2012/05/08ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEET OF MAY 8, 2 012
The May 8, 2012 regular meeting of the Anaheim City Council was called to order at 3:06 P.M
in the Chambers of Anaheim City Hall located at 200 South Anaheim Boulevard.
PRESENT: Mayor Tom Tait and Council Members Gail Eastman, Lorri Galloway, Kris Murray
and Harry Sidhu
STAFF PRESENT: Acting City Manager Bob Wingenroth, City Attorney Cristina Talley, and
City Clerk Linda Andal
BUDGET UPDATE WORKSHOP:
Debbie Moreno, Acting Finance Director, stated the budget update would focus on Anaheim's
General Fund, specifically three revenue sources comprising 90 percent of the fund's resources;
i.e., Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT), Sales and Use Tax and Property Taxes. At the start of
FY 2010/11, she acknowledged, expenses had exceeded revenues and Anaheim had been
losing $51,000 a day, a loss that had been turned around in the current budget which no longer
relied on the use of reserves and reflected a balanced budget based on moderate revenue
projections.
Currently, she pointed out, TOT had seen growth of approximately 10 percent in the first part of
2012 and was expected to moderate slightly to finish with an anticipated 8.2 percent increase.
Sales and Use Taxes were also up by 11 percent compared to last year; however, at the end of
this fiscal year, it was projected to finish with a 6.1 percent increase over the prior year.
Property taxes had remained fairly steady and were projected at a slight decline for this fiscal
year.
For FY 2012/13, Ms. Moreno explained the most likely scenario would see a 7.5 percent growth
in TOT revenues. As the economic recovery continued to strengthen over the next couple of
years, staff expected the hotel occupancy and average daily rate levels to increase taking into
account the Disney California Adventure venue scheduled to open in 2012. For sales and use
taxes, the projected growth for the next year was 5.9 percent, slightly less than the current year
anticipated growth of 6.1 percent. She remarked that although growth was occurring, sales and
use tax levels remained at the 2005/06 range. She added for the last full calendar year of
revenues, the state of California had seen growth of about 8.8 percent, Orange County reflected
8.1 percent, and Anaheim came in slightly higher at 9.7 percent. She expected continued
growth in all sectors, especially transportation, construction and auto sales, commenting the
average car age in use was about 10.8 years. Property taxes would remain steady with Orange
County estimating, in the best case scenario, a one percent decline.
Ms. Moreno indicated a preliminary plan had been developed for FY 2012/13 based on
sustained revenue growth, maintaining current service levels, and as resources became
available, funds would be provided for council priorities. The preliminary plan continued with no
reliance on reserves and watchful of PERS impacts for long -term financial planning. The plan
included expenses added for graffiti contracts and the operation of the Ponderosa Library for
five days a week. Some of the expenditures had increased, she informed Council, and some
revenues such as CDBG and UASI grants reflected reductions in the amount of funding
received. Labor concessions were sun - setting and other miscellaneous changes were also
Council Meeting Minutes of May 8, 2012
Page 2 of 17
reflected in the preliminary budget plan with reserves identified as $2.8 million. She noted that
planning for the next five years reflected a surplus drop down to $1.7 million which related to
PERS anticipated impacts in years 13/14 and 15/16.
Ms. Moreno emphasized, should Council wish to increase some expenditures, staff
recommended $1.5 million for on -going expenditures which would still keep the plan with no
reliance on reserves and allow for another $800,000 for one time expenditures. If those
adjustments were made and the budget continued to add to reserves, there would be an
opportunity to provide for some additional services. She noted if the on -going expenditures
were increased by 1.5 percent, a one month reserve of 8.3 percent would be maintained, which
fell within the long- standing reserve policy of 7 to 10 percent, although, the Government
Financing Office of the U.S. and Canada recommended two months of reserves or 16.6 percent.
In addition, as Anaheim was fully funded for setaside monies regarding compensated absences
and future self - insurance liabilities, there was another $21 million setaside that the General
Fund could use in case of a catastrophic event, which would result in two months of reserves.
The presentation ended with Ms. Moreno remarking the departments would put together budget
packages and additional services for consideration during the June presentations. On May 25 th ,
the proposed budget document would be available, and on June 5 the first budget
presentations would be heard with the second round occurring on June 19
Council Member Eastman appreciated hearing that the Ponderosa Library, one of Council's
long -term goals, would be funded for operation. Council Member Galloway requested funding
details on the graffiti contract and Ponderosa Library with Ms. Moreno replying the library
operating for five days a week would run $200,000 a year and the graffiti contract added $1
million to the budget, with both those items already accounted for in the preliminary plan. Mayor
Tait expressed concern for ongoing PERS impacts. Ms. Moreno reported the increase for the
miscellaneous group for the next fiscal years would be one to two percent higher with safety
members seeing two to three percent higher costs, for a total of $2.5 million included in the
numbers given for the preliminary plan. For the years going beyond, FY's 14/15, 15/16 and
16/17, Ms. Moreno explained, assumptions were built in for approximately $4 million. Mayor
Tait added that he supported the two month reserve recommendation. Mayor Pro Tern Sidhu
also supported the two month reserve option and inquired whether salary increases were
reflected in the preliminary plan with Ms. Moreno responding no general salary increases were
assumed and the same level of staffing was retained (with the exception of additional services
that might be added).
ADDITIONS /DELETIONS TO CLOSED SESSION: None
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON CLOSED SESSION ITEMS: None
At 3:31 P.M., Council recessed to closed session for consideration of the following items.
CLOSED SESSION:
CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - ANTICIPATED LITIGATION
Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to subdivision (b) of Government Code
Section 54956.9: One potential case.
