1999/03/23ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES,
MARCH 23, 1999
The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session.
PRESENT: MAYOR : Tom daly
PRESENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS : Frank Feldhaus, Lucille Kring, Tom Tait, Shirley McCracken,
PRESENT: ASST. CITY MANAGER : Dave Morgan
CITY ATTORNEY : Jack White
CITY CLERK : Leonora N. Sohl
ASST. CITY CLERK : Ann Sauvageau
PLANNING DIRECTOR : Joel Fick
ZONING DIVISION MANAGER : Greg Hasings
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR COMMUNI TY DEVELOPMENT : Lisa Stipkovich
A complete copy of the agenda for the meeting of the Anaheim City Council was posted at 1:55 p.m. on
March 19, 1999 at the City Hall Bulletin Board, (both inside and outside the entrance to City Hall)
containing all items as shown herein.
Mayor Pro Tem, Shirley McCracken called the Workshop portion of the Council Meeting of March 23,
1999 to order and welcomed those in attendance (3:12 P.M.), all Council Members being present with the
exception of Mayor Daly.
City Manager, James Ruth. This is the appointed time for a workshop to be presented by the Planning
Director, Joel Fick who will give an overview of the Community Planning Program for the Anaheim
Resort Neighborhood Action Plan.
ANAHEIM RESORT NEIGHBORHOOD ACTION PLAN :
155: Joel Fick, Planning Director. The
subject plan has been prepared in conjunction with the overall Community Planning Program. A packet
has been provided to the Council that identifies each of the items in much more detail (see
Memorandum dated March 17, 1999, Subject : Community Planning Program – Anaheim Resort
Neighborhood Action Plan – attached to which was a copy of the Plan including Location Maps as well as
a Recommendation Reference Map - made a part of the record). Mr. Fick’s presentation, supplemented
by Power Point slides, covered the highlights of the Action Plan. He first introduced the Planning
Department staff members who were a part of the Community Planning Team, Niki Cutler, Jonathan
Borrego and Susan Kim. He also noted that the Plan was presented to the Planning Commission at one
of their workshops at a recent Commission meeting and all the recommendations were well received.
Mr. Fick’s presentation covered the following highlights of the Action Plan : planning area boundaries,
what the planning area encompasses, physical improvements, the focus of the Action Plan,
recommendations, Action Plan categories (General Plan Amendments, Zoning Reclassifications and
Zoning Code Amendment, Landscape Improvements, Additional Recommendations). He then briefed
the recommendations/proposals under each category of the Plan. (Also see Anaheim Resort
Neighborhood Action Plan, Pg. 2-Community Planning Program Overview, Pg. 3-Anaheim Resort
Neighborhood Action Items and follow-on pages 4 through 18 listed 30 action items encompassing the
foregoing categories.)
At the conclusion of the presentation, Council Member Feldhaus first commended staff for the work that
was done formulating the plan. He stated that he has a number of questions which he would like to go
through with staff page by page, not at this time, but would like to make an appointment with staff to do
so; Joel Fick. Staff will be happy to do that and also with any other Council Member if they wish.
Mayor Pro Tem McCracken . It has been an extensive project for staff and she knows they have
received a great deal of input from the communities involved/affected. She thanked staff for the
informative and detailed presentation.
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES,
MARCH 23, 1999
Addition to Closed Session Agenda : Before recessing into Closed Session, City Attorney White stated
there is one item staff is requesting be added to the Closed Session Agenda which was not known at the
time the agenda was prepared. There is a need to take action on the item before the next Council
Meeting involving anticipated litigation concerning the possible initiation of litigation pursuant to
Government Code Section 54956.9(c). It will take a unanimous vote of the four Council Members
present.
MOTION. Council Member McCracken moved to waive the 72-hr. posting provision of the Brown Act to
add an item to the Closed Session Agenda (see Item 7. below) since the item was not known at the time
the agenda was prepared and it is necessary that the Council take action on the item before the next
Council Meeting. Council Member Kring seconded the motion. Mayor Daly was absent. MOTION
CARRIED.
REQUEST FOR CLOSED SESSION:
City Attorney Jack White requested a Closed Session noting first that there was one addition to
Closed Session items.
PUBLIC COMMENTS - CLOSED SESSION ITEMS:
There were no public comments relative to Closed Session items.
The following items are to be considered at the Closed Session.
CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION
1.
54956.9(a) - Existing Litigation:
Name of case :
Delmonico, et al. v. City of Anaheim, et al. (and related cases and cross actions)
Orange County Superior Court Case No. 70-80-71.
CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION
2.
54956.9(a) – Existing Litigation:
Name of case : Vista Royale Homeowners Assoc. vs. 396 Investment Co. fka The Fieldstone
Company, Orange County Superior Court Case No. 77-30-74,
( and related cases).
.
CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION
3
54956.9(a) – Existing Litigation:
Name of case : Allstate Insurance Co. v. City of Anaheim, Orange County Superior Court Case
No. 78-99-11.
CONFERENCE WITH LEGALCOUNSEL PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION
4.
54956.9(a) – Existing Litigation
:
Name of Case : James Productions, Inc. v. City of Anaheim, Orange County Superior Court
Case No. 79-56-80.
.
CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL –ANTICIPATED LITIGATION:
5
Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 54956.9 of the
Government Code : two potential cases
Existing facts and circumstances : Disputes with the Los Angeles Dept of Water and Power
relating to electrical power transmission billing rates to the City under the (I) the Los Angeles –
Anaheim IPP Base Rate Capacity Transmission Service Agreement and the Additional Capacity
Transmission Service Agreement (ii) Los Angeles-Anaheim Adelanto- Victorville/ Lugo 110 MW
Firm Transmission Service Agreement.
CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR:
6.
2
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES,
MARCH 23, 1999
Dave Hill
Agency Designated Representative :
Anaheim Fire Association, AMEA.
Employee organization :
7. Added Item:
CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION
54956.9(c) – Anticipated Litigation:
One Potential Case.
RECESS:
Council Member McCracken moved to recess into Closed Session. Council Member Kring
seconded the motion. Mayor Daly was absent. MOTION CARRIED. (3:25 p.m.)
AFTER RECESS:
Mayor Daly called the regular Council meeting of March 23, 1999 to order at 5:54 p.m. and
welcomed those in attendance.
INVOCATION: Pastor Jimmy Gaston, from the Church of Christ gave the invocation.
FLAG SALUTE:
Council Member Lucille Kring led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
PRESENTATION – RECIPIENTS – GENE AUTRY HUMANITARIAN AWARDS :
119: Recognizing the
recipients of the Gene Autry Humanitarian Awards from the Greater Anaheim Chamber of Commerce.
Mr. Mike Nebin, Chamber of Commerce, accompanied by Susan Klaren, Executive Vice President of the
Chamber stated it is a pleasure on behalf of the Chamber to recognize students from Anaheim High
Schools who have distinguished themselves in ways beyond the sports arena by giving of themselves
through their humanitarian efforts in the community. Mr. Nebin then introcuded the Cochairs of the
Humanitarian Awards Committee, Bob Cook of Islands Golf and Norm Buben of Photomation.
Both Mr. Cook and Buben commented on the history leading to the Humanitarian Awards and also
elaborated on why the awards are being given to the youngsters who are present today (and those who
were unable to be present).
Mayor Daly and Council Members then personally greeted and commended each of the recipients
present; the Mayor presented them with Flying “A” Certificates congratulating them on being named a
winner of the 1999 Gene Autry Humanitarian Award. Those present : Candace Garcia, Magnolia High
School (HS); Linda In Yea Kim, Loara HS; Fatima Khwaja, Fairmont HS; Ruth Anne Lazzari, Connelly
HS; Mark Santos, Servite HS. (Additional recipients : Nick Atkins and Christy Forbes, Kennedy HS;
Richard Herrera, Cypress HS; Brian Soloman, Canyon HS; Ryan Lewis, Katella HS; Lori Lambaren,
Savanna HS; Johnny Nguyen, Anaheim HS; Virginia Zavala, Western HS.
