Loading...
1998/02/10ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA- CITY COUNCIL MINUTES FEBRUARY 10, 1998 The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session. PRESENT: PRESENT: ABSENT: PRESENT: MAYOR: Tom Daly COUNCIL MEMBERS: Shirley McCracken, Tom Tait, Bob Zemel, Lou Lopez COUNCIL MEMBERS: None CITY MANAGER: James Ruth CITY ATTORNEY: Jack White CITY CLERK: Leonora N. Sohl ASSISTANT CITY CLERK: Ann Sauvageau PARKS SUPERINTENDENT: Jack Kudron TRAFFIC & TRANSPORTATION MGR: John Lower FIRE CHIEF: Jeff Bowman PLANNING DIRECTOR: Joel Fick CODE ENFORCEMENT MANAGER: John Poole ZONING MANAGER: Greg Hastings A complete copy of the agenda for the meeting of the Anaheim City Council was posted at 2:00 p.m. on February 6, 1998 at the City Hall Kiosk, containing all items as shown herein. Mayor Daly called the workshop portion of the Council Meeting of February 10, 1998 to order at 3:16 P.M. and welcomed those in attendance. There is a recommendation on tonight's agenda by the Sister Cities Association that Anaheim launch a second sister city relationship with Vitoria-Gasteiz, Spain. This workshop is intended to give the background on that recommendation. City Manager, James Ruth. He introduced John Poole, President, Sister Cities Association (and also the City's Code Enforcement Manager) who will make the presentation. 114: SISTER CITY PROGRAM - VITORIA-GASTEIZ, SPAIN: John Poole, President, Sister Cities Association first thanked the City Manager and City Council for the opportunity to make the presentation today and update the Council on the work of the Association and the efforts to establish a relationship with the City of Vitoria-Gasteiz, Spain. If it were not for Mr. Santiago Echievera, who is present today, they would not have had this opportunity. The presentation will be in three segments: (1) a brief history of Sister Cities International program and the Anaheim program, (2) recent events of the Sister Cities Association and, (3) what the future holds for the Anaheim Sister Cities Association. He then briefed each of the topics. He also submitted an informational packet which contained information on Sister Cities International and a group of photographs taken in Vitoria-Gasteiz showing various scenes and civic buildings, museums, etc., along with a map showing the location of the City in northern Spain noting that "Vitoria represents a natural vertex between central Europe, Portugal and the Mediterranean Arc." Mr. Poole then briefed the history of the Anaheim Sister Cities Program which began in 1976 when a relationship was established with Mito, Japan. He highlighted many of the activities and exchanges that have taken place, most especially the student exchange program and the scholarship program which enable students in Anaheim schools, after a selection process, to take part in an annual cultural exchange with Mito. Mr. Greg Hastings, Vice President, Sister Cities Association (and the City's Zoning Division Manager) explained the specifics of the scholarship program. Mr. Poole then explained that 1997 was a busy year for the Association, not only working to establish a relationship with Vitoria-Gasteiz, but also exploring possible relationships with Chunchon, Korea and Sochi, Russia. Korea will be included as part of the trip to Japan which a delegation from Anaheim will be taking in April. He urged those who could to join in the trip. ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES, FEBRUARY 10, 1998 Mr. Poole then asked Mr. Echeverria to show the video tape giving the history, past and present, of Vitoria-Gasteiz. (The video highlighted the City's many amenities.) Additional information was posted on the Chamber wall. Another short video showed a news segment that was given to the Anaheim delegation, including Mayor Daly, when it visited Vitoria-Gasteiz. Mayor Daly. Vitoria-Gasteiz is as hospitable as a City could be. He believes this will be a wonderful potential partnership. The Basque country is a little bit "out of the way"; however, the relationship is not to promote tourism. Their motivations are the cultural and educational exchange and the potential for international business. Vitoria-Gasteiz has a major Michelen and Mercedes plant. They are very proud of their industry and do want more. It is a very prosperous area with very high standards -- environmental, historic preservation, etc. It is not a tourism center. Mr. Poole. Establishing a relationship with Vitoria-Gasteiz will be a "shot in the arm" for the Sister Cities Association. He feels the program needs a new sister city relationship, along with Mito, Japan, to bring new blood and new interest to it. The Association recommends establishing the new relationship which has been approved by the Board (of the Association). If the Council acts favorably on the resolution which is on the Council agenda tonight, it will establish Vitoria-Gasteiz as a second Sister City. Mayor Daly asked when might they expect a group from Vitoria-Gasteiz to visit Anaheim; Mr. Poole stated they are hoping in April. After the Council acts tonight, they will send a letter to the Mayor of Vitoria-Gasteiz and hopefully their Council will act to accept Anaheim as a Sister City. Then, when they visit Anaheim in April, they can bring the Proclamation with them. Everything should be done by April. Council Member Tait. It is a beautiful place, very modern and well maintained. He is willing to start a relationship. Mayor Daly. He noted that most of the Board of Directors of the Sister Cities Association were in the Chamber audience and thanked them for being present and for the time and effort in bringing this new Sister City relationship to fruition. He especially thanked Mr. Poole, Hastings and Echeverria. REQUEST FOR CLOSED SESSION: City Attorney Jack White requested a Closed Session noting first that there were no additions to Closed Session items. PUBLIC COMMENTS - CLOSED SESSION ITEMS: There were no public comments relative to Closed Session items. The following items are to be considered at the Closed Session. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR Agency Negotiator: Dave Hill Employee organization: Anaheim Fire Association, IBEW, AMEA, APA and non represented employees. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9(a) - Existincl Liftclarion: Name of case: Delmonico, et al. v. City of Anaheim, et al. (and 18 related cases) Orange County Superior Court Case No. 70-80-71. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Initiation of litigation pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 54956.9: one potential case. ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES, FEBRUARY 10, 1998 HEALTH IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM: Dave Hill. RECESS: Mayor Daly moved to recess into Closed Session. Council Member Lopez seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. (3:50 p.m.) AFTER RECESS: The Mayor called the meeting to order, all Council Members being present, and welcomed those in attendance to the Council meeting. (5:05 p.m.) INVOCATION: Pastor Adam McCoy of St. Michael's Episcopal Church gave the invocation. FLAG SALUTE: Council Member Bob Zemel led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. 119: PROCLAMATION: The following Proclamation was issued by Mayor Daly and authorized by the City Council: Vocational Education Week in Anaheim - February 8 - 14, 1998 Mr. Slim Terrell and Katherine Smith, both Board Members of the North Orange County Regional Occupational Program, accepted the Proclamation. Mr. Terrell noted that this program not only covers Anaheim but also Placentia, Yorba Linda, Brea, LaPalma and Cypress. It teaches youngsters and young adults job skills enabling them to get work in the marketplace. Mayor Daly also noted this is one of the largest and best vocational education programs of its type in California. Mr. Terrell and Mrs. Smith are Trustees on the Board of Trustees of the Anaheim Union High School District which is the primary local supporter of the Regional Occupation Program. RECOGNITIONS AUTHORIZED BY COUNCIL THIS DATE TO BE MAILED OR PRESENTED AT ANOTHER TIME: DECLARATION recognizing Amtrak and the importance of rail service to Anaheim. DECLARATION recognizing the Air Force band concert on February 11, 1998, at the Anaheim Convention Center. FINANCIAL DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY in the amount of $3,592,776.82 for the period ending February 6, 1998, in accordance with the 1997-98 Budget, were approved. Mayor Daly recessed the City Council meeting until after the Redevelopment Agency meeting. (5:13 p.m.) Mayor Daly reconvened the City Council Meeting ( 5:13 p.m.) ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES, FEBRUARY 10, 1998 ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA: City Clerk Sohl announced that two people requested to speak on Item C1, the discussion to consider a possible ballot measure to amend Section 1220 of the City Charter. Council Member Tait. He placed Item C1 on the agenda for discussion; however, at this time, he believes it is premature to even discuss the issue. Because they are in the middle of an RFP process regarding the city's utilities, he is removing this item from the agenda at this time. City Attorney White. It is legally OK to take the item out of order, but after the motion is placed on the floor, under the Brown Act, it is necessary to take public comments. Mayo Daly asked how many were present to speak on Item C1. besides Mr. Tom Kirker and Mr. Ron Bengoshea. (No one else indicated they wished to speak). MOTION. Council Member Tait requested that Item C1. be removed from the agenda at this time since any discussion/action would be premature. Council Member Zemel seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. ITEMS OF PUBLIC INTEREST: The following people requested to speak - re: the Special Prosecutor hired by the City concerning campaign finance laws. Their comments are summarized. Steve Mather, 102 S. Seneca Circle, Anaheim, Pastor, Anaheim 1st Presbyterian Church. He is present with a number of citizens who have a name for their group - TEA - Taxpayers Expecting Accountability. (Approximately 60 members were present.) They are present to gain some clarification and speak to a concern that has galvanized them -- the appointment of a Special Prosecutor and the expenditure of inordinate amounts of money to look into campaign finance reports. While they want complete accuracy in campaign reporting, they are getting an uneasy sense it is not just about fairness in campaign ethics but as a guise for some other ulterior motive. They would like the Council to speak to their group to answer questions about the chronology of events. From their understanding, everything was fine in Anaheim when it came to electoral politics until the City Attorney filed a law suit against a PAC (Political Action Committee) the Business and Taxpayers Good Government Committee in Lake Forest headed by Steve Sheldon. It was determined different sources of funding were not reported in a timely manner and subsequently a suit brought by the City Attorney instigated by a citizen complaint regarding a $32,186 contribution to one of the City Council Candidates in the last election. Subsequently, there was a concern expressed by another citizen and all of a sudden, there was a question as to whether or not the City Attorney could adequately look into the complaint. Two Council Members voted the City Attorney could not be unbiased enough to look at the complaint and appointed a Special Prosecutor. The net effect -- it seems the aim of the Special Prosecutor is to create political havoc selectively going after political candidates that do not agree with the two persons who appointed him. They also have other questions relating to this matter. Dr. John Baird, 3239 W. Ravenswood Drive, Anaheim (41 years). He is speaking for the group who have questions concerning the investigation conducted by Ravi Mehta. They wonder about the selection and need for a Special Prosecutor. The questions are: Can he (Mehta) be considered an independent investigator when it would appear that only Council Members Lopez and Zemel are giving him directions, is this not a conflict of interest when the investigation is targeting only their political adversaries, why was the entire matter never presented to the Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) or the Orange County District Attorney, why has this turned into a criminal investigation, relative to the allegations of violations of Anaheim's contribution laws, why was the City Attorney's opinion on this issue not accepted. Harold Bickford, 501 Fairmont Circle, Anaheim. The group is present regarding the unnecessary expenditure of their taxes in payment of fees to an outside prosecutor. He would like the City Attorney to comment on the following: the fee for the prosecutor is $250/hr. and the cost already is over $100,000 and rising and there seems to be no budget limitation nor do they know who approved the expenditures, ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES, FEBRUARY 10, 1998 the money already spent could have put two Policeman on the beat, the expenditures thus far are only the "tip of the iceberg", the City may even also have to defend itself against a suit for malicious prosecution. Speaking to Council Member Lopez because of his vote to hire the Prosecutor, he noted that he (Lopez) had stated he considered these to be minor violations, but any money spent is well worth it. He asked if he could advise those who disagree with that how many voter signatures would it take to stop this drain on their taxes and should such a petition be directed to him because of his vote in this affair. Stan Pawlowski, 1433 W. Jeanine, Anaheim (48 years). The City is spending a lot of time and effort to have a Special Prosecutor at great expense. Having checked with the City Attorney's Office, up to November, 1997, $86,000 has already been expended and by now it could be anywhere from $125,000 to $150,000 and there is no indication when the investigation will end. They believe it is a "witch hunt" because it is targeted on specific members of the Council and former candidates for City offices. It has been reported so accurately in the Santa Ana Register and by Shirley Grindie who is responsible for the Orange County Campaign Reform Ordinance (Tin Cup) that these violations by Council Members were not deliberately intended to defraud or deceive the public but honest mistakes made by the committee(s). She advised not to spend any more money on outside counsel, at that time, until a decision was made on the constitutionality of Proposotion 208. In concluding, he stated it is time to fire the independent counsel and go about the business of running the City. If there was any criminal intent, the matter should be turned over to the District Attorney for handling on an individual basis. Jonathan Moynihan, Lance Corporal, St. Catherine's Military School. He is speaking as a 12-year old taxpayer since every time he buys something, he pays a tax. The Special Prosecutor has already been paid $100,000. He was thinking of all the things the City could have paid for with that money, upon which he elaborated. Instead, they have chosen to hire a man to file malicious criminal charges against Mrs. Debra Daly, his Sunday school teacher. Peggy Austin, 502 N. Janss, Anaheim. She read excerpts from a number of newspaper articles relating to the matter basically revolving around Mr. Mehta's background and positions held in the recent past up to his hiring by members of the City Council. Mayor Daly asked Mr. White to respond to the questions posed to him. City Attorney White. As he indicated previously to the Council, currently he has unexpended amounts in his budget for litigation matters that he has been able to save for the first six monthis of this fiscal year. The answer is, there is money in the City Attorney's budget that has not been spent and savings on other litigation matters being used currently to pay the costs of the Special Prosecutor. Miriam Kaywood, Anaheim resident (former Council Member). She is very concerned that because there are unexpended funds, they should spend it. She feels if Council Member Zemel is so anxious to have Ravi Mehta do an investigation, he should hire him and use his own funds for whatever witch hunt he wants. She also feels it is a dangerous precedent to hire somebody from Sacramento indicating there are no qualified attorneys in Orange County. She asked if the City pays his (Mehta's) fare every time he travels to and from his home, has anyone in the City seen the expenses, is there any end to the amount of time or money that is spent. She emphasized, the sooner this matter comes to an end and the City monies expended for it, the better it will be for the City. Council Member Zemel. It is one thing for the City Attorney to prosecute a member of the public for a crime, it is another to ask him to turn around and investigate one of the Council Members, three members of which can decide any week that he is not going to bring a paycheck home. There is a law of the Political Reform Act, 91001.5 that allows the City Attorney in a Charter City if elected to prosecute. He interprets that as being not in the best interest of the City for him to prosecute the Council. He asked the City Attorney if he would want to do so. ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES, FEBRUARY 10, 1998 City Attorney White. He believes it would be unwise since it creates a dichotomy in the relationship between the Attorney and the Council trying to maintain an attorney-client relationship while at the same time prosecuting one or more of its members. He does not think it is wise for any City Attorney, including himself, to be in a position where he or she has to prosecute a member of the Council. Council Member Zemel. He first clarified this is not the first time this same situation has happened in Orange County. It happened in Irvine in March of 1997. He then relayed what took place noting that in finality, the matter was sent out to the District Attorney so this does not set a precedent. It is not "scary" to have the law looking at potential violators of the law. Every one, especially the Council, should not be above the law. This is about ethics and standards for which the Council should be held to a higher level and not lower. Just because a favorite politician has been charged doesn't mean that it automatically does not exist. Relative to the cost, it is not just a matter because funds are there they should be spent. All legal issues in the City are going to be dealt with. He cannot talk about the case and will not fall into what they are asking him to do or discuss. The prosecutor and the defendant's attorney are the ones handling the case. He does not think it is proper for the City to discuss the case. The bottom line is, when there is a situation like this, those that are not guilty need not be concerned. It has to go forward and has to be dealt with within the law and within the scope of ethics and fairness. City Attorney White then explained as a result of a question from the audience, that the Special Prosecutor in this case is accountable to the City Council who hired him. In addition to that, any prosecutor whether on his staff, a special prosecutor, the District Attorney, or any other prosecuting attorney is accountable to the State Attorney General, the State Bar of California which governs the licensing and, in addition, there are civil remedies available if a prosecutor maliciously prosecutes a case. After additional comments by Council Member Zemel, he noted that Ravi Mehta,. independent counsel, had just entered the Chamber. He asked if he (Mehta) would like to address the public. Ravi Mehta, Special Prosecutor, business address, City Attorney's Office, City of Anaheim. This is a unique situation for him but he feels compelled to give an update. There are a couple of issues the Council needs to know as well as members of the public. Not only does he have to have the legal authority but also the moral authority and support of the citizens. The investigation is continuing. There have been recent filings of campaign statements that were just done. He will not discuss with the Council or anybody the extent of the investigation, who is being investigated and how long it will take. One member of the Council, Mrs. McCracken, has already settled the matter with him. There have been comments made that two members of the Council made the appointment but, in fact, three members of the Council voted (to hire him). It was a majority with Council Member McCracken also voting to appoint him as Special Prosecutor. There is an ongoing investigation and costs have increased. In November of 1996 (I believe he meant 1997) after a thorough investigation, there was an agreement signed with Council Member McCracken, Mayor Daly and former Council Member Pickler and that agreement stated that these individuals had all agreed to settle all the matters civilly with him as Special Prosecutor and all would be brought to a conclusion by the end of December. As a result, he decided not to pursue criminally based upon their request. He put in many hours working with the attorneys of the parties involved in resolving the matter as well as preparing the documents. In January, he was notified by Mayor Daly's attorney as well as Mr. Picklet's attorney that the agreement they entered into they were not going to honor. He is not aware of the reason(s) for not going through with the agreement but it left him with no choice but to do his job as Special Prosecutor. Those are some of the reasons why the criminal case was filed and why it will continue until some sort of resolution is reached. With respect to former Council Member Feldhaus and the Anaheim Firefighters Association, he is confident that both of those matters will be settled soon. Mayor Daly. He does not know who invited Mr. Mehta to the meeting or to speak; Council Member Zemel stated that he did. ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES, FEBRUARY 10, 1998 Mayor Daly continued that he feels obliged to speak. Mr. Mehta has chosen to describe a certain series of events and he (Daly) could sit and debate him point by point as to their accuracy, the series of events leading up to his signing the agreement to agree and all the events that happened after the fact, but he does not think this is the forum to do that. He is disappointed Mr. Mehta has chosen to divulge some of his prosecutorial activities in this way. He reiterated, he could debate him point by point for hours on each point. He feels it is one more example of the highly unusual procedures followed from day one of this matter. For a prosecutor to come to a public meeting and characterize events and imply certain behaviors by him is wrong. That is all he is going to say. He guesses that Mr. Mehta had a point to make and the reason for saying all the things he said at a Council meeting. Ravi Mehta. The only purpose in making the comments was that the citizens are concerned about the costs and he believes it was incumbent upon him to relate and share with the Council the progress on some of the cases to alleviate some of the concerns and also to indicate certain costs. It is to give some comfort and update and to share and reiterate on the record that no member of the City Council has ever directed him to do anything. The purpose of his attendance is to indicate the cases are progressing. Council Member Zemel. It is his desire that the entire citizenry know that the Council is not going to be above the law and are going to be accountable. Kevin Moynihan, 215 S. Atcheson, Anaheim approached the podium and asked questions of Council Member Zemel relative to his campaign statements; Council Member Zemel stated his records are looked at as well. Council Member McCracken. She has heard several things said about her (by Mr. Mehta) and would like an opportunity to respond because there needs to be some clarification. The City Council, by two votes, voted to hire a Special Prosecutor, Council Member Zemel and Council Member Lopez. She voted against doing so at that time. A week later in Closed Session, Mr. Mehta's name came up and the City Attorney was not in the room so no legal advice could be rendered. Mr. Mehta came in and told them all the things the City Attorney could not do. She was hoping if she voted on the prevailing side, she could call for reconsideration. The vote for a Special Prosecutor came with two votes in public outside in the Council Chamber. Council Member McCracken continued noting that her case involved clerical oversight and Council Member Zemel made some of those in his campaigns as well. If her issue had been referred to the FPPC, she would have been assessed a $100 fine for late filing. Why she settled her case, because the legal process she would have to go through would have cost thousands of dollars. She suspects there are those who thought she would fight it and go through that money but she only had $3,200. Because of a mistake Mr. Mehta made, he originally wanted $10,000 but sent her an agreement for $5,000, they ended up with a compromise. She feel his actions in this matter are not above board. She would not have said any of these things because she said she would not discuss them but he (Mehta) has just broken that agreement. If people make clerical errors on their reports, they could have been sent to the FPPC (Fair Political Practices Commission) by an individual for them to examine. Mr. Mehta could have done so as well. Only Council Member Zemel and Council Member Lopez have talked to Mr. Mehta. Even after her case was filed and settled, the City Attorney did not even have a copy of that settlement. Something is amiss and something is wrong. She does not believe this is the way it has to be done in Anaheim. They are not above the law but want to practice the law as it is fairly practiced throughout the State and not something that is selective in the City of Anaheim. After additional comments by Mrs. Kaywood directed toward Council Member Zemel, Mayor Daly concluded public comments on the matter indicating this is a diffcult and complicated issue and he regrets some of the things he heard said in this public forum. ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES, FEBRUARY 10, 1998 Sally White, 809 W. Broadway, Anaheim, President of Releaf Anaheim. She is "begging" the Council on behalf of Releaf Anaheim to help them. When they were established four years ago, it was their understanding they would eventually have a full-time Director. During that time, they have proven themselves to be an asset to the community and have received several grants, honors and awards. Currently they have, on grant, 900 trees waiting to be planted. Their Director has found it impossible to survive on 20 hours a week. Stress has taken a toll on her health and without health benefits, it makes it even more difficult. She emphasized the asset they have in their present Director and the impact that would result not to have her in that position. She is appealing to the Council to find the extra 20 hours in the budget which will put the Director on a full-time basis with accompanying benefits. She also explained for the Mayor that she was told as late as one o'clock this afternoon that a full-time Director is not to be included in the upcoming budget. Mayor Daly. They will ask the City Manager to look at the facts and report back to the Council at the earliest opportunity. Council Member Zemel. Sally White asked him to be a part of Releaf, an organization that does a great deal of work at the City's behest. Because it is non-profit run by citizen volunteers, they are able to obtain grants. Heidi's (the Director) job is to get those grants and also coordinate the planting of the trees throughout the City. It is a great service to the City and an asset to the budget. He asked that the City Manager look at it from that angle; City Manager Ruth stated he would be glad to do so. Beatrice Kight-Herbst, 1435 E. Walnut, Orange, a member of the Board of Directors of Releaf and Shirley Wombacher, 1221 Tibbets Lane, Anaheim then spoke on how valuable the present Director of Releaf is to the organization and the good work of Releaf Anaheim. They urged full-time funding for the Director. Shirley Wombacher, 1221 Tibbets Lane, Anaheim. Speaking for Releaf Anaheim, she is one of those who digs the hole and helps plant the trees, but they need Heidi to get the whole thing organized. She urged their support of the request to have a full-time Director. PUBLIC COMMENTS - AGENDA ITEMS: Public input was received on Item A 13. (see discussion under that item). MOTION: Mayor Daly moved to waive reading in full of all ordinances and resolutions to be acted upon for the Council meeting of February 10, 1998. Council Member Lopez seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. CITY MANAGER/DEPARTMENTAL CONSENT CALENDAR A1 - A21 On motion by Mayor Daly, seconded by Council Member Lopez, the following items were approved in accordance with the reports, certifications and recommendations furnished each Council Member and as listed on the Consent Calendar; Mayor Daly offered Resolutions Nos. 98R-23 through 98R-28, both inclusive, for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. A1. 118: Rejecting and denying certain claims filed against the City. Referred to Risk Management. The following claims were filed against the City and actions taken as recommended: a. Claim submitted by David P. and Lisandra R. Castro for bodily injury sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about July 4, 1997. ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES, FEBRUARY 10, 1998 A2. A3. A4. A5. A6. A7. A8. A9. b. Claim submitted by Lois E. Cool for bodily injury sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about June 3, 1997. c. Claim submitted by Rita Nardella for property damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about October 25, 1997. d. Claim submitted by Dumitrii Lazuran for property damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about August 28, 1997. e. Claim submitted by Sandra L. Collins for bodily injury sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about May 19, 1997. f Claim submitted by Earnest L. Washington, c/o Roger E. Naghash, Esq. for bodily injury sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about September 17, 1997. g. Claim submitted by Seville Inn, c/o Roger E. Naghash, Esq. for bodily injury sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about September 17, 1997. 128: Receiving and filing the Monthly Financial Analysis for six months ended December 31, 1997, as presented by the Finance Director. 176: RESOLUTION NO. 98R-23: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO VACATE CERTAIN PUBLIC STREETS, HIGHWAYS, AND SERVICE EASEMENTS, AND SETTING A DATE AND TIME TO CONSIDER ABANDONING THAT PORTION OF LINCOLN AVENUE LOCATED GENERALLY ON THE NORTH SIDE OF LINCOLN AVENUE APPROXIMATELY 150 FEET WEST OF MANCHESTER AVENUE; AND THAT PORTION OF MANCHESTER AVENUE LOCATED GENERALLY ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF MANCHESTER AVENUE APPROXIMATELY 200 FEET NORTHWEST OF LINCOLN AVENUE (ABANDONMENT NO. 98-3A). (Suggested public hearing date: March 3, 1998, at 6:00 p.m.) 158: Authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute a quitclaim deed to a portion of Coronado Street, previously abandoned, to Taormina Industries. 158: RESOLUTION NO. 98R-24: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ACCEPTING CERTAIN DEEDS CONVEYING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTIES, OR INTERESTS THEREIN TO THE CITY. (R/W 5236 - DM287, 123: Approving an Agreement with Southern California Regional Rail Authority, in the amount of $92,562.56 for the extension of sewer casings; and authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute said Agreement. 123: Authorizing a Third Amendment to Agreement with Kleinfelder, Inc., in an amount not-to-exceed $14,760 for testing, inspection, and monitoring services for the abatement of lead based paint and asbestos building materials during construction of the Anaheim Convention Center Enhancement Project. 123: Approving an Amendment to Agreements with Anaheim Transportation Network for $63,825 to complete administration and reporting for the Anaheim Commuter Connection and Fixed Fare Taxi Programs. 123: Approving the new hourly rate schedule increases of 2.5 - 5% in connection with the Agreement with John-Frank and Associates, Inc., for plan checking services. ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES, FEBRUARY 10, 1998 A10. All. A12. A13. 160: Accepting the law bid of Trayer Engineering Corporation, in the amount of $32,500 for ten 15KV Icadbreak subsurface switches, in accordance with Bid #5744. 161: RESOLUTION NO. 98R-25: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM CERTIFYING THE ELECTION OF THE PROJECT AREA COMMITTEE FOR THE WEST ANAHEIM COMMERCIAL CORRIDORS REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT. 113: RESOLUTION NO. 98R-26: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AUTHORIZING THE DESTRUCTION OF CERTAIN CITY RECORDS MORE THAN TWO YEARS OLD. (HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT. 135: Denying the request by the Senior Citizen Commission for reduced golf rates for the Backniners Golf Group. Jack Klinglesmith, 1302 Feather St., Anaheim. He is President of the Anaheim Seniors Backniners sponsored by the Anaheim Senior Citizens Club. The group is comprised of retirees on fixed incomes. He notes that their request is recommended to be denied. He clarified that he has already written to Golf Department (Community Services) staff and their last hope is the City Council. Mayor Daly asked if he had a chance to read the staff report summarizing the request. The three-page report contains quite a bit of detail and recommendation from professional staff. Robert Porter, 2047 Margie Lane, Anaheim. He does not know who the professional staff is but a great number of the voters of Anaheim are senior citizens and they deserve to have a little better treatment than they have gotten up to this point. He urged the Council to give due consideration to their request. Bill Pebley, 1591 Stolman Place, Anaheim. Most cities all over the County give senior citizens a break when they play golf. He cannot understand why they do not get it at their local golf course. It should be given a lot of thought. Sid Jardine, former resident of Anaheim for 41 years (and a past President of the Senior Citizens Commission). He is present on behalf of the Backniners. They are all members of the Anaheim Senior Citizens Club. The club supports their activities and also question why senior residents do not get a special rate at the Dad Miller or Anaheim Hills course. The seniors are the backbone of the community. He asked for the Cauncil's special consideration. Mayor Daly. He notes from the staff report that there is an existing senior discount in Anaheim of at least a few dollars per round and any senior who chooses to play golf at Dad Miller can receive the discount under certain terms and conditions; Mr. Jardine stated that is correct, on standby only. They cannot make reservations. Mayor Daly. He noted that the group is 30 to 40 in number and they have one specific time per week to play and it is a reserved type situation. Council Member McCracken. She asked for clarification that the Backniners are exempted from the current $5.00 