1979/10/0279-1056
City__ Hall.,_ Anaheim., ._.~!i.fornia - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 2, !,979, .!: 30 P.M.
The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session..
PRESENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: OVerholt, Kaywood, Bay, Roth and Seymour
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
PRESENT' CITY MANAGER' William O. Talley .
CITY ATTORNEY- William P. Hopkins
CITY CLERK: Linda D, Roberts
CITY ENGINEER- William G. Devitt
TRAFFIC. ENGINEER: Paul Singer
POLICE CHIEF: George P. Tielsch
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, REDEVELOPMENT: Norman J. Priest
STREETS & SANITATION SUPT.- William S. Lewis
ASSISTANT DIRECTOR FOR PLANNING- Joel Fick
ASSOCIATE PLANNER- Jay Tashiro .
POLICE DEPARTMENT: Lieutenant Lawrence Hutcheson
CETA SERVICES MANAGER: Bill Hepburn
ASSISTANT PLANN~: Pam Lucado
Mayor Seymour called the meeting to order and welcomed those in
attendance to the Council meeting.
I~NqyO. C.ATION: Reverend G. Paul Keller, Retired, First Presbyterian. Church, gave
the Invocation.
FLAG. SALUTE: Councilman Don Roth led the assembly in the Pledge of AllegianCe
to the Flag.
_!19_:_ PRE..SEN.TAT.IO,N:. Mr. Edward Sullivan, District Manager of the Automobile
Club of Southern C~lifornia, pre~ented to the City a National Pedestrian Program
Award sponsored by the AAA for outstanding pedestrian program activitY. Anaheim
was in competition with all citie~ with a population of 200,000 to 500,000. In
1978, Anaheim's pedestrian injury rate was 59 per 100,000 population, whereas
the National average was 96 per 100,000. He especially th. anked Traffic Engineer
Paul Singer and his staff who were responsible for the program in 'the City.
The award was accepted by both the Mayor, on behalf of the CoUncil, as well as
Traffic Engineer Paul Singer.
119: PRESENTATION: Mr. Tom Liegler, Stadium, Convention Center & Golf.Director,
introduced Mr. Hector Garcia, winner of the City's Annual Golf Championship. A
trophy was .presented and congratulations extended to Mr. Garcia by May°r Seymour
~on behalf of' the Council.
119: RESOLUTION OF CONDOLENCE: A resolution of condolence was adopted bY the
City Council on the passing of Henry George "Dad" Miller, .Anaheim'S'.Super Senior,
who was Just 102.on September 11, 1979. The resolution Was to be presented to
the family of "Dad" Miller. ·
!19: , .RE.$.OLUTiON :.OF_CONDOLENCE: A resolution of condolence was adopted by the
City CounCil On t-he Passing of Robert M. Law, a member of ~the CitY's prOject
Area Co~nittee from November of 1976 to June 1979, to be presented t:o his family.
11_9: .RES~LUTi.ON.0F CONGRATULATIONS._.- A resolution of congratulations was adopted
by the City Council, to be sent t° the California Angels, congratulating the players
manager, and owner Gene Autry, for a victorious SeaSon thus far.
79-1057
Cityj Hal_l, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 2~ 1979~ 1:30 P.M.
Mayor Seymour then presented each Council Member with a T-shirt, expressing an
inspirational sentiment with regard to the California Angels success in the
American League Play-offs, "Yes We ~n - Will".
119: RESOLUTION 0.~' CONGRATULATIONS: A resolution of congratulations was adopted
by the Council to be presented to the Newport Harbor Art Museum on their 17th
Anniversary.
119: RESOLUTION OF CONGRATULATIONS: A resolution of congratulations was adopted
by the Council to be presented to Reverend Satoshi Hiata, Pastor of the Orange
County Buddhist Church, for him many years of dedicated service to his Church
and community.
119: PROCLAMATIONS: The following proclamations were issued by Mayor Seymour
and authorized by the City Council:
"Escrow Week in Anaheim" - 3rd week of October
"Chesm Weekend in Anaheim" - October 5 - 7, 1979
Mr. Orville Woods accepted the Escrow Week proclamation and Mr. Dervain Barber
accepted the ~ess Weekend proclamation.
142/108: ORDINANCE NO. 4049 - DAYS AND HOURS OF OPERATION FOR BINGO: A verbatim
transcript of the following proceedings are on file in the City Clerk's office.
Mayor Seymour first asked for a show of hands of those who were present, specifi-
cally relative to the Bingo matter; there were approximately 75 to 100 people
present. The Mayor than asked that since a great deal of testimony had previously
been given just two weeks prior, he would appreciate it if those individuals who
wished to speak would present something new and different from that previous
testimony. He then opened the floor for public testimony:
Mrs. Galen Phipps, 320 North Lemon Street, stated that she was present to protest
Bingo in Anaheim more than one day per week. She had approximately 70 signatures
of people who lived in the vicinity of Colonial Manor (423 North Anaheim Boulevard)
who asked her to represent them at the meeting. Many were senior citizens and
others were working and, therefore, could not be present. They were directly
affected by the unbearable conditions around Colonial Manor. That organization
did not provide adequate parking for their patrons; the bingo players parked
on all the adjacent streets running in each direction from the Manor; they
blocked drives, parked on the red curbs and near fire hydrants. She then relayed
some incidents which had occurred as a result of the parking situation in the
area. The neighborhood was disturbed by noise, exhaust fumes and inability
to park in front of their own residences. The legitimate businesses in Anaheim,
large and small, and the property owners of the City had to pay the taxes
necessary to provide police and fire protection for the charitable institutions,
but conversely those organizations paid nothing to support educational and
municipal services. If Anaheim was determined to be the gambling capitol of
California, then it should be legalized where consequently that type of bus-
iness could be put in an area outside the business or residential district
where there were adequate facilities for parking and where they would not
disturb the peace. Further, they had been informed by a reliable source in the
79-1058
C_ity Hal!, .Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MI .N%JTES - October 2~ 1.979, .I:30...P.M.~
City government that a bingo parlor could go to donation bingo and coUld not be
touched by the Police Department. Under the present ordinances, the Police or
City Council could not enforce the five-day, three-day or one-day a week bingo
as it now existed. They wanted to see an ordinance passed that would return
the control of bingo to the City Council and Police Department 'of Anaheim. They
wanted the Council to limit it to one group per location and one day per week
per location, otherwise they would be faced with the same situation as at present--
bingo seven days a week with a different group named for each day. Bingo was
meant for senior citizens and church grouPs, not organized promotion'.by bingo
bosses. They were asking the Council to eliminate the. unbearable Conditions that
they now had in the neighborhood around Colonial Manor.
Councilman Roth asked the City Attorney whether or not the Council had the authorit
to control donation bingo.
City Attorney William Hopkins explained that the Attorney 'General had issued .an
opinion indicating if it was truly donation bingo lacking the element of consi-
deration, not considered under the provisions of the law as bingo, it was merely
a chance and a prize without consideration. It was very difficult to conCeive
of any long-term operation being conducted without money being brought in. Thus,
it was a matter of enforcement. He repeated if it was truly dOnation bingo with-
out any consideration or money being paid, then it was not under the definition
of State law.
Mr. John Hanson, P.O. Box 5499, Beverly Hills, stated that he owned property on
Adele .Street and wanted to address the problems of his tenants, most or all of
which were senior citizens, many 80 and 90 years old, having lived on that pro-
perty for up to 20 years. The tenants could not have any access to. the building
and prospective tenants could not view the apartments because they had no place
to park. He then reiterated the' same concerns expressed by .Mrs. Phipps relative
to noise, congestion and parking violations. He wanted to see bingo eliminated
to zero days a week because they were faced with a situation that occurred every
day, every week. A couple of possible solutions were to either rid the residen-
tial areas of bingo, review the conditional use permit of the parking lot adja-
cent to his property between Adele, Anaheim Boulevard and Lemon Street, issue
parking permits, or change the green zones from 9'00 A.M. to 6:00 P.M._ to 24
hours a day. The other possibilities would be to have more Police patrol or
more street lighting. Although he was not against bingo, he believed that in
a fixed area with many seniors, apartment buildings and individual homes, it
was not proper relative to the habitability of the tenants who had a longer
standing in the community than the bingo games..
Mr. Frank Rose, Colonial Manor, stated that there was a parking problem in the
area. Even when there were no bingo games in progress, people used their
parking lot. They had adequate parking for the seats in their building but
people parked in that area when they went to Pearson Park and filled up their
lot, causing the bingo patrons to park in the street. They were in the process
of buying two more pieces of property to improve their parking situatiOn which
was 40 to 45 days in the future. They should have additional parking and they
were also going to have security type parking because the neighborhood' was not
the most secure, and there was a lot of vandalism and burglary there. They had
to keep armed guards in the lots to protect the cars on their property.
79-1059
City Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 2~ 1979~ 1:30 P.M.
Mr. Rose continued that the people in Anaheim voted 2 to I for bingo. There
were a few people who wanted to see it cut down to one day a week because they
had buildings and organizations scattered all over the City. Relative to
donation bingo, not only the Attorney General indicated that organizations
had a right to use it, but also the U.S. District Court in Los Angeles. They
were presently in a change over in their organization, restructuring it, merging
with other organizations and becoming a church. Bingo was not bad for Anaheim
and it had done a lot of good for a lot of poor people. It was just a cheap
form of entertainment. If the people voted it in, it was theirs to vote out.
Betty Hegelstine, Manager, 124 West Adele, stated she was not against bingo but
against being kept up until 2:00 and 2:30 A.M. The ladies that lived in her
apartment were 70 to 90 years old, and they were being kept awake as well. They
had adequate off-street parking for everybody but when, for examPle, her tenants'
families came to pick them up, there was no place to park in front. There was
a bunch of litter thrown on her property from the bingo people who had played
the night before. The situation was not fair to her and her tenants.
Mr. Michael Valenti, 202 East Adele, stated he lived somewhat adjacent to Colonial
Manor, and he did not experience the parking problems mentioned today. Some of
the problems he experienced with parking were directly related to the Sons of
Italy hall opposite Colonial Manor. That hall was rented on weekends for weddings
and other festivities and they did not have adequate parking. On Saturday he
found his lawn littered with beer cans, his driveway blocked and street
not from bingo players, but celebrants from the wedding reception taking place.
Bingo was approved by the Anaheim vo~ers 2 to 1, and the voters should be listened~Ji~
to. If charity was not provided for by bingo, it would have to come out of some
other budget, perhaps the City budget, and he preferred that the money come from
the pocket of people who willingly played a game providing some kind of revenue
to offset those expenses. The charge had been made that big bingo was behind
recall. He w~shed it were and encouraged it to support recall because he would
like to see those City officials who did not adhere to the will of the people
recalled, with the support of anyone and everyone who would come forward to do
SO.
Mr. Brad Wyle, 13th Street Detoxification Center, stated he was an alcoholic and
alcoholism was a disease. Alcoholics Anonymous was a religious organization
even though someone laughed at the comment of bingo becoming a church. He was
behind bingo because bingo was behind alcoholics.
Marlan Pantel, Hope House, drug and alcoholic rehabilitation program, stated he
was in support of bingo. They were not just a bunch of addicts but were in a
program doing things to help change their lives. Programs such as those provided
by Hope House were in need of some type of support.
Mary Crowe, Manager, TLC supported by the National Association for Senior Citizens,
stated that three days after the last hearing before the Council held September 18,
1979, they had to close the TLC center at the National Association for Senior
Citizens (NASC) because there was no more money, The owner had to hire a lawyer
to fight the ordinance because they were originally told they could remain open
until April and, as a result, had many commitments. Many of her seniors had
called her and wanted to know why it had closed since it served approximately
79-1060
.City .Hall, Anaheim, .California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October. 2, 197.9, _1:30 p.M.~
65 people, five days a week which took the overflow from the other Anaheim TLC
sites. She felt there were more important things in Anaheim to fight than bingo,
such as prostitution, massage parlors and drugs.
Judy Tolls, Hope House, stated it was just recently that they heated they might be
shut down for lack of funds. They could not work at bingo anymore and the County
had not funded them completely for what they needed. If it' did close down, there
were going to be a lot of people going to jail because they would not be able to
· finish their sentences at Hope House and it was their only chance to get their
lives together. She was certain that was true for people in detoxificatiOn, as
well and other programs Mr. Rose was running. 'People's lives we're more important
than a parking problem or trash on a lawn.
Mrs. Pat Clancy, 303 North Bush, stated she could not say that she was opPosed
to bingo, but when the results showed only approximately one tenth of the
proceeds were turned back for the purpose it was instituted, then something was
wrong. Over 50% should be for charitable purposes, and she questioned where the
rest of the money was going. She felt if the voters had a chance to vote again
relative to bingo, they might change their minds, so her suggestion~Was to place
the issue on the ballot again.
The Mayor stated that they now had a good cross section of testimony between the
present hearing and that~ held September 18, 1979 (see minutes that date). He
thereupon closed that portion of the hearing for receiving public testimony and
opened it to questions of the public or the staff from the Council.
Councilman Overholt then questioned Mr. Valenti relative to his statement that
Anaheim voters approved bingo 2 to 1. He (Overholt) stated the proposition was
to ascertain whether o~not the legislature by statute could authorize cities
and counties to provide for bingo games, but only for charitable purposes and
that was the issue they were dealing with today--whether the City was to allow
bingo games and to what extent for charitable purposes. The citizens of Anaheim
voted 2 to 1 that the City might determine its own destiny with regard to.bingo.
He voted for tha't and he would vote~ for it again. Now they were trying to decide
what to do with that, since the City in the past chose to' allow bingo five days a
week, and it had become the most liberal city in Orange County for bingo. As a
result, there was some big operations in the City.
Councilman Roth noted that the Council had previously taken action to reduce
bingo from five days a week to three days a week and when he came' back' from
vacation, found that a proposal had been made to reduce it to one day.. He,
therefore, asked the City Manager if there were any organizations playing bingO
just three days a week under the new ordinance.
City Manager William Talle¥ stated the City Attorney advised, him.~there. Was only
one instance where that had occurred to date; Councilman Roth was of the opinion
that since only one organization was involved under the new ordinance thus far,
they' did not have the opportunity to monitor the differential in the-effects
relative to fiVe days a week, as opposed to three days a week.
Mrs. Martin, Anaheim Village Mobile Home Park, stated her husband, was the current
bingo manager at their park. They were told on April 15, 1979 they could onlY
get a license to play bingo one day a week, and she wanted to' know why they were
79-1061
City H~ll, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 2, 1979, 1:30 P.M.
given that information when everybody else had been allowed to play five days;
Mr. Talley asked for all pertinent information so that he might give her an
answer.
Councilwoman Kaywood asked that a verbatim transcript of the minutes of this portion
of the meeting on the subject of bingo be provided.
Councilman Overholt then questioned Mrs. Crowe relative to the closure of the
TLC site at the National Association of Senior Citizens, 471Brookhurst Street.
Mrs. Crowe relayed the following information: TLC was no longer operating at
that site but NASC was still running bingo games at that location. The lawyers
were afraid they would have to get out of business fast. He wanted his money,
and he took $10,000 to fight the bingo ordinance, which originally was to be
used to continue TLC at that site until April, and they had prior commitments.
Councilman Overholt then posed a line of questioning to Mr. Rose revolving around
whether or not Colonial Manor had ever been audited by the City, if he felt the
City had a right to audit his operation under the ordinance, and if he had ever
prohibited the City from auditing his operation.
Mr. Rose stated that his organizstion had never been audited by the City, but he
felt the City had a right to audit his operation. He had never prohibited the
City from making such an audit. In fact, Mr. Young Choi, Audit Supervisor for
Anaheim, met with their Marty Levine yesterday to set up a format to find out
what books the City wanted to inspect. However, they were not going to turn
anybody loose on a fishing expedition, but would provide specific books requested k-~
to be inspected. He denied there was ever an audit made by the City in March
of 1978. The City did have someone at Colonial Manor at that time who did
nothing when he was there.
Councilman Overholt recounted that on September 18, 1979 Colonial Manor was
represented by a Mr. Ronald Davis and that on September 21, 1979, Mr. Davis
wrote a letter to Anaheim on Mr. Rose's behalf stating that the letter would
further serve to confirm that he advised the City that the anticipated audit
of Colonial Manor Halfway House due to begin on September 24, 1979 would not
take place. He asked Mr. Rose if he had knowledge of that.
Mr. Rose answered that he did not know and he could be wrong regarding the date.
He did not want to look at the letter, but indicated that something-did take place.
An audit was being conducted by the City at this time and the letter was'wrong.
Mr. Rose then answered questions posed by Councilman Overholt regarding parking.
They were presently negotiating on two houses to the rear of their building and,
if successful, that land would double the parking capacity. They had approximately
200 to 300 cars at present. Pearson Park attracted many people and there was a
lot of drug dealing in the park. He commented that it should be better patroled
than at present.
Councilwoman Kaywood then recalled that on May 1, 1979 when the first meeting was
held on bingo~and also on September 18, 1979 that Mr. Rose stated that all the big
bingo outfits that played five days a week as did Colonial Manor should be
grossing the same amount. She wanted to know if he (Rose) would question any
79-1062
Ci. ty Hall, Anaheim~ California- COUNCIL .MINUTES -October 2,_. 1979, 1:30 P.M.
organization report'ing one-half the amount of Colonial Manor, given that they
were one of the big outfits and also if it seemed reasonable that an Organization
reporting a take of $1 million in 6 months would stop a program for lack of
money if the fee were' $10,000.
Mr. Rose stated he still maintained that they should all be grossing the same
amount and as an individual, he would question any one of those organizations
reporting one-half that amount. He could also see h°w an organization might
stop a program for lack of funds because of legal fees, but' he would have to
look at the books in order to know for sure. As far as Colonial Manor, they had
28,000 dues paying members and what he would do in his organization would
be to put the "touch" on the members for a couple of dollars in order to raise
money. The dues for their members was $1 for a lifetime. At present, they were
not paying dues because there was no need for dues at this time and no dues had
been~ taken at Colonial Manor for two years.
Mr. Rose also relayed the following on additional questioning posed by C°uncil-
woman Kaywood: as he indicated in a previous meeting, he felt there, was wrong-
doing in bingo as had been borne out by the Anaheim Police Department; there
were several large organizations running one-day a week bingo, So' that they could
have five-day a week or seven-day a week bingo. Those. were the organizations
that had large buildings in different areas of the City. One church would play
on one night, another in a different part of the City on TUesday night, etc.
