04-27-1999 Council Minutes
APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL ON MAY 11, 1999
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES ORANGE, CALIFORNIA
OF A REGULAR MEETING April 27, 1999
The City Council of the City of Orange, California convened on April 27, 1999 at 4:30 p.m.
in a Regular Meeting in the Council Chambers, 300 E. Chapman Avenue, Orange,
California.
4:30 P.M. SESSION
1. OPENING
1.1 INVOCATION
Pastor Rick Rzeszewski, Orange Coast Community Church
1.2 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG
Councilman Alvarez requested a moment of silence in respect for the families in
Littleton, Colorado, which was followed by the Pledge of Allegiance.
1.3 ROLL CALL
PRESENT - Murphy, Slater, Mayor Coontz, Spurgeon, Alvarez
ABSENT - None
1.4 PRESENTATIONS/ ANNOUNCEMENTS/ INTRODUCTIONS
Mayor Coontz announced a meeting is being held by Caltrans at La Veta Elementary
School, 2800 E. LaVeta, from 4:00 p.m. - 7:00 p.m.. regarding the SR-55 Freeway
improvements.
Employee Recognition Service Awards were presented by the City Manager to Dan
Carbaugh (police); Del Schultz (Community Development); Paul Ruseler
((Community Services); Sheryl Dinsmore (Finance); Jeff Olson (Fire); Miguel Perez
(Fire); La Verne Cooper (Public Works); Robert Crawford (Public Works); Ross
Peterson (Police); and Mike Pollok (Police). (C2500.JA.18)
Gary Mead, representing the Chamber of Commerce, announced the Gogh Van
Orange event will be held at the Stadium Promenade May 1-2, 1999. The Mayor
and Councilmembers were invited 0 participate in the F AM Tour, whose activities
are sponsored by members of the Chamber of Commerce.
Mayor Coontz announced the success of the Dash for Dare event held April 16-17,
1999 and Earth Day Celebration held April 24, 1999.
Councilman Alvarez presented Certificates of Distinction to Timothy and Nicholas
Brooks for their heroic rescue efforts of their neighbors Shawn Silvers and her
children from their burning house. Family members of the recipients, neighbors, and
Lou and Judy Silvers were also recognized.
PAGE 1
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
April 27, 1999
1.4 PRESENTATIONS! ANNOUNCEMENTS! INTRODUCTIONS (Continued)
A Safely On Shore (S.O.S.) proclamation was presented to Terrye McAulay, CEO &
President of an organization for abused women and their children.
A proclamation proclaiming April, 1999 as Public Schools Month was presented to
John Sleppy, Master, Shawn Greenfield, Senior Warden, and Arthur Paris, Junior
Warden of the Masonic Orange Grove Temple of Orange #293.
A proclamation recognizing Municipal Clerk's Week - May 2 - 8, 1999 was
presented to Cassandra 1. Cathcart, City Clerk.
Mayor Coontz announced a community workshop, directed by the City's consultant
Purkiss Rose, RSI, will be held on Tuesday, May 4, 1999 at 7:00 p.m. in the Weimer
Room to receive input regarding open space, park, and recreational needs of the City,
Councilman Alvarez announced his new web site: www.OrangeCouncilman.com.
2.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Tape 924
Barbara DeNiro, (address on file), commented that examples set are how young
people turn out and expressed the need to realize there are absolutes, rights and
wrongs. (R1200.0)
Jim Cline, 2603 Riding Way, spoke regarding Council's approval at the April 13th
meeting of a contract with Geo-Environmental, Inc. for the Featherhill Subdrain
Study and Geotechnical investigation. An outline was requested of what the contract
entails.
Gary Meserve, (address on file), expressed concern with tourist buses in the City and
campaign funds given to candidates. Mr. Meserve feels the homeowner and
taxpayer has no representation in the City.
3.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Tape 1197
3.1 Declaration of City Clerk, Cassandra J. Cathcart, declaring posting of City
Council agenda of a regular meeting of April 27, 1999 at Orange Civic Center,
Main Library at 101 N. Center Street, Police facility at 1107 North Batavia, the
Eisenhower Park Bulletin Board, and summarized on Time-Warner
Communications, all of said locations being in the City of Orange and freely
accessible to members of the public at least 72 hours before commencement of
said regular meeting.
ACTION: Accepted Declaration of Agenda Posting and authorized its retention as a
public record in the Office of the City Clerk.
PAGE 2
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
April 27, 1999
3. CONSENT CALENDAR (Continued)
3.2 Request Council Confirmation of warrant registers dated AprilS and 15, 1999.
ACTION:
Approved.
3.3 Request approval of City Council Minutes, Adjourned Regular Meeting, April
6,1999 and Regular Meeting, April 13, 1999.
ACTION: Approved. Mayor pro tern Spurgeon abstained on the April 6, 1999
minutes due to his absence from the meeting.
3.4 Consideration to waive reading in full of all ordinances on the Agenda.
ACTION:
Approved.
AGREEMENTS
3.5 Agreements with temporary employment agencies to provide temporary
employees to City departments on an as-needed basis. (A2100.0 AGR-3241;
AGR-3244; AGR-3245)
SUMMARY: Throughout the year, temporary employees are required by various
departments to accomplish additional work on specific projects.
ACTION: Awarded Temporary Employee Service Agreements to Apple One
Employment Services, Thomas Staffing and The Dial Group and authorized the
Mayor and City Clerk to execute on behalf of the City.
FISCAL IMPACT: Temporary employee services are budgeted by each
department's requirements.
3.6 Agreement with the law firm of Rutan and Tucker to represent the City in its
lawsuit filed against Jeff Hambarian, et ai, for losses associated with the alleged
ORRS/ODS trash contracts. (A2100.0 AGR-3184.A)
SUMMARY: The City currently has an agreement with Rutan and Tucker for an
amount not to exceed $30,000. That amount has been expended and the request is to
increase the not to exceed amount to $250,000.
ACTION: Approved and authorized the Mayor and City Clerk to execute an
agreement with Rutan and Tucker on behalf of the City for an amount not to exceed
$250,000.
FISCAL IMPACT: Funds are currently available in Sanitation Account Nos. 220-
550-426700 and 220-5022-427100.
PAGE 3
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
April 27, 1999
3. CONSENT CALENDAR (Continued)
APPROPRIATION
3.7 Appropriation of funds from Fund 262 - Traffic Improvement (Measure M)
Unappropriated Reserves to Project 3820 Katella/SR-55 Freeway Interchange
Modification in the 1998-99 Capital Improvement Program. (S4000.S.7)
SUMMARY: The City has received an invoice from Caltrans for the City's portion
of the cost for design and construction of an on-ramp from Katella Blvd. to the SR-
55 Freeway (CIP Project 3820). Due to an acceleration of work the total exceeds
available funding in the approved 1998-99 CIP Budget for this project. An
appropriation of additional funds is therefore required.
ACTION: Approved an additional appropriation of $226,000 from Fund 262
Unappropriated Measure M Reserves to Account 262-5011-483300-3820 Traffic
Improvement (Measure M), Katella/SR-55 Freeway Interchange Modification.
FISCAL IMP ACT: Funds are available to appropriate $226,000 to Account 262-
5011-483300-3820. It is anticipated that these monies will be reimbursed.
BIDS
3.8 Contract Change Order No.1 and Final Contract Change Order for Bid No.
978-32; Project No. SP-3210; All American Asphalt; The City Drive Widening
from the Garden Grove Freeway to Dawn Way/City Way. (A2100.0 AGR-
3046)
SUMMARY: This Final Change Order authorizes payment for the increase in the
quantities of various bid items beyond the original estimate of work and unforeseen
extra work. The total contract cost is $1,658,797.29.
ACTION: Approved Final Contract Change Order in the amount of $127,243.69 to
All American Asphalt.
FISCAL IMPACT: Funds are budgeted and available in Account No. 284-5011-
483300-3235 $127,243.69 (The City Drive Widening/Chapman).
3.9 Project No. SP-3095; Main Street and Chapman Avenue Critical Intersection
Widening; approval of plans and specifications and advertising for bids.
(S4000.S.3.7)
SUMMARY: Plans and specifications have been completed for the street widening
and reconstruction of Main Street and Chapman Avenue Critical Intersection
Widening and is ready to be advertised for bids. The estimated construction cost
including administration and contingencies is $875,000.
PAGE 4
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
April 27, 1999
3. CONSENT CALENDAR (Continued)
ACTION: Approved plans and specifications and authorized advertising for the
Main Street and Chapman Avenue Critical Intersection Widening project.
FISCAL IMPACT: Funds are budgeted in the Capital Improvement Program and
available in the following accounts: 550-5011-483300-3229 $799,876.00 (Measure
M lIP), 262-5011-483300-3229 $573,459.00 (Measure M), 271-5011-483300-
3229 $74,016.00 (Gas Tax).
3.10 CLAIMS (C3200.0)
The City Attorney recommends that the City Council deny the following Claims for
damages:
a. Fay and Abdol Fannyan
b. Mary and Frederick Glasser
c. Michael Markus
d. Bruce Winstead
e. Samuel Yang
FISCAL IMPACT: None.
ACTION: Denied claims for damages and referred to City Attorney and Adjuster.
CONTRACTS
3.11 Contract Change Order No.2 with Highlight Electric, Inc. - Old Towne Street
Lighting Project. (A2100.0 AGR-3084)
SUMMARY: To improve the current design for the street lighting at the intersection
of Chapman Ave. and Center St., it is recommended that the existing poles be
relocated to the opposite comers, rather than being replaced as shown on the current
design. This is a contract change order in the amount of $3,025.65 to Contract No.
