Loading...
RA1993/12/14Anaheim Civic Cen%er, ANAHEI~ REDEVELOPMENT AOENCY DECEMBER 14t 19931 5~00 P.M. PRESENT: ABSENT: PRESENT: AGENCY MEMBERS: Feldhaus, Simpson, Pickler, Hunter, Daly AGENCY MEMBERS: None CITY MANAGER: James Ruth CITY ATTORNEY: Jack White SECRETARY: Leonora N. Sohl EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: Lisa Stipkovich A complete copy of the agenda for the meeting of the Anaheim Redevelopment Agency was posted at 3:25 p.m. on December 10, 1993 at the Civic Center kiosk, containing all items as shown herein. Chairman Daly called the regular meeting of the Anaheim Redevelopment Agency to order at 6:03 p.m. FINANCIAL DEMANDS AGAINST THE ANAHEIM REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY in the amount of $41,218.48 for the period ending December 10, 1993, in accordance with the 1993-94 Budget, were approved. ITEMS OF PUBLIC INTEREST: No items of public interest were addressed. PUBLIC COMMENTS - AGENDA ITEMS: Public input received on Agency Item 1 (see discussion under that item). CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS 1 - 4: On motion by Agency Member Pickler, seconded by Agency Member Simpson, the following actions were authorized in accordance with the reports and recommendations furnished each Agency Member and as listed on the Consent Calendar Agenda. 1. 123: Approving a Fourth Amendment to Agreement with Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc., to extend the term of the Agreement for traffic engineering and transportation planning consulting services in the amount of $90,000 through March 1995; and authorizing the Chairman and Secretary to execute said Amendment to Agreement. Coleen Wiley. She represents Campanula Properties, Inc. They have an interest in certain Arena area parking facility projects. They have been informed by Barton-Aschman Associates who they have retained to assist them in connection with the parking study related to the Arena area that they believe there is a conflict of interest that may exist between her client and the City of Anaheim. They just received that letter in the last day or two. Because they do not know what this fourth amendment involves, her question is to ask the City Council to discuss the item so that they can determine whether there is or is not a conflict of interest. Chairman Daly. He imagines the appropriate party to bring that up would be Barton-Aschman since they are desirous of working for City Government. Perhaps they will have staff comment on that potential. Lisa Stipkovich, Executive Director of Community Development. This is a new issue to her. She is not aware o~ the issue regarding the conflict of interest. She would like Barton-Aschman to make a statement regarding their concern and why they wrote the letter to their other client. Gary Adams, Planner Associate, Barton-Aschman Associates, Irvine, California. His company was retained by the City Department of Public Works to do work regarding parking issues for the Anaheim Arena. The Public Works staff 93-99 Anaheim Civic Center~ ANAHEI~ REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY DECEMBER 14t 1993t 5;00 P.M. recommended Barton-Aschman to do work for this company (Campanula) and they asked them to look into conflict of interest issues. They indicated that there weren't any and they were in the process of entering into agreements with Campanula. Subsequently, there were litigation issues that came up and the issue of conflict was once again discussed. After discussions with City staff and their attorneys, they felt it would be best to withdraw their services from that contract (with Campanula). He confirmed that his firm was not now under contract with Campanula and does not intend to seek any work from them during the duration of the contract with the Anaheim Redevelopment Agency. Lisa Stipkovich. She recommends moving forward. The issues before the Agency are critical items and they want Barton-Aschman to work on them, specifically the I-5 Freeway in relation to the CALSTRS project. City Attorney White answering Agency Member Pickler stated he does not have any problems with this. He believes that Barton-Aschman has been under contract with the City and Agency for several years on various projects. If there was a perceived conflict, Barton-Aschman has seen fit to withdraw its representation from the other party and that is their choice. It should not impact the Agency's decision on this agreement. Chairman Daly asked if they were required to disclose the potential for a conflict and if there is a legal entanglement if they are working for the Agency. City Attorney White. They are a professional engineering company and he does not know the tenets of their canon of ethics. The City's standard agreement prohibits them from entering into relationships that constitute a conflict. It does not require them to disclose perceived conflicts and it is his understanding with regard to the work they have done for Campanula that it did not directly relate to the Arena parking work they did on the EIR for