Council Meeting Minutes of May 8, 2012
Page 3 of 17
2. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - ANTICIPATED LITIGATION
Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to subdivision (b) of Government Code
Section 54956.9: Claim of Michael Buss
3. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS
(Subdivision (a) of Section 54957.6 of the Government Code)
Agency Representative: Kristine Ridge
Employee Organization: Anaheim Municipal Employee's Association
At 5:04 P.M., council returned from closed session for the remainder of the agenda.
invocation: Ken Singh, Guru Nanak Sikh Temple
Fla Salute: Council Member Eastman
Presentations: Proclaiming May14 -18 2012, as Orange County Bike to Work Week
Council Member Galloway, OCTA Board Member, accepted the proclamation on behalf of
OCTA, inviting the community to participate in a bike ride from the Orange Station to OCTA
headquarters in Santa Ana.
Recognizing the graduates of the Community Emergency Response
Team (CERT) Class
Mary Jo Flynn, Emergency Management Assistant Director, introduced the recent graduates of
the CERT program, a volunteer program training participants to assist during emergencies.
Acceptance of Other Recognitions (To be presented at a later date):
Proclaiming May 2012, as Water Awareness Month
Jarred Ross, Water Conservation Manager, thanked Council for recognizing Water Awareness
Month and highlighted the events, landscape workshops and other water -wise incentives
available to the community.
Proclaiming May 2012, as National Community Action Month
Clarence Ray, Community Action Partnership of Orange County, emphasized the organization
had been around for 46 years, improving communities and dedicated to helping people help
each other.
May 4, 2012, as Meals on Wheels Day in Anaheim
Proclaiming May 6 - 12, 2012, as Wildfire Awareness Week
Jeff Lutz, Fire Marshal, Anaheim Fire Department, remarked wildfires were a year -round
concern and urged homeowners to take the necessary steps to prepare their family and their
homes from potential wildfires.
Recognizing the recipients of the Anaheim Union High School District
Superintendent's Scholar - Athlete Awards
Council Meeting Minutes of May 8, 2012
Page 4 of 17
Recognizing Christine Terry on her retirement from the North Orange
County Community College District School of Continuing Education
ADDITIONS /DELETIONS TO THE AGENDA: Staff requested Item No. 28 be continued to May
29, 2012 as a result of revisions made to the development agreement.
PUBLIC COMMENTS (all agenda items, except public hearings):
Cecil Jordan Corcoran, Outreach Homeless Ministries, discussed gang activities and the need
for family counseling programs.
James Robert Reade voiced his opinion on gang activity impacts to the community.
Michele Lieberman and Megan Shigo announced the historic home and garden plus Anaheim
Brewery tour scheduled for Memorial weekend, inviting the community to attend.
Moses Morales, high school student, supported -the "Let the People Vote" initiative urging
interested persons to sign the petition.
Jeff Farano, Chamber of Commerce, spoke in support of Item 24, the first set of
recommendations from the regulatory relief task force, simplifying Anaheim's business
regulations and making them easier to understand and less expensive to comply. He remarked
the Chamber was proud to be a major participant in this undertaking and looked forward to
making Anaheim the most business friendly city in the state.
William Fitzgerald, Anaheim Home, offered his opinion regarding the city of Yorba Linda's
rejection of Anaheim's proposal for police services in their community.
William Grisholia reported the "Let the People Vote" initiative was strong and support was
increasing. He urged residents to download the petition and support their position.
Patricia Carter remarked he had two homes on Lido Street, had resided there for 46 years and
objected that he would have to pay for permit parking caused by overflow parking from Anaheim
Memorial Hospital.
Archie McVictor protested having to pay for permit parking on Lido Street after having lived
there for 43 years.
CONSENT CALENDAR: At 5:40 P.M., Council Member Eastman requested Item No. 20 be
removed from the consent calendar for further discussion and Council Member Murray pulled
Item No. 24. Mayor Tait indicated he would record an abstention on Item No. 6, Item No. 13
and Item No. 18 due to potential conflicts of interest. Council Member Eastman moved to waive
reading in full of all ordinances and resolutions and to adopt the balance of the consent calendar
as presented, seconded by Council Member Galloway. Roll Call Vote: Ayes — 5 (Mayor Tait
and Council Members: Eastman, Galloway, Murray and Sidhu). Noes — 0. Motion Carried
1. Receive and file minutes of the Budget, investment and Technology Commission
meeting of November 16, 2011, Library Board meeting of January 9, 2012, and Sister
8105 City Commission meetings of June 27, 2011, July 25, 2011, August 22, 2011,
Council Meeting Minutes of May 8, 2012
Page 5 of 17
September 26, 2011, October 24, 2011, November 28, 2011, January 23, 2012,
February 16, 2012 and March 28, 2012.
2. Determine on the basis of the evidence submitted by Macquarie Platinum Katella, Inc.
that the property owner has complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of
Development Agreement No. 2005 -00007 for the 2010 -11 review period for the
AGR -3639 development of a 336 -unit condominium project located at 1725 and 1755 Auburn Way
and 1 East Katelia Avenue in the Platinum Triangle.
3. Ratify change orders with Trillium USA and Clean Energy increasing the amounts of the
current purchase orders by a total of $40,000 in order to maintain a continuous supply of
compressed natural gas for the City's fleet vehicles.
4. Approve a License Agreement with Mariposa Women and Family Center allowing
Mariposa use of space at the Anaheim Family Justice Center to provide counseling
AGR -7210 services to clients of the Center.
5. Approve the Agreement for Acquisition of Real Property with SRS Properties, LLC, in the
purchase amount of $133,000, for property located at 3470 East La Palma Avenue for
AGR - 6901.11 the Anaheim Canyon Metrolink Pedestrian Improvement Project (RNVACQ2012- 00422).