3084 (Bid No. 978-52) with Highlight Electric, Inc.
ACTION: Authorized a contract change order in the amount of $3,025.65 with
Highlight Electric, Inc. NOTE: Councilman Slater abstained on this item due to a
property interest in Old Towne and he has abstained on past street lighting issues.
FISCAL IMPACT: $3,025.65 is available utilizing TSIP Area B - West Orange
Street Light Installation, Account No. 284-5032-483100-1818 funds.
PAGE 5
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
April 27, 1999
3. CONSENT CALENDAR (Continued)
DONATIONS
3.12 Acceptance of $1,000 donation from Villa Ford to support the Earth Day
celebration. (C2500.M)
SUMMARY: Villa Ford has made a donation to the City for use in the Earth Day
celebration, 1999.
ACTION: Accepted donation and appropriated the funds to Account No. 220-5022-
426600 (Sanitation - Publicity and Advertising).
FISCAL IMP ACT: This donation will augment the Recycling budget to help offset
costs for the Earth Day celebration.
PERMIT PARKING
3.13 Request Council approve NO FEE parking permit in Municipal Parking Lot J, S.
Orange St. for the Assistance League of Orange (10), and First United
Methodist Church (2), and review this waiver annually. (S4000.3.1.2)
SUMMARY: The Assistance League of Orange and First United Methodist Church
are requesting issuance of NO FEE parking permits to accommodate their charitable
medical and community activities. This request is reviewed annually by the City
Council.
ACTION: Approved the request to be effective July 1, 1999. NOTE: Councilman
Alvarez abstained on this item due to a potential conflict with property ownership
within 300 feet of the subject property.
FISCAL IMP ACT: Loss of $1 ,440 in annual parking permit fees.
RATIFICATION OF DECLARATION OF EMERGENCY
(REMOVED AND HEARD SEPARATELY)
3.14 Review the existence of a local emergency as declared on April 1, 1999 and
ratified in Resolution No. 9094 (Vista Royale Tract). (C2500.E.6)
FISCAL IMPACT: None.
The Assistant City Attorney explained Resolution No. 9103 allows the City
Manager, as Director of Emergency Services, to make amendments to the previous
orders imposed to make it a more workable document. Resolution No. 9103 will
come before Council at every regular Council meeting to ratify changes that may
have occurred.
PAGE 6
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
April 27, 1999
3. CONSENT CALENDAR (Continued)
RESOLUTION NO. 9103
A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Orange reviewing the need for
continuing the Local Emergency ratified by City Council Resolution No. 9094 and
authorizing certain acts and orders by the Director of Emergency Services.
MOTION - Murphy
SECOND - Mayor Coontz
AYES - Murphy, Slater, Mayor Coontz, Spurgeon, Alvarez
Moved to adopt Resolution No. 9103.
RESOLUTIONS
3.15 RESOLUTION NO. 9073 (C2500.M.16.1)
A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Orange approving Lot Line
Adjustment LL 98-8 adjusting lot lines of certain real property situated at parcels 1
and 2 of Parcel Map No. 85-278 in the City of Orange, County of Orange, State of
California, more particularly described in Exhibits A and B. (continued from
2/23/99)
Location: Ridgeline Country Club
Owners: Creekside at Orange Park Acres, LLC and David and Kerry Freimann
ACTION: Approved.
3.16 RESOLUTION NO. 9096 (S4000.S.3.7)
A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Orange requesting the Orange
County Transportation Authority to allocate combined transportation program funds
for La Veta Avenue and Glassell Street Intersection Widening, Project No. 95-
ORNG-1149.
ACTION: Approved. NOTE: Councilman Slater abstained on this item due to
ownership of property at 222 E. LaVeta, located within 300 feet of the
La Veta/Glassell intersection.
3.17 RESOLUTION NO. 9098 (A4000.0 APP-450)
A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Orange overruling the decision of the
Planning Commission of the City of Orange and Upholding Appeal No. 450,
granting a Conditional Use Permit to allow the on-site consumption of beer and wine
upon property located at 1948 North Tustin Street.
PAGE 7
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
April 27, 1999
3. CONSENT CALENDAR (Continued)
Appeal No. 450
Conditional Use Permit No. 2238-98
Applicant and Appellant: Aroma Italiano Coffee House
ACTION: Approved.
3.18 RESOLUTION NO. 9100 (C2500.B)
A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Orange expressing appreciation to
Donna M. Goodman of the City Attorney's Office for 13 years of loyal and
dedicated service.
ACTION: Approved.
3.19 RESOLUTION NO. 9101 (A2100.0 AGR-3240)
A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Orange authorizing the City Manager
to execute a Cooperative Agreement between the Orange County Chapter of the
American Red Cross and the City of Orange providing for assistance in case of
disasters and emergencies.
ACTION: Approved.
SPECIAL EVENTS
3.20 Request for temporary suspension of permit parking restrictions within "Area
A" (downtown area). (S4000.S.3.1.2)
SUMMARY: Orange High School will hold their annual Senior Program and
Graduation Ceremony at their campus on Sunday - June 13, 1999 and Thursday -
June 17, 1999, respectively. Due to anticipated attendance it may be necessary to
park in the surrounding residential neighborhood which restricts on-street parking
except by permit.
ACTION: Approved Orange High School's request.
FISCAL IMPACT: None.
(REMOVED AND HEARD SEP ARATEL Y)
3.21 Request waiver of fee for installation of Plaza banner advertising fund raising
event at the Orange County Ronald McDonald House on June 26, 1999.
(R1200.0)
PAGE 8
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Apri127, 1999
3. CONSENT CALENDAR (Continued)
SUMMARY: The Orange County Ronald McDonald House is hosting a fund
raising event at their facility on June 26, 1999 and are requesting waiver of the
$150.00 Plaza banner installation fee.
FISCAL IMPACT: Loss of$150.00 banner installation fee.
Karen Cooper, representing Ronald McDonald House, requested a fee waiver for the
installation of the Plaza banner for the event.
Mayor Coontz commented Council and many City departments have always been
supportive of Ronald McDonald House. The City Manager explained the Orange
Municipal Code authorizes banner fee waivers only for events co-sponsored by the
City.
Counci1members concurred to contribute personal funds for the banner installation.
MOTION - Murphy
SECOND - Alvarez
AYES - Murphy, Slater, Mayor Coontz, Spurgeon, Alvarez
Moved to deny the request and solicit alternative funding.
MOTION - Murphy
SECOND - Alvarez
AYES - Murphy, Slater, Mayor Coontz, Spurgeon, Alvarez
Item Nos. 3.14 and 3.21 were removed and heard separately. Mayor pro tern
Spurgeon abstained on Item No. 3.3, April 6, 1999 minutes. Councilman Alvarez
abstained on Item No. 3.13. Councilman Slater abstained on Item Nos. 3.11 and
3.16. The remainder ofthe Consent Calendar was approved as recommended.
END OF CONSENT CALENDAR
********
4.
REPORTS FROM MAYOR COONTZ
Tape 1495
4.1 Opposition to SB 1277 - the passage of this bill would have a negative impact on
the construction of the Foothill South Toll Road Project. (T2200.0.4)
Mayor Coontz reported Senate Bill 1277 was proposed at the State level by Senator Tom
Hayden in Sacramento.
PAGE 9
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
April 27, 1999
4. REPORTS FROM MAYOR COONTZ (Continued)
RESOLUTION NO. 9102
A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Orange opposing SB 1277.
MOTION - Spurgeon
SECOND - Murphy
AYES - Murphy, Slater, Mayor Coontz, Spurgeon, Alvarez
Moved that Resolution No. 9102 as introduced, be adopted and same was passed and
adopted by the preceding vote.
5. REPORTS FROM COUNCILMEMBERS - None
6. REPORTS FROM BOARDS, COMMITTEES, AND COMMISSIONS Tape
1518
6.1 Reorganization and appointments to the Orange Park Acres Planning
Committee: (OR1800.0.26.1)
Nancy Vance, Vince Ferragamo, Mark Harris, Diana Garbers, Bob Bennyhoff and Scott
Richmond (Alternate) Terms to expire 1/2001.
General Duties: To review and provide recommendations to the City Council and Planning
Commission regarding significant land use proposals (such as new tract developments and
general plan amendments) and policy issues related to circulation, infrastructure and
equestrian/recreation trails within the Orange Park Acres community. The Orange Park
Acres Plan is the basis for the origination and continuation of this advisory committee.
Mayor Coontz reported the general duties of the Orange Park Acres Planning Committee are
not spelled out to cover the Orange Park Acres Plan, which goes back to the early 1970's.
The individuals recommended represent both the City and County areas of Orange Park
Acres. The revised duties would be as stated above.
Councilman Slater commented the guidelines adopted for the Orange Park Acres Planning
Committee suggest the County appoint two members, the City appoint two members, and
the Orange Park Acres Association or community appoint the fifth member. Concern was
expressed with the City appointing residents of the County to a citizens committee. Further,
Laurie Cesena and Richard Siebert did express an interest in continuing to serve and were
not being asked to return. With the exception of the Design Review Committee, all other
committees have been reinstated. He indicated perhaps he could be more supportive if all
members had been replaced and a new committee started. County involvement would have
been appreciated, even through Supervisor Todd Spitzer did indicate a willingness to pass to
the Mayor's prerogative. Councilman Slater further commented if he does not support the
appointments it is not because he does not support the newly proposed members.
