MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CYPRESS CITY COUNCIL HELD JANUARY 9, 2012

A regular meeting of the Cypress City Council was called to order at 5:00 p.m. by Mayor Bailey in the Executive Board Room, 5275 Orange Avenue, Cypress, California.

Members present:
Mayor/Agency Chair Doug Bailey
Mayor Pro Tem/Agency Vice Chair Prakash Narain
Council/Agency Board Member Phil Luebben
Council/Agency Board Member Leroy Mills
Council/Agency Board Member Todd Seymore

Staff present:
City Manager John Bahorski
City Attorney William Wynder
Agency Counsel Dan Slater
Assistant City Manager/Director of Finance and Administrative Services Richard Storey
Director of Community Development Ted Commerdinger
Police Chief Jackie Gomez-Whiteley
Public Works Director Doug Dancs
Recreation and Community Services Director June Liu
Assistant Finance Director Matt Burton
Recreation Superintendent Dena Diggins
Assistant City Engineer Kamran Dadbeh
Administrative Services Manager Andrew Tse
City Clerk Denise Basham

ORAL COMMUNICATIONS:

Chris Bardis, Los Alamitos Race Track, discussed the race track and golf course property and the need for an initiative process. 

Jack Rubens, Counsel for the Los Alamitos Race Track, spoke of the property uses should it be rezoned. 

WORKSHOP SESSION:

The City Manager stated this would be an informational workshop for the City Council on the initiative being circulated for signatures.  He informed that the initiative is written in a zoning code format and that the Director of Community Development will review frequently asked questions (FAQ’s) and that the City Attorney will review timelines for this project. 

The Director of Community Development stated that the ballot measure proposal includes the 33.5 acre site east of Enterprise Drive and north of Katella Avenue.  He indicated that the initiative, if passed, would allow applications to be submitted and flexibility into the Specific Plan. 

The Director of Community Development indicated that there is a provision in the Election Code that allows the City to have a fiscal analysis done and that four requests for proposals (RFP’s) were sent out mid-December, with two submitted back to the City. He stated that options include moving forward with selection from the two submitted proposals, select the one that is more specific to senior development projects, or have a peer review of the document provided today by the race track done at a reduced cost. 

The City Attorney stated that the Election Code allows for an analysis of the impacts of an initiative on the City with one element being the fiscal analysis and that the request for proposal (RFP) went through the identified items of the Elections Code that could be studied. 

Mayor Bailey asked if the City is required to do the study based on Elections Code Section 9212. 

The City Attorney responded that an analysis of the impacts of the initiative is not required based on the sole discretion of the City Council. 

Mayor Bailey asked if the comprehensive X and Y analysis in 2007 would still be relevant and asked about the purpose of doing an analysis at this time. 

The City Manager responded that parts of the 2007 analysis could still be relevant.

The City Attorney stated that the purpose of the analysis is to provide information to the electorate that is provided by an independent party (City Council) to the voters so that they could make the decision whether they support or oppose the initiative. 

Council Member Mills commented that this discussion should have occurred in December 2011 so that City Council Members would have had an opportunity to debate the request for proposal. 

The City Attorney replied that City Council Members would not debate a request for proposal and assured that this discussion is more than timely. 

Council Member Seymore asked if the initiative would be on the November ballot should this not be handled in a timely manner.

The City Attorney responded in the affirmative.  He reviewed the legal process for the next 30 days stating that the required number of signatures is required to be submitted by January 13, 2012, and that the City Council should give direction on the analysis.  He stated that the signature checking period occurs over 30 statutory days. 

Mayor Bailey asked about the language of the initiative. 

The City Attorney replied that the initiative was prepared by the proponents and is distributed as a part of the signature-gathering process.  He indicated he prepared the ballot summary with input from the proponent. 

Council Member Seymore commented that the signature gatherers are pushing the senior care facility and not the other options. 

The City Attorney stated that on or about February 22, 2012, the City Council would have the resolutions to request consolidation of this measure with the State and Presidential General Primary on June 5, 2012.  He indicated that the City Council would have the option to:  (1) Direct the City Attorney to prepare an impartial analysis of arguments in favor and arguments against the ballot measure; or (2) Designate the City Council or one or more Member to write ballot arguments for or against the initiative or build into the resolutions the statutory criteria under the Elections Code for who gets to write ballot arguments. 

The City Attorney reviewed the petition qualifying and election deadlines for the June ballot. 

Council Member Mills asked which budget line item the $20,000 for the analysis would come from. 

The Assistant City Manager/Director of Finance and Administrative Services responded that there are no funds budgeted, therefore, a budget adjustment would have to be made. 

