Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/16/2001 PRC Minutes - Special Meetingr CITY OF DIAMOND BAR MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION HEARING BOARD ROOM OF S.C.A.Q.M.D. 21865 E. Copley Drive, Diamond Bar JULY 16, 2001 CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Hull called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance by Chairman Hull. ROLL CALL: Present: Chairman Hull, Vice Chairman St. Amant, and Commissioners Anis, and Torres. Commissioner Finnerty was excused. Staff: Bob Rose, Director of Community Services; Gary Olivas, Recreation Superintendent; and Marisa Somenzi, Administrative Secretary. MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE: None Offered. 1. OLD BUSINESS: 1.1_ Tennis Court Rules - The City Council has directed the Parks & Recreation Commission to develop rules that allow professional tennis instruction in the City's parks. The Commission established an Ad Hoc Committee to develop rules for the Commission, to review and ultimately to recommend to the City Council for adoption. A community meeting that was attended by about 30 Diamond Bar residents was held on Thursday, April 26, 2001 to discuss possible components to include in the rules. The Commission Ad Hoc Committee received this input and has developed a draft set of rules that allows professional tennis instruction in the City's parks. Following is the intent of the recommended tennis court rules: 1. Allows free use of a tennis court, on a first com-first serve basis, for private JULY 16, 2001 Pi PAGE 2 SPECIAL PARKS & REC COMMISSION MEETING and semi -private tennis lessons (up to two ((2)) people on a court with instructor.) Instructor is required to obtain a no -fee permit from the City of Diamond Bar in order to collect fees from student(s). No requirement for liability insurance for private and semi private tennis lessons. 3. No time of day or day of week limitations for private and semi -private tennis lessons. 4. Court use of up to 1/i hour allowed while people are waiting and no courts) are available. 5. Does not allow a private instructornp �oritX use of public tennis courts. When people are waiting and no courts are available, instructor must relinquish court after 1/z hour of use. 6. No limit on number of balls that can be used on a court. 7. Instructor's use of a single tennis court for private or semi -private tennis lessons up to two (2) students shall not be considered commercial use of the park. The instructor must have the permit issued by the City of Diamond Bar to collect fees from students. CSD/Rose presented staff's report. Staff recommends that the Parks and Recreation Commission review the proposed tennis court rules as presented by staff and the Ad Hoc Committee and recommend their adoption to the City Council. Robert Chou, a Diamond Bar resident, spoke on behalf of a local tennis association which has 150 plus members. He thanked the Commission and CSD/Rose for their thoughtful input. There is not a realistic overcrowded tennis court problem in D.B. Just because there have been four complaints over the past five years or so, that number of complaints does not deserve the time being spent on this issue. It is bad economics. All of the tennis association members are opposed to the permit requirement. Since the December 2000 meeting there has not been any permit process put into place. The only thing that has occurred is more and more rules and no mention of how to acquire a permit. The City Council concluded that the city needed to provide a permit process and not to set more rules. In seven months residents have not seen anything that is directly involved in getting a permit. There is no form, no process, and no requirements that have been mentioned or posted. He cannot understand why a permit would be required because his understanding is that there is no business license requirements in D.B. To require a tennis instructor to have a permit is, in his opinion, discrimination. Several unreasonable rules were passed during the first meeting without input from or presence of the majority of tennis players. He believes that about 95 percent of the people present at tonight's meeting received their notice last Friday. He received only a portion of the package being discussed tonight and he feels it is unfair to expect residents to offer informed I JULY 16, 2001 PAGE 3 SPECIAL PARKS & REC COMMISSION MEETING r F opinions under these circumstances. I Paul Moravek, a Diamond Bar resident, said his daughters are receiving tennis instruction hoping to make the Rosary tennis team when they attend high school. One thing that struck him as interesting was that the last meeting was a free -form meeting where everyone was allowed to participate and he believes the ideas were easier to crystalize. When the speakers are split up it makes it more difficult to get a popular opinion. Last meeting he asked for a vote on how many people in attendance were for the concept of one hour per resident of D.B. having unrestricted use of the tennis court for tennis purposes and everyone favored such a concept. When he looks at