HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/10/1990Next Resolution No. 65
Next Ordinance No. 10
JULY 10, 1990
DIAMOND BAR CITY COUNCIL
ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING
6:00 P.M.
THANK YOU FOR NOT SMOKING, DRINKING OR EATING
IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBER
CALL TO ORDER: 6:00 P.M.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mayor Werner
ROLL CALL: COUNCILMEN PAPEN, KIM, HORCHER, MAYOR PRO TEM
FORBING AND MAYOR WERNER
COUNCIL COMMENTS: Items placed on the agenda by individual
Councilmembers for Council discussion. Action may be taken at this
meeting or scheduled for a future meeting. No public input is required.
PUBLIC COMMENTS: "Public Comments" is the time reserved on each
regular meeting agenda to provide an opportunity for members of the
public to directly address the Council on Consent Calendar items or
matters of interest to the public that are not already scheduled for
consideration on this agenda. Please complete a Speaker's Card and give
it to the City Clerk (completion of this form is voluntary). There is
a five minute maximum time limit when addressing the City Council.
CONSENT CALENDAR: The following items listed on the Consent
Calendar are considered routine and are approved by a single motion.
Consent Calendar items may be removed from the Consent Calendar by
request of a Councilmember only.
1. SCHEDULE FUTURE MEETINGS -
A. Parks and Recreation Commission Study Session -
July 12, 1990 - 6:30 p.m. City Hall
B. Traffic and Transportation Committee - July 12, 1990 -
7:00 p.m. Community Room, 1061 Grand Ave.
C. City Council Regular Meeting - July 17, 1990 - 6:00 p.m.
W.V.U.S.D., 880 S. Lemon Avenue
D. General Planning Advisory Committee -
July 19, 1990 - 7:00 p.m. Ramada Inn
E Planning Commission - July 23, 1990 - 6:30 p.m.
W.V.U.S.D. Board Room
F. Parks and Recreation Commission - July 26, 1990 - 6:30
p.m. Community Room - 1061 S. Grand Ave.
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR USES RECYCLED PAPER
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA PAGE 2 JULY 10, 1990
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Adjourned Regular Meeting of June 12,
1990; Regular Meeting of June 19, 1990; and Adjourned Regular
Meeting of June 26, 1990.
3. WARRANT REGISTER - Approve the Warrant Registers dated June
29, 1990 and July 10, 1990 for the total amount of
$434,889.81.
4. CLAIM FOR DAMAGES - Claim filed June 26, 1990 by Natalie M.
Lanzas.
Recommended Action: Deny claim.
5. ADMINISTRATIVE ANALYST - At this time, two Administrative
Analyst positions have been authorized in the FY 90-91 Budget.
Due to the wide range of activities that they will be involved
in, it has been determined that an additional Administrative
Analyst position is needed to adequately respond. Therefore,
it is staff's recommendation that Council authorize a position
for an additional Administrative Analyst and appropriate
monies necessary to fund that position.
Recommended Action: Approve a position for an additional
Administrative Analyst and appropriate monies necessary to
fund that position in the amount of $35,750.00; (salary =
$25,905; benefits $9,845).
6. RESOLUTION NO. 90 -XX: MEMBERSHIP IN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS - Authorize membership in the
Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) for
Fiscal Year 1990-91.
Recommended Action: Approve membership in the Southern
California Association of Governments (SCAG) for Fiscal Year
1990-91 in the amount of $3,595, adopt Resolution No. 90 -XX
and appoint Councilman Kim and alternate representatives to
the Association.
7. RESOLUTION NO. 90 - XX: COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT, LOS ANGELES
URBAN COUNTY COMMUNITY BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM - The City has been
invited to participate in the Los Angeles Urban County
Community Block Grant (CDBG) Program. The Program is based
upon 3 -year funding cycles and the City would be included in
the cycle beginning July 1, 1991 and ending June 30, 1994.
The City's first Program allocation would be received July 1,
1991.
Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 90 - XX authorizing
participation in the Los Angeles Urban County CDBG Program and
directing the Mayor to execute the Cooperation Agreement with
the County of Los Angeles.
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA PAGE 3 JULY 10, 1990
8. REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL FOR COMPUTER SYSTEM - In accordance with
recommendations from various computer consultants, it is
desirable for the City to obtain proposals for installation of
a "network" allowing all staff to share data currently
available only to individuals. In addition, five more systems
are necessary in order for new staff members to complete their
assignments in a timely manner. The Request for Proposals
attached to the staff report outlines the hardware, software
and cabling required.
Recommended Action: Authorize staff to request proposals for
purchase, installation and service of a "Local Area Network"
and related hardware and software.
SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS:
9. PROCLAMATION - Proclaiming the Month of July, 1990 as "Store
Emergency Food" month in the City of Diamond Bar.
JOINT MEETING CITY COUNCIL AND PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION - 6:30
p.m. or as soon thereafter as matters may be heard.
10. COUNCIL/PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION PHILOSOPHIES
Recommended Action: Discussion regarding:
1. Philosophies
2. C.D.B.G. Funding Options
Seniors, Child Care
3. Joint Powers Agreement between
W.V.U.S.D., City of Walnut and City
of Diamond Bar.
(See Parks and Recreation Commission Agenda).
ANNOUNCEMENTS: This time is set aside for any City Councilmember to
direct staff regarding any matters to be discussed at the next regular
meeting.
CLOSED SESSION: Personnel - Government Code Section 54957.6
Litigation - Government Code Section 54956.9
ADJOURNMENT
MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR ADJOURNED MEETING OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
JUNE 12, 1990
CALL TO ORDER:
M/Werner called the meeting to order at 6:03 p.m.
in the Council Chambers, W.V.U.S.D., 880 S. Lemon
Avenue, Diamond Bar, California.
PLEDGE OF
The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance
ALLEGIANCE:
by M/Werner.
ROLL CALL:
Councilmen Papen, Kim, Horcher and Mayor Werner.
Mayor Pro Tem Forbing was excused.
Also present were City Manager Robert L. Van Nort,
City Attorney Andrew V. Arczynski and City Clerk
Lynda Burgess.
CONSENT CALENDAR:
C/Kim moved, C/Horcher seconded to approve the
Consent Calendar with the exception of Item 1B.
With the following Roll Call vote, the motion
carried:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS - Papen, Horcher, Kim
and M/Werner
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS - None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS - None
Agreement for Approved agreement for legal services with the
Legal Services Law Firm of Markman, Arczynski, Hanson and
Goldman.
Council Strategic C/Horcher moved to hold the Strategic Planning
Planning Workshop Workshop in Diamond Bar. The motion died for lack
of second.
Mr. Frank Dursa and Mr. Al Rumpilla both spoke in
favor of utilizing the facilities in Diamond Bar
for the Workshop.
Dan Buffington, 2605 Indian Creek, spoke in favor
of using the Balboa Bay Club.
Following further discussion, M/Werner moved,
C/Papen seconded to approve the date, time and
location of the Strategic Planning Workshop.
Motion carried with a vote of 3 to 1, C/Horcher
voting no.
OLD BUSINESS:
Lively Sr. CM/Van Nort presented a request from the Diamond
Citizens Bar Lively Senior Citizens for a $1,000.00 grant
JUNE 12, 1990 PAGE 2
and recommended award of the grant with the
understanding that an accounting of the
monies be provided. In addition, prior to
issuance of the check, the group shall meet
with the Parks and Recreation Commission to
finalize how the funds will be spent.
C/Kim moved, C/Papen seconded to approve the
request for a grant of $1,000 to the Diamond
Bar Lively Senior Citizens. With the follow-
ing Roll Call vote, the motion carried:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS - Papen, Kim, Horcher,
and M/Werner
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS - None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS - None
SCAG MEMBERSHIP As a follow-up to a presentation by SCAG
representatives on June 5, 1990, CM/Van Nort
recommended approval of membership in the
amount of $3,595 and, pursuant to earlier
recommendation, that C/Kim be the designate
to this organization.
Following discussion, Council continued this
matter for 30 days.
BUDGET FOR FY 1990-91 C/Horcher moved, C/Kim seconded to adopt
Resolution 90-58 Resolution No. 90-58 entitled: A RESOLUTION
OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND
BAR APPROVING AND ADOPTING A BUDGET FOR THE
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR FOR THE FISCAL YEAR
COMMENCING JULY 1, 1990 AND ENDING JUNE 30,
1991, INCLUDING MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS,
SPECIAL FUNDS AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS AND
APPROPRIATING FUNDS FOR ACCOUNTS,
DEPARTMENTS, DIVISIONS, OBJECTS AND PURPOSES
THEREIN SET FORTH. With the following Roll
Call Vote, the motion passed.
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS - Papen, Kim, Horcher,
and M/Werner
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS - None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS - None
PUBLIC HEARING:
Ordinance 20A M/Werner opened the Public Hearing. With no
(1989) public testimony being taken, M/Werner closed
the Public Hearing.
JUNE 12, 1990
PAGE 3
C/Horcher moved, C/Kim seconded to waive full
reading and approve for First Reading by title
only Ordinance No. 20A (1989): AN ORDINANCE OF
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
AMENDING SECTIONS 24A AND 24B TO ORDINANCE NO. 20
(1989) PERTAINING TO COMPETITIVE BIDS FROM
RESIDENT BUSINESSES AND RECYCLABLE MATERIALS.
With the following Roll Call vote, the motion
carried:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS - Papen, Kim, Horcher
and M/Werner
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS - None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS - None
RECESS M/Werner declared a recess at 6:58 p.m.
RECONVENE M/Werner reconvened the meeting at 7:12 p.m.
JOINT MEETING Planning Commission Chairman David Schey called
City Council/ the Planning Commission to order. Members present
Planning were: Commissioners Grothe, MacBride, Vice
Commission Harmony and Chairman Schey. Commissioner Lin was
absent.
Planning Comm. Chair/Schey presented the Consent Calendar to the
Consent Calendar Planning Commission.
By consensus, the Planning Commission approved the
Consent Calendar and set Monday, June 25, 1990 as
their next meeting date.
Chair/Schey opened the Planning Commission
Public Hearing.
C/Werner opened the Joint Public Hearing.
C/Werner announced that the following topics would
be discussed: Sign Ordinance, Development Code,
General Plan, Home Occupation Ordinance and
Council/Commission expectations and concerns.
VChair/Harmony asked that there be a discussion
regarding Planning staff for next year.
CA/Arczynski explained the Development Review
process and discussed the Planning Commission's
role in reviewing projects. He pointed out that
the Commission would be expected to make findings
based on City Codes.
Following discussion by Council, M/Werner turned
the meeting over to the Planning Commission for
comment.
JUNE 12, 1990 PAGE 4
Chair/Schey stated that, in his opinion, the
L.A. County Codes are inadequate and ex-
plained that the Commission has been attempt-
ing to develop standards. Because of the
amount of projects coming in for review and
those on the horizon, there is not enough
time to develop standards. He suggested that
current projects be put on hold in order to
bring development standards and zoning codes
up to their proper levels.
C/Grothe stated that he would like to see
more joint study sessions with Council to
obtain direction. He further stated that
Council's expectations of the Commission have
not been clearly stated.
C/MacBride stated that he would like to see a
balance of approximately 70% residential
development to 30% commercial development.
Mr. Ken Spear, representing Cahan/Crisell
Properties, gave the developer's side of the
planning issue. His concerns included the
lack of accepted or agreed upon guidelines
and the lack of coordination between the
Council and Commission on basic philosophical
goals. He recommended that the Council and
the Commission set realistic goals as to what
is achievable regarding development and
suggested that the City keep an open mind and
remember that compromise has to take place
for economic development to occur.
Dr. Dan Buffington, 2605 Indian Creek, stated
that he had attended several Planning
Commission meetings and that, in spite of no
direction from the Council, the Commission
has done a good job.
Mr. Don Nardella, 23444 Coyote Springs,
stated that there appears to be a lack of
adequate standards resulting in inconsistent
application. He suggested that the Planning
Commission, with City Council approval,
develop standards. He urged the Council to
take action quickly to prevent further pre-
judice both to the community and businesses.
M/Werner stated that he heard considerable
comment on lack of and/or deficiency of
standards --specifically sign standards. He
further stated that he felt that parking
standards were deficient and that he would
JUNE 12, 1990 PAGE 5
like to work to correct these standards in
addition to looking at other standards that may be
deficient.
C/Kim stated that he was opposed to a moratorium.
He suggested that sign ordinances used by other
cities be obtained to provide guidelines for
developing a similar ordinance.
