Anaheim City Council
June 9, 2026

ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING OF MARCH 24, 2026
The regular meeting of March 24, 2026 was called to order at 2:31 P.M. in the Council Chamber of Anaheim City Hall, located at 200 South Anaheim Boulevard. The meeting notice, agenda, and related material were duly posted on March 19, 2026.

MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Ashleigh E. Aitken and Council Members Carlos A. Leon, Ryan Balius, Norma Campos Kurtz, and Natalie Meeks. Council Members Natalie Rubalcava and Kristen M. Maahs joined the meeting during Closed Session.

STAFF PRESENT: Interim City Manager Greg Garcia, City Attorney Robert Fabela, and City Clerk Theresa Bass
ADDITIONS/DELETIONS TO CLOSED SESSION: None
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON CLOSED SESSION ITEMS: None
CLOSED SESSION: At 2:31 p.m., Mayor Aitken recessed to closed session for consideration of the following:

1. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Initiation of litigation pursuant to paragraph (4) of subdivision (d) of the California Government Code Section 54956.9: One potential case

2. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – EXISTING LITIGATION
(Subdivision (d)(1) of Section 54956.9 of the California Government Code) Name of Case: J.A.P.T., by and through his Guardian ad Litem Tania Tanda-Soto v. City of Anaheim, et al., USDC Case No. 8:26-cv-00433-DOC-ADS

3. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS
(Subdivision (a) of Section 54957.6 of the California Government Code) Agency Designated Representative: Linda Andal, Human Resources Director Name of Employee Organizations: (1) American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (General Management, Professional/Technical, and Confidential Units) and (2) Teamsters, Local 952
At 4:10 p.m., Mayor Aitken reconvened the Anaheim City Council.

MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Ashleigh E. Aitken and Council Members Carlos A. Leon, Ryan Balius, Natalie Rubalcava, Norma Campos Kurtz, Kristen M. Maahs, and Natalie Meeks
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON WORKSHOP: None
WORKSHOP: Fiscal Year 2025-26 Mid-year Budget Update
Finance Director Deborah A. Moreno reported that the adopted budget of $2.4 billion provides strategic core services that strengthen our neighborhoods and support our community. She stated that the budget is comprised of many different sources of funding. She shared that the City’s Enterprise Funds are used to fund operations for our City’s Water and Electric Utilities, solid waste City Council Minutes of March 24, 2026

and sanitation, golf courses and the Convention, Sports and Entertainment Venues and Special Revenue funds are primarily funds awarded to us by other governmental agencies for restricted programs such as the Housing Authority, Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), Gas Tax and Roads, and Workforce Development. She reported that Capital Project Funds are also primarily funded by other governmental agencies for restricted projects such as street improvements and infrastructure; Internal Service Funds are used to track costs for internal services such as employee benefits and insurance, fleet and facility maintenance and replacement, and information and communication services; and Restricted Funds and Other General Purpose Funds represent only 5% of the City’s overall budget and have similar restrictions in how they are spent. Director Moreno added that the remaining budget is the General Fund, or 22% of the total budget. She stated that the bulk of discretionary funding comes from the General Fund and is used to fund core services.

Director Moreno presented the General Fund Five-Year Forecast. She reported that General Fund sources, less the use of bond proceeds, were $611.1 million and uses were $675 million, a deficit of $63.9 million. She stated that in March 2021, the City Council approved a plan to issue deficit bonds of $138 million to address the structural deficit. She explained that the bonds were initially projected to last two years and were intended to balance the budget, preventing dramatic budget cuts. She added that when the Resort reopened, revenues rebounded more quickly than expected, and a portion of the bond proceeds remains, allowing us to balance the structural deficit. She noted that the adopted budget included the planned use of $63.9 million in one-time revenues, including what is left of these bond proceeds. She reported that the adopted 5-year forecast included Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) growth of 2.4% in FY 2025/26 slightly increasing to 3% in the out years. She stated that Sales Tax revenues were projected to grow 2.5% in the current year and Property Tax revenues were estimated to grow 4.1%, with both leveling to 2-3%. She added that personnel expenditures were based on the labor agreements in place when the budget was adopted, and other operating expenses generally assumed a 3% inflationary increase per year.

Director Moreno reported that the General Fund financial sources represent all sources of income available to support governmental services, including both revenues and transfers from other funds.

She stated that General Fund sources for FY 2025/26 were $611.1 million, with 73% of the revenues from taxes, including the big three revenues: TOT, Sales Taxes, and Property Taxes. She added that the remaining revenues include Fees and Permits, Business License, other revenues, and the draw on bond proceeds. She noted that General Fund financial uses represent the total obligations of the General Fund, including both expenditures and transfers to other funds. General Fund uses were adopted in the amount of $675 million, more than half of which is for personnel services.

Director Moreno explained that visitors to Anaheim pay a tax of 15% on their hotel, motel, and short- term rental stays of 30 days or less. She reported that the tax is locally controlled, with the City retaining 100% of the revenue. She added that the tax is collected monthly, and the City receives the revenue approximately one month after it is paid by visitors.

Director Moreno reported that the adopted TOT budget for FY 2025/26 was approximately $247 million, or 38% of General Fund operating sources. She stated that for the current year, TOT is projected to be about $252.1 million, or 3.4% over the prior year actuals and $5.6 million or 2.3% over budget and $2.3 million net of Lease Payment Measurement Revenues (LPMR).

Director Moreno reported that Sales and Use Tax, the second largest General Fund revenue, is applied to the sale of tangible personal property. She stated that Anaheim tax rate is 7.75% with the bulk of taxes going to the State to fund schools and other state supported programs. She added that the City receives one cent of every dollar spent in Anaheim. She added that taxes are collected by the State quarterly and paid to the City in two monthly advances and a quarterly true-up. She City Council Minutes of March 24, 2026

reported that Anaheim has a diverse and balanced economy. She noted that 30% comes from general retail and the remaining 70% is almost equally shared among the food, transportation, construction and business to business categories. She shared that while the tax base is diverse, there are weaknesses in the transportation sector, likely due to higher interest rates, however there is growth in general retail, food products, construction and business-to-business. She added that food products make up 20% of our tax base and are projected to increase 1.8% and miscellaneous is projected to decrease 5.0%, but makes up only 1% of the City’s tax base. She stated that the adopted Sales and Use Tax budget for FY 2025/26 was $115 million, or 18% of the General Fund operating sources. She reported that for FY 2025/26 the Sales Tax revenue is projected to be $1.8 million or 1.6% over budget at year end.

Director Moreno reported that all real and tangible personal property in the State is subject to a property tax equal to 1% of the value. She stated that the County collects the revenue and distributes it to local taxing entities, with the City’s share at approximately 20%. She noted that the balance is shared among other local taxing entities, including the County, Schools and special districts. She reported that the adopted Property Tax budget for FY 2025/26 was approximately $111M, or 17% of General Fund operating sources. She noted that Property Tax is the most stable of the big three revenues but the least robust. She stated that Property Tax is expected to be over budget by about $1.5 million or 1.3% due to secured property values.

Director Moreno stated that the remaining revenues make up 27% of the General Fund Budget. She provided an overview of the remaining revenues and the adopted budget of $172 million. She shared that the largest revenue source is fees and permits at 34% and the revenues are designated to pay for the services provided and cannot exceed the reasonable cost for providing the service. She reported 10% of other revenues are intragovernmental service charges. She explained that they represent fees for services provided by one department to another. She added that Business License and Property Transfer Taxes make up 5% of the total, and Refunds and Reimbursement revenue makes up 9%. She noted that the balance includes intergovernmental revenues, or revenue from other agencies, fines, forfeitures and penalties, and use of money/property. She added that the use of money/property makes up a larger share due to the planned use of deficit bond proceeds in the amount of $34 million.

Director Moreno reported that nearly half of the City’s uses go to Keeping Us Safe, which includes Police and Fire, and is typical of local government. She shared that providing the necessities (Utilities and Public Works) make up 6%, Ensuring Quality of Life 15%, and the support departments make up 7% of General Fund Uses. She stated that a small portion of the transfers go to Economic Development and Other Funds, but the majority goes to support debt. She added that a bulk of that debt is for Resort Debt, or LPMR that are determined by formula. She reported that the amounts are equal to a specified portion of TOT, and then Sales and Property Tax increments on Disney properties. She added that expenditures are divided into the following percentages: Police makes up 40% of all expenses, 24% for Fire, 10% for Community Services, 3% for Housing and Community Development and reflects the City’s ongoing commitment to funding homeless shelters and services, 7% for Planning and Building, and 7% for Public Works which maintains their maintenance of effort to continue receiving Measure M grant funding. She added that Public Utilities is at less than 1%, which is mainly for streetlights and support for the 3-1-1 call center, and the Administrative and Supporting Activities, which make up the remaining 9% of expenditures.

Budget Supervisor D’Anne Lee presented operating department’s programs and projects for the Fiscal Year in support of the City’s Strategic Plan. She reported that the Community Services Department worked with the community and artist Damin Lujan on a colorful mural located at Center Greens along the east and north-facing walls of the Youth Center and along the east wall of the City City Council Minutes of March 24, 2026

Hall Parking structure. She explained that the colorful mural represents Anaheim’s history, river, and wildlife and can be seen from almost all areas of the park. She added that a new restroom and adjacent picnic space opened in March at Rio Vista Park. The Department has improved and modernized park restroom facilities at Manzanita, Chaparral, Pearson, Riverdale, Eucalyptus, Sycamore, and Deer Canyon Parks by installing permanent stall doors to provide for additional privacy and security for park patrons. She stated that construction on the City’s 3rd splash pad at Brookhurst Park and is expected to be completed in Summer 2026. She reported that construction of the City's 9th skate park at Boysen Park is anticipated to start later in the year. The skate park was designed with the community and incorporates skate elements that residents requested, in addition to seating and shade structures and the first phase of a complete park renovation at Boysen Park. She stated that construction on the City's 69th park is expected to start later this year. Located along the Santa Ana River, next to Angel Stadium, this will be the first phase of the OC River Walk. Once completed, River Park will be 3-acres of recreational space with walking paths, a playground, outdoor fitness, benches, shaded picnic areas, a small amphitheater, native landscaping, and more.

Budget Supervisor Lee reported that the Anaheim Police Department and Anaheim Fire & Rescue play an integral role in keeping our communities safe and prepared in the event of an emergency.

She shared that Anaheim Police Department’s School Resource Officers (SRO’s) are organizing a parent workshop to include 1 high school, 2 junior highs, and 4 elementary schools. She noted that parents will receive information about their child’s safety at school and at home. She added that the Anaheim Community Services Department and local community groups (Neutral Ground) are also invited to attend and share how they can support parents and school administrators. She noted that the department continues to leverage the resources of the Real Time Crime Center to support patrol operations, conduct investigations, and provide long-term problem-solving solutions. She shared that the center utilizes personnel to monitor calls for service, camera feeds, Automated License Plate Reader (ALPR) hits, and drones, as well as leveraging the Department’s technology solutions and averages 200 calls per month and provides follow up investigative work for several of the department’s detective units. She reported that with the support from Congresswoman Young Kim, APD is expected to receive $500,000 in funding to equip the Anaheim Police Department with advanced technology to support the Real Time Crime Center and Department Operations Center.

She noted that the equipment will enhance officers’ ability to proactively respond to calls for service using information gleaned from various law enforcement databases, analytical software, and video in real time to deter and solve crime, provide and share real-time intelligence, and assist with tactical support to patrol operations and critical incident resolution. She added that the City’s Homeless Assessment Liaison Officers (HALO) focus on citywide outreach and enforcement efforts, partnering with a variety of non-profit organizations and our Community Care Response Team (CCRT) to provide long-term solutions for our unhoused community. She stated that the HALO team continues to collaborate with our Public Works Department and neighboring law enforcement agencies to conduct ongoing cleanups of illegal encampments to reduce visual blight in and around the City. She reported that the Anaheim Fire & Rescue Department’s Ambulance Program continues to demonstrate strong financial performance and positive community impact. She shared that ambulance-related revenues are projected to generate approximately 25% of the department’s FY 2025/26 General Fund operating budget, and the program maintains strong community ties through events including the Fall Festival, Fourth of July Firecracker Run, Spark of Love Toy Drive, and neighborhood CPR training—reinforcing the department's commitment to Anaheim residents year- round.

Budget Supervisor Lee reported that beyond the financial metrics, the Ambulance Program serves as a meaningful investment in the department's future workforce. She noted that ambulance attendants develop hands-on clinical skills alongside firefighters and paramedics and receive structured preparation for firefighter recruitment, including interview coaching and physical fitness training. She City Council Minutes of March 24, 2026

added that by cultivating this internal talent pool, the program ensures a sustainable pipeline of highly qualified, department-ready candidates who are already deeply familiar with the Anaheim community and the City’s high standards of care. She noted that construction of Fire Station 12 started in April 2025 and is scheduled for completion in Winter 2026. She added that Fire Station 12 will include two buildings: a 10,400 square foot main building to house the primary response apparatus, dormitories, and administrative offices; and the 2,274 square foot auxiliary building for staging, covered parking, and showcasing of Anaheim Fire & Rescue’s oldest antique apparatus. She noted that the department responds to over 40,000 calls for service annually, resulting in over 3,600 responses per fire station. Once completed, Fire Station 12 will help reduce response times, improving Public Safety and fulfilling Strategy No. 3 to Build Fire Station 12 as part of Anaheim’s Strategic Plan. She stated that the Community Risk Reduction Division has revolutionized its fire prevention efforts by transitioning from paper-based workflows to First Due, a sophisticated cloud-based inspection platform. She explained that by equipping fire inspectors with iPads, the department has replaced manual record-keeping with a real-time digital system that allows for immediate documentation of California Fire Code compliance, including the ability to attach photographic evidence of deficiencies for clearer educational outreach. She added that the digital pivot enhances transparency and efficiency for the business community; business owners receive comprehensive inspection reports and automated invoices via email within minutes of the inspector’s departure. She noted that the introduction of First Due supports Goal D (Foster a High Performing Organization), Strategy No. 7 (Assess current technology to identify gaps and needs within City operations to better serve the community) as part of Anaheim’s Strategic Plan.

Budget Supervisor Lee reported that the Public Utilities and Public Works Departments are focused on Enhancing Livability and Investing in Infrastructure through projects that foster community well- being and creating resilient infrastructure to meet the community’s needs. She shared that in October, APU opened the Sustainability Education Center (SEC), advancing the City’s sustainability, student enrichment, and workforce development goals. The SEC features interactive exhibits showcasing how energy and water are delivered to customers. The SEC was dedicated in October 2025 with the help of local elementary students from nearby schools. She added that following the dedication, APU has hosted a mix of student and school administrator tours, and high school mentoring and community open house events. She stated that ongoing collaboration with school districts has identified future partnership opportunities for students and teachers to learn about the energy and water industry. She noted that based on community input and in coordination with City departments, APU has continued making lighting improvements throughout the City. She added that upgrades have been completed along several major corridors, including Brookhurst, Euclid, Santa Ana Canyon, and State College, to improve major corridor visibility. She reported that APU also offers the Dusk to Dawn Program, which provides high efficiency security lights for single-family and multi- family homes. Distribution events are held in neighborhoods to make the lights accessible, inform residents of utility projects, and connect residents with efficiency and bill assistance programs. She shared that the Public Works Department will be installing a new 21-inch sewer main along the southern edge of Katella Avenue, between Harbor Blvd. and West Street. She noted that the project will include the upsizing of the existing northern sewer line from 21 and 24-inch to a 30-inch pipe on Katella Avenue between Harbor Blvd. and Walnut Street. She added that the improvements will eliminate seven high-maintenance inverted siphons and provide increased efficiency and capacity for the foreseeable future. She shared that the project will also provide a rehabilitated roadway, a new 4th westbound lane on Katella Avenue, between Harbor Blvd. and Disneyland Drive, new sidewalks, ADA access ramps, curb and gutter, pavement markings, and repainted curbs. She added that the project is currently in design, and construction is scheduled from the fourth quarter of 2026 to the second quarter of 2028, finishing before the 2028 Olympics. She reported that the Anaheim Litter Removal Taskforce (ALRT) and HALO team have collected approximately 149 tons of litter, equaling about 298,000 pounds. She explained that services for the programs are provided across a range of City Council Minutes of March 24, 2026

locations, including freeway entrances and exits, as well as other citywide areas requiring litter removal. She noted that the ALRT program reimbursement for FY 2025/26 is projected at approximately $200,000, reflecting the City’s commitment to cleanliness and its ongoing partnership with Caltrans. She shared that Public Works made significant progress during FY 2025/26 with the launch of a new Annual Palm Pruning Initiative, which increased the palm trimming cycle from every two years to every year. She highlighted the City’s efforts, noting that 6,160 palm trees are projected to be pruned, establishing an annual palm pruning schedule supporting the longevity of the City’s palm tree inventory.

Budget Supervisor Lee reported that through the Planning & Building, Housing & Community Development, and Economic Development Departments' key projects, the departments show strong alignment with the strategic goals of Investing in the Future and Encouraging Major Development.

She stated that construction is ongoing for Phase 1 of the OCVIBE project, with completion of the Market Hall, Concert Hall, Urban Park, Parking Deck D, River Road, and Cerritos Avenue anticipated by the end of 2026. Construction of Phase 2, which includes the Arena Hotel, Katella Entertainment Building, South Plaza, Parking Deck A, Meadow Park, and two pedestrian bridges, is expected to commence before the end of 2026. She shared that staff continues to work with Disney for the long- term growth and expansion of theme park and tourist-oriented uses in The Anaheim Resort area.

Anticipated projects in 2026 include an Avatar-themed attraction/land in Disney California Adventure, a pedestrian bridge over Harbor Boulevard, improvements to the east esplanade area, and related temporary improvements to shuttle and rideshare drop-off areas. She reported that the Housing and Community Development department continues to work to provide affordable housing options. She noted that the Azure Apartments (formerly Studio 6 Motel) permanent supportive rental housing community was completed in February 2026. The Azure Apartments project will provide 87 affordable rental housing units for extremely low-income families and/or individuals exiting homelessness. She reported that the My Anaheim Home Program, launched in late 2025, is a strategic initiative funded by the Anaheim Local Housing Trust Fund (A-LHTF). She noted that it is designed to bridge the affordability gap for residents who can qualify for a primary mortgage but struggle with high market prices or down payment requirements. She shared that the Program provides a $50,000 loan in the form of a "silent" second mortgage and is available to first-time home buyers with a household income up to 150% of the Area Median Income (AMI) for Orange County. She stated that the City has transitioned from extensive outreach to active intake. She reported that a new application portal is now live, allowing interested residents to complete a pre-application screening and join the interest list. Applications are currently being reviewed in the order received. She shared that the Economic Development Department continues its efforts to revitalize commercial corridors and support local businesses through its Storefront Improvement Program, which offers funding to help businesses enhance their façades, landscaping, and signage. She added that the Department is working to secure a major investment along the Lincoln Avenue corridor by negotiating the development of a new Porsche dealership on a vacant former redevelopment agency site. She added that if required financing is secured, the project will transform underutilized land into a high-value commercial anchor featuring modern architecture with freeway visibility.