surcharge; Jack Kudran, Parks Superintendent, answered yes. Council Member McCracken. That exemption for 40 people (at $5 each) each is substantial. Mayor Daly asked Mr. Jardine if he had an opportunity to talk to the members of the Gold Advisory Commission (the Cauncil's advisory board on golf matters); Mr. Jardine answered, no but Mr. Kudran spoke to the Senior Citizens Commission several weeks ago. 10 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES, FEBRUARY 10, 1998 Mayor Daly also asked if there were any other changes to the rate structure for seniors that he is recommending at this time; Mr. Jardine answered the only thing he would like for them to consider is resident seniors -- people who actually reside in the City. Council Member Zemel. He asked if the Golf Commission has looked at this and, if not, why not. Mr. Kudron explained when the Senior Citizens Commission took action, they wanted their recommendation to go straight to the Council; therefore, it was not taken to the Golf Commission. He explained for the Mayor that the next meeting of the Golf Commission is the fourth Tuesday of the month and this could be handled as an agenda item at that time. Further, if staff had recommended approval, the Golf Commission would have been apprised since it would have affected the rates and fee structure, but since staff recommended denial, it was not effectively going to change the golf rate. They would have no problem presenting this to the Golf Commission and coming back to the Council with a recommendation. MOTION. Council Member Zemel moved that the request be submitted to the Golf Commission for a recommendation back to the Council. Council Member McCracken seconded the motion. Before a vote was taken, Council Member Lopez asked staff to explain what discounts seniors get and under what circumstances. Some of the public thinks they do not get a discount. Jack Kudron. Basically, the policy is that if you play with reserved tee times, you pay the regular rates (for 18 holes) of $19 weekdays and $25 weekends. Those 62 or older who want to play on a standby basis without a reservation, the discount is $1.50 off the existing nine-hole rate. If seniors play as a standby on a weekday, they can play for $11 and play unlimited golf. A group reservation such as the Backniners of 30 to 40 who play every other week has tee times and therefore they would pay the regular fee. That has been the policy forever as far as he knows. Council Member Zemel amended his motion that the Council also ask the Golf Commission to look at ways to insure everything possible is being done for seniors on this issue and other issues. Council Member McCracken agreed in her second. Mayor Daly. Mr. Jordine mentioned that some cities have discounts for senior golfers only for residents of that particular city. Anaheim allows it for any senior. There was a mention made that it might be cumbersome for the Golf staff to check residency. He would like that looked at. It seems to him they ought to give an extra break to Anaheim residents. If there is substantial overhead doing so or if it is going to cost money administratively, they need to know that. Mr. Jardine said he thought Anaheim residents should get more of a break than non-Anaheim residents/seniors. Council Member Zemel. He is also including what the Mayor articulated relative to residency a part of his motion. Council Member McCracken. In this case, they are only talking about the Backniners. She also received a call from a senior woman about her group. They have to be very careful they are not being selective. She would like the Golf Commission to look at that. She is concerned they give them everything they can but want to be sure they do not get in a bind. She would like them to look at the whole issue and come back with that. Jack Kudron. He asked for clarification from the Mayor if he was talking about senior citizen residents only; Mayor Daly answered, yes. A vote was then taken on the motion made by Council Member Zemel, with the foregoing amendments, seconded by Council Member McCracken. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 11 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES, FEBRUARY 10, 1998 A14. 123: Exercising the option to renew an Agreement with Golf Management Systems to continue to provide automated tee time reservation services for Dad Miller and Anaheim Hills Golf Courses for one year; and delegating authority to the Director of Community Services to exercise the remaining two one-year options. A15. 140: Accepting two grants from the California State Library, each in the amount of $5,000; and authorizing the Library Services Division to expend that amount for the sponsorship of Grandparents and Books Program at the Canyon Hills and Sunkist Libraries; and increasing the Library Services Division budget, in the amount of $5,000 in each revenue and expenditure account no. 217-213-4259 and 217-213-4256. A16. 144 RESOLUTION NO. 98R-27: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM WAIVING NOTICE OF LEASED SPACE AGREEMENT BY THE COUNTY OF ORANGE OF CERTAIN PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM. (WAIVER OF 60-DAY NOTICE REQUESTED BY THE COUNTY OF ORANGE HEALTH CARE AGENCY, CHILDREN AND YOUTH SERVICES FOR LEASE OF PROPERTY AT 1535 EAST ORANGEWOOD AVENUE FOR THE EARLY & PERIODIC SCREENING AND DIAGNOSIS TREATMENT PROGRAM.) A17. 114: RESOLUTION NO. 98R-28 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ESTABLISHING A SISTER CITY RELATIONSHIP WITH THE CITY OF VITORIA-GASTEIZ, SPAIN. Mayor Daly. He again thanked the Sister Cities Association for their presentation at the workshop today on this new relationship and the time and effort to make it happen. It will be exciting to see how they progress with Anaheim's second Sister City. A18. 152 Authorizing the City Manager to respond to the Orange County Grand Jury findings and recommendations in its report "Water Distribution and Rates Within Orange County". A19. 129: Authorizing the reissuance of the Request for Proposals for emergency transport services, and conducting the process per the schedule submitted by the Fire Department. (Continued from the meeting of January 27, 1998, Item A22.) Council Member Zemel. He apologized to Fire staff for missing the meeting scheduled on Monday. He then reiterated what had taken place relative to the subject RFP as well as his concerns (see minutes of 1/27/98, Item A22. and the 2/3/98 Workshop wherein Council Member Zemel expanded on the concerns and questions he had relative to the process). At the conclusion of reemphasizing his continuing concerns, he stated this is the one public safety service the Council has the ability to outsource. It causes him a great deal of concern and the fact that the elected officials have not had a major part in this. He would like to go forward with the RFP but with a couple of proposals in the form of motions as follows: (1) MOTION. That they require that an ambulance company have a minimum of five year's of first responder experience to be considered (pass/fail) and any company with less than five years not be approved by the Council. (2) MOTION. That the grading tool be provided to the Council before the RFP goes out giving a precise understanding of what the City is looking for and how the points will be allocated. (3) MOTION. That there be a separate section with input for a disaster preparedness plan. Mayor Daly. He noted the first motion on the floor and asked if there was a second; Council Member Tait seconded the first motion. 12 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES, FEBRUARY 10, 1998 Council Member Lopez. He does not support any additional changes to the RFP. He spent several different dates and hours with the City Manager, City staff and with the Fire Chief on this matter. He believes they have dissected and changed this as much as he would like to see. He is satisfied that staff has done a good job and he will not support the proposed additions. City Manager Ruth asked for clarification relative to adding first responder language to the RFP. Council Member Zemel. It should be someone with 911 experience that has actually worked with Fire Departments on accident calls. Council Member Tait. He feels five years might be a little strong and that two year's experience would be sufficient. He would not want to disqualify a firm with three year's experience that otherwise would do a good job. Council Member Zemel amended his motion that a company have at least two year's experience as first responder. Council Member Tait agreed in his second. A vote was then taken on the motion and failed to carry by the following vote: Ayes: Zemel and Tait. No: McCracken, Lopez, Daly. Council Member Zemel then reiterated his motion that a grading tool be provided so that there is a precise understanding of what the City is looking for and how the points will be allotted. The motion died