1998/02/24ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA- CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
February 24, 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
PLANNING DIRECTOR: Joel Fick
TRAFFIC & TRANSPORTATION MGR: John Lower
ZONING DIVISION MANAGER: Greg Hastings
A complete copy of the agenda for the meeting of the Anaheim City Council was posted at 12:10 p.m. on
February 20, 1998 at the City Hall Kiosk, containing all items as shown herein.
Mayor Daly called the workshop portion of the meeting of February 24, 1998 to order at 3:17 P.M. and
welcomed those in attendance, all Council Members being present ( Council Member Zemel entered at
3:32). The purpose of this joint workshop is to exchange points of view and dialogue planning and
development issues in the City.
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Bostwick, Boydstun, Peraza, Henninger, Napoles.
Planning Commission Chairman, Paul Bostwick called the adjourned regular meeting of the Planning
Commission to order, all Commissioners being present with the exception of Commissioner Bristol (and
one vacancy).
City Manager, James Ruth. He deferred to the Planning Director, Joel Fick.
JOINT WORKSHOP - CITY COUNCIL AND PLANNING COMMISSION: Joel Fick, Planning Director.
The City Council is always interested in meeting with the Planning Commission to discuss issues in
general as well as specific planning topics which they have in mind as well as those of the
Commissioners. That is the spirit under which this joint workshop was scheduled today.
Mayor Daly. It is important to understand the thinking of both groups relative to the state of development
and land use planning in the City and to identify concerns. Some of the best things that have been done
have been a result of what has come out of these joint workshops.
The following issues were then broached and the ensuing discussion summarized:
Beer and Wine (alcohol) Licenses: Paul Bostwick. Relative to mini-markets and gas stations and the
need for liquor licenses in these locations, the Commission would like to know the Council's feelings and
if there is a preference on how these requests should be approached in the future. In the recent past,
they have asked the proponent to buy out some of the other licenses in the area that are either not being
used or that may be available to try to reduce some of the licenses.
Council Member Lopez. He is unequivocally opposed to any additional beer and wine licenses especially
at the locations being discussed. As a Police Officer, he has witnessed the consequences especially
relative to drinking and driving. If it were up to him, he would not approve the issuance of any new
licenses. If people want to buy alcohol, they can do so at the large supermarkets.
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES, February 24,1998
Commissioner Boydstun. She feels they support Council Member Lopez but in reality it is not possible to
do so entirely. In instances where they have turned down such requests, the applicant turns around and
sues the City thus costing taxpayer dollars. They try to find reasons why they turn down requests for
alcohol.
Commissioner Peraza. If people want to drink, they should be able to do so. He is, of course, against
drinking and driving. People also have a right to conduct legitimate businesses. The Commission has to
try to look at the crime statistics in an area as well as how many licenses there are and make a
determination on that basis.
Council Member McCracken. In several instances in the last 14 months, she has supported (beer and
wine) licenses in some of the quality developing gas stations where they have changed the community
(positively) and where, particularly the name stations, are controlling and monitoring alcohol sales
because they have a lot to lose if they do not do so. If they can reduce some of the "mom and pop"
establishments selling alcohol where there is no such supervision,or lack of it it, will be better for the
community.
Commissioner Henninger. While none of them support drinking and driving, he does not believe that
beer and wine sold at a gas station impacts that. If they can get licenses into better-managed hands,
they can improve communities. If they set a policy that they are going to have just a given number of
licenses in each reporting district, a policy to limit the number of convenience sotres, etc., what they will
have are gas stations selling liquor resulting in fewer liquor and convenience stores. He feels it is a good
place for the City to go. He also feels they should think about asking those who request licenses in a
reporting district where there are already too many, to buy other licenses and establish this as a policy;
Commissioner Boydstun. She agreed but also there should be some way to restrict licenses where an
applicant would have to buy up a license in their own area.
Commissioner Napoles. He feels they should minimize and curtail giving so many licenses in order to
have a better place in which to live. His feeling is they are granting too many licenses.
Mayor Daly. He asked if there was any specific followup the Commission would like staff to do.
Speaking for himself, the current trends are good and also the buyout recommendation works.
Commissioner Henninger. He feels the question is, should there be a formal policy and, with a
meaningful policy, they could then address some of the issues.
Mayor Daly. They will ask staff to look at formalizing what they have basically been doing and
recommending for the past year and bring it back for the Council and Commission to consider. He feels
the direction they are heading and the things they have been doing, including recommendations from
Police and Code Enforcement, are all working well. He agrees with Mr. Henninger it is fruitless to deny
beer and wine to a new and beautiful gas station when there is a 7-11 down the street able to do so.
PlanninQ Issues/PlanninQ Areas: Commissioner Peraza. He would like to see the City take more
aggressive action in upgrading the west part of Anaheim as well as some of the hotels and motels noting
the recent action taken on Pacific Inn (CUP terminated). Most of the businesses they have worked with
have upgraded and maintained their facilities. He is pleased with the rehabilitation of certain areas such
as the North Citron area and, well before that, the Chevy Chase area which was so positive for the
community. It is necessary to continue these efforts and also to keep revisiting those areas to make sure
the rehabilitated areas are being maintained.
Mayor Daly. He asked relative to the neighborhood planning effort that is in progress, is there anything
they can learn from the experience to apply in their next efforts -- should they be more aggressive
relative to Code Enforcement, Police and Planning. He is interested in the bigger picture, i.e., in west
Anaheim as they look at the area lot by lot in the current planning effort, the amenities that the
community has, City type crossroads, is there a "heart" of west Anaheim, new parks, playgrounds,
identifying features discussed in the past, etc. He has a concern they are not thinking big enough in
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES, February 24,1998
some of the large areas such as everything west of Brookhurst. He questions if they are adding any real
value to those neighborhoods, encouraging more home building -- the types of things they used to do as
a City.
Joel Fick, Planning Director. He recalled that it was at one of these workshops that they launched the
idea of community planning starting with what was originally Planning Area 17, the East Anaheim Area,
and came up with 50 action items, many of which have been accomplished. He then gave some history
on what took place then and since then which has been a cooperative effort with the neighborhoods and
many City departments leading to very positive and long-ranging results.
Mayor Daly. He noted as an example in west Anaheim the whole Brookhurst Community Center
complex with five public facilities in that area. If someone is thinking about buying a house in west
Anaheim, are they aware of that complex, does it create any value for the City, after 20 years, should
they finish it off and make it more valuable with perhaps the possibility of having to buy more property to
do so, are those types of questions raised relative to the larger, big-picture challenges to the community.
Commissioner Bostwick. He feels they have started the process with the Redevelopment Project Area
that was recently established in that area which hopefully will provide a wave of new businesses that will
provide the services people want and are going to need if they are going to rehabilitate the 40, 50 and
60-year old homes in those areas.
Mayor Daly. Because corridors are so key, they may want to talk about expediting the time frame staff is
using to beautify them. He is impatient in this regard; are there systems in place to generate ideas; Joel
Fick. The concept is a great one and of prime interest to staff as well. He explained what is taking
place. They are using the community planning process to go back with the departments and are in the
process of merging those interests and developing a plan and recommendations to bring back to the
Council.
Commissioner Henninger. When the Sunkist plan came through (part of the first Planning Area), there
were a number of long-range plans regarding parkways and streetscapes. He felt reluctant in
emphasizing those too much because they might not be affordable for the City or promising something
that could not be delivered. He feels they need to be concerned about costs but one of the things going
on in the City right now, all the freeway ramps are being rebuilt and will be landscaped by Caltrans. He
wonders, and he knows that staff is working with Caltrans, if it will be helpful to the City to have all those
interchanges landscaped and add to that by doing some improvements between the interchanges and
the first major intersection. He believes it is something where they can get more "bang for the buck" with
gateways and entrance monuments.
Mayor Daly. Staff has come up with a program where the right-of-way is not available for the larger
monument to use a junior monument sign. He asked if that had been given to the Planning Commission;
Joel Fick. Portions of it have.
Mayor Daly. He stated it might be good to revisit that. Maybe as a result of that discussion, there might
be further recommendations they want to make -- the opportunities created by rebuilding the
interchanges. They ought to seize on that as much as they can.
Commissioner Boydstun. She suggested perhaps having a twice-a-year general cleanup program for the
area where trash bins are provided. In other areas, communities do take advantage of the opportunity.
Mayor Daly. He reiterated his recommendation relative to public facilities on the west side. The
Planning Commission should feel free to make recommendations. Even if it costs money, the Council
will consider them.
Council Member Tait. Relative to the motels on Beach Boulevard, an idea that was brough up about
three years ago that he still feels is a good idea is the opportunity for SRO (single room occupancy) type
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES, February 24,1998
units. He believes it is more of a management issue than anything else. He would like to see at least
one such facility tried and perhaps staff could work on that. The motels cannot all be shut down, but
maybe there are some incentives they could use to try to convert one. He is not sure how to implement
it but it is the type of idea he would like to get from the Planning Commission which he feels will make a
long-term impact;Mayor Daly. H e asked staff to report back on how or what type of incentives might be
available.
Commissioner Henninger. It is broader than just hotels -- it looks to him that there is a lot of
excess/vacant commercial capacity. Hopefully the end of the recession will take care of that. Perhaps
they should think about what course of action to take in that regard as well.
Council Member McCracken spoke about the change in the commercial picture where once strip
commercial was the way to go but now that is no longer true with newer cities developing regional
shopping centers bringing a whole different look to an area. Those are the cities Anaheim is competing
with. She feels they are going to have to look at a new philosophy about commercial areas and how they
are dealt with especially along the City's main corridors. In some areas, commercial zoning has been
changed where it was no longer viable as commercial and converted to educational facilities (private).