Budget Supervisor Lee stated that as the City looks to transition into a new fiscal year and navigate uncertain economic and political conditions, we continue to leverage optimistic forecasts with potential risks when planning the budget. She shared that the U.S. economy continues to show resilience. Inflation rates have cooled and are settling at normal levels. Consumer spending continues to grow and has not shown signs of slowing. In California, restaurant and travel sales are experiencing modest growth, and taxable sales increased by approximately 1.7% year over year for FY 2025. She shared that despite the positive economic activity California still faces various concerns including a higher unemployment rate, a state budget deficit, and material increases in fuel costs resulting from the recent conflict with Iran, which adds further uncertainty as the fiscal impacts on City Council Minutes of March 24, 2026

state- and federally funded programs still remain unclear. She added that higher gas prices may also affect local tourism, as increased travel costs could discourage visitors. She noted that frequent administrative changes create a high level of economic and political uncertainty. The federal deficit continues to grow as federal spending continues to exceed revenues. She added that together with the possibility of a deflating technology bubble could set off a fiscal crisis and negatively impact the state budget. She added that housing affordability continues to be a growing issue for California, as home prices and mortgage interest rates remain high. She explained that high interest rates are keeping people in their homes and fewer homes are available for buyers. The median home price in November of 2025 for Orange County was $1.4 million. She emphasized that the Finance Department is dedicated to supporting the City’s departments' commitment to providing key public services to the community.

Director Moreno stated that TOT, Sales Tax, Property Tax are projected to exceed budget, as are other revenues; however, labor increases, operating expenses, and transfers out are projected to be higher by an even greater amount. She noted that the net increase from the five-year plan is estimated to be $12.1 million more than what was adopted in June. She reported that in the preliminary proposed budget TOT is estimated to be flat, while sales tax and property tax are both estimated to be higher than Year 2 of the adopted five-year forecast. She added that other revenues are projected to be higher, but they are largely fee revenues that have offsetting expenditures. Both labor and other operating costs are projected to be higher. She noted that staff will continue to review and refine those estimates as they prepare the proposed budget.

Director Moreno provided an overview of the budget calendar. She reported that departments submitted their proposed FY 26/27 budgets. She noted that at the end of April and May, staff will publish the City Manager’s Proposed Budget for review by the City Council, the Budget, Investment and Technology Commission, and the community. She shared that Story Maps will also be available for users to explore the proposed capital improvement plan online and see where projects are planned throughout the City. She added that the Department will hold Budget Workshops and visit neighborhood meetings in June, concluding with the Budget Adoption at the second meeting in June.

DISCUSSION: Council Member Meeks noted that the current budget outlook is significantly improved compared to the same time last year and expressed optimism regarding this year's budget projections. She inquired about the timeline for the LPMR payoff.

Director Moreno reported that the LPMR would be paid off between the third and fourth quarter of the next fiscal year with refined estimates before budget adoption.

In response to Council Member Meeks, Director Moreno clarified that the LPMR payoff is already incorporated into the five-year forecast and that the forecast will be updated to reflect a more refined payoff timeline.

Council Member Balius requested clarification regarding the difference between Uses and Expenditures.

Director Moreno explained that the Uses category includes both expenditures and transfers out, such as debt service payments. She clarified that as a result, the Uses total is broader than direct expenditures alone, while the expenditures category reflects only direct General Fund expenses.

Council Member Balius requested clarification on the revenue projections presented in the adopted Five-Year forecast.

City Council Minutes of March 24, 2026

Director Moreno confirmed the projections and noted that increased revenues would also result in a corresponding increase in LPMR-related payments or transfers.

In response to Council Member Balius, Director Moreno confirmed that the increase for labor costs were $9 million due to labor savings, with the contracts totaling $12 million.

In response to Mayor Aitken, Director Moreno clarified that the increased labor contract costs applied to the current fiscal year.

Mayor Pro Tem Leon requested clarification regarding the Anaheim Litter Removal Task Force reimbursement, asking whether the anticipated $200,000 reimbursement was solely from Caltrans or included contributions from other organizations. Director Moreno confirmed that the costs would be reimbursed by Caltrans.

Mayor Pro Tem Leon requested clarification regarding revenues were outperforming budget assumptions and inquired about the projected net revenue increase for the fiscal year.

Director Moreno confirmed that net revenues were up by $16 million, with most being fee-type revenues that have offsetting costs or may be restricted.

In response to Mayor Pro Tem Leon, Director Moreno clarified that overall revenues had increased slightly, but operating costs had risen by a similar amount, resulting in little net change. She noted that the primary additional budget impact was attributable to increased labor contract costs.

Council Member Rubalcava thanked staff for the detailed budget update and expressed appreciation that the City's financial outlook had improved compared to projections from six months earlier. She requested that the upcoming budget workshop include a discussion of potential revenue diversification strategies, noting the City's reliance on TOT revenues. She also requested additional information regarding public safety expenditures, including a breakdown of reimbursements received from Resort partners for public safety services, specifically information on the fully burdened costs covered by Resort partners and the portion attributable to reimbursed overtime, to better assess the extent to which service costs are being recovered. She expressed optimism about the City's improved fiscal position and hope that the positive trend would continue through the upcoming budget process.

Director Moreno clarified that the structural deficit remains and has increased; however, revenue growth has helped offset a portion of the City's rising operating and labor costs, reducing the overall budget impact.

Council Member Rubalcava acknowledged staff's clarification regarding the structural deficit and noted that previous projections had indicated revenues would decline, potentially resulting in a larger- than-anticipated deficit and the need for a budget reforecast.

In response to Council Member Maahs, Director Moreno explained that revenues from major development projects are not currently included in the forecast because the timing of those projects remains uncertain. She noted that those revenues will be incorporated as more information becomes available. She clarified that anticipated sales tax revenues from routine development activity, such as the Porsche dealership project, are already included in the forecasts.

The City Council took a brief recess at 4:51 p.m. and reconvened at 5:00 p.m.

INVOCATION: Reverend Lissa Smith, Canyon Hills Presbyterian Church FLAG SALUTE: Council Member Ryan Balius
City Council Minutes of March 24, 2026

Without objection, Mayor Aitken took the meeting out of order for a brief presentation from Orange County Commission on the Status of Women & Girls Commissioner Jolynn Mahoney.

PRESENTATIONS:

Presentation on the Orange County Commission on the Status of Women & Girls Commission
Orange County Commission on the Status of Women & Girls Commissioner Jolynn Mahoney provided an overview of the Commission's work and presented the Council with copies of its first annual report. She explained that the Commission, reestablished in 2025 by the Orange County Board of Supervisors, includes representatives from each supervisorial district and at-large commissioners. She reported that the Commission's inaugural report compares data and statistics on women and girls in Orange County with Statewide figures across various quality-of-life and well-being indicators. She noted that Orange County women and girls generally fare better than statewide averages, while emphasizing that challenges remain. She shared that the report was developed in collaboration with numerous county departments and agencies. She stated that the Commission's upcoming work will focus on issues related to child care, adult care, and associated costs. She invited public participation in the Commission's monthly meetings on the first Thursdays at 10 a.m. and thanked the Council for the opportunity to present the report.

Mayor Aitken thanked Commissioner Mahoney for dedicating her time to the Commission.

Recognizing Janis Heckel on her retirement as Executive Director of the Anaheim Community Foundation
Mayor Aitken recognized Janis Heckel for her over 35 years of service to the Anaheim community and highlighted her retirement from the Anaheim Community Foundation. She commended her leadership as Executive Director of the Foundation, noting her contributions to strengthening community partnerships, expanding access to services, and supporting children, families, and seniors throughout Anaheim. She highlighted Ms. Heckel’s previous service with the City's Community Services Department, where she oversaw a variety of recreational, arts, aquatics, youth, nature, and community center programs. Her accomplishments with the Anaheim Community Foundation included leading community needs assessments for youth, families, and older adults; helping establish the Second Act program for seniors; overseeing a $1 million federal grant that expanded youth mental health services; and growing the Anaheim Collaborative network to more than 30 nonprofit partners. She also recognized her role in organizing the annual State of the City fundraising luncheon and her recent support of the City's Anaheim Contigo initiative, which has provided emergency assistance grants to families impacted by immigration-related issues. She thanked Ms.

Heckel for her longstanding dedication and contributions to the Anaheim community.

Ms. Heckel thanked the Mayor and City Council for the recognition and expressed gratitude for the opportunity to serve the Anaheim community. She reflected on her career in community service and emphasized that the accomplishments highlighted were the result of collaborative efforts involving the Anaheim Community Foundation Board of Directors, City staff, nonprofit partners, and members of the Anaheim Collaborative. She thanked her husband, family, friends, and colleagues for their support throughout her career. She stated that serving the Anaheim community had been a privilege and noted that Anaheim would always hold a special place in her heart.

City Council Minutes of March 24, 2026

Recognizing City of Anaheim Retirees for 20 plus years of service Mayor Aitken recognized Anaheim employees retiring after more than 20 years of service, expressing appreciation for their long-term commitment and contributions to the City. She noted that their decades of service had positively impacted City operations, their colleagues, and the residents of Anaheim. She recognized Sergeant Brian Paqua, retiring after 23 years of service, Jose Leon after 24 years of service, Senior Administrative Analyst Julie Parker after 26 years of service, Senior Police Dispatcher after 29 years of service, and Electric Meter Supervisor Jose Leon after 31 years of service.

Recognizing Police Service Dogs "Rebel" and "Zax" on their retirement and service to the City of Anaheim
Mayor Aitken recognized Anaheim Police Department K-9s Rebel and Zax upon their retirement from service, commending their contributions to public safety, criminal investigations, officer protection, and community engagement. She shared that Rebel was honored for eight years of service, during which he assisted in the apprehension of numerous violent offenders, contributed to hundreds of peaceful surrenders, served as a primary SWAT K-9, and became the second undercover K-9 in Anaheim Police Department history. She added that his retirement comes with the promotion of his handler, Sergeant Nathaniel Cox. She noted that Zax was recognized for five years of service, including assisting in the apprehension of violent felony suspects, conducting hundreds of narcotics searches, and participating in community outreach at schools and public events. She acknowledged the dedication of the dogs' handlers and expressed appreciation for the role both K-9 teams played in protecting the community.

Chief of Police Manny Cid thanked the City Council for its continued support of the Anaheim Police Department and its K-9 program. He recognized retiring K-9s Rebel and Zachs, along with their handlers, Sergeants Mullins and Cox, for their dedicated service and contributions to public safety.

He noted the inherent risks associated with K-9 operations and highlighted the valuable role the dogs played in serving the community and supporting law enforcement efforts. He congratulated the K-9 teams on their retirement and expressed appreciation for their years of service.

At 5:23 p.m., Mayor Aitken called to order the Anaheim Public Financing Authority, Anaheim Housing and Public Improvements Authority and Anaheim Housing Authority, in joint session with the City Council.

ADDITIONS/DELETIONS TO THE AGENDAS: None
PUBLIC COMMENTS (all agenda items, except public hearing): Prior to receipt of public comments, City Clerk Theresa Bass provided an outline of procedures for public comments, notice of translation services, and a brief decorum statement.

City Clerk Theresa Bass reported that a total of 142 public comments were received electronically prior to 3:45 P.M. [A final total of 156 public comments were received electronically, distributed to the City Council, and made part of the official records]. – See Appendix.

Carol Latham, Community Outreach Specialist at the Muzeo, thanked the City Council for the recognition for Janis Heckel. She provided an update on upcoming museum activities. She announced a community "paint-out" event to help prepare gallery space for future exhibits following the conclusion of the current exhibition. She noted that the galleries would be closed until April 25 while new exhibits were installed. She also announced the opening of the museum’s spring exhibits, including Concrete Wave: Vans Off the Wall, an exhibition celebrating 60 years of surfboard culture City Council Minutes of March 24, 2026

and the legacy of Vans. She also announced the Spirit of '76 in the historic Carnegie Gallery, which will complement future America 250-related programming. She encouraged community engagement, participation, and support for museum activities and invited feedback from the City Council and residents on ways the museum can continue to serve the community and promote the arts.

Stephanie Mercadante raised concerns regarding the safety and quality of Anaheim's drinking water, questioning whether hydrant flushing activities conducted prior to water testing may have affected test results. She cited observations of hydrant flushing in Anaheim Hills and referenced turbidity measurements, requesting an explanation for the timing and purpose of the flushing activities. She also expressed concerns about PFAS contamination, specifically elevated PFOS levels reportedly identified at Well 51, and questioned when the City was notified, what actions were taken, and how the public was informed. She raised concerns regarding perchlorate contamination, its potential sources, and its impacts on public health. She questioned why residents and taxpayers bear the costs associated with water contamination remediation and called for greater accountability from entities responsible for the pollutants.

Mayor Aitken requested that Public Utilities General Manager Dukku Lee provide a written response to Ms. Mercadante. She stated that Anaheim maintains a safe drinking water system and emphasized confidence in the quality of the City's water supply. She also encouraged residents to utilize tap water and expressed concern about unnecessarily alarming the public regarding water quality.

Mike Robbins expressed concerns regarding water quality, citing reported PFAS contamination at Well 51 and questioning the City's response to water infrastructure issues. He argued that the City should prioritize proactive investment in infrastructure and public safety services rather than reacting to problems after they arise. He raised concerns regarding emergency services funding, particularly in Anaheim Hills, and criticized City leadership for what he characterized as insufficient attention to residents' needs. He urged City officials to prioritize public safety, infrastructure investment, and accountability in decision-making and concluded by emphasizing the importance of serving the interests of Anaheim residents.

Jeanine Robbins raised concerns regarding the safety of Anaheim's drinking water, citing reports of elevated trihalomethane (THM) levels in the Walnut Canyon Reservoir system and questioning the frequency and timing of hydrant flushing activities in Anaheim Hills. She shared that flushing conducted prior to water sampling could affect the accuracy of water quality testing and requested additional information regarding the City's water monitoring practices. She expressed concerns about PFAS contamination associated with Well 51, questioning when the City was notified of elevated contaminant levels, whether the well was immediately removed from service, and how residents were informed. She alleged that contaminants, including perchlorates and PFAS compounds, pose health risks and called for greater transparency regarding water quality issues. She criticized City officials and raised concerns regarding potential conflicts of interest involving Council actions and labor union support. She referenced the Festival project, public safety matters, and a prior police-related incident, urging City officials to prioritize accountability and compliance with applicable laws and regulations.

Cecil Jordan Corkern shared concerns regarding the content and themes of certain Disney films. He expressed a desire to discuss the concerns with the City Council. He shared his efforts to save money and expressed hope for the Council’s support.

R. Joshua Collins urged the City Council to prioritize housing, shelter, and services for individuals experiencing homelessness. He expressed concern about the number of unhoused individuals and households waiting for affordable housing assistance in Anaheim and called for greater investment in affordable housing, shelters, mental health services, and substance abuse treatment programs. He City Council Minutes of March 24, 2026

criticized excessive spending on corporate subsidies and other expenditures, arguing that additional resources should be directed toward addressing homelessness and housing needs. He also raised concerns regarding the proposed Festival development, citing evacuation and public safety issues, and encouraged the City to carefully consider those concerns. He shared his support for rent control measures and called for the release of information related to the death of Albert Arzola. He concluded by encouraging the Council to act with compassion and prioritize the needs of residents.

Jennifer Koon spoke in support of establishing an Anaheim Immigration Legal Defense Fund and urged the City Council to approve funding of at least $100,000 as proposed under Agenda Item No.

28. She stated that Anaheim's immigrant community has been significantly impacted by immigration enforcement actions and emphasized the importance of timely access to legal representation for affected residents. She encouraged Anaheim to follow the example of neighboring cities by partnering with qualified legal service providers through a formal selection process to expand access to immigration legal assistance. She described immigrant residents as an important part of the Anaheim community and urged the City to respond with compassion and support during a time of heightened need.

Kelsey Gordon urged the City Council to allocate an additional $250,000 to the Anaheim Contigo program and establish a separate $250,000 Immigration Legal Defense Fund to provide legal screenings, representation, and related services for residents impacted by immigration enforcement actions. She stated that immigration enforcement activities have caused significant hardship for affected families and emphasized the importance of access to legal representation and due process.

She shared her experience with the Orange County Rapid Response Network and described the challenges faced by detained individuals and their families and argued that current funding levels are insufficient to meet community needs. She requested enhancements to the Anaheim Contigo program, including a simplified application process and increased financial assistance, contending that current aid levels do not adequately address the economic impacts experienced by affected residents. She encouraged the City Council to demonstrate compassion and provide additional support to Anaheim families facing uncertainty and hardship.

Karen Hernandez read a statement on behalf of Anaheim resident Rigo Hernandez in support of the Anaheim Contigo program and the proposed Immigration Legal Defense Fund. The statement urged the City Council to simplify the Anaheim Contigo application process, increase funding for the program, and establish a legal defense fund to assist residents facing immigration-related challenges.

It explained that the current application process can be difficult for families experiencing hardship and that additional funding is necessary to meet growing community needs. The statement referenced the experiences of the speaker's family following an immigration enforcement incident involving a family member, emphasizing the importance of accessible support services and legal assistance during times of crisis. It concluded by requesting that the City Council simplify the application process, increase the funding for the Contigo program, and support the addition of the Legal Defense Fund.

Janet Brown, Senior Field Representative for Congressman Lou Correa, read a letter on behalf of Congressman Correa expressing support for the proposed Immigration Legal Defense Fund within the Anaheim Contigo program. The letter stated that immigration enforcement activities have economic impacts on Anaheim's workforce, businesses, and families, particularly in industries such as hospitality, construction, food service, and logistics. It noted that enforcement actions can disrupt employment, reduce workforce stability, and create financial hardship for affected households. The letter further stated Anaheim Contigo has provided valuable assistance and resources but argued that additional legal support is needed to address growing demand. Congressman Correa expressed support for establishing a dedicated Immigration Legal Defense Fund, stating that access to legal representation can improve case outcomes, reduce detention-related impacts, and help maintain City Council Minutes of March 24, 2026

economic stability for families and employers. The letter concluded that such a program would build upon existing City efforts and align Anaheim with approaches adopted by other jurisdictions.

G. Price raised concerns regarding the status of the East Anaheim wildfire evacuation study, noting that the study was intended to develop evacuation planning tools, evaluate evacuation routes, model wildfire evacuation scenarios, and establish significance thresholds for future development impacts on evacuation times. She stated that the study was originally expected to be completed in fall 2025 and questioned delays in its completion. She expressed concerns regarding the release of evacuation modeling data, alleging that information generated through the study had not been made publicly available despite public records requests. She alleged potential conflicts of interest involving individuals associated with both the evacuation study and the Festival project. She argued that approval of the Festival project should not proceed without incorporating the findings of the wildfire evacuation study and asserted that doing so could have implications for public safety and emergency evacuation planning.

Lana Erlanson, representing Radiant Futures and speaking on behalf of USA 250 Anaheim, presented an overview of the community-led initiative commemorating the 250th Anniversary of the United States. She shared that the effort is being coordinated through the Muzeo with participation from local businesses, nonprofits, schools, neighborhood groups, and other community stakeholders.

She stated that the initiative is intended to promote reflection on the nation's history, encourage dialogue about current community issues, and inspire discussion about the future. She highlighted the creation of a community events calendar and encouraged organizations throughout Anaheim to participate through educational, cultural, civic, and neighborhood-based activities. She noted that planning efforts are already underway, including previous partnership events and upcoming exhibits and programs, and invited City Council support as Anaheim joins communities nationwide in commemorating the nation's 250th anniversary.

