Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/11/1995Cit COUItc/l/ AGENDA Tuesday, July 11, 1995 6:30 P.M. Adjourned Regular Meeting South Coast Air Quality Management District Auditorium 21865 East Copley Drive Diamond Bar, California Mayor Mayor Pro Tem Phyllis E. Papen Gary H. Werner Council Member Eileen R. Ansari Council Member Clair W. Harmony City Manager Terrence L. Belanger City Attorney Michael Jenkins City Clerk Lynda Burgess Copies of staff reports, or other written documentation relating to agenda items, are on file in the Office of the City Clerk, and are available for public inspection. If you have questions regarding an agenda item, please contact the City Clerk at (909) 860-2489 during regular business hours. In an effort to comply with the requirements of Title R of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, the City of Diamond Bar requires that any person in need of any type of special equipment, assistance or accommodation(s) in order to communicate at a City public meeting, must inform the City Clerk a minimum of 72 hours prior to the scheduled meeting. Please refrain from smoking, eating or drinking in the Council Chambers. The City of Diamond Bar uses reQjcIed paper and encourages you to do the same. DIAMOND BAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING RULES PUBLIC INPUT The meetings of the Diamond Bar City Council are open to the public. A member of the public may address the Council on the subject of one or more agenda items and/or other items of which are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Diamond Bar City Council. A request to address the Council should be submitted in writing to the City Cleric. As a general rule the opportunity for public comments will take place at the discretion of the Chair. However, in order to facilitate the meeting, persona who are interested parties for an item may be requested to give their presentation at the time the item is called on the calendar. The Chair may limit the public input on any item or the total amount of time allocated for public testimony based on the number of people requesting to speak and the business of the Council. Individuals are requested to refrain from personal attacks toward Council Members or other persona. Comments which are not conducive to a positive business meeting environment are viewed as attacks against the entire City Council and will not be tolerated. If not complied with, you will forfeit your remaining time as ordered by the Chair. Your cooperation is greatly appreciated. In accordance with Government Code Section 54954.3(a) the Chair may from time to time dispense with public comment on items previously considered by the Council. (Does not apply to Committee meetings.) In accordance with State Law (Brown Act), all matters to be acted on by the City Council must be posted at least 72 hours prior to the Council meeting. In case of emergency or when a subject matter arises subsequent to the posting of the agenda, upon making certain findings, the Council may act on an item that is not on the posted agenda. CONDUCT IN THE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS The Chair shall order removed from the Council Chambers any person who commits the following acts in respect to a regular or special meeting of the Diamond Bar City Council. A. Disorderly behavior toward the Council or any member of the thereof, tending to interrupt the due and orderly course of said meeting. B. A breach of the peace, boisterous conduct or violent disturbance, tending to interrupt the due and orderly course of said meeting. C. Disobedience of any lawful order ofthe Chair, which shall include an order to be seated or to refrain from addressing the Board; and D. Any other unlawful interference with the due and orderly conduct of said meeting. INFORMATION RELATING TO AGENDAS AND ACTIONS OF THE COUNCIL Agendas for the regular Diamond Bar City Council meetings are prepared by the City Clerk and are available 72 hours prior to the meeting. Agendas are available electronically and may be accessed by a personal computer through a phone modem. Every meeting of the City Council is recorded on cassette tapes and duplicate tapes are available for a nominal charge. ADA REQUIREMENTS A cordless microphone is available for those persons with mobility impairments who cannot access the public speaking area. Sign language interpreter services are also available by giving notice at least three business days in advance of the meeting. Please telephone (909) 860-2489 between 8 am. and 5 p.m. Monday through Friday. HELPFUL PHONE NUMBERS Copies of Agenda, Rules of the Council, Cassette Tapes of Meetings (909) 860-2489 Computer Access to Agendas (909) 860 -LINE General Information (909) 860-2489 NOTE: ACTION MAY BE TAKEN ON ANY ITEM IDEN-t inxV ON THE AGENDA. 1. CALL TO ORDER: PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: ROLL CALL: Next Resolution No. 95-38 Next Ordinance No. 06(1995) 6:30 p.m. July 11, 1995 Mayor Papen Council Members Ansari, Harmony, Mayor Pro Tem Werner and Mayor Papen 2. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS, PROCLAMATIONS, CERTIFICATES: 2.1 Presentation to County of Los Angeles Department of Public Works for 6 years of service. 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. Although the City Council values your comments, pursuant to the Brown Act, the Council generally cannot take any action on items not listed on the posted 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. COUNCIL COI01ENTS: Items raised by individual Council - members are for Council discussion. Direction may be given at this meeting or the item may be scheduled for action at a future meeting. 5. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS: 5.1 CONCERT IN THE PARK - July 12, 1995 - "SHOUT" (60's Classics) - 6:30 - 8:00 p.m., Sycamore Canyon Park, 22930 Golden Springs Dr. 5.2 TRAFFIC & TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION - July 13, 1995 - 7:00 p.m., AQMD Board Hearing Room, 21865 E. Copley Dr. 5.3 CITY COUNCIL MEETING - July 18, 1995 - 6:30 p.m., AQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr. 5.4 CONCERT IN THE PARK - July 19, 1995 - "BILLY LEMON AND THE WARNING" (Rock n Roll) 6:30 - 8:00 p.m., Sycamore Canyon Park, 22930 Golden Springs Dr. 6. CONSENT CALENDAR: 6.1 APPROVAL OF MINUTES: JULY 11, 1995 PAGE 2 6.1.1 Adjourned Regular Meeting of May 17, 1995 - Approve as submitted. 6.1.2 Adjourned Regular Meeting of May 23, 1995 - Approve as submitted. 6.1.3 Budget Study Session of May 30, 1995 - Approve as submitted. Requested by: City Clerk 6.2 PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION MINUTES: 6.2.1 Regular Meeting of April 27, 1995 - Receive & File. 6.2.2 Regular Meeting of May 25, 1995 - Receive & File. Requested by: Community Services Director 6.3 VOUCHER REGISTER: Approve Voucher Register dated July 11, 1995 in the amount of $892,410.33. Requested by: City Manager 6.4 TREASURER'S REPORT - Receive & File Treasurer's Report for May, 1995. Requested by: City Manager 6.5 CLAIM FOR DAMAGES: 6.5.1 Filed by Denise A. Kilz June 20, 1995. Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council reject the request and refer the matter for further action to Carl Warren & Co., the City's Risk Manager. 6.5.2 Filed by Randi Tracy June 8, 1995. Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council reject the request and refer the matter for further action to Carl Warren & Co., the City's Risk Manager. Requested by: City Clerk 6.6 RELEASE OF GRADING CASH BOND POSTED FOR 2866 WAGON TRAIN IN "THE COUNTRY" - The Principal desires release of a cash bond posted for grading in the amount of $2,880. The City Engineer has found that all work has been completed on the approved "As -Built" grading plan. JULY 11, 1995 PAGE 3 Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council declare the obligations under the bond null and void and release the cash bond posted. Requested by: City Engineer 6.7 (A) RESOLUTION NO. 90-45J: RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR SETTING FORTH PERSONNEL RULES AND REGULATIONS REGARDING THE PAYMENT OF SALARIES, SICK LEAVE, VACATIONS, LEAVES OF ABSENCE, AND OTHER REGULATIONS. (B) RESOLUTION NO. 95 -XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA, ESTABLISHING A 401(A) DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN. With the adoption of the FY 95/96 Budget, the Council approved an increase in salaries of all part- and full- time classifications. The Council also approved an increase of the benefit plan amount by $50 per month. Staff is also proposing the addition of a 401A Deferred Compensation Plan, which allows eligible employees to contribute up to 25% of their salary, not to exceed $30,000 annually, if employees so desire. Currently, the City's Section 457 Deferred Compensation Plan provides for an annual deferred maximum amount of $7,500. Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 90-45J establishing salary ranges for all part- and full-time classifications and increases the employee benefit program payment by $50 per month; and adopt Resolution No. 90 -XX establishing a 401A Deferred Compensation Plan. Requested by: City Manager 6.8 AMENDMENT TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH ENVICOM REGARDING ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES FOR TM 46485 - Amendment to a contract for environmental services for an Environmental Impact Report analyzing environmental project impacts of an amendment to a proposed 53 lot subdivision located off Rocky Trail and Blaze Trail. Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council enter into an amended Professional Services Agreement with Envicom Corp. to provide environmental services for Tentative Tract No. 46485 in the amount of $41,751.90. Requested by: Community Development Director JULY 11, 1995 PAGE 4 6.9 RESOLUTION NO. 95 -XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA ADOPTING THE STATEMENT OF INVESTMENT POLICY - Submitted for Council's review and approval is the Proposed Investment Policy for FY 1995-96. Recommended Action: It is Council adopt Resolution No. 96 Investment Policy. Requested by: City Manager 7. PUBLIC HEARINGS: recommended that the City 95 -XX adopting the FY 1995- 7.1 RESOLUTION NO. 95 -XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR LEVYING AN ASSESSMENT ON CITY OF DIAMOND BAR LANDSCAPING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 38 FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1995-96 - On June 12, 1995, Council approved the Engineer's Report and adopted Resolution No. 95-27 declaring the City's intention to levy and collect assessments for District No. 38. Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 95 -XX to set the assessment for FY 1995-96 for Landscaping Assessment District No. 38. Requested by: City Engineer 7.2 RESOLUTION NO. 95 -XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR LEVYING AN ASSESSMENT ON CITY OF DIAMOND BAR LANDSCAPING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 39 FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1995-96 - On June 12, 1995, Council approved the Engineer's Report and adopted Resolution No. 95-27 declaring the City's intention to levy and collect assessments for District No. 39. Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 95 -XX to set the assessment for FY 1995-96 for Landscaping Assessment District No. 39. Requested by: City Engineer 7.3 RESOLUTION NO. 95 -XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR LEVYING AN ASSESSMENT ON CITY OF DIAMOND BAR LANDSCAPING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 41 FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1995-96 - On June 12, 1995, Council approved the Engineer's Report and adopted Resolution No. 95-27 declaring the City's intention to levy and collect assessments for District No. 41. JULY 11, 1995 PAGE 5 Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 95 -XX to set the assessment for FY 1995-96 for Landscaping Assessment District No. 41. Requested by: City Engineer 8. OLD BUSINESS: 8.1 LEASE OF OFFICE SPACE FOR CITY HALL - Shall the City lease office space, if so for what term of years; or continue to pursue the possibility of purchasing a building to serve as City Hall? Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council approve a one year lease for Suites 100 and 190, in the amount of $158,106; further, direct staff to pursue the purchase of a building for City Hall offices; and, hold a closed session on July 11, 1995 to give staff negotiation direction and authority. Requested by: City Manager 8.2 RESOLUTION NO. 95 -XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ADOPTING THE 1995 GENERAL PLAN FOR THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR - On May 9, 1995, Council held a public hearing on the draft 1995 General Plan. The public hearing was opened, testimony received, and corrections and changes made by Council. Resolution No. 95-21 incorporating Resolution No. 92-43 by reference and certifying the adequacy of the Addendum to the General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report was adopted. On May 9, 1995, Council discussed the possibility of placing the General Plan on the ballot. The meeting was continued to May 23, 1995 in order to provide options regarding the adoption of the 1995 General Plan. The May 23rd discussion was continued to June 20, 1995 and was further continued to July 11, 1995. Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council discuss the adoption of the 1995 General Plan and/or the placing on the ballot and adopt Resolution No. 95 -XX. Requested by: Community Development Director 9. NEW BUSINESS: None 10. ANNOUNCEMENTS: JULY 11, 1995 PAGE 6 11. CLOSED SESSION: Conference with Real Property Negotiator - Government Code Section 54956.8 Property: 1320 Valley Vista, Diamond Bar Negotiating Parties: Mr. Simon Chu City of Diamond Bar Under Negotiation: Price 12. ADJOURNMENT: In memory of Yetta Rosenberg. CITY OF DIAMOND BAR NOTICE OF PUBLIC XEETING AND AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS. CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ) The Diamond Bar City Council will hold an Adjourned Regular Meeting at the South Coast Air Quality Management District Auditorium, located at 21865 E. Copley Dr., Diamond Bar, California at 6:30 p.m. on Tuesday, July 11, 1995. 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 Regular Meeting of the Diamond Bar City Council, to be held on July 11, 1995 was posted at their proper locations. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct and that this Notice and Affidavit was executed this 7th day of July, 1995, at Diamond Bar, California. /s/ Lynda Burgess Lynda Burgess, City Clerk City of Diamond Bar TO: FROM: ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA #/SUBJECT: CITY CLERK Eel ` a c���_S DATE: ' ! — I I —% f3C / -) C ® u 4-S PHONE: Prys2oi e esfo ©ra L r' C c? 14 v} I n1 t o S�a e_ W I Lk 2i-Lcv— I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address as written above. Signature n TO: FROM: ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA #/SUBJECT: CITY CLERK `J C � '� ' r% t ' �" F DATE: P H 0 N E 7 I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address as written above. Sign TO: FROM: ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA #/SUBJECT: CITY CLERK DATE: ST. PHONE: I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address as written above. Signature TO: FROM: ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA #/SUBJECT: CITY CLERK / e- L �- ��f t S DATE:— j{U ��� T ��Q. I�13 PHONE: I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address as written above. i ,lam Signature [a TO: FROM: ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA #/SUBJECT: CITY CLERK DATE: WA I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address as written above. Signature TO: FROM: ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL CITY CLERK DATE: PHONE: AGENDA #/SUBJECT: I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address as written above. Signature U TO: FROM: ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA #/SUBJECT CITY CL K DATE: t- �L�-�//z NE: G g _-2 62 I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address as written above. jSignature VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL TO: FROM: ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: AGENDA #/SUBJECT: CITY CLERK DATE: PHONE: I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address as written above. Z. Signature D TO: FROM: ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA #/SUBJECT CITY CLERK`` DATE: PHONE: q // 1V I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address as written above. Signature VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL TO: FROM: ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: AGENDA #/SUBJECT: CITY CLERK W , . I b DATE: 7 PHONE: I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address as written above. W Signature VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL TO: FROM: ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: AGENDA #/SUBJECT: CITY CLERK �- L- � � DATE: S.. 2 a-2� & c f 0 c, �� PHONE: f . Cc-) c,)' /J —1 --dC- Lo % l L L ter` `7 Lo T LIIVL I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address as written above. Signature VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL TO: CITY CLERK FROM: eke s ".A.,J ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: AGENDA #/SUBJECT: DATE: 7 % f,-- C5- PHONE: mak,\ J I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address as written above. Signature VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL TO: CITY CLERK FROM ' / /,- ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: AGENDA #/SUBJECT: DATE: PHONE: I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address as written above. Signature VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL TO: CITY CLERK (} FROM: L� �� i`1 �\( DATE: 1 ADDRESS: PHONE: ORGANIZATION: AGENDA #/SUBJECT: f J� G' �_- Czr> J I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address as written above. '� Signa ure VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL TO: FROM: ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: AGENDA #/SUBJECT: CITY CLERK -7-�,7 '21 DATE: PHONE: I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address as written above. Signature VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL I TO: FROM: ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: AGENDA #/SUBJECT: CITY CLERK'' Z/ DATE: PHONE: I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address as written above. Signature Sigh t e 1. 6 4 I r iutwres 6I• TNC CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR MAY 17, 1995 CALL TO ORDER: M/Papen called the meeting to order at 6:38 p.m. in the AQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley, Diamond Bar, California. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance by C/Miller. ROLL CALL: Council Members Harmony, Miller, Mayor Pro Tem Werner and Mayor Papen. Council Member Ansari was excused. Also present were Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager; Frank Usher, Assistant City Manager; Michael Jenkins, City Attorney; George Wentz, City Engineer; James DeStefano, Community Development Director; Bob Rose, Community Services Director and Lynda Burgess, City Clerk. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS, PROCLAMATIONS, CERTIFICATES: None PUBLIC COMMENTS: COUNCIL COMMENTS: Taken on May 16, 1995. Taken on May 16, 1995. 5. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS: 5.1 CITY -ON-LINE TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE - May 17, 1995 - 7:00 p.m., Heritage Community Center, 2900 S., Brea Canyon Rd. 5.2 PLANNING COMMISSION - May 22, 1995 - 7:00 p.m., AQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr. 5.3 CITY COUNCIL MEETING (GENERAL PLAN) - May 23, 1995 - 6:30 p.m., AQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr. 5.4 PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION - May 25, 1995 - 7:00 p.m., AQMD Board Hearing Room, 21865 E. Copley Dr. 5.5 MEMORIAL HOLIDAY - May 29, 1995 - In observance City Offices will be closed. Will reopen Tuesday, May 30, 1995. 5.6 CITY COUNCILISTAFF WORK SESSION (BUDGET) - May 30, 1995 - 2:00 - 5:00 p.m., AQMD, Room CC2, 21865 E. Copley Dr. 5.6 CITY COUNCIL MEETING - June 6, 1995 - 6:30 p.m., AQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr. 5.7 TRAFFIC & TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION - June 8, 1995 - 6:30 p.m., AQMD Board Hearing Room, 21865 E. Copley Dr. C/Ansari arrived at 6:58 p.m. 6. CONSENT CALENDAR: C/Ansari requested that the April 18, 1995 Minutes be corrected on Page Two as follows: "C/Ansari reported that she was also in Sacramento on Wednesday, March 29, 1995 during the lobbying of the MRF issue. She advised that the Gonzalves Firm stayed neutral until March 31, 1995 MAY 17, 1995 PAGE 2 when the firm took sides with the City of Industry. She stated that everyone was surprised because there was no previous indication that Gonzalves and Sons would not remain impartial." C/Miller moved, MPT/Werner seconded to approve the Consent Calendar. With the following Roll Call vote, motion carried: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Harmony, Miller, MPT/Werner, M/Papen NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Ansari 6.1 APPROVED MINUTES - Regular Meeting of April 18, 1995 - as amended. 6.2 APPROVED VOUCHER REGISTER - dated May 16, 1995 in the amount of $378,371.75. 6.3 REJECTED CLAIM FOR DAMAGES - Filed by Big 0 Tires/Patti Schoe on April 21, 1995 - Referred matter for further action to Carl Warren & Company, the City's Risk Manager. 6.4 APPROVED NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR DIAMOND BAR BOULEVARD/ REHABILITATION PROJECT BETWEEN GRAND AVENUE AND BREA CANYON ROAD - Accepted work performed by Griffith Company and authorized the City Clerk to file the Notice of Completion and release any retention amounts. 6.5 AWARDED DESIGN SERVICES CONTRACT FOR LEFT -TURN SIGNAL PHASES AT THE INTERSECTIONS OF GOLDEN SPRINGS DRIVE AND DIAMOND BAR BOULEVARD, GOLDEN SPRINGS DRIVE AND BREA CANYON ROAD, AND DIAMOND BAR BOULEVARD AND MOUNTAIN LAUREL WAY - Awarded a contract for left -turn signal phase design services to DKS Associates in an amount not -to -exceed $8,600. 6.6 EXTENSION OF CONTRACT WITH LANTERMAN DEVELOPMENTAL CENTER FOR SUPPLEMENTAL WEED/LITTER ABATEMENT - Approved extension of the contract for supplemental week and litter abatement services with Lanterman Developmental Center in the total amount of $16,483 for FY 1995/96. 6.7 AUTHORIZED ADDITIONAL EXPENDITURES FOR GENERAL PLAN SERVICES - Authorized additional $15,000 toward completion of the General Plan. MAY 17, 1995 PAGE 3 7. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 7.1 CERTIFICATION OF MASTER ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 91-2 AND APPROVAL OF VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 47850, LOCATED EASTERLY OF STEEPLECHASE LANE AND SOUTH OF WINDMILL DR. ADJACENT TO THE PRIVATE GATED COMMUNITY KNOWN AS THE "THE COUNTRY'- At the request of applicant, continued to June 6, 1995. 8. OLD BUSINESS: 8.3 UPDATE ON INVESTIGATION OF FIRE ON GREAT BEND - CM/Belanger summarized a report prepared by the Fire Department and indicated that the time frame described at the May 2, 1995 Council meeting was essentially correct based on all information gathered from police and fire agencies. He further reported that Chief Lockhart had discussed the fire with the tenant occupying the house at the time of the fire. Martha Bruske, 600 So. Great Bend, reported on the sequence of events occurring at the time of the fire and expressed concern with clean up of this property. Further, she requested a report from fire and police agencies evidencing the "911" calls. Building & Safety Director Tarango stated that the City requested the owners' insurance company to provide a temporary fence, a fireplace strap in order to protect the neighbors north of the property and clean up of the property and they have complied with the first two requests. The tenant had personal items that needed to be picked up prior to property clean up. The insurance company planned to contact the tenants as soon as possible to pick up personal items so the clean up could begin. Max Maxwell, 3211 Bent Twig Ln., requested that the City give residents more information in regard to city events. Barbara Beach-Courchesne, 2021 Peaceful Hills Rd., felt unsafe in her home because of the mistakes of the fire and police agencies. Terry Birrell asked residents to support the City Council, the fire victims and the police/fire agencies and requested a summary of the hour-long conversation between Chief Lockhart and the tenant and that the summary be made available to the public. She was concerned regarding the time lag in the fire department's response. She suggested that staff look at building codes and possible electrical problems as well as review other fire situations MAY 17, 1995 PAGE 4 for response times. Red Calkins, 240 Eagle Nest Dr., commended both the Sheriff and the Fire Departments on always performing well and responding quickly to emergencies. Wilbur Smith, 21630 Fairwind Ln., requested that staff notify residents that their homes may contain aluminum wiring which should be inspected or replaced. MPT/Werner agreed with Mr. Calkins' comments and supported police, fire and rescue agents. He felt that it is the Council's responsibility to direct staff to cause certain actions as enumerated in staffs report. He questioned the "911" computer clock running five minutes fast and the fire department's response time. He then asked the Council to direct staff or the Mayor to prepare a letter for the Sheriffs department and California Highway Patrol regarding these issues. Further, he expressed concern regarding the length of time taken to clean up the property and requested that staff determine the normal response time. C/Harmony stated that the 8 -minute response time was too long. He commented on the "real" time kept on the "911" computer clock and advised that the conversations between the police department and the residents could be made available for public review. He asked staff to look into firms to provide aluminum wire testing to residents. C/Ansari suggested that staff include a "health and safety" check for homeowners in the quarterly newsletter. CM/Belanger indicated that for the June issue of the Windmill, there will be an article and tear out with suggestions and helpful hints in order to detect aluminum wiring. City staff and the insurance company have been sensitive to the needs of the fire victims to give them as much time as possible to recover their belongings. 8. OLD BUSINESS 8.1 (A) RESOLUTION NO. 95-21: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING THE ADDENDUM TO FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (SCH NO. 92081040) AND APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 51253, TO DEVELOP A 21 UNIT SUBDIVISION, LOCATED EAST OF MORNING SUN AVENUE AND NORTH OF PATHFINDER ROAD, IN DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA AND MAY 17, 1995 PAGE 5 MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF. (B) RESOLUTION NO. 95-22: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING AN ADDENDUM TO FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (SCH. NO. 92081040) AND APPROVAL OF HILLSIDE MANAGEMENT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 92-12 AND OAK TREE PERMIT 92-9, ASSOCIATED WITH THE DEVELOPMENT OF TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 51253, LOCATED EAST OF MORNING SUN AVENUE AND NORTH OF PATHFINDER ROAD IN DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - At the request of M/Papen, Robert Lane, Field Operations Supervisor for the Gas Co. reported that they had monitored the damage to Morning Sun Ave. caused by the landslide on a daily basis for the past three weeks. There is no leakage in the gas line and no danger to the gas lines. The Gas Co. will start to excavate the main on May 18, 1995 to make it available for an emergency. He indicated that he would provide a 24-hour emergency number to staff. M/Papen advised that Sasak and the Walnut Unified School District discussed this issue with staff and that the school district board had been in contact with their engineers to move forward to take necessary action. She also stated that Sasak engineers will be out on the site on 05/18/95 with a backhoe to create test pits. Sasak indicated that if land forms are shallow, they will complete the remedial work but not fix the problem; however, they will continue to monitor it on a daily basis. She asked staff to contact the Federal Emergency Management Agency for some type of relief for the property owners. CM/Belanger reported that Supervisor Dana's office and County Public Works staff had been contacted and that City engineering staff will meet with the County Public Works staff to discuss strategies that the City and the County may pursue in regard to this issue. In regard to the tentative map, M/Papen stated that staff provided an amendment, Exhibit C dated 05/16/95, correcting the number of oak trees on page 5, paragraph 10 as well as a memo from Mike Myers to the City Attorney indicating conditions discussed at the previous meeting. In response to M/Papen, CA/Jenkins advised that once the public has been heard and public testimony closed on a tentative tract map issue, the Brown Act does not compel the matter to be re -opened. He suggested that staff give an update status report to answer any questions and that the focus should be on approving the tentative tract map, not the hillslide. MAY 17, 1995 PAGE 6 C/Harmony moved, C/Ansari seconded to deny the project. CE/Wentz introduced language to be considered for a motion. He suggested that Council require the property owner to further bond for the work that he is agreeing to perform at the front end and that bond would run concurrent with the City's discussions of when all of the work would be completed so that the time frame on this particular bond would come due at the end of the repair period the two parties agreed to. He advised if this is the case, the City would be in a position, if the applicant did not complete the work, to receive the funds to complete the work. He advised that staff supported the conditions with the exception of a short sentence referring to the map being null and void. He suggested adding "owner agrees at owners' sole expense...." and "final execution of this resolution be conditioned on the applicant posting security with the City in the amount of $1,000,000 to guarantee performance of the above specified worts in the time frame specified..." He also advised that the paragraph identified as "the expending of $25,000 dollars to abate the immediate hazards..." also be included in the conditions paragraph. In response to M/Papen, CE/Wentz advised that the $1,000,000 bond would be released at such time as the grading work is completed, particularly for the landslide. M/Papen asked if the $25,000 to expedite abatement of the immediate hazards would be handled through an escrow account. CE/Wentz stated that the original plan was for the $25,000 to be placed in an escrow account. M/Papen moved, MPT/Werner to adopt the Resolutions including the three Condition paragraphs as additional conditions of approval along with the revisions to Exhibit C. Jan Dabney, Sasak Property Manager, advised that the owner was not present for agreement. In response to C/Harmony, CA/Jenkins advised that under Parliamentary Rules of Procedure, a motion to amend and a substitute motion are generally similar and are treated the same. He stated that the motion to amend or the substitute motion are allowed as long as they pertain to the subject matter of the original motion. In this case, the motion is, in effect, a substitute motion because passage of the motion would render the original motion moot. MAY 17, 1995 PAGE 7 C/Harmony asked if the Council approves the development project contingent upon the developer resolving his problems, what's the relationship between the upper slope and the other property owners. CA/Jenkins advised that there would be no relationship. C/Harmony expressed concern that the Council could approve the development project when it affects adjacent property owners and the school district. CM/Belanger advised that the conditions recited by the City Engineer indicate that the property owner must prove, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and our geotechnical consultants, that the project can in fact be accomplished in a safe fashion. C/Harmony expressed concern in not hearing any expertise advise to determine the cause of the landslide and the amount of money to remediate the problem instead of repairing the hillside. He asked how much the $25,000 would buy the City if the developer stops the work. CM/Belanger agreed with C/Harmony in that the problem needs to be determined and addressed before any remedial repair is completed for the time being. CENVentz assured the Council that it is the intent of the applicant to insure that actions taken at the site and other recommended actions are based upon sound criteria, field data and field testing. The intent of the paragraph relating to the $25,000 was in response to a good faith gesture from the applicant and in an effort to resolve any minor problems or some immediate needs to assure that action was initiated promptly. C/Harmony argued against the motion due to the financial implications and giving the applicant an economic incentive. He advised that he would like to reword his motion to deny the project without prejudice which would allow the applicant to resubmit his project once all of the engineering information is completed. He requested that the motion be separated from the declaration of public nuisance and that it include Sasak and all adjacent properties affected by the hillside. MPT/Werner suggested adding the following wording to the current conditions "to the extent that the reconnaissance information or remediation efforts reveal that an unsafe geologic or soils condition emanates from properties or a source beyond the scope and limits herein, the owner may request and the city will provide its best efforts to foster a coordinated multi- MAY 17, 1995 PAGE 8 jurisdiction or multi -property owner resolution." CM/Belanger explained that the statement had the effect of informing and providing certain comfort to the property owner in terms of confronting a situation under which he has no actual control. He didn't feel that this was a condition to be included for a tentative map. CA/Jenkins agreed with CM/Belanger's comments in that the City would want to impose conditions on the applicant and not on the City and it does not belong in the Resolution. C/Ansari reiterated the she would like these two issues separated because she did not feel the 21 lots would fit on this land and that the project does not fit in the neighborhood. M/Papen asked if the applicant agreed to the revised conditions. Mr. Dabney asked for clarification of the final clause which states "final execution of the resolution, etc. and the $1,000,000 bonding." CA/Jenkins answered that the applicant would put up a surety bond to guarantee remediation of the slide and that would be required with a time schedule established by the City Engineer for remediation of the slide and if this was not remediated within that period of time by the applicant, the City could call the bond and compel the surety company to either perform the necessary work or pay the amount of money from the bond necessary to do so. Mr. Dabney stated that this puts the owner in an unusual position which makes him accountable for the entire circumstance and whether or not he can abate that problem. He also stated that the secondary consideration is the abatement of the problem from the applicant's circumstance --and does the bond exceed the actual value of the property. The applicant has offered to go out to the site with his geotechnical advisors to investigate the site to try and rectify this problem immediately, upon receiving that information from the site, funding $25,000 to abate whatever the applicant can to resolve and save the street for the people that are in the immediate area. He expressed concern regarding there being no indication of a time line and advised that the $1,000,0000 would be a hardship on the applicant and requested that it be reduced to $250,000. RECESS: M/Papen recessed the meeting at 8:12 p.m. MAY 17, 1995 PAGE 9 RECONVENE: M/Papen reconvened the