ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING OF JULY 28, 2026
The regular meeting of July 28, 2026 was called to order at 5:02 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 July 23, 2026.
Mayor Aitken announced that, pursuant to Senate Bill (SB) 707, the meeting would include in-person and remote participation via the City’s Webinar system.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Ashleigh E. Aitken and Council Members Carlos A. Leon, Ryan Balius, Norma Campos Kurtz, Kristen M. Maahs, and Natalie Meeks MEMBER ABSENT: Council Member Natalie Rubalcava
STAFF PRESENT: Interim City Manager Greg Garcia, City Attorney Robert Fabela, and City Clerk Theresa Bass
INVOCATION: Pastor Edward Wiafe, Messiah Pentecostal Ministry FLAG SALUTE: Council Member Norma Campos Kurtz
PRESENTATIONS: Recognizing Comunidad Madres Ponderosa for their contributions to their neighborhood
Mayor Aitken recognized Comunidad Madres Ponderosa for their dedication and the positive impact that they have on their neighborhood. She expressed her excitement to celebrate a group of incredible women coming together to support each other and the community. She shared that being a mom is one of the most rewarding jobs and one of the most demanding. She noted that the women are often caregivers, volunteers, and City leaders, who continue to show up not just for their families, but for all the families in their neighborhood. She stated that they dedicate countless hours volunteering, supporting families, promoting health and wellness, and creating opportunities for connection, service, and hope for children to grow up in communities that they can be proud of.
Council Member Kurtz highlighted the group and their role in the community. She noted that they organize events in the neighborhood, including cleanups and an annual Christmas tree lighting. She shared that the Christmas tree lighting event is always held on the Friday after Thanksgiving and invited the community to attend.
Recognizing Logan Ostaszewski, Antonella Villa, and Shane Wexelman from Anaheim Ballet for representing Anaheim at a ballet competition Mayor Aitken recognized Logan Ostaszewski, Antonella Villa, and Shane Wexelman from Anaheim Ballet who represented the City at the Youth America Grand Prix Finals in Houston. She noted that the event highlighted the dancers’ hard work, dedication, and countless hours of practice. She recognized the support of their families, coaches, and instructors. She congratulated the dancers and invited Anaheim Ballet Executive Director Larry Rosenberg to share a few comments.
Mr. Rosenberg expressed gratitude to the City Council and Anaheim community for their continued support. He noted that Anaheim Ballet supports professional performances, youth outreach, and dance opportunities for children who may not otherwise be able to afford lessons. He emphasized City Council Minutes of July 28, 2026
that these programs depend on community and City support. He concluded by thanking the City Council through a ballet révérence.
At 5:14 p.m., Mayor Aitken called to order the 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 in-person and remotely, notice of translation services, automated live captioning in the Webinar, and a brief decorum statement.
City Clerk Theresa Bass reported that a total of fourteen (14) public comments were received electronically prior to 3:00 p.m. [A final total of twenty-one (21) public comments were received electronically, distributed to the City Council].
R. Joshua Collins addressed the need for additional safe spaces for people experiencing homelessness, particularly seniors, people with disabilities, and vulnerable women and mothers. He cited the high demand for affordable housing and Section 8 assistance and proposed allowing individuals to use designated City parking lots for overnight vehicle parking or camping. He commented on the need for rent control and the lengthy waiting lists for affordable housing to emphasize the urgency and need for the community. He requested that the City Council establish designated nightly parking or camping areas for individuals experiencing homelessness.
Cecil Jordan Corkern raised concerns regarding alleged criminal activity involving Disney employees in Florida and urged the City to maintain a strong focus on public safety and the protection of children at Disneyland and surrounding areas. He requested that the City provide updates and additional information regarding Disney.
Melody Marler raised concerns about a pop-up event at Center Greens Park that reduced parking availability for senior activities at the Downtown Community Center. She emphasized that seniors from throughout Anaheim participate in monthly activities held one Saturday each month and that adequate adjacent parking was particularly important for older adults, including those in their 80s and 90s. She requested that the City avoid scheduling events at Center Greens Park that conflict with or limit parking for senior programs and noted that other venues or times after the senior activities conclude at 3 p.m. could be considered.
Mayor Aitken stated that she would follow up with Community Services regarding directing event parking to the City Hall parking structure to avoid parking conflicts for the senior community.
Jeanine Robbins raised concerns about the Police Department's handling of overtime practices and questioned the status of an audit reportedly initiated by former Police Chief Rick Armendariz involving Anaheim Police Association President Jose Duran and former Vice President Tony Lee. She questioned whether opposition to the former Chief and subsequent leadership changes were connected to the overtime audit. She questioned the status of the audit’s findings and called for transparency regarding the audit and raised concerns about potential conflicts of interest, retaliation, and interference with the investigation.
Stephanie Mercadante questioned the City’s decision to consider the drinking-water matter closed, citing 26 written questions submitted by residents, with only one response received. She repeated unresolved questions regarding the timing of the Well 51 PFAS shutdown, the cause of the City Council Minutes of July 28, 2026
September 23, 2025, brown-water event, and the flushing of approximately 10 million gallons of water, including flushing conducted before compliance testing. She referenced concerns raised by three licensed water systems operators regarding excessive flushing and the accuracy of records submitted to the State. She questioned the scope and transparency of the Division of Drinking Water investigation, including what records were reviewed and which personnel were interviewed, and criticized the Council for not requesting an independent investigation.
Mike Robbins criticized the City's approach to police accountability and expressed concerns about the use and potential misuse of Flock license plate cameras, including for monitoring individuals' personal activities. He questioned the City's practice of investigating allegations internally and called for an independent review of Police Department matters. He raised concerns regarding the status of the Police Department overtime audit, alleged misconduct, and department time spent over civil disputes. He urged the Council to address police overtime, alleged misconduct, surveillance practices, and related costs.
Marc Herbert expressed support for the Arzola family and raised continued concerns regarding Anaheim’s drinking water. He stated that residents had repeatedly raised detailed health and safety questions at City Council and Public Utilities Board meetings since March 2026. He explained that the City had provided general presentations rather than directly investigating and answering specific concerns. He criticized the direction to submit public records requests to obtain information, arguing that such requests should be a last resort rather than the City's primary response to residents' questions. He emphasized that the City's licensed water system operators are responsible for operating the drinking water system and called for the City Council and Public Utilities Board to independently investigate concerns.
Georgia Price criticized the City for a lack of accountability and cited a lawsuit settlement involving a woman who alleged she was wrongfully arrested following a vehicle purchase at an Anaheim dealership. She questioned how a civil contract dispute escalated into a felony arrest and noted that the charges were ultimately dismissed, with the City settling the lawsuit without admitting wrongdoing.
She criticized the Council's handling of other allegations involving senior City officials, stating that residents deserve greater transparency, meaningful oversight, and independent review when constitutional rights or taxpayer funds are at issue.
Dave Duran criticized the City Council's oversight and accountability, stating that taxpayers bear the financial consequences of City failures. He emphasized that the Council's responsibilities include overseeing public safety and services, scrutinizing staff recommendations, monitoring taxpayer expenditures, asking difficult questions, and demanding transparency and accountability. He urged Council Members to fulfill their responsibilities and enforce accountability.