the Arena. It was in relation to a potential new zoning application to be made by Campanula properties for the use of the property. Coleen Wiley. It is their understanding as well that is the case. They could not tell from the Agenda item whether or not the scope of work on the amendment which they are proposing to approve would in any way impact on the project for which they were hired by Campanula. City Attorney White. It is a moot point at this time. If Barton-Aschman has seen fit to withdraw from the Campanula representation, he does not know if the Council has an interest in determining whether or not there would or would not be a conflict. Barton-Aschman has seen fit as a business judgement not to continue a dual representation. He does not see the relevance of the City making further inquiry. He clarified Barton-Aschman has seen fit to withdraw from dual representation even if it is not a conflict. That is their decision and the City Council is not involved in that decision. Chairman Daly. He is not sure he entirely agrees with that. He appreciates Barton-Aschman has committed not to pursue the other work which could be in conflict with the City's objectives. That is why he is asking about contract language which requires them to disclose. If they are going to be working potentially against the City in the future they need to know that. City Attorney White. He does not want to have to defend Barton-Aschman, but it needs to be clear that with regard to what they were doing, he does not 93-100 Anaheim Civic Center, ANAHEIM REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY DECEMBER 14t 1993, 5500 P.M. perceive that as working against the City. They were working on a zoning application for an adjacent property owner. If they were making comments that would be in conflict with comments they made on the EIR~ that would be different. 2. 118: The following claim was filed against the Redevelopment Agency and action taken as recommended: Claim rejected and referred to Risk Management: Claim submitted by William D. Young & Sons, cio Richard R. Therrien, esq., for indemnity sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about July 15, 1993. 3. 171: ORDINANCE NO. 1993-01 - INTRODUCTION: AN ORDINANCE OF THE ANAHEIM REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ENACTING A SALES AND USE TAX. 123: Approving a Sales Tax Agreement by and between the Agency and the City of Anaheim. 171: Authorizing transmittal of a draft agreement for State Administration of Local Sales and Use Taxes by and between the Agency and the State Board of Equalization. 171: Authorizing transmittal of a draft agreement for Preparation to Administer and Operate a Uniform Sales and Use Tax Ordinance by and between the Agency and the State Board of Equalization. 4. 161: Approving minutes of the Anaheim Redevelopment Agency meeting held November 16, 1993. RECESS: Agency Member Daly moved to recess to 6:00 p.m. to meet with the Community Redevelopment Commission and City Council for a continued joint public hearing on the Commercial/Industrial Redevelopment project. Agency Member Simpson seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. (6:15 p.m.) Chairman Daly reconvened the Redevelopment Agency meeting. (6:46 p.m.) Chairman Paul McMillan called the Community Redevelopment Commission to order, all Commissioners being present with the exception of Commissioner Bostwick and Commissioner Perreira. (6:46 p.m.) D1. 155/161: CONTINUED JOINT PUBLIC HEARING - REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY/CITY COUNCIL AND COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION - PROPOSED REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT: This is a continued joint public hearing of the Community Redevelopment Commission, the Anaheim Redevelopment Agency and the City Council of the City of Anaheim. The members of the Council also sit as members of the Redevelopment Agency. At the joint public hearing of December 7, 1993 (see minutes that date and also verbatim transcript of the proceedings - made a part of the record), the Council/Agency/Commission opened the public hearing. Procedures were outlined, staff gave their input and public testimony and comments taken. Written objections were also received thus necessitating a continuance of the public hearing for one week in order to provide written responses to the 93-101 Anaheim Civic Center, ANAHEIM REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY DECEMBER 14, 1993~ S:00 P.M. written comments as required. The public hearing portion of the hearing was closed and subsequently continued to this date for final action with no additional input to be taken at this time. Mayor/Chairman Daly. There will be a staff report at this time which will follow up on last week's hearing. On December 7, 1993 the City Council, Redevelopment Agency and the Community Redevelopment Commission held a joint public hearing to consider the proposed redevelopment plan for the Commercial/Industrial Redevelopment Project. The Council also considered the report