HA1999/06/15ANAHEIM CIVIC CENTER, ANAHEIM HOUSING AUTHORITY
June 15, 1999
PRESENT: CHAIRMAN : Tom Daly
PRESENT: AUTHORITY MEMBERS : Frank Feldhaus, Lucille Kring, Tom Tait, Shirley McCracken
ABSENT AUTHORITY MEMBERS : None
PRESENT: CITY MANAGER : James Ruth
CITY ATTORNEY : Jack White
SECRETARY: Leonora N. Sohl
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT : Lisa Stipkovich
A complete copy of the agenda for the meeting of the Anaheim Housing Authority was posted at 3:45 p.m. on June
11, 1999 at the City Hall Bulletin Board; both inside and outside containing all items as shown herein.
Chairman Daly called the regular meeting of the Anaheim Housing Authority to order at 5:48 p.m.
FINANCIAL DEMANDS AGAINST THE ANAHEIM HOUSING AUTHORITY
in the amount of $10,337.21
for the period ending June 11, 1999 in accordance with the 1998-99 Budget, were approved.
ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA :
There were no additions to agenda items.
ITEMS OF PUBLIC INTEREST :
No items of public interest were addressed.
PUBLIC COMMENTS - AGENDA ITEMS :
See discussion under items 1 and 2.
Chairman Daly then reconvened the Redevelopment Agency for the purpose of hearing Agency Item 2. on today’s
agenda and also reconvened the Council Meeting for purposes of considering receiving public comments on Council
Item A29. (5:50 P.M.) All public comments can be given on all of those items concurrently.
CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS 1 – 3 :
The Authority acted on Item 3. first as follows:
3. 177/109 : Chairman Daly offered Resolution No. AHA99-2 for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. AHA99- 2 A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM HOUSING AUTHORITY
authorizing application to the California Housing Finance Agency for funding under the HELP (Housing
Enabled by Local Participation) program.
AYES: HOU SING AUTHORITY MEMBERS : Feldhaus, Kring, Tait, McCracken , Daly
NOES: HOUSING AUTHORITY MEMBERS : None
ABSENT: HOUSING AUTHORITY MEMBERS: None
1. Approving a Cooperation Agreement with the Anaheim Redevelopment Agency and City of Anaheim
regarding the Jeffrey-Lynne Affordable Housing and Neighborhood Revitalization Plan, and making
certain findings in connection therewith
2. RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM HOUSING AUTHORITY
approving an Affordable Housing and Neighborhood Revitalization Agreement regarding the Jeffrey-
Lynne Neighborhood and making certain environmental findings in connection therewith
Chairman/Mayor Daly opend the floor to Public Comments on Redevelopment Agency Item 2., Housing Authority
Item 1. and 2., and Council Item A29.
City Attorney White suggested that a staff presentation would be in order prior to public comments:
Submitted were reports dated June 15, 1999 from the Community Development Department under the
Redevelopment Agency, Housing Authority and the City Council recommending that the Agency, Housing
Authority, and Council recommending that each entity approve a Cooperation Agreement regarding the Jeffrey-
Lynne (J-L) Affordable Housing and Neighborhood Revitalization Plan and making certain findings in connection
ANAHEIM CIVIC CENTER, ANAHEIM HOUSING AUTHORITY
June 15, 1999
therewith. (Also see, Jeffrey-Lynne Revitalization Plan submitted by Related Companies of California and Southern
California Housing Development Corporation previously submitted and made a part of the record.) .
Lisa Stipkovich , Executive Director of Community Development. They are asking the Housing Authority as lead
agency to approve the subject plan tonight and also an agreement between the Anaheim Housing Authority and the
developer which is a combination of the Related Compaies of California and Southern California Housing
Corporation which would allow them to implement the plan by commencing negotiations with property owners,
preparing a relocation plan and coming back with the final terms for the financing. It would enable them to apply for
a tax credit application. The other items on the agenda for the Council and Redevelopment Agency will be part of a
Co-op Agreement whereby those entities will be allocating the funds in the future should all the issues be resolved.