One way to really restrict bingo would be to indicate that they all had t°
play on specific nights;, the highest Jackpot to his knowledge that had been paid
by Colonial Manor in the recent past was $1,300 on progressive bingo, which he
explained, and the 'odds on that were slim to none.
Later in the meeting, Mr. Rose stated it had been brought to his attention that
the highest jackpot that Colonial Manor ever paid out in any given game was $250.
What he had eluded to was Hope House running donation type bingo and they paid
out $1,300, but that was another organization.
Councilman Bay asked for clarification as to the statement made by 'Mr. Rose
that those organizations with large buildings wanted to go to one-day a'week
bingo So that they could have it seven daYs. If they had seven buildings, they
can have 35 games going every week.
Mr. Rose stated they had other activities going in those'buildings. Garden GroVe
had bingo seven day~ a weok, and he did not Understand how Garden GrOVe was' not
hassling the charities located in that city. They plaYed strictly AB101'bingo
which was 326.5 .(Penal Code section) bingo, and 'they-were not the only city.
Mayor Seymour as.ked Mr. Rose if his pro~ected income was in excess of $3 million
or $3.6 million and of that, what percentage went toward Pri~:eS ?
Mr. Rose first confirmed the $3.6 million pro~ected gross income figure~ and reporte~
that twO-thirds of it went to charity. Mayor Seymour stated that the report prO-
duced by staff last week indicated approximately 25% went to Charitable
organizations; City l~tnger Talle¥ interjected and stated those figures were the
amounts that would be available for charity based on the statements Colonial
l~nor filed. They had no way of verifying how much that Was. Approximately
75% went for all expenses and 25% maximum possible to charity.
79-1063
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 2~ 1979~ 1:30 P.M.
Mr. Rose stated he believed one-third went directly to charity. The Attorney
General had audited their books twice in the last 12 months and also the Depart-
ment of Benefit Payments. Thus, they had been aUdited by State agencies.
Mr. Talley clarified for the Mayor that the statements required t° be filed by
Colonial Manor under the ordinance contained a line that indicated the amount
available for charity. They used the information provided them, although he
did not know if that figure was right or wrong. It was 25.9%, and they were
allowed to deduct for operating expenses, but no salaries.
Councilman Overholt wanted to know the source of the $3,454,992 estimated annual
gross figure, how it was determined, and where patrons bought bingo cards.
Mr. Rose answered that the money came from the organization and that patrons
could buy bingo cards from the cashiers or sellers on the floor. Each seller
was issued 75 pieces of paper or cards, plus a soft card. When a seller went
onto the floor with 75 cards, those cards would be viewed as $75 and thus if
they turned in $50, they had to turn in 25 cards as well to the people who worked
in the cashier's cage. Three people worked in the cage and kept the count system
going which he explained and for which he was ultimately responsible. He also
explained that a hard card had one bingo card on it, and a soft card had four.
Councilman Overholt then asked if Mr. Rose was conducting donation bingo at
Colonial Manor at present; Mr. Rose answered that he was not conducting it,
but there were people conducting it. He would say he was conducting it
because he was involved in it.
Councilman Overholt asked how many days a week bingo was being played at the
Colonial Manor location and an estimate of how many hours'a day.
Mr. Rose answered seven days, on Sunday from 12:00 to 12:00; Monday through
Thursday, 6:00 to 12:00; Friday 6:00 to 2:00; Saturday, 12:00 to 2:00. He
also reported the average person spent between $10 and $15 dollars a night
on bingo although they could buy as many cards as they wished to play.
Councilman Roth then posed a line of questioning to Mr. Rose relative to the
Attorney General's audit. Mr. Rose then stated what Anaheim should do was
demand that everybody who grossed $50,000 a year in bingo to quarterly
supply a certified audit of an outside CPA at that organization's expense as a
prerequisite to licensing. If the City was spending $50,000 on policing bingo,
a surtax should be placed on those licenses and that was possible to do.
Mayor Seymour stated he had not seen that done; Mr. Rose reported there were other
cities charging a surcharge, for instance Pomona, and they were taking approximately
10% of the gross. If Anaheim wanted to, they could put everything back on the
operators and that was where it belonged. He clarified for Councilwoman Kaywood
that he did not have a game in Pomona, but the Christian Fellowship had a game
there, and he was a member of that church. The way he found out about the 10%
was that the lawyers were defending a case for the church in Federal Court, and
that was how he knew it could be done.
79-1064
..
Ci. ty~ Hall, ~maheim, .C~!if.°rni.a. - .COL~qC~IL M!.NUTE..S -....OctOber 2,. 1.979, 1-30., P-.M'~
Councilman~ OVerholt asked to hear from Chief Tielsch on the difficulties encountere~
by the Police Department in policing bingo since he (Tielsch) was not present at
the meeting of September 18. At that meeting, Lieutenant Wilcox was present and
indicated there were a number of ca~es pending and some had been disposed of bUt
there were great difficulties in attempting to get adequate policing on the bingo
situation.
PoliCe Chief George Tielsch explained 'that part of the problem was the fact
that they had not added anybody to the Vice, Narcotics and Organized Crime unit
subsequent to the advent of bingo, and they were assuming an additional workload
with the same.number of people. As pointed out, there were other crimes in the
City to which they had been devoting their time amd in the realm of prostitution,
they had made over 400 prostitution related arrests this year thus far. There'
were bingo games going on and it was impossible for the Police Department to do
a great deal of monitoring because they were of such great fr'equency throughout
the City. It was a drain on their resources and if there was' some way of re-
covering some of those charges and charging back the people creating the problem,
they would certainly welcome that.
Councilman Roth noted going back over the last eight to twelve mon'ths, there
were two convictions relative to bingo violations and the defendants paid a
fine of $250 each. He suspected from Mr. Rose's ~testimony that there was some
serious problems in bingo, but yet there were only those two conVictions. He
was questioning, therefore, whether it was an accounting procedure or a police
problem, because it appeared to him with enough surveillance, there would have
been something more serious than the two offenses.
Chief Tiel$ch stated it was a combination of both, there would have to be
an investigation backed by an audit. Part of the problem w~th bingo was the
great opportunity for skimming. They could not literally place officers in
every bingo operation every night to count every doliar flowing through those
operations. His experience in other cities relative to bingo games had what
they called "first come privilege". The operators~running the game'would take
the money into the back room, count it, come back out and indicate that they had
grossed "X" number of dollars for their charitable operation when', in fact,
nobodY really knew how many dollars had flowed through and that was one of the
more serious problem~. He was not an auditor, but he did know that they faced
serious problems in going in and attempting to monitor the cash flow through
any bingo operation on~ any given night. He did not disagree with~ the 'fact
that some of the violations they observed had been relatively minor in nature.
The courts apparently did not consider any offenses relative to gambling to
be overly serious.
Councilman Roth asked Chief Tielsch if once the public was aware, particularly
seniors, that the odds in bingo were 6,000 to 1, did he believe-it would have
a tendency to die out along with the knowledge that there might be some skimming.
Chief Tielsch answered "no". Relative to the 6,000 to 1 figure, he did not know
where that came from, but he. did not agree; that only' meant there were 6,000. cards
·
out. If two people had cards, they were going to keep calling numbers until one
person shouted bingo and he assumed the 'odds were even. People had. been gambling
for years, and he felt they would be gambling well into the foreseeable future,
79-1065
City Hall., Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 2~ 1979~ 1:30 P.M.
Mayor Seymour then called upon Mr. Hoffman from NASC to answer Councilwoman
Kaywood's question relative to the funding of TLC.
Mr. Richard Hoffman, National Assocation for Senior Citizens, Stated that he
did not know where they got the information that NASC no lOnger had any money.
That was conjecture on the part of the person who made the statement. They were
faced with the possibility of being cut back to one day a week bingo by November 1.
Considering the charitable commitments of their Association with a budget of
approximately $25,000 to $30,000 a month and outstanding commitments that had
to be paid by November 1, it was necessary for them not to fund the salaries
and other things at TLC which they had been funding at between $8,000 and $10,000
a month. They had a $22,000 commitment for air conditioning that was being
installed in the building, as well as other commitments. They talked to the
people at TLC and told them they were not going to be able to fund them until
they found out what was going to happen.
Mr. Hoffman digressed and commented upon the 6,000 to 1 odds previously mentioned.
He felt that Mr. Rose was talking about progressive bingo. About 80% of funds
taken in were paid out and, therefore, the gambling odds were very good.
Councilwoman Kaywood referenced the Council minutes of May 1, 1979 .wherein Mr.
Morrell of NASC mentioned that they were undertaking to fund the entire Senior
Citizen Health Fair. She wanted to know if Mr. Hoffman was aware of that and
also the fact that they did not donate one cent to the Fair.
Mr. Hoffman answered that he was aware of both the former and the latter. The
decision not to fund was based on the fact that they felt the money they had
given to Chartres (Senior Citizens Center) was not appreciated. No mention was
ever made of it and Chartres had not cooperated with them socially in any way.
Councilwoman Kaywood asked if he was saying that a thank you letter had never been
sent; Mr. Hoffman stated that was correct. Councilwoman Kaywood thereupon clarified
that they did have a copy of a thank you letter.
Mr. Hoffman stated that they appreciated it; however, they had gone to the Center
to post a brochure on one of the TLC dances and were told because they were
connected with bingo they would not be allowed to advertise their dance. They
did have funds and were using all the charitable funds for charity. Other
charities they donated to included a Stop Gap project, an independent group
that worked in conjunction with TLC. He had been with NASC for only two months,
and thus was not aware of all the other things that happened when Mr. Morrell
was there. The NASC was a charity and had a charitable function in itself in
addition to the other things they funded and the building was open for those
activities. The name, National Association for Senior Citizens, was a name
incorporated in the State of California for a non-profit corporation and the
name was chosen by somebody who preceded him. The only existing senior citizen
groups they were affiliated with was the TLC operation StOp Gap, and other
donations went to charitable organizations. He did not know the exact date
TLC was chosen as a charity, but NASC had funded them for a number of months
prior to the Council's action.
- 79=1066
City..H.a!!,_ Anaheim, California -. COUNC.I.L.MINUTE.S .,. October.. 2~ 19.79~ .!.:30.~ P....M.
Councilwoman Kaywood again asked where the name originated and if there was
someone present who was with the organization frOm the start; Mr. H0ffman stated
that the only one he knew of was a Mr. Gadsden who worked as a volunteer with
John Morrell in the 'operation at the time it started. Mr. Morrell was no longer
with the group and lived in Irvine. Mr. Gadsden was not with NAsc as 'an officer
or director. He worked as a volunteer.
Mr. Hoffman continued that the only contention they had about changing the
ordinance was that if it was changed, it should be done in a manner so that
an injunction would not be filed against the City. They should allow people
time to depreciate their capitalization and make their commitments, at least
relying on their present business license.
Councilman Overholt stated .that a statement was made in the Chamber that TLC was
told~ that they could no longer continue their program because the NASC needed
$10,000 to hire an attorney to fight the ordinance.
Mr. Hoffman emphasized the statement was not made by him and whoever made' it
did it on the basis of conjecture. As he mentioned, they told TLC it would
be necessary to find out what was happening. They wanted to prepare themselves
for the November 1 phaseout. They hoped they were in good standing with TLC,
and they had made a substantial contribution to them and planned to continue
to do so in the future.
Mr. Hoffman then explained for Councilwoman Kaywood that a Mr. Danny Saratelli
was not now with NASC and that Kay Weaver and Corliss Hoffman were both an
officer and director and that they were in the process of reorganization. He
also confirmed for Councilman Overholt that they were Still located'at 471 South
Brookhurst.
CoUncilman Bay questioned the City Attorney relative to the statement made that
Pomona apparently found a way of taking 10% of gross from bingo. He wanted to
know if, to his knowledge, under State law there was any way that was a legal
operation.
City Attorney HoPkins stated he had not seen the Pomona ordinance, but under
Section 326.5 of the Penal Code, he did not see any way that could be legally
arranged, but that he would .be .glad to call and find out their procedure, as well
as if there was any litigation connected with it.. He did not see h°w it could
be done under the exi.~ting State Code.
Councilman Bay noted' from reading the State Code, he could see wh~ere it abs°-
lutely prohibited the intent and that it was done to prohibit just that from
haPpening by cities and counties and limiting the license to $50 a year.
ORDINANCE NO. 4049: Councilman Overholt offered Ordinance No. 4049 for adoption,
~me'ndin'g Titl'e '7'.3~4, relating to the days and hours of operation for Bingo for
final reading. Refer to Ordinance Book.
?RD_.INANCE NO. 4049: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMEND. lNG SECTION 7.34.240
OF CHAP~R 7.34, TITLE 7, OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO BINGO GAMES.
79-1067
City H~ll, Anaheim.~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October ~ 1979~ 1:30 P.M.
Before a vote was taken, Councilwoman Kaywood stated considering all of the
calls, letters etc. that she had received and people she had talked to throughout
the City, she found nothing that would change her mind relative to bingo. The
people who voted for bingo were speaking in terms of senior citizens and church
groups and recreational and entertainment type bingo where there might be a
maximum jackpot of $5. Nobody had in mind what had been taking place. What
they now had in Anaheim was totally out of order.
Mayor Seymour stated he wanted to express feelings different from those he
expressed two weeks ago. He now had further input and further opportunity to
consider bingo in Anaheim. He had sent out a Mayor's survey to over 300 what
he would identify as community leaders in the City of Anaheim, more specifically,
those serving in an appointed office, those involved in business, those in
educational institutions, principals, presidents of-PTA's, ministers, etc., a
cross section of the leadership of the City. There were 12 questions on the
survey and he was still receiving results, but had received the first results
on September 22, and one of the twelve questions had to do with bingo. The
people who responded were able to respond in such a fashion that they need not
give their name - it was a private poll. The results were significant relative
to what community leaders thought. The question - "How do you feel about bingo
in the City of Anaheim?"--a) Do you feel it should be eliminated entirely;
b) Be reduced; c) Days ought to be increased; d) Leave as is; and e) No opinion.
The results, although he did not have an opportunity to develop results to
the other 11 questions, the bingo questions indicated that 56% of respondents
who had an opinion wanted to see bingo eliminated or reduced, 5% said they would
like to see it increased and another 30% indicated that it should be left alone.
That told him that people were concerned about bingo and also that the community
was well divided as to how to control bingo. He felt they had to insure that
the criminal allegations that had been made, but little proven, did not come
through. When Anaheim voted "yes" on bingo, he was of the opinion they were
saying if they wanted to play bingo, they should be able to do so, not that they
thought bingo was okey if the City Council thought it was okey. There was a
large segment of the community who believed in bingo. A vast percentage was
saying that bingo was fine, but they did not want bingo games, big business,
etc. They had the responsibility to keep bingo alive and at the same time
do their best to assure that alleged criminal elementg did not become a reality.
The Mayor continued that as he listened to the Chief of Police and the bingo
operators, he was more of the opinion that the way to control bingo was to
control the money, that which was picked up from the patrons taken into the
cage and counted. Bills were then paid and a percentage went to charitable
causes and a percentage to prizes. Those actions involved accounting systems
and the ordinance~needed to be tightened up in that area. The City Attorney
indicated two weeks ago the ordinance could be upheld if the City were to
require bingo operators with gross revenues in excessOf $50,000 to have a
CPA furnish quarterly financial audits to the City. That would, (1) insure
a timely, equitable administration of financial controlg and, (2) save the
City the cost of conducting audits. He wanted to take it a ste f r
ask the City Attorney to consid~ -~-~^~ ........... P uther and
.... ~=~-=~ ~ non nne or~%nance would stand if
they required an operator with gross revenues of say $50,000 a year and above
to maintain a CPA or an accountant, somebody with credibility to observe the
79-1068
City_ .Ha.1!, An~aheim, California- COUNCIL MINUTE.S -0cto.ber 2 1979, 1:30 P.M.
,, ~ ..... · ~ ,
cash as it moved into the cage, moved from there into the bank, and followed
through with a full and complete audit. He felt if those steps were taken, the
Council would be doing all it could, short of eliminating bingo. They should
consider attacking the ordinance on an intelligent basis - controlling the
activity by controlling the money.
As to the social and charitable work, they were certainly worthwhile. Those tYpes
of works should be done within the community itself and without those services,
government would have to pick up the tab. The real objection was the potential
invasion of criminal money and activities into the City. He reiterated if they
could devise a way tO insure those types of allegations from becoming a reality,
that is what he would favor rather than taking an overt action that would dictate
to the citizens of Anaheim the opposite of which they clearly voted on affirma-
tively.
Mayor Seymour stated in its current form, he could not support the ordinance, but
would vote strongly in favor of anything other than the way the ordinance was
currently worded to insure keeping the criminal element out. His thrust was to'
control the money as it moved through the various operations.
Councilwoman Kaywood noted that the Mayor's surve¥7'zof 300 community leaders indicate
that 56% wanted to see bingo eliminated, and she considered that signifcant; the
Mayor clarified 'that those who had an opinion of that 56% approximately one-half
wanted to see bingo eliminated and one-half wanted to see it reduced. What he
gathered from that was that they did not want to see them do away with bingo,
but take every possible step to clean it up.
Councilman Ruth stated that two weeks ago, he suggested that the people have an
opportunity to make their own recommendation by placing the issue on the ballot,
however, his suggestion did not gain any support. He then referred to Council
minutes of May 1, 1979, which revolved around reducing bingo five days to three
days. At that time,, it was reduCed to three days He then quoted excerpts from
those minutes and emphasized the portion wherein he stated that the City intended
to monitor bingo on the three-day a week basis. Only one organization was presently
operating under the three-day ordinance and, therefore, they had not had an
oPPortUnity to see the. effect of that change. He felt the~ were penalizing a '
number of people they had not heard from today. He was very concerned about
bingo in the City and wanted to discourage people from playing as well as being
aware of the unbelievable odds involved. The Anaheim Chamber of Commerce took
no position on the reduction of bingo. He would support a reduction to two days,
but he was not interested in reducing it to one day until there was first an-
opportUnity to get everybody on line under the three-day ordinance in Order' to
monitor the situation. If there was skimming and some Way .of determining the'
alleged violations, he would support elimination of bingo entirely and not even
consider one day.
- .
