOA is requesting seems to be agreeable. Council Member Faessel inquired if the sewer line would be the City of Buena Park's issue. Mr. White advised the sewer line would be a City of Anaheim issue when plan checking the development. He reiterated the Condition of Approval requires the developer to depict the location of all the access and the sewers including the provision to ensure the perpetual maintenance of those easements and those improvements. City Council Minutes of August 9, 2022 Page 35 of 44 Council Member Faessel requested clarification if the Condition of Approval means the applicant must maintain the easements and inquired if it includes the pipelines in the easement. Assistant City Attorney Leonie Mulvihill explained the conditions intend to recognize that there is one huge parcel that has been subdivided and easements were put in place to benefit this one parcel. She explained the Parkdale HOA was required to be formed to provide for the maintenance. She noted the developer has recognized that the maintenance would need to be shared. She further explained the law requires that both parties be reasonable with one another. She advised if they cannot agree, a court or an arbiter would need to intervene. She advised the condition does require that the developer show they have an agreement in place. She confirmed the perpetual maintenance of the easement would include the utilities, sewer, and road. Council Member Faessel inquired if that was already included in Condition #11, to which Mr. White confirmed it is already included in Condition #11. Council Member Faessel expressed disappointment that the applicant was unable to work out these issues over the last month. Mr. Segesman explained that it takes time. He reported a topographical map of the entire Parkdale community was created from an aerial view to help calculate the amount of sewer the project would be using compared to the number of sewer lines within the Parkdale community as well as the ingress/ingress portion of the easement. He noted there is a lot of back work that needs to happen before costs could be justified and it could be a lengthy process. Ms. Mulvihill explained that having the parties come together and agree is implicit in Condition #11. Council Member Faessel restated Ms. Mulvihill's explanation of Condition #11 and inquired if that gives Parkdale HOA any assurances. Ms. Gill advised it does not give Parkdale HOA any assurances and noted many of the things that were presented to City Council were not presented to the HOA so there is no trust. She also has had many problems with getting an actual answer from the City of Buena Park. Council Member Faessel noted it was unfortunate that the utilities were being handled by the City of Buena Park and the plan check was with the City of Anaheim. Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil confirmed Ms. Gill's email came in this morning but he had not had an opportunity to read them. Council Member Diaz noted he is a proponent for new housing but also sees the point of Parkdale residents. He advised the new residents would also be using the private road and that would have to be negotiated and is a legitimate concern. Council Member Diaz inquired how long the implicit condition would last. Ms. Mulvihill explained that an easement between two properties is an agreement and allows the right to that use. She advised the issue tonight is that the relationship is changing. She explained the developer is going to need to show he has those rights in place and if they cannot agree, a court of law would decide for them. She further explained the agreement that is very vague right now would have to be more specific. Council Member Diaz inquired if the City can deny the project based on a lack of agreement. City Council Minutes of August 9, 2022 Page 36 of 44 Ms. Mulvihill explained that would be subject to the Housing Accountability Act which would require City Council to make specific written findings as to adverse impacts based on objective standards and those would be presumably lack of sewer service which the facts would not support. She explained that within the condition, the City preserved the status quo, recognized that the easement rights exist, and requires the developer to button down the agreement before they record the map. Council Member Diaz inquired why an agreement has not yet been reached and believed the developer is setting themselves up for a lawsuit. Mr. Segesman explained that there have to be two reasonable parties that negotiate an agreement. He provided an example of installing a new sewer. He explained it is an evolving conversation. He reiterated they are committed to working on an agreement with the Parkdale HOA. He also explained that putting in a new sewer line would tear up the street and they do not want to impact the community. Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil noted Condition #11 requires that before the final map is recorded there must be a written maintenance agreement to share the costs. Mr. White recommended changing the terminology from implicit to explicit and it gets everyone to the same place, to which Mr. Segesman agreed. Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil noted that unless the parties agree, the project would never happen based on the Condition of Approval and requested clarification. Ms. Mulvihill agreed and clarified that each party has the right to seek a judicial determination as to what that agreement is. Council Member Valencia thanked the residents and the developer for attending the meeting. He noted it sounds like everyone wants to agree. He agrees with either changing the language before the project breaks ground, or continuing the item. Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil inquired if continuing the item prevents the developer from doing the necessary engineering work to determine what a shared agreement would look like. He clarified that no ground would break unless both parties agree and the leverage Parkdale has is that the developer cannot get the final map recorded before he can break ground on the project. Mr. Segesman advised he is not in favor of continuing the meeting and referenced the continuance with the Planning Commission. Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil inquired if the developer would consider an 8-foot wall. Mr. Segesman advised they do not agree with an 8-foot wall since they initially proposed a 3-foot wall. He advised that they agreed to a 6-foot wall. Council Member Moreno expressed confusion about being able to impose a condition. Mr. Fabela explained he was referring to imposing arbitration without the consent of the parties. Council Member Moreno inquired why the appellant insists on the six-foot wall. Ms. Gill explained there is already a six-foot wall in place to separate the communities. She advised it makes sense given the layout of the community. City Council Minutes of August 9, 2022 Page 37 of 44 Council Member Moreno inquired if the explicit wording brings a level of comfort to Parkdale HOA. Ms. Gill advised she does not want the full burden of the agreement to be on the Parkdale community for the developer to negotiate. Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil explained that the burden to negotiate would be on the developer because if there is not an agreement they would not get their Tract Map recorded and cannot build. Mr. White confirmed that is correct but it could also be litigated. MOTION: Council Member Diaz moved to approve the project via RESOLUTION NO. 2022-081 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM approving Conditional Use Permit No. 2021-06121 (DEV2021-00188) (1442 North Dale Avenue), and RESOLUTION NO. 2022-082 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM approving Tentative Tract Map No. 19177 (DEV2021-00188) (1442 North Dale Avenue), as revised pertaining to Condition No. 11, and deny the appeal, seconded by Council Member Valencia. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES — 6 (Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil and Council Members Diaz, Ma'ae, Moreno, Valencia, and Faessel); NOES — 0. Motion carried. C350 30. MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION C410 DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO.2020-00248 C280 GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2021-00536 C220 RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2021-00336 AGR- CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.2021-06097 13702 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 19141 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT OWNER: Allen Liou, Best Western Summit Inn, Inc., 12823 Moorshire Drive, Cerritos, CA 90703 APPLICANT: Kim Prijatel, City Ventures Homebuilding, LLC, 3121 Michelson Drive, Suite 150, Irvine, CA 92612 PROJECT LOCATION: The project site is approximately 1.55 acres in size and located at 1661-1673 West Broadway, approximately 275 feet east of the intersection of Broadway and Euclid Street. REQUEST: The applicant requests approval of the following zoning/land use entitlements: 1) a General Plan Amendment to amend the land use designation from Office — Low to Mid Density Residential; 2) a zoning reclassification from the C-G (General Commercial) zone to the RM-3.5 (Multiple -Family Residential) zone; 3) a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to allow for the construction of a 34-unit, attached single-family residential project with modified development standards; 4) a Tentative Tract Map to permit a 1-lot, 34 unit subdivision for condominium purposes; and 5) a Development Agreement to permit a voluntary financial contribution to support the City's affordable housing programs. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The City Council will consider whether the proposed action has been adequately analyzed in a Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (Draft IS/MND) for the proposed project in compliance with Section 15070 to 15075 of State of California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: Approved and recommended City Council approval of Mitigated Negative Declaration, Development Permit No. 2020-00248, General Plan Amendment No. 2021-00536 (PC2022-070), Reclassification No. 2021-00336, Conditional Use Permit No. 2021-06097, Tentative Tract Map No. 19141, and Development Agreement (PC2022-071). VOTE: 6-1 (Chairperson Meeks and Commissioners Vadodaria, Kring, White, Heywood and Mouawad voted yes; Commissioner Perez voted no) (Planning Commission meeting of July 6, 2022) City Council Minutes of August 9, 2022 Page 38 of 44 RESOLUTION NO. 2022-083 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration for proposed General Plan Amendment No. 2021-00536, Reclassification No. 2021-00336, Conditional Use Permit No. 2021-06097, Tentative Tract Map No. 19141 and a Development Agreement (DEV2020- 00248) (1661-1673 West Broadway). RESOLUTION NO. 2022-084 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM amending the General Plan of the City of Anaheim (General Plan Amendment No. 2021-00536) (DEV2020-00248) (1661-1673 West Broadway). RESOLUTION NO. 2022-085 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM approving and adopting proposed Conditional Use Permit No. 2021- 06097 (DEV2020-00248) (1661-1673 West Broadway). RESOLUTION NO. 2022-086 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM approving Tentative Tract Map No. 19141 (DEV2020-00248) (1661-1673 West Broadway). ORDINANCE NO. 6533 (INTRODUCTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM amending the Zoning Map referred to in Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code relating to Zoning (Reclassification No. 2021-00336) (DEV2020-00248) [reclassifying the property at 1661-1673 West Broadway from the "C-G" General Commercial zone to the "RM- 3.5" Multiple -Family Residential zone]. ORDINANCE NO. 6534 (INTRODUCTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM approving a Development Agreement by and between the City of Anaheim and Anaheim 1 INV, LLC, and authorizing the Mayor Pro Tem to execute said agreement for and on behalf of the City (DEV2020-00248). Planning and Building Director Ted White reported the item is a request for a General Plan Amendment (GPA), a Zoning Reclassification, a Conditional Use Permit (CUP), a Tentative Tract Map, and a Development Agreement to construct a 34-unit townhome project. He advised the Planning Commission recommended approval of the item at its June 6 meeting. He reported this 1.5- acre property is located on the north side of Broadway just east of Euclid Street and is currently developed with multi -tenant office buildings. He advised surrounding uses include multi -family residential to the north and across Broadway to the south, community and religious assembly uses to the east and west, as well as commercial uses to the west. He reported the subject property is designated for Office -low land uses in the General Plan and is zoned General —Commercial. Mr. White reported the applicant requests a GPA to the Mid -Density Residential land use designation and reclassification to the RM-3.5 zone which would allow up to 27 units per acre. He advised the proposed project would have a proposed density of just under 22 units per acre. He noted the proposal also includes a 1-unit condominium Tract Map. Mr. White reported the 34-unit townhomes would be built in five (5) three-story buildings consisting of two- to four -bedroom units and each unit would have a two -car garage. He advised the project would provide 100 parking spaces and meet zoning code requirements with vehicle access provided from a driveway on Broadway. He noted the project includes a contemporary design with fagade variations and incorporates a mix of building materials. Mr. White reported a CUP is required for single-family attached units in the RM-3.5 zone. He explained development standards could be modified in conjunction with the CUP and the applicant City Council Minutes of August 9, 2022 Page 39 of 44 requests modification of building to building interior setbacks. He reported staff and the Planning Commission agree and believe that the proposed setback reductions are appropriate and compatible with surrounding development patterns. Mr. White reported the proposed project also includes a Development Agreement (DA) to facilitate a voluntary contribution on behalf of the applicant toward the City's affordable housing programs. He advised the applicant proposes a voluntary contribution of $1,000 per unit, for a total of $34,000. Mr. White reported an initial study in support of a Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) has been prepared to evaluate the environmental impact associated with the project and to identify necessary mitigation measures. He advised the IS/MND was circulated to public agencies and interested parties and advised that one (1) comment was received that did not require recirculation of the MND. Mr. White reports staff and the Planning Commission considered the proposed project and recommended approval. DISCUSSION: Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil inquired if there were any ex-parte communications the City Council needed to disclose. Council Member Moreno reported he had a Zoom call with the developer last week. Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil opened the public hearing. Kim Prijatel, Senior Vice President for City Ventures, expressed excitement for bringing the project before City Council and noted they have been working since the fall of 2020. She reported a community meeting was held in the fall of 2020 with no attendance. City Clerk Theresa Bass reported no electronic comments were submitted related to Public Hearing Item No. 30. Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil closed the public hearing. DISCUSSION: Council Member Valencia reported no ex-parte communication. Council Member Faessel inquired about the reason why Planning Commissioner Perez voted no. Mr. White advised Commissioner Perez was looking for affordable housing to be provided as part of the development rather than having a contribution towards the affordable housing programs. Council Member Moreno reported he had a good conversation with the developer and thanked him for reaching out to his office. He inquired why there is no affordable housing on this project. Ms. Prijatel explained that without an ordinance in place it was very difficult when a property owner puts a property up for sale. She explained it is very difficult in this in -fill market bidding on those properties and without an ordinance in place, it makes it difficult for a developer to underwrite a project to build the units on -site when everyone else is bidding on the project assuming all market - rate units. Council Member Moreno inquired if City Ventures builds affordable housing in other jurisdictions where it is required. Ms. Prijatel confirmed they do builds affordable housing where required. City Council Minutes of August 9, 2022 Page 40 of 44 Council Member Moreno inquired if City Ventures has experience in building affordable and market units in the same project. Ms. Prijatel confirmed they do have experience. Council Member Moreno inquired since it is not required, due to the price of the land, City Ventures cannot afford to compete with other developers because they would sell all of their units at market rate. Ms. Prijatel confirmed that this was correct. Council Member Moreno inquired what could the City do with the $34,000 that is being contributed. Mr. White advised the funds could be contributed to rent subsidies such as the Senior Safety Net program. Council Member Moreno inquired if the City had programs to work with this developer to build affordability into their project. Mr. White explained in a project like this where it is a transaction between a private buyer and private seller, affordability is not their primary interest. Ms. Prijatel advised they would be open to discussing affordability programs with the City. Council Member Moreno inquired if those discussions are held proforma. Mr. White confirmed City Council policy is that applicants speak with City Housing staff and review programs that are available. Ms. Prijatel confirmed having a conversation with the Housing staff. She explained since it was a private transaction they did not speak about funds the City had available. Council Member Moreno inquired if the City were to provide the resources and if they would be willing to build affordability into the project. Ms. Prijatel explained she could not answer that without knowing the economics of what was before her. Council Member Moreno noted the City has been collecting these affordable housing donations for some time now and inquired if there was enough to assist developers with building affordable housing into their projects. Mr. White advised the donations are for the assistance of the City's affordable housing programs. He noted that based on the amount of revenue coming in, it is difficult to see the actual production of new affordable housing units. Council Member Moreno inquired if the developer looked into any programs where first-time homebuyers or those working in Anaheim were given preferences. Ms. Prijatel advised they should be able to figure something out with those types of programs but would just want to confirm they are legally allowed to participate in those programs. Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil noted if there was a conversation to be had with the City about affordability, those conversations would have taken place long before the design and entitlement of the project, and even before the acquisition of the land. Mr. White confirmed that was correct. Council Member Moreno reported Planning Commissioner Heywood noted that the affordable housing policy is weak with no teeth and that City Council needs to change it. He suggested City Council look into reviewing the policy. He noted the donation almost looks like pay -to -play since most City Council Minutes of August 9, 2022 Page 41 of 44 of the developers are making those donations. He believed the City should look at how it produces affordable housing. He expressed appreciation for the developer's candor explaining that they can produce affordable housing if it was required. He reported he spoke with the developer about working with the school district to review programs around careers and thanked the developer for being willing. He advised that part of the City has struggled with illegal dispensaries and this would be an improvement of the space. MOTION: Council Member Moreno moved to approve Public Hearing Item No. 30 through four Resolutions and the introduction of two Ordinances, seconded by Council Member Diaz. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES — 6 (Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil and Council Members Diaz, Ma'ae, Moreno, Valencia, and Faessel); NOES — 0. Motion carried; ordinances introduced. D155 31. Public hearing to consider approving the Fiscal Year 2022-2023 Annual Action Plan, in substantial form, for federal Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME), Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG), and Housing Opportunities for Persons With AIDS (HOPWA) funds totaling $9,549,735; and designating the Director of the Housing and Community Development Department as the Certifying Official authorized to execute all documents related to the administration, management, and implementation of the CDBG, HOME, ESG, and HOPWA programs. Housing and Community Development Director Grace Stepter reported that the item is to request authority to move forward with the submission of the Fiscal Year 2022-2023 Annual Action Plan. She reported the City receives funding from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for four major programs: Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME), Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG), and Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA). She reported these programs are used to address critical unmet local needs in the areas of affordable housing, public facilities, infrastructure, economic development, and public services. She advised the Annual Action Plan sets forth the City's proposed activities to achieve the Housing and Community Development goals as described in the 2020/24 Consolidated Plan approved by City Council in July 2020. She reported the funds are for preservation and expansion of affordable housing, assistance for the homeless, economic development, and programs focused primarily on job training, life skills, and career preparation, public facility and infrastructure, code enforcement, and fair housing services. She reported the City receives $9,500,000 under the four programs. Ms. Stepter reported that to comply with federal regulations and as part of the planning process, staff hosted an Annual Action Plan workshop and delivered a presentation to service providers in June 2022. She advised staff gave a general overview of the four entitlement programs to the Anaheim Citizen Participation Plan. She reported the workshop allowed local non -profits to learn more about the planning process and proposed budget. Additionally, she advised the draft action plan was published for review and public comment from May 26, 2022 to August 3, 2022, during which time staff attended District Community meetings to make copies of the Draft Annual Action Plan available for public comment. Ms. Stepter reported the Anaheim Citizen Participation Plan outlines that the City will hold a public hearing before submission of the Annual Action Plan to HUD. She explained the public hearing is generally presented to the Housing and Community Development Commission; however, due to the pandemic, they have been unable to reach a quorum and therefore the hearing is being held before City Council. Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil opened the public hearing. City Council Minutes of August 9, 2022 Page 42 of 44 City Clerk Theresa Bass reported two (2) public comments were received electronically and were distributed to the City Council and posted on the City's website. — See Appendix. Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil closed the public hearing. DISCUSSION: Council Member Faessel inquired about the $847,857 in unprogrammed funds. Ms. Stepter advised the reason that happens is that there may be non -profits that did not expend their entire amounts or a program that paid back money which creates a pot of money that gives the City additional resources that can be programmed towards another purpose. She reported she is already having conversations with Community Services about allocating those funds. Council Member Faessel inquired if City Council can make recommendations, to which Ms. Stepter advised staff is open to recommendations. Council Member Faessel recommended using the funds for Community Services. Ms. Stepter reported there is a 15% cap on the public services programs and noted it is already fully programmed. Council Member Faessel hoped the Community Services Director looks towards a way to spend all of those funds. Council Member Valencia noted a number of the itemized funds are allocated to other cities, but inquired if the services are being directed to the City of Anaheim. Ms. Stepter explained the City always requires confirmation that the services are being offered in Anaheim. MOTION: Council Member Ma'ae moved to approve the Fiscal Year 2022-2023 Annual Action Plan, in substantial form, for federal Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME), Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG), and Housing Opportunities for Persons With AIDS (HOPWA) funds totaling $9,549,735; and designating the Director of the Housing and Community Development Department as the Certifying Official authorized to execute all documents related to the administration, management, and implementation of the CDBG, HOME, ESG, and HOPWA programs, seconded by Council Member Diaz. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES — 6 (Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil and Council Members Diaz, Ma'ae, Moreno, Valencia, and Faessel); NOES — 0. Motion carried. Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil returned to consideration of the remainder of the End of Consent Calendar. D125 26. Direct staff to commission a Request for Qualifications/Request for Proposals of Planning consulting firms to procure consulting services to study the various district options for the Brookhurst Street Corridor. MOTION: Council Member Ma'ae moved to continue Item No. 26 to August 23, 2022, seconded by Council Member Diaz. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES — 6 (Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil and Council Members Diaz, Ma'ae, Moreno, Valencia, and Faessel); NOES — 0. Motion carried; item continued to August 23, 2022. 0148 B105 City Council Minutes of August 9, 2022 Page 43 of 44 27. Nominate and appoint a voting delegate and up to two voting alternates to the League of California Cities annual conference, to be held on September 7 — 9, 2022 in Long Beach, California. APPOINTMENT: Council Member Gloria Sahagun Ma'ae ALTERNATE: ALTERNATE: NOMINATION: Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil nominated Council Member Ma'ae as the voting delegate to the League of California Cities annual conference. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES — 6 (Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil and Council Members Diaz, Ma'ae, Moreno, Valencia, and Faessel); NOES — 0. Nomination approved. 28. District 2 appointment of an unscheduled vacancy to the Parks and Recreation Commission to serve a term ending December 31, 2022. Parks and Recreation Commission: District 2 appointment: Wesley Padilla (term ending December 31, 2022) (unscheduled vacancy, John W. Elwell) NOMINATION: Council Member Ma'ae nominated Wesley Padilla. DISCUSSION: Council Member Moreno inquired if Mr. Padilla lives in District 2, which staff confirmed. NOMINATION: Council Member Ma'ae nominated Wesley Padilla. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES — 6 (Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil and Council Members Diaz, Ma'ae, Moreno, Valencia, and Faessel); NOES — 0. Nomination approved. At 12:46 A.M., on August 10, 2022, Council Member Diaz left the meeting. REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION ACTIONS: None PUBLIC COMMENTS (non -agenda items): None COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS: Council Member Faessel announced his upcoming 50'h wedding anniversary on August 19 and thanked his wife, Susan, for her support. COUNCIL AGENDA SETTING: Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil requested an agenda item on August 23 of a report on criminal and code enforcement activities along Beach Blvd. and recent improvement made, as well as staff recommendations for additional enforcement activities and necessary appropriations. He also requested an item on August 23rd to discuss and approve holding a State of the City event ideally at the end of September that would be staff driven, planned, and implemented, with the opportunity for all Council Members to participate in the program. City Council Minutes of August 9, 2022 Page 44 of 44 ADJOURNMENT: At 12:49 A.M., on August 10, 2022, with no further business before the Council, Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil adjourned the City Council in memory of Bryan Crow and John Fenn. Respectfully submitted, sa Bass, CMC City Clerk Public Comment From: Tamara Jimenez <tjimenez@lighthousetreatment.com> Sent: Friday, August 5, 2022 12:43 PM To: Public Comment Subject: [EXTERNAL] Item 5-Strong Support Warning: This email originated from outside the City of Anaheim. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and are expecting the message. Dear Council, I am writing to strongly support Item 5. Ratify and authorize direct receipt of settlement funds, in the anticipated amount of $12,000,000 over 18 years, with the first year partial amount anticipated at $300,000, to be used for approved opioid abatement purposes. The city has the option to have the monies sent to the County or keep it. Let's make sure it stays in Anaheim! I ask for your aye vote on this item. Have a great day, Tamara Jimenez, CADC II, ICADC Credential 4A060491021 Community/Government Relations Manager Anaheim Lighthouse CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message is protected under the Federal regulations governing Confidentiality of Alcohol and Drug Abuse Patient Records, 42 C.F.R. Part 2, and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 ("HIPAA"), 45 C.F.R. Pts. 160 & 164 and cannot be disclosed without written consent unless otherwise provided for in the regulations. The Federal rules prohibit any further disclosure of this information unless a written consent is obtained from the person to whom it pertains. The Federal rules restrict any use of this information to criminally investigate or prosecute any alcohol or drug abuse patient. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. Public Comment From: Aimee Inglis Sent: Saturday, July 30, 2022 12:53 PM To: Public Comment Subject: [EXTERNAL] Comment for Aug 9 on proposed Charter Amendment on rent Warning: This email originated from outside the City of Anaheim. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and are expecting the message. As a resident of Anaheim, born and raised, I'm writing to dissuade the City Council from placing a Charter Amendment on the ballot to, as Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil requested, "allow property owners to establish over the price for which their property is sold, leased, rented, transferred, or exchanged" on the assumption that this is an attempt to undermine the extremely modest statewide rent -gouging law that was passed a few years ago. There is not currently an issue for property owners that would justify the expense and labor of passing such a Charter Amendment. Landlords have the ability to set the rent for every new tenant, as California does not have a vacancy control law. As well, an annual increase of 10% outpaces inflation and increased costs for landlords, as well as being much greater than the average annual wage increase in Anaheim. The rent -gouging law also does not cover all rental properties, leaving many landlords exempt. Anaheim is now a majority -renter city, and those 52% of Anaheim residents are already paying more than a third of their income in rent every month, according to ACS data on the city of Anaheim. Increased housing costs are directly related to the rise in homelessness, which the City Council has a responsibility to prevent. The state law as it exists already does very little to keep rental housing costs in check, as it was intended to prevent the most egregious of rent increases, not to control rents. There is no need for this Charter Amendment and it is an affront to the majority of Anaheim residents to consider putting it on the ballot. Thank you, Aimee Inglis Public Comment From: Karen Malley Sent: Sunday, July 31, 2022 3:34 PM To: Public Comment Subject: [EXTERNAL] Comment: Aug. 9 Charter Amendment on rent Warning: This email originated from outside the City of Anaheim. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and are expecting the message. I'm a 38 year resident of Anaheim and I'm objecting to the proposed charter amendment concerning rents being allowed to be higher than the rent control cap, based on what the property would sell for. The same proposer of this charter amendment, has historically been trying to fight rent control in Anaheim even though more than half of Anaheim residents are renters. And if one checked the school lunch rosters, it would be clear that a majority of those renters are pushing their financial limits as the rents stand now. Currently, the 10% annual increase is larger than this year's inflation rate, even in this time of huge inflation, so there is no good reason for landlords to need this chance to increase rents beyond what is legally possible at this time. Mayor pro temp, Trevor O'Neil, in bringing this charter amendment up, blatantly demonstrates a lack of care for the majority of Anaheim residents, when his purported job is to manage the city in a way which would benefit as many people as possible. Thank you, Karen Malley 92804 Public Comment From: Dominic Lopez Sent: Monday, August 8, 2022 4:17 PM To: Public Comment Subject: [EXTERNAL] General Public Comment Warning: This email originated from outside the City of Anaheim. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and are expecting the message. Hello Anaheim City Council my name is Dominic Moonheart Lopez and I'm a resident of Los Angeles County and I am working with my supervisor Janice hahn to propose a light rail line from Union Station to Disneyland I have Contact it Avelino Valencia Office and still Haven't gotten a response The benefits of the light rail line would provide easy access to Universal Studios from Disneyland and vice -versa for all the tourist visiting Los Angeles County and Orange Counties in particular Anaheim currently Tourists have to get on three different train the routes and a bus line to get to Disneyland from Universal Studios The new Light rail line proposal would shorten the proximity time to get from Universal Studios to Disneyland and would benefit District 4 the Orange County Chair Doug Chaffee and his transnet team Supports the new proposal we want to hear from the City Council Especially Councilman Valencia Thank you for taking the time to read my public comment. Sincerely Dominic Moonheart Lopez Public Comment From: John Spring Sent: Tuesday, August 9, 2022 1:27 PM To: Public Comment Subject: [EXTERNAL] RUSSIAN MIND CONTROL OR SEVERE BRAINWASHING BEING ADMINISTERED ON YOUTH IN ANAHEIM Warning: This email originated from outside the City of Anaheim. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and are expecting the message. John W. Spring Anaheim, CA 92817-8946 August 9, 2022 RE: RUSSIAN OR SOVIET MIND CONTROL BEING USED ON YOUTH IN ANAHEIM Mayor Pro Tem and Members of City Council: As a retired College Instructor who has been a Geopolitical Analyst and also as a Scientist with a background in Psychology, I must call your attention to something that has never been reported to the American public, but due to only recently being administered on young adults and adolescents here in Anaheim without the victim ever becoming aware that it has happened to her or him, you need to know. So, unlike Fentanyl, which has led to the highest rate of drug overdose in America when the abuser is no longer able to function, I am going to share information with you about a technique that can be used on any innocent and vulnerable victim that will enable him or her to function in a highly effective manner where he or she can even become an assassin or a shooter without ever being aware because her or his manipulator(s) had instructed her or him to carry out such a massive shooting. I am informing you about Russian Mind Control that during the Korean War was called Brainwashing by the Chinese, but due to how semantics has diminished the latter's meaning, Russian Mind Control remains as a far more accurate term for the severe mental torture the victim is administered for nearly an hour when his or her subconscious mind is being altered for an indefinite period of time and remains completely under the control of the manipulator, which may cause permanent brain damage. The manipulator is able to control the rest of victim's life. This technique was developed and experimented on many prisoners in labor camps of the Gulag. Sincerely, John W. Spring Geopolitical Analyst and Scientist with a Psychological background Sent from Mail for Windows Public Comment From: Nicholas J. Taylor Sent: Wednesday, August 3, 2022 2:33 PM To: Public Comment Subject: August 9 CC Appeal Correspondence Attachments: Russo Dale Ave Appeal.pdf Attached is public correspondence for 8/9 CC Meeting. Nick Taylor, AICP Senior Iflllanner flllanniing and Il: 0111ldiing Depa rtlrnent Diity of Anaheiilrn 200 South Anaheiilrn I1:3oullevaird I Suite 162 An ahelY'n, CA 92805 Office (714) 765-4323 E-mail NJTaylor@anaheim.net From: Christina Russo Sent: Monday, August 1, 2022 10:25 PM To: Nicholas J. Taylor <NJTaylor@anaheim.net> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: 1442 North Dale Project arithigw This email originated from outside the City of Anaheim. Do itot click litiks or opett attachmetits unless you recognize the sender and are expecting the message. Hello Mr. Taylor, This is Christina Russo again from Parkdale Townhomes. I have a couple questions for you then a comment. The question is that I am allergic to dust so knowing when the construction starts I may have a very difficult time, I recently purchased an air purifying system for my house hoping that may offset some of the dust and alleviate some of the allergy reactions. Also. I am wondering what Anaheim requirements are for developers in terms of minimizing the dust. Are there AQMD requirements please advise if you are able. The second question is what are the Anaheim approved days and hours for construction? That is, what are the allowed days of the week and time of day that developers can work on projects. If the dates and hours are listed somewhere in the Anaheim regulations please let me know so I can be aware. I am hoping to have some quiet time on weekends and after hours but I need to know when that would be. Next, I have a couple comments to share in hopes of making things better for Parkdale and the developer. lam not a Board member and cannot speak for them but a long time resident as you are aware. This whole process has been very difficult and there have been miscommunication and misstatements regarding the project in my opinion. This has created an aura of mistrust where Parkdale is concerned due to these mis- statements, mis-communications and attitudinal statements regarding the Peppertree easement. This development is most unusual in that it is in the midst of a totally separate unit surrounding the new community. Parkdale has requested a few items to be in writing and I will try to outline as a recall them below. It would be my hope that the developer would cooperate and have the information in writing to Parkdale as a "good neighbor" type of document to ensure that our area gets what he has verbally agreed to. As you are likely aware, it is much better to have things in writing so that there is thorough understanding for both parties. This is especially important since there has been miscommunications. In my opinion, a written agreement will go a long way for the owners of the units to trust he developer but moreover would create a welcoming environment for the potential new neighbors instead of having a negative attitude due to not outlining the issues prior to the start of this project even before the units are sold. This is likely going to create some animosity in that the expenses for the common areas are not shared equally and that the monthly fees for the Parkdale HOA will go up related to this new community to manage the parking of Parkdale and more. . Issues that I am aware of hopefully to be in writing : 1. Solid brick fence 8ft around the new project. Chris S. had already agreed verbally to this (but not in writing). 2.Have the new HOA pay for the street use of the square footage that the new owners will be using to go in and out. Parkdale repaves approx. every 7 years and the square footage taht will be shared is only 1000 feet in a total of 192,000 feet in Parkdale. The aforementioned translates into about 3% of the repaving every approx 7 years. At current price that would about $500 or close to it, if my calculations are correct. 3. Sewer and maintenance costs for utilities (if and when needed). Eighteen new units are added to 160 existing units total is now 178 instead of 160. This creates a 10.1 % increase in the community. Therefore it would be seem reasonable if utilities are tied into existing units that the new community be responsible for a portion of the costs which if I calculate correct is 10.1%. Remember I am not a Board member but these seem to be reasonable and I am hoping would be satisfactory to Parkdale HOA board. 