Council - Regular Meeting

With Mickey, there's always a

Good evening, everyone. Welcome to the July 28th meeting of the Anaheim City Council. I'd like to call this meeting to order pursuant to SB 707. This meeting will include in-person as well as remote participation via the city's webinar system. Clerk, can you please call roll?

Thank you, Mayor. Council Member Bayless. Council Member Kurtz.

Here.

Council Member Moss. Here. Council Member Meeks. Here. Mayor Pro Tem Leon.

Present.

Mayor Aiken. Present. Let the record show we have six members present.

First item on our agenda is an invocation that will be offered this evening by Pastor Edward Wiafi from Messiah Pentecostal Ministry. Following that, Council Member Campos-Kurtz will lead us in the flag salute. If you are able, please stand. Pastor Wiafi, you may begin.

We thank the Lord this day for his favor and grace on our city and the maintenance of this great tradition of prayer. You've all heard that knowledge is power, but wisdom is the best. My prayer this day for the city council meeting is for the Lord to give them wisdom. The greatest man to have wisdom on this earth was King Solomon. One of his writings is found in Psalm 127 where he said, except the Lord builds the city, they live by in vain who build it. And except the Lord watches over the city, the watchman wakes but in vain. Let's pray in the name of God the Father, God the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Precious Lord, we thank you this day for your favor, your blessings, all your provisions for this great city that you built, oh Lord. I thank you, Holy Spirit, for your presence here And I pray also, O Lord, that you give your children, the council members, wisdom from above. Wisdom to build the city. Wisdom to watch over the city. And wisdom to love the city, the state, and the nation. I pray the peace of Christ over you. And I pray his favor over The Lord pours down wisdom and some judgment for you. Above all, I praise his holy great name, and I pray his blessings upon the city of Anaheim by day and night, in spirit and in truth. And maintain his grace with favor from heaven upon all of us. This I pray in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ. Amen.

Thank you, Madam Mayor. We all face the flag with our right hand over our heart. Ready, begin.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

God bless America. I preach on this ministry.

Thank you. So we have two presentations today. Tonight we are recognizing Comunidad Madres Ponderosa for their dedication and the positive impact that they have on their neighborhood. As a mom myself, I'm honored to celebrate a group of incredible women coming together to support each other as well as their community. Being a mom is one of the most rewarding jobs that God can give you, but it can also be one of the most demanding. These women are often caregivers, volunteers, as well as city leaders. But despite their very busy lives, they continue to show up, not just for their families, but for all of the families in their neighborhood. They dedicate countless hours volunteering, supporting families, promoting health and wellness, and creating opportunities for connection, service, and hope. As moms, we do hope that our children grow up in communities that they can be proud of. And giving back is one way to make sure that that happens. And these are what these amazing women are doing. So on behalf of the city, as well as our community, thank you for all the time that you devote to making your neighborhood a better place for Anaheim. Please join council for a photo. Would one of you like to share any statements? Council member Kurtz, I know you nominated. Would you like to share a few words?

Congratulations.

Look at these absolutely wonderful women, all part of the Ponderosa community. And more importantly than just being a part of the community, they are really, really helping their community. They organize things like neighborhood cleanups, neighborhood awareness. They are the ones that have led the effort for two years and we're going into the third year for the Ponderosa Christmas tree lighting. It is thanks to these ladies behind me that the Ponderosa area has its own Christmas tree at the park and a phenomenal celebration. For those of you that don't know, it's always held on the Friday after Thanksgiving with a tree lighting at 6 p.m. You'll have to join them and you'll see what kind of a tremendous organization this is. Thank you.

So next I'd like to do a presentation for one of our crown jewels in Anaheim, the Anaheim Ballet. So we are proud to recognize an extraordinary group of young dancers who proudly represented our city in a ballet competition. They performed at the Youth America Grand Prix Finals in Houston. This opportunity shows that their hard work, dedication, and countless hours of practice is how you get to the invitation to the Grand Prix. We know your success would not be possible without the support of your families, your coaches, and your instructors. We hope that you will continue to believe in yourself and always enjoy this incredible experience that you get to be a part of. Again, congratulations to Logan, Antonella, as well as Shane for proudly representing Anaheim. If we could please invite you and your executive director, Larry, up to share a few comments with us.

Just a couple words. My name is Larry. I'm the executive director. Very briefly, just all we have is gratitude, and the mayor said we're the crown jewels. If that's true, we're part of Anaheim's treasure chest. We're only here because the community supports us, and we want to thank the city council that... The dances you're seeing here are pretty much the cream of the crop, but there's a larger crop just across the street at Anaheim Ballet. And that crop includes an outreach program for kids that can't afford to dance, a school, and then the professional company that you would see, for example, doing the Nutcracker. But it doesn't exist without the support of the city council and the community at large. In classical ballet, no matter where you go, if you go to see the Bolshoi American Ballet Theater or Anaheim Ballet, there's classical mime. Dancers, turn around. This is how we say thank you to the city council. This is called a reverence. Reverence means respect or reverence. We go step and thank you. This is to you. Thank you, community.

Now I'd like to call to order the Anaheim Housing Authority in joint session with our City Council. Clerk, are there any additions or deletions to tonight's agendas?

Mayor, there are none.

Can you please outline the public comment procedures and call forward the first several speakers that will be addressing our agenda?

Thank you, Mayor. Speakers have one opportunity to address the City Council, except for the scheduled public hearing. The first public comment period is limited to 90 minutes or until all agenda item speakers have been heard. Any time remaining of the 90 minutes will be provided to speakers who wish to speak on any non-agenda related items but within the Council's jurisdiction. A second public comment period will be opened by the mayor only if any non-agenda item speakers were not heard during this first public comment, and it'll be open at the end of council business. The time limit for public comment is three minutes per speaker. In compliance with California Senate Bill 707, remote public participation is available at all city council meetings. Members of the public wishing to address the City Council remotely must complete a remote speaker card available at anaheim.net slash council webinar. Detailed public participation information can be found on the city's website as well as on the published agenda. For in-person participants, speakers are available at the back of the council chambers. The name and contact information requested on the speaker card is optional. Any unidentified speaker will be called by the speaker card number. Remote participants will be called to speak following in-person speakers. At this time, I'd also like to announce that Spanish interpreting services are provided at every City Council meeting. Simultaneous Spanish interpretation is provided through the use of headsets, and consecutive interpretation is available to anyone who would like to address the City Council. For those participating remotely, the webinar supports automated live captions in multiple languages, including Spanish. For translation services in other languages, please contact the city clerk's office at least 48 hours prior to the scheduled meeting. At this time, I'd like to introduce our interpreter who will make the same announcement in Spanish.

Buenas tardes. para los miembros que participan en el formato remoto. El webinario cuenta con substitutos automáticos en el directo varios idiomas, incluyendo el español. Para solicitar servicios de interpretación en otros idiomas, póngase en contacto con la oficina del secretario municipal con un mínimo de 48 horas antes de la reunión programada.

At this time, on behalf of the City Council, we would like to remind the public that Anaheim remains committed to freedom of speech. And we ask that speakers address the City Council with civility and refrain from making personal, threatening, abusive, slanderous, or profane remarks towards any member of the Council, staff, or general public. We appreciate you reflecting the spirit when you speak. The time now is 5.17, with a 90-minute public comment period set to conclude at 6.47, or until all agenda item speakers have been heard. We do ask that speakers line up at the podium once they see their name appear on the projection screen behind me. For those participating remotely, you will be called at the appropriate time. And Mayor and City Council, for agenda items, we have one speaker. For agenda item number 10, Mr. R. Joshua Collins, if you could step forward at this time.

Good afternoon, Mayor and Council. My name is R. Joshua Collins, founder of Homeless Advocates for Christ on Facebook. First, I'd like to encourage everyone to give life to Jesus Christ, who died on the cross for us to save us from hell to give us everlasting life. We've all sinned. We all need a Savior. There's not many ways to heaven, just one way. And as we know, Jesus cares very much for those in need. And, of course, I want to speak on that. You know, Matthew 25 says what you did for the least of these, his brethren you did for him. It's so important that we take that warning seriously because if we don't, the Bible says that there's condemnation to those that don't treat the least of God's people well. And one thing I'm concerned about is a lot of the homeless still needing somewhere safe to sleep. We have seniors, we have people that are disabled, we have mothers and females out there that are vulnerable that need safe places to sleep. And I was looking at agenda item number 10 about the use of this parking lot, looks like, of the City Church and Anaheim City Central Library. for two years. Would it be wonderful if we could have use of parking lots for the homeless to be able to park their cars? I know you've made a lot of laws that would keep people from parking places that are homeless or camping in areas because they're homeless, public spaces, you know, they cannot park there, they can't camp there. But we desperately need areas where people can park and can camp that are homeless because we have obviously a need for rent control. The rent keeps going higher and higher. Right now we have, what, 30,000 or so or more households on the wait list for Section 8 vouchers and over 4,000 waiting specifically for affordable housing options. So it's a major crisis. And if you don't feel it, maybe you're not looking at this as a priority, but there's a lot of people that are feeling the stress of this. that are older, that are weak, that are out there struggling with health issues, some of them in wheelchairs, all these types of situations. It's so much your responsibility as a council to take these issues seriously and to provide something. It's a crisis, really. And we need more housing, not more subsidies for corporations. Obviously, corporations don't need more money. Look what happened with the police and how much money they took that wasn't deserving to them. Why not spend some money for those that are desperately in need? So I want to encourage the council to put this on the agenda. We need this on the agenda. Nightly parking areas for the homeless, for the poor, for the disabled, for the sick, for homeless mothers. If we cannot provide housing, why not at least some parking areas or some camping spaces, right? And you could vet them, make sure they're not doing anything crazy or whatever, but let them... THAT ARE JUST NEEDING SOMEWHERE TO REST, HAVE A PLACE TO REST. I ASK THE COUNCIL TO DO THIS IMMEDIATELY, GET THIS ON THE AGENDA FOR THE NEXT MEETING, AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL, THAT INCLUDES AGENDA ITEM SPEAKERS. NOW WE WILL MOVE TOWARDS TO GENERAL COMMENTS. WE CURRENTLY HAVE 17 IN-PERSON SPEAKERS AND ONE THAT WILL BE PARTICIPATING REMOTELY. IF OUR FIRST SPEAKER CAN PLEASE STEP FORWARD, CECIL JORDAN CORKIN. CECIL?

What it is, Outreach Homeless Ministries, what it is, is the reality of what Disney's been through, of the Polk County Chef Department of Disney World, and nearly three dozen, Disney workers' employees arrested for sex intercession by Justin Morgan in July the 13th, 2019. Update. And since 2006, the 35 at least Disney workers have been arrested during the violation of child sex. And... illustration for crimes that have been indebted and actions to meet a minor sex possession of child pornography. I don't know why they got involved in that, but they did. And that's the problem we're having to deal with. It's Florida. Polk County Sheriff Department and Disney World. You have to play it safe here in Anaheim with the stories of Anaheim. They mistressed the princess and they got arrested for that. Cause I remember looking at the reports on my computer and how they were being protected and Disney, Only thing I'm concerned about right now is what the reports I have to bring to the mayor's meeting. Y'all need to upgrade the situation on the reports of the meeting of Disney and what's going on. Y'all have to update those things and find out the reports y'all have since Tom Tate. and the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit. That's what we're working on to protect the children and the safety of the public and the people that come around the world and come to Disneyland. Because Disney's supposed to be internationally known as far as that goes. And as far as I'm doing, I'm working on, this is all I got, the same thing of the reports. So remember this in prayers that the Lord's gonna have to change the situation. And I hope something gets done about it in the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit. God bless you, Mayor. You're in control of this.

Thank you, Cecil. We'll have our next speaker step forward. Melody.

We're bringing a happy smile on Mickey.

Thank you, Cecil.

I know my last name is a little difficult to spell. It is M-A-R as in railroad, L-E-R as in railroad. Thank you. My name is Melody Marler. Good evening, Council and Mayor. I am a member and resident of District 3, a member of the Anaheim Senior Citizen Club, and a volunteer for the City of Anaheim, as well as one of the applicants for the vacant seat in District 3 on the Older Adults Commission. One Saturday each month, the hardworking staff of the City of Anaheim's Community Services Division, as well as the Senior Citizens Club, arrange activities and events for all the resident seniors in the City of Anaheim. And this past, let's see, where am I? Yeah. They are dependent on the availability of parking adjacent to the Center and Center Greens Park so that seniors from every district in Anaheim can park and participate in those activities and events. Those activities and events are usually concluded by 3 p.m. on that one Saturday a month. This past Saturday, a pop-up event was scheduled at Center Greens Park, negatively impacting the availability of parking for scheduled seniors, activities, and events at the downtown community center. One of the state of California's master plan for aging goals is equity and inclusion for all seniors in the state of California. As a member of two vulnerable populations to neglect and isolation, it is important for the city of Anaheim to respect the hard work of its community services staff and senior citizen club and volunteers by not over scheduling anything at Center Greens that would negatively impact the availability for seniors to park at the downtown community center. Let's see, where am I? There we go. That one Saturday a month is very important to the senior citizens that attend those events. They come from every district in the city of Anaheim, and when they can't get in the parking lot, and we have seniors that are in their late 80s and 90s still driving and wanting to participate in those events once a month, when they can't park because there's no parking because of an event at Center Greens, it impacts everyone. Let's see. I request in the future that no events be scheduled at Center Greens Park that negatively impact the senior services that are scheduled the one Saturday of the month when they are using the downtown community center. There was ample parking available after 3 p.m. when senior services are done at the Downtown Community Center. And District 3 has other outdoor venues that they could have used to host that event. And that's all I have. Thank you very much.