Councilman Bay stated that he never voted on bingo before because he was not on
the Council when any other vote was taken on the matter. He had listened to'.a
great deal of testimony and also read a great deal about it and what happened
with bingo all over the United States. There were only 12 st:ates that did not
allow bingo and there were numeroUs articles reporting what had happened in
some of the largest states back East. Florida in an article in Forbes magazine
79-1069
City Hal_!, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 2~ 1979~ 1:30 P.M.
quoted that organized crime almost totally controlled bingo in that state. He
was not saying that was true in Anaheim, but the possibility was there and no
doubt bingo in Florida started the same way as bingo started in Anaheim or some-
thing similar. The Los Angeles Times in an editorial stated the way he felt
about bingo. They said, "by cutting down the action and the emphasis on gambling,
the Council could reduce violations, better audit the operations and possibly
increase the percentage of money going to charity which is why the City licensed
bingo in the first place.''~ To him, that was the essence of getting it down to
where it was controllable. He interpreted the Mayor's survey differently than
the Mayor. To him, 56% sounded like a clear majority wanted bingo reduced and
controlled. If it was not controlled now, eventually they would have no control
at all. He listened to what the Mayor said about placing people in the organization
to count the money as well as CPA audits, but when skimming was still going on
in Las Vegas casinos with all the State and local controls in practice in Nevada,
he was not as optimistic in being able to control that factor in the City, nor
where the money would come from if the final legal decisions were that controls
could not be imposed. He was going to vote on principle and support the
ordinance to reduce bingo to one day a week.
Councilman Overholt stated that the survey taken was most interesting and agreed
with Councilman Bay that it appeared the people contacted by the Mayor, on the
basis of 56% to 30%, were not happy with bingo as it preBently existed and
wanted to see it reduced. He also agreed with Councilman Bay that the problem
was, the Council before some of them were on the Council, perhaps misinterpreted
the vote in 1976 and felt bingo should be wide open. Contrary to Mr. Rose's
suggestion regarding Garden Grove, it was his understanding Anaheim was the
most liberal city in Orange County regarding bingo even now.
City Manager Talley stated that they checked with Garden Grove just before
the meeting and they reported they had bingo one day per week, per organization
or per location. They could have it once a week but could not rent the location
where bingo could be played to another organization.
Councilman Overholt stated that there were approximately 80 people in the Council
Chamber, some of whom were present to support the present bingo ordinance and some
to support the new ordinance. He asked for a show of hands of those from'Colonial
Manor. There were approximatley 30 and also approximately 14 from NASC. They
also had a petition from Mrs. Phipps with 70 signatures of people concerned
(three were present in the Council Chamber) who had signed that petition. Another
petition had been delivered to them that contained approximately 60 signatures
and the Council had received many telephone calls, some pro and some opposed.
His tally of calls received supported the reduction of bingo to one day. Members
of the community supported reduction of bingo to one day and they had to give
credence to the community. He was not going to use his judgment on such matters,
but was attempting to reflect the attitude of the people who talked to him and
expressed concern about what was taking place in the community. That was why
the proposed ordinance was offered by him in the first Place. He had not seen
anything to change his mind that the best thing for the taxpayers was to restore ~?~
bingo to where it belonged, one day a week so that charities, such as Mrs. Crowe's!
TLC grouP, could raise the money themselves and carry on their good work. They !
did not need money froTM other organizations. If money was easy to come by, the
charities would align themselves and become dependent on that source of money.
79-1070
C.itY~H. all.,. .. Anaheim, California...-...COUNCIL MINUS. ES - .October 2,. 1979, 1:30 P.M.
It was his opinion that the unknowns were the problem in bingo'. Chief Tieslch
indicated the'big problem was that they did not know what was passing through
the bingo game. The Mayor suggested that a CPA and accountant be utilized to
audit the cash flow in the bingo games. Two weeks ago Mr. Rose stated he fe~
that no accountant would "risk his neck" to do that.
Mr. Rose thereupon indicated that he did mot say that; Councilman Roth stated
he believed what Mr. Rose said was that no accountant would stick his neck out
to falsify the account. He also said if they hired a reliable accountant, they
would be provided with accurate figures.
Councilman Overholt stated that was not the way he heard it. He then concluded
that he did not think the people felt they had come up with an answer yet. His
feeling was that the proposed ordinance would present that answer and bingo
would go elsewhere and the charities would look to bingo for fund raising. Most
charitable organizations were operating one day~ and found that filled their needs.
No one was more sensitive than he for the need for senior recreation, and recrea-
tional bingo was a good answer to that, or the need of funding charities, and his
record in working with-numerous charities would support that. He felt even more
so today than he did two weeks ago that the present bing° ordinance permitting
bingo more than one day a week was not in the best interest of the citizens of
the City and, therefore, he was supportive of the reduction to one day.
Councilwoman Kaywood noted that at the May 1 meeting, it was suggested if three
days a week did not clean bingo up, they would go to zero days. Her concern
at that time revolved around the fact that people had voted for recreational
type bingo and she did not want to punish all of them. In May, she wanted to
go to two days~ a week. She felt they had gone beyond that now and two days a
week would not do it. She did not want to penalize the senior citizens and
those justifiably raising money for charities that were legitimate, and those
who played for recreation and entertainment. Thus, she would support the
proposed ordinance. ~
Mayor Seymour stated that Councilman Roth pointed ou~ clearly that there was
never any test on three-day a week bingo because of the newness of that ordinance
which had gone into effect June 1, 1979. The ordinance called fOr the Change
on the expiration of bingo licenses and since that time only one had expired.
A vote was then taken on Ordinance No. 4049.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Owerholt, Kaywood and Bay
NoES: COUNCIL- MEMBERs: Roth and SeymoUr
ABSENT: ' coUNcIL MEMBERS: None
The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 4049 duly passed and adopted.
RECESS' By general consent the Council recessed for 10 minutes. (4:02 P.M.)
~AFTER..RECES.$:. Mayor Seymour' called the meeting to order, all Council Members being
present. (4:12 P.M. )
79-1071
.City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 2~ 1979~ 1:30 P.M.
CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING - REHEARING ON CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1923 AND
NEGATIVE DECLARATION: Application by Frederick R. and Ruth E. Sachet, to permit
the sales of home furnishings on ML zoned property located at 1040 Kraemer Place.
Both the City Planning Commi~sion and the City Council previously denied Condi-
tional Use Permit No. 1923. The rehearing was requested by Mr. Floyd Farano,
attorney for the applicant, which was granted May 29, 1979, with a public hearing
scheduled and continued from August 28, 1979. An additional continuance was
being requested by the applicant to October 16, 1979.
MOTION: Councilman Roth moved to grant the request for continuance to October 16,
1979 at 3:00 P.M.. Councilman Bay seconded the motion.
Before a vote was taken, Councilman Bay 8rated at the time of the rehearing, if
they considered a time allowance, that they also consider the continuance period
as part of the time the operation would have to cease violations of the ordinance
which had been occurring.
A vote was then taken on the foregoing motion. MOTION CARRIED.
176: PUBLIC ~ING - ABANDONMENT NO. 79-1A: In accordance with application
filed by Mr. Dennis Aase, public hearing was held on proposed abandonment of a
portion of a dedicated 18-foot wide public alley and sanitary sewer line located
from approximately 363 feet to approximately 207 feet eamt of Pauline Street and
approximately 175 feet south of Adele Street, pursuant to Resolution No. 79R-526
duly published in the Anaheim Bulletin and notices thereof posted in accordance
with law.
Report of the City Engineer dated August 21, 1979 and recommendation by the
Planning Commission .were submitted, recommending approval subject to the applicant
removing the existing AC/AB and manhole and plug the exioting 6-inch sanitary
sewer line and constructing a new manhole at the west terminus of the abandoned
area, with plans to be submitted to the City Engineer for approval. Also, and/or
that a bond, certificate of deposit, letter of credit, or cash in an amount and
form satisfactory to the City shall be posted with the City to guarantee that
the above mentioned improvements will be constructed prior to occupancy.
The Mayor asked if anyone wished to address the Council.
Mr. Dennis Aase, 706 EaSt Adele, applicant, stated he wan asked to submit a
$3,900 bond for removal and replacement of a sewer manhole on the easement. It
did not go anywhere and removing it would be part of the construction they had
planned for the property in any case. The sewer line had not gone anywhere since
the early 1930's, and thus, he wanted the bond requirement dropped.
Mr. William Devitt, City Engineer, stated the basic problem was the fact that it
was an old sewer line that had been there for many years unused. The Street
Maintenance Supervisor indicated that he required a new terminus manhole be
constructed to be able to continue to maintain that sewer once it was constructed,!' i
and it did involve construction of new manhole. From the standpoint of constructi~
79-1072
City =Hall;. Anaheim~ Califo.rnia.-...COUNCIL MINUTES - October 2, ..19.79, 1'30 P.M.
of any new building, Mr. Aase would tie to that sewer line and it would be
utilized and necessary to provide entrances for cleaning and maintenance.
Although it was true that it had not been utilized for many years, all evidence
indicated that continued maintenance or new maintenance would be required. The
new manhole was in an area where new construction would occur and thus, it would
be eliminated, necessitating the installation of a new manhole at the terminus of
the sewer.
Further discussion followed between the Mayor, Mr. Aase and City Engineer Devitt,
in which Mr. Devitt emphasized the need and reasons for maintenance of the sewer
line.
MOTION: Councilman Seymour moved to continue further consideration of the
matter until later in the meeting so that Mr. Lewis, Street Maintenance Supervisor,
could be present to give his input. Councilman Roth' seconded the motion. MOTION
CARRIED.
Later in the meeting, Bill Lewis, Street Maintenance Supervisor, stated that the
sewer line was important at some point immediately west of the existing railroad
tracks. He elaborated, upon technicalities and why the requirement to construct
a new manhole at the west terminus of the abandoned area was necessary, the
essence of which was, that they needed manhole access at the end of the line,
wherever it might be, in order to provide physical access for maintenance
purposes.
After additional discussion between the Mayor, Mr. AaSe and Mr. Lewis, the Mayor
stated that it was clear that Mr. Aase was saying that he wanted the abandonment
so that he could build his 13,000-square foot tilt-up building, but he did not
want to have to bear the expense of putting a manhole on somebody else's proPerty.
Mr. Lewis was saying that the City did not have one sewer line that dead-ended
without a manhole, and thus, there was no other alternative.
There being no further persons who wished to speak, the MaYor closed the publiC
hearing.
ENVIRONMENTAL 'IMPACT REPORT - CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION: On motion.by Councilwoman
Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Overholt, the City Council ratified the deter-
mination of the Planning Director that the proposed activity falls within'the .
definition of Section 3.01, Class 5, of the City of Anaheim guidelines to the
requirements for an Environmental Impact Report and is, therefore, categorically
exempt from the requirement to file an EIR. MOTION CARRIED.
Councilwoman Kaywood offered Resolution No. 79R-540 for adoption', approving
Abandonment No. 79-1A, subject to all conditions including that contained in
the City Engineer's memorandum of August 21, 1979. Refer to Resolution Book,
_RESOLUTION NO. 79R-5..40' A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
DETERMINING THAT CERTAIN PUBLIC ALLEY SHOULD BE ABANDO~D AND ESTABLISHING
CONDITIONS PRECEDENT TO SAID ABANDONMENT.
79-1073
Cit.y Ha~.l,. Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 2~ 1979~ 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-540 duly passed and adopted.
164: PUBLIC HEARING - ABATEMENT OF PUBLIC NUISANCE: Citrus Water Company, to
hear and consider testimony relating to a private water well on property located
at the southwest corner of Banyon Court and Sunkist Way, determined to be a pub-
lic nuisance by the Public Utilities General Manager, pursuant to Chapter 10.20
of the Anaheim Municipal Code.
TheM ayor asked if anyone was present to speak on the matter; there was no
response..
On motion by Councilwoman Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Roth, consideration
of the subject abatement of public nuisance was continued to October 30, 1979,
at 3:00 P.M., as recommended by General Manager of Public Utilities Gordon Hoyt
in his memorandum dated SePtember 26, 1979. MOTION CARRIED.
170: PUBLIC HEARING - TENTATIVE TRACT NOS. 9212 AND 9215: Submitted by the
Baldwin Company to consider amendments to Condition Nos. 9 and 10 of the con-
ditions of approval relating to drainage, property located on the south side of
Nohl Ranch Road, easterly of Anaheim Hills Road.
Mr. Phillip Bettencourt, representing the Baldwin Company, 16811 Hale Avenue,
Irvine, developer and builder, stated that the tract note was not untypical of
the note that often appeared among hillside subdivision standards as an extra
precaution to insure that if storm drain facilities were not-completed prior to
the rainy season, grading could not proceed. When the Council had granted a
waiver in the past, the drainage exposure was relatively limited. The Baldwin
Company represented less than 25% of the total tributary area and the balance
of the property of the water course was owned by Anaheim Hills, Inc., and the
Anaheim Hills company had provided a hold harmless agreement as had the Baldwin
Company for the grading. The off-site storm drain would be installed by
November 1, in any case, but the developer was anxious to proceed with the grading
to have as much done prior to the legal rainy season.
The Mayor asked if anyone wished to speak either in favor or in opposition;
there being no response, he closed the public hearing.
On motion by Councilman Roth, seconded by Councilman Bay, amendment to Condition
No. 9 of Tentative Tract No. 9212 and amendment to Condition No. 10 of Tentative
Tract No. 9215, was approved, as requested by the Baldwin Company in accordance
with the recommendation of the City Engineer and Public Works Executive Director
in memorandum dated September 20, 1979, as follows: That provisions for the
temporary retention of the mud and/or debris within Tracts Nos. 9212 and 9215
be constructed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and maintained by the
developer during the grading operations of Tracts Nos. 9212 and 9215 and after
the grading is completed until such time as the downstream storm drain is con-
structed and operational. MOTION CARRIED.
79-1074
~ Anaheim~California- COUNCIL MINUTES- October 2 1979 1:30 P.M.
169' PUBLIC HEARING - CLOSURE .OF. .LO.ARA STREET- Public Works Department, to
consider the closure of Loara Street immediatel--y north of Lincoln Avenue at the
Southern Pacific Transportation Company's tracks, pursuant to Section 21101 of
the Vehicle Code.
City Engineer William Devitt explained that they did not make a clear cut
recommendation relative to the closure. They had made a previous recommendation
to submit a request to the Southern Pacific Transportation Company and the Public
Utilities Commission that railroad crossing gates be installed at the subject
location, and basically they~had not changed that position.
The Mayor asked if anyone wished to speak either in favor or in opposition.
The following businessmen and property owners in the area spoke in opposition
to the closure and elaborated upon the specific reasons why the closure would
be detrimental to their businesses:
Mr. Ross Dean, Dog and ~Cat Hospital, northeast corner of Loara and Lincoln;
Mr. Art Green,-Dornon's Brake and Gear, 275 North Manchester Avenue; Mr. Tony
Silva, Anaheim Subaru, 1557 West Lincoln Avenue; Mr. Peter Rosen, Friend of
R. A. Gri§sby, owner of property at 264 and 266 North Manchester presently being
leased to thriving businesses in the area; Mr. Robert Wong, owner of the property
at the northwest corner of Lincoln and Loara for 21 years; Mr. Mike Mendenhall,
southeast corner of Lincoln and Loara. Mr. Rosen also submitted letters written
by Mr. C. G. Reynolds, President of Renco-C, 266 North Manchester, Mr. James
McCririe, Kaman Bearing, (home offices in San Bernardino), 264 North Manchester,
and Mr. Jerry Phillips, manager of the Broadway Motel, 300 North Manchester who
were all opposed to the closure. Mr. Wong also stated that Mr. Eiruss of Russ
Motors, 1613 West Lincoln, Mr. Dave Moore of Action Mufflers, 1615 West Lincoln,
and Mr. Guiterrez of Herb's Foreign Cars, 1611 West Lincoln, had been present
awaiting the hearing to express their opposition to the closure, bUt had to leave
the meeting.
In addition to their opposition to the closure, the following people made additional
recommendations- Mr. Dean recommended relative to his property 'that railroad' crossi~
arms be installed on Loara just as on Lincoln to assist in restraining the great
number of cars presently cutting through his parking lot when the? railroad
crossing arms were down on Lincoln. His facilities were not geared for highway
traffic. He also explained that he had a drainage problem on his PrOperty when
it rained and wanted to prevail upon the City to authorize Some. drainage in order
to alleviate that excess collection of water.
Mr. Green noted that when exiting the freeway at Lincoln Avenue onto Loara,
there were no stop signs across Manchester. Since there were buildings on
both sides, it was difficult to see a train approaching. Because there were
no flashing lights, signals or arms at present, he recommended that Something
be installed to notify people of the train crossing.
Mr. Silva noted that the corner of Loara and Lincoln was poorlY lighted and not
designed with the flow of traffic. He recommended that a railroad crossing sign
or other type of~ signing be painted on the street to assist Vehicular traffic
at that location.
79-1075
City Ha!%, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 2~ .1979~ 1:30 P.M.
Mr. Wong suggested that instead of the Public Utilities Commission asking the
City to close the street, the City should ask the PUC to install some kind of
safety device or signal to protect the citizens.
There being no further persons who wished to speak, the Mayor closed the public
hearing.
Mayor Seymour stated it was obvious from the input of the business people and
property owners in the area that they unanimously felt closure of the street
would injure them in some way or another, and the more appropriate action would
be to have some type of signing and/or safety device installed to insure that
Loara would remain open. He asked staff if that were the mind of the Council
what they would then recommend.
Mr.-Devitt stated it would be their recommendation that the Council adopt a
resolution requesting the PUC to give the highest priority to the establishment
of crossing gates at that location.
Councilman Seymour thereupon offered ResolutiOn No. 79R-538 for adoption. Refer
to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 79R-538: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
REQUESTING AND URGING THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION TO GIVE THE HIGHEST PRIORITY
TO EXPEDITING THE INSTALLATION OF CROSSING GATES OR OTHER PROTECTION AT THE LOARA
ST~ET CROSSING BK-$08.4 IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM LOCATED ON THE SANTA ANA BRANCH
OF THE SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANSPORTATION COMPANY.
Before a vote was taken, Councilman Bay stated considering the lengthy time
frames of the State and the PUC, he felt there shouldbe someinterim means of
mitigating the accidents taking place at that corner. He suggested that they
investigate the possibility of stop signs or warning signs that could warn the
unfamiliar driver of that active railroad crossing.
Mr. Paul Singer, Traffic Engineer, stated that Stop signs on the off-ramp would
be just as lengthy to obtain from the State as the gate crossing protection.