Douglas Robbins expressed concerns regarding wildfire evacuation safety and the project's potential impact on emergency evacuation conditions. He stated that residents have experienced significant traffic congestion during past evacuation events and argued that existing traffic and evacuation modeling may not accurately reflect real-world conditions. He questioned how the City could proceed with consideration of the project before completion and public review of the City's wildfire evacuation study. He noted that many residents had previously submitted comments and raised similar concerns regarding evacuation safety. He also expressed concerns about public confidence in the decision- making process, citing perceived coordination between project stakeholders and labor organizations.

He urged the Council to ensure that all relevant safety studies are completed and publicly reviewed, that decisions are based on transparent information, and that public safety remains the primary consideration before moving forward with the project.

Shelly Robbins spoke in support of the appeal of the Festival project and objected to the recommendation to deny it. She stated that the appeal raised significant concerns related to public safety, wildfire evacuation, traffic congestion, and the adequacy of the environmental review process.

She argued that evacuation modeling does not adequately reflect real-world traffic conditions and existing roadway bottlenecks. She also noted that the City's wildfire evacuation study had not yet been released and questioned whether the Council should proceed with a final decision before reviewing its findings. She stated that more than 300 residents had submitted opposition comments and expressed concerns regarding transparency, noting that a public records request she submitted regarding the project remained pending. She requested that any final action on the project be delayed until the wildfire evacuation study is completed, public records have been released, and residents have had an opportunity to review the information. She referenced concerns regarding public confidence in the decision-making process and requested that Council Member Natalie Rubalcava City Council Minutes of March 24, 2026

recuse herself from consideration of the project. She concluded by urging the Council to fully address the outstanding safety and transparency concerns before making a final decision and expressed support for the Arzola family.

Greg Falcioni expressed concerns about wildfire evacuation safety and traffic congestion. Drawing on his experience during a previous wildfire evacuation, he described significant traffic gridlock that limited residents' ability to leave the neighborhood and stated that additional residential development could worsen evacuation conditions. He urged the Council to postpone any decision on the project until the wildfire evacuation study is completed and reviewed.

Willie Sweet spoke in opposition to the proposed development, expressing concerns about neighborhood safety and its impact on an established community with many senior residents. He noted that many residents have lived in the area for decades and that the neighborhood has a stable, multigenerational character. He stated that residents are concerned about increased traffic and mobility challenges associated with the proposed project, particularly for seniors who regularly walk within the neighborhood. He urged the City Council to reconsider the development proposal and take into account the concerns of longtime residents regarding neighborhood safety and quality of life.

LuisAndres Perez read a letter on behalf of Assemblymember Avelino Valencia expressing support for the proposed immigration legal defense component within the Anaheim Contigo program. The letter stated that there is a growing need for immigration-related legal services in Anaheim and emphasized that access to legal representation helps protect families, promote stability, and ensure due process. Assemblymember Valencia expressed support for partnering with qualified nonprofit legal service providers and described the proposal as an investment in the well-being of Anaheim residents. The letter urged the City Council to approve the item and move forward with implementation of the expanded services.

Betty Farnsworth urged the City Council to reconsider and rehear the Festival project, citing concerns regarding wildfire safety, evacuation planning, and the adequacy of the review process. She noted that the City's wildfire evacuation study had not yet been released and questioned whether decisions regarding the project should proceed before the study is available for public review. She raised concerns regarding comments made during prior Council discussions, including references to labor considerations and housing development in various districts. She argued that the proposed project site differs from other development locations because it is situated in a very high fire severity zone and contended that alternative sites should be considered. She referenced past wildfire events, including the Canyon fires, and expressed concerns about ember-driven fire spread and evacuation challenges. She argued that the proposed residential development could increase risks in the area and urged the Council to prioritize public safety and reconsider approval of the project.

Tannis Soto addressed the City Council regarding Agenda Item No. 24 and stated that she was concerned to see the item presented with a recommendation to deny the request for rehearing. She expressed concerns regarding wildfire risk, evacuation capacity, and traffic congestion in Anaheim Hills, arguing that additional residential development could worsen evacuation conditions during an emergency. She referenced prior discussions regarding wildfire mitigation measures and questioned whether proposed traffic mitigation strategies would adequately address existing gridlock concerns.

She suggested that future developers should contribute funding toward wildfire prevention and safety improvements.

Justin Massey, representing Senator Tom Umberg, read a letter in support of Agenda Item 28, which would provide additional funding for the Anaheim Contigo program and establish an immigration legal defense component. The letter stated that Anaheim Contigo has provided critical assistance to families experiencing financial hardship related to immigration enforcement actions and described the City Council Minutes of March 24, 2026

program as an important resource for affected residents. The letter further expressed support for creating a legal defense component to provide legal representation and educational resources to individuals facing immigration proceedings. Senator Umberg's letter emphasized the importance of access to legal counsel and due process, arguing that legal representation can significantly affect case outcomes and help families remain together. The letter urged the City Council to support the proposed funding and expansion of services.

Joni Gaynor opposed the Festival project and expressed concerns regarding wildfire safety, evacuation planning, and the decision-making process. The speaker noted that the project site is located within a Wildland-Urban Interface (WUI) and a high fire severity zone, arguing that conditions in District 6 differ significantly from other areas of the city and should not be compared when evaluating housing development needs. She questioned the Council's approval of the project while the City's wildfire evacuation study remained incomplete, asserting that decisions affecting public safety should be based on a full understanding of evacuation risks. She raised concerns about the timing and conduct of the public hearing process, arguing that residents were not provided sufficient opportunity to comment on developments that occurred during Council deliberations. She noted that the Mayor and Council Member Meeks voted against the project and expressed concerns regarding statements made during prior Council discussions about the use of union labor. She questioned whether factors unrelated to land-use planning and public safety influenced the decision and urged the Council to reconsider the project approval.

Michael Wakely addressed concerns regarding the proposed Festival project, wildfire safety, and housing requirements. He stated that concerns raised by Council Members regarding evacuation routes and infrastructure remain unresolved and argued that the project site's location in a high fire hazard area warrants additional scrutiny. He explained that State housing law requires the City to plan and zone for housing units rather than construct a specific number of homes and contended that Anaheim has already met its housing planning obligations through existing development capacity, including projects in the Platinum Triangle area. He argued that roadway infrastructure and evacuation capacity have not been sufficiently improved to support additional development in the area. He questioned the need for the project given the perceived availability of alternative housing sites and urged the Council to prioritize public safety and resident interests when considering future development decisions.

Steve Herr addressed the City Council regarding the Festival project and expressed concerns about its potential impact on traffic and evacuation safety in Anaheim Hills. He stated that many residents had previously raised concerns about adding a large residential development and the resulting increase in vehicle traffic on roads already perceived as congested during emergency situations. He argued that roads have practical limits similar to buildings and public venues and contended that additional development could exceed the area's ability to safely accommodate evacuation traffic. He referenced the Council's prior decision regarding the Deer Canyon project and urged the Council to reject the Festival project, citing public safety and evacuation concerns as the primary reasons for opposition.

Linda Hurley spoke regarding the proposed Festival project and expressed strong concerns about wildfire evacuation safety and the Council's decision-making process. She thanked the Mayor and the Council Members who voted against the project at a previous meeting and stated that she believes public safety concerns raised by residents have not been adequately addressed. She argued that residents have repeatedly voiced concerns about wildfire risks, evacuation capacity, and the potential impacts of additional development in Anaheim Hills. She asserted that the Council should prioritize resident safety when considering development proposals and criticized what she perceived as greater consideration being given to other interests than to community concerns. She concluded by City Council Minutes of March 24, 2026

stating that residents intend to remain engaged in the issue and participate in future elections to hold elected officials accountable for their decisions regarding the project and public safety matters.

Navreet Singh Dhaliwal spoke in support of Agenda Item 28 and advocated for expanded legal assistance for immigrant residents. He emphasized the challenges individuals face when navigating complex legal systems, particularly those affected by immigration enforcement actions, and argued that access to legal representation, information, and language assistance is critical to ensuring due process. He stated that legal support services help residents understand and exercise their rights and can strengthen trust between community members and public institutions. He encouraged the City to continue investing in and expanding legal assistance programs, asserting that access to due process and legal representation should be available to all residents regardless of immigration status or financial circumstances.

Teresa Ploum urged the City Council to deny approval of the Festival project, citing concerns about wildfire evacuation safety and the absence of a completed wildfire evacuation study. She argued that the project should not be approved until the study is released and considered as part of the environmental review process, asserting that decisions should be based on complete information regarding potential safety impacts. She emphasized that Anaheim Hills is designated as a high fire hazard area and stated that wildfire risks, evacuation challenges, and emergency response conditions differ from those in other parts of the City. She explained that approving additional high- density residential development without fully understanding these impacts could place residents at greater risk. She also expressed support for the Arzola family and called for the release of body-worn camera footage related to an officer-involved shooting, stating that transparency is important to maintaining public trust.

Vern Nelson discussed an ongoing citizen-led initiative to place a rent control measure on the ballot in Anaheim. He stated that the proposed initiative would limit annual rent increases, establish eviction protections, and create a renters’ board to help enforce housing regulations and resolve disputes between landlords and tenants. He noted that supporters are currently gathering signatures to qualify the measure for the ballot and encouraged community participation. He expressed support for increased funding for Anaheim Contigo and the proposed immigration legal defense fund. He shared support for the Arzola family’s request for information related to an officer-involved shooting and reiterated opposition to the Festival project, citing safety concerns and a lack of affordability. He promoted the Anaheim Rent Stabilization, Eviction Restrictions, and Mobile Home Park Closure Regulations Initiative, which supporters are seeking to place on the ballot. He stated that the measure would limit annual rent increases, establish eviction protections, and create a renters’ board to enforce housing regulations and help resolve disputes between landlords and tenants. He argued that the initiative would provide tenants with greater access to information about their rights and a local mechanism for addressing housing concerns without the expense of legal representation.

Glen Kim urged the City Council to reconsider its support for the Festival apartment project, citing concerns related to wildfire evacuation, traffic congestion, insurance costs, and environmental review.

He shared his personal experience during a previous wildfire event and argued that the project would increase evacuation times in a high fire hazard area and could worsen existing traffic conditions during emergencies. He expressed concerns that regional commuter traffic was not fully accounted for in traffic analyses and suggested that additional residential density in the area could contribute to rising homeowner insurance costs. He questioned aspects of the project's environmental review and stated that alternative development locations should be considered before approving housing in a high fire-risk area. He requested that the City Council reverse their support for the project and prioritize resident safety concern.

City Council Minutes of March 24, 2026

Grace McGee expressed continued concerns regarding wildfire evacuation and public safety in Anaheim Hills, urging the City Council to reconsider approval of the Festival project. She stated that infrastructure and evacuation capacity should be addressed before additional housing development is approved in the area. She emphasized Anaheim Hills' wildfire risks, citing its location near the Santa Ana Canyon and comparing local conditions to recent major California wildfires. She argued that Anaheim Hills has already accommodated significant residential development and questioned the need for additional housing in the area. She expressed disappointment with Council Members who supported the project and urged them to prioritize resident safety and reconsider their votes.

John L. Mazzarella urged council members who previously supported the Festival project to reconsider their votes, arguing that the project would create safety risks for Anaheim Hills residents and negatively affect community trust throughout the City. He expressed concern that approving the project could deepen divisions among neighborhoods and lead to broader impacts across Anaheim.

He contended that Anaheim Hills faces unique wildfire and evacuation challenges that differ from conditions in other districts and argued that these factors should be given greater consideration in development decisions. He questioned the necessity of approving the project, stating that alternative housing sites exist elsewhere in the City and urging the Council to prioritize public safety and community concerns before moving forward.

Chuck Hill stated that a formal request had been submitted to the City Attorney asking that Council Member Natalie Rubalcava recuse herself from voting on matters related to the Festival Center project. He alleged that Council Member Rubalcava's prior statements, political support, and relationships with labor organizations created the appearance of bias regarding the project. He criticized the Council's prior discussions of wildfire safety and evacuation issues, alleging that portions of the deliberations were coordinated or influenced by outside interests. He raised concerns regarding Council Member Norma Kurtz's comments about evacuation conditions in her district and argued that comparisons between other districts and Anaheim Hills were not appropriate due to differing wildfire risks. He urged the Council to consider potential conflicts of interest and public trust concerns before proceeding with any final action on the Festival Center project.

Dean Gaynor thanked the Mayor and council members who opposed the Festival project and urged the remaining council members to reverse their support. He expressed concerns about wildfire evacuation safety, citing personal experience during the 2017 Canyon Fire when evacuation routes were heavily congested and it took hours to leave the area. He argued that adding the proposed apartment development would significantly increase traffic and evacuation risks in a designated high- fire zone. He stated that public safety should take precedence over development interests and requested that the Council deny the project approval. He thanked the retiring police canines and their handlers for their service to the community.

Penelope L urged the City Council to establish an immigration legal defense fund of at least $250,000 and partner with community-based legal service providers to ensure timely assistance for residents facing immigration enforcement actions. She stated that immigration raids have caused significant hardship for Anaheim families, citing examples of family separation, loss of housing, and community displacement. She emphasized that access to legal representation during the first 24 hours of detention is critical but often unavailable due to limited resources. She noted that neighboring cities have implemented similar legal defense programs and argued that increased funding is needed to help Anaheim residents access due process and legal support during immigration proceedings.

Natalia Ocho urged the City Council to establish an immigration legal defense fund of at least $100,000, stating that immigration cases can cost thousands of dollars and that Anaheim residents are directly affected by immigration enforcement actions. She shared personal observations of City Council Minutes of March 24, 2026

enforcement operations and expressed concerns about their impact on community members. She highlighted community-led efforts to provide support and resources to affected families and argued that the City should similarly invest in legal assistance for residents facing immigration proceedings.

She encouraged the Council to take action to support immigrant families and also called for accountability and transparency regarding the death of Albert Arzola.

Dave Duran criticized City leadership for allegedly disregarding resident concerns and called for the release of the names of officers involved in the death of Albert Arzola. He also expressed support for establishing an immigration legal defense fund and raised concerns about homelessness and unhoused deaths in Anaheim. He referenced California Senate Bill 707, urging the City to comply with public participation requirements that would allow residents, including those unable to attend meetings in person, to participate remotely in council proceedings. He called for greater transparency, accountability, and public engagement in City government.

Julie Filppi raised concerns about wildfire evacuation planning related to the proposed Festival project, referencing the City’s Know Your Way evacuation program and evacuation routes directing residents to use Santa Ana Canyon Road. She argued that project traffic analyses did not adequately account for existing evacuation patterns and questioned assumptions regarding resident evacuation behavior during wildfire emergencies. She expressed concerns about the project's compliance with environmental review requirements and the adequacy of evacuation planning in the area. She criticized the proposed addition of high-density housing in a high-fire-risk area and questioned the effectiveness of current evacuation strategies, noting that the City had commissioned a separate wildfire evacuation study that had not yet been released. She urged the City Council not to approve the project.

Sandra De Anda spoke in support of establishing an immigration legal defense fund and thanked Mayor Pro Tem Leon for supporting the effort. She stated that the organization has received thousands of calls related to immigration enforcement activity in Orange County and described the challenges faced by affected families. She shared an example of an elderly Anaheim resident and asylum seeker who experienced detention and ultimately chose to leave the country rather than risk further detention. She emphasized the human impact of immigration enforcement actions and urged the Council to support the proposed legal defense fund to help residents access legal assistance and remain connected to their families and communities.

Andrew Winger urged the City to provide the Arzola family with closure by releasing information related to the case they have been raising at council meetings. He also requested that Council Member Rubalcava recuse herself from further consideration of the Festival project, citing concerns about the appearance of bias based on campaign contributions, interactions involving labor representatives, and actions taken during the project approval process. He argued that these circumstances could undermine public confidence in the fairness of the decision-making process and stated that recusal would help preserve the integrity of the proceedings.

Wendy Sowski urged the Council to grant a rehearing on the Festival project, arguing that the City approved the development before completing and releasing its comprehensive wildfire evacuation study. She questioned whether sufficient information was available to fully assess evacuation risks, noting that the proposed development would add housing and traffic along key evacuation routes currently under evaluation. She distinguished between the project-level evacuation analysis and the broader citywide wildfire evacuation study, emphasizing the importance of understanding cumulative impacts during emergency conditions. She requested that the Council delay further action until the citywide study is completed and reviewed, stating that doing so would be a reasonable and responsible step to ensure public safety and informed decision-making. She concluded by expressing City Council Minutes of March 24, 2026

concerns about wildfire risk and increased traffic congestion affecting evacuation capacity in Anaheim Hills.

Andrea Phelps expressed concerns about the proposed Festival project, arguing that high-density residential developments are generally unsuitable for very high fire severity zones due to evacuation and public safety considerations. She contended that the Festival project is a dense development despite being market-rate housing and asserted that it may be denser than the previously proposed Deer Canyon project when evaluated by development footprint. She raised concerns regarding wildfire evacuation capacity, increased traffic, and higher vehicle miles traveled, while also noting that retaining the site's commercial uses could reduce travel demand for local residents. She emphasized that different districts have distinct needs and risks and urged the Council to consider the unique wildfire and transportation challenges of Anaheim Hills when evaluating housing developments in high fire hazard areas.

Engler Fish Phelps expressed opposition to the Festival project, alleging that developers often use long-term strategies to increase profitability through rent increases, vacancy practices, and redevelopment of underperforming properties. He asserted that project supporters associated with the developer presented themselves as independent community members and questioned commitments made regarding labor participation. He speculated that future rent increases could affect existing commercial tenants and expressed concern that additional residential development could occur on the site in the future if commercial spaces become vacant. He urged the Council to consider these concerns when evaluating the project.

Erik Garcia, Organizing and Program Director with Órale, spoke in support of expanding the Anaheim Contigo program to include immigration legal services. He drew from personal experience in immigration proceedings as a child, and emphasized the importance of access to trusted legal representation for individuals navigating the immigration system. He stated that many immigrants lack access to affordable legal counsel and argued that legal assistance can significantly affect case outcomes. He urged the City to invest in legal services through Anaheim Contigo, stating that such support would help immigrant residents navigate legal challenges, strengthen community trust, and demonstrate the City's commitment to supporting vulnerable residents during a period of increased immigration enforcement.

Mark Fortezzo spoke in opposition to the proposed Festival project. He described the area's growth over several decades and noted that Anaheim Hills experiences significant traffic congestion due to its location along regional commuter routes. He shared his personal experience living through multiple wildfires and expressed concerns about evacuation challenges and public safety in the area.

He stated that existing traffic conditions and wildfire risks should be carefully considered before approving additional development that could increase population density and place further strain on evacuation routes. He urged Council Members to visit the area and observe existing traffic conditions firsthand before making a decision on the project and requested that the Council prioritize resident safety and community impacts when considering the proposal.

