1979/06/1279-645
City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - June 12~ 1979~ 10:00 'A.M..
The City Cow ~cil of the City of Anaheim met in adjourned regular
session.
PRESENT:
ABSENT:
PRESENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS: Overholt (entered at 10:21 A.M.), Kaywood, Bay,
Roth and Seymour (entered at 10:42 A.M.)
COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
CITY MANAGER: William O. Talley
CITY ATTORNEY: William P. Hopkins
CITY CLERK: Linda D. Roberts
ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER: William T. Hopkins
DATA PROCESSING DIRECTOR: TakuJi Tamaru
UTILITIES GENERAL MANAGER: Gordon W. Hoyt
RISK MANAGER: Jack Love
AUDIT SUPERVISOR: Young Choi
PROGRAM BUDGET MANAGER: Ron Rothschild
In the absence of the Mayor and Mayor Pro Tem, Councilwoman
Kaywood called the Council to order at 10:00 A.M. for the
purpose of conducting a Budget Session with staff.
DATA PROCESSING DEPARTMENT: City Manager William Talley referred to Control
Center 76, Page C228-233 of the proposed 1979-80 Resource Allocation Plan
with capital improvement projects for Data Processing listed on Pages D36-39.
Mr. Takuji Tamaru, Data Processing Director, explained that the proposed Budget
for his Department of $1,861,451 was a 3.4% increase over the current Budget of
$1,792.155 and the number of regular positions proposed for the next year being
exactly the same as those for the current year or 47 positions. CETA positions
were reduced by 9 and clerical staff was being reduced from 5 to 3.
The budget was broken down into three programs as follows: Information Systems
Processing or the Operations Program, totaling $1,343,227 or 72% of the total
budget. It involved day-to-day processing of all systems for the City and all
users: Systems Maintenance and Modification Program totaling $'387,151 or 21%
of the total budget invol~ing the maintenance of ongoing syste~ to meet the
new legal requirements an~ tax law changes; and Data Processing Administration
totaling $131,073 or 7% c~ the total budget. In Administration, they had com-
pleted a reorganization in which all administration services.had now been
centralized, and as a result, they were able to reduce clerical positions and
CETA clerical positions~
On the revenue side, the largest user was the Anaheim Public Utilities Department,
Utilities Fund, or $678,7~8 including $93,000 in Sanitation billing, or 36.5%.
The MDS cities under contract would provide $623,800, or 33.5% of the Data
Processing revenues. The 12 General Fund departments which they serviced in
varying degrees would be allocated $419,162, or 22.5% of the total allocation.
Other agencies and CETA provided for the remaining $44,741 or 2.4% of the
allocation.
The Capital Improvement Program for the next year consisted of seven projects
totaling $524,552. Of that amount, the General Fund total would be $231,848,
or 44.2%. One of the objectives of the Department was to maintain the General
79-646
.City H~ll., Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - June 12, 1979, 10:00 A.M.
Fund expenditure at the !977-78 level or lower. They had been able to do so
and in 78-79 they had $663~000 allocated for both capital investment and operation.
In 79-80, it would be .~=du=ed slightly to $651,000 for both operations.
The services to be rendered from the b,,~%et would be to maintain all ongoing
currently operational systems with the foIlowing major additions for the
City of Anaheim: the Accounts Payable System proposed to go on-line as part
of the integrated Fiscal System in July of 1979; Inventory Control System
scheduled to go on-line in November of 1979; the Payroll/Personnel System, a
major subsystem, scheduled to go on-line in early 1980.
The Library and Book Tracking Library Circulation and Book Acquisition System,
Phase I, would start in early 1980. The Event Work Order System, Phase I, was
currently in operation with Phase II scheduled to start in 1979-80. The on-line
Budget System would start in 1979-80.
A major reorganization of the Utilities Customer Information System would be a
joint effort between Utilities, Data Processing and the original software firm
that wrote the programs, scheduled for 1979-80. A major study to be undertaken
was that of a Master Plan Police Information System for the Anaheim Police
Department. Also contemplated in the budget was a major reorganization of the
Operations program. On May 21, 1979, they appointed Don McGregor, Computer
Operations Manager. A major change in philosophy in the Systems Development
Program would be the concentranion on in-house maintenance of ongoing programs,
and they were going to contrac-~ out to the industry as much of the development
projects as possible. One of the major objectives for next year was to increase
the current computer capacity by another 10%o They were essentially at full
capacity today and planned to acquire t'hat increase by using more efficient
software and by changing their procedures.
Mayor Pro Tem Overholt entered the Council Chamber. (10:21 A.M.)
City Manager Talley stated the only item he would add was, based upon the Budget
Blue Ribbon Committee recommendations, Council had also approved solicitation
for an in depth analysis of the current relationship with MDS. He recommended
that they add $25,000 to the cost of that study, which was not budgeted and which
was to be submitted to t~e Council later today.
Councilman Roth stated he was interested in the MDS study and felt it should be
a priority. He wanted to know if Mr. Tamaru knew of any additional cities coming
on-line~
Mr. Tamaru answered they were abiding by Council wishes and thus had deferred
any additions.
Mayor Pro Tem Overholt stat.~d that he and the Mayor had an opportunity to talk
to Mr. Tamaru about his Department in liaison meetings, as well as privately.
They were looking forward t~ the results of the study to see what direction the
City as a matter of policy wanted to take regarding cooperative or non-cooperative
data processing. He felt that the Department was doing a good job, and it was
just a matter of understanding where it was headed.
79-647
City Ha.il, Anaheim~ ..California - COUNCIL MINUTES - June 12~ 1979, 10:00 A.M.
Councilwoman Kaywood stated that she had been very supportive of the Data
Processing Department al!. :~.!ong and was sorry for the turmoil. They were
doing a fantastic job ~nd~:r the existing morale situation.
CITY COUNCIL BUDGET~ Mr~ i!~iley refer~ to Page C10-13 listing the City Council
budget which did not inci~de capital improvement programs. The budget included
Council salaries and certain amounts under unappropriated reserves or the Council
Contingency Fund and Community Promotion, basically the Halloween Festival,
special promotional projects, and the allocation to the Visitor and Convention
Bureau (V&C). The V&C allocation required the City to submit 17% or one-sixth
of the amount collected for room taxes. However, because the room tax amount
had been increasing at such a rapid rate, they were recommending an increase
based on a review with Mr. Snyder. As part of the allocation made by the City,
the V&C provided information to show they had received like amounts in either
dollars or services from their membership--in effect, the City was providing
a match program of well over $i million. In view of the fact that Anaheim was
a very competitive market and with gas shortage and other factors, he believed
one the of wisest investments was the advertising done through the V&C to keep
people coming to Anaheim. Of the $150,000 in the Council Contingency Fund for
this year, $128,593 had been allocated as of yesterday. Thus $150,000 was
again appropriated to the Council Contingency Fund, which was a nominal amount
for the Council to consider for the coming year.
Councilman Roth asked about the Sister Cities' budget and also the Cinco de
Mayo Festival. Although the latter only involved a minor amount, a discussion
arose on the issue every year.
Mr. Talley explained that the Sister Cities Program was included in Program 103,
Community Promotion, in the amount of $1,500. The Cinco de Mayo Festival was
not included in the program. There were a number of items that were going
to be presented this afternoon at the budget hearing, and it could be added as
a special item, such as the HERE Program, TLC and other applications pending.
Councilwoman Kaywood noted that some items that had been presented as a one-
time proposal suddenly were becoming annual events, and she maintained some
could be supported without depending upon the City in view of Proposition
13.
PUBLIC UTILITIES DEPARTMENT BUDGET: Mr. Talley referred to Pages C234-327 of
the Resource Allocation P!an~ the Public Utilities budget, and the largest
of all departments. The capital improvements for the department were outlined
on Pages D3-9, Water, Capital Improvements, D10-16, Electric, D17, Utilities
Service Center, and D37-38, Data Processing. A major policy area to be
addressed by Mr. Hoyt was relative to the $43 million budgeted for San Onofre,
Units 2 and 3. Council could, at the adoption of the budget, either elect
to bring that amount forward or wait until the Public Utilities Board (PUB)
made a definite recommendation. At that time, they could then add that amount
to the budget. New amounts were estimated at close to $50 million. He would
be discussing the matter in the budget wrap-up when he would be talking about
$54 or $55 million worth of budgeted changes--S50 million would involve this
one item, with $3 million bail-out resulting in a 1% change.
79-648
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - June 12~ 1979~ 10:00 A.M.
General Manager of Public Utilities, Gordon Hoyt, stated it would be well to hold
action on the San Onofre bonding until such time as they were ready to sell, and
the Council could make whatever adjustments were appropriate at that time. He
estimated it would be somewhere between $54 and $57 million.
Mr. Hoyt then gave an overview of his Department's budget as follows: Electric:
approximately 81% of the Electric Utility's income from sales went to purchased
power, or $67 million. Excluding purchased power and electric revenue bonds
capital, the budget increased 2.3% over the previous year. Major construction
proposed out of current revenue funds was a new substation in the Santa Ana
Canyon to be constructed over a four-year period. A rate increase was approved
by the Council effective June 1, 1979 of approximatley 7%.
Mayor Seymour entered tile Council Chamber. (10:42 A.M.)
Total funds budgeted from all sources, $91.7 million. The $42 million budgeted
for San Onofre carried forward would make a significant difference in that
number.
Water: Approximately 48% of the Water Utility's income from sales was for the
supply of water. Excluding water supply costs and bond fund capital, the Water
Utility's budget increased eight-tenths of one percent. A six percent increase
would be going into effect July 1, 1979 under the Water Commodity Clause,
reflecting an increase in the cost of water from the MWD, pump tax, basin equity
ratio and the cost of electricity for pumping. When the PUB approved the budget,
it recommended to the Council that there be a shift $394,274 in Program 606 and
619 from Water Revenue Funding to Water Bond Funding. The reason the Board and
the Department made that recommendation was due to the fact that without that
shift, they would be looking for a 4% base rate increase this year. With that
shift, no increase in the water rate base would be necessary. They were antic-
ipating selling $4~ to $5 million of water revenue bonds later in the year,
with approximatley $1.1 million of that for the water system in the Redevelopment
Ma__~.'or Construction Items: Construction of the Diemer Intertie Pipeline was ex-
pected to be started shortly to become operational in the summer of 1980 and
construction of a 2-million gallon reservoir at the Lenain Filtration Plant was
expected to start approximately October 1979.
Later in the year, they intended to review the charges they were making for the
primary main system, acreage fees and connection charges for meter boxes, etc.,
for connection to the water facility and at that time, would make appropriate
recommendations.
Budgeted in the Electric budget were two Power Contract Engineers. They had
recruited for those people~ but were unable to do so satisfactorily at the
proposed salary level. Therefore, Mr. Hoyt was proposing instead that they
eliminate that classification and use two existing classifications--an
Electrical Engineer which they had, and an Electrical Engineering Associate,
a job classification they already had. That would increase the cost of those
two positions approximately $6,500 a year without burden and $9,700 with.
79-649
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - June 12.~ 1979, 10:00 A.M.
In connection with San Onofre, they were preparing an amendment to the appli-
cation for licensing of the plant to include Anaheim and Riverside as licensees.
That was being worked out w~th Special Counsel, Alan Watts, and the lawyers for
Edison and would be submittcd to the Council later in the month in the form
of a resolution. He anticipated that action woul~ be completed at the earliest,
approximately August 1, 1979, and at the latest several months beyond that.
They could sell electric revenue bonds as early as October or November although
it could be closer to December or the early part of next year. The project
remained on schedule with Unit 2 scheduled for initial operation in 1980.
Mr. Hoyt then explained for Councilmmn Bay that the current schedule called for
November 27, 1979 as the sale date for the water bonds. He also confirmed that
prior to that time, Redevelopment would not receive $1.1 million for their cash
flow.
Councilman Bay then wanted to know if the $1.1 million for the water works to
be done in Project Alpha was going to be impacted by the November 27th date.
Mr. Hoyt explained the matter was discussed with Mr. Priest and his associates,
and currently it did not present any problems.
Councilman Roth asked Mr. tloyt what he could say about the future relative to
wholesale rates and power from Edison.
Mr. Hoyt reported that an increase would be going into effect August 16, 1979,
and it had been taken into consideration in the recent retail rate case presented
to the PUB and the Councii. However, they expected the cost of fuel to escalate
considerably, but with the fuel energy cost adjustment arrangement now in current
rates, costs would increase more slowly. With the balancing account idea, they
hoped to have some rate stability in their retail rates. The latest estimate
was that by June 30, 1980, rates would be nearly 11.9% above what they were in
May 31, 1979.
Several litigations wera also pending before the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission (FERC) and Case No. 76205 was expected to net a refund of approx-
imately $6 million. It had been heard by the Commission and scheduled back
to the Commission two weeks ago, but it had not yet come back. It was possible
they would get a decision in the current fiscal year with a refund in hand by
the end of the fiscal year. They made no provisions for that refund in the
current budget.
Mr. Hoyt expressed to the Council his appreciation to his staff who were
responsible for and who did an outstanding job of putting the budget together.
CITY ATTORNEY'S BUDGET: Mr, Talley referred to Page C23-28 including program
121-125.
City Attorney William Hopki:]s stated the budget covered the cost of handling
the City's legal business, and he anticipated they could do so with the same
number of attorneys and secretarial staff. No personnel increases were
proposed. The increases that were proposed reflected the increase in costs
due to inflation and increasing litigation and legal activity workload.
79-650
City Hall, Anahei~., California - COUNCIL MINUTES - June 12~ 1979, 10:00 A.M.
It was difficult to predict how many lawsuits would be filed against the
City or how many crimes they would be prosecuting. The figures presented
represented the best estimates of the number of cases anticipated. He hoped
they would be able to operate at a cost below the estimated budget figures
and they would do their best to minim~e expenditures in all categories.
CITY CLERK'S BUDGET: Mr. Talley referred to Page C29-33, Control Center 34,
programs 132 and 134~ There were no capital improvement projects involved.
City Clerk Linda Roberts explained that the 1979-80 budget consisted of three
programs, two additional over last year due to the municipal election in April
1980 and the new program of Centralized Records Management to assist administra-
tive departments in cannralizing the records of the City. Activities included
in the City Clerk's records were only those required by the City Charter, the
Municipal Code and the Government Code of the State. The Centralized Records
Management Program included one additional position for a period of 18 months.
Councilman Roth asked if her office was going to be losing any CETA representa-
tion; Mrs. Roberts answered, not to her knowledge. They would maintain the
three positions for the 12 months~
CITY TREASURER'S BUDGET~ ~e Mayor reported that he had spoken with the City
Treasurer, Glen Stewart who indicated that since he would have a difficult time
ascending the stairs to the Council Chamber, he would be happy to discuss his
budget with the Council either on the first floor or in his office. The Treasurer's
budget could be found on Page C34, 35 and 36 and if there were any questions,
special arrangements could 'be made.
Councilwoman Kaywood noned the projection of $5 million of interest earned
annually, and she wanted to know if that was reasonable.
Mr. Talley answered "yes", and the budget of $2.5 million would be substantially
exceeded~ It was a s~ngle position budget representing only the City Treasurer.
The major cost allocations 'were those amounts paid for the Money Max System
and charged to the City by the S~ate for collection of revenues. The figures
for this year were roughly $4.2 million instead of $2.5 million and those had
been reported on a monthly basis.
ADMINISTRATION BUDGET: Mr. Tailey referred to Page C14-22, Control Centers 32,
29 and 38, Capital Improvement No. 907 and on Page D35 there was a $12,000
amount for the design and implementation of a cable TV system to serve the
residents of the Santa Aha Canyon which Council approved recently. Since Mr.