She then gave the background on the origination of the plan (see staff report dated June 15, 1999 to the City
Manager/Housing Authority – Subject : Affordable Housing and Neighborhood Revitalization Agreement (Jeffrey-
Lynne Neighborhood Revitalization). She briefed the material contained therein – Background, Jeffrey-Lynne
Revitalization Plan (copy attached to the report) and Affordable Housing and Neighborhood Revitatlization
Agreement. In concluding her presentation, Mrs. Stipkovich reiterated the issues they dealt with – the condition of
the buildings, the number of people in the units, the amount of overcrowding, and the unusual product type in the
neighborhood, i.e., the one-bedroom units housing an average of five people. One of the key factors in the plan that
was developed had to do with all those factors. Because of the cost of Police services, security issues, high-crime
rates, high cost of Code Enforcement, and number of violations in addition to the overcrowding and low-income
nature of the people living in the area, it was felt the current plan was worth pursuing. She emphasized it is not the
final step but the first step. Staff would be coming back with a relocation plan. It is the first step – it would allow
the developer to submit his tax credit application, negotiate with property owners and for the Housing Authority to
negotiate with property owners. She then asked Bill Witte from The Related Companies to speak to the plan.
Bill Witte, Partner, The Related Companies of California, 18201 Von Karman, Ste. 400, Irvine, CA 92612. With
their Co-General Partner to be, Southern California Development Corporation, a non-profit, they are the designated
development entities that worked in developing the subject plan. As Mrs. Stipkovich indicated, they attempted to
look at not one, but all aspects of the problems known to the City, not just the physical conditions or the crime
problems or the lack of facilities or overcrowding, but the totality of all the issues and devised a plan that addresses
them all comprehensively and that was financially feasible. Mr. Witte then summarized the physical aspects of the
plan working from posted graphics/plans of the site which were also a part of the Jeffrey-Lynne Revitalization Plan
booklet previously submitted (proposed site plan, floor plans, existing J-L area total unit breakdown, etc.). He noted
key aspects as follows: (working from the posted plan) the core area is the focus of activities for acquisition because
the one-bedroom units are contained in that area – 55 buildings with 554 units which is also the focus of the
overcrowding, six of the buildings are to be demolished and in their place a large community facility will be
developed of 10,000 sq. ft. which will serve multiple purposes, creating a green belt of open space, over 256 more
parking spaces to be provided, over 319 more bedrooms will be created, there will be site control with Jeffrey-Lynne
to be gated at the main vehicular entrances, gating and site control will enable on-site property management to
address all common area needs, street system changed, significant addition of public open space, on-site
mangement , and the entire community gated and controlled. Total cost is approximately $54 million. Of that, $40
million would come from private sources, $24 million in cash equity from the sale of low-income housing tax
credits they would hope to obtain from the State, another $16 million would be a private loan probably from the
same consortium of lenders as Paseo Village, the other $14.5 million would come from a variety of local public
agency resources which can only be used for affordable housing.
At the conclusion of the foregoing presentations, Council Members posed questions which were answered by Mrs.
Stipkovich mostly relating to funding sources. She also re-emphasized that this is the first step. Implementation
agreements will be coming back to the Agency/Authority/Council and, If approved, staff will work with the tenants
to come up with a relocation plan. There is a lot of misinformation and confusion on some of the benefits. They
will come back to the Authority/Agency and Council with a formal relocation plan that they would have to approve.
There have been nine meetings with the owners in a variety of settings, four meetings with the tenants and five
meetings with tenant organizations. They have met with the Walnut Neighborhood Council on four occasions and
have also shown the plan to the Housing and Redevelopment Commission which recommended its approval and
also to the Planning Commission. They have had one-on-one meetings with tenants and owners. They feel this is
the best plan for the neighborhood. They have support of other departments and City Manager’s Office and ask
their approval tonight to allow them to implement the program.
Acting Police Chief Roger Baker. The Police Department enjoys a good relationship with the residents in the J-L
area and the owners. They have established that relationship over a long period of time and it has come at a great
2
ANAHEIM CIVIC CENTER, ANAHEIM HOUSING AUTHORITY
June 15, 1999
deal of expense. Over the last 10 to 12 years, they have made numerous attempts to begin community policing
projects in that area and to get the community involved – residents, owners, and managers -- into self-sustaining
programs where they can manage themselves. These are the same techniques used throughout the City with a great
deal of success. That same success has not occurred in J-L. They have as yet been unable to sustain a level of
independence. Service to date for the last 12 months amounts to approximately $500,000 of extra policing services
to maintain the quality of life for those residents who wish to achieve it. When the Police leave, calls for service
come back up, crime comes back up, and they are drawn back to the community. As yet, they have been unable to
get the J-L community to sustain itself at a quality-of-life level that the residents themselves request.