He therefore suggested stop signs for southbound traffic at the grade crossing
itself with a red flasher that would alert drivers, the cost for which would
be approximately $300 to $400. They could do that because it was on City property.
Councilman Bay stated that anything that could be done in the way of a sign or
flashing red light would lessen the chances of risk to the City.
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-538 duly passed and adopted.
79-1076
.,City H~,.,!I, Anaheim~ California - _COUNC. I.L MI.NU~. ES - Oc. tpber 2. 19~9.,~ 1'30 P.M.
Councilman Seymour moved to direct staff to construct stop signs at the grade
crossing, as articulated by the Traffic Engineer, along with appropriate lighting..
Councilwoman Kaywood seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
1_34; ....PUBLIC HLEARING - GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 152 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
. To consider an amendment to' the Land Use E"~ement of the General Plan to change-
the current hillside low-medium density residential and general commercial des-
ignations to hillside medium density, to subdivide an existing mobile home park
located on the north side of La Palms Avenue, east of Imperial Highway, and
sell individual lots.
The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. 79R-539, approved
Exhibit "A" (hillside medium density residential) for the approximate 51
acres at the subject location and further recommended, that a negative dec-
laration from the requirement to prepare an EIR be approved on the basis..that
there would be no significant individual or cumulative adverse environmental
impact due to the approval of the negative declaration.
Mr. Jay Tashiro, Associate Planner, working from the maps posted on the Chamber
wall, briefed the Council on the staff report dated September 10, 1979 relative
to the subject General Plan Amendment Land Use. It was a property owner/City
initiated General Plan Amendment to change the current hillside.loW-medium
density residential and general commercial designation to hillside medium density
residential. The property owner-initiated amendment involved a parcel consisting
of approximately 44 acres presently designated as hillside low-medium. It was
the intent of the property owner to subdivide the existing mobile home park
(Friendly Village) and sell individual lots. The proposed amendment was nec-
essitated by the Subdivision Map Act.
The City-initiated portion consisted of approximately a 7.5 acre parcel presently
designated as general commercial.
Councilman Roth stated originally the mobile home park'was developed as an adult
park. Although he had no objection, his concern was that when changing-the
concept of the park from all adult to own-your-own home, it W°ul'd break the
covenants,if ~" ~'thereby resulting in having children in the park. He Wanted' to know
the
r-ann~ng Commission was concerned relative to green areas and a playground
area.
Mr. Joel Fick, AsSistant Director for Planning, stated that the Planning Commission
next Monday was going to be considering a Tentative Tract Map and Variance for
the specific, sUbdivision itself. The General Plan Amendment was essentially
the first step prior to the Tentative Tract consideration', and the Planning
commission would be addressing the concerns expressed.
Councilwoman Kaywood stated it was her understanding the park was both familY
and adult when-it was first built; Mr. Fick rest~onded that they would research
that pOint and clarify 'it in their staff report to the Commission.
Councilman. Bay nOted that the density was now approximately 8 per acre and the
actual zoning was 6 per acre and the change would be to 16 per aCre permitted.
79-1077
City Hal.~, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 2~. 1979~. 1:30 P.M.
Mr. Tashiro explained that hillside medium density would permit up to 16, but
they were asking in excess of 8 units per acre. Councilman Bay asked that since
they would discussing the matter with the Planning Commission, he was concerned
that somewhere it be stipulated that there were no plans to increase the density
to 16 merelYbecause there was a change in zoning. He was also concerned relative
to the subdivision and the square footage of the lots. He did not know how
much of the 8 per acre was taken up with private streets or if there were
amenities. He supported the concept, but wanted to be certain that they did
not lose that concept when they came down to the details at the Planning
Commission hearing.
The Mayor asked if anyone wished to speak.
Mr. Boyce Jones, representing the owners of the park (Friendly Village), explained
that the park, which had been in existence for five years, was both adult and
family. Between 1972 and 1973 the owner converted it to the combination adult-
family, and it had existed that way with approximately one-third being adult, and
two-thirds family, At that time, the ownership proceeded to convert part of
the recreation area into family use. He then passed a small map to the Council
showing those areas. In February 1979, they became involved as buyers of the
park and in August of last year, the owners at that time were in the process of
applying for and submitting an initiative or a resolution that would convert the
park back to all adult. When they took over, they heard comments that it was an
unfriendly park. Subsequently, they held meetings with the association and took
a sampling of the people in the park to try and determine their anxieties, the
most vocal being, they had no way of communicating with the owner. ~ey then
sent letters out to the coach owners to explain their program and now felt they
had reached a reasonable level of communication with them. They also had an
open meeting with the owners relative to owning their own lots, and approximately
300 were in attendance. The concern expressed was what would happen to the park
when it was converted and the individuals now living in it--the main concern
were those people who could not afford to change. In trying to understand and
eliminate the anxieties, they held meetin§s and sent letters to the coach owners
giving them information as to how they were going to proceed.- He also explained
the financing program that would be available which was communicated to the owners,
as well as the possibility of assistance for those who needed it through the City's
Housing Authority or State program. If that was not available, they could then
assist in secondary financing or wrap around. They also indicated that no one
would be moved out of the park, given a termination notice, or evicted. The
persons who now lived in the park could remain there and pay rent if they did
not want any part of the new program, and they would hold those lots in a separate
entity until such time as those people moved. When they did move, however, that
was the end of the "marriage" and if they sold their coach, the owners would have
the right to sell the lot to whoever bought the coach. In their notice, they had
to state, "subject to termination" because that was required by the State. The
final facts would be available next summer when the finalized program would be
presented relative to lot value and the financing available.
Councilman Bay stated as he understood, the alternatives were, (1) bUy, (2) rent,
or (3) move, and the rent alternate was based on getting 51% buyers in the park.
Mr. Jones stated that was correct in order to close the first escrow. He also
reported that the typical size lot in the park was 47 feet by 70 feet.
79-1078
City .H~ !.1,' .Anah. eim,... _C~lifor. nia - COUN. CIL M.iNUTES _ October 2, 1979,. !.: 30 ?.M.
The Mayor asked if anyone else wished to speak either in favor or in opposition.
Mr. Dick Easy, Space 88, stated he had been living at the park for approximately
one year and he represented the association in the ad hoc committee to gather
facts surrounding the conversion. The :people felt they had not been presented
with all the facts. Mr. Jones addressed the green belt areas and in their
discussion with him the other evening, he indicated those areas could possibly
become part of the lot of some of the coaches. He also had a concern that if
more children were brought into the park, they would have to have some play
areas. He questioned where the teenagers would go. The facilities at present
were not adequate both for the adult community and children, and that was an area
that the Planning Commission should consider. The association would have to
assume the operati-on of the park under the ownership and file with the State.
They did not know how that filing would read - whether the association would
have 51% rule or whether they could possibly be railroaded by any group of
individuals who might own a number of lots.
Another concern was relative to the people on fixed incomes and' the price the lots
were going to be. No one had any idea and thus there was no way of planning their
futures if they wanted to own a lot in the park. He did endorse the lot ownership
concept, but they had a long way to go in asking questions not only of the owner,
but also other parks. The people should have so~e kind of target to start think:lng
about now. They were panicking, selling out, and did not know the full facts.
Mrs. Martin, Space 337, stated she was speaking for half of the adult section of
the park. There were only 52 members in the association, which was not even one-
eighth of 354 coaches. She questioned why, after seven years of the park's opening,
the owners wanted to come in and up~et the lives of the people living there just
as had been done with apartment houses. They chose a mobile home park, sold their
home and paid cash for their coaches. Banks did not loan money on land, but only
on the mobile homes and the age of the coach. Their coach was seven years old and
on a seven-year old coach, they were only giving 12 years at $280 a month. Her
coaCh Was paid for,. as were others, and they did not feel they wanted to put up
their titles to buy land. They bought the coaches for the financial security
they were seeking at retirement age. They did not wan~ the land and would not
have moved into the mobile home park if they wanted to~ own land. As well, there
would be more children living in the park, and it would, be difficult with six or
seven children living five feet away. At present, there were too many children
in the pool so that it was difficult for the adUlt~ to use it. She was' also
concerned about the older l~eople and those on welfare and disability. The
owners were looking for a fast move ~ust as wit'h apartment houses' They should
be allowed to live their lives the way they wished.
Councilman Roth explained that the Council had been concerned over the i. ssue of
rent control and one of the groups objecting to rent increases were. those in
mobile home parks and many wanted to be able to own their lot so that they,
could control the amount of rent being paid. Mrs. ~rtin was giving the other
side of the story which he respected. However, the proposal appeared to be
one of the ways in which people could prevent rent increases.
Discussion then followed between Councilman 'Roth, the Mayor and Mrs. Martin,
revolving around the issue of buying or renting, at the conclusion of' which,
Councilwoman Kaywood stated one of her concerns was Wi~h those who Could not
79-1079
qi~y Hall,. Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 2~ 1979~ 1:30 P.M.
afford to buy the land. She asked Mrs. Martin if there was a dual arrangement,
to buy or rent, would she have any objection to that.
Mrs. Martin indicated that she had no problem with the dual arrangement. Under
that arrangement it was possible to stay as long as one wanted to rent, but when
moving, the land had to be sold. However, if the coach was sold, it would have
to be moved and would cost $4,000 to move it out of the park.
Mr. Jones clarified some of the questions raised and explained that the common
areas now existing between the coaches would remain as Lot No. 348 and that was
the purpose of the additional lot which would pick up all the common areas, all
private streets, the recreation lot, and all the property belonging to the
recreational area. The question concerning lots now existing picking up part
of the common areas would apply to only a few pieces of land where there was
landscaping beyond the coach. They would weigh whether or not it could be
kept in the lot area at the time of survey.
Relative to control of children, they demonstrated that could be done by enforcing
the existing rules. They planned to help the association set up by-laws so that
both could live in peace and both could use the recreational facilities.
Relative to the problem of ownership for those on welfare or assistance programs,
two points would be addressed at the Planning Commission hearing next week by the
Anaheim Housing Authority: (1) It could be done under a program that would set
aside specifically for mobile home parks; and (2) They hoped that a policy now
at the State level would be passed and set down for next year that would allow
even a person under a rent subsidy program to own their own lot. It was a
special program geared specifically for coach owners.
They had talked to Crocker, Security and Bank of America and all three acknowledged
interest in making the type of loan necessary. They would be happy to take any
coach owner to the Bank of America and have them talk directly to the bank repre-
sentative. It wasalready being done in Hemet and Palm Springs. The new part
was that they applied for a 30-year loan.
In summation, he stated at this point, they had the benefit, they owned the land
and they enjoyed an appreciation in value which would continue. The possibility
of converting that park was one means of selling it, but it also meant putting
individual lots in the hands of coach owners thus, (1) it would stabilize their
monthly rent payment which would remain the same for the next 25 years, and (2)
they had been told by the County Tax Assessor that the first year taxes would
be about the same that coach owners were now paying for their licenses. However,
the increase in value was turned over to the coach owner, and he had no doubt
that the land value in the Anaheim Hills area would more than increase to off-
set any anxieties.
There being no further persons who wished to speak, the Mayor closed the public
hearing. ~
Mr. Jones then explained for Councilman Roth if the coach owner could not find
a buyer who also wanted to buy the lot, it was his contention, because of the
calls they had received, there were people living in the park who were interested
and wanted to know where they could find out.
79-1080
California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 2~ 1979,_ 1:_30: p.M.
Mayor Seymour stated the concept proposed originated in November of 1'978 when
he suggested what they needed was a program that provided a number of positive
alternatives to rent control by increasing the supply of housing, rental, as
well as ownership opportunities. They were not only in a housing shortage,
but also facing a housing crisis. They had a long way to go on the present
project and they had to assure to the best of their ability that the implemen-
tation of those creative types of ideas would offer protection to the citizens.
He was enthusiastic enough on the concept to give it its first green light,
subject to the hearing that would take place before the Planning Commission
and subject to the final approval by the City Council. If positive action was
taken today, the owners would have the responsibility to demonstrate to the
Council that they were up to the challenge and that tenants could find some
protection, not only that they could continue to live at the park and rent
there, but also that they could be protected in the areas Councilman Roth
questioned. At the' same time they had the further challenge of meeting the
pocketbooks of those people who had equity in their coaches and who were
interested in ownership. He felt that the Council was up to the challenge of
trying something new and creative in their attempt to. offer alternatives to
rent control and increasing housing, especially Iow and moderate income.
ENVIRONM .ENT~ IMPACT REPORT - .NEGATI.VE DE_C!ARATI..ON! On motion by Councilman
Seymour, seconded ~by Councilnmn Overholt, the City Council finds that this project
would have no significant individual or cumulative adverse environmental impact
and is, therefore, exempt from the requirement to prepare an EIR. MOTION CARRIED.
Councilman Seymour offered Resolution No. 79R-539 for adoption, approVing General
Plan Amendment No. 152, Exhibit "A", as recommended by the Planning Commission.
Refer to Resolution Book.
RES. O. LUTION N0. 79R-539: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
APPROVING ~AN AME~NT TO'THE GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATED AS AMENDMENT NO. 152,
EXHIBIT' "A".
Before a vote was taken, Councilwoman Kaywood wanted .to know how enforcement
would be implemented if many more children came into the park than was antic-
ipated and disturbed surrounding neighbors.
Mr. Jones stated that under the current rules, it was an adult park and therefore
no CoaCh could be sold to any adult with a ~child under 21 Year~ of age. ~ey
were proposing and had a petition in process to the coach owners fOr their vote
if they wished to revert to a combir~atiOn adult-f~mily park. It was thoir intent
to work with the association as to. guidelines relative to numbers and age groups
and still maintain a section that would be available to adults only.
A brief discussion then followed between Councilman Bay and Mr. Jones relative to
the association which Mrs 1,[artin indicated consisted of 52 nmmbers- Mr. Jones
also confirmed that the association was voluntary and in order to be a voting
member, one must pay five dollars a year. Councilnmn Bay noted there were 347
spaces in the park with an occupancy of approximately 857'. It was evident to
him that if the proposal was ever going to work, there had to be'some way in the
interim for Mr. Jones to get more than 52 people together. ~
Councilwoman Kaywood acknoWledged a lady from the Chamber audience who wished to
speak. -
79-1081
City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 2~ 1979~ 1:30 P.M.
Mrs. Lucille Johnson, Space 296, stated she was a newcomer at Friendly Village,
having lived there since May. Relative to the association, no one had approached
her and asked her to join. However, one night she decided to attend a meeting
and raised her hand to make a comment, but was told she could not speak because
she was not a member and did not pay any dues. There were other people not
members who were also not allowed to speak. When she was informed upon question-
ing that there were only 57 members, she indicated that something must be wrong
since there were 347 coaches in the park. She felt that everybody in the park
should be in the association and subsequently inquired of several people as to
why they were not. They informed her that they were paid members of the associa-
tion, but everytime they attended a meeting, they got nowhere and when they
wanted to speak, they were not treated in a proper manner and it was a riotous
situation. They were the people who had children and as a result, they became
disgusted and decided not to pay dues anymore and not be in the association.
In concluding, Mrs. Johnson stated they wanted to have some indication as to what
a lot would cost without having to wait a whole year. If the figure was right,
she was of the opinion that it was not a bad idea.
Mayor Seymour stated that not only must Mr. Jones provide a figure or a close
proximity, but also many other things before he would vote in favor; Council-
woman Kaywood stated her understanding at this point was that if they voted for
approval, there were still many steps to be taken with many assurances that might
be given before proceeding.
Mr. Fick confirmed that was correct.
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-539 duly passed and adopted.
177: PUBLIC HEARING - DEFERRED PAYMENT R~ILITATION LOAN PROGRAM: To
consider the delegation of authority to the Anaheim HOusing AUthoritY to operate
the Deferred Payment Rehabilitation Loan Program authorized by Section 50660 et
seq. of the California Health and Safety COde.
Mr. Norm Priest, Executive Director of Community Development, briefed the Council
on his memorandum dated September 25, 1979, recommending approval of the subject
program which was exactly the same as the City program upon which they voted'two
weeks prior.
The Mayor asked if anyone wished to speak to the subject program; there being no
response he closed the public hearing.
Mayor Seymour commented that it was an excellent program which would insure that
rehabilitated houses would become a reality in the community, and he commended
Mr. Priest on the Job he had done relative to the program.
79-1082
_City Hall, Anaheim, ..Cal.ifo.rnia- CO_UNC_IL MI.NU.. TES- October 2,~ 1979,.~ !:L3.0 P.M.
Councilwoman Kaywood offered Resolution No. 79R-541 for adoption, approving the
delegation of authority to the Anaheim Housing Authority to operate the Deferred
Payment Rehabilitation Loan Program. Refer to Resolution Book.
_RES~OL_ ~UT!ON NO~.~ 7.9. R.-$41~' A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
DELEGATING AUTHORITY TO OPERATE THE DEFERRED-PAYMENT REHABILITATION LOAN PROGRAM
AUTHORIZED BY SECTION 50660 ET SEQ. OF THE HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE TO THE ANAHEIM
HOUSING AUTHORITY.
Roll Call Vote'
AYES' COUNCIL MEMBERS- Overholt, Kaywood, Bay, Roth and Seymour
NOES' COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS' None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 79R-541 duly passed and adopted.
M_INUTE. S' On motion by Councilman Roth, seconded by Councilwoman Kaywood, the
minutes of the regular meeting of May 1, 1979, were approved subject to typo-
graphical corrections. Councilman Bay abstained. MOTION CARRIED. -
_WAIVER OF READING j-. ORDINANCES AND .RE.S.O. LUTIONS. Councilman Bay 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. Councilwoman KaywOod seconded the motion,
MOTION CARRIED.
FINANCI .AL .D. EMAND.S.. AG.A.INST THE. CI~TY~ in the amount of $1,034,836.88 for the period
ending September 21, and $3,114,778.64 for the period ending September 28, 1979,
in accordance with the 1979-80 Budget, were approved.
15_6'_ REVUE.ST. FOR H. ELICOPTER .S .ERVICES' FROM _TNE_ CITY OF BRF. A: City Manager William
Talley briefed the Council on his memorandum da'ted' Septe~be'r 27, 1979, attached to
whiCh was a memorandum from Police Chief George Tielsch describing the request of
Chief Forkus of the Brea Police Department regarding the possibility of contracting
the services of the Anaheim helicopter for periodic flight throUgh carbon Canyon
on a fire suppression mission on a temporary basis. He also stated that Chief ·
Forkus was present, but had to leave to attend Brea's Council meeting.
