HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/05/1991CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA
Mayor — John A. Forbin
gm
Pro Tem — Jay C. IGm
Councilwoman — Phyllis Papen
Councilman — Gary H. Werner
Councilman — Donald C. Nardella
City Council Chambers
are located at:
South CoastAir Quality Mlanagement District Board Roam
218165 East Copley Drive
Please retain from smoking, eating or drinking in the 0mcil. Chambers.
MEETING DATE: November 5, 1991 Robert L. Van Nort
City Manager
REGULAR MEETING Andrew V. Arczynski
City Attorney
MEETING TIME: closed Session - 5:00 P.M. Lynda Burgess
Regular Session - 6:00 P.M. City Clerk
Copies of staff reports or other written documentation relating to each item referred to an this agenda
are on file in the office of the City Clerk and are available for public inspection.: It you have questions
regarding an agenda item, please contact the City Clerk at (714) 860-2409 during business hours.
i ne c.rry or uramona tzar uses REGYGLED paper and encourages you to do the same.
THIS MEETING IS BEING TAPED BY JONES INTERCABLE FOR
AIRING ON CHANNEL 51, AND BY REMAINING IN THE ROOM,
YOU ARE GIVING YOUR PERMISSION TO BE TAPED. ALL
COUNCIL MEETING TAPES WILL BE BLACKED IMMEDIATELY
AFTER AIRING AND WILL BE UNAVAILABLE FOR REPRODUCTION.
5:00 P.M. - CLOSED SESSION:
Litigation - Section 54956.9
Personnel - Section 54957.6
*** ELECTION RESULTS:
1. Can be viewed on Channel 51; or
2. Can be obtained by calling L.A. County Registrar -Recorder
at (213) 725-5781
Next Resolution No. 66
Next Ordinance No. 8 (1991)
1. CALL TO ORDER: 6:00 P.M.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: MAYOR FORBING
ROLL CALL: COUNCILMEN WERNER, NARDELLA, PAPEN,
MAYOR PRO TEM KIM, MAYOR FORBING
2. COUNCIL COMMENTS: Items raised by individual
Councilmembers are for Council discussion. Direction may be
given at this meeting or the item may be scheduled for action
at a future meeting.
3. 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.
4. CONSENT CALENDAR: The following items listed on the
Consent Calendar are considered routine and are approved by a
single motion:
4.1 SCHEDULE OF FUTURE MEETINGS:
4.1.1 GENERAL PLAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE - November 7,
1991 - 6:30 p.m., Hotel Diamond Bar, 259
Gentle Springs Ln.
4.1.2 HOLIDAY - Veteran's Day - November 11, 1991 -
City Offices will be closed.
4.1.3 TRAFFIC & TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION -
November 14, 1991 - 6:30 p.m., AQMD Hearing
Room, 21865 E. Copley Dr.
NOVEMBER 5, 1991 PAGE 2
4.1.4 PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION - November 14,
1991 - 7:00 p.m., City Hall, 21660 E. Copley
Dr., #100
4.1.5 CITY COUNCIL MEETING - November 19, 1991 -
6:00 p.m., AQMD Board Room, 21865 E. Copley
Dr.
4.1.6 GENERAL PLAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE - November 21,
1991 - 6:30 p.m., Hotel Diamond Bar, 259
Gentle Springs Rd.
4.1.7 PLANNING COMMISSION - NOVEMBER 25, 1991 - 7:00
p.m., AQMD Hearing Room, 21865 E, Copley Dr.
4.2
APPROVAL
OF MINUTES - Regular Meeting of October 15,
1991.
4.3
WARRANT
REGISTER - Approve Warrant Register dated
November
5, 1991 in the amount of $671,843.67.
4.4
TREASURER'S
REPORT - Receive & File Treasurer's Report
for Month
of September, 1991.
4.5
RECEIVE
& FILE TRAFFIC & TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
MINUTES
- Regular Meeting of September 12, 1991
4.6
RECEIVE
& FILE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -
4.6.1
Regular Meeting of September 9, 1991
4.6.2
Regular Meeting of September 23, 1991
4.7
RECEIVE
& FILE PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION MINUTES -
4.7.1
Regular Meeting of August 22, 1991
4.7.2
Regular Meeting of September 26, 1991
4.8
RESOLUTION
NO. 91 -XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY
COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR SUPPORTING THE
ESTABLISHMENT
OF AN IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION
SERVICE
OFFICE IN THE SAN GABRIEL VALLEY.
Recommended
Action: Adopt Resolution No. 91 -XX support-
ing establishment of an Immigration and Naturalization
Service
office in the San Gabriel Valley.
4.9 RESOLUTION NO. 91 -XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR IN THE MATTER OF AUTHORIZING
PARTICIPATION IN A STATEWIDE PURCHASING PROGRAM - The
League of California Cities and the County Supervisors
Association of California (CSAC) have negotiated a
contract with Southwest Airlines for discount airfares
within California for all city and county business
travel.
Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 91 -XX authoriz-
ing participation in a statewide purchase program for
discount airfares.
NOVEMBER 5, 1991
5.
M
PAGE 3
4.10 MEMBERSHIP OF LAGUNA HILLS & LAKE FOREST IN SCJPIA - The
Southern California Joint Powers Insurance Authority
Executive Committee, at their meeting of October 23,
1991, recommended approval of the cities of Laguna Hills
and Lake Forest for membership in the Authority. Cities
applying for membership must be approved by a two-thirds
majority of the current membership.
Recommended Action: Approve membership of the cities of
Laguna Hills and Lake Forest in the SCJPIA and authorize
the Mayor to execute the consent forms on behalf of the
City as the City's delegate to the Authority.
4.11 NOTICE OF COMPLETION - On August 6, 1991, the City
Council awarded a contract to Nobest, Inc. for sidewalk
construction on Brea Canyon Rd. at SR 60. Construction
was completed on September 30, 1991.
Recommended Action: Accept work performed by Nobest,
Inc. and authorize the City Clerk to file the proper
Notice of Completion.
OLD BUSINESS:
5.1 ORDINANCE NO. 4A (1989): AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR RELATIVE TO THE
LOCATION OF REGULAR MEETINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR - First reading October 29, 1991.
Recommended Action: Approve for 2nd reading and adoption
Ordinance No. 4A (1989) relative to the location of
regular meetings of the City Council.
5.2 COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT - TRES HERMANOS SPECIFIC PLAN -
Continued from October 29, 1991. The City of Diamond Bar
and the City of Industry Urban Development Agency desire
to develop a Conceptual Specific Plan for the 800 acre
Tres Hermanos Ranch property. In order to coordinate the
necessary studies associated with such a project and to
minimize expense to the public, a cooperative agreement
between the two agencies is proposed.
Recommended Action: Approve the Cooperative Agreement
and authorize an expenditure of up to $75,000 to prepare
the Conceptual Specific Plan.
ANNOUNCEMENTS:
7. ADJOURNMENT:
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING
AND AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS.
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR )
The Diamond Bar City Council will hold a Closed Session at
5:00 p.m. and a Regular Meeting at the South Coast Air Quality
Management District Board Room, located at 21865 E. Copley Dr.,
Diamond Bar, California at 6:00 p.m. on Tuesday, November 5,
1991.
Items for consideration are listed on the attached agenda.
I, LYNDA BURGESS, declare as follows:
I am the City Clerk in the City of Diamond Bar; that a copy
of the Notice for the Regular Meeting of the Diamond Bar City
Council, to be held on November 5, 1991 was posted at their
proper locations.
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is
true and correct.
Executed on November 1, 1991 at Diamond Bar, California.
/s/ Lynda Burgess
LYNDA BURGESS, City Clerk
City of Diamond Bar
NOTICE OF CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the following Public
Hearing was continued from the October 29, 1991 City Council
meeting to the City Council meeting of November 19, 1991.
(1) SOURCE REDUCTION AND RECYCLING ELEMENT (SRRE)
NOTICE IS FURTHER GIVEN that the City Council meeting
of November 19, 1991 will take place at 7:00 p.m., in the Council
Chambers, AQMD Board Room, 21865 E. Copley Dr., Diamond Bar. All
interested persons are invited to attend said Public Hearing, and
to be heard in favor or in opposition to the item, either orally
or by written communication to the City Council
DATED this 1st day of November, 1991.
/s/ Lynda Burgess
LYNDA BURGESS, City Clerk
City of Diamond Bar
MINUTES OF THE CITY
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF DIIAMOND BAR ®RAFT
OCTOBER 1, 1991
1. CALL TO ORDER: MPT/Kim 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 ALLEGIANCE: The audience was led in the
Pledge of Allegiance by MPT/Kim.
ROLL CALL: Mayor Pro Tem Kim, Councilmen
Papen, Nardella and Werner. Mayor Forbing was excused.
Also present were Robert L. Van Nort, City Manager; Terrence
L. Belanger, Assistant City Manager; William P. Curley, III,
Deputy City Attorney; James DeStefano, Director of Community
Development; Sid Mousavi, Public Works Director/City Engineer
and Lynda Burgess, City Clerk.
2. COUNCIL COMMENTS: C/Papen introduced her brother,
Philip Schoenthal, visiting from Chicago.
3. PUBLIC COMMENTS:
None offered.
4. CONSENT CALENDAR: C/Werner moved, C/Nardella
seconded, to approve the Consent Calendar with the exclusion
of Item 4.8 regarding the San Gabriel Valley Transportation
Coalition. With the following Roll Call vote, the motion
carried:
AYES: COUNCILMEN - Werner, Nardella, Papen, MPT/Kim
NOES: COUNCILMEN - None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN - M/Forbing
4.1 SCHEDULE OF FUTURE MEETINGS:
4.1.1
PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION - October 24,
1991 - 7:00 p.m., Community Room, 1061 S.
Grand Ave.
4.1.2
GENERAL PLAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE - October 24,
1991 - 7:00 p.m., Diamond Bar Hotel, 259
Gentle Springs Rd., Poolside Conference Room.
4.1.3
PLANNING COMMISSION - October 28, 1991 - 7:00
p.m., W.V.U.S.D. Board Room, 880 S. Lemon Ave.
4.1.4
ADJOURNED REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING -
October 29, 1991 - 6:00 p.m. - W.V.U.S.D.
Board Room, 880 S. Lemon Ave.
4.1.5
CITY COUNCIL MEETING - November 5, 1991 - 6:00
p.m., AQMD Board Room, 21865 E. Copley Dr.
4.2 APPROVAL OF MINUTES -
4.2.1 REGULAR MEETING OF OCTOBER 1, 1991 - Approved
as submitted.
4.3 WARRANT REGISTER -
4.3.1 WARRANT REGISTER DATED OCTOBER 15, 1991 -
Approved warrants in the amount of
$180,289.76.
OCTOBER 15, 1991 PAGE 2
4.4 TREASURER'S REPORT -
4.4.1 MONTH OF AUGUST, 1991 - Received and filed.
4.5 BOND EXONERATION - Approved work completed, accepted for
public use the sanitary sewer, exonerated Surety Bond No.
83SB 100 426 683 for Private Contract Nos. 10237 & 10237A
and directed City Clerk to notify the principals.
4.6 ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 91-63: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, COUNTY OF LOS
ANGELES, APPROVING THE APPLICATION FOR BICYCLE AND/OR
PEDESTRIAN FUNDS UNDER SB 821 AND APPROVING THE ADOPTION
OF ITS BICYCLE AND/OR PEDESTRIAN PLAN.
4.7 ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 91-64: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING PLANS AND
SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE PURCHASE AND INSTALLATION OF
PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT FOR LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT
#39 MINI -PARK AT SOFTWIND AND STARDUST IN SAID CITY AND
AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO ADVERTISE TO
RECEIVE BIDS.
4.9 ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 91-65: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA, IN
CONCERN FOR POW/MIA MEMBERS.
4.10 BICYCLE LANE ON DIAMOND BAR BLVD. - Approved the plan and
design to restripe and modify the current bicycle lane on
Diamond Bar Blvd. between Golden Springs Rd. and State
Route 60.
4.11 JOINT INDEMNITY AGREEMENT - Approved the Revised
Assumption of Liability Agreement, now titled Joint
Indemnity Agreement, as adopted by the California
Contract Cities Association, and authorized Mayor to
execute the contract amendments.
MATTERS WITHDRAWN FROM CONSENT CALENDAR:
4.8 SAN GABRIEL VALLEY TRANSPORTATION COALITION - C/Papen
stated that she and ACM/Belanger attended a
Transportation Coalition Meeting called by several cities
to discuss the L.A. County Transportation Commission's
30 -year Integrated Transportation Plan and whether or not
the San Gabriel Valley, as a whole, was represented
fairly in the 30 -year stip plan.
In response to MPT/Kim's questions, ACM/Belanger
responded that the $5,000 contributed by the City would
assist in engaging a consultant to review the 30 -year
Integrated Transportation Plan, with specific focus on
how the plan impacts the East San Gabriel Valley. The
recommended consultant, Forsythe & Associates, currently
staffs the Foothill Transportation Corridor and
represents 21 of the S.G.V. Cities and is considered
OCTOBER 15, 1991 PAGE 3
knowledgeable of transportation and transit issues in the
San Gabriel Valley. In addition, 18 of 31 cities have
indicated interest in joining the Coalition.
C/Werner requested that the City Attorney be involved in
writing documentation to accompany the payment stating
that once the payment is accepted, it is accepted with
certain provisions that protect the City's interest.
C/Papen moved, C/Werner seconded, to authorize a maximum
of $5,000 of Proposition A, Local Transportation Program
monies, to be used for the pro rata share to analyze of
the 30 -Year Integrated Transportation Plan. With the
following Roll Call vote, motion carried:
AYES: COUNCILMEN - Nardella, Papen, Werner, MPT/Kim
NOES: COUNCILMEN - None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN - M/Forbing
5. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS - PROCLAMATIONS, CERTIFICATES, ETC.
5.1 PROCLAIMED WEEK OF OCTOBER 20 - 26, 1991 AS "RED
RIBBON WEEK."
5.2 PROCLAIMED NOVEMBER 1, 1991 THROUGH 1992 AS "BUCKLE -UP
FOR LIFE CHALLENGE."
6. OLD BUSINESS:
6.1 ORDINANCE NO. 24B(1989): AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AMENDING ORDINANCE NO.
24(1989) AS HERETOFORE AMENDED, CONCERNING THE TERMS OF
OFFICE OF PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSIONERS.
(see action under item 6.3 below)
6.2 ORDINANCE NO. 25C(1989): AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AMENDING ORDINANCE NO.
25(1989) AS HERETOFORE AMENDED, CONCERNING THE TERMS OF
OFFICE OF PLANNING COMMISSIONERS.
(see action under item 6.3 below)
6.3 ORDINANCE NO. 28B(1989): AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AMENDING ORDINANCE NO.
28(1989) AS HERETOFORE AMENDED, CONCERNING THE TERMS OF
OFFICE OF TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSIONERS.
DCA/Curley explained that Ordinance Nos. 24B, 25C and 28B
had been prepared to modify Commissioners' terms in order
to retain the 90 -day end -of -term provisions which were
affected by the change in Election dates from April of
even -numbered years to November of odd -numbered years.
OCTOBER 15, 1991 PAGE 4
C/Nardella moved, C/Papen seconded to approve, for first
reading by title only and waive full reading, Ordinance
No. 24B(1989), No. 25C(1989) and No. 28B(1989). With the
following Roll Call vote, motion carried:
AYES: COUNCILMEN - Papen, Werner, Nardella, MPT/Kim
NOES: COUNCILMEN - None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN - M/Forbing
7. ANNOUNCEMENTS:
C/Werner reminded everyone to "Buckle -Up for Life".
C/Nardella reminded the public of "Red Ribbon Week" October 20
- 26, 1991 and advised that ribbons would be available at City
Hall free of charge.
C/Papen stated that in a recent piece of campaign literature,
it was indicated that homes were going to be built on the
Pantera Park land. She explained that the City Council did
not intend to allow construction of homes on that site. In
fact, the Council approved an application for grant funds for
construction of a park at that site approximately one month
ago.
8. ADJOURNMENT:
With no further business to conduct, MPT/Kim adjourned the
meeting at 6:42 p.m. to Tuesday, October 29, 1991 at 6:00 P.M.
ATTEST:
Mayor
Lynda Burgess, City Clerk
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
ADDRESS:
ORGANIZATION:
SUBJECT:
VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL
REGARDING AGENDA ITEM NO. a
City Clerk
I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the
Council Minutes reflect my name and address as written above.
NOTE: All persons may attend meetings and address the City Council. This
form is intended to assist the Mayor in ensuring that all persons wishing
to address the Council are recognized and to ensure correct spelling of
names in the Minutes.
VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL
REGARDING AGENDA ITEM NO.
DATE: /
TO: City ClerX-
r"
FROM :>�/
ADDRESS:
ORGANIZATION •
SUBJECT: /r��
s
I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the
Council Minutes reflect my name and address as wrlttgn above.
Signature
NOTES All persons may attend meetings and address the City Council. This
form is intended to assist the Mayor in ensuring that all persons wishing
to address the Council are recognized and to ensure correct spelling of
names in the Minutes.
VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL
REGARDING AGENDA ITEM NO.
DATE:
TO: City Clerk
FROM:
ADDRESS:
ORGANIZATION: S
SUBJECT: z2o z2,JZrg�nd 18(r,+
,
c_ff n
I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have
Council Minutes reflect my name and ad ss as written ab
Signature
NOTE: All persons may attend meetings and address the City Council. This
form is intended to assist the Mayor in ensuring that all persons wishing
to address the Council are recognized and to ensure correct spelling of
names in the Minutes.
VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL
REGARDING AGENDA ITEM NO. '_
DATE:
TO: City Clerk
FROM:.
ADDRESS:
ORGANIZATION: l_;r
SUBJECT: C%>�i� °,�,,�L
I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the
Council Minutes reflect my name and address as written above.
ignature
NOTE: All persons may attend meetings and address the City Council. This
form is intended to assist the Mayor in ensuring that all persons wishing
to address the Council are recognized and to ensure correct spelling of
names in the Minutes.
I N T E R O F F I C E M E M O R A N D U M
TO: Mayor Pro Tem Rim and Councilmember Papen
FROM: Linda G. Magnuso,2.(Inior Accountant
SUBJECT: Voucher Register, October 31, 1991
DATE: November S, 1991
Attached is the Voucher Register dated October 31, 1991. As
requested, the Finance Department is submitting the voucher
register for the Finance Committee's review and approval prior to
it's entry on the Consent Calender.
The checks will be produced after any recommendations and the final
approval is received.
Please review and sign the attached.
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
VOUCHER REGISTER APPROVAL
The attached listing of vouchers dated October 31, 1991 have been
audited approved and recommended for payment. Payments are hereby
allowed from the following funds in these amounts:
FUND NO. FUND DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
001 General Fund $591,823.60
138 LLAD #38 Fund 3,403.18
139 LLAD #39 Fund 5,866.02
141 LLAD #41 Fund 3,792.26
225 Grand Ave. Const. Fund 57,673.49
250 Capital Improvement Project Fund 9.285.12
TOTAL ALL FUNDS $671,843.67
APPROVED BY:
Linda G. MAgouson
Senior Accou tant
l
Robert L. Van Nort
City Manager
Phyl is E. Papen
Councilmember
Jay C. Kim
Mayor Pro Te�Y//17
1/
V
RUN TIME: 12:54 10x31;91 C C 7 E k R E S E R
DUE THRU.............11;05'91
VENDOR INAME VENDOR 1D.
ACCOUNT PROJ.Ti-NO BATCH PO.LINE/NO. ENTRYIDUE INVOICE DESCRIPTION
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ARA/Cary Refreshment Secs ARA
+001-4090-2325 1 21105A
Accurate Landscape Accurate
+138-4538-5590 1 21105A
+139-4539-5509 1 21105A
American Controller - AmerRepair
+141-4541-2210 2 21105A 01/1928
Aqua Backflow d
AquaBack
+138-4538-5500
2 2110SA
+001-4328-5300
1 21105A
+139-4539-5500
2 21105A
ANI BNI
+001-4510-2320 2 21195A 0111225
Beke, John C. BekeJ
+001-4553-4100 1 21105D
Best Lighting Products BestLtg
+001-4316-2210 1 21105A 01/1229
Bishop Company BlshopCo
+001-4310-1290 2 21105A 01/12"s9
Business Systems Supply Business5y
+001-4090-6220 2 21105A 0111089
r1AGE
+ PREPAID # +
AMOUNT DATE CHECK
--------------------------
10/29
11105
274105
Meeting Supplies
76.25
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------;
76.25
10/29
11/05
00351
Sept Maint. Dist 136
3,100.00
10/29
11/05
00352
Sept. Maint. Dist :39
5,500.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------3
8,660.00
10,29
11/05
4166
Sprinkler Repair 01
66.91
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------;
66.91
10/29
11185
8636
Backflow Tests Dist 38
160.28
10/29
11/05
8847
Backflow Test-Summt Rdge
25.04
10;29
11/05
8847
Backflow Test Dist 139
213.53
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------
398.81
10/29
11/05
9/091603
Pub Wks Publication
36.67
TOTAL DUE VENDOR ---------
36.67
10/30
11/05
Trffc Mtg 10/10
40.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR -------->
40.49
10/29
11/05
1073
Light Repair -Maple Hill
595.86
TOTAL DUE VENDOR ---------?
595.86
10/29
11/05
42527
Safety Supplies
134.75
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------)
134.15
10129
11/05
179159
Gray File Cabinets
1,370.12
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------}
1,370.12
PEN TINE: 12:54 10;31191 1? u C H. R R E 5 1 5 T E n
DUE THRU.............1115;91
VENDOR NAME VENDOR ID.
ACCOUNT PROJ.TX-NO BATCH PO.L1NE/NO. ENTRY/DUE INVOICEDESCRIPTION
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cable Connectors, The .ablconect
*001-4440-6310 2 21105A 0111243
California Society of CSMFO
*001-4050-2315 1 2116A
Center for the Study of CenterLaw
*001-4090-2320 1 21105A
Chavers, 3. Todd
001-4553-4108
Clarke, Kathleen
*601-3478
ChaversJT
2 21105D
116
6 21105Z
Community Sweeping CpmSweep
*001-4555-5500 1 21105A
Computer Applied Systems CAS
*001-4050-4030 1 21105A
Computerland of D. B. Cmptrland
*001-4090-6230 1 21105A
Conlin Bros Sporting Good ConlinBres
*001-4350-1200 2 21105A 0111246
*001-4350-1200 4 21105A 01/1247
*001-4350-1200 7 211MA
PAGE
PREPAID
AMOUNT DATE CHECK
--------------------------------
10;30
11/05
Installation Coax Cables
653.56
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------;
653.56
10/31
11/05
Member Dues -Magnuson
50.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR -------->
50.00
10/30
11/05
Transportation Handbks
225.23
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------)
225.23
10130
11/85
Trffc Mta 10;10
40.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------;
40.00
10129
11105
Recreation refund
110.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------)
110.04
10/30
11;05
Sweeping Svc Aug -Oct
28,430.50
TOTAL DUE VENDOR -------->
28,430.54
10/30
11/05
911110
Computer Maint.-Nov
745.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR -------->
745.00
10/30
11/05
0958
nata Projection System
697.13
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------
697.13
10/30
11/05
41437,4171;
Recreation Equip
174.50
10/30
11/05
41773
Office Supplies
223.54
10131
11/05
41773
Small Tools(Equip)
278.74
TOTAL DUE VENDOR -------->
676.78
###
it
'i =
J
a ,m a n d B a r f f 4
RUN TIME: 12:54 110131/91
0 LI C
H E R R
E 3 15 T E R
PAGE 3
rut
THRU.............11/05/91
VENDOR NAME
VENDOR !D.
PREPAID � }
ACCOUNT PROJ.T%-NO BATCH PO.LINE/NO.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ENTRY/DUE
INVOICE
'DESCRIPTION
AMOUNT
DATE CHECK
CoWasters, The
CopvMaster
*001-4090-2109
2 21105A
10/30
11/05
055679
Konica Maint
132.06
*001-4090-2100
1 21105A
10/30
11105
130844
Toner-Konica Copier
206.51
TOTAL DUE 'VENDOR-------->
338.57
Cowden, Darryl L.
122
*001-3478
4 211052
10/29
!1105
Recreation refund
40.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR--------;
40.09
D. B. Chamber of Commerce Hchamoer
*001-4010-2325
4 21105F
10130
11/05
Retreat Deposit-CCouncil
435.00
11/05191 00000!3230
*001-4030-2325
1 21105E
10130
11/05
Chamber Retreat-CityMgr
95.00
11/05/91 0000013239
*001-4210-2325
1 21105F
10/30
11/05
Chamber Retreat-Ping Dir.
95.00
11/05/91 0000013230
TOTAL PREPAID AMOUNT ---->
625.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR--------r
0.00
DB Country Club
DBCountryC
*001-4410-2325
1 21105F
10/30
11/05
Quarterly BreaKfst-Sherif
413.20
11/05/91 0000013229
TOTAL PREPAID AMOUNT ---->
413.20
TOTAL DUE VENDOR-------->
0.00
DKS Associates
DKS
*001-4551-5221
1 21105A
10/30
11/05
14274
Trffc Rort-Car Wash
332.50
*001-4551-5221
2 21195A
10/30
11/05
14277
Survey Palamino;Alamitos
475.09
*001-4551-5221
3 21105E
10/30
11/05
14330
Retainage-91-105
131.30
*001-4551-5221
4 21105E
10/30
11/05
14331
Retainage 91-106A
25.09
f001-4551-5221
5 21105E
10/30
11/05
14332
Retainage-91-108
40.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR--------}
11003.60
De Stefano, Jim
Destefano
*001-4210-1300
1 21165A
10/30
11105
Reimb-Tape Recorder
54.11
TOTAL DUE VENDOR--------i
54.11
Dept of Transportation
Dept?rans
*001-4555-5501
1 21105A
10;30
11/05
119130
5lgnals.Lightng-August
697.50
TOTAL DUE VENDOR.-------->
697.50
Diamond Bar Stationers
DBStationr
*001-4090-1100
3 21105A
10/30
11/05
27496
Enyelopes,Pens
12.12
*001-4090-1100
2 21105A
10/30
11/05
27500
Sign
8.52
*001-2300-1010
1 21105A
10/30
11/05
27515
3uoplies-CUP 91-11
32.64
*001-4090-1100
1 21105A
10/30
11/05
27530
Badge Holder-Papen
3.16
T TAL DUE 'VENDOR-------- %/
56.44
S a
9JN TIME; i2;541s+i 191 !0U CaE REGISTER
DUE THRU.............111;05;91
VENDOR NAME )ENDOR ID.