Carolina Mendez spoke in support of establishing an immigration legal defense fund of at least $250,000. Drawing on her professional experience and personal family history navigating the immigration system, she described the fear and uncertainty many immigrant families face due to immigration enforcement actions. She urged the Council to continue strengthening community support programs and emphasized that immigrant families often hesitate to seek assistance because of fear and distrust of institutions. She encouraged the Council to focus on reducing barriers to access rather than concerns about potential misuse of resources. She expressed support for expanding Anaheim Contigo services and requested that the City approach future discussions with City Council Minutes of March 24, 2026

trust, compassion, and a commitment to supporting immigrant families and ensuring they feel valued within the community.

Amina Fields, Senior Managing Attorney and Immigrant Rights Attorney with CARE, spoke in support of establishing an immigration legal defense fund. She explained that her organization provides free immigration legal services to low-income residents in Anaheim and throughout Orange County. She shared that she was a refugee who arrived in the United States from Vietnam, and emphasized the importance of community support and access to legal protections. She described challenges faced by many immigrants, including detention, high bond requirements, transfers before court hearings, language barriers, and difficulties navigating the immigration system without legal representation. She stated that an immigration legal defense fund would help ensure residents have access to due process and a fair opportunity to present their cases. She urged the Council to support the fund, describing it as an investment in the well-being of immigrant residents and the broader community.

Marc Herbert expressed support for the Arzola family and encouraged public participation in an upcoming Police Review Board meeting. He also voiced support for increasing funding for the proposed immigration legal defense fund, noting that the City has significant budget allocations in other areas and suggesting additional resources could be directed toward legal assistance programs.

He raised concerns regarding transparency and public participation, alleging Brown Act violations and stating that previous complaints submitted to the City had not received a response. He also criticized meeting procedures, arguing that opportunities for public engagement were limited. He questioned information related to fire protection services in Anaheim Hills, citing a recently received public records response that appeared inconsistent with prior statements regarding fire engine staffing and deployment in the area. He requested clarification from City officials on the matter.

Elizabeth Hansburg expressed support for the previously approved Festival project, citing the region's housing shortage and the need for additional housing opportunities throughout Anaheim. She stated that the project would provide approximately 400 housing units on the site of a former movie theater and argued that housing development should be distributed across all areas of the City rather than concentrated in western Anaheim. She contended that the project is consistent with the City's housing planning goals and housing element, and stated that adding multifamily housing in areas that have traditionally been low-density residential communities promotes housing equity and fair housing objectives. She urged the Council to uphold its prior approval of the project and not reverse its decision.

Mark Richard Daniels opposed the Festival project, citing the unique geography and infrastructure constraints of Anaheim Hills. He described the history of development in Anaheim Hills and noted that fire roads and other precautions were established early due to recognized wildfire risks. He expressed concerns that the area's road network and evacuation routes are not designed to accommodate additional high-density development and argued that increased population and traffic could worsen evacuation challenges during emergencies. He stated that roadway blockages or traffic incidents could significantly hinder evacuation efforts and characterized the project as creating unnecessary public safety risks. He urged the Council to reject the project, arguing that the long-term impacts would be borne by residents while the benefits would primarily accrue to the developer.

Julie Shin requested that the City Council modernize Anaheim’s backyard chicken ordinance. She stated that the current regulations, particularly the 50-foot setback requirement, are overly restrictive and make it difficult for most residents to keep hens for personal food production. She noted that several neighboring cities, including Buena Park and La Mirada, have recently updated their ordinances to allow a limited number of hens with reduced setback requirements while maintaining sanitation and nuisance standards. She urged the Council to review policies adopted by surrounding City Council Minutes of March 24, 2026

cities and consider amending Anaheim’s ordinance to allow five to six hens, prohibit roosters, and establish more reasonable setback requirements. She stated that such changes would support food security, sustainability, and resident interests while bringing Anaheim’s regulations more in line with those of neighboring communities.

Pearl Arzola stated that their family has experienced ongoing police presence and harassment since the death of her brother Albert Arzola. She requested that the City and Police Department allow the family to grieve without continued police activity near their home and neighborhood. She criticized the City’s handling of public safety issues related to the Festival project in Anaheim Hills, expressing concerns about wildfire evacuation risks, traffic congestion, and the potential impact of additional development in the area. She urged the Council to focus on addressing fire safety concerns and opposed approval of the project. She concluded by calling on Council members to pay attention to residents’ concerns and prioritize public safety.

Christine Lopez addressed the Council regarding the Arzola family’s requests for transparency following an officer-involved shooting. She stated that while a flash drive containing information had been provided to the family, certain materials remained redacted and called for the release of the autopsy report and the involved officer’s name in accordance with California law. She expressed concerns regarding communication and scheduling difficulties surrounding a proposed meeting between the family and the Mayor, stating that delays and lack of response contributed to the family’s frustration. She emphasized the family’s desire for answers and accountability, noting the emotional impact the incident has had on relatives and younger family members.

Ariana Avalos addressed the Council in support of the Arzola family and raised concerns regarding transparency surrounding the police department’s community information meeting related to the incident. She criticized the decision not to livestream the meeting and expressed concerns about the accuracy and completeness of information provided to the public. She questioned the circumstances surrounding Albert Arzola’s death, arguing that the underlying incident did not warrant the outcome and emphasizing the value of his life. She referenced research on the effects of authority and power, advocating for enhanced psychological screening, training, and oversight of law enforcement officers.

She expressed frustration over alleged ongoing police presence and activity near the family’s residence, stating that the family continues to seek accountability and transparency following the incident.

Jocelyn Pacheco expressed support for the Arzola family and called for accountability and transparency regarding the officer-involved shooting death of Albert Arzola. She questioned the circumstances surrounding the initial police contact, the timeline of information released by the police department, and the continued withholding of officer names, video footage, and autopsy information.

She raised concerns about statements made by law enforcement following the incident, the detention of multiple individuals at the scene, and the impact of the incident on Arzola’s family. She questioned aspects of the investigation and evidence handling, urging the City and Police Department to release additional information, including unedited video footage, the names of the involved officers, and the autopsy report. She concluded by encouraging the City to respond to community concerns and voiced support for the proposed immigration legal defense fund.

David Pulido expressed support for the Arzola family and called for accountability in the officer- involved shooting death of Albert Arzola. He stated that a Public Records Act request had been submitted seeking reports, unedited video footage, officer identities, and related records, and expressed concern that the requested information had not yet been released. He criticized the pace and transparency of the investigation process, arguing that the family and community deserve timely access to information and justice. He expressed concerns about police accountability, the handling of City Council Minutes of March 24, 2026

officer-involved investigations, and perceived disparities in the criminal justice system. He objected to the City’s recognition of police personnel during the meeting, stating that it was inappropriate while concerns regarding police conduct remained unresolved. He concluded by urging the City to release the names of the involved officers and take action to ensure accountability.

Art Castillo shared personal experiences working for the City of Anaheim and witnessing what he described as police misconduct and intimidation in local neighborhoods over many years. He expressed concern that similar incidents continue to occur and stated that families affected by police actions often feel unheard. He described efforts to assist community members, advocate for accountability, and engage with city leadership, but said they experienced difficulty obtaining responses from city management regarding their concerns. He noted his involvement in advocating for the establishment of the Police Review Board and encouraged greater participation by city officials and community members in the review process. He emphasized the need for dialogue between city leaders and residents regarding police-related incidents and announced plans to raise their concerns before the Police Review Board and participate in future community discussions on the issue.

Matthew Compton advocated for justice and accountability regarding the death of Albert Arzola. He stated that Albert was a 19-year-old Anaheim resident with his future ahead of him and expressed support for his family, commending their continued advocacy before the City Council. He criticized the lack of publicly released information regarding the incident, including the identities of the involved officers, body camera footage, and records related to the case. He stated that public records requests had been submitted seeking this information and expressed concern about delays in receiving a response. He called for the release of records related to the incident, the identification of the officers involved, and accountability measures regarding the officers’ actions. He expressed support for the Arzola family and their pursuit of justice.

Abe Q expressed solidarity with the family of Albert Arzola and advocated for greater transparency and accountability regarding the police shooting incident. He requested the release of the involved officers’ names, full unedited body camera footage, and related records concerning the case. He recounted the incident and expressed concern about the officers’ actions, the use of force, and the treatment of family members and others present following the shooting. He questioned the handling of the investigation and asserted that the community and the Arzola family deserve additional information about the incident. He concluded by calling for transparency, accountability, and justice for Albert Arzola and other individuals affected by police-related incidents.

Bryan Kaye addressed the Mayor regarding a previously discussed meeting with community members and expressed disappointment that the meeting had not occurred. He referenced prior comments encouraging respectful dialogue and urged City leadership to act in accordance with principles of honesty, accountability, and compassion. He criticized City leadership's handling of police-related incidents and alleged a lack of accountability for misconduct. He expressed concerns about the treatment of residents by law enforcement and argued that city policies and decisions have contributed to a lack of trust in local government and public safety institutions. He concluded by calling for greater transparency, accountability, and responsiveness from city leadership regarding community concerns.

Mazatl Tepehyolotzin expressed concerns about the historical treatment of Indigenous peoples, including colonization, displacement, slavery, and abuses associated with mission systems and other institutions. He highlighted recent state efforts to expand Native American history education in schools and advocated for greater recognition of Indigenous perspectives and historical experiences.

He also criticized individuals he believed were misrepresenting Indigenous communities and called for increased accountability and representation of Native voices in public discussions. He concluded City Council Minutes of March 24, 2026

by urging greater acknowledgment of Indigenous history, culture, and land stewardship, and expressed support for efforts related to Indigenous rights and historical recognition.

Sergio Pelayo expressed support for the family of Albert Arzola and reflected on Albert’s connection to Anaheim and Orange County, noting his enthusiasm for local sports and pride in his community.

He criticized the circumstances surrounding Albert’s death and argued that the incident represented a failure of due process. He referenced concerns about police accountability and compared the issue to broader international discussions regarding the use of force by law enforcement. He questioned the officers’ actions during the incident and asserted that greater accountability and transparency are needed. He concluded by advocating for justice for Albert Arzola and continued public scrutiny of the circumstances surrounding the case.

COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS:

Council Member Kurtz thanked the City employees who participated in the Big Give. She thanked the volunteers who participated in the cleanup at Guinida Lane. She shared that the residents requested a walking area. She noted that many participants were family members, friends, and residents contributed to the event. Council Member Kurtz shared the volunteer efforts at the Anaheim Community Foundation property to bring joy to the area used by nonprofits. She thanked the City employees and department heads who participated in the meaningful event.

Council Member Maahs highlighted the East Anaheim Little League opening day on March 7th at Benito Juarez Park. She thanked the coaches, volunteers, and parents who assist with the league.

She shared that Pioneer Park includes an accessible field for athletes in wheelchairs. She added that many families travel to Anaheim to access the field. Council Member Maahs thanked the City employees who participated in the Big Give. She highlighted the City employees who participated in Patriots & Paws to clean the barbecue area for veterans. Council Member Maahs reported her attendance at E. Kate Rea’s 150th Birthday Celebration at the Ebell Club. She shared that Kate Rea was an educator who earned her Master’s Degree from UC Berkeley. She added that she was the founder of Anaheim’s first PTA and a longtime leader on the City’s Library Board and secured grant funding for the Carnegie Library. She expressed her appreciation of the Ebell Club for continuing to honor her legacy.

Council Member Rubalcava thanked everyone who participated during public comments. She emphasized that each vote she casts is vetted and that she approaches her responsibilities as an elected official with seriousness and diligence. She shared that she grew up in the City of Anaheim and her father worked for the City for 40 years. She explained that for each project she reviews, she considers expert testimony and staff opinions seriously. She shared that she has opposed projects that staff have not recommended. She expressed empathy for the residents in Anaheim Hills due to safety concerns; however, she assured that she would not support a project that was not safe.

Council Member Rubalcava reported that she visited a charter school in District 3 to speak with students. She shared that the school is educating young minds in the City from T-K to sixth grade.

She recognized Public Utilities employee Darin Strain on his retirement after 30-plus years of service.

She highlighted the Public Utilities Department and the safe drinking water in the City. She emphasized the City Council’s commitment to resident safety and highlighted the Public Utilities Department’s pride in maintaining safe water conditions throughout the City. Council Member Rubalcava reported her attendance at groundbreaking ceremonies at local elementary schools, including Loara Elementary School’s Multi-Purpose Room Innovation Center. She recognized Team Kids who developed businesses to sell tickets to donate to a local nonprofit. She thanked the Anaheim Police Department, Fire & Rescue Department, and City staff for engaging in the process.

She shared that many children in District 3 come from working-class families and emphasized the City Council Minutes of March 24, 2026

importance of providing opportunities to all in the City. She thanked Team Kids for providing access to entrepreneurial experiences. Council Member Rubalcava announced that a new taco restaurant had opened in District 3. She thanked Director of Economic Development Sergio Ramirez for ensuring that local businesses can thrive and open in the City. She thanked City staff for responding to enhanced safety initiatives in District 3, following a reported sexual assault. She reported that additional lighting was installed in the area, tree landscaping, and the HALO team had responded to ensure safety in the City. Council Member Rubalcava welcomed new resident Valentina Ceja to the City.

Mayor Pro Tem Leon acknowledged and thanked the Mejia family for inviting him and the Council to their home to commemorate the one-year anniversary of their daughter’s passing. He shared that the family’s mission is to support and help other families. He expressed his appreciation for those who have supported the family. Mayor Pro Tem Leon shared his participation in the annual District 2 Read Across America tour. He added that he read to the current classes of his former third and fourth- grade teachers. He emphasized the importance of literacy and early education in schools and thanked the schools, administrators, and teachers for the invitation. He acknowledged City staff’s continued efforts to expand access to books in the community. Mayor Pro Tem Leon reported his attendance at the Natural Products Expo West show at the Convention Center. He mentioned that the convention is the largest show hosted at the Convention Center, with tens of thousands of visitors coming to Anaheim. He recognized the Convention Center staff, Code Enforcement, and the workers across the Resort District for their work. Mayor Pro Tem Leon announced his attendance at the Barton Elementary Multi-Purpose Room groundbreaking. He shared that the opportunity highlights a collaboration between the City and school districts to create space for students and families. He shared his participation with City staff for the Big Give to clean up debris and graffiti in a District 2 neighborhood. He highlighted the impacts the event has on the community and thanked the City staff who participated. Mayor Pro Tem Leon announced his attendance at the Americana Awards. He recognized award recipients and Anaheim residents Alden and Linda Esping and their contributions to the City. He highlighted the Youth Leadership Summit that gathered high school students from across Anaheim and the County for a day of leadership, public speaking, civic engagement, and financial literacy. He noted that students participated in workshops and spoke with City leaders, including the Chairman of Disney Experiences, Thomas Mazloum. He highlighted the impact the event had on students, noting that students rated their experience positively. He expressed his commitment to the initiative and thanked everyone who assisted with the event. Including the volunteers and the District 2 office. Mayor Pro Tem Leon shared that the Welcome to Little Arabia mural was complete. He noted that the initiative was a collaboration with the Arab American Civic Council, Al Karmel Market, and students from Magnolia High School. He shared that students from Magnolia High School contributed to the mural. He expressed his appreciation for the staff who assisted with the initiative.

Council Member Balius recognized the Housing and Community Development Department and Public Utilities Department for installing new lighting and securing a fence at the vacant property on Beach Boulevard. He announced the Eggstravaganza at Maxwell Park on March 28th from 10 a.m. to 1 p.m.

He shared that the event would be hosted by the Magnolia Baptist Church.

Mayor Aitken echoed Mayor Pro Tem Leon’s comments on the Americana Awards. She shared that Linda and Alden Esping are school teachers who have dedicated their lives to the City. She congratulated them on their recognition. Mayor Aitken thanked staff for participating in the Big Give to help with projects throughout all the districts. She announced that residents have the opportunity to submit posters recognizing the 250th Anniversary of the United States. She shared that the posters would reflect community pride and civic engagement in Anaheim. She noted that submissions would be collected in collaboration with the Cultural and Heritage Commission. She shared that the City Council Minutes of March 24, 2026

submissions would be open until April 14th. She requested that the Interim City Manager share the information with the Cultural and Heritage Commission’s staff liaisons to connect with Muzeo. Mayor Aitken thanked a student group with Benito Juarez for interviewing her on her role as a female Mayor.

She thanked the New California Coalition for inviting her to a panel on addressing affordable housing.

She shared that she participated with other mayors who have the greatest impact at the local level.

CITY MANAGER’S UPDATE:

Interim City Manager Greg Garcia echoed the Council’s comments on the Big Give. He thanked City staff for their participation and the City Council for their support. He noted that approximately 150 volunteers participated, covering 12 projects throughout the City. He thanked AMEA and AFSCME for providing breakfast and lunch to the volunteers. He announced the Stay Housed Anaheim Program through the Anaheim Housing Authority to support emergency rental and security deposit assistance.

He added that the program was authorized by the City Council when the Housing Trust was created.

He reported that the program would offer residents a one-time emergency rent or security deposit assistance up to $3,000. He shared that utility assistance may also be provided. He highlighted the program and noted that it is unique to Anaheim.

Interim City Manager Garcia announced that AMEA requested that Item No. 22 be withdrawn from the agenda. He stated that, out of deference to AMEA, staff would withdraw the item from Council consideration.

Without objection, Mayor Aitken took the meeting out of order to consider City Council Business Calendar Item No. 27.

At 8:50 p.m., Mayor Aitken recessed the Anaheim Public Financing Authority, Anaheim Housing and Public Improvements Authority and Anaheim Housing Authority to address City Council Business Calendar Item No. 27.

BUSINESS CALENDAR:

27. RESOLUTION NO. 2026-021 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM amending the dates and times for regular meetings of the Anaheim City Council for the 2026 calendar year and rescinding Resolution No. 2025-095 [rescheduling the meeting of June 16 to June 23, 2026].

MOTION: Council Member Meeks moved to approve RESOLUTION NO. 2026-021 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM amending the dates and times for regular meetings of the Anaheim City Council for the 2026 calendar year and rescinding Resolution No. 2025-095 [rescheduling the meeting of June 16 to June 23, 2026], seconded by Council Member Balius. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES – 7 (Mayor Aitken and Council Members Leon, Balius, Rubalcava, Kurtz, Maahs, and Meeks); NOES – 0. Motion carried.

At 8:51, Mayor Atiken recessed the Anaheim City Council to address the Anaheim Public Financing Authority, Anaheim Housing and Public Improvements Authority, and Anaheim Housing Authority agendas, and reconvened at 9:02 p.m.

CONSENT CALENDAR: The Consent Calendar was considered with Council Member Kurtz pulling Item Nos. 15, 17, and 19, Council Member Meeks pulling Item No. 20, and Mayor Aitken pulling Item Nos 24 and 25.

City Council Minutes of March 24, 2026

MOTION: Council Member Meeks moved to waive reading of the ordinances and resolution and adopt the balance of the consent calendar as presented, in accordance with reports, certifications, and recommendations furnished each City Council Member, seconded by Council Member Maahs.

ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES – 7 (Mayor Aitken and Council Members Leon, Balius, Rubalcava, Kurtz, Maahs, and Meeks); NOES – 0. Motion carried.

9. Receive and file minutes of the Anaheim Tourism Improvement District Advisory Board meetings of October 16, 2025 and January 15, 2026, the Cultural and Heritage Commission of January 15, 2026, the Older Adults Commission meeting of January 15, 2026, the Public Utilities Board meeting of January 28, 2026, and the Sister City Commission meeting of January 26, 2026.