Lieutenant Hutcheson then more fully explained the request which, if approved,
would provide helicopter service to Brea for a period of approximately four
weeks.
Mr. Talley then explained for Councilwoman Kaywood that when the'heliCopter was
flying in the area of the requested surveillance, they would incorporate that aS
part of the normal patrol. He confirmed that they would not be responding to
calls, but would be making periodic patrols through the area. .
Mayor Seymour asked what would be done if there were motorcycles or unauthorized
persons in those areas; Lieutenant Hutcheson answered that theY WOuld use the
loud Speaker system and ask them to come Out or alert ground units by radio.
79-1083
City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 2~ 1979~ 1:30 P.M.
Mayor Seymour then stated in essence they were talking about providing much more
than observation. He then asked if the intent was to provide the same service
to those open space areas, as provided in the open space areas in Anaheim, and
~if the answer was "yes", was surplus time involved with the helicopters now.
Lieutenant Hutcheson answered "yes" to the former, but "no" to the latter; he
would not call it surplus time. They would suffer for that period of four weeks
for the loss of the hours spent.
Mayor Seymour stated that he did not mind the four weeks, but recalled discussion
with the City Manager approximately two years prior relative to joint use of the
helicopter with adjoining cities. He viewed the present request as the first
open door of the sharing of the assets of the City's fine helicopter service
with other cities. .
Mr. Talley stated they were talking about no more than twenty hours total and
if they were to provide helicopter service to any other city even on a trial
basis for longer than a few weeks, they would have to achieve additional capacity
of helicopter by putting on more shifts or manpower. However, he was not
recommending that the Council change its present policy of not rendering that
service unless there was additional capacity which they did not have at the
present time.
Mayor Seymour also expressed his concern over the possibility of servicing a
call in Brea in that hazardous area and not being able to service a call i~
Anaheim; Mr. Talley noted that as Lieutenant Hutcheson indicated, if Anaheim
had a call, the helicopter would proceed to that call first.
Further Council discussion followed with Lieutenant Hutcheson for purposes of
clarification relative to the proposed request wherein Lieutenant Hutcheson
reiterated that they intended to include the surveillance in their normal flight
operation because of its close proximity to the City's borders. They would be
flying a wider arc at that point and would not be going out of the way to run
patrol checks through Carbon Canyon.
Councilwoman Kaywood was of the opinion that the service would provide fire pro-
tection for Anaheim as well; Lieutenant Hutcheson stated that a fire in Carbon
Canyon the previous year did burn into Anaheim's City limits.
MOTION: Councilman Roth moved to approve the request for helicopter services
from the City of Brea on a temporary basis with the stipulation that during
that period, if there was a conflict or problems relative to adequate coverage
in Anaheim, the program would be cancelled. Councilman Bay seconded the motion.
Before a vote was taken, Mayor Seymour stated he was going to vote against the
motion because there was no surplus time, they were subject to complaints about
response times, and they would be approving something that would be utilizing
time, thereby taking that time away from Anaheim.
Councilman Overholt stated that fire surveillance in the Carbon Canyon area was a
benefit for Anaheim during the extreme fire period and, therefore, he would suppor~
the motion although he had misgivings as expressed by the Mayor. Surrounding com-
munities should not assume for a moment that the Council was at all interested in
going to a joint program of helicopter surveillance.
79-1084
~ity,. ~Hal.1..,... Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTE.S~ - ..October 2, ..!.97.9., 1. :.,30 P.M.
A vote was taken on the foregoing motion. Councilman Seymour voted "no".
MOTION CARRIED.
156' MASSAGE P~ARLORS AND SIMILAR BUSINESS ESTABLISHMENTS: Request to address
the Council by Mr. Dick Liebert relating to massage.. Parlors and similar business
establishments (continued from September 18, 1979). '
Mr. Dick Liebert, 1230 South Dale and owner of Your Florist, 1215 South Beach.
Boulevard, stated his concern and reason for addressing the Council was relative
to the increase of so-called dance and modeling studios in the City. He wanted
to alert the Council and department heads because he had reason t:o believe they
were not dance or modeling studios for the following reasons- (1) they had
peculiar hours of operation, seven days a week, some 24 hours a day, and some
until 4'00 A.M.; (2) it was unusual for dance instructors to stand outside of
their place of business yelling and cursing at local "hookers" who walked the
streets by their place of business; (3) it was very hard to dance or teach any-
one to dance on shag carpeting or in small cubiCles; (4) if dance instruixtion
was being given, he never heard any music and if pictures were being taken, he
never saw any one of the patrons carrying a camera. He did see truck' drivers
parking their trucks at the studio to go in for a quick dance lesson at all
hours of the night. The City's Police Department exhibited a great deal of
concern when such studios opened. He then referred to a want ad being run
daily, advertising the Subject studios. He wanted to know what department head
issued business licenses to those businesses, who gave them the authority, and how
many more such businesses could the public expect to have in the City.
City Attorney William Hopkins stated that the business license WaS under the
revenue section of their licensing ordinance enacted soley, to raise revenue
and not intended for regulation. There was an ordinance regulating massage
establishments rand escort facilities and the model establishment ordinance
required a permit and an application. The business liCenSe was being confused
with permit type regulation. If they found an organi~:ation engaging in illegal
conduct, they had to take that operator to court and prosecute on information
obtained by the Police Department or citi~:ens who would be willing to testify
to what they observed. He repeated that the issue of business licenses' was a
revenue matter. As to what took place therein, thoy had to prove any illegal
conduct and until that time, had to go along with it. If Mr. Liebert had evidence
which he could turn over, they would be very glad to prosecute those cases.
Mr. Hopkins continued that he received a report from the ProsecutiOn section which
explained that they had prosecuted approximately 149 prostitution cases since the
first of the year with 369 arrests for violation of 647B of the Penal COde· which
was prostitution. It was not possible to move ~in and close down an oPeration'
merely because it was called a dance studio.
Mr. Liebert stated that nobody could tell him they were operating a dance or
modeling studio. He felt there could be an ordinance passed whereby the City
would not allow any more such openings. The people who issued the linenses should
be resPonsible t° the citizens and voters of Anaheim to get~ those ~businesses Out,
and the City Council should help the Police Department in doing. so. He had no
quar'rel with the POlice Department because it seemed they Were operating with
'~aandcuffS", and he wanted the Council to do something about that Situation.
79-1085
City Hall~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October .~.~ 1979~ 1:30 P.M.
Councilman Roth stated that the City Attorney was trying to explain that the
handcuffs were in the courts and the Council had gone on record in support of
the Police in closing the subject establishments. Also, there had been a radical
change regarding pornographic newsracks. The problem revolved around the fact
that proof was very difficult to come by and the Folice were charged with en-
trapment. Those establishments hid under the different amendments of the Cons-
titution, and there were many problems involved in eliminating such operations.
Councilwoman Kaywood explained that requiring a minimum age of 18 provided some
control and necessitated a conditional use permit, but if they did not have an
age limitation, the City was hampered by what the Constitution allowed and
did not allow. Whatever they could do Constitutionally, they were doing.
Police Chief George Tielsch stated they shared Mr. Liebert's frustrations and
they had very serious problems enforcing the pertinent laws. Mr, Liebert was
a very concerned citizen and he (Tielsch) had worked with him on many occasions.
He also emphasized that he had never received greater support than from the
Anaheim City Council and City Manager as far as utilizing resources to handle
vice problems. They had always been very responsive in trying to solve the
subject problems. The police were aware of what was taking place in many of
the locations, but owners and operators were very knowledgeable as to what was
necessary to make a successful arrest. He agreed with all that had been said,
and it was a very difficult situation.
Mayor Seymour stated that the Council, the citizens, the Chief and his staff and
the City Manager were tired of witnessing the type of activity under discussion
taking place in the City. He contended that there must be something more the
Council could provide the Chief, the City Attorney or anyone else to rid the City
of such establishments. He could not and refused to accept the assumption that
they must tolerate the existing conditions merely because Anaheim was a convention
city. They were willing to look at any proposal of the Chief's, or a joint proposal
with the City Manager and the City Attorney, to ride such businesses out of town.
Chief Tielsch stated that a Task Force between the Police Department Vice Unit
and a representative from the City Attorney's office to seek out different methods
of proposed legislation might be in order, because he did not think they could
continue to do'what they were doing at present.
The Mayor stated in order to emphasize how serious the problem was, he had even
thought of setting up a Mayor's brigade of ladies of concerned citizens willing
to march in front of those establishments and picket them, making anybody who
would enter the premises feel that they would not only be observed, but they
would also be in the news. They had to turn the situation around because, if
not, it would get worse. If he thought it was a permanent condition and likely
to worsen as the City became more of a convention area, he would have to vote
against becoming that kind of a city.
Chief Tielsch stated if the Mayor felt that strongly, there was some additional
strategies that could be developed, working with the City Attorney. Los Angeles
did not'set up picketing women, but they did contact the customers and indicated
they were in an area where there had been problems of prostitution and also
issued field interrogation cards. If that was the direction the Council wished
to take, he was certain it would generate some heat. They could be more aggressive
79-1086
C~ity_ Hall,. Anaheim,...C.alifor.nia - COUNCIL MINUTES -.Octob,er 2~ ,1979~._ 1:30 P..M.
in their field tactics, and he would also like to meet with the City Attorney on
some proposed legislation that would assist.
MOTION: Councilman Seymour moved to direct the City Manager to work with the
Chief of Police, City Attorney and other appropriate department heads to devise
a plan whereby they could succeed in preventing and driving the types of bus-
inesses described from the community and submit same to the Council. Council-
man Ro th seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
Mr. Bill Cooper, Anaheim resident, stated he was in the massage business in
Anaheim for approximately 8 or 9 years although he was no longer in that business
and was speaking as a citizen in the City. He addressed the Council about three
years prior at the time the massage ordinance was passed and stated then that
there were going to be problems that should have been taken care of at that time
instead of now. Those problems had come to pass as a result of the Police
Department not acting when they should have acted, though not the whole Department.
At the time the massage ordinance was written, he requ%sted the dance studio
ordinance be written quite similar. However, tomorrow he could pay $25 and
obtain a license for a model studio, and there was no age limit involved. Ail
it would take was to put an 18-year age limit on photo studios, and it would
prevent any new studios from opening. Then, if anyone wanted to open, they
would have to get a conditional use permit. He was very much opposed to people
picketing different locations. He knew of the good places and the bad, and he
was speaking for the good establishments. Consequently, the picketers would
be going to places that should not be picketed. The ordinance itself was the
answer to stopping any new places from opening. The name of the game was
prostitution and he wanted to get rid of prostitution. As he stated three
years ago, it was not possible to legislate morality, but it was possible to
close the loopholes of such places running under the pre=ense of other buinesses.
He suggested that an age limit be establiShed and a permit required of those
girls working in modeling studios. A massuese had to have 100 hours of schooling
to get a permit, and the requirements for massage parlors could also be applied
in those other fields. He also urged the Council again not to use picketing, or
to Start harassing. There were enough prostitution laws and state laws on the
books at present, and the Red Light Abatement Act was the only thing that had
been effective. The Council should require schooling for model Studios personnel
and for the other fields, require a permit and an 18-year age limit. In doing
so, they might not eliminate such businesses, but would stop their growth.
The Mayor asked Mr. Cooper to submit his ideas in writing and subsequently the·
Council could pass those on to the Task Force for their consideration and response.
Mr. Frank Rose, Anaheim resident, stated that on State College Boulevard and
Lincoln Avenue there were massage and model studios and everyone knew where
the houses of prostitution were in the neighborhood. He suggested that the
subject establishment be restricted to operating one day a Week during certain
hours, that they "bug" those establishments and prosecute accordingly, and'
consider a "red light'' district such as 'had been established in other cities
to confine those businesses to one area.
79-1087
~ity Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 2~ 1979~ 1:30 P.M.
Ms. Malvina. Trenholm stated she owned a massage parlor for five years and built
it the way the City wanted it, and it was a clean establishment. She had never
been affected by prostitution because she did not have it in her establishment.
Now, however, because there was a problem with model and rap studios, the massage
parlors were paying the price. She had gone to the Police Department and asked
them to work with her and she would reciprocate. They were open for 24 hours
and served a purpose. They served people who were at conventions and wanted
a massage and kept drunks off the street by sobering up a lot of people. Their
hours were taken away from them because supposedly there was prostitution, rape
and crime going on. She had never had that in her establishment and she ques-
tioned how they could run a clean establishment and make it a nice place if they
could not get somebody to work with them.
Mayor Seymour stated that the Council sympathized in the fact that, caught up
in any act of government, were those people who wrongly suffered, but on the
other hand although there were a number of massage parlors in Anaheim that were
truly.legitimate, there were some that were not.
Ms. Trenholm stated that the Police Department would not listen. According to
the ordinance, you could not have a felony conviction against you and in massage
establishments, potential employees were asked to fill out applications and they
were also asked to state if they had ever been arrested for prostitution or
anything else. They called the Police Department and were told that they could
not give that information. If a girl had been arrested in a massage estab-
lishment, she should not be reissued a license and that would stop 50% of
those girls from working. It was always the owner who paid the consequences
for the girls' behavior.
The Mayor stated that they would take Ms. Trenholm's suggestion under consider-
ation.. He also asked if she experienced a situation since the institution of
the massage parlor ordinance where she submitted a girl for a license, the
license was subsequently obtained and later that person was found guilty of
prostitution.
Ms. Trenholm answered affirmatively, and the person was still working. She
knew of at least 15 that she had fired, and they were working in other establish-
ments after being arrested.
Councilman Roth asked how under those circumstances once the licenses were
issued; Mr. Coope~ answered and stated that the charges were dropped against
the girls in order to prosecute the business. When that occurred, this allowed
the girls to work at another place.
The Mayor clarified that his previous question to Ms. Trenholm was whether she
knew of anyone who was found guilty. Mr. Cooper's statement refuted that and
although they may have been tried, they really had not been found guilty of
prostitution.
The Mayor then thanked those who spoke for their input.
173: LOZANO TAXICAB - REQUEST FOR EXPANSION OF SERVICE: Mr. Manuel Lozano, re-
questing expansion of the Lozano taxicab permit to allow the operation of two to
fou~r~vans in the Disneyland area during convention and peak periods, at $1 per
person, per destination, up to $4 maximum charge per trip per destination.
79-1088
Ci.ty~.Hall.~ Anaheim3 California- COUNCIL MINUTES-...Oc.otber 2~ ..1979~ 1.:30. P.M.
On motion by Councilman Roth, seconded by Councilman Seymour, consideration of
the subject request was continued one week to October 9, 1979 at the request
of Lozano Taxicab Service. MOTION CARRIED.
,1, Q2:.. REQUES. T,,,TO KE, EP ,,FOUR.. ,D0, GS' AT 390 PERALTA. ,... HILLS DRIVE: Request by Mr. Kory
Kazarian. for permission to keep four dogs on'his LP'remise's~at 390 Peralta Hills
Drive. was submitted.
On motion by Councilman Roth, seconded by Councilman Seymour, consideration of
the subject request was continued one week to October 9, 1979. MOTION CARRIED.
!6.7~: .. REQUEST .FOR.REFUND OF TRAFFIC SIGNAL ASSESSMENT- Request by Mr. R. M.
,
Rindt, Truck and Auto Suppiy, Inc., for a partial refund in the amount paid for
traffic signal assessment fees in connection with Project Douglass Annex, located
at 1654 Douglass Road, was submitted.
Councilman Roth moved to grant the requested refund as outlined in Mr. Rindt's
letter dated August 21, 1979, with no refund to be granted to anyone after
November 1, 1979. The motion died for lack of a second.
Councilman Seymour moved to continue consideration of the Subject request for
one week since Mr. Rindt was not present in the Chamber. Councilman Overholt
seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
179' CODE .VIOLATIONS - 1926 EAST CENTER STREET: Request by Mr. Jerry K. Prosek
to address the Council relatimg to Code violations on property located at 1926
East Center street, was submitted. ~
On motion.by Councilman Seymour, seconded by Councilman Roth, consideration of
the subject request was continued to October 23, 1979 upon verbal request for
continuance by Mr. Prosek. MOTION CARRIED.
V~AR.!AN. CE N0. 3!03. - REQUEST.. FOR REHEARING: Mr. John F. Swint, on behalf of Bhikhu
Patel, requesting a rehearing on Variance No. 3103, to construct a' 40-unit motel
on ProPerty located on the south side of Ball Road, east of West Street.
councilman Roth moved to grant the subject request for rehearing subject ~to the
$50 fee. Councilman Seymour seconded the motion for the' purpose of discussion
only.
Before any action was taken, Mr. John Swint stated he had 'something to add to
his letter of September 24, 1979 (on file in the City Clerk's office). He was
not aware the item had been pulled from the Planning Commission 'Consent calendar
and set for public hearing on September 18, 1979, since he was not notified.
Mayor Seymour stated that Mr. Swint's clients were present at the 'previoUs meeting'
and told the Council that he (Swint) told them they did not have to show.
Mr. Swint answered that was out of context. He intended to be at the meeting
and that was why he had said his client did not have to be 'preSent. After the'~.
Planning Commission hearing, his client asked him if he had to attend the CoUnCil
79-1089
City. ~all,.Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 2~ 197.9~ 1:30 P.M.
meeting and he (Swint) told him "no". He repeated, he was not notified that
the item was taken off the Consent Calendar and not notified of the date of
the hearing.
The Mayor emphasized that the property owners were notified, and he questioned
Mr. Swint as to why his clients did not notify him; Mr. Swint stated that was
something he could not answer. They were Indian and perhaps did not realize the
import. This was a case where he had been present seven times before and asked
for variances on parking. Each time it was passed by the Commission and by the
Council and, therefore, he had no reason to assume it would be taken off the
Consent Calendar. Therefore, he had no reason to question his client relative
to anything.
Mayor Seymour stated he would be willing to approve the rehearing if it were just
his own personal feeling. However, Mr. Swint was aware that the Sheraton Hotel,
the Admiral Cove Motel and a third establishment were strongly opposed. He would
vote for the rehearing if the Sheraton approved of it. He would not vote for a
rehearing and then not have much more evidence than was presented the last time,
and then vote .against a property owner who had as much invested in the City as
the Sheraton Hotel.
Councilman. Seymour thereupon withdrew his second to the motion.