Armstrong of his office was coordinating that activity, the project was placed
in the City Administation budget. He then deferred to Assistant City Manager
William Hopkins to make the presentation on the three Control Centers.
Assistant City Manager Hopkins, starting with Control Center 32, City Admin-
istration, explained that the budget reflected the reorganization changes, thus
changing dollar amounts, as well as work hour amounts as shown and explained on
Page C15. The 1979-80 appropriations total $219,981 or 1.7% increase over
the current adopted budget. Some 357 work hours were added to show some of
the apportionment of a parttime sharing of a full time clerk in IGR.
79-651
City Hall~ Anaheim~ .Cali___fo__rnia.- COUNCIL MINUTES - June. 12~ 1979~ 10:00 A.M.
In the City Manager's general functioning area, the main items being contemplated
were the expansion of Anaheim Stadium to bring in the Rams in time for the
fall season, initiation of the Betterment II Project and negotiations for a
major hotel adjacent to the Convention Center, moving into the new Civic Center
in the Spring of 1980~ developing progrzm budgets for 1980-81, implementation
of CATV, institution of many of the basic information systems or institution
of studies as indicated by other departments such as the Police Information
System. The foregoing function~ were special items in addition to the normal
day-to-day routine of running the City of Anaheim in accordance with Council
Policy and Charter requirements~
FISCAL AUDIT CENTER: (Page C17-19) Mro Hopkins explained that the program
recovered a large part of its income from charges made to other departments
utilizing its services° Relative to expenditures, the total cost of the
Fiscal Audit Program before reimbursements totaled $112,757, a decrease of
$17,212 from the current budget. The prime reason was the reduction of one
CETA Supportive Junior ~ditor due to the new CETA regulations, precluding
continuance with that program at the current salary level. The other City
Auditor position would be transitioned effective September 28, 1979. The
primary emphasis was to insure that the City's assets were protected. An
important by-product was the fact that they recovered revenues as audits were
performed which more than paid for the audit function. On the bailout list
there was a recommendation to Council to reconsider the possibility of cons-
tituting the Audit Force at its present strength and including another
position making a total of four positions in the Audit Program going into the
next fiscal year° That position would take care of itself in terms of the
revenue achieved through the audit program.
They were maintaining or increasing audits in the Bingo area.
Councilman Roth expremsed his concern over the reduction in bed tax audits, while
putting more emphasis on Bingo audits, whereas more revenue was generated from
the bed tax.
Mr~ Talley explained that was true when they started the program, but they had
now or would be soon c~ompleting a total cycle of audits of motels-hotels. As
they returned, those businesses were aware that they were coming and thus their
books were better maintained, eliminating substantial adjustments. They were
therefore spending less time on the average audit.
An area he believed to be very beneficial under the audit program was to have rep-
resentatives visit ~he Stat~ Board of Equalization and make checks to see if
the City was receiving all sales tax allocations by comparing sales tax vs
business licenses. In that function alone, they picked up an estimated $80,000
which would be ongoing and sales taxes which were not being apportioned to the
City correctly and that would be a continuing program.
Councilman Roth asked if there would be less Bingo audits after the new Bingo
ordinance went into effect due to the decreased number of playing days allowed.
Assistant City Manager Hopkins explained that reductions would not take place
until the end of the calendar year because the ordinance would affect licenses
as they expired. They were isolating five Bingo operations from the present
79-652
City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - June 12~ 1979, 10:00 A.M.
22 licensed games in terms of their total intake and had been performing major
audits on the major Bingo activities which they planned to continue even though
there may be diminished activity.
Councilwoman Kaywood asked the cost of ~he Bingo audit thus far; Mr. Young Choi,
Audit Supervisor, stated it was approximately $1,250 per Bingo audit or an
average of 70 hours each Bingo audit. After further questioning by Councilman
Overholt, Mro Choi confirmed that the cost of auditing the largest Bingo
operators in the City was $1,250o
Councilman Bay asked, if Bingo were reduced to one night a week, instead of three,
would he have any estimates on how much that action would reduce the audit cost.
Mr. Choi explained if they maintained five audits a year and audited one-day-a-
week operations, that would substantially lower the audit time required and they
might be able to reduce the number of Bingo audits per year. The problems they
might encounter in the course of auditing one-day operations would be substan-
tially immaterial compared to the problems with larger Bingo operations.
RISK MANAGEMENT: Mr. Hopkins referred to Control Center 38, Page C20-22. The
Risk Management Program was instituted in late 1977-78 and the financial results
of the program since then had been outstanding. For example, the marketing of
General Liability insurance brought a reduction from the prior year's premium
of approximately $135,000; the Workers Compensation excess insurance was restored
to net a savings of $27,000; the first layer of automobile liability insurance,
which was self-insured, resulted in an approximate $31,000 savings, and the CETA
Worker's Compensation was placed with a private carrier instead of with the
State which resulted in a savings of approximately $35,000 for a total reduction
in the premium of $229,000~ They anticipated that the cost savings for the coming
fiscal year in addition to the savings mentioned above would occur in the
following areas: ratio of Worker's Compensation incurred losses to the manual
premiums; the self insured worker's compensation premium had been reduced from
$2.2 million to $1.5 million for the next year; the industrial accident rate
had been reduced by approximately $30,000 in anticipation of the safety program;
the liability insurance premiums were anticiapted to be at least $100,000 below
the cost for the current year as a result of the brokerage activities of the
City~
EXPENDITURES: In terms of expenditures, the Risk Management budget totaled
$244,142, an increase of $60,014 due first to the fact that they were now at
full strength in addition to a new Safety Administrator.
The major area of emphasis in 1979-80 would be as follows: administering the
City's liability insurance program with the objective of reducing expenditures
from 10% to 20%; administering the Worker's Compensation program with the
objective of reducing costs in lost time by 5% throughout the entire City;
administering the property insurance program to insure the City had sufficient
coverage in all areas; administering the safety program with the objective of
reducing liability and all claims by 5%; the process by which they were now
handling claimants in Police and Fire for disability retirement at the
direction of the Council was underway, and they hoped to have the outstanding
backlog of those cases completed by the end of the calendar year.
79-653
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - June 12~ 1979~ 10:00 A.M.
Mr. Jack Love, Risk Manager~ then answered questions posed by both Councilmen
Bay and Roth for purposes of clarification. He reported that the main plus
in reducing the total claims relative to Workers Compensation would be in
exerting their controls in certain areas where administratively they could
exert those controls.
Councilman Roth was concerned that in those cases where employees definitely
had a problem, he did not want anything done to harass them in order to
obtain information. He also noted the broad range of between 10 to 20%
projected as the goal for reduction of expenditures in the liability insurance
premium.
Mr. Love explained that the current broker had suggested to him a dollar figure
of approximatley $200,000, but he would prefer to see those figures in an offer
before they were submitted to Council in July, as opposed to accepting their word,
it was possible that it could be more than 20%.
Councilman Roth asked Mr~ Love to keep the Council advised relative to any
reduction.
Councilwoman Kaywood asked the total savings in reduced premiums over the former
broker.
Mr. Love stated savings were approximately $229,000, and he had been advised that
premiums for liability alone in the current year could be reduced by approximately
another $200,000 and a conservative estimate would be approximately $100,000.
They now had two of the top brokerage firms in the country to bring in the best
price this year~ He then elaborated upon other areas of reductions anticipated
in the coming year~
Councilman Overholt commented that the results of the efforts in the Risk Manage-
ment area were starting to show, and he complimented staff in that regard.
VISITOR AND CONVENTION BUREAU: Assistant City Manager Hopkins then briefed the
Council on the V&C Program. He explained that part of the Council's promotional
program (Page C10) incorporated $671,000 for the coming fiscal year for the
V&C activity supported by the City~ The pm~gram was based primarily on how
the Program Manager viewed the activities for the coming year, as well as the
initiation of another office in the Chicago area and the allowance for
inflationary costs over the current $578,000 budget. The City paid the V&C
on the basis of monthly statements submitted, and applied the 17% formula to
make sure that the support the Convention Bureau was required to give the City
occurred before reimbursement was made to the Bureau.
Mayor Seymour stated that the projections on bed tax revenue were based upon
some facts that may have changed since the time the projection was made,
specifically the gasoline crunch. He asked, knowing what they knew now, were
they changing those project%ons on the bed tax revenue.
Assistant City Manager Hopkins stated they were not changing the projections
and had analyzed the matter in the light expressed by the Mayor. They still
maintained a 5.2 revenue projection for the coming year. Much of the activity
in the hotel/motel area was supported by people transported by mass transit
methods, as opposed to individual methods.
79-654
.~ity Hall, Anaheim.~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - June 12~ 1979~ 10:00 A.M.
Mayor Seymour stated he had contact last week with people in the RV park business
who indicated that business was off 50% to 75% and that projections throughout
the year on the average were for a 35% to 50% decrease.
Mr. Hopkins explained that they repreg.,~ted a relatively lesser portion of the
total occupancy factor; Mrs. Talley stated that they picked up approximately
$100,000 a year on a $4 million budget, or about 2%. In reviewing the situation,
the Council should be aware that they received a report of room tax collected
on a monthly basis. They would be watching it very closely month to month and
the budget projection was based upon an approximate percentage collected of the
annual amount, and they would be using a five-year average for tracking purposes.
He continued that two things they believed would mitigate any adverse effects
was (1) even though gasoline seemed to be hard to get, it was a sales tax item
and it had gone up 30%; it appeared almost as much gas was being consumed, but
at the higher cost. Thus, there might be an offsetting sales tax revenue.
(2) Occupancy involved people coming from outside the area, and it appeared now
that their initial rates of inflation may be exceeded. If so, normally room
rates tracked inflation. However, they would look at the situation each month
and if there were serious drops in their projections, they would alert the
Council and institute whatever modifications were required.
Assistant City Manager Hopkins reiterated that they saw no reason for changing
the present projections at this time.
The Mayor asked Mr. Snyder if he was satisfied and if he could do the same out-
standing job as in the past with the money being allocated to the V&C.
Mr. Bill Snyder, President of the Visitor and Convention Bureau, stated he
was very comfortable with the allocation and they were in a competitive situation
with other cities who operated with substantially higher budgets. He felt that
they could continue to do their day-to-day job and have some latitude to capture
new business. He then briefed the Council on the new Chicago office as requested
by Councilwoman Kaywood.
C~ty Manager Talley then referred to a communication he proposed giving to the
Council at the afternoon Council Meeting listing all policy decisions; however,
he felt it would be beneficial if they could review that document now and have
any department heads that might be needed available at 3:00 P.M. to go over
those decisions. Mr. Ron Rothschild, Assistant Finance Director, then submitted
a memorandum of June 12, 1978 from the City Manager to the Council, subject:
FY 1979/80 Resource Allocation Plan. Mr. Talley briefed the Council on the
document listing under headings: (1) Policy decisions, "a" through "h", expenses
and revenues (where applicable), (2) Budget Adjustments, "a" through "m",
(3) San Onofre Generation. Units 2 and 3, rebudgeted participation in SONGS
Units 2 and 3 financed through the sale of revenue bonds, (4) Public Utilities
Capital Improvement Projects "a" through "f", and (5) State Proposition 13 surplus
subvention--"bailout".
There was Council discussion and questioning on the following items: la--purchase
200 volumes of the Anaheim Historical Buildings publication for community
promotion purposes--S2,500.
79-655
Ci___t.y Ha!l~ Anaheim~alifornia - COUNCIL MINUTES - June 12~ 1979~ 10:00 A.M.
CouncZlwoman Kaywood fait that 200 volumes was excessive, considering the cost;
the Mayor stated when he asked to have an amount budgeted, he had in mind that
from time to time the books be presented to vimiting dignitaries to the City,
and he did not anticipate that they would all be used in the next fiscal year.
Mr. Talley explained that the supply of the books would be an inventory.
The Mayor then confirmed for' Councilwoman Kaywood that at times the books would
be given, at other times the "A" frame, and on occasions both items.
Councilman Overholt pointed out that the book was not a depreciating asset and
would be Just as appropriate to present 20 years from now as today.
Mayor Seymour stated the answer was "yes" on that item; Mr. Talley stated they
would make it part of a specific program°
Councilman Bay questioned if all items listed would come out of the $3.2 million
Proposition 13 subvention monies.
Mr. Talley answered they all would be eligible to come out of that program or
out of the reduction in some other program, and none were included in the
Resource Allocation Plan~ The Council would be telling him on the items listed
that they be added to the budget and come from Proposition 13 subvention monies,
unless he was told to the contrary. For example, the $2,500 for item la would
come from bailout because the Council did not indicate they wanted it to come
from some other source.
The Mayor suggested that they review the whole list before trying to decide from
what revenues expenses would be derived.
lb--West Orange County Hotline--$1,200. Councilman Roth questioned the figure
because he was under the impression that they requested $500.
Mr. Ron Rothschild stated when the representative addressed the Council, she
changed the request to $100 a month; Mr. Talley added they also followed up
with a communication clarifying the $1,200 figure.
Councilman Roth suggested that $550 be allocated to that program; Councilman
Bay suggested $600.
Mayor Seymour indicated Council approval of that amount in the amount of $600.
lc--Support Project TLC of the Feedback Foundation, Inc.--$2,400.
Councilman Roth stated 'he believed the program to be an important one and it
should not be touched at all.
Councilwoman Kaywood expressed her concern over the fact that other people were
very concerned that money was coming from the National Association of Senior
Citizens Bingo operations~ and they were expanding the TLC Program beyond what
they really could afford to do, placing them in a position of needing more if
that support decreased; she questioned if they would then come to the City
for more money. They were federally funded, along with County Revenue Sharing
funds, in addition.
79-656
City Hall~ ..Anahei~, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - June 12~ 1979, 10:00 A.M.
Councilman Roth stated that most of the money was going to the Salvation Army
for rental purposes of their new kitchen facilities. The program on Brookhurst
at the Senior Citizens Bingo Parlor was different from the subject request.
The dollars requested were not going for food, but the majority to the
Salvation Army and the rest to St~ Pau'~ ~ Church ~aheim ~]ite No. 1).
Councilwoman Kaywood referred to a letter dated May 24, 1979 from TLC Feedback
Foundation requesting an additional $696 to deflate costs of trash removal and
utilities and thus the total request was $3,096. She was wondering whether
that was due to having overextended themselves at the other location. Council-
man Roth believed they were only referring to St. Paul's and the Salvation Army.
Mayor Seymour stated he could look beyond the people involved and even the Bingo.
He looked to the people being served and what the program was doing for senior
citizens. A $3,096 investment on behalf of the City returned 50 to 100% in
the services provided.
Councilwoman Kaywood wanted to know if they were able to see the books to know
how their money was being spent; Mr. Talley stated he was certain any allocation
the City made could stipulate that condition.
Mayor Seymour recommended rather than going through an audit, that they speci-
fically allocate $3,096, $2,404 for rent at the Salvation Army, and the remain-
der to be applied toward utilities and trash removal at St. Paul's. He indicated
Council's approval of that item in the amount of $3,096.
Councilman Overholt stated he also shared Councilwoman Kaywood's concern because
at about the time they would consider modifying the Bingo program in the City,
TLC was going to be before the Council as one of the strongest lobbyists against
such action. They should be aware that if they expanded programs based upon
Bingo contributions, they were "sticking their neck out" as far as he was person-
ally concerned.
ld through f. d) Provide for a five-person Crime Task Force--S246,093; e) provide
for School Resource Officer Program with the addition of five officers--S210,300;
f) appropriate matching funds of $58,782 as well as grant funds of $48,095
for a Law Enforcement Assistance Act Grant for managing criminal investigations--
$106,877.