6. Approve the Agreement for Acquisition of Real Property with Smith Properties, in the
purchase amount of $71,000, for property located at 3480 East La Palma Avenue for the
AGR - 6901.111 Anaheim Canyon Metrolink Pedestrian Improvement Project (RNVACO2012- 00423).
Mayor Tait abstained due to a potential conflict of interest. Roll Call Vote: Ayes - 4: (Council
Members; Eastman, Galloway, Murray and Sidhu.) Noes — 0. Abstention - 1: Mayor Tait. Motion
to approve carried.
7. Approve the Agreement for Acquisition of Real Property with HD Development of
Maryland, Inc., in the purchase amount of $50,000, for property located at 1011 North
Tustin Avenue for the Tustin Avenue and La Palma Avenue Improvement Project
AGR - 7131.1 (R/VVACQ2010- 00379).
8. Approve the Agreement for Acquisition of Tenant - Seller's Interest in Real Property with
Canyon Fireplace Corporation, in the payment amount of $175,405, for property located
AGR - 6194.1 at 2600 -A East Katella Avenue for the AR T iC project.
9. Approve the Design and Engineering Services Agreement with GHD, Inc., in an amount
not to exceed $480,000, for the Ball Road and Sunkist Intersection Improvements
AGR -7211 Project.
10. Approve an Agreement with Psomas, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $410,000, for
engineering services for the first revision to the Combined Central Anaheim Master Plan
AGR -7212 of Sanitary Sewers.
11. Approve the First Amendment to Agreement with Mark Thomas & Company, Inc., for an
additional amount of $95,976 for an amended contract total not to exceed $629,914, for
engineering design services for the Katella Avenue Undercrossing Improvements for the
AGR - 7013.1 1 -5 Freeway from Manchester Avenue to Anaheim Way.
Council Meeting Minutes of May 8, 2012
Page 6 of 17
12. Approve the First Amendment to Amended and Restated Lease Agreement with
AGR- 2502.A.1 Anaheim Hotel, LLC, to facilitate the Grand Plaza at the Anaheim Convention Center.
13. Approve the Third Amendment to Agreement with KPMG LLP, in the amount of
AGR- 1683.1 $180,000, for ARTIC project management consultant and financial advisory services.
Mayor Tait abstained due to a potential conflict of interest. Rol/ Call Vote: Ayes - 4: (Council
Members; Eastman, Galloway. Murray and Sidhu.) Noes — 0. Abstention - 1: Mayor Tait. Motion
to approve carried
14. Approve and authorize the Public Utilities General Manager to execute and take the
necessary actions to implement and administer the Mine Reclamation and Trust Funds
Agreement (Agreement) among the San Juan Participants and approve the San Juan
Generation Station Reclamation Trust Agreement (Trust Agreement) with U.S. Bank
AGR - 1683.1 National Association with such changes, insertions and omissions as approved by the
AGR - 1683.11 City Attorney consistent with the Agreement and authorize the General Manager to
execute and deliver the Trust Agreement and any other documents and instruments
necessary to implement and administer the Trust Agreement.
15. Approve and authorize the Public Utilities General Manager to execute and take the
necessary actions to implement the Wireline Crossing Agreement and related
documents with the Union Pacific Railroad Company for power and communication lines
AGR -7213 crossing underneath the railroad tracks within Underground District No. 59 -
Brookhurst/Katella.
16. Approve and authorize the Public Utilities General Manager to execute and take the
necessary or advisable actions to implement the Fifth Amendment to the Electric Service
AGR - 1754.5 Agreement and any related documents with Walt Disney Parks and Resorts U.S., Inc. to
continue to provide electric service to the Disney Project.
17. RESOLUTION NO. 2012 -034 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ANAHEIM accepting certain deeds conveying to the City of Anaheim
P124 certain real properties or interests therein (City Deed Nos. 11485, 11495, 11496, and
11497).
18. RESOLUTION NO. 2012 -035 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ANAHEIM accepting certain deeds conveying to the City of Anaheim
P124 certain real properties or interests therein (City Deed Nos. 11492, 11493 and 11494).
Mayor Tait abstained due to a potential conflict of interest. Roll Call Vote: Ayes - 4: (Council
Members; Eastman, Galloway, Murray and Sidhu.) Noes — 0. Abstention - 1: Mayor Tait. Motion
to approve carried.
19. RESOLUTION NO. 2012 -036 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ANAHEIM accepting irrevocable offers of dedication of certain property
P178 and /or facilities (Tract Map No. 12147).
Council Meeting Minutes of May 8, 2012
Page 7 of 17
21. RESOLUTION NO. 2012 -037 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ANAHEIM designating Parkwood Street from Crescent Avenue to
D175 Westmont Drive as "Permit Parking Only" Streets within Permit - Eligible Parking District
No. 21 (Permit Parking Area No. 21).
22. RESOLUTION NO. 2012 -038 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ANAHEIM vacating two public utility easements located at 2738 West
Pilo Lincoln Avenue pursuant to California Streets and Highway Code Section 8330, et seq. -
Summary Vacation (Abandonment No. ABA2012- 00248).
23. ORDINANCE NO. 6241 (ADOPTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM amending Ordinance No. 6212 temporarily waiving certain provisions of
M142 Chapter 17.38 of Title 17 of the Anaheim Municipal Code relating to deferral of certain
impact fees (Introduced at the Council meeting of April 17, 2012, Item No. 18).
25. Approve minutes of the Council meeting of April 17, 2012.
END OF CONSENT:
20. RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ANAHEIM designating Lido Street from La Palma Avenue to Claredge
D175 Drive "Permit Parking Only" street within Permit - Eligible Parking District No. 17
(Anaheim Memorial).