the rules proposed by staff they seem reasonable, but when you look at the interest of the people that took the time over and over to participate, it seems that almost no one's interest is served by anything other than that very simple statement "one resident of D.B. - one hour - tennis purpose." To add a permit or to kick his daughter off of the tennis court when she waited for the court 30 minutes but she is signed up for an hour lesson, she is still a citizen of D.B. He is not sure who's interests are being served by initiating these rules. He does not understand why citizens have to keep coming back again and again to say please do not do whatever these other interests are. If the City keeps initiating rules there will be no end and that is why he wants a positive statement about what the residents have a right to - one hour per resident for tennis use. Kay Dalli, a D.B. business owner, said she and her husband started the ball rolling on this issue. She said that at the informal meeting she asked Robert Chou if his tennis association was open to the public and she said he told her it was private. And then he went on to demand changes he wanted in the community, yet the tennis association is not open to the public. She has reported incidents of vandalism to her person, her vehicles, her business and her home which she believes were a direct result of her complaints regarding illegal use of the tennis courts. She spoke about witnessing various incidents she believes represent illegal use of tennis courts. She is trying to keep a business going for the entire community as a whole and not just for one particular ethnic (group) wanting their way. Grace MacBride said she believes everyone can see that she is not Chinese and she does not believe that this is "just an ethnic problem." She is a member of the Diamond Bar Tennis Association. 1) In checking the list of rules prepared by Bob Rose for the Commission's approval, she assumes the 30 minute time limit for use of a tennis court is a typo. Even the most rank amateur tennis players come to the court and warm up for 10 minutes with practice serves, volleys and overheads. In fact, no serious tennis player would even consider starting to play without the warmup period which leaves 20 minutes for play. If players or coaches must relinquish a court in one-half hour that means players will not be able to finish even one set let alone finishing a best two out of three match. Coaches charge for one hour lessons. If they have to leave the court after 20 minutes of instruction neither they nor their student will wish to adhere to such a rule. Students would not be getting a decent lesson and coaches would be forced to lower fees which are already very reasonable in D.B. No where that she has been in the entirety of the United JULY 16, 2001 PAGE 4 SPECIAL PARKS & REC COMMISSION MEETING States and other countries has she ever seen a half-hour rule and she has easily visited y 1777 100 facilities. This rule makes no sense. Every hour on the hour is the accepted ruleup,;Gil! among all tennis players and coaches everywhere; 2) limiting coaching to not more than two persons on the court - what is the reasoning? If there is concern about damage to the surface, when you put two coaches on one side (of the net) and 8 people on the other side (of the net) it is called a tennis clinic. The coaches can feed only one ball at a time so that each of the four people would be attempting to hit every fourth ball. Major wear and tear of surfaces comes much more readily from wearing hard soled shoes when walking on the court, skate boarding or roller blading on court surfaces. No tennis player could ever be accused of doing any of these things. They respect and realize the importance of proper care of the courts. 3) What will the instructor permit look like? Will' the instructor have a card or other document he carries with him to be presented upon request. I suppose the D.B. residents who are instructors could comply with this fairly easily. But what about the instructors that you or I bring here to give us our tennis instruction on these courts. Do you expect someone who comes from a jurisdiction to visit family to get a city permit if he wants to give someone in his family a one-hour tennis lesson. Consider this. An instructor from Pasadena is asked by a D.B. resident to come here and give him/her a one-hour lesson, possibly on a one-time basis. Now he (the instructor) has to take an extra hour and one-half to drive here and get his city permit before he can go out and teach that D.B. resident for one hour. This is cumbersome for the city and for D.B. residents and the coach. Surely you are not going to use taxpayer dollars to send the sheriff's out but maybe you are. If the sheriff is going to be the monitor he should only have to see the persons ID - driver's license, school ID card or other official ID card. Will the city' issue ID cards to people who do not have driver's licenses or student ID's? What sort of citationi!,will the sheriff or monitor issue? The more rules, the more difficulty enforcing them. Please! Let's keep it simple. When