4. Repave the Peppertree alley after conclusion of the construction. If these simple items could be documented prior to approval and start of construction would make for a much more positive and supportive environment. It would be nice if the prospective condo owners would be welcomed and this could occur if Parkdale residents felt that this was more of a partnership as with applicable shared costs where approlpriate opposed to more of a unilateral experience. I would like to see harmony and try to work out mutual costs. and agreement as opposed to a more negative environment. I would hate to see Parkdale THOA Board try to seek more legal issues or potentially an injunction to getting the items above to be in writing. I am not sure what you can do to help but I am hoping you and the Planning Commission can help so that this situation can be turned into a positive experience for all. Thank you for your time and assistance. Christina Russo Anaheim, Ca., 92801 Public Comment From: Nicholas J. Taylor Sent: Thursday, August 4, 2022 10:52 AM To: Public Comment Subject: FW: [EXTERNAL] Letter for CC & Attorney Attachments: 1442 N Dale Avenue Letter CC (8-4-22).pdf Nick Taylor, AICP Senior Iflllanner flllanniing and Il: 0111ldiing Depairtlrnent Diity of Anaheiilrn 266 South Anaheiilrn I1:3oullevaird I Suite 162 An ahelY'n, CA 92805 Office (714) 765-4323 E-mail NJTaylor@anaheim.net From: Chris <chris@bona nnidevelopment.com> Sent: Thursday, August 4, 2022 10:47 AM To: Nicholas J. Taylor <NJTaylor@anaheim.net> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Letter for CC & Attorney Warning: This email originated from outside the City of Anaheim. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and are expecting the message. Hi Nick, See the attached letter we would like routed to the City Attorney and all members of CC. Let me know if you have any questions. Best, Chris Segesman Bonanni Development 5500 Bolsa Avenue, Suite 120 Huntington Beach, CA 92649 Phone: (714) 892-0123 www.bonannidevelODment.com 1 BONANNI DEVELOPMENT August 4, 2022 City Council City of Anaheim 200 S. Anaheim Boulevard, 7th Floor Anaheim, CA 92805 Subject: Development Permit 2021-00188 Tentative Tract Map 19177 Conditional Use Permit 2021-06121 1442 North Dale Avenue Appeal from Parkdale Town Home Owners Association Dear Honorable Members of the City Council, I am a Partner of the applicant for the subject entitlements for an 18-unit attached single-family housing project with 10% of the units designated as affordable. We are the authorized agent for the family that has been the longstanding owner of the property. We are proud of our plans for the property and grateful for the Planning Commission's favorable consideration of the project, which has been found to be consistent with all applicable planning and zoning requirements, and which promotes and advances the City's housing goals and policies. We are appreciative of the City's careful and thoughtful analysis of the project, and we are prepared to comply with all conditions of approval. I look forward to attending your meeting on August 9 to present the project and answer any questions you might have. I am writing to address a couple issues that arose at the Planning Commission hearing and that seem to be the central concern of the appeal, although the issues are ultimately a civil matter between private property owners in which the City no doubt does not wish to intercede, or perhaps even does not have the ability to do so. The Parkdale Town Home Owners Association (Parkdale HOA), which represents the existing multi -family residential development surrounding the subject property, has questioned whether the subject property has rights for ingress, egress, vehicular access, and sewer connections with regard to the Parkdale development. The short answer, as demonstrated below, is YES — the subject property has such rights under easements of record. A related issue pertains to the allocation of maintenance responsibilities between the private property owners for shared streets and sewer facilities. In this regard, we want you to know that we have engaged in numerous outreach efforts to the Parkdale HOA, and we are committed to continuing to cooperate in good faith and work with the HOA to establish a fact -based equitable arrangement for the payment of each parry's fair share of costs and expenses on an ongoing, permanent basis. The subject property and the property underlying the Parkdale development were originally under common ownership when the City approved a subdivision of the land (Tracts 7657, 7658 and 7659 in 1973). The map for Tract 7659 labeled the subject property as "not a part," essentially establishing it as a remainder parcel for potential future development. The map also depicts the location of the easements that are the subject of the Easement Grant Deed discussed B B►ONANNI DEVELOPMENT below. At nearly the same time as the maps were recorded, the land was sold to the Boisseranc Estate, and the subdivider (Westfield -Urban Company) simultaneously executed an Eascment Grant Deed in favor of the Boisserane Estate `far ingress, egress, vehicular access, sewer, public utilities and for other incidental purposes to the property designated `not a part' .. . over and across" the remainder of the land. I have attached a copy of the Easement Grant Deed for your convenience and reference. We provided the City staff with an Encumbrance Map (dated June 21, 2022), which was based on a title report prepared by First American Title Company, to depict the location of these easements (which are shown as Parcels B and Q benefrtting the subject property (shown as Parcel A) and burdening the Parkdale development. I have attached a copy of the Encumbrance Map for your convenience and reference. As required by the Planning Commission, the final map for Tract 19177 will depict the location of these easements, including provisions ensuring the perpetual maintenance of the easements. We hope you find the above information useful in providing context for the appeal issues. Thank you for your attention to and consideration of our project. S' ZI Chris Segesman Bonanni Development a25. s SHEET 1 OF 2 SHEETS vrattr.jj wlERo /40 TRACT N0.76,59 20929 ILAr. it T) wJ IN THE CITY OFANAHEIM CRAW-E COUNTY CokLIFORN1A d 54MW5XV a 4A2FIAW olrx! WS£,W,1.rdP1;W 1WWr-Isr ZW 6bWk1A.7 a- �� •� Fw,r %C7.fJ,7a11.iMIR79Le%7./ AMOYWWSr, lNr,�£Aza,*-/&yla5ZVV7ZS ifySoM4ft 7(lkEq i4ia FfaWw QNAAf�AP01HB+%2d'5�545111a<A�NSC£C[.C,YfLY/SA1Lo°J .Nf[YJPIJ$Or � ��Larw £ daff/Y 1 rT1�1R1Aly I�w0M1r sum to, THE NHPEASiIYeD, pCW0 Au fARtFf IWAWIN. WYEA%-0Lv vu. ILIfee Mewl CorataDai T.-Few. DO NE[EAr CO.," COTYE IL[F44AfwN Ui. 1EOPRMe(W vF—w?K IN-IM earaen M1 ful (WaEo McMeal,ela AMP WE Meaar OFTEN, IBA"o,"Te" TOTHE TW uL We 6NI17 FFPIPOIFE, ME SEIff r YFE ALSO OFF[ O FOE OF olfAfllA'I 1.E rev' Of MAE(va All PIHit W AP {(((55 EI:HR TO DALE SFIEj I. Ef(FPI AT IYE EfiifW IN FEE IEE Tlo WESTFIELD—URBAN COMPANY 1 LFa. Fe1F ewer Nle Su(P qr WESTFIELD DEVELOPMENT COMPANY INC A(Pit0il/O�*No Gf Nf PII 9APFUF2 TNIF If gualu., IIIiIf LI llinFi ii It ,,ssue� n �T� yAA� I In,"sle"Ie It-A09th IM AII111 A4 *rP)tk`FApffAW_ l 0'411""1' 1Ne111114111," MIlAr1 lF!IIYAl11 IIFFf l! !F• �5. IflnmAl 11 AYPMM1160r,dZ ;&fflACAj_;1AfIf SACONE MF MAMIE * WFT(IFt1 F(lrlffntlT lWlPllr v[ 1E11MriiJN SIT I I(1O141FIY METfY€rrif EMeF0IN lid$0401.F NO CHIN An A(!I T1 M fri50fs EA REfee PiLI IeTL It r1 UM FIT tO IN611 V UeP OFFOtlrNla. NO CIEtP111FON IF ION, LPOff MAE M If VAT LIge11L NI[11111 Of MISOKLP FINN (a[rewYI elalelP Eirrf(f/Elf!w Ia #MrIWE1}AIP IOAT EffduTEO VX elwW INSFE00 ENT IA0 +!f W reFP4E41I A( no rNf PIET"pho (AyF Lim Re111twif Filto if for HALF IF 1W SI' ET IIY P 40 4M1IIL SELL weOEsylrlwleFA,REOE. y rtl }(lwOus ill nP *i+"fr MO C;q(fjNv5'11I �+aim .r lal+lesswu Il+rt rs.riF.c �4 PYFP Lw •wsll - ti�rr✓Mw1� N yee •wMIIIrA+I _ �.RF LM a�.#N[IY .ENGIS. n£Sf f1a a£YlfdAVff^Y feHEr NN/ or. eo fMRArJ h' Arr"i W6 rNls AM aFl SQ4fl!w9J O& SN Nlv ON "Ar R&NCXFO AfP QO£5 NrNFBr afS/6NAT£ C'fAIMaN COY Sr AS RFCREAT/ONAC "z4s __yr[Na£O 'OZ5£ fr TNr fYP(rlaelW6M A'SAra 5feAgiAfAy FRl'.i rp A71" A.Va OrF£R orarT a AC y/r/r5 l M_5r Alfa' AR£45 ARf "I O F'AT£d Xr EBr FaN U.OE Or T 6e,,eRAC dWO11C AMO ACY 5alrlr rAf Tpy C'A, AF" N5£ @£NfFl AWO f&JJfAf£Nr Qf AMC AH dwlrI IN SA/a S62Fwr SF" AS �£/y(J£ f'NOa p — . Hf AECz4RNr/" 9F ['aN£NRA'i'S, 1-AM1rldN5 4WO RfS A`lelX"S .fPPrMAn�E ra SA/0 S✓�NVIS/ON SI/O OZ'C'lARR ldN � mer&ANTS mffO TIaN$ "a +PE3'TR/ef-fo " . S NCRFfr AY &Vftidet[ A&Ll AMOS A 1%wr OF 7Nb MA k ~I ,-- HW, Ar M d6fll .Nu /INS *# e ;arrr rfrrr�raarFr �auNoaNa..Fia f .rw arwu frXTWreL4;[F AYalrfa a ArfuP rr PAAafar fFa a. x•.l arTxr� u iF'mT kmdafeA>ssr ary Nttl4vaaaaAf frE.arEAFar � I MS q'Affl Aws!. INaaryMwof AAr[� f 1NW 04 A'IIfA/ 1, pAfOlO C [EY, WAFIT [E[IFIY ruAT [ AN F LlCEIiSED LLNB su;KYOI� Ha tiarl of ryP 111 EF W 0}LIFNW A AfE"IT TWL MAl,[PYNSYgFA 0 WID G0I ali 01ffCTLY bl[Ef! 41% A rEM AND [aMhETF t.mv NAM:. YNoft IAY4YICETINON W LAY rift T1L7 THE MO AfHet I!4 OF Fill CJAEI eA A4P OCd ON THE 10451TWIAs Woe f o"MUM 4.r W sue! ReHL eaf . WFTNFY NM50 H1Yi AewL1Ya!0[dPRNIf 0iFL[IF NFRO EMEwS WOPMT WO-M.L.M AM (01{Mi ENT a ELAM T.alveffY TO if UK" Ep U1100 4.fAAi-uLCf1eR FJNRfNYfeP1 eW II[ T„ AI ISf.Allred, uef MlYLfrw TNL ENV 01 A" MIN MN,F f a*TI 6L MvVA,w NF fifT arlIn T1YF'I HWt HASIU60 T" WPANa 'LINE AMMIo eT TF 16 50114TOWLLY THE MW 411NE "He1Fl.E NAP is 1 kFV LFIW FE:oAW Ireveei lT WE [IIf fuiew." WWII! INogI TNIf ALL PlOYrIw1f Of FNe E WaIrK1" P"Mr A MTT IHAMWISWN Qf4BlATlONf RAVE flOY O1FY0[O YFTW li1PTM wNe HO New WP M ratite 'T EollEa.. fARv I11AdL(DI___A9(qE - ,015 IWE.a{EALEVAk— Q..Ter Of Vaee11E PS. Eiri cie A.A N41H IF fH LH.Jsfwvmiev OF TYE rlR'OFANAHFOA,Feel IEde#Y OctriFr^r FArs FLAP we. IP1Fa UE iN AW.ML CRY EcmYdi IVAeF6ul1Y LeefEH,, }Nfa[PK N".. W ]1=,nT1CF W ,Mry,Wo MATrINPa1PIN! WO CANIMIL Iw 6yWa1W EL jWti D AND EHr9K B,AP/aar( AAUJAF WO DO jUgOr OLIa ,,AAF Or T,, Mot tYa OVFPf OF AD Clee" W4MII TWFPAIF.OLE %TICE T IAEo (INJOk4 Oil NEW A((EP' THE OER(AFAH Tp %t CITI Of ANALI MR, ALI VFNMNA[ AI055 FYNT1 Tf LALF iFEFE F, L[Fffe AT of lvrw AT TAIL OSECT10N1 AND MR A -LW AFFM 9011 PAP %fWAM:r Fb IRFFON I01FT jIj OF ME 5111H11E11F1 WINE WE1 wen jeNy I. Jmwr£ •ills, 4e [Till OM ni 0 NigH, Angie RP WrMYIA r fi4 1.