Mark Vukojevic, City Engineer, reported this item was for the approval of permit parking on Lido
Street, a neighborhood street that was part of the Anaheim Memorial District first established in
2007 and approved when the City implemented its permit parking policy. Staff had met and
worked with residents requesting the permit parking, and conducted a neighborhood vote in
which the majority of residents voted in favor for the permits. He added all minimum threshold
requirements were met and over the last couple of years staff had studied reducing the cost of
permits in an effort to make them as convenient as possible to obtain.
Council Member Eastman commented this was a sensitive issue in many neighborhoods and
recommended the policy be reevaluated to determine whether any other parking control efforts
could be considered. Public Works Director Natalie Meeks, in response to a question by Mayor
Pro Tem Sidhu, remarked the survey had been sent to 20 households on Lido Street and 15 of
those homeowners had responded and voted, eleven of which were in support of permit
parking. The permit fee was $30 per car and expired in two years. She added the department
streamlined the process as much as possible and $30 was the smallest fee possible to recover
any of the administrative costs. Council Member Murray asked whether the continuation of this
item would impact other neighborhoods. With Ms. Meek responding no, Council Member Murray
requested staff reach out to those five residents that had not participated in the original vote to
determine their preferences, adding that the vote was a bare majority. Ms. Meeks provided that
it was typical for a percentage not to vote and shared that the city's policy requires a minimum
response rate, then the majority rules.
Council Member Galloway shared her challenges with this decision asking if Council could
bifurcate by honoring the vote of the neighborhood that was rightfully and efficiently taken while
Council Meeting Minutes of May 8, 2012
Page 8 of 17
honoring the issues of the homeowners. Ms. Meeks advised that staff could review the policy to
consider a supplemental policy for hardship.
Mayor Tait moved to continue this item to June 5, 2012 to allow staff additional time for review
taking into account the comments they heard during this meeting. Staff was also directed to
examine the current permit parking policy with a report back to Council, seconded by Council
Member Eastman. Roll Call Vote: Ayes — 5: (Mayor Tait and Council Members: Eastman,
Galloway, Murray and Sidhu.) Noes — 0. Motion Carried.
24. ORDINANCE NO. (INTRODUCTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM amending various Chapters of Titles 3, 4, 6, 7, 8 and 18 of the
M142 Anaheim Municipal Code (Regulatory Relief Task Force Recommendations). This item
continued to May 29, 2092
Acting City Manager Bob Wingenroth reported this item was the result of staff efforts in
conjunction with recommendations from the Regulatory Relief Task Force charged with lowering
the regulatory burden on businesses by reducing compliance time and costs and increasing
certainty. He added these recommendations were unanimously approved by the City's
Planning Commission in March.
CJ Amstrup, Planning Department, explained this item was an amendment to the Code to
streamline business permit regulations and reduce the number of businesses that required a
Conditional Use Permit (CUP) or a parking variance. One of the key recommendations of the
Task Force was to reduce the time and cost of opening a business in Anaheim and to achieve
this goal, seven chapters of the business regulations code were eliminated. Those seven
chapters related to the operation of businesses that were either regulated by other state
agencies or subject to other city approvals or had no identified land use impact. In addition, he
explained, nine other chapters and associated permits had been rolled into the zoning code,
which eliminated potentially redundant permits and reduced transactions necessary to open a
business in the city. Annual renewals and the cost and time associated with these renewals
would also be eliminated.
After the Planning Commission hearing, he added, staff identified a further reduction in
regulations for amusement devices and the ordinance now before Council reflected elimination
of the requirement for a regulatory permit for pool tables and amusement devices where they
were an accessory to another business. This code amendment, he further explained, also
included a complete update of the massage ordinance to comply with recent changes to state
law which would allow massage businesses by right and would bring city code into alignment
with state requirements for zoning and licenses. He pointed out whether or not these changes
were incorporated into the zoning ordinance; the city would have to defer to state requirements
in dealing with massage businesses.
Mr. Amstrup reported the task force also recommended the types of businesses requiring a
CUP be reduced and identified approximately 70 businesses that through development
standards or administrative review process could be operated without impacting neighboring
businesses or properties. The proposed ordinance has identified the first 16 business types for
which staff had developed standards. By requiring these activities to be conducted in doors or
screened from view, the ordinance wouid allow uses such as veterinary hospitals, equipment
rental businesses, auto parts sales, and outdoor storage to open without a CUP, a process that
Council Meeting Minutes of May 8, 2012
Page 9 of 17
normally took two to three months for eventual approval by the Planning Commission. The
typical conditions of approval were evaluated, he added, and were now included as
development standards within the code and any potential impacts to adjacent properties would
still be addressed.
Another recommendation of the regulatory task force was to provide more discretion to staff
which accomplished that goal by revising the requirements for shared parking. The revised
code amendment would establish a process allowing staff to consider various factors when
determining the required number of parking spaces for a property and could save business
owners two to three months in processing time and between $4,000 and $8,000 in fee costs.
The amendment would not reduce the number of parking spaces for either type of businesses
but would allow into consideration the fact the uses could occur at different times and therefore
adequate parking would be available.
Lastly, he explained, the code amendment contained updates and clarifications to code
provisions and included reference changes throughout the code to reflect the substantive
changes proposed in the ordinance. After the distribution of this ordinance, he further added
staff identified an omission of language related to emergency shelter code requirements and
provided Council with a copy of the final revised ordinance which added these sections back to
reflect existing code only.
Council Member Murray remarked she fully supported the policy behind the proposed revisions
but recognized there was much information on the breadth and scope of the changes proposed.