The Director of Community Development clarified that the two requests for proposals received were in the amount of $20,500 and $22,000 or the City Council could choose a peer review to take what has been provided exclusive to a senior development project. 

Council Member Luebben expressed his support for accepting a request for proposal and spending the $20,500 for a thorough review. 

Mayor Mills asked Agency Counsel Slater for his opinion.

Agency Counsel stated that he provided qualified firms that could provide a financial analysis. 

Jack Rubens, Counsel for the Los Alamitos Race Track, expressed appreciation for staff and the City Attorney’s early efforts with this matter.  He stated that the full 30 days to review the petition signatures would not be needed due to the low number of signatures required and that it is his assumption that it would take the County Registrar of Voters less than 30 days to review the signatures.  He indicated that he is confident to still make the June 5, 2012 ballot. 

Mr. Rubens stated that he reviewed the request for proposals and that it included a specific analysis for a life care facility.  He indicated that this is not an initiative for a specific development project.

Council Member Seymore stated that the perception is that of a senior life care facility and that he is not able to make a proper decision based solely on that. 

The City Manager commented that the analysis would not define the market for the project, that provision of the analysis would provide a third party review of the initiative and its varying impacts, and provide the City Council useful information. 

Council Member Mills clarified that changing the zoning is the only action that is being taken and that the type of facility is not part of the initiative. 

It was moved by Council Member Luebben and seconded by Council Member Seymore, that the City proceed with an analysis to the lowest bidder for an amount of $20,500.

The motion was carried by the following roll call vote:

AYES:        3    COUNCIL MEMBERS:   Luebben, Seymore and Narain
NOES:        2    COUNCIL MEMBERS:   Mills and Bailey
ABSENT:    0    COUNCIL MEMBERS:   None

CLOSED SESSION:

The City Attorney reported that the City Council would be meeting in Closed Session regarding Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation, pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a), Smith v. City of Cypress, WCAB No. ADJ620339 (ANA 0397750), Claim No. 066-06-00003. 

The City Attorney reported that the City Council would be meeting in Closed Session regarding Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation, pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a), Dominguez v. City of Cypress, WCAB No. ADK4617027; ADJ101968; ADJ211528; ADJ4708073; ADJ3615469, Claim No. 066-02-00001; 066-04-00001; 066-04-00005. 

The City Attorney reported that the City Council would be meeting in Closed Session regarding Public Employee Performance Evaluation, pursuant to Government Code Section 54957(b)(1), Title:  City Manager. 

At 6:03 p.m., the Mayor recessed the meeting.

7:00 P.M. SESSION:

The 7:00 p.m. session of the City Council meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Bailey.

Members present:
Mayor/Agency Chair Doug Bailey
Mayor Pro Tem/Agency Vice Chair Prakash Narain
Council/Agency Board Member Phil Luebben
Council/Agency Board Member Leroy Mills
Council/Agency Board Member Todd Seymore

Staff present:
City Manager John Bahorski
City Attorney William Wynder
Agency Counsel Dan Slater
Assistant City Manager/Director of Finance and Administrative Services Richard Storey
Director of Community Development Ted Commerdinger
Police Chief Jackie Gomez-Whiteley
Public Works Director Doug Dancs
Recreation and Community Services Director June Liu
Assistant City Engineer Kamran Dadbeh
Assistant Finance Director Matt Burton
Planning Manager Doug Hawkins
Human Resources Manager Cathy Thompson
Administrative Services Manager Andrew Tse
City Clerk Denise Basham

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Council Member Mills.

INVOCATION:  The invocation was given by City Attorney Wynder.

REPORT OF WORKSHOP AGENDA/CLOSED SESSION:

The Mayor asked for the report of the Closed Session Agenda items discussed earlier in the evening.

The City Manager reported that the City Council held a workshop regarding the proposed initiative being circulated throughout the community.  He stated that the City Council was provided with additional information along with a timeline.  He indicated that staff was given direction to move forward on additional studies. 

The Mayor asked for the report of the Closed Session Agenda items discussed earlier in the evening.

The City Attorney reported that the City Council met in Closed Session regarding Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation, pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a), Smith v. City of Cypress, WCAB No. ADJ620339 (ANA 0397750), Claim No. 066-06-00003.  He stated that there was a privileged and confidential discussion regarding the conclusion and resolution to this case.  He stated there was a strategy recommended by Worker’s Compensation counsel and that the City Council unanimously authorized the pursuit of that strategy. 

The City Attorney reported that the Closed Session regarding Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation, pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a), Dominguez v. City of Cypress, WCAB No. ADK4617027; ADJ101968; ADJ211528; ADJ4708073; ADJ3615469, Claim No. 066-02-00001; 066-04-00001; 066-04-00005 was not held but would be considered, if at all, at a future City Council meeting.