Commissioner Bostwick. He has talked about schools with Council Member McCracken. He noted that
recently the Planning Commission turned down a school out on Orangethorpe (in a commercial center)
and the Council overrode the decision. He would like to know their feelings about schools in commercial
or industrial areas since obviously there is going to be an increase in private schools because people are
looking for alternatives; Council Member Zemel. It was not that they overturned the decision so much as
it was a temporary solution since there were only two years left on the lease.
Council Member Tait. They do look to the Planning Commission -- everything is a balance. Having
been a Planning Commissioner and now a Council Member, he never realized how much the Council
relies on the Commission. They very seldom pull an item for a public hearing even though they may get
ten or twelve items a week (on the Planning Commission consent calendar). They rely on the
Commission's decisions and the balancing process and the majority of times it works.
Commissioner Henninger. Relative to economic alternatives to the existing rundown commercial center
converting to some other use, perhaps through the Redevelopment Agency they could get some
professional help on alternatives.
Coolieration with School Districts Overcrowdincl Issues: Council Member Zemel. When he was
on the Planning Commission in 1991, Mel Lopez and other School Superintendents came to them with
school overcrowding problems. They now have a huge issue with regard to adding classroom space with
the influx of population they are experiencing. He feels perhaps the City may be able to be more
interactive in helping with those problems. He knows that Mayor Daly and Council Member Lopez sit on
a board regarding after-school sports where the City is interacting with the School District. He is hoping
they can find some way of working with them.
Mayor Daly. When this issue became very apparent a couple of years ago, school officials were very
aggressive in opposing developments that were proposed to the City. The City Manager and Planning
staff started spending time with the School District staffs. The Betsy Ross school expansion is an
example of one outcome and also the Adelaide Price expansion. Redevelopment Staff is also working
with them.
City Manager Ruth. Their working relationship both with the Anaheim Elementary School District and the
High School District is better than it has ever been. There is a lot of dialogue going on (relative to
overcrowding) and they are getting a lot of feedback from the schools. In terms of park space, the Mayor
mentioned two that the City has developed with the School District. The City also helped with their
Administrative Headquarters by giving $5 million out of Redevelopment funds. There is a lot of effort
being made, it is critical, and that effort is continuing.
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES, February 24,1998
Discussion then followed between Council Members and Commissioners relative to the overcrowding
issue, its causes and some of the things that have been done to assist (i.e., parking bans, insuring
garages are used only for parking vehicles, etc.) Commissioner Bostwick stated one thing that would
help would be a State occupancy ordinance; Council Member Zemel suggested renewing the efforts and
opportunities in that regard.
Commissioner Peraza. Anaheim Schools are probably some of the best maintained in the State. They
place high priority on maintenance. The problem is the schools are just old and built not for 1,000 -
1,200 children, but 600.
Council Member McCracken noted that the present overcrowding issue started about 30 years ago when
(now outlawed) adult-only apartments were built. These apartments now hold many more
people/families than intended; Commissioner Boydstun pointed out also that when they built in
downtown, parking was only 1 1/4 spaces/unit and now it is 2 1/2 and there is no place to expand. Santa
Ana has a code that occupants have to have parking space in their garages and there is an inspection
provision included. They need something with "teeth" to enforce vehicle parking in garages and this
would help. It has not yet been an agendized Commission item.
Council Member Zemel. A solution could be, on a temporary basis, that private schools partner with
public schools to take the overflow. Perhaps they could think about that and if staff has any thoughts
how they might be able to work together with the School District with a private school opportunity;
Commissioner Bostwick. They might encourage Redevelopment staff to deal with the School District
and private schools in the City to look at that option.
Council Member Tait. He appreciates the Commission's general pro-business attitude and he feels that
that attitude is understood in the community. Anaheim has a good reputation for being business friendly.
One "housekeeping" item he has and information that would be helpful to him, if certain conditions that
are extremely important to the Commission where they might not have approved the project without
those conditions, if that could be communicated maybe through Mr. Fick or some way, perhaps through
the minutes. He would like to know what the conditions are that are very important to the Commission.
Underqroundinq Issue: Commissioner Henninger. As part of his duties, he sits on the
Undergrounding Committee. He asked if the deregulation in the utility industry will affect the cash flow
for undergrounding and, if so, are the correct priorities in place. Right now undergrounding is balanced
so that all communities in the City benefit. If funding becomes limited, will the priorities change.
Mayor Daly. The latest update on the Five-Year Undergrounding Plan will be coming to the Council
soon. Perhaps as part of the Advisory Commission process as well as part of the report that comes to
the Council they could outline how those cash flows might be affected and does staff have a fallback
program if the amount shrinks. A strategy then might be to concentrate on the most heavily travelled
corridors or whatever works best. It is a good question and one that should be posed to the Public
Utilities Director, Ed Aghjayan and the City Manager -- will deregulation affect funding for
undergrounding.
Additional Issues: Rehabilitation of Properties Self-Storacle Facilities - Industrial Properties
(Anaheim Blvd./South St. Area(s): Mayor Daly. Issues that he is interested in pursuing: the first is
the potential of a City-wide program to encourage rehabilitation of properties whether in Redevelopment
project areas or outside, perhaps properties of a certain age or one-category properties like shopping
centers or single-family homes. The key would be the availability of funding if certain properties they
would like to see renovated if there was a low-interest loan program or incentive programs to encourage
those properties to do rehabilitation such as some of the older shopping centers on the west side. He
would like feedback on that from the Planning Commission and also staff.
Commissioner Henninger thought it would be a great program; Chairman Bostwick noted that in the City
of Orange, the entire length of Tustin Avenue has been rehabilitated (especially the many strip
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES, February 24,1998
commercial centers). He does not know what they did to accomplish that extensive project but that is
something Anaheim should look at since it has worked well.
Mayor Daly. The second issue is the proliferation in the City of self-storage facilities. Zoning allows
them in certain areas and there is another on tonight's agenda. The question is, are self-storage facilities
the highest and best use for precious industrial land. Some cities do not allow them at all. Do they want
to think long term about how many will be able to be accommodated in the community. The people in
West Anaheim tell him they think they have enough even now. Just because the investment of the
moment is self-storage may not be the best for the community. Commercial land is also precious.
Commissioner Boydstun. She believes that self-storage is a temporary situation. If it is zoning that is
important, they should leave the zoning in place. There are now high-rise facilities and condominiums
on the south side of town where there were once self-storage facilities.
Council Member Tait. He understands they are so profitable, it would be difficult to tear one down to
build a commercial center or an industrial building. He agrees with the Mayor; Commissioner Boydstun
noted, however, that in some places where nothing else is planned for the property, self-storage cleans
up the area.
Commissioner Henninger. He does not agree with people in west Anaheim about self-storage. As long
as the architecture is right, they seem to be a benign land use and one of the solutions rather than one of
the problems at this time. He believes they have to monitor the supply but to him they are part of the
solution for certain areas. He also stated what he heard about self-storage was a concern about
continuing to make future substantial commitments in some of the areas that perhaps ought to be
comprehensively planned and possibly a complete use change. It is something that has not been looked
at in detail but perhaps they should do so.
Mayor Daly. His last issue and one of the challenges of the older part of the City is the interface between
residential zoning and industrial zoning. Some of the industrial zoning, short-term and long-term, may no
longer be appropriate. This last point which ties into self-storage are the industrial properties along South
Anaheim Boulevard and Santa Ana Street. There has been no change or investment going on on Santa
Ana Street and the old railroad tracks are never used. They ought to replan that area for the good of
downtown and for the good of the Anaheim Boulevard corridor. That industrial area comes right into the
heart of the City. Coming in on Anaheim Blvd., people see abandoned lumber yards two blocks from the
downtown Redevelopment area. He questioned what they are going to do about it -- revise the General
Plan or use Redevelopment. Maybe they could talk about their comfort level in looking at some of the
sub-areas of the City and considering that very thing (comprehensively planned areas). Waiting for
Redevelopment alone in some of these areas is not enough. They could consider the same thing they
did in the Anaheim Business Center, a specific plan process that retooled the area.
Before the workshop concluded, there were closing comments by the Planning Director, Joel Fick on
some of the issues that were discussed today as well as the many positive short-term and long-range
projects that had been undertaken such as the Community Planning process which, in some areas, had
brought about dramatic changes. The process is ongoing and many things are happening on top of all
the things the City has been doing historically.
Mayor Daly. Speaking to the Planning Commissioners, the Council appreciates all the work that they do
on behalf of the City. He also thanked them for their time today and the Council will look forward to
another such workshop at the earliest opportunity. They should feel free to call Council Members with
their ideas and questions. The Mayor also acknowledged/thanked the Planning Director and his staff.
Commissioner Peraza then thanked the Council for providing the Commission with a professional staff
that is excellent and always provides them with all the information they need to make the best decisions.
They are very appreciative of staff.
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES, February 24,1998
ADJOURNMENT PLANNING COMMISSION: By general Commission consent the City Planning
Commission meeting was adjourned, with the next regularly scheduled meeting to be held March 2, 1998
at 11:00 A.M.
REQUEST FOR CLOSED SESSION:
City Attorney, Jack White. Prior to recessing to Closed Session, he announced that there were two
errors on the Closed Session Agenda under Item 3 and item 5. Under Item 3, the parties with whom the
City negotiated are Alberto V. and Marina C. Miranda and under Item 5, the claimant is Marie Davis.
Those errors were discovered after the agenda was posted and it will, therefore, be necessary for the
Council to take action waiving the 72-hour posting provisions of the Brown Act to correct those items.