PROCLAMATION :
119: The following Proclamation was authorized by the City Council:
National Community Development Week – March 29, 1999 through April 4, 1999
June Lowry, Chairman, Community Development Advisory Board ( CDAB) and member of the
Community Services Board. The Board is asked to advise the Council on CDBG (Community
Development Block Grand) funding. They spend hundreds of hours each year in meetings and Public
th
Hearings making decisions both for infrastructure and human services needs. This year is the 25 year
of the national CDBG program. She thereupon presented a framed poster, the National poster for this
3
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES,
MARCH 23, 1999
year. She also explained the makeup of the board (representing six neighborhoods) and elaborated
further on the work performed by the Board. She then introduced those members of the CDAB who were
present noting that the Board is made up of 12 neighborhood members and seven members from the
City’s Commissions : John Koos, Planning Commissioner; Francisco Ceja, Walnut Neighborhood,
Francisco Martinez, North Anaheim; Lila Jaegers, Ponderosa Neighborhood; John Lambrusco and
Katherine Tikker, West Anaheim; John Karczynski, Redevelopment and Housing Commission.
Mayor Daly stated it was their honor to salute the Block Grant Program; he thereupon presented the
Proclamation recognizing the Board (and the CDBG Program) for their efforts to find creative and long-
term solutions for the City’s community development and human service needs.
RECOGNITIONS AUTHORIZED BY COUNCIL THIS DATE TO BE MAILED OR PRESENTED AT
ANOTHER TIME.
Anaheim Family YMCA week in Anaheim – March 29, 1999 through April 3, 1999
Campaign for Kids Day – March 27, 1999
FINANCIAL DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY
in the amount of $3,197,425.56 for the period ending
March 23, 1999, in accordance with the 1998-99 Budget, were approved.
ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA:
There were no additions to agenda items.
Mayor Daly recessed the City Council meeting until after the Redevelopment Agency and Housing
Authority meeting. (6:15 p.m.)
Mayor Daly reconvened the City Council Meeting. (6:35 p.m.)
ITEMS OF PUBLIC INTEREST:
Seferino Garcia, Solevar , 1233 Diamond Street. He thanked Council and staff for giving recognition to
National Community Development Week, something that the community has been waiting for for seven
years. He then broached another issue – the proposed community center and park on Walnut Street
(next to Betsy Ross School). Solevar and the neighborhood have been working hard with Community
Development Department staff to accumulate funds to bring in a program to fit the needs of the
community. He then gave an historical overview of what has transpired and how the community feels it
has been slighted since meetings are now being held in the Central Library instead of in the Walnut area.
They feel City staff is in violation of the Public Hearing process. They also feel they fought for every
cent accumulated for the project but now are being denied the gymnasium they have wanted. Now staff
is working on a joint program with the School District. He is asking for an investigation of what City staff
is doing in their area since they are not, in his opinion, listening to the community. He feels there is a
conflict of interest because there are members on CDAB and members of the Parks and Recreation who
are also on the School Board.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
4
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES,
MARCH 23, 1999
Dr. John Baird, 3239 W. Ravenswood Drive, Anaheim (since 1956). He has observed in the past few
weeks, the City is still paying money to a Special Prosecutor as the result of a debacle which took place
some months ago caused by Mr. Zemel and Lopez. The time has come to cancel that contract since it is
of no value whatsoever. The people who pushed for the prosecution are no longer involved in any way.
He further believes one of the responsibilities of the Council is to repay the money which has been levied
against Council Members McCracken and Feldhaus and Mayor Daly. They were improper levies but
because of an action of an agent of the City of Anaheim, that money was spent. He reiterated , it is
absolutely necessary that the Council cancel the contract with the Special Prosecutor. He understands
he has initially billed the City for $50,000 and the City has still not received a bill from that time to now.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Patricia Kotter, Chairman, Performing and Cultural Arts Center Committee, 3145 Westhaven Drive,
Anaheim. She first submitted and read letter dated March 23, 1999 to Mayor Daly and City Council
Members which she signed as Chairman, Performing and Cultural Arts Center Committee. The letter
reported on a newly established group organized to promote the building of a Performing and Cultural
Arts Center in northwest Orange County. The group has had three meetings to determine the interest
and received overwhelming enthusiasm from members of the communities of Anaheim and several
surrounding cities. The purpose of the letter was to seek the Council’s support and requested that
Anaheim and surrounding cities donate to a multi-city feasibility study estimated between $20,000 and
$30,000 with the cost per city determined by the number of cities involved. Attached to the letter was a
partial list of participants of the Performing and Cultural Arts Center Committee. She also stated she had
a summary of the economic impact of non profits arts organizations in Orange County in 1997. She will
submit a copy to City Manager Ruth. After further input relative to the work that has been done by the
Committee, Ms. Kotter stated in concluding that at a recent meeting, a person who owns property in
north west Anaheim offered to donate five to six acres for a Performing Arts Center provided he is able
to get IRS approval of the land appraisal. There is another gentleman who wants to build a theatre for
the youth. There is a lot going on and with the Council’s help, they are sure they can accomplish
something. They recently met with Mrs. Stipkovich (Executive Director of Community Development)
relative to the Lincoln-Beach site. They feel that will work, but if not, there may be some other site that
will.
Mayor Daly. He asked, relative to the cost of the study between $20,000 and $30,000, was she
suggesting that the four or five cities in the area all donate funds toward that cost .; Ms. Kotter answered,
yes.
Mayor Daly. He suggested that they give the City Manager and staff a chance to look over the
suggestion and determine the best way for Anaheim to study the proposal, whether jointly with other
cities or in conjunction with the City’s Cultural Plan. They will look for the advice and recommendation of
the City Manager to do their best to help with the idea.
PUBLIC COMMENTS – AGENDA ITEMS:
Public input was received on item B1. ( see discussion under that item).
MOTION:
Mayor Daly moved to waive reading in full of all ordinances and resolutions to be acted upon for
the Council meeting of March 23 , 1999. Council Member Kring seconded the motion. MOTION
CARRIED.
CITY MANAGER/DEPARTMENTAL CONSENT CALENDAR A1 – A22:
On motion by Mayor Daly,
seconded by Council Member McCracken , the following items were approved in accordance with the
reports, certifications and recommendations furnished each Council Member and as listed on the
5
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES,
MARCH 23, 1999
Consent Calendar; Mayor Daly offered Resolutions Nos. 99R-51 through 99R-59 , both inclusive, for
adoption. Refer to Resolution Book.
A1. 118: Rejecting and denying certain claims filed against the City. Referred to Risk Management.
The following claims were filed against the City and actions tak en as recommended:
a. Claim submitted by James H. Minx for property damage sustained purportedly due to actions
of the City on or about October 2, 1998.
b. Claim submitted by Kevin Simmons c/o James A. Jenson for bodily injury sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about August 27, 1998.
c. Claim submitted by Judith La Vornia c/o James A. Jenson for property damage sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about August 27, 1998 .
d. Claim submitted by Halla Moran for property damage sustained purportedly due to actions of
the City on or about February 10, 1999.
e. Claim submitted by Sami Naber c/o Joanna Naber for property damage sustained purportedly
due to actions of the City on or about December 22, 1998 .
f. Claim submitted by Sandra Brown for bodily injury sustained purportedly due to actions of the
City on or about August 25, 1998.
g. Claim submitted by Mary J. Bells for property damage sustained purportedly due to actions of
the City on or about September 4, 1998.
h. Claim submitted by Brain Perez c/o Suresh Gulaya, Esq. for bodily injury sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about June 19, 1998.
i. Claim submitted by Leonardo Perez for bodily injury sustained purportedly due to actions of
the City on or about June 19, 1998.
j. Claim submitted by Michael Perez for bodily injury sustained purportedly due to actions of the
City on or about June 19, 1998.
k. Claim submitted by Richard Kiner for property damage sustained purportedly due to actions
of the City on or about December 30, 1998.
l. Claim submitted by Joyce Turney, a minor c/o John R. Pollitt, Esq. for bodily injury sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about May 23, 1998.
m. Claim submitted by Alejandra Garibay, a minor c/o John R. Pollitt, Esq. for bodily injury
sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about May 23, 1998.
n. Claim submitted by Olivia Garibay c/o John R. Pollitt, Esq. for bodily injury sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about May 23, 1998.
A2. 105: Receiving and filing minutes of the Mother Colony House Advisory Board m eeting held
January 8, 1999.