C/Papen stated that she heard that the Planning
Commission has asked for the Council's support and
that there are no guidelines in place, which is
hampering the Commission from doing their job.
She further stated that the Commission appears to
be requesting permission to set aside current
projects in favor of formulating guidelines for
smoother decision making. She suggested that
guidelines adopted for the Gateway Corporate
Center be used as model guidelines for other
projects.
M/Werner advised that he would have no problem
with using Gateway Corporate Center guidelines in
comparing zoning standards already in place. The
Council would then know where deviations exist and
could then work with the Planning Commission to
make necessary adjustments. He further advised
that he would have no problem with a moratorium on
free-standing signs until the guidelines are in
effect. The City could then develop a more
specific set of ordinances for these signs. He
also felt that parking standards are as important
as sign standards and would like the Council to
implement an ordinance amendment to increase
retail parking requirements to either 5, 5 1/2, or
6 parking spaces per 1,000 sq. ft.
By consensus of Council, staff was directed to
prepare an Ordinance for a moratorium on free-
standing signs in excess of 6 ft. in height and a
35 ft. maximum on monument signs. Staff was
further directed to upgrade the number of parking
spaces in retail centers.
With no further testimony being given, Chairman
Schey closed the Planning Commission's portion of
the Public Hearing and turned the meeting over to
M/Werner.
M/Werner then closed the Joint Public Hearing.
PLANNING C/Harmony moved, seconded by C/Grothe to adjourn
COMMISSION the Planning Commission meeting to June 25, 1990
ADJOURNMENT at 7:00 p.m. in the Board Room, W.V.U.S.D., 880 S.
Lemon Ave., Diamond Bar.
JUNE 12, 1990 PAGE 6
ADJOURNMENT: With no further business to conduct, M/Werner
adjourned the meeting at 9:27 p.m. to 10:00
a.m. on June 14, 1990 at the Balboa Bay Club,
Newport Beach, CA.
ATTEST:
Mayor
LYNDA BURGESS,
City Clerk
WTV"Mon AD M"V CTMV CaUWnTL
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
JUNE 19, 1990
CALL TO ORDER:
M/Werner called the meeting to order at 6:03 p.m.
in the Council Chambers, W.V.U.S.D., 880 S. Lemon
Avenue, Diamond Bar, California.
PLEDGE OF
The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance
ALLEGIANCE:
by Councilman Horcher.
ROLL CALL:
Councilmen Papen, Horcher, Mayor Pro Tem Forbing
and Mayor Werner. C/Kim arrived at 7:10 p.m.
Also present were City Manager Robert L. Van Nort,
City Attorney Andrew V. Arczynski and City Clerk
Lynda Burgess.
COUNCIL COMMENTS:
MPT/Forbing announced that he and M/Werner had
attended the christening of the Metro Blue Line
Fleet earlier in the day. Diamond Bar was
selected as one of the 54 cities to have a metro
car named after it. He displayed a bronze plaque
that will be placed in the car describing the
City.
M/Werner added that car number 115 will bear the
City of Diamond Bar plaque. He gave the City
Clerk a Certificate certifying the car number as
well as the remains of the champagne bottle used
to christen the blue car.
M/Werner congratulated C/Horcher on his victory
for the Republican candidacy for the 52nd Assembly
District in the June Primary. He further congrat-
ulated Gary Neely on his Democratic candidacy for
the same seat.
PUBLIC COMMENTS: Mr. Jim Paul, 1269 Ahtena Dr., spoke about the
Strategic Planning Workshop held in Newport Beach.
He encouraged the City Council to utilize facil-
ities in Diamond Bar as much as possible in the
future.
CONSENT CALENDAR: CM/Van Nort presented the Consent Calendar and
advised that the TRAN issue on the Warrant
Register should be deleted due to the fact that it
must be a wire transfer. The correct amount for
the Warrant Register is $218,353.68.
C/Papen moved and C/Kim seconded to approve the
Consent Calendar with the exclusion of Item No's.
5, 8 and 9. Motion carried by the following Roll
Call vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN - Papen, Kim, Horcher, MPT/
Forbing and M/Werner
NOES: COUNCILMEN - None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN - None
JUNE 19, 1990
PAGE 2
Schedule Future
A.
Solid Waste Proposal Review Study
Meetings
Session - June 21, 1990 - 7:00 a.m. to
1:00 p.m., W.V.U.S.D. Board Room
B.
General Plan Advisory Committee - June
21, 1990 - 7:00 p.m., Ramada Inn
C.
Planning Commission - June 25, 1990 -
7:00 p.m., W.V.U.S.D. Board Room
D.
Adjourned Regular Meeting/Joint Meeting
City Council/Traffic & Transportation
Committee - June 26, 1990 - 6:00 p.m.,
W.V.U.S.D. Board Room
E.
Disaster Preparedness - June 27, 1990 -
7:30 p.m., Walnut Sheriff's Station
F.
Parks and Recreation Commission - June
28, 1990 - 6:30 p.m. Community Room,
1061 Grand Avenue.
Approval of
Approved Minutes of Regular Meeting of June
Minutes
5,
1990.
Warrant Register Approved Warrant Register dated June 19, 1990
in the amount of $218,353.68.
Traffic and Received and filed Traffic and Transportation
Transportation Committee Minutes of April 5 and May 3, 1990.
Committee Minutes
Resolution 90-59 Adopted Resolution No. 90-59 entitled: A
Lighting District RESOLUTION GRANTING CONSENT AND JURISDICTION
10006, Zone Proj. TO THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES IN THE MATTER OF
133-57 COUNTY LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT 10006
AND COUNTY LIGHTING DISTRICT LLA -1, CITY OF
DIAMOND BAR ZONE PROJECT 133-57.
Resolution 90-60 Adopted Resolution No. 90-60 entitled: A
Lighting District RESOLUTION GRANTING CONSENT AND JURISDICTION
10006, Zone Proj. TO THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES IN THE MATTER OF
135-57 COUNTY LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT 10006
AND COUNTY LIGHTING DISTRICT LLA -1, CITY OF
DIAMOND BAR ZONE PROJECT 135-57.
Resolution Supporting C/Horcher requested that Resolution No. 90 -XX
Legislation to be continued until copies of the proposed
Combat Criminal Bills and input from Senator Frank Hill are
Street Gangs obtained.
Bid Award — Median CM/Van Nort announced that the bid award for
Construction, Median Construction, Landscaping and Traffic
Landscaping and Signal Modifications on Diamond Bar Blvd. and
Traffic Signal Grand Ave. be continued to June 26, 1990.
Modifications
Home Occupation M/Werner advised that the proposed ordinance
Permit is zoning -related which means that it must be
reviewed by the Planning Commission
before it can be adopted by the City Council.
JUNE 19, 1990 PAGE 3
The following residents spoke against the proposed
Ordinance requiring Home Occupation Permits:
Bob Beidelman, 1926 Derringer Ln.
Marshal Wise, 2600 Broken Feather Ln.
Loni A. Cruz, 848 Carlton Privado, Ontario
Chuck Martin, 444 N. Red Cloud Dr.
Tom Van Winkle, 21103 Gerndal St., Walnut
Paula Nafuger, 22902 True Grit Pl.
Carole Rickey, 555 Pinto Mesa
Gelly Borromeo, 150 Cottonwood Cove Dr.
Curtis C. Claybrook, 2111 Chestnut Creek Rd.
Individual comments included: this is a way for
the City to raise taxes; how would the 20% be
determined; where child care facilities would fall
under this ordinance; concerns regarding no
automobile or pedestrian traffic, whether it would
include a "grandfather" clause; how could persons
with home occupations advertise, etc.
M/Werner read a letter from Dexter MacBride,
President of the DBIA, in favor of the Home
Occupation Permit.
Mr. Mark Logan, Chamber of Commerce President,
stated that the reason behind letters sent to the
business community was to educate them regarding
the proposed ordinances. He continued by saying
that he felt that the intent of the ordinance does
have value, however, over the last day and a half
the Chamber has received approximately 150 phone
calls regarding this ordinance. He followed by
reading a letter from resident George Wright
explaining his concerns.
Mr. Gregory Gaffney, representing the DBIA,
advised that it was the consensus of the
Association that they did not want to become
involved in creating a business ordinance where
home businesses are concerned.
C/Papen advised that one year ago, the City had
been notified by the County that no business
licenses were being issued except for businesses
that had health and safety issues that needed to
be regulated and monitored. She further explained
that complaints are being received from residents
who have paid persons or businesses to perform
services that are not completed and then the
business person(s) cannot be located again.
Following discussion, C/Horcher moved, C/Kim
seconded to table the Home Occupation Permit
Ordinance indefinitely. With consensus of
Council, the motion was approved.
JUNE 19, 1990 PAGE 4
RECESS: M/Werner recessed the meeting at 7:20 p.m..
RECONVENE: M/Werner reconvened the meeting at 7:35 p.m.
PRESENTATIONS:
"Good Driver Deputy Larry Luter made a presentation on the
Citations" "Good Driver Citations" Program being organ-
ized by the Sheriff's Department. He will
report on the success of the program at the
end of the six month trial period.
Certificate of M/Werner presented Capt. Thomas Vetter,
Appreciation Walnut Sheriff's Station, with a Certificate
of Appreciation for outstanding service to
the citizens of Diamond Bar.
Since Capt. Vetter was not present, M/Werner
advised that the Certificate would be
presented to him at the Quarterly Breakfast
on June 28, 1990.
Video Presentation C/Papen extended apologies from Congressman
Dreier's office and explained that the video
presentation regarding zip codes was still in
the mail.
OLD BUSINESS:
Proposed Ordinance M/Werner polled the Council regarding Home
re: Business Occupation Permits to determine whether staff
Permits should include Home Occupations in the
Business Permit Ordinance.
Mr. Fred Scalzo, 22640 Golden Springs Dr.,
asked if Council could assure that the fees
for licenses would be limited to administra-
ive processing only and not used as a form of
future taxing. He indicated he was concerned
about the possibility of having to re -qualify
through inspection.
Mr. Curtis Claybrook, 2111 Chestnut Creek
Rd., complained about excessive amounts of
regulations that may be placed on the
business person in the City.
Mr. Joe McManus, 23561 Coyote Springs Dr.,
requested clarification on permit fees. He
advised that if a fee is to be placed on the
business owner, there should be no distinc-
tion between whether the business is being
conducted at home or in a store front.
In response to Mr. Russ Hand's inquiry regarding
raising of taxes, CM/Van Nort advised that the
City is a General Law City and, therefore, voters
JUNE 19, 1990
PAGE 5
must approve any tax increases.
Mr. Joe Larutta, 2546 Sunbright Dr., commented
that if a business license is required, there may
be conflicts with CC&R's.
Mr. Tom VanWinkle, asked why the City cannot
obtain necessary information from other sources,
not through Business or Home Occupation Permits.
Mr. Mark Logan, representing the Chamber of
Commerce, felt that the intent of the Ordinance is
to enable the City to monitor businesses. He
advised that the Chamber had called a meeting for
June 28, 1990 to determine their position regard-
ing Business Permits.
M/Werner advised that the business permit issue
was being referred to the Planning Commission for
re-evaluation and modification. It was suggested
that staff work with the Chamber of Commerce on
these issues and provide for input by the citizens
expressing concern into the preparation of the
ordinance. The City Attorney was directed to
attend the Chamber's meeting on June 28.
Ordinance 30 Asst. City Engineer Jack Istek advised that
(1989) Flood following Council adoption of the Ordinance,
Damage Prevention it would be sent to FEMA and the City should
have a Flood Insurance Rate Map in place by
December.
Following discussion, MPT/Forbing moved, C/Horcher
seconded, to approve Second Reading of Ordinance
No. 30 (1989) entitled: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR RELATING TO
FLOOD DAMAGE PREVENTION. With the following Roll
Call vote, the motion carried:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS -
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS -
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS -
Papen, Kim, Horcher,
MPT/Forbing and
M/Werner
None
None
Ordinance 6 (1990) CA/Arczynski presented for second reading by
Amending Zoning title only Ordinance No. 6 (1990) entitled: AN
Map ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
DIAMOND BAR AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP OF
THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR BY RECLASSIFYING CERTAIN
REAL PROPERTY, HEREIN DESCRIBED, FROM THE R-1-6000
(SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE, 6,000 SQUARE FOOT
MINIMUM, PARCEL SIZE) ZONE TO THE C1 -DP -BE
(RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL -DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM -
BILLBOARD EXCLUSION) ZONE (ZONE CHANGE NO. 90-
0028).