MOTION. Mayor Daly moved to waive the 72-hour posting provisions of the Brown Act to make the
adjustments to the Closed Session Agenda (as noted under Item 3 and 5 below) as articulated by the
City Attorney. Council Member Lopez seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.
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 REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION
54956.8:
Property: 300 North Olive Street
Negotiating parties: Anaheim Redevelopment Agency (also Alberto V. and Marina C. Miranda
added as per motion above)
LIABILITY CLAIMS
Claimant: Pamela Schleski
Agency Claimed Against: City of Anaheim
LIABILITY CLAIMS
Claimant: Daryan Davis (corrected to Marie Davis per motion above)
Agency Claimed Against: City of Anaheim
RECESS:
Mayor Daly moved to recess into Closed Session. Council Member Lopez seconded the motion.
MOTION CARRIED. (4:32 p.m.)
AFTER RECESS:
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES, February 24,1998
The Mayor called the meeting to order, all Council Members being present, and welcomed those
in attendance to the Council meeting. ( 5:09 p.m.)
INVOCATION:
A Moment of Silence was observed in lieu of an invocation.
FLAG SALUTE:
Council Member Shirley McCracken led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
119: PROCLAMATIONS: The following Proclamations were issued by Mayor Daly and authorized by
the City Council:
Volunteer Recognition Month in Anaheim - March, 1998
Black History Month in Anaheim - February, 1998
Terry Lowe, Recreation Superintendent announced that relative to Volunteer Recognition Month, two
long-standing and very valuable volunteers were present to accept the Proclamation on behalf of
Anaheim's great number of volunteers; Michelle Prichard and Linda Hoffman accepted the Proclamation.
Mayor Daly. He noted that a volunteer banquet is held every year at the Anaheim Convention Center to
recognize all the City's volunteers who commit many thousands of hours to the City -- this year, a total of
103,897 hours with a savings to the City valued at $658,700. (The Recognition Banquet is to be held
Thursday, March 19, 1998).
Liz Cason, an active member of the Anaheim community, accepted the Black History Month
Proclamation. She noted that the population of the African-American community in Orange County has
grown tremendously in the last 10-15 years and are now an integral part of the County numbering almost
50,000. She then introduced Bea Jones who introduced to the Council and Chamber audience, the Pan-
African flag (a miniature version), an international flag which unites all African people throughout the
world. She explained its symbolism and also that it is now over 76 years old.
Mayor Daly and Council Members congratulated and commended those who accepted the
Proclamations.
RECOGNITIONS AUTHORIZED BY COUNCIL THIS DATE TO BE MAILED OR PRESENTED AT
ANOTHER TIME:
DECLARATION recognizing Jeff Bowman as the Cypress College Foundation 1998 Citizen of
the Year for Anaheim.
FINANCIAL DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY in the amount of $3,094,472.91 for the period ending
February 17, 1998 and $4,716,932.95 for the period ending February 24, 1998, in accordance with the
1997-98 Budget, were approved.
Mayor Daly recessed the City Council meeting until after the Redevelopment Agency meeting. (5:24
p.m.)
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES, February 24,1998
Mayor Daly reconvened the City Council Meeting (5:25 p.m.)
ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA:
There were no additions to agenda items.
ITEMS OF PUBLIC INTEREST: The following people spoke relative to the previous hiring of a Special
Prosecutor to investigate possible violations of the campaign finance laws either opposing the
appointment, expenditure of funds for and tactics of the Special Prosecutor. Their comments are
summarized. (NOTE: A verbatim transcript of this portion of the meeting will be on file in the City
Clerk's Office.)
Steven Mather, 102 S. Seneca Circle, Anaheim, Pastor, First Presbyterian Church. (Also see minutes of
February 10, 1998 where Pastor Mather spoke to the same issue.) He was present along with members
of the community, Taxpayers Expecting Accountability (TEA) who he asked to stand (approximately 110
were present). He made comments to and posed a line of questions about the issue of the hiring of the
Special Prosecutor. At the conclusion, he noted that the City has never embarked on appointing a
Special Prosecutor in its history, and he questioned why at this juncture.
Victoria Brady, Sisters of Mercy Community, St. Boniface Church, 425 E. Center St., Anaheim. The
charges were formulated and prosecuted by the Special Prosecutor with an ulterior motive, not to secure
justice, but to harrass and intimidate (Council Member Zemel's and Lopez's) political opponent. Having
spoken with Council Member Zemel, he admitted that the situation all began with the City Attorney's
intention to bring suit against Steve Sheldon's Business and Taxpayers Good Government Committee
for violations of Anaheim's Campaign Finance Ordinance spending at least $32,186 in support of Council
candidate, Lucille Kring in the last 10 days of the campaign in what any fair-minded person would label,
"below-the-belt" hits. Justice does not seem to be the aim but a subterfuge. Shen then elaborated on
the reasons she believed this to be true.
Claire Moynihan, 215 S. Atcheson, Anaheim. She expressed concerns relative to the hiring particularly
of Ravi Mehta as the Special Prosecutor, a person who she stated resigned from the FPPC under a
cloud. Mr. Mehta at the last Council meeting was willing to tell everything (see minutes of February 10,
1998) so as to justify his "price tag." The charges against the Business and Taxpayers Good
Government Committee involve the most blatant examples of breaking the law. He (the Special
Prosecutor) is either unable or unwilling to look at the more grevious offense but instead appears to be
fixated on a predetermined agenda of harassing, intimidating and draining the treasuries of specific
political figures in concert with those who appointed him.
Joe Carter, Retired Schood Educator, 1945 Bayshore, Anaheim 92801. He spoke to the cost of the
investigation thus far -- for October, November and December, over $118,000 has been billed to the City
by the Special Prosecutor and it looks like the bills for January and February will bring the fees to a total
of $250,000. Two weeks ago, they heard there was no limit to these charges and this is of concern to
TEA.
Paul Kott, 1225 W. Lincoln Avenue, Anaheim. They agree that no one is above the law, but this
particular investigation has the perception of a "kangaroo court." The investigtion is an embarrassment
to the City. It costs far too much money and sends a frightening message to future leaders. The "ship of
State of Anaheim" is beginning to sink. He asked that they show they are not politicians, but community
leaders with integrity.
Monsignor Wilbur Davis, Pastor, St. Boniface Church, 120 N. Janss, Anaheim. He is speaking on behalf
of a group of concerned religious leaders, himself, Reverend Charles Lopez, Jr., Pastor, Grace Lutheran
Church, Jimmy Gaston, Minister, State College Church of Christ, Reverend Dr. Robert Shepard, St.
Pastor, Anaheim United Methodist Church, Reverend Steven Mather, St. Pastor, First Presbyterian
Church, and Sister Victoria Brady, Parish Sister/St. Boniface. They wish to express their profound
concern about the events of the last few months regarding the actions of the Special Prosecutor. He
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES, February 24,1998
then elaborated on their issues. In concluding, he stated the situation is a major public embarassment
that seeks immediate resolution. The citizens of Anaheim have not benefitted and no doubt will be hurt.
Dr. John Baird, 3239 W. Ravenswood, Anaheim. (Also see his input given at the meeting of February
10, 1997.) He was present two weeks ago and asked a series of questions and is still waiting for answers
from either Council Member Lopez and/or Zemel.
Lois Van de Warker, 206 N. Merrimac Dr., Anaheim. She is not part of an organized effort. Having
worked in municipal government for 20 years, she is aware of all kinds of laws on the books people do
not even know about. It would not be difficult to break any one of those laws. This is overkill, the fallout
from which is not merely playing havoc with a few lives, but it is affecting everyone. The money spent
on Mr. Mehta's contract could have been spent on repairs of the City's streets or enhancing community
programs. The individuals facing charges are not criminals. She has known and worked for them for
many years. They are honest people who care about all the citizens of Anaheim.
Shirley Grindie, 5021 Glen Arran, Orange. She knows and has spoken to each of the Council Members.
She monitors all their campaigns and for twenty years has been monitoring County offices. She
currently monitors all reporting in Anaheim, Orange and Santa Ana. Mr. Zemel assured the public all
Council Members are being treated fairly and equally by the Special Prosecutor and no one is above the
law. She was astonished when she heard these comments because she knows first hand, there is not a
single Council Member who has not committed some of the same violations as those that have been
charged against McCracken, Daly, Feldhaus and Pickler. Ms. Grindle's extensive presentation then
covered many areas amongst which were the following: Anaheim is the first and only City in Orange
County that she knows of that has hired a Special Prosecutor to investigate itself, reported on specific
violations she has found under one or more categories committed by all present Council Members, the
point being that some people get charged and some do not, etc. It is difficult to conclude, from her
standpoint, from these facts (those which she outlined in her presentation - see verbatim transcript for
specifics) that Mr. Mehta is conducting a fair and unbiased investigation. He has filed charges against
Daly, Pickler, McCracken and Feldhaus, but not Lopez, Zemel, Tait and Kring for the same violations.
Ms. Grindie continued, she can only speculate as to the real reasons behind this unequal treatment none
of which would justify singling out of certain individuals for prosecution. She also finds it unbelievable
that one individual can be the investigator, the negotiator, and finally the assessor of the monetary
penalty. It is imperative for all of them to put aside their political bickering and payback schemes and
restore some fairness and confidence in the entire situation. Mr. Mehta's agreement specifically allows
the Council to terminate his contract and all his legal services at any time with or without costs. If they
did this, they could forward all the outstanding charges as well as those brought to their attention by her
tonight to the FPPC. The charges against Mayor Daly and others for the phone bank issue can also be
handled by the FPPC to let them decide whether the independent expenditure by Daly, Pickler and the
Firefighters was truly independent and whether a committee should have been formed when it was not.