[00ELF I CFE9019WN11 TW CQ"6F0l dill Ff leHff YaFfe(aa, OF ft WF m rT, W KKAf Weri"F OYT IENIAUL es THE 1f W oFI aF MYOF{F(E�TgFEE ![E Yn LIFMF Fff�Nf1' FyE 141e1 LEW Y OY TRL NAr q RYY TCQi E1lQEBe, FO[ W 1M0 aiITE W4YfY of pIr l IaMi 1f fYfCMI EfFFSIMgtgi OPLIFerffA ttics,.flt[er 1011FIOP SRCIN. AWmeic $oi`xE vo MLEE gerl rWf AReffiakf MI Tft !fit FAr DP M a Y ffrA 1 IFa11T I-CIFIpF ONEII fn 044=4NO"FIF W OFMAI lT W i 'lnl\ rr Ma Of LAUFOFNN fi fdeutef OF OICIFit 1, W f Cf AU4N, LoA rf tWiL OF SJLAAF C&LeutY N HEVE41 FfI(FFY Ee r1F foci NTT aflalpm or EAW(a.W Yore we ruFeAu tQr w INi"uov A4PACr wFa sera awLf R wrf 91644RINF OI IbL(n 111645NIII TYe eAExdNeR TUN,] OFOECNL AWdME.lf ORLECIN0 AF 9.44; ON Twe YFFfiYa Fap1Y ENIa NAf. ME@ ronAkRIT uF ,.. WE Qe lead f OPYNei :.[ELL aT I]AYWEP 11146MO0II Folul'- ..Ne OF L NFQe1VLCa of raNin lIN YETOa RYA �#.= fFIOT u to cp [i r.,t 9 5 a TEE 1 2 A# 2 SCALE ,.4{ �,za„ pwra .1r IPx1 TRACT NO.".7659 IN THE CITY CIFANAHEIM ORANGE COUNTY CALIFORNIA • ro e'xr1 r vP.. � lq xos,,vfae smrrrr r: BASIS OF PV:,AfHIYT • 1•ry urs s 7 r xY.•: ne! �),Y,r wwrm+a yb'.r 1w'r rar nr crrrinw a+nw, lrxir ++per evlwrrr;vr•r,y,fw. 4V vwry M Rrr r •r..m s�rRroi Ar rxu >r a a � 1+e^rrr'p yA� ii it N,Ir •lit 3 � � � iy R7AD �! a errs s' !L - Joe 01, DALE ilex u•nzlr ci: tY��r nr ! �-r%J•Ti _— a Y J ,.QOi11 w•�N.�.{ ►..wf.r 2098,9 lUNiOI>py AlC/Wj tixyp d 7 1� pfIAIL :p' wnaurr I Lwn No WHEN. f ECOR'DED MAIL YO 3erLLrity PILCific "t'L PA r. It 890 North Main $tmvt i v Jt.00 mu I&-&- lit WICIA& XK"O OF a ptimat CQU01". "Lip, jUpj S W3 MA6- --t — $14-- --�— - - -- . , . I - . . - , , 4LL -NA � T4 7mjwl TO k DEXUIIWARY- TRAM! TAXJC ��� 6 A BOVE CO-vu 104 &ks . ��� lr—. led'en t"G Ciloqodwollon csv,vfikN Ifts nerwa r o• cwmvbwK-,w 1�m INV 111 V� 611.0f A x—v 4F FIjF 4 'lALVADI. F IqlCtliv! lit ;vt,;!t C01PARY. a U*Ifted ;F,9ppmpry m1fiP""Lm e 11pnry fin"m- I t t e *eea4,,s,1 the t:,* Nfvllwl, - vo C.I, i.1 r.,pe-gy qj im. :-tm; , valiculAr ..... ... Of other inCidgwCal purlumite cc) She p" 'e, I d"10,14 at to and 'masc a pamt. h*,,.,r. Of UF18 de'scription, Over anA iLCJ4,ms those whed tier T rT na Ced *not a part" *n p6rtLoAa Qr the West half -or " Horthesai quarter of SectUNn 1. TaonshLPA South,- ftoa LL 11amt, IrP Ult- Rancho (op _Cpyottles As ,%jqjvj) ul, & QC MiselekJAncoo pApg, pc�colqll% of OrAnge C(,Unty. MLP r4corded tn Book 51, Pape 11 descrthed on pZxhtblt 'A`CAWbrnla. beLrt$ muxv' pqrricularly 3110va txvimt, berwt,v- wed. - !4ax 31, 197A. SWC OF CJkL(F01tk1A' (if OF D*Nre (OIL ;t"s NOC&V Pobk -1" old Im %or L "I.-wkmthn jr_f*AVW 7 WEST MLD- UTW. Cgjojo[� It Aj%LkqA_ ajr%0SM4jp L 11144 to, ah.w MAJL T'%X STATCMENrS AS 01RECfED ABOV& E ECAL DESCR;PT.Ok: HE LAXD REFERRED TO rti.NE•3N ?S SITUATED IN THE CITY Of AXAHEM. Cp'JMrY 4f ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AND 5 DESCRAN AS FOLLOWS: FARCE-- A; l+AT PORT1.^,N OF THE WEST WAIF CF rK NORTHEAST OUARTER OF SECTION ^.. TCMNSHIP a SO.LPYH. RANGE 11 WEST, IN THE RANCHO LOS COYOTES, AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED -N BOOK 51. PACE .t OF WSCELLANEOUS MARS, RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY. CAL,FOPWA DESCRIBED AS fOLLOWS: B€CINNINC AT A POINT SOUTH 87'33'W EAST 034 FEET FROM 'HE !4TERSECTtON OF THE EAST LINE OF THE WEST ?ODD FEET OF SAID NORTHEAST OUARTER WIT,, THE SOU7AERLT LINE OF PARCEL I OF DEED TO THE SATE OF CALIFORNIA RECORDER APRIL 17 1957, :N BOO. 3875. PACE 95 OF 0-ICA RECORDS. THENCE SDLPH 87°33'09' EAST ALONp SAID SDUTHERL" LINE 2112 9G FEET TO TH.E TRUE PO;NT OF BEGINNING: TYfNCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY LINZ,. SOUTS 8r33'06' EAS? 205.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 1731'0ET` EAST, 130.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 44 T8'32` WEST 60,01 FEET: TIAE14CE SOUTH 8n8'5i WEST 05.DET FEET: THENCE NORTH 4v-';9'D8• WEST 45 CO F!E7; "HENCE "iQRTH O'JVDB' WEST. 90 GO FEET, THENCE NORTH 89°28'527 EAST 27 GD FEET. "HENCE NORTH 4V32'2T EAST 27.DO FEE"; 1H,ENCE NORTH. e39'547 WEST 44.0I0 FEET TO 'HE TRUE -C N7 OF BEO:NNING- PACE. 9 AN EASEMENT FCR IN.CRESS, EGRESS, VEHICULAR ACCESS. SEWER. PL'B:..I.". ,iTl.: TIES ANC FOR NCIDENTAL PURPOSES OVER A PORTION OF THE Yr_`ST HALF O+ THE NORTHEAST O.,ARTER O> SECT.GN . '•CWNSHIP A SOUTH, RANGE tL WEST. IN TYE RAiC-iO 0S OOYOTES AS SHOWN 0\ A MAP $,'t RECORDED IN X $1, PA:;L :T Cr V15CELLANECU'S M7.5'S. 3:ZXROS OF ORAN ;. COU.NF1'. CA,L!=CRNI.L 0F5CR.BE6 AS ;01-OWS: BEING A YARIAOLt WIDTH EAS.EWNT DESCRIBED AS FOLLDWS- BEGINNING AT THE SDLiFHW'ESTERLY CORNER OF FARCE. I AND A POINT IN THE 40RTHEASTERLY LINE OF PARCE; 2 OF A DEED TO THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, RECCRDEO APRIL 17, t957, IN KKK 3875, PACE 95 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. Smo NORTHEASTERLY LINE EEiNG A CURVE CONCA'FE SOUTHWESTERLr. 1LAVIN:G A RADIUS OF 5I OG FEET: THENCE SOaTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 15`25'3,T AN ARC LENGTI'I OF 1$ 73 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. A RADIAL BEARING 70 SND TRUE PC.NT O� BEGINNING REARS NDRTH 31`27'337 EAST; (HENCE SOUTH 67' 33 C8`EAST PARALLEL AvITh THE DISTANT 4,00 FEET AS MEASURED AT RSHT ANGLES FROL1 THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID -PARCEL ', 281 11 FEET: THENCE SOUTH 4'39'ST EAST. 24 19 FEET: TTENCk NORTH 87°33'W WEST,. 50.55 FEET: THENCE NORTH 0031'E18' WEST. 5.I j FEET; THENCE SOUTH 89'28'52LWEST 9893 FEET; THENCE NORTH 87°33'0® WES PARALLEL WITH AND DISTANT 29.00 FEET AS MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLES rROM THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL 1. - 12.57 FEET 14 A POINT ON A CURS CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY 10WINC A RADIUS OF 51.00 FEE`. A RADAL BEARING TO SAIO ?DINT BEAR$ NORTH W37'25' ;,AST: TW-NCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE T8R"lGH A CENTRAL ANGLE Of 3-.r9'SI"AA ARC LENGTH OF 33,38 FEET TO THE TRUE RGIN? OF SEVNNING PARCEL C- AN EASEMENT F0H INGRESS, EGRESS, VEHICOLAR ACCESS, SEWER. PUBLFC ll':LJTiES ANO FOR N4CICHNTA L PIJRPDSES O`dER A PCPTION O' THE WEST HALF OF TI,E NORTHEAST DUAR%ER OF SECi1CF! I 1pHN5:tIP a SOUTH. RANGE 11 'A EST. IN TH_ PANCHID LOS COYOTES AS SHDmN ON A MAP W-COWED IN 'a=K 5% PAU I V '1NSCES..ANEO:.S MAPS. P'ECOial'35 0! ORA4G_ CCv.HTY, CALItC4MA, 7ESC419ED AS FOfICMS A STRIP OF LAND MM FEET :N VADTH, LYING 24.00 FEET NORTHERLY AND NORTHEASTERLY AND 1220 FEET SOL'RHERLY AND SOUTFNNESTfRLY CF THE FOLEOWINC DESCRIKO UNIT BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE EASTERLY LINE OF PARCEL 2, SAID POINT BFING S4UT" 011 33Or EAST. 15062 FEET FROLL THE SORTHWESTERLY CORNER OF THE LAND DESCRIBED AS PARCEL I' OF DEED TO THE STATE OF CALIFQRNIA. RECORDED APRRL 17. t957, IN BOOK 3875 PACE 95 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS; TK&CE NORTH 89 28'Sf EAST, 25,00 FEET 70 THE TRUE POINT 05 9E0 NNINa: THENCE CCNrTINLiNC ALONC SAID 1.214E. NORTH M8'52- EAST, 187.11 FEES; rHENCE SvU11, 45'31'08" JUST. 101. 6 =EET; THENCE NORTAi 89"28'52" I 11 23 FEET TO THE EASTERtr TERV:NUS OF THIS DESCRIPTION EXCEPTiNC FROM PARCEL C ABSVE; T'A.T PDR-WN 51IG91H ON EXH.:BR 'B'AS NOT A PART AND THAT. PORTION WITHIN TRACT NG 7657 AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED ON 6004 306. PAGES 25 AND 28 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS. RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFCRNIA AND CN EXHIBIT 'B'ATTACHED TO AND MALE A PARF OF DOCUMENT RECORDED J,)NE 8, 1973 N BOOK :D74I PAGE 20. DF OFFICIAL RECORDS SQD EASEMENTS ARE SHOWN OY THE MAP OF TRACT NO- 7650 RECORDED IN WGIC 325 PAGES 5 AND £ Cf MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, IN Tr1E OFFICE DF 'HE ; WINTY RECORDER Of SAID COUNTY. Aft O7C-741-01 I AA,FS,A F. EE o+ Public Comment From: Greg bird Sent: Tuesday, August 9, 2022 8:31 AM To: Public Comment Subject: [EXTERNAL] 1442 N Dale Project Appeal Warning: This email originated from outside the City of Anaheim. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and are expecting the message. Hello, I am resident of Parkdale HOA at I am unable to attend but would like to express my concerns about this development/developer. It was agreed at the planning commission that they have some financial responsibility for their planned use of our private utilities, water, sewer, and private roads. We were encouraged to "work things out." We have sent them a proposal. They sent us nothing and have not seriously counter -proposed or even sent their own proposal. They want to wait until they have your full approval they say. This is tantamount to waiting until we have no leverage, not that it feels like we have much leverage now. It feels like this is proof of how they opened our first meeting with them when they said "this is going to happen whether you want it to or not so you should get used to it." They are bullies and they are using your process to bully us. Once this appeal is over we have no leverage to get them to agree to any deal apart from an expensive legal case. They have far more funds to wage that legal case which would be a true David and Goliath fight. By you not putting any conditions on them that ensure they work this out with us fairly you are throwing us to the wolves. They have not been treating us as they claim so far. They say one thing to you, the city, and another to us. They seem to be waiting until they have all the leverage and approval to do what they want and push us aside. We don't want to stop the project, we want to be treated fairly and decently. We want to be sure we are not being forced to agree to something that forces us to pay for their resident's utilities. Please put conditions on their permit approval. Require them to have easement agreements about private street use and private utility use with Parkdale as a condition of land use permits. Force them to a negotiation table with us. Without you we have little recourse but to go to a judge and fight their high powered and expensive attorneys and without some type of special assessment of our homeowners, that we can't afford, we have no hope. Please help us! You are our last, best hope. Sincerely, Greg Bird Public Comment From: Meridith Gill <meridith@diversifiedhoa.com> Sent: Tuesday, August 9, 2022 10:29 AM To: Public Comment Subject: [EXTERNAL] City Meeting August 9, 2022 Agenda Item Attachments: Parkdale THOA Letter to the City of Anaheim 8-8-22.docx; City of Buena Park Sewer Plans.pdf, Parkdale THOA Attorney Letter 8-8-22.pdf Warning: This email originated from outside the City of Anaheim. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and are expecting the message. Good afternoon. Please see attached items I would like to submit to the City Council on behalf of myself and Parkdale THOA in regard to agenda item — 1442 N. Dale Ave. Thank you, Meridith Gill I Senior HOA Manager, Diversified Association Management cell: main: 714.544.7755 ext. 114 180 LF.... Main St. Ste. 101 I if ust'irn, CA 02.708 Office hours: Mon -Fri 8:30 am-4:30 pm. Discialinni Illhe iiinfcirrt7aq:iicin coir)q:aiiined iiin this cciriiriuvuiniicaq:iicin %lrcir7 the seir) eir its coir)fiireir)giiall. It its iiinteir)ded solely for use Icy the ireciil:rileir): air)d others authorized to receive it. If you are incq the ire(:Jpileir) , you are Thereby i that ainy diiscllcsuvuire, copyilir)g, diistiriibuvuq:iicin cr takllir)g acq:iicin iiin irellaq:iicin of the coin) eir) s of this iiinfcirrt7aq:iicin its stiriictlly pirclhiibiited air)d iriay IDe uvuinllawfuvull. Parkdale THOA has not approved nor agreed to proposed plans. ■ Adequate notice has not been given to Parkdale THOA homeowners by the City of Anaheim notifying them of the meeting date for appeal. ■ Public records requested for sewer and water lines not provided in an adequate time by the City of Anaheim. • Outreach the developer has made to Parkdale THOA has been solely for the benefit of the developer only and appears to be an obligation to meet requirements for development. • Board members and homeowners need to protect their biggest investment and the integrity of their community. • The sole responsibility to draft a maintenance agreement is the burden of the developer, not the HQA. ■ Developer has not submitted any agreements in writing for maintenance prior to approval as requested by homeowners and in an open forum at the July 6, 2022 City Planning Meeting. This includes but is not limited to street, sewer, public utilities. • A demand has been made by Parkdale"s attorney to the developer requesting a maintenance plan in writing. ■ Communications via email and in writing will be provided upon request. COMMUNICATION OUTREACH September 7, 2021: Developer met with Board, Homeowners, and Management on -site to inform them of proposed plans and purchase. This was not at a scheduled Board meeting. October 6, 2021: Parkdale's THOA's attorney contacted developer. Maintenance and utility plans were not submitted by the developer for review. November 3, 2021: Developer attended monthly Parkdale THOA meeting and discussed concerns and proposed plans with homeowners. Items of concerns and plans discussed with the homeowners and developer were not submitted in writing by the developer. December January 19, 2022: Meridith Gill emailed developer and City of Anaheim Planning Department list of concerns homeowners have regarding proposed project (access to the community, drainage, parking, perimeter wall height, construction, requesting a copy of the environmental impact report, safety concerns, and utility connections). January 20, 2022: ZOOM meeting with City of Anaheim, Developer and Parkdale THOA Board Member and Management. Direct concerns regarding The City of Buena Park access to lines within the community were discussed by Meridith Gill. Developer stated Ken Kim at the City of Buena Park was contacted and will work with the City. Agreement was not met by Parkdale THOA to access lines. January 21, 2022: Walden & Associates emailed Meridith Gill (Parkdale's manager) a proposed utility plan that was presented at the meeting. Environmental impact report and a written maintenance plan were not submitted. June 29, 2022: ZOOM Meeting with Parkdale THOA homeowners, Tary Loomis-Therrian (HOA's attorney), Meridith Gill (manager) and Developer. Homeowners directly discussed the affect accessing water and sewer lines will have on Parkdale THOA as they have been exclusively used by Parkdale THOA homeowners for over 40 years. Developer discussed City of Anaheim approval to access lines on shared easement and stated their plans for sewer and water access on shared easement were public record and could be accessed at the City. A written maintenance plan was not submitted by the developer and requested. CITY OF ANAHEIM COMMUNICATION - APPEAL July 6, 2022: City Planning Meeting held. July 13, 2022: Appeal filed by Parkdale THOA. Meridith Gill filed on behalf of Parkdale THOA in person and was told by the City Clerk a public meeting would be held within 60 days of filing. A calendar of the City Meeting schedule was given to Meridith Gill by the City Clerk, and she was told the City would contact her to confirm appeal and date. July 14, 2022: Judy Boiseranc text a homeowner in Parkdale she had received notice of appeal and was told by the City the meeting was to be held on 8-9-22. July 26, 2022: Management emailed City Clerk stating an appeal of the Planning Commission's decision was filed on July 13, 2022 requesting additional information on the appeal and for the meeting date it will discussed. July 28, 2022: At 6:08 P.M. City Clerk emailed Meridith Gill a copy of the letter in regard to the appeal with the meeting date (August 9, 2022). August 1, 2022: Notice posted on a street light pole on Dale St. for Public Hearing. Pole on the exterior of the community. NOTICE POSTED LESS THAN 10 DAYS BEFORE MEETING (8 days prior). August 3, 2022: Parkdale THOA homeowner received meeting notice from the City of Anaheim in the mail. LESS THAN 10 DAYS BEFORE MEETING (5 days prior). August 4, 2022: Meridith Gill received meeting notice from the City of Anaheim in the mail. LESS THAN 10 DAYS BEFORE MEETING (4 days prior). UTILITIES COMMUNICATION January 21, 2022-May 11, 2022: Walden & Associates and Developer started an email chain with The City of Buena Park and Management. Walden & Associates stated an agreement with The City of Anaheim and Diversified/Parkdale HOA was made regarding the development of the Project on Dale and all parties agreed on the proposed connections for the Sewer and Water lines within the existing HOA. This was not approved by Parkdale THOA and the details and shared costs were not resolved. May 2, 2022: City of Buena Park sent response letter to Developer, subject: WATER AND SEWER WILL -SERVE LETTER AT 1442 N. DALE AVE. Letter in response to request for a will -serve letter. In addition, the sewer and water plans will need to be approved by Buena Park as well as Anaheim. If there are any pressure or capacity deficiencies to the water and sewer mains, the developer shall mitigate the deficiencies. July 13, 2022: Meridith Gill attempted to access plans submitted to the City by the Developer to access the sewer and water lines as well as a flow meter test. July 26, 2022: Meridith Gill was told by Public Works they may not be public record, and they would verify. July 26, 2022: Public Works emailed Meridith Gill sewer sizing for Dale project directly from the City. Flow test was not preformed, only by analysis. Water line access plans were not provided 81b/2?. 11:59 AM Sewer plans F -,er PLans The City of Buena Park Sewer Services Division is responsible for operating and maintaining more than 200 miles of sanitary sewer mains each year, as well as well as more than 3,400 manholes. The Division provides routine and emergency main line cleaning and helps to review sewer lines for maintenance and repairs. This includes the video inspection of approximately 200,000 feet of sewer line each year. Use the map below to view sewer lines within the city, or open the whole map in it's own tab here. Note that you can click on a sewer line or point to display information about that item, including a link to download the available plans for that item. https:/lwww.buenoperk.coMcity_iep.9rnuents/public_workslen�ineerinZ-s—i—slsewer_plans.php P 1 LAW OFFICE OF TARP C. LOOMIS-THERRIEN Phone, 949 459-0906 Fax: M9 459-0916 Chris Segesman Bonanni Development 5500 Bolsa Avenue, Suite 120 Huntington Beach, CA 92649 23272 Mill Creek Dr., Ste 130 Laguna Hills, California 92653 August 8, 2022 e-mail: tarygdoomislaw.com Via First Class Mail and Email to: chris@bonannidevelopment.com Re: New Development at 1442 N. Dale, Anaheim, CA My Client: Parkdale Town Horne Owners Association Dear Mr. Segesman; Pursuant to our discussion at last month's special meeting, I am legal counsel for the Parkdale Town Home Owners Association. My client objects to the utility and access easement you are claiming and intending to use over and under my client's property, for the new development at 1442 N. Dale in the City of Anaheim, without adequate assurances, compensation and protection for, and arising from those uses (including mitigation of the negative impact on my client's property). Although you list your "community outreach" efforts forthe City, any claim to have provided assurances and solutions for my client are misleading: to date this has only been vague talk, with no documentation or formalization of any agreement or terms. Community outreach, regardless ofhow extensive, if it does not resolve my client's objections and issues, it is inadequate. To resolve the dispute, my client proposes that Bonanni Development (and its new development at 1442 N. Dale in Anaheim, the "Development") and my client enter into a maintenance agreement, which will control the terms of use and provide for the maintenance ofthose proposed shared amenities and the adjacent facilities on my client's property. The following is an initial list of terms to be included. This list is not complete, as it is understood that during the drafting of the maintenance agreement, further concerns will arise and be addressed. 