Our next speaker. Thank you. I'm going to follow up, Ms. Marlar, with community services, because I know there is the parking structure, which would not be great for our senior community, but maybe we can direct people and then keep that parking lot reserved for seniors. So let me follow up with our community services staff, and hopefully we can get something back communicated to your group. Thank you.

Police Chief Manny Sid may have inherited many of the personnel issues facing the Anaheim Police Department. I recognize that, but let's connect the dots. Former Chief Armendariz initiated an audit into overtime practices involving Anaheim Police Association President Jose Duran and former Vice President Tony Lee after serious concerns were raised regarding overtime misconduct. Then the Anaheim Police Association launched a survey in which, according to rank and file officers, they wanted a chief who would not put Disney before the department. What exactly did that mean? Did it mean don't investigate overtime misconduct at Downtown Disney? It's interesting how the Anaheim Police Association survey was released around the same time Tony Lee was removed from his lifetime assignment, as he said. And it has been reported that Jose Duran and Tony Lee may have retaliated against those who were ordered to investigate overtime misconduct. Natalie Rubacava clearly did not support Chief Armendariz. Was that because he ordered an audit into the overtime practices of Duran and Lee? Is that why she wanted Chief Armendariz out, so that the audit would go away? We know Jose Duran and the Anaheim Police Association publicly supported the appointment of Chief Sid. We also know they supported his annual salary of $433,000. Chief Sid reported to Vanderpool, which meant Vanderpool was going to get a $50,000 annual raise. We also know Vanderpool reportedly received the overtime audit concerning Jose Duran and Tony Lee. So where did the audit go? Did it go poof? Did it disappear into Neverland? Or is this why Jim Vanderpool jumped ship so quickly? Because he saw this coming. And now I'll speak directly to City Attorney Rob Fabella. In case you need a refresher on legal terms, quid pro quo is commonly defined as this for that, or an exchange of something of value for something else. And former Anaheim Mayor Harry Sidhu's favorite legal term, obstruction of justice, which is when someone interferes with an investigation. So, we have overtime compensation reaching into the hundreds of thousands of dollars. We have an audit launched by Armendariz into Lee and Duran. We have Armendariz getting pushed out by Duran and Rubacava. We have Duran and the Anaheim Police Association pushing for the hiring of Sid. We have Vanderpool and this city council approving the hiring of Sid. We have sky-high salaries for Sid, Lee, Duran, and a raise in the works for Vanderpool at that time. We have an audit that is nowhere to be found when Sid joins the team, thanks to Vanderpool. We have an audit that is still missing in action, even though Vanderpool ran for the hills. We have Duran and Lee still working for Sid. We have Duran sending campaign donations to Rubicava. Have you connected the dots yet, Mr. Fabella, or do you need me to write it down for you?

On July 22nd at the Public Utilities Board meeting, Craig Parker declared that the water issue that residents have expressed valid concerns on is closed, closed. How pray tell Mr. Parker, can this matter be closed when you still cannot or will not answer very basic questions? After months of raising serious concerns, residents submitted 26 written questions and we received one complete answer. Mr. Parker acknowledged the discrepancy in the city's Well 51 PFAS shutdown timeline, but we still don't know why. And we still don't have an answer to what caused the brown water event on September 23rd. And we still don't have an answer about the excessive flushing. And again, Mr. Parker, Mr. Craig Parker, lecture on how hydrant flushing is a recognized water quality tool. And again, we already know that. That wasn't the question. The question remains, why were 10 million gallons flushed after the water turned brown in September 2025, and why was flushing occurring before compliance testing? Yet Mr. Parker insists the matter is closed. Mr. Parker also stated that the Division of Drinking Water investigated concerns raised by licensed water systems operators regarding Anaheim's drinking water system. Not one, not two, but three licensed water systems operators reported concerns of excessive flushing and alleged that the records submitted to the state may not accurately reflect actual operating conditions. These are the employees who actually operate the Linane Water Treatment Plant. Mr. Parker works across the street from City Hall, nowhere near the Linane Water Treatment Plant. He's not the one operating it every day. So forgive me for being a little skeptical, but how can the public place complete confidence in an investigation when we don't know what information Craig Parker provided to the DDW and what information wasn't provided? What records were reviewed and what records weren't reviewed? We don't know who was interviewed and who wasn't interviewed. Yet Mr. Parker insists the matter is closed. And the most disturbing issue of all, this city council has not demanded an investigation into the water systems operator's claims. Mr. Parker may have declared this matter closed. The residents of Anaheim assure you it is not.

Our next speaker, Mike Robbins, followed by Mark Herbert.

Good evening, flock cameras are good, so the police can track their husbands and wives and lovers and their friends and boyfriends and girlfriends, where they're going, what they're doing, because they really want to know, and I'm sure you're happy that they will know where they're going and what they're doing. At least that's happening in other cities who've done that, so it's gotta happen here too. Once upon a time, there was a fox. This fox was sly, he was sneaky, he was secretive. Not only was he in charge of guarding the hen house, he was also responsible for investigating all nefarious activities whenever one of the other foxes got into trouble. And wouldn't you know it, Fox never found that he or any of the other Foxes had done anything wrong ever. That's how Anaheim handles accountability. When allegations arise, the city investigates itself, clears itself, and then tells the public nothing to see here. This does not inspire public confidence, it doesn't. We know it doesn't, you know it doesn't. But you're continuing to do that same pattern, the Harry Sadu pattern. Chief Armendariz initiated an audit into overtide practices involving Tony Lee, Jose Duran. Then Chief Armendariz was pushed out. Chief Manny Sid was hired and the audit vanished. Today the audit is still nowhere to be found. Be honest and open please. If there's nothing to hide, why not refer the matter to an independent law enforcement agency? And we learn about Detective Leslie Vargas and allegations surrounding the arrest of a young black woman. This has been described as a civil dispute, along with the allegations that the police report included false information. How many Anaheim PD hours were spent on civil disputes over the last several years? Hours that were being paid for by the residents. We all understand that every organization could have employees who are not ethical. But leadership is measured by how it responds. So does City Hall continue to believe the Fox and leave them guarding the hen house? Or do more elected officials need to go to jail But they can't do the civil stuff. That's for somebody else. For us to spend money on that is a waste of our money, especially when we're in deficit. So certainly all these things should be on your agenda to look at and to solve, whether it's the police over time or they're doing other things that they're not supposed to be doing, including maybe tracking where their wife or husband or lovers are going to. because that costs us money and we can't afford it. Thank you very much.

Our next speaker.

Mark Herbert, AnaheimGreece.com. Before I start, I'd like to express my support of Albert Arzola's family and bring attention to Vern Nelson's Orange Shoes blog, and people should read his article today on Officer Nathan Garcia and his harassment of Albert Arzola. Since March 24th of this year, multiple residents have raised concerns about Anaheim's drinking water. Instead of asking the questions residents were asking, this council requested a presentation. Craig Parker gave an overview of how the water systems operate. We returned on April 21st and raised those concerns again. That same evening, Mayor Aiken referred to her own constituents as the, quote, disinformation brigade. Think about that. Residents take time away from their families and careers because we care about this city and want to ensure our leaders are doing right by its residents. Yet simply for asking legitimate questions, we're portrayed as spreading misinformation. Since then, residents have continued asking those same questions at council meetings on April 7th, April 21st, May 5th, May 12th, June 9th, June 23rd, and again tonight. We asked those same questions at the Public Utilities Board meetings on May 27th, June 24th, and July 22nd. At the July 24th, the Utilities Board meeting, Assistant General Manager of Water Services, Craig Parker reminded the public, at the 55 minute 37 second mark, that the information for the answers to their questions was available through a public records request. May I remind the Mayor, Council, and Mr. Parker, the public records requests are the public's last resort to the public records, not the first option. You have heard our questions, we have listened to your presentations. There was time for big picture reports, there was time for context, but there was no time in the past four months for an investigation into finding the answers to our questions. We have not made vague accusations. They're detailed health and safety related questions that deserve detailed answers. Am I an expert in drinking water? No. Is this council made up of drinking water experts? Again, no. But do you know who the experts are? The licensed water system operators who operate Anaheim's drinking water system every single day. The professionals responsible for producing and delivering safe drinking water to more than 300,000 residents. Well, running out of time here. Instead of requesting an independent investigation into the concerns raised by your own licensed professionals, this City Council and the Public Utilities Board have repeatedly interrupted residents, dismissed concerns, directed them to file public records requests, or simply ignored them. That's not how transparency works.

Our next speaker. Following this speaker, Dave Duran.

Anaheim has an accountability problem. A few days ago, the Los Angeles Times reported that the city agreed to pay a quarter of a million dollars to settle a lawsuit brought to the city by Ms. Bush, a young woman who claimed she was wrongfully arrested after purchasing a vehicle at an Anaheim dealership. According to her lawsuit, what should have been a simple contract dispute became a criminal case. Prosecutors ultimately dismissed the charges against her, and the city settled the lawsuit admitting no wrongdoing. Residents need to ask themselves one question. How does a civil dispute over a contract become a felony arrest? According to her allegations, a young woman legally purchased a car, but ultimately she lost her vehicle, lost her job, faced felony charges, and lived under the threat of prison before those charges were dropped. If the allegations are true, it isn't a simple mistake. It's a complete failure of accountability. If the council would simply address its internal problems and hold people accountable, perhaps the embarrassing press might stop. But your actions speak louder than your words. When six of the seven of you refused to ask the former city manager even a single meaningful question about his chamber funded trip, you sent a message loud and clear to the public. Accountability or lack of accountability hasn't changed within the city. The names may have changed, but the culture has not. Residents were promised a new direction after Harry's to-do. Instead, too often we see the same reluctance to ask difficult questions, the same unwillingness to hold senior officials accountable, and the same expectation that the public should simply move on. When serious allegations are made that involve constitutional rights, residents deserve an independent review, not simply another internal conclusion. Now, Anaheim taxpayers are paying a quarter of a million dollars to resolve a lawsuit. Whether it's overtime or whether it's a costly settlement, the common denominator is not the dollar amount. It's that taxpayers keep paying for the city's failures.

Our next speaker.

There's one thing every one of those unacceptable scandals has in common. It's that Anaheim taxpayers, like you just heard, are the ones that keep paying for the city's failures. It's time we remind you that the job of city council actually is as follows. Your job isn't to protect department heads or dirty cops. Your job is not to protect the city manager or the city image. Your job is to oversee safety and the needs of the public. Your job is to ask difficult questions and to demand accountability. Your job is to oversee how taxpayer dollars are being spent. And when something goes wrong, your job is to insist on transparency, not simply accept the first explanation that you're given. We already know Vanderpool didn't tell you the truth, and your silence is complicit with that. We know Linda Andal and Debbie Moreno don't either. They don't tell the truth either. And Greg Garcia is terrified of all of them. Oversight isn't a suggestion. It's your responsibility. You weren't elected to rubber stamp staff recommendations. You were elected to challenge them. Every time this council chooses silence over scrutiny, every time it accepts assurance instead of demanding evidence, every time it avoids accountability, the taxpayers are the ones who pay the price. The taxpayers didn't elect seven complicit spectators. The public was fooled into thinking and believing they elected seven ethical city council members to provide responsible oversight, but your silence, your neglect, and your lack of responsibility mere corruption in the city that known and quickly is becoming the city of anti-crime. Do your jobs as you campaigned on. Do your jobs as you were elected on. And if you don't, do the community, do the city a favor and resign.

Our next speaker, Art Castillo, followed by Vern Nelson.

Good evening. I just wanted to bring up a lot of things that everything I'm hearing is like I'm back in, 45 years ago. So I'm hearing a repeat. I just want people to know that when people say it's the past, it's still coming on. But one of my main concerns is that since I have for 45 years got involved with this community, coming to the city councils, going to school boards, going to neighborhood councils or neighborhood community meetings when it wasn't district, and getting involved to my community to help these people and go into those streets. And I actually moved into those streets that were problem, didn't see any problems, but I seen the police not doing their job completely correct. And also some of these things slipped through. We had police in our schools change because one of the officers at the school board said, yeah, we had problems with officers with doing things wrong with kids. So now we're gonna slip it, but we're gonna put in these SO, I guess they call it SORs or some, if I'm correct. But there was no debate. And a lot of things, there was no debate and they were just slipped in. and the community didn't get a chance to put out their input. And I do applaud you, Boys and Girls Club, Kids in Action and YMCA, those are great things you guys do great jobs for, but you guys don't do things for the at-risk kids that we're picking up, that we're finding to have problems. And I've been in the community, and I'm still doing it right now, and I do it by myself. I got women and families together. I have a lot of questions for some of you that I'd like to have a meeting with to discuss so you can hear the other side, because you shouldn't just choose one side. There's always the other side. And as I've been in this community for a long time listening, I really get nervous for the families because of the threats. Because even these people, these young kids today that have been taken and killed by police, their families were intimidated. So you've got to understand that. These families, I knew every single one of them. That's the scared thing for me. And they come out and saying they're afraid to come forward to the complete because you're still having these officers that did these things in front of their homes and harassing them. So I'm not a hearsay. I'm an eyewitness. And I can tell you a lot of names. So before my time's up, I just want to let you know I offered the school board, listen to what I can help you. Nobody. And then I say to you guys, listen to what I can help you so it doesn't get this big. Solve it. Be part of the other part that you guys are not getting involved in. So I wanted to leave that with you guys that I'm willing to help do what I can for my experience. You know, I had 45 years. If I would have been in the city, I would have had 45 years. I did May 12 and they got rid of me because I opened my mouth. Even a police officer got fired for opening his mouth. So as whistleblowers, we had one recently, he got fired, she got fired.