The charges against the Sheldon committee should be returned to the City Attorney for prosecution. The
City will be a far more aggressive defender of their own ordinance than will be Mr. Mehta who already
has shown a predisposition towards the Zemel camp.
Council Member Zemel asked if she was recommending that the City Attorney handle the Sheldon case
and the FPPC, the Daly incident; Ms. Grindie answered, yes. If they choose not to terminate Mr. Mehta's
contract, then it is their duty to see that he investigates and prosecutes all the individuals involved. He
can start by filing charges against Zemel, Lopez, Tait and Kring. If Mr. Mehta does not and they do not
instruct him to do so, it will confirm the suspicion that this entire investigation is politically motivated, that
it does target political adversaries, and that some Council Members really are above the law.
Frank Feldhaus, 612 S. Harbor Blvd., Anaheim. Both the Orange County Register and the Los Angeles
Times need some correction. He did not pay $10,000 to avoid prosecution as reported; in fact, he
wanted the case to go to trial because he and his Treasurer would prove that the charges were not
criminal, not knowing and willful acts nor gross negligence but errors of omission by the Treasurer who,
10
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES, February 24,1998
like him, was unfamiliar with all the technical reporting requirements of State law which omissions did
not warrant criminal prosecution. He then gave additional reasons why he settled the matter along with
additional comments relative to the issue. (See transcript of the proceedings for specifics.)
The following people spoke in favor of the hiring of and/or work of the Special Prosecutor. Their
comments are summarized:
Kenneth Fisher, 1415 W. Cerritos #51, Anaheim. He stated he is a citizen leader in this community and
Orange County. Justice has to prevail. The matter should be continued until the truth is out.
Herb Hamilton, 629 Revere Street, Anaheim. He is behind Council Member Lopez and Zemel 100%
and asked them to keep up the good work.
John White, 2085 Strong Place, Anaheim. He does not represent a company or a church. He is present
to discuss Mayor Daly's prosecution for violation of Anaheim's campaign laws. He referred to a Los
Angeles Times article of February 20 regarding the issue. He also referred to the fact that at the meeting
of February 10, 1998 (see minutes that date) because Mayor Daly reneged on his agreement with the
Special Prosecutor to settle his case, he feels he (Daly) is driving up the legal costs. He then posed a
number of questions to the Mayor and subsequently to Council Member McCracken with a final question
to the City Attorney.
Mayor Daly. He referred to the questions posed to him by John White. He would very much like to
respond but the City Attorney has advised him from day one that he (Daly) must abstain from discussion
and voting on the subject. He asked the City Attorney if he would comment on the questions posed by
Mr. White and if he could respond.
City Attorney, Jack White. He first quoted the basic provisions of the conflict of interest law, Sec. 87100
of the Government Code. In the past, he has adivsed him (Daly) because he was at one time the target
of prospective criminal prosecution and now has had charges filed against him and others, under that
provision of law, he would have a conflict relating to Mr. Mehta and his contract. However, that does not
preclude him from running the meeting as the Mayor; he does not have to leave the room. He also
clarified for the Mayor the penalties that would be involved should he (Daly) not follow or accept his
advice.
Mayor Daly. Having heard the City Attorney, he invited Mr. (John) White to contact the City Attorney or
his office. If there are questions he can submit them in writing or call.
Council Member Zemel. He noted that people are saying that the prosecutor answers to two Council
Members only. It would be an obstruction of justice if that were the case. The prosecutor answers to the
Judge, Attorney General and State Bar Association. They also do not have the power to close the cases.
He asked the City Attorney relative to the cases that have been brought forward, what happens if they
decide to ask the prosecutor to go away.
City Attorney White. If the Council should decide to terminate the current Special Prosecutor's contract,
that will not affect the fact that there are existing cases filed. Those cases will have to be dealt with and
handled by someone acting as the prosecutor for the people of the State of California whether it is Mr.
Mehta, his office, the District Attorney's office or anyone else serving as a prosecutor. Someone has to
deal with those cases. Specifically with regard to his office, he believes he would have a conflict with
regard to the one existing case involving the Mayor and former Council Member Pickler.
Council Member Zemel. He stated he made notes on every speaker and proceeded to answer each.
(See verbatim transcript of the proceedings.) He had already spoken to Dr. Baird and thought he had
answered his questions. He would be glad to meet with him again. He (Zemel) feels this is not
necessarily about minor violations. The reason why the issue came about in the first place is that
everybody should be treated equal -- members of the public and members of the Council, not to suggest
11
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES, February 24,1998
that a member of the public's case be handled by a prosecutor and the same charges for the Mayor be
handled by the FPPC.
Mayor Daly interjected and questioned the City Attorney again relative to his not being able to address
this issue; City Attorney White stated that the law is often not fair but confirmed if he does have an
interest in the matter discussed, it would be a violation to participate.
Council Member Zemel continued and emphasized it is his duty as he sees it to be sure every law with
respect to how the Council behaves is followed and that all persons be treated equally. They should
move on and abide by the procedures that were put in place by the Council.
Mayor Daly. The City Attorney was asked a couple of times by Council Member Zemel if he (White)
thought he would have a conflict of interest in prosecuting charges against one member of the Council or
any member. He wanted to know if he was asked that question in public before the City Council began
discussing the special prosecutor and the idea of hiring the special prosecutor; City Attorney White stated
he did not recall.
Mayor Daly. The reason it is relevant, since now that there has been a mention of the potential for
charges against three other members of the Council (as reported by Ms. Grindie), he wanted to know
who can bring up the prospect of a special prosecutor -- could he. Before he would do so, he would ask
the City Attorney's advice as to how it should be handled and what are the alternatives before the
taxpayers -- what are various courses of action to be taken.
City Attorney White. The hiring of a special prosecutor, as he recalls, was brought up by Council
Member Zemel in a series of motions (see minutes of February 10, 1998 and verbatim transcript of that
portion of the meeting), one of which was to appoint an independent counsel (not called special
prosecutor at the time) to review campaign violations that may have occurred by him (Daly) among
others. Because that was the item pending for action in front of the Council at that time, that was the
basis for his advice -- that he would have a conflict in voting because it related to him and his financial
interest. Obviously it also works the other way. If the action were to hire a special prosecutor to
investigate another member, that member would have a conflict and he (Daly) would not.
A member of the public approached the podium to speak (Miriam Kaywood); Mayor Daly stated that
public comments had been closed. He asked Council Members if they wished to reopen the floor to
public comments.
It was the general consensus of the Council that public comments should not be reopened.
The following item was taken out of order by request.
C2. 114: DISCUSSION TO RECONSIDER SPECIAL PROSECUTOR - RAVI MEHTA'S CONTRACT:
Discussion requested by Council Member McCracken at the meeting of February 10, 1998, Item C4.
Council Member McCracken then asked that Item C2. be considered at this time. Before she is
challenged, she explained that the FPPC provided an oral opinion indicating she has no conflict of
interest on this issue since the charges against her have been dealt with. Council Member Zemel made
a comment that Mr. White works for three individuals. If he knows that and that is all he works for, then
she suspects they may have a Brown Act violation. Mr. White works for the City Council and the citizens
of Anaheim and not for three but all five Council Members. She asked for reconsideration of Mr. Mehta's
contract for several reasons:
First, she considers this matter out of control. Mr. Mehta was hired to investigate campaign fraud and
instead he has found reporting violations which any individual could report to the FPPC with no cost to
the City. Mr. Mehta said that the City Attorney could not prosecute these charges because he had a
12
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES, February 24,1998
conflict. That is what he told her, and Council Members Zemel and Lopez and if the charges were
referred to the District Attorney, he would not do it.
Secondly, costs are excessive and growing with no end in sight. The charges in September, October
and November amount to $118,000 for five sets of violations. Mr. Mehta earned less than that for a
whole year investigating hundreds of State violations. He has earned more in a few months than the City
Attorney does the whole year. With a jury trial ahead, the costs to the City could escalate to hundreds of
thousands of dollars. If necessary, a local qualified attorney with staff support, could reduce this
hemmorhage of expenses.
Third, even the appearance of impropriety on the part of the Council in appointing a prosecutor who
answers to no one, is of definite economic disadvantage to the City in attempting to attract new
development and new business. Developers who want to come to Anaheim are questioning the stability
of the Council when this kind of interaction is going on. She also questions the lack of professionalism on
the part of Mr. Mehta in appearing in an open session before the City Council and discussing pending
legal matters with defendants present. It makes her very uneasy about his representation of the City in
such matters. In the 14 months that she has served on the Council, they have hired many special
counsels and none have come to the meetings to discuss cases that are pending. Two weeks ago they
heard the statement that no one is above the law. She agrees but neither should anyone be exempt. Ms.
Grindle's charges that they all have violations perhaps they, as Council Member Zemel said to her a few
months ago, should abstain. Charges against some individuals and ignoring similar violations indicates
some people may be above the law. California has a Fair Political Practices Division to deal with
violations at no cost to the City. The City Attorney has prosecutors on staff whose hourly rate, including
benefits, is $50.70 an hour to handle violations of City codes and if there is a conflict, the County of
Orange has a District Attorney to handle cases with no cost to the City.
MOTION. Council Member McCracken moved that the Council direct the City Attorney to contact the
District Attorney to see if he would assume jurisdiction over the unresolved matters raised by Mr. Mehta
and if the District Attorney is unwilling to do so, that the City Attorney contact a number of local counsel
who will be willing to substitute for Mr. Mehta and report back to the Council giving alternatives to the
termination of Mr. Mehta's contract. MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
Mayor Daly was unable to act due to a conflict and Council Member Tait subsequently stated, for the
record, that he was also abstaining on this item.