ACCOUNT PROJ.TX-NO BATCH PO.LINE/NO. ENTRY/DUE INVOICE DESCRIPTION
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Diilon, Jeff D. 119
+001-3474 4 211451 14/29 11,45 Recreation refund
E. San Gab. Planning Ca®A ESGVPC
+001-4010-2325 1 21105F
Eastman Inc.
+001-4210-1200
+001-4090-1100
+001-4210-1200
+001-4090-1100
Eastman
2 21105B 14/1213
4 211658 15/1213
1211058 13/1213
5 21105E 16/1213
Ewing Irriqation Products Ewing
+001-4310-1200 3 21105B 01/1204
TOTAL DUE 'VENDOR
7C 4
+ + PREPAID + +
AMOUNT DATE CHECK
--------------------------------
40.00
40.04
10;30
11105
Mtq 10/24 -Kim
19.00 11i05191 0000013224
+001-4216-2310
2 21105B
TOTAL PREPAID AMOUNT ----'
19.00
4253001
rue! -Plug
+001-4310-2310
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------;•
0.00
10/30
11/05
8033664
Stapler -Plug
17.90
10/30
11/05
8033665
Supplies -Gen Bovt
287.35
10/30
11/05
8033666
Supplies -Ping
2.87
10/30
11/05
8064503
File Folders -Gen Govt
16.54
Fuel-ACAgr
+001-4030-2310
1 211058
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------;
324.62
10130 11/05 394160 Operating Supplies
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------)
Exxon
ExxonS
+001-4216-2310
2 21105B
10130
11105
4253001
rue! -Plug
+001-4310-2310
2 211058
10/30
11105
4954261
Fuel-P&M
+001-4310-2310
1 21165B
10/30
11105
4954412
Fuel PGM
+001-4090-2310
1 211058
10/30
11/05
4954541
Fuel -Gen Govt
001-4030-2310
2 21105E
10/30
11/05
4954666
Fuel-ACAgr
+001-4030-2310
1 211058
10130
11/05
4954681
Fuel-Cagr
+001-4030-2310
3 21105B
10/30
11105
4958391
Fuel Csgr
+001-4210-2310
1 211058
10130
11/05
4958903
Fuel -Ping
+001-4310-2310
4 211058
10/30
11/05
4958962
Fuel -PGM
+001-4310-2310
3 211058
10/30
11/05
5653410
Fuel -PJM
+001-4310-2310
6 21105B
10/30
11105
5653760
Fuel-P8M
+001-4310-2310
5 21105B
10/30
11/05
5658391
Fuel -PJM
+001-4310-2310
7 211058
10/30
11/05
6355252
fuel-P&N
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
I
141.03
141.03
19.51
34.04
30.92
14.91
16.00
11.54
15.31
18.51
18.92
30.00
30.76
27.96
31.00
299.34
FORMA FORMA
+001-4090-4000 1 21105B 01/1232 10,130 11/05 7124 Landscape Svcs-Pantera Pk 5,000.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------i 5,000.00
:f i1amo
n d bar +tx
RUN TIME: 12:54 10/31/91
V
O U C N E R R
E G.: T E R
PAGE 5
DUE THRU.............11r05;91
VENDOR NAME
VENDOR ID.
+ + PREPAID + +
ACCOUNT PROJ.TX-NO
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BATCH PO.LINE/ND.
ENTRY/DUE INVOICE
DESCRIPTION
AMOUNT DATE CHECK
Fass Co. Courier Svc
FASSCO
+001-4090-2395
1 21105E
10/30
11105 294;4
Courier Svc -Park Grant
62.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR ------ ->
62.00
Federal Express Corp.
FedExpress
+001-4210-2120
1 211058
10/30
ilr'05
Overnight Postage Chrgs
36.25
+001-4440-2120
1 21105B
10,30
11/05
Overnight Postage Svcs
13.00
+001-4510-2120
1 21105E
10/30
11/05
Overnight Postage Svcs
13.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------)
62.25
Forbing, John
Forbing
+001-4010-2330
1 211058
10/30
11/05
Conf. Reimb
156.22
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------:
156.22
Forbing, John
Forbing
+001-4010-2330
7 21105}
10,130
11/05
Conf. per diem 10/11-16
270.00 11/05/91 0000013222
TOTAL PREPAID AMOUNT ---->
270.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------;
0.00
Fritz, Art
FritzA
+001-4553-4100
3 21105D
10/30
11/05
Trffc Mtg 10/10
40.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------:
40.00
Fromex
Fromex
+001-2300-1018
2 21105B
10/30
11/05
3 Roils of Film CUP 91-11
30.35
+001-4210-2110
1 21105B
10130
11/05
Film Dvlping-Ping
7.71
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------;
38.06
S 8 G Trophy Co.
GGGTrophy
+001-4350-1200
5 21105B
10/30
11/05 0550
Trophies -Adult Softball
45.79
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------
45.79
GTE California
GTE
+001-4313-2125
1 211058
10/30
11/05
Oct. Phone Svc -Heritage
55.15
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------y
55.15
GTEL
GTEL
+001-4090-2130
1 211058
10i30
11/05
Equip Rental thru Nov 18
897.82
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------;
897.82
+++
Iit
of
Dias:onU
Sar +++
RUN TIME: 12:54 10/31x91
d
O U C
H E R P,
E 5 15 T E R
PAGE 6
DUE THRU.............il/05/91
VENDOR NAME
VENDOR ID,
+ + PREPAID + +
ACCOUNT PR03.TS-40
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BATCH PO.LINEiNO.
ENTRY/DUE
INVOICE
DESCRIPTION
AMOUNT DATE CHECK
Garcia, Richard
115
+001-3418
7 211052
10/29
11/05
Recreation refund
225.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
-------->
225.00
Gardner Communications
GardnerCom
+001-4095-1200
1 211058
10,30
11/05
886
Reprints for Rch
Festival
64.95
+001-4210-4220
1 211058
10/30
11/05
889
Reprints -General
Plan
201.02
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
-------->
265.97
Gonsalves 9 Son, Ode A.
Gonsalves
+001-4010-4000
1 211058
10/30
11105
Legal Svcs -Noy 91
2,100.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
-------->
2,100.60
Grant, Maria L.
124
+001-3478
3 21105Z
10/29
11/05
Recreation refund
16.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
--------4
16.00
Heller s Associates
Heller
+001-2110-1004
1 21105C
10130
11/05
Nov -Dental Pres
148.89
+001-2110-1006
1 21105C
10/30
11/05
Nov Vision Pres
333.99
+601-4090-2399
1 21105C
10/30
11105
COBRA -P. Sartin
26.63
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
--------'>
1,111.51
Hi -Way Safety Rentals,Inc
HiWaysafe
+001-4095-2130
1 21105E
10/30
11/05
63530
Safety Signs-Rch
Festival
830.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
-------->
830.00
Holzer, Richard
120
+001-3474
3 21105Z
18/29
11/05
Recreation refund
40.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
-------->
40.00
Hovey Electric Inc.
Hovey
+225-4510-6412 05192
2 21105D
10/30
11/05
300
Trfc Signal Install -Grand
45.077.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
-------->
45,077.00
I.E.S.
IES
+001-4510-2320
3 21105E
10/30
11i05
Roadway Lighting
Publictn
45.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
-------->
45.00
RUN ?IME: 12;54 18 31191
u J C
H E RE 5
i T R
PAGE
DUE
THRU.............11`05.ii
VENDOR NAME
VENDOR ID.
PREPAID * +
ACCOUNT PROJ.TX-NO
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BATCH PO.LINE/N0.
ENTRY/DUE
INVOICE
DESCRIPTION
AMOUNT
DATE CHECK:
ICMA
iCMAl
*001-4030-2315
1
21105E
18130
11/05
Annual Member Dues-ACMgr
534.98
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------;
534.98
Impressive Screenwork.s
Impressive
*001-4350-1200
6
211OSD
10/30
11105
7257
Softball T -Shirts
206.88
TiTAL DUE VENDOR --------f
286.88
Inland Valley Dly Builetn
iVDB
*001-4040-2115
121105B
10130
11/05
dc10948
Pub HrR-Bids Mini Prk
31.50
*001-2300-1010
4
21105B
10/31
11105
dc13784
Pub Hrg CUP 91-11
45.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------)
76.50
Irwin M. Kaplan
Kaplan
1901-4210-4210
1
21105C
10130
11105
Interim Planner Aug -Sept
6,900.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------)
6,000.00
Jennings Engstrand
JenningsEn
*001-4020-4021
1
21105B
10/30
11105
Legal Svcs -Sept
5,036.44
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------)
5,936.44
Kens Hardware
Kens
*001-4310-1200
4
21105C 19/1162
10/30
11/05
50013
Drill Bits
6.96
*001-4310-1200
6
21105C 21/1182
10/30
11/05
50026
light Switch
2.37
*001-4310-1200
5
21105C 20/1182
10/30
11/05
50439
Nuts,Screws,Rivets
4.20
*001-4310-1200
7
2116C 2211182
10130
11/05
53407
light Bulbs
16.82
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------)
30.35
Kia, Jay
KimJ
*001-4010-2330
2
21105C
10/30
11105
Reimb. Leage Conf.
221.21
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------)
221.21
Kim, Jay
KimJ
*001-4010-2330
6
21105F
10130
11105
Cont. per diem 10/11-16
150.00
11/05/91 0000013221
TOTAL PREPAID AMOUNT ----)
150.00
TOTAL DUE 'VENDOR --------)
0.00
King, Ilene
130
*001-3478
11
21105Z
10/29
11/05
Re_reat.on refund
20.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------)
20.00
mar !+}
RUN TIME: 12:54 1B;_ �l J O U C H- R R EE R EE °
DUE THPU.............11105%91
VENDOR NAME VENDOR ID, + + PREPAID + +
ACCOUNT PRO:,Tz-NO BATCH PO.LINEINO. ENTRYIDUE INVOICE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT DATE CNECk'
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
L.A. 'County -Sheriffs Deo LACSher.ff
+001-4411-5401 1 21145C 10130 1115 90825 Sept Sheriff Svcs 9,389.85
+001-4412-5401 1 21105C 10/30 11105 90825 Sept Sheriff Svcs 84,508.64
+001-4413-5401 1 21i05C 10130 11105 90625 Sept Sheriff Service 219,096.47
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 3121994.96
L.A. County -Sheriff's Dep LACSheriff
+001-4411-5401 2 21105C 10/30 11/05 90951 Sept. Helicopter Svc 134.36
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------: 134.36
L.A.Courty Public Works LACPubWk
}001-4553-5507
1 21105E
10/30
11105
9200001528
Maint
Trffc Signal -July
1,774.82
+001-4553-5507
2 21105C
10/30
11105
9200001528
Maint
Trff Signals -August
61989.13
+801-4555-5506
1 21105C
10/30
11105
9200002365
Strip
Sign Mrking Repair
17.22
+001-4555-5505
1 21105C
10/30
11/05
9200002387
Permanent
Sidewalk
878.11
+001-4555-5512
1 211850
10,30
11105
9200002388
Drain
Facility Maint.
564.64
+001-4555-5510
1 21105C
10/30
11/05
9200002389
Tree
Watering Svc
3,055.81
+001-4555-5509
1 211450
10,130
11705
9200002390
Tree
Trimming Svc
1,742.10
+001-4555-5508
1 21105C
14/30
11/05
9200002391
Weed
Abatement
14,212.23
+041-4555-5507
2 21105C
10/30
11/05
9200002392
CAB Test
Sunst/6Springs
30,60
+001-4510-5530
1 21105C
10130
11/05
9200002393
DBar
IN Svcs
882.14
+001-4555-5506
2 211050
10130
11/05
920002386
Stripinq
Marking Siqns
973.45
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------; 31,120.91
LA Cellular Telephone LACeliular
+001-4440-6240 2 21105C 01/1230 10/30 11/05 001199 CelluIr Emer Prep Phones 1,365.03
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------- 1,365.03
Lan, John 112
+001-3474 S 211052 10129 11/05 Recreation refund 40.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------- 40.00
Landscape West LandscapeW
}141-4541-5500 2 21105C 10/30 11/05 006036 Tree Trim -Pathfinder 550.00
+141-4541-5500 1 21105C 10i30 11/05 006084 Sept Maint Dist 141 3,100.04
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------;> 3,650.00
Lewis Engraving Inc. LewisEngra
+001-4095-2110 1 21105C 10/30 11105 009712 Tile Engraving -Daily News 20.82
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------} 20.82
RUN I l.'JE. 12:54 10; J1! 9l
0 'u E -i
E R R E .,
a S T E R
DUE HRJ
.............11
S/>'1
VENDOR NAME
VENDCR ID.
+ + PREPAID +� +
ACCOUNT ?RO3.TK-NO
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BATCH PO.LiNE/NO.
ENTRY/DUE
INVOI"E
DESCRIPTION
AMOUNT DATE CHECK'
Lewis, Naomi
113
+001-3418
1 21i05Z
10/29
11/05
Recreation refund
24.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR -------->
24.00
Loma Vista
LomaVista
+001-4319-2210
2 2110SC 01/1250
10130
11105
12544
Chinese Ela -Peterson
617.03
?OTAL DUE VENDOR --------:
617.03
Lopez, Dan
121
+001-3474
2 21105Z
10/29
11/05
Recreation refund
40.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------;
40.00
Lyons, Florence
110
+001-3478
2 21105Z
10129
11/05
Recreation Refund
1S.@@
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------;
1S.04
Mariposa Horticultural
Mariposa
+@01-4319-5300
2 21105C
10/30
111@S
2270
Repair Main Line -Petersen
203.83
+001-4311-5300
1 21105C
10/30
11/05
2473
Sept Maint.-Grow Park
995.04
+001-4313-5300
1 21105C
10/30
11/05
2473
Sept Maint-Heritage Prk
663.00
+001-4316-5300
1 21105C
10/30
11/05
2473
Sept Maint-Maple Hill Prk
829.04
+001-4319-53@0
1 21105C
10/30
11/05
2473
Seot Maint-Petersen, Prk
1,244.00
+001-4322-5300
1 21105C
10/30
lU @S
2473
Sept Maint-Reagan Prk
995.04
+001-4325-5300
1 21105C
10/30
11/05
2413
Sept Maint-Starshine Prk
415.00
+001-4328-5300
2 21105C
10/30
11/@5
2473
Sept Maint-Sumat Rage Prk
1,492.04
+001-4331-5300
1 21105C
10/30
ll/@S
2473
Sept Maint-Sycamore
1,528.00
+001-4319-2210
3 21105C
10/30
11105
2474
Sprinkler Repair -Petersen
457.58
+001-4328-2210
1 2110SC
1@/30
1115
2475
Sprinkler Repair-Suat Rdg
26.06
+001-4319-2210
4 21105C
10/30
11/05
2476
Fertilize -Petersen
450.04
+001-4319-2210
5 21105C
10/30
11/05
2471
Soil Test -Petersen
125.00
70TAL DUE VENDOR -------->
9.423.47
Martin G Chapman Co.
MartinBCha
+0@1-4040-1200
2 21105C 0111149
10/30
11105
91412
Minute Paper
183.62
TOTAL DUE VENDOR -------->
183.62
McCain Traffic Supply
McCain
+225-4510-6412
4 21105F 03/1181
14/31
11/05
@6864
Controller Cabinet
51968.79
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------;
5,968.79
4
_7,
RUN TIME: 12:54 10/31191
J
O J C
DUE TNR6.............iii�+519i
VENDOR NAME
VENDER 13.
x PREPAIDr
ACCOUNT PR0].T1-N0
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BATCH PO.LiNE/N0.
ENTRY/DUE INVOICE
DESCRIPTiCP!
AMOUNT
DATE C�EC�:
Meyer, David
MverD
+001-4310-4100
3 211@SC
10130
I1/05
PIR Mtq(4)-3J1'y-Oct.
160.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR. --------,
160.04
Miller, Margaret
114
+001-3478
8 2110S17
10/29
11/05
Recreation refund
25.00
TOTAL DIVE VENDOR --------:
2S.04
Miracle Recreation Equip.
MiracleRec
+0@1-4310-1200
9 2110SC 01/1248
10/30
11/05 333400
Sunplies-Parks
174.71
TOTAL DUE VENDOR -------->
174.71
Nardella, Don
NardellaD
+0@1-4010-2330
5 21105E
10130
11/05
Conf. oer diem 10/11-16
210.@@
11/05191 0000013220
TOTAL PREPAID AMOUNT ----;
210.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------'
0.00
Nobest incorporated
`Jokiest
+2S@-4510-6411 @5692
1 21105E
10/30
11/05
Sidewalk -Brea Cyn Rd
91285.12
TOTAL DUE VENDOR -------->
9,285.12
Ortiz, Thomas
Orti:T
+@@1-4553-4100
4 211@5D
10/3@
11/@S
TTffc Mtg 10/10
40.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------;
40.04
PAPA
PAPA
+0@1-4310-2325
1 21105F
10/30
1115
Seminar-3aniel 10/29-30
70.00
11/05191 000@01312'
TOTAL PREPAID AMOUNT ----j
70.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------;
0.06
Pac Tel Cellular
PacTel
+@@1-4030-2125
1 211@SD
10130
11/05
Cellular Svcs -October 91
21.33
TOTAL DUE VENDOR -------->
21.33
Pacesetter Building Svcs
Pacesetter
+031-4090-214@
1 211OSD
10/30
11105
October Rent ste. 190
3,557.60
+001-4210-1200
3 211050
1@/30
11/05
Reimb-Microfiche Toner
66.04
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------)
3,623.64
RUN TIME: 12:5+ 10/31/91 O U C 'r. E R R E G 1 a T E R ?AGE :1
DUE T'iRU.............!I
VENDOR NAME VENDOR ID. + * PREPAID + +
ACCOUNT PROJ.TX-NO BATCH PO.LINE/NO. ENTRY/DUE INVOICE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT DATE CHECK
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pacesetter Buildino Svcs Pacesetter
+001-4220-5201
1 211050
10/30
11/05
Bldg Svcs -Oct
19,638.14
+801-4220-5201
2 21105D
101130
11/05
Plan Chk Svc -October
11,112.86
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------)
30,151.60
Papen, Phyllis
PapenP
+001-4010-2330
3 211050
10,30
111105
AQUA Coni. 10/22/91
42.81
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------)
42.81
Payroll Transfer
PayroliTr
+001-1020
2 21105F
10/30
11/05
Payroll Transfer PP22
40,850.00
11/05/91 0000000022
TOTAL PREPAID AMOUNT ----)
40,850.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------)
0.00
Payroll Transfer
PayrollTr
+001-1020
1 21105E
10/30
11/05
Payroll Transfer PP 23
41,000.00
11/05/91 0000000023
TOTAL PREPAID AMOUNT ----)
41,000.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------)
0.00
Planning Network
PlanningNw
+001-4210-4220
2 21105C
10/30
11/95 90542
DB Gen Plan Phase 2
20,365.50
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------)
20,365.50
Plunk, Lydia E.
Plunk.L
*001-4310-4100
5 21105C
10/30
1115
P3R Mtgs(6)-July-Oct
240.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR -------->
240.00
Pomona Valley
PomonaViy
+001-4350-5305
2 211650
10/30
11/05 4114
Shuttle Svc-Prk Concert
112.50
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------;
112.50
Public Empl Retirement
PERS
+001-2110-1008
1 21105C
10/30
11/05
PP22 Contrbtns-Employer
3,101.11
+001-2110-1008
2 21195C
10/30
11/05
PP22 Contrbtns-Employee
2,124.53
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------)
5,825.10
Public Empl Retirement
PERS
001-2110-1008
3 21105F
10/30
11/05
Contributions -Employee
2,122.00
1-1/05/91 9+100013225
*001-2110-1008
4 21105F
10/30
11/05
Contributions -Employer
3,098.29
11105/91 9990913225
TOTAL PREPAID AMOUNT ----)
5,820.29
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------)
0.09
+
RUN TIME: 12:54 91 E R R� 5- 7- R
E TyRU.............tt:F;S'.t
VENDOR NAME V:NDCR ID.
ACCOUNT PR 3J.TI-N0 BATCH P-3.LINE/NO. ENTRYIDUE INVOICE CESCRIPT:IJN
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
R a D Blueprint
*001-4210-2100
*001-4551-2110
*001-4551-2110
*001-4090-2100
3 ?1i05D
1 21105C
2 211050
3 21105E
Radio Dispatch Corp. RadioDispa
*001-4030-213^ 1 21105D
*001-4310-2130 1 21105D
Rancho Valley Chevrolet VallevChey
*001-4090-2200 2 21105D 01/1241
Ready Made ReadyMate
*001-4310-1200 11 21105D 01/1244
Regents of the University UCI
*001-4510-2340 2 21105D 01/1228
Ruzicka, Joseph T. RuzickaJ
*001-4310-4100 2 21105C
S.S. Valley Asn of Cities SGVAsnCity
*001-4010-2325 2 21105F
50. CA. City Clerks Assoc SCCCA
*001-4040-2325 1 21105D
San Gabriel Valley SGVCCC
*001-4010-2325 3 21105E
"01$1 11;05
10!30 11145 48190
10"30 lli05 46191
10130 11105 48193
10/30 11/05
10/30 11/05
10130 11105
10/30 11105
10/30 11105 101221
10/30 11105
10/30 11/05
10/30 11105
10130 11/05
3 Maps
7 Mylars
6 Mylars
Map of D Bar
TOTAL DUE 'VENDOR --------::
uctobrt Monthly Svc
October Monthly Svc
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------;
Maint.-Poo1 Car
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------
Signs for Parks
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------
Seminar D.Liu
TOTAL DUE VENDOR -------
R Mtgs(6)-3uly-Oct.
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------
Member MtQ-Kim
TOTAL PREPAID AMOUNT ----::>
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------
Membership Mtg/Luncheon
TOTAL DUE VENDOR -------->
Wrkshoo-"Berner 10/26
TOTAL PREPAID AMOUNT ----?
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------i
PREPAID * +
AMOUNT DATE CHECk.
----- --------------------
11,11
144.51
101.65
7.64
264.91
21,25
63.75
85.00
164.04
164.04
94.60
94.60
169.00
169.04
240.00
240.00
18.00 11/05/91 0000013226
18.00
0.00
25.00
25.04
50.00 11/45/91 000001322!
50.ea
0.00
Bar t++
RUN TIME: 12:54 10/31/91 V O U C H E R R--. S T E R
D'uE T H R U ..............1? 5,91
VENDOR NAME VENDOR ID.
ACCOUNT PROJ.TX-NO BATCH PO.LINEiNO. ENTRY/DUE INVOICE DESCRIPTION
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
San Gabriel Vlv Tribune S`:VTr:Dune
+001-4210-2115 3 21105D
+001-4210-2115 2 21105D
+001-2300-1010 3 211050
Savhney, Pro■ila R. 123
+001-3414 1 21105
Securicorp Int'I,Inc. Securicorp
+001-4553-5531 121105C
Sheriffs Relief Assoc Sher:ffsRe
+001-4095-1200 2 21105F
Siecke, Warren C. SieckeW
+225-4510-6412 05192 1 21105C
Siqns By Susan SignsBYSus
+001-4210-4220 3 21105D
Sir Speedy
SirSpeedy
+001-4030-2110
2 21105D
+001-4030-2110
1 21105D
+401-4090-2110
1 21105F
Southern Ca. Edison SoCaEdison
+001-4555-2126 1 21105E
Southern. Ca. Edison SoCaEdison
+138-4536-2126 1 21105E
10/30 11105 sgvt 10036 GPAC-Public Meeting
10/30 11/05 sgvt9955 Pub Hrg-CUP 91-5
10/30 11/05 sgvt998S Pub Hrg CUP 91-11
TOTAL DUE VENDOR -------
10/29 11/05 Recreation refund
TOTAL DUE VENDOR -------->
10;30 11/05 11145 Sept. Crssg Gaurd Svcs
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------
10/3e 11/05 Badge -Mayor Forbing
TOTAL PREPAID AMOUNT ----
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------r
+ + PREPAID + +
AMOUNT DATE CHECK
----------------------------------
37.96
90.30
46.44
157.77
35.00
35.00
436.77
436.77
9.69 11/05191 0000013223
9.69
0.00
10130
11105
2659.12
Sept Mngmt-Grand/RllgKnol
1,531.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------}
11531.04
10/30
11/05
1394
Signs Gen Plan Display
439.50
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------?