meeting at 8:34 p.m. At the request of MPT/Werner, CE/Wentz indicated that the following paragraph is intended to replace the $1,000,000 performance bond paragraph: 'The applicant shall, upon approval herein, immediately commence to remediate the adverse soils and geotechnical aspects of the site. Within 30 days of this approval, the applicant shall submit to the City Engineer, for his review and approval, a reconnaissance study prepared by a licensed and certified engineer/geologist providing a plan of remediation of the unsafe soil and geologic conditions. Within 60 days of the approval herein, the applicant shall post a surety bond in a form acceptable to the City Attorney to cover the cost plus 20% for the remediation efforts conditioned and attributable to the property." CA/Jenkins stated that this condition was unorthodox in the sense that the City is attempting to use the subdivision map as a vehicle for accomplishing a short term objective on the property. If some aspect of this were to fail, he wasn't sure what the implications would be; however, he had no objections to the concept underlying the language. In response to MPT/Werner, CA/Jenkins advised that a Closed Session would not be appropriate unless there had been an explicit threat of litigation against the City and not unless the Council is contemplating initiating litigation. M/Papen stated that in a previous meeting, she moved to approve this tentative map with 18 or 19 homes. She directed a question to C/Ansari if she would consider this project if the number of homes was at 18 or 19. C/Ansari stated that she would like the developer to do the grading within his property line, build a fair number of homes, approximately 14 or 15 homes, on his property and to conform to the neighborhood. C/Miller stated that the developer should be requested to put up a non- refundable $250,000 bond within 7 days of approval that the work will be completed and in 60 days, that bond is substituted by the actual cost of improvements plus the 20%. Mr. Patel agreed to place a $250,000 bond (non-refundable) within 7 days of approval and within 60 days, the bond will be replaced with the full amount of the necessary repairs plus 20%. At the request of M/Papen, CE/Wentz read the following Conditions: No. 67 MAY 17, 1995 PAGE 10 "Owner agrees at owner's sole cost and expense that owner will make all investigations, analyses, recommendations and reports as required by the City Engineer concerning all geotechnical aspects of this site along with a preparation of all plans and specifications necessary for the remedy of all adverse geological and soils aspects of the site. All reports, plans and specifications shall be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval. All approvals and permits shall be obtained and all earth work and other construction necessary shall be performed to make this property safe from landslides, settlements, slippage and all other geological and soils conditions and to cause this property to not pose any danger or hazard to nor have any adverse effect in the adjacent properties. All work shall be performed in a time frame and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer." No. 68 "Final execution of this resolution is conditioned on the applicant posting surety with the City in the amount of $250,000 within 7 days of this City Council approval to guarantee performance of the above specified work in the time frame specified. No. 69'The applicant shall, upon approval herein, immediately commence to remediate the adverse soils and geotechnical aspects of the site. Within 30 days of this approval, the applicant shall submit to the City Engineer for his review and approval, a reconnaissance study prepared by a licensed and certified engineer/geologist acceptable to the City of Diamond Bar providing a plan for remediation of the unsafe soil and geologic conditions. Within 60 days of the approval herein, the applicant shall post a surety bond in a form acceptable to the City Attorney to cover the costs plus 20% of the remedial efforts identified and attributable to this property." Add'This bond would replace the earlier $250,000 bond." C/Miller asked if these conditions guarantee that the work will move expeditiously and that damaged area will be repaired and made safe. CE/Wentz advised that within 60 days, we will be assured that we would have bonds sufficient to cover the extent of work that has been identified in the plan prepared. C/Miller asked when will mitigation commence to stop the damage that is occurring presently and if there is any work that can be done now prior to the 45 days; and is the 45 days expeditious. CE/Wentz reported that mitigation will commence no sooner than 45 days. He also advised that this hillslide should not be touched until it is certain what the cause is. He stated that the 45 days is reasonable; however, he advised that he will be encouraging the applicant to accelerate that to the extent possible so that time frame is not exceeded. C/Miller requested that the above statements be added to the conditions. MAY 17, 1995 PAGE 11 In response to M/Papen, CE/Wentz proposed Condition No. 70 "Final execution of this resolution is conditioned on the applicant expending $25,000 to abate the immediate hazards on the property in accordance with the recommendations of a professional geologist and registered soils engineer retained by the applicant and with the final approval of the City Engineer. CA/Jenkins suggested an addition to Condition No. 69 "The Mayor shall not be authorized to execute this resolution and the approval of this tentative tract map shall not be considered final unless this condition shall have been satisfied." M/Papen asked CA/Jenkins to identify the paragraphs that would condition whether or not the Mayor would be authorized to sign the documents. CA/Jenkins advised paragraphs 68, 69 and 70. M/Papen asked Mr. Patel if he agreed with the new conditions. Mr. Patel stated that he agreed. C/Harmony asked if the applicant could comply with these conditions on a financial level. MPT/Werner asked if the additional changes to the conditions warrant a re- opening of public comments. CA/Jenkins advised that it is the Council's decision; however, the law does not compel the Council to re -open the public hearing because the project remains the same. Responding to C/Harmony, MPT/Werner stated that, whatever Mr. Patel's financial condition, he is the owner of the property and the conditions on the property will cause a financial impairment on his property. He felt it was appropriate to bring a conclusion to Mr. Patel's four-year long effort for approval of the project. CE/Wentz read the complete conditions as follows: No. 67 "Owner agrees at owner's sole cost and expense that owner will make all investigations, analyses, recommendations and reports as required by the City Engineer concerning all geotechnical aspects of this site along with a preparation of all plans and specifications necessary for the remedy of all adverse geological and soils aspects of the site. All reports, plans and specifications shall be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval. All MAY 17, 1995 PAGE 12 approvals and permits shall be obtained and all earth work and other construction necessary shall be performed to make this property safe from landslides, settlements, slippage and all other geological and soils conditions to cause this property to not pose any danger or hazard to nor have any adverse effect in the adjacent properties. All work shall be performed in a time frame and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer." No. 68 "Final execution of this resolution is conditioned on the applicant posting security with the City in the amount of $250,000 within 7 days of City Council approval. This is to guarantee performance of the above specified work in the time frame specified. The Mayor shall not be authorized to execute this Resolution and the tentative tract map shall not be deemed approved unless this condition is satisfied. No. 69'The applicant shall, upon approval herein, immediately commence to remediate the adverse soils and geotechnical aspects of the site. Within 30 days of this approval, the applicant shall submit to the City Engineer for his review and approval, a reconnaissance study prepared by a licensed and certified engineer/geologist acceptable to the City of Diamond Bar providing a plan for remediation of the unsafe soil and geologic conditions. Within 60 days of the approval herein, the applicant shall post a surety bond in a form acceptable to the City Attorney to cover the costs plus 20°x6 of the remedial efforts identified and attributable to this property." "The Mayor shall not be authorized to execute this Resolution and the tentative tract map shall not be deemed approved unless this condition is satisfied. No. 70 "Final execution of this resolution is conditioned on the applicant expending $25,000 to abate the immediate hazards on the property in accordance with the recommendations of a professional geologist and registered soils engineer retained by the applicant and with the final approval of the City Engineer. The Mayor shall not be authorized to execute this Resolution and the tentative tract map shall not be deemed approved unless this condition is satisfied." M/Papen moved, MPT/Werner seconded to adopt RESOLUTION NO.95- 21: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING THE ADDENDUM TO FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (SCH NO. 92081040) AND APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 51253, TO DEVELOP A 21 UNIT SUBDIVISION, LOCATED EAST OF MORNING SUN AVENUE AND NORTH OF PATHFINDER ROAD, IN DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF and RESOLUTION NO. 95-22: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING AN ADDENDUM TO FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (SCH. NO. 92081040) AND APPROVAL OF HILLSIDE MANAGEMENT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 92-12 AND OAK TREE PERMIT 92-9, ASSOCIATED WITH THE DEVELOPMENT OF TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 51253, LOCATED EAST OF MORNING SUN AVENUE AND NORTH OF PATHFINDER ROAD MAY 17, 1995 PAGE 13 IN DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF. Motion carried by the following Rall Call vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Miller, MPT/Wemer, M/Papen NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Ansari, Harmony ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None 8.2 MODIFICATION OF THE DEDICATED RIGHT TO PROHIBIT THE CONSTRUCTION OF RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS WITHIN A PORTION OF LOT 1, TRACT NO. 31479 - CE/Wentz reported that this matter would usually only be before the City Engineer; however, there is an issue related to the current prohibition of construction across the entire parcel of the existing Lot 1, Parcel C. He stated that Parcel C butts up to Lodgepole Rd. within "The Country." The applicant proposed that the restriction of construction on the existing Lot 1 (larger portion of Parcel C) be lifted to construct one home on any part of the newly -created Parcel C. He stated that the intent would be to take access from Lodgepole Rd. and it would be up to the applicant for the appropriate access to the site. Existing easements and other restrictions across the property would remain in place unless the applicant asked to have certain easements relocated or modified. The issue before the Council is whether or not the Council believes the current prohibition of any construction across that larger parcel should in fact be modified. M/Papen asked what area is the area where the applicant is requesting permission to build one house and what area would have restrictions for no residential property. ACE/Michael Meyers identified Lot 7 fronting Lodgepole. He advised that the applicant is proposing to modify the prohibition on Lot 1 and that the remaining portions of Lot 1 will remain as the "no building" prohibition. In response to M/Papen, ACE/Meyers stated that the approximate depth for the two areas behind Longview and Knoll Ct. is 100'. MPT/Werner insisted that the buffer be no less then 100' on the remainder of the parcel and requested more information on the house and accessories. C/Ansari stated that the Council discussed this property's development in the past. She expressed concern over honesty from the developer and requested a scheduled meeting to announce the proposed lot adjustments to the surrounding property owners. Responding to C/Harmony, CE/Wentz advised that he is unsure of the MAY 17, 1995 PAGE 14 owners' motivations other than having the option of placing a residence on any part of the newly created lot as opposed to the current Lot 7. Further, the current structure was condemned due to local soils problems and it is unknown if the property owner can rebuild on that site. Parcel A is separated on the map because it will remain a buffer. ACE/Meyers stated that Parcel A consists of a portion of all of Lot 61 which also has residential building restriction rights dedicated. The remaining portion of Parcel 1, which is combined to make this new Parcel A, is an easement that is dedicated to LAD 39. Responding to C/Harmony, CE/Wentz stated that the engineering staff has not received any other applications. The only proposal which has been received for this project includes the lot line adjustment. M/Papen advised that the Council revised the land usage in the General Plan which would make anything proposed previously not buildable. She asked staff to discuss the land use designation in the General Plan. RECESS: M/Papen recessed the meeting at 9:30 p.m. RECONVENE: M/Papen reconvened the meeting at 9:38 p.m. CDD/DeStefano explained that the property is associated with a tract of homes approved in the late 1970's by the County and developed in the late 1970's and early 80's. This property is zoned RPD 20,0002U which is a creative planned development type zone. The zoning has not changed on this property as a result of the Council's General Plan deliberations. The Council has tentatively established a rural residential land use classification for Lot 7 (small piece), Lot 1 (large piece) and Lot 61 (small piece adjacent to Summit Ridge and Grand Ave.). There is a 7.5 acre strip behind the homes (north of Lot 1) that Council has designated as open space. The only application before the City was for the parcel map which covered Lots 61 and 1 and was designed to remove some of the property restrictions that exist and to merge those properties into one. Open space is approximately 7 1/2 acres. Lot A is the buffer for the homes to the north. C/Harmony asked staff to describe how the General Plan Advisory Committee treated this property. CDD/DeStefano responded that GPAC looked at the City's 20 sq. mi. and designated a number of properties that contained various map or deed restrictions as open space. This particular property, Lot 1 and 61, was MAY 17, 1995 PAGE 15 designated by the GPAC as open space. This was based on their recommendation that all properties with this type of restriction be designated as open space. In responses to MPT/Werner, CDD/DeStefano explained that open space designated properties have a description of "areas designated as open space provide recreational opportunities, preservation of scenic and environmental values, protection of resources, water reclamation and conservation, protection of public safety and preservation of animal life. This designation also includes lands which may have been restricted to open space by map restriction, deed/designation, condition and/or restriction or by an open space easement pursuant to GC Section 51070. This designation carries with it a maximum development potential of one single family unit per existing parcel unless construction was previously restricted or prohibited on such properties by the County of Los Angeles." MPT/Werner clarified that the owner is requesting to merge Lot 7 and a portion of Lot 1 into one parcel which would reduce the original four lots into three. He also commented that the house on Lodgepole would be demolished on one of those lots and proposing to reconstruct one residential house in a location better suited for the size of the property. CA/Jenkins stated that the restriction gives the right to the City to prohibit the construction of any residential building on the site. MPT/Werner asked if the 'one residential structure" wording was added, what guarantees does the City have to assure that is the end of it and there are no more requests, rights or opportunities. CDD/DeStefano advised that there is no guarantee. He advised that by modifying the restrictions so that they remain on the property covenant or restriction. MPT/Werner asked if "any use beyond one residential dwelling unit" wording could be subject to a vote of a certain area or community. CA/Jenkins indicated that a future property owner could challenge it. C/Ansari interpreted the restrictions that almost anything else (stables, tennis courts, etc.) could be built on that property but residential buildings were restricted. CM/Belanger explained that if Council denied the request, then there will be a right to build a single dwelling unit where the current lot exists on MAY 17, 1995 PAGE 16 Lodgepole. On Lot #1, any other kind of use that is allowed in a residential zone, except for a residential structure, can be constructed. If Council modified the building restriction, then what would be permitted would be the location of a single family residence anywhere within that larger area. Regarding the right to prohibit construction of residential buildings, there is also a reciprocal statement which is to permit the building of residential buildings. The restriction that would remain, if Council did not modify the language on the newly -created parcel, would permit construction of accessory uses or any other similar use on that portion of the property. It just would not allow construction of a single-family residence. That restricted area is connected to an area that does allow for construction of a residential house. Under the City's zoning ordinance, there must be a single-family residence before accessory uses are constructed. M/Papen asked if the Council could leave the building restrictions on the property and transfer the right to build to on that one acre to another acre within the parcel. CM/Belanger advised it is the Council's prerogative to prohibit residential building. He stated that the restricted area can be anywhere on the property. Charles Williams stated that he was against development of this property and asked that the restriction not be removed. He asked what the residents in the City would be getting in return for this development. Teresa Guber, 24303 Rimford PI., asked how the construction of one house on that street would benefit the City; how can the residents stop the Council from approving the project at this time so that residents in the area can be notified; how to block C/Miller from voting on the project because he had a prior interest. Mike Long, 1648 Longview, asked why is there such a hurry on this project. Randy Schue, Rimford PI., asked what type of ownership transfers have occurred in this project and what the intentions are for this lot. David Capestro, 1652 Longview, reminded the Council that the Planning Commission recommended no building on this lot and that the Council itself voted against it previously. Gordan Guber, 24303 Rimford PI., opposed removing map restrictions on Lots 1 and 61. MAY 17, 1995 PAGE 17 Wilbur Smith, 21630 Fairwind Ln., commented that the only alternative that these residents have is by going to court. Max Maxwell, 3211 Bent Twig Ln., stated that he does not want to see any building on this lot. He shared a map indicating map restrictions for Lot 1. Lee Chen, 1531 Summit Ridge Dr., advised that her neighbors and her family bought their homes in this neighborhood because of its quiet and safety. She stated that she did not want to see any construction on this property and asked that a public hearing be held so that all residents in the area can be notified before a decision is made. Calvin Lin, Lodgepole, expressed concern over building on this property because development would ruin the "country living" and increase traffic problems. Dr. Radnigy, 24155 Lodgepole, stated that he is opposed to building on the property. Robert Brodney, 24316 Knoll Ct., requested C/Miller to abstain from voting on this matter. He expressed concern over the many unanswered questions surrounding this property and asked Council and staff to look into the matter further before voting on it. Juan Matos, 1551 Summit Ridge, lives directly across from the proposed road and is totally opposed to building on this property. Don Schad, 1824 Shaded Wood Rd:, requested that Council pay attention to GPAC when they voted unanimously to keep the property restricted from building. Terry Birrell concurred with the previous speakers that this property not be developed and advised that it property contains designated open space for public health and safety reasons relating to soil conditions and that the property is within a flood hazard area. Barbara Beach-Courchesne, 2021 Peaceful Hills Rd., reminded Council that both the Planning Commission and the Council said no to development on this land in the past. Why should it be changed now. Karen Capestro, 1652 Longview Dr., stated that she and her neighbors do not want the building restriction lifted. James Siecke, 24320 Rimford PI., supported his neighbors and opposed MAY 17, 1995 PAGE 18 development of this property. Sue Pang, 24336 Rimford PI., opposed the project. Emma Chow requested the Council to vote no and leave the land restricted. Autsku Akita, 24300 Rimford PI., stated that she was opposed to development of the property. Joseph Shu, 1820 Derringer Ln., advised that he has tiled a letter with the City Manager's office to oppose the building on this property. Steven Chang, 1531 Summit Ridge Dr., opposed any building on this property. Chin Wan, 15337 Summit Ridge, strongly opposed any building on this property. Mel Tan, 1537 Summit Ridge Dr., concurred with all of the other residents in that no building on this property be allowed. He asked that if this proposal passes, who will be compensating current home owners for depreciation of their homes. Ruth and George Barrett, 1884 Shaded Wood Rd., strongly opposed development of this land due to the map restrictions. Elizabeth Ui, 24316 Rimford PI., also opposed development of this property. Responding to residents' concerns, CM/Belanger advised that, currently, there is no development proposal for a house or a subdivision on this property. A public hearing would be held before development could take place. This is a request to modify the wording on the map in the manner previous discussed. Regarding the variance process, requires public hearing at the Planning Commission level with specific findings and a public hearing at the City Council level. In response to the question one per lot to more than one per lot, CDD/DeStefano explained that that issue cannot be completed through a variance; it requires discussion of the map restrictions upon the property and a process to review the proposal of at least two lots with public hearings before the Planning Commission and City Council. CE/Wentz advised that in regard to Lot 28, the City has not received any formal requests of any property transfers or easement matters. In the MAY 17, 1995 PAGE 19 response to questions of why is a lot line adjustment needed, he advised that from staffs point of view, as long as the application complies with the requirements of the subdivision map act, staff is bound to process that application through the appropriate reviews and findings. Regarding roads on the north end of Parcel C, there are no prescribed or intended road easements and all restrictions currently remain in place. In response to M/Papen, CA/Jenkins confirmed that the issue was not a public hearing issue and when the matter is addressed at the next meeting, it can be shall be addressed by the Council only, if they so desire. Council concurred. Jan Dabney, Project Manager advised that he would like to hold his comments until the May 23, 1995 City Council meeting. C/Ansari moved, C/Harmony seconded to notice this matter as a public hearing. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Ansari, Harmony, MPT/Werner NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - M/Papen ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Werner ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Miller MATTERS CONTINUED TO MAY 23,1995: 9. NEW BUSINESS: 9.1 AWARD OF PROJECT MANAGEMENT SERVICES TO RJM DESIGN GROUP FOR THE MAPLE HILL PARK RETROFIT PROJECT. 9.2 CITY ENTRANCE SIGNS. 10. ANNOUNCEMENTS: M/Papen appointed MPT/Werner and M/Papen to participate on an Ad Hoc Committee for Animal Control. 11. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business to conduct, M/Papen adjourned the meeting at 11:34 p.m. to May 23, 1995 at 6:30 p.m. ATTEST: Mayor LYNDA BURGESS, City Clerk INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO- Honorable Mayor and Members of Cityy Council FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, City Managet/ �7 RE: City Hall Office Space DATE- July 3, 1995 ISSUE Shall the City lease office space, if so for what term of years; or, continue to pursue the possibility of purchasing a building to serve as City Hall? RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council approve a one year lease for Suites 100 and 190, at 21660 E. Copley Drive, in the amount of $158,106. It is further recommended that the City Council direct staff to pursue the purchase of a building, for City Hall offices; and, hold a closed session on July 11, 1995 to give staff negotiation direction and authority. DISCUSSION: On June 20, 1995, staff provided the Council with a memorandum (attached), which discussed proposed four year leases with Seeley (current lessor) and SCAQNM. The staff recommended that the City Council approve a four year lease with Seeley, for Suites 150 and 190 (9098 sq.ft.). The staff was asked to bring back to the Council a lease proposal with a shorter term of years. Also, the Council expressed continuing interest in purchasing a building for use as City Hall. As regards a shorter term of years for an office space lease the following are the Seeley and SCAQMD alternatives: Seeley: Year One: Suites 100/190 (3 mos@1.66/ft) $ 34,984.50 Ops expenses Suites 100/190 4,542.00 Suites 150/190 (9 mos@1.65/ft) $135,105.30 $174,632.00 Year Two: Suites 150/190 (12 mos@1.75/ft) $191,058.00 $191,058.00 $365,690.00 LEASE SPACE JULY 3, 1995 PAGE TWO SCAQMD: Year One: 9,100 sq.ft. @ 1.55/ft Year Two: 9,100 sq. ft. @ 1.60/ft $169,260.00 $174,720.00 $169,260.00 $174.720,00 $343,980.00 Over the two year term of the lease, the difference in cost between the Seeley proposal and the SCAQMD proposal is $21,710, with the Seeley lease being the higher of the two. Suite 100/190 & Building Purchase Alternative: Another office space alternative is the pursuit of the purchase of a building for City Hall offices. There is a 10,505 sq. ft. office building available, located at 1320 S. Valley Vista. The building owners' agent is Simon Chu Associates. It is recommended that the Council and staff meet in closed session to discuss the negotiating parameters for possible building purchase. If the Council decides to pursue the purchase of a building, staff suggests that the current office lease agreement, between the City and Diamond Bar Business Associates, for Suites 100/190, at 21660 E. Copley Drive, be extended for FY'1995-96. The total lease cost would be $166,433.64. Holding Over Cost Impact: The existing lease between Diamond Bar Business Associates and the City contains a holding over clause (Section 26). The holding over clause provides that the Lessee (City), with the Lessor's (DBBA) consent, may remain in possession of the premises, after the expiration of the lease term, here June 30, 1995. Such occupancy shall be a tenancy from month to month, except the rent payable shall be two hundred percent (200%) of the rent payable immediately preceding the termination date of the lease. The monthly hold over amount would be $24,748.94, plus $1,495 for ops expenses ($26,243.94). This hold over clause would not be effected if the City were to ultimately enter into a lease agreement. This hold over cost provides a compelling reason to give serious consideration to continuing the leasing of office space at 21660 E. Copley Drive, at least for a one year term. SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT TECHNICAL SUPPORT SERVICES MEMORANDUM DATE: July 11, 1995 TO: Mayor Papen & Members of Diamond Bar City Council FROM: Nick Nikkil(04 SUBJECT: Space Leasing at SCAQMD's Diamond Bar Headquarters Building My current understanding is that the discussion over office space for Diamond Bar's city government has changed and the council now plans to continue its current lease for one year and to search for a suitable building to purchase. If that is the case, our site would not be appropriate for consideration since our building is not for sale. If that is not the case, we believe our most recent offer represents superior office space at the least cost. My purpose in communicating with you stems from my recent viewing of the video tape of your council meeting on June 20th. At that meeting you discussed the choices of leasing 9100 square feet at the SCAQMD headquarters building or 9098 square feet at your current location. I was surprised and dismayed to hear comments such as, "they [SCAQMD] are throwing up roadblocks to leasing their office space" (Council Member Ansari) and, "they [SCAQMD] are not being realistic" (Council Member Harmony). Having been involved in every step of the discussion process regarding the potential lease with city staff, I can only conclude the true facts were not conveyed to the council. With that in mind, this communication is intended to describe the process and offer made by the SCAQMD. It is correct that when the city initially approached the District in early 1994 and inquired about the availability of office space we had not yet reached a decision regarding the lease of any of our building space and, therefore, responded in the negative. Since the down sizing of our staff, we have further considered the matter and decided to pursue the leasing of available office space to appropriate parties. At that time, I approached the city manager, Terry Bellanger, and inquired if the city would still be interested in the headquarters building. He indicated interest and we toured the available space. No concern was expressed about the size of the space (12,000 square feet) other than a comment that it would accommodate future city growth. On that basis, a lease cost was developed and communicated to Mr. Bellanger. The initial cost provided was a four year fixed rate of $1.50 per square foot plus common area maintenance charges of $1,000 per month. Given the uncertainties associated with the Southern California economy, we felt it would be especially valuable to the city to have a fixed rate. We indicated the partitions would remain, extra modular furniture would be made available, and we would be willing to consider making changes to the current configuration depending on the amount of work and cost. It was our perception this offer was met with significant interest. Surprisingly, we did not hear anything from the city for quite some time. Recently, we were informed the amount of space was more than needed. We responded the size could be reduced to 9,100 square feet. We were informed the total cost was higher than the cost associated with the property offered by Seeley. It was suggested that we look at a lower initial rate combined with annual step increases. We were informed the Seeley property was 9,098 square feet available at a total 48 month cost of $715,102.80. We dropped the common area maintenance charge and responded with a package having a total 48 month cost of $709,800. That package contained a lower initial rate, as requested, with annual step increases. The costs for either of the two properties would be virtually the same during years one and two and lower for the SCAQMD property during years three and four. The end result was superior space at the least cost. In addition, we still have not ruled out the possibility of covering the cost of initial space improvements but, since no plans have been provided it is impossible to make that decision. Since the overriding consideration communicated to me was the total cost, I thought it would be unfair to the city if I did not address the potential for future costs associated with the continued use of our auditorium by non -tenant entities. As a revenue source, we have been looking into this issue for several months. Current staff work suggests such a cost could be on the order of, $200 for 4 hours with a $20 fee for every additional 1/2 hour. I can't predict the final outcome of this process. If, however, I did not bring the issue to your attention and, after leasing the Seeley property, you found you were faced with this unanticipated cost, I believe you would have a reason to feel blind sided. The disclosure was not some ploy to sweeten the plot as suggested by Mr. Bellanger. It was a straightforward attempt to make sure the council was in a position to consider the total potential cost of either proposal. If it can be assumed the council would use the auditorium 45 times per year, the additional cost could be on the order of $45,000 over the 48 month period of the lease. Thus the savings associated with the SCAQMD office space has the potential to be $50,302.80 over the full 48 month term. I hope this helps to clear up any misconceptions which may have been held by members of the city council or city staff. The District is proud of its association with the city of Diamond Bar and intends to continue to be an exemplary corporate citizen. Thank you for your time and consideration. MINUTES OF T41E CITY CAuw1c1L ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR MAY 23, 1995 CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Papen called the meeting to order at 6:34 p.m. in the AQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley, Diamond Bar, California. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance by Mayor Papen. ROLL CALL: Council Members Ansari, Harmony, Mayor Pro Tem Werner and Mayor Papen. Also present were Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager; Mike Estrada, Asst. City Attorney; Michael Montgomery, Special Legal Council; James DeStefano, Community Development Director; Bob Rose, Community Services Director and Lynda Burgess, City Clerk. CM/Belanger announced that a local emergency was called by the City Manager as a result of the landslide located east of Morning Sun Dr. in Rowland Heights, on property on the westerly edge of the City. The Council must consider and ratify a local declaration of emergency if made by a non -elected official in order for the declaration to be effective. This Declaration of Emergency occurred after the agenda for this meeting was sent and, therefore, the Council can, if they wish to consider this an emergency condition, by four-fifths vote, place the matter on the agenda for consideration. MPT/Werner moved, C/Ansari seconded to place the item on the agenda as an emergency item. With the following Roll Call vote, motion carried: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Ansari, Harmony, MPT/Werner, M/ Papen NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None C/Harmony moved, C/Ansari seconded to move Public Comments to the front of the agenda, since there were many people attending the meeting to speak on the landslide. MPT/Werner stated that he had no objections with relocating Public Comments, but he announced that he would be leaving the meeting at 6:55 p.m., as he had another commitment. M/Papen also announced that she would be leaving at the same time as MPT/Werner and that there would no longer be a quorum. C/Harmony asked for an explanation as to why two Council Members would leave when a Public Hearing had been scheduled. M/Papen stated that there was no Public Hearing scheduled and that this meeting MAY 23, 1995 PAGE 2 was a carry over from the May 16 and May 17, 1995 meetings. M/Papen asked for any comments from either the audience or Council that would suggest that the emergency resolution should not be adopted. No testimony was offered. MPT/Werner moved, C/Ansari seconded to adopt Resolution No. 95-23: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF DIAMOND BAR CONFIRMING THE EXISTENCE OF A LOCAL EMERGENCY AND RATIFYING THE PROCLAMATION THEREOF. With the following Roll Call vote, motion carried: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Ansari, Harmony, MPT/Werner, M/ Papen NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None 2. OLD BUSINESS: C/Harmony pointed out that there was a motion and a second to move Public and Council Comments forward. Motion failed by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Ansari, Harmony NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - MPT/Werner, M/Papen ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None 2.1 MODIFICATION OF THE DEDICATED RIGHT TO PROHIBIT THE CONSTRUCTION OF RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS WITHIN A PORTION OF LOT 1, TRACT NO. 31479 - CM/Belanger reported on the modification of a dedicated right to prohibit construction of residential buildings within a portion of Lot 1, Tract No. 31479 and stated that this was part of the agenda of May 16, 1995 and that at that time, Council took an action to set the matter for Public Hearing. Following that action, Council requested that the applicant take a week to consider whether or not he wanted to proceed with the matter to be considered at a Public Hearing or withdraw the request. Jan Dabney, representing D & L Properties, stated that it is the property owner's intent to proceed with the understanding that a Public Hearing will be scheduled. He requested that the hearing be held within a 45 -day time period so he has an opportunity to converse with the applicant prior to the hearing. It is not the applicant's intent to withdraw, but he might do so in the next two weeks. MAY 23, 1995 PAGE 3 MPT/Werner restated Mr. Dabney's request by stating that at this time, the applicant wanted to proceed with a Public Hearing; however, staff should not send out notices until Mr. Dabney has contacted them as the applicant may withdraw his request. M/Papen suggested scheduling the Public Hearing for July 18, 1995 and Mr. Dabney agreed to this date. MPT/Werner requested that he be shown an access route to a location and a buildable site designated and asked that the applicant file that information prior to the hearing. Mr. Dabney stated that it is the intent of the applicant for this property to modify the language that would only allow construction of one home. Through the City's process, once the right to establish the home is granted, then the process would also go before the Board of the Country Estates for design review and considerations. The total parcel being considered has an existing driveway, has all existing services and the intent is not to increase the driveway or any services, except the land to build the single family home. Brought forth at the previous meeting was the consideration of future access. The lot line adjustments were requested to set aside the true open space area and in that process give up access to anywhere outside the Country. The second consideration is to meet an obligation the applicant made to one of the local residents on a request to expand his backyard. It was agreed that the Public Hearing would be scheduled for July 18, 1995. 3. NEW BUSINESS: 3.1 AWARD OF PROJECT MANAGEMENT SERVICES TO RJM DESIGN GROUP FOR THE MAPLE HILL PARK RETROFIT PROJECT - At staffs request, the matter was continued to June 20, 1995. 3.2 CITY ENTRANCE SIGNS - Continued to June 20, 1995. 2. OLD BUSINESS: 2.1 RESOLUTION NO. 95 -XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ADOPTING THE 1995 GENERAL PLAN FOR THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR - CM/Belanger stated that this was a continuation from the May 16 meeting and all activities pertaining to it had been concluded and is now before Council for consideration. Red Calkins, 240 Eagle Nest, stated that he was opposed to placing the General Plan on the ballot. MAY 23, 1995 PAGE 4 M/Papen moved, MPT/Werner seconded to continue the matter to June 20, 1995. C/Harmony asked what the consequences are to delaying this matter as far as the time schedule to placing it on the November ballot, knowing that the initiative process will probably begin tomorrow on the citizen's version. CC/Burgess stated that the Council has until July 17 to adopt the General Plan and place it on the ballot. With the following Roll Call vote, motion carried: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Ansari, Harmony, MPT/Werner, M/ Papen NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None M/Papen advised that both Mr. Huff and Mr. Schad wished to speak on the General Plan. Both gentlemen stated that they would wait until June 20. 3. PUBLIC COMMENTS: None 4. COUNCIL COMMENTS: None 3. ANNOUNCEMENTS: M/Papen announced that a Financial Workshop would be held to discuss the budget on May 30, 1995 at 2:00 p.m. at the AQMD. The next regular meeting of the Council is scheduled for June 6, 1995 at 6:30 p.m. C/Harmony asked the City Manager if it would be possible to have staff solicit contributions from area merchants to help feed the workers on the landslide. CM/Belanger stated that staff would be directed to do so. C/Ansari stated that she was impressed with all agencies involved in working on the landslide and thanked staff for their participation. 4. ADJOURNMENT: Due to the lack of a quorum, the meeting was adjourned at 7:00 p. M. ATTEST: Mayor LYNDA BURGESS, City Clerk MINW-rcor pr -r"= irITY irONIVGL CITY OF DIAMOND BAR BUDGET WORKSHOP MAY 30, 1995 �F CALL TO ORDER: M/Papen called the meeting to order at 2:00 p.m. in Room CC -2, AQMD Building, 21865 E. Copley Dr., Diamond Bar, California. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance by M/Papen. ROLL CALL: Council Members Ansari, Harmony, Mayor Pro Tem Werner and Mayor Papen. Also present were Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager; Frank Usher, Assistant City Manager; Michael Jenkins, City Attorney; George Wentz, City Engineer; Bob Rose, Community Services Director; James DeStefano, Community Development Director and Lynda Burgess, City Clerk. 2. BUDGET WORKSHOP: CM/Belanger reported that proposed FY 1995-96 operating expenditures include departmental costs, capital outlay, personnel and cost of services. He proposed expenditures of $9,307,170 compared to projected expenditures in the current fiscal year of $9,151,621 with $9,958,150 in revenues as opposed to $10,409,115 for FY 94-95. In response to C/Harmony, CM/Belanger advised that General Fund revenue could reflect an approximate loss of $800,000 based on current per capita amounts and $300,000 in Gas Tax Funds. C/Harmony stated that this would mean that the General Fund would be short approximately $500,000. CM/Belanger advised that income increases which have occurred over the last three years have been approximately $800,000. For clarification, M/Papen advised the projected decrease in revenues this fiscal year is due to the City not having received the final payment from the County for the property tax allocation repayment. In response to MPT/Werner, CM/Belanger reported that no decrease to public services is currently recommended. I AW FNFORCFMFNT SERVICES - Captain Waldie, L.A. County Sheriff, reported that no reduction in their services will be proposed. He stated that the Walnut Sheriff has done a great job for the City and the City's crime rate has decreased. MAY 30, 1995 PAGE 2 Lt. Dave Stothards reported that overall, the crime in D.B. has decreased in the past three years; however, there is potential for increase in crime due to gang violence, narcotic violence and robberies. There are 2,400 active gang members, identified with five major gangs who either live, work or go to school within City limits. The proposal included a "Special Problems Unit" which would include an OSS team of two Sheriff deputies that would be deployed on a day- by-day basis to areas shared by Walnut and D.B. with costs shared by both cities. The annual cost would be approximately $106,000 to D.B. Captain Waldie recommended that the unit operate 40 hours per week, shared by Walnut and D.B. for prevention. MPT/Werner asked if any of the drug -seized money could go toward to off- setting these costs. Captain Waldie advised that monies are given back to D.B. for any kind of seized drug money, etc. In response to C/Harmony, Captain Waldie advised that the cities of Lakewood, Cerritos, Bellflower, Los Angeles, and many more and special teams such as this. He advised that these special units do not interrupt normal daily activities of Sheriffs because they are special deputies dealing with these special problems. In response to MPT/Werner, Captain Waldie advised that the "Special Problems Unit" would work in conjunction with the OSS. The unit would not be part of OSS or the Narcotics department; however, they would deal with any special problem that D.B. was having at that time. M/Papen stated that since the crime rate is down 12%, she asked the Council to consider transferring the General Law Enforcement Officer and the Crime Prevention Deputy funding to this category. She commented that this program had never been discussed before and asked why was being proposed at this time. Captain Waldie clarified that the reduction in the crime rate is over three years and by keeping this type of service in place, it is important that the level of service be kept or increased. He requested the Council to reconsider merging the Crime Prevention Deputy to this "Special Problems Unit" because the job involves the Neighborhood Watch Program, the false alarm system, graffiti enforcement, Senior Volunteer Patrol, etc. M/Papen asked that the Senior Volunteer Patrol be called "Community Volunteer MAY 30, 1995 PAGE 3 Patrol." She also stated that she was not convinced that the reported active gang members was correct. She asked how many of those 2,400 gang members are hard core. Lt. Stothards reported that the OSS department identified 236 active, hardcore gang members and that there are other hardcore, active gang members that have not been arrested; however, they impact the gangs and their activities. In response to M/Papen regarding officer training, CM/Belanger advised that $5,000 is allocated to the Public Safety Law Enforcement Budget to provide a resource for the department to train deputies. In response to C/Ansari regarding costs for the "Special Problems Unit," Captain Waldie answered that costs would include the vehicle, salary, etc. for the entire year for two deputies including sensitivity training for the special needs of different cultures. C/Harmony asked if there is a general increase in County services the next fiscal year and, if so, is the increase reflected in this budget. CM/Belanger advised that an estimated amount of 6% for County services is reflected in the budget. He stated that the County service increase is unknown at this time; however, they will determine that increase in the early spring of next fiscal year and a budget amendment will reflect actual costs. In response to C/Harmony, CM/Belanger advised that the Senior Volunteer Patrol costs a little less than $14,000. C/Harmony stated he would like to think about this "Special Problems Unit" and would like more education on the program. MPT/Werner commented in favor of the program and asked the Council not to overlook it. He stated that the crime rate needs to be kept low in D.B. Captain Waldie stated that there is no cost to the Sheriffs department for a satellite office because he would not commit officers to be there; however, he stated that he would want to see these officers in this special program. In response to CM/Belanger, Captain Waldie advised that Walnut has agreed to try the special program for six months with a review as an alternative, costing only $59,000. MAY 30, 1995 PAGE 4 PUBLIC WORKS: CE/Wentz reported that there is a 4.3% decrease projected in the Public Works Budget for FY 95/96 and made the following recommendations for operations: 1) Personnel: No change; however, the position held by Mr. Liu will be considered for reclassification. 2) Supplies & Operating Fxpenditures: No change. 3) Professional Services: Increase due to moving the engineering firm's costs from Contract Services to Professional Services. A significant decrease in the Pavement Management Line, Account # 4230 will be expected which reflects the completion of the Pavement Management System. 4) Contract Services: Line items 5221 - 5227 reflect activities related to projects and/or development -review activities within the department and not related to the CIP. He advised that the bulk of this work is reimbursed by the applicant. Line item 5501 - Street Sweeping contract is scheduled to be re -bid in October 1995 and the budgeted recommendation will be the same. Line Items 5502, 5504, 5505, 5506, 5512, and 5522 - Street Maintenance related issues are currently part of the new street maintenance contract previously provided by the County and reflects an approximate 9.6°x6 decrease in the current year's budget. The new proposed budget is approximately $314,000. Line items 5504 and 5505 were transferred to Road Maintenance items 5502 and 5522 for accounting purposes. 5) Bridge Inspection & Industrial Waste: He reported that Industrial Waste is currently still under contract with the County and no changes are reflected. M/Papen asked if staff considered posting street sweeping days and times. She also stated that the times and days need to be coordinated with trash pick up. CE/Wentz advised that staff reviewed the pros and cons of posting streets for street sweeping purposes and that he would provide a report to the City Manager regarding costs associated with signs, towing, ticketing, etc. In response to C/Harmony regarding the frequency of street sweeping, CM/Belanger advised that in the past, it was once/week, it is now every other week and that the condition of the streets has stayed the same. MAY 30, 1995 PAGE 5 C/Harmony felt it is important to keep major thoroughfares swept from large car parts, trash, etc. and that he's not convinced that the City is getting the best service available. CM/Belanger advised that there isn't a recommendation in next year's budget to change the method by which the Publics Works Department is managed. The recommendation is to leave it as it is and create within the department, a person whose primary focus will be on contract management both in Public Works Maintenance and Capital Improvements. He stated that Mr. Liu is currently handling this position; therefore, his title will be reclassified. C/Harmony asked if this department needs to have a specialized engineer in order to understand developer's plans and make sure that plans are being presented to the Council thoroughly. CM/Belanger stated that in any project -related activity, the property owner/ developer is informed at the beginning of the process that he is responsible for payment of an independent engineer for soils/dirt types of analyses. In response to C/Harmony regarding hiring an independent engineer for the Sasak Property, CM/Belanger stated that it was required for Mr. Patel to provide all of the soils and dirt reports prior to his maps becoming valid. CE/Wentz explained that the City retains experts in the field to review any documents presented for a project. COMMUNITY DPVELOPMPNT: CDD/DeStefano reported that the Community Development Department consists of planning personnel, code enforcement and building and safety services and that there is a $400 increase over last year's budget, bringing estimated departmental expenditures to approximately $690,000. 1) Personnel Services: No changes 2) Operating FVenditures: Slight Increase as a result of proposed advertising and workshops necessary for creation of the Development Code and printing associated with that project. 3) Professional Services: Expenditures remain about the same; however, projects are different. With the anticipated adoption of the General Plan, significant budget outlay will end. An estimated amount of $10,000 will be necessary for a 1996 Housing Element Update, which is still mandated by the State. 4) Environmental Services: No changes. It is anticipated that MAY 30, 1995 PAGE 6 further review will be necessary for environmental documents for the MRF project. He reported that the City of Industry had allocated more funds for consultants to rewrite the EIR and other environmental documents. The budget also contains $50,000 for preparation of a Development Code which is anticipated to be a two-year project. 5) Contractual Services: No changes, based upon anticipated Building & Safety permit and inspection revenue. In response to M/Papen's question regarding accounting problems relating to the YWCA program at Lorbeer Jr. High, AA/Fritzal explained that Lorbeer and the YWCA are working that problem out. M/Papen asked if the Building & Safety Department had been audited to make sure that the City is getting the percentages per the contract agreement for fee sharing. CDD/DeStefano responded that audits are performed by the City's finance staff on a regular basis with receipts received from Building & Safety staff and the reconciliation that occurs prior to any payment to that provider. In response to C/Harmony, CDD/DeStefano advised that preparation of the Development Code was delayed due to the General Plan. In regard to Code Enforcement, he stated that a report would be made available at the June 6, 1995 Council Meeting. MPT/Werner stated that there had been a number of complaints by residents regarding poor management of properties and asked if that problem was resolved. CDD/DeStefano reported that some have been resolved; however, some are still problems. He stated that there is a remedy through litigation to resolve a conflict between appearance and standards; however, it is difficult if ownership changes frequently. Only one or two cases have been turned over to the District Attorney. In response to M/Papen, CDD/DeStefano stated that the ability of the Code Enforcement officer to write citations would not solve the problem because receipt of a ticket and payment of a find does not mandate or enforce the Code any better. In response to Frank Dursa, CDD/DeStefano stated that at least one property had been foreclosed upon. The City has the ability to abate a public nuisance through a lien fashion and secure recovery of the costs through a lien. MAY 30, 1995 PAGE 7 CM/Belanger advised that a status report regarding Property Maintenance and Ordinance Enforcement would be prepared for the June 6, 1995 Council Meeting. CM/Belanger reported that a variety of ordinances will spin off of adoption of the General Plan. The tree ordinance will be included the General Plan and the Development Code. COMMUNITY SFRVICFS: CSD/Rose reported that in the proposed Community Services Department budget is the Recreation Program which includes the City operated Tiny Tots, Senior Program, and Concerts in the Park; contracted services through the City of Brea for the athletics program, special interest classes and excursions for Summer Day Camp; maintenance of the eight City parks; operation of Heritage Park Community Center, and the landscape maintenance division of the Public Works Department which includes vegetation control and street tree mainten- ance. The FY 95-96 Department budget proposes a 21 % increase in costs over the current FY which will be offset by a 54.36° increase in projected revenue. The majority of the increase is included in the contract with the City of Brea to provide recreation services including rollerblade hockey, summer day camp and additional youth and adult excursions. The proposed budget for planned activities is: 1) Senior Program: $16,040 budgeted with an equal amount of revenue suggested. 2) Concerts in the Park: An addition of a ninth concert is proposed which will add $525.00 to the budget. 3) Heritage Park Community Center: A $6,000.00 increase in part-time costs to increase the free use of Heritage Park Community Center to any D.B. based, non-profit organization. 4) Tiny Tots Day Care: An increase of $27,000 is needed due to increased participation the Tiny Tots Day Care Program. An equal amount will be collected as revenue. 5) Finger Printing: Finger printing of volunteer coaches in the youth sports program required by the State. 6) Capital Fquipment: Purchases for capital equipment include a small lifting crane for one of the park trucks so that when a tree is down, staff can remove the larger portion out of the public right -a -way. Also included is a carpet cleaner and floor stripper for Heritage Park, player benches for dugouts at Heritage and Sycamore Canyon Parks and a tennis court screen at Maple Hill Park. 7) Landscape Maintenance (page 61): a) Parkway Maintenance: No MAY 30, 1995 PAGE 8 change. Will renew a contract with Lanterman to provide weed removal in areas not covered by the vegetation control contract; b) Vegetation Control: Decrease in the proposed budget by completely eliminating County involvement; c) Street Tree Maintenance and Watering: Street Tree Maintenance will pertain to primarily trimming and emergency response, and tree watering will be along major boulevards; d) Graffiti Removal: This represents a $5,000 reduction in the amount of Graffiti encountered; e) Litter Control: Part of the Lanterman Contract to control litter along the major boulevards and the trail along Sycamore Canyon Park. In regard to park trail maintenance, Don Schad asked if any funding had been made available through the MTA. CM/Belanger advised that the MTA had not yet reached a decision. Further, there is a proposal for Sycamore Canyon Park creek rehabilitation in the Capital Improvement Program. He suggested that the creek be retested for the iron level. C/Harmony suggested that funds be allocated for a new senior citizen center in the future. MPT/Werner suggested that a category be developed for long term capital improvement projects including a community center, city office facilities, etc. M/Papen requested an itemized listing of the Community Services Department's activities and budget proposals. LFGISI ATIVF GOVFRNMFNTAI SFRVICFS- CM/Belanger reported that the Legislative Governmental Services included City Council, City Manager, City Clerk, Finance, Community Promotion, Economic Development and General Government. The largest increase is in the City Clerk's budget for the November 1995 election which is partially offset by elimination of line item category for legislative advocate services. In response to C/Harmony's suggestion that the City should have its own lobbyist for the MRF, CM/Belanger advised that the City is using Stuart Spencer in conjunction with the City of Walnut. M/Papen requested a staff report regarding pay increases for Commissioners and Council. CM/Belanger reported that the Council had not had a pay raise in six years. MAY 30, 1995 PAGE 9 Further, Economic Development activities and Promotional/ Marketing Activities have been placed into a separate budget to be better identified. MPT/Werner asked that this suggestion be placed in the box and that the Council reconsider giving funds to the D.B. Chamber of Commerce in order to establish a professional person to interest national marketers in Diamond Bar. The person would be familiar with City regulations and business license requirements. CM/Belanger recommended that full and part-time staff members' salaries be increased by 3.5% to reflect cost of living as well as an increase in the cafeteria benefit by $50.00 per month. The total cost of both of these changes in benefits would be $63,288. In response to M/Papen, CM/Belanger advised that the City is paying $430 for regular staff and $500 per executive manager level. M/Papen did not feel justified in giving a $50 increase to employees benefits when it is unknown if insurance costs will go up at the same rate. She requested a report on costs of insurance per employee versus family coverage. In response to C/Ansari, CM/Belanger advised that Ganesha High School requested $5,000 to replace their school marquee. C/Ansari requested that the marquee read "donated by the City of D.B." MPT/Werner suggested that the $5,000 be donated directly to the D.B. students for support during their schooling at Ganesha High School and objected to funding the marquee. M/Papen advised that parents objected to the City donating money to the new high school, Diamond Ranch, because Ganesha has served the D.B. kids for a long time. CM/Belanger suggested that the money be allocated to the Ganesha community for the D. B. students. M/Papen requested C/Ansari and CM/Belanger to review the letter, meet with Ganesha/D.B. parents and make a recommendation to the Council at a later date. CM/Belanger reviewed Street Improvements on page 80 and funding sources and the amounts of money from each of the funding sources for each project: MAY 30, 1995 PAGE 10 1) Grand Avenue Overlay Awarded this FY and carried over into the next fiscal year. 2) Slurry Seal Area #6 3) Golden Springs Seepage CM/Belanger explained that the seepage is caused by an underground spring. A new underground drain system will be constructed and tied to the park drain. 4) Under grounding These funds are for the purchase of light standards. 5) Brea Canyon Resurfacing Between northerly city limit and Golden Springs. 6) Sunset Crossing to D.B. Blvd. to SR 57 Resurfacing only. A parking lot will be constructed at the Sunset Crossing and YMCA cul-de- sac for a future rollerblade hockey court and a curb to separate D. B. from Industry. 7) Pathfinder to Shaded Wood to D.B. Blvd. Street rehabilitation. 8) D.B. Blvd. to Grand Ave. to SR 60 Street rehabilitation. CM/Belanger reviewed the proposed Traffic Signals as follows: 1) Grand Ave. Traffic signal synchronization. 2) South and North Bound Brea Canyon Left hand turn arrows. 3) Southbound Golden Springs at D.B. Blvd. Left hand turn arrows. 4) Northbound D.R. Blvd. at Pathfinder Left hand turn arrows. 5) D.B. Blvd. at Mt. Laurel Left hand turn arrows. 6) Traffic signals Four warranted signals have been authorized; however, three are be proposed to be funded with the Traffic & Transportation Commission to recommend priority based on the four signals that will be warranted. The four proposed signals are at D.B. Blvd./Gold Rush; D.B./Palomino; Golden Springs/Calborne. CM/Belanger reviewed the proposed Parks and Recreation Improvements: 1) Peterson Park Lights 2) Maple Hill Park Retrofit 3) Sycamore Canyon I andslide Repair 4) Peterson Park Drainage Problem CSD/Rose explained that funds for the Maple Hill Park Retrofit will come from CDBG. It is anticipated that there will be funds left over which will then be used for the Peterson Park Retrofit. In response to M/Papen's concern regarding removal of Peterson Parks' MAY 30, 1995 PAGE 11 playground equipment, CSD/Rose stated that it will have to be done sometime in the future; therefore, it should all be done at the same time to save funds. M/Papen suggested that the Peterson Park equipment be auctioned or donated to the YMCA or another program. In response to MPT/Werner, CSD/Rose advised that, based on the cost of the Maple Hill equipment, play equipment for Peterson Park would be approximately $31,000 with the entire project costing approximately $230,000. CM/Belanger reported that the Health Department is requiring that Sycamore Canyon Concession Stand make improvements with hot and cold running water. In regard to lighting at Lorbeer Jr. High, CM/Belanger stated that the City will enter into a relationship with the District in order to flexibly schedule the facility for athletic events. The following Sidewalk Improvements are proposed: 1) Gold Rush to Golden Springs, east Side of D.B. Blvd. 2) Fast side of D.B. Blvd. from Highland to Temple 3) 400' South of Tin Dr., west side of D.B. Blvd. In response to Frank Dursa, CM/Belanger explained that "transferring other funds" means that money that comes from the State goes into the General Fund and it's restricted to usage only on a specific project. Further, staff is not proposing the sale of Prop A funds within the next fiscal year. In response to Mr. Dursa's question regarding sidewalks, M/Papen explained that there is a major road study being completed on Brea Canyon Rd. and that Capital Improvement funds include Brea Canyon widening from Pathfinder Rd. to D.B. Blvd. and sidewalks will be provided at the same time. In response to C/Ansari regarding City -on -Line, CM/Belanger advised that upgraded equipment is included as a capital outlay and a discussion will be added to the June 6, 1995 meeting. Similar projects in other cities have been reviewed and proposals obtained to change the operating system to make it more capable of interfacing with systems outside of D.B. 3. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business to discuss, the meeting was adjourned at 5:00 p.m. MAY 30, 1995 PAGE 12 ATTEST: Mayor LYNDA BURGESS, City Clerk D CITY OF DIAMOND BAR MINUTES OF THE PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION BOARD HEARING ROOM OF S.C.A.Q.M.D. 21865 Copley Drive APRIL 27, 1995 CALL TO ORDER Chairman Ruzicka called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance by Commissioner Finnerty. ROLL CALL Present: Chairman Ruzicka, Vice Chairman Goldenberg, Commissioners Tye, Finnerty, and Medina. Staff: Community Services Director Bob Rose Recreation Supervisor Marla Pearlman Absent: None MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE Council Member Eileen Ansari commented in favor of the City sponsoring more youth programs and activities. She suggested a "battle of the bands" as one of the activities. She also stated that she would like to see the Commissioners get more involved in the selection of the bands for the "Concert in the Parks" Series. VC/Goldenberg advised that CSD/Rose brought this to the Commission's attention and it was suggested by the Commission that staff take care of the selections. CSD/Rose advised that staff investigated this issue and found that other cities have dedicated a weekday night to "kids night" including bands, arts/crafts, movies. He advised that the budget has not been finalized yet and suggested that the Commission give some kind of direction for this type of activity. VC/Goldenberg asked if an Ad Hoc committee would be appropriate for this activity. CH/Ruzicka stated that we need to get the word out to the youth in the community to see if it's something that will be used. CH/Ruzicka appointed VC/Goldenberg and C/Medina to the youth activity Ad Hoc committee. April 27, 1995 Page 2 Parks & Recreation Commission Council Member Ansari distributed City of Diamond Bar pins and pens. CONSENT CALENDAR - VC/Goldenberg moved to approve the Consent Calendar as amended, seconded by C/Medina and carried 5-0. 1. Approval of Minutes of March 23, 1995 meeting. OLD BUSINESS 2. Park Use Policies and Procedures - CH/Ruzicka reported on the Park Use Policies and advised that staff's recommendation was for the Commission to accept the revision of Section V, B, 2 as stated. VC/Goldenberg advised that the scheduling clause will required a "super -computer" to implement. He expressed his concerns with this clause including so many exceptions and stated that he would like to see something simpler. CSD/Rose advised that staff is aware that the community wants to see the community center available for free use for non-profit organizations. He advised that staff's recommendation would be to provide for needs of the non-profit organizations without negatively affecting the revenue generating capabilities of the community center. CSD/Rose advised that it is costing the City $35,000-$40,000 a year to operate the community center including utilities, staff time, maintenance, and supplies and it's generating approximately $25,000 a year. He also advised the Commission that staff is looking for advice on the amount of staff time that is appropriate for each organization to receive of free use. C/Finnerty asked if each team in a large sports organization is equal to a Boy Scout Troop or is the sports organization limited to four hours per month. CSD/Rose stated that the City will allow each individual team to schedule time at the community center, however, if the City receives use requests from all 120 teams then staff will look to the sports organization to schedule a limited number of teams per month. VC/Goldenberg stated that the "reservation policy" should state who gets to make these reservations and how many uses are allowed for free. He also commented that part of this issue could be stated in Section III, rather than Section V. April 27, 1995 Page 3 Parks & Recreation Commission CSD/Rose advised that Section V, B, 2 has been used to describe what resident non- profit organizations are entitled to. He also advised that Section V was added as a whole in reference to Heritage Park Community Center and that policies regarding the use of the Community Center have not been cross referenced into the rest of the Policies and Procedures. C(Tye reiterated that it cost the City $40,000 to operate the community center and the City receives revenue of approximately $25,000. He also asked that out of that $25,000 revenue, how much of that money is generated on a Friday, Saturday, or Sunday event. CSD/Rose advised that approximately $18,000-$20,000 is generated from the weekends. C/Tye expressed his concern that each day that a non-profit organization gets free use would eliminate revenue that could be generated. He stated that the policy needs to state that the non-profit organizations cannot reserve the community center on Fridays, Saturdays, or Sundays, so that the free use will not affect revenues. CSD/Rose advised that there is a requirement for non-profit organizations to make reservations within 35 days of use on Fridays, Saturdays and Sundays. The revenue producing uses on those days are birthday parties, weddings, anniversaries and church services. Those activities are normally scheduled more than 35 days ahead of time, and will not be affected by uses scheduled less than 35 days ahead of time. C/Medina stated that it would be cost effective for the City to hire part-timers and pay them $5.00/hour to work as needed. CSD/Rose advised that all the staff that work at Heritage Park Community Center are part timers and the wage range that is currently being paid is $7.00-$10.00/hour. He also advised that C/Medina's suggestion is a good recommendation. CH/Ruzicka stated that the City has very limited community center space available for the community. He advised that he would like to find a compromise position where all of the non-profit organizations can use the facilities without losing the revenue that is needed to keep the community center cost effective. C/Finnerty suggested that instead of adopting this new policy, the Commission can suggest that the staff recommendations can serve as an "interim" policy to see how April 27, 1995 Page 4 Parks & Recreation Commission well it works. Staff and the Commission can then evaluate its effectiveness, and make changes accordingly. CH/Ruzicka advised that these policies are not carved in stone and they can be revised when necessary. He also advised that when an organization has too many teams using the facility all the time, the City will then contact that organization and have someone in that organization begin to schedule their uses is cooperation with the City. VC/Goldenberg asked if this statement should be included in the policy. C/Finnerty suggested that a special fee schedule be set up for just the youth serving organizations. VC/Goldenberg advised that there cannot be a separate fee schedule. CSD/Rose advised that the sports organizations each already have a contact that schedules athletic facilities cooperatively with the City. He also advised that per the City Attorney, there can be a separate fee schedule for non-profit youth serving organizations. CH/Ruzicka stated that the Commission should make a recommendation based on what the Commission believes is good for the community. Before the recommendation goes to the City Council for action, staff will verify the legality of the action. VC/Goldenberg added that the recommendation, if approved, will result in a loss of revenue. CSD/Rose advised that staff has considered that, and the wording of the recommendation expands free use, but limits the negative affect on revenue generation. Bruce Flamenbaum, Diamond Bar resident expressed his concerns that this Commission wants to operate the Community Center at a profit. He advised that the City gives the ball fields, staff's time and the lights to the sports organizations. He stated that he agrees with the City giving use of these facilities away, because the parents of the children pay the taxes that pay for these facilities. VC/Goldenberg explained that the Commission is trying to control costs, not to April 27, 1995 Page 5 Parks & Recreation Commission generate a profit. Bruce Flamenbaum stated that if the Commission is going to charge or cut costs, then it needs to be done across the board. He expressed that he is in favor of the proposed policy, however, he feels that it does not go far enough. CH/Ruzicka advised that the Commission is not out to make a profit, the Commission is here to control costs. He also stated that this policy can provide the opportunity to schedule the use of community facilities with as little hurt as possible, similar to the way the user group sub -committee allocates athletic facilities to the sports organizations. C/Tye commented that the Commission needs to pay great attention to maintaining control of the costs and not letting them get out of control. C/Finnerty commented that cost recovery in programs requires a constant effort in order to maintain the programs at their current level. If it is decided to decrease revenues, then costs to operate programs are expected to be decreased as well. VC/Goldenberg commented that the City is always paying for programs and not getting the return revenue. Council Member Ansari asked who gets priority for the community center, the non- profit organization or a profit organization. CSD/Rose advised that the Diamond Bar based non-profit organization has priority over a private resident use. C/Finnerty asked what amount of lead time is necessary to assure obtaining a desired date at the community center. CSD/Rose advised that if a Saturday date is desired for use by a group, they would need about three to four months lead time; Sunday use is available only after 6:00 p.m.; any other week day use could be obtained with a week's notice. C/Finnerty asked if there are any organizations that are regulars and how many groups can be accommodated at any one time. CSD/Rose advised of several regular groups that meet during the week. He advised April 27, 1995 Page 6 Parks & Recreation Commission that the maximum number of groups is three with two in the main room and one in the tiny tot room. He also advised that the community center is not booked up during the week. C/Finnerty asked what a reasonable lead time is and if it is a problem if the community center was full every night. CSD/Rose advised that it would not be a problem if the community center was full every night, and that a reasonable amount of lead time for the use of this facility is a month's notice. C/Finnerty asked if there is an organization that meets there regularly, are they required to ask for the facility monthly. CSD/Rose advised that the policy allows for ongoing use to be scheduled 6 months in advance. He also advised that the priority remains with the Diamond Bar resident non-profit organizations. With consensus of the Commission, the Commission has requested that staff bring back a more simplified version of the recommendation at the next Commission meeting. C/Finnerty expressed her concerns in that the Commission needs to make sure that the community facility is open for a more spontaneous usage than what this recommendation is stating. CSD/Rose briefly explained the types of use and reservations that are normally received at the community center. C/Tye asked if three groups would be charged if their meeting were held the same evening and using the same staff time. CSD/Rose advised that this fee would be charged to all three groups. The staff fee does not include all of staff's costs, just the hourly rate, plus it is always unknown if one of the groups will cancel. C/Tye asked Mr. Flamenbaum how much in advance was his reservation made for the community center. April 27, 1995 Page 7 Parks & Recreation Commission Mr. Flamenbaum advised that his reservation was made a month ahead of time. C[Tye stated that this recommended policy seems much more complicated than it needs to be. CH/Ruzicka reminded the Commission that Diamond Bar only has one facility with 55,000 citizens and that staff needs to be able to accommodate the citizens who desire usage of this community center. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS 3. 6TH Anniversary Celebration - Update C/Medina gave thanks to all of the businesses participating in the Anniversary Celebration and for the support provided by Diamond Bar staff. He announced that Diamond Bar's 6th Anniversary Celebration will be on Sunday, April 30, 1995 from 1:00 - 5:00 p.m. C/Medina advised that there should be an estimated 1,500 attendees. He shared the Anniversary Celebration program and expressed thanks to all of the donors that are expected to participate during the day. CSD/Rose advised that this event has evolved into a family celebration with the intent of bringing Diamond Bar families to Peterson Park for an afternoon of fun, low cost activity with lots of freebies for the children. RS/Pearlman advised that there will be four teams in the one -pitch softball tournament which is scheduled from 10:00 a.m. - 3:30 p.m. She distributed parking passes to the Commissioners. She also explained the types of booths that will be operating during the day. C/Tye asked what the booths are charged for participating. RS/Pearlman advised that booths run from $10.00 - $85.00. C/Medina also announced that )ones InterCable will be covering the day's events. a. Contract Classes April 27, 1995 Page 8 Parks & Recreation Commission RS/Pearlman advised that the participation goal was met for the Winter Session. She also stated that a resident of Diamond Pointe Swim Club had concerns regarding the City using their facilities for Contract Classes. RS/Pearlman advised that she contacted this resident and the resident explained that she was very upset and stated that the club's bylaws allows use by owners only. She also advised that the residents will be picketing these classes. RS/Pearlman advised that there were Spring contract classes scheduled for that facility and they have been cancelled in the best interest of the participants so they are not subjected to such a demonstration by the residents. CSD/Rose reiterated that the City of Diamond Bar was invited to use Diamond Pointe Swim Club facility in a letter dated February 10, 1995. C/Finnerty asked if there were any residents signed up for the contract classes and how did they find out that the contract classes were being held there. RS/Pearlman advised that many of the residents were asking for classes there. CSD/Rose advised that per his meeting with Jeff Koontz, President of the Diamond Ponte Board of Directors, Mr. Koontz indicated that there was a very small minority of residents that were raising this issue. He also stated that until the home owners and the board resolve their issues, the City will find other facilities to accommodate the contract classes. b. Athletics 1. Youth baseball information was distributed at the elementary schools last week. 2. Youth Track and Field Meet will be held in Los Angeles on May 6, 1995. 3. Day Camp registration will begin on May 15, 1995. ANNOUNCEMENTS April 27, 1995 Page 9 Parks & Recreation Commission C/Tye stated that staff did a terrific job at the City Wide Youth Track and Field Meet. He also advised staff that Peterson Park looked terrific during one of his softball tournament games. C/Medina asked that Item A, #3a, page 8 of the Policies, Regulations and Procedures be placed on the Agenda for the next Commission meeting for discussion. He advised that the discussion will pertain to posting rules and regulations regarding first come/first serve rules for the use of basketball courts. CSD/Rose advised that the agenda item will involve posting of a sign at the basketball court regarding open play. C/Medina stated that he represented the Commission at the ribbon cutting ceremony for the Dial -A -Cab that was held at Heritage Park Community Center. VC/Goldenberg expressed his frustrations that the Commission is not informed of such events happening in the City. He stated that it is important for the Commission to participate in these events in order to be able to provide information to or answer questions received from the residents of the community. VC/Goldenberg commented in amazement that Larkstone Park's replacement has not been resolved. He expressed his anger regarding the handling of the refund for the community facility and that people believe that this Commission is out to make a profit. ADJOURNMENT At 9:20 p.m., it was moved by VC/Goldenberg and seconded by C/Medina and carried unanimously to adjourn the meeting. Respectfully submitted, /s/ Bob Rose Bob Rose Secretary Attest: /s/ Joe Ruzicka Joe Ruzicka Chairman CITY OF DIAMOND BAR MINUTES OF THE PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION HERITAGE COMMUNITY CENTER MAY 25, 1995 CALL TO ORDER Chairman Ruzicka called the meeting to order at 7:12 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance by Vice Chairman Goldenberg. ROLL CALL Present: Chairman Ruzicka, Vice Chairman Goldenberg, Commissioners Finnerty and Tye, (Commissioner Tye arrived at 7:25p.m.) Staff: Community Services Director Bob Rose Recreation Supervisor Chris Emeterio Absent: Commissioner Medina MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE Tyra Beers, Instructor for the City of Diamond Bar Tiny Tots Program, invited the Commissioners to the Tiny Tots Graduation Ceremony scheduled for Friday, lune 9, 1995 at 7:00 p.m. at the Heritage Park Community Center. She advised that there will be entertainment by the children enrolled in the tiny tots program and a potluck dinner following distribution of diplomas. CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Approval of Minutes of April 27, 1995 meeting. C/Finnerty moved to approve the minutes, seconded by VC/Goldenberg and carried 3-0. Commissioners Medina and Tye were not available for the vote. OLD BUSINESS 2. Park Use Policies and Procedures - CH/Ruzicka expressed that the revised recommendations were well prepared by staff. He stated that this wording answers the Commission's questions and offers an opportunity for the non- profits to utilize Heritage Park Community Center without any fees. He also May 25, 1995 Page 2 Parks & Recreation Commission commented that this policy leaves the opportunity for the facility to recover the expenses associated with its operation. CSD/Rose advised that per the Commission's request, staff revised the recommendation to the City Council that Section V. -B.-2 read as follows: a) one use for fund raising purposes per calendar year where room rental fees and staff costs are waived for up to eight hours of use. Request may be scheduled up to 6 months prior to desired date. b) one use per month for general business meetings of the organization where room rental fees and staff costs are waived for up to four hours of use. Requests for use on Saturdays or Sundays will not be accepted more than 35 days prior to desired date. Requests for use on weekdays may be submitted up to 6 months prior to desired date. Section III. F. will read as follows: Heritage Park Community Center - Fees required for the use of Heritage Park Community Center are described in Section V (Facility Reservations Policy). VC/Goldenberg moved to approve the above recommendations, seconded by C/Finnerty and carried 3-0. Commissioners Medina and Tye were not available for the vote. Commissioner Tye arrived at 7:25 p.m. 3. Request for City of Diamond Bar Support for the Children's Center for Creative Development - CH/Ruzicka reintroduced this item and asked for Mrs. Karapetian's report. Mrs. Karapetian handed out her revised recommendations. She reviewed her packet of recommendations which would include an art and crafts center for under privileged children in the Diamond Bar community. In regards to Mrs. Karapetian's letter to CH/Ruzicka, VC/Goldenberg asked if the statement of "50% of the city's 55,000 population was below the median level" pertained to 50% of the residents or 50% of the households. Responding to VC/Goldenberg, CH/Ruzicka advised that the median level of income is approximately $60,000 in the City of Diamond Bar and that the information in the letter is incorrect. He stated that the revised proposal is May 25, 1995 Page 3 Parks & Recreation Commission extremely misleading and the information given is incorrect in regards to art classes being offered in public schools and the lack adult support of youth activities in the community. CH/Ruzicka stated that he does not believe that the Commission should support this program. With the consensus of the Commission, there is no recommendation to support the request for support of the Children's Center for Creative Development. NEW BUSINESS None. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS 4. Recreational Program Up -date a. Athletics 1. Youth Baseball - "Try -Out Skills Day" for the 4-7 age group has been discontinued. There are approximately 315 kids enrolled in the Youth Baseball Program thus far. 2. One -Pitch Softball Tournament - was very successful. )ones Intercable won the tournament and advises that they will be back next year to defend their title. 3. Youth Rollerblade Hockey - It was advised that YMCA will continue their rollerblade hockey program. It was also advised that staff, flyers and tentative school grounds are ready for the City rollerblade hockey program. Staff will provide all of the coaching and training heavily emphasizing self-esteem for the kids. 4. 6th Anniversary Celebration - was a great success. A great response from the community was received. 5. Day Camp - It was advised that staff is in place, equipment and other needs are in the process of being ordered for the day camp. The City of Brea is also in the process of completing the flyers and distributing them at the schools in Diamond Bar. May 25, 1995 Page 4 Parks & Recreation Commission ANNOUNCEMENTS: C/Tye commented that the 6th Anniversary Celebration was a fun day. He thanked staff, C/Medina and CSD/Rose for their efforts. In regard to the Pantera Park Community Center, he expressed concern that the Parks & Recreation Commission recommended the community center and the recommendation was denied by the Planning Commission. CSD/Rose advised that the recommendations by the Parks & Recreation Commission went forward to the Planning Commission as part of the Conditional Use Permit process. He advised that during that process, different types of traffic studies and parking evaluations were conducted on a worse case scenario. He stated that from the Planning Commission's point of view, it was unacceptable to consider relying on on -street parking for over flow parking at the facility, therefore, as part of the Conditional Use Permit process, the Planning Commission did not include the community center. CSD/Rose advised that during the May 2, 1995 City Council meeting, the park plan was presented and the City Council expressed a desire to have some meeting space in that facility. He advised that staff checked with the Planning Department on the Conditional Use Permit to determine what size of building could be authorized to be placed on the park. VC/Goldenberg expressed his concern that this building would not be large enough for the senior citizens to meet and that this building does not include kitchen facilities. C/Tye asked how many square feet could be included in the proposed building. CSD/Rose advised that the proposal could include a 2,000 square foot building and still meet the intentions of the C.U.P. VC/Goldenberg stated that the concession stand, rest rooms and maintenance room are included in the 2,000 square foot proposed building, leaving only 1,000 square feet for a meeting space. He also advised that the Park & Recreation Commission did not recommend lights for this project, however, when it left the Planning Commission, lights were approved in the C.U.P. CH/Ruzicka asked that each Commissioner keep this project fresh in their minds for comments and review at a later date. Bruce Flamenbaum, Chairman -Planning Commission and Diamond Bar resident commented that when this project came before the Planning Commission, they felt that this park was not accessible to the public to have such a large meeting space. CH/Ruzicka thanked the staff for their hard work during their 6th Anniversary Celebration. He commented that Mrs. Karapetian's letter would have insulted a lot of residents in the City May 25, 1995 of Diamond congratulated Commission. Page 5 Parks & Recreation Commission Bar and that's why he did not recommend her program. CH/Ruzicka Mr. Flammenbaum for being re-elected as Chairman to the Planning CSD/Rose congratulated Chris Emeterio for his promotion to Recreation Supervisor for the City of Brea. He announced that Gary Miller has been elected to the Assembly, therefore his appointees to the Commissions become vacant 90 days after that action. He advised that August 18, 1995 will be the last day for C/Medina to serve on the Commission. He also advised that this seat will remain vacant until the next election, November 1995. ADJOURNMENT At 7:50 p.m., it was moved by C/Tye, seconded by C/Finnerty and carried 4-0 to adjourn. Respectfully submitted, /s/ Bob Rose Bob Rose Secretary Attest: /s/ Joe Ruzicka Joe Ruzicka Chairman —I I- I N T E R O F F I C E M E X O R A N D U M TO: Mayor Papen and Mayor Pro Tem Werner FROM: Linda G. Magnuson, Accounting Manager SUBJECT: Voucher Registers, July 11, 1995 DATE: July 6, 1995 Attached are the Voucher Registers dated July 11, 1995. You will notice there are two voucher registers. This is due to the Fiscal Year ending June 30. There is a register for expenditures allocated to FY94-95 and one for FY95-96. As requested, the Finance Department is submitting the voucher registers for the Finance Committees review and approval prior to their 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 listings of vouchers dated July 11, 1995 have been reviewed, approved, and recommended for payment. Payments are hereby allowed from the following funds in these amounts: FUND NO. FUND DESCRIPTION 001 General Fund 112 Prop A Fund 115 Int. Waste Mgt. Fund 118 Air Quality Improvement Fund 125 CDBG Fund 138 LLAD #38 Fund 139 LLAD #39 Fund 141 LLAD #41 Fund 227 Traffic Mitigation Fee Fund 250 CIP Fund TOTAL ALL FUNDS APPROVED BY: Linda G. Magnpson Accounting Manager errence L. Bela City Manager Phy is E. Mayor nger Gar�H Mayor AMOUNT $653,009.60 26,087.23 5,619.22 174.17 3,565.88 5,307.27 8,343.88 3,944.24 25.00 186.333.84 $892x410.33 . 41 1-_ Papen .M/ ----i -a E r. -- •r _ ,`l•'yr __--__-- NL Li,JLli EuPLET _-------- -_---__-. •__... .3 •__ ___ _ ._ � .. __ __ • __,. r]"_ �_ ate—Lel'._ _a__ 15 iyClC 71 'L—_ ._L+_ire -JCI _ r1_... 41 +i jr 4sar lE pvysZi1,- J./a/2.__ rl..-M';' 11 - --m---- _ _.. -------- -- -------- -• - o �'l''ri_-:�i2 E'% got y. 1a. __ ,_, CDPed L�nc� _L�.�j it _. hi`J=_.�. .c. _. - _ DUE.- -- --- _4 !Kv!_ _ _ ____, _AZ_ -. :Q- _ - __- K; 127n-:: i_._ .-.,,_- nZI MA -.1-4L _--. _ _ a-1 •_ L__ 7,65 __,_ .a -r__ __ __-..__Cs- lann ing 1.-_ _ _ _..-.r_ a _-/+_L• �. a.. h - lr .. _. ..`+,_a_3�v4'i_1 L.. S. D 7—KB W25 _ _ _ .. _ r. ._� :4,-77 4, _ . _�r..� a..� __ _. .L� 1 .. _, a _i _ria V'" L't''sl •___.- _ -, ,(J - r, r��r - •, - 4- _._"�.... HL -_-_r,>_ _'UE ---------. _.:_ 141 rr .. -� - -• - -. '. ..- -- '- -' �- _ -`� _ �=237: ...'. -':1..-Y___ -- n -_Z_. .fir, 44 °.1.'...-_'= _.L_--,ir E— r -TOY �C• J rt._. 1. ------- . .:.c . _-_...-._- y •__ _- -_ - _ .-i ,- '-i - - � .��.a=_1_-� moi_, -4 ,E,EN"OF---- - - - - - a4 P,t;1 ------------------------- --------------------------------- ------ -------- - ----------------------------------------------------- - I lF ILE --------- D 'E Wm"!=c-' 7n -g --------- Q- D"LL - -------- A 7 � i4 f S Ir C -tY,'J�- T _._—t�"_—tom_.. �_ _. ♦__ _ _ __ .. _ _at,n`� .� r —:`F ....... . .. . ... __ - ':07 i? "LE ri,..--------; _. . 4 ____ __-i•-r•` 1= -_ .` __ --_. _ __ _r _. _-,C 7lU�r.�,IJ�_�JIRCl'�{�IiI TLI r u 71 IF .iF --. ___.-..__ .�- _ .., _ ._ _. --• - __ _'ice--.�-=i.�,yt =..=�.Gi� ._, -_ - _. le EN'L _„- -- - - - - -I ... . _'i-Y'•t_ �1..: �- �.r,il __ '_�_. _. C,___ _,tea-`cJ� U'JW __._c -- Er - -r „ av==-�Ell _ _. Tim2Gut _ -- -:�• - 57 .IG i11%— 1H O', __ ._ _. _�. _ t'�T= :r =_ - E c -+i a_f nT rAz- - sir- ��` - y 9 q het.z J::,.- Iz ^._. ____.... - --------------- __-- - - - - -- ,� -- CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AGENDA REPORT AGENDA NO. TO: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager MEETING DATE: July 11, 1995`W� REPORT DATE: July 5, 1995 FROM: Linda G. Magnuson`, Accounting Manager TITLE: Treasurer's Report - May 31, 1995 SUMMARY: Submitted for Council's review and approval is the Treasurer's Statement for the month of May 1995. 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: RE IEWED BY: errence L. Belang ran s Linda G. M c uson City Manager Assistant City Manager Accounting Manager CITY COUNCIL REPORT AGENDA NO. MEETING DATE: July 11, 1995 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: City Manager SUBJECT: Treasurer's Statement - May 31, 1995 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 May, 1995 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 May, 1995. This statement shows the cash balances for the various funds, with a breakdown of bank account balances, investment account balances and the effective yield earned from investments. PREPARED BY: Linda G. Magnuson CITY OF DIAMOND BAR TREASURER'S MONTHLY CASH STATEMENT May 31, 1995 " "A GENERAL FUND $7,880,528.45 $788,877.54 $608,236.17 $8,061,169.82 LIBRARY SERVICES FUND 159,561.65 159,561.65 TRAFFIC SAFETY FUND 31,241.21 31,241.21 GAS TAX FUND 2,881,477.34 208,234.87 1,687.02 3,088,025.19 TRANSIT TX (PROP A) FD 988,991.27 20,316.40 22,565.77 986,741.90 TRANSIT TX (PROP C) FD 1,268,753.06 1,268,753.06 INTEGRATED WASTE MGT FD 47,088.50 21,959.60 3,023.24 66,024.86 AIR QUALITY IMPRVMNT FD 76,176.19 2,861.54 73,314.65 PARK FEES FUND 363,660.93 363,660.93 S PARKS GRANT (PRP A) FD (43,228.44) (43,228.44) COM DEV BLOCK GRANT FD (37,354.28) 123.00 6,612.03 (43,843.31) LANDSCAPE DIST #38 FD 63,756.05 27,227.16 7,761.45 83,221.76 LANDSCAPE DIST #39 FD 20,488.16 7,705.58 6,472.54 21,721.20 LANDSCAPE DIST #41 FD 180,499.13 16,038.45 3,665.40 192,872.18 GRAND AV CONST FUND 400,682.16 1,896.07 398,786.09 CAP IMPROVEMENT PRJ FD 136,387.15 211,326.80 (74,939.65) SB 821 FUND 138,780.82 138,780.82 SELF INSURANCE FUND 420,313.98 207.78 420,106.20 TOTALS $14,977,803.33 $1,090,482.60 $876,315.81 $0.00 $15,191,970.12 SUMMARY OF CASH: DEMAND DEPOSITS: GENERAL ACCOUNT $454,246.09 PAYROLL ACCOUNT 345.32 CHANGE FUND 175.00 PETTY CASH ACCOUNT 500.00 TOTAL DEMAND DEPOSITS $455,266.41 INVESTMENTS: TIME CERTIFICATES $0.00 COMMERCIAL PAPER 0.00 LOCAL AGENCY INVESTMENT F 14,736,703.71 TOTAL INVESTMENTS 14,736,703.71 TOTAL CASH $15,191,970.12 Note: The City of Diamond Bar is invested in the State Treasurer's Local Agency Investment Fund. All funds are available for withdrawal within 24 hours. Investment in the Local Agency Investment Fund is allowed under the City's formally adopted investment policy. L.A.I.F - Effective Yield for May, 1995 6.008% There are sufficient funds available to meet the next month's financial obligations of the City. ACANZCARL WARREN & CO.;•t•,ir ." Insurance Adjusters Claims Management and Administration 750 1 he < iri Drive Smrc 400 (range. CA 92668 .Lla(I PO Kur 25180 Sawa Ana. CA 92799-5180 (714)740-7999 18001572-6900 1;A% 17141740-7992 June 21, 1995 TO: City of Diamond Bar ATTENTION: Tommye A Nice, Deputy City Clerk RE: Claim Claimant D/Event Reed Y/Office: Our File 95 JUN 23 Pit 2* 38 Kelz v. Diamond Bar Denise A. Kelz 1/12/95 5/20/95 S 82585 ABK a "-� . We have reviewed the above captioned claim and request that you take the action indicated below: • CLAIM Rr iEMQN: Send a standard rejection letter to the claimant. Please provide us with a copy of the notice sent, as requested above. If you have any questions please contact the undersigned. very truly youm CARL & COMPANY Dwi J. cc: SCJPIA w/enc. , v %0 % .0 r -i, r 1-1 �-: _ TO PERSON OR PROPERTY PiSTR CTIONS 1. Claims for death, Injury to person or to personal property must be filed not later than 6 pias. after the occurrence. (Gov Code Sec 2. Claims for damages to real property must be filed not later than 1 year alter the occurrence. (Gov. Code Sec. 911.2) 3. Read entire claim before filing. 4. See page 2 for diagram upon which to locate place if acc.dent. 5. This claim form must be signed on page 2 at bottom. S. Attach separate sheets, if necessary, to give full details. SIGN EACH SHEET. 7. Clain must be filed with City Clerk. ( Gov Code Sec. 915a) To: The City of Diamond Bar Name, of Claimant Home Address of Claimant Business Address of Claimant City and State City and State L: C K .- r\J 0 Age of Claimant (if natural perscn) 3y Home Telephone Number Business Telephone Number Give address to which you desire notices or communications to be sent regarding this claim: How did DAMAGE or INJURY occur? Give full particulars J71" �'/>�,'�r� i� L:_FYI', �,p/'f� -,� �%C'f �/, �.. /C).�J,' - � '7CT/.i��.=!, �T �,n*r j✓d 'J 't, When did DAMAGE or INJURY occur? Give full particulars, date, time of day: Where did DAMAGE or INJURY occur' Describe fully, and locate ga diaQrazA on reverse side of this sheet, where appropriate, give street names and addresses and measurements from landmarks: 0 what particular ACT or OMISSION do you claim caused the injury or damage? Give names of City employees causing the injury or -amage, if known: What DAINL4GE cr '_NJliRIES do you claim resulte? Give full extent of injuries or damages claimed: What AMOUNT co you claim on account of each stern of injury or damage as of date of presentation of this claim, giving basis of computation: n 1W 7 Give ESTIMATED AbtOUNT as far as known you claim on account of each item of ospective injuryj or damage, giving basis o,f computation: _ � 07 i- i Z7 �G _;�. SEE PAGE 2 (OVER) THIS C MUST BE SIGNED ON REVERSE SIDE lrs.:ar.ce payrner.ts reie:ve3, .f - ,.L.as cif Expenditures maae on account of accident cr :n;ury: ;Dace—hemi Name and aadress of Witnesses, Doctors and Hospitals: READ CAREFULLY For all accident claims place on follo-wing diagram names of streets, including North, East, South, and West; indicate place of accident by "X" and by showing house numbers or distances to street corners. if City Vehicle was involved, designate by letter "A" location of City vehicle when you first saw it, and by "B" location of you -self or your vehicle schen you first saw City vehicle; location of City vehicle at time of accident by "A-1" and location of yourself or your vehicle at the time of the accident by "B-1" and the point of impact by "X." NOTE: If diagrams below do not fit the situation, attach hereto a proper diagram signed by claimant. 7A\ CURB--)' V/ / FOR AUTOMOBILE ACCIDENTS FOR OTHER ACCIDENTS 01 SIDEWALK Signature of Claimant or person filing on his behalf giving relationship to Claimant: PARKWAY SIDEWALK Typed Name: �, ,c `1�'S'_' BE FI=D TH CI Y CiERK (GOV. CODE SEC. 915a) . CURB Date 7-o 4-� (Afol's no lz�D C x I i(( , I a s v >ir_ > r C 'D 0 Ll I r A > lor, "a 00 TI tY7 z C,j cz) N ti V1 r 0 c RE LTi> M n a tl or Lq VJ gn > 164,— mc z > r 0 rn Z I I ( N .jl (I C: Lo DO ph Li k- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- & - ) . (,r, +' I M ///////////////////////////////////////////////////✓///�/�/iiiiiiiiiiiiiuiii��r��i�r;;/,�,�,�/,�1JllJli�fllJll%Ii�I��IJI��IIIII VIII!((IIIIIIIIIIIIIII����1�llh�ll(I�JIIIII�II �I��IIIII I Yl� ill,di J i CARL WARREN & CO. I-L-111,Viiu,tQrs 95 AN 15 P!t/ l laims Nlanagcment and adrninnrr.0 n L' 'i0 Fhc ( aN Drive 1—, 400 (lran4c. ( 4 92008 MadPO Box 25180 Santa Ana. ( A 92799 I80 17141740-,999 800 572-6900 FAX (714,740-7992 TO: City of Diamond Bar ATTENTION: Lynda Burgess, CMC/AAE RE: Claim Claimant D/Event Recd Y/Office : Our File June 15, 1995 Tracy v. Diamond Bar Randi Tracy 3/24/95 6/8/95 S 82551 SWQ We have reviewed the above captioned claim and request that you take the action indicated below: • - q AIM RIr T'XMON: Send a standard rejection letter to the ebtm-at. Please provide us with a cM of the notice sent, as requested above. If you have any questions please contact the undersigned. Very truly yours, C & COMP DWight YKunz cc: SCJPIA w/enc. ROBERT R. WA1Q LUKE J. MC DA June'7, 1995 CERTIFIED MAS. MAIN STREET LAW Offf!j� -+r �1195 JUN 12 AH 10= 38 Olde Towne Yorba Linda 4895 Main Street Yorba Linda, Ca. 92686 Tele:714-777-96%, Fax:714-777-9699 CITY OF DiM1M BAR 21660.Copley DOVe Diamond Bat, CA Re: RANDI TRAM!' StWL ELI M. GOFF JACKIE L. MYERS JODI STOUT SHQ.PA BALAN VERA UMY its 4 uJ "+ci T p C-6q?IZ � n Date of AcaqieO,� ljarch 24, 1995 r Y17 The undora*w4r.7bk� due &Waving claim for persond-b*Wies,.ft. forriia GovermmnaQor�9 49d MU as foWws: 1. Claimant's name *OW&TM-y and CWmpa rcA&S at 5113 TTA 9uogt,:Ww ;:VACrnia, 91760; 2. Cl*;MA-V regWft er a OFFICES at 4$95 t; " 3. This claim t 4. Location of of Diamond i6 V be sept to Claimant's adomaya, MAIIy_STMT LAW ,a Linda, CII, 9Z411116; - vadw d by ca'"nant on at aboil MwiA 24;.1 14 11;30 a.m.; I= Spriags Drive near of and Av=x in 1W porated area ;ales, State of California; -5. Asaolsimant received severe injuries to clr4niant's bad , head, arms breast and ` 6. At the time of 4•4pd�t, Claimant was a passenger in a vdsi k which mw pW*tiy ihit by a Foothill Transit bus, situ# Wme personal injuries and propm;y doWk 7. The names of the County officials, servants or employees c w4ng the dame eat. unies are unknown; CITY OF DIAMOND BAR June 7, 1995 Page 2 8. Claimant demands general damages in the sum $100,000.00 medical expenses, lost earnings, property damage and all relaxed expenses incidental thereto. Very truly yours, ROBERT R WARD RRW jlm A 4 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AGENDA REPORT AGENDA NO.: TO: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager MEETING DATE: July 11, 1995 REPORT DATE: June 21, 1995 FROM: George A. Wentz, City Engineer TITLE: Release of Grading Cash Bond Posted for 2866 Wagon Train Lane in the "Country" in Diamond Bar. SUMMARY: The Principal, Chungs Investment, desires release of a cash bond posted for grading located at 2866 Wagon Train Lane in the amount of $2,880. The City Engineer finds that Principal has performed all work as shown on the approved "As -Built" grading plan, on file with the City. This bond was a condition precedent to issuance of a grading permit for 1,600 cubic yards of grading for an house addition, patio and garage at 2866 Wagon Train Lane in the amount of $2,880.00. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council 1)declare the obligations under this bond null and void and release the cash bond which was posted with the City of Diamond Bar in January, 1992; 2)instruct the City Clerk to notify Chungs Investment of the City Council's action. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS:x Staff Report _ Public Hearing Notification _ Resolution(s) _ Bid Specification (on file _ Ordinance(s) in City Clerk's Office) Agreement(s) X Other: Final Engineering Certificate and Copy of Cash Receipt and Grading Permit EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION: SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST: 1. Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed N/A by the City Attorney? 2. Does the report require a majority or 4/5 vote? Majority 3. Has environmental impact been assessed? N/A 4. Has the report been reviewed by a Commission? _ Yes x No Which Commission? N/A 5. Are other departments affected by the report? Yes x No Report discussed with the following affected departments: N/A REVIEWED BY: 6�4 Terrence L. elanger Frank A. she e A *enzz� g �,,p"�e$rg City Manag Assistant Ci y Manager K�^ City Engineer MEETING DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Crry COUNCIL R._rors-r AGENDA NO. July 11, 1995 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager Release of Grading Cash Bond Posted for 2866 Wagon Train Lane in the "Country" in Diamond Bar. ISSUE STATEMENT: The Principal, Chungs Investment, desires release of a Cash Bond posted for grading located at 2866 Wagon Train Lane in the amount of $2,880.00. This bond was a condition precedent to issuance of a grading permit for 1,600 cubic yards of grading for an addition and a garage at 2866 Wagon Train Lane, in the amount of $2,880.00. The City Engineer finds that Principal has performed all work as shown on the approved "As -Built" grading plan, on file with the City. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council 1)declare the obligations under this bond null and void and release the Cash Bond which was posted with the City of Diamond Bar in January, 1992; and 2)instruct the City Clerk to notify Chungs Investment and the City's Finance Department of the Council's action. FINANCIAL SUMMARY: This recommendation has no financial impact on the City's F.Y. 1995-1996 budget. BACKGROUND: The grading on this lot was for a 2,800 square foot addition to the house, a 900 square foot garage and a 1,800 square foot patio. The lot was inspected and final grade was approved on June 21, 1995 by the City's Consultant, Mr. Mike Myers of Charles Abbott and Associates. Therefore, we now recommend that the bond which was posted with the City of Diamond Bar be released. DISCUSSION: The following listed cash bond needs to be released: Address: Owner: Tract No.: Cash Receipt No.: Account No.: Amount: PREPARED BY: Anne X. Garvey 2866 Wagon Train Lane John and Diana Cheng 30578 5925 0800 2300 1001 $2.880.00 tivar ewe 7ls,§ x=16=r. C- 6;z �if%� ��or L- �l�r/9.✓� /oR �v�,fa %^y' /iV A/�iJci.v� G�' & -4 -'PcPo - /v.s% ,csi 11i, �' �,4 i� �y ray le 21w0 E. COPLEY DRIVE, SUITE 1.90 DIAMOND BAR, CA 91765-4177 (909) 396-5671 Vc pi. SUPERVISED GRADING INSPECTION CERTIFICATE i9 1g95 )B ADDRESS/LOT AND TRACT NO. 2866 Wagon Train Lane pERN[liN*O. E 9►o91 —"a,61 VNER John and 'Diana Chung CONTRACTOR W At --r ENGINEER'S ROUGH GRADING CERTIFICATION certify that the earth fills placed on the following lot(s) were installed upon competent and properly prepared base material and ?mpacted in compliance with requirements of Building Code Section 7010. I further certify that where the report or reports eAgineering geologist, relative to this site, have recommended the installation of buttresses, fills or other similar stabilization .ea ures, such earthwork construction has been completed in accordance with the approved design. r: ez report dated for compaction test data, recommended allowable soil bearing values and her ?ecommendations. - XPANSIVE SOILS (YES) (NO) LOT NO.(S) UTTRESS FILLS (YES) (NO) LOT NO.(S) EMARKS NGiNEER REG. NO. DATE Signature (and wet -stamp) UPERVISING GRADING ENGINEER'S ROUGH GRADING CERTIFICATION certify to the satisfactory completion of rough grading including: grading to approximate final elevations, property lines located ad staked; cut and fill slopes correctly graded and located in accordance with the approved design; swales and terraces graded !ady for paving, berms installed; and required drainage slopes provided on the build' er certify that where reportsib,, Q r reports of an engineering geologist and/.Qr soils engineer have been prepar .k to + III the recommendations ontained in soils reports have been followed in the execution of the work. �F� �� H A. .OT NO. (S) EMARKS � N ' 0 - '-NGINEERR REG. NO. 18713 Signature (and wet -stamp) JY1'�1 UPERVISING GRADING ENGINEER'S FINAL GRADING CERTIFICA, qj CiV1t certify to the satisfactory completion of grading in accordance with the appyed nQ.F k fired drainage devices have een installed; slope -planting established and irrigation systems provided (whei"e required); and adequate provisions have been Sade for drainage of surface waters from each building site. The recommendations of the soils engineer and engineering eologist (if such persons were employed) have been incorporated in the work. ,OT NO.(S)Lot 70, T act 011�1 M.B. 785 Pg. 9 EMARKS :NGINEER REG. NO. R.C.E. 18713 DATE March 28, 1995 signature (and wet -stamp) Kenneth A. Wilch ;RARING CERTIFICATION BY THE SOILS ENGINEER AND GRADING ENGINEER IS REQUIRED FOR ROUGH GRADE YSPEC77ON ANE REUSE TO BUILDING DEPARTMENT FOR STRUCTURAL PERMITS. 7NAL GRADING CER7TFICA770N BY THE GRADING ENGINEER IS REQUIRED BEFORE' Fl:;: -Lr- GRADE INSPECTION :ND RELEASE TO B UILDING DEPARTMENT FOR OCCUPANCY OF SYR UCTURE. U. -, _ el L :; tIPAST �' Vii' .ri,y ,� V, Od. 'IT -it !