Mayor Daly again asked the City Attorney if there were any aspects of this subject that he may discuss in
this forum.
City Attorney White. He would suggest that he and Mayor Daly discuss this matter in an attorney-client
priviliged manner rather than giving advice publicly.
Mayor Daly. Under the hypothetical that was mentioned earlier, where allegations have been made that
there may be violations by three Council Members, is it permissible for him to agendize the potential for
hiring a special prosecutor to pursue those; City Attorney White answered yes. He also clarified that it
would be permissible for him (Daly) to participate in that discussion to the extent that it does not involve
his own personal violations.
Mayor Daly. Where allegations have been made, he asked the City Attorney's advice as to what should
be done.
City Attorney White. He believes the Mayor is speaking specifically about Ms. Grindle's comments which
related to violations, if not exclusively, primarily of the Political Reform Act (PRA) which is the State law.
His practice, if given to him, he would first contact the FPPC and refer the matters to that commission to
determine if they wish to pursue them.
13
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES, February 24,1998
Council Member McCracken. Speaking to comments made by John White earlier stated she does not
believe he was present two weeks ago (February 10, 1998). She sat at the dais and never got up from
her seat. She placed the item on the agenda under Council Comments at the end of the meeting. (This
was in answer to John White's earlier question posed during his comments).
MOTION:
Mayor Daly moved to waive reading in full of all ordinances and resolutions to be acted upon for
the Council meeting of February 24, 1998. Council Member Zemel seconded the motion.
MOTION CARRIED.
CITY MANAGER/DEPARTMENTAL CONSENT CALENDAR A1 - A26: 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-32 through 98R-35, 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 Valverde Construction, Inc. (Greg Cole) for property damage sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about September 12, 1997.
b. Claim submitted by Crusade Productions, Inc. (Rick Motter) for property damage sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about September 30, 1997.
c. Claim submitted by Wm. H. McGee & Co. Inc. (Marco Kuhlmann) for property damage
sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about September 30, 1997.
d. Claim submitted by Allied Modular Building Systems Inc. (Kevin Peithman) for property
damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about December 26, 1997.
e. Claim submitted by Angelique Fulford for property damage sustained purportedly due to
actions of the City on or about December 16, 1997.
f. Claim submitted by Maria C. Nichols for property damage sustained purportedly due to actions
of the City on or about December 22, 1997.
g. Claim submitted by Wendy Kay McCullan for property damage sustained purportedly due to
actions of the City on or about June 23, 1997.
h. Claim submitted by Robert and Donna Rauh for property damage sustained purportedly due
to actions of the City on or about May, 1997.
i. Claim submitted by Michael Habib for property damage sustained purportedly due to actions
of the City on or about January 12, 1997.
j. Claim submitted by Rosalie M. Mallat for property damage sustained purportedly due to
actions of the City on or about July 2, 1997.
k. Claim submitted by Helen Rawhouser for property damage sustained purportedly due to
actions of the City on or about December 6, 1997.
14
A2.
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES, February 24,1998
I. Claim submitted by Pamela Schleski (Law Offices of Lee CArter) for bodily injury sustained
purportedly due to actions of the City on or about October 3, 1997.
m. Claim submitted by Anaheim La Palma Inn for property damage sustained purportedly due to
actions of the City on or about July 24, 1997.
n. Claim submitted by Jesus Ramirez for property damage sustained purportedly due to actions
of the City on or about November 13, 1997.
o. Claim submitted by Teresa Stevens for property damage sustained purportedly due to actions
of the City on or about December 26, 1997.
p. Claim submitted by Chieh Chieng for property damage sustained purportedly due to the
actions of the City on or about December 5, 1997.
105: Receiving and filing minutes of the Anaheim Public Library Board meeting held January 7,
1998.
105: Receiving and filing minutes of the Anaheim Redevelopment and Housing Commission
meetings held January 7, 1998, and January 21, 1998.
105: Receiving and filing minutes of the Community Services Board meeting held January 8,
1998.
105: Receiving and filing minutes of the Senior Citizens Commission meeting held January 8,
1998.
117: Receiving and filing the Investment Portfolio Executive Summary for the month of
January, 1998, as submitted by the City Treasurer.
A3.
A4.
A5.
A6.
A7.
169: Awarding a contract to the lowest responsible bidder, Pro Tech Engineering Corporation, in
the amount of $234,285 for Citron Beautification Project - Phase III, Part II; and in the event said
low bidder fails to comply with the terms of the award, awarding the contract to the second low
bidder, as well as waiving any irregularities in the bids of both the low and second low bidders.
175: Awarding a contract to the lowest responsible bidder, Valverde Construction, Inc., in the
amount of $975,488 for I-5 Segment D Water Facility Relocations; and in the event said low
bidder fails to comply with the terms of the award, awarding the contract to the second low
bidder, as well as waiving any irregularities in the bids of both the low and second low bidders.
158: Approving the Acquisition Agreement for real property located at 2109 West Katella
Avenue (R/W 5220-8) - Katella Avenue Smart Street Improvement Project; authorizing the
Mayor and City Clerk to execute said Agreement; and authorizing the acquisition payment of
$158,000 to Grover Escrow.
158: Approving the Acquisition Agreement for real property located at 1793 South Carnelian
Street (R/W 5220-2) - Katella Avenue Smart Street Improvement Project; authorizing the Mayor
and City Clerk to execute said Agreement; and authorizing the acquisition payment of $163,000
to Grover Escrow.
158: Approving the Acquisition Agreement for real property located at 1751 South Ivanhoe
Street (R/W 5220-5) - Katella Avenue Smart Street Improvement Project; authorizing the Mayor
and City Clerk to execute said Agreement; and authorizing the acquisition payment of $153,000
to Grover Escrow.
15
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES, February 24,1998
A8.
A9.
A10.
All.
A12.
A13.
A14.
A15.
A16.
A17.
A18.
158: Approving the Acquisition Agreement for real property located at 2105 West Katella
Avenue (R/W 5220-7) - Katella Avenue Smart Street Improvement Project; authorizing the
Mayor and City Clerk to execute said Agreement; and authorizing the acquisition payment of
$156,000 to Graver Escrow.
158: Approving the Acquisition Agreement for real property located at 2101 West Katella
Avenue (R/W 5220-6) - Katella Avenue Smart Street Improvement Project; authorizing the
Mayor and City Clerk to execute said Agreement; and authorizing the acquisition payment of
$177,922.80 to Graver Escrow.
121: Approving a Consent to Substitute Condemnation - I-5 Segment A3 Water Relocations - for
exercise of the power of eminent domain by Caltrans, to exchange for an interest in real property
owned by George E. Atkinson, Jr., and Alice J. Atkinson, for public utility purposes.
124: Approving an Escrow Agreement for Security Deposits In Lieu of Retention; accepting
security deposits offered by M. A. Mortenson Company to be held by First Trust of California
throughout construction of the Anaheim Convention Center Enhancement Project - Step I; and
authorizing the City Engineer to execute said Agreement on behalf of the City.
170: Approving the Final Map of Tract No. 14733, said Tract being located at 2625 West Lincoln
Avenue, and the Subdivision Agreement with New Life Homes, Inc.; and authorizing the Mayor
and City Clerk to execute same. Said Tract is filed in conjunction with CUP No. 3936 and
Variance No. 4204.
173: RESOLUTION NO. 98R-32 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM in support of Southern California Regional Rail Authority Funding Requests to the
California Transportation Commission in 1998 (for additional Metrolink rail cars).
106: Approving an adjustment to the Public Works Department's Fiscal Year 1997/98 Capital
Improvement Program budget in the amount of $82,470; and increasing revenues and
expenditures in account nos. 275-412-K758-5797-SB821, 275-412-K758-7851, and 790-412-
3246-7825. (To expand bicycle storage facilities at the Utilities Service Center and Streets and
Sanitation, and for construction of sidewalks.)
160: Accepting the base bid of Canada Power Products Corp., c/a Matzinger-Keegan, in the
amount of $106,470 for fifteen 600 Amp SF-6 subsurface switches, in accordance with Bid
#5747.
160: Accepting the low bids of (1) Wildfire Pacific Inc., in the amount of $10,931.60 (39% of the
total bid); (2) L.N. Curtis & Sons., in the amount of $12,400 (40% of the total bid); and (3) Allstar
Fire Equipment, in the amount of $13,327.72 (21% of the total bid), for miscellaneous fire truck
tooling and equipment, in accordance with Bid #5748.
160: Waiving Council Policy 306, and authorizing the Purchasing Agent to issue a Purchase
Order to PRC Public Sector, Inc., in the amount of $23,616.90 for a Computer Aided Dispatch
software enhancement for the Police Computer System Communication Network.
123: Authorizing the purchase and reimbursement of costs, in accordance with our Agreement
with Systems and Computer Technology Corporation, in an amount not to exceed $754,592 for
the upgrade of the Hitachi Data Systems mainframe computer, network infrastructure and
software maintenance, and authorizing the Finance Director to execute related maintenance
documents.
16
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES, February 24,1998
A19.
153: Authorizing the Human Resources Director to credit eight hours of vacation to each full-
time employee who successfully completes all required elements of the City's Health
Improvement Incentive Program.
Council Member McCracken. She needs more information on this item. The Human Resources Director
brought this item to the Council. She has had input from employees who are concerned about
confidentiality relative to the questionnaires which contain their Social Security numbers and concern
that the information may get into the wrong hands and used against them later on; Council Member
Zemel. He would second the recommendation to continue.
City Manager Ruth. There is no problem. That very issue was discussed in the Department Head
meeting and they are very sensitive to the confidentiality issue. He confirmed for the Mayor that the
program is voluntary and paid for out of the rebate back from the insurance program. That money
cannot be spent for anything other than health benefits for employees. The Health Council
recommended this after their review.