She asked for details regarding the seven chapters eliminated. Mr. Amstrup responded the
chapters dealt with regulatory permits for bus shelters, amusement devices, figure model
studies, fortune telling, tattooing establishments, dance studios and social studios, all of which
were addressed elsewhere in the code. Regarding shared parking between businesses,
Council Member Murray asked how follow -up would be done, since business models changed
along with hours of operation. Mr. Amstrup responded the permit for shared parking would
require signatures of the property owner requesting the shared parking and also signatures from
other affected property owners. There would be acknowledgement that the permit only ran as
long as the hours of operation remained consistent and if there were changes; staff would have
to reevaluate the permit. She asked what permitted "by right" meant. Mr. Amstrup replied if a
use was identified in the zoning ordinance as conditionally permitted, it meant it required a CUP
which was a process by which staff made a recommendation to the Planning Commission
regarding the compatibility and consistency of that use for surrounding areas and required
Planning Commission approval. Permitted by right would have staff reviewing the consistency
with development standards and the code and then the issuance of a building permit. He
pointed out staff examined the 16 uses listed, reviewed past CUP's and where there were
consistent types of conditions of approval applied by the Commission, converted them to
development standards. He added all of the same code enforcement available for a CUP was
available for a use permitted by right.
Council Member Murray inquired if Council could have additional time to review the amendment
as it contained a great deal of information and while she agreed with the goals of the regulatory
relief task force, she would like the ability to ask additional technical questions. Council Member
Eastman commended staff and the task force for their efforts and concurred with continuing this
matter until the next meeting. Council Member Murray moved to continue Item No. 24 to the
May 29, 2012 agenda, seconded by Council Member Eastman. Roll Call Vote: Roll call vote:
Council Meeting Minutes of May 8, 2012
Page 10 of 17
Ayes — 5: (Mayor Tait and Council Members: Eastman, Galloway, Murray and Sidhu.) Noes — 0.
Motion to continue approved.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
26. This is a public hearing to consider a resolution determining the public interest and
necessity for the acquisition of portions of property located at 225 South Imperial
Highway for the Imperial Highway Safety Routes to School Sidewalk Widening Project,
P121 RESOLUTION NO. 2012 -039 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ANAHEIM determining the public interest and necessity for the acquisition
of portions of property located at 225 South Imperial Highway for the purposes of the
Imperial Highway Safety Routes to School Sidewalk Widening Project (R/W ACQ2011-
00399).
The first public hearing was heard at 6:20 P.M.
Natalie Meeks, Public Works Director, reported this resolution was for the acquisition of right -of-
way for the construction of Imperial Highway Safe Routes to School Sidewalk Widening project.
The project would widen the sidewalk on the west side of Imperial Highway from an existing two
feet to five feet. It would also improve the addition of access ramps, curb and cutter,
landscaping and modifications to the existing median, as well as construction of a new retaining
wall and fence. The improvements would also enhance pedestrian safety around imperial
Elementary School, Canyon High School and Canyon Hills Special Education School. Currently,
she explained, pedestrians must negotiate sidewalks as narrow as 18 inches at certain points
and inaccessible to wheelchairs. The proposed acquisition consisted of a permanent
acquisition for the sidewalk and wall improvements and a temporary construction easement to
work on and connect to the adjacent property. She added, the City's initial offer to acquire
proposed a reduced permanent acquisition that would have placed the retaining wall on private
property, a routine decision, as it left the retaining wall under the control of the private property
owner allowing for modification or removal of the wall in the future. in this case, she explained,
the property owner's representative submitted a written objection to having the retaining wall
placed on the private property, staff modified the acquisition and the offer now included the area
of the retaining wall in the public right -of -way. Based on the current objection letter submitted
by the property owner's representative, Ms. Meeks stated, it did not appear they had modified
their objections based on the revised offer and therefore a response to their objections was
provided and would be included in the record. She further stated staff was confident an
agreement would be reached; however, this legal process should move forward as the
ownership was held by a homeowners association and due to the complexity of the ownership
interest, filing the eminent domain action would be the most efficient way of obtaining the rights
to the property.
Mayor Tait opened the public hearing, explaining comments would be limited to whether the
public interest and necessity required the project, 2) whether the project was planned and
located in a manner most compatible with the greatest public good and the least private injury,
3) whether the property sought to be acquired was necessary for the project, 4) whether the
offer required by government code section 7267.2 had been made to the owner or owners of
record, and 5) whether the city had met all other perquisites to exercise of eminent domain in
Council Meeting Minutes of May 8, 2012
Page it of 17
connection with the property. Mayor Tait invited the owner or representatives to speak followed
by members of the public.
William Fitzgerald, Anaheim Home, objected to this action stating the imperial Street sidewalk
project was not in the public interest, was not for the greater good, was not necessary and a fair
offer was not given to the property owners.
With no other comments offered, Mayor Tait closed the public hearing.
After discussing details of the proposed project, Mayor Pro Tern Sidhu remarked he was fully
supportive of this project which would make traversing an 18 inch sidewalk on a busy street
adjacent to schools a much safer environment. Council Member Eastman remarked it was
another example of staff identifying a community need, and pursuing and receiving grant funds
specifically earmarked for this project.
Council Member Eastman then moved to approve RESOLUTION NO. 2012 -039 OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM determining the public interest and necessity for the
acquisition of portions of property located at 225 South imperial Highway for the purposes of the
Imperial Highway Safety Routes to School Sidewalk Widening Project, seconded by Mayor Pro
Tem Sidhu. Roll Call Vote: Ayes — 5: (Mayor Tait and Council Members: Eastman, Galloway,
Murray and Sidhu.) Noes — 0. Motion Carried.