JUNE 19, 1990 PAGE 6
MPT/Forbing moved, C/Kim seconded to adopt
Ordinance No. 6 (1990). With the following
Roll Call vote, the motion carried:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS - Papen, Kim, Horcher,
MPT/Forbing and
M/Werner
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS - None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS - None
Ordinance 7 (1990) CA/Arczynski presented for second reading by
Commercial Vehicles title only Ordinance No. 7 (1990) entitled:
Exceeding 10,000 lbs. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF DIAMOND BAR PROHIBITING THE USE OF STREETS
WITHIN THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR BY COMMERCIAL
VEHICLES AND BY ANY VEHICLES EXCEEDING A
MAXIMUM GROSS WEIGHT OF TEN THOUSAND POUNDS,
EXCEPT AS SPECIFIED HEREIN, ESTABLISHING
PENALTIES THEREFOR AND REPEALING CHAPTER
15.48 OF THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY CODE AS
HERETOFORE ADOPTED.
Mr. John Griffin, 2105 #1 Dublin, asked for
clarification regarding recreational
vehicles.
MPT/Forbing moved, C/Kim seconded to adopt
Ordinance No. 7 (1990). With the following
Roll Call vote, the motion carried:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS - Papen, Kim, Horcher,
MPT/Forbing and
M/Werner
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS - None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS - None
NEW BUSINESS
Ordinance 8
CA/Arczynski advised that in order to adopt
(1990) Amending
the Uniform Codes by reference a Public
Title 26 (Building
Hearing must be held and full notice given.
Code), Title 28
He then presented -for first reading by title
(Plumbing Code)
only Ordinance No. 8 (1990) entitled: AN
& Title 29
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
(Mechanical Code)
DIAMOND BAR AMENDING TITLE 26 (BUILDING CODE)
TITLE 28 (PLUMBING CODE) AND TITLE 29
(MECHANICAL CODE) OF THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY
CODE, AS HERETOFORE ADOPTED, PERTAINING TO
THE ADOPTION BY REFERENCE OF THE "UNIFORM
BUILDING CODE, 1988 EDITION," THE "UNIFORM
BUILDING CODE, 1988 EDITION," AND THE
"UNIFORM MECHANICAL CODE, 1988 EDITION."
INCLUDING ALL APPENDICES THERETO, WITH
CERTAIN AMENDMENTS, ADDITIONS AND DELETIONS,
INCLUDING FEES AND PENALTIES.
JUNE 19, 1990
PAGE 7
MPT/Forbing moved, C/Horcher seconded to approve
Ordinance No. 8 (1990) for first reading by title
only and set date of July 17, 1990 at 7:00 p.m.
for Public Hearing. With the following Roll Call
vote, the motion carried:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS -
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS -
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS -
Papen, Kim, Horcher,
MPT/Forbing and
M/Werner
None
None
Interim.Ordinance CA/Arczynski introduced Ordinance No. 9
9 (1990) Adopting (1990) entitled: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY
Interim Zoning COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ADOPTING
Ordinance re AN INTERIM ZONING ORDINANCE PURSUANT TO THE
Signs PROVISIONS OF CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE 65858(a)
AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF.
Mr. Joe Larutta, 2546 Sunbright Dr., advised that
in 1975, the Diamond Bar Improvement Association
attempted to formulate the original open space
master plan for the unincorporated area. His
concern was for any signage that may be viewed
from the freeway and pointed out that the 57
freeway was considered a "scenic route." He asked
Council to consider limiting signage and keeping
them off the freeways so that Diamond Bar can
retain its country atmosphere.
Mr. Mark Logan and Mr. Russ Hand spoke in regard
to the proposed interim ordinance and their
pending application for expansion of D. B. Honda.
C/Horcher moved, MPT/Forbing seconded to suspend
the agenda and discuss Conditional Use Permit
89528 for Diamond Bar Honda prior to making a
decision on the Interim Ordinance. With a vote of
4 Ayes and 1 No (C/Papen voting no), the motion
passed.
RECESS M/Werner recessed the meeting at 8:40 p.m.
RECONVENE M/Werner reconvened the meeting at 9:05 p.m.
PUBLIC HEARING
Conditional Use Acting Planning Director Dennis Tarango gave
Permit 89528 a presentation regarding the Conditional Use
Diamond Bar Honda Permit and advised that the Planning Commission
adopted Resolution No. PC90-8 approving the CUP
for development of a restaurant, automatic car
wash and expansion of the existing Honda
dealership. The CUP also reflects two free-
standing signs exceeding 6 ft. in height. He
further advised that on May 29, 1990, C/Papen
JUNE 19, 1990
PAGE 8
submitted an amended appeal based on signage,
traffic, landscape, scenic impacts and set-
back requirements.
C/Papen stated that she would like a require-
ment that all properties have 10 ft. set-
backs and that landscaping along the 600 ft.
of wall be required for this project. She
asked whether the project had been before the
Architectural Review Committee. She was
advised that it had not.
Mr. Mark Logan, General Manager, and Mr. Russ
Hand, Owner, of Diamond Bar Honda, spoke on
behalf of the proposed project.
Ms. Sharon Collins, real estate representa-
ive with MacDonald's Corp., spoke in regard
to the proposed project and introduced the
operators of the proposed site, so that each
could discuss the benefits to the City.
Mr. Mark Brownstein, 636 Eckoff Ave., Orange,
spoke on behalf of MacDonald's restaurant and
discussed the importance of the sign.
M/Werner declared the Public Hearing open.
With no testimony being offered, M/Werner
closed the Public Hearing.
C/Horcher moved, MPT/Forbing seconded to
overrule the appeal, sustain the action of
the Planning Commission and direct staff to
prepare the appropriate resolution for
presentation at the next available meeting.
With the following Roll Call vote, the motion
carried:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS - Kim, Horcher and
MPT/Forbing
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS - Papen and M/Werner
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS - None
Interim Ordinance M/Werner then returned discussion to the pro -
9 (1990) posed Interim Ordinance regarding free -
Free -Standing standing signs in excess of 6 ft. in height
Signs and/or in excess of 35 sq. ft. of sign size.
C/Papen moved, C/Kim seconded to adopt the
Interim Ordinance. With the following Roll
Call vote, Ordinance No. 9 (1990) carried:
JUNE 19, 1990
PAGE 9
Lighting and
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS - Papen, Kim, Horcher
Landscape
MPT/Forbing and
Assessment
M/Werner
Dist.
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS - None
Engineer's Report
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS - None
Resolution 90-61
CM/Van Nort explained that a Public Hearing
Establishing
must be held in order for the City to estab-
Appropriations
lish the appropriations limit for Fiscal Year
Limit for
1990-91. In addition, the Resolution was
FY 1990-91
under protest because the City had not yet
received figures from the Census or the County
that give our growth projections.
M/Werner opened the Public Hearing. With no
testimony being offered, M/Werner closed the
Hearing.
C/Horcher moved, C/Kim seconded to approve
Resolution No. 90-61. With the following Roll
Call vote, the motion carried:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS - Papen, Kim, Horcher,
MPT/Forbing and
M/Werner
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS - None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS - None
1990-91
Asst. City Engineer Bob Morganstern presented
Lighting and
the Engineer's Report for Districts 38, 39
Landscape
and 41 (Lighting and Landscaping Assessment
Assessment
Districts) which included the budget, assess -
Dist.
ment amounts, zone maps and assessable lots.
Engineer's Report
C/Kim asked if the assessment rate was the same as
the prior year and Mr. Morganstern replied that
there was an increase in the assessment rate for
District 41 due to a miscalculation by the County.
However, the total amount is the same as the prior
year.
Following discussion, C/Horcher moved, MPT/
Forbing seconded to approve the 1990-91 Lighting
and Landscape Assessment District Engineer's
Report. With consensus of Council, the motion
passed.
Resolution 90-62 Mr. Morganstern then gave a presentation
Ordering Maint. regarding approval of maintenance work and
Work & Confirming confirming Diagrams and Assessments within
Diagrams & the three landscape districts.
Assessments
LLAD 38, 39 & 41 M/Werner opened the Public Hearing.
JUNE 19, 1990 PAGE 10
Mr. Al Rumpilla, 23958 Golden Springs Dr.,
asked if the Council will be approaching the
County or trying to raise assessments in
District 38 in the near future.
With no further testimony being taken,
M/Werner closed the Hearing.
Following discussion, staff recommended that
the Council form an LLAD Committee and re-
evaluate the benefit spread.
MPT/Forbing moved, C/Kim seconded to approve
Resolution No. 90-62. With the following
Roll Call vote, the motion carried:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS - Papen, Kim, Horcher,
MPT/Forbing and
M/Werner
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS - None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS - None
ANNOUNCEMENTS: M/Werner moved to adjourn the meeting in
memory of Eric Magdaleno who passed away
Thursday morning. He was six years old.
ADJOURNMENT: With consent of Council, M/Werner adjourned
the meeting to Thursday, June 21, 1990 at
7:00 a.m. for the purpose of interviewing
solid waste haulers and a Closed session.
ATTEST:
Mayor
Lynda Burgess, City Clerk
Following discussion, C/Kim moved, seconded by
C/Papen to authorize an amended contract with the
Planning Network for preparation of the
Development Code and directed staff to negotiate
the contract amount up to $40,335 and increase the
proposal from 3 to 6 meetings. Staff was further
directed to obtain hourly rates and time and
materials information prior to execution of the
contract. With the following Roll Call vote, the
motion carried:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS - Papen, Kim, MPT/Forbing
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS - C/Horcher and M/Werner
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS - None
PRESENTATIONS:
D.B. Chinese M/Werner presented a City Tile to the Diamond Bar
Assn. Chinene Association to commemorate the organiza-
tion's inaguration. President Carey Shin and Vice
President Bob Chiu accepted the Tile.
Mr. Shin then presented the City with a check in
the amount of $200.00 for the purchase of a tree
to help beautify the City.
MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR ADJOURNED MEETING OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
JUNE 26, 1990
CALL TO ORDER:
M/Werner called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
in the Council Chambers, W.V.U.S.D., 880 S. Lemon
Avenue, Diamond Bar, California.
PLEDGE OF
The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance
ALLEGIANCE:
by M/Werner:
ROLL CALL:
Councilmen Papen, Kim, Horcher and Mayor Werner.
Mayor Pro Tem Forbing arrived at 6:11 p.m.
Also present were City Manager Robert L. Van Nort,
City Attorney Andrew V. Arczynski and City Clerk
Lynda Burgess.
CONSENT CALENDAR:
C/Kim moved, C/Papen seconded to approve the
Consent Calendar with the exception of discussion
regarding preparation of the Development Code.
With the following Roll Call vote, the motion
carried:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS - Papen, Horcher, Kim
and M/Werner
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS - None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS - MPT/Forbing
Preparation of
CM/Van Nort discussed the proposed preparation
Development Code
of the Development Code by the Planning Network
by Planning
and stated that this would be an amendment to
Network
the existing contract.
Following discussion, C/Kim moved, seconded by
C/Papen to authorize an amended contract with the
Planning Network for preparation of the
Development Code and directed staff to negotiate
the contract amount up to $40,335 and increase the
proposal from 3 to 6 meetings. Staff was further
directed to obtain hourly rates and time and
materials information prior to execution of the
contract. With the following Roll Call vote, the
motion carried:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS - Papen, Kim, MPT/Forbing
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS - C/Horcher and M/Werner
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS - None
PRESENTATIONS:
D.B. Chinese M/Werner presented a City Tile to the Diamond Bar
Assn. Chinene Association to commemorate the organiza-
tion's inaguration. President Carey Shin and Vice
President Bob Chiu accepted the Tile.
Mr. Shin then presented the City with a check in
the amount of $200.00 for the purchase of a tree
to help beautify the City.
JUNE 26, 1990
PAGE 2
Video Presentation A video tape was shown of the testimony
re Congressman presented by Congressman David Drier regard-
Dreier's Testimony ing the Zip Code problem in Diamond Bar and
on Zip Codes other Southern California cities.
CLOSED SESSION: M/Werner recessed the meeting to Closed
Session for the purpose of discussing
litigation at 6:35 p.m.
RECONVENE: M/Werner reconvened the meeting at 7:00 p.m.
OLD BUSINESS:
Solid Waste
M/Werner announced that discussion on Solid
Proposals
Waste proposals would be continued to the
Council reject all
meeting of July 17, 1990.