the city contracts with the organization from Brea to conduct summer clinics does the contract limit them to half hour usage and only two students to one coach on 'the court? Please, please, keep it simple. Richard Han, 553 Great Bend Drive, has been a resident of D.B. for 10 years and described himself as a tennis enthusiast. He plays in many USTA league games and his team has won many, many trophies. He hires/retains coaches to teach his kids - Mad Dog and his nephew who is great with the kids because he teaches them how I to think and behave on the court. He retains Mr. Brian Su to teach his team mates how to think on court. His team just happened to be undefeated in their district and they are going to the playoff. He would find it very disheartening to find out four different reasons that he will not be able to retain Mad Dog. He would be even more disheartened to discover that he cannot retain Mr. Brian Su to educate his team mates. D.B. is very small and he does not understand all the fuss about setting up regulations. How is it that we have fallen into a police state mentality. When he mentioned "tennis police" to Mr. Henry Talbot who happens to be the executive h director of the Southern California Tennis Association, he laughed. He acknowledged the fact that cities have the right to set ordinances and regulations, but it is unusual. He said that if there are circumstances that require it, go ahead. But not in the City of Diamond Bar. The city does not need to raise money and the courts are JULY 16, 2001 PAGE 5 SPECIAL PARKS & REC COMMISSION MEETING not overloaded. Mr. Talbot said that a half an hour is not good for anyone. Mr. Talbot suggested that he (Richard Han) come to this meeting and ask three questions: 1) What is the situation or situations that is causing this to be necessary; 2) what are i the procedures to require the teaching permit, and 3) who is behind all of this. He believes that this is much fuss about nothing. Just let the people play, promote tennis and encourage tennis activities and league play. Dennis Su, a D.B. resident and member of the tennis team. At present the tennis courts are under-utilized. Mr. Han visited the city and school tennis courts during the day and he found that there was only 25 percent usage of the courts. In the event the courts become full, the tennis team proposes self-management and volunteer patrol. More regulation and control demotes tennis as many have stated. They do not want it made difficult for people to participate in tennis - they want everyone to be able to enjoy tennis. Sheriff's department personnel and staff should not be utilized to patrol courts. Tennis courts in this and other communities have been managed by a simple rule - courtesy and respect for others. He requested an amendment to 3.d. of the proposed tennis court rules to wit: "Players in waiting should acknowledge others when they have the right and are waiting. Players should place rackets in holders and remain in person- to reserve the courts." This is common practice in many communities. Self-management will prevail because this is our community. - Felix Chen, 1537 Diamond Court, said that tennis courts are supposed to be for the �,-.. recreation of D.B. residents. From what he observes about this proposal, it is anything but recreational. He urged the Commission to consider who or why this policy is an issue and look at the matter from the standpoint of the residents. The purpose of setting up rules is so that there is something for everyone to follow. Only D.B. residents should be allowed to express their opinion and participate in the making of rules. He urged the Commissioners to look at the motives of the person who originally brought up this issue and to determine why the community is going through such a time consuming process. The simpler the rules, the better for the community. Tommy Lu asked if tonight's discussion included the issue of "misdemeanor" to which CSD/Rose responded that "misdemeanor" is not being proposed. Milind Joshi, a D.B. resident and tennis player. He agreed with most of the prior statements. Unfortunately, this year's Wimbledon winner was not from the U.S. Here in D.B. we are trying to create champions and the only way they can be created is to have natural talent properly directed by proper coaching. His son wants to be a good tennis player and he should have all of the rights to select who coaches them and how they are trained. He suggested that the Council not put any restrictions on where he chooses to have training as long as he follows tennis etiquette, manners and is courteous to everyone. Annie Wang, a D.B. resident who lives close to Ronald Reagan Park. When she visited the park at the end of June she discovered that all three courts were occupied by City of D.B. Recreation for three hours. There are only eight courts in the City of JULY 16, 2001 PAGE 6 SPECIAL PARKS & REC COMMISSION MEETING Diamond Bar. If rules are imposed on residents, how will these rules effect the City's recreation program. Chair/Hull responded to Ms. Wang that there is not a park in D.B. that should have instruction