Mayor Seymour stated that he was supportive of what they asked for of the Council
and what the Chief had devised. As he perceived City services among the citizenry,
they were satisfied with the exception of street cleaning and repair. However,
the street sweeping program was being implemented, along with repairing of streets.
The other area he felt sensitivity to was relative an increase in burglaries
and robberies. In trying to answer that concern, they had to demonstrate that
they were prepared to spend the money and thus he supported all three requests
of the Chief.
Councilman Roth was totally in agreement and curtailing home burglaries was one
of his top priorities.
79-657
City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - June 12, 1979, 10:00 A.M.
Councilman Overholt was also in full agreement and reported that the most
frequent calls he received were from people who were concerned that they
were not getting the protection services they needed, and the three programs
proposed would provide that.
Councilman Bay stated he had no disagreement increasing funds in the Police
Department, but he had gone through the capital improvement projects proposed
and personnel restorations totaling some $3,200,000. In so doing, he started
adding things he wanted to see while subtracting other items. He would be
very concerned as to where they were going to make cutbacks in order to add
the three items under discussion~ Relative to the Crime Task force, he thought
this could not be implemented for a full year and, therefore, he did not
believe the $246,093 figure was a proper one, nor $210,300 on the School
Resources Officer Program~ He calculated $200,000 for the former and $180,000
for the latter because the programs could not be implemented quickly enough
to spend that much money.
Mr~ Rothschild stated that the figures presented were September 1 figures, and
it was his understanding that the matter had been reviewed and the figures
reduced to those indicated.
Mayor Seymour indicated the Council's approval of the items in concept.
lg--Initiate Sunday public service of five hours at the Central Library--$20,O00
h--Reinstate Library audio-cassette program--S5,000.
Councilman Bay stated he was against initiating Sunday Library openings. He
looked at library hours throughout the County as well and the only way he could
go along with the request would be without any additional cost. He maintained
that the Library could cut hours during the week. Relative to the audio-cassette
program, once again he saw services in the Library program being reduced all
over the County and there were things they had to reduce throughout the City.
He did not think that the Library should be a total exception to that trend.
Councilman Overholt explained that the cassette program represented an investment
and the thought was to preserve and keep that current. Relative to opening
Sunday, it was the result of a great deal of community expression. It seemed
a shame to have the Library closed all day on one of the weekend days, without
regard to what was being done elsewhere. There was an investment there, as well
whether or not people were utilizing the facility. He agreed with Counci]m~n
Bay that the Library should devise a way of reducing hours to make up for the
hours of opening on Sunday° Even if they reduced the weekday hours, there
probably would be some additional expense to open Sunday, and he did not agree
that the additional expense would not be worth it. People had talked to him
about the situation particularly parents who stated that students would utilize
the Library for study on Saturday but Sunday it was closed. He concluded that
Anaheim should not be governed by what everybody else was doing, that he would
favor the reduction in weekday hours to make up for Sunday openings, and he did
not think it was realistic to say it would not cost anything additional.
79-658
Cit~ Hall,. Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - June 12, 1979, 10:00 A.M.
Councilwoman Kaywood stated she had a dichotomous feeling because she was very
supportive of libraries and always had been. However, the fact that they had
never initiated Sunday service, to start something new with Proposition 13
would indicate there was no problem at all for expanding all kinds of services
with cuts in revenue~ BalancJ~ng that a§ainst the new library in the canyon,
they were looking for $1 million for a z~aw facility and $.25 million to staff
it. She questioned the whole situation of Sunday openings from that basis.
She did not favor starting a new service.
Mayor Seymour stated he personally felt that the new library was a high priority
and since the Council was committed to it and they did not know how long "bailout"
money would last, he was inclined to move that entire project up one fiscal
year knowing that construction could not begin until after January. He was
sensitive to construction costs which by 1980-81 and then 1981-82, they might
be looking at $70 a square foot, in comparison to $55 at the present time. He
felt the dollars would be better invested in the new library. He would forego
the $20,000 and $5,000 (items g and h) for moving up the construction of the
library one fiscal year.
Councilman Bay stated he would like to move the construction of Fire Station
No. 8 up one year; the Mayor emphasized they were talking about priorities
and if it was a question of need, he answered what they received from the
Library Board reflected such a need.
Councilman Overholt stated there were two separate questions involved and the
question relative to the Central Library was whether or not it was going to
be used.
Mayor Seymour felt the rea]. question was if they wanted to expand activity in
an existing facility when there was a segment of the City that had no activity
at all.
Councilman Overholt did not feel it was a matter of a trade-off. The issue of
building a library in the hills was entirely separate. If the library staff were
to look at the cost of opening Sunday and reducing hours during the week, the
cost would be substantially less than $20,000. He was supportive of both issues,
but maintained that they should consider Sunday opening in the Central Library
on a pilot basis and on an hour-trade basis. If the Library Board felt they
could not trade hours, that was something to consider.
Councilman Bay was concerned over cuts that would have to be made in other
projects as they changed things around. In reviewing the request from the
Fire Chief on accelerating Station No. 8 by one year and the cost of that and
looking at other projects, fire protection in the canyon was more important
than the Library being stepped up. It was difficult to talk about one priority
without talking about all priorities.
Councilman Roth recalled that the Library Director stated relative to priorities,
that opening on Sunday had a much lower priority. He felt that Anaheim should
not necessarily be unique and have Sunday openings, and he too was not sold on
the need to open five hours on Sunday. If they did so, there should be a
reduction during weekdays to preclude any additional costs.
79-659
Ci__~y. Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - June 12~ .1979, 10:00 A.M.
Mayor Seymour stated that the answer on Sunday openings was that it would be
acceptable, but library hours reshuffled in order to do so.
Mr~ Talley stated as Ear as staff's position, this was a Library Board recommen-
dation and staff did ~ot ~u~pcrt that p~ition~. Tf they had to trade hours,
the Library Director preferred not to do so although he recognized the Library
Board wanted to try it. The Council should know that Mr. Griffith viewed it
as bringing on more problems~ and he would rather not give up hours to have
Sunday openings. He noted that on an hour-trade basis, they could not take an
hour off five days a week. What they would probably have to do was take a
block of time--for example, close Mondays from 9:00 to 1:00 or Friday evening.
Mayor Seymour then indicated they should defer a decision relative to the matter
and ask the Library Director to address the Council on the matter at the 3:00
P.M. public hearing.
BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS: City Manager Talley then briefed the Council on the following
budget adjustments listed as "a" through "m" in his report dated June 12, 1979,
which items were either to be deleted or added to the proposed 1979-80 Resource
Allocation Plan. The figures were either unavailable or have changed subsequent
to preparation and submittal of the proposed budget on May 1, 1980.
a) credit the Legal Administration program to reflect
litigation expenses of general liability claims
within the appropriate programs of other depart-
ments;
Expense Revenue
$(133,930)
b) include the Joint-city energy consumption and
requirements study with General Motors Company;
$ 25,000 $ 21,428
c) adjust estimated general fund property tax
receipts in lieu of the Orange County Assessor's
Office most recent change in assessed valuation
(Until the City receives an audited tax roll
from the O.C. Auditor/Controller's Office in
August, 1979, property tax revenue will not be
known with any assurity. It is recommended
that any final adjustments be made to the R.A.P.
along with the setting of the general obligation
bond debt service tax rate at that time.);
$(239,780)
d) include both the lease payment as well as
estimated revenue for the new stadium scoreboard;
$ 84,600 $ 386,500
e) appropriate grant monies for the library out-
reach to the Hispanic community grant;
$ 46,000 $ 46,000
f) include the multi-agency commercial/recreation
area transportation and circulation study;
$ 80,000 $ 60,000
79-660
City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - June I2, 1979, 10:00 A.M.
g) appropriate revenue from Orange Unified School Expense
District for Canyon High School swimming pool
lighting, thus relieving park in lieu fees; $ 5,500
Revenue
$ 5,500
h) adjust the John Marshall Park deve~coment
project, utilizing revenue from a contribution
from a private developer and from the sale of
Citron Park (The project would then be removed
from the "bailout" list.);
$ 230,000
$ 230,000
i) include improvements to the recreation
facilities at three elementary school sites
(Revere, Franklin, Ross) by using revenue from
the sale of Citron Park;
j) adjust the Canyon Site II Park development
project to include revenue from Orange County
revenue sharing (This would reduce the
requirement of State "bailout" monies to
complete this project by the same amount.);
$ 120,000
$ 50,000
$ 120,000
$ 50,000
k) reappropriate unused FY 1978/79 monies intended
for executive and program management compensation
into the 1979-80 fiscal year for identical
purposes; and
$ 75,396
i) adjust the Personnel Employment program for
a mini coukputer to comply with affirmative
action requirements.
$ 6,625
m) Data Processing/MDS analysis, as recommended
by the Blue Ribbon Budget Committee.
$ 25,000
SAN ONOFRE GENERATION UNITS NO. 2 & 3: The City Manager advised that the $50,000
to be appropriated for SONGS 2 and 3 would be discussed at a later date, as
previously directed by the City Council.
PUBLIC UTILITIES CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS: City Manager Talley then referred
to Item 4, "a" through ~"f", of his report and advised that the Public Utilities
General Manager desired the following items reappropriated or reduced since
either the project was not commenced or only partially completed in the 1978-79
budget year:
a) reappropriate monies for the construction of
a two million gallon reservoir at the Lenain
Filtration Plant;
b) rebudget funds for the procurement of
cathodic protection equipment;
Expense Revenue
$ 647,000
$ 9,500
79-661
City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - June 12~ 1979, 10:00 A.M.
c) reduce the appropriations for land
acquisition and construction of Fairmont
Substation, as progress to date is ahead
of prior projections;
d) reappropriate monies for various electrical
overhead line extension projects which did
not come to fruition this current fiscal
year;
e) recycle federal revenue sharing funds to
continue street lighting improvement projects;
and
f) rebudget funds for the conversion of 4kV
overhead circuits to 12kV circuits in
Neighborhood Improvement Area IV.
Expense Revenue
$(215,000)
$ 224,000
$ 29,525
$ 31,043
STATE PROPOSITION 13 SURPLUS SUBVENTION--BAILOUT: The City Manager then dis-
cussed the Bailout funds, advising that if the City Council authorized Items
"a" through "h" under Policy Decisions of his June 12, 1979 report, they would,
in effect, be subtracting whatever the Council took from them, reduce the Bailout
availability by approximately $594,000; credit back to Bailout funds $280,000
if John Marshall and Canyon Site II Park sites are approved; thus leaving a
total of approximately $300,000 for new determinations.
In conclusion Mr. Talley advised that the City Librarian and the Chief of Police
would be available at the 3:00 p.m. public hearing this date with information
and answers requested by the Council at this budget work session.
Mayor Seymour stated, as he understood the City Manager's figures, there was
approximately $2,824,069 available to prioritize certain projects. The Mayor
indicated his priorities would be: Canyon Library, $495,000; Canyon Site II
remainder, $60,000; Fire Station No. 8, $252,408; and the Anaheim Hills Golf
Course Creek Bed Repair, $150,000; with the John Marshall Park project already
resolved. Upon explanation by the City Manager, the Mayor added Anaheim Hills
Golf Course Cart Path Reconstruction, $40,000.
Councilwoman Kaywood indicated that with escalating construction costs and with
the ongoing costs because of an inefficient operation due to the lack of a
central facility, she strongly encouraged the Council to consider appropriating
$1.1 million towards the construction of a new Mechanical Maintenance facility.
Councilman Bay stated that with the figures the City Manager relayed to the
Council this date, he estimated they were looking at approximately $2.9 million
to prioritize. His priorities were: Fire Station No. 8, Crime Task Force, one-
third of the garage facility cost, and cut the State College Boulevard Storm
Drain in half. He believed that Peralta Canyon Park could slip one year without
great impact. ~
Councilman Roth agreed with page 1 of the City Manager recommendations, with the
exception of the $25,000 for the Library. His priorities were Canyon Library
construction, Canyon Site II Park, Miraloma Storm Drain, and his highest priority
was that of Police.
79-662
City Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - June 12~ 1979~ 10:00 A.M.
Of great concern to him, added Councilman Roth, was the $350,000 to $400,000'
loss anticipated by the Anaheim Hills Golf Course this year. Since Council in the
past had determined to keep the Course, it was his opinion that it was imper-
ative that steps be taken t~ speed up play and attract more people to the
Course in order to reduce losses.
Councilman Overholt expressed the opinion that the Miller Golf Course Creek
Bed Repair, $50,000 should be included, along with construction of the Canyon
Library. Councilman Overholt stated that he believed the street improvements
listed should be considered.
City Manager Talley explained that the Street Superintendent had placed into
contract status certain street improvements/repairs he believed were mandatory
to accomplish and would be going to bid in July unless Council directed Obher-
wise. The projects listed today were necessary projects. Mr. Talley emphasized
the importance to maintain the infrastructures of the City and it does require
a large investment of funds to do so.
Councilman Overholt suggested that it may be wise for the Council to appropriate
only a portion of the Bailout funds today and hold the remaining funds in
abeyance; Mayor Seymour concurred.
The City Manager pointed out that the concluding paragraph in his June 12th
report suggested that should the Council not wish to make final determination
of the appropriation of all of the ~ailout monies at this time, a separate
capital projects fund could be established to reserve those monies for later
prioritization. He cautioned that the Council should not do anything with the
last $1.6 million until it is, in fact, received from the State. Ail the figures
are staff's best estimate.
Discussion ensued as to naming such a fund and the consensus was to name it
Capital Improvement Projects Reserve Fund, however, projects other than
capital improvement projects, could be funded out of that fund.
After listening to concerns and opinions expressed by the Council, Mayor Seymour
proposed the following initial list of expenditures to be considered at the
3:00 p.m. hearing this date: 1) Canyon Library, $495,000; 2) Canyon Site
$60,000; 3) Fire Station No. 8, $252,408; 4) Anaheim Hills ~olf Course Drainage,
$150,000; 5) Anaheim Hills Cart ~aths, $40,000; 6) Personnel restoration, excluding two
police officers because of the new Crime Task Force, $118,000; 7) Dad Miller
Course Repair, $50,000; totalling $1,165,408.
Of those mentioned by the Mayor, Councilman Bay again emphasized he could not
support the $½ million for the new Library and additionally the $20,000 expense
listed in the Manager's report for Sunday hours at the Central Library.
Councilman Overholt stated he agreed with the proposed list, but he preferred
an excha~ of hours in the Library to accommodate Sunday opening on a pilot
basis. ~i
Councilman Roth agreed with the proposed list.
79-663
C__ity Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - June 12, 1979~ 10:00 A.M.
Councilwoman Kaywood requested that the Public Works Executive Director be pre-
sent at the 3:00 pom~ hearing to discuss what it would cost the City not to
have the new garage facility. The City Manager advised all department heads
would be present°
Councilman Bay questioned if the the Miraloma Storm Drain is not a part of the
list, would it still be built,~
City Engineer Devitt advised that it would still be constructed.
On motion by Councilwoman Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Roth the City Council
adjourned. MOTION CARRIED. '
Adjourned: 1: 18 P.M.
LIND~ D. ROBERTS, CITY CLERK
79-66~.
City .Hal.l, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - June 12, 1979~ 1:30 P.M.
PRESENT:
ABSENT:
PRESENT:
The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session.