105: Receiving and filing minutes of the Deferred Compensation Committee meeting held
February 3, 1999.
6
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES,
MARCH 23, 1999
105: Receiving and filing minutes of the Investment Advisory Commission special meeting held
November 19, 1999.
117: Receiving and filing the Investment Portfolio Report for the month of February, 1999, as
submitted by the City Treasurer.
128: Receiving and filing the Monthly Financial Analysis for seven months ended January 31,
1999, as presented by the Finance Director.
Council Member Feldhaus . He commended Dave Hill and Bill Sweeney for their conservative positions
on hiring an outside consultant as well as those same concerns expressed by Charlene Jung, the City
Treasurer. It is gratifying to know that the Deferred Compensation Management Committee has the
credentials (that they have) working on behalf of the taxpayers of the City of Anaheim.
A3. 169: Awarding a contract to the lowest responsible bidder, Mobassaly Engineering, Inc., in the
amount of $436,119.64 for Nohl Ranch Road Street Improvements Project from Walnut Canyon
Road to Stage Coach Road; and in the event said low bidder fails to comply with the terms of the
award, awarding the contract to the second low bidder, as well as waiving any irregularities in the
bids of both the low and second low bidders.
A4. 158: RESOLUTION NO. 99R- 51 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF ANAHEIM accepting the Offers of Dedication for Tract No. 12996. (Consisting of Weir
Canyon Road, Serrano Avenue, Canyon Vista Drive, Canyon Creek Road and Monte Vista
Road.)
A5. 160: Authorizing the Purchasing Agent to issue a Purchase Order to
Ameron International, c/o Pacific Lighting Sales, Inc., in the amount of $76,160 for decorative
streetlights in the Anaheim Colony Historic District.
A6. 123: Approving a Lease Agreement with General Motors Acceptance Corporation, in the amount
of $53,385.12 for four electric trucks.
This item was acted upon (approved) under Item 6 of the Redevelopment Agency Meeting of today’s
date.
A7. 127: To consider approving a Professional Services Agreement with Mark Briggs and Associates
in an amount not to exceed $100,000 for processing of grant applications and HUD Sec. 108
loan applications on an as-needed basis.
A8. 123: RESOLUTION NO. 99R- 52 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF ANAHEIM (1) consenting to a Cooperation and Reimbursement Agreement between the
Anaheim Redevelopment Agency and the Anaheim Union High School District, and (2) making
certain findings with respect to the funding of public improvements by the Agency. ( Brookhurst
Demonstration Project)
A9. 161: RESOLUTION NO. 99R- 53 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM (I) approving the submittal of a grant application for the U. S. EPA
Brownfields Pilot program for the northeast corner of Beach Boulevard and Lincoln Avenue and
(ii) certifying the City’s eligibility to receive funds.
A10. 106: Amending the FY 1998-99 JTPA Budget increasing revenues and expenditures in Fund
220 by $79,000 for FY 1998-99 to conduct worker profiling and re-employment services.
7
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES,
MARCH 23, 1999
A11. 123: RESOLUTION NO. 99R- 54 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF ANAHEIM approving the Cooperation Agreement for the West Lincoln Avenue Street
Improvements, make certain findings related to the project, and authorizing the Executive
Director of Community Development to execute said Agreement.
A12. 161: RESOLUTION NO. 99R- 55 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM amending the Project Area Committee Formation and Election Procedures
for the West Anaheim Commercial Corridors Redevelopment Project.
A13. 153: Approving a decrease in the mileage reimbursement rate from 32.5 cents to 31.0 cents per
mile to match the decrease approved by the Internal Revenue Service for 1999, in accordance
with the Memoranda of Understanding for the various employee bargaining units.
A14. 123: Approving an Amendment to Agreement with Collection Recovery Services, Inc., for the
collection of unpaid accounts.
A15. 123: Approving an Agreement with H.T.E ., Inc., for programming and consulting services for the
Customer Information System; authorizing the Finance Director, on behalf of the City, to execute
said Agreement, and taking necessary actions for implementation; and authorizing the Finance
Director, on behalf of the City, to execute annual renewals of the Agreement on the same terms
and conditions, at an annual cost of $100,000.
A16. 150: Approving a request from the Anaheim City Golf Championship Tournament Committee to
waive the tournament surcharge of $10 per golfer per day for the 1999 tournament.
A17. 179: RESOLUTION NO. 99R- 56 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF ANAHEIM granting Conditional Use Permit No. 4010, and amending Resolution No. 98R-183
nunc pro tunc.
A18. 156: RESOLUTION NO. 99R- 57 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF ANAHEIM authorizing the Acting Chief of Police to submit a grant proposal on behalf of the
City of Anaheim to the Office of Criminal Justice Planning for the Delinquency Prevention and
Intervention (DPI) Grant Program.
A19. 153: RESOLUTION NO. 99R- 58 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM amending Resolution No. 98R-13 which established rates of compensation
for classifications designated as Confidential (Personnel Records Specialist).
153: RESOLUTION NO. - - - - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM amending Resolution No. 92R-18 which established rates of compensation for
classifications designated as Professional (Public Utilities Communications Officer).
Mayor Daly. He would like the City Manager to comment on what appears to be an increasing number of
persons who will be speaking to the media on behalf of the City, how it will be coordinated and the
rationale.
City Manager Ruth. This is a reinstatement of a position in the Utilities Department. With all the multiple
programs they are preparing under the Public Benefit Program plus day-to-day operations, they needed a
more effective way to communicate with the public. They have done without that position for some time
and it has created some problems for them. In terms of press relations, 90% or more will be handled
through the Public Information Office and City Manager.
8
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES,
MARCH 23, 1999
Mayor Daly. He would like a two-week continuance on this item only to more fully understand the work
loads.
MOTION. Mayor Daly moved for a two-week continuance on the proposed resolution relating to the
Public Utilities Communications Officer only. Council Member Tait seconded the motion. MOTION
CARRIED.
153: RESOLUTION NO. 99R- 59 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF ANAHEIM establishing rates of compensation for classifications assigned to the General Unit
Represented by the Anaheim Municipal Employees Association (Reprographics Equipment
Operator).
A20. 124: Authorizing the City Manager to reimburse the Visitor and Convention Bureau for costs
associated with media relations and public information efforts during the development of the
Anaheim Resort.
A21. 114: Approving minutes of the Anaheim City Council meeting of February 23, 1999.
A22. 184: Approving the agreement with the Santiago Geologic Hazard Abatement District.
Roll Call Vote on Resolution Nos. 99R-51 through 99R-59, both inclusive, for adoption:
AYES: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS : Feldhaus, Kring, Tait, McCraken, Daly
NOES: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS : None
ABSENT: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS : None
The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 99R-51 through 99R-59, both inclusive, duly passed and adopted.
END OF CONSENT CALENDAR. MOTIONS CARRIED.
RESIGNATION FROM THE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION:
A23. 105:
Accepting a letter of resignation from Manuel T. Ontiveros, Parks and Recreation Commission,
and directing the City Clerk to post a notice of vacancy (term expires 6/30/00).
MOTION: Mayor Daly moved to accept the subject resignation with regret. Council Member McCracken
seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
ITEMS B1 – B6 FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF
MARCH 1, 1999 - INFORMATION ONLY
APPEAL PERIOD ENDS MARCH 23, 1999:
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 319
B1. 155:
CODE AMENDMENT NO. 99-03 – AMENDMENT TO TITLE 18 “ZONING”
RECLASSIFICATION NO. 98-99-11
OWNER:
City-initiated (Redevelopment Agency), 201 S. Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, CA
92805
LOCATION:
Approximately 318 acres of property in the Brookhurst sub-area of the West
Anaheim Commercial Corridors Redevelopment Project Area.
To establish the Brookhurst Commercial Corridor (BCC) Overlay Zone in combination with the
existing zoning (RS-A-43 ,000 “Residential/Agricultural, RS-7200 “Residential, Single-Family,
“ RM-3000 “Residential, Multiple-Family”, RM-1200 “Residential, Multiple-Family”, CO
9
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES,
MARCH 23, 1999
“Commercial, Office and professional”, CL “Commercial, Limited”, CG “Commercial, General”,
CH “Commercial, Heavy”, PD-C “Parking District, Commercial” and ML “Limited Industrial”) of
approximately 318 acres located in the Brookhurst sub-area of the West Anaheim Commercial
Corridors Redevelopment Project Area.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Reclassification No. 98-99-11 GRANTED ( PC99-34) (7 yes votes).