Ordinance 20A
CA/Arczynski presented, for second reading by
(1989)
title only and adoption, Ordinance No. 20A
Competitive Bids
(1989) entitled: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY
from Resident
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AMENDING
Businesses and
SECTIONS 23 AND 24 AND ADDING NEW SECTIONS
Recyclable
24A AND 24B TO ORDINANCE NO. 20 (1989)
Materials
PERTAINING TO COMPETITIVE BIDS FROM RESIDENT
BUSINESSES AND RECYCLABLE MATERIALS.
item immediately.
C/Papen moved, C/Kim seconded to adopt
With the following Roll
Ordinance No. 20A (1989). With the following
Roll Call vote, the motion carried:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS - Papen, Kim, Horcher,
MPT/Forbing and
M/Werner
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS - None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS - None
Bid Award
CA/Arczynski advised that it was staff's
Median
recommendation that the
Council reject all
Construction
bids and direct staff to
re -bid the project
Landscaping
immediately and arrange
for final award as
& Traffic
quickly as possible due
to inconsistencies in
Signal Modif.
the bid documents.
C/Kim moved, MPT/Forbing
seconded to reject
all bids and re -bid the
item immediately.
With the following Roll
Call vote, the motion
carried:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS -
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS -
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS -
Papen, Kim, Horcher,
MPT/Forbing and
M/Werner
None
None
JUNE 26, 1990
PAGE 3
JOINT MEETING Chair/Ortiz called the Traffic and
TRAFFIC AND Transportation Committee to order.
TRANSPORTATION
COMMITTEE
Roll Call Chair/Ortiz, Com/Chavers, Gravdahl and
Rebeiro. C/Eustaquio was absent.
C/Kim advised that at 3:00 p.m. on Thursday, June
28, 1990 a meeting would be held with IACTC at
which would be attended by MPT/Forbing, CM/Van
Nort, Todd Chavers and himself.
Com/Chavers gave a brief presentation on the
Congestion Management Commission and that due to
Prop 108 and 111, Cities must institute a traffic
congestion program.
CM/Van Nort advised that both he and Asst. CM/
Belanger had met with the AQMD to discuss
Council's concerns over traffic congestion. He
stated that the AQMD will be moving to Diamond Bar
in October and will be providing certain modes of
transportation to their employees that will be
open to everyone. They will be using alternative
fuels, including an electric bus that will be
operative in 1991.
Following further discussion by Council and the
Commission, CM/Van Nort advised that a presen-
tation would be made to Council on July 17 on the
best methods to approach the problems referred to
during this discussion.
He further stated that at the Strategic Planning
Workshop, the City Manager and the Asst. City
Manager were directed to prepare an analysis of
what other cities are doing to compensate for
reimbursement of expenses to the various
commissions. He stated that it is their hope to
present it in August to be effective September 1,
1990.
CM/Van Nort suggested that the Planning Commission
and Traffic and Transportation Committee plan a
joint meeting to discuss the Development Code.
CM/Van Nort then introduced Mr. Terry Belanger,
Asst. City Manager, who gave a report on the
meeting held with the AQMD.
With no other discussion, Chair/Ortiz
adjourned the Commission portion of the
meeting to July 5 at 4:00 p.m., whereupon
that meeting will be adjourned due to lack of
a quorum to July 12, 1990.
JUNE 26, 1990 PAGE 4
ANNOUNCEMENTS: C/Papen announced that she had received a
letter from Jones Intercable informing her of
a rate increase. She referred it to staff to
review of the franchise agreement for proper
procedure notification.
C/Kim asked about bus shelter construction
and informed staff that part of the fence at
the Diamond Bar Country Club had fallen, and
requested staff to contact the Club for
repair. He also wanted to find out if the
"Ninja Turtle" dancing in the median on
Diamond Bar Blvd and Grand Ave. is legal.
CA/Arczynski advised that the City is waiting
for the existing bus benches to be removed,
which should be at the end of June.
MPT/Forbing thanked the Traffic and
Transportation Committee for all their hard
work.
M/Werner welcomed Asst. City Manager, Terry
Belanger and also thanked the Traffic and
Transportation Committee.
ADJOURNMENT: With no further business to conduct, M/Werner
adjourned the meeting at 8:33 p.m. to 4:00
p.m. on July 3, 1990 at City Hall, whereupon
the Clerk will adjourned that meeting for
lack of quorum to July 10, 1990 at 6:00 p.m.
ATTEST:
Mayor
Lynda Burgess, City Clerk
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
2E
LAW OFFICES OF
WILLIAM D. SHAPIRO
290 NORTH D STREET, SUITE 604
VANIR TOWER, CITY HALL. PLAZA
SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA 92401
(714)888-0102
Attorneys for
Claimants
(S IPQS=ulEi(py FILING STAMP ONLY)
DIAMOND BAR
CI -v CLERK
`'....".`" 20 i ' 3 32
CLAIM FOR PERSONAL INJURIES
(under Government Code Section 910)
TO THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR:
YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED that NATALIE M. LANZAS, (date of
birth 5/17/85) a minor and her Guardian, MARIO LANZAS, whose
address is 11621 Oakwood Drive, Fontana, California 92335
claims damages from the motor vehicle accident vs pedestrian
in the amount computed as of the date of presentation of this
claim in the sum of $500,000.00.
This claim is based on the personal injury of Natalie M.
Lanzas on or about December 28, 1989 in the City of Diamond
Bar, County of Los Angeles under the following circumstances.
On December 28, 1989 plaintiff Natalie M. Lanzas was a
pedestrian using a crosswalk at the intersection of Grand
Avenue and Diamond Bar in the City of Diamond Bar. Claimant
was struck by a motor vehicle due to defendants, City of
Diamond Bar's, failure to maintain this intersection in a safe
manner to and including the timing of the signal lights.
This intersection is dangerous and defective and is a
1 dangerous condition as defined in the government code, in that
2 it was improperly and negligently maintained. Said damages
3 and defective condition is further evidenced by the numerous
4 accidents that have occurred at the intersection before the
5 subject accident which gave this public entity notice of such
6 condition.
7 It is contended by claimant that this public entity had
8 actual and constructive notice of this condition and failed
9 to resolve the deficiencies which resulted in the injury of
10 plaintiff.
11 Defendant, City of Diamond Bar, negligently maintained
12 public roadway conditions for public safety and maintained
13 roadways in a dangerous and defective condition of public
14 property which episode was a direct and proximate result of
15 the negligence of the City of Diamond Bar, its agents and
16 employees.
17 TOTAL AMOUNT CLAIMED as of date of presentation of this
18 claim is $500,000.00.
19 All notices of other communications with regard to this
20 claim should be sent to claimants attorney, WILLIAM D.
21 1 SHAPIRO, 290 North "D" Street, Suite 604, San Bernardino,
22 California 92401.
23 Dated: June 19, 1990
WI IAM D. S P RO
24 Attorney fo Claimant
25
26
27
28
AGENDA NO.
------------------------------CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
AGENDA REPORT
-----------------------------------------------------------------
DATE: July 3, 1990 MEETING DATE: July 10, 1990
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
VIA: City Manager
FROM: Assistant City.Manager
SUBJECT: Authorization of an additional Administrative Analyst Position
BACKGROUND:
There are two authorized Administrative Analyst positions in the FY91 budget.
After evaluating the wide range of activities that the Administrative Analysts
are expected to be involved with, it has been determined that an additional Ad-
ministrative Analyst position is needed to adequately respond to the various
tasks with which the Analysts are expected to be involved.
The Administrative Analysts will be expected to provide staff support service in
a variety of major functional areas. Among these areas would be: general ma-
nagement, finance, personnel, transportation projects and programs, solid waste
(AB939/1820 requirements), recreation programs, parks projects and programs,
planning and zoning (General Plan), senior services (CDBG), and others. The Ad-
ministrative Analysts will provide staff support in all of the areas mentioned,
as well as, other areas of need as they arise.
The backgrounds of the Administrative Analysts will be generalist in nature.
However, each of the Analysts selected will have specific experience in one or
more of the mentioned functional areas. As an example, one of the recently
hired Administrative Analysts has specific experience in AB939/1820 legislative
analysis and implementation programs. Another of the Analysts, has specific ex-
perience in the area of recreation and parks, as well as, planning. The combi-
nation of a generalist background, with experience in specific functional areas,
FISCAL IMPACT:
Amount Requested
Budgeted Amount
In Account Number
Deficit:
Revenue Source:
Narrative continued on next page
$35,750.00
001-4030-0010
General Fund
(1/2) and 112-4030-0010 (1/2)
(1/2) and Prop. A Local Return Funds (1/2)
REVIEWED BY:
Robert L. Van Nort Andrew V. Arczynski
City Manager City Attorney
AR300.FRM 3/90 1
Terrence L. Belan
Assistant City Manager
provides a high degree of flexibility in being able to respond to a wide range
of issues, problems, and concerns. The three Administrative Analysts positions
will enable the staff to respond to the requests of the City Council; and, the
Planning Commission, Parks and Recreation Commission, Traffic/Transportation
Committee, and the staff.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council authorize one (1) additional Administra-
tive Analyst position, in the FY 1991 City budget; further, it is recommended
that the City Council appropriate the monies necessary to fund the recommended
Administrative Analyst position, in the amount of Thirty-five Thousand, Seven
Hundred Fifty Dollars ($35,7.50.00; salary = $25,905; benefits = $9,845).
2
AGENDA NO.�_
-------------------------------
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
AGENDA REPORT
DATE: July 3, 1990 MEETING DATE: July 10, 1990
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
VIA: City Manager
FROM: Assistant City Manager
SUBJECT: SCAG Membership
BACKGROUND:
The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) is a voluntary agency
whose purpose is to provide a forum for discussion, study and development of
recommendations on regional problems of interest and concern, regarding the or-
derly physical development of the SCAG region. A further purpose of the SCAG is
to identify and encourage the establishment of units of local government within
the region that can best discuss, study and solve regional problems.
The City Council is considering membership in the SCAG. The Council, if it de-
termines that membership is appropriate, must adopt a resolution authorizing the
participation in a joint powers agreement. The FY91 membership dues are Three
Thousand, Five Hundred Ninety-five Dollars ($3,595.00).
The SCAG region includes the Counties of Los Angeles, Riverside, Orange, Ventura
and San Bernardino. There are one hundred seventy-one (171) cities in the SCAG
region, with one hundred thirty-eight (138) cities as SCAG members.
The cities, in the SCAG region, which choose to be members do so because they:
1. Generally, agree with the purpose and functions of this regional agency;
or,
2. They do not enthusiastically support the SCAG purpose/functions but believe
it more prudent to protect their respective local interests from within,
through active participation in the regional debate.
Narrative continued on next page.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Amount Requested $ 3,595.00
Budgeted Amount $
In Account Number 001-4090-2314
Deficit: $
Revenue Source: General Fund
REV ED BY:
c
Robert L. an Nort Andrew V. Arczynski Terrence L. Bela er
City Manager City Attorney Assistant City M ager
Those cities that have chosen not to participate in the SCAG do so because:
1. The SCAG advisory agency could too easily evolve into an authoritative
regional government,
2. The SCAG purpose which could centralize the functions of planning, zon-
ing, or development on a regional basis are blatant intrusions into
local municipal control; and,
3. Local municipal governmental power could be effectively destroyed or
gravely eroded.
The majority of non-member cities that are not members of the SCAG fall into two
categories. The first group of non-members are new cities that have incorporat-
ed, within the past two years. These cities have not made a decision on member-
ship. The second category is Orange County cities of which approximately one-
half (1/2) have chosen not to belong to the SCAG. The listing of non-member
cities is:
NEW CITIES•
Diamond Bar
Temecula
Laguna Niguel
Mission Viejo
Dana Point
Apple Valley
Hesperia
Yucaipa
Malibu
ORANGE COUNTY:
Anaheim
Costa Mesa
Fountain Valley
Fullerton
La Habra
Los Alamitos
Orange
San Juan Capistrano
Santa Ana
Stanton
Tustin
Westminster
It should be noted that the Orange County Cities have recently attempted to es-
tablish a mini -COG (Council of Governments), as an alternative to the SCAG. It
is the belief of the preponderance of Orange County cities that their mutual
interests would be better served and preserved by an Orange County COG> It is
the Orange County cities further belief that the SCAG does not reflect their
interests and is, in fact, detrimental to their interests.
Although the list is not definitive, other non-member cities (by choice) are:
Ventura, E1 Monte, Walnut, La Habra Heights, Palos Verdes Estates, Irwindale,
Beaumont and San Jacinto. All San Bernardino cities are members, with exception
of the above-mentioned new cities.