on all courts. The City intends that it will not happen again. Grace MacBride said she does not agree with the statement regarding the majority of input referred to in CSD/Rose's letter regarding the special April 26'h meeting. In fact, the majority of the people present were not happy with the things that were happening. Robert Chou came to the podium to set the record straight. First of all, the D.B. Tennis Association is open to everyone. Their membership includes Council Member O'Connor. He said that rule 1 d. refers one hour but there is a 30 minute rule posted on the tennis court. C/Torres asked staff to explain why, from an historical perspective, the city has gotten to this point. CSD/Rose responded that the issue of the tennis court rules came to the fore last summer when the six -ball rule began to be more aggressively enforced.. Many members of the public and instructors were contacted by staff and by the sheri'ff's" department because of having too many balls on the tennis courts. A number of residents came before the City Council and requested that the six -ball rule be eliminated. The City Council asked the Parks and Recreation Commission to make a recommendation to the Council and in November 2000, the Commission recommended that the Council eliminate the six -ball rule. In December, the City Council supported the Commission's recommendation for elimination of the six -ball rule. During the December meeting discussion, Council instructed the Commission to come up with a permit system i that would allow private instructors to use the public tennis courts for private instruction which began the process for a permitting system for private instructors. The reason this issue was raised is that the six -ball rule was always used to identify "illegal" instruction of private lessons because a tennis instructor would usually have a basket of balls on the court rather than six balls. If a person was observed to have a basket of balls they were approached. City Council directed staff and the Parks and Recreation Commission to find an alternative method of identifying illegal instructors and to establish a permit system that allowed private instruction on the tennis courts. As a result of Council's instruction, an ad hoc committee was established at the Commission level. The ad hoc committee came up with a very restrictive permit process which went before the Council for first reading in March and second reading in April. Tennis players became aware of the restrictive permit process and presented their comments to the Council. As a result, Council tabled establishment of the restrictive permit process and directed the Parks and Recreation Commission to come back to them with an alternative process. A public meeting was held in April to discuss ideas regarding the permit process. From that information the ad hoc committee met again with staff and developed the rules that are presented in draft form tonight. .v ..� �.. 0.. - :, --., x., .. .. .�„_ �v.,,,, -,,,,. 'M1. ,IR _�... ., �. .... �.� .,. _m"„ _.. 71.. '_­. , JULY 16, 2001 PAGE 7 SPECIAL PARKS & REC COMMISSION MEETING VC/St. Amant indicated to Mr. Chou that the proposed rules will eliminate problems. He pointed out that with the implementation of these rules, tennis instruction will be allowed (it was not allowed in the past) and the remainder of the rules have been in effect. He believes the 30 minute court use while people are waiting should be re- worded to state "one set" which is a universal tennis rule. Currently, this is not a consideration because generally, people do not have to wait for a court. One-half hour is a universal rule and there would be no reason to change a universal rule and he does not see a problem with that rule. When the Commission was considering the six -ball rule, the residents testified that everyone was instructing their kids and there was no illegal instruction. As a result, the Commission recommended that the Council eliminate the six -ball rule which they did. At the same time the Commission recommended that something be done about illegal instruction. At the time, there was no public interest in illegal instruction and the focus was on elimination of the six -ball rule. He further explained that proposed rule 1 allows for use of tennis courts on a first come, first serve basis which means exactly that. It does not mean that someone who holds a permit for instruction has the right to be the first person on the court. All are treated equally. As far as enforcement, it will remain the same as before except that now there will be enforcement of illegal instruction. The permit process will not be difficult. A person need only go to city hall, apply for a permit and receive the permit. There is no fee- it is a simple process. In response to Grace T Mac Bride, he stated that the permit process applies to professional and semi- professional instructors, not to friends and family members. C/Anis agreed with VC/St. Amant. The reason this process has gone on for such a long period of time is because one issue is addressed and then citizens come back with new issues. Chair/Hull