Mr. Swint stated that Mr. Patel was going to build a motel regardless of what
happened. He could take five units off the ground floor. They would then have
35 units and 35 parking stalls rather than 30 parking stalls. He did not see
where that was going to help anything as far as traffic was concerned.
Mayor Seymour stated that would then meet their parking standards; Mr. Swint in-
dicated that was correct.
No other Council Member offered a second to the motion by Councilman Roth; there-
fore, the motion for a rehearing died for lack of a second.
CITY PLANNING COMMISSION I~S: The following actions taken by the City Planning
Commission at their meeting~held September 10, 1979, pertaining to the following
applications, as listed on the Consent Calendar, were submitted for City Council
information.
1. RECLASSIFICATION NO. 79-80-8~ EIR NO. 227, (TENTATIVE TRACT NO~ 10784): Sub-
'~itted by TeXaCo Anaheim H'~'!i'~, Inc., for a change in zone from Rs-A-43,0~0 to
RM-3000,~to establish a 19-lot, 16-unit condominium subdivision on proposed
RM-3000 zoned property located on the north side of Canyon Rim Road, west of
Serrano Avenue.
The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC79-178, granted
Reclassification. No. 79-80-8 (Tentative Tract No. 10784), and certified EIR
No. 227.
2. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2004: Submitted by Cosmo Vincent Taormina, Arlene
Taormina and Taormina Industries, to permit an Elks Lodge on RS-A-43,000 zoned
property located at 526 - 528 West Vermont Avenue, with certain Code waivers.
'T
79-1090
City_ Ha!l..~ .....Anaheim_,.Ca. lif.ornia - c.OUN~C. IL MINUTES - .October 2, 1979, ..... !:30 P.M.
The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC79-180, granted in
part Conditional Use Permit No. 2004, and granted a negative declaration.
3. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2012' Submitted by George NelSon, to retain a
church on CG zoned property located at 303 East Lincoln Avenue with a Code
waiver of minimum number of parking spaces.
The City Planning COmmission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC79-183, granted
Conditional Use Permit No. 2012, and granted a negative declaration.
4. CONDITI.ONAL USE PERMIT. NO. 2.01~7: Submitted by Sidney and Charlene Crossley,
to permit on-sale 0f alcoholic beverages in a bar on CL zoned property located
at 319 South Magnolia Avenue with a Code waiver of minimum number of parking.
spaces.
The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC79-184, denied Condi-
tional Use Permit No. 2017, and granted a negative declaration status.
5. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2020: Submitted by Stadium Industrial' Park, Ltd.,
to permit an exterminating service on ML zoned property located at 2120 East
Howell Avenue.
The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC79-185, granted Con-
ditional Use Permit No. 2020, and granted a negative declaration status.
6~, CONDITIONAL U. SE ~P. ERMIT NO. 2022- Submitted by Executive Industries, to permit
a metals processing and ref'ining ~acility on ML zoned property located at 5500-A
East La Palma Avenue.
The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC79-187, granted Con-
ditional Use Per, it No. 2022, and granted a negative declaration status.
.7. VARIANCE NO. 3016' Submitted by Cyprien and Catherine C. Duhart, to construct
a 6'.unit apartment building on RM-1200 zoned property, located at 896 ~S°uth Lemon
Street with a Code waiver of maximum structural height.
The.City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No PC79-181, granted Variance
No. 3106, and granted a negaitve declaration status.
8.~ ~iV. ARI.ANCE.'.NO 3109: Submitted by Mabel J. Bauer and United California Bank,
to construct a shopping center on RS-A-43,000 zoned property located at northwest
corner of Santa Ana Canyon Road and Weir Canyon Ro.ad, with a COde .waiver of
minimum setback from a scenic highway.
The City .Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC79-182, granted Variance
No. 3109, and granted a negative declaration.
Mr. Alan Orsborn, representing Kaufman & Broad, stated he wanted, the COuncil to
be aware that two commercial centers were proPosed on the Bauer Ranch in' the
Canyon. They had submitted plot plans to the City in connection With the 21
acres referred to under the subject item. However, engineering being developed
on the regional center indicated that they could not conform to that plOt plan
and out of regard for that possibility, they wanted to ask for a continuance on'
the matter of two weeks.
79-1091
Cit~ Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 2;. 1979; 1:30 P.M.
Mayor Seymour first asked the Council if any Member was going to set the appli-
cation for a public hearing. No member intended to do so. He then explained,
that being the case, Variance No. 3109 would stand approved as recommended by
the City Planning Commission.
Mr. Or,born stated that he understood, but did not want to inconvenience staff
who worked so diligently toward completion and presentation of the Variance to
the Council only to come in a week or so later to submit a different plot plan
than that submitted initially.
City Manager Talley stated that to his knowledge, the changes were probably
administrative in nature.
No further action was taken on the item.
9. RECLASSIFICATION NO. 78-79-40~ VARIANCE NO. 3098 AND TENTATIVE TRACT NO.
10710 - APPROVAL OF REVISED PLANS: Submitted by Richard A. Broadway, IPS Companies,.
requesting approval of revised plans to Reclassification No. 78-79-40, Variance
No. 3098 and Tentative Tract No. 10710, for construction of a 1-lot, 44-unit
condominium on proposed RM-3000 zoned property located on the southwest corner
of Crescent Avenue and Magnolia Avenue.
The City Planning Commission approved the revised plans to Reclassification
No. 78-79-40, Variance No. 3098 and Tentative Tract No. 10710.
10. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1558 - EXTENSION OF TIME: Submitted by Ray
Siegele, requesting an extension of time to Conditional Use Permit No. 1558, to
permit metal reclamation and outdoor storage of rags and metal on ML zoned
property located on the southeast corner of Santa Aha Street and Atchison Street.
The City Planning Commission approved an extension of time to Conditional Use
Permit No. 1558, to expire August 14, 1980.
11. VARIANCE'NO. 2546 - TERMINATION: Submitted by Lazare F. Bernhard, requesting
to terminate Variance No. 2546, to permit an automobile and recreational vehicle
storage facility on ML zoned property located at the northeast corner of Broadway
Street and Loara Street.
The City Planning Commission, pursuant to Resolution No. PC79-189, terminated
Variance No. 2546.
No action was taken by the by the City Council, therefore the actions of the
City Planning Commission became final.
VARIANCE NO. 3110: Application by Teachers Insurance and Annuity AssOciation
of America, to construct a free-standing sign on ML zoned property located at
2411 West La Palma Avenue with certain Code waivers.
Councilman Bay removed the subject Variance from the Planning Commission Consent
Calendar and requested a review of the subject application.
79-1092
City. Hall,.. Anahei_m,' .C.aliforni.a - .COUNCIL MINUTES - October .2,. 19.79_, 1.:_30 P.M.
CONDITIONAL'.' USE PERMIT NO~. 1.872 -..EXTENSION OF .TIME-~ Submitted by Elizabeth
Schafer, to retain 9 beehives on RS-A-43,000 and RS-5000 zoned property located
at 1500 West Broadway Str%et.
The subject extension of time was approved by the Planning Commission to exPire
August 14, 1980.
Councilwoman Kaywood removed the requested extension of time relative to
Conditional Use Permit No. 1872 from the Planning Commission Consent Calendar
and requested review of the matter.
Council Members Roth and Bay left the Council Chamber. (7'31 P.M.)
134: GENERAL PLAN. AMENDMENT NO. 153 AND' 154 - SETTING PUBLIC HEARING: To
consider (I) an amendment to change the eXi'sting hillside. es't'a'te 'density res-
idential designation to general commercial, to construct a Regional Shopping
Center on property located on the south side of Santa Ana Canyon Road, south-
west of Weir Canyon Road, Bauer Ranch, GPA 153 and (2) to consider alternate
land uses of single-family residential, commercial (including Regional Shopping
Center), office, industrial, open space and any combination of these on property
located north of the Riverside Freeway on the east and west sides of Weir Canyon
Road, SAVI Ranch, GPA 154.
Setting October 16, 1979, 7'30 P.M., Canyon High School Cafetorium, 220 South
Imperial Highway as the suggested date, time and place for a public hearing.
Mr. Alan Orsborn, Kaufman & Broad, emphasized the importance of the date involved.
The Council earlier approved planned community zone on the property, but also
required that before development proceeded, that adjacent property in the area
would have to be self supporting and not impose a hardship on the balance of
the community. They had worked diligently in that direction and had secured
what they considered to be a very fine and very well qualified buyer in the
Taubman Company.
Councilman Seymour moved to set October 16, 1979 at 7:30 P.M., Canyon High School
Cafetorium as the date, time and place for a public hearing on the subject General
Plan Amendments.
Before any action was taken, discussion followed relative to the proposed date
and ttme of the meeting, considering that the World Series would be in progress
with the possibility that the California Angels would be a part of it and,
therefore, attendance at the hearing would be low.
Councilman Roth and Bay entered the Council Chamber. (7'57 P.M.)
At the conclusion of Council discussion, Mayor Seymour stated that he would
agree to inoving the time to 8'30 P.M. Councilman Overholt seconded the motion.
A vote was then taken on the foregoing motion, setting the date and time for a
public hearing on GPA 153 and 154 as articulated by changing-the 'time to 8:30 P.M.
MOTION CARRIED.
79-1093
Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 2; .1979.~ 1:30 P.M.
RECESS - EXECUTIVE SESSION: By general consent the Council recessed into
Executive Session. (7:38 P.M.)
AFTER RECESS: Mayor Seymour called the meeting to order, all Council Members being
present, with the exception of Councilman Overholt. (8:30 P.M.)
177.123: ACCEPTANCE OF TRUST DEEDS AS SECURITY FOR THE CITY'S DEFERRED PAYMENT
REHABILITATION LOAN PROGRAM: Councilman Seymour offered Resolution No. 79R-542
for adoption as recommended in memorandum dated September 25, 1979 from Executive
Director of Community Development Norm Priest, approving certain Deeds of Trust
as security for the City's Deferred Payment Rehabilitation Loan Program. Refer
to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 79R-542: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY couNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
APPROVING CERTAIN DEEDS OF TRUST. (Alan and LaDel Clendenon; Berl D. and Excell
Clancy; Carol Janette Dudnick; Jack and Lucille Tatner)
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
TEMPORARILY ABSENT:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Kaywood, Bay, Roth and Seymour
None
Overholt
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 79R-542 duly passed and adopted.
Councilman Overholt entered the Council Chamber. (8:31 P.M.)
123/174: REHABILITATION LOANS: Councilwoman Kaywood offered Resolution No.
79R-543 for adoption as recommended in memorandum dated Ocotber 18, 1979
from the Executive Director of Community Development Department, approving a
new agreement with Security Pacific Bank to subsidize rehabilitation loans
under the Localities Community Development Block Grant Program. Refer to
Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 79R-543: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
APPROVING THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF A NEW AGREEMENT WITH SECURITY PACIFIC BANK
TO SUBSIDIZE REHABILITATION LOANS UNDER THE LOCALITIES ~(RgfONITY DEVELOPMNNT
BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM, AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE SAID
AGREEMENT.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Overholt, Kaywood, Bay, Rotb and Seymour
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 79R-543 duly passed and adopted.
123: REIMBURSEMENT OF RELOCATION EXPENSES: Councilwoman Kaywood offered
Resolution No. 79R-544 for adoption, as recommended in memorandum dated
September 19, 1979 from the Executive Director of Community Development
79-1094
Anaheim,...California .- .COUNCIL .MINUTES,. _. 0..ctober 2, _1979, ..1 :....30. P.M;
Department, approving an agreement with the Agency in the amount of $2,825.10
for reimbursement of relocation expenses incurred by the City when moving the
Community Services Division from an Agency-acquired parcel. Refer to
Resolution Book.
R~ESOLUTI..ON NO.. .79R-544: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM APPROVING AN AGREEMENT FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF RELOCATION EXPENSES
INCURRED BY THE CITY OF ANA/{EIM.
Roll Call Vote'
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Overholt, Kaywood, Bay, Roth. and Seymour
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS- None
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 79R-544 duly passed and adopted.
1~23_: ..... FA!R._HoUSING ACTIVITIES UNDER ~ 5TH Y~.~R CDBG PROGRAM: Councilman Overholt
offered Resolution No. 79R-545 for adoption, as recommended i~ memorandum dated
September 17, 1979 from the Executive Director of Community Development, approving
a second agreement with the Orange County Fair Housing Council'in the amount of
$10,000 relating to the fair housing activities under the 5th year CDBG program
Refer to Resolution Book. '
RESOLUTIONs. NO. 79R-545- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
APPROVING THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF A sECOND AGREEMENT WITH THE ORANGE COUNTY
FAIR HOUSING COUNCIL AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO
EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES- COUNCIL MEMBERS- Overholt, Kaywood, Bay, Roth and Seymour
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 79R-545 duly passed and adopted.
167.: .TR~. ~..F'~IC SIGNAL .MA.. INTENANCE CONTRACT: (Account Nos. O1-263-6235-3000..and
01-263 6240-3000) Council~nan Bay offered .Resolution No. 79R-546 and 79R-547
for' adoptlon~ as recommended in memorandum dated September 24, 1979 from the
City Engineer William Devitt, the first rejecting the single bid received from
Signal Maintenance Incorporated for traffic signal maintenance and the Second
approving and authorizing the readvertising of the Traffic '.Signa1~ Maintenance
Contract ~(bids to be opened October 25, 1979, at 2:00 P.M.). Refer to
Resolution Book.
·
R~SpL..UT!ON NO. 79R-546: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
REJ.ECTING -ALL BIDS RECEIVED UP TO THE HOUR OF 2:00' P.M. 'ON 'THE '13~ DAY oF
SEPTEMBER, !979, FOR A PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, TO WIT-.,~ ~MAINTENANCE CONTRACT FOR
TRAFFIC SIGNALS FOR A PERIOD OF 3 YEARS.
79-1095
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 2~ 1979.~ !:30 P.M.
RESOLUTION NO. 79R-547: . A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY REQUIRE THE CON-
STRUCTION AND COMPLETION OF A PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, TO WIT: MAINTENANCE CONTRACT
FOR TRAFFIC SIGNALS, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, ACCOUNT NOS. 01-263-6235-3000 AND
01-263-6240-3000; APPROVING THE. DESIGNS, PLANS, PROFILES, DRAWINGS, AND SPECIF~-
CATIONS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION THEREOF; AUTHORIZING THE CONSTRUCTION OF SAID PUBLIC
IMPROVEMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH SAID PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, ETC.; AND AUTHORIZING
AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO PUBLISH A NOTICE INVITING SEALED PROPOSALS FOR
THE CONSTRUCTION THEREOF. (Bids to be opened October 25, 1979, 2:00 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-546 and 79R-547 duly passed and adopted.
123: ENVIRONMENT IMPACT PROFILES~ INC.~--PREPARATION OF EIR FOR THE PROPOSED
WIDENING OF ANAHEIM BOULEVARD~ BETWEENBROADWAY AND BALI. ROAD: Councilman Roth
offered Resolution No. 79R-548 for adoption, as recommended in.memorandum dated
September 26, 1979 from the City Engineer. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 79R-548: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
APPROVING THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF AN AGREEMENTWITH ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
PROFILES, AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE SAID
AGREemENT. ($7,000)
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-548 duly passed and adopted.
106: IMPROVEMENTS TO THE LOW SCHOOL PROPERTY: City Manager William Talley briefed
the Council on staff report dated September 19, 1979 from the Department of Finance,
recommending the appropriation of $500,000 of both revenues and expenditures for
the improvement of the Low School property and also clarified questions posed by
Councilman Bay on the recommendation.
On motion by Councilman Overholt, seconded by Councilman Seymour, $500,000 of
both revenues and expenditures was appropriated for the improvements to the Low
School property. MOTION CARRIED.
160: PURCHASE OF EQUIPMENT - TEN THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED EIGHTY-FIVE POUNDS OF
ACSR '%{ERLIN" WIRE - BID NO. 3569: On motion by Councilman Roth, seconded by
Councilman Bay, the low bid of General Electric Supply Company was-accepted and
purchase authorized in the amount of $10,828.19 for the-wire and $1,000 for a
refundable deposit on five (5) metal reels, for a total of $11,828.19, including
tax, as recommended by the Purchasing Agent in his memorandum dated September 24,
1979. MOTION CARRIED.
79-1096
C~i.ty_~ Ha!.l., Anaheim, Cal..i. forni.a. - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 2.,- 1979, .1_:.30 P :M..
160.: PURC..HASE OF. EqU. IPMENT -...POLYPHASE METERS - BID NO. 357!: On motion by
Councilman Ro th, seconded by Councilman Bay, the low bid of Maydell and Hartzell
(Sangamo) was accepted and purchase authorized in the amount of $28,696.32 for
240 Ployphase Meters, type V-645, Item 1; and $1,891.08 to 12 Polyphase Meters,
type VM-66, Item 2, including tax, as recommended by the Purchasing Agent in his
memorandum dated September 21, 1979. MOTION CARRIED.
153: AMENDMENT TO PLAN DOCUMENT OF SELF-FUNDED MEDICAl. PI;AN: On motion by
Councilwoman Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Overholt, an amendment to the Plan
Document of the self-funded employee medical plan was authorized to provide benefit~
for SecOnd Opinion Surgery Consultations and to include Free Standing Surgical
Clinic facilities charges within the hospitalization provisions, and authorizing
the Benefits and Training Manager to execute the documents, 'as recommended in
memorandum dated September 19, 1979 from Human Resources Director Garry McRae.
MOTION CARRIED.
~123: ..... .ADMINIS _.TRATIVE SE.R. VICE. S FOR THE CITY'S SELF-FUNDED F~fPLOYEE ~ICAL PLAN'
Councilman Overholt offered Resolution No. 79R-549 'for 'ad'opti~o~ 'a~" re¥0mmg'nde~d-
in memorandum dated September 19, 1979 from the Human Resources DireCtor approving
an agreement with Galbraith and Green, Inc., to provide administrative services
for the City's self-funded employee medical plan, effective October 1, 1979.
Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 79R-549' .A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF' ANAHEIM
APPP.6V~¢ ~E 'z~m~ AND COm)~ONS O~ AN AO~ W~TH oAL~~TH ~ om~m~, ~c.,
AND AUTHORIZING AND DI_RECTING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEME~.
Roll 'Call vote-
AYES' COUNCIL MEMBERS: Overholt, Kaywood, Bay, Roth and Seymour
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS' None
ABSENT: COUNCIL" MEMBERS: None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 79R-549 duly passed and adopted.