27. This is a public hearing to consider the Taxi Advisory Committee recommendation and
three ordinances granting taxi franchises to the following: 1) Yellow Cab Company of
Northern Orange County, Inc. dba: Yellow Cab of Greater Orange County for 135
F130.2 taxicabs; 2) Cabco, Inc. dba: California Yellow Cab for 60 taxicabs; and 3) A White and
Yellow Cab, Inc. dba: A Taxi Cab for 60 taxicabs.
Sandra Sagert, Acting Planning Director, announced the Taxi Advisory Committee (TAC)
appointed in November of 2011, had recommended Council award taxi franchises to three
companies for the next ten years after going through a lengthy Request for Proposal (RFP)
process. TAC, she noted, consisted of six members representing Police, Code Enforcement,
Community Services, the Convention Center and the hospital and hotel industries. Additionally,
she remarked, a consultant had been retained to assess the needs of taxi service in the city,
proposed several changes to the RFP such as required uniforms, credit card terminals in
vehicles, and Certified Tourism Ambassador Training. The study also determined the existing
base allocation of 255 taxicabs was more than adequate for the demand in the city.
Four proposals were submitted on March 2012 by Yellow Cab of Greater Orange County,
California Yellow, A -Taxi and 24/7 Taxicab. All four met the minimum bidding requirements
established in the RFP and each were evaluated taking into account company experience,
management experience, financial capacity and stability, management and quality insurance,
facilities and equipment, fleet sustainability and fleet accessibility. The final scoring showed
Yellow Cab of Greater Orange County receiving 90.5 points from a possible total of 100,
California Yellow with a total of 85.5, A -Taxi with a total of 78.75 and 24/7 at 62.25.
TAC recommended award of franchises to the top three proposals, as it would provide
competition and flexibility to meet high demands during conventions with more available cabs to
provide sufficient service to meet demands. The committee determined 24/7 Taxi Cab had
failed to demonstrate and provide detailed support documentation as to how they would be able
Council Meeting Minutes of May 8, 2012
Page 12 of 17
to establish a franchise in Anaheim if awarded, and to meet the requirements of maintaining a
franchise. Yellow Cab of Greater Orange County had the highest marks in every category
except fleet sustainability and had demonstrated they had the most experience, provided great
service to Anaheim and received the least amount of complaints. TAC felt that Yellow Cab had
been dedicated to Anaheim residents, businesses and visitors since 1945 and should continue
to provide excellent service. She stated California Yellow Cab had made improvements in
quality control and insurance along with fleet sustainability over the years and were able to
demonstrate they continued to meet the standards of the requirements of the city franchise. A
Taxi lacked in a couple of areas such as fleet sustainability and financial capacity but the
Committee felt those areas could be monitored by city staff to insure requirements were met
and that the company had also demonstrated commitment to servicing low income and disabled
Anaheim residents.
She reported the allocation of taxicabs was difficult to recommend due to the fact no company
could receive what they had proposed with the limited number of taxicabs to be allocated. TAC
had evaluated the original franchises awarded in 2000, wherein Yellow Cab of Greater Orange
County received 130 cabs as requested, California Yellow received 50 as requested and A -Taxi
received 50 as requested for a total of 230 cabs at that time. However, she pointed out, in 2009
there was an increase in the total number of cabs to 255 and an additional allocation of 25 cabs
was granted to Yellow Cab of Greater Orange County. With the decision to maintain the current
number of 255 taxicabs, Ms. Sagert emphasized, it was impossible to award additional cabs to
any company without removing cabs from another. The Committee felt each company should
be granted additional cabs from their original allocation in 2000 and recommended that Yellow
Cab Company of Greater Orange County increase their cabs from the original number of 130 to
135, California Yellow would go from 50 to 60 cabs and A -Taxi would increase from 50 to 60
cabs as well.
Mayor Tait opened the public hearing by establishing ground rules and inviting franchise
applicants to speak first, followed by any members of the public. Without objection, franchise
applicants were provided additional time to speak, 15 minutes, and comments from members of
the public remained at 5 minutes.
Larry Slagle, Yellow Cab of Greater Orange County, stated his family company had been
providing proven quality service to Anaheim since 1945 and should not be penalized for their
high rating by losing cab permits. With the most management experience and the largest facility
on five acres, he remarked, Yellow Cab had been building its fleet and purchasing natural gas
cars. In addition, a GPS integration system had been implemented which helped manage the
fleet and reduced incidents of late service. Yellow Cab also had over 84 accounts with medical
centers, hospitals and corporations and offered back -seat credit card devices that could be
swiped by the customer. He added his business was involved in community participation and
various community organizations and most of the drivers had completed the ambassador
training program. He believed their 67 years of service and upgraded equipment and operating
system showed a commitment to the city and should not be diminished by taking a portion of
those permits and distributing them to companies that ranked lower in each category.
Tim Conlon, California Yellow Cab, emphasized his company was the first to enroll in
ambassador training, the first to install the latest in taxi technology, and the only company in
Orange County to maintain 10 percent of its fleet as wheelchair accessible. It was also the first
cab company to install high resolution video cameras to assist in incident resolution as well as
accident reconstruction and the first to install back -seat credit card devices, which was a
Council Meeting Minutes of May 8, 2012
Page 13 of 17
requirement of the RFP. For these reasons, he felt California Yellow Cab was deserving of a
more equitable allocation in line with the Taxi Advisory Committee's percentage scoring results;
which translated to 91 cabs for Yellow Cab of Greater Orange County, 85 for California Yellow
Cab and 79 for A -Taxi.
William Gray stated A -Taxi would be updating its fleet with six passenger luxury minivans, in
demand with Anaheim's hotel, and its drivers were also undergoing ambassador training with
additional emphasis on sensitivity, first aid, defensive driving and passenger assistance. A -Taxi
had shown a strong commitment to Anaheim, especially the underserved areas of west
Anaheim and the medical groups and hospitals' shared ride program. He urged for a more
equitable distribution of taxi permits to allow A -Taxi to provide better service to residents versus
focusing all vehicles on the Convention Center. He concurred with using the percentage
ranking by the TAC to determine cab allotments.