1. The new easement and maintenance agreement will be generally set forth in the CC&RS of the Development; 2. The Development's CC&Rs shall provide that owners, residents, tenants and their family members, guests and invitees, will not use Peppertree Dr. nor the alley other than for ingress and engress; I The Development's CC&Rs shall disclose that the Development is a separate residential development from Parkdale Town Home Owners Association, and there are no rights of use of any of, but not including the Parkdale's common areas, recreational facilities, and parking; Chris Segesman Bonanni Development August 8, 2022 Page 2 of 2 4. The Block wall will be constructed to a height of 6' or 8'. The Development's CC&Rs shall provide that the Development shall maintain, repair and replace the Block wall in first class condition at all times, as originally built including, but not limited to the same design, location, length, height and width; 5. Plans and contracts for access, installation, use, maintenance, and repair of utility tie- ins, shall be mutually agreed upon by both parties before submitting for permits or commencing work; the exception being in the case of emergencies where damage to persons or property is occurring or imminent; 6. Original installation of utility tie-ins will not unreasonably block ingress and egress to Parkdale Town Home Owners Association; sidewalks will be made accessible to pedestrians, and streets will be made accessible for pedestrians and vehicles during the hours of 5:00 p.m. each evening to 7:30 a.m. each morning, Monday -Friday; and the whole of Saturday and Sunday, and all holidays. This will be accomplished by back filling and leveling all completed areas to make them safe for ingress and egress, and using steel plates over open trenches, snaking the entire area safe for ingress and egress. Upon completion of original installation, all impacted areas, including but not limited to streets, landscaping, sidewalks, and walkways, will be restored to new condition by Bonanni Devolvement - this requires replacement of the asphalt street the length and width of Peppertree Dr. up to and including the intersection of Weeping Willow and also the alley (if the same is impacted by the utility tie-in work) all to new condition, and slurry coat the remaining of Peppertree Dr, and all intersecting streets; 7. Complete, finished, detailed architectural, engineering, fire protection, electrical, sewer, and all utilities plans or contract documents, for all improvements, present and future, to the Easement, including but not limited to all special improvements or additions required for building purposes, must be submitted to by client; and 8. The Development will pay (after original installation) 10.1% for all future costs of maintenance, repair and replacement of utility lines and tie-ins in the easement, and for the asphalt maintenance, repair and periodic replacement of the alley access easement. Please get back to me the first of next week, with your agreement to beginning working on and drafting the proposed maintenance agreement. My client requests that this maintenance agreement be completed and signed by all parties before any work commences for the Development. Very truly yours, Tary C. Loomis -Therrien TCLT: TAO137100011442 Dale Developement\Segesman - Bonanni LOl.wpd Public Comment From: Dave Snowdon Sent: Tuesday, August 9, 2022 12:06 PM To: Public Comment Subject: [EXTERNAL] 1442 North Dale Avenue Development Warning: This email originated from outside the City of Anaheim. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and are expecting the message. Mr Jose Diaz, Hello Mr Diaz, My name is Dave Snowdon. I live in District 1. Today an appeal for the property at 1442 North Dale Avenue will come before the council. I am asking if you can help the 159 families and myself that live in the Parkdale TownHomes. We need a delay in the vote today for 30 days. The major reason is the Builder has not given us in writing what we need to cover the expenses and upkeep for the project. There is also the wall that he the Builder said would give us the 8 ft wall but once again he has not given it to us in writing. The reason that we take issue with this, we have a shared easement and need the ongoing maintenance of the easement in writing to prevent the Parkdale Home Owners from covering the increased expense for the new development. If the council approves the project today then, the Builder will not have a reason to negotiate with us in good faith. I want to thank you for your time and I will be at the meeting today should you have any questions. Thank you Dave Snowdon Public Comment From: Courtney Welch <courtney@carlaef.org> Sent: Tuesday, August 9, 2022 12:21 PM To: Public Comment Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: 1442 North Dale Avenue Townhome Development Attachments: Anaheim - North Dale Ave HAA Letter.pdf Warning: This email originated from outside the City of Anaheim. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and are expecting the message. Dear Anaheim City Council, Please the attached letter in regards to item 29, 1442 North Dale Ave Townhome Development on the August 9th, 2022 agenda Courtney Welch Planning and Investigations Director California Renters Legal Advocacy and Education Fund CALIFORNIA RENTERS LEGAL ADVOCACY AND EDUCATION FUND August 8, 2022 City of Anaheim 200 S. Anaheim Boulevard Anaheim, CA 92805 Re: 1442 North Dale Avenue Townhome Development Dear City Council, The California Renters Legal Advocacy and Education Fund (CaRLA) submits this letter to inform the Anaheim City Council that they have an obligation to abide by all relevant state housing laws when evaluating the proposal to develop housing at 1442 North Dale Avenue. The Housing Accountability Act requires approval of zoning and general plan compliant projects unless findings can be made regarding specific, objective, written health and safety hazards.' (Cal. Gov. Code § 65589.5). These findings must be unmitigable, based on written health and safety standards, and supported by a preponderance of evidence in the record. If a court reviews a local denial of housing, it will not defer to local judgment on these questions but instead "afford the fullest possible weight to the interest of, and the approval and provision of, housing."' In this case, none of the grounds for the appeal identifies impacts associated with this project that could justify a denial of housing. The environmental analysis of the project is complete and more than sufficient under the law. The Anaheim, City Council should therefore deny the appeals and approve the project as proposed. As you are well aware, California remains in the throes of a statewide crisis -level housing shortage. New housing such as this is a public benefit; it will bring increased tax revenue, new customers to local businesses, decarbonization in the face of the climate crisis, but most importantly it will reduce displacement of existing residents into homelessness or carbon -heavy car commutes. The appeal in this instance does not identify any health or safety impacts caused by the project, therefore the Anaheim City Council is under a legal obligation to approve of the project, and not attach any conditions that would result in a reduction of density. We ask that the Council deny the appeal and allow for the creation of these new homes. ' Cal. Gov. Code § 65589.5. z § 65589.5(a)(1)(L), see, e.g., California Renters Legal Advocacy s Education Fund yr City of San Mateo (2021) 68 Cal.App.5th 820. 360 Grand Ave #323, Oakland 94610 hiLacarlaef.org CaRLA is a 501(c)3 non-profit corporation whose mission includes advocating for increased access to housing for Californians at all income levels, including low-income households. While no one project will solve the regional housing crisis, the proposed 1442 North Dale Avenue development is the kind of housing Anaheim needs to mitigate displacement, provide shelter for its growing population, and arrest unsustainable housing price appreciation. You may learn more about CaRLA at www.carIaef.org. Sincerely, Dylan se CaRLA Executive Director Sincerely, A/ Courtney Welch CaRLA Director of Planning and Investigation 2of2 Public Comment From: Joe Perez Sent: Tuesday, August 9, 2022 12:11 PM To: Public Comment Subject: FW: [EXTERNAL] Letter for City Council This is intended for the II::'ubHc II learing, item # 31 on the City Counc H Agenda, 8/9/22. From: kandee bear Sent: Monday, August 08, 2022 11:49 PM To: Joe Perez <JPerez@anaheim.net> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Letter for City Council Warning: This email originated from outside the City of Anaheim. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and are expecting the message. I am Kandee Beas Chair of the Community Services Board. Due to the change in review and approval process, I am not available to attend a late night meeting. Please know that the Community Services Board has met over the past few months to review applications, hear presentations by the non-profit agencies seeking CDBG funds from the City of Anaheim. We have discussed each organization and have agreed on the budget recommendations that are included in the Annual Actin Plan as presented to you for final approval. Sincerely, Kandee A. Beas Public Comment From: George Gilliam Sent: Tuesday, August 9, 2022 1:37 PM To: Public Comment Subject: [EXTERNAL] Public comment on approving the Annual Action Plan at the City Council meeting tonight Warning: This email originated from outside the City of Anaheim. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and are expecting the message. Dear City of Anaheim Public Comment Staff, Please provide our Public Comment to the Mayor Pro Tern and Council Members for tonight's City Council Meeting. Please let me know you received this Public Comment. Thank you in advance. Best regards, Dr. Cynthia Smith, MT -BC Program Director Creative Identity August 8, 2022 Dear Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil and Council Members, My name is Dr. Cynthia Smith, and I am the program director of Creative Identity, a non-profit therapeutic music and expressive arts program which has been serving the fine arts and prevocational education needs of adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) in Anaheim since 1996. 1 am writing in support of the approval of the Fiscal Year 2022/2023 Annual Action Plan. Creative Identity has previously been awarded the CDBG grant for our Prevocational Empowerment Program, and this has helped strengthen our ability to carry out our mission of improving the quality of life and societal perceptions of adults with IDD by providing therapeutic and educational interventions that cultivate personal and social responsibility, prevocational skills, independence, and creative potentials. The CDBG funding has been very important to Creative Identity by supporting our ability to maintain skill staff members and to provide our program participants opportunities to perform concerts and demonstrate their developing fine arts skills through community concerts and art exhibitions. These events also include the opportunity for our participants to engage with the public and with other non -disabled musicians and artists, as well as the opportunity to earn commissions on the sale of their art and ceramic ware. Additionally, we support the CDBG funding recommendations for all the non-profit organizations in the Annual Action Plan as they all provide important services to the members of our community. Thank you in advance for your consideration in approving the Fiscal Year 2022/2023 Annual Action Plan and the CDBG funding recommendations. Sincerely, Dr. Cynthia Smith, MT -BC Program Director Creative Identity 200 N Harbor Blvd Suite 210 Anaheim, CA 92805 657.208.3350 phone www.creativeidentity-oc.org