An advisory regional agency, such as the SCAG, , will predictably be perceived
with scorn or suspicion, by many local municipal governments. An advisory re-
gional agency could evolve into a government with the power to centralize plan-
ning, zoning, and development policy and implementation. This possibility may
be enough to justify not dignifying or validating such a regional agency. A
local government's membership in the SCAG could be justified, regardless of a
City's lack of belief in the regional agency's purpose or validity, by actively
and vociferously advocating, protecting and preserving the interests of local
municipal government, from within the organization. One salient point needs to
2
be stated. State of California Departments and Agencies use and rely on SCAG
data and reports. To a limited extent, Federal Agencies use SCAG data and re-
ports. Therefore, the more prudent approach, to SCAG membership, would be to
influence and shape the formulation of policy and the compilation of data and
reports through active and vigilant participation in this regional agency pro-
cess.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council approve the membership of the City of
Diamond Bar in the Southern California Association of Governments and that the
Council take the following actions related to said membership:
1. Adopt a resolution that authorizes and directs the Mayor to execute the
Southern California Association of Governments Joint Powers Agreement, on
behalf of the City,
2. Appropriate funds in the amount of Three Thousand Five Hundred Ninety-five
Dollars ($3,595.00) to the General Government, Membership and Dues Account,
for Fiscal Year 1990-91 membership dues.
3. Appoint, by resolution, two members of the Council as the delegate (reaf-
firm Councilman Kim's appointment) and alternate representatives to the
Association.
3
AGENDA NO.__
-----------------------------------
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
AGENDA REPORT
DATE: July 3, 1990 MEETING DATE: July 10, 1990
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
VIA: City Manager
FROM: Assistant City Manager
SUBJECT: Los Angeles County Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)
BACKGROUND:
The City of Diamond Bar has been invited to participate in the Los Angeles Urban
County Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program.
The Los Angeles Urban Community CDBG program is the mechanism for a non -entitle-
ment city to participate and share in CDBG program and project funding. An en-
titlement city is one that has been deemed, based upon census data, to have a
population of 50,000 or greater as of a particular date. For instance, 1988 is
the date currently used, by HUD, in determining entitlement status. The staff's
most recent information is that the City of Diamond Bar has not been given en-
titlement status. Therefore, unless and until such status is granted the City,
the only way the City can participate in CDBG programs and projects is through
the Los Angeles Urban County CDBG program.
The urban county CDBG program is based upon three (3) year funding cycles. The
funding cycle the City would be included in runs from July 1, 1991 through June
30, 1994. The City would receive its first urban county CDBG program alloca-
tion, commencing July 1, 1991 (FY192). The CDBG program cooperation agreement
must be filed with the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), by
September 4, 1990. Therefore, time is of the essence, in approving the coopera-
tion agreement. The due date for the City's approval to the County is July 16,
1990.
Narrative continued on next page.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Amount Requested $
Budgeted Amount $
In Account Number
Deficit: $
Revenue Source:
REVIEWED BY:
Robert L. Van Nort
City Manager
Andrew V. Arczynski
City Attorney
AR300.FRM 3/90 1
J
J
F
Terrence L. Belanger
Assistant City Manager
The Urban County CDBG program requires that participants not drop out of the
program during the agreed upon funding cycle; here, July 1, 1991 through June
30, 1994. Under the CDBG program requirements, each participating city retains
control over its allocated CDBG funds. And, the City has the flexibility of
using in-house staff and/or Community Development Commission staff, in pro-
gram/project formulation and implementation.
In order for the City to participate in the Los Angeles Urban County program
CDBG program, the Council must adopt a resolution which authorizes participa-
tion; and, directs that the Mayor execute the cooperation agreement, between the
County of Los Angeles and the City of Diamond Bar. As has been indicated here-
in, the agreement must be transmitted to the County Community Development Com-
mission by July 16, 1990. If the Council chooses not to participate in the CDBG
program, a letter of declination must be sent to the County by the same July 16,
1990 date.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City of Diamond Bar participate in the Los Angeles
Urban County Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program, for the three
year funding cycle commencing July 1, 1991 and ending June 30, 1994.
It is further recommended that the City Council adopt the resolution which auth-
orizes participation in the Los Angeles Urban County program, and which, directs
the Mayor to execute the CDBG program cooperation agreement, between Los Angeles
County and the City of Diamond Bar.
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: The Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers
FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, Assistant City Manager
SUBJECT: Possible CDBG Community Projects
DATE: July 6, 1990
BACKGROUND:
The City Council will be considering, elsewhere on the July 10,
1990, agenda, the matter of participation in the upcoming three
(3) year funding cycle, relative to the Los Angeles Urban County
Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program. This CDBG pro-
gram funding does not commence, until July 1, 1991.
However, the City has the opportunity to receive CDBG funds
through Supervisor Schabarum's office, in FY 91. There is an
amount of CDBG monies (estimated to be Three Hundred to Three Hun-
dred Fifty Dollars -$300,000 to $350,000) that could become avail-
able to Diamond Bar on the conditions that there are specific CDBG
eligible activities for which the monies can be allocated and that
City agrees to not trade the CDBG monies for other funds.
Generally, CDBG program monies can be expended for programs that
serve, at a minimum, a low/moderate income constituency of fifty-
one percent (51%). Due to the socio-economic profile of Diamond
Bar, the list of probable programs or projects is not extensive.
Nevertheless, there are two (2) projects that, in all probability,
will meet the fifty-one percent (51%) requirement. The staff is
exploring the possibility of other projects. The projects herein
described should not be considered an all-inclusive list.
The first is a proposal to renovate the old Post Office building
into a senior citizen center. The owner of the building is a de-
veloper (condominium -style) who has offered to participate in a
renovation project, for certain considerations, related to a resi-
dential development proposal, (on the adjacent land). The City
could use CDBG monies to purchase land and/or fund building reno-
vations. This proposal is currently in the discussion stage. Nc
plans or applications have been submitted.
1
The second project is one that would involve the YMCA. The pro-
posal is to provide child care program and/or facilities funding.
CDBG monies would be used to support program costs and/or provide
additional building space or equipment. This proposal is also in
the preliminary discussion stage.
The City Council and the Parks & Recreation Commission will be
discussing several issues of mutual interest, on July 10, 1990.
It is suggested that these two (2) CDBG eligible projects be dis-
cussed and direction provided, regarding the CDBG monies.
If the City Council decides to request the currently available
(FY91) CDBG funds ($300,000 to $350,000), it is very important Su-
pervisor Shubarum's office be notified immediately by letter, to
express our intent regarding the CDBG monies. Staff recommends
that the City request the CDBG funds.
2
FILE COP"I
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM
PARTICIPATING CITY
COOPERATION AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into this day of
1990, by and between the City of Diamond Bar ,
hereinafter referred to as "City", and the County of Los Angeles,
hereinafter referred to as the "County".
WITNESSETH THAT:
WHEREAS, County and City desire to cooperate to undertake, or
assist in undertaking, community development, community renewal of
lower income housing assistance activities, specifically urban
renewal and publicly assisted housing, including, but not limited
to, the improvement or development of housing for persons of low
to moderate incomes and other community or urban renewal activities
authorized by the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974,
as amended, hereinafter referred to as the "Act"; and
WHEREAS, County Counsel has determined that the terms and
provisions of this agreement are fully authorized under State and
local law, and that this agreement provides fully legal authority
for the County to undertake, or assist in undertaking, essential
community development and housing assistance activities,
specifically urban renewal and publicly assisted housing.
NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows:
1. The City and the County agree to cooperate to undertake,
or assist in undertaking, community development, community renewal
of lower income housing assistance activities, specifically urban
renewal and publicly assisted housing, including, but not limited
to, the improvement or development of housing for persons of low
to moderate incomes and other community or urban renewal activities
authorized by the Act.
2. The City hereby authorizes the County to perform, or cause
to be performed, those acs necessary to implement the community
development and housing assistance activities, specifically urban
renewal and publicly assisted housing, including but not limited
to improvement or development of housing for persons of low to
moderate income and other community or urban renewal activities
authorized under the Act specified for the City in the County's
annual Statements of Community Development Objectives which will
be funded from annual Community Development Block Grants from
Federal Fiscal Years 1991, 1992 and 1993 appropriations and from
any program income generated from the expenditure of such funds.
County shall have final responsibility for selecting projects and
annually filing Final Statements of Community Development
Objectives.
4. The City and County agree that Community Development Block
Grant funding for any activities in or in support of any
cooperating City, that does not affirmatively further fair housing
within its own jurisdiction, or that impedes the County's action
to comply with its fair housing certification is prohibited.
5. Pursuant to 24 CFR 570.501 (b), the City is subject to all
requirements applicable to subrecipients, including the requirement
of a written agreement set forth in 24 CFR 570.503.
6. The City shall inform the County of any income generated
by the expenditure of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)
funds received by the City. Any such program income may be
retained by the City subject to the requirements of this agreement.
Such program income may only be used for eligible activities in
accordance with all CDBG requirements as may then apply.
7. The County shall be responsible for monitoring and
reporting to HUD on the use of any program income; therefore, the
City shall be required to maintain appropriate recordkeeping and
reporting for this purpose.
8. In the event of close-out or changes in status of the
City, any program income that is on hand or received subsequent to
the close-out or change in status shall be paid to the County.
9. All program income generated from the disposition or
transfer of real property acquired or improved by the City, using
CDBG funds or program income, during the term of this agreement,
shall be treated as described in Sections 5 through 7 of this
agreement.
10. Any real property which is acquired or improved by the
City during the term of this agreement, in whole or in part, using
CDBG funds or program income, shall be subject to the following
standards:
a. The County shall be notified by the City in writing
of any modification or change in the use or disposition
of such real property from that planned at the time of
acquisition or improvement. Such notification shall be
made prior to the modification or change in use or
disposition.
b. If such real property is ever sold or transferred
for a use which does not qualify as an eligible use
under CDBG regulations, the City shall reimburse to the
County an amount equal to the current fair market value
of the property less any portion thereof attributable to
expenditures of non-CDBG funds.
11. The City shall make available for inspection and audit
to County's representatives, upon request, at any time during the
duration of this agreement and during a period of three (3) years,
thereafter, all of its books and records relating to CDBG program
income.
12. This agreement shall be effective for the period of time
_ .. 1 11 ..--. r.. a _ l l r%r+ai-Pri to the
e
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the governing bodies of the parties hereto
have authorized this agreement and have caused the agreement to be
executed by their respective chief executive officers and attested
by the executive officer -clerks thereof as of the day, month and
year first above written.
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
By
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
T
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Attorney
By
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
Chairman, Board of
Supervisors
ATTEST:
LARRY J. MONTEILH, Executive
Officer - Clerk of the Board of
Supervisors
By
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
DE WITT W. CLINTON
County Counsel
1
By By
Deputy
AGENDA NO.
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
AGENDA REPORT
----------------------------------------------------
DATE: July 6, 1990 MEETING DATE: July 10, 1990
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
VIA: City Manager
FROM: Lynda Burgess, City Clerk and Terry Belanger, Assistant City Manager
BACKGROUND:
During discussions with various computer consultants over the past year, all have
recommended that the City consider installing a "network" so that staff members
would have the ability to share data. At that time, it was felt that we were not
yet in a position to encumber the expense involved and that the number of personal
computers involved did not warrant such a sophisticated system. However, with the
growth in staff authorized by the City Council for Fiscal Year 1990-91, five more
computers are necessary, bringing the total number of persons needing systems to
thirteen. Rather than purchasing separate computers and printers for each new
staff member to be added, it was determined that the time is now appropriate for
installation of a network environment which will eliminate the need for complete
personal computers and printers at every desk.
Two versions of local area networks are currently available --one which allows only
up to .eight users on one system which would require the City to purchase two
separate systems thus virtually dividing the staff "in half." The other, more
expensive version allows up to 100 users should the City require that capability
at some point in the future.
Staff is looking into software to provide us the ability to perform some desktop
publishing or graphics which could eliminate the need for some of the printing
that is currently being done by professional printers. In addition, relational
databases will be used in preparing indexes of City Council actions which could
be accessed by all staff in conducting research.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Authorize staff to solicit proposals for the networked computer system described
on Exhibit "A." It is estimated that costs will run between $25,000 and $30,000.