10. Approve certificates recognizing Blake’s Place for 30 years of business in Anaheim; Anaheim resident Alexa Smith from Orange Lutheran High School for her achievement of becoming a CIF-SS Masters Champion in wrestling; Sydney Tran from El Rancho Charter School for winning the Orange County Spelling Bee for a second consecutive year and for representing Orange County at the national spelling bee in Washington, D.C.; Savanna High School Girls Basketball for winning their CIF Division Championship; the owners of Superior Laundry and LaundryUp for partnering with the Anaheim Union High School District to provide students access to free laundry services; Disneyland Resort’s 70th Anniversary; and Canyon High School’s Connor Shim who has been named a semifinalist in the Music Center’s 38th Annual Spotlight Program.

11. Receive and file, with the possibility of discussion, the list of Professional Services Agreements authorized by the City Manager and the list of Visit Anaheim Subcontractor Agreements approved by the Executive Director of Convention, Sports, and Entertainment for February 2026.

12. Approve the 2025 General Plan and Housing Element Annual Progress Reports and direct the Planning and Building Director to submit the reports to the California Department of Housing and Community Development and the Governor’s Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation, formerly the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research.

13. Waive the sealed bidding requirement of Council Policy 4.0 and authorize the issuance of a Purchase Order to Stryker Sales, LLC, in an amount not to exceed $172,378.47 inclusive of all applicable taxes and fees, for the purchase of Lucas chest compression systems, accessories and preventative maintenance for Anaheim Fire and Rescue and authorize the Purchasing Agent to execute all necessary contractual documents.

14. Approve Amended and Restated Master Agreement Contract No. 106-498828 with Crisp Enterprises Inc., dba Crisp Imaging for as-needed citywide reprographics services, increasing the current Master Agreement by $150,000 thereby amending the not to exceed amount from $100,000 to $250,000 for the term effective September 1, 2025 through June 11, 2026, with three one-year optional extensions in the amount not to exceed $360,000 annually thereafter, including applicable taxes and fees, for a cumulative total not to exceed of $1,330,000; authorize the Purchasing Agent to execute all necessary contractual documents related to the City Council Minutes of March 24, 2026

agreement in accordance with the competitively solicited City of Long Beach Contract No. 36905; and ratify a change order to the Master Agreement with Crisp Enterprises, Inc., dba Crisp Imaging, increasing the contract amount by $152,863.18 from $277,020 to $480,000 for citywide reprographics services from December 1, 2023, through August 31, 2025.

16. Approve the Joint Agreement with the County of Orange for the implementation and operation of the Orange County Automated Fingerprint Identification System, with an estimated first year cost of $155,616, with future annual costs to be determined by the County of Orange OC-RAN Board and negotiated by the parties, for recurring periods of ten (10) years unless terminated by either party; and authorize the Chief of Police, or designee, to execute and administer the agreement.

18. Approve the Amended and Restated National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Stormwater Permit Implementation Agreement with the County of Orange for stormwater compliance activities; and authorize the City Manager, or designee, to approve the annual operating budget each year [City’s cost share for Fiscal Year 2025/26 is $560,000 with an anticipated increase of 5% to 10% annually; approval of the Implementation Agreement is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15378, as it involves administrative and organizational actions that do not result in direct physical changes to the environment].

21. Authorize participation in additional proposed opioid litigation settlements with six regional distributors/dispensers, acceptance of the anticipated allocation plans, and direct receipt of the settlement funds; and authorize the City Attorney to effectuate the City’s acceptance of the settlements by executing participation agreements and any related documentation necessary to complete the settlements [Associated Pharmacies, Inc. and American Associated Pharmacies, J M Smith Corporation, Louisiana Wholesale Drug Company, Inc., Morris and Dickson Co., North Carolina Mutual Wholesale Drug Company, Inc., and United Natural Foods, Inc. and its subsidiaries SuperValu and Advantage Logistics) (collectively the “Remnant Defendants”].

22. Implement the Segal Company, Western States, Inc. (Segal) Citywide classification and compensation study, Phase I, by realigning base salary ranges for specified classifications within the Anaheim Municipal Employees Association Part-Time and Executive Management groups to support the City’s recruitment and retention strategy, while addressing internal equity and compensation compaction.

RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM amending Resolution No. 2025-030, as amended, for the purpose of increasing salaries pursuant to the State of California minimum wage requirements, modifying pay policies for classifications designated as Non-Represented Part-Time, and amending certain Non-Represented Part-Time and Executive Management compensation plans to align with the City’s adopted market-position strategy.

RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM amending Resolution No. 2026-006, for the purpose of modifying pay City Council Minutes of March 24, 2026

policies for certain classifications represented by the Anaheim Municipal Employees Association, General Employees.

RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM amending Resolution No. 2026-007, for the purpose of modifying pay policies for certain classifications represented by the Anaheim Municipal Employees Association, Clerical Employees.

RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM amending Resolution No. 2022-138, for the purpose of amending salary ranges for certain classifications represented by the Anaheim Municipal Employees Association, Part-Time Employees.

RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM amending Resolution No. 2023-081, for the purpose of modifying pay policies for certain classifications represented by the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, Local 2002, General Management Unit.

RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM amending Resolution No. 2023-082, for the purpose of modifying pay policies for certain classifications represented by the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, Local 2002, Professional/Technical Management Unit.

Item No. 22 was withdrawn by staff.

23. ORDINANCE NO. 6624 (INTRODUCTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM repealing and replacing Chapter 10.24 (Water System Cross-Connections) of the Anaheim Municipal Code to align local and state-mandated public water system cross connection control requirements.

RESOLUTION NO. 2026-022 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM adopting modifications, which do not increase rates or fees, to Rule Nos. 11 and 16 of the Water Rates, Rules and Regulations, as originally adopted by Resolution No. 72R-600 and most recently amended by Resolution No. 2024-023, and making determinations under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”).

RESOLUTION NO. 2026-023 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM adopting modifications, which do not increase rates or fees, to Rule Nos. 16 and 22 of the Electric Rates, Rules and Regulations, as originally adopted by Resolution No. 71R-478 and most recently amended by Resolution No. 2024-022, and making determinations under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”).

Approve the Generation Interconnection Agreement for the interconnection of generating facilities to Anaheim’s electric system and authorize the Public Utilities General Manager or designee, to (a) execute the Agreement from time to time with generating facility owners with City Council Minutes of March 24, 2026

any changes that are authorized by Rule No. 22, required by the Risk Manager, or deemed nonmaterial by the City Attorney’s Office; (b) execute all related or implementing documents, including cost-neutral amendments, assignments, and documents contemplated by the Agreement; and (c) take all actions necessary or advisable to implement and administer executed Agreements; and determine that the adoption of the Ordinance and Resolutions and approval of the Agreement are not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) because the actions do not constitute a “project” within the meaning of CEQA Guidelines (California Code Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3) Sections 15060(c)(2)-(3) and 15378 in that they are regulatory/administrative actions that establish standards and contractual terms and do not approve, commit Anaheim to, or result in any physical changes to the environment and that, to the extent any of the actions could be considered a “project,” they are exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines sections 15061(b)(3) and 15301-15304.

26. Approve minutes of the Council meeting of January 13, 2026.

BUSINESS CALENDAR:

15. Approve a Canine Transfer Release and Agreement to Indemnify, Defend and Hold Harmless with Officer Brandon Mullins and Sergeant Nathaniel Cox authorizing the transfer of ownership of retiring Police Service Dogs "Rebel" and "Zax," respectively; and authorize the Chief of Police to execute and implement the agreements.

DISCUSSION: Council Member Kurtz thanked Rebel and Zax for their service and the officers and families that will be taking care of them in their retirement.

MOTION: Council Member Kurtz moved to approve a Canine Transfer Release and Agreement to Indemnify, Defend and Hold Harmless with Officer Brandon Mullins and Sergeant Nathaniel Cox authorizing the transfer of ownership of retiring Police Service Dogs "Rebel" and "Zax," respectively; and authorize the Chief of Police to execute and implement the agreements, seconded by Council Member Meeks, ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES – 7 (Mayor Aitken and Council Members Leon, Balius, Rubalcava, Kurtz, Maahs, and Meeks); NOES – 0. Motion carried.

17. Approve the Agreement for Provision of OC Animal Care Services with the County of Orange for a five year term commencing May 31, 2026 through May 30, 2031, with the City responsible for paying the County the Net Cost of providing agreed upon Animal Care Services specified in the Animal Care Notice of Intent approved annually; approve the Animal Care Notice of Intent, in substantial form, for Animal Care Special Services, Animal Care Shelter Services, and Barking Dog Complaint Services for the period of July 1, 2026, through June 30, 2027, at an estimated cost of $5,788,082 plus a 10% contingency; and authorize de minimis changes that do not substantially change the terms and conditions of the Notice of Intent, as determined by the City Attorney’s Office.

Planning and Building Director Heather Allen reported that since 1989, the City of Anaheim has contracted with the County of Orange to provide animal care services, including field, shelter, and licensing services. In 2016 Anaheim became a participating City for the funding and construction of the regional animal shelter in the City of Tustin. She stated that there are two actions under City Council consideration, first is approval of the new agreement for provision of OC Animal Care City Council Minutes of March 24, 2026

Services; the second is approval of the Notice of Intent.

Director Allen reported that the Orange County Board of Supervisors approved this master agreement on February 24, 2026 for consideration by the 14 contract cities. She added that the master agreement establishes a defined five-year term, replacing the current 10-year evergreen agreement expiring May 30, 2026, consolidates remaining provisions related to the Participation Agreement for shelter construction into a single contract structure, improves financial transparency through stabilized billing practices and enhanced monthly reporting, provides service category flexibility that would allow cities to opt in or out of certain service components, and provides a mechanism for new cities to participate if regional service capacity expands. She noted that OC Animal Care has also committed to improving communication and operational transparency with contract cities through enhanced reporting and Collaboration throughout the contract term.

Director Allen stated that Notice of Intent (NOI) is the annual process, wherein the County provides estimated net costs for services to the City for next fiscal year commencing July 1. The NOI represents a projection based on the most recent service utilization and revenue data available. She added that the City’s costs are ultimately based on actual services provided by the County, less actual revenues generated. She stated that services provided include Animal Control Services, Animal Care Special Services, Animal Care Shelter Services, and Barking Dog Complaint Services.

Director Allen reported that staff recommends approval of the new agreement for OC Animal Care Services and the NOI to ensure continuity of animal care and shelter services consistent with state and federal statutes and Title 8 of the Anaheim Municipal Code.

DISCUSSION: Council Member Kurtz noted receiving frequent constituent complaints regarding animal-related issues, particularly stray cats and dogs, and asked staff to explain changes that have been made to the feral cat policy in recent years.

Director Allen explained that the County's animal services program does not currently include a trap- neuter-return (TNR) program for feral cats. He noted that if the Council is interested in exploring such a program, it would need to be considered separately from the current contract action and could be brought back for future Council discussion.

In response to Council Member Kurtz, OC Animal Care Director Monica Schmidt explained that the County's animal services contract does not currently include TNR services. She stated that, if the Council is interested in pursuing a TNR program, it would require separate consideration and could be brought back for future discussion. She added that County Counsel previously determined that TNR is prohibited under its interpretation of California Penal Code Section 597.1. As a result, the County does not offer TNR services. She noted that individual cities may consult their own legal counsel regarding the issue and could potentially contract with outside providers, such as low-cost veterinary clinics or nonprofit spay/neuter organizations, to offer TNR-related services if legally permissible. She added that TNR remains a recognized animal welfare tool and that future legislative or legal developments could affect the County's position on the practice.

Council Member Kurtz relayed concerns received from residents regarding animal control response times. She stated that residents have reported incidents involving loose dogs in neighborhoods that frightened children, but were told by dispatch that, due to traffic and travel times, the animals would likely be gone before officers could arrive and therefore no response would be sent. She also noted reports from residents who were told that no animal control officers were available for dispatch at the time of their call and were advised to call back if the issue occurred again. She expressed concern City Council Minutes of March 24, 2026

about these responses and their effectiveness in addressing public safety concerns related to stray or loose animals.

Ms. Schmidt clarified that field officers are deployed throughout the county during both daytime and evening shifts and are assigned to service areas rather than waiting at the shelter for dispatch. She stated that reports of residents being told no response would be sent due to travel time do not reflect department procedures and encouraged residents receiving such information to request a supervisor.

She explained that supervisors can reallocate additional animal control officers or assistants to areas experiencing high call volumes. She added that officers are equipped to respond to multiple calls before returning to the shelter, as animal control vehicles can safely transport several animals at once. She noted that calls are prioritized based on public safety concerns, similar to police dispatch systems. She stated that the highest-priority responses include aggressive loose animals, requests for assistance from police or fire personnel, and other situations posing immediate threats to public safety, with lower-priority calls addressed as resources become available.

In response to Council Member Kurtz, Ms. Schmidt stated that information about available services is provided through the agency’s website and noted that the City of Anaheim’s website includes basic information and directs residents to the Animal Services website for additional details. She indicated that educational materials and informational flyers covering the full range of services are available and can be provided to the City for distribution to residents.

Council Member Kurtz requested access to those materials.

Mayor Aitken requested County Counsel’s legal opinion on the TNR program.

Ms. Schmidt explained that she could not disclose the County’s legal opinion but would connect the City Attorney’s Office with County Counsel.

Council Member Maahs expressed support for the animal services contract and acknowledged improvements made since the pandemic, including addressing concerns regarding limited visitation hours. She praised the quality of the current animal shelter facility and highlighted several community programs offered by Animal Services, including a monthly drive-through pet food pantry, affordable microchipping services, affordable vaccinations, and a new pilot program called “Dog Day Out.” She requested additional information on the Dog Day Out program.

Ms. Schmidt provided an overview of the new “Dog Day Out” pilot program, which launched on March

26. The free program allows community members to take shelter dogs on outings to pet-friendly locations, such as parks, walking trails, outdoor patios, and local businesses. She explained that participating dogs wear highly visible “Adopt Me” vests, which help generate public interest and conversations about adoption opportunities. Prior to launch, the program was tested with volunteers to identify and address operational issues. She reported that the pilot has already resulted in successful dog adoptions and strong community interest, with the first two weeks of participation fully booked. She expressed enthusiasm for expanding awareness of the program and encouraging Anaheim residents to participate.

In response to Council Member Maahs, Ms. Schmidt confirmed that pet adoptions are available free of charge year-round through the shelter. She added that the shelter is open daily for adoptions from 11:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., providing accessibility for a variety of schedules. She noted that veterans are eligible for waived adoption fees under a state Senate Bill and may receive discounted adoption rates if they do not qualify under the program. She added that discounted adoption fees are available for senior residents.

City Council Minutes of March 24, 2026

Council Member Maahs shared that a friend of hers is a veterinary nurse instructor at a local college and commended the OC Animal Care.

In response to Council Member Balius, Ms. Schmidt clarified that wildlife-related responses are generally limited to situations involving threats to public safety. She stated that the agency typically responds to cases involving raccoons, opossums, or other wildlife trapped inside a residence, particularly because raccoons can carry diseases such as rabies. She explained that the agency does not typically respond to nuisance wildlife issues involving animals such as roof rats, mice, or squirrels. She added that for wildlife concerns, priority is given to animals that are sick, injured, aggressive, trapped, or otherwise pose a threat to public safety. She emphasized that the department does not seek to indiscriminately remove wildlife and instead focuses first on public education, helping residents understand how to safely coexist with wildlife and determine when intervention may be necessary. She added that OC Animal Care would respond to calls for raccoons or possums.

Council Member Balius requested information on any low-cost spay and neuter services for residents who have dogs or cats.

Ms. Schmidt explained that the agency operates a full-service veterinary clinic staffed by licensed veterinarians, registered veterinary technicians, and veterinary assistants; however, the clinic is dedicated exclusively to animals in the shelter’s care. She noted that caring for more than 15,000 animals annually requires significant veterinary resources, including a high volume of spay and neuter surgeries for adoptable animals. She added that while they do not provide public spay and neuter services, staff stated that residents are provided with information on community resources, including organizations that offer low-cost spay and neuter services. She also noted that shelter hosts three low-cost vaccination, microchipping, and wellness clinics each month on its campus to help residents access affordable pet care services.

Mayor Pro Tem Leon thanked OC Animal Care for its participation in community events, including older adult appreciation events, and for its efforts to promote pet adoptions. He raised concerns about cats being abandoned in neighborhoods and commercial areas, noting that business owners sometimes report individuals dropping off cats at their properties, resulting in growing populations of stray cats. He requested information about procedures or resources are available for business owners facing this type of situation and how OC Animal Care would respond to such reports.

Ms. Schmidt explained that responses to reports of cats being abandoned at businesses depend on the specific circumstances. She noted that if abandonment is suspected, field officers would first seek evidence such as security camera footage, witness information, or license plate numbers, as animal abandonment is illegal. She stated that the agency prioritizes intake of cats that are sick, injured, aggressive, pose a public safety threat, are underage kittens, nursing mothers with litters, pregnant cats, or otherwise in need of assistance. She explained that the agency prioritizes intake of cats that are sick, injured, aggressive, pose a public safety threat, are underage kittens, nursing mothers with litters, pregnant cats, or otherwise in need of assistance. She added that they focuses its limited resources on assisting cats that are most vulnerable or at risk, including those involved in confirmed abandonment cases.

In response to Mayor Pro Tem Leon, Director Allen explained that if the contract is not approved, there would not be an alternative to the contract. She noted that Anaheim has historically received quarterly reports from Orange County Animal Care along with quarterly billing information. She shared that under the new contract, participating cities have expressed a desire for greater transparency, more detailed reporting, and more frequent updates tailored to each jurisdiction.

City Council Minutes of March 24, 2026

Mayor Pro Tem Leon expressed appreciation for Orange County Animal Care’s commitment to enhanced reporting and requested that key service data be shared with the City on a regular basis, potentially on a quarterly basis, to help inform councilmembers and residents about service trends and outcomes. He acknowledged a recent neighborhood cat-related issue in District 2, noting that City Code Enforcement staff worked collaboratively with Orange County Animal Care to address resident concerns. He thanked both Orange County Animal Care and City staff for their responsiveness and ongoing partnership in serving the community.

Council Member Rubalcava acknowledged and thanked Orange County Animal Care for implementing significant improvements since its previous appearance before the Council. She noted shared concerns raised by colleagues regarding ongoing service issues and expressed hope that continued planning efforts would lead to further enhancements. She raised concerns about increasing coyote activity in District 3, noting that residents have reported a significant rise in coyote sightings and related concerns. She inquired about the protocols Orange County Animal Care follows when receiving coyote-related calls and inquiries from residents.

Ms. Schmidt explained that coyote-related calls are initially addressed through public education. She noted that while Anaheim maintains its own coyote management plan, Orange County Animal Care supports residents by providing information, documenting sightings, and sharing reports with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), which has primary oversight of wildlife management. She noted that they partner with CDFW and local cities on community outreach efforts, including town halls and educational presentations. She added that staff provide guidance to residents on preventing wildlife activity by reducing attractants on private property and educating callers on appropriate coyote hazing techniques. She reported that when coyote sightings are reported, staff assess whether the animal is responding to hazing, becoming habituated to human presence, or exhibiting aggressive behavior. She explained that, depending on the circumstances, Animal Services may dispatch an officer to evaluate the situation and coordinate with CDFW when further action is necessary. She added that the agency responds to reports involving sick, injured, or aggressive wildlife, including coyotes, and works with CDFW to determine appropriate next steps.