So I'm sorry, your time is up.

So I just want to let you guys know the other side, unless you guys already know. Thank you.

Our next speaker, Vern Nelson.

Hello. Hello. There's this great Ben Franklin quote, those who would give up their liberty for a little security deserve to lose both their liberty and their security. I keep remembering that as we see more and more flock cameras and our Motorola cameras and cameras putting up everywhere. And people just think it makes them safer, but they're losing all their privity and liberty. But I know that argument won't work with you. And so this is something that my friend Bethany discovered. These kind of cameras are actually forbidden in the Anaheim City Charter. Section 1213, prohibition of automated traffic enforcement systems, red light cameras. This is because Kurt Pringle didn't like red light cameras, but There it is. No ordinance shall be adopted by the City Council which would permit or authorize any red light camera or any other automated traffic enforcement system in the City of Anaheim. Any ordinance adopted by the City Council in violation of this section shall be null and void. It goes on a few more paragraphs, it's repetitious like that kind of writing. But sounds like the purchase for three quarters of a million dollars that you guys made in April for 72 cameras is null and void. That's good news. I also wanted to talk about three other things. I gotta highly recommend not only the Odyssey, But also a documentary about Luis Valdez, the great Chicano playwright and film director. It's called American Pachuco, and it's being shown. I'm going tonight because they're interviewing the director. It's being shown at the AMC theaters at the block tomorrow. There's a lot of tickets left for tomorrow. Tonight's sold out. Another thing, there's another thing on the Orange Juice blog. I didn't write it, I put it up. It seems important that over at the convention center, the duty managers are really getting the short end of the stick. There's only 10 of them, 10 or 11. They need to be reclassified and get a raise because everybody else there's been getting raises and they haven't. I hope you guys will be fair about that. Anybody that feels strongly about Albert Arzola getting justice, We're meeting up at the Central Library on Thursday at four for a little rally in memory of Albert. We really think the cop who killed him, who also cost us a lot of money by beating up a 14 year old a year before that, he shouldn't be on the street. So we'll see you there maybe. Maybe you'll all be there. Bye bye.

Vance Disney.

Okay, the Puss in Boots on Disney campaign is still well on the way, and you can all reach me at 909-538-4737. First, I need to talk about the biggest problem in the world, that we don't have a slice guard pillar protector on our freeways, and that's just a temporary fix to get the sliding center wall working. And I know anti-intelligence AI is attacking the people with tarted pewter geeks to make the poor poorer, to make the rich richer, with misdirection and fake... products, so we need to remember good people like Jay McAfee, not your fake trillionaire muck and its butt coin trying to turn the money into brown starfish worth less than sand dollars. Better to remember Chancellor Putin was a billionaire long before, and muck is a blatant fake a fraud pretending to be Tesla. I already explained the easy bat car, easy battery replacement car, and the Jetson atomic spark plug factory city's viability, yet these freaks are trying to remember the first African butt monkey tree loafer. when we really need to remember President Saran, or Saran, who protected us from those Kennedy, its blatant nepotistic fag reps of bitchland. And now Saran is being held hostage in the Confederate prison San Quentin, run by a Warden Davis, who worships a corrupted star of divot, when the Israel star should have two points up, for the ears of Cleopatra's time of tigers, or the Muslim M. Yet, they want to shame people for denying the Holocaust, while they deny the Palousacost genocide of Palestinian children, and the Gazatration camps. though they're still fake ding bell trump slow slovakia fag mapatosos try to send naturally born american children to southern concentration camps and he's not even a citizen he became one in a marriage with a slovakian and he can't even capture one small island of hormuz with all his mafia and changed the name to the Cabal Shem Canal, though we know he couldn't keep it straight, or even say make America straight again, and as for the integrity of the ballot measure, we can't have integrity in ballots printed in every language but American, but you don't care, you like to speak but American, with the racist fake priest who thinks his Christianity is more important than the law and thinks everyone else should just go to hell, and anyway. You can always reach me at phat99 at gmail.com, but remember my number. I get it right first. And thank you for your time and listening. Next time I'll try to be more positive, but these things weigh on us.

I'm sorry, your time is up.

And also, the Regal Theater should be retrofit. I don't want to get negative about everything you said.

Our next speaker, following the speaker, it's speaker with card number 7555.

Good evening, Mayor and the members of the City Council. My name is Andrew Wenger and I'm here to speak about the Dudek Wildfire Evacuation Study. Residents had hoped that this document would make the community safer. Unfortunately, it does not. There's no mechanism within the report to determine whether we can safely evacuate. At best, the report limits the size of new developments. At worst, it could become a roadmap for developers to justify much larger projects. I was troubled to hear that the preliminary information from this report may have been presented to the city council before the festival decision and used to support the project. If anything, the report points in the opposite direction by identifying evacuation times of more than seven hours in some scenarios. I submitted a 21-page analysis identifying significant problems, questions, and assumptions within the study. As I read it to my wife, her jaw dropped. She asked a simple question, how did Public Works not identify these problems? Part of the problem may be in the way that legitimate public concerns are being handled. For the past seven months, residents have raised specific concerns about the Know Your Way plan, which is the foundation of the Dudek study. Instead of acknowledging those concerns, investigating them, or providing evidence supporting the city's decisions, we often receive assurances without meaningful answers. For example, when we ask how residents will be told which zones will evacuate, we're told Anaheim Alerts, but nobody's received even a test of the Anaheim Alerts. When we ask whether the system will work during a major emergency, the response is simply, it works, we have it handled. That's not analysis, that's reassurance without any sort of verification. I'm concerned that the same message may be reaching the city council when you guys ask if the residents are safe. Public Works must incorporate some sort of Jedi mind track.

Yes, they are.

However, you continue to receive hours of testimony from frightened residents who are seeking answers. We've not received adequate responses to our questions. We need the city to work with us, not merely reassure us. I'm asking for a working group that includes residents, city council representatives, public works, fire and police, basically bring everyone together to examine these issues and resolve the conflicting information and provide real answers. Whatever process is happening right now is not working. We need collaboration, transparency, and measurable improvements before additional development places more people into an evacuation system that has not been demonstrated to be safe. How do we make this happen? Thank you.

Our next speaker. Following this speaker, June Jackson.

Hello again. This is week three. I'm here to talk about the duty managers that have not received a raise for 10 years working at the Anaheim Convention Center, while everybody else that they work with has made at least cost of living increases of the 30 plus or minus range. More recently, the maintenance people got an 18% raise in January. The security people got two raises since January, one defined as significant, but they get just passed over year after year after year. So they attempted to join the union two years ago and they were denied that offer because it was mid contract. So Not being part of the union means they don't get a raise. That portion of their request got skipped over. So you guys did a study. Let's reclassify them. Let's figure out what they do, and then we'll give them a raise. Well, that study took over a year, so they got passed over a second time. So the reason I'm here is because not a damn person has spoken up for these people for 10 years, and they have had a raise request floating around for two years, and they were recently told by Mindy, the number two person in charge, not to expect anything retroactive and not to expect very much at all. Not very much at all while everybody else keeps keeping pace with the changing economy. So this is their job description. They're not really officially duty managers. They are convention center relief events supervisors. In their description, it says they act as the assistant and the relief person for event managers. Event managers make between $150,000 to about $350,000. a year. You boil that down to an hourly rate, for the least of them, it's $71 per hour. And your duty managers make $21.84, just a little bit more than fry cooks at McDonald's. And they have enormous responsibility, which I have shared with you. Last time I was here, I asked if any of you had received any of the information that I provided and read it, I got blank stares. So to make life easy for you, it is now readily available on the political blog known as Orange Juice. So I would appreciate it if you would drink it up, read it, pay attention. Nobody in the city of Anaheim deserves to have been passed over for 10 years. It is actually against your handbook and your rules regarding classification and equal responsibilities, et cetera, it's against your rules not to pay them a fair wage, and you have allowed this to happen for 10 years. I do acknowledge that you folks here have not been here longer than four years, so you haven't been here for the entire period of time, but believe me, the management at ACC has just looked down upon them, and how they got skipped over with regard to joining the union blows my mind. I thought it was because they were part-time But two weeks ago, I learned that 30-hour people who are part-time, you've got a union rep standing up here pretty much groveling. Well, could you give these 30-hour people jury duty? And could you give them paid vacations? And these part-time people just got passed over. Read about it.

Our next speaker.

Good evening, council members and residents. I'm here tonight to address the growing abuse, excuse me, the growing use of automated license plate readers and Motorola solution systems, better known as flock cameras. Law enforcement has presented these cameras as a tool to recover stolen vehicles and apprehend dangerous criminals. But across the country, serious concerns have been raised about the abuse of this technology and its impact on our privacy rights. These cameras create a warrantless surveillance network that records the daily movements of all law-abiding citizens. Example one. I am a whistleblower and a former civilian employee of the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department, dealing with multi-agency conspiracy. For nearly two decades, I have been subjected to indefinite persistent aerial surveillance, and the Anaheim Police Department has participated in this illegal surveillance, stalking me with their helicopters since 2014, despite my having no criminal history. They've abused millions of taxpayers' dollars on this. My license plate has been entered into the flock system as though I were a criminal or driving a stolen vehicle. Every time I pass a flock camera, my location is recorded, and law enforcement agencies are alerted, allowing air and ground surveillance to continue as I travel across city and county lines. This demonstrates how this technology is being used for purposes far beyond what the public is being told. I have even filed formal police reports and official claim forms with the city of Anaheim regarding this misconduct. Instead of taking corrective action, the city concealed this and dismissed my complaints with boilerplate response. Some people say, if you've done nothing wrong, you have nothing to worry about. That misses the point. This is about protecting our constitutional rights and preventing surveillance from expanding beyond its stated purpose. Public safety should never require sacrificing our privacy and civil liberties. We do not need promises of oversight, which is a facade to pacify the public while overreach continues. We need action before these systems are further abused. I urge this council to not just be passive, but to stand up to this abuse and remove flock cameras from our city and protect the rights of the residents you are elected to serve. The freedoms we give away today may not be there for future generations.

To the audience, write your representatives and your senator regarding this.

And I wanna say, this is not China. We have our next speaker.

Our next speaker, step forward.

Good afternoon. We stand on traditional lands of the Kish, Tangua, or Gabrileños is what the colonists named them when they came from Europe. I want to first give a shout out to the Hopi Nation. Hello, Delosoyas. I know you're watching. Thank you for the piki. Blue Corn, thank you so much. I wish I could have traveled to Arizona with all of you there, but... Sadly, when I always go drive to Quartzsite, Arizona, I get racially profiled, and I get stopped by the Highway Patrol. They'll let me go. I let them search my car, even though I can say no, but it's okay. Give them something to do. But respect to the Hopi Nation. Thank you, the Lasoya family. Actually, I want to talk about the... Mendez Freedom Trail, city mayor, city council, city manager, and city attorney, city clerk, and everyone else here in the audience and watching. It's very interesting because, I wish Natalie was here, I hope she's watching. Very beautiful, they actually extended, when I used to pick up Artie Castillo and Westminster Garden Grove, we saw the monument, the park, but they actually extended something, Westminster, it's like a two miles, it's very educational, it's very inspiring. Carlos Leon, it's about Mexican-Americans, Chicanos, and Westminster versus, I mean, Mendez versus Westminster, how they didn't allow, how the colonists, you know, white European Saxons at that time did not allow us to go into the same school. But things have changed, but thanks to that case that got fought, we won our people. And when I say Mexican-American, Chicanos, we have Native American blood, right? A lot of us speak Nawa, like the words , , Seattle, Wisconsin, Chicago. I could keep going and on with Nawa terms and history. And with that, I hope that maybe one day we can have some type of educational monument at Pearson Park, because that actually explains how, explaining at the pool, how at Pearson Park they would not allow us to swim in that same pool. But now things have changed. But it would be nice to have something educational. Obviously, they killed Arzola. That has not changed. It's always brown people being killed, you know. Even Donaldson in 2012. So I feel that it's time that we have something like that. And there is good cops and there is bad cops. Just like there's good white people and there's bad white people. Just like there's good brown people, there's bad brown people. There's good and bad. So I hope that we have this. And I actually like the monument. I like the trails because actually... The city mayor, the city manager came together with the school board. They're going to have kids go there, and they're going to teach them. It actually says the Anaheim Ku Klux Klan run the city council in the 1920s, 30s or 40s, I think. And they mentioned the colonists, actually, and they were fighting to change the name of the school, the colonists. And I'm glad that Congressman Lou Correa is finally on our side, and even Gustavo Reynos, like, 50 yes, 50 no, you know. But it takes education. It takes people like myself and other people to come together. and to take the initiative and do it respectfully, you know, and not just come here and yell, but, you know, have facts and talk about our experiences and have some data, and hopefully we have a future. Let's keep changing the grass and save water. And those of you- Sorry, your time is up. Thank you so much.