The City Attorney reported that the City Council met in Closed Session regarding Public Employee Performance Evaluation, pursuant to Government Code Section 54957(b)(1), Title:  City Manager.  He stated that the City Council talked about the process that they would like to follow and gave the City Attorney direction to assist them in that process.  He indicated that this item would be continued to the next regular City Council meeting and that no reportable action was taken. 

No other action was taken in Closed Session, nor was any solicited.

ORAL COMMUNICATIONS:   LIMITED TO ONE-HALF HOUR.  (THREE MINUTES PER SPEAKER, SPEAKING ONCE.)

Mayor Bailey asked anyone who wished to speak on any topic not included on the meeting Agenda to come forward.

Mariellen Yarc, Cypress Chamber of Commerce, spoke regarding upcoming activities and events.

The City Attorney requested that an urgency item be added to the Agenda and informed that a staff report has been prepared.  He commented that urgency Measure SB 659 has been introduced by Senator Padilla and that the CRA is asking every City in the State to support that bill, to write a letter of support to that bill, to forward that letter to the Governor and members of the Senate and State Assembly.  He indicated that this request was received after the posting of the agenda and that it is extremely time sensitive and should not wait until the next City Council meeting. 

Council Member Luebben stated that he is not in favor of adding the item.  He commented that the City of Cypress opted out and it is his opinion that the extra time is not needed.  

It was moved by Council Member Seymore and seconded by Council Member Mills, to add the urgency item to the agenda.

The motion was carried by the following roll call vote:

AYES:        4    COUNCIL MEMBERS:   Mills, Seymore, Narain and Bailey
NOES:        1    COUNCIL MEMBERS:   Luebben
ABSENT:    0    COUNCIL MEMBERS:   None

PUBLIC HEARINGS:         7:00 P.M. (PUBLIC COMMENTS RESTRICTED TO TEN MINUTES PER SPEAKER, UNLESS EXTENDED BY THE CITY COUNCIL).

Item No. 1:   PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING A REQUEST TO APPROVE ZONE CHANGE NO. 2011-01, SPECIFIC PLAN PC-12, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2011-02, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2011-07, AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 17421 FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF SIXTEEN (16) SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES AND ADOPTION OF THE HARMONY SPECIFIC PLAN FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 5042 ORANGE AVENUE IN THE RS-6000 RESIDENTIAL SINGLE-FAMILY ZONE.

The Planning Manager provided background information on this item. 

Mayor Pro Tem Narain asked about Lot B and how common it is to have elevators in two-story homes.

The Planning Manager responded that Lot B would serve as a fenced-in, recessed water retention basin and that it is required for water quality.  He stated that elevators in homes this size have become more common. 

Mayor Bailey asked why it is needed for the water retention basin to be fenced and if the area could be used for recreational purposes. 

The Planning Manager replied that because of the slope there are safety and liability issues that would prohibit the area from being used for recreational purposed.

The Public Works Director stated that certain types of vegetation are required to treat the water. 

Council Member Seymore asked if the area could be a mini-park similar to the area near the Costco site.

The Public Works Director responded that different elements could be submitted but it is up to the developer to recommend the water percolating system. 

Council Member Mills asked how the styles/colors were determined as stated in Condition No. 55. 

The Planning Manager responded that the developer proposed four different design styles and provided up to nine different color treatments. 

Council Member Mills asked for clarification regarding Condition Nos. 71 and 72 related to decibel values of the exterior and interior noise impacts. 

The Planning Manager replied that Condition Nos. 71 and 72 are part of the Environmental Review and that noise impacts were evaluated to protect the inhabitants from road and exterior noise through the installation of dual pane windows and a concrete block wall along Orange Avenue and Moody Street. 

Council Member Luebben spoke of the water retention basin and that conception of this project has taken several years. 

The Planning Manager indicated that a decorative wrought iron or similar tubular steel fence would be required around the water retention basin. 

Council Member Seymore asked about the height of the perimeter wall.

The Planning Manager indicated that the perimeter wall would be between 6’ and 7’ high.

Mayor Bailey asked about altering the retention basin to allow it as open space and what expense it would be to mitigate.

The Public Works Director stated that the purpose of that area is to catch the dry weather flow and that it would not be desirable to have people in the middle of that. 

The public hearing was opened.

The applicant, Hal Woods, stated that water quality laws have evolved in the last few years and that the nuisance water has to be taken off of the residential street on a daily basis and storm water retained.  He indicated that open space would be desirable, however, there is concern for the amount of water that would be retained in the area along with liability and health concerns. 

Mr. Woods complimented staff and commented that this will be one of the finest and environmentally friendly projects ever built in the City.  He informed of residents’ comments and concerns raised at the community meeting. 