PAGE 10
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
April 27, 1999
6. REPORTS FROM BOARDS, COMMITTEES AND COMMISSIONS
(Continued)
Mayor Coontz indicated that over a period of time appointments have been made by the City
Council. Committee members are generally unified in the direction of issues such as:
circulation, horse trails, etc. Orange Park Acres is a unique community, and it is believed
this reorganization will work.
Bob Bennyhoff, 10642 Morada Drive, Orange Park Acres, urged Council to consider his
appointment, even though he lives in the County, and urged their support of the suggested
nominations.
Councilman Slater responded he has no problem with County individuals serving on the
Committee. He appreciates Mr. Bennyhoffs involvement but would prefer that individuals
living in the County be appointed by the County Board of Supervisors. Councilman Alvarez
concurred with Councilman Slater.
Mayor pro tern Spurgeon indicated he also has some reservations but respects the
prerogative of the Mayor.
MOTION - Spurgeon
SECOND - Mayor Coontz
AYES - Murphy, Mayor Coontz, Spurgeon
NOES - Slater, Alvarez
Approved appointments as recommended.
6.2 Report from the City Treasurer on the Investment Oversight Committee
Quarterly Report for the Quarter Ending March 31, 1999. (OR1800.0.27.16)
The City Treasurer presented the report.
MOTION - Murphy
SECOND - Spurgeon
AYES - Murphy, Slater, Mayor Coontz, Spurgeon, Alvarez
Moved to receive and file.
7.
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS
Tape 1912
7.1 Report from the Finance Director - Treasurer's report for the period ending
March 31, 1999. (C2S00.F)
The Finance Director presented the report.
PAGE 11
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
April 27, 1999
7. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS (Continued)
MOTION - Slater
SECOND - Alvarez
AYES - Murphy, Slater, Mayor Coontz, Spurgeon, Alvarez
Moved to receive and file.
8.
REPORTS FROM CITY MANAGER
Tape 1968
8.1 Report on the City's Measure M Transportation Grant Applications. (C2500.E)
The Director of Public Works reported Measure M programs are competitive in which the
City competes against all the cities and the County of Orange for funding under six or seven
different categories of programs. Since 1997, the City has been awarded approximately
$12.5 million in Measure M competitive grant funds. The City of Orange represents about
4.6% ofthe County's population and has been able to receive approximately 8% of available
funding over the last three years. City Council's willingness to support this effort by
providing necessary matching funds through the budget process has allowed the City to
achieve this level of success. Some of the significant project approved for grant funding
include:
. SR-22/The City Drive interchange improvements
. Meats Avenue bridge widening
. Chapman Avenue widening from - Cannon to Canyon View
Compliments were extended to the City Manager and Director of Public Works.
8.2 Report on future distribution of bankruptcy proceeds. (C2500.F)
The Finance Director reported to date, the City has recovered approximately $1.4 million.
Approximately $4.5 million remains to be recovered for those cases that have been settled.
Of the funds recovered, $2.1 million should go to various City funds and $2.4 million
should go to the Redevelopment Agency. When the funds are received, they will be
allocated to the various funds in the same portion as the original loss was written off. The
loss was written off based on the amount of cash each individual fund had in the investment
pool. It is anticipated that the General Fund could receive approximately $595,000 in future
recoveries. The City Council can allocate any General Fund proceeds to any governmental
purpose, i.e. parks, libraries, salaries, or other capital projects.
After the bankruptcy proceeds have been credited to the specific funds in the same
proportion as the original loss was written off, Council could consider reallocating surplus
funds in the Internal Service Fund (Fleet Maintenance Fund, Vehicle Replacement Fund, or
the Liability Fund) to a General Fund use. This action can be taken by the City Council if it
can be supported that the funds are surplus and are in excess of amounts needed for internal
PAGE 12
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
April 27, 1999
8. REPORTS FROM CITY MANAGER (Continued)
expenditures. The reason this can be done is because the Internal Service Funds are
supported for the most part by internal services charges paid by the General Fund. The
funds are required to be accounted for separately and are not to be co-mingled with the
General Fund. The City expects to get approximately $600,000 into the General Fund.
Possibly another $600,000 could be reallocated, $400,000 to the Liability Insurance Fund
and the remaining balance to the two Fleet Funds. It appears approximately $1.2 million
could be reallocated.
Contrary to information published in the newspaper recently, bankruptcy proceeds or any
potential bankruptcy proceeds have not been a part of the revenue estimates for the
balancing of next years budget.
MOTION - Murphy
SECOND - Alvarez
AYES - Murphy, Slater, Mayor Coontz, Spurgeon, Alvarez
Moved to receive and file.
9. LEGAL AFFAIRS - None
10. RECESS TO THE MEETING OF THE ORANGE REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY
11. RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION
The City Council recessed at 5:50 p.m. to a Closed Session for the following purposes:
a. Conference with Legal Counsel - anticipated litigation. Significant exposure to
litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(b) (two potential cases). Contract
with ORRS.
b. Conference with Legal Counsel pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 -
existing litigation. Vista Royale HOA v. City of Orange, et aI., Orange County Superior
Case No. 78 02 84.
c. Conference with Labor Negotiator pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6:
City Negotiator: Personnel Director Steven Pham: Employee Organizations: Maintenance
& Operations, Orange Management Association, Orange Municipal Employees' Association
and Water Department Employees' Association.
d. To consider and take possible action upon such other matters as are orally announced
by the City Attorney, City Manager, or City Council prior to such recess unless the motion
to recess indicates any of the matters will not be considered in Closed Session.
PAGE 13
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
April 27, 1999
7:00 P.M. SESSION
12. PUBLIC COMMENTS - None
13. PUBLIC HEARINGS
13.1 GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2-98, ZONE CHANGE 1196-98,
TRACT MAP 15680, MAJOR SITE PLAN REVIEW 76-99,
GREYS TONE HOMES: (C2300.E) Tape 2430
Time set for a public hearing to consider General Plan Amendment 2-98 to allow the
redesignation of 6.09 acres of property from Low-Medium Density Residential, designating
residential use of the property at a density range between 6 and 15 dwelling units per acre;
Zone Change 1196-98 to reclassify presently zoned C- TR (Limited Business District) Tustin
Redevelopment Project Area as R-3, Multiple Family Residential District allowing
construction of apartments, condominiums or townhouses subject to specific development
standards and regulations; Major Site Plan Review 76-99 for 5.7 acres of property, including
78 units in 26 buildings and Tentative Tract Map 15680 to allow the subdivision and
development ofthe 5.7 acres consolidating 13 parcels and development proposal including
26 residential buildings (comprised of3 units each) in a community with a recreation center,
entry gate, guest parking areas and perimeter security fence. The planned residential density
amounts to 14 dwelling units per acre and is located east of Canal Street and south of Heim
Avenue, but north and west of the Mall of Orange for condominium purposes.
NOTE: Negative Declaration 1560-98 was prepared to evaluate the environmental impacts
ofthis project.
The Director of Community Development reported the site is currently occupied by ten
single family residences. If approved, all residences but one would be removed for the
proposed development. The owner of the remaining property chose not to be a part of the
development proposal, however, his property would be zoned as requested. The proposal
before Council is radically different from the original submittal which included 123 units; 3
story portions in the buildings; and a density of approximately 21 dwelling units per acre.
The proposal has been modified as a result of discussions with the community and the
Planning Commission. The newly proposed project is 78 units (a reduction of 45 units from
the original submittal); all buildings will be 2 story in height; with a density of 13.7 units per
acre. Each unit would consist of 2 or 3 bedrooms and two car garages with direct entry into
the unit. Each unit would contain a private yard area of approximately 450 to 500 square
feet; the carriage units would have a balcony on the second floor. The project includes
recreation open space amenities including a pool and spa within approximately 13,000
square feet of common open space.
In addition to the enclosed garages, the proposal includes 33 guest parking spaces, which is
nearly double what the code requires. The system of driveways and roadways meet code
PAGE 14
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
April 27, 1999
13. PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued)
standards and supports the needs of the Police and Fire Departments. The entry road off
Canal is 40 feet wide; the other roadways are 25 feet wide. Three emergency access points
provide exits on both Heim Avenue and Canal Street. There was discussion at the Planning
Commission meeting relative to providing full project access onto Heim Avenue. However,
the Traffic Engineer recommended against this due to existing street and alley entries on the
north side that would be in conflict with that entryway. The Planning Commission
considered the project at three separate meetings. Each time the proposal was modified by
the applicant in an attempt to respond to concerns. On March 1, 1999 the Planning
Commission recommended approval of the project subject to conditions. If approved, the
zone change would not remove the project from the Tustin Redevelopment zone.
Mayor Coontz asked about future planning to eliminate Heim Street access. The Director of
Public Works explained a concern in the review of the project was the potential conflict of
traffic entering or exiting the street and the alley across from the project on Heim Avenue.
Although Heim Avenue access could be accomplished, it would be more desirable to leave
the primary access on Canal Street.
Councilman Slater asked if the property where the single family home would remain were
rezoned, how many units could be built, based on the size of the lot? The Director of
Community Development responded approximately three or four units could be built on the
remaining lot.