Approved previously certified EIR NO. 319.
Recommended approval of Code Amendment No. 99-03 to the City Council.
Esther Wallace, Chairman, WAND. She urged the Council to accept the Brookhurst Commercial
Corridor Overlay Zone. This matter was discussed with members of the Land Use and Business
Development Committee of WAND and the members were overwhelmingly impressed with the proposal.
Judithanne Gollette, Chair, WAND Land Use and Business Development Committee. She had
previously submitted letter dated March 18, 1999 to the Council (Subject : Brookhurst Corridor Overlay
Project). She thereupon read the letter into the record the essence of which was, “ WAND’s Land Use
and Business Development Committee strongly supports the Brookhurst Corridor project . . . and strongly
urges the entire Anaheim City Council to vote in favor and continue to support the Brookhurst Corridor
Overlay Project.” (There were approximately 20 people present indicating their support for this
proposal.)
Tamara Martin. She spoke with the neighbors on her street and the majority are in support of the
proposed Brookhurst Commerical Corridor Overlay Zone. They are happy things are improving and will
support the businesses that will be established and appreciate all the work that is being done.
Mayor Daly. He noted that the proposal contains a sign amortization program for a term of 15 years.
This would grandfather existing signs not in compliance with City codes for a period of 15 years from the
adoption. He asked if any thought was given to a shorter time period; Lisa Stipkovich, Executive
Director of Community Development explained that State law requires a 15-year period if no
compensation is paid. What staff is hoping to do is when that Redevelopment area creates more tax
increment to provide an incentive program which they can either operate through Redevelopment or
come back and amend the ordinance. She also clarified for Council Member Feldhaus that there are
some residential properties in the overlay zone. There is a strip (north of Lincoln) where there is some
residential and some used as commercial. They are not proposing any zoning changes with this overlay
but they do have certain things in place in terms of restrictions as to how those properties could be
developed.
Council Member McCracken offered Ordinance No. 5677 for first reading.
ORDINANCE NO. 5677 (INTRODUCTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
ADDING CHAPTER 18.55 TO TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE TO ADOPT
THE BROOKHURST COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR OVERLAY ZONE.
179: WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 4075, AND
B2.
NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
OWNER:
Raymond Runo Trust, Norma Hillman, Dan Neyenhuis, Lillian Runo, 1120 Kenwood
Place, Fullerton, CA 92831
AGENT:
David Jackson, 100 S. Anaheim Blvd., #125, Anaheim, CA 92805
LOCATION: 1575 West Mable Street - Fairmont Private School. Property is 0.89 acre located
on the north side of Mable Street, 270 feet east of the centerline of Loara Street.
To permit the conversion of an existing 14,775 square foot industrial building into a private
elementary and junior high school addition to the existing Fairmont Private School with waiver of
minimum number of parking spaces.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
10
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES,
MARCH 23, 1999
CUP NO. 4075 GRANTED for 20 years, to expire March 1, 2019
( PC99-35) (7 yes votes).
Approved waiver of code requirement.
Approved Negative De claration.
The decision of the Planning Commission was appealed by Bryan Industrial Properties, R.S. Hoyt, CEO
in letter dated March 16, 1999 and, therefore, a Public Hearing will be scheduled at a later date.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 4013, AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
B3. 179:
OWNER:
CWCT, LLC A California Limited Liability Company, 1451 Quail Street, Suite 210,
Newport Beach, CA 92660
AGENT:
The Clifford Companies, Attn : Loren W. Brucker, 1451 Quail Street #210, Newport
Beach, CA 92660
LOCATION: 8181-8201 East Kaiser Boulevard. Property is 6.2 acres located at the southwest
corner of Santa Ana Canyon Road and Weir Canyon Road.
To permit roof-mounted equipment for a previously-approved planned commercial office\light
industrial complex with seven buildings.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
CUP NO. 4013 APPROVED ( PC99-36) (6 yes votes, 1 abstained).
Negative Declaration previously approved.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3663, AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
B4. 179:
OWNER:
Interchemical Corporation, Attn: Donald Smith, 300 Continental Drive North, Mount
Olive, NJ 97828
AGENT:
Griffith Company, Attn: Bob Schultz, 12200 Bloomfield Avenue, P.O. Box 2150, Santa
Fe Springs, CA 90670
LOCATION :1160 (formerly 1244) North Lemon Street. Property is 8.12 acres located on the
east side of Lemon Street, 330 feet south of the centerline of Commercial Street.
To consider reinstatement of this permit which contains a time limitation (approved on March 7,
1994 until March 7, 1999) to retain the manufacturing of road base material from asphaltic
concrete and to retain one 160 square foot modular office unit.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Approved reinstatement of CUP NO. 3663, to expire January 31, 2000
( PC99-37) (7 yes votes).
Mitigated Negative Declaration previously approved.
WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT
B5. 179:
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 4103
DETERMINATION OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY NO. 99-03
CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
OWNER :
Thrifty Oil Company, Attn: Vincent Le Pore, 13539 East Foster Road, Santa Fe
Springs, CA 90670
AGENT:
David Rose, 3870 La Sierra Avenue, #193, Riverside, CA 92505
LOCATION: 727 South East Street - Arco. Property is 0.49 acre located at the northwest corner
of South Street and East Street.
Conditional Use Permit No. 4103
- to establish conformity with existing zoning code land use
requirements for an existing service station and to convert an existing accessory auto
repair/cashier building into a convenience market with retail sales of beer and wine for off-
premises consumption with waivers of (a) minimum landscaped setback adjacent to an arterial
highway and (b) minimum retail sales floor area.
Public Convenience or Necessity No. 99-03
- to determine Public Convenience or Necessity
to allow the retail sales of beer and wine for off-premises consumption within the proposed
convenience market.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
11
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES,
MARCH 23, 1999
CUP NO. 4103 DENIED ( PC99-38) (6 yes votes, 1 abstained).
Denied waiver of code requirement.
Denied Determ ination of Public Convenience or Necessity No. 99-03
( PC99 -39).
Denied Negative Declaration.
The decision of the Planning Commission was appealed by the Regents Group, David Rose III in letter
dated March 19, 1999 and, therefore, a Public Hearing will be scheduled at a later date.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3991, AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
B6. 179:
- REQUEST FOR RETROACTIVE EXTENSION OF TIME :
Salvation Army, 1300 South Lewis
Street, Anaheim, CA 92805, requests a retroactive time extension to comply with conditions of
approval to construct a women’s rehabilitation center in conjunction with the existing Salvation
Army men’s rehabilitation center and work therapy unit. This petition was originally approved on
December 22, 1997. Property is located at 1300 South Lewis Street.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Retroactive extension of time for CUP NO. 3991 APPROVED, to expire December 22, 1999.
Approved previously approved Negative Declaration.
END OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS.
ITEMS B7 – B10 FROM THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR MEETING OF
MARCH 11, 1999 - DECISION DATE: MARCH 18, 1999
INFORMATION ONLY - APPEAL PERIOD ENDS APRIL 2, 1999
APPEAL PERIOD FOR THE TRACTS – MARCH 29, 1999:
ADMINISTRATIVE ADJUSTMENT NO. 153
B7. 179:
CEQA EXEMPT {SECTION 15061(b)(3)}:
OWNER: TODD ESSENMACHER, Attn : Mike Stevenson, 601 North Batavia, Orange, CA
92868
LOCATION: 7801 East Bridgewood Street. Property is 0.51 acre having a frontage of
approximately 83 feet on the north side of Bridgewood Street, and a maximum depth of 259 feet
and being located 110 feet east of the centerline of Rosecrest Circle.
Waiver of minimum front yard setback to construct a 4,062 square foot single-family residence
with a 20-foot front yard setback to a side-on garage.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR:
Approved Administrative Adjustment No. 153 ( ZA DECISION NO. 99-5).