COUNCIL MEMBERS: Overholt, Kaywood, Bay, Roth and Seymour
COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
CITY MANAGER: William O. Talley
CITY ATTORNEY: Willaim P. Hopkins
CITY CLERK: Linda D. Roberts
ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER: William T. Hopkins
DATA PROCESSING DIRECTOR: Takuji Tamaru
UTILITIES GENERAL MANAGER: Gordon W. Hoyt
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, REDEVELOPMENT: Norman J. Priest
RISK MANAGER: Jack Love
CITY LIBRARIAN: William J. Griffith
PUBLIC WORKS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR: Thornton E. Piersall
AUDIT SUPERVISOR: Young Choi
PROGRAM BUDGET MANAGER: Ron Rothschild
ADMINISTRATIVE AIDE: James Armstrong
ASSISTANT DIRECTOR FOR ZONING: Annika Santalahti
PLANNING AIDE: Pam Lucado
INVOCATION:
Invocation.
Mayor Seymour called the meeting to order and welcomed those in
attendance to the Council meeting.
Rabbi Herschel Brooks from Temple Beth Emet gave the
FLAG SALUTE: Councilwoman Miriam Kaywood led the assembly in the Pledge of
Allegiance to the Flag.
119: INTRODUCTION OF MISS ANAHEIM: Mrs. Fran Mauck introduced to the Council
Miss Virginia Martin, Miss Anaheim of 1979.
Mayor Seymour welcomed and congratulated Miss Martin on behalf of the Council and
presented her with a replica of the Big "A" and roses.
119: PROCLAMATION: The following proclamation was issued by Mayor Seymour and
approved by the City Council:
"Honor America in Anaheim" - June 14 - July 4, 1979
119: RESOLUTION OF CONGRATULATIONS: A resolution of congratulations was adopted
by the City Council to be presented to the Long Beach Chapter of the National
Safety Council on 25 years of dedicated services, to be presented at a later
date.
119: RESOLUTION OF CONGRATULATIONS: A resolution of congratulations was adopted
by the City Council to be presented to Mr. Count Basie on his 75th birthday.
MINUTES: Approval of minutes was deferred to the next regular meeting.
79-665
._City Hall, Anaheim.~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - June 12, 1979~ 1:30 P.M.
WAIVER OF READING - ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS: Councilwoman Kaywood moved to
waive the reading, in full, of all ordinances and resolutions and that consent
to the Waiver of reading is hereby given by all Council Members unless, after
reading of the title, specific request is made by a Council Member for the read-
ing of such ordinance or resolution. Councilmsn Ro~b seconded the motion MOTION
CARRIED. ·
FINANCIAL DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY in the amount of $6,304,521.51, in accordance
with the 1978-79 Budget, were approved.
164: TIMKEN ROAD SEWER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT: (Account No. 11-790-6325-0120)
On motion by Councilwoman Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Roth, award of contract
on the Timken Road Sewer Improvement Project was continued to June 19, 1979 as
recommended in memorandum dated June 5, 1979 from City Engineer William
Devitt. MOTION CARRIED.
175: AWARD OF CONTRACT - CONVERSION OF 4 KV LINE TO 12 KV DISTRIBUTION LINE
HUD AREAS II AND III: (Account No. 25-671-6328-74410-36500-Area II, Account
No. 25-671-6328-74420-36500-Area III). On motion by Councilwoman Kaywood,
seconded by Councilman Overholt, a contract for the subject distribution lines
was awarded to A.S. Schulman Electric Company in the amount of $44,957.38 as
recommended in memorandum dated June 4, 1979 from the City Engineer. MOTION CARRIED.
158: PURCHASE OF LAND FOR SUBSTATION SITE: On motion by Councilwoman Kaywood,
seconded by Councilman Overholt, the acquisition of a 1.64-acre parcel of land
located on the east side of Fairmont Boulevard, south of Santa Ana Canyon Road,
in the amount of $104,300, to be used as a substation site, was approved as
recommended by the City Engineer in his memorandum dated June 6, 1979 MOTION
CARRIED. ·
160: PURCHASE OF EQ.UIPMENT - EXPANSION OF UTILITIES DEPARTMENT RADIO COMMUNI
CATIONS NETWORK: On motion by Councilwoman Kaywood, seconded by Councilman
Roth, the low bid of Motorola Communications and Electronics Inc. was accepted
and purchase authorized in the amount of $17,901.71, including tax, as
recommended by the Purchasing Agent in his memorandum dated June 5 1979 MOTION
CARRIED. , ·
i58: IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CITY'S REBATE INCENTIVE PROGRAM: On motion by
Councilwoman Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Overholt, implementation of the
City's rebate incentive program was authorized as recommended in memorandum
dated June 6, 1979 from the Executive Director of Community Development, Norm
Priest. MOTION CARRIED.
177: IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CITY'S DEFERRED PAYMENT HOUSING REHABILITATION LOAN
PROGRAMS: Councilwoman Kaywood offered Resolution No. 79R-330 for adoption, as
recommended in memorandum dated June 5, 1979 from the Executive Director of
Community Development Norm Priest, authorizing the Deferred Payment Loan Program
and authorizing and approving the Community Development Director to approve
said loans for and on behalf of the City. Refer to Resolution Book.
79-666
~ity Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - June 12, 197~,~ 1:30 P.M.
RESOLUTION NO. 79R-330: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
AUTHORIZING THE DEFERRED PAYMENT LOAN PROGRAM AND AUTHORIZING AND APPROVING THE
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR TO APPROVE SAID LOANS FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL M_EM~ERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Overholt, Kaywood, Bay, Roth and Seymour
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 79R-330 duly passed and adopted.
174/123: YOUTH PAINT AND PICK-UP PROGRAM: Councilwoman Kaywood offered
Resolution Nos. 79R-331 and 79R-332 for adoption, as recommended in memorandum
dated June 6, 1979 from the Executive Director of Community Development, ap-
proving agreements with both John Rush and Wallace Alexander for instructional
services for the Youth Paint and Pick-up Program for the term ending June 30
1980. Refer to Resolution Book. '
RESOLUTION NO. 79R-331: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
APPROVING THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF AN AGREEMENT WITH JOHN RUSH FOR INSTRUCTIONAL
SERVICES. '
RESOLUTION NO. 79R-332: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
APPROVING THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF AN AGREEMENT FOR INSTRUCTIONAL SERVICES.
(WALLACE ALEXANDER)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Overholt, Kaywood, Bay, Roth and Seymour
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 79R-331 and 79R-332, both inclusive, duly
passed and adopted.
.123/124: CALIFORNIA MILK ADVISORY BOARD ADVERTISING: Councilwoman Kaywood
offered Resolution No. 79R-333 for adoption, as recommended in memorandum dated
June 5, 1979 from the General Manager, Stadium, Convention Center and Golf
Courses Tom Liegler, authorizing an agreement with the California Milk Producers
Advisory Board for advertising on structures at the Anaheim Convention Center,
and authorizing the General Manager of the Anaheim Convention Center to execute
same. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 79R-333: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION BY THE GENERAL MANAGER OF THE ANAHEIN CONVENTION CENTER
OF AN AGREEMENT WITH THE CALIFORNIA MILK PRODUCERS ADVISORY BOARD FOR ADVERTISING
ON STRUCTURES AT THE ANAHEIM CONVENTION CENTER.
79-667
Cit~ Hal.l, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - June 12~ 19~79~ 1:30 P,M.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Overholt, Kaywood, Bay, Roth and Seymour
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 79R-333 duly passed and adopted.
123/175: SUPPLEMENT TO AGREEMENT WITH SPIEGEL AND McDIARMID - BILLING ARRANGE~
MENTS ON ANTI-TRUST PROCEEDINGS: Public Utilities General Manager Gordon Hoytl
first clarified questions posed by Mayor Seymour relative to the subject Sup-
plement to Letter Agreement dated April 14, 1978, at the conclusion of which,
he indicated that in his view, the proposed supplement had a good option of
saving money for the City.
Councilman Overholt offered Resolution No. 79R-334 for adoption, as recommended
in memorandum dated May 30, 1979 from the General Manager of Public Utilities.
Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 79R-334: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
APPROVING THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF A SUPPLEMENT TO THE LETTER AGREEMENT DATED
APRIL 14, 1978, WITH SPIEGEL AND MC DIARMID AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE
PUBLIC UTILITIES GENERAL MANAGER TO EXECUTE SAID SUPPLEMENT (FERC DOCKETS E-777~
(II) AND E-7796)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Overholt, Kaywood, Bay, Roth and Seymour
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
The Mayor declared Res'Olution No. 79R-334 duly passed and adopted.
175: ELECTRIC RATES~ RULES AND REGULATIONS: Councilman Bay offered Resolution
No. 79R-335 for adoption, as recommended in memorandum dated May 31, 1979 from
the Public Utilities General Manager, amending Resolution No. 79R-292, nunc pro
tunc, to correct clerical errors relating to Electric Rates, Rules and Regulations.
Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 79R-335: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHELM
AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 79R-292 NUNC PRO TUNC.
Roll C~ll Vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Overholt, Kaywood, Bay, Roth and Seymour
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 79R-335 duly passed and adopted.
79-668
City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - June 12, !979~ 1:30 P.M.
173: ORANGE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION'S FIVE-YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVE
MENT PLAN: Councilwoman Kaywood offered Resolution No. 79R-336 for adoption, as
recommended in memorandum dated June 6, 1979 from the City Engineer, supporting
the Orange County Transportation Commission's five-year Transportation Improve-
ment Program and requesting the California Transportation Commission (C.T.C.) to
support and adopt same. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 79R-336: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
SUPPORTING THE ORANGE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION'S TRANSPORTATION IMPROVE-
MENT PROGRAM AND REQUESTING THE CALIFORNIA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION TO SUPPORT
SAME.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Overholt, Kaywood, Bay, Roth and Seymour
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 79R-336 duly passed and adopted.
123/173: COMMERCIAL/RECREATION AREA TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION MANAGEMENT
STuOY: City Manager William Talley briefed the Council on memorandum dated
June 6, 1979 from the Planning Director and Executive Director of Public Works.
He also noted that the Orange City Council should express their views on the
matter so that at some later date, they would not be in a position or have a
chance to say that they did not have an opportunity to become fulI participants
or that they had some concerns this study could have addressed, but did not,
because they did not participate.
Councilman Overholt offered Resolution No. 79R-337 for adoption, as recommended
in memorandum dated June 6, 1979 from the Planning Director and Executive
Director of Public Works, approving the City's participation in the subject
study and authorizing an agreement with O.C.T.C., OCTD and the City of Garden
Grove in an amount not to exceed $20,000 local contribution. Refer to Resolution
Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 79R-337: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
APPROVING THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF AN AGREEMENT WITH THE ORANGE COUNTY TRANS-
PORTATION COMMISSION, ORANGE COUNTY TRANSIT DISTRICT AND THE CITY OF GARDEN GROVE,
IN CONNECTION WITH THE ANAHEIM COMMERCIAL/RECREATiON AREA TRANSPORTATION AND
CIRCULATION MANAGEMENT STUDY; AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE MAYOR AND CITY
CLERK TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT.
Before a vote was taken, Pam Lucado, Planning Aide, informed the Council that
to her knowledge the Orange City Council had not been approached on the matter,
but they had approached all Orange City staff.
Councilman Overholt stated that he hoped the Orange Council would take a hard
look at the situation. He knew from the meeting held with people from Garden
Grove that they were excited about the study and the long-term benefits that
it could mean to their community.
79-669
.City.~all~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - June 12, 1.979~ 1:30 P.M.
Mayor Seymour then gave a brief background on how the need for the study invol-
ved and concluded that he, too, hoped the Orange City Council would seriously
consider participation in the study.
A vote was then taken on the foregoing resolution.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Overholt, Kaywood, Bay, Roth and Seymour
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 79R-337 duly passed and adopted.
On motion by Councilman Overholt, seconded by Councilwoman Kaywood, the City
of Orange would be requested to participate in the Anaheim Commercial/Recreation
Area Transportation and Circulation Management Study and staff was directed tO
prepare a letter for the Mayor's signature to be directed to the Mayor and
City Council of Orange as suggested by Councilwoman Kaywood. MOTION CARRIED.
On motion by Councilman Overholt, seconded by Councilwoman Kaywood, the
Executive Director of Public Works or his designee was appointed as Project
Manager of the subject study. MOTION CARRIED.
180: RENEWAL OF HELICOPTER LIABILITY INSURANCE: On motion by Councilman Roth,
seconded by Councilwoman Kaywood, the offer of renewal of liability insurance,
as contained in the letter from Marsh and McLennan dated June 6, 1979, for the
City's helicopters and heliport was approved. MOTION CARRIED.
i80: RENEWAL OF PUBLIC OFFICIALS ERRORS AND OMISSIONS LIABILITY INSURANCE:
Counc~lm~n Roth moved to accept the offer of renewal of liability insurance
by the Forum Insurance Company, as contained in letter from Marsh and McLennan
dated June 6, 1979, for Public Officials Errors and Omissions coverage in the
amount of $1,000,000 coverage only, as recommended in memorandum dated June 6,
1979 by the Risk Manager Jack Love. Councilwoman Kaywood seconded the motion.
Before a vote was taken, Mayor Seymour noted that it appeared they had greater
coverage in the past; Risk Manager, Jack Love, stated that was true and that
in January they purchased a policy of $2,000,000 over $1,000,000 for a total
of $3,000,000. Mayor Seymour noted, however, that the Council would be exposed
until later in the year. Mr. Love confirmed that was correct until September 1,
1979. He anticipated obtaining the other layers of coverage in the renewal of
the comprehensive general liability policy on September 1, 1979.
City Manager Talley asked if they could stay at $3,000,000 and cancel the
policy in 60 days.
Mr. Love presumed they could do so if they paid a short-rate cancellation penalty;
Mr. Talley suggested that the Council might want that information before voting.
79-670
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - June 12~ ,1979~ 1:30 P.M.
Councilman Roth thereupon withdrew his motion and Councilwoman Kaywood her
second.
Later in the meeting, Mr. Talley stated that Mr. Love reported that other than
the pro-rata amount, approximately $700 would be charged as a short-rate can-
cellation penalty, and he recommended that they take $3,000,000.
On motion by Councilwoman Kmywood, seconded by Councilman Bay, the offer of
renewal of liability insurance, by the Forum Insurance Company, as contained
in letter from Marsh and McLennan dated June 6, 1979, for Public Officials
Errors and Omissions coverage, was accepted in the amount of $3,000,000 coverage.
MOTION CARRIED.
112: SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANSPORTATION COMPANY~ ET AL. VS. COUNTY OF ORANGE~
CITY OF ANAHEIM~ ET AL.: On motion by Councilwoman Kaywood, seconded by
Councilman Overholt, the Orange County Counsel was authorized to defend the
City in the matter of the Southern Pacific Transportation Company, et al. vs.
County of Orange, City of Anaheim, et al, relating to recovery of property
taxes based on alleged erroneous assessments. MOTION CARRIED.
163: POTENTIAL CLOSURE OF SAVANNA HIGH SCHOOL: Mayor Seymour stated that the
subject matter had caused the Council some concern and a great deal of personal
concern to him. He wanted to take the opportunity to represent to the public
certain facts as he best understood them. He explained that the issue was so
volatile that the Mayor's Hotline call station ran out of tape due to the over-
flow of calls received. People were most concerned with threatened closure
since no parent favored the idea of having their children change schools. There
was apparently a misunderstanding on the part of many citizens because some of
the calls suggested that the City Council might be in a position to do something
about the closure of the school. However, neither the Council, Mayor, nor City
Management had any authority whatsoever over the School District and specifically
the elected officals of the High School District Board. Legally, there was
nothing the City could do. However, they did have the responsibility individually
to speak with members of the School Board to express their views.