� 014�� cl, 2166 p I 7 rF At Ff V Received from: F IF kL G Description: -ac) ISO Revenue Description rLRA1% Building Permits .13A .A K Plumbing Permits Electrical Permits n J. 4i X Mechanical Permits Q . R 4i 4i & LIP Bldg. Permit Iss. Fees J Bldg. Plan Check Fees SJ SMIP Fees Engr. Plan Check Fees Engr. Permit Iss. Fees Engr. Inspection Fees T., Plan ning-Enviro nm ental Feest V Advance Planning Fees Current Planning Fees Sale of Printed Material 313 3 5 j;1 -x Cpv5,i :De4=>o-e1T 2 S X30 51: P!J RECEIVED BY 4(-tq f— \)49=, TC TAL RECEIVED 8 F3 0 4 Gsh_ ---Check Other who@ - CLMIWW. Canary- Dwal--I Prt Scld�nmld Finance Fi IEv vt o Oj . 1�'\ nye- o w✓ n -°. c �, '- c °' d w [' f c` a °��- 0 ao _$� o, s -,4w :3 > m "' = t"•a s^ C eo o° mac�n.. •r.e]v _uc at_i C _Na m? o: c'c. , -.a•.- E uf�°y_"._° -°. 'u pn -a>o ... >O XO vn ?OO<� , El tz '5'p> ° o'u ^.' '3 >> n �.•1 <` a o� 3 �.e "gg '^ r7 O _ice 0 . i � °ora A p 4Nn o >O n .j 3 F n> cyo o� 3E �Q S'.'• P.'a nQs>i $01?' o� `a 0 'nrl 25 ano +° NT. C'$SR s ° o f u° of c°c G r Sn >a O-oNO > 000 _rrm 0 > 0 z-4zr> D O 07 >> Z 0;:EC9 C00N .n0.0nO 0 > Z OP z X> M m M vex m z s m o D 0 D i + F'. ,`(Gi Om ^n m m r > 0 n� to 0 _ m O Cr1 0 CD cm or �4 N -� D.1 z 0 �pp >o m `�c=, n _ V5 yO ogo a a �nQ°� 3 u)on Z-4 > z -I z-1 m0 z nmC) pm V < im\. ♦ 7_t n H c 0 C .n- �/ m ? '•"� �" 1` 1 Cj n .- 'Of'r a G p- O (D O Vrca Iv�: t•_ H n O c ,— G O C Er OD CD R) n p C 0-4 O "1 cmc x marl --a 0c0c y x C�\>;?n0� ¢ ° `� 0 p O_ = ((11 y-.0� n -/ -a Nm -i �.-its m m v0>Om •--. `G .-d O C 0tO7 co �Q f`7 •J V m Z z D�^ j�0i N Orn tir zO rNomm �.o c 7'd A W ,1 Rl ]�� „-} m l m -' —m+ yv n a^� a. `c ars fl .... 0 ` T �•(� 0 Cl)ai j ( iy .1 �j p n p� 0 m �] O" Fis' W > o c H V :"0 1�J 1 4 D <�<�� W Or y aCn 7 ti > —C M 0 o „ m ) d o nn tip^^ o o H r1 �J m-4 l n z "1 ,° c c, ° n J N m O m O = O a) 7 0 d O < d Qro 3 S 7 rrry Ar rlyiX A �A AGENDA REPORT AGENDA NO.(L) 46 TO: Mayor and City Council MEETING DATE: July 11, 1995 REPORT DATE: July 7, 1995 FROM. Terrence L. Belanger, City Manger ISSUE: Consideration of adoption of Resolution 90-45J, Personnel Rules and Regulations Regarding the Payment of Salaries, Sick Leave, Vacations, Leaves of Absences, and Other Regulations. DISCUSSION: The City Council, with the adoption of the Fiscal Year 1995-96 Budget, approved the increase in salaries of all part- and full-time classifications. The City Council also approved the increase of the benefit plan amount by $50 per month. Also, staff is proposing the addition of a 401A Deferred Compensation Plan, which provide eligible employees to contribute up to 25% of their salary, not to exceed $30,000 annually, if individual employees so desire. Currently, the City's Section 457 Deferred Compensation Plan provides for an annual deferred maximum amount of $7,500. The stated changes are reflected in Resolution 90-45J. Also, there is a separate resolution which would designate the ICMA Retirement Corporation as the trustee for the Section 401A Deferred Compensation Plan. The ICMA/RC is currently the trustee for Section 457 Deferred Compensation Plan. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council approve Resolution 90-45J which establishes salary rangers for all part- and full-time classifications, increases the employee benefit program payment by $50 per month, and make available to all eligible employees a 401A Deferred Compensation Plan. SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST: 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? 5 Are other departments affected by the report? Report discussed with the following affected departments: REVIEWED BY: A Terrence L. Belanger City Manager X_ Yes MAJORITY N/A _ Yes Yes Yes No No —No X No RESOLUTION NO. 90-45J RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR SETTING FORTH PERSONNEL RULES AND REGULATIONS REGARDING THE PAYMENT OF SALARIES, SICK LEAVE, VACATIONS, LEAVES OF ABSENCES, AND OTHER REGULATIONS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR HEREBY RESOLVES, ORDERS, AND DETERMINES AS FOLLOWS: WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that it is necessary to the efficient operation and management of the City that rules and regulations be maintained prescribing sick leave, vacation, leaves of absences, and other regulations for the employees and officers of the City; and WHEREAS, it is necessary from time to time to establish comprehensive wage and salary schedules and to fix the rates of compensation to be paid to officers and employees of the City. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar, California, as follows: SECTION 1. COMPREHENSIVE WAGE AND SALARY PLAN There is hereby established a Comprehensive Wage and Salary Plan for employees of the City of Diamond Bar. The Comprehensive Wage and Salary Plan is designed to provide for a fair and efficient framework for the administration of wages and is based upon the recommendations of the City Manager. SECTION 2. SALARY SCHEDULE Pursuant to Ordinance No. 21 (1989), the Diamond Bar City Council hereby establishes the salaries and the various full-time positions of the City of Diamond Bar. As of the pay period which is paid on July 14, 1995, the compensation of the various classes of positions shall be as shown on Schedule A (attached). SECTION 3. FULL-TIME SALARY SCHEDULE GUIDELINES New employees shall be hired at the entry step or any step at the discretion of the City Manager and must successfully complete a one year probation period. At the end of six months, the employee will be given a performance evaluation and may be eligible for the next step. Every year thereafter, employees shall be given a performance evaluation and shall move to each successive step, so long as the employee's performance is satisfactory or above. RESOLUTION 90-45J Page Two SECTION 4. PROBATION In an effort to monitor newly -hired employees, the probation period for newly -hired employees is one year. SECTION 5. MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT Private automobiles are not to be used for the City business except as authorized. The City Manager may authorize such use at the reimbursement rate equal to that set forth by the Internal Revenue Services. Payments shall be based upon the most direct route to and from the destination, and garage and parking expenses shall be paid in addition to the current rate, upon submission of paid receipts. SECTION 6. HEALTH. DENTAL. VISION. LIFE, LONG TERM DISABILITY AND UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE. All full-time employees and designated permanent part time employees are eligible to receive group health, dental, vision, life, deferred compensation, disability insurance and unemployment insurance within the City's group insurance carrier(s), with the administrative cost and premiums paid by the City to a maximum established in Section 7 after 30 days of employment. Dependents of employees are eligible for health, dental and vision insurance. SECTION 7. FRINGE BENEFIT PACKAGE An employee benefit program is authorized wherein all officers, full-time employees and designated permanent part-time have a choice of medical and/or fringe benefits, as described in Section 6, in an amount not to exceed $520.00 a month, paid by the City. A. Employees, defined as Management, shall receive an additional $30.00 per month to be applied as described in Section 6. B. All employees shall participate in the Life, Dental and Vision Insurance programs. The City shall pay the cost of the employee in addition to the benefit program described in Section 6 or Section 7(A). Monies in excess of the City's 457 Plan may be paid off annually, during each December. C. All eligible employees may participate in the City's 401(A) deferred compensation plan. SECTION 8. PART-TIME HOURLY RANGE CHART Hourly compensation for the various part-time positions shall be as set forth in Schedule A (attached). RESOLUTION 90-45J Page Three SECTION 9. STATUS OF EMPLOYMENT All employees serve under the City Manager, pursuant to Government Code Section 34856. Per Government Code Section 36506, nothing in these rules and regulations shall be construed to provide employees with any tenure or property interest in employment. SECTION 10. PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM - DEFERRED COMPENSATION The City of Diamond Bar shall pay the employee contribution of said employee salary to the State Public Employees' Retirement System (PERS) as deferred income. SECTION 11. PAY PERIODS The compensation due to all officers and employees of the City shall be on a bi-weekly basis. SECTION 12. PAY DAYS Warrants or checks in the payment of compensation shall be made available by the City to employees and officers of the City on the Friday succeeding the close of any given pay period. In an event that pay day falls on a holiday, all warrants or checks in payment of compensation shall be made available to the City employee on the last work day preceding the holiday. SECTION 13. WORKING HOURS AND OVERTIME A. Eight (8) hours, exclusive of lunch period, shall constitute a day's work for all full time employees. B. The official work week of the City of Diamond Bar shall be five (5) working days of eight (8) hours each. It shall be the duty of each Department Manager to arrange the work of their Department so that each employee therein shall not work more than five (5) days in each calendar week. The City Manager may require an employee to temporarily perform service in excess of five (5) days per week when public necessity or convenience so requires. C. Whenever an employee, other than an Administrative/Executive employee, shall be required to work overtime, beyond 40 hours per week, such person shall receive compensation for such overtime worked at one and one-half (11/2) times the regular rate of pay, provided they have completed a fu1140 hour work week. RESOLUTION 90-45J Page Four SECTION 13. WORKING HOURS AND OVERTIME (CONT'D) D. Any full time employee, other than an Administrative/Executive employee, who is required to work on an observed holiday beyond the regular 40 hour work week, shall be entitled to pay at the rate of two (2) times the regular rate of pay provided they have worked a 40 hour work week. E. There is nothing contained within this Section to exclude the City from implementing a 4-10 Plan, at their option. SECTION 14. ANNUAL VACATION YEARS OF SERVICE VACATION ACCRUAL 10 days 15 days 20 days A. A full time employee, after twelve (12) months continuous service with the City of Diamond Bar, shall be entitled to a vacation of ten (10) work days per year to be accrued at a rate of 3.08 hours per pay period. B. Vacation time may be accumulated to a maximum of twenty (20) days (160 hours). The City Manager may approve vacation time accruals exceeding twenty (20) days. C. The total vacation allowance shall be computed to the nearest whole day, based upon the number of full months of City service. D. In the event one or more municipal holidays follow accumulated vacation leave, such days shall not be charged as vacation leave and the vacation leave shall be extended accordingly for those employees eligible for such holidays. E. An employee shall take vacation at such time during the calendar year based upon due regard to the needs of the employee's services and the work schedule. F. Vacation shall be taken during the year following which the vacation privilege has been earned. G. The time set for the vacation of the City Manager shall be subject to the approval of the City Council. RESOLUTION 90-45J Page Five SECTION 14. ANNUAL VACATION (CONT'D) H. Employees who terminate shall be paid the salary equivalent to all accrued vacation earned after one (1) year of service has been completed, prior to the effective date of termination. I. All vacation requests shall be made at least five (5) days in advance and prior approval must be given by employee's supervisor and department head. J. If an employee does not request time off in advance and simply does not show up for work, the City Manager may deny the use of vacation time or other benefit for the time off, and said employee is subject to disciplinary action including discharge. K. Management employees, for the purpose of accrual, shall be credited with previous municipal experience, up to five (5) years of service. SECTION 15. SICK LEAVE A. Sick leave with pay shall be accrued by full-time employees at a rate of 3.08 hours per pay period. B. After six (6) months of continuous service, the employee is eligible to use sick leave. C. Unused sick leave may be accumulated to a maximum total not to exceed 160 hours. Absence or illness may not be charged to sick leave if not already accrued and/or accumulated. D. Each full time employee shall be paid one-half (1/2) of the unused balance of the annually accrued sick leave, accrued during a given accrual year, when the then annual accrual results in sick leave in excess of the maximum allowable accumulation of 160 hours. The sick leave payout shall only apply to the amount which is in excess of the maximum allowable accumulated amount of 160 hours. The annual accrued sick leave, over the maximum accumulation, shall be paid once a year, at the employee's current wage at the time of payment. Said payment is to be made on the first day in December, or at such other time as the City Manager may determine, at his/her absolute discretion, as appropriate. E. Sick leave shall be allowed only in case of necessity and actual sickness or disability of the employee or dependent family members, as determined by the City Manager. In order to receive sick leave with pay, the employee shall notify the department head prior to or within two (2) hours after the time set for beginning daily duties. The City Manager may, if he/she deems necessary, require the employee to file a Physician's Certificate or a Personal Affidavit stating the cause of absence. RESOLUTION 90-45J Page Six SECTION 15. SICK LEAVE (CONT'D) F. Sick leave shall not accrue to any employee for any month in which that employee is on unpaid leave and does not work a minimum of ten (10) eight (8) hour working days in any one month or combination thereof. G. If an employee does not show up for work and does not call in within two hours, the City Manager may deny use of sick leave for the unauthorized time off, and employee is subject to disciplinary action. H. Employees using all accumulated sick leave may be deemed to have abandoned their employment. I. After five (5) years of service, when an employee retires, resigns or terminates in good standing, that employee will be paid all accumulated sick leave at a rate of one-half (1/2) of the employee's current rate of pay at his/her date of termination. SECTION 16. BEREAVEMENT LEAVE When circumstances are such and the City Manager determines that conditions warrant, three (3) paid bereavement leave days may be granted in the event of death of a relative of a full-time employee. "Relative" is defined as spouse, parents, children, step -children, brother, sisters, grandparents, grandchildren, half-brothers, half-sisters, aunts, uncles, or other individuals related by blood or marriage. SECTION 17. UNAUTHORIZED LEAVE If an employee does not show up for work for three consecutive work days without notifying said employee's supervisor or department head, said employee shall be considered to have voluntarily terminated employment with the City. SECTION 18. ON-THE-JOB INJURY Whenever a person is compelled to be absent from employment with the City on account of injury arising out of or in the course of that employee's employment as determined by the Workers' Compensation Act, the employee may elect to apply pro -rated accrued sick leave, if any, to such absence to receive compensation of an amount of the difference between the compensation received under the Workers' Compensation Act and that employee's regular pay, not to exceed the amount of the employee's earned sick leave. An employee in such instance may also elect to use any earned vacation time in like manner after sick leave is exhausted. The City will pay the employee up to three (3) days of that employee's regular salary as it relates to an on-the-job injury and if not covered by Workers' Compensation. RESOLUTION 90-45J Page Seven SECTION 19. JURY DUTY If a full-time employee is called for jury duty, such person shall receive regular pay while actually performing jury service, however, any amount received by such employee as payment for services as juror shall be reimbursed to the City. All mileage paid to the employee as a juror shall not be considered as a reimbursable item to the City. SECTION 20. ATTENDANCE Full time employees shall be in attendance at their work in accordance with the rules regarding hours of work, holidays, and leave. Departments shall keep attendance records of all employees. Absence of any employee without leave may result in possible disciplinary action including discharge. SECTION 21. HOLIDAYS A. Holidays which fall on Saturday shall be observed on the preceding Friday, and holidays which fall on Sunday shall be observed on the following Monday. Paid holidays are only for the observed days. B. The City of Diamond Bar's observed paid holidays are as follows: 1. New Year's Day (January 1) 2. Washington's Birthday (observed the third Monday in February) 3. Memorial Day (observed the last Monday in May) 4. Independence Day (July 4) 5. Labor Day (observed first Monday in September) 6. Veteran's Day (November 11) 7. Thanksgiving Day 8. Day following Thanksgiving Day 9. Christmas Eve (December 24) 10. Christmas Day (December 25) 11. Two (2) Floating Holidays SECTION 22. FLOATING HOLIDAYS A. Each full time employee is allowed two (2) floating holidays (8 hours each) per calendar year, January through December. B. Floating Holidays are not cumulative and must be used during the above period or said employee will lose the allocated hours. RESOLUTION 90-45J Page Eight SECTION 22. FLOATING HOLIDAYS (CONT'D) C. Each employee must submit a request in advance, and approval must be given by the employee's supervisor and department head. D. A full time employee is eligible to use a floating holiday after 30 days of continuous employment. E. Floating Holidays may be used in lieu of sick leave only if all other benefit time has been exhausted. SECTION 23. TRAINING PLAN The City Manager and employees of the City are eligible to request specialized training in the form of symposiums, special courses, forums, etc., at the City's expense. SECTION 24. LEAVE OF ABSENCE Leave of absence without pay may only be granted by the City Manager. SECTION 25, RESIGNATION An employee wishing to terminate employment in good standing shall file a written resignation with the City Manager stating the effective date and reasons for leaving, at least two (2) weeks prior to the resignation. Failure to give such notice shall mean the employee did not terminate in good standing, unless by reason of hardship and upon that employee's request, the City Manager has waived the two week notice requirement. SECTION 26. ANTI -NEPOTISM PROVISION A. Relatives of those listed below may not be employed anywhere in the City organization: 1. City Councimembers; 2. Standing Board and Commission members; 3. Administrative/Executive employees of the City; 4. Employees of the City Manager's Department; or 5. Employees of the Personnel Department. RESOLUTION 90-45J Page Nine SECTION 26. ANTI -NEPOTISM PROVISION (CONT'D) B. The employment of a relative within a department is prohibited when they: 1. Perform joint duties; 2. Share responsibility of authority; 3. Function in the same chain of command; and 4. Work on the same shift at the same work site. C. For business reasons of supervision, safety, security or morale, the City may refuse to place one spouse under the direct supervision of the other spouse. D. For business reasons of supervision, safety, security or morale, an employer may refuse to place both spouses in the same department, division, or facility if the work involves potential conflicts of interest or other hazards greater for married couples than other persons. E. "Relative" means child, step -child, parent, grandparent, grandchild, brother, sister, half- brother, half-sister, aunt, uncle, niece, nephew, parent -in-law, brother -in law, sister-in-law, or another individual related by blood or marriage. F. "Employee" means any person who receives a City paycheck for services rendered to the City. SECTION 27. NON-DISCRIMINATION The City of Diamond Bar does hereby affirm to adopt and support a policy of non-discrimination with regard to all phases of personnel recruitment, selection and appointment. The City further declares that it will not exclude from participation in, deny the benefits of, or subject to discrimination any person on the basis of race, religion, nationality, sex, age or handicap, thereby affirming the City of Diamond Bar's posture as an equal opportunity employer. SECTION 28. EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION APPEALS PROCEDURES It is the intent of the City to offer fair and equitable appeals procedures for employee's performance evaluations. Below are the official guidelines. A. Employee and supervisor meet to review and discuss the employee's performance evaluation. RESOLUTION 90-45J Page Ten SECTION 28. EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION APPEALS PROCEDURES (CONT'D) B. The employee may respond in writing to the contents of the evaluation. This response must be submitted to the department head within five (5) working days immediately following the evaluation. C. The department head, as the reviewing official, shall respond in writing to the employee within five (5) working days. This response becomes an official part of the evaluation. D. If the employee chooses to continue to appeal following the response from the reviewing official, the employee must submit an additional written response to the Personnel Director within five (5) working days after receipt of the reviewing official's response. E. The Personnel Director shall review the evaluation appeal within five (5) days with the employee, supervisor and department head. Every effort will be made at this level to resolve the appeal. F. If the matter is not settled, a written appeal may be submitted tot he City Manager by the employee within five (5) working days following the decision rendered in writing by the Personnel Director. G. The City Manager shall review the appeal with the employee, supervisor, department head and Personnel Director. The decision shall be rendered in writing within five (5) working days by the City Manager and shall be final. SECTION 29, POST OFFER PHYSICAL EXAMS All individuals who become a candidate for City employment must successfully pass a post -offer physical and substance abuse exams and are subject to fingerprinting and a background investigation. The candidates being considered for employment will be sent to a City authorized physician at the City's expense. RESOLUTION 90-45J Page Eleven SECTION 30. EMERGENCY CALL -OUT POLICY The following Emergency Call -Out Policy shall be adhered to: A. When a full time employee, other than an Administrative/Executive employee, is called out for a City emergency, the employee shall be given a minimum of two hours pay, regardless of the amount of time it takes to rectify the problem. B. The employee shall be paid overtime per Section 13. SECTION 31. ADMINISTRATIVE LEAVE Administrative/Executive employees are allowed two (2) days of administrative leave per fiscal year. Additional days of leave may be authorized by the City Manager, based on the number of total hours the individual works over and above 40 hours per week. A. Administrative/Executive employees do not receive paid overtime, and this leave is to recognize those employees who work over and above 40 hours per week. B. Following is a list of Administrative/Executive positions: Accounting Manager Administrative Analyst Administrative Assistant Assistant to the City Manager Assistant City Manager Assistant Civil Engineer Assistant Planner Associate Engineer Associate Planner City Clerk City Engineer/Director of Public Works Community Relations Officer Director of Community Development Director of Community Services Secretary to the City Manager Senior Accountant Senior Engineer Superintendent of Parks & Maintenance RESOLUTION 90-45J Page Twelve SECTION 31. ADMINISTRATIVE LEAVE (CONT'D) C. Administrative leave may not be accumulated and carried over to the following year. It must be used by June 30 of each fiscal year. Leave may be granted in hourly increments. Requests shall be submitted to employee's immediate supervisor for approval, then forwarded to the City Manager for approval. Administrative leave will be authorized at the convenience of the City and the work schedule. SECTION 32, MEDICARE Pursuant to Revenue Billing 86-68 of the Internal Revenue Code, all employees hired after March 31, 1987 will have 1.45 percent of their base salary deducted from their paycheck to be paid to Medicare. The City will match the 1.45 percent as mandated by law. SECTION 33. IMMIGRATION REFORM AND CONTROL ACT OF 1986 In compliance with the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, all new employees must verify identity and entitlement to work in the United States by providing required documentation. SECTION 34. EXTENDED BENEFITS - COBRA The Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985 (COBRA) provides for the continuation of health care coverage to certain employees who terminated employment and beneficiaries of employees who die, become disabled or are divorced. Employees become eligible for continued coverage upon termination of service, whether voluntary or not (other than termination for gross misconduct), retirement or reduction in hours worked. For these employees and their dependents, continued coverage is available for 18 months, at their expense. SECTION 35. TUITION REIMBURSEMENT Subject to Council fiscal year budget authorization, each employee shall be entitled to reimbursement in the amount of $500 per fiscal year, for college -level or university -level educational courses (including tuition and related books), which have been approved by the personnel Officer or his/her designate as being job-related and of value to the City. Reimbursement under this Section is contingent upon the verification of the attainment of a letter grade of "C" or better, or in those cases where no letter grade is given, verification of completion of the course with a "Pass" or "Credit" grade and submittal of a receipt for registration bearing the name of the course, for which reimbursement is being requested. In the case of reimbursement for books for any approved/verified course; a syllabus, course reading list or course outline showing the book as being required for the course, plus a receipt bearing the title of the book shall be submitted. RESOLUTION 90-45J Page Thirteen SECTION 36. PART TIME EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT Effective July 1, 1991, part time, seasonal and temporary employees will be covered by a retirement system, under Social Security (OASDI). An employee's contribution rate shall be 6.2% on wages up to $61,200. The employer's tax rate is the same. Election workers and emergency workers are excepted from coverage, under this section. ADOPTED AND APPROVED THIS day of , 1995 Mayor I, LYNDA BURGESS, City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar held on the day of , 1995, and was finally adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar held on the day of , 1995, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ATTEST: LYNDA M. BURGESS, City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar Schedule A CITY OF DIAMOND BAR SALARY RANGES BY POSITION FY 1995-% (3.5%) JOB TITLE A B C D E F G Receptionist 804 8.04 8.44 8.86 9.30 9.77 10.26 10.77 1,392.97 1,462.62 1,535.75 1,612.54 1,693.16 1,777.82 1,866.71 16,715.64 17,551.42 18,429.00 19,350.45 20,317.97 21,333.87 22,400.56 Jr. Clerk Typist 930 9.30 9.77 10.26 10.77 11.31 11.87 12.47 1,612.54 1,693.17 1,777.82 1,866.71 1,960.05 2,058.05 2,160.96 19,350.46 20,317.99 21,333.88 22,400.58 23,520.61 24,696.64 25,931.47 Clerk Typist 1000 10.00 10.50 11.03 11.58 12.16 12.76 13.40 1,733.49 1,820.16 1,911.17 2,006.73 2,107.06 2,212.42 2,323.04 20,801.82 21,841.91 22,934.01 24,080.71 25,284.74 26,548.98 27,876.43 Account Clerk I 1000 10.00 10.50 11.03 11.58 12.16 12.76 13.40 1,733.49 1,820.16 1,911.17 2,006.73 2,107.06 2,212.42 2,323.04 20,801.82 21,841.91 22,934.01 24,080.71 25,284.74 26,548.98 27,876.43 Adminstrative 1095 10.95 11.50 12.08 12.68 13.31 13.98 14.68 Analyst 1,898.63 1,993.56 2,093.24 2,197.90 2,307.79 2,423.18 2,544.34 22,783.52 23,922.69 25,118.83 26,374.77 27,693.51 29,078.18 30,532.09 Secretary 1100 11.00 11.55 12.12 12.73 13.37 14.03 14.74 1,906.03 2,001.33 2,101.39 2,206.46 2,316.79 2,432.63 2,554.26 22,872.32 24,015.94 25,216.74 26,477.57 27,801.45 29,191.52 30,651.10 Code Enforcement 1150 11.50 12.08 12.68 13.31 13.98 14.68 15.41 Officer 1,993.68 2,093.36 2,198.03 2,307.93 2,423.33 2,544.49 2,671.72 23,924.11 25,120.31 26,376.33 27,695.14 29,079.90 30,533.90 32,060.59 Parks Maintenance 1160 11.60 12.18 12.79 13.43 14.10 14.80 15.54 Worker II 2,010.29 2,110.80 2,216.34 2,327.16 2,443.52 2,565.69 2,693.98 24,123.43 25,329.61 26,596.09 27,925.89 29,322.19 30,788.30 32,327.71 Deputy City Clerk 1212 12.12 12.73 13.36 14.03 14.73 15.47 16.24 2,100.65 2,205.68 2,315.97 2,431.77 2,553.35 2,681.02 2,815.07 25,207.81 26,468.20 27,791.61 29,181.19 30,640.24 32,172.26 33,780.87 Administrative 1212 12.12 12.73 13.36 14.03 14.73 15.47 16.24 Secretary 2,100.65 2,205.68 2,315.97 2,431.77 2,553.35 2,681.02 2,815.07 25,207.81 26,468.20 27,791.61 29,181.19 30,640.24 32,172.26 33,780.87 Administrative 1212 12.12 12.73 13.36 14.03 14.73 15.47 16.24 Assistant 2,100.65 2,205.68 2,315.97 2,431.77 2,553.35 2,681.02 2,815.07 25,207.81 26,468.20 27,791.61 29,181.19 30,640.24 32,172.26 33,780.87 Management 1212 12.12 12.73 13.36 14.03 14.73 15.47 16.24 Information System 2,100.65 2,205.68 2,315.97 2,431.77 2,553.35 2,681.02 2,815.07 (MIS) Assistant 25,207.81 26,468.20 27,791.61 29,181.19 30,640.24 32,172.26 33,780.87 Schedule A CITY OF DIAMOND BAR SALARY RANGES BY POSITION FY 1995-96 (3.5%) JOB TITLE A B C D E F G Engineering 1465 14.65 15.38 16.15 16.95 17.80 18.69 19.63 Technician 2,538.57 2,665.50 2,798.78 2,938.72 3,085.65 3,239.93 3,401.93 30,462.89 31,986.03 33,585.33 35,264.60 37,027.83 38,879.22 40,823.18 Planning 1465 14.65 15.38 16.15 16.95 17.80 18.69 19.63 Technician 2,538.57 2,665.50 2,798.78 2,938.72 3,085.65 3,239.93 3,401.93 30,462.89 31,986.03 33,585.33 35,264.60 37,027.83 38,879.22 40,823.18 Community Relations 1465 14.65 15.38 16.15 16.95 17.80 18.69 19.63 Coordinator 2,538.57 2,665.50 2,798.78 2,938.72 3,085.65 3,239.93 3,401.93 30,462.89 31,986.03 33,585.33 35,264.60 37,027.83 38,879.22 40,823.18 Secretary to the 1576 15.76 16.55 17.37 18.24 19.15 20.11 21.12 City Manager 2,731.37 2,867.94 3,011.34 3,161.91 3,320.00 3,486.00 3,660.30 32,776.49 34,415.31 36,136.08 37,942.88 39,840.03 41,832.03 43,923.63 Assistant Civil 1576 15.76 16.55 17.37 18.24 19.15 20.11 21.12 Engineer 2,731.37 2,867.94 3,011.34 3,161.91 3,320.00 3,486.00 3,660.30 32,776.49 34,415.31 36,136.08 37,942.88 39,840.03 41,832.03 43,923.63 Assistant Planner 1576 15.76 16.55 17.37 18.24 19.15 20.11 21.12 2,731.37 2,867.94 3,011.34 3,161.91 3,320.00 3,486.00 3,660.30 32,776.49 34,415.31 36,136.08 37,942.88 39,840.03 41,832.03 43,923.63 Assistant to the 1576 15.76 16.55 17.37 18.24 19.15 20.11 21.12 City Manager 2,731.37 2,867.94 3,011.34 3,161.91 3,320.00 3,486.00 3,660.30 32,776.49 34,415.31 36,136.08 37,942.88 39,840.03 41,832.03 43,923.63 Superintendent of 1829 18.29 19.20 20.16 21.17 22.23 23.34 24.51 Parks/Maintenance 3,170.02 3,328.52 3,494.95 3,669.70 3,853.18 4,045.84 4,248.13 38,040.28 39,942.29 41,939.41 44,036.38 46,238.20 48,550.10 50,977.61 Senior Accountant 1829 18.29 19.20 20.16 21.17 22.23 23.34 24.51 3,170.02 3,328.52 3,494.95 3,669.70 3,853.18 4,045.84 4,248.13 38,040.28 39,942.29 41,939.41 44,036.38 46,238.20 48,550.10 50,977.61 Associate Planner 1916 19.16 20.11 21.12 22.18 23.28 24.45 25.67 3,320.35 3,486.37 3,660.69 3,843.72 4,035.91 4,237.70 4,449.59 39,844.22 41,836.43 43,928.25 46,124.66 48,430.89 50,852.44 53,395.06 Associate Engineer 1916 19.16 20.11 21.12 22.18 23.28 24.45 25.67 3,320.35 3,486.37 3,660.69 3,843.72 4,035.91 4,237.70 4,449.59 39,844.22 41,836.43 43,928.25 46,124.66 48,430.89 50,852.44 53,395.06 Transportation 1916 19.16 20.11 21.12 22.18 23.28 24.45 25.67 Planner 3,320.35 3,486.37 3,660.69 3,843.72 4,035.91 4,237.70 4,449.59 39,844.22 41,836.43 43,928.25 46,124.66 48,430.89 50,852.44 53,395.06 Schedule A CITY OF DIAMOND BAR SALARY RANGES BY POSITION FY 1995-96 (3.5%) JOB TITLE 5.18 A B C D E F G Accounting Manager 1966 19.66 20.64 21.68 22.76 23.90 25.09 26.35 7.77 8.28 3,407.77 3,578.16 3,757.07 3,944.92 4,142.17 4,349.28 4,566.74 8.28 8.80 40,893.29 42,937.95 45,084.85 47,339.10 49,706.05 52,191.35 54,800.92 Senior Engineer 2059 20.59 21.62 22.70 23.84 25.03 26.28 27.60 15.01 15.53 3,569.38 3,747.85 3,935.24 4,132.00 4,338.60 4,555.53 4,783.31 42,832.52 44,974.15 47,222.86 49,584.00 52,063.20 54,666.36 57,399.68 City Clerk 2137 21.37 22.44 23.57 24.74 25.98 27.28 28.64 3,704.95 3,890.20 4,084.71 4,288.95 4,503.39 4,728.56 4,964.99 44,459.44 46,682.41 49,016.53 51,467.36 54,040.73 56,742.76 59,579.90 Community Services 2223 22.23 23.34 24.51 25.73 27.02 28.37 29.79 Director 3,853.15 4,045.81 4,248.10 4,460.50 4,683.53 4,917.70 5,163.59 46,237.80 48,549.69 50,977.18 53,526.04 56,202.34 59,012.46 61,963.08 Comm. Development 2878 28.78 30.22 31.73 33.31 34.98 36.73 38.56 Director 4,988.04 5,237.44 5,499.31 5,774.27 6,062.99 6,366.14 6,684.44 59,856.42 62,849.24 65,991.71 69,291.29 72,755.85 76,393.65 80,213.33 City Eng/Public 2878 28.78 30.22 31.73 33.31 34.98 36.73 38.56 Works Director 4,988.04 5,237.44 5,499.31 5,774.27 6,062.99 6,366.14 6,684.44 59,856.42 62,849.24 65,991.71 69,291.29 72,755.85 76,393.65 80,213.33 Assistant City 3058 30.58 32.11 33.71 35.40 37.17 39.03 40.98 Manager 5,300.59 5,565.61 5,843.90 6,136.09 6,442.89 6,765.04 7,103.29 63,607.03 66,787.38 70,126.75 73,633.08 77,314.74 81,180.48 85,239.50 City Manager 8,056.00 96,672.00 PART-TIME/HOURLY Comm. Svcs Leader 5.18 5.70 6.21 6.73 7.25 7.77 8.28 Community Svcs Leader II 7.25 7.77 8.28 8.80 9.32 9.84 10.35 Intern/Part-Time 7.25 7.77 8.28 8.80 9.32 9.84 10.35 Parks Mtce Helper 7.25 7.77 8.28 8.80 9.32 9.84 10.35 Comm Svcs Coordinator 9.32 9.84 10.35 10.87 11.39 11.91 12.42 Counter Clerk/Permit Tech 12.94 13.46 13.98 14.49 15.01 15.53 16.05 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AGENDA REPORT AGENDA NO. 6.0 TO: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager MEETING DATE: July 11, 1995 REPORT DATE: June 20, 1995 FROM: James DeStefano, Community Development Director TITLE: Amendment to Professional Services Agreement with Envicom Corporation regarding Environmental Services for TM 46485. SUMMARY: This matter requests approval of an amendment to a contract for environmental services to prepare an Environmental Impact Report analyzing the environmental project impacts of an amendment to a proposed 53 lot subdivision located off Rocky Trail Road and Blaze Trail. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council enter into a Professional Services Agreement with Envicom Corporation to provide environmental services for Tentative Tract No. 46485 in the amount of $41,751.90. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS: X Staff Report _ Public Hearing Notification _ Resolution(s) _ Bid Specification (on file in City Clerks Office) X Agreement for Payment (on file in City Clerk's Office) EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION: Project Applicants, Envicom Corporation 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? N/A 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: Terre ice L. Belan Frank . Sher' City Manager Assistant City Manager s es DeSt anl-- ,��/ Community Development i)irector czTz cvvrrczz. z�rvziz- AGENDA NO. MEETING DATE: July 11, 1995 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager SUBJECT: Amendment to Professional Services Agreement with Envicom Corporation regarding Environmental Services for TM 46485. ISSUE STATEMENT: This matter requests approval of an amendment to a contract for environmental services to prepare an Environmental Impact Report analyzing the environmental project impacts of an amendment to a proposed 53 lot subdivision located off Rocky Trail Road and Blaze Trail. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council enter into a Professional Services Agreement with Envicom Corporation to provide environmental services for Tentative Tract No. 46485 in the amount of $41,751.90. FINANCIAL SUMMARY: Costs associated with processing the project are funded through developer fees paid by the applicant to the City. BACKGROUND: The tentative tract map and associated applications were submitted to the City in October of 1990. In November, 1991 the City entered into a contract with Envicom Corporation to prepare an Environmental Impact Report for the project. Several alternative project designs were submitted to the City over the period extending from 1990 to June of 1994. The changes to the project placed the preparation of the document on hold, with sections related to the particular design, incapable of being completed. The City placed the preparation of the EIR on hold until the applicant agreed to submit a schedule for submitting the required technical reports and other information. The previously drafted material within the EIR must be updated and reviewed for accuracy, amended if necessary, and updated with newly provided technical information. The scope of work, tasks and associated costs have resulted from the review of the existing documentation and information submitted with the application. The applicant has complied and has submitted the required monetary deposit and associated Agreements for payment of the City's environmental consultant costs. Additionally, the applicant has forwarded a written tentative schedule for providing a Traffic Study and a Preliminary Soils and Geotechnical report. All reports are to be submitted to the City by mid-July for the completion of the EIR based on the revised projected schedule. The project applicants support the staff recommendation. PREPARED BY: Robert L. Searcy Associate Planner Attachments: Agreement for Consulting Services Scope of Services and Budget (March 27, 1995) Updated Confirmation Letter (June 6, 1995) CAWP51 \AGENDA\46485PSA AGREEI IENT FOR EIR CONSULTING SERVICES THIS AGREEMENT is made this 6th day of June, 1995, by and between the City of Diamond Bar, a municipal corporation (hereinafter called "CITY"), and Envicom, Inc., a California corporation (hereinafter called "CONSULTANT"). RECITALS WHEREAS, an application has been submitted for a Tentative Tract Map, Hillside Development Conditional Use Permit and Oak Tree Permit in connection with a subdivision project consisting of a 53 unit development on a 80 acre site located in the City of Diamond Bar; and WHEREAS, the California Environmental Quality Act (hereinafter called "CEQA"), the State Environmental Impact Report Guidelines, and the CITY's local Environmental Impact Report Guidelines require the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (hereinafter "EIR") prior to CITY's decision on this project; and WHEREAS, CONSULTANT represents that it is qualified and able to prepare an EIR in compliance with all applicable state laws and state and local guidelines; NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows: Section 1. CONSULTANT's Services. CONSULTANT shall perform the following services: - (a) CONSULTANT shall prepare an EIR for CITY on the project described in the first Recital hereinabove, which is more particularly described in Exhibit A, Request for Proposal, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. The EIR shall be prepared in compliance with and shall contain all items required by the CEQA, Public Resources Code Sections 21000 et sea., the State Guidelines, and 14 California Code of Regulations Sections 15000 t.-1. , as amended. (b) When requested, CONSULTANT shall attend and participate in meetings with CITY staff and public hearings before CITY's Significant Ecological Area Technical Advisory Committee (SEATAC), Planning Commission and City Council which involve the EIR. Included within the compensation provided for pursuant to Section 3 of this Agreement, are the following: Ten (10) public hearings before the SEATAC, Planning Commission and City Council. For additional meetings which CONSULTANT is requested to attend by CITY, CONSULTANT shall be compensated on a time and materials basis at the rates set forth in the "Professional Fee Schedule" attached hereto as Exhibit B and incorporated herein by reference. (c) All reports, information, data and exhibits prepared or assembled by CONSULTANT in connection with the performance of its services pursuant to this Agreement are confidential until released by CITY to the public and CONSULTANT CMETTEMENVICON.CON agrees that they shall not be made available to any individual or organization without prior written consent of the CITY prior to such release. All such reports, information, data and exhibits shall be delivered to CITY upon demand without additional cost or expense to CITY. The Final EIR shall be provided to CITY in hard copy reproducible form and also in Word Perfect 5.1 format. All charts, tables, figures, and maps which are prepared with computer-based mapping or spread -sheet programs shall be provided to CITY in a format acceptable to CITY. CONSULTANT shall retain unlimited rights to the future use of reports and data produced as a result of this agreement. (d) CONSULTANT shall respond in writing, in the manner required by CEQA and the State Guidelines, to those comments raised by CITY's staff and public review of the draft EIR, in order to facilitate the completion of the Final EIR. Section 2. Time of Performance. CONSULTANT shall timely perform the foregoing services as follows: (a) The Draft Screencheck EER shall be completed and five (5) copies delivered to CITY's staff for review within eight (8) weeks of the Notice To Proceed by the CITY. (b) CITY staff comments on the Administrative Draft EIR shall be delivered to CONSULTANT within fifteen (15) working days following delivery of such Administrative Draft EER to the CITY. (c) The Draft EIR shall be completed and delivered to CITY within fifteen (15) working days of receipt by CONSULTANT of CITY comments on the Draft Screencheck. CITY staff comments on the Draft EIR shall be delivered to CONSULTANT within . ten (10) working days of delivery of the Draft EIR to the CITY. Within seven (T) working days of delivery to CONSULTANT of CITY, staffs comments on the Draft EIR, CONSULTANT shall deliver to CITY one (1) original and thirty-five (35) copies of the Draft EIR for distribution and public review. (d) The Administrative Final EIR shall be completed and delivered to CITY within fifteen (15) working days after the end of the forty-five (45) day review period of the Draft EIR. CITY staff comments on the Administrative Final EIR shall be delivered to the CONSULTANT within ten (10) working days of delivery of the Administrative Final EIR to the CITY. CONSULTANT shall deliver one (1) reproducible and thirty-five (35) copies of the Final EIR to the CITY within ten (10) working days of delivery to CONSULTANT of CITY staff s comments. The foregoing time schedule may be modified by the mutual written consent of the parties hereto. Section 3. Compensation. CITY agrees to compensate CONSULTANT, and CONSULTANT agrees to accept in full satisfaction for the services provided for hereunder, fees on a time and material basis at the rates set forth in Exhibit B hereto, but in no event to CALETTEMENVICOM.CON - 2 - exceed $41,751.90, which fees include all labor, materials, printing and other costs incurred in connection with the project. Not included in this fixed fee are the costs incurred for attending meetings beyond those specified in Section L (b) of this contract, analysis of key issues in addition to those identified in Exhibit A, changes in the project description, plans or scope of work requiring reanalysis or rewriting of report sections, and printing additional copies of any document specified in Exhibit A. Upon delivery of a Notice to Proceed to CONSULTANT, CITY shall pay to CONSULTANT a sum equal to twenty percent (20%) of the not -to -exceed cost established above. Within the first ten (10) days of any month this Agreement is in effect thereafter, the CONSULTANT shall submit to the CITY an estimate of the cost of the CONSULTANT's services and reimbursable expenses for that month. The CONSULTANT will, on or before the last day of each month this Agreement is in effect, submit to the CITY an invoice for the actual costs of CONSULTANT'S services and reimbursable expenses. CITY shall pay to CONSULTANT the total amount due for any month within twenty (20) days of the last day of the month, provided, however, that at the following phases of the work, the following percentages of the not -to -exceed cost established above shall not be exceeded: (a) Sixty percent (60%) upon completion and CITY acceptance of the Draft Screencheck EIR. (b) Seventy percent (70%) upon completion and CITY acceptance of the Draft "r (c) Ninety-five percent (95%) upon completion and CITY acceptance of the Final EIR. (d) One hundred percent (100%) upon completion of all remaining duties under this Agreement. If CONSULTANT is requested by CITY to revise or supplement the Draft EIR with additional data, information or analyses solely as a result of the Draft EIR's failure to comply with the requirements of CEQA, or the State or local CEQA Guidelines, CONSULTANT shall provide such revision or supplement at no additional cost to the CITY. If changes to existing laws, rule, regulations or policies of any state, federal or local governmental authority having jurisdiction over the project occur during the term of this Agreement that require modification of the final EIR, CONSULTANT will perform such additional services on a time -and -materials basis. C:\LETTERS\ENYICOM.CON - 3 - The CITY and CONSULTANT hereby acknowledge and agree that the terms of CONSULTANT's compensation are not dependent upon the CITY's approval of the Developer's project. Section 4. Independent Contractor. CONSULTANT will act hereunder as an independent contractor. This Agreement shall not and is not intended to constitute CONSULTANT as an agent, servant, or employee of the CITY and shall not and is not intended to create the relationship of partnership, joint venture or association between the CITY and CONSULTANT. Section 5. Assignment. This Agreement shall not be assigned in whole or in part, without the prior written consent of CITY. Section 6. CONSULTANT: Responsible Principal and Project Manager. The CONSULTANT shall have a Responsible Principal and a Project Manager who shall be principally responsible for the CONSULTANT's obligations under this Agreement and who shall serve as principal liaison between CITY and CONSULTANT. Designation of another Responsible Principal or Project Manager by CONSULTANT shall not be made without the prior written consent of CITY. The name of the Responsible Principal is Joseph Johns ; the name of the Project Manager is Catherine Bernstein . Section 7. Personnel. CONSULTANT represents that it has, or shall secure at its own expense, all personnel required to perform CONSULTANT's services under this Agreement. CONSULTANT may, with CITY's approval expressed in writing, associate with or employ associates or subconsultants in the performance of its services under this Agreement, but at all times shall be responsible for their services. The following -subconsultants are approved by y CITY for tasks associated with preparation of the EIR: Ken Wilson CONSULTANT shall not employ additional or substitute subconsultants without prior written approval of CITY. Section 8. City: Liaison. CONSULTANT shall perform under the general supervision of the City Manager of CITY or his designee, and all communications, instructions and directions on the part of the CITY shall be communicated exclusively through the City Manager or his designee. Section 9. Data and Services to be Furnished by CITY. All information, data, records, reports and maps as are in possession of CITY and necessary for the carrying out of this work shall be available to CONSULTANT without charge. Section 10. Interests of CONSULTANT. The CONSULTANT affirms that it presently has no interest and shall not have any interest, direct or indirect, which would CALETTEMENVICON.CON - 4 - conflict in any manner with the performance of the services contemplated by this Agreement. No person having any such interest shall be employed by or be associated with the CONSULTANT. The CONSULTANT shall comply as necessary with the requirements of the Political Reform Act of 1974, as amended, and the regulations promulgated pursuant thereto. The terms of the CONSULTANT's compensation is not dependent upon the CITY's approval of the developer's project. The parties agree that: (a) CITY has sole discretion to direct the work and evaluate the performance of CONSULTANT and CITY retains the right to fire or replace CONSULTANT at any time. (b) CITY has sole discretion to determine the amount of compensation paid to CONSULTANT. (c) CITY shall pay CONSULTANT from a CITY account under the exclusive control of CITY. During the term of this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall not communicate with the project applicant or its representatives or agents without prior approval of the CITY. CONSULTANT shall refrain from entering into any contract with or performing any services whatsoever on behalf of the project applicant for one year following the City Council's final action on the EIR. The project applicant for purposes of this paragraph includes Tom Tice and Associates, and its owners, officers and employees. Section 11. Insurance. CONSULTANT shall submit to CITY certificates indicating compliance with the following minimum insurance requirements not less than one (1) day prior to the beginning of performance under this Agreement. 1. Worker's Compensation Insurance to cover its employees as required by the California Labor Code. The CONSULTANT shall require all subcontractors similarly to provide such compensation insurance for their respective employees. 2. Comprehensive general and automobile liability insurance protecting CONSULTANT in amounts not less than $1,000,000 for personal injury to any one person, $1,000,000 for injuries arising out of any one occurrence, and $500,000 for property damages or a combined single limit of $1,000,000. Such policy of insurance shall: a) Be issued by an insurance company which is admitted to do business in the State of California or which is approved in writing by CITY. b) Name and list as additional insured the CITY, its officers and employees. C:\LETTERS\EMVIC0M.00W - 5 - C) Be primary to any other similar insurance and shall name the CITY, its officers, agents and employees, as additional insureds. The insurance policy shall contain a provision that prohibits cancellation, modification, or lapse without thirty (30) days' prior written notice to the CITY. The insurance certificate evidencing such insurance shall be submitted to the CITY for review and thereafter the CITY shall have the right to approve or disapprove any insurance procured by CONSULTANT under the standards of this section. d) Indemnify the CITY from all liability from loss, damage or injury to persons or to property arising from or in connection with the performance of services under this Agreement. e) Include a severability of interests clause substantially similar to the following: "The insurance afforded by this policy applies separately to each insured against whom a claim or suit is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limit of the insurer's liability." f) Contain a clause substantially in the following words: "It is hereby understood and agreed that this policy shall not be canceled nor materially changed except upon thirty (30) days prior written notice to the CITY of such cancellation or material change as evidenced by a return receipt for a registered letter." g) Cover the operations of CONSULTANT pursuant to the terms of this Agreement. Procurement of insurance by CONSULTANT shall not be construed as a limitation of CONSULTANT's liability or as full performance of CONSULTANT's duties to indemnify, hold harmless, and defend under this Agreement. 3. CONSULTANT shall not commence the performance of its services under this contract until the above insurance has been obtained and Certificates of Insurance have been filed with CITY. CONSULTANT further agrees that a clause substantially similar to this Section 11 will be included in any subcontract executed under this contract. Section 12. Indemnification. CONSULTANT agrees to indemnify the CITY, its officers, employees and agents against, and will hold and save them and each of them harmless from, any and all actions, claims, damages to persons or property, penalties, obligations or liabilities, including reasonable attorney's fees and costs of suit, that may be asserted or claimed by any person, firm, entity, corporation, political subdivision or other organization arising out of the acts, errors or omissions of CONSULTANT, its agents, employees, subcontractors, or invitees, in the performance of this Agreement. 1. CONSULTANT will defend any action or actions filed in connection with any of said claims, damages, penalties, obligations or liabilities due to death, injury to C:\LETTERS\EMVICOM.CON - 6 - any person and injury to any property, and will pay all costs and expenses, including attorneys' fees incurred in connection therewith; 2. CONSULTANT will promptly pay any judgment rendered against CITY, its officers, agents or employees for any such claims, damages, penalties, obligations or liabilities; 3. In the event CITY, its officers, agents or employees are made a party to any action or proceeding filed or prosecuted against CONSULTANT for such damages or other claims arising out of or in connection with the sole negligence of CONSULTANT hereunder, and which claims do not arise from death, injury to any person or injury to property, CONSULTANT agrees to pay CITY, its officers, agents, or employees, any and all costs and expenses incurred by CITY, its officers, agents or employees in such action or proceeding, including but not limited to, reasonable attorney's fees. Section 13. Termination. The executory provisions of this Agreement may be terminated by CITY upon five (5) days' written notice to the CONSULTANT without further action by CITY. The executory provisions of this agreement may be terminated by the CONSULTANT upon thirty (30) days' written notice to the CITY. In the event of such termination by the CITY, the CONSULTANT shall immediately cease performance of services and shall preserve, compile and deliver to CITY all of the products prepared pursuant to this Agreement in accordance with CITY'S instructions. The CITY shall pay the CONSULTANT for work satisfactorily completed to date of such termination, provided such work is in a form usable by CITY. Section 14. , Notice. Any notice required to be given to the CONSULTANT shall be deemed duly and properly given upon delivery, if sent to CONSULTANT postage prepaid to: - Joseph Johns, President Envicom Corporation 28328 Agoura Road Agoura Hills, CA 91301 or personally delivered to CONSULTANT at such address or other address specified to the CITY in writing by CONSULTANT. Any notice required to be given to the CITY shall be deemed duly and properly given upon delivery, if sent to the CITY postage prepaid to: Robert Searcy City of Diamond Bar Community Development Department 21660 E. Copley Drive, Suite 190 Diamond Bar, CA 91765 C:\LETTERS\ENVICOM.CON - 7 - or personally delivered to CITY at such address or other address specified to the CONSULTANT in writing by the CITY. Section 15. Entire Agreement. This agreement represents the entire integrated agreement between CITY and CONSULTANT, and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations or agreements, either written or oral. This Agreement may be amended only by a written instrument signed by both CITY and CONSULTANT. Section 16. Litigation Costs. Should any dispute under this Agreement lead to litigation, the prevailing party shall be entitled to reasonable attorneys' fees for the prosecution of the action. EXECUTED the day and year first above stated. "CITY" ATTEST: CITY CLERK CITY OF DIAMOND BAR MAYOR "CONSULTANT" ENVICOM CORPORA�ON t By J C:\LETTERS\ENVICOM.CON - 8 - Afton. CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE ISSUE DATE MM.D:"' 06/14r'95 PRODUCER THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND STANTON & ASSOCIATES CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE 3617 THOUSAND OAKS BL X305 POLICIES BELOW. WESTLAKE VILLAGE CALIFORNIA 91362 COMPANIES AFFORDING COVERAGE COMPANY LETTER A UNDERWRITERS @ LLOYDS LONDON CO COMPANY B FREMONT COMPENSATION INS CO INSURED LETTER ENVICOM CORPORATION COMPANY LETTER C COMMERCIAL UNION INSURANCE CO 28328 AGOURA ROAD COMPANY 0 AGOURA HILLS CA LETTER 91301 COMPANY E LETTER ..................... :. THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED, NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES. LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS. CO TYPE OF INSURANCE POLICY NUMBER LTA POLICY EFFECTIVE POLICY EXPIRATION LIMITS DATE (MM/DD/YY) DATE (MM/DD/YY) GENERAL LIABILITY GENERAL AGGREGATE $ 2,000,000 X COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY PRODUCTS-COMP/OP AGGR. S 1,000,000 CLAIMS MADE X OCCUR. PERSONAL & ADV. INJURY .S 1,000,000 C FALK60836 05/17/95 05/17/96 OWNER'S & CONTRACTOR'S PROT, EACH OCCURRENCE $ 1,000,000 FIRE DAMAGE (Airy one tire) S 100,000 MED. EXPENSE (Airy one person) S 5,000 AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY COMBINED SINGLE S 1,000,000 ANY AUTO LIMIT ALL OWNED AUTOS BODILY INJURY S SCHEDULED AUTOS (Per person) A FALK60836 05/17/95 05/17/96 X HIRED AUTOS BODILY INJURY S X ' NON -OWNED AUTOS (Per accident) GARAGE LIABILITY " PROPERTY DAMAGE $ EXCESS LIABILITY EACH OCCURENCE $ UMBRELLA FORM AGGREGATE S OTHER THAN UMBRELLA FCRM STATUIDAY LIMITS WORKER'S COMPENSATION EACH ACCIDENT S 1,000,000 B AND WP94-567057-02 08/16/94 06/16/95 DISEASE -POLICY LIMIT $ 1,000,000 EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY DISEASE -EACH EMPLOYEE $ 1,000,000 OTNER CLAIMS MADE $250,000 /CLAIM A F93/4085/076 06/07/91 09/16/95 PROF. LIABILITY $25,000 DED. DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONSA,OCATIONSriMCLESISPECIALITEM THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR IS NAMED AS ADDITIONAL INSURED. CERTIFICATE HOLDER CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ROB SEARCY 21660 E. COPLEY DRIVE 1100 DIAMOND BAR, CA 91765-4177 ACORD 23-S (7/90) CANCELLATION SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, THE ISSUING COMPANY WILL ENDEAVOR TO MAIL l fl DAYS WRITTEN NOTICE TO THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER NAMED TO THE LEFT, BUT FAILURE TO MAIL SUCH NOTICE SHALL IMPOSE NO OBLIGATION OR LIABILITY OF ANY KIND UPON THE COMPANY, ITS AGENTS OR REPRESENTATIVES. A j D RREEPRESUTA71VE wO A6ORD CORPORATfON 1998 ENVICOM CORPORATION March 27, 1995 City of Diamond Bar Community Development Department 21660 E. Copley Drive, Suite 190 Diamond Bar, CA 91765-4177 Attn.: Mr. Robert Searcy, Associate Planner Subject: Tentative Tract 45485 Dear Rob: T7 TR Cost Budget and Management Structure Pursuant to your verbal request on March 21, Envicom Corporation El„r,,:,.,,r G_., submits the following update to our August 4, 1994 contract amendment proposal for the subject project. The cost budget has been modified to reflect our January, 1995 professional services fee schedule, including appropriate revision to tasks which were previously covered by "remaining" contract funds. ;Hill, GI vna cl''I rc l Based upon these changes, the proposed contract amendment amount is $35,634.55. Please note that this cost proposal is valid for sixty days. At this time, we would like to notify the City that Mr. Geoff Reilly will handle the EIR topics previously assigned to him, but that the project will be managed by Ms. Catherine Bernstein, Senior Project Manager at Envicom Corporation. Of course, Mr. Johns will contini e as Pr... ;r al -in -Charge for the duration of the EIR. Josef S! Johns Pi esident Enclosure Cost Estimate for TT46485 EIR Revised March 27,1995 ITask Staff Assigned LABOR COSTS Prepare Administrative Draft EIR Project Description Catherine Bernstein Cumulative Projects Geoff Reilly Land Use Catherine Bernstein Biology Carl Wishner TrafficlCirculation Geoff Reilly Air Quality Catherine Bernstein No ow Geoff Reilly Aesthetics/Light 6 Glare Jack Blok Housing/Population Catherine Bernstein Public Services/Utildies Geoff Reilly Geology/Hydrology Ken Wilson Project Management Joseph Johns 40 $85.00 Catherine Bernstein 18 $85.00 Geoff Reilly Prepare Draft EIR Team Prepare Draft Response to Comments Team Prepare Administrative Final EIR Team Prepare Final EIR/Statement of Findings Team Post Draft EIR Project Management Team - Public Hearings - Planning Commission/City Council (4) Team Additional Public Hearings - SEATAC/City Council (6) Catherine Bernstein/Team Project Meetings (3) Catherine Bernstein /Team Word Processing Wendy Chenel Graphics Primo Tapia, III Hours/Task Hourly Rate Cost 16 $8500 $1,360.00 4 $85.00 $340 00 4 S8500 $340.00 18 $85.00 $1,53000 12 $8500 $1,02000 24 $85.00 $2,040.00 16 $8500 $1,360.00 24 $9500 $2,280.00 16 $8500 $1,36000 12 $8500 $1,020.00 subconsultant $7,275.00 4 $18500 $740.00 40 $85.00 $3,400.00 18 $85.00 $1,530.00 remaining contract funds remaining contract funds remaining contract funds remaining contract funds EXPENSES $4,82490 Total Additional Costs $38,90490 Less "Remaining" Contract Funds ($6,117.35) Billing Rate Increase for "Remaining Contract Fund" $2,847.00 CONTRACT AMENDMENT AMOUNT $35,634.55 remaining contract funds remaining contract funds 42 $8500 $3,570.00 15 $8500 $1,275.00 32 $4500 $1,44000 40 $5500 $2,200.00 SUBTOTAL LABOR COSTS $34,080.00 EXPENSES $4,82490 Total Additional Costs $38,90490 Less "Remaining" Contract Funds ($6,117.35) Billing Rate Increase for "Remaining Contract Fund" $2,847.00 CONTRACT AMENDMENT AMOUNT $35,634.55 I� ,! PROFESSIONAL FEE SCHEDULE ENVICOM January 1, 1995 CORPORATION Envicom Corporation provides its clients with consulting services in land planning and urban design; environmental compliance; real estate development and entitlement; and environmental restoration. Compensation for these services is based upon the following schedule of fees and charges. Expert Witness testimony: Two and one-half times the listed rate. (including Depositions) Project -related Expenses: 1. Travel related expenses (hotels, meals, rental vehicles, etc.): Cost plus 15%. Per Diem Hourly Fees for Professional and Support Staff: Rate/Hour Upi,,,;,pi,,;,;,,, ,,, Principal 185.00 3. Senior Associate 115.00-145.00 fax mailings, telephone and regular mail/shipping. Associate 95.00 Senior Professional 85.00 �Q 111 a, Dc rl pmrn; E r , , ,, Staff Professional 70.00 Technical Assistant 50.00 Microcomputers are charged at a flat hourly rate of $35.00/hour which includes software Computer Graphics Specialist/Artist 55.00 S3 'S ; 7. Word processor/Administrative Assistant 45.00 Special transportation: $90.00/day plus $0.60/mile (includes 4 -wheel drive and non- intern 30.00 Expert Witness testimony: Two and one-half times the listed rate. (including Depositions) Project -related Expenses: 1. Travel related expenses (hotels, meals, rental vehicles, etc.): Cost plus 15%. Per Diem charge for subsistence may be negotiated in lieu of expenses for hotels/meals. 2. Subcontractors and subconsultants: Cost plus 15%. 3. Communications charge: 3.0% of labor cost. Includes costs for routine correspondence, fax mailings, telephone and regular mail/shipping. 4. Xerox, photocopies, and color copies: $0.15 per single -sided page (standard size page); $0.12 per page duplexed; $3.25 per 8 1/2x1 lcolor copy; $3.75 per 11x17 color copy. 5. Out-of-pocket expenses for special reprographics, aerial photos, presentation graphics, publications, overnight shipping, messenger service, project expendable materials and supplies, etc.: Cost plus 159. 6. Microcomputers are charged at a flat hourly rate of $35.00/hour which includes software and peripheral costs. S3 'S ; 7. Passenger cars: $0.50 per mile. �,Ow,7 H,1k, Cihtor,!ia , ; 8. Special transportation: $90.00/day plus $0.60/mile (includes 4 -wheel drive and non- standard rental cars). It1 Fay 1til a. —ii i June 6, 1995 ENVICOM CORPORATION City of Diamond Bar Community Development Department 21660 E. Copley Drive, Suite 190 Diamond Bar, CA 91765-4177 Attn.: Mr. Robert Searcy, Associate Planner Subject: Tentative Tract 46485 EIR- 1?evised Cost Estimate dated 3/27/95 Dear Rob: Envicom Corporation hereby extends the applicability of our TT 46485 EIR cost estimate dated March 27, 1995 for an additional 45 days, effective May 25, 1995. We look forward to receiving and executing our EIR tri, irnn�ccral Rt',r::.; contract amendment which will bring our total available budget to approximat $41,000.00. Sincerel 6V' y \` Jo Johns President U' 1 i;,nna Hdl> l.tLrnn�; ai IL! '',i,1)-"-t-gym F,7,f,'i,�-a_1-i! OTTY of nTmmn nAn AGENDA REPORT AGENDA NO. TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council MEETING DATE: July 11, 1995 REPORT DATE: June 23, 1995 FROM: Linda G. Magnuson, Accounting Manager TITLE: F.Y. 95-96 Investment Policy SUMMARY: Submitted for Council's review and approval is the Proposed Investment Policy for Fiscal Year 1995-96, and it's accompanying resolution. RECOMMENDATION: Approve Resolution 95 - LIST OF ATTACHMENTS: X Staff Report X Resolution(s) Ordinances(s) Agreement(s) EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION: SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST: which adopts the FY95-96 Investment Policy. Public Hearing Notification Bid Spec. (on file in City Clerk's Office) Other 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? X Yes_ No 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: _ RE IEWED BY• errence L. Belan Frank M. s er Lihda G. M son City Manager Assistant City Manager Accounting M nager MEETING DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: GITX GUUNGIL REPORT AGENDA NO. July 11, 1995 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City Manager F.Y. 1995-96 Investment Policy ISSUE STATEMENT: It is the policy of the City of Diamond Bar to annually present its investment policy to the City Council review and approval. The problems experienced by the Orange County Investment fund have made it imperative that the City Council continue its practice of annually reviewing and adopting the investment policy. RECOMMENDATION: Approve Resolution 95- which adopts the FY 95-96 Investment Policy. BACKGROUND: Submitted for Council's review and approval is the F.Y. 95-96 Investment Policy and its accompanying resolution. The proposed investment policy states the goals of the City's investment activities, the types of investments in which the City will invest funds, and the monthly reporting requirements. This fiscal year, the policy has been revised to protect the City funds from the type of activities which have caused problems for the agencies which were investing in the Orange County Investment Fund. There have been many enhancements to the investment policy this year. Some of new areas which have been addressed include: The pre -qualification of broker-dealers via the use of a questionnaire. Segregation of duties. Periodic reviews of the Local Agency's Investment Fund's market valuation reports and their investment goals and objectives. Clear identification of investment activities in which the City will not participate. rdyc z - rivn-76 investment rolicy Report Safekeeping and custodial procedures. Definitions of the different types of investments. This includes legally defined portfolio percentage limitations. It should be noted that the City has invested funds in the State Treasurer's Local Agency Investment Fund. The investment goals and practices of LAIF are in concurrence with the City's investment goals and objectives. Attached as Exhibit B is a description of the LAIF program. The proposed investment policy was drafted in accordance with the newly established Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) investment policy outline and model. The broker/dealer questionnaire was adapted from a questionnaire which was provided by the City's auditing firm of Conrad and Associates. Additionally, the proposed investment policy has been reviewed by the City's auditors. PREPARED BY: Linda G. Magnuson RESOLUTION NO. 95- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING THE STATEMENT OF INVESTMENT POLICY WHEREAS, it is the City's policy to annually adopt the City investment policy, and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar that the attached Statement of Investment Policy (Exhibit A) be adopted as presented herein. PASSED, ADOPTED and APPROVED by the City of Council of the City of Diamond Bar, California, this 11th day of July, 1995. 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 Council of Diamond Bar held on the day of by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSTAINED: COUNCIL MEMBERS: City Clerk 1995, EXHIBIT A CITY OF DIAMOND BAR INVESTMENT POLICY - FY 1995-96 PURPOSE This Statement is intended to provide guidelines for the prudent investment of the City's temporarily idle cash and to outline the policies for maximizing the efficiency of the City's cash management system. The ultimate goal is to enhance the economic status of the City while protecting it's accumulated cash. It is the policy of the City Council to review, update and adopt the City's Investment Policy on an annual basis. INVESTMENT OBJECTIVE The investment of funds of the City of Diamond Bar is directed to the goals of safety, liquidity and yield. The authority governing investments for municipal governments is set forth in the Government Code, Sections 53601, et. seq. 1. Safety. Safety of principal is the foremost objective of the investment program. Investments shall be undertaken in a manner that seeks to ensure the preservation of capital in the overall portfolio. The objective will be to mitigate credit risk and interest rate risk. The City will operate only in those investments that are considered very safe. A. Credit Risk is the risk of loss due to the failure of the security issuer or backer. Credit risk will be mitigated by: Limiting investments to the safest types of securities; Pre -qualifying the broker-dealers with which the City will do business. This will be done via a competitive bid and the response on a questionnaire (Appendix B) submitted by the prospective institution. In addition broker-dealers should be primary, registered investment securities dealers; Diversifying the investment portfolio in order that potential losses on individual securities do not exceed the income generated from the remainder of the portfolio. B. Interest Rate Risk is the risk that the market value of portfolio securities will fall due to a change in general interest rates. Interest rate risk will be mitigated by: Structuring the investment portfolio so that securities mature to meet cash requirements for ongoing operations, thereby avoiding the need to sell securities on the open market prior to their maturation to meet specific operational needs; Operating funds will be invested primarily in shorter term securities. 2. Liquidity. The investment portfolio will remain sufficiently liquid to meet all operating requirements which might be reasonably anticipated. This is accomplished by structuring the portfolio so that securities mature at the same time as cash is needed to meet anticipated demands. Additionally, since all possible cash demands cannot be anticipated, the portfolio will consist largely of securities with active secondary or resale markets. 