for lack of a second. MOTION. Council Member Zemel. He first stated he will withdraw his third motion and then decided to proceed with it that there be a separate section on disaster preparedness to develop the plan and get the Council's viewpoints in that part of the plan; Council Member Tait seconded the motion. Council Member Lopez. He asked for clarification that disaster preparedness was already covered in the RFP. Fire Chief, Jeff Bowman. It is addressed in the RFP. Staff presented a document to the Council last week at the workshop that identified several sections of the RFP that asked for certain certifications upon which he elaborated. In addition, the County has very thorough plan in place on what occurs in the County in the event of a disaster. All ambulance companies that are certified in the County which includes all of the initial bidders are all required to understand and know the policies of the County. Twice a year, drills are held that test this system County wide. He believes it is unnecessary to ask any ambulance proposer what they are going to do when the County has very stringent requirements. Council Member Zemel. He stated he was going to withdraw the motion but would like the Chief to consider that as being an integral part of the RFP that the ambulance company has experience in disasters and can respond. Council Member Tait withdrew his second. MOTION. Mayor Daly moved to authorize the reissuance of the Request for Proposals for emergency transport services and conducting the process per the schedule submitted by the Fire Department. Council Member McCracken seconded the motion. Council Member Zemel voted No. MOTION CARRIED. A20. 152: Authorizing the Fire Chief to sign, on behalf of the City, all documents related to the City's Used Oil Recycling Program. 13 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES, FEBRUARY 10, 1998 A21. 114 Approving minutes of the Anaheim City Council meeting held January 27, 1998. Roll Call Vote on Resolution Nos. 98R-23 throuclh 98R- 28, both inclusive, for adoption: AYES: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: McCracken, Tait, Zemel, Lopez, Daly NOES: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: None The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 98R-23 through 98R-28, both inclusive, duly passed and adopted. END OF THE CONSENT CALENDAR. MOTIONS CARRIED. A22. 142: TAXICAB OPERATIONS: To consider an ordinance repealing Chapter 4.72, and adding a new Chapter 4.72 to title 4 of the Anaheim Municipal Code relating to regulation of taxicabs; and considering resolutions adopting certain fees to cover the cost of processing taxicab operator permits, adopting rates of fare to be charged by taxicab operators and adopting the taxicab regulations of the Orange County Taxi Administration Program (OCTAP). (Continued from the meeting of February 3, 1998, Item A15.) ORDINANCE NO 5627: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM REPEALING CHAPTER 4.72 OF, AND ADDING NEW CHAPTER 4.72 TO TITLE 4 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO REGULATION OF TAXICABS. (Introduced at the meeting of February 3, 1998, Item A15.) RESOLUTION NO 98R-29: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ADOPTING THE TAXICAB REGULATIONS OF THE ORANGE COUNTY TAXI ADMINISTRATION PROGRAM (OCTAP). RESOLUTION NO. 98R-30: OF ANAHEIM ADOPTING OPERATORS. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY RATES OF FARE TO BE CHARGED BY TAXICAB RESOLUTION NO. 98R-31: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ADOPTING CERTAIN FEES TO COVER THE COST OF PROCESSING TAXICAB OPERATOR PERMITS. Mayor Daly. He noted some language change (in Chapter 4.72). Public convenience or necessity is now, public convenience and necessity. City Attorney White. When the language was originally written, the word or may have inadvertently been substituted for the word and. State law which regulates public utilities and conveyance says public convenience and necessity not or. The recommendation is to use the same language as in State law which will give the City the benefit of all the legal precedents interpreting what the language means because it would be the same language. At the conclusion of discussion, Mayor Daly offered Ordinance No. 5627 and Resolution Nos. 98R-29 through 98R-31 for adoption. 14 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES, FEBRUARY 10, 1998 Roll Call Vote on Ord No. 5627 for adoption: AYES: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: McCracken, Tait, 7emel, Lopez, Daly NOES: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: None The Mayor declared Ordinance No 5627, duly passed and adopted.. Roll Call Vote on Resolution Nos. 98R-29 throuclh 98R-31, both inclusive, for adoption: AYES: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: McCracken, Tait, 7emel, Lopez, Daly NOES: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: None The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 98R-29 through 98R-31, both inclusive, duly passed and adopted. ITEMS B1 - B12 FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF JANUARY 21, 1998: INFORMATION ONLY -APPEAL PERIOD ENDS FEBRUARY 12, 1998: B1. 179: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3966 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION: OWNER: Walter A. Friedman, 624 Barnsdale Street, Anaheim, CA 92804 AGENT: Mark Scheuerman, 105 South State College Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92806 LOCATION: 105 South State College Boulevard - Insta-Tune and Lube. Property is 0.35 acre located at the southwest corner of State College Boulevard and Center Street. To permit a 1,266 square foot expansion of an existing 1,008 square foot lubrication, oil change and smog check and minor auto repair facility. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: CUP NO. 3966 GRANTED, for two years, to expire 1/21/00 (PC98-7) (4 yes votes, 3 absent). Approved Negative Declaration. Mayor Daly. He understands this item in and of itself would not require the billboard to be removed but it is to be removed when the street is widened; Joel Fick, Planning Director. That is staff's understanding as well. They work with the City Attorney's Office on these issues. It is difficult at best to have a billoard removed with a Conditional Use Permit application that is for use of the property only. In this instance it was granted solely for two years. They could not remove it with this permit and have investigated that with the Public Works Department. The right of ways are still being set in that location. Mayor Daly noted that the building is going to double in size from the existing 1,008 sq. ft. for a total of 2,274 sq. ft. and the Planning Commission gave a two-year permit to do that. Mr. Fick stated that the two-year time limitation had to do with landscaping and widening issues. Council Member Lopez. They finally got rid of the eyesore on the northeast corner and are actively trying to beautify the area. He is concerned about parking and doubling the size of the building. He would not approve this until the landscaping is provided. With the requested waivers, they should at least provide the landscaping now and not in two or three years. The intersection will be widened in some form in the next couple of years. If it is going to be done, have them do it correctly now. Mayor Daly. The concern is that the exact right of way of the widening is not yet determined so it is difficult to pin down where the landscaping should go. He believes he and Council Member Lopez have 15 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES, FEBRUARY 10, 1998 the same concern -- how much landscaping can be provided now. The Planning Commission required a 4' wide landscape border in front of the building not on the sidewalk. The owner must provide a 10' landscaped section along the sidewalk after the widening. Additional questions were posed to staff during which John Lower, Traffic and Transportation Manager explained that there was no detailed impact study done for this project because the number of trips does not fall under their threshold. While it is designated as a critical intersection, it is not within the Public Works 5-Year Capital Improvement Program. This coming fiscal year, they are widening at the northeast corner. He clarified it is a typical critical intersection widening. Mayor Daly. If funding were found to widen this intersection earlier than six years, he asked if that would impact in any way how the Planning Department is treating the landscaping, billboard, etc. One reason the landscaping is not settled is because they do not know when the intersection is going to be widened. He would like to see it sooner rather than later. City Attorney White. The Council, if they call for a Public Hearing, could impose a condition recommended by staff either to currently require the landscaping or a time contingent in the future when the public improvements are done. There is some flexibility but it would require setting the matter for a hearing and amending the conditions to do that. Council Member Lopez requested that a Public Hearing be set on this matter; Mayor Daly concurred and, therefore, a public hearing will be set at a later date. Mayor Daly asked that staff follow up on the funding question for the critical intersection -- the cycles of funding and what sources of funding are being pursued. B2. 