Council Member Rubalcava expressed appreciation for OC Animal Care’s collaborative approach to addressing coyote-related concerns, emphasizing the importance of ensuring residents are not turned away when seeking assistance. She noted that while coyotes are generally not harmful, there have been instances of aggressive behavior and situations where multiple coyotes have established dens beneath residential properties, requiring intervention. She thanked OC Animal Care for participating in community events.

Ms. Schmidt expressed appreciation for the partnership with Anaheim’s Family Resource Center mobile events, noting that providing pet tags to residents is an important service. She explained that identification tags help reunite lost pets with their owners more quickly, particularly for residents who may not otherwise be able to afford them. She added that approximately one in three pets will become lost during their lifetime and providing pets with tags and current contact information significantly increases the likelihood of a rapid return home and helps reduce the time animals spend in shelters.

Council Member Rubalcava shared her personal experience locating a lost dog through OC Animal Care and expressed appreciation for their service.

In response to Council Member Kurtz, Ms. Schmidt explained that contract costs are based on each city's actual utilization of services rather than a flat fee or population-based formula. She reported that City Council Minutes of March 24, 2026

billing is determined by factors such as the number of field service responses, resident service requests, support provided to first responders, the number of animals received from the city, and the length of time animals remain in shelter care. She noted that while annual cost estimates are provided, actual expenses may vary slightly depending on service usage throughout the year, ensuring that each jurisdiction pays in proportion to the services it receives. She explained that annual cost estimates are based on the most recent 12 months of actual service utilization. She noted that it is due to service demand fluctuating from year to year, actual costs may increase or decrease depending on factors such as changes in wildlife-related calls, barking dog complaints, and other service requests. She reported that reports will break down service usage by category and compare the most recent 12 months of activity with the previous two full fiscal years, allowing staff and City officials to monitor trends and track whether service utilization is increasing or decreasing over time.

Council Member Kurtz requested copies of the reports once received.

Director Allen reported that a review of the previous five years showed actual animal care service costs have varied both above and below annual estimates. She explained that in three of the five years, actual costs were below the estimated amount, while in two years (FY 2021/22 and FY 2022/23), costs exceeded estimates by approximately 7% and 4%, respectively. She noted that service rates remain consistent, and fluctuations in total cost are primarily driven by the volume of services utilized by the City.

MOTION: Council Member Kurtz moved to approve the Agreement for Provision of OC Animal Care Services with the County of Orange for a five year term commencing May 31, 2026 through May 30, 2031, with the City responsible for paying the County the Net Cost of providing agreed upon Animal Care Services specified in the Animal Care Notice of Intent approved annually; approve the Animal Care Notice of Intent, in substantial form, for Animal Care Special Services, Animal Care Shelter Services, and Barking Dog Complaint Services for the period of July 1, 2026, through June 30, 2027, at an estimated cost of $5,788,082 plus a 10% contingency; and authorize de minimis changes that do not substantially change the terms and conditions of the Notice of Intent, as determined by the City Attorney’s Office, seconded by Council Member Maahs.

DISCUSSION: In response to Council Member Balius, Director Allen confirmed staff have data available for the total number of calls.

MOTION: Council Member Kurtz moved to approve the Agreement for Provision of OC Animal Care Services with the County of Orange for a five year term commencing May 31, 2026 through May 30, 2031, with the City responsible for paying the County the Net Cost of providing agreed upon Animal Care Services specified in the Animal Care Notice of Intent approved annually; approve the Animal Care Notice of Intent, in substantial form, for Animal Care Special Services, Animal Care Shelter Services, and Barking Dog Complaint Services for the period of July 1, 2026, through June 30, 2027, at an estimated cost of $5,788,082 plus a 10% contingency; and authorize de minimis changes that do not substantially change the terms and conditions of the Notice of Intent, as determined by the City Attorney’s Office, seconded by Council Member Maahs. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES – 7 (Mayor Aitken and Council Members Balius, Leon, Rubalcava, Kurtz, Maahs, and Meeks); NOES – 0. Motion carried.

City Council Minutes of March 24, 2026

19. Approve the Waste Infrastructure System Enterprise Agreement with the County of Orange for solid waste disposal services, effective July 1, 2026, through June 30, 2036, with one 10-year optional extension for a three (3) year progressive rate of $67/ton (July 1, 2026 through June 30, 2027), $74/ton (July 1, 2027 through June 30, 2028), and $81/ton (July 1, 2028 through June 30, 2029) subject to a rate adjustment each July 1 beginning 2029 equal to the percentage change in the consumer price index; and authorize the Director of Public Works, or designee, to execute the agreement and any other related documents and take any and all actions as are necessary, required, or advisable to implement and administer the Agreement.

Public Works Director Rudy Emami reported that the proposed Waste Infrastructure System Enterprise (WISE) Agreement would replace the City’s current waste disposal agreement, set to expire on June 30, 2026, and would ensure Anaheim’s continued access to the County’s landfill system. He stated that the County operates three active landfills and approximately 20 closed sites.

He noted that the City of Anaheim relies on the system, disposing over half a million tons of solid waste annually. He stated that over the past year, the County of Orange and a subcommittee of the Orange County City Managers Association have worked extensively to negotiate the terms of the new agreement. He explained that the negotiations were necessary due to the County’s rising operational costs, increased regulatory requirements, landfill expansion needs, and long-term post-closure that were not fully accounted for under the prior rate structure.

Director Emami reported that the proposed WISE agreement includes a phased increase in landfill disposal per ton rates over the first three years, beginning in FY 2026/27. He noted that while the initial increase of 53% is significant, the disposal costs represent only 23% of a typical customer’s monthly bill. He added that the remaining 77% is related to collection and hauling services. He explained that as a result, the impact on customers is not a direct increase to the trash bill. He reported that to further mitigate the immediate financial impact on residents and businesses, the City is proposing a rate smoothing strategy by utilizing sanitation reserves. He explained that the approach would spread the increase more gradually with incremental adjustments of approximately 5% per year over a five year period, rather than passing through the full cost increase at once. He added that staff would return to the City Council with a recommended fee rate schedule for FY 2026/27 as part of the annual fee adoption process. He noted several key provisions negotiated by the City Managers Association to negotiate several key provisions to protect cities in the new WISE agreement. He noted that it includes increased financial transparency, a “True-Up” process that allows for review of the County’s cost recovery, and flexibility for cities to pursue alternative organic waste processing options. He concluded that the agreement secures long-term disposal capacity for residents and businesses of Anaheim and incorporates important safeguards for cities to help residents with a predictable, stabilized rate spread over five years to mitigate the impact of cost increase.

DISCUSSION: Council Member Kurtz thanked staff for recognizing the impact that a 25% rate increase would have on residents and businesses and for developing a phased approach to lessen the immediate financial burden. She acknowledged that the increase would still be felt but appreciated the effort to ease the transition. She requested confirmation that the phased implementation would apply to both residential and business customers and requested additional information regarding the reserve funds available to help support and stabilize rates over the five-year period.

Director Emami explained that the sanitation enterprise fund reserves are maintained at an industry- standard level equivalent to approximately three months of operating expenses. He added that the reserves provide financial stability and ensure continuity of services during emergencies, economic City Council Minutes of March 24, 2026

disruptions, or other unforeseen events. He confirmed that the City plans to use a portion of these reserves to help phase in the rate increases over several years. Anaheim is in a unique position because it administers its own utility billing, allowing the City to use reserves to smooth the impact of the increase on residents and businesses. He added that unlike other cities where the hauler bills customers directly and rate increases take effect immediately, Anaheim can spread the cost increases over time to reduce the immediate financial burden on ratepayers.

In response to Council Member Balius, Director Emami explained that Orange County operates the region’s landfills and that, if the City did not enter into the agreement, waste would need to be transported outside the County. He added that while alternative facilities would still be subject to the same state regulations and associated costs, transporting waste farther distances would add significant transportation expenses, resulting in higher costs for residents.

Council Member Balius requested confirmation that the County landfill is the most affordable option and when the County sites would be full.

Director Emami clarified that while rate increases are being smoothed over a five-year period, the proposed agreement is a 10-year contract. He explained that the County maintains projections for the remaining life of its landfill sites but does not have definitive closure dates. He noted that he Brea Olinda Landfill is expected to be the first facility to reach capacity. He explained that once it closes, waste will need to be transported to landfills in South County, and current expansion projects at those facilities are intended to accommodate future disposal needs.

MOTION: Council Member Kurtz moved to approve the Waste Infrastructure System Enterprise Agreement with the County of Orange for solid waste disposal services, effective July 1, 2026, through June 30, 2036, with one 10-year optional extension for a three (3) year progressive rate of $67/ton (July 1, 2026 through June 30, 2027), $74/ton (July 1, 2027 through June 30, 2028), and $81/ton (July 1, 2028 through June 30, 2029) subject to a rate adjustment each July 1 beginning 2029 equal to the percentage change in the consumer price index; and authorize the Director of Public Works, or designee, to execute the agreement and any other related documents and take any and all actions as are necessary, required, or advisable to implement and administer the Agreement, seconded by Council Member Meeks. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES – 7 (Mayor Aitken and Council Members Leon, Balius, Rubalcava, Kurtz, Maahs, and Meeks); NOES – 0. Motion carried.

20. Approve an Agreement with Harris & Associates, Inc., in the amount of $196,890 plus a 15% contingency for a total amount not to exceed $226,423.50, to provide engineering design services related to the Anaheim West Tower Bollards Project; authorize the Director of Public Works, or designee, to execute the agreement and related documents and to take the necessary actions to implement and administer the agreement; and amend the Fire & Rescue Department’s budget by $226,424 from restricted FEMA Emergency Operations Center Grant Funds.

DISCUSSION: Council Member Meeks requested additional information on the design of the project.

Public Works Director Rudy Emami explained that consistent with the approach taken for projects in Anaheim, the Department intends to go an extra step to enhance the overall quality and presentation.

Council Member Meeks noted that at Angel Stadium, similar structures were designed to resemble baseballs, but space constraints make that approach impractical for the project. She added that the City Council Minutes of March 24, 2026

goal is to ensure the project is aesthetically pleasing and serves as an upgrade to the community rather than appearing purely utilitarian.

MOTION: Council Member Meeks moved to approve an Agreement with Harris & Associates, Inc., in the amount of $196,890 plus a 15% contingency for a total amount not to exceed $226,423.50, to provide engineering design services related to the Anaheim West Tower Bollards Project; authorize the Director of Public Works, or designee, to execute the agreement and related documents and to take the necessary actions to implement and administer the agreement; and amend the Fire & Rescue Department’s budget by $226,424 from restricted FEMA Emergency Operations Center Grant Funds, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Leon. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES – 7 (Mayor Aitken and Council Members Leon, Balius, Rubalcava, Kurtz, Maahs, and Meeks); NOES – 0. Motion carried.

24. Deny the request for a rehearing of the City Council’s administrative decisions associated with the Anaheim Hills Festival Project (DEV2023-00043), which was considered at the public hearing held on January 13, 2026, with the project consideration concluding with City Council action on March 3, 2026.

DISCUSSION: In response to Mayor Aitken, City Attorney Fabela explained that the administrative remedy process was established by the Council to provide participants with a local avenue for seeking redress if they are dissatisfied with a decision. He added that if the administrative remedy does not resolve the issue, participants may file a lawsuit. He reported that an alternative approach would be to eliminate the administrative step and allow participants to proceed directly to court.

Mayor Aitken sought clarification regarding voting on Item Nos. 24 and 25.

City Attorney Fabela explained that there are specific legal criteria for granting a rehearing. He advised that it would be consistent and appropriate for a Council Member to vote in favor of Item 24 while voting against Item 25.

In response to Mayor Aitken, City Attorney Fabela explained that, under the ordinance, the rehearing process is a prerequisite to filing a lawsuit. He explained that denying the rehearing request satisfies that requirement and allows the applicant to pursue legal action following the vote.

Mayor Aitken questioned whether the rehearing requirement is necessary, noting that it appears to add an extra procedural step before petitioners can file a lawsuit. She proposed revisiting the issue during future municipal code updates and discussing whether the requirement should be modified or removed.

Director Allen confirmed that staff can evaluate the policy and return to Council.

MOTION: Mayor Aitken moved to deny the request for a rehearing of the City Council’s administrative decisions associated with the Anaheim Hills Festival Project (DEV2023-00043), which was considered at the public hearing held on January 13, 2026, with the project consideration concluding with City Council action on March 3, 2026, seconded by Council Member Kurtz. ROLL CALL VOTE:

AYES – 7 (Mayor Aitken and Council Members Leon, Balius, Rubalcava, Kurtz, Maahs, and Meeks); NOES – 0. Motion carried.

City Council Minutes of March 24, 2026

25. ORDINANCE NO. 6622 (ADOPTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM approving and adopting amendments to the Anaheim Hills Festival Specific Plan No. 90-1 (SP 90-1) and Chapter 18.108 (Festival Specific Plan No. 90-1 (SP 90-1) Zoning and Development Standards) of Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code and amending Ordinance Nos. 5109 and 5110, as previously amended (Amendment No. 6 to the Festival Specific Plan) (DEV2023-00043, introduced at the Council meeting of March 3, 2026 Public Hearing Item No. 10).

ORDINANCE NO. 6623 (ADOPTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM approving and adopting Development Agreement No. 2025-00001 by and between the City of Anaheim and OTR, an Ohio Partnership, and making certain findings related thereto (DEV2023-00043, introduced at the Council meeting of March 3, 2026 Public Hearing Item No. 10).

MOTION: Mayor Aitken moved to deny the adoption of Ordinance Nos. 6622 and 6623.

City Attorney Fabela clarified that a ‘yes’ vote would be contrary to the staff recommendation and would result in denial or non-approval of the ordinance and a ‘no’ vote would allow the Council to consider approval of the ordinance through a subsequent motion and vote.

In response to Council Member Rubalcava, City Attorney Fabela clarified that Council Member Meeks can vote based on the new motion for consideration.

Council Member Kurtz requested clarification on the motion.

Council Member Rubalcava and Mayor Aitken clarified that a ‘no’ vote would be to deny the project.

MOTION: Mayor Aitken moved to deny the adoption of Ordinance Nos. 6622 and 6623, seconded by Council Member Meeks. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES – 3 (Mayor Aitken and Council Members Maahs and Meeks); NOES – 4 (Mayor Pro Tem Leon and Council Members Balius, Rubalcava, and Kurtz).

Motion failed.

MOTION: Council Member Rubalcava moved to adopt ORDINANCE NO. 6622 (ADOPTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM approving and adopting amendments to the Anaheim Hills Festival Specific Plan No. 90-1 (SP 90-1) and Chapter

18.108 (Festival Specific Plan No. 90-1 (SP 90-1) Zoning and Development Standards) of Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code and amending Ordinance Nos. 5109 and 5110, as previously amended (Amendment No. 6 to the Festival Specific Plan) (DEV2023-00043, introduced at the Council meeting of March 3, 2026 Public Hearing Item No. 10) and ORDINANCE NO. 6623 (ADOPTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM approving and adopting Development Agreement No. 2025-00001 by and between the City of Anaheim and OTR, an Ohio Partnership, and making certain findings related thereto (DEV2023-00043, introduced at the Council meeting of March 3, 2026 Public Hearing Item No. 10). ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES – 4 (Mayor Pro Tem Leon and Council Members Balius, Rubalcava, and Kurtz; NOES – 3 (Mayor Aitken and Council Members Maahs and Meeks).

DISCUSSION: Council Member Rubalcava addressed concerns regarding potential bias, noting that the matter had been reviewed by the City Attorney and Ethics Officer, who determined that she was eligible to participate in the vote. She stated that voting decisions are made based on careful review City Council Minutes of March 24, 2026

of each project and referenced a previous project that was not supported due to staff concerns and safety issues. She distinguished the current proposal as an infill project that has received support from city staff, including fire, traffic, police, and planning departments. She expressed confidence in the recommendations of city experts, support for projects that are completed safely and efficiently, and appreciation for staff, the City Attorney, and the Ethics Officer for their assistance and review.

Mayor Pro Tem Leon thanked all participants who spoke on the item and reaffirmed a commitment to work with Public Works and OCTA staff on both short-term and long-term solutions to address identified community concerns, regardless of the project's outcome.

MOTION: Council Member Rubalcava moved to adopt ORDINANCE NO. 6622 (ADOPTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM approving and adopting amendments to the Anaheim Hills Festival Specific Plan No. 90-1 (SP 90-1) and Chapter

18.108 (Festival Specific Plan No. 90-1 (SP 90-1) Zoning and Development Standards) of Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code and amending Ordinance Nos. 5109 and 5110, as previously amended (Amendment No. 6 to the Festival Specific Plan) (DEV2023-00043, introduced at the Council meeting of March 3, 2026 Public Hearing Item No. 10) and ORDINANCE NO. 6623 (ADOPTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM approving and adopting Development Agreement No. 2025-00001 by and between the City of Anaheim and OTR, an Ohio Partnership, and making certain findings related thereto (DEV2023-00043, introduced at the Council meeting of March 3, 2026 Public Hearing Item No. 10). ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES – 4 (Mayor Pro Tem Leon and Council Members Balius, Rubalcava, and Kurtz; NOES – 3 (Mayor Aitken and Council Members Maahs and Meeks). Motion carried. Ordinances adopted.

The City Council took a brief recess at 9:53 p.m. and reconvened at 9:59 p.m.

28. Receive an update on funding for the Anaheim Contigo program; provide direction to staff on establishing an immigration legal defense component to support Anaheim residents, including the scope of services and contract amount; and authorize the City Manager to enter into an agreement with a nonprofit legal provider, in the estimated range of $50,000 to $100,000 depending on the scope and demand, to launch and implement the immigration legal defense component accordingly.

Interim City Manager Garcia reported the item is a follow-up from the previous Council meeting based on direction from Council to address a legal defense fund for the Anaheim Contigo program. He reported that significant work had been completed since the prior discussion.

Director of Community Services Sjany Larson-Cash provided an update on the Anaheim Contigo Program and the proposed establishment of an immigration legal defense component. She reported that the program was approved in July 2025 with $250,000 in funding to assist Anaheim residents affected by immigration enforcement activities through emergency grants for rent, utilities, and other eligible expenses. She noted that program funding is primarily sourced from housing funds, with the General Fund serving as a secondary source if needed. She reported that as of March 17, the program had received financial assistance requests totaling approximately $225,262, representing 343 Anaheim residents who have benefited from the program.

Director Larson-Cash outlined additional funding strategies to continue supporting Anaheim residents while minimizing impacts on the General Fund. She reported that beginning April 1, the Housing and Community Development Department will launch the Stay Housed Anaheim Program, providing one- time emergency rental assistance of up to $3,000 for qualifying residents, funded through the City Council Minutes of March 24, 2026

Housing Trust. She noted that Anaheim Public Utilities will expand access to electric and water bill assistance programs, with eligible residents referred directly to those resources. She shared that due to the reallocation of utility-related assistance accounts, the Contigo Program fund balance increased to approximately $45,312. She added that the remaining Contigo funds will be used for miscellaneous emergency expenses not covered by other programs, including medical costs, phone bills, gas bills, and transportation needs.