439.54
10/30
11/05
Stationary Supplies
55.51
10/30
11105
4
Stationary Supplies
53.90
10/30
11/05
1419,7400
Stationary Supplies
83.61
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------:
193.02
10/30
11105
Electric-Trffc Control
3,529.58
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------}
3,529.56
10130
11/05
Electric Dist t38 -Sept
1142.90
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------)
142.94
VENE R "aA"E '1ENDCR. 1D, + + E°pili F +
A.CCOi!NT P t 1J.Tt-NO BATCH ?'3.L: lt'N0. ENTRY/DOE iN`V0TCE CE! %i?TION AMOUbT DATE : aE
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Loutnern Ca. E�iso^ ,CaE�isan
+139-4539-2i26 e1l?5_ 10130 11:105
Southern Ca. Edison SoL&F Bison
+141-4541-2126 1 2112SE 1i; C 11105
Southern Ca. Edison
SoCaEdison
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------;
:52.49
+001-4316-2126
1 21105E
10/30
11105
+001-4322-2126
1 2110SE
10130
11x05
+001-4328-2126
1 21105E
10130
11/05
+001-4331-2126
1 211105E
10130
iIl05
Standard Insurance of Ore Standardln
+001-2110-1005 1 211050 10/30 11115
Standard Insurance of Ore Standardin
+001-2110-1005 2 211050 10/30 11/05
State compensation ins Fd StateComp
001-2110-1211 1 21105D 10(30 11/05
+001-41:192-0083 1 2110SD 10/.30 11/05
Stitt, Garretson J. 5tittG
001-4310-4100 4 211050 10130 11/05
Tadros, Souad 129
+401-3478 10 21105Z 10/29 11,105
Taylor, Gloria 128
+0e1-3'78 9 211052 10/29 11/05
Electric Dist :J9
152.49
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------;
:52.49
Electric Dist 441 Sept
75,35
TOTAL C!E VENDOR --------;
75.35
Electric -Maple Hill
296.05
Electric -Reagan Apr -Sept
2,855.82
Electric-Summitridge
274.83
Electric -Sycamore Cyn
223.05
TOTAL DDE 'VENDOR --------;
3,649.75
Life.Add Prems-Nov
276.50
TOTAL DGE VENDOR --------)
276.50
Life Ins Prem
72.00
TOTAL DOE VENDOR --------)
72.04
Workers Comp Prem-Jul/Aug
4,961.45
Como Premium
101.89
TOTAL DUE 'VENDOR --------:
5,063.34
P&R Mtgs{43-Aug-Oct
160.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR. --------,
160.00
Recreation refund
23.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------)
23.00
Recreation refund
16.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR -------- %/
16.04
RUN TIME: 12:54 10/31/91 0 U C _ P P_ T 5, E R
DUE THRU.............11/05%91
VENDOR NAME VENDOR ID.
ACCOUNT PROJ.TX-NO BATCH PO.LINE/NO. ENTRY/DUE TNVOTCE DESCRIPTION
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Time Out Personnel Svc. TimeOut
+001-4210-4060 1 21105E
Traffic Operations TrafficOp
+001-4555-5506 3 21109
Triad Sales TriadSales
+225-2020 3 21109
US Sprint USSprint
+001-4510-2125 1 21105E
Unocal Unocal
+001-4210-2310 3 21105E
+001-4310-2310 8 21105E
Van Nort, Robert L. VanNortRob
+001-4030-2330 1 21105E
Visco Communications Visco
+001-4090-1100 6 21105E
Walnut Valley Recreation WVRecreati
+001-4090-2140 2 21105D
Walnut Vly Water Dist WVWaterDis
+001-4311-2126 1 21105E
+001-4316-2126 2 21105E
+ PREPAID + +
AMOUNT DATE 1HE
---------------------------------
10130
11/05
WP Secretary 8/19-23
572.66
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------:
572.66
10;30
11/05
91-538
9ign-DBar/9.uail Summit
550.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------
550.00
10i31
11;05
11621
Trffc Signal Equip -Grand
5,096.70
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------)
5,096.70
10/30
11/05
Engr Long Distance Svcs
33.69
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------i
33.69
10/30
11105
290582
Fuel -Ping
18.00
10130
11/05
290639
Fuel -Parks
19.78
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------)
311.76
10/30
it/05
Reimb Conf. 11/16
210.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR -------->
210.00
10/30
11/05
4412
Fax Paoer
74.69
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------
74.69
10/30
11/05
Mtg Room Usage -Sept
96.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------:
96.00
10i30
11/05
Grow Park July -Sept
1,871.49
10/30
11/05
Maple Hili July -Sept
1,945.85
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------;
3,817.34
x:4 1 -435? -S F5
bFerner. Ear'= ger^er Gar'J
4es* Publishing Co. LIeS``uh
V401 -4093-232n 2 2i105E
Whelan, Stuhen P. wheIan, SP
031-4313-4433 1 211(15C
Woodall. Eindv l0�
4401-3479 5 241352
--n'_a ner ar Pry nc r
2'..:`.�
ENDDR NAME
='a
;,'R _:.
+ . '__
rf!_L:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
}_1+jO PATCH
-_._.:.t; �lv. �iTi.,: u''ut _eY `';:.l�_L,
U— T.:�7 nim -";N liHit _
x:4 1 -435? -S F5
bFerner. Ear'= ger^er Gar'J
4es* Publishing Co. LIeS``uh
V401 -4093-232n 2 2i105E
Whelan, Stuhen P. wheIan, SP
031-4313-4433 1 211(15C
Woodall. Eindv l0�
4401-3479 5 241352
--n'_a ner ar Pry nc r
2'..:`.�
a.�^�J
rl :ll 1-1
-��:. er JLa�II I � �
21 r( ll i :A�•'� rte'
� ..:IYj �:• _ •'4 �':�1___
TOTAL PPEPAID AMOUNT ----
714 .,H
I
A AR ________
� D JE VENDOR
3 93
..,;30
iyib:S :944Jt]!
'.A CD Publications
24.15
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------'
24.15
14?i
li: �{P&R
�!tgs!4)-Jlul'J-S2�7i
16d.O@
TOTAL Du'E VENDOR --------:
160.00
40'29
ll/5
Racreatian refund
26.33
T,TAL DUE VENDOR ---------
26.0
TOTAL PREPAID `y
89,715.18
:_lye Lu. ---------------
2.4
TOTAL REPORT ------------;
671,843.67
{ i _ c =i 3 a S x a
RUN TIME: 12:54 10'31, 1 ti O E R R 3 I. T E R
F_ND, .L''+,:",AR ! REPu&:T
.E THRI.............11'61`91
Dish-,SE u7L 55E WILL POST SIE HAS POSTED
FUND TOTAL DIRECT PAY REVENUE EXPENSE REVENUE EXPENSE
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0015eneral Fund 591,523.60 1001043.25
138LLAD 138 Fund 3,43.16
139LLAD 139 Fund 5.566.02
141LLAD Poi Fund 3,792.26
225.3rand Av Const Fu 5,',073.49 5,06.70
259.I.P, Fund 9,285.12
TOTAL------------------------------------------------
ALL FUNDS 671.843.67 105,134.45
A:E
FUTURE TRANSACTIONS
REVENUE EXPENSE
?35.00 491,045.35
3,41)3.18
5,.665.02
3;792.26
52,575.79
4,265.12
- ------------ ------------
735.00 565.968.72
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
AGENDA REPORT AGENDA NO.
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
MEETING DATE: November 5, 1991 REPORT DATE: October 24, 1991
FROM: Linda G. Magnuson', Senior Accountant
TITLE:
Treasurer's Report - September 30, 1991
SUMMARY:
Submitted for Council's review and approval is the Treasurer's Statement for
the month of September 1991.
RECOMMENDATION:
Review and approve.
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS:
X Staff Report
Resolution(s)
Ordinances(s)
Agreement(s)
EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION:
SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST:
_ Public Hearing Notification
Bid Spec. (on file in City Clerk's Office)
Other
1. Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed _ Yes_ No
by the City Attorney?
2. Does the report require a majority or 4/5 vote?
3. Has environmental impact been assessed? _ Yes X No
4. Has the report been reviewed by a Commission? — Yes X No
Which Commission?
5. Are other departments affected by the report? _ Yes X No
Report discussed with the following affected departments:
REVIEWED BY:.
Robert van Terrence L. Belanger (Department Head)
City Manager Assistant City Manage
F:\WP51\AGENDA\COVER.FRM
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
AGENDA NO.
MEETING DATE: October 24, 1991
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: City Manager
SUBJECT: Treasurer's Statement - September 30, 1991
ISSUE STATEMENT:
Per City policy, the Finance department presents the monthly Treasurer's
Statement for the City Council's review and approval.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve the September, 1991 Treasurer's Statement.
FINANCIAL SUMMARY:
No fiscal impact.
BACKGROUND:
Submitted for Council's review and approval is the Treasurer's Statement
for the month of September 1991. This statement shows the cash balances
for the various funds, with a breakdown of bank account balances and
investment account balances.
PREPARED BY:
Linda G. Magnuson
F:\WP51\WORK\AGENDA\AGE-RPT.FRM
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
TREASURER'S MONTHLY CASH STATEMENT
September 30, 1991
SUMMARY OF CASH:
DEMAND DEPOSITS:
INVESTMENTS:
GENERAL ACCOUNT $91,238.08
PAYROLL ACCOUNT 379.13
PETTY CASH ACCOUNT 500.00
TOTAL DEMAND DEPOSITS
TIME CERTIFICATES
COMMERCIAL PAPER
L.A.I. F.
TOTAL INVESTMENTS
$0.00
0.00
8,876,000.00
$92,117.21
8,876,000.00
TOTAL CASH $8,968,117.21
BEGINNING
TRANSFERS
ENDING
FUND
BALANCE
RECEIPTS
DISBURSEMENTS IN (OUT)
BALANCE
GENERAL FUND
$5,230,495.48
$545,420.24
$698,631.70
$5,077,284.02
TRAFFIC SAFETY FUND
43,736.81
43,736.81
GAS TAX FUND
1,659,629.81
112,787.91
1,754.80
1,770,662.92
TRANSIT TX (PROP A) FD
498,501.63
68,605.00
567,106.63
LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FD
0.00
FEDERAL AID URBAN FUND
0.00
INTEGRATED WASTE MGT FD
6,295.25
7,972.35
3,872.10
10,395.50
STATE PARK GRANT FUND
0.00
0.00
LANDSCAPE DIST #38 FD
28,303.13
1,737.85
16,526.19
13,514.79
LANDSCAPE DIST #39 FD
203,261.85
12,039.29
191,222.56
LANDSCAPE DIST #41 FD
79,862.83
19,066.36
60,796.47
GRAND AV CONST FUND
591,121.81
3,486.26
587,635.55
TRAFFIC MITIGATION FEE FD
332,407.37
332,407.37
CAP IMPROVEMENT PRJ FD
54,401.90
54,401.90
SB 821 FUND
19,117.60
19,117.60
SELF INSURANCE FUND
239,835.09
239,835.09
TOTALS
$8,986,970.56
$736,523.35
$755,376.70 $0.00
$8,968,117.21
SUMMARY OF CASH:
DEMAND DEPOSITS:
INVESTMENTS:
GENERAL ACCOUNT $91,238.08
PAYROLL ACCOUNT 379.13
PETTY CASH ACCOUNT 500.00
TOTAL DEMAND DEPOSITS
TIME CERTIFICATES
COMMERCIAL PAPER
L.A.I. F.
TOTAL INVESTMENTS
$0.00
0.00
8,876,000.00
$92,117.21
8,876,000.00
TOTAL CASH $8,968,117.21
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
MINUTES OF THE TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
SEPTEMBER 12, 1991
CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Ortiz called the meeting to order at 6:30
p.m. at the Diamond Bar Library, 1061 South Grand
Avenue, Diamond Bar, California.
PLEDGE OF The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance by
ALLEGIANCE: C/Chavers.
ROLL CALL: Commissioners Beke, Chavers, Vice Chairman
Gravdahl, and Chairman Ortiz. Commissioner Fritz
arrived at 7:30 p.m.
Also present were City Engineer Sid Mousavi,
Administrative analyst Tseday Aberra, Associate
Engineer David Liu, Engineering Technician Ann
Garvey, Sergeant Rawlings, and Contract Secretary
Liz Myers.
MINUTES:
Aug. 28, 1991 Motion was made by C/Chavers, seconded by C/Beke
and CARRIED to approve the Minutes of August 28,
1991. VC/Gravdahl abstained.
COMMISSION VC/Gravdahl apologized for missing last months
COMMENTS: meeting. He also commended C/Chavers for his
comments made at the Planning Commission Public
Hearing meeting regarding the General Plan.
STAFF COMMENTS: CE/Mousavi distributed copies of the "Guidelines
for Preparation of Traffic Impact Analysis Report"
to the Commission. He introduced two new members
of the Engineering Department, David Liu, the
Associate Engineer, and Ann Garvey, the Engineering
Technician.
NEW BUSINESS:
Proposal:
CE/Mousavi reported that the success of the
Community
Christmas shuttle, made us consider a community
Circulator
circulator for the City. The City received one
response, Mayflower, to the RFP for a community
circulator. Staff has reviewed and discussed the
proposal with Mayflower. From the time the RFP has
been sent out until now, there has been some
changes with respect to how we want to handle the
community circulator within the City. The City is
now considering using CNG type engines for the bus
system. It is anticipated that the development of
that system will take about two years, therefore,
staff has considered using conventional system for
two years for two years, and then changing to
alternate fuel system buses by the third year. To
have a two year system in place, it was considered
to either purchase used buses for the program, or
have the company provide used buses, or perhaps
lease the buses. Also, it was discussed removing
September 12, 1991 Page 2
the route establishment clause from the contract,
and have a consultant develop the route system for
the City. At the same time, we could develop a new
RFP to get more operators bidding on the program.
After reviewing the proposal submitted by
Mayflower, and considering the various alternatives
available to the City, staff has determined that
entering into an agreement with one company for
three years, at this time, is premature. However,
the City will pursue the Christmas shuttle program
independent of the community circulator. It is
recommended that the Commission direct staff as
necessary.
C/Beke stated that RTD is doing the testing for
alternate fuels. Experimenting can be very costly
because technology is changing rapidly. He
suggested that the City remain with standard fuels.
VC/Gravdahl suggested that a letter be sent out to
the community circulators to inquire why they did
not submit a proposal.
Chair/Ortiz suggested that staff research if
Mayflower participates in a bus security system.
C/Chavers inquired if the RFP had indicated that
reimbursement of prospective service is contingent
upon the amount of ridership.
CE/Mousavi responded that the RFP stipulated that
they would get paid based upon their proposal and
bid. Whatever monies are collected from fares
would go back to the City.
C/Chavers indicated that the RFP may be more
attractive to bidders if the City entered into a
privatization technique.
Chair/Ortiz inquired if there were any comments
made regarding advertisement.
CE/Mousavi stated that Mayflower would administer
the advertisement, and the City would govern it.
Motion was made by VC/Gravdahl, seconded by
C/Chavers and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to direct staff
to contact prior bidders and find the reason why
they did not submit proposals, with a caveat that
Mayflowers bid is not rejected at this point;
September 12, 1991 Page 3
modify the RFP; and bring back the information to
the Commission for further discussion.
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Beke, Chavers, Gravdahl
and Chair/Ortiz.
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None.
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Fritz.
Request for AA/Aberra addressed the Commission regarding the
Crossing guard request from the Director of Transportation from
Services the Walnut Valley Unified School District (WVUSD)
for crossing guard services at the intersections of
North Hampton/Glenwick, and Lemon/Colima. A
warrant study must be conducted to determine if
these intersections warrant a crossing guard. It
is recommended that the Commission direct staff to
conduct a warrant study.
CE/Mousavi stated that the warrant study would be
conducted in house.
Motion was made by C/Chavers, seconded by C/Beke
and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to adopt staff's
recommendation as written.
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Beke, Chavers, Gravdahl,
4 and Chair/Ortiz.
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None.
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Fritz.
Traffic Report CE/Mousavi reported that the owners, Fred and Norma
Janz, of the property located at 23475 Sunset
Crossing, submitted a plan earlier this year to
develop an office building on the undeveloped
portion of their property. Currently, the 2.76
acre site is developed with a three story building,
with 120 parking spaces. In April of 1991, the
Planning Commission directed the applicant to
submit a traffic impact report to the City, to be
reviewed by the Traffic and Transportation
Commission. It is recommended that the Commission
concur with the recommendations made by DKS and
Associates.
Fred Janz, the developer, described the site to be
developed. He explained that, because his existing
building and the Racquetball Club would be able to
share the parking areas, customers would not have
to park on Golden Springs.
Sgt. Rawlings, in response to Chair/Ortiz's
inquiry, stated that the "right turn only", as
recommended by DKS and Associates, would be
enforceable.
September 12, 1991 Page 4
Motion was made by C/Chavers, seconded by C/Beke
` and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to accept staff's
recommendation, and pass it back to the Planning
Commission with the Traffic and Transportation
Commission's approval.
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Chavers, Beke, Gravdahl,
and Chair/Ortiz.
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None.
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Fritz.
Request Removal AA/Aberra addressed the Commission regarding the
of the No request made to the Department of Public Works from
Parking Sign Mr. Michaels, of Valley Professional Center,
requesting the removal of the "No Parking" sign on
Colima Road. It is recommended that the Commission
deny the request to remove the "No Parking" sign on
Colima Road.
CE/Mousavi stated that Mr. Michaels had indicated
that he would be attending the meeting to make a
presentation. However, Mr. Michaels was not
present.
Sgt. Rawlings recalled that prior to the posting of
the "No Parking" sign, people were parking cars for
sale in that area.
Motion was made by C/Beke, seconded by VC/Gravdahl
and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to accept staff's
recommendation to deny the request.
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Beke, Chavers, Gravdahl,
and Chair/Ortiz.
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None.
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Fritz.
Commissioner Fritz arrived at 7:30 p.m.
Chair/Ortiz requested of the Sheriff's Department
to enforce the parking on Golden Springs by the In
and Out Burger restaurant.
OLD BUSINESS:
Priority List CE/Mousavi addressed the Commission regarding the
evaluation of unsignalized intersections and the
potential need for signalization. Staff
recommended that the Commission concur with the
sub -committee's recommendation, evaluate the
attached proposal, and direct staff to work with
DKS in establishing a "Priority List".
September 12, 1991
Page 5
C/Beke indicated that there are two different
issues at hand: Deciding where warrant studies
will be done; and prioritizing which signals are
the most needed once they are warranted.
C/Chavers stated that DKS' proposal is lacking an
establishment of criteria, or a subsequent ranking
of the signals already warranted. He suggested
that DKS be asked to include another step which
establishes priority after the signal is warranted.
C/Fritz suggested grouping intersections that are
candidates for signals, those that are not
candidates, as well as an intermediate category,
based on the available data generated from the
circulation element data. Also, DKS could be asked
to develop a mechanism for prioritizing signals
once they are warranted.
C/Beke suggested that DKS be asked to give us a
grouping of intersections that will probably
require a signal in the next five years, a grouping
that may need signals within the next five to ten
years, and a grouping that will probably never need
signals.
Motion was made by C/Fritz, seconded by C/Beke and
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to ask DKS to develop a
grouping, as suggested by C/Beke, for the purpose
of determining whether to do a warrant study; and
ask DKS to develop a mechanism for prioritizing
signals once they are warranted.
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Beke, Chavers, Fritz,
VC/Gravdahl, and
Chair/Ortiz.
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None.
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None.
Signal Warrant CE/Mousavi addressed the Commission regarding the
Study signal warrant study for Silver Hawk and Diamond
Bar Boulevard. A copy of the warrant study was
presented to the Commission on July 11, 1991. At
that time, the decision was to postpone this matter
until the other matter was decided. It is back to
the Commission one more time for the decision on
this matter.
C/Beke noted that the request had come before the
Commission at the time that the time that a signal
was put in at Kiowa Crest. The applicants were
told that we would take a look at Silver Hawk,
after the signal was in at Kiowa Crest, because
more traffic gaps would have been created.
September 12, 1991
Page 6
Chair/Ortiz requested that the applicants be
notified that their request has not been forgotten.
Motion was made by C/Chavers, seconded by C/Beke
and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to postpone the matter
until the next meeting; to ask staff to review the
commitment to study Silver Hawk and Diamond Bar
Blvd., and bring back the information to the next
meeting.
Signal Warrant CE/Mousavi addressed the Commission regarding the
Study signal warrant study on Golden Springs at Golden
Prados Drive and at Prospectors Drive.
Motion was made by VC/Gravdahl, seconded by
C/Chavers and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to accept the
warrants on Golden Springs at Golden Prados and
Prospectors Drive, and direct staff to include it
into DKS' priority list.
Speed Survey: CE/Mousavi addressed the Commission regarding the
Palomino Dr. & request to monitor and control Palomino Dr. and
Armitos Place Armitos Place for speeding. The streets have been
studied as a part of the Circulation Element Study.
DKS has submitted their report, and recommendation
on their findings, with respect to the indicated
streets. It is recommended that the Commission
direct staff as necessary.
C/Beke stated that a stop sign should not be used
as speed control, as is suggested on Armitos Place,
in the recommendations made by DKS. He also stated
his concern for the use of speed bumps.
Sgt. Rawlings stated that there have been 95
tickets written for speed on Palomino from the last
day of April to July 8, 1991.
C/Beke indicated that there are specific
recommendations made for Palomino Drive that the
Commission can act on, but not with the
recommendations made for Armitos Place.
Motion was made by C/Beke, seconded by C/Chavers
and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to accept the
recommendations made on Palomino Drive for
additional advanced school zone warning signs, and
the posting of 25 mph school zone sign.
Request to AA/Aberra addressed the Commission regarding the
Improve the request made by the occupants of the complex,
Egress located on the NE quadrant of Grand Avenue and
Diamond Bar Boulevard, to improve the egress and
ingress. They have suggested a stop light, or
September 12, 1991
Page 7
painting a red marking on the access lane, as a
solution. Staff recommended that the Commission
deny the request and the proposed solutions.
C/Fritz stated that it does not appear that their
proposed solutions would solve the problem.
Motion was made by C/Chavers, seconded by
VC/Gravdahl and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to accept
staff's recommendation to deny the request and the
proposed solutions.
Reorganization CE/Mousavi stated that the term would end June of
1992.
Chair/Ortiz requested nominations for chairperson.
VC/Gravdahl nominated C/Chavers for chairperson.
Chair/Ortiz seconded the nomination. C/Chavers
accepted the nomination.
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Fritz, Beke, Chavers,
Gravdahl, and Ortiz.
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None.
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None.
The nomination carried.
Chair/Ortiz requested nominations for vice
chairperson.
C/Beke nominated VC/Gravdahl for vice chairperson.
C/Ortiz seconded the nomination. VC/Gravdahl
accepted the nomination.
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Beke, Fritz, Chavers,
Gravdahl, and Ortiz.
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None.
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None.
The nomination carried.
ITEMS FROM THE C/Fritz suggested that a stop sign be considered on
COMMISSION: Pathfinder at Brea Canyon Road to slow the traffic
coming down Pathfinder, and to give relief to
traffic trying to turn left from Brea Canyon Road.
C/Beke stated that on the August 10th meeting, he
requested staff to review a possible lead for a
signal at Pathfinder and Brea Canyon Road, upon the
opening of Pathfinder Road to Fullerton.
CE/Mousavi stated that staff is currently reviewing
the situation.
September 12, 1991
Page 8
C/Beke, referring to Sunset Crossing and Golden
Springs, indicated that normally the need for a
crossing guard is evaluated after the signal is in
operation for six months. He inquired if this will
be done.
CE/Mousavi responded that it will be done. It will
be brought to the Commission, along with other
requests made, at the next meeting.
C/Beke inquired what the schedule is for the
restriping of the bike lane on Golden Springs and
Diamond Bar Boulevard.
CE/Mousavi stated that the City authorized a
stripping plan today.
C/Chavers suggested that the Commission attend the
Planning Commission Public Hearing meeting, on the
General Plan, and present their comments. He
indicated his concern of a comment made, at the
September 9th Public Hearing, indicating that the
Traffic and Transportation Commission had formally
disapproved of the idea of Tonner Canyon, and then
later reversed it's recommendation. He stated that
he did not recall the Commission making any kind of
formal statement.
CE/Mousavi confirmed that the Commission had not
made any such formal recommendation regarding the
Tonner canyon project. CE/Mousavi stated that when
the study was done, the consultant requested three
counties to submit position letters. The County of
Los Angeles has drafted a position letter
supporting the idea of Tonner Canyon. It was
requested that the City of Diamond Bar and Pomona
respond. Staff is not prepared to make a
recommendation because the study did not address
the environmental aspects of the project. However,
if the Commission has any comments or
recommendations, it will be conveyed to the City
Council, and then from there a position letter may
be developed.
C/Chavers requested that the matter be placed as an
agenda item.
C/Fritz stated that he is interested in seeing the
position letters that exist in our request.
September 12, 1991 Page 9
STAFF COMMENTS: AA/Aberra stated that the Commissioners will be
contacted regarding the training session scheduled
for this Saturday.
CE/Mousavi informed the Commission that the
sidewalk at Brea Canyon Road under the 60 freeway
will start in a couple of weeks.
ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 8:45 p.m.
Respectively,
/s/ Sid Mousavi
Sid Mousavi, Secretary
Attest:
/s/ Tom Ortiz
Tom Ortiz, Chairman
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
SEPTEMBER 9, 1991
CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Grothe called the meeting to order at 7:03
p.m. in the Walnut Valley School District Board
Meeting Room, 880 South Lemon Street, Diamond Bar,
California.
PLEDGE OF The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance by
ALLEGIANCE: Gary Neely.
ROLL CALL: Commissioner Harmony, Commissioner Schey, Vice
Chairman MacBride, and Chairman Grothe.
Commissioner Lin was absent.
Also present were Planning Director James
DeStefano, City Planner Emeritus Irwin Kaplan,
Associate Planner Robert Searcy, Planning
Technician Ann Lungu, City Engineer Sid Mousavi,
Deputy City Attorney Bill Curley, and Contract
Secretary Liz Myers.
MATTERS FROM Don Schad, 1824 Shady Wood Road, cautioned that the
THE AUDIENCE: homes below Sandstone Canyon could possibly be
damaged from the heavy rain fall predicted this
year. He suggested that the situation be assessed.
MINUTES:
VC/MacBride requested that the Minutes of August
26, 1991 be amended on page 5, eighth paragraph, to
Aug. 26, 1991
properly spell "principle", and paragraph three, to
omit "and the bounds..."; page 4, fourth paragraph,
to omit "privy of information"; and page 6, seventh
paragraph to pluralize the word "statement".
Motion was made by VC/MacBride, seconded by C/Schey
and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to approve the Minutes of
August 26, 1991, as amended.