The following people then spoke to the plan, the majority in opposition, giving their reasons/concerns while others,
though not opposed, requested that the plan be wider in scope and encompass the periphery of the area along with
the core area of Jeffrey-Lynne. All comments are briefed/summarized.
Kenneth Fisher, Pepperwood Village. The Constitution forbids the seizure of private property. Go to the owners
and negotiate with them and do not use government force.
Seferino Garcia, 1233 Diamond Street, Anaheim. Allow the Neighborhood Councils in the area to work with City
staff.
Pamela Pietras , Pepperwood Village Homeowners Association (across Cerritos from J-L). If they are going to do
the project right and improve the area, do not partially fund it. Expand the project from the interior to the exterior
units as well.
Jim Benson, 905 S. Lemon, Anaheim. Sit down with community leaders who have not been consulted.
Josie Montoya . She is a representative of the United Neighborhoods for Lulac and Civil Rights Chair for the State
Lulac Board. The Jeffrey-Lynne area is made up of decent, hard-working families who are struggling to survive. In
arriving at their decision, she asked that they place themselves in the position of the community of people who live
there. They have every right to have the same level of respect and dignity as they would expect for themsleves.
Duane Roberts, 2276 Colchester , Anaheim. He outlined a number of issues of concern to him relative to the plan.
He is not opposed to low-income housing but is opposed to a project that he feels discriminates and segregates.
Francisco Ceja , 1303 W. Lynne, Anaheim. Include the people of Jeffrey-Lynne in the decision making.
Bill Moynihan , 1507 W. Cerritos, Anaheim (two doors west of the area). He is definitely in favor of improving the
area; however he is urging that they do the whole job including the perimeter of the area.
th
Allen Baldwin, 1833 17 St., Santa Ana, Orange County Community Housing Corporation. Do not file a negative
declaration for the plan but instead work on mitigation measures and the creation of new housing. The investment
of $54 million in a project such as this that may exacerbate housing availability and affordability is of great concern
to him. Answering the Mayor who asked what he would do in the area, Mr. Baldwin suggested eliminating the
garages which would give space and visibility and eliminate crime.
Abbey Silverstone , owner in Jeffrey-Lynne. It is immoral for a City or government to seize property from a land
owner and give it to someone else.
Linda Lee Grau , 24 Morning Dove, Irvine. She spoke in opposition to the proposal. Let the people who own the
properties do what is best for their properties.
Art Montez, Board Member, Centralia School District, invited by Los Amigos and Lulac. The impact report staff
has provided lacks the impact the project will have on education and children. When displacing one unit, there is
need to make it up somewhere else. If that is not done, there is non-compliance.
Maurice Abrams, 2549 Runion Place, Anaheim. He is a member of the Unitarian Church of Orange County located
in downtown Anaheim and is totally opposed to the plan. Residents have not been given full and timely information
about what is proposed. It is the duty of the Council to take care of the tenants.
3
ANAHEIM CIVIC CENTER, ANAHEIM HOUSING AUTHORITY
June 15, 1999
Ross Romero, 420 S. Euclid, Anaheim. Relocation benefits are very important. Jeffrey-Lynne is a community.
Make the residents a part of the process. (Mayor Daly asked if the relocation part of the plan is pinned down
adequately would he (Romero) be a supporter of the concept; Mr. Romero answered, who would not be. He likes
the idea of revitalizing the neighborhood.)
David Cordero, 12822 Garden Grove Blvd., Garden Grove representing the Apartment Association of Orange
County. He is present in support of the property owners and residents urging the Council to oppose the proposal.
The owners do not want to sell. Residents are not inclined to relocate and both review the proposal with great
skepticism.
James Turner, new resident of 1502 W. Laster , Anaheim. If the City turns away from the situation, he does not
believe that will benefit anybody.