VISCAL IMPACT:
Amount Requested
Budgeted Amount
In Account Number:
Deficit:
Revenue Source:
$ 25,000 - $30,000
VI WED B j
-----��---------------------- - ---- -- ---
bert L. Van Nort Andrew V. Arczynski Terrence L. e anger
ty Manager City Attorney Assistant City anager
NOTICE OF
REQUEST TO SUBMIT PROPOSALS
TO PROVIDE EQUIPMENT
AND SUPPORT SERVICES
The City of Diamond Bar, California, requests proposals to
provide the following equipment and support services:
Networked computer system; software; external floppy
drives; all cabling and printers. Proposals with used
or refurbished equipment will not be accepted.
The City may award the contract for only a portion of
the equipment and services identified in the request
for proposal.
To be considered for selection, a proposal must be submitted to
the City Clerk's Office, 21660 E. Copley Drive, Suite 100,
Diamond Bar, California 91765, at or before 11:00 a.m. on Monday,
July 23, 1990.
Copies of the City's Request for Proposals, the proposed
contract, the specifications, and the standard proposal forms to
be used by all Providers are available at the City Clerk's
office.
1
REQUEST TO SUBMIT PROPOSALS
TO PROVIDE EQUIPMENT: Networked Computer Hardware and Software
AND SUPPORT SERVICES: Maintenance and Repair
The City of Diamond Bar, ("CITY" hereinafter) seeks to acquire
the equipment described in Exhibit 1 which is attached hereto and
incorporated herein by this reference. Further, CITY seeks to
acquire with that equipment certain support services which are
described in Exhibit 2 which is attached hereto and incorporated
herein by this reference. Proposals are requested, subject to
the following:
1.0 PROCEDURE
1.1 DEFINITIONS
A. The CONTRACT OFFICER for this proposal process is the
CITY's City Clerk.
B. The REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS documents are:
1. The Notice;
2. This REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS to be signed and dated
by the Provider;
3. A blank PROPOSAL COVER SHEET to be completed,
signed and dated by the Provider;
4. A blank Statement of Provider's Experience and
Financial Condition to be completed, supplemented,
signed, and dated by Provider; and
5. A blank proposed contract with attachments to be
completed, signed, and dated by the Provider.
C. A Provider's PROPOSAL shall be made up by the following
documents:
1. A REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS signed and dated by an
individual clearly authorized to bind the
Provider;
2. A PROPOSAL COVER SHEET prepared on the CITY's form
that is signed and dated by an individual clearly
authorized to bind the Provider;
3. A Statement of Experience and Financial Condition
with supporting documents on the CITY's form,
signed and dated by an individual clearly
authorized to bind the Provider;
K,
4. A proposed contract with attachments prepared on
the CITY's form, signed and dated by an individual
clearly authorized to bind the Provider; and
1.2 INTERPRETATION OR CORRECTION PRIOR TO PROPOSAL OPENING
A. Prior to the opening of proposals, a person may
submit, in writing, to the CONTRACT OFFICER, a request for
interpretation or correction of the REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
documents.
B. Any interpretation or correction rendered by the
CONTRACT OFFICER of the REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS documents shall be
made immediately available to all other persons who obtained
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS documents from the CITY.
1.3 TIME AND PLACE TO OPEN PROPOSALS
A. To be considered, a PROPOSAL must be received at
the office of the City Clerk prior to the hour of 11:00 a.m. on
July 23, 1990; at which time the proposals will be opened.
B. Any PROPOSAL received by the City Clerk after the
time specified herein shall be returned unopened to the Provider.
C. The Provider shall be bound to the terms of the
PROPOSAL for a period of sixty (60) days following the opening of
the PROPOSAL.
1.4 OPENING AND PRELIMINARY REVIEW OF PROPOSALS
A. Upon the opening of the proposals, all proposals
shall be reviewed by the CONTRACT OFFICER to determine the
accuracy of any totals in the PROPOSAL. A Provider's error in
adding up numerical items contained in the PROPOSAL shall not
constitute a material error. Rather, the CITY will rely upon the
amount assigned to each item of the PROPOSAL.
B. Proposals will be reviewed for completeness and
responsiveness.
1.5 REJECTION OF PROPOSALS
A. The CITY may reject all proposals and either
initiate a new Request for Proposals or abandon the acquisition
of the equipment and support services.
B. A reasonable belief by the CITY that an
individual, firm, partnership, corporation, or association is
financially interested in more than one proposal may cause the
rejection of all proposals in which such financial interest
exists.
3
C. A materially incomplete or non-responsive PROPOSAL
shall be :rejected.
1.6 RESPONSIBILITY OF PROVIDER
A. Each Provider shall submit, as part of the
PROPOSAL, a "Statement of Experience and Financial Condition" in
accordance with the guidance and format provided by the CONTRACT
OFFICER.
B. The Provider must present positive evidence in the
PROPOSAL that the Provider has a demonstrated trustworthiness and
is capable of performing the proposed contract in a manner that
is satisfactory to the CITY. The Provider should have a
demonstrated ability to deal fairly and effectively with a public
agency and a record of satisfying public agencies. The PROPOSAL
should present the Provider's financial resources, surety and
insurance experience, equipment experience, completion ability,
personnel, current workload, experience in dealing with private
owners and experience in dealing with public agencies.
C. By submitting a PROPOSAL to the CITY, Provider
agrees that the CITY is authorized to conduct investigations into
the Provider's background.
1.7 ERROR IN PROPOSAL
A. If, prior to the opening of proposals, a Provider
discovers an error in the Provider's PROPOSAL, the Provider may
submit a replacement PROPOSAL prior to the time and date set as
the deadline for submitting proposals. The replacement PROPOSAL
shall clearly indicate that it supersedes the prior PROPOSAL.
B. Once the proposals have been opened, an erroneous
PROPOSAL may not be reformed or modified by the Provider; but the
Provider may request that the CITY release the Provider due to an
error in the PROPOSAL. The CITY may release the Provider so long
as the integrity of the proposal process is not jeopardized, the
error was a result of excusable neglect, and the Provider is not
advantaged. If the CITY releases the Provider, the PROPOSAL will
be deemed to have been rejected and the Provider shall be
prohibited from performing all or any portion of the proposed
contract.
C. If the Provider submits an erroneous PROPOSAL and
is not released by the CITY, and thereafter refuses to proceed
with the contract awarded to the Provider, then the Provider's
PROPOSAL security shall be forfeited. The CITY may award the
contract to another Provider.
1.8 AWARD OF CONTRACT
4
A. The CITY is not required to select the lowest
monetary proposal.
B. If the contract is awarded, the contract shall be
awarded to the Provider who proposes to provide the equipment and
support services to the best advantage to the CITY.
C. The CITY may award the contract for only a portion
of the equipment and services identified in the request for
proposal.
D. After the award of the contract, the successful
Provider has 20 days to accomplish the following:
1. Deliver and install the equipment and
software as specified in Exhibit 1.
2. Provide the support services as specified in
Exhibit 2.
E. If the first -selected Provider fails to accomplish the
precontract requirements specified above, then a second -selected
Provider may be awarded the contract and be given 20 days
thereafter to accomplish the requirements set forth above.
F. Upon the selected Provider's satisfactory completion of
the above requirements, the CITY will execute the contract with
the selected Provider.
2.0 REQUIREMENTS
2.1 PROVIDER'S DUTY TO OBTAIN INFORMATION
A. The Provider shall carefully study the REQUEST FOR
PROPOSALS documents and shall at once report to the CONTRACT
OFFICER any errors, inconsistencies, or omissions discovered.
B. The Provider shall take field measurements and
verify field conditions and shall carefully compare the field
measurements and conditions and other information known to the
Provider with the REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS documents before
submitting the PROPOSAL. Errors, inconsistencies and omissions
discovered by the Provider shall be reported at once to the
CONTRACT OFFICER.
2.2 CHANGES IN PROPOSED CONTRACT
Except as expressly authorized, no changes to the
proposed contract shall be offered by the Provider.
2.3 EQUIPMENT AND SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED (ATTACHMENT A)
5
The Provider shall set forth in Attachment A to the
proposed contract the equipment which the Provider intends to
provide. Also, the Provider shall set forth in Attachment A the
support services that the Provider intends to provide.
2.4 PAYMENT FOR EQUIPMENT AND SERVICES (ATTACHMENT B)
The Provider shall set forth in Attachment B to the
proposed contract the price, by proposal item, for which the
Provider proposes to provide the equipment and the support
services.
2.5 LISTING OF SUBCONTRACTORS (ATTACHMENT C)
The Provider shall set forth in Attachment C of the
proposed contract:
A. The name and business address of each
subcontractor who will perform work or labor or render equipment
to the Provider in performing the proposed contract.
B. The specific portion of the work which will be
done by each listed subcontractor.
2.6 EQUAL BRANDS/TRADE NAMES (ATTACHMENT D)
The CITY's description.of the requested equipment
designates specific brands or trade names. If the Provider
proposes to provide an "equal" item, the item should be indicated
in Attachment D of the proposed contract.
SIGNATURE OF PROVIDER
This document is signed by an individual clearly authorized
to bind the Provider. The Provider agrees to be bound by the
provisions of this REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS.
PROVIDER:
ADDRESS:
PHONE:
by
SIGN DATE
TITLE
0
EXHIBIT 1 TO REQUEST TO SUBMIT PROPOSALS
TO PROVIDE EQUIPMENT
AND SUPPORT SERVICES
The CITY desires to acquire the following described equipment:
1 80386-25 Mhz Computer System (0 -Wait State). 64K CACHE
RAM (Exp. 256K); 4096K RAM (80 Nanoseconds); expandable
to 16MB RAM; 1.2 5.25" Floppy Drive; 320 MB ESDI Hard
Drive (17ms); 16 -Bit ESDI Hard Drive (17ms); 16 -Bit
ESDI Controller Card; Multi I/O (2 Parallel/2 Serials);
Monochrome Video Card; 12" Monochrome Monitor (Tilt &
Swivel); desktop case with 220W power supply; enhanced
101 keyboard
1 Novell NE -2000 Ethernet Card (or equivalent)
16 -Bit Ethernet Card
5 80286-12Mhz Computer System (0 -Wait State). 1024K RAM
(100 Nanoseconds); expandable to 4096K RAM; 1.2 5.25"
Floppy Drive; Multi I/O (1 Parallel/2 Serials); 16 -Bit
VGA Card (256K RAM); 14" VGA Monitor with Tilt and
Swivel); desktop case with 20OW power supply; enhanced
101 keyboard
5 Novell NE -1000 Ethernet Card (or equivalent)
8 -Bit Ethernet
3 Hewlett Packard Laser Jet III printers (or equivalent)
1 500VA Uninterruptible Power Supply
1 Novell Advanced Netware including Asynchronous Remote
Bridge Software. Supports Internetworking (more than 2
servers. Supports 100 Concurrent Connections.
1 Lotus 1-2-3- v3.0 (LAN Version)
1 Word Perfect v5.1 (LAN Version)
1 FOX Base Pro Database (LAN Version)
1 Microsoft Windows v3.0 (LAN Version)
All necessary cabling (must conform to current NEC --
check with City of Diamond Bar, Department of Building
& Safety)
Vi
EXHIBIT 2 TO REQUEST TO SUBMIT PROPOSALS
TO PROVIDE EQUIPMENT
AND SUPPORT SERVICES
The CITY desires to acquire the following support services:
- Provide installation of operating system and
application software.
- Provide delivery and assemble computer hardware.
- One year maintenance contract on all hardware
following expiration of manufacturer's warranty.
11
PROPOSAL COVER SHEET
PROVIDER'S PROPOSAL
TO PROVIDE EQUIPMENT
AND SUPPORT SERVICES
In compliance with the REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS, the
undersigned hereby agrees to furnish all labor, materials, and
equipment to perform the proposed contract which is enclosed
herewith; and to do so in strict accordance with the provisions
of the proposed contract.
ENCLOSURES
1. A Request for Proposals, dated and signed by the
Provider;
2. A Statement of Experience and Financial Condition
on CITY's form, dated and signed by the Provider
with supporting documents;
3. The proposed contract with attachments prepared on
CITY's form, dated and signed by the Provider; and
SIGNATURE OF PROVIDER
This document is signed by an individual clearly authorized
to bind the Provider.
PROVIDER:
ADDRESS•
PHONE:
BY
SIGN DATE
TITLE
9
STATEMENT OF EXPERIENCE AND FINANCIAL CONDITION
In submitting this PROPOSAL, the Provider represents that
Provider has a demonstrated trustworthiness and possesses the
quality, fitness and capacity to perform the proposed contract in
a manner that is satisfactory to the CITY. The Provider
represents that Provider's financial resources, surety and
insurance experience, equipment experience, completion ability,
personnel, current workload, experience in dealing with private
owners, and experience in dealing with public agencies all
suggest that the Provider is capable of performing the proposed
contract and has a demonstrated capacity to deal fairly and
effectively with and to satisfy a public agency.