3. Yield. Yield is the potential dollar earnings an investment can provide and sometimes is described as the rate of return. The primary objective of the investment policy of the City of Diamond Bar is SAFETY. Investments shall be undertaken to ensure the preservation of capital in the overall portfolio. The investment portfolio shall be designed with the objective of attaining a market rate of return throughout budgetary and economic cycles, taking into account the investment risk constraints and cash flow characteristics of the portfolio. Return on investment is of least importance compared to the safety and liquidity objectives described above. Investments are limited to relatively low risk securities in anticipation of earning a fair return relative to the risk being assumed. Securities shall not be sold prior to maturity unless one of the following conditions exists: 1) a declining credit security could be sold early to minimize loss of principal; 2) a security swap would improve the quality of yield in the portfolio; or 3) liquidity needs of the portfolio require that a security be sold. POLICY As a General Law city, Diamond Bar operates its accumulated idle cash investments under the prudent man rule. This insures that "...investment shall be made with the exercise of that degree of judgement and care, under circumstances then prevailing, which persons of prudence, discretion and intelligence exercise in the management of their own affairs, not for speculation but for investment considering the probable safety of their capital as well as the probable income to be derived." (CC #2261) This affords the City a broad spectrum of investment rA-LU LJ LLLV�ULLL LLLi-VliC.Y opportunities, so long as the investment is deemed prudent and is allowable under current law of the State of California and the regulations of the City of Diamond Bar. The City of Diamond Bar strives to maintain the level of investment of all funds as near 100% as possible, through daily and projected cash flow determinations. Cash management and investment transactions are the responsibility of the Treasurer. Investments are allowed in the following media: United States treasury bills, bonds, notes or any other obligations or securities issued by the United States treasury or any other obligation guaranteed as to principal and interest by the United States. Local Agency Investment Fund (state pool) - Demand Deposits Certificates of Deposit (or Time Deposits), placed with commercial banks and/or savings banks. Negotiable Certificates of Deposit Bankers Acceptances Commercial Paper Medium Term Corporate Notes Passbook Savings Accounts Active Deposits Money Market Funds comprised of investments rated in the highest category by Moody's Investors Services Inc. or by Standard & Poor's Corporation. Repurchase Agreements Government and agency paper are the highest quality investments available in terms of safety and liquidity. Certificates of deposit and savings accounts are insured or collateralized. Only commercial paper, with A-1 Moody's and P-1 Standard & Poor's ratings, is authorized for purchase. Most investments are highly liquid, with the exception of collateralized and insured certificates of deposit held by banks and savings banks. Maturities are selected to anticipate cash needs, thereby eliminating the need for forced liquidation. rcayc Y - 1ilVCSLIlICi1L ru11cy Effective January 1, 1989 the Government Code, Section 53601 states ... "no investment shall be made in any security, other than a security underlying a repurchase or reverse repurchase agreement authorized by this section, which at the time of the investment has a term remaining to maturity in excess of five years, unless the legislative body has granted express authority to make that investment either specifically or as a part of an investment program approved no less than three months prior to the investment." Therefore longer-term investments (over one year) are limited to maturities of five years or less unless specifically approved by the City Council. Diamond Bar attempts to obtain the highest yield possible when selecting investments, provided that the criteria for safety and liquidity are met. Ordinarily, through a positive yield curve, (i.e., longer term investment rates are higher than those of shorter term maturities), the City attempts to ladder its maturities to meet anticipated cash needs in such a way that longer term investments carry a higher rate than is available in the extremely short term market of 30 days or less. The City is authorized to invest in the Local Agency Investment Fund based upon periodic reviews of the book to market value of the investment pool and an annual review of the goals and strategies of the investment board. If there are changes in the management of the Local Agency Investment Fund, and there is a conflict with the City's investment goals, the City may elect to discontinue investment in LAIF. It should be noted that, per LAIF's investment policy, no more than 100 of its portfolio may be invested in Reverse Repurchase Agreements. Since these types of investments are extremely sophisticated, the City of Diamond Bar chooses not to individually invest in these types of securities but will participate LAIF's investment in these as long as the percentage of the portfolio remains at 10% or less. POLICY CONSTRAINTS The City operates its investment pool with many State and self-imposed constraints. The City does not purchase or sell securities on margin. The City does not buy stocks or deal in futures or options. The City does not use Reverse Repurchase Agreements for the investment of funds. The City does not invest in Guaranteed Small Business Administration (SBA) Notes. Page 5 - Investment Policy The City does not invest in derivative type products. SAFEKEEPING OF SECURITIES The City of Diamond Bar will adopt the operational practice of having all purchased securities physically delivered versus payment to a safekeeping account at the City's depository bank. It is recognized this will be a third party independent custodian under contractual agreement made with the Security Services Division of the chosen bank. Investment transactions will be authorized by the City Treasurer and executed by either the Accounting Manager or the Deputy City Clerk. The transactions will be verified via monthly reconciliations by the Senior Accountant. REPORTING A monthly report of investments will be provided to the City Manager. The required elements of this report are as follows: a) Type of investment b) Institution c) Date of Maturity d) Amount of deposit or cost of security e) Current market value of securities with maturity in excess of twelve months f) Statement relating the report to the Statement of Investment Policy g) Rate of interest h) Statement that there are sufficient funds to meet the next 30 days' obligations The basic premise underlying the City of Diamond Bar's investment philosophy is to insure that money is always available when needed. Attachment: Appendix A - Description of Investments Appendix B - Broker Dealer Questionnaire Appendix C - Local Agency Investment Fund Description Terrence L. Belanger City Manager Appendix A Description of Investments U.S. Treasury Issues are direct obligations of the United States Government. These issues are called bills, notes and bonds. The maturity range of new issues is from 13 weeks (T -Bills) to 30 years (T - Bonds). These are highly liquid and are considered the safest investment security. Federal Agency securities are issued by direct U.S. Government agencies or quasi -government agencies. These issues are guaranteed directly or indirectly by the United States Government. Examples of these securities are Federal Home Loan Bank (FHLB) notes, Federal National Mortgage Associations (FNMA) notes, Federal Farm Credit Bank (FFCB) notes, Small Business Administration (SBA) notes, Government National Bank (GNMA) notes, Federal Home Loan Mortgage Credit (FHLMC) notes and Student Loan Association (SALLMAE) notes. Investment in these types of securities is limited to 200 of the portfolio per Government Code Section 53601. Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) is a special fund in the State Treasury which local agencies may use to deposit funds for investment. There is no minimum investment period and the minimum transaction is $5,000, in multiples of $1,000 above that, with a maximum of $20 million for any agency. It offers high liquidity because deposits can be converted to cash in twenty-four hours and no interest is lost. All interest is distributed to those agencies participating on a proportionate share determined by the amounts deposited and the length of time they are deposited. Interest is paid quarterly via direct deposit into the agency's LAIF account. The State keeps an amount for reasonable costs of making the investments, not to exceed one-quarter of one percent of the earnings. Certificates of Deposit are investments for inactive funds issued by banks, savings and loans and credit unions. Investments of $100,000 are insured respectively by Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation (FSLIC) and the National Credit Union Share Insurance Fund (NCUSIF). Certificates of Deposit can be issued from 14 days to several years in maturity allowing the City of Diamond Bar's investment of funds to be matched to cash flow needs. For deposits exceeding $100,000 the financial institution is required to collateralize with 110%; government securities collateral. City of Diamond Bar does not accept 15016 Collateral (First Trust Deeds) or 1050 Letters of Credit (L.C.) . Fags 2 - Appendix A Negotiable Certificates of Deposit are unsecured obligations of the financial institution. These securities are generally issued in bearer form and pay interest at maturity. Although negotiable, a strong secondary market exists only in the NCD's issued by the largest United States banks. Examples of large banks include Bank of America, Citibank, Chase Manhattan, Manufacturers Hanover, etc. These securities generally trade with minimum amounts of $1 million per trade with the average trade in the secondary market of $5 million. Investment in Negotiable Certificates of Deposit is limited to 30% of the investment portfolio per Government Code Section 53601. Bankers Acceptances are short-term credit arrangements to enable businesses to obtain funds to finance commercial transactions. They are time drafts drawn on a bank by an exporter or importer to obtain funds to pay for specific merchandise. By its acceptance, the bank becomes primarily liable for the payment of the draft at maturity. An acceptance is a high grade negotiable instrument. Acceptances are purchased in various denominations for 30 to 180 days but no longer than 270 days. The interest is calculated on a 360 day discount basis similar to Treasury Bills. Investment in Banker's Acceptances is limited to 40% of the investment portfolio per Government Code Section 53601. Commercial Paper is a short term unsecured promissory note issued by a corporation to raise working capital. These negotiable instruments may be purchased at a discount to par value or interest bearing. Commercial paper is issued by corporations such as General Motors Acceptance Corporation (GMAC), Shearson American Express, Bank of America, Wells Fargo Bank, etc. Local agencies are permitted by state law to invest in commercial paper of "prime" quality of the highest ranking or of the highest letter and numerical rating as provided by Moody's Investor's Service, Inc. or Standard & Poors Corporation. Purchases of eligible commercial paper may not exceed 180 days maturity nor exceed fifteen percent of the local agency's surplus funds. An additional fifteen percent (for a total of 30%) can be invested in Commercial Paper provided the average maturity of invested funds in Commercial Paper does not exceed 30 days. Investment in Commercial Paper is limited to 30% of the investment portfolio and 10% of the issuing corporation per Government Code Section 53601. Page 3 - Appennlx A Medium Term Corporate Notes are unsecured promissory notes issued by a corporation organized and operating in the United States. These are negotiable instruments and are traded in the secondary market. Medium Term Notes (MTN) can be defined as extended maturity commercial paper. Corporations use these MTN's to raise capital. Examples of MTN issuers are General Electric, GMAC, Citibank, Wells Fargo Bank, etc. Investment in Medium Term Corporate Notes is limited to 30% of the investment portfolio per Government Code 53601. Passbook Savings Account is a certificate of deposit issued in any amount for a non specified amount of time. Interest rate is much lower than CD's but the savings account allows flexibility. Funds can be deposited and withdrawn according to daily needs. Mutual Funds are referred to in the Government Code, Section 53601, K, as "shares of beneficial interest issued by diversified management companies". The Mutual Fund must be restricted by its by-laws to the same investments as the local agency by the Government Code. These investments are Treasury issues, Federal Agency issues, State of California and City (within California) debt obligations, Certificates of Deposit, Repurchase Agreements, Reverse Repurchase Agreements, Financial Futures and Financial Options and Medium Term Corporate Notes. The quality rating and percentage restrictions in each investment category applicable to the local agency also applies to the Mutual Fund. The City may not invest in a mutual fund which invests in derivative types of products. The purchase price of shares of mutual funds shall not include any sales commission. Investments in mutual funds shall not exceed fifteen percent of the local agency's investment portfolio. Active Deposits are demand or checking accounts which receive revenues and pay disbursements. Repurchase Agreements and Reverse Repurchase Agreements are short term investment transactions. Banks buy temporarily idle funds from a customer by selling him U.S. Government or other securities with a contractual agreement to repurchase the same securities on a future date. Repurchase agreements are typically one to ten days in maturity. The customer receives interest from the bank. The interest rate reflects both the prevailing demand for Federal Funds and the maturity Paye g - Appendix A of the REPO. Some banks will execute repurchase agreements for a minimum of $100,000, but most banks have a minimum of $500,000. A reverse -repurchase agreement (reverse -repo) is exactly what the name implies. The City of Diamond Bar does NOT invest in Reverse Repurchase Agreements. Financial Futures and Financial Options are forward contracts for securities. The government code states that a local agency may incur future contracts/options in any of the investment securities enumerated in Section 53601 A -N. Due to the volatility of trading in financial futures the City of Diamond Bar does NOT invest in financial futures of financial options. Derivative Products are structured products which limits, through imbedded options, the flow of principal and or interest to the note holder. This limitation could be on how fast payments are received, how much principal is returned, or how high or low a coupon can move. Derivative is also a broad term referring to any security which derives its value from another underlying asset. The City of Diamond Bar does NOT invest in derivative products. The Local Agency Investment Fund does NOT invest in derivative products. APPENDIX S CITY OF DIAMOND BAR BROKER/DEALER QUESTIONNAIRE AND CERTIFICATION 1. Name of Firm: 2. Address: 3. Telephone: ( ) ( ) 4. Broker's Representative to the City (attach resume): Name: Title: Telephone: ( ) S. Manager/Partner-in-Charge (attach resume) Name: Title: Telephone: ( ) 6. List all personnel who will be trading with or quoting securities to City employees (attach resume) Name: Title: Telephone: ( ) ( ) 7. Which of the above personnel have read the City's investment policy? 8. Is your firm a primary dealer in United States Government Securities? Yes No CITY OF DIAMOND BAR Broker/Dealer Questionnaire and Certification Name of Firm: Page Two 9. List the total volume of United States Government and Agency Securities for the last calendar year. Firm -wide $ Your local office $ No. of Transactions No. of Transactions 10. Which instruments are offered regularly by your local office? Treasury Bills Treasury Notes/Bonds BA's (domestic) BA's (foreign) Commercial Paper Agencies (specify): CMO's Bank CD's S & L CD's Repos Reverse Repos Other (specify): 11. References -- Please identify your most directly comparable public sector clients in our geographical area. Entity Contact Telephone ( ) Client Since APPENDIX B CITY OF DIAMOND BAR Broker/Dealer Questionnaire and Certification Name of Firm: Page Three 12. Have any of your clients ever sustained a loss on a securities transaction arising from a misunderstanding or misrepresentation of the risk characteristics of the instrument? If so, explain. 13. Has your local office ever subject to a regulatory or state/federal agency investigation for alleged improper, fraudulent, disreputable or unfair activities related to the sale of securities? Have any of your employees been so investigated? If so, explain. 14. Has a client ever claimed in writing that your firm was responsible for investment losses? If so, explain. 15. Explain your normal custody and delivery process. Who audits these fiduciary systems? Can you meet safekeeping requirements? APPENDIX B CITY OF DIAMOND BAR Broker/Dealer Questionnaire and Certification Name of Firm: Page Four 16. How many and what percentage of your transactions failed last month? Last year? 17. Describe the capital line and trading limits of the office that would conduct business with the City of Diamond Bar. 16. Does your firm participate in the S.I.P.C. insurance program If not, explain. 19. What portfolio information, if any, do you require from your clients? 20. What reports, transactions, confirmations and paper trail will the City receive? 21. Does your firm offer investment training to your clients? Yes No APPENDIX R CITY OF DIAMOND BAR Broker/Dealer Questionnaire and Certification Name of Firm: Page Five 22. Please enclose the following: Latest audited financial statements. Samples of reports, transactions, and confirmations the City will receive. Samples of research reports and/or publications that your firm regularly provides to clients. Complete schedule of fees and charges for various transactions. ***CERTIFICATION*** I hereby certify that I have personally read the Statement of Investment Policy of the City of Diamond Bar, and have implemented reasonable procedures and a system of controls designed to preclude imprudent investment activities arising out of transactions conducted between our firm and the City of Diamond Bar. All sales personnel will be routinely informed of the City's investment objectives, horizons, outlooks, strategies and risk constraints whenever we are so advised by the City. We pledge to exercise due diligence in informing the City of Diamond Bar of all foreseeable risks associated with financial transactions conducted with our firm. Under penalties of perjury, the responses to this questionnaire are true and accurate to the best of my knowledge. Signed Date Title Countersignature* Date Title * Company president or person in charge of government securities operations. APPENDIX C THE LOCAL AGENCY INVESTMENT FUND The Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF), a voluntary program, created by statute, began under the Jesse Unruh Administration in 1977 as an investment alternative for California's local governments and special districts. The enabling legislation for the LAW is Section 16429.1,2,3. This program offers participating agencies the opportunity to participate in a major portfolio which daily invests hundreds of millions of dollars, using the investment expertise of the Treasurer's Office Investment staff at no additional cost to the taxpayer. This in-house management team is comprised of civil servants. The LAW is part of the Pooled Money Investment Account (PMIA). The PMIA began in 1953 and has oversight provided by the Pooled Money Investment Board (PMIB) and an in-house Investment Committee. The PMIB Board members are the State Treasurer, Director of Finance, and State Controller. The LAW has oversight by the Local Investment Advisory Board. The LAW Board consists of five members as designated by Statute. The Chairman is the State Treasurer, or his designated representative. Two members qualified by training and experience in the field of investment or finance, and two members who are Treasurers, finance or fiscal officers -or business managers, employed by any County, City or local district or municipal corporation of this state, are appointed by the State Treasurer. The tern of each appointment is two years, or at the pleasure of the appointing authority. APPENDIX C - Page 2 All securities are purchased under the authority of the Government Code Section 16430 and 16480.4. The State Treasurer's Office takes delivery of all securities purchased on a delivery versus payment basis to a third party custodian. All investments are purchased at market, and a market valuation is conducted quarterly. Additionally, the PMIA has Policies, Goals and Objectives for the portfolio to make certain that our goals of Safety, Liquidity and Yield are not jeopardized and prudent management prevails. These policies are formulated by investment staff and reviewed by both the PMIB and the Local Investment Advisory Board on an annual basis. The State Treasurer's Office is audited by the Department of Audits on an annual basis. Department of Audits also has a continuing audit process throughout the year. All investment and LAW claims are audited on a daily basis by the State Controller's Office as well as an in-house audit process involving three separate divisions. It has been determined that the State of California cannot declare bankruptcy under Federal regulations, thereby allowing the Government Code Section 16429.3 to stand. This Section states that "money placed with the state treasurer for deposit in the LAW shall not be subject to impoundment or seizure by any state official or state agency." The LAW has grown from 293 participants and $468 million in 1977 to 2,200 participants and $8.9 billion in 1995. GiTT Vr, DI^MOPIU 0^1% AGENDA REPORT TO: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager MEETING DATE: July 11, 1995 FROM: George A. Wentz, City Engineer TITLE: Landscaping Assessment District Number 38. REPORT DATE: AGENDA NO. 7. / July 5, 1995 SUMMARY: The City Council at the June 12, 1995 meeting approved the Engineer's Report and adopted Resolution No. 95-27 to declare City's intention to levy and collect assessments for District No. 38. The Council also set July 11, 1995 as the public hearing date on the levy of the proposed assessments on assessable lots within this District for Fiscal Year 1995-96. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached Resolution to set the assessment for Fiscal Year 1995-96 for Landscaping Assessment District Number 38. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS:X Staff Report X Resolution _ Ordinances(s) Agreement(s) EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION: _ Public Hearing Notification _ Bid Specifications X Other: Engineer's Report 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? _ 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? X Yes _ No Report discussed with the following affected departments: Community Services REVIEWE BY: Ter;ence L. B ger Frank M. Ushe'�eorge A. Wentz City Manager Assistant City Manager City Engineer C: \W P60\LINDAKAY\AGEN95\DIST#38.628 CITY COUNCIL REPORT AGENDA NO. MEETING DATE: July 11, 1995 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager SUBJECT: Landscaping Assessment District Number 38 ISSUE STATEMENT: The City Council at the June 12, 1995 meeting approved the Engineer's Report and adopted Resolution No. 95-27 to declare City's intention to levy and collect assessments for District No. 38. The Council also set July 11, 1995 as the public hearing date on the levy of the proposed assessments on assessable lots within said District for Fiscal Year 1995-96. RECONEMENDATION: It is recommenced that the City Council adopt the attached Resolution to set the assessment for Fiscal Year 1995-96 for Landscaping Assessment District Number 38. FINANCIAL SUMMARY: The revenues generated by this District will finance the cost. There will be no impact on the City's General Funds. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: The landscaping improvements to be maintained by District 38 are the parkways along the northerly side of Grand Avenue (between Diamond Bar Boulevard and Summitridge Drive) and along the southerly side of Temple Avenue (between Diamond Bar Boulevard and Golden Springs Drive), and the medians throughout the City. As shown on the attached Exhibit "A", this reflects a total maintenance area of 6.23 acres. The primary benefit derived from the maintenance of said improvements are the beautification of open spaces which are used by all residents, and the general enhancement of the property values within the community. These benefits derived apply equally to all residents and parcels within this district and therefore, it has been determined that all taxable parcels would receive the same net assessment within the district. The estimated number of parcels within the District is 17,341 parcels. The amount assessed upon the lands within District No. 38 for Fiscal Year 1994-95 was $15.00 per parcel. The amount to be assessed for Fiscal Year 1995-96 is to remain at $15.00 per parcel. 01 Landscaping Assessement District Number 38 July 11, 1995 Page 2 The proposed assessments are for the purpose of (1) meeting operating/maintenance expenses including staff wages, (2) purchasing or leasing supplies, equipment or materials, (3) meeting financial needs and requirements, and (4) constructing median islands on Golden Springs Drive between Gona Court and Lemon Avenue. It should be noted that the proposed medians on Golden Springs Drive between Gona Court and Lemon Avenue will not be constructed until Fiscal Year 1997-98. Accumulating the revenue for the next two years will be necessary in order to buildup the capital improvement fund for the proposed medians. Prepared By: David G. Liu C: \VnWLINDAKAY\CCR-95\DISTN38.628 ig Iia / �b ? d Z, 4 7, A\,Jv. i4l MI. POMON 47 2. ---- > 4� \\Fswy ay - le 7l 16, Arw5 To 6e WMJRI MRS an A. (S7 F",y D. �kvAy *.% &r BI Area: will1l `rurf : S. 4 Acres IILZ Gwa4 Gow; .83 Acre SP19 7 --------- - .. .... ---------- - RESOLUTION NO. 95- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR LEVYING AN ASSESSMENT ON CITY OF DIAMOND BAR LANDSCAPING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 38 FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1995-96. A. RECITALS. (i) By its Resolution No. 95-27, this Council approved a report of the City Engineer related to City of Diamond Bar Assessment District No. 38 prepared pursuant to California Streets and Highways Code Section 22623, described the improvements thereon and gave notice of and fixed the time and place of the hearing on the question of assessment thereon for fiscal year 1995-96. A diagram of the area encompassed by said assessment district is attached hereto as Exhibit "A-1." (ii) Said hearing was duly and properly noticed, commenced at the South Coast Air Quality Management Auditorium, 21865 East Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California on July 11, 1995, and was concluded prior to the adoption of this Resolution. (iii) All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. RESOLUTION. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar does hereby find, determine and order as follows: 1. The Recitals, as set forth in Part A of this Resolution, are in all respects true and correct. 2. This Council hereby expressly overrules any and all protests filed objecting to the proposed improvements specified herein or the assessment levied therefor. 3. Based upon its review of the report of the City Engineer referred to hereinabove, and other reports and information, the City Council hereby finds that (i) the land within the said District will be benefitted by the improvements specified in said report, (ii) said District includes all of the lands so benefitted, and (iii) the net amount to be assessed upon the lands within said District for the 1995-96 fiscal year, in accordance with said report, is apportioned by a formula and method which fairly distributes the net amount among all assessable lots or parcels in proportion to the estimated benefits to be received by each such lot or parcel from the improvements. 4. The improvements specified in the report hereinabove referred to which is on file with the City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar are hereby ordered to be completed. 5. The assessment diagram contained in the report referred to hereinabove and the assessment of $15.00 for each assessable lot located within said District are hereby adopted and confirmed and said assessment hereby is levied for the 1995-96 fiscal year. 6. The assessment is in compliance with the provisions of the Act, and the City Council has complied with all laws pertaining to the levy of an annual assessment pursuant to the Act. The assessment is levied for the purpose of paying the costs and expenses of the improvements described in the report referred to hereinabove for fiscal year 1995-96. 7. The City Treasurer shall deposit all moneys representing assessments collected by the County to the credit of a special fund 2 for use in City of Diamond Bar Assessment District No. 38. S. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to file the diagram and assessment with the County Auditor, together with a certified copy of this Resolution upon its adoption. 9. A certified copy of the assessment and diagram shall be filed in the office of the City Clerk and open for public inspection. 10. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. ADOPTED AND APPROVED this day of , 1995. MAYOR K, I, LYNDA BURGESS, City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was passed, approved and adopted at the regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar held on the day of 1995, by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSTAINED: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ATTEST: Lynda Burgess, City Clerk City of Diamond Bar 4 SHEET / Of 1 SHEET / ti � •� u1Ci : : �'•r 'TJ ;�^ � /l � •i/: q, yeti '�.e�./ ' y: : •vet ?:'� r.%. •%��. C_ A_ .001 1��1`�%• :I\RSI '!'�'������.•:�. ..,'� �,r, - fffff f1 .� IL" t •�1_t. �+', 1','•�^���''�.+ 1'1 ` • , �Y1��, .�' '. 1,. �•�'.�., 4.1111:11` .aE�`ac':`\�°.TMna.."°� •'e.: ,h'' ,�1.1' �. � 1 • � Aar .+�' � la 1, '�; O 1�• 0�. t .. �_ _ \..17+�. �. .,.ice,%:.i ,; `;• � cmaau,woee. e_ rucr•000 t �.. �• '1 • � � � � •' EXHIBIT "A-1" ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM �. • ; „�,.. ASSESSMENT DISTRICT N0.38 1 e,r , FISCAL YEAR 1995-96 A , •.. 1 for the • �'' f; � �• CITY OF DIAMOND BAR n<rmau.00eu d I GFB FRIEDRICR & ASSOC. INC 0 0 ENGINEER'S REPORT Update of ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 38 Fiscal Year 1995-96 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR June 6, 1995 Prepared by: GFB-FRIEDRICH & ASSOC., INC. 6809 Indiana Avenue, Suite 201 Riverside, CA 92506 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION 1 BOUNDARIES OF DISTRICT 2 IMPROVEMENTS 3 Landscaping FINANCIAL ANALYSIS 4 Revenue Appropriations METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT 5 ASSESSMENT 6 ASSESSMENT ROLL 7 EXHIBITS Exhibit "A-1" - Assessment Diagram 6 6 INTRODUCTION Pursuant to the order of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar, this report is prepared in compliance with the requirements of Article 4, Chapter 1, Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, Part 2 of Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California. This report presents the engineering analysis for the 1995-96 Fiscal Year for the district known as: ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 38 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR (Hereinafter referred to as "District"). This District, by special benefit assessments, provides funding for the maintenance of landscaped areas owned by the City of Diamond Bar which are located in public rights-of-way within the City of Diamond Bar. Section 22573, Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, requires assessments to be levied according to benefit rather than according to assessed value. The section states: "The net amount to be assessed upon lands within an assessment district may be apportioned by any formula or method which fairly distributes the net amount among all assessable lots or parcels in proportion to the estimated benefits to be received by each such lot or parcel from the improvements. The determination of whether or not a lot or parcel will benefit from the improvements shall be made pursuant to the Improvement Act of 1911 (Division 7 (commencing with Section 5000)) [of the Streets and Highways Code, State of California]." As the assessments are levied on the basis of benefit, they are considered a user's fee, not a tax. and, therefore, are not governed by Article XIIIA of the California Constitution. Properties owned by public agencies, such as a city, county, state or the federal government, are not assessable by law. BOUNDARIES OF DISTRICT The boundary of the District is completely within the City limits of the City of Diamond Bar and is shown on the Assessment Diagram (on file in the office of the City Clerk at the City Hall of Diamond Bar as Exhibit "A-1"). All parcels of real property included within the District are described in detail on maps on file in the Los Angeles County Assessor's office. 2 46 IMPROVEMENTS The facilities and items of servicing and maintenance included within the District are as follows: Landscaping Servicing means the furnishing of water for the irrigation of any landscaping, the operation of any fountains, or the maintenance of any other improvements. Maintenance means the furnishing of services and materials for the ordinary and usual maintenance, operation and servicing of any improvement, including: 1. Repair, removal or replacement of all or any part of any landscape improvement. 2. Providing for the life, growth, health and beauty of landscaping, including without limitation, cultivation, irrigation, trimming, spraying, fertilizing, or treating for disease or injury. 3. The removal of trimmings, rubbish, debris and other solid waste. Improvements to be serviced and maintained include, but are not limited to, median island and parkway landscaping on major streets and thoroughfares in the City of Diamond Bar. 3 FINANCIAL ANALYSIS The estimated funding for maintenance and servicing of landscaping for the update of Assessment District No. 38 for the 1995-96 Fiscal Year is as follows: 1995-96 Recommended Budget Revenue: Appropriation Fund Balance (from FY 1994-95) $ 17,716 Property Tax and Assessments 260,115 Interest Revenue 2,000 TOTAL $279,831 Appropriations: Personal Services Salaries $ 28,100 City Paid Benefits 350 Benefits 3,950 Worker's Compensation Expense 1,150 Medicare Expense 450 Cafeteria Benefits 3,550 Operating Expenses Utilities 81,100 Maintenance -Grounds & Bldg 15,300 Professional Services 3,400 Contract Services 38,400 Capital Improvements 0 Reserves 104,081 TOTAL $ 279,831 4 METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT The net amount to be assessed upon lands within the District in accordance with this report is apportioned by a formula and method which fairly distributes the amount among all assessable lots or parcels in proportion to the estimated benefits to be received by each lot or parcel from the improvements, namely the maintenance and servicing of public landscaping improvements within such District. The maintenance and servicing of public landscaping improvements installed and constructed in public places in the City of Diamond Bar provides a special benefit which is received by each and every lot or parcel within the District, tending to enhance their value. The primary benefits of landscaping are as set forth below: Beautification of the streets which are used by all of the residents in Diamond Bar. 2. A sense of community pride resulting from well-maintained green spaces. 3. The enhancement of the value of property which results from the foregoing benefits. Existing land use information indicates that well over 90 percent of the parcels within the City of Diamond Bar are residences. Because the special benefits derived apply equally to all residents and parcels, it has been determined that all assessable parcels would receive the same net assessment. ASSESSMENT The amount to be assessed upon the lots and parcels within the District and the amount apportioned to each assessable parcel within the District is shown in the table below. Estimated Assessment Requirements: $ 260,115 Estimated Number of Parcels: 17,341 Estimated Assessment Per Parcel: $ 15.00 1994-95 Assessment Per Parcel: $ 15.00 1995-96 Assessment Per Parcel: $ 15.00 Difference: $ 0.00 R ASSESSMENT ROLL The individual 1995-96 assessments, tabulated by Assessor's parcel number, are shown on an Assessment Roll on file in the Office of the City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar as Exhibit "B" and are made a part of this report by reference. (The Assessment Roll is not included in this report due to its volume.) Dated: /,//�( 2 5 o NO. 27861 ' EXP ; ;��J CIVIL Q \ f Of CAl1F�� , 1995 GFB-FRIEDRICH & ASSOC., INC. 7 N EI EXHIBITS m SHEET I OF I SHEET j elk toe -3u IA1% Vz - CoJml, - n EXHIBIT "A-1" ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM ASSESSMENT DISTRICT N0.38 FISCAL YEAR 1995-96 for tho CITY OF DIAMOND BAR L --6F5-FRllDRlCH . . . . . . . . . ...... v Alr %0! ap - CoJml, - n EXHIBIT "A-1" ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM ASSESSMENT DISTRICT N0.38 FISCAL YEAR 1995-96 for tho CITY OF DIAMOND BAR L --6F5-FRllDRlCH C`iTV CIF. [1[l\MC]l�iC] F3AR AGENDA REPORT AGENDA NO. TO: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager MEETING DATE: July 11, 1995 REPORT DATE: July 5, 1995 FROM: George A. Wentz, City Engineer TITLE: Landscaping Assessment District Number 39. SUMMARY: The City Council at the June 12, 1995 meeting approved the Engineer's Report and adopted Resolution No. 95-28 to declare City's intention to levy and collect assessments for District No. 39. The Council also set July 11, 1995 as the public hearing date on the levy of the proposed assessments on assessable lots within this District for Fiscal Year 1995-96. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached Resolution to set the assessment for Fiscal Year 1995-96 for Landscaping Assessment District Number 39. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS: X Staff Report X Resolution _ Ordinances(s) Agreement(s) EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION: SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST: _ Public Hearing Notification _ Bid Specifications X Other: Engineer's Report 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? _ Yes X No 4. Has the report been reviewed by a Commission? _ Yes No Which Commission? 5. Are other departments affected by the report? X Yes _ No Report discussed with the following affected departments: Community Services REVIEWED BY: Tce Ter.aner Frank � 8 eor e Atz 8 City Manage Assistant City Manager City Engineer C:\WP60\LINDAKAY\AGEN95\DISTN39.628 CITY COUNCIL REPORT AGENDA NO. MEETING DATE: July 11, 1995 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager SUBJECT: Landscaping Assessment District Number 39 ISSUE STATEMENT: The City Council at the June 12, 1995 meeting approved the Engineer's Report and adopted Resolution No. 95-28 to declare City's intention to levy and collect assessments for District No. 39. The Council also set July 11, 1995 as the public hearing date on the levy of the proposed assessments on assessable lots within said District for Fiscal Year 1995-96. RECONEW ENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached Resolution to set the assessment for Fiscal Year 1995-96 for Landscaping Assessment District Number 39. FINANCIAL SUMMARY: Personal/Administrative Services will be borne by the City's General Funds. The revenues generated by this District will finance the remainder costs. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: The landscaping improvements to be maintained by District 39 are the mini parks, slopes, and open space areas. As shown on the attached Exhibit "A", this reflects a total maintenance area of 60.65 acres. Requested by Bramalea Limited, Inc. and M. J. Brock and Sons, Inc. of the Diamond Bar Hills Project, Landscaping Assessment District Number 39 was formed in 1985 to include all of the unincorporated area known as Diamond Bar Hills in the Diamond Bar area. For FY 1985-86, with 354 parcels, the assessed amount was $236 per parcel. The administration of the District was provided by the Los Angeles County Department of Parks and Recreation until the City's incorporation in 1989. For FY 1990-91, based on the Assessment Engineer's calculations which include an estimate of available carry-over funds, 1990-91 revenues, and operating costs, the assessment amount was $130 per parcel. In FY 1991-92, the assessment was reduced to $77 per parcel. Subsequently, in FY 1992-93, the assessment amount was reduced to the current amount of $73.50 per parcel. 1 Landscaping Assessement District Number 39 July 11, 1995 Page 2 The primary benefit derived from the maintenance of said improvements are the beautification of open spaces which are used by all residents, and the general enhancement of the property values within the community. These benefits derived apply equally to all residents and parcels within this district and therefore, it has been determined that all taxable parcels would receive the same net assessment within the district. The estimated number of parcels within the District is 1,272 parcels. The amount assessed upon the lands within District No. 39 for Fiscal Year 1994-95 was $73.50 per parcel. The amount to be assessed for Fiscal Year 1995-96 is to be at $130 per parcel. For the past several years, the maintenance of mini parks and landscaped areas has been subsidized by the large reserve fund that had built up. In 1992, the City Council reduced the annual assessments to $73.50 in order to use up the reserve fund. These reserves have now been exhausted. This year, the assessments in District 39 more closely reflect the actual costs of providing these maintenance services. Prepared By: David G. Liu C:\WP60V INDAKAY\CCR-95\DIST#39.628 2 I C-1-OA94 IT Ri UA r_ 0 a a 0 i J (NLVEIZ-r, F ) NAN O—r I x X r w3 ory _ 1 kl f C� O (-Chit Q'ew N ) ve g n h 11 TU ;� F .10 xx x 13 AREA -ro -6;� k x \� I YX arks urs; w,�,5„a,Tu►-� x x X �w �lEw s] 1. Irk s�opQ- OSP19 �,ZDe 04r RESOLUTION NO. 95- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR LEVYING AN ASSESSMENT ON CITY OF DIAMOND BAR LANDSCAPING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 39 FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1995-96. A. RECITALS. (i) By its Resolution No. 95-28, this Council approved a report of the City Engineer related to City of Diamond Bar Landscaping Assessment District No. 39 prepared pursuant to California Streets and Highways Code Section 22623, described the improvements thereon and gave notice of and fixed the time and place of the hearing on the question of assessment thereon for fiscal year 1995-96. A diagram of the area encompassed by said assessment district is attached hereto as Exhibit "A-2." (ii) Said hearing was duly and properly noticed, commenced at the South Coast Air Quality Management Auditorium, 21865 East Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California on July 11, 1995, and was concluded prior to the adoption of this Resolution. (iii) All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. RESOLUTION. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar does hereby find, determine and order as follows: 1. The Recitals, as set forth in Part A of this Resolution, are in all respects true and correct. 2. This Council hereby expressly overrules any and all protests filed objecting to the proposed improvements specified herein or the assessment levied therefor. 3. Based upon its review of the report of the City Engineer referred to hereinabove, and other reports and information, the City Council hereby finds that (i) the land within the said District will be benefitted by the improvements specified in said report, (ii) said District includes all of the lands so benefitted, and (iii) the net amount to be assessed upon the lands within said District for the 1995-96 fiscal year, in accordance with said report, is apportioned by a formula and method which fairly distributes the net amount among all assessable lots or parcels in proportion to the estimated benefits to be received by each such lot or parcel from the improvements. 4. The improvements specified in the report hereinabove referred to which is on file with the City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar are hereby ordered to be completed. 5. The assessment diagram contained in the report referred to hereinabove and the assessment of $130.00 for each assessable lot located within said District are hereby adopted and confirmed and said assessment hereby is levied for the 1995-96 fiscal year. 6. The assessment is in compliance with the provisions of the Act, and the City Council has complied with all laws pertaining to the levy of an annual assessment pursuant to the Act. The assessment is levied for the purpose of paying the costs and expenses of the improvements described in the report referred to hereinabove for fiscal year 1995-96. 7. The City Treasurer shall deposit all moneys representing assessments collected by the County to the credit of a special fund 2 for use in City of Diamond Bar Assessment District No. 39. 8. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to file the diagram and assessment with the County Auditor, together with a certified copy of this Resolution upon its adoption. 9. A certified copy of the assessment and diagram shall be filed in the office of the City Clerk and open for public inspection. 10. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. ADOPTED AND APPROVED this day of , 1995. MAYOR K I, LYNDA BURGESS, City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was passed, approved and adopted at the regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar held on the day of 1995, by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSTAINED: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ATTEST: Lynda Burgess, City Clerk City of Diamond Bar 4 EXHIBIT "A-2" ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM ASSESSMENT DISTRICT N0.39 FISCAL YEAR 1995-96 for the CITY OF DIAMOND BAR 'BASE MAP COLRtES Q< THE cm a nnnol0 sLF SHEET10F1SHEET i NUMBER FOR EACH LOT OR PARCEL WITHIN SSFSSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER AS ASSIGNED BY TME 4ELES ASSESSOWS OFFICE TENSIONS Fpl EACH LOT OR PARCEL Of LAND WITHIN ;NDWN ON TMF ASSESSOR'S PARCEL MAPS ON FILE IN LOS ANGELES COUNTY ASSESSOR 1 OF THE CRY CLERK OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND S ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, TNIS- 18 CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR OF THE COUNTY AMMOR COUNTY OF LOS CALIFORNIA, THIS DAY OF '9- C CLERK OF THE CRY OF DIAMOND BAR GFB.FRIEDRICH & ASSOC., INC. 1 ENGINEER'S REPORT Update of ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 39 Fiscal Year 1995-96 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR June 6, 1995 Prepared by: GFB-FRIEDRICH & ASSOC., INC. 6809 Indiana Avenue, Suite 201 Riverside, CA 92506 Ila f TABLE OF CONTEN' Page INTRODUCTION I BOUNDARIES OF ) [STRICT 2 IMPROVEMENTS 3 Landscaping FINANCIAL ANAI YSIS 4 Revenue Appropriatio is METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT 5 'ASSESSMENT 6 ASSESSMENT ROLL 7 EXHIBITS Exhibit "A-2" - Assessment Diagram INTRODUCTION Pursuant to the order of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar, this report is prepared in compliance with the requirements of Article 4, Chapter 1, Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, Part 2 of Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California. This report presents the engineering analysis for the 1995-96 Fiscal Year for the district known as: ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 39 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR (Hereinafter referred to as "District"). This District, by special benefit assessments, provides funding for the maintenance of landscaped areas owned by the City of Diamond Bar which are located in public rights-of-way within the City of Diamond Bar. Section 22573, Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, requires assessments to be levied according to benefit rather than according to assessed value. The section states: "The net amount to be assessed upon lands within an assessment district may be apportioned by any formula or method which fairly distributes the net amount among all assessable lots or parcels in proportion to the estimated benefits to be received by each such lot or parcel from the improvements. The determination of whether or not a lot or parcel will benefit from the improvements shall be made pursuant to the Improvement Act of 1911 (Division 7 (commencing with Section 5000)) [of the Streets and Highways Code, State of California]." As the assessments are levied on the basis of benefit, they are considered a user's fee, not a tax, and, therefore, are not governed by Article XIIIA of the California Constitution. Properties owned by public agencies, such as a city, county, state or the federal government, are not assessable by law. BOUNDARIES OF DISTRICT The boundary of the District is shown on the Assessment Diagram (on file in the office of the City Clerk at the City Hall of Diamond Bar as Exhibit "A-2"). All parcels of real property included within the District are described in detail on maps on file in the Los Angeles County Assessor's office. 2 IMPROVEMENTS The facilities and items of servicing and maintenance included within the District are as follows: Landscaping Servicing means the furnishing of water for the irrigation of any landscaping, the operation of any fountains, or the maintenance of any other improvements. Maintenance means the furnishing of services and materials for the ordinary and usual maintenance, operation and servicing of any improvement, including: 1. Repair, removal or replacement of all or any part of any landscape improvement. 2. Providing for the life, growth, health and beauty of landscaping, including without limitation, cultivation, irrigation, trimming, spraying, fertilizing, or treating for disease or injury. 3. The removal of trimmings, rubbish, debris and other solid waste. The purpose of Assessment District No. 39 is for the maintenance and servicing of mini parks, slopes and open spaces within the District. 3 G r \ FINANCIAL ANALYSIS The estimated funding for maintenance and servicing of landscaping for the update of Assessment District No. 39 for the 1995-96 Fiscal Year is as follows: 1995-96 Recommended Budget Revenue: Reserve Fund Balance (from FY 1994-95) ($ 11,305) Property Tax and Assessments 165,360 Interest Revenue 1,000 TOTAL $ 155,055 Appropriations: Personal Services $ 0 Operating Expenses Utilities 57,475 Maintenance -Grounds & Bldg. 15,500 Professional Services 4,000 Contract Services 73,080 Capital Improvements 0 Reserves 5,000 TOTAL $ 155,055 9 METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT The net amount to be assessed upon lands within the District in accordance with this report is apportioned by a formula and method which fairly distributes the amount among all assessable lots or parcels in proportion to the estimated benefits to be received by each lot or parcel from the improvements, namely the maintenance and servicing of public landscaping improvements within such District. The maintenance and servicing of public landscaping improvements installed and constructed in public places in the City of Diamond Bar provides a special benefit which is received by each and every lot or parcel within the District, tending to enhance their value. The primary benefits of landscaping are as set forth below: Beautification of the streets which are used by all of the residents in Diamond Bar. 2. Public parks which can be utilized and enjoyed by all residents within the District. 3. A sense of community pride resulting from well-maintained green spaces. 4. The enhancement of the value of property which results from the foregoing benefits. Existing land use information indicates that all of the parcels within the District are residences. Because the special benefits derived apply equally to all residents and parcels, it has been determined that all assessable parcels would receive the same net assessment. 5 0 ASSESSMENT The amount to be assessed upon the lots and parcels within the District and the amount apportioned to each assessable parcel within the District is shown in the table below. Estimated Assessment Requirements: $ 165,360 Estimated Number of Parcels: 1,272 Estimated Assessment Per Parcel: $ 130.00 1994-95 Assessment Per Parcel: $ 73.50 1995-96 Assessment Per Parcel: $ 130.00 Difference: $ 56.50 2 0 0 ASSESSMENT ROLL The individual 1995-96 assessments, tabulated by Assessor's parcel number, are shown on an Assessment Roll on file in the Office of the City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar as Exhibit "B" and are made a part of this report by reference. (The Assessment Roll is not included in this report due to its volume.) Dated: V // Pi / i NO. 27861 EXP.��}[-Q� CIVIL , 1995 GFB-FRIEDRICH & ASSOC., INC. HN A. FReIEDRICH 7 +ik 4 \ EXHIBITS `— SHEET t OF 1 SHEET EXHIBIT hA-2" ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM ASSESSMENT DISTRICT N0.39 FISCAL YEAR 1995-96 forthe CITY OF DIAMOND BAR M yr M YYoO W uusfolls rule. urr+ As Aaaaro .. ne •ce.a.>wao+s orrlca WMY OM M.�pl"tr�Kll WR Or Yl � I lOi ANiHDCOJR'/ Af.lpCA anrtc a vn CMWaAu 4-Wu.RAT!Or4 OftA. ms_ 'I— O W.qn v 01 .0 BAA CP r cm Auwok c— • na o.. a vs. atAc or nye vn os aArouo u. GFB.FRIEDRI( it ' & ASSOC, IM 01-rV OF, HAFZ AGENDA REPORT AGENDA NO. 7.3 TO: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager MEETING DATE: July 11, 1995 REPORT DATE: July 5, 1995 FROM: George A. Wentz, City Engineer TITLE: Landscaping Assessment District Number 41. SUMMARY: The City Council at the June 12, 1995 meeting approved the Engineer's Report and adopted Resolution No. 95-29 to declare City's intention to levy and collect assessments for District No. 41. The Council also set July 11, 1995 as the public hearing date on the levy of the proposed assessments on assessable lots within this District for Fiscal Year 1995-96. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached Resolution to set the assessment for Fiscal Year 1995-96 for Landscaping Assessment District Number 41. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS: X Staff Report X Resolution(s) Ordinances(s) Agreement(s) EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION: _ Public Hearing Notification _ Bid Specifications X Other: Engineer's Report SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST: 1. Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed by the City Attorney? 2. Does the report require a majority or 4l5 vote? 3. Has environmental impact been assessed? 4. Has the report been reviewed by a Commission? Which Commission? 5. Are other departments affected by the report? Report discussed with the following affected departments: REVIEWED BY: Yes _ No Majority _ Yes -X No Yes Y No X Yes _ No Community Services WeTerrence L. Langer rank eorge A. entz City Manager Assistant City Manager City Engineer C: \ WM\LINDA"Y\AGEN95\DISTN41.628 CITY COUNCIL REPORT AGENDA NO. MEETING DATE: July 11, 1995 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager SUBJECT: Landscaping Assessment District Number 41 ISSUE STATEMENT: The City Council at the June 12, 1995 meeting approved the Engineer's Report and adopted Resolution No. 95-29 to declare City's intention to levy and collect assessments for District No. 41. The Council also set July 11, 1995 as the public hearing date on the levy of the proposed assessments on assessable lots within said District for Fiscal Year 1995-96. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached Resolution to set the assessment for Fiscal Year 1995-96 for Landscaping Assessment District Number 41. FINANCIAL SUMMARY: Personal/Administrative Services will be borne by the City's General Funds. The revenues generated by this District will finance the remainder costs. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: The landscaping improvements to be maintained by District 41 are the slopes and open space areas. As shown on the attached Exhibit "A", this reflects a total maintenance area of 15.5 acres. For Fiscal Year 1995-96, no new improvements are proposed for District 41. Known as the Diamond Bar High Country community, District 41 was transferred to the City on June 6, 1989 (Resolution No. 89-50). Until that time, for FY 1989-90, the administration of the District was provided by the Los Angeles County Department of Parks and Recreation and the assessment amount was $240 per parcel. For FY 1990-91, based on the Assessment Engineer's calculation which include an estimate of available carry over funds, 1990-91 revenues, and operating costs, the assessment amount was adjusted to $280 per parcel. In FY 1991-92, the assessment was reduced to $228 per parcel. Subsequently, in FY 1992-93, the assessment amount was reduced to the current amount of $220.50 per 11 Landscaping Assessement District Number 41 July 11, 1995 Page 2 The primary benefit derived from the maintenance of said improvements are the beautification of open spaces which are used by all residents, and the general enhancement of the property values within the community. These benefits derived apply equally to all residents and parcels within this district and therefore, it has been determined that all taxable parcels would receive the same net assessment within the district. The estimated number of parcels within the District is 554 parcels. The amount assessed upon the lands within District No. 41 for Fiscal Year 1994-95 was $220.50 per parcel. The amount to be assessed for Fiscal Year 1995-96 is to remain at $220.50 per parcel. Prepared By: David G. Liu C:\WP60\LINDAKAY\CCR-95\DISTN41.628 2 N Q—� qP .tic N'7 Xx y r 12 sP19 SwpE — 12.oL� aca TURF — 1 -7, (,00 S.F.(°•4 ACRE) RESOLUTION NO. 95- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR LEVYING AN ASSESSMENT ON CITY OF DIAMOND BAR LANDSCAPING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 41 FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1995-96. A. RECITALS. (i) By its Resolution No. 95-29, this Council approved a report of the City Engineer related to City of Diamond Bar Landscaping Assessment District No. 41 prepared pursuant to California Streets and Highways Code Section 22623, described the improvements thereon and gave notice of and fixed the time and place of the hearing on the question of assessment thereon for fiscal year 1995-96. A diagram of the area encompassed by said assessment district is attached hereto as Exhibit "A-3." (ii) Said hearing was duly and properly noticed, commenced at the South Coast Air Quality Management Auditorium, 21865 East Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California on July 11, 1995, and was concluded prior to the adoption of this Resolution. (iii) All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. RESOLUTION. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar does hereby find, determine and order as follows: 1. The Recitals, as set forth in Part A of this Resolution, are in all respects true and correct. 2. This Council hereby expressly overrules any and all protests filed objecting to the proposed improvements specified herein or the assessment levied therefor. 3. Based upon its review of the report of the City Engineer referred to hereinabove, and other reports and information, the City Council hereby finds that (i) the land within the said District will be benefitted by the improvements specified in said report, (ii) said District includes all of the lands so benef itted, and (iii) the net amount to be assessed upon the lands within said District for the 1995-96 fiscal year, in accordance with said report, is apportioned by a formula and method which fairly distributes the net amount among all assessable lots or parcels in proportion to the estimated benefits to be received by each such lot or parcel from the improvements. 4. The improvements specified in the report hereinabove referred to which is on file with the City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar are hereby ordered to be completed. 5. The assessment diagram contained in the report referred to hereinabove and the assessment of $220.50 for each assessable lot located within said District are hereby adopted and confirmed and said assessment hereby is levied for the 1995-96 fiscal year. 6. The assessment is in compliance with the provisions of the Act, and the City Council has complied with all laws pertaining to the levy of an annual assessment pursuant to the Act. The assessment is levied for the purpose of paying the costs and expenses of the improvements described in the report referred to hereinabove for fiscal year 1995-96. 7. The City Treasurer shall deposit all moneys representing assessments collected by the County to the credit of a special fund 2 for use in City of Diamond Bar Assessment District No. 41. 8. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to file the diagram and assessment with the County Auditor, together with a certified copy of this Resolution upon its adoption. 9. A certified copy of the assessment and diagram shall be filed in the office of the City Clerk and open for public inspection. 10. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. ADOPTED AND APPROVED this day of , 1995. MAYOR 3 I, LYNDA BURGESS, City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was passed, approved and adopted at the regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar held on the day of 1995, by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSTAINED: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ATTEST: Lynda Burgess, City Clerk City of Diamond Bar EXHIBIT "A-3" ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM ASSESSMENT DISTRICT N0.41 FISCAL YEAR 1995-96 for the CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ��11�11f�1� ;tU III III1111111111! ��I_�Iflflf_�titi4ti4 SCRIE r. - THE ASSESSMENT NUMBER FORE T OR PARCEL wH DISTRICT 15 THE ASSESSOR'S PAR— NUAIBER AS A55 GNEDBv TRE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ASSESSOR 5 OFFICE THELINES AND DIMENSIONS FOR EACH LOT OR PARCEL Of LAND wHnry THE DISTRICT ARE SHOWN ON THE ASSESSOR'S PAPCEL MAPS ON FILE iN THE OFFICE OF THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY ASSESSOR TI�1 SE WF CDAFEST OF E CtM1 OF DAME- BNi SHEET I OF 1 SHEET FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THT�CITY CLERK OF TIE CITY Of DIAMOND BAR, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE Of CALIFORNIA THIS DAY OF Is— C7 B_ CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY AUDITOR, COUNTY Of LOS ANGELES. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, THIS DAY Of IB CITY CLERK OF THE Cm OF DIAMOND BAR GFB-FRIEDRICH & ASSOC., INC. ENGINEER'S REPORT Update of ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 41 Fiscal Year 1995-96 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR June 6, 1995 Prepared by: GFB-FRIEDRICH & ASSOC., INC. 6809 Indiana Avenue, Suite 201 Riverside, CA 92506 • M / TABLE OF CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION 1 -BOUNDARIES OF DISTRICT 2 IMPROVEMENTS 3 Landscaping FINANCIAL ANALYSIS 4 Revenue Appropriations METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT 5 ASSESSMENT 6 ASSESSMENT ROLL 7 EXHIBITS Exhibit "A-3" - Assessment Diagram INTRODUCTION Pursuant to the order of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar, this report is prepared in compliance with the requirements of Article 4, Chapter 1, Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, Part 2 of Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California. This report presents the engineering analysis for the 1995-96 Fiscal Year for the district known as: ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 41 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR (Hereinafter referred to as "District"). This District, by special benefit assessments, provides funding for the maintenance of landscaped areas owned by the City of Diamond Bar which are located in public rights-of-way within the City of Diamond Bar. Section 22573, Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, requires assessments to be -levied according to benefit rather than according to assessed value. The section states: "The net amount to be assessed upon lands within an assessment district may be apportioned by any formula or method which fairly distributes the net amount among all assessable lots or parcels in proportion to the estimated benefits to be received by each such lot or parcel from the improvements. The determination of whether or not a lot or parcel will benefit from the improvements shall be made pursuant to the Improvement Act of 1911 (Division 7 (commencing with Section 5000)) [of the Streets and Highways Code, State of California]." As the assessments are levied on the basis of benefit, they are considered a user's fee, not a tax, and, therefore, are not governed by Article XIIIA of the California Constitution. Properties owned by public agencies, such as a city, county, state or the federal government, are not assessable by law. 4 / BOUNDARIES OF DISTRICT The boundary of the District is shown on the Assessment Diagram (on file in the office of the City Clerk at the City Hall of Diamond Bar as Exhibit "A-3"). All parcels of real property included within the District are described in detail on maps on file in the Los Angeles County Assessor's office. 2 IMPROVEMENTS \ The facilities and items of servicing and maintenance included within the District are as follows: Landscaping Servicing means the furnishing of water for the irrigation of any landscaping, the operation of any fountains, or the maintenance of any other improvements. Maintenance means the furnishing of services and materials for the ordinary and usual maintenance, operation and servicing of any improvement, including: 1. Repair, removal or replacement of all or any part of any landscape improvement. 2. Providing for the life, growth, health and beauty of landscaping, including without limitation, cultivation, irrigation, trimming, spraying, fertilizing, or treating for disease or injury. 3. The removal of trimmings, rubbish, debris and other solid waste. The purpose of Assessment District No. 41 is for the maintenance and servicing of mini -parks, slopes and open spaces within the District. 91 0 44 FV, ANCIAL ANALYSIS The estimated funding for mainc(-nance and servicing of landscaping 'or the update of Assessment District No. 41 for the 1995-96 Fiscal Year is as follows: 1995-96 Reco, mended Budget Revenue: Appropriation Fund Balance (from FY 1994-95) $ 153,847 Property Tax and Assessments 122,157 Interest Revenue 3,000 TOTAL $ 279,004 Appropriations: Personal Services $ 0 Operating Expenses Utilities 60,500 Maintenance -Grounds & Bldg 12,000 Professional Services 3,400 Contract Services Contract Services 35,400 Weed/Pest Abatement 14,000 Capital Improvements 0 Reserves 153,704 TOTAL $ 279,004 4 METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT The net amount to be assessed upon lands within the District in accordance with this report is apportioned by a formula and method which fairly distributes the amount among all assessable lots or parcels in proportion to the estimated benefits to be received by each lot or parcel from the improvements, namely the maintenance and servicing of public landscaping improvements within such District. The maintenance and servicing of public landscaping improvements installed and constructed in public places in the City of Diamond Bar provides a special benefit which is received by each and every lot or parcel within the District, tending to enhance their value. The primary benefits of landscaping are as set forth below: 1. Beautification of the streets which are used by all of the residents in Diamond Bar. 2. Public parks which can be utilized and enjoyed by all residents within the District. 3. A sense of community pride resulting from well-maintained green spaces. 4. The enhancement of the value of property which results from the foregoing benefits. Existing land use information indicates that all of the parcels within the District are residences. Because the special benefits derived apply equally to all residents and parcels, it has been determined that all assessable parcels would receive the same net assessment. 5 Oft ASSESSMENT The amount to be assessed upon the lots and parcels within the District and the amount apportioned to each assessable parcel within the District is shown in the table below. Estimated Assessment Requirements: $ 122,157 Estimated Number of Parcels: 554 Estimated Assessment Per Parcel: $ 220.50 1994-95 Assessment Per Parcel: $ 220.50 1995-96 Assessment Per Parcel: $ 220.50 Difference: 2 ASSESSMENT ROLL The individual 1995-96 assessments, tabulated by Assessor's parcel number, are shown on an Assessment Roll on file in the Office of the City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar as Exhibit "B" and are made a part of this report by reference. (The Assessment Roll is not included in this report due to its volume.) Dated: Me a Q i NO. 27861 y EXP�-3/-9 sf9f CIViI ��? �F CAOE , 1995 GFB-FRIEDRICH & ASSOC., INC. HN A. F ED CH 7 • EXHIBITS El SHEET I OF I SHEET EXHIBIT "A-3" ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM ASSESSMENT DISTRICT N0.41 FISCAL YEAR 1995-96 for the CITY OF DIAMOND BAR $CALL r .1F0 NAD W THE OFFlCE OF TFE CRY CLM aF THE CITY OF aAALONO EAI, COUNTY DF EDS AkGRM STATE OF CAUFO WA. TDS DAY OF 1E_ CRY QFM OF THE CRY OF aA II0RO EAR FLED W TNF OFFICE OF M COUNTY A 707 COUM OF LOS AWALES, STATE OF CALPOPPSA. THIS DAY OF CRY CIFIIS OF THE CRY OF QIAA W EAR THE ASSESS - NURRA FON EACH LOT OR PARCED — M DISTRICT 15 THE ASYSNOR'S PARCEL NLFAEER AS ASSNKD BY `LE COIMTY OF Las acro —1 OFFICE TME UMS AM OrIOISgE6 Pal EACs LOT OR PARCEL OF LAND —IRI THE DISTRICT AK SECLYN ON TK ASSESSOIFS PARCEL MAK ON PIF M THE OFFICE OF TM LDS ANGELES CD-- ASEEssD11 wPmeFa> I GF&FRIEDRICH TN an ar wRa10 EM F & ASSOC.. INC. 100 10o Foo ILoo • •" . . INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, City Managef t� RE: City Hall Office Space DATE: July 3, 1995 ISSUE. Shall the City lease office space, if so for what term of years, or, continue to pursue the possibility of purchasing a building to serve as City Hall? RECONDAENDATION: It is recommended, that the City Council approve a one year lease for Suites 100 and 190, at 21660 E. Copley Drive, in the amount of $158,106. It is further recommended that the City Council direct staff to pursue the purchase of a building, for City Hall offices; and, hold a closed session on July 11, 1995 to give staff negotiation direction and authority. DISCUSSION: On June 20, 1995, staff provided the Council with a memorandum (attached), which discussed proposed four year leases with Seeley (current lessor) and SCAQMD. The staff recommended that the City Council approve a four year lease with Seeley, for Suites 150 and 190 (9098 sq.ft.). The staff was asked to bring back to the Council a lease proposal with a shorter term of years. Also, the Council expressed continuing interest in purchasing a building for use as City Hall. As regards a shorter term of years for an office space lease the following are the Seeley and SCAQMD alternatives: Seeley: Year One: Suites 100/190 (3 mos@1.66/ft) $ 34,984.50 Ops expenses Suites 100/190 4,542.00 Suites 150/190 (9 mos@ 1.65/ft) $135,105.30 Year Two: Suites 150/190 (12 mos@1.75/ft) $191,058.00 $174,632.00 $191,058.00 $365,690.00 LEASE SPACE JULY 3, 1995 PAGE TWO SCAQMD: Year One: 9,100 sq.ft. @ 1.55/ft Year Two: 9,100 sq. ft. @ 1.60/ft $169,260.00 $174,720.00 $169,260.00 $174.720,00 $343,980.00 Over the two year term of the lease, the difference in cost between the Seeley proposal and the SCAQMD proposal is $21,710, with the Seeley lease being the higher of the two. Suite 100/190 & Building Purchase Alternative: Another office space alternative is the pursuit of the purchase of a building for City Hall offices. There is a 10,505 sq. ft: office building available, located at 1320 S. Valley Vista. The building owners' agent is Simon Chu Associates. It is recommended that the Council and staff meet in closed session to discuss the negotiating parameters for possible building purchase. If the Council decides to pursue the purchase of a building, staff suggests that the current office lease agreement, between the City and Diamond Bar Business Associates, for Suites 100/190, at 21660 E. Copley Drive, be extended for FY 1995-96. The total lease cost would be $166,433.64. Holding Over Cost Intpact: The existing lease between Diamond Bar Business Associates and the City contains a holding over clause (Section 26). The holding over clause provides that the Lessee (City), with the Lessor's (DBBA) consent, may remain in possession of the premises, after the expiration of the lease term, here June 30, 1995. Such occupancy shall be a tenancy from month to month, except the rent payable shall be two hundred percent (200%) of the rent payable immediately preceding the termination date of the lease. The monthly hold over amount would be $24,748.94, plus $1,495 for ops expenses ($26,243.94). This hold over clause would not be effected if the City were to ultimately enter into a lease agreement. This hold over cost provides a compelling reason to give serious consideration to continuing the leasing of office space at 21660 E. Copley Drive, at least for a one year term.