179: CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION-CLASS 11 WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3993: OWNER: Lewis R. Schmid, Attn: Jason T. Schmid, 1725 South Douglass Road, #C, Anaheim, CA 92806 LOCATION: 2600-2620 East Katella Avenue - J.T. Schmid's Brewhouse and Eaten/. Property is 3.1 acres located at the southeast corner of Katella Avenue and Douglass Road. To permit a 25-foot high, 210 square foot freestanding sign including 30 square foot of marquee signage with waiver of prohibited signs. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: WITHDRAWN by the applicant. B3. 179: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3703 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION: OWNER: Lewis R. Schmid, Attn: Jason T. Schmid, 1725 South Douglass Road #C, Anaheim, CA 92806 LOCATION: 2600-2620 East Katella Avenue - J.T. Schmid's Brewhouse and Eaten/. Property is 3.1 acres located at the southeast corner of Katella Avenue and Douglass Road. To modify or delete a condition of approval pertaining to freestanding signs. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: WITHDRAWN by the applicant. B4. 179: WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENTCONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3995 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION: OWNER: Gilbert U. Kraemer, c/o North Street Partnership, P.O. Box 275, Placentia, CA 92871 AGENT: Taormina Industries, Inc., Attn: Jeri Muth, P.O. Box 309, Anaheim, CA 92815-0309 16 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES, FEBRUARY 10, 1998 LOCATION: 1071 North Blue Gum Street. Property is 1.42 acres located at the southwest corner of La Palma Avenue and Blue Gum Street. To permit an outdoor household hazardous materials recycling/resources recovery transfer facility with waivers of minimum structural and landscape setback adjacent to the Riverside Freeway and permitted encroachments in setback areas. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: CUP NO. 3995 GRANTED (PC98-8) (4 yes votes, 3 absent). Approved waiver of code requirement. Approved Negative Declaration. B5. 179: WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3994 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION: OWNER: California Drive-In Theaters, Inc., Attn: Jay Swerdlow, 120 N. Robertson Boulevard, Los Angeles, CA 90048 AGENT: A. Terrance Dickens, P.O. Box 2488, Long Beach, CA 90801 LOCATION: 1500 North Lemon Street (formerly Anaheim Drive-In). Property is 24.95 acres located at the southeast corner of Durst Street and Lemon Street. To establish an outdoor swap meet marketplace with waivers of minimum parking lot landscaping and permitted encroachments in setback areas. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: CUP NO. 3994 GRANTED (PC98-10) (4 yes votes, 3 absent). Approved waiver of code requirement. Approved Negative Declaration. Mayor Daly. The Planning Commission approved a swap meet at the Anaheim Drive-In site. The Planning Commission and Council previously approved an indoor movie theatre but apparently the owner has decided not to do that. He then posed a line of questions relative to the site and the current proposal which were answered by the Planning Director, at the conclusion of which he (Daly) stated he is not comfortable with another swap meet operation in the City. He feels they need to scrutinize every detail even if for only three years. Mayor Daly thereupon requested a review of the Planning Commission's decision which was concurred in by Council Member Lopez; therefore, a Public Hearing will be set at a later date. B6. 179: WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3987 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION DETERMINATION OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY NO. 98-01: OWNER: Tokiko Nakamura, 8430 Pebble Beach Drive, Buena Park, CA 90621 AGENT: Steve J. Rendes, 521 Laguna Road, Fullerton, Ca 92635 LOCATION: 2631-2637 West Lincoln Avenue - 98 Cent Store. Property is 0.84 acre located on the north side of Lincoln Avenue, 390 feet west of the centerline of Magnolia. To retain an unpermitted 7,624 square foot convenience market located within a 9,424 square foot commercial center and to permit sales of beer and wine for off-premises consumption with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces and to determine public convenience or necessity to permit the sales of beer and wine for off-premises consumption. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: CUP NO. 3987 GRANTED (PC98-11) (4 yes votes, 3 absent). Approved waiver of code requirement. Approved Determination of Public Convenience or Necessity No. 98-01. Negative Declaration Approved. Council Member McCracken. This permits sale of beer and wine. She was concerned and received a few phone calls that this was an additional beer and wine permit. 17 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES, FEBRUARY 10, 1998 Joel Fick, Planning Director. Changes came up at the Planning Commission meeting different from the staff recommendations contained in the staff report. Staff originally recommended denial based on the recommendation from the Police Department. The Police Department worked with the applicant and the license will be transferred from the drive-in dairy. Because it was a drive-through facility, it has been problematic for the Police Department. This will be a transferred license and will have conditions upon the permit with the new application. He personally spoke with Investigator Tom Engle and he is supportive of the request. B7. 179: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3977 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION: OWNER: Milton G. Johnson, Trustee of the Johnson Family Trust, 1214 W. Katella Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92802 AGENT: Keyvan Yousefy, 6007 Camino Manzano, Anaheim, Ca 92807 LOCATION: 520 South Walnut Street - Anaheim Collision Craft. Property is 2.1 acres located at the southeast corner of Walnut Street and Santa ^na Street. To retain an unpermitted auto repair, auto body and paint facility. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: CUP NO. 3977 DENIED (PC98-13) (4 yes votes, 3 absent). Negative Declaration Denied. B8. 179: WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3940 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION: OWNER: Shell Oil Products Company, P.O. Box 25370, Santa Ana, CA 92799 AGENT: Service Station Services, Attn: April Smith, 3 Hutton Centre Drive, Suite 711, Santa Ana, CA 92707 LOCATION: 3085 East La Palma Avenue - Shell Service Station. Property is 0.51 acre located at the northwest corner of Kraemer Boulevard and La Palma Avenue. To construct a 1,200 square foot service station with an accessory convenience market and automated car wash facility with waivers of minimum landscaping abutting an arterial highway and minimum landscaping adjacent to interior site boundary lines. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: WITHDRAWN by the applicant. B9. 179: WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 1816 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION: OWNER: Norman D. McDanel, 1381 N. Miller Street, Anaheim, CA 92806 LOCATION: 1381 North Miller Street - Mc Danel Grid Rollin.q Company. Property is 1.08 acres located at the west side of Miller Street, 1,109 feet north of the centerline of Miraloma Avenue. To amend or delete conditions of approval to expand an existing contractor's storage yard with waivers of required improvement of parking areas and minimum number of parking spaces. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: Approved amendment to conditions of approval for CUP NO. 1816 (PC98-14) (4 yes votes, 3 absent). Approved waiver or code requirement. Negative Declaration previously approved. 18 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES, FEBRUARY 10, 1998 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ITEMS: B10. 161: REQUEST FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF AN ADJUSTMENT TO THE WEST ANAHEIM REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA: City of Anaheim (Community Development Department), 201 S. Anaheim Blvd., Anaheim, CA 92805, requests review and approval of a resolution to add territory to the proposed West Anaheim Redevelopment Project Area. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: Approved an adjustment to the West Anaheim Redevelopment Project Area (PC98-6) (4 yes votes, 3 absent). Bll, 179: CEQA EXEMPTION SECTION 15061(b)(3) CODE AMENDMENT NO. 98-01 - AMENDMENT TO THE DECISION PROCESS FOR TIME EXTENSIONS TO COMPLY WITH CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: City of Anaheim (Planning Department), 200 S. Anaheim Blvd., Anaheim, CA 92803, requests amendment to the decision process for time extensions (to comply with conditions of approval) for amendments, conditional use permits, administrative use permits, variances and administrative adjustments. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: Recommended adoption of Code Amendment No. 98-01 to the City Council. Mayor Daly offered Ordinance No. 5628 for first reading. ORDINANCE NO. 5628 (INTRODUCTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING SUBSECTION ..030 OF SECTION 18.03.090 OF CHAPTER 18.03 OF TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO EXTENSIONS OF TIME LIMITS. B12. 179: VARIANCE NO. 4323 - REQUEST FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF FINAL LANDSCAPE PLANS, AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREV.-APPROVED): Howard Engelman, 111 N. Glenroy Avenue, Los Angeles, CA 90036, requests review and approval of final landscape plans. Property is located at 1098 North Euclid Street. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: Approved Final Landscape Plans for Variance No. 4323. Negative Declaration previously approved. Mayor Daly asked if staff was comfortable with the landscape plan as submitted and also the signage package. Joel Fick, Planning Director. The landscaping was given a lot of attention and they are in compliance. Relative to the signage, it will be removed and adjusted when the critical intersection widening takes place. John Lower, Traffic and Transportation Manager. Relative to the timing, this is another (critical intersection) location that is not in the Public Works current Capital Improvement Program. Mr. Fick stated that the pole sign will be removed but they will have a sign in the same location, an updated sign. When widened, it will be removed in its entirety. It has to go back for Planning Commission review and the discussion was for a monument sign at that time. END OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS. 19 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES, FEBRUARY 10, 1998 c1. 127: Discussion to consider a possible ballot measure to amend Section 1220 of the City Charter to require a simple majority vote rather than a 2/3 majority vote of the electorate for sale, lease, transfer or other disposal of electric or water utility. (Discussed, input received, and continued from the meeting of February 3, 1998, Item C2.) (Requested by Council Member Tait.) Earlier in the meeting (see discussion before Items of Public Interest) a motion was made by Council Member seconded by Council Member Zemel to remove this item from the agenda at this time. The motion carried and, therefore, this item was removed from the agenda. C2. 127: DISCUSSION - POSSIBLE JUNE BALLOT MEASURE ON TERM LIMITS: Discussion to consider a measure on the June ballot regarding the issue of term limits for boards, commissions, the Mayor, and Council Members requested by Council Member Zemel at the meeting of February 3, 1998. MOTION. Council Member Zemel moved that this item be removed from the agenda until further notice. Council Member Tait seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. Later in the meeting, Council Member Zemel stated that the City Attorney informed him of an error in dates. Instead of offering to remove the item from the agenda, he would, therefore, like to have the subject discussion placed on the Council Meeting agenda of February 24, 1998. City Attorney White. It is just continuing the matter to the next meeting. In order to meet the deadline for the election, some direction would have to be given to staff to draft the appropriate resolution. It was determined that the subject item will be agendized for the meeting of February 24, 1998 superseding the motion to remove it from the agenda. C4. 114: COUNCIL COMMENTS: Council Member Zemel. He referred to his previous request and concern relative to the Utility Department brochure sent out with every Utility bill giving the impression that the City Council imposed a City utility fee (State mandated Public Benefit fee). The report submitted by staff does not address what he was looking for -- the fact that it was approved on a 3-2 vote of the Council (he and Council Member Tait voting no) and not a unanimous vote. He resented having taxpayer's dollars spent on sending out a message that made it look like he and Council Member Tait voted with the Council majority. City Manager Ruth. In the response back, staff indicated they could understand how he could feel that way. It did not say it was not a unanimous vote and, therefore, the public could perceive that it was. It was indicated to staff to make sure they are sensitive on any publication that goes out not to try and represent personal beliefs or feelings. They do not feel it is necessary to send everything to the Council and have five Council Members review material before sending everything out. The main thing, they need to control that internally and have committed to doing that. If the Council wants some kind of clarification in terms of that particular vote, they will be more than happy to do so in a future addition of the brochure. From staff's standpoint, it was unintentional to misrepresent that vote. They will be very sensitive particularly with relation to any split vote in the future. Council Member Zemel suggested that he and the City Manager could dialogue the issue at a later time. Council Member Lopez. He noted that the fee was not a tax but it was a Public Benefits Program; City Manager Ruth. That is correct and it was State mandated. 20 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CiTY COUNCIL MINUTES, FEBRUARY '10, 1998 and have five Council Members review matedHal before sending everything out. The main thing, they need to control that intemally and have committed to doing that. If the Council wants some kind of clarification in terms of that particular vote, they will be more than happy to do so in a future addition of the brochure. From staffs standpoint, it was unintentional to misrepresent that vote. They will be very sensitive particularly with relation to any split vote in the future. Council Member Zemel suggested that he and the City Manager could dialogue the issue at a later time. Council Member Lopez. He noted that the fee was not a tax but it was a Public Benefits Program; City Manager Ruth. That is correct and it was State mandated. Council Member Lopez. He reiterated it was not a tax, but it was something mandated by the Legislators. The Council only voted to keep the revenue under City control to give a benefit to the City's citizens. They did not have a choice - it is State law. Council Member Zemel. He has been noticing around the City billboards which indicate a slogan, 'Kiss Your Big A Goodbye'. They were told when negotiations started with Anaheim Sports and with Disney to take over the stadium they would make it a baseball stadium but from a nostalgic point of view, they were going to bring back the 'Big A'. He feels the slogan is a slap in the face beyond calling Anaheim Stadium Edison Field. He does not know if they want to send a letter, and no matter how they felt on the stadium issue that there is consensus on the Council that the slogan is one that does not sit well with the residents of Anaheim and ask them to come up with a different slogan and not insult the citizens. City Manager Ruth. He found out about it yesterday and was somewhat shocked and surprised by it also. Whatever the Council's direction would be they would be happy to respond. Mayor Daly. He suggested the City Manager contact the relevant staff people (in the Disney organization) and convey the concern that has been raised and report back to the Council with the result of the conversation. Council Member McCracken. She would like placed on the next Council agenda reconsideration of Mr. Ravi Mehta's services to the City. (This item will be placed on the Council Meeting agenda of February 24, 1998). ADJOURNMENT: Mayor Daly asked that the meeting be adjourned in memory of Homer Wallace a legendary former City employee. He was one of the odginal Anaheim Firefighters and as the City Manager had reported, served as Fire Chief and Cheif Building Official at a time when employees wore several hats. He asked the City Clerk to convey Council's regrets and sympathy and best regards to his wife, Bemice and son Rod. Mr. Wallace was 93 years old. By general Council consent, the City Council meeting of February 10, 1998 was adjourned in memory of Homer Wallace. (7:35 P.M.) LEONORA N. SOHL CITY CLERK 20