Councilman Slater requested more elaboration on the proposed street widening. Concern
was expressed that the proposed four lanes for Heim Avenue east of Canal Street is based on
an outdated Traffic Circulation Plan that assumes higher intensity retail development at the
Mall. Why is staff suggesting it be widened to four lanes? If the property is changed to
residential, is there really a driving force for creating such an odd section of street, where it
could be landscaped instead as a buffer, perhaps even retaining the Eucalyptus trees? The
Director of Public Works explained Canal Street from Meats Avenue to Heim Avenue and
Heim Avenue from Canal Street to Tustin Street are both shown on the circulation element
of the City's General Plan. Heim Avenue is designated as a secondary and Canal Street is a
commuter. The right-of-way widths for Heim Avenue is 80 feet; Canal Street is 60 feet.
Because of some of the limitations of the existing development, the code calls for an
asymmetric width on Heim Avenue of 30 feet north of the center line and 44 feet to the
south of the center line. The project reflects a width south of the center line of 42 feet which
is achieved by reducing the lane width in certain sections to 10 feet, which allows the 2 foot
reduction.
Further, the existing right-of-way on Heim Avenue varies at the present time. The proposed
project represents approximately 60% of the total frontage along the south side of Heim
Avenue between Canal and Tustin Streets. The four lane designation is based upon a 1989
or later General Plan which envisioned a combination of significant commercial
development and some medium density residential within the corridor. The proposed
PAGE 15
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
April 27, 1999
13. PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued)
project is driven by the ultimate land use and density of uses in the corridor. Absent an
update of that study, it would be difficult to make a firm determination that the roadway is
not needed. The traffic volume at the present time is approximately 5,000 a day, which is
the extreme low end of a traffic volume that might justify four lanes. Typically, when there
are traffic volumes of 10,000 or more a day, four lanes are needed. Since the project
frontage is unimproved, there have to be improvements constructed of some kind, i.e. curb,
gutter and paving. Based upon the best available information and planning, the project
should be built to the improvement as indicated in the General Plan and to a width as
specified in the code. There is no basis for doing anything else without at least doing an
area traffic study and land use study to determine the need for the roadways.
Councilman Slater asked if it could be concluded this would be a low priority for street
widening to actually finish the project on the south side ofthe street? The Director of Public
Works responded there would have to be other development activity in the area to extend the
improvement further east from the proposed project.
MAYOR COONTZ OPENED THE PUBLIC HEARING.
APPLICANT: Douglas Woodward, Greystone Homes, 26 Executive Park, Suite 100, Irvine,
commented the proposed change to low medium density residential is appropriate for the
property, based upon the surrounding uses. The proposal meets or exceeds all of the
requirements of the R-3 zone being requested and does not require any variances. The
revised proposal is to have an open view fence. The 78 unit proposal resulted in a reduction
of 33 in the number of homes originally proposed, and also reduced the density of over 20
units to the acre to 13.68 units to the acre. The community would include two and three
bedroom homes that range from 1277 - 1638 square feet. Each home would have a two-car
20' x 20' garage, with access directly into the home. The proposal provides for a total of
189 parking spaces, which exceeds the guest parking requirement by 23 spaces. It provides
two large open play areas, recreational area with a pool and spa, and a bathroom cabana.
There would be picnic benches and barbecues for use by the residents. Each home in the
development provides a private open space. The total open space "qualified" by the City
staff is 23,130 square feet, which exceeds the zoning requirements by 3,600 square feet.
Pedestrian access for their pedestrian circulation plan was also provided.
Mr. Woodward further indicated that Mr. Rios, the resident who wished to stay in his
property, supports the project. Mr. Rios' requests have been accommodated by providing
sewer capacity and access to his rear yard. The community is designed to help Mr. Rios
retain his privacy. They have agreed to the widening of Heim Avenue but would be willing
to accommodate a landscaped right-of-way. The proposal benefits the City and provides an
opportunity for new affordably priced homes in a site appropriate for low medium
residential use.
PAGE 16
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
April 27, 1999
13. PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued)
SPEAKING IN OPPOSITION:
Barbara DeNiro, address on file
Jim Cline, 2603 Riding Way
H. A. Boehner, 8891 N. Canal Street
Rev. Carl Lutz, 533 N. Glenrose
Kevin Gibbs, 1130 Buoy Avenue
Mark Manning, 2710 N. Gaff Street
Mary Woodhouse, 2530 Bortz Street
Diane and Gary Nowak, 2541 N. Bortz Street
Robert Helton, 2511 N. Crestwood
Katheryn O'Rourke, 2520 N. Bortz Street
Mariquita Royas, 2594 N. Bortz Street
Robert and Cheryl Blethrow, 723 E. Elizabeth Drive
Pastor Norman Franzen, 601 Santa Fe, Placentia
Bruce Patrick, 1733 N. Modoc Street
Ade De Blasio, 1501 E. Candlewood Avenue
Diana Nonnweiler, 1120 E. Buoy Street
Mel Schlueter, 2521 N. Delta
Jennifer Sterling 1601 E. Baldwin Avenue
Pastor Ron Martin 1250 Heim Avenue
Frances Walters, 2240 N. Shaffer Street
Vernon Brierly, 903 E. St. James Avenue
Chris Kelly, 2506 N. Canal Street
Judith Carrello, 340 S. Mere1et Lane
Paul Rogers, 3055 N. Valley View
Reasons for opposition: Density and incompatibility with surrounding area; traffic
congestion; only one entrance on Canal Street; safety issues; street parking concerns; lack of
adequate parking for residents; detriment to the community; other more suitable uses; higher
crime and domestic disputes; mixed-family development; lack of sufficient space between
buildings; building repairs; impacts on nearby elementary schools, residential
neighborhoods and city services; units being sublet or rented; lack of notification; no area
for children to play; Planning Commission Chairman opposed project; rumor that low-
income housing would go in ifnot approved; project would set a precedent.
PAGE 17
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
April 27, 1999
13. PUBLIC HEARINGS (CONTINUED)
SPEAKING IN FAVOR:
Karen R. Peters, 2525 N. Bourbon Street M-2, referenced petition submitted with 59
signatures of homeowners of a condominium complex on Bourbon Street supporting the
project.
Diane Golden, 385 S. Earlham Street
Barbara Eggert, 2525 Bourbon Street M-2
Clifton Chang, 501 Colorado Avenue #310, Santa Monica, representing former land owner
Reasons for Support: Proposed complex is attractive and will enhance the property; vacant
property has been a hazard causing more crime to single-family residences; there had been a
lot of police response for loud neighborhood, drug use, etc.; housing units and density was
significantly lowered; preferred alternative for neighborhood than the construction of more
commercial buildings; Canal Street entry/exit is safest alternative for traffic circulation, with
emergency access on Heim Avenue; commercial development would also generate traffic.
APPLICANT'S REBUTIAL:
Douglas Woodward, commented the price range for the homes would be from the upper
$100,000's to lower $200,000's. The proposed gate will provide an amenity that many of
the buying public prefer and helps keep traffic down on internal streets. There are 33 spaces
available for guest parking, in addition to the existing garages. There is also public parking
along Canal Street. He further explained the code requirements for parking spaces per
dwelling unit, noting there would be 23 spaces more than the code requires. The Police
Department was involved in staff review and did approve the project. The homeowners
within 1,000 feet were noticed and invited to attend a community meeting regarding the
project. If this project were commercial, traffic would be three times more intense than the
proposed use. They have met with representatives of the Orange Unified School District
(OUSD) relative to the funding. Schools fees will be paid and they are open to further
discussion on whether more than school fees need to be provided.
Mayor Coontz indicated many individuals referred to the project as being high density,
noting the proposed project is classified as low to medium density. An explanation was
requested. The Director of Community Development responded density could best be
explained by comparing it to surrounding neighborhoods. The proposed project is 13.7 units
per acre. The single family residential neighborhoods to the west of the project are
approximately 4.5 units per acre. The duplex development which front on Canal Street are
approximately 12-13 units per acre. The Chateau Orleans and the apartment projects on
Bourbon Street are approximately 17 units per acre. The density range requested for the
proposed project area on the General Plan is 6-15 units per acre. The Hoover/Wilson area
was built in the early 1960's and is approximately 20 units per acre.
PAGE 18
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
April 27, 1999
13. PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued)
Councilman Spurgeon asked if approved, do the CC&R's prohibit garages from being used
as storage units? Mr. Woodward responded the CC&R's will state that the residents must
first park in their garage before parking outside. The Board of Director's enforce the
CC&R's.
MAYOR COONTZ CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING.
COUNCIL COMMENTS:
Councilman Slater commented he likes the project very much, but felt this is the wrong
place for this project. There isn't anything internally within the project that he has a
problem with, however he doesn't like the street being widened to four lanes. The area is
already heavily impacted. The developer is proposing to increase the density seven to eight
times from what was originally built. Orange already has too high a share of apartments and
high density which are problem areas in the City. The schools are overcrowded and there
aren't enough parks and fields to accommodate the current population, especially in
established neighborhoods like this one. The project will create an odd ball lot on Canal
Street. Once Mr. Rios decides to sell, it will always be a problem property, because it wasn't
developed with the whole site. That is poor planning. From a realtor perspective, the
property is always going to be blighted. No one that wants to live in a single-family
neighborhood would ever want to buy that house. Eventually it would be developed into
more condos or into apartments and will not compliment the neighborhood.
Councilman Slater further commented the street widening is a bad idea and not necessary.