thanked everyone for their participation. He commented that he has two daughters who play soccer and he pays for private instruction for them which is done in the public parks. He has been guilty of doing what these rules are attempting to avoid. He is a member of the ad hoc committee that helped put together the proposed rules. As Commissioner Anis stated, every time we come to a meeting we hear something new that the public wants addressed by the Commission. He concurs with the speakers that kids need private instruction so he will push for that. He has checked with the city managers of the cities of Walnut, Chino Hills and Irvine and all that the etiquette on all tennis court is a'/z hour rule. And so now the residents are asking for something that is not a part of tennis etiquette. He pointed out problems with the "hanging racket" proposal. If an instructor can potentially hang up several rackets and monopolizes court time, how will he/she be monitored. He asked if players have to pay instructors if they arrive at 5:00 p.m., for instance, and have to wait for an hour to obtain a court. Alfred Planes, a Walnut resident, is a tennis instructor and has been teaching "illegally" in D.B. He did not solicit business in D.B. He was asked by friends and family member to give private instruction using public facilities. During the entire time he has been instructing tennis players, he and all of the other instructors and players follow the tennis etiquette rules. When he and other instructors show up to JULY 16, 2001 PAGE 8 SPECIAL PARKS & REC COMMISSION MEETING give lessons and the courts are busy they wait along with everyone else as they have always done. No one considers that they are to have special privileges. He responded to Chair/Hull that when he is giving instruction it is rare that someone is waiting to use the court. VC/St. Amant reiterated that'the 1/2 hour use rule should not be an issue because !it is a universal tennis rule. The D.B. courts are not private courts, these are public courts. A person does not have to be a resident of D.B. to use the courts. Chair/Hull explained why he is very much in favor of the permit process. He has dealt with many groups such as Pop Warner Football, NUB Basketball, little league, girls softball, etc. Every organization that uses a public facility must have a permit to be on the fields. The permit is nothing more than letting the city know who is on the field so.that 15 different organizations are not fighting over the same location. The permit process is no charge/no fee is easily accessible. The process that the Commission is proposing is a pro -active stance to ward off potential problems. It is not restrictive. In addition, when an instructor is provided a permit they will also be provided a copy of the rules and regulations so that they understand the rules. He does not believe that these proposed rules are burdensome. Paul Moravek returned to state that he felt it was important to characterize the April ay, 26 participation as a unanimous vote for one player - one hour which was not made clear by the review of the record and it was implied that participants agreed to rules such as those proposed at tonight7s meeting which is not correct. He asked the Commission if they noticed the animosity of Mad Dog representatives toward the tennis teaching and learning community. Mad Dog has a business interest and if the city gives them a half hour club with which to beat Brian Su they will bloody him with it and they will make it impossible for him (Brian Su) to bill his hour with his daughters. . VC/St. Amant asked how often other courts are in use when Brian Su is teaching. Mr. Moravek indicated that when he picks up his daughters on Thursday evening there are usually one or two other courts being used at Maple Hill Park. VC/St. Amant said he sees the potential problem but he believes there are ways around it. Chair/Hull said that if the Council approves recommended changes he believes] the Commission needs to monitor this matter for one year during which time) all complaints will be documented and reviewed. He reiterated his recommendation for changing one-half hour to one hour court use. CSD/Rose explained to Alfred Planes that if the rules air, adopted the same penalties that currently exist will continue to apply. it is an infraction for violating the rules. The first offense in a year can garner a fine of up to $100; a second offense in the same year can garner a fine of up to $200; the fine for an offense in the same year can �.. ,..;.. .,.....n.^_, .._JA,_._,! a .,�J .w..m �.