Konstantino Roditis, 2417 Taxi Company, objected to the scoring of his proposal by the Taxi
Advisory Committee raising a number of points in the various categories ranked by the TAC.
He He believed 24/7 had clearly demonstrated their ability to provide quality service to the city
and that the city should reconsider his proposal. He added 2417 was also investing $4.2 million
in 100 new CNG vehicles to bring this new technology to the city.
William Fitzgerald. Anaheim Home, objected to the apportionment of cab permits, alleging they
were allocated in favor of Disney supported cab companies.
Jill Kanzler, SOAR, spoke in support of additional cab permits for Yellow Cab of Greater Orange
County stating their commitment to the city was unmatched as evidenced by their preferred cab
status with several of the larger hotels in the Resort district and as the only company located
and paying taxes in Anaheim.
Jeff Faranc, Chamber of Commerce, also spoke in support of Yellow Cab of Greater Orange
County retaining their current level of 155 cab permits. He remarked the company ranked the
highest of all four applicants in six of the seven categories, and with their record of excellence,
they should not have permits reduced.
A taxi cab driver asked if it was fair for one company to provide cab services to the large hotels.
A driver for California Yellow concurred in allowing three taxi franchises in the city; however, he
objected that cab companies were not given an equal opportunity to service the major hotels.
Bill O'Connell, developer, supported Yellow Cab of Greater Orange County, remarking the firm
should not be penalized with a reduction in permits when it reached the highest standards of
service in all categories judged.
Sarah Ray, USMC, spoke in support of 24i7 Taxi Company offering letters of recommendation
from Easy Choice Health Plan, Fullerton Joint Union High School District and the Marriott
Anaheim Marriott Suites.
Naranj Pandhja, taxi driver, stated Yellow Cab of Orange County was fair to all drivers,
providing better working conditions and well maintained cabs. He remarked the taking away of
cab permits would have a negative impact on drivers.
Council Meeting Minutes of May 8, 2012
Page 14 of 17
Rindook Mod, taxi driver, supported Yellow Cab's management practices and their fairness to
all drivers.
A California Yellow cab driver urged council to consider an even playing field and allow the
three franchises to have the same allocation of taxi permits.
A -Taxi driver remarked that all the A -Taxi drivers in the audience were here on their own dime
because they were serious about providing good, personal service to Anaheim's customers.
Richard Barry, resident, expressed his support for the extraordinary service he received from
white and yellow cabs during the week.
A -Taxi driver remarked cab drivers were not directly employed, they leased their cabs and to be
fair, he urged Council to consider a fair share of permits for all three vendors.
Patrick, A -Taxi, remarked capitalism worked because of competition.
Greg Aikins, California Yellow Cab, stated the TAC committee looked at all three companies
and determined they all met the criteria to provide service to the city. He asked Council to
consider letting the customers decide which cab company they want to call and to share the
permits equally among the three franchisees.
(Mayor Tait temporarily left the dais at approximately 7:53 p.m.)
With no other comments offered and Mayor Tait briefly away from , Mayor Pro Tem Sidhu
closed the public hearing.
(Mayor Tait returned to the dais at approximately 7:56 p.m.)
Council Member Murray asked for the specific number of permits that were requested by the
three companies during the previous franchise contracts with Ms. Sagert responding in 2000,
Yellow Cab requested 130 permits, A -Tax requested 50 and California Yellow requested 50 and
they were all granted those numbers as the maximum number allowed was 230 permits at that
time. At that time, she explained, the franchises were for five years, with additional five one -
year renewals, to be requested each year. She explained for one reason or another, renewals
were overlooked and the franchise contracts expired in different years. In 2009, 50 permits
were up up and at that time the prior Council elected to change the code to a full 10 -year
franchise and placed the burden on staff to insure requirements were met during that term.
Council also awarded 25 additional cabs based on public necessity in addition to the 230,
increasing Yellow Cab of Greater Orange County's number from 130 to 155 permits. Council
Member Murray emphasized the TAC did not take into account a rating regarding commitment
to the city by a company investing in the city since 1945, and in a deeper, more personal way
with a family business involved in community activism as well as economic development.
Yellow Cab's level of service had not slipped, she remarked; they were a green company,
receiving awards for their green service, were already using back seat credit card devices
should not have been penalized by having their permit number decreased. She recommended
Council consider keeping the current allocation for permits, pointing out it would not
disadvantage the other firms since they had not geared up for increased permits, seconded by
Council Member Eastman.
Council Meeting Minutes of May 8, 2012
Page 15 of 17
Council Member Eastman appreciated the public comments offered this evening but felt it was
unfair to take any permits away from a company that had the most outstanding score among the
applicants. She also supported Anaheim businesses, and the residents who lived, worked and
played in the city.
Council Member Galloway preferred a shorter term franchise, rather than a 10 year contract,
since the business environment and technology was an ever- changing scene. Ms. Sagert
responded the ten year term addressed the cab firm's investment in natural gas vehicles and
new technologies and offered them some certainty on their investment. The franchise also
allowed for a 15 percent up or down from their franchise numbers to adjust for high and low
demand, and an unlimited number of cabs could be brought in for conventions.
Mayor Tait stated he believed the fairest option was to go with staff' recommendation and would
not support the motion to retain the current levels of permits. Mayor Pro Tem Sidhu indicated
he would support the motion as he felt quality service should be rewarded and took into account
business investment.