Laura Romero (speaking through an interpreter), 1633 S. Jeffrey, Anaheim. Each of the residents living in the J-L
community are conscious of the area needing a change but one that will bring about the well being and security they
have always been looking for. They will support any plan that does so. They do not want their children to have an
uncertain future.
Lucille Jesinani , 834 E. Ferndale Avenue, original owner of one of the properties in Jeffrey-Lynne. She was
previously the Vice President of the J-L Owners Association and gave some background on the area. They should
not be taking anyone’s property.
Christopher Sutton, Attorney, 35 East Union Street, Ste. C, Pasadena, retained by the Jeffrey-Lynne Owners
Association and representing a number of residential tenants living within the J-L neighborhood. (See Mr. Sutton’s
letter dated June 12, 1999 which outlined issues and concerns regarding the proposed Revitalization Plan especially
with regard to the Initial Study, proposed Negative Declaration and the concern over the failure to prepare a full
Environmentatl Impact Report relative to the proposal – made a part of the record). The RFQ was not sent to the J-L
Owners Association. They requested to submit their own plans but it was refused. Staff did not mention the J-L
owners as a possible redevelopment source. Do not approve this tonight. Do an EIR, let it simmer, and then let the
owners be in charge of the process.
th
Zeke Hernandez, Deputy State Director for Lulac (League of United Latin-American Citizens), 1665 E. 4 Street,
Santa Ana. Most of the residents who live in Jeffrey-Lynne work for Disneyland. They support United
Neighborhoods/ Lulac and are against the plan being proposed to them today. There are over 100 individuals outside
of the building who are present because they want the Council to know that they are not supportive of the project or
the EIR. The project cannot be done without their input.
Judith Serafini , 278 N. Wilshire , Anaheim, SOLEVAR Community Development Corporation and also Chair of the
Fair Housing Council of Orange County. Affordable housing and the issue of housing is very important to her as
well as representing the G.I.Forum. She reiterated what Sefarino Garcia said – go forward with the idea of
developing a J-L Development Council with citizen and owner participation.
Bob Ball, 1532 W. Laster, Anaheim. He has a problem not including the perimeter areas in the project as well. He
is generally in favor but they should postpone their vote until staff, under the Council’s direction, can go back to the
drawing board to see if something can be done to include the whole project.
John Walker, 1312 W. Cerritos. ( residence – 10161 Constitution Drive, Huntington Beach with an office in
Placentia). He owns a building on the perimeter. The idea of doing the project half way is wrong. If they do not
include him, they are making a mistake.
Bob Mitchell, 1590 W. Cerritos, Anaheim. He works for the City of Los Angeles. Once wide-spread urban decay
sets in in single-family residential areas, it is one of the hardest things to reverse. He does not support the plan as
currently presented but he could support a more comprehensive plan.
Jose Perez, 4119 W. Franklin Avenue, Fullerton (owner in Jeffrey-Lynne). The have completely renovated their
property. They do not support the plan.
4
ANAHEIM CIVIC CENTER, ANAHEIM HOUSING AUTHORITY
June 15, 1999
Len Spivak , Owner in the Jeffrey-Lynne area. Redevelopment has never asked the owners to participate in the
program. They would like to work with Redevelopment and continue to work with Code Enforcement and the
Police Department.
John Huang, 915 Chestnut Place, Huntington Beach – property owner in Jeffrey Lynne. He questioned why they
picked this as a Redevelopment area. It is not a slum and it is not something the City needs to spend a lot of
taxpayer money on.
Angela Hernandez, 1613 S. Michelle Drive, Anaheim (15 years). She is not for or against the proposal. Some of
the money should be spent to assist the tenants to help in getting the multiple families that live in one-bedroom units
more affordable living. Put in two bedrooms and three bedrooms. If not in the area, then in another part of
Anaheim where they can live closer to their jobs. Everybody should benefit and not just that area.
Linda Sank, 9422 Hazel Circle, Villa Park. They own the apartments at 1603 and 1607 S. Walnut. When the
owners finally saw the plan, they were devastated. It looks like they are going to be hurt by the plan. She thought
eminent domain was for slum lords. It is not fair.