Our next speaker, Mark Richard Daniels, followed by Pearl Arzola.

Real quick there, it took me off my thought. They would drain the pool at the end of the summer The Mexican kids, the dark kids, would get to swim in the pool. The next day they would drain the pool to put fresh water in. And also the Klan rally in 1925 involved a lot of the then city council members. who were the board of trustees of the old Vineyard Society, and they were completely recalled. 1925, they were completely thrown out. So anyway, to get back to where I was going, the cameras is here to stay because there's so much, technology involved. There's so much money that's been invested that it's not going to go away. So here's the fact that you just hold on to that, that it's just going to progress. It will be even more mind-boggling in 20 years. Right now, I can stand out in the middle of Anaheim Boulevard And Lincoln, I could hold this agenda out and a satellite up there in space will be able to read every word of that. What time the meeting is. I can hold the dime heads up right out there in the same spot and a satellite will be able to tell me heads or tails and what year is that dime. from space, you know. We have such technology now that just, it's beyond belief and it's only gonna get more, we're gonna see what used to be called Big Brother 1984, you're gonna have much more sophisticated, wherever you go, and that's just the life that we live. Unfortunately, that's what it's all about. They outdo, it's like the latest television set or the latest whatever, it will only get better or more sophisticated as time goes on, and it will be things that we can't even comprehend. And just to get back to the fact that we've had investigations, we can't allow ourselves to get so caught up that this day as city council, mayor, or whoever comes along will govern themselves. It doesn't work that way. It didn't do it with Harry Sadu. It takes outside agencies to do that. Thank you very much.

Our next speaker, Pearl Arzola. Pearl Arzolo. We'll go to our next speaker, Sergio.

If you guys have time and a Netflix subscription, please watch A Toxic Love Story. It's a great example how Anaheim PD failed themselves and the community. They locked up an innocent woman for over 90 days and the Anaheim City Council had to pay for it. Why? Because we failed to do our due diligence. It's the most simple thing. When your teacher gives you homework, you go home and finish it. If you guys couldn't even tell if this lady was putting false claims, what are we gonna do in the next time? It's very easy to manipulate the law when you're a man of law enforcement. I'm here today in support of my cousin Alvaro Zola and Emmanuel. We still don't know who shot Emmanuel in the back of the head. It wasn't a fair shot. He was giving himself up. Anaheim PD, at the meeting we had about Albert's death, Chief Stutter, he yelled back at the lawyer. He said, you want to know what your guy was charged with?

You want to know?

All he had was, they said, was a dagger, which he already was giving himself up. What are you going to do? Are you really going to run at the cops when there's 15 cops with their guns pointed at you? There was no need to hit that man in the back of the head. That's a serious brain shot that could have severely damaged him for the rest of his life. And we still don't know who did that. We still don't know who drove Nathan Garcia to commit the murder. It's just simple things. What does he have to fear for his life? They are police officers. They are the most trained, safe. Nobody ever messes with the police because you have to be stupid. The police control all sections of your life. When you go to the jail, who are they friends with? They're friends with the people that arrested you. It just blows my mind that we couldn't even find out Garcia's name until the lawsuit was in the settlement works. I'm happy that the LA Times is the only news article that posts reliable things, because the OC Registry, I mean, why wouldn't they want to put out the news that Anaheim Police Union leaders were abusing the overtime payment? That's a good money click. You know why they don't do that? Because they have friends. Friends at Disney, friends at the Anaheim police stations. They don't want to put them on blast. That's the LA Times. They were the ones that wrote about Nathan Garcia's previous abuse that we had no idea of. It just makes you wonder. We noticed a seat is missing. They're the famous LA Times seat that was mentioned in the document. I didn't see anybody else, so I would say congratulations. NIPD's official statement read, yes, we know the shooting was a tragedy, but it was the name of public safety. You also know what the Department of Homeland Security said when ICE officers shot an unarmed man in front of his own daughter? They said it was for public safety. You guys can't say ICE is terrible, ICE is bad, and ICE you fear for your life when you guys say the exact same quotes when it comes to killing someone over graffiti. We're not here to spend any time with Albert over graffiti. Thank you.

Our next speaker Christine.

Good evening. I'm the aunt of Albert Arzola, and I'm here to demand justice for our family. On December 6th, nothing wrong, he did not commit a crime. But Nathan Garcia should have never drawn his weapon upon exiting his vehicle. Albert just arrived from work that evening. He was not looking for trouble. Can we say that of your employee? We can't. Your officer displayed behavior that violates police standards of conduct. So when we all know if there was in fact, do we know if there was in fact a report called in for graffiti that Albert did not do? Has that call been made public? Was there any evidence like spray cans and such? Graffiti does not warrant a death sentence, but it should be very concerning if in fact that no evidence exists Why did your officer target Albert that night? Why did he abuse his authority and act erratically towards a teenager? Why did it happen again? If he is still on the streets, what are you doing to ensure that your children are safe? And we still demand that you release the name of the other officer who did not turn his camera on. It's the law. The flock cameras, the US Supreme Court recently ruled the Shattree Court case, look it up, which represents a significant step in reinforcing our Fourth Amendment privacy protections when dealing with location tracking without a warrant. So what you all voted for with the flock cameras may be considered illegal. It has been sent back to lower courts. So those cameras should be removed immediately. until the lower courts decide, but it's currently with the lower courts. Nonprofit events. Why are nonprofits who provide needs to the community be charged $2,200 for a permit, plus $2,000 more for barricades, plus being told they need to provide their own watchers, which could have amounted to $6,000? when all they were doing was making children smile, showering them with love and ensuring that they have what they need for a successful school year. Nonprofits should not be nickeled and dimed to provide basic needs to the community. I hope that those charges, the fees that were charged to Wings of Kindness are dropped. We did have cadets there and they are actually volunteers. So you don't need to be paying them. So I'm not sure why the city ended up charging them so much for a nonprofit event for the community.

Your time is up. Our next speaker, Grace Arzola.

My name is Grace Arzola. I'm here to advocate for Albert Arzola. My nephew was killed, and you guys continue to tell us to trust the process. How can we trust the process when we see over and over again, whether it's LA Times or Netflix, that your guys' police department is incompetent? Lawsuits and settlements for the misconduct of the police department, and invest that money in the youth that we need. You guys were happy to brag here about citing people who displayed illegal fireworks you guys are continue to oppress the poor and you guys continue to oppress the poor and Provided a golden handshake for the police officers sergeant union vice presidents all these fancy titles They held while they sold hundreds of thousands of dollars in fake overtime You guys could not have two standards. You guys could not kill my nephew because he according to the chief, was the lookout for the person tagging, yet no evidence had been given to us, and let someone walk away free with no charges, or giving the community an explanation how you guys allowed someone to just walk away with all that money they stole. Who was overseeing them? Are you guys providing now additional, looking at it, the books, running? reports without other people knowing inside, holding those accountable, who is holding the police accountable? Who is checking for the overtime fraud and who is checking for the excessive force? These are all leading to problems. Weren't you guys embarrassed to watch the number one movie that was Toxic Love? Your guys' police department goes into calls with prejudice. Prejudice got my nephew killed. Prejudice got that girl arrested for 90 days. I mean, you guys can't catch a break. Two weeks ago was the LA time. This time is the toxic love. When are we going to hear good news from you guys? When are we going to hear that you guys are actually investing hundreds of thousands of dollars into the community instead of paying these settlements to people because your guys' police has misconduct issue? Ashley, I know you're running for reelection. I saw you filed. Be transparent. You ran on transparency. Tell us what you guys are gonna do about the fraud being committed at the Anaheim Police Department. Tell us what you guys are gonna do of holding those accountable. whether they're in power or not. And I know you guys don't drink the Kool-Aid because the water's contaminated, you know? So you need water for Kool-Aid, unless you have a fancy filter. But we want you guys to hold everyone in the Anaheim community accountable, whether they're in the poverty level or up in the District 6. We want the same justice for everyone. Oh, and Natalie, you're on vacation, please watch Toxic Love, I know you got downtime. And I recommended everyone so you guys could see how incompetent this department is and how the city continues to enable them.

Our next speaker, Albert Arzola.

All right, this was a Friday night. I almost got run over by the Anaheim Police Department. I called 911 so they could document it for my lawyers. We could do another lawsuit against you guys. And also, you know what? All you people right here are hating against that cop that stole the money. Good for him. Good for him. I hope he steals some more money from you guys. He didn't let everybody steal the money. Who cares, you know what I mean? And the... Backpack getaways that you guys had, where you guys were doing chupacabra over here, refereeing them. One kid gets one, one kid doesn't get one. If you guys ain't got money, you just come up to me, you know what I mean? At least you got lots of money. Just ask for it, we'll give it to you guys. You know what I mean? Shit. Why should kids go with no backpacks to school? That was embarrassing. Didn't you like being in Anaheim and you got refereeing backpacks? Oh my God. That's, yeah, shame. You know? I couldn't believe that one. You know what I mean? But actually, you're not going to get reelected. We're going to take you out of here. You're worthless to us, honestly. You don't do a goddamn thing for us. Nothing, for nobody. You know what I mean? Yeah, we're going to get better mayor. You know what I mean? And it ain't going to be you, so go to sleep with that thought.

Pearl Arzola.

Pearl.

Anaheim is not a safe place, like everybody seems to think. The water isn't healthy, Anaheim Hills has a fire hazard issue, and the so-called police officers are shooting and killing kids that were raised in Anaheim. We, the community, are trying to protect and defend the community. Last week, Wings of Kindness had an event and had to pay just to close out the street of both sides and give out school supplies for the kids in that community. It's sad when you guys are trying to block people that are trying to give back, especially when Wings of Kindness is a safe place for kids and all the people. I feel like the, I don't know if you guys know Wings of Kindness, but Wings of Kindness is founded by a liquor store, a husband and wife. The liquor store's name is Madrigon. The Madrigon is a safe zone for kids and families. liquor store you guys might think like oh it's a liquor store it brings drugs and guns and all this other stuff but that is not true that liquor store is a very safe zone there is two I want to say there is two gangs where that liquor store is. And those people always go in and show the most decency respect to those owners and try to give as much safe zone. We, the community, probably don't have neutral grounds. But what we do have is a respect. to each other and we know when it's a place to act accordingly. And you guys as police officers don't have the respect for us, the community, to act accordingly. You guys all should be ashamed of yourselves.

Our next speaker, Eric Chen.

thank you all people here i own apartment of ben morning since 1980 and i found out I found out another problem with my property in that area, because like parking problem, and double parking in the alley. So I went to city police department, and then I want to talk to the police about this problem. Before, I see the police drive by, but today, you know, foot track, the city in same place for more than 30 hour, 30 minute, they will move to different area. So double parking is very popular over there now. So I tend to city. to talk to one of the policemen, and turned out he come to Dunbar's window three. I was talking to him, and then three minute, he left, and never come back. I saw he maybe go to bathroom, so I ruined, so finally I give up. This is one of the problem. The next problem is, I want to let you people know, this is a circuit breaker. It's most important each sub-panel or in the main panel, they protect all inside property. How will they protect the current? that the wire number six, they insisted me to put on number six wiring in the inside from the main panel to sub-panel. And I saw that it's not necessary because I didn't see anything inside change like an appliance. I never had an appliance upgrade like that. Tesla, that kind of charger, because Tesla use number six wiring, gauge number six. So I talked to the inspector, and he in this day, used to be, what they call, insurance company require, now today is a city call. And I don't think that is true because I have feeling, you know, he's like Xi Jinping in China, that kind of person. I can never communicate with him anymore. He just want me to change it. And I keep thinking number six violence is not necessary because I don't have Tesla, that kind of battery charger inside my apartment. So this is a big problem to me. If I want to draw it, I spend about 20,000 to do this kind of job. So I want to find out if this is a call is necessary for city to enforce it. If not, please don't do it. Okay, this is all I want to ask you to understand it. So you may help me out, thank you.

Thank you. Mr. City Manager, can we have someone maybe from building and planning get his address and just check in on the double parking as well as whether what he's doing conforms to our new building codes?

Absolutely. So Ted White is in the back of the room, and we'll meet with the resident. Thank you.