Art Castillo expressed concern that longstanding issues involving police conduct, youth, and community safety continue to recur. He questioned changes to police presence in schools, stating that community input and public discussion were insufficient, and encouraged greater support for atrisk youth beyond existing programs offered by organizations such as the Boys & Girls Club, Kids in Action, and the YMCA. He emphasized concerns about families who may be afraid to come forward regarding alleged police misconduct and harassment, stated that they had personally witnessed some of the incidents referenced, and offered to meet with Council Members to provide additional information and perspectives. He raised concerns about alleged retaliation against whistleblowers and individuals who speak out about misconduct, and urged the City to address issues proactively and engage more directly with affected communities.
Vern Nelson expressed concerns about the expansion of surveillance cameras in Anaheim, including Flock and other camera systems. He stated that the technology threatens residents’ privacy and City Council Minutes of July 28, 2026
liberty. He reported that Anaheim City Charter Section 1213 prohibits automated traffic enforcement systems, and questioned whether the cameras were consistent with the Charter. He called for the reclassification and increased compensation of Anaheim Convention Center duty managers, noting that approximately 10 to 11 employees had not received raises comparable to other employees. He announced an upcoming community gathering in memory of Albert Arzola and reiterated concerns about the continued employment of the officer involved.
Vance Dizney raised concerns about freeway safety infrastructure and the use of artificial intelligence and technology, alleging that certain technologies contribute to economic inequality and misinformation. He raised concerns about ballot integrity and language accessibility in elections and criticized the imposition of religious beliefs in public policy.
Andrew Winger commented on the Dudek wildfire evacuation study and expressed concern that the study does not establish whether Anaheim can be safely evacuated during a major emergency. He stated that the study identified evacuation times exceeding seven hours in some scenarios and questioned whether preliminary findings were considered in connection with other development approvals. He identified concerns with the study and its underlying assumptions, including the City's Know Your Way Evacuation Plan. He expressed frustration that residents' questions regarding evacuation zones and the reliability of Anaheim Alerts had not been adequately answered or tested.
He requested that the City create a working group of residents, City Council Members, Public Works, Fire, and Police to review the issues, resolve conflicting information, and establish measurable improvements before additional development increases evacuation demands.
Anonymous 3 (Card No. 7555) advocated for Anaheim Convention Center duty managers, stating that they have not received a pay increase in approximately 10 years while other Convention Center employees have received cost-of-living and other raises. He noted that the employees attempted to join the union two years ago but were denied because the request occurred mid-contract. He explained that a subsequent City Classification Study took more than a year to complete, resulting in further delays. He stated that the duty managers act as Convention Center Relief Supervisors and perform duties assisting and providing relief for event managers, who earn substantially higher salaries. He emphasized that the duty managers earn approximately $21.84 per hour despite having significant responsibilities and urged the Council to address duty managers' compensation and classification.
June Jackson raised concerns about the growing use of automated license plate readers and Flock cameras, questioning their impact on privacy and constitutional rights. She stated that the technology is capable of tracking residents' movements and alleged that the Anaheim Police Department had misused the system and other surveillance resources against them. She shared that she had filed police reports and claims with the City regarding alleged surveillance and misconduct but believed her complaints were dismissed without adequate investigation. She urged the Council to remove Flock cameras from Anaheim, strengthen protections for residents’ privacy and civil liberties, and take action to prevent the technology from being used beyond public safety purposes.
Mazatl Tepehyolotzin discussed Native American and Mexican American history in Anaheim and expressed appreciation for the Hopi Nation and the Mendez Freedom Trail in Westminster and Garden Grove. He highlighted the historical significance of Mendez v. Westminster and the desegregation of Mexican American students and proposed establishing an educational monument or similar historical feature at Pearson Park to recognize local discrimination, including the former exclusion of Mexican Americans from the park's swimming pool. He referenced the death of Albert Arzola and other community members and expressed concerns regarding racial disparities and police accountability. He emphasized the importance of education, respectful community engagement, and using historical facts and personal experiences to promote understanding and positive change.
City Council Minutes of July 28, 2026
Mark Richard Daniels provided additional information regarding discriminatory treatment at Pearson Park's swimming pool. He expressed concern about the continued advancement of surveillance technology, expressing concern about increasingly sophisticated monitoring capabilities and the potential implications for privacy. He added that investigations into alleged City misconduct should be conducted independently and that outside agencies are necessary to ensure accountability.
Sergio Pelayo cited a recent documentary, involving an innocent woman who was detained for more than 90 days, as an example of alleged failures by the Anaheim Police Department and City oversight. He spoke in support of the Arzola family and raised concerns regarding the death of Albert Arzola. He questioned why the other officer involved was not identified and why additional information was not released. He raised concerns about Police Department overtime practices.
Christine Ediss called for justice and accountability for the death of her nephew Albert Arzola. She questioned the circumstances that led to his death. She called for the release of the identity of the officer who was present and questioned why the officer involved remained employed. She expressed concern over the City’s use of Flock cameras and cited a recent Supreme Court decision regarding warrantless location tracking and Fourth Amendment privacy rights. She questioned fees charged to nonprofit organizations for community events, including permit, barricade, and staffing costs, and requested that the City waive or reduce fees for nonprofits providing services to children and families.
Grace Arzola expressed continued frustration with the City’s response regarding the death of her nephew Albert Arzola and other alleged Police Department misconduct. She criticized the City for lawsuits and settlements related to alleged police misconduct rather than investing the resources in youth and community programs. She expressed concerns regarding police overtime, excessive force, and unequal treatment of residents. She questioned who was responsible for independently reviewing Police Department finances, overtime, and use-of-force incidents. She called for greater transparency and accountability for employees at all levels and urged the Council to take action to address alleged misconduct within the Police Department.
Albert Arzola shared an incident involving an Anaheim Police Department vehicle and stated that he called 911 to document the incident for potential legal action. He commented on Police Department financial misconduct and criticized City leadership. He raised concerns about the distribution of school backpacks to children, stating that some children did not receive backpacks and calling for greater support for local students.
Pearl Arzola expressed concerns about community safety in Anaheim, citing issues involving drinking water, wildfire hazards in Anaheim Hills, and police use of force. She criticized fees charged to the non-profit Wings of Kindness for closing streets during a community event providing school supplies to children. She shared that Wings of Kindness, founded by the Mondragon family who operate a local liquor store, provides a trusted community space for children and families. She expressed concern that the community lacks trust and positive relationships with the Police Department. She called for greater respect and cooperation between law enforcement and residents.
Eric Chen raised concerns regarding parking and traffic enforcement near their apartment property, including food trucks remaining in the same location and contributing to double parking. He stated that he attempted to report the issue to the Police Department but did not receive assistance. He questioned a City electrical-inspection requirement to replace or install Number 6 wiring between an electrical main panel and subpanel, stating that the upgrade could cost approximately $20,000 and may not be necessary because the property does not have high-demand equipment such as an electric vehicle charger. He requested clarification regarding whether the City is authorized to require the electrical upgrade and asked the City Council to review the requirement.
City Council Minutes of July 28, 2026
In response to Mayor Aitken, Interim City Manager Garcia reported that Deputy City Manager Ted White could meet with Mr. Chen to discuss the City’s requirements and compliance with building codes.
Kenneth Batiste expressed concerns about national political and economic conditions, including press freedom, inflation, rising costs, corporate influence, and election integrity. He commented on the death of Albert Arzola and questioned why the autopsy report had not been released.
Duane Roberts (Remote) thanked Council Members Balius and Kurtz for responding to questions he submitted regarding the June 24th awards gala at the Nixon Library and Museum. He expressed disappointment that some Council Members and the City’s Public Information Officer did not provide requested information. He noted that he submitted a Public Records Act Request and emphasized that transparency should not require a lengthy formal process.
COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS:
Mayor Aitken recognized the Anaheim Police Department's recent Police Awards Ceremony, thanked the department for the invitation to attend, and commended the officers who were recognized for their outstanding service and contributions to the community. Mayor Aitken thanked Interim City Manager Garcia for the invitation to participate in the First Tee community program. She explained that the program offers low- and no-cost golf lessons to kids in the community who would typically not have access to those programs. She highlighted the community programs that the City champions and supports, and encouraged the public to check out the program.
Council Member Maahs highlighted the ribbon cutting at Window World of Orange County on July 14th. She shared that the business was located on North State College Boulevard, north of the 91 freeway. She added that the business is operated by a father and daughter, and expressed appreciation for their investment in Anaheim. Council Member Maahs thanked Teresa Rodriguez and the staff at the Miraloma Family Resource Center for hosting a Splash Day. She thanked the prior Council for approving the splash pad. She shared that there were hot dogs, water slides, popsicles, and water guns. She highlighted the event for the children who live in the neighborhood and the memories made. Council Member Maahs congratulated the Sunkist Library staff for hosting a wonderful STEAM Fair. She highlighted the Summer Reading Program where the Public Works Department and the Library collaborated. She shared that trash pickers were given to participants and highlighted the opportunity for children to learn about big equipment in the City.
Mayor Pro Tem Leon shared that another season of the OC Fair Express at ARTIC has begun. He shared that the Express makes it easier for Orange County families to enjoy the OC Fair without the hassle of traffic and parking. He reported that the OC Fair Express runs every Saturday and Sunday through August 16th with direct service to the fairgrounds from six locations across Orange County, including ARTIC. He noted that buses arrive every 30 minutes, with fares costing $2 each way for adults, while youth ages 18 and under ride free through Orange County Transportation Authority’s (OCTA) Youth Ride Free program with a WAVE card. He encouraged the public to consider taking the OC Fair Express.
CITY MANAGER’S UPDATE:
Interim City Manager Garcia reported that the City and the Anaheim Public Library are celebrating Chicano Heritage Month in August and invited the public to attend. He stated that Chicano Heritage reflects the richness of Mexican American identity through art, food, music, and more. He shared that the libraries will have various hands-on events and activities. He encouraged the public to check out the newest books celebrating Chicano heritage, including cultural cookbooks, personal essays, and powerful historical testimonies. He added that the public can visit the City’s website for additional City Council Minutes of July 28, 2026
information on the programs. Interim City Manager Garcia announced the Police Department’s National Night Out on Tuesday, August 4, from 5 p.m. to 8 p.m. at Juarez Park. He shared that the event is an opportunity for residents and Police to interact and continue building a sense of community. He noted that Anaheim Police would put on demonstrations with the helicopter Angel and showcase motorcycles, special operations equipment, police dogs, and horses. He encouraged the public to bring their family, friends, and neighbors to enjoy live music, food trucks, and games. Interim City Manager Garcia announced that Anaheim Public Utilities would be hosting an event on Saturday, August 8 at 9:30 a.m. at the new Sustainability Education Center. He added that people can learn about different landscape design concepts and how to save water and lower bills by replacing grass lawns with drought-tolerant gardens. He noted that the event was free, but RSVPs were required due to limited spots. He encouraged the public to visit the City’s website for additional information.
At 6:41 p.m., Mayor Aitken recessed the City Council to address the Anaheim Housing Authority agenda and reconvened at 6:42 p.m.
CONSENT CALENDAR: At 6:42 p.m., the consent calendar was considered with Council Member Meeks pulling Item No. 10 for separate consideration.
MOTION: Mayor Pro Tem Leon moved to waive reading of the ordinances and resolutions 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 Balius. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES – 6 (Mayor Aitken and Council Members Leon, Balius, Kurtz, Maahs, and Meeks); NOES – 0; ABSENT – 1 (Council Member Rubalcava). Motion carried.
3. Receive and file minutes of the Anaheim Tourism Improvement District Advisory Board meeting of April 16, 2026, the Community Services Board meeting of March 12, 2026, and the Library Board meeting of June 8, 2026.
4. Approve certificates recognizing Helen Franke in honor of her 102nd Birthday and Dukku Lee for his retirement as City of Anaheim’s Public Utilities General Manager.
5. Receive and file, with the possibility of discussion, the list of Professional Services Agreements authorized by the Interim City Manager and the list of Visit Anaheim Subcontractor Agreements approved by the Executive Director of Convention, Sports, and Entertainment for June 2026.
6. Approve response to the 2025-2026 Orange County Grand Jury report titled, “California Housing Mandates: The Unintended Reshaping of Orange County Neighborhoods,” and authorize the Interim City Manager to execute a letter and forward the response to the Presiding Judge of the Orange County Superior Court, pursuant to California Penal Code Section 933(c).
7. Approve the contract to the lowest responsible bidder, R.J. Noble Company, in an amount not to exceed $5,646,126.25, for the Harbor Boulevard Rehabilitation from Chapman Avenue to Convention Way, Placentia Avenue Rehabilitation from State College Boulevard to the 91 Freeway, and the Miraloma Avenue Vicinity Rehabilitation Project; authorize the Director of Public Works to execute the contract and related documents and to take the necessary actions to implement and administer the contract; determine that the project is Categorically City Council Minutes of July 28, 2026
Exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Class 1, Section 15301 (Existing Facilities) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations; and authorize the Finance Director to execute the Escrow Agreement pertaining to contract retentions.
8. Approve the Master Construction Agreement – High Voltage Electric Facilities (Master Agreement) for high voltage electric utility construction, maintenance, repair, and immediate response projects, with a five-year term and extensions of up to one year as needed to complete in-progress work, and authorize the Public Utilities General Manager, or designee, to execute individual Master Agreements with each contractor currently prequalified by the Anaheim Public Utilities Department (APU), and with any additional contractors prequalified by APU during the five-year term of the Master Agreement, with any changes that do not materially alter the terms and conditions of the Master Agreement, as determined by the City Attorney’s Office; approve a not to exceed amount of $1,000,000 per work order package or request for immediate response services with a limit of $4,000,000 in total awards per contractor per fiscal year during the term of the Master Agreement, with change order authorization for up to 10% of the work order package/request amount capped at $100,000 in total change orders; authorize the General Manager, or designee, to execute any documents contemplated by or related to the Master Agreement, including work orders and changes thereto, and to take any necessary or advisable actions to implement, fund, and administer the Master Agreement; and determine that the projects to be performed under the Master Agreement are categorically exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines (California Code Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3) Sections 15301, 15302, 15303, and 15304; and further determine that none of the exceptions to the categorical exemptions set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 apply [Asplundh Construction LLC, Diversified Utility Services, Inc., Edison Power Constructors, Inc., Elecnor Hawkeye LLC, Ferreira Power West LLC, Hampton Tedder Electric Co., Henkels & McCoy West, LLC, Herman Weissker Power, Inc., Michels Pacific Energy, Inc., Miron Electric Construction Corp., Outsource Utility Contractor, LLC, PAR Western Line Contractors, LLC, Parkia, Inc., Pinnacle Power Services, Inc., Power Grade Inc., Sturgeon Electric California, LLC, Wilson Utility Construction Co.].