Mayor Daly surmised then that the employee may choose not to participate; City Manager Ruth
answered that was correct.
MOTION: Motion to continue Item A19 for one week to the meeting of March 3, 1998, was made by
Council Member McCracken, seconded by Council Member Zemel.. MOTION CARRIED.
A20.
153: Approving a rate reduction for the Aetna U.S. Healthcare Temporary Disability Income
Plan, to be effective March 1, 1998.
A21.
105: Approving the proposed amendments to the Anaheim Senior Citizens Commission Bylaws
as required by City Charter Section 904.
A22.
123: Approving an Agreement with Planergy, Inc., to provide contract services for the design
and development of the public benefit programs, in an amount not to exceed $150,000, and
authorizing the Public Utilities General Manager to execute said Agreement and related
documents necessary to implement said Agreement.
City Manager Ruth. He respectfully requests that item A22 be removed. The Public Utilities General
Manager, Ed Aghjayan, is out of town and not returning until Thursday. He wanted to be present for this
item.
The item was continued one week.
A23.
153: RESOLUTION NO. 98R- 33 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM establishing rates of compensation for classifications assigned to the General Unit
represented by the Anaheim Municipal Employees Association. (Creating Literacy Coordinator,
effective February 20, 1998.)
RESOLUTION NO. 98R-34 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM amending Resolution No. 97R-101 which established rates of compensation for
classifications designated as unrepresented part-time. (Adding EMD Quality Coordinator,
effective February 20, 1998.)
RESOLUTION NO. 98R- 35 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM amending Resolution Nos. 92R-18 and 92R-22 which established rates of
compensation for classifications designated as professional and Administrative Management.
(Adding four classifications, effective February 20, 1998.)
17
A24.
A25.
A26.
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES, February 24,1998
123: Approving Caltrans Utility Agreement No. 12362 to remove and relocate electrical facilities
for the Interstate 5 widening project, Segment A3.
123: Approving Caltrans Utility Agreement No. 12-UT-214 to remove and relocate electrical
facilities for the Interstate 5 widening project, Segment D.
114: Approving minutes of the Anaheim City Council meeting held February 3, 1998.
Roll Call Vote on Resolution Nos. 98R- 32 throuclh 98R-35, 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-32 through 98R-35, both inclusive, duly passed and adopted.
END OF THE CONSENT CALENDAR. MOTIONS CARRIED.
A27. 108: SEXUALLY ORIENTED BUSINESS (SOB) TASK FORCE COMMITTEE:
To consider the approval of the recommended strategy and action steps as a result of the February 3,
1998, Sexually Oriented Business (SOB) Task Force meeting:
(1) Approving certain actions presented by City staff at the Task Force meeting, as outlined herein, and
pursue, as appropriate, recommendations regarding amending and strengthening City ordinances
relating to SOB's;
(2) Scheduling an SOB Town Hall meeting to obtain community input to be held within the first two
weeks in April, 1998; and
(3) Scheduling an SOB Site Tour, preferably on the same date, to educate select members of the state
legislature about the City's regulation and enforcement practices relating to current SOB legislation.
City Manager Ruth. A task force was formed on the matter and a Liaison Committee with Kris Thaiman,
Phil Tsunoda and Council Members Zemel and Tait; Council Member Zemel stated, and Council
Member Lopez.
Council Member Zemel. He wanted to compliment staff for keeping up the efforts on this issue - Kris
Thaiman, Phil Tsunoda, Joel Fick, John Poole, Jack White and City Attorney staff and also Tom Wood,
Deputy City Manager and the Police Department. They came up with several items and Council Member
Lopez was part of the effort. They also took suggestions from the public into that meeting along with
some innovative subjects brought to them by the City Attorney. The City Attorney is going to get back to
the Task Force on some options. Again, he wholeheartedly thanked staff and also recommend and
offered for approval the foregoing actions.
MOTION. Council Member Zemel moved to approve the action steps recommended by the Task Force
Committee, Items (1), (2) and (3) as listed above. Council Member Lopez seconded the motion.
Before a vote was taken, Mayor Daly noted that one of the recommendations is a Town Hall Meeting.
He proposed that the entire Council conduct that meeting during that time frame and suggested
Thursday, April 9, 1998.
18
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES, February 24,1998
Council Member Zemel noted that at the meeting it was suggested that the entire Council be invited and
that it be a scheduled meeting so it will be legal. He thought it was a part of the recommendation. In his
motion, he will include that April 9 be a preferred date but subject to change if their calendars do not
coincide. He can have an answer relative to his availability on that date tomorrow.
City Attorney White. He suggested that they use April 9 as a working date. If Council Member Zemel
advises he cannot make it, they can put it on the agenda for Council to select another date. They can
either call a Special Meeting or adjourn to that meeting.
Mayor Daly noted that 5:00 P.M. is their traditional meeting time but suggested perhaps a later start or
6:00 P.M.; Council Member Zemel was agreeable to a 6:00 P.M. start time.
Mayor Daly confirmed for the City Attorney that the place for the meeting to be held would be the Council
Chamber.
A vote was then taken on the foregoing motion which included approval of the three recommended
action steps and including a date for the Town Hall Meeting, Thursday, April 9, 1998 at 6:00 P.M. in the
Council Chamber subject to a possible change which would be announced in advance. MOTION
CARRIED.
ITEMS B1 - B7 FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF
FEBRUARY 2, 1998:
INFORMATION ONLY- APPEAL PERIOD ENDS FEBRUARY 24, 1998:
B1.
179: VARIANCE NO. 2804, CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT, CLASS 21:
OWNER: Vera Everett Trust, c/o Walter A. Friedman, 9 Goodyear, Irvine, CA 92718.
LOCATION: 1107 North Brookhurst Street - Guerrero Auto Repair. Property is 0.4 acre located
at the northwest corner of La Palma Avenue and Brookhurst Street.
City-initiated request to consider the revocation or modification of Variance No. 2804 (waiver of
permitted uses, to establish an automobile diagnostic and service center).
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Variance No. 2804 Modified (PC98-17) (6 yes votes, 1 absent).
B2.
B3.
179: WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3996 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
OWNER: Orange County Association for Buddhist Practices, Inc., 1501 West Katella Avenue,
Anaheim, CA 92802.
AGENT: Larry Lazar, 12555 High Bluff Drive, #120, San Diego, CA 92130
LOCATION: 1501 West Katella Avenue. Property is 0.97 acre located at the northwest corner
of Katella Avenue and Ninth Street.
To construct a new one-story 3,450 square foot Buddist Temple with a 3,450 square foot storage
basement and a two-story, 5,814 square foot classroom building with waivers of (a) minimum
structural setback (APPROVED,)
(b) minimum number of parking spaces (APPROVED), (c) minimum landscape setback
(DENIED), (d) minimum setback of institutional uses adjacent to a residential zoned property
(APPROVED), and (e) minimum parking lot landscaping (APPROVED).
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
CUP NO. 3996 GRANTED, IN PART (PC98-18) (6 yes votes, 1 absent).
Approved in part, waiver of code requirement as follows: waivers (a), (b), (d), and (e) approved,
and waiver (c) denied on the basis that it was deleted following public notification.
Approved Negative Declaration.
179: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3997 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
19
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES, February 24,1998
OWNER: Anaheim Hills Plaza, Inc., Attn: Bob Courtney, P.O. Box 16700, Encino, CA 91416-
6700.
LOCATION: 430 South Anaheim Hills Road, Suites H, I and J - Anaheim Hills Plaza. Property
is 11.4 acres located at the northeast corner of Nohl Ranch Road and Anaheim Hills Road.
To permit a 2,100 square foot full-service veterinary clinic within an existing commercial center.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
CUP NO. 3997 GRANTED (PC98-19) (6 yes votes, 1 absent).
Approved Negative Declaration.
B4.
179: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3998 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
OWNER: Dale K. Lenk, Dale F. Lenk, and Jayne P. Lenk, 860 West 18th Street, Costa Mesa,
CA 92627.
AGENT: Linda D. Lee, 1419 Lake Cook Road, #410, Deerfield, IL 60015.
LOCATION: 1201 North Barsten Way. Property is at 0.23 acre located at the northwest corner
of Coronado Street and Barsten Way.
To permit a medical waste transfer facility.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
CUP NO. 3998 GRANTED (PC98-20) (6 yes votes, 1 absent).
Approved Negative Declaration.
B5.
WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3999 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
OWNER: Peter Lawrence Dunkel, Cheryl Jean Dunkel, Larry S. Dunkel, and Sarah P. Dunkel,
2475 West La Palma Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92801.
AGENT: Caster Group L.P., Attn: Tom Kearney, 4607 Mission Gorge Place, San Diego, CA
92120.
LOCATION: 2475 W. La Palma Avenue. Property is 3.7 acres located on the north side of La
Palma Avenue, 980 feet west of the centerline of Gilbert Street.
To permit a 161,800 square foot, 1 and 2-story self-storage facility including an existing 50,000
square foot warehouse building with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
CUP NO. 3999 GRANTED (PC98-21) (6 yes votes, 1 absent).
Approved waiver of code requirement.
Approved Negative Declaration.
An appeal of the Planning Commission's decision was filed by area residents, and therefore, a
public hearing will be scheduled at a later date.
City Clerk Sohl confirmed for the Mayor that the appeal was submitted by residents in the neighborhood
and not the applicant. She will provide the names tomorrow.
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ITEMS:
B6.
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3939
REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF FINAL PLANS:
LOCATION: 301 South Anaheim Boulevard.