In support of these representations, Provider presents
herewith letter of commendation/recommendation; reports; titles
of lawsuits involving Provider during the preceding ten years;
personnel strength reports, current and anticipated projects that
Provider will be expending effort upon in the State of California
during the performance of the proposed contract; a list of all
public contracts performed by Provider during the preceding five
years that identifies the governmental agencies involved; and
such other documents that the Provider deems necessary to support
Provider's PROPOSAL. The supporting documents are enclosed
herewith.
SIGNATURE OF PROVIDER
This document is signed by an individual clearly authorized
to bind the Provider.
PROVIDER:
ADDRESS:
PHONE:
by
SIGN DATE
TITLE
10
AGREEMENT TO PROVIDE EQUIPMENT
AND SUPPORT SERVICES
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered
execution by the City of Diamond Bar, a
hereinafter referred to as "CITY", and
hereinafter referred to as "PROVIDER".
RECITALS
into as of the date of
municipal corporation,
The CITY requires outside assistance to provide the
following equipment:
Networked computer system; software; external floppy
drives; all cabling and printers.
PROVIDER represents itself as possessing the necessary
skills and qualifications to provide the equipment required by
the CITY;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of these recitals and the
mutual covenants contained herein, the CITY and PROVIDER agree as
follows:
1.0 TERM OF AGREEMENT
1.1 This AGREEMENT shall be effective on and from the
day, month and year of the execution of this document by the
CITY.
1.2 PROVIDER shall commence the delivery of the
equipment on and the equipment shall be fully
delivered and installed by , and
instruction and support services shall continue for approximately
one year or until the AGREEMENT is terminated.
2.0 PROVIDERIS OBLIGATION
2.1 PROVIDER shall provide the CITY with the specific
equipment and support services that are described in Attachment A
which is attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this
reference, as though fully set forth at length, collectively
hereinafter referred to as "DESCRIBED EQUIPMENT/SUPPORT
SERVICES."
2.2 PROVIDER shall perform all work required to
provide the DESCRIBED EQUIPMENT/SUPPORT SERVICES in conformity
with applicable requirements of law: Federal, State and local.
2.3 PROVIDER shall maintain professional certifica-
tions as required in order to properly comply with all the CITY,
State and Federal laws.
11
3.0 PAYMENT FOR EQUIPMENT AND SERVICES (ATTACHMENT B)
Payment to PROVIDER to deliver the DESCRIBED EQUIPMENT/
SUPPORT SERVICES hereunder shall be as set forth in Attachment B
which is attached hereto and incorporated herein as though fully
set forth at length.
4.0 SUBCONTRACTING (ATTACHMENT C)
4.1 If PROVIDER subcontracts for any of the equipment
or support services that are to be provided under this AGREEMENT,
PROVIDER shall be as fully responsible to the CITY for the acts
and omissions of PROVIDER's subcontractors and for the persons
either directly or indirectly employed by the subcontractors, as
PROVIDER is for the acts and omissions of persons directly
employed by PROVIDER. Nothing contained in the AGREEMENT shall
create any contractual relationship between any subcontractor of
PROVIDER and the CITY. PROVIDER shall bind every subcontractor
to the terms of the AGREEMENT applicable to PROVIDER's work
unless specifically noted to the contrary in the subcontract in
question and approved in writing by the CITY.
4.2 The name and location of the place of business of
each subcontractor who will perform work or labor or provide
equipment to the PROVIDER in performing this AGREEMENT are con-
tained in Attachment "C" which is attached hereto and incorpor-
ated herein as though fully set forth at length.
5.0 EQUIVALENT ITEMS (ATTACHMENT D)
The CITY's description of equipment designates specific
brands or trade names. PROVIDER proposes an "equal" item
indicated in Attachment "D" which is attached hereto and
incorporated herein as though fully set forth at length.
6.0 EXTRA WORK
PROVIDER shall not provide equipment or perform support
services in excess of the DESCRIBED EQUIPMENT/SUPPORT SERVICES
without the prior, written approval of the CITY. All requests
for extra work shall be by written Change Order submitted to the
CITY prior to the delivery of such equipment or the commencement
of such work.
7.0 VERBAL AGREEMENT OR CONVERSATION
No verbal agreement or conversation with any officer,
agent or employee of the CITY, either before, during or after the
execution of this AGREEMENT, shall affect or modify any of the
terms or obligations herein contained nor shall such verbal
agreement or conversation entitle PROVIDER to any additional
payment whatsoever.
12
8.0 TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT
8.1 In the event of PROVIDER's failure to prosecute,
deliver, or perform the DESCRIBED EQUIPMENT/SUPPORT SERVICES, the
CITY may terminate this AGREEMENT by notifying PROVIDER by
certified mail of said termination. The City Manager of the CITY
shall determine any final payment due to PROVIDER.
8.2 This AGREEMENT may be terminated by either party,
without cause, upon the giving of thirty (30) days written notice
to the other party. The City Manager of the CITY shall make a
determination of the percentage of work which PROVIDER has
performed which is usable and of worth to the CITY. Based upon
that finding, the City shall determine any final payment due to
PROVIDER.
9.0 COVENANTS AGAINST CONTINGENT FEES
PROVIDER warrants that it has not employed or retained
any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working
for PROVIDER, to solicit or secure this agreement, and that
PROVIDER has not paid or agreed to pay any company or person,
other than a bona fide employee, any fee, commission, percentage,
brokerage fee, gift, or any other consideration contingent upon,
or resulting from, the award or making of this AGREEMENT. For
breach or violation of this warranty, the CITY shall have the
right to terminate this AGREEMENT without liability, or, at the
CITY's discretion to deduct from the AGREEMENT price or
consideration, or otherwise recover the full amount of such fee,
commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gift or contingent fee.
10.0 STATUS OF PROVIDER
PROVIDER shall provide and perform the described
EQUIPMENT/SUPPORT SERVICES REQUIRED herein as an independent
contractor and in pursuit of PROVIDER's independent calling, and
not as an employee of the CITY.
11.0 HOLD HARMLESS
PROVIDER agrees to defend, indemnify, and save free and
hold harmless the CITY and the CITY's agents, officers, and
employees from and against all claims, liabilities, penalties,
fines, or any damage to goods, properties, or effects of any
person whatever, and from personal injury or death caused by, or
resulting from, or claimed to have been caused by, or resulting
from, any acts or omissions of PROVIDER or PROVIDER's agents,
employees, subcontractors or representatives. PROVIDER's
obligation herein includes, but is not limited to, alleged
defects in the work of PROVIDER; but does not extend to
liabilities or claims that are alleged to arise out of the CITY's
sole act of negligence or deliberate wrongdoing.
13
12.0 ASSIGNMENT OF CONTRACT
PROVIDER is without right to and shall not assign this
AGREEMENT or any part thereof or any monies due hereunder without
the prior written consent of the CITY which shall not be
unreasonably withheld.
13.0 INSURANCE
13.1 PROVIDER shall obtain, and during the term of this
AGREEMENT shall maintain, policies of liability, automobile
liability, public liability, general liability and property
damage insurance from an insurance company authorized to be in
business in the State of California, in an insurable amount of
not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000) for each
occurrence or aggregate. The insurance policies shall provide
that the policies shall remain in full force during the life of
this AGREEMENT and shall not be canceled, terminated, or allowed
to expire without thirty (30) days prior written notice to the
CITY from the insurance company.
13.2 The CITY shall be named as an additional insured
on these policies.
13.3 Before PROVIDER shall employ any person or persons
in the performance of the AGREEMENT, PROVIDER shall procure a
policy of Workers' Compensation Insurance as required by the
Labor Code of the State of California.
13.4 PROVIDER shall furnish certificates of said
insurance to the CITY prior to commencement of work under this
AGREEMENT.
14.0 DISPUTES
14.1 If a dispute should arise regarding the
performance of this AGREEMENT, the following procedures shall be
used to address any question of fact or interpretation not
otherwise settled by agreement between the parties. Such
questions, if they become identified as part of a dispute between
persons operating under the provisions of the AGREEMENT, shall be
reduced to writing by the complaining party. A copy of such
documented dispute shall be forwarded to the other party involved
along with recommended methods of resolution. The party
receiving the letter shall reply to the letter along with a
recommended method of resolution within ten (10) days of receipt
of the letter.
14.2 If the dispute is not resolved, the aggrieved
party shall send to the CITY's Manager a letter outlining the
dispute for Manager's resolution.
14
14.3 If the dispute remains unresolved and the parties
have exhausted the procedures of this section, the parties may
then seek remedies available to them at law.
15.0 NOTICES
15.1 Any notices to be given under this AGREEMENT, or
otherwise, shall be served by certified mail.
15.2 For the purposes hereof, unless otherwise provided
in writing by the parties hereto, the address of the CITY and the
proper person to receive any notice on the CITY's behalf is:
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
21660 E. Copley Drive, Suite 100
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
15.3 For the purposes hereof, unless otherwise provided
in writing by the parties hereto, the address of PROVIDER and the
proper person to receive any notice on the PROVIDER's behalf is:
16.0 ATTORNEYS' FEES
In the event that one party incurs expenses, including
attorneys' fees and costs, in enforcing the provisions of this
AGREEMENT, such party shall be entitled to recover from the other
party reimbursement for those costs including a reasonable
attorney's fees.
17.0 PROVIDER'S CERTIFICATION OF AWARENESS OF IMMIGRATION
REFORM AND CONTROL ACT OF 1986
PROVIDER certifies that PROVIDER is aware of the
requirements of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986
(8 USC, §§ 1101-1525) and has complied and will comply with these
requirements, including but not limited to verifying the
eligibility for employment of all agents, employees,
subcontractors and consultants that are included in this
Agreement.
15
PROVIDER
by
(Signature)
Date
(Title)
16
CITY
City of Diamond Bar
by
Robert L. Van Nort
City Manager
Date
ATTACHMENT "All
DESCRIBED EQUIPMENT/SUPPORT SERVICES
EQUIPMENT:
SUPPORT SERVICES:
ATTACHMENT "B"
(Payment For Equipment/Suppo t Services)
The CITY shall pay PROVIDER for as follows:
TOTAL SYSTEM COSTS
1. EQUIPMENT
Hardware Purchase Cost $
Software Cost $
2. FREIGHT AND INSTALLATION COSTS $
3. SUBTOTAL
PURCHASE AND DELIVERY $
4. SUPPORT SERVICES COSTS
Equipment Maintenance Costs $
Software Maintenance Costs $
Other Ongoing Costs $
5. SUBTOTAL $
Tax $
TOTAL EQUIPMENT COST i
NOTE: THE CITY MAY AWARD THE CONTRACT FOR
ONLY A PORTION OF THE EQUIPMENT AND
SERVICES IDENTIFIED IN THE REQUEST
FOR PROPOSAL
-31
ATTACHMENT "B"
(Payment For Equipment/Support Services)
EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE COSTS
•TOTAL ANNUAL EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE COST FOR ONE YEAR $
NOTE: COST FOR EACH COMPONENT MUST INCLUDE ALL
REQUIRED FEATURES
NOTE: THE CITY MAY AWARD THE CONTRACT FOR ONLY A
PORTION OF THE EQUIPMENT AND SERVICES
IDENTIFIED IN THE REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL
ATTACHMENT "Bit
(Payment For Equipment/Support Services)
SOFTWARE LICENSE COSTS
TOTAL SOFTWARE LICENSE COST $
NOTE: COST FOR EACH COMPONENT MUST INCLUDE ALL
REQUIRED FEATURES
NOTE: THE CITY MAY AWARD THE CONTRACT FOR ONLY A
PORTION OF THE EQUIPMENT AND SERVICES
IDENTIFIED IN THE REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL
ATTACHMENT "B"
(Payment For Equipment/Support Services)
EQUIPMENT PURCHASE COSTS
TOTAL EQUIPMENT PURCHASE COST $
NOTE: COST FOR EACH COMPONENT MUST INCLUDE ALL
REQUIRED FEATURES
NOTE: THE CITY MAY AWARD THE CONTRACT FOR ONLY A
PORTION OF THE EQUIPMENT AND SERVICES
IDENTIFIED IN THE REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL
ATTACHMENT "B"
(Payment For Equipment/Support Services)
SOFTWARE MAINTENANCE COSTS
TOTAL ANNUAL SOFTWARE MAINTENANCE COST FOR ONE YEAR $
NOTE: COST FOR EACH COMPONENT MUST INCLUDE ALL
REQUIRED FEATURES
NOTE: THE CITY MAY AWARD THE CONTRACT FOR ONLY A
PORTION OF THE EQUIPMENT AND SERVICES
IDENTIFIED IN THE REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL
ATTACHMENT "B"
(Payment For Equipment/Support Services)
FREIGHT AND INSTALLATION COSTS
TOTAL FREIGHT COSTS
TOTAL INSTALLATION COSTS $
TOTAL FREIGHT AND INSTALLATION COSTS $
NOTE: COST FOR EACH COMPONENT MUST INCLUDE ALL
REQUIRED FEATURES
NOTE: THE CITY MAY AWARD THE CONTRACT FOR ONLY A
PORTION OF THE EQUIPMENT AND SERVICES
IDENTIFIED IN THE REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL
ATTACHMENT "Cu
(Subcontractors)
Name Business Address Relationship
ATTACHMENT I'D"
(Equal Items)
Specified Brand/Trade Name Proposed Equal
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Ivan Nyal, Chairman, Parks and Recreation Commission
VIA: Robert L. Van Nort, City Manager
SUBJECT: Parks/Recreation Commission Roles) and Responsibilities
DATE: July 3, 1990
This is the Parks and Recreation Commissions first opportunity to
meet formally with the City Council, since the November 7, 1989
meeting when the Commission was seated.