153: TEMPORARY HELP SERVICES CONTRAC.TS: City Manager Talley briefed the council
on memorandum dated September 26, 1979 f-rom the Human Resources Department, recom-
mending the solicitation'of proposals from firms interested in providing temporary
help ~ervices and to implement an outside .agency t:~porary clerical relief program.
Mayor Seymour stated that he was going to oppose the recommendation.on 'the basis
that he did not believe in temporary relief unless necessary 'in some very' dire
cases. What had been happening with the program was that dePartments were
staffing temporary help., to cover for vacations and situations .of that:-'tyPe.
He could run his business without doing that and he knew many businessmen in
town that could do ~o as well. It was possible to take existing help and.have
them cover a bit more territory. He felt that a "yes" vote would open the
door~. to nmking it much easier for' someone to fill in when a secretary, was on
vacation, and he did not think that was necessary.
On motion by Councilman Bay, seconded by Councilwoman Kaywood,' the Human Resources~
Department wa~ authorized to solicit proposals from firms to provide t:emPorary help
services and to implement an outside agency temporary clerical relief program.
Councilman Seymour voted "no" ~ MOTION CARRIED.
79-1097
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES -October 2~ 1979~ 1:30 P.M..
174: MODIFICATIONS TO THE YOUTH EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING PROGRAM: Councilman
Overholt offered Resolution No. 79R-550 and 79R-551 for adoption, as recommended
in memorandum dated September 18, 1979 from the Hum-n Resources Director, the
first approving a modification to the subgrant agreement with the Orange County
Manpower Commission to increase the budget by $26,879, bringing the new level
to $185,591, and the second approving an agreement with the Orange County Neigh-
borhood Youth Corps, Inc., in the amount of $44,882, to provide services related
to Vocational Work Experience. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 79R-550: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
APPROVING THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF A MODIFICATION TO THE SUBGRANT AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AND THE ORANGE COUNTY MANPOWER COMMISSION, AND
AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE SAID MODIFICATION.
RESOLUTION NO. 79R-551: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM AND THE ORANGE COUNTY NEIGHBORHOOD YOUTH CORPS, INC,, RELATING TO
COMMUNITY BASED INDIVIDUALIZED INSTRUCTION, VOCATIONAL SKILLS TRAINING, AND WORK
EXPERIENCE. '
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-550 and 79R-551 duly passed and adopted.
174:. pLACEMENT OF CERTAIN PUBLIC SERVICE EMPLOYMENT TRAINING POSITIONS IN CITY
DEPARTMENTS: Ctty Manager Talley briefed the Council on memorandum dated SePtember 26,
1979' from the H%~n Resources Director, recommending authorization for the City
Manager to assign certain training positions under the Public Service Employment
Program (PSEP) to City Departments as participants' training needs were identified.
Councilman Overholt moved to authorize the placement of certain PSE training
positions in City Departments by the City Manager. Councilwoman Kaywood seconded
the motionl
Before a vote was taken, Mayor Seymour asked why the subject conditions could
not be identified in the budget process.
Mr. Talley answered that now the thrust of the Federal CETA Program had changed
from one wherein the needs of the City were identified t° wherein needs of the
individual were identified. When someone entered the program, they had to be
given a range of tests to determine where they might be placed in the City
services and then find a department that would take that person On. It was a
matter of servicing individual needs, rather than the needs of a department,
and the program was now basically a training program, rather than providing
additional hours to the City.
Mr. William Hepburn, CETA Services Manager, than explained the pr6gram in greater
detail using a specific example. There were several hundred persons going
through the system, and they were assessing their needs and assigning them to
the various Programs.
79-1098
City...H_al.l,, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MI.NUT~S - .October .2~ . 1979,..1:30 P..M:.
The Mayor stated he had no objection to the City being used to channel such
personnel, but to say that the City was running a training school rather than
fulfilling the needs of the City, he felt they were missing the original intent.
Mr..Hepburn confirmed that the emphasis would be now on training and nOt on
productivity; the Mayor stated he did not want any part of such a program..
Mr. Talley explained that they elected to try it for a year and if it did not
work out at the end of that time, they would be armed with more information.
They chose to provide training opportunities for residents of Anaheim.
A brief discussion followed between the Mayor, Councilwoman Kaywood and City
Manager Talley'further clarifying the operation of the CETA program in its
present form. -The Mayor emphasized that the City was running a training
school as a priority in the program and if some work happened to get done in
the process, he had a problem with. that. Mr. Talley stated that the Mayor had
just concisely enunciated the Federal policy, since that was the new CETA legis-
lation.
Mr. Hepburn explained the program represented 100 positions and they estimated
the total program next year would be approximately 200 or 250 positions or slightly
less than 50% of the total program. They were not required to use 100% of the
money for the PSE program- the balance would continue to be in the same form
as that in the past in terms of positions in the City budget and the assignments
of people. The program was not limited to City departments, but assignments
would be made to outside agencies as well, such as TLC and the school districts.
To that extent, they could take advantage of that kind of program.
Mr. Talley stated that the old program was still reflected in the budget and the
Council had already approved those Slots. The present issUe referred to just
the training element. He would not have any problem in. giving the Council a
monthly report on where those assignments were made, and-thus, they would be inform~
of those assignments on a monthly basis.
Councilman' Overholt stated he would like to amend his motion adding .that the City
Manager inform 'the Council on a monthly basis as to the placement of those position:
councilwoman Kaywood accepted the amendment in her secOnd.
A vote was taken on the foregoing motion with the amendment as articulated.
Councilman Seymour voted "no". MOTION CARRIED.
Before concluding, Mr. Talley asked for clarification if the report, should
include every person assigned to the program or every person assigned to the
program within the City, since there were many outstation positions involved.
It was clarified that the monthly report should include the whole program.
Later in the meeting, Mayor Seymour asked that the motion be rescinded and instead
asked-the City Manager to submit a report as to the feasibility of using' CETA funds
for outstation training programs. Councilman Bay seconded the motion for the
purpose of discussion.
Before a vote was taken, Mr. Talley stated that although he could not speak with
technical cOmPetence as to how the fund had to be allocated,' he would provide a
· .
repor~ and would not make any assignments until the Council received' it.
79-1099
City Hall, Ana. heim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October .2, 1979~ 1:30 P.M.
Mayor Seymour explained that what he wanted was to see the unemployed and under-
privileged helped, while at the same time, contributing to high-in-need programs,
such as preschool, TLC and youth-oriented programs. Those groups need that type
of program to a much greater degree than the City, and that was his thrust.
Councilman Overholt asked if the motion included rescision and also reallocation;
Mayor Seymour answered "no"--Just a rescision and asking the City Manager to submit
the requested report.
Councilman Bay stated that earlier he did not wish to debate the philosophy of
the CETA program because it was basically to train. He did not say he agreed
with it, but it was a fact, it was a training program.
If they could use the monies somewhere else where they could agree with it to a
greater degree, then they should do so.
Councilman Overholtstated if the thrust was to go back where they started and
postpone consideration on the original motion until the report was submitted, he
would support the Mayor's motion; the Mayor indicated that was the thrust.
A Vote was taken on the foregoing motion by Councilman Seymour. MOTION CARRIED.
174! CONTRACTS TO EXTEND CETA ACTIVITIES: Councilman Overholt offered Resolution~.3~
No. 79R-552 through 79R-563, both inclusive, for adoption. Refer to Resolution
Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 79R-552: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
APPROVING COMPREHENSIVE MANPOWER PROGRAM AND AUTHORIZING DISBURSEMENT OF FUNDS
FOR APPROVED ACTIVITIES,
RESOLUTION NO. 79R-553: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
APPROVING AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AND THE ORANGE COUNTY MANPOWER
COMMISSION RELATING TO MANPOWER PROGRAMS AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO
EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT AND MODIFICATIONS THERETO ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM.
RESOLUTION NO. 79R-554: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM AND THE ORANGE COUNTY NEIGHBORHOOD YOUTH CORPS, INC., RELATING TO A
YOUTH DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM.
RESOLUTION NO. 79R-555: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
APPROVING AND AUTHROIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
AND THE ORANGE COUNTY NEIGHBORHOOD YOUTH CORPS, INC., RELATING TO COMMUNITY BASED
INDIVIDUALIZED INSTRUCTION AND VOCATIONAL SKILLS TRAINING.
RESOLUTION NO. 79R-556: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM AND THE NORTH ORANGE COUNTY COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT RE~ATING TO
COMMUNITY BASED INDIVIDUALIZED INSTRUCTION IN BASIC EDUCATION STUDIES.
.RESOLUTION NO. 7~R-557: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
APPROVING AND AUTHROZING THE EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THECITY FO
ANAHEIM AND THE NORTH ORANGE COUNTY COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT RELATING TO
VOCATIONAL GUIDANCE AND COUNSELING SERVICES.
79-1~100
Ci..ty_Hal!,..Anaheim, Cal..i.f0. rni. a .- .. CouNciL MINUTES - October 2,.. 1979, 1' 30 P.M.
RESOLUTION NO. 79R-.558: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM AND THE NORTH ORANGE COUNTY COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT RELATING TO
CETA ASSESSMENT SERVICES.
~RESOLU. TION .NO.,..79R.5.59.,:_ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM AND THE ORANGE COUNTY NEIGHBORHOOD YOUTH CORPS, INC., RELATING TO COMMUNITY
BASED INDIVIDUALIZED INSTRUCTION, VOCATIONAL SKILLS TRAINING, AND WORK EXPERIENCE.
K~ESOLU~ION.N.O.._ .7.9R, 56~0..'_ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM AND THE NORTH ORANGE COUNTY COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT RELATING TO
COMMUNITY BASED INDIVIDUALIZED INSTRUCTION IN BASIC EDUCATION STUDIES.
~sOLU. T.!ON., NO..,..79.R-5,61., A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
APPROVING 'AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM AND THE NORTH ORANGE COUNTY COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT RELATING TO THE
ESTABLISHMENT OF A HOUSING REPAIR TRAINING AND WORK EXPERIENCE PROGRAM',
RE.S0~UT!ON.NO,. 79,R.-..5.62.: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN'THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM AND THE MAGNOLIA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT RELATING TO THE OPERATION
OF A PUBLIC SERVICE EMPLOYMENT PROGRAM.
RESOLUT!QN.....N0.._7.9R-563' A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CiTY OF
ANAHEIM AND THE LEGAL AIDE SOCIETY OF ORANGE COUNTY RELATING TO THE OPERATION OF
A PUBLIC SERVICE EMPLOYMENT PROGRAM.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Overholt, Kaywood, Bay, Roth and Seymour
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS- None
The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 79"R-552 through 79R-563, both inclusive,
duly passed and adopted.
!74~: .... C.E.,T~ .-.PRESCHOOL PROGRAM: Councilwoman Kaywood asked how many were-in the'
-preschool program., if there was a waiting list, and if there was a greater need.
Mr. Bill Hepburn reported that in the preschool program, there were 30 children
at ~a time and approximately 60 a year and" there was a waiting list,' although he
did not know to What extent..~
Councilwoman Kaywood explained that she was interested, in knowing because if
there were enough on the waiting list, perhaps another group could be .formed
since it did not seem to her the program was fulfilling near the need that
existed.
79-1101
City Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 2, 1979~ 1:30 P.M.
Mayor Seymour felt that he and Councilwoman Kaywood were now in agreement to
the extent that he would have taken the money set aside for the PSE training
positions he voted against and put it all in the subject type of program;
Councilwoman Kaywood commented that she did not know if it were possible to d~
SO.
Mr. Hepburn stated that he wanted to investigate the matter and subsequently
report to the Council.
City Manager Talley suggested if the Council wished to approve the program today,
a report would be submitted in one week to see if there was additional funding
and if the preschool program would accept it.
Councilwoman Kaywood offered Resolution No. 79R-564 for adoption. Refer to
Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 79R-564: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
APPROVING ANDAUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM AND THE NORTH ORANGE COUNTY REGIONAL OCCUPATIONAL PROGRAM RELATING TO A
PRESCHOOL PROGRAM.
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-564 duly passed and adopted.
173: ANAHEIM TRANSPORTATION CENTER ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY - DRAFT: On motion by
Councilwoman Kaywood, seconded by Councilman Overholt, the "Anaheim Transportation
Center Environmental Study" draft was ordered received and filed, and staff
directed to relay the City's comments to the Orange County Transit District.
MOTION CARRIED.
123: COMMERCIAL/RECREATION AREA TRANSPORTATION AND ~IR~GULATION MANAGRMR. NT~STUDY:
Councilwoman Kaywood offered Resolution No. 79R-565 for adoption, as recommended
in memorandum dated September 24, 1979 from Pam Lucado, A~sistant Planner author-
izing an agreement with JHK and Associates in an amount not to exceed $79,000 for
the Commercial/Recreation Area Transportation and Circulation Management Study.
Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTIONNO. 79R-565: A RESOLUTION OF T~E CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
APPROVING THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
AND JHK & ASSOCIATES, AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE SAID
AGREEMENT.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: 'COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Overholt, Kaywood, Bay, Roth and Seymour
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 79R-565 duly passed and adopted%
79-1102
Ci. ty.,.Hal!,_.Anahe.im,'.Cal, ifornia- CO.UN..C!L MINUTES .-October 2, 19.79, 1:30 P.M.
ORDINANCE NO. 4055- Councilman Roth offered Ordinance No. 4055 for first reading.
ORDINANCE NO. 4055' AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM REPEALING SECTIONS
16.16.030, 16.16.040 AND 16.16.050 OF CHAPTER 16.16, TITLE 16, OF THE ANAHEIM
MUNICIPAL CODE AND ADDING NEW SECTIONS 16.16.030, 16.16.040 AND 16.16.050 TO
CHAPTER 16.16 IN ITS PLACE AND STEAD RELATING TO FIRE ZONES' (Project Alpha)
!4.2/124' ORDINANCE NO. 4056 - CONVENTION CENTER BETTERMENT II EXPANSION - PROPERTY
EXCHANGE WITH MARRIOTT CORPORATION: Councilman Seymour offered Ordinance No. 4056
for first reading.
ORDINANCE NO. 4056: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
(A) APPROVING A THIRD AMENDMENT TO COMMUNITY CENTER-FACILITY LEASE DATED FOR
CONVENIENCE AS OF OCTOBER 1, 1979, BETWEEN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AND THE COMMUNITY
CENTER AUTHORITY, (B) APPROVING A THIRD AMENDMENT TO SITE LEASE DATED FOR
CONVENIENCE AS OF OCTOBER 1, 1979, BETWEEN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AND THE COMMUNITY
CENTER AUTHORITY, AND (C) AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO .EXECUTE 'AND
DELIVER SAID THIRD AMENDMENT TO COMMUNITY CENTER FACILITY LEASE AND SAID THIRD
AMENDMENT TO SITE LEASE.
158: SALE OF CITRON PARK pROPERTY: Councilman Bay offered Resolution No. 79R-566~
~or 'ad~'Pti0n,' asA 're~commended 'i'n 'memorandum dated September 24, 1979 from the City
Attorney authorizing execution of a Corporation Grant Dee'd to John J. Kogler and
Michael T. Collins, relating to the sale of Citron Park Property and delivering
said Deed into escrow.. Refer to Resolution Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 79R-566..:' A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE A CORPORATION GRANT DEED AND TO
DELIVER SAID DEED INTO ESCROW.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES' COUNCIL MEMBERS- Overholt, Kaywood, Bay, Roth and seYmour
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSENT' COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 79R-566 duly passed and adopted.
124; DESIGN OF LOGO AT THE CONVENTION CENTER: Councilman Seymour offered Resolutio
No. 79R-567 ~-for adoption, as recommended by the City Attorney, authorizing the
execution of declarations under Sections 8 and 15 of the Trademark Act of 1946,
relating to the design of the logo at the Convention Center. Refer to Resolution
Book.
RESOLUTION NO. 79R-567: ~A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE DECLARATIONS UNDER SECTIONS 8 AND 15 OF THE TRADE-
MARK ACT OF 1946.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBER'S- Overholt, Kaywood, Bay, Roth and seYmOur
NOES · COUNCIL MJg~BERS: None
ABSENT. COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 79R-567 duly passed and adopted.
79-1103
City Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 2~ 1979, l:30..p,M~
105: VACANCY - PROJECT AREA COMMITTEE: On motion by Councilman Roth, seconded
by Councilman Overholt, the seat of Robert M. Law on the Project Area Committee
was declared vacant in order to make the appropriate posting of that vacancy.
MOTION CARRIED.
CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS: On motion by Councilman Bay, seconded by Councilman
Overholt, 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 Claims Administrator or allowed:
a. Claim submitted by Steven and Deborah Coleman for damages purportedly sus-
tained as a result of baseballs from adjacent City park breaking windows at 1081
North Windsor on or about July 27, 1979, and 2 windows on or about August 1,
1979.
b. Claim submitted by State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Agency, for Bruce
Corigliano, insured, for vehicular damages purportedly sustained as a result of
golf ball striking windshield, in the vicinity of Anaheim Hills Golf Course, on
or about July 20, 1979.
c. Claim submitted by Fremont Indemnity Company for Leslie Swift, insured, for
personal injury damages purportedly sustained as a result of accident involving
City vehicle, on or about June 8, 1979.
d. Claim submitted by Bill Ormerod for personal injuries purportedly sustained
as a result of unsafe condition of ground at Pearson Park, on or about June 24,
1979.
e. Claim submitted by Fred H. Severns for damages purportedly sustained as a
result of '~ot" power line falling into and destroying shrubbery behind resi-
dence on or about August 9, 1979.
f. Claim submitted by Margaret Anne Arford for damages purportedly sustained
as a result of actions by Anaheim Police on or about June 22, 1979.
g. Claim submitted by James Edward Owens for d-manges purportedly sustained as a
~result of Police having found stolen vehicle towed without owner's permission,
on or about September 5, 1979.
h. Claim submitted by Martin Grois for personal injury damages purportedly
sustained as a result of false arrest on or about July 26, 1979.
i. Claim submitted by James C. Kennison for damages purportedly sustained as a
result of loss of wearing apparel while confined to Anaheim City Jail, on or
about September 4, 1979.
j. Claim submitted by La Vone K. Prahl for personal.injury damages purportedly
sustained as a result of slip-and-fall accident at Anaheim Stadium on or about
July 4, 1979.