ADMINISTRATIVE ADJUSTMENT NO. 155 CEQA EXEMPT {SECTION 15061(b)(3)}:
B8. 179:
OWNER: KAUFMAN AND BROAD OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA,
801 Corporate Center Drive, #201, Pomona, CA 91768
AGENT: MICHAEL MURPHY & ASSOCIATES, 130 East McCormick, #100, Costa Mesa, CA
92626
LOCATION: 205 North Helena Street. Property is 0.16 acre having a frontage of 45 feet on the
west side of Helena Street, and a maximum depth of 158 feet and being located 71 feet north of
the centerline of Chartres Street.
Waiver of minimum side yard setback to construct a new 1,820 square foot single-family
residence.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR:
Approved Administrative Adjustment No. 155 ( ZA DECISION NO. 99-6).
12
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES,
MARCH 23, 1999
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 98-246 CEQA EXEMPT {SECTION 15061(b)(15)}:
B9. 170:
OWNER: RAYMOND PAUL DINKLER and GERALDINE H. DINKLER,
P.O. Box 8417, Hastings, Nebraska 68901
AGENT: AMADOR GONZALEZ, JR., 3151 Airway Avenue #J-3, Costa Mesa, CA 92626
LOCATION: Property consists of two parcels: (1) a 2.7 acre irregularly-shaped parcel located
between Frontera Street and Jackson Street approximately 260 feet east of the centerline of
Park Vista Street, with frontages of 437 feet on the south side of Frontera Street and 162 feet on
the north side of Jackson Street; and (2) a 1,8 acre irregularly-shaped parcel having frontages of
100 feet and 231 feet on the south side of Jackson Street, a maximum depth of 344 feet, and
located approximately 720 feet east of park Vista Street.
To establish a 2-lot residential subdivision in the RS-A-43 ,000(0) zone.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR:
Approved Tentative Parcel Map No. 98-246 ( ZA DECISION NO. 99-7).
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 98-245 VARIANCE NO. 4353 AND NEGATIVE
B10. 170.179:
DECLARATION:
OWNER: LOUIS J. SIENER, 9323 La Alba Drive, Whittier , CA 90603
AGENT: ANACAL ENGINEERING COMPANY, Attn : Glen Gwatney,
1900 E. La Palma Avenue, #202, Anaheim, CA 92805
LOCATION: 8205 East Santa Ana Canyon Road. Property consists of two parcels : Parcel (1) is
2.65 acres having a frontage of 65 feet on the north side of Santa Ana Canyon Road, and a
maximum depth of 748 feet and being located 850 feet west of the centerline of Weir Canyon
Road. Parcel (2) is 0.83 acre having no street frontage and a maximum depth of 320 feet and
being located 285 feet west of the centerline of Weir Canyon Road.
To establish a 2-lot commercial subdivision with waiver of minimum lot frontage abutting a public
street.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR:
Approved Tentative Parcel Map No. 98-245 ( ZA DECISION NO. 99-8).
Approved Variance No. 4353 ( ZA DECISION NO. 99-9).
Approved Negative Declaration.
PUBLIC HEARING - WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT
D1.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 4095 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
OWNER:
Parcel 1 : Kenneth J. Cummins, Trustee, Couch Living Trust, 4041 MacArthur Blvd.,
#360, Newport Beach, CA 92660
Parcel 2 : Carol Arthofer, 78373 Sterling Lane. Palm Desert, CA 92211
AGENT:
Form Guild Architects, Attn : Caroline Shaw, 34102 Violet Lantern, Dana Point, CA
92629
LOCATION: 2144 South Harbor Boulevard - currently Arby’s Restaurant. Property is 0.60 acre
located on the east side of Harbor Boulevard, 480 feet north of the centerline of Wilken Way.
To construct a new fast food restaurant with drive-through lane with waiver of a) minimum drive-
through lane requirements and b) permitted encroachment into setback area.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
CUP NO. 4095 GRANTED ( PC99-23) (6 yes votes, 1 absent).
Approved waiver of code requirement.
Approved Negative Declaration.
Review of the Planning Commission Action requested by Mayor Daly and
Council Member Feldhaus .
PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY:
Publication in North County News : March 11, 1999
Mailing to property owners within 300 feet: March 4, 1999
Posting of property: March 5, 1999
13
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES,
MARCH 23, 1999
Mayor Daly. He asked for a hearing on this because he wants to understand some of the planning
implications for the entire neighborhood. He feels they need a more in-depth look at what is happening
to some of the City’s commercial corridors. This particular block is just outside the Resort Area. He
realizes that the site has contained a fast-food operation for years and this proposal will be a dramatic
improvement over the existing building on the property. There is a residential neighborhood behind this
location and he is not sure anyone would want to live across the street from a 24-hr. fast food restaurant.
It is not his intent to derail this project, but he wants to get into some of the fast food restaurant issues
and specifically wanted to address the proliferation of these establishments in key locations in the City.
Joel Fick, Planning Director summarized the proposal as outlined in the Staff Report to the Planning
Commission dated February 1, 1999.
Mayor Daly opened the Public Hearing and asked first to hear from the applicant or applicant’s agent.
He stated, however, that he explained earlier to the applicant it was not necessary to lay out a detailed
rendering/explanation of the project because the Council is already apprised of the proposal and it
speaks for itself. He did explain to the applicant’s representative his larger concern, that being the
proliferation of fast food restaurants. At the conclusion of the Public Hearing, he (Daly) will ask the
Council to support his request that staff provide the Council information under what circumstances are
fast food restaurants allowed in various commercial corridors of the City. He reiterated it is optional for
the applicant to speak.
Applicant’s Statement : Although the applicant (applicant’s agent) was present in the Chamber audience
he did not wish to speak.
Mayor Daly asked if anyone else was present to speak either in favor or in opposition; there was no
response. He thereupon closed the Public Hearing.
Mayor Daly. He voiced some concerns in recent weeks about some trends and the proliferation of 24-
hour service stations with convenience markets. Some of those applications included fast food
restaurants. They are seeing a new wave of fast-food applications in the City and many will make good
sense in the right locations. His concern is that the City spends a lot of time playing “defense” on 24-
hour a day operations not compatible with residential neighborhoods. His request is to ask staff to report
back to the Council with their thoughts and information on the various standards that exist for fast-food
restaurants for different parts of the City, i.e., the Resort Area, Anaheim Hills, Redevelopment areas --
what standards exist in those areas vs. those that exist outside those districts. He would like to have a
better understanding of where they would like to encourage 24-hour-a-day fast-food restaurants and
where they might want to suggest a different approach. He asked staff to bring back a summary of the
current standards and what their thinking is.
Council Member Tait . He disagrees somewhat, his feeling being if there is not a market need the
owner/applicant would not be building a fast-food restaurant. He is cautious when considering an overall
plan or rule and would like to take each application on a case-by-case basis. If it is a nuisance to
adjoining residential, he would have a problem as well but oftentimes such proposals are an
improvement to the property such as this case. He reiterated , he would like to caution Council about
instituting an overall plan on fast food restaurants.
Mayor Daly. His request is for staff to bring the Council a summary of what now exists. He realizes it
will be time consuming and there is no sense of urgency or rush. He is basically asking that they
describe the different standards.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT – NEGATIVE DECLARATION :
On motion by Council Member
Kring seconded by Council Member McCracken, the City Council approved the Negative Declaration
upon finding that it has considered the Negative Declaration together with any comments received during
the public review process, and further finding on the basis of the initial study and any comments received
14
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES,
MARCH 23, 1999
that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment.
MOTION CARRIED.
Council Member Kring offered Resolution No. 99R-60 for adoption, approving Conditional Use Permit
4095. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 99R-60 : A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ANAHEIM GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.
4095.
Roll Call Vote on Resolution No. 99R-60 for adoption:
AYES: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBE RS : Feldhaus, Kring, Tait, McCraken, Daly
NOES: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS : None
ABSENT: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS : None
The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 99R-60 duly passed and adopted.
PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 4097, AND NEGATIVE
D2.
DECLARATION:
OWNER:
Susan Saltzburg, Trustee, Milldred Altshuler Irrevocable Trust and George Altshuler
Irrevocable Trust, 18022 Medley Drive, Encino, CA 91316
AGENT:
Charles A. Perez, 420 S. State College Blvd., Anaheim, CA 92806
LOCATION: 420 South State College Boulevard - C&M Automotive. Property is 0.40 acre
located at the northeast corner of State College Boulevard and Westport.