David Quezada , Fair Housing Council of Orange County, 201 S. Broadway, Santa Ana. They have been working
diligently in the area for the last seven months. There is a management problem in the vicinity. The other problem
is assuring they provide housing for all economic segments and this City has an obligation to do so like all cities.
Also, replacement housing on a one-to-one basis is important – 85 to 90% of the families living in the area are
interested in bettering their future and living conditions. He is looking forward to receiving and reviewing more
information on the plan.
Amin David, 419 S. Cole St., Anaheim. When he was on the Planning Commission, the General Plan said, “we will
provide affordable housing.” He questioned where the 1,000 people were going to go. He is also concerned about
the “bashing” of the neighborhood – the unauthorized seige of Jeffrey-Lynne. He suggested making it simple –
make a pool of all the money available to the property owners so they can borrow from that pool.
Hao Vu Pham , 1338 W. Lynne, Anaheim, owner in the Jeffrey-Lynne area. They invested in the property and put
time and effort into improving it and have a good relationship with their tenants. They oppose the plan.
Chairman/Mayor Daly. Public input is concluded. He asked to hear from staff and Mr. Witte relative to some of the
issues raised.
Lisa Stipkovich , Executive Director of Community Development. She addressed the major issues of concern –
eminent domain possibilities, relocation, concern of surrounding property owners that the plan does not go far
enough. She also spoke to some of the other issues broached such as the request for creation of an advisory
committee for tenants in the community which staff would not object to. She also emphasized and reiterated that
they are trying to work on expanding the housing stock, not reducing it. (She clarified for Council Member Tait that
they are decreasing units by 71 but increasing the number of bedrooms by 319 – one-bedroom units will be
converted to two, three and four-bedroom units theoretically expanding the number of people that could live in the
community.) They also need to work with surrounding owners a great deal more and talk about what the periphery
owners would be required to do and why they think an association can work in that case because those are the larger
units and they tend to be better maintained. It is something they would still have to work on.
Bill Witte. Relative to some of the concerns expressed regarding non-participation of property owners, he explained
that part of the problem is that they have just begun the process. It is difficult to answer many of the questions until
they have an opportunity to meet with and discuss the plan with the various owners. It does not have to be a straight
acquisition. The proposed action tonight is enabling them to go forward and to come back with the details of exactly
how the plan will be implemented.
Council Member McCracken . If there are other options, perhaps owner-participation, those ought to be included as
possible alternatives to get the cooperation of the owners. She would like some choices. This plan does not give
any of the guidelines.
Mr. Witte explained if the plan is approved, they would redouble their efforts to meet with all owners first in the
core and then in the perimeter area. If they are interested, they would attempt to negotiate a fair price; if not, there
may be another option. He explained some alternatives to provide incentives.
5
ANAHEIM CIVIC CENTER, ANAHEIM HOUSING AUTHORITY
June 15, 1999
Mrs. Stipkovich also explained for Council Member Tait relative to displacement of families, the relocation plan,
which would be dependent upon further analysis of individuals in the community, indicates that they will get
relocation benefits – Section 8 or rental assistance. The issue would be for them to interview all the families in an
area that would be impacted and then come back with more specifics and subsequently submit the relocation plan
for approval. This is not going to be a project that will happen tomorrow. It will take months just to get to a level
where they could come back and give input. No one would be displaced before adoption of a plan. She explained
for the Mayor that the goal is to bring back a relocation plan that assures no one will be displaced but she cannot
guarantee that. The entire plan does create more affordable housing without overcrowding. The net effect is less
units and more bedrooms since the need is to accommodate large families.
The Mayor asked the City Manager to comment relative to his staff’s ability to bring back a relocation plan and to
implement the various steps ; City Manager Ruth. Staff has a track record of working with neighborhoods trying to
improve the quality of life. It is not their intent to drive people out of their homes but to improve quality of life. He
has confidence that staff and the private sector, given the right tools, can work with the residents and develop with
them programs that can accommodate their living needs and living standards. There needs to be more
communication. There is no way staff has tried to mislead anyone. They have tried to work with the citizens with
the goal to improve their quality of life and to minimize the problems in the area. He feels comfortable that staff
with this plan can go back and work with the residents, understand their issues, work with the property owners and
come up with a comprehensive plan that will work for everybody.