9. Approve a Joint Use Agreement with Vista Charter Public School for Vista Charter Public School’s use of facilities at Palm Lane Park and Palm Lane Global Academy for a term of five years with two five-year optional renewals, and authorize the Director of Community Services, or designee, to execute the agreement.
11. RESOLUTION NO. 2026-087 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM designating Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. the authority to examine the City’s sales and use tax records.
12. RESOLUTION NO. 2026-088 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM vacating easements for public utility and public purposes generally located at 200 West Midway Drive pursuant to California Streets and Highways Code Section 8330, et seq. -Summary Vacation (ABA2025-00444).
City Council Minutes of July 28, 2026
13. RESOLUTION NO. 2026-089 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM vacating a portion of a public service easement generally located at 1501- 1551 West Lincoln Avenue pursuant to California Streets and Highways Code Section 8330, et seq. - Summary Vacation (ABA2026-00452).
14. Approve the minutes of the City Council meetings of May 5, 2026, May 12, 2026, and May 27, 2026 (Special).
BUSINESS CALENDAR:
10. Approve a Joint Use License Agreement with City Church of Anaheim, Inc. to provide designated parking lot use at City Church and Anaheim Central Library for an initial term of two years, with three additional one-year optional renewals; and authorize the Director of Community Services, or designee, to execute and administer the Agreement on behalf of the City.
DISCUSSION: Council Member Meeks expressed her support for the item to use available parking to reduce parking spillover into surrounding neighborhoods but raised concerns about pedestrians and families jaywalking between the parking area and the church. She inquired whether signage could be installed on the library side encouraging pedestrians to use the designated crosswalk.
Director of Community Services Sjany Larson-Cash added that staff held similar concerns due to the staggered locations. She supported installing signage and noted that staff has spoken with the church to have escorts or representatives on-site to encourage individuals to walk to the crosswalk.
In response to Council Member Meeks, Director Larson-Cash stated that the measures were not included as a written term of the agreement, but had been discussed with church officials. She added that staff would continue to monitor the crosswalks.
Council Member Meeks suggested written documentation to ensure continuity in the event of personnel changes.
Director Larson-Cash confirmed that staff would follow up with the church in writing.
MOTION: Council Member Meeks moved to approve a Joint Use License Agreement with City Church of Anaheim, Inc. to provide designated parking lot use at City Church and Anaheim Central Library for an initial term of two years, with three additional one-year optional renewals; and authorize the Director of Community Services, or designee, to execute and administer the Agreement on behalf of the City, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Leon. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES – 6 (Mayor Aitken and Council Members Leon, Balius, Kurtz, Maahs, and Meeks); NOES – 0; ABSENT – 1 (Council Member Rubalcava). Motion carried.
City Council Minutes of July 28, 2026
15. RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA ordering the submission to the qualified voters of the City of Anaheim at the General Municipal Election to be held on Tuesday, November 3, 2026, of a general tax measure set forth in a proposed ordinance adding Chapter 2.16 (Tourism Mobility Tax) to Title 2 (Taxes) of the Anaheim Municipal Code to establish a 10% ($2 average) tax on rideshare trips originating from or ending in nonresidential use areas of The Anaheim Resort or in the Transit District, part of the Katella District, and nonresidential use areas of the Arena District and the Stadium District all of which are within the Platinum Triangle Area; requesting that the Orange County Board of Supervisors direct the Orange County Registrar of Voters to render services to the city relating to the conduct of the General Municipal Election; establishing the deadlines for the filing of arguments and rebuttal arguments; and directing the City Attorney to prepare an impartial analysis [includes determination that general tax measure relates to organizational or administrative activities of government and creation of a government funding mechanism that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment, and therefore is not a project within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and the State CEQA Guidelines, Section 15378(b)(4)]. a. If the resolution is adopted, the City Council may designate up to three Council Member(s) and two others to prepare and sign an argument in support of the tax measure and, if needed, a rebuttal argument to a potential argument opposing the tax measure, if so desired by the City Council.
Interim City Manager Garcia reported that the proposed tax measure supports the City’s Strategic Plan for new funding sources to increase City revenues and to maintain and enhance services. He noted that during the December 9, 2025 Strategic Plan Workshop, the City Council discussed various options for sales tax measures, utility user fees, Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) increases, admission taxes, parking taxes, billboards, and development impact fees. He explained that during the discussion, the City Council identified the Transportation Network Company or TNC tax as a viable option that should be explored. He reported that staff reviewed the proposed tax and prepared a potential ballot measure for Council consideration.
Interim City Manager Garcia stated that the proposed measure would establish a 10% tax on rideshare trips within designated non-residential use areas of the Anaheim Resort and portions of the Platinum Triangle. He added that part of the action is to establish the deadlines for filing arguments and rebuttal arguments and designate up to three Council Members to prepare and sign an argument in support of the tax measure. He added that the action includes direction for the City Attorney to prepare an impartial analysis of the measure.
Interim City Manager Garcia read the proposed ballot measure language, “To maintain City services, including police, fire, 911 response; safe/clean public parks; address homelessness; repair streets; improve public transit/traffic congestion; other general services; shall a measure levying 10% ($2 average) on rideshare/driverless-vehicle company trips starting or ending only in nonresidential locations within The Anaheim Resort, the Transit District/Arena District/Stadium District/ part of Katella District within the Platinum Triangle, generating approximately $3,600,000 annually until ended by voters, requiring audits, spending disclosure, funds benefiting Anaheim residents, be adopted?” He explained that the proposed measure was designed to minimize impacts on Anaheim residents by excluding residential areas. He noted that within the Anaheim Resort, areas with residential zoning were excluded, while within the Platinum Triangle, the proposed tax would only apply to portions of the Arena, Katella, Stadium, and Transit Districts, excluding residential areas. He stated that the measure would only apply to two square miles of Anaheim’s 50-square-mile area.
City Council Minutes of July 28, 2026
Interim City Manager Garcia reported that, with assistance from outside counsel and a transitplanning firm, the City estimated approximately 1.5 million rides to and from the Anaheim Resort and 240,000 rides to and from the Platinum Triangle annually. He acknowledged that precise ride data was not readily available and noted that the estimates represented the closest available projections based on the firm’s methodology. He explained that at a proposed 10% tax rate, the annual revenues were estimated to be $3.6 million. He stated that staff reviewed similar TNC tax programs in other jurisdictions, including San Francisco and Berkeley in California, and Baltimore, Chicago, New Orleans, New York City, Philadelphia, Portland, Seattle, and Washington. He noted that those programs generally applied citywide compared to the City’s proposed tax measure, which would be limited to non-residential areas of the Anaheim Resort and Platinum Triangle to minimize impacts on residents.
Interim City Manager Garcia presented examples of existing airport pickup and drop-off fees at surrounding airports, noting that flat fees are commonly used and have been in place for an extended period. He outlined the proposed ballot-measure timeline, including an August 4 th deadline for the
impartial analysis and ballot arguments, an August 14th deadline for rebuttal arguments, with the election taking place on November 3
rd for voter consideration.
DISCUSSION: Mayor Aitken thanked staff for bringing the item forward expeditiously. She requested clarification regarding “shared rides” and “all other rides”, inquiring whether shared rides related to trips booked through a rideshare application with multiple passengers or between services and other transportation providers.
Steve Mattas with Redwood Public Law clarified that “shared rides” refer to Uber and Lyft trips where passengers agree to share the vehicle with other passengers. He explained that shared rides generally receive a lower tax rate, while individual rides taken alone or with members of the same party are subject to the higher tax rate.