Council Member Mills asked if the reflecting roof is an option or would the homes be equipped with that type of system as part of the design and build. 

Mr. Woods stated that the reflecting roof would be an option and that tankless water heaters would be a standard feature. 

Council Member Seymore asked the height of the perimeter fencing.

Mr. Woods stated they will work with staff but anticipate the perimeter fencing to be between 6’ and 7’ depending upon the outside berming. 

Council Member Luebben asked about the original plan for more units as compared to the current project. 

Mr. Woods stated that the land price dropped slightly and that more market research was done. 

Mayor Bailey asked if Mr. Woods agreed to the conditions of approval.

Mr. Woods replied in the affirmative.

Council Member Seymore asked about the homeowners’ association and parking requirements to prevent garages from becoming storage units.

Mr. Woods stated that they could put the condition in the Codes, Covenants, and Restrictions (CC&R’s) and indicated that the homes are large with ample storage space.

Council Member Luebben stated that he is not in favor of adding the condition of approval.

Mayor Bailey asked if there was anyone who wished to speak in favor of the item.

Mayor Bailey asked if there was anyone who wished to speak against the item.

The public hearing was closed.

It was moved by Council Member Luebben and seconded by Council Member Mills, that the City Council: 1) Adopt a Finding of De Minimis Impact, adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration, and adopt the Mitigation Monitoring Program in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and 2) Introduce for first reading the Ordinance by title only, for approval of Zone Change No. 2011-01 and the Harmony Specific Plan; and 3) Adopt the Resolution by title only, approving General Plan Amendment No. 2011-02; and 4) Adopt the Resolutions by title only, approving Conditional Use Permit No. 2011-07 and Tentative Tract Map No. 17421, subject to the conditions in Exhibit “A” of the Resolutions.

Council Member Seymore made a substitute motion to approve staff’s recommendation with the additional condition of approval that garages not be used as storage units.

Motion failed due to lack of a second.

The original motion was unanimously carried by the following roll call vote:

AYES:        5    COUNCIL MEMBERS:   Luebben, Mills, Seymore, Narain and Bailey
NOES:        0    COUNCIL MEMBERS:   None
ABSENT:    0    COUNCIL MEMBERS:   None

Ordinance No.

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CYPRESS,
ADOPTING ZONE CHANGE NO. 2011-01 AND THE HARMONY
SPECIFIC PLAN, CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF THE
PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF ORANGE
AVENUE AND MOODY STREET FROM RS-6000 RESIDENTIAL
SINGLE-FAMILY TO PC PLANNED COMMUNITY (PC-12).

Resolution No. 6277

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CYPRESS,
ADOPTING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2011-02,
CHANGING THE GENERAL PLAN CLASSIFICATION OF THE
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 5042 ORANGE AVENUE FROM LOW
DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO SPECIFIC PLAN.

Resolution No. 6278

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CYPRESS,
APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2011-07 -
WITH CONDITIONS.

Resolution No. 6279

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CYPRESS,
APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 17421
– WITH CONDITIONS.

Item No. 2:   PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING AMENDMENT TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2011-02 AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 17411, A REQUEST TO REDUCE THE TOTAL NUMBER OF CONDOMINIUM UNITS AND INCREASE THE NUMBER OF THREE-BEDROOM UNITS WITHIN THE PROJECT LOCATED AT 8672 AND 8692 BELMONT STREET IN THE RM-20 RESIDENTIAL MULTIPLE-FAMILY ZONE.

The Planning Manager provided background information on this item. 

Mayor Pro Tem Narain asked about the total number of units.

The Planning Manager indicated that there would be an overall reduction by two units, from 16 units to 14 units. 

Council Member Luebben asked if there is a water retention basin for this project.

The Public Works Director stated that there would not be a water retention basin, however, there would be underground rock drainage. 

The public hearing was opened.

The applicant, Ed Bonanni, thanked staff for their efforts and agreed to all of the conditions of approval.

Mayor Bailey asked if there was anyone who wished to speak in favor of the item.

Mayor Bailey asked if there was anyone who wished to speak against the item.

The public hearing was closed.

It was moved by Council Member Luebben and seconded by Council Member Seymore, that the City Council adopt the Resolutions by title only, approving Amendment to Conditional Use Permit No. 2011-02 and Tentative Tract Map No. 17411, subject to the conditions in Exhibit “A” of the Resolutions.

The motion was unanimously carried by the following roll call vote:

AYES:        5    COUNCIL MEMBERS:   Luebben, Mills, Seymore, Narain and Bailey
NOES:        0    COUNCIL MEMBERS:   None
ABSENT:    0    COUNCIL MEMBERS:   None

Resolution No. 6280

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CYPRESS,
APPROVING AMENDMENT TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
NO. 2011-02 – WITH CONDITIONS.