To permit and retain an automotive repair facility.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
CUP NO. 4097 GRANTED, to expire 12/31/01 ( PC99-24)
(6 yes votes, 1 absent).
Approved Negative Declaration.
Review of the Planning Commission action requested by Mayor Daly and Council Member
Shirley McCracken.
PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY:
Publication in North County News : March 11, 1999
Mailing to property owners within 300 feet : March 4, 1999
Posting of property: March 5, 1999
Mayor Daly. He asked for the Public Hearing to clarify with certainty some of the changes proposed for
the site. He notes that the propane tank which has been an eyesore out near the sidewalk will be
removed. Other concerns are – the overnight parking of cars on the lot, whether 18 cars can be parked
overnight as indicated and the thinking of the Planning staff regarding a time limit for the use.
Joel Fick, Planning Director briefed the Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated February 1,
1999. He also noted that the Commission approved the CUP to expire on December 31, 2001, a time
limitation set up to coincide with the applicant’s lease. He also briefed the conditions imposed (see
Resolution PC99-24). Staff recommended that the propane tank be removed; the Planning
Commission’s approval allowed it to remain but required it to be installed in a horizontal rather than
vertical fashion.
15
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES,
MARCH 23, 1999
Joel Fick . He continued, clarifying staff recommended removal of the tank and also installation of
additional landscaping. At the Public Hearing, the applicant’s presentation focused on the viewpoint that
his lease would terminate in the 2001 time frame. He believes that was the thinking of the Commission
in reaching a compromise on those two items. If the Council approves the permit, staff’s
recommendation is that the applicant comply with the conditions imposed within 90 days. He also
clarified for the Mayor that the tank would have to be relocated to an area behind the setback area which
would be 10’ further back, that a landscape plan will be required to be submitted by Report and
Recommendation and, to the best of his knowledge, that the tenant intends to vacate the lease on
December 31, 2001. The permit will expire that day. Relative to the parking of cars, there are some
items where the existing operation is out of compliance. There are enough parking spaces on site if used
in the day; however, as mentioned, some of that parking is used for storage which should not be
occurring. There is an existing condition that there is no outdoor storage display of or working on
vehicles, Condition No. 19.
Mayor Daly opened the Public Hearing and asked to hear from the applicant or applicant’s agent.
Applicant’s Statement : Charles Perez, (business) 420 S. State College Blvd., Anaheim. He leases the
property and has been doing business in Anaheim for over 24 years. Relative to the propane tank, it is a
service to the public and that is the reason he installed it originally. He knows it looks like a “sore thumb”
but it was approved by all authorities. Because of the concern, he suggested going to the horizontal tank
but he does not know if the Council has accepted that proposal or not. It would hardly be noticeable with
the landscaping around it. He suggested that to the Commission and they went along with it. On the
east wall when he took the building over, he was asked to remove 10’ of asphalt away from the wall to
plant trees. He is about the only business that has ever done that. It is hard to keep ground cover in that
area. He was asked to do it and he did so but wonders why. With some of the conditions that were
imposed on him, he is wondering if it is worthwhile to stay in business. He reiterated he has been in
business in the community for 24 years and only has a couple of years remaining (on his lease) and he is
then going to retire. He clarified for the Mayor that he also lives in Anaheim behind Esperanza High
School.
Council Member Tait stated that the permit is proposed to expire on December 31, 2001. He asked Mr.
Perez if he intended to vacate the property at that time; Mr. Perez answered that he does plan on
vacating the property.
Council Member Feldhaus . Twenty-seven conditions have been imposed on approval of the CUP. He
asked Mr. Perez which of those he felt were the most burdensome; Mr. Perez answered, the removal of
the public telephone. He would like to keep the phone where it is. His building is too small to move it
inside. All the other conditions he can live with.
After additional discussion between Council Members and staff relative to the condition that the phone
be moved within 15’ of the main entrance, the Mayor asked if anyone else wished to speak either in favor
or in opposition.
Gary Hart, Suburban Propane. He would like to leave the tank in the same place and make it a
horizontal tank. It will hold the expense down.
After additional discussion and questioningg relative to the setback requirements and the tank, Mr. Fick
clarified that the minimum required setback is 10’ along State College and 5’ along Westport. Staff’s
recommendation was that the tank be removed and replaced. The Planning Commission upon hearing
the discussion about the lease to 2001 approved the tank but it has to be located outside the setback
area. It is clear in the conditions, the minimum required landscape setback area adjacent to the street
from the inside of the sidewalk. The Planning Commission will be reviewing the landscape plans formally
at one of their meetings. Realistically, a structure of that height when trees, shrubs or bushes are first
installed, while those will provide some screening, it won’t be fully screened.
16
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES,
MARCH 23, 1999
Virgil Encarnacion , 875 S. Nordica , Anaheim. He is speaking for Mr. Perez who he has known and who
has been his mechanic for 20 years. All the restrictions the City is imposing on the Conditional Use
Permit for the three remaining years that Mr. Perez will be in business , will prohibit him from making any
money because he will have to put it into the business. He stayed in business longer in the expectations
of being able to fund his retirement. He is asking the Council to look at the financial strain that the
conditions imposed are causing. In 1995, this property was vacant and an eyesore for the City. Mr.
Perez, working with the owner, improved the property and spent $40,000 doing so. When he (Perez)
received the permit, it was supposed to be mailed to him but instead it was sent to the realtor and now
Mr. Perez is paying all the consequences. It should have only cost him $400 to renew the permit but now
it is costing him his retirement income and money to fix up the property.
Larry Slagle , 1619 E. Lincoln, Anaheim -Yellow Cab Company of North Orange County. Notwithstanding
the merits of the concerns/arguments, in general, propane is considered to be a clean fuel. His fleet (of
cabs) and others have been converted to propane as a method of propulsion. He would assume more
would look to compressed natural gas, electricity and propane and those types of fuel would become
more in demand. He asked as they go through the process, that there be some consideration for those
types of stations for people who have converted their fleets (to alternative fuels).
Michael Hart, Suburban Propane, 535 Melrose Avenue, Placentia. His concern is it seems propane is
the eyesore issue. He does not look at it like that. Mr. Perez Provides a service to the community.
Anaheim has many sights to see and, therefore, there are a lot of tourists/campers who come to Mr.
Perez to fill their tanks for long-term stays. The gas stations that do have propane are all mini-marts and
it is very hard for the employees to come out and service propane customers. He would like to downsize
the tank. They could install about a 4’ high tank (instead of the 5’). He would like to see Mr. Perez
continue to serve the public. He sells quite a bit of propane. He asked that they please consider a
smaller tank.
Mayor Daly closed the Public Hearing.
Council Member Kring . Mr. Perez mentioned he felt he was the only one in the area responsible for
having ground cover. She would like to know if that is accurate noting that it would be very difficult to do
that on his property.
Joel Fick . The landscaping planters were installed when the business changed from a service station to
an auto repair use. The planters are existing now and the code requires landscaping within those areas.
Any business would need to meet those requirements. He confirmed that the planter area is not a “box ” ,
just the ground.
Council Member Tait . There are 27 conditions which have to be met, the most significant to him being
No. 24 stating that the permit expires on December 31, 2001. Because of that, it makes it difficult for Mr.
Perez to invest a whole lot into the property. As far as the propane tank, he shares the Mayor’s concern
but only 2 ½ years are left on the lease and, in the interim, the tank will be placed in a horizontal
position. After that, the whole thing goes away.
Mayor Daly stated he is content in supporting the Planning Commission recommendation.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT – NEGATIVE DECLARATION :
On motion by Council Member
Tait seconded by Council Member Kring, the City Council approved the Negative Declaration upon
finding that it has considered the Negative Declaration together with any comments received during the
public review process, and further finding on the basis of the initial study and any comments received
that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment.
MOTION CARRIED.
17
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES,
MARCH 23, 1999
Council Member Tait offered Resolution 99R-61 for adoption granting Conditional Use Permit No. 4097
subject to City Planning Commission conditions.
Before further action was taken, Mayor Daly noted that the Planning Director mentioned the 4’ maximum
height for the propane tank; Council Member Tait stated he will include that as part of his offering.