Secondly, an allegation had been made by someone who was either misinformed or
who wanted to stir citizen unrest. They were telling an untruth whereby the
Council or City Management had some type of secret negotiations or open nego-
tiations with the Los Angeles Rams for using Savanna High School as a potential
training site or for any other activity having to do with the Rams. He could
only say unequivocably, totally, and completely that absolutely nothing could
be farther from the truth. The City committed itself to the Rams on a long-
term lease and a one-half million dollar expenditure on the Low School, and
there were no conditions which he could imagine wherein the Rams or the City
would be interested in Savanna High School or anything having to do with the
Rams. He asked if the City Manager or any member of the 8ouncil had any
information that discussion had taken place on the subject, that they make it
public and do so now. As well, some of the Hotline calls suggested they were
interested in taking over Savanna for purposes of a golf course. He had not
had and he did not believe any Council Member had any conversation with any
member of the School Board, school management or staff on that particular
subject. He had heard and shared conversations with Tom Liegler to the degree
79-671
City ~al.l~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - June 12~ 1979~ 1:30 P.M.
that if something were to happen to Savanna, if a portion of the parking lot
were excess, they could possibly utilize that space, but in no way could they
use the entire facility. That was not to be confused with the use of the
school. To have that misconstrued into some "under the table plot" that the
Council or the administration was involved in Frying to acquire Savanna High
School, was totally ridiculous.
Councilman Roth stated that the public should be aware that the duly elected
School Board authorized a citizens committee to study the whole population
decrease and decreased school attendance, with a subsequent recommendation to
the School Board. Thus, the City had not been involved with anything, including
the citizens committee which was appointed by the School Board.
Councilwoman Kaywood stated that all she knew of the matter was what she had
read in the newspaper, except that a citizens committee had been appointed to
make the study as Councilman Roth expressed to consider proposed closures of
Savanna, Magnolia and Western High Schools. She could not believe some of the
calls they had had been receiving. As well, many were caller unknown, or
no address, and she did not know how they could respond.
Councilman Overholt stated he had received a telephone call from a Mr. Ovid
Larr, and he had attempted to reach other members of the Council as well. He
was concerned about the Savanna closure and advised that there was to be a
rally at Savanna at 5~:00 P.M. It would proceed to the chambers of the Anaheim
Union High Schoool District (AUHSD) Board of Trustees and that the City should
be involved in helping with the rally. He explained to Mr. Larr that as Council
Members, they had to wear many hats and as parents they had their own opinions
about things. As a City Councilman, what went on in the School District was
up to the Trustees and he, therefore, suggested to Mr. Larr that it would be
inappropriate for him as a Councilman to get involved in that activity. He
also suggested the only service he could perform was to advise the Police
Department of the fact that there was a group forming at 5:00 P.M. so that
everybody's rights would be observed, and no one would get hurt. He knew of
nothing in the way of plans with reference to Savanna High School as far as
the City was concerned.
Mayor Seymour asked City Manager Talley if he had anything to add relative to
any knowledge of any member of staff being involved with Savanna High School
and the Rams.
Mr. Talley stated the only knowledge he might remotely have would be that the
golfing public had constantly looked at the parking area at Savanna and men-
tioned to Mr. Liegler on a number of occasions if there were some way they could
have joint use of that parking area. As the Council was aware, they had made
substantial investments in the Golf Course Driving Range and in the current
budget were anticipating substantial outlays for cart and creek renovation, and
he had been instructed to enter into substantial negotiations for improvement
of the concession stand at the Course. He did not know how they could expand
into Savanna and use it.
79-672
City Ha~l~ Anahe~ California -COUNCIL MINUTES - June~ 12, 1979, 1:30 P.M.
The Mayor asked for confirmation that Mr. Taliey did not have a hidden agenda
to utilize the facilities of Savanna High School, other than the fact that
additional parking was needed, and the City might want to share that either
with the school or anybody else.
Mr. Talley stated he oaiieved it would be a beneficial use, but did not see
how it would affect the operation of the high school itself.
The Mayor stated he was in the process of preparing a letter of response to
each and everyone of the telephone calls received to try to clear the air.
He could understand how such a situation could occur, but felt it incumbent
upon them to clarify the matter and they had done so.
175: REQUEST FOR WATER AND SEWER SERVICES FOR A CONDOMINIUM PROJECT IN BUENA
PARK: Request by Kennedy and Hause, Builders and Developers, for water and
sewer services from the City of Anaheim for a 76-unit condominium to be devel-
oped in the City of Buena Park on the south side of La Palma Avenue, west of
Magnolia Avenue, was submitted.
Miss Santalahti, Assistant Director for Zoning, explained that following pre-
paration of the staff report, the builders modified their request and were now
asking that only water service be provided by Anaheim. The report was written
with the intent that they wanted two services out of three utilities. Under
those conditions, staff felt strongly the property should be annexed to the
City. In view of the modified request, they did not feel as strongly.
Mr. J~ E. VanDell, VanDell and Associates, Civil Engineers and Land Planners,
Irvine, presented a diagram of the property involved. The question was posed
to them asking if it was feasible for affordable housing and in response, they
met with Buena Park and developed some tentative plans. Subsequently met
with the Anaheim Planning staff who indicated the plan did not exactly conform
to the City's zoning regulations. They would have no stringent opposition to
the project, subject to the feelings of the local residents. They met with
the residents who had some objections. They subsequently changed their designs
and. went back to the residents who were furnished with a copy of the minutes
of the Buena Park Council meeting wherein residents of Buena Park did support
the proposal. In essence they had made peace with the residents adjoining the
property.
Mr~ VanDell then elaborated upon the results of the engineering studies which
revealed sewer and water problems, thus necessitating their request for the
services from Anaheim, although now it was for water only. In summation, Mr.
VanDell stated the request was, (1) a logical solution to the water problem
and fire protection was for the benefit of both cities, (2) keeping the cost
of the project lower would be a benefit as well, relative to providing affor-
dable housing, and they did not want to see any additional costs to the project.
Councilwoman Kaywood then posed questions to Mr. VanDell relative to the sewer
service and why they were no longer requesting it. As well, she noted the
size of the proposed units, the density of the project not being in line with
Anaheim's standards, and a parking problem. She had a number of concerns with
the project and would not be able to support it. She asked Mr. VanDell if he
had considered annexing the property to Anaheim.
79-673
City Ha.ll~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - June 12~ 19.79, 1:30 P.M.
Mr. VanDell answered that such a move was considered. The site was zoned
industrial, and the owners requested that it be rezoned to residential to bring
it into line with what Anaheim would like to see as zoning on the property.
Relative to the annexation from Buena Park, when they talked to staff of
Buena Park, they were opposed, because it would probably have to involve
Sears or the Edison Company, and they did not want to lore that tax base.
Councilwoman Kaywood pointed out that Anaheim required a 150-foot setback
between residential and two story units, and theirs was only a 50-foot set-
back.
Mr. VanDell stated that the two-story building had no openings facing residential
and that had been a concern of the residents. They had accepted the change in
design. He also believed that a variance for that specific requirement had
been granted in Anaheim.
Further discussion followed upon Mayor Seymour's inquiry as to whether or not
they had evidence of support of the neighborhood.
Mr. VanDell explained that excerpts of the minutes of the meetings in Buena
Park were available. He also had a list of the people who attended the
meetings and those were the people who then responded to the Council. He
also did not know whether they were homeowners or renters of property.
Mayor Seymour stated he was not certain that was an expression that the neigh-
borhood approved. The project would not hamper the City's interest north
of La Palma Avenue, and thus he was inclined to go along with the request. How-
ever, he noted that Anaheim was impacted to the east and to the south of the
subject property, and he was sensitive to those neighborhoods.
Mr. VanDell stated they met twice with the residents although he did not have
a signed petition in support.
Councilman Bay also posed additional questions to Mr. VanDell relative to the
project and in concluding, asked the price range of the units; a gentleman
from the audience indicated that $65,000 to $70,000 was the projected price
at present.
Councilman Roth stated he was extremely interested in affordable housing and
asked for clarification as to what the developer meant by affordable housing.
Mr. VanDell stated that a number of opportunities for affordable housing were
in fill areas that had been vacant for many years; Councilman Roth stated he
did not want to see in five or six months that the price was $110,000 and up.
Councilman Bay then asked if anyone from the Anaheim side on Greenbrier Street
bordering the development complained about the two-story height within 50 feet
of their homes.
Ms. Marie Gillman, VanDell and Associates stated in the meetings held with the
citizens, the citizens felt that certain things should be done relative to
placement of garages along the back property line and rearrangement of the
79-674
q.ity Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - June. 12~ 1979~ 1:30 P.M.
windows was more than adequate to assure their privacy. Ail the minutes
reflected that only a few people spoke, there were quite a number of people
in attendance in full support of the project after they had worked with them.
Councilman Bay suggested a ona week's continusnce io order ~or the developers
to contact the Anaheim citizens adjacent to the project for their reaction.
Mayor Seymour stated that the majority of the Council was indicating if the
neighborhood supported the project as proposed, they would also be inclined
to support it, provided they could also come to an understanding that it would
be affordable housing. He felt as strongly as Councilman Roht that if they were
going to tell the Council today tbat the cost would be $65,000 to $70,000 and
then they advertised $85,000 to $90,000~ they would have misled the Council.
Therefore, they needed some type of assurance on that subject, and given that
assurance, as well as the assurance that the neighbors were happy, he was
inclined to think there would be three votes in support.
Councilwoman Kaywood added that after a long study, the City's Planning Commission
had just presented a 3,000-square foot minimum site for condominiums and the
proposed project was down to 2.457 with a much higher density. Anaheim allowed 14.8
units per acre and the project was 17.8. Her big concern was that a precedent
was being set, and with the ordinance still new, consideration was being given
to granting an exception.
The Mayor emphasized that the Council was going to have to come to grips with
the situation and if they believed in affordable housing, they were going to
have to look at new innovative ways of providing it. They could decrease
density and increase parking requirements, but then they could not say they
supported affordable housing. There was no way to do so without subsidizing.
Councilwoman Kaywood requested that when gathering the Anaheim neighbors' com-
ments, she would also like to know whether they were homeowners or renters.
Councilman Overholt stated the problem he had with the list of names, was that
it appeared these people attended the meeting, but it did not indicate whether
they were for or against, and he suggested that the developer submit names in
the form of a petition of expressed approval by those residents. He did not
know whether that could be accomplished in one week, but he was in support of
the continuance as well.
On motion by Councilman Bay, seconded by Councilman Roth, consideration of the
subject request was continued for one week in order for the developer to submit
a petition containing signatures of Anaheim residents indicating their expressed
approval of the project. MOTION CARRIED.
159: ALLEGATIONS RELATING TO THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT: Request by Mr.
Steven A. Silverstein to address the Council on a matter relating to the
Public Works Department and the City Attorney's office, was submitted.
City Attorney William Hopkins first advised the Council that an arbitration
case was pending in the matter of a Mr. Jeffrey Silverstein employed by the
Anaheim Public Works Department. He recommended that the Council make no
79-675
City Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - June 12~ 1979~ 1:30 P.M.
comm~ent on matters relating to the arbitration case in Mr. Jeffrey Silverstein's
matter. He also wanted to ask Mr. Steven Silverstein, Attorney, if he would
be willing to make his statement under oath because of the nature of the matter.
Mr. Steven Silversteim~ Attorney, 730 North Euclid, first stated that today there
was a claim made against the City in the amount of $1,000,000 which also put
them in a plaintiff/defendant situation. The City Attorney and his office were
named as the defendant in that action and, therefore, if the Council was going
to be receiving any advice or recommendations with regard to anything he had
to say, he asked that the City Attorney disqualify himself.
Mayor Seymour interjected and stated that the Council should first be polled on
the matter. The Council had received a request from Mr. Silverstein to appear
to divulge certain information and allegations and they decided that they would
do so. Since that communication he (Silverstein) had now informed them that
he lodged a $1,000,000 lawsuit against the City. If that were true, and he
assumed it was, perhaps the Council would want to reconsider whether or not to
hear anything today if, in fact, he had decided unilaterally to already take the
matter to court.
Mr. Silverstein answered the lawsuit that was filed and the arbitration claim
that was made were all part and parcel of the incidents he wanted to talk to the
Council about. However, the matters he discovered in his investigation of the
lawsuit and arbitration were matters that would probably be handled by Grand
Juries in some cases and in other cases by independent investigative Government
agencies, because it involved corruption within the City.
The Mayor again stated that he wanted to poll the Council since they had no
knowledge that he had Just filed a lawsuit against the City. They looked
upon him as they would any citizen petitioning their Council on a matter they
felt should be public, and the Council was supportive of that. If there was a
pending lawsuit and what he was going to divulge now was information that may
be part of that lawsuit, he would ask the Council to determine whether or not
they wanted to hear the matter.
Councilman Overholt asked if the Summons and the Complaint had been served.
Mr. Silverstein answered that no Summons and Complaint had been served and that
a claim had to be made against the public entity prior to the filing of a
Complaint. A suit had not been filed and the claim was mailed today so it
would not have been received by the City.
Mayor Seymour stated that he looked to Councilman Overholt and the City Attorney
for some guidance in the matter. He stated again for Mr. Sitverstein and for
the purpose of the public and the press that the Council received a request
to bring a matter to the Council that had some serious allegations attached to
it and it also involved a City employee's arbitration. The Council's feeling
was that relative to the arbitration, they were not going to turn the Chamber
into a public hearing forum on arbitration. On the other hand, if any citizen
had information they felt they should bring to the Council, the Council wanted
to hear it, good, bad or indifferent. Now, however, the whole nature of the
situation changed when Mr. Silverstein suggested that a $1,000,000 lawsuit
had been filed.
79-676
City Ha~l~ Anaheim~ California - CpUNCIL MINUTES - J~ne 12., 1979~ 1:'30 P.M.
Mr. Silverstein answered that the law suit was basically on the same grounds
as the arbitration; the Mayor pointed out that he (Silverstein) stated at the
podium that part of the $1,000,000 lawsuit included information relative to
what he termed, "corrupt practices".
Mr. Silverstein answered that the Mayor misunderstood what he said, or otherwise
he did not make himself clear. In the course of his investigation of the law-
suit and arbitration, he discovered information about City employees. That
information would not be included in the lawsuit. The suit was for false arrest,
false imprisonment and violation of civil rights. The background information
they were going to hear would be introduced as background information only if
the matter proceeded to a jury° If the Mayor and Council did not want to hear
about practices going on within the City, that was fine with him. He came because
he was concerned.
The Mayor reminded Mr. Silverstein if the Council did not want to hear him,
he would not be present today. They had a need to know if Mr. Silverstein was
subsequently going to turn around and sue the City on information he wanted to
present today.
City Attorney Hopkins stated that the City Clerk reported that she had not
received any claim against the City, and no service had been received.
Councilman Overholt asked Mr. Silverstein if the facts he was about ready to
allege were facts to be determined in the lawsuit he intended to file.
Mr~ Silverstein answered they would not be facts that would have to be proven
in the lawsuit in order for the lawsuit to be successful. They were per-
ipheral facts that would obviously be revealed, but they were not the basis
for the lawsuit.
Councilman Overholt than asked if the evidence to be offered in the lawsuit
would tend to support the facts he was about ready to allege.
Mr. Silverstein answered it possibly could be and it probably would be introduced
by the attorneys for the City.
Councilman Overholt then asked if there would not be duplicity in something
that he would present in the lawsuit or something that would be presented in
the lawsuit by the City.
Mr. Silverstein reiterated his lawsuit concerned arrest and false imprisonment.
The issue of fact would be whether his defendant had done those things and
there might be some crossover; however, the touchstone of the lawsuit was not
the acts he was going t¢ relate to the City, and a number of acts had absolutely
nothing to do with the lawsuit.
Councilman Overholt asked if he could limit himself to alleged facts that had
nothing to do with the lawsuit.