In response to Mayor Aitken, Sky Woodruff with Redwood Public Law reported that, as proposed, vehicles with taxi medallions are excluded from the tax. He noted that if the vehicles migrated into a typical transportation network company model like Uber and Lyft, the tax would apply.
Mayor Aitken requested clarification on how the proposed measure would exclude Anaheim residents.
Mr. Woodruff explained that the City evaluated whether Anaheim residents could be legally or practically exempted from the proposed TNC tax but determined that such an exemption could present significant legal challenges. He reported that instead, the proposed measure excludes designated residential areas within the affected districts. He clarified that rides to or from residential portions would not be taxed, while rides to and from designated commercial areas would be subject to the tax, regardless of whether the rider is an Anaheim resident.
In response to Council Member Maahs, Mr. Woodruff clarified that rideshare trips beginning or ending in designated residential areas would be exempt from the proposed tax measure. He provided an example of a trip from a residence to a workplace at a Resort Area hotel, followed by a return trip directly home, because each trip begins or ends in a residential area. He further clarified that rideshare trips originating in designated residential areas would be exempt from the proposed tax measure. He reported that residents living elsewhere in Anaheim who travel to the affected areas would be subject to the tax.
In response to Council Member Kurtz, Mr. Woodruff confirmed that the tax would apply to rides from the Resort Area to homes outside of the designated area.
City Council Minutes of July 28, 2026
Council Member Kurtz requested clarification on the data and methodology used to determine the average $2 per trip rate.
Mr. Mattas explained that the City’s consultant Kittelson & Associates, Inc. analyzed multiple data sources to estimate the number of TNC trips entering and leaving non-residential areas of the Anaheim Resort and Platinum Triangle. He noted that the consultant compared available electronic rideshare data with Anaheim traffic information and estimated approximately 1.6 to 1.8 million TNC trips annually. He stated that the revenue projection assumes an average taxable trip of approximately $20, resulting in an estimated $2 tax per trip at a 10% rate. He noted that because Anaheim can tax only the portion of a trip occurring within the City, the estimate accounts for the taxable portion of a trip originating outside Anaheim and traveling into the City.
In response to Council Member Kurtz, Mr. Mattas explained that the proposed ordinance provides two methods for calculating the taxable portion of the trip. He stated that under the mileage-based method, the rideshare company would calculate the percentage of the trip that occurs within Anaheim based on the pickup and drop-off locations and route traveled. He added that a TNC may elect to calculate 50% of the total trip amount as the taxable portion. He noted that a TNC must consistently use its selected calculation method when reporting the tax.
Council Member Kurtz inquired about the percentage of resident riders compared to visitors.
Mr. Mattas clarified that the Kittelson report did not determine the percentage of trips made by residents compared to non-residents. He explained that the consultants calculated the number of trips entering and leaving the Resort and Platinum Triangle. He noted that a significant portion of trips likely originated outside Anaheim, but the exact percentage was unknown.
Council Member Kurtz expressed concern about residents living in neighborhoods surrounding the Resort subject to the proposed tax when using rideshare services to travel to or from work.
In response to Council Member Meeks, Mr. Mattas explained that excluding residential areas was intended to discourage visitors from parking in nearby neighborhoods to avoid the tax. He noted that staff also wanted to ensure that residents living within the Resort and Platinum Triangle who work within those areas would not be taxed on short trips between their homes and workplaces.
Director of Public Works Rudy Emami addressed Council Member Kurtz’s previous concern regarding residents living near the Resort who commute to and from work by rideshare. He explained that the City considered using a flat fee versus a percentage-based and selected a percentage-based approach because it would result in lower charges for shorter trips. He noted that while an airport-toResort trip could cost approximately $30 and generate a $3 tax at 10%, shorter trips would result in lower tax rates. He stated that the percentage-based structure provides flexibility and reduces the impact on Resort workers who live nearby.
In response to Council Member Meeks, Director Emami explained that the proposed TNC tax was initially designed to target Anaheim’s tourist-heavy transit-use areas, the Anaheim Resort and the Platinum Triangle. He stated that residential areas were excluded to protect residents and everyday workers who live and work within those areas from being taxed on routine trips.
Mr. Woodruff explained that the proposed TNC tax was structured in consideration of federal constitutional requirements under the Commerce Clause and Dormant Commerce Clause. He noted that the provisions may restrict the City from treating economic activity differently based on whether it involves Anaheim residents versus residents of other jurisdictions, as doing so could improperly favor local economic activity. He stated that, in addition to the policy objective of limiting the tax to high- City Council Minutes of July 28, 2026
tourism areas, the legal considerations influenced the decisions to apply the proposed tax to specific geographic areas and exclude designated areas rather than provide a Citywide resident exemption.
Council Member Meeks expressed concern that the proposed geographic structure could incentivize drivers to drop off passengers outside a taxable area. She questioned why taxi and rideshare services would be treated differently under the proposed tax structure and requested clarification on how taxi services would contribute through existing franchises or other fees.
Mr. Woodruff explained that traditional taxi operations are subject to different regulatory requirements, franchise payments, and taxes than TNCs. He stated that California and other jurisdictions have generally excluded taxis from similar TNC taxes because taxis operate under a separate regulatory and taxation framework, while TNCs have historically not been subject to the same requirements.
In response to Council Member Meeks, Mr. Woodruff clarified that a taxi driver who accepts a trip through a rideshare application may be operating as a TNC driver rather than under the taxi’s existing regulatory and tax framework. He explained that the taxi driver would be subject to the proposed TNC tax because the trip would be provided outside the regulatory and taxation requirements that apply to traditional taxi operations.
Council Member Meeks acknowledged the expedited timeline for considering the proposed TNC tax and expressed concern that additional analysis may be needed. She questioned whether the City’s study evaluated potential impacts on Uber and Lyft ridership, visitors, or other unintended consequences associated with implementing the tax.
Mr. Mattas stated that the staff report did not include analysis of how the proposed TNC tax might affect ridership. He reported that comments submitted from Uber and Lyft stated that a 10% increase could discourage rideshare use and shift travelers to other modes. He noted that rideshare users generally see the total trip price when selecting a ride rather than the individual components of the fare and tax. He explained that as a result, it would be unclear how identifying the tax on a receipt would influence a rider’s transportation decision.
In response to Council Member Balius, Director Emami explained that the City initially considered using the ZIP code associated with a rideshare user’s account to automatically exempt Anaheim residents from the proposed TNC tax. He stated that the federal Dormant Commerce Clause would prevent the City from legally applying the tax differently based on residency.
Mr. Woodruff explained constitutional concerns with exempting Anaheim residents from the proposed TNC tax based on their billing ZIP code. He reported that under the Dormant Commerce Clause, the City could face legal challenges for taxing similar economic activity differently based on where the rider lives. He provided an example of an Anaheim resident taking a rideshare from their home to a concert could be exempt, while a resident of a neighboring city would be taxed. He explained that because the tax could be viewed as favoring local economic activity over activity originating outside Anaheim, staff determined not to pursue a residency-based exemption.
Council Member Balius requested additional information on the legal rationale for excluding designated residential areas from the proposed TNC tax, questioning why the same constitutional concerns regarding different treatment of residents would not apply to the geographic exemptions.