City Attorney White. Also mentioned in the Planning Director’s report, he is suggesting that Condition 26
which provides for the time period to comply with certain of the conditions be a maximum of 90 days
from the date of the resolution which would be slightly different from what the Planning Commission
approved if that is agreeable.
Joel Fick . He stated staff is open to additional time; Mayor Daly suggested 120 days.
A vote was then taken on Resolution 99R-61 offered for adoption by Council Member Tait including the
following : that the propane tank will be 4’ maximum and the time to comply with conditions is amended
to 120 days from the date of the resolution instead of 90 days. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 99R-61 : A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ANAHEIM GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.
4097.
Roll Call Vote on Resolution No. 99R-61 for adoption:
AYES: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS : Feldhaus, Kring, Tait, McCracken, Daly
NOES: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS : None
ABSENT: MAYOR/ COUNCIL MEMBERS : None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 99R-61 duly passed and adopted.
DISCUSSION – FORMATION OF CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE :
C1. 142: Request by Mayor
Daly at the meeting of December 15, 1998, Item C4, to discuss the subject of forming a Charter
Review Committee for purposes of reviewing the City Charter. (Continued from the meeting of
January 5, 1999, Item C2, application procedure approved at the meeting of January 12, 1999,
Item C1, discussion continued for the meeting of January 26, 1999, Item C1. and February 23,
1999, Item C1.)
City Clerk Sohl . She has submitted all the applications received to date. In addition, one was received
only this afternoon which they have been given from Dr. Barry Escoe.
Mayor Daly. There are a number of ways they can proceed to appoint persons to the Committee. The
current proposal is to appoint seven members and he is going to suggest that they stay with that number
for now. However, if there appears to be a need for additional representation from geographic areas or
to bring in different types of expertise, he suggests going to nine but first wait and see how the
appointment of the seven goes. Secondly, he suggests each Council Member have the ability to
nominate one person subject to approval by a majority of the Council. That would be five and for the last
two appointments, he is open to suggestions. For those Council Members still reviewing the applications
and who may not be ready to nominate someone this evening, they can continue to nominate over the
next few weeks although it is desirable to move forward as quickly as possible.
Council Member Kring . She was under the impression that each Council Member was going to appoint
somebody without a vote of the other Council Members ; Mayor Daly. He apologizes if that was the
impression. He would disagree with that. Technically speaking, the Council as a whole has to approve
the appointments. Even aside from that, he would be uncomfortable giving any Council Member the
authority to appoint whoever they wanted. He will support virtually anyone a Council Member
18
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES,
MARCH 23, 1999
nominates who is a resident unless there is a severe concern. He would like to reserve the opportunity to
disagree with a nomination if he considers it bad for the community.
City Clerk Sohl . Prior to beginning, there may be one individual who wishes to speak to this item ;
Council Member Feldhaus. He asked the zip code of the person submitting the newest application.
City Clerk Sohl stated Dr. Escoe’s zip code is 92807.
Council Member Tait . Rather than starting, he feels it would be better to put off the nominations for
another two weeks and then do it all at one time. He is not ready to nominate at this time and it would
make more sense doing it all in one action; Council Member Kring concurred.
Council Member McCracken . She is ready to nominate but if others are not, she is willing to wait to
appoint the entire committee at one time ; Mayor Daly. He feels it is more important than any individual
nomination and appointment is the goal of having a strong overall group that reflects different
experiences and as broad-based as they can accomplish with seven persons. If they do not feel it is
broad-based enough, they may want to expand it.
Council Member McCracken . She believes they have a challenge limiting it to seven or nine ; Mayor
Daly. He remembers why they had a ten-member committee last time because each Council Member
nominated two people. Council Member McCracken is right, it is not easy to limit the number of persons
and inevitably some members of the committee may not be able to attend all meetings. They may need
to increase the number to nine or ten. He notes that of the applications they have now, it is “light” on the
female side while geographically it looks like a good representation.
Council Member Feldhaus stated he is ready to make appointments but will wait. He just feels they need
to get started.
MOTION. Mayor Daly moved to continue appointment of members to the 1999 Charter Review
Committee for two weeks. Council Member Tait seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
DISCUSSION – CONSIDERATION OF RESCINDING CITY’S CAMPAIGN REFORM
C2. 127:
ORDINANCE :
Discussion requested by Council Member McCracken at the meeting of January 12,
1998 (see minutes that date), Item C4., to consider the adoption of an ordinance rescinding the current
Campaign Reform Ordinance. Item continued from the meeting of January 26, 1999, Item C3 and from
the meeting of March 16, 1999, Item C1.
Mayor Daly. He will be turning the meeting over to Mayor ProTem McCracken. Last week, he explained
it was his intent to abstain on this issue and subsequently the City Attorney explained his
recommendation (see minutes of March 16, 1999). The Mayor then explained that he has a private
attorney engaged on this subject since he has been the target of a prosecution that goes back many
months and has cost him in excess of $30,000 thus far. It is a criminal attorney engaged to protect him
in the unfair prosecution. He has asked him to be as cost-effective as possible in representing him to
keep his legal bills from going much beyond $30,000. He has strongly advised him (Daly) to abstain
because of the implications that are on the table. He will, therefore, be following his advice. He has
many opinions on the subject and will have in the future, but on the discussion this evening, his private
attorney advises him to abstain although he would much rather not do so.
Mayor Daly temporarily left the Council Chamber (8:22).
Mayor Pro Tem McCracken asked the City Attorney to give a summary of the options before the Council.
City Attorney White explained that at the last meeting (see minutes of March 16, 1999), Council
Members introduced two ordinances for consideration tonight. It would be appropriate to adopt one but
not both since they are not mutually consistent. The first Ordinance on the agenda, Ordinance 5675,
19
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES,
MARCH 23, 1999
Option B, would amend the existing campaign finance law of the City. It would continue the $1,000
campaign contribution limit per contributor but change the time from per election limit to a per election
cycle limitation. It would define an election cycle for purposes of general, special and recall elections.
Generally for a normal four-year General Election, the cycle would be the period starting January 1st
st
following the election for that office and run through December 31 of the fourth year thereafter which
st
would be December 31 of the next general election for that same office. It would allow contributions to
continue to be collected to retire existing campaign debt for prior elections which would not be counted
toward the $1,000 per election cycle limit but limit those contributions to $1,000 per contributor as now
limited. The other main provision of the ordinance is that it would change the enforcement from a
criminal prosecution to a civil proceeding. It would impose fines but would involve no criminal action
being brought. Any authorization to bring a civil action to recover the fines would require Council
approval of at least three Council Members. Finally it would provide good faith reliance upon the written
opinion of the City Attorney and would be a defense to any such action which is similar to language now
contained in State law relating to violations of the Political Reform Act where reliance upon the advice of
the FPPC (Fair Political Practices Commission) is the defense to any enforcement action.
The second ordinance, Ordinance 5676, would totally repeal the Anaheim local campaign finance
ordinance. The City would continue to be subject to State law which is currently a reporting law, not a
limitation on amounts that can be contributed or received by candidates and it also does not contain a
savings clause which means, if this ordinance is adopted, any past violations that have not yet either
been filed or resulted in a final judgment relating to the Municipal Code would no longer be viable and
the existing case that has been filed at least as to the Municipal Code violations would no longer be
prosecutable.
Mayor Pro Tem McCracken asked if anyone wished to speak to the issue.
Shirley Grindle . She thanked the Council for treating her with respect in allowing her to address them on
the subject. She is encouraging them to adopt the first Ordinance, Option B which she has worked on
with the City Attorney. She then outlined why she feels the City needs a limitation on contributions (also
see input given by Ms. Grindle at the meeting of March 16, 1999). (1) A contribution limit removes the
undue pressure on people who do business in and with the City of Anaheim. (2) It removes suspicion by
the public against Council Members because no one in the public can accuse them of being unduly
influenced by campaign contributions. (3 ) If there are no contribution limits, it becomes an incumbent
protection matter. It is not fair to challengers. (4 ) One of the good things about having a contribution
limit, and she believes the $1,000 limit is reasonable, it forces them to broaden their base of financial
support. Other points broached were – the existing ordinance was enacted after an advisory vote of the
citizens (in 1992) supporting a $1,000 contribution limit. She also noted that, working with the City
Attorney, they eliminated the criminal aspects of the current ordinance and established a way to enforce
it without making it a major crisis. She also knows that one of the Council Members is concerned about
the “ Ravi Mehta incident”. She cannot forsee, with the way the ordinance is written and the wording that
was included last week, how any of the Council Members could be accused of intentionally violating the
ordinance. If they decide to repeal the current ordinance (without replacing it), she would like to hear on
the record why they would do so and what the issues are. She hopes that they do not do so. As an
aside, she stated, one other advantage (of not doing so) is they won’t have to deal with Shirley Grindle
again.