79-677
~ty Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - June 12~ 1979, 1:30 P.M.
Mr. Silverstein stated the problem they were going to have in order to bring
the facts forward was the Council was going to have to hear the whole story,
rather than facts in isolation. There may be portions that would be part of
the lawsuit. If the claim was denied, which he anticipated it would be, and
he filed his lawsuit, the information would b~i~ oar,~ of the public record and,
therefore, exposed not only to the Council, but also to all of the people in
the Chamber, as well as anybody who cared to pull that public record. Thus,
he did not know how hearing what he intended to allege in a complaint would
in any way prejudice the Council or in any way reveal something that they
were not going to hear in any event.
Councilman Overholt contended, except to try the case in the press. Mr. Silverstein
answered, if he wished to do so, he would have called a press conference in
his office. He came to let the City clean its own house.
Mr. Robert Schwartze, Attorney in Newport Beach, stated depending upon Mr.
Silverstein's statements, he might wish to make a response to those statements.
He represented Mr. John Roche, an employee of the City of Anaheim in his
individual c~pacity.
Councilman Overholt stated he, for one, was not going to participate in any k~nd
of presentation. He felt they were trying a case in the Council Chamber, and
he did not think it appropriate relative to innocent parties, including Mr.
Silverstein's client, and that was why they had lawsuits. If Mr. Silverstein
had complaints against the City, he had a great deal of recourse.
Mr. Silverstein answered that he would think that Councilman Overholt, as an
attorney, would grant him the same courtesy that he (Silverstein) would grant
to him. He was not going to discuss any allegations against his client. He
was telling them that there were corrupt practices being engaged in the City,
and had been engaged in for some time, and there were people in the City who
had evidence and would come forward to the Council.
MOTION: Councilman Seymour moved to grant Mr. Silverstein 10 minutes to speak
to the issue and Mr. Schwartze three minutes to make his presentation. Council-
man Bay seconded the motion.
Before a vote was taken, Councilwoman Kaywood stated she was prepared to hear Mr.
Silverstein until he reported that a claim was filed today, and she was concerned
that any response the Council made could jeopardize the situation.
The Mayor stated that he did not intend to respond to any allegations today,
other than to direct the City Manager and the City Attorney to investigate the
allegations. That would be his only action.
Councilwoman Kaywood was of the opinion that it could best be accomplished in
a letter.
Councilman Overholt stated he would support the motion, but he, too, would not
make any comment whatsoever. He still believed the action to be totally
inappropriate because they were in essence trying a lawsuit at this stage
with two attorneys, but he would listen to the presentation.
79-678
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - June 12~ 1979~ 1:30 P.M.
Mayor Seymour stated he made the motion in a spirit of openness and so that
neither Mr. Silverstein~ Mr~ Scbwartze, nor any citizen, could point a finger at
the Council and accuse them of a cover-up, although he did not think they had
anything to cover up to begin with.
A vote was taken on the foregoing motion. MOTION CARRIED.
City Attorney Hopkins asked the Mayor if he wished the Council to request that
Mr. Silverstein be sworn.
The Mayor asked Mr. Silverstein if wanted to be sworn in and if he was willing
to be sworn in.
Mr. Silverstein answered "no", and he would be willing only if the City Attorney
would also testify and be sworn.
Mayor Seymour stated, not testify; Mr. Silverstein then wanted to know why he
would be sworn in if he was not testifying.
The Mayor asked if he was refusing to be sworn in; Mr. Silverstein reiterated he
would be sworn in only if the City Attorney would stand and be sworn and make
his comments and responses.
Mr. Hopkins indicated it was only a request; Mr. Silverstein denied the request.
Mayor Seymour stated that the record should show that Mr. Silverstein refused to
be sworn in; Mr. Silverstein asked that the record also clearly reflect that he
asked the City Attorney to be sworn in, and there was no response to that question.
Mr. Silverstein reported that in approximately late March 1979, there was an
incident which was the background incident that Council must hear in its briefest
form in order to understand the involvement. Three people were involved, two
laborers, one of whom was a Supervisor or actually a Cement Finisher in charge
of a cement crew, one of the laborers being his brother, and that was how he
was involved. They we~t out to perform a Job on other than City property--a
private residence in Buena Park. Subsequently, the Supervisor caught two of'
the laborers, neither of whom were his clients, and those laborers were forced
to either quit or were fired, dependent on whose version of the facts were
heard. Ail three were eventually fired. The City, acting through Mr. Roche,
and Mr. Murtha and through Detective Churchill filed criminal charges of
grand theft, in that the employees were using their time and City equipment for
private gain. At that point, he became involved and the charges against his
client were dismissed. A probation violation was brought relative to previous
trouble he had been in on another matter, but nothing was done, and walked away
unscathed from the incident. One of the other employees pleaded guilty to
trespass and the party who was in charge pleaded guilty to petty theft. In
preparing his defense of the matter, he talked to a number of people in the
City. In excess of 20 people were interviewed at one time or another, either
by himself or his associates, investigators that were retained, and various
other sources that they had. They discovered that in the Public Works Depart-
ment, or the Division over which Mr. Roche had charge, that the incident was
not isolated but a common practice. They found out that there were two lead
men in that department, Vince Guiterre and Jerry Moreno who were the ones
79-679
~ity Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - June 12, 1979~ 1:30 P.M.
who told other employees where to go. There were City employees who had
stated if they could come forward and speak their piece and not feel the wrath
of their superiors, they would come forward and confirm certain information
to the Council. One employee would come forward and state that he caught one
of those lead men stealing a saw blade and further state that he presented
that information to Mr. Roche, and to the best of his knowledge, absolutely
nothing was done.
Another employee of the City would come forward and state that Mr. Guiterre was
caught with a City of Anaheim dump truck with cement in it and dumping that
cement on to private property on a job for private gain. That information was
reported to Mr. Roche and no criminal charges were filed and no dismissal made.
There were a number of other individuals who were either employees of the City
at present or past employees who would state that they had been told on a
number of occasions to "get lost", because there was nothing for them to do
that day or that afternoon, and with the full consent of superiors in the
Department.
There were other employees currently employed or who had left the employ of the
City who would state that they had done side jobs, not for the City, but using
City equipment and City material with the full knowledge, consent and under
the instruction of the lead men. They would further state when they reported
those instances to Mr. Roche, that not only was nothing done, but also it
became difficult for them to maintain their positions because there was tre-
mendous pressure put on them, and they were given rather bad jobs.
He understood from his confidential informants that the Finance Department of
the City was undertaking an investigation, since the matter arose, of certain
practices wherein it was discovered that there were a number of invoices for
cement that were paid for where there were no supporting purchase orders. They
had someone who would testify that they saw City equipment, on City time, City
property using City employees putting a permanent trailer hitch onto Mr. Roche's
truck and they would state that under oath. This was the same man who swore
out the complaint to the Police Department to have those other employees arrested.
They had other employees who had information they would like to give to the
City Council or to independent investigators about Mr. Roche's avocado farm.
They had further information that there were rules within that Department to
have valid California drivers licenses and that certain people asked for
transfers into that Department, but had been turned down because they did not
have valid California licenses. However, they did know that there were at
least two female employees in that Department who were transferred from Mr.
Roche's previous job who did not have valid California licenses, and the'reason
one was transferred was to drive the other one around. '
There were instances of misuse of trailers on the Anaheim Stadium parking lot,
of beer drinking and other practices being engaged in there by supervisory
personnel.
The reason he was before the Council was due to the fact that the foregoing
information was presented to Mr. Roche in the presence of the City Attorney
and nothing was done. It was also presented to Mr. Roche's supervisor in
79-680
City Ha.ll~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - June 12~ 1979~ 1:30 P.M.
the presence of the City Attorney and nothing was done. He questioned if
the Council knew about those instances and knowing the reputation of the
Council Members, he was certain that they did not know about them. He asked
that the Council investigate the matter with City employees. If the Council
wished City Attorne~ ~i~kins tc investig te thc m'~?~ar, a'~f he would do it on
his own and not delegate it to any of his subordinates, he would have no
objection and would be in favor of that action. He would have gone to the City
Manager, but was instructed by the City Attorney that he could not talk to the
City Manager or any other managerial employees considering the pending arbi-
tration suit in progress. He would have to talk to the City Attorney first
to get permission because there were certain canons of ethics and the City
had authorized him (Hopkins) to proceed against him should he do that. He
did not want to bring a lawsuit against Anaheim and even though they had been
severely injured and there was a false arrest, they wanted to see justice
done. If they put things back to where they were and the City conducted a
full and open investigation of the charges he made and the further charges
laid, they would dismiss the claim and not file a lawsuit. They were seeking
to have things corrected and to have the City clean its own house.
Mro Robert Schwartze, attorney, 4299 MacArthur Boulevard, Suite 200, Newport
Beach, stated he had just recently been retained to represent Mr. John Roche
concerning the statements and allegations just made by Mr. Silverstein. His
response was solely on behalf of Mr. Roche and directed only towards those
allegations and statements made either expressly or by innuendo involving Mr.
Roche. He pointed out that Mr. Silverstein had chosen a convenient forum to
come in and make the statements and allegations. In any City Council proceeding
absolute immunity was given and Mr. Silverstein could make such statements and
allegations as much as he desired, knowing they were false, regardless of
any facutal basis to support the allegations. The immunity was further extended
despite any malice on the part of Mr. Silverstein and despite any intention on
his part to make a false statement. Secondly, because of the arbitration
pending concerning a grievance involving Mr. Silverstein's brother, both he
<Schwartze) and his client were severely restricted in discussing the facts of
the underlying incident. They had already been told that Mr. Silverstein's
brother was discharged by the City and that it was now in grievance. Because
Mr. Roche was going to be a material witness in arbitration, the underlying facts
could not be discussed on instruction from the City Attorney's office and until
such time as the grievance had been concluded. Basically, Mr. Silverstein's
brother was terminated by the City when he was involved in an incident wherein
City equipment, which consisted of two dump trucks, an air compressor, a jack
hammer and skiploader were being used to excavate the driveway of a private
homeowner in Buena Park for compensation. Stage 1 and Stage 2 grievance proceedings
had been held, and termination of Mr. Silverstein's brother was held to be proper.
Regarding the statements, allegations and innuendos made by Mr. Silverstein
toward Mr. Roche, each and every allegation of wrongdoing on the part of
Mr. Roche was specifically and unequivocably denied.
In closing, Mr. Schwartze added a personal thought relative to the situation
that Mr. Silverstein found himself in, because of the conduct of his brother.
Not only was he faced with the normal problems of an attorney-client relationship,
79-681
.City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - June 12, .1979~ 1:30 P.M.
but also he had a deep emotional involvement in the problem because he was
representing a close family member. His brother had placed him in several
other difficult situations in the past, according to information from the Orange
County Superior Court files. One situation involved Mr. Silverstein's being
charged and convicted of a fe].ony involving pc~ess!on of dangerous drugs;
another involved his brother being charged with coranitting a felony burglary
wherein he subsequently admitted that he aided another person who had knowingly
committed a burglary with the intent to assist the burglar in avoiding arrest.
A more recent example involved Mr. Silverstein's brother being found to be in
violation of probation on which he had been previously placed by the Orange
County Superior Court. That violation was found to be for the same conduct for
which Mr. Silverstein's brother was terminated by the City. Based on those
circumstances, he sympathized with the position that Mr. Silverstein's brother
had placed him in; however, he did not condone his action in launching a personal
attack against his client, Mr. Roche, without any basis therefor.
RECESS - EXECUTIVE SESSION: Councilman Seymour moved to recess into Executive
Session. Councilman Overholt seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. (3:14 P.M.)
AFTER RECESS: Mayor Seymour called the meeting to order, all Council Members being
present. (3:20 P.M.)
MOTION: Councilman Seymour moved that upon receipt of specific and written
allegations including names, dates and times by Mr. Silverstein or any other
person, the City Manager, as an individual, and the City Attorney, as an individual,
would then jointly conduct an investigation. In the process of his investigation,
the City Manager would grant amnesty to any City employee coming forward with
facts. The investigation would not proceed unless specific and written charges
and allegations were brought forward. Councilman Overholt seconded the motion
MOTION CARRIED. ·
A verbatim transcript of the foregoing proceedings is on file in the City Clerk's
office.
CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING - 1979-80 RESOURCE ALLOCATION PLAN (BUDGET): (Continued
from May 22, 29, and June 5, 1979) At the outset, Mayor Seymour explained that
he would have to leave the meeting to attend an important event (family graduation)
that he could not miss which was starting at 4:00 P.M. After a brief discussion,
the Council decided to proceed with consideration of the Budget and, if neces-
sary, to recess when the Mayor left, until 5:30 when he could return to the
meeting.
City Manager Talley, continuing from the morning's Budget Work Session, had sent
to the Council on the date of June 12, 1979 a tentative prioritization of the
"bailout" funds. The matters broached were: moving the canyon branch library
up one year, finishing the canyon Site II development, advancing Fire Station
No. 8, three golf course projects and five personnel restorations amounting
to $1,165,808. In addition, on Page 1 of the Resource Allocation Plan, approx-
imately $60,000 in savings was made in projects 4 and 5, the Crime Task Force
and School Resource Officer, since those programs were starting on September 1,
1979. The total of the projects listed (see tentative prioritization "bailout"
list--Items 1 through 8 from June 12, 1979 communique) was $461,478. The total
of the two lists amounted to $1,627,286.
79-682
City Hal.l, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - June 12, 1979~ 1:30 P.M.
City Attorney Hopkins pointed out that under Item 2a (page 2, June 12, 1979,
subject: ~Y 1979-80 Resource Allocation Plan), it stated, "credit the general
counsel program to reflect litigation expenses of general liability claims
within the appropriate programs of other departments". He explained that
the words, general ccu~el, were in er~'~~ and sho~]~ be Le?~l Administration,
Program 121.
Councilman Overholt asked the City Librarian, Mr. Griffith, if the Council were
to approve the recommendation of the Library Board to have the Library open
five hours on Sundays (see discussion this date that took place at the Work
Session) on the condition that those five hours would be deleted from the
present schedule during the rest of the week, would that involve an additional
cost or an even trade.
Mr. William Griffith explained that they would have to close a whole afternoon
or half day or some quantum of time, as opposed to closing on a pattern of one
hour per day, and there might be a budgetary impact. If they closed all the
branches and the main Library on Friday evening from 6:00 to 9:00, it would
about equal or offset the cost of the Sunday opening of the Central Library.
He knew of no other problems that would be created but the situation would
have to be worked out.
Councilwoman Kaywood asked if the Sunday opening, even as a pilot project, would
be worth the trade-off when talking about closing all branches on FFiday night.
Mro Griffith stated that was difficult to answer since they were working a known
against a hypothetical situation. His inclination would be to refer the matter
to a policy group, such as the Library Board, so that they could make a choice.
Councilwoman Kaywood noted that school children at different locations could
walk or bicycle to the branches near their homes, whereas they would have to
travel to the Central Library on Sundays. She asked Mr. Griffith if given
a choice of Sunday openings compared to the building of the canyon library,
what his choice would be.
Mr. Griffith answered, in terms of serving the canyon residents, the construction
of the facility would be more important, but in terms of the rest of the community,
that would not necessarily be so.
Councilman Overholt asked Mr. Griffith if he would give his no-holds professional
opinion as to the worthiness of the Sunday opening in terms of potential use.
Mr. Griffith answered that he felt it was very worthwhile and the Library could
be utilized only when the facility was open and available for use by the public.
Sunday was a gap and in terms of the lifestyle of California, he believed it
would be a useful thing if the Library were open on Sundays, and very helpful to
the public.