Resolution No. 6281

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CYPRESS,
APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 17411 – AS REVISED.

Item No. 3:   PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT NO. 2011-02, A CITY INITIATED ACTION TO AMEND SECTIONS 4.19.06.H.2, 4.19.070.H.3, AND 4.19.080.I.2, OF THE CYPRESS ZONING CODE RELATED TO INCREASED TIME EXTENSIONS FOR DESIGN REVIEW APPROVALS, CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS, AND VARIANCES.

The Director of Community Development provided background information on this item. 

Council Member Luebben asked if this item is similar to the item previously brought before the City Council. 

The Community Development Director stated that there is still an issue with extensions and consistency. 

The public hearing was opened.

Mayor Bailey asked if there was anyone who wished to speak in favor of the item.

Mayor Bailey asked if there was anyone who wished to speak against the item.

The public hearing was closed.

The City Attorney clarified that the extensions now require approval by the City Council. 

It was moved by Council Member Seymore and seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Narain, that the City Council introduce for first reading the Ordinance by title only, approving Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 2011-02.

The motion was unanimously carried by the following roll call vote:

AYES:        5    COUNCIL MEMBERS:   Luebben, Mills, Seymore, Narain and Bailey
NOES:        0    COUNCIL MEMBERS:   None
ABSENT:    0    COUNCIL MEMBERS:   None

Ordinance No.

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CYPRESS,
ADOPTING ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT NO. 2011-02 TO
MODIFY SECTIONS 4.19.060.H.2, 4.19.070.H.3, AND
4.19.080.I.2 OF THE CYPRESS ZONING CODE.

CONSENT CALENDAR:

All matters listed on the Agenda under “Consent Calendar” are to be considered by the City Council to be routine and will be enacted by one motion approving the recommendations listed on the Agenda.

Council Member Mills requested Agenda Item No. 4 be pulled from the Consent Calendar.

It was moved by Council Member Seymore and seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Narain, to approve Consent Calendar Items No. 5 through 16.

The motion was unanimously carried by the following roll call vote:

AYES:        5    COUNCIL MEMBERS:   Luebben, Mills, Seymore, Narain and Bailey
NOES:        0    COUNCIL MEMBERS:   None
ABSENT:    0    COUNCIL MEMBERS:   None

Item No. 5:   MOTION TO INTRODUCE AND/OR ADOPT ALL ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS PRESENTED FOR CONSIDERATION BY TITLE ONLY AND TO WAIVE FURTHER READING.

Item No. 6:   ACCEPTANCE OF THE “AVOID THE 26” OFFICE OF TRAFFIC SAFETY (OTS) TRAFFIC GRANT AND ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF THE OTS TRAFFIC GRANT GOALS IN THEIR ENTIRETY.

Recommendation:   That the City Council: 1) Accept the Office of Traffic Safety (OTS) Grant; and 2) Adopt the Resolution by title only, agreeing to support the grant goals in their entirety; and 3) Authorize the Chief of Police to sign a Memorandum of Understanding between the City of Anaheim and the City of Cypress; and 4) Increase estimated revenues (114-50183.3525 Grants – Miscellaneous) in the Fiscal Year 2011-2012 General Fund – Grants Fund for the grant total of $25,000; and 5) Approve appropriations in Fiscal Year 2011-2012 in the General Fund – Grants Fund as follows: 114-50183.4003_21 (Overtime) in the amount of $25,000.

Resolution No. 6282

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CYPRESS,
CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING THE ACCEPTANCE OF THE
“AVOID THE 26” ORANGE COUNTY REGIONAL DUI CAMPAIGN
AND AGREEMENT WITH THE OFFICE OF TRAFFIC SAFETY GRANT
GOALS IN THEIR ENTIRETY.

Item No. 7:   REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT.

Recommendation:   That the City Council authorize the Mayor to execute the Reimbursement Agreement.

Item No. 8:   CONSIDERATION OF ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION DETERMINING THAT THE CITY OF CYPRESS ELECTS TO SERVE AS THE SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE DISSOLVED CYPRESS REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY.

Recommendation:   That the City Council adopt the Resolution by title only, determining that the City of Cypress elects to serve as the Successor Agency to the dissolved Cypress Redevelopment Agency pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 34173.

Resolution No. 6283

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CYPRESS,
CALIFORNIA, DETERMINING THAT THE CITY OF CYPRESS ELECTS
TO, AND SHALL, SERVE AS THE SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE
DISSOLVED CYPRESS REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY PURSUANT
TO HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE SECTION 34173.