Council Member Kring . She would like to have an advisory board of tenants and suggested to City staff before they
vote to go back to the owners and talk with them and get their input. She recommends postponing this vote until
staff has had a chance to put the advisory board together for the tenants and see where that goes.
Mayor Daly. The prospect of an EIR challenge was raised. He would like to suggest that the Council discuss that
briefly in closed session.
City Attorney White. That would be an appropriate reason for a Closed Session to get advice concerning potential
litigation.
RECESS – CLOSED SESSION : Mayor Daly moved to recess to Closed Session to get advice regarding potential
litigation. Council Member Kring seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. (9:00 p.m.)
AFTER RECESS : The Mayor called the Redevelopment Agency/Housing Authority and Council meeting to order
(9:45 P.M.).
Mayor Daly. Following up on a comment by Mrs. Stipkovich, the notion of a Tenant’s Advisory Board is an
excellent idea. He asked if she could create such a Board so they would have maximum input on any relocation
plans that will be put together.
Lisa Stipkovich . They will work on setting up a Tenant’s Advisory Board and do so as soon as possible. It will take
a few weeks.
Mayor Daly. He supports moving forward with the concept of rehabilitating Jeffrey-Lynne. There is disagreement
about how comprehensive the plan should be with some of the neighbors wanting a more ambitious and expensive
plan. Some of the property owners feel City government should stay out of it entirely. There are tenants who are
facing uncertainty and want answers to questions that do not have answers. It is important for the City to move
forward. They have been working in earnest on a plan for the last two years. This is a positive step that can be fine-
tuned and adjusted. The City has a credible track record in other neighborhoods. He is hoping they can move
forward tonight but if not at the earliest opportunity.
Council Member Kring . She would like to have staff go back and talk to the landlords as a group or individually to
get their input. She also supports the advisory board and because of that, she would like to postpone their vote until
July 13, 1999. At that point, they will have more information concerning the displacement of tenants and also input
from the landlords.
6
ANAHEIM CIVIC CENTER, ANAHEIM HOUSING AUTHORITY
June 15, 1999
MOTION. Council Member Kring moved to postpone the recommended actions relative to the Jeffrey-Lynne area
under the Redevelopment Agency, Housing Authority and Council until July 13, 1999. Council Member
McCracken seconded the motion.
Before a vote was taken, City Attorney White explained that a separate vote would have to be taken on each. The
primary lead agency is the Housing Authority and the motion as stated should relate first to the Housing Authority
and if it carries, to the other agencies.
Council Member Tait . He will support the continuance but has some serious reservations with the plan. He believes
it will take more than fine tuning. His feeling is they should start from “square one”. He believes it is flawed for
two reasons – it is based on the power of eminent domain and, secondly, it will displace at least 71 families. He has
no problem with spending the money to revitalize Jeffrey-Lynne but if the City is going to spend $14 million he
feels they should spend it right.
MOTION. Authority Member Kring moved to continue Item 1. and 2. on the Housing Authority Agenda to July 13,
1999. Authority Member McCracken seconded the motion.
th
Before a vote was taken, Council Member McCracken stated before the 13 (of July) she would like to know the
other options on how the project could be done and how the owners could participate as stated by Mr. Witte as well
as some other options or alternatives to eminent domain; Council Member Kring . She would like to get feedback
th
from the landlords prior to the meeting of the 13 .
A vote was then taken on the foregoing motion under the Housing Authority. MOTION CARRIED.
MOTION. Agency Member Kring moved to postpone the recommended action relative to the Jeffrey-Lynne area
under the Redevelopment Agency, Item 2. to July 13, 1999. Agency Member McCracken seconded the motion.
MOTION CARRIED.
MOTION. Council Member Kring moved to postpone the recommended action relative to the Jeffrey-Lynne area
under Council Agenda Item A29. to July 13, 1999. Council Member McCracken seconded the motion. MOTION
CARRIED.
ADJOURNMENT: Chairman Daly moved to adjourn, Authority Member McCracken seconded the motion.
MOTION CARRIED. (9:56 P.M.)
LEONORA N. SOHL
SECRETARY
7