PUBLIC HEARING:
CPE/Kaplan indicated that this is the first in a
series of public hearings on the City of Diamond
General Plan
Bar General Plan. He explained that the General
Plan was prepared by the General Plan Advisory
Committee (GPAC), which consisted of approximately
35 citizens that had met for a period of two years.
The Planning Commission has not been involved in
the formulation of the plan. The Commission will
formulate a plan for presentation to the City
Council after it receives and =considers public
input, makes it's own comments and recommendation,
and receives staff comments. Staff will make a
brief presentation of the highlights of the General
Plan, and then open up the hearing for public
comments.
C/Harmony requested staff to outline the schedule
of hearings and deadlines.
September 9, 1991 Page 2
PD/DeStefano explained that State law requires all
new cities to process and complete their first
general plan within 30 months of incorporation.
Diamond Bar's deadline is October 17, 1991. The
public hearing process has begun tonight before the
Planning Commission, and another is planned
September 23, 1991. Two public hearings are
tentatively set before the City Council on the 1st
and 15th of October. Also, on September 17th,
staff has scheduled to bring a recommendation to
the City Council that an extension of time be
requested from the State of California in order to
further the public review and input process, and
complete the document in an appropriate time frame.
C/Harmony asked what kinds of information articles
were used that proceeded this hearing.
PD/DeStefano stated that a city newsletter was
published approximately nine months ago that
included a discussion about the City's forthcoming
General Plan. There have been announcements, at
every City Council meeting, indicating the time and
place of GPAC meetings. Recently, press releases
have gone out to various news media, notices have
been published within the newspaper, and special
letters have been sent to a variety of
organizations in the community, as well as a
variety of property owners that may be affected by
the General Plan. Additional notification is
scheduled via Jones Intercable, and the Windmill.
Notices has been sent to the Chamber of Commerce
and to major retailers in the communities asking
that fliers, outlining the public hearing process
scheduled beyond this evening, be posted within
their windows. Also, the City's fall newsletter is
devoted substantially to the General Plan. It
outlines the issues faced by the City, the major
components of the General Plan, and encourages
public input.
Kent Norton, of the Planning Network, stated that
the plan is intended to meet all the State planning
law requirements addressing General Plan elements
such as land use, circulation, and housing. The
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the General
Plan is intended to meet the requirements of the
California Environmental Quality Act. Copies of
the entire document are available at City Hall and
the Diamond Bar Public Library. This plan is
designed to chart the course of the City's decision
making process into the 21st century. Almost all
the goals, objectives, and strategies were
developed and approved by the GPAC. There are a
September 9, 1991 Page 3
number of strategies included that is believed to
be logical extensions of GPAC policies. However,
the Planning Commission and the City Council public
hearing process is either going to validate or
eliminate one or more of these strategies.
CPE/Kaplan highlighted the critical and
controversial issues of the General Plan, while Ken
Norton pointed to the indicated areas, on the
presentation map.
The following are the highlighted issues regarding
land use: Retain much of the existing remaining
open space, in residential areas, by maintaining
existing restrictions on certain undeveloped
parcels; reduce the density of other vacant
properties, which are mostly on hillsides, below
that which the existing zoning currently allows;
modify the character of hillside development to
look more like the natural terrain, as well as
protect the ridgeline from development; lower the
density of certain residential areas, which are
already substantially developed, to reflect the
densities that actually exist; permit multiple
family units, up to 16 units per acre in certain
locations; allow second units in single family
zones, under certain conditions; a specific plan
for the 800 acre of Tres Hermanos Ranch; the
annexation of Tonner Canyon, primarily for open
space with golf courses and conference facilities;
the potential conversion of the Golf Course into an
"urban village", but only if the golf course was no
longer to occupy the site; the eventual convergence
of the area between Brea Canyon Rd., Colima Rd.,
Villa Serela, and the 57 freeway into a mixed used,
mid to high rise tower development for office,
hotel, conference, and/or multi -family use;
additional sites be considered for commercial use;
density limits for commercial uses which are less
than the zoning currently allows; a hospital at the
Grand/Golden Springs intersection; allow churches
by CUP, except in general commercial zones and low
density residential areas; additional parks areas
at Sandstone Canyon, Sycamore Canyon, and Brea
Canyon Cutoff; transfer development rights for
sensitive areas; a City wide bike way and
pedestrian trail system; and the annexation of the
open land west of Brea Canyon Cutoff, and the
residential development west of the 57 freeway in
Rowland Heights.
The following are the highlighted issues regarding
the circulation element: The City should encourage
CalTrans to make the freeway system work more
September 9, 1991 Page 4
effectively, and at the same time down grade the
local system to restore the streets to local use; a
Tonner Canyon by pass is too high a price to pay;
widen Grand Ave. to three lanes in each direction,
within the existing right of way, and consider
grade separation or an over pass at Diamond Bar
Blvd.; and Sunset Crossing should be maintained as
a cul-de-sac at the Little League field and not be
opened to through traffic through residential
areas.
The following are the highlighted issues regarding
housing: There should be a residential component
in large scale commercial office development;
reduce the parking requirements for senior citizen
housing; utilize State, Federal, and private
programs to expand affordable housing opportunities
within the community; permit sorority and
fraternity housing if the nuisance factors can be
mitigated; incorporate defensible space design;
recognizing the SCAQMD is here and that those
facilities represent a state of the arts in terms
of air quality innovation and experimentation and
suggests that Diamond Bar be a demonstration
community; a tree preservation and replacement
ordinance with a ratio of 3:1 for oak, sycamore,
and walnut trees; require drought tolerant
landscaping in conjunction with development, except
if reclaimed water is being used for irrigation;
suggests a variety of energy conservation measures;
the prohibition of new development if the
development will reduce the level of public service
below that which is felt to below an acceptable
standard; a high school recreational facility be
integrated into the design in the Tres Hermanos
plan; and consider an institution of higher
learning in the community.
PD/DeStefano pointed out the public hearing process
for the General Plan includes discussion regarding
the EIR. The EIR is in it's draft stage and is
currently out in it's public review process. The
time for public review has been extended -for an
additional ten days to generate more public input,
and will not close until September 23, 1991.
Throughout the process of reviewing the document,
and it's impacts to the community, a variety of
errors have been found in the Land Use Element,
particularly dealing with the map. Staff will be
responding to those errors in a recommendation for
the next Commission meeting. Staff will also be
responding to the correspondence from approximately
five developers with interest in seeing land use
changes for their property,'and to some suggestions
September 9, 1991 Page 5
made regarding changes to the circulation element.
Additionally, staff and the consultant have not yet
indicated the changes felt to be appropriate. The
entire package, from a staff's standpoint, will be
coming back to the Commission on the September 23rd
meeting, with the final comments on the EIR.
The Public Hearing was declared open.
Gary Neely, residing at 344 Canoe Cove Dr.,
presented studies showing that the circulation
element of the EIR would not work. He also
presented a community plan done before
incorporation. He inquired if letters will be sent
to homeowners living near the golf course informing
them of the possibility of developing the golf
course into a regional commercial center. He
inquired if the residents living in the area west
of the 57, south of Colima, and east of Brea Canyon
Rd., will be notified of the provision to change
those homes into high rise buildings. He presented
his overview opinion of the General Plan: There is
no discussion regarding the potentiality of
redevelopment financing for the City; there is no
discussion regarding a need for a road to the new
high school site; there is no discussion regarding
the need for infrastructure, including water
facilities, for the site; a second sewage treatment
plant is needed; the map does not indicate a Chino
Hills Pkwy.; the map is not to scale; the document
barely mentions the Tres Hermanos Water Resource
Project; there's a discrepancy with the 23 acre
Pantero Park area; and the circulation element
portion of the document is out of date.
Lavina Rowland, residing at 23945 Highland Valley
Rd., inquired how the traffic on Grand Ave. can be
down graded, and what other canyons can be used as
a bi pass for the traffic.
CPE/Kaplan suggested that everyone in the audience
have an opportunity to speak, then the appropriate
staff members can be asked to clarify any comments.
Bill McDonnell, residing at 1825 Morning Canyon,
speaking for himself and his partner Roco Patera, a
legal owner of parcel 13, tract 46485, a 20 acre
parcel south of the Country, stated that they are
opposed to the change of zoning and density of this
parcel.
Bruce Flannenbaum, a member of GPAC, indicated that
the General Plan does not reflect what the GPAC
arrived at. There are numerous additions to the
September 9, 1991 Page 6
plan which were not at the recommendation of the
GPAC. Additionally, there are areas that were
specifically rejected by the GPAC but included in
the plan, such as the request to expand Grand Ave.
to three lanes, and the call for an institution of
higher learning.
Tod Chavers, residing at 23816 Chanuk Place, a
member of the Traffic and Transportation Commission
(TTC) speaking as a resident and a professional
transportation planner and engineer, stated the
following concerns: The Land Use Element and the
goals explained are inconsistent with the
Circulation Element; we will not be able to get an
EIR cleared for a grade separation at Diamond Bar
Blvd. and Grand Avenue; and there are many
inconsistencies in the Plan.
Don Gravdahl, residing at 23988 Minnequa, member of
the TTC, stated his disapproval for the forming of
a Benefit Assessment District to fund slope
landscaping on Diamond Bar Blvd., Grand Ave., and
Golden Springs.
Dan Buffington, residing at 2605 Indian Creek,
suggested that the GPAC reconvene to review the
General Plan document.
Greg Hummel, residing at 23239 Iron Horse Canyon
Rd., member of GPAC, supported a review, by GPAC,
of the final draft version of the General Plan as
compared to the document presented tonight.
Eric Stone, residing at 24401 Daring Drive, member
of GPAC, approved of the idea to reconvene the GPAC
to review the document. He stated that, as a
property owner with land in Diamond Bar where
zoning is changing it's current status, he feels
the changes are beneficial to the City.
Al Rumpella, residing at 23958 Golden Springs Dr.,
remarked that the project proposed by Mr. Stone was
not favored by residents before incorporation. He
stated that there may be a conflict of interest
with other members of the GPAC, as is with Mr.
Stone.
Jerry Arnett, residing at 1646 Ono Nuevo, suggested
that the one car garage provision for senior
citizens be reconsidered.
John Arconio inquired what it would take for
Diamond Bar to create and establish their own
school district.
September 9, 1991 Page 7
C/Harmony requested staff to describe the condition
of a specific plan for the Tres Hermanos Ranch
area.
CPE/Kaplan explained that the City Council
authorized the beginning of a concept study for
Tres Hermanos at their last meeting. Once the
framework is set, it will then be developed into a
specific plan that lays out the detail such as the
circulation system, the infrastructure, associated
costs, and so on.
C/Harmony inquired if there was talk of a specific
plan for the golf course.
PD/DeStefano responded that there is not a specific
plan for the golf course. There is discussion
regarding a proposal for a specific plan in the
Tonner Canyon Boy Scout property, with some
consideration for a golf course in that area.
VC/MacBride explained to the audience the
importance of adopting a General Plan, and
encouraged them to express their concerns and
comments regarding the document. The following are
a variety of comments expressed by VC/MacBride:
The document should address some commentary about
the concern for political stability; it should
address our relationship with the Rail Transport;
noting that over 500 of the community does not want
a raise in taxes, or additional assessments, there
should be a segment discussing services versus
revenues; there should be a major segment
discussing residential amenities; the persons who
gave their time on GPAC should be identified and
acknowledged; the term "high quality of life" is an
assumption, and the document ought to be talking
about the low quality of life in Diamond Bar and
how to bring it up to a consensus of what we all
dream for; the GPAC document, that is to become our
"constitution" ought to be changed from the thick
document to something more comprehensible and
concise; he desires a community that respects
senior citizens, and makes housing accessible to
them; he desires a hospital facility; he concurs
that Diamond Bar should establish itself as a model
City of innovation, in Southern California, to
reduce air pollution; and he would like to see a
dozen such different attributes grow out of our
inspirations from a decent document.
C/Harmony commented on his surprise on the amount
of speakers present, considering the type, and
amount of advertising that was done. He encouraged
September 9, 1991 Page 8
the public to involve themselves in making sure the
City Council and the Planning Commission respond to
staff's recommendation for a continuance of the
General Plan.
Al Rumpella stressed that the major problem is
attracting public awareness and encouraging the
silent majority to speak out.
CPE/Kaplan encouraged the public to submit their
specific comments to staff, so that it can be
entered as a matter of record.
VC/MacBride requested that an executive summary of
the document be included, and distributed via the
Windmill.
Motion was made by VC/MacBride, seconded by
C/Harmony and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to continue the
public hearing to the meeting of September 23,
1991.
Chair/Grothe stated that the General Plan needs
further polishing before the Commission can review
it item by item.
C/Schey indicated that the'General Plan should only
discuss specific development on specific parcels
that are going to occur now, not what may occur
someday. When it is appropriate to discuss an
issue, it can be dealt with as a General Plan
amendment. He will submit his specific comments to
staff.
CPE/Kaplan suggested that, in addition to the
written specific comments, it would be appropriate
to also strike those items that the Commission find
inappropriate.
Chair/Grothe suggested that the GPAC and staff meet
and redraft a new version of the General Plan.
VC/MacBride requested that the GPAC members be
invited to attend the public hearing on the 23rd of
September, and offer their testimony to clarify the
issues presented tonight.
C/Harmony requested a copy of all the comments
made, as they come in, from other government
agencies, with respect to the EIR.
Chair/Grothe called a recess at 9:24 p.m. The
meeting was called back to order at 9:35 p.m.
September 9, 1991 Page 9
ZCA 91-3 PT/Lungu addressed the Commission regarding the
request to amend certain provisions of the Los
Angeles County Code, as heretofore adopted by the
City of Diamond Bar pertaining to political signs.
Staff recommended approval of the Draft Sign
Ordinance to City Council.
C/Harmony and DCA/Curley, upon C/Harmony's request
for advise, discussed the conflict of interest
provision. C/Harmony decided that, in the interest
of fair play, and to avoid any appearance of a
conflict of interest, he would feel more
comfortable withdrawing from discussion regarding
the political sign ordinance. He removed himself
from the meeting room.
PD/DeStefano explained that there was a request to
bring a political sign ordinance before the City
Council for their consideration in time for this
years election. An ordinance was brought to the
Council on July 23, 1991. At that time, it was
suggested that the Planning Commission was the more
appropriate body to review a political sign
ordinance. During the interim between that time
and today, the Council requested an enforcement
policy such that all candidates for office would
understand the existing limitations within the
existing LA County code, and the proposed
limitations that were contained within the sign
ordinance recently reviewed by the Commission and
approved by the City Council. A briefing sheet was
prepared for the Council, in early August, which
attempted to outline political sign issues, and
reference both the existing ordinance, which is in
effect till September 20, 1991, and the new
ordinance. The briefing sheet, sent to all the
candidates, is not as restrictive as the ordinance
before the Commission for consideration.
VC/MacBride submitted various written suggestions
for revisions of the draft ordinance. These
suggestions included: grammatical errors; the
insertion of an additional requirement #3, under
Registration; change the removal period of
political signs to seven (7) days as opposed to ten
(10) days; change the dimensional limitations of
political signs to 9 square feet for residential
properties, and 24 square feet for non residential.
C/Schey suggested that there be a provision which
requests that there be some indication that there
is owner permission to place a sign on privately
September 9, 1991
Page 10
owned property, only in the situation where the
parcel is vacant.
Chair/Grothe concurred that there should be a
provision which gives the City the right to ask for
a written permission, however, making it mandatory
could complex the situation.
VC/MacBride suggested that requesting written
permission should only be made mandatory for vacant
properties.
The Public Hearing was declared open.
Greg Hummel, residing at 23239 Iron Horse Canyon
Road, vice president of Candidates Outdoor Graphics
Service, stated the following: There are
precedents set in the courts that highly restrict
cities, counties, etc. from placing size
restrictions of political signs on private
property; regarding political signs on non
residential areas, political campaign use signs
that correspond to the standard sizes of the lumber
and material available that the signs are made of;
time restrictions for the removal of political
signs on private property are not allowed; and
requested the inclusion of the provision that would
allow the use of cross bars.
Don Gravdahl noted that the worst offender of not
removing signs, in Diamond Bar, has been the Pomona
School District regarding a bond election. He
inquired if the draft sign ordinance would cover
organizations as well as political entities.
DCA/Curley stated that the general sign ordinance
contains temporary sign provisions.
Bruce Flannenbaum stated his concern that the draft
ordinance seemingly limits free speech. He
inquired if political signs, not relating to any
specific election, and placed out of Diamond Bar,
would have to be removed if the persons erecting it
lived in Diamond Bar.
Greg Hummel stated that there should be a provision
in the sign ordinance stating that signs for
successful candidates in the primary election
should be allowed to remain until the general
election.
Al Rumpella stated that the date for allowing
candidates to begin campaigning should correspond
with the closing filing date for candidacy. He
September 9, 1991
Page 11
suggested that the candidates be required to clean
up old signs. He noted that if the political sign
ordinance is too restrictive, the City will be bi-
passed by national political campaigns.
Dan Buffington stated that signs should be
restricted from the right of ways.
Frank Dursa, residing at 2533 Harmony Hill Dr.,
suggested that the candidates post a $100 bond, to
be returned when the signs are taken down.
The Public Hearing was declared closed.
C/Schey stated the following: He does not object
to restricting political signs from the right of
ways; he does not object to limiting the size of
signs; and he does not object to requiring a 7 day
removal time period.
Chair/Grothe concurred with restricting signs from
the right of ways.
VC/MacBride revised his earlier recommendation and
indicated that the size of the political signs
should be reflective of the smallest permissible
size, as determined by the City's attorney's
office. He further indicated that if there is a
legal problem with limiting political signs on
private property, the issue should be disregarded.
Motion was made by C/Schey, seconded by VC/MacBride
and CARRIED to direct staff to prepare a political
sign ordinance with the provisions of banning signs
from the public right of way; limitations of size
and location pursuant to VC/MacBride's
recommendations; and the limitation on time
pursuant to VC/MacBride's recommendation.
C/Harmony abstained.
CUP 90-12 The application was withdrawn by the applicant.
Motion was made by VC/MacBride, seconded by
C/Harmony and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to receive and
file.
ANNOUNCEMENTS: PD/DeStefano reminded the Commission of the planned
tour to the AQMD facility.
ADJOURNMENT: Motion was made by C/Schey, seconded by C/Harmony
and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to adjourn the meeting at
10:47 p.m.
September 9, 1991 Page 12
Respectively
JaWes DeStefa o
Secretary/Pla ning Commission
Attest:
/s/ Jack Grothe
Jack Grothe
Chairman
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
SEPTEMBER 23, 1991
CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Grothe called the meeting to order at 7:08
p.m. in the Walnut Valley School District Board
Meeting Room, 880 South Lemon Street, Diamond Bar,
California.
PLEDGE OF The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance by
ALLEGIANCE: Ben Reiling.
ROLL CALL: Commissioner Lin, Commissioner Schey, Vice Chairman
MacBride, and Chairman Grothe. Commissioner
Harmony arrived at 8:35 p.m.
Also present were Planning Director James
DeStefano, City Planner Emeritus Irwin Kaplan,
Associate Planner Robert Searcy, Planning
Technician Ann Lungu, City Engineer Sid Mousavi,
Deputy City Attorney Bill Curley, and Contract
Secretary Liz Myers.
MATTERS FROM Norman Franere, residing at 21205 Kerndall, stated
THE AUDIENCE: his concern for the proposed conversion of the
triangular area to a mixed-use planned development
as stated in the General Plan.
Teddy Decker, residing at 1875 Tenta Drive,
indicated that there should be considerations made
in the fencing code, and the CC&R's regarding flag
lots.
MINUTES:
C/Schey requested that the Minutes of September 9,
1991 be amended on page 10, first paragraph, to
Sept. 9, 1991
indicate "only" as opposed to "particular".
VC/MacBride commended staff on the quality of the
September 9th minutes.
Motion was made by VC/MacBride, seconded by C/Schey
and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to approve the Minutes of
September 9, 1991, as amended.
PUBLIC HEARING:
PT/Lungu addressed the Commission regarding the
request made by the applicant, Zelman Development
Tentative Parcel
Company, to merge two lots into one parcel. Staff
Map No. 23039
recommended that the Commission approve Tentative
Parcel Map No. 23039, the Findings of Fact, the
Categorical Exemption, and the attached resolution
and listed conditions.
The Public Hearing was declared opened.
Ben Reiling, of Zelman Development Company, located
at 1661 Hanover Road, City of Industry, stated that
the building is complete, and 40% is leased.
The Public Hearing was declared closed.
September 23, 1991 Page 2
Motion was made by C/Schey, seconded by VC/MacBride
and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to recommend approval of
the Tentative Map No. 23039 to the City Council.
Tentative Parcel PD/DeStefano addressed the Commission regarding
Map No. 22102 Tentative Parcel Map No. 22102 to subdivide an
existing 4.39 acre site into two parcels. The site
is located at the end of Valley Vista Drive in the
Gateway Corporate Center. Staff met with the
applicant to review the draft conditions of
approval. Additional time is necessary to revise
the conditions. Staff has requested that the
Commission continue this public hearing to the
October 14, 1991 meeting.
The Public Hearing was declared opened.
Motion was made by C/Schey, seconded by VC/MacBride
and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to continue the public
hearing item to the October 14, 1991 meeting.
CUP 91-9 PD/DeStefano addressed the Commission regarding the
request for a reverse vending machine to be located
at the Standard Brands Paint Store shopping center.
The City of Diamond Bar received a letter on
September 18, 1991, from the Reynolds Aluminum
Recycling Company, requesting the withdrawal of the
application. PD/DeStefano explained that though
staff had indicated full support for a recycling
facility at that location, they had expressed
concern to the applicant that the facility may not
be architecturally compatible with the rest of the
shopping center. The applicant chose to withdraw
the application.
Motion was made by C/Schey, seconded by VC/MacBride
and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to receive and file the
matter.
General Plan PD/DeStefano stated that this is the second in the
series of public hearings before the Planning
Commission regarding the adoption of the City's
first General Plan. The General Plan is a document
that is a result of approximately 20 meetings of
the citizens General Plan Advisory Committee
(GPAC), as well as about 10 study sessions either
held before the Planning Commission or the City
Council. There was concern expressed at the
September 9th Public Hearing regarding the
document's faithfulness to the document prepared by
the GPAC. The Planning Commission concluded their
discussion by requesting that the GPAC members be
invited to attend the September 23rd meeting, be
given an opportunity to present their comments at
September 23, 1991 Page 3
any and all public hearings, be given a recent copy
of the plan, and suggest that they reconvene to
review it. The City Council also discussed the
General Plan at a study session held September
10th. The City Council concluded their discussion
by directing that the document go back to the GPAC
for at least two meetings in October of 1991, and
that the document be more widely advertised. It is
suggested that the Planning Commission do the
following: Reopen the Public Hearing; accept
additional testimony regarding the General Plan;
direct the staff to take the appropriate action
deemed necessary; direct the document to go back to
the GPAC; and hold the next Public Hearing no
sooner than November 11, 1991, or as soon
thereafter that the GPAC concludes their review.
CPE/Kaplan, upon confirmation that the majority of
the audience came to discuss their concern for the
rezoning of the triangular area between the 57
freeway, Colima Road, and Brea Canyon, explained
that this is one of the items that the Planning
Commission and the City Council was concerned with
also because it was not a GPAC recommendation. The
main reason the General Plan document is being sent
back to the GPAC is to give them an opportunity to
identify items that are their recommendation, and
those that are not. The items that are not will be
deleted.
The Public Hearing was declared opened.
Don Schad, residing at 1824 Shady Wood Road, a
member of the GPAC, stated his concurrence that the
document needs to be reviewed by the GPAC. He
suggested that the public be invited to attend the
GPAC meeting and present their comments.
Ada Kotowski, residing at 1856 Kiowa Crest Drive,
stated her support for the suggestion made earlier
in the meeting regarding the CC&R codes.
Bruce Flannenbaum, a member of GPAC, indicated that
after further review of the plan,' there are other
areas of the plan that do not reflect the desires,
goals, aspirations, and decisions of the GPAC.
Chair/Grothe requested a copy of the letter,
received by the audience, that has generated so
much attention. He requested that it be included
in the minutes for the record:
--------------------------------------------------
IMPORTANT
September 23, 1991 Page 4
THE NEWLY -PROPOSED DIAMOND BAR GENERAL PLAN
SUGGESTS TEARING DOWN YOUR AND YOUR NEIGHBORS'
HOMES AND REPLACING THEM WITH HIGH-RISE OFFICE
BUILDINGS!!!
This is ONE of the suggestions for FUTURE
development of your neighborhood (the area between
57 Freeway, Colima Road and Brea Canyon Road).
The Original City Council (Papen, Miller, Forbing,
Horcher and Werner) each appointed six members of
the community to form the General Plan Advisory
Committee (GPAC). The GPAC was given the
responsibility of preparing several alternative
plans for future development of Diamond Bar. At
the suggestion of one council member, the resultant
plans recommend the following:
"Consider the eventual conversion of the triangular
mixed-use area bounded by Brea Canyon Road, Colima
Road, and the 57 Freeway to a mixed-use planned
development of mid -to -high-rise towers that may
include commercial, office, hotel/conference and/or
multi -family uses."
There is a hearing regarding this and other equally
distressing GPAC recommendations before the Diamond
Bar Planning Commission on September 23rd at 7:00
pm. (Walnut Valley School Board Meeting Room, 880
South Lemon in Diamond Bar) I strongly suggest you
attend.
I don't know if you will receive any other
notification of this meeting so I am making certain
you are aware of this action. If I can answer any
questions for you, please call me at my home.
--LAVINIA ROWLAND
714/860-5802
--------------------------------------------------
PD/DeStefano, upon the request made by
Chair/Grothe, read the section of concern from the
General Plan, and confirmed that the underlined
portion of the letter is a direct quote from the
General Plan. However, the statement, "At the
suggestion of one council member, the resultant
plans recommend the following:...", is not true.
He explained that the suggestion is a result of
consultant work looking at the potential for the
future development of the community. It is
exploring various options at this location and
other locations around town. The statement came
September 23, 1991
Page 5
from the consultants, and to his knowledge, did not
come from any member of Council, present or former.