Item No. 9:   CONSIDERATION OF ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION DETERMINING THAT THE CITY OF CYPRESS SHALL RETAIN THE HOUSING ASSETS AND FUNCTIONS OF THE DISSOLVED CYPRESS REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY.

Recommendation:   That the City Council adopt the Resolution by title only, determining that the City of Cypress shall retain the housing assets and functions of the dissolved Cypress Redevelopment Agency pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 34176.

Resolution No. 6284

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CYPRESS,
CALIFORNIA, DETERMINING THAT THE CITY OF CYPRESS SHALL
RETAIN THE HOUSING ASSETS AND FUNCTIONS OF THE
DISSOLVED CYPRESS REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY PURSUANT
TO HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE SECTION 34176.

Item No. 10:  ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION OF THE CYPRESS CITY COUNCIL DECLARING THAT THE CITY OF CYPRESS HAS NOT FORGIVEN ANY LOAN OWED TO THE CITY BY THE CYPRESS REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY.

Recommendation:   That the City Council adopt the Resolution by title only, making a declaration under Health and Safety Code Section 33354.8 that, during the period from January 1, 2010 to December 31, 2011, the City has not forgiven the repayment, wholly or partially, of any loan, advance, or indebtedness owed to the City by the Cypress Redevelopment Agency.

Resolution No. 6285

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CYPRESS,
CALIFORNIA, MAKING A DECLARATION UNDER HEALTH AND
SAFETY CODE SECTION 33354.8 THAT, DURING THE PERIOD
FROM JANUARY 1, 2010 TO DECEMBER 31, 2011, THE
CITY HAS NOT FORGIVEN THE REPAYMENT, WHOLLY OR
PARTIALLY, OF ANY LOAN, ADVANCE, OR INDEBTEDNESS
OWED TO THE CITY BY THE CYPRESS REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY.

Item No. 11:  ACCEPTANCE OF STORM DRAIN REHABILITATION ON MOODY STREET AND VALLEY VIEW STREET, PUBLIC WORKS PROJECT NOS. 2008-12 AND 2008-14.

Recommendation:   That the City Council: 1) Accept the Storm Drain Rehabilitation on Moody Street and Valley View Street, Public Works Project Nos. 2008-12 and 2008-14, as being satisfactorily completed in conformance with the project specifications, in the final amount of $2,077,557.37; and 2) Approve the final retention payment of $207,755.74 to Excel Paving Company, Long Beach, California; and 3) Authorize the City Clerk to release the Labor and Materials Bond and the Faithful Performance Bond upon expiration of the required lien period, if no claims or objections have been filed, upon concurrence of the Director of Public Works.

Item No. 12:  ACCEPTANCE OF THE COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2011.

Recommendation:   That the City Council receive and file the report.

Item No. 13:  ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING THE CLASSIFICATION SPECIFICATION FOR THE POSITION OF COMMUNITY OUTREACH OFFICER THEREBY AMENDING THE CITY’S POSITION CLASSIFICATION PLAN AND MODIFYING THE TEMPORARY PART-TIME AND SEASONAL EMPLOYEES HOURLY PAY RANGE SCHEDULE TO INCLUDE THE COMMUNITY OUTREACH OFFICER. 

Recommendation:   That the City Council, and acting as the ex-officio governing Board of Directors of the Cypress Recreation and Park District: 1) Adopt the Resolution by title only, establishing the position of Community Outreach Officer; and 2) Adopt the class specification and part-time hourly pay range for the new classification of Community Outreach Officer; and 3) Appropriate from the unreserved fund balance of the General Fund $15,000 to account 111-50174.4010 for part-time salary and $1,500 to account 111-50174.4006 for fringe benefits to fund the position of Community Outreach Officer for the Balance of FY 2011-12.

Resolution No. 6286

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CYPRESS,
AND ACTING AS EX-OFFICIO BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE
CYPRESS RECREATION AND PARK DISTRICT, ESTABLISHING THE
PART-TIME CLASSIFICATION OF COMMUNITY OUTREACH OFFICER,
MODIFYING THE CITY’S CLASSIFICATION PLAN AND ESTABLISHING
COMPENSATION FOR THE PART-TIME CLASSIFICATION OF
COMMUNITY OUTREACH OFFICER BY ADDING THE POSITION TO
THE TEMPORARY PART-TIME AND SEASONAL EMPLOYEES
HOURLY PAY RANGE SCHEDULE.

Item No. 14:  REVIEW OF INVESTMENT REPORT FOR THE MONTH OF NOVEMBER, 2011.

Recommendation:   That the City Council receive and file the Investment Report for the month of November, 2011.

Item No. 15:  APPROVAL OF COMMERCIAL WARRANT LIST AND WIRE TRANSFERS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2011-12 FOR WARRANTS NO. 20371 THROUGH 20518.