Mr. Woodruff explained that the proposed residential-area exclusions would apply based on the location where the ride begins or ends, rather than the ride’s residency. He stated that as a result, the exemption could apply equally to Anaheim residents and visitors from neighboring cities who begin or end a trip within a designated residential area. He reported that exempting riders based on their City Council Minutes of July 28, 2026
Anaheim residential ZIP code could result in otherwise identical rides being taxed differently depending on where the rider lives, potentially creating constitutional concerns under the Dormant Commerce Clause.
In response to Council Member Balius, Mr. Woodruff stated that a residency-based exemption could still be viewed by a court as primarily benefiting Anaheim residents, even if structured differently. He explained that the concern is that residents traveling to the same destination could be treated differently based solely on their place of residence, creating potential constitutional issues.
Council Member Balius requested clarification on how the proposed tax would apply when an Uber or Lyft picks up multiple passengers at different locations to go to a common destination. He inquired whether both passengers would be subject to the tax or whether it would apply differently depending on which passenger was picked up first.
Mr. Woodruff clarified that, under the proposed ordinance, neither passenger would be subject to the TNC tax until the shared trip enters Anaheim. He stated that once in the City, each passenger would be taxed 10% of their respective share of the fare, limited to the portion of the trip occurring within the City.
Council Member Meeks inquired if rideshare companies maintain Anaheim business licenses or if they are regulated by the State.
Mr. Mattas explained that TNCs are regulated by the State, limiting the City’s options for imposing a tax. He stated that the City considered taxing the rideshare companies directly; however, State law does not permit that approach. He added that taxing individual drivers is also restricted, as drivers generally may only be taxed in the City they identify as their primary business location. He stated that the remaining option was to impose the tax on the individual rideshare trip or rider, with Uber or Lyft responsible for collecting and remitting the tax.
Council Member Meeks expressed general support for exploring the proposed TNC tax but stated that additional analysis was needed before proceeding. She recommended working with Uber and Lyft to examine how similar taxes have been implemented in other cities, assess their effectiveness, and identify best practices. She requested further review of the proposed residential-area exemptions and whether alternative approaches could better protect Anaheim residents from the tax. She stated that although additional study could delay implementation by up to two years, she explained that she was not prepared to move forward with the current proposal and evaluate all available options.
Mayor Aitken noted that staff reached out to the Anaheim community based on voter registration; however, inquired whether the City had sought input from labor unions representing Resort District workers, hoteliers, or other business stakeholders regarding the proposed TNC tax. She suggested a flat fee on riders beginning or ending in the Resort District, similar to airport transportation fees. She requested information on the percentage of Resort District employees who rely on Uber or Lyft for transportation and what alternative transportation options may be available. She stated that understanding how many Anaheim residents and Resort-area workers use rideshare services could influence whether residential exemptions are necessary. She shared that most trips to destinations such as the Honda Center, Angel Stadium, Convention Center, and Resort hotels are primarily visitoror entertainment-related.
Director Emami stated that despite the expedited timeline, the City attempted to reach key stakeholders and informed Visit Anaheim about the proposed TNC tax. He reported that Visit Anaheim was supportive and did not believe the tax would negatively affect visitation. He acknowledged that additional outreach could provide more information, particularly regarding Resort- City Council Minutes of July 28, 2026
area workers’ transportation habits. He added that potential methods included directly surveying employees and reviewing employee commute-mode data that larger California employers are required to report. He noted that delaying consideration of the measure could provide additional time to collect and verify the information.
Mayor Pro Tem Leon thanked staff for their work in developing the proposed TNC tax and acknowledged the Council’s broader goal of exploring new revenue options. He expressed concern about the potential impact on Resort workers, emphasizing that their success is essential to the success of the Resort District. He requested clarification on how the proposed 10% TNC tax would be calculated when rideshare companies apply surge pricing, specifically whether the tax would apply only to the base fare or to the total fare including any surge pricing.
Mr. Mattas clarified that the tax would apply to the total fare amount, excluding tips.
Mayor Pro Tem Leon reiterated concerns that the proposed TNC tax could affect Anaheim residents who work in the Resort District. He stated that an average $2 charge may have little impact on visitors but could become a significant recurring expense for Resort workers who rely on rideshare services to the community, potentially totaling about $30 per week or $100 per month. He referenced essential Resort workers and expressed support for continuing discussions with labor, business, and other stakeholders to identify a revenue option that would not adversely affect Anaheim residents or Resort workers.
Council Member Balius thanked staff for developing the proposed TNC tax but stated that it may not be the appropriate approach for generating additional City revenue. He emphasized that the Anaheim Resort is a major economic engine for the City and noted that visitors already pay TOT and other tourism-related expenses. He expressed concern that adding another tax could make Anaheim less competitive, discourage visitation and overnight stays, and reduce repeat tourism. He acknowledged that the measure could generate approximately $3.5 million annually, and questioned whether the additional revenue would outweigh the potential negative economic impacts and stated that the City should focus on attracting visitors rather than adding costs.
Mayor Aitken proposed continuing discussions with the City Manager’s Office to further explore questions and concerns raised regarding the proposed TNC tax. She noted that the Council’s review provided valuable information about rideshare transportation and residents’ priorities, based in part on outreach to Anaheim voters. She suggested allowing additional time for further analysis and stakeholder engagement rather than moving forward under the expedited timeline required to place the measure on the November ballot.
Interim City Manager Garcia agreed that the Council discussion had provided valuable information and direction for any future consideration of a TNC tax. He stated that staff has a better understanding of the additional studies, analysis, and stakeholder input that would be needed before revisiting the proposal. He thanked Director Emami and his team, along with Redwood Public Law and City staff, for their work and acknowledged the Council’s feedback.
Discussion; no formal action taken by the City Council.
City Council Minutes of July 28, 2026
PUBLIC HEARING:
16. DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION NO. 2026-00022 (DEV2026-00022)
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE ELEMENT
ADJUSTMENT NO. 17 TO THE FESTIVAL SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 90-1 ADJUSTMENT NO. 5 TO THE MOUNTAIN PARK SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 90-4 ADJUSTMENT NO. 17 TO THE ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 2015-1 ADJUSTMENT NO. 12 TO THE BEACH BOULEVARD SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 2017-1 AMENDMENT OF TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE – SIXTH CYCLE
HOUSING ELEMENT IMPLEMENTATION
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA), SECTION 15061(B)(3) AND CALIFORNIA PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE SECTION 21080.085
PROJECT LOCATION: Citywide.
REQUEST: A City-initiated General Plan Amendment to update the General Plan Land Use Element (including an amendment to Table LU-2), and amendments to Title 18 (Zoning) of the Anaheim Municipal Code (Code) amending Chapters 18.04 (Single-Family Residential Zones), 18.06 (Multiple-Family Residential Zones), 18.08 (Commercial Zones), 18.10 (Industrial Zone), 18.12 (Mixed-Use Zone), 18.14 (Public and Special-Purpose Zones), 18.16 (Regulatory Permits), 18.20 (Platinum Triangle Mixed Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone), 18.22 (Brookhurst Commercial Corridor (BCC) Overlay Zone), 18.36 (Types of Uses), 18.38 (Supplemental Use Regulations), 18.39 (Multiple-Family and Mixed-Use Objective Design Standards), 18.42 (Parking and Loading), 18.52 (Affordable Housing), 18.92 (Definitions),
18.108 (Festival Specific Plan No. 90- 1 (SP 90-1) Zoning and Development Standards),
18.112 (Mountain Park Specific Plan No. 90-4 (SP 90-4) Zoning and Development Standards), 18.120 (Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan No. 2015-1 (SP 2015-1) Zoning and Development Standards), 18.122 (Beach Boulevard Specific Plan No. 2017-1 (SP 2017-1) Zoning and Development Standards), and other related provisions of the Zoning Code. The proposed amendments are to comply with changes to State law and implement the Sixth Cycle Housing Element.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The City Council will consider whether the proposed action is exempt from the requirements to prepare additional environmental documentation per California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, Section 15061(b)(3) and California Public Resources Code Section 21080.085.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Approved Resolution No. PC2026-015 recommending that City Council approve and adopt a proposed General Plan Amendment amending the Land Use Element (Development Application No. 2026-00022). VOTE: 5-0 (Chairperson Walker and Commissioners Castro, Kelly, Lieberman, and Tran-Martin voted yes; Commissioners Abdulrahman and Perez absent). (Planning Commission meeting of June 15, 2026).