Max Maxwell, residing at 3211 Bent Twig Lane,
stated his concern that many decisions are made on
issues that are vague, unannounced, unpublicized.
They are being sneaked through the system.
Lavinia Rowland, residing at 23945 Highland Valley
Road, indicated her concern for the following
issues: allowing second units and attached
dwellings behind the primary residential structure;
the conversion of the Golf Course to a Mall, or a
Civic Center; if Tonner Canyon is not to be built,
then where else will there be an access road to get
traffic off of our surface streets; and the
rezoning of the aforesaid triangular area.
Joan Sorensen, residing at 1137 Bain Ave., stated
that it appears that issues are being put under the
table, and that decisions will be made without the
public's knowledge.
Bill Tinsman, residing at 1014 Capen Ave.,
complained that he feels disenfranchised because,
though he is a Diamond Bar resident, his zip code,
91789, is Walnut. He concurred that the public
should be able to give input at the GPAC meetings.
He stated his dissatisfaction with the Council
members, and his skepticism that the public is
being properly represented.
Daniel Tanner, residing at 1056 Capen Ave., thanked
Lavinia Rowland for the letter she distributed. He
stated that regardless of their Walnut zip code, he
expects to receive any and all mailing from the
City.
Linda Hedekin, residing at 1136 Hare Ave., inquired
who is the consultant responsible for the document.
Mary Delle, residing at 21225 DeVane Street,
pointed out that most of the residents work and
don't have time to get copies of the General Plan.
The first priority of the City is communication,
and representation that is fair and equal.
Don Schad, a member of GPAC, explained to the
audience that the GPAC consisted of Diamond Bar
residents who tried their best to come up with a
blanket idea that would maintain our homes in the
lifestyle preferred in the community.
September 23, 1991 Page 6
Victor Panuellas, residing at 1053 Adelle Ave.,
suggested that the Planning Commission recommend to
the City Council that where there is an existing
home, or tract of homes, there be no rezoning for
commercial purposes only.
Randy Anderson, residing at 21265 DeVane Ave., a
real estate broker, explained that the property
values of the homes in the triangular area are
affected by the suggestion that they could be
rezoned commercially.
CPE/Kaplan, upon Chair/Grothe!s request, explained
that the purpose of developing a General Plan is to
define the City's future on it's own terms. He
explained that the Planning Commission is seeing
the document basically for the first time. The
first step is to get a document that better
reflects what the GPAC had intended, and figure out
how to better proceed with communication to the
residents. When this has been done, it will be
brought back to the Planning Commission, and
further testimony will be heard through the public
hearing process. At that point, a recommendation
will be made to the City Council. It will be the
first time that the Council will have seen the
document in it's entirety. He stated that the City
will be requesting a year's extension, from the
State, in developing the General Plan.
C/Schey suggested that the Public Hearing be closed
briefly in order to act upon the audience' request.
The Public Hearing was declared closed.
C/Schey, recognizing that this issue was not a GPAC
recommendation, suggested that staff be directed to
omit this issue, and any reference made to the
indicated tract, from the General Plan.
C/Harmony arrived to the meeting at 8:35 p.m.
VC/MacBride suggested that, when the plan -is sent
back to GPAC for further deliberation and study, it
be sent back with a strong recommendation, without
prejudice, that GPAC drop this item specifically
from their work, unless they wish to originate it
again.
C/Lin addressed the audience and assured them that
the Commission is equally concerned with the future
of Diamond Bar.
September 23, 1991
Page 7
Linda Hedekin, doubting the Commission's concern,
emphasized that there has been no communications
made to the residents.
C/Harmony, agreeing with the audience, stated that,
at his political committees expense, he has sent
letters out to every civic organization, and has
had City staff make copies of the General Plan, in
which he has hand delivered all over town. The
original plan for the GPAC was to meet in different
parts of the community so each of the neighborhoods
could participate, and play a part in developing
the 50 year plan. That did not occur. Even a
summary report of the document was never sent out
to the community. Something has gone awry in the
whole process. He assured the audience that he is
with them one hundred percent.
Motion was made by VC/MacBride, seconded by C/Schey
and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to direct staff to delete
the matter of the triangular area from the General
Plan and defer it back to the GPAC, with a strong
recommendation, without prejudice, that GPAC drop
this item specifically from their work, unless they
wish,to originate it again.
The Public Hearing was declared opened.
Willa Clark, residing at 1038 Dale, inquired if the
residents will receive a letter stating that the
issue has been canceled.
Lavinia Rowland, against the possible development
of the Golf Course, inquired if the suggestions
made concerning the Golf Course is one of the many
issues that will be deleted from the General Plan.
Chair/Grothe explained that the GPAC's
recommendations will be brought back to the
Planning Commission, and will be reviewed at the
public hearings. It will take some time before the
General Plan is reviewed by GPAC
Tom Van Winkle, residing at 21103 Kerndall, stated
that many issues slide by despite the public's
opinion.
Ada Kotowski stressed the importance of keeping the
public informed through the press.
Mary Delle inquired why the project on Brea
Canyon/Colima was not completed.
September 23, 1991 Page 8
PD/DeStefano explained that the applicant had been
granted a permit by the County before the City had
incorporated. However, construction did not begin
on time. The Planning Commission, and the City
Council, did not grant an extension of the project.
C/Harmony stated that there are 48 items in the
General Plan that was not recommended by the GPAC,
yet somehow has drifted into the document. The
same kind of things drift into ordinances when
staff and the legal counsel are asked to go back.
He further stated that he had suggested that the
Planning Commission be put on cable television
because of the important issues at hand. However,
the Commission had voted against it. Also, he
stated that he had suggested that the Commission
appoint a speakers bureau to discuss pertinent
issue to the community. However, the Commission
did not see fit to appoint one.
C/Schey requested, as a point of order, that the
discussion remain on the Public Hearing at hand.
The Public hearing was declared closed.
Motion was made by VC/MacBride, seconded by C/Schey
and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to send the General Plan
back to the GPAC, as well as a summary of all
comments made regarding the plan.
Chair/Schey called a recess at 9:04 p.m. The
meeting was called back to order at 9:19 p.m.
CUP 91-8 AP/Searcy addressed the Commission regarding the
request from the applicant, Jung Ho and Yeon Ho
Kim, to permit a billiard room establishment to be
located in the Colima Plaza at 20627 Colima Road.
This use is before the Planning Commission because
it is a discretionary action by the standards of
the development code. The purpose of the
discretionary action is to determine the
appropriateness of the use at this specific
location. Staff recommended that the Coranission
approve CUP 91-8 with the findings of fact and
conditions as listed.
Doug Smith, employee of Pfieler Associates
Engineer, 612 N. Diamond Bar Boulevard, indicated
that the establishment is to be a family billiard
center. No alcohol will be served.
AP/Searcy, responding to VC/MacBride's inquiry
stated that the site plan indicates that there is
an 8 foot concrete block wall immediately abutting
September 23, 1991
Page 9
the building. He read a correspondence from the
Dianos Family objecting to the establishment
because it could become a hangout for kids, and
attract gangs and drugs.
The Public Hearing was declared opened.
Virginia Anderson, residing at 21626 Devan,
objected to the location of the project.
Max Maxwell, residing at 3211 Bent Twig, also
objecting to the project, suggested that the
applicant be requested to prove that there is a
need and a desire that such an establishment will
enhance the community.
Bill Tinsmen, residing at 1014 Capen, Walnut,
inquired where billiards rank relative to other
types of entertainment in the community.
The Public Hearing was declared closed.
VC/MacBride inquired why additional conditions are
needed for this kind of an institution. He also
inquired if staff is comfortable with the
information received from the sheriff's office.
AP/Searcy stated that the conditions are necessary
to mandate that this use will proceed, be
successful, and meet the sheriff department's
criteria. However, in a discretionary procedure it
can be decided where the use is appropriate and not
appropriate. If it is deemed appropriate, these
are the conditions that are put forth.
C/Schey indicated that good uses, as opposed to
poor 'uses, vary from community to community. He
suggested utilizing the codes as they stand, and
placing conditions, as necessary, to manage the
use, and make it appropriate to the community, to
get the diversity a community needs.
VC/MacBride stated that he is upcomfortable with
allowing the use without first investigating if
there is an alley way, the condition of the
billiards hall at Rowland Heights, and further
discussion with the Sheriff's Department.
AP/Searcy read Title 7, section 18, of the LA
County Code which states the grounds for denying
issuance of a license. If the license is not
obtained, the CUP is null and void.
September 23, 1991 Page 10
Chair/Grothe indicated that he does not object to
the establishment if it is a family oriented
recreation, and not a hangout. He suggested asking
the Sheriff Department for further input, and the
applicant to provide more information regarding
billiard establishments.
C/Harmony stated that he has difficulty in going
along with this kind of use.
VC/MacBride stated that he would like information
regarding the traffic generation, and the quantity
of parking spaces, realistically given a full
patronage of such a facility.
C/Lin indicated that the establishment has a great
potential for attracting undesireables. There is
doubt that the conditions given by staff, in the
recommendation, can be enforced.
Chair/Grothe requested that the residents in the
surrounding area be renoticed. There should have
been more public attendance considering the nature
of the application.
Motion was made by VC/MacBride, seconded by C/Schey
and CARRIED to continue the matter to the October
28th meeting for further information on traffic,
parking, and a sheriff's analysis as to why such
safeguards are needed for this kind of institution.
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Schey, Lin, MacBride, and
Chair/Grothe.
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: Harmony.
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None.
Tentative Tracts
PD/DeStefano addressed the Commission regarding the
#x47850, 47851, &
request to develop 120 single family units on 160
48487; CUP 89582,acres located east and south of Wagon Train Lane
89583, & 89584
and Steeple Chase Lane. The site is located
respectively; &
adjacent to the "The Country", and within
Master EIR 91-2
Significant Ecological Area (SEA) No. 15 in
northern Tonner Canyon. The development requires a
Conditional Use Permit to develop in a hillside
area, a SEA, and an Oak Tree Permit to remove oak
trees. On June 24, 1991, the Commission was given
a presentation by staff, and the consultant, on the
project, and on the procedure underway to correct
deficiencies identified in the draft EIR. Michael
Brandman Associates (MBA) has coordinated the
preparation of the revised draft EIR, and D. G.
King & Assoc. has resubmitted it to the City for
review and certification. PD/DeStefano reviewed
the alternatives recommended by SEATAC. It is
recommended that the Commission direct staff to
J
September 23, 1991 Page 11
P -
request the detailed information needed to fully
understand Alternative No. 2 in the draft EIR, the
extent to which this alternative satisfies the
conditions established by SEATAC, and review the
project in order to provide conditions applicable
to the design.
C/Schey inquired which alternative is preferred by
staff.
PD/DeStefano explained that Alternative 2 is
preferred by the developers. Staff is also leaning
towards Alternative 2, however, there are specific
concerns that need be resolved before staff can
give a recommendation.
C/Schey inquired if the tract map is under common
ownership, or if it is several tract maps under
different ownerships.
PD/DeStefano explained that there are two general
partners in this project: JCC, an acronym of a
company based in Torrence, and Dr. Al LaPeter,
owner of Tract 48487. Dr. Al LaPeter is involved
in a joint venture partnership with JCC for the
development of the total project. The actual
applicant is Diamond Bar Associates. He explained
that the projects could be separated. However, in
the proposed plan, they are sharing dirt, and need
each other to make this project work.
VC/MacBride inquired what the implications would be
for the remaining Liu parcel, if alternative 2 is
followed.
PD/DeStefano stated that the grading, the street
pattern, and the development pattern would be
affected.
C/Harmony inquired if the proposed overall study,
of all the adjoining properties as they would
affect the Tonner Canyon area, was completed. It
is important to be sure that development is
consistent with one another so that the area is not
piece-mealed together.
PD/DeStefano explained that the broader scope
study, as recommended by SEATAC, was not completed
because the consultant firm fell apart. There is
an RFP prepared and ready to be distributed to
other ecological firms.
The Public Hearing was declared opened.
September 23, 1991
Page 12
Cecil Mills, a principal with Diamond Bar
Associates, developer of tract #47850 & 147851,
explained the joint operation of these tracts to
the Commission. It was determined that it was
necessary to cooperate with each other in order to
be able to arrange mutual grading easements for cut
and fill operations. He explained the process that
led to the development of the proposed plan and
alternative two. He requested that the Commission
consider the following: Find that the EIR complies
with the requirements of CEQA; evaluate alternative
2 as the preferred alternative; request staff to
work with the developers to establish conditions of
approval for alternative 2; and place the item back
on the calendar for final consideration of the map
no later than the meeting four weeks from today.
Dr. Al LaPeter, resident of Diamond Bar, developer
of tract #48487, indicated that his plan is to
develop a good project for the City.
Lex Williman, with Planning Director of Hunsaker &
Associates, 10179 Huntington Street, San Diego,
stated that the development team has developed a
project that meets all the zoning requirements, all
the Hillside Ordinance requirements, and all of the
legal requirements for the certification of the
EIR. He explained the changes made to the project
from the original plan submitted to the County.
These changes included: The use of contour grading
techniques; reduction of slopes internally; the
elimination of the crib walls; and the mitigation
of the geotechnical problems in the contents of
land form grading. He further explained how they
have incorporated the mitigations proposed by
SEATAC. He reiterated the requests made by Cecil
Mills.
C/Harmony inquired if the homes will be built by
the developer's -company.
Cecil Mills responded that it is anticipated that
some individuals lots will be sold in tracts #48750
& #48751, as well as building some individual homes
and selling them in-house.
Craig Weber, representing Dr. LaPeter and Diamond
Bar Association, architect, discussed contour
grading and what has typically been proposed as a
slope treatment, in terms of channelized drainage,
and what the developers are proposing.
Don Schad opposed the project completely for the
following reasons: The dominant Black Walnut will
September 23, 1991 Page 13
be destroyed; the area should be available to all
citizens of Diamond Bar, and not just the Country;
the soil formation is not suitable building
material; we will lose the animals if the wildlife
corridor is closed off; that part of the City needs
a park; the animals may perish from the water in
the collection basins; the designs of the waterways
may not be able to handle water from a heavy down
storm; and moving so much dirt changes the natural
terrain.
William Gross, residing at 21637 High Bluff,
complained that, although he lives to the left of
the project, he did not receive a notice. He
objects to the project for the following reasons:
The intention is to pack as many units as possible;
the project completely involves grading in the
gully area which will redirect the flow; the
project is being ramrodded; there is no mention of
any land being dedicated to the City to offset the
ecological and environmental impacts; there should
be sidewalks; the wildlife is not being protected;
and the dangers of brushfires. Diamond Bar should
be preserved as it was originally conceived.
Max Maxwell, residing at 3211 Bent Twig, stated his
concern for the environment, the wildlife,
brushfires, and density of the project.
Brian McGirdy, residing at 24419 Top Court, a
professional biologist and hydrologist, objected to
the project for the following reasons: There is a
need to know the cumulative impacts of the project;
an ecosystem is complex and needs a large area;
doubts the viability of the plan to protect the
Black Walnut Woodlands; wildlife will be lost;
nursery plants are not a substitution for natural
vegetation; and there may not be sufficient water.
He made the following recommendations: Wait for a
Regional Study; use native seeds; and set criteria
determining if the intent is to save the Walnut
tree or the Walnut Woodlands.
Lex Williman stated the following rebuttals:
SEATAC reviewed the project and it's relationship
to the ecosystem; the development team offered to
pay for a Regional Study; the project is in
conformance with City standards in regards to
density; native seeds will be used; the property
has access through "The Country"; they will be
getting additional letters of capacity from the
Water District; and they are equally concerned
about brushfires, and are proposing fuel
modification zones.
September 23, 1991 Page 14
CE/Mousavi, responding to C/tin's inquiry, stated
that the details of the traffic report on Wagon
Train and Steeple Chase have not been reviewed.
The Public Hearing was declared closed.
C/Harmony inquired how the formula for the park
trade off is being applied in this matter.
PD/DeStefano replied that the issue has not yet
been resolved at a staff level. He explained that
the difficulty in requesting open space and
dedicated land is that if it is a part of "The
Country", then the dedication may not serve the
purpose intended. However, it could be requested
that, as a condition of approval, an in lieu fee be
assessed to be used to enhance open space elsewhere
for the broader community. The project will be
assessed a fee, or a dedication requirement, or a
combination of both, as a condition of approval, if
there becomes a project to be approved.
VC/MacBride emphasized the importance of preparing
a total Regional Study. He commended the efforts
of the development team, in accommodating the best
technology presently available to do the project
well. He questioned if this effort is sufficient
to answer our total ecological needs in context.
C/Harmony stated that the project impacts the area
more than he had originally believed it would.
C/Schey requested staff to explore the potential
benefit of reducing density, giving a reasonable
yield for the developer but still maintaining a
reasonable level of ecological sensitivity to the
community.
C/Lin requested a traffic impact report on Steeple
Chase.
Chair/Grothe stated that if there is to be some
dedicated park land in this community, it should be
certain that it is to be located in a desirable
area. He also requested that staff assess the
various mailing errors regarding notices.
C/Harmony stated that the option of swapping land
should not be disregarded, and should be discussed
with the developer.
Motion was made by C/Schey, seconded by VC/MacBride
and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to continue the matter for
30 days, and request staff to report back with the
September 23, 1991
Page 15
status report on the alternatives, and the status
report on the study of the overall Tonner Canyon
SEA as far as it's selection on a consultant, and
the program that the consultant is working on.
ANNOUNCEMENTS: VC/MacBride, referring to the comment made by
C/Harmony which indicated that the Commission had
voted not to accept the entrance of cable
television, indicated that the statement made is
inaccurate. He would like the Commission meetings
to be as open, and as directed to the public as
humanly possible.
C/Harmony pointed out his argument to get the
Commission to take a stand for cable television.
As a result of the discussion, the Commission
decided to go along with any recommendations or
suggestions made by the City Council. Thereby, the
Commission neither supported, nor denied cable
television.
C/MacBride reiterated that he does not appreciate
being told in front of a large audience that the
Commission voted against cable television. The
Commission did not.
C/Harmony stated that this Commission has taken a
negative position to cable television.
C/Schey indicated his resentment of the
implication, made by C/Harmony, that any vote taken
here was taken in the intent of keeping information
from the public. That is a clear
misrepresentation, and is clearly untrue.
C/Harmony recalled the comments made by the
Commission that the General Plan was too difficult,
and people didn't really want to deal with it and
study it. The Commission was wrong, and the people
came out and talked about it tonight. We have a
disastrous plan here because it is wrapped up
behind closed doors. He also indicated that
ordinances are being modified by gther people, like
the City Council. The same things appear on our
ordinances as appears on the City Council. The
City is not getting a clear, clean, forward type of
presentation and representation to the public. He
requested a vote to determine if the Commission
wants cable television.
Motion was made by VC/MacBride that, for record
purposes, the Commission takes the public position
that we welcome public examination in such matters
as news reporters, or television cameras, or any
September 23, 1991
Page 16
other media that may be appropriate at any of our
publicly noticed.sessions.
C/Harmony requested that the motion include a
recommendation that the City Council authorize
cable coverage.
VC/MacBride explained that the purpose of his
motion is to clarify that the Commission is not
opposed to any kind of public exposure.
C/Harmony stated that the City Council has cable
coverage, yet these important issue of the General
Plan, the constitution, are closeted.
C/Schey reiterated his objection to the statement
that implied that the Commission had forbid cable
television. That statement is not true.
C/Harmony replied that the Commission has blocked
cable coverage from coming into the meetings, and
has opposed the speakers bureau as well. He then
recommended that the motion be amended to include a
recommendation that the City Council specifically
authorize cable television for the Planning
Commission meetings.
VC/MacBride stated that he is trying to stop the
throat cutting and criticizing of a Commission that
is trying to work for community.
C/Harmony replied that he will criticize at any
time that he finds that the Commission is not
representing the people, and is blocking the way
for good public exposure of issues and policies
that have to be discussed in the public. The
General Plan is not even the plan of GPAC. The
plan is being kept a secret by the City. The
people need to know what is said in the document.
C/Lin indicated her concern over this discussion
and stated that it has never been the Commission's
intention to keep secrets from the public.'
Chair/Grothe stated that the Commission recognizes
that the draft General Plan is not acceptable. It
is being sent back to GPAC.
C/Harmony requested a second to the motion.
C/Schey seconded the motion.
VC/MacBride then restated his motion, and the
purpose of the motion, and C/Harmony restated his
proposed amendment to VC/MacBride's motion.
September 23, 1991 Page 17
C/Schey, not realizing that he had seconded
C/Harmony's amendment, withdrew his second.
The amended motion failed for lack of a second.
C/Schey then seconded VC/MacBride's motion that,
for record purposes, the Commission takes the
public position that we welcome public examination
in such matters as news reporters, or television
cameras, or any other media that may be appropriate
at any of our publicly noticed sessions.
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Harmony, Schey, MacBride,
and Chair/Grothe.
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: Lin.
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None.
The motion CARRIED.
ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 12:55 p.m.
Respectively,
J es DeStefo
Secretary/P1nning Commission
Attest:
/s/ Jack Grothe
Jack Grothe
Chairman
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
MINUTES OF THE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
AUGUST 22, 1991
CALL TO ORDER:
PLEDGE OF
ALLEGIANCE:
ROLL CALL:
CONSENT CALENDAR:
OLD BUSINESS:
Chairman Whelan called the meeting to order at 7:03
p.m. at the Community Room, 1061 Grand Avenue,
Diamond Bar, California.
The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance by
Commissioner Stitt.
Commissioners Plunk, Stitt, and Chairman Whelan.
Vice Chairman Ruzicka arrived at 7:05 p.m.
Commissioner Meyer was absent (excused).
Also present were Assistant City Manager Terrence
Belanger, Recreation Superintendent Bob Rose,
Planning Intern John Berry, and Contract Secretary
Liz Myers.
C/Plunk requested that the Minutes of August 8,
1991 be pulled from the Consent Calendar.
Motion was made by C/Stitt, seconded by C/Plunk and
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to approve the Consent
Calendar.
C/Plunk requested that the Minutes of August 8,
1991 be amended on page 2 to include her reference
of the request made by Mr. Broski, during the
August 23, 1990 meeting, for fencing on his
property at Maple Hill Park; and amended on page 4,
third paragraph, to indicate "some of the stalls,
including Sycamore Park".
Motion was made by C/Stitt, seconded by C/Plunk and
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to approve the Minutes of
August 8, 1991, as amended.
Parks Use Policy ACM/Belanger addressed the Commission regarding the
draft copy of the updated Park Use Policy. It is
recommended that the Commission conveys any further
deletions, additions, or modifications of the
document during the meeting, or submit written
comments at a later time.
C/Plunk inquired if the appointment process should
be mentioned in the draft Parks and Recreation
Commission section.
ACM/Belanger explained that there is already a
process in place, in the County code, that governs
the Park and Recreation Commission.
August 22, 1991 Page 2
VC/Ruzicka indicated that the community
organization leaders should be informed that it
would be appropriate to submit, in writing, to the
Commission, problems with any of the parks use
policies and regulations, as well as their
suggestions for changes. The Commission will
review the suggestions, and make the appropriate
changes, in a reasonable amount of time.
C/Plunk requested, with the concurrence from the
Commission, that there be a definitive review of
the document in one year.
C/Plunk noted the conflicting statements on the
bottom of page 5, item C, and page 7, item A.2.,
regarding campfires and charcoal fires. She
requested that one or the other statement be
removed.
ACM/Belanger indicated that the first statement,
under Definitions, is not a definition and should
be removed. He further suggested that the
statement, "No campfires, liquid fluids, or
charcoal fires are allowed, except where allowed in
designated areas, as provided by the City.", be
included as a new item under A.1.e. on page 7. It
should also indicate on item 2, page 7, that the
use of campfires and liquid fluids are not
permitted, but charcoal fires are allowed in those
areas designated by the City.
C/Plunk, referring to item 3.a., on page S, stated
that the Commission had concurred with the
provision regarding tennis, but that there was
discussion regarding a concern that the provision
would exclude the National Junior Basketball of
Diamond Bar/Walnut. She requested that the
provision be reworded.
ACM/Belanger suggested that the provision include
the statement, "...except for City activities, or
for non profit athletic program, as approved by the
City.".
C/Plunk requested that the word "use" in item f,
page 9, be amended to "user".
ACM/Belanger stated that page 13, item B.3, should
read, "... required for groups that make ...".
C/Plunk inquired if the word "User" is
appropriately used on page 15, item B.2.
August 22, 1991 Page 3
ACM/Belanger suggested that item B.1. be amended to
read, "...user group (user) or one time user (user)
is ...", so that the use of "User" in item B.2.
refers back to the previous item.
ACM/Belanger amended item C.2., page 16, to read,
"...be allowed on City park property, outside
public parking areas, except those designated for
parks maintenance or specifically permitted by the
City.".
C/Plunk and Chair/Whelan indicated their concern
for the verbage "indirect expenses" as stated on
page 17, item 2.a.
Chair/Whelan suggested that item 2.a. be amended to
read "...all costs relating to such monitoring...".
ACM/Belanger amended item 3.b., page 18, to read,
"...motorized vehicle for dragging the fields, or
other such related activities."; and item 4, page
19, to read "...equipment shall be placed and/or
erected on...".
Motion was made by VC/Ruzicka, seconded by C/Plunk
and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to accept the draft Park
Use Policy, as amended.
ACM/Belanger stated that the final revision of the
document, including all the attachments, will be
presented at the September 12, 1991 meeting.
NEW BUSINESS:
Commissioner's ACM/Belanger addressed the Commission regarding the
Request Commission's request for information on the status
of any recommendations that have gone to the City
Council. It has been determined that only one
recommendation has not been directed to the City
Council. That recommendation, concerning the
designation of the oak tree as the official tree of
Diamond Bar, will be sent to the Planning
Commission for inclusion in the Tree
Ordinance/ Development Code. It is recommended that
the Commission direct staff as necessary.