Our next speaker, Kenneth Batiste.

giving honor to God, those on the council serving the God of the people. It says, we're number one. Make America great again. Well, no, we're not number one anymore. We're number 64 by the World Press Freedom Index grade, downgraded and a fall to a fall in our democracy. We're not even, we've been downgraded from a fault democracy to a decline in democracy. 78% of our farmers voted for Trump. Now they're losing everything, generational wealth. 18 months have happened, higher costs, higher inflation, new wars, costly tariffs, and stunning corruption. Republican control, President, Senate, Congress, and the Supreme Court. Groceries are higher, rents higher, gas prices are higher, paychecks don't go further. The average American is living in record credit card debt.

What is the problem?

Corporations are leading America while the people are getting left behind. Credibility of honest election. I hear our presidents talk about corrupt elections. Excuse me. When I grew up, we used to send people to other countries to go ahead and perform their elections because we were that honest about ours. Certain people forget that. But when you go ahead and get away from the morality, you go ahead and you vote for racism, rapists, making fun of special need people, destroy endorsers. Trump was endorsed by the KKK. Do we know that the Anaheim PD headquarters down there used to be a KKK? It used to be a KKK headquarters. So my vote is for people who are losing friends and family. You voted for black and brown community. You voted against the gay community. You voted against women's rights. You voted against years of children and abortions, food. Matter of fact, It's like we are becoming friends with the Nazi. We go ahead and have gotten away from caring for our fellow man. I'm gonna close with the Arizona one. The autopsy has not been released. Why hasn't it not been released? Because they don't wanna show how many times that boy was shot in the back. And when you shoot somebody in the back, you cannot go ahead and say it's under the fear of your life. My point of it is we need to do better. as a community, as a society. Thank you.

Mayor and City Council, that concludes our in-person speakers. We will now turn to our remote speakers. We have one remote speaker. Mr. Dwayne Roberts, if you can please unmute yourself at this time.

can you hear me yes you can your time has started okay very good uh good evening duane roberts editor and publisher and i'm investigator.com two things first i want to thank council members ryan bayless and norma campos kurtz for responding to the questions i sent via email regarding the awards gala at the nixon library and museum on june 24th i applaud the professionalism and willingness to engage Second, I'm extremely disappointed some council members and the city's public information office failed to provide me with at least the name of the person who nominated ex-city manager James Vanderpool for the City Manager of the Year award at that event. That's a simple, factual question that should have been provided. It doesn't matter I filed a Public Records Act request. Transparency shouldn't require a months-long scavenger hunt, nor should basic answers be treated like privileged state secrets to be withheld from the public. May I remind you of who you are supposed to be working for. I thank you very much for your time.

Mayor and City Council, that concludes our in-person as well as remote speakers. Noting for the record, we did receive electronic comments. Ten were related to general comments and four were related to item number 15. Those were distributed to City Council as well as posted on the City's website and can be found at anaheim.net forward slash public comment.

Thank you, City Clerk. So we're now going to close public comment portion of this meeting and move on to council communications. Are there any council members with items to share? Okay, I just wanted to share two items. Last week, they had the police awards ceremony at the River Church across the street. I wanted to thank the Anaheim Police Department for inviting me to be a part of this. We had a lot of officers, some of our younger officers as well, of our more experienced officers that got awards that were nominated by the department. So just wanted to thank them and for the excellent work that they are doing in our community. Second, I wanted to thank the city manager for having us participate in a community program called the First Tee. I know we talk a lot about the Anaheim Hills Golf Course as well as the golf course in District 2 called Dad Miller. One of the amazing programs that we have and we support as a city is a program called First Tee, which offers low and no cost golf lessons to kids in that community that would not have access to those programs under any other circumstances. So it's one of the really great community give backs that our city champions and supports. And so if you haven't had a chance or if you've never heard of it before, please take a moment to check out First Tea. They do great work in our Anaheim community. Oh, Council Member Moss.

Thank you. I do have a few slides to share briefly. On July 14th, we had a ribbon-coating at Window World of Orange County. They are located on North State College, just north of the 91 Freeway. This is a father-daughter operation, so we wanted to welcome them and appreciate them investing in Anaheim. Next slide. I wanted to thank Teresa and the staff at the Mira Loma Family Resource Center for putting together a splash day and to thank the council before me who approved this splash pad. There were hot dogs served, we had water slides there, popsicles, water guns. It was a really great day for those kids who live in the neighborhood who don't have a front yard. They made a lot of great memories there that day and stayed cool doing it. And then lastly, I wanted to congratulate the staff at the Sunkist Library for putting on another wonderful STEAM fair. We had a fantastic summer reading program where the Public Works Department and the library worked together. That's always appreciated when we collaborate. And the event was wonderful. We were giving out trash pickers you guys know i love trash so there were trash pickers for adults and kids and an opportunity for kids to learn about some of the big equipment we have here in our city so congratulations to the staff and thank you for that those are all my slides thank you so much council member mayor pro tem leon

Thank you, Madam Mayor. I'll be brief tonight. I wanted to share that we recently kicked off another season of the OC Fair Express at Arctic, which makes it easier for Orange County families to enjoy the OC Fair without the hassle of the traffic and the parking. The OC Fair Express runs every Saturday and Sunday through August 16th with direct service to the fairgrounds from six locations across Orange County, including Arctic here in Anaheim. Buses arrive about every 30 minutes. Fairs are also just $2 each way for adults and youth ages 18 and under ride free through OCTA's Youth Ride Free program with a wave card, making it an affordable option for families who want to visit the OC Fair. If you're planning a trip to the fair this summer, I encourage you to consider taking the OC Fair Express. It's an convenient way to get there while helping reduce congestion around the fairgrounds. Thank you, Madam Mayor.

Thank you, Mayor Pro Tem. Now is the time for the city manager's update. Mr. Interim City Manager, do you have anything for your report?

Yes, a few items, Madam Mayor. First up, the city of Anaheim and our Anaheim Public Library are celebrating Chicano Heritage Month in August and invite everyone to join us. Chicano heritage reflects a richness of Mexican-American identity through art, food, music, and more. And our libraries will have various hands-on events and activities. You can also check out our newest books celebrating Chicano heritage, including cultural cookbooks, personal essays, and powerful historical testimonies. So for more information on these programs, visit anaheim.net slash Chicano heritage. Next up, next Tuesday, join us in the Anaheim Police Department for National Night Out on August 4th from 5 to 8 p.m. at Juarez Park. It's a chance for residents and police to get to know each other and continue building a sense of community. And our police will put on demonstrations with our helicopter angel and showcase their motorcycles and special operations equipment. And of course, our police dogs and horses will be there too. Bring your family and friends and neighbors to join us and enjoy live music, food trucks and games and more. And then finally, another great event we have coming up is a landscape workshop. Our Anaheim Public Utilities will host this event at 9.30 a.m. next Saturday, August 8th, at our new Sustainability Education Center. People can learn about different landscape design concepts. You can also find out how to save water and lower bills by replacing grass lawns with drought tolerant gardens. The event is free, but RSVPs are required as spots are limited. So to register, please visit anaheim.net slash be water smart. And that concludes my manager updates.

Thank you, Mr. Garcia. So we will now recess the city council to address the Anaheim Housing Authority agenda. Items one and two are before us. Is there a motion to pass this consent calendar?

I'll move.

Second. We have a motion and a second. Please vote.

The vote is six ayes, no nays, with a recorded absence by Councilmember Huabacalva.

Thank you. So without objection, we are going to adjourn the Housing Authority and reconvene our City Council to address the City Council Consent Calendar. Consent Calendar Items 3 through 14 are before us. Are there any members of council who wish to remove an item for further discussion? I will start with Councilmember Meeks. Item 10, please. Thank you very much. Are there any other items that a council would wish to pull? If not, can I get a motion for the remainder of the calendar? We have a motion and a second by Mayor Pro Tem and Council Member Bayless. Please vote.

The vote is six ayes, no nays with the recorded absence by Council Member Bacalva. Motion carries.

Thank you. So item number 10 was pulled by Council Member Meeks. Would you like a staff report? No, I just have a question.

Okay. I appreciate this. I support it. I think it's great when we have available parking to use it rather than have the parking spill over into neighborhoods. So I appreciate that, but I am concerned with people and families jaywalking across the street to get from the parking to the church. Can we require them to put up a sign or something on the library side that says, please use crosswalk with an arrow or something? just to encourage it. I know it's not against the law, but it's just really a bad idea.

Yes, Councilmember, thank you so much for that question. We have similar concerns because they are a little staggered, and we definitely don't want folks jaywalking. I think a sign is a good idea. We've also talked to the church about having escorts or representatives on site to encourage folks to walk the couple blocks down to the... Crosswalk.

Okay. Is that part of our agreement, having people out there or a sign or something?

It was part of our discussion with the church to make sure that that happens, and we'll continue to monitor that. I don't believe it's a written term in the agreement. It didn't look like it. I didn't see it. But it definitely was something that we spoke about.

Okay, and do you feel good about that? I mean, should we have at least a letter or something documenting it? Because people change hands.

Yes, we can definitely follow up in writing with the church requesting that. Okay, thank you. That was it.

I'll move approval of the item.

Then a second, please vote.

The vote is six ayes, no nays with the recorded absence by Council Member Pakalva. Motion carries.

Thank you so much. Item 15 is a resolution ordering the submission of a ballot measure on the November general municipal election. Mr. City Manager, could we please have a staff report?

Yes, yes, thank you. And I'll give my team some time to get settled. So with us in the box today are Alyssa Guerrero with our city manager's office, Rudy Omami, our public works director, Steve Mattis, and also Skye Woodruff with Redwood Public Law. Mayor and Council, this item before you tonight, just to let you know, this is a result of some work we did earlier at the end of last year. And you may recall on December 9th, we held a strategic plan workshop to discuss options for new funding sources to increase city revenues and to maintain and enhance services. THIS IS ALL PART OF ONE OF THE GOALS IN THE STRATEGIC PLAN THAT WAS APPROVED. DURING THAT TIME WE HAD A VERY ROBUST DISCUSSION ABOUT ALL OTHER TYPES OF REVENUE OPTIONS THAT COULD BE AVAILABLE TO THE CITY IN THE FUTURE AND WE DISCUSSED VARIOUS OPTIONS FROM SALES TAX MEASURES, UTILITY USER FEES, TOT increases, admission taxes, parking taxes, billboards, developer impact fees. We had a good discussion about all options available. As part of that discussion, council did identify the transportation network company or TNC tax as a viable option that should be explored further and prepared for more information for council to consider. And so here we are today with a follow-up of that. Staff has done our due diligence. We've studied the issue a bit and also we've prepared some information should council wish to move forward with this item, we can certainly do so. And so that is where we are today. So moving on to the consideration items before you tonight. If Council chooses to move forward, there are a few items before you. One of them is to submit a general tax measure establishing a 10% tax on rideshare trips within designated non-residential use areas of the Anaheim Resort and portions of the Platinum Triangle. Of course, part of this is to establish the deadlines for filing the arguments and rebuttal arguments. If desired by the council to designate up to three council members and two others to prepare and sign an argument in support of the tax measure and also if needed a rebuttal and then direct the city attorney to prepare an impartial analysis of the measure to the elections code. So before you, on the screen is the ballot measure question that our team had come up with, if this were to be considered by council. I could read through it, but it's here on the screen. To maintain city services, including police, fire, 9-11 response, save clean public parks, address homelessness, repair streets, improve public transit, traffic congestion, other general services, shall a measuring level, a measure levying 10% $2 average on rideshare driverless vehicle company trips, starting or ending only in non-residential locations within the Anaheim Resort, the Transit District, Arena District, Stadium District, part of Cotella District within the Platinum Triangle, generating approximately $3.6 million annually until ended by voters, requiring audits, spending disclosure, funds benefiting Anaheim residents be adopted. So that is the proposed measure if we were to consider this tax. Moving on, when we were discussing this tax in front of council and the possibility of such a tax, part of the charge was to minimize the impact on Anaheim residents. And so as part of the exploration process, we wanted to limit this to the resort and also to the Platinum Triangle. And so this shows the Anaheim Resort area and specifically just shows some of the areas excluded within the Anaheim Resort area because there is some residential zone in this area. Moving on to the Platinum Triangle, a large part of the Platinum Triangle is reserved for residential and therefore you can see a lot of that was excluded. And so really it just includes the Arena District, the Cotella District, the Stadium District and the Transit District, which is Arctic. And so as you can see in the maps, when looking at this and exploring this, we really tried to limit the impact to residents. And so we really tried to limit the area. And so as you know, our city is 50 square miles, but this impacted areas covers roughly two square miles. And so we believe that was the charge. And as we put this together, we felt that this was the best way to move forward. So with regard to projected revenues, with the help of our outside counsel, we worked to try and figure out what the impact could be for a measure like this. It's kind of difficult because this data isn't readily available, so we employed the use of a firm, a transit planning firm, to try and estimate the number of rides to and from the Anaheim Resort and also the Platinum Triangle, and so you see here, It's about 1.5 million rides to and from the resort and 240,000 rides to and from the Planet Triangle. Again, very tough to really pinpoint that, but we felt that using this firm and their methodology, this was the closest we could get. And then from there, you can estimate the revenues to about 3.6 million annually at the 10% tax rate. So we wanted to provide council, as we were exploring this, as council directed us to explore this further, we started looking around at what other communities and similar municipalities have done. In California alone, we're aware of the San Francisco program and also Berkeley program that were done by ballot measure. Both of those programs are citywide measures, and so there's no carving out of non-residential areas. And also, when you look at the various out-of-state programs that exist in which cities put an assessment on these types of TNCs, Baltimore, Chicago, New Orleans, New York City, Philadelphia, Portland, Seattle, and Washington, again, all of those are citywide measures, which is why when we were crafting ours, we thought... in order to minimize impact to residents, unlike these other cities, we thought we would confine it to the resort and platinum triangle. But this just gives you a flavor of other municipalities around the country that have explored this and actually implemented these tax measures on rideshare companies. Next slide. Similarly, I think we're all familiar with airport fees that exist as well. And so we wanted to just provide counsel with a snapshot of some of the fees that exist for pickup and drop off at our surrounding airports. And so yeah, these are flat fees. And these are very common and have existed for quite a bit of time. So with that, like I said, we wanted to provide you an opportunity to explore this further. I'm really thankful to the team. As part of this process, we've learned a lot about what's out there in developing a measure like this and trying to determine the best way forward should we need to move forward with something like this. And so we put together a little calendar here. If council wants to move forward with the ballot measure, Very quickly on August 4th. We would need an impartial analysis do We would do the ballot arguments as well on August 4th rebuttal arguments would be due on the 14th and then of course when placed on the ballot the voters will have an opportunity to weigh in on Election Day, November 3rd That concludes my brief presentation. I know you must have some questions and where we stand ready to answer any questions you may have I

Thank you, Mr. City Manager, and thank you to the team. I know because of the cutoffs with the city clerk's office leading up to Election Day, we had to bring this forward in an expedited nature, and so it was a lot of work and a lot of information to acquire and condense in a short period of time. I had a couple of questions. If you could go back a couple slides. Between the shared rides and all other rides, is that... I guess under the Uber app when you are doing a ride share versus I'm going by myself, or is that a ride share versus other rides like a taxi company?