RESOLUTION NO. 2026-090 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM amending the General Plan Land Use Element [DEV2026-00022; includes determination that the project is exempt from the requirements to prepare additional environmental documentation per California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, Section 15061(b)(3)].
City Council Minutes of July 28, 2026
ORDINANCE NO. 6627 (INTRODUCTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM approving Development Application No. 2026-00022, adopting amendments to Title 18 (Zoning) of the Anaheim Municipal Code to implement the Sixth Cycle Housing Element and maintain consistency with state housing law and finding and determining that this ordinance is not subject to the requirements to prepare additional environmental documentation per California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, Section 15061(b)(3) and California Public Resources Code Section 21080.085 because it will not have a significant effect on the Environment [Development Application No. 2026-00022].
Director of Planning and Building Heather Allen reported that the item includes a series of Housing Element implementation actions involving zoning code and specific plan amendments, which are required to fulfill commitments already made in the City's certified Sixth Cycle Housing Element. She noted that the item includes an amendment to the General Plan Land Use Element. She stated that the Housing Element was adopted by the City Council in 2025 and subsequently found by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) to be in substantial compliance with State Housing Element Law. She reported that as part of the Housing Element, the City committed to several implementation actions to ensure that local regulations remain consistent with State housing laws, remove barriers to housing, and expand housing opportunities. She explained that several of the implementation actions have deadlines in June and July of 2026. She stated that there are five (5) proposed amendments that are intended to fulfill the commitments while supporting continued compliance with State law and Housing Element certification. She reported that on June 15, 2026, the Planning Commission recommended City Council approval of Zoning Code, Specific Plan, and General Plan Land Use Element Amendments.
Director Allen reported that the first amendment responds to Senate Bill (SB) 4, effective in 2024, and implements Housing Production Strategy 1I of the Housing Element. She explained that SB 4 allows qualifying affordable housing developments on land owned by religious institutions and nonprofit colleges, regardless of certain local zoning restrictions. She stated that to implement those requirements, staff is proposing a new section of the Zoning Code that establishes standards and procedures for eligible affordable housing developments on the properties. She added that the amendments also update the Land Use Table and related provisions throughout the Code and applicable specific plans to identify eligible housing as a permitted use. She noted that the proposed amendment is consistent with the provisions of applicable State law.
Director Allen stated that the next amendment codifies a formal replacement housing program within the Zoning Code, based on SB 330 and State Density Bonus Law. She reported that State law mandates cities to require replacement of certain residential units when they are demolished, converted, or otherwise removed as part of a development project. She noted that the requirements generally apply to units that are occupied by lower-income households, subject to affordability restrictions, or have been removed from the housing market within the previous five years, regardless of affordability level. She reported that the proposed code section establishes when replacement housing requirements apply and specifies the number and type of replacement units that must be provided. She stated that it also establishes affordability requirements, affordability terms, standards for comparable replacement units, and protections for existing occupants. She added that the protections include relocation assistance requirements and the right for displaced lower-income households to return to replacement units when they become available. She noted that the proposed amendment is consistent with the provisions of applicable State law.
Director Allen reported that State housing and fair housing laws require cities to treat a variety of living arrangements as residential uses and prohibit housing discrimination based on protected characteristics, including familial status. She added that to maintain consistency with the legal requirements, the proposed amendments update several residential use definitions, including Single City Council Minutes of July 28, 2026
Housekeeping Unit, Boarding House, and other related residential classifications. She stated that the revisions are intended to clarify existing code language, ensure compliance with State law, and recognize that both related and unrelated individuals may reside together in a residential setting. She noted that the changes are required as part of the City’s adopted Housing Element implementation program and do not create new residential use types; rather, they ensure the Municipal Code is consistent with current State housing and fair housing requirements. She added that the proposed changes are clarifying in nature and are intended to remove any perceived ambiguity while ensuring consistency with current State housing requirements.
Director Allen stated that State law requires cities to affirmatively further fair housing, which means taking meaningful actions to reduce barriers to housing, address discrimination, and promote equitable access to housing opportunities. She added that the City must periodically review and update its regulations for group homes, which are identified in the Zoning Code as Community Care Facilities – Unlicensed and Sober Living Homes. She reported that the proposed amendments make targeted clarifications by establishing clearer operational standards, confirming that the facilities must comply with applicable building, fire, safety, and parking requirements, and providing examples of services that may be offered as part of a legitimate recovery program. She noted that the updates are intended to improve regulatory clarity while ensuring the City’s regulations remain consistent with State fair housing laws, which require the facilities to be treated as residential uses rather than subject to more restrictive standards. She stated that the updates are intended to provide clear expectations for operators while ensuring that residents are afforded housing opportunities consistent with State law. She added that the City’s regulations would continue to be similar to those adopted by other Orange County jurisdictions.
Director Allen reported that the last zoning code amendment updates the City’s emergency shelter regulations. She stated that the proposed amendments implement requirements established by Assembly Bills 139 and 2339 by revising the City’s emergency shelter standards. She noted that the amendments update separation requirements between emergency shelters and similar facilities, limit parking requirements to employees rather than shelter residents, and clarify permitting requirements for larger shelters. She added that the updates ensure that Anaheim’s regulations remain compliant with State law while continuing to provide clear development standards for emergency shelter operators.
Director Allen stated that in addition to the Housing Element implementation-related Code amendments, staff is proposing a targeted amendment to the General Plan Land Use Element. She added that the amendment would reduce the minimum density within the Mixed-Use High Land Use designation from 30 dwelling units per acre to 20. She noted that the maximum density of 60 dwelling units per acre would remain unchanged, as would the maximum floor area ratio for non-residential uses. She reported that staff initiated the amendment after evaluating current market conditions and development trends. She explained that through the analysis, staff determined that the existing minimum density requirement may limit the feasibility of certain housing projects and may not always reflect market-supported development patterns. She added that reducing the minimum density requirement would provide additional flexibility for a wider range of housing products and site configurations while continuing to support residential development consistent with the intent of the Mixed-Use High designation.
Director Allen concluded that staff recommends that the City Council approve the targeted Land Use Element Amendment and introduce an ordinance to approve the Housing Element Implementationrelated Code updates in compliance with State law and continued certification of the Housing Element. She noted that the amendments implement existing State housing law and fulfill five Housing Element programs.