The Commission has been very busy over these past several months,
resolving, or attempting to do so, the problems and concerns that
the Council asked the Commission to handle, with it's initial
charge. We are pleased to report that many of those issues have
been addressed and resolved, by the Commission. we are continuing
to work on solutions for the other items on the initial list, plus
many that have evolved during the past months.
The Parks and Recreation Commission is extremely interested in
serving the Council and the Community. We shall continue in our
attempts to find effective and cost conscious solutions to the
City's parks and recreational needs. And, we shall assist the
Council in its forward look into the future of parks and recre-
ation, by advising the Council on parks and recreation policies.
The Commission looks forward to the joint meeting, with the Coun-
cil, with great anticipation. we are transmitting a list of top-
ics that we would like to discuss, with the Council. Your direc-
tion and guidance on the issues are needed. We stand ready to
respond to your direction and guidance, in any way we can.
Sind ly,
Ivan Nyal, Chairman
Parks and Recreation Commission
IN:vw
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
PARR AND RECREATION COMMISSION DISCUSSION AGENDA
I. DISCUSSION ISSUES
1. Open Space/Conservation Element
2. Parks Master Plan
A. Athletic Facilities
B. Community Center
C. Senior Center
D. Pantera Park
E. Heritage Park
F. Racquetball Facility
G. Facilities Evaluation
H. Support Groups and Sports Organizations
3. Funding Sources
4. JPAs
A. Walnut Valley Unified School District
1) Maintenance
2) Facilities Usage
3) Recreation
B. Facilities Improvement (D.B. Little League)
C. Sports Complex (Lanterman Site)
5. Development Review
6. Staffing
7. Other Items of Mutual Concern
Racuetball Facilty
In October of 1989, Mr. Van Nort recommended that the City Council take no
action on a report from Staff before it, regarding the pro's and con's of
authorizing a "Pay for Play" racquetball facility on City property.
On November 35, 1989, Mr. Chris Lancaster, representing a development
corporation of Kartcher and Chollet, Inc., presented a history of public
racquetball facilities. The presentation included site proposals and a
committment on the part of the developers to leave room space available at no
cost to the City, for use as the City sees fit.
After some discussion, Staff was requested to contact Deputy Luter (L.A. County
Sheriff) to discuss possible vandalism / crime associated with such projects.
It was then decided to continue the matter at the next meeting on December 14,
1989.
At the next meeting, Deputy Luter reported on possible law enforcement problems
at the proposed project. The deputy reported that crime could range from minor
graffiti to possible coin box theft.
Com./ Ruzicka and V.C./ Nardella ask about security and Deputy Luter advised
that foot patrols could be made to secure the area.
Comm./ Stitt expressed concern over residents that would be subject to evening
traffic noise as well as the amount of cars parking in the lot and if we would
have to install lighting for evening participants.
Chair./ Nyal requested a survey of residents be made by the company and by the
Staff to determine interest or concern for the project in the area.
By January the proposed project was dead , in part due to the fact that no
representative of the project returned before the Commission.
Mr. Chris Lancaster is no longer with the firm he was representing. This was a
new project for that company and the pursuit of it may have left with Mr.
Lancaster. The City has not been contacted regarding the proposal since late
last year.
Sender : Garry Stitt Sent
Subject Parks Facilities
PARK FACILITIES
On December 14, 1989, Chair./ Nyal requested Commission members survey each
park to determine needs.
At the meeting of January 11th, the Commission reviewed a survey and some of
the finding were:
A. Most Parks do not have a telephone for use in emergencies.
B. There was evidence of vandalism in nearly every Park.
C. Most restrooms had missing fixtures, electric lights, etc.
Heritage and Sycamore Parks needed BBQ repairs/replacements of grills.
During this time, residents came forward and expressed concerns regarding the
Parks in their neighborhoods:
A. A request for a fence was made at the Maple Hill Park.
B. A request for the development of a wild life perserve was made.
C. Several groups suggested a memorial site at a Park(s).
D. Residents of the Heritage Park area pleaded for the resumptions of the the
"Tiny -Tots" program which had served the neighborhood earlier.
E. Several parents of children living near Peterson Park ask about progress on
playground equipment, sun shelters and picnic facilities at there Park and
how soon they might expect them available.
During the sring and now summer, improvements were made whenever possible:
A Shortly after the survey was submitted, the missing restroom fixtures were
replaced and electric lights were replaced / fixed.
B. BBQ's at Heritage and Sycamore Parks were replaced or repaired.
C. The P & R Comm. is currently working on instalation of a donated, phone
which will serve as a test for the balance of the Parks.
D. Vandalism continues and every effort is made to reduce the threat and repair
damaged property as soon as it is possible.
Requests made by the residents have been considered and action taken:
A. The request for a fence around. Maple Hill Park has been budgeted for 1990.
B. The resumption of the "Tiny -Tots" program at Heritage Park began in March.
C. Peterson Park improvements have been budgeted, with contract, plans and
specifications being prepared, with anticipated presentation to Council for
bid authorization at the first meeting in August.
A facility inventory has been completed showing each Park by location and
facilities / activities available. This formwill be updated as needed. (I.E.
Peterson Park).
Sender Garry Stitt Sent =
Subject Heitage Park
Heritage Park
On January 11th, City Manager Van Nort announced that the City Received
$40,000.00 from a state grant for improvements to the park. By the 30th, Mr.
Van Nort had committed another $35,000.00 from City money into the the project.
In February Mr. Charles Janiel requested the Parks Commission appoint a
sub -committee to address improvements to Heritage Park .
On February 8th, Comm./ Whelan and Comm./ Stitt were appointed by the
Commission to form that sub -committee.
As of this date, the City's engineering firm is acting as consultant on this
project. Staff has met with RKA, to discuss improvements . RKA has met with
several contractors to discuss various options.
Currently the engineering office is seeking architectual services to
prepare plans and specifications for construction. Areas identified for
improvement are:
1. Termite fumigation / repairs.
2. A new roof.
3. Suspended cieling / new lighting fixtures.
4. Remove interior wall to increase room size.
5. Install panic bars / Exit signs as required by fire codes.
6. Install a rear exit for safety.
7. Carpet installation.
8. Replace bathroom fixtures.
9. Various adjustments to plumbing, electrical and cabinetry work.
At the last Rec. advisory board meeting it was mentioned that we may want to
hold off construction untill next summer , in order to allow the "Tiny -Tots"
run a full year in order to have a better evaluation of the structures needs.
INTEROFFICE MEMO
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council via
Parks & Recreation Commission
FROM: Robert L. Van Nort, City Manager
SUBJECT: Joint Power Agreement between Walnut Unified School Dis-
trict, City of Walnut, and City of Diamond Bar
DATE: July 3, 1990
The City of Walnut has been notified by the Superintendent that
the school district is intending to terminate the recreation Joint
Powers Agreement (JPA), effective July, 1991.
The City of Walnut, much like the City of Diamond Bar, has been
reviewing the present Recreation Program to determine what is
needed to meet our community needs, on July 1, 1991. A cut off
date has been set for December 31, 1990 to have the analysis com-
plete and reviewed.
It may be that a JPA between our respective two cities is the lo-
gical answer. However, this office still stands supportive of the
present arrangement as it relates and respects all program facili-
ties, with our respective political boundaries.
The City of Walnut is presently developing a proposal to analyze
its recreational needs; and, is asking whether the City of Diamond
Bar would be interested in participating in the proposal process.
It is requested that the Parks and Recreation Commission in con-
junction with the City of Walnut and the Walnut School District,
review and analyze the present and future recreation program needs
of the City of Diamond Bar. If it is the Commission's recommenda-
tion that a joint request for proposal is the best approach,
please inform the Council of your determination.
In the interim, the proposed Administrative Analyst job is to pro-
vide support and information pertaining to this issue and other
recreation matters, for use by the Parks and Recreation Commiss-
ion
Robert L. Van Nort
City Manager
RLVN:vlw
P.O. Box 682, Walnut CA 91788-0682
21201 LA PUENTE ROAD
WALNUT, CALIFORNIA 91789
Telephone (714) 595-7543
FAX (714) 595-6095
tjI A'k,-,,0i"D B A I R
CITY OF WALNUT
June 26, 1990
Bob Van Nort
City of Diamond Bar
21660 East Copley Drive
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
Dear Bob:
"BERT" ASHLEY
Mayor
RAY T. WATSON
Mayor Pro Tem
WILLIAM T. CHOCTAW, M.D.
DREXEL L. SMITH
H. THOMAS SYKES
Council Members
The City of Walnut currently participates in a Joint Powers Agreement
with the Walnut Valley Unified School District, for the District to
provide the community recreation program. Dr. David Brown,
Superintendent, has notified the City that it is the School District's
intent to terminate the Recreation JPA on July 1, 1991.
The City of Walnut is seeking an alternative service provider for the
recreation program, effective July 1, 1991. It has been suggested that
the establishment of a Joint Powers Authority between the City of
Diamond Bar and the City of Walnut may be feasible.
My staff is forwarding information to Charlie Janiel pertaining to the
existing recreation program, with copies of brochures, budgets,
attendance data, etc. In addition, we are preparing a Request for
Proposal, which will be forwarded to you. It is anticipated that the
RFP will be mailed the first of July and will be due the end of July,
with a staff recommendation forwarded to the Walnut Parks and Recreation
Commission in August and to the City Council in September. Final action
should be taken by January 1, 1991. I look forward to working with you
and your staff in evaluating a potential joint program.
Please contact Assistant to City Manager Tony Ramos at (714) 595-7543,
if you have any questions regarding this matter.
Sincerely,
Linda Holmes
City Manager
LH:jw
cc: Tony Ramos, Assistant to City Manager
Tom Hatch, Administrative Assistant
PROVIDER:
ADDRESS:
PHONE:
by
SIGN DATE
TITLE
PROCLAMATION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, PROCLAIMING THE MONTH OF
JULY, 1990 AS "STORE EMERGENCY FOOD" MONTH IN
CONJUNCTION WITH THE YEAR-LONG EARTHQUAKE SURVIVAL
PROGRAM IN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
WHEREAS, the County of Los Angeles adopted and implemented
the Earthquake Survival Program which encourages residents to
take a different precaution each month; and,
WHEREAS, the loss of life and property can be greatly
reduced if appropriate preparedness measures are taken before a
damaging earthquake; and,
WHEREAS, the month of July has been designated as the month
to store emergency food in conjunction with the Earthquake
Survival Program; and
WHEREAS, all residents of Southern California are encouraged
to take emergency preparedness precautions to make themselves
more self-sufficient in the event of a catastrophic incident,
such as a major earthquake; and,
WHEREAS, the year-long educational campaign, known as the
Earthquake Survival Program is a convenient method for residents
to better prepare themselve's and also to enhance their awareness
of the ever-present threat of earthquakes; and,
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT PROCLAIMED by the City Council of the
City of Diamond Bar that the month of July, 1990 is STORE
EMERGENCY FOOD month in Los Angeles County and the Council
encourages all residents to prepare themselves by having
available at their residence at least a three-day supply of food
set aside for each family member. Further, it is recommended
that residents take similar steps at their place of business.
Mayor
ATTEST:
LYNDA BURGESS, City Clerk
City of Diamond Bar