I believe, and I'll refer to my team to correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that refers to single rider versus multiple riders.

That's correct. It's single riders versus multiple riders on an Uber trip or a Lyft trip. So if you select on the Uber app or under Lyft, that you're willing to join a shared ride, then you would pay, in many of these instances, a lower percentage. And if you're taking the Uber individually or just with your own family, you pay the higher rate.

And then I know that some of the, I think, yellow cab and companies like that are trying to move over into a more app-based model. Would this then apply to those with a taxi medallion or just the traditional shared ride operators?

As the ordinance is currently drafted, if they actually have a taxi medallion, they would be excluded from the tax. If they migrated more fully into a typical transportation network company model like Uber and Lyft, the definition would then incorporate them. But a taxi trip operated under the medallion would be excluded.

Thank you. When we look at the map and it designates that we were trying to take out residential areas to prevent taxing Anaheim residents that may be using this, can you explain how the pickup and or drop off excludes Anaheim residents or is it more of a guess? So if I'm taking it from Anaheim Hills, but I'm being dropped off at an Angels baseball game, would I still be paying that tax?

As you noted, there was a great deal of analysis that went into this. And one of the factors that was considered was whether it was feasible legally or practically to exempt Anaheim residents as a category. Legally, we observed that there would be potentially significant legal obstacles to doing that. And so we turn to trying to create these defined areas where the residential areas would be excluded, but anybody going to or from those areas would benefit from the exemption. So if you were going into one of those areas and you were and you were going to a residential portion, the trip would not be taxed. If you were going to one of the commercial areas, the trip would be taxed.

Thank you. That's all I have to start off with. I'd like to turn it over to Council Member Maz and then Council Member Campos-Kurtz.

Just one initial question that tags onto that. So if I have a resident who lives in the Platinum Triangle but works at a hotel, they would be paying the tax to go to work if they choose to Uber, is that correct?

They would not because their trip would be starting in a residential area and their return trip would be ending in a residential area. The trip would actually be exempt. If they went straight work, if it starts in the resident, the tax excludes trips that start in a residential area or end in a residential area. If they were commuting from one of the residential areas to a hotel, the trip would not be taxed. And then if they return from work straight home, the trip would not be taxed.

OK. And if a resident wants to go enjoy a concert and take an Uber, they would not be taxed if they pick up the Uber from home?

Residents in the designated areas would be anywhere else in the city. If they were going to a concert, the trip would be taxed.

OK.

Thank you.

I'm sorry. Can you say that one more time?

I will do my best. Looking at this map, a whole bunch of residential areas are hash marked. If somebody lives in one of those areas that's hash marked and they go to a concert, they go straight from home to the concert, the trip would not be taxed. If you live in a residential area anywhere else in the city, or if we turn to the resort area and the small residential area that's designated there, that would also be excluded. But anywhere else in the city, if you live in a residential area and you go to a concert, the trip will be taxed.

Will be taxed.

Will be taxed.

Okay, thank you.

Following that line of questioning, if we have residents who live outside of the resort area, I'm gonna use an example of a hotel worker. Gets a ride to work, that's great. But when they get out of work at two o'clock in the morning and they take an Uber to their home in Ponderosa, they're gonna get taxed.

That is correct. That is the way that the ordinance as currently proposed is structured.

Okay. in your analysis for the estimate that we get at $2 a trip, what data was used for that trip? Was it from the airport? Where did you calculate that drive?

the consulting firm that was referred to by the city manager, Kittleson, analyzed through various data sources the types of rideshare trips that go in and out of the Platinum Triangle, non-residential areas, and the Anaheim Resort. And they looked at electronic data that they have access to. They then compared that against Anaheim's traffic information. And they identified the number of trips that they thought would be TNC trips that happen on an annual basis. And it's roughly around one point. six to 1.8 million a year. And so that then was, that number of trips was then utilized to calculate the amount of revenue that would be generated by the trip. And we assumed that each of the trips would be approximately $20 because when you impose this tax, you impose the tax on the portion of the trip that is within Anaheim. So if someone were to start in another city and drive to Anaheim, the portion of the trip that's within Anaheim is what is taxed. That's what the city can tax by law. And so we assumed a generalized trip cost of around $20. And so 10% of that would be $2.

Okay, who would be responsible for doing that calculation? Example, I take an Uber from our Orange County Airport, clearly not in Anaheim. They're not taxed with this tax until they hit the Anaheim border. Who calculates then?

The ordinance provides two ways for the tax to be calculated. For instance, the rideshare company, Uber, would look at the mileage from the point of pickup to the point of drop-off, and they would say, for instance, if you're coming from the airport, they might say it's, I don't know exactly how many miles it is, but assume it's 10. They would say six miles of that is outside of Anaheim, four miles of that is inside. So the TNC company, the rideshare company, would just calculate that based on the maps. They know exactly where the where the cars have gone. The alternative to that that the TNCs can opt to is it's just half of the trip. So half of whatever the total trip amount is. And the TNCs can report it. They have to be consistent in the way they report it, but they can report it either way.

Do we, you don't know what percent of ridership today is our resident versus our visitor?

We don't have that. The Kittleson report did not specify what the percentage was of, if I'm understanding you correctly, the question of how many rideshare riders are Anaheim residents versus non-Anaheim residents, right? They did not calculate that. They did calculate the number of trips that go into the resort and the Platinum Triangle. And as the council can understand, you will have a significant number of those trips will be outside of Anaheim because there are people that are traveling to the destinations that are within the Platinum Triangle and the Anaheim Resort area. But we don't know the exact breakdown.

Yes, at the moment. I have a concern about residents trying to get to work or trying to get home paying this because they're living in the neighborhoods just around the resort area. But thank you.

Thank you, Council Member Meeks. And then Council Member Bayless.

So the majority of the residents Anaheim if they travel into the resort or the OC vibe area would be subject to this tax But the residents living within the Platinum Triangle And this little hash tagged area here would not be subject to the tax if they were traveling to those destinations What's the the rationale for that? I guess I'm just not understanding that Part of the rationale is

is to avoid a situation. Well, there's really a couple of parts to it. One of it is to avoid a situation where people might want to go to the resort, but they don't want to pay a tax, and so they park close by. So that addresses it if you protect the residential areas. We also wanted to make sure that people who lived in the residential portions of the Platinum Triangle and the Anaheim Resort who also happen to work in that area, work within those two areas, would not be subject to the tax just by virtue of going back and forth from close proximity to those two areas. Rudy, if you want to add any more to that.

Thank you for that. I was just going back to Councilmember Kurtz's comments earlier, your concern about, you know, the resident that lives in Ponderosa and working in the resort. And we thought about that. And that was one of the considerations when we were looking at a flat fee versus a percentage, because it is like the one example that we saw a ride from the airport to the resort is about $30. And 10% of that would be about $3. But on average, we're looking at 20 because we do have those shorter trips. And if you're talking about somebody that's going from a you know, the center of the resort to Ponderosa, you're talking about maybe a $7 or $8 fare. So a 10% of that, and then you're talking about, you know, 70 cents as their tax. So I just wanted to, you know, highlight the fact that it is flexible and benefits to our workers that live close by to the resort.

And can you add anything to the justification? I mean, I don't understand why the people in the Platinum Triangle don't have to pay this tax if the people in Ponderosa, who are basically right next to it, also would have to pay it.

It's a great question. point council member and I think what we were trying to do and the initial vision was we're trying to identify the two tourist heavy transit use areas which were identified as the resort and the platinum triangle so that was our thinking and then going back to how do we protect the residents and the workers everyday workers that work in offices even in the platinum triangle from getting that tax because we weren't trying to impact them we're really trying to focus on those high intense transit use area. So that's where we started to try to highlight it. But I, you know, that is a great question. I mean, if we would have instead identified the entire city, and just hatched in the opposite direction in the areas we want to tax, I don't know if that gets us into the Commerce Clause issues that we had when trying to use resident zip codes to avoid the tax, but maybe Skye, if you can expand on that.

Yeah, one of the legal constraints that we were operating under is, as Ruby said, the provisions of the federal Constitution. They're referred to as the Commerce Clause, which has a companion provision called the Dormant Commerce Clause that basically says that economic activity has to be taxed the same way regardless of where it occurs. You can't benefit. local economic activity. And so one of the concerns about a carve out for the entire residential area of the city was that residents of the city would be getting treated differently from residents of other cities. And that would potentially be viewed as favoring local economic activity over economic activity occurring other places. So in addition to the policy goal of limiting the tax to the trips that were in the high tourism areas, the approach that resulted in this ordinance, and that's before you tonight, was sort of a combination of these considerations.

Okay. I have concerns that... This might need a little more work. But someone's going to drop off, an Uber's going to drop off a block away because now I don't get a tax. But I don't know if anybody's going to pay that much attention. I mean, I think people get an Uber and they're not assessing their bill before they jump in there. So the difference between the Uber or Lyfts and the taxis Explain to me why there's a tax difference there, too. Are the taxis paying their fair share, if that's what we're going to be here, in some other way through the franchise or something? Explain that to me.

Yeah. traditional taxi operations are subject to different regulations and franchise payments and other forms of taxation that TNCs are not subject to and so the the reason that the cities in California and the other cities around the country that have considered this type of tax have excluded tax eases because of the different regulatory and tax environment in which tax eases operate that TNCs have not been subject to because of the way that those operations have been defined.

But I mean, I don't use Uber that often. But when I travel, sometimes they do. And I'll call and put in my little Uber app, and a taxi shows up. So how does that then work?

So my understanding in those situations is that the taxi is not operating under their medallion. I'm just going to continue to use this because I think it's an understood term. They're just not operating under their medallion when they do that. If they're responding based on the app, they've kind of taken off their taxi driver hat. they've put on their Uber driver hat and they're operating as a TNC driver rather than as a taxi driver. So the reason that the tax is then collected in that is that they're operating outside of the regulatory and tax environment that applies to taxi operators.

Okay. Unfortunately, yeah, we are kind of up against a timeline right now. Some of this I wish we had more time to assess. I don't think our study, did I see anything in there about, did we study if this would actually impact Uber ridership or our visitors or any unintended consequences?

Yeah, there was no, there's no information There was no information in the staff report that indicated that A PARTICULAR TAX AT A PARTICULAR RATE WOULD AFFECT RIDERSHIP, AS THE COUNCIL IS AWARE FROM SOME OF THE COMMENT LETTERS YOU RECEIVED TODAY, INCLUDING FROM UBER AND LYFT, THEY MAKE THE ARGUMENT THAT A TAX MIGHT DISSUADE PEOPLE FROM USING RIDESHARE AND MOVE THEM BACK TO CARS FOR TRANSPORTATION. AND THEY CITE TO ONE STUDY WHICH REFERENCES THAT AN INCREASE OF 10% does cause a mode shift, causes people to think about going from rideshare to another. But as for all of us who have used Uber and Lyft, when you're making the decision, you see the total price that you're going to pay. You don't see it broken down into its component parts. On the receipt, you see it broken down. Afterwards, but when you're actually selecting which car you want to use you just see the price and that price is the total price As we go through so when people are making that choice They don't necessarily see right away what all the component parts are they only see that on the receipt Okay All right, that's all the questions I have right now Thank You councilmember Bayless

Thank you. I think I'm gonna just ask a clarification on two questions that were already asked. First was the idea of using the zip code as the area to either include or exclude. And I apologize, I didn't get the whole answer I was looking for, but can you maybe explain one more time why you choose to explicitly gray out this area as opposed to the zip code as a whole?