There would be the huge expanse of asphalt. There is no reason to eliminate a nice row of
Eucalyptus trees. If the current alignment on the street were kept, the Eucalyptus trees
would not have to be removed. He indicated if Council disagrees with him and moves to
approve the project, he asked Council to consider requesting the developer dedicate the land
and keep it as a landscaped median, at least for this time. He assured that the remainder of
Heim Avenue east of Tustin Street will not be widened for at least 20 years. From a realtor
perspective, developers have been standing in line to purchase this property. Greystone
recently bought the project and they will develop something at the site. If they don't,
someone else will be right behind them. The project would have a negative impact on the
surrounding single family homes. The residents on Bourbon Street support the project
because they are in a higher density project than this proposed project. The City should
provide what is for the best interest of the City; determine what is the best use of the
property; and what the proper zoning should be. Single family homes of 6,000 plus square
foot lots, would compliment the neighborhood. In his opinion the project is high density
and will not compliment the City of Orange.
PAGE 19
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
April 27, 1999
13. PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued)
Councilman Murphy commented he is uncomfortable with the internal circulation of the
property and it being a gated community in an ungated area. There needs to be some
additional thought to the project. He is unsure that it needs to go to the extreme of single-
family residences, but is uncomfortable with a condominium-type project. There are
examples around the City that have not been complimentary or contributory to the
neighborhoods. He indicated he does not want to tell a private property owner what to do
but provide some guidance as to what the City is looking for and cannot support the project
as it is proposed.
Councilman Alvarez concurred with Councilman Slater's idea to save the row of Eucalyptus
trees, as they are a part of the City's history which cannot be replaced. On a similar project
on Taft Avenue and the 55 Freeway, he indicated that he argued for wider streets. He
recommended the streets be wider and the density be lowered. He cannot support the project
but encouraged Greystone to stay with the project because they build nice projects.
Mayor pro tern Spurgeon expressed concern with the density. In an area already established
when existing lots are being filled with other uses, the City must be careful. Greystone
enjoys a very good reputation in their product. He agreed with his colleagues that he can not
support the project as it is now. He further supports retaining the Eucalyptus trees.
Mayor Coontz expressed concern with the traffic circulation and street width. The project is
in the low medium density category. What makes a difference in a good project is the open
space and other amenities and the developer has included some of these in the project.
Perhaps more could be done with the open space. It is not foreseen that Heim Avenue will
be widened in the near future, therefore, dedication would be involved..
Doug Woodward requested a 30 day continuance to return with a revised plan that addresses
Council's concerns. The dedication on Heim Avenue is approximately twelve feet, of which
they are open to dedicating to the City and would work with the staff and Council on the
curb and gutter placement. Mr. Woodward indicated his willingness to redesign the project
to be sent back to the Planning Commission.
MOTION - Murphy
SECOND - Alvarez
AYES - Murphy, Slater, Mayor Coontz, Spurgeon, Alvarez
Moved to send the project back to the Planning Commission for re-review based on
comments and input from this meeting and some major updates being done to the project.
THE CITY COUNCIL RECESSED AT 9:17 AND RECONVENED AT9:33 P.M.
PAGE 20
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
April 27, 1999
14. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS
14.1 Report from the City Manager and City Attorney regarding the Settlement
Agreement with Orange Resource Recovery Systems and Orange Disposal Services.
(A2100.0 AG-OI19.G.16)
SUMMARY: For approximately 1 ~ years the City has been attempting to negotiate a
resolution of various fraud and contract issues that arose with the current providers of City
trash services, ORRS and ODS. The recommended resolution is a three-way deal in which:
(1) Waste Management will purchase ORRS/ODS; (2) ORRS/ODS will deliver $9.3 million
to the City to resolve all fraud and contract issues; and (3) the City will enter into a 10-year
fixed term contract with Waste Management to provide exclusive trash services for the City.
The City Manager presented an overview of the key points of the proposal.
Two Proposed Actions:
. Settlement agreement with Orange Disposal Services (ODS) and Orange Resource
Recovery Systems (ORRS)
. Award of franchise to USA Waste
The proposed actions are recommended to bring resolution to the loss of funds from the
fraud case and resolve the issue of trash collection and recycling. This is a complex issue
that has involved many months of staff time as well and legal and expert consultant
assistance.
Background:
. Early 1996 Staff was proceeding to hire consultants to conduct a professional
review of the service levels and operating costs that it was felt needed analysis.
. Late 1996 Concerns arose that suggested a more serious issue may exist.
. Early 1997 The City hired Arthur Anderson, an accounting firm, to conduct a
fraud audit of the operations ofORRS. Within a few weeks Arthur Anderson uncovered
activity which included possible theft of recycling revenues.
. April 1997 Upon receipt of these findings, the Orange Police Department and the
District Attorney were given the information and a criminal investigation was begun.
The District Attorney, with the full time assistance of fraud investigators from the Orange
Police Department, has identified approximately $4.2 million in fraudulent activity at
ORRS, ODS, and the former Recycle Orange. Since the fraud investigation began, the City
has been working with ORRS and ODS to negotiate a resolution to all of the outstanding
contractual issues and the return of all monies. The City Council, after hearing from the
community through meetings and correspondence, set out key objectives they felt must be
achieved in order to satisfactorily bring resolution to these issues.
PAGE 21
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
April 27, 1999
14. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS (Continued)
Objectives:
. Ensure uninterrupted trash collection services
. Maintain low rates for the next ten years
. Maintain high quality services to the community
. Ensure compliance with State recycling laws
. Resolve contractual and fraud issues with ODS and ORRS which would achieve a
recovery of monies.
The proposals presented to the City Council are the results of extensive negotiations over the
last 18 months between the City Attorney, City staff, ORRS and ODS, and representatives
from two different trash service providers. The City employed outside professional
consultants and legal counsel to assist with the negotiations and proposes to the City
Council to move forward in a three-way agreement with USA Waste, ODS and ORRS, and
the City. The Resolution presented at this meeting best accomplishes the City Council's key
objectives and appears to be in the best interest of the community as a whole.
Laith Ezzet, Hilton Famkopf & Hobson, commented his firm was hired to assist the City of
Orange in developing a proposed scope of collection services for its next contract and to
assist in the procurement of the services. His firm works exclusively for public agencies
providing solid waste consulting services and has assisted over 200 cities to plan, evaluate
and implement their solid waste programs. He indicated they do not work for the waste
haulers, vendors, cart manufacturers, or truck manufacturers. His firm evaluated the existing
services, conducted community involvement meetings on alternative service arrangements,
and developed a set of recommended services for the new contract. They subsequently
prepared the draft contract that the City Attorney used in its negotiations with Waste
Management. The community outreach performed included a series of briefing and
workshops in January, 1999 with the Economic Development Partnership, Apartment
Owners' Association, Chamber of Commerce, and with the residents. A written survey was
also performed of the City Council's preliminary solid waste program goals in late 1998,
and subsequently conducted individual briefings for the Councilmembers with a result of the
community meetings. Some of the themes from the community outreach, which have been
addressed in the new contract, include the following:
Recognition among the residents of a need for a yard waste program where yard waste
would be collected separately from the refuse and recycling, in order to increase the amount
of waste diversion. State law requires the City of Orange and all other cities divert 50% of
all trash by the year 2000. Currently the City's diversion rate is 31 %.
PAGE 22
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
April 27, 1999
14. ADMINISTRTIVE REPORTS (Continued)
. Desire for automated services using rolling carts for refuse, recycling, and yard waste.
The primary reason was to increase the amount of diversion. It has been found when
rolling carts are used for recycling and green waste, the amount of recycling increases by
50% to 100% in the communities that do that. They also tend to increase the cost
effectiveness of the system and improve the community's appearance.
. Preference among the multi-family customers for mixed waste processing. Mixed waste
processing means that the multi-family customer would not have to separate their
recyclables from their garbage. Instead, that function would be performed at a
processing facility. This is because a lot of the apartments lack container space for
separate recycling containers.
. Desire by the apartments to receive bulky item collection, i.e. refrigerators, or some
other item collected at no additional cost. That has been achieved in the new agreement.
There was support for the automated collection program among many residents but
resistance from others who did not want to see any change. That is fairly typical in any
community they have been involved with, where there is a conversion from manual to
automated service. In most communities, most of the residents are very happy with the
program after the transition is complete and after they understand the benefits and are
familiar with it. There is a trend in the industry towards automated collection. It tends to be
more cost effective, significantly reduces work or injuries, and improves neighborhood
appearance.
In addition to an overall improved level of service, the new contract adheres to Council
priorities. One goal is to minimize monthly rates and ensure low term rate stability. This
has been achieved. The rates for similar services are among the lowest in the County, and
the rate adjustment method should ensure minimal increases going forward. A second
important goal was to minimize contract administration activities and costs. That has been
achieved. The new agreement eliminates the complex rate review cost plus process and
instead uses a rate adjustment index and a simple rate adjustment formula. Lastly, the
proposed rates, after the automated program is in place in January, 2000 appears reasonable
compared to those in other cities that have three cart systems with a separate automated cart
for refuse, recyclables, and yard waste. Based on twelve Orange County cities that have or
will have this system, including the City of Orange, the rate for the residential service would
be among the three lowest of the twelve and the rate for commercial service would be the
fourth lowest of the twelve. In summary, the City of Orange will be getting a
comprehensive set of services, a much improved state-of-the-art contract, and pay rates that
are at the lower end of the range for similar services.
PAGE 23
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
April 27, 1999
14. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS (Continued)
The City Manager continued with the presentation:
Complexities:
The matter before the City Council is not a simple matter of contract termination and
contract bidding for a replacement company to provide trash services.
. The City's trash collection contract with ODS ends in December, 1999.