Changiz Zomorodian, 100 South Brookhurst Street, Anaheim, CA 92804, requests review and
approval of final site, floor, sign, landscape and building elevation plans for a previously-
approved 3,750 square foot service station including a convenience market with retail sales of
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Approved Final Plans with revisions for CUP NO. 3939.
Mitigated Negative Declaration previously approved.
2O
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES, February 24,1998
Mayor Daly asked staff if they were comfortable with the final review and approval on the design of the
project; Greg Hastings, Zoning Division Manager. The Planning Commission as well as the
Redevelopment Commission and staff have reviewed the plans which include the landscaping,
elevations, walls, materials, signage and the roofing materials and everyone was satisfied. The only
thing that has not been settled is the roof-mounted equipment. Unless it is completely hidden, it will
have to be shielded. He also confirmed for the Mayor that the original proposal was to use river rock but
after further review as well as review of the Redevelopment Architect, it was considered that brick would
be more appropriate. It will be close to resembling the Library building (across the street). There will be
one variance coming back having to do with the setback of the car wash on the east property line. The
Planning Commission still has to review that and the Council will have the opportunity later.
B7.
179: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3955, AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION
REQUEST DETERMINATION OF SUBSTANTIAL CONFORMANCE:
LOCATION: Property is located at 5555 and 575 East Afton Lane (Lots 13 and 14 of Tentative
Tract Map No. 15418). City-initiated (Community Development Department) 201 South
Anaheim Boulevard, Suite 1003, Anaheim, CA 92805, requests determination of substantial
conformance for setback requirements adjacent to single family developments in conjunction
with previously-approved 43-1ot, 41-unit RM-3000 detached "affordable" one-family dwelling
subdivision.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Determined to be in substantial conformance.
Negative Declaration previously approved.
B8.
179: (ORDINANCE NO. 5628 (ADOPTION) 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. (Introduced at the meeting of February 10,
1998, Item B11 .)
Mayor Daly offered Ordinance No. 5628 for adoption.
Refer to Ordinance Book.
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.
Roll Call Vote on Ordinance No. 5628:
AYES: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: McCracken, Tait, Zemel, Lopez, Daly
NOES: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSENT: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 5628 duly passed and adopted.
ITEMS B9 - B12 FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF
FEBRUARY 18, 1998:
INFORMATION ONLY- APPEAL PERIOD ENDS FEBRUARY 27, 1998:
21
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES, February 24,1998
B9.
107/179: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 15565
VARIANCE NO. 4331
SPECIMEN TREE REMOVAL PERMIT NO. 97-03
CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
OWNER: Mary Yaeko Murata, Robed Kenzo Murata, Paul Seichi Murata, Sachiko Murata, 2312
Cliff Drive, Newport Beach, CA 92663
AGENT: Salkin Engineering Corporation, Attn: George E. Kerns, 1215 E. Chapman Avenue,
#2, Orange, CA 92866
LOCATION: 421 South Country Hill Road. Property is 8.0 acres located on the south side of
Country Hill Road, 270 feet east of the centerline of Old Ranch Road.
Waivers of minimum private street width and maximum structural height to establish a 13-1ot 11-
unit single-family detached residential subdivision and approval for the removal of 103 specimen
trees.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 15565 APPROVED (6 yes votes,
1 vacancy).
Variance No. 4331 GRANTED (PC98-24).
Specimen Tree Removal Permit No. 97-03 continued to the Planning Commission meeting of
3/16/98.
Approved Negative Declaration.
NOTE: VARIANCE NO. 4331 AND SPECIMEN TREE REMOVAL PERMIT NO. 97-03 HAVE A
22-DAY APPEAL PERIOD TO EXPIRE 3/12/98.
Council Member Zemel. He would like some input from staff. Looking at the entry and driveway, he
knows how dangerous that is as far as ingress and egress.
Joel Fick, Planning Director. That item, Tentative Tract 15565 had with it a specimen tree removal
request. That request was continued so it is still in process. Since it did conform with the zoning
standards with the exception of the minimum width to the entrance way because only 31' wide, there was
a variance associated with that. Council Member Zemel's question centers around whether it is adequate
and does it work. The Traffic and Transportation Manager reviewed this from the aspect of grading and
the entrance way and for the number of lots, he believes it is adequate; Council Member Zemel asked if
access on Fairmont was evaluated.
Mr. Fick stated it was reviewed by the Traffic and Transportation Manager and for the number of lots it is
adequate; Council Member Zemel asked if access on Fairmont, the southwestern portion, was evaluated.
Mr. Fick answered that was examined and it was not desired because of the slope off of Fairmont.
After additional questions posed to staff by Council Member Zemel, Council Member Lopez stated he
would like to pull this item at this time. He has concerns if they do remove the trees, how will that impact
the grading and erosion as well as the access in and out of the tract. He would like the matter continued.
City Clerk Sohl. She believes what the City Attorney would advise (he had stepped out of the Chamber
for a moment), the appeal period for the Tentative Map would end on February 27, 1998. If the Council
wishes the matter returned to the agenda, it would need to be set for a Public Hearing; City Attorney
White (returning to the Chamber), stated that was correct. Everything but tree removal will be final if the
Council does not set the matter for a Public Hearing. Tree removal will come back separately.
Council Member Lopez thereupon requested a review of the Planning Commission's decision Council
Member McCracken concurred; therefore, a Public Hearing will be scheduled at a later date.
22
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES, February 24,1998
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ITEMS:
B10.
179: REQUEST TO DETERMINE CONFORMANCE WITH THE ANAHEIM GENERAL PLAN
FOR IMPROVEMENTS TO THE CARBON CREEK CHANNEL:
LOCATION: Property is a portion of the Carbon Creek Channel (Facility No. B01) located south
of Orange Avenue, north of Ball Road, east of Holder Street and west of Knott Avenue.
REQUESTED BY: County of Orange, Public Facilities and Resources Department, Orange
County Flood Control District, Attn: Hwie - Ing, Project Engineer, 300 North Flower Street, Santa
Aria, CA 92702, requests determination of conformance with the Anaheim General Plan for
improvements to the Carbon Creek Channel.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Determined to be in conformance with the Anaheim General Plan
(6 yes votes, 1 vacancy).
Mayor Daly. He is interested in any opportunity to gain additional landscaping from the County as
improvements are made to the Carbon Creek Channel. He would like staff to look for those
opportunitites in working with the County. Some of the flood control channels do not have enough
screening and landscaping.
Joel Fick, Planning Director. This item is specifically relates to General Plan conformity. Staff will make
sure that both Public Works and Parks and Recreation staff are aware of that issue and investigate those
opportunities.
Bll,
B12.
179:ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 311 (Prev.-Certified)
FINAL SITE PLAN REVIEW NO. 98-03 - REQUEST FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF A
FINAL SITE PLAN FOR THE DISNEYLAND HOTEL ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE: The Wait
Disney Company, Attn: Doug M. Moreland, 500 South Buena Vista Street, Burbank, CA 91521,
requests review and approval of a Final Site Plan for the construction of a three-story Disneyland
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Approved final site plan (6 yes votes, 1 vacancy).
EIR NO. 311 previously certified.
179: MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREV.-APPROVED)
FINAL SITE PLAN REVIEW NO. 98-02 - REQUEST FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF A
INSTALL NEW WALL SIGNAGE AT AN EXISTING HOTEL: Sunstone Hotel, 3110 NE 106th
Street, Vancouver, WA 98686, requests review and approval of a Final Site Plan to add
approximately 160 square feet to the lobby area and install new wall signage at an existing hotel.
Property is located at 1752 South Clementine Street (Crystal Suites).
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Approved final site plan (6 yes votes, 1 vacancy).
Mitigated Negative Declaration previously approved.
Hotel Adn
D1.
179: PUBLIC HEARING - WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3983, AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
OWNER: J.D. Gantes Airport Properties, P.O. Box 80340, Rancho Santa Margarita, CA 92688
AGENT: Jack Abi, 170 N. Maple Street, Suite 103, Corona, CA 91720
LOCATION: 8295 East Santa Ana Canyon Road - Bur.qer Kin.q. Property is 2.33 acres located
at the northwest corner of Santa Ana Canyon Road and Weir Canyon Road.
To construct a second story 1,309 square foot indoor playground for an existing drive-through
restaurant (3,724 square feet total) within a commercial retail center with waiver of minimum
number of parking spaces.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
CUP NO. 3983 GRANTED (PC98-1) (6 yes votes, 1 absent).
23
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES, February 24,1998
Approved waiver of code requirement.
Approved Negative Declaration.
Informational item at the meeting of January 27, 1998, Item B1. Review of the Planning
Commission's decision requested by Council Members Lopez and Daly.
HEARING SET ON: Review of the Planning Commission decision was requested by Council Member
Lopez and Mayor Daly and, Public Hearing scheduled this date. Informational Item at the meeting of
January 27, 1998.
PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY:
Publication in North County News- February 12, 1998
Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - February 13, 1998
Posting of property - February 13, 1998.
Council Member Tait declared a conflict and temporarily left the Council Chamber.
STAFF INPUT:
Greg Hastings, Zoning Division Manager, briefed the staff report to the Planning Commission dated
January 5, 1998 giving the details of the proposed project. Two concerns are the massiveness and
height of the addition, and the difficulty maneuvering within the parking areas. This addition may further
increase parking lot congestion. He confirmed for the Mayor that the issues are parking, design issues
and circulation.
Council Member Lopez then posed a line of questions which were answered by the Planning Director,
Joel Fick relative to parking in the complex and notification procedures to surrounding businesses.