I'll start the question and then hand it over for the legal reason why. That was our initial intent. We know that when you sign up for any one of the app-based transportation services, you have to submit your credit card, your name, and your zip code. So we thought it would be a pretty easy transition to use that zip code that identifies you as an Anaheim resident to automatically exclude you from the tax. But as Sky was mentioning, there's a dormant commerce clause that prevents us from legally being able to do that. And Sky, maybe you can expand.

Yeah, I'd be happy to. It's a complicated legal concept. And I'll do my best to try to explain it in a way that is understandable for a wide audience. Constitutional limitation that we're operating from, as I mentioned, says that if economic activity is similar and it occurs both inside a city and outside a city, that a tax that that favors the activity inside the city and disfavors the activity outside the city is potentially at odds with the federal constitutionals commerce clause provisions. And so when we looked at the idea of using, for example, zip codes for customers whose billing is to a residential zip code anywhere in the city, The legal concern was that a resident of Anaheim would, in effect, be exempt from the tax, but somebody who lives in a neighboring city and is going to the exact same destination would have to pay the tax. And that under the federal constitution, although this issue has not yet been adjudicated, that the concern would be that the resident that the same economic activity, which is the rideshare trip, that originates at a residential location within Anaheim and goes to the same destination, and one that originates in a residential area in a neighboring jurisdiction and goes, again, to the same venue for a concert is going to be taxed, but the one that originates at a residential address in Anaheim is not going to be taxed. And so because of our concern about those potential legal problems, we turned away from that as a potential approach.

So then I'll ask the follow up, which is, what makes it, I guess, legit to exclude this area when the same conditions still apply?

Because the Economic activity would be viewed as somebody would get the same benefit regardless of where they actually reside if they start or end a trip in these crosshatched areas. So somebody who lives in a neighboring city who's visiting a friend starts a trip in one of these crosshatched residential areas and goes to a concert. that trip would be exempt regardless of their residency. But if we exempted the residential zip code of every customer in the city, the way that the law looks at the way the tax falls on the individual would potentially view that as a violation Problematic under the Constitution so I can try to explain that again because like I said, I know it's a complicated issue Well, let me just ask this then Could you not then crosshash every residential district inside Anaheim? I'm just asking. I think that the concern would be at that point that, again, you have, you're then treating, it's a slight, because it's a slightly different scenario, the, I think a court would, our concern is that a court would look at that and say, that's really just, that's really primarily an exemption for Anaheim residents, and so somebody who's going to the same venue is getting their trip exempted, but Anaheim residents are not.

Okay, thank you. I'm gonna move on to the second question, and I apologize. We talked about ride shares. So I'm gonna give the example, maybe if you can, I hope I'm on the right path here, but let's say somebody gets picked up at the Orange County Airport, they're customer A. Customer B is in Garden Grove. Somehow, someway, it made it economical for Uber to route that through Garden Grove, picked up customer B, and they all get dropped off at Disneyland. are per the slide prior, does customer A and customer B both pay the shared surcharge? Or does one customer, since they picked up first, get the ride, the whole ride, and the second customer get the shared?

So this one's actually, relatively straightforward under the ordinance that's before you. So for both passengers, neither of their trips is subject to the tax until they enter Anaheim. And so once they enter Anaheim, however Uber or Lyft splits the fare between them, they each would pay 10% on that portion of the fare, but only for the portion of the trip that's inside of Anaheim.

OK. That's all my comments so far. Thank you.

Okay, I don't see anyone else with any other. Okay, Council Member Meeks. Do rideshares, Uber, Lyft, things, do they have an Anaheim business license or are they regulated by the state?

They're regulated by the state and When you think about like a rideshare company and how you might tax an activity, you can think about taxing Uber directly. And the city looked at that as well, too, but that's not allowed under state law. And we also looked at you could tax the drivers. That is also under state law. Drivers can only be taxed in the main city that they identify as their primary city. so that they're not taxed across all of them. And so that leaves really only the mechanism of taxing the rider, him or herself, and having Uber or Lyft collect that.

Okay. Yeah, I mean, we talked about looking into this, and I'm not necessarily opposed to it, but I think it might need... a little more work. I would like to work with Uber and Lyft and explore some more about how the other cities have implemented this and is it working for them? What are the best practices they've learned? That does push this off potentially for two years, but I don't know that I'm ready to to jump in right now because I do think there's questions that maybe we need to delve into more, like the residential. We all agreed we didn't want to target our residential. So are there better ways to do that? What are all of our options, not just this one? So that's kind of where I'm standing right now.

Thank you. In assessing, and I know we reached out to the Anaheim community based on kind of voter registration. And so did we reach out to any of the labor unions that work in the resort district or the business community hoteliers for feedback on this? And the reason I ask is, it seems it would be almost easier that no matter where you're from, if you end or start in the resort district, it's a flat fee similar to how airports operate. But to the concern about workers, I would like a little more information about kind of maybe what percentage of our resort area workers do take Uber and Lyft? And if not, what are the options? I don't believe OCTA is operating at that time. But if it's a large percent of hotel workers or resort area theme park workers that do rely on this, Again, that's just a piece of information I'd like to know, and I'm not sure where that would come from, if it would be from our labor partners or our hotel and resort partners, because I think that might take the whole residential part out of it. If you're going to the Honda Center, Angel Stadium, or the resort area, convention center, hotels, we're just going to assume that you are a visitor or going for an entertainment purpose. But if it's a majority or there is a large proportion of workers that are Anaheim residents that are using it, that would change the way I view this.

Yeah, that's a great point, Mayor. And obviously with the time crunch, we did try to reach out to as many of our stakeholders as we could and work with and informed Visit Anaheim because we also want to understand what with all the costs of visiting Anaheim, was this something that they thought would be detrimental to that? They did not. They were actually supportive of it. But obviously, there's an endless amount of outreach that we could do, and you bring up a good point. I think there's a couple of ways we could try to get that information. One is through direct surveys of our workers, but also many of the large employers in California with over 250 employees are also required to do a lot of reporting. on ride modes for their employees getting to work. So that's another way we can sample or verify information from surveys as well. So if we were looking to even delay this option, that would give us more time to get more information of that sort.

Thank you. Mayor Pro Tem Leon.

Thank you, Madam Mayor, and I do want to thank staff for their work on this. I know it's taken a long time, and it's one of the things that we had had a conversation up here about exploring all of our options, especially as we move into the next few years. I wanted to just take a couple of clarifying questions, and I'll preface that by saying that I agree with what my colleagues have said. I think one of my concerns when I spoke to our interim city manager about this was what this was going to mean for the workers of the resort district. And I've always said that I want the resort district to be successful, and obviously the only way that that can happen is the workers that make it happen. And so I do share that concern with some of my colleagues. But what I wanted to ask you was in terms of the, I know sometimes the companies, they have surge pricing, depending on the time of day, depending on the events. Would this tax have been 10% on the basic fare of a ride, or would it be on top of the surge pricing tax?

It's on top of the fare, excluding any, it specifically excludes tips. So if someone uses Uber and they tip the driver, the tax is not on the tip.

Got it, okay, thank you. And then did we, I think a lot of the questions were asked. I don't wanna repeat them, but I do wanna echo my colleague and say that I am concerned about this negatively affecting our residents who are workers in the resort district. I think for someone that's visiting, a $2 charge on average isn't gonna make or break, isn't gonna make them decide whether or not to take a ride share. That's my personal opinion. I don't think it's gonna break the bank, but for a worker that does rely on this to get to and from work Those two dollars start to add up and you're starting to look at 30 bucks a week just to get to and from work that becomes $100 a month and Not everybody not everybody has that has those funds to be able to afford that or to do that you know, I'm talking our housekeepers or security guards really essential workers in the resort district and So again, I do think that there's merit in continuing the conversation and in working together with all of the different stakeholders to see if there's something that we might be able to do to move forward in the future. But right now, I share those concerns of making sure that we're not adversely affecting our residents or our workers.

Thank you. I don't see any other further comments or questions. Oh, sorry, Council Member Bayless just chimed in.

Yeah, thank you, sorry. I'm just gonna maybe give it a wrap real quick, and I'll just say this. First, I want to begin by saying that I appreciate the work that's gone into this proposal. I certainly understand the need and why we're looking at ways to bring in the additional revenue. But for me at the end of the day, I just don't think this is the right way to do it. And maybe I look at this from a different lens maybe than everybody else. I certainly wanna make sure the residents aren't taxed going into the district, but the resort district itself is the city's primary economic engine that generates hundreds of millions of dollars per year for the city itself. And the visitors who come here, you know, they're already paying a high price to be here between the hotel tax, which is already one of the highest around and everything else visitors spend on money while they're here. I just don't think it's a good idea to keep reaching into their pockets and we ought to be doing everything we can do to kind of get people to come to Anaheim rather than giving them more reasons to think twice. And I look at this proposal, I keep coming back to the simple thought here. is the juice worth the squeeze? We've got 3.5 million in real money, and nobody's saying otherwise for sure, but adding another tax makes us less competitive, causes fewer people to visit, stay overnight, come back next year. We've lost, in this particular instance, I think we lose more than we gain, and I just think that's important to take under consideration, so thank you.

Thank you, Council Member. So I don't believe anybody wants to make a motion at this time. Please correct me if I'm wrong. So I think I'd like to keep working with the city manager's office and maybe we can get some further exploration into the items that were raised tonight. And I do just want to echo the city manager's comments about the wealth of information that we have learned about not just how rideshares and how transportation works in our city, but in the priorities that our residents are really asking us to look at. I thought that was absolutely worth going through the exercise to talk to real Anaheim voters and get a sense of what they prioritize, what is important to them going forward. But I think there's a couple of just items we would like to further explore. And so maybe over the next year, 18 months, we can look into it when we're not backs against the wall to get something on the ballot in November.

Yeah, thank you. Thank you for the comment. And I agree. We've learned a lot. A lot of good information has come out of this. And so great feedback from council. And so if we want to continue to explore this in the future, I think we know the direction we need to go in and some of the studies and things that we need to look at. And so I do want to also, again, thank the team. Rudy Amami and his whole team has put a lot of time into this, and I want to thank him for all of that hard work and also our friends at Redwood. Alyssa, also Rob and his team, specifically Leone and Bryn in his office have been fantastic. And so thank you for the feedback, and we'll move forward.

Thank you. And I haven't thought about the Dormant Commerce Clause in a really long time, so thanks for raising it. So item number 16 is a public hearing. Clerk, could you please read?

Thank you, Mayor. Item 16 is a public hearing on the development application number 202600022 related to the general plan amendment to the land use element, adjustment number 17 to the festival specific plan number 90-1, adjustment number 5 to the mountain park specific plan number 90-4, adjustment number 17 to the Anaheim Canyon specific plan number 2015-1, adjustment number 12 to the beach boulevard specific plan number 2017-1. And this is amendments to Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code related to the six-cycle housing element implementation.

Mr. City Manager, could we please have a staff report?

Yes, that report will be given by Heather Allen in our Planning Department.