C/Stitt corrected that, for the record, he did not
request the staff report, as indicated in the
memorandum. The request was made by C/Plunk.
Chair/Whelan noted that present policy directs the
Commission to request information through a
Commission meeting, rather than coming to staff
with individual requests. However, the memorandum
August 22, 1991 Page 4
indicates that requests for information should be
on the consensus of the Commission, to prevent
staff from conducting research that the Commission
was not interested in. it is requested that the
Commission receive direction as to the proper
procedure to obtain information from staff.
ACM/Belanger stated that there is an implied
approval, from the Commission, for any requests
made, unless it is otherwise indicated. He assured
the Commission that they have been following an
appropriate way for requesting information.
Adopt -a -Park
Chair/Whelan addressed the Commission regarding the
request, made by several scouting organizations,
along with the Key Club from DBHS, for an adopt -a -
park program. He inquired if initiating such a
program would be possible; if there is a liability
issue involved; and if the program could be
initiated quickly.
ACM/Belanger indicated that staff will research
those cities that have "adopt -a-? " programs, and
come back to the Commission, at the September 12,
1991 meeting, with suggestions for operating such a
program for our parks.
Chair/Whelan noted that the enclosed fence area, at
the back of Sycamore Canyon Park, is trashy.
General Plan -
ACM/Belanger reviewed the Plan for Resource
Resource
Management (known as the Recreation/Open
Management
Space/Conservation Element of the proposed General
Element
Plan), and the Recreation and Open Space document
(an excerpt from the General Plan Master
Environmental Assessment). He pointed out to the
Commission that the Resource Management Plan
indicates that Diamond Bar has a paucity of park
lands for a community of its size, and that one
must look at ways to increase park land resources
significantly. He further explained that the
Environmental Assessment provides the beginnings of
the shaping of the City's Master Plan of Parks and
Recreation. He introduced John Berry, a Planning
Intern, who will be working with staff in
developing the Master Plan of Parks and Recreation.
He informed the Commission that only those
elements, of the proposed General Plan, that
contain policy issues, and issue statements, that
is within the purview of the Park and Recreation
Commission, has been presented. It is recommended
that the Commission review the Plan for Resource
Management.
August 22, 1991 Page 5
VC/Ruzicka inquired if there is an inventory, of
all the parks, included in the documents presented
tonight.
ACM/Belanger responded that the last three pages,
of the document, contain that information. Staff
will have presentation maps, of Land Use, Zoning,
and Open Space, at the next meeting that will make
it easier to visualize the open space/ recreation
areas.
Chair/Whelan suggested that the Commission review
the document, and have an open discussion at the
next meeting. He requested that the agenda be
limited.
ACM/Belanger stated that a copy of the Land Use
portion of the General Plan will be made available
to the Commission.
C/Plunk requested that a representative of the
Planning Network be asked to attend the next
meeting. She made reference that it may be
appropriate to discuss the Lanterman property, and
the development of the YMCA fields.
INFORMATION:
Recreation RS/Rose addressed the Commission with an update of
Program Update the Summer Recreation Program. The program was
successful and attracted 1,550 people, and
generated $52,000 dollars. They are in the process
of developing the Fall Recreation Program and
finalizing scheduling situations with Walnut Valley
and Pomona School District. He briefly reviewed
the various programs planned for the season. There
will be a final Concert in the Parks, August 28th
at 6:30 p.m. He informed the Commission that the
awards picnic for the Heritage Park Youth Baseball
will be Saturday, August 24th, at 12:00 noon.
Chair/Whelan suggested a Holiday in the Park theme
during the Christmas season.
ACM/Belanger suggested the that there be further
discussion later in the year to determine the
feasibility of such a concert. He commended the
efforts of the City of Brea, and RS/Rose, in
preparing the Recreation Program. He then informed
the Commission that Jones Intercable is putting
together tapes of each of the concerts and will be
shown on channel 51.
August 22, 1991 Page 6
Chair/Whelan suggested playing a tape of one of the
concerts at the City booth during the Ranch
Festival.
ADJOURNMENT: Motion was made by VC/Ruzicka, seconded by C/Stitt
and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to adjourn the meeting at
8:40 p.m.
Respectively,
o` r
errence Belanger
Secretary
Attest:
Pat Whelan
Chairman
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
MINUTES OF THE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
SEPTEMBER 26, 1991
CALL TO ORDER:
PLEDGE OF
ALLEGIANCE:
ROLL CALL:
CONSENT CALENDAR:
OLD BUSINESS:
Chairman Whelan called the meeting to order at 7:03
p.m. in the Community Room, 1061 Grand Avenue,
Diamond Bar, California.
The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance by
Commissioner Plunk.
Commissioners: Plunk, Meyer, Vice Chairman
Ruzicka, and Chairman Whelan. Commissioner Stitt
was absent.
Also present were Assistant City Manager Terrence
Belanger, Administrative Analyst Kellee Fritzal,
and Recreation Superintendent Bob Rose.
Commissioner Meyer requested the Minutes of August
22, 1991 to be pulled from the Consent Calendar.
Motion was made by VC/Ruzicka, seconded by C/Plunk
and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to approve the Consent
Calendar.
Motion was made by VC/Ruzicka, seconded by C/Plunk
and CARRIED to approve the Minutes of August 22,
1991. C/Meyer abstained.
General Plan:
ACM/Belanger
informed the
Commission that the City
Resource
Council has directed
that
the draft General Plan go
Management
back to the
GPAC for
further review. Staff
Element
recommended
that the
Commission postpone
discussions
concerning
the Resource Management
Element of the City's draft General Plan until GPAC
has reviewed
and approved
the General Plan.
C/Plunk suggested that the Commission may want to
begin preliminary discussion of the document, with
the understanding that there may be some changes.
ACM/Belanger stated that the purpose of asking the
Commission to refrain from further discussion of
the General Plan is wait until the document better
reflects the goals and aspirations of the GPAC.
Furthermore, because the City intends to request a
one year extension from the State, there is more
time for the Commission to read and reflect on the
document in terms of the recommendations that may
be made to the City Council.
Chair/Whelan inquired if the request previously
made by VC/Ruzicka, as to what is available to open
space to the community, could be discussed.
September 26, 1991 Page 2
ACM/Belanger explained that not all of the open
spaces listed in the document are currently zoned
open space, further the property owners have not
been notified of the potential change in status of
their property. The item was pulled from
discussion because the issue has not been
ultimately resolved.
C/Meyer suggested that it would be helpful to get a
schedule of events regarding the review process.
It would also be helpful if staff defined the
purpose of the General Plan to help the Commission
focus their input.
NEW BUSINESS:
Payment Fees ACM/Belanger informed the Commission that private
non-profit athletic groups are currently being
charged $7.50 per participant for use of public
agencies' fields and facilities, causing a
financial strain on some of the City's non-profit
organizations. It is recommended that the
Commission consider having the City pay the fees to
other public agencies, on behalf of Diamond Bar
non-profit athletic organizations, for the use of
athletic fields and facilities, and recommend the
proposal to the City Council at it's October 1,
1991 meeting. The fiscal input of this proposal is
estimated to be $5,000 per year. As a caveat, the
issue of "gift of public funds" must be researched.
Jeff Stevens, residing at 23710 Monument Canyon
Drive, representing the Board of Directors for
Diamond Bar Little League, explained that the
Walnut Valley Unified School District (WVUSD) wants
last year's bill paid plus half of what next year's
fee will be, causing a financial strain on the
organization. The Board of Directors has decided
not to pay the bill, and not to use the WVUSD
fields.
ACM/Belanger suggested that, as a revenue -raising
alternative, the Little League could rent their
facilities to the City, creating a quid pro quo for
the payment of the fees to the Little League.
C/Meyer suggested that the Little League, and other
organizations struggling to pay the fees, lobby the
School District, in mass, to try to get them to
lower the fees.
VC/Ruzicka explained that there has been numerous
discussions, with the School District regarding
these fees, to no avail.
September 26, 1991 Page 3
Chair/Whelan inquired if it would be appropriate
for the Commission to send a letter to the School
District asking for the justification of charging
the fees, and,. as a Commission, asking them to
waive the fees.
ACM/Belanger suggested that the Commission could
include, as one of the elements in the
recommendation to the City Council, that a strong
letter be directed to the School District asking
for a change in this particular policy.
VC/Ruzicka stated that one of the main issues at
hand is the appropriateness of the School Board to
be charging this fee.
C/Meyer indicated that the concept of the
recreation program is to make it available to all
the residents of the community, and, in terms of
the City paying these fees, to demonstrate that
there is an economic hardship. The Little League
does have an asset, and an opportunity to turn the
asset into a revenue producer. That avenue should
be explored further.
ACM/Belanger, responding to VC/Ruzicka's inquiry,
explained that the monies to pay the W.V.U.S.D.
would come from the General Fund.
Chair/Whelan informed Mr. Stevens that the
Commission is not able to alleviate the Leagues
existing debt. He suggested that the City
consider, at a later date, assessing a $1.00 flat
field usage fee to everyone that participates in
the Diamond Bar recreation program, to help pay the
field usage fees.
Chair/Whelan suggested that the Commission
recommended that the City Council write a letter to
the Walnut Valley Unified School District (WVUSD)
Board of Trustees, regarding the assessment of fees
to the citizens of Diamond Bar, for the use of
fields for which taxes are already being paid.
Motion was made by VC/Ruzicka, and seconded by
C/Plunk to recommend that the City Council write a
strong letter to the WVUSD requesting a change in
policy with regard to field use fees. It is also
recommended that the City Council authorize and
allocate the expenditure of approximately five
thousand dollars for the payment of current fees
until the matter can be resolved.
September 26, 1991 Page 4
Chair/Whelan suggested that the Little League
should also write a letter.
C/MeyerIs stated that, in his opinion, the motion
is limiting the range of the recommendation to the
City Council. He suggested that the Commission
include in the recommendation that before the fees
are paid, it is recommended that the City Council
develop the criteria to demonstrate that there is a
hardship that residents are being denied
recreational opportunity.
Chair/Whelan indicated that the Parks and
Recreation Commission's user group subcommittee
could determine the hardship and bring back the
information to the Commission and the Council.
VC/Ruzicka requested C/Meyer to elaborate further
on his amendment to the motion.
C/Meyer stated that, in his opinion, with the
information provided, it has not been demonstrated
that there is a hardship. The sports groups have
not sought other sources of revenue, have not
approached the School District since the bond
change, have not organized with all the sport
groups in mass, have not approached service clubs
for help in defraying the liability, and have not
explored leasing out their assets to create another
revenue source. He suggested that VC/Ruzicka's
motion include the following: the City Council
should develop the criteria to demonstrate that
there is a hardship that residents are being denied
recreational opportunity because of the impact of
the user fees imposed by the school district; on
behalf of the Diamond Bar residents, the City
Council should contact the School Board and
register it's objections to those user fees; and
barring a change in the policy of the School
District, relative to the user fees, and upon
demonstration of a hardship on behalf of a sport
league, the City should pay the fees from the
fiscal 191-192 budget.
Chair/Whelan suggested that instead of discussing a
hardship on the residents, it may be more
appropriate to look at it as a facility use
hardship.
VC/Ruzicka amended his motion to include the
suggestions made by C/Meyer. The motion CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
September 26, 1991 Page 5
LA Park, Beach & ACM/Belanger informed the Commission that the Los
Recreation Act Angeles County Park, Beach, and Recreation Act, if
of 1992 passed by the voters, will provide approximately
$800 million in bonds to preserve, improve, and
restore park, beach and open space lands and
recreation facilities throughout the County. Those
projects that we'd like to have considered for
funding must be turned in, to the County of Los
Angeles, by October 15, 1991. The two projects
suggested by staff are the Site "D" project, and
the Pantera Park project. Staff recommended that
the Commission recommend to proceed with the
application, and that the Parks Master Plan Sub-
committee be directed to work with staff in
finalizing the plan and the application, and bring
the information back to the Commission on the
October 10th meeting.
Motion was made by C/Meyer, seconded by VC/Ruzicka
and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to accept staff's
recommendation.
Summer Youth ACM/Belanger stated that the Summer Youth Program
Program resembles the programs that the City engaged in
during the summer session. It would not be
difficult to incorporate those elements of the
summer program that were already offered, into a
program associated with the Sheriff's Department.
Upon the Commission's direction, staff will try to
incorporate the Walnut substation with those
excursions and other programs.
VC/Ruzicka indicated that the Diamond Bar
Improvement Association (DBIA) expressed interest
in this program. He suggested that they and other
civic organizations be contacted.
Intermural Sports ACM/Belanger reported that Councilwomen Papen
Program suggested the possibility of creating an intermural
sports program for at -risk children. The program
will need a higher degree of marketing to get the
children involved.
Chair/Whelan stated that creating a weekend program
in a neighborhood park, involving the community,
had been discussed.
ANNOUNCEMENTS: VC/Ruzicka stated that Don Schad is volunteering to
replant the Larkstone Park site. He inquired if
the City has control of the park, and the
irrigation system.
September 26, 1991 Page 6
ACM/Belanger stated that the City has control of
the park, but not of the rest of the site.
VC/Ruzicka stated that the DBIA would like to know
where the Redwood tree can be planted.
ACM/Belanger suggested planting it in a place that
it will have room to grow.
ADJOURNMENT: Motion was made by VC/Ruzicka, seconded by C/Plunk
and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to adjourn the meeting at
8:58 p.m.
Res ectively, /- &��
Terrence Belanger
Secretary
Attest:
Pat Whelan
Chairman
MAYOR: ,yi•® 3.
.l Al 7 IMPERIAI -
MAYOR PRO TEM.
MARGARET CLARK _
COUNCILMEN: A
ROBERT BRUESC,H
DENNIS McDONALD T
GARY A TAYLOR
October 9, 1991
itch �: Posc wtead
8838 E VALLEY BOULEVARD • P.O BOX 399
ROSEMEAD CALIFORNIA 91770
TE: 18181 ?88-667'
The Honorable John A. Forbing
Mayor
City of Diamond Bar
21660 E. Copley Drive
Suite 100
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
Dear Mayor Forbing:
Attached is a Resolution passed by the Rosemead City Council at the
regular Council meeting of October 8, 1991, supporting the
establishment of an Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS)
sub -office in the San Gabriel Valley. We are requesting that your
city support this effort with a similar Resolution, and by
communicating this support to your county, state, and congressional
representatives.
The City of Rosemead believes this issue to be of critical importance
to the cities of the San Gabriel valley. The existing INS situation
presents some difficulty for a significant portion of our population.
We believe this inequity must be addressed by the Federal government,
and we believe it is the cities' responsibility to voice this need to
the appropriate officials.
Let me thank you in advance for your support. If you have any
questions or comments, please do not hesitate to contact me or the
City staff.
Sincerely,
J Y T. IMPERIAL
Mayor
City of Rosemead
JTI:nv
Attachment
C:INS: 1
RESOLUTION NO. 91-52
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD
SUPPORTING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF AN IMMIGRATION AND
NATURALIZATION SERVICE OFFICE IN THE SAN GABRIEL VALLEY
WHEREAS, the City of Rosemead recognizes the tremendous
contribution to the growth and development of this Nation made by new
immigrants; and,
WHEREAS, the Los Angeles area is the second largest port of
entry for immigrants in the United States; and,
WHEREAS, the City of Rosemead and surrounding cities in the San
Gabriel Valley are home to a large and growing population of
foreign -born residents; and,
WHEREAS, this area is served by a single Immigration and
Naturalization Service office, located in downtown Los Angeles; and,
WHEREAS, this situation creates distinct hardships for area
residents seeking to work through the Immigration and Naturalization
process, often causing excessive delays or forcing them to pay for
private legal assistance; and,
WHEREAS, the City of Rosemead believes that those seeking to
become contributing members of our Nation should have ready access to
the legal means to this end and that it is the responsibility of the
United States Government to provide this access,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the City of Rosemead supports
the necessary federal funding and staffing to establish an
Immigration and Naturalization Service suboffice in the San Gabriel
Valley; and,
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a copy of this resolution be
transmitted forthwith to the elected officials of the San Gabriel
Valley.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 8th day qt- October, 1991.
Q.., Z - _," --� - ilii . _
2
MAY721000" V -
ATTEST:
l l�,
CITY CLERK
I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 91-52 was duly and regularly
adopted by the City Council of the City of Rosemead at a regular meeting thereof
held on the 8th day of October, 1991, by the following vote:
RESOLUTION NO. 91-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
DIAMOND BAR SUPPORTING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF AN
IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE OFFICE
IN THE SAN GABRIEL VALLEY
WHEREAS, the City of Diamond Bar recognizes the
tremendous contributions to the growth and development of this
Nation made by new immigrants; and,
WHEREAS, the Los Angeles area is the second largest port
of entry for immigrants in the United States; and,
WHEREAS, the City of Diamond Bar and surrounding cities
in the San Gabriel Valley are home to a large and growing
population of foreign -born residents; and,
WHEREAS, this area is served by a single Immigration and
Naturalization Service office, located in downtown Los Angeles;
and,
WHEREAS, this situation creates distinct hardships for
area residents seeking to work through the Immigration and
Naturalization process, often causing excessive delays or forcing
them to pay for private legal assistance; and,
WHEREAS, the City of Diamond Bar believes that those
seeking to become contributing members of our Nation should have
ready access to the legal means to this end and that it is the
responsibility of the United States Government to provide this
access.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the City of Diamond Bar
supports the necessary federal funding and staffing to establish an
Immigration and Naturalization Service suboffice in the San Gabriel
Valley; and,
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a copy of this resolution be
transmitted forthwith to the elected officials of the San Gabriel
Valley.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this day of
, 1991.
MAYOR
I, LYNDA BURGESS, City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar,
do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was passed,
approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of
the City of Diamond Bar held on.the day of ,
1991, by the following votes:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSTAINED: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
LYNDA BURGESS, City Clerk
City of Diamond Bar
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF DIAMOND BAR IN THE MATTER OF AUTHORIZING
PARTICIPATION IN A STATEWIDE PURCHASING
PROGRAM.
A. Recitals.
WHEREAS, the City has expressed an interest in parti-
cipating in a statewide purchasing program jointly sponsored by
the County Supervisors Association of California and the League
of California Cities; and
WHEREAS, a lead public agency has been designated to
contract for volume discount pricing on certain products and ser-
vices for the benefit of public agencies throughout the State of
California; and
WHEREAS, the City proposes to participate in the state-
wide purchasing program to generate savings on the goods and
services offered under the program; and
WHEREAS, Government Code Section 6502 authorizes the
City to participate jointly with other public agencies in such a
program.
B. Resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby resolved, ordered, and
determined, as follows:
1. The City's participation in the statewide pur-
chasing program jointly sponsored by the County Supervisor's
Association of California and the League of California Cities, is
hereby approved and joint participation is hereby authorized
1
pursuant to the provisions of Government Code Section 6502.
2. The Mayor, City Manager, the City Clerk and other
designated officials of the City and all other proper officers
and officials of the City, are hereby authorized and directed to
execute purchase orders and documents and to perform such other
acts and deeds as may be necessary or convenient to effect the
purposes of this resolution and the City's participation in the
statewide purchasing program.
3. This resolution shall take effect from and after
its date of adoption.
PASSED, ADOPTED, AND APPROVED this day of
, 1991.
Mayor
I, LYNDA BURGESS, City Clerk of the City of Diamond
Bar, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was passed,
adopted and approved at a regular meeting of the City Council of
the City of Diamond Bar held on the day of ,
1991, by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSTAINED: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ATTEST:
City Clerk of the City of
Diamond Bar
N
■IEr
.Emu
;W; League of California Cities
:=` 1400 K STREET . SACRAMENTO, CA 95814 . (916) 444-5790
California Cities
Work Together September 18, 1991
TO: Mayors, City Managers or City Clerks in Non -Manager Cities,
Finance Directors and Purchasing Managers
SUBJECT: Airline Discount Program and Cooperative Purchasing
The League and the County Supervisors Association of California (CSAC) have negotiated
a contract with Southwest Airlines for discount airfares within California for all city or
county business travel. For the first time ever in California an agreement has been made
to provide an unrestricted, anytime, anywhere discount airfare for local officials. For $89.00
round trip, California city officials can fly on any Southwest flight in California. This
represents a 25% discount off regular unrestricted fares of Southwest and as much as a
400% reduction in unrestricted fares of some other airlines.
Your immediate assistance and cooperation is urgently needed to ensure the
availability of the discount airfare program. The program requires an initial
collective purchase of 5,000 segments (2,500 round trips) among all the cities
and counties in the state. Tickets are valid for six months from the date of
delivery. Up to 50% of the tickets purchased can be reissued atter six months,
applying the dollar value of unused tickets to the purchase price of new
unrestricted tickets on the date of reissue. Please review your potential air
travel within the next six to ei!ht months and advance purchase these tickets so
that the program can be initiated immediately.
Additionally, discounts of 60% or more off list price are now available on office and systems
furniture offered through Haworth and Herman Miller. An equipment leasing program has
been established to provide a low cost alternative to vendor leases for capital equipment.
Existing purchasing procedures in many cities already provide for joint participation with
other public entities. A lead public agency has been designated for each of the products
offered under the Statewide Purchasing Program. Each product offered meets the
purchasing requirements of the lead agency. In the event that your city does not have joint
purchasing authority, a suggested resolution for adoption by your City Council is being sent
to city managers.
Further details on each of the three initial products are contained in the product
information sheets which are attached to this letter in packets being sent to city managers,
finance directors and purchasing managers. The program is jointly sponsored by the League
and CSAC to secure volume discounts and produce cost savings for cities and counties
throughout the state.
We anticipate adding other products to the program in the future, possibly one new product
each quarter. For further information, you may contact the program advisor, Steve Hamill,
at 1-800-635-3993, or Dan Harrison or Karen Durham at the Sacramento office of the
League.
Enclosures to city managers,
finance directors and
purchasing managers:
• Sample Resolution
• Discount Airfare Program, Product Information Sheet and related materials
• Office and Systems Furniture, Product Information Sheet and related materials
• Equipment Lease Program, Product Information Sheet
Sacramento
Oakland
San Francisco •
\ 136 rbank
•l
Los Angeles i Ontario
(LAX) ��
San Diego
SOUTMST ROUTES
WITHIN CALIfORNIA.
I:MEMBEF ,RID\JOIVTPUR. MEM
SOUTHWEST AIRLINES
• Southwest Airlines is celebrating its 20th year of service in 1991.
• Southwest Airlines specializes in shorthaul, high frequency service ideal for the
business traveler.
• Southwest Airlines operates 120 Boeing 737 aircraft with an average age of 6.4
years, making it the youngest pure jet fleet in the nation.
• Southwest Airlines is #1 in passenger boardings at Burbank, Oakland, Ontario,
and San Diego, making it the fastest growing airline in California.
• Southwest Airlines is #1 in both ontime performance and customer satisfaction in
the most recent report of the U.S. Department of Transportation (for July, 1991).
• Southwest Airlines is the "official airline" of the League of California Cities and
the County Supervisors Association of California for service in the California
corridor.
Sacramento
Oakland
San Francisco
Los A
(LAX)
Burbank
,\_4
Ontario
San Diego
SOUTHWEST ROUTES
VVITHIN CALIFORNIA.