City Council Minutes of July 28, 2026
DISCUSSION: In response to Mayor Pro Tem Leon, Director Allen explained that eligible affordable housing projects would be permitted by right under State law, eliminating the need for a zone change or General Plan Amendment. She stated that the State establishes development standards, including maximum density, property eligibility requirements, proximity restrictions such as separation from industrial uses, and labor commitments. She reported that properties and developers that meet all State law requirements and project criteria would be eligible for an expedited review process. She added that the City would still conduct a technical review, but the project would not require discretionary approval from the Planning Commission or City Council.
Mayor Pro Tem Leon inquired whether the proposed affordable housing regulations include specific parking requirements or ratios and whether those standards would differ from the City’s existing requirements and density-bonus provisions.
Deputy Director of Planning and Building Joanne Hwang stated that the proposed regulations do not establish a specific parking requirement; however, eligible affordable housing projects would qualify for any parking reductions available under existing State density bonus laws, because the projects are required to provide affordable housing.
Mayor Pro Tem Leon inquired whether the proposed regulations would provide the City with additional enforcement authority over existing group homes, including the ability to inspect properties to ensure compliance with applicable standards. He noted that group homes have been a recurring concern for residents in several parts of the City, including District 2, and asked whether the proposal would apply only to newly established group homes or also affect existing facilities.
Assistant City Attorney Leonie Muvihill explained that the proposed changes are intended to implement the City’s program in compliance with Housing Element requirements and do not add new regulatory authority over existing sober-living homes or unlicensed community care facilities. She stated that existing regulations remain in place, although the changes address certain legal and regulatory concerns that have been identified. She noted that the City is balancing its desire for additional regulation with State requirements to affirmatively further fair housing and avoid discriminatory practices. She reported that while the City is not adding new regulations; however, staff would continue to monitor legal developments and other cities’ approaches and will continue using existing enforcement tools, including nuisance laws, where appropriate.
Senior Planner Christine Nguyen added that the code amendments would make applicable standards more objective and clearly define operational requirements. She noted that it would provide greater clarity for both property operators and Code Enforcement regarding the standards being regulated.
At 7:45 p.m., Mayor Aitken opened the public hearing.
Marc Herbert expressed concern that residents have limited opportunities to ask questions and participate in the Housing Element process, noting the absence of public workshops and that residents do not receive the same opportunity for clarification available to the Council. He questioned the accuracy of information in the Housing Element and referenced the Deer Park development proposal. He questioned proposed reductions in housing density, noting that Anaheim’s Housing Element identified a target of approximately 9,100 affordable housing units and asserting that only about 350 had been completed at the midpoint. He questioned how reducing density would help the City meet its affordable housing goals and expressed concern that the changes may be responding to special interests rather than residents. He noted that residents have spent months seeking answers to health and safety concerns without receiving responses.
City Council Minutes of July 28, 2026
Andrew Winger questioned the proposed reduction in housing density and asked whether the change was required by State law or was a City policy intended to broaden eligibility. He expressed concern that additional factors may have influenced the proposed density level and requested clarification on the basis for the change.
City Clerk Theresa Bass reported that there were no remote speakers or electronic public comments on Public Hearing Item No. 16.
At 7:50 p.m., Mayor Aitken closed the public hearing.
Council Member Meeks inquired if the ordinance requires religious properties to maintain sufficient parking.
Senior Planner Nguyen confirmed that the parking standards would remain the same.
Council Member Meeks asked whether the proposed regulations could make it more difficult for owners of aging rental housing to replace or substantially rehabilitate existing units. She expressed concern that additional requirements could create barriers for property owners seeking to upgrade or rebuild rental housing that has reached the end of its useful life.
Director Allen stated that the replacement housing provision was an existing State law that the City was incorporating into the Municipal Code.
Director of Housing and Community Development explained that the City has limited experience implementing the replacement housing requirement. She reported that when a property owner seeks to remove rental units from service, and the City determines that lower-income tenants occupy some of those units, staff works with the owner to verify tenant eligibility and requires replacement of the affected units. She noted that, based on the limited cases reviewed, the requirement has not created a significant barrier to redevelopment, although it does add an additional step involving verification of tenant income and occupancy status before a property can be fully vacated and remodeled.
Council Member Meeks expressed concern that the replacement housing requirement could hinder efforts to rebuild, rehabilitate, or add units to aging rental properties, but acknowledged that the requirement is mandated by State law and expressed support for incorporating it into the City’s code.
She requested clarification regarding the proposed reduction in minimum density for mixed-use projects, inquiring whether the change was a City proposal based on staff’s determination that existing minimum density requirements may be too high for certain mixed-use developments.
Director Allen confirmed that the proposed reduction was a City staff recommendation. She stated that the change would not affect the City’s ability to meet its arena-related requirements or alter any sites previously designated for affordable housing, as those sites have a different land use classification.
Council Member Balius inquired whether the five proposed code amendments are requirements imposed on the City by the State and whether Anaheim had any discretion in adopting those provisions, other than through participation in the State legislative process.
Director Allen confirmed that the code amendments are required to bring Anaheim’s regulations into compliance with State housing laws. She explained that as part of the Housing Element process, the City identified existing codes and regulations that were not compliant with State law and established a work plan to address them as a condition of maintaining a certified Housing Element. She stated that City Council Minutes of July 28, 2026
the amendments were identified for completion by June 2026, following certification of the Housing Element in 2025.
In response to Council Member Balius, Director Allen confirmed that if the item was not approved, the City would be at risk of attention from HCD for not meeting the timelines.
In response to Mayor Aitken, Director Allen confirmed that the item was properly noticed for the June 15, 2026 Planning Commission meeting. She added that the public could have attended and submitted public comments. She noted that the item was part of the Housing Element, which has been publicly identified for many years.
Mayor Aitken clarified that the project manager remained available by email or other methods of contact, and that the item has been posted since Thursday, and public comment had been received during the meeting.
MOTION: Mayor Pro Tem Leon moved to approve RESOLUTION NO. 2026-090 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM amending the General Plan Land Use Element [DEV2026-00022; includes determination that the project is exempt from the requirements to prepare additional environmental documentation per California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, Section 15061(b)(3)] and introduce ORDINANCE NO. 6627 (INTRODUCTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM approving Development Application No. 2026-00022, adopting amendments to Title 18 (Zoning) of the Anaheim Municipal Code to implement the Sixth Cycle Housing Element and maintain consistency with state housing law and finding and determining that this ordinance is not subject to the requirements to prepare additional environmental documentation per California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, Section 15061(b)(3) and California Public Resources Code Section 21080.085 because it will not have a significant effect on the Environment [Development Application No. 2026-00022], seconded by Council Member Kurtz. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES – 6 (Mayor Aitken and Council Members Leon, Balius, Kurtz, Maahs, and Meeks); NOES – 0; ABSENT – 1 (Council Member Rubalcava). Motion carried, Ordinance introduced.
PUBLIC COMMENTS (non-agenda items): None
COUNCIL AGENDA SETTING:
Council Member Balius requested to agendize for discussion a chronic nuisance property ordinance that would authorize administrative penalties for properties, especially hotels and motels, that repeatedly generate excessive nuisance activities and disproportionate demands on the City for public safety resources.
Mayor Aitken requested an update on the status of the police staffing report, including staffing changes, and an update on the Department overtime study.
In response to Interim City Manager Garcia, Mayor Aitken clarified that her request related to the Police Department staffing study.
City Council Minutes of July 28, 2026
ADJOURNMENT: With no further business before the Council, Mayor Aitken adjourned the City Council at 7:58 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Theresa Bass, CMC
City Clerk