Interim City Manager Garcia reported that staff researched legal defense models used by other cities and consulted with communications staff to identify the most pressing community needs. He highlighted the Communications Team and Chief Communications Officer Mike Lyster for understanding the needs of the community.

Chief Communications Officer Mike Lyster reported responding to more than 100 immigration enforcement or suspected enforcement incidents and identified the first 24–48 hours after a detention as the period of greatest need for affected families. He added that families often require immediate assistance locating detained loved ones, understanding detention procedures, and navigating available resources. He added that staff currently provides guidance on detention locations, detainee locator tools, and the initial immigration process, but noted that families are frequently unfamiliar with these systems and face significant uncertainty. He shared that based on field experience and discussions with community organizations, staff recommended partnering with a trusted nonprofit to provide a hotline and intake service for families during the critical early stages following a detention.

He reported that the proposed service would supplement existing City support by connecting families with trained professionals who can provide guidance, referrals to legal counsel, and assistance navigating immigration court proceedings. He noted that community organizations are already serving Anaheim residents and that the recommendation reflects both local experience and a review of approaches used by other cities.

Interim City Manager Garcia reported that staff reviewed legal assistance models used by other communities and determined that the greatest need is providing timely legal support during the first 24–48 hours following a detention. He shared that he has been in discussions with Immigrant Defenders, an organization already serving Anaheim residents and possessing significant legal capacity, while continuing to collaborate with other respected community partners. He explained that the request is for authorization to continue developing a scope of work and enter into an agreement not to exceed $100,000 for legal services. He noted that the proposed program would operate as a pilot initiative focused on maximizing available resources and evaluating community needs, with primary objectives to provide immediate access to legal consultation and helping families locate and connect with detained loved ones, ensure detainees can consult with legal professionals and understand their rights during the critical early stages of detention, and refer individuals and families who require ongoing representation to trusted and reputable legal service providers. He emphasized that this targeted approach would allow the city to assist more residents than funding long-term legal representation on a case-by-case basis.

DISCUSSION: Mayor Pro Tem Leon emphasized the hardships faced by families when a primary wage earner is detained through immigration enforcement, leaving families to navigate complex legal systems while managing immediate financial and personal needs. He shared an example of assisting a family seeking help after a loved one was detained and highlighted the lack of immediate access to qualified legal guidance during such situations. He stated that the proposed program is intended to address this gap by connecting families with legal expertise and support during critical early stages.

He expressed appreciation for the Communications Team and staff who have provided direct support to residents, including responding to incidents, verifying information, and helping families navigate difficult circumstances. He emphasized the importance of providing assistance during the first 24–72 City Council Minutes of March 24, 2026

hours following a detention, when critical decisions are often made. He raised concerns about families being vulnerable to exploitation by unqualified individuals charging significant fees for assistance without delivering meaningful results. He expressed support for establishing a trusted hotline and referral system that would connect families with qualified legal professionals, provide accurate guidance, and help them navigate available resources. He thanked staff for their work and voiced hope that Anaheim families will have a reliable source of support and legal guidance when needed.

Council Member Meeks expressed support for the proposal, emphasizing the importance of helping families navigate the first 24–48 hours following a detention. She noted that government and immigration processes can be difficult to understand and that families need reliable information and guidance during critical situations. She expressed support for providing trusted resources that can help families avoid exploitation by individuals seeking to profit from their circumstances. She stated that the City’s role should focus on immediate assistance, triage, and referrals to qualified organizations and legal professionals, rather than providing long-term legal representation. She endorsed connecting affected individuals with reputable agencies that can provide ongoing support as needed.

Council Member Kurtz commended City staff, including the communications, housing, and public utilities teams, for proactively responding to community needs and providing assistance without waiting for formal council direction. She expressed appreciation for the creation of assistance programs funded through housing and utility resources, helping reduce the need for additional city funding. She stated that the remaining Contigo funds may be sufficient for miscellaneous assistance needs but encouraged staff to return to the council if additional funding becomes necessary. She expressed support to allocate $100,000 for a legal aid initiative focused on providing guidance and referrals during the first 24–48 hours following a detention. She emphasized the importance of helping residents navigate complex legal processes, particularly those unfamiliar with available resources, and protecting families from exploitation by unqualified service providers. She thanked Mayor Pro Tem Leon for bringing the item forward.

Council Member Rubalcava expressed support for the proposed legal assistance program and thanked staff for their leadership and ongoing efforts to support Anaheim residents affected by immigration enforcement activities. She raised concerns that the proposed funding amount may be insufficient given the level of community need and suggested considering a higher allocation to avoid returning to Council for additional funding in the near future. She highlighted the importance of continuing outreach and education efforts, including distribution of “Know Your Rights” materials and other informational resources. She urged staff to include information warning residents about scams and unqualified individuals, including notaries falsely offering legal immigration services, to help protect families from fraud and exploitation.

Council Member Maahs expressed support for the recommendation to allocate up to $100,000 for legal assistance services. She stated concern about the circumstances that have created the need for such services and acknowledged the importance of the City's response. She expressed appreciation for staff efforts to support residents and families affected by immigration enforcement activities. She specifically thanked the Communications Team for its ongoing field work and responsiveness to community concerns and encouraged staff to prioritize their own well-being while carrying out these responsibilities.

In response to Council Member Balius, Interim City Manager Garcia stated that the scope of the proposed legal services program is still being refined in coordination with nonprofit partners. He noted that unlike other models that fund attorneys to handle a set number of cases, the proposed pilot City Council Minutes of March 24, 2026

would focus on enhancing intake, counseling, and early-stage legal assistance services. He explained that the proposed $100,000 allocation could have a significant impact under this approach but noted that final program details and service levels will be determined once the agreement is finalized.

Council Member Balius shared his preference to keep the amount to $100,000.

Interim City Manager Garcia expressed support for the proposed $100,000 funding level, describing it as a reasonable starting point that could be accommodated within the budget. He noted that focusing resources on initial access, intake, and referral services rather than long-term legal representation would allow the funding to assist more residents and remain effective for a longer period.

Mayor Aitken thanked the Communications Team, particularly Chief Communications Officer Lyster, for maintaining up-to-date community resources and adapting city outreach efforts as conditions have changed. She expressed support for adding the legal assistance component and noted concerns about notaries and other individuals who misrepresent their qualifications and take advantage of vulnerable residents. She stated that providing access to trusted legal professionals would help ensure residents receive accurate information and realistic guidance regarding their situations. She expressed support for efforts to protect individual liberty and help reunite families affected by detention or immigration-related proceedings.

Mayor Pro Tem Leon requested that staff provide periodic updates on the use of the proposed $100,000 legal services allocation. He noted that the initial funding amount is intended as a pilot and that the city does not yet know how far the funds will stretch. He emphasized the importance of proactively monitoring the program and discussing potential funding needs before resources are exhausted.

Interim City Manager Garcia agreed to provide the City Council with details of the program once the scope of work and agreement are finalized. He confirmed that updates on the legal services initiative will be incorporated into regular Contigo Program reports.

Mayor Aitken suggested additional updates from the City Attorney’s Office, referencing comments by Council Member Balius.

City Attorney Fabela confirmed that staff could provide updates.

Mayor Pro Tem Leon thanked colleagues for the discussion and emphasized that the purpose of the proposal is to ensure that families affected by immigration enforcement have access to a qualified and trusted source of information during the critical early stages following a detention. He stated that providing residents with guidance, support, and access to services is part of the City Council’s responsibility and helps ensure families are not left without resources during difficult circumstances.

He noted affected individuals are members of the Anaheim community and that the city should be prepared to assist residents facing these challenges.

MOTION: Mayor Pro Tem Leon moved to receive an update on funding for the Anaheim Contigo program; provide direction to staff on establishing an immigration legal defense component to support Anaheim residents, including the scope of services and contract amount; and authorize the City Manager to enter into an agreement with a nonprofit legal provider, in the estimated range of $50,000 to $100,000 depending on the scope and demand, to launch and implement the immigration legal defense component accordingly, seconded by Mayor Aitken. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES – 7 (Mayor City Council Minutes of March 24, 2026

Aitken and Council Members Leon, Balius, Rubalcava, Kurtz, Maahs, and Meeks); NOES – 0. Motion carried.

PUBLIC HEARING:

29. Public Hearing to consider and adopt a Development Impact Fee (DIF) Nexus Study, a related capital improvement plan for DIF funded projects, and increases/decreases to DIF fees for the City of Anaheim.

RESOLUTION NO. 2026-024 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM adopting the Development Impact Fee Study and Development Impact Fee Improvement Plan [includes determination that approval of this resolution is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Section 15060(c)(2), 15060(c)(3), and 15061(b)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines].

ORDINANCE NO. 6625 (INTRODUCTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM amending Chapter 17.08 (Subdivisions), Chapter 17.34 (Development Fees) and Chapter 17.36 (Public Safety Facilities and Vehicle Equipment Impact Fees) of Title 17 (Land Development and Resources) of the Anaheim Municipal Code and finding and determining that this ordinance is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15060(c)(2), 15060(c)(3) and 15061(b)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines, because it will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment because there is no possibility that it may have a significant effect on the environment and because it is not a project as defined in Section 15378 of the CEQA.

RESOLUTION NO. 2026-025 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM amending the Public Safety Facilities and Vehicle and Equipment Impact Fees [includes determination that approval of this resolution is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Section 15060(c)(2), 15060(c)(3), and 15061(b)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines].

RESOLUTION NO. 2026-026 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM amending the Library Facilities and Collection Items Impact Fees [includes determination that approval of this resolution is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Section 15060(c)(2), 15060(c)(3), and 15061(b)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines].

RESOLUTION NO. 2026-027 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM approving the amount of the park-in-lieu fee and rescinding Resolution No. 2011-085 and Resolution No. 2011-086 [includes determination that approval of this resolution is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Section 15060(c)(2), 15060(c)(3), and 15061(b)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines].

Interim City Manager Greg Garcia thanked Finance staff for bringing the item forward and working with each department on the Development Impact Fees.

City Council Minutes of March 24, 2026

Budget Supervisor D’Anne Lee reported that consistent with the Anaheim Strategic Plan, we have been working for more than a year to update certain development impact fees affecting Police, Fire and Community Services. She stated that the City contracted with David Taussig & Associates (DTA) to prepare a Development Impact Fee (DIF) nexus study to identify the capital needs of our departments based on the impact of long-term development, determining the maximum rates to fund the reasonable cost of facilities, vehicles, and equipment needed to sustain the City's current levels of service, and updating land and development costs for the Quimby calculation. The Development Impact Fee Study, DIF Improvement Plan, and proposed fees were publicly noticed and have been available for public review at the City Clerk’s counter and online since February 19, 2026.

Budget Supervisor Lee stated that the Development Impact Fees for Fire, Police, Library, and Parks have not been updated since 2011 or earlier. She reported that the process provides the support for updating the maximum impact fees allowed for Fire, Police, Library and Parks based on their projected needs resulting from new development. She explained that to simplify our development impact fee structure, the proposed fees would be applied Citywide rather than to specific, limited areas, such as the Platinum Triangle, as is currently the case for Police, Fire & Rescue and Libraries.

She stated that the maximum rates are based on the estimated buildout population, employment, residential units, and non-residential building square footage from the Land Use Plan updated in April 2025. Facility and Equipment needs resulting from new development are identified in the DIF Improvement Plan and included in the DIF Nexus Study.

Budget Supervisor Lee reported that departments identified their needs based on the projected new development through 2045 based on increases in population and units. The Facility and Equipment needs resulting from new development are identified in the DIF Improvement Plan and referenced in the nexus study. She shared that the estimated costs for the department's needs lists are compared to existing levels of service to ensure that the fees cover only the impact of new development and not that of existing development. She added that needs attributable to new development include new and expanded facilities, equipment and vehicles for Police and Fire personnel, Traffic signal preemption devices for Fire, a new bookmobile, and library collection materials.

Budget Supervisor Lee reported that the proposed fees would be applied citywide based on square footage for retail, commercial, office and industrial uses, per room for hotel and motel uses, and per unit for single and multi-family residential uses. The City has determined that, on average, there is no evidence that a larger home corresponds to additional residents in the home, thus a uniform per-unit fee best reflects the actual impact of a new home, rather than the number of square feet. She added that per Government Code, ADUs of less than 750 square feet are exempt from impact fees; ADUs that are 750 square feet or larger would be assessed proportionately in relation to the square footage of the ADU to the square footage of the primary dwelling unit. She provided an overview of Police and Fire.

Budget Supervisor Lee explained the Library fees and noted that impacts are generated by both residential and non-residential development, so the proposed fees apply to all land uses citywide. An employment adjustment factor is applied to non-residential developments with the assumption that residential developments typically generate roughly five times the demand for Library services than employees of non-residential development. She explained that the adjustment to the Library Impact Fees across all development types addresses the reality that residents and employees both utilize Library services provided within the City.

Budget Supervisor Lee reported that the park-in-lieu lieu fee applies only to residential development and is established by formula according to the Quimby Act. The formula is equal to the cost per acre ($6.8M) times the City Park Standard (2 acres per 1,000 residents) times the population per City Council Minutes of March 24, 2026

household divided by 1,000. She stated that the proposed fees represent 35% of the maximum rates allowed by the Quimby formula, which brings the total combined fees for Police, Fire, Library and Parks in line with the average similarly combined fees of Orange County cities. She noted that by formula, the maximum park-in-lieu fee for a single-family residential home is $45,077 because of development costs and the cost of land. She outlined the difference in fees for Orange County cities compared to Anaheim.

Budget Supervisor Lee shared that for park-in-lieu fees the proposed fee of $16,022 per unit for a single-family home would place Anaheim just below other Orange County cities, like Yorba Linda, Huntington Beach, Buena Park, Orange and Westminster, with the average OC park-in-lieu fee being approximately $13,000 per unit. She provided examples of the proposed fees by land use combined for single and multi-family residential and hotel development demonstrating how the proposed fees compare with other local cities in Orange County. She displayed additional comparisons for retail, commercial and industrial development, the wider variation being the result of different demographic and land use mixes in different cities.

Budget Supervisor Lee reported that for retail, commercial and industrial development, the wider variation being the result of different demographic and land use mixes in different cities. She explained that the fees in the Fee Study are based on current facility costs and best practices recommended that they be adjusted annually by a reliable index to account for inflation. Park-in-lieu fees are established by formula pursuant to the Quimby Act. She explained that since the formula includes cost per acre and with land values continually increasing, staff recommend that fees be set at approximately 35% of the maximum allowable, with an annual escalation by the greater of 5% or CCCI. She noted that the escalation would mitigate the immediate impact on developers and allow the fees to increase gradually toward full recovery of the costs needed to support the park development. She emphasized that at no point would the fee exceed the maximum with annual CCCI increases.

Budget Supervisor Lee outlined the actions presented before Council and that the City Clerk would call for separate votes for each item.

At 10:42 p.m., Mayor Aitken opened the public hearing.

Marc Herbert questioned why a longer speaking time was provided for the current hearing than for a previous Festival public hearing. He expressed concerns about City oversight and enforcement, citing a hotel project where additional rooms were reportedly discovered years after construction and questioning how future compliance issues would be monitored and enforced. He raised concerns about whether violations would result in meaningful penalties or simply require corrective action after being discovered. He questioned potential conflicts of interest involving council members and staff, referencing prior discussions about conflict-of-interest reviews conducted by the City Attorney. He stated that while certain actions may meet legal requirements, the council should strive for a higher standard of transparency and avoid even the appearance of potential conflicts of interest. He encouraged the council to exceed minimum legal standards in matters of ethics, transparency, and public trust.

City Clerk Theresa Bass reported that no electronic public comments were received related to Public Hearing Item No. 29.

At 10:47 p.m., Mayor Aitken closed the public hearing.

DISCUSSION: Council Member Balius shared strong support for the item. He requested clarification City Council Minutes of March 24, 2026

on the last park fee update Citywide.

Director Moreno reported that the last update for park fees took place in FY 2010/11.

In response to Council Member Balius, Director Moreno reported that the previous increase was two years prior to the update.

Council Member Balius stated that research indicated park fees outside the Platinum Triangle had not been increased since approximately 2004–2005 and expressed concern that the fees had remained unchanged for more than two decades. He emphasized that development impact fees are an important source of funding for public infrastructure and services, helping mitigate the impacts of growth. He noted that residents moving into the city today are paying essentially the same park fees as residents who moved in more than 20 years ago. He referenced previous suggestions to update the fee structure in 2019. He stated that the lack of fee adjustments has contributed to funding challenges for parks and other public facilities and services, including police, fire, and libraries. He shared that the City has often relied on General Fund resources for improvements and expressed support for updating fees to better support community amenities and infrastructure needs. He noted that previous planning and parks-related studies had identified updating development impact fees as a key funding strategy more than a decade ago, but those recommended fee increases were not implemented. He stated that failure to update park fees over time may have resulted in the loss of significant revenue that could have been used to improve and expand park facilities. He questioned the use of different population figures in calculating park fees versus police, fire, and library fees and noted that the differing methodologies can be difficult to understand. He explained that the calculation of park in-lieu fees, observing that the maximum fee amount is based on assumptions regarding land acquisition costs and parkland standards. He expressed concerns that current land value assumptions may underestimate the true cost of acquiring parkland, particularly in areas where vacant land is limited and developed properties may need to be purchased. He noted that Anaheim’s park land standard of two acres per 1,000 residents is lower than that of many neighboring cities and that the City remains park-deficient in many areas. He acknowledged that charging the maximum allowable fee may not be practical, he emphasized the importance of recognizing the City’s park needs and the rationale behind the higher calculated fee levels. He questioned why the proposed fee update would capture only a portion of the maximum allowable amount and sought clarification regarding the remaining unmet funding needs, particularly in areas experiencing future growth and redevelopment.

Council Member Balius summarized concerns regarding development impact fees and park funding, noting that planning documents for the Beach Boulevard Specific Plan identify a need for approximately 26 additional acres of park space in West Anaheim. He expressed concern that collecting only 35% of the maximum allowable park fee may not generate sufficient funding to meet the parkland needs identified in city planning documents. He acknowledged that charging less than the maximum fee may be appropriate; however, the need to identify alternative funding sources to address the remaining gap and ensure that development mitigation commitments can be fulfilled. He shared that he reviewed proposed capital improvement needs and questioned whether future facility requirements associated with anticipated growth had been fully incorporated into the analysis. He inquired why plans for expanding police facilities in West Anaheim were not included, noting that future growth under the Beach Boulevard Specific Plan could require additional officers and increased police station capacity. He requested clarification regarding how future public safety facility needs are being accounted for in the City's planning and fee calculations.

Director Moreno explained that the needs list is determined by the departments.

City Council Minutes of March 24, 2026

In response to Mayor Aitken, Council Member Balius stated that development impact fees should be used to help address facility needs created by new development, even if they cannot fund services for existing residents. He suggested that at a minimum, impact fee revenues should support expansion of existing public safety facilities if additional growth creates increased demand.