Recommendation:   That the City Council approve the attached warrant register and wire transfers for Fiscal Year 2011-12.

Recreation and Park District Matters:

Item No. 16:  ACCEPTANCE OF THE COMPONENT UNIT FINANCIAL REPORT OF THE CYPRESS RECREATION AND PARK DISTRICT FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2011.

Recommendation:   That the City Council, acting as the ex-officio Board of Directors for the Cypress Recreation and Park District, receive and file the report.

Regarding Item No. 4:       APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF DECEMBER 12, 2011, Council Member Mills stated the minutes should be corrected to reflect that Assemblyman Chris Norby presented him with a Certificate of Recognition not a plaque. 

Council Member Luebben indicated that his comment on page 3 should be corrected to read, “Council Member Luebben stated that he does not want to make a change in the direction of the infrastructure program that would remove or delay a project or projects that would otherwise provide a benefit to the entire community.”

It was moved by Council Member Mills and seconded by Council Member Luebben, that the City Council approve the Minutes of the Meeting of December 12, 2011, as amended.

The motion was unanimously carried by the following roll call vote:

AYES:        5    COUNCIL MEMBERS:   Luebben, Mills, Seymore, Narain and Bailey
NOES:        0    COUNCIL MEMBERS:   None
ABSENT:    0    COUNCIL MEMBERS:   None

URGENCY ITEM

Item No. 16.5:  URGENCY MEASURE – SB659 (PADILLA)

The City Attorney stated that the City was asked to urge the legislature to pass this urgency item which would extend for 60 days compliance with the measures imposed by the California Supreme Court. 

Council Member Luebben asked if the City truly requires an additional 60 days. 

Agency Counsel stated that the California Supreme Court set the new dissolution date for redevelopment agencies as February 1, 2012, and the proposal in the Legislature is to extend that date two months in order to give the Legislature an opportunity to address certain clean-up issues in the bill, some of which would/could benefit the City.  He commented that it is not known what other bills might be forthcoming and that there is one bill that has been introduced that would require the additional two months.  He stated that the League of California Cities is encouraging cities to support the extension. 

Council Member Luebben stated that he does not see a real reason for Cypress to request a delay of 60 days and that he would vote no on this item. 

Agency Counsel stated that there is a possibility that the Legislature could fashion clarifications to the dissolution bill that may help implement the dissolution process or may provide some greater relief to the City as it goes through the dissolution process.

Council Member Mills commented that, even though Cypress may not directly benefit because we opted out of redevelopment, there are a lot of cities that are heavily involved in redevelopment and our letter of support would be more in the interest of our sister cities that have issues to resolve.  He stated that the City should support this to the benefit of the community and other cities. 

Mayor Bailey expressed concern with the substantial non-enforceable obligations from 2006 and that it is the duty of the City Council to recover those funds.  He stated that he is in favor of this item.

It was moved by Council Member Mills and seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Narain, that the City Council authorize the Mayor to sign the letter of support.

The motion was carried by the following roll call vote:

AYES:        4    COUNCIL MEMBERS:   Mills, Seymore, Narain and Bailey
NOES:        1    COUNCIL MEMBERS:   Luebben
ABSENT:    0    COUNCIL MEMBERS:   None

END OF CONSENT CALENDAR

NEW BUSINESS:

No items.

RECREATION & PARK DISTRICT MATTERS:  The Cypress City Council, Acting as the Ex Officio Governing Board of Directors.

No items.

CYPRESS REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MATTERSThe Cypress City Council, Acting as the Cypress Redevelopment Agency.

It was moved by Agency Board Member Seymore and seconded by Agency Board Member Mills, that the Cypress Redevelopment Agency Board approve Consent Calendar Item Nos. 17 and 18.

The motion was unanimously carried by the following roll call vote:

AYES:        5    AGENCY MEMBERS:    Luebben, Mills, Seymore, Narain and Bailey
NOES:        0    AGENCY MEMBERS:    None
ABSENT:    0    AGENCY MEMBERS:    None

Item No. 17:  ACCEPTANCE OF THE COMPONENT UNIT FINANCIAL REPORT OF THE CYPRESS REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2011.

Recommendation:   That the Cypress Redevelopment Agency Board receive and file the report.

Item No. 18:  ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION OF THE CYPRESS REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY DECLARING THAT THE AGENCY HAS NOT FORGIVEN ANY LOAN OWED TO THE AGENCY BY A PUBLIC BODY.

Recommendation:   That the Cypress Redevelopment Agency Board adopt the Resolution by title only, making a declaration under Health and Safety Code Section 33354.8 that, during the period from January 1, 2010 to December 31, 2011, the Agency has not forgiven the repayment, wholly or partially, of any loan, advance, or indebtedness owed to the Agency by a public body.