®,..,.... _A JULY 16, 2001 PAGE 9 SPECIAL PARKS & REC COMMISSION MEETING be up to $500. Infractions are enforced by the sheriff's department. It is not the y intent of the City of Diamond Bar to deploy sheriff's onto the tennis courts looking for infractions. However, from last summer to when the six -ball rule was eliminated the sheriff's department was instructed to assist in enforcing the six -ball rule because the information going to staff was that there was a lot of illegal activity taking place. He said he believes that as a direct result of that enforcement the issue is being discussed today because it created interest in having it be legal and not illegal to be on the courts. CSD/Rose indicated to Grace MacBride that if a person wishes to receive a permit they can fax their application to city hall and a permit can be faxed back to them or sent to them in the mail. The permit process involves obtaining identification information and signature. The main reason for requiring this information is to have it available to the public. At this point, the city has no idea who is teaching or how many are teaching on the public tennis courts. He is only aware of five or six instructors as reported to him. Chair/Hull indicated to Grace MacBride that if a one-time lesson turns into full time instruction and the instructor does not have a permit this process allows the city to issue a citation. The process is very simple and it does not cost a penny. C/Torres said that the community will have had due notice that a permit is required and he does not believe that "emergency" instruction will be a major concern. The Commission is trying to meet the spirit of what the community wants with balance and rationality. CSD/Rose responded to C/Anis that no time limit has been set for permits. The city intends that the permit will be more like a registration and will not expire. There is no limit on the number of students that can be taught under any single permit. VC/St. Amant asked participants if the standard universal tennis rules allow for one- half hour or one hour. CSD/Rose said other cities did not designate times, they had one set to indicate the length of time. Paul Moravek asked if Brian Su's permit could be revoked if the city received a certain number of complaints about him from Mad Dog Tennis, for instance. All of this time is being spent on one issue to accommodate Mad Dog and the owner will do what he can to destroy it for everyone else. There is no problem with the one hour court time with the rest of the residents. VC/St. Amant said that the rules should not be changed to accommodate instruction. Tennis courts are for public use. In response to a question regarding revocation of a permit, CSD/Rose responded that any time the city receives a complaint it is thoroughly investigated. The city has been JULY 16, 2001 PAGE 10 SPECIAL PARKS & REC COMMISSION MEETING receiving complaints from Mad Dog for 10 years. Staff requires proof to determine that the complaint is valid. Merely because the city receives numerous complaints does not mean that they must be true and that an instructor's permit will be revoked. VC/St. Amant said he liked Dennis Su's recommendation for hanging rackets with a body present and he would like it incorporated in the rules because he believes it is a good indication that someone is actually waiting to get onto a court. Sometimes people show up and sit on the bench and it is difficult to tell whether they are waiting to play or just observing. Alfred Planes said he feels that in order to eliminate unnecessary arguments the best thing to do is for the people who want to wait for a tennis court, they should show up to the court, hang the racket and identify themselves and indicate they are waiting for a court, and whatever rules the Council initiates, those are the rules that must be followed. It is very simple. He does not teach consecutive lessons if other people are waiting to use the court. If no one is waiting for a court, instructors may conduct consecutive lessons. Chair/Hull moved, C/Torres seconded, that the following rules be recommended to the City Council for approval. 1) Change III to read: "Any other usage requiring exclusive reservation for more than one hour. 2) Change 3 to read: "When others are waiting and no courts are available play is limited to one hour of use and then must be relinquished." 3) Delete 3.b. and 3.c.; change 3.d. to 3. b. and reword as follows: "Wait�ng players must remain in person on the court desired. Priority of right to use the court shall be established by the placing of a racket -on a numbered placeholder." 4) Eliminate 3.e. and 3. f. 5) 4. 5.6. will remain as written. 6) Change the last sentence of 7. to read as follows: Instructor must have a permit issued by the City of Diamond Bar in order to collect fees from student(s). 7) If deemed necessary, review the tennis court rules in 12 months. Motion passed by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Anis, Torres, VC/St. Amant and Chair/Hull i NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Finnerty CSD/Rose stated that the proposed rules will most likely be presented to the City Council on August 21 as part of the user group document. 2. ANNOUNCEMENTS: -,niVr6l.:i,IiibbpuAlFUl1YllYug41�NWJAIWwNhm it ..� ». - ., ... -. � �_ i -h ,. -- �• .n _mmai.xn mownim...���iii.��iw+.�.�. _ ._-- _ - ___"__ _ JULY 16, 2001 PAGE 11 SPECIAL PARKS & REC COMMISSION MEETING ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business to come before the Commission, Chairman Hull adjourned the special meeting at 9:08 p.m. Respect ully ub itted, B Rose Secretary _ ,��- --4 C ai an IT/Aull