Director Moreno noted that the capital improvement program includes approximately $65.8 million for expanded public safety facilities, although the funding is not currently allocated to a specific location or project.

Council Member Balius referenced the Capital Improvement Plan’s allocation of approximately $65 million for expanded law enforcement facility space, including about 64,000 square feet of additional capacity. He noted that the project appeared to reflect a need for expanded police facilities and sought clarification regarding how the funding and square footage would be applied. He inquired whether the planned expansion represented a single new police facility or whether the additional square footage could be distributed among multiple locations throughout the city based on future needs.

Vice President of David Taussig & Associates, Nehal Thumar, explained that the Police Department identified a future need for approximately 45,000 square feet of additional law enforcement facility space to accommodate growth and new development within the City.

Chief Cid stated that the department’s facility needs are comprehensive and would encompass multiple operational requirements. He noted that the Department’s most significant facility need is the Main Police Station, which has been outgrown and is in need of substantial improvement. He acknowledged future needs at other locations, but indicated that the West Anaheim station remains functional and in a better condition than the Main Station.

Council Member Balius acknowledged the need for significant improvements or reconstruction of the Main Station. He requested clarification regarding how the proposed additional law enforcement facility space would be allocated, asking whether the planned square footage would be concentrated at the Main Station or distributed among the City’s police facilities. He noted that as Anaheim continues to grow, demand for services is likely to increase at the Main, East, and West police stations, and questioned how future facility expansion plans account for growth throughout the City.

Mr. Thumar clarified that the fee study identifies a need for approximately 45,000 square feet of additional police facility space on a 64,000-square-foot site, but does not specify where that space would ultimately be located.

Council Member Balius expressed hope that police facilities, particularly in West Anaheim, would expand alongside anticipated growth associated with the Beach Boulevard Specific Plan. He noted that the City Council was reviewing the capital improvement program (CIP) and related facility needs for the first time and emphasized the importance of understanding how projected growth will affect public safety infrastructure. He requested clarification regarding the application of development impact fees under AB 1600. He questioned whether future development fees could be used to fund facilities identified in the capital improvement program that may already exist or have previously been planned, citing Fire Station No. 12 as an example.

Director Moreno explained that the applicable ordinances authorize development impact fees to be used for facility construction, equipment purchases, and reimbursement of eligible costs that were initially funded from other sources. She noted that because impact fee programs operate over long City Council Minutes of March 24, 2026

periods, it is anticipated that facilities or improvements may be funded in advance through other financing mechanisms and later reimbursed with collected impact fee revenues.

In response to Council Member Balius, Fire Chief Russell explained that Fire Station No. 11 was not included in the Capital Improvement Plan because it is an existing station that already serves the area. He indicated that a future priority could be the placement of a ladder truck in the area to support increased service demands as development occurs.

Mr. Thumar clarified that Fire Station No. 11 is an existing facility and impact fees are collected to construct new infrastructure and improvements.

Council Member Balius noted that the development impact fee program includes funding for future vehicles and equipment, not just facilities, and questioned whether future fire service needs in West Anaheim had been fully accounted for. He explained that as development associated with the Beach Boulevard Specific Plan occurs, additional fire apparatus may be needed to maintain service levels, even if existing station facilities can accommodate the equipment. He inquired why an additional fire engine for Station No. 11 or the west side of the City was not included in the list of future equipment needs, while other stations were identified for additional vehicles.

Mr. Thumar stated that the current list of future fire equipment needs was developed in consultation with the Fire Department and reflects the resources identified as necessary to serve anticipated new development. He noted that if additional analysis shows another fire engine is needed to accommodate growth, the equipment list could be amended accordingly.

In response to Council Member Balius, Director Moreno confirmed that staff can evaluate the need in the future. He added that an additional vehicle would cost $1.7 million.

Council Member Balius stated that he would support the item but requested that staff return in a year to review the CIP.

Mr. Thumar explained that under AB 602, development impact fee studies must be updated at least every eight years. He added that it is the City’s intent is to update the fee study every five years to ensure that projected development, facility needs, and infrastructure requirements remain accurate.

In response to Mayor Aitken, Mr. Thuman confirmed a Consumer Price Index escalator was built into the fee.

Director Moreno confirmed that staff can review the fees sooner than the five to eight years and can update the estimates accordingly.

Council Member Balius inquired whether the city could apply an annual 5% adjustment to park fees under the Quimby Act. He noted that Quimby fees are tied to land values and that current calculations are based on determining the value of land used for park acquisition. He expressed interest in whether park fees could be adjusted annually to reflect changes in land values rather than requiring a full fee study update each time.

Director Moreno explained that there is no Charter requirement preventing the proposed fee adjustment methodology. He stated that because the city is not charging the maximum allowable park fee, annual adjustments can be made using the greater of a 5% increase or the applicable Construction Cost Index (CCI). She explained that the approach was designed to allow fees to gradually increase over time, helping the City keep pace with rising costs and, when appropriate, City Council Minutes of March 24, 2026

catch up to actual land and development-related expenses. She confirmed that the proposed annual adjustment mechanism is permissible and consistent with applicable requirements.

Council Member Balius stated that while the proposed annual fee adjustments may help maintain current funding levels, they are unlikely to fully compensate for the effects of inflation and more than two decades without significant fee increases. He reiterated strong support for updating the development impact fee structure and acknowledged the difficulty of addressing funding gaps created by many years of unchanged fees. He requested an increase to the proposed park in-lieu fee by an additional $1,700 above the recommended amount and requested that the matter be brought back to the City Council within one year, after further review of the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and the city’s long-term infrastructure and facility needs.

Mayor Aitken requested clarification on the 35% increase to park-in-lieu. Director Moreno explained that the increase was proposed to align the City with other neighboring jurisdictions.

Mayor Aitken suggested that increasing fees above the proposed 35% level may be necessary to begin addressing the gap created by years without updates. She inquired whether the proposed additional $1,700 increase would equate to approximately 50% of the maximum allowable park in-lieu fee.

Council Member Balius stated that if the proposed $1,700 increase did not achieve the intended percentage, he would support establishing the fee directly at 45%.

Council Member Meeks thanked staff for bringing forward the development impact fee update and acknowledged that fee increases had been discussed for many years without action. She shared support for increasing fees but cautioned against setting rates so high that they could discourage development or make housing construction more difficult. She emphasized the need to balance infrastructure funding needs with maintaining Anaheim’s competitiveness for new development and housing projects. She noted that the City has successfully secured grants and other external funding sources for parks and recreational improvements, reducing the need to rely solely on development fees. She expressed support for the staff-recommended fee levels rather than increasing fees to the maximum allowable amount. She asked sked staff for clarification regarding the proposed fee structure for accessory dwelling units (ADUs), specifically how impact fees would be calculated for ADUs of 750 square feet or larger in relation to the size of the primary dwelling unit.

Budget Supervisor Lee explained that impact fees for accessory dwelling units (ADUs) of 750 square feet or larger are calculated proportionally based on the size of the ADU relative to the primary dwelling unit. She provided an example that if a primary residence is 4,000 square feet and the ADU is 1,000 square feet, the ADU would be assessed 25% of the applicable impact fee because its size is 25% of the primary dwelling unit.

In response to Council Member Meeks, Mr. Thumar clarified that development impact fees are typically assessed on a per-unit basis for residential development. He explained that State ADU laws provide an exemption from impact fees for accessory dwelling units that are less than 750 square feet. He noted that for ADUs that are 750 square feet or larger, impact fees are assessed proportionally based on the size of the ADU relative to the primary residence, in accordance with State law.

Council Member Meeks questioned the difference in impact fee calculations between accessory dwelling units (ADUs) and other residential units.

City Council Minutes of March 24, 2026

Mr. Thumar explained that the fee structure for accessory dwelling units (ADUs) is based on the assumption that ADUs generally house fewer residents and create less demand on public facilities and services than a primary dwelling unit.

Council Member Meeks expressed uncertainty regarding the rationale for assessing lower impact fees on accessory dwelling units (ADUs). She asked staff whether the proportional fee structure is a common practice among other jurisdictions or whether ADUs should be treated and charged as separate residential units for impact fee purposes.

Mr. Thumar responded that the City could choose to define and treat accessory dwelling units (ADUs) differently within its fee program documents.

Council Member Meeks stated a preference for treating accessory dwelling units (ADUs) as separate residential units for impact fee purposes rather than applying a proportional fee based on square footage.

Mayor Aitken inquired if there was any data to support fewer people residing within ADUs compared to primary dwelling units.

In response to Council Member Meeks, Mr. Thumar clarified the ADU typically serves as a secondary unit on the main lot.

Director Moreno confirmed that staff can evaluate the volume for the ADUs.

Council Member Rubalcava concurred with Council Member Meeks’ concerns on ADUs. She noted that ADUs utilize public services such as public works, police, and fire protection and questioned whether they should receive different treatment under the impact fee structure. She expressed support for reconsidering the exemption or reduced fee treatment for ADUs. She inquired whether the proposed development impact fees would apply to future development projects on Disney-owned property.

Mr. Thumar confirmed that the formula for ADUs is based on State law for the proportion of the main unit.

Council Member Rubalcava requested a copy of the policy. She requested clarification regarding how the proposed development impact fees would apply to future development under the DisneylandForward project.

Director Moreno confirmed that any new development would apply.

Council Member Rubalcava emphasized the importance of applying development impact fee policies consistently to all eligible projects and developments. She agreed with Council Member Balius’ comment that Anaheim cannot fully recover from decades of prior development that occurred under lower fee structures and acknowledged the need to remain competitive with other cities for future investment. She stated that larger developments should contribute their fair share toward infrastructure and public service costs because of the demands they place on City resources. She expressed concern that future development agreements or other negotiated arrangements could potentially exempt projects from the fee program and urged staff to ensure that the adopted policies are applied consistently. She concluded by emphasizing the importance of fairness and uniform application of the fee structure across all qualifying developments.

City Council Minutes of March 24, 2026

In response to Council Member Kurtz, Mr. Thumar confirmed that the proposal would apply to OCVIBE. He explained the fee is paid at the time the building permits are issued.

City Attorney Fabela noted a potential concern regarding the applicability of updated development impact fees to projects operating under existing development agreements. He explained that the city has previously entered into development agreements with Disney and OCVIBE, which are generally intended to lock in certain fees and development conditions for a specified period. He explained that research would be needed to clarify whether the new fees would apply to those developments.

In response to Council Member Kurtz, Director Moreno explained that single-family home fees are slightly higher than multi-family.

Mr. Thumar clarified that the proposed development impact fee program generally includes a single fee category for residential units and four separate categories for non-residential development.

Budget Supervisor Lee clarified that the police, fire, and library development impact fees use a single residential fee applied uniformly to all residential units. She explained that park impact fees are structured differently and vary by residential housing type. She explained that park fees are assessed based on categories such as single-family homes, multifamily developments, two-to-four-unit projects, and larger multifamily developments with five or more units, resulting in multiple residential fee classifications with different fee amounts. She added that the summary page includes the combined fees.

Council Member Kurtz requested a page with all of the fees. Budget Supervisor Lee explained that a page was included in the agenda packet that explains the fees.

In response to Mayor Aitken, Mr. Thumar explained that hotel development impact fees are influenced by both projected future hotel room growth and the costs of facilities needed to serve that growth. He noted that the fee calculation is based on allocating eligible infrastructure and facility costs across the anticipated number of future hotel rooms. He explained that if the projected number of hotel rooms increases while the total allocable costs remain the same, the fee charged per hotel room could decrease because the costs are spread across a larger number of units. He emphasized that the fee methodology reflects a combination of projected development, demographic assumptions, and capital facility costs identified through the planning process.

Budget Supervisor Lee explained that the previous study relied on calls-for-service data to allocate costs among land uses. She reported that the updated study instead uses a dwelling-equivalent approach based on the number of residents and employees served, which staff stated provides a more consistent and equitable allocation of costs across different land uses.

Mr. Thumar explained that comparable calls-for-service data were not available for the current study, contributing to the adoption of a different methodology.

Mayor Aitken expressed concern about moving away from a calls-for-service methodology when calculating police and fire development impact fees for hotels and motels. She noted that public safety demands associated with hotel and motel guests may occur outside the property itself, such as in nearby parks, commercial areas, or other locations within the surrounding district. She questioned whether the reduced fee allocation for hotels and motels adequately reflects the level of public safety services required in areas with high concentrations of visitor-serving uses.

Director Moreno explained that the fees apply to increases due to future development.

City Council Minutes of March 24, 2026

Mayor Atiken noted that the City recently expanded the Resort Specific Plan to include additional parcels and development opportunities, including potential future hotel development.

Director Moreno explained that future demand for hotels and related development is not driven solely by economic conditions or tourism trends.

Mr. Thumar explained that the fee study uses an equivalent dwelling unit (EDU) methodology to allocate development impact costs across land uses. He added that under the approach residential development is assigned a baseline impact factor, while non-residential categories are assigned impact factors based on the number of employees per 1,000 square feet of development. He stated that these factors are then used to proportionally allocate eligible infrastructure and facility costs between residential and non-residential development types. He explained that because reliable calls- for-service data was not available for the current analysis, staff utilized the EDU methodology, which they described as an industry-standard approach for allocating development impact fees among different land uses.

In response to Council Member Rubalcava, Director Moreno explained that understanding that impacts are primarily calculated based on factors such as employment generation rather than solely on the size of the development. Mr. Thumar added that explained that a residential unit is assigned a baseline factor of 1.0, while a hotel room is assigned a lower factor (approximately 0.228), resulting in a proportionally smaller share of allocated costs.

Council Member Rubalcava expressed concern that the hotel impact factor appeared too low given Anaheim’s significant tourism activity. She noted that the City’s daily population effectively increases due to visitors staying in hotels and using local services and infrastructure. She questioned whether hotel rooms should be assigned a lower impact factor than residential units, arguing that hotel guests still generate demand for police, fire, emergency response, and other City services.

Mr. Thumar clarified that the methodology is based on employees per 1,000 feet and not visitors.

Council Member Rubalcava questioned whether the standard fee allocation methodology adequately reflects Anaheim’s unique economic and employment characteristics. She noted that the Resort area contains one of the region’s largest employment centers and generates substantial demand for city services. She acknowledged he methodology may be an industry-standard approach, the member suggested that Anaheim’s circumstances may warrant further review of how costs are allocated among land uses. She encouraged staff to review the methodology to ensure that it accurately captures the impacts and service demands associated with the city’s resort and hospitality industries.

Mr. Thumar explained that the methodology would need to be reviewed with the Planning Department.

In response to Council Member Meeks, Mr. Thumar clarified that the methodology is based on the employees per 1,000 square feet.

Council Member Meeks suggested a review of the methodology and recommended a continuance.

Mr. Thumar explained that modifying the fee allocation methodology for hotels and motels would not increase the overall amount of development impact fees collected by the City. He explained that any adjustment would redistribute costs among the various land-use categories. He noted that increasing the share allocated to hotel and motel development would correspondingly reduce the share City Council Minutes of March 24, 2026

allocated to other residential or non-residential uses. He added that the change would require a justifiable methodology supported by available planning and development data.

Council Member Balius emphasized that the development impact fee calculations are not created arbitrarily by city staff but are based on methodologies and requirements established under state law, including AB 1600. He explained that staff applies local data to the prescribed formulas and methodologies to generate the resulting fee amounts. He acknowledged the concerns raised and expressed support for moving forward with adoption of the proposed fees. He suggested that the Council revisit the methodology and make adjustments in the future if warranted by additional analysis or changing conditions.

Mayor Aitken supported the request.

In response to Council Member Kurtz, Director Moreno noted that the development impact fees are intended to fund infrastructure and facilities needed to support the delivery of city services, rather than the day-to-day operational costs of providing those services.

Council Member Kurtz supported continuing the item to review potential impacts.

In response to Council Member Balius, City Attorney Fabela advised that there would be three separate motions and that the amendments should be applied to the individual motions.

Council Member Meeks suggested adopting staff’s recommendation and reviewing the fees in a year.

City Attorney Fabela confirmed there was no confirmed motion on the floor requiring a substitution which is not allowed.

MOTION: Council Member Meeks moved to approve RESOLUTION NO. 2026-024 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM adopting the Development Impact Fee Study and Development Impact Fee Improvement Plan [includes determination that approval of this resolution is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Section 15060(c)(2), 15060(c)(3), and 15061(b)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines], seconded by Council Member Balius. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES – 7 (Mayor Aitken and Council Members Leon, Balius, Rubalcava, Kurtz, Maahs, and Meeks); NOES – 0. Motion carried.

MOTION: Council Member Meeks moved to introduce ORDINANCE NO. 6625 (INTRODUCTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM amending Chapter 17.08 (Subdivisions), Chapter 17.34 (Development Fees) and Chapter 17.36 (Public Safety Facilities and Vehicle Equipment Impact Fees) of Title 17 (Land Development and Resources) of the Anaheim Municipal Code and finding and determining that this ordinance is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15060(c)(2), 15060(c)(3) and 15061(b)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines, because it will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment because there is no possibility that it may have a significant effect on the environment and because it is not a project as defined in Section 15378 of the CEQA, seconded by Council Member Maahs. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES – 7 (Mayor Aitken and Council Members Leon, Balius, Rubalcava, Kurtz, Maahs, and Meeks); NOES – 0. Motion carried. Ordinance introduced.

City Council Minutes of March 24, 2026

MOTION: Council Member Meeks moved to approve RESOLUTION NO. 2026-025 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM amending the Public Safety Facilities and Vehicle and Equipment Impact Fees [includes determination that approval of this resolution is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Section 15060(c)(2), 15060(c)(3), and 15061(b)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines], RESOLUTION NO. 2026-026 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM amending the Library Facilities and Collection Items Impact Fees [includes determination that approval of this resolution is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Section 15060(c)(2), 15060(c)(3), and 15061(b)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines], and RESOLUTION NO. 2026-027 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM approving the amount of the park-in-lieu fee and rescinding Resolution No. 2011-085 and Resolution No. 2011-086 [includes determination that approval of this resolution is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Section 15060(c)(2), 15060(c)(3), and 15061(b)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines], seconded by Council Member Maahs. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES – 7 (Mayor Aitken and Council Members Leon, Balius, Rubalcava, Kurtz, Maahs, and Meeks); NOES – 0. Motion carried.

REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION ACTIONS: None
PUBLIC COMMENTS (non-agenda items): None
COUNCIL AGENDA SETTING:

Mayor Aitken requested additional information on the City’s domestic and agricultural policies. She requested information on the process to receive public input on the annexation of unincorporated County land and the annexation process. She requested a recognition for Parsa Ketabi for winning a national scholarship for community college students.

Council Member Meeks requested a presentation from the Public Utilities Department at the April 21st meeting on the City’s water quality.

Council Member Maahs requested a proclamation recognizing Holly Hagler’s retirement from Meals on Wheels Orange County. She shared that she has served as President and CEO for 14 years and oversaw the organization’s growth into a major regional provider of nutrition and supportive services for older adults.

Mayor Pro Tem Leon requested a recognition for Anaheim Ducks broadcaster Steve Carroll and his retirement after 50 years and 27 seasons with the Ducks.

ADJOURNMENT: With no further business before the Council, Mayor Aitken adjourned the City Council at 11:50 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,
Theresa Bass, CMC
City Clerk