Good evening. Thank you, Mayor Heather Allen, Director of the Planning and Building Department. Joining me this evening is Christine Nguyen, Senior Planner, Joanne Huang, Deputy Director of Planning Services, and Leonie Mauvihill, Assistant City Attorney. So the item before you this evening includes a series of housing element implementation actions involving zoning code and specific plan amendments. which is required to fulfill commitments already made in the city's certified six-cycle housing element. The item also includes an amendment to the general plan land use element. The housing element was adopted by the city council in 2025 and subsequently found compliance by the California Department of Housing and Community Development, or HCD, to be in substantial compliance with state housing element law. As part of that housing element, the city committed to several implementation actions to ensure that local regulations remain consistent with state housing laws, remove barriers to housing, and expand housing opportunities. Several of those implementation actions have deadlines in this timeframe, June or July of 2026. There are five proposed amendments before you tonight that are intended to fulfill these commitments while supporting continued compliance with state law and housing element certification. On June 15th, 2026, the planning commission recommended city council approval of the zoning code specific plan and general plan land use element amendments. It was a 5-0 vote with two commissioners absent and there were no public comments. So the First Amendment responds to Senate Bill 4, which became effective in 2024, and implements housing production strategy, one I of the housing element. SB 4 allows qualifying affordable housing developments on land owned by religious institutions and nonprofit colleges, regardless of certain zoning restrictions. To implement these requirements, staff is proposing a new section of the zoning code that establishes standards and procedures for eligible affordable housing developments on these properties. The amendments also update land use tables and related provisions throughout the code and provide applicable specific plans and applicable specific plans to identify eligible housing as a permitted use. The proposed amendment is consistent with the provisions of state law. I would point out that although this bill has been in effect since 2024 and we have been prepared to provide compliant projects we have had no applications to date the next amendment codifies a formal replacement housing program within the zoning code based on senate bill 330 and state density bonus law this is also something that in practice is already implemented through our partners with the city's housing and community development department State law mandates cities to require replacement of certain residential units when they are demolished, converted, or otherwise removed as part of a development project. These requirements generally apply to units that are occupied by lower income households, subject to affordability restrictions, or have been removed from the housing market within the previous five years, regardless of affordability level. The proposed code section establishes when replacement housing requirements apply and specifies the number and type of replacement units that must be provided. It also establishes affordability requirements, affordability terms, standards for comparable replacement units, and protections for existing occupants. These provisions include relocation assistance requirements and the right for displaced lower income households to return to replace units when they become available. This proposed amendment is consistent with the provisions of the applicable state law. State housing and fair housing laws require cities to treat a variety of living arrangements as residential units and prohibit housing discrimination based on protected characteristics, including familial status. To maintain consistency with these legal requirements, the proposed amendments update several residential use definitions, including single housekeeping unit, boarding house, and other related residential classifications. These revisions are intended to clarify existing code language, ensure compliance with state law, and recognize that both related and unrelated individuals may reside together in a residential setting. These changes are required as part of the city's adopted housing element implementation program and do not create new residential use types. Rather, they ensure the municipal code remains consistent with current state housing law and fair housing requirements. Overall, the proposed changes are clarifying in nature are intended to remove any perceived ambiguity while ensuring consistency with state housing requirements state law requires the cities to affirmatively further fair housing which means taking meaningful action to reduce barriers to housing address discrimination and promote equitable access to housing opportunities as part of these requirements the city must periodically review and update this regulation for group homes which are identified in the zoning code as community care facilities, unlicensed, and sober living homes. The proposed amendments make targeted clarifications by establishing clear operational standards, confirming that these facilities must comply with applicable building, fire, safety, and parking requirements, and providing examples of services that may be offered as part of a legitimate recovery program. These updates are intended to improve regulatory clarity while ensuring the city regulations remain consistent with state fair housing laws, which require these facilities to be treated as residential uses rather than subject to more restrictive standards. These updates are intended to provide clear expectations for operators while ensuring that residents are also afforded housing opportunities consistent with state law. Also, the city's regulations would continue to be similar to those adopted by other Orange County jurisdictions. The last zoning code amendment updates the city's emergency shelter regulations. The proposed amendments implement requirements established by Assembly Bills 139 and 2339 by revising the city's emergency shelter standards. Specifically, the amendments update separation requirements between emergency shelters and similar facilities, limit parking requirements to employees rather than shelter residents, and clarify permitting requirements for large shelters. These updates ensure that Anaheim's regulations remain compliant with state law while continuing to provide clear development standards for emergency shelter operators. In addition to the housing element implementation related code amendments, staff is proposing a targeted amendment to the general plan land use element. Specifically, the amendment would reduce the minimum density within the mixed use high land use designation from 30 dwelling units per acre to 20. The maximum density of 60 dwelling units per acre would remain unchanged, as would the maximum floor area for non-residential uses. Staff initiated this amendment after evaluating current market conditions and development trends. Through that analysis, staff determined that the existing minimum density requirement may limit the feasibility of certain housing projects and may not always reflect market supported development patterns. Reducing the minimum density requirement would provide additional flexibility for a wider range of housing products and site configurations while continuing to support residential development consistent with the intent of the mixed use high designation. With that, staff recommends that the City Council approve the targeted land use element amendment and introduce an ordinance to approve the housing element implementation related code updates in compliance with state law and continued certification of the housing element. These amendments implement state housing law and fulfill five housing element programs with the current deadline. This concludes staff's presentation and we are available to answer any questions. Thank you.

Thank you, are there any questions by council at this time before I open the public hearing? Mayor Pro Tem.

Quick clarifying question, thank you, Madam Mayor. The slide about SB4, just to clarify, so does that mean we're required to provide an expedited process for these properties? Or what is it that makes it easier for them?

Certainly. Essentially, it makes them be by right, so they don't have to come in for a zone change, general plan amendment. The state law establishes the development regulations that they would comply with, so it gives a maximum density. It gives eligible property by proximity to... or not close to industrial as an example. So certain types of properties are disqualified. So properties that are eligible and we have a developer who qualifies as affordable housing developer, the type of affordable project meets the state law. They provide certain labor commitments. If they check all those boxes, then they would go through an expedited process that wouldn't, we would do a technical review, but it would not require discretionary action before planning commission or city council.

And then does it say anything about in terms of parking ratios? I know that we have density bonuses out there. Does this say anything about that? Or does that stay consistent with what we currently have?

I don't believe it has a specific parking requirements, but they would qualify for any parking reductions that's afforded by the density bonus, because by nature it needs to provide affordable housing. So any type of reduction that's allowed by other type of state law, they will qualify for it.

That's consistent, okay. And then the slide before strategy 50, missed it. The one before this one. This one. Does this give us any additional authority to go and do these checks on these group homes? I know that that's been a point of conversation. This council, previous councils, and some concerns of residents in certain areas, I think all across the city, definitely in District 2, there are a few of these group homes located across the district, but does this give us any additional authority in terms of going in and checking that they're meeting all of these standards, or does this just Is this just implemented for new homes that wanna open up?

I'll start, but I certainly do rely on the planning folks to, they know the details of the ordinance. Our goal in bringing these changes was to get our program implemented as we wanted to do in compliance with the housing element law. we had existing regulations for both particular types of uses such as sober living and community facilities that are unlicensed. This does not change those regulations, but it certainly does address some issues that have been identified as being potentially problematic. So we haven't done anything to provide the city with more regulation over certain types of uses specific to what we call these community care and licensed and sober living. but it is a path that we've carefully, because we do have councils prior direction where they did want greater regulation. And at that time we put a pause on more regulation We're looking at our housing element and working closely with HCD to balance both their concerns that we are affirmatively furthering fair housing and not discriminating, but the city is maintaining its authority to regulate. And we're not changing those at this time, and we certainly aren't. adding additional ones at this time, but we continue to monitor the legal landscape, we continue to see what other cities are doing, and making sure that the tools that we have in place, such as nuisance laws, are continued to be used to the areas where we feel that the particular homes might need some attention.

Got it, okay, thank you.

I was just going to add that the code amendments are also making these standards more objective. And so they're meant to clarify more of what these operational standards are. And so it'll be much more clear for those operators as well as code enforcement to see what they're regulating. Perfect.

Thank you.

Thank you. So now I'm going to open the public hearing. Clerk, do we have any speaker cards for this hearing?

Mayor and City Council, we do have one in-person speaker, Mark Herber. Time limit is three minutes.

The clock started.

Okay, we can restart it.

Mark Herbert, AnaheimGreece.com. Housekeeping questions first. I feel the public is part of continuing Anaheim's policy on discouraging public engagement. We don't get an opportunity to have our questions answered during this process like the council does. There's been no workshops preceding this. So I'm gonna be asking questions because I don't have all the information. Little late in the process. Housing element. I'm concerned about the data. in the housing element. Specifically, there was no mention during the housing element or during these additions reacting to the housing element about the falsification of data that came up during the Deer Park proposals. And a resident out there, a resident, not the staff, not public works, not the council found that A developer, three instances where the address changed as their proposal specific moved through the process over several years, never caught. But the address at the end was different from what they started with, allowing the developer to assemble that property without the public knowing. This was brought to the attention in the process at Deer Park a couple years ago. There's been no follow up on that. Falsification. Okay, I guess that's not a legal matter. So I guess these can also be circumvented. The data in there can change in the course of a couple years. And if the residents happen to find it, it's all right. Nothing will happen. Seems to be part of a pattern here. I'm concerned about lowering the density of this. As I recall, Anaheim in the housing element had a target of 9,100 affordable units. I believe at last count in the mid point of the element, they've completed about 350. I don't see how lowering the density will increase the possibilities for more affordable units. Seems like you're responding to certain interest in the process, but not the residents. It's taken us, as I mentioned earlier, over four months to try to get health and safety questions addressed through the council, mayor, and various agencies, and we failed. I would presume this is a lower priority in terms of treating residents' questions.

We have one more speaker, Andrew Wigner.

Hi, I was not prepared to speak on this at all. Just in watching the presentation, this slide with the lowering the density, is it possible to go back to that slide? I think it was the last slide that was shown. That one. Is that required by law, or is that just a decision that was made to cast kind of a wider net and include more in this. I'm not prepared. I mean, I'm just I was kind of taken by surprise by this. I'm just concerned that there's more to that number than what we're seeing right here. And I'm not sure that it's required to get this moved along. So that's my comment. Thank you.

Mayor and City Council, that concludes our in-person speakers. We don't have any remote participation on the public hearing. And noting for the record, we did not receive any electronic comments on the public hearing.

Thank you. So now I'm going to close the public hearing. Are there any further comments or questions by Council? Council Member Meeks?

So the ordinance on housing on religious properties, does it require the church to maintain parking sufficient for the church?

Yes, all the parking standards will remain the same. Thank you.

And then the replacement housing, I mean, there are some rental housing in Anaheim that probably has passed its lifespan and needs to be replaced. So does this make it harder to do that? I mean, are we putting a roadblock in the way of owners that may own some of these units that need to be upgraded, rebuilt, and now they have these additional regulations?

Certainly, so I would actually ask Director Stepter to come and talk about this. So this, as I mentioned, is also an existing state law that we're now bringing into our code. So we've been working with this on multiple applications so they can talk about the process and what that entails.

OK, thank you. Grace?

Thank you for the question. We have had limited experience with this and how it's being implemented in actuality is that when a developer, when a property owner is taking property offline and we find that there are lower income tenants there, then we work with them to confirm their status and then ask them to replace those units. So we haven't had experience yet with too many of these. So I certainly can see your concern in practice. We're not seeing it as a limitation. In the one case that I can speak to directly, it was a limited number of lower income folks. I think it was, my memory serves me correct, three out of a larger amount of tenants that did have the relocation. But certainly it does add an extra step and more validation of who's living in your property rather than just the wholesale, go ahead and close it down and do your full remodel.

Yeah, or rebuild and add more units or some of the other things that we're trying to achieve. I hate to see this stand in the way of that, but I understand it's state law, so we will adopt it. And then I had one more question just to... clarify the question that Mr. Winger had. The mixed-use density lowering, that is something that we proposed, right? Because we were finding that maybe our minimum density was too high for some of these mixed-use projects.

Correct. That is correct. It's something the staff's bringing forward, but it does not change our ability to meet our arena. It does not change our ability to, it does not change any of the sites that we had designated for affordable housing. Those had a different land use classification.

All right. Thank you. Those are all I had. Thank you. Council Member Bayless.

Thank you. I don't necessarily know that this is a question or not, but I guess what I'll ask is at least for the first five pieces that are provided here, this is the state essentially telling the city of Anaheim what they need to do. We didn't have any say in these additions here unless we did it at the state level.

That's correct, and the heading on all the slides indicates that they're all coming from the housing element. So in the preparation of the housing element, the city's, one of the efforts that we do is look for existing codes and regulations that are not in compliant with state law. So in order for us to have a certified housing element, we identify a work plan to bring our regulations into compliance. So these five items were the ones that we had identified first to be completed in June of this year following certification last year.

So then whether we like it or not, if we don't vote for this tonight, we would fall out of compliance with our state plan.

We would certainly be at risk for attention by HCD for not meeting our timelines.

Thank you.

Thank you. Seeing no further comments or questions by council, just as a point of clarification based on some comments, this was properly noticed for the June 15th, 2026 Planning Commission?

Yes, that's correct.

And this was attached to the June 15th, 2026 Planning Commission? Yes. Where people could come to the meeting and submit public comment?

Correct and as previously stated, so this was part of the housing element. So these have been in the public eye for many years at this point.

Thank you and of course the project manager at any point could be emailed or contacted as well as this has been posted since Thursday and there's been public comment presented at this meeting. So I just wanna clear that up for the record. Somebody like to make a motion? Second. Thank you. We have a motion and a second. Please vote.

The vote is six ayes, no nays with the recorded absence by Councilmember Bucalva.

Motion carries.

Thank you. I'm sorry, Mayor. My apologies. If I could read the resolution. A resolution of the City Council of the City of Anaheim amending the General Plan Land Use Amendment. And this also includes determination that the project is exempt from CEQA to prepare additional environmental documentation pursuant to guidelines section 15061 .

Thank you. So we're going to now move on for future agenda requests by council members. Do any council members have items that they would like put on a future agenda? Council member Bayless.

Thank you. I would like to agendize for discussion, a chronic nuisance property ordinance that would authorize administrative penalties for properties, especially hotels and motels that would repeatedly generate excessive nuisance activities and disproportionate demands on the city for public safety resources. Thank you.

Thank you. Any other council members with items upcoming? I'd like to ask to work with the city manager's office on following up on two police items. One, I know that our chief of police inherited the report on overtime that was requested last year. It has been several months since we have requested that item. Could we schedule in the in maybe one of the upcoming meetings just a update on where we are with both the police staffing report and any changes that have been made or updates that could be given as well as any reports on overtime changes and updates and changes that have been made.

Just so I'm clear, Mayor, on the staffing report, you're referring to the staffing study? Yes, excuse me.

No, thank you for that clarification.

Okay, I'll work with the Chief and report back on a good time for that to come back.

Thank you, I appreciate it. So with no further business before the Council, we stand adjourned until August 11th. Thank you, everyone.