. The City's recycling contract with ORRS does not end for nearly 8 years.
. The contractual disputes and fraud losses of millions of dollars with ODS & ORRS must
be resolved
. The City must get a new trash contractor by January 1,2000.
City's Alternatives:
. Issue a Request for Proposal to a variety of trash service companies to become the next
trash company for the City, while entering into a lawsuit with ODS and ORRS to resolve
the contractual disputes and the fraud losses.
. Approve the negotiated proposal with USA Waste which settles the contractual disputes
and fraud issues with ODS and ORRS. This proposal allows the City to recover monies
for the contractual and fraud disputes and provides for uninterrupted trash services that
meets the businesses and community needs.
The City Attorney reviewed some of the important aspects of the Settlement Agreement and
USA Waste contract. There are several other possible alternatives to the resolution before
Council. Some of the alternatives may prove beneficial to certain special interests in the
City. Staff was most interested in trying to find a resolution which was of the greatest
benefit to the community as a whole. The $9.3 million payment is contingent upon the City
entering into a contract with USA Waste, and not doing so would likely lead to a long,
contentous and lengthy legal battle.
Highlights of the Settlement Agreement with ODS/ORRS are as follows:
. IT PROVIDES FOR THE CITY TO RECEIVE A TOTAL OF $9.3 MILLION. The $9.3 million is
comprised of three general areas of recovery. 1) $5.1 to pay the City for fraud losses; 2)
ODS/ORRS will pay the City $3.0 million to resolve the contract issues; 3) ODS/ORRS
relinquishes all claims to about $1.2 million in a Wells Fargo bank account, known as
the gate fee account.
. ORRS GIVES UP THEIR REMAINING EIGHT YEARS ON ITS CONTRACT. The City is not in a
position to solicit bids for full contract services, absent termination of that contract.
It was noted that Jeff Hambarian and other persons who it is believed may have assisted him
in alleged fraudulent conduct are not released from future lawsuits. The City will pursue its
PAGE 24
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
April 27, 1999
14. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS (Continued)
lawsuit against Mr. Hambarian and other potential defendants for additional recoveries. The
City has already filed a complaint in Orange County Superior Court to begin that process.
He explained the City's civil case is solely to seek monetary recoveries, while the District
Attorney's criminal case could result in Mr. Hambarian serving a jail sentence and also
result in additional monetary recoveries. The two cases could proceed concurrently, or the
City's case may be stayed during the pending criminal trial. As part of the criminal case, the
State law does permit the District Attorney to seek monetary restitution for the costs of the
investigation and reimburse the victims of the fraud, which includes the City and its rate
payers. The District Attorney has seized several million dollars worth of assets from Mr.
Hambarian. One of the purposes of the seizure would be to try to satisfy some of the claims
for restitution.
Contract with USA Waste, dba as Waste Management of Orange
The City Attorney reported that USA Waste is a nationwide trash provider, currently
providing trash services to several neighboring cities, including Santa Ana, Tustin, and
Irvine. Waste Management which is more well known in Orange County was purchased by
USA Waste in June, 1998.
Highlights of the Contract with USA Waste are as follows:
. The rate the residential and business customer will pay will be less than what USA
Waste will receive for the trash services. The reason for this is that the City is going to
use approximately $8.75 million over the next ten years to subsidize both the residential
and business trash rates. As an example, it is currently proposed that residential
customers will pay $10.25 per month for trash service starting around the beginning of
next year. This rate is .82 cents lower than any other city in the County for a three cart
system and $3.00 lower than the County average. USA Waste will receive $12.50 per
month for the same service. The difference of $2.25 would be paid by the City from the
settlement money. It does factor in both interest earned on the money and growth.
. Rates for businesses and multi-family residential customers using the larger bins will
also be subsidized. Rates charged to bin customers, who are generally businesses and
multi-family residential complexes, would be reduced by $4.35 through the end of the
year. Bin customers will see the reduction on their City utility bill because the City will
be eliminating the trash services that it charges on that bill which amounts to $4.35.
For example, the rate for a 3 cubic yard bin customer who has a once a week pick-up
would go from its present total of $65.33 to $60.98. Beginning January 1, 2000 the
commercial bin rate will be $77.61, the fourth lowest in the County in the twelve cities
with a comparable system and approximately $12.00 lower than the County average.
PAGE 25
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
April 27, 1999
14. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS (Continued)
As noted earlier, the City will use $8.75 million from the settlement to subsidize both
residential and commercial rates. The proposed $2.25 per month subsidy for residential
rates will stay in existence through the entire ten year term of the agreement. The
subsidy could be increased or decreased minimally depending upon the growth in the
City. It does factor in both interest earned on the money and growth. Beginning
January 1, 2000, rates for bins picked up once a week will be subsidized $1.30 per
month going up to $7.80 per month subsidy for bins picked up six times a week. This
subsidy is also proposed for the entire ten year term of the contract.
. The current rate of $9.10 per month that residential curbside customers are now paying
will remain in effect through the end of the year. According to a 1998 survey, the
current rate is the lowest rate in the County for those cities using private trash
contractors.
Additional highlights
. The three cart system primarily for the single family residences would be introduced
between January pI and March 3lS\ 2000. USA Waste will provide mailers and
information to residents over the next several months. There will probably be
community meetings with respect to this also.
. The contract would be effective June 1, 1999 with a fixed term of 10 years. The City
has the sole discretion as to whether or not to extend the contract term.
. Two free on-call bulky items pick-ups per year for each residence, with a maximum of
four items per pick-up. The bulky item pick-up is also available to multi-family
residential complexes, with some limited restrictions. In addition, each multi-family
unit will get two coupons for free disposal of bulky items if they bring it to a designated
site in Orange.
. This is a fixed price contract. The complexities involved with the cost plus 10% contract
no longer will exist. There will continue to be a rate review.
. The contract guarantees that the City's residential and commercial rates will remain at a
minimum among the lowest third in Orange County for the life of the contract.
. There will be increased services at City facilities with an anticipated savings to the City
of $50,000 annually.
. USA Waste will assume responsibility for the City's recycling program, possibly
resulting in additional savings for the City.
. Bin customers may request one annual cleaning or replacement of a bin at no charge.
(Customers currently pay $20.00 for such a cleaning).
. Temporary bins and roll-off boxes must be supplied within 24 hours of request,
excluding Sundays. If not supplied within that time frame, the customer may request
another bin or roll-off box from another trash service provider.
. Other aspects of the contract include insurance, penalties for non performance, recycling
requirements, etc.
PAGE 26
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
April 27, 1999
14. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS (Continued)
In conclusion, this resolution would accomplish the following:
. Low rates and a proven trash service provider.
. Resolves significant legal issues and recovers the fraud and contractual monies that are
owed to the City's rate payers.
. Strengthens the City's litigation position.
The City Attorney noted that the City also negotiated with Athens Disposal for
approximately three months. While Athens Disposal proposed rates were competitive for
the County, they were higher than staff was willing to accept and significantly higher than
the rates Waste Management has offered.
Mayor Coontz stated this has been a very long and difficult process. When the contract
dispute with ORRS first surfaced two years ago, no one realized the impact it would have on
the City. When more information became clear that the City needed to make major changes
in the way the City contracted for trash services, those involved learned a lot about this
business. Throughout the process there has been a clear set of goals as follows:
. Ensure residences and businesses would have no interruption in their trash services.
. Recover any losses and use them to reduce future trash rates.
. Approve a new contract with high service standards, low rates, and straight forward
language that would protect the City from this sort of thing happening in the future.
The Council has been unified in their commitment to the three major goals. The proposal
before Council provides an opportunity to turn a real crisis into something positive for the
City. It is a result of months of very hard work. Appreciation was extended to the City
staff, the consultants from Hilton Farnkopf & Hobson, Harry Thomas, Public Works
Director, and to David DeBerry, City Attorney who took the lead in negotiating the
proposal, and to the residents for their patience as the City worked through the process for
over two years. The proposal meets all of the City's objectives and the professionalism of
the people from USA Waste was impressive. Where other companies balked at the City's
very demanding terms, USA Waste found a way to make it work. With the City's local
current contractor, the City always knew who to call when there was a problem. USA
Waste is a nationwide company. Mayor Coontz asked what kind of presence USA Waste
will have in Orange and someone will be readily accessible to respond to varying service
issues and calls.
Gaye Soroka, 1800 S. Grand Avenue, Santa Ana, representing USA Waste Services,
explained USA Waste Services is a legal entity name for the local hauling divisions in
California that primarily goes with the Waste Management name. The parent company is
Waste Management. They are committed to maintaining a local presence in Orange. Their
PAGE 27
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
April 27, 1999
14. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS (Continued)
company will be called Waste Management of Orange and Skip DeLaCuesta is the
community representative designated to be liaison with Council and with the community.
Councilman Alvarez asked what will happen to the existing employees of Orange Disposal
Services? He requested an explanation of the Performance Hearing listed in Article 6 of the
Agreement with Waste Management and how it will be handled during the term of the
contract? The City Attorney responded that Waste Management indicated the current
employees and drivers of ODS would be hired if they pass the drug screening and the
minimum requirements of Waste Management. Mr. Ezzet explained the Performance
Hearing is an opportunity for the City
to revisit issues and services after they have been implemented citywide. At the two year
anniversary of the agreement, there would be a public hearing where the City would review
existing services and any changes the City would like to see in services. It provides a
change to modify the new recycling or yard waste programs if they are not meeting the
City's standards. Looking at new technologies, any changes in law, customer complaints,
all of these types of items could be called part of the performance hearing. It is a flexible
type of arrangement that is not defined exactly to which items can be looked at. The hearing
provides for a chance to make sure services are provided the way they were intended and if
not, it provides a forum to correct them. The public would be invited to participate in the
public hearing. There are a series of liquidated damages regarding performance in the
contract that also give the ability to ensure things are done right.