Resolution No. CRA - 140

A RESOLUTION OF THE CYPRESS REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY,
MAKING A DECLARATION UNDER HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE
SECTION 33354.8 THAT, DURING THE PERIOD FROM
JANUARY 1, 2010 TO DECEMBER 31, 2011, THE AGENCY
HAS NOT FORGIVEN THE REPAYMENT, WHOLLY OR
PARTIALLY, OF ANY LOAN, ADVANCE, OR INDEBTEDNESS
OWED TO THE AGENCY BY A PUBLIC BODY.

ORAL COMMUNICATIONS:  For Matters Not on the Agenda.

None.

ITEMS FROM CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS:

Item No. 19:  CYPRESS SCHOOL DISTRICT MEETING REQUEST (Mayor Bailey)

Mayor Bailey stated that he received a phone call from Cypress School District Board Chairman Donna Erickson requesting that a meeting be held with her, the Cypress School District Board Vice President, Mayor Bailey, and the Mayor Pro Tem. 

The City Attorney stated that if the City Council wishes to open a dialogue with potential discussion of the Measure D issues and the surplus school site issues, he would prefer that it be a privileged and confidential discussion under Evidence Code Section 1152 and other principles of similar effect.  He indicated that if an agreement could be reached at that first meeting, that any discussions on the topic of surplus school acquisitions/sale/development or Measure D’s applicability to school sites would be pursuant to a privileged and confidential settlement discussion so that nothing either party says to each other could be used for or against that party in a court proceeding, then he would not object. 

Council Member Luebben stated that he is not comfortable with this and that at the last City Council meeting, the City Council approved an ad hoc committee.  He commented that the City is in litigation with the Cypress School District and that he would prefer that any type of discussions such as this be held at a fully agendized joint meeting of all members of the Cypress School District Board and the City Council. 

Council Member Mills asked for clarification from the City Attorney. 

The City Attorney stated that conversation related to the school site issues or Measure D is a statement against interest and could have a potential prejudicial impact.  He indicated that in order to protect against that is to not have the conversation or there is a provision under the Evidence Code that allows for these types of conversations to be privileged and confidential and cannot be cited by either party for or against another party or its own position in a court proceeding.  He indicated that, in order to do that, there has to be an agreement by both sides up front that everything that is said on that subject is privileged and confidential and in the interest of facilitating settlement.  He stated that two statements of the City Council do not bind the City Council and do not constitute the position of the City. 

Council Member Seymore clarified that the other three City Council Members would not be able to hear anything about that meeting and that he contacted the City Attorney to ask about having a general meeting with the Cypress School District and was advised against it.  He stated that he does not have a problem with the meeting as long as it is a one-time meeting. 

Mayor Bailey assured that it would be an informal, one-time meeting. 

It was moved by Mayor Bailey and seconded by Council Member Mills, that the City Council approve the request from Cypress School District Board President Donna Erickson for the District President and Vice President to meet with the Mayor and Mayor Pro Tem, on a one-time basis only, and report back to the City Council the outcome of the meeting.

The motion was carried by the following roll call vote:

AYES:        4    COUNCIL MEMBERS:   Mills, Seymore, Narain and Bailey
NOES:        1    COUNCIL MEMBERS:   Luebben
ABSENT:    0    COUNCIL MEMBERS:   None

Mayor Bailey requested reports from the Council Members on their respective committee assignments.

Council Member Luebben:

Attended a SCAG Energy and Environment Committee meeting.  Attended the Cypress Recreation and Park District youth basketball games at Lexington Junior High School.

Mayor Pro Tem Narain:

Attended an O.C. Sanitation District Administrative Committee and Board meeting.

Council Member Seymore:

Attended the retirement party for O.C. Fire Authority Assistant Chief Jorge Camargo. Placed a rose on the Donate Life Rose Parade float.

Council Member Mills:

Attended a Joint Forces Training Base Cities Group meeting in Seal Beach.  Attended a SCAG Regional Council meeting.  Attended an ACC-OC Legislative Committee meeting.  Attended the retirement ceremony in honor of three retiring colonels, a master sergeant, and a sergeant first class. 

ITEMS FROM CITY MANAGER: 

No items.

ADJOURNMENT: Mayor Bailey adjourned the meeting at 8:41 p.m. to Monday, January 23, 2012, beginning at 5:30 p.m. in the Executive Board Room.

_______________________________
MAYOR OF THE CITY OF CYPRESS

ATTEST:

___________________________________
CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF CYPRESS

City of Cypress Department of Administration ~ 5275 Orange Avenue ~ Cypress, CA 90630 ~ 714-229-6780