Russell Kitteringham , resident of Anaheim and concerned voter. When he became aware of the
possibility of the Council rescinding the current ordinance, he felt compelled to speak. His understanding
is that those who make contributions do so in order to gain access in order to voice their concerns
regarding political matters. The more the contribution, the greater the ear the politician will give. He
further elaborated on this issue and concern and in closing urged the Council to keep contribution limits
intact.
Council Member Kring stated she does not believe because they accept a contribution it allows a person
access. Anybody who wants to have access to her or talk to her about an issue it doesn’t matter if they
20
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES,
MARCH 23, 1999
give a penny or $1,000. She urged anyone who wishes to do so to feel free to come and talk to her
about any issue.
James Vanderbilt, 415 E. Chartres , Anaheim. He believes this is a matter of freedom of expression or
freedom of information. As a resident of the City, he knows that throughout the election season, there
are articles that delineate what the Council candidates receive and the amounts. Since that information
is readily available, he believes it also influences the way people vote. He is asking that the Council
consider the second ordinance, Ordinance 5676, Option A2, repealing the current ordinance and option
not to vote in favor.
Extensive discussion followed wherein Council Members gave input relative to their thoughts on either
Ordinance 5675, Option B which would replace the current ordinance while still retaining the $1,000
contribution limit, or Ordinance 5676, Option A2, which would repeal the current Campaign Reform
Ordinance in total thus eliminating contribution limits in the City of Anaheim reverting instead to State
law. Main points of their comments are summarized.
Council Member Tait . Other than money, there is no other way for a candidate to get their message out
in a City of 300,000. He is concerned about government putting a limit on free speech just as the
founding fathers. He cannot in all good conscience support campaign limits and supports Ordinance
5676 repealing the current ordinance.
Council Member McCracken . She had asked that this issue be placed on the agenda because of her
concern with the current ordinance relative to its enforcement provisions especially the criminal
prosecution provision which provision created a major opportunity for a “witch hunt” in the City. It is not
to rescind the limits but to change the way in which the violations are treated. Those violations if
determined to be intentional and negligent have fines attached to them. In 1992, Anaheim’s voters in an
advisory ballot measure told the Council they wanted campaign limits. Limits protect local businesses
from being continually hounded by candidates who need funding for their campaigns. Limiting
contributions to candidates is not limiting the free speech of any individual in the community. She does
not believe the opinion of the community has changed since 1992 and the reason she offered Ordinance
5675 is that it addresses concerns she had while still retaining the $1,000 limit.
Council Member Feldhaus . He was a Council Member in 1993 when the Council voted to enact the
Campaign Reform Ordinance and the $1,000 contribution limit. Only 15% of the cities in California have
such ordinances. The problem is not the limit but the issue of compliance. Option B as amended still
condones partisan politics in the local community just as was the case in the last election. Thus far,
about $ 40,00 has been spent on the Zemel/Lopez “witch hunt” and the clock is still ticking. He believes
another “ Ravi Mehta” debacle could happen again. He explained how he felt it could happen. (As an
aside he stated he also votes to stop paying any further taxpayer funds in the matter.) The Charter
Review Committee should look at this issue and make recommendations. In the interim, they can defer
to State law under the Fair Political Practices Commission. The City’s next General Election is 18
months away. By that time, they should be able to get something back from the Charter Review
Committee on whether or not they should enact another ordinance. The proposed language is not
forgiving and is too encumbering and difficult to comply with. He, therefore, will support repealing the
current ordinance and the spending of any more tax dollars in the Appeals Court.
Council Member Kring . Some of the things each of the Council Members said plus Mrs. Grindle are very
valid. She agrees with Council Member Feldhaus on some of the language, and Council Member Tait
alluded to it last week, it is complicated and still contains language that is difficult to swallow. One of the
things she would like to see changed, under Civil Liability, it states, “Any person who intentionally or
negligently violates or otherwise fails to comply . . . shall be liable in a civil action. . .” She feels an
intentional act is something a person wants to do, but a negligent act is something done by accident.
She would like to see that language cleaned up (under Option B). However, she would still like to
maintain the limit because she feels it does put a hardship on the business community and she dislikes
having to raise money. It is also easy to make mistakes. Perhaps they should refer it (the Ordinance)
21
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES,
MARCH 23, 1999
back to the City Attorney to clean it up and in a couple of weeks bring it back for discussion. She asked
the options.
City Attorney White answered, to adopt one of the two ordinances or refer it back to him. He can take
another crack at it although he does not know how successful he will be in simplifying it until there is just
one paragraph. The other is, as suggested, refer it as a subject for the Charter Review Commission.
At the conclusion of further discussion and input from Council Members, Mr. White stated the comments
reflect the difficulty in drafting an ordinance on the one hand that is short and simple, and on the other,
comprehensive and covers everything.
Council Members then gave additional comments and thoughts relative to the proposed ordinances after
which Council Member Tait stated he would like to vote on the repeal tonight; City Attorney White stated
the opportunity to act on the ordinances should be in the order as listed on the agenda. If no one wishes
to offer Ordinance 5675 for adoption, any member could offer Ordinance 5676.
Council Member McCracken offered Ordinance 5675, Option B, for adoption.
Roll Call Vote on Ordinance No. 5675 for adoption:
AYES: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS : McCracken
NOES: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS : Feldhaus, Kring, Tait
ABSTAINED/ TEMP. ABSENT: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS : Daly
The Ordinance failed to carry.
Council Member Tait offered Ordinance 5676, Option A2, for adoption repealing the current Campaign
Reform Ordinance.
Roll Call Vote on Ordinance No. 5676 for adoption:
AYES: MAYOR/COUNC IL MEMBERS : Feldhaus, Tait
NOES: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kring, McCracken
ABSTAINED/ TEMP. ABSENT: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS : Daly
The Ordinance failed to carry since three affirmative votes are required to adopt an ordinance (or
resolution).
Mayor Pro Tem McCracken . With the consent of the Council, she is asking the City Attorney to continue
to work on an amendment to the current ordinance which is still in effect. Perhaps with some input from
the Council, they can agree on an amendment that would be acceptable and that they could adopt
because she does not believe the current ordinance is one under which they want to continue to function.
Council Member Tait . The ordinance (Ordinance 5675, Option B) is certainly much improved over the
existing one. Although he would like to repeal the current ordinance, he supports the vast improvement
in the proposed replacement (amended) ordinance.
Mayor Daly entered the Council Chambers. (9:00 p.m.)
22
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES,
MARCH 23, 1999
C3. REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION ACTIONS:
City Attorney Jack White announced the Council approved a Letter of Agreement between the City and
the Los Angeles Dept. of Water and Power resolving certain transmission billing rate disputes. Roll call
vote was ALL Ayes.
COUNCIL COMMENTS:
C4. 114:
Council Member McCracken :
She noted the Council tonight accepted the resignation of Manny
Ontiveros from the Parks and Recreation Commission. Manny has been appointed to the North Orange
County Community College District and congratulations are in order.
ADJOURNMENT: Before adjournment, Mayor Daly noted that the next meeting will be two weeks from
tonight, April 6, 1999. At that time, he stated they will absolutely appoint the Charter Review Committee;
City Clerk Sohl recalled that the Mayor had mentioned the possibility of changes to the upcoming Council
Meeting schedule.
Mayor Daly. He does not detect a consensus toward any change and, therefore, there will be no change
in the current schedule of meetings at this time.
By general Council consent, the Council Meeting of March 23, 1999 was adjourned (9:05 P.M.).
Leonora N. Sohl
City Clerk
23
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES,
MARCH 23, 1999
24