Council Member Murray commented that with the expansion of the Convention Center and
ARTIC coming on line as well as Disney's growth, there would be opportunities to take another
look at whether or not demands were being met in Anaheim.
With no other comments offered, Mayor Tait closed the public hearing.
Council Member Murray had moved to reject the TAC's recommendation and continue with the
current allocation of taxi franchises as follows: 1) ) Yellow Cab Company of Northern Orange
County, Inc. dba: Yellow Cab of Greater Orange County for 155 taxicabs; 2) Cabco, Inc. dba:
California Yellow Cab for 50 taxicabs; and 3) A White and Yellow Cab, Inc. dba: A Taxi Cab for
50 taxicabs. (Approved Vote: 3 -2; Ayes: Council Members Sidhu, Murray and Eastman; Noes -
2:( Mayor Tait and Council Member Galloway). The following Ordinances were introduced as
amended.
ORDINANCE NO. 6242 (INTRODUCTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM granting a non - exciusive franchise to Yellow Cab Company of Northern
Orange County, Inc. dba Yellow Cab of Greater Orange County, for the purpose of
operating taxicab service in the City of Anaheim; and stating the term and conditions
upon which said franchise is granted.
ORDINANCE NO. 6243 (INTRODUCTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM granting a non - exclusive franchise to CABCO, Inc. dba California Yellow Cab,
for the purpose of operating taxicab service in the City of Anaheim; and stating the term
and conditions upon which said franchise is granted.
ORDINANCE NO. 6244 (INTRODUCTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM granting a non - exclusive franchise to A White and Yellow Cab Inc. dba A Taxi
Cab, for the purpose of operating taxicab service in the City of Anaheim; and stating the
term and conditions upon which said franchise is granted.
Council Meeting Minutes of May 8, 2012
Page 16 of 17
28. AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO 2007 -00002 IDAG2007-
00002A
OWNERS: Ronald W. & Deborah L. Marshall Trust, The Marshall Family Trust, 1105
E. Katella Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92805 and See Development LP, 4931 Birch Street,
Newport Beach, CA 92660
AGR -5025 APPLICANT: Greg Sullivan, 94 Discovery, Irvine, CA 92618
LOCATION: 1015 & 1105 East Katella Avenue
The applicant requests an amendment to Development Agreement No. 2007 - 00002,
extending the term of the Agreement by five additional years, to expire in March 2018.
Environmental Determination: CEQA Previously Approved Final Subsequent
Environmental Impact Report No. 339, together with Mitigation Monitoring Program No.
106C.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Recommended City Council approval of Amendment No. 1 to Development Agreement
No. 2007 -00002 (DAG- 2007- 00002A; Resolution No. PC2012 -020). Vote: 6 -0 Chairman
Pro Tempore Ramirez and Commissioners Bostwick, Faessel, Lieberman, Persuad and
Seymour voted yes. (Planning Commission meeting of April 9, 2012)
Motion: Find and determine that the previously- approved Final
Subsequent Environmental impact Report No. 339, together with Mitigation Monitoring
Program No. 106C, serves as the appropriate environmental documentation for this
request.
ORDINANCE NO. (INTRODUCTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM (i) approving Amendment No. 1 to Development Agreement Ne.
2007 -00002 by and between the City of Anaheim and Ronald W. Marshall and Deborah
L. Marshall Trust, The Marshall Family Trust and See Development Limited
Partnership, (ii) making certain findings related thereto, (iii) authorizing the Mayor to
execute said amendment on behalf of the City (DEV2012- 00124)
Item continued to the May 29, 2012 Council meeting.
Report on Closed Session Actions: None
Council Communications:
Council Member Murray wished the USA Men's Volleyball Team fuck at the NORCECA Men's
Continental Olympic Qualification Tournament, to be held for the first time in the United States
at the Pyramid in Long Beach. She spoke of the upcoming Bike Nation workshop next month, a
new and innovative, bike sharing program and the first to launch on the west coast. She
expressed her condolences to the family of Army Private First Class paratrooper Christian
Sannicolas who perished on April 28 in Afghanistan.
Council Member Galloway reported on the quick recovery of Planning Director Sheri Vander
Dussen and recognized City employee, Maggie Solorio, Executive Assistant in the City
Manager's Office.
Mayor Pro Tem Sidhu announced the following events: South Orange County Job Fair in
Mission Viejo on May 10 Job Fair Readiness Workshop in Buena Park held every Friday, the
Anaheim Orange County Job Fair on June 13 and the 6 th Annual Health Fair to be held on
Council Meeting Minutes of May 8, 2012
Page 17 of 17
June 3f He expressed condolences to the family of Army Private First Class Christian
Sannicolas and requested the meeting be adjourned in his memory.
Council Member Eastman reported that she and Council Member Murray traveled to
Washington, D.C. to discuss community business and transportation, meeting with Senators
Boxer and Feinstein and staff. They also participated in a congressional meeting to support
Chief regarding UASI grants to fund needed homeland security equipment. In addition, Council
Member Eastman attended the 75 celebration of Norcal Beverage located in Anaheim and
announced upcoming events: the Taste of Anaheim on May 10 Fire Service Day on May 12
West Anaheim BBQ at Twila Reid Park, the Art Crawl and the Greek Festival on May 10
Mayor Tait spoke about his attendance at a west neighborhood meeting and a ride -along in
west Anaheim with Deputy Police Chief Craig Hunter. He asked staff to return to Council with
strategies to address the community's concerns of drugs and prostitution along Beach Blvd and
was honored to adjourn the meeting in memory of Army Private First Class Christian
Sannicolas.
Adjournment: At 8:42 PM., Mayor Tait adjourned in memory of Army Private First Class
Christian Sannicolas.
Linda N. Andal, CIVIC
City Clerk