Councilman Bay asked if the canyon branch library were accelerated one year,
could the library spend $495,000 more during the 1979-80 period.
79-683
City Hall; Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - June 12~ 1979~ 1:30 P.M.
Mr. Griffith stated even if they could start on the project in 1980, it was
unlikely that amount would be spent, considering the fact that plans for the
building would take about seven months followed by a bid period.
Councilwoman Kaywood asked the Executive Director of Public Works, Thornton
Piersall, what effect moving up the Public Works garage facility or setting it
back still another year or longer would have.
Mr. Piersall answered that although he did not have a dollar and cents report,
he had a copy of the Arthur Young report prepared in 1976 which emphasized the
need for that facility. They were still investigating the possibility of a lease-
back arrangement as previously suggested by the Council. The new facility would
bring about a more efficient and economical operation with the ability to
repair equipment faster with more productivity. Mr. Piersall also elaborated
upon a number of other projects, in answer to questioning by the Mayor, Council-
woman Kaywood and Councilman Bay.
There were no additional questions posed to Department Heads.
The Mayor asked if any member of the public wished to be heard relative to any
aspect of the proposed Resource Allocation Plan; there being no response, he
closed the public hearing.
City Manager Talley then stated that he believed the Council agreed on the list
presented and that from the bailout list, Items 2 through 7 seemed to repre-
sent all the Council's wishes. Relative to moving the canyon branch library
up one year, if Council wished, that could be prepared by August 1, 1979 to
bring in a time phase plan on the library. They could present the architec-
tural plan and indicate exactly when the disbursements would be made with the
anticipation they would move the library up as far into the 1979-80 Budget as
possible. Perhaps the best they could do would be $200,000, instead of $495,000.
On Items 1 through 8 of the communication submitted today, only one would be
opened if they wanted to approve the $5,000 for the Library audio-cassette pro-
gram. It seemed that the Sunday hours at the Library was still a matter of
discussion and that there were at least three Council Members who felt that
$20,000 should not be added to the Budget. If the Council deemed it appropriate,
they could make a determination on the audio-cassette program and then direct
staff to incorporate the remainder, which would approximate $1,100,000 plus,
in the programs and set the balance of the current money received for bailout,
the projected amount for next year, and the land sale into the Capital Improvement
Reserve Fund and bring that information back to the Council when two things had
occurred: (1) when the Library was firmly scoped, and (2) the State acted and
they had an exact amount of bailout funds. At that time, all of the priority
projects could be resubmitted to the Council for consideration because no
definite funding was available at this time for anything beyond $1,590,000.
The foregoing would incorporate all of the policy decisions requested and all
of the adjustments. Other items that had either been addressed by the Council
or which represented both revenues and expenses on the Budget adjustment were
the San Onofre Generation Units 2 and 3 which were eliminated and the Public
Utilities Capital Improvement Projects which could all be handled by rebudgeting
reduction, or reappropriated monies. ,
79-684
~ity ~all, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - June 12, 1979, 1:30 P.M.
Mayor Seymour stated that he, for one, could accept the recommendation. What
they would be doing was moving the canyon branch library out into a "limbo"
status to be included with consideration of other program adjustments and/or
capital improvement decision until approximately August 1, 1979. On the other
hand, they would s£t p~iorities and a]'~-~te f~nd? ~'r tb 'emaining items on
the tentative prioritization of bailout funds. He also stated in answer to
Councilwoman Kaywood~s query that the garage facility would also be one of the
items to be considered at that time.
After a brief Council discussion, it was determined that the $5,000 library
audio-cassette program would be included in the budget with the Sunday openings
to be deferred.
MOTION: Councilman Seymour moved to approve the prioritization of "bailout"
funds, Items 2 through 7, and policy decision, Items 1 through 6 and Item 8, as
outlined in list dated June 12, 1979 entitled, "Tentative Prioritization of
Bailout and Allocation of Funds Therefor". Councilman Roth seconded the
motion. MOTION CARRIED.
Mayor Seymour then indicated that they would now consider Department Head
increases and then move to consider the entire Budget.
City Manager Talley stated it gave him a great deal of pleasure and sense of
accomplishment to bring to the Council's attention the matter of Executive
Management compensation. Under the annual MBO review process, each of the
Department Heads was evaluated; Program Managers were previously compensated.
During the month of May, he again reviewed the MBO statements, the current
year's progress and plans for 1979-80 representing an approximate 20-month
evaluation° The cost of living had increased over 14% since any additional
compensation was paid. He was proposing that the Council consider for
approval granting management increases that would include those for the
period October 1977 through October 1978 that would normally have been granted
during October 1978 and for the October 1978 through 1979, that would normally
have been granted this October. Thus, he would not be evaluating management
compensation until October 1980~ Mr~ Talley proposed the following increases
and in so doing elaborated upon the accomplishments of the particular depart-
ment head, all proposed to be effective July 6, 1979, with the exception of
the new Police Chief, which increase was scheduled to be effective October 12,
1979: Gordon Hoyt, Public Utilities General Manager, 11%; Tom Liegler, Convention
Center~ S~adium and Golf Co~rses General Manager, 11%; Thornton Piersall,
Executive Director of Public Works, 13%; William Hopkins, Assistant City
Manager, 12.5%; Norm Prie~t~ Executive Director of Community Development, 12%;
George P. Tielsch, Chief of Police, 6%; James Ruth, Deputy City Manager, 13%;
~ames Riley, F~re Chief, 14%; George Ferrone, Finance Director, 11.5%; Tug
Tamaru, Data Processing Director, 10%; Ron Thompson, Planning Director, 10%;
William Griffith, City Librarian, 12%; Garry McRae Human Resources Director,
13%. '
Mayor Seymour stated he wanted to speak to the recommendations of the City
Manager, as well as to the entire proposed Resource Allocation Plan. The
Council would recall that when the subject of Department Head increases was
proposed last summer, he was philosophically opposed to the increases at that
time due to (1) Proposition lB and (2) because he continued to oppose the
70-685
City Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - June .12~ i979~ 1:30 P.M.
Budget a year ago. As they moved into the fall, winter and spring, he
suggested to his Council colleagues and Department Heads that, pending a good
Budget, one that he felt the Council could hold up to the citizens of Anaheim
and be proud of relative to insuring that it carried the true spirit embodied
in Proposition 13, that he would be the first to support pay increases for
Department Heads, as well as the City Manager. There were some in the bureaucracy,
as well as on the Council, who felt he had some type of hidden agenda in mind when
he made that statement and that for whatever reason, he would not be supportive.
He was supportive of the recommendations of the City Manager and speaking spe-
cifically to the City Manager, he had done an outstanding job of bringing the
City Council and the citizens of Anaheim a Budget that was the best he had seen
since he had been involved in the City. Any time in the days of inflation and
the challenge of Proposition 13 that an individual could bring in a Budget
through Department Heads, representing less dollars, actually 6.4% less than
a year ago, while being able to meet the demands for services of a growing city,
he had met the challenge and deserved to be rewarded. The operation portion
of the Budget, excluding the cost of electricity and water, indicated an extre-
mely low 3.4% increase, while at the same time being faced with increasing
population and expansion programs taking place throughout the City. He was to
be commended and commended publicly. To the degree that the City Manager kept
with what he (Seymour) felt was the philosophy of the citizens of Anaheim to
meet the spirit of 13, Mr. Talley had done that in every possible way. He
could find no fault whatsoever with the Budget as proposed, even as critical
as he had been in the past. The citizens of Anaheim, as well as the Council,
could be proud of the City Manager's Budget. It exceeded the expectations
of ndt only Proposition 13 and the City Charter passed by the voters, as well
as the Spirit of 13 yet to be passed, but also costs were kept down in that
proposed Budget. He would challenge anybody in the City to say that the budget
was filled with "fat" or any such comment.
MOTION: Councilman Seymour stated he was totally satisfied and proud to offer
a motion of approval on the 1979-80 Budget, as recommended and amended, as well as
a recommended increase for the City Manager of 12% as a result of his hard efforts
in bringing the Budget together. At the same time, they should consider the
City Attorney and the City Clerk with equal increases of 12% individually, as
well as the Department Head increases as recommended by the City Manager, to be
effective as of the beginning of the new fiscal year. Councilman Overholt
seconded the motion.
Before a vote was taken, Mayor Seymour stated he would be less than honest,
however, if he did not add a few more comments relative to the individual
increases that the City Manager recommended on Department Heads. He did not
agree in any way with some of the specific recommendations and, in fact, he
strongly disagreed. However, in the spirit of unanimity with the Council and
in the spirit that the recommendations were those of the City Manager, who was
delegated the authority as well as the responsiblity for insuring that those
Department Heads performed for the citizens of Anaheim, he would set his personal
strong feelings aside in favor of that unanimity and in favor of supporting a
recommendation by the City Manager, because he made it, and not because he agreed.
A vote was taken on the foregoing motion. MOTION CARRIED.
79-686
City Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - June !2~ 1979, 1:30 P.M.
Councilman Seymour offered Resolution No. 79R-338 for adoption, adjusting rates
of compensation for classifications designated as Executive Management, covering
the foregoing recommended increases relative to Department Heads by the City
Manager, as well as the City Manager, City Attorney and City Clerk. Refer to
Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 79R-338: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
SUPERSEDING RESOLUTION NO. 77R-819 AND AMENDMENTS THERETO AND ADJUSTING RATES OF
COMPENSATION FOR CLASSIFICATIONS DESIGNATED AS EXECUTIVE MANAGEMENT. (effective
July 6, 1979)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Overholt, Kaywood, Bay, Roth and Seymour
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 79R-338 duly passed and adopted.
Mayor Seymour left the Council Chamber (4:11 P.M.) and turned the chairmanship
of the meeting over to Mayor Pro Tem Overholt.
City Manager Talley then proposed eight additional resolutions, the first three
regarding revenues.
Councilman Overho!t offered Resolution Nos. 79R-339 through 79R-341, both
inclusive, for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book.
150: RESOLUTION NO. 79R-339: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF ANAHEIM ESTABLISHING THE POLICY AND FEES FOR CITY-WIDE PARK AND RECREATION
PROGRAMS AND SERVICES IN THE CITY AND RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 79R-2.
i35: RESOLUTION NO~ 79R-340: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM ESTABLISHING THE GREEN FEES AND CART RENTAL FEES TO BE CHARGED AT THE
H. G. "DAD" MILLER ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL GOLF COURSE AND THE ANAHEIM HILLS GOLF
COURSE, AND RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 77R-579. (effective October 1, 1979)
124/101: RESOLUTION NO. 79R-341: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM ESTABLISHING FEES FOR PARKING AT ANAHEIM CONVENTION CENTER
AND ANAHEIM STADIUM TO BE EFFECTIVE ON JANAURY 1 1980. (increase from $1.50
to $2.00) '
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Kaywood, Bay, Roth and Overholt
None
Seymour
The Mayor Pro Tem declared Resolution Nos. 79R-339 through 79R-341 both inclusive,
duly passed and adopted. '
City Manager Talley then introduced the next five proposed resolutions from
the Human Resources Division Which he explained briefly all to be effective
June 22, 1979.
79-687
City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - June 12, 1979, 1:30 P.M.
Councilman Overholt offered Resolution Nos. 79R-342 through 79R-346, both
inclusive, for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book.
153: RESOLUTION NO. 79R-342: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF ANAHEIM AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 78R-660 WHICH ESTABLISHED RATES OF COM-
PENSATION FOR CLASSES DESIGNATED AS STAFF AND SUPERVISORY, TO CHANGE THE
TITLES OF EXISTING CLASSIFICATIONS, ADJUST A SALARY SCHEDULE AND CREATE NEW
CLASSIFICATIONS TO IMPLEMENT THE 1979-80 RESOURCE ALLOCATION PLAN. (CETA
Assistant, CETA Specialist I, CETA Specialist II, Recreation Service Manager,
Payroll Supervisor, Computer Operation Supervisor, Data Control Supervisor,
Economic Development Coordinator, Employee Benefits Representative, Employment
Representative, Management Operations Analyst and Utilities Consumer Represen-
tative)
153: RESOLUTION NO. 79R-343: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF ANAHEIM AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 78R-659 WHICH ESTABLISHED RATES OF COM-
PENSATION FOR UNREPRESENTED JOB CLASSES AND CREATING NEW CLASSIFICATIONS TO
IMPLEMENT THE 1979-80 RESOURCE ALLOCATION PLAN. (Community Center Director,
Housing Loan Counselor, Telecommunications Representative)
153: RESOLUTION NO. 79R-344: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE. CITY OF
ANAHEIM AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 77R-703 WHICH ESTABLISHED RATES OF COMPENSATION
FOR CLASSES REPRESENTED BY THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION, GENERAL
CITY EMPLOYEES UNIT, AND CREATING NEW CLASSIFICATIONS. (Parking Checker I and
Parking Checker II)
153: RESOLUTION NO. 79R-345: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 77R-704 WHICH ESTABLISHED RATES OF COMPENSATION
FOR CLASSES REPRESENTED BY THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION, CLERICAL
UNIT, AND CREATING NEW JOB CLASSES. (Accounts Receivable Collection Representative,
Tape ~brarian)
153: RESOLUTION NO. 79R-346: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM AMEINDING RESOLUTION NO. 79R-94 WHICH ESTABLISHED RATES OF COMPENSATION
FOR PROGRAM MANAGERS, TO CREATE A NEW CLASSIFICATION. (Landscape Architect)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Kaywood, Bay, Roth and Overholt
None
Seymour
The Mayor Pro Tem declared Resolution Nos. 79R-342 through 79R-346 both inclusive,
duly passed and adopted. '
City Manager Talley referred to memorandum dated June 8, 1979 from the Human
Resources Director recommending in addition to the currently authorized auto-
mobile allowances that the automobile allowance for the Public Works Executive
Director be adjusted from $175 to $200 per month based on the amount of driving
required for that position and to provide for additional automobile allowances;
Conve~tion Center, Stadium and Golf Courses General Manager, $225 and the
79-688
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - June 12, 1979, 1:30 P.M.
Assistant City Manager, $200~ He further advised the Council that although
the above recommendations were scheduled to go into effect July 1, 1979, if
approved, it was anticipated that a recommendation to increase automobile
allowances for those going into effect and the existing allowances would be
forthcoming on August 1, 1979, concurr~~ with the adjustment in mileage paid
under agreements with employee organizatlons. Based upon the last 90 days,
there was a very substantial increase on mileage allowances which he would
probably recommend that they all be increased by $25 to $30.
Councilman Bay moved to increase the automobile allowance for the Public
Works Executive Director from $175 to $200 per month, to grant the General
Manager of the Convention Center, Stadium and Golf Courses an automobile
allowance of $225 per month; to grant the Assistant City Manager an auto-
mobile allowance of $200 per month, all effective July 1, 1979. Council-
woman Kmywood seconded the motion. Councilman Seymour was absent. MOTION
CARRIED.
RECESS: By general consent, the Council recessed for 5 minutes. (4:17 P.M.)
AFTER RECESS: Mayor Pro Tem Overholt called the meeting to order, all Council
Members being present, with the exception of Mayor Seymour. (4:22 P.M.)
CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS: On motion by Councilwoman Kaywood, seconded by Council-
man Roth, the following actions were authorized in accordance with the reports
and recommendations furnished each Council Member and as listed on the Consent
Calendar Agenda:
1. 118: CLAIMS AGAINST THE CITY: The following claims were denied and referred
to the City's Insurance Administrator, or allowed, and the Application for
Leave to Present Late Claim was denied:
a. Claim submitted by Albert E. Fiedler for damages purportedly sustained as
a result of a utility pole problem on or about the last week of April, 1979.
b. Claim submitted by Alice G. Hutchison for vehicle damages purportedly sustained
as a result of unmarked hole in Harbor Boulevard on or about May 20, 1979.
c. Claim submitted by Paul J. Kabat for vehicle damages purportedly sustained
as a result of an accident caused by an unmarked obstacle on West Street on or
about May 12, 1979.
do Claim submitted by Mr. Gene Love for damages purportedly sustained as a
result of problems relating to meter connections on or about May 1, 1979.
e. Claim submitted by Pacific Telephone for damages purportedly sustained as
a result of repairing a water leak on or about April 12, 1979.
f. Claim submitted by Pacific Telephone for damages to lO0-pair buried cable
purportedly sustained as a result of City power cable blowout on or about
March 4, 1979.
79-689
~ity Hall, Anahei~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - June 12~ 1979~ 1:30 P.M.
g. Claim submitted by Mrs. Zena Shapiro for personal injury damages purportedly
sustained as a result of claimant being struck by falling parkway tree limb on
or about April 23, 1979.
h. Claim submitted by Southwest Expo Services/Mike Ambrose for damage to
vehicle purportedly sustained as a result of an accident at Convention Center
caused by employees on or about May 11, 1979.
i. Claim submitted by Ed Windrim for damages purportedly sustained as a result
of electricity being shut off, date unknown.
j. Claim submitted by Mercy Zamora Dennison for vehicle damages purportedly
sustained as a result of an accident involving a City-owned vehicle, on or about
May 15, 1979.
k. Claim submitted by Jesus Sandoval for vehicle damages purportedly sustained
as a result of tree branch falling on or about May 19, 1979.
1. Claim submitted by American States Insurance for property damage purportedly
sustained as a result of improperly located electrical conduit which was approved
by the City Building Inspector, on or about January 29, 1979.
m. Claim submitted by Katherine O'Connell-Mordick for vehicle damages purpor-
tedly sustained as a result of golf ball striking windshield on or about May 5
1979. ,
n. Claim submitted by Samuel Garcia-Garcia for damages purportedly sustained
as a result of actions by the Anaheim Police or or about May 22, 1979.
o. Application for Leave to Present Late Claim submitted by Bret Richard Friedman
for personal injuries purportedly sustained as a result of negligence, on or about
December 4, 1978, was denied.
p. Claim submitted by Y. Murakami for damages purportedly sustained as a result
of City Crew walking through 25 feet of strawberry rows and damaging one length
of irrigation pipe on or about April 30, 1979, was allowed.
2. CORRESPONDENCE: The following correspondence was ordered received and filed:
a. 173: Civil Aeronautics Board, Docket 34291, notice of proposed rulemaking
regarding elimination of operating market restriction attached to air carrier
certificates.
b. 173: Before the Civil Aeronautics Board, Docket 35576, appliCation of
Pacific Southwest Airlines, Inc., for Orange County-San Francisco authority,
and Docket 35440, application of Hughes Air Corp., dba Hughes Airwest, for
amendment of its certificate of public convenience and necessity for Route
76 (Orange County-San Francisco nonstip authority).
c. 105: Community Redevelopment Con~nission - Minutes of May 23, 1979.
d. 105: HACMAC Committee - Minutes of May 8 and 22, 1979.
79-690
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - June 12~ 1979~ 1:30 P.M.
e. 105: Youth Commission - Minutes of May 23, 1979.
f. 155: Planning Department~ Building Division - Monthly Report for May 1979.
3. 164: VERMONT-LEM~
w ~, CHANGE C~DER NO. 1: In accordance
with the recommendations of the City Engineer, Change Order No. 1, in the amount
of $33,750, Nick Didovic Construction Company, contractor, was authorized, bringing
the original Contract price to $875,458.
Councilman Seymour was absent. MOTION CARRIED°
CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS: Councilwoman Ka~ood offered Resolution Nos. 79R-347
through 79R-349, both inclusive, for adoption in accordance with the reports,
recommendations and certifications furnished each Council Member and as listed
on the Consent Calendar Agenda° Refer to Resolution Book.
!58: RESOLUTION NO. 79R-347: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM ACCEPTING CERTAIN DEEDS AND ORDERING THEIR RECORDATION. (Pralle and
Case No. 2, two deedS; Sunburst Development, Inc.; Robert R. Cumhman, et al.)
176: RESOLUTION NOo 79R-348: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM ORDERING THE VACATION AND ABANDONMENT OF A PORTION OF MAC DUFF STREET.
[76-9A)
164: RESOLUTION NO. 79R-349: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY REQUIRE
THE CONSTRUCTION AND COMPLETION OF A PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, TO WIT: JUAREZ PARK
DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT~ N/O ANNIKA STREET, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, ACCOUNT NOS.
t6-802-6325 AND 01-792-6325-2470; APPROVING THE DESIGNS, PLANS, PROFILES,
DRAWINGS, AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION THEREOF; AUTHORIZING THE
CONSTRUCTION OF SAID PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH SAID PLANS, SPECIFI-
CATIONS, ETC.; AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO PUBLISH A NOTICE
INVITING SEALED PROPOSALS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION THEREOF. (Bids to be opened
July 12, 1979, at 2:00 P~M.)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL M~_~MBERS~
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Kaywood, Bay, Roth and Overholt
None
Seymour
The Mayor Pro Tem declared ~%esolution Nos. 79R-347 through 79R-349, both inclusive,
duly passed and adopted.
CITY PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS: The following actions taken by the City Planning
Commission at their meeting held May 21, 1979, pertaining to the following
applications, as listed on the Consent Calendar, were submitted for City Council
information.
1. RECLASSIFICATION NO. 78-79-40, VARIANCE NO. 3098 AND (TENTATIVE TRACT NO.
10710~: Submitted by Jay J. Wall, et al, for a change in zone from RS-A-43,000
to RM-3000, to construct a 44-unit condominium subdivision on proposed RM-3000
property located at the southwest corner of Crescent Avenue and Magnolia Avenue
with waiver of maximum building height.
79-691
City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - June 12~ 1979~ 1:30 P.M.
The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution Nos. PC79-93 and PC79-94,
granted Reclassification No. 78-79-40 and Variance No. 3098 and granted a
negative declaration status.
2. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1921 (READV): Submitted by William W. Lange, to
permit an automobile detailing facility on ML zoned property located at 1536-
1538 West Embassy Street, with a request to delete Condition Nos. 1 and 4 from
Resolution No. 78-289 relating to payment of traffic signal assessment fees and
restriction on outdoor uses for the facility.
The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC79-103, granted in
part Conditional Use Permit No. 1921, and a negative declaration status was
previously approved.
3. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1974: Submitted by James R. and Jacklyn A.
Martin, to retain an automobile a~d truck sales and leasing facility on ML
zoned property located at 1280 North Grove Street.
The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC79-92, granted
Conditional Use Permit No. 1974, and granted a negative declaration status.
4. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1975: Submitted by Gilbert N. and Marie B.
Kluthe, to permit on-sale liquor in a proposed restaurant onCL zoned property
located at 831 South State College Boulevard.
The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC79-97, granted
Conditional Use Permit No. 1975, and ratified the Planning Director's
categorical exemption determination.
5. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1977: Submitted by Brookmore Arms Inc., to permit
the on-sale of beer and wine in an existing restaurant on CL zoned property
located at 888 South Brookhurst Street.
The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC79-99, granted
Conditional Use Permit No. 1977, and ratified the Planning Director's categorical
exemption determination.
6. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1978: Submitted by Chew-Nar Cheng, to permit a
25-unit motel on CL zoned property located at 426 South Beach Boulevard with
certain Code waivers.
The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC79-100, granted
in part Conditional Use Permit No. 1978, and granted a negative declaration
status.
7. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1979: Submitted by Lana Corporation, to permit
a racquetball facility on CL zoned property located south side of La Palma Avenue,
west of Harbor Boulevard, with a waiver of required tree screen.
The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC79-101, granted
Conditional Use Permit No. 1979, and granted a negative declaration status.
79-692
C.i.ty Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - June ~2~ 1979, 1:30 P.M.
8. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1980: Submitted by Richard S. and Elsie MacKensen,
to permit an adult book store on CG zoned property located at 314 East Lincoln
Avenue.
The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC79-96, denied
Conditional Use Permit No. 1980, and granted a negative declaration status.
9. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1981: Submitted by Anaheim Hills Inc., to
permit specific sites for 46 existing and proposed signs on (SC) zoned property
located on 4300 acres bounded by Santa Ana Canyon Road to the north, Anaheim
City Limits to the south and east, and Meats Avenue to the west.
The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC79-95, granted
Conditional Use Permit No. 1981, and granted a negative declaration status.
10. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1982: Submitted by Pete Billey, William P.
Draganza and Douglas E. Jones, to permit a 213-unit motel with related accessory
uses on CL zoned property located at 2041 South Harbor Boulevard with a waiver
of minimum number of parking spaces.
Councilwoman Kaywood noted that the item did not state specifically whether they
were requesting a restaurant of any kind at the subject location. As a matter
of record, she noted they were getting a waiver of minimum number of parking
spaces so that there should be no restaurant.
Mr. Douglas E. Jones, one of the owners, stated there would be no restaurant
in the facility. He continued that the only question Thriftimart had was in
regard to an easement, and they had record of an easement. He requested that
the Council approve the Planning Commission recommendation and subsequently
let the City Attorney review all the documents and be subject to the City
Attorney's approval. The items in dispute were items 5 and 7 of the Planning
Commission Resolution No. PC79-102. He felt that Thriftimart had every opportun-
i:y to attend the Planning Commission meeting, and they were well aware of the
building of the motel a few weeks ago because he personally told them. They
had taken no position to appeal the action and the applicants did not want to
be delayed any longer; they wanted to build a motel.
Mr. Edward B. Smith, 707 Wilshire, Los Angeles attorney representing Thrifti-
mart referred to the first paragraph of letter dated June 11~ 1979 from
Thriftlmart which was sent to the Council indicated that they had received
no notice of the Planning Commission public hearing on May 21, 1979. He also
disputed what Mr. Jones said relative to having discussed the Planning
Commission hearing with tham. He reiterated they did not know about the
meeting, nor did they receive a notice, and thus it was impossible to appeal and
object. They were not trying to interfere with what Anaheim wanted to do with
its property, but they wanted the City to understand that there were permanent
parking rights on the Thriftimart property. They had in their file an opinion
from Loeb & Loeb in 1964, stating that there had been no change. One of the
conditions of approval was that parking would be provided on the Thriftimart
property, and he emphasized that would not be done.
79-693
City Hall~ Anahei~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - June 12, 1979~ 1:30 P.M.
Miss Santalahti explained that the action was granted with a waiver for the
minimum number of parking spaces. A condition of approval was an easement for
parking purposes on the property to the south. It was a condition of the CUP,
and they would have to satisfy the City Attorney with a properly recorded
document re!at%ye to that aspect.
Councilman Bay asked Mr. Smith if he wanted a public hearing on the matter.
Mr. Smith stated he did not know what purpose a hearing would serve unless under
the City's procedures they would prefer to have them state their position pub-
licly, other than at the present time. However, Thriftimart was very emphatic
about their position.
Miss Santalahti explained if they could acquire the easement and some alternate
means of providing parking, the CUP could be reconsidered by the Planning
Commission and when they decided what could be done, they could delete that
condition and perhaps replace or modify it, and thus it could take care of
itself.
11. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1193 - CLARIFICATION OF RELATED FACILITIES:
Submitted by David O. Beadles, requesting clarification to Conditional Use Permit
No. 1193, to permit a church and related facilities on property located at the
southeast corner of Wagner Avenue and State College Boulevard, to include estab-
lishing a pre-school.
The City Planning Commission determined that a new Conditional Use Permit be
required, and that a public hearing be held in order to permit a pre-schoo1
in connection with Conditional Use Permit No. 1193.
12. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1517 - EXTENSION OF TIME: Submitted by Robert W.
Hostetter, requesting an extension of time to Conditional Use Permit No. 1517,
to permit a board and care facility for the treatment of alcoholics on RM-1200
zoned property located at 703 North Lemon Street.
The City Planning Commission approved an extension of time to Conditional Use
Permit No. 1517, to expire May 28, 1981.
13. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1705 - EXTENSION OF TIME: Submitted by Robert S.
Anderson, requesting an extension of time to Conditional Use Permit No. 1705, to
permit truck and trailer storage with a waiver of permitted Outdoor uses on ML
zoned property located on the east side of Red Gum Street, south of La Jolla
Street.
The City Planning Commission approved an extension of time to Conditional Use
Permit No. 1705, to expire May 9, 1981.
14. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1838 - EXTENSION OF TIME: Submitted by Helen M.
Corn, to Permit a tent camping facility in an existing recreational vehicle park
on CL zoned property located at 333 and 475 West Ball Road.
The City Planning Commission approved an extension of time to Conditional Use
Permit No. 1838, to expire May 22, 1980.
79-694
City Hal~,. Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - June 12~ 1979, 1:30 P.M.
15. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1875 - REQUEST TO AMEND RESOLUTION NO. PC78-255
NUNC RPO TUNC: Request by the City Planning Commission to amend Resolution
No. PC78-255, nunc pro tunc~ tc correct a clerical error.
The City Planning Commission~ pursuant to Resolution No. PC79-104 amended
Resolution No. PC78-255o '
16. VARIANCE NO~ 2599 - EXTENSION OF TIME: Submitted by Kenneth Keesee,
requesting an extension of time to Variance No. 2599, to establish an auto-
mobile leasing agency on ML zoned property located at 1922-30 South Anaheim
Boulevard, with waiver of permitted uses and minimum number of parking spaces.
The City Planning Commission granted an extension of time to Variance No. 2599
to expire May 13, 1981. '
No action was taken by the City Council on the foregoing items; therefore the
actions of the City Planning Commission became final.
VARIANCE NO. 2214 - EXTENSION OF TIME: Submitted by V. S. Crocker, Pacific
Telephone, requesting an extension of time to Variance No. 2214, to permit a
225-foot tall, microwave tower on CG zoned property located at 217 North Lemon
Street with waiver of maximum structural height.
On motion by Councilman Roth, seconded by Councilwoman Kaywood, an extenison
of time to Variance No. 2214 was approved, to expire June 1, 1980 as recommended
by the Planning Commission. Councilman Seymour was absent. MOTION CARRIED.
ORDINANCE NO. 4019: Councilwoman Kaywood offered Ordinance No. 4019 for adoption.
Refer to Ordinance Book°
ORDI~LkNCE NO. 4019: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF
THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (69-70-31(6), ML)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Kaywood, Roth and Overholt
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSTAINED: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Bay
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Seymour
The Mayor Pro Tem declared Ordinance No. 4019 duly passed and adopted.
ORDINANCE NO. 4020 AND 4021: Councilman Roth offered Ordinance Nos. 4020 and
4021 for first reading.
ORDINANCE NO. 4020: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF
THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (78-79-39, RS-43,000)
ORDINANCE NO. 402i: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF
THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (73-74-46(10), PC(SC)
79-695
City H~ll, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - June 12, 1979~ 1:30 P.M.
114: PERMISSION TO LEAVE STATE FOR 90 DAYS: Mayor Pro Tem Overholt indicated
that he would be leaving for a vacation on June 18, 1979 and returning July 4
1979. '
On motion by Councilwoman Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Roth, permission to
leave the state for 90 days was approved, as requested by Mayor Pro Tem Overholt.
Councilman Seymour was absent. MOTION CARRIED.
ADJOURNMENT: Councilman Bay moved to adjourn. Councilman Roth seconded the
motion. Councilman Seymour was absent. MOTION CARRIED.
Adjourned: 4:55 P.M.
LINDA D. ROBERTS, CITY CLERK