Councilman Slater asked if residents will continue to be able to take a pick-up load of trash
to the MRF? Ms. Soroka responded that residents will still be able to use the MRF with
pick-up trucks for those kinds of items that are not appropriate to be picked up at the curb.
It was confirmed that basically anything can be taken to the MRF.
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
Speaking in favor:
Joe and Debbie Massey, 2211 W. Beverly
Blaine Molsberry, 3010 E. Palmyra Avenue
Pat Buttress, 3434 E. Westridge Drive
Reverend Jene Wilson, 1774 N. Glassell, Director of American Family Living
Raul Lopez, 880 Oak Park Road., Covina
Bob Bennyhoff, 10642 Morada Drive
Gaye Soroka, 1800 S. Grand Ave., Santa Ana, representing USA Waste
Speaking in a neutral position: Bruce Patrick, 1733 N. Modoc Street
PAGE 28
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
April 27, 1999
14. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS (Continued)
Speaking in opposition:
Ray Maggi, 6141 Orange Avenue, Cypress, Vice President of the legislative counsel of the
Apartment Association of Orange County
Ray Walls, 8541 Afton Circle, Huntington Beach, apartment owner in Orange
Coralee Newman, a principal of Government Solutions, 120 Newport Center, Newport
Beach, representing WARE Disposal
David J. Cordero, 12822 Garden Grove Blvd. Ste. D, Garden Grove, Public Affairs
Reed L. Royalty, 30205 Hillside Terrace, San Juan Capistrano, representing WARE
Disposal
Marilyn Silverstein, 3800 San Pablo, Fullerton, owns apartments at 243-265 Holly, Orange
Julia Araiza, 246 N. Holly St.
Questions:
Nick Lall, 6231 E. Mabury Ave.
Barbara DeNiro, address on file
QUESTIONS AND CONCERNS ADDRESSED BY THE PUBLIC AND RESPONSES BY THE CITY
ATTORNEY:
Q. Why do we have to do this now? Have you looked at other alternatives?
A. Yes, the City does have to do this now. Significant issues with respect to statute of
limitations have to be addressed. If not done now, the City has to go forward with a
lawsuit possibly against ODS/ORRS as well as Jeff Hambarian. If a two week
continuance were given and changes made to the contract, the City would again have
to negotiate with Waste Management, who may have to renegotiate with
ODS/ORRS. Other alternatives might benefit certain special interests. However,
they don't resolve the fact the City has an eight year contract with ORRS and the
contract and fraud issues. As a global solution it would not be in the best interest of
the community.
Q. Reference to the fraud going back to 1985.
A. The District Attorney's report clearly spelled out that the fraud went back to 1985.
A two year investigation with six or seven personnel devoted full time were used to
uncover all the fraud.
Q. Why are monies being split 50/50 with ODS and ORRS?
A. Under the settlement agreement, in exchange for an assignment of rights from the
Hambarians, the City has agreed that after it has netted $2.1 million in litigation
proceeds, it would split the additional revenues with the Hambarian families.
Ultimately, since the Hambarian family has to pay for what is alleged to be
fraudulent conduct of one person, they will also be victims in this too. The
PAGE 29
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
April 27, 1999
14. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS (Continued)
assignment of the rights is believed to be a very important tool and will strengthen
the City's litigation position.
Q. Why is the City allowing the new contractor to keep 100% of the recycling revenue?
A. The City had a previous arrangement that did not allow that. The recycling market is
very volatile and subject to great fluctuations. Waste Management takes that risk.
Q. Did the City get money from the Hambarians previously?
A. Yes, the Hambarians previously paid the City between $400,000 and $500,000 for
misappropriated recycling revenues. Including this amount, the total settlement paid
would be $9.7 or $9.8 million.
Q. How will the trash items appear on the bill?
A. The three line items currently on the bill which add up to $9.10 will go away and
there will be a single charge on the bill of $9.10. The City sanitation fee for street
and sewer cleaning, tree trimming, and those types of things, and unrelated to trash
service, will also appear on the bill.
Q. Questions regarding recovery of additional money?
A. That is the City's intent and the reason why the City is pursuing litigation against
Jeff Hambarian and other potential defendants.
Q. Concern with evergreen provision in the contract.
A. The contract does not have an evergreen provision. It is a ten-year fixed term
agreement.
Q. Suggestion the City should not use the settlement recovery to subsidize the trash
rates.
A. By law the City has to since the money was taken from the Sanitation Fund, it has to
go back to the Sanitation Fund. $8.75 million will go back into the Sanitation Fund
and will be used to subsidize rates.
Q. Why does the City only compare the three cart system rates and not all the rates
throughout Orange County?
A. When trying to compare trash rates, getting an apples to apples comparison is often
difficult. The three cart system rates was used as the most relevant comparison.
Comparing all of the cities, no matter what system they had, the City of Orange had
the lowest residential rates in the County. The commercial rate which now exists is
the third or fourth lowest in the County of the 23 or 24 cities that responded. With
the commercial rate as of January 1, 2000, fourteen cities will be higher and nine
cities lower. The commercial bin rates are also subject to fluctuation, depending
upon whether the trash in the bins is sent through the MRF.
PAGE 30
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
April 27, 1999
14. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS (Continued)
Q. What are the actual costs to USA Waste? Questions regarding charges on the water
bill?
A. The City is trying to get away from determining such costs as that is what caused the
current problem. The cost plus 10% is the kind of contract the City had before. The
City was concerned with getting low rates which was done by comparing rates to
other cities in Orange County. Currently, each water meter that has been serviced
pays $4.35 which is the MRF loan fee and a collection charge. The bill charged by
the commercial hauler will be the total bill for trash service; the $4.35 on the water
bill will disappear.
Q. How many free pick-ups will there be per multi-family unit?
A. There would be two free bulky item pick-ups per unit, with a maximum of ten pick-
ups total for the residential complex. In addition to that, each unit will get two
coupons. If the resident takes the bulky item to the designated site in Orange, USA
Waste will dispose of the item for free.
Q. Free bin cleaning?
A. One provision of the contract requires USA Waste to clean the bins every year. A
second provision allows the bin customer to either request a cleaning at no charge, or
to have the bin replaced at no charge, on an annual basis.
Q. What will happen to the average guy in the average house?
A. Over the next several months, USA Waste will be providing information both
through direct mails and community meetings informing residents what is
happening. The three carts will be a set size. However, if a particular residential
customer has a problem either with storage or size, other sizes can be requested from
Waste Management.
Q. Concern with unfairness of the subsidy of the residential vs. commercial.
A. During the first seven months of the contract, the subsidy on the commercial side
will be approximately $90,000 a month. On the residential side it will be $30,000 a
month. Once the three cart system is introduced, the residential subsidy is much
higher than the commercial subsidy. The reason for the higher residential subsidy is
because the residential customers are being asked to carry the burden of significant
new recycling costs with the new three cart program to help the City meet its waste
diversion requirements. The service remains the same with the commercial
customer.
Q. References made to contract administration and activities of staff.
A. When referring to reducing the amount of staff administration, there is a lot more
staff involvement that goes into the cost plus 10% contract as opposed to the fixed
rate contract with the producer price index (PPI) index. However, there still will be
PAGE 31
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
April 27, 1999
14. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS (Continued)
some needed review whenever USA Waste submits an increase based upon the PPI
index. Hilton Famkopf & Hobson has submitted an exhibit which shows how the
calculation will be used. The City will most likely retain an outside consultant to
review any requests for a change in the rates based upon the PPI.
Q. Has USA Waste been investigated thoroughly?
A. Waste Management, with their chemical waste arm, has had some problems
throughout the country with hazardous spills. However, I have spoken with
attorneys that represent the cities of Irvine, Tustin, and Santa Ana who have
negotiated contracts with Waste Management, who indicated they have not
evidenced such problems in Orange County.
Q. Will we still be paying for the recycling bins or new ones? Will we still be paying
for the MRF loan?
A. The MRF charge, collection charge, and recycling charges, when put together, add
up to $9.10. A $9.10 charge only will be shown on the water bill and the MRF
charge disappears. The customers have not been paying for the bins for some time.
The recycling bins can be kept or USA Waste will pick them up at no cost.
Q. What happens to the old trash cans and recycling crates?
A. They can be kept or thrown away. The cans will be picked up if set out in the first
weeks the automation begins.
Q. Concern that only monies should be collected that were related to the fraud. Why is
the City collecting more money than it appeared that the District Attorney found?
Settlement of contractual disputes.
A. The District Attorney identified approximately $4.2 million in fraud going back to
1985. In negotiating with the ODS/ORRS attorney's, the City went through various
calculations. Basically, what the City is doing with the $5.1 million fraud is
recovering the $4.2 million that was identified by the District Attorney and the
additional $900,000 is for other damages and interest losses. There are a number of
contractual disputes as to what costs were allowed and not allowed, having nothing
to do with the fraud. It was decided to resolve the contract issues for $3 million.
The $3 million includes approximately $550,000 that ORRS/ODS has agreed to pay
to the City for staff and consultant time involved in negotiating the issues. The $1.2
million in the gate fee account was used by ODS to pay landfill costs. There were
some disputes between the City and the contractors as to the ownership of the funds.