of the Community Redevelopment Commission to the Council as well as all evidence and testimony for and against the adoption of the plan. The purpose of today's hearing is to have staff respond to comments, questions and objections received at the December 7, 1993 session and in particular the written responses to written objections received from affected project area property owners and taxing agencies and for the City Council to consider those before making a final decision. He then introduced the Executive Director of Community Development, Lisa Stipkovich. Lisa Stipkovich, Executive Director of Community Development. The purpose of her comments is to respond orally to oral comments made. At the hearing of December 7, 1993 they received both written and oral objections to the proposed plan. After the close of the public hearing last week, the City Clerk received an additional written objection. The issues raised will be covered tonight in her oral presentation. At the December 7, 1993 meeting, there were 13 speakers, 8 were in support and 5 expressed concerns - Joan Marks, Ron Bevins, Thomas Spencer, John Lenny and Barry Eaton. Mr. Lenny's property is not within the proposed project area and his comments were outside the scope of the agenda items being considered tonight. In reviewing the oral comments, they identified several key issues raised which fall into four different categories: 1. Lack of specifics. 2. Questions about eminent domain and the effect on small property owners and businesses. 3. Concerns about adjacent residential areas. 4. City of Fullerton concerns about the area north of the 91 Freeway. Mrs. Stipkovich then addressed each of those concerns (see verbatim transcript for details). In concluding her answers to the concerns and questions expressed orally at the December 7, 1993 joint public hearing, Mrs. Stipkovich stated she feels they have now responded to the oral objections expressed and relative to the written objections, written responses have been submitted to those submitting those objections and copies given to the Agency and Commission. Mayor/Chairman Daly asked if there were any questions of the Community Redevelopment Commission, staff or Council/Agency Members; there were none. Mayor/Chairman Daly. The public hearing was closed last week. Before them tonight is a series of resolutions recommended for adoption by the Redevelopment staff. If there are no further questions, he suggests that they proceed to act on items A-I as indicated on the agenda followed by an ordinance which is recommended for first reading this evening. The Agency will adopt the first item and then the Community Redevelopment Commission is 93-102 Anaheim Civic ten,err ANAHEIM REDEVELOPMEN~ AGENCY DEC~4BER 14~; 1993;. 5:00 P.M. to consider the next two items. Ail of the remaining items are either for the Redevelopment Agency or Council to consider. Council Member Daly offered Resolution No. ARA93-31 for adoption, certifying the final Environmental Impact Report. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. ARA93-31: A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY CERTIFYING THE COMPLETION OF A FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT. Roll Call Vote on Resolution No. ARA93-31 ~or &doption: AYES: AGENCY MEMBERS: Feldhaus, Simpson, Pickler, Hunter, Daly NOES: AGENCY MEMBERS: None ABSENT: AGENCY MEMBERS: None The Chairman declared Resolution No. ARA93-31 duly passed and adopted. Commissioner McMillan offered Resolution No. CRC93-14 for adoption, considering the final Environmental Impact Report and CRC93-15 for adoption, approving and adopting the Redevelopment Plan for the Commercial/Industrial Redevelopment Project and recommending City Council approval. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. CRC93-14: A RESOLUTION OF THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION CONSIDERING THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT. RESOLUTION NO. CRC93-15: A RESOLUTION OF THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION APPROVING AND ADOPTING THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AND RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL. Roll Call Vote on Resolution Nos. CRC93-14 and CRC93-15 for adoption: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COMMISSION MEMBERS: Holguin, Linn, McMillan, Pinson, Renner, COMMISSION MEMBERS: None COMMISSION MEMBERS: Bostwick and Perrelra The Chairman declared Resolution Nos. CRC93-14 and CRC93-15 duly passed and adopted. Agency Member Daly offered Resolution No. ARA93-32 for adoption, approving and adopting Relocation Assistance Guidelines for the Commercial/Industrial Redevelopment Project; Resolution No. ARA93-33 for adoption, finding that the use of taxes allocated from the Commercial/Industrial Redevelopment Project for the purpose of improving and increasing the Community's supply of iow and moderate income housing outside the project area will be of benefit to the project; and Resolution No. ARA93-34 for adoption, approving and adopting the Redevelopment Plan for the Commercial/Industrial Redevelopment Project and recommending City Council approval. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. ARA93-32: A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY APPROVING AND ADOPTING RELOCATION ASSISTANCE GUIDELINES FOR THE COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT. 93-103 Anaheim Civic Centerr ANAHEIM REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY DECEMBER 14, 1993, 5~00 P.M. RESOLUTION NO. ARA93-33: A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY FINDING THAT THE USE OF TAXES ALLOCATED FROM THE COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT FOR THE PURPOSE OF IMPROVING AND INCREASING THE COMMUNITY'S SUPPLY OF LOW AND MODERATE INCOME HOUSING OUTSIDE THE PROJECT AREA WILL BE OF BENEFIT TO THE PROJECT. RESOLUTION NO. ARA93-34: A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY APPROVING AND ADOPTING THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AND RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL. Roll Call Vote on Resolution Nos. ARA93-32 throuqh ARA93-34, both inclusive, for adoption: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: AGENCY MEMBERS: Feldhaus, Simpson, Pickler, Hunter, Daly AGENCY MEMBERS: None AGENCY MEMBERS: None The Chairman declared Resolution Nos. ARA93-32 through ARA93-34, both inclusive, duly passed and adopted. Council Member Pickler offered Resolution No. 93R-240 for adoption, considering the Final Environmental Impact Report; Resolution No. 93R-241 for adoption, finding that the use of taxes allocated from the Commercial/Industrial Redevelopment Project for the purpose of improving and increasing the Community's supply of low and moderate income housing outside the project area will be of benefit to the project; and Resolution No. 93R-242 for adoption, overruling written and oral objections and adopting written findings in response to written objections received from affected property owners and taxing entities and overruling such written objections to the proposed Redevelopment Plan for the Commercial/Industrial Redevelopment Project. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 93R-240: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM CONSIDERING THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT PREPARED AND CERTIFIED BY THE ANAHEIM REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY FOR THE COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT. RESOLUTION NO. 93R-241: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING THAT THE USE OF TAXES ALLOCATED FROM THE COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT FOR THE PURPOSE OF IMPROVING AND INCREASING THE COMMUNITY'S SUPPLY OF LOW AND MODERATE INCOME HOUSING OUTSIDE THE PROJECT AREA WILL BE OF BENEFIT TO THE PROJECT. RESOLUTION NO. 93R-242: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM OVERRULING WRITTEN AND ORAL OBJECTIONS AND ADOPTING WRITTEN FINDINGS IN RESPONSE TO WRITTEN OBJECTIONS RECEIVED FROM AFFECTED PROPERTY OWNERS AND TAXING ENTITIES AND OVERRULING SUCH WRITTEN OBJECTIONS TO THE PROPOSED REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT. Roll Call Vote on Resolution Nos. 93R-240 throuqh 93R-242, both inclusive, for adoption: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Feldhaus, Simpson, Pickler, Hunter, Daly COUNCIL MEMBERS: None COUNCIL MEMBERS: None 93-104 Anaheim Civic Center~ ANAHEIN REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY DECEMBER 14, 1993~ 5:00 P.M. The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 93R-240 through 93R-242, both inclusive, duly passed and adopted. ORDINANCE NO. 5415 - INTRODUCTION: Approving and adopting the Redevelopment Plan for the Commercial/Industrial Redevelopment Project. Council Member Daly offered Ordinance No. 5415 for first reading. ORDINANCE NO. 5415: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING AND ADOPTING THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT. Mayor Daly thanked the Community Redevelopment Commission for the time they have devoted to the project as well as to the Planning Commissioners, five of whom are present this evening (Peraza, Messe, Mayer, Tait and Caldwell). He thanked the Community Development Department staff and all consultants. He especially commended Lisa Stipkovich for the community outreach she has done to gain a remarkable degree of community support for what the Council believes is a badly needed and vitally important project for the core of the City. ADJOURNMENT - COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION: Chairman Paul McMillan moved to adjourn the Community Redevelopment Commission meeting. Commissioner Renner seconded the motion. Commissioners Bostwick and Perreira were absent. MOTION CARRIED. (7:05 p.m.) ADJOURNMENT - REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY: Agency Member Daly moved to adjourn the Anaheim Redevelopment Agency meeting. Agency Member Pickler seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. (7~06 p.m.) LEONORA N. SOHL, SECRETARY 93-105