Mayor Daly stated because the Burger King is a separate property with separate entitlements, he has
concerns about adding a second floor and the impact it might have on the businesses behind them
requesting additional signage later. Secondly, he has a concern about sufficient parking and the general
circulation in the center. Staff raised those concerns as well. He then opened the Public Hearing and
asked first to hear from the applicant or applicant's agent.
John Gantes, Franchisee for Burger King at the subject location. He did inform all the tenants in the
adjacent strip center of the Planning Commission meeting and he also attempted before tonight's
meeting to do the same. He has the business cards or their signatures on documents and will be happy
to provide those to the Council. They also include the liquor store. It is their feeling that the more
successful the Burger King business is, it will benefit their business as well. Also, to a great degree, the
businesses have different hours of peak demand which he briefed. What they are trying to do is to
regain the sales they have lost in the last two years. A Burger King opened on the corner of Imperial and
LaPalma in Anaheim that hit them for approximately 15% of their sales. There is a playground at that
location. They are attempting to bring their business back up 10% from where they are now which will
still be significantly less than before.
Mayor Daly posed additional questions relative to alternatives to adding a second story and staff's
concern about the aesthetics; Mr. Gantes explained they are not looking to add any additional dining
seats on the second floor but will isolate the playground in a separate room. Their goal was to upgrade
the building and the landscaping. They conducted many studies prior to this and took photos of the
building from different directions. There would still be a clear view of the buildings behind them. For the
amount they have to spend, they want to put the best product in. They did a test a couple of years ago
with a small one-story playground which did nothing for their sales.
Answering additional questions posed by Council Member Zemel, Mr. Gantes explained/confirmed they
would have to use some parking spots but he feels what they are trying to attempt would be very positive
for the residents of the community, they are trying to bring their business back to what it was or to
approximately 97% rather than additional business.
24
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES, February 24,1998
Council Member Lopez stated he lives close to the area and has been to the complex many times.
Parking is at a premium. Burger King may pick up the 15% loss in business but it will impact the liquor
store and pizza business. It is extremely difficult to get in and out of the center in the evening, from 4:30
to 7:30. That is also the time Burger King would have a lot of customers; Mr. Gantes stated their
greatest concern is the lunch business. He has talked to the other businesses and they are supportive of
the proposal.
Additional questions and discussion followed between Council Members and Mr. Gantes at the
conclusion of which Mayor Daly asked if anyone else wished to speak.
Andrea Manes, 1475 Wedgewood, Anaheim. Speaking as a fellow business person, Mr. Gantes has
shown he is sensitive to the scenic corridor, his request seems reasonable, and she is encouraged he
has spoken to his business neighbors and they support what he is requesting to do.
Mayor Daly. He is concerned with the aesthetics and asked Ms. Manes how she felt about the design
aspects.
Andrea Manes. From what she understands, it won't be the first facility that is two-story with a
playground. The design people worked on this a long time to be sure it is acceptable to the area and the
Planning Commission has given a positive vote after having looked at the design elements and
determined it is acceptable and in accordance with the scenic corridor.
There were no public comments in opposition.
Mr. Gantes. He has expressed his feelings. They have addressed the concerns of the Planning
Commission. They want to be successful at that location. They built the store new in 1990 and plan to
be there for a long time.
Mayor Daly closed the Public Hearing. He then stated that this is a business asking for expansion. He is
not sure the City has allowed a second floor at other fast food establishments in this neighborhood and
new area of Anaheim Hills. He has a concern about aesthetics and how it will affect a very important
corridor of the City. Planning staff has advised against it. He supports expanding the restaurant but he
is not sure that alternatives to a second floor were explored. He would like to suggest that some
additional thought be put into some type of design or that staff work with the applicant to come to some
solution. He is not convinced this is the only way to build a play area.
Council Member Lopez. He agrees. He is not going to support the project for the same reasons. A
second story will change the entire look of that corner and encourage other businesses to do the same
thing. Secondly, there is a parking problem there right now and the proposal will cause even further
problems.
Council Member Zemel. He would like to give the business every opportunity to succeed. Surrounding
tenants are not present to speak against the proposal. He believes it will increase their business as well
so that the sign issue mentioned will be moot. He is prepared to support the proposal.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - NEGATIVE DECLARATION: On motion by Council Member
Zemel, seconded by Council Member McCracken, the City Council approved the Negative Declaration
upon finding that it has considered the Negative Declaration together with any comments received during
the public review process, and further finding on the basis of the initial study and any comments received
that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment.
MOTION CARRIED.
Council Member Zemel offered a resolution granting Conditional Use Permit No. 3983 subject to City
Planning Commission conditions.
25
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES, February 24,1998
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM GRANTING
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3983.
Roll Call Vote on Resolution:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAINED:
City Attorney White.
MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS:
MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS:
MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS:
McCracken, Zemel
Lopez, Daly
Tait
Since there is a tie vote with the fifth Council Member not voting, the Conditional
Use Permit is denied by operation of law and determined to be a final decision.
C1. 127/105: Discussion to consider a measure on the June ballot reclardincl the issue of term
limits for boards, commissions, the Mayor, and Council Members. (Requested by Council Member
Zemel.) (Continued from the meeting of February 10, 1998, Item C2.)
Council Member Zemel. He asked that the item again be continued one week with the proviso that the
City Attorney do two things: one, take the submitted Anaheim Term Limits Act as proposed and divide it
into two sections -- one would be for board members and commissioners only, and another would be to
have all board members, commissioners, City Council and the Mayor all the same, i.e., one resolution to
be prepared as written and another resolution prepared with just board members and commissioners.
Mayor Daly asked if the City Attorney prepared the language; City Attorney White answered no, that it
was submitted by Council Member Zemel.
Council Member Zemel. He prepared the language with an Attorney and subsequently submitted it to
the City Attorney for his approval. The City Attorney has reviewed it and, not necessarily recommending
approval of the item, but the feedback was that it was done properly; City Attorney White. He confirmed
he reviewed the language submitted.
Mayor Daly. They have not discussed this matter at all and the deadline for submittal is next Tuesday.
There has been no public discussion as to the intent. Who prepared the initial draft and is it worthwhile
for the City Attorney to spend time dividing this draft into two proposed amendments and whether the
Council wants to see the City Attorney spend time on this subject at this time.
Council Member Zemel. If adopted by the City Council, it would give citizens an opportunity to vote on
the issue. Otherwise on a 3-2 vote, one Council Member is determining there will be no term limits for
boards and commissions only. Everyone has received a copy of the Anaheim Term Limits Act which he
is proposing.
Discussion followed on how much staff work would be involved in preparing the resolutions at the
conclusion of which, Mayor Daly stated there should be "truth in advertising." A five-page legal
document was submitted (Anaheim Term Limits Act) with about 1 1/2 pages on advisory board and
commission members and the remaining dealing with terms limits for Mayor and Council Members.
They already have term limits for Mayor and Council. There has been no discussion on this, no public
input, it has not been advertised and, he reiterated, there are already term limit provisions in the City
Charter.
Council Member Zemel. The Mayor is correct and that is why he is offering to bifurcate the two issues so
they can be dealt with separately or together. The terms limits they have right now do not deal with
board or commission members. The reason he is recommending deleting the existing term limits is to
bring everything in conformance that there be two terms only. He would like to see the people of
Anaheim tell them what they would like to see and if they want to revise the Mayor and Council term
26
ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES, February 24,1998
limits, that would be discussed and the people could decide. At this point in time, it is a moot issue and
the main issue is beard and commission members.
Mayor Daly. it needs to be pointed out, this would make changes to the existing term limits and he
(Zemel) barely touched on that until this evening. It is an item he had drawn up privately, brought to the
Council and then not labeled clearly as to what it is.
After additional discussion between the Mayor and Council Member Zemel, Council Member Tait stated
procedurally it makes more sense for Council Member Zemel to withdraw the item (insteed of bifurcate)
and then reagendize what he wants to agendize.
City Attorney White. If there are going to be any items put on the June ballot, the deadline for delivering
the resolution, calling the election consolidating it with the County election, setting forth the ballot
measure and the language and establishing who will write the arguments and directing the City Attorney
to prepare an impartial analysis is March 6th. There will be at least four resolutions. The deadline to
adopt those is next Tuesday. Without the resolutions to look at next Tuesday, the Council is deciding
tonight whether the issue(s) goes on the ballot.
Council Member Tait stated it makes more sense just to consider limits for beards and commissions
since they already have term-limit provisions for the Mayor and Council. He suggested a change in
Council Member Zemel's motion.
Council Member Zemel. That is the position he is intending on taking. They have had ongoing
discussions in the last I 1/2 years on the issue of term limits for beards and commissions but not the
Mayor/Council term limits. He thereupon instructed staff to prrepare resolutions dealing with term limits
for beards and commissions only and that the item again be on the agenda next week for
discussion/decision.
C2. 114: DISCUSSION TO RECONSIDER SPECIAL PROSECUTOR - RAVI MEHTA'S CONTRACT:
Discussion requested by Council Member McCracken at the meeting of February 10, 1998, Item C4.
See discussion and action taken after Items of Public Interest the first part of the meeting.
C4. 1t4: COUNCIL COMMENTS:
Council Member Zemel. In order to pay tribute to and before they lose former President, Ronald
Reagan, he feels it appropriate to name something significant after him. He would like Anaheim to lead
that effort and is asking the City Manager how they might go about putting a committee together to find
some opportunity to name a City facility after President Reagan. He would like some direction relative to
agendizing the matter for discussion next week or if there is a consensus, they could get started.
Mayor Daly suggested it be agendized for discussion next Tuesday - the potential of naming a public
facility after President Reagan.
ADJOURNMENT: By general Council consent the City Council meeting of February 24, 1998 was
adjourned (8:10 P.M.).
LEONORA N. SOHL
CITY CLERK
27