This has been resolved and ODS/ORRS has agreed that the City has full ownership
of the funds.
Q. Explain why Waste Management or USA Waste would retain 100% of the recycling
revenue?
PAGE 32
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
April 27, 1999
14. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS (Continued)
A. Waste Management now takes the risk of what the market will bear for the
recyclables. The City does not take that risk. This results in more stable rates.
The City Manager noted other questions and concerns had been addressed. Should the
Council approve the agreement, there will be a number of community meetings prior to an
automated system going into effect in January - March, 2000.
RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS AND CONCERNS ADDRESSED BY THE COUNCIL.
Mayor pro tern Spurgeon asked what type of oversight the City will have to make sure that
something like the City had to go over the past two years doesn't happen again. In terms of
the audit controls, what employees will be overseeing the contract and the administrative
details. He asked for the record for reassurance that this will not occur again.
The City Attorney responded to issues relating to financial aspects. The benefit of the cost
plus 10% contract is that it gives you a close look at the operational cost of the company and
you set the profit margin. But, as the City has found out, it is also subject to and there is
more exposure for fraud. According to the allegations that have been made by the District
Attorney's office, Mr. JeffHambarian entered into a number of fairly elaborate schemes
with other individuals which, not only the City couldn't catch, but the companies own
auditors didn't catch, and the other officer's in the corporation didn't catch. We don't have
and we don't care about that type of oversight anymore. The City is going to have rates
which are based exclusively on the producer price index which is a fixed index and is public
information like the consumer price index. The City will hire outside consultants to review
the rate requests that are submitted by USA Waste and will be paid by the City. The City
will not rely on the independence of any auditors that are paid by the trash company.
The Director of Public Works explained The City would be maintaining the same type of
operational oversight that has been done in the past utilizing the Sanitation section of the
Public Works Department, which consists of Code Enforcement Officers and a Field
Maintenance Superintendent, who would be inspecting the operations to make sure there is
contract compliance. There would not be some of the types of duties that were done in the
past to verify whether or not they have purchased particular items of equipment, that they
are in their inventory and that sort of thing which the City had to do before under a cost plus
contract. It will be geared strictly to the service that is provided on the street. The City will
have the Administrative Analyst that had been fairly heavily involved in the public
education programs, involved in the contract administration issues, to provide more
administrative assistance in that area. Public education will now be part of the contract that
the hauler will be providing. With the additional staff hours freed up from that change, we
will devote that to the contract administration activities. With that level of oversight, it is
far more than is provided in these types of contractual arrangements. The City can be
assured that of a good level of performance by the hauler.
PAGE 33
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
April 27, 1999
14. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS (Continued)
The City Attorney added there is the performance review which will be comprised of an
audit of the operations and the services that are being provided. There will be that audit that
is performed also. And, just as a general policy, the City Manager has instituted a policy of
auditing all of the City's contracts on either, if not every two years, on an every three year
basis."
Mayor pro tern Spurgeon asked for the record if the City is legally bound to go out to bid?
Ifnot, are we in solid legal ground by doing what staff is recommending for us to do?
The City Attorney responded yes, to answer Mayor pro tern Spurgeon's question. The law
relating to how local agencies solicit and secure trash service providers is in the Public
Resources Code and there are no competitive bid requirements in State law. Basically, it
gives the public entity a lot of discretion and room for securing a solid waste franchise."
Mayor Coontz noted there was an implication that the Request for Proposal (RFP)process
was not used? The City Attorney explained further that staff would not have spent any time
looking at alternatives other than an RFP process if it wasn't for all of the legal issues that
are facing the City. The RFP process is generally the best indicator of what the market rate
is. Unfortunately, the RFP process does not resolve the City's fraud and contract issues and
does not address the fact that the City still has an eight year agreement with ORRS, which
would have to be terminated to do a full RFP. ORRS has said that they would fight any
termination in court. It would bring a lot of uncertainty to the bid process and it would be
costly, even if an RFP were done.
Councilman Slater asked the City Attorney to explain the time necessity? The City
Attorney responded a lawsuit has been on file in the Orange County Superior Court for three
weeks to a month. The City has a very limited time in which to serve the lawsuit. Delays
will increase the City's legal costs and defendants who are being released in the proposed
agreement would need to be named in the lawsuit. If the proposed agreement is not entered
into at this time, an RFP would have to be done now in order to have a contractor by the end
of the year. Any significant changes would entail going back and negotiating the changes
with USA Waste which mayor may not impact the Settlement Agreement with ODS/ORRS.
The City Attorney explained there could be a situation where there may be three, four or five
businesses or residents utilizing the same bin. At today's rate, they would pay the contractor
$60.98 for the bin. However, if they have separate water meters, each one of the businesses
or residents would be paying an additional $4.35 on their water meter. In theory, a five unit
commercial complex could be paying $82 - $83 for a single bin; whereas a business which
only has one water meter might pay $65.00. However, in the new system, those types of
situations will get a break because their rates will go down by approximately $21.00.
PAGE 34
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
April 27, 1999
14. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS (Continued)
COUNCIL COMMENTS:
Councilman Alvarez commented Council's first responsibility is to make sure the City
recovers the money that was stolen and learn lessons from what has happened in the past.
The Performance Hearing is very important in that it forces the City to come back every two
years and review how the company is performing in a public hearing forum. Also important
is making sure the record keeping and the reports that the new company will have to
generate will be there, how they are to be read, how they are to be dealt with, either through
Finance or the Public Works Department. The cost of the audit if one is needed and the
monthly reports are very important. He is satisfied with what Waste Management has told
him relative to their hiring the current ODS employees. It is important to point out that this
is the biggest contract that Council will approve. Compliments were extended to Mr. Laith
Ezzet with Hilton Farnkopf & Hobson for an outstanding contract and the City Attorney for
doing a tremendous job. He is very comfortable with the proposed contract.
Councilman Murphy commented he looks at the proposed agreement as the resolution of a
long trying situation. The issue foremost in everyone's mind was to protect the ratepayer
and the taxpayers of the City of Orange. The City had to look at the rate structure, ensure
the service quality the City has come to expect which includes the employees that know the
neighborhoods so well already, and to make sure all misappropriated funds that were
outstanding are accounted for. This is the best situation is to move forward. With the
proposed contract, the accountability issue is very clear and easy to measure. A straight
forward water bill will eliminate many questions received. The contract being fixed with
regular review is also a critical portion of the contract. Ifthis had been a standard situation
of contracts expiring or being terminated with no other issues involved, he never would have
considered anything but a competitive bid process. The objective of competitive bid is low
rates and good service, and this is being accomplished with the return of funds now, rather
than waiting several years. Appreciation was also expressed to police officers involved in
the investigation.
Councilman Slater commented the last two years have been a nightmare on Council in
dealing with the trash situation. It has been an embarrassment for the City and a scourge for
the Council. The new company coming in with a ten year fixed contract will be much
cleaner and efficient. The City will also have the low and/or the lowest rates in the County.
He is very proud of that. He feels badly some people are being eliminated from the process,
and he knows other companies would have liked to have had a piece of the contract.
However, the contract and fraud issues have to be resolved. There is $9.3 million the City
would be turning its back on if it takes any other direction. Ten years from now, when the
City goes out for proposals again, he hopes the City can conduct an RFP process.
Unfortunately, it cannot be done this time around. He is very impressed with the way staff
has put the contract together. Appreciation was expressed for the City staff and their level
of professionalism.
PAGE 35
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
April 27, 1999
14. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS (Continued)
Mayor Coontz expressed appreciation to the City Attorney for all the work that he has
accomplished. The City's decision tonight is whether to approve the proposal or move
forward with the bid process and litigation. The decision is clear. The Council has
indicated what their desires are. Support for competitive bidding was expressed, however,
these are extremely unique circumstances which make the second option very risky. The
City is assured of what it is getting with the USA Waste proposal. It is a very detailed
contract which meets all of the City's objectives. Appreciation was also extended to Hilton
Famkopf & Hobson, who have indicated that the proposed contract compares well with the
industry, which is extremely important. Getting the highest level of service for one of the
lowest rates in the County is definitely a good deal. It is time for the City to put this behind
and move forward with a new contract.
MOTION - Murphy
SECOND - Alvarez
AYES - Murphy, Slater, Mayor Coontz, Spurgeon, Alvarez
Moved to approve the Settlement and Release Agreement between the City of Orange,
Orange Resource Recovery Systems, Orange Disposal Services and related parties and
authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute same.
RESOLUTION NO. 9099
A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Orange, approving a 10-year fixed term
contract with USA Waste of California, Inc., dba Waste Management of Orange to provide
exclusive solid waste handling services for the City.
MOTION - Murphy
SECOND - Alvarez
AYES - Murphy, Slater, Mayor Coontz, Spurgeon, Alvarez
Moved to adopt Resolution No. 9099, awarding a 10-year fixed term trash contract to Waste
Management to provide exclusive trash services to the City.
15. PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT - None
PAGE 36
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
16. ADJOURNMENT
MOTION - Mayor Coontz
SECOND - Murphy
AYES - Murphy, Slater, Mayor Coontz, Spurgeon, Alvarez
The City Council adjourned at 11 :52 p.m.
April 27, 1999
&Pf~dr;dtf-MZ
CASSANDRAJ. A CART, CMC
CITY CLERK
JOANNE COONTZ
MAYOR
PAGE 37