79-1104
.City .Hal.l, ,Anah,eim,, ..cal.~ifo. rnia - .cou.NcI..L MI .NU.TES - October 2,~ ~197.9, 1: 3Q~P.M.'
The following claim was allowed'
k. Claim submitted by Edward J. Davis for vehicle damages purportedly sustained
as a result of accident involving a City truck on the Lewis Substation east
parking lot, on or about August 5, 1979.
2; .... CpRRES?OND. ENCE.:, The following correspondence was ordered received and filed'
a. 105' Community Center Authority- Minutes of September 10, 14, 17, 1979.
b. 148: Orange County Health Planning Council, advising of the availability of
the Component of the 1979 Orange County Health Systems Plan, Directions in Health
Promotion Services and Programs.
c. 105: Community Services Board- Minutes of August 9, 1979.
d. 105: Anaheim Golf Course Advisory Commission- Minutes of September 20, 1979.
e. 1-05: Library Board - Monthly Report for August 1979.
f. 105: Library Board - Minutes of August 15, 1979.
g. 156' Police Department- Monthly Report for August 1979.-
h. 105' Community Redevelopment Commission- Meetings of August 22, 1979 and
September 5 and 12, 1979. '
i. 175' Public Utilities Department, Customer Service Division- Monthly
Report for August 1979.
j. 175' Public Utilites Department, Utilities Field Division- Monthly Report
for August 1979.
k. 114: City of Yorba Linda, Resolution No. 1280, opposing Senate Bill 462,
placing restrictions on the removal of billboards by city governments.
3. 108' APPLICATIONS: The following applications were approved in accordance
with the recommendations of the Chief of Police:
.,
a. Ameusement Devices Permit, submitted by Ruth Al'ice Siegel, for pinball machines
and pool table to be located at' KoJaks Koney Island, 3024 WeSt Ball Road..
b. Public Dance Permit, submitted by Cruz Munoz' Empresa Frias, for a public dance
to be held October 20, 1979, 6'00 P.M. to 1:00 A.M., at the Anaheim Convention
Center.
MOTION CARRIED.
114: ~CITY OF CYPRESS RESOLUTION NO. 2135, SUPPORTING AB 1955: Councilman Bay
stated he wanted to support the City of Cypress in their resolution. Council-
woman KayWood stated that the resolution also talked about elected judgeships,
and she felt the Bar Association or someone else should be involved in that
aspect.
79-1105
Ci.ty Hall~ Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL~MINUTES - October 2~ 197.9, 1:30 P.M.
Councilman Bay moved to support the City of Cypress Resolution No.· 2135, supportin;
AB 1955, calling for a special election to fill County Board of Supervisors' vacancies.
Before any action was taken, the Mayor suggested that each Council Member receive
a copy of AB 1955 and continue consideration of the matter for one week.
On motion by Councilman Bay, seconded by Councilman Seymour, consideration of
supporting Resolution No. 2135 was continued one week; a copy of AB 1955 to be
provided to the Council in the interim. MOTION CARRIED.
CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS: Councilwoman Kaywood offered Resolution Nos. 79R-568
through79R-577, 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.
158: RESOLUTION NO. 79R-568: A RESOLUTION OF THE'CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM ACCEPTING CERTAIN DEEDS AND ORDERING THEIR RECORDATION. (Kilroy Indus-
tries; First Congregational Church of Anaheim; Arvil Sparks, et al.; Raymond G.
Spehar, et al.; Jacob Logar, et al.; Randall William Blanchard, et ux.)
169: RESOLUTION NO. 79R-569: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM FINALLY ACCEPTING THE COMPLETION AND THE FURNISHING OF ALL PLANT, LABOR,
SERVICES, MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT AND ALL UTILITIES AND TRANSPORTATION INCLUDING
POWER, FUEL AND WATER, AND THE PERFORMANCE OF ALL WORK NECESSARY TO CONSTRUCT AND
COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, TO WIT: INSTALLATION AND REPLACEMENT
OF INCANDESCENT STREET LIGHTING LUMINAIRES AND LAMPS - HUD AREAS II & III, ACCOUNT[
NOS. 25-676-6340-73630-37300 AND 25-676-6340-73640-37300. (Steiny and Company, Inc.)
164: RESOLUTION NO. 79R-570: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM FINALLY ACCEPTING THE COMPLETION AND THE FURNISHING OF ALL PLA2Cf, LABOR,
SERVICES, MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT AND ALL UTILITIES AND TRANSPORTATION INCLUDING
POWER, FUEL AND WATER, AND THE PERFORMANCE OF ALL WORK NECESSARY TO CONSTRUCT AND
COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING PUBLIC IMPROVEMF~NT, TO WIT: WALNUT 'CANYON DAM ROCK SLOPE
PROTECTION PHASE II, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, ACCOUNT NO. 51-619-6340-25580-31200.
(L. S. Hawley Corporation)
164: RE~OLUTION NO. 79R-~7~: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM FINALLY ACCEPTING THE COMPLETION AND THE FURNISHING OF ALL PLANT, LABOR,
SERVICES, MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT AND ALL UTILITIES AND TRANSPORTATION INCLUDING
POWER, FUEL ANDWATER, AND THE PERFORMANCE OF ALL WORK NECESSARY TO CONSTRUCT AND
COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, TO WIT: VERMONT-LEMON INTERCEPTOR
SEWER IMPROVEMENT, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, ACCOUNT NO. 46-790-6325-0070. (Nick
Didovic Construction Company)
176: RESOLUTION NO. 79R-572: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO VACATE AND ABANDON A CERTAIN PUBLIC SERVICE
EASEMENT. (78-30A, setting October 23, 1979, 3:00 p.m., as date and time for
public hearing)
79-1106
,CitY. Hall, Anaheim, ~lifornia .- ..c.o. UN. CIL MINUTES - October. 2.,__ 1979,,. 1: 39. P.M.
124: RESOLUTION NO. 79R-573: 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: ANAHEIM CON-
VENTION CENTER ARENA ACOUSTIC CEILING KEPAINTING, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM,
ACCOUNT NO. 64-308-7i07-C9'010; APPROVING THE DESIGNS, PLANS, PROFILES, DRAWINGS,
AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION THEREOF; AUTHORIZING THE CONSTRUCTION
OF SAID PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH SAID PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, ETC.;
AND AUTHORIZING .AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO PUBLISH A NOTICE INVITING SEALED
PROPOSALS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION THEREOF. (Bids to be opened October 25, 1979, at
2:00 P.M.)
150' RESOLUTION NO. 79R-574' A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
A~~iM FiNDiNG' AN~ 'DETERMINING THAT PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY REQUIRE
THE CONSTRUCTION AND COMPLETION OF A PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, TO WIT: PEARSON PARK
RENOVATIONS, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, ACCOUNT NO. 16-808-7105-80811; APPROVING
THE DESIGNS, PLANS, PROFILES, DRAWINGS, AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION
THEREOF; AUTHORIZING THE CONSTRUCTION OF SAID PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT IN ACCORDANCE
WITH SAID PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, ETC.; AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY
CLERK TO PUBLISH A NOTICE INVITING SEALED PROPOSALS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION
THEREOF. (Bids to be opened October 25, 1979, at 2:00 P.M.)
16.9..' .... _RESO. LUTION NO. 7.9..RT575' 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: GILBERT STREET
STREET IMPROVEMENT, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, ACCOUNT NOS 47-792-63.25'-2'440 AND
47-792-6325-2460; APPROVING THE DESIGNS, PLANS, PROFILES, DRAWINGS, AND SPECIFI-
CATIONS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION THEREOF; AUTHORIZING THE CONSTRUCTION OF SAID PUBLIC
IMPROVEMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH SAID PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, ETC.; AND AUTHORIZING
AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO PUBLISH A NOTICE INVITING SEALED PROPOSALS FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION THEREOF. (Bids to be opened November 1, 1979, at 2'00 P.M.)
131: RESOLUTION NO. 79R-576' A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM INFORMING THE COUNTY OF ORANGE, ROAD DEPARTMENT, OF CERTAIN CHANGES IN
THE CIRCULATION ELEMENT OF ARTERIAL STREETS AND HIGHWAYS ON THE GENERAL PLAN,
AND REQUESTING THE COUNTY OF ORANGE TO ADOPT SAID CHANGES INTO THE COUNTY
ARTERIAL HIGHWAY MASTER PLAN.
173: KESOLUTION NO. 79R-577: A RESOLUTION .OF THE CITY COUNCIL. OF THE CITY OF
'ANAHEIM AUTHORIZING THE .M~-~ ~ CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE A pIpE' LINE-LICENSE
,AGKEEMENT WITH THE ATCHISON' TOPEKA AND SANTA FE RAILWAy. COMPANY' (S/O Orange-
thorPe, E/o Miller - BL-70208)
Roll Call Vote'
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Overholt, KaywoOd, Bay, Roth'and Seymour
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS' None
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 79R-568 through 79R-577, both inclusive,
duly passed and adopted.
79-1107
City Hall., Anahe .tdn, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - October 2~ 1979~ I:30..P.M.
ORDINANCE NO. 4057 - AMENDMENT TO TITLE 18 - SOLAR COLLECTOR PANELS: Proposed
amendment to Section 18.84.042.012, to delete the requirement for a conditional
use permit for roof-mounted solar collector panels while retaining the prohibi-
tion against other roof-mounted equipment including exterior-mounted radio and
television antennas, was submitted, as recommended by the Planning Commission.
Councilwoman Kaywood noted that it had been mentioned before the solar panels
could be made out of beer cans. She wanted to know if something could be worked
out to where they would have some aesthetic control over such circumstances.
Planning Director Ron Thompson stated that they could review that section of the
Code and if they encountered such a situation, they would bring it to the Council
rather than handling it administratively. That would occur at the time the permit
was applied for.
Councilman Overholt offered Ordinance No. 4057 for first reading.
ORDINANCE NO. 4057: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING SECTION 18,84.042.
012 OF CHAPTER 18.84, TITLE 18, OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING.
142/179: ORDINANCE NO. 4050: Councilman Bay offered Ordinance No. 4050 for
adoption. Refer to Ordinance Book.
ORDINANCE NO. 4050: AN OP~INANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING SECTION 18.61.O50
AND ADDING SECTION 18.61.010.600 TO CHAPTER 18.16, TITLE 18, OF THE ANAHEIMMUNI-
CIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Overholt, Kaywood, Bay, Roth and Seymour
None
None
The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 4050 duly passed and adopted.
142/171: ORDINANCE NO. 4051 AND 4052: Councilwoman Kaywood offered Ordinance
No. 4051 and 4052 for adoption. Refer to Ordinance Book.
ORDINANCE NO. 4051: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 4042,
NUNC PRO TUNC, RELATING TO FIXING AND LEVYING A PROPERTY TAX ON ALL PROPERTY WITHIN
THE CORPORATE LIMITS OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1979-80.
ORDINANCE NO. 4052: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING ORDINANCE
NO. 4043, NUNC PRO TUNC, RELATING TO FIXING AND LEVYING A PROPERTY TAX ON ALL
PROPERTY WITHIN THE CORPORATE LIMITS OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FOR THE FISCAL
YEAR 1979-80.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES: COUNCIL M]94BERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Overholt, Kaywood, Bay, Roth and Seymour
None
None
The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 4051 and 4052 duly passed and adopted.
79-1108
C.i. ty Hall, Anaheim, Ca..l. if0rni,a -.COUN.CIL MINUTES ..- Ocotber .2, .... 1..979.,' 1.,:...30 p;.M.
ORDINANCE NO. 4053: Councilman Overholt offered Ordinance No. 4053 for adoption.
Refer to Ordinance Book.
ORDINANCE NO. 4053: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF
THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (77-78-63(1), CL)
Roll Call Vote'
AYES' COUNCIL MEMBERS' Overholt, Kaywood, Bay, Roth and Seymour
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS' · None
The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 4053 duly passed and adopted.
ORDINANCE NO. 4054' Councilman Roth offered Ordinance No. 4054 for adoption.
Refer to Ordinance Book.
ORDINANCE NO. 4054: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING 'TITLE 18 OF
THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (77-78-47, RM-3000)
Roll Call Vote'
AYES' COUNCIL MEMBERS' Overholt, Kaywood, Bay, R~th and Seymour
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS- None
The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 4054 duly passed and adopted.
0R..~).IN.ANC$_.~NO...4058. ~ 4059: Councilwoman Kaywood offered Ordinance Nos. 4058
and 4059, both inclusive, for first reading.
ORDINANCE NO. 6058' AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEI/~I A~ENDING TITLE 18 OF
THE -ANAHEiM ~iCiPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (79-80-6, ML)
..
142/156- ORDINANCE NO. 4059' AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ADDING CHAPTER
6.72 TO TITLE 6 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO AMPLIFI~ SOiHqD.
ORDINANCE NO. 4060 THROUGH 4062' Councilman Overholt offered Ordinance Nos.
'~0'60 '[hr"oUgh""4~062,'- bO'th.. i~l~sive, for first reading. '
ORDINANCE NO, 4060' AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM' AMENDING TITLE 18 OF
~THE' ANA~'E'I~ MUNi'ciPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING' (73-73-51(35(36)(37), RS-HS-22,000)
'ORDINANCE'NO' '4061: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TITLE 18 OF
THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. .(75-76-26, CO, Parcels A & B)
ORDINANCE 'NO' 4062' AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TiTLE 1'8 OF
THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ZONING. (66-67-64 (11) , ML) ~ .
114: NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES CONFERENC.E~.' SAN. F.RAN. qIsCo, SEPTEMBER 22-25,~ 1979:
Councilman Overholt' e'xpre'ssed his appreciation for ~those in attendance at the
subject conference who Coached him relative to addressing the conference. It
was difficult to register a position contrary to the position recommended by
~9-1109
Cit¥...fla.~l~ .Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - Uctober.2~ 19.79~ 1:.3.0 P~M.
the Resolutions Committee while a sea of people were registering their objections
inconsistent with the Council's prior position. He further reported that Pete
Wilson, Mayor of San Diego, attempted to amend the resolution dealing with
Proposition 4, and he (Overholt) attempted to contact him,~but was unable to do
so, and subsequently Mr. Wilson's efforts regrettably failed to turn' that res-
olution around to a positive position on Proposition 4, which was the position
the Council had taken.
Councilman Bay then reported on the items they pulled off the calendar and.on
which they voted "no" as follows: the creation of a public and private non-profit
foundation because there was no funding in the resolution; the State Land Banking
Fund; yearly auto smog inspection requirements; California Fire Services that
additional training be a State requirement; no on 63 which, in essence, opposed
the "Spirit of 13" and Proposition 4 by implicatiom. However, Anaheim voted "yes"
on 48 of the resolutions; Councilman Overholt noted again that they supported
Pete Wilson's amendment, which failed.
173: RAILROAD CROSSING - SANTA ANA AND WEST STREET: Councilman Overholt reported
that he received a telephone call from Mrs. Fredna Jackson, 431South'West Street,
(intersection of West Street and Santa Ama Street). He also referred to the letter
received detailing a number of near misses between trains and automobiles at that
location. Mrs. Jackson was anxious to know when something was going to be done
regarding the installation of crossing protection at that intersection. The
letter advised that the City made initial application to the railroad and the
Public Utilities Commission in April of 1977 and such applications were acted
upon in about four years. The recommendation was that the City Council by
resolution ask Southern Pacific Transportation Company to expedite the install-
ation of that crossing protection for a number of reasons, one major one being
the fact that former Fremont students now attending Ball Junior High were
utilizing that route to school. Mrs. Jackson pointed out that there was now an
increasing danger to those children.
Councilman Overholt thereupon offered Resolution No. 79R-578 for adoption that
the Council request the Southern Pacific Transportation Company to expedite
installation of crossing protection at Santa Ana and West Streets, as provided
for'in the priority listing from Caltrans dated August 1979. Refer to
Resolution Book.
RESOL~%0N NO. 79R-578: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
REQUESTING AND URGING THE SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANSPORTATION COMPAN~ TO EXPEDITE THE
-INSTALLATION OF CROSSING PROTECTION AT THE INTERSECTION OF SANTA ANA STREET AND
WEST STREET IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA.
Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL M]~tBERS:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Overholt, Kaywood, Bay, Roth and Seymour
None
None
The Mayor declared Resolution No. 79R-578 duly passed and adopted.
79-1110
City Hal_l,'_ ~Anaheim, Ca~lifornia -. COUNCIL M~NUTES~-.. October 2~, 197.9,_ 1:30 p.M.
114' LIAISON MEETING WITH CONVENTION CENTER AUTHORITY' Councilman Overholt
reported on his attendance at a meeting with the Convention~ Center Authority
Monday, October 1, 1979. He felt that the meeting and the relationship between
the Authority and staff was excellent.
!!4.' ..... .ATT ..~. AN. CE..AT...V. AR.!.OUS F.UNCTION. S..: Councilwoman Kaywood reported on her
attendance at the following events' Mito Luncheon, Wednesday, September 26,
1979; Pioneer Picnic, Sunday, September 30, 1979; Celebration of lOth Anniversary
of Anaheim YMCA.
114' SUPPORT OF HENRY G. "DAD" MILLER: Councilman Roth reported that the family
of Dad Miller wished to thank the Council for all the years of their support of
Dad Miller and what it meant to him. That relationship was a very important part
of his life, and his family was most appreciative of it.
114: STATUS OF SENIOR CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE: Councilman Roth referred to
his previous requ'est'"('See minutes. Augus~t- '21, 'i'9'79)L relative to the formation of a
Senior Citizens Advisory Committee and asked for an update on the status of the
situation. He had received a letter from Mr. Herb Eggett today strongly supporting
the proposal. As well, in March of 1980, one of the largest Senior Citizens
conventions was going to be held in Anaheim and he (Roth) felt the City's par-
ticipation would demonstrate how interested they were in the seniors.
Mayor Seymour noted that they heard from the Community Services Board on the
matter and that Board, in essence, had a Senior Citizens subcommittee. Thus,
Council should take that into consideration; Councilman Roth stated he had already
talked with some seniors on that situation, and they rejected the concept.
Mayor Seymour stated that the letters to the various senior activity groups
within the City would be expedited, and an answer would be forthcoming 'per
Councilman Roth' s request.
ADJOURNMENT: Councilwoman Kaywood moved to adjourn. Councilman Bay seconded
the motion. MOTION-CARRIED.
Adjourned' 9' 23 P.M.