SOUTHWEST AIRLINES
NON-STOP CALIFORNIA SERVICE
MONDAY - FRIDAY
Burbank (BUR)
To Oakland (OAK)
850
7:00a
8:15a
568
7:45a
8:55a
507
8:55a
10:05a
570
9:55a
11:05a
572
11:00a
12:10p
574
12:35p
1:45p
578
3:30p
4:40p
576
4:30p
5:40p
622
5:40p
6:50p
594
6:20p
7:30p
557
7:20p
8:30p
To Sacramento (SMF)
1701
7:00a
8:20a
1703
8!00a
9:15a
1705
11:00a
12:15p
1707
2:00p
3:20p
1709
5:00P
6:15p
1711
8:00P
9:15p
From Oakland (OAK)
448
6:40a
7:50a
506
7:30a
8:40a
853
8:30a
9:40a
569
9:30a
10:40a
571
10:45a
11:55a
495
12:30p
1:40p
610
1:20p
2:30p
573
2:05p
3:15p
577
4:55p
6:05p
575
5:55p
7:05p
579
7:50p
9:00P
From Sacramento (SMF)
1702
6:30a
7:35a
1704
9:35a
10:40a
1706
12:35p
1:40p
1708
3:35p
4:40p
1710
6:35p
7:40p
1712
9:30p
10:40p
Los Angeles (LAX)
To Oakland (OAK)
1401
6:30a
7:45a
1403
8:00a
9:15a
602
10:00a
11:15a
1409
12:30p
1:45p
1411
2:00p
3:15p
1415
3:30p
4;45p
1417
5:00p
6:15p
1419
6:30p
7:45p
1421
7:35p
8:50p
From Oakland (OAK)
611
6:30a
7:40a
1464
8:00a
9:10a
1466
10:00a
11:10a
1468
12:30p
1:40p
1470
2:00p
3:10p
1472
3:30p
4:40p
1474
5:00P
6:10p
1476
6:30p
7:40p
1670
7:30p
8:45p
Oakland (OAK)
To Burbank (BUR)
6:55a
From Burbank (BUR)
448
6:40a
7:50a
850
7:00a
8:15a
506
7:30a
8:40a
568
7:45a
8:55a
853
8:30a
9:40a
507
8:55a
10:05a
569
9:30a
10:40a
570
9:55a
11:05a
571
10:45a
11:55a
572
11:00a
12:10p
495
12:30p
1:40p
574
12:35p
1:45p
610
1:20p
2:30p
578
3:30p
4:40p
573
2:05p
3:15p
576
4:30p
5:40p
577
4:55p
6:05p
622
5:40p
6:50p
575
5:55p
7:05p
594
6:20p
7:30p
579
7:50p
9:00P
557
7:20p
8:30p
To Los Angeles (LAX)
611 6:30a 7:40a
1464 8:00a 9:10a
1466 10:00a 11:10a
1468 12:30p 1:40p
1470 2:00p 3:10p
1472 3:30p 4:40p
1474 5:00P 6:10p
1476 6:30p 7:40p
1670 7:30p 8:45p
To Ontario (ONT)
381 7:00a
935 7:55a
361 9:05a
583 10:30a
668 11:50a
387 2:15p
983 3:10p
389 5:15p
391 7:45p
1695 9:05p
To San Diego (SAN)
383
6:55a
1501
8:05a
385
9:00a
984
10:25a
1503
11 !40a
794
2:55p
847
3:40p
978
5:00p
987
6:10p
907
7:10p
737
8:15p
(Effective September 6, 1991)
8:15a
9:05a
10:20a
11:40a
1:00p
3:30p
4:20p
6:30p
8:55p
10:15p
8:20a
9:30a
10:25a
11:45a
12:55p
4:15p
5:00P
6:25p
7:35p
8:30p
9:35p
From Los Angeles (LAX)
1401
6:30a
7:45a
1403
8:00a
9:15a
602
10:00a
11:15a
1409
12:30p
1:45p
1411
2:00p
3:15p
1415
3:30p
4:45p
1417
5:00p
6:15p
1419
6:30p
7:45p
1421
7:35p
8:50p
From Ontario (ONT)
382
6:55a
8:05a
939
9:20a
10:30a
483
10:15a
11:30a
585
11:55a
1:05p
386
12:50p
2:00p
388
3:45p
4:55p
985
4:40p
5:50p
390
5:55p
7:05p
563
8:05p
9:15p
From San Diego (SAN)
980
7:15a
8:40a
646
8:50a
10:10a
1502
10:00a
11:20a
742
11:10a
12:30p
601
12:20p
1:40p
1504
1:20p
2:45p
816
3:20p
4:40p
1506
5:15p
6:40p
335
6:00p
7:30p
988
7:50p
9:10p
812
9:20p
10:40p
SOUTHWEST AIRLINES
NON-STOP CALIFORNIA SERVICE
MONDAY - FRIDAY
Ontario (ONT)
To Oakland (OAK)
382
6:55a
8:05a
939
9:20a
10:30a
483
10:15a
11:30a
585
11:55a
1:05p
386
12:50p
2:00p
388
3:45p
4:55p
985
4:40p
5:50p
390
5:550
7:05p
563
8:050
9:150
To Sacramento (SMF)
1801
8:20a
9:40a
1803
10:15a
11:35a
517
12:00p
1:20p
1807
1:45p
3:050
1809
5:30p
6:50p
1811
8:40p
10:00p
From Oakland (OAK)
381
7:00a
8:15a
935
7:55a
9:05a
361
9:05a
10:20a
583
10:30a
11:40a
668
11:50a
1:00p
387
2:15p
3:30p
983
3:10p
4:20p
389
5:150
6:30p
391
7:45p
8:550
1695
9:05D
10:150
From Sacramento (SMF)
1802
8:35a
9:50a
1804
10: 00a
11:15a
1806
12:00p
1:15p
1808
1:35p.
2:50p
1810
4:00p
5:150
1812
7:10p
8:25p
Sacramento (sw)
To Burbank (BUR)
1702
6:30a
7:35a
1704
9:35a
10:40a
1706
12:35p
1:40p
1708
3:35p
4:40p
1710
6:35p
7:40p
1712
9:30p
10:40p
To Ontario (ONT)
1802
8:35a
9:50a
1804
10:00a
11:15a
1806
12:00p
1:15p
1808
1:35p
2:50p
1810
4:00p
5:15p
1812
7:1 Op
8:25p
To San Diego (SAN)
1550
6:50a
8:20a
1552
9:05a
10:35a
1554
10:30a
12:00p
998
2:00p
3:30p
1558
4:15p
5:45p
1560
6:00p
7:30p
From Burbank (BUR)
1701
7:00a
8:20a
1703
8:00a
9:15a
1705
11:00a
12:15p
1707
2:00p
3:20p
1709
5:00p
6:15p
1711
8:00p
9:150
From Ontario (ONT)
1801
8:20a
9:40a
1803
10:15a
11:35a
517
12:00p
1:20p
1807
1:45p
3:05p
1809
5:30p
6:50p
1811
8:40p
10:000
From San Diego (SAN)
1551
7:20a
8:50a
1553
8:35a
10:05a
1555
12:15p
1:45p
990
2:30p
4:00p
1559
4:1Op
5:40p
1561
6:000
7:30p
San Diego (SAN)
To Oakland (OAK)
980
7:15a
8:40a
646
8:50a
10:10a
1502
10:00a
11:20a
742
11:10a
12:30p
601
12:20p
1:40p
1504
1:20p
2:45p
816
3:20p
4:40p
1506
5:15p
6:40p
335
6:00p
7:30p
988
7:50p
9:1 Op
812
9:200
10:40p
To Sacramento (SMF)
1551
7:20a
8:50a
1553
8:35a
10:05a
1555
12:15p
1:45p
990
2:30p
4:00p
1559
4:1 Op
5:40p
1561
6:00p
7:30p
To San Francisco (SFO)
982
6:30a
7:55a
202
9:00a
10:30a
734
10:40a
12:1 Op
90
12:40p
2:1 Op
93
4:20p
5:50p
721
5:45p
7:15p
98
8:50p
10:20p
From Oakland (OAK)
383
6:55a
8:20a
1501
8:05a
9:30a
385
9:00a
10:25a
984
10:25a
11:45a
1503
11:40a
12:55p
794
2:55p
4:15p
847
3:40p
5:00p
978
5:00p
6:25p
987
6:10p
7:35p
907
7:10p
8:30p
737
8:151)
9:35p
From Sacramento (SMF)
1550
6:50a
8:20a
1552
9:05a
10:35a
1554
10:30a
12:00p
998
2:00p
3:30p
1558
4:15p
5:45p
1560
6:00p
7:30p
From San Francisco (SFO)
968
6:35a
8:00a
80
7:20a
8:45a
969
9:30a
10:55a
303
10:55a
12:20p
466
12:05p
1:30p
92
2:30p
3:55p
598
3:50p
5:150
94
6:55p
8:25p
480
7:35p
9:050
San Francisco (SFO)
To San Diego (SAN)
968
6:35a
8:00a
80
7:20a
8:45a
969
9:30a
10:55a
303
10:55a
12:20p
466
12:05p
1:30p
92
2:30p
3:55p
598
3:500
5:15p
94
6:550
8:25p
480
7:35p
9:050
(Effective September 6, 1991)
From San Diego (SAN)
982
6:30a
7:55a
202
9:00a
10:30a
734
10:40a
12:10p
90
12:40p
2:10p
93
4:20p
5:50p
721
5:45p
7:15p
98
8:50p
10:20p
A!
iscou 1iT AIRFARE PROGRAM
COUNTY SUPERVISORS ASSOCIATION OF CALIFORNIA
LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA Cn IES
ORDER FORM
AGENCY:
CONTACT PERSON:
PHONE NUMBER:
MAKING ADDRESS:
ORDER: NUMBER OF SEGMENTS*
X $44.50 PRICE PER SEGMENT
TOTAL
MAKE CHECKS PAYABLE TO:
California Statewide Communities Development Authority
MAIL TO:
California Statewide Communities Development Authority
7901 Stoneridge Drive, Suite 225
Pleasanton, California 94588
ORDER SUBMITTED PURSUANT TO TIIE PROVISIONS OF THE JOINT EXERCISE OF POWERS
AGREEMENT ON THE REVERSE SIDE OF THIS ORDER FORM.
*One round trip = (2) segments
a
By:
Title:
JOINT EXERCISE OF POWERS AGREEMENT
(Airline Tickets)
This Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement, dated as of September 1,
1991, among each of the California counties and cities executing this
Agreement by submitting an order ("Order") pursuant to the Contract (as
defined below) (such entities being herein referred to collectively as the
"Parties" and individually as a "Party").
W I T N E S S E T H:
WHEREAS, the County Supervisors Association of California and the
League of California Cities have instituted a Statewide Purchasing Program to
assist in the joint purchase of certain supplies, materials and services by
California counties and cities; and
WHEREAS, the County'of Los Angeles (the "County"), in furtherance
of said Statewide Purchasing Program and in accordance with its own
procurement procedures, has arranged for the availability to the Parties of
reduced -cost airfares within California through a special tariff (the
"Contract") with Southwest Airlines,
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS:
This Agreement is entered into pursuant to Chapter 5 of Division 7
of Title 1 of the California Government Code (the "Act") for the purpose of
jointly exercising the common power of the Parties to provide for air travel
for their respective officials, employees and other authorized persons.
No separate entity is created pursuant to this Agreement. No
property or funds shall be given to or be held for any agency or entity for
purposes of the Act and therefore no provision as to a person having charge
of, handling or having access to such property for purposes of Section 6505.1
of the Act, or for the distribution of property or surplus funds for purposes
of Section 6511 or Section 6512 of the Act, is necessary. No person need
establish an official bond in connection with this Agreement.
The County is hereby designated the agency to administer or
execute this Agreement for purposes of the Act, such administration or
execution to be accomplished in the manner, and subject to the restrictions,
applicable to the County. The County shall take all action necessary to
finalize the Contract.
Orders under the Contract, together with payment therefor, shall
be forwarded for processing to the California Statewide Communities
Development Authority. All moneys shall remain the property of the applicable
Party until vouchers for tickets are issued under the Contract and, upon
issuance by Southwest Airlines, all such vouchers for tickets shall be the
property of the ordering Party. All persons receiving or disbursing funds
pursuant to this Agreement shall strictly account for all such funds and shall
report on all receipts and disbursements.
This Agreement shall remain in effect so long as the Contract is
in effect. A city or county shall become a Party to this Agreement by
executing an Order pursuant to the Contract but each Party's obligations
hereunder are only to make the payments required by such Party's Orders. No
Party shall have any other obligations as a result of this Agreement and no
debts, liabilities or obligations of any agency administering this Agreement
for purposes the Act or of any other person or Party shall be debts,
liabilities or obligations of a Party.
LAI -8959-1 409294 -EJC -09/09191
STATEWIDE PURCHASING PROGRAM
COUNTY SUPERVISORS ASSOCIATION OF CALIFORNIA
LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES
PRODUCT INFORMATION SHEET
Product: DISCOUNT AIRFARE PROGRAM.
Product No.: ONE (1).
Lead Agency: LOS ANGELES COUNTY.
Vendor: SOUTHWEST AIRLINES
DESCRIPTION:
Discount unrestricted airfare on all routes flown by Southwest Airlines within California. Airports
served include San Diego, Los Angeles, Burbank, Ontario, Oakland, San Francisco and Sacramento.
See enclosed route map and schedule.
COST/DISCOUNT:
$44.50 one-way (each segment); $89.00 round trip. Fare represents a 25% discount or $29.00 off
the lowest available unrestricted round trip airfare of $118.00. Pricing represents potentially greater
savings based on comparable unrestricted fares which can cost up to $358.00 roundtrip.
PROCEDURE/REQUIREMENTS:
Order advance purchase vouchers using enclosed order form. Vouchers are valid on any South-
west flight within California for six months from date of delivery. One-half (501/6) of vouchers
purchased may be reissued after the six month date based on the dollar value of unused tickets as
applied to the unrestricted fare in effect at the time of reissuance. Advanced seat reservation
recommended by calling toll free 1-800-845-1221.
The program will be initiated after the first collective purchase of 5,000 segments (2,500 round
trips) by participating cities and counties, Please review travel requirements for the next six
to eight months and order tickets as soon as possible.
ADMINISTRATIVE FEE:
A fee of $1.50 per segment to offset the cost of administering this program is included in the $44.50
purchase price of vouchers.
FURTHER INFORMATION:
Call program advisor at 1-800-635-3993.
I
STATEWIDE PURCHASING PROGRAM
COUNTY SUPERVISORS ASSOCIATION OF CALIFORNIA
LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES
PRODUCT INFORMATION SHEET
Product: OFFICE AND SYSTEMS FURNITURE.
Product No.: TWO (2).
Lead Agency: SANTA CLARA COUNTY.
Vendor: HAWORTH
HERMAN MILLER
DESCRIPTION
Complete line of systems furniture and selected freestanding furniture lines as offered by
designated vendors.
COST/DISCOUNT:
Haworth Discount from List
List Price Product Only Installed
$0 - $600,000 60% Negotiable
$600,001 - $1 Million 62% Negotiable
$1 Million + Negotiable Negotiable
Herman Miller $0 - $600,000
64.5%
601/6
$600,001 -1 Million
65%
62%
$1,000,001 - $2 Million
65%
63%
$2 million +
Negotiable
Negotiable
PROCEDURE/REQUIREMENTS:
Contact regional representatives for each vendor shown on the enclosed list. Catalogs and price
list available through regional representatives. When ordering, use standard purchase order, but
note Contract No. 91-01312-002 for Haworth or contact No. A 1563 for Herman Miller on purchase
order.
e
OFF1C1. AND SYSIL,MS FURiV17'URE continued
Page 2 V%#�
By placing an order, the furniture will be acquired under a joint exercise of powers pursuant to
Section 6502 of the California Government Code and in accordance with the Joint Exercise of
Powers Agreement on the reverse side hereof. Placing the order constitutes participation in such
Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement.
Send copy of purchase order to: California Statewide Communities Development Authority,
7901 Stoneridge Drive, Suite 225, Pleasanton, California 94588-3657.
ADMINISTRATION
Vendors will rebate up to 1% of the value of orders to the Statewide Purchasing Program to offset
administrative costs.
FURTHER INFORMATION:
Contact vendor representatives as shown on the enclosed list or for general program information,
call the program's advisor at 1-800-635-3993.
JOINT EXERCISE ON POWERS AGREEMENT
(office and Systems Furniture)
This Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement, dated as of September 1,
1991, among each of the California counties and cities executing this
Agreement by submitting an order ("Order") pursuant to a Contract (as defined
below) (such entities being herein referred to collectively as the "Parties"
and individually as a "Party").
W I T N E S S E T H•
WHEREAS, the County Supervisors Association of California and the
League of California Cities have instituted a Statewide Purchasing Program to
assist in the joint purchase of certain supplies, materials and services by
California counties and cities; and
WHEREAS, the County of Santa Clara (the "County"), in furtherance
of said Statewide Purchasing Program and in accordance with its own
procurement procedures, has arranged for the availability to the Parties of
reduced -cost office and systems furniture with Haworth and Herman Miller
(each, a "Vendor") through Contract No. 91-01312-002 (Haworth) and Contract
No. A1563 (Herman Miller) (each, a "Contract").
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS:
This Agreement is entered into pursuant to Chapter 5 of Division 7
of Title 1 of the California Government Code (the "Act") for the purpose of
jointly exercising the common power of the Parties to acquire office and
systems furniture.
No separate entity is created pursuant to this Agreement. No
property or funds shall be given to or be held for any agency or entity for
purposes of the Act and therefore no provision as to a person having charge
of, handling or having access to such property for purposes of Section 6505.1
of the Act, or for the distribution of property or surplus funds for purposes
of Section 6511 or Section 6512 of the Act, is necessary. No person need
establish an official bond in connection with this Agreement.
The County is hereby designated the agency to administer or
execute this Agreement for purposes of the Act, such administration or
execution to be accomplished in the manner, and subject to the restrictions,
applicable to the County. The County shall take all action necessary to
finalize each Contract.
Orders under a Contract, together with payment therefor, shall be
forwarded directly to the applicable Vendor. All persons receiving or
disbursing funds pursuant to this Agreement shall strictly account for all
such funds and shall report on all receipts and disbursements.
This Agreement shall remain in effect so long as a Contract is in
effect. A city or county shall become a Party to this Agreement by executing
an Order pursuant to a Contract but each Party's obligations hereunder are
only to make the payments required by such Party's Orders. No Party shall
have any other obligations as a result of this Agreement and no debts,
liabilities or obligations of any agency administering this Agreement for
purposes the Act or of any other person or Party shall be debts, liabilities
or obligations of a Party.
LAI -8859.2 409294-1JG09/09/91
TATE DE PURCHASING PROGRAM /■�
I REGIONAL REPRESENTATIVES
� (`�
OFFICE AND SYSTEMS FURNITURE
Placer ......................
Plums ....................
Riverside .................
Sacramento .............
San Benito ..............
San Bernardino .......
San Diego ...............
San Joaquin ............
San Francisco .........
San Luis Obispo .....
San Mateo ...............
Santa Barbara .........
Santa Clara ..............
Santa Cruz ...............
Shasta ......................
Sierra
Siskiyou ..................
Solano .....................
Sonoma ...................
Stanislaus ................
Sutter .......................
Tehama ...................
Trinity .....................
Tulare...... :...............
'Tuolumne ...............
Ventura ............
Yolo.......................
Yuba.......................
Contact
(reverse side)
Herman
Haworth Miller
6
Contact
6
(-reverse side)
*
..................A
Herman
.................. B
Haworth
Miller
Alameda ...........................
7 ..................13
2
Alpine..............................6
.....- ...
....... B
Amador............................
6 ..................
B
Butte........................
........ 6 ..................
B
Calaveras.........................6
.................
.B
Colusa..............................6
,.................B
..................0
Contra Costa ....................7
.................Ii
6
Del Norte .........................6
......:,..........
B
El Dorado .......................6
..................
B
Fresno..............................6
..................
B
Glenn...............................6
..................B
6
Humboldt ........................6
..................B
..................B
Imperial...........................
2 ..................
A
Inyo..................................6
..................
B
Kern.................................4
..................13
6
Kings................................
6 ..................
B
Lake.................................7
..................I3
lasscn..............................6
..................13
Los Angeles ................
....3 ..................A
Madera............... - ............
6 ..................B
Marin................................
7 ..................
B
Mariposa ........... ...............
6 .................
B
hlendoc ino ... :........
. .......... 6 ..................
B
Merced...........................6
..........
... —. [i
Nlodoc............. .............6
..................
B
Mono................................6
..................B
Monterey ..........................1
..................
C
Napa.................................6
.................13
Nevada.... . ......................
- 6 ..................
B
Grange...................
8 ..................A
Placer ......................
Plums ....................
Riverside .................
Sacramento .............
San Benito ..............
San Bernardino .......
San Diego ...............
San Joaquin ............
San Francisco .........
San Luis Obispo .....
San Mateo ...............
Santa Barbara .........
Santa Clara ..............
Santa Cruz ...............
Shasta ......................
Sierra
Siskiyou ..................
Solano .....................
Sonoma ...................
Stanislaus ................
Sutter .......................
Tehama ...................
Trinity .....................
Tulare...... :...............
'Tuolumne ...............
Ventura ............
Yolo.......................
Yuba.......................
Contact
(reverse side)
Herman
Haworth Miller
6
..................B
6
..................B
5
..................A
6
.................. B
,.......1
1...I .............0
5
.................. A
2
..................A
6
..................B
7
..................B
4
..................A
1
..................0
4
..................A
1
.................. C
1
..................0
6
..................B
6
..................B
6
.................. B
6
... ............... B
7
..................B
6
..................B
6
..................B
6
..................B
6
..................B
6
..................B
6
..................B
4
.................. A
6
.................. B
6
.................. B
HAWORTH
1. SHELLEY BERGBOWER 5. TOAD JAMES
(408) 971-6212 (714) 250-6050
2. MARK CANEZ
6. TOM MICHIELS
(714) 250-6050
(916) 677-5516
(415) 981-8795
3. GARY DALE
(213) 652-2210
7. BARRY TERRESHKOW
(415) 981-8795
4. SUE DE FURIO
(213) 652-2210
8. DIANE SEALS
(714) 250-6050
HERMAN MIIJF.R
A. Ms. Sheryl Smith B. Mr. Ray Taylor C. Ms. Deanna Zimmerman
(213) 659-7600 (415) 433-2900 (408) 727-9517
STATEWIDE PURCHASL TG PROGRAM
COUNTY SUPERVISORS ASSOCIATION OF CALIFORNIA
LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES
PRODUCT INFORMATION SHEET
Product: EQUIPMENT LEASE PROGRAM.
Product No.: THREE (3).
Lead Agency: CALIFORNIA STATEWIDE COMMUNITIES
DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, (CSCDA).
Vendor: CALIFORNIA STATEWIDE LEASE
PROGRAM, "CASTLE"
DESCRIPTION
An equipment leasing program to fund multiple equipment projects, replace existing costly and
burdensome leases and provide an alternative to vendor financing. Examples of eligible equip-
ment include telecommunication equipment, computer equipment, vehicles, office furniture and
other personal property. Program includes all financial, technical and record keeping services to
reduce the administrative cost normally associated with equipment leases.
COST/DISCOUNT:
Lease rates currently less than 7% (2 to 10 year lease terms), representing an average total savings
of $10,000 - $15,000 per $100,000 of equipment leased under program.
PROCEDURE/REQUIREMENTS:
Contact program adminsitrator at 1-800-635-3993 to arrange initial meeting and review potential
savings available through program. Program brochure available on request. Minimum lease of
$500,000 of equipment per year, limited to equipment and other personal property with a useful
life exceeding one year.
ADMINISTRATION:
All financial, legal and administrative costs associated with the program are to be included in the
annual lease rate available through the program.
FURTHER INFORMATION:
Call the program administrator at 1-800-635-3993.
This sample resolution may be used to authorize city participation in cooperative purchasing
with other agencies. If your city already has this authority, no additional action is required f
process orders.
(CITY RESOLUTION RE: STATEWIDE PURCHASING PROGRAM)
CITY OF , STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Resolution of the City Council
Resolution No.:
IN THE MATTER OF A RESOLUTION APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING
PARTICIPATION IN A STATEWIDE PURCHASING PROGRAM
The following resolution
Council of the City of
meeting held
was duly passed by the City
at a regular
by the following vote:
Ayes:
Nays:
Absent:
Signed and approved by me after its passage.
Attest:
by:
City Clerk
by:
Mayor
WHEREAS, the City has expressed an interest in
participating in a statewide purchasing program jointly sponsored
by the County Supervisors Association of California and the
League of California Cities; and
WHEREAS, a lead public agency has been designated to
contract for volume discount pricing on certain products and
services for the benefit of public agencies throughout the State
of California; and
WHEREAS, the City proposes to participate in the statewide
purchasing program to generate savings on the goods and services
offered under the program; and
WHEREAS, Government Code Section 6502 authorizes the City
to participate jointly with other public agencies in such a
program;
1
NOW, THERFORE, it is hereby RESOLVED, ORDERED and
DETERMINED, as follows:
SECTION 1. The City's participation in the statewide
purchasing program jointly sponsored by the County Supervisor's
Association of California and the League of California Cities, is
hereby approved and joint participation is hereby authorized
pursuant to the provisions of Government Code Section 6502.
SECTION 2. The Mayor, City Manager, the City Clerk and
other designated officials of the City and all other proper
officers and officials of the City, are hereby authorized and
directed to execute purchase orders and documents and to perform
such other acts and deeds as may be necessary or convenient to
effect the purposes of this resolution and the City's
participation in the statewide purchasing program.
SECTION 3. This resolution shall take effect from and after
its date of adoption.
(resolut.frm)
PA
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA JOINT POWERS INSURANCE AUTHORITY
MEMORANDUM
TO SCJPIA DIRECTOR, C/O CITY CLERK SCJPIA MEMBER CITY
FROM THOMAS M. BUTCH, GENERAL MANAGER
DATE OCTOBER 24, 1991
SUBJECT MEMBERSHIP APPROVAL FOR THE CITIES OF LAGUNA
HILLS AND LAKE FOREST
At their Regular Meeting on October 23, 1991, the SCJPIA Executive Committee recommended
the approval of the new cities of Laguna Hills and Lake Forest for membership in the SCJPIA,
subject to the following:
1 ) That all claims related to land movement be excluded.
2 ) That all claims related to lakes in Lake Forest be excluded.
3) That their premium deposits reflect the 3% and .97% of annual payroll
figures for establishing initial deposits as approved and adopted by the
SCJPIA Executive Committee.
Laguna Hills Lake Forest
Primary Deposit $ 89,900 $ 114,000
Excess Pool Deposit 28.900 37.000
Total Annual
Liability Deposit $ 118,800 $ 151,000
Enclosed are Membership Consent forms for the admission of the cities of Laguna Hills and Lake
Forest along with the report of Physical Survey.
We are requesting that each City Clerk deliver the enclosed materials to the SCJPIA Director
appointed by their Council and expedite returning the form to this office as soon as possible. If
the Director is unavailable the duly appointed Alternate may execute the Consent.
The SCJPIA By -Laws permit the independent judgment and action of your City's Director (or
Alternate) on this matter so that admissions may be accomplished in a timely manner. If your
City's procedures require Council action, please arrange that this item be given special handling
at your next Council Meeting.
Thank you in advance for your assistance in expediting the return of the Consent form by
November 15, 1991. Please call this office if you have any questions.
ATTACHMENT
so. D SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
CAL. 0 JOINT POWERS INSURANCE AUTHORITY
4952 La Palma Avenue, La Palma, California 90623
(213) 402-6372 (714) 827-3361 FAX (213) 860-4992
MEMBERSHIP APPLICATION
REPORT OF PHYSICAL SURVEY
of
CITY OF LAKE FOREST
GENERAL INFORMATION
A. Date of Survey: October 8, 1991
B. Participants in Survey:
For SCJPIA: Thomas Butch, General Manager
Patricia France, Risk Manager
David Jones, Risk Manager
Joanne Rennie, Sr. Risk Manager
2. For City: Helen Wilson, Councilmember
Richard Dixon, Councilmember
Tim Link, Councilmember
Ann Van Haun, Councilmember
Marcia Rudolph, Councilmember
Daniel Miller, Interim City Manager
Craig Collings, Risk Management Consultant, ARM Tech.
C. Description of Applicant:
Date of Incorporation: December 20, 1991
The city of Lake Forest is situated in Southern Orange County along the Pacific Ocean
between the cities of Mission Viejo and Irvine. It occupies 21 square miles and lies midway
between Los Angeles and San Diego. The city of Lake Forest has a rich heritage stemming
from Indian and Spanish settlements in the area beginning in the 1700's.
Lake Forest has developed over the past 20 plus years in a pattern of small planned commu-
nities, each the product of a separate and distinctive planning effort. There are more than 45
Homeowners' Associations with responsibility for maintaining the many private community
streets, the landscaped slopes and medians as well as the two private man-made lakes and
eucalyptus tree forest within the city's incorporated boundaries.
The city of Lake Forest will officially incorporate on December 20, 1991. At that time the five
member city council elected in March 1991, will assume formal responsibility for the operation
of the city government. It has a present population of 60,000, and has followed a planned
and controlled development program adopted by the County of Orange. The proposed city is
now approximately 85 per cent developed. The city is predominantly residential in character
with a mix of commercial uses and light industrial.
The City Council's plan of action is to contract for the majority of necessary services including
planning and engineering services. The City is currently recruiting for a permanent City
Manager who they hope will be on board by the first part of December.
The incorporation election resulted in a 85 per cent vote in favor of incorporation.
if. CURRENT INSURANCE PROGRAM
A. General and Automobile Liability Coverage:
All current insurance programs are carried by the County of Orange.
B. Workers' Compensation:
None. Incorporation will take place on December 20, 1991. Adequate coverage
for workers' compensation is available through the SCJPIA's Workers'
Compensation program.
C. Property:
Effective December 20, 1991, the city of Lake Forest will not own any
facilities or equipment. In discussion with the city's interim City Manager,
the city will initially contract for services and lease facilities for City Hall
and council chambers. Adequate coverage for personal property and automobile
physical damage is available through the SCJPIA's All Risk Property Insurance
Program. The city has expressed a desire to participate in this program.
III. EXPERIENCE AND LOSS DATA
The County of Orange has reviewed their claim records and have found only one claim during
the last five years that occurred within the limits of the new City of Lake Forest.
The claim dated from 1988, a skateboarder was struck by two vehicles at the intersection of
Trabucco Road and Ridge Route Drive. Liability was based on inadequate lighting at the
intersection. The claim was settled recently for approximately $175,000.
IV. APPLICATION FEE AND DEPOSIT COMPUTATIONS
A. Application Fee:
The City has paid an application fee of $1,500.
B. General Liability Deposits:
The initial primary general liability deposit was established at $114,000. The development of
the deposit was based upon 3% of annual city payroll as projected in the LAFCO incorpora-
tion study projecting the city's first three years of operation, $3,820,000.
The excess general liability annual deposit was established at $37,000, utilizing the .97% of
the projected payroll.
The 3% and .97% of annual payroll figures for establishing initial deposits were approved and
adopted by the SCJPIA Executive Committee.
2
C. Workers' Compensation Deposit:
City participation in the SCJPIA Workers' Compensation program may be appropriate for
consideration at some future point. The SCJPIA's overall composite "deposit rate" for
workers' compensation is approximately $2.50 per $100 of payroll.
V. PHYSICAL INSPECTION AND COMMENTS
A. Civic Center/City Hall Complex:
None. Currently the city plans to lease space in a commercial building.
B. Corporate Yard:
None. According to discussions with the Interim City Manager the city will contract for
public works services.
C. Parks and Playgrounds:
The city will take over thirteen developed park sites, 115 acres in total from the County
of Orange. The parks are generally small neighborhood parks, with an acreage size
of 8.8 acres, characterized as passive use parks.
The park sites appeared to be well cared for with no hazardous conditions or
activities observed.
D. Streets, Sidewalks and Trees:
Streets appear to be well maintained with adequate pavement markings and
signs. Curbs and gutters appear throughout the city.
During the course of our investigation no evidence of roadway undermining, caused
by surface drainage was observed. Crosswalks and lanes of travel are well marked
with sufficient warning signs.
The city has 95 miles of streets within its 21 square miles. Forty-three fully automatic
traffic signals, maintained by contract, operate within the city.
A distinctive characteristic of the city is the large number of privately owned and
maintained streets in the various residential neighborhoods. Approximately one-
fourth of the roads are privately maintained by the more than 40 Homeowners'
Associations within the City. This is a situation that will continue after the City's
incorporation.
2. Sidewalks are adjacent to curbs, leaving walkways clear and offering additional
line of sight for motorists and pedestrians at intersections. Sidewalks throughout the
city were observed to be in very good condition and well maintained. There was no
evidence of sidewalk lifting or other hazardous conditions.
E. Unusual Exposures:
There are two man-made lakes within the City boundaries. The lakes are privately owned
and operated by the respective Homeowners' Associations and are not open to the general
public. Access to both lakes is only across private property and via private Association
maintained streets.
VI. WATER AND OTHER UTILITIES
None. They will continue to be provided by other public agencies.
Water: Los Alisos, Irvine Ranch, and EI Toro Water Districts.
Electrical Power: Southern California Edison.
Natural Gas: Southern California Gas Company.
Telephone: Pacific Bell, General Telephone.
Solid Waste Disposal: Deweys-Waste Management.
VII. FIRE DEPARTMENT
Fire protection and paramedic service will be provided through contract with the Orange County
Fire Department. Four fire department sub-stations are located within the city boundaries.
VIII. POLICE DEPARTMENT
Police services will be provided under contract with the Orange County Sheriff's Department.
IX. PUBLIC AND STAFF ATTITUDES
A. Public:
As evidenced by voter turnout and support for incorporation, the citizens of Lake Forest
want responsive local government. One of the espoused goals for incorporation
is development of community recreation facilities, such as baseball and soccer fields.
The city is very clean and pleasant with no overt signs of graffiti or vandalism. Homes are
well cared for and maintained. Pride of ownership is evident.
X. SUMMARY AND EVALUATION
It is our conclusion that though certain exposures exist, the low loss experience, the well planned
and developed nature of the community, and the interest expressed qualify the City of Lake Forest for
consideration for membership in the SCJPIA.
We also find that membership will be of advantage to the city by providing economical coverage,
and will be of advantage to the SCJPIA by expanding its ability to spread pooled losses.
XI. RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the application of the City of Lake Forest, for membership in the Southern
California Joint Powers Insurance Authority be approved, subject to a coverage exclusion for land
movement and lakes, with an initial annual general liability primary deposit of $114,000 and an
excess liability deposit of $37,000 for a total annual liability deposit of $151,000.
tp/survey-lake forest
4
s0. SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
CAL. a JOINT POWERS INSURANCE AUTHORITY
4952 La Palma Avenue, La Palma, Califomia 90623
(213) 402-6372 (714) 827-3361 FAX (213) 860-4992
MEMBERSHIP APPLICATION
REPORT OF PHYSICAL SURVEY
of
CITY OF LAGUNA HILLS
I. GENERAL INFORMATION
A. Date of Survey:
October 1, 1991
B. Participants in Survey:
1. For SCJPIA:
Thomas Butch, General Manager
Joanne Rennie, Senior Risk Manager
Patricia France, Risk Manager
David Jones, Risk Manager
2. For City:
Melody Carruth, Councilmember
Joel Lautnschleger, Counctlmember
Craig Scott, Councilmember
L. Allan Soundstad, Councilmember
Randal J. Bressette, Councilmember
Ron Bradley, Interim City Manager
Bruce Channing, City Manager
C. Description of Applicant:
Date of Incorporation:
December 20, 1991
The city of Laguna Hilts is situated in Southern Orange County along the Pacific Ocean
between the cities of Mission Viejo and Laguna Niguel. It occupies 5.2 square miles and
lies midway between Los Angeles and San Diego. The city of Laguna Hills has a rich
heritage stemming from Indian and Spanish settlements in the area beginning in the mid -
1700's.
Laguna Hills has developed sporadically over the past 30 years resulting in a pattern of
smaller "planned communities"; each the product of a separate and distinctive planning
effort.
The city of Laguna Hills will officially incorporate on December 20, 1991. At that time the
five member city council elected in March 1991, will assume formal responsibility for the
operation of the city government. It has a present population of 25,597, and has followed
a well planned and controlled development program adopted by the County of Orange.
The proposed city is now approximately 95 per cent developed. The city is predominantly
residential in character with a mix of commercial uses.
The City Council's plan of action is to contract for the vast majority of necessary services. It
recently hired a City Manager with many years of public service in California Municipal
Government.
The incorporation election resulted in an 83 per cent vote in favor of incorporation.
I1. CURRENT INSURANCE PROGRAM
A General and Automobile Liability Coverage:
All current insurance programs are carried by the County of Orange.
B. Workers' Compensation:
None. Incorporation will take place on December 20, 1991. Adequate coverage
for workers' compensation is available through the SCJPIA's Workers'
Compensation program.
O Property:
Effective December 20, 1991, the city of Laguna Hills will not own any
facilities or equipment. In discussion with the city's interim City Manager,
the city will initially contract for most services and lease facilities for offices
and council chambers. Adequate coverage for personal property and automobile
physical damage is available through the SCJPIA's All Risk Property Insurance
Program. The city has expressed a desire to participate in this program.
III. EXPERIENCE AND LOSS DATA
Any prior loss experience is on file with the County of Orange. Specific data is not
available for Laguna Hills and loss information cannot be broken out to accommodate this
new city. In discussion with the County of Orange Risk Management Department, no
claim with major impact could be recollected, or any claim frequency that would have any
adverse effects.
IV. APPLICATION FEE AND DEPOSIT COMPUTATIONS
A. Application Fee:
The City has paid an application fee of $1,500.
B. General Liability Deposits:
The initial primary general liability deposit was established at $89,900. The development
of the deposit was based upon 3% of annual city payroll as projected in the LAFCO
incorporation study projecting the city's first three years of operation, $2,997,080.
The excess general liability annual deposit was established at $28,900, utilizing the .97%
of the projected payroll.
2
The 3% and .97% of annual payroll figures for establishing initial deposits were approved
and adopted by the SCJPIA Executive Committee.
C. Workers' Compensation Deposit:
City participation in the SCJPIA Workers' Compensation program may be appropriate for
consideration at some future point. The SCJPIA's overall composite "deposit rate" for
workers' compensation is approximately $2.50 per $100 of payroll.
V . PHYSICAL INSPECTION AND COMMENTS
A. Civic Center/City Hall Complex:
None. Currently the city plans to lease space in a commercial office building.
B. Corporate Yard:
None. According to discussions with the City Council, Interim City Manager and City
Manager, the city will contract for public works services.
C. Parks and Playgrounds:
The city will take over nine developed park sites, 28.7 acres in total, from the County
of Orange. The parks are generally small neighborhood parks, with an acreage size
of 3.1 acres.
The park sites visited appeared to be well cared for with no hazardous conditions or
activities observed.
D. Streets, Sidewalks and Trees:
Streets appear to be well maintained with adequate pavement markings and
signs. Curbs and gutters appear throughout the main portion of the city. Some
older residential areas have forgone curbs and gutters in pursuit of a rural
atmosphere.
During the course of our investigation no evidence of roadway undermining,
caused by surface drainage, was observed. Some roads in the community have
varying grades. Crosswalks and lanes of travel are well marked with sufficient
warning signs.
The city has 65.4 miles of streets within its 5.2 square miles. Approximately five
miles of state controlled highway pass through the city. Finally, 44 fully automatic
traffic signals, maintained by contract, operate within the city.
2. Sidewalks are adjacent to curbs, leaving walkways clear and offering additional
line of sight for motorists and pedestrians at intersections. Sidewalks throughout
the city were observed to be in very good condition and well maintained.
V1. WATER AND OTHER UTILITIES
None. Government service which will not be apart of the city's responsibility. They will continue
to be provided by other public agencies.
Water: EI Toro and Moulton Niguel Water Districts.
Electrical Power: Southern California Edison.
Natural Gas: Southern California Gas Company.
Telephone: Pacific Bell.
Solid Waste Disposal: Deweys-Waste Management.
VII. FIRE DEPARTMENT
Fire protection and paramedic service will be provided through contract with the Orange County
Fire Department. Three fire department sub-stations are located adjacent to the city boundaries.
Vlll. POLICE DEPARTMENT
Police services will be provided under contract with the Orange County Sheriff's Department.
IX. PUBLIC AND STAFF ATTITUDES
A. Public:
As evidenced by voter turnout and support for incorporation, the citizens of Laguna
Hills want responsive local government. One of the espoused goals for incorporation
is development of community recreation facilities, such as baseball fields.
The city is very clean and pleasant with no overt signs of graffiti or vandalism. Homes are
well cared for and maintained. Pride of ownership is evident.
B. Staff:
The City of Laguna Hills will be administered by Bruce E. Channing, who has been with
the City of Yorba Linda for the past 10 years, and is now Assistant City. He was selected
after a nationwide search. Mr. Channing has served as a Board Member of the
International City Management Association Foundation and on the Executive Committee
of the League of California Cities.
The Council elect is made up of professional people, all eager to develop city government
responsive to the community's needs.
4
X. SUMMARY AND EVALUATION
The new city leadership understands the concept of risk management and is cognizant that
certain potentially hazardous conditions, such as slopes and public roads need to be closely
evaluated as to the parameters of acceptable risk.
It is our conclusion that though certain exposures exist, the low loss experience, the well
planned and developed nature of the community, and the interest expressed by City Council
qualify the City of Laguna Hills for consideration for membership in the SCJPIA.
We also find that membership will be of advantage to the city by providing economical coverage,
and will be of advantage to the SCJPIA by expanding its ability to spread pooled losses.
X1. RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the application of the City of Laguna Hills, for membership in the Southern
California Joint Powers Insurance Authority be approved, subject to a coverage exclusion for land
movement, with an initial annual general liability primary deposit of $89,900 and an excess liability
deposit of $28,900 for a total annual liability deposit of $118,800.
tp/survey-laguna hills
AGENDA REPORT
AGENDA NO.
TO: Robert L. Van Nort, City Manager
MEETING DATE: November 5, 1991 REPORT DATE: October 30, 1991
FROM: Sid J. Mousavi, City Engineer/Public Works Director
TITLE: Notice of Completion for sidewalk construction on Brea Canyon Road at State Route 60
SUMMARY: The City Council, on August 6, 1991, awarded a contract to Nobest, Inc. for sidewalk
construction on Brea Canyon Road at SR 60 for a total contract amount of $9,894.40. The sidewalk
construction was completed on September 30, 1991.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council accept the work performed by Nobest, Inc.
and authorize the City Clerk to file the proper Notice of Completion.
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS:X Staff Report
_ Resolution(s)
Ordinances(s)
Agreement(s)
EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION:
SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST:
_ Public Hearing Notification
Bid Specification (on file in City Clerk's Office)
X Other Notice of Completion
1. Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed
by the City Attorney?
2. Does the report require a majority or 4/5 vote?
3. Has environmental impact been assessed?
4. Has the report been reviewed by a Commission?
Which Commission? N/A
5. Are other departments affected by the report?
Report discussed with the following affected departments: N/A
REVI D BY:
Robert L. Van Nort
City Manager
;1;17�
Terrence L. Belanger
Assistant City Manager
Yes X No
Majority
_ Yes X No
Yes X No
Yes X No
Sid J. Mousavi
Public Works Director
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
AGENDA NO.
MEETING DATE: November 5, 1991
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Robert L. Van Nort, City Manager
SUBJECT: Notice of Completion for sidewalk construction on
Brea Canyon Road at State Route 60
ISSUE STATEMENT
File and submit for recordation a Notice of Completion for sidewalk
construction on Brea Canyon Road at State Route 60.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council accept the work performed by Nobest,
Inc. and authorize the City Clerk to file the proper Notice of Completion.
FINANCIAL SUMMARY
The process of filing Notice of Completion has no financial impact on the
City's budget.
BACKGROUND
On August 6, 1991, the City Council awarded a contract to Nobest, Inc. for
sidewalk construction on Brea Canyon Road at SR 60. The total amount of
contract was for $9,894.40.
DISCUSSION
The sidewalk construction at said location was completed on September 30,
1991. The work is accordance with the designs and plans prepared by the
City.
PREPARED BY:
Sid Jalal Mousavi
CITY OP DIAMOND BAR
AGENDA REPORT AGENDA NO.
TO: Robert Van Nort, City Manager
MEETING DATE: October 19, 1991 REPORT DATE: October 29, 1991
FROM: James DeStefano, Community Development Director
TITLE: Cooperative Agreement for Preparation of the Tres Hermanos Specific Plan.
SUMMARY: The city of Industry Urban Development Agency and the City of Diamond Bar desire to develop
a Conceptual Specific Plan for the 800 acre Tres Hermanos Ranch property. In order to
coordinate the necessary studies associated with such a project, and to minimize cost and
expense to the public, a cooperative agreement between the two agencies is proposed in order
to develop the plan. The purpose of this report is to review an updated Cooperative Agreement.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council approve the Cooperative Agreement.
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS: X Staff Report
Resolution(s)
Ordinances(s)
X Agreement(s)
_ Public Hearing Notification
Bid Specification (on file in City Clerk's Office)
!Other
EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION:
City of Industry - Urban Development Agency
SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST:
1. Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed
X Yes _ No
by the City Attorney?
2. Does the report require a majority or 4/5 vote?
MAJORITY
3. Has environmental impact been assessed?
X Yes — No
4. Has the report been reviewed by a Commission?
_ Yes X No
Which Commission?
5. Are other departments affected by the report?
_ Yes X No
Report discussed with the following affected departments:
REVIEWED BY:
RobertL. Van Nort Terrence L. Belanger 0
Fames DeStefano
City Manager Assistant City Manager
Community Deve opment Director
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
AGENDA NO.
MEETING DATE: November 5, 1991
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: City Manager
SUBJECT: Cooperative Agreement for Preparation of the Tres
Hermanos Specific Plan.
ISSUE STATEMENT: A specific plan for the 800 acre Tres Hermanos Ranch
property is deemed necessary in order to facilitate
development of a new North Diamond Bar high school and
plan for the future development of the ranch property.
To minimize the cost and expense to the public, a
cooperative agreement between the City of Industry Urban
Development Agency and the City of Diamond Bar is
proposed in order to develop the plan.
On October 29, 1991, City Council reviewed the proposed
Cooperative Agreement and Consultant's Proposal. The
purpose of this report is to report back to the Council
with proposed amendments.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council approve the
Cooperative Agreement and authorize an expenditure of up
to $75,000 to prepare the Conceptual Specific Plan.
FINANCIAL SUMMARY:
BACKGROUND: On October 29, 1991, City Council reviewed an updated
Cooperative Agreement for preparation of the Tres
Hermanos Specific Plan. The City of Industry Urban
Development Agency and the City of Diamond Bar are
desirous of developing a Conceptual Specific Plan for the
800 acre Tres Hermanos Ranch property. The cost of the
Conceptual Plan has been estimated to be $150,000.
Diamond Bar's estimated participation is 50% of the cost
of the study. On October 22, 1991, the City of Industry
Urban Development Agency approved the Cooperative
Agreement.
On October 29, concerns were raised regarding the impact
approval of the contract may have on the negotiations
between the City of Industry and the Pomona School
District relative to the District's desire to acquire
acreage for the construction of a new high school. In
addition, corrections are necessary within the
consultant's proposal to clarify the process for public
participation. The City Attorney has contacted the
school district's legal counsel and will report its
findings in a separate correspondence to the Council.
The corrections have been made to the proposal from
Kotin, Regan & Mouchly, incorporating a public workshop
to be conducted by City Staff and/or the consulting team
STAFF REPORT
Tres Hermanos
Page Two
for purposes of gaining community input. This initial
public meeting will take place within 6 weeks from the
consultants notice to proceed. All affected
jurisdictions and constituencies will be invited to
participate in this process, including, but not limited
to, Metropolitan Water District, San Bernardino County,
Chino Hills, the General Public, etc. In addition, a
conceptual analysis of the property's potential, paying
particular attention to the high school site, will be
completed within 6 weeks from the notice to proceed
within the first 6 weeks of the contract.
Additionally, the proposal has been corrected to
eliminate conflicting statements regarding the public
participation process. Finally, the estimated budget for
Phase I has been refined. It is estimated that the
completion of Phase I will require four months from the
Consultant's Notice to Proceed. Upon Council
authorization, the City of Diamond Bar will enter into a
contract with the Consultant Team and begin the study.
DISCUSSION:
ARED BY:
JaiMs Destefano, Community Development Director
Irwin Kaplan, C'ty Planner Emeritus
Attachments: Cooperative Agreement
JDS:mco
day of
COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT FOR PREPARATION OF
TRES HERMANOS AREA SPECIFIC PLAN
This Agreement is made and entered into as of-thi-s
, 1991, by and between INDUSTRY URBAN
DEVELOPMENT AGENCY, a public entity ("INDUSTRY" sometimcs
hereinafter) and the CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, a municipal corporation
("DIAMOND BAR" sometimes hereinafter).
A. R29,kt412.
(i) INDUSTRY and DIAMOND BAR desire to develop a
Specific Plan for that area within the corporate limits of
DIAMOND BAR commonly referred to as a portion of the "Tres
Hermanos Ranch" ("the Property" hereinafter).
(ii) INDUSTRY and DIAMOND BAR desire to retain the
services of qualified persons to prepare a conceptual specific
plan for the Property, pursuant to the provisions of California
Government Code Sections 65850, et seq., including necessary
environmental documentation, on a coordinated basis with DIAMOND
BAR as the lead agency in order to minimize cost and expense to
the public, hereinafter in this Agreement, the preparation of a
conceptual specific plan for the Property shall be referred to as
the 'Plan".
(iii) INDUSTRY and DIAMOND BAR desire to set forth
their respective rights and obligations concerning the Plan -
1
NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto agree as follows:
1. DIAMOND BAR shall, in consultation with INDUSTRY,
prepare Request for Proposal(s) to seek the services of qualified
persons to prepare the Plan.
2. DIAMOND BAR shall be responsible for the
preparation of required documents and for the preparation and
award of contract(s) pursuant to applicable law for the
preparation of the Plan. Toward this end, DIAMOND BAR shall be
responsible for the preparation of all legal documents, including
the Request(s) for Proposal, related agreements, and insurance
requirements. DIAMOND BAR shall be solely responsible for the
administration and performance of the contract awarded to any
contractor(s) for the preparation of the Plan.
3. INDUSTRY and DIAMOND BAR agree to equally share the
costs associated with the preparation of the Plan. The parties
agree that the preliminary estimate for preparation of the Plan
is $150,000.00.
4. In the event proposal(s) submitted by responsible
proposers for the preparation of the Plan exceeds the preliminary
estimate, DIAMOND BAR shall not be empowered to award any
contract therefor or bind INDUSTRY to any such contract hereunder
without the prior written consent of INDUSTRY.
5. Upon approval of contract document(s) for
preparation of the Plan, DIAMOND BAR shall invoice INDUSTRY for
its pro -rata share of progress payments to person(s) engaged
thereby to prepare the Plan, monthly. INDUSTRY agrees to pay
E
DIAMOND BAR the amounts set forth in such itemized invoice within
twenty (20) days of receipt of the same. DIAMOND BAR further
agrees to provide to INDUSTRY copies of all invoices p -resented by
the persons) retained to prepare the Plan upon receipt of same.
G. DIAMOND BAR shall incorporate within the contract
documents with the person(s) retained to prepare the Plan
requirements for the proposers) to obtain and keep in full force
and effect throughout the life of the Plan preparation, for the
mutual benefit of DIAMOND BAR and INDUSTRY, a policy or policies
of comprehensive, broad form, general public liability and
automobile insurance against claims and liabilities for personal
injury, death, or property damage arising from the activities of
the proposer(s), in an amount and in form and content
satisfactory to DIAMOND BAR's City Attorney and INDUSTRY's
General Counsel. Said policies shall name DIAMOND BAR, INDUSTRY
and their respective elected and appointed officials, officers,
and employees as additional insureds and shall, additionally,
contain language providing for waiver of subrogation, that the
policies are primary and noncontributing with any insurance that
may be carried by the parties hereto and that said insurance may
not be canceled or materially changed except upon thirty (30)
days notice to DIAMOND BAR. DIAMOND BAR shall also require that
workers' compensation benefits are secured by the proposer(s) as
required by law.
7. INDUSTRY shall defend, indemnify and save harmless
DIAMOND BAR, its elected officials, officers and employees, from
3
e
all liability from loss, damage or injury to persons or property,
including any and all legal costs and attorneys' fees, in any
manner arising out of the performance, by INDUSTRY, i-ts-elected
and appointed officials, officers and employees of this Agreement
to the extent permitted by law.
8. DIAMOND BAR shall defend, indemnify and save
harmless INDUSTRY, its elected officials, officers and employees
from all liability from loss, damage or injury to persons or
property, including any and all legal costs and attorneys' fees,
in any manner arising out of the performance, by INDUSTRY, its
elected and appointed officials, officers and employees, of this
Agreement to the extent permitted by law.
9. In the event any action or proceeding is filed to
enforce this Agreement, or any term or provision hereof, the
prevailing party in any such action or proceeding shall be
entitled to its reasonable expenses, including costs and
attorneys' fees.
10. Mediation: Any dispute or controversy arising
under this Agreement, or in connection with any of the terms and
conditions hereof, shall be referred by the parties hereto for
mediation. A third party, neutral mediation service shall be
selected, as agreed upon by the parties and the costs and
expenses thereof shall be borne equally by the parties hereto.
In the event the parties are unable to mutually agree upon the
mediator to be selected hereunder, the City Council shall select
such a neutral, third party mediation service and the City
4
Council's decision shall be final.. The parties agree to utilized
their good faith efforts to resolve any such dispute or
controversy so submitted to mediation. It is specifically
understood and agreed by the parties hereto that referral of any
such dispute or controversy, and mutual good faith efforts to
resolve the same thereby, shall be conditions precedent to the
institution of any action or proceeding, whether at law of in
equity with respect to any such dispute or controversy.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed
this Agreement as bf the day and year first above written.
ATTEST:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
/General ounse
ATTEST:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Attorney
By "—-AA
Chairman
By—
Secretary
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, a municipal
corporation
By
Mayor
By
